Well, we’re on to the first Iris Murdoch novel I ever read. Aged 14, I borrowed it from my neighbour, Mary, supplier of much of my teenage reading material and many of my long-lasting favourites. Appropriately for International Women’s Day, Mary was a huge heroine of mine who encouraged me to think and explore the world, and as well as Murdoch, she introduced me to Virago Books, Elizabeth Taylor’s novels, Barbaras Pym and Comyns and Anita Brookner (whose books I think my Triad Granada “Severed Head” resembles.
I’m really not sure what I would have made of – or understood of – this novel back then. I do recall feeling that it – and therefore I, in reading it – was terribly sophisticated, reading this rather rude book with terrible, posh goings-on in it. Of course I’ve refined my reaction over the many times I’ve read it.
I’ve got four copies of this one – but do please share with me any alternative cover images you’ve got of your copies of this. Tweet them to me, pop them on Facebook for my attention or use the email address you can find on my Contact Form.
Iris Murdoch – “A Severed Head”
(14 October 2017)
The introduction to my Vintage copy, by Miranda Seymour, refers this book back to the first novel, “Under the Net” and it does have something of its European nature, small cast and obsession with rattling around London, also the humour. It feels lighter than the other books – I’m not sure there are any big lectures or sermons or discussions, just a load of people trying to justify and explain how they feel and in the main hide their true feelings. One major thing I noticed this time was just how like a play it is – all dialogue and farcical diving through French windows, and talk of acting and plays and scenes. I think this is because we listened to a dramatisation of it on the radio a few years ago, and of course it was adapted into a play by Murdoch and J.B. Priestley.
It’s funny – of course it’s funny. Honor making her first entrance accompanied by more than a whiff of sulphur, Martin lynching the gibbon by trying to be the most rational human being in the world and repressing his animal side, only to have it all burst out of him. And of course there’s the deep black humour of the layers upon layers of adultery in the Lynch-Gibbons’ oh-so-civilised marriage. He even describes himself as being “really magnificent” at one point (p. 162). There’s lots of doomy prefiguring, for example when Martin has dreams offering him “certain horrors, glimpses of a punishment which would perhaps yet find its hour” (p. 10) and him being “stripped, sahved, and prepared as a destined victim; and I awaited Honor as one awaits, without hope, the searing presence of a god” (p. 166), but these seem to me quite funny and almost a bit “Cold Comfort Farm”-y. I loved the two women in the Lynch-Gibbon wines office, perhaps heirs to the efficiencies brought in to Rainborough’s office in “The Flight from the Enchanter”. They are funny as well as being a matter-of-fact introduction of a lesbian couple, perfectly normally, although flirted with by the hapless Mytten. This office part was an aspect I’d forgotten. In a couple of sentences reminiscent of “The Bell” when Dora resolves not to give up here seat on the train, we read:
‘Well, I’m not going to introduce you to Antonia, and that’s that.’
‘Antonia, this is Georgie Hands. Georgie, my wife.’ I found these incredible words passing my lips. I was able to speak without stammering or choking. No one fainted. (p. 85)
And the funniest line in the book perhaps shows IM’s own attitude to psychoanalysis: “I led Georgie out, leaving Palmer to use whatever were now the most up-to-date psychological methods for dealing with hysterical women” (p. 89) (Honor also talks about “a good analysis” in a way that makes Martin think of “a good thrashing” (p. 110).
There’s serious stuff about marriage, of course, with the statement about there being a selfish and an unselfish partner in every marriage (p. 11) and later the description of the reassurance of the taken-for-granted:
There is no substitute for the comfort supplied by the utterly taken-for-granted relationship; and after all, in spite of all that had happened, Antonia and no one else was my wife.(p. 188)
Murdoch is once again cruel to a carefully created and self-curated woman, Antonia, “her face taking on that look which is sometimes described as ‘ravaged'” (p. 14), although Martin is at pains to explain this makes her more attractive rather than less. She also makes Antonia and Rosemary feed off scandal and pain, which makes them quite unattractive and negative (Georgie’s fate perks Antonia up so much that she buys three hats!).
