Overview Of Materialism In Henry James

812 Words2 Pages

1. Literature Review

The broad extent of criticism addressing materialism in Henry James is best summed up in H.G Wells's searing castigation in 1915 of We can note here the roots of an ongoing tradition of literary criticism regarding Jamesian materialism. Wells and other peers of James, amongst them his friend Edith Wharton, pointed out the incomprehensibility of certain passages of James and the often infuriatingly minute attention paid to detail, which was, certainly according to Wells, all to no effect. Wells cruelly compared James to a hippoptamus struggling to pick up a pea in the corner of its den; (Wells, 3:108). In Wells's vision of Jamesian materialism, the object itself is intensified to the extent where it becomes nothing, merely refuse. Wells sees James as simultaneously too materialist and not materialist enough, which presents the reader with a significant textual problem. If we are to take it that certain things are inherently Jamesian; cabinets and chairs, collections, portraits, the golden bowl in The Golden Bowl, which seems tenable, and therefore make the assumption that such material things are invested with nuanced meaning, we are then forced to answer certain questions. Is the destruction of such items of importance? In almost every James novel the object(s) at the centre of the novel is destroyed, erased. From that arise more questions - can we conceivably erase an image that has been so carefully worked into the reader's consciousness? The negation of an image leaves something of itself after all, and often an impression that would not exist where it not for the initial effacement. Such lingering images often serve only to highlight the immaterial aspects of a novel. Materialism in James is highly ...

... middle of paper ...

...heticism by conducting an investigation into cultural shifts in Britain which were later imported into America, most importantly regarding changing ideas of interior décor, particularly in relation to the increasing culture of acquisition and collection of art in the US.
Whilst Freedman's historical points are very attentive, his treatment of James is somewhat lacking in specificity – it becomes a rather vague critique of reification, and rather than paying due attention to the varying forms of ownership and means of owning, Freedman throws around the dubious term 'objectification', in effect robbing the object itself of the potential to be worthy of analysis itself.

Mark Seltzer wrote on The American in Bodies and Machines (1992), detailing a power-centered form of criticism conceptually dependant upon Michel Foucault's Discipline and Punish. According to Seltzer,

Open Document