Aldous Huxley's Early Novels

ALDOUSHUXLEY’SEARLYNOVELS:ANUNFOLDING DIALOGUEABOUTPAIN

Abstract

ThearticleexaminesfourearlynovelsbyAldousHuxley– CromeYellow,AnticHay, Those BarrenLeaves and PointCounterPoint –inconnectiontoeachotherandtoHuxley’s essays,intermsofanoverarchingthemeofacycleofpain,andtherebyconnectsthenovels to BraveNewWorld.Inthecourseoftheanalysis,themethodologicalproblemsof approachingthenovelsas‘‘novelsofideas”arediscussed,focusingontheproblemof reducingcharacterstotype,whichmakesitmoredifficultforreaderstonoticetheway Huxleyconstructsindividualcharactersandtheargumentshewishestoexplorewiththem. Finally,implicationsoftheexistenceofthisoverarchingthemeforreadingstrategiesare discussed.

Ina1931essayentitled‘‘ObstacleRace,”Huxleywrotethat‘‘[t]hought hasalifeofitsown....Anotion...proceedstogrowwithallthe irresistiblenessandinevitabilityofaplantedseed,oracrystalsuspendedin asaturatedsolution”(CEvol.III,143).Thispaperisfocusedonsuch agrowthofideasinhisearlynovels,specificallyin CromeYellow (1921), AnticHay (1923), ThoseBarrenLeaves (1925)and PointCounterPoint (1928).However,whilethemetaphorofacrystalsuggestslinearexpansionin time,Huxley’sideasoftendevelopeddialogically,continuallysupporting, contradictingandshapingeachother.

Theprocesswillbestudiedfromtwodifferentperspectives.First,thereis theinternalperspectiveofHuxleydialoguingwithhimself–itisfairlywell establishedthatoneofhismotivationsforwritingwastheexplorationof ideasforhisownbenefit(seee.g.Sion,195).Itshouldbenoted,however, thatsincetheauthorisanactualperson,whosemotivationsandunrecorded thoughtsareinaccessible,thestudymakesadistinctionbetweenAldous

Huxleyasa person andhis persona,accessiblethroughhispubliclyavailable writing,andwillbeconcernedonlywiththelatter.

Thesecondperspectiveofrelevanceisthatofthereaders,whoare invitedtobetheaudienceofHuxley’sstrugglewithideas–beingpublished texts,thenovelswere,inpractice,providedforthereaderstoexperience. Consequently,whileinquiringintohowHuxleyseemedtodevelopparticular ideasinthefournovels,theanalysiswillalsoincludethequestionofwhat thatcanmeanforthereaderandhowitmayinfluencetheprocessofreading.

Itmustalsobenotedthatthisarticlehastoberestrictedtoaselected theme,sincetryingtodojusticetothewholecontentofthefournovelswould requireabooklengthstudy.Inthepresentpaper,theanalysisislimitedto onethemewithdystopianimplications:whileHuxley’sfourearliernovelsare, intermsofsettingandstructure,verydifferentfromthelater BraveNew World (1932),theydocontainsometracesofitandthisanalysisisconcerned withonesuchstrandoftraces.

1.Truetotype

Aproblemthatneedstobeaddressedfirstisthenovels’collectivereputation –thetextsfromthetwentiesarerelativelyoftendiscussedtogether(e.g.Sion) andclassifiedas‘‘novelsofideas,”thedefinitionofthegenrebeingoften takenstraightfrom PointCounterPoint,whereitissuggestedthat:‘‘[t]he characterofeachpersonagemustbeimpliedasfaraspossible,intheideasof whichheisthemouthpiece”(299).

Twosignificantproblemsmayarisefromlookingatthenovels collectivelyandpayingexcessiveattentiontothis‘‘missionstatement.” ThefirstisthecreationofacertainnarrativeofHuxley’sdevelopment, seeingeachbookas,essentially,animprovementonthepreviousone.An exampleofthisisofferedbyGeorgeWoodcock,whostatesthatthe‘‘novels growincomplexityandquality–withthespecialexceptionof BraveNew World –astheyproceedfrom CromeYellow to EyelessinGaza.”Theproblem liesinthat,whileitisgenerallytruethateachconsecutivenovelfromthe twentiescanbeseenasanimprovementinthescopeandcomplexityofthe narrativetold,habitualthinkingaboutthenovelsinthismannercreatesarisk thattheearliernovelswillbeignoredoroverlooked,infavourofthelater ones.

