Possession by A. S. Byatt ~ Book Club Online for June

[marcie]

The Book Club Online is  the oldest  book club on the Internet, begun in 1996, open to everyone.  We offer cordial discussions of one book a month,  24/7 and  enjoy the company of readers from all over the world.  everyone is welcome to join in.

Week III: Flora, Fauna, and Melusina
 

Interview with A.S. Byatt on Possession Submitted by Jude S.

A Zest for Pastiche by John Mullan on Possession by AS Byatt. Week one:  Satire: (Possible spoilers within).  Submitted by Marcie

Characters and Plot   by our Readers

Schedule of Discussion:


June 14-20  Chapters 12-17 (102pp)            
June 21-27  Chapters 18-23 (123pp)
June 28-30  Chapters 24- end  (90pp)  

Week III: June 14-20:   WHAT a section! All our questions answered and more mysteries posed. What did you make of it?

1.  "Dearest Ellen," (page 277 among others).  We have Ash's letters to his wife.  "It would require  quite horrible self- control and dupliicity." (page 235).  What do you make of Randolph Ash's loving letters to his wife at home while he is passing with his second wife in Whitby? Which one do you feel is the more innocent, Ash or Christabel?

2. "I have done wrong in her regard. I have behaved less than well....I should have... " (page 252). Do you agree with Ellen Ash's assessment of her treatment of Bertha?  Why or why not?

3. Blanche Glover comes to see Ellen, what is the result? How does that compare to Fergus going to see Val?

4. This section contains some of the most beautiful writing of the book. Which passages struck you as especially fine?

5. "But Melusina sounds often as though he wrote it. To me. Not the subject matter. The style." (page 288). Can you tell a difference in Ash's poetry and Melusina? The entire Chapter 16 is an excerpt from Melusina. What did you see in it? Why did Ellen get so upset when she read it in the previous section?

6. "A clean empty bed. I have this image of a clean empty bed in a clean empty room, where nothing is asked or to  be asked." (page 290). What do you make of this dual dream of Roland and Maude?

7. Why do you think Blanche killed herself?

8. "He would teach her she was not his possession" (page 304). What does this mean?

9. "If he loved her face, which was not kind, it was because it was clear and quick and sharp....a disdain masking itself as calm." (page 302). Why does Ash see Christabel in this way?

10. From Catherine  Burgass' Reader's Guide to Possession: "Could the reader of Possession be made to feel inferior to its author?"  (submitted by Kidsal). What a question! What do you think?

11. Can you tell the difference in LaMotte and Ash?


The exercise here presented, in identifying the poetic "voice" of Ash from LaMotte, has proven to be extremely instructive. I found "La Motte" to have two stylistic patterns which identify "her" immediately. It's when these are absent that it becomes more difficult, take a stab at these, who wrote them?

A.  

 "This rock was covered with a vivid pelt
Of emerald mosses, maiden hairs and mints
Drabbling dark crowns and sharply-scented stems
Amongst the water's peaks and freshenings."

B.

"From which descends a glossy cone
A mirror-spire that mocks its own.
Between these two the mackerel sails
As did the swallow in the vales
Of summer air , and he too sees"

C.

"Beating the lambent bath to diamond-fine
Refracting lines of spray, a dancing veil
Of heavier water on the breathless air."

D.

"Or never-melted mountains of green ice
Or hot dark secret places in the steam
Of equatorial forests, where the sun
Strikes far above the canopy, where men"

If we can see the difference, we will be able to see what Ellen saw in Melusina that made her so upset. I see it now. It's the same voice, to me, but the STYLE is different.


Most of the time LaMotte rhymes. It's very difficult to find parts where she does not.  And her verse is sing-song, it's  a particular rhythmic pattern, iambs, it's iambic pentameter for the most part and the rhythm is very strong.

She also uses lots of dashes ------  big ones, especially as her work goes on. Many revisions of Melusina, huh? We should be able to tell them apart, can we?

Discussion Leaders: ginny & Marcie

 

[marcie]

ohmygosh! I am very caught up in your reactions to Ash. Ash, the father of Bertha's child! Some of you do think poorly of him. I believe that it's insects and hydras that he is dissecting; not small animals. As for his interest in the reproduction of the water creatures, "When food is plentiful, many hydras reproduce asexually by producing buds in the body wall, which grow to be miniature adults and simply break away when they are mature." (wikepedia). Many people at that time were amateur zoologists and very much concerned with the origins of life. I think that Byatt was showing Ash to be passionately interested in all of LIFE.

This is, I think what draws Christabel to him. As you quote, Ginny. She says "You are in love with all the human race,  Randolph Ash." She loves him for it. I don't believe Byatt is presenting this as a negative trait.

And he loves the passion and life in Christabel. Again, your quote, Ginny:

"With you. [Christabel]. And by extension all creatures who remotely resemble you.  Which is, all creatures,  for we are all part of some divine organism I do believe, that breathes its own breath and lives a little here, and dies a little there, but is eternal."

We do need to remember that Byatt has cautioned us that this is a romance and not either a novel or biography. She quotes Nathaniel Hawthorne in the very beginning. "The former [romance]--while as a work of art, it must rigidly subject itself to laws, and while it sins unpardonably so far as it may swerve aside from the truth of the human heart--has fairly a right to present that truth under circumstances, to a great extent, of the writers own choosing or creation... The point of view in which this tale comes under the Romantic definition lies in the  attempt to connect a bygone time with the very present that is flitting away from us."

The story of Ash and LaMotte might be almost a fairy tale. LaMotte says on the train ride with Ash that their being together is for her a "necessity." She has planned for their being together and is committed to it. She has thought things out, even more than he it appears sometimes. I really don't think that she is a victim.

Events seem to be set in motion for both of them that are bigger than themselves. I think that Byatt is trying to convey "truths of the human heart."

I don't think that Byatt has meant to create unsympathetic characters in Ash and LaMotte. I am with you, Jonathan: "We shouldn't condemn him [Ash] out of hand."
   

[kidsal]

More from Catherine Burgass:

There are so many illusions in this book.  In the final paragraph of Chapter 15 Christabel mentions George Herbert, the 17th century Metaphysical poet and quotes in the original from Goethe’s Faust.  Ash responds by quoting two lines from Andrew Marvell’s “To His Coy Mistress,” without citing author or title.  All of these have reference to the couple’s situation.  Faust in Goethe’s play is tempted by the devil with sensual pleasures, and at risk of losing his soul if he cries out:  “Stay, thou art so fair.”  “To His coy Mistress” is a Carpe Diem poem, a genre in which the poetic speaker attempts to persuade his mistress to enjoy the pleasures of the flesh today rather than worrying about tomorrow.  George Herbert wrote on the struggle between earthly delight and heavenly love (“The Agonie”)

[kidsal]

From Burgass:

Chapter 13:  Roland and Maud:  “They paced well together, though they didn’t notice that both were energetic striders.  They eat a huge meal of vegetable soup, plaice with shrimps and profiteroles served by a large “Viking woman.”
Chapter 14:  Boggle Hole:  They walked down through flowering lanes.  The high hedges were thick with dog-roses…..
Chapter 15:  Ash and Christabel:  also served a huge meal of soup, fish, meat and pudding by another Viking descendent.  When they go out walking they notice the compatible rhythm of their step.  They have visited Boggle Hole:  They had come across summer meadows and down narrow lanes between tall hedges thick with dog-roses…

[ginny]

Golly, more parallels than I spotted, thank you Kidsal!

I also found this, have been reading Reader's Guides for this book and finding very little, but I did find this:

Poems that will enrich your understanding of Possession Robert Browning, "Childe Roland to the Dark Tower Came," "My Last Duchess," "Porphyria's Lover," "Caliban Upon Setebos," "Bishop Blougram's Apology," "Mr. Sludge, the 'Medium'," "Andrea del Sarto," and "Fra Lippo Lippi"; Samuel Taylor Coleridge, "Christabel"; Andrew Marvell, "To His Coy Mistress," "The Garden"; Petrarch, Rime Sparse; Christina Rossetti, Poetical Works; Alfred, Lord Tennyson, "Merlin and Vivien" from Idylls of the King, In Memoriam, "Maud," "Mariana," "The Lady of Shallott"; W.B. Yeats, The Rose.

Well, this is exciting, so good to see you, Joan, move over on that bench, we have definitely two sides here today, YAY. The best discussions we've ever had have contained truly opposite points of view and we definitely are opposed on the character of Ash.

