Peter's Room and Cricket Term
Sep. 13th, 2011 10:34 pm![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
theladymoppet.livejournal.com posting in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
trennelsI recently snapped up reasonably-priced copies of PR and CT and re-read them for the first time in quite a few years. Here are some of my thoughts:
1. The Bronte discussion in the library in PR is fascinating but are we really supposed to agree with Karen that Gondal and Angria were a complete waste of time? Charlotte gave up Angria but it's an obvious influence on the Rochester backstory in Jane Eyre. I seem to remember from Juliet Barker's biography of the Brontes that Wuthering Heights is much more of a Gondal story than it seems as the Gondal setting was similar to Yorkshire. If Gondal and Angria were essential to the published works, weren't they a necessary part of the Brontes' creative development? Has critical opinion changed on this in the decades since PR was published?
2. When Peter pins Nicola down and twists her arm behind her back, it seems cruel and out of character for him. It could just be that he hasn't quite realised that he is getting too strong to fight with her like they did as children - but then I remembered that Foley does something similar to Nicola in TMATT and I wondered if Peter was subconsciously copying him. Foley gets mentioned in PR (because of the treachery theme coming up again I guess) and it's stated that Peter doesn't remember all that happened. I wondered if the arm-twisting incident was something he internalised and is now acting out - so that, whatever he says, Foley is still an influence on him.
3. Cricket Term - how far ahead is Karen planning? She tells Nicola that Colebridge Grammar is one of her arguments for staying in the Tranters' cottage. I wonder if she is looking ahead to starting a family of her own, because if they save on school fees and/or her family waive the rent for the cottage it makes it harder for Edwin to say they can't afford any more children. I can't see him being keen on going through the dirty nappy stage again and maybe she is already thinking how to counter his arguments?
Otherwise, I'm not sure why Karen is so keen to stay near to Trennels. Edwin doesn't get on that well with her family and you would think they'd do better making a fresh start further away.
1. The Bronte discussion in the library in PR is fascinating but are we really supposed to agree with Karen that Gondal and Angria were a complete waste of time? Charlotte gave up Angria but it's an obvious influence on the Rochester backstory in Jane Eyre. I seem to remember from Juliet Barker's biography of the Brontes that Wuthering Heights is much more of a Gondal story than it seems as the Gondal setting was similar to Yorkshire. If Gondal and Angria were essential to the published works, weren't they a necessary part of the Brontes' creative development? Has critical opinion changed on this in the decades since PR was published?
2. When Peter pins Nicola down and twists her arm behind her back, it seems cruel and out of character for him. It could just be that he hasn't quite realised that he is getting too strong to fight with her like they did as children - but then I remembered that Foley does something similar to Nicola in TMATT and I wondered if Peter was subconsciously copying him. Foley gets mentioned in PR (because of the treachery theme coming up again I guess) and it's stated that Peter doesn't remember all that happened. I wondered if the arm-twisting incident was something he internalised and is now acting out - so that, whatever he says, Foley is still an influence on him.
3. Cricket Term - how far ahead is Karen planning? She tells Nicola that Colebridge Grammar is one of her arguments for staying in the Tranters' cottage. I wonder if she is looking ahead to starting a family of her own, because if they save on school fees and/or her family waive the rent for the cottage it makes it harder for Edwin to say they can't afford any more children. I can't see him being keen on going through the dirty nappy stage again and maybe she is already thinking how to counter his arguments?
Otherwise, I'm not sure why Karen is so keen to stay near to Trennels. Edwin doesn't get on that well with her family and you would think they'd do better making a fresh start further away.
Tags:
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Thoughts....
Date: 2011-09-15 01:53 pm (UTC)a) Karen's being presented here as a scholar, and as quite sensible and generally right - she gets to correct Nick about Haklyut, for example. All this goes toward her characterisation at this point as intellectual authority.
b) Karen is arguing AGAINST Ginty - whom we're rarely meant to sympathise with
c) Her view of art and artists is a pragmatic, no-nonsense one of the kind I should think AF shared or at least admired. There's a lack of humbug about it: don't pretend you're sad when Best Friend fails her exams; don't tell your sister her poetry is good when it's not
d) she's given an emphatically pro-Rowan line here, when she gets cross with Nick for calling her a 'bossy type'. I think this means AF is lining herself up with Kay at this point.
e) Karen is proved right because Gondalling does go bad - and there's even a suggestion it's a bit devilish, isn't there, with Peter thinking about his coin turning to fairy gold?
