So.
We've read a book with 67 chapters and worth hundreds and hundreds of pages filled with paragraphs that last a page and dedicated to everything from crafty detectives, sad orphans, and mud, mud, shitloads of mud everywhere. That's a long, long road we've traveled, so where does it leave us?
Dickens spent a lot of time giving us things to think about, though without actually making us read essays upon essays of drab, wordy complaints about society. Through an immense amount of characters who represent entire ideas and philosophies, and a carefully, if not overwhelmingly, intricate plot that connect them all together, Dickens has given us something complex. Every connection, every action, every little detail, and especially the time he chooses to make certain things happen to particular people, is done for a reason and speaks about something.
So how has this book changed your perspective? Beyond plot and entertainment, Dickens ultimately had a vision that was meant to inspire some sort of change to your mindset (and mine) on society. What is it?
In partnerships:
We've examined the problems of love vs marriage and relationships for convenience through Lady Dedlock and Nemo/Captain Hawdon, Ada and Richard, and obviously between Esther and John and Alan (we've been on this book so long I feel I have a right to be on a first name basis with the characters).
How does correlate to your own life or your feelings on living for passion and real love vs supposed-realism and being a golddigger (anyone looking for sugar daddies or mamas?) Is the ending with Esther and Alan real? How would it be different if Jarndyce hadn't given them such a merry beginning?
We've seen how things like religion (or particularly religious fundamentalism) have ruined perfectly fine relationships through Ms. Barbary: she ruins the bond she had with her sister, Honoria/LD, she drove LD and Hawdon to split after making a big thing out of Esther's birth and claiming Esther died, and she ruined her own relationship with Boythorn. How else does it affect characters or our own society?
In solving problems:
What about society makes it a failed device? What makes it work? Clearly Dickens has his own ideas about it. In Law we have Bucket as the answer to law enforcement. In Tulkinhorn and Guppy to an extent, we saw law used for personal and selfish goals, and to a larger extent, Jarndyce v. Jarndyce was a device to be used to keep Chancery in such a painful limbo. Do we do the same in modern day? Do we distract or drag out pointless things to take advantage?
In altruism:
How do we help people like Jo with our resources today? Can any of us ever imagine taking in someone to help them without expecting anything in return? Do we push people along? Do we see our Pardiggles and Jellbys in modern culture? Is there any hope for the Jennys and Lizs of our day? Can we, like in chapter 8, ever truly understand people who go through that kind of existence, and, like Esther and Ada, make any kind of difference?
Anything else?
I'm writing alot and this may start to look like an essay or essay questions so I apologize. But if we haven't gotten anything out of this book, except for hopefully a good grade, then in the long run we didn't get much out of this class. This was sure as hell as a long book that wasn't very fun like other huge books (like Harry Potter for Mona) but please share anything you've picked up from the text, our conversations, or even some other form of revelation that dawned on you at the time of this semester through this story.
And, as the final blogger, I can only say that after traveling this long road, it sure as hell feels good to reach the end, rest my figurative feet for the moment, and see what new paths this road has opened up for me.
You've all been fun. Especially Team Handsome. (We're awesome, but so are you). And Prof Reitz. You rock too.
Cheers.
Masoud
Wednesday, December 2, 2009
Friday, November 27, 2009
Lady Dedlock: The End
So in an era of writing, where by and large, the good guys are sent through hell but get a happy ending (Esther), and the bad guys are usually just sent to hell (Tulkinghorn), My Lady Dedlock dies painfully and alone in a cemetery (convenient, I suppose). Her mean-spiritedness aside, she was not a villain in the story, yet it seems she was given one of the saddest endings in the book.
Among the graves of the departed, this cemetery is for the dishonored, the unidentified and the poor, and it is here where Esther eventually comes upon the body of her mother. She had gone to this cemetery in the hopes of finding the grave of Nemo/Hawdon, arguably the only man she truly loved.
While it was appropriate for Nemo to be buried in such a place, having Lady Dedlock die in this cemetery has more layers to it than we think. Granted, it has a certain melodramatic flare to it, dying alongside her former lover, something that is spookily romantic, and not surprising in Victorian era writing. But dying in this cemetery for the dishonored and the poor, she dies not as Lady Dedlock but as Honoria, her true self; her secrets laid bare—the affair with Nemo, the child out of wedlock. She isn't the haughty, phlorizin and self-centered woman whose regal demeanor and money kept her in the richest of circles. She is the fallen woman, dying among the wretched and the poor.
