Tracey’s Comments (group member since Jul 17, 2016)

Tracey’s comments from the Sir Walter Scott Appreciation group.

Rosemarie wrote: "The Prince is a gentleman and a dreamer. It was too late for him in time- history marched on and there was no place for him on the throne."

The Prince, although raised in foreign courts, had been raised to believe in his heritage and his right. There was indeed a true right to the throne, more so than the House of Hanover. However, since the back and forth of religious persecution with King Henry VIII, divorce from the Catholic Church, Queen Mary, back to protestant persecution, then Queen Elizabeth, who made choice of religion something that was not to be persecuted over but still the country feared it would happen again...thus any future monarch had to be C of E and maintain the peace in the country. When James II rightly declared himself Catholic, he should have abdicated but he did not. This is when the fight began.
I can admire the Stuart family for being true to their religious beliefs but not for being willing to plunge the British people into another civil war. Maintaining peace and stability of one's nation would be paramount one would think, for it's monarch.

However, I can understand those who followed Prince Charlie for he seems to have been a true believing soul and quite a noble Prince to follow. Unfortunately his family and their beliefs ended up with no throne and no purpose in life; very sad.

What do you think of Prince Charles? Do you think he had a legitimate claim?
When the 'army' marches from Edinburgh my heart sank. The description of the rag tag bunch that made up 1/2 their number and the division that seemed to be between the different clans spoke of defeat and failure. Of course, I know what's coming...

Patrick wrote: "The introduction to the Penguin edition outlines these issues very helpfully."

I have the oxford world's classic version. If there is anything in yours you want to add to the thread that would be great. I am writing from my own education and understanding. I have been to most of the sites mentioned in the book including the field of Culloden. Being able to visualise is helping bring the book alive a lot for me.

Patrick wrote: "I don't take the portrayal of Flora as altogether positive. She is pre-wedded to her fanaticism."

Yes, it is as if she has taken a vow and is as much as a nun as if she were in a convent

Patrick wrote: "Edward does not appear to take his military service very seriously, that is for sure."

He doesn't seem to take much seriously at this point but that could be a mix of both his personality and his upbringing.

Flora has given her heart and soul to the Stuart family and their restoration to the throne. In doing so she seems to have dismissed any idea of love for herself and I feel that Edward comes as quite a surprise to her and she knows not what to do. She also has seen more of political/religious exclusion and isolation and fears that Edward would not be able to stand such things if he is doing them only for her and not from his own principles

There is a lot of religious upheaval in the story which mirrors the upheavals of the times. The British Isles went through enormous religious changes over the period of a few hundred years; in some cases it lead to persecution and prejudice and in others to more tolerance and understanding. Scott does describe the characters and their particular stance very well.

Loving the story the history lesson it is giving me.
1. The hunting party happened prior to the 1715 uprising and was used as a sort of rendezvous for those in the Jacobite cause and to get together arms and men.
2. The herbal 'spell' chanted is very similar to others I have seen and still used today by some.
3. The letters Edward received showed the very different characters of his father and uncle; the former only interested in himself, the latter obviously full of affection and concern for his nephew.
4. At last Edward's leave of absence is noted...it would be called AWOL in today's world and a court marshal would be arranged.
5. Flora's rejection of Edward...was this anticipated? Do you agree or disagree with her?

So far my thoughts are that Scott truly was a master of taking historical facts and weaving a beautiful, interesting story out of them. He mentions references to Shakespearean works and one senses that the readership of the time were far more literate than now.

I have paused at the end of Volume 1 which is chapter 23.
Thoughts...
Many references to the politics of the time. After the uprising of 1715, many Scot loyal to King James were exiled, but there were still some families living in Scotland; Fergus Mac Ivor and his sister being such.
I thought the poem she translated to English was beautiful and noble and the families named refer to those who either stood with King James or should have done and were being urged to return to resume the pure faith. These clans were referred to by the emblems on their banners and as such one would need to know the reference to understand the name. The story is on the eve of the last civil war fought on British Soil; the landing of Prince Charles Edward Stuart (aka Bonnie Prince Charlie or the Young Pretender) in Scotland in the summer of 1745 and the unfurling of his standard at Glenfinnian:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glenfinnan

The song about the loss of a cow was in fact in reference to the cause that Jacobites would have understood.

Rosemarie wrote: "Thanks for the correct way to pronounce Alice's name. My daughter did Celtic Studies in university, so when she was still living here, I would ask her. But that was years ago.
Talking about berries..."

A lot of the names, as I travel around, I can see are from the British Isles; but also there are names from other European countries too. I am not sure where Saskatoon comes from but it has a Gaelic ring to it and a lot of Highlanders and Outer Islanders came to this country and Saskatchewan.

One other thing I was surprised to see was the word blackmail but apparenetly the origin of the word blackmail does come from this period and place:

The word is variously derived from the word for tribute (in modern terms, protection racket) paid by English and Scottish border dwellers to Border Reivers in return for immunity from raids and other harassment. The "mail" part of blackmail derives from Middle English male, "rent, tribute."[10] This tribute was paid in goods or labour (reditus nigri, or "blackmail"); the opposite is blanche firmes or reditus albi, or "white rent" (denoting payment by silver). Alternatively, Mckay derives it from two Scottish Gaelic words blathaich pronounced (the th silent) bla-ich (to protect) and mal (tribute, payment). He notes that the practice was common in the Highlands of Scotland as well as the Borders.

