Literary Testament of Youth by Vera Brittain

[desertblues]

Thanks all for the links!

Before I speak about the book, I read an interesting fact about World War I. It seems that the German put up an electric fence, the Wire of Death (375 km) on the border between the neutral Netherlands and the invaded Belgium. Several persons are electrocuted on that wire, many of them civilians. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wire_of_Death

Spoiler:

The Netherlands are neutral, but it takes some maneuvering to remain that way, with the provocations from the other countries, such as trade embargoes. They are in a tight spot between England, Germany and Belgium. The German emperor Wilhelm II fleas to exile to the Netherlands in 1918. At the Treaty of Versailles in 1919, Wilhelm II is to be prosecuted ‘ for a supreme offence against international morality and the sanctity of treaties. However, the Dutch Queen Wilhelmina refuses to extradite him, despite appeals from the Allies.
Modern historians blame this war not on the Germans; all countries are willing to go to war in 1914.

Some thoughts about this book while reading: I haven’t read Brittain’s diary as Issybird did, but I certainly intend to. I understand that the diary shows more details of Vera’s real story and is less of a construction than the Testament of Youth. Perhaps, as a survivor, Vera needs to reconstruct her memories in this way. Her war-experiences overshadow all and are her criterion for assessing all, even in retrospect.

Spoiler:

562.'Only gradually did I realize that the War had condemned me to live to the end of my days in a world without confidence or security, a world in which every dear personal relationship would be fearfully cherished under the shadow of apprehension; in which love would seem threatened perpetually by death, and happiness appear a house without duration, built upon the shifting sands of chance. I might, perhaps, have it again, but never again should I hold it.'

Therefore, I think, it is that I do miss certain aspects in the first part of her book, where she speaks about her youth. I find this too shallow, and feel that it doesn’t tell about the essence of her, except for her hunger to learn, to become someone. It strikes me as well that she hardly mentions the fun children do have or the foolish things they do.
She judges the Buxton of her youth and it’s view on the war with a very critical eye. I find her too critical in this aspect; what is more human than to try to translate dramatic events into more manageable pieces?

Spoiler:

131.'Few of humanity’s characteristics are more disconcerting than its ability to reduce world-events to its own level, wherever this may happen to lie. By the end of August, when Liege and Namur had fallen, and the misfortunes of the British Army were extending into the Retreat from Mons, the ladies of the Buxton élite had already set to work to provincialize the War.'

I do feel for her and her contemporaries when she talks about the last ‘care-free entertainment’ before the war. She describes beautifully the loss of her generation, the loss of her youth. As many of her young generation, she is propelled into a war she doesn’t want and matures too fast.

Spoiler:

120. 'I have written so much of Uppingham Speech Day because it was the one perfect summer idyll that I ever experienced, as well as my last care-free entertainment before the Flood. The lovely legacy of a vanished world, it is etched with minute precision on the tablets of my memory. Never again, for me and for my generation, was there to be any festival the joy of which no cloud would darken and no remembrance invalidate.'

In the second part of the book I applaud how she talks about her nursing in the war. As I mentioned before, it is believable and rings so very true. I can well imagine what she has gone through. For me this part of the book makes up for other deficiencies. She is a different person after her nursing of critical ill soldiers under unmerciful, harsh conditions; will never be the same.

Spoiler:

207.'On my first day at the hospital, a Scottish sergeant produced a comment of which the stark truth came finally home to me three summers afterwards.
‘We shall beat them,’ he said, ‘but they’ll break our hearts first!'

And just when one wonders how these nurses can bear the unending torrent of dying young and critical wounded men, Vera describes the their idealism. When reading this account I almost hear her disappointment at what follows after the war, and becomes the fundament for her pacifism.

Spoiler:

446. 'Between 1914 and 1919 young men and women, disastrously pure in heart and unsuspicious of elderly self-interest and cynical exploitation, were continually re-dedicating themselves - as I did that morning in Boulogne - to an end that they believed, and went on trying to believe, lofty and ideal. When patriotism ‘wore threadbare’, when suspicion and doubt began to creep in, the more ardent and frequent was the periodic re-dedication, the more deliberate the self-induced conviction that our efforts were disinterested and our cause was just. Undoubtedly this state of mind was what anti-war propagandists call it - ‘hysterical exaltation’, ‘quasi-mystical, idealistic hysteria’ - but it had concrete results in stupendous patience, in superhuman endurance, in the constant re-affirmation of incredible courage. To refuse to acknowledge this is to underrate the power of those white angels which fight so naïvely on the side of destruction.'

