Readthrough: Ready Made Family: Chapters 8-10

[lilliburlero.livejournal.com]

Many thanks to jackmerlin for taking the reins last week.



We begin with a delicious understatement, and a worrying indication of the cultural and political differences between the Dodd and Marlow households. I’m a slow-starting, coffee-sipping, absently reading sort of morning person myself, so I have one of my rare moments of sympathy with Edwin here.

Forest gets Ginty and Peter’s teenage obnoxiousness down to a tee, I think, and it’s thoroughly enjoyable if you don’t have to sit through it yourself. Peter’s ‘ “[Ginty’s feet] will be stirrup-bound” ’ and her response, ‘ “How quite revolting-sounding,” ’ strikes me as moderately risqué for the target market. (It wouldn’t entirely surprise me if the Merrick Boy turned out to have some fascinating sexual kinks in later life, but that is to gallop too early into the Vale of Headcanon, perhaps.)

Ginty overdoes it: ‘a bish that would make her kick the sheets for months to come when memory gibbered at her in the night’ is one of my favourite Forest insights. Ouch. Katie is wonderfully pitiless.

Edwin’s distant studiousness contrasts with the Marlows’ mucking-in ethos, and the children’s rather pathetic response to being noticed: ‘like puppies who have heard their names called’. How perfectly Edwin of Edwin to address his reply about Yetland Cove to Mrs Marlow rather than answering his son directly.

His hostility to the nicknames is interesting: I can see how he might resent his children having been so summarily re-christened, but he handles it (after all, rather a sign of affection and welcoming than the reverse, and one which the children like and reciprocate) perfectly abominably. It’s a lovely touch that he’s ‘baffled’: Edwin’s never had a nickname, has he? (Sympathy briefly re-ignites.)

Oof, Peter. 'Patrick or Buster?' That was needlessly nasty.

Nicola and Patrick’s conversation is painfully strained, but warms up a little at the introduction to Blackleg, which is, of course Ginty’s cue, make-up and all. Nicola’s realisation that she is not wanted is done with great subtlety and the comfort she takes in Buster rather heartbreaking. Nick really does pick ‘em, doesn’t she? Watsonian reasons why she keeps on getting dumped?

The uncomfortable conflicts of authority resulting from the Dodds and the Marlows inhabiting the same space are nicely intimated in the minor row over Rose’s reluctance to go out, and the reaction to Chas’s comical ‘ “Poor girl! Life is quite over for her!” ’ is well-observed, I think: Edwin wanting to laugh but suppressing it with a snap at Karen’s unconcealed smile.

Nicola and Peter’s oscillations between responsibility and carelessness in this passage are beautifully handled, and I much enjoy their conversation about Kay’s apparent uninterest in asserting her presence in the children’s lives, ending on that uncomfortable margin of speculation about the sexual lives of siblings: ‘“She must have made it clear to Mister—sorry-pardon, Edwin—[...] that she was alive and breathing” ’. Their compact over The Idiot Boy (Wordsworthian names for nags: classy, eh?) is also a nicely-handled moment, though one with far-reaching consequences.

Nicola’s circumnavigation fantasies are a nice lead-in to the episode on the wrecked smack. Interesting that her childhood reading doesn’t seem to have included Old Possum’s Book of Practical Cats. Forest achieves a nice balance of real danger and anxiety with utter farce here: nearly a nasty accident, indeed. Nicola’s exasperation with the follies of Chas, only four years younger than she, is precisely observed, I think: the difference between Nine and Thirteen is vast. Her learning how to communicate with the Dodds (‘circus pusscat’) ties in to the books’ theme of family idiolect.

Peter’s dislodging of the capstan continues the book’s theme of near and narrow misses, but turns out fortuitous. Nicola’s observation that ‘for the moment is all seemed to have been an enormous huha about nothing’ is accurate about the psychology of immediate relief.

