SqueakyChu Goes for 75 - Page 6

The Race of the Butterflies will continue in this thread. My previous thread can be found here.







I'm posting three more months to complete the year of 2011: October, November, and (chilly) December. *thinks of snow and shivers*

Are you wondering what TIOLI is? Private message me, and I'll tell you. :)

Thanks for stopping by!

October 2011


Gaver Farm in Maryland - Photo by SqueakyChu

My October bookish plans:
1. Register more books at BookCrossing.
2. Transfer many, many books (not registered at Bookcrossing) to The Book Thing of Baltimore.

On my bookshelf for this month...
58. The Cantor's Daughter - Scott Nadelson - TIOLI: Read a book that has been mentioned in 150 conversations or less on the book's main page
59. Fat land - Greg Critser - TIOLI: Read a book that has been mentioned in 150 conversations or less on the book's main page
60. The Particular Sadness of Lemon Cake - Aimee Bender - SqueakyChu - TIOLI: Read a book that is characteristic of the 75 Books Challenge Group
61. The Grotesque - Patrick McGrath - TIOLI: Read a book with a spooky cover

*trying hard to get to 75 before the end of the year, but thinks she'll never reach that number due to hunkering down with Emma in a tutored read with lyzard*

*Sigh*

November 2011


Pilgrims! - Photo by SqueakyChu

My November bookish plans:
1. Take bags and bags of gently used books from one upstairs bedroom to The Book Thing of Baltimore Inc. I'm overwhelmed with the number of bags of books and VHS tapes in my house at this time. :(
2. Attend a BookCrossing Meet-Up in Birdie's Cafe in Westminster, Maryland.

On my bookshelf for this month...
62. Suburban Safari - Hannah Holmes - TIOLI: Read a book with at least one animal mentioned on page 50
63. From the Holocaust to a new Dawn - David Shachar - TIOLI: read a book with an animal mentioned on page 50
64. The Shining - Stephen King - Reading
65. Emma - Jane Austen - TIOLI: Read a book that someone has written in - Reading
66. War Dances - Sherman Alexie - Reading
67. Comedy in a Minor Key - Hans Keilson - TIOLI: read a book with an animal on page 50 - TBR
68. The Way I See It: A Personal Look at Autism and Asperger's - Temple Grandin - TIOLI: read a book with an animal on page 50 - Reading
69. From the Holocaust to a new Dawn - David Shachar - TIOLI: read a book with an animal mentioned on page 50
70. The Night Circus - Erin Morgenstern - TIOLI: read a book with an animal on page 50 - Reading

December 2011

On my bookshelf for this month...
71. ?
72. ?
73. ?
74. ?
75. !!!

:)

Me, pick me! I'm first.

I'm not asking what will happen. I'm asking, did they say what I think they said? Was it implied in the conversation that Mr. Dixon was more interested in Jane Fairfax than Miss Campbell? Or did I misread the conversation?

And no, I don't have problems with multiple characters.

Just here following the Emma conversation. And ready to pipe up with my small bit of help where I can. (don't know answer to the current question)

Found you!

Oh yes indeed, they do imply that Mr. Dixon is more interested in Jane Fairfax than he should be to keep a new bride happy.
Hi, Madeline. I'm glad I lucked into your new thread before it blossomed with 20 or 30 messages!

> 7, 8

Hi Lori and Peggy!

I like the picture!

I also like new threads. Do you think I can somehow pretend that I was caught up all along? ;)

> 10

Do you think I can somehow pretend that I was caught up all along?

I won't tell if you don't say anything.

I can't keep up with all these threads. Thanks for stopping by!

So are you going to the Boston Meet-Up? I know Jeremy will be there. Do you think Tim will be there as well?

Yup, I'm going to the meet-up! I think Nora is as well. I'm hoping that as more people commit, interest will build, but I have to admit that I don't expect Tim to show up.

We'll just have to plan a group trip to Portland! :P

I think it would be a fun road trip! Hehe.

Another one would be a trip to Toronto! If I ever make it up to Toronto, I'd want to meet Smiler69 (Ilana).

By the way, the name of the book store owned by my friend in Canada is Write Bookshop, 285 St. Paul St., St. Catharines. The phone number is 905-684-8426. The owners are Fran Merion and Steve Heinemann. Fran and I were volunteers in Israel together many years ago. Tell her you are my friend, and she'll give you a good price (she said!). :D

I looked for the store on a map and see it's nowhere near Toronto! :(

Emma - Vol. 2 - Chapter 6

...in which Emma and Frank Weston Churchil take a walk together and both decide they don't much care for Jane Fairfax,

2. What are post-horses?

Madeline, I lost track of your last thread and fell hopelessly behind. Usually, I unstar the old thread when a new one comes up, but I've kept the star on the last one so I can track it down again, as I intend to read along when I decide to tackle Emma again. It's not happening this month as I've got plenty of planned reads I'm much more excited about for now, but I'm still cheering you on.

Ilana, I'll be reading Emma for l-o-n-g time. Join me whenever you'd like!

I believe a post-horse is the horse the mailman (POSTman) rides on.

Hmm. That makes sense!

According to the Free Dictionary, a post horse is 'a horse kept at an inn or post house for use by postriders or for hire to travellers.'

Yike! Lost you there for a minute, which would have been a catastrophe - who would I lecture and nag!?

Post-horses are horses that could be hired to draw carriages. For long journeys, you changed horses at each coach-stop (or "posting-house") so that they covered a certain distance and then got a rest.

Travelling this way was a bit pot-luck. If you were really rich, you would own enough horses to cover the whole distance, and send them ahead of you so they were waiting for you at each stage of the journey.

Edit: Oops, cross-post!

> 21, 21

So, when travelling, you could either use your own horses or "rent" post-horses?

> 22

Oh, please don't leave me until we finish Emma, Liz. You are my inspiration to get through this book!

Emma - Vol. 2, Chapter 7

1. What does it mean to be called a coxcomb? I know the flower named coxcomb. Anyway, it said about Frank Weston Churchill, "his father only called him a coxcomb."

2. Who is Perry as in "Perry tells me that Mr. Cole never touches malt liquor". Is that the apothecary, Mr. Perry? If so, why was his name abbreviated to Perry? That's so confusing!

Oh, don't worry - you won't escape my clutches that easily! Mwuh-ha-ha!

1. A coxcomb was a vain young man, often a little too interested in his clothes, etc., or with too good an opinion of himself. (It was also an easy insult from the older generation to the next: Young people these days...

2. The omission of "Mr" indicates that he is an inferior (or regarded as such).

I'll be reading Emma for l-o-n-g time. Join me whenever you'd like!

Well Madeline, if by that you mean you'll be reading it into November, then I could very well join you. I have Emma on audio, but also have several Nobel reads on audio as well that I want to get to this month.

Liz: I'm finding your tutoring just amazing and as I said to Madeline, will go back and read all the tips and info you gave Madeline in her last thread when I get started.

if by that you mean you'll be reading it into November

At the rate I'm going (which is doable for me), I'll be reading Emma through the middle of November. Please join me. I'm reading one chapter a day (more or less), so you might finish even finish it before I do, depending how quickly you read it. :)

I usually get through audiobooks relatively fast Madeline, so I imagine this one shouldn't take me much long than a week to ten days or so. I'll start it toward the beginning of the month, and as I said, follow along with the notes on your former thread until I catch up with you. Of course I'll come back and comment here along the way. Sounds good?

> 28

Yes!! I'd love to have someone else making comments beside myself Morphy and me. :)

This is so much better than a group read because I can read at my own pace.

I wonder if we can do more of such "tutored reads" (one on one, with the option of others tagging along/lurking) here on LT? It's an idea. What do you think, Liz? Peggy? Others? If so, how would we get it started? Er, I guess we already have it started. LOL!

For example, I could/would make myself available for someone who's doing a read on a Jewish subject if that person were not familiar with Judaism at all.

No pay for anyone, of course! :)

>29 SqueakyChu: HEY! What am I? Sliced bread? :D

HEY! What am I? Sliced bread?

I'll bite. ;)

We need *more* comments from you, Morphy. Gear it up!! :D

Okay! I have to say that the whole conversation about if the dance should be held in the inn and the queries about if the hallway was too breezy had me scratching my head in chagrin. Did they really have nothing better to do? Was this all that important? Or was Austen trying to be funny?

And was it really all that ill-mannered to call someone Knightly without the Mr.? Was that like farting in public?

Madeline - I've posted my comments about Dracula on my thread ( http://www.librarything.com/topic/104427 post #413, sorry I don't know how to send you to the exact post). I know you loved the book too, so if you wanted to chat about it a bit, I'm interested in what you have to say.

#33 - Morphidae, Did they really have nothing better to do? Was this all that important?. I read Emma before I became an Austen fan, and I had the exact same thought at the time. After all, wasn't Napoleon sacking all of Europe at the time? Somehow with continued reading of Austen, I've overcome this annoyance. That was the world Jane Austen knew, and she only wrote what she knew.

Just caught up on this thread and I have absolutely loved the Emma discussion. Madeline, I think it's really brave to read something so outside your own comfort zone. I think we're almost opposites in that I feel quite comfortable with 19th century British fiction but the thought of reading nothing but contemporary literary fiction would have me running for the hills.

#33 & 34 "Did they really have nothing better to do? Was this all that important?"

I think the fussing was mainly concern for Mr Woodhouse (Emma's father) because they all know how upset he can get about things not being right and perhaps also Jane Austen poking fun at the fussing. I think she would have found it ridiculous too.

"And was it really all that ill-mannered to call someone Knightly without the Mr.? Was that like farting in public?"

It was rude and vulgar - I think even married women still referred to their husbands in public as Mr __ at the time (Liz/someone jump in if I'm wrong). I think the closest modern equivalent I can think of is of someone calling President Obama 'Barry' or Queen Elizabeth II 'Liz' to their face. People's jaws would hit the floor and they would either assume you were incredibly rude or that you knew the person really, really well to be able to get away with it. And that's one reason why Emma finds Mrs Elton calling Mr Knightly 'Knightly' so annoying - it implies that Mrs Elton thinks that she and 'Knightly' were really close.

Good heavens, have I been away for a week?? :)

First of all, if people really are finding what Madeline calls this "tutored reading" helpful, I am very happy to go on contributing, in whatever format is considered most useful.

On the venue for the dance, there are several things going on. Yes, life really was that narrow and trivial, and although Napoleon was sacking Europe, that was less important to most people in England than where the next social gathering would be held; Austen reflects reality. Secondly, that whole passage is an illustration of, on one hand, what a hypochondriacal old fussbudget Mr Woodhouse is, and on the other, one of Emma's most positive qualities: she never loses patience with him. In a novel so devoted to her flaws, this is Austen showing her good side. And third, things like deciding the venue for a dance was about the local power structure and who got to call the shots, socially.

Regarding "Mr", Heather has answered that - it's both a question of relative social standing, and degree of intimacy. Emma is offended on Mr Knightley's behalf in both respects.

I think we're almost opposites in that I feel quite comfortable with 19th century British fiction but the thought of reading nothing but contemporary literary fiction would have me running for the hills.

Sister! :)

Emma - Vol. 2 - Chapter 8

1. What is a pianoforte? Is it just a piano?

2. Am I understanding this correctly...that Emma doesn't want Mr. Knightly to marry because she wants Isabella's oldest child Henry to inherit Donwell (by virtue of the fact that Mr. Knghtly then would have no cildren of his own? In other words, Emma wants to keep the inheritance of Donwell in her own family.

I find it amusing that Emma doesn't like when others try to play matchmaker (as Mrs. Weston seems to be doing in this chapter). :)

1. Yes, pianoforte is the correct name for the instrument, piano is an abbreviation.

2. I may leave that one in the "wait and see" category.

3. Aren't our own faults and habits what we always find most annoying in other people?? :)

Actually, I've been thinking about you a lot in the last few days, Madeline, while I've been reading Catherine Cuthbertson's Santo Sebastiano. Cuthbertson was a hugely prolix early 19th century novelist (she favoured 5 volumes, which is about 2000 pages), whose stories always have dozens and dozens of characters, all with complicated family histories and lots of intermarrying.

While I've been trying to keep them straight in my head - not always successfully - one side of my brain has been chuckling evilly at the image of you trying to cope with this book, while the other half is whispering to me that I'm being hoist with my own petard... :)

> 38

Aren't our own faults and habits what we always find most annoying in other people??

LOL! Indeed!!

Heh! - thinking of you again. One of the subplots of Santo Sebastiano is that of a long-married couple who just might, finally, be falling in love. We've just had a highly dramatic moment in which, for the very first time, and after twenty-five years of marriage, the wife calls her husband by his first name...

Catching up on the Emma comments after my week away. I think this 'tutored' read is fascinating, and an interesting variant on a group read. It would be fun to use this approach with other books - how would it work, I wonder? Perhaps we could have a thread where people could post if they are planning to read something outside their comfort zone/area of expertise, and ask if anyone is willing to be their 'tutor'.

>#42 Perhaps we could introduce this next year, as a regular 75ers activity? - people could list their request for a "tutor" on the wiki. It might encourage group reads amongst people who have wanted to tackle a particular book or author, but have been hesitant to do it on their own, but would also work one-on-one.

> 41

for the very first time, and after twenty-five years of marriage, the wife calls her husband by his first name...

LOL!!

