Forever Amber - with reading schedule

[Irene]

The ending did not surprise me all that much.

[Meg]

well next week we will discuss why I feel that way, I don't want to give anything away!

[Sheila , Supporting Chick]

Finished! :-)

[Meg]

yay! now we can talk, but I will wait a few more days.

[Irene]

Anxious to read your thoughts.

[Meg]

Were you surprised in the end how disliked Amber was? I thought the author was pretty open about Barbara and Carlton's wife, but if far surpassed that. I wonder why the author didn't get into that, I think that would have made the reading wickedly enjoyable.

[Joni]

I've read my fair share of romance novels in my time, but I wouldn't classify this as only a romance novel. I think it gives a window into the world of women that transcends the historical context. Amber lived in an unfair world, where a woman was a man's property or chattel. She used every weapon at her disposal, her beauty,her wit, and an ability to act, in order to survive and thrive in this environment.

You could point to a dozen mistakes she made and basically a lack of moral compass, but even in the end, you have the feeling that she'll land on her feet.

[Irene]

I was not surprised by how much she was disliked. First of all, it seems as if no one liked anyone in that rarified world of the upper crust. It was all suspicion. In order to advance, a person had to cast someone else off their rung of the social ladder. So, every one seemed to be a threat to everyone else, every one was a rival. Plus, her crazy attacks and off-her-rocker fits would have made her a social outcast in nearly any social group. Finally, her overt flouting of social norms would have made her distasteful to anyone who was still trying to keep up appearances of a more traditional morality, such as her final mother-in-law, even if that person did not act according to those social norms themselves. Frankly, I was never convinced that Amber loved Bruce. She was determined to ruin his marriage even when Bruce told her numerous tims that he loved his wife, his life in America, his family. I think he was the one trophy that she could not win out of someone else's hands and so she had to get that at any cost. If she had ever won Bruce, I think she would have grown bored with him, would have chased another person's husband or whatever. She would never have been happy in a country home somewhere raising Bruce's kids.

[Sheila , Supporting Chick]

I was not surprised at how disliked Amber was in the end. In fact the ending made me smile, that she was being tricked by those around her to get her out of England. They wanted to be rid of her, didn't like her at all. She was just a scheming social climber that didn't care who she stepped on or hurt along the way.

I am also glad she didn't end up with Bruce, though with the ending Bruce is apparently going to have to deal with her again. He obviously didn't love her, at least not the way he loved his wife. He never wanted to marry her, from day one. Was she just a woman he loved to have sex with? He must have been very attracted to her, to keep risking his relationship with his wife whom he seemed to really love. Was this just lust between them?

[Meg]

Were you satisfied that she got what she deserved in the end?

[Irene]

I did not think she got what she deserved in the end. She will head to America, find Bruce, continue to disrupt his life and continue to position herself in a new setting. I thought this was the set up for a sequel.

[Meg]

Well the book was written in 1944 so I don't forsee a sequel :)

[Sheila , Supporting Chick]

I agree that the ending did leave things hanging though. :-) I wonder if some of the hundreds (or was it thousands) or pages that the editors originally cut from this novel included more of the story. Or did the author always plan to leave Amber's future in limbo?

[Meg]

Well I think she got some of what she deserved, she lost her position in court and influence with the king by deserting and going to America. Does the king get assassinated?

[Sheila , Supporting Chick]

It looks like King Charles II died on his own, though he might have been poisoned:

According to Wikipedia:

Death:
Charles suffered a sudden apoplectic fit on the morning of 2 February 1685, and died aged 54 at 11:45 am four days later at Whitehall Palace. The suddenness of his illness and death led to suspicion of poison in the minds of many, including one of the royal doctors; however, more modern medical analysis has held that the symptoms of his final illness are similar to those of uraemia (a clinical syndrome due to kidney dysfunction). On his deathbed Charles asked his brother, James, to look after his mistresses: "be well to Portsmouth, and let not poor Nelly starve", and told his courtiers: "I am sorry, gentlemen, for being such a time a-dying." On the last evening of his life he was received into the Catholic Church, though the extent to which he was fully conscious or committed, and with whom the idea originated, is unclear. He was buried in Westminster Abbey "without any manner of pomp" on 14 February.
Charles was succeeded by his brother, who became James II of England and Ireland and James VII of Scotland.

[Irene]

I wondered if the author intended a sequel but never got to it.