Chas and Fob’s lack of trepidation concerning 'Fiorfrorefiddle' [sic: I'm not sure if it's Chas's mispronunciation, a typographical error, or Forest's misremembering] contrast with their older sister’s fear of animals: I rather love Fob yowling The Beatles at him. The information that it took Nicola ‘quite some years’ to feel very warm towards Fob again is a delightful flash-forward: this has been your regular scheduled fic prompt.

Peter’s minatory conversation with Chas is very acutely done: the lower decks' pastiche of the quarterdeck. But oh dear—I shouldn’t trust Peter’s judgement and orders above Nicola’s, improved though he has since Traitor. His closing revelation that he was quite happy to let Nicola take responsibility for the infant Dodds until it became clear something was actually wrong doesn’t wholly inspire confidence either.





The first paragraph, with its litany of disappearances, is a rather foreboding opening. Edwin and Karen seem to be neglecting their responsibilities rather: it's something of a cheek to ask Mrs Marlow to take the kids to the dentist, but as we'll discover, Karen has a neck of solid brass. 'Me hatee Katee': oh Chas, I sympathise (and more than trying it on for sound.)

More conflicts of authority as Edwin tries to negotiate forbidding Chas the embankment and Peter is aggravating. And conflicts of loyalty: Nicola's feelings on overhearing Karen's deprecation of her brother to Edwin are absolutely characteristic of Nicola's stubborn affections. Ominous foreshadowing, though still played for comic effect as Lawrie becomes dissatisfied with Ariel and enamoured of Caliban. Lawrie's letter to Kempe is all the more delightful for remaining in our imaginations, I think, but if anyone fancies epistolary!Lawrie, this has been your regularly scheduled &c.

Rowan's relief at the farm being free of swine fever reminds us of her fairly thankless ongoing toil throughout all this; but her editorial work on Lawrie's letter provides a comic moment.

I think giving people dogs as surprise gifts is just an awfully bad idea, so I find myself in uncertain sympathy with what Peter imagines Edwin's response to be on this one. In fact, the drama of Chas's birthday treat does seem to gloze over the introduction of another canine member of the household. Nicola and Peter-both, one reflects, now dumped by the Merrick Boy-get on hearteningly well here.

Nicola's collection of The Idiot Boy is a lovely setpiece: her defiant response to Patrick's tease, her surprising initial mastery of him, the 'apocalyptic' sky, her fall, her realisation that in her discomfort she'd forgotten to give Patrick the cheque.

The descriptions of the rainwashed village are beautiful, and with the comedy of Mr Pedder's pedantry and PC Catchpole's officiousness create a deceptively sanguine mood before what is I think a definitive moment in Lawrie and Nicola's relationship. What do others think of their row and its significance?

Peter's intuition that it was seeing Patrick and Ginty together that rattled Nicola, and his relative tact (even though he is wrong in this instance) about it demonstrates the improvement of their relationship. The description of 'Peter and the Idiot both trying to understand what Peter meant' is rather charming; I'm amused his 'officerly' laziness at book-distance, too, though in the flesh I find such behaviour unreasonably irritating.

What do people think of Karen's sharp practice about the house? I'm with Rowan and Nicola on this one: I think it's fairly bloody vile of her, though I can partially sympathise with Mrs Marlow being apparently on her side, largely to get the Dodds out of Trennels before violence erupts (which she doesn't manage to do). Karen appears to great disadvantage in this book, I think--utterly selfish. Her notably feeble riposte ' "I suppose the real reason you won't do anything is because I didn't tell you beforehand" ' reveals the extent of her self-centredness: she really hasn't noticed that Rowan has a more-than-professional relationship with the Tranters. Peter's '"If I were you I wouldn't write [to Capt Marlow] at all"' neatly connects the eldest sister with the youngest, as does Karen's uncharacteristically Lawrie-ish door-bang, and Forest segues smoothly into Nicola's refusal to back down over The Idiot. Both Karen and Lawrie do (eventually, very eventually in Lawrie's case) get their way on these matters, though: a nicely anti-moralising touch.

