James is so sharp and mean in this – it’s not what I expected at all, and I kind of loved it. The story is set post-Civil War and concerns the women’s rights movement of the time. Olive Chancellor is a frigid, yet highly emotional, spinster who is obsessed with the idea of women’s suffering and oppression. She takes up a begrudging acquaintance with her Mississippian cousin Basil Ransom, who is the perhaps the least ridiculous of the three principle characters, despite being cast as the stereotypical southern gentleman who likes his women pretty, vaguely dim, and susceptible to his chivalric charm. Between them is the ingénue Verena Tarrant, a blossoming public speaker who is set to become the new face of the movement and to whom they both wish to lay claim, albeit for different reasons.

And it is it on this stage that James proceeds to mercilessly make fun of everyone involved. The women are awful. Their arguments, saving those of the brusque lady-doctor, are silly and shallow. Think less Elizabeth Cady Stanton and more Legally Blonde. I wanted to shake both of them every time they opened their mouths. James’ language is wonderful; there’s a lovely line from Olive that really sums up her views of men in general: “No man that I have ever seen cares a straw in his heart for what we are trying to accomplish. They hate it; they scorn it; they will try to stamp it out whenever they can. Oh yes, I know there are men who pretend to care for it; but they are not really men, and I wouldn't be sure even of them!” So if you are against us, you’re a jerk – if you are with us, you aren’t much of a man. It’s a miracle she doesn’t win more converts in the masculine ranks.

The men, primarily Ransom, are a bit better but are still at the butt end of James’ joke. I found Ransom’s chauvinism to be somewhat more palatable than Olive’s reforming, due to his honest, good-humored delivery of it. He’s undoubtedly a caricature, though: he is implacably deaf to the ideas of women’s equality, he cheerfully sees Verena as a beautiful moron, and he persists in his gallantry despite having little real feeling behind it. You’ll have to excuse another quote, but the disparity between Ranson’s outward politesse and his inward loathing toward Olive is one of my favorite examples: “…he had quitted her, the other year, without telling her that she was a vixen, and that reticence was chivalrous enough.” We should really bring back the word “vixen” – I only ever see it in nail polish names now but it always makes me laugh.

I had trouble initially accepting the idea that Verena could love Basil despite his unvarnished disregard of her passionately-held opinions. The more I read, however, the less bothered I was. First, it quickly became apparent that her opinions were very easily molded by whatever strong personality exerted the most influence over her. Secondly, while his approach was patronizing and offensive, Basil’s sentiment of, ”I deplore Miss Tarrant's opinions, but her character—well, her character pleases me” would actually have been rather romantic if it had been paired with a bit more respect. The whole thing reminded me of the amusing conversations I had at my hyper-politicized college with people of violently different opinions, back when I still thought I cared about domestic politics; sometimes the eye-rolling and stern disapproval eventually would give over to the “you’re a lunatic, and possibly dangerous, but adorable” look. I always found it endearing, and I chose to assign that sort of incredulous affection to Basil rather than the more calculated sexism it could be read as. Although honestly, I guess I would probably prefer either reaction to the cold scorn and dismissal which was Olive’s approach to ideas that didn’t mesh with her own.

I would love to have been able to see Henry James’ expression as he was writing some of the passages in this book. I have the impression, or anyway I’ve chosen to be under the impression, that he wrote this was a sense of amusement and not just cynicism. It’s too funny to be entirely mean-spirited. This is my third attempt at James, following The Turn of the Screw and Washington Square, and I think I may have hit my stride with this author. I will definitely be reading more.

Very little suspense and action. But interesting as a portrait of the posh Bostonian environment that imagined itself to be very idealistic.

En mi humilde opinión es uno de los libros menores de un autor enorme, uno de mis favoritos. Precisamente lo que me gusta de Henry James es que debes desenredar la madeja según lees. En muchos casos debes sacar tus propias conclusiones. A pesar de esas maravillosas descripciones tan detalladas que tiene en común con la que fuera su amiga Edith Wharton, tanto de escenarios, situaciones, emociones o perfiles psicológicos, siempre hay una historia oculta entre lineas. James siempre dice mucho más de lo que escribe. Algo que es obvio para el lector está magistralmente velado con las palabras adecuadas, todo un arte. Todo esto se me hizo mucho más patente en novelas o relatos como Daisy Miller, Washington Square, El Americano u Otra Vuelta de Tuerca. En fin, la pena es que no pueda darle 4'99 sólo por ser mi adorado Henry James.

It is hard to root for anyone in this novel. I sympathize with Olive's passion as a suffragette but not her wish to control her protégé, Verena. Verena's suitor Basil is worse because he wants to dominate and believes her role should be to serve him. And Verena is a malleable young woman who has no will of her own - nor any sense of where her best interests lie.

I don't need likable characters and really enjoyed this novel for its satirical sharpness. Perhaps the character I liked best was Dr. Prance, a pragmatic female physician who declares to Basil, "Men and women are all the same to me. I don't see any difference. There is room for improvement in both sexes. Neither of them is up to the standard."

Tanta analisi psicologica dei personaggi, minuziose descrizioni, ritmo piuttosto lento, una lettura non sempre facile e protagonisti non propriamente empatici, tutt'altro!

I listened to this on audible while driving to & from work -- it took awhile, but the book allows itself to be 'read' in chunks. The story is certainly a bit too long (typically Jamesian, I guess), often melodramatic -- but, in the end, quite good. Magnficent characters -- Verena, Olive, Basil...

The audible was narrated by a woman named Xe Sands - pronounced 'ex-y Sands'. she specializes in reading audible erotic romances -- so I guess 'Xe' is not chinese; probably her real name is Mildred or something... That said, the reading was brilliant -- a pity she doesn't do more serious 'reading'.

There is a great joke in the Wiki entry --

"Another theme in the book, much discussed recently, is Olive's possible lesbian attraction to Verena. (The term Boston marriage, apparently first used here by James, came to connote just such an ambiguous co-habiting long-term relationship between two women.) James is not explicit here, partially due to the conventions of the time. But this vagueness may actually enrich the novel because it creates possible ambiguity about Olive's motives."

"possible"...??? Ha! Ha! Not much "ambiguity about Olive's motives" that I could see...

A pesar de mi poca experiencia con Henry James, me atrevo a decir que no es un autor precisamente fácil: sus descripciones son exhaustivas hasta el paroxismo, el ritmo de la narración es concientemente lento, es pulcro y detallista hasta la exasperación… A veces se pasa de la raya, como en ‘La copa dorada’ (libro que confieso que no tuve fuerzas para terminar), pero a veces se queda justo al límite como por un milagro de equilibrista consumado, como es el caso de ‘Retrato de una dama’ y también ‘Las bostonianas’. Ésta última es una novela que te pide cierto esfuerzo y cierta paciencia, pero al final, una vez has superado los primeros escollos y te has acostumbrado a su forma, la recompensa es muy grande.

Si me preguntan de qué va ‘Las bostonianas’ diría que va de una lesbiana feminista de la segunda mitad del siglo XIX que se enamora de una chica y que en la primera cita ya le pide que se vayan a vivir juntas. Esta descripción del argumento reconozco que es la más llamativa, la que pretende pillar a los lectores por el supuesto morbo, pero no deja de ser cierta. Más exactamente se podría decir que va de una prima y un primo, que se conocen y no se soportan, y luego se enamoran de la misma mujer. La prima es una solterona que ha consagrado su vida a la lucha para la emancipación y la igualdad de la mujer; es una persona seria, apasionada, sufridora y determinada. El primo es un hombre del sur que pasa por dificultades económicas; es el típico caballero del sur, galante con las mujeres pero con un ideario conservador.

¿Y cómo es el objeto de deseo de estos dos primos? Para unos es una furcia que sólo busca atención y elogios, para otros es un ser puro consagrado a la causa feminista. Probablemente ninguno de los dos tenga razón, probablemente sea un poco de las dos cosas; es una oradora comprometida con un talento extraordinario pero también una persona social y alegre. Tiene su punto frívolo y superficial, pero también su punto de luchadora por la igualdad. Y creo que en parte su tragedia es ésta, que está entre dos mundos opuestos y que nadie puede entenderla tal como es. Los dos primos se enamoran de ella pero para cambiarla; parecen ser incapaces de aceptarla tal como es. Aunque también se podría argumentar que la tragedia de esta chica es que es débil de carácter, excesivamente dócil, que se deja llevar demasiado fácilmente por los que la presionan.

No pasa mucho en la novela. Henry James se puede tirar casi 100 páginas para describir una velada, es decir, para narrar no más de unas tres horas. Aunque más que narrar lo que hace James es describir. No narra una historia sino más bien describe la psicología de unos personajes. Describe la oposición de caracteres entre Boston, Nueva York y el Sur. También describe la manipulación, egoísmo, celos y sentimiento de culpa que puede haber en cualquier relación amorosa. En lo que se refiere a la trama, uno pronto adivina qué va a pasar y cómo va a terminar todo, pero esto poco importa, lo que importa es cómo va a pasar lo que sabemos que va a pasar. James es un maestro a la hora de describir la psicología de sus personajes y, encima, es capaz de ser despiadado con ellos al presentarlos como unos seres vanidosos y egoístas, pero tan humanos y reconocibles, y además lo hace todo con una pizca de sutil sentido del humor. De verdad que hacía tiempo que un libro no me maravillaba tanto.

Another step in the slow accretion of my lifelong project of reading the major novels and stories. The Bostonians -- maddening, thrilling, vexing, and troublesome -- illustrates again the principle that at its very highest levels fiction operates upon the reader in a messy and unpredictable way. As I write this, I am about to go to the "Great Books" discussion group at the Yale Club, which typically comprises late middle-aged women and me -- my peeps, in other words -- and which is always enlightening and amusing. It is difficult to predict how this novel's jarring and in some ways deeply unsatisfying denouement, its stern fictional renunciation of basic gender equality, and its portrayal of three fundamentally flawed and not very likable characters will sit with a sampling of contemporary readers. These elements, to my mind, are symptomatic of what I consider to be James's basic toughness -- not a word usually associated with him, obviously -- which manifests in his refusal to oblige the reader with neat and satisfying endings, or to soften the remorselessness of his satire. These are the operations of genius.

This book is bizarre! It’s my first Henry James novel, but apparently it’s very different from all his other work, so I’ll have to read more HJ if I want to get the full idea. All I can say is it is an absolute TRIP to finish this book the week after the 2024 presidential election. Someone in my reading group said there are a lot of Verenas in the US, and boy are they right!

The novel takes place around the time of Reconstruction and follows Olive Chancellor, a rich and passionate women’s rights activist; Verena Tarrant, a silver-tongued public speaker and budding feminist; and Basil Ransom, an ultra-conservative lawyer from the plantations of Mississippi. Olive and Basil are both in love (romantically or platonically) with Verena, and the story is about their battle over her heart and mind. Olive wants Verena to be the voice of the feminist movement; Basil wants Verena to marry him and devote all her charm and sweetness to making his life better and easier.

I struggled with this book for a couple reasons: Its just straight up difficult to physically read because the sentences and paragraphs are so long, and all the characters are frustrating. There really isn’t anyone to root for. Olive is a one-track minded obsessive jerk, Basil is a bigot whose main goal in life is to crush Verena’s spirit, and Verena is, to put it nicely, an airhead. I do, unfortunately, like to LIKE at least one of the characters in a book I’m reading.

For the positives: This book is very funny, especially at the beginning the very end. I gather from my supplemental reading that humor isn’t a given with James, which is crazy because he is, truly, so funny! There is a rich and diverse cast of side characters who are a lot of fun to read. And the last line of the book is incredible and redeemed the ending for me when I was feeling really down about it, lol. Also, the post-Civil War setting is fascinating.

I think part of my frustration with this book is that I was kind of going through it while I read it (had just adopted a puppy and was reading as part of a book club with a strict schedule) so some of my negative feelings may stem from that. But I don’t think it was ever going to be my favorite. Still very much worth reading, though!

I didn’t know Henry James was funny. Everything I ever heard about his style was that he was annoyingly verbose and it a made it hard to pick up and get started on this book. Turns out I love annoyingly verbose I guess. Once I started viewing this as a dark comedy, I couldn’t put it down even though I hate every character. That being said, I have the perfect casting for an HBO miniseries.

~ Calificación: 4.5 ⭐

Wow. Wow. Wow. Woah. Wow. I'm rating this one star? But the truth is, I should leave it unrated because I have NO idea how I feel about this book.

I checked this book out from my local library because the description said "Dealing heavily with the then very timely political issue of feminism and the changing role of women in society, Henry James's The Bostonians is the story of Civil War veteran Basil Ransom's conflict with his cousin Olive Chancellor for the allegiance and affection of Boston feminist Verena Tarrant." I found this tantalizing.

Once I got to reading it, I realized pretty much right away that I had read extensively about this book when I read Inseparable: Desire Between Women in Literature by Emma Donoghue. Because of this, I already knew the ending. This gave me a unique perspective on the book. I didn't have to pay as much attention to the plot itself, instead I focused on the actual writing: the characters and the intent behind the book. And that is why this book ended up being so difficult to rate. I mean, frankly--it's a masterpiece. The characters, their personalities, their faults and fears are so vibrantly written, they really feel *real*. They practically breathe. They feel like people you really might come across in your daily life. They also, coincidentally, are incredibly loathsome.

And that's the thing--Henry James' complete and passionate hatred of feminism, women working outside the home, having independent opinions or ideas, and his goal of wanting to show everyone that women should have no desire other than keeping their man/men happy all make it totally impossible to enjoy this book even the slightest bit...even while being amazed by the authors skill. And let's be clear--all that is *exactly* what Henry James is saying in this book.

Olive Chancellor is definitely a lesbian---some other authors called her "repressed" but that definitely isn't the case. She's closeted, yes but not "repressed". James purposely uses the phrase "a Boston Marriage" to refer to their relationship--which is how people used to talk about two members of the same sex living alone in a house together for a long time. It was basically a way to say a "gay/lesbian couple", when it was totally impossible to actually acknowledge such things existed.

Olive actively hates men, and constantly complains that Verena's biggest flaw is she doesn't "hate them as a species". Olive is jealous, controlling, dominating, demanding, domineering, and also dresses plainly, has no amusing hobbies (which women are supposed to have such as singing, dancing, playing instruments, drawing, etc.) and also happens to be humorless and speak in a monotone voice. It's constantly commented how little she smiles and laughs.

Basil, a Southerner who fought on in the civil war on the side of the south, constantly makes comments about "minorities" (and even writes some article expounding his views and manages to get it published) and is firmly convinced that women have no business being anything other than charming, quiet, and entertaining to men. Basil, is of course, the hero, the love interest, and the "winner" of Verena's heart. These two characters are meant to be foils of each other.

I do want to note that I was fascinated by how strongly Henry James drives the idea that women's only goal in life should be to entertain men home. It is really interesting because he never evern once makes any reference to the fact that women can't be happy unless they have children, raise a family, nurture living things, etc. These arguments are still used as a way to control women and tell us what our desires are--I know because I, as a women, have been told this in my own lifetime by multiple people. No one, on the other hand, has ever told me my life goal should be to entertain and please the men I'm with. They tell me my job should be to reproduce our species, and be excellent at that, (also while of course pleasing my husband in the bedroom---but that should be a side goal to the all consuming nature of motherhood, of course.) But Henry James never makes any of these claims. He is only interested in women as wives, as hostesses, as soothing voices to bring you cigars at the end of the day. Presumably because at this time rich women had wet nurses and the like to raise children, and they probably didn't have much activie involement in the lives of their children. Regardless, I think it's interesting to compare James' ideal gender roles with the roles that Olive espoused, and with the roles that are normative today.

Overall, despite the fact that this book is skillfully written and composed (though the ending is melodramatic) it extremely disagreeable due to the authors horrible opinions. I can't say I recommend reading it, but it is certainly an influential piece of literature.