Victorians! discussion

Discuss this portion of the story.

I've finished this section, and, as I said in the other thread, I am full of speculation!

Edited: I'm so sorry - I messed up on how long this selection was! I thought it was chapters 4 thru 6, so what I posted was full of spoilers. I'm sorry if anybody suffered as a result of this, and I've now put it all into a spoiler, so nobody else will see it until they're ready. Sorry again!!!

(view spoiler)[I'm wondering about Juliana's motivation in seemingly throwing Tita at the narrator. One possibility I have considered is that she is worried what will happen to Tita after she dies, and wants the narrator to fall for her and take care of her. However, this is probably unlikely, since she barely knows him. On the other hand, although the narrator has told Tita that he is not rich, Tita had originally told her aunt that she thought he was, and that would appeal to Juliana. Or is she suspicious of him and wants Tita to find out the truth? She may even suspect that he is Cumnor, who wrote to her. I thought it was a bit strange that at the end of their meeting in the garden, after the narrator had mentioned that he reads Aspern, Tita suddenly asked him whether he has published anything about the poet. That seemed to come out of left field. Tita has told the narrator that she has not told her aunt anything about his interest in Aspern, but she might not be telling the truth.

Another question about Juliana's motivation in asking to see the narrator. He thought it was because he had stopped sending flowers, while Tita later tells him that her aunt wants him to stay so that he will pay her exorbitant rent longer. But is either the truth, or has she some deeper motivation? When they have their outing in Venice, Tita tells the narrator that her aunt is cunning, and even tells him that he would do better to live in another house, or, even better, leave Venice altogether. I thought that this was a sinister warning!

And the biggest speculation of all - is it possible that Tita is not Juliana's niece at all, but her daughter by Aspern?! (hide spoiler)]

In response, Denise, I'll quote: "The Aspern Papers demonstrates James' ability to generate suspense while never neglecting the development of his characters." (Wiki)

I think it is particularly fun here to consider how much James has or has not told us about his characters. I ask myself, how many women in today's world that I have met, might I consider as prototypes for Juliana and Tita. My own reaction is that, especially as I age and know more and more elderly widows/singles or stories about women in assisted living or even nursing homes, the more connections I can make, for Juliana, at least.

Mystery is the other side that it is intriguing to consider: how suspense is built as there seem to become more and more questions and enigmas to be unraveled. Now, if James is the devil with his short stories that he is with his longer later novels....we'll get to twist our minds a bit. (I like your speculation about Tita, Denise! Like a true reader of Victorian fiction.)

Should we consider Venice a "character" in this story?

Has anyone here read James's Italian Hours (1909)? I have only dabbled in it, although I love the illustrations from the days when people made drawings rather than took photographs as much as I enjoy the descriptions, of which the text here reminds me. I have never visited Venice, but authors like James have led me to feel as if I have.

It had a sense of thrill that Tita went out in the narrator's own gondola to savor Venice, like a tourist, this magical city on the sea which she apparently had once known well from direct experiences before holing up in the forlorn palazzo. Why the loss in daring?

I dont think that Tita can be Julia's daughter by Aspern. The NN says that Aspern died one hundred years ago, and Julia is a magnificent age. The only mention of Tita's age that I have seen is that she is a spinster, however, in Victorian times you didnt have to be that old to be a female spinster. And from Chapter One Mrs Prest remarks that

The niece, according to Mrs. Prest, was not so old, and she risked the conjecture that she was only a grandniece

Of course, none of this means that she couldnt possibly be some other relation to Aspern, its just doubtful that Tita is his daughter. I'm also guessing that Julia is somewhere in her thirties, possibly early forties.

However, in Chapter 4 the NN does remark that while its hard to put a finger on the exact lines that painted Julia in ingonominy the poems do present her as a bit of a free spirit, perhaps a bit wanton, and a bit wild.

In both Chapters the NN spends a lot of time speculating on what it was that caught Aspern's eye, what in Julia made the NN's hero revere her with immortal poetry. I guess another good question to ask in that case, since much of this story is about Aspern's right to privacy, what right did Aspern have to immortalize Julia?


One thing I felt that added to the mystery is that Tita says up until 20 years ago Julia was still willing to talk about Aspern. What changed?

Lily wrote: "Should we consider Venice a "character" in this story?..."

I definitly think so!
I'm always glad to go ti Venice, but after reading this, I've already booked to go there in two weeks time: the town here is ... alive!

