The Friendly Young Ladies

A basic rule of language is that substantives (verbs and nouns) govern modifiers (adjectives and adverbs). Why then do so few stories about homosexual people--even in these supposedly more enlightened times--depict them as people first? It seems as though most writers about homosexuality think of Gays and Lesbians as a separate species from 'normal', heterosexual people. Bad enough that such an attitude comes from heterosexual writers, but one finds it among gay and Lesbian writers, which is even worseElise is a not-too-bright girl, nearly 18 but acting more like 14; nowadays she'd probably be classified as having some sort of mild learning disability. She lives in Cornwall with her rather odious parents; some years before her older sister Leonore ran away from home and her parents consider her dead--she is never mentioned. Elise finally gets fed up, goes through her mother's private papers and finds Leonore's address, and runs away from home.She finds Leonore living on a houseboat on the Thames, writing Western novels, living with a nurse turned medical illustrator. It is never said in so many words, but the two women are lovers.Good points--Renault depicts the two women as just that, two women. She isn't interested in the political, economic, legal, or spiritual implications of Lesbianism--merely two human beings who care for one another, have built a life together, and who just happen to be both women.Renault admits in her afterward that she wrote this as a reaction to Radclyffe Hall's infamous "The Well of Lonlness", which takes precisely the reverse tack. I am told by those who have read both that if one is familiar with "The Well" this is quite obvious, the way Renault sometimes parallel's Hall and sometimes inverts what Hall did. I've never read Hall, and have no desire to, and therefore cannot further comment on this point.Unfortunately, none of the other characters feel real. We are told what they are thinking and feeling, but we are never shown. This was an early effort of Renault's, and she hadn't mastered the rule of "show, don't tell." Elsie, especially, never really comes to life.Comparing this novel with Renault's mature work, especially "The Charioteer", one sees how far she came as a writer, and one also sees the seeds of her subsequent work.The two afterwards are, as another reviewer remarked, almost worth the price of the book. I especially liked Renault's remark about how explicit erotic writing is the literary equivalent of ketchup--covering the deficiencies of insipid writing, and desired only by people whose taste buds are anesthetized.

This book left me with to many questions, which may not be answerable but at least i can get them off my chest so i can move on to some other book from this era:1. why do both leo and helen seem to have no qualms about making out with the man elsie has a crush on?2. if she actually is a lesbian, why does leo seek out men so often?3. why does anyone want to have relations with peter? not only is he rather an ass, but he's also engaged.these are just a few of the issues i have with this book. unfortunately they strain credulity to the point that it's hard to enjoy the good writing .

I'm still not sure what the story was about. The reason for the actions of the players escaped me and I soldiered on to the end. Oh well!!

A wordy novel that never came together, there was no purpose to this novel, no real character development, not a single thing to be learned and it was a colossal waste of time.

Those who have never discovered Mary Renault are in for a treat. While many are familiar with her classical Greek novels, she also wrote some wonderful novels set in the 1930s. This is one of them. For beautiful writing and in-depth character analysis, she is one of the best.

This book is a favorite of mine. Its charm comes from youthful energy and emotional excess. The autobiographical element may account for the vivid setting on the river and the behavior of some of the characters. They seem like real people whom the author cannot control. They may confuse or annoy her (and the reader), but they are alive.And then there is the love story. The friendship of two very likeable people unexpectedly intensifies, overwhelming both them and the reader. Very satisfying.Mary Renault surely polished her craft over a long successful career, but this youthful effort has a spirit and immediacy that has held up remarkably well and still gives me a great deal of pleasure.

This is a very entertaining novel, set shortly before the Second World War and written as a riposte to Radclyffe Hall’s angst-ridden novel of lesbian life, “The Well of Loneliness”. It contains a quantity of period detail and has a cast of interesting characters.The plot gets going when the naive Elsie decides to run away from home to find her mysterious older sister Leo. Leo began life as Leonora, and left home years before with a (male) pal, but because of a misunderstanding is assumed by her parents to be “living in sin.” Elsie imagines Leo as an exotic courtesan, but the truth is startlingly different.What struck me especially on this re-reading were the details about work. Helen, after studying at the Slade, trained as a nurse, and now works as an illustrator for medical text books, which involves visiting operating theatres. Leo is careful to get the facts for her novels about ranches and cowboys correct. Their friend Joe, a more “serious” novelist (F.R. Leavis would probably approve of him), has sensible stuff to say about the business of writing, and has a second string to his bow working in the family brewing business. Even the ghastly Peter has stories to tell about his work as a doctor – and he is a good doctor, despite his failings a as person. For Elsie, who didn’t do well at school, secretarial training seems the only prospect.Peter fancies himself as a psychologist, and can’t resist meddling in the lives of other people because he thinks he’s awfully good at knowing what is best for them. Actually, he’s rather an idiot. He is the cause of much of the comedy in the novel; the scene in which Leo seduces his girl friend in a canoe – as far as a seduction can take place in a canoe – is very funny. But despite its light-hearted tone, the novel has darker, more serious moments, like Leo’s feelings of guilt when she realises that when she left home years before, she abandoned her younger sister Elsie to a toxic family atmosphere. The novel becomes almost over-written at the end when Leo makes the decision to leave the idyllic life she has shared with Helen on their houseboat on the Thames and go away with Joe.And there is the difficulty. Although Renault treats the Leo-Helen relationship with a light touch, it seems that Leo has been put off men by an unfortunate first encounter, and we are also told that she in on the fence (bisexual, or some one whose sexuality is fluid, like other characters in Renault’s non-historical novels), so it’s all a bit muddy. There is a sense that the women’s relationship was a kind of practice run which was bound to end. Self-censorship, perhaps. In the afterword written decades later Renault says that she regrets the unconvincing ending, which some readers dislike.David Sweetman’s interesting biography of Renault is illuminating in relation to this and other of her novels.

I bought this out of curiosity. I've read, at one time or another, all of MR's historical works (and lost the actual books in various moves, loans etc - I've just ordered 10 of them from here). I saw it mentioned somewhere or other, so I thought I'd have a punt.The preceeding review has admirably summarised the plot so I won't repeat it. What I will say is that:- I had very low expectations, but bought it (a) out of curiosity and (b) for the obvious reason that you can buy second-hand paperbacks here for next to nothing, so where is the risk, just chuck if nbg- I thought it an excellent book, very well written. Written in 1944 but set in 1937, it is a wonderful evocation of certain classes, types and mileaux in 1930's England, something that MR lived through and which cannot be recreated by the most assiduous social historian, which is why little forgotten gems like this can be so wonderful- it has an excellent afterwood by MR, written I think in the year she died (mine was a Virago reprint)Its not a lost masterpiece but I thoroughly enjoyed it and have the feeling it will remain as one of those books that are part of my mental baggage. And its description of living on a river boat made me ache to do the same.

I returned this as unreadably dull. I read 50% and the language was so opaque it was difficult to understaand what the author meant. She was writing at a time when same sex relationships were taboo but even so it was very turgid and eliptic. I loved her historical novels but this one was just dire.

a Mary Renault book but not set in old Greese. It makes a bit of a queer reading itset in so called modern times.Her "The Charlotier was set in the WW1, this set in the 20s.Not quite as good as her other books, but OK if you have not ready anything of hers before.

Interesting. A little obscure at times. I felt the author was trying too hard to be clever and live up to her Oxford education.