The Readers Review: Literature from 1714 to 1910 discussion
Red Pottage
>
Red Pottage - Week 4
date
newest »
newest »
Robin P wrote: "And the big question - did Lord Newhaven do it on purpose? If so, why wait two days?"I think that's clear enough: he did it on purpose. And he gave Hugh two 'days of grace' to do his part. After these two days, it was clear to him that he had been right: Hugh would not kill himself. ( It is interesting that Rachel, and she alone, notices the delay: this could be the seed of a terrible doubt.)
The big question for me is: WHY did Newhaven do it?
The death of Lord Newhaven - I think that caught us all out!Mary C has us all guessing so I won’t speculate on what I think happens next. I’m not clear on who is meant to be the protagonist - but I don’t really like Hugh or Rachel. I’m more interested in Hester’s resilience and Dicks humorous pranks. If those two prospered I would be more than happy.
Robin P wrote: "In this section we get comedy, tragedy, romance, and the source of the title.And the big question - did Lord Newhaven do it on purpose?.."
A clever twist in the plot……..the wrong man died - or did he?
Why did he (Lord Newhaven) do it? I think that the answer is in the text…… but other readers may not agree with me.
’ Winter, the destroyer, was late, but he had come at last. There was death in the air, a whisper of death stole across the empty fields and bare hill-side. The birds heard it and were silent. The November wind was hurrying round Westhope Abbey, shaking its bare trees.’
That Lord Newhaven jumped rather than fell under a train seemed clear enough and the damning evidence was that he consulted the doctor about his ‘vertigo’ after the deadline for Hugh to carry out his ‘honourable’ deed was past.
But was Lord Newhaven’s deadly retort an ‘honourable’ action? It was extreme but here could be his motivation……
Once Lord Newhaven had realised that Rachel and Hugh were in love with each other, he seemed determined that the two of them should not live their lives together in harmony.
‘ Scarlett seems a fortunate person, " he said, pacing up and down. "That woman (Rachel) loves him, and if she marries him she will reform him. Is he going to escape altogether in this world and the next--if there is a next? Is there no justice anywhere? Perhaps at this moment he is thinking that he has salved his conscience by offering to fight, and that, after all, I can’t do anything to prevent his living and marrying her if he chooses. He knows well enough I shall not touch him, or sue for a divorce, for fear of the scandal. He thinks he has me there. And he is right. But he is mistaken if he thinks I can do nothing’……..
………..‘Did Scarlett tell her himself in an excess of moral spring-cleaning preparatory to matrimony? No. He may have told her that he had got into trouble with some woman, but not about the drawing of lots. Whatever his faults are, he has the instincts of a gentleman, and his mouth is shut. I can trust him like myself there. But she is not for him. He may think he will marry her, but I draw the line there. Violet and I have other views for him. He can live, if he wants to, and apparently he does want to, though whether he will continue to want to is another question. But he shall not have Rachel. She must marry Dick. "
Newhaven seems to have assumed the role of an Ancient Greek God to split asunder the lovers by his own self execution, ensuring their misery.
In the background to all this is Rachel (the angel of death?)
That (albeit indirect) revelation of her love for Hugh at the dining table may have brought him to undertake this drastic action.
Rachel was even sent by his wife to the chapel to verify that the Lord actually was dead! (Chilling!)
’ So Rachel, familiar with death, as all are who have known poverty or who have loved their fellows, went alone into the chapel, and stood a longtime looking down upon the muffled figure, the garment of flesh which the soul had so deliberately rent and flung aside.’
Whilst I don’t think that death and Rachel walk hand in hand, it seems, at least, that death is looking over Rachel’s shoulder wherever she goes.
Mod
Trev wrote: "That (albeit indirect) revelation of her love for Hugh at the dining table may have brought him to undertake this drastic action."very interesting thoughts ... but I have to disagree on this: MC makes it clear that Newhaven has been planning his suicide for a long time - since summer. Here is how he takes his leave of Hugh:
Well, good-bye, Scarlett, in case we don't meet again. I dare say you will pay Westhope a visit later on. (ch. 30)
Hugh is puzzled by these words, and so are we - at that point in the story. In hindsight, their meaning is clear: Newhaven has already laid his plan of suicide, and foresees that Hugh will take his place at Lady Newhaven's side.
Revenge or punishment seem indeed to be at least part of Newhaven's suicide motive. The code of honour may be another. But is revenge an "honourable" thing? I doubt it. I can't imagine a worse motive - when it comes to abandoning children, for example.
I certainly don’t mean to be crass, but did anyone else think it was odd that the Rachel was still able to ID Newhaven’s body including such detail, yet he was run over by a train. Wouldn’t that be pretty difficult to view? I don’t long for gore- I can’t bear to watch a horror movie. (I always dream about it if I do)
It just struck me as odd. Am I missing something?
Mod
Wouldn’t that b..."
Possibly his body was crushed but not his head? More likely, Victorians didn’t write about gory details.
... about Rachel and Hugh. MC lets us know in detail that Rachel's love is based on her misinterpretation of Hugh. Only we have to follow the text rather closely to find and put together the dispersed clues to their characters, and to what is going on between them. (the fact that I am re-reading this novel helps me enormously - I admit I missed a lot of the clues the first time round). Rachel idealises him erroneously, and silences her gut-feelings (Victorians did have them too, although calling them by this name would have been highly inappropriate ;-))
Hugh is a complicated character: he is a gentleman on the one hand - so much so that Newhaven can rely 100% on his discretion - on the other hand he is selfish, and lies to himself and others if it serves his purpose.
Here's the key misunderstanding between them:
He was thinking if only he might be let off this dreadful self-inflicted death. She thought he meant that he repented of his sin, and would fain do better.
As Newhaven predicts, Hugh takes his refusal of a conventional (shooting) duel to replace their wager as an excuse for not killing himself:
He won't fight, won't he! He thinks I will die like a rat in a trap with all my life before me. I will not. I offered him a fair chance of revenging himself—I would have fired into the air—and if he won't take it is his own look-out, damn him! He can shoot me at sight if he likes. Let him.
Hugh spares no thought for Newhaven's reasons for the wager, namely to avoid scandal for his family.
Their love relationship is bound for disaster one or the other way: not only is it based on a big misunderstanding, it is also a meeting between a man who thinks the woman is his (only) way to salvation and a woman who thinks she is and can be the saviour. This never works, in my experience.
Hugh reminds me of Henry Crawford of Mansfield Park. But Rachel is not like Fanny. (view spoiler)
Rachel reasons, on the basis of her misinterpretation, that Hugh is the one to survive. Her logic takes as premises his honour, his discretion, and his sincerity. So she convinces herself - but she does not stop fretting and doubting (gut-feeling!):
"Les esprits faibles ne sont jamais sincères." [Weak spirits are never sincere] She had come across that sentence one day in a book she was reading, and had turned suddenly blind and cold with anger. "He is sincere," she said, fiercely, as if repelling an accusation. "He would never deceive me." But no one had accused Hugh.
I think it is this gut-feeling that makes her notice the discrepancy of Newhaven's suicide coming two days late.
Robin P wrote: "So Newhaven thinks guilt over his death will stop Hugh from marrying Rachel? Neither of the men knew that Rachel and Lady Newhaven both found out about the drawing of lots."I think Newhaven was confident in exploiting Scarlett’s weaknesses. He has implied more than once that Hugh cannot manage burdens of guilt, but what an extreme way to exact his revenge.