More name changes. I can't cope! ;)

Granted, his name is "Theodosius" - she may have felt it kinder not to. :)

Let's rename him Theo. What do you say?!

Emma - Vol. 2 - Chapter 8

..in which Emma is planning to see the piano in the home of Miss Bates.

1. So who is Patty? Mr. Larkins? Mrs. Wallis?

You're trying to make me repent volunteering as tutor, aren't you? AREN"T YOU?? :)

William Larkins is Mr Knightley's land agent at Donwell - in charge of the farms etc. that are attached to the property - so he looks after the harvest and sells the crops and does the accounts and so on.

Patty is the Bateses' servant, I think (as you can tell by her just being called "Patty", no surname). Mrs Wallis may be the cook - cooks usually got "Mrs" whether they were married or not.

We've just had a highly dramatic moment in which, for the very first time, and after twenty-five years of marriage, the wife calls her husband by his first name...

This comment made me smile for three reasons:

1) Describing the moment as 'dramatic'.
2) In a knowing way, seeing the irony of people falling in love 25 years into marriage, and how clever JA was to see that irony to begin with, especially in her day.
3) at myself, because just last week, before I read a previous post by you, Liz on this very topic, I wouldn't have had any idea what you were talking about.

I also think this tutoring idea is really good. Remains to be seen how many other people can prove to be quite so dedicated, or be able to take the time for it, but I support it 100% as someone who would be in need of LOTS of tutoring! :-)

> 48

You're trying to make me repent volunteering as tutor, aren't you? AREN"T YOU?? :)

I really don't understand this. All of these people are mentioned casually. I'm afraid of not writing down who they are because there are so many characters in this story that I can't otherwise keep them straight. I feel as if I'm lost in a party crowd. The faces are familiar, but I'm afraid to talk to anyone because I'm fear they'll discover I don't know their names. I feel that way at my work sometime as well! :(

Are you sorry you became my tutor? Is there a list of characters to which I can refer when I don't remember who's who?

I found this last chapter especially hard/boring reading because nothing happened. Next chapter should be better because Emma will be at the Bates' listening to the new "pianoforte". :)

> 49

We've just had a highly dramatic moment in which, for the very first time, and after twenty-five years of marriage, the wife calls her husband by his first name...

This reminds me of the story of my own maternal grandparents which goes like this:

My grandfather (originally from Yugoslavia) came to the US as a young man (age 17) to work as a baker. When he decided to marry, he went back to Yugoslavia to a matchmaker who paired him with a bride. They both came back to the US where they fell in love. (I guess that's the point at which she'd have called him Adolf, had they been born a century earlier!) Sadly, they eventually both returned to Yugoslavia because my grandmother (after whom I'm named - my middle name is Teresa) disliked the US. Both perished in Auschwitz during the Holocaust. I love knowing the part about when they fell in love, though. That's the sweetest part of their history.

I just decided to check your thread out and have to say that I find this "tutor reading" very informative. I have never read any Jane Austen novel. I don't know why but I seem to own some but never pick them up to read.

I haven't been reading all the answers to Madeline questions. I am afraid I will read them all and either ruin the story for miyself or decide not to read the book.

I am learning some things as I do read some of the questions mainly the ones about certain words and the names.
I will try to continue following as you read through Emma and this may give me the kick to try and read Jane Austen.

>#50 Hey, only joking! I just thought it was funny that on the back of my "happy to be your tutor" announcement, I was immediately asked to wrack my memory for who the heck Mrs Wallis is!?

As for "nothing happened"...I would advise you to pay more attention to Miss Bates' conversation than the people she talks to ever do... :)

>#51 Ah, that's a sad and lovely story, Madeline.

>51 SqueakyChu: I was also touched by your grandparent's story.

I'm following the tutoring with great interest. Love the idea of incorporating it as a 75 group feature somehow. It is really like being in a lit class . . .

>50 SqueakyChu:: Is there a list of characters to which I can refer when I don't remember who's who?

Madeline, you might find sparknotes as a handy reference to help keep those characters straight. I'm not trying to usurp Liz and others as your tutor(s). Sometimes it takes a village!

I love this idea of tutored reading. I'm planning to read Infinite Jest next year. Forget the group read, I need a tutor! It's such a monster of a book totally out of my comfort zone that I might have to request someone to live in and cook and clean while I read!

> 55

Donna, up front I was advised *not* to use Sparknotes because of spoilers. I like to try to wrack Liz's brain better anyhow! ;)

...that I might have to request someone to live in and cook and clean while I read!

I also want someone to cook and clean for me while Liz is tutoring me. Who wants to volunteer? :D

Is there anyone reading this thread that wants to figure out how to get this "tutored" read going on the 75-ers and communicate with drneutron about incorporating it somehow? I have my hands full with the TIOLI so don't want to take on any new projects here at LT. I think it works best with a one-on-one student-teacher situation with everyone else chiming in (or lurking).

I just found ou tonight that my older son was starting to read Emma very recently but gave up after five chapters because he really disliked the writing style. I have to say that I totally agree with him, but I'm finding my "tutored reading to be really a lot of fun, and I don't want to give that up.

I was thinking that before the end of the year, we might create a thread to bring this idea to the attention of 75ers generally, and see how much interest there might be. Then we could judge whether "tutored reads" might be their own threads, like group reads are now, or whether it would better be done one-on-one within the thread of the individual reading the book, as with Madeline and Emma.

A separate thread would create a valuable resource for people coming to the same book later, I think.

A separate thread would create a valuable resource for people coming to the same book later, I think.

I think a separate thread would be better as well. Liz, would you like to carry this idea forward? Perhaps someone else would want you as a tutor next for another Jane Austen book!

Perhaps we could create a wiki list of wannabe tutors and wannabe tutees* listing the kinds of reads they either want to teach or want to learn? They could pick each other and then start their own thread.

*Hey! I just found out that "tutee" is actually a word. :)

Sure, happy to! - I'll post a discussion thread and we'll see what happens.

So you're my tutee, huh? :)

That I am! :)

Emma - Vol. 2 - Chapter 10

... in which Jane Fair fax plays the pianoforte at the home of Miss and Mrs. Bates

1. So...was the pianoforte really a gift from Colonel Campbell or do we still not know who really sent it?

2. Why is it that so many conversations go on in this book, and I have no idea what some of these conversations are about?

3. What is a country-dance player?

>#60 Heh!

I've just created a thread for discussion of the tutored reads idea, if anyone wants to add their two cents.

>#61

1. Wait and see. :)

2. Um...I don't know... If you post an excerpt, I'll try to help.

3. It's the poor schmuck who gets to play the piano while everyone else is dancing. Country-dances were group dances with many people involved and frequent changes of partners (like barn dancing), as opposed to the one-on-one waltz, which was still quite scandalous at the time.

> 48

cooks usually got "Mrs" whether they were married or not.

Hmmm. That's a strange custom. What is the reason for that? Was it done with any other role?

Housekeepers, too. It was to mark the cook and housekeeper as a higher level of servent. In this case, as opposed to "Patty", the general maidservant.

> 63

If you post an excerpt, I'll try to help.

They're too long. I'll just read through them and try to get the main ideas. I don't want to get too bogged down.

Country-dances were group dances with many people involved and frequent changes of partners

I was wondering about that because I was trying to imagine who Emma and Jane were dancing with when people talked about their dancing. I guess they were dancing with all the men at one time or another.

Am I supposed to know who Mrs. Hodges is? ...as in "Mrs. Hodges may be angry." I have no idea who she is.

My older son had me laughing tonight when he was describing the opening of the novel War and Peace in which there were about ten people around a table all having conversations with one another. That's exactly how I feel about all of these characters in Emma. Why were so many characters introduced into 19th century novels? When people read them, did they, too, write down the list of characters as I am doing (or did they have bettter memories at that time?)

> 65

It was to mark the cook and housekeeper as a higher level of servent

Could servants rise in rank, or were they destined to stay at whatever level they were when they entered the service of a household?

If it's any consolation to you (and him), War And Peace nearly finished me.

You're stuck on Miss Bates and the apple conversation, aren't you? I can tell from the questions. :)

I think Mrs Hodges is the cook at Donwell - she's upset with Mr Knightley giving so much of his produce away (via William Larkins) and not keeping more for himself (and for her to cook with).

The other thing about dancing at this period - and this is VERY important in Austen - is that some dances took half a hour, during which you occasionally danced, and the rest of the time stood watching and talking and waiting your turn. This was *the* major opportunity for more or less private interaction between young men and woman and is one of the reasons parents with marriageable daughters and young people alike are always trying to get dances arranged.

Generally servants entered service as maids, footmen or stableboys, and they could rise to be housekeeper, butler, lady's maid, valet or head groom. A nursery-maid could become the childrens' nurse. Cooks were a bit more of a specialty. A really wealthy household would have one (usually a man) who had been through formal training in France, but amongst the gentry they would just have "a good cook" (usually female).

Some people stayed in service a lifetime (even as they married and had children), and often for the same family. Others, particularly if they wanted to get married - some households wouldn't have married servants - would leave and go into business: starting a shop, or running a lodging-house or maybe an inn. If they had been good servants, their former employers might get them started.

>66 SqueakyChu: I suspect their memories were better, with no distractions such as TV and the internet.

Also, didn't people read aloud 'en famille' at that time? Sharing a read and talking about it can really reinforce memory.

> 68

f it's any consolation to you (and him), War And Peace nearly finished me.

LOL!!

You're stuck on Miss Bates and the apple conversation, aren't you? I can tell from the questions.

:)

*eating apple cranberry crisp*

I think Mrs Hodges is the cook at Donwell

Now that is another problem. All of these people have property with names. I must remember who lives where by the name of the property. I now need to add that to my list of characters. :(

one of the reasons parents with marriageable daughters and young people alike are always trying to get dances arranged.

Who decided who was to marry? Did a man ask a woman and then ask the father? Or did the parents make "matches" of each other's children if they thought those children were interested in someone particular?

If they had been good servants, their former employers might get them started.

That reminds me of an excellent book I read called Reef by Romesh Gunesekera. I liked reading about the caring relationship of the wealthy man to his servant. I also found the book The White Tiger by Aravind Adiga, about a servant moving up in society, quite humorous.

Did servants ever move up into the wealthier class? If so, how was that accomplished?

Yes, that's understandable - property names very often didn't have anything to do with the family occupying them, so it can be hard to link them to particular people.

I understand perfectly why you're struggling at this point - there are so many tiny details here that a 19th century reader would have known without needing to be given a context. That said - don't forget that the people around Miss Bates often find her as bewildering as you do, from the sheer mass of inconsequential details. You're not necessarily supposed to grasp all of it.

Ahhh, marriage...now there's a subject for a lengthy post. :)

Briefly, it depended on your social position and your money. A lot of marriages amongst the aristocracy were still basically arranged. Love-matches were more accepted, but there was an awful lot of financial manoeuvring behind the scenes even if a marriage was that kind, and a lot of negotiating around social position and income and settlements. By this time, it was generally accepted that a girl had the right to say "no", although she wasn't supposed to marry against her parents' wishes. And the reality was if her family was poor and a man with some money proposed, there would be enormous pressure on her to agree whether she wanted to or not. (You see a lot of that in Austen.)

Technically a man was supposed to ask the father's consent first, but in practice he would often propose first then ask the girl's permission to speak to her father. People under twenty-one couldn't marry without their parents' consent.

Servants very rarely became "wealthy", although some managed to accumulate a nice nest-egg in service (all your living expenses were paid for you), and some got legacies or annuities from their employers. And no, at this time they would not generally have changed "class", except rarely through marriage.

property names very often didn't have anything to do with the family occupying them, so it can be hard to link them to particular people.

The weird thing is that the property names sound like family names. *sigh*

You're not necessarily supposed to grasp all of it.

Phew! ...becauseI don't! (1) What that supposed to make these books "timeless"? In other words, because the conversations were so laden with "stuff", was that a reason for people to want to go back to do rereads of classics (i.e. with each reread, new understanding was gleaned)?

although she wasn't supposed to marry against her parents' wishes

(2) If parents objected to a marriage, did that stop a wedding from taking place?

there would be enormous pressure on her to agree whether she wanted to or not.

(3) Who put on the pressure?

in practice he would often propose first then ask the girl's permission to speak to her father

(4) In practice, what would happen if a girl agreed but her father disagreed?

And no, at this time they would not generally have changed "class", except rarely through marriage.

(5) Was the process of marriage (asking the father for permission) also the norm for the servant class?

1) I think it's just Miss Bates who tends to drone on and on, not the books themselves. Pretend she's like the teacher in Peanuts :-)

2) Pretty much. The kids could run away and elope, but they would be disowned and wouldn't get any money.

3) Parents

4) See #2

5) Since servants gained their money through work instead of inheritance or marriage, they had a bit more freedom when it came to marriage. If their parents didn't agree, it was more feasible for the lovers to elope, since they weren't getting much inheritance anyway. Plus, if neither side has any hope of getting money through marriage either way, why would the parents object?

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems that servants were discouraged from marrying while still in service, since most of the servants of these big places 'lived in'.

Enjoying the Emma conversation!

re: your friend's book store in St. Catharine's, it is actually only about 1.5 hours from Toronto, so you could totally visit it. :)

>#72 Nora has answered this very well. I would just add that you need to keep in mind that at this time, children had few rights and no autonomy - and no money. You could run away, but where to? And what would you live on? A girl who didn't want to marry the man her parents picked could be locked in her room until she gave in - or worse. The law was powerless to intervene unless there was physical violence involved and rarely would even then.

