Peter's Room, chapter by chapter read-through: Chapters 10 and 11

[lilliburlero.livejournal.com]

Posting on behalf of legionseagle, to whom, many thanks for a really incisive and thought-provoking set of discussion posts. And thanks to everyone for their contributions in comments.

--L.B.

These two chapters take us right through to the end of the book. They largely parallel End of Term in that Nicola goes from her lowest point in the whole book to her highest. Forest, though, as always in dialogue with the genre, doesn't allow this to wipe out what's gone before; relationships have fundamentally shifted in the course of the book (even more than in EoT) and what's lost will not be regained – although possibly Nicola's better understanding with Rowan is some compensation.



I argued at the outset that one of the themes of the book is the Marlows ceasing to be visitors and becoming part of the local scene. This chapter in my view is key to that, beginning with Rowan deciding that wearing a velvet cap (as a farmer) would be premature "till the Master or someone says so".

My personal sense of the chapter is that it it's one of Forest's great set pieces (usual disclaimers about being unable to speak to accuracy on equine matters, but it conveys a great sense of authenticity.)

Once again, a nice blend of social comedy and repressed tension. For me., I particularly like Mrs Marlow, smoking over the breakfast table and stubbing out cigarettes half-smoked. This dates the book almost more than when she later descends the stairs in full riding habit complete with top-hat, to what can reasonably be described as shock and awe on the part of her family.*

Nicola, of course (having suffered her second severely broken night in a row) is channelling her inner Pte Fraser ("Doom! Doom!") although, being Nicola, she's achieving this by stoical silence, Service spit-and-polish and shedding silent tears into the neck of the dog when she's sure no-one's looking.

Another sidelight: Karen having "the sunny confidence of the unteachably bad driver." I don't suppose the Dunning-Kruger effect had been described at the time, but we certainly see it in action there.

Arrival at the Merricks is particularly funny, with Rowan's borrowed horse (what is a "blood weed" when it's at home?) giving rise to all sorts of alarums on the Merrick gravel. Like Nicola, I find Ronnie Merrick much more endearing in borrowed ratcatcher, visibly conscious of a nervous system.

I also like Patrick flinging around the place being a complete arse, Sellars being unflappable, Ronnie's fervent "Now and later" when asked about jumping powder and the neurotic Hot Ginger swinging "to and fro like a dinghy from its painter in an uneasy sea".

And then my darling Buster. He really is charming in this chapter; making Nicola at home even more than he makes her shine. I particularly like the way everyone from the Master down recognises him instantly and treats him as a Nicola's character witness: "Well, she might be a bit inept, but if old Buster likes her – "

Love, too, the hound names; almost Shakespearean, especially Oriel, Hotspur and Galliard.

Interesting how Gondal affects the players in the hunting field. Lawrie uses it as a self-preservation strategy; Ginty is almost unaffected by it, at least visibly; Peter is driven by it to take risks he then hasn't the skills/nerve/confidence to bring off (so business as usual, then) and Patrick –

Patrick carries betrayal through to the point where he's still Gondalling even when he's almost killed Nicola (and, for that matter, given Marlow codes of proper behaviour and relative culpability, when he's still not sure his own old pony isn't horribly injured.) Thoughts? For me, that really is a chilling moment and if the chapter had ended there I think it would have been game, set and match for Karen's analysis of Gondalling as an unmitigated Bad Thing. Of which more in the next.

It doesn't end there, and I find the final pages some of the most perfectly evocative prose I know. Especially the ending; it's reminiscent of Jim Brading falling asleep in the soup at Pin Mill, and John Walker doing the same at Flushing – a young person completely done in by whole-hearted involvement in physical exercise.

Possibly that may be what Forest is saying about Gondal; it inhibits the ability to lose oneself in the moment, which Nicola experiences (which she then tries and fails to turn into poetry – reality preceding representation rather than the other way round.) In short, are Ginty, Peter, Patrick and Lawrie so lost in the Gondal fiction of the hunt that they become detached from the real life experience of it?