Secondly,ifthededicationofthenovelofideas to ideasistakentoo simplistically,itmayinterferewithseeingindividualnovelcharacters as characters.Giventhatthereisonlyacertainnumberofimportantidea combinationstobeexpressed,significantlydifferentcharactersmaybefit intoafewgeneraltypes(e.g.‘‘thescientist,”‘‘theharlot,”‘‘theintellectual”),

thedifferencesbetweenthembeingpurposefullyoverlooked.Theriskis especiallyhigh,iftheanalysisspansanumberofbooks.

Forinstance,Woodcockexpressesanopinionthat‘‘thattheexcitement oftheideasmakesuptoagreatextentfortheshallownessofmanyofthe characters,whoareoftenlittlemorethanJonsonianhumours”(63).Hethen suggests(amongotherthings)that‘‘women[...]–withrareexceptions–are theenemiesinHuxley’sworld”(128),andattributestheportrayalsofthe olderfemalecharacterstotheauthor’s‘‘chronicmisogyny”(163).Thereare, however,potentiallymuchmoreinterestingwaystoreadthevariousfemale characters,ifoneconceivesofthemnotasaclass,butasagroupof characterswithindividualhistories.

Asimilarfatebefallsthemainfocalisingcharacters(DenisStone, TheodoreGumbrilJunior,MrCalamyandFrancisChelifer,andPhilip Quarles),whoarenotinfrequentlycollectivelydescribedasvariantsofthe failedintellectualtype.Forexample,MiltonBirnbaumclassesthemallas ‘‘cerebrotonicis,”andseesthemasfrustratedandhamperedbya‘‘Hamletlike[...]indecisionandinabilitytoexecutetheirplans”(48).Inconsequence, bothCalamyandFrancisCheliferseemtobereducedtotype,forneitherof themactuallydemonstratessignificantinactivityandindecision:bytheendof thenovelCalamyembarksonaquestformysticalenlightenment,while Chelifertakesafrustratingjobandlivesinanunpleasantlodginghouseout ofconviction(AH:97),insharpcontrasttoanumberofotherHuxley characters,whofeelcripplinglyembarrassedinthepresenceofpovertyand misfortune.

Anevenmoretroublingcaseofsimplifiedinterpretation,onealsomost likelytohappentothemainfocalisingcharacters,involvesidentifyingthem asauthor-mouthpieces.Someinstancesofsuchidentificationmayevenhave mildlyhumorousorabsurdresults,aswhenDavidIzzonotesthatwhilePhilip Quarles’swifehadanaffair,it‘‘didnothappeninreallife”(91).Inother instances,whenitisactuallyhighlyprobablethatHuxleyhadgivenoneof thosecharactersaparticularideaheagreedwith,dependingtooheavilyon thenotionofanauthor’smouthpiececanleadtooverlookingthingsother charactershavesaidinprobableagreementwithHuxley.

Thereis,forexample,MrsBetterton,agenerallysatiricalcharacter,who deliversaquotationfromShakespeareonthevirtueoffeastsbeingrare (PCP:55),whichHuxleylaterrepeatsinthe1929essay‘‘HolyFace”(CEvol. II,363).AsimilarthinghappenstoIllidge,adevoutCommunistworkingas aresearchassistant,apparentlysufferingfromaninferioritycomplex,aman eventuallycajoledintocommittingamurder,whodeliversthefollowinglines:

‘Asymmetricaltadpoles![...]’HethoughtofhisbrotherTom.Who[sic]hadweak lungsandworkedabroachingmachineinamotorfactoryatManchester.He

rememberedwashingdaysandthepinkcrinkledskinofhismother’swatersoddenhands.‘Asymmetricaltadpoles!’(PCP:66)

Thelanguageusedinthepassage,especiallytheevocative‘‘pinkcrinkled skinofhismother’swater-soddenhands,”echoesHuxley’sownsentiment, amixtureofconcernandembarrassment,evidentinessayshewroteafter encounterswithpeopleforcedtodogruellingphysicallabour(see Jesting Pilate and‘‘Sight-SeeinginAlienEnglands,”).Therearemanywaysinwhich IllidgeisnotHuxley,butinthisinstancetheauthorandcharacterseemtobe insignificantagreement.

