Madam, want to talk about author Mary Stewart? discussion

Hannah wrote: "Jemidar wrote: "I took the early scene of Mary chain smoking to be a device for her to flash around the cigarette lighter with Mary Grey's initials on it because it more or less stopped once she wa..."

But, she did smoke in her room, too, before she was visited by Lisa.

Jemidar wrote: "You see, I didn't notice that. LOL."

He had been drinking the night she confronted him in the kitchen, or somewhere, hadn't he? One or two of those menacing scenes involved him smelling of drink.

But bad guys are supposed to be drunkards, aren't they? I just thought the reference to smell of alcohol was to enhance his bad guy image.

Jeannette wrote: "I just checked and the university library has some of her other books, just not this one. Can you recommend any others by her that you enjoyed? I am being constantly surprised by the library at t..."

I've only read one other by JAH, Windover. I liked Savannah Purchase more but did enjoy Windover as well.

Misfit wrote: "I wish I had had time to read BF before starting this. I'll do that before I reread this one. You really do want to start right in on it again and try to pick up on the clues missed the first time."

That is my plan as well, BF before a reread. And BF was posted by Laura, I think. http://ebooks.adelaide.edu.au/t/tey/j...
In case someone missed it.
All those clues that MS sprinkled around will be so fun to discover.

Kim wrote: "Hj wrote: "Going off topic, how did you like Brat Farrar? (the book and the character)...."

I really liked it, Hj, even though it didn't hold too many surprises plot-wise. The psychological portrait of Brat was really interesting and the characterisation was excellent. However, I thought the ending was a bit rushed. ..."

So, what do you make of the ending? (view spoiler)[.I've thought for years that Brat actually ends up with Bee (I mean romantically, not just helping her with the horses) rather than with Eleanor. What do you think??.. (hide spoiler)]

Now there's an interesting thought...

Jemidar wrote: "But bad guys are supposed to be drunkards, aren't they? I just thought the reference to smell of alcohol was to enhance his bad guy image."

It certainly made him more menacing!

Diane Lynn wrote: "Jeannette wrote: "I just checked and the university library has some of her other books, just not this one. Can you recommend any others by her that you enjoyed? I am being constantly surprised b..."

Thanks, Diane Lynn. I'll see if they have that one.

Hj wrote: "Kim wrote: "Hj wrote: "Going off topic, how did you like Brat Farrar? (the book and the character)...."

I really liked it, Hj, even though it didn't hold too many surprises plot-wise. The psycholo..."

I haven't read it yet, so please mark spoilers if you get into a discussion of Brat Farrar. :)

Jeannette wrote: "I haven't read it yet, so please mark spoilers if you get into a discussion of Brat Farrar. :) ..."

Sorry! I've gone back into my post and edited it to mark the spoiler.

Hj wrote: "So, what do you make of the ending?..."

That's an interesting take on the ending, Hj, but not one that occurred to me at all. (view spoiler)[I thought that Brat's love for Bee was that of a son who'd never known a mother's love and that Bee's love for him was maternal. Eleanor specifically told Bee that she would marry Brat and I accepted that this was what would happen after the family scandal had settled down. (hide spoiler)]

Kim wrote: "Hj wrote: "So, what do you make of the ending?..."

That's an interesting take on the ending, Hj, but not one that occurred to me at all. [spoilers removed]"

Yes, but (view spoiler)[I think it is significant that when he is semi-conscious the only person he wants is Bee:

"For a day and a night and a day again she sat by his bed and listened to that restless torrent of talk. “Bee?” he would say, just as the little probationer had recounted to her. And she would say: “Yes, I’m here,” and he would go back reassured to whatever world he was wandering in."

And then in the last chapter, when Bee is talking to Eleanor about taking Brat to Ulster, they have the following exchange:

"“What shall we do about letting people know about Brat? I mean, about his not being Patrick.”
“I don’t think we’ll have to do anything about it. The facts will inevitably ooze. They always do." ...
"“But I should like the news to get round before I’m too old to marry him.”
“Are you thinking of it?” Bee said, taken aback.
“I’m set on it.”
Bee hesitated; and then decided to let the future take care of itself."

I think that hesitation, and Bee's deciding to let the future take care of itself, is significant. Eleanor may have decided that's what she wants but either Bee thinks it isn't what Brat wants or Bee wants him herself!

And then Bee goes to see Brat and tells him she is going to Ulster:

"She saw his fingers begin to play with the sheet, unhappily.
“Are you going away to Ulster, then?” he asked.
“Only if you will come with me, and run the stable for me.”
The easy tears of the newly-convalescent rose in his eyes and ran down his cheek.
“Oh, Bee!” he said.
“I take it that means that my offer is accepted,” she said."

