The Readers Review: Literature from 1714 to 1910 discussion

IX. MONICA KNOLLYS
X. LADY KNOLLYS REMOVES A COVERLET
XI. LADY KNOLLYS SEES THE FEATURES
XII. A CURIOUS CONVERSATION
XIII. BEFORE AND AFTER BREAKFAST
XIV. ANGRY WORDS

I wonder if Le Fanu got the idea of the Knollys from the ill fated Boleyn family. Catherine Boleyn daughter of Mary, sister of Ann (beheaded by Henry VIII) married Robert Knollys. The poor woman bore 16 children and as an attendant of Elizabeth I, her death is commemorated in Westminster Abbey. There are rumours that she was the illegitimate daughter of Henry VIII:-

http://www.theanneboleynfiles.com/mar...

That's interesting you mentioned that, MadgeUK. My first thoughts on reading that surname were about Lettice Knollys!

Great minds and all that Hannah:D.

MadgeUK wrote: "Great minds and all that Hannah:D."

So right!

There are some early illustrations of Uncle Silas on this Russian website:-

http://metalonmetalblog.blogspot.com/...

It is said that Le Fanu did not collaborate well with his illustrators, being more interested in painting illustrations in words.

The appearance of Lady Knollys certainly was a welcome relief raising the humour from dark to light. Sheridan Le Fanu has a very dark sense of humour - his collection of short stories In a Glass Darkly is a good example of this.

But it is nice to know that Maud is not without a friend other then her servants.

I realise Madame is a grotesque and her actions sinister and malevolent but do any of you find a humour in the character which amuses?

Yes, Malcolm. There are points where I feel Madame's characterisation at this point in the novel is almost a parody. But I think the grotesque can have a 'carnivalesque' side to it. Also, its a bit like how clowns can have something very scary/uncanny about them.

Quite. I think 'carnivalesque' is a good way of describing her particularly after her singing that song at Church Scarsdale.

That really is an extraordinary scene. Actually, I've found all the opening chapters quite extraordinary - incredibly vivid & colourfully odd, especially the graveyard episode. A lot of novels take a while to warm up, but this one certainly hits the ground running.

It certainly does grab the reader by the eyes and throat immediately. Personally I think that the chapters are quite short and the reading schedule ought to be re-arranged, as I am sure some must already be on to volume II. Throughout Friday I was glancing to see if this next part of the discussion had been put up. I've read some way ahead since I read Chapter 8.

I think it's an excellent build-up for the reader before we actually get to meet Uncle Silas.

Yes, I'm nearly on vol II, but dont know how much I'll be able to read for a bit. Personally I'd prefer it if the chapter division discussions were posted early, so ppl who do read on early could post thoughts and get discussions going. It kind of goes against every grain in my body to put down a book that grabs my attention. Some novels are best digested slowly and episodically - like Henry James & Dickens etc. But some just have a plot propulsion that is hard to resist.

I'll admit, I am ahead in my reading. Today, I will get the pleasure of meeting Uncle Silas. Madame was quite carnivalesque in avoiding meeting Lady Knollys. I laughed at picturing Madame hiding under the covers holding the blanket over her. I get the idea that Madame and Lady Knolly have met before, and Lady Knolly knows much more about her than we the reader do.

Yes, le Fanu is adept at circulating knowledge of hidden stuff without really explaining anything. Seems there are quite a few narrative secrets being juggled - whether it's Uncle Silas's past, Maud's father's relationship with the Swedenbourgs, where Madame has come from & how she's got here, & now Lady Knolly's knowledge of Madame.

The bedroom encounter between Madame & Knolly is pretty comical.

Yes, I really enjoyed that encounter. Originally upon my first reading of the novel, I found it hard to tell whether Madame was aware of who Lady Knollys was when she kept insisting upon an introduction, and then used her cunning to avoid her by being indisposed.

But when Lady Knollys recognised the cunning vixen I revelled in her triumph - however short-lived.

There's a bit in Chapter XV, I think, which tickled me. But I will have to wait to explain what and why.

