Poldark Saga - Winston Graham discussion
Warleggan - #4
>
Ross and the thing that happened (spoilers straight away)
message 1:
by
Tanya, Moderator/Hostess
(new)
Nov 30, 2015 07:02PM
Mod
reply
|
flag
*
Mod
In a marriage that lasts as long as theirs (it wouldn't be a 12 book series without it!), there is plenty of opportunity for hurt on both sides.
Fiona wrote: "Can you forgive Ross for what he did? I don't mean the potential rape, which seems much debated. But can you forgive him for cheating?I know my modern perspective probably gets in the way here, b..."
Although true forgiveness doesn't require the offender to be sorry, that he doesn't show any remorse makes it especially hard to forgive Ross.
And okay, fine, we get it, he's undergoing a paradigm shift in his psyche, but he seems to have NO consideration for how Demelza is affected while he "gropes" for new values.
I'm so glad that Demelza's message is "I won't stay if I'm not wanted" and she means it. She stays because he asks her to. (I hope the show takes the time & care to portray Demelza's strength & independence during this part.)
I wonder now if that is when things start to crystallize for Ross: her readiness to go, to find work, to leave Jeremy behind with Jane for the time being. Her attitude on the beach walk when he returns from Looe causes him to be startled, taken aback, "he had never seen her like this before." Her readiness to go may have helped him clarify what his true values are.
That it took him seven months to actually apologize, and that, as she was just about to ride away and that it seems to come as an afterthought is just bewildering.
After reading the book on this subject, Ross absolutely cannot stand George, having a very intense dislike for him and knowing Elizabeth does not love George, even though she says she does. The social gathering at the Trevaunance's Elizabeth confessed to Ross that she never loved Francis, married him thinking Ross was dead. All of this made Ross was so angry at her. She brought it on herself when he carried her to bed. I am anxious to see how the script will be in Series 2
Fiona -Mara-Sonia . . .many have written that this HAD to happen for Ross to realize that his true love, only love, was Demelza. But what a horrible way to go about coming to that realization! Ross's torch for Elizabeth makes no real sense in any "real world" scenarios. He had formed his attachment when she was 16 and he was 20. While in America he had letters indicating that her interest in him had cooled. Then, upon returning, he finds she's marrying his cousin!
This is enough for a "normal" man to start extinguishing his torch. And yet Ross has real true love blossom right under his nose with Demelza. And while maybe he doesn't recognize it as love at first, he IS saying he loves her by the night of the pilchards catch, only two months from their wedding. She then gives him two children!!
And yet this is the woman he'll ride away from at night to bed down his idealized fantasy girl because she's marrying a man he detests? Absolutely insane! And I don't see it happening in ANY real world situations, but I guess this is why we enjoy drama and fiction!
Tanya wrote: "Fiona wrote: "I just wish she could have really hurt him too."In a marriage that lasts as long as theirs (it wouldn't be a 12 book series without it!), there is plenty of opportunity for hurt on b..."
This is true Tanya. And I actually have MORE difficulty with the future hurts!
Mod
Good point! Perhaps I don't know enough about real life to judge whether it would never happen, but I know what I would do to my husband if it happened to me!. ;-)
Tanya - I've discussed this elsewhere that during this time women felt they had little option than to continue to live with an adulterous husband. I've even heard(read) that women of the landed gentry class at some point expected (or, at least) didn't mind if their husband frequented prostitutes for those "nasty" urges.Graham - writing these stories in the late '40's early '50's, is giving us a much more modern approach to marital love than was actually the case in the 1780's and 1790's. For all intensive purposes, Ross and Demelza are a modern couple with modern romantic ideals infused into them. While adultery is NOTHING new and is just as strong as ever, OUR modern polite society condemns it thoroughly in ALL circles of society. Not so much then. This is a romantic saga and the Ross and Demelza we read about are supposed to be deeply in love and their bodies, for physical pleasure, are pledged to each other, and only each other for all eternity . . . .even if that flies in the face of reality of how things actually were back then.
Because this is a modern love story (just happens to be taking place in the 1780's and 1790's) the fact that Ross is going to Elizabeth and NOT a prostitute stings/crushes Demelza all the more! I've always maintained to other's that I've discussed this with . . . .it is SO much more horrible to lose your spouses's heart to another, than to just lose them to lust for a few hours. DOn't get me wrong, as a married man, . . . .a modern married man . . .BOTH type of infidelity are bad, it's just, to me, the former is so much worse.
