Washington Square's "virus of suggestion": Source Texts, Intertexts, and Adaptations

In a 22 February 1891 notebook entry, James writes, "I began yesterday the little story that was suggested to me some time ago by an incident related to me by George du Maurier" (Matthiessen 102). Unlike James's entry for Fanny Kemble, which basically transcribes Kemble's story, the du Maurier entry lays bare the process by which he appropriates and adapts du Maurier's anecdote into "The Real Thing" by adding what he refers to as "contrast and complication." James writes, "I thought of representing the husband as jealous of the wife [...]. But this is vulgar and obviousworth nothing. What I wish to represent is the baffled, ineffectual, incompetent character of their attempt, and how it illustrated once again the everlasting line of amateurishness [...]. It is out of that element that my little action and movement must come; and now I begin to see just how" (102-03). The difference between James's account of Kemble's anecdote and his account of du Maurier's initiates useful questions about the process of adaptation and the institutional codes involved. The differences suggest, for example, that James is, for whatever reason, invested in demonstrating his personalization of du Maurier's anecdote more so than Kemble's. Perhaps the du Maurier idea needed more working through. Or, returning to Matthiessen and Murdock's implications, perhaps women's oral culture is easier to appropriate or contains less of an internal authority that requires more visible acknowledgement in appropriation.

If, indeed, du Maurier's anecdote provided the skeleton for "The Real Thing" and James's attention to "contrast and complication" transformed this "germ" into a story, what of Washington Square] Cornelia Pulsifer Kelley, in The Early Development of Henry James, states that in writing Washington Square, "James did not proceed without guidance" (280). She observes that "when Washington Square and Eugénie Grandet are placed side by side [...] it is evident that [James] had Balzac's novel before him as a model" (281-82). In addition to similarities in plot, character, and dialogue, many of Washington Square's structural cornerstones correspond to Eugénie Grandet's. For example, both texts situate the narrative geographically and in terms of a dominant paternal figure. Balzac's story opens with a lengthy description of the town and Monsieur Grandet, a vine merchant, who, like Dr. Sloper, married a woman whose ample dowry enabled him to establish himself in business. Additionally, both households are immediately disrupted by the presence of a handsome outsider. Charles Grandet's entrance, like that of Morris Townsend, affects everyone in Monsieur Grandet's home. Like Lavinia, whose kindnesses and transgressions are motivated by pity for Morris Townsend, Madame Grandet, Eugénie, and Nanon do special things for Charles because they pity his orphaned, penniless state. Dr. Sloper, like Monsieur Grandet, reacts harshly to Catherine's declaration of love (although his violence is primarily psychological rather than physical and psychological, as Monsieur Grandet's). Finally, both narratives conclude with the daughter's inheritance following the father's death (although this is substantially less for Catherine than for Eugénie) and the return of the lover.