Does anyone recall reading a description of Austin Ruthyn's physical characteristics? Unless I missed it, the only description of Austin is given by Lady Knollys in chapter 9. Monica describes Austin as being an ugly creature.  I found it interesting that very detailed descriptions in regard to looks and dress were given for the main characters but not much mentioned about Austin. Both Charles Oakley and Uncle Silas (based on the portraits) have feminine and delicate features which I thought was interesting in contrast to Madame's masculine features.  The description of Dr. Bryerly reminds me of the grim reaper.

Th e style of dress for Maud and Uncle Silas (portraits) is outdated and Dr. Bryerly's coat is ill fitting. Lady Knollys and Captain Oakley are both well dressed and Deedle's (Duds) clothing is striking. Yet there is not much mentioned about the clothing of Austin.

I am not sure why but I think Le Fanu has a reason for omitting details about Austin's features and style of dress. I just found it curious.

First law of the novel, the narrator isn't always the same as the author! ;) The fact that Maud might leave out any description of her father is really interesting. I only remember her saying her father seemed to move in & out of the shadows like a portrait. And then describes him as 'like a ghost' - calling him "this phantasm of my father".

When you put that against how Silas also first appears as a portrait & Madame as a ghost, it makes me start to wonder if there isn't something really Oedipal (Elektra complex for girls)/psychoanalytical going on with Maud. The good & the bad father (Austin & Silas); & the good & the bad mother (Knolly & Madame).

Probably barking up the wrong tree, but that's how it feels at this point.

All this seeing people as ghosts is getting a bit like Hamlet! (ghostly father, strange oedipal relationship with mother).

Also wanted to say, I have no idea at this point how much longer after all these events Maud is writing this narrative - or why.

Perhaps the descriptions of the style of women's dress are more explicit because the fashions at the time were rather outrageous, whereas men dressed more soberly?

http://www.fashion-era.com/mid-late_v...

http://romancereaderatheart2.com/vict...

I find it interesting that, after this period of extravagant female dress, the movement for Rational Dress began, headed by Mrs Bloomer who had declared before she invented 'bloomers' that she found the cage of the crinoline preferable to the weight of petticoats.

I wonder if our period of 'baring all' will lead us back to one of irrational dress again?! A crinoline on the tube/metro would certainly drive down the number of passengers and their proximity to you:).

I think that Maud allows her cousin's good-humoured description of Austin as 'ugly' because it is friendly family banter, and it shows what sort of relationship they have with each other. Any description Maud would give of her father as handsome would naturally be biased especially considering her devotion to him.

I think Monica doesn't think that in terms of looks that Austin is considered much of a catch, unlike how he would be considered extremely eligible in terms of money and social status. However handsome Silas may have been, despite the allowance his brother made him, most parents would consider him highly ineligible as a marriage prospect due to his being a rake and a roue.

As for Maud's outmoded style of dress, this is because she no longer has a mother to select her dress for her and she has to rely upon her servants taste and discretion.

With regard to his daughter, Austin no doubt feels that what she wears in adequate for a child who doesn't go out in society.

He'd no doubt allow her far more liberty and licence once she has gone to finishing school.

Also, Austin doesn't appear to be as 'vain' (and I use the term loosely) as the rest of the world, due to his religious beliefs.

with regard to Bryerly's dress, according to the notes in my edition, Maud is quite snobbish in her assessment and regards him in appearance of a low church artisan who has influenced her father into becoming a Swedenborgian. In the opinion of the editor/note writer, Maud is high church (and apparently would be by implication more 'dressy' in taste).

Cousin Monica is concerned that Austin has not influenced her religious beliefs, and from what Maud has revealed to the reader so far, she appears to consider the Swedenborgians an 'odd sect'.

There is something grim reaperish about Bryerly. But Maud's description of may be jaundiced due to is influence with her father and the opinions of the servants. I don't think enough has been said about him and events yet to allow the reader to tell either way whether he is bad or good.

