Something that I just cannot swallow, but the book is a good read…

09 +00002014-02-27T21:45:53+00:0028 2012 § 9 Comments

The Mistress, Victoria Griffin

I remember reading a review of this book when it first appeared, though I’m surprised, now that I’ve looked at the title page, to discover that it was published in 1999.  I didn’t read the book itself then and, although I acquired my copy last autumn (by somewhat roundabout means – I didn’t exactly choose it), I have been in no hurry to read it.  However, a couple of weeks ago, having subsisted for perhaps too long on a reading diet of mostly crime fiction, but too tired to embark on one of the ‘serious’ history books I have in reserve, I decided to give it a go.

I was pleasantly surprised to discover that it is both witty and extremely erudite.  Mea culpa, but, either because I misremembered the review or the review misrepresented the book, I had assumed that it would be lighter and frothier than it actually is.  Beginning with the stories of the mistresses of the Greek gods and continuing with that of Heloise and Abelard (in which I have a particular interest, because George Moore offers a version of it in one of his novels), it traces the story of the mistress through history, sorting her into types: the royal mistress, the political mistress, the artist’s mistress etc.  Griffin announces at the very start of the book that she is a mistress herself.  She says this with some defiance, indicating that she has chosen the role in preference to that of wife, and that ‘mistress-types’, particularly if they are writers, like herself, or pursuers of some other creative career, value the freedom that being a mistress gives them.  Wise mistresses know not to stray into the territory of the wife and they certainly don’t seek to replace her: those who attempt the latter usually find that they lose their lovers in the process.

Griffin is both knowledgeable and entertaining, but there is something about this basic premise that I just can’t swallow.  Given that she concedes that mistresses not only have to endure the privations associated with being forced to keep their liaisons secret, but also spend many hours waiting in vain for their lovers to arrive, I cannot understand how this makes them ‘free’ to pursue their own interests.  For example, only a very special type of writer can shut out all specific annoyances and worries from the external world to get on with her/his work.  Most writers are super-sensitive to any kind of external niggle or worry and find that thinking about it impairs or completely destroys their concentration.  Not knowing when, or even if, their lovers were going to turn up would certainly not help mistresses who were also writers to fill in the intervening hours with productive work.

Then there’s that burden of secrecy.  The brunt of it is shouldered by the mistress, who sometimes cannot confide in or complain to even her closest friends if her lover neglects, forgets or completely abandons her.  It is a condition insisted upon by the lover in order to protect his ‘real’ life, to ensure that it is comfortable and free from a wife’s chidings, tears or worse.  In other words, engaging in an ‘affair’ or illicit liaison carries very unequal benefits for the two participants.  I’ve known only a few mistresses during the course of my life (though there may have been others among my friends and acquaintances who were discreet enough to conceal their affairs completely) and, without exception, they’ve been worn down by the deceit, the waiting, the uncertainty and often, ultimately, tragic abandonment after many years of ‘service’.  Griffin herself acknowledges that she and her lover have discussed whether, if his wife were to die or divorce him, they would marry, and concludes that they probably would.  ‘But’, says the lover, ‘I really want you to be my mistress.’  Griffin presents this conversation as mature, sophisticated and loving.  To me it reveals a childish man with a huge ego, a man who succeeds in getting away with ruthlessly having his cake and eating it by cloaking his real outlook with a flimsy veneer of wistfulness.  He is doubly fortunate in that Griffin, who is proud of her financial independence, also refuses to let him pay for her, whereas a mistress from an earlier era would undoubtedly have expected substantial monetary assistance from her lover.

Something else that I find difficult about this book is that all the ‘mistresses’ are women – ‘the other woman’; all the lovers (i.e., duplicitous two-timers) are men.  The book would have had more credibility had Griffin also included some accounts of two-timing women being unfaithful to their husbands.  History offers some famous examples: Emma, Lady Hamilton; Georgiana, Duchess of Devonshire; even some of the mediaeval queens, such as Isabella of France, who cuckolded Edward II when she embarked upon her liaison with Roger Mortimer.  Although she devotes a chapter to George Eliot and George Henry Lewes, Griffin says little about the equally interesting affair that precipitated Eliot into Lewes’ arms: that between Agnes, Lewes’ wife and Thornton Hunt, which, very unusually for the mid-Victorian period, had resulted in Agnes’ giving birth to several of Thornton’s children whom Lewes then acknowledged as his own.