(Which is also true for wives at this time; it was late in the 19th century before wives were not completely legally subject to their husbands. Which is one of the reasons that marrying the right man is such an obsession in the literature of the time, particularly in books by women.)

Servants were usually discouraged from marrying, but there were exceptions. In some households the butler and the housekeeper might be a married couple, for instance. And some householders would choose to hire married couples as they were considered more stable and likely to stay put.

Emma is a book that warrants re-reading because there's a lot going on in it that you're almost guaranteed to miss the first time around...

>76 lyzard: Somehow I don't picture Madeline re-reading Emma ;-)

I agree with you, though, I have read it at least four times and each time it strikes me in a different way. When I read it in high school I didn't even notice that Emma (the character) was annoying--she was my idol for a long time (maybe because of her book lists).

Loving this discussion!!

I forgive everything else on the strength of Emma's book lists. :)

> 77

76 Somehow I don't picture Madeline re-reading Emma

You've got that right, Anne! :)

I think you would benefit from reading Pride and Prejudice, Madeline. (Though perhaps after a long, Austen-free break.) I think it is a lot more straightforward than Emma, and would help you understand some of the subtleties of marriage and family and money of the time period.

> 80

Though perhaps after a long, Austen-free break.)

Like about ten years? ;)

But - but - but - what am *I* supposed to do for ten years!? :)

(It occurred to me to make the same suggestion, by the way...but then I didn't, 'cos I knew what you'd say!)

76 - I would just add that you need to keep in mind that at this time, children had few rights and no autonomy - and no money. You could run away, but where to? And what would you live on? A girl who didn't want to marry the man her parents picked could be locked in her room until she gave in - or worse. The law was powerless to intervene unless there was physical violence involved and rarely would even then.

I opened to this (my first unread post), and I didn't realize what thread I was on. Lately I've been reading a lot of stuff on the internet about forced marriage of immigrant girls ... young women in Britain, Canada, the US, Australia, etc. who during school vacation are taken back to their original country to be forced into an arranged marriage. I was shocked to learn that there are 56 different countries where immigrants are taken back to and forced to marry against their wishes. Then I checked the thread and realized we were talking about Jane Austen! Hmmmmm, how little things actually change .. .

Somehow I don't picture Madeline re-reading Emma

You've got that right, Anne! :)

Ha! After taking four years to read Emma, and reaching the final page and throwing the book against the wall, I said that too.

However, I know I'll read it again one day. Maybe soon. Never say never.

> 82

But - but - but - what am *I* supposed to do for ten years!?

You, Liz, will help others with this type book until I feel compelled to read such a book again. What I forsee (and I will not butt into what you will actually do with this idea) is that there would be a place where tutees could list what they'd like to read and what kind of help is needed. Then the tutors could choose those they'd like to help.

I am positive you will get lots of requests for help with Jane Austen books. They are so popular (...with others, I might add!).

I'm not sure what will be on my agenda for a tutor in the future. Any such future book might have something to do with what my niece is required to read at Princeton, though!

By the way, I am thrilled to announce that I've made it past the half-way mark in Emma...and I'm continuing full steam (well, maybe a bit less than full steam) ahead. I fully intend to read this whole book, though.

*appears very determined*

> 83

Then I checked the thread and realized we were talking about Jane Austen! Hmmmmm, how little things actually change

Sad, but true.

Emma - Vol. 2, Chapter 11

...where Mrs. Weston is planning a dance.

1. Who is Mrs. Hodges?
2. Who is Mrs. Stokes?
3. What was the Crown Inn? Was that a place owned by Mr. Weston or a place that he would rent?
4. I presume all dances had suppers either preceding or during them then?
5. Mr. Weston whispers, "He has asked her my dear." So, are Mr. and Mrs. Weston setting a plot to get Emma eventually married into their family?
6. About Mr. Perry and Emma's measles..."He came four times a day for a week". Now that's what I call good medical attention. Even at the home health agency which employs me, they limit skilled nursing visits to only twice daily!
7. Was everyone so worried about draughts (drafts) or was that primarily Mr. Woodhouse?

Now on to the second half of this book... :D

By the way, I really thought it was hilarious that my older son had just started and stopped reading Emma. He recently got a Kindle so he'd been downloading some free classics to read. Emma wasn't for him, though. He did like The Count of Monte Cristo. I think he will not make his way through War and Peace either. Too bad, I an't get him to sign up for you as a tutor, Liz! :D

My daughter also got a Kindle as a present and had been downloading classics this summer. The first book she read was Anna Karenina. Next time I talk to her I'll have to see if she has read Emma or any other of the Jane Austen Classics. Now she is in her first year of law school so I don't think she has much (er, any) free time for pleasure reading.

61. The Grotesque - Patrick Mcgrath



I keep wondering why Patrick McGrath is not a more popular author. Of the four books of his I've now read, three of them (this one, Spider, and Mr. Haggard's Disease) have simply blown me away.

In The Grotesque, I found all the elements that I truly love in a novel. There are but a few characters, but all are deeply interesting. The setting is a bit spooky. Best of all, though, is that this book is a pyschological thriller with a story that kept me guessing what was to come and spurring me on to turn its pages faster and faster. Even by the story's end, I had much about which to think.

Sir Hugo Coal is a paleontologist who is trying to prove that the dinosaur bones, which he brought back from Africa and which he has currently set up in his barn, prove that the his specimen is bird-related. However, at this time in his life, he sits in a wheelchair unable to communicate because of an "accident" that lead to his "vegetative" state. Nevertheless, he tells us his story because he wants us to know how evil his butler is. In fact, he is sure that his butler, named Fledge (there's also a neurosurgeon named Walter Dendrite in this book!), had something to do with the disappearance of his daughter Cleo's fiance. Just listen to what he tells us...

Enjoy this book, folks, it's a good one!

Rating - 5 stars

>#87 The second half!? You go, girl!! :)

1. The cook at Donwell (I think).

2. The landlady at the Crown Inn.

3. In country towns, there would be one or more inns supplying accommodation, food and drinks for travellers, but which would also have rooms available for hire, for public meetings, club meetings, suppers and (as here) dances.

4. Yes, they went for hours.

5. Yes, Emma is the subject of a plot. :) As I mentioned before, a dance was a good opportunity for a young man to pursue a young woman (and vice versa). The man would ask the woman for one or more dances beforehand, which would be written into her dance-card. He might also ask for the privilege of taking her in to supper.

6. If the richest and most influential people in town (who also pay their bills on time) ask you to call four times a day, you don't argue!

7. Mr Woodhouse is an extreme - or rather, EXTREME - case. But don't forget this was before antibiotics and other medicines, and many illnesses we might regard as trivial were often serious and sometimes fatal. So there was more concern about draughts, wet shoes, going from hot rooms to cold rooms, etc.

Oh - and I'll make a deal with you: finish Emma, and I'll re-read The Grotesque. :)

I do own it, but it's been a long time.

I'll make a deal with you: finish Emma, and I'll re-read The Grotesque.

Oh, okay, but know that you're getting the better part of this deal! ;)

If you can think of a more effective carrot, I'm happy to dangle it. :)

(Notice I haven't mentioned the stick...)

From my (other) current read, Suburban Safari by Hannah Holmes:

"One of the reasons the songbird population is crashing is that North America is being converted into Wal-marts and White-Crowned Sparrow Estates."

>94 SqueakyChu: What a sadness! We did not hear a single wood thrush this summer......YouTube is no substitute for a good bird.
(And I finished Emma today and loved it all over again.)

From Emma by Jane Austen

"How often is happiness destroyed by preparation, foolish preparation?"

This line reminds me of when a friend of mine told me that he and his fiancee broke up after fighting over wedding plans. To date, they have been happily married for over 30 years - so, no biggy! (They reconsidered.) :D

More from Emma by Jane Austen

"Oh! The blessing of a female correspondent when one is really interested in the absent!"

That reminds me of my aunt and uncle in Israel. You know who wrote to me. It was my aunt. My uncle used to say, "No news is good news!". :)

P.S. My beloved aunt and uncle (they were sister and brother) are no longer alive. It's now their own children (my uncle's *daughter* and my aunt's *daughter-in-law*) who continue our correspondence (by Facebook now!) to this day. My aunt always said she preferred "snail mail." :)

Emma - Vol. 2, Chapter 12

...in which preparations for the ball must be cancelled.

1. For someone who intends never to be married, why does Emma put so much effort into relationships (albeit friendly) with men?

2. Why is she sad that Frank, who seems to be in love with her, will be disappointed that the ball has to be cancelled?

3. Why would she want to lead him on...although she does admit to maybe being in love with him?

4. Is Emma just a tease?

Uh oh! I saw a spoiler in the list of quotations which, I think, leads me to know who sent that pianoforte to the Bates residence and why. *sigh*

I always thought Emma was lying to herself.

I always thought Emma was lying to herself.

I totally agree, Joyce. I always used to say, when I was younger, that I didn't want to marry. I think I did that because the situation was never right. When all issues resolved themselves, there was no question that I would marry. Why do some of us women do that?

Here was my situation. I was in my mid-twenties and traveling the world. I worked as a volunteer nurse for a year in Israel. My aunt and my dad (my mom was no longer alive at that time) asked why I didn't marry. I simply said I didn't want to because I wanted to travel. When I finally met my future husband, he wasn't Jewish, so, once again, I said I didn't want to marry. When he said he wanted to convert to Judaism and asked if I would marry him, I immediately said, "Of course!" The rest is history! We, too, have been happily married for over 30 years. :)

I wouldn't call it lying to herself - it's not conscious - misunderstanding her own motives is nearer the mark - and which of us hasn't experienced that? Austen's novels are often about a young woman growing into a proper understanding of herself, and Emma certainly is.

There's a mix of things going on with her. At the moment Emma has about as much freedom (and power) as a woman of her time could have, and she's understandably not thrilled at the thought of surrendering that. She's willing to flirt but is skittish about deeper emotional involvement. She's vain enough to enjoy being admired, without necessarily wanting to "give back" - the fact that she can calculate about "maybe" being in love shows she's playing at it, not serious.

However - the "effort" she puts in would, I think, mostly indicate how short she is of meaningful ways to spend her time - since she doesn't like most of the ways she "should" be spending her time.

Many people really don't want to marry, of course, and some simply never meet "the right person". But at this time a woman often had little choice over whether she did or not, and was usually taught from an early age that marriage was her sole purpose and goal in life. Emma has an unusual degree of autonomy - she can buck the system, so she does.

(Ugh indeed, Madeline - I hope you're mistaken.)

Hello!

I wouldn't call it lying to herself - it's not conscious

Is lying to oneself usually conscious? Is it ever conscious?

Well, let me put it this way - I know several people with a habit of doing whatever they like on the back of finding unselfish-sounding excuses. Once they've thought up a good reason, that in effect becomes their reason - as if they really believed it. I'd differentiate that from genuinely not realising you're doing it, or from not recognising your own motives, which I think is what Emma is doing.

I'd differentiate that from genuinely not realising you're doing it, or from not recognising your own motives, which I think is what Emma is doing.

Ah, so we ARE talking about the same thing--just calling it different names. I was confused for a minute.

I think I was baulking at the expression "lying", which implies to me awareness. Perhaps we can substitute "fooling herself"? :)

> 101

spend her time - since she doesn't like most of the ways she "should" be spending her time.

Such as?

But at this time a woman often had little choice over whether she did or not, and was usually taught from an early age that marriage was her sole purpose and goal in life.?

...and were a girl's parents gravely disappointed when no marriage took place?

Emma - Vol. 2, Chapter 13

...in which Frank Weston Churchill writes a letter

1. Why does Emma think that Harriet will accept her bouncing Frank off onto her after the episode with Mr. Elton didn't work out? Emma is proving to be quite "ditzy"!

2. What gives Emma the right to scold Harriet for still grieving over the fact that Mr. Elton chose a different wife than Harriet?

Emma is a silly teenage girl with too much time on her hands! Unlike, say, Elizabeth Bennet, I don't think Emma--at least Emma until the end of the book--is supposed to be a protagonist that the reader wants to emulate. Rather, I think Emma is a pretty realistic picture of a self-assured teenager/young woman who is learning about life and learning that's she's fallible, but in the meantime is trying to run everyone's life to her satisfaction. She behaves immaturely and does irrational things.

> 109

Unlike, say, Elizabeth Bennet

Who is Elizabeth Bennet?

"I am the 99 percent."

There. I just had to say that. I feel better now.

>110 SqueakyChu:: The main character in Pride and Prejudice. Even if you don't want to read any more Austen, some of the movie versions of this book are pretty fun--the recent one with Keira Knightley and the miniseries with Colin Firth.

Even if I had the ability to hear movies, P&P would not be a movie I'd choose to see. Again, I'm just not interested in 19th century life in England.

I saw under LT's "books I should borrow" feature, that there were NO books recommended that I should borrow from lyzard. I thought that was pretty humorous!

>#107

Improving her mind with serious reading, practising the piano for long periods, finishing some of the drawings / paintings she starts, visiting the poor and the sick, and spending her time with Jane Fairfax instead of Harriet Smith. (In other words, we don't really blame her for her minor rebellion.)