Thepurposeofthisdemonstrationistochallengeacommonlyheldidea aboutthenovelsofideas–thegenrehasareputationofbeinginattentiveto charactersandplot,butwhileHuxley,admittedly,didnotcreatevery memorablecharactersinhisearlynovels,acriticalapproachthatactively overlookstheindividualityofparticularcharactersonlyexacerbatesthe problem.Thecharacters,howeverflawed,havemoretoofferthanfirstmeets theeye,anexampleofthishiddencomplexitybeingMyraViveashfrom Antic Hay.

2.Thewoundedflapper

Inhisonlineessay,JakePollerdescribesMyraasa‘‘anarchetypeofthe despairing,pleasure-seeking,sexuallypromiscuouspost-warflapper”(paragraph4),inlinewithsuchpreviouscriticsasWoodcock,whoclassifiesheras embodying‘‘theCircefigure[...]whoreduceshervictimstoanimalityor stupidity”(45).Thistypeofsentimentissometimestemperedwithan admissionthatMyraisalsoavictim–Pollerdescribesheras‘‘asympathetic figure,goadedbygriefintoanendlesssuccessionofaffairs”(paragraph8), whileJeromeMeckiercallshera‘‘victimofthewar,”whose‘‘despaircanbe tracedtothebattlefielddeathof[...]theonlymansheapparentlyeverloved” (69),buthestillinsistsonaninterpretationinwhichMyraisoneinaseriesof femalecharactersre-enacting‘‘Huxley’srecurrentnegativemyth,the collisionofidealisticmalesandvapidorheartlessfemalestosignifyreality’s refusaltocorrespondtothepresumptuousdesignsofthemind,[...]life’s inabilitytoimitateart”(68).

Thisseemstostillbeareductionistreading,evenifMyraisaccorded somemeasureofsympathy.Whileitistruethatatleastthreemalecharacters inthenovel–TheodoreGunbril,LypiattandShearwater–losetheirheads overherandpursuingherleadstopersonaltragediesforthem,their ‘‘idealism”canonlybetakenseriouslyifonereadsthemasreliablenarrators oftheirowncondition.Thatcanbedone,andisespeciallycommonwith

afocalisingcharacterlikeGumbril,butisnottheonlyreadingapparently justifiedbytextualevidence.

Lypiatt’smostdirectimpulsetocommitsuicideislearninghowlowly Myrathinksofhisart,i.e.learningwhatmanyotherpeoplehavepreviously toldhim.Andeventhen,inhisdeathbedconfession,hedoesnotabandon thepretenceofbeinglargerthanlife,goingsofarastocomparehimselfto Hamlet(AH:214).Hispropensityforbombasticgrandiloquenceis,however, perhapsbestrepresentedinasceneinwhichMyrahasagreedtositforoneof hispaintings:

‘Youmakemesufferagreatdeal,’saidLypiatt...quietlyandunaffectedly[...] ‘Iamverysorry,’shesaid;and,really,shefeltsorry.‘ButIcan’thelpit,canI?’ ‘Isupposeyoucan’t,’...hisvoicehadnowbecomethevoiceofPrometheusinhis bitterness.‘Norcantigresses.’...‘Youlikeplayingwiththevictim,’hewenton;‘he mustdieslowly.’

Reassured,MrsViveashfaintlysmiled.ThiswasthefamiliarCasimir.Solongas hecouldtalklike...anold-fashionedFrenchnovel,itwasallright;hecouldn’t reallybesoveryunhappy.(74)

MyraadmitssheknowssheishurtingLypiattandthereaderistoldshe even‘‘feelssorry”forcausinghimpain.Howeverthelocusofagencyin breakingawayfromthisrelationshiplies,toasignificantextent,withLypiatt, whorefusestohonestlyfacethefacts.Onthevergeofdoingso,herevertsto fauxtragedy,eventuallypromptingarealone.