Lady Dedlock died alone believing her world to be over. She believed she was hunted for a murder she did not commit, believed Sir Leicester hated her for her secrets, for what they would do to the Dedlock name. She died horribly, and the ending wasn't happy. However, the reader is cued in on some other truths. Sir Leicester's love for her was so great he felt sorry for her. He didn't care about the Dedlock family legacy, and had forgiven her totally for her past—he loved her more than he could have expressed to her. My Lady died in pursuit of her first love, and when she was found, the first hands upon her was Esther, her daughter. So in that way, her death was perhaps more bittersweet. When she died, people mourned her, unlike Tulkinghorn whose death was probably met with a ticker-tape parade. Lady Dedlock died surrounded by the love of other people.
In that way, Dickens gave her--a flawed woman--a bittersweet end. It was sad, but she was allowed to die the woman she actually was, not the woman she pretended to be. In that way, it was a happy ending.
Among the graves of the departed, this cemetery is for the dishonored, the unidentified and the poor, and it is here where Esther eventually comes upon the body of her mother. She had gone to this cemetery in the hopes of finding the grave of Nemo/Hawdon, arguably the only man she truly loved.
While it was appropriate for Nemo to be buried in such a place, having Lady Dedlock die in this cemetery has more layers to it than we think. Granted, it has a certain melodramatic flare to it, dying alongside her former lover, something that is spookily romantic, and not surprising in Victorian era writing. But dying in this cemetery for the dishonored and the poor, she dies not as Lady Dedlock but as Honoria, her true self; her secrets laid bare—the affair with Nemo, the child out of wedlock. She isn't the haughty, phlorizin and self-centered woman whose regal demeanor and money kept her in the richest of circles. She is the fallen woman, dying among the wretched and the poor.
Lady Dedlock died alone believing her world to be over. She believed she was hunted for a murder she did not commit, believed Sir Leicester hated her for her secrets, for what they would do to the Dedlock name. She died horribly, and the ending wasn't happy. However, the reader is cued in on some other truths. Sir Leicester's love for her was so great he felt sorry for her. He didn't care about the Dedlock family legacy, and had forgiven her totally for her past—he loved her more than he could have expressed to her. My Lady died in pursuit of her first love, and when she was found, the first hands upon her was Esther, her daughter. So in that way, her death was perhaps more bittersweet. When she died, people mourned her, unlike Tulkinghorn whose death was probably met with a ticker-tape parade. Lady Dedlock died surrounded by the love of other people.
In that way, Dickens gave her--a flawed woman--a bittersweet end. It was sad, but she was allowed to die the woman she actually was, not the woman she pretended to be. In that way, it was a happy ending.
Friday, November 20, 2009
The Two Identities of a Fallen Woman
In The Home for Homeless Women, the residents are trained to adapt to the way of life of the proper Victorian woman, abandoning the unacceptable behavior they practiced while living on the streets, in order to live new lives without malice from society. To avoid constantly shifting from prostitution to prison, these women are taught to do household tasks which will ultimately prepare them for their new lives abroad: "The distinctive feature of the home established by Miss Coutts and Dickens, Urania Cottage in Shepard's Bush, was that it prepared the girls for emigration, and a new life. This solution to the twin problems of social stigma and the pulling power of known ways and old companions appealed strongly to Dickens" (Homes for Homeless Women, 124). Although these girls would learn proper etiquette and how to tend to a family, their education at the home would be useless in their own country because English society would never accept these fallen women regardless of how far they have come. In order to obtain fulfilling lives without the fear of social stigma, these women must immigrate to a foreign land, erasing their pasts. They must project images of proper, well-behaved women while disguising the identities that have shaped them into the women they are.