We have the Murdochian themes – although there are maybe no stones and there’s not much water. Georgie’s hair is of course reddish and of course gets chopped off along the way (severed hair as opposed to a severed head). Georgie also has the only room-cave, with its dimly descried treasures, and she has Chinese incense holders which chime with the Japanese possessions of Palmer. Usually Eastern bits and bobs belong to saints, though, and that doesn’t really apply here; although Georgie is perhaps messy enough, she definitely passes on pain rather than absorbing it. She does have “remarkable detachment and lack of worldly pretention” (p. 5), so maybe she’s a saint who just gets pushed over the edge. Palmer has animal fur for hair, not uncommon in Murdoch, and I’m sure there’s another rangy American (perhaps someone in a baggy monster coming later). London is a character, as is the fog (which we will meet again in “The Time of the Angels”, and I loved the detail of the dolphin lamp-posts on the Embankment, still there today. There are complicated arrangements for breaking into a house, when Martin goes to Cambridge and here we find the common theme of a figure standing in the garden, looking in, which we find so often.
Siblings abound, of course, the triumvirate of Martin, Alexander and Rosemary, Honor and Palmer. And there are many contrasts and pairs, from three sets of Christmas decorations to Georgie and Antonia being one perfect woman if you somehow glue them together. Palmer also has two colds – is the first one, when Martin goes to collect Honor, a fake, as he doesn’t seem ill in between then is shown in a bit of a state when Martin visits him on Antonia’s behalf later on. Pictures move around, the Audubon bird prints back and forth between the Lynch-Gibbon properties and Palmer’s Japanese pictures around his house.
There aren’t so many echoes of the other books, however I was pleased to note that Martin does run out and hear receding footsteps as Honor runs out in to the dark night at one point, after their encounter in the cellar. Antonia wants to keep Martin in her “loving net” even after running off (p. 193).
Talking of saints and enchanters, Palmer does seem to be an enchanter, with his ability to bend everyone and everything to his will and his ability to “set people free” (is Mischa Fox said to have this talent, too?). Georgie, the voice of reason until she’s pushed too far, points out that Martin is “always looking for a master” (p. 3) and he finds one in Palmer and then Honor. Palmer is described as a magician by Martin – Alexander, who wins everything in the end, has interestingly never liked him. Honor is the severed head, a god and a fearsome avenging deity with a sword, but very much seems to claim this role for herself rather than having it placed upon her. Is Martin an enchanter to Georgie? Certainly, “Georgie’s stoicism had helped to make me a brute,” (p. 175) but does that make him an enchanter? She seems to need a man to hang off, so maybe she goes around creating her own mini-enchanters.
The feeling of a play comes at the end, with Martin’s last letter to Georgie, with the almost Shakespearian:
I feel as if we had been actors in a play, and there must be some exchange between us for the drama to be complete. (p. 197)
What did I get out of this on this re-read? It is a farce, isn’t it, and, as the introduction states, a book to be enjoyed only with the intellect. Although this seems a bit cruel when Georgie, at least, is a real, warm and hurt human being. I did enjoy it immensely and I see I’ve written quite a lot about it for such a little book!
P.S. I was going to list this book in my Reading Ireland challenge, but that seems a bit wrong when the only mention of the place is when Martin “retain[s] a sentimental sense of connexion with that poor bitch of a country” (p. 12). Maybe not, then!
Please either place your review in the comments, discuss mine or others’, or post a link to your review if you’ve posted it on your own blog, Goodreads, etc. I’d love to know how you’ve got on with this book and if you read it having read others of Murdoch’s novels or this was a reread, I’d love to hear your specific thoughts on those aspects, as well as if it’s your first one!
If you’re catching up or looking at the project as a whole, do take a look at the project page, where I list all the blog posts so far.
heavenali
Mar 09, 2018 @ 07:27:17
This is one of the Murdoch novels I have read twice. I remember enjoying it.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Liz Dexter
Mar 09, 2018 @ 07:49:20
It feels quite small but I had a lot to say and there’s loads to get out of a re-reading. I remember being really happy you were already an IM reader. Doesn’t it seem an age ago we were doing the last read of them!