Becky wrote: "... The NN says that Aspern died one hundred years ago, and Julia is a magnificent age...."

Doesn't that alone suggest hyperbole, if Juliana was truly a lover for Aspern or, at the very least, the muse of his poetry?

I'm sorry Lily, I dont think I understand to which part of my post you are referring?

I dont doubt that Tita exlaiming her Aunt was a 150 was hyperbole, I'm just saying that given both characters seeming respective ages I doubt that its possible.

Not that Tita doesnt have some other secret, or relation hidden about somewhere, I just dont think she is secretly her Aunts daughter. Watch me be wrong though :)

Lily wrote: "Should we consider Venice a "character" in this story?

Has anyone here read James's Italian Hours (1909)? I have only dabbled in it, although I love the illustrations from the days when people made drawings rather than took photographs as much as I enjoy the descriptions, of which the text here reminds me. I have never visited Venice, but authors like James have led me to feel as if I have.

It had a sense of thrill that Tita went out in the narrator's own gondola to savor Venice, like a tourist, this magical city on the sea which she apparently had once known well from direct experiences before holing up in the forlorn palazzo. Why the loss in daring?"

I think that Venice is important because it does impart a certain atmosphere, and the narrator speculates that Juliana chose it both because it is so full of oddities that they could get lost in it without attracting much attention, and also because it apparently is cheap to live there. But I don't think it rises to the level of being a character in the story. Other than the narrator's excursion with Tita, it does not intrude much into the gist of the story. I find this a very "interior" story, both because I think that it consists mostly of the thoughts and interactions of a few characters rather than a lot happening, and also because it seems almost as confined to the house as the women do. Other than the fact that the house has typical Venetian architecture (such as the sala), I think that almost any large dingy house with an attached garden would do.

I was surprised to find that Tita and her aunt had not been so isolated earlier; that they had had a number of acquaintances and been out and about. I also wonder at what point this changed, and why.

Becky wrote: "I dont think that Tita can be Julia's daughter by Aspern. The NN says that Aspern died one hundred years ago, and Julia is a magnificent age. The only mention of Tita's age that I have seen is that..."

I think that the narrator said that Aspern died a hundred years ago at a point where he was still pretending to Tita that he read and admired the poet's work, but did not know that much about him. I think it was more of an offhand remark, simply implying that he had died a long time ago, and Tita's reply that her aunt was a hundred and fifty was a rare spark of humor from her.

I noticed that in one of his posts on the first section, Everyman said that he thought that Aspern had died about thiry-five years before the start of the story; I wonder what gave him that idea? I have skimmed through the first pages, but don't really want to reread it all over again.

Early in the story, when the narrator finds out that Juliana is alive, his first reaction is that she must be a hundred years old, but then he says that when he reasoned it out, he realized that she needn't "have exceeded by very much the common span." It would be interesting to know what the average mortality was at that time; probably not as old as now. He also mentions that Aspern died young, and Juliana has obviously lived to a more advanced age. So far, I don't think there has been any indication of Tita's age, but I have suspected from the beginning that she may be older than she appears. So I don't think it's impossible, but you may be right that the age difference might be more than would make it logical.

Another thing that I noted was that Tita told the narrator that they received a small periodic amount of money from a lawyer in America, and that she thought that the money was hers, rather than her aunt's. Another mysterious factor!

Becky wrote: "However, in Chapter 4 the NN does remark that while its hard to put a finger on the exact lines that painted Julia in ingonominy the poems do present her as a bit of a free spirit, perhaps a bit wanton, and a bit wild."

This is what I would have liked to point out to Everyman in the earlier thread when I said that I thought that Tita had been more sheltered than her aunt, and he said that at that time Juliana would likely have led a sheltered life, too, but it would have been a spoiler. At the time I read his response, I had already read this bit. However, I had somehow gotten that impression even earlier, when I had read only the first section and posted my impression. Not sure exactly why, though.

Becky wrote: "...since much of this story is about Aspern's right to privacy...

Actually, I don't see that as a theme here. I do see it as being about Juliana's right to privacy, but not Aspern's.

However, I had somehow gotten that impression even earlier, when I had read only the first section and posted my impression. Not sure exactly why, though. Poets muses are rarely docile doves are they? :)

Considering how vehemently James treated his own privacy, I think that the story is veru much about Aspern's right to privacy, and that Julia is a sort of guardian, and, she has her own right to privacy as well. Perhaps I should have said that a major theme is privacy- regardless of who's it is.

