Beast in the jungle

Henry James always wrote with complexity and intricacy. This was a reflection of his intellect which was devoted to the deeper meanings of culture and morals. Unfortunately this made his prose very abstruse; the underlying clarity is only available to the careful and dilligent reader.

Last night I finished reading this story, and I am still under its spell. This is a truly unforgettable psychological portrait.<br><br>I don't have much to add to the above review; however I have two questions:<br><br>1) Marcher's behaviour, his very essence, is an extreme case of egotism and childishness, while May is a deep, mature and intelligent woman (not to mention beautiful). What, then does she find in Marcher? Why does she sacrifice her life for him?<br><br>2) A question about Henry James' style: is it intentionally difficult and involved, to convey more meaning by allusion and veiling, or is this simply the way Henry James writes, his personal writing style?<br><br>Thanks in advance<br>-- Massimo<br><br>

[Michael Nader]

Five pages into Part II, here are a series of words & phrases: screw loose, queer, concealing veil, gaiety, to pass, unhappy perversion, fell short, act of dissimulation, wore a mask, living with it so long, exposed. In Part III: you help me pass for a man like another, she "knew" something, his queer consciousness. These accumulated words could indicate a closeted man afraid of society's censure if his truth were known. They could also explain his inability to love May, thinking of her only as a friend. Possibly?