B.t.w., I noticed that Vera hardly speaks about (other) famous war heroines, and I have come across some interesting ones: the famous British nurse Edith Cavell http://www.biographyonline.net/human...th-cavell.html , the courageous Australian Olive May King http://adb.anu.edu.au/biography/king-olive-may-6962 or the Scottish doctor Elsie Ingles http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elsie_Inglis

She is less harsh on the German enemy than on the Buxton of her younger years. And I didn’t realize before that the Treaty of Versailles could have had that much influence on the young generation that lived the First World War, even if Vera doesn’t actually read it’s articles.

Spoiler:

563.'the beaten, blockaded enemy pay the cost of the War. For me the ‘Huns’ were then, and always, the patient, stoical Germans whom I had nursed in France, and I did not like to read of them being deprived of their Navy, and their Colonies, and their coal-fields in Alsace-Lorraine and the Saar Valley, while their children starved and froze for lack of food and fuel. So, when the text of the Treaty of Versailles was published in May, after I had returned to Oxford, I deliberately refrained from reading it; I was beginning already to suspect that my generation had been deceived, its young courage cynically exploited, its idealism betrayed, and I did not want to know the details of that betrayal.'

The disappointment in the Treaty of Versailles and the betrayal of society afterwards seems to have set her on the path for a search of the meaning of life; at an too early age.

Spoiler:

565.’ We should never be at the mercy of Providence if only we understood that we ourselves are Providence; our lives, and our children’s lives, will be rational, balanced, well-proportioned, to exactly the extent that we recognize this fundamental truth. It may be that our generation will go down in history as the first to understand that not a single man or woman can now live in disregarding isolation from his or her world. I don’t know yet what I can do, I concluded, to help all this to happen, but at least I can begin by trying to understand where humanity failed and civilization went wrong. If only I and a few other people succeed in this, it may be worthwhile that our lives have been lived; it may even be worthwhile that the lives of the others have been laid down. Perhaps that’s really why, when they died, I was left behind.'

The world is changed after this war. It is the end of three empires, the Austran-Hungarian, the German and the Russian. For the women however, things don’t change that much. The women are more confident after the war; dresses in shorter skirts, cut their hair, smoke and frequent café’s, but in their professional life they are discriminated against for years to come.
It must have been devastating for women, who don't grow up with the morals of the Victorian age but are formed in the war, to realize that society isn’t waiting for their input. And in effect, for women some things change, but not as quickly as they would like. For example, English women factory workers during the war are being paid about half of the salary of the men, and have to get back to their kitchens afterwards.

Spoiler:

684 'during the wartime preoccupation with ‘heroes’, it rose again directly after the War owing to the fact that, unlike men, they had inconsiderately failed to die in large numbers. The reason universally given for limiting the vote to women over thirty was that the complete enfranchisement of adult women would have meant a preponderant feminine vote.
This excessive female population was habitually described, none too flatteringly, as ‘superfluous’,'
685.'As a generation of women we were now sophisticated to an extent which was revolutionary when compared with the romantic ignorance of 1914. Where we had once spoken with polite evasion of ‘a certain condition’, ‘a certain profession’, we now unblushingly used the words ‘pregnancy’ and ‘prostitution’.

It is very interesting to read about her pacifism, the Congresses she visits and so on in the last section of this book. However, I prefer the middle part, where she writes about her work as a VAD. This is the most authentic piece about herself, I feel.

Once married, Vera paints her husband in a mellow, romantic light, but he must have been a disappointment for her in her later years. She yields to his remarks on her book and changes parts of it. (!!) I find this difficult to believe of a woman who has gone through difficult times in the war and has made her way in life, despite many obstructions.

Spoiler:

In his introduction of the book, Bostridge speaks about 'the strong objections of her husband, the political scientist George Catlin, to his own appearance in the book’s last chapter. Catlin scrawled his comments in the margins of the typescript: ‘intolerable’, ‘horrible’, ‘pretty terrible’. (…) Believing that his wife’s book would hold him up to ridicule among his academic colleagues - not least, one suspects, because of the account of the continuing importance to her of her intimate friendship with Winifred Holtby - he begged Brittain to make changes to certain passages, and prayed that ‘this spotlight’ would pass swiftly. She complied by reducing him to a more shadowy figure in the final draft, though she bitterly regretted that the theme of her post-war resurrection, symbolized by her marriage, had been irretrievably weakened.'