Very gravely disappointed, since they would have to support her financially until they died, and her brother(s) if she had any after that. Also, no grandchildren. But it was mostly the money - and the stigma of raising a "failure".

>#108

1. Because Harriet's main attraction as a friend is that she has little intelligence, very little will of her own and will docilely do what Emma wants.

2. No right, obviously.

First, her doing so makes Emma feel bad. Second, it stands in the way of Emma's new favourite game of "push Harriet at Frank". Third, see Point 1. :)

> 113

spending her time with Jane Fairfax instead of Harriet Smith.

1. Is this because Jane Fairfax's status was "superior" to that of Harriet?

But it was mostly the money - and the stigma of raising a "failure".

2. Do you think any of that stigma remains to this day?

Improving her mind with serious reading,/i>

At least she wouldn't have had to read Emma! ;)

3. What were some of the "serious reads" she could have been reading at that time and place?

> 113

it stands in the way of Emma's new favourite game of "push Harriet at Frank".

...which reminds me of a nasty thing I used to do when I was about 18. If I had a guy call me that I didn't like, I'd refuse the date and suggest he go out with one of my friends. Not so unlike the 19th century English Emma, eh? :O

ETA: Some things never change.

>#113 But - but - I have 17th and 18th century literature, too! :)

>#115 Yes, she and Emma are of the same social standing, although one is rich and the other poor. Emma, of course, prefers a companion who she can make do what she wants - and who she doesn't suspect of being better than her at most things...

Speaking for myself - hell, yes! Speaking also for a friend of mine, whose parents like to jeer at and insult her for her singleness.

Don't kid yourself, the old yardsticks are still out there.

>#116 Not so unlike at all. Few of us are. I suspect that's why so many readers don't like Emma. :)

>#115(b) Well, NOT novels, that's for sure. Sermons and other religious works, conduct books, history, philosophy, natural history - all of it carefully pre-vetted to make sure it was appropriate for a young lady. (Ordinarily, but maybe not in Emma's situation.)

> 118

Well, NOT novels, that's for sure.

1. So who was allowed to read novels at that time?
2. If a young girl remained unmarried, was she ever allowed to read novels? If so, when?

> 117

Don't kid yourself, the old yardsticks are still out there.

Do you believe they will ever go away?

I'd like to think so, but I'm not optimistic. Personally I'm a great believer in live and let live, and feel no particular need to tell other people how to run their lives.

Their reading, yes - but not their lives. :)

Girls certainly did read novels, but right through the 18th and 19th centuries there was a lot of angst over the supposed pernicious influence of fiction. Novels were supposed to corrupt girls' morals*, give them unrealistic expectations# - and make them think about things girls weren't supposed to think about, like social injustice.

*Which is entirely absurd - I've never yet read an English novel of this period that didn't ultimately come down heavily on the side of conventional morality and religion, even if some of the minor characters were up to no good, and even if a few radical ideas snuck in. And sexual transgression (even quite minor) was always, always punished - at least in women.

#This one was a more valid criticism. Novels certainly did influence prevailing views of love and marriage, but not just amongst girls.

(And don't get me started on what was said about servants reading novels!!)

Very strict households would ban novels, or only let the menfolk read them. But most households adopted novel-reading, although as Judy (I think) said up above, they were often read allowed at night, with the family gathered, so they had to be "appropriate".

> 121

Personally I'm a great believer in live and let live, and feel no particular need to tell other people how to run their lives.

That's what my husband says, but I guess I have a bit more of "Emma" in me! :)

and make them think about things girls weren't supposed to think about, like social injustice.

...which is exactly why I always wanted my daughter to read novels. Although fiction can tell facts about social injustice, novels brign out the emotional qualities of social injustice.

(And don't get me started on what was said about servants reading novels!!)

Were the servants allowed to read non-fiction? Were they given the books to read, or did they have their own small book collections? Were most of the srevants able to read?

When my kids were young, at the times my husband and I read in the evening sitting on our old sofa, whenever there was a kid of ours on it with us and also reading, we'd call it "The Family Squoosh"! :)

"The Family Squoosh"!

Ah, that's great! When I was very young, my father worked Saturday nights and my mother and I used to lie on my parents' bed and read together. Saturday was my favourite day of the week, as "reading day".

Tragically, over the years my Saturday nights have changed very little. :)

Paradoxically, servants had more freedom than the young ladies of a family. They got paid their wages and had their half day off, once a week or once a fortnight, so if they wanted to buy books they could. There were also newspapers and magazines written for that audience. They also produced versions of novels which were broken up into sections, so poor people could buy them a piece at a time instead of having to pay for a whole work all at once. There were also the "Penny Dreadfuls", short works full of crime and horror and thrills.

But of course, many people did read to improve themselves. Literacy rates rose sharply from the end of the 17th century onwards, and by the 19th a majority of people could read, although certainly not all; and there was a lot of concern about what the working classes were reading, which reached a peak around the French Revolution (obviously).

From the late 17th century onwards, many publishers produced extracts of other works intended to give basic information about various topics of interest (like a Reader's Digest encyclopaedia). During the 19th century there was the development of what were called "Mechanics Institutes", where working-class men (just men) could go - like night school - and learn to read and write and do accounts, and be exposed to basic geography, history, science and listen to guest speakers. They were founded chiefly not just for educational purposes, but to give men an alternative to going to the pub every night. Nevertheless, many state / church types (those with a vested interest in the "class differences as God's will" view of life) were dead against this form of education as giving "low" people ideas above their station. The teaching of science was considered particularly corrupting (especially post-Darwin). These institutes often built up an extensive collection of books, and some of them evolved into early public libraries.

Nevertheless, many state / church types (those with a vested interest in the "class differences as God's will" view of life) were dead against this form of education as giving "low" people ideas above their station. The teaching of science was considered particularly corrupting (especially post-Darwin).

Unfortunately, shades of this still exist to this very day.

There's that "telling people how to live" again...

LOL!!

...and this time it's not me!

Emma - Vol. 2, Chapter 14

...where Emma gets to talk at length to Mrs. Elton.

1. What is a barouche-landau?
2. What is a chaise?
3. Why did married women usually give up music?
4. When Emma refers to giving up music, is that only to playing the pianoforte?
5. Were women (or men) involved in any other sort of music in the home?
6. Were women who remained umarried also likely to give up playing the pianoforte as they aged?
7. Who is Selina? Is that Augusta's sister?

Haha! Emma is sure in a tizzy from meeting Mrs. Elton!

The chaise and barouche-landau were both carriages. See earlier conversation about carriages as their version of cars.

1. chaise: http://www.google.ca/search?tbm=isch&hl=en&source=hp&biw=1152&bi...

2. barouche-landau: http://www.google.ca/search?tbm=isch&hl=en&source=hp&biw=1152&bi...

Yikes!

A barouche-landau and a chaise were both forms of carriages. There were different types of chaises which could seat one, two or four people, and which might be enclosed or just have a hood. They were light carriages used for getting around (comparatively) quickly. A landau was a larger, heavier travelling-coach that seated four, and a barouche-landau was the same carriage but with two hoods that joined in the middle and could be raised or lowered according to the weather.

The kind of carriage(s) you owned said a lot about your social status and wealth. By going on about her brother-in-law's barouche-landau, Mrs Elton is indirectly bragging about how rich he is.

Some married women gave up music because they could - although the excuse was that they were now "too busy". Music was one of the accomplishments that girls were expected to have and any girl whose parents could afford it would have piano lessons (at least) and be expected to practice extensively whether she liked it or not, and to perform at social gatherings whether she liked it or not. And if she didn't, she would drop it after she caught a husband - it had served its purpose. But many women liked to play and sing and kept it up after they were married. And unmarried women - i.e. old maids - would be expected to play for other people's entertainment, including at dances.

Emma doesn't practise as much as she "should" - there's no-one to make her - and she's rich, so it isn't so important; while Jane Fairfax must, as her musical abilities are one of the things likely to help her get a new position.

The piano was the standard instrument. Some girls also learned the harp. Other instruments were usually only taught if there was real ability (or unusual circumstances). The organ might be taught in a minister's family. Boys were usually taught music (piano) too, but did not "have to" persist with it.

Selina is Mrs Suckling, nee Hawkins, wife to the wealthy (and barouche-landau owning) Mr Suckling.

A landau was a larger, heavier travelling-coach that seated four, and a barouche-landau was the same carriage but with two hoods that joined in the middle and could be raised or lowered according to the weather.

It's hard to see the to different hoods on the barouche-landaus pictured on Joyce's link.

any girl whose parents could afford it would have piano lessons (at least) and be expected to practice extensively whether she liked it or not,

Many Jewish families did that also when I was growing up in Baltimore in the 1950's. I always hated taking piano lessons because I had absolutely no talent for it. When my dad said I couldn't practice because he wanted to watch TV, I'd happily agree. As a young adult (in the 1960's), I happily taught myself to play guitar. I had my own agenda in those later days. :D

Another question:
1. What gave Mrs. Elton the right to call Mr. Knightley simply "Knightley"?

NOTHING!! :)

It's an over-familiarity, a touch of vulgarity that indicates a lack of breeding - i.e. she's not really "a lady".

I just received an update from my niece. She's now reading Vanity Fair. She wrote to me, "I'm currently 3/4 of the way through Vanity Fair...that one is a doozy! I would not recommend it unless you truly love Victorian literature!"

Yeah. Right! :)

Not really anything I can say in response to that, is there? :)

Have you read Vanity Fair, Liz? Did you like it?

Hell, yeah. And HELL, YEAH!!

It certainly is one of the definitive Victorian works (though set in the Regency), so perhaps that's the point at issue here. :)

I had Vanity Fair assigned in high school and I loved it to pieces, though I was possibly the only one in my class who did, the others seemed to think it was too much like work.

There are some kinds of work in reading that I like and other kinds that I don't. If I really like the subject of a book, I don't mind doing the work that goes along with it. Perhaps the others just didn't fancy the book as much as you did, Kerry.

With Emma, I like the work better than the story! :D

I've been trying to remember what 19th century works I did in high school - usually the ones where length permitted: Jane Eyre, Silas Marner and A Tale Of Two Cities, I think. I'm surprised a high school would have assigned anything as long as Vanity Fair.

Is that the equivalent of enjoying the class because of the teacher, Madeline? :)

Man. I didn't read any good Brit-lit like those in high school. I had one year of pre-1600s world lit, one year of post-1600 world lit (okay, I think we read Frankenstein and Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, but that was our only Brit-lit), one year of American lit, and one year of college-level lit (for which I had already read all the books assigned that year)

We seem to have huge amounts of formal literature study, compared to most people I talk to - novels and plays (mostly but not only Bill S.) and poetry*, and right from the beginning of Year 7 (ages 12/13). Heh! - now that I look back, I remember verbally tutoring a struggling friend of mine through Jane Eyre.

*Due to some vagaries in our system, I ended up having to do Coleridge three times. The third time I shrieked at my teacher, "If I have to listen to Richard Burton reading The Rime Of The Ancient Mariner one more time, I will kill myself!!" She made me do it anyway. Make of that what you will. :)

> 138

Is that the equivalent of enjoying the class because of the teacher, Madeline?

It is! I've had some marvelous teachers in my past who made some incredibly difficult subjects delightful for me. A past Organics Chemistry professor had me laughing my way to an A in his class. I heard that Organic Chemistry was the flunky class (the class to weed out those who should not be studying the sciences - that was the time I was headed back to school to get my BSN in nursing.) This guy was a comedian. He came to the first class wearing a molecule on his head (a hat that was made up of molecular parts). His classes were hilarious.

Another professor taught Modern History of the US through the use of novels. That was the only history class I can say that I truly loved. One of my assigned reads was Catch 22. I can still remember laughing out loud at that book and thinking, "This is for a history class?!"

In school, I read Silas Marner, but now I remember nothing of it other than not liking it. I also read A Tale of Two Cities but don't remember all that much of it. I liked Dickens' style of writing, though. I did read Oliver Twist just for fun and enjoyed that book immensely. I also read Jane Eyre on my own. I remember liking it, but don't remember too many details of that book other than it was mysterious. Jane Eyre happens to be my niece's all-time favorite novel.

I was very fortunate in my English teachers, although as you've probably gathered I was a chronic book-nerd long before I first set foot in any of their classes.

> 140

Oh, yeah! We also did The Rime of the Ancient Mariner. I remember not liking it, but that's all I remember about it. I also remember not liking Gulliver's Travel which I had to read for college English.

Perhaps that's why I like modern literature so much. It eliminates all those books I didn't like.

I remember verbally tutoring a struggling friend of mine through Jane Eyre.

...and your tutoring skills remain as strong as ever!

> 142

I always did a lot of reading. I got that from my mom. She used to take me every Saturday to the big Enoch Pratt Free Library in downtown Baltimore (Maryland, USA). I'm the kind of person who likes to do free choice reading. I read at whim, but only what I like. If something gets boring or doesn't attract my attention, it must go.

My husband always questions why I occasionally read things that I don't like. I usually complain bitterly as I do that. I'm reading Emma because I created a challenge to read the books that my niece was reading for university. I thought I'd start with her first assigned book. Little did I know how challenging this would be for me. I have to say, this has been my most challenge TIOLI book ever.

