Victorians! discussion

Apologies, everybody! I'm going to post the final segment of Barnaby Rudge a little early. I'll be busy over the weekend with Christmas shopping and preparations. I'm sure many of you are already done with reading. For those who are still reading, please comment at your leisure.

Summary

The riots are finally quelled. The perpetrators are searched for and arrested, including Lord Gordon. Barnaby and Rudge are imprisoned again and Mrs. Rudge visits Barnaby. The poor woman is heartbroken over his son's predicament.

Dennis is also arrested and put on the same cell with Hugh. Dennis, although in prison, thinks his office of hangman will somehow help him to escape from his predicament.

A month has elapsed. Mr. Varden visits Sir John on a secret errand. Mr. Varden carries a message from Dennis which connects Sir John with a woman that was hanged years ago. This woman is none other than Hugh's mother. And the surprising outcome of this strange missive is the revelation that Hugh is an illicit son of Sir John. Dennis's intention of disclosing this news was to seek an interference from Sir John to stop his and Hugh's execution.

The day arrives where Barnaby, Hugh, and Dennis are to be hanged. Barnaby and Hugh put a good face but Dennis piteously laments of his plight. Before being hanged, Hugh makes a last minute speech wishing that Barnaby be pardoned since it's his doing that put Barnaby into this predicament. He also wishes a violent death for his father who forsook him.

Meanwhile, John Willet ponders on what he is to do now that the Maypole Inn is damaged. His friends wants him to come and live in the country but John views this as the first step to become a pauper. He recalls hearing some news that victims of the damaged properties are to be compensated from the public purse and his spirits lift up.

Joe comes to talk with his father of his future course. He informs John that since he is now maimed and crippled, his best course is to take employment with Mr. Edward Chester who's doing well in the West Indies. At this very disclosure, Dolly bursts in and tearfully confesses her love for Joe.

We are taken to Golden Key, the Locksmiths's abode. Mr. Haredale and Edward Chester meet there and have a talk about the future of Emma and Edward. Haredale gives his consent to Emma's and Edward's union, apologising for the role he played in Sir John's wile schemes at separating the two.

Barnaby is rescued! Finally our hearts are at rest. 😀 Gabriel Varden and Mr. Haredale, with great effort, have managed to obtain a free pardon for poor Barnaby. Gabriel brings him home to his mother.

A burial takes place at night. It was a humble ceremony where Mr. Edward is also present. We learn that it's the burial of Hugh and that Edward has learnt his father's secret.

We return to a happy occasion at the Varden's house. Vardens have consented to the union between Dolly and Joe. A private tea party is hosted by the Vardens in their honour.

To this comes an intruder. And she is no other than Miss Miggs. The audacity of the woman is surprising. She comes with a view of taking up her domestic position but this was firmly denied by the Vardens. Furious, Miggs insults the Vardens, Dolly and Joe, and leaves the house.

Another month elapses. Edward and Emma had left England and Mr. Haredale's is about to leave it, too. Before leaving England for good, Mr. Haredale wants to visit Warren for one last time. Surprisingly, he meets Sir John there. Mr. Haredale tries to avoid him and leave but Sir John goads Mr.Haredale into a duel. During the duel, Sir John dies and Mr. Haredale immediately leaves England and takes refuge in a monastry.

Wow…Dennis’s character (or lack, thereof) shines through in this segment …and he finally gets his comeuppance. A very interesting contrast between Dennis & Hugh (who actually manifests some degree of humanity towards Barnaby & his dog in the end.

What happened to various characters are revealed and most of the lose ends are tied up.

The back story of the rivalry between John Chester and Hardale and what happened to the Rudge Sr. weren't explained (unless I missed it somewhere) which was disappointing.

James wrote: "Wow…Dennis’s character (or lack, thereof) shines through in this segment …and he finally gets his comeuppance. A very interesting contrast between Dennis & Hugh (who actually manifests some degree ..."

Quite agree. Hugh has some character.

Piyangie wrote: "....what happened to the Rudge Sr. weren't explained (unless I missed it somewhere) which was disappointing..."

I almost missed that as well, but it was described at the beginning of ch. 76: "As the locksmith walked slowly away from Sir John Chester’s chambers, he lingered under the trees which shaded the path, almost hoping that he might be summoned to return. He had turned back thrice, and still loitered at the corner, when the clock struck twelve.

