Georgette Heyer Fans discussion
This topic is about
The Foundling
Group Reads
>
The Foundling Feb 2022 Group Read SPOILERS thread
date
newest »
newest »
Susan, goodreads wasn't giving notifications for a good three days or so, but they seem to be back now.
Critterbee❇ wrote: "Susan, goodreads wasn't giving notifications for a good three days or so, but they seem to be back now."Thanks, I just looked and have 19 notifications! Don’t recall that ever happening…I saw everyone commenting on this yesterday, but sorted through my notifications, so was shocked to find this many today! I guess everyone is playing catch up.
I'll start a new thread about the feed to make it easier to find for other members.Goodreads is a tricky site to negotiate!
I've removed a few posts from here & put them in this thread.https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/...
If anyone is having trouble with Goodreads if they could post there please. :)
Mod
This is a bit of a problem for me, honestly: because Liversedge is a villain, but he is portrayed as a lovable rascal and gets away scot-free at the end.
I know criminals almost always do get away with it in GH (except in The Tollgate (view spoiler)!) because the main characters are anxious to avoid scandal; but Liversedge walks away practically without a stain on his character. Exploiting Belinda, without a thought for her welfare (taking her away from her apprenticeship, which at least was a steady job and a home, failing which her only option but for Gilly would have been prostitution), blackmailing Matthew and conspiring to murder Gilly - all these are, frankly, wicked, and we are drawn into brushing them aside because, you know, good old Swithin, he's such a character, isn't he, ha ha.
I do love The Foundling and count it among my favourites for many reasons, but I do find this deeply disturbing. It makes me feel morally contaminated, because it's so well done that I do find myself, like Gilly, rather liking and sympathising with Liversedge and overlooking his appalling behaviour. But 'lovable rascals' do get away with things in real life (think of Jimmy Saville and try not to think of any particular politician) and I'm very uneasy about it.
I really dislike Liversedge, and what looks like his sociopathy to me. There does need to be a villain in the story, but I also dislike that he does not get his own back in the end! I don't find anything really likable in that character. Maybe that portrayal was more an example of Gilly being so forgiving, even to those undeserving. It would not have really detracted from the story if Liversedge had some nice, symmetrical, fitting end. Imprisonment? Maybe, but then, oh, no, the scandal! haha
Or maybe being found by an old, wronged employer who was determined to get him to work to the bone to make up for his actions? Much more interesting and likely than if he had a change of heart and mended his ways.
The only GH book I can think of where the villain gets his comeuppance in a legal way is (view spoiler)As always, the treatment of the villain is a weakness, but at least Gilly burns down his domicile & Gideon strangles him.
I'm reading a Dorothy L. Sayers which also has a (painfully drawn out) reluctance to seek a remedy to some crimes through the police. Was this really a prevalent view amongst the upper classes in Sayers & GH's era? Or a convenient literary device?
Carol She's So Novel꧁꧂ wrote: "The only GH book I can think of where the villain gets his comeuppance in a legal way is [spoilers removed]As always, the treatment of the villain is a weakness, but at least Gilly burns down his..."
I wonder…they always clutch their pearls or cravats, and natter on about “the scandal” of being involved with the police!
Carol She's So Novel꧁꧂ wrote: "The only GH book I can think of where the villain gets his comeuppance in a legal way is [spoilers removed]As always, the treatment of the villain is a weakness, but at least Gilly burns down his..."
Maybe our police chiefs have been reading Heyer too, and so as a result have developed a new style of "reluctant to do anything" ; "just observe"- referring to Wellington protest. :)
Carol She's So Novel꧁꧂ wrote: "As always, the treatment of the villain is a weakness, but at least Gilly burns down his domicile & Gideon strangles him..."oh that is hilarious! and true
Regarding Dorothy Sayers and Golden Age mysteries, my sense has always been that the forgiveness extends mostly to the gentleman and gentlewoman characters, not to lower-class folks. As for Liversedge and Regency criminals in general, the penalties for even minor crimes like shoplifting was so draconian—deportation or death—and the state of the prisons so disgusting and even deadly (especially for those who didn’t have bribery money) that I can understand why British people developed a level of reluctance to bring anyone to justice who could be seen as having any spark of humanity.
Carol She's So Novel꧁꧂ wrote: "Was this really a prevalent view amongst the upper classes in Sayers & GH's era? Or a convenient literary device?"I suspect a bit of both. Regarding putting the family's well-being (including reputation) above punishing the criminal, I can see that being a prevalent view, and not just among the upper classes. Middle and respectable working class also had reputation (and possibly other things, like money if they had to fund some kind of private prosecution) to lose. I wouldn't be at all surprised if the same sort of approach happened today - I've certainly heard of criminal acts that never went to the police to protect the victim, or even to give the criminal a second chance, although there are other possible motives, like fear. And I suspect that the development of the idea that the police would handle crime was slow, and it definitely was later than we sometimes think. The first official police force in the UK was, according to Google, founded in Glasgow in 1800. It could also be a plot device, of course. in this case, I'm with those who think Liversedge should have been punished in accordance to the law -- hanged, or at least imprisoned for a lengthy time. I don't think he has any redeeming qualities.
No redeeming qualities? But he's an excellent Butler! Sure, he was willing to have Gilly killed, but you know how hard it is to get good staff. But, when I'm reading the book Gilly's "I"m in his debt" good-natured attitude toward him seems to make sense due to Heyer's skill.
Jackie wrote: "No redeeming qualities? But he's an excellent Butler! Sure, he was willing to have Gilly killed, but you know how hard it is to get good staff. "
Hahahaha!
Gilly forgiving Liversedge seems in character to me, especially given your comment Abigail. What didn’t make sense to me was that they’d have him acting in any sort of capacity within the household. Knowing what he was capable of, any sense of self-preservation would surely have them put Liversedge at as much distance as possible!
Mod
Especially given the access a servant has to their employers' private lives and that Liversedge is a blackmailer!
Jackie wrote: "No redeeming qualities? But he's an excellent Butler! Sure, he was willing to have Gilly killed, but you know how hard it is to get good staff. But, when I'm reading the book Gilly's "I"m in his ..."
AH, Jackie, lol!
Jackie wrote: "No redeeming qualities? But he's an excellent Butler! Sure, he was willing to have Gilly killed, but you know how hard it is to get good staff. But, when I'm reading the book Gilly's "I"m in his ..."
LOL!! Yes, Heyer makes it sound almost reasonable, but honestly, I'd bet in less than six months as a butler, Liversedge will have gotten involved in another of his get-rich-quick schemes, funded by Gilly's silverware, probably, and if he was caught, he'd claim that he was just "borrowing" the valuables to "invest" on Gilly's behalf!
As villainous as Liversedge may be, I confess I don't like the thought of him being hanged--which would doubtless be his fate if he were convicted of kidnapping Gilly.
I'm not quite done yet but I have a lot to say so I'll start now and come back.Does anyone really believe that a puny, sickly 7 months child could survive? Supposedly George III was a7 months child so maybe?
Poor Gilly! He's miserable and hemmed in. His uncle is Duke and Father in all but official name and treats Gilly like a child. Gilly is almost 25 and when he tries to assert himself, his uncle dismisses Gilly's concerns and says older and wiser heads know best, your agent will take care of everything, don't worry. Gilly genuinely wants to make a change for good so we're left wondering at this point if Uncle Lionel is siphoning off the estate or something, which we soon learn he's not. The servants who have known him since he was a child refuse to let Gilly grow up and the newcomers just accept whatever directions Gilly has for them but secretly see what is going on and root for the young Duke. It's impossible for Gilly to become a man.
That marriage proposal was so awkward for both of them. We end up seeing two people who are so suited for each other but the older adults in charge nearly ruined this great relationship. Who knew Gilly had a sense of humor? Harriet falls right in with it and doesn't bat an eyelash. I'm sooo happy Gilly sees Belinda as a child.
Having the responsibility of two young people and even trying to help Matt shows Gilly how hard it is to be an adult responsible for younger people. Sometimes you don't make the right choices no matter how hard you try.
Belinda... she may be beautiful but that lack of brain is going to get her into trouble. I didn't like the underlying sexism/elitism- Belinda is a beautiful, empty-headed foundling and therefore must be a lightskirt yet Harriet's mother encourages Harriet to be an empty-headed beautiful ornament, compliant with whatever the men say.
I can't stand young Tom. He needs to be punished and not rewarded. The highwayman stunt, shooting the random Pug dog and generally causing mayhem wherever he goes gets rewarded by giving him what he wants. I'll forgive the backwards race, that was innocent boyish fun but the rest was deliberate.
It's disturbing how quickly Liversedge goes from comical villain to evil, dangerous criminal. I, too, am bothered by how he gets off just because Gilly feels embarassed about being taken in by a child's trick and because Gilly had the time of his life. What happened to the highwayman who was Gilly's prisoner? I found it interesting how the people in the village readily accepted Gilly's tale because they seemed aware of the villains in the seedy inn. If everyone knows about this place then why doesn't someone do something to get Bow Street to come after the criminals? That small section of the story doesn't seem to fit the story.
Now, the search for Belinda's swain begins in earnest. I forsee Lord Gaywood causing a lot of trouble.
Does anyone really believe that a puny, sickly 7 months child could survive? Supposedly George III was a7 months child so maybe?Oh, yes. The odds were against the survival of very weak and premature babies in the past, but that doesn't mean that none of them survived. Far more recently (1935), the Dionne quintuplets were born prematurely to a poor family (they had a doctor and midwives, but no modern technology) and at very low birth weights. They all survived, although it was admittedly considered something of a miracle. I have no problem believing that 7 month babies, even fragile ones, sometimes survived.
Belinda - I always had a lot of sympathy for her. It was (and is) hard to have no family or other support at all while growing up, but it's a lot worse if you don't have the intelligence to figure out the world around you and worse again if you have something, like extraordinary beauty, that will tempt people to try to use you. She's so vulnerable. I was reminded slightly of a lovely but mentally challenged young woman I knew once - but she, at least, had family to protect and support her. Belinda doesn't, and doesn't have the judgement to work out her apprenticeship rather than go off with a sleazy stranger. I didn't see a parallel with Harriet's mother's views - yes, she wants her daughter to be appealing in the way that was fashionable at the time, but her daughter is not as vulnerable as Belinda. She has family behind her, her beauty isn't as extreme, and she's far more intelligent. That allows her to make choices that Belinda can't make. I guess I'm looking more at the individual level. Tom does go way beyond the bounds of decent behaviour, although he's not as bad as Liversedge (a low standard, I know!) It doesn't really bother me that the villagers didn't call in Bow Street to clear out the villains. Villagers (or, well, any smallish cohesive group) tend to tolerate their own, especially if their own villains mostly prey on each other or outsiders. Look at the people who ignore violent crime among gangs of drug dealers in our own cities, sometimes passing off the reports with some comment about how they're only killing each other! And I don't think policing in general or Bow Street in particular tended to be called in to handle local crime in villages at that period.
I finished the book last night.Lord Gaywood is stupid and nasty. He's another minor villanous character. He is another who doesn't respect Gilly and bulldozes over Gilly's wishes doubting the truth of Gilly's words. Gilly is a gentleman and a Duke, above Lord Gaywood and therefore, Gilly's word should be honored. ALSO Gilly is engaged to Lord Gaywood's sister and I would think risking angering one's future brother-in-law would not be on one's best interest. I foresee he would become another gambling brother in a sequel subplot.
Harriet is lovely, intelligent and fully trusts Gilly. She's smart enough and old enough to know she doesn't have to but she does. She has a good heart and wants to help Belinda, knowing there's a thin line between their situations. I disagree that Belinda doesn't have the capacity to fully love someone else. How can she even know what love is when she's never been shown love before? Mrs. Mudgley understands that and has sympathy for Belinda. I think Belinda just lives in the moment. She doesn't really know what she needs to be fulfilled because she's never had it. I hope Mr. Mudgley continues to love her unconditionally and doesn't just love the idea of her beauty and innocence.
I want another chapter or two to see Gilly and Harriet's honeymoon in Paris. I think the pair will have fun away from their overbearing relatives. Maybe they can take Dowager Lady Ampleforth with them. She's a character and deserves more scenes! I love the elderly dowagers who say what they want and everyone lets them. I feel sorry for the Victorian ladies caught up in the excessive morality of the age. Harriet is in-between but it sounds like her mother leans in the excessive Victorian direction. Harriet will learn to be more like her grandmother but with more tact.
Mod
I think of the three books with the same plot structure, only (view spoiler) really carries this off, because there the hero and his lady are actually thrown into each other's company for some time. With this one, the lady is off-stage for most of the book and they only see each other at the end for - what? a couple of days?
Jenny wrote: "Do you think we - or Gilly for that matter - really see enough of Harriet to explain how Gilly's adventures mend their relationship? Yes, she is very obliging in falling in with his plans, but why ..."I tend to agree , though glossed over it because I enjoy the book so much, The other GH you mention is much more believable , a very sweet bucolic interlude in fact .
The reluctance of the upper class types in GH novels and others like Agatha Christie etc bothers me bit too, but not nearly so much as their appalling attitude to them when they are called in ( I'm speaking of the mystery novels here really ) ,openly regarding police arrival on murder scenes as an unwarranted and boorish intrusion into their lives. Misleading, obfuscation, hiding evidence and outright lying are standard behaviours !
Jenny wrote: "Do you think we - or Gilly for that matter - really see enough of Harriet to explain how Gilly's adventures mend their relationship? Yes, she is very obliging in falling in with his plans, but why ..."My understanding of their relationship is that they have been friends from childhood on, and been in love for a while without calling it that. The unfortunate proposal is only an interlude where the influence of the towering "adults" almost estranges them. They would have married and probably, over time, found out that they were made for each other even without Gilly's adventures and Harriet's part in them. But of course, it's better this way. Harriet also finds out that she can take independent action and has a lot of commonsense to rely on. In a sense, their development in the story is parallel so that they suit - again - very well in the end. In my view it's not the usual "falling in love" trope of romance, but rather the realization of having been in love all the time.
sabagrey wrote: "My understanding of their relationship is that they have been friends from childhood on, and been in love for a while without calling it that. The unfortunate proposal is only an interlude where the influence of the towering "adults" almost estranges them. They would have married and probably, over time, found out that they were made for each other even without Gilly's adventures and Harriet's part in them. But of course, it's better this way. Harriet also finds out that she can take independent action and has a lot of commonsense to rely on. In a sense, their development in the story is parallel so that they suit - again - very well in the end. In my view it's not the usual "falling in love" trope of romance, but rather the realization of having been in love all the time.."I agree. They were friends and Harriet is someone Gilly knows he can rely on and she won't judge him or push him to be someone he's not. She knows he will do the same for her. They share a sense of humor and a sense of honor and decency. It takes Gilly's adventure for him to see himself as a man and thus, Harriet as a woman worthy of him. He saw himself as a boy forced to propose when he really wasn't ready and Harriet saw herself as being forced to accept the hand of someone she admired but wasn't ready to marry and she didn't like it. Left alone, they "rub along" well and can see each other as they really are.
really excellent posts, folks, I'm enjoying these ideas.
Mod
That's a very good point! I'd never thought of that, but up to now Gilly has always been on the receiving end of other people's 'parenting', hasn't he? Having to be responsible for two younger people himself is part of what makes him grow up, or maybe just acknowledge that he's grown up.
I'm enjoying the posts in this thread as well. Such great analysis of the book! Thank you!
I haven't been able to read along, but I'm really enjoying the posts. The Foundling was one of the Heyer novels that left me quite nonplussed, perplexed, and even vexed when I first read it in my teens. I wanted romance, I thought the name of Heyer warranted romance, and where was it? The Foundling is more of an adventure novel, a bit picaresque, not at all what I'd expected.Now that I'm an older and a wiser woman, I know how to enjoy it ;-).
Elizabeth, I find my tastes are so different now. I first loved Devil's Cub as a teenager but now that I'm 60 I really prefer a different hero and heroine. The romance here is very sweet and I like how sabagray put it: They would have married and probably, over time, found out that they were made for each other even without Gilly's adventures and Harriet's part in them. But of course, it's better this way. Harriet also finds out that she can take independent action and has a lot of commonsense to rely on. In a sense, their development in the story is parallel so that they suit - again - very well in the end. In my view it's not the usual "falling in love" trope of romance, but rather the realization of having been in love all the time
Finished this late last night, on time ;) Here is my review:My 31st Heyer book. I squeaked this in as a February read for the monthly group read and stayed up way too late to finish it.
Brilliantly written. Not quite a romance, although I enjoyed the bits of romance that were in it. It's about someone learning to deal with the world alone and stand up for himself. The Duke of Sale is coddled excessively because he was a sickly orphan child and by 24 years old, has had enough, and goes "adventuring". His adventuring turns into all sorts of "scrapes", the worst being getting kidnapped and ransomed.
He's not my favourite GH hero, obviously (not tall, not handsome, not ridiculously self-confident, although extremely rich), but it was still a good read, and I appreciated reading something different. Heyer is a genius at writing the Regency. Everything was described so well that I could picture it clearly. Lots of nuggets of information. And such gold one-liners - she is worth reading just for those.
I was a little annoyed at the end, though, when he decided he'd rather be a Duke after all with his plenty of servants to take care of everything for him. Wouldn't we all! Plus, he was never short of money, so really, he didn't experience real life for most people during that time.
Yes, I’d put this in my top five too. Gilly’s relationships with everyone were so beautifully done. A very unique hero. Able to overcome whatever was thrown at him with a combination of calm, and his natural sweetness and courtesy. Occasionally, coincidence gave a helping hand, but on the whole, he learned to navigate the world on his own terms.