Sometimes I try to finish certain books I don't like to see why books are prize winners or to see why people like them in the first place. This certainly is the case with Emma. I've always wondered what all the fuss was about Jane Austen. In addition, how embarrassed I'd be if I couldn't read the one book I chose to read for my own challenge!

Emma - Vol. 2, Chapter 15

...where Mrs. Elton talks about how impressed she is with Jane Faifax.

I have no questions for this chapter, but I have to say that Mrs. Elton is so totally obnoxious and annoying. She's insufferable! The problem with a book such as this is that I have to read about such people. They just go on and on. In real life, I'd make a quick exit to converse with people who don't bring me down.

I'm trying to think about what about this book is so disagreeable to me. Perhaps, it's my left-leaning self. I have great distaste for reading books about the rich and famous and the class systems. In this book, the class systems were so totally ingrained that there was no getting out of or away from them. The wealthy all seem so pretentious. No one seems to care about people as individuals. That is so disagreeable to me. In a novel such as this, I'm forced to accept that as the status quo.

:(

Austen's novels are generally about girls with integrity trying to navigate within such a system and hold onto their identity and ideals as they do so. Emma is different, as Emma herself is very much a part of the system - and needs to open her eyes in a number of respects.

Which is why (alas, much too late) we have realised that Emma probably wasn't the best place for you to start... :(

But look on the bright side: you have reacted completely correctly, and with no difficulty of interpretation at all, to Mrs Elton!

But look on the bright side: you have reacted completely correctly, and with no difficulty of interpretation at all, to Mrs Elton!

LOL!

I *did* need to start with Emma, though, if only because that was the first book assigned for my niece to read in her English class of her freshman year at Princeton. That was reason enough for me to give it a try. She is finding my troubles with it kind of amusing. :)

By the way, Emma has slowed my reading down so much this month that I'll probably not make it through 75 books this year. However, the idea of you and Jim working together on a tutored read feature for the 75-ers group is so fabulous that not accomplishing my reading goal this year is mere peanuts. There's always 2012. :)

Just posting so you know I'm still here. I don't have any questions because I'm ahead of you by several chapters and by the time you get caught up, you've asked the questions I had!

And Mrs. Elton doesn't get any better. I've known people like her (in my own family unfortunately) and I don't like reading about them any more than you do. Though my moderate leaning self doesn't mind reading about the rich. After all, when I win the lottery, I'll be rich too!

by the time you get caught up, you've asked the questions I had!

Heh!

After all, when I win the lottery, I'll be rich too!

Then I probably won't read your autobiography, at least the part that includes your "lottery-winning" period. :)

The funny thing is that I don't mind reading about "the bad guy" in general. It's just that, when I read about people who seem to think they're superior because of material wealth, I find no entertainment value in that. Let me read about the "regular guy" any day.

If I had to pick my favorite character so far in Emma, it would probably be Harriet because being a devoted friend is a most important trait (although how she gave up Mr. Martin is beyond me. All of us have faults). I'd really rather be reading about Harriet having married Mr. Martin and living on a farm!

Maybe I'd pick Mr. Woodehouse as my favorite character, though, because he is always concerned about the well-being of others. I think he shows a generosity of heart.

A question for participants and lurkers in this conversation:
Who is your favorite character in Emma? Why?

I actually like Emma a lot. I don't really see any of myself in her, but I do see a lot of people that I know. Privileged and spoiled, but so full of good intentions that you can't help but like them.
For entertainment value I like Mr. Woodhouse. He's such a cranky old man; he reminds me of one of my dogs.

So, are you going to try to read all the books your niece reads for class? Does this mean you'll be reading Vanity Fair at some point? I will totally read it with you, especially at the current leisurely pace :-)

So, are you going to try to read all the books your niece reads for class?

That was my original intention, Nora, but now that seems very unlikely. I'm now waiting to see what she reads for the spring semester. I want to get myself out of this 19th century fiction class! :)

She was reading five books for her current course. She's on book 3, and I'm still on book 1. I still want to see if I can read 75 books this year - which looks unlikely at this point in time. I think I'll try again with my niece's reading list for her Spring semester. I have no idea what her English course will be then. I hope she reads world literature! Maybe she'll be in a class taught by Joyce Carol Oates! We'll just have to wait and see. I have a feeling I'll need a tutor again, though. :/

Feel free to pick a tutor for Vanity Fair. Check with lyzard and drneutron to see how this project is coming along or check back on this thread from time to time.

I'm not so much in need of a tutor for Vanity Fair as a buddy, to keep me motivated but who also doesn't want to read it too fast. This is the first year I've ever come close to 75 books and I want to keep reading short books so I can get there ;-)

I have promised myself that if I read 75 books before the end of the year, my 76th book will be something giant. I'm thinking War and Peace.

153: But don't you want to read 75 books in 2012 too?

153 posts and I haven't yet commented... Still following with interest, but nothing to contribute.

A question for participants and lurkers in this conversation: Who is your favorite character in Emma? Why?

Ooh, good question! It's easier to pick the ones I love to hate or find annoying... among whom, Mrs Elton as you've already identified. Emma herself I found insufferable the first time I read it, but I found I had more patience with her the second time.

Miss Bates I would not call a favourite exactly, but I love her characterisation - the almost stream-of-consciousness endless chatter that inadvertently reveals her cares and her precarious life of genteel poverty, and her kindness. She reminds me rather of my mother, and then I remember how impatient I get with my mother and realise I am more like Emma than I like to think I am!

Mr Knightly is another favourite - because he is truly patient yet does not hesitate to speak hard truths.

It's been too long since I've read it; I don't really remember liking anyone. I felt compassion for Harriet though. Emma was a bit of a bully to her.

Joyce, you can re-read it now with me and Morphy. I'm certainly reading it slowly enough - like about 5 pages a day! :)

Emma - Vol. 2, Chapter 16

...where Emma and her father throw a party for Mr. & Mrs. Elton.

1. Why would someone (Emma) feel it necessary to throw a party for a person (Mrs. Elton) she doesn't like?
2. Were people judged by their handwriting?
3. What gave one person the right to tell another what to do (Mrs. Elton telling Jane Fairfax whether or not she has the right to walk to the post office in the rain)?

I am so glad I was not born in England in the 19th century. I would have suffered so much. People would have simply driven me beserk!

Madeline - I was thinking of maybe reading it in December. Will you be finished by then?

I am so glad I was not born in England in the 19th century. I would have suffered so much. People would have simply driven me beserk!

Me too! Love to visit in books, but don't want to actually be there. First, no indoor plumbing and no toilet paper. And then there's the whole society. I'd be giving people a piece of my mind constantly, and that just wouldn't work. Have you ever read Charlotte Bronte? Her books are really bad for everyone watching each other and passing judgement on every little thing.

Just my guesses...

1) she can feel superior to Mrs. Elton by throwing a party for her
2) yes. More wealth = more leisure time = more writing to friends and family = better handwriting
3) I think Mrs. Elton just likes to tell everyone what to do, or not do.

> 159

I was thinking of maybe reading it in December. Will you be finished by then?

I *dearly hope* to finish it in November. I'm about 60% of the way through it now.

Many people will still want to read it any time you decide to start. Perhaps do it as a tutored read. This is such a fun way to get through a more difficult book...and you get to read at your own pace. Or maybe start a group read. This is a book better read along with company.

> 160

Have you ever read Charlotte Bronte?

I actually did read Jane Eyre many, many years ago. I remember liking it but the details of the book are pretty much gone from my memoiry.

> 161

1. What a waste! Why not throw a party for someone you like instead? There were so many things that people did because it was the "correct ettiquette". I wonder if they actually didn't feel stifled just because that was the only style of living they knew.

2. Businessmen did a lot of writing, too, Didn't they?

3. Did she tell Mr. Elton he must marry her?! ;)

I'm now inclined to think the right book for you might have been Sense And Sensibility, Madeline, which on one level is about the hell of being trapped amongst uncongenial people, and how you survive.

While Pride And Prejudice has the two greatest scenes ever written of a poor, socially unsupported individual telling the rich and mighty where to go. (Which accounts for at least some of its enduring popularity, I think.)

Yeah, yeah, I know it's no use... :)

1. Noblesse oblige. As the community's female leader, it is Emma's responsibility.
2. Also indicative of a better education. Which is also a matter of more wealth, etc.
3. Money + social standing = "right". If you had the power you could make life very difficult for people less well-off than you. If you were that kind of person.

While Pride And Prejudice has the two greatest scenes ever written of a poor, socially unsupported individual telling the rich and mighty where to go.

Now that sounds more like my kind of book! Maybe I'll take you up on that book after the New Year (if you'll agree to tutor me some more).

Yeah, yeah, I know it's no use... :)

No. To the contrary. It's the dialogue about the book Emma that is fun...even if the content is hard to take. Just think what this would have been like for me if I liked this book Emma a bit more. I might actually agree to read another Jane Austen book (after a little break, though) if I thought the next book would be better.

1. Noblesse oblige. As the community's female leader, it is Emma's responsibility.

What would have happened to Emma if she declined to have that party for the Eltons? Would she have been ostracized by others?

Also indicative of a better education. Which is also a matter of more wealth, etc.

What if someone with a better education had a poor handwriting? That happens, you know.

Money + social standing = "right". If you had the power you could make life very difficult for people less comfortable for you. If you were that kind of person.

That is so wrong!!

Emma - Vol. 2, Chapter 17

... in which Mr. Weston brings a letter that has the news that Frank is soon to return.

1. I have no idea what Mrs. Elton is talking about to Jane Firfax. What Is Mrs. Elston trying to arrange for Jane Fairfax before the summer?

2. Why did Emma react with agitation when she learned that Frank was coming back?

Liz, have you seen the movie Emma, starring Gwyneth Paltrow? If so, what did you think of it? My niece suggested I view it. I should probably do that after I finish this book! If I can get it on DVD, I'd be able to have the closed captioning.

I haven't, because I think GP was horribly miscast (and Toni Colette, for that matter). I will be getting around to seeing the recent BBC series, though.

(Beats me why everyone isists on casting blondes in this role, when Emma is the only one of Austen's heroines for whom she specifies a colour-scheme - yup, brunette!)

Mrs Elton is organising JF a new position, probably as governess, whether she wants it or not. (Not, presumably. One, Mrs E. is being her usual pushy officious self. Two, imagine living surrounded by Mrs E.'s friends and relatives!)

She didn't really - she's still trying to convince herself she might be in love with him, but it's taking an effort - she thought her agitation was considerable? What, she wasn't quite sure?

It did sounds as if Mrs. Elton was trying to arrange a job, but she was pretty unclear about what it was she was arranging. For a while, I was wondering if she was trying to arrange a husband for JF!

I can't get what Jane Fairfax thinks of Mrs. Elton. Is that stated or implied anywhere in this chapter? Does Jane feel compelled to be Mrs. Elton's companion and friend?

Poor Harriet! Where is she, and how did she get left by the wayside?

An update on my niece's reading of Vanity Fair:

"Vanity Fair is really the toughest novel this semester. I am not a huge fan; Thackeray takes too much time to explain the most minute details, in my opinion!"

She also said she's takng a writing course next semester, not a reading course. She's so lucky!

It's more about Mrs E. showing off how many friends and connections she has, and how much power she has, than what position JF might be suited for.

As is implied in the text, caught between Mrs E. and Miss Bates, JF probably didn't have much say in the matter. Most likely she starts out being grateful for some respite from her grandma, and ends up rushing home for some respite from Mrs E.

Harriet is more like a toy than a friend - she gets picked up and put down, loved and neglected...

For Victorian novelists, the devil was in the details. :)

I'm glad you're good at peeking into the corners. That helps me a lot!

I'm glad. :)

My youngest daughter just watched the movie Clueless and asked me what book it was based on as she wanted to read it.....Emma!

Tell her good luck with Emma, Kerry!

Emma - Vol. 2, Chapter 18

... in which Mr. Weston tells Mrs. Elton about Frank's upcoming visits.

1. This is not right...Mrs. Elton "laughing affectedly" at Mr. Weston's opening a letter he should not have opened. It had been addressed to his wife. Both Mr. Weston and Mrs. Elton are annoying me so much!

2. Why did Mrs. Elton say that Selina "is no fine lady"? Since Selina is her sister-in-law, doesn't that reflect poorly on Mrs. Elton's family? Or is her brother so rich that what Mrs. Elton thinks of Selina doesn't really matter?

3. Why did people bring their own bedsheets when staying at an inn?

4. Is Mrs. Chuchill really sick,or is she the hypochondriac that everyone thinks she is?

5. What does this mean: "...at this rate it would be May before Hymen's saffron robe would be put on for us".

Now...the good news...

I'm finished both Volumes I and II of Emma. Hooray! :)

I'm on to Volume III...

Well done!!

1. Husbands had the right to open their wives' letters, as parents had the right to open their children's (which in practical terms means their daughters'). Wives and children were not supposed to correspond without their husbands'/parents' knowledge and permission. It was up to the individual whether that was enforced, however. Presumably in this case it was only because he could tell it was from Frank, but yes, it certainly leaves a bad taste.

2. Mrs Elton wants to be corrected, and she annoyed with Mr Weston for being so absorbed in his own situation to do it.

"Fine lady" was a very charged phrase during the 19th century, btw, but I'm not sure this is the place for a lecture. :)

3. Because they didn't trust those supplied by the inn to be (i) clean, and (ii) bug-free.

4. Wait and see.

5. "...it would be May before everyone had a wedding to gawk at."

