Victorians! discussion

"Crawley of Queen's Crawley" through "Quite a Sentimental Chapter"

Spoilers for this section may be found here.

Among so much other interesting character exposition in this section, Thackeray does seem to get down to the differences between Rebecca and Amelia and the life that Amelia deals with.

We see that when it comes to the competition regarding finding a man, Amelia is seen as a strong contender and does not find friends among the girls in her neighborhood. She was also quite lonely because, rather than hunting for a fortune or position, and enjoying the extra attention of the men, she was actually just in love with George Osborne.

The author calls women out in this marriage game...he writes that some were interested in accepting any husband if the deal was good enough. So we start to see just how much competition Becky Sharp faces?

With regard to Chapter IX, the following excerpt about Mr. Crawley the son: " ..... He patronised an Independent meeting-house in Crawley parish, much to the indignation of his uncle the Rector, and to the consequent delight of Sir Pitt, who was induced to go himself once or twice, which occasioned some violent sermons at Crawley parish church, directed point blank at the Baronet's old Gothic pew there...... ----- what was an Independent meeting-house and why is the Rector so incensed? Help, please!

Cleo wrote: "With regard to Chapter IX, the following excerpt about Mr. Crawley the son: " ..... He patronised an Independent meeting-house in Crawley parish, much to the indignation of his uncle the Rector, a..."

Independent meeting-house is usually Methodist, certainly not the mainstream parish church which is Church of England, of which the uncle is Rector of. In all circumstances in that period the Parish Church refers to Church of England, others, including RC are frowned upon - not acceptable.

In an earlier period these breakaway and RC religions (Quaker, Methodist etc) would have been meeting in secret, often underground in caves, as it was considered against the law and King to follow other than Church of England.

Rawdon Crawley is one my favorite characters (behind the fabulous Becky Sharp).

Ella's Gran wrote: "Independent meeting-house is usually Methodist, certainly not the mainstream parish church which is Church of England ..."

Ah, thanks, Ella's Gran! It's all clear now!

@Susanna - I always had a soft spot for Rawdon Crawley too, but on this re-read I'm finding him little more than bland and stupid :-( I had remembered him as a likeable cad, but maybe I've been influenced by screen representations of him.

If one reads Chap. 5-7 as a unit (as serialized), one is left wondering (for a month, originally) what in the world Miss Sharp is headed into.

You're right, Lily - what a way to leave your readers for a month! Interesting that chapters 5-7 were an episode together, as to me they seem quite disjointed. Chapter five especially for me feels quite different to the surrounding chapters, but maybe because we're meeting a new character for the first time. Dobbin is given practically as much air-time background-wise as Becky was in chapters 1-2.

How far has everyone got through this section so far?

I have completed this section. Yes, I think we are still in the mode in this part of the novel where Thackeray is introducing things and characters that he wants us to think about.

Has anyone noticed that the narrator stutters?

@ Beve, how so?

Hederahelix wrote: "You're right, Lily - what a way to leave your readers for a month! Interesting that chapters 5-7 were an episode together, as to me they seem quite disjointed. Chapter five especially for me feels ..."

I'm working on Chapter 11. I had to switch to listening to it and my commute isn't that long.

I adore Thackeray's mode of telling a story, but there are so many of the remarks and attitudes about women among women that many of us spent the '60's and 70's refuting, changing, updating -- all the things that went with consciousness raising -- especially the ones related to petty jealousies and back biting. Sometimes I wonder if much of such imputations weren't simply another mode of (masculine) control.

The extent of (physical) abuse and taking it for granted is frightening, too. Reinforces that this may be a modern day problem, but it didn't originate in our lifetimes.

SarahC wrote: "I have completed this section. Yes, I think we are still in the mode in this part of the novel where Thackeray is introducing things and characters that he wants us to think about."

He's hooking us in with colorful characters and testing the waters before fully committing on his plot?

"Besides these honest folks at the Hall (whose simplicity and sweet rural purity surely show the advantage of a country life over a town one), we must introduce the reader to their relatives and neighbours at the Rectory..."

Thackeray, William Makepeace (2012-05-17). Vanity Fair. (Chapter XI, p. 75). Kindle Edition.

Does Thackeray ever take the tongue out of his cheek? [g]

Rachel wrote: "@ Beve, how so?"

The excerpt is not within the Chpts 7-12; however, it occurs many times before this and after.

Rachel: This is just one example but I have come across it many times.

Mr. Osborne and the Family Bible.

"The colonel of th--th regiment, in which Messieurs Dobbin & Osbourne...

The use of "th--th" to me indicates stuttering. What do you think?

I'm up to chapter 19, but I'll be extra careful to limit my comments to this section only.

@Lily - I feel that you answered your own comment before you even wrote it! Thackeray is constantly tongue-in-cheek for me, so the comments on how women behave in society is relatively easy for a modern reader to take as social criticism. I think it strengthens the fact that Becky is a very unusual young woman, for better or for worse. Unfortunately, her standing up for herself, manipulation and making her own way is always going to be criticized too - but this is Vanity Fair after all, and so far I don't think anybody has got off scot free.

I have far more problems with a feminist reading of other Victorian novels - Jane Eyre being a very strong case in point.

Oh Beve! I thought exactly the same the first time I read that th _ the, but realized its actually _th as in 4th, 5th, 6th etc. :-)

Hederahelix wrote: "I have far more problems with a feminist reading of other Victorian novels - Jane Eyre being a very strong case in point...."

Meaning?

Hederahelix wrote: "Oh Beve! I thought exactly the same the first time I read that th _ the, but realized its actually _th as in 4th, 5th, 6th etc. :-)"

It's a commonplace usage in a lot of 19th and early 20th century stuff I've read. (An adolescent girls' series I grew up with of that era, set at a woman's college, very carefully uses "Class of 19__" to avoid giving a year.)

I'm only making my way through chapter 9 so I must catch up.

Was anyone else surprised by the Baron at first? I also felt like in these chapters Becky refined her skills a little since her stay with Seedlys.

Beve wrote: ""The colonel of th--th regiment, in which Messieurs Dobbin & Osbourne...

The use of "th--th" to me indicates stuttering. What do you think?
"

My assumption is that it's not stuttering, but that he doesn't want to name a specific regiment (doesn't want to pretend they're part of any particular actual regiment, and doesn't want to create a fictional one), so leaves it unstated. Authors of the era used the same trick for some places and for dates: for example, in Chapter 5 he dates the letter from Osborne March, 18—

Lily wrote: "I adore Thackeray's mode of telling a story, but there are so many of the remarks and attitudes about women among women that many of us spent the '60's and 70's refuting, changing, updating -- all ..."

That's a very common issue with reading older literature -- do we read it with the mindset of the original author and times, or do we read it with a modern mindset? Or, perhaps better, with both, not condemning an author for reflecting what are accepted values of his or her day, but at the same time being aware, as you point out, of the differences between their times and ours. Sometimes ours modern view are better, as with not allowing students to inflict serious pain on other students; sometimes not so much so (I will leave it up to each reader to decide when they are not so).

Everyman wrote: "(I will leave it up to each reader to decide when they are not so)..."

[g] With Thackeray, it is not always clear when we are dealing with telling it like it is versus holding up for social criticism.

Rachel wrote: "Was anyone else surprised by the Baron at first? I also felt like in these chapters Becky refined her skills a little since her stay with Seedlys."

I was somewhat surprised by Sir Pitt. I found his manners crass for what I expected from a baron but I am beginning to learn to be surprised at nothing in this novel! ;-)

As for Becky's skills, Thackeray/the narrator says:

.... She was quite a different person from the haughty, shy, dissatisfied little girl whom we have known previously, and this change of temper proved a great prudence, a sincere desire of amendment, or at any rate great moral courage on her part.....

This surprised me because I didn't see the development of this prudence in her character, but if you compare the original volatile Becky (throwing the dictionary out the window) to this more temperate Becky (pleasing everyone --- even being respectful to Mrs. Crawley who really does not factor in her advancement at all, and therefore is one person who she really does not need to be nice to), I can see that there has been a change, in spite of the fact there are no details as to how this moderation of behaviour comes about (at least that I can see).

Lily wrote: "[g] With Thackeray, it is not always clear when we are dealing with telling it like it is versus holding up for social criticism. ..."

Oh yes, absolutely! Do you think the difficulty is because the social criticism and the "telling it like it is" is often blended together and topped with a generous dose of satire?

I finally thought I had found a character that had seen through Becky's shenanigans ---- Mrs. Bute Crawley. But then, Mrs. Bute is shown to have self-serving actions and machinations of her own. I love how the main purpose of her letter to Miss Pinkerton is carefully embedded in the postscript.

Lately this Shakespearean quote keeps coming to mind:

All the world's a stage,
And all the men and women merely players:
They have their exits and their entrances;
And one man in his time plays many parts ....

Hederahelix wrote: "Oh Beve! I thought exactly the same the first time I read that th _ the, but realized its actually _th as in 4th, 5th, 6th etc. :-)"

It was not being used in that context. It is not a big deal, just wondered if anyone saw that.

Everyman wrote: "Beve wrote: ""The colonel of th--th regiment, in which Messieurs Dobbin & Osbourne...