LikeLike
anewlookthrougholdeyes
Mar 09, 2018 @ 08:24:24
Terrific review. I have finished listening to this book and will be posting my review soon. Absolutely agree with you about the drawing room drama aspect which is probably even clearer when listening to,it being read.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Liz Dexter
Mar 09, 2018 @ 08:25:31
I can imagine, as it will of necessity be more “stagey” when being read out loud. I can’t wait to read your review, especially as the formats are different.
LikeLike
Tredynas Days
Mar 09, 2018 @ 09:58:10
Great post, Liz. I haven’t read this novel, but feel inclined to do so now. I like the way you refrain from plot summary but provide instead a sense of the quality of the writing. I’m not sure I understood your quip on Martin’s name, lynching the gibbon- but it’s a great name. Under the Net is the only IM I’ve read, long ago – must try again
LikeLiked by 1 person
Liz Dexter
Mar 09, 2018 @ 10:14:08
Thank you – I think you’d enjoy this one. I meant that the whole premise of Palmer’s handling of the situation is to make everyone be terribly, terribly civilised and to kind of slay the animal in us, so Martin is killing his inner ape, so to speak, in order to make everything run smoothly on the surface. Of course all the repressed anger rises up uncontrollably. Very Freudian, which is amusing given IM’s dislike of psychoanalysis!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Tredynas Days
Mar 09, 2018 @ 10:20:08
Thanks for explaining. I’m in bed with a chest infection so maybe the brain isn’t functioning too well…at least I have some time for visits to favourite blogs, commenting, and reading – finally finished one big trilogy started in Jan, and a refreshing B Pym in two sessions!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Liz Dexter
Mar 09, 2018 @ 10:22:59
Sorry to hear about the chest infection but glad you’ve got caught up on things. Pym is just the thing for a poorly read!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Maria Peacock
Mar 16, 2018 @ 16:21:50
Thank you Liz for a wonderful review which I am sure will encourage
others. I have just finished re-reading and what can I add?
It is such a powerful and courageous work, and beautifully crafted. And yes, I also think it is a farce and it would be terribly grim if it were just a work of realism. It contains abortion, adultery, scenes of physical violence, incest. It goes to some dark Freudian places and yet it is the most wonderful comedy, and in some ways a satire on the religion of the way psychology has taken the place of religion The action all takes place within an enclosed circle of characters and although very diverse they seem to have no other family or friends who pop in or are concerned about them. When Georgie attempts suicide all the cast surround her bed, despite all the harm they have done each other. It is more of a drama than a realistic novel, and there are so many ways to read it.
On reading it this time, I was struck by the questions of truth and betrayal. Although this is a serious theme, I could not help chuckle at the sheer hypocrisy and nerve of Antonia and Palmer in particular. They piously insist on everyone being truthful and loving each other, and they were outraged by Martin’s infidelity with Georgie. As the plot unfolds Martin and the reader discover they were betraying each other and everyone else. Only Georgie and Honor are truthful and they destroy the web of deceit through their need to expose the truth.
I loved the scene when Antonia very sweetly and plausibly tells Martin she is going to marry Alexander Martin’s brother. Martin comments to his sister Rosemary who has come in wearing a little black hatt, exultant because she has some avocado pears at Harrods (in 1961 this would be a triumph) ‘Great news for you sister…My wife is going to marry my brother. Isn’t that splendid?…..It only remains for me to fall madly in love with Rosemary (his sister) and then we can all go and live happily together…’. He then recieves a letter to say Palmer (Antonia’s former lover is going to America with his half sister with whom he has had an incestuous relationship. – but
Although there is much talk of love, I felt on this reading it is more about power. I see Palmer, Antonia’s analyst and lover as the enchanter and as a psychotherapist he has tremendous power over people’s minds and decisions. Alexander also as a sculptor is an enchanter – symbolically he severs heads and keeps them in making sculptures of them. Honor becomes an enchanter in the way, to Martin she embodies mysteries far deeper than Alexander’s skills as a scientist.
However I kept reminding myself that Martin is a first person narrator, and one who is in a fog and a mist and often drunk and seemingly quite seriously ill. We see all the characters only through his eyes and the dialogue he reports and they are all deceiving each other and,including Martin, themselves . This makes them unreal, and Martin brings to them a strong current of myth. This novel can be read on so many levels – it is a brilliant, witty, clever work .