Where do you stand, Kidsal (and thank you for that great analysis, that's a great reference), are you in sympathy with Ash or where do you stand at this point?  Mippy? Bellamarie? Everyone?

We've got two opposing sides, the pro Ashers (shall we say Ashettes hahahaa Jonathan and Marcie) and the put him in the trash can (Ash Can) bench consisting of Joan and Ginny.

hhhaa  Jonathan, condemned out of hand?  Rush to Judgment? Well I can't see a lot to praise in him at this point. You can't help (and unlike those more prone to Ash, I haven't read the entire book) forming opinions as you read, all readers do, but at this point, so far,  so far as Joan says, people are being hurt.

I don't think Christabel is a victim and  Ash the mustache twisting villain, either, Marcie,  but this man of Love for All Creatures Great and Small, this saintly genius who is interested in everything is so  interested to the point that he's hurting a lot of people and things. And that's the point at which his extreme Narcissism (if Byatt throws that in one more time I am going to scream) really gets pointed, as it seems to apply to quite a few people in this text.

He loves all creatures, and nature, just everything. Ok that's positive. To the point that he causes those whom and which  he loves or is interested in, harm. What does that make him, then? Someone to be admired?

We know Ellen knew, the faithful wife at home, because Blanche Glover came and told her. We know she became extremely upset at the reading of a section of Melusina. This doesn't matter? She doesn't matter because....she takes to her bed and laudanum because of him? Isn't that pretty strong stuff? My sympathy is with her.

Blanche kills herself, I guess over Christabel, so I guess that's her burden not his, but he's the one who made the first approach and even as he looks on his new "wife," he sees negative things. He's no saint. No Lancelot.

Jeepers the more I read here, Beatrice Nest not admitted to the rooms the male faculty was, the more I read the more I feel sympathy for the poor Victorian women.

Now don't think for a moment our hero doesn't notice dissembling in others, oh no worries about a rush to judgment with the great poet, even (or maybe especially) of those he loves, note what he says of his love, Christabel (just to qualify which love hahahaa) Bold is mine:

He saw, or thought he saw, how those qualities had been disguised or overlaid by more conventional  casts of expression--an assumed modesty, an expedient patience, a disdain masking itself as calm. At her worst--oh he saw her clearly, despite her possession of him--at her worst she would  look down and sideways and smile demurely, and this smile would come near a mechanical simper, for it was an untruth, it was a convention, it was her brief constricted acknowledgment of the world's expectations.  (page 302).

So he has NO trouble in telling when others pretend or wear the mask or are untrue. And nobody knows faults like one who is practiced in them himself.

[ginny]

Joan, you've BEEN to Whitby? Did you recognize it from the description? And the same restaurant!   Now you have a mental picture we don't,  but the writing really is glorious in some of these chapters, and beautiful.  It's right on the Yorkshire coast, what were you doing in that remote area? Looks fabulous, to me.

I don't think that he's the father of Bertha's child, despite her red face and refusal to talk but I do admit it entered my mind because of her strange behavior. Do you all feel that Ellen did wrong by her?  I'm confused about that part of the book.

We've all done science experiments. On dead life forms. His, I think, go beyond that. Was it Gandhi who said a man is known by how he treats the lower animals? I'm sure he didn't mean sea anemones or protoplasms.  Or did he?

Marcie, "I believe that it's insects and hydras that he is dissecting; not small animals," I don't know why I can't stop thinking about Hitler pulling wings off flies, this bit in the book was truly  awful, to me.

But even if this gruesome bit  had been left out, he's still cheating on his wife, can we allow that? Or not? He IS duplicitous and he's not the only one here. He's not caught up in a vortex all helpless, he's very calculating. That's not admirable, is it?

 I just love the way everything is twisted when he's involved. Vivisection is "propaganda." He writes his "Dearest Ellen," and neglects as somebody said,  to say wish you were here, or take her with him, or say the woman whom I have suggested travel AS my wife sends her greetings, or anything else.

And way at the bottom after he's lectured her on interminable flora and fauna and his own important  thoughts,  he remembers to ask, " Now let me know how you are--- your health, your household doings your reading---" (277). You dull thing, you.

I liked this, Marcie:  The story of Ash and LaMotte might be almost a fairy tale.

That's really good. Good point on the Romance aspect, too, I think that Byatt is trying to convey "truths of the human heart."

What truths of the human heart do we see in their brief Romance? Possession? He seems remarkably self possessed, to me.

Events seem to be set in motion for both of them that are bigger than themselves.

This is a great statement, who set them in motion? Do you see, do any of you see any culpability at all in any of these characters?


Jonathan, According to Maud, as an expert in these things, literary criticism should take into account what is not said!

I honestly think THAT is the whole point of the book, and what it does to the truth.  The Truth seems to be a silent character here, flitting about thru the moors and the dusty rooms, elusive, snatched at by Cropper and Roland and Maude and Beatrice, and, yes,  let's add baffled.

The Reader's Guide quoted above also had a question on the names and their significance including Sir George Bailey! I can't think why, can any of you?

Can you all tell Ash's poetic  style from Christabel's?  It seems to be an important point in the book. Want to have a fun sort of challenge? We can put in 4 passages and then honestly try, ourselves, to see if we can say "who" supposedly wrote them. Want to try?  No fair looking them up!

[bellamarie]

I have not read past ch 16, but I have to tell you I am so darn frustrated I could scream!!!  I am exhausted with Byatt's cat and mouse game.  So...we pretty much KNOW what we expected, that Christable and Ash went together, he very possibly had a hand in Melusina, she threw caution to the wind and left with him after all the warnings from Blanch.  Wow I was shocked to read Blanch showed up at Ellen's door. Wooo wooo talk about hell hath no fury like a woman scorned.  But what did she deliver to dear Ellen?  The copy of Swammerdam or the missing letters or both?

Yes, as soon as I read Bertha was pregnant and could not tell who the father was, I suspected it could be Ash.  Afterall, I have not held a high opinion of him early on and suspecting Ellen's inadequacies has to do with lack of sexual satisfaction for Ash, he would have to be turning to someone, and why not the hired help?  So...I began to ask myself, WHO is going to end up being the son/daughter of Bertha and possibly Ash?  Now there is a mystery in and of itself.

Why as a reader have I not felt any intimacy between any of these characters?  I feel each one of them have been self serving.  Romance has escaped me so far.  Even the menions of Roland where Maud is concerned seems so contrite.  It seems so out of his character that I'm not believing it.  I feel Byatt spend too much time with the poems and letters that she was not able to make me feel the least bit connected and caring for any one particular character.  We are half way through the book and there is no rooting for a couple, no sympathy for any character because each one deliberately seems to have their own agenda and so betrayal is obvious.  Val even seems to be getting exactly what she wants, a relationship with very littel commitment but  a place to come to and a partner for sex if and when either decides to.

Gosh, I really am disappointed in the lack of emotional connections in this book.  The poems for me are not even romantic, so the title is Possession A Romance.  Hmmm...where's the romance?  I don't even feel sorry for Blanch because she and Christabel had to be missing something to give up life and stay cooped up in their house they way they did. 

Joan R. "He's taking terrible advantage of our Cristabel"

Interesting how you see her as the victim, I see her as the black widow spider.  Neither of them have shown much character, care or concern for anyone but their self.  I don't see any damsels in distress in this book.  They talk about women's movement, but their actions are contradictory to women being strong.  Maud is so wishy washy with her relationship with Fergus and Lenora.  My favorite character up to this point is Mrs. Joan Bailey. Now she has strength and conviction.

Okay enough of my ranting.....I am going to read ch 17 and hope to find, pie in my eye!  LOL
Ginny thank you for the pictures, they were the highlight of my day, where this book is concerned.  I'm still keeping my eye on Fergus, he seems the one fading in and out and very concerned about what they may find, more so than Cropper.

[bellamarie]

Just one more thought before I forget..., as far as Ash and his interest in dissecting there is one theme that seems continuous .....He is interested in proving, LIFE EVERLASTING.  He wants in some way to see his death as life continued.  pg. 272 "It is my belief that at this point in time Randolph had reached what we crudely call a "mid-life crisis," as had his century.  He, the great psychologist, the great poetic student of individual lives and identities, saw that before him was nothing but decline and decay, that his individual being would not be extended by progeny, that men burst like bubbles.  He turned away, like many, from individual sympathies with dying or dead men to universal sympathies with Life, Nature and the Universe.  It was a kind of Romanticism reborn_germmated, so to speak, from the old stock of Romanticism_but intertwined with the new mechanic analysis and the new optimism not about the individual soul, but about the eternal divine harmony of the universe.  Like Tennyson, As saw that Nature was red in tooth and claw.  He responded by taking an interest in the life_continuing functions of the digestive functions of all forms, from the amoeba to the whale."