Similarly, Lady Dedlock, a woman with an illegitimate child from a man who is not her husband, chooses to continue sheilding her sin from the world even after she confesses to her daughter, Esther, that they are in fact mother and daughter: "I must travel my dark road alone, and it will lead me where it will. From day to day, sometimes from hour to hour, I do not see the way before my guilty feet. This is the earthly punishment I have brought upon myself. I bear it, and I hide it" (450). Instead of accepting that she, like every other human being, makes mistakes and taking responsibility for her actions, Lady Dedlock must conceal her misdeed and continue to punish herself with guilt. Likewise, the women in the home for homeless women do not demonstrate to society, after having changed their ways, that they have learned from their immoral actions. Rather, they immigrate to a foreign land and pretend to be someone else. Fallen women are forced to deny the fact they have ever fallen and consequently, they are inclined to live double lives--inwardly, as the women that have brought them where they are and outwardly, as the women society expects them to be. Through his establishment of the home for homeless women and Lady Dedlock, a fictionalized example of a fallen woman, Dickens does not encourage society to accept women who are or have been in such situations. Instead, fallen women are expected to adapt to the guidelines that have been set for females all along.
Similarly, Lady Dedlock, a woman with an illegitimate child from a man who is not her husband, chooses to continue sheilding her sin from the world even after she confesses to her daughter, Esther, that they are in fact mother and daughter: "I must travel my dark road alone, and it will lead me where it will. From day to day, sometimes from hour to hour, I do not see the way before my guilty feet. This is the earthly punishment I have brought upon myself. I bear it, and I hide it" (450). Instead of accepting that she, like every other human being, makes mistakes and taking responsibility for her actions, Lady Dedlock must conceal her misdeed and continue to punish herself with guilt. Likewise, the women in the home for homeless women do not demonstrate to society, after having changed their ways, that they have learned from their immoral actions. Rather, they immigrate to a foreign land and pretend to be someone else. Fallen women are forced to deny the fact they have ever fallen and consequently, they are inclined to live double lives--inwardly, as the women that have brought them where they are and outwardly, as the women society expects them to be. Through his establishment of the home for homeless women and Lady Dedlock, a fictionalized example of a fallen woman, Dickens does not encourage society to accept women who are or have been in such situations. Instead, fallen women are expected to adapt to the guidelines that have been set for females all along.
Wednesday, November 11, 2009
"Wretched and dishonouring creature that I am!" The Happiness Lacking in Dickens's Happy Ending for Women
It was surprising when Michie claimed that Dickens's female characters are traditionally not complicated, for it seems that there are several complicated female characters in Bleak House. Although she goes on to say that Esther is quite complicated, it seems like Lady Dedlock, coincidentally being Esther's mother, is also a complicated female character. When she admits to Esther that she is her mother, and that she must remain on "the dark road [she has] trodden for so many years," she also makes another admission that allows us to see more deeply into the soul of Lady Dedlock, the woman whom to society seems like the perfect trophy wife that always seems to be bored and haughty. She says in answering Esther's question about whether she surely wishes to remain alone, "I am resolved. I have long outbidden folly with folly, pride with pride, scorn with scorn, insolence with insolence, and have outlived many vanities with many more. I will outlive this danger, and outdie it, if I can. It has closed around me, almost as awfully as if these woods of Chesney Wold had closed around the house; but my course through it is the same. I have but one: I can have but one" (451).
It is strange that she uses the word "outbidden" in this context. How exactly has she "outbidden folly with folly" or "insolence with insolence?" There is definately a reference to her past, and how she has dealt with reactions from society, and more importantly from her sister. When she says "outbidden," is she talking about exceeding her folly with more folly? Or does she mean that she has exceeded other people's folly in her actions? Or, is she perhaps claiming that she rises above or surpasses people's expectations and counters their perceptions of her by doing things like marrying into a wealthy family? If she is making the claim that she has made mistakes in her past, and then made even worse mistakes and continues to constantly outdo herself, then is this not an indication of her making a bigger mistake now? If her folly was having a child out of wedlock, then does she outbid that folly by abandoning that child and refusing to publicly acknowledge her? That certainly seems to be the case, since Esther is one of the narrators of Bleak House, and is liked by Dickens, and meant to be liked by the readers of Bleak House, for she will eventually become a force of social change. Although Lady Dedlock's refusal to publicly acknowledge Esther may have some benefits for Esther, like not having the public brand her as a bastard child, we still get the sense that Lady Dedlock is wrong for not wanting any relationship with her daughter.