What I find rather sweet, endearing, charming and optimistic about Maud, is, considering the whole mood and tone of her tale so far, how death is the last thing on her mind when her father talks ominously of perhaps having to leave suddenly with a friend whom he fears.

Her mind seems perfectly rested by the knowledge or assumption that Bryerly is not a medical doctor but a religious doctor of divinity.

Someone suggested that her name may have been chosen by the author because her character is maudlin. However, I find her father far more maudlin than she.

I tend to think of one sad, tearful, and perhaps obsessed with death, when I think of a maudlin person, and somehow Maud doesn't strike me as such.

Malcolm wrote: "The appearance of Lady Knollys certainly was a welcome relief raising the humour from dark to light. Sheridan Le Fanu has a very dark sense of humour - his collection of short stories In a Glass D..."

I enjoyed the antics of Madame as she tried to avoid being recognized by Lady Knollys. It reminded me of my kids trying to evade me when they knew they had done something that would upset me.

Seeuuder wrote: "Does anyone recall reading a description of Austin Ruthyn's physical characteristics? Unless I missed it, the only description of Austin is given by Lady Knollys in chapter 9. Monica describes Aust..."

That's a very interesting observation. There could be many reasons for this not least some sort of parental respect. Although, that said, despite the awe and respect Maud holds her father in, so far the little she has disclosed reads a bit like a mild character assassination. Perhaps in a few chapters more I may return to this point and give my reasons for Maud's reserve on this matter.

This being my re-read of the novel, it may be unfair on you first timers if I opine too much at present.

I'll be interested to see why Maud's father can't see through Madame. He always takes her side. What hold does she have over him?

I was also interested in Maud's description of Captain Oakley: "Handsome, elegant, with features almost feminine, and soft wavy, black hair, whiskers and moustache, he was altogether such a knight as I had never behld, or even fancied, at Knowl--a hero of another species, and from the region of the demigods. I did not then perceive that coldness of the eye, and cruel curl of the voluptous lip."

Obviously, Charlie will be back, and we'll have to wait to see what damage he'll do to Maud.

But seems like a typical description from a girl who hasn't met that many men, and especially from a young girl. The knight coming to save her from her lonely existence...

Lynnm wrote: "I'll be interested to see why Maud's father can't see through Madame. He always takes her side. What hold does she have over him?

I was also interested in Maud's description of Captain Oakley:..."

That is one of the things which frustrated me. Though traditionally at that time father's were not all that involved in the lives of their children, and particularly not daughters, he is her only parent, and they seem to have something of a close relationship and it seems as if he does care about her. He ought to know her well enough at least to know that she is the not sort to cause trouble, or tell lies and there hasn't been any problems with her and the any of the other members of the household. So it was quite frustrating that he did always automatically take Madame's word over Maud and would not listen to Maud.

I've just dragged myself out of bed with worry. 'A very mild character assassination' is far too strong an assessment. Allow me to explain myself.

Maud's description of her father would during the Victorian period be seen by people of her class as very positive. Independently rich from an old family, high-minded and caring for his fellow man. Maud tells of his frustrated ambitions with regard to his failed political career, and how his peers in the House of Commons - in his view (and seemingly Maud's) people in some way inferior (for whatever reason) had succeeded.

Aloof, Austin goes abroad before settling back in England where he remains aloof and concerns himself with his estate and family.

Readers of the same well-bred and educated background as Maud, would, unlike us lesser mortals, find this highly commendable, and so far so good.

Alas his wife dies and he becomes more introverted and secludes himself at home where he mourns his wife and his religious inclinations turns to the spiritual teaching of Swedenborg for comfort and solace.

Most at that time would see nothing wrong with Austin leaving his daughter's education to the charge of a series of suitable governesses or if so inclined to some suitable boarding school for young ladies, in lieu of a mother to take charge of the daughter's education (by which I mean the mother would select and keep a close eye upon the governesses).

Austin and men of his class have not been brought up to raise daughters, that being a mother's duty. So to us as readers he appears far more cold than Maud intends to paint him.

