Bleak House Week 1 - Chapters 1-7

[Paula]

Lily, I really appreciate everything you are giving us!

[Lily]

Paula wrote: "Lily, I really appreciate everything you are giving us!"

Thsnk you, Paula! I'm sort of front end loading this because I'm probably going to disappear for awhile while my eyes heal.

[Everyman]

Jeremy wrote: "First, in spite of what he [Skimpole] says about his modest tastes, according to the text he's constantly running up debt. Maybe more will be revealed later, but his appetites may be larger than he lets on. "

Yes, and what he wants is by no means modest. Claret? Music has to be provided by somebody with an instrument and sufficient talent and training to please, since there was no way to record music at the time. So that is only going to happen in more comfortable, even wealthy, homes. And both fruit and claret were, at the time, considerable luxuries. So modest, no. He wants to live quite comfortably at somebody else's expense (whether a friend or a tradesman, he doesn't care).

[Everyman]

Susanna wrote: "Paula wrote: That cat creeps me out...and I have two cats that I adore."

It might also have been the time period. Cats were just starting to become household pets. Birds were more popular as pets...."

Cats weren't pets, they were working animals, catching mice and rats. And who wants to pet an animal which has just been eating rats and mice, and is probably covered in fleas?

[Everyman]

Theresa wrote: "Also, at this point I don't see the evil in Mrs Jellyby. It seems she could become tragically blind but it is also possible something could happen in the next few chapters that jolts her sense of ..."

One could start, of course, by asking whether the Africans WANT English settlers to come and take their land (they wouldn't bother to buy it because after all, they're coming there as a favor to the Africans who should be grateful) and create coffee plantations that will make the Africans turn into the same near-slave labor that English mine and factory workers were quickly becoming.

But more to the point is her total disregard of her children, not only personal disregard but not worrying about whether anybody is feeding, washing, clothing them, or helping them when they get their heads stuck in the railings (it takes a total stranger happening by to save Peepy.) That may not be evil, but it hardly qualifies as a genuine philanthropic nature.

[Audrey]

To the people who are having some trouble getting into Bleak House, my experience is that Victorian novels often don't really get going until pages 150-200 (depending on typographic choices). So, don't give up yet.

Also, I think Dickens is done a disservice by his reputation. Victorian novels in general (and certainly Dickens in particular) are not realistic works of fiction, nor do they have any pretensions to being so. They exist in an alternate universe where you might happen by your previously unsuspected half-sister in a crossroads, and the local miser's illegitimate son might also turn out to be the stepson of someone from your long-hidden, shady past. It resembles the real world, but it isn't. It's Dickensland, where half of the world's details are left out, and the other half are intensified by a power of three. I think the opera analogy is a good one.

[Lily]

Audrey wrote: "...I think the opera analogy is a good one...."

I agree, at least to some extent. But in general, I like opera. Still, greatness can be recognized without being "liked." In the meantime, am using as an excuse to learn more about what attributes great literature generally has -- and why some personally attracts, some does not.

[Lily]

Could almost be a modern day picture. Young woman seeks a confidante. Esther's dress is more period than Miss Jellyby's. Note the rabbit and the baby.



Scanned image and text by George P. Landow.

See also:
http://www.victorianweb.org/victorian...

Includes textual context.

[Genni]

Paula wrote: "Just touching on a fraction of your wonderful post, E'man.

There’s a point to my post, I promise, even though it may not at first seem apparent.

I was just shy of 17 when my professional opera c..."

I am behind in my reading and posts, but wanted to tell you how great I thought this post was! :-)

[Lily]

The third of the illustrations from the main text of this week:



The "meaning" of Mr. Krook's name is so nicely obvious.!

See here for text and acknowledgements to Landow:
http://www.victorianweb.org/victorian...

[Everyman]

Lily wrote: "The "meaning" of Mr. Krook's name is so nicely obvious.!"

And yet so far, he doesn't seem to be one.

[Chris]

Everyman wrote: "Lily wrote: "The "meaning" of Mr. Krook's name is so nicely obvious.!"

And yet so far, he doesn't seem to be one."

I agree. He seems like a hoarder of goods & people in wait for an opportunity to be used.

[Lily]

Chris wrote: "Everyman wrote: "Lily wrote: "The "meaning" of Mr. Krook's name is so nicely obvious.!"

And yet so far, he doesn't seem to be one."

I agree. He seems like a hoarder of goods & people in wait for..."

Is Dickens providing foreshadowing, irony, stereotype, or a left feint? Or some other literary technique whose name I do not know?

[Lily]

The "last" Phiz illustration for this first week of reading:



For associated text and acknowledgements to Landow:

http://www.victorianweb.org/victorian...

"Leigh Hunt was the original of Harold Skimpole in Bleak House. 'Dickens wrote in a letter of 25 September 1853, "I suppose he is the most exact portrait that was ever painted in words! ... It is an absolute reproduction of a real man"; and a contemporary critic commented, "I recognized Skimpole instantaneously; ... and so did every person whom I talked with about it who had ever had Leigh Hunt's acquaintance."'[10] G. K. Chesterton suggested that Dickens 'may never once have had the unfriendly thought, "Suppose Hunt behaved like a rascal"; he may have only had the fanciful thought, "Suppose a rascal behaved like Hunt!"' (Chesterton 1906)."

Leigh Hunt article:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leigh_Hunt

(Includes picture ostensibly of Shelley's funeral -- doesn't really match other accounts. Note text.)

[Lisa]

Thanks Paula and E-man for those insightful first posts, definitely cleared up my befuddled thoughts surrounding the first chapters. Think I'm going to enjoy reading this discussion more than I'm going to participate.

[Everyman]

Lisa wrote: "Think I'm going to enjoy reading this discussion more than I'm going to participate. "

If that's your choice. But we look forward to your comments and questions as much as you do to ours.

[Everyman]

Everyman wrote: "Lisa wrote: "Think I'm going to enjoy reading this discussion more than I'm going to participate. "

If that's your choice. But we look forward to your comments and questions as much as you do to..."

I realize that was a bit too much shorthand. Should have read: If that's your choice, that's fine. But if you should decide to participate, we would look forward to your comments and questions as much as you do to ours.

[Dee]

I know this has been touched on above, but the thought did occur to me that if Mrs Jellyby is so disorganised, than how can she achieve anything for her African project? Letters ending up in the gravy, and replies being written in the midst of dinner doesn't strike one as the most effective way of getting things done. And did the letters ever get sent to their rightful recipients? That would seem to require a level of organisational competence sorely lacking in the house.

[Laurel]

David wrote: "I know this has been touched on above, but the thought did occur to me that if Mrs Jellyby is so disorganised, than how can she achieve anything for her African project? Letters ending up in the gr..."

Good point, David. I don't suppose she got any more done for the Africans than she did for her family.

[Cass]

Aplogies for diving in late, I decided to finish ToTC before I began this one, so I have started a week behind, but read the first section in two days so I will be caught up soon.

As a note of comparison I am finding this an easier and more interesting read. I kept looking at the massive tomb (BH) sitting on my shelf, and to be honest I wasn't very keen to pick it up. After I finished ToTC I actually read two other books last week just because I couldn't do it. ToTC was boring and I wasn't interested in the protaganists, I was expecting BH to be exactly the same, just a much bigger book... I was pleasantly surprised, they are worlds apart and I am very interested in Esther and the plot in general.

Esther reminds me of many other literary characters (Jane Eyre, Harriet Smith (Emma), Moll Flanders, perhaps even a touch of Fanny Price). She does have a touch of the Austen Heroine about her (practically perfect in every way), able to rise above a horrid life... Gosh, she came out of quite a horrid life relatively unscathed.

It is cold here, and my study is cold, so apologies to the trees but I printed out all 171 comments prior to mine and read them all by the fire in the warmth of my loungeroom, so here goes:

1. I think she buried the doll to make herself cry. She was crying in the coach on the way to the boarding house. But she was not crying for the godmother because she did not love her, I think she was crying for the doll. I think she buried the doll in order to make herself feel the way she ought to, or to punish herself for not crying over her godmother.

2. A lot of characters were mentioned as being key characters, and it was noted that Dickens is setting the scene and laying out the main characters. I don't think the old lady was discussed with enough prominence. There is something in those papers, some key element to the story, it is Chekhov's Gun ("One must never place a loaded rifle on the stage if it isn't going to go off. It's wrong to make promises you don't mean to keep."). Anyone else think the same? I half think that Tom Jarndyce gave her something before he shot himself and told her to reveal it at some appointed time, and she is following his instructions to the letter... waiting daily in court for that moment.

3. I say the same about Skimpole, and the mysterious lawyer living on the second floor. I am waiting for more about them. Regarding Skimpole, when Jarndyce talked about him being childlike I was expecting a mental deficiency, I expected he literally had the mental capacity of a child - not so.

