The Readers Review: Literature from 1714 to 1910 discussion
This topic is about
Ruth
Elizabeth Gaskell Collection
>
Ruth - Week 3
date
newest »
newest »
It is getting very religious - a bit too much for me:(
MadgeUK wrote: "It is getting very religious - a bit too much for me:("It will get better in this section, I promise:-)
NB! This thread covers chapters XXI-XXVI.
Gaskell's first novel but she wrote Mary Barton and Cranford before it, which are more sophisticated and far less religious. Wikipedia says about the reception of Ruth:-'Ruth received a mixed critical reception. As a work that dealt frankly with seduction and illegitimacy, it inevitably attracted controversy: Gaskell reported that it was a "prohibited book" in her own household, that friends expressed "deep regret" at its publication, and that two acquaintances burnt their copies. On the other hand, some reviewers complained that Gaskell painted Ruth as too passive a victim of Bellingham's advances, eluding the question of Ruth's own sexual feelings. Gaskell loaded the story down with so many extenuating circumstances that Ruth scarcely seemed a representative example of a "fallen woman."
I think today we would call Ruth a wimp:)
Well, all good things must come to an end. And it is definitely true for Ruth. Her disguise and her true identity are now known to too many people. Some of them disclose her true self, and some of them keep it private. Despite the semi-revelationary nature of the plot, the novel has not yet reached its denouement. Thus, readers are left with many unanswered questions. I also have some questions at hand for you to consider1. Do you think that Gaskell is critical when she portrays the election and Mr. Bradshaw's involvement?
2. Why are we not explained how Mr. Bellingham became Mr. Donne? Is his reappearance plausible? Has Gaskell prepared us for his eventual reappearance? Does Mr. Donne's reincarnation as a potential and later elected MP hold water?
3. Why does Gaskell shift gears and focus on Jemima?
4. Do you think that Mr. Farquhar lacks tangibility and is mostly present as a shadow and a device to trigger powerful revelations in the novel?
5. Why has not Jemima exposed Ruth's background and past?
6. Do you think that Gaskell relies too much on serendipity to move the plot forward?
7. How could you characterize Mr. Donne's behavior? (his secret investigations, his love confessions, his proposal, and eventually his rumored marriage)?
8. At finally, why does any malaise and illness play such an important role in any Victorian novel? Is a lack of proper medication and knowledge the only possible explanation? The last question, as you see, is just a general one, but Victorian literature is full of examples where a minor cold or malaise, by modern standards, turns into a major event.
I think illness was a major event then and before anti-biotics and safe surgery it killed a great many people. Childbirth was a killer for both mothers and babies - only 50% of babies survived childbirth. Tuberculosis ('consumption') and cholera were common and young children frequently died from infectious diseases like measles, scarlet fever and diptheria. In 1854, a cholera outbreak in London caused 500 deaths in only 10 days.http://www.victorianweb.org/science/h...
We little realise what a vast difference the introduction of clean water, good hygeine and inoculations have done for us since the 20th century. It makes my blood boil to learn that many parents are now not having their children inoculated against measles, for instance, because even when I was young this was an illness which killed a number of my schoolmates and I nearly died myself from both scarlet fever and pneumonia.
http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/b...
I understand the gravity of medical situation in the past. My question was actually provoked by the description of Elizabeth's fatigue and illness due to her heat 'exhaustion' and heat stroke. It took her several weeks to recuperate, and then she was even taken to the seaside to continue her treatment. And this was the case of a banal heat stroke that should not have taken weeks to recover from. Either Gaskell was exposing the social vices of a relatively prosperous family and was trying to tell us that Elizabeth was a spoilt and whimsical child or this event deliberately was used as a trick; as a result, it did not look plausible. Too many illnesses in Victorian novels move the plot forward. Too many … I think because both the mortality and the morbidity were quite devastatingly high, many authors found it natural to use them as plot-shaping devices.
