The Old Curiosity Club discussion

(Sorry, people--I accidentally posted this earlier under General. I'll go delete it there now.)

This is the forum for thoughts on The Tenant of Wildfell Hall as a whole, now that we’ve finished it.

First I want to say thank you, Mary Lou and Peter, for reading and commenting on Tenant of Wildfell Hall, one piece at a time. Your virtual companionship along the way has deepened the book for me. While I don’t expect to go back to the kind of schedule we were all keeping while the Dickens reads were running, those reads taught me how much fun it could be to work through a book serially in company, and I had been missing it. I hope Old Curiosity can continue to pick up a book now and then, even with just a few readers at a time. After hosting this read with help from Mary Lou, I also have an even stronger appreciation for the work that Peter, Tristram, and Kim did keeping the Dickens novels consistently underway over years and years. What a labor of love.

But on to the book.

When we started this book, the first I’ve read by Anne Brontë, I mentioned how much I liked the work of Charlotte and disliked that of Emily, so I was curious what I would think of Anne. The verdict is, this feels like a very uneven book to me, and I don’t think it demonstrates the mastery of either of Anne’s sisters. It comes across like an early draft from a very talented writer. Anne has such an observant eye and is capable of pithy, insightful characterization: I think about how Mary Millward is introduced, for instance, or the shifting social relationships between the people in Gilbert’s hometown or the Grassdale Manor house parties. But she doesn’t stay anywhere long enough for it to stick. As Mary Lou has pointed out, she creates brilliant characters like Mrs. Markham, Rose, and Fergus, and then just leaves them on ice, going nowhere. I really wanted to know how Mrs. Markham reacted to her oldest son getting off the farm, for instance, or how her relationship with her new daughter-in-law might shake down, but I am never going to find out.

That said, although I don’t find Anne to be the best writer of the three Brontë sisters, I do think I would like her best as a person. It’s funny how Helen, who starts out as such an oddity in in town, ends up being really a pretty ordinary woman who makes a commitment and holds it to an extraordinary degree. She never expects special treatment. Jane Eyre is a preternaturally self-possessed child from birth (I think of her verbally fencing as a child with the minister who calls her sinful), and the Wuthering Heights crowd is set on perpetual histrionics. Helen may be impractically dedicated, even a bit of a martyr (but possibly not even that: she is practical enough to leave her husband, and human enough to fall in love with another man before her husband dies)—but she’s so no-drama about it all. And Anne Brontë has a sympathy broad enough to reach so many minor characters, each facing their own personal trials and triumphs. In the end maybe her strong sense of so many of them means she takes on more than she can really process (this book needed to chase after fewer characters and do more with them)—but I think it would make her an interesting, insightful, and generous companion, and the book captures that as well.

What are your thoughts on the book as a whole?

Good morning!

Julie, thank you so much leading our discussion! I agree with everything you said about missing the group reads and appreciating the moderators. You took the reins seamlessly, and did a wonderful job.

You and I are also on the same page (so to speak) about the Brontë sisters. I've read two by Charlotte (Jane Eyre being superior to Villette), and Wuthering Heights, which I really disliked. Anne falls somewhere in the middle.

I enjoyed this story, and it was certainly important subject matter that needed to be addressed. It could have been done in a more enjoyable, effective way, though, had Anne not written it as an epistolary novel. The letter writing/diary entries dragged on and on (and on!), and it was very unrealistic that Gilbert would have transcribed, word for word, Helen's diaries. (Not to mention the significant breach of confidentiality!) An omniscient narrator could have given us both Gilbert's and Helen's thoughts just as reliably, and may have also given some more depth to the minor characters, like Lowborough. This would have been immensely helpful in giving them more distinct identities and motivations. As written, they are rather 2 dimensional, and I had trouble remembering who was who from week to week. And, again, all those H names! Any publisher worth his salt should have known that Hargrave, Hattersley, Huntingdon, Halford, and Helen were just too much! (Then we have Grimsby and Gilbert; Markham, Millward, and Myers; two Helens and two Arthurs! Stop the madness!)

