Constant Reader discussion

First, my apologies for getting this started a bit late ... I am on the road driving from Wisconsin to Texas and back and have only intermittent internet access.

Okay ...

Let's get started by talking about Kitty ... here's an excerpt from my original review when I read this book in April ...

Maugham gives us a “heroine” who is so flawed, so unlikeable, so self-centered, shallow and obtuse … and yet … Raised by a socially ambitious mother to make “an advantageous marriage,” in an era when women were mostly defined by the men they married, Kitty hastily chooses Walter. Trying to fit into Hong Kong society, she falls for Charlie’s charms, but she fails to recognize how he is using her. Finally faced with the realities of the cholera epidemic and the selfless conduct of others, Kitty begins to recognize what a mess she has made of her life, and what a different path she might have chosen.

Maugham created a very unlikeable character, yet I couldn't stop reading about her. It was obvious that she found her life meaningless, but was unaware that she could try to find a purpose for her life. It was only through suffering that she was able to mature enough to choose a different path.

I had never read a book by Maugham before. After reading this, I am eager to read some more. Can anyone recommend another "must read" from him?

I loved The Razor's Edge, and there's an old discussion of it somewhere in our archives. Yes, Kitty was a vain, shallow, silly woman, and I loved the way she gradually developed.

The Painted Veil

Kitty was shaped and molded by her first teacher, good old mom. I am sure Kitty had inherent DNA , but if er mother had been a wiser woman , she might have directed Kitty better. This being said I liked Kitty, yes she was willful ,shallow and selfish, but she made for an interesting character. He father neglected her also, so she thought Walter was like her father, and was totally surprised by him. I think he was instrumental in her growth.

Hello everyone. I finally read a book and can join you in a discussion.

This was my first book by Somerset Maugham, and it will not be the last. I loved his writing and the psychological dimension of his characters.

I also found it a very feminist book for the time. Somerset seems to me to be making a critic of the British society of his time; much like Jane Austen did of her contemporaries. And as unlikeable as he makes Kitty, he does give her some chance to grow and redeem herself.

Carol, I think you are right about "she thought Walter was like her father". I had not made that connection.

Do you all think Walter was committing suicide (and attempted murder)? Do you think he was surprised when Kitty went with him? For me the book came stunningly alive when Walter issued his ultimatum and we saw through his eyes how Charley was such a fraud. Walter was a wonderfully complex character. He hated himself for being in love with such a ninny, but I don't think he realized how she could change given a chance. Maybe all women of his day were like her. Maybe he thought there was no alternative. I liked him and felt sorry for him, but was a bit put off that he was so dishonest with her from the beginning.

Walter knew she had no alternative, because he knew how despicable Charley was. Didn't Walter hint at the murder, suicide motive. Maybe I am dreaming. I thought Kitty asked him if he was trying to kill her.

Capitu, her dad proved to be more of a man then she thought. I was surprised at her mother's stoic acceptance of her pending death. I thought she would have been more demanding.

I have a question - the end where the line says that "she kissed her father as if he were her lover" - or something like that. This line has been haunting me. Kind of strange - and creepy. But maybe you guys have hit on the fact that Walter and her father were interchangeable for her psychologically and this was Maugham's way of letting us know?????

Another really bit part of her growth I thought was when she told Walter that it wasn't her fault that he couldn't see through her. He knew what she was and he got what he wanted. Not her fault. He picked her and that was that. I thought that this must have been somewhat controversial or rare writing for the time. For a woman to put responsibility onto the husband.

I would love to hear what others have thought about the line I mention above.

I thought it was creepy, too, Roxanne. Where do you suppose Maugham was going with it?

Carol wrote: "Walter knew she had no alternative, because he knew how despicable Charley was. Didn't Walter hint at the murder, suicide motive. Maybe I am dreaming. I thought Kitty asked him if he was trying to ..."

Carol, after reading your comment I thought about it and in a way it emphasized her lack of true feeling and emotion. She lived in a time when human emotion and/or passion simply didn't seem to fit into the equation. She was numb.

Sherry wrote: "Do you all think Walter was committing suicide (and attempted murder)? Do you think he was surprised when Kitty went with him? For me the book came stunningly alive when Walter issued his ultimatum..."

Sherry - could it be that he hated himself with or without Kitty? And self-sabotage was just a way for him to act out this self-hatred?

This makes me think about Maugham in a broad sense. "Of Human Bondage" and this book - all about what it means to be human - and telling us stories about where this humanness takes us whether we like it or not. And also - I think - that he makes the point that there is no "right" or "wrong" - just choices.

