It is certainly true that Wharton "<i>could</i> have made use of moving away from" Archer's perspective. She did not, though. What do you think she would have gotten out of it? I see some big disadvantages. May and the other conspirators are obviously off-limits. Aren't they?
But then I don't think that <i>Mirth</i> is equally claustrophobic, but rather less. <i>Innocence</i> is set thirty years earlier in a smaller, more aristocratic, narrower society. And of course Bart is trying to <i>join</i>, where Archer is securely in it, trapped. It is not clear to me, either, that <i>Mirth</i> has more "movement," but you may be using that term differently than I do.
If what you want is a story from the point of view of someone <i>like</i> May or Olenska, I can strongly recommend Wharton's short fiction. She writes about a wide range of people.
Tremendous. I am so excited for this project
It is certainly true that Wharton "<i>could</i> have made use of moving away from" Archer's perspective. She did not, though. What do you think she would have gotten out of it? I see some big disadvantages. May and the other conspirators are obviously off-limits. Aren't they?
But then I don't think that <i>Mirth</i> is equally claustrophobic, but rather less. <i>Innocence</i> is set thirty years earlier in a smaller, more aristocratic, narrower society. And of course Bart is trying to <i>join</i>, where Archer is securely in it, trapped. It is not clear to me, either, that <i>Mirth</i> has more "movement," but you may be using that term differently than I do.
If what you want is a story from the point of view of someone <i>like</i> May or Olenska, I can strongly recommend Wharton's short fiction. She writes about a wide range of people.