The use of "th--th" to me indicates stuttering. What do you think?
"

My assumption is that it's not stutterin..."

Thanks.

Sorry Beve, I didn't express myself very well; I was trying to make the same point as Everyman (who DID express himself well!)

In the quote "The Colonel of the --th regiment, in which Messieurs Dobbin and Osborne had companies", towards the end of chapter 24, Thackeray is avoiding specifying the regiment which would have been something like the 6th regiment or the 12th regiment. He does this throughout the novel.

@Lily - if you read and analyse Jane Eyre from a feminist point of view, Mr Rochester is an all-out baddie. Mad woman in attic, Bluebeard complex, bigamist, imprisoning a young girl's affections for his own gratification, the sudden and suspicious breaking off with Blanche Ingram.... I'm not saying that is my particular reading of the story as I love Jane Eyre, but there it is :-)

For an interesting take on the novel, see Can Jane Eyre Be Happy? by John Sutherland: http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/16...

Hederahelix wrote: "Sorry Beve, I didn't express myself very well; I was trying to make the same point as Everyman (who DID express himself well!)

In the quote "The Colonel of the --th regiment, in which Messieurs D..."

Thank you.

Cleo wrote: "Lily wrote: "[g] With Thackeray, it is not always clear when we are dealing with telling it like it is versus holding up for social criticism. ..."

Oh yes, absolutely! Do you think the difficult..."

My feeling is that Mrs. Bute is as conniving and devious and Becky!

Cleo wrote: "I was somewhat surprised by Sir Pitt. I found his manners crass for what I expected from a baron but I am beginning to learn to be surprised at nothing in this novel! ;-)"

Have you not read Tom Jones? After reading that, one cold never be surprised at the conduct of a baron (though in that case it's a squire, but still, the nobility).

Beve wrote: "My feeling is that Mrs. Bute is as conniving and devious and Becky! ..."

Yes, exactly!

Everyman wrote: "Have you not read Tom Jones? After reading that, one cold never be surprised at the conduct of a baron (though in that case it's a squire, but still, the nobility). ..."

No, I have never read Tom Jones but now you have whetted my interest. It's another chunkster though, isn't it? Hmmm ...... I'm juggling a few of those so it will have to wait. Perhaps it would be a nice summer read .....

In the Background thread, it was pointed out that Anthony Trollope wrote a biography of Thackeray, and it turns out they were friends. I've never read Trollope because one of the criticisms leveled at him is that none of his characters are ever like-able... no obvious heroes vs. villains (unlike Dickens and most other Victorian writers). But I've also heard it said that Trollope had great human insight, so I'm wondering if both Trollope and Thackeray created characters who were three-dimensional -- ie, replete with both negative and positive qualities, and burdened with human foible, folly, and vanity as well as heroics (as are we all).

And that's why all the characters in Vanity Fair seem to be some of this, and some of that, and why the narrator seems to like even the bad players on his stage. He does keep reminding us that we are observing characters parading by in a Vanity Fair.

Cleo wrote: "Everyman wrote: "Have you not read Tom Jones? After reading that, one cold never be surprised at the conduct of a baron (though in that case it's a squire, but still, the nobility). ..."

No, I hav..."

Yes, it's a chunkster. I don't necessarily recommend it; frankly, I think there are better ways to spend your English novel reading time. I do recommend the movie; one of the few cases where a movie actually captures the feel of a novel and, in my opinion, is better than the novel. Rare, but it does happen.

Everyman wrote: "...I do recommend the movie; one of the few cases where a movie actually captures the feel of a novel and, in my opinion, is better than the novel. Rare, but it does happen....."

If I were a writer, I'd do a short story on the memories that movie evokes.

I am sadly very behind in my reading and working hard to catch up. It's been a strange couple of weeks in my world.

One thing that keeps going around and around in my head is the title Vanity Fair. Particularly the multiple definitions that can be assigned to the word fair. Does he mean fair like a country fair? Or fair as in good/beautiful? Or fair as in pale? The multiple meanings keep seeming to pop out at me.

I was shocked at the Baron as well. He seemed to be a lower order of personage. I haven't read the book Everyman spoke about, but had seen the movie.

Like Lily the abusive behavior was a bit surprising to me, but I felt that Thackeray was showing us just how little control women had over their destinies. The abuses would await for those who made a bad choice without the ability to remove oneself from them.

Chapter 10 made a bit of a difference for me in my opinion of Becky. Before this I really didn't see any malice in Becky. Selfishness yes, manipulation yes. But in this chapter we are told that Becky will show up Amelia by obtaining a better husband/position. She also allows the children to teach themselves instead of doing her job; yet she manages to ingratiate herself into the household.

The Crawley household is definitely interesting. In my earlier defending of Becky, I mentioned the money factor as motivation for her behavior. In the Crawley family we see money as being a big motivator and actually creates rivalry and hard feelings among the members.

I was a bit disgusted by the note written by Becky in Chapter 11 to Amelia - poor poor pitiful me! It felt so artificial to me. This is a personal bias for me as I get really frustrated with people who cry poor me and don't deal with things. Here Becky is using the poor me as a manipulation which set my teeth on edge.

The back biting and jealous of the women, while disappointing, was very accurate. I do think a lot of that still exists in our world today among women. I wish it could be otherwise and really don't believe it is just human nature. I think it comes from insecurity and competition.

Poor poor Amelia. She loves a man who clearly is self-centered. His sisters are terrible. But here again we have a woman motivated by money. Maria Osborne is willing to marry whomever she needs to in order to have a home, a country house, a chariot, and the list goes on. It's made very clear that she doesn't care who the gentleman is as long as he brings status and provides the things she desires. How is she different from Becky? I'm not really seeing any difference at all other than Becky has more of a need than Maria. Yet, in reading about Maria, it didn't feel as strong of a negative portrayal as it did with Becky.

Trying hard to catch up on the rest. Sorry I'm so far behind.

"Vanity Fair" - think he's getting the title, and the concept, from The Pilgrim's Progress, where one of the stops is in the town of Vanity, the home of a constant carnival, the "Vanity Fair," celebrating "the things of this world" and people's attachment to them. (Pilgrim's Progress is very heavy on symbolism and allegory.)

Susanna wrote: ""Vanity Fair" - think he's getting the title, and the concept, from The Pilgrim's Progress, where one of the stops is in the town of Vanity, the home of a constant carnival, the "Vanity Fair," cele..."

That's correct. I think, at least so far, the book is a criticism of the concentration on material wealth (both some of the men, (particularly Jos with his pride of possession) and the women, who seek material advantage without worrying about the quality of relationship or the values of the people they are pursuing. Meanwhile, Dobbin, who seems one of the most sincere, honest characters, is used without any appreciation of his true value or worth.

Everyman wrote: "Meanwhile, Dobbin, who seems one of the most sincere, honest characters, is used without any appreciation of his true value or worth. .."

So far, Dobbin reminds me of Tom Pinch in Martin Chuzzlewit

Deborah wrote: "I am sadly very behind in my reading and working hard to catch up. ..."

I'm behind too, Deborah, so you're not alone.

I've been thinking about the sub-title of Vanity Fair, "A Novel Without A Hero". Why did Thackeray feel that he needed to add this? Was it a capricious decision or due to careful thought? After mulling it over, I believe that, while Thackeray's characters are ripe with faults, he represents them in such an engaging manner that he has to remind the reader at the beginning of the novel and in capitals that at this "Fair" there is really no one to admire and emulate and that they frequently become victims of their own selfish plots. Often in novels, traits can be exaggerated so the hero is easily identified as well as the villain. Yet in this book he portrays real humans with all their weaknesses and faults and while he calls it a "comedy" and appears to want us to laugh at these people, he also wants us to be able to identify these weaknesses and learn from them. Just some of my musings .....

Strangely enough, while your impression of Becky has become more negative, mine has become more positive. I hope this is not a spoiler because I'm only at chapter 13, but in a recent chapter she expresses regret for Mr. Sedley after he is ruined in business. I felt this regret was genuine and that this was the first time I felt that Becky saw another person as anything other than a means to get what she wanted. So while I don't dislike her as intensely as I originally did, I'm still rather appalled at her scheming.

Everyman wrote: "Susanna wrote: ""Vanity Fair" - think he's getting the title, and the concept, from The Pilgrim's Progress, where one of the stops is in the town of Vanity, the home of a constant carnival, the "Va..."

I still think the author is playing with the word fair.

Cleo wrote: "...he also wants us to be able to identify these weaknesses and learn from them. Just some of my musings ....."

I suspect he wants us to perhaps be more open and able to recognize weaknesses in ourselves, too, even if simply sometimes to the end of being more kind to the foibles of others.

Deborah wrote: "I still think the author is playing with the word fair...."

I agree. It is my understanding Bunyan did, too, although I am familiar with Pilgrim's Progress mainly through commentaries; I haven't read it in entirety.

Lily wrote: "Cleo wrote: "...he also wants us to be able to identify these weaknesses and learn from them. Just some of my musings ....."

I suspect he wants us to perhaps be more open and able to recognize wea..."

How so?

I think it is fascinating to look at this novel from the perspective of how desperately people seek and react to kindness, are hurt by rejection, and take steps, conscious or unconscious, healthy or unhealthy, to insulate themselves from injury and hurt.