Vintage Tales discussion

This is where we will be reading and discussing our group read for September and October Lorna Doone. Enjoy and happy reading!

I'm just getting started but it seems very familiar...especially the scene where all the schoolboys rush outside when the water gets to a certain level....I must have read this in the Dark Ages at some point!

Having started on this book a little before Sept. 1, I'm probably a bit further along with it than some others are; I'm ready to start Chapter 12. When I nominated it for the poll this time around, I'd never read it, only seen movie adaptations. So the actual content and style were, of course, completely unknown to me when I opened the cover for the first time.

Blackmore opted for first-person narration here. Unlike some Goodreaders, I don't have any problem with first-person narration as such; it's an author's call whether first or third person, or a mixture of both, will best fit each particular book. Because of the late 17-century setting here, though, it could be argued that third person might have been a better choice. John Ridd's narrative voice undeniably does take a bit of getting used to, with the Jacobean diction and vernacular that was archaic even by Victorian standards. The style is more orotund and discursive even than was usual in the 19th century; and the faithful reproduction of the West Country accent and dialect (especially in the speech of less educated characters like John Fry, and Betty) poses an additional challenge. (It helps to recognize that they often use "her' as a pronoun meaning "he;" I'm not sure why that usage developed, but I've encountered it before in the speech of the 19th-century ethnically Welsh characters in Life in the Iron Mills, and suspect it might be a Welsh influence in the West Country.) The edition I'm reading has no glossary (just the author's own very rare footnotes), but it could use one, as well as a regional map. This won't be a quick read, and there are a few places where I don't have a complete understanding of a sentence's meaning.

Even so, Ridd's narration is beginning to grow on me (despite occasional wince-worthy sexist comments that I surmise reflect the author's own sentiments, using his character as a mouthpiece). It helps that he has a certain strain of dry, deadpan humor, and doesn't take himself too seriously; he comes across as mostly pretty likeable, despite being opinionated, and in spite of his taking part in the bullying of "day-boys" (as opposed to boarding students) at his school; and I can respect his guts, even if I think he's foolhardy at times. I'm also intrigued by Tom Faggus' character (which I don't remember from the film versions).

Oh, no....dialect in chapter 2. I hate dialect. I thought I could go ahead and read this book even with my reservations, but I'm quitting. Way too many other books to read that don't annoy me. Sorry, everyone. Don't let my fuddy-duddy-ness stop you from enjoying.

Nah, Debbie, you don't have to apologize! These reads are voluntary, and you're right: there are too many unread books out there waiting for us to waste time on a book we don't enjoy! My wife is really put off by dialect in books, too, and I know a lot of others are. If I'd known what the prose was like, I probably wouldn't have nominated this book; but in my case, the hook is in now, and I'm committed for the long haul. :-)

Amber mentioned earlier (on another thread) that she needs to sit out for this particular common read. Is anybody else taking part at this point?

Sorry, not me. I knew I wouldn't be joining in a long read this time. I know the story though, and have just found this interesting bit about the dialect. By his own account,

"Blackmore relied on a "phonologic" style for his characters' speech, emphasising their accents and word formation. He expended great effort, in all of his novels, on his characters' dialogues and dialects, striving to recount realistically not only the ways, but also the tones and accents, in which thoughts and utterances were formed by the various sorts of people who lived in the Exmoor district in the 17th century."

No wonder it is tricky to understand!

Another Wiki article says,

"Blackmore's best known and most successful novel, Lorna Doone (1869), established him in the front rank of British novelists of that time. With it, he pioneered a new romantic movement in English fiction."

and he does seem to have been very prolific. How odd then, that all we ever read and remember now is Lorna Doone: A Romance of Exmoor!

That "phonologic" style was characteristic of all of the regionalist Realist writers, too, on both sides of the Atlantic in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Romanticism and Realism are different styles, but not polar opposites (unlike Romanticism and Neoclassicism), so they've been able to fruitfully influence each other.

While the wiki you quoted credited Blackmore with starting "a new romantic movement in English fiction," I'd argue that the original one never stopped (even though literature textbooks separate the "Romantic" and "Victorian" periods). I'd place Dickens and Charlotte and Emily Bronte (I haven't read Anne so far), who chronologically bridge the gap between the earlier Romantics and Blackmore, squarely in the same tradition. (Thackery, though, is a proto-Realist.)

It's not unheard of for one book to stand out in an author's body of work as his/her best, and for reader and critical attention to concentrate on it because of that, to the neglect of all the other books. But the library where I work does have some of Blackmore's other novels. If I like this one well enough, maybe I'll sample another one someday!

