In this affectionate study, Brooks concedes that the young James 'missed the point, completely,' but argues that what he observed in Paris deeply affected him, and was especially crucial to his late novels.
(
The New Yorker )
Brooks's main thesis is that when James lived in Paris he 'missed' much that was new and exciting. He didn't really like Flaubert's writing, he dismissed the Impressionists, and he found Wagner's music 'boring.' But twenty or more years later, Brooks argues, what James failed to appreciate at the time came back to haunt him and to affect his later great work. Though James was more of a Romantic realist in the tradition of Balzac (with a large taste for melodramatic kitsch and wild and improbable plot twists), he came to appreciate Flaubert's exquisite style and measured realism and to write several important essays on him.
(
Edmund V. White New York Review of Books )
[E]ngaging and perceptive. . . . [A]n exceptionally clear-sighted account of James's boldness and importance as a novelist.
(
Times Literary Supplement )
Peter Brooks has produced a brilliant and accessible account of a young American landing in Paris and missing the point. In
Henry James Goes to Paris . . . Mr. Brooks shows how James' year in the City of Light--1875 to 1876--left him in the dark, baffled about the French avant-garde.
(
New York Observer )
In the autumn of 1875, Henry James arrived in Paris . . . yet, a little more than a year later, he left for London, disappointed and disenchanted. In this masterly critique, Peter Brooks reveals why, and why also it would prove in time to be one of the most important years of his life. . . . With skill and sensitivity and unusual readability, Brooks reveals how, as James matured . . . he came to admire the passion and commitment, if not the work, of these men.
(
Anne Haverty Irish Times )
Brooks's readings of James's novels are deep and rich.
(
Barbara Fisher Boston Globe )
A brilliant study of how James's experiences that year lay repressed for two decades in what the novelist called 'the deep well of unconscious cerebration', before he transformed his style. Or, as Brooks, who is one of America's finest literary critics, puts it, how James 'missed much of what he experienced--but missed it, I think, only for the time being.'
(
Frances Wilson The Daily Telegraph )
In his fascinating new study,
Henry James Goes to Paris . . . Peter Brooks . . . gives a detailed account of the year James spent there, a year that would shape him forever. . . . Mr. Brooks weaves together episodes from James's year in Paris with his novels, from Roderick Hudson onward, to make plain how painstakingly James absorbed the lessons of the masters even as he seemed to repudiate them.
(
Eric Ormsby The New York Sun )
Peter Brooks is an engaging, lucid writer with a marvelous intuitive grasp of Jamesian complexities and a rare gifting for integrating biography, history, gossip and literary criticism.
(
David Laskin Seattle Times )
In Brooks' excellent account of [James's] time in Paris we can begin to understand how the Balzacian disciple became the Master of the novel we know and still love to read today.
(
Book Depository )
This is a perceptive and well-finessed account of the novelist's growth, enlivened by several lightnesses of touch . . . and James should feel well served.
(
Ian F. A. Bell Modern Language Review )
Unsurpassed as a James reader, Brooks grounds his larger argument in penetrating analyses of not only
What Maisie Knew and
The Golden Bowl but of two early signposts of James' development,
The American and
The Tragic Muse. These readings will surely lend new stature, and generate new interest, in all these novels.
(
David M. Robinson American Literary Realism )
[A] rich and subtly presented case. . . .
Henry James Goes to Paris explores the intersection of narrative and criticism, using an explanatory hypothesis of James's development to frame a series of perceptive critical readings.
(
John Attridge Modernism/modernity )
