Victorians! discussion

Book 8

Years pass and one evening Aurora sits in the garden when unexpectedly Romney appears. They reminisce, and it becomes clear that Aurora is not aware of certain developments. For one, she still thinks he is married to Lady Waldemar. For another, Romney tells her that his do-gooder social experiment backfired. He had invited the downtrodden to live in his manor, and they burnt it down. At the end of the chapter Romney hands Aurora a letter from Lady Waldemar.

Book 9

Aurora reads Lady Waldemar’s caustic letter where she denies all wrongdoing regarding Marian. She also learns that Romney isn’t married! To make on old wrong right, he proposes to Marian again, but she refuses. She would never burden her son with a father who wouldn’t love him as much as his own children. Romney reveals to Aurora that he is blind due to illness suffered after the fire. Finally, Aurora and Romney admit to each other they have been in love with each other all along and decide to marry.

Sorry everyone for the long delay! My laptop died last week after a valiant 10 years of service. I had to get a new one, everything set up again with the added royal pain of getting situated with all the "new and improved" apps...

Sorry to hear that Kerstin and hope everything is now working smoothly!

Well, that was an emotional rollercoaster of a final 2 chapters! Romney returns! He isn't married! His ancestral home burned down! He's going to marry Marian! He's NOT going to marry Marian! He's blind! He's leaving! She loves him! He stays! They are going to build a New Jerusalem of Art and Society! It was really beautifully written but somewhat overwrought.

I did love the discussion of Romney's feelings for Aurora through a description of her arrival, and the allusion to their being plighted to one another by their parents:

For he, a boy still, had been told the tale
Of how a fairy bride from Italy,
With smells of Oleanders in her hair,
Was coming through the vines to touch his hand;
Whereat the blood of boyhood on the palm
Made sudden heats. And when at last I came,
And lived before him, lived, and rarely smiled,
He smiled and loved me for the thing I was,
As every child will love the year's first flower,...

which then goes on to describe how he had ever loved her, and turned to his work when she refused him.

The plot similarities to Jane Eyre were striking (spoiler alert is for those who haven't read Jane Eyre) (view spoiler)[ The grand home being burned down, the hero losing his vision in trying to rescue someone, his slow recovery, and now they can finally love each other openly. (hide spoiler)]

Did anyone else feel a bit sorry for Lady Waldemar after this? If she had truly just tried to get Marian (who for a variety of reasons WAS an unsuitable bride for Romney, not least because he didn't love her but was marrying her to make a statement) out of the way and somewhere she could make a good life for herself, and then spent all that time working for and nursing Romney to try and win his love, and then gets that nasty letter from Aurora, and gets refused by Romney, that is a pretty harsh outcome.

Frances wrote: " It was really beautifully written but somewhat overwrought."

I'm with you there. Romney blind, really??? And yes, I was thinking of Jane Eyre immediately. There were so many passages in the book where Aurora is exploring a theme at length, and it seems almost inexhaustible, then all of a sudden the plot moves into warp speed and you don't know whether you're coming or going.

Hope you are getting used to your new laptop, Kerstin, but ten years sounds like a great innings!

I'm really looking forward to seeing what people thought of the poem as a whole.

I thought the writing on writing was beautiful, but although it alluded to many great and classic works, (incidentally according to the notes in my edition, the obvious parallels with Jane Eyre weren't conscious), the plot and characters fell flat.

The notes on the eighth book where Romney talks about the 'disordered lives' he tries to make orderly and 'forcing crooked creatures to live straight', were that EBB is being very patronising to the working classes, that they are tainted from the start, and I guess basically if you try to help them all the 'good' country people hate you and your house gets burnt down. The moral seemed to be don't try to change the social order, only help people who can be humble and show the appropriate gratitude to you.

Which brings me to Marian, who I assume is supposed to be some ideal poor girl. Psychologically I cannot credit someone who loves their child and has a chance to socially save them and keep them comfortable would refuse that marriage proposal from a good person. She just seemed to be swept away as a character to allow Romney and Aurora to end up together.

I ended up feeling cross as it all seemed trite manipulation which has actually lowered my opinion of a poet I've previously enjoyed.

Frances wrote:
Well, that was an emotional rollercoaster of a final 2 chapters! Romney returns! He isn't married! His ancestral home burned..."

Yes, I agree that the emotion poured out from all the main characters, particularly in book 9. The focus was on love and how it transcends all other ambitions. Marian, Romney, Lady Waldemar and Aurora all revealed how their lives had been shaped by love in one way or another.

I have to say straight away that I believed Lady Waldemar to be much worse than she probably was. I still have lingering doubts, but if it was her maid that led Marian to the brothel then Lady Waldemar does deserve some sympathy.

The eventual coming together of Romney and Aurora was riddled with misunderstandings on both sides. It was distressing but seemed fitting that both of them had to be scarred by life's experiences before they could accept each other’s love.

But it was the one scarred most of all whose lines I will remember the longest.
’ That I, who felt myself unworthy once
Of virtuous Romney and his high-born race,
Have come to learn, . . a woman poor or rich,
Despised or honoured, is a human soul;
And what her soul is,–that, she is herself,
Although she should be spit upon of men,
As is the pavement of the churches here,
Still good enough to pray in. And, being chaste
And honest, and inclined to do the right,
And love the truth, and live my life out green
And smooth beneath his steps, I should not fear
To make him, thus, a less uneasy time
Than many a happier woman………….’

‘Tis said that women have been bruised to death,
And yet, if once they loved, that love of theirs
Could never be drained out with all their blood:
I’ve heard such things and pondered.
Did I indeed Love once? or did I only worship?’

Marian’s love has now become distilled and directed towards one thing only.
‘ …….…….. But for me
Once killed, . . this ghost of Marian loves no more,
No more . . except the child! . . no more at all.’

Clarissa wrote: "Which brings me to Marian, who I assume is supposed to be some ideal poor girl. Psychologically I cannot credit someone who loves their child and has a chance to socially save them and keep them comfortable would refuse that marriage proposal from a good person. She just seemed to be swept away as a character to allow Romney and Aurora to end up together."

Ah, there is that, the clumsy plot device to make the happy ending. When I look at Marian I see a woman whose hard upbringing taught her to only trust herself. Aurora is not threatening to her, so she agrees to live with her in relative luxury she would never be able to achieve herself, plus she won't have to worry where the next meal comes from. Aurora gets 300 pounds per year from her legacy and royalties from her writings, so she still lives a charmed life. In contrast, last year when we read The Odd Women, the sisters had to share 17 pounds per year!

At this point all Marian's energies are concentrated, fixated even, on her son, because she can control what happens here. It is a safe relationship. Trusting a man, even a good man, is too risky for her.

Trev wrote: "The eventual coming together of Romney and Aurora was riddled with misunderstandings on both sides. It was distressing but seemed fitting that both of them had to be scarred by life's experiences before they could accept each other’s love."

Yes. In the beginning, both have a very pronounced idealism that obscures much reality. Their wings have to be clipped by life first, suffer the pains of not achieving the heights to which they had initially aspired. Did Aurora think at the age of 20 she could pen another The Illiad or The Divine Comedy? In these early chapters I immediately thought she had to live life first before she could write about it. Her last book, even though she herself didn't think much of it, resonated with the public precisely because she could pour her life experience into it.

For Romney the hard lesson only came when he no longer had the physical abilities to rescue the poor, no house and the debasement of being dependent on others himself.

Trev wrote: "The eventual coming together of Romney and Aurora was riddled with misunderstandings on both sides. It was distressing but seemed fitting that both of them had to be scarred by life's experiences before they could accept each other’s love. ."

Is this a particularly British Isles thing, where someone in love with someone else will hide their love because they don't want to speak until they know their love will be returned? I see this a lot in literature-for example Frederick Wentworth/Anne in Persuasion, The Remains of the Day, or anything by Sally Rooney. While I haven't read much French or Italian literature somehow I don't sense that there is so much undeclared passion on the continent. Anyone else see this? I get that this might be the case for women in Victorian literature, that they could not declare themselves until the gentleman did first, but why wouldn't Romney give one last go and outright propose to Aurora once Marian was taken care of? Or even why did he feel obliged to marry Marion in the first place, rather than just commit to support her if he felt he ought?

Frances wrote: "Trev wrote: "The eventual coming together of Romney and Aurora was riddled with misunderstandings on both sides. It was distressing but seemed fitting that both of them had to be scarred by life's ..."

