The Readers Review: Literature from 1714 to 1910 discussion

We have come to the end of the novel, and the last chapters, one each, tell of Mrs Hurtle's fate, Marie Melmotte's fate, Lady Carbury and Mr Broune, and finally the outcome for Hetta and Paul and Roger, and a little glimpse of Ruby and John.

What do you think of each of our couples, and of their likely fate?

What was your impression of this novel overall, and how does it compare to other Trollope's that we've read so far?

Any comments on the title of the book, The Way We Live Now, and what Trollope is saying about (his) contemporary England?

Did you find any relevance to "the way we live now" today?

Thank you to everyone who joined this discussion, it has been a pleasure talking Trollope with all of you!

I have really enjoyed this novel and the discussion. Thanks for leading it, Frances.

I am glad Felix is on the continent and can't damage his sister's happiness.

I'm super happy for Lady Carbury/Mrs. Broune. After all she's been through, finally she can have some peace with a spouse who's a true friend.

Is seven weddings a record for Trollope?

It sure seemed like it. :D

Elizabeth wrote: "I'm super happy for Lady Carbury/Mrs. Broune. After all she's been through, finally she can have some peace with a spouse who's a true friend."

He will also likely stop her from enabling Felix' bad behaviour so that will be a big help for her as well.

I thought this was a very interesting magnum opus for Trollope especially that:

1. Trollope has created an ensemble cast with many supporting characters and no one character, or even one relationship, takes center stage for long, I did think that any of these could be the central character at one time:
Felix – the story starts as if he will be the central figure but, as the story develops, he is revealed as too singularly bad of a person to be a central character; however, the story does then end with a reference to Felix’s fate;
Melmotte – so much of the story and character's actions revolve around him yet one spends much of the book before his viewpoint even enters and, ultimately, he dies well before the end, or in TV terms, with 2 episodes left;
Paul – possibly the hero during the middle portion but he fades at the end. The last of the ending sequence chapters is on Paul/Hetta/Roger, which is probably the novel's central relationship, yet it is seen from Roger’s view and, while Hetta gets some dialogue, Paul is a barely mentioned person - we see nothing through Paul’s view and don't get a look at his real feelings at the end. Paul also has a part in the chapter detailing Mrs. Hurtle’s ending story but, again, it is a subordinate part.

2. The railroad is, as Phrod would have pointed out, a McGuffin in the story. For all the talk at the beginning, I thought there would be more details about the non-construction of the rail line or anything about its failure or progress – instead it is a side detail barely worth talking about which serves only to set up the story and is forgotten about.

3. I thought this was an very good Trollope novel, While I enjoy the light touch of Trollope, I did enjoy that in this novel he was sharper with his daggers when portraying English society and, as said before, creates sympathetic American and Jewish characters besides. I think that the magnitude of this story and characters, along with the sharper digs, makes this the best of Trollope’s stand alones I've read. However, I prefer the more focused and genteel story and settings of both Framley Parsonage and Barchester Towers – and the more witty satire of Barchester Towers. I admire TWWLN a lot but I confess to having had a more satisfied and pleasant feeling at the end of other Trollope novels.

It certainly was a more balan ensemble. And for some reason none of them engaged in fox hunting...?

Whatever happened to Phrodick?

‘That he would never marry he was quite sure. Indeed he was prepared to settle Carbury on Hetta’s eldest boy on condition that such boy should take the old name.’

Amongst the Victorians, this kind of arrangement, where an heir would change his name to that of a family whose estate he received and thus seem to maintain the family name, was not uncommon.

Thank you, Frances, for leading us through this excellent novel. I understood that it was possibly Trollope's masterpiece, and enjoyed it very much, but am remembering enjoying some of the Barchester series more, especially The Last Chronicle.

For all the plot twists and turns here, he managed to wind things up very quickly once he began. Thank goodness he got Felix out of everybody's way! The marital couplings all seemed right, even the last-minute ones, except perhaps Georgie and the curate.
That seemed rather jumped up. Mr. Brehgert was definitely too good for her morally, and also not a good physical match. Poor Mrs. Hurtle couldn't have had Paul anyway, with her husband still alive, and she has to go back and face the music in America. I saw the mini-series when it came out, but most details faded. Maybe now another viewing would be the thing.