A very interesting comment Werner! Perhaps the Wiki entry was not very accurate - I was surprised to read that myself.

My overview of the different styles and periods is not as good as yours, and I know very little about USA literature. But I would argue that my all-time favourite author Charles Dickens - and as it happens, the author of my least favourite classic novel, who is Emily Brontë - are polar opposites! I think of her as proto stream-of-consciousness, whereas Dickens is populist - looking back towards melodrama and forwards toward persuasive fiction with a social conscience.

You will know William Makepeace Thackeray's waspish name for Charles Dickens of course? "Mr Popular Sentiment"?! Personally I think he was just envious. It didn't stop him from falling off his chair at one of Dickens's performances on stage once, which I read in Simon Callow's recent book about him.

The Brontes should not be grouped together, in my opinion. I know virtually everybody does, though. Yet they are all very different! Try The Tenant of Wildfell Hall. And I have yet to try the poetry of Anne Brontë, which is supposed to be very good.

I'd be interested to hear about other works by Richard Blackmore. I thought I had remember that he didn't care for Lorna Doone: A Romance of Exmoor, but since I couldn't find a credit for that I didn't mention it. Since what I did find now sounds as if it was... either misleading, or misinformed, perhaps I should have :D

Here's a link to my review of Vanity Fair

in case you are interested. I won't link to my review of "Wuthering Heights" (although it's easy enough to find on my page. But I am a bit partisan! LOL)

Jean, good reviews! I just officially "liked" the one for Vanity Fair; and I'd done that earlier for the review of Wuthering Heights, and commented on it. Although I've read both of them, so far I've never reviewed either one; they're part of the huge backlog of books read before I joined Goodreads that I hope to review someday, as I get time. ("So many books, so little time" applies to reviewing, as well as reading!)

The wiki you read isn't necessarily misleading or misinformed. Lorna Doone may well have re-kindled enthusiasm for the Romantic style at a time when it was flagging. (And I'm no expert on literary history, just an interested amateur.)

The Tenant of Wildfell Hall is on my to-read shelf! I'd agree that Charlotte and Emily Bronte do have real differences from each other, and that both differ from Dickens in significant ways. The common characteristic of all three, though, is a profound concern for using literature to express the writer's own strong emotions, and to evoke an emotional response in the reader. Your characterization of Dickens is right on the mark, IMO. When I think of "stream of consciousness," though, I think of an extreme, "experimental" form of Realism that argues that people experience reality as a stream of disconnected, jumbled perceptions (I don't think this is usually true, unless the people have ADD!), and that fiction should be written in a way that reflects this. I don't really get that from EB, though maybe I'm misusing the term.

Gotta get offline --a thunderstorm has come up here, and it's not safe to be running the computer!

Thackeray probably did have a certain professional jealousy towards Dickens that would show up at times; but the two were friends for most of their lives. (And at one point, when Thackeray's little daughter asked him, "Why don't you write like Mr. Dickens?" he replied, "My dear, I wish I could!") They did have a falling out late in life, over a review one of them (I forget which) had written of a book by the other. But about a month before Thackeray died in 1868, he and Dickens passed each other without a word as the former was going up the steps to a London club they both belonged to. Thackeray relented, turned and caught up with Dickens, and offered his hand. Dickens took it, and the two made up. (About a month later, while reading the newspaper on a train, a stunned Dickens announced to his companions, "Thackeray is dead!" When one of them ventured to say something to the effect that this must be especially hard on Dickens, since at this time the two were no longer friends, the great novelist replied, "No --thank God, we were!"

Thanks for coming back after the storm! Hope you're all OK there, Werner, and no bits blown off the house or anything ...

I'm a sucker for anecdotes about Dickens, so lapped these up! :)

Oh boy, yes I too have a "huge backlog of books read before I joined Goodreads that I hope to review someday," Ah, but isn't it just the perfect excuse to reread all these classic favourites :D

Stream-of-consciousness stuff is what I find most difficult to read and enjoy. I hope to improve - I know I'm missing out - but if I can't enjoy Emily Brontë's melodramatic mauderings, it's doubtful whether I'll get very far! As you say, the style became far more extreme than hers But because I dislike her style so very much, I tend to think that's what it led to! Perhaps a little unfair...

