Naturalism In Edith Wharton's The House Of Mirth

In his article entitled, “The Naturalism of Edith Wharton’s The House of Mirth” Donald Pizer discusses Wharton’s focus of naturalism in her novel, The House of Mirth. Pizer argues, “The House of Mirth may best be read as a form of naturalistic fiction” (241). Though some people disagree on what type of naturalism Wharton’s novel is, Pizer states “Whether Lily’s fate is shaped by the capitalistic exchange values of her society or by its patriarchal power structure or by some variation of these two central readings the novel” is naturalistic (241). Overall, Pizer maintains that Wharton used a specific form of naturalism—challenging that naturalism exclusively pertains to social determinism—that is distinct from her contemporaries:

Pizer argues that, “Nettie’s progress from ‘victim’ to ‘victory’ within her own category of social determinism”, which shows Lily that “victory is also possible…within her own seeming manacles of environmental conditioning” (244). Consequently, Nettie’s “powerful will and the providential actuality of a man willing to take a chance on her” is what separates her from Lily (244). Pizer maintains that through the contrast between Nellie and Lily’s situations, Wharton is defining naturalism, “not…as fully and destructively conditioned for all mankind; rather… the powerful effect of environment and heredity on various and specific kinds of temperament and experience” (245). Moreover, “all are exposed to and deeply affected by the conditioning forces of life, but some not only survive but even triumph”

For instance, when Selden goes to Lily’s death bed and has a “this moment of love, this fleeting victory over themselves…which made all clear” he realizes that “the ‘conditions of life’ conspire to defeat the spiritual fulfillment which is human love. But love did exist and continues to exist despite this defeat” (246). Therefore, Selden’s “faith” allows him to “penitent” so that the “word” may be symbolically spoken to each other. Moreover, Pizer argues “life seemingly defeats the human effort to believe in a spiritual force in life, but in fact that belief transcends defeat both in its functional force in human affairs during life and in its permanence despite the transience of life”