*Bets now being taken. Was her girlhood riding habit really constructed on the basis that since marriage and babies were a known bug, there had to be enough in the seams to let out to make sure of its longevity, or does she really have an extraordinary metabolism despite the eight babies? Or did she sink the last dregs of the Last Ditch in a new outfit?







Unlike a number of the commentators I do genuinely enjoy the Gondal sections; they certainly aren't deathless prose, but they aren't at all bad for what they are. And there are times for the Michelin two-star plateful and times for a well-earned cheese sandwich; likewise for self-indulgent swash-buckling.

Nevertheless, given the emotional impact of the previous chapter, the italicised portion now comes over as all rather wooden. Brief note of "Captain Roncesvalles" – unconscious echoes of a last stand? Also, belated recognition on Rupert's part that the plotting includes a classic "idiot plot" – the forged dispatch is directly contrary to the recollections of all four others as to the contents of the originals, and it only needs someone to compare notes and he's done.

Another Foley echo – "It occurred to him to wonder … whether such sanctuary would be worth the seeking."

Interesting that the only time Nicolas Brenzaida is given any characterisation at all is almost at the last gasp of the Gondal: "And I would not. He may burn for all of me."

Not Nicola's normal style, that. Either she's suddenly decided to act, or she's exasperated beyond measure by the betrayal in the hunting field.

And then Rupert's suicide posturing. And Patrick pulling out information he knows (must know) Peter doesn't have, in order to wound as hard as he can (lawyer speak here; the thin skull rule. Peter has a particularly thin skull as regards treachery. Patrick doesn't know it. Nevertheless, he takes his chances when he takes this line.). And the (probably improbable, but nevertheless) gun incident.

One of the things I never understood at the time I first read this is why Nicola saving Patrick's life – as she undoubtedly does – is probably the biggest breach between them that could be (mind you, I read Sayers because of Forest, and not vice versa.)

I also didn't appreciate then – but do now – how Nicola's "I don't care if it's a billion to a quarter" shows how far she's grown up in what is about three-and-a-half weeks, from when she tried to argue issues of family democracy about Buster with Patrick.


Any thoughts about the post-Gondal ending? Round-up? Over-arching themes? Was the writer of the blurb copy right after all?

Comments

[occasionalhope.livejournal.com]

I'll comment on these two chapters later, but I just wanted to bring up something which has just occurred to me from earlier in the Gondal story. I wonder if it's occurred to Patrick that in his characterisation of his secondary character of the Evil Regent Lord Alcona, he's actually playing a version of his hero Richard III.

[legionseagle (from livejournal.com)]

Actually, he's playing Shakespeare's Richard III (especially in his suggestion about the old King being "wine, women and song" - which is a reasonable suggestion for later period Edward IV) not the Richard III of The Daughter of Time, in whom he professes to believe (I have met people in my days in the Richard III society who argued that RIII did it* because it was the right thing to do for the Kingdom, but so far as I can tell Patrick isn't one of them, he simply believes the straight Tey line)


*kill the princes

[bookwormsarah.livejournal.com]

I love Nicola's sudden assertiveness as she breaks free of it all. Her realisation that she doesn't have to join in just because everyone else is, ignoring the family democracy, and her finality are hugely satisfying, one of my favourite scenes in the book. I understand how she feels, but I know that I would have been caught up in it all like Lawrie and been so frustrated with her for ending it!

[buntyandjinx.livejournal.com]

And I love the way Nicola starts the hunting day "depressed" - quite a strong word but is renewed by the end, thanks to the wonderful Buster. I'd guess her success at hunting (combined with her disgust at P's monstrous behaviour) is also one of the major triggers in breaking free of the group

jacket copy

[lilliburlero.livejournal.com]

I think the discussion has given me a better appreciation of how destructive the Gondal really is to interpersonal relationships, above and beyond shoddy firearms safety. But I still think the jacket copy is rather misleading and moralising.

First of all '[Nicola]'s reservation is seen to be well-founded as the imaginary characters exercise more and more influence over their creators,' is a bit off, I think. The copy suggests that the roleplay characters themselves start to possess their creators; whereas the effect Forest actually gives is a much more plausible one of their immersion in a world. I recognise that sense of immersion from writing fiction: it really does have a sort of obsessive aspect to it, in that when I'm writing a story that I'm really invested in, there's nothing else I really want to do, and its world is slightly more real to me than my own life. I'm the one muttering to my characters on the bus.

