Commonplace 26 George & Masochism
It could be argued that George loved to suffer. Some of his more self-inflicted suffering episodes - the almost poverty, the lack of a social life, the sticking to writing books that no-one wanted to read; that hang-dog expression he sometimes wore; the demand for 'sympathy' in order to function - does have 'kick me' written all over it.
Masochism has two pathological realms: the sexual and the psychological. Sexual sadism and masochism are linked in a supply and demand way, and we do not need to dwell on these mutually enjoyable diversions. Was George a sexual masochist? Who knows and who cares!
What is meant by the charge that George was a masochist is, I think, that he courted and even enjoyed losing; suffering; being at the bottom of life's heap. Is this true? If so, where did have its origins?
We know George's mother was a strict disciplinarian who thought nothing of beating her children or locking a child in a cellar for being naughty. It was a time of strict adherence to the old saw that 'to spare the rod is to spoil the child'. Middle class England in the late 1800s was terrified of breeding a race of rebellious children. Christian religious groups were enthusiastic corporal punishers - not surprising for a faith that makes an icon out of a man being tortured and murdered on a cross.
Mrs Gissing, with five children to raise, had to run a tight ship. Three boys was a challenge, though it is very hard to think of George, Will and Alg as being anything but little angels. However, headstrong and adventurous George would probably have been less than cooperative at times - ever rebellious as redheads often are. If his mother beat him, it would have been emotionally as well as physically painful, and humiliating - especially in the face of his two brothers looking on. Children do not question how they are treated by adults, but most tend towards being ashamed of being punished. Was this heady mix of pain and humiliation the catalyst for adult emotional tendencies?
There is a movement afoot in the world of psychiatry to classify the psychological state of masochism as a form of neurosis. To differentiate it from the sexual form, the subject can be said to be suffering from masochistic tendencies if the behaviours do not occur exclusively in response to, or in anticipation of, being physically, sexually, or psychologically abused, or if the behaviours do not occur only when the person is depressed, and when the subject:
Well, you just have to read about George's tragic life to know some of this might float. Here are random, brief examples I can think of; you can add your own.
1. Poor Edith, totally unsuited to George and deserving of so much better from life. It is difficult to know which of them suffered more. My feeling is, of course, Edith was the one who came out worse in that struggle - to the extent she suffered tremendous hardships she probably would have avoided if George had not married her. And, as for Marianne aka Nell...
2. Turned his back on Fred Harrison and the offer of some journalist work that would have set him up and allowed him time to write whilst earning a decent living. Think of WT Stead to know how influential he might have been as an editor or journalist. It was good enough for Daudet, Mr Gissing...
3. George always emphasised the lack of worth of his work, even when it was the product of inspired graft. Tends to get ill when things should be starting and offer a turn for the better - holidays, especially, saw him floored by sore throats and phthisis. Moving house: likewise - always for something worse. The same after the birth of his sons - he saw the children as a mistake.
4. The Owens debacle. Was his ego so huge he thought he was above the law?
5. His entire adult life.
6. His method of writing and the way he cut himself off from sources of material to write about. Refused to stop buying books when he was eating lentils - and making his ill wife live that way. Admitting his faults and yet not attempting to change.
7. Many people were glad to offer him social invitations but he withdrew under the false banner of saying as he couldn't return the hospitality, so his pride would not let him accept. Then he moaned about being lonely. Allowed his sensual nature to reject Clara Collet (she wasn't pretty - and she was chubby) who would have licked him into shape.
8. George underestimated his selfishness in proposing to two women who were taken on under false pretences. Both had to endure his brutal make-overs, and both were made miserable by him. Both had their lives ruined before being dumped by him, not before he went crying to anyone who would listen about what a terrible time he was having living with 'unsuitable' women who refused to comply with his heartless, snobby, ghastly fascist regime. Did he ever give a twopenny toss for anyone else but himself when it came to the love of a good woman? And all that recording of bread and butter and cold tea being his only meal - poor George!
Am I being unfair? Well, as a masochist, George would appreciate my comments LOL. He was weak - he knew that, but he flaunted it, he didn't cringe at the admission. The famous phrase 'More than most men am I dependent on sympathy to bring out the best that is in me' - is embarrassing to read, and likely to engender pity rather than sympathy. It is designed to disarm criticism and feedback, to stage-manage the other person's responses and perceptions. Did he ever try that philosophy on Marianne and Edith? Did he give them 'sympathy' - or just a sound psychological thrashing? Freud, who did some of the first work on the subject of sadomasochism, believed the two were indistinguishable: that sadism is just the other side of the coin of masochism.