I was, and am still, quite confused as to why Bellingham changed his name to Donne. I hope there will be some explanation by the end of the novel. As far as Gaskell preparing us for his eventual appearance, I think that most readers would assume he would come back into the story at some point; I know I certainly did. I still feel that he was not really a bad person, as I mentioned before, only selfish and insensitive to a point, taking the easy way out when he was sick and it was easier to let his mother take care of him and remove him from Ruth. Here it seems that he has continued to have feelings for her; he wants to try to exculpate himself for his past actions by giving her an explanation, and even goes so far as to propose to her. I thought that was a generous move to make. When she continues to reject him, he does not try (so far, at least) to make trouble by revealing her to her present acquaintances, or trying to take Leonard from her. I was a bit surprised to hear he was getting married, but Ruth certainly gave him no cause for hope, and even in his choice he demonstrates that he is not after a rich wife, so it may well be a love match.Jemima finds herself in quite a quandary. She is repulsed by what she learns about Ruth, and in addition, her jealousy over Mr. Farquar makes it tempting to expose Ruth. On the other hand, from all she knows about Ruth since she has known her, she recognizes that Ruth is essentially good and worthy of respect, and Jemima's own better instincts win out. However, she does begin to watch Ruth closely, ready to expose her if she sees the least sign that Ruth is not what Jemima believes her to be. She is willing to accept Ruth's rehabilitation, although warily.
Denise wrote: "Jemima finds herself in quite a quandary. She is repulsed by what she learns about Ruth, and in addition, her jealousy over Mr. Farquar makes it tempting to expose Ruth. On the other hand, from all she knows about Ruth since she has known her, she recognizes that Ruth is essentially good and worthy of respect, and Jemima's own better instincts win out"Jemima's attitude is a commendable one. Yes, she is repulsed by what she learns about Ruth, but she also understands subconsciously that this fact alone does not turn Ruth into a despicable human being despite the general opinion.
It is also interesting to observe that the guilty one is always a woman although there are, as we all know, two sides involved. Women do not become fallen on their own, but the role of men is somehow ignored or is not considered worth mentioning. Unfortunately, one can see the same trend in the rhetoric of Southern New-Con politicians in the USA, especially when they express their ideas about rape. Women wear provocative clothes, women seduce men, and in a case of a rape, a conception is God's will. Although it seems that our society is way ahead of the social inequality of the nineteenth century, in fact, misogyny is still alive in the minds of some men and even women.
Jack, I like your suggestion about the symbolism of Ruth's tears. I hadn't really noticed that, but I still noticed how much she is drawn to windows.I do think that at that time, anyone would have definitely assumed that a man and a woman sharing a room would have been having a sexual relationship. And, if they hadn't, the result certainly proved it!
Whether Miss Benson came to see the light through her brother probably depends on how you define seeing the light. I think that even though it was her brother who convinced her that it was their moral duty to help Ruth and her child, once Faith came to know Ruth, she came to love her and see how good and worthy she was. I think that it was that that really convinced her that an automatic moral censure based on the circumstances was not right.
I don't think that Mr. Benson being crippled really had anything to do with why he lived with his sister. I think that it was common for unmarried siblings to live together, and I can think of other examples where preachers in particular had unmarried sisters living with them. Usually the sister would run the household in the absence of any wife of the brother. I can see a couple of reasons why Gaskell would have made Benson a cripple. He might be seen as being closer to God as a result, and he also would probably be familiar with prejudice and more disposed to sympathize with Ruth as a result. Also, his disability was an important plot point, as when he was trying to keep Ruth from drowning herself, he fell and was injured, which was the reason she stopped and returned to help him.
I'm so glad that you enjoyed your first Gaskell novel! You have a lot of pleasure ahead of you in reading her other novels (as have I, as this is only the fourth I have read).
Mod
I hadn't read this and enjoyed it a lot, in spite of the preachy elements.
Jack wrote: "No one in the comments mentioned Ruth's frequent tears. She cries for joy, she cries for sadness. I suspect this suggests her innate goodness and purity of spirit in a world filled with both good and evil. So many tears. Part of the sentimentalism (feeling) that came into English literature in the very late eighteenth century"Ruth is, indeed, the horn of plenty when it comes to tears. It is a very keep observation, Jack. Her tears are possibly the only way to show us that Ruth is a human being. In all other aspects, her feelings are not exposed while other characters are presented with more insight and astuteness. Her tears (they obviously reflect sentimentalism as a trend in literature) are quite important in creating her image of an ultimate victim. Gaskell wants Ruth to be a victim, yes, a sinner, but a victim as well.
Robin wrote: "Some things haven't changed all that much, double standards as mentioned above, and the influence of money in elections. It was more straightforward when the candidate could just bribe people (almo..."Robin, I also find this passage of the novel about politics, election, and corruption intriguing. Some things do not change (alas), but it also makes it easier for readers to relate to a book that was written some time ago.
The final part is quite preachy- sorry for spoilers- but I think it is quite obvious; otherwise, it is quite an interesting social novel. No wonder that after its publication, mothers discouragerd their daughters from reading this novel. It is very sexless and much is left to assumption, but even assumptions can be dangerous ...
I will be traveling back to the USA from Russia, and I might be absent here for the next two days. I will be back on Friday and will open the thread for the final discussion. Recharge your batteries for a lively and heated discussion! :-)
Some questions that I encountered and am actually curious about, but I do not think we have received any hints on that or I might have missed them:1. When and why did Bellingham become Donne?
2. Why did Mrs. Pearson wait so long to tell this story and then all of a sudden the whole town knows of it or was Mrs. Pearson new to Ecclestone? Well, reconsidering the paragraphs in which she meets Jemima we almost have to assume the later.
3. Had Mr. Benson never seen Bellingham in Wales so that he might have recognized his face in Mr. Donne?
Hedi wrote: "Some questions that I encountered and am actually curious about, but I do not think we have received any hints on that or I might have missed them:1. When and why did Bellingham become Donne?
2. W..."
Questions 2 and 3 are interesting and thought-provoking. Question 1 is answered in the final part of the novel:-)
One of the above questions was about the elections and the way they are described:I think Gaskell tries to point out hypocrisy in different situations incl. the one about bribing during the elections and having advantages from that, but keeping a distance from those actually doing it to keep the clean vest - something we encounter, unfortunately, far too often even in our days.
However, in comparison to e.g. Dickens she is far too subtle. In Pickwick Papers you can also find an episode about elections which is more satirical, but therefore, also much more to the point which it criticizes. After all the novels we have been reading with the Dickens project, the criticisms here seem more gentle.
On the other hand, Gaskell dares to address the topic of a fallen girl, which was a huge taboo in those days, and I do appreciate this.
Still I have a problem to really get close to Ruth as the protagonist. She is still too passive in my opinion. I actually enjoy the passages about Jemima and her jealousy, but also her kindness much more.
Well, maybe the recent change in events will transform Ruth.
Zulfiya, thanks for the hint on question 1. I will try to continue my read today. I somehow had a little rough continuing with the book until the events with Mr. Donne started and somehow the novel became more interesting to me again.I hope you had a nice trip to Russia and got back well. :-)
Apropos of the bribery, I was a little bit saddened when Mr. Benson returned the watch to Mr. Donne, believing it to be a bribe, when Mr. Donne actually wanted to give a keepsake of himself to his son (although of course he couldn't reveal why he was doing it). I still don't see him as that evil; he does want to do right by Ruth and Leonard, but Ruth won't let him.
Denise, I understand what you mean. I thought of that, too. Actually, I was also wondering why Ruth did not talk about her encounter with Mr. Donne/ Bellingham to the Bensons, as they are the only confidantes and surrogate family she has. Obviously, the encounter upset her very much, so she might have wanted to talk about this and as Mr Benson was quite involved in the whole affair in Wales, I do not think it would have been very strange to address this upsetting reunion to his attention.However, maybe Ruth felt too embarrassed and just wanted to forget everything as best as possible.
Hedi wrote: "Still I have a problem to really get close to Ruth as the protagonist. She is still too passive in my opinion. I actually enjoy the passages about Jemima and her jealousy, but also her kindness much more."I agree with you - Ruth is impenetrable as a character; we, readers, are deprived of her thoughts, emotions, and inner struggle. She is a hollow statuette, and who could relate to a hollow idol? I have already mentioned elsewhere that this character behavior was intentional. Gaskell wanted to turn her into a perfect victim of circumstances and naivete to arouse sympathy, but it could only be achieved by watching her suffer without giving her a voice. As a matter of social awareness, she did a great job, but as a character, Ruth is possibly the weakest female protagonist ever created by Gaskell.
P.S. My Russian trip was great and without notorious traveling mishaps:-) Thank you for asking.
Denise wrote: "Apropos of the bribery, I was a little bit saddened when Mr. Benson returned the watch to Mr. Donne, believing it to be a bribe, when Mr. Donne actually wanted to give a keepsake of himself to his ..."As much as it would be nice to attribute feelings of fatherly responsibility to Mr. Donne, I really felt that the gift of the watch was to gratify his own feelings and not particularly to impart a keepsake to Leonard, as if by pushing himself into their lives and giving the child a memento was a way to imprint his claim on Leonard, or at least to push Ruth to speak with him. I'm not quite finished this week's reading yet though, so perhaps I might change my mind as I read on ......
Zulfiya, I like your description of Ruth as a hollow character. That is a really fitting term. There is no substance. In a certain way she reminds me a little of Nell in TOCS. And as you said it was probably necessary to be able to make such a sinful person the protagonist in a novel at that time. I wonder whether the novel was for some people an eye-opener so that they acted maybe a little more gentle to these fallen women in real life.
Hedi, I have also thought to compare Ruth to Nell, as they are both almost too good to be real. I hesitated to mention it, because at least Nell was able to take charge once she and her grandfather left the shop, whereas Ruth, I think, would have been totally incapable in such a situation. But they are both very, very good!I agree with your earlier post that Ruth was probably too ashamed to mention her encounter with Bellingham and wanted to put it behind her. Also, she most likely did not want Leonard to find out about his father; he might have overheard something, or Benson might let something slip, since Donne was in the neighborhood for the election. Maybe she was even afraid that Benson might want to confront Donne, which might have let to the Bradshaws finding out.
Cleo wrote: "As much as it would be nice to attribute feelings of fatherly responsibility to Mr. Donne, I really felt that the gift of the watch was to gratify his own feelings and not particularly to impart a keepsake to Leonard, as if by pushing himself into their lives and giving the child a memento was a way to imprint his claim on Leonard, or at least to push Ruth to speak with him."Cleo, I finally read the introduction to my edition last night, and the commentator kept stressing how Bellingham only thought of himself, so you are probably right. Although he did have enough thought for Ruth's feelings not to reveal himself to Leonard.
Mod
I laughed at the description of measles as a "Victorian Scourge" as I remember having them in the early 1960s (I think I was probably in the last cohort to have measles and mumps routinely). I liked the Doctor's description of measles as something every child had to go through, and most would survive (although, as we have too quickly forgotten, many did not or were left permanently disabled following complications such as meningitis). Having gone through a pretty severe bout of chicken pox with my own children a few years before the vaccine was available (fortunately with only a few mild facial scars on my eldest daughter as permanent damage) I can sympathize with the fears and the feeling of helplessness of a parent watching over a distressed and suffering child.