And I believe it's pretty evident that Demelza feels she has experienced BOTH in one act. Yes, there's the outward act of sex, but Graham gives us a pretty good description of her desolation . . . .a type of desolation that only comes from feeling you've lost your spouses love.
Mod
Absolutely! The focus is primarily on Demelza--we never get inside Elizabeth's head and we don't see much inside Ross's head either--but we're completely drawn in to Demelza's pain. I've seen in other forums people questioning why a reader's first comments are about how badly they feel for Demelza and withhold sympathy from Elizabeth--I think it's how we were meant to feel. If WG wanted us to identify with Elizabeth, we would have been shown more of her perspective. Instead, it's all about Demelza and Ross's betrayal of her.
Tanya - we get a little of Elizabeth's thoughts after Ross's "visit" when she is trying to put off her marriage to George. I've used these thoughts in trying to explain to them why I don't view Ross's actions as "rape". While George is pressing her to set a new date for the wedding, Graham gives us a peak into her mind. She is anguishing over why Ross had not returned after that night. My point to these people who may disagree with me is that what woman wishes for her rapist to return? From everything I know of this horrible crime, most victims never want to see their attacker again! Yet, here is Elizabeth in absolute turmoil that Ross has NOT returned to her!I've tried to piece the aftermath of this event together in other discussions. Best I can figure is that Elizabeth may have hoped that Ross would now leave Demelza and Jeremy while somehow providing for their welfare and come and live with her at Trenwith. While divorce was a possibility, it was not common and it was very costly (about £ 10,000 - in 1790's pounds!) and had to be granted by Parliament. At this moment, Ross didn't have two shillings to rub together. He would have had to have been the most detestable of men to turn out his wife (mother of his children) in order to take up with Elizabeth. Without a proper divorce, they could only live together. And that's NOT what Elizabeth's is about. She is a WIFE . . .not a kept woman.
This is why Ross's actions are so very insane, because in looking at all aftermaths . . . there is no other outcome that can occur except for her to marry George. The only way Ross could stop that would be to publically shame Elizabeth by telling George about their night together. At that point, to defend herself, and for George to defend her honor, Ross would have been labelled a rapist (or whatever the term was in those days). The only thing the sex accomplished was a devastation of Demelza.
Mod
You're right, Ross was not thinking about the consequences at the time; he was driven by rage. He in effect "claimed" Elizabeth before George could. Unfortunately, Elizabeth was a pawn in their ongoing feud and ego-war and Demelza suffered for it as well. Afterward, Ross was sensible enough to keep his "conquest" to himself, leaving Elizabeth to marry George and escape her impoverished life.
Tanya, The way I see this episode in the book Warleggan when Elizabeth confessed to Ross ( at the Trevaunances social) that she never loved Francis and the emotion in her voice really shocked Ross, he just couldn't get over it or fathom her out. He knew she did not love George his archenemy (they were both desperate leaping before looking). I am anxious to see how the script will portray this. On reading both their thoughts will be difficult to film. I am glad to have read the book on this for a better understanding. Winston Graham is a superb author
Mod
That's exactly why adaptations of books to film sometimes get harsh criticism. WATCHING someone think isn't as interesting as reading about it. And voice overs of thoughts can be tedious. Aidan Turner is a good "face actor" so I think we'll be able to sense his emotions. Hopefully Heida Reed is also up to the task!
I attended a 'making poldark' talk in September and Debbie Horsfield said that for parts of the book that explain Ross' thoughts, she is usually able to find a character that Ross can have a discussion with to explain his thoughts. She feels that is the best way to portray his thoughts in the script she writes.
Mod
That sounds like a very useful technique! Winston Graham did something similar to bring in the historic references in the books--two characters talk about what's going on in France or in Parliament, etc.
Mod
Fiona, you crack me up! I don't think we would have been very good 18th century wives.
This has been a fascinating discussion. Looking back (I'm now reading Stranger from the Sea), I think this book, Warleggan, cemented my total commitment to the Poldark books.I thought Ross was stupid, stupid STUPID! How many men of his time were married to women they loved and trusted, as he was? Most were in arranged marriages, with women they had little in common with and who detested them (especially sex with them). So of course they strayed, as did many of the wives, and yes, I believe it was much more acceptable then.