But the bit that really enrages me is 'the dangers of make-believe prolonged beyond the proper age'. While there is some commentary on the Brontës continuing their roleplay into adulthood, and the implied authorial standpoint is broadly disapproving (though if Karen is a sort of mouthpiece here she's a highly ironised one), that's really not what the book's about at all. (And I always wonder what is 'the proper age'?).

I think the jacket copy implies that the novel's about The Dangers of Roleplaying, and that fantasy and imagination are the cause of the mess that the Gondal creates. Whereas I think the book's actually the dangers of embarking on a collective activity which is highly immersive but for which you have not defined parameters and when you have a group of people who are riven by all sorts of unspoken interpersonal conflicts. The problem is almost Too Much Reality, not Too Much Fantasy. And the problems won't be solved by eschewing imaginative activity.

Re: jacket copy

[schwarmerei1.livejournal.com]

*claps loudly* *feels validated* *weans off anxiety meds*

Collective Activity with Undefined Parameters

[legionseagle (from livejournal.com)]

Yes; that's why I referenced Mansfield Park in one or two of the earlier posts; I think Lovers Vows maps onto Gondal quite well:

Henry Crawford = Patrick. Wants to shine and flirt and doesn't care about how much harm he's doing to any or all of Maria, Julia or Fanny.
Ginty = Maria Bertram Enjoys acting and is good at it, but the real agenda is pursuing Patrick
Mr Yates = Lawrie
Nicola = Fanny Price

Admittedly, you don't have a Rushworth equivalent and Peter is more into it than Edmund but you do have the same sense of the subtext taking over the whole thing.

Mrs Marlow and the "jumping powder"

[buntyandjinx.livejournal.com]

I too absolutely adore the insights into Pam in the hunting chapter - the ciggie at breakfast, the outfit, best of all the alacrity with which she accepts Mr Merrick's "jumping powder" and then, at the first opportunity, disappears into the pub with him for more (along with Rowan and Ronnie :)). These days, I think social services would be alerted.

Re: Mrs Marlow and the "jumping powder"

[schwarmerei1.livejournal.com]

I know! It makes me ponder the notion of someone doing a "cleaned-up" Forest for the modern YA reader, much in the way Blyton has been for children. Imagine the series with drunk Lawrie gone, ciggies banned, no anti-Pomona league, and Marie Dobson not bullied?

Re: Mrs Marlow and the "jumping powder"

[legionseagle (from livejournal.com)]

Probably not in the Marlows' & Merricks' rank of life, even today. After all, if Cameron can leave his daughter in the pub...

Re: Mrs Marlow and the "jumping powder"

[antfan.livejournal.com]

Yes, it was a real shock to me to read FL where she is so bland it's not true. Much prefer her in her ciggie-stubbing, drinking and hunting manifestation!

I wonder if she is flowering because Geoff isn't there - he does dominate when he is present - or whether Forest just fleshed her out more as the series went on?

[legionseagle (from livejournal.com)]

Thanks for the comment and the support throughout the process. I've really enjoyed doing it, and thanks to everyone who's joined in.

[coughingbear]

The chapter about the hunt is a favourite part of Forest's writing to me. I love so much about it; Mrs Marlow's outfit, nervous systems, what the Merricks are like on hunting days, the hounds, Nicola's greeting to the Master, Buster who I love so much ('Come on, don't be such a cissy!'), the ride with the three white hounds and the awful awful moment when Patrick nearly jumps on her. (I do also love the moment in Attic Term when Nick bites back at Patrick and Ginty over that. I get the impression then and here that Patrick has never really noticed that's what he did.)

A very minor point: I'm always slightly taken aback by 'Rowan was one of those people who keep their promises even when they turn out inconveniently' over lending Peter Prisca. Of course I see that she would like to hunt, but the inconvenience was inherent in the promise that he could have Prisca in the holidays; it's not as though Peter is unexpectedly at home.