I think AF's approach to art was like her approach to life - direct and down to earth. Interestingly, we do find that both Gin and Nick sometimes try to write poetry, so obv she doesn't think it's namby pamby in itself. You just shouldn't waft about '*being* a poet' at the expense of writing some poetry. Cf also Tim's 'father's not at all artistic. Father paints'.
(I also think it's irrelevant that by the book's timeline, Kay should have met Edwin by then. I don't think AF thought that for a moment)
2. Peter twisting the arm isn't so out of character - they can all be a bit handy when they need (Nick thumping Pomona, for instance!). Peter is a bit of a git and has a bit of a temper. I don't think he's meant to be subconsciously aping Foley - just that in AF's world, people do twist other people's arms sometimes. I've always thought it rather overdone the way Nick won't admit that it hurt, though!
3. Karen is planning. As Nick says 'you're just like Lawrie - you make your thing happen and pooh to the rest of us!'. In fact both Nick and Lawrie over-plan in the first book, but by later on, it's only Lawrie who still goes in for plans and intentions. Interestingly, Ginty is prone to this too. AF seems to see it as a function of a slightly narcissistic character, maybe? I think she wants to stay there because it's Trennels and family and all the rest of it - and possibly also doesn't want to lose Mrs M's help with the children! Rose and Chas aren't going to board anywhere if old non-church-going, Guardian-reading Mister has anything to do with it, and at least the Colebridge Grammars seem like a known quantity.
Karen also likes things to stay the same, I think - hence wearing stripey jamas even at Oxford! She would, I think, generally balk at moving away and setting up home somewhere new and alone.
And I don't think either of them want babies!
Re: Thoughts....
Date: 2011-09-15 09:21 pm (UTC)(Except I think possibly Karen might want a baby. After all, she doesn't rule in out when Lawrie says they have to do is symmetrically - in fact she says something like "we'll see what we can do".)
Re: Thoughts....
Date: 2011-09-15 10:48 pm (UTC)I think that when Fob is nine or ten, Karen will bring up the idea of more children, and when Edwin rejects the notion, she will calmly stop taking the Pill. Once pregnant she reminds a fuming Edwin that only abstinence is 100% effective.
Re: Thoughts....
Date: 2011-09-16 12:22 pm (UTC)Karen is amused and says something like "all in the cause of symmetry, I'll see what I can do"
It always intrigued me, because if it's going to be symmetrical around Fob, then presumably Karen has to have a vast number of children. (marlows plus elder Dodds). Unless I've missed what Lawrie is getting at here.
Re: Thoughts....
Date: 2011-09-16 02:39 pm (UTC)Re: Thoughts....
Date: 2011-09-16 02:41 pm (UTC)Re: Thoughts....
Date: 2011-09-16 08:39 pm (UTC)colne_dsr, I agree Karen isn't really taking Lawrie seriously, but I think the fact she is amused shows that she doesn't consider the idea of future children to be an issue at all. If she anticipated any conflict with Edwin over it, I think she would be slightly flustered (even by a very lighthearted comment) in the same way she is when it comes up (can't remember how) that Edwin and his first wife hadn't made the final decision to divorce and, had it not been for her untimely death, might have reunited.
Re: Thoughts....
Date: 2011-09-18 03:29 am (UTC)Re: Thoughts....
Date: 2011-09-18 09:51 pm (UTC)Re: Thoughts....
Date: 2011-09-15 09:22 pm (UTC)(Except I think possibly Karen might want a baby. After all, she doesn't rule in out when Lawrie says they have to do is symmetrically - in fact she says something like "we'll see what we can do".)
Antfan
Re: Thoughts....
Date: 2011-09-15 10:35 pm (UTC)I'd forgotten about Tim's father! Yes, it makes a lot of sense in that context.
Re: Thoughts....
Date: 2011-09-29 03:21 pm (UTC)Though it does make rather a nice retrospective irony that by the time the Ready Made Family rolls around Karen has ended up doing just what Ginty and Patrick do, but with adult and permanent consequences -- I get the feeling that she idealises Edwin rather at Oxford, and it's not until she gets him on home turf that she recognises him for the person he is.