Thesecondvictim,Shearwater,haspreviouslyestrangedhiswife,Rosie, topursuehisresearchwithoutanydistractions.Inresponse,afterrepeated attemptstowinhisattention,hiswifehasanaffairand,bythetime ShearwaterhasembroiledhimselfinanaffairwithMyraandwishestocome cleantohiswife,thereisnocommunicationbetweenthem.Theopportunity forhealingmissed,heislastseenrunningapotentiallylethalexperimenton himself.

And,finally,thereisGumbrilJunior.HeperhapsbestfitsMeckier’s notionofa‘‘maleprotagonistpour[ing][his]ownuntenablyidealisticnotions” (68)ontoawoman,sincethereactuallyisawomanheseemstoidealise.Yet, whenpresentedwithanopportunityofpursuingalifewithher,hethrowsit away.WhileMyradoespresshimstronglytoaccompanyherforlunch,he couldprobablyrefuseandcatchthetrainoutofLondontomeetEmily,ifhe hadenoughconviction.Instead,hecreatesafictionof‘‘theclown,”who ‘‘couldn’tbecalledtoaccountforhisactions”(161–162).Thattorefuseto takeresponsibilityforoneself is afiction,ismadeobviousthenextmorning, whenheattemptstomeetEmilyandfindstherentedcottageempty.

BothShearwaterandGumbrilfollowapatternofbehaviourthatleadsto inflictingpainonothersandlaterreapingpainfulconsequencesfor

themselves,thepainbeingmagnifiedintheprocess.Rosieisinitiallygreatly distraughtatherhusband’slackofinterestinhumancontact,but,bythetime Shearwaterneedsher,shehasmovedontoacceptingalifeofemotional separation.GumbrilclearlymournsthelossofEmily,butultimatelyleaves herwoundedbyhisactions.

ThepatternalsomanifestsinMyra–shehaslosttheloveofherlifein theGreatWarandisnowunabletolivefully.Sheadmitsthattheneonsigns inPiccadilly,whichforGumbrilepitomise‘‘[r]estlessness,distraction,refusal tothink,[...]anunquietlife,”‘‘areher”(231).Havingchildrenshecalls‘‘the mostdesperateexperimentofall,”afinalbidforconnectionsheisunwilling toactuallyresortto,apparentlyforfearitmaynotsucceed(242).

3.Thedestructivecycle

Thispatternofinflictingharminresponsetoaninitialcatastropheand, thereby,perpetuatingpaincanbeobserved,invaryingcontextsandto varyingdegrees,inallofHuxley’searlynovels.Ingeneral,itbeginswithan experienceoftheGreatWar(ashattererofvaluesandindividuallives), personaltraumaorageneralsenseofalienation.Theexposurethenleadsto adestructivereaction,suchasanaffairortheadoptionofaharmfullifestyle, which,predictably,leadstodamagetoothercharactersandtheirinitiation intothecycle.

Tobegin,somewhatanachronistically,with PointCounterPoint,wehave, amongothers,MarjoriewhoispropelledintoanaffairwithWalterBidlake byheralcoholichusband,leavesheremotionallyunsatisfyingbuteconomicallyindependentlife,andendsuppregnantandunhappyasWalterbeginsto pursuethebeautifulandunscrupulousLucyTantamount.ThereisWalter himself,dislikedbyhisfather,embroiledinanaffairheinitiatedbuthasno wishtocontinue,painfullyafraidofconfrontation,andgrovellingatthefeet ofthewomanhewantstohave.She,inturn,isachildoftheWar,whocame ‘‘outofthechrysalis...whenthebottomhadbeenknockedoutofeverything” (138),refusesto‘‘agreetoanythingin...life...formorethanhalfanhourat atime”(156)andenviespeoplewhoaresufficientlydetachedtohave‘‘fun” withoutbeingunhappy,evenifthatalsoprecludestruehappiness.

ThenthereisLordTantamountwhoattemptstoclumsilylecturehis daughteraboutpropermoralitywhilewildlyunderestimatingherexploitsand whoensconceshimselfinhishighlyabstractresearch.Thereishisassistant, Illidge,bothderidinghisemployerandderivinghislivelihoodfromthat whichhederides,plaguedbyasenseofinferiority,atheoreticallydevout communistgoadedintobecominganunwillingaccomplicetomurderasatest ofconvictions.Thedynamiccanalsobeseeninthelifeofhispartnerin

crime,MauriceSpandrell,whoplansandperformsthemurder,aspiringto diabolisminalopsidedsearchforGodandinanattempttowoundhis mother’sfeelings,totakerevengeforherremarriage.