More disappointments for Lawrie in Kempe's letter: I think it's probably a bit unfair (and daft) of Kempe to respond in this way, though--it can't have escaped her notice that Lawrie is a child who needs firm boundaries, and to expect her to understand politely negative equivocation is setting oneself up for trouble down the line.





I enjoy the way that Forest suggests the strict discipline under which Peter lives at Dartmouth with his creative letter-but-not-spirit evasions of the much laxer home equivalent. Peter's sketch of Edwin as someone who 'just doesn't like people to enjoy themselves in their own way' is spot on, but Nicola' mention of Malise suggests a more personal reason for Peter's disinclination to go to Colbrook Castle, and his immediate sympathy with Chas on the point.

Forest conveys the Yetland Cove outing with economy but a fine sense of its dawnlit magic. Poor Rose, though: 'Peter and Nicola had no idea they were walking with someone who was sure she knew just how it felt to be a poor fish...'--such a precise description of painful sensitivity.

Of what legionseagle once memorably in another context called the Guy Gibson school of dog nomenclature, I shall say nothing. But if people do want to thrash through the unedifying but I think largely incidental instances of racism in the series (though, one reflects, incidental for roughly the same reason that Mr Deasy is able to acquit Ireland of anti-Semitism), please feel free. Rowan, I have noted, seems to go in for stereotypes and slurs concerning Chinese people.

The detail that Mrs Marlow is gluttonous about fried fish for breakfast is a delight. Chas, you rotten thing, knowing how Rose feels and still pulling the guts-for-garters routine.

And finally, the Saving of the London Train. Again, I appreciate the flash-forward to Nicola's future: 'It was something she was to remember always...', her panicked flashback to the previous nearly-a-nasty-accident and her first meeting with the Dodds, the 'newspaper words', her memory of the squashed hedgehog. Forest does shock and relief almost better than she does peril itself: Nicola, Peter, Chas and Rose have post-stress reactions that are all perfectly in subtly-shaded character. Does every children's writer long to do a Railway Children, I wonder?


Right, I think that'll do from me. Have at it!

Comments

[oursin.livejournal.com]

am just wondering whether Karen's rather unsympathetic streak of determination over getting her way might just have some relationship to being Giles' immediately younger sibling? And also being put into situations as when she was Head Girl and under expectations of certain kinds (like keeping discipline in the Thirds) in which she had no interest. This might make her a bit over-emphatic about getting her own needs met.

[serriadh.livejournal.com]

It might also be a product of growing up in a family where actually requesting anything seems rather frowned on (presumably because it's disclosing the emotional state of wanting it). If you do want things and have never really got them, and you've spent quite a lot of your early years Being Always Wrong (I am imagining living with the sainted eldest son and then expected to discipline first the lower deck and then the Thirds), and have never learnt how to ask for things in a calm way, you're liable to be somewhat over-emphatic. (Not realising Rowan might perhaps have formed a friendship with the Tranters while Katie was cavorting at Oxford* is unforgiveable though.)

* Which is another thought: is Rowan particularly bitter because (while Karen was obviously never going to want to run the farm or be even slightly able to) she was able slightly to soothe the worst parts of farm-running with the thought that she was freeing Karen for Oxford and Giles for his career, and it's become very clear that Karen didn't much like Oxford and is in fact throwing it all up anyway?

[(Anonymous)]

I wonder if Karen's "streak of determination" comes from being near the top of a very large family? All those very demanding babies and toddlers, in what was pretty often a one parent home, ( and with less money and presumably less help than now) The older ones might have had to be pretty determined to get their share.
Pip

[legionseagle (from livejournal.com)]

I have to say, giving someone else's child a dog (particularly in a family where another child is nervous to the point of phobic about animals) without clearing it with the parents strikes me as spectacularly Off*.

Though also a Tory MP christening a horse "Blackleg" and giving it to his offspring isn't the most tactful gesture I could think of, either.