4. I am very taken with the idea, presented by Everyman in post #100, that we have higher expectations of Mrs Jellby and her duties to home because she is a woman. We all believe she has her priorities in the wrong place, but nobody is bothered that Mr Jellyby does not step up and take care of the house. I can see that in that era it would not even be a consideration, there would be almost no expectation that Mr Jellyby (as he is) or a Mr Jellyby (if he were the African advocate) would have any responsibility for the house - but we do expect her too.

5. I want to take Peepy home.

6. I am always challenged by the idea of philanthopists and missions who look to overseas and not to home. While I admit there are greater problems in Africa, it seems that today we still send over what we want rather than what we need (Nestle baby formula anyone? Want to mix formula with dirty water rather than just giving them breastmilk? Sorry did you say help them, I thought you meant use them to expand our market - our bad). The Drown child link in post #123 was a good read and evokes an entire ethical discussion in itself.

7. Why did that guy (name forgotten) right the words "Jarndyce" and "Bleak House", he didn't know what they were, but he wrote them. Where did he read them etc. This part seems important, but I don't know what is meant by it.

8. @Lily in #150 - I was surprised to read my name. Sorry I took so long to respond.

9. Finally, love David's point (#170) about Mrs Jellby being so unorganised as to not be effectual in her African aide. To be honest I feel somewhat akin to her. I tend toward obsessing over whatever current project I am working on (be it learning French or planning a hiking trip or making 200 jars of jam for xmas) and my household gets a bit ignored in the process. I think if I had a decent housekeeper my life would go rather smoothly.

On to section 2!!

[Dee]

I wonder how much of Skimpole's character is based on Dickens' own father? John Dickens was constantly in debt, and Charles frequently was forced to bail him out, to his great displeasure.

And this is probably completely irrelevant, but I couldn't help comparing the birds who are to be released when the case is finished, but die before it happens and are replaced with new ones with the idea suggested by Cebes in Plato's Phaedo of the soul inhabiting several bodies in succession before finally itself dying.

[Cass]

Did she actually feed those birds? She didn't appear to feed herself, did they die of starvation?

[Dee]

Cass wrote: "Did she actually feed those birds? She didn't appear to feed herself, did they die of starvation?"

I think somebody asked this above, but I'm not sure we can answer. Maybe she cared more for the birds than for herself, though I somehow doubt it. Her neglect would no doubt contribute to their early death.

[Audrey]

I think part of the point is that they don't die an early death. They live out entire lives of normal bird length, in constant captivity, waiting for the chancery suit to be over. They mirror the multiple generations that have been born into Jarndyce vs. Jarndyce. But I would also say that they have known their share of starvation.

[Lily]

Cass wrote: "...8. @Lily in #150 - I was surprised to read my name. Sorry I took so long to respond...."

:-) It was worth the wait! Welcome back, Cass.

[Cass]

I forgot to add. I was not confused by the initial section of the book, changing narrators etc.

I was too busy being confused by the lack of debtor's prison, I didn't understand why there was a Chancery or who Jarndyce and Jarndyce was... until I realised we were reading "Bleak House" not "Little Dorrit" (which I watched a couple of years ago on TV).

[Everyman]

Cass wrote: "I think she buried the doll to make herself cry. She was crying in the coach on the way to the boarding house. But she was not crying for the godmother because she did not love her, I think she was crying for the doll. I think she buried the doll in order to make herself feel the way she ought to, or to punish herself for not crying over her godmother."

Very interesting. That idea had never occurred to me.

[Everyman]

Cass wrote: " There is something in those papers, some key element to the story, it is Chekhov's Gun ("One must never place a loaded rifle on the stage if it isn't going to go off. It's wrong to make promises you don't mean to keep."). Anyone else think the same? "

Keep reading! [g]

[Everyman]

Cass wrote: "Why did that guy (name forgotten) right the words "Jarndyce" and "Bleak House", he didn't know what they were, but he wrote them. Where did he read them etc. This part seems important, but I don't know what is meant by it."

Krook. And keep reading! [g]

You're right, Dickens doesn't leave loaded guns (or loaded characters) on stage if he doesn't intend them to go off (metaphorically). Good observation on your part. Bleak House has been called a mystery story, and in many ways it is -- multiple mysteries. It's fun to watch the connections gradually unfold, and if you look closely for clues as you go along and consider why apparently unimportant events happy, you may solve the mystery, or at least think you have solved it, before it is fully exposed.

But he has 800 or so pages to reveal all, and he will take his time (because, keep in mind, he was writing in serial form, so he had to keep people on the edge of their chairs and wanting to keep reading for 20 episodes.)

BTW, I agree with you that ToTC is decidedly inferior to Bleak House.

[Cass]

Everyman wrote: "keep in mind, he was writing in serial form, so he had to keep people on the edge of their chairs and wanting to keep reading for 20 episodes."

This is one of the reasons that I like reading in groups in this manner... with the book and discussions evenly paced. They let us experience some of the feelings that the original readers would have (and I liken this to the way we used to watch TV, one episode per week).

I get to discuss theories openly with people who are at the same spot as me (where as I know that members who have previously read the book do not get to participate on that level for a second time). One of my initial theories was that she was somehow related to the case herself, maybe related to a ward from a generation earlier.

One more question. What did Jarndyce mean when he said that Skimpole had many children? I am wondering if Esther isn't related (a daughter) of one of them.

Loving the mystery of it all.

[Everyman]

Cass wrote: One more question. What did Jarndyce mean when he said that Skimpole had many children? I am wondering if Esther isn't related (a daughter) of one of them."

I took that literally, that he had fathered many children (and isn't taking any care of them, an aspect of his total irresponsibility about money and responsibility). As to Esther, that's an interesting speculation. We'll have to keep reading to find out! But it's a reasonable guess given the way Dickens likes to slip little clues into the book that one only realizes the importance of much later.

[Sue]

One must be careful when checking upon a minor character's description via Wiki…not to read other character descriptions or much plot may be given away..happened to me this morning when I was checking on just who "Coavinses" was again (now I recall but had forgotten it) (could not find in the book's descriptions and for good reason!). But even knowing more than I ought at this time ….I still find it most interesting!

[Paula]

Sue wrote: "One must be careful when checking upon a minor character's description via Wiki…not to read other character descriptions or much plot may be given away..happened to me this morning when I was check..."

I know what you mean. I've read Bleak House, oh, probably 20 times. I recently purchased Nabokov's lectures on European literature and Bleak House was one of the lecture topics. I started reading it, but then realized that I didn't want his insights quite yet. I want to participate in our group discussions without his insights blending with my own. Once we are finished, I will read the lecture and see if we left any stones unturned for him to enlighten me on.

The book is an absolute feast though. I'm just dining on a different one!!

[Cass]

Paula wrote: "I want to participate in our group discussions without his insights blending with my own. "

I am the same. I really enjoying the virgin reading of a book, without influence from academic sources. Even for modern fiction I rather write my review before I read any other reviews.

[Laurel]

A great thing about Kindle books is that they allow you to quickly find every mention of a character, say, in the order mentioned, so you can stop looking where you stopped reading.

[Everyman]

Laurele wrote: "A great thing about Kindle books is that they allow you to quickly find every mention of a character, say, in the order mentioned, so you can stop looking where you stopped reading."

Same is true of reading Gutenberg books online. I usually keep a copy of our current reading open in a Firefox tab so I can look up precise quotations quickly or search the text to find things I'm not sure about.

[Everyman]

Paula wrote: "The book [Nabakov's lectures] is an absolute feast though. I'm just dining on a different one!! "

It is indeed. It's hard for me to believe that the same person wrote his lectures (I have the Lectures on Literature, Russian Literature, and Don Quixote, and they're all excellent) also wrote some of the novels he did.

[Audrey]

Something we haven't yet discussed here is the manner of Esther's godmother's death. I find this episode intriguing, because of its use of contrasting biblical quotations:

"I had come down at nine o'clock as I always did to read the Bible to her, and was reading from St. John how our Saviour stooped down, writing with his finger in the dust, when they brought the sinful woman to him.

'So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself and said unto them, "He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her!"'

I was stopped by my godmother's rising, putting her hand to her head, and crying out in an awful voice from quite another part of the book, '"Watch ye, therefore, lest coming suddenly he find you sleeping. And what I say unto you, I say unto all, Watch!"'"

If you take it as a given that Esther's "shame" is being illegitimate, this verse seems to be speaking directly to her godmother's treatment, both of Esther and of her mother. I think it's telling that she dies upon hearing this specific verse.

The verse her godmother quotes, however, is more ambiguous. Is she quoting it as a judgment on herself for failing in her Christian duty not to judge lest she be judged? Is she, in other words, the one who was caught sleeping? Or is she using it in its more traditional sense of admonishing all sinners to stop their evil ways, because you never know when judgement will come? This is much more in keeping with her previous behaviour. Since she dies immediately after this, we'll never really know for sure.

Dickens leaves us with the knowledge that "To the very last, and even afterwards, her frown remained unsoftened." Does this mean that she died unrepentant, or without time to repent?

[Everyman]

Audrey wrote: "Something we haven't yet discussed here is the manner of Esther's godmother's death. I find this episode intriguing, because of its use of contrasting biblical quotations:

"I had come down at nin..."

Great questions. Great close reading.

[Cass]

Oh yes, I loved this passage too.

I agree, the bible passage that Esther reads is a criticism of her godmother. I waited for the godmother to feel that shame, but felt she missed the point completely and instead pointed the finger back at Esther, almost in some sort of biblical war-of-verses.

I felt that the godmother's verse was telling Esther that Esther's verse should not be used as an excuse to sin.

I don't think the godmother was repentant at all, and I think the death was a punishment metered down by Dickens (something he does like to do).

[Dee]

"Punishment meted out by Dickens." I like that. The author is in complete control of his characters.
What is interesting, is that we're not told wether Esther's godmother asked her to read that passage, or if she chose is for herself. I think the way we react to the godmother's death would depend which of the two we think is more likely.

[Audrey]

David: "What is interesting, is that we're not told wether Esther's godmother asked her to read that passage, or if she chose is for herself."

That's a very good point. It completely changes the situation. I had always actually assumed a third scenario, in which they were gradually reading through John and came upon that passage without any particular plan beforehand. This, again, changes the scene, with happenstance or God playing more of a hand than either character.

I also can't help wondering what's happened when they've come across that story in the past. It's impossible to be a regular churchgoer without hearing it in the liturgical reading cycle. Moreover, if they were, in fact, in the habit of reading the Bible together, they would have had to put in quite a bit of effort to avoid it (or similar stories, such as the entire history of Mary Magdalen).

[Lily]

Audrey wrote: "...such as the entire history of Mary Magdalene ..."

Well, that depends on what assumptions about her "entire history" are made!

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_Mag... for example of some of the confusions of identity, often traced to the influence of Pope Gregory.

[Theresa]

Everyman wrote: "One could start, of course, by asking whether the Africans WANT English settlers to come and take their land (they wouldn't bother to buy it because after all, they're coming there as a favor to the Africans who should be grateful) and create coffee plantations that will make the Africans turn into the same near-slave labor that English mine and factory workers were quickly becoming."

That is true. I don't see her so much as a true philanthropist, I just see her as a woman of her time who is desperate to escape the domestic sphere. She wants some role in the public sphere and there were very limited ways in which women of her time could engage with the world outside the home.

Sometimes when I read about the lives of 19th and early 20th century feminists I am offended by how culturally condescending they were to aboriginal people or people from far away countries that they made it their business to 'save'. The so called 'Famous Five' women of Canada, who were trailblazers in getting women the vote in Canada, also campaigned for eugenics and the forced sterilization of 'unfit' people. They were also against non-white immigration. They were also in favor of prohibition and against the evils of alcohol..etc. This was in the early part of the 20th century but from what I understand, in the latter half of the 19th century women organized around moral issues associated with church work if they organized at all. I guess 'saving' (colonizing) the Africans fell into that category of acceptable work that a middle class woman could do outside the home. Anyway, it was a way to escape the so called domestic sphere

[Theresa]

Lily wrote: "Okay, about enough of this for today, but let me slip in one of the illustrations for this week's sectioin:
"

thanks for all the interesting illustrations.

[Lily]

Theresa wrote: "...Anyway, it was a way to escape the so called domestic sphere ..."

What an article! Surprised myself to have not read something similar long ago, although certainly parts were already known. Thx, Theresa. (How do you add a link to text? I've never figured that one out.)

(And, yes, my eyes will let me start to put up last weeks pictures, although am unbalanced enough for while yet and am limiting online time. Glad you are enjoying. Hope you have a chance to read some of the background ebook on them.)

[Theresa]

Lily wrote: "How do you add a link to text? I've never figured that one out."

href="URL">link text<

With the hyperlink tag and closing tag before and after.

[Lily]

href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Separat..." >domestic sphere<

Help! that didn't work. I still don't understand! :-(

[Lily]

domestic sphere

That worked!

[Theresa]

as explained here