Here’s another post about an Edith Wharton ghost story called ‘The Triumph of Night.’ ( Now there’s a masterclass on the effect of a resonant metaphor just in the title of the story!) There is definitely something ‘of the night’ about the narrative , not least in the heartless betrayal that lies at the heart of the tale.
Close analysis is essential to the study of English Literature and English tuition works to enhance the skills of students through practice at all levels of English Studies, whether GCSE, GCE A level or Undergraduate. Attention and confidence are key to textual analysis. Look for the ‘strange’ and think about WHY you have noticed something in particular, then follow your ‘nose’ through the trail of narrative or poetry to get to the heart of the message.
In fact the more I consider the implications of the sustained metaphor of the ‘triumph of the night’ the more nightmarish yet ‘proximate’ the tale becomes. For it is the very openness and generosity of the young man Rainer which makes him vulnerable. So cynicism would seem to be the best way to avoid betrayal, yet Wharton shows us that self preservation as evinced by the protagonist Faxon, is also a form of self-betrayal and leads to guilt and emotional isolation.
Once again I look for the ‘strangeness’ in an attempt to explore the undercurrents of the narrative. perhaps nothing is more pleasurable in reading critically than asking yourself ‘why does this word or phrase affect me in this way…?’ Being curious about the EFFECT of language helps us appreciate the way in which a text is constructed and certainly gives an individual aspect to our essay writing. Reading ‘otherwise’ makes your essays have a voice.
Extract Two.
They saluted their host’s nephew with friendly familiarity, and Mr. Grisben, who seemed the spokesman of the two, ended his greeting with a genial–“and many many more of them, dear boy!” which suggested to Faxon that their arrival coincided with an anniversary. But he could not press the enquiry, for the seat allotted him was at the coachman’s side, while Frank Rainer joined his uncle’s guests inside the sleigh.
A swift flight (behind such horses as one could be sure of John Lavington’s having) brought them to tall gateposts, an illuminated lodge, and an avenue on which the snow had been levelled to the smoothness of marble. At the end of the avenue the long house loomed up, its principal bulk dark, but one wing sending out a ray of welcome; and the next moment Faxon was receiving a violent impression of warmth and light, of hot-house plants, hurrying servants, a vast spectacular oak hall like a stage-setting, and, in its unreal middle distance, a small figure, correctly dressed, conventionally featured, and utterly unlike his rather florid conception of the great John Lavington.
The surprise of the contrast remained with him through his hurried dressing in the large luxurious bedroom to which he had been shown. “I don’t see where he comes in,” was the only way he could put it, so difficult was it to fit the exuberance of Lavington’s public personality into his host’s contracted frame and manner. Mr. Laving ton, to whom Faxon’s case had been rapidly explained by young Rainer, had welcomed him with a sort of dry and stilted cordiality that exactly matched his narrow face, his stiff hand, and the whiff of scent on his evening handkerchief. “Make yourself at home–at home!” he had repeated, in a tone that suggested, on his own part, a complete inability to perform the feat he urged on his visitor. “Any friend of Frank’s… delighted… make yourself thoroughly at home!”
Look how cleverly Wharton encourages our interest through our designated reader’s position as ‘Faxon’, using his physical exclusion’at the coachman’s side’. this exclusion delays his(and therefore the reader’s) firm knowledge about Rainer’s significant birthday and what such an anniversary might signify in terms of wealth.
The repetition used by Mr Grisben concerning Rainer’s longevity reinforces the narrator’s intuitive concern about Rainer’s future health. These techniques alert the narrator( and therefore the reader) to something impending and when ‘we’ arrive at Rainer’s Uncle’s home, we start to notice much ‘strangeness’ indeed! For look at the pronounced contrast between Uncle Lavington’s home being described both in terms of its ‘principal dark bulk’ and then the ‘violent impression of warmth and light. ‘
Faxon feels ambivalent about what the house represents. He feels confused about the ‘character’ of the house, and a few moments later, he is confused as well by the contradictory character of Uncle Lavington with his ‘dry and stiff cordiality.’ as opposed to his apparently exuberant ‘public personality.’
It all seems the wrong way around. We might expect a character to be more at home’ with himself when he is at home! We join with Faxon in wondering about such an irony, and if Lavington is strangely not ‘at home’ we must expect the uncanny! He is performing friendliness and geniality rather than feeling it as he is harbouring a terrible intention. He is plotting to destroy his trusting nephew in order to save his own reputation and wealth. Truly a man of the ‘night’!! ( And with a curiously perfumed handkerchief..as if his deceit has a scent! Or maybe his effete quality is a sign of his malignant, corruption of his ‘feminine’ role as nurturer of his ward and nephew?)