Throughout all of chapter 14 there are constant mentions of life everlasting.  pg. 273 Cropper quoted Moby Dick, "Still deeper the meaning of that story of Narcissus, who because he could not grasp the tormenting, mild image he saw in the fountain, plunged into it and was drowned.  But that same image we ourselves see in all rivers and oceans. It is the image of the ungraspable phantom of life; and this is the key to it all.

Ash did NOT want to believe life ended.  He was determined to find a truth to believe he would never truly die and that would be the end of him.  His "ID" had to prove everlasting life.

pg. 278 "If there is a subject that is my own, my dear Ellen, as a writer I mean, it is the persistant shape_shifting life of things long_dead but not vanished."

pg. 279 Ash writes to Ellen, "All these new sights and discoveries, my dear, as you may imagine, have started off shoots of poetry in every direction. (I say shoots in Vaughn's sense, "Bright shoots of everlastingness," where the word means simultaneously brightness of scintillation and flights of arrows, and growth of seeds of light_ I wish you would despatch to me my Silex scintillans, for I have been thinking much about his poetry and that stony metaphor since I have been working on rocks here..."

pg. 271 "His friend Michelet was at this time working on La Mer, which appeared in 1860.  In it the historian also tried to find in the sea the possibility of an eternal life, which would overcome death.  He describes his experiences in showing to a great chemist and subsequently to a great physiologist a beaker of what he called, "the  mucus of the sea...this whitish, vicious element."  What is most easily discerned, in the case of the seawater mucus, is that it is simultaneously an end and a beginning.  It is a product of the innumerable residue of death, who would yield them to life?"

So my amature analysis of Ash is he feared dying, death.  He wanted and needed to believe there is no absolute end to life.  His ego wanted to cheat death.  He wanted to be bigger than life and death.  What I found interesting is this particular statement, pg. 277 "They valued themselves.  Once, they knew God valued them.  Then they began to think there was no God,  only blind forces.  So they valued themselves, they loved themselves, and attended to their natures_"  "At some point in history their self_value changed into_what worries you.  A horrible over_simplification.  It leaves out guilt, for a start.  Now or then."

They did not want to be accountable for their self serving life, so it was easy to believe there was no God, but then at some point they began to worry about "what if" they would be accountable one day. I suspect Christabel and/or Ash, in the end, will committ suicide, and drown in the "sea of life."
 NOT Vanished!
The romance is not that of man and woman, it is of "oneself", or even more so of life and death.  Food for thought....Ciao!

[kidsal]

I feel that both Christabel and Ash took advantage of each other.  Did they really love each other -- I don't think so.  Like Roland and Maud -- they used each other.
What was the point of the story of Patience?  Poor Ellen with the house being cleaned and Patience's children tearing through it and breaking pieces of the chandelier.  And did we really need the story of Bertha?  Was it to show how helpless Ellen was when faced with challenges?

Well Google brings up George Bailey from "Its A Wonderful Life."

[ginny]

Oh good points, Kidsal and Bellamarie. What WAS the point of Bertha and Patience? What good questions and points! I agree with both of you.

I have not read to the end, will all be revealed or will we still be sloughing thru the swamps of allusion. Just loved both of your posts.

Maybe to show...Patience is worn down, their dear Mama had 15 children, Ellen has none...er....Bertha has a child...er....  I don't know why Patience is in there. Like Bellamarie I really don't have any connection to any of these characters, why do we all like Joan Bailey?  I agree she's the most likable of the bunch.

Somewhere in that huge list of poems is the answer to George Bailey's name being significant,  but Possession the book is not.....do I want to say worth further research? Is it worth taking hours to read each poem, to somewhat emulate the scholars here excitedly and search for the Grail. (What IS the Grail in this book?)  And why does one feel frustrated that the name George Bailey (good one Kidsal on It's a Wonderful Life, the Best Known Movie I Never Have Seen all the way thru) does not ring a bell?

Bella, this must be a "Romance" in the Victorian literary style. Not as we think of it, I loved your post. I must look up Romance as she means it and Hawthorne's definition, if that's what's being followed, in Marcie's post, then there's nothing that we recognize as "romance" in it.

I did not catch, in the blizzard of allusions, or references, the everlasting life thing AT ALL, my goodness, good for you,  but I did see the questioning of God and that possibly was brought on by Darwin, one of the few dates in the thing as Marcie pointed out was the introduction of his theory.

Maybe this is why the reviewers say "something for everybody?" You grab on and there literally IS something  for everybody.

I still don't know why Ellen berates herself over Bertha. Was it normal in her day for pregnant servants to stay on and work? I don't think so but am not sure what the problem is here. Today of course it would be different, I am confused...I  thought at first she might have shown more compassion but then I recalled Upstairs Downstairs and a similar situation in Edwardian times. And they were less caring, or what actually happens in the "home" for unwed mothers? I need to read that again.

And since I can't tell Byatt from Ash from Christabel in poetry I'm going to put 4 selections in here, (if I myself can even figure out who wrote what, I better steer shy of Melusina, huh)? and we can have fun trying to identify who said what.


I want to agree with Bellamarie  that I feel no connection to the characters.    I really liked Sally's  thought that they were using each other, and Roland, Maude and Val, too.

There seem a lot of "users" in this thing, when you think about it? You might make the case for several others, too, in various levels.

Fergus reminds me of the Kenneth Branaugh character in Harry Potter, am I the only one? So like. hahaha

What a shame this book puts people off, what a great discussion you're making of it, all sorts of things I never saw. I do think a little judicious editing would have really helped it.

I wonder, what do you think?

What percentage of readers really study the poems carefully? Look up all the references? Have read all the poetry bibliography above?

What percentage of readers give up and never get TO the plot of the book?

What percentage of readers are made to feel like Professor was it Leavis made his students  feel?

What percentage of readers think that because of all these references, which ARE impressive, that the book must somehow then have merit because of them?  

Which character is the best fleshed out, would you say, at this point?

[ginny]

Ok look at this (of course this is Wikipedia, so who knows how accurate IT is) but it fits in nicely with Marcie's Ash and Christabel as fairy tale:


Romance as literary genre: from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Romance_(genre)  bolding mine:

Many medieval romances recount the marvellous adventures of a chivalrous, heroic knight, often of super-human ability, who, abiding chivalry's strict codes of honour and demeanour, goes on a quest, and fights and defeats monsters and giants, thereby winning favour with a lady.[8] The story of the medieval romance focuses not upon love and sentiment, but upon adventure....

The first romances heavily drew on the legends and fairy tales to supply their characters with marvelous powers. The tale of Sir Launfal features a fairy bride from folklore, and Sir Orfeo's wife is kidnapped by the fairy king, and Sir Orfeo frees her from there. These marvelous abilities subside with the development of the genre; fairy women such as Morgan le Fay become enchantresses, and knights lose magical abilities.[9] Romancers wrote many of their stories in three, thematic cycles: (i) the Arthurian (the lives and deeds of King Arthur and the Knights of the Round Table); (ii) the Carolingian (the lives and deeds of Charlemagne, and Roland, his principal paladin); and, (iii) the Alexandrian (the life and deeds of Alexander the Great)...

Actually that entire article is fascinating. So it appears (if Wikipedia is to be believed) that there are certain elements needed for a literary Romance, and it's interesting what they are. I'll see if I can find a more authorativie source but that's pretty interesting.

The last few lines of the  Browning poem, seen then in conjunction with the Hawthorne certainly rings true too,

"How did you contrive to grasp
The threat which led you though this labyrinth?
How build such solid fabric out of air?
How on so slight foundation found this tale,
Biography, narrative? or in other words,
'How many lies did it require to make
The portly truth you here present us with?'"

We had talked about the possibility of lies previously. I think the portly Truth is the Grail here, very elusive and possibly...unanswered, I bet, at the end, but what IS it?

[kidsal]

In Burgass' discussion questions:  Could the reader of Possession be made to feel inferior to its author?