Yes, that's one of the more uncomfortable usages of the time - Hymen, or Hymenaeus, was the Greek god of marriage ceremonies, for reasons I'm sure I don't have to explain and would frankly rather not. If he didn't attend (in his traditional saffron robe) the marriage would fail, so it was the custom to call aloud for him before a wedding took place. Expressions like that are very common in literature up to the 20th century.

Wow! Now I know what the saying "the devil is in the details" means. There are so many things that readers of 19th century fiction would immediately understand thatI don't, simply because I'm unfamiliar with the setting that is the time and place of Jane Austen novels.

Husbands had the right to open their wives' letters

Isn't opening another's maiintentionally afelony now? At least, I thought was in the United States. I know that parents still have the right to open letters of a minor (one of their children under age 18).

One of the issues that I don't like about reading 19th century fiction is the in-your-face lack of privacy and independence for women. I find it very upsetting because it makes me feels as if women are considered of "lesser" worth.

Women are trying so hard to be "accepted" by society by practicing correct manners, but, in reality, all they are doing is being forced into a mold of behavior. Grrrr!

Again, here comes my socialist side sneaking out! :)

"Fine lady" was a very charged phrase during the 19th century, btw, but I'm not sure this is the place for a lecture.

Oh, do give me a lecture if there is more for me to learn about the term "fine lady".

Because they didn't trust those supplied by the inn to be (i) clean, and (ii) bug-free.

Bed bugs, perhaps? Did only "finer"people do this or was there a general lack of trust? Or, perhaps only the wealthier people could stay in inns anyway?

If he didn't attend (in his traditional saffron robe) the marriage would fail

I never knew of this custom. How interesting!

for reasons I'm sure I don't have to explain and would frankly rather not

LOL!!

Hymen's main job was to preside over the weddings of the other Greek gods, so I'm not actually sure that his presence guaranteed a successful marriage. :)

Bed-bugs were epidemic at this time - due to the way mattresses were made, and the fact that bed-frames were generally wooden, they were nearly impossible to eliminate. (And a lot of people still had the old-fashioned canopy beds, with curtains surrounding them, which were a real breeding-ground.) Even rich people had to deal with them. But over the century, styles changed, mattress filler changes, and bed-frames started to be made out of metal - and that took care of the problem.

Ah, "fine lady"... I'll try to be brief. On one level it meant exactly what it said. It meant that you were in a high position, that you had money, that you wore all the right clothes, that you went all the right places. It was more than just being rich; it was breeding and conduct. (Which means that we can probably assume that Selina Suckling really isn't a "fine lady".)

BUT - at the same time, there was always a slightly negative connotation to the expression; it carried with it the sense that you were "above" certain things you shouldn't be - for example, caring for your own children, or visiting the poor. "She's too much the fine lady to do that." And over the 19th century the expression took on a much more pejorative meaning - it became distinctly a negative term, meaning that a woman was (or was compelled to be) essentially just ornamental - a non-person, if you like - just a fine lady. There's a beautiful example of this in George Meredith's The Egoist, where the hero is getting to know the heroine, who at this point is engaged to the not-hero: "He groaned in his spirit to think that of all girls, this one had been chosen for the position of fine lady." - meaning that she had too much individuality and personality to be reduced to the kind of automaton existence that this particular marriage would entail.

And that's the short version! :)

As for women's lives---

There's an infamous passage in Blackstone's legal commentaries, which you may have heard of, where "criminals, lunatics, imbeciles, paupers, children, and women" are lumped together, as having no rights under English law. And that is the way it was.

What drives me crazy is when people dismiss these books, Austen's and others - their books are about love and marriage, therefore they are romances, therefore they are trivial. The truth is that decision to marry or not marry, and who to marry, was EVERYTHING for a woman. If you married the wrong man, your life was over. There was no way out. Most of these books are not "romances" at all - they are serious reflections upon the reality of women's lives - as you say, no privacy, no autonomy, no freedom.

And you're not wrong to find it distressing. But the other side of this (not that I'm suggesting you do this!), is that if you look at the literature of the 19th century overall, you can see things changing - slowly, painfully, resisted every step of the way - but it happened - and it took courage and endurance. It drives me crazy today that so many women have so little appreciation of how good they have it, and how easy they have it. I always want to force these books on them - "Read this, and learn something!"

Oooff! And now I think I'll go and lie down...

179 - Lyzard, just dropping by to say I enjoyed today's class very much.

Nice to hear it! And just as well, because I haven't actually finished. :)

Just a couple of afterthoughts---

I find it very upsetting because it makes me feels as if women are considered of "lesser" worth.

They were. Simple as that. And again, the value of novels like Austen's, and others, is that (often unspoken) they are about the demonstration of women as intelligent, witty, generous, passionate, complex - not just the simple, narrow creatures they were "supposed" to be. When reading these works, you always have to pay attention to the distance between the outer actions, over which there was often little control, and the inner self.

The gap between theory and reality became increasingly strange over the 19th century - I think because things were changing, and a lot of people reacted either by actively fighting back or by sticking their fingers in their ears - "La, la, la, I'm not listening!" By mid-Victorian times you had this weird dichotomous view of women as these "higher", supremely moral, almost spiritual beings who were supposed to set an example for men and inspire them, but who were at the same time weak, helpless, frail, likely to "fall". How it was possible to believe both those things at once I don't know, but the Victorians managed it. :)

But before we say "were"--- Let's face it, in much of the world women still are considered lesser beings, and even in our supposedly "advanced" societies we have things like salary inequality - a woman's work being of less value than a man's, even if it's the same work - what's that about?

> 179

1. Bed-bugs were epidemic at this time

I'll have to go look up bed bugs and learn more about them. Fortunately, I've never had an encounter with them nor do I ever hope to. I take it that they found refuge in the wood of the bed-frames.

2. meaning that she had too much individuality and personality to be reduced to the kind of automaton existence that this particular marriage would entail.

This was the feeling I was getting about everyone back then in this book. Everyone seemed pre-programed by "society" to act alike in their roles. No one could move out of his or her mold because "society" would object. If that happened, the individual would be ostracized.

Who, back at that time, straddled the distance between the "haves" and "have-nots"? Were there such people? In what important areas did women, in fact, have a say? Just hosting parties and chatting up visitors?

So, in essence, a "fine lady" was an individual who was "too big for her britches" and could no longer lower heself to do much more than exist to be admired. How boring!!

3. There's an infamous passage in Blackstone's legal commentaries, which you may have heard of, where "criminals, lunatics, imbeciles, paupers, children, and women" are lumped together, as having no rights under English law. And that is the way it was.

I haven't heard of it, but for sure I'll ask my daughter, who's in her first year of law school, about it. She is studying old laws on the books because those are the precursors to laws of today.

My question then is why, in the whole history of man, did it take until the 20th century for women to wake up? Another question I have to ask is if you think the "progress" made by women today will ever revert back to the "old ways"? Alternatively, do you think that women will ever be treated with the same value as men (you mentioned pay inequity as an example)?

Interestingly, on the Israeli kibbutz (a communal style of living started by the pioneers in Palestine with the founding of the state of Israel) women started out sharing roles with men. As the kibbutzim and the country developed, the women slowly began to gravitate back to the more traditional female roles. Today, even the kibbutz style of living as a whole is at risk.

4. What drives me crazy is when people dismiss these books, Austen's and others - their books are about love and marriage,

I certainly don't consider this a story about romance. I see it more as the story of an individual...and how she fits into the society into which she was born. Clearly, she wants to be able to "do her own thing". However she sees that she can do this by following the rules rather than disobeying them. For example, if Emma hosts a party for Mrs. Elton, she neither has to like her, nor entertain her. She can have this "required" party, and then so as she likes there. Ha! She is basically manipulating the rules for her own good. In trying to match Harriet to Mr. Elton, in another example, she was trying to manipulate the rules to benfit her friend.

5. If you married the wrong man, your life was over.

It's very interesting, over the years, for me to remember how divorce was such a stigma when I was a child. Now it's so common no one even bats an eye when a divorce is mentioned.

6. they are serious reflections upon the reality of women's lives

Okay. So books of that time were mainly studies of women? Or were there also similar books, that became best sellers, that were studies of men?

7. not that I'm suggesting you do this...is that if you look at the literature of the 19th century overall

LOL!

Oh, by the way, I asked my daughter how she liked Pride and Prejudice. She said she didn't like it. I don't know if she read that for school or just on her own.

8. so many women have so little appreciation of how good they have it, and how easy they have it

We can say that for women in our own Western society, but there are many countries in which women are still oppressed (to my way of thinking). I wonder how many of those women feel held back and how many are truly happy for their station in life that is seemingly of lower status than that of men.

Despite my resistence to reading 19th century literature, I very much like to read about women in contemporary societies - even women with little freedom. My favorite reads are mostly middle eastern literature, perhaps because I myself lived there (specifically, in Israel) for a short time. I am for their own rights. I consider them truly brave.

Back in 19th century England, did rich women have more freedom generally than their poorer counterparts?

1. the value of novels like Austen's, and others, is that (often unspoken) they are about the demonstration of women as intelligent, witty, generous, passionate, complex - not just the simple, narrow creatures they were "supposed" to be

I think I'm beginnng to understand that. See above when I reponded to you by saying "Clearly, she (Emma) wants to be able to 'do her own thing'. However she sees that she can do this by following the rules rather than disobeying them."

It reminds me of social movements that work better if you play by the rules and try not to do things that are illegal. Negative attention can work against one's cause.

*she says as she watches what's happening with Occupy Wall Street*

2. By mid-Victorian times you had this weird dichotomous view of women as these "higher", supremely moral, almost spiritual beings who were supposed to set an example for men and inspire them, but who were at the same time weak, helpless, frail, likely to "fall

...which again reminds me of Mrs. Churchill. Perhaps that woman is a symbol of just what you're saying. I remember reading in this past chapter or the previous chapter that Mrs. Churchill required two (!) men to hold her up so she could walk. Those had to be her husband and Frank - no one else. Imagine! Today, we use walkers - the metal kind with rubber wheels, for that purpose. :)

3. in much of the world women still are considered lesser beings, and even in our supposedly "advanced" societies we have things like salary inequality - a woman's work being of less value than a man's, even if it's the same work - what's that about

Sometimes I think that women who we, in Western society, consider oppressed simply don't feel that way about themselves so they are not open to more freedom for themselves. This is very much like religion. People of fervent faith do not allow themselves to be open to other ideas very easily.

Yikes! I'd better go get today's chapter read!! :)

Emma - Vol. 3, Chapter 1

...in which Emma receives the news that Frank will be moving closer

1. Emma thinks that Frank's feelings for her have subsided. He spends almost no time with her since his newest arrival. Why? (You're going to say, "Wait and see.") :)

>#184 How well you know me. :)

>#182 & #183

Rich women had more freedom, but only up to a point. It's more that poor women had no freedom. :(

A woman with rank and/or money could have influence, but only within small circles, usually. If she met her responsibilities, she would assist the poor, improve employment opportunities, start schools. If she had an interest in the arts, she might patronise (in the good sense) an artist or a writer or a musician. She might hold musical or literary salons. Alternatively, she might campaign for women's rights, build orphanages for unwanted children, set up district nursing programs or food drives, meet with like-minded men and women to fight for sanitary improvements or better schools or more hospitals. But always, it was a case of what she was allowed to do. Which brings us back to the crucial importance of marrying the right man.

(Ironically, women were rarely better off than when they were widows. A widow with money was the most free of all women!)

I certainly don't consider this a story about romance. I see it more as the story of an individual...and how she fits into the society into which she was born.

Congratulations - it appears that you understand Jane Austen's novels much better than many people who claim to love them! "Oh, they're so romantic!" Groan... :)

I would say it was less a case of women "waking up" than it was of men being willing to share. Men made the laws, men made the rules; nothing could change until they let it - and of course, if all society is structured so that you get your own way in everything, why would you change anything?

Of course, there were men who were passionate about women's rights and fought for them. And there were women who were dead against - a lot believing that it was God's will that women be inferior and submissive, and that anything that interfered with that was sinful. The negative pressure kept change painfully slow, particularly with respect to anything resembling "equality".

But there were men who made sure their daughters had an advanced education, and who wanted wives who were intelligent and knowledgeable*. And there were women who lived extraordinary lives - who were explorers, and artists, and who studied medicine and science. Let's take the most iconic of all Victorian females (except Victoria herself), Florence Nightingale, who went off to the Crimea and revolutionised nursing. But they were exceptions. There was enormous pressure not to be different, and it took great courage and usually some exceptional circumstances for a woman to break away.

(*You would have had the exchange in Emma where Mr Knightley contends that men don't want foolish wives, and Emma laughs at him and says, "You don't, maybe, but...")

It's also important to realise that through the literature of the 19th century, we're getting a view that's skewed to the conservative, because the publishers (and increasingly, the libraries) were very powerful, and if you were too daring, you couldn't get published. And surprise, they were much harder on women writers than men. (Which is one of the reasons that the Brontes and George Eliot used male pseudonyms.)