LikeLiked by 2 people
Liz Dexter
Mar 17, 2018 @ 07:00:57
I chuckled away at Palmer and Antonia’s massive hypocrisy, it just felt like a drawing room comedy or farce, with the surface all calm and all manner of stuff going on below. You’re right that Martin is an unreliable narrator, too – who can we believe? No one! So clever.
LikeLike
Maria Peacock
Mar 16, 2018 @ 17:15:19
Sorry – some last thoughts – given Martin’s befogged and deluded state of mind does Honor exist as a person? She is called Honor: is she an embodiment of truth, clarity, and his repressed impulses? Is she a product of his psyche?
LikeLiked by 2 people
Liz Dexter
Mar 17, 2018 @ 07:01:27
Ooh, I LIKE this. Was it you who posited that Finn doesn’t exist in Under the Net? I can’t remember. Brilliant!
LikeLike
Audio book reviews March 2018 | A New Look Through Old Eyes
Mar 19, 2018 @ 18:26:52
Liz
Mar 27, 2018 @ 15:29:58
Thank you for this excellent and thorough assessment. Here’s my Goodreads review. 😀 https://www.goodreads.com/review/show/2340570048
LikeLiked by 1 person
Liz Dexter
Mar 28, 2018 @ 09:43:37
That’s great, thank you. Glad you enjoyed it, and it is an odd thing, isn’t it, such themes but such lightness!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Peter Rivenberg
Mar 28, 2018 @ 12:10:06
Wonderful reviews from all! I cannot add much. Just what surprised me on this reading, probably my sixth.
This time around, reading in sequence I just marvel at the way Murdoch has gone from writing two third person narratives set in rural, somewhat closed communities (The Sandcastle and The Bell), each featuring an adolescent boy and some fairly technical descriptions (the climbing of the tower, the lifting of the bell) to this first person narrative that so perfectly captures the dry, ironic voice of a well-to-do wine merchant whose childless world is described with relatively spare but telling details.
Of course there is the same central concern with a marriage and infidelity, with enchantment, with art and with seeing the other. But such a different treatment and voice. Or at least so it seems to me. And I think it is a voice that allows you an ironic distance but also at times an empathy with the characters. In past readings I’ve seen Antonia as somewhat one dimensional, blown by the winds of her therapy (or her therapist), a bit of a puppet, and I still find her reactions wonderfully comic; but on this reading I felt at times the reality of her marriage to Martin, the connection between them that is difficult to unbind, and there was something quite moving in their back and forth as their marriage dissolves. At any rate, my reaction surprised me a bit, though it’s been decades since I last read the book.
My other surprise this time around was that I’d forgotten Palmer is described as being an American. I’m not quite sure what to make of that really but it seemed potentially significant and I’ll be interested to see where Americans show up in her later novels.
LikeLike
Iris Murdoch Readalong: A Severed Head – Bookish Beck
Mar 29, 2018 @ 09:00:37
“A Severed Head” round-up and “An Unofficial Rose” preview #IMReadalong @IrisMurdoch | Adventures in reading, writing and working from home
Mar 31, 2018 @ 18:36:09
iconoclasticnan1
Mar 31, 2018 @ 23:38:50
Yes clever farce for sure, I saw it in the West End when first produced & remember feeling very sophisticated! Though ten years later, experienced a not entirely dissimilar circle of characters!!! So I am all the time questioning what might reflect real situations (given the complexity of IM’s own social network) and what must be just amusing imaginary plotting. Highly entertaining but for me, not really what I most love in IM – immersive, cinematic settings, gripping philosophical conundrums and characters of more depths.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Liz Dexter
Apr 01, 2018 @ 11:03:17
Oh, wow, I am jealous that you got to see it in the West End! We enjoyed the radio play version done a couple of years ago, although that wasn’t exactly the same. It is tempting to look at IM’s circle, even as a dyed-in-the-wool Death Of The Author type person, I have to say. But I know what you mean about its lightness – we’ll be back in her messy and immersive world for the next one!