[Mippy]

Here's an excellent non-Wiki link about many of the romantic poets:

http://www.poetseers.org/the_romantics/

Ash is annoying.   Not actually evil.  And I do not fault him for cutting up little sea animals, since I was a TA for years in college and grad school where we did just that, in order to teach invertebrate biology.  I find the references to Darwin do help to date the events, as mentioned.
                        
May I say his attitude toward women is weird, but perhaps not uncommon.  Since I just plain hate almost any guy who cheats on his wife, I guess I hate his behavior.              
So count me in:    Ash Can    

I keep falling asleep reading this ... do I recall others said so, too?  The plot is too contrived, IMHO, so I'm not commenting too often.   I would not be finishing this novel if it were not for the interesting comments everyone has posted here.

[marcie]

Along the lines of what you found, Ginny, about Chivalrous romance, I just found an article that tries to explain how Byatt questions a dominant Victorian construction--female sexuality-- in Possession, a Romance. The article is at http://www.postcolonialweb.org/uk/byatt/farrell4.html

[bellamarie]

Ginny..........Romance as literary genre: from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Romance_(genre)  bolding mine:
Quote

Many medieval romances recount the marvellous adventures of a chivalrous, heroic knight, often of super-human ability, who, abiding chivalry's strict codes of honour and demeanour, goes on a quest, and fights and defeats monsters and giants, thereby winning favour with a lady.[8] The story of the medieval romance focuses not upon love and sentiment, but upon adventure....

 BINGO!!!!!!   Now I know why I could not associate with any couple's romance in this book.  It's because like I saw last night, there is NO real romance between the characters, there is a romance of adventure.  For Ash he is the dragon going to slay death!  He was not interested in Christabel so much so in a romantic, she's so beautiful way, but he was interested in her mind.  He could see she was more intelligent than the average woman for her time.  She likewise was attracted to his mind.  All of their lettering writing was the two of them showing off and impressing each other and being impressed with each other.

I think Patience's visit was nothing more than to show Ellen and her as siblings and how Ellen didn't really tolerate children very well.  So its best she had none of her own.  Bertha is still a possibility of an heir of Ash's to show life continuing.  Who knows, I am grappling with this.   lol

I think the lies are red herrings, but ultimately, in the end each person has to personally realize their mortality, and they have to struggle with, "is there a God," will "I" have to be accountable to some being in the end, will it matter how I lived my life and how I treated others?  I feel all the sexual innuendos were also red herrings.  Nothing seemed to matter, there has been no passionate love relationships between any of the characters.  Blanch committing suicide because she lost Christabel to Ash was a bit over the top for me.

Roland solved the mystery of whether Christabel was with Ash when he saw the light on the cave and then Maud compared it to the beginning of Melusina, but more so he solved the mystery of Ash's obsession of life continuing. This is where my Epiphany appears!

When I think about the "Possesion" title, now through my own perspective, I think Ash wanted to possess "life", he could not accept an end of man.  As Cropper stated, "He, the great psychologist, the great poetic student of individual lives and identities, saw that before him was nothing but decline and decay, that his individual being would not be extended by progeny, that men burst like bubbles.  Imagine someone with an ego as big as Ash's to have to believe that is all there is to life and then NOTHING!  He can accept vanishing rather than death. 

If you go back and read the prelude it all  makes sense..."When a writer calls his work a Romance, it need hardly be observed that he wishes to claim a certain latitude, both as to its fashion and material, which he would not have felt himself entitled to assume, had he professed to be writing a Novel.  The latter from of compostion is presumed to aim at a very minute fidelity, not merely to the possible, but to the probable and ordinary course of man's experience.  The former_while as a work of art, it must rigidly subject itself to laws, and while it sins unpardonably so far as it may swerve aside from  he truth of the human heart_has fairly a right to present that truth under circumstances to a great extent, of the writer's own choosing or creation...The point of view in which this tale comes under the Romantic definition lies in the attempt to connect a bygone time with the very present that is flitting away from us."
_Nathaniel Hawthorne Preface to The House of the Seven Gables

This is outright telling us that the author has the discretion to call this Novel a Romance even though it is not in the sense of humans loving humans.  So the truths lie in the author's creation.

The lies in the book are the allusions Byatt has so craftily used.  I must say, she is a brilliant author.  I never thought for one minute I would finish this book or even consider trying to figure out her tangled balls of yarn.  Now, on to chapter 17.  I can't imagine what the finals chapters have in store for us or where they will lead us, but an adventure is for certain.  Still keeping my eye on Fergus...tee hee  Ciao!

[Gumtree]

Such a good discussion going on - sorry not to be posting... things went a trifle pear shaped in my life - but it's all looking up again now.

The posts are wonderful - I see we have two camps on Ash. He can go in the Ash can for mine. I have no doubt that he is the culprit in regard to Bertha's condition and that Ellen knows he is responsible (perhaps there have been other servants placed in the same position by him). Ellen has to handle the situation as best she can but she wants Randolph there to discuss it with - and probably make the decision as to Bertha's immediate future... on June 12th Ellen writes:

What should I, in Christian charity do for her? I do not want to trouble Randolph's work with these matters, and yet I am not empowered to do much for Bertha without his assent...
Patience says the servant classes are naturally ungrateful, lacking education. At times like this - when they must be encountered and judged and enquired into - I am led to wonder why they do not rather feel hatred. That hatred is what some do feel I am convinced. And I do not see how a true Christian can find a world of master and man to be 'natural'...
If Randolph were here I could discuss this with him. Perhaps it is as well he is not - it belongs to my sphere of influence and responsibility.

For Bertha perhaps it was a world of 'master and woman' - and if Ash had been there what would or could he have done for Bertha - if indeed he is the father would his action then be tempered by his fear of mortality expressed in the writings- 'that men burst like bubbles' etc and perhaps his natural desire for an heir.

Eventually Ellen consults Herbert Baulk who told her of 'an institution that makes very handsome provision for women in her position to be brought to bed and if at all possible re-established in a useful trade... I was bold enough to engage myself - that is, my dearest Randolph - to contribute to her keep until her lying-in, if that might aid in securing a bed for her

This would have been a very generous offer by Ellen and made on Randolph's behalf. I'm positive Ellen knows who the father is.
Was it Beatrice Nest who said in effect that Ellen's writings were a smokescreen designed to cover the truth - can't find the passage.

I think Patience is there simply as a contrast to Ellen - one overworked and worn down by the demands of family and the other headachy and hysterical from too little to do.

As for our dedicated Ash and LaMotte scholars - I can't find any connection to any of them - they are all self seeking and using each other and whomever may cross their paths in their 'quest' - which  really amounts to getting the better of the others being the first to uncover the Ash or LaMotte holy grail.

It is a strange novel - Byatt said:  'I see it as comedy, although it makes people cry' - well there's plenty of comedy -eg. think of the bathroom scenes - and maybe it does make people cry - if only with frustration at trying to make head and tail of the mock Victorian poetry and writing style. I love the allusions (when I get them) and like checking some of the others out - but there are just so many of them that it makes one wonder how other cultures view it -it's been translated into 30 languages - though some countries have a long history of dealing  with quests and fairy stories in their literature - so they could be ahead of me there but they'd still need a degree in English Lit as well.   

[bellamarie]

Welcome Gumtree, its great to see you post.  So you and I are thinking alike, nothing new there my friend across the continent.

I read a few interviews today that Byatt gave and I feel Patience is the contrast as you say, but also she is Margaret Drabble her younger sister.  They have this love/hate relationship that their Mother seems to have created, but now that they are both established writers seem to try to temper it with friendship. I think Byatt put her in as a sentiment to Margaret.

I dare say on my last two posts I was confused and thought I had read up to ch 17.  Well, pie in my face indeed after reading the sweet romance of Ash and Christabel in Yorkshire.  She a virgin, well I would have thought as much since her only companion up to Ash was Blanche, if indeed it was romantic with Blanche as we have been led to believe.  It is bittersweet, because Ash and Christabel both know it will come to an end.  Poor Christabel lying there in tears knowing it has been her first real true love and sexual encounter, only to know it will not last.  Well, as sorry as I feel for her those are the consequences and she herself said there will be regrets. The Fairy Melusine Poem (ch 16) sure describes their affair in my opinion. She is struggling with the judgements of the Lord.  She says, "Forever banished from the hope of Heaven."  Ash seems not to be the least bit concerned about judgement. 