I think much comes from the social conventions that were tabled by Victorian society. Victorian women were very much restricted and weren't allowed to show their feelings and passions. Hiding them was taught to be the proper behavior. So many women had to suppress their feelings. This is seen in many Victorian and even earlier literature. Comparatively, continental literature is much more relaxed with women expressing their feelings. They enjoyed much social freedom than contemporary British women.

Your question on why Romney decided to marry Marian instead of supporting her was on my mind as well, Frances. I remember reading (can't remember in which book though) that Romney was marrying a class and not a person. His eagerness to break conventional barriers overshadowed any unsuitability of his action.

Book 9 was I thought the most beautifully written part with its torrent of emotions. I enjoyed reading the confession of love from both Romney and Aurora. Although EBB had to clear Marian from the path to unite Aurora and Romney, I thought she kind of gave a valid reason for her refusal. Marian fears that if she marries Romney there may be differences of treatment between Romney's natural children and her illegitimate son (although adopted by Romney). I don't think she fears Romney would do so, but she is not so sure about others' treatment since she has first-hand experience of how she was looked on by them as Romney's betrothed. And in Marian's heart, she knows there is no love in Romney for her, only pity and the noble thought to do the duty by her. The ending is unspecific, but I think it's implied that Marian and the child will be taken care of by Aurora and Romney.

Piyangie wrote: "Book 9 was I thought the most beautifully written part with its torrent of emotions. I enjoyed reading the confession of love from both Romney and Aurora. Although EBB had to clear Marian from the ..."

Yes, I agree with all that you have written here.

I think EBB should be admired for even attempting a ‘novel in verse’ as she called it. She was already highly respected for the quality of her poetry and inevitably it is the poetry that pushes its way to the fore, leaving the narrative plot to be a little less convincing.

This is the second time I have read the whole poem and my enjoyment and understanding of it has definitely been enhanced by this repeated reading.

For anyone interested in reading more about ‘Aurora Leigh’ and its reception by the Victorian critics, there are some interesting articles at the ebbarchive, including scans of original contemporary newspaper articles etc. (in the criticism-reviews section.)

http://ebbarchive.org/poems/aurora_le...

Also the Victorian Web has both specific and non specific articles about Aurora Leigh ( although one or two of the links seem to be missing.)

https://victorianweb.org/authors/ebb/...

Frances wrote: "Or even why did he feel obliged to marry Marion in the first place, rather than just commit to support her if he felt he ought?"

I saw him as having to propose to Marian to show that he's a good gentleman who honours his commitments and duties which are more important than his personal happiness. Then Marian obviously has to be given some suitable reason to refuse because the raped poor woman is not the eponymous heroine, and Aurora Leigh gets the conventional happy ever after, it took a while but we got there, romantic ending.

So much to respond to here and I agree with so much of what others have already said. On the whole, I'm glad to have read this, but the enjoyment factor was only middling for me, and as Kerstin mentioned, the contrast between the extended passages on high-flown themes (which I found VERY slow) and the "warp speed" plot was odd! The plot itself was fine, although nothing particularly original - it seemed typically Victorian in its moral, sentimental and sensational aspects. (Although I admit I have enjoyed Victorian books with this type of plot many times.)

The echoes of Jane Eyre do seem glaring, although EBB apparently denied that it was a conscious echo. Unfortunately, the footnotes in my edition gave away early on that Romney would be blinded by the end of the book (so annoying!), although I thought the actual reveal was cleverly done, right at the end of a 40+ page conversation between Romney and Aurora. Until it was revealed, I hadn't realised that the blinding had already happened even though I was expecting it and in retrospect there were indications in the preceding scene. It was then interesting to look back at the little hints which had been dropped - how Romney sat down "A little slowly, as a man in doubt", and it explains his comment after Aurora points out the stars to him - "Then you do not know" - and she doesn't realise what he means. Aurora's reference to their youthful proposal scene as taking place in the morning and the present scene as night also takes on another layer of meaning as Romney repeats "And now 'tis night", "Ay, 'tis night". His line "Auroras must not come to spoil my dark" is a both a reference to the meaning of Aurora's name (dawn) and an allusion to his blindness.

I agree with Frances about Lady Waldemar and do feel a bit sorry for her. I think she is actually my favourite character! Whilst she behaved selfishly in persuading Marian to leave, I don't believe she did foresee or intend the terrible events which were in store, and she admits her fault and expresses her regret in the letter to Aurora. She also nursed Romney through his fever, and when she realises that he loves Aurora, she finally admits defeat. And I can see why she dislikes Aurora so intensely - I confess I am not very keen on her either!