*Not quite as off as a case on my parents' street, where my parents' neighbour's grandchild was given an iguana (which bit) by the child's father, their son-in-law. The father being the non-custodial parent, the child's parents having separated.

dogs as gifts

[antfan.livejournal.com]

giving someone else's child a dog (particularly in a family where another child is nervous to the point of phobic about animals) without clearing it with the parents strikes me as spectacularly Off

Agree completely. Maybe Nicola and Peter are thinking that the puppy can always muck in at Trennels if necessary (but then that would be devastating for Chas) or maybe it's culture of the times, and all the RSPCA's "a dog isn't just for Christmas" campaigns have made us more aware.

(I do wonder about the dogs generally in the series. Tessa - who is definitely not a farm dog, not allowed near the sheep - must need a lot of exercise. Presumably that's one of Mrs M's chores when the kids aren't home, walking her. And keeping a young poodle at a boarding school - however devoted Esther may be, that just doesn't seem at all kind - Daks must spend most of his time shut up in a run/kennel.)

[lilliburlero.livejournal.com]

I assumed that Blackleg, like most dapple greys, just has black legs and hence, but the political implications are hilarious.

[legionseagle (from livejournal.com)]

On the subject of the Tranters, I'm also with Rowan and Nicola (quite apart from the callousness, it sets up long term problems for Rowan in her ability to attract a new farm manager in the medium term; another house will have to be found, it won't be as nice as the farm-house, and the bad feeling will no doubt linger all the way from Westbridge to Compton Marshall.)

[mrs-redboots.livejournal.com]

Indeed. The Tranters might have been very relieved to have their nice council house at last, but if they are to employ another farm manager, another cottage will be wanted... but then, it's quite possible that the Dodds will move on in due course, no? I mean, I know they haven't by the end of the series, but that is less than a year away in Marlow-time, so not very long at all.

[nineveh-uk.livejournal.com]

she really hasn't noticed that Rowan has a more-than-professional relationship with the Tranters

But how would she? Rowan took over the farm in the summer. Karen has been away for most of the time since, and I very much doubt that Rowan has been writing saying "Mr Tranter has been an enormous help, I couldn't have managed without him". I'd be surprised if Karen were getting signals that Mr Tranter were more than another employee. She perhaps ought to have considered that Rowan knows nothing about farming and must be learning it from someone, and Mr Tranter is probably that someone, and that his employers probably owe him some considetation, but without someone telling her "Mr Tranter isn't just an employee, he's a friend" is not a message than any absent Marlowe is going to be told, or necessarily going to pick up on. So I rather regard that separately from her behaviour once she does know, which is selfish.

Ed: TL:DR I think there's a classic case of Marlovian "Family members will have psychic powers" adding to the whole mess here.

[antfan.livejournal.com]

I think whether Rowan is friends with Mr Tranter or not isn't really the point. It's that Rowan and Nicola are much more invested in Trennels and its relationships in a traditional landlord-with-obligations-to-the-tenants almost feudal sort of way. Rowan's already said she feels obliged to the people who work at Trennels not to leave, and Nicola also seems very involved with the people on the farm - knowing who Mrs Tranter's sister is, for example, and exactly how long the Tranters have in the farm.

By contrast, Karen and maybe Mrs Marlow see Trennels in a much more contractual, employees and employees sort of way.

[lilliburlero.livejournal.com]

I suppose what I meant was that, given that Karen has developed a relationship that ended in marriage over the same period, she might just have intuited, were she less self-centred, that other members of the family weren't in cold storage, and might feel quite deeply attached to the people they'd been working with too.

Rowan and the tranters

[scarletlobster.livejournal.com]

Earlier on, it is made clear that Rowan sometimes goes to the Tranter's for lunch instead of coming to the big house. Karen must surely have known that this was the case.

