Victorians! discussion
Archived Group Reads 2009-10
>
"Far From the Madding Crowd" Part 6: Chapters LXVIII-LVIL
date
newest »
newest »
I just watched that film Rochelle, my Mum said she loved the film from seeing it years back and recommended it to me. I was a little preoccupied with trying to figure out who the familiar actor playing Troy was - Terence Stamp right? He's so different in Priscilla - Queen of the Desert!
Stamp has been making films for 43 years, so his roles do vary.
To say the least! Lovely film though and as you say, a faithful adaption of the book.
Everyman wrote: "Although we are not quite, officially, at the time for discussion of Part VI, because things have been so quiet and because there is so much to talk about concerning not only the final chapters but..."
Since Boldwood never noticed Baths. or any other woman, in church, or in a non-business reltionship, I think that the valentine did push a button that had never beenpushed. However, as Victorian Dr. Freud pointed out, stimuli do not create obsessions, they merely bring them to the surface. If Baths. did not bring out this 'complex', someone or something else, might have.Troy did not deserve to 'die like a dog'. He should have been tried for his scams and rotted in prison where he might start to consider the consequences of his actions.
I do not think that anyone gets over their first love, because it defines our future experiences.
Now that we are in the waning days of this group read of Hardy's Far From the Madding Crowd, I wanted to share with you something that you may find of interest. In 1932, Virginia Woolf published her series of literary essays entitled, The Common Reader (Second Series). Chapter 21 of this brilliant collection is entitled, The Novels of Thomas Hardy; and was actually written very shortly after Hardy's death on January 11, 1928, at the age of 87. I most humbly encourage each of you to read this essay by Woolf. In my opinion, she 'nails' Hardy and his fiction, and specifically addresses the beautiful novel that we've just completed reading. [Note: Please do recall that we discussed early on that Woolf's father, Leslie Stephen, edited "Far From the Madding Crowd" as it was serialized in Cornhill Magazine]Here's the link to the essay--
http://ebooks.adelaide.edu.au/w/woolf...
I would love to hear your thoughts of Woolf's comments and opinions put forth in this essay.
Also, I want all of you to know that I have very much enjoyed our discussions associated with Far From the Madding Crowd, all of the other reads I've participated in, and all of my time here with the 'Victorians' group. My fondest hope is that some of you will leave this group read and these discussion threads on September 14th with a new-found love and sense of awareness for all things Thomas Hardy--including his other novels, his short stories, and his truly beautiful and powerful poetry.
My heart-felt and very best wishes to all of you, and I bid you all a very fond adieu! Cheers! Chris
Hmm. There is something infuriatingly patronising about Woolf's tone. ("He is book-learned in a home-made way" - what the hell does that mean?) She rather damns Hardy with faint praise, I feel. I am reminded of TS Eliot's disparagement of Elizabethan drama as an 'impure art'. I happen to be of the opinion that in the work of modernists like Woolf and Eliot there was something of a triumph of style over substance. In Hardy, as in real life, it is finally the substance that triumphs over the style. At one point in her essay, Woolf writes:"It is as if Hardy himself were not quite aware of what he did, as if his consciousness held more than he could produce, and he left it for his readers to make out his full meaning and to supplement it from their own experience."
I don't agree at all that the reader must, in some way, make up for Hardy's omissions, or that Hardy was unaware of what he was doing. If Henry James's pedantic over-explanation of every psychological twitch of his characters is more to Woolf's personal taste, fair enough, but I think that Hardy's work has stood the test of time far better than James or, for that matter, Woolf herself. When it boils down to it, this essay and its attitudes don't stand up to 21st century scrutiny half as well as Far From the Madding Crowd does!
Kathy wrote: "Hmm. There is something infuriatingly patronising about Woolf's tone. ("He is book-learned in a home-made way" - what the hell does that mean?) She rather damns Hardy with faint praise, I feel. ..."Well, Kathy, I find this quite fascinating. I do not interpret Woolf's essay as in any way shape or form as beating up on Hardy or his work, but that she is actually praising his work as some of the best of English fiction! Sure, Woolf notes that Hardy can be a little 'rough around the edges,' but that is part of what makes Hardy's so great, in her opinion. Her comparison to (or, more accurately, contrasting with) James is a case in point--from Woolf's perspective, I don't think that that comparison was as 'kind' to James or Flaubert as it was to Dickens, Scott, or Hardy. It was at the least certainly quite different. Based upon my interpretation of Woolf's comments on James, I'd say that she pretty much agrees with you, Kathy.