[issybird]

I think some of the issues relating to the latter and less compelling part of the book have to do with its being more recent for Vera and as a result both less synthesized and internalized and with her shorter perspective on events. Moreover, from our vantage, we know how ultimately futile the various Congresses and the League would turn out to be and it's less interesting as a result compared to the war, of which we still feel the reverberations a century later.

I can sympathize with George, even though his edits hurt the book. I remember reading that years (decades) later, Vera was startled to learn that he felt as if he always came in second to the memory of Roland. She said there was no comparison between the shadowy lover of her girlhood and the full partner of her maturity and father of her children, but one can see why George felt that way. I can't be the only one who winced a bit at Vera's wanting a bridal bouquet of the flowers Roland gave her.

It was obviously a difficult marriage, understandably so. Winifred was part of their household (and who of us would want a spouse's BFF as permanent tenant?) and George had to make serious sacrifices in regard to his career, even giving up his tenured position at Cornell (a prestigious American university, for the non-Yanks) when they couldn't make the transatlantic partnership work with Vera spending time in New York. There were infidelities on both sides. Just saying that I can see his point of view, too!

[desertblues]

Originally Posted by issybird

(...)

I can sympathize with George, even though his edits hurt the book. I remember reading that years (decades) later, Vera was startled to learn that he felt as if he always came in second to the memory of Roland. She said there was no comparison between the shadowy lover of her girlhood and the full partner of her maturity and father of her children, but one can see why George felt that way. I can't be the only one who winced a bit at Vera's wanting a bridal bouquet of the flowers Roland gave her.

It was obviously a difficult marriage, understandably so. Winifred was part of their household (and who of us would want a spouse's BFF as permanent tenant?) and George had to make serious sacrifices in regard to his career, even giving up his tenured position at Cornell (a prestigious American university, for the non-Yanks) when they couldn't make the transatlantic partnership work with Vera spending time in New York. There were infidelities on both sides. Just saying that I can see his point of view, too!

Hm, yes I can understand it somewhat better now. Thank you for this information, Issybird. I see I have some additional reading to do.
I have the feeling Vera is the most true at heart when she speaks about her nursing.
But still; I wouldn't take it lightly, no matter what, when any husband would tell me what to edit in my book or not.........

Edit: I edited 'only true' to 'the most true' at heart, as the first didn't do her justice.

[Bookpossum]

Thanks desertblues and issybird - really interesting posts.

I can well understand that George felt he always came second to Roland - he was forever young and perfect, where with George there would be the disagreements and irritations that occur in even the best marriages (unless one partner is a total doormat!). The difficulties of trying to make a relationship work when the partners are living and working in different countries would be almost insuperable.

[Bookpossum]

Here's a link to a series of programmes being broadcast here in Oz this weekend, which I think may be of interest to you. I'm planning on listening to most if not all.

http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/...s/worldwarone/

[issybird]

Thank you, 'possum, these look fantastic.

[BelleZora]

My appreciation, also, for the link, Bookpossum. I just listened to the first episode and especially appreciated the stated intention to go beyond a narrow nationalistic view of the war, as well as the assertion that the causes of the war are even more argued today because of current political situations. It is enlightening to realize that the causes of the Great War are not just history, but critically important to grasping and dealing with today's issues.

I was looking for something like this earlier today, but did not find anything to compare with this Australian series.

[desertblues]

Thanks Bookpossum, for the link.
It is fortunate, good timing, that we're reading this book at this time, as the First World War started on 28 of June 100 years ago. It somehow feels more recent than that.

[Bookpossum]

You are all welcome! I have listened to some of them and of course they are from an Australian perspective, but with various contributors. An interestingly lively discussion on the competence or otherwise of the generals in Lions Led by Donkeys.

[issybird]

Originally Posted by Bookpossum

You are all welcome! I have listened to some of them and of course they are from an Australian perspective, but with various contributors. An interestingly lively discussion on the competence or otherwise of the generals in Lions Led by Donkeys.

I'm looking forward to this one. I'm aware of revisionist history in this regard, but I can't imagine I'll be convinced!

I've just read a novel that didn't make the cut for my selections, The War-Workers by E.M. Delafield (of Provincial Lady fame). I didn't think it was literary enough for this club and it isn't, but it's interesting in the context of Vera's experiences, especially as it was a contemporary tale (written in 1917).

