Victorians! discussion
Conversations in the Parlor
>
The Good That Prevails: Optimism in Vic Lit
Charles Dickens A Christmas CarolLittle Dorrit
Bleak House
David CopperfieldGreat Expectations (with the happier of the 2 endings)
Far From the Madding Crowd
Jane Eyre
You'll note that all these happy endings were bought by the protagonists at a great price and not easily.
Wuthering Heights has, I think, only about 2 optimistic paragraphs at the end, after 20 years of total misery. Should we consider Bronte optimistic here? :)
Sure, wherever you see optimism in that book.
At the very tail-end, after the reader is ready to commit suicide along with Heathcliff!!I suspect that, like WH, even the saddest of Victorian novels has a little hope at the end. I don't think any author of the time left you in complete despair, although I haven't read Thackeray or Trollope. But I don't know if that makes the entire work optimistic.
Most novels I can think of end either in marriage(supposedly happy) or one or more characters finding their true selves and becoming better people. Sometimes orphans find their real parents, or very good substitutes.
Well you have made the disclaimer in message 4 and very good points, Rochelle, so with that everyone will have to decide for themselves. But remember the original request was for books to "shorten the winter" as the old phrase goes. And you mentioned Trollope, and he was mentioned in the other thread also where we began these thoughts. I have only read Orley Farm and I would personally call that a "positively affecting" book. So, not cheerful and not strictly happy ending, but affecting in good way for me.
Since they all have varying degrees of optimism and pessimism, why not do the survey for the MOST optimistic book? Will that one be the one we use to shorten the winter, presumably in Feb? :)
Rochelle, this thread is just for fun and determining the MOST isn't necessary. We aren't choosing a group read here either necessarily unless a section of members feel strongly about a book or two and might choose to do a side read together. Thanks for asking though!
As I mentioned in the other thread, Silas Marner is the most positive Victorian book I can think of. It's not a happy-ending book so much as a sad-beginning book. Personally, I don't find that a happy ending necessarily erases the pathos of some of these novels. And I'm not sure I'd enjoy a happy-happy book. I like sunshine, singing birds, butterflies, Bambi and Thumper, and flowers in my yard (ok, no Bambi, we're too developed), but not so much in my reading. (My loss, I'm sure.) Still, I'd like to broaden my horizons, so I'm interested in reading other people's recommendations for happier reads.
"Lorna Doone" Blackmore (IMO one of the most romantic of books)"Mr. Midshipman Easy" Marryat (entirely for hilarity)
"Wives & Daughters" Gaskell
The Cranford Chronicles; Gaskell
I have always thought of Dickens as supremely hopeful (although sarcastic and caustic for sure) and would suggest many of his, such as "Nicholas Nickleby"; "Bleak House"; "A Tale of Two Cities"; "David Copperfield"
Any of the Barsetshire novels; Trollope
And this may not fit, but maybe "Kim" by Kipling?
I love Silas Marner too, and all of Eliot, but she's a little more work. Definitely not "Romola" although that would be an awesome group read some day, but what about "Middlemarch"; "The Mill on the Floss"; or "Adam Bede"? They all have drama and trauma, but I recall loving them.
This is a fun thread. Perhaps some of these books have been discussed before, sorry I didn't look before I began typing.
Oh K, They all sound wonderful. I wish I could clone myself in order to read all of these great books faster!
I'm going a out of bounds here, because she was writing a tad late and an American, but Willa Cather's Death Comes for the Archbishop is a beautiful, peaceful book. All the way through, I was left with the feeling that I was priveleged to glimpse into this world.
I think that Trollope, with some exception (i.e. He knew he was right), is a positive/optimistic writer. Ironic, but hi thinks that in the end a good laugh will solve almost everything!Also The Woman in white has a nice consoling ending...
I could not get into that book, although I love Cranford, both the video and the novel. I like K. B. and her ideas of butterflies and sunshine and happiness,but for me you take the sour with the sweet, there must be some bad for there to be good. Am I right?
Robin, a balance would be nice. But it seems, and maybe I'm just not reading the more positive works, that there's usually an excess of pathos. I'm not complaining, just making an observation.
It's been a while, so someone correct me if I'm wrong--but I remember Mary Barton as much more of a sad plea for the plight of the poor working-class ...the descriptions of the hovel-like homes were very humbling. If I had to categorize Gaskell, I would probably put Wives & Daughters, Cranford and even North & South together as the more light-hearted of her works, while I'd group Mary Barton, Ruth and Sylvia's Lovers together as her more socially critical and cause-promoting. It's a huge generalization and she has some other things that don't fit either category. It's not as if you'd necessarily go away weeping and depressed from any of her works, but some are more emotionally charged for sure.
That is the take I got from reading some of Mary Barton. Since I've only read Cranford, I can say that Cranford is not necessarily the working class, but it is different classes of people struggling through their daily lives.
Uncle Silas has a happy ending; Wuthering Heights which is highly satirical throughout has a romantic and perhaps a happy ending; Coningsby and Sybil have happy endings. The Dead Secret has a happy eending. East Lynne has a happy ending. North and South has a happy ending Maria Edgeworth's Ennui has a uplifting, feel good factor ending but it was published in 1807.
I guess if you are really looking you can see the good in just about any novel, but I found Wuthering Heights very disturbing in the treatment of the dogs, in particular. Sometimes I like the film adaptation better than the stories. but I learn something in each novel that I do read.
Malcolm wrote: "Uncle Silas has a happy ending; Wuthering Heights which is highly satirical throughout has a romantic and perhaps a happy ending; Coningsby and Sybil have happy endings. The Dead Secret has a happ..."I m reading The Dead Secret right now and loving btw.
Robin, WH is my most favorite of all the classics. ...and we do learn from everything we read and that is what makes reading so wonderful I think!
The novel delves into much more than if I just saw the movie. Without background information we lose so much of what we can get from reading. Reading is foremost for me, and when I want to branch out I watch a video. I didn't think Emily Bronte could write like that, and in one of the biographies, she does treat her animals in that way.
The hanging of the dog was shocking but there was shocking brutal treatment throughout. And what's the hanging of a dog compared to the brutal treatment Heathcliff has recieved since childhood? Isn't what he had suffeed over the years as equally as shocking and spiteful?
Yes, t was something that bothered me throughout the book. That poor boy was mistreated all his young life and nobody cared for him. So sad, so tragic and yet so moving I think.
Besides for the age in which it was set only the fact that it was a pet makes it appear more merciless than fox hunting or game for the pot.Whatever, still a romantic and perhaps happy ending to the novel. By the ending that incident was dead and buried and the narrator was in a happier brighter future.
Treasure Island and Kidnapped had happy endings.
Emily's treating animals in that was only enhances the realism of the work.
Malcolm wrote: "Besides for the age in which it was set only the fact that it was a pet makes it appear more merciless than fox hunting or game for the pot.Whatever, still a romantic and perhaps happy ending t..."
Well, I guess it is that if you are mistreated you pass that on to those who are below you (animals included). It becomes a way of your life.
Dog eat dog as they say but the cycle of brutality began with the Earnshaws in the first place.
Personally I really couldn't care too much about whatever fictional character in whatever novel. From the moment Cathy's ghost slashed her wrists tapping at the window I really couldn't take whatever followed that seriously or literally. I just took it to be a relentless social satire. The more incident the more shock to a degree by the continual procession. But I couldn't stop laughing from cover to cover. I think it's an incredible novel. It pushed at the boundaries of gothic romance.
You laughed from cover to cover, Geesh, I get that Heathcliff was treated in much the same way as the dog, and he retaliated against the dog also,so I see your point. I don't think Cathy slashed her wrists, didn't she get sick looking for Heathcliff in the moors, that is what I took away from the novel.
