The opening of this 1953 novel by L. P. Hartley may be more famous than the novel itself. Perhaps you’ve heard it:
The past is a foreign country: they do things differently there.
In context, the past here does not refer to some long-distant era that we cannot recall or understand for ourselves. It refers instead to the narrator’s own past. Upon discovering a long-forgotten diary from 1900, the year he turned 13, the narrator, Leo, looks back on that year, and especially on the hot summer holiday that he spent at the home of his friend Marcus.
This book reminded me quite a lot of Julian Barnes’s The Sense of an Ending. In both cases, you have an older man reflecting on a significant relationship from his youth, although Leo’s memories refer to a much earlier relationship. And in both cases, you have to deal with questions of reliability of memory. In Hartley’s novel the questions are there almost from the very beginning when Leo first comes across the diary:
I did not want to touch it and told myself that this was because it challenged my memory; I was proud of my memory and disliked having it prompted. So I sat staring at the diary, as at a blank space in a crossword puzzle. Still no light came, and suddenly I took the combination lock and began to finger it, for I remembered how, at school, I could always open it by the sense of touch when someone else had set the combination. It was one of my show-pieces and, when I first mastered it, drew some applause, for I declared that I had to put myself into a trance; and this was not quite a lie, for I did deliberately empty my mind and let my fingers work without direction.
So Leo’s memory is playing tricks on him or he’s playing a trick on us—most likely there’s a little of both. At any rate, we know that the memories he shares are at least a little suspect, whether it’s because he’s shaping them to give us a show-piece or because his memory is not as great as he thinks.
The story Leo conjures is one that puts him “in between” in a number of ways. At the heart of his story is the fact that he’s trying to move between classes. Marcus invites Leo to his grand home for a summer holiday partly because, Leo believes, Marcus thinks Leo is more wealthy than he is. However, it quickly becomes obvious that Leo doesn’t have the right clothes or know the right thing to do. I get the impression that Marcus invites him because he likes having someone to boss around. And Leo is eager to please those he sees as his betters.
This eagerness to please is what puts Leo in the literal position of a “go-between.” When Marcus is ill, his sister recruits Leo to carry secret messages to and from a neighboring farmer. Leo, all innocence, assumes the messages have to do with some sort of family business, and he happily undertakes the mission, glowing with pride that he is their Mercury, the messenger of the gods. Leo is convinced of his own importance, and his actions have repercussions. But the power he has is coincidental, not intentional. Any attempt he makes to exert his own will goes nowhere. He has no more actual influence over people’s lives than he does over the mercury in the thermometer, which he also likes to think he can have some effect on.
By the end of the book, even that grand statement with which Leo opens the book is called into question. In an epilogue, we see that his present is not all that different from his past. His worship of his supposed betters, even after their actions have rendered them unworthy in his eyes, still keeps him in that old go-between role. The past may be a foreign country, but human nature is a constant in all times and places.
I hadn’t heard of this novel until Jenny put it on my reading list for the year. I’m very glad she brought it to my attention. Another win for the book swap!



Great review! I’m glad this book is on my to-read list.
Thanks! Hope you enjoy it!
Thanks for this excellent review of a wonderful novel — hope it gets a few people reading it!
I hope so too. I know lots of people would enjoy it.
This is one of my favourite books and certainly one that makes for wonderful discussion. If you get the chance see the film that was made with a script by Harold Pinter and starring Julie Christie and Alan Bates. It was one the better book to screen adaptations.
I just looked the film up and it doesn’t look like it’s out on DVD in the U.S., but I’ll keep my eyes open for it.
I was so interested to read this post because I’ve been meaning to read The Go-Between myself ever since I learned it was a significant influence on Ian McEwan’s Atonement (which I love). You make it sound very compelling on its own terms too.
I didn’t know that about Atonement, but I can see the connection quite clearly.
You’re quite right about that first line; I know I’ve heard it before, but I’d never have been able to identify just what book it comes from. Thanks for bringing it to your readers’ attention.
I’ve heard it–and used it–many times without never knowing where it was from. Glad to know I’m not the only one.
The movie is excellent and quite faithful to the book, but I would not recommend viewing it until you’ve read the book.
Good to get another confirmation that the movie is worth seeing–I hope I’m able to find it at some point.
I picked this up last year when everyone seemed to be reading it – you motivate me to do slightly more than pick it up now! The opening quotation is so resonant – and misused – by those of us who study the ancient world but don’t know the original context.
It is a very resonant line, and I think that even if Hartley meant it ironically and even though he’s referring to the recent past, it’s still apt in some respects when talking about the distant past.
It’s on my new list of books to read this autumn and I’m very much looking forward to it, particularly after your lovely review.
I’ll be very interested to hear what you think of it! I’m sure it’ll give you lots of good material to mull over.
THis looks really good. I already have it on my tbr but thank you for the reminder. I just read and loved The Sense of an Ending.
I loved Sense of an Ending, too. The reliability questions are quite as complicated here, but the two books do have a lot in common.
I feel like authors are constantly citing this book as an influence. Which is interesting! It’s been on my list for a thousand years, but the library never seems to have it in. Luckily I have a Nook now. I can get it electronically. The time is drawing nigh!
I can’t believe I’d never heard of it! (In truth, I’d probably seen it mentioned, but the title fell out of my brain.) And hooray for getting hard-to-get books on your Nook!