Lady Dedlock then goes on to say "I have but one: I can have but one." Here, she seems to be alluding to having only one choice. That one choice is that she must not have a relationship with Esther, and she must continue to be secretive about her past. Lady Dedlock is a complicated female figure. She struggles with having to reconcile, or refuse to reconcile, her past with her present. She claims that she is a "wretched and dishonouring creature," but has to portray herself to the public as a proud and indifferent being. She must keep the secret of her being the mother of Esther, but must live with the guilt and the pain that her child lives, but she cannot ever care for her. She must be quite strong to be able to do all of these things simultaneously, and she has been successful at doing most of these things prior to finding out that Esther is her daughter. But in all of her complications, Lady Dedlock says she has but one choice. This admission reminds me of an "Appeal to Fallen Women" and "Homes for Homeless Women." In these works by Dickens, he seems to allude to the idea that women who are "fallen" only have one choice: to get married and forget about their pasts. Dicken's seems to make it seem like this transition will be easy for the women, and will help them to achieve the happiness they were born to have. Lady Dedlock, however, seems far from attaining any happiness in her current state. Although she has achieved all that Dickens would hope that fallen women would achieve in his letter and article, she is still miserable. But why would such a complicated character merely conform to society's standards of what makes a woman happy and what a woman ought to do with her life, espcially if she is not happy? Lady Dedlock's case goes against Dickens's idealistic views on what marriage does for women, and how people should live. Perhaps women are not born to be happy, and it seems like marriage is not a means of achieving happiness, at least for the fallen woman in Dickens's novel.
Lady Dedlock's extremism in trying to cover up her shame makes her a very complicated character. Her extremism causes her to walk along the path of shame and secrecy alone, causes her misery, and also causes her to go to great lengths to conform to societal expectations on how women should live. But in her extremism, and in her being adamant on keeping her secret and continuing to maintain the Dedlock name and honor, she reveals not only the pressures of nineteenth cetury society on women, but also the need for social change. One of Dickens's overarching themes in this novel is the need for social reform. Women like Lady Dedlock should not have to be separated from their children, and should not have to live a certain way because society says they should. If Dickens truly believes that women, even fallen women, were born to be happy, and shows us that Lady Dedlock is not happy in her situation, then there must be a need to reform society's constraints on women, their freedom, and their happiness. This change might even need to extent to the products of the mistakes of fallen women, namely, people like Esther. Esther makes the claim that she "should not be punished for birth" (455), and being separated from her mother, or knowing that having any relation with her mother if she should ever want one, is impossible, obviously upsets her. So, Dickens's call for social reform would be for the benefit of these women, and the benefit of their children who are innocent of the sins of their fathers, or mothers, as Esther is.
It is strange that she uses the word "outbidden" in this context. How exactly has she "outbidden folly with folly" or "insolence with insolence?" There is definately a reference to her past, and how she has dealt with reactions from society, and more importantly from her sister. When she says "outbidden," is she talking about exceeding her folly with more folly? Or does she mean that she has exceeded other people's folly in her actions? Or, is she perhaps claiming that she rises above or surpasses people's expectations and counters their perceptions of her by doing things like marrying into a wealthy family? If she is making the claim that she has made mistakes in her past, and then made even worse mistakes and continues to constantly outdo herself, then is this not an indication of her making a bigger mistake now? If her folly was having a child out of wedlock, then does she outbid that folly by abandoning that child and refusing to publicly acknowledge her? That certainly seems to be the case, since Esther is one of the narrators of Bleak House, and is liked by Dickens, and meant to be liked by the readers of Bleak House, for she will eventually become a force of social change. Although Lady Dedlock's refusal to publicly acknowledge Esther may have some benefits for Esther, like not having the public brand her as a bastard child, we still get the sense that Lady Dedlock is wrong for not wanting any relationship with her daughter.
Lady Dedlock then goes on to say "I have but one: I can have but one." Here, she seems to be alluding to having only one choice. That one choice is that she must not have a relationship with Esther, and she must continue to be secretive about her past. Lady Dedlock is a complicated female figure. She struggles with having to reconcile, or refuse to reconcile, her past with her present. She claims that she is a "wretched and dishonouring creature," but has to portray herself to the public as a proud and indifferent being. She must keep the secret of her being the mother of Esther, but must live with the guilt and the pain that her child lives, but she cannot ever care for her. She must be quite strong to be able to do all of these things simultaneously, and she has been successful at doing most of these things prior to finding out that Esther is her daughter. But in all of her complications, Lady Dedlock says she has but one choice. This admission reminds me of an "Appeal to Fallen Women" and "Homes for Homeless Women." In these works by Dickens, he seems to allude to the idea that women who are "fallen" only have one choice: to get married and forget about their pasts. Dicken's seems to make it seem like this transition will be easy for the women, and will help them to achieve the happiness they were born to have. Lady Dedlock, however, seems far from attaining any happiness in her current state. Although she has achieved all that Dickens would hope that fallen women would achieve in his letter and article, she is still miserable. But why would such a complicated character merely conform to society's standards of what makes a woman happy and what a woman ought to do with her life, espcially if she is not happy? Lady Dedlock's case goes against Dickens's idealistic views on what marriage does for women, and how people should live. Perhaps women are not born to be happy, and it seems like marriage is not a means of achieving happiness, at least for the fallen woman in Dickens's novel.