Theresa wrote: "Thank you, Frances, for leading us through this excellent novel. I understood that it was possibly Trollope's masterpiece, and enjoyed it very much, but am remembering enjoying some of the Barchest..."

My favorite Trollope is still Barchester Towers.

I was under the impression that Mrs. Hurtle would have been free to marry Paul because she was divorced, and divorce was legal in the US? Not that it would have worked out, as they're mismatched.

The two qualities that distinguish a true classic work of literature are perfect expression of the culture that created it, and universality, ability to speak to readers in all times and places. John Bunyan’s The Pilgrim’s Progress is a great example. It embodies the life and soul of 17th century English Puritanism, and yet anyone who embarks on a long and exacting task, whether founding an empire or getting into better physical or mental condition, will recognise the stages in the process, like the Slough of Despair, the Valley of Apollyon, or Vanity Fair. Anthony Trollope’s The Way We Live Now depicts a point in Victorian society when the traditional English virtues of fair play and honest dealing had been brushed aside in favour of wealth and glamour. But its villain, the vulgar parvenu financier Melmotte, seems perfectly to embody the corrupt values of contemporary America a century and a half later. So The Way We Live Now is certainly a classic.

It is worthwhile to recall that financial trickery is not the only target of Trollope’s satire. Lady Carbury’s trash fiction and endeavours to use the press to puff her books, the efforts of idle aristocrats to recoup their families’ fortunes through exchanging social status for wealth, the violent lawless world of the American Wild West, where ladies had to be handy with a pistol, are exposed to the satirist’s gaze as well. The only close to admirable character in the book is the socially despised Jewish banker Brehgert. I am most reminded of the world portrayed in Edith Wharton’s novels, where the upper classes of Old New York are replaced by the vulgarity of the Nouveau Riche.

I imagine that Marie Melmotte will end up as a California Grande Dame and probably endow a college or library. Were I rewriting the novel, though, I’d not have sent Sir Felix to Germany - what would he find to do there? Every penny of his £150 remittance would go for drink. Rather, like other remittance men, he should have gone to the colonies. I can easily imagine him in Australia or South Africa promoting shares in salted gold mines.

Most of us who identify as Trollopeans, though, will not be as fond of TWWLN as we are of the Barchester or the Palliser novels. Part is the absence of really funny characters like Mr Slope, engaging ones like Mme Max and Lady Glencora, or admirable figures like Plantagenet Palliser. And I think we also miss fox hunts and comic proposals, though I rather liked the insouciant Lord Nidderdale. This is a book to enjoy and relish, but not quite to cherish for solace and delight.

I so enjoyed the journey with the fellow readers in this group, I've loved our three months together and I look forward to joining you again if I can.

Bill wrote: "Most of us who identify as Trollopeans, though, will not be a fond of TWWLN as we are of the Barchester or the Palliser novels. Part is the absence of really funny characters ... This is a book to enjoy and relish, but not quite to cherish for solace and delight."

Elizabeth's previous comments are consistent with this analysis.
Grimmer novels are by nature just tougher to enjoy. While I admire Zola's Germinal, I enjoyed his Ladies Paradise much more. Obviously, Trollope's novels are not nearly as grim as Zola's, but TWWLN is relatively grim in the Trollope ouvre. (See the article posted by Linda in the previous thread) The seriousness of the satire so effectively done here does raise its stature, IMO, so as to join the two series as essential Trollope.

Brian, I actually loved this book. It's just that last night I was talking about Trollope to a friend (who is still on _The Prime Minister_), and suddenly realized that TWWLN had not contained a single fox hunt.

I think it was an excellent book. It took some time to get going, but then, boy, it really took off!

Elizabeth wrote: "Brian, I actually loved this book..."

I'm sorry, I checked and the comment I was thinking of was actually Theresa's. I had you on my brain as I was just on the previous thread reading the article Linda posted the new link to and was re-reading some of your comments there.

I do agree that this book was slow out of the chute, then really picked up steam. For him to leave out his beloved fox hunt, Trollope was making a real effort to make more serious comments on society in this book. Such self-restraint. :)

Perhaps because this is a stand alone we don’t form the same attachments to characters as in either Barchester or the Pallisers. In the introduction to my edition- Oxford- it did note that all the plots and subplots in some way were connected through Melmotte, whereas it’s not unusual for Trollope to have plot lines that are in no way connected.
What will one do for money and what will one do for love? Seems to be the broad theme.
My favorite character was Mrs. Hurtle. She dealt with the circumstances of her life with a strength and belief in her own self-worth that is admirable, even if some of her necessary actions for survival were horrendous. And she managed to still retain a kindness and concern for others which other more “privileged” characters in the novel never possessed. I don’t know if I would have the wherewithal to do what she did or not become totally bitter about life.

Here's an article I found earlier when checking to see if a railway was actually ever built from Salt Lake to Veracruz. It talks about Melmotte's financial speculations.

https://www.cpr.org/2014/10/31/a-19th...

Bill wrote: "The only close to admirable character in the book is the socially despised Jewish banker Brehgert...."

What about Roger? He seems intended to be an admirable example of old-fashioned honour, yet I ended up ambivalent about him, because of his perverse blindness to Hetta's feelings and his vindictiveness towards Paul. Maybe he represents the old style of landed gentry whose way of life would be becoming harder to maintain even in Trollope's times. Roger sticks to traditional ways and has to force himself into a new way of thinking, to his credit.

Actually I think one of the joys of Trollope is that there is a certain ambivalence about most of his characters which makes them very human and believable. Nobody is perfect in Trollope's world (unlike that of Dickens) and nobody is totally imperfect either.... well, maybe Felix. But he is great fun to read about.

Emma wrote: "Actually I think one of the joys of Trollope is that there is a certain ambivalence about most of his characters which makes them very human and believable. Nobody is perfect in Trollope's world (unlike that of Dickens) and nobody is totally imperfect either.... well, maybe Felix. But he is great fun to read about."

I agree; I like that about Trollope as well.

Emma wrote: "What about Roger? He seems intended to be an admirable example of old-fashioned honour, yet I ended up ambivalent about him, because of his perverse blindness to Hetta's feelings and his vindictiveness towards Paul. ."

I think Trollope is portraying Roger as admirable but too rigid to be our hero and intends us to feel ambivalent about him. I saw Roger as a Lily Dale-type with his rigid adherence to his "one true love" self-martyrdom. And as Trollope was surprised that readers thought Lily so wonderful a heroine, I think he would have been likewise surprised if readers elevated Roger too high also.
Like Emma and Lori, I like that Trollope has such grey characters with faults. As Trollope has Roger thinking in the last chapter: "And Paul Montegue had shown himself to be very weak in regard to women." Amen to that. And thank goodness too, as that weakness creates some nice plot lines here.

I agree with everyone’s comments about the complexity of Trollope characters. That is what makes them realistic and interesting although sometimes frustrating!

I don’t see any heroes or heroines here. No matter the social class or gender everyone has their faults, some more extreme than others.

Did anyone think that Marie was just attaching herself to another con man by marrying Fisker? At least she has control of her money. Are we to think she will willingly become her father’s daughter and take part in Fisker’s schemes?

Linda wrote: "...Did anyone think that Marie was just attaching herself to another con man by marrying Fisker? At least she has control of her money. Are we to think she will willingly become her father’s daughter and take part in Fisker’s schemes?"

I was definitely fearful and thought Marie best avoid Fisker. However, at the end, without being explicit, Trollope gave the impression that all was going to work out between Fisker and Marie. But there is nothing that Trollope implies to prevent one from thinking that this could include Marie adapting and happily joining Fisker as a bit of a scoundrel, just not very dirty or rotten ones.

I think that Marie gained a lot of strength and self awareness during the course of the book. She will be fine at keeping Fisker relatively honest.

Linda, I did indeed think she had jumped from the frying pan into the fire.

What was your impression of this novel overall, and how does it compare to other Trollope's that we've read so far? "

I rank the Trollope stand alones I've read as follows:

The Way We Live Now - 5 stars
Orley Farm - 4 stars
The Claverings - 4 stars
The Fixed Period - 4 stars
Dr. Wortle's School - 3 stars
Rachel Ray - 3 stars
He Knew He Was Right - 3 stars

I also liked The Three Clerks, which introduced Mr Chaffenbrass, and The Rector of Bullington.

Thank you, Frances. It was an enjoyable reading and your questions and remarks were interesting and useful, as the other readers' comments. I found the book easy to read despite the number of pages. I am sorry for Roger Carbury but we knew from the beginning that it was either his happines or Paul's, there could not have been an happy ending for both. I would not have predicted such a bad ending for Melmotte, either such an happy ending for Lady Carbury.
It was only my second Trollope, so I have a long way to go!
Happy to have spent all these (strange and peculiar) weeks with you all!

Brian wrote: "I thought this was a very interesting magnum opus for Trollope especially that:

1. Trollope has created an ensemble cast with many supporting characters and no one character, or even one relations..."

Lots of good points, and I agree that several of the characters could have been the focal point of a novel.

I also enjoyed the sharper satire/criticism of society, though generally enjoy Trollope for his gentler portrayals of social circles and personalities, and have found other novels to have more humour. I think we are going to see a very different Trollope in Ayala's Angel

Elizabeth wrote: "Linda, I did indeed think she had jumped from the frying pan into the fire."

I was really unsure how Marie's life would unfold-some will depend upon Fisker himself, and it was hard to get a good read on him. However Marie had shown herself to be a doer and a planner and a pretty strong character (the whole elopement plan for example) so I expect she will hold her own in California.

Bill wrote: "‘That he would never marry he was quite sure. Indeed he was prepared to settle Carbury on Hetta’s eldest boy on condition that such boy should take the old name.’

Amongst the Victorians, this kind..."

Quite a big step for Roger, and it will be interesting to see how this turns out. Brian mentions how like Lily Dale Roger is in this regard-one love of his life never to be supplanted-and I certainly felt the way I felt about Lily-it seemed a shame that they were almost shutting themselves off from any future happiness after one great loss.

Bill wrote: "It is worthwhile to recall that financial trickery is not the only target of Trollope’s satire. Lady Carbury’s trash fiction and endeavours to use the press to puff her books, the efforts of idle aristocrats to recoup their families’ fortunes through exchanging social status for wealth, the violent lawless world of the American Wild West, where ladies had to be handy with a pistol, are exposed to the satirist’s gaze as well. The only close to admirable character in the book is the socially despised Jewish banker Brehgert. I am most reminded of the world portrayed in Edith Wharton’s novels, where the upper classes of Old New York are replaced by the vulgarity of the Nouveau Riche.."

Yes, Trollope certainly had several targets for his satire, and I think he was very pointed in his criticisms. My other big issue with Lady Carbury was how hard she was on Hetta, while absolutely spoiling and indulging Felix. Trollope has a sympathetic eye for the various plights of women in society, and in this case he certainly seems to sympathize with those being pushed into marriage by family or by circumstances.

Linda wrote: "What will one do for money and what will one do for love? Seems to be the broad theme.
My favorite character was Mrs. Hurtle. She dealt with the circumstances of her life with a strength and belief in her own self-worth that is admirable, even if some of her necessary actions for survival were horrendous. And she managed to still retain a kindness and concern for others which other more “privileged” characters in the novel never possessed."

One of the things I love about Trollope is how nuanced characters are in all walks of life. Both Mrs Hurtle and Mr Brehgert, while acknowledged as not being suitable partners for their fiancé(e)s, are shown to be kind and good hearted and honest, qualities that the actual Aristrocrats are shown to lack.

Daniela wrote: "It was only my second Trollope, so I have a long way to go!
Happy to have spent all these (strange and peculiar) weeks with you all!

You have some wonderful reading to look forward to, and I would certainly direct you towards his two series, The Chronicles of Barsetshire and The Pallisers. I do think most Trollope fans would agree that these are some of his final works. (But first, join us for Ayala's Angel next month!)

Thank you to everyone for your great comments throughout (and keep them coming) and I hope you'll all come back and join us for Ayala's Angel mid-June.

Madame Melmotte and the curacao cracked me up.