But Ross is on the verge of throwing away happiness on a stupid whim. I agree with all the above comments on his motives (hatred of Warleggan, dominance of Elizabeth), but for a very intelligent, and, up to now moral and ethical man, the seduction (not rape) of Elizabeth is unforgettable. I've never felt the same way about Ross since.
Going forward, with what happens in the later books, this act makes a little more sense. But I still hate it. DUMB ROSS!
On the night we are talking about, Demelza pleaded with Ross not to go that night to Elizabeth's but wait until the morning, (Ross should know better to heed what his wife says) he was so outraged with the thought of Elizabeth marrying his archenemy George, (who knows what his actual intentions were, it just happened). No excuse for Ross cheating on his wife at all. Later on in the 6th book "The Four Swans" Elizabeth to George swearing on the Bible, how she put it in words (to convince George)---who knows what went on behind closed doors. (was she actually raped). (I hate that word.) Will we be seeing this happening in Series 2. Reading the books one has a much better understanding.
Mod
The discussion regarding the events in this book originally started in a thread that became snarky, so it is closed to further comment, but you can read it all here -WARNING contains SPOILERS for later books
SPOILER-The Very Bad Thing in this book
An essay on the topic, taken from the WINSTON GRAHAM ~ AN ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY website, has been posted (with spoilers hidden) as the first comment in the above thread. You can go right to the comment here (view on a computer and click on the links to view the spoilers from later books)
For those that have read all the books, or don't mind spoilers, there are some related thoughts and observations in some other folders.
In The Loving Cup folder:
SPOILER-Advice to Jeremy from Ross
In the Bella Poldark folder:
"Against her will" (with apologies to Jane)
The reason this event is so debated is because the chapter is so ambiguous. And I believe WG did this on purpose. We are given very little of what both Ross and Elizabeth were thinking in the moment and the chapter just doesn't give you a lot of information. By the beginning of the next chapter all you really know for sure is that they slept together. Everything in between Ross carrying Elizabeth to the bed and him returning home is entirely left to your own imagining. The conversations and thoughts that occur later can help you make up your mind one way or another but in the end for me how this event came about will never make sense. Ross' actions do not make sense. I know he's prone to act irrationally when his emotions are running and yes he felt he was hit with a big blow but it does say he cooled off on the ride over. So why break into the house? I mean really, the man climbed a tree and went in through the window. He knows that house as well as his own, surely he knew another way in. And then just how the scene played out as a whole... It didn't feel genuine or organic to me. It felt like a plot devise that needed to happen to push the story forward. I think that's why there is so little insight into the characters' heads until after the event. It needed to happen but couldn't really be rationalized out.
Mod
I agree on that point for sure! I had different feelings about the genuineness of the scene, though. Ross's feud with George had been building for quite some time. When he gets the letter from Elizabeth, he is so angry he can't see straight. He cools down enough on the short ride over to Trenwith to refrain from property destruction, but he's still angry. George had taken so much from him and now he would take the Poldark ancestral home and his lost love. I think part of his actions were the result of wanting to "take" Elizabeth before George. Perhaps he even thinks Elizabeth won't want George after she's been with Ross, or George won't want Elizabeth--if he ever found out.
Mod
Presentism
"...a disposition to judge all literature by the narrow standards of present time and present culture. This leads to peculiar phenomena such as the denunciation of classic novels such as Huckleberry Finn, on grounds that they deal with issues such as slavery, women's civil rights, etc., in a way not consistent with the present-day notion of political correctness. In essence, this attitude is based on a failure to acknowledge that any time other than the present has actually existed; since that underlying assumption is clearly mistaken, the resultant attitude--that it is reasonable to judge historical times and characters by modern standards--can't possibly be taken seriously..."
Diana Gabaldon, The Outlandish Companion
It is perhaps harsher than I would have said it, but it's a good point. The modern definition of consent has evolved quite a bit in just the last decade--and especially since WG wrote this book. Ross, and other characters, exhibit behaviors that just wouldn't be acceptable in the present day. Mark murders his wife and his friends help him escape. Many are actively involved in smuggling and its justified. Ross and Dwight break Jim out of jail. There are brawls and duels. We need to keep an historical perspective on all events in an historic novel.