The protagonist is an upper-class, 30-ish woman who runs the local supply depot. Her aged father has a stroke, but Charmian thinks her work is more important than coming back home, where her able mother and a full-time nurse can care for her father. The local doctor makes this pronouncement:

"It's not the work you want to get back to, young lady; it's the excitement, and the official position, and the right it gives you to interfere with people who knew how to run a hospital and everything connected with it some twenty years or so before you came into the world. That's what you want. I can't tell you, as a matter of medical opinion, that it will bring on a second stroke, if you vex and disappoint your good father by monkeying about in a becoming uniform and a bit of gold braid on an office stool while he desires you to stay at home; but I can and I do tell you that you're playing as heartless a trick as any I ever saw, making patriotism the excuse for bullying a lot of women who work themselves to death for you because you're of a better class, and have more personality than themselves, and pretending to yourself that it's the work you're after, when it's just because you want to get somewhere where you'll be in the limelight all the time."

So there's what Vera was up against when her mother had her breakdown. The POV of the story, as written by a woman, is that Charmian makes the wrong choices and that women should be more womanly, a view that the women who work under Charmian share. The scales fall from their eyes and they see her for the selfish, power-grabber she is. Alas.

[Bookworm_Girl]

Since it was short I read A Diary Without Dates for comparison. Whereas Vera's book is so full of details and careful research, Enid's book is more of a compilation of loosely woven experiences as the title suggests. It's very stream of consciousness. Still an interesting read but I'm glad I read Vera's book first to have a better knowledge of daily hospital life over which Enid's feelings are laid. I do recommend it though.

[paola]

I've just finished the book, and I will need some time to figure out how i really feel about this - but I will agree with many of the points already made - I also do not like Vera particularly, though I kept telling myself to be more indulgent, as form the point of view of a girl brought up by Victorian parents, the turnaround of her life must have seemed absolutely impossible.

I also agree on the third part being the least compelling, though it did pick up for me toward the end - and poor George has all my respect. I am pondering whether I should have a go at Shirley William's memoir, to see what her mother was like from another perspective.
Most of all this was for me a feminist book, but like desertblues I also thought class does play a role - one passage which did shock me is

Though the three maids had been unoccupied all evening, not one of them offered to help me unpack or to get me a cup of tea, and I was far too much absorbed in my misery to ask them for anything

So little Vera is upset and nees to be pampered? Having a fulfilling job is ok if you are educated and lucky enough to be born in a well to do family? I must wonder how close she really felt to the poor of London's East End...

[issybird]

Originally Posted by paola

So little Vera is upset and nees to be pampered? Having a fulfilling job is ok if you are educated and lucky enough to be born in a well to do family? I must wonder how close she really felt to the poor of London's East End...

That exact passage also jumped out at me. And there's one where Vera makes it explicit on her first visit to hall at Somerville that neither the cuisine nor the company met her exacting standards.

Another issue of interest for me is Vera's attitude toward homosexuality. I've mentioned that even in retrospect she seems obtuse about Edward's sexuality; when I read a little farther I saw that Edward tried to tell her, almost in so many words. In one letter, he said he doubted he'd marry and mentioned how he identified with The Loom of Youth, which he'd just read. Really, did Vera need to be hit over the head with a plank? Although it's possible she knew, but didn't want to acknowledge it overtly.

She might have been defensive. For me, there are obvious overtones that while Vera was heterosexual, Winifred's feelings for Vera were those of a lover. I googled a bit to see if there was any new scholarship on the subject of Winifred's lesbianism and found a provocative article about their friendship by Mark Bostridge, who seems to be a one-man Vera Brittain industry. I giggled at Stella Benson's comment and it seems inescapable to me that the Caitlin/Holtby menage worked better for Vera than the other two.

[Bookpossum]

I read Testament of Friendship a long time ago - probably just after I read Testament of Youth for the first time. I was interested at the comment about Vera's death bed happy ending. She was presumably disguising Winifred Holtby's devotion to her and the implications that people seemed to have been drawing from their relationship.

I do get the impression that Vera was quite happy to accept the devotion of others to her as her due. I do feel sorry for George!

[paola]

very intersting thoughts! Indeed, two more passages jumped at me, on the closeness between Vera and Winifred - one in particular, towards the end of the book, after quoting a couple of passages from correspondence with G., Brittain writes

That spring, too, looked more per*son*ally hope*ful for our*selves than had any pre*vi*ous year.

At this point I would have expected the sentence to continue with a "G.", whereas it reads

Winifred was now con*tribut*ing notes and oc*ca*sional lead*ers to Times and Tide ...

There were a couple more instances like that, were a "we both" surprised me by referring to Vera and Winifred, instead of Vera and Caitlin.