As I mentioned last week, I had no fondness for Gilbert and, therefore, didn't much care if he got the girl in the end. Helen's character was more complex, but her romance with Gilbert didn't interest me in the least. In fact, the lack of communication between the two of them once she left Wildfell Hall made me feel as if it didn't really interest her that much, either. But her fervent faith and uncompromising set of values makes her a fascinating character study.

Despite its mature themes of alcoholism and adultery, this novel very much mirrored 19th century children's literature, with its heavy-handed religious message, and the lesson that those who behave themselves will be rewarded, whereas those who are naughty will come to a bad end. There was no ambiguity in the outcomes for our characters. Those who were good - pious,honest, hard-working, thrifty - were (eventually) rewarded, and thrived. Those who were not were punished - in this world and, presumably, the next. The only exception might be Gilbert and his little problem with anger management, though one could argue that he made amends and was forgiven by his victim, but still paid a price by having to wait so long for Helen to be free, and for her aunt to give her blessing. Looking back, that incident was, perhaps, the most startling and dramatic scene in the book, and yet it ended up being somewhat unnecessary to the story as a whole. But it did bring us a little moral ambiguity, so there's that.

Julie wrote: "What are your thoughts on this meandering, deja-vu, flash-forward, love-conquers-all (or does duty?) conclusion?..."

Well, I think it's safe to say that Duty was the name of the game here more than love. And there's something to be said for that - if it's handled well. Regrettably, I don't think it was. Brontë had a good plot and an important message, but the execution fell flat for me. At the end, I began wondering if she was writing a serial and realized she didn't have enough text to fulfill her contract. From the moment Eliza told Gilbert that Helen was getting married, it was nothing but extraneous words. We'd been waiting long enough by that time.

As we've discussed, a few of the minor characters had the potential for being really interesting, and it's a pity that they weren't better developed and given greater roles. The only two who stood out among them were Lord and Lady Lowborough. And they were quickly summarized and dismissed at the end. How old was Anne when she wrote this, I wonder? (Checking....) She was 28 when it was published, so pretty young. I imagine that had she lived to write more, she would have matured as a writer and some of those things I've viewed as problems would have been improved upon.

And now I'm off to see what Hollywood has done with this story, if I can find anything streaming for free. This may be one of those rare cases in which a dramatization is better than the novel.

Thank you again, Julie, for taking the lead on this one, and Peter for joining in and sharing your always insightful comments. I'd missed our discussions, and was delighted to be able to do this with you again.

Mary Lou wrote: "And now I'm off to see what Hollywood has done with this story, if I can find anything streaming for free. This may be one of those rare cases in which a dramatization is better than the novel."

Oh, let us know if you find anything! I agree: this one could be better if a clever screenwriter took a knife to it and some actors got a chance to dig into the supporting characters.

I also felt like maybe Brontë was being paid by the page at the end, but even if that were the case it was so unnecessary to drag out the romance the way she did, when there were so many other things I was itching to see her develop further. Mostly the subplots, but also I would have liked to see Gilbert and Helen interact in a way that made me believe more that they were perfect for each other. As it was, Gilbert when he meets Helen is a little bit like Helen when she meets Arthur: mind made up and no heed to anything that might get in the way. He came across as a lot less mature than she did, so I found it difficult to work out what the foundation of their connection might be. Maybe compatible artistic sensibilities, since he consulted with her on her paintings? That doesn't really seem enough.

The frame narrative also had potential for development, with Gilbert writing it in an effort toward greater intimacy with the brother-in-law he counts as a deep friend. But that didn't go anywhere either.

Still, I looked forward to picking this book up every week. A good voice and a female protagonist who keeps her head will take you a long way.

Ah ladies,

These weeks have be a joy.

Julie, your comments, insights, and thoughts always made me think before I started typing away. I hope your students realize what a fine teacher you are.

Mary Lou, I always look forward to your entries. You have a unique way of getting to the essence of an idea or thought. Your career as a librarian has enriched countless patrons.

As for me, it was a treat to simply respond to another moderator. I’m thankful we met here on Goodreads. Should we three ever want to meet again, I’m in. There’s my only buried mystery quotation.

Overall, I confess that I would not have completed this novel without your support and input. I found the characters too wooden, too flat, and, candidly, rather boring. Let's see.

Arthur. A true cad. Earlier in our discussion someone wondered if he could have been based, at least in part, on Anne’s brother Branwell. I have no doubt that far too many men in the Victorian times were like Arthur. Women had few roles in life. Men too many freedoms that legally, socially, and morally were acceptable. I’m glad he died, but wish an editor had sent him on his way to hell more quickly. I felt it was a death worthy of an opera. Indeed, if this book is ever considered as a movie I would suggest an opera instead.

Gilbert. Well, he was persistent , and, I imagine, Anne Bronte wanted him to be as that would help highlight the remarkable moral and dedicated character Helen is. The epistolary nature of the novel may have been partly responsible for him evolving, or not evolving as a character, but that I’m unsure of yet.

Helen. My favourite character. Yes, she was faithful to her husband to a fault, and she accepted far too much social and mental abuse. Underneath this suffering, I could not help but wonder if there was an unsaid current of physical abuse as well. Was it there and I missed it?

I wished that much more was made of her artistic nature. It seemed earlier in the novel that we were given broad hints that her repressed nature did find an outlet in her art. I wish more was explored about how her art was a manifestation of her heart, soul, and nature.

Earlier I mentioned Anthony Trollope’s character Lily Dale in ‘The Small House at Allington.’ Lily is also a headstrong woman who makes a poor decision of one suitor yet does not respond when a better man comes along. She and Helen would make a great comparison of 19C characters.

And now, Anne Bronte. I always winch if I react too negatively about a book when I know I could never ever, ever, write one. Just imagine, 28 year’s old, living a cloistered life on the Yorkshire Moors. Your sisters are Jane and Emily. Yikes!

I believe you both were members of the Old Curiosities club when Everyman was with us before his passing. He lived on San Juan Island, in the State of Washington, just a short hop on a ferry from Victoria, British Columbia, where I once lived. We always planned to meet, but never did. After he passed I kept in contact with his two daughters each Christmas. This year their note told me that their sons, both in Grade 10, have joined Goodreads. And so the circle continues.

What a pleasure it would be to connect with you in the future and talk about another book.

Go well, my friends

Peter

Peter wrote: "As for me, it was a treat to simply respond to another moderator. I’m thankful we met here on Goodreads. Should we three ever want to meet again, I’m in. There’s my only buried mystery quotation."

When shall we three meet again? You never know. I'm still in the State of Washington (I do remember being surprised on joining this group at how geographically close you and Everyman were at the time, Peter--I'm in Bellingham), but I travel a lot.

And then there's here. How wonderful that you've kept in touch with Everyman's expanding Goodreads family.

Earlier I mentioned Anthony Trollope’s character Lily Dale in ‘The Small House at Allington.’ Lily is also a headstrong woman who makes a poor decision of one suitor yet does not respond when a better man comes along. She and Helen would make a great comparison of 19C characters.

I'll have to read that one. I enjoyed the one Trollope novel this group read, maybe more than most.

I would also have liked to see more of Helen's artistic pursuits. She did end up something of a one-note character, though I expect Brontë felt she had to keep Helen on message in order to make her social-problem point. I did enjoy the moments when Helen broke out of her own restraint--a look cast at Gilbert, or a moment of hatred toward her husband, or (my favorite) her excitement at her liberty on escaping Grassdale Manor.