Lady Dedlock's extremism in trying to cover up her shame makes her a very complicated character. Her extremism causes her to walk along the path of shame and secrecy alone, causes her misery, and also causes her to go to great lengths to conform to societal expectations on how women should live. But in her extremism, and in her being adamant on keeping her secret and continuing to maintain the Dedlock name and honor, she reveals not only the pressures of nineteenth cetury society on women, but also the need for social change. One of Dickens's overarching themes in this novel is the need for social reform. Women like Lady Dedlock should not have to be separated from their children, and should not have to live a certain way because society says they should. If Dickens truly believes that women, even fallen women, were born to be happy, and shows us that Lady Dedlock is not happy in her situation, then there must be a need to reform society's constraints on women, their freedom, and their happiness. This change might even need to extent to the products of the mistakes of fallen women, namely, people like Esther. Esther makes the claim that she "should not be punished for birth" (455), and being separated from her mother, or knowing that having any relation with her mother if she should ever want one, is impossible, obviously upsets her. So, Dickens's call for social reform would be for the benefit of these women, and the benefit of their children who are innocent of the sins of their fathers, or mothers, as Esther is.
Esther and Lady Deadlock must be Mother and Daughter ... They're Both Lame
So in the last installment we finally get to see Lady Deadlock admit that she is in fact Esther's mother, and to be honest it was not very interesting. We read all throughout the book about Esther's curiosity towards her parents and when she finds out she has a very dull reaction. at the start of the novel she is very meek but as the book progresses she has been a bit more opinionated and vocal about her feelings and i wanted her to get upset with Lady Deadlock. It might not really be in her nature to do so but it would have been interesting to have them fight a bit. instead Esther tells Deadlock that she still has love for her even after she is told that she and her mother can't have a relationship. Esther's reaction to the news is as though she knew it all along.
Lady Deadlock annoyed me too. I can understand her being upset at the fact that she had a child that she didn't know was alive but if you're not going to try to have a relationship with her, what difference does it really make? when reading the chapter i felt as though Lady deadlock was overacting to compensate for the lack of presence in Esther's life. as though Esther would feel better about still not having a mother if she cried her eyes out. i was actually waiting for Lady Deadlock to spontaniously combust (which I am determined to prove), she suddenly had this burst of emotion and i wasn't sure what to expect. I mean if she keeps this secret bottle up any longer she might just do so.
But seriously i think that Lady Deadlock chose that time to tell Esther because she had been through so much with her sickness and her temporary blindness that it would have just been rude not to sprinkle some good news in there somewhere. she was probably feeling bad for Esther and thought that telling her she was her mother and then that she didn't want anything to do with her was going to make Esther feel better.
While Esther has a new outlook on life now after surviving her sickness i think everyone feels bad for her. She is scarred all over her face and it doesn't seem like people can handle it. she has spent so much time focusing on her that the scars on her face serve as a reminder that she needs to focus on herself. i mean after those kids were commenting on how awful she looks now, who wouldn't feel bad for her? Even Guppy gave up on her, their engagement was not all that real but it's called off after she gets sick and looks like a mess, it sounds weird to me...
Wednesday, November 4, 2009
The Evolution of Esther, Krook's Death and More
We are now officially over the half-way mark on Bleak House and Esther has grown quite a bit. Esther has matured and begun to find herself, when sickness struck her. For a while we were left unsure of whether Esther would regain her sight, and when she did we were then left with the fact that Esther had been scarred. Her comment on Charley changed and disfigured looks is a window into Esther's own feelings when she is later afflicted.