I like the inference to Alfred Lord Tennyson's quote "It's better to have loved and lost, tis to have never loved at all." on pg.  309 "And every day we shall have less.  And then none."  "Would you rather, therefore, have had nothing at all?"

After reading the interviews I can see the moral fibers Byatt has woven into some of the characters keeping true to her own beliefs.  Yes, Ellen struggled with wanting to do the Christian thing where Bertha was concerned, but knew she MUST get rid of her because of he implications and shame.  Like I said before, I think Ash probably used the hired help for his sexual pleasures, since Ellen speaks of her inadequacies where sex in concerned.  Wouldn't it be a  hoot if Fergus ended up being a descendant of Ash!  Wooo wooo now there would be a paradox and comedy Byatt would have accomplished.  Okay I am going to stop, I do like getting a bit carried away with this complex novel.  But, Fergus is back on the scene and hell bent on finding out what Maud and Roland have uncovered.  Ohhh ....I can't wait to begin ch.  18!  Our poor Joan Bailey seems to be ill, I do hope Maud and Roland get a chance to speak with her before or if she dies.  I sense she holds some keys to our Pandora's box.  What say you???


Here is the link to one of the articles of an interview.  It is not a spoiler so enjoy.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/profiles/as-byatt-the-dame-who-dared-to-criticise--the-world-of-harry-potter-586608.html

AS Byatt: The dame who dared to criticise the world of Harry Potter
By Hermione Eyre
Saturday, 12 July 2003

I especially like this statement....we can all agree!

"Fans of AS Byatt's fiction can be divided into two groups: those who cannot understand her novels and those who lie." - Ron Charles, Christian Science Monitor

[marcie]

"Fans of AS Byatt's fiction can be divided into two groups: those who cannot understand her novels and those who lie." - Ron Charles, Christian Science Monitor

LOL. that's a good one, bellamarie.

I think that there is evidence in the book that Ash loved Ellen. He also loved Christabel. Both in different ways. I don't think there is any evidence that he engaged in sex with Bertha or other servants, and none that Ellen thought that of him. Ellen writes in her journal in Chapter 12: "We have been so happy in our life together, even our separations contribute to the trust and deep affection that is between us." (Ellen hasn't been told yet by Blanche of the letters between her husband and Christabel and maybe even of their going on a trip together.)

Whatever you think of Ash's brief liaison with Christabel, he is not portrayed in the book as a womanizer or a casual philanderer.

[Jonathan]

Of course Ash loved his wife Ellen. We've been given evidence that they have enjoyed many years of a happy life together. Of course she has lived for years in the shadow of an illustrious poet. Writing from Yorkshire about his field trip is an authentic bit of sharing. Only a devoted husband could write his wife about a dirtied shirt and that he would have it laundered before he gets home.

As for the supposed affair between Ash and Christabel, I get the impression that they regarded each other with suspicion. Or, without trust at the very least. Chapter 15 is a very dubious chapter. Everything depends on the credibility of the narrator. No sources are cited.

I've run out of time. Ciao.

[ginny]

"Fans of AS Byatt's fiction can be divided into two groups: those who cannot understand her novels and those who lie." - Ron Charles, Christian Science Monitor

hhahaaa, well that's heartening. hahahaaa, thank you Bellamarie. 

Also I loved this one from Sally and have put it in the heading as number 10:

Could the reader of Possession be made to feel inferior to its author?

I would really like to know everybody's  reaction to that one! We could talk on that a week, what do you say? Can somebody make you feel inferior? DO you feel inferior?

Gum!!!! There you are, so good to see you! Ash Can seems to be popular today but will we have to eat ashes? Jonathan, what a point you've made: who IS the narrator there and can we trust him/ her?

If you consider the letters proof, there's not a lot of proof anywhere, really.

I don't trust anything in the book at this point.

Thank you Marcie and Bellamarie and Mippy for those excellent links, much to explore. On a side page of one of them I found another page of links and one was to the BBC, who always do things splendidly. I hoped it was a filmed lecture as so many are there, but it's not,  but it's in print: Romantic Poets: Introduction: http://www.bbc.co.uk/arts/romantics/intro.shtml


Peter Ackroyd, writer, historian and presenter of The Romantics, explains how Romantic poetry brought about a revolution in ideas in the early 19th century that changed the face of the world today.


Bella, what sort of Pandora's box do you think Joan Bailey may have the key to?

[ginny]

I love all the disparate reactions here and how we all see the same characters differently!!!

Mippy,
I keep falling asleep reading this ... do I recall others said so, too?    Yes I'm afraid so, I find my eyes crossing and get irritated with myself. I still think a bit of judicious editing would have helped.

Gum, This would have been a very generous offer by Ellen and made on Randolph's behalf.   That's why I can't understand why she is second guessing her decision and worrying so over it. Do they take the babies away? What's with this Herbert Baulk anyway, everywhere you turn there he is suddenly.

At this point one really does not want another  peripheral character to try to understand.


Gum, It is a strange novel - Byatt said:  'I see it as comedy, although it makes people cry' - well there's plenty of comedy -eg. think of the bathroom scenes - and maybe it does make people cry - if only with frustration at trying to make head and tail of the mock Victorian poetry and writing style.


Hahaha, laughed out loud at that one.  It's very funny, to me.

So far I agree. I hope it doesn't get sad on top of everything else but I  am afraid it may.

  As for our dedicated Ash and LaMotte scholars - I can't find any connection to any of them - they are all self seeking and using each other and whomever may cross their paths in their 'quest'

I agree, ALL of them except Beatrice. Can we exclude her do you think or not?

Bella: .... Byatt gave and I feel Patience is the contrast as you say, but also she is Margaret Drabble her younger sister.

Really!!   Drabble would be more suited to Ellen from what I've seen of her, the NY Times did a big piece on her, her furniture is covered in ...was it really plastic... against the grandchildren. More Ellen, perhaps they are reversed. I have heard they did not get on. Drabble was accused of copying Byatt's style in The Seven Sisters, another extremely annoying book, where she toyed with the reader as a cat with a mouse. I appreciated it the second time around because I wasn't as angry at her.



She says, "Forever banished from the hope of Heaven."  Ash seems not to be the least bit concerned about judgement.


Why do you suppose that is? He's given up? He thinks he's beyond religion?

Marcie, "We have been so happy in our life together, even our separations contribute to the trust and deep affection that is between us."

Golly, that IS sad, she's got no end of migraines, poor thing,  she's always in bed when he's there,  is this some of her coverup writings or does she really think that?  I guess if she did, not having apparently much confidence (she misses his reading to her, but is not even sure she can read on without him tho she'd like to),  then the visit from Blanche and her finally seeing it   in Melusina (where, Bella?) would be devastating.  I hope she makes it through the book.

Or do we all think HER innocent?

 I wonder who we are going to cry over, ever since Gum put that in, I can't stop wondering. Is it she? She's a sad character, to me. I feel sorry for her.

What IF none of the characters are what we think, tho?

I must be improving, I actually just removed a take  on the name Randolph which was satirical, but I leave that to your imaginations. hahaha Now IF I were Byatt, I'd know some old Norse legend about Sir Randophe of Elk or something and I'd refer to it. Lacking that, I'll get up 4 passages for tomorrow and we can try our hand, I bet you all can tell them apart.  I can't, but I have a feeling you can. Let's give it a good shot!

Meanwhile what is your true opinion of Question 10? From Catherine  Burgass' Reader's Guide to Possession: "Could the reader of Possession be made to feel inferior to its author?"  (submitted by Kidsal). What a question! What do you think?

[ginny]

Kidsal, I have to tell you when I first read that incredible question 10, I thought it applied to the writer of that Reader's Guide. hahahaa It took me a minute to realize she meant Byatt. hahaa, sort of a legacy from Leavis?

[bellamarie]

I don't think there is any doubt that Ash loved Ellen or Christabel in his selfish way.  But...we don't know the secret Ash could not share with Christabel where he said, it would not harm Ellen, and he could not betray her.   Hmmm...interesting, he can't be open and honest with Christabel, because he can't betray probably what is a medical condition of his wife.....But...he can betray his wife and go off and have an affair with Christabel.  The fact each of them acted upon their desires, leaves me with NO sympathy for either. 

