Fairness in the Marlow household

[carmine-rose.livejournal.com]

I was wondering if anyone had any thoughts on the fair/unfair treatment of the Marlow young by their parents. I'm thinking specifically the treatment of Nicola by her parents/mother in Cricket Term. Is there anyway this could have been handled better? Should it actually have been Nicola who was going to have to leave? Should they have told her or dropped it on her in the summer holidays? Should they have removed all the girls, or perhaps just both twins?

For that matter, should Lawrie have been given the Prosser? (I know this wasn't her parents' decision, I'm just interested whether people think it was a good judgement call on the part of the staff.)

In a similar vein, what about the horse business in Peter's Room? Was it fair that their mother bought Ginty a horse for her birthday, and said no-one else was to ride it? Was it reasonable to buy herself one before ensuring the children all had equal access to a horse for hunting? In effect, she created a situation where one daughter was the only one in the family who was unable to go hunting (without hiring a horse), which seems harsh to me. But then, I'm from a small family where such unequality with gifts never happened - is this normal for a large family? Was Lawrie's reaction reasonable, or did other readers take it as just one more example of her throwing whiny tantrums?

These two occasions seemed to me to best illustrate Mrs. Marlow's failings as a mother (and also perhaps where the children got their selfishness) - I wondered if anyone else felt the same.

Can anyone else think of any other examples of this kind of thing? Or of fairer treatment?

Comments

[slemslempike.livejournal.com]

I don't know. I don't see Lawrie having to hire a horse as a problem - I assume that the family funds pay for that. I think she just wanted one to have one and because Ginty did. It seems that the present was more generous than usual presents, but it was birthday and Christmas, and there's not much description of other presents, and perhaps on a farm it's not so big a deal anyway.

I never thought Mrs Marlow was that bad a parent. I think she's the kind of parent her children want her to be, mostly.

[carmine-rose.livejournal.com]

I don't necessarily mean Mrs. Marlow was a bad parent - just pointing out some of of what I consider to be mistakes. And I'm sure they wouldn't want her any other way.

I think perhaps the "one big random present" thing is more normal in large families, and you're right, we don't know if the others have had similar large presents at other times. But I do think hiring a horse was a bit of an issue, in that obviously a pretty talented rider (I think we're told Lawrie is quite good) couldn't stay the course of the hunt because the hired hirse she is one goes "lame".

[clanwilliam.livejournal.com]

Except Lawrie *isn't* that talented a rider. She ignores the horse's needs in favour of her own pleasure.

And it's also the first time we hear of her being that into riding - while she likes the idea of being co-owner of the Idiot Boy, she's clearly not keen enough to fork out any cash for him and you'd wonder just how much work she'd put into taking care of him.

[melandraanne.livejournal.com]

Interesting question...

First of all, I think Mrs Marlow has a pretty tough time, being left sole in charge of such a large family while her husband is at sea for so much of the time. And she tries hard in order not to flap too much, not to criticize one child in front of another, not to be hypocritical (for example when Karen announced her wedding plans...) Considering she can only have been in her early 40's, I feel she does pretty well !

Concerning the fee-paying situation, I suppose they could have looked around for another (slightly) cheaper school for all four girls. Taking just one out does, on the surface, look rather unfair - although Mrs Marlow's reasons for Nicola's 'it's you' letter seem totally reasonable. I must admit that having been in a similar situation myself, I did have one daughter in private school and one in public for a year - it just happened to be the most convenient way to do things when financial changes meant we couldn't keep them both at the private school.

For the Prosser, it does sound, to me, like the sort of thing a school would do - to find a rather 'cheeky' way to give the award twice to the same family. Kingscote must have done quite well out of the Marlows over the years, and that does tend to count. I was at boarding school with some very large families, where 5 or 6 girls had all gone through the school, and it became noticeable that 'solutions' were sometimes found for them that would not have been reached for others...

I must admit that I've always been rather shocked by Ginny and her amazing birthday/Christmas present, especially as it does not seem to compare with other things we have heard about (how much would two reworked party frocks cost, for example, compared to a horse ? And didn't Nicky's penknife have to last her until her 21st birthday ?)

However, I suppose we're not getting all the information here ... perhaps Ginny's been asking for a horse on a weekly basis since she was small ? Perhaps she was the only one to kick up a fuss when the girls stopped riding lessons at school because they could ride at home (if I remember that bit correctly) and was promised a horse to make up for it ?

[carmine-rose.livejournal.com]

Perhaps saying Mrs Marlow is a bad mother is a bit strong, but I don't know. I don't think she's a particularly good mother, but I guess she's just trying to do her best. I still feel that it was unfair to all the others to single Ginty out to such an extent, as I definitely got the impression that it was an unusually big present. I don't generally have much sympathy with Lawrie, but this was one occasion I felt for her, especially since all the tohers seemed to be a bit cavalier about her distress as well.

I'm still not sure about the school fees thing - it seems unfair to pick one, but I'm not sure how they could have done it otherwise, and Mrs Marlow's reasons are pretty logical. I think the worst thing is that in effect Lawrie is being "rewarded" for being a brat, and Nicola "punished" for being the better behaved twin.