The theme of watching and looking-glasses/mirrors was prevalent with not only Esther's brief blindness, but Charley's removal of the mirrors from the rooms so that Esther could not see herself, as well as Mrs. Woodcourt's visit at the beginning of the installment where she makes the fortune of "...it is that you will marry some one, very rich and very worthy, much older -- five-and-twenty years perhaps -- than yourself. And you will be an excellent wife, and much beloved..." (p.367) This fortune mirrors that of Lady Dedlock's marry to Sir Leicester, but also hints at a possible relationship between Esther and John Jarndyce. Which could explain Jarndyce's reaction to being called "Father." More speculation can be made about the interactions of Esther and John Jarndyce as opposed to Esther and Richard or Esther and Guppy.
Esther has sometimes been noted as being unreliable and contradictory. With the final passage we read in class of the installment as well as the great pains Esther takes to keep Ada from becoming sick along with not seeing Esther, we can deduce that Esther does care about looks. As we had said previously, Esther is protecting her own looks by protecting Ada's. Esther's relief that Alan Woodcourt had not professed his love as it would break both their hearts now if Esther had to write to Alan about disfigurement, now brings into question Guppy's response to how Esther now looks. Would Guppy still pursue Esther? Guppy seems to be in love with Esther, but how far will that love go now?
There is also the suspicious events of not only Krook going up in flames along with the blackmail material that Guppy was about to show Lady Dedlock, but Esther contracting smallpox from Charley who had gotten it from Jo. Now, there is very little tying Esther and Lady Dedlock together. Whatever Guppy had to say on the matter is now just hearsay. Jo has been an unreliable witness before and quite possibly dead. The only connection left may lay with Mr. George or even Mr. Bagnet who knew of Captain Hawdon before Nemo, and may hold writing samples that everyone is after. And with the Smallweeds now being connected with Krook through Mrs. Smallweeds, their hold over people is spreading and bringing further corruption.
How ironic is it that Krook/Lord Chancellor has become the Wind that sometimes upsets Jarndyce to enter the Growlery?
Also, to watch out for is the handkerchief that Esther had laid on Jenny's dead child several installments back. It makes a brief mention by Miss Flite who relays the story from Jenny that a "lady with a veil" took the "handkerchief away with her as a little keepsake, merely because" it belonged the Esther. (p.438) Is Esther right that the lady was Caddy? Or can we guess that it's Lady Dedlock who took the handkerchief?
And there is Mrs. Rouncewell crossing paths with Mr. George and Mr. Bagnet outside of Tulkinghorn's office, and of course Mr. George had been so occupied over something else that he hadn't turned around until Mrs. Rouncewell had left despite the fact that Mr. Bagnet and Mrs. Rouncewell had conversed on the fact that she had a son that was a soldier. Did Mr. George know and recognize her, and thus had been hiding? Or was it truly a coincidence that he had been distracted?
The theme of watching and looking-glasses/mirrors was prevalent with not only Esther's brief blindness, but Charley's removal of the mirrors from the rooms so that Esther could not see herself, as well as Mrs. Woodcourt's visit at the beginning of the installment where she makes the fortune of "...it is that you will marry some one, very rich and very worthy, much older -- five-and-twenty years perhaps -- than yourself. And you will be an excellent wife, and much beloved..." (p.367) This fortune mirrors that of Lady Dedlock's marry to Sir Leicester, but also hints at a possible relationship between Esther and John Jarndyce. Which could explain Jarndyce's reaction to being called "Father." More speculation can be made about the interactions of Esther and John Jarndyce as opposed to Esther and Richard or Esther and Guppy.
Esther has sometimes been noted as being unreliable and contradictory. With the final passage we read in class of the installment as well as the great pains Esther takes to keep Ada from becoming sick along with not seeing Esther, we can deduce that Esther does care about looks. As we had said previously, Esther is protecting her own looks by protecting Ada's. Esther's relief that Alan Woodcourt had not professed his love as it would break both their hearts now if Esther had to write to Alan about disfigurement, now brings into question Guppy's response to how Esther now looks. Would Guppy still pursue Esther? Guppy seems to be in love with Esther, but how far will that love go now?
There is also the suspicious events of not only Krook going up in flames along with the blackmail material that Guppy was about to show Lady Dedlock, but Esther contracting smallpox from Charley who had gotten it from Jo. Now, there is very little tying Esther and Lady Dedlock together. Whatever Guppy had to say on the matter is now just hearsay. Jo has been an unreliable witness before and quite possibly dead. The only connection left may lay with Mr. George or even Mr. Bagnet who knew of Captain Hawdon before Nemo, and may hold writing samples that everyone is after. And with the Smallweeds now being connected with Krook through Mrs. Smallweeds, their hold over people is spreading and bringing further corruption.
