MARION FAY by Anthony Trollope
Oct. 1st, 2013 10:13 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
blueinkedfrostThis rather good quote occurs close to the beginning, establishing the premise: The radicalism of a Marquis is apt to be tainted by special considerations in regard to his own family.
I was charmed by the collision of the mildly hypocritical familial personages - the uncle the Marquis against his radical nephew who then becomes a new radical Marquis and a father of children much more extreme than he is. Lady Frances falls for post office clerk George Roden and Lord Hampstead for Marion Fay the Quaker's daughter, the cause of great familial consternation. The Marchioness is grievously upset at her stepchildren's mesalliances and retains hopes for her own sons in the succession scheme; her indolent chaplain Greenwood encourages her worst impulses while grasping at income for himself; and bumptious post office clerk Crocker intrudes at every opportunity.
The best description I've read of this novel is Catherine Pope's "a literary bubble and squeak". The novel is about the characters' interactions with rank, but the mood and nature of the different story threads make them seem oddly juxtaposed. This is a long juicy novel of ample substance for an entertainment of length, but some aspects don't weave well together.
There's an autobiographical element in George Roden's profession. The novel contains interesting descriptions of life in the Public Service, which has and hasn't changed since that time. Here's one such:
"Is a young man to be afraid of that?" asked the Quaker, indignantly. "Ten till four, with one hour for the newspapers and another for lunch. See the consequence. I never knew a young man yet from a public office who understood the meaning of a day's work."
"I think that is a little hard," said Roden. "If a man really works, six hours continuously is as much as he can do with any good to his employers or himself."
It was also interesting to read that the expression 'talk the hind legs off a dog' was considered unsuitable for the ears of well-born ladies at this time. (I assume because of 'hind'.)
The story retreads some ground covered in AN EYE FOR AN EYE, but Hampstead is much more likeable than Fred Neville when it comes to falling in love with women of lower rank; the Marquis' heir treats Marion Fay with honest respect as well as infatuation. This line has an interesting innuendo to it, though, regarding Marion from Hampstead's point of view:
She had poked his fire, and she must be made to sit at his hearth for the remainder of their joint existence.
The plot and characters sometimes seem mechanical. Sometimes the honourable characters act in a way that's noble and seems to show a touching faith in human nature on the author's part, but which also comes across as not quite plausible. (A sense of honour before reason can be a human trait, but it took me some distance into the novel to become convinced and interested in these characters.) Additionally, the antagonists are lacking in power and seem pathetic, particularly Crocker the clerk and Greenwood the chaplain.
Crocker the post office clerk as an antagonist is bothersome. Crocker's boorish, opportunistic, lazy, selfish, shallow, rather stupid, and from a family of no renown nor wealth. Setting him up against a cast studded with prosperous marquises, lords, ladies, and dukes comes across as bullying - he is effectively powerless against all the other characters. Despite Crocker's lack of personal redeeming qualities, one feels sorry for him for being so out of his depth and having almost no one who likes him. The way that Crocker drives characters toward a misunderstanding that could have been corrected with a little common sense and communication is rather silly. Crocker's point seems to be to show that sometimes lower class people are terrible people with no idea how to act gracefully, but that's an unpalatable message to a modern eye - and Trollope himself is always consistent in showing upper class people who also act terribly, so the point is rather lost except in that Crocker is an excuse for other characters' inner snobs to come out. Which in turn makes them come across as bullies, considering their position above Crocker. At least Crocker's exuberance is undaunted and adds energy to the story.
Greenwood is another (relatively) powerless antagonist who makes himself the Marchioness' Svengali and then flirts with the idea of turning murderer himself. His ideas are melodramatic, but the way they are accomplished in the novel seems natural - vide Trollope's own words on the subject of the sensational novel. Melodramatic things have happened in reality and can seem very realistic when written by a skilled novelist. But, though Greenwood was realistically handled, he suffered the problem of being a powerless antagonist - he helps the Marchioness worsen her own moral character and he inconveniences and annoys other characters. Despite his total lack of redeeming traits circumstances alone make him pitiable and ineffective, like Crocker.
One aspect I enjoyed in the characterisation, though, was the moral views of the Marchioness contrasted with the moral views of her stepson, the heir. The Marchioness knows that her stepson stands against the interest of her own sons and therefore her conscience will not permit her to be anything but kind to him, but since her stepdaughter is not against her interests, she is able to be mean there. Whereas the stepson announces that he would find his stepmother more palatable if she tried to murder him for her son's inheritance rather than if she was simply cruel to his sister, since the former would mean she was doing wrong for love rather than hate.
The mystery of Mrs Roden's background was an intriguing aspect of the story: just enough information that it felt to be a mystery, but not enough information revealed to prove the details of the solution before a due time, with a natural feel to it to avoid the sensation that the author was painfully contriving the lack of revelation. The solution is melodramatic, but handled with enough skill to keep it from sliding into sensation. Unfortunate implications of Roden's past are partially invoked, but the novel as a whole as well as Trollope's other works use the fact that noble blood is not any more noble in character than average blood.
The past of Marion Fay's mother then comes into question to parallel this story, though her crime turns out to be ill health of a possibly hereditary nature, as per the Victorian novelist's medical science. It's tragic: medicine is not advanced in this time and Marion may die young from causes barely understood. (Perhaps the narrator's reticence means to imply something specifically feminine about the causes of the illness Marion may have inherited from her mother, or perhaps it's only a writer's vagueness.) Even if she lives to marry, the reader feels that perhaps she will die only a few years into her happiness, as Jane Austen is supposed to have remarked extracanonically about the fate of Jane Fairfax. The tragedy is a valid way of occupying a reader's time, but it is oddly combined with the other stories.
Some aspects charming, some aspects mechanical, a mix of traits. Since this is a long novel, there's plenty of meat on its bones to fill a reader's time in a congenial way.
I was charmed by the collision of the mildly hypocritical familial personages - the uncle the Marquis against his radical nephew who then becomes a new radical Marquis and a father of children much more extreme than he is. Lady Frances falls for post office clerk George Roden and Lord Hampstead for Marion Fay the Quaker's daughter, the cause of great familial consternation. The Marchioness is grievously upset at her stepchildren's mesalliances and retains hopes for her own sons in the succession scheme; her indolent chaplain Greenwood encourages her worst impulses while grasping at income for himself; and bumptious post office clerk Crocker intrudes at every opportunity.
The best description I've read of this novel is Catherine Pope's "a literary bubble and squeak". The novel is about the characters' interactions with rank, but the mood and nature of the different story threads make them seem oddly juxtaposed. This is a long juicy novel of ample substance for an entertainment of length, but some aspects don't weave well together.
There's an autobiographical element in George Roden's profession. The novel contains interesting descriptions of life in the Public Service, which has and hasn't changed since that time. Here's one such:
"Is a young man to be afraid of that?" asked the Quaker, indignantly. "Ten till four, with one hour for the newspapers and another for lunch. See the consequence. I never knew a young man yet from a public office who understood the meaning of a day's work."
"I think that is a little hard," said Roden. "If a man really works, six hours continuously is as much as he can do with any good to his employers or himself."
It was also interesting to read that the expression 'talk the hind legs off a dog' was considered unsuitable for the ears of well-born ladies at this time. (I assume because of 'hind'.)
The story retreads some ground covered in AN EYE FOR AN EYE, but Hampstead is much more likeable than Fred Neville when it comes to falling in love with women of lower rank; the Marquis' heir treats Marion Fay with honest respect as well as infatuation. This line has an interesting innuendo to it, though, regarding Marion from Hampstead's point of view:
She had poked his fire, and she must be made to sit at his hearth for the remainder of their joint existence.
The plot and characters sometimes seem mechanical. Sometimes the honourable characters act in a way that's noble and seems to show a touching faith in human nature on the author's part, but which also comes across as not quite plausible. (A sense of honour before reason can be a human trait, but it took me some distance into the novel to become convinced and interested in these characters.) Additionally, the antagonists are lacking in power and seem pathetic, particularly Crocker the clerk and Greenwood the chaplain.
Crocker the post office clerk as an antagonist is bothersome. Crocker's boorish, opportunistic, lazy, selfish, shallow, rather stupid, and from a family of no renown nor wealth. Setting him up against a cast studded with prosperous marquises, lords, ladies, and dukes comes across as bullying - he is effectively powerless against all the other characters. Despite Crocker's lack of personal redeeming qualities, one feels sorry for him for being so out of his depth and having almost no one who likes him. The way that Crocker drives characters toward a misunderstanding that could have been corrected with a little common sense and communication is rather silly. Crocker's point seems to be to show that sometimes lower class people are terrible people with no idea how to act gracefully, but that's an unpalatable message to a modern eye - and Trollope himself is always consistent in showing upper class people who also act terribly, so the point is rather lost except in that Crocker is an excuse for other characters' inner snobs to come out. Which in turn makes them come across as bullies, considering their position above Crocker. At least Crocker's exuberance is undaunted and adds energy to the story.
Greenwood is another (relatively) powerless antagonist who makes himself the Marchioness' Svengali and then flirts with the idea of turning murderer himself. His ideas are melodramatic, but the way they are accomplished in the novel seems natural - vide Trollope's own words on the subject of the sensational novel. Melodramatic things have happened in reality and can seem very realistic when written by a skilled novelist. But, though Greenwood was realistically handled, he suffered the problem of being a powerless antagonist - he helps the Marchioness worsen her own moral character and he inconveniences and annoys other characters. Despite his total lack of redeeming traits circumstances alone make him pitiable and ineffective, like Crocker.
One aspect I enjoyed in the characterisation, though, was the moral views of the Marchioness contrasted with the moral views of her stepson, the heir. The Marchioness knows that her stepson stands against the interest of her own sons and therefore her conscience will not permit her to be anything but kind to him, but since her stepdaughter is not against her interests, she is able to be mean there. Whereas the stepson announces that he would find his stepmother more palatable if she tried to murder him for her son's inheritance rather than if she was simply cruel to his sister, since the former would mean she was doing wrong for love rather than hate.
The mystery of Mrs Roden's background was an intriguing aspect of the story: just enough information that it felt to be a mystery, but not enough information revealed to prove the details of the solution before a due time, with a natural feel to it to avoid the sensation that the author was painfully contriving the lack of revelation. The solution is melodramatic, but handled with enough skill to keep it from sliding into sensation. Unfortunate implications of Roden's past are partially invoked, but the novel as a whole as well as Trollope's other works use the fact that noble blood is not any more noble in character than average blood.
The past of Marion Fay's mother then comes into question to parallel this story, though her crime turns out to be ill health of a possibly hereditary nature, as per the Victorian novelist's medical science. It's tragic: medicine is not advanced in this time and Marion may die young from causes barely understood. (Perhaps the narrator's reticence means to imply something specifically feminine about the causes of the illness Marion may have inherited from her mother, or perhaps it's only a writer's vagueness.) Even if she lives to marry, the reader feels that perhaps she will die only a few years into her happiness, as Jane Austen is supposed to have remarked extracanonically about the fate of Jane Fairfax. The tragedy is a valid way of occupying a reader's time, but it is oddly combined with the other stories.
Some aspects charming, some aspects mechanical, a mix of traits. Since this is a long novel, there's plenty of meat on its bones to fill a reader's time in a congenial way.