Brittany and Tanya. My thoughts on that Chapter, Ross just could not imagine or deal with it, Elizabeth marrying George ( so full of anger and hatred for his archenemy) I really think Ross tried to talk Elizabeth out of marrying George. Who knows what happens behind closed doors, also wasn't W.Graham writing "Warleggan" as his last Poldark book until 1973 twenty years later. I am now reading "The Millers Dance" three more books to go. Will we find out who Valentines father really is. interesting.
Good discussion, new points & perspectives. What puzzles me are these two things: Elizabeth anticipating Ross's return to her immediately after May 9th AND her swearing on the Bible in a later book that she has never given herself to another man.
So was she NOT giving her self to Ross all those hours on the night of May 9th?
Did she lie when she swore? Did Ross, indeed, TAKE her? Can both answers be no?
Tanya I agree with what you have there. In discussing the series with my husband he says the same thing. I do try to keep the times in mind while reading but I just can't (or maybe not want to) wrap my head around Ross doing something so vindictive. It still feels more like a plot device.Sonia I'm on the same book! But it was already revealed who Valentine's father is by The Angry Tide and there's more evidence of it in this book. It has never been blatantly stated but all the clues are there.
Mara it was stated by Ross himself that he did TAKE Elizabeth. However I do believe it is possible to take but not rape. There is no definite yes or no answer for this situation. It's all in the eye of the beholder. Saying as much, my opinion is Elizabeth was willing but said no for the sake of saying no. If it ever was found out she had her "no" to lean on and I believe that was how she felt when she swore to George.
Brittany wrote: "Mara it was stated by Ross himself that he did TAKE Elizabeth. However I do believe it is possible to take but not rape. "You know if that's true, if Graham thought there was a difference it explains why Elizabeth is waiting for Ross to DO something in the days that follow, why Ross himself thinks it was "monstrous" of him NOT to return, and why Demelza is perplexed that he has returned to Nampara with no obvious plans to leave.
Nevertheless, I can also see how in our present culture, as Tanya writes above, the idea of Take & Rape not being the same would be inflammatory.
Most definitely. By today's standards no means no and there are no if, ands, or buts about it. And I agree. But I also know I can say no and not mean no. Body language, tone, ect.. But all that aside I never got the impression from Elizabeth that she was raped. She didn't act or think as someone who was. I know in those times it was believed for women to just except what happened to them and move on but I don't feel that is what she was doing. She even stated Ross not coming back was "the crowning insult". If I was a woman who was raped THAT would be the crowning insult. But again, everyone has their own view on what happened and I do not want to force my opinion.
I also think Ross found his inaction "monstrous" because he had realized after the fact that Elizabeth wasn't what he truly wanted and had no idea how to convey that to her. It would be quite the conversation and I can see how he had no idea how to go about it. It even took him until Christmas to even explain it to Demelza. Ross has never been able to express himself outwardly very well.
Mod
Brittany wrote: "Tanya I agree with what you have there. In discussing the series with my husband he says the same thing. I do try to keep the times in mind while reading but I just can't (or maybe not want to) wra..."Brittany wrote: "Tanya I agree with what you have there. In discussing the series with my husband he says the same thing. I do try to keep the times in mind while reading but I just can't (or maybe not want to) wra..."
I realize there are clues to who Valentines father could be, (haven't come across the clue in the 9th book yet just started it.) But will George acknowledge this in the end. Reading the books one right after the other is hard to recollect which story line is in which book. I will have to read them all again ☺ I bought the "Complete Scripts" Series 1. Does anyone else have a hard time hearing all the words spoken. I do. I see that complete scripts series 2 is advertised coming out in Nov.2016 very help full for me, even though it will be after the series is ended
Mod
In order to avoid spoilers in this thread, I've added a discussion in the Angry Tide, related to Valentine's paternity--follow the link to read the passage in which all is revealed.
https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/...
Mod
I know a number of people turn closed-captioning on for shows with accents different than their own. If you watched any of the 1970's series, Jud is almost incomprehensible--more so because he has no teeth and is drunk most of the time. I do pretty well with accents, the words that I miss end up being words or phrases either new to me, or used in a way that I didn't expect. (e.g. I didn't know what a "pilchard" was before this show!)