And that's the end. Taking this together with what Brat has thought earlier to himself during the book about how much he cares for Bee (I think he actually does think that he loves her), I do feel that at the very least it is an option that he marries Bee rather than Eleanor. I know that at first blush it seems odd given that he was pretending to be her nephew, but of course they never had that relationship (she didn't look after him while he was a child) and he was clearly far older than his years after all his experiences. (hide spoiler)]

Hj wrote: "Yes, but (view spoiler) ..."

Ooh, good point! I clearly wasn't paying enough attention. I like a (view spoiler)[ conclusion with a bit of ambiguity (hide spoiler)]!

Kim wrote: "Hj wrote: "Yes, but (view spoiler) ..."

Ooh, good point! I clearly wasn't paying enough attention. I like a [spoilers removed]!"

Funnily enough, I don't! I wish I knew what she really meant by the ending. That's why I asked - because I keep hoping someone else will tell me that's what they thought before I tell them what I think. So far, no-one has...

I also think Brat (view spoiler)[ended up with Eleanor as his main concern about being found out became that he wouldn't see E again so he's obviously in love with her. He also seems, before the accident, to feel guilty about Bee because she becomes like a mother to him and he sees her as the only person that has loved him for him unconditionally. I think it's natural to want your mother/mother figure when desperately ill so didn't pay much attention to that bit, however, I did wonder about Bee packing him off to Ulster as a romance with Eleanor would be difficult from Ireland! And also, why didn't they all stay if he was to marry E as she inherits so he would be running the stud with her. And what's Bee going to do once they marry? I must admit I also did wonder at her hesitation when E said she wanted to marry him. (hide spoiler)] Hmmmm.... Much to think about.

Jemidar wrote: "I also think Brat [spoilers removed] Hmmmm.... Much to think about."

It isn't cut and dried, is it? And (view spoiler)[don't you think that Bee's state of mind, when she's worrying that Brat might not survive, is a bit extreme for someone who is only feeling motherly to a boy she's known for such a short time? (hide spoiler)]

Sorry for highjacking the Mary Stewart thread!!

I'd have to say my favorite part was in chapter 14 when Adam finally realizes that Mary/Annabel is really Annabel. And that he doesn't get angry but asks her

...merely,"Why did you do it?"

Because I don't think their two lives could have gone any other way-with him married and from what we learn of his wife and Annabel being so young when they had their initial affair, I think they would have imploded if they had run off together. I think the guilt would have destroyed the relationship.

But letting time pass and allowing both of them to become free of their encumbrances and grow leads me to believe in the world beyond the story they will be together.

Lisa was a nice bit of misdirection because I thought she was as guilty as sin.

Linda wrote: "I'd have to say my favorite part was in chapter 14 when Adam finally realizes that Mary/Annabel is really Annabel. And that he doesn't get angry but asks her

...merely,"Why did you do it?"

Becau..."

Yes, but she does admit that she hoped he would come for her, anyway.

I think it was a stroke of luck that Julie put the letter in the ivy tree, thinking she was being romantic. Even though Annabel and especially Adam went through hell after they went there separate ways and Annabel said she hoped Adam would come for her I think at moments she maybe realized that maybe he hadn't because he couldn't break the vows he had made to his wife-no matter how unhappy that made him. That by him doing the "right thing", even though it may have broken her heart, made him an honorable man, a man that she would have wanted to be with, even though she couldn't.

Linda wrote: "Lisa was a nice bit of misdirection because I thought she was as guilty as sin..."

Hear, hear!!

Hannah wrote: "Linda wrote: "Lisa was a nice bit of misdirection because I thought she was as guilty as sin..."

Hear, hear!!"

Funny, I don't think this ever occurred to me. She just seemed too passive and adoring. However, I suspect that if someone had threatened her precious Con she'd have gone for them without a second thought.

Hj wrote: "Hannah wrote: "Linda wrote: "Lisa was a nice bit of misdirection because I thought she was as guilty as sin..."

Hear, hear!!"

Funny, I don't think this ever occurred to me. She just seemed too p..."

Oh yeah-what I imagined happening to Annabel in the end is that Lisa would be the one who ended up "doing away" with her for some slight against Con or when she found out who she really was. I imagined Lisa finding out about the affair might set her against Annabel also. How could Annabel not want to be with Con--at least in Lisa's eyes?