ETA: also, it only occurs to me now to link these together, but not only does Nicola save Patrick's life in the last chapter, but he could easily have killed or seriously injured her in this. So the debt is piling up.

[legionseagle (from livejournal.com)]

I like that moment in Attic Term, too, especially since Patrick was being an arse about her having fallen off in front both of Ginty and his father and deserved all he got.

Prisca

[sprog-63.livejournal.com]

I took it that the "turning out to be inconvenient" was because they hadn't expected hunting (because of the foot-and-mouth)?

the (probably improbable, but nevertheless) gun incident

[antfan.livejournal.com]

I never understood why the gun went off when Peter had supposedly tested them all. Do we assume he fired all the guns once but there was a bullet in the next chamber?

Or not? Because Ginty then tells Nicola that "nothing would have happened" if Nicola hadn't bashed Patrick's wrist (and Nicola herself seems to think that Lawrie is the one that would have been shot, she doesn't mention Patrick) but surely if Nicola hadn't done anything then, as legionseagle says Patrick would have killed himself?

Please explain, anyone who understands guns.

Or is there even meant to be something a bit supernatural about it all - harking back to thate earlier Devil on the Rooftop stuff?

Re: the (probably improbable, but nevertheless) gun incident

[legionseagle (from livejournal.com)]

It seems to me that Ginty is being extremely unfair to Nicola here. When the gun goes off it proves it was in fact loaded contrary to everyone's belief. Since in the previous five minutes Patrick has pointed it first at Lawrie (without pulling the trigger but allowing himself to be disarmed by force in circumstances where he could inadvertently have pulled the trigger) and himself (while deliberately pulling the trigger) Nicola hitting Patrick's wrist has merely deflected what the gun was pointing at when discharged not whether it discharged at all.

Two possibilities I can think of for Peter - first that he checked one gun twice over and overlooked the loaded one, secondly that he managed merely to cock the trigger rather than pulling it fully. I'm not sure, either, whether a pistol might previously have failed to discharge because of damp, but the constant fires and warmth in the room over the Gondalling period have dried out the charge sufficiently to cause it to work.

[occasionalhope.livejournal.com]

I've always envisioned Colbrook Castle as Corfe - which as it turns out actually did fall by treachery, but I'm not quite convinced by the royalist officers being shot out of hand in the aftermath. Except in Ireland my impression was that siege survivors were kept prisoner or sometimes released on oath they wouldn't rejoin the fight. I was also under the impression that Charles I only had one Catholic officer, the unfortunate Sir Arthur Aston (who was killed even more nastily than being shot, after the siege of Drogheda), who was a professional soldier not a Merrick-type landed gentleman.

Patrick knowing about Malise.

[jackmerlin.livejournal.com]

Does anyone else think it's quite deliberately nasty the way that Patrick has known about the real Malise's treachery all along and never thought to tell Peter? There's the interrupted conversation early on, when Peter asks if there's any more papers about Malise in the log, and Patrick says that he already knows how it ended. He doesn't get the chance to finish explaining then, but why not say something as soon as Peter chose the name Malise? Of course he has no knowledge of the Foley incident, so he doesn't know just how hurtful the full knowledge will be. But it seems to me that it would have been natural to tell Peter before he got any more interested in a character who he was going to be ashamed of. It just smacks to me of withholding information so that it can be released at a time when it will cause maximum damage.

Re: Patrick knowing about Malise.

[cyphomandra.livejournal.com]

It does seem particularly cruel when Patrick says "Don't you really know?", when surely he knows that Peter doesn't. I don't think he withholds it deliberately, but he does choose to release the information in the most devastating manner.

[cyphomandra.livejournal.com]

On my first read of this as an ever-so-slightly fantasy-obsessed teenager I was shattered when Nicola (who I'd previously identified strongly with) was the one to break the Gondal. I think I've now moved past that, although I do wonder what the Gondal would've been like without Ginty. Possibly I'm reading back in from Attic Term (and other later books), but I don't think it would have worked with any of the others gone - and yet it is Ginty that brings up the idea in the first place, and initially wants so desperately to identify with Emily Bronte that she encourages it.