I agree with everyone who has said that Kitty is not likeable. I also think that she was a product of her times. If anyone has read books by or about the Mitford Sisters, they will recognize Nancy, the eldest, born in 1904 I believe, in Kitty: the coming out, the younger sister marrying first and to a titled man, the choosing of someone, anyone just to not be a spinster and have to live under Mother's dominance anymore. I was pleasantly surprised that Maugham had Kitty vow to rear her own daughter in a much more independent fashion.

I was confused by the Father at the end. Did he agree to take Kitty with him to the Bahamas because he'd begun to love her and wanted to give her(and their parent/child relationship) another chance or because he was a man who always gave in to the importuning of women he felt were stronger than he was?

I had real problems with the book and I'm not sure whether it's because of Kitty's character or the style of the book itself. It all seemed so melodramatic. But of course I just had to read to the end to see what would happen.

Her mother was a bit the mother from hell and Walter was a bit too accepting at the start. She was a silly child who seemed to think she could and would have whatever she wanted, no matter the effect on others.

As for the ending, yes she did seem to have recognized the wrongs she had done but her only way of dealing with that was to run away and try to raise her child differently. I find it so hard to feel anything for her at all. Or for anyone except the orphans and nuns, especially Mother Superior. She alone shows me that Maugham writes multi-faceted characters.

I also agree with Roxanne that the father-daughter kiss was creepy.

Portia wrote: "I agree with everyone who has said that Kitty is not likeable. I also think that she was a product of her times. If anyone has read books by or about the Mitford Sisters, they will recognize Nan..."

Great question - Makes me wonder if instead of thinking they lived happily ever after - maybe this is just more of the same - why would she want to do this? And why would he?

Oh - and what about the title???? The Painted Veil. I can't help it - but the line where he says (this is paraphrasing) you can't judge people by how they look - makes me think of the title. I'll find the line I'm referring to.

Sue wrote: "I had real problems with the book and I'm not sure whether it's because of Kitty's character or the style of the book itself. It all seemed so melodramatic. But of course I just had to read to the ..."

Like Sue - I could have gone into feeling like it was too melodramatic - except that something about Maugham's writing kept me. And if I looked deeper than the plot into the motivations and what he was trying to get across - I could even see past the time period limitations. To me, he was brilliant at weaving a story which was fascinating for its timeless human character development which really hasn't changed. I love his writing for the multi-dimensional quality.

In Chapter 26, there is a reference to "Hobson's choice." Does anyone know what that is referring to? This came up when Kitty was begging Charlie to get a divorce and he refused.

I agree with much of what has already been said. I’ve never read anything else by this author but plan to do so; the writing compelled me to read on despite the main character initially being so shallow and self-absorbed. Kitty indeed seemed to be a product of her era in which a woman’s status was determined by her marriage. I enjoyed watching her grow in bits and pieces despite herself. Maugham resisted the urge to tie things up in a pretty little bow. He did not wave a magic wand and have her fall in love with her husband, instead she grew to at least respect him somewhat by seeing the admiration others had for him.

Regarding Kitty’s mother: It’s interesting the author never gives her a first name and just refers to her as Mrs. Garstin. I can’t remember now what it was but he did give a first name to her father.

What I came up with is he either accepted the offer or not. Or no illusions as to what the choice would be. It can apply either way.

Perhaps there is something in me that resists the book. Can't figure it out as I actually enjoyed most of the reading of it. I don't recall another reading experience quite like this. Oh well. Maybe a reading of the Mitford book would be good and enlightening.

Yes, Hobson's Choice is where there is just one option to choose from. Sort of 'take it or leave it'. This must be a British thing then because we use it here all the time!

The writing carried me through this book more than anything, I wasn't very attached to the characters and I could see where it was going. However, I found I could not really dislike Walter or Kitty, much as I thought I was going to. I began to feel sad for them because their marriage seemed so hopeless right from the start there didn't seem to be anywhere they could go. I was almost yearning for them to be friends, despite everything, but Walter would not budge an inch and I couldn't even blame him for that given the circumstances. It left me with quite the feeling of melancholy, which I'm sure was the point.

On a different subject, I was trying to work out the role of the convent in the novel. Obviously it helped Kitty redeem herself somewhat but I also found Maugham's treatment of the Mother Superior to be a little odd, as if she was insincere or lacked feeling and was therefore not fully a good person. Anyone else notice this?

What is the significance of "The dog it was that died" that Walter quoted? Apparently, it is the last line from Goldsmith's "Elegy." I think I know what it means, but am not sure.

Soph wrote: "The writing carried me through this book more than anything, I wasn't very attached to the characters and I could see where it was going. However, I found I could not really dislike Walter or Kitt..."
I did. I got "mild sociopath" from Mother Superior, especially when she spoke of her own mother, sort of, "Oh, well, me ma would like me to visit her before she dies but too bad."

Portia wrote: "Soph wrote: "The writing carried me through this book more than anything, I wasn't very attached to the characters and I could see where it was going. However, I found I could not really dislike W..."

Yes I felt that Maugham was being subtly critical of her and the other nuns (who I thought came off a little stupid almost), but wasn't sure because the convent experience did so much in helping Kitty's character grow. Then again, perhaps she just grew up on her own by activating her own humanity and kindness, never mind where she did it.

It made me go a little cold when the children would rush to the Mother Superior and she would pat them on their heads then dismiss them. She was all business I think, and I wasn't fond of that. I guess that would tie in well with the comment she made about her own mother. Real human connections meant little to her, whereas Kitty learned to value the ones she made and it changed her for the better. Lesson here?

Portia wrote: "Soph wrote: "The writing carried me through this book more than anything, I wasn't very attached to the characters and I could see where it was going. However, I found I could not really dislike W..."

I didn't really see her that way. I believe the expectation in those days was that a woman who chose that life (and probably most Catholic priests too) didn't return home once they had left for an overseas mission. That was their new life. I think she was speaking realistically in fact. And though her mother would certainly have wanted to see her, she too would have known that it could not and would not happen.

I think Mother Superior was very good at living various roles, which she had to be in being the go-between with local government, medical personnel, the other sisters, the local people, the children and undoubtedly the financial backers of her mission.
all this and she appeared to be humane when she was with the children and people in need, such as Kitty.

Another thought on the Mother Superior. Is Maugham using her character as a comment on religion, that Kitty had to find her reason for being within herself rather than in something else before she could honestly dedicate herself to something else?

Remember that she was sent away by Mother Superior; she did not leave voluntarily. the work at the convent seems to have been a major part of her change but couldn't be the end of it. Perhaps she had to face the real world (Charles?) in order to really change.

☯Emily wrote: "Maugham created a very unlikeable character, yet I couldn't stop reading about her. It was obvious that she found her life meaningless, but was unaware that she could try to find a purpose for her..."

I'm a little late to the discussion, so someone has probably already answered this question, but The Razor's Edge is a stunning book. I mean gorgeous! I also really liked Cakes and Ale. And The Moon and Sixpence, in which there is a character (loosely?) based on Gauguin.

I also could not stop reading about her. And although she was a ridiculous little thing, I felt something other than just contempt for her. I really wanted Kitty to grow, so I was glad when she started first to examine her life and then to see where she had been a fool. Maugham demonstrated real compassion toward her as a character.

So Kitty had to sleep with Charles one last time, to wash him out of her system?

Sherry wrote: "I loved The Razor's Edge, and there's an old discussion of it somewhere in our archives. Yes, Kitty was a vain, shallow, silly woman, and I loved the way she gradually developed."

Me, too, Sherry! I can't recommend it enough--as it evidenced by my just recommending it to Emily. :-)

Maybe the Mother Superior realized that the only way to efficiently run a mission such as hers, where life was hard and unpredictable, was to remain just an inch away from emotional involvement.

Janet wrote: "I agree with much of what has already been said. I’ve never read anything else by this author but plan to do so; the writing compelled me to read on despite the main character initially being so sh..."

I was so pleased that Maugham didn't, as Janet says, tie everything in a little bow by having Kitty and Walter fall in love. That she came to respect him was far more satisfying because it was more believable--more real life than fairy tale.

☯Emily wrote: "What is the significance of "The dog it was that died" that Walter quoted? Apparently, it is the last line from Goldsmith's "Elegy." I think I know what it means, but am not sure."

Emily, here's the Elegy in Full:
http://www.poetry-archive.com/g/an_el...

It's almost a template for the book itself. Walter dies instead of Kitty--it seems to suggest that he meant her to die instead of him. That's just one possible reading, of course.

Carol wrote: "So Kitty had to sleep with Charles one last time, to wash him out of her system?"

It would have been nice if she could have rejected him without sleeping with him, but apparently she hadn't reached the point of sufficient self-loathing yet. That certainly seemed to do it.