Yes, this thread is about Lorna Doone: A Romance of Exmoor! Sorry, if anyone's wondering :)

Glad to be back, Jean, and yes, we're all okay and the house unscathed. It wasn't that bad of a thunderstorm --just wet and noisy while it lasted!

Sometimes our discussions on Goodreads do meander off topic, to wander off down rabbit trails. (But rabbit trails can be interesting, and scenic.... :-) )

I am currently on Chapter 4. The first couple of chapters helped me to realize that I am going to read this, no matter what. It is difficult to get through the dialect however, I have it on Audible and am enjoying the way the narrator reads the most difficult dialect I have ever come across. It makes the other historical novels appear to be a breeze read after reading this one, but I shall persevere, because I know it will benefit me in the end.

Suggestion: Do not read if you are tired, if there is any noise, or if the phone continues to ring. Otherwise, you will be thrown off especially at the beginning. I started three times before I got the pdf to follow along. Between the two, I will manage. Gutenberg.org has it for free.

Drew wrote: "I am currently on Chapter 4. The first couple of chapters helped me to realize that I am going to read this, no matter what. It is difficult to get through the dialect however, I have it on Audible..."

"Gutenberg.org has it for free"...Oh, dear me...I shouldn't have looked...I see they have tons for free... My virtual library just keeps growing and growing.....What Fun!! Thanks, Drew...Oh, audio is a great idea for this one. Maybe someday I'll come back to it and try that.

If you continue to read, you will fall for this book, I can assure you. This is a short piece when John (also called Tom and Jan) Ridd - don't understand why- has just met Lorna Doone. I think Chapter 8

'Don't cry,' I said, 'whatever you do. I am sure you have never done any harm. I will give you all my fish Lorna, and catch some more for mother; only don't be angry with me.'
She flung her little soft arms up in the passion of her tears, and looked at me so piteously, that what did I do but kiss her. It seemed to be a very odd thing, when I came to think of it, because I hated kissing so, as all honest boys must do. But she touched my heart with a sudden delight, like a cowslip-blossom (although there were none to be seen yet), and the sweetest flowers of spring.

Just finished reading Chapter 17. This is the second time Jack Ridd meets Lorna, only now they are grown up. He is 21. But they cannot speak for long, because the Doones would outright kill him.

And she smiled with a light that made me care to cry out for no other way, except to her dear heart. But only to myself I cried for anything at all, having enough of man in me to be bashful with young maidens. So I touched her white hand softly when she gave it to me, and (fancying that she had sighed) was touched at heart about it, and resolved to yield her all my goods, although my mother was living; and then grew angry with myself (for a mile or more of walking) to think she would condescend so; and then, for the rest of the homeward road, was mad with every man in the world who would dare to think of having her.

At this point, I'm a couple of pages into Chapter 24. Does anyone have any theories as to the cause of the "wailing voice" sound that begins to manifest itself sometimes in the Exmoor area (in what we can calculate would be late in 1682), which is heard over a wide area and doesn't seem to have a detectable point of origin? (I don't recall this from the adaptations I've seen.) Since Blackmore mentions it often enough to keep it in our minds, it's clearly fairly important to the plot.

John's first meeting with Lorna takes place when he's 14, and she's about 8 years old. (In the 2000 A & E/BBC miniseries, the adaptation I saw most recently and remember best, they first meet when she's full-grown, and there isn't such a disparity in their ages.) Drew quoted (in message 15 above) the part where he kisses her on that occasion. In our hyper-sexualized culture, we might regard a 14-year-old boy kissing an 8-year-old girl as improper and creepy. Here, I'd say that the gesture wasn't sexual as such, and was more in the nature of a homage. When they next meet, she would be 15 --still too young for a 21-year-old guy, by our standards, but 17th-century girls matured psychologically at an earlier age, and married earlier. Still, by that time and before they've met again, John has developed what are clearly romantic thoughts toward the memory of an 8-year-old child. What are your thoughts about this? Is it psychologically realistic?

For readers not familiar with the terms, the "bustards" that young Squire de Whichehalse was hunting are a species of game bird; and the "perukes" the judges at Westminster are described as wearing are a kind of wig (such as English lawyers and judges wear in court). There are some other words I've encountered so far that are new to me; I'm hoping, when I have time later this month, to use the resources of the library where I work to look these up, and will report my findings here.

Lord Chief Justice Jeffreys was an actual person, who in 1685 presided over the Bloody Assizes, in which the captured supporters of Monmouth's Rebellion were tried. His conduct as a judge earned a historical reputation for "severity and bias," although in the latter trials he was obliged to impose the death sentence on those convicted of treason, and the high number of hangings resulted from James II's refusal to grant clemency as freely as it traditionally would have been (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Jeffreys... ).

