What a delight to be invited to the #1970Club party and to bring Mavis Gallant as my guest. The quintessential short story writer published her novel A Fairly Good Time in 1970.
The first chapter is a letter from Shirley Perrigny’s mother, a slippery few pages that spill from her pen and conclude by marvelling that, before Shirley was born, her presence had been mistaken for a tumour.
Later, Shirley’s advice, at twenty-six years old, to another young woman struggling with her mother’s expectations, reveals her sense of alienation: “When you are unhappy anywhere with anyone, family or not, you walk away and never look back.”
So we know, from the start, that there’s a hint of malignancy in Shirley’s family relationships.
In the next chapter, we learn that her husband is more attached to Geneviève than Shirley, his wife. And all the time he’s been spending with Geneviève, ostensibly reading her manuscript, hasn’t been dedicated to editorial work.
Shirley tries to avoid this reality, partly because she’s vulnerable to being judged, partly because she doesn’t want to believe it. “The less you know, the less can happen,” she declares. The mere possibility is painful. There’s a view of an ice creamery’s window, with GLACES appearing from two perspectives, one upside-down and the other in reverse, that demonstrates how disorienting all this has been.
Gallant’s prose feels almost manic, at times, with Shirley’s desperate need to cover up what’s going on with Philippe. At other times, Gallant’s prose is sharp and pointed, the sentences taut, reflecting Shirley’s desire to control the narrative.
And it all takes place in a darker side of Paris (recalling Gallant’s first collection, The Other Side of Paris). Where the left bank of the Seine is a “waste country of filling stations and shut, blind-looking factories” with a “refuse and oil and an oil-stained pigeon” floating atop the river—a Paris is filled with “urine-smelling staircases”, filled not with tourists but people living far from home, just getting by—often refugees. (You could read it for this alone, the socio-political texture and complexity.)
Shirley views her Canadian parents as eccentric and says they can be “judged but never displaced.” She, however, can be displaced. Generally, this is the story of Shirley’s displacement; specifically, it’s the story of her work as an interpreter in a department store, awkward meals with in-laws, reading Le Miroir on the Métro, and moving through spaces where the smell of curry mixes with the smell of disinfectant.
But there is also such intelligence and attention-to-detail, that it’s never overwhelmingly bleak. There are moments of fierce determination, insistence on truth, that afford readers shelter from the storm that Shirley currently inhabits.
“You’ve messed up two marriages now,” said Mrs. Castle. “Why are you always in such a hurry to get married, I wonder? You seem to get married in a rush, then you rush the other way.”
“Pete died, Mrs. Castle.”
“So he did. Now his mother was American.”
“He didn’t die of that,” said Shirley, seeing herself in miniature in the other woman’s glasses.
You can feel the simmer of irony behind the dialogue, but Gallant also doesn’t miss the opportunity to remind us that Shirley feels small, that she is unusually aware of how others are viewing her, at this juncture. Even two thirds into the novel, she’s still unable to confront the reality of her husband’s decision, arguing with her landlady: “I’m not a tourist. I’m not somebody who keeps moving on. I’m somebody’s wife.”
From start to stop, readers are immersed in “Shirley’s calendar of time” in Gallant’s novel and her interior experience of this period of instability. But Gallant’s skill and experience offer readers a safe place from which to observe.
If you’re new to Gallant, check our Jhumpa Lahiri’s Q&A with here on Vimeo or the 1956 documentary on Telescope, for a peek into her daily life in Paris.
And if you want to meet a younger Shirley, she also appears in “The Accident”, first published in The New Yorker, later collected in The End of the World and Other Stories. (Towards the end of the novel, time shifts as Shirley reflects more on her first marriage and how it impacted her expectations of life with Philippe.)
Thanks to hosts Simon and Kaggsy for hosting and encouraging me to read the last Gallant unread in my collection. (There are links to my chronological read through of her short stories here.) Check out the posts/links on both hosts’ pages to see what else was published in 1970 and remark on what you read below if you’re participating too.
I’ve still never read any Gallant, but did recently buy Green Water, Green Sky (I trust Daunt Books implicitly with whatever they reprint) and I love the tone in the quote here. I must read her short stories too.
Daunt seems like such a fine press: I’d be happy reading my way through their list too!
