A review by b0toxdenkirk
Washington Square by Henry James

emotional fast-paced
  • Plot- or character-driven? Character
  • Strong character development? Yes
  • Loveable characters? It's complicated
  • Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes

4.75

This one is severely underrated, in my opinion. It's up there with Austen and the Brontë sisters to me. TO ME! 

James has a very "love him or hate him" reputation for his writing style, which is ornate yet highly intimate. As others have mentioned, this story in particular has a theatrical quality to it, and much like live theatre, you're privy to a character's actions and encounters while leaving just enough room to speculate on their motives; though James employs a narrator, his penchant for irony is a tack that leaves enough plausible deniability to refrain from saying "X character unequivocally represents Y."

Truly, what is most heart-breaking to me is the relationship Catherine has with her father; or rather, his patronizing attitude towards her. You start off seeing that his intentions are largely magnanimous, but throughout the novel, he descends into baseless cruelty, even on his deathbed. I can personally relate to that confusing admixture of animosity and amity that he employs, and I see how Catherine came to the conclusion he resolutely disliked her. (Lowkey get big Chuck McGill vibes from Pops as well)

Though it's piercingly evident Morris was primarily interested in Catherine for her fortune, I also see enough ambiguity in the narrative to suggest that there could have been some tacit affection there as well, and I'm not so sure Catherine would have been "miserable" if she wed him. Though the ending is quite dour, Catherine triumphs in the end through her own obdurate will, refusing to relinquish it though it was the trait her father so despised...the conclusion makes us distrust the characters' rhetoric that Catherine is so aggressively plain and dull, but perhaps she is simply an average woman who is timid and awkward, yet steadfast, kind, and sincere; not a dullard, just perhaps not quite intellectually curious.

Simple yet highly effective, this is a great entry for James and his early period that I think pretty much anyone could find moving and accessible.