trennels | Lawrie's beliefs

Almost everyone I've ever met has an irrational view of the universe. Anything else is too depressing for words.

But Lawrie doesn't think that the Bible is unbelievable on the basis that she's considered Christian mythology and decided it's irrational and therefore not worthy of belief: she just always thought it was being presented to her as a mythology, not as a living religion. The point, I always thought, of that scene between her and her Catholic grandmother is that Lawrie has never thought about Christianity and Christian belief, not that she has thought about it and decided it's too stupid to believe in: she's just lumped it vaguely in with Greek mythology. She's consistently characterized as quite a vague and self-centred thinker, with a tendency to generalize outwards from what she thinks to what "everyone" thinks, and - when people claim not to think the same as her - to assume that they do think it really, but they can't say so because of a social norm forbidding it. So her instinctive disbelief in Christianity fits very well, for me, with her instinctive, only-half-articulated belief in a "Them".

I agree, and have always found that scene, and the one where everyone is horrified at the prospect of an embarrassing discussion of religion, hilarious, with Laurie happily rattling on about religion in terms of it being 'hymns and things' and Zeus and co. When I first read AF in the Ireland of the 1970s, as someone from a society which was still thoroughly saturated in Catholicism, it was difficult for ten year old me to understand precisely how Laurie has failed to grasp, not only that other people are believers, but that she herself is supposed to at least pay lip service to belief, or at least get that it's being presented in those terms. (It is only now, as far as I can judge, that Irish Catholicism can be assumed to be as tepid and occasional an affair as Anglicanism is for many people here. My entire primary school education in a convent school was subordinated to preparation for first communion and confirmation, and the nuns left us under no illusions about the reality of judgement and hell and such matters.) Ann, however, is AF's only actively-believing Anglican - all other characters who are not hideously embarrassed by religion are Catholic - Madame Orly, Patrick - or, arguably, Jewish, if you grant that Miranda is at least cognisant of the tenets of Judaism, even if her family isn't observant. Everyone else is paying lipservice, and there is a well-mannered school assembly/going-through-the motions in AF's representation of Anglicanism that makes it seem quite plausible to me that someone as self-centred and vague Laurie never actually realised she was supposed to believe this stuff.

Rowan says in End Of Term that for quite long stretches she believes, so conceivably she might have entered the long stretch of 'not' that she's in at that point at some point earlier in the canon, or left it at some point later. I also have a very dim remembrance of Esther being asked if she believes and unguardedly saying 'I just wish I didn't have to - ' but can't find it in either End Of Term or Attic Term, so possibly she was talking about someone else altogether or I just made it up.

Other than that, AF's believing Anglicans do seem to be the very minor characters - the Jean Bakers and Jess Geddesses - and Jess may well be Church of Scotland or some other variety of Presbyterian, in any case.

As far as Lawrie goes, I think her not finding it credible that anyone else can have faith is all of a piece with her not believing that anyone else has feelings, which is also mentioned in End Of Term. It's not a matter of rational or irrational, so much as the only division Lawrie really respects being the one between Lawrence S. Marlow and the vague shambling shapes that make up the rest of the universe, who only really come into focus when defined by being fair or unfair to Lawrie.

It's End of Term, early in Chapter 8. But I think what Esther means is "I just wish I didn't have to sing those solos", but stops herself in time. She isn't actually answering the religious question at all.

At an ordinary UK state primary school in the 1980s, when we had compulsary assembly every morning, with hymn-singing, prayer, the usual gospel stories, and the occasional infliction in year groups of the Good News Bible, I don't think I ever really considered that there was an intention that we were supposed to take all this seriously as individuals, as opposed to it being "one of those things you do at school". Despite having observant Catholic neighbours, I was still rather shocked when on holiday at the age of 11 another child my age referred to God in conversation. I'd grasped the fact that people might practice ritual, but not that people who were not visibly different could do anything as outre as _believe_.

Lawrie's superstition I find entirely believable - who has never, ever thought "If I do this, the universe owes me that". It's the entire basis behind Father Christmas bringing presents to "good" children!

