The Pickwick Club discussion
This topic is about
Dombey and Son
Dombey and Son
>
Dombey, Chapters 8 - 10
Everyman wrote: "Linda wrote: "And again, little Paul is not afraid to say what is on his mind. "Where does that come from? How did he get that way? Partly, perhaps, nature. But a significant part, I suggest, from Richards allowing, even encouraging, him to speak his mind, to become his own person.
..."
Didn't Richards get dismissed when Paul was about 6 months old?
It's hard to say how Paul had the courage to speak his mind like he does but perhaps he's not in the company of his father that much? From the few months with Richards, he was paraded in front of his father for an hour or so in the evenings. There wasn't a lot of closeness between them.
Of course, there's then a 5 year gap and we don't know if that changed as Paul got older.
I suspect that being alone with Florence and the servants in the Nursery, not having the influence of his father's more narrow thoughts & ideas, as well as his inner ponderings, have given him an independence that somehow allows him to speak his mind if he feels he is right.
Kim wrote: "Tristram wrote: "Knowing the story already but not wanting to be a bean-spiller, I'll just say here that Florence is going to be one of the major characters in the book..."I was wondering if you ..."
Well, it is hard, but I once got so upbraided - and rightly, I must confess - by the Chief Grump in here that from that moment on I made sure to keep an eye on not giving anything away.
Kate wrote: "I felt so sorry for Paul with the comment that Dombey would swap him for another son, because of his health. It tells me that Dombey see everything only as a commodity. Any son would do. The personality is negligible. "Kate, I must have overread that passage. Would you mind telling me in which chapter you found it?
Kim wrote: "Dickens told John Forster that Mrs. Pipchin in Dombey was modeled after somebody he had relations with in his own life. On November 4, 1846, he tells Forster,“I hope you like Mrs. Pipchin’s es..."
Thank you, Kim, for finding these passages. Dickens words about himself as a little boy, inexperienced, reduced to poverty and left alone by his family at an age when he needed his parents, really gave me a shudder ... It's probably through his books that Dickens managed to cope with some of his bleakest childhood memories.
I'd like to point out a passage at the beginning of Chapter 8, which shows something about Mr. Dombey's relationship towards his son. First the narrator enlarges on Paul's frail state of health and Mr. Dombey's reflexions on it, e.g. his wish to be able to employ somebody to go through all these diseases for Paul, and then there's this,"But as this was not feasible, he merely wondered, in his haughty manner, now and then, what Nature meant by it; and comforted himself with the reflection that there was another milestone passed upon the road, and that the great end of the journey lay so much the nearer. For the feeling uppermost in his mind, now and constantly intensifying, and increasing in it as Paul grew older, was impatience. Impatience for the time to come, when his visions of their united consequence and grandeur would be triumphantly realized."
Here we see that Mr. Dombey is so obsessed with the role his Son is going to play in his business one day that he is incapable of enjoying the present time with little Paul. I might have overread this passage seven years ago, but now as a father it really strikes me as bewildering and bemusing because I often look at my little daughter and feel glee and happiness about her being so little still. Yes, she may cause nocturnal disturbance and also havoc in the kitchen, but it is so enjoyable to have her fall asleep on my shoulder while I am reading passages from Dickens to her. It gives me a pang to think that in some years my son and my daughter will be teenagers and will thus have become my natural enemies ;-)
Tristam, that struck me too, a few times already. Dombey is living in the future while his son & daughter are living in the now and all of them are missing the benefits of merely being with one another. Dombey doesn't know what he's missing. He has 2 good children who would love to love him wholeheartedly. I feel sorry for him. I don't think he's a cruel person at heart; just so cold & distant, as well as goal-orientated (for Paul) that he misses out on the Present, which is all we have really.
Tristram wrote: "Here we see that Mr. Dombey is so obsessed with the role his Son is going to play in his business one day that he is incapable of enjoying the present time with little Paul......now as a father it really strikes me as bewildering and bemusing because I often look at my little daughter and feel glee and happiness about her being so little still."I agree completely with you here. This passage really struck me with sadness when I read it.
Petra wrote: "Tristam, that struck me too, a few times already. Dombey is living in the future while his son & daughter are living in the now and all of them are missing the benefits of merely being with one ano..."Excellent points.
One does feel sorry for the children, but this wasn't that unusual for the time, if my reading of Victorian times is correct.
Tristram wrote: "Kate wrote: "I felt so sorry for Paul with the comment that Dombey would swap him for another son, because of his health. It tells me that Dombey see everything only as a commodity. Any son would d..."Hi Tristram. I'm sure I read it in chapter 8 but for the life of me I can't find it! I'm wondering, perhaps, in my dozing state, I misread it. Often I nod off whilst reading since at the moment I mainly read before going to sleep. Lol.
KateWhat? Dickens and doze in the same sentence. Surely that is an oxymoron! [g]
Peter wrote: "KateWhat? Dickens and doze in the same sentence. Surely that is an oxymoron! [g]"
I know! I'm bad, but am so eager to read that I literally do read until I'm asleep with the book still in my hand. LOL.
I'm also not rereading, Pip, but I sort of wish I were as the comments are so interesting. Yes Kate, I also doze off, even with Dickens, and not necessarily last thing at night!I love little Paul AND Florence. I just question how such a character as Dombey managed to spawn such lovely children!
Hilary wrote: "I love little Paul AND Florence. I just question how such a character as Dombey managed to spawn such lovely children! ..."
I think all children are born innocent (except for, perhaps, a few that turn out to be complete sociopaths/psychopaths) and, therefore, as lovely as Florence & Paul. It's experiences and personal interpretations of events that cause understanding that form the final outlook on life.
Florence & Paul have, so far, lived a pretty privileged life. Their father is cold but he's also distant so his influence on their thinking processes wouldn't be that large (yet). Servants would most likely, I think, be more grounded and realistic in their outlooks because of their lack of privilege. They've got to know the world in a more realistic manner than Dombey and the rich do.
Until now, Florence & Paul have been in daily contact more with servants than their father and their father's business is kept far away from their home (no contact with this at all), so their views would most likely be more along the lines of what/how the servants think about life.
I think it's rather realistic and possible for Florence and Paul to remain innocent and lovely so far. Things may change as they get older, Dombey spends more time with them (or at least with Paul) and they start to venture out more into the world of Business. That's when their views may change, I think.
Hi Petra! So I take it that you're on the side of nurture in the nurture v nature debate. I like to believe so too. Unfortunately genetics can sometimes 'get in the way' either positively or negatively. We have four children, all of whom have been brought up by us in what we hope is a similar way. They couldn't be more different from one another, though in lovely ways. Then again that may be purely a mother's bias!
Hilary, I'm kind of in the middle of the argument.I believe we're all born as some sort of individual with our unique way of interpreting and believing (Nature).
Our experiences growing up are just that. Experiences are unique to each of us because of how we interpret and believe what we're experiencing (Nature again but with a twist of nurture).
Therefore, Florence and Paul are born with a unique way of looking at things and interpreting them. Their experiences, so far, are rather limited to their nursery and household, which consists of servants' points of views and a cold father. They both seem to be interpreting this as a sad situation they would like to change but are powerless to and their beliefs/viewpoints have been formed by what they hear the servants talk about, which leads to the information they gather and have to interpret for themselves. How they interpret that info makes them what/who they are. So far, it appears that they interpret things in a gentle, kind way.
Children are different, with the same upbringing, because of personality. Some are more open, some timid, etc. But, how do they think and interpret beliefs and morals, etc? These are the things that nurture may have more influence on (unless, as stated above, a true sociopath/psychopath is born).
So, I'm not sure where exactly I stand but I think it's somewhere in the middle with both the nature of the child and the nurturing of the child working together over the years.
Hilary wrote: "I'm also not rereading, Pip, but I sort of wish I were as the comments are so interesting. Yes Kate, I also doze off, even with Dickens, and not necessarily last thing at night!I love little Pau..."
I agree Hilary. They obviously acquired their mother's qualities. Poor little mites.
Well, now, we don't know what Dombey was like years earlier. He may have been born with many of the sweet qualities of Paul and Florence, but had them beaten (physically, or emotionally, or both) by a father who had to shape him into the then Son of Dombey and Son. I don't see him as deliberately unkind, but more as a man who his role in life shaped to be a certain way from his birth. Who knows. Maybe Paul, when he's 40, will have become a carbon copy of his father.
Everyman wrote: "Well, now, we don't know what Dombey was like years earlier. He may have been born with many of the sweet qualities of Paul and Florence, but had them beaten (physically, or emotionally, or both) ..."True. I agree too, that Dombey is not purposefully being cold, he probably just doesn't know how to show affection and to consider anything outside of his business. There are people like that today. Sad but true.
Kate wrote: "Tristram wrote: "Kate wrote: "I felt so sorry for Paul with the comment that Dombey would swap him for another son, because of his health. It tells me that Dombey see everything only as a commodity..."Hi Kate,
maybe you were referring to this passage here:
"He had settled, within himself, that the child must necessarily pass through a certain routine of minor maladies, and that the sooner he did so the better. If he could have bought him off, or provided a substitute, as in the case of an unlucky drawing for the militia, he would have been glad to do so, on liberal terms. But as this was not feasible, he merely wondered, in his haughty manner, now and then, what Nature meant by it; and comforted himself with the reflection that there was another milestone passed upon the road, and that the great end of the journey lay so much the nearer."
I, at first, also tended to misunderstand it, but on second reading it became clear to me that Dombey did not want to exchange his son for somebody else but employ somebody else to go through all those sicknesses and diseases for Paul - because after all, they are not something a Dombey should be bothered with.
I also sometimes doze off when reading, but that's not due to Dickens but to a little wonderful girl who sometimes keeps us awake at night ;-) So don't worry.
Hi Everyman, it's true that there are probably countless reasons as to why Dombey is the way he is. I also do believe that people can choose to make the best of the hand that they've been dealt. Certainly, I'm glad that he wasn't my father ...
Tristram wrote: "Kate wrote: "Tristram wrote: "Kate wrote: "I felt so sorry for Paul with the comment that Dombey would swap him for another son, because of his health. It tells me that Dombey see everything only a..."Ah, yes, I think that's where I get that impression from Tristram. Thank you! Yes, upon reading it again, I agree with your translation of it is. Sometimes, when tired, its so easy to misunderstand what Dickens is getting at. LOL!
I could blame my children too, but (un)fortunately they both sleep so well. Plus I know they have my problem, as I often go into their rooms to turn off their lights at night, to find them asleep with a book in their hands. :)
Awh, that's so cute, Kate! :)
Kate wrote: "Tristram wrote: "Kate wrote: "Tristram wrote: "Kate wrote: "I felt so sorry for Paul with the comment that Dombey would swap him for another son, because of his health. It tells me that Dombey see ..."I like the idea of blaming one's children, Kate. After all there's a whole branch of psychology founded of the concept of blaming the parents ;-)
I actually do blame a lot of things on my one-year-old daughter since she is not old enough to give counter-evidence. So when my wife asks me, for instance, who ate all the cookies or who mixed up the figures for the tax computation, I always and invariably say, "It was the lassie."
Tristram wrote: "Kate wrote: "Tristram wrote: "Kate wrote: "Tristram wrote: "Kate wrote: "I felt so sorry for Paul with the comment that Dombey would swap him for another son, because of his health. It tells me tha..."Lol. Good luck with that when your daughter finds her words, Tristram. I think she'll have something to say about that.
So evil, Tristram, but yet so logical. :-}
Hilary wrote: "Hi Everyman, it's true that there are probably countless reasons as to why Dombey is the way he is. I also do believe that people can choose to make the best of the hand that they've been dealt. Certainly, I'm glad that he wasn't my father ... ..."Actually, there was a lot of him in my father, who was raised in England by frequently absent parents (who were medical missionaries in China). There was more love there, certainly, than in Dombey and Paul, but also the emotional distance of middle class England in the WWI years and shortly after. Stiff upper lip and all that was not merely a saying.
Tristram wrote: "I actually do blame a lot of things on my one-year-old daughter since she is not old enough to give counter-evidence. "Yes, you would.
[g]
I remember that my Grandma told me once that there was a lot of formality in her family. She even had to call her parents "Sie" instead of "Du", and had to use the formal "Mutter", "Vater" instead of "Mama", "Papa". She was also one of those people who could never really show affection but hid it behind roughness and irony.
Everyman, that's fascinating about your father and grandparents. It's true that in those times there was a much more just-get-on-with-it/ pull-yourself-together attitude or as you say stiff upper lip. Imagine what they would make of the numbers of people who depend on counselling and therapy nowadays.One of my cousins, who is a real home bird married a man whose job involved living in many different parts of the world. She invariably accompanied him where possible or flew out long distance every three weeks to see him. Their children were all sent off to schools in England at age 8. I know that this is still normal practice in some English families, but it happens rarely in Ireland; certainly not at such a young age. I could never understand how my cousin came to terms with her children leaving at such a young age. She is such an affectionate and loving mother. They are all grown up now and appear to have experienced no harmful side effects, but for a time I sensed that my cousin was pining her life away. Very difficult!
Oh dear, Tristram, how difficult that must have been for your grandmother. I suppose that she didn't question it at the time, but thank goodness we've moved on from that, in general. Now, displays of affection are more common than not; well, in my experience anyhow. :)
Sometimtes, there's too much emotion in certain situations, and I usually prefer to tone it down with some ironic understatement or absurdity. Maybe the heritage of my dear old grandmother ;-)
I have a husband who adopts similar tactics!
Hilary wrote: "I have a husband who adopts similar tactics!"Give him my regards! ;-)
Haha, I shall. Perhaps he could learn from you. ;-)
I just came across this painting by Harold Copping. Copping was a British artist best known as an illustrator of Biblical scenes. His 1910 book The Copping Bible illustrated by himself became a best-seller. The painting here is of the scene in Chapter 9 (which is why I'm putting it here), in the chapter Captain Cuttle attempts to bail Sol Gills of out a debt of "three hundred and seventy odd" pounds. According to what I read on the Victorian web:"As in Phiz's original, in Copping's illustration a dejected Sol Gills sits downcast in his chair, his glasses sitting on his forehead and below his grey Welsh wig, while Walter attempts to comfort him. The bulk of the Captain in blue and white dominates the rosey-hued room and squeezes the uncle and nephew out of the frame, as if to suggest the process whereby all too often in Dickens's novels the minor comic characters crowd the pallid principals out of the mind's eye. Missing, probably because they would have disturbed this focus and cluttered the scene, are Sol's footstool and Mr. Brogley. Further, whereas Phiz has exaggerated the Captain's red nose and girth, Copping has made him less of a caricature and a more individualized character, his gaze directed at his constant companion, the old silver pocket-watch, rather than (as in Phiz's plate) Sol Gills, the object of selfless philanthropy."
What I really like about that painting, Kim, is that, for once, Captain Cuttle is in his hat - as Dickens said he usually is. As to Sol Gills in the background, I thought I could gather from the text that he was more one the portly side.
Tristram wrote: "What I really like about that painting, Kim, is that, for once, Captain Cuttle is in his hat - as Dickens said he usually is. As to Sol Gills in the background, I thought I could gather from the te..."I also did not picture Sol Gills the way this artist has him painted. He reminds me of grandfather from TOCS, maybe the boy could be Oliver Twist another of your favorites.
Oh at last, Cuttle in his hat has shown up, but the background keeps disappearing ... NEED my laptop back ... Missing so much!
Maybe you'll be able to see this one better, it's from an unknown illustrator.
Captain Cuttle: "Uncle much hove down, Wal'r?" inquired the Captain
Unidentified illustrator - approx. 1912
Here is Brown's extra illustration of Paul:
Thanks so much, Kim! These are great! :)
Kim wrote: "Tristram wrote: "What I really like about that painting, Kim, is that, for once, Captain Cuttle is in his hat - as Dickens said he usually is. As to Sol Gills in the background, I thought I could g..."No, Kim, this can't be Oliver Twist. Remember the proboscis Cruikshank gave Oliver?
Kim wrote: "Maybe you'll be able to see this one better, it's from an unknown illustrator.Captain Cuttle: "Uncle much hove down, Wal'r?" inquired the Captain
Unidentified illustrator - approx. 1912"
This is a brilliant illustration: The Captain has a very lifelike face and is not reduced to a caricature.
Tristram wrote: "Remember the proboscis Cruikshank gave Oliver?" Proboscis? Where do you find these words? Do you have a book of English words that no one has ever actually used before? Thanks to you I once again had to go searching for a word and I find the word proboscis will never be one of my favorite words. Here is the definition:
"the nose of a mammal, especially when it is long and mobile, such as the trunk of an elephant or the snout of a tapir.
•Entomology
(in many insects) an elongated sucking mouthpart that is typically tubular and flexible.
•Zoology
(in some worms) an extensible tubular sucking organ."
See, there is nothing good about this word, we either have a long and mobile snout, an elongated sucking mouthpart or a worm's sucking organ. Then, of course, there is the word "tapir" so I'm thinking, what in the world is a tapir and here it is:
Wherever these things are from I'm glad it isn't Pennsylvania. Here's poor Oliver for you.
Kim wrote: "Proboscis? Where do you find these words? Do you have a book of English words that no one has ever actually used before? "The better question is what sort of school you went to that you never read any books with real vocabulary in them. I probably read or used proboscis dozens of times before I was out of high school.
I love the word proboscis. And I think the tapir is rather cute. :)
Thanks again, Kim, for uploading those photos. Now if you take a look at Oliver and the tapir, you will definitely notice some likeness as to their respective noses, or should I rather say probosces? It's probably because Oliver is snivelling all the time.As to the word "proboscis" itself, it was probably one of the first words I ever learnt of the English language, along with such favourites as "serendipity", "pusillanimity", "halitosis" and "echinite". It took me years before I could lead a halfways sensible conversation with anyone ;-)
Tristram wrote: "As to the word "proboscis" itself, it was probably one of the first words I ever learnt of the English language, along with such favourites as "serendipity", "pusillanimity", "halitosis" and "echinite."Those are the first words you learnt in English? What about: if, and, the, you, see, but, you know nice simple words. Oh, here are a few more: Christmas, Santa Claus, snow, Merry, etc.
Everyman wrote: "I probably read or used proboscis dozens of times before I was out of high school. ..."Figures.
I bet you had to walk ten miles to get there too, in the snow, up hill, both ways. I heard all that when I was your age stuff from my dad long ago.
Which, if I recall my biography correctly, is what Dickens endured in the little formal schooling he had.
I don..."
Charles Kingsley's portrayal of school was also not very flattering. Rather than wondering how many Victorian novels portray schools as horrid, squalid places with corporal punishment as dessert each day it would be interesting to think of novels that present school, or a governess's experiences, as positive and enjoyable. Having just finished Agnes Grey we have yet another novel of horrid children tormenting a governess.
It makes one wonder how it was that so many inventions, innovations and creative people flourished in the Victorian times if the existing fragmented, unregulated educational system was as bad as it is depicted by so many diverse novelists.