Ruth wrote: "Maybe the Mother Superior realized that the only way to efficiently run a mission such as hers, where life was hard and unpredictable, was to remain just an inch away from emotional involvement."

I think she had to live on an emotional edge, giving only so much of herself, since she was responsible for holding so much together.

Carol wrote: "So Kitty had to sleep with Charles one last time, to wash him out of her system?"

Carol, I hope your comment was meant to induce a snicker, because that is what I did when I read it.

Both , Portia. A little facitiousness on the side.

Portia wrote: "Carol wrote: "So Kitty had to sleep with Charles one last time, to wash him out of her system?"

Carol, I hope your comment was meant to induce a snicker, because that is what I did when I read it."

What's that old shampoo commercial -- "she's gonna wash that man right out of her hair"?

Sue wrote: ""she's gonna wash that man right out of her hair"? ..."

That's a song from South Pacific.

Ruth wrote: "Sue wrote: ""she's gonna wash that man right out of her hair"? ..."

That's a song from South Pacific."

"And send him on his way. Got the picture?"

"Course, when Emile Lebec shows up on a horse five minutes later, Nellie starts singing, "I'm in love, I'm in love, I'm in love, I'm in love, I'm in love with a wonderful guy.: :P

Portia wrote: "Another thought on the Mother Superior. Is Maugham using her character as a comment on religion, that Kitty had to find her reason for being within herself rather than in something else before she..."

I saw the Mother Superior as the counter-balance to Kitty: the perfect woman/human being, highly spiritual and above the smallness of Kitty’s world. It seems to me that Kitty finally saw herself only when she measured her life against the women in the convent and the Mother Superior in particular.

So much in this discussion already!

I really loved this book - one of the few I've given 5 GR stars. Not just because of his beautiful, understated writing, but because, as others have noted, the characters actually grow, change and seem real.

I agree with Capitu as to Maugham's use of the Mother Superior. (I don't see her as sociopath at all...too much compassion for other people!) She certainly balanced Kitty's impetuosity with her self-control, but I don't think they were total opposites. Once removed from her social butterfly life, Kitty develops a capacity to read people - all those quiet, lonely evenings trying to figure out her husband. The Mother Superior had this ability in spades.

At first I was sympathetic to Walter, the quiet, betrayed husband. But - again, no black/white here! - he has his dark side. I think he forced his wife to come with him out of sheer cruelty, to rob her of what she loved. And on some level, I think he didn't care if he died or if she died, either. (But then the incident with the salad - where he tries to keep her from eating it and then, when she plunges ahead, recklessly, to defy him, he eats it as well, and then they eat it every night - his first impulse is to save her. I don't think he willed her death for long.) And his refusal to give an inch, his nursing of his woundedness and anger, really made me tired.

In the end, it seemed Kitty grew, but Walter shrank. Or shrivelled.

It's interesting the duplicity in so many of these lives, especially Kitty, Walter and Charles. Kitty and Walter are seen as saints for coming to the town with the cholera outbreak. Then Kitty is seen as the noble, sainted widow and mother-to-be. Of course Charles is all duplicity but as a civil servant no one is looking for him to be a saint (except Kitty for a time).

Carol I didn't find the kiss that Kitty gave her father creepy at all but I see where you're coming from. I thought maybe it was a lover's kiss in that it was pure and honest. Since her relationship with Charlie was supposed to be between lovers but was somehow tainted by the people they both were. Her father was as was the norm for that timeframe so she barely saw him as anything outside of a provider. She never took into account that he was a person. The kiss signified a turning point for each of them in that there's freedom to be who they are without expectations. I hope this makes sense. I'm on vacation and sitting in a casino! Service is horrible.

oops. I think it was Roxanne who first mentioned the kiss. I was so excited that the discussion started, I couldn't wait to participate but I forgot my laptop at home.

I just can't shove that kiss under the carpet. I actually winced when I read it. No one kisses their father like their lover! Good heavens. But once again - when I think about it - just that term "like her lover" is so subjective. And Kitty's lover was not particularly innocent or pure and honest. So should we believe that in the context of the story - Kitty kissed her father as she kissed Charlie?

A girl's first love is her father, he teaches her about a man. Not in the physical sense, but how a man approaches life. Kitty didn't have that little girl experience, maybe she was finally going to have a father in her life to teach her things a mother can't.

Roxanne, said it exactly as I saw it. Its their start of the kind of relationship they should have had as father and daughter but never did. My interpretation anyway but who knows. I also meant that her relationship with Charlie should have been pure but was polluted because they were not free to do whatever they wanted.