There is a cruel streak in George and a lacking of human feeling. For example, he was cruel to his first wife, eventually abandoning her when she needed him most. And his truly shocking abandoning of his children is shameful, and not the behaviour of anything but a truly selfish human being. Who can forget that last meeting with Alfred with George not even speaking to the wee chap? Of course, George mentions it to focus on his own feelings, and there is no account of him wondering how it might have affected his boy - or might ever affect him when he read his father's documents. George seemed not to care who raised his sons as long as it wasn't him. As ever, he gave money but not himself in a relationship. We can make excuses - much as he excused himself - but it was heartless to send the boys off to strangers and to separate them. And cruel not to allow Edith contact with Walter - George acted on this to suit himself to solve a problem he could not resolve and I suspect, to demonstrate power over his wife - even, to punish her for her lack of cooperation. Even in the 1890s any exploration of the debate around child welfare would have alerted him to the risks for their emotional development and future happiness. George made so much mileage out of his own self-inflicted suffering and yet seemed incapable (or unconcerned) about how his dependents might survive alone in the world. Not very 'heroic'.
 |
| Post card advocating 'striking arguments' to keep your man in check.
The chap could be GRG? And she could be Edith?
|
Masochism has two pathological realms: the sexual and the psychological. Sexual sadism and masochism are linked in a supply and demand way, and we do not need to dwell on these mutually enjoyable diversions. Was George a sexual masochist? Who knows and who cares!
What is meant by the charge that George was a masochist is, I think, that he courted and even enjoyed losing; suffering; being at the bottom of life's heap. Is this true? If so, where did have its origins?
We know George's mother was a strict disciplinarian who thought nothing of beating her children or locking a child in a cellar for being naughty. It was a time of strict adherence to the old saw that 'to spare the rod is to spoil the child'. Middle class England in the late 1800s was terrified of breeding a race of rebellious children. Christian religious groups were enthusiastic corporal punishers - not surprising for a faith that makes an icon out of a man being tortured and murdered on a cross.
 |
| Spanking the Bad Boy by Pavel Osipovich Kovalevsky date unknown to me. Weird. |
 |
| Soul in Bondage by Elihu Vedder 1891/2 |
- chooses people and situations that lead to disappointment, failure, or mistreatment even when better options are clearly available
- rejects or renders ineffective the attempts of others to help them
- following positive personal events (e.g., new achievement), responds with depression, guilt, or a behaviour that produces pain (e.g., an accident)
- incites angry or rejecting responses from others and then feels hurt, defeated, or humiliated (e.g., makes fun of spouse in public, provoking an angry retort, then feels devastated)
- rejects opportunities for pleasure, or is reluctant to acknowledge enjoying things(despite having adequate social skills and the capacity for pleasure)
- fails to accomplish tasks crucial to their personal objectives despite demonstrated ability to do so, e.g., helps fellow students write papers, but is unable to write their own
- is uninterested in or rejects people who consistently treat them well, e.g., is not attracted to caring sexual partners
- engages in excessive self-sacrifice that is unsolicited by the intended recipients of the sacrifice.
Well, you just have to read about George's tragic life to know some of this might float. Here are random, brief examples I can think of; you can add your own.
1. Poor Edith, totally unsuited to George and deserving of so much better from life. It is difficult to know which of them suffered more. My feeling is, of course, Edith was the one who came out worse in that struggle - to the extent she suffered tremendous hardships she probably would have avoided if George had not married her. And, as for Marianne aka Nell...
2. Turned his back on Fred Harrison and the offer of some journalist work that would have set him up and allowed him time to write whilst earning a decent living. Think of WT Stead to know how influential he might have been as an editor or journalist. It was good enough for Daudet, Mr Gissing...
3. George always emphasised the lack of worth of his work, even when it was the product of inspired graft. Tends to get ill when things should be starting and offer a turn for the better - holidays, especially, saw him floored by sore throats and phthisis. Moving house: likewise - always for something worse. The same after the birth of his sons - he saw the children as a mistake.
5. His entire adult life.
6. His method of writing and the way he cut himself off from sources of material to write about. Refused to stop buying books when he was eating lentils - and making his ill wife live that way. Admitting his faults and yet not attempting to change.
7. Many people were glad to offer him social invitations but he withdrew under the false banner of saying as he couldn't return the hospitality, so his pride would not let him accept. Then he moaned about being lonely. Allowed his sensual nature to reject Clara Collet (she wasn't pretty - and she was chubby) who would have licked him into shape.
8. George underestimated his selfishness in proposing to two women who were taken on under false pretences. Both had to endure his brutal make-overs, and both were made miserable by him. Both had their lives ruined before being dumped by him, not before he went crying to anyone who would listen about what a terrible time he was having living with 'unsuitable' women who refused to comply with his heartless, snobby, ghastly fascist regime. Did he ever give a twopenny toss for anyone else but himself when it came to the love of a good woman? And all that recording of bread and butter and cold tea being his only meal - poor George!
 |
| An invitation to S&M? |
 |
| The Limbic System, that sausage and mushroom - shaped mass just behind the eye is the key to the emotions, feelings of empathy and much more. |
 |
| He's enjoying that! |
No comments:
Post a Comment