Having read three of Gallant’s collections (Home Truths, Montreal Stories, and In Transit) – through your inspiration – I think it would be an interesting contrast to read a novel by her. She’s very good, but kind of sad, and the families in her stories are just so dysfunctional!
It’s a revealing thing to say, I s’pose, but I don’t find her families are so terribly dysfunctional (compared to, say, Jonathan Franzen? or Eimear McBride?) but maybe it’s just that they feel safely secured in a past world that feels far away. But I do feel that thread of melancholy and loneliness; I guess, in this, she fits, for me, with writers like William Trevor and Edna O’Brien and Alistair MacLeod, who also seem pulled in that direction more often than not.
I think of her as such a consummate short story writer–I haven’t tried her novels. But the bit about a tumour and the exchange between Shirley and Mrs. Castle show she certainly didn’t slouch in her novels either. Hmmm….
She has some sharp insights about expectations of marriage and you really get the sense she spent a lot of time in these characters’ minds (plus, if you have read “The Accident” it’s a thrill to see how things developed afterwards).
You had me at “we know, from the start, that there’s a hint of malignancy in Shirley’s family relationships”. Wonderful stuff. I’ll definitely see this out!
Heheh One reader never truly knows what’s going to draw the attention of another reader.
Oh I’ve been meaning to read Mavis Gallant for YEARS! This sounds like a really intriguing novel. I’ve always thought of her as writing only short stories but this is the second novel of hers I’ve read reviewed lately. The other was Green Water, Green Sky, and both I’m now curious to read. However, given the book of hers that I possess is short stories, I really must start there! Thank you for a great review.
In Canada, she’s also known for her journalism (how her career began), and I’m still hopeful that her diaries will be published in full (some of them have been published in “The New Yorker”). If you happen to have a subscription to “The New Yorker” (either personal or via your public library), you can sample her work there!
Ah, so glad you could take part with a Gallant (although I’m sorry for you that it’s the last one). Sound really well done – those quotes are excellent!!
I think we share that sharp reluctance to “read the last”, that pang, so I appreciate the acknowledgement. But of course it’s silly because the best are eminently rereadable (and memory is fallible)!
I managed to bring Langston Hughes into focus after reading so many BIP posts about him. I will at least make the effort to do the same for Mavis Gallant. The closest I seem to be able to get in my local (state-wide) library system is What to Read and Why by Francine Prose (2018).
Gallant’s one of the writers in there? Now I have to read it! I absolutely loved Prose’s earlier book How to Read like a Writer; I assume WtoR&W is similar, maybe elaborating on writers only briefly considered in the earlier book? I think you would enjoy Gallant writing about post-WWII in Paris specifically and how her journalistic eye infuses her fiction, reporting from the margins. Not to say that you wouldn’t appreciate this novel, your preferred form anyhow!
I don’t think I’ve ever read Mavis Gallant, but reading this review has made me realize I think I’m overlooking a writer I would really enjoy. She’s a classic writer of course, but I’ve just never gotten around to her. I always lump her in together with Alice Munro in my mind, but that’s likely an unfair comparison…
You’re not alone in thinking of her alongside Alice Munro; they’re both dedicated to short fiction, above all, so that makes sense.
I find it challenging to make time for classics, too, but I guess because I came to Gallant and Munro as books on shelves in a bookstore, rather than a classroom, I gravitate towards them, without the same sense of…duty? obligation? that sometimes surrounds the idea of reading “classic literature”?
A few years back I read and loved Gallant’s Green Water, Green Sky for many of the reasons you discuss in your review of A Fairly Good Time — the marvelous prose, the psychological acuity and that wonderful, lurking irony! Despite best intentions, however, I didn’t at the time have the energy to continue with A Fairly Good Time (the Edith Wharton quote is one I treasure BTW) and moved on to other things. Thanks for a great review, which reminds that it needs to be Gallant time again!
Always love to chat with a fellow-Gallant-admirer! I think you’ll be glad that you waited. GWGS is, comparatively, so tight and controlled; I think AFGT might have seemed to suffer, unfairly, if you’d gone into it straightaway (until our narrator has come to a degree of acceptance with the turmoil in her life). Even a few years apart from focussed MG reading, I was thinking “Is this Gallant?!” at first. And that Wharton epigraph is fab: it is the perfect herald for this narrative!