Not everything worth reading is hot off the press. In this section, Nicholas Reid recommends "something old" that is still well worth reading. "Something old" can mean anything from a venerable and antique classic to a good book first published five or more years ago.
Here I go
into one of my maddening recherché moments. I have just been looking at two
books about women, including one about women as they were once depicted by male
advertising copywriters. This leads me to consider a novel by a male that
conceives of a woman in most unrealistic terms.
Is the
novel worth your rushing out and finding?
No.
Why then am
I dealing with it?
Because the historian in me likes
finding novels that so perfectly represent the prejudices of the age in which
they were written.
Stephen
McKenna’s Sonia was written and first
published during the First World War. High-brow British reviewers praised it
and for a time McKenna was regarded as an important figure in modern Eng Lit. I
even have on my shelves a couple of “surveys” of early 20th century
Eng Lit that mention him respectfully. His books continued to be re-printed for
quite a few years, including this one and its sequel – which I haven’t read – Sonia Married. I myself read Sonia in a battered Penguin paperback
printed in 1949. Then, inevitably, McKenna slipped out of view and is now quite
justifiably forgotten, even though he lived a long life (1888-1967) and
apparently churned out nearly 50 novels.
To show why
this should be so, let me ask you to sit, like good children, cross-legged on
the carpet in front of me while I give you the novel’s plot.
It goes
like this.
Ostensibly
it is the story of the social butterfly Sonia Dainton, who breaks men’s hearts
in the years just before the First World War. In fact, however, this eponymous
character is peripheral to much of the novel’s action. The real centre of
vitality is David O’Rane, illegitimate son of an Irish peer.
Narrated in
the first person by one George Oakleigh, the novel begins at the public school
Melton. A couple of years younger than Oakleigh and his friend Lord Jim Loring,
David O’Rane comes as an outsider speaking an odd mixture of Irish and American
idioms; but he becomes a school legend with his formidable energy and
scholarship.
Running
through the 1890s and 1900s, the novel takes the main characters to Oxford and
then to parliament. Jim Loring becomes an ultra-Conservative member of the
House of Lords; George Oakleigh, an opponent of the Boer War, becomes a
Liberal. David O’Rane has fallen in love with Sonia Dainton, but her parents,
seeing her as too young, break off the match.
O’Rane
travels the world and we hear of his daring exploits – supporting Hungarian
nationalists in the Austrian Empire; making a fortune in oil with desperadoes
in Mexico etc. The narrator gives us great slabs of social commentary about
frivolous high society as it contrasts with real social questions on the eve of
the Great War. Meanwhile Sonia – who really has an important role only from
about halfway through the novel – continues to break men’s hearts. She makes
and then breaks an engagement with Jim Loring, because her parents disapprove
of Jim’s being a Catholic.
O’Rane
returns to England, filled with energy for reform. He is briefly a Conservative
(!) member of parliament. When war at last threatens in 1914, Sonia happens to
be travelling in Germany. Posing as an American businessman, O’Rane daringly
travels to Germany and rescues her. But she does not immediately submit to him.
The
narrator Oakleigh has been anti-imperialist and even edited a pacifist paper
called Peace; but as soon a war
breaks out he and O’Rane vigorously support recruiting drives. Jim Loring is
conveniently killed in the first year of the war, so he is no longer a rival
for Sonia’s heart. David O’Rane is blinded and then crucified with bayonets by
German soldiers. He survives and returns to England where he takes a post as
schoolmaster at his old public school Melton. Humbled by O’Rane’s experiences,
Sonia at last submits to him and they are married. The novel ends with O’Rane
preaching the need for a better world.
Okay,
synopses are not the way to criticise novels, but this one may at least help
you to get your bearings and you probably already have an inkling of why this
novel is now as dead as mutton.
The obvious
defects first. The narrator, for all the events in which he is supposedly
involved, gives the impression of being a passive observer, far less vital or
interesting than O’Rane and others. There are many creaking flaws in the choice
of first-person voice, with Oakleigh most improbably able to report in detail
intimate conversations between O’Rane and Sonia. Later, there is the awkward
device of Oakleigh receiving letters from his nephew, just so that we can be
told how brilliantly the blinded O’Rane does as a humble schoolmaster. No, this
is not the conscious “unreliable narrator” technique with which much better
novelists like Joseph Conrad were then experimenting. It is simply McKenna’s
clumsiness.
