The Readers Review: Literature from 1714 to 1910 discussion

The story and intrigue pick up during these six chapters after a slower start in the first six chapters.

One, can we all agree that Mark Robarts is a bit of an idiot and that Fanny deserves someone better? Why?

Two, what happens on the day Mark is to give his sermon? What offends him about Mrs. Proudie? How does the sermon go over with the audience?

Three, how does Miss Dunstable insult the Duke of Omnium? (Hint: about her dog). And were you surprised to see Mary and Frank at the Duke's home?

Four, we meet Lucy. What circumstances brings her to Framley Parsonage? What is her personality like? How do the others respond to her, including Fanny, Lady Lufton, and Lord Lufton?

Five, describe the triangle between Lord Lufton, Lucy, and Griselda Grantly. What is the arrangement between Lady Lufton and Mrs. Grantly? What is Griselda Grantly like, and how is she different from Lucy? Without spoilers, do you think Lucy will upset Lady Lufton's and Mrs. Grantly's plans? (This all reminds me a bit of Mary and Frank in Doctor Thorne although Lady Lufton is much nicer than Lady Arabella de Courcy Gresham).

I so identified with Mark waiting for everyone to finish their breakfast as they keep assuring him they will be ready and then he has to rush in. I've been in that situation! Of course, no one in the church really cared that much about his sermon after he worked so hard on it.

The Lucy/Ludovic (what a name!) relationship did remind me of Mary and Frank, though they had known each other a long time and here the couple is just meeting.

The Duke's personality was so different from what we saw in the last book where he didn't converse with his guests. I thought Trollope must have decided to change the character, but then there is an observation by Frank about how he was ignored when he had no money and now he is welcomed.

Right, I wasn't surprised to see him there either. Frank may not like the Duke, but he feels the pressure to join his social circle.

I love Miss Dunstable! If anything bad happens to her, I'm going to be so angry with Trollope! That was hilarious, telling the Duke that her dog was in danger of being corrupted there.

Of course Lord Lufton will fall in love with Lucy. How will Lady Lufton react? I don't think her reaction will be nearly as extreme as Lady Arabella's. Lady Lufton is nicer; Lord Lufton doesn't really NEED more money; Lucy is legitimate.

Describing Lucy as an "emblem of death" was kind of strange. If this were a different author, I would suspect an upcoming tragedy, but Trollope doesn't seem to go there to often (at least not in what we've read so far).

Sounds like Griselda is someone we'd call an "ice queen" today.

I was sad to hear that the Grantly's have apparently lost two children - the sister they mentioned, and it said there were two boys left (there were three in The Warden).

Lord Dumbello's (also what a name!) muteness as his most eloquent form of expression!

All I could think at the end of chapter 12 was "Dammit, Mark!" I know he's young, but really, how dumb could he be? He'd been warned so many times.

That comment by Miss Dunstable just cracked me up. :-) And it confirms Lady Lufton's views on the Duke.

And I thought the same think about Mark. The first time, I could see how he could be duped. But the second time??? Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.

Agreed, he's gone down a couple of notches in my estimation, including his not seeking counsel from either his wife or a trusted adviser before getting deeper into debt.

Mark was "groomed" by Sowerby, flattered and paid attention to, which led him to the first loan. After that, he just doesn't know how to get out of the situation. He's generally not able to say no to people, he just avoids dealing with situations. He put off talking to Lady Lufton about her son's problems, and he let his wife deal with their patroness more than once. He's really trusting and has never dealt with someone like Sowerby before.

I agree that Mark is being very foolish in not confiding in his wife about the debt. Sowerby must be an extremely smooth operator to convince so many people to lend him money and Mark is just "a babe in the woods". I am upset he succombed again, but he has led a sheltered existence and really is "green".
Here is a description of Griselda: She was decidedly a beauty, but somewhat statuesque in her loveliness. Her forehead was high and white, but perhaps too like marble to gratify the taste of those who are fond of flesh and blood.
I can also see that Lucy will interrupt Lady Lufton's schemes for marrying off her son to Griselda-- who will probably end up as Lady Dumbello!