Mod
"Although respectful of Winston Graham’s storytelling in the original novels, Norris is no stickler for following them to the letter. He supports, for example, writer Debbie Horsfield’s decision to remove some of the more patriarchal elements of the books, which Graham began writing in 1945, such as the replacement of Ross Poldark’s rape of Elizabeth with something more consensual.
“They were written by a man in the Forties and beyond,” he says. “Because this series is written by a woman, there’s an attempt at redressing that balance at bit.”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/tv/2016/08...
What do you think? Was the scene written the way that it was because WG was male or because he wrote it for a patriarchal society? If he instead wrote it with Elizabeth immediately falling into Ross's arms, would the 1950's audience have been up in arms about depicting a "wanton" female character? Was he perhaps reflecting the time period of the publication rather than the time period of the events?
Tanya, I have read this scene over and over ( ending, he carries her to bed ). We wont ever know what W.G. thoughts were, I think he left it to the readers imagination ending so abruptly. Did Elizabeth fight Ross anymore. Probably not shall we say/think.
Tanya wrote: "A slightly different take on the ambiguity of WG's writing and the time in which he wrote it comes from an interview with Luke Norris (who plays Dwight Enys):"Although respectful of Winston Graha..."
I believe it was both, although I am of the persuasion there was no rape, I try to take the context within a 1940's and 18th century outlook. Reading the first 7 novels, it reads to me that Elizabeth wanted a sample of what she missed all of these years, she received said sample, waited for Ross to return, and he did not...He gave her the 21st century version from a 18th century perspective of "hitting it and quitting it." Of course she was angry and I would have been too. He went back to his kitchen wench...Many things probably went through his head at the time. She gave in. I believe she resisted him before it got sexual, in her way she had a lot of pent up sexual energy and she was trying to be civil, somewhere along the lines, I believe her eyes locked to his and they just gazed for a moment...A gaze of 5 seconds which to the both of them probably felt like decades of missed opportunities and the moment he picked her up, she felt pray to her passions and penned up frustrations and gave in.
I believe if she did not resist at first she would have been labeled a slut, but her reaction is true to her character. I believe it was from a male perspective trying to address multiple perspectives
Fiona wrote: "Can you forgive Ross for what he did? I don't mean the potential rape, which seems much debated. But can you forgive him for cheating?I know my modern perspective probably gets in the way here, b..."
For me, I used to think that if my husband cheated it would be over, but I am more concerned with why he cheated. The why of the cheating sometimes makes the difference as to why married couples stay married after infidelity...The issue of trust is my biggest thing. I am a visual woman like many men so when I hear a confession of infidelity from my husband, I literally see the infidelity of my husband with another woman every time I see him. Images kill trust!
Delmeza knew that her husband's heart would have never been totally hers...The moment after they first slept together before they were married and when Elizabeth visited, her thoughts towards Elizabeth was insight. I can see why she stayed even if it was hard for her to do so. I don't think she forgave Ross easily...She may have said it with her words, but her actions were an entirely different story. I believe had Elizabeth did not meet her make in Angry Tide, her and Ross would have eventually reengaged in the emotional affair they had back then. The grave yard scene for Aunt Agatha had to happen and I see why Winston Graham killed her off...It would have never ended.
Some time you can meet that one person that you never lose attraction for, desire for, love for, and longing for, but your good sense allows you to make peace that just because you want it does not mean you will get it or likely to keep it.
There was a statement from Winston Graham's son read at the BFI Q&A concerning this seen."In the novel, Warleggan, the point of departure for the relevant scene is indeed consistent with the potential for rape. But what then actually happens is not described, but is left entirely to one's imagination. The only way to judge what my father intended is to read the novels as a whole. Doing so, it becomes clear from earlier scenes, as well as from Elizabeth's immediate reactions and later mixed emotions, that what finally happened was consensual sex, borne of long-term love and longing."
This statement sums it up pretty well but as it was also said at the BFI, it's not as straight forward as it is stated. The scene for the new series will be ambiguous too but will ultimately let you know it was consensual.
Here's the Youtube link for the full Q&A
https://youtu.be/OWRqkyLotcE
Mod
And for those who want the reference to share NOW without watching the full Q&A, here it is in The Telegraph (see last paragraph) http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/...
