The Readers Review: Literature from 1714 to 1910 discussion

This section focusses on The Melmotte's, and by extension the ignominious ending of poor Marie's love affair.

Can Felix ever recover from the disgrace of his behaviour-both in his failed elopement, his financial/gambling doings, and his standing at his club? Do you think Marie will finally see the light?

Melmotte appears to be overextending himself both socially and financially. Can he maintain the course or is a crash inevitable?

We have a brief interlude with Mrs Hurtle and Paul Montague-were you surprised by the outcome? Do you think Mrs Hurtle will continue her attempts to lure him back?

What did you make of the little interlude with the priest and Melmotte?

I hope everyone is staying well-I know I find my reading time a great respite from the constant news cycle.

I think that Felix has sunk as low as he can go. He shouldn't be allowed to have cash, since he gambles it away so quickly.

Melmotte, much like certain political figures, is completely off his rocker. He's definitely headed for a crash, and he may have to flee the country. In that case, why is he putting so much effort into the election?

He's obviously abusive to Marie, but he may have "good" intentions. I had thought his sole object in getting Marie married quickly to a lord was so he could be the father-in-law of one. But I think he also knows what's coming and truly wants to spare Marie by having her safely married by that time. It doesn't excuse his abuse, but it might explain why Marie's refusal frustrates him so much - he really feels the marriage is for her own good, and he came very close in that exchange to telling her why (perhaps he should have done so).

Felix's experiences should make him take a good look at his life and try to become a better person, but I seriously doubt he will do so.

I think Mrs. Hurtle is done with Paul, but it's too early in the book for her story to be over.

Regarding the interlude with the priest and Melmotte. The good Father can't be blamed for trying to thank Melmotte for the donation, but trying to convert him is an impossible task.
I wonder how Melmotte is going to pay for everything-he doesn't seem to have a lot of cash on hand.

Felix is very consistent - if there is a self-centered slimy thing to do, the reader can count on Felix to choose to do it. Not sure whether he can recover from his disgraces. My ideal outcome for Felix would be to have him go to Pinocchio's Pleasure Island and see if he becomes the animal that some have called Paul. Unfortunately I don't think Trollope would do that.

Trollope doesn't portray either the Catholic priest or Anglican minister in a favorable light. The priest is certainly sure of himself. I enjoy how Trollope writes the scenes with them. If I were Anglican, I'd agree with Roger - let the Catholics have him. It's funny how the priest is willing to think highly of an insolent vulgar brute of a man who was totally uncivil to him merely because he is rich and a potential Catholic.

I'm not sure what will happen to Mrs. Hurtle. She and Paul ended how I thought - if it is the end. But, as Lori says, there is still a lot of book left.

Lori wrote: "Melmotte ,.. He's obviously abusive to Marie, but he may have "good" intentions. I had thought his sole object in getting Marie married quickly to a lord was so he could be the father-in-law of one. But I think he also knows what's coming and truly wants to spare Marie by having her safely married by that time. It doesn't excuse his abuse, but it might explain why Marie's refusal frustrates him so much - he really feels the marriage is for her own good, and he came very close in that exchange to telling her why (perhaps he should have done so).."

That makes sense, Lori. You may be on to the 'hidden' depth in Melmotte. It makes sense that Melmotte is more complex and has some humanity in him. Trollope is good at doing shades of grey rather than black and white. The only one 100% bad is Felix, but even his bad, while consistent, is not really evil or "that" bad.

Felix has a great opportunity to change, I think it is now or never. It was deeply shameful how he lost all those money gambling. We still do not know what Marie is thinking about the failed elopment. She has to marry, her father wants it so, but Lord Nidderdale wants nothing to do with her anymore, and are there other suitors? Furthermore Melmotte seems on the verge of a financial crisis, his house of cards is collapsing, perhaps in the future she will be less appealing as a wife.
I am very disappointed with Paul and his behaviour towards Mrs Hurtle, he seemed incapable of a clear cut, he succeded only because she gave it up.
I agree with Frances, it is refreshing to spend time with Trollope in these difficult days.

Melmotte would be right at home in a novel by Balzac!