Rosemarie wrote: "I agree that Mark is being very foolish in not confiding in his wife about the debt. ..."

The word that comes to mind when I think about Mark is "pride". It's not immediately apparent because he's such an easy-going, "nice" character, but the flattery that went to his head and then his decision to cover up what happened does not bode well. I hope he doesn't get in much deeper.

REPOST FROM THE READING SCHEDULE THREAD:

A quick reminder to everyone that this will be a holiday week and a break in our reading schedule.

A good time to catch up on our reading, if we are behind. Or take a reading break, if needed (are there really people who need reading breaks???) :-)

I'm on track with Framley Parsonage, but I'm actually going to use to time to finish Huck Finn - was near the end when I got busy with school and never finished it during one of the forum's monthly reads.

I'll be around, checking the threads, but for those taking the break, we'll be back in full swing immediately following Christmas!

I also see similarities between the Lucy-Ludovic and Mary-Frank relationships. First, of course, there is the scheming mother, Lady Lufton and Lady Arabella. But second, I wasn't sure Frank was right for Mary in the beginning; he seemed full of himself and flirtatious, not as deliberate and thoughtful as Mary. There was a long stretch of years though, during which he grew. Again, Ludovic seems handsome in his ways, but it's hard to know his character so far. I'm guessing Trollope will reveal all.

Lynnm wrote: "...And I thought the same think about Mark. The first time, I could see how he could be duped. But the second time??? Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me...."

Such solid wisdom. And yet who among us (at least over fifty) has not been fooled twice on something we'd rather not admit?

One of the constant challenges to me in reading Trollope, with his so human characters, is how to observe rather than to judge -- and to learn therewith. But such is also a key challenge of life, with both its admonitions about judging and the absolute necessity of doing so, again and again in our daily lives.

I have been stepping away from the texts themselves and reading what some of the academics have written about them. I am fascinated by their perceptions of what Trollope is doing in these stories -- to what extent is he observing and recording the society he perceives, to what extent is he putting forth social or moral commentary. Which is the sounder or more valuable these decades later?

I'd love to hear more of what you've been reading Lily. Is this your second (or more) reading of these books?

I feel that Mark has put himself in a difficult position because of inexperience, and then he is embarassed to tell his wife about his problem. He needs to tell her, but it is not going to be easy to tell her about his actions. I think Trollope has depicted human nature accurately in this case.

Frances wrote: "I'd love to hear more of what you've been reading Lily. Is this your second (or more) reading of these books?"

Except for The Warden, this is my first pass through the Barchester series, Frances. I have been dipping into the essays in one of the Interpretive series edited by Harold Bloom -- can't find it just now under the many titles attributed to Bloom, but hopefully will another day. Some of the articles I quarrel with, others I am finding useful and providing perspectives beyond my own and perhaps even those we have reached here. Although the volume focuses on The Warden and Barchester Towers, many of the comments seem more broadly applicable to the series and even all of Trollope. If one's library has a copy, I suggest dipping into it could be interesting, especially if one is making the time investment in reading this whole series.

Rosemarie wrote: "I feel that Mark has put himself in a difficult position because of inexperience, and then he is embarassed to tell his wife about his problem. He needs to tell her, but it is not going to be easy ..."

In some ways it is "obvious" Mark needs to tell his wife, but can we name here why it is obvious -- because his odds of getting into real trouble that she will inevitably have to know about? Because, despite the short term ire, could build a trust? Because the two could figure out a better way together? Because he's not going to escape without her knowing and it will be worse then.....? Because she could somehow stop him from further damage? What line of thinking, if it had occurred to him, might possibly have persuaded Mark to confide? Or, what might his wife have needed to be or have been perceived likely to act?

Sorry my thoughts/sentences are kind of jumpy. My arm is continuing to prohibit me from being as fluid at the keyboard as I am accustomed and want to be --

I think that she would be very supportive,but sad that he didn't confide in her sooner- or ask her for advice before getting even deeper into debt.