As an aside, his courtroom is now a very nice tearoom in Dorchester! We often go there when staying in Dorset :)

In the part of the book I just read today, Lorna states her age (in the summer of 1683) as 17. That would make her four years younger than John, nor six, and ten years old when they first met. At the time, he guessed her age then to be about eight; but we can infer that he's not necessarily good at guessing children's ages.

I began to watch Lorna Doone last night on You Tube. I was disappointed as it really begins when Lorna is older and John of course. I decided it was too disappointing and decided not to watch it until I am done reading. It really spoils the whole book as far as I'm concerned.

I read a little every night and find it so helpful with audible reading it for me. But I must follow with the pdf or I get lost. I am loving the book thus far.

Drew, I wasn't aware that there was any adaptation of Lorna Doone available on YouTube! (That's surprising, because usually commercial feature films aren't offered there.) Do you have a link?

There's no question that seeing a movie version of a book before you read it can be a "spoiler," in that it lets you know a lot of the plot before you read it. (If you read the book first, it can be a spoiler for the movie in the same way!) Of course, movie adaptations often don't follow the book very closely (or at all :-( ). But that's never been a problem for me; spoilers or not, book and movie versions of the same work tend to whet my appetite for each other, no matter which format I experience it in first. In this case, I've seen two filmed versions, one when I was a kid and the other in 2000, the BBC/A&E miniseries version. At the time, I taped that one on VHS, after this read, I'd like to re-watch it to see how faithful it is to the book. (It's been 14 years, and I forget some details!)

werner,
http://youtu.be/wB9kzVS8oww
I think this might be the one in 2000 you spoke of. I am on chapter 28. Thanks for delving and sharing the history of George Jeffreys.

If you check on the list on You Tube, there are other formats, one way back in the 50's, I believe. When I am done reading, I plan to watch a few adaptations as well.

At the beginning, did young John Ridd see his father killed by the Doones? I was so busy just getting into the story and trying to connect with the characters introduced, that I missed that altogether as it depicts such in the You Tube movie.

Drew, thanks for the link! No, this is a different one than either of the two I watched, made in 1990. Clive Owen wasn't in the 2000 miniseries.

Drew wrote: ...did young John Ridd see his father killed by the Doones? Not in the book, no. The novel opens at John's school, on his 12th birthday, with John Fry coming to fetch him home because his father has been killed.

As of today, I'm a couple of pages into Chapter 35 (I started a little early).

Werner, did young John Ridd see his father killed by the Doones? Not in the book, no. The novel opens at John's school, on his 12th birthday, with John Fry coming to fetch him home because his father has been killed.

I find that rather sad, that a movie company would change the story that much. Too bad as far as I'm concerned that they take such liberties. Especially, in such a major situation. What do you think?

In general, commercial film makers don't have very high respect for the material they're supposedly "adapting;" the extreme liberties they take are practically a standing joke, in the industry and with viewers. With some laudable exceptions, you can't assume that the plot and characterizations of any movie "based on" a book will bear much resemblance to the latter. I wish that wasn't the case; ethically, I think that adapters owe the authors of the original work as faithful a reflection of their original vision as the different medium will allow.

That said, the differences of the written and film formats do need to be allowed for. Roughly two-hour time limits for feature films tend to require that the contents of long novels be pared and condensed for time. Written narration and interior monologues may have to be transformed into dialogue, since the viewer only experiences what he/she can see and hear. Physical action scenes may be more prominent in a movie than a book for the same reasons.

Then too, there are cases where it's arguable that, the ethical debt to the original author aside, movies can tweak the storyline in ways that improve it. I've only seen enough of the Lorna Doone movie you're talking about to ascertain that it wasn't one that I'd watched before, so can't comment on it overall. But the writers may have felt, with some justification, that having John actually witness his father's death heightened the dramatic intensity.

Yes, you are correct in your final statement, Werner. However, in school for instance, if a child depends on the movie adaptation for his/her tests, or exams, the first part would be remembered clearly. And it wasn't so in the novel. So therefore, I think it is morally wrong to change this specific part, especially.

I know the book would probably not be used nowadays, anyway. But, I am just sayin'.

Good point, Drew! If I were adapting a novel for a movie, I'd feel morally obligated to stick as close to the work of the writer whose name and title I was using as I possibly could.