What struck me is how so many “honorable” people were willing to put up with someone whose behavior they felt was abhorrent, whom they at least half suspected of being a fraud because he would serve a purpose for them in some way. I include both the priest and the parson, both political parties and much of English society. Melmotte does indeed remind me of another political figure.

Melmotte has become so arrogant and enveloped in his own power bubble, I don’t think he believes he can possibly come to any bad ending. I think he wants Marie to do as she’s told and to marry Nidderdale to increase his own social position and access to money by association. What he thinks of Marie is revealed when he speaks to Nidderdale and describes her as a silly idle girl whose opinions should not mean anything to them.

I like Nidderdale. He is a victim of sorts in this love triangle/power play. He has enough self respect that he doesn’t want to marry Marie after she has not shown him the least encouragement and after she has attempted to elope with Felix. Melmotte keeps pushing him to at least visit their house so that he does finally agree. He recognizes that Marie has become a strong woman with her own firmly held beliefs and intentions. Meanwhile, his father was truly repulsed by Melmotte’s behavior at India House which is not a good portent for any future marriage.

I am more convinced that Paul and Mrs. Hurtle traveled either as man and wife in America or at least engaged in a continual sexual affair as she refers to Paul amusing himself before throwing her over. The only reason for her pursuit of him which seems logical is that she truly does love him and that love has caused her to abandon everything else in her hopes of marriage. She and Ruby and Marie could form a club.

What else is there to say about Felix? I wonder if he will come to a bad ending?

Daniela wrote: "I am very disappointed with Paul and his behaviour towards Mrs Hurtle, he seemed incapable of a clear cut, he succeded only because she gave it up...."

I agree that Paul is really not coming out of this at all well. He seems to think he is behaving in an honourable way by offering to see Mrs Hurtle again if she insists, but all he is doing is stringing her along because he lacks the willpower to break with her definitively. Mrs Hurtle shows more courage when she breaks with him.

As for the truly dishonourable Felix, he seems to revert to infanthood in his disgrace by taking to his bed. He makes me feel sorry for his poor mother, even though she is not always likeable in other respects.

Not sure how to feel about Paul and Mrs Hurtle. In Trollope’s world, a man who proposed marriage and was accepted would normally be required by the laws of society to go through with the marriage. Not to would be to reveal one was a cad and a bounder, like Crosbie in A Small House at Allington. But what happens if he discovers a good reason to believe the marriage would be a mistake? That the bride had shot a previous husband must be a socially acceptable ground for calling off the wedding. But having spent my youth in Texas, I can see Mrs Hurtle’s viewpoint as well, as her ex obviously needed killing.

Bill wrote: "Not sure how to feel about Paul and Mrs Hurtle. In Trollope’s world, a man who proposed marriage and was accepted would normally be required by the laws of society to go through with the marriage. ..."

Good to get a Texan perspective on this, Bill! I'm also interested in whether Trollope will redeem Paul (and reward him with Hetta). Do we know of any other Trollope heroes who've been "allowed" to jilt a woman and then end happily?

i don't see it that Paul is being weak and dishonorable. He has said what he needed to say to Mrs. Hurtle. He wasn't able to say it before because of Mrs. Hurtle's strength and abilities to manipulate. He sees her again because she pleads with him to do so and he thinks its the least he can do since she came all the way across the ocean. While it may have been from weakness at first, now I believe he really thinks it is the honorable thing to do. He is not stringing Mrs. Hurtle along. Mrs. Hurtle is manipulating his sense of honor and stringing him along. I understand why she does it.
Trollope again has created a complex situation where you can view Paul's actions at various levels along the gray spectrum, That's why its fun to discuss his characters - they can elicit contrasting but supportable evaluations.

Frances wrote: " Do we know of any other Trollope heroes who've been "allowed" to jilt a woman and then end happily?."

Hmm. I was trying to think of one and, while a hero didn't come to mind, in Can You Forgive Her? Trollope did allow Alice Vavasor to jilt John Grey and then live happily with him.

Alice went through engagements to Cousin George, then John Grey, then Cousin George again and then finally marriage to John Grey. She's a serial jilter who got to live happily ever after. But then Trollope usually likes his women better than his men.

The marriage between Paul and Mrs. Hurtle would not have a success. She has more life experience than Paul so maybe she thought it would be better to end the relationship there and then.
As Brian said, the characters can be studied from different angles.

Brian wrote: "i don't see it that Paul is being weak and dishonorable. He has said what he needed to say to Mrs. Hurtle. He wasn't able to say it before because of Mrs. Hurtle's strength and abilities to manipul..."

While in this section he has finally taken a stand, I think he has been weak and dishonourable previously in doing things like taking her out to a play, "embracing" her (which I interpret to mean at least some passionate kissing, maybe more), going for a weekend at the seaside (!) and otherwise engaging in the sort of behaviour that would imply at least an engagement. Yes, she was manipulating him into these things as a way to try to win him back, but if he knew that he loved another, he should have resisted. While I'm sure Hetta would excuse this sort of behaviour from him before he met her, it would certainly not be excused in a man who had any sort of understanding with or pretensions to another woman.

Brian wrote: "Frances wrote: " Do we know of any other Trollope heroes who've been "allowed" to jilt a woman and then end happily?."

Hmm. I was trying to think of one and, while a hero didn't come to mind, in C..."

OK, since I thought Alice deserved her happiness I'll allow Paul to be happy, should Trollope decree it!

Frances wrote: "I think he has been weak and dishonourable previously in doing things like taking her out to a play, "embracing" her (which I interpret to mean at least some passionate kissing, maybe more), going for a weekend at the seaside (!)."

I did weakly admit that Paul's conduct "it may have been from weakness at first." You are definitely right, Paul was inarguably weak and dishonorable in his failure to resist Mrs. Hurtle. He did seem like he was interested in possibly having "one for the road" before making a full break which, while understandable considering Mrs. Hurtles physical charms, is totally dishonorable toward Hetta,

‘In Rome they were worshipping just such men as this Melmotte. Do you remember the man who sat upon the seats of the knights and scoured the Via Sacra with his toga, though he had been scourged from pillar to post for his villainies? I always think of that man when I hear Melmotte’s name mentioned. Hoc, hoc tribuno militum! Is this the man to be Conservative member for Westminster?’

Roger is alluding to the 4th epode of Horace, a satiric portrait of a jumped up parvenu whom Horace claims still bears the scars of the beatings he received as a slave. It tells us something that Trollope assumes that Roger!, the bishop, and the reader will not only be at home with the Classics, but know Horace practically by heart.

After John Henry Newman converted to Roman Catholicism in 1845, along with a number of his Anglo-Catholic followers (like Barham), many English RCs were very optimistic that England would soon return to their faith. Frequent tales of members of the nobility or even the Royal family being about to ‘swim the Tibur’ and convert to Rome circulated. So Fr Barham’s expectations about Melmotte quite fit the period. I wonder if The Surplice’ is modelled on The Tablet.

Thank you explaining the connection to Horace, Bill.

Bill wrote: "‘It tells us something that Trollope assumes that Roger, the bishop, and the reader will not only be at home with the Classics, but know Horace practically by heart...."

That's an interesting observation. Horace would have been a staple of schoolboy Latin for Trollope's better-off male readers... so maybe he was assuming that anyone educated enough to read his books would understand the reference. Meanwhile his poor female readers would just have to work it out for themselves.

According to this bit, apparently quoting this poem was very in vogue in the later 19th century:
https://books.google.be/books?id=E-bn...

I'm surprised to see so many comparisons between Melmotte and Trump in this thread. I thought of it, too, when Father Barham was rationalizing Melmotte's potential utility to the church despite being a horrible person.

Elizabeth wrote: "I'm surprised to see so many comparisons between Melmotte and Trump in this thread. I thought of it, too, when Father Barham was rationalizing Melmotte's potential utility to the church despite bei..."

That was the point where, try as I might, I couldn't avoid thinking about the comparison too. I turn to Trollope as my escape from the real world not as my reminder of it.

Elizabeth wrote: "I'm surprised to see so many comparisons between Melmotte and Trump in this thread. I thought of it, too, when Father Barham was rationalizing Melmotte's potential utility to the church despite bei..."

In the next section, Daniela comments that he reminds her of Berlusconi so I guess there are lots of political parallels to be drawn!

I suppose that would be apt! The US is certainly not the only country to have dealt with such a leader.