Lawrie's superstition I find entirely believable - who has never, ever thought "If I do this, the universe owes me that". It's the entire basis behind Father Christmas bringing presents to "good" children!

I'm not sure if anyone else has read Katherine L. Oldmeadow's Princess Charming, but one of the younger girls in that, colluded with by the old family servant (yes, it is that kind of book) has a somewhat similar belief in Them, who I think are supposed to be the faeries - though in her case it's more propitiatory than 'you scratch my back and I'll scratch yours'. I always vaguely imagined as a child that Lawrie had read it too and picked it up from there, giving it her own self-centred slant in the process.

I haven't read it, but I think I must!

It is a very strong contender for my favourite school story ever - Katherine L. Oldmeadow manages to not-very-subtly subvert and poke fun at the genre whilst still having a gift for the genuinely evocative descriptions that make you-the-reader secretly wish you could just fall through the pages and join in the story. It also has the Hon. Agnes Billock, who is up there with Miss Cromwell as far as memorable fictional teachers go.

It's quite easy to get the Childrens Press edition, but I've never seen so much as a sniff of an earlier printing - which is sad, as I strongly suspect the Childrens Press one was abridged.

It's a school-story as well! Maybe I should investigate whether the Bodleian bothered to take children's books. Abebooks comes up with a couple of "Collins's Clear-Type Press" editions, one of which is described as a first.

Clearly you are good luck - I just found a copy of the 1932 reprint and it's on its way to me as soon as postal strikes permit.

kit120, sorry for getting completely off-topic in this thread!

The Bod has tons of children's books. Including all the Forests. I keep thinking I really must get a reader's card...

Yes, quite severely abridged. I was delighted at the further detail when I got an early edition, having grown up with a Children's Press one. Princess Prunella is also abridged, but oddly Princess Anne isn't.

IAWTC! I think it's maybe more difficult for Americans to credit that someone has never consciously confronted religion as a thing people believe in and take literally, because people are constantly going on and on about God and the Bible here. Growing up in New Zealand and London, it wasn't something anybody bothered to mention in everyday life. God gets talked about in church and -- IF you go to a religious school -- at school assemblies where, yes you things "hymns and things." He doesn't leak out into other venues.

I am a certified atheist, but I routinely pray to TPTB to, e.g., send me a prompt subway train when I'm running late, or similar trivial things of that kind. Everyone bargains with the universe in some form or another, I think.

It is very easy, even for those not quite as self-centred as Lawrie, to take one's own views as default! Especially when they are apparently backed up by how you see other people behaving.

This describes my primary school experience with religion precisely. Despite all the "hymns and things" every morning, as well as an annual Christmas carol service, I was very surprised when I first realized (somewhere around the age of ten, shortly after I moved to the U.S.) that many people actually took this sort of thing seriously and genuinely worried about their relationships with God. We had regular Scripture lessons, too, but I tended to consider the biblical characters we discussed as belonging vaguely in the realm of Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny, and the Tooth Fairy, i.e. beings and events that were only "real" inasmuch as everyone was very serious about pretending they were real. On the other hand, I believed quite firmly in heaven, especially cat heaven, and was terrified of ghosts.

So, yes, on the whole Lawrie's attitude toward religion and superstition make perfect sense to me.

I think you are dead right.

There is a quotation allegedly by Chesterton (with which I'm not saying I concur, because it's a raging over-generalisation) 'When people stop believing in God, they don’t believe in nothing — they believe in anything'. (It's actually Caemmerts, who he? - see 'Misattributed' here (http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/G._K._Chesterton). The implication is that there is a belief-shaped space inside people which is filled up with any old nonsense if they give up (a rather specific form of) theistic religion. This isn't necessarily universally true, but certainly the desire to make sense of things and attribute meaningful causes to phenomena is very pervasive.

Not believing in the Bible (son of god, resurrection, water into wine, dying equals forgiveness of sins, etc) isn't incompatible with a nebulous belief in 'something' out there, or a vague idea that if you're good the world will reward you.

I would say most of my year at school (we had lights out at 9.30 when we were third years, so had many conversations into the night about existence of god...) would be similar to Lawrie, vaguely believing in a god/higher power but not believing most of the Bible. Even the few who called themselves Christian tended to say "I believe in God but not the Church".