How ironic is it that Krook/Lord Chancellor has become the Wind that sometimes upsets Jarndyce to enter the Growlery?
Also, to watch out for is the handkerchief that Esther had laid on Jenny's dead child several installments back. It makes a brief mention by Miss Flite who relays the story from Jenny that a "lady with a veil" took the "handkerchief away with her as a little keepsake, merely because" it belonged the Esther. (p.438) Is Esther right that the lady was Caddy? Or can we guess that it's Lady Dedlock who took the handkerchief?
And there is Mrs. Rouncewell crossing paths with Mr. George and Mr. Bagnet outside of Tulkinghorn's office, and of course Mr. George had been so occupied over something else that he hadn't turned around until Mrs. Rouncewell had left despite the fact that Mr. Bagnet and Mrs. Rouncewell had conversed on the fact that she had a son that was a soldier. Did Mr. George know and recognize her, and thus had been hiding? Or was it truly a coincidence that he had been distracted?
Combustion?
I want to start off by saying that Caddy's wedding could have been summed up in no more than 3 sentences. After 400 pages I understand that Mrs. Jellyby is a really huge mess due to her philanthropist work. Esther spend too much time narrating her wedding. It was the same scene as the one when we first meet them, just under different circumstances. Congrats Caddy!
Mrs. Woodcourt is an evil manipulator. I felt so bad for Esther when she said her son's kindness towards women were just him being nice, and ALL of them took it as something else. Poor Esther, this lady just went over there to ruin Esther's kind heart. I really like Mr. Woodcourt, I hope this lady dissapears some where and Esther and him can reunit and start a passionate romance. But now Esther is DISFIGURED!
Before I comment on this desease, WHERE IS JO??? This better not be his ending, but with Charley and Esther almost dying I dont know what could have happened to him in such a bad state.
I wonder how bad Esther looks now, because im pretty sure she was as good looking as her mother, since everyone seems to think they look so much alike. She should have had more confidence in herself, and stop looking so much at Ada. Im also pretty sure Esther was better looking than her. Im glad both Charley and Esther are better, I knew Esther couldn't die in the middle of the book, but I was a little nervous for Charley. I think she is some one to admire.
Now on to Krook... how bad does some one need to be inside to explode in such a way? I wonder what Krook found in those letters that led to his explosion. Maybe everyone was underestemating him, and he did teach himself how to read. I would love to read those letters because it sounds like the information is JUICY!
The Smallweeds, Mr. Turkinhorn, and Lady Deadlock are all conspiring something together. This novel is getting really interesting. I hope more people explode...Mrs.Woodcourt, Lady Deadlock, her lawyer, and Mr. Skimpole.
Mrs. Woodcourt is an evil manipulator. I felt so bad for Esther when she said her son's kindness towards women were just him being nice, and ALL of them took it as something else. Poor Esther, this lady just went over there to ruin Esther's kind heart. I really like Mr. Woodcourt, I hope this lady dissapears some where and Esther and him can reunit and start a passionate romance. But now Esther is DISFIGURED!
Before I comment on this desease, WHERE IS JO??? This better not be his ending, but with Charley and Esther almost dying I dont know what could have happened to him in such a bad state.
I wonder how bad Esther looks now, because im pretty sure she was as good looking as her mother, since everyone seems to think they look so much alike. She should have had more confidence in herself, and stop looking so much at Ada. Im also pretty sure Esther was better looking than her. Im glad both Charley and Esther are better, I knew Esther couldn't die in the middle of the book, but I was a little nervous for Charley. I think she is some one to admire.
Now on to Krook... how bad does some one need to be inside to explode in such a way? I wonder what Krook found in those letters that led to his explosion. Maybe everyone was underestemating him, and he did teach himself how to read. I would love to read those letters because it sounds like the information is JUICY!
The Smallweeds, Mr. Turkinhorn, and Lady Deadlock are all conspiring something together. This novel is getting really interesting. I hope more people explode...Mrs.Woodcourt, Lady Deadlock, her lawyer, and Mr. Skimpole.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)