Denise wrote: "I noticed that in one of his posts on the first section, Everyman said that he thought that Aspern had died about thiry-five years before the start of the story; I wonder what gave him that idea?"

I should have gone back and checked my notes instead of relying on memory. It was 53 years, not 35 years. I got that from early in the book where the narrator says "There had been in impression about 1825 that he had "treated her badly." The story was published in 1888, which is 53 years.

Now, I suppose that the impression could have been posthumous, and the actual treating her badly could have been long before that, but if we assume that the treatment actually took place in 1825, she could have been 25 at the time and then she would now be 88 years old, not an unreasonable old age.

Everyman wrote: "Denise wrote: "I noticed that in one of his posts on the first section, Everyman said that he thought that Aspern had died about thiry-five years before the start of the story; I wonder what gave h..."

Edit: In Chapter 4, Aspern's imaginary "bright ghost" says to the narrator "Strange as it may appear to you she was very attractive in 1820." So presumably she was born very early in the 1800s, if not in the very late 1700s. Still well under 100 at the time of the story, 1888, assuming that we are intended to see this as a contemporaneous narrative.

I was surprised when, in Chapter 4, the narrator says "as I look back upon [the summer days] they seem to me almost the happiest of my life." This seems strange to me. He doesn't seem to be getting any work done, he doesn't seem to be advancing at all toward getting the papers or even getting to know Miss Tina, the garden is barely getting underway, and he is getting "little satisfaction" from trying to guess "the mystic rites of ennui of the Misses Bordereau."

What on earth does he have to be happy about?

At last, in Chapter 5, he gets into a real conversation with Miss Tina. But like him, I am mystified as to the reasons for "Miss Tina's sudden conversion to sociability...The story hung indifferently together." Doesn't James's story hang a bit indifferently together? But at last we start to hear something of their past lives in Venice, the sociability.

And surely there must be some meaning I'm missing to the lawyer Pochintesta writing beautiful poems including one addressed to the aunt. Another poet writing poetry to her -- yet James, for the time being, makes almost nothing of this. Is it really a throw-away passage, or is there something here I'm not getting?

It strikes me that this is a "quest" story, successor to quest stories going all the way back to Jason and the Golden Fleece, if not to Gilgamesh.

I didn't take any formal literature analysis courses, but do others know more about the "quest" genre of stories and whether (and if so how) this fits into them?

One other post before I stop overposting: what does the narrator mean when, in Chapter 5 about 3/4 of the way through the chapter, as he and Tina have been talking for some time, and right before he introduces Jeffrey Aspern's name, he says "Ah yes, she was safe and I could make her safer!"

That went completely over my head. What is she safe from that he can make her even safer from?

That went completely over my head. What is she safe from that he can make her even safer from I assumed that he meant bringing her more into his control/confidence. She had brought the subject up, but then he gave her more information than was necessary, as he could have deflected such a naive women's suspicions. I assumed that he continued to go on to show that he placed a certain amount of confidence in the girl, and that alone might honor a person so emotionally deprived as Tita.

You asked if this could be considered a quest story, but Jason and the Golden Fleece, Gilgamesh, like Homer and the Niebilunglied are Epics, which, I was always taught was something different. Epics require God, and beasts of godlike porportion, and I feel that such enormity is missing here. Furthermore in quest tales I believe there must be a trial-by-fire and a sacrifice. At this point in the story we cannot say if James will fulfill those requirements.

The perceptions in the novel of these women are mysterious, and is it because we don't trust the narrator? They still exist as mysterious characters only seen through the eyes of the narrator. In Chapter 5, actually on the same page, he refers to both of them as "old women." And as he continues to ponder them, he says, "that they must once have been young or at least middle-aged."

So he makes them sound somewhat old.

Everyman, your question struck me also. What was the narrator happy about? Things yet unrevealed I suppose, but also in this he seems hard to follow. He complains of this garden, but also seems to have a bit of a fine taste for it too, building his little nooks there, spending a lot of time there, and discerns that "he liked it better as it was, with its weeds and its wild rich tangle, its sweet characteristic Venetian shabbiness."

So the narrator sounds like what I would call a true gardener, someone who really has a sense of things -- a lover of sorts. Contrast that with his distasteful ways of "doing business," as others have already commented upon.