I’d like to suggest that today this is no longer an unusual phenomenon and that women are just as capable as men of being the double-dealer in a love triangle.  I offer a very commonplace example, my second cousin Ruby, some years my senior, a pale and fairly insipid girl who aspired neither to obtaining a good education nor to building a career and had only limited interest in becoming a ‘home-maker’ – I realise that this is a very catty description, but Ruby, who certainly won’t be reading it, would as certainly agree that it is accurate if she were to. She bore one man’s child very shortly after her marriage to another man who was not the child’s father and caused both men to come to blows as they competed for her favours.

I suppose what I’m trying to say is that women can give as good as they get and that mistresses who accept martyrdom sugared over with ‘free spiritedness’ have only themselves to blame, particularly today, when the kind of double standard that allowed Lewes to mix with the Victorian literati while George Eliot was obliged to sit at home, completely ostracised, no longer prevails.  Psychologists say that in every relationship there is always one partner who cares more than the other.  I think that perhaps this is the truth that I am trying to explore and I’d suggest that in probably 90% of cases it is the ‘secret’ mistress who cares more for her lover than he for her and that she is deluding herself if she believes otherwise, however noble and ‘pure’ (in the sense of independent of material consideration) she may paint their love.

Nevertheless, The Mistress is a book of many delights because of the histories that it recounts and the ideas it expresses, all captured in Victoria Griffin’s very fine prose.  I am sure that it will become a classic, if it is not regarded as one already (hence the reprint).  I recommend it to anyone who is looking for some unusual and gripping non-fiction to read this weekend.  Let me know what you think!

Tagged: , , , , , , , , ,

§ 9 Responses to Something that I just cannot swallow, but the book is a good read…

  • vallypee says:

    What an interesting history! I think this is one I would also enjoy reading, but like you, Christina, I think there are very many cases of the double-dealing woman as well. I wonder if that might be truer of women earlier in history, however. The 19th century was unkind to women in many respects, and when I think of Queen Elizabeth 1 or Mary Queen of Scots as well as the many notorious ladies of Charles Stuart’s court, it strikes me that maybe women were more ‘equal’ in earlier centuries than they were during Victoria’s reign – excepting the Cromwellian era of course. I’m just speculating here as I haven’t studied the subject, but it seems possible. But then maybe that was only accepted for women of higher social standing. It would be interesting to find out more.

  • Jenny Lloyd says:

    Thank you, Christina, for reminding us that women too can have their cake and eat it! Yours is a far more inspiring vision than one of women rendered to the status of mere puppets awaiting the puppet master (lover) to animate them. I would make a very poor mistress, I think. I could not tolerate waiting on someone, never knowing if or when they would turn up. It puts me in mind of the days when men held all the power over women’s lives. I think Val raises an interesting question – I suspect it was only women with power and wealth who dared to stick two fingers up to convention and religion and take lovers. Women of more lowly status were so financially dependent on their husbands, by virtue of their having to bear children, few would have risked destitution by taking a lover.

    • Yes, Val and Jenny, I think that you’re right that status gave women more control over their lives and their lovers! Chaucer’s Wife of Bath was always looking to find her next husband from the men around her and she had the status that the money she inherited from each gave to her. I particularly like that detail about her looking at Jankin the scholar’s shapely legs as she followed her husband’s bier. That’s not to say that she cheated on her husbands, but she made them think she did! I remember that she got her own back on one cheating husband by ‘making him fry in his own grece’, or something like that, as she convinced him that he was a cuckold.

  • j welling says:

    A mistress? You can put a live ferret down your trousers, too. Just about as advisable.

  • Alexandria says:

    Sounds interesting, but also like the author forgot that the world is a circle for a reason: what you do to others (even if the poor wives may not know it) is your karma; what others do to you is their karma.

    Lying & intentionally hurting people (the wives) doesn’t seem like it would be good karma for creativity

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

What’s this?

You are currently reading Something that I just cannot swallow, but the book is a good read… at Christina James, crime novelist.


%d bloggers like this: