Penelope Mortimer’s Misanthropes and Outcasts

At one point or other, most women of my generation discovered Penelope Mortimer’s The Pumpkin Eater.  We read it after we rented the movie, starring Anne Bancroft and Peter Finch, with a brilliant screenplay by Harold Pinter. In Mortimer’s classic ’60s novel, an unnamed woman,  fulfilled only by her brood of children, is in therapy. She is struggling to survive her problematic marriage to a  wealthy screenwriter.

Much as I love The Pumpkin Eater, I do not believe it is her best work.  Mortimer considered Long Distance, which was originally published in The New Yorker, her best novel. Certainly it is an unusual, difficult book – a departure from her realistic novels about witty, bemused wives and mothers who struggle to hang on to their identities or forge complicated new identities.  The narrator awakens one day to find herself living in a strange community.  She does not know who she is.

Morimter writes in a blunt, slightly awkward style here, capturing the stream-of-consciousness style of feminist novels of the ’70s.  Pretty writing was unnecessary in such novels.

I was, and still am, running away from the person to whom (in a sealed envelope, a bulky carton, a gift-wrapped package) I had addressed my life. The name on the address is simply “you,” partly because I still can’t bear to name you specifically, and partly because I am beginning to suspect that you are not an individual at all but a composite of many individuals;… that your characteristics, unlike your thumbprint, are not unique to you but are those of an ethic, a way of oblivion, what Mann calls “an unconscious type,” which I must either escape from or pledge myself to destroy.

At the moment, I am rereading the book I consider Mortimer’s best, The Handyman (1983), in which she explores the meaning of home.

Yes, you can decorate a home, or hire a handyman to redo the bathroom, but you need people, too. The  protagonist, Phyllis, a lonely widow, moves to a cottage in the country after her husband’s death, pressured by her daughter, who fears Phyllis will move to London and encroach on her life.  The cottage is adorable but not the home Phyllis  had hoped for:   the vicar doesn’t call on her, Henry James is not on the shelves of the library (he’s in storage), and the neighbors  snub her, certain that the  feudal Brigadier who owns the town  will drive her out, as he did the last  occupants, because he wants her land.

Desperately lonely, Phyllis invites her son Michael, who works in publishing,  to visit: she entices him with a story about her neighbor Rebecca Braun, a once famous writer who is now a recluse.

And here we encounter the wicked hilarity of Mortimer’s take on the male point-of-view.  Michael wants to meet Rebecca for monetary reasons but admits privately that  he dislikes most women writers.

Michael’s views are brazenly sexist, but comical.

…he disliked twentieth-century women novelists, including Mrs. Woolf, who, in his opinion, would have been far better employed as a schoolteacher.  They were either soft-centered bitches or malicious slobs–his vocabulary at the time–and he had no sympathy with their view of the world.

Can he be more outrageous?  Yes.   He continues,

People in a state of transition–women, adolescents, transsexuals, invalids, restless coal miners and most blacks–should not write novels.  Their books were messages from chaos.  He believed that the purpose of fiction was to observe without judgment; all these categories–but particularly women–judged without observation.  They had nothing to offer but prejudice and self-pity.  Privately, he believed that the Brontes and Austens and Eliots were an extinct breed, irresponsibly slaughtered by a bunch of self-conscious schoolgirls.

I have to say this politically incorrect  interior monologue made me  roar with laughter.  I can see Woolf as an intellectual but underprepared teacher, stumbling over a Greek text with her English pony pasted on the back of the page. (This is how she read Greek.)  Woolf’s lyrical running sentences used to send me into rapture, but I prefer the 19th-century geniuses.  (And the Brontes taught.)

Like Mortimer, I appreciate “messages from chaos.”  Without women’s literature, who would we be?  How bored I used to be by the history of men!

Mortimer is witty and brilliant–let’s hope NYRB reissues some of her other books.  The Pumpkin Eater is not her only masterpiece.

The Planned Parenthood Book Sale, The Wrong Box, & Audiobooks

Volunteers getting ready for the Planned Parenthood Book Sale

We went to the Planned Parenthood Book Sale,  which is held  biannually at the 4-H Building (45,000 sq. ft)  on the Iowa State Fairgrounds in Des Moines.

It is a family tradition.  My grandmother used to attend the sale.  She filled her shelves with 19th-century editions of Thackeray, Dickens, and George Meredith. I was awed: why, oh why didn’t I live in Des Moines?

And now it’s our turn to support Planned Parenthood.

Tonight we staggered home with a box of splendid books, among them Edna O’Brien’s The Little Red Chairs,  the Native American writer Linda Hogan’s neglected novel Solar Storm, books by Ted Mooney, Marge Piercy, Nina Berberova, Stephen Dixon, and Amy Tan, and a dictionary.

But I had another reason to attend: I wanted to buy my own books back.

This spring, my husband donated the wrong box to the sale. This kind of muddle regularly happens in our distracted household.   Imagine my surprise a few weeks ago when I discovered the mix-up.  Gone were some of my favorite books:  Library of America editions of Louisa May Alcott and  Laura Ingalls Wilder, a Penguin Galaxy hardback copy of Ursula K. Le Guin’s The Left Hand of Darkness, 1992 Modern Library hardcovers of Dostoevsky, and God knows what else.

I lamented.  But you know what I say:  Get over it!

The Oxford (left) and  Modern Library (right) edition of “Crime and Punishment”

I  found one of my books at the sale:  the 1990s Modern Library hardcover copy of Dostoevsky’s Crime and Punishment, translated by Constance Garnett.  And it is a relief to have it back, because Nicholas Paternak Slater’s translation reads like English in translation (the Oxford hardcover is gorgeous, though).

Well, it’s all for a good cause!  I’ll just have to make do or buy the books all over again.


Anne Bogel’s podcast What Should I Read Next? is very enjoyable, because she is  well-read in many genres, comfortable interviewing people, and has a kind of alternative radio vibe.   In Episode 173,  “Clocking in at the reading factory,” she interviews Natalie Van Waning, a blogger who  has decided to read long books this year.

Whether you love or hate long books, you’ll enjoy the discussion.  What constitutes a long book  anyway?   (My husband says 500 pages, I say 600.)  And what’s on Natalie’s TBR? John Irving’s A Prayer for Owen Meany is one of her selections.

And then they digressed a bit about audiobooks.  Does listening to an audiobook count as reading?  Yes, they say.  And I’m sure it does  but I admit I have never listened to an entire audiobook.

Years ago, I tried listening to one of Paul Theroux’s travel books while I did the dishes.  But it was so absorbing that I simply bought the book and finished it!

And I tried to listen to one of Elizabeth George’s mysteries while I walked, but the noise of traffic drowned it out.

Do I need better headphones?  Perhaps it’s as simple as that.  I don’t even have an iPod.

What equipment do I need?  Please advise.

Exit mobile version