On the other hand, serious Victorian novelists got very good at "writing between the lines" - getting stuff in by allusion and implication - and Victorian readers got very good at finding that stuff. This is one of the difficult things for readers today - there is almost invariably more going on in these books than meets the eye, and it takes experience and practice to be able to spot it. Finally, quite late in the 19th century, writers like George Meredith (again) and Thomas Hardy and George Moore and George Gissing (and no, I don't know why they're all called "George") took on the system and forced some changes.

And to answer your earlier question, there were probably many more books that were studies of men, because men's lives were so much more interesting - and of course, more important. (*sarcasm alert*) Meaning that men could go off and have adventures, and try this and that, and sin and reform, and it was all perfectly okay and did them no particular damage. But there were also thoughtful books about men's inner lives. And authorship wasn't necessarily gender-divided - women wrote about men, men wrote about women.

1. A woman with rank and/or money could have influence

All of the influences you describe sound like what an American Presidential wife might do in this modern age. She looks for something useful to occupy her time while her husband runs the country. (...so far. Just wait until we get a woman in the White House, though!) Michelle Obama plants a vegetable garden...

2. "Oh, they're so romantic!"

I don't really see any romance yet. I see flirting. I see rejection. I see ambivalent feelings. For romance to bloom, both members ofa couple must be of the opinion that they really like one another. Don't you think? Unrequited love is not really romance.

Harriet, in reality, didn't know whom she loved. She allowed herself to be talked "out of loving" Mr. Martin and "into" loving Mr. Elton. However, was that really her idea, or was that first a fantasy that Emma firmly implanted into Harriet's brain? It seemed as if Harriet had no will of her own.

3. and of course, if all society is structured so that you get your own way in everything, why would you change anything?

Oh, no! That sounds too much like the power elite that Occupy Wall Street is fighting now. No one at the top wants to change a thing, and the 99% are powerless. I don't mean to turn this discussion into a political essay, but when the top eschalon of any group holds all the power, how can any change take place at all? That goes for women being held down by men (figuratively) as well.

4. Of course, there were men who were passionate about women's rights and fought for them. And there were women who were dead against - a lot believing that it was God's will that women be inferior and submissive, and that anything that interfered with that was sinful. The negative pressure kept change painfully slow, particularly with respect to anything resembling "equality".

There are always those who are compassionate and try to empathize with the perceived underdog. There are also those who use religion to rationalize whatever it is they want to explain or control.

5. But there were men who made sure their daughters had an advanced education, and who wanted wives who were intelligent and knowledgeable*.

Education for women... That is such a key issue! Dr. Izzeldin Abuelaish is a Palestinian surgeon who resides in the West Bank of Israel. He wrote his autobiography called I Shall Not Hate. He feels the key to peace is through education of women. The same goes for Greg Mortenson (whom I know is a bit controversial now), author of Three Cups of Tea. Mortenson is building schools for women in order to enable them to complete in the world, provide for themselves, and not be forced into a dependent position to men if their life situation regarding love and marriage does not turn out for the best.

Why should women have brains if we aren't allowed to use them?! Women can think, too.

6. if you were too daring, you couldn't get published

Nowadays, you can get published, but your books will be banned in schools. :( Some things don't change.

7. This is one of the difficult things for readers today - there is almost invariably more going on in these books than meets the eye, and it takes experience and practice to be able to spot it

So, in Emma for example, what do you feel were one or two of the most important between-the-lines concepts? ...or should I answer this question after I finish this book? :)

8. writers like George Meredith (again) and Thomas Hardy and George Moore and George Gissing (and no, I don't know why they're all called "George")

LOL!

I've never read anything by Thomas Hardy. What book would you recommend for me, now that you know my taste in books and what I don't like to read!)? :D

Going forward, I might just make a Hardy book a "tutored read". I was trying to talk a friend of mine into doing a classic read with me, but so far we haven't been able to agree on an author. She wants to do Chekov, and I don't. I want her to read Dracula by Bram Stoker, and she won't. Seems like we're at an impasse right now.

My niece will be reading Middlemarch by George Eliot as her last book of five novels this semester. I, on the other hand, am still working my way through her first book of the semester. Heh! I was looking forward to her reading list for next semester, but she told me that she won't be reading for school because she'll be taking a writing course. I can't wait to see who she gets as an instructor. Joyce Carol Oates teaches at Princeton and just happens to be my niece's very favorite poet. We'll see...

But there were also thoughtful books about men's inner lives.

What would some of these be?

Well - as far as that goes, Middlemarch has one in the character of Dr Lydgate, but I wouldn't advise you to plunge into those deep waters just yet. :)

Let's see...some of Thackeray's novels, some of Disraeli's, some of Dickens (though his are a bit odd), some of Charles Kingsley - and our old friends Meredith, Hardy and Gissing.

But yes, it was more common for novels to be about the "outer" (public) lives of men and the "inner" lives of women, because it more accurately reflected life.

I have certain issues with Hardy, and am probably not the best person to be advising you in that respect. Ilana took a liking to him, I believe, so you might be better off asking for her input.

In Emma, it's not about overt social criticism so much as quietly puncturing prevailing conventions. For example, take poor Harriet: she's pretty and docile, she does what she's told and believes what she's told to believe - not an original thought in her head. In other words, she's satirical sketch of the "perfect" woman, and this is why she's balanced by Mr Knightley (as the voice of progressive reason) insisting that this isn't what a "sensible" man wants at all.

So I gather you found out all you ever wanted to know about bed-bugs!? That is hilarious!

I'm not going to try Middlemarch but perhaps a friend of mine will. I like Dickens. Perhaps I'll try one of his book in a few months. I need some "away from classics" time. :)

But yes, it was more common for novels to be about the "outer" (public) lives of men and the "inner" lives of women, because it more accurately reflected life.

Don't you think that is sort of the way noels are still written. Men are action figures while women are emotional figures.

I've never read any book by Thomas Hardy so I might actually give a book of his a try in a few months. Could you recommend one that you think Imight like?

> 188

Bed bugs. Ew!

<>B>Emma - Vol. 3, Chapter 2

1. What is "puppying"? Acting like a puppy? In what way? Was that a common expression?

2. Did the Westons forget to pick up Jane Fairfax and Miss Bates on the way to the ball, or did I imagine that? I know the Eltons sent the carriage back to retrieve them.

3. I think that Mrs. Elton has finally outdone Miss Bates' habit of talking non-stop. :/

4. Why did Mrs. Elton have to say, "I see very few pearls in the room except mine"? How rude! Was she supposed to present herself as "superior" to all others because the party was given in her honor?

5. I liked this line:
"Emma must submit to stand second to Mrs. Elton though she had always considered the ball as peculiarly for her." :)

6. What is a "tippet"? ... as in "Mrs. Weston says you have to put on your tippet."

7. The chapter has a sweet finish with Emma and Mr. Knightley dancing. Mr. Knightley is the only voice of reason of any of the characters of this book.

8. Why did Mr. Knightley say he couldn't dance if he really could? Was it so he would only dance with Emma and no one else? (I know...wait and see.)

Oh, no! I'm losing the battle of the butterflies!! :(

(deleted - duplicate entry)

1. Puppyism? When a young man is "a puppy" his manners aren't all they should be, particularly in the opinion of his elders. :) He might be a bit impudent, or careless about rules of conduct. But in Mrs Elton's mouth, it probably means that a young man has not paid her sufficient attention.

2. No, the Westons stopped to pick them up but were told that the Eltons were insisting on taking them. Only then it turned out that the Eltons had, in fact, forgotten to do so, so their carriage had to be sent back.

3. It's the clash of the titans. :)

4. She's drawing attention to her pearls while trying to pass off her wearing them as a "compliment" to her hosts. There were complicated rules about where and when jewellery was worn; this may be another instance of Mrs Elton not being well-bred enough to know, or just so intent on showing off that she doesn't care.

5. I like the next one: It was almost enough to make her think of marrying.

6. A tippet was a short wrap that hung around the shoulders. Jane would have worn hers to the party but left it in the cloakroom.

7. I think this is a great chapter.

8. You almost don't need me any more! :)

Men had the choice of whether to dance or not. A woman was not allowed to refuse one partner and then dance with someone else; she either had to dance with everyone or no-one. This is why girls often tried to secure the partners they wanted before the dance. It was all right to refuse a partner if you were already engaged for a dance.

(There's a famous passage in Frances Burney's Evelina where the young heroine gets herself into an awful mess through not knowing this rule.)

I think it would be fun to have a dance with dance cards today. Just for fun, of course! ...and one evening only!

There were so many rules!!

Could a woman attend a dance and decline to dance at all (i.e. not have a dance card)?

You almost don't need me any more! :)

My laundry is in a big pile from the time I'm taking to read Emma! ;)

Madeline, just de-lurking to say I'd love to go to a dance with dance cards just for an evening too ... but someone has to post all the rules so we know how to behave. haha

I've read Thomas Hardy and I disliked Far from the Maddening Crowd and Jude the Obscure, I thought Mayor of Casterbridge was ok, but I liked Tess of the d'Ubervilles.

191: Oh, no! I'm losing the battle of the butterflies!! :(
You're going to have an entire thread on Emma. I see you've made it an "About" so it will be available for posterity. 75 is within reach! I bet the next books will go extremely quickly once you're freed of Emma.

> 195

I liked Tess of the d'Ubervilles.

I'll wishlist Tess of the d'Ubervilles, Caroline, and consider reading that book after the first of the year, but no promises!! :)

> 196

I bet the next books will go extremely quickly once you're freed of Emma.

If truth be told, Katherine, I'm trying to sneak some other books in while I'm reading Emma! At least I have some good ones that are not boring me (meaning that I'll finish them rather than eventually cast them aside).

More good news: I'm 2/3 way through Emma now! Hurray!!

#197 - I really liked Tess. Some of the characters are exasperating, but if you can get past that I think it's a terrific read.

I really liked Tess.

Good to hear that, Joyce.

#189 - I love Thomas Hardy and have read quite a bit. Jude the Obscure, is, by far, my favorite and actually one of my favorite novels of all time. It's horribly grim and depressing though, if you like to stay away from that sort of thing.

Jude the Obscure, is, by far, my favorite

I don't mind grim and depressing. I actually prefer it to sweet and sunny. Such books make for more interesting reading. I'll check out Jude the Obscure as well then. Thanks, Kerri!

I don't mind grim and depressing. I actually prefer it to sweet and sunny. Such books make for more interesting reading.

Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha. Well, then, you may have found your new favourite author in Thomas Hardy! I've only read Tess, which was indeed grim, but from what I hear that was his happy novel.

BTW, I'm starting Jude the Obscure tomorrow for my November big book. My theme for the month is grim and depressing. Feel free to join me.

Feel free to join me.

Thanks, but I have to decline. I'm still working on Emma, and then I plan to take a short vacation from classics for a while. :)

I might try for a tutored read of that in 2012. It depends how much time I have to put into studying for my Home Care Coding exam, though. My recert exam takes place in March, 2012, and it won't be easy. I failed the initial exam twice before finally succeeding on my third try. Therefore, I have to put my whole attention (meaning lots of time) to it.

ETA: I checked Amazon for some pages to glance at, and Jude the Obscure seems like a novel I'd be willing to try.

If "grim and depressing" is your theme, Thomas Hardy is your man. :)

If "grim and depressing" is your theme, Thomas Hardy is your man. :)

Okay! I think I'll be in for entertainment! :)

Thanks, but I have to decline.

Of course you're not up for another classic--I know that. Sorry, I was unintentionally ambiguous. What I meant was that I will be reading grim and depressing books in November. I will start with Jude, but there will be other shorter non-classics too. You could join me in reading a grim book for November.

Pity they've already gone with Neil in November - a little quicker off the mark, we could have had Nihilism in November. :)

> 206

I now feel overwhelmed with too much to read. I just got an Early Reviewer book in the mail today, too. This is one that I never received since June. So, of course, it comes right now. :(

Oh, I don't mean to add pressure. I know the feeling. But if you happen to read a grim, depressing book, speak up, and viola! Suddenly we have a group read.

Loved the decoding of Emma-speak! Very thorough.

Emma - Vol. 3, Chapter 3

... in which Harriet returns with Frank after her having been stopped and harrasesd for money by gipsies.

1. Why this spelling of gipsies? I thought the word was "gypsies". I didn't even know there were gipsies in England. For some reason, I only thought they were on the mainland of Europe.

2. Why wasn't Emma more interested in keeping Frank liking her? Why did she now want Frank and Harriet to be a couple? I guess Emma really wasn't all that interested in Frank in the first place. I think Emma just liked the idea of Frank liking her.

3. How far and how often could women leave their homes alone? Were they ever in any danger when doing so? Was begging by gipsies common? Did the gipsies ever try to harm people from whom they were begging money?

1. It's a variant spelling common at the time. There were gipsies in England for hundreds of years at that point, probably from around the early 16th century onwards - there was a vast migration across Europe before that with England the last stop.

2. Bingo.

3. More leeway was allowed in the country, although higher-born girls would be expected to be accompanied - by a companion or governess, or even a footman or a groom. Usually it would be a matter of walking to a friend's house or into town - or just walking out for exercise (or private conversation). There could be dangers for unaccompanied women then as there are now.

There were various degrees of relationship between gipsy clans and landowners - sometimes the landowners would set aside an area for the gipsies to live on; others treated them as trespassers. There were a range of ways that gipsies might obtain money - everything from good honest work to stealing and poaching - along with traditional fortune-telling and dancing. Begging was reasonably common, and it is very likely Harriet and her friend overreacted and saw more of a threat than really existed. Or perhaps it was just inexperience:

It was a very extraordinary thing! Nothing of the sort had ever occurred before to any young ladies in the place, within her memory; no rencontre, no alarm of the kind.