LikeLike
Jo
Apr 04, 2018 @ 23:50:06
Liz, I read this at the beginning of the month and loved it but am still working on getting a review written as March was a crazy month. I am intending to post one though!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Liz Dexter
Apr 05, 2018 @ 08:50:39
Glad you loved it, and that’s fine, just pop a link on here when you’ve got to it and I’ll add to the round-up, too. Looking forward to reading your thoughts on it!
LikeLike
Michelle Austin
Apr 05, 2018 @ 09:16:02
I like this one for a lot of reasons, partly I think because it’s so dark. I think Flight was a dark novel in its way with Mischa and the two Polish brothers. But I think the psychological angles in this book make it much darker.
For the women I think it’s probably too simplistic if I say one is one thing or another, although it does kind of look that way to me at a surface level. Antonia is the vacuous, showy wife who appears very beautiful but doesn’t seem to have much depth or feeling. I think Murdoch does a lot to talk about the appearances of women and the masks that they use and sometimes she really seems to bring out the emptiness in some people just by describing them totally as aesthetic and not as fully rounded or “real”. I see Georgie as far more real, she has much more brutal experiences, is physically damaged by things like abortion and her suicide attempt and is very much for sexual purposes in Martin’s mind. Honor on the other hand I think you can say she has a fearsome element, and Martin perhaps sees her as something to fear and be greatly attracted to at the same time. But I’d hesitate to make this too Freudian as that’s overly simplistic as well.
I think those are the broader aspects that I’d see in those characters but again if I said well Antonia is this and Georgie is that it would just set up a binary or assign a “type” which is probably wrong.
One thing that annoys me about the book is Martin himself. Perhaps it’s just another unreliable narrator element, but considering he narrates the story and conducts all these relationships, he is incredibly weak and really quite frightened and mixed up about what women are and what they are supposed to be/behave like etc. He wants to dominate I think because he feels emasculated, although probably doesn’t acknowledge, but he is controlled quite heavily by others, doesn’t really know how to maintain a grip on any situation. A lot of the time I think I just want him to grow a spine and be a bit more responsible as a fully grown man, maybe understand that his actions affect other people, such as Georgie, who I think he uses very cruelly to make himself feel better and then takes no real personal responsibility for that in the end.
I think that’s something about a few of IMs books, she writes these incredibly weak men who are actually really selfish, and there is no lesson for these people. I suppose Honor is a little but didactic and provides something of a lesson to Martin, but mostly he doesn’t seem to learn anything. But then that’s reality as well I suppose, or can be.
This is definitely one of her best though and I agree there are comic moments. I wish I’d seen it on stage as I think it must have worked very well. Definitely worth a re read.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Liz Dexter
Apr 05, 2018 @ 12:03:02
This is really interesting. Martin does have similarities to Bradley Pearson and Charles Arrowby in that, I think, and maybe equally self-deceptive. I love your contrast of the women; I think the best women in the book are the two office ladies, calmly going about their lives, and I wonder if IM is saying something there. I really really wish I’d seen the stage version, too!
LikeLike
Michelle Austin
Apr 06, 2018 @ 08:55:51
Yes those are two other men who annoy me. I think as I said they just can’t decide what they want women to be for. And I think they do view them as having different purposes, which might actually be very realistic (but then that’s cynical feminism coming in there). At any time they can want innocence, a mother figure, a sexual figure, a controller, or someone to be controlled by them. And they can never decide what they need.
I do in some ways just feel sorry for the women who are often made out to have schemed or behaved falsely or they’re just passed over for being boring or empty, but in the case of narrated novels like this that’s totally a male perspective on them. And perhaps just a sign that those men are quite weak and not very psychologically pulled together or secure in themselves? Not sure. It would have been nice to have seen IM write a novel where the women have much starker voices. A female narrator perhaps.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Liz Dexter
Apr 06, 2018 @ 09:03:41
While I’m the last person to attribute authorial attitudes to their texts, I do wonder if there are really many women that IM writes sympathetically even when there isn’t a male narrator (in fact some of the women in Philosopher’s Pupil come out quite well, don’t they?). She seems quite cruel to anyone trying to be not their basic self (so is positive about the lesbian office ladies in Severed Head but not the primped and preened sexy ones in Flight). I’ve always found her male characters more interesting and vivid and positive (and it’s odd that I accept this, but I do here).