To her, her father is discharging his duties as a parent accordingly to both his gender and station.

But, along with her own description of him from her child's eye view he appears to a degree distant and cool (but not cold). Indeed, she has depicted him as caring and loving by granting her wishes that Madame can no longer take her off the grounds of the estate.

However, Maud has also revealed to us cousin Monica's disagreement with Austin over his choice of governess, and her casual comments with regard to his judgement of character be that of his own brother Silas, his friendship with Bryerly and his involvement with the 'odd sect' of Swedenborgians, and of course his employment of Madame as governess and guardian.

To me alone (and with hindsight) this may seem like a very mild (and unintentional) character assassination. But I do not think this retrospection is what Maud wishes to intend to convey to the reader.

Sweet dreams all.

I think Maud's description of her father in Chapter 1 is instructive:-

'This monotony and silence would have been terrifying to a person less accustomed to it than I. As it was, it had its effect. I have known my father a whole day without once speaking to me. Though I loved him very much, I was also much in awe of him.'

This awe, which could also be described as fear, pervades Maud's feelings towards her father and we could suppose that it gets in the way of a real understanding of the defects of his character. Victorian female readers of the book might not look favourably upon him and would probably be very critical of his strange religious beliefs and choice of governess. Well bred Victorian readers would be likely to be members of the Church of England and his religious proclivities alone would have given them grounds for criticism from the outset of the novel. Maud's 'awe' makes her less critical.

Madame's fearful character is in keeping with the Victorian's attitude towards governesses, who were not, in general, well regarded. There is an abundance of instances in contemporary letters, journals, and fiction describing public humiliation and degradation by employers of the women they'd charged with the upbringing of their children. Foreign governesses were especially derided.

'[Victorian] Governesses suffered miserably as a result of repeated humiliations, sexual repression, and intense loneliness. Not equal to her employer, yet not typically considered a servant, the governess was often isolated, not being able to socialize with members of either group; moreover, she often resided in a remote part of the house with only her pupils for company, which further contributed to her seclusion. Any flirtation or attraction between a gentleman and a governess was strictly forbidden, and a governess was obliged to downplay her own sexuality in order to avoid any misperceptions; as a result, the stereotype of the stern, strict, and severe governess was quick to emerge....The fictional governess was portrayed in a variety of ways: as a grotesque figure, an evil influence, a virtuous maiden, and a down-trodden and ill-used employee. Common themes included the pitting of the lady of the house against the governess and the often cruel behaviour inflicted upon the governess by her pupils.'

Madame fits many of these stereotypes and perhaps we should feel more sorry for her. Also, at the age of seventeen it would have been customary for Maud to finish her education at home and to be sent abroad for 'finishing'. That she isn't is yet another example of the dominance (cruelty?) of her father and other males around her and of her complete dependence upon them.

Interesting. But well bred Victorian readers would just as likely be Roman Catholic, Methodist, Quakers and Jewish than just Church of England, and if we are to believe the academics who write introductions and notes to Uncle Silas, Swedenborgian too.

I don't think Maud's awe is necessarily fear. I think her character and relationship with her father typifies the children should be seen and not heard attitude prevalent at the time. I think that she is extremely concerned about breaking his general rule of silence in his adult space.

If she does 'fear' her father, I don't think it anything more than a child's natural respect for a parent or adult.

There is nothing in her account of any cruelty inflicted upon her by her father (other than having Madame as a governess). He doesn't beat her or anything like that.

Also, with regard to your last paragraph, Madame has been employed specifically to get Maud ready in European languages before being sent off to finishing school abroad. So that particular notion of cruel dominance is entirely unjustified and unfounded.

Maud puts me in mind of Edith Domby, but without the torment of being told that she is unwanted and unnecessary by her father. Whatever his faults as a parent, Austin does not seems as cold and callous as Paul Domby.

Agnes Grey by Anne Brontë is about a young woman's life as a governess. The indignities that Agnes endures reveals the harsh life of a governess. According to Charlotte Bronte, this depiction is based on Anne's actual experiences as a governess.

