The all new 50 Books Challenge!
Title: The Witches of New York: a Novel by Ami McKay
Details: Copyright 2017, Harper Collins
Synopsis (By Way of Back Cover): "New York in the spring of 1880 is a place alive with wonder and curiosity. Séances are the entertainment of choice in exclusive social circles, and many enterprising women—some possessed of true intuitive powers, and some gifted with the art of performance— find work as mediums. At their humble teashop, Tea and Sympathy, Adelaide Thom and Eleanor St. Clair provide a place for whispered confessions, secret cures, and spiritual assignations for a select society of ladies, who speak the right words and ask the right questions.
When Tea and Sympathy posts an ad that reads "Respectable Lady Seeks Dependable Shop Girl. Those averse to magic need not apply," seventeen-year-old Beatrice leaves the safety of her village to answer, though she has little inclination of what the job will demand. Beatrice doesn't know it yet, but she has great spiritual gifts— ones that she will come to harness under the tutelage of Adelaide and Eleanor. But not even they can prepare her for the evils lurking in the darkest corners of the city or the courage it will take to face them."
Why I Wanted to Read It: It's been a big year for Witch books! Both books about real Witches but also the fantasy kind. Having now read more current (written in the past five years) Witch books than I have in a long time, I wondered what else written recently I might have missed. In that, I found quite a bit of fiction. Fiction can of course be hit or miss, but so can any book, and it was a book of fiction that helped send me "officially" down the Pagan path (In the Land of Winter by Richard Grant, a massively underrated book) many years ago.
With that in mind, I requested a bunch of books of "witch fiction" (is the witchcraft the fantasy or the real kind? We'll see!) so this is just one of many, all by different authors. The first book I read in this lot was the extremely disappointing A Secret History of Witches.
How I Liked It: We know things can suffer by comparison. That pretty good movie you watched after the masterpiece you can't stop referencing suddenly becomes so-so to "meh". That perfectly pleasant time you had after a wonderful, exhilarating trip can become disappointing.
But can it go the reverse way? Can something be improved by comparison? That isn't to say the media (for example) in question isn't great on its own, it's just that compared to something else far, far lesser, it becomes even more great. I'll get to what I mean.
But first, it's New York City in the fall of 1880! The Industrial Revolution is under way and America is still repairing itself from the War Between the States (better known now as the Civil War). Things are about to really change, of course, we're just on the cusp of it, but what a cusp! Meet Adelaide Thom and Eleanor St Clair, business partners and friends who run a tea shop with occultism on the side with their talking raven who is probably only pretending to be a raven. Needing some help, they put out an advertisement for a shopgirl, to be answered by a teenager yearning for something else, but she's not sure what, Beatrice Dunn, who has a very telling accident on her way to interview for the job.
But trouble and complications exist on all sides! Fairies, ghosts, demons, secrets and the spurned, and a witch-hunting, murdering reverend and his pearl-clutching scold of a parishioner-henchwoman (who writes frantically to Anthony Comstock about the tea shop) all aim to complicate life for our protagonists. Things come to a head and our trio learns who their true friends are, as well as their own real strengths, and the book has a plausibly happy ending.
Reading this book after the massively disappointing (on a number of levels) A Secret History of Witches, it's hard not to compare the two books. Both are historical fiction and fantasy, aiming to use witchcraft-as-metaphor, particularly as it relates to feminism. Where Secret History failed on numerous parts though, this book more than succeeds.
First things first. Is it Witchcraft (the real life spiritual practice than can be a religion for some, for others it's murky, related to Paganism) or witchcraft (fantasy ala The Wizard of Oz)? While there are some passing glances to Witchcraft, this book falls firmly into the fantasy part.
Grimoires are discussed, although that's not exclusive to Witchcraft. Probably most tellingly is the inclusion of the "Dumb Supper", a long-held folk tradition continued today by some modern Witches around Samhain (or Halloween). The book not only shows a Dumb Supper being held with fantastical results, the chapter quotes Eleanor's grimoire:
The Dumb Supper is the most respectful way to summon the dead. Although traditionally held on All Hallows' Eve (the time of year when the veil is thinnest), it can be performed at other times, in other seasons, should the need arise. The rules of the ritual must be strictly obeyed, lest unintended consequences follow. Reverence and respect are required throughout. (pg 235)
It should be noted that the concept of a Dumb Supper is by no means exclusive to Witches. Dumb Suppers are generally a way to pay respect to the dead/court ghosts (depending on your take) and as the Spiritualist movement was gaining traction, they even became fashionable for a time. The Dumb Supper depicted in the book is relevant to the plot.
Another interesting note,
"What's that song you were singing?"