So many plots from Shakespeare to soap opera turn on people not telling each other things. But it feels psychologically right. Mark keeps convincing himself that things will work out, so why worry her. Although they have a strong partnership, this was still a time when the man expected to be in charge of finances and other decisions. He feels a bit hen-pecked by his patroness already. I think it's recognizable that once we have done something we're not proud of, we become more and more reluctant to admit it. In fact, people often find ways to blame those they have actually wronged.

That is so true, Robin. I noticed that Sowerby treated Mark in that way, as if it was Mark's fault that Sowerby was in debt.

One of the reasons it is so painful for me to read Mark's train of thought as he starts making bad choices, then conceals and compounds them, is it is all too personally recognizable. I admit it. So when I read your comment, Lily, I sighed over how easy it is for me to get judgmental about a fictional character with whom I identify. Good reminder! Trollope is writing about being human.

Linda wrote: "One of the reasons it is so painful for me to read Mark's train of thought as he starts making bad choices, then conceals and compounds them, is it is all too personally recognizable. I admit it. S..."

How touching your comment feels to me, Linda. How hard it is to be, shall I say, "appropriately judgmental," even upon ourselves?

Rosemarie wrote: "That is so true, Robin. I noticed that Sowerby treated Mark in that way, as if it was Mark's fault that Sowerby was in debt."

Thanks for the astute observation, Robin and Rosemarie. I hadn't registered that one, only cringed.

Just catching up. Your comments have all been wonderful to read. My own mind has been such a flurry of distractions lately that I really needed a quiet place to sort through my thoughts on the book so far. This thread has helped to clarify the passing perceptions I've had which might otherwise have otherwise been lost in all the tinsel and sugar plums.

Lily wrote: "Frances wrote: "I'd love to hear more of what you've been reading Lily. Is this your second (or more) reading of these books?"....

Anthony Trollope's Barchester Towers and The Warden edited by Harold Bloom is the book to which I refer. I particularly found useful the last four or so articles. Frances, the book also has a lengthy bibliography of other resources.

Lynnm wrote: "One, can we all agree that Mark Robarts is a bit of an idiot and that Fanny deserves someone better?"

I don't think he's an idiot. Basically, I think he's innocent. He apparently has never learned how sly and even wicked people, even (especially??_ people who are invitees at a great man's country house. Perhaps for a vicar it's a bad trait not to be able to understand wickedness when you see it, but I think that's his main fault. That and a bit of rebellion against being micro-managed by women.

I think that Mark Robarts has led a sheltered existence until his encounter with Sowerby. I would call him naive and inexperienced, and too trusting.

Lori wrote: "All I could think at the end of chapter 12 was "Dammit, Mark!" I know he's young, but really, how dumb could he be?.."

When I started re-reading FP in preparation for this discussion, I was reading in bed and got so angry at Trollope for making Mark sign that second note that I tossed the book away and quit reading for about a month. Just got back to it, and I'm still angry with Trollope, but I'm pretty sure it will come out okay for him in the end, somehow, that I'll give T the benefit of the doubt for the time being (I've forgotten what happens since my first reading of this was almost half a century ago). But if T brings Mark, and with him necessarily Fanny, to grief, I will curse his grave and hope he cannot rest in peace.

Everyman wrote: When I started re-reading FP in preparation for this discussion, I was reading in bed and got so angry at Trollope for making Mark sign that second note that I tossed the book away and quit reading for about a month. Just got back to it, and I'm still angry with Trollope, but I'm pretty sure it will come out okay for him in the end, somehow, that I'll give T the benefit of the doubt for the time being (I've forgotten what happens since my first reading of this was almost half a century ago). But if T brings Mark, and with him necessarily Fanny, to grief, I will curse his grave and hope he cannot rest in peace. ..."

He makes me squirm with embarrassment; he is so stupid it makes me cringe. I also had the same problem as you vis a vis being unable to read any further, but rather than it being caused by anger, I couldn't bear to go any further through shame in his actions. It's like a train wreck but I'm more than happy to look away. :-)

I do think he's innocent yes, but I think his major fault is that he has such a high sense of (unjustified) self worth that he's not willing to do some self examination. He's weak willed, spoilt and thinks far far too much of himself. He always gets his own way and is more than happy to leave unpleasant things to other people like his poor wife and the letter.

Anthony Trollop does seem to have a large number of spineless and stupid men in this series.

Lily wrote: "In some ways it is "obvious" Mark needs to tell his wife, but can we name here why it is obvious ."

To us it's obvious. But would it have been obvious to Trollope's original readers? Married women weren't expected to know about money, were they? Trollope does have an unusually large number of women who do know something about money -- Miss Dunstable, Lady Lady Lufton, earlier Eleanor Bold, but they are all single, either spinsters or widows. Would Trollope's original readers thought that there was a duty of a husband to inform his wife about financial decisions he had made? Or is Mark's sense that he needs to tell her an indication that he hasn't yet made it as a fully matured Victorian husband?

I think Mark's portrayal is pretty realistic. He's young and has always been treated well so he's not suspicious. He wants to be "one of the guys". Many people make mistakes especially in their youth. But some have more leeway. For instance, Ludovic was bailed out by his mother.

Mark has a certain amount of privilege, somewhat like Frank Gresham in Doctor Thorne. That is, they might at some point be poor or in debt but they are not going to end up like Dickens' Nancy Sykes or the Dorrit family, in a life of crime or even debtor's prison. They know people with money and power and know how to talk to people. They could suffer public shame and a loss of status, which seems horrible to a middle-class person, but one mistake isn't as deadly as it would be for a poor person (Jean Valjean is another dramatic example.)

Everyman wrote: "Lily wrote: "In some ways it is "obvious" Mark needs to tell his wife, but can we name here why it is obvious ."

To us it's obvious. But would it have been obvious to Trollope's original readers? ..."

I'll hang on a little further. Why "obvious"? For reasons of establishing "trust" between husband and wife? Because she could have done something about it? What? Was she likely to have been able to be successful? Because telling might have curbed his own actions,,,? Silly, perhaps, but I persist with my "why" question.

Lily wrote: "
I'll hang on a little further. Why "obvious"?."

I should have clarified. I meant that to us if the situation happened today it would be obvious that we should share the information, because marriage today is seen much more as a partnership than it was in Victorian days. This is especially true in community property states like Washington, where a husband and wife have a legal fiduciary duty to each other to share all relevant information about their financial situation. Also, today, at least in the West, a woman has options if she finds that her husband has been deceiving her -- divorce is simple, and in most states and I think most Western countries the lower earning partner, often (but less frequently now than twenty years ago) the woman, is entitled to a share of the marital assets and/or income. So a Mark Robarts who concealed such information from his wife today would have a much harder time "getting away with" it without consequences. Whereas for Mark in FP, what can Fanny do other than be unhappy about it? He has all the legal power and authority and she has almost none.

So I meant that in today's world it would be obvious that he should tell her, but I think Trollope's readers might well not have seen it that way.

I agree with those that view Mark as naive. I think he is pretty gullible, very inexperienced, and perhaps would not have had the personal gumption to stop himself from being taken advantage of even if he had been educated about the likes of Sowerby. I don't think most men of this era would necessarily view their wives as confidants, particularly regarding money matters, but I think these two have a close relationship.

I just finished Chapter 12 and had the same reaction as Everyman and Nicola; I felt angry at both Mark and Trollope and stopped reading.
I am on a reread of the Chronicles and I don't remember being so frustrated 20 years ago. Maybe I'm not as tolerant now of what Dianne and others call Mark's naivity. (I'm in the idiocy camp) Maybe its because I've now had sons of that age make such stupid decisions.
However, I have faith in Trollope so I will soon rejoin the denizens of Barsetshire. I started this on January 1st and Trollope's world is always a great place to start a year in.

I wanted to give Mark a good scolding when I saw how foolish he was.
I actually finished the book early because I couldn't wait to find out what happens.
I feel like I am visiting with old friends as I read these books, especially when we meet characters from previous books in new situations.