Mod
Much as I have disliked Bradshaw, I was glad he had enough of a conscience to feel ashamed of his use of bribery and to feel that he had lost the moral high ground in his community and, more importantly, in his sense of himself. I wonder if his knowledge of his own duplicity contributed in any way to his tremendous outrage at Ruth and his implying that her presence alone (or that of Leonard) was enough to pollute his family, regardless of how she had behaved all this time. I find it so hard to reconcile the brand of Christianity shown here with the doctrines of compassion and forgiveness if one truly repents and tries to change (as Ruth has clearly done as evidenced by her behaviour). I know that organized religion so often ignores its own fundamental teachings (love your neighbour, forgiveness of sins etc), it just seems a whole new sort of hypocrisy.
Hedi wrote: "Actually, I was also wondering why Ruth did not talk about her encounter with Mr. Donne/ Bellingham to the Bensons, as they are the only confidantes and surrogate family she has. ..."Hedi, I found a passage that may explain a little of Ruth's reluctance to go to the Bensons for assistance:
" ...... She thought often of writing and warning Mr. Benson of Leonard's danger; but then she shrank from recurring to circumstances, all mention of which had ceased years ago; the very recollection of which seemed buried deep for ever. Besides, she feared occasionaing discord or commotion in the quiet circle in which she lived. Mr. Benson's deep anger against her betrayer had been shown too clearly in the old time to allow her to think that he would keep it down without expression now. He would cease to do anything to forward his election; he would oppose him as much as he could; and Mr. Bradshaw would be angry, and a storm would arise, from the bar thought of which Ruth shrank with the cowardliness of a person thoroughly worn out with late contest. She was bodily wearied with her spiritual buffeting ....."
It appears she did not want to be the cause of any more problems and/or turmoil and she also was exhausted with the burden of her secret that she did not have the strength face any new dischord.
Does anyone else feel that because Ruth has "sinned" she is now trying to live as perfect a life as possible and sometimes is almost too hard on herself as she tries to atone for her past indiscretions. She seems to want to take every burden on herself and is reluctant to share them, which would be opposite of what the Bensons would have encouraged her to do.
Denise wrote: "Although he did have enough thought for Ruth's feelings not to reveal himself to Leonard. ..."Yes, you're right, Denise. His actions in this case surprised me. He was pushing so hard to get Ruth to listen to him and at times seemed so ruthless, that I was taken aback when he suddenly withdrew himself. Perhaps we haven't heard the last of him; it will be interesting how it all plays out.
Hedi wrote: "Zulfiya, I like your description of Ruth as a hollow character. That is a really fitting term. There is no substance. In a certain way she reminds me a little of Nell in TOCS. And as you said it was probably necessary to be able to make such a sinful person the protagonist in a novel at that time. ..."I've been thinking about the above and now, being about 3/4 of the way through the book, I have a theory.
Other than the one indiscretion in her life, Ruth is portrayed as almost perfect (is this why we see her as "hollow"?) She is admired by everyone for her calm composure, for her kindness and her gentle manner. Perhaps Gaskell is trying to say that even a human who is near perfect is still capable of "sinning" and deserves not only love and forgiveness from God, but love and forgiveness from other people as well. Ruth's willingness to admit her error and her reliance on God puts her on a straight path. Her life improves and she is a good example for her son. However, she also learns that there are consequences to her actions that cannot be escaped.
As for relying on God, we see this with Jemima where she first of all hates Ruth and wishes to see her exposed, however when she cries out to God, her heart fully changes and, in spite of her harsh puritanical upbringing, she is able to have mercy for a fellow human being.
On the other side of the coin, with regard to Mr. Bradshaw, he looks to wordly judgement and wisdom:
" ...... The world has decided how such women are to be treated; and, you may depend upon it, there is so much practical wisdom in the world that its way of acting is right in the long run, and that no one can fly in its face with impunity, unless, indeed, they stoop to deceit and imposition...."
and when he relies on human wisdom, there is no room for forgiveness or mercy.
Just a few thoughts that have been bouncing around in my head.
And I have a rather uneasy feeling about how things will turn out for Ruth in the end.
Cleo wrote: "Hedi, I found a passage that may explain a little of Ruth's reluctance to go to the Bensons for assistance:" ...... She thought often of writing and warning Mr. Benson of Leonard's danger; but then she shrank from recurring to circumstances.."..."