Yes, students who rely on movie adaptations instead of reading the book or story, if they're naïve and lazy enough to do that, are apt to get a rude surprise come test time. But the case could be made that they shouldn't be cheating themselves with that kind of shortcut in the first place, if reading the work itself was assigned. (Of course, when I was homeschooling my daughters, I sometimes assigned them to watch a movie adaptation in lieu of assigning the novel. But in those cases, I first made sure it was a very faithful adaptation!) Even if you're not a student formally taking a class, if you just want to become familiar with the classics, the only real way to truly do that is to read them as they were written.

One of the more interesting aspects of this novel (at least to me) is the fact that its central romance crosses two deep chasms that divided people in the England both of the setting and of the author's own day --class and religion. It was axiomatic that commoners weren't good enough for the nobility to marry; and Catholics and Protestants hardly even accepted each other as fellow Christians, let alone as acceptable marriage partners. Yet here we have an Anglican yeoman farmer troth-plighted to a Catholic daughter of the aristocracy. Those divisions make themselves felt in the novel; but you get the clear impression that Blackmore feels (and wants the reader to feel) that the love of a man and woman for each other is more important than any such barriers. (And if that's the case, what does it say about the basic commonality that we ALL share as fellow humans?)

Some readers (like me!) may have wondered what kind of business the "fellmonger" that John stayed with in London was in. It turns out that a "fellmonger" was a dealer in skins or hides of animals, especially sheep.

Gwenny Carfax's father came "from one of the Cornish stannaries." For those who (again, like me) didn't know what "stannaries" were, they were "the districts comprising the tin mines and smelting works of Cornwall and Devon, formerly under the jurisdiction of the Stannary courts."

When John greets Ruth with a kiss "according to... the ordering of the canons," I believe he's referring to the New Testament references to the first-century custom of greeting visitors with a friendly kiss on the cheek, and/or to the practice (derived from those references) in the more "high" liturgical churches like the Church of England, of fellow Christians exchanging the "holy kiss" or "kiss of peace" in the service. The more conservative Mennonite churches, which follow the New Testament very literally, keep up the same practice; so I've been greeted with a kiss in those contexts. (Of course, being kissed by another guy could be a bit disconcerting, if you aren't aware of the background of the custom! :-) )

I think my husband felt a bit like that in New Zealand, where the Maoris greet each other, and us, with a "nose-rub". It's always as well to be prepared ;)

Is there anybody besides me who has a very serious credibility problem with the fact that (view spoiler)[Lorna apparently has no memory whatsoever of being kidnapped, or of her family before that? She wasn't an infant at the time (though I think the miniseries I watched took the position that she was, which didn't present the same problem) but a child of at least seven years old, maybe eight. A kid of that age would have a much more developed memory than that (I certainly did!). (hide spoiler)]

I mustn't be that far along, Werner. I listen at night following a hard day's work and sooner than later, fall asleep. I am around chapter 35 but I have listened to more. I have to go back to chapter 35. Sorry, but there have been some family issues that came up and have to be dealt with. Until two weeks ago, I was enjoying the read every night, until life got too busy. But soon I'll be back to my reading schedule.

No need to apologize, Drew; we all read at different rates, and when life happens it sometimes plays havoc with our reading. (And I can relate to family problems, too; that's another thing that's pretty common to us all at times. Hope you get everything worked out soon!) I'm a short ways into Chapt. 58 myself, but I figured not everyone would be that far along; so that's why I used the spoiler tags. (Those are a great invention!) You'll catch up soon enough.

I finished reading the book yesterday morning, and got my four-star review posted last night. Here's the link, if anyone's interested: www.goodreads.com/review/show/33317965 .

Great review Werner! I was sorry not to join in with this read, but am looking forward to catching up with a couple of others I've missed in the "Second Chance" group read for Nov and Dec. Not this one, this time, though ;)

Good review, Werner. I just finished the book. I really liked some of the descriptions, especially of nature, but it was too long-winded sometimes. I gave it three stars.

I'd like to read some other Victorian novels, though. I'll be reading Northanger Abbey for the "Second Chance" group read next month.

Hey Beth I think that one will win the classic group read at the reading for pleasure book club for November/December too.

Thanks, Jean and Beth. (Sorry I missed your comments earlier; not sure how that update got overlooked!)

Well, I finally am here, but not quite done Lorna Doone. I'm on chapter 52. This is one long novel, however I am enjoying it. If time permitted, I would be done. I read Northanger Abbey last year fi that is the book to be chosen next. Have fun, ya'll!