I also agree with Clarissa that the characters were quite flat. At first I wondered if it is just the medium of poetry which doesn't allow for rounded characterisation, but then I thought of Robert Browning's "dramatic monologues" which bring to life characters such as Fra Lippo Lippi and Andrea del Sarto so well in what are basically extended conversational soliloquies.

I thought Clarissa's point about the patronising attitude to the "crooked creatures" of the working classes was interesting, and is still something of an issue today. But it can be difficult to see what the right thing to do is - Romney had a big empty house and plenty of money, and was well-intentioned in using these to help the poor, but of course the "poor" may not consider themselves in need of help. But if he had kept his house and money to himself and done nothing, he could also have been criticised for that. I'm sure many Victorian philanthropists and well-intentioned mill owners came in for similar criticism when they tried to improve conditions for the people who were nevertheless stuck in an endless rut of working very long hours in dangerous conditions for the profit of their employers.

I agree with Piyangie that Marian gave valid reasons for her refusal of Romney, and I was pleased with how her character ended up, having regained her faith and her self-belief. As I think I commented last week, the fact that she is allowed to live and find some degree of happiness through her child seems unusual in Victorian fiction's treatment of unmarried mothers.

Lorna wrote: "Romney had a big empty house and plenty of money, and was well-intentioned in using these to help the poor, but of course the "poor" may not consider themselves in need of help. But if he had kept his house and money to himself and done nothing, he could also have been criticised for that. I'm sure many Victorian philanthropists and well-intentioned mill owners came in for similar criticism when they tried to improve conditions for the people who were nevertheless stuck in an endless rut of working very long hours in dangerous conditions for the profit of their employers."

Romney did the typical top-down approach. He knows best what the poor need. That's the utmost in hubris. This is where all do-gooder impulses fail. If he truly wanted to better their lives, then he could have paid all his servants and folks working on his estate a properly living wage and let them decide how they want to improve their own lives. But that would mean letting go of control. In a way his blindness is a symbol of having to let go of control, he can barely move without the aid of others.

I was pondering on Romney's situation. When he could see (physically) the world, he was blind as to its true needs. But when he becomes blind, he starts to see things clearly. There is a bit of irony there. I felt that EBB is perhaps being critical of the blind enthusiasm of the philanthropists of the time. Romney wanted to good by the poor. But his method was all wrong. What he could have done is to gently guide them to better their lives rather than trying to fix their lives for them.

Piyangie wrote: "I was pondering on Romney's situation. When he could see (physically) the world, he was blind as to its true needs. But when he becomes blind, he starts to see things clearly. There is a bit of iro..."

As I was reading the part where Romney condemned his own methods of philanthropy, I was reminded of Sir Titus Salt, one of the few who did get it right.

https://www.biographyonline.net/busin...

His methods seemed to work and he gained universal respect, particularly from those who worked for him.

I realised that there were not many like him at that time and although steps are being made to improve today, there is still a long way to go.

Piyangie wrote: "I was pondering on Romney's situation. When he could see (physically) the world, he was blind as to its true needs. But when he becomes blind, he starts to see things clearly. There is a bit of iro..."

This book is suffused with Christian and biblical references. Here we have the reversal of John 9:1-12 The Healing of the Blind Man. In the biblical understanding sickness always signifies spiritual sickness. In the healing of the blind man Jesus is healing not just his visual impairment, but more importantly also brings into right order his spiritual understanding of heaven and earth. For Romney this happens in reverse, the insight only comes when he is stripped of his ability to continue his all-consuming social engineering.

This was a great choice to start the year with. Thanks, Kerstin, both for the choice of the book and leading the discussion. A great job done!

You're welcome! This was a great discussion.

Agreed-thanks for doing this and i appreciate the chance to read something I would never have tackled on my own.

I've just finished a fascinating biography of EBB, Two-Way Mirror: The Life of Elizabeth Barrett Browning, which really added to my enjoyment and appreciation of Aurora Leigh and of EBB herself. I hadn't realized that in fact she met Browning quite late in her life, in her mid-thirties, at which point she was already a well-established poet, and that she was certainly the better known and more acclaimed poet of the two. Highly recommended if you have room on your reading list.