I took away that both of these individuals were marred by their environment. Cathy was looking for something that she thought she needed and that was social class while Heathcliff was looking for love in all its forms. He never had any love other than that of Cathy's. She realized too late that love is what is the most important, not class not status, just the simple love that one carries forever. I never laughed, I often cried as I read this book. They were ever fated for one another yet could not "get it together" enough to defy convention and relish the love that they held for one another. So sad, so tragic in my estimation!
I just laughed that it was one horror after another and Emily had her tongue firmly in her cheek as she piled it on. I just read it as a satirical piece of romantic pulp of its time. I really didn't get that emotionally involved with any of the characters but I sympathised with Heathcliff mostly. I was more impressed by its structure and various narratives. As to shock value and its remorseless horror I see it in the vein of James Hogg's The Private Memoirs and Confessions of a Justified Sinner, and Matthew Gregory's The Monk. I read them as if the work of an author telling a good yarn. I expect Emily would be pleased that her work is thought about deeply but I think too she'll just be laughing at you. She was a fan of the type of gothic humour of Blackwood's Edinburgh Magazine. Her work is no more shocking than the literature of that magazine. Perhaps it may be that I see it as a part of a literary canon more than just a stand alone piece but nevertheless the wit and the humour of work would be uppermost for entertainment value, and as far as nightmarish romantic romps go it is a highly entertaining novel.
I agree with your interpretation, Marialyce. She wanted status and got the loveless marriage with Earnshaw. Heathcliff was "starving" for affection after his ill treatment. This a beautiful story of love never to be. But at the end, I think they were seen walking the moors, maybe I am thinking of the Olivier and Oberon version, film adaptation, which I still love, no modern version has me more enthralled with their love for each other.
It is my belief that Ms Bronte (I can't call her Emily since I didn't know her personally) was a very melancholic type person who suffered from anorexia and would not eat when upset. I do not, from what limited things I know about her, see her as a person who would laugh at others or see a story as a group of satirical pieces. I believe she wrote of love that she herself thought was the most idealistic, one she knew she would never possess.
I agree with you, Marialyce. I don't think we as readers should talk about authors as if we know them, well we do in one sense, because we are reading them. It is kind of presumptuous of us, if we start calling authors Charles, or Charlotte, as if we were introduced to them and are great friends with them.
As far as how one names an author then each person to their own taste.I think Emily Bronte was much more than an author of romantic fiction and by far the better writer of the three sisters.
Wuthering Heights is a multi-layered masterpiece. I think she was so skilled at her level of art that she thought just as much what the publisher/editor would think of her work and its market as she did of the reader reaction. She set out to shock the reader, and she thought as much of the professional critic as she did of the regular, casual reader.
Whichever of you that was shocked at Heathcliff hanging the dog, in terms of animal cruelty in a novel, where do you think it ranks alongside decapitating a racehorse? And compared to all the other incidents in the fictional world of Wuthering Heights, why single that one out?
Malcolm, I really don't see her writing for her publishers more for herself. The Bronte sisters lived a very harsh life. Their father didn't associate with them even to the point of taking his dinner alone in his room.(as well as the aunt who raised them) Her two oldest sisters died as children. Supposedly for three years, Emily spoke to no one but family and servants. Their brother was a drug addict and an alcoholic who ranted and raged with threats of suicide and that of killing their father. They had very little in the way of love in their lives so the girls needed to escape into the world of romantic love in order to survive their home life. Their lives have been analyzed quite a bit as to the detrimental effects their home life had upon them.
The beauty about literature is that some many people can take different messages away.Sorry, Marialyce, but an author can write the manuscript for herself, but the publisher always puts its stamp on the published work. So if the publisher wants more horrific elements, in they go; less horrific elements, out they come.
So K.B So she wrote this specifically to be published? I really didn't know that! Thanks you!
I don't know if she did. But at the point when it was submitted for publication, the publisher gained a large measure of control over the contents of the manuscript. Today, there are a handful of authors so powerful, if you will, in terms of sales, who can insist on having their books published exactly as written. The majority don't have that kind of pull and have to accept that the publisher is going to have a say in the final content.