Marcie, "Ash's brief liaison" Up through ch 17 there is no indication it was indeed a brief liaison.  How many months did he betray Ellen through the letter writing and the imagination and thoughts of Christabel before they even met in the park?  Betrayal can be of mind and/or body.  I sense Ellen suffers from a mental disorder and is in denial when writing in her journal.  Blanche brought her something, and intstead of her being upset, she goes on about having the house spic and span for when Ash comes home, while Blanche goes off and committs suicide.  Whether the book does or does not portray Ash as a womanizer, or casual philanderer, really does not do much for his character as far as I am concerned, because we do know he is an adulterer.  Unless they have an open marriage arrangement, which we have had no indication of such at this point.  This sort of reminds me of so many politicians and famous men, who think they are entitled to pursue other women regardless of being married.  Look at JFK, Jackie was known to spend endless hours in bed due to the anxiety and emotional stress she dealt with, while John looked like this wonderful, doting father and husband, all the while committing adultery.  These type of men are prone to think they are bigger than life and cheat in life and in death, as I see Ash doing.  He can not accept there is nothing after death, because he does not believe in God or the afterlife in a heavenly sense.  He needs and wants proof scientifically life will go on in some form other than spiritually.  This is where I do feel sad for Christabel, because she is a Christian and is struggling with knowing she will have to face the choices she is making.  Like she said in her poem, "Forever banished from the hope of Heaven."  She said, "She had to carry her own burden," and what a burden it is for her.

I am in the group of Ash can, and it would take alot for me to take him out of that can and turn my feelings around about him.  Christabel tried to stop the letter writing, a honorable man would have respected her wishes, especially since he was married. Although if he had any honor he would not have been doing this in the first place, because he admits from the start at the breakfast he had to possess Christabel. I blame them both, I am just saying, HE could have at that point stopped pursuing her.

I can't wait to see what Blanche gave Ellen.  As for whether Bertha's baby is Ash's, that still remains to be seen.  There has to be a reason Byatt wrote it, a red herring, possibly, but I don't feel it is.  I'm sensing the baby has a connection in this, and someone is going to get a shock when they find out.  Gosh can I wait until the week end to continue reading? 

[bellamarie]

OMG!!!! Ginny we were posting at the same time.  I read your post and just about fell out of my chair laughing.  My husband came into the room and had to see what all the laughter was about.  NOW...Byatt has us seeing the comedy.

Yes, Margaret was the more perfect one of the two.  In one of the interviews, Byatt even expresses her feeling less important etc.  BUT....out of humor she may have decided to cast Margaret as Patience.  Whichever, my point was I think she wanted to bring in the sisterly connection.  We would not have known it to be of much importance had we not known the relationship between the two sisters.  I  have five sisters and oh what competition we still have with each other, even though we have much love for each other.  I have three grand dauthters and boy is there a huge amount of competition between them.  Oh shucks, I am getting a bit off the topic.  LOLOL  I truly enjoyed your post Ginny, and will have to go back and reread it a few times when I'm looking for humor.  And yes, I agree we sure don't need one more character to throw in the batch at this point.  This recipe is doomed already!   LOLOL

For some reason I feel Joan Bailey holds the key to the Pandora's box, e.g., all the answers to be revealed.  Hold on Joan.....Maud and Roland are on there way home.  George, you take good care of our favorite character.  

"Could the reader of Possession be made to feel inferior to its author?"

Oh heavens NO!  I barely know Victorian style writing from Modern and did not feel inferior.  Frustrated, yes!  I sensed from the very beginning Byatt was showing off, and in her interview she admits to it.  She did not intend to be superior in her writing, she intended it to be a romance, of Victorian age, so she could use all her poems and such, because as she stated, she was frustrated with the 60's and wanted to go back to a time this book would be appreciated, yet bring it into the modern day, with a bit of comedy thrown in.  I sorta missed the comedy up to your last post Ginny.  Ciao...

[marcie]

Whatever the cause of her condition, it sounds like Ellen wouldn't let Randolph come near her on their wedding night or ever. It also sounds like he has always been very considerate of her about that.

Perhaps his telling Christabel that Ellen would not be harmed by his and Christabel's physical relationship has to do with his thinking that Christabel would not be taking Ellen's place since Ellen doesn't have a physical relationship with him. I'm just trying to interpret what he may have meant.

There isn't evidence that his love for Ellen diminished as he loved Christabel but he may have come to know and regret (or not; we don't know one way or the other) that their involvement caused others to be hurt. The fact that he and some others of his time did not hold religious beliefs would not have caused them to be any less caring.

[nolvikarn]

Dear Ginny,
Ollie, Ollie, Oxen Freeee. . . . . . .  was a funny (at first confusing) metaphor.
And it took me some minute to recognize the rhythm and the feeling from long gone childhoods innocent games.
But there is a relevance there: I am free to search for something hidden in this great novel and myself.
I have found out that I am not educated or cultivated enough to play in the same league as you lot.

Nevertheless, it is very stimulating to read your comments and realize that they very often are identical with mine.
I think that Ms. Byatt is playing with us. I'm sure that she has had great fun writing this tall tale, showing off her brilliant handling of the poets from the time. Imitating their style and making great pastiches, full of love and admiration.
But of course trying to give a look into the academic world and show us that in the end we are all looking and striving for something. It's in the human nature to have a dream of some sort and here you have all kind of desires: fame, glory, to get hold of the Holy Grail, possession and over all love and nearness. The big loser is Ellen Ash. Devoted wife, poor lover.

The other week the Swedish TV had an investigation of how women with the disease "vestibulitis" are mistreated. When it comes to the unfortunate Mrs. Ellen Ash it suddenly struck me that she might have been suffering from that. I have never heard about that disease before. Have you? A woman suffering of this, is incapable to make physical love without great pain and the pain can be more or less constant. Am I happy to be a man?

Ginny dearest. I really am sorry to let you down. You are (for me) the Wonder woman. Reading, editing and commenting everything we are thinking. That's an amazing job. And you also make me (us) feel equal. I certainly hope that this is not the last word from you and I promise you that I'll find you and mail you again.

With love and affection 
Ollie, Ollie

[marcie]

What interesting thoughts, Olle. You are in the "same boat" with all of us. Please don't feel that your reading of the book is any less than ours whose first language is English. We are having difficulty too. I am amazed at your skill with the English language.

[kidsal]

I have been reading Peter Hopkirks marvelous books about 19th century India, China, Russia, Pakistan, etc.  I was trying to explain these books to several of the people I have lunch with.  None of them had heard of the Silk Road.  I couldn't believe it -- why had they never heard of it and why did I know of it?   Know I am reading this book and realize how little I know of literature.  I had heard the names of most of the authors and had read some of them but couldn't recall much about them.  My smugness about being the great know-it-all has taken a beating reading this book.

[Mippy]

Feeling inferior?  let's see         Nope, guess not!
        
I think the reasons Blanche killed herself are explained in the letter she left.
As in other mental illnesses, it was apparently a cry for attention and love.
                          
As a reader, this ploy was annoying to me, but many authors use it:
kill off a character whenever you don't know what to do with her otherwise.

[ginny]

Ollie Ollie, you are such a HOOT! I can't imagine trying to read this in another language, it's bad enough in English. Great point on the television show, so you and Marcie both see Ellen perhaps as not participating physically or happily physically in the marriage. Interesting.

I am so glad to see you here, now come right on back again and give your Swedish opinion. Gumtree, in Australia,  has just asked what people in other countries reading in translation think of this and HERE you are, how do you like her compared to her sister?

Bella I got up thinking I should not have made that comparison between sisters based on one NY Times article. I think I'll reread a bio of both before I assign the characters in the book to them. I am heartened to hear of the results of your own reading of Byatt's interviews however, (because they support my supposition) hahaaa.

Sally, the Silk Road? Loved this: My smugness about being the great know-it-all has taken a beating reading this book.

Love it, so you're thinking Burgass is right. Mippy and Bella say no way, but admit to feeling frustrated over Byatt.

For my part, I admire learning and it seems that Byatt has a lot of it, but the presentation is maddening, so no I don't feel inferior (pearls before swine syndrome I guess), for what's truly there in learning I am in admiration, for the way it's presented, like her sister, I am in frustration and fury half the time.

I got up thinking how much I am enjoying this book discussion (and not the book). I believe this is the first time (seems like it) I have not read the book several times before discussing in parts. This time I really wanted the feeling of being one giant brain together, reacting, as a reader will, to the twists and turns.

I don't know what's coming and have but will not watch the film adaptation till we're though. Let's discuss, at the end, those who have or can get the film, for a day or so any differences we see in the film treatment?

I got up thinking about EVIDENCE, it's all over your posts.

I don't think there is any evidence that he engaged in sex with Bertha or other servants, and none that Ellen thought that of him.

Chapter 15 is a very dubious chapter. Everything depends on the credibility of the narrator. No sources are cited.

We've been given evidence that they have enjoyed many years of a happy life together.

Whatever the cause of her condition, it sounds like Ellen wouldn't let Randolph come near her on their wedding night or ever.


There isn't evidence that his love for Ellen diminished as he loved Christabel

I think you've hit on the very subject and subtext, the main theme of the book, expressed quite early on, on page 56. The author is too clever not to have summed up the entire thing in the initial chapters, but cryptically, bafflingly.

"Well," she said, "the dates fit. You could make up a whole story. On  no real evidence. It would change all sorts of things, LaMotte scholarship. Even ideas about Melusina. That Fairy Topic. It's iintriguing."

That's the theme of the book, in my opinion. Evidence, or more importantly, the lack of it.

It's a satire on literary criticism and those who practice it. Marcie mentioned Ash and Christabel are like a Fairy Tale. Isn't the entire book? It's one big Fairy Tale with the cardboard characters all runnning about, it's Wonderland, 'twas brillig, and nothing is what it seems. All of the seekers, the literary scholars, I believe, not having read a word past 17 will be found to have manufactured "evidence," some of them deliberately, some of them earnestly, some of them whatever, all of them will look foolish and wrong. It's a satire. Intended to be funny. ON literary scholarship.  We'll see no more evidence than what's on these pages, who is the author of any of them?

I got up thinking of Motel of the Mysteries by David Macaulay.  Are you familiar with it? It's a satire in the form of drawings and text on modern archaeology, parodying both (but not both by name only by combination and allusion), Heinrich Schliemann and Howard Carter, two very different archaeologists and the discovery of Tut's Tomb, or in this case the Toot 'n Come On Motel in the year 4022 A.D.. It's absolutely hilarious.

This is, in my opinion, a prose version of the same thing. We will find no hard evidence and any conclusions we are now drawing are based on what she's seeded here like the bread crumbs for Hansel and Gretel. Too bad half of them are missing, but that's no mistake. I think you're all picking up on it indirectly, but that's what I think today, tomorrow may be different.  Love it.

[ginny]

Mippy what an intreresting supposition, that Byatt didn't know what to do with Blanche's character so she had her kill herself, get rid of the character? What do you all think? Why is Blanche in here? Why Bertha?


The exercise here presented, in identifying the poetic "voice" of Ash from LaMotte, has proven to be extremely instructive. I found "La Motte" to have two stylistic patterns which identify "her" immediately. It's when these are absent that it becomes more difficult, take a stab at these, who wrote them?

A.  

 "This rock was covered with a vivid pelt
Of emerald mosses, maiden hairs and mints
Drabbling dark crowns and sharply-scented stems
Amongst the water's peaks and freshenings."

B.

"From which descends a glossy cone
A mirror-spire that mocks its own.
Bewteen these two the mackerel sails
As did the swallow in the vales
Of summer air , and he too sees"

C.

"Beating the lambent bath to diamond-fine
Refracting lines of spray, a dancing veil
Of heavier water on the breathless air."

D.

"Or never-melted mountains of green ice
Or hot dark secret places in the steam
Of equatorial forests, where the sun
Strikes far above the canopy, where men"

If we can see the difference, we will be able to see what Ellen saw in Melusina that made her so upset. I see it now. It's the same voice, to me, but the STYLE is different.


Most of the time LaMotte rhymes. It's very difficult to find parts where she does not.  And her verse is sing-song, it's  a particular rhythmic pattern, iambs, it's iambic pentameter for the most part and the rhythm is very strong.

She also uses lots of dashes ------  big ones, especially as her work goes on. Many revisions of Melusina, huh? We should be able to tell them apart, can we?

[ginny]

PS: Anybody know whose shells those are in the heading? Whose "Cabinet of Curiosities?"

[Jonathan]

I'm beginning to look at the book as a 'cabinet of curiosities.' There must be something in it for everyone, no matter what the interest. It certainly has taken me back to the Yorkshire moors and beaches. Such eloquent things are said about it, even the strong winds are made to sing and dance and to liberate ones mind, but kept me from getting out of the car at times. But it can be breath takingly beautiful. I'm with these people in spirit.

Ginny, that's a wonderful exercise, attempting to distinguish between her and his lines. Beyond the stylistic differences, it's easy to see what drew them together. Something fateful about this strange liason.

With some of the literary pieces, as well as the journals and letters, I'm inclined to let Maud look for the meanings. I trust her judgement. But even she feels overwhelmed at times and exclaims, after several days of looking for clues along with Roland:

I just want to look at something, with interest, and without layers of meaning. Something new.

And off they go, she and Roland, to Boggle Hole. They have spent several days looking and finding words and things that will prove that Christabel was there with Ash. Strange words, brooches, etc. But on this day the two of them just wander, and do some beach combing.

A peculiarity of that beach is the proliferation of large rounded stones...shiny black, sulphurous yellow, a kind of old potato blend of greenish waxy, sandy white or shot with a kind of rosy quartz. p292

Fast forward to page 312. Or, more correctly, go back in time. And we find Ash and Christabel on the same beach:

On that shore can be found round stones of many kinds of rocks black basalt, various coloured granites, sandstones and quartz. She was delighted by these, she filled the picnic basket with a heavy nest of them..."I shall take them home," she said, and use them to prop doors and weigh down sheets of my huge poem, huge at least in mass of paper.

Doorstops and paperweights! I had to shudder when I suddenly remembered having read about round stones once before...on page 235.

"What happened to Blanche?"

"She drowned herself. She jumped from the bridge, at Putney - with her clothes wetted and her pockets full of big round stones

Blanche is crucial to the plot and her death must have consequences for Christabel before too long. Blanche had found a life with Christabel and could not live without her.

My favorite allusion. Christabel and Ash being served dinner by Mrs Cammish, a tall woman with the heavy-browed frown of the Northmen in the Bayeux Tapestry.

http://www.bayeuxtapestry.org.uk/

[ginny]

I'm beginning to look at the book as a 'cabinet of curiosities.'


Hahha, and so it is.  Great parallels!  So MANY!  I am so glad you liked the exercise and found it useful.

Bayeux Tapestry! I absolutely love that thing. One of the highlights of one of my trips was seeing the original, in the new museum:  they do it perfectly. You are in these long long lines and then you finally get to it but on the way you walk past  and they explain every panel. IF you take the time, most people are in a total hurry. Now that I know what it IS and how much I could have understood I'd like to do it again. I was relying on the audio which did not actually explain all.

I'm glad to hear that even more will be revealed about Blanche and the plot, can't wait to read it. On the texts everybody is silent, is that because you, like me, can't tell them apart without the rhyming?

Because they are all Byatt's voice?

I think that's the case and I notice as she goes on how much more sing song LaMotte becomes, how much shorter and how many dashes and how many rhymes.

I had quite  a time finding prose selections and I copied them and the page number and who said it, wrote the answers and covered them up.

Here's what I think, not remembering one answer and why:



A.  

 "This rock was covered with a vivid pelt
Of emerald mosses, maiden hairs and mints
Drabbling dark crowns and sharply-scented stems
Amongst the water's peaks and freshenings."

There's no da DAH da DAH da DAH da DAH da DAH  which is iambic pentameter and what LaMotte uses.

I'd say this is Ash. Remember I don't remember who did what, so that's my thought this morning. Drabbling dark crowns: in meter of poetry written like DRAB bling dark CROWNS  | uu|

no u| u| u| u|  where u means an unstressed syllable and | shows a stress.  





B.

"From which descends a glossy cone
A mirror-spire that mocks its own.
Between these two the mackerel sails
As did the swallow in the vales
Of summer air , and he too sees"

This one rhymes, and it's da DAH da DAH da DAH da DAH, this is LaMotte.



C.

"Beating the lambent bath to diamond-fine
Refracting lines of spray, a dancing veil
Of heavier water on the breathless air."

lambent bath to diamond fire...BEATING THE ....|uu

hmm I'd say Ash there's no da DAH

D.

"Or never-melted mountains of green ice
Or hot dark secret places in the steam
Of equatorial forests, where the sun
Strikes far above the canopy, where men"

This one's got a rhythm when you read it, but it does not rhyme. It's possible I cut off a rhyme, notice that the last sentence is not finished. But there's no rhyme. It's possible this is Ash but there's a rhythm in the words, it's not da DAH but it's a rhythm, I'll say LaMotte.

Or maybe an Ash influenced (written) LaMotte? That's what I meant when I said Ellen saw him in Melusina. I could be wrong. I probably am.  What do you all see?

I'm with Maude, TELL us already what YOU mean, this is not rocket science. hahahaa (Don't you HATE it when somebody says that?)

Love it.

What are YOUR thoughts today?

[kidsal]

...where men dream/scheme/preen?  LaMotte

[bellamarie]

Ginny/Mippy,  "Byatt didn't know what to do with Blanche's character so she had her kill herself, get rid of the character? What do you all think? Why is Blanche in here? Why Bertha?

I don't think Byatt would not know what to do with a character and then just kill them off.  I think she has a reason for each character in the book and it will become clear as we read on.  Blanche was to show that Christabel had a relationship with another woman, and I feel because of her betrayal and going off with Ash was more than Blanche could handle emotionally.  I think Christabel is going to have to carry that burden once she returns and learns of the suicide.  That in and of its self may be what ends Ash and Christabel's relationship.  Christabel has numerous times made it known she believes in God and entering heaven is a concern of hers.  Having this affair with Ash is going to seem small sin, to knowing Blanche killed herself because of Christabel's actions.  I am NOT holding Christabel responsible for Blance's suicide, but I sense Christabel will hold herself responsible.  (Jonathon seems you and I are agreeing once again, I am shocked!  LOLOL)

I still feel Bertha's child may turn out to be one of these modern day characters, a descendant of Ash.  Because Ash is obsessed about life continuing it would tie in to that theme.

Sorry I have been absent, my day care was rather overwhelming these past two days.  I look forward to the next three days of quiet and calm so I can read the next chapters.  I really can't wait and am beginning tonight.  Ginny I did notice that Christabel does like to rhyme her poems, and I do see that she tells a story of her own life in her poems.  Ash has a tendency to rattle on and on and on in his poems so I haven't cared to read them much.  Be back to check in later, til then .....Ciao

[ginny]

Wow,. I missed two of them and now that I look I can definitely see why!



A.  Page 320

 "This rock was covered with a vivid pelt
Of emerald mosses, maiden hairs and mints
Drabbling dark crowns and sharply-scented stems
Amongst the water's peaks and freshenings."

There's no da DAH da DAH da DAH da DAH da DAH  which is iambic pentameter and what LaMotte uses.

I'd say this is Ash.

That was right, no da DAH da DAH da DAH





B.  Page 149

"From which descends a glossy cone
A mirror-spire that mocks its own.
Between these two the mackerel sails
As did the swallow in the vales
Of summer air , and he too sees"

This one rhymes, and it's da DAH da DAH da DAH da DAH, this is LaMotte.

This one is right.

The next two are wrong:




C. Page 135:

"Beating the lambent bath to diamond-fine
Refracting lines of spray, a dancing veil
Of heavier water on the breathless air."

lambent bath to diamond fire...BEATING THE ....|uu

hmm I'd say Ash there's no da DAH

This is interesting. Here Roland is reading "Melusina," it was one of the few non rhyming  excerpts from Melusina I could find. The meter is all over the place here. It doesn't say, does it, what edition of Melusina this is (weren't there 8?) and it's POSSIBLE this excerpt actually WAS written by Ash but it doesn't say so and again this one is listed as being Melusina by LaMotte!!

Oh wait! WAIT! Here it comes after Ellen's Journal listing of having "laid down Melusina having come trembling to the end."

Oh my goodness, my goodness, THIS is why you can't read the book too fast, here it is! THIS IS the passage, she recognizes Ash when supposedly LaMotte has written it. Holy smoke! Talk about stumbling innocently on the very thing, wow!!

WOW!!

D.  Page 223   I totally missed this one:

"Or never-melted mountains of green ice
Or hot dark secret places in the steam
Of equatorial forests, where the sun
Strikes far above the canopy, where men"

THIS is Ash! Supposedly. In Swammerdam.  And I do see now it's not strictly iambs, lots of different meter.

This is why I can't tell Byatt from Ash from La Motte.  I truly think it's all one voice using or trying to use different forms and meter.  But of course it does not rhyme, it's not in little couplets, there are no dashes and the rhythm (iambic pentameter is normal speech I think) is not as strict as anything else, but what a great exercise.

I was wrong on this one, it's supposed to be Ash.  I love stuff like this. What fun!

Sally, no the next line is:

And other creatures never see her light.

No rhyme so that's why I left it out, Ash does not rhyme.

LOVE it!

[ginny]

Bella,


I am NOT holding Christabel responsible for Blanche's suicide, but I sense Christabel will hold herself responsible


I sort of have a problem with  where the guilt needs to be placed in the case of suicide. Poor Blanche. As Mippy says her reason's in her letter. Who was it who filled their pockets with rocks and drowned, another very famous author? Virginia Woolf? We just read about it in another book discussion, I can't recall.

Other than Mary Wollstonecraft.  (who was she?) She left a note saying she could not pay her debts (page 236), that's Christabel's fault if they had an understanding (how long WAS this trip Christabel and Ash went on, anyway?) and she was a "superfluous person of no utility," (page 236 for the suicide note).

She died in June of 1860. We need to try to keep what few dates are here separate.

Just because the two women were living together I don't think we can assume a homosexual relationship. They were like creative minds, one had a small inheritance and supported the household. Perhaps they formed a friendship, attachment. Hard to figure why Christabel just left Blanche to the debts unless of course this was a long loong LONG trip.

So what guilt would we say Christabel actually has here? The coroner thinks Blanche was of unsound mind at the time, women tending to be hysterical. ("being known for strong and irrational alterations of temperament.")

A lot of suicides or so I've read, produce a lot of anger in those left behind and sometimes it's kind of a "I told you so" type of thing, now you'll be sorry." I don't know anything about suicide personally, thank God,  (and thus far we know almost nothing about their home life) but if Christabel left Blanche with no income or penny to her name alone with no word or provision then perhaps the guilt is a bit more than imagined, what do you all think?

How culpable is Christobel at this point do you think (knowing only what we know so far) in the suicide of  Blanche? What alternatives would Blanche have actually had?

Christabel is beginning to look kind of as Ash described her physically.

__________________________

Bellamarie, I totally missed this: and I do see that she tells a story of her own life in her poems.. Good one!

__________________________

Ok we've got a few days before we move on to the next section and I imagine you all frantically reading to (1) catch up or (2) find out what happened. I'm moving on tonight myself, but till then, what is meant here?



6. "A clean empty bed. I have this image of a clean empty bed in a clean empty room, where nothing is asked or to  be asked." (page 290). What do you make of this dual dream of Roland and Maude?

So Roland and Maude BOTH dream of a clean empty bed in a clean empty room where nothing is asked or to be asked. Hmm, that's pretty strange, what  a strange image and imagine the coincidence: BOTH of them dream of this. I can say I never have, what does this mean?

Possession and the various meanings of the word is a theme running thru the book and here it comes out again as Ash speaks of Christabel.

How many different meanings does "possession" HAVE anyway and what does this mean?


8. "He would teach her she was not his possession" (page 304). What does this mean?

He's going to teach HER? He's so totally full of himself it makes you want to barf.

What are your own reactions  on these or any other subject today?

[ginny]

Oh our tricksey author. This is the kind of thing that drives me wild. Just wild.

 Mary Wollstonecraft did not drown by throwing self off a bridge with stones in her pocket. No stones. She weighed herself down by getting her clothes wet first and walking back and forth. She was rescued and did not die.

 She was devastated by losing her friend to marriage. The friend's husband took the friend, always in precarious health,  off to Europe fpr a cure, and the friend  died but Mary Wollstonecraft  found employment as a governess and went on, writing etc. She died in childbirth or rather of septicemia.

[ginny]

And yes, it was Virginia Woolf who committed suicide with rocks in her pockets:

On 28 March 1941, Woolf committed suicide. She put on her overcoat, filled its pockets with stones, then walked into the River Ouse near her home and drowned herself. Woolf's skeletonised body was not found until 18 April 1941.  Wikipedia which may be as factual as our Trickesy Byatt.