Oh what a tangled web we weave. I go along with this subject as being consensual as in the book it seems to be left to ones imagination, ending so abruptly. That was my first thoughts after reading this in Warleggan. Book after book is just as dramatical, WG is a great story writer. Anxiously waiting for Series 2 end of September here in the usa.
Mod
message 46: by Evelyn Jan 21, 2017
A little pot stirring here.... Rape? What rape? It appeared to me that Elizabeth all but wanted Ross to sleep with her and put up a fake fight to work him up more like some lancelet come in to save her day.
And we all know why she married George.... She was convinced she was "late"... More plotting and scheming by Elizabeth as best taught to her during her upbringing in order to catch the best man on the market... I don't know if I should feel pity for Elizabeth or disgust at her manipulative behaviour throughout the series. Angry Tide spoiler (view spoiler)
While WG seemed to leave it to the reader's imagination as to what happened between Ross and Elizabeth, he was very specific in The Black Moon about what another character did to a woman. He used the word 'rape.' So it is my understanding that Ross did NOT rape Elizabeth. In fact, she seemed to be expecting him at some point after sending him the note about her upcoming marriage. Then after THAT night, she seemed to think that he would return to her, hence her request to George to postpone their marriage.
I HATED Ross for having the fling with Elizabeth....I was fantasizing ways to kill him (Just going off of the show....haven't read the book yet)! Now, I see that Elizabeth was probably as manipulative a George.
Samantha wrote: "I HATED Ross for having the fling with Elizabeth....I was fantasizing ways to kill him (Just going off of the show....haven't read the book yet)! Now, I see that Elizabeth was probably as manipulat..."I HATED the look on Ross' face when Demelza moves out of his way and he walks past her. His look seems to say, "YOU don't matter right now, only my feelings for Elizabeth matter."
THAT was good acting. In the book it says something about Ross not being able to SEE Demelza at that point, that she was somehow fading or getting smaller, something to that effect. His walking past her was so painful to read about and see in the show.
Mara wrote: "I hated the look on Ross' face when Demelza moves out of his way..."Groan. I just watched that episode again, and could not agree more. It was a look that he would give George, not someone he loves and loves him back. Quite possibly, Aidan Turner must have imagined that at that moment, Ross really was only thinking of his hatred for George, and not even seeing Demelza, so yes, good acting, but painful to watch. What I liked about the TV version is Demelza decking Ross the next morning. Wow, did that feel good to watch. That scene was not in the book, so the aftermath was not nearly as satisfying. Then in the next episode, Ross sports a black eye and can't even tell Dwight the truth about what happened. Hah!
About acting - I have been really impressed with how Aidan Turner just embodies Ross Poldark. I'd never heard of Aidan Turner before, never seen him in anything. And when I watched a few clips of him on TV interview shows I just thought, Aidan is nothing like Ross - he's so smiley and cheery and laughing all the time, he doesn't even look the way I imagine Ross looks, but then I see him on the show, and he is absolutely Ross Poldark. It's sort of mind boggling.
Mod
Brenda wrote: "About acting - I have been really impressed with how Aidan Turner just embodies Ross Poldark. I'd never heard of Aidan Turner before, never seen him in anything. And when I watched a few clips of h..."Right? Aidan is so hyper and kind of all over the place, and seems very open, self-denigrating, guileless. Ross, on the other hand internalizes everything, and is, yes, that overused word, brooding. I think he epitomizes the strong, silent type, who despite trying to put on a brave face to shield others from worry, causes greater worry to those closest to him with his reticence. I never rest easy unless I can vent to my husband, and he'd better not be hiding anything from me!
I agree with Brenda, Aidan Turner is Ross Poldark. I love his interviews when he talks about the character he plays. I had seen A.Turner in all the Hobbits but did not know who he was then. Evidently his acting in the Hobbit and facial expressions is why he was chosen for Poldark, amazing. It is like Michael Crawford made the Phantom his own, A.Turner IS Ross.
It was gratifying to hear her say in the show all the things she was merely THINKING in the book. I especially liked, in the book, when she asks him when he wants her to go, that she can find work easy, that Jeremy will be fine for the time being with mrs. Gimlet. Though it was subtly written, I think Ross was dumbstruck, and had forgotten how independent she COULD be when she felt she was being mistreated, as with her father.
Now that I've read the book, I think what Ross did was an act of anger; his enemy with the woman he has always loved. I think Demelza can forgive, but she can't forget.