"J'ai vu le loup," Eleanor answered. "'I Saw the Wolf.' My mother used to whistle it while clacking a pair of sheep's ribs to keep time. Before the burnings, witches sang it as they danced at their Sabbaths."(pg 243)
Note Eleanor says "Sabbaths" not "Sabbats" as Witches call them. It's nice that it's clear Eleanor is relating folklore.
They also at one point chant a favorite Witch chant:
Earth, air, water, fire,
In a circle we conspire, (pg 247)
In the acknowledgements, the author thanks two Witches:
as well as the many writings on folk magic, traditions, and witchlore by Gerina Dunwich and the late, great Scott Cunningham. (pg 534)
So the witchcraft (which in some places is clearly synonymous with "psychism" or even "occultism") is generally fantasy and like Alice Hoffman's work, manages to have witchcraft only look a bit like Witchcraft (particularly for an audience that at this point, has at least a passing notion of what Witchcraft is).
The most important thing about the author's witchcraft though, is the fact it's much more clearly a metaphor for feminism, and unlike A Secret History, it goes far better. It's worth noting that the two women practicing are somewhat outcast from society, although they have friends that regularly partake of their services who are upstanding accepted citizens. The people rallying against their witchcraft and even aligning with Comstock would absolutely be the same ones against feminism and women's suffrage (quite literally in the case of Comstock).
Tellingly, a demon reflects at the end of the book when his efforts have been thwarted,
In his long existence he'd brought about the demise of many witches merely by encouraging man's hate, man's greed, man's hubris, man's intolerance. Taking down these new witches would require careful consideration and planning. A small part of him was glad for the challenge. The hunts in Europe had gone smoothly. Salem had been far too easy a task. These women were another matter altogether. (pg 504)
The book ends with a (human) character, now transformed, who hears of a new "witch", a young telegraph operator who'd been receiving strange, prophetic messages over the wires after an accident. After much consideration, and realizing the young woman would "be in need of a friendly voice to let her know she wasn't alone", this character searches for something one of her mentors might have written, a spell, or a saying, or some bit of wisdom.
Nothing was quite right. In the end, she chose to pick up her own pen. (pg 526)
Lest you think I'm just grasping at straws or reading into this what I choose, in a note in the back of the book, the author reflects on discovering witch-hunting in her own family's past, a great aunt nine times removed who was murdered by the state in Salem. Her daughter was also accused and imprisoned, and only thanks to an edict to stop subsequent hangings was her life spared. The author reflects on this shaping the narrative of the book, of course, and asks
So many questions now came to my mind as I wrote. What does the word "witch" truly mean? Had any vestiges of folk magic survived the witch trials? What had happened between the witch hunts (of both Europe and North America) and the constraining, patronizing view of womanhood held in the Victorian era? (pg 529)
The author goes on to reflect on her love as child of playing witches, rather than princesses, especially L. Frank Baum's version of Glinda, who was "wise and savvy, kind yet firm, and always erred on the side of letting Dorothy find her own way." She reflects Glinda was not unlike her own mother.
My mother, like Glinda, believed in the powers of intellect, tenacity, and intuition ("you've always had the power, my dear... you just had to learn it for yourself") and taught me that no girl or woman should ever apologize for such gifts. (pg 530)
From there, the author notes feminist undertones that were really more like overtones in the Oz series, and L. Frank Baum's inspiration by conversations with his mother-in-law, "staunch abolitionist, [...] unapologetic suffragist, and [...]leading voice for aboriginal rights in the United States", writer and activist Matilda Joslyn Gage. She urged him to populate Oz with "strong female characters so that his four sons might grow up with role models in their fairy tales that would prepare them for a new, enlightened age." The author quotes Gage's 1893 work Women, Church and State where she addressed the history of witchcraft, the persecution of women because of witchcraft, and how witchcraft and witchhunting related to the then-modern day:
The church degraded woman by destroying her self-respect, and teaching her to feel conscious of guilt in the very fact of her existence.
To this day, an open, confident look upon a woman's face is deprecated as evil.
Death by torture was the method of the church for the repression of women's intellect, knowledge being held as evil and dangerous in her hands... The witch was in reality the profoundest thinker, the most advanced scientist of those ages.
The testimony of the ages entirely destroys the assertion sometimes that made witchcraft was merely a species of hysteria.
According to the author,
The treatise was a call to action, a rallying cry to women to reclaim the word "witch." She was tired of female voices being silenced (for being too intelligent, too wise, too feminine, too different). She was tired of seeing women get cast aside-- dismissed, ostracized, or sent off to asylums. This was the era of Charlotte Perkins Gilman's "The Yellow Wallpaper" and Jean-Martin Charcot's weekly lectures at the Salpêtrière, where he parades his "hysterical" female subjects before the general public. It seemed the hunts hadn't ended; they'd just taken a more subversive, sinister form.
Sadly, Matilda's work was met with sneers and skepticism, even among a few of her sister suffragists. "Too radical," they said, "too divisive." Yet she persisted, speaking out for the suffragist causes until her death in 1898. I wonder what she'd make of the women's movement today.
I'm guessing she'd stay there's still plenty of work to be done. How many times are women still told that their stories, their testimonies, their ideas don't matter? Or that they're meant only for their own gender? How many girls are scolded each day for not smiling? Or shamed for the clothes they choose to wear? Or teased for being too smart? Or refused admittance to school?
Ray Bradbury once wrote, "A Witch is born out of the true hungers of her time."
I believe that's true for the witches in this book, for their time as well as mine.
Get ready, world, something witchy this way comes. (pg 531)
It's worth also noting that the date of the author's note is May 16, 2016, before the Presidential election that would ultimately crown a man who bragged about sexual assault on tape, before throngs of supporters derided the appearances of the women who credibly accused him of sexual assault, had notorious codes of gender conduct in place for his female employees in the White House (women were to "look like women"), and, oh yeah, enforced a staggeringly disgustingly misogynistic political agenda, even by Republican standards.
Again, unlike Secret History, this witchcraft-is-feminism works. Like Secret History, this takes place in eras not known for witch-persecution. UNLIKE Secret History, this is actually accounted for in the book by having the persecution be the work of a lone, murdering crackpot religious zealot. His henchwoman is not unfamiliar to anyone familiar with the Satanic Panic of the 1980s to the scolds clucking their tongues about the video earlier this year for "Montero" in which Lil Nas X gives a lapdance to Satan after pole-dancing down to hell (but before ultimately killing him and stealing his crown). Both characters hate and fear witches, but fit in historically, particularly in the author's witchcraft-as-feminism metaphor. Given also this author picked an era ripe with occultism given the Spiritualist movement (not unlike the "Age of Aquarius"/"New Age" movement of the 1960s and 1970s), there aren't any anachronistic/plot-device witch persecution, and the story is far better for it.
Also, there is far more bonding and appreciation between female characters, not just the witches, but female friends, relatives, and cohorts.
All around, the book has more heart, character growth and development, and attention to detail despite having a far larger cast, some of them not human.
But lest you get the idea this book is only good by comparison, I want to stress that it's a genuinely charming, compelling, and even important book all on its own. Whimsy isn't something many authors can do well, but this author manages to pull it off without being too twee. Not that there isn't a certain dark charm in having ghosts as pivotal characters, or a pair of fairies plotting, of course. The author's turn of phrase is impressive as well, as is her imagery.
At first blush, the strange creatures might've been mistaken for a pair of overgrown dragonflies. Made from equal parts memory, mischief, goodwill, and longing, they belonged to an ancient order of Fay who involved themselves exclusively with the fashioning of dreams. (pg 32)
Short, stout, and balding, Alden Dashley was a veritable giant when it came to intellect, but never certain of himself when it came to his wife. He found it difficult to express his feelings, although he too had been hit hard by their son's death-- so entrenched in sorrow that he'd feared it couldn't be lifted up without a system of fortified levers and wedges.(pg 308)
The book is suspenseful, funny, touching, harrowing, and heartwarming in the most genuine way. It also features a Queer character without stereotypes and treated well (and even given a realistic-for-the-times and yet lovely happy ending) which shouldn't be noteworthy for 2017 but well, you know. There is the murder of a sex worker in the novel, but it's treated the same as the other murders, and sex work is treated more or less the same as other work, although the characters note both the danger and the marginalization of their profession.
It's all around a really compelling, entertaining book that uses witchcraft-as-metaphor for good. While it feels like a breath of fresh air, it's also wonderful entirely on its own. Do some things look better by comparison? Sure do, and they've earned every bit of that shine.
Notable: While this book fares massively better than Secret History in the historical accuracy department as well as everything else, only one thing really caught my critical eye:
"I can't keep track of you young ladies. So many faces running willy-nilly all over the city with rouge on their lips and minds of their own. Where I come from, all three of you dear girls would've been married and holding babies of your own."(pg 411)
This is indeed a nitpick, but in 1880 in New York City, women weren't wearing any kind of cosmetics unless they were performing on a stage. It might have been used by some sex workers at the time, but that's not to whom this man (the character speaking) is referring, he's just talking about young women he sees in the city.
An appropriate line (particularly with the "you young women are so different and independent here!" tone) maybe for the 1920s at the earliest, but not for the 1880s.
There's also some anachronistic phrases, but they seem pretty purposefully so and they don't distract from the story. As I noted with Alice Hoffman's Magic Lessons, anachronism is some places is necessary as well adding to the story in a contextual sense, if done properly as it is here.
Final Grade: A
No comments:
Post a Comment