Madam, want to talk about author Mary Stewart? discussion

Please discuss the events of the first 5 chapters. Please mark spoilers with spoiler tags.

Hey, look at you doing the moderator-thing!! Excellent :D

Jeanette can step right in any day. I been busy and don't have the book yet.

Thank you Jeanette.

You're welcome! I just finished chapter 1, and thought I'd get the ball rolling. :)

End of chapter 1. Mary Stewart sets the stage for a story full of menace. If I were Mary Grey, I would get out of there!

End of chapter 2. Why do I think that maybe Mary might really be Annabelle after all. Of course, how could she not know.

Do you like putting the chapters in bold like this? I didn't want to set the style or anything.... ;)

Going to try to catch up and participate soon.

Jeannette wrote: "Do you like putting the chapters in bold like this? I didn't want to set the style or anything.... ;)"

I thought your bold print looked lovely so I copied you. lol

Shelley wrote: "Going to try to catch up and participate soon."

That's excellent to have you join us, Shelley. :)

A giant oak stood. It had been originally on the inside of the wall, but with the years it had grown and spread, pressing closer and ever closer to the masonry, until its vast flank had been and finally broken the wall, which here lay in a mere pile of tumbled and weedy stone. But the power of the oak would be its undoing, for the wall had been clothed in ivy, and the ivy had reached for the tree, crept up it, engulfed it, till now the trunk was one towering mass of the dark gleaming leaves, and only the tree’s upper branches managed to thrust the young god leaves of early summer through the strangling curtain. Eventually the ivy would kill it. Already, through the tracery of the ivy stems, some of the oak’s boughs showed dead, and one great lower limb, long since broken off had left a gab where rotten wood yawned, in holes deep enough for owls to nest in.

That certainly sounds foreboding, doesn't it?

Willowfaerie wrote: " That certainly sounds foreboding, doesn't it? ..."

So does this:

"It doesn't necessarily have to be midnight, does it, when you and I go walking at the edge of a cliff with water at the bottom? Remember? You'd never have come mooning up here alone, would you darling, if you'd known I was coming too?"

LOL Oh yeah, good ole Con seems downright dodgy. Knowing Stewart though, he'll probably be the good guy. lol

I hadn't thought of that! Oh, my, I can't see how that will be the case. I'm just finished with chapter 4, and the reunion with Granda Winslow.

I'm almost caught up with you. I didn't get a chance to read hardly at all yesterday. :(

I do think the sister is definitely up to no good.

Mary certainly didn't need much persuading to engage in a bit of fraud, did she? (view spoiler)[And is she Mary? Or is she really Annabel after all, engaged in a clever double bluff? (hide spoiler)]

I love the way Stewart starts with this gorgeous peaceful sunny day and turns it into something sinister so smoothly that you are surprised that it happened.

Kim wrote: "Mary certainly didn't need much persuading to engage in a bit of fraud, did she? [spoilers removed]"

That is part of what makes this story interesting. Of course, (view spoiler)[if she is Annabel, she has certainly lost her way with horses (hide spoiler)].

I like the way Grandfather is being so mysterious about (view spoiler)[the terms of his will. Was he just trying to "punish" Annabel, or is he seriously thinking about passing the farm on to Con? (hide spoiler)]

Jeannette wrote: "That is part of what makes this story interesting. Of course, (view spoiler)....."

I guess it's possible that she really did (view spoiler)[fall off a horse and hurt herself (hide spoiler)].

Someone who (view spoiler)[loves horses probably wouldn't be dissuaded so easily. (hide spoiler)]

Willowfaerie wrote: " A giant oak stood. It had been originally on the inside of the wall, but with the years it had grown and spread, pressing closer and ever closer to the masonry, until its vast flank had been and ..."

I love this description of "the ivy tree"

I also wonder if (view spoiler)[ Mary really is Annabel and she is just pretending about a fear of horses to throw Con off. (hide spoiler)]

Diane Lynn wrote: "I also wonder if [spoilers removed]"

I think that is almost certainly the case! While I really hope I'm wrong about (view spoiler)[Mary being Annabel (hide spoiler)] the more I read, the more I tend to that view. It would be much more satisfying to be totally surprised by the conclusion.