Finally,thereisthemainfocalisingcharacter,PhilipQuarles,andhis wife.TheirmarriageisdamagedbyanaffairElinorpursues,promptedbyher husband’sdetachment.HerloverislatermurderedbyIllidgeandSpandrell, ostensiblyforpoliticalreasons,whichtraumatisesher,andadditionalstrainis thenputonthecouplebythedeathoftheirchild.Asifthatwerenotenough, Quarlesisalsodisabledandthedisabilityseemstobeoneofthefactors apparentlyexacerbatinghisdetachment.

CromeYellow doesnotdealwithtragediesonsuchamonumentalscale, soitsdestructivecycleishardertonotice–themainsymptomsare‘‘the inherentlackofproperhumancommunication”(asnotedbyWimTigges–Barfoot21)andself-delusion.Thetwocharacteristicsseemtobemost stronglyembodiedbythefocaliser,DenisStone,whomTiggesdescribesas ‘‘self-centredandself-preoccupied”(Barfoot21),andbytheintellectually aspiringbutnaı¨veMaryBracegirdle.

Denis’egocrisisismadeevidentwhenheencounterscaricaturesof himself:

Deniswashisownseverestcritic;so,atleast,hehadalwaysbelieved.[...]His weaknesses,hisabsurdities–nooneknewthembetterthanhedid.Indeed,in avaguewayheimaginedthatnobodybesidehimselfwasawareofthematall.It seemed,somehow,inconceivablethatheshouldappeartootherpeopleasthey appearedtohim;inconceivablethattheyeverspokeofhimamongthemselvesin that[...]mildlymalicioustoneinwhichhewasaccustomedtotalkofthem.(136)

Whenhelaterattemptstosharethisexperience,hespeaksindefensive generalities,asifhisfeelingswerecommonfacts:

Theindividual[...]isnotaself-supportinguniverse.Therearetimeswhenhe comesintocontactwithotherindividuals,whenheisforcedtotakecognisanceof theexistenceofotheruniversesbesideshimself.(140)

ThisismetmeasureformeasurewhenMaryBracegirdle,theaddressee, proceedstosimilarlyexplainherownpredicament,anaffairwithanother guest:

Thedifficulty[...]makesitselfacutelyfeltinmattersofsex.Ifoneindividualseeks intimatecontactwithanother[...],sheiscertaintoreceiveorinflictsuffering.If ontheotherhand,sheavoidscontacts,sheriskstheequallygravesufferingsthat followonunnaturalrepressions.(141)

Atthispoint,thenarratorovertlytellsthereaderthatthetwoaretalking atcrosspurposes,toopreoccupiedtonoticeeachother’spain.WhenDenis eventuallymanagestomakeMaryhisconfidante,theresultisnoless

disheartening–sheconvinceshimtostageanemergencydeparturefrom Cromeandhisunrequitedloveinterest,buthelosesheartbeforetheplan comestofruitionandleavesfrustrated,surroundedby‘‘funeralimagery” (Barfoot23).

WhathappenstoDeniscanbeinterpretedasanextremecaseof aproblemthatplaguesmanyofthecharacters.Mary,withhernewfound experienceofheartbreak,prescribesacurethatistailoredtoherownneeds ratherthanhis,justasmanyothercharacterseitherliveintheirownworlds (e.g.MrWimbush)orgiveadvicewithouttrueregardfortheonetheyare advising,seeminglycommunicatingbutactuallyisolated.Suchisthecaseof MrScogan,moreinterestedinthehypotheticalRationalStatethanin currentproblems,orofBarbecue-Smith,whoadvisesDenistousehis automaticwritingtechniquedespitethedifferenceingoals. CromeYellow can bereadasthefirstinaseriesofnovelisticexplorationsofthecycleofpain, heremostlyintheguiseofegocentricisolation.