[nzraya.livejournal.com]

But Karen was THERE when Rowan came in, terribly upset, the day Mr Tranter had his stroke. I mean, it is so obvious in that scene how hard it's hitting her from various angles. Bt Karen, of course, is all wrapped up in her own little drama (considerably less interesting or important than the near-death of, well, ANYONE, much less an integral member of the farm staff who would leave behind a frightened wife as well as an overwhelmed Rowan).

And I mean. It just seems so un-English to be willing to trample all over such a delicate situation like that. I know living at Trennels itself is hellish, but Karen really SHOULD have thought of that before she saddled them all with each other. Riding roughshod over a grieving widow (practically) and demanding a house that even in the ABSENCE of the Tranters is not actually rightfully hers....it's digustingly entitled and inconsiderate. I hate people who act like this.

[occasionalhope.livejournal.com]

Both Nicola and Peter are rather irresponsible with the Dodd children: they don't really supervise the beach play properly, resulting in the near-drowning; they leave the children to their own devices in the train incident; and I agree with everyone saying given a puppy as a present not approved of by the parents is a horrendously bad idea. Especially a spaniel cross, which are almost invariably extremely hyperactive and not noticeably bright, so although lovely affectionate pets, they need a lot of attention.

Didn't Nicola already know all her knots before she joined the Guides?

[legionseagle (from livejournal.com)]

There's no reason for her to know a highwayman's hitch if she's been looking at it from a nautical point of view.

With respect to the beach play, I think that's a difference between now and the 1960s with respect to the level of supervision that might be seen as appropriate.

[oursin.livejournal.com]

Earlier attempt failed to post. Might argue that this constitutes something of as a maturity moment, when Peter and Nicola are no longer the Young Ones to be looked out for (not that this is exactly Marlow practice) but the ones supposed to be responsible for the littler ones. Possibly a point along Nicola's longer trajectory towards taking responsibility - a certain amount already in school context (and much more in next volume!) - also perhaps relates to her response to Lawrie's meltdown?

Sympathy with Edwin

[antfan.livejournal.com]

I've got a bit of sympathy with Edwin in these chapters. OK, he's not the most charming, but he probably has very little to do with teenagers, and as he would have been a teenager himself in what - the 1940s? - it's not surprising he doesn't really know how to talk to them. (I've hear myself making totally asinine remarks of the "oh, how you've grown!" variety out of desperation when confronted with unknown children.)

And, as Occasionalhope says, Peter and Nicola are pretty irresponsible. Even without knowing anything about Peter's firearms record - would you trust them with your kids? Especially after your wife has just been killed in an accident, thus making you, presumably, a bit more protective than usual?

(Mind you, he's getting a lot of free child care. He could be grateful for that.)

Re: Sympathy with Edwin

[jackmerlin.livejournal.com]

I know attitudes to child-care have changed since the sixties, but isn't it extraordinary that Edwin not only trusts two teenagers to look after his children all day, every day, but actually takes it for granted that they will look after them. Especially as Fob is only five, and looking after a five year old is a very different thing to keeping a nine and ten year old company.

Lawrie/Nicola bust up and Nicola and friends

[antfan.livejournal.com]

I do really enjoy this, for all the reasons in the summary. (Those very Lawrie-esque struggles with the mackintosh are lovely too.) But I do think Nicola has actually resisted Lawrie's demands quite often in the series before - she spends most of End of Term refusing to go along with her over desks, and parts, and Thuggery starts with her going to London despite Lawrie's opposition. So I'm not sure why this occasion is seen as so significant - perhaps because it's at home, and it's within the family context that Nicola's role as the twin that gives way is most entrenched? Or because she's said "No" to Lawrie without the extra nudge of Miranda backing her up?

I also think Nicola's reflections about her best friends earlier aren't entirely justified. She acquired Miranda as a best friend at about the same time she realised she wasn't Tim's best friend, and there's no sign at all in the series of Miranda ever considering dumping Nick. I think this may be a rare case of Nicola being a teeny bit self-indulgent...or maybe not wanting to face head-on the fact it's really Patrick, not anyone else, she's upset about.