Thanks Cleo. That explains it a little bit and I had forgotten that she actually was not at home when this all happened. The topic would not be something you would write in a letter, especially if you are in distress. So that makes sense and later it did not mean that much any more...
I also think she tries to be perfect to compensate for her sin. I just think that Ruth is not as well depicted in the novel as maybe Jemima. Everything seems to be predefined, except for a couple of situations when she actually is in some distress - actually the one you named above is one of those. Despite her sin in the beginning, which even was quite innocently described - so I still have a problem to blame her for that and wished Mr. Bellingham to be punished for his doings as well -, she seems to fly through the novel like an angel devoting herself to her child and her job.
I finished the novel yesterday, so I will post further comments in the thread of week 4, as I am afraid I might name any spoilers.
Cleo wrote: "On the other side of the coin, with regard to Mr. Bradshaw, he looks to wordly judgement and wisdom:"In the introduction to my edition (Penguin Classics), the commentator says that the Bensons represent the 'spirit' of their religion, whereas Bradshaw represents the 'letter' or law; he lives very strictly by what he sees as the rules of his religion, while the Bensons interpret what they believe to be right.
Denise wrote: "Cleo wrote: "On the other side of the coin, with regard to Mr. Bradshaw, he looks to wordly judgement and wisdom:"In the introduction to my edition (Penguin Classics), the commentator says that t..."
That's interesting, Denise. I can certainly see this. Grace vs. works. Or perhaps the Bensons are behaving in the manner of the Apostles and Bradshaw is behaving in the manner of the Pharisees ......??
My free Kindle version has no notes so I am enjoying your Penguin commentary!
The lively discussion is in full swing! Great job, everybody!
1. Do you think that Gaskell is critical when she portrays the election and Mr. Bradshaw's involvement? I think the Gaskell is intending to be critical as well as expose hypocrisy considering Mr. Bradshaws strict judgements of other people, particularly the members of his own family, and his being overly critical over everyone, expecting moral perfection. He himself proves his own humanness in the mistakes he makes and his own moral failings in this instance.
2. Why are we not explained how Mr. Bellingham became Mr. Donne? Is his reappearance plausible? Has Gaskell prepared us for his eventual reappearance? Does Mr. Donne's reincarnation as a potential and later elected MP hold water?
Like others have expressed I was confused by the reasons behind the change of his name as well. Perhaps he did not want to be associated with his mother, who did seem very much to rule his life. So after her death he changed his name as a way in which to separate himself from her and be more of his own person.
I did not find anything really implausible in his return, I could believe it possible, though it is also a plot device.
I found Ruth's response to his proposal interesting, because of the fact that the typical ideal Victorian outcome would of course be her wedding the father of her child and through this means saving herself as well as her child. But Ruth is seen as taking the moral high ground by refusing him as a way of turning her back finitely upon her past sins and on account of her new found dedication to faith.
3. Why does Gaskell shift gears and focus on Jemima?
I think that Jemima is a sort of counter to Ruth, they come from very different backgrounds, and were raised in vastly different ways as Ruth herself early became an orphan and thus had little to no parental guidance, while Jemima is staggered under excessively strict dictatorship of her father.
They are also contrasting in nature. Ruth is meek, shy, submissive while Jemima is outgoing, strong willed, opinionated.
Their two worlds collide together, both as the Bensons bring Ruth into the Bradshaw house, and then of course with Farquhar coming between them.
By turning the focus of the story on Jemima it further shows the contrast between these two unlikely frineds turned rivals (though against Ruth's own knowledge and intention).
We also see how Ruth mattieralaizies as a seemingly more ideal mate for Farquhar though she is undesierous of such attentions from him.
4. Do you think that Mr. Farquhar lacks tangibility and is mostly present as a shadow and a device to trigger powerful revelations in the novel?