Silver wrote: "He ought to know her well enough at least to know that she is the not sort to cause trouble, or tell lies and there hasn't been any problems with her and the any of the other members of the household."

True. It's all very odd. Part of the many mysteries so far in the book.

MadgeUK wrote: "I wonder if Le Fanu got the idea of the Knollys from the ill fated Boleyn family. Catherine Boleyn daughter of Mary, sister of Ann (beheaded by Henry VIII) married Robert Knollys. The poor woman bo..."

Maybe a bit of foreshadowing with the name? I hope not; I rather like Lady Knollys.

But well bred Victorian readers would just as likely be Roman Catholic, Methodist, Quakers and Jewish than just Church of England,

I was taking well bred in this instance to mean the aristocracy and the English aristocracy were and are overwhelmingly Church of England and loyal to the Queen as head of it. But yes, there was a lot of dissension in the church at this time a la the Oxford Movement. The Swedenborgian sect were part of the dissension of the late Georgian and early Victorian era. Between 1849 and 1855, post Darwin, 100,000 members of the Church of England were lost to various sects, of which Methodists were the largest. In 1909 there were only 70 Swedenborgian societies, 45 ministers, 6665 registered members, and 7907 Sunday scholars. It was never a very big sect, though it had some high profile adherents like William Blake and Samuel Taylor Coleridge. Their sexual theories seem to have been particularly appealing, especially Kabbalistic practices regulating the inhalation and exhalation of breath, aimed at achieving an erection without progress to ejaculation. The reverent Kabbalist could supposedly achieve an orgasmic trance state that elevated him to the world of spirits and angels and Swedenborg became experienced in heavenly sexuality, which he — like the Kabbalists — believed to be 'the essence of the reintegrated God'.

As a trained scientist and student of anatomy, Swedenborg objectively recorded in his Journal of Dreams' the physiological processes of the erotic and visionary trance. Describing his own sensations in brain corticals, lung rhythms, abdominal muscles, and seminal duct, he provided a uniquely "scientific" record of paranormal states.' He was often distracted by lower spirits, grotesque images of perverted sexuality, one of which was an image of a vagina with teeth(!), and he sometimes feared that he would go mad from the psychic strain. During one period, he was found naked in the Fetter Lane Chapel and then delirious and naked in the street. Blake remarked that Swedenborg's "sexual religion is dangerous".

Lots of gothic imagery there for Fanu to draw upon! And lots of male fantasies!

But Fanu doesn't draw upon it. He leaves that sort of stuff to the imagination of his readers. For him it is enough that Austin is a Swedenborgian. All the implied sexual connotations are then there to be picked up upon or ignored according to the knowledge or ignorance of the reader - which is why academic editors dwell on that sort of stuff for the benefit of the modern reader.

I remember thinking the scene where Maud inadvertently comes across Dr Bryerly leaning over her father in chapter 1 a bit mysterious...! I think I raised a euphemistic eyebrow at it... Mr Bryerly's wig leaning "close to my father's grizzled hair". Her father orders her out and Maud feels 'shock and disgust'... I know its just a literal mystery to do with cult 'incantations' but metaphorically it's quite funny.

Yes, I found that incident curiously amusing due to the sex-cult implication of Swedenborgs teachings.

One of the implications of Swedenborg is necrophilia or necromantic desires (not actually having sex with dead bodies (although that implication is not to be dismissed) but the thought of past union with the dearly departed (while trying to resist sexual urges in Austin's case) while succumbing to Onanism.

With regard to Austin, he is presented as mourning the loss of his wife and remaining faithful to her memory by not re-marrying.

With regard to Austin and Bryerly in communion together there is an overt implication of homosexuality.

Perhaps Austin felt obliged to marry. Being the eldest son maybe he was expected to marry, which he did as a duty. Fanu/Maud does not say whether she is the only offspring of the union (tho she doesn't mention an elder or younger brother lying in the Ruthvyn mausoleum.