It was a solemn sound, and not merely for its reference to to-morrow; for he knew that in that chime the murderer’s knell was rung. He had seen him pass along the crowded street, amidst the execration of the throng; and marked his quivering lip, and trembling limbs; the ashy hue upon his face, his clammy brow, the wild distraction of his eye—the fear of death that swallowed up all other thoughts, and gnawed without cessation at his heart and brain. He had marked the wandering look, seeking for hope, and finding, turn where it would, despair. He had seen the remorseful, pitiful, desolate creature, riding, with his coffin by his side, to the gibbet. He knew that, to the last, he had been an unyielding, obdurate man; that in the savage terror of his condition he had hardened, rather than relented, to his wife and child; and that the last words which had passed his white lips were curses on them as his enemies.

I had to read it twice before I understood who this was about. Varden had just spoken to Sir John about Hugh and Dennis and I did not immediately catch that he had switched to the original murderer Rudge here. Too many murderers, I guess 😂

Overall, a satisfying end. Everything is nicely wrapped up, the good people are all allowed to be happy. The bad people get what they deserve. Dennis was quite the most disgusting of all!* Even Hugh showed his good side when speaking for Barnaby and regretting that he got him into trouble.

*Edit: Miggs being a close second for me! Well, third, because the list must be topped by Sir John, of course. Or Gashford. Oh my, it's difficult to try and rank all these villains!

Lindenblatt wrote: "Piyangie wrote: "....what happened to the Rudge Sr. weren't explained (unless I missed it somewhere) which was disappointing..."

I almost missed that as well, but it was described at the beginning..."

I wondered at that part. So, that's about Rudge! Still, do we know anything about the backstory of the rivalry between Chester and Haredale?

I missed that, too! Thank you, Lindenblatt for pointing it out. Dickens usually ties up his storylines so I knew I’d missed something.

I think it’s interesting that all the domestic unrest in the Varden household seems put down to Miggs. We knew she was a two-faced misery, but initially I thought she was mirroring Mrs. V in order to ingratiate herself. Now that Miggs is gone, all bodes well for domestic bliss… I think.

I find the revelation of Hugh’s parentage to be odd and unexpected. I honestly don’t know why Dickens added that tidbit to the mix. It doesn’t really explain or alter anything. The seedy motivations of selfishness, greed, and jealousy were already present. I mean, it’s interesting but hardly necessary. Unless Dickens felt there needed to be one more nail to justify the final death by dueling.

If I remember correctly, Barnaby takes Hugh's dog home with him.

Renee wrote: "I think it’s interesting that all the domestic unrest in the Varden household seems put down to Miggs. We knew she was a two-faced misery, but initially I thought she was mirroring Mrs. V in order ..."

I agree, Renee. Dickens had introduced Mrs Varden has having an uncertain temper, being capricious and making everybody uncomfortable. I had understood Miggs to exacerbate the drama, but not to instigate it. Let alone be the sole responsible for it. Guess that Dickens wanted to have a perfect happy end and needed a scapegoat.

Same for Hugh's parentage. It seemed unnecessary for the story.

@Piyangie, I believe that the backstory of Haredale and Chester remained unexplained. Same as for Hugh's animosity towards Haredale.

@Rosemarie, yes, it is shortly mentioned in the last chapter.

Renee wrote: "I find the revelation of Hugh’s parentage to be odd and unexpected. I honestly don’t know why Dickens added that tidbit to the mix. It doesn’t really explain or alter anything. The seedy motivations of selfishness, greed, and jealousy were already present. I mean, it’s interesting but hardly necessary. Unless Dickens felt there needed to be one more nail to justify the final death by dueling...."

Maybe that relationship was added to show what a cold-hearted wicked evil man Chester is. His status and comfort was all he cared. After goading Hugh to carry on his wicked deeds, he abandons him, and even after learning from Varden his connection to Hugh. (I think he suspected it all along. I remember he was startled at one time after a close scrutiny of Hugh’s sleeping face.)

About Mrs. V, I felt Dickens's stance was contradictory. My understanding was also that Mrs. V was a difficult character with her changeable temper and that Miggs only exacerbated the situation. But Dickens ends up blaming Miggs for domestic disharmony.

However, another interpretation is possible. Mrs. V was subdued after the riots. Maybe she realised how brave and authoritative Mr. V could be after destroying that "shrine" kind of thing where Mrs. V collected money for Lord G's movement and the note from Tappertit guaranteeing the Varden household is Protestant. Also, her knowledge of how her husband stood up to the rioters may have awed her.

Now the story is over, I'm still puzzled with the title. What drove Dickens to name the novel Barnaby Rudge?

Good question! Barnaby's a good guy but he really didn't play that big a part in the book as a whole.
Dickens probably didn't want to name the book after a bad guy!

In which case he could have kept the original title: Gabriel Varden, the Locksmith of London. Would have made a lot of sense to me.

I have now read King Mob: The London Riots of 1780 by Christopher Hibbert. It's a detailed description of the riots and one that I recommend to any of you who want more information. Here are some of the things I learned which bear on our story:
1. Lord George Gordon had a gift for gathering the support of many working-class people, along with a gift for severely irritating others in Parliament, the King, and his superiors in the Navy. He had a habit of taking up causes and apparently didn't realize the violence he was stirring up with the "No Popery" cause. He even made an attempt to stop the violence but was unsuccessful.
2. The burning of Newgate and release of the prisoners is true, along with similar action at other prisons in the area. The burnings of homes of the members of Parliament is also true. The inaction of the Lord Mayor is portrayed accurately. Also, the confusion of the necessity and legality of military action is true and probably led to much more property destruction.
3. The vintner was a real person whose home and distillery were destroyed, with the loss estimated to be more than 100,000 pounds. The horror of the many people who died drinking the liquor that flooded the streets is also true, as is the story earlier in this section of the poor little canaries deliberately burned alive in their cages.
4. The hangman Denis was a real person who fell in with the rioters and was eventually arrested.
5. Many, if not most, of the people who truly supported keeping the restrictions on Catholics, retreated from the mob early on. The rioters were apparently just a mindless angry mob.

Lindenblatt wrote: "In which case he could have kept the original title: Gabriel Varden, the Locksmith of London. Would have made a lot of sense to me."

True!

Thank you, Nancy, for getting back to us. Those facts are truly interesting and add another level of depth to the story.

Nancy wrote: "I have now read King Mob: The London Riots of 1780 by Christopher Hibbert. It's a detailed description of the riots and one that I recommend to any of you who want more information. Here are some o..."

Thank you for sharing all that information, Nancy. It's nice to know that Dickens has got most of his facts correct.

Lindenblatt wrote: "In which case he could have kept the original title: Gabriel Varden, the Locksmith of London. Would have made a lot of sense to me."

Exactly!

Yes, in the end everyone gets what they deserve but the way Dennis tries to escape his sentence is still terrible. The scene where Miggs is sent away from the Varden house was much more satisfying.

How much suffering for poor Barnaby. However, I am happy that in the end Dickens decided to give his name to the novel, perhaps he does not have a great role as a character but he is the most innocent of all them and the one who from the beginning has the least tools to face what awaits him. I liked the dignity with which he faces his death sentence. Varden has a more active role but he is a man who has a place in society and the ability to distinguish between good and evil.

Daniela wrote: "Yes, in the end everyone gets what they deserve but the way Dennis tries to escape his sentence is still terrible. The scene where Miggs is sent away from the Varden house was much more satisfying...."

Yes, that could be the reason, Daniela. Barnaby is trusting, loyal, and innocent in his own simple way. And I agree with you on Miggs. Sending her away was most satisfying!

Thank you nancy for those facts, interesting that Lord George Gordon tried to stop the violence, i think that could have been part of the reason to why he was found not guilty (besides being privileged).

Overall, like others here, glad the characters got the happy endings they deserved. Somehow I wish we had more on Barnaby’s father, especially towards his death. I don’t remember if Dickens ever addressed this but what was the reason to why he murdered Reuben Haredale? I was most interested in this part of the story.

And I’m sure others will disagree on this but I had some sympathy for Hugh before his death, even though I disliked him throughout the book. We had moments where I got the sense that he did “care” for Barnaby and the fact that he lost his mother and finding out his father is Chester who doesn’t even care about him.

Lastly, thank you to everyone who shared their opinions on this read. This was my first group read and I’ve enjoyed reading everyone’s thoughts 😄 Wish everyone a happy holidays! Please feel free to connect, would like to see what everyone is reading and hopefully to see some familiar names on other group reads.

Hugh got a raw deal out of life, for sure. And Dennis was the hangman for Hugh's mother-it's a good thing Hugh didn't know that.

I'm pleased, too, to learn that Lord Gordon attempted to stop the violence. That places him in a favourable light in the history. And as Daryl says, that could be the reason of his subsequent release from the Tower.

Daryl wrote: "Thank you nancy for those facts, interesting that Lord George Gordon tried to stop the violence, i think that could have been part of the reason to why he was found not guilty (besides being privil..."

Neither why Rudge killed Reuben Haredale nor the rivalry between George Haredale and John Chester was properly explained. I wish he did. I was very much interested to know.

Thank you for your contribution to the discussion. So pleased to know you enjoyed your first group read with us. Happy holidays to you as well!

Piyangie wrote: "Daryl wrote: "Thank you nancy for those facts, interesting that Lord George Gordon tried to stop the violence, i think that could have been part of the reason to why he was found not guilty (beside..."

Didn't he learn that at the end? I thought he did. (Looks like I've misinterpreted many things 😀) Maybe Dennis was careful as not to reveal that fact to Hugh.

Although I enjoyed this read, the second reading of Barnaby Rudge for me, I wasn’t entirely satisfied with the ending.

The contributions from everybody in this group added depth and brought in new dimensions which greatly enhanced my enjoyment so thank you to all.

It was cheering to see the lovers reunited, with Dolly’s admission of love to Joe the most heartwarming of all (although she probably went a bit too far for today’s younger readers.)

The revelation that Chester was manipulating Gashford came as somewhat as a surprise to me, but elevated him to the top of the pile of the many villains in this story. His demise was described quite gruesomely in the bloody duel and it was fitting that the long suffering Haredale should (even if he was reluctant) administer the fatal blow. It was sad though that he was left alone and had to retire to a monastery. Why couldn’t he have gone out to the West Indies with his niece and Edward?

Someone wrote that everyone got what they deserved, but I am not sure that Tappertit or Gashford did.

Tappertit was the man who nurtured and fostered the United Bulldogs into a rampaging mob responsible for the deaths and maiming of hundreds of people. And yet he was released having lost only his precious legs, the result being a couple of pages of jokes at his expense. He even lived ‘happily ever after’ blacking boots and finding a wife. That would not have been the ending I would have given him.

Gashford just seemed to slink away from justice, down the ‘sewers’ like the slimy rat he was. One of the many who manipulate villains and literally get away with murder.

On a positive note, I agree that Gabriel Varden was the real hero of the story. He was a man who refused to be intimidated and who quietly but firmly went about his business to achieve his aims. He did need the help of Haredale, Edward and Joe but Gabriel was the driving force that eventually led to Barnaby’s survival. No wonder Mrs. Varden became a changed women when she realised it was her husband who best demonstrated all those Christian virtues. So much so that she probably threw the Protestant handbook into the dustbin.

Trev wrote: "Although I enjoyed this read, the second reading of Barnaby Rudge for me, I wasn’t entirely satisfied with the ending.

The contributions from everybody in this group added depth and brought in ne..."

I'm with you about George Haredale, Trev. I wished a better ending for him. As you've said, he could have ended up with Edward and Emma.

I too wasn't pleased at the light sentence Tappertit got. The worse is Gashford evading justice altogether. Both should have been hung! Tappertit lost both his legs however. I don't know whether they executed cripples at that time.

Piyangie wrote: "I don't know whether they executed cripples at that time. ..."

It seems that they did as described in ch. 77:
Two cripples—both mere boys—one with a leg of wood, one who dragged his twisted limbs along by the help of a crutch, were hanged in this same Bloomsbury Square.

Trev wrote: "Someone wrote that everyone got what they deserved, but I am not sure that Tappertit or Gashford did...."

I am one of those that said this 😊, and for my part I meant that I am not shedding a single tear for those that were hung or died in any other way. And while Tappertit and Gashford did survive, they seem to have led quite miserable lives. A far cry from the happiness that the good people achieved.

Lindenblatt wrote: "Piyangie wrote: "I don't know whether they executed cripples at that time. ..."

It seems that they did as described in ch. 77:
Two cripples—both mere boys—one with a leg of wood, one who dragged h..."

Ah, yes! I remember that.

The illustrations that accompanied Barnaby Rudge provided another added dimension to my enjoyment of the story. I am sure that the Victorian reader would also have relished the artwork provided for them.

The webpage below gives details of many of the illustrators who were asked to contribute to editions of Barnaby Rudge, both in books and magazines.

https://victorianweb.org/art/illustra...

Two illustrations of the duel between Haredale and Chester reveal the differences in the ways the illustrators depict this scene.

The expressions on the duellists’ faces show differing emotions.


(Fred Barnard - 1874)



(George Cattermole - 1841)

Both could be considered as metaphors for good finally overcoming evil, with possibly the worst villain of the lot finally vanquished.

As I said before, I have enjoyed reading Barnaby Rudge. It probably stands as a cautionary tale even today.

However, it hasn’t disturbed the placings of my personal favourite top three Dicken’s novels which are 1. Great Expectations, 2. Bleak House and 3. Little Dorritt.

Indeed, quite a difference, Trev. Has Dickens authorised the illustrations in the original version or were these added by the publisher? The later ones (after Dickens' death) he obviously never even saw.

I love a ranking, so here goes mine: 1. Bleak House, 2. David Copperfield and 3. A Tale of Two Cities (so far). Little Dorrit is next on my list (unless there'll be a group read of any of the other novels before I get to it).

Piyangie wrote: "Trev wrote: "The illustrations that accompanied Barnaby Rudge provided another added dimension to my enjoyment of the story. I am sure that the Victorian reader would also have relished the artwork..."

My copy has the second illustration. But I like the first more. To me, it captures the duelling scene better.

Here goes my top 3 of Dickens:
1. Our Mutual Friend and Bleak House
2. A Tale of Two Cities
3. David Copperfield

Bleak House is one of my favourites as well.

Looks like Bleak House is a common Dickens favourite. 😀

My top three are:
1. David Copperfield
2. Bleak House
3. Great Expectations

Piyangie wrote: "Looks like Bleak House is a common Dickens favourite. 😀"

It’s a great story! My top 3
1. Bleak House
2. David Copperfield
3. A Tale of Two Cities

Pamela wrote: "Piyangie wrote: "Looks like Bleak House is a common Dickens favourite. 😀"

It’s a great story! My top 3
1. Bleak House
2. David Copperfield
3. A Tale of Two Cities"

Our choices are more or less similar. 😀

I finished this book early lest week and I think forgot to come and post.

It seems like some of you were not thrilled with it, but I loved this book. I thought it an interesting story filled with both good and bad characters. Some of the bad characters were just bad - Dennis, for example, and Mr Rudge. Hugh was mostly bad, but I do wonder what a different childhood might have given him. With a father who didn’t even own him and a mother who was hung when he was young, he’d had two strikes against him before he even started, and you can tell that his defiance was mostly out of knowledge that he never belonged anywhere and that not a soul on earth cared. Plus, he did watch out for Barnaby a bit, showing that he did have some loyalty when he actually found a person worthy of it. Hugh is an interesting character, and probably the one I feel most conflicted about because although he was a bad person, it didn’t have to have been that way. If only someone had ever been there.

I think my favorite characters were probably Gabriel Varden and Barnaby himself. Both men wanted the absolute best for those they cared about. They were good, decent people.

I think that the most evil character in the book was probably Gashford. He never thought of anyone but himself. And Sir John Chester is right there tied with him. Horrible people who HAD been given higher stations and better chances, but chose evil on purpose and had no loyalty to anyone.

As for ranking Dickens books, I’ve only read 4 so far: Barnaby Rudge, Great Expectations, a Christmas Carol, and Oliver Twist. Of those, I’ll set aside A Christmas Carol for length and rank the others as follows: 1. Great Expectations; 3. Barnaby Rudge; 3. Oliver Twist.

In 2025 I plan to read The Pickwick Papers, David Copperfield, and Bleak House unless a read-along changes that.

We might read Martin Chuzzlewit next year, Beda. Hope you'll join.

I would love to read David Copperfield with this group. I’d welcome a Bleak House read or any other Dickens novel that the group wants, but David is my first choice.

According to Wikipedia……..

‘ Dickens based the Maypole Tavern on the Kings Head, Chigwell,[7] a 17th-century public house, situated on High Road, opposite the entrance to Roding Lane.’

Here is what it looks like today. It seems like lots of the original architecture is still in situ. Was this what you imagined the Maypole to look like?



‘the half-timbered building is one of Chigwell's oldest. Formerly the King's Head, the building dates from the 17th century and was the model for The Maypole in Charles Dickens' novel Barnaby Rudge. Dickens was a frequent visitor and described Chigwell as 'the finest place on earth'.

Thanks for the photo, Trev!

Thanks for sharing this info and the photo, Trev. I confess I imagined something more darker than this. I find this building more cheerful.