[yonmei.livejournal.com]

I don't think she's a particularly good mother

I think she's an excellent mother. The horses pother is really not a good example of it.

The letter to Nicola, on the other hand, is arguable; I think it's an example of how she is a good mother - she's clear about what's happening, she explains why Nicola will have to be the one to leave, and I think she breaks it to Nicola the right way: she could have come to visit and told her face-to-face, but then everyone would have known something was up, and it's obvious Nicola is a much more a private person - I think it's reasonable that Mrs Marlow knew a clear, honest letter was the best way to tell Nicola something as shattering as that.

The only argument on the other side is that you could argue that a good mother always treats all of her children exactly alike, and if they couldn't afford all the girls at Kingcote, none of them should be there. That's a point, except that while disagreeing in principle with private education, I agree with Mrs Marlow that it would have been unreasonable to move Ginty or Ann just as they were studying for exams: and personally, I think it would have done Lawrie a lot of good to be separated from Nicola during term-time. ;-)

[jen-c-w.livejournal.com]

I think the worst thing is that in effect Lawrie is being "rewarded" for being a brat, and Nicola "punished" for being the better behaved twin.

it's awkward isn't it? I think Jan says that about Lal being rewarded for being a brat, but in that situation...whilst it's horrendously unfair, in terms of end results Lal would raise merry hell for all the family if she were moved, and probably be disastarous at wherever she went - just look at the fuss she made about being in the remove initially - whereas, as the letter says, Nick'll just buckle down and get on with it.
It's hard, but in larger families there's normally one child that's expected to be successful and no trouble. (sighs with feeling)

[clanwilliam.livejournal.com]

Something that's never mentioned, since Ginty's gift is made clear as being for her, is that the horse needs exercise and a certain amount of expertise. I suspect the whole "it's Ginty's" only lasts as long as the holidays and Rowan gets to use it later on when everyone is back at school - if nothing else, Mrs Marlow could produce that as a suitable excuse for keeping it exercised. And the horse is of a size that means that women could ride it, but the twins might have a certain amount of difficulty.

Horses and dresses

[(Anonymous)]

Isn't the point about the dresses that clothes were still on rationing until about 1953 and that the dresses were originally very grand?
I don't suppose ponies were "on points", were they? And wouldn't Catkin have been handed down when she grew out of him?

[jonquil.livejournal.com]

Was it reasonable to buy herself one before ensuring the children all had equal access to a horse for hunting?

I feel passionate about this one. She sold her tiara to buy the horse; it was her particular property. Mothers do not always have to take care of the children first.

As to the horse, it's Ginty's birthday present; it is customary in my family that large birthday presents do not have to be shared. On the other hand, the other children could now reasonably expect horses for their birthdays...

[oursin.livejournal.com]

Birthday AND Christmas present: perhaps this is finally years of guilt of making one present stretch to cover both coming home to roost?

Also, it's already been established that Nicola doesn't share Mr Buster: and while Rowan will share Prisca the latter doesn't appear to be a general family mount.

[carmine-rose.livejournal.com]

On one hand I think it's fair enough - it was her tiara, and why shouldn't she spend the proceeds from selling it on herself? But on the other hand, it seems like she's spending money on something pretty frivolous when some of her children don't even get new best clothes (I'm not objecting to hand-me-downs in general, or for school uniform cast-offs, but it seems a bit harsh to me that the twins have to have rewokred party clothes). Perhaps I should have reworded that to say Was it reasonable to spend so much on herself when some of her children are going without some things?

I came from a home where one of us never got a substantially larger present than the ohter, so maybe that's why that seemed so unfair to me.

[oursin.livejournal.com]

where one daughter was the only one in the family who was unable to go hunting (without hiring a horse)

2 family members, but the Major lends Rowan Hot Ginger, so she lets Peter ride Prisca, as I recall.

[carmine-rose.livejournal.com]

Oh yes, I forgot about Peter.

[ex-ajhalluk585.livejournal.com]

I think my difficulty with Catkin - whom we know cost somewhere under eighty-seven pounds fifteen shillings and eightpence, though how much less is open to doubt, likewise the purchasing power of eighty-seven pounds fifteen shillings and eightpence in either 1948 or 1959 (depending on whether the Legatts held to their original selling price between End of Term and Peter's Room) - is not the not lending him around bit (it strikes me as quite clear that none of the younger children with the possible exception of Lawrie is remotely capable of riding him) but that given he represents a fair percentage of the Last Ditch, and the Last Ditch is by definition a one-off, that there is no possibility of any of the other children having a present remotely equal to him in lavishness.

That, actually, always has bothered me; it does look like favoritism because it's a whopping expenditure which - so far as one can tell- simply can't be replicated for any of the other children, and I do wonder why. And I do wonder if in some respects it's because Mrs Marlow is seeing something in Ginty which she recognises in herself; the pretty party girl with all the dance dresses who stays up all night to dance and is off to the Hunt looking fabulous the next day on an hour and a half's sleep (and, better than Pam ever managed, Madame Orly actually approves of Ginty!). No-one suggests, for example, that Nicola ought to have a dinghy, or Ann a grand-piano or even a superior upright.