LikeLike
Michelle Austin
Apr 06, 2018 @ 10:22:05
True, but so much of being female in society involves hiding the basic self, it’s more or less what women are told to do. Those are male stereotypes, which I don’t think Murdoch totally supports, but nor does she set herself up to argue with them. It’s just a very typically narrow male/societal view that niggles with me. But I think there is some sympathy for women in her books. If they’re being abused or they’re really terribly mistreated I think there’s some sense of injustice. So yes maybe.
And it’s true some of her male characters are very interesting. Although in this book I think I find Palmer a bit too bland. The more complex and enigmatic ones certainly draw me though, Julius King being a great example.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Liz Dexter
Apr 06, 2018 @ 10:28:40
I know what you mean. I feel like IM basically has a male gaze in some ways but also punishes the artificial in women while never acknowledging this is a thing women have to put on to get by in life. But at least she has gentle men, too, Peters Saward and Topglass, Tallis (ugh, manky kitchen, though), Willy Kost …
LikeLike
Michelle Austin
Apr 06, 2018 @ 11:36:54
yes I think it’s good she doesn’t demonize the man too much either, just having enchanter figures or abusers or womanizers would be too narrow as well, so that is good. And there are some loveable men in her books as well.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Jo
Apr 08, 2018 @ 18:41:13
Hi Liz, Here is the link to my goodreads review, it’s a little wordy but there just seemed so much to say for this novel. I added the spoiler although the majority doesn’t give too much away, I’m always concerned about too much information. Have just received my 1977 copy of An Unoffical Rose and once I’ve finished a few other things, look forward to getting into that.
Jo
https://www.goodreads.com/review/show/2313291456
LikeLiked by 1 person
Liz Dexter
Apr 09, 2018 @ 08:23:24
I loved your review, thank you for posting it, and thrilled that this was your favourite so far, as I’m so very fond of it. I liked the way you brought out the fog as almost a character – watch out for this coming back in “The Time of the Angels”. I’ve added a link to your review to my round-up post. Hope you enjoy “An Unofficial Rose”!
LikeLike
“An Unofficial Rose” round-up and “The Unicorn” preview #IMReadalong @IrisMurdoch | Adventures in reading, writing and working from home
Apr 30, 2018 @ 20:57:59
John P. Houghton
May 27, 2018 @ 18:56:26
I got to the end of ‘A Severed Head’ and felt, for the first time after finishing a Murdoch novel, a sense of disappointment.
Inspired by the formidable Honor, I examined my motives for these feelings. Why did this novel make me feel like this?
For a start, I was confused by the genre, for want of a better word. Instead of a reflective philosophical work with elements of humour, this was a mixture of farce and Freud. It reminded me of Shakespeare’s foray into gory revenge tragedy with Titus Andronicus; an author code-switching into a new style.
Linked to that, the shortness left me unsatisfied. Whereas The Bell seemed perfectly paced and just the right length to get to know a character and walk with them to the end of their journey, A Severed Head jumped from one screwball encounter to the next.
The permanent miasma of hungover fugginess and the perma-haze of stale smoke also make me feel a little queasy at points. They must all have had terrible bad breath!. Though this, of course, is a tribute to Iris’ descriptive powers.
Nine of these reasons quite captured why I put down the book with a shrug. Then I read Liz’s review.
A Severed Head is a play, not a novel! A series of dialogue-heavy set pieces, rather than a sustained exploration of unspoken motives.
The pace and episodic style make much more sense when thought of as a piece of theatre. It has been adapted for the stage, and was made into a film in 1970, so I will keep an eye out for a production.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Liz Dexter
May 28, 2018 @ 05:26:23
It is a slight anomaly in her works, isn’t it, although having a lot of the traditional Murdochian features. I loved your comment, “The permanent miasma of hungover fugginess and the perma-haze of stale smoke also make me feel a little queasy at points. ” – very true! I’m glad my review helped you find a way into it. I would also love to see a staging – did you hear the version they did on the BBC a few years ago as part of a short season? That was very effective, though not IM’s version.
LikeLike