It was only a year earlier I'd learnt there really were Christians, as I had a scholarship interview where I ended up causing the head of RE to have an asthma attack and ended up in hospital...needless to say I didn't get the scholarship!

I have thought exactly the same way as Lawrie since childhood; although I do believe that there might be some higher power 'out there' I have not been convinced by any religious view of God yet.

Actually, though, I have always quite liked Alan Partridge's view that 'God's a gas'.

Despite regular churchgoing from the age of 5, the first time I was told what I was supposed to believe was confirmation classes at age 15, which was when I discovered I didn't believe it. I can quite see how it could all have washed over Lawrie. Presumably confirmation is something Kingscote would have dealt with at some point after Upper IVA?

I should think so. Lower V was 'confirmation year' at my school for most and preparation classes were compulsory if you wanted to be done.

That would fit relatively well with Upper V being when you can be a conscientious objector if you go and talk to Miss Keith about it - it's the same sort of time-frame, anyhow. :)

Surely the sort of person who not only doesn’t believe, but can’t actually believe anyone else could either would be totally rational in all other respects and immune to superstition or supernatural belief of any kind.

Not only do I have difficulty contemplating a sentence which impliedly links "Lawrie" and "totally rational in all other respects" I'd not be in much better shape if "all other" were replaced with "any other", either.

Lawrie's belief system - as well as Jukie's, for that matter - always made perfect sense not only in the context of the characters concerned but also when compared to various people one meets.

I'm, personally, always fascinated by the clash between Nicola's belief system and robust rationality and her terror of ghosts, though.

I sometimes think Nicola's robust rationality is only robust because she insists it should be so - I doubt it would stand up to close examination. Like Lawrie, Nicola at 13 hasn't really thought through what, if anything, she believes, you remember her surprise when the Dean(?) of the Minster explains that yes, there are still believers today! And how she doesn't want to go to Mass at Patrick's again after her first visit, for fear of being "sucked in".

I'm another certified atheist who bargains with the universe, and I also, as a child, lumped Christianity in with myths and things, though not in any articulated sense - when I was eight or so, I made an attempt at literary criticism in church and told Mum that while of course Jezebel and co were bad, in another way they were good because they made the Bible a better story. My very devout mother was Not Impressed.

I've met any number of people who genuinely seem to believe that all members of majority religions are just putting it on in order to impress the neighbours, but who have various superstitions of their own that they adhere to. Admittedly, they're mostly ex-born agains of various varieties, which doesn't seem to apply to Lawrie. ;)

That clarifies things. Growing up in a time and place where there was no social pressure to attend church, the church goers I knew – mostly Anglican and non-conformists were damned serious about it, so I must have overestimated the strength of mind required to reject a church-going upbringing. Also, I never separated the fact that Lawrie had dismissed the whole thing without thought from the fact that, in my view, it merited no thought. I couldn’t think badly of Lawrie for her ignorance, although I knew I was supposed to because Rowan did. I think Lawrie’s deal with ‘them’ was even more problematic for me than her attitude to religion. I grew up in a household where nobody believed in God, ghosts, herbal remedies, superstitions, slow metabolism or four-leafed clover. It never occurred to me that there was anything out there with which to make a bargain. Even now, although I can believe that people might offer the universe sacrifices in the hope of getting a parking space, I can’t really believe they expect it to work or that even when it appears to they fulfill their side of the bargain. Do you?. Lawrie, on the other hand, really does expect it to work to such an extent that the shock of failure makes her reveal all. That I found incredible. On top of all that, Lawrie’s refusal to believe that the people in the Bible are Jews was baffling. It’s there to show she’s stubborn and deaf to reason and it's linked to the ignorance of religion, but why should she care? She doesn’t even believe they existed. And why should the whole of lower IVA be surprised as well? Is the incident there to enlighten the audience? If so, it’s annoying.

Lawrie's beliefs

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

Princess Charming

Re: Princess Charming

Re: Princess Charming

Re: Princess Charming

Re: Princess Charming

Re: Princess Charming

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject