The Readers Review: Literature from 1714 to 1910 discussion
This topic is about
Bleak House
Dickens Project
>
Bleak House, Chapters XIV - XVII
date
newest »
newest »
Mod
It's also a contrast to Richard who can choose his career and doesn't at all appreciate that. Dickens seems to say that it's not totally his fault, the uncertainty of the case causes that attitude. But I think Richard is just lazy and self-centered. I wonder if he can be cured by some hard knocks as Martin Chuzzlewit was. Martin started out quite shallow and concerned for appearances but learned the hard way the value of loyalty and hard work.
Nice to see Esther has a young woman's heart, she's not a nunlike figure such as Nell who devotes herself only to others, but does feel attraction to the young doctor.
Robin wrote: "but does feel attraction to the young doctor. "Good for spotting it so early. It took me awhile to understand that Esther's heart has some hot blood in it :-)
As for Caddy and Prince, they are both, as you justly noticed, the children of ultimate egoists. And the name - Prince! What the ... Poor young man has to live with this name, and, in addition, his father has virtually enslaved him. By the way, this is another object of Dickens criticism - poor parenting.
Regarding Caddy and Prince's romance, I can't say that I blame Caddy. She must be so desperate to escape her mother's house that she would not be picky about a suitor. Given how kingly his father acts, I am not surprised by Prince's name; I only hope that he turns out better than his father!A note on Esther: I am enjoying her narrative and agree that she seems more realistic and less saintly than other Dickens female characters. I think it noteworthy that she expresses, albeit in a subdued manner, her opinion that Richard is too flighty and that he should settle down to an occupation. In a time when women were to be completely submissive and always (at least outwardly) approving and supportive of their male counterparts, Esther's mild criticism of Richard speaks to her strength and wisdom as a character.
First, I wasn't surprised that it finally came out that Esther was illegitimate. It was expected. To me, the mystery is, who is the father? I thought that Mr. Jarndyce's reaction was interesting when Esther says that he has been like a father to her.Second, the narrative on the three destitute children was heartbreaking. Ditto with Jo. Again, Dickens is still timely; there are still many places on earth where children lead miserable lives, and no one does anything about it. And yes, agree, that Esther's forgetting about them was puzzling. Hopefully, Dickens will will come back to them.
Third, I thought that it was interesting that Dickens says that Lady Dedlock could be taken for a high level servant or a lady that day when she sought out Jo. Is it because of her background? I have to reread the Ghost's Walk story, but I think there is the same type of point there as well?
Fourth, Richard is going down the path of all the others who got too involved in the court case. A foreshadowing of his end? It seems that way, especially how Esther is worried about Ada.
Fifth, love the Caddy and Prince story. Both of them ill used by their parents, although she realizes it, and he doesn't. Unfortunately, I keep thinking of the singer Prince everytime I read his name. :-)
Lastly, I was a bit puzzled about the scene with the flowers. Allan Woodcourt is leaving, says goodbye to Esther, but then, when leaves flowers that Caddy brings to Esther, as if they were meant for her? Why didn't he just give them to Esther himself?
Lynnm wrote: "Richard is going down the path of all the others who got too involved in the court case."The whole idea of the court is more just a symbol or a phenomenon in the novel. It definitely is much more. Good thinking, Lynnm!
Mod
Another brilliant piece of descriptive writing in describing Mr Turverydrop:
He was a fat old gentleman with a false complexion, false teeth, false whiskers, and a wig. He had a fur collar, and he had a padded breast to his coat, which only wanted a star or a broad blue ribbon to be complete. He was pinched in, and swelled out, and got up, and strapped down, as much as he could possibly bear…He had a cane, he had an eye-glass, he had a snuff-box, he had rings, he had wristbands, he had everything but any touch of nature; he was not like youth, he was not like age, he was not like anything in the world but a model of deportment.
This is like the male version of Edith's mother in Dombey and Son and the writing is a perfect gem of rhythmic description and satire. I am also always surprised by the good characters in Dickens' novels that are often blinded to the folly of their parents-again I think of Florence Dombey, Prince, Little Nell and her grandfather.
On a much sadder note is his description of Jo's lodging: Now, these tumbling tenements contain, by night, a swarm of misery. As on the ruined human wretch vermin parasites appear, so these ruined shelters have bred a crowd of foul existence that crawls in and out of gaps in walls and boards; and coils itself to sleep, in maggot numbers, where the rain drips in; and comes and goes, fetching and carrying fever and sowing more evil in its every footprint than the Lord Coodle, and Sir Thomas Doodle, and the Duke of Foodle…shall set right in five hundred years-though born expressly to do it. This is an interesting attribution of the cause of some of this misery to the courts which tie the properties up so that they cannot be used or maintained.
This was followed later in the chapter by a beautifully written passage on what it must be like to be illiterate-seeing all the symbols written on walls and in the streets and watching people reading and being shut out of that whole aspect of life-somehow coming to feel less than fully part of humanity.
Again, Dickens comments pointedly on the whole Charity begins at Home theme when Jo sits down on the doorstep of the Society for the Propagation of the Gospel in Foreign Parts to eat his dirty bit of bread, all the while wondering what the grand building is for.
I think it is remarkable how Dickens, so busy in his professional and personal life, was still so aware of the misery of those living alongside him in London, and so sympathetic to their plight.
Thank you for your beautiful post, full of brilliant quotations, Francis. I still keep asking myself the same question - how could a person still remember what it is to be poor when he is relatively safe, busy with his career, deadlines, publications, theater, reading tours, and numerous family members?!
Unfortunately, the future for Jo and similar characters is not getting brighter.
At least in OT and NN and even in OCS, we knew as readers quite early that there were people who cared about Oliver, Smike, and Nell. Is there anyone who thinks about Jo, cares about Jo, and worries about Jo? Lady Dedlock just gives him a coin and stops thinking about him the moment she leaves the cemetery, and she turns out to be the most charitable if we compare her to Mrs. Pardiggle and/or Mrs. Jellyby.
Frances wrote: "Flowers-it would have been most inappropriate for a young man to give flowers to a young woman to whom he was not betrothed, hence the subterfuge. It would also be inappropriate for him to write le..."Frances, thanks for the reminder - yes, it would be inappropriate for Allan Woodcourt to give Esther the flower directly.
And agree that it is amazing that Dickens cared so much for the poor in London. He suffered when he was younger, but that doesn't ensure that someone will be compassionate - sometimes those who suffer feel that others have to figure a way out just like they did. Sometimes I think you have that bent from early in life or you don't.
Argh!! I just wrote a long post and then something happened and it disappeared. :(So, this will be quick summary of what I had written. I just finished this section, trying to catch up with everyone.
I also don't blame Caddy wanting to escape her mother's grasp and only using Caddy for her use in her charity work. I hope that she and Prince will be able to escape their parents and be happy with each other. It is too bad that Prince does not recognize his father's influence on him. Mr. Turveydrop is disgusting. While Prince gets a scrap of cold mutton (and happily so), his father gets to dine comfortably, and when asked if he is also off now, replies "Yes, my dear. I suppose," said Mr. Turveydrop, shutting his eyes and lifting up his shoulders, with modest consciousness, "that I must how myself, as usual, about town." UGH!
I also wondered what Esther and Mr. Jarndyce would do for the three children when they came upon them and found them trying to provide for themselves. How heartbreaking, especially of little Charlotte who is still just a child, to be acting so grown-up. Yet she is still a child, and it's seen as she can't keep back her tears.
I was also surprised at Mr. Jarndyce's reaction to Esther calling him "father". Could Mr. Jarndyce actually be Esther's father? Why was he chosen as the person to whom the letter was written? Who, exactly, is Esther's mother? What is her past?
Linda wrote: "Could Mr. Jarndyce actually be Esther's father? Why was he chosen as the person to whom the letter was written? Who, exactly, is Esther's mother? What is her past? "You are asking very good questions, Linda! Surprisingly, Esther is not asking these questions OPENLY, but they are definitely there for a reader to keep reading and asking them.
Linda wrote: ""Yes, my dear. I suppose," said Mr. Turveydrop, shutting his eyes and lifting up his shoulders, with modest consciousness, "that I must how myself, as usual, about town." "It is all about HIS deportment for this 'gentleman', isn't it.
Mod
I'm not sure his inability to choose is due to laziness or not caring. I see him as a sort of lost soul who is being pushed about by the thought of the money from the suit. I think Richard is thinking once the suit is settled, it won't matter if I have a career as I will live off the great proceeds of this important suit. We, as readers, know the results of Chancery, but it appears that Richard has yet to learn this.
Mod
Once again we are faced with the question of what is charity. Is it charity to give so much time, energy, and apparently money that it bankrupts your family emotionally, physically, and financial (i.e. Jellyby)?
The futility of Chancery is really found the the names Miss Flite has given to her birds. Each becomes a literally interpretation of the ongoings in Chancery, with no freedom until the suit is settled.
Krook's attachment to Mr. Jarndyce was very creepy to me. We would call it stalking today, and it makes me wonder why. Another layer in our mystery.
Although others have mentioned the heartbreak of the Coavines children, nobody has mentioned Mr. Skimpole's reaction. He ends up saying proudly how he had impacted this family through him employment of the now deceased father. In other words, he contributed to the deprivation these children face due to his unwillingness to pay for services. What's the deal with his meaning to pay equals payment because he doesn't have it??? (chapter 15)
While we are all under the assumption that the servant Jo meets is Lady Dedlock, the text isn't specific about who it is. Granted, I agree that it is most likely Lady Dedlock, who is once again described as bored, yet seems to be driven to find out more information on Mr. Nemo.
Deborah wrote: "Although others have mentioned the heartbreak of the Coavines children, nobody has mentioned Mr. Skimpole's reaction. He ends up saying proudly how he had impacted this family through him employment of the now deceased father. In other words, he contributed to the deprivation these children face due to his unwillingness to pay for services. What's the deal with his meaning to pay equals payment because he doesn't have it??? (chapter 15)"I really don't understand Mr. Skimpole. When he was first introduced, I was trying to figure out if he was mentally challenged, and that is why he was described as a "child". But it seems as if he instead chooses to live without any personal responsibility because it's easier and he would rather enjoy the simple things in life, and does so at the expense of all those around him. I just don't understand why people put up with him, and so when he was going on about the Coavinces, I was disgusted by him, especially since he sounds so proud of himself.
Deborah wrote: "He ends up saying proudly how he had impacted this family through him employment of the now deceased father. In other words, he contributed to the deprivation these children face due to his unwillingness to pay for services. What's the deal with his meaning to pay equals payment because he doesn't have it???"Harold Skimpole is one of the darker characters in the novel who pretends to be as innocent as a butterfly that does not know the worries and needs of everyday life. In fact, he is a dark man who claims to beneficially contribute to the Neckett's household because his lackadaisical attitude creates debts collectors. Arrogance and hyperbolic sense of ego.
Mod
Lynnm wrote: "Unfortunately, I keep thinking of the singer Prince everytime I read his name. :-)..."I have the same issue, Lynnm. :-)
Deborah wrote: "Although others have mentioned the heartbreak of the Coavines children, nobody has mentioned Mr. Skimpole's reaction. He ends up saying proudly how he had impacted this family through him employment of the now deceased father. In other words, he contributed to the deprivation these children face due to his unwillingness to pay for services. What's the deal with his meaning to pay equals payment because he doesn't have it??? (chapter 15)..."Deborah, I had marked that section, too. How can Mr Skimpole be so self-complacent and self-laudatory thinking he had a large part in providing for these children? That made me rather furious.
Deborah wrote: "I actually ended up wanting to slap Skimpole in this section."Me too. :-)
Some of my comments - at last:The Turveydrops are another famiy/ husband/ wife relationship which is leading to the wife's death in the end. It reminded me a little of the Mantalinis in Nicholas Nickleby. The man has the "fun" while the wife is providing for the family. After the mother's death the poor son has to take over that role and despite his name he seems to have rather the role of Cinderella in her stepmother's house. Hopefully, there will be a happy ending for him.
I was wondering whether Dickens was also expressing his disgust for his father through Mr Turveydrop. His father always lived beyond his means and had his son cover for his debts. His father died around the time when Dickens was writing Bleak House, maybe this is a way of coping with that fact.
Mr. Krook was creepy to me as well and I was wondering whether he might know more about Nemo's death than he admits. Maybe it sll has to do with the Jarndyce case, but this now all speculation...
We also learn about another type of "philanthropist", Mr. Quale. What a person! His mission is "to be in ecstasies with everybody else's mission" and that is "the most popular mission of all". He is a follower of Mrs. Jellyby and Mrs. Pardiggle and increases their self-praise and good feeling about themselves. He is almost a propagandist for their causes.
In contrast to that Mr. Jarndyce is described as rather being disgusted by this type of charity. He truly cares about the charity and not about the publicity of it. Even today you sometimes have the feeling that certain charity is only conducted due to the positive publicity or the tax credit behind it, but not due to a true concern about the cause.
Charlotte/ Charley is really strong. She is described so womanly as she pretends to be grown up, but in the end she is still a child. I liked the description of her including the alliterations:
"We were looking at one another and at these two children when there came into the room a very little girl, childish in figure but shrewd and older-looking in the face—pretty-faced too—wearing a womanly sort of bonnet much too large for her and drying her bare arms on a womanly sort of apron. Her fingers were white and wrinkled with washing, and the soap-suds were yet smoking which she wiped off her arms. But for this, she might have been a child playing at washing and imitating a poor working-woman with a quick observation of the truth."
Mr. Gridley is another rather new character. His case was mentioned in the beginning of the novel. He seems quite grumpy (made so by the Chancery), but he seems reasonable as well. He did not like Mr. Neckett to moving into the house due to his profession, but as he mentions also at a later appoint he blames the system and not the individuals who are executing the system. It is also kind of him (and truly a charitable act) that he helps Charlotte with the two little ones.
We learn also a little about the Jarndyce case though I still have a problem in what role/ relationship Esther, Ada and Richard have in this. It was all about the legacy of 300 pounds to be paid by "our" Mr. Jarndyce to his brother. I do not understand why he did not do that directly when the whole case started to roll. Or was there no way out any more? Now it has involved 17 people at least and has cost much more than the originally requested amount and it is still ongoing without a light at the end of the tunnel.
Lady Dedlock is very restless, running from one place and potential distraction to another, seems unsatisfied with her life and the people around her. Is that maybe a reflection of Dickens's own situation when writing this novel? He was quite unsettled and this was not very long before he separated from Catherine.
Sir Leicester suffers from the gout like Dickens did. I cannot remember whether Dickens got it before or after this novel. At least he describes the illness as a "troublesome demon".
Dickens also criticizes the housing conditions of the poor quartiers of London in form of his description of Tom-all-Alone's. Frances, you have mentioned this already including the fact that the poor might see what is going on around them and question it. Did Dickens think of the possibility of a revolution similar to the French Revolution? Maybe the poor realize how they are treated, like animals, sometimes maybe even worse.
He critizes the charity system once again by showing that chrity is needed here and that a poor soul here does not/ cannot care about e.g. a coffee planatation in Africa.
Mr. Gridley was mentioned in Ch. 16 as a disappointed suitor, which was a little strange to me, as we had heard so much in Esther's narrative about him. It seems that the narrator's story and Esther's story a re quite disconnected in that respect not considering that the reader gets both information.
Richard's education is considered a disadvantage to him. That reminded me of Dickens's taking out his eldest son from Eton to send him to Germany for becoming a merchant. Is Richard maybe a copy of his son Charley? His father was quite similar as well, rather wanting to live off others, trying to do this and that, but never successfully. He ended up in Dickens's publishing house which seemed the first fitting job for his father after decades.
A question I have had and which has been increased during Ch. 17 is: What's up with all the nicknames for Esther? I do not have annotations in my edition, unfortunately. Maybe you can help me with some of those.
- Dame Durden
- Mother Hubbard
- Mrs. Shipton
- Minerva - goddess of wisdom
- little woman - maybe due to her being so young, but grown-up at the same time.
So much for now. I will try to read the next 3 sections over the weekend. Then I should be at your current section next week.
Hedi wrote: "Lynnm wrote: "Unfortunately, I keep thinking of the singer Prince everytime I read his name. :-)..."I have the same issue, Lynnm. :-)"
Glad someone else does too! :-)
Hedi wrote: "Dickens also criticizes the housing conditions of the poor quartiers of London in form of his description of Tom-all-Alone's. Frances, you have mentioned this already including the fact that the poor might see what is going on around them and question it. Did Dickens think of the possibility of a revolution similar to the French Revolution? Maybe the poor realize how they are treated, like animals, sometimes maybe even worse."That's an interesting question. I know that when I was researching Jane Austen, they said at that time people were very concerned about something similar to the first French Revolution taking place in England. But the situation was so different in England, that it would have been highly unlikely.
Society was clearly changing by the time of Dickens. It must have been highly unsettling to everyone, so it wouldn't be surprising to see that anxiety played out in Dickens' novels.
Lynnm, revolution would be the extreme, but an uprising of the poor might have been a possibility. There were also the uprisings in Paris described in Les Miserables which occurred in or around 1832 if I am not completely wrong. Then there were political uprisings in Europe in 1848 as well.The upper classes described by Dickens in the section with the cynical notion were discussing the previous times being better. Maybe that was because the split between rich and poor was not questioned and the feudal system was more accepted. This is after all a time of a lot of social and economic changes which might bring forward a request for better conditions for the poor. Maybe Dickens is also raising that as a due possibility. He liked the French and was impressed by the French Revolution as to be seen in A Tale of Two Cities.
The Readers Review: Literature from 1714 to 1910
Books mentioned in this topic
Nicholas Nickleby (other topics)Dombey and Son (other topics)
This week we are discussing chapters 14 -17, and hopefully you will be more emotionally involved this time because it is mostly Esther's story. Despite the size of this week's part, the chapters are quite revealing.
1. Esther's suspicions as well as ours are confirmed that Esther is an illegitimate child. Was there anyone who was surprised by this revelation? If yes, why? If no, why? Were there any clues earlier in the novel that she might be illegitimate?
2. Dickens is back with his scathing criticism (Harry Skimpole and his attitude towards Neckett - the deabt collector, dark and grisly environments of London underbelly, three destitute children, Mr. Turveydrop who has a "model of deportment"). Which of these is the most effective? The most powerful? The most absurd?
3. Is there anything new we learn about Lady Dedlock?
4. I was greatly disappointed with Esther because even though she knew that the Coavinses (the three children) were destitute and she was upset bu their current situation, she ignored the topic of these poor children in her subsequent chapters. I hope it was just the whim of the author, and we will soon learn about Mr. Jarndyce's or Esther's follow-up. How do you feel about Esther's behavior? Should she have been more compassionate or is she concealing the truth of her charity because she is one of the two main story-tellers?
5. What are your thoughts about Richard? He is again not happy with his choice of a career and now dreams of becoming a lawyer and winning the case and inheriting a lot of money. Is he a pipe-dreamer?
6. Are Mr. Gridley's words a warming for Richard? (If you remember, he is the one who helps children and tells Esther and Mr. Jarndyce that his inheritance was lost because of the read tape and bureaucracy of the Chancery)
It is obvious that the plot thickens and the mystery becomes more palpable, but it is far from being unshrouded:-) Post away, friends.