All the Bronte sisters wrote to impress their publishers and beyond that the literary world at that. The chose non-gender specific pennames in the hope that critics would not dismiss them as mere women rather than for the merits of their work alone. The didn't want to be pidgeon-holed, and particularly Emily had the more mature literary understanding of the work. What applies to Emily in terms of background and family life applies equally to all of the Bronte sisters and their work differs greatly in terms of style and to a certain degree content.But, at the end of the day, in terms of happy endings, Wuthering Heights is a relatively happy ending. Both Heathcliff and Cathy are safe from harm and the judgements of society and readership, and their restless spirits wander happily and in love over the moors.
Might it not be better to discuss the literary merits of Wuthering Heights and Emily Bronte in its own specific folder? This has gone far beyond happy endings and optimism which was the sole aim and purpose of my original observation.
K.B. wrote: "I don't know if she did. But at the point when it was submitted for publication, the publisher gained a large measure of control over the contents of the manuscript. Today, there are a handful ..."
Thanks again, K.B. I really did not know that!
All the Bronte sisters wrote to impress their publishers and beyond that the literary world at large. They chose non-gender specific pennames in the hope that critics would not dismiss them as mere women rather than for the merits of their work alone. The didn't want to be pidgeon-holed, and particularly Emily had the more mature literary understanding of the work. What applies to Emily in terms of background and family life applies equally to all of the Bronte sisters and their work differs greatly in terms of style and to a certain degree content.The Bronte sisters wrote their debut works with a view to earning their living as writers and as equals to the male writers of their day.
But, at the end of the day, in terms of happy endings, Wuthering Heights is a relatively happy ending. Both Heathcliff and Cathy are safe from harm and the judgements of society and readership, and their restless spirits wander happily and in love over the moors.
Might it not be better to discuss the literary merits of Wuthering Heights and Emily Bronte in its own specific folder? This has gone far beyond happy endings and optimism which was the sole aim and purpose of my original observation.
Might I mention, Malcolm, that you started this in message 31?I think we are done with the topic of Wuthering Heights anyway.
By the time Emily was finished with Wuthering Heights, she already had an established relationship with a publisher. They had already published poems by Emily under a pen name, so I'm pretty sure that's an indication that she meant to publish Wuthering Heights while writing it. Interesting note, WH and Agnes Grey by her sister were presented together to the publisher and pretty much simultaneously accepted.
Shay wrote: "By the time Emily was finished with Wuthering Heights, she already had an established relationship with a publisher. They had already published poems by Emily under a pen name, so I'm pretty sure t..."Thanks, Shay!
Might I mention that I merely mentioned Wuthering Heights had an happy ending. Someone else highlighted its content with regards to animal cruelty. My primary interest in this discussion is happy endings and optimism in vic lit.
Marialyce wrote: "Shay wrote: "By the time Emily was finished with Wuthering Heights, she already had an established relationship with a publisher. They had already published poems by Emily under a pen name, so I'm ..."My son is on my computer but I downloaded an article from a peer-reviewed literature publication about Emily and it states that the Glaskell biography is not reliable and is responsible for a number of misconceptions about the Brontes. In particular, the home life wasn't really that bad. It recommended another biography on the Brontes- I'll post the title and author when I can get back on my computer.
Marialyce wrote: "Might I mention, Malcolm, that you started this in message 31?I think we are done with the topic of Wuthering Heights anyway."
I suggest that you look further back to comment 21. I commented that my view Wuthering Heights had a happy ending. Someone else was more interested in specific content and that came after my original comment.
Victorians!
Books mentioned in this topic
Death Comes for the Archbishop (other topics)Silas Marner (other topics)
And an absolute happy ending wont be a requirement for listing the books here. Because happy endings can vary by perception, and it isn't always the ending that is the most important part of a novel.