Literary Significance & Criticism
In the New York Edition preface Henry James proclaimed The Ambassadors as the best of his novels. Critics have generally agreed that this novel ranks high in the list of his achievements, although there have been notable dissenters, such as E.M. Forster and F.R. Leavis. James's evocation of Paris has gained many plaudits, as the city becomes a well-realized symbol of the beauty and the sorrow of European culture.
Critical controversy has swirled over Strether's refusal of Maria Gostrey, with some seeing it as a perverse rejection of his best chance for happiness. Others have said that Strether, whilst a great friend of Maria's, is not in love with her, and that the couple couldn't have made a successful marriage. Critics also have speculated about whether or not Chad will heed Strether's advice to remain with Marie, or if he'll return to America for the substantial rewards of family business — their general verdict is that Chad will follow the money.
In a letter to a friend, James said that Strether bears a vague resemblance (though not facial) to his creator. It is true that Strether shows an ability to grow in understanding and good judgment, although some critics have seen him as limited and timid, despite his European experiences.
A continuing literary mystery is the nature of the "little nameless object" made in Woollett. Strether calls it: "a little thing they make—make better, it appears, than other people can, or than other people, at any rate, do"; and he calls the business: "a manufacture that, if it's only properly looked after, may well be on the way to become a monopoly". In an article in Slate magazine, Joshua Glenn proposes that the nameless object is a toothpick, while other critics have proposed matches, toilet articles, button hooks, et cetera.
In 1998, the Modern Library ranked The Ambassadors 27th on its list of the 100 best English-language novels of the 20th century.
Read more about this topic: The Ambassadors
Famous quotes containing the words literary, significance and/or criticism:
“... the Ovarian Theory of Literature, or, rather, its complement, the Testicular Theory. A recent camp follower ... of this explicit theory is ... Norman Mailer, who has attributed his own gift, and the literary gift in general, solely and directly to the possession of a specific pair of organs. One writes with these organs, Mailer has said ... and I have always wondered with what shade of ink he manages to do it.”
—Cynthia Ozick (b. 1928)
“Of what significance the light of day, if it is not the reflection of an inward dawn?—to what purpose is the veil of night withdrawn, if the morning reveals nothing to the soul? It is merely garish and glaring.”
—Henry David Thoreau (1817–1862)
“However intense my experience, I am conscious of the presence and criticism of a part of me, which, as it were, is not a part of me, but a spectator, sharing no experience, but taking note of it, and that is no more I than it is you. When the play, it may be the tragedy, of life is over, the spectator goes his way. It was a kind of fiction, a work of the imagination only, so far as he was concerned.”
—Henry David Thoreau (1817–1862)