I think Mrs Marlow was quite right to buy Chocbar for herself, but I do wonder why Ginty gets this big splashy present which is out of line with anything we ever hear of any of the other children getting - or of its being possible for them to get.

[carmine-rose.livejournal.com]

You've articulated perfectly what my thoughts on this, better than I've been doing - thanks for that.

As I've said elsewhere in these comments, it's that both horses were bought at the same time with the Last Ditch that makes me uncomfortable. If Mrs. Marlow had sold her own tiara to buy herself a horse, that wouldn't bother me a bit. Or if she'd sold it to buy two horses for the children, say one for Ginty, and one for the twins to share, or for Lawrie and Peter, since Nicola has more-or-less permanent usage of Mr. Buster, that wouldn't have made me turn a hair. It's just that it's such a huge one-off thing that none of the others get a share in. It picks Ginty out from the others.

I also wonder if Karen felt a pang about the tiara - as the eldest daughter, she may well have expected to inherit such a valuable piece of family jewellery. Obviously this is purely specualtion; there's no textual evidence for this.

[coughingbear]

This makes lots of sense. Also, I think I suggested this further up one of the threads, but I wondered if it is in part because Mrs Marlow still worries about Ginty after the Traitor stuff and being trapped after a bomb, and thinks it will help her.

Just had an additional thought, could it also be that she can't resist buying Catkin as well as Chocbar, and Ginty's the only child he will suit? She's very encouraging when Lawrie and Peter first discuss having the Idiot Boy, so perhaps she's just desperate for horses after all those years of Hampstead.

imo

[jen-c-w.livejournal.com]

the whole thing boils down to a question of justice or equality. Ginty always seems to drift - the half term off (ok there's reasons behind it, but you get the impression that Nick or Ro would have managed to drag themselves back), right at the beginning Lal says about Ginty being in an A even though she's not clever at all, she's really good at diving, yet always mucks it up, and she has generally useless friends - the redoutable Monica aside. So, perhaps it's a case of Mrs M feels that if gin has something she really gets into, it will work its way into all of her life, rather than just leaving her as pretty and somewhat vacant which is how some - Mrs Merrick for example - but not AF I hasten to add - seem to see her. Personally I've always loved Ginty, so was fairly happy about it all, but that's a "proper" reason for it.

Re: imo

[carmine-rose.livejournal.com]

Yes, that's a good distinction - it's not really "equal" treatment, but it might well be "just", what with what Ginty's been through and with her general tendancy to be unfocused.

[ex-ajhalluk585.livejournal.com]

Nicola would not wreck her own life if kicked out of Kingscote. She would go to Colebridge Grammar, do very well (possibly, with a faint air of "showing them" do exceptionally well), go on to Oxford or whatever and pursue her own course.

Gin or Lawrie would howl about injustice to the n'th, and wind up drug raddled hard cases, equally to "show them".

Ann would conscientiously do well, overreact to the family crisis, and go to India just after O levels to "save anyone trouble", in the process driving everyone white with worry.

Nicola is the only one Mrs Marlow can in fact trust. That's what the letter says. That's what Nicola reacts to. Of course it's a slam in the solar plexus - but it's one Mrs Marlow has faith that Nicola (alone among the kids)is capable of handling. And she is absolutely and totally right in her judgement. Nicola plays a blinder in The Cricket Term- it makes Elinor in Sense and Sensibility look like a duster.

Have you ever seen pure unadulerated
heroism? If not, I suggest you read The Cricket Term.

[carmine-rose.livejournal.com]

Yes, I can't see any better way for Mrs. Marlow to sort that one out. One of those "'But surely there must be another solution!' except there really isn't" situations.

And Nicola coped with it significantly better than most people, I think. That bit where she's on the roof with Jan is actually one of my favourites in the whole series.

[owl]

Was I the only one who thought that most of the Lst Ditch went on Chocbar and Catkin was just a super dip into the general birthday/Christmas fund? It only gets mentioned after someone asks, 'What's this nag doing here if Catkin's for Ginty?', IIRC.

[carmine-rose.livejournal.com]

That could be the case - and raises the question (for me) of exactly how much Chocbar cost, and how much the Last Ditch did sell for. I wish we could find out!

And if that is the case, it makes Catkin being bought for Ginty a lot less of a problem for me - because then it's conceivable that the others could get an equivalent at some later date.

Lawrie and 'fairness'

[chazzbanner.livejournal.com]

I just read the first chapter of The Thuggery Affair, and in it Lawrie is (remembering) complaining about Nicola going off for a weekend with Miranda. Nicola says, but what if it were Tim who asked you for a weekend.

Lawrie: Yes, but that's different!

Hmm.

Re: Lawrie and 'fairness'

[carmine-rose.livejournal.com]

Oh yes, I'm sure if she'd got the horse she wouldn't have been complaining on behalf of Ginty or Peter. But it would still be uneven treatment of the children, even if she didn't mind it that way round.