Sunday Morning! “Desperate Characters” by Paula Fox
My mother resides in the suburbs in a small Virginia town where she has lived for over five decades now, and where members of my family have lived since before she was born. It is a fairly anodyne and prosperous community whose population is 50% white and 30% Asian, known mostly for its historical attractions. According to FBI data, your chance of being a victim of crime there is 1 in 81, although my mother only really leaves the house for groceries and to dine out with her brother. She remains convinced that one day very soon “rioters” will come to burn the town to the ground. Other members of my family are the same way: they’re exemplars of middle-class prosperity and totally convinced their civilization is on the precipice of an abyss. Maybe it’s a common anxiety.
Certainly, all of the anxieties of the bourgeois class are well-documented at this point. Literature has laid them all bare and flogged them thoroughly, and then offered them free therapy. It feels like every second novel I’ve written about here has dealt with bourgeois anxiety in one form or another, and this week’s novel, Desperate Characters by Paula Fox, is maybe the most anxious. It’s not as if this is a huge interest of mine. At some point, I need to read a few more novels about coal miners.
“Bourgeois” is one of those words that’s hard to use without sounding like a college radical, so let’s define them as the affluent upper middle class whose values and mores tend to most characteristically define the culture of their society. It’s not too much to say they created the modern world in all its good and bad, partly because they have a great deal of cultural capital; but also because they tend to have the most time and impetus to worry about things like what shoes go with what outfits and where soup spoons should go. And what it all means. Literature has probably focused so excessively on the bourgeois class because that’s who traditionally reads (and writes) the most novels. It’s their world; we just feed and clean up after them.
Oh, the other thing is they’re pretty miserable, at least, if literature is any guide.
Certainly, the characters of this novel (one of those rediscovered masterpieces one hears about often these days) are fairly miserable, though they couldn’t tell you why.
Sophie and Otto Bentwood (a name that sticks on the ear a bit more than in should) are a married couple in their 40s living in a brownstone in a part of Brooklyn that is changing less rapidly than they’d like in a marriage that seems more like purgatory. Their immediate problem, however, is the stray cat that bites Sophie’s hand on the first page of the novel. Throughout, her reluctance to get the hand checked out will be a repeated refrain. It’s alright. It’ll be fine. Just a little swollen. Maybe she’s afraid of finding out the cat has rabies, or afraid of the tetanus shots. Or maybe she thinks she deserves whatever’s coming to her. At one point, she says out loud:
“God, if I am rabid, I am equal to what is outside,”… and felt an extraordinary relief…
Meanwhile, Otto’s legal partner, Charlie, has unceremoniously broken up their long-time partnership, a decision throwing everyone into turmoil, although Otto is mostly annoyed. Charlie is what we’d call a social justice warrior today and a bleeding heart then, and Otto is annoyed with the pretense: “Because he doesn’t mean it,” he cried passionately. “Because he wants to be caught up by something, to be swallowed so as not to think about anything.” Everyone’s trying to distract themselves.
At the same time, the culture is changing in ways that seem to Otto like barbarism, and that annoys him as well. A revolution would make sense; what bothers him about the petty hooliganism and random violence that will befall Otto and Sophie over the course of the story is that it’s “meaningless. It doesn’t represent an idea. It is primitive, the void…” In fact, it’s an attack on meaning. One of the side stories in the novel is about an abusive artist who has rebuilt typewriters to produce nonsense. Throughout, Otto and Sophie seem to be assailed by illogic. They are the repositories of a certain middle class logic, and yet they’re also almost inarticulate.
So, on one hand, we’re dealing with urban decay and the upending of the social order- a big theme in 1970. Just think of Saul Bellow’s Mr. Sammler’s Planet or Brian Garfield’s Death Wish (a rare example where the novel is worlds away from the movie). Desperate Characters works better, I think, because the characters are not as articulate: they’re not mouthpieces for the author’s doctrines. There’s also a strangeness to the novel that reminds me more of John Cheever, a writer who’s really more of a surrealist of suburbia than a sociologist.
Really, the bind is that Otto and Sophie are at the top of the social evolutionary scale, the ideal to which everyone around them is striving, and they don’t know what the hell they’re doing. Like any number of these bourgeois wife characters, she had an affair in years past, but the lover didn’t really want her and nothing came of it, aside from the realization that she stopped loving Otto a long time ago. And the husk of memories; this has to be one of the most devastating lines in literature:
“She had put herself to sleep again, nursing memories of Francis Early like an old crone with a bit of rag for a baby.”
And then, there’s this:
“The truth about people had not much to do with what they said about themselves, or others said about them.”
It’s a bit strange to read about the malaise associated with a life that fewer members of the rising generation will even attain. My boomer parents lived like this without even really trying. But Generation X was likely the last generation in history to worry about “selling out.” In 2022, Otto and Sophie’s life seems like a somewhat unlikely fantasy. Maybe the cat bite shatters all of the importance and stability of their roles as suburban totems because it reveals how little that stability actually means to them. They awake from the dream, not really knowing why they are where they are in life, or what to do about it. At one point, Otto says: “I wish someone would tell me how I can live.” No answer comes.
Are they even entitled to be unhappy living the dream? And, worst of all, when you’ve achieved the ideal life in your society and are desperate for something else, where do you go from there?
So, friends, what are YOU reading, writing, playing, pondering, watching, or seeing a doctor about this weekend?