Is he another case of a character who is just a mixture of things, good and bad? We know those people in real life, don't we? Those who seem to delicately view life and the good things, but then can be crass in certain areas?

SarahC wrote: "So the narrator sounds like what I would call a true gardener, someone who really has a sense of things -- a lover of sorts."

Well, yes, but perhaps more an appreciator of gardens than a gardener -- unless I missed something, he leaves all the actual gardening to a paid gardener, and all he does is pick and deliver the flowers. Real gardeners, I think, like to get their hands dirty and do the actual care of the plants, don't they?

It depends on which committee you are appointed too, Everyman! haha, Just kidding. No, seriously, I disagree with you. I think the love can come in a less hands-on way. Von Armin's Elizabeth in her German Garden wasn't allowed to dig, pull weeds, and transfer plants, etc. because it wasn't lady-like but her passion was strong. Maybe our narrator was in a similar situation, for a gentleman.

I actually noticed particularly the Narrator's descriptions of things and it caught my eye that he seemed to have a heart for things. Which, like I said makes him a character of contrasts, for me anyway. But this is a man who has a passion for Aspern that won't stop too. People who feel and love things, but maybe go overboard at times?

SarahC wrote: "People who feel and love things, but maybe go overboard at times? "

I think that's dead on. Overboard for sure!

Everyman wrote: "...Overboard for sure!"

Hmmm! Wonder if NN would share that assessment? Especially as we consider the ending of the story in the last section. Following comment intended as opinion; certainly not as spoiler. but in case others don't agree: (view spoiler)[ Perhaps not far enough, soon enough? (hide spoiler)]

I have a somewhat different take on this section. I think the NN is happy because even if he hasn't achieved his goal of the papers, nor making quick progress, he is where he wants to be working towards that goal. He's taken the Aunt's denial and basically ignored it. He's got opportunities just by being there to connect and possibly change their mind. That's what I read into the happiness thing anyway.

I don't believe he even picks the flowers but has someone deliver the tokens for him. I'm not clear on this point. Anyway, I don't see the love or enjoyment of the garden that you guys are seeing. I'm seeing the garden being a means to the end. It was the reason he gave them for wanting to rent rooms, therefore, he has to make it look good or look honest if you will. In fact, it's just another piece of deception and part of his grand plan to get what he wants. I find the NN almost evil in his obsession. He never thinks about the impact any of this will have on the ladies. He just wants what he wants.

I was really surprised at the fact the ladies previously had been so much a part of the social life in Venice, and like many of you, wonder what happened?

As to whether the poet had any right making the Aunt famous, I think we're getting a bit ahead of ourselves. First the poet is famous at the time of the story being written, but that doesn't mean he was famous when he was writing the poems about the Aunt. I don't know if I've missed something in the text that indicated he was famous at the time of the poems being written. If I have, let me know so I can revisit that. Also, I have a theory about artists of all types that many find their art is not something they choose to do, but rather almost have to do in their lives.

Everyman wrote: "One other post before I stop overposting: what does the narrator mean when, in Chapter 5 about 3/4 of the way through the chapter, as he and Tina have been talking for some time, and right before he introduces Jeffrey Aspern's name, he says "Ah yes, she was safe and I could make her safer!"

That went completely over my head. What is she safe from that he can make her even safer from?"

I hadn't thought of this before, but perhaps he is using the word 'safe' in a different way, a bit more archaic. I'm not sure exactly how to express it, but perhaps he is saying that he is now becoming sure of her (that she is trusting him and falling under his influence), and he can become even surer of her.

Deborah wrote: "I have a somewhat different take on this section. I think the NN is happy because even if he hasn't achieved his goal of the papers, nor making quick progress, he is where he wants to be working t..."

Maybe he is happy because of how he feels the presence of Aspern in the house because of his proximity to Juliana. He mentions feeling this presence several times, I think. I think it is all in his head because of his obsession. But I think this ties in with what you are saying. Since he is in the same house as the only surviving acquaintance of Aspern, staying in that atmosphere is making him feel more content.

I also agree with what you say about the garden - that to the narrator, the garden is nothing more than an instrument in his manipulation of the women.

Everyman wrote: "I was surprised when, in Chapter 4, the narrator says "as I look back upon [the summer days] they seem to me almost the happiest of my life." This seems strange to me. He doesn't seem to be getti...
What on earth does he have to be happy about? "

Maybe he knows deep inside that he iis up to no good. Not getting there makes hiom feel ... free?