Henry Green’s Loving appears to only be in print in the U.S. in a volume containing two of his other novels, Living and Party Going, and since I enjoyed the first novel I decided to try the other two. (Incidentally, these latter two novels don’t appear to be copyrighted in the U.S., at least not according to the cover page that indicates that Loving is copyrighted in this country.)
Living was Green’s first novel, and was the worst of the three in this volume by a fair margin. The story is, as is typical for Green, thin, revolving around workers in a Birmingham foundry that is poorly managed by its declining owner and that faces upheaval when he dies. The prose, however, is excruciating, because Green chose to omit most definite and indefinite articles, so even strong phrasings become painful to read:
Were tins of pineapple in that shop window and she wondered and languor fell on her like in a mist as when the warm air comes down in cold earth; in images she saw in her heart sun countries, sun, and the infinite ease of warmth.
The closest thing to a central storyline is the secret romance between Lily and Bert, a factory worker who sees no future for himself in Birmingham and decides to elope with Lily and move to Canada. The unraveling of that romance is one of the most absurd ends to a plot that I have ever seen, rivaling Tony Last’s fate in A Handful of Dust.
Party Going, on the other hand, is more conventionally written and, while not classically plotted, at least follows a more defined pattern by showing us a specific block of time for a specific set of characters. Those characters, a group of friends plotting a getaway to the south of France, end up stuck in a railway station and then in its associated hotel when the trains are all delayed indefinitely by fog. Their reactions to various inconveniences (mostly minor) and to the sudden, unexplained illness of the aunt of one member of the party make up the bulk of the action of the novel, although there’s a bit more drama when the crazy girlfriend of one of the characters shows up unannounced as if she was supposed to be on the trip all along.
As bad as Green’s prose was in Living from a readability standpoint, the prose in Party Going is the novel’s greatest strength:
Memory is a winding lane and as she went up it, waving them to follow, the first bend in it hid her from them and she was left to pick her flowers alone. Memory is a winding lane with high banks on which flowers grow and here she wandered in a nostalgic summer evening in deep soundlessness.
Even when he lapses into the modernist style of Woolf or James, he can still craft an image compelling enough to pull the reader through the awkward syntax:
Night was coming up and it came out of the sea. Over harbours, up the river, by factories, bringing lights in windows and lamps on the streets until it met this fog where it lay and poured more darkness in.
Fog burdened with night began to roll into this station striking cold through thin leather up into their feet where in thousands they stood and waited. Coils of it reached down like women’s long hair reached down and caught their throats and veiled here and there what they could see, like lovers’ glances.
Party Going also offers more small humor along the lines of Loving, including some witty dialogue between the characters and other lines demonstrating their lack of self-awareness when trying to treat station workers like servants, while Living was nearly devoid of humor save that of the old-guard managers at the foundry who attempt to stymie the young boss trying to coax changes in the plant’s operations. Green also shifts back and forth deftly between the primary focus on the fatuous upper-class twits at the novel’s center and their beleaguered servants who, by the way, have to wait out the fog in the station while their masters relax in comfort in the hotel.
EDIT: Almost forgot – one thing I did wonder about Party Going, which Green wrote in the late 1930s, was whether the fog represented Nazi Germany, creeping up on an England too wrapped up in itself to notice the impending danger. The fog lifts at the novel’s end, which probably disproves the theory, although I could craft an argument that Green was commenting on the English aristocracy’s reliance on luck, fate, God, or simply on other parties to get it out of trouble.
Next up: The Grapes of Wrath. No, I’ve never read it before.
With regard to your historic All-Star team: Bonds > Williams.
You’d do well to provide some justification for that comment, Josh. Williams was pretty dominant – led the AL in OPS+ as many times as Bonds led the NL, for example, and did so despite losing his age 24-26 seasons to war.
Okay. While I think their hitting stats make them pretty even (as you said, both led their respective league in OPS+ nine times), Bonds was clearly better on the basepaths than Williams and was, by most accounts, a pretty good left fielder (even in toward the end of his career, he had a pretty solid UZR).
Bonds stole over 500 bases in his career, while Williams stole 24. Even if steals aren’t really all THAT important, it’s still something that tilts the argument in favor of Bonds.
Also, if you look at their peak OPS+ seasons, Bonds has 3 years that beat Williams’ best.
Maybe it comes down to opinion, but I think that since you were putting together an all-time BASEBALL team, defense and baserunning should be taken into account and to me, that makes Bonds the choice. It’s unfortunate Williams had to lose three years of his career in service of his country, and that can be taken into account, I just don’t know how much.
I’m excited for your review of Grapes of Wrath, because it’s also on my to-be-read list, and waiting patiently on my bookshelf. I hope you like it, since if you give it a bad review, it may be waiting a while longer.
When will you be getting to the review of Word Freak?
Don’t know why I’m looking forward to it since I’ve already read it. It was entertaining, which was all I’d hoped for when I bought it.
Keith,
I was wondering how individual pitches are evaluated on the 20-80 scale. More specifically, how does a scout determine that a guy’s curveball is a 50 versus a 55 or + versus ++ or what have you?
Do you know if anyone is using a pitch/fx type system to more specifically evaluate/describe a given pitch so that in addition to saying a guy has a 70 curveball they would also say it breaks x inches down and x inches away?