Fidelity: A Novel

Susan Glaspell was a great writer. This book is a masterpiece of realism told with a clever use of flashback. Glaspell has deep psychological insight into her characters and acute observational awareness of the oppressive stifling effects of small town 'morality' on people's lives. She manages to present intricate moral dilemmas and the rigid requirements of society in a non-judgemental and intriguing way. Her prose style is plain but servicable. I found myself annoyed when my reading was interrupted and surprised by the ending, which avoided the apparently inevitable, clichéd outcome. I wish Glaspell were better known these days.

This book was a revelation to me and I cannot recommend it highly enough. Although the standards of behaviour and conformity are so different now, I still found it difficult to believe that the book was first published in 1915. I kept thinking of Middlemarch and am not entirely sure why - perhaps because of the flawed nobility of the central character and society's reaction to a mesalliance whether financial, social or morale. The characters and plight of Deane and Ruth are incredibly moving and the ending realistic (however much one hoped for a different way out). I could not stop thinking of the book for a long time after finishing it, and this has not happened for a long time.How many other neglected Classics are out there I wonder?Elaine Elliot

This earnest and intensely emotional novel dramatically demonstrates how much social attitudes to marriage have changed in Western society during the last hundred years. Set in the first couple of decades of the last century in a Midwestern town, the novel's heroine, Ruth Holland, falls in love with a man who is unhappily married, whose wife won't give him a divorce. They elope, and for a dozen years or so live as man and wife, mostly trying to run a farm; a hard life, but for much of it joyous too, despite being childless and socially ostracised. Much of the novel concerns the town's reaction to Ruth's return when her father is dying. Here, the sacrifices she made for love are laid bare: it splits her family; destroys close friendships; society cuts her; she's the subject of scorn: her life in the home she loves is untenable. The central question the novel leaves us with is: was it worth it? Interestingly, the answer could fall either side, the novelist leaves it up to us to decide.Glaspell sorts her characters into sheep and goats. On one side are Ruth's allies: her younger brother Ted; Deane, the doctor, who is also in love with her; and Annie, a working-class market-gardener. These are the one's who the author approves of, who live life to the full rather than follow its conventions. On the other side are all the society matrons, many of whom were her childhood friends, who loved her before her 'fall'; chief among them is Edith, her best friend, whose loyalties are genuinely torn but who sides with convention, and Ruth's elder brother, who even refuses to sleep in the same house as her as their father is dying. Hovering in the middle is Harriet, Ruth's sister, pulled either way, not strong enough to follow her instincts, not fully understanding Ruth's motives. In her depiction of Ruth's 'enemies' Glaspell is able to condemn all those in society that do not forgive, show no charity or compassion, even if they might privately feel it, and are ruled by convention rather than feeling. She is so clearly on the side of Ruth that the novel is in danger of becoming too one sided.Perhaps Glaspell realised this, for about two-thirds of the way through the story makes a significant shift. At the heart of the opposition to Ruth's elopement is, not unnaturally, her lover's deserted wife. She gets a bitter satisfaction from withholding a divorce and pleasure in the pain it gives her husband; but after a dozen years, two events change her mind. As a result, she choses compassion over convention and opens the way to a divorce. You might think Ruth and Stuart, her lover, would be deeply thankful: now at last they can do the respectful thing and get married. But it's here that Glaspell raises the novel to a new level and gives it its deeply equivocal ending.The novel is not without its faults. I'll pick out the two that struck me the most. Firstly, the love affair between Ruth and Stuart is conducted largely off-stage and Stuart remains a shadowy, undeveloped character, making the central love affair of the book curiously weak and unfocused. One wonders why Glaspell chose to underplay it. Secondly, towards the end she uses some heavy-handed symbolism to underline Ruth's outsider status and loneliness: she is watching sheep huddle together in a bitterly cold winter field, how they rely on each other for life-giving warmth, how some are on the edge, more likely to perish. Laura Goodwin, in her preface to this book, thinks this is central to the novel; to me its treating the reader as too dumb to work it out for themselves.Glaspell has been likened to Willa Cather and Edith Wharton. She's not as good, even in this, her best novel; but nevertheless, its a powerful and affecting read and well-worth its reissue.

First published in 1915, Susan Glaspell's 'Fidelity' tells the story of Ruth Holland, an attractive and determined young woman, who is much admired by her childhood friend, medical student Deane Franklin, but instead falls deeply in love with Stuart Williams, a charming, but unhappily married man. Despite the knowledge that Stuart's embittered wife refuses to divorce him, the pair leave their homes and families for a new life together, a decision which results in Ruth being ostracised by the community in her hometown of Freeport, and in her becoming estranged from her family. (No spoilers - we learn all of this very early on in the novel). Some eleven years later, when Ruth's now widowed father is dying, she returns to Freeport and is shunned by those who used to be her friends, and it is only her younger brother, Ted, and Dr Deane Franklin who offer her any sort of welcome. However, Deane has recently married the beautiful, but cool Amy, who is shocked by her husband's willingness to forgive and forget and is jealous of his apparent devotion to a woman whom Amy feels is a fallen woman. When Deane asks Amy to meet Ruth, Amy is insulted and threatens to go back home to her parents and Deane is torn between the demands of his new wife and his affection for his childhood sweetheart, a woman he still respects and admires. Does Deane give in to his wife and the rigid morals of the community at large, or does he follow his own moral compass and support Ruth when she is in need of a friend? And is Ruth able to come to terms with the effect her actions have had on her family over the years, and does she still feel that her love for Stuart and her desire to be true to her own beliefs has been worth the pain she has caused to others?As noted by other reviewers writing here, Susan Glaspell's 'Fidelity' is somewhat reminiscent of the writing of the better-known Edith Wharton, but Ms Glaspell (who was an American Pulitzer Prize-winning playwright, novelist, journalist and actress) has her own talents as a novelist and her own story to tell. 'Fidelity' is a subtle and sensitive story of a woman's search for self-fulfilment and is one in which, amongst other themes, the author explores moral attitudes, personal integrity, personal freedom and the importance of love in all its guises. Although a fairly slow-moving story (and there's nothing wrong in that), it's a deftly constructed one and one that is very satisfying to read, and I particularly enjoyed the ending - of which I would like to discuss further, but obviously cannot as it would spoil the novel for those who have yet to read it. Another enjoyable Persephone publication and one I find easy to recommend.5 Stars.