I think Lisa was guilty as sin. She was Con's accomplice. I always think about what she said to Annabel the night Con tried to kill Julie. She would have covered for him if he had succeeded. He even said so. Annabel was nuts asking if she still wanted to stay, but then she kept giving Con second chances too.

Willowfaerie wrote: "I think Lisa was guilty as sin. She was Con's accomplice. I always think about what she said to Annabel the night Con tried to kill Julie. She would have covered for him if he had succeeded. He..."

You're quite right. In message 72 I wasn't thinking properly; I was meaning that she wouldn't have done much actively e.g. actually kill someone herself as opposed to aiding and abetting Con.

On reflection though, if grandfather had made a will leaving everything Con needed to Con, I wouldn't have put it past her to smother him at a time when Con was making an alibi for himself miles away. She was monomaniacal about Con.

I agree. I wouldn't have put it past Lisa to smother the old man either. Like you said, she was monomaniacal about Con. In a trashier book, there might have been more than a hint of incest. lol

Willowfaerie wrote: "In a trashier book, there might have been more than a hint of incest. lol"

My mind must be trashy then because I suspected it anyway!

LOLOL So did I!

((Raises hand meekly))

Me three!

Con is too self-absorbed for that!

OMG-I'm glad I'm not the only one thinking incest! I felt so dirty (blushes)

Long in the past mind you but still...

I do think that the author's intention was to emphasis that Lisa felt very maternal towards Con, and that was why she looked after him first and foremost and would do his bidding.

Thoughts on finishing:

Yup, if this were a more recent book or an author other than MS, I'd say there was incest with Lisa and Con.

Another sign of the times is that I think it's very ambiguous whether Adam and Annabel actually slept together eight years ago. If this were set in a later time I would say certainly yes, but given how young Annabel was at the time and that it would have been the 1950s, I tend to think that there were only kisses. There's also the huge deference Annabel gives to Crystal's feelings (even long after she's dead). In the end I think we're meant to conclude, along with Adam and Annabel, that despite all the pain and sorrow of the intervening eight years, things worked out for the best that way.

I don't think that they actually slept together. She says in the letter that he didn't get that if he wanted she would be his mistress.

I wondered whether your edition had all reference to Con's lie about the pregnancy removed to make it really clear that Annabel was a good girl, really? I do find it really odd that someone did that. It wasn't an easy change to make, because it crops up quite often; it colours her Grandfather's view of her, especially when he wishes that she and Con could get married and avoid his having to make a decision about the farm and the money. It also affects Annabel's relationship with Con, as she really dislikes his having said that. It gives her a clue to his personality; he hated that she had wanted nothing to do with her, and even more when he realises that she preferred Adam to him.

HJ, having just read this pretty closely, I think I can say with confidence that someone successfully removed all references to that lie. There was nothing in the text that gave me any clue to a lie by Con about Annabel, pregnancy related or not.

I find it very interesting that they took that out, where the book is already dealing with a married man falling in love with an 18 year old girl and pressing her to run away with him. I mean, once you've gone that far, what's a lie from Con about Annabel being pregnant really adding to the controversy?

Tadiana wrote: "I find it very interesting that they took that out, where the book is already dealing with a married man falling in love with an 18 year old girl and pressing her to run away with him. I mean, once you've gone that far, what's a lie from Con about Annabel being pregnant really adding to the controversy? ..."

I agree! I hate it that any book is altered after the author has published it how she wants it to be, but this change seems particularly odd. Is your edition said to be abridged? That might explain it -- if one takes out that storyline it would shorten the book quite a bit, although probably with other changes too. As you can probably guess from what I've already said, I hate the abridging of books with a passion!

Laura, you said that you discovered that your copies were abridged when you tried to find your place after listening to some of the audiobook. Did the abridgements miss out the alleged pregnancy? The first mention is in the section dealing with Lisa's coaching of Mary in Newcastle. She's explaining exactly what happened between Annabel and Con the night before Annabel left home, because Mary had said she wanted Con to explain just what was so serious that Annabel had felt she had no option but to leave home.

HJ wrote: "Laura, you said that you discovered that your copies were abridged when you tried to find your place after listening to some of the audiobook. Did the abridgements miss out the alleged pregnancy?...."

Yes. The original version of the story has 20 chapters and the abridgement has 18. Most of the cut scenes are early in the book. Chapter 2 (Mary is working as a waitress and Lisa is watching her) is cut completely. The abridgement's chapter 2 starts with Mary packing and adds a couple of lines to explain she had been watched.