ThoseBarrenLeaves partlybreaksthepatternandisthemostoptimistic ofthebooks.Whileunrequitedloveandpossessiveness(MrsAldwinkle), alienationfromreality(MissThriplow),existentialdiscontent(Francis Chelifer),andevendeathmaketheirappearances,theresolutionissmoother thanintheothertexts.ThecynicalThomasCardanattemptstomarry amentallychallengedwomanforhermoney,butindoingsosavesherfrom hermurderousbrother,andshediesofnaturalcausesshortlyafter experiencingsomefreedom.MrsAldwinkle’snieceisabletobreakfree fromheraunt’sinfluenceandmarrywell,despitetheaunt’sprotestations. Calamyembarksonapromisingquestforenlightenment,hislastwords–and theclosingwordsofthenovel–being:‘‘hewassomehowreassured”(230).

Tosummarise,theexplorationofthecycleofpainbeginswith Crome Yellow,focusingmainlyonmiscommunication,egoism,andmentalisolation, expandsin AnticHay,diminishesin ThoseBarrenLeaves,andexplodesinfull forcein PointCounterPoint, whichportraysmanydifferentvarietiesof sufferinginsignificantdetail.Itmustbenoted,though,thatinthetwo bleakestnovelstherearecharacterswhomanagetoavoidmostofthepain.

In AnticHay theonewhoseemstoescapewithoutmajordamageis Emily.Whilehercharacterisrelativelydifficulttodecipher,becausesheis focalisedmainlythroughGumbrilandlastseenthroughherfarewellletterto him,sheneverthelessdistinguishesherselfbyrespondingtoGumbril’s affectedphilosophicalruminationsaboutthedisharmonyofmodernlifewith ‘‘Youmakethingsverycomplicated”(148).Furthermore,intheletter announcingherpermanentdeparture,thetoneismildandaccepting,in contrasttothementalgymnasticsothercharactersengageinwhenpained.

In PointCounterPoint atleasttwocharactershavestrategiesfordealing withreality.OneisMarkRampion,commonlyreadasanexponentofD.H.

Lawrence’sphilosophy(seee.g.Woodcock),whoappearstobelivingarather satisfactorilysimplelifewithhiswifeMaria.TheotherisMrsQuarles,who, dealingwithanadulterousandincompetenthusband,standsbytraditional Christianideas.Shebelievestheyoungaremistakeninfocusingon ‘‘happiness,”since‘‘goodtimes[...]simplycannotbehadcontinuously,” andthatitwouldbebettertoask‘‘HowcanwepleaseGod,andwhyaren’t webetter?,”since,inthecourseofansweringthisquestioninpractice,people ‘‘achievehappinesswithouteverthinkingaboutit”(352–353).

Yet,eventhoughbothMrsQuarlesandRampionoffervenuesofescape fromthecycleofpain,Huxleyseemsnottoendorseeitheroftheirpositions. Christianitymayhaveaspokeswoman,butitisalsorepresentedbyBurlap, whoisfullofpiousideasaboutSaintFrancisbutdriveshissecretaryoutof workandintosuicide.Rampionistreatedcomparativelymildly,butis portrayedasdidactic,impractical,domineeringandsomewhatofapuritan.

4.Implications

Inthefourworks–althoughin ThoseBarrenLeaves lessintenselythanin others–thereaderispresentedwithacycle:hurtindividualsreacttotheir ownpaininwaysthatcausefurtherhurtandproliferatepain.Whileavenues ofescapearesuggested,inthemorepessimisticnovelstheyarealsoeither downplayedordeprivedofauthorialapproval,soitisneverclearwhether theyarelegitimatepathsofescapeorpersonaldelusions.

Thereareatleastthreeinterestingimplicationsofthepresenceofthis themeinHuxley’swork.Firstly,itseemstoinform BraveNewWorld –inhis forewordtoit,HuxleyassuredreadersthattheWorldControllers‘‘arenot madmen,”eveniftheyarenot,strictlyspeaking,sane(BNW:xii),butthe noveldoesnotnecessarilydeliveronthisassessment.Thesnapshotsof atrocitiesofferedbyMondinchapterthreemightexplainwhyamorestable statewasconsiderednecessary,butnotwhythatstatecouldnottolerateany sufferingatall.

ItiseasiertoseriouslyconsiderthenotionthattheWorldState’stotal aversiontosufferingisnotanabsurdoverreaction,ifeverypotential unhappinessislookedatthroughthelensofthecycleofpainHuxleyseems tobeconcernedabout.Fromthatperspective,whilehisargumentmaystillbe extreme,itisatleastbetterdelivered–thereaderisopenlyfacedwiththe argumentthatpainmayleadtomorepainirrespectiveofscaleand, therefore,iftheobjectiveistocreatetotalsocialstability,itdoesmakesense toeradicatepaincompletely,atwhatevercost.