Here is some info on the Border Reivers which are just the sort of people that Edward is meeting in these chapters:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Border_...

Reive" is an early English word for "to rob", from the Northumbrian and Scots verb reifen from the old English rēafian, and thus related to the archaic standard English verb reave ("to plunder", "to rob"), and to the modern English word "ruffian".[2]

So this is me playing catch up....
I was a little surprised by Edward being able to just take time off like that. Is this realistic? Not sure. I think the position was one bought and therefore had privileges!?
Yes Rose is sweet on him as seems to be most females he has met so far (Alice Bean Lean; pronounced bane lane, for example).

Cranberries are mentioned in the meal Alice made which surprised me as I know cranberries as they are known in North America do not to be found naturally in the UK. I looked at the reference and thought called cranberries in Scotland they would have been cowberry or red whortleberry. I am wondering if Scottish influence was what named the red berries when found in the Americas that we know as cranberries? Anyhow, the ones in Scotland are sweet with or without cooking which the ones here are not. Just a bit of seasonal info.

I am at last able to concentrate on just this book having cleared all the other books for this year. Up to chapter 9 my thoughts:
1. I agree with Lori that Scott excels at description and character.
2. Humour is paramount and also accuracy for instance, the tale of the Jacobite returning for his Livvy is true, except in the real event, it did not soften the heart of his captors and he was executed, I like Scott's version better.
3. Even though it is a romance and historical fiction I love the way Scott remains true. He describes Scotland and the Scottish sometimes not in the best of colours but nevertheless he reports things as they are.

Lori wrote: "I know Esmeralda is young and naive, but I feel like smacking her over the head with a frying pan! Of course, I don't expect her to fall in love with Quasimodo, but I wish she'd just get over Phoeb..."

I agree that she is being very naïve but of course the story does not show what her upbringing was and maybe she has survived by being 'imaginative' and somewhat of a dreamer. She still sees Phoebus as her knight in shinning armour but yet Quasimodo is that. Would I at her age have behaved better? Love is a very strange emotion that does not always follow logic.

Everything comes to a climax in the last 2 books.
1. Who, if anyone, do you feel showed true love in their hearts?
2. How would you describe the book....as a romance? A tragedy? A gothic tale? A historical tale?
3. Sum up your feelings about how the story ends and review the book.

This week's reading ends with all 3 protagonists, Quasimodo, Frollo and Esmeralda, aware of each other in 'sanctuary' and yet all 3 in a sort of hell and locked in battle.

1. There were many analogies Quasimodo presented to Esmeralda to show her that the beauty of the inner man was better than the beauty of the outer. Can you think of any? How did Esmeralda respond to them?

Lasciate Ogni Speranza: Abandon all hope.
The conditions which Esmeralda are held in are abysmal and Hugo makes one feel these conditions and the utter despair she must have felt. A very sad but brilliantly written piece,

1. What are your thoughts and feelings on the diabolical thoughts and feelings of Frollo? How can he justify such as love?
2. What do you blame? Fate? God? Frollo?
3. The 3 men's hearts...the selfish shallow heart, the lascivious jealous heart, the adoring protective heart. Which of the 3 hearts did the masses rejoice to and why?

Rosemarie wrote: "It has been a while since I read the book, but I remember thinking what a thoughtless, self-centred twit Phoebus was. She loved him and he used her as a plaything.
Claude is obsessive about her, no..."

I read an except from a review of the book by Eugene Sue:
'Quasimodo ...the beauty of heart and devotion,-Frollo, scholarship, knowledge and intellectual power- and Chateaupers physical beauty- confronting these 3 types of human nature you have a naïve young girl...'

From book 7:
1. Quasimodo and Claude Frollo both are looking at Esmeralda but with different interest and reasons. What are the differences? What is Hugo trying to infer about the characters of each man?
2.Why is it so important to Claude that Esmeralda has her virtue intact?
3. What are you thoughts on the treatment of Esmeralda by:
a. Phoebus
b. Claude Frollo
c. The 'justice' system
4. What does Claude Frollo say about Fate?

Lori wrote: "We get a nice parallel of Quasimodo with the cathedral - the old title "Notre Dame de Paris" really did include the hunchback as well. It was a nice chapter.

Claude Frollo is a sympathetic charact..."

Yes one sees in this novel a developing young author who one day will be the brilliant author of Les Miserables.
\
What do you think of the idea of a recluse or hermit being locked up basically in a cell for the rest of their life? What could cause a person to do such? Do you think that they are holy people or damaged people?

Claude Frollo lived for learning but then he came to see that 'life without tenderness and without love is a piece of machinery...noisy and wearisome.' I agree with this sentiment.

There is in scripture, 'ever learning and never coming to a knowledge of the truth.' Claude Frollo had an epiphany moment when his parents died and took on the guardianship of his baby brother and Quasimodo.

I think that Esmeralda is the lost Agnes and Quasimodo the 'hideous and deformed' gipsy child that was left in her stead. Thus it is indeed pitiful that the recluse Sister Gudule, recognised as Paquette-la-Chantefleurie, curses Esmeralda.

I was dismayed by the chapter where Quasimodo was punished in the pillory. I have seen such instruments of public humiliation and torture in England but this descriptive chapter brought it to life for me. Why would anyone enjoy such a spectacle and want to go and see it as entertainment?