Having once experienced marriage once and done his duty in producing an heir of sorts (Maud is an heiress, but not a male heir through which the family name would pass), he feels no obligation to re-marry, especially if he realises that he is a closet homosexual.

Silver wrote: "Lynnm wrote: "I'll be interested to see why Maud's father can't see through Madame. He always takes her side. What hold does she have over him?

I was also interested in Maud's description of C..."

I had the same frustration with this point. It also added to my frustration of her father and his perpetual enigmatic dialogue. This frustration is only compounded by Lady Knolly's cryptic assessments of Madame and Silas. I understand this is a gothic novel and a certain element of mystery is part and parcel of this genre, but I feel like parts of it seem a bit contrived at times.

I honestly don't think that Austin is an important or significant character, which is why there is so little description of him and he is presented in such an enigmatic way. I really don't wish to elaborate upon this point at this time until the discussions reach to the point where I can add to the relevancy of my observation.

I can somewhat agree with that. I wouldn't call him insignificant either, as his decisions and actions have set certain plot lines in motion.

Austin is a major influence on Maud's life but doesn't seem to be an integral piece of the continuing story. It may be that the memories for Maude are farther away than some of the other people she's writing about.

What I mean, with regards to the story, Austin is only significant due to the contents of his will. Other than that the story could do - and does - quite well with out him. Also, he serves as a contrast with his brother Silas, their characters being binary oppositions.

I have read up to chapter 14 and I don't remember Austin dying!

I said nothing about him dying. Only the contents of his will, which Madame was very curious about.

I was mistaken when I stated that Austin’s style of dress and physical features were not described by Maud (or Le Fanu). From chapter one, Austin Ruthyn is described as follows: “It was a peculiar figure, strongly made, thick-set, with a face large, and very stern; he wore a loose, black velvet coat and waistcoat.” While reading, I kept thinking that these descriptions of dress and physical characteristics had a significance more than giving us a mental picture of the characters. Anyway, I found an interesting article titled “Swedenborg and the Disintegration of Language in Sheridan Le Fanu’s Sensation Fiction” written by Devin P. Zuber. The article mentions that the three major male figures in the novel dress like Emanuel Swedenborg. “Swedenborg when invited out usually wore some sort of black velvet jacket, which became one of the only graphic details of Swedenborg’s attire that 19th century biographers had at their disposal”. So in addition to Austin wearing a black velvet coat, Dr. Bryerly was also described as ”sheathed in a shining black cloth”, and the third male figure dressed in “…black, with an ample black velvet tunic, which was rather a gown than a coat” (chapter 32, I realize I am jumping ahead, but I am not giving any spoilers here) is Uncle Silas. It is kind of a trivial point, but I thought it interesting that Le Fanu would sprinkle Swedenborgianism on the dress of his characters.

Interesting find Seeuuder - thanks! Traditionally, black cloth was worn only by wealthy people because it was an expensive dye. Velvet has been associated with the nobility as it was an expensive cloth to produce.

Malcolm wrote: "I said nothing about him dying. Only the contents of his will, which Madame was very curious about."

Thanks for redacting.

Seeuuder wrote: "I was mistaken when I stated that Austin’s style of dress and physical features were not described by Maud (or Le Fanu). From chapter one, Austin Ruthyn is described as follows: “It was a peculiar ..."

Very interesting that Le Fanu dressed them that way.

I'm loving this book, but then I've loved Victorian gothic for a long time. It's been an extremely long time since I've read any of it, so I am especially enjoying this book (Sorry Madge). It's been a book that I truly don't want to set down without finishing.

BunWat wrote: "I'm enjoying myself as well. I like Lady Knollys, she seems to me to bring a bit of fresh air and liveliness into a household that is in desperate need of some lightness."

She does as well as some strong common sense instead of quirkiness.

I'm very pleased you are enjoying it Deborah:). I usually enjoy the gothic but perhaps I am not in the mood for it at present - maybe I need a dark, windy winter night!