Following on the heels of yesterday's inquiry:
Almost all these young Americans gave each other pet names or short names. Edith was "Lily," and sometimes "John," as well as Puss or Pussy. (60)
"Lily" and "Pussy" I understand, but "John"? Why would she have been nicknamed "John"? This hammers home something I've thought since I started working on Wharton: the rich really are different. I know nothing about their society, and the research I've done on American culture in Wharton's time (as well as the moments she represents in her novels) bears little to no relation to the culture of the circles in which she moved.
For example: I have absolutely no idea why every wealthy family in New York aired out their mansions on 15 October. Not a clue. This type of what Wharton will call "tribal" behavior pertains to a tribe about which I know nothing.
Another example: Ward McAllister. Seems like I should've run across the name before—and I probably have, but so removed are he and his from the concerns I've been researching, the name never stuck. As for who McAllister was, this note on him from The Musical Times (1 November 1894) captures him nicely:
A case of give and take! My. Ward McAllister, autocrat of New York "society": "I like Wagner in a good box at the Opera in New York or Paris, with a house brilliantly lighted up and full of handsome women in opera dress, where one can while away Wagner's long and stupid recitals by whispering pleasant things to charming women."
I don't know why mansions would be aired out on 15 October, but that sounds like about the time of year that all the boats are taken off of Lake Michigan--in other words, probably your last good chance for a good airing until opening day in the spring.
Posted by: Rebecca | Saturday, 16 June 2007 at 12:27 PM
I like my theory. In fact, I'll go so far as to say that if absolutely everyone in your circle is airing their mansion on the same day, you can avoid any unpleasantness that might be associated with impromptu visitors arriving in the midst of household chaos.
(Incidentally, I have a good track record for making up the truth. I have created my own etymology for a number of nautical phrases in the past, only to discover belatedly that I had been telling the truth all along.)
Posted by: Rebecca | Saturday, 16 June 2007 at 12:33 PM
Scott, check out, if you haven't already, Nancy Bentley's *Ethnography of Manners: Hawthorne, James, Wharton*. She discusses (Wharton discussing) the savage tribal behaviors of the rich.
Posted by: Luther Blissett | Saturday, 16 June 2007 at 12:44 PM
Ward McAllister is the dude who invented the term "the 400" to designate those who _really_ counted in society. Supposedly only 400 people could fit into his ballroom (due to ladies with big skirts etc.) and once you moved out of that circle, that list, you started coming in contact with people who you would not know their entire pedigree and history ---- and you wouldn't want _that_, now would you?
Posted by: Sisyphus | Saturday, 16 June 2007 at 03:38 PM
Rebecca:
Would that I had your talent. Anytime I concoct a plausible explanation when evidence lacks, I'm laughably wrong. That said, I hope Luther's book provides some clue into the mysteries of 15 October.
While I'm at it, I'll say that my one complaint with the Lee biography is that it asks questions without providing answers, either in the text or the footnotes. The bit about 15 October crops up in a catalog of upper-class oddities, but in the form of a rhetorical question. "Who would know why they did this? Or this? What about this? (It's nuts!)" I'd prefer an answer, or a clue as to where I could find one. (Another 700 pages into the book, maybe?)
Luther:
I'm on it. I should post a general
complaintrequest for information about Wharton studies, since I'm having to bone up on it on the fly.Sisyphus:
First, let me say that every time I see you post here, I feel a little less burdened by my own, well, burdens. Second, that's the same McAllister, who I just learned died alone, in an expensive but gauche restaurant, of a heart attack, and that no one there noticed. I know, I know, I shouldn't glory in another's death, but it seems oddly appropriate, no?
Posted by: SEK | Saturday, 16 June 2007 at 09:16 PM
I don't know why they'd pick October 15th in particular as the day to air out the mansions, but I assume they're being aired out around that date because everyone is about to return to town for the "season": before mid-October the mansions would have been in a storage-like state while all but a few servants/caretakers were out of town. Or so I gather from House of Mirth.
Posted by: eb | Wednesday, 20 June 2007 at 05:15 AM