I think what keeps you guessing is that this is first person narration, and (view spoiler)[Mary Grey says she is Mary Grey. (hide spoiler)]

Hmmm ... In my experience, first person narrators are (view spoiler)[notoriously unreliable (hide spoiler)] and as a reader I tend to (view spoiler)[take what they say with a large grain of salt (hide spoiler)]!

Which makes this all so interesting and at the same time sinister because it could go either way.

Diane Lynn wrote: "Which makes this all so interesting and at the same time sinister because it could go either way."

Yes.

I guess I am more likely to believe the narrator. Maybe I'm too trusting? ;)

Jeannette wrote: " I gues I am more likely to believe the narrator. Maybe I'm too trusting? ;) ..."

I suppose I'll know the answer to that question once I've finished reading the book! (view spoiler)[ When I read a first person narration, I almost always assume that it is unreliable in some way, although not necessarily because the narrator is lying. It may be because the narrator has a faulty memory, or because they want to appear in the best possible light, or because they lack some vital piece of knowledge. In any event, I'm not sure that the narrator tells the reader that she is Mary. She certainly says it to other people, starting with Con. Also, how much can you trust a narrator who is apparently prepared to perpetuate a fraud? (hide spoiler)]. Of course it may just be that I'm not trusting enough. That may come from being a lawyer! ;D

As she approaches the farm for the first time, in chapter 3, she says to herself: (view spoiler)["I was Annabel. I was coming home. I had never been anyone else. All that must be forgotten. Mary Grey need never appear again, except perhaps to Con and Lisa. Meanwhile, I would forget her, even in my thoughts. I was Annabel Winslow, coming home." (hide spoiler)] This can be taken two ways, can't it? Either this is (view spoiler)[Mary Grey deciding to become Annabel. Or, Annabel casting off her role as Mary Grey, and assuming her true identity. (hide spoiler)] At this point I certainly do not suspect that Mary Grey (view spoiler)[is, in truth, Annabel (hide spoiler)].

It's quite twisty, either way.

It is indeed twisty. I've thought that (view spoiler)[ the narrator is really Annabel ever since the discussion about "Brat Farrer" and the comment to the effect that such an imposture could only happen in a novel. I read this as suggesting that what is happening here is in fact "real life" rather than a novel, and that accordingly, the imposture couldn't happen. So far, there appears to be lots of support in the text for the narrator being Annabel. But I rather hope I'm wrong and that there's a real twist I haven't even contemplated! (hide spoiler)] It's a fun read, though, even if the gender politics are, well, let's just say .... dated. Which is not exactly surprising, given the period!

Yes, quite twisty. Mary does this again at the beginning of chapter 5. (view spoiler)[ While talking with Lisa, Mary says, "I've a difficult role to play, and the only way to play it is to be it, to live in it, breathe it, think it, try to dream it. In other words, not to have to keep stepping out of Annabel's skin to remember that I'm just someone pretending to be Annabel."
So is Mary trying to convince Lisa, or herself, or us? (hide spoiler)]

Kim wrote: "It is indeed twisty. I've thought that [spoilers removed] It's a fun read, though, even if the gender politics are, well, let's just say .... dated. Which is not exactly surprising, given the period!"

lol I still don't see any reason not to believe (view spoiler)[that Mary Grey is not Mary Grey. She convinces Con into believing she is not Annabel. Of course, it is quite a BIG coincidence for Annabel's double to show up near Whitescar. There is a scene further along that pushes me towards your opinion, but that is beyond this thread. (hide spoiler)] How far are you in the book?

This seems to be set in the 1950s or 60s, maybe? Looking at my cover, I put it even earlier, and it isn't really mentioned anywhere. No reference to either war, to put a time on this.

Diane Lynn wrote: "Yes, quite twisty. Mary does this again at the beginning of chapter 5..."

Goes back to what Kim was saying, doesn't it?

Good question, when was this set? I recall reference to a plastic lampshade in Mary's boarding house room. That's not much help though. As I read I will try to concentrate on time period.