Yes I think that Farquhar does serve primarily as a device to stir up friction and tension within the Bradshaw household and help advance the story forward. He also serves to act as something of a foil to Jemima in showing the strong differences between their opinion and nature in spite of the inititial attraction which buds between them.
5. Why has not Jemima exposed Ruth's background and past?
I think the revelation of the truth about Ruth does really challenge Jemima's feelings towards Ruth. And the very fact of knowing she could destroy her perceived rival also effects her reaction towards the news. Learning of Ruth's past, and knowing what would become of her if it were made know forces Jemima to feel pity for Ruth, even though she is repulsed by the thought of what Ruth has done.
I think in a way as well learning of Ruth's own past mistakes instills in Jemima a sense of shame of her bad behavior towards Ruth, because in the awareness of Ruth's past sins it more strongly brings to her mind her own sins.
As well knowing that suddenly she is placed in a position in which she could do serious damage to Ruth ressolidifies her prior feelings of affection for Ruth, for in spite of all of her proclaimed jealously she does not have it within her to do Ruth true harm.
7. How could you characterize Mr. Donne's behavior? (his secret investigations, his love confessions, his proposal, and eventually his rumored marriage)?
I believe that Mr. Donne in his own way does care for Ruth and have feelings for her but as others have said, I do not see him as villainous, but simply as careless, and self-serving, not really thinking of others or the consequences of his actions, but nor intending to cause harm. I also think he was very much under his mother's thumb and particularly while ill lacked the will to stand up to her.
In his proposal to Ruth I think he is well intended. I was a bit surprised by the rumor of his marriage, as it did seem to come out of no where and I am curious what more might later be revealed about it. It is hard to believe that His and Ruth's fates would be so soon separated. I though Mr. Donne would play a greater part in Ruth's life, and now that Ruth has been ousted I wonder if this will spark a return of Mr. Donne to attempt to save her.
8. At finally, why does any malaise and illness play such an important role in any Victorian novel? Is a lack of proper medication and knowledge the only possible explanation? The last question, as you see, is just a general one, but Victorian literature is full of examples where a minor cold or malaise, by modern standards, turns into a major event.
Personally I think it is primarily just a refection of what real life was like in Victorian times, and the fact that it was quite common for people to die and often of what could be/should be rather minor ailments . And particularly when dealing with the peasant/working classes it further emphasis the struggles and hardships in which they must deal with, and the despair in which they live in.
Silver wrote: "I think in a way as well learning of Ruth's own past mistakes instills in Jemima a sense of shame of her bad behavior towards Ruth, because in the awareness of Ruth's past sins it more strongly brings to her mind her own sins. "A lovely post, Silver!
Do you find Jemima more attractive and fleshed out than Ruth, the titular heroine of the book? I think the novel would have become even better if Jemima had been more involved into the plot. For example, instead of describing her inner reflections over Mr. Farquhar (somewhat shallow, I must admit), it would be interesting to read about her struggle over secret knowledge of Ruth's past. Instead, this topic was only mentioned cursorily.
Zulfiya wrote: "Silver wrote: "I think in a way as well learning of Ruth's own past mistakes instills in Jemima a sense of shame of her bad behavior towards Ruth, because in the awareness of Ruth's past sins it mo..."I do think that Jemima feels far more complex in many ways than Ruth is. She is a more tangible and "human" character than Ruth. While Ruth has made mistakes in her past life she did so in a way in which she herself was completely unaware (or nearly so) of those mistakes. While she had brief moments of conflict with herself for the most part she was as Gaskell described completely innocence and just had things done to her by others good or bad.
With Jemima we see more of an actual human/emotional reaction to things, and we see how she is conflicted with herself and her feelings. She takes a more active role in her own life, and she has a more active awareness of her own mistakes.
Ruth does seem almost ethereal in a way at times. Jamima is far more of a relatable character, we can understand her feelings and the motivations for her feelings.
Sorry for my absence. Computer died plus some family issues. I haven't even gotten to read this one ;(