Emma - Vol. 3, Chapter 4

1. What is court-plaster?

2. Emma says, "I am determined against all interference." Can I believe her? (I know. Wait and see.)

3. Harriet kissed her hand in silent and submissive gratitude.

Was this a common thing for a woman to do to another woman in gratitude? I thought men kissed women's hands in greeting.

1. An adhesive substance like a band-aid which was used for covering small cuts, but could also be used as a general adhesive for temporary repair jobs. It's also what ladies used to make beauty spots out of.

2. Heh!

3. Female friends often kissed each other. A hand kiss could be used as a mark of gratitude, but I think the key word here is "submissive". Harriet kisses Emma's hand rather than her cheek as a mark of the difference between them.

It's also what ladies used to make beauty spots out of.

How did they do this?

Wow, Madeline and Liz must delurk and say that I admire your patience and dedication to Ms. Austen's Emma. Are you both convinced the lady is quite worth the trouble? Personally I rate her as a precursor to the Victorian heavyweights but I don't feel she compares at all favourably to Eliot whose scope and breadth of vision is far more to my manly palate!
Who would you say (imposing of Liz's area of special interest) was a: your favourite novelist of the period and b: in literary terms the most important?

Paul, I've forever been trying to avoid any Victorian novels at all so just the fact that I've endured Emma to this point is a true credit to Liz.

Even if the young lady Emma is not worth the trouble, the knowledge and insight into Victorian novels that I've gained from Liz's tutoring was very much worth the effort (...and still is...as I'm not yet finished my book!).

Oh, I think Emma is worth the trouble, as are all Austen's books except mayb Mansfield Park. Eliot, of course, is a grand master of a different sort. I've just finished Middlemarch and I can still feel her whispering in my ear.

Since this IS a classroom, can I just speak up and point out that Emma is not a Victorian novel, simply for the reason that the Victorian era didn't begin until 1837. Emma was published in 1815. As Paul says, it's a precursor.

FFortsa - I studied Mansfield Park at university, and I think it's definitely worth the trouble. It's my second favourite Austen novel.

Madeline - Northanger Abbey was my first Austen followed by Mansfield Park which I liked somewhat less. Quite a number of years later I read P&P and S&S and they are in my view on a quite different plane in terms of quality from the other two. I have yet to read Persuasion or Emma but feel that I wont really need to if I pay sufficient attention to your ...er...thread (class)!
Austen's work I have found acutely observed, wry and in some ways homespun but I prefer something with a little more gravitas and brushstrokes confidently set across a broader canvas.

Judy "I can still feel her whispering in my ear. What a lovely poetic turn of phrase!

Joyce - Grade A History! I suppose grudgingly to give Mansfield Park due credit it is a heck of a lot better than most of the rubbish passing for fiction (wont call it literature) which gets published today. I am a bit of a stick-in-the-mud and can't see the attraction with experimentalism, avant-garde fiction or magic-realism. Give me a proper story well told and I am as happy as the proverbial.

Oh, do read Persuasion! P&P is certainly Austen's most popular, but I think Persuasion is marvelous, and in some ways a more mature novel.

Yes, Persuasion generally ties P&P for favorite Austen among aficionados--it's definitely worth reading.

Yes, it's important that Austin be correctly placed. She was not a Victorian novelist - she started writing in the 1780s, and she died in 1817 - twenty years before Victoria. Her novels are the bridge between the didactic fiction of the 18th century and the socially conscious writing of the Victorian era.

The other important thing is that when she was writing she wasn't "Jane Austen, Literary Giant" - she was "Jane Austen, Single Daughter Of A Poor Country Family". She was Anne Elliot without the happy ending, disregarded and forced to put up with whatever her family decided for her - and necessarily, she wrote about what she knew, social interactions and women's lives in country communities, and the need to find a meaningful way of living in a stifling and often mercenary world.

I find it ironic that Mansfield Park is so generally disliked, since of all her novels it most has the gravitas that people complain is missing in Austen.

Madeline, if you're into grim and depressing and want a break from the classics, may I recommend In Red by Magdalena Tulli? I received it from Archipelago Books and it's if anything, certainly depressing. But the writing is quite beautiful. So maybe you'll like it.

>#215 Court-plaister (or "court-plaster", because ladies at court used it; sticking-plaster) was adhesive - it was coloured and cut into various shapes - usually spots and stars of different sizes - and stuck on the face to highlight a particular feature, the eyes or the lips or a dimple. These were also called "patches"; you might have seen that word used instead.

I find it ironic that Mansfield Park is so generally disliked, since of all her novels it most has the gravitas that people complain is missing in Austen.

Yes! I so strongly agree. The class where I studied it was one of the best ones I had in all of my time at university. My prof thought it was a masterpiece, and showed us why. Studying that book in depth was richly rewarding. I still prefer the sparkle, charm and fun of Pride and Prejudice (in part because I have Colin Firth firmly in mind as Mr. D), but Mansfield Park will always have a special spot on my book shelf.

As I've said before, I think Austen is often misinterpreted: she's perceived as a writer of romances, but she's a social commentator as much as Eliot or Wharton, just working on a much narrower canvas. People looking for romance in Mansfield Park will certainly be disappointed.

People looking for romance in Mansfield Park will certainly be disappointed.

Indeed! Sometimes I think people get confused because Austen wrote in the romantic era (in fact, that was the name of the class where I studied her). I also find it odd when people find Wuthering Heights romantic. I guess it is--if you think dysfunctional relationships between spoiled brats and psychopaths are romantic (don't get me wrong--I love WH. It's just not a love story).

Yes!! Honestly, those people who find the relationship between Cathy and Heathcliff "romantic" worry me very, very much... :)

(Probably judging by the movies, not the novel.)

I found Mansfield Park deficient in wit and a little too practical. Fanny is so unrelentingly realistic. But I may come back to it some day.

#230 - that's a fair assessment and I think few would disagree. The humour is in Mrs. Bertram (my favourite minor character in all of Austen), and nasty Mrs. Norris. Also the somewhat vacuous young female non-Fanny characters. But yes, it doesn't have the wit of P&P, that's for sure.

Emma - Vol. 3, Chapter 5

... in which Emma invites several people to stop by her home.

1. What kind of a table is a Pembroke?

2. What kind of alphabet game was being played? Was it really a game, or were they just fooling around by making words and passing the words along to each other? What was the significance of the work "Dixon" that was passed along to Jane Fairfax?

62. Suburban Safari - Hannah Holmes



I found this quite a fun book to read. Perhaps that was mostly because I felt comforted to realize that someone beside myself takes the time to very closely look at all creatures and plants that inhabiting her yard - and even her hous! The author worries about such things as her carbon footprint, invasive species, and sufficient food for the animals that visit her yard.

There are parts of this book which are quite funny as the time when the aithor tried to eliminate a wasp next and all but eliminated herself! Other parts are a bit sad, as the time when her chipmunk failed to return at all after having developed a long-standing relationship based on seeds.

For those who appreciate nature at its simplest and best, I'd recommend this book. It's very sweet.

Rating - 3.5 stars

>#232

1. It's an extendable table with flaps at each end so that it can be increased in size.

2. A game of anagrams. You chose the letters to make a word or phrase, and the next person had to make sense of it. "Dixon" was the name of the husband of Jane's friend, who Frank and Emma suspected of having romantic feelings for her.

Dixon" was the name of the husband of Jane's friend, who Frank and Emma suspected of having romantic feelings for her.

That's right. I keep forgetting who all these people are. So why was Frank teasing Jane by displaying that name? Wasn't that a bit cruel?

What if the next person could not figure out the word? Was it just an informal game, or were there "rules" to it?

1. Yes.

2. Just a party-game, no real rules; although it could be played as elimination.

Anagrams are ufn! :D

LLO! :)

Oh, who'd being witty now!

Emma - Vol. 3, Chapter 7

...where Emma and friends attend yet another party.

1. Another party?! Don't these people ever tire of parties? In this chapter, it seems as if they do. They're hard pressed to find something fun to do. There is much less mingling. Emma opens her mouth once too often with a certain faux pas that she regrets after she is castigated by Mr. Knightley for it.

2. Who else feels sorry for Harriet? She just tags along everywhere. Emma is trying to make her into something she is not. Poor Harriet is such a nonentity in this novel. I'd prefer to learn more about Harriet and less about Emma at this point.

Hurray! I'm now 75% of the way through Emma. :)

63. From the Holocaust to a New Dawn - David Shachar



Opening what looked to me like a textbook, I discovered the autobiography of a man who lived in five different countries during the course of his life, beginning with Poland and ending in Israel. In this book, David Shachar tells about the twists and turns of fate that led him to also live in the Soviet Union, France, and Italy after life as he knew it in his native city of Krasnosieilc, Poland, was suddenly interrupted with the invasion of the Nazis at the beginning of World War II.

This book is basically a list of events, as is with most autobiographies, but there were very few happenings that took one out of the chronology of his story. We learn about David’s family, friends, and acquaintances but not in very great detail. It was almost as if this book had been written for his own family and not for a wider audience. Oddly, though, I grew to like this book very much the more I progressed through it. I don’t think this would be a good book for a wide readership, but for those who are familiar with or would like to become more acquainted with modern Jewish history as well as those who have a feeling of “knowing” Israelis, David has quite an interesting story.

Had I put this book together myself, I’d have given it a different binding – one which more pointed to the fact of its being an autobiography. I’d have eliminated the map in Hebrew since the rest of this book has no Hebrew. In addition, I would definitely have more clearly identified the people in the group of pictures at the center of this book.

I found David’s story fascinating and finished this book in three days. However, every person who immigrates to Israel has his own story. It’s just nice that David has captured so many details of his experience and shared them with others. Actually, what first interested me in reading this book was that David lived for seven years in Kiryat Shemona, a development town in Northern Israel. I lived in that same town, but years later, and I simply wanted to relive what it felt like to be located in the valley between Har Naftali and Mount Hermon. As David Shachar put it, “I am again filled with gratitude for how well my fateful decision to move to Kiryat Shmona turned out.” I share that feeling.

Rating - 3.5 stars

>#241 Well done!

>#240 Think of socialising as these people's "profession". (It's still that way today for some people, of course.) And as in all professions, there are good days and bad days...and Box Hill was a very bad day.

Assuming there *is* more to know about Harriet...

241: Congrats! (Would you have believed when you began this thread that Emma would spill into another?)
242: Maybe not a book for me, but it did inspire me to find Kiryat Shmona on Google maps.

I loved living in Kiryat Shmona. I was there from October to December of 1972. I lived in a dorm with other volunteers because that's where the ulpan (Hebrew language school) was. In Shachar's book, he is also a volunteer who works in that town for seven years. He hoped to bring tourists and economic development there. He was there about ten years before I was.

When I lived there, it still only had a population of 18,000, with most of the population being poorly educated Jews who were mostly from North Africa, mainly Morocco. I had half a day of language lessons and the rest of the day to hike on the mountains, visit my aunt on her kibbutz, or sit in the town square and drink an iced coffee (at Shapiro's!). At night I used to go to Yossi's discotheque and dance to the music of James Brown or the Platters! :)

Emma - Vol. 3 Chapter 8

... in which Emma visits Miss Bates.

1. What is an ostler?

2. I'm confused. I thought that Emma went to visit Miss Bates to apoligize for being rude, but that didn't happen. Why not?

3. Why did Jane Fairfax not want to see Emma? Or did she really not feel well?

4. Frank is gone again. It seems to me that he is super-controlled by Mrs. Churchill. Or is there something else going on that does not meet the eye? (I know. Wait and see.)

1. The person who looks after the stables at an inn (as opposed to a groom, who would be privately employed).

2. The visit itself was the apology, theoretically the beginning of an ongoing apolgy - She would call upon her the very next morning, and it should be the beginning, on her side, of a regular, equal, kindly intercourse.

3. Jane often isn't well; but it's also possible that Emma isn't exactly her favourite person at the moment.

4. Hey, you know...

1) a person who works in a stable (possibly at an inn) to take care of the horses.

> 247

So an apology can completely skirt the issue of what the apology is for? I'll have to try that myself some day! :)

> 247/248

How do you pronounce ostler (Oh-slur or ohst - ler)? What kind of word is that? Someone who ostles? :)

By the way, I'm glad to see they played backgammon. I always used to like to play that after I got back from Israel (although now I no longer know how to play it).

It's a practical apology - Emma both meeting her own social duties and setting an example for others to follow (as per Mr Knightley's reproof). Miss Bates gains more that way than from a verbal offering.

"Ohst-ler", I think. Originally the word was "hostler", which was derived from "hostelier", meaning inn-keeper; but somewhere along the way it narrowed down to meaning the person in charge of the stables at an inn.

Funny how books stir memories like that - I've recently been reading about, yes, backgammon, and cribbage, and euchre, all of which I used to play and now wouldn't remember how.

My former roommate used to play cribbage, but I've never even heard of euchre!

It's a card game played with a reduced deck that involves taking tricks and where the jacks have special weight - but I can't remember the details. :)

I spot some thread police on the horizon, so I'm slipping into this thread.