Possibly this is me also trying to argue with the blurb. Was this doomed from the start because a) the flaws inherent to make-believe or because b) the flaws of those involved in it? (or c) the devil on the roof-tree)

Peter's collar bone.

[jackmerlin.livejournal.com]

I can't help wondering what happened to Peter and his collar bone when he got home. Were Mrs Marlow and Rowan still out hunting? Did Karen have to drive him to hospital?
I like to think Rowan would have had the sense to go home after a half-day, seeing as she was on a young horse and they'd gone fast. So maybe Peter was saved a scary drive with Karen after all.
I love Lawrie's hired horse who seems to be the only one who knows that you don't stay out all day on one horse, if the hunt goes fast.

end of Gondal + AFand gender

[(Anonymous)]

It seems to me that Nicola's helped to break away from the Gondal at the end not just by the near disaster but by Rowan's 'what on earth d'you think you're playing at?' Rowan's her natural ally, but she's been missing her because R is so preoccupied after taking on the farm. Once the crisis of the shooting scene is over, her last scene is arranging with Rowan to help with lambing.

Re earlier discussions about relationships and gender presentation, no-one ever seems to say but AF was lesbian, surely? Best best close friends with GB Stern (see Katharine Whitehorn etc), going on holidays together, never married? In the books, conventionally married mothers (and girls like Ann who are shaping up to be such) are dull/ shallow/ spiteful/ irrelevent, and being interested in boys like Ginty isn't much better.

Sorrel

Rowan's role

[scarletlobster.livejournal.com]

It strikes me that Rowan's role throughout is PAINFULLY grown-up. I can't remember the exact gap between her and Ginty, but it's not that great. But she basically spends the entire book toiling away from dawn to dusk in the freezing cold while the others lounge in front of a warm fire roasting chestnuts and playing a game she is not allowed to know about. I don't know if you would be human not to resent it a bit and to feel rather left-out, especially as we never get any sense of a relationship between Rowan and Ann.

Treachery and friendship/Forster

[antfan.livejournal.com]

An aspect of the treachery theme that struck me in the final chapter is the presentation of a clash between loyalty to friends and loyalty to principle.

When Rupert is unmasked as a traitor, Ginty says "we are his friends" and argues that they should help him escape or go into voluntary exile. Peter rejects that outright. This friendship vs the state (or personal loyalties vs principles) clash I'd argue is a very big theme - maybe the major theme- in The Players and the Rebels (and a theme of MATT too?)

Some of us have commented on Kim Philby as maybe inspiring this preoccupation of Forest's with treachery of a certain kind. But others have pointed out that the Philby case happened too late. But now I'm wondering if it's the EM Forster “If I had to choose between betraying my country and betraying my friend I hope I should have the guts to betray my country” line and perhaps related discussions/debates that Forest is interested in and taking issue with - the Forster quote is from an article published in 1938 by the way. Forster and Philby were both Apostles and so the linkages are still there, if you see what I mean. I must add quickly that I know very little about Forster/the Apostles/Bloomsbury set and the general background, but obviously these were questions that interested them.

It's interesting that Ginty makes the plea for friendship, oblivious to the fact that Patrick has betrayed his friendship with Nicola. And I like the fact that when Nicola breaks with the others, she still doesn't betray them to Rowan - despite having several opportunities to do so throughout the book. Of course, that's Nicola's character - she virtually never confides in anyone - but still.

Sayers

[(Anonymous)]

I think it refers to Harriet being in Lord Peter's debt for saving her from the gallows - she can't stand having to be grateful.

sayers

[(Anonymous)]

Sorry , saying this again because I don't know how to link - I think this is about Harriet hating having to be grateful to Lord Peter for saving her life.

Re: sayers

[antfan.livejournal.com]

Oh yes, of course! Thank you so much.

Sayers

[(Anonymous)]

Sorry , still not going where i want it to.
Pip

Re: Sayers

[lilliburlero.livejournal.com]

For a time, comments containing links were being spamfiltered, but I think ankaret has removed the restriction for the time being.

Info on linking in general (http://www.w3schools.com/html/html_links.asp).