Her comment, that you refer to, that "He is book-learned in a home-made way" is simply a statement of fact, and I construed it as quite complimentary. Hardy completed his 'formal education by the age of 16, and was an autodidact for the rest of his life. I think Woolf is trying to say that it is precisely that quality that makes Hardy's achievements all the more remarkable and meaningful.
Personally, I find myself in large agreement with all that Woolf has put forward here. In essence, I see her essay as quite laudatory, and that it was an incredibly loving tribute to a great novelist--one whom Woolf obviously admired very, very much. In some respects, the essay almost reads as an elegy; which I think may have been some small part of Woolf's overall intent.
Of course, all of this is simply my interpretation and opinion. Cheers! Chris
Chris & Kathy, I read the linked essay too. This essay by Woolf was one that encourages you to offer your own distinct view, so I can understand Kathy's response. I feel Woolf offers some very sympathetic thoughts of Hardy's writing that I can relate to only having read one of his stories. Some of the essay really just seems to be Woolf enjoying her own philosophical voice though! It seemed an essay with so much of herself in it, in other words.I didn't really get the portion about the authors such as Dickens, as the Unconscious authors -- "lifted up and swept onwards."
I found interesting "[Hardy] is already possessed of the conviction that a novel is [not] an argument; it is a means of giving truthful if harsh and violent impressions of the lives of men and women." I wasn't sure if she was referring to Hardy's declaration of this somewhere though or if those were more her words.
Some of the pieces of the essay were so Woolf, as I mentioned above, that maybe I didn't follow along well in relation to Hardy "that halo of freshness and margin of the unexpressed which often produce the most profound sense of satisfaction." (?!?) And "His light does not fall directly upon the human heart. It passes over it and out on to the darkness of the heath..." (more ?!?)
I do say true that to Woolf seeing Hardy's men and women "enlarged and dignified." And her writing about his "tragic power." I also found myself nodding along with "to put aside the writer's conscious intention in favour of some deeper intention..."
I just concluded to myself a couple of things on this. Woolf, great though she may be, is still writing from a closer distance to Hardy's own time. Even when she mentions "styles" in literature, she can't mean the same things we mean when saying that in 2010. Her view of her own surroundings and Dorsetshire and the world would not compare to ours. When she mentions going back a generation to study Hardy... I am not sure she was convinced that Hardy's voice would truly become timeless.
Thanks for your comments, Sarah. I also wondered whether the distance of time was distorting the meanings. I had taken it that Woolf was using terms like 'control' as a positive quality and 'unconscious' as a somewhat lesser quality. Hence I thought she was complimenting James and being mildly disparaging about Hardy. In today's world, some might put the value of these qualities round the other way. I thought Woolf seemed to regard Hardy as rather quaint, homespun and unsophisticated. I don't think this is a fair judgement of his work at all.
I have been thinking about how Hardy set Far From the Madding Crowd in the past - I mean, it is set in an era before Hardy himself was born, isn't it? George Eliot also did this with Middlemarch. Does anyone have any opinions about why?
There's no reason to believe it wasn't set in 1874. Did you notice anything specific?
I thought Troy had returned from the Napoleonic wars. Did I just make that up?
Kathy wrote: "I have been thinking about how Hardy set Far From the Madding Crowd in the past - I mean, it is set in an era before Hardy himself was born, isn't it? George Eliot also did this with Middlemarch. ..."Actually, "Far From the Madding Crowd," like most of Hardy's novels, was generally set in his 'present day.' A notable exception is his "The Trumpet-Major," and it was set during the Napoleonic Wars.
I just went to Michael Millgate's biography of Hardy (Thomas Hardy: A Biography Revisited), and found the following tidbit about Hardy's writing of "Far From the Madding Crowd"--
"From the first he made no secret of having drawn upon his native countryside and its inhabitants for many of his scenes and characters. Writing to [Leslie] Stephen in 1874 of his desire to stay in Bockhampton until the novel was finished, he explained that his home was 'within a walk of the district in which the incidents are supposed to occur'--the village of Puddletown is clearly intended--and that he found it 'a great advantage to be actually among the people described at the time of describing them'."I recall other examples like this where it seemed very clear that Hardy wrote in the present. I will look at Tomalin's biography, and Sarah Bird Wright's excellent Hardy reference book, and find a definitive answer to your query, Kathy.
Kathy wrote: "I thought Troy had returned from the Napoleonic wars. Did I just make that up?"You just made that up. LOL.
Kathy wrote: "I thought Troy had returned from the Napoleonic wars. Did I just make that up?"No, there's no reference to Troy serving in the Napoleonic Wars. He was simply in the Royal Army. The original illustrations for the book (maybe by Helen Paterson?) indicate a sergeant's uniform from a much, much later time (i.e., that of the British Army from the late-1860s through the 1880s). Remember the uniform from the movie too? I assume they used period-correct costuming.
Kathy wrote: "Thanks for your comments, Sarah. I also wondered whether the distance of time was distorting the meanings. I had taken it that Woolf was using terms like 'control' as a positive quality and 'unco..."Kathy, I think it is time for your review of FftMC-- Woolf's essay needs some company! Please do, really. I would like to read it.
Whoops. Yes, The Trumpet Major must have been lurking in the back of my mind.Sarah, I will give a review some thought. See if I can articulate what I found so particularly appealing about this book. Watch this space.
Kathy wrote: "Whoops. Yes, The Trumpet Major must have been lurking in the back of my mind.Sarah, I will give a review some thought. See if I can articulate what I found so particularly appealing about this bo..."
Kathy, I am very glad that you enjoyed the novel! It is certainly one of my favorites of all of his, and right up there with "The Return of the Native," "The Woodlanders," "Tess of the d'Urbervilles," and "Jude the Obscure." Those are the 'big five' from amongst all of his novels, in my opinion. As with much of Hardy's prose, I get more and more from his books, or short stories, every time I read them. Cheers!
So, having come late to Hardy I find myself hooked. Bought Tess from second hand book shop! I'll give it a couple of months b4 I start.
Em wrote: "So, having come late to Hardy I find myself hooked. Bought Tess from second hand book shop! I'll give it a couple of months b4 I start."Em, you will love Tess of the d'Urbervilles! One of the most powerful novels that you'll ever read--I guarantee! Cheers! Chris
Christopher wrote: "right up there with "The Return of the Native," "The Woodlanders," "Tess of the d'Urbervilles," and "Jude the Obscure." Those are the 'big five' from amongst all of his novels, in my opinion."I'm with you on four, but I would take out The Woodlanders and insert The Mayor of Casterbridge for my big 5.
Everyman wrote: "Christopher wrote: "right up there with "The Return of the Native," "The Woodlanders," "Tess of the d'Urbervilles," and "Jude the Obscure." Those are the 'big five' from amongst all of his novels, ..."That's interesting, Everyman; and Hardy, in his later years when preparing the Wessex and later Mellstock editions, told people that his favorite was "The Woodlanders."
Christopher wrote: "Hardy, in his later years when preparing the Wessex and later Mellstock editions, told people that his favorite was "The Woodlanders." "But favorite doesn't always mean best. Orley Farm was Trollope's favorite novel, but I don't consider it his best. Do you?
Everyman wrote: "Christopher wrote: "Hardy, in his later years when preparing the Wessex and later Mellstock editions, told people that his favorite was "The Woodlanders." "But favorite doesn't always mean best. ..."
You are absolutely right! I could think of so many authors who've stated what their favorite is from their works, and much of the time it is different than what is typically recognized as their finest work (e.g., I think Dickens always loved "David Copperfield" the best, but most think "Bleak House" or "Our Mutual Friend" are his very best works).
In Hardy's case, I understand that his emotional attachment to "The Woodlanders" was because it was made up so much of his mother's world--the area she grew up in, and the lives that the Hand family lived.
Excellent comment, Everyman!
I think Woolf is often full of herself.
I agree with Em, that Gabriel's love was originally "love at first sight," but it grew over the years into real love. He's the perfect mate for Bathsheba- gentle, caring, patient, devoted to farming, honorable, accepting of her independence. She will get over Troy as if he were a nightmare, and she and Gabriel will have an unusual(for that time) equality in their marriage.
Boldwood didn't know her as a person the way Gabriel did. His love was an obsessive infatuation.
I've read a good deal of Hardy, and he attacked Victorian concepts of marriage, education and religion in most of his novels. The attacks against his last novel, Jude, were enough to turn him back to his poetry. Far is an early novel(1874,) but I've always felt it was his best. Bathsheba is an extraordinary woman for her time, and Gabriel is equally memorable.
I highly recommend the faithful 1967 film version for anyone who hasn't seen it. It stars Julie Christie, Alan Bates, Terence Stamp and Peter Finch. I found the later TV version pale by comparison.