Why was
this once regarded as acceptable high-brow writing? It gives a seemingly
authentic view of public school, university, parliament, social whirl and
marriage market. Its tone is apparently detached, apparently world-weary (the
novelist was aged about 30) and with much discussion of foreign policy, politicking
and government plans. All serious stuff for the intellectual reader of 1917.
And why is
it now so dead? Because all of its observations are really in the service of a
dated, class-ridden, essentially snobbish world view. Sonia does not transcend its age. It simply legitimizes what were,
I suspect, the standard views of public-school-and-Oxbridge-educated chaps like
the author. Any apparent criticism of society and its rulers is rapidly turned
into an argument in favour of the status
quo. The narrator may have edited a pacifist journal, but as soon as war
breaks out it’s obvious to him that British civilization (the peak of all
civilization, dammit!) must prevail to ensure a just peace. At one point, the
folk-fiction of an army of Russian soldiers passing secretly through Britain is
justly ridiculed. But the equally untruthful propaganda story of German troops
crucifying Allied soldiers is made a major plot point. [Check the index at left for my review of James Hayward’s Myths and Legends of the First World War
to find out more about this nonsense]. Very well. McKenna was writing while
the war was still being fought, and it would be unfair to criticise him for not
seeing it with the historical perspective that we now have. Even so, his
eagerness to latch onto a lurid propaganda tale says something about his
prejudices and preconceptions.
If you
couple the novel’s earlier Oxbridge aestheticism and disdain for London society
with its later support for the war, you can quite clearly hear the strains of
Rupert Brooke’s delight at “swimmers into
cleanness leaping”. Note, too, a very minor strain of anti-Semitism in the
novel’s caricature of the German-Jewish London merchant Adolf Eicksteinn.
But the key
figure in this piece of conservative special pleading is David O’Rane. He comes
across very much the way the sympathetic German officer does in Powell and
Pressburger’s famous Second World War propaganda film The Life and Death of Colonel Blimp. He is the voice from “the
other side”, who most conveniently reinforces “our” view of things. Note that
David O’Rane (“Raney”) is the illegitimate son of a peer. (This must have been
a sensational plot device at the time. Compton MacKenzie’s Sinister Street, much superior to Sonia as a novel and published four years earlier, also has a hero,
Michael Fane, who is an aristo’s bastard.)
O’Rane’s status makes him an
outsider, while at the same time reassuring readers that his blood is blue.
O’Rane’s Irish and American idiom drops away before the sterling public-school
classical education to which he is exposed. Offstage, he mingles with the
lowest and most desperate of society and he is determined to bring about social
reform. But he does it in the ranks of
the Conservative Party. At one point, sheer emotion causes him to weep at
the goodness of British civilization, the most democratic in the world, in
allowing a penniless chap such as he (a peer’s son) to make something of
himself. Presumably in 1917, the dramatized opinions of such a get-up-and-go
(!), self-made (!!), mutilated-by-Germans (!!!) “outsider” would have promoted
the war effort. Given that the daydream figure of O’Rane is far more engaging
than the vapid Sonia, one wonders if he was not the real object of the
(never-married) author’s admiration.
Now let me
be a total cad. After all the supercilious mud I have thrown, I actually
enjoyed reading this novel, because it is so neatly a product of its age and no
other. As always in such circumstances, it gave me the sense – at once
comforting and chastening – that all bestsellers are thus. They encapsulate the
views and play up the prejudices that people in a particular age wish were
true. Thus I happily visualise readers of 2103 digging out forgotten
bestsellers of 2013 and chortling over their unexamined prejudices, just as I
am chortling over Sonia.
Wikipedia informs me that Sonia was the tenth best-selling book in
the United States in 1918. The nine best-selling books ahead of it are all
equally forgotten now. There are good reasons for this.
No comments:
Post a Comment