Re: Lawrie/Nicola bust up and Nicola and friends

[intrepid--fox.livejournal.com]

Not sure I agree with you there. Miranda has a track record of taking up and dumping people, so Nicola may well be thinking that she somehow gives out, er, dumpee vibes, and that's why Miranda picked her in the first place.

Though I do like your point that it could all be a proxy for being much more hurt about Patrick even than she's willing to admit to herself.

*That* kind of stirrups?

[intrepid--fox.livejournal.com]

i have to say, I'd never interpreted the exchange about stirrup-bound feet like that, probably because I'd never heard of the gynaecological variety when I first read the book, aged 12. Really, Miss Forest.

Re: *That* kind of stirrups?

[jackmerlin.livejournal.com]

I wonder if Edwin's inability to talk to the Marlow teenagers without sounding uncle-ish stems from extreme shyness. Which perhaps explains his appeal to Karen - she gets to see the 'real Edwin' when they are on their own.
I find Peter and Ginty very funny in this scene. But I have mixed feelings about the nineteen year old Karen being drawn into the cajoling adult role - trying to draw Peter and Ginty out to talk sensibly to their nice uncle Edwin as if they were reluctant toddlers.

Buying the Idiot Boy.

[jackmerlin.livejournal.com]

No-one seems to take the amount of money involved in buying the Idiot Boy seriously, which as someone who could never have afforded a pony in my wildest dreams, I always found astonishing, especially in comparison to KM Peyton's Ruth who has to save up desperately to buy Fly-by-Night.
What I find odd I suppose is that Peter and Nicola are buying him pretty much on a whim, and neither really wants him. Peter just wants to show that he can be brave about riding, and Nicola just wants to make a stand against Lawrie - neither good reasons to spend your life savings. I suppose the money doesn't seem real to Nicola and Peter because it has been remote savings certificates in a bank and not money in their pockets, but should Mrs Marlow be allowing them to do this? After all, if the Idiot Boy breaks a leg galloping around loose after bucking one of them off, they will have lost everything.

Re: Buying the Idiot Boy.

[antfan.livejournal.com]

Yes, it is bizarre, isn't it? And really, Lawrie does have a bit of a point that she is being double-crossed - although Forest does such a good job of showing Lawrie as a chump in this book that it's hard not to see things entirely from Nicola's perspective (for me, anyway).

As for Mrs M, though - I guess part of it is that riding is such a big part of local life, and a way of getting her kids involved in what she herself finds a very enjoyable activity. And who knows, with the Marlows, maybe riding will actually be a less risky option than leaving them to their own devices... Anyway, she's got eight kids. She can take the risk.

Nicola's future husband.

[jackmerlin.livejournal.com]

I like Nicola's feeling as she overhears Karen apologising to Edwin, that she would never side with any future husband against Rowan or Giles. While I would love Nicola to end up with an improbably wonderful husband who never makes her feel that tension between himself and her family, I can also see some future fan-fic opportunities. How about Nicola's husband being a Naval Officer ranked higher than Giles, and an argument brewing while they are all spending a leave at Trennels?

Re: Nicola's future husband.

[oursin.livejournal.com]

I'm not necessarily positing eventual total disillusionment over Giles, but the fallibility of supposedly senior figures is a recurrent motif (Foley, Lois, various members of Kingscote staff, etc).

Edwin and Karen and responsibilities for others

[mainerobin.livejournal.com]

I really don't understand why when Edwin and Karen come home, they make no attempt whatsoever to spend time with the children so they can get to know Karen. I feel furious with Edwin's deciding his children need to see a dentist right away and then being too busy to actually take them. Why don't we see any bonding with Edwin and the children, Karen and the children, or even for that matter Edwin and Karen? Why doesn't Mrs Marlow suggest to Karen that it might be a good idea for her to get to know her new children.