Jeannette, I think you were asking Kim how far she was, but in case it was me, I'm on page 100. It takes me so long to respond, remembering to hide spoilers and what not, that by the time I come back there are more responses. I need to go get a cup of tea, it might help;)

Jeannette wrote: "This seems to be set in the 1950s or 60s, maybe? Looking at my cover, I put it even earlier, and it isn't really mentioned anywhere. No reference to either war, to put a time on this.
..."

I haven't noticed any time references. However, I assume that it's set around the time it was written. If Stewart meant to set it much before then, I suspect that there would be something in the text to make that explicit.

Diane Lynn wrote: "Jeannette, I think you were asking Kim how far she was, but in case it was me, I'm on page 100."

I guess you are just starting chapter 5? (My book has tiny print, so page 100 is the middle of chapter 6 for me.)

I was wondering, too, how far Kim had gotten.

First edition 1961, which sounds right.

I have tiny print as well. Page 100 is middle of chapter 6.

I was thinking 1961.

Diane Lynn wrote: "I have tiny print as well. Page 100 is middle of chapter 6.

I was thinking 1961."

Then I'll see you in the next section soon! :)

Jeannette wrote: "I think what keeps you guessing is that this is first person narration, and [spoilers removed]"

Is that the case? (view spoiler)[Of course she says it to Con and Lisa, but does she ever say it to the reader? I don't think she does. (hide spoiler)]

Kim wrote: "Jeannette wrote: " I gues I am more likely to believe the narrator. Maybe I'm too trusting? ;) ..."

I suppose I'll know the answer to that question once I've finished reading the book! [spoilers r..."

Kim says what I said just now, only better!

Hey ladies! I've been busy both personally and with work, so I haven't had a leisurely moment to log on to GR and check out the boards. You ladies have been busy with the speculation on TIT. Good observations and theories. I've finished my re-read, and as I thought, I had forgotten most of it from my last reading.

What an great job Stewart did on maintaining the mystery. Someone (I think it was Jeannette) (view spoiler)[talked about the value of a re-read (or at least a quick review) of this after finishing. I think that's an excellent idea, because you could probably pick up clues you missed on the first read. (hide spoiler)]

My brain is too tired to produce any brilliant observations right now (if ever!), but I hope to be able to be more involved once April 15th is over.

Hj wrote: "Jeannette wrote: "I think what keeps you guessing is that this is first person narration, and [spoilers removed]"

Is that the case? [spoilers removed]"

What about the passage I quote in message 29? (view spoiler)[That can be taken either way, or at least I see it that way. (hide spoiler)] But, I tend to trust the narrator, as a general rule. ;)

Hannah wrote: "Hey ladies! I've been busy both personally and with work, so I haven't had a leisurely moment to log on to GR and check out the boards. You ladies have been busy with the speculation on TIT. Goo..."

Whoever talked about the value of a re-read is right. I read this not so long ago, so re-reading it now meant that I could really appreciate what an excellent job Mary Stewart did when writing it.

Hannah wrote: "Hey ladies! I've been busy both personally and with work, so I haven't had a leisurely moment to log on to GR and check out the boards. You ladies have been busy with the speculation on TIT. Goo..."

I'm still looking forward to our chat! Hj and I have been discussing the ending, too, in Spoilerland. Join us when you can.

Hj wrote: "Whoever talked about the value of a re-read is right. I read this not so long ago, so re-reading it now meant that I could really appreciate what an excellent job Mary Stewart did when writing it. "

I mention a second read over in Spoilerland, when you point out some things about the beginning that I hadn't picked up on.

Jeannette wrote: "I mention a second read over in Spoilerland, when you point out some things about the beginning that I hadn't picked up on. ..."

I was thinking that those commenting in this section hadn't got to Spoilerland yet!!

All but Hannah, and the two of us, I'm guessing. But, I won't go into any details here, either way. :)

I've read it before also , but it really gives a different perspective to hear others talk about it, makes me see things I may have missed the first time around.

Come join us on the Spoilerland thread, Shelley!

http://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/1...

Two paragraphs in on Chapter 1, and this line captured my attention. THIS is why I love Stewart's descriptive prose so much:

Ahead of me, ridge after ridge running west, with the Wall cresting each curve like a stallion's mane:



(view spoiler)[Coincidence Mary used a horse analogy in describing the wall? (hide spoiler)]