I just finished reading Dangerous Rhythms: Jazz and the Underworld by the true crime writer T.J. English. It is about how the business end of jazz and the early commercial music industry was basically run by mobsters. Literature might focus a lot on the bourgeois but modern society also has a big attraction to people who live in the dangerous part of society and lead some very violent, hedonistic and decidedly non-bourgeois life. Its why shows like Peaky Blinders, Broadwalk Empire, and the entire gangster image in hip=hop are or were popular.
One classic bourgeois cultural anxiety is that we are all a bunch of softies, and I was raised in the bourgeois world so I know this, and that we can be crushed from either above or below at a moment’s notice. There is also a suspicions that people living on the edges of life, especially the bottom edges but also the top edges, are more real and authentic than the bourgeois. The result is a tendency to give the criminal underworld a certain allure.Report
Right! It’s been a while since I read Beneath the Underdog by Charles Mingus, but I think I remember him talking a little about it there too. Really I get the feeling anything to do with city nightlife had a large mob element at one time.Report
‘
It is basically a relic of Prohibition. Night clubs are a great way to distribute illegal alcohol and that was a practical Godsend to the mob. That jazz was exploding and public morals were liberalizing during the 1920s just made things easier. Once Prohibition stayed away, the Mob-night life connection remained.Report
On a related note, I was researching a nearby building, the Louis N. Jaffe Theater on Second Avenue where Jackie Curtis lived and then Peter Hujar and David Wojnarowicz had a flat. In the 40s, there was apparently a drag club there, co-owned by Anna Genovese, the estranged wife of Vito, who was in love with a drag king there. It was quite a story, and no surprise to find out HBO is working on a series about her.Report
You know, your description of your own relatives makes me wonder if this isn’t some sort of Imposter Syndrome thing. They aren’t quite sure how they got here, and are afraid that it will all collapse.
These books from the 60’s and 70’s about the emptiness of suburbia/bourgeoisie/middle class/etc also though seem a bit like wish fulfillment. I mean, I know poor people. They aren’t more noble, they just have less money.
Everyone’s life is empty until they figure out how to fill it with something.Report
Brownstone Brooklyn was in a weird spot in the 1970s because it is when people priced out of the Village discovered they could buy a fixer-upper Brownstone for 20K. It was the very start or what would later be called gentrification.
The problem with bourgeois is that the term is too malleable. There is lots of polling which informs that the most consistently liberal (social and economic) voters in the United States are bougie, college educated professionals. As far as I can tell, everyone hates this fact including the bougie liberals themselves.Report
Ah, late 70s looking at places in Hoboken with my aunt and uncle. Walking distance to the PATH station. Some of it had been gentrified and the police patrolled heavily and responded quickly. Three blocks away and the police didn’t go. If you guessed right about which way the gentrification was going to spread, you could buy a structurally sound building with a view of the whole Manhattan skyline for peanuts and start renovating. Might have jumped at it except there was no way my wife-to-be would live there.Report
Yeah, I remember a passage in… I think it was Low Life by Lucy Sante about how most of what people call “gentrification” was already happening in Greenwich Village before the first world war, which stuck with me. Really, just buy a cheap house, fix it up, and wait- congrats, you’re a gentrifier.
When I think of “bourgeois,” I think of my former in-laws, who lived every stereotype, were well-educated and well-to-do, and indeed very culturally and economically liberal. The only point of disconnect came when we started looking to move to a “steel town,” because man did my MIL disdain working poor people- but only in practice! Not in theory!Report
That’s bougie AF.Report
The inner parts of London also started gentrifying at the same time after their post-World War I to 1960s decay. Basically gentrification is driven by upper middle class people that don’t want to move to the suburbs.Report
I did not know who Colleen Hoover was until yesterday and yet she apparently dominates the bestseller lists. https://slate.com/culture/2022/08/colleen-hoover-books-it-ends-with-us-verity.html
“The blandness of Hoover’s characters makes them easy for anyone to identify with, and the smooth, featureless quality of her prose makes her novels easy to breeze through in a day or two. They are built of clichés, which is not necessarily a drawback in romance fiction, where the deployment of familiar devices feels comforting. This also appeals to people who view themselves as nonreaders because they lack the patience for or interest in literary prose. For such readers, C.S. Lewis once wrote, cliché makes reading effortless because:
… it is immediately recognizable. ‘My blood ran cold’ is a hieroglyph of fear. Any attempt, such as a great writer might make, to render this fear concrete in its full particularity, is doubly a chokepear to the unliterary reader. For it offers him what he doesn’t want, and offers it only on the condition of his giving to the words a kind and degree of attention which he does not intend to give. It is like trying to sell him something he has no use for at a price he does not wish to pay.
Hoover never, for example, wastes words in conjuring a sense of place or atmosphere. She might set a novel in Boston or San Francisco or upstate New York, settings chosen seemingly at random, and with a minimum of research. There’s no such thing as local color in Hooverland. Hilariously, in It Ends With Us, she has two teenagers in a small Maine town discuss their desire to move to Boston, where the people talk in such a funny way, saying “cah” instead of “car”—as if Mainers don’t pronounce the word similarly, with an even heavier Yankee accent.”
There is something ironic about the fact that unliterary books dominate bookselling.Report
Is it really ironic though? The best selling books are going to have the most crowd appeal. Most people do not read for art and do not necessarily like literary fiction that plays with language. What they want is the book equivalent of a TV series or blockbuster movie and plenty of authors are out there to give it to them.Report
I’m not sure if this writer does it, but there was an article going around recently about novelists using AI for descriptions because they found it such tedious work. Which seems like a better answer would be to make it an “internal” story and not worry about the color of the drapes.Report