The original's chapter 4 (coaching Mary) and chapter 5 (Mary arriving at Whitescar) are shortened (removing the long explanation about the pregnancy) and combined into one chapter for the abridgement. Every other hint of the supposed pregnancy found throughout the book is gone.

The original also has Mary telling Adam that she is really Annabel earlier. After the Julie fainting episode, she tells him that she was lying when she said she was Mary and he can ask her anything that only Annabel would know. He doesn't seem to believe her and just walks out. This edit makes sense to me, because it keeps the suspense about her identity going a little longer. And it is followed immediately by Con walking in and Annabel wonders what he has overheard. Then they talk about Con wanting to kill Julie. Con points out that Adam and Mary/Annabel are on first name basis but nothing about her telling Adam about being Mary and the impersonation plot but then taking it back which was said just before he walked in. So I was a bit confused whether he was supposed to be listening in or not.

There may have been more cuts, but these were all the ones I noticed.

I have a 1968 copy and a 1985 copy and since I've read them both, I'm pretty sure that they're identical and they have no reference to Anabel's supposed pregnancy. I'm also pretty sure that neither of them are abridged; they don't have any of the shortenings that Laura mentions above. The only thing that's missing is the weird pregnancy thing!

Wow, there is certainly nothing about that in my copy, a paperback from the 1970s and a hardback I read at the library with nothing in either about being abridged. I thought Annabel ran away because Con tried to rape her to make her agree to marry him although nothing is said in the book. Maybe a difference between the US and British editions like the first cousin thing in Gabriel Hounds. I have to say American publishers have a lot of gall! Although I think MS had to agree, I think the editing was done so skillfully in both cases it had to have been her work.

Laura wrote: "After the Julie fainting episode, she tells him that she was lying when she said she was Mary and he can ask her anything that only Annabel would know. He doesn't seem to believe her and just walks out. This edit makes sense to me, because it keeps the suspense about her identity going a little longer."

My 1973 US printing has all the cuts you describe, Laura and I actually think the cuts improved the book.

Now, going through this excellent discussion thread, I recall reading the other version years ago and being unimpressed. The abridgements seem to have tightened the plot very nicely and as Laura points out, they keep the suspense going much longer. It also makes Con a more ambiguous figure--all to the good IMO.

Finished. Just trying to process my thoughts.

I had read Brat Farrar. I am going to assume that Mary Stewart thought BF would become a modern classic, but in my country Tey's books are nearly impossible to get hold of now. A danger of making a comparatively modern book a plot feature.

There are definitely echoes of Jane Eyre. I haven't read any Victoria Holt in quite some time, but I think this particular MS may have been a strong influence on some of her early works.

I'm reading Hana's final comment now. I'm reading a 1966 copy (I've had to sellotape it together to finish the read, lol!) I can see an abridged version may have been an improvement. Still an excellent book & all the way I wasn't sure about Mary/Anabel. For a goodish length of time I wasn't sure who the romantic lead was!

I have to go to work soon & I'm going to ponder a bit more before I do my review.

Three things

In reality there are things that will identify you. Scars, moles, the way you walk. I just don't buy that Con or Grandfather could be completely fooled.

What about Rowan? Even in 60s Britain wouldn't a horse that killed someone be destroyed

& like HJ, I doubt if a letter not wrapped in plastic would survive 9 years

Carol, I think it's fair to say that Brat Farrar is regarded as a classic by those who read or write question of identity books (or whatever they're called). But I think The Ivy Tree can be read and enjoyed without knowing Brat Farrar. Do you agree?

Incidentally, Brat Farrar is still inspiring authors, as is The Ivy Tree. Stranger on the Shore by Josh Lanyon was published last year; the author is a fan of both Josephine Tey and Mary Stewart. It also has (deliberate) echoes of The Great Gatsby. (I should warn you that the book includes explicit sex.)

HJ wrote: "Carol, I think it's fair to say that Brat Farrar is regarded as a classic by those who read or write question of identity books (or whatever they're called). But I think The Ivy Tre..."

Definitely can still be enjoyed without reading BF (a book I loved) but I think I would have felt a little frustrated. Tey is one of 3 authors that I would have thought Should Be Modern Classics & I haven't had a single copy of there works come through the op shop I volunteer at. I'm hoping ereaders will stop these writers' works vanishing.

I'll look out for Stranger on the Shore.

Reading the book for the second time for this current buddy read. Read it several years ago and don't remember anything other than the big secret that Mary is really Annabell. Reading the book this time around with that knowledge has been very fun! It's interesting to see how Mary Stewart phrases things so as not to alert the reader. I'm only about five chapters in… I'm reading the UK version. I now have a copy of the American version and going back-and-forth between the two in the beginning is interesting. Of course the UK version has way more spoilers in the front that were cut.