Thisleadstothesecondwayinwhichsuchreadingsmaybebeneficial. Huxley’searlynovelsseemtofollowapatternwherebyeachconsecutive

novelmodifiesthetoneandmessageoftheearlierone.Theeffectisnot properlyvisible,however,inselectivereadings–theearlynovelsrewardan organic,chronologicalprocessofreading,proceedingfromonetextto anothernotmerelytoestablishsomecanonicalideaaboutHuxleyasawriter, buttotrulylistenintothedialogueheishavingwithhimself.Whilereading onlyselectedtextsstillremainsanobviouslyvalidstrategy,thebenefitsofa moreorganicapproachareworthnoting.

Finally,intheprocessofreadingtextsinthismanneritispossibleto discoveradifferentwayofcommittingtothenotionofdialogicallityin literature.Inanactualdialogueitisnecessarytolistenandresisttheimpulse toreducetheotherparty’sstatementsoutofconvenience.Similarly,Huxley’s earlytextsrewardthereaderwhoiswillingtoseethemasmorethanjust socialcritiqueswithtypecastcharacters,or romana ` clef repositoriesof biographicaldata.Whiletheydonotactivelyresistbeingthusreducedand theremaybegoodreasonstoreducethem,theyalsohidesomecomplexities thatmaybedifficulttonotice,ifthereaderoptsforareductiveframework.

Inhisdefenceofthenovelofideas,Meckierassertsthat‘‘In Point CounterPoint,Huxleyhasanabundanceofexplanationsofwhatlifeisand... canseethroughthemall”(34),butitseemshealso speaks throughthem. Huxleyseemstodismisshischaracter’sworldviews,sincenoneofthem containanultimateanswertothequestionsposedbylife,butheisalso generousenoughtoletmanyofthecharactersstatetheirpositionsinfulland togivethemtouchesofgenuinehumanity.Buthewillbecaughtintheactof doingso,onlyifthereaderpayscloseattention.

REFERENCES

Barfoot,C.C.

2001 AldousHuxleyBetweenEastandWest.Amsterdam:Rodopi. Birnbaum,Milton

2006 AldousHuxley:AQuestforValues.NewBrunswick,N.J:Transaction Publishers.

Bradshaw,David

1994 TheHiddenHuxley.LondonandBoston:FaberandFaber.

Huxley,Aldous

1960[1923] AnticHay:ANovel.Harmondsworth:PenguinBooks.

1998[1932] BraveNewWorld.NewYork:HarperCollinsPublishers.

2000 CompleteEssaysofAldousHuxley,VolumeI,1920–1925.Eds.RobertS.Baker andJamesSexton.Chicago:IvanR.Dee.

2000 CompleteEssaysofAldousHuxley,VolumeII,1926–1929.Eds.RobertS. BakerandJamesSexton.Chicago:IvanR.Dee.

1937[1921] CromeYellow.Harmondsworth:PenguinBooks.

1965[1924] PointCounterPoint.Harmondsworth:PenguinBooks.

1955[1928] ThoseBarrenLeaves:ANovel.Harmondsworth:PenguinBooks. Izzo,GarrettDavid

2005‘‘AldousHuxley.” ReviewofContemporaryFiction 25.3:86–136.

Meckier,Jerome

2006 AldousHuxley:ModernSatiricalNovelistofIdeas.Eds.BerfriedNugeland PeterE.Firchow.Berlin:LitVerlag.

Poller,Jake

2010‘‘AldousHuxley’sAnticHay:LondonintheAftermathofWorldWarI.” LiteraryLondon 8.2(2010):n.p.Web:www.literarylondon.org/london-journal/ september2010/poller.html.30April2014.

Sion,Ronald,T.

2010 AldousHuxleyandtheSearchforMeaning:AStudyoftheElevenNovels. Jefferson,NorthCarolina,andLondon:McFarland.

Woodcock,George

1972 DawnandtheDarkestHour:AStudyofAldousHuxley.London:Faberand Faber.