schokomuffin123's review against another edition
lighthearted
reflective
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? N/A
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
4.5
duffypratt's review against another edition
2.0
I read these on my Kindle, from a "Complete Works" that I got for nothing or almost nothing. Later in life, James went back and revised his earlier work to conform better with his later aesthetic. There are several writers who have done revisions like this -- famously Mary Shelley with Frankenstein -- and I think its almost always a mistake. Once an author publishes a work, he should have no more authority over it than anyone else.
With James, and with this book, it makes me wonder. There is more detail and description in this book than in most of James. But I get the feeling that there would have been even more if I had not read the "corrected" edition. As his career progressed, it seems clear that James fell more in love with vagueness, and with having his characters never come out and say what they mean. Here, they sometimes do, but there are other times when I get the feeling that they did, but the author then thought better of it. Thus, in some ways, this book feels a little schizophrenic to me, which makes sense because it was written by one guy, and then edited much later by another.
The story, as in much of James, is very simple. Hero meets girl in chance meeting. Later, hero visits friend who is thinking about engaging himself to girl. Friend asks for advice. Hero gives, perhaps, bad advice. A love triangle is suggested, and a "comedy" of sorts ensues. That said, its the old fashioned kind of comedy, where everyone ends up married, and not the new sense of comedy, which is supposed to be funny. This is never funny, although there are points at which it is mildly amusing.
The twist that James seems to throw in here is that the real "love" difficulty is between the Hero and his friend, who seem to be more in love than any of the conventional couples. The only real conflict and resolution in the book is in the rift between these two. It is by far the most overtly queer of any of the James books I've read. (I still have about five to read at some point, so that's quite a bit.) It's kind of cool to see how James pulls this off without breaking any of the taboos at the time. But that's not enough to make me enjoy the book. I would have had a better chance at liking this if it had more of his concrete early style (as in Watch and Ward or Roderick Hudson), or if it had more fully been completely vague like the later books (Wings of the Dove or Golden Bowl). As it is, it felt like a stylistic mess.
With James, and with this book, it makes me wonder. There is more detail and description in this book than in most of James. But I get the feeling that there would have been even more if I had not read the "corrected" edition. As his career progressed, it seems clear that James fell more in love with vagueness, and with having his characters never come out and say what they mean. Here, they sometimes do, but there are other times when I get the feeling that they did, but the author then thought better of it. Thus, in some ways, this book feels a little schizophrenic to me, which makes sense because it was written by one guy, and then edited much later by another.
The story, as in much of James, is very simple. Hero meets girl in chance meeting. Later, hero visits friend who is thinking about engaging himself to girl. Friend asks for advice. Hero gives, perhaps, bad advice. A love triangle is suggested, and a "comedy" of sorts ensues. That said, its the old fashioned kind of comedy, where everyone ends up married, and not the new sense of comedy, which is supposed to be funny. This is never funny, although there are points at which it is mildly amusing.
The twist that James seems to throw in here is that the real "love" difficulty is between the Hero and his friend, who seem to be more in love than any of the conventional couples. The only real conflict and resolution in the book is in the rift between these two. It is by far the most overtly queer of any of the James books I've read. (I still have about five to read at some point, so that's quite a bit.) It's kind of cool to see how James pulls this off without breaking any of the taboos at the time. But that's not enough to make me enjoy the book. I would have had a better chance at liking this if it had more of his concrete early style (as in Watch and Ward or Roderick Hudson), or if it had more fully been completely vague like the later books (Wings of the Dove or Golden Bowl). As it is, it felt like a stylistic mess.
doctortdm's review against another edition
2.0
Yawn, I'm sure there are scheming people as described but doubt that a group of people all speak in such a similar elegant fashion, even in the 19th century.
msand3's review against another edition
4.0
Confidence is one of James' lesser-known novels, which is probably due to several factors. It wasn't included in his New York edition. It has two versions--American and British--intended specifically for those audiences. (I read the American version from the Library of America, which identified most of the American slang and expressions that James changed in the British version.) It also happened to fall within the four-year period (1878-1882) during which he produced some of his first great works: The Europeans, Daisy Miller, Washington Square, The Portrait of the Lady, and his theatrical comedy version of Daisy Miller, which was a popular success. Confidence happens to be merely a good work overshadowed by a handful of classics.
At first it seems to bear a passing resemblance to Daisy Miller, which had been published a year earlier. Indeed, we get more playful references to playboys making "studies" of young ladies (Daisy Miller is, of course, subtitled "A Study"), but James soon turns this idea on its head, as the ladies--Angela and her mother--begin to manipulate the men like so many chess pieces. This gives the title "Confidence" its double meaning: to take one into confidence as a way to share and keep secrets, but also the confidence to take control of a situation and remain assured of the desired outcome. It feels almost like a companion piece to Daisy Miller, as if it should be published alongside that novella in textbooks or critical editions. The male protagonist, Bernard, is wonderfully self-effacing, and therefore much easier to like than Winterbourne. By the end of the novel, the reader appreciates James' ability to manage the love quadrangle (a favorite Jamesian motif) in a way that is insightful, while giving the reader a satisfying conclusion. Compared to some of his more famous works, Confidence is light entertainment; however, the novel is still a pleasure to read just for fun.
At first it seems to bear a passing resemblance to Daisy Miller, which had been published a year earlier. Indeed, we get more playful references to playboys making "studies" of young ladies (Daisy Miller is, of course, subtitled "A Study"), but James soon turns this idea on its head, as the ladies--Angela and her mother--begin to manipulate the men like so many chess pieces. This gives the title "Confidence" its double meaning: to take one into confidence as a way to share and keep secrets, but also the confidence to take control of a situation and remain assured of the desired outcome. It feels almost like a companion piece to Daisy Miller, as if it should be published alongside that novella in textbooks or critical editions. The male protagonist, Bernard, is wonderfully self-effacing, and therefore much easier to like than Winterbourne. By the end of the novel, the reader appreciates James' ability to manage the love quadrangle (a favorite Jamesian motif) in a way that is insightful, while giving the reader a satisfying conclusion. Compared to some of his more famous works, Confidence is light entertainment; however, the novel is still a pleasure to read just for fun.
dedasab's review against another edition
3.0
Too much drama, this book could have been much shorter.
More...