Brideshead Revisited
discussion
Lady Marchmain?
date
newest »


She wants people to believe she is a victim, and she probably earnestly believes she is one. Yetit is her own behavior, her need to manipulate and dominate people, which makes her family end up loathing her and abandoning her.






I'm not a Roman Catholic, just a mere Protestant, but I recognize Lady M as some of the older RC womn I knew years ago - more devoted to church than to family (let alone husband). I remember how hurt some of their children were that they could never be more important than Mary to their mothers. One schoolmate who had a mother who had 'heard the call' told me in later years that if it hadn't been for a special teacher we both had, he would never have known what a mother's love could be like.
Lady M isn't a bitch or a manipulator. She is a sincere Child of the One True God, and we cannot know if she is right or wrong - only eternity will tell. What she should NOT have tried to be was a wife or mother.





Lady Marchmain has already suffered, Terry, even before her agonizing death. She has lost three beloved brothers in WWI, she is abandoned by her husband after the war, she has a daughter who enters a misalliance, and a son who is an alcoholic. If any of you have been around an advanced alcoholic, you know that *nothing* is going to stop it, short of the absolute will of the alcoholic him/herself. If you're a spouse or parent, you go crazy trying to "fix" the situation, or at least go crazy trying to limit it. You can't.
Lady Marchmain has control-freak tendencies that probably fell within the range of normal, but go way out of orbit with a situation she will never be able to remedy. This is the source of her suffering. She tries to control what is not in her control.
This is her fatal flaw. This is her cross. This is why someone in the book calls her saintly, but not a saint. She suffers *enormously.* If you've been a parent, you can see that. Certainly her daughters see that in the end.

Lady Marchmain is very much a control freak who is helpless as she watches her children fall without being able to influence anything at all. She has taken refuge in her religion which is probably the only comfort she can find after all that has happened in her life. And yes she has suffered tremendously and, being a control freak, can never let go. In the end, she dies in pain, a reflection of the pain she caused others but mostly, the pain she herself endured.



Far from offering her "comfort," one could argue that her religion is the source of her suffering. Nancy Mitford wrote to Evelyn Waugh: "Are you or are you not on Lady Marchmain's side? I couldn't quite tell." Waugh replied: "No, I am not on her side. But God is, who suffers fools gladly." It's his book, after all, and presumably he knew what he was about.
Whether or not you agree with the religion, in the end Lady Marchmain "wins": she prayed for the conversion of her family circle and Charles, and after her death all of them, Sebastian, Julia, Lord Marchmain, and even Charles, converts (or "recommits," if you prefer).


Julia claims that she grew up being repeatedly told that she was "bad" and in turn she rebelled and made decisions that validated her mother's claim that she was "bad." Sebastian's emotional issues shows that he was adversely affected by this influence as well.
Perhaps it is naive to "blame the mother" but there has to be a source of all the emotional and psychological pain evident throughout the novel.
all discussions on this book |
post a new topic
To take one example, a lot of readers seem to side with Charles over her on the issue of Sebastian's alcoholism. Quite honestly, I don't see what is so appalling about a woman being concerned by her son's heavy drinking and in wanting to restrict his alcohol intake - it seems a perfectly natural, caring and common-sense approach to me. By contrast, I did actually think it very wrong of Charles to give Sebastian money to buy alcohol with - that is essentially enabling an alcoholic, it is NOT being a good friend or a sign of having his best interests at heart and, whilst she is perhaps a little over-the-top in her confrontation with him, my sympathies are entirely with Lady Marchmain at this point. I do not have any experience of dealing with alcoholics myself, thankfully, but I would hazard a guess that the best way to act is to try to control their drinking, not to endorse and encourage it, as Charles does in agreeing to give Sebastian money.
I understand one issue of the matter is that Lady M wants Sebastian to take over his uncle's position, rather than allowing him to live as he pleases, but, whilst it is of course unfair to expect him to live up to such a standard, again, what is so unforgiveable about parents wanting their grown-up children to take on adult responsibilities?
Let's be fair to Lady M - she's not perfect, yes, but I hardly think she's the monster some people make her out to be. I think it's right to give her a break and bear in mind that she has suffered the loss of her three younger brothers, been abandoned by her husband to raise four children single-handedly and then has to watch her son sink into alcoholism and turn against her and her daughter enter a sinful marriage with an unsuitable man. I think she is worthy more of sympathy than contempt.