That said, I love these chapters and the joys Rose, Chas, and Fob are having spending their days with Peter and Nicola. Regarding their own lack of responsibility about the Dodds, Peter and Nick are doing exactly what they want to do and are happy enough to have the Dodds along, but no one has actually said they must change their plans to babysit the Dodds. They are just all playing together. When I was young (in the 60s, about the same time as this book), groups of children of all ages might play together and one generally assumed that everyone was responsible for oneself. If someone ran into trouble, everyone was happy to help them, particularly to avoid trouble with adults, but no one was there saying "Don't do that, it isn't safe." Nick and Peter's attitude sounds very similar to our own when playing with younger kids. I don't see it as irresponsible, just a typical lack of awareness, some of which Nicola develops when she decides not to follow Peter into the cave.

One other point of interest from a personal point of view. (I could be one of those people who would be happy to buy any boat I can get my hands on). I find it fascinating that Nicola wants a catamaran to sail around the world. Where would she have seen these? Chicester sailed with a monohull. Multihulls were being rediscovered in the 60s, but not really in popular culture. I wonder where AF ran into catamarans. BTW, a trimaran would be a better global-sailing boat as they head upwind much better, but I'm assuming AF knows about circumnavigating like she knows about pigeons, and horses.

Re: Edwin and Karen and responsibilities for others

[legionseagle (from livejournal.com)]

I agree it wouldn't be my choice for a round the world boat (especially the early cruising cats which had massive overturning problems) but apparently Prout were doing cruising cats from the mid 50s.

Who on earth is on the book cover?

[scarletlobster.livejournal.com]

Possibly the middle of a read-through is not quite the place, but I am baffled. I have the faber edition, with a girl in jeans with a ghastly kind of mullet. I assume that is Nicola.

But what on earth is the cover of the Fanfare edition about? There appears to be an angry/ furtive looking young man in the foreground, a child behind him to the right, and the back view of a woman behind him to the left. Who ARE these people? http://www.amazon.co.uk/Ready-made-Family-Fanfare-Antonia-Forest/dp/0571114946

Re: Who on earth is on the book cover?

[lilliburlero.livejournal.com]

I have the Fanfare edition, and have pondered this conundrum myself. Is the angry/furtive young man meant to be Peter? I think the back-view figure is meant to be a girl, perhaps Rose? And maybe the small child is Fob? I think whoever provided information to the cover artist must have skim-read the vaguest of summaries.

Peter

[melandraanne.livejournal.com]

One of the things that I seem to notice on re-reading this book is the way that Peter seems to be continually prodding Nicola and Ginty about Patrick ... as if he's trying to gauge their reaction and feelings.

Is this just being a typical brother ?

Or is it more a case of his interest in another discarded 'friend of Patrick' is reacting to, or coping with, being dumped by Patrick ?

(I have to admit that in my personal future story, Patrick, after working his way through all the available Marlows, including Gilles, would end up back with Peter...)

Re: Peter

[jackmerlin.livejournal.com]

It is fairly typical brother behaviour, but then only a few weeks previously Peter and Patrick were in the thick of the Thuggery Affair, which you would have thought would have deepened their friendship. And yet we haven't even seen Patrick and Peter say hello yet this holiday. So I think you are right that Peter is prodding at Nicola's feelings as a displacement for thinking about his own.

Re: Privileged Marlows

[(Anonymous)]

How can you say that Edwin has a rough time? He has moved in with in-laws that he didn't have the courtesy to meet before the wedding, he is being housed and fed, his children are being attended to (and when he doesn't approve of the care they are getting he doesn't actually look after them himself - they can stay in the garden) .It might be a bit tense but the only thing that is really difficult is that a teenage boy is a bit cheeky - so he HITS HIM WITH A STICK!!!!!

Re: Privileged Marlows

[scarletlobster.livejournal.com]

For a man in his 40's he certainly doesn't seem to behave very sensibly. "Oh, my wife is dead. I think I'll marry this young student, remove her from university, and move in with my in-laws, none of whom I have ever met, and who are bound to regard the whole thing with disfavour. What could possibly go wrong?"