I remember when I read it the first time being rather perplexed at Mary Stewart's choice of a protagonist. Mary is so dark and conniving I was very taken aback with that. Not the usual protagonist of a Stewart story!

I have been trying to remember when I first read 'the Ivy Tree' and I think it was about 1966. I remember I enjoyed it enormously but was never tempted to re-read it once I knew the reveal! This time, because of the Buddy read, I was about half way through Chapter 1 when I rememberered!! It didn't spoil it though. I suspended disbelief, parked my 21st century gender susceptibilities to one side and ignored the reminders of how long ago it was, (when even I was a smoker!), and I just simply enjoyed it. Tightly plotted, beautifully descriptive and so very cleverly narrated:- the clues are all there but so well presented that it's only afterwards you realise!! It is not my favourite Mary Stewart - and there are aspects that I find a little odd and even distasteful, (the older married man and the young girl sits ill with me). However, all the things I love about MS are there. Beautifully written with an engaging plot; witty, clever dialogue; fascinating heroine and puzzling mystery. Mary Stewart's ability to conjure up a location and draw one into it - is beautifully displayed here as well though not quite as well as her evocations of Greece!. Having visited that part of Northumberland before, it was easy to imagine myself in that landscape. I think the way MS grabs one in from the beginning and maintains the pace of the storytelling means you ignore or forget some of the flaws in the story telling. Loved the chance to immerse myself in the story again - but I'll not be rushing to re-read it soon!

Susan in Perthshire wrote: "It is not my favourite Mary Stewart - and there are aspects that I find a little odd and even distasteful, (the older married man and the young girl sits ill with me).

I agree with everything you say, Susan, and this especially. But then why am I more forgiving of Mr. Rochester in Jane Eyre, who is in a quite similar situation? Hmm.

I think one problem is that Adam never becomes a completely fleshed out character for me, and what description there is didn't make me view him as particularly romantic. As I say in my review of The Ivy Tree, he's defined chiefly by his long-suffering. I even like Nicholas in Wildfire at Midnight better than Adam, which is kind of weird (at least from a morality point of view). I think it's a function of my feeling like I got to know and understand Nicholas better.

I'm going off my memories of my prior reads here, especially the last one from 2015. I'm still planning to pull this out and reread it this month, so assuming I can get to it, I'm going to pay particular attention to Adam as a character and see if my feelings about him change. :)

Tadiana ✩Night Owl☽ wrote: "Susan in Perthshire wrote: "It is not my favourite Mary Stewart - and there are aspects that I find a little odd and even distasteful, (the older married man and the young girl sits ill with me).

..."

Tadiana, I absolutely agree. And I forgive Rochester anything and everything! and with Nicholas in Wildfire we again have someone who is flawed - but you can empathise and see his journey! (sorry - I hate 'journeys') He knows he was in the wrong and I believe he will not make that mistake again! I think you are so right that Adam is not fleshed out and so I cannot engage with him in the same way. Be interesting to see how you feel about him after re-reading!

Yes, Adam's minimal presence in the book is really frustrating, partly for sentimental people like me who partly read (and re-read) Mary Stewarts for the romance but mainly because he is the main motive for Annabel's big decisions in the story. You need to be able to see that he is attractive, desirable, hard to let go of - and, in the end, capable of redemption. And the author doesn't let you see any of those things.

It's odd and makes me wonder whether it was a deliberate act on MS's part - part of the 'unreliable narrator' technique. Mary/Annabel is telling us that Adam has all the qualities I've listed above, but she isn't SHOWING it - and we already know she doesn't always tell us everything.

I finished the book. I didn’t care for it though. Sorry to those who loved it, it just wasn’t for me. I didn’t connect with Mary and I totally agree with what Susan and Tadiana said about the romance! I’m like Annabel, one of the things I enjoy about Mary Stewart’s books is the romance and this one just didn’t do it for me.

Call me strange (ha!), but Adam comes off to me as completely believable - tortured and flawed, wanting a chance to do things right this time and handicapped by his morality. He knows that he should never have been drawn into the relationship, but I think it hit him like a ton of bricks before he knew what had happened. As far as the age difference, we don't ever know exactly what it was, I think. Adam could have been quite young when he married Crystal, but no matter what it was, some of the most stable (and even romantic!) marriages I know are May/December ones.

I'll definitely pick Adam over Rochester and Nicolas!