Erratum for Matthew Sussman, “Henry James and Stupidity,” Novel 48, no. 1 (2015): 45–62.

On page 59 of the print version of this article, the last two sentences of the last full paragraph should read:

While, as Brewis suggests, James's interest in the “interesting” reveals his reluctance to adopt the Kantian position wholeheartedly, the difficulties of the late style “stupefy” the reader in such a way as to preserve for him or her some experience of the disinterested stupidity that James wistfully portrays in his stories and tales. At the same time, in its forbidding magnificence, the style itself comes to embody some of the magisterial autonomy, the fortified inscrutability, the “stupid elegance” (Golden Bowl 420) of that freedom from desire that for James is the truly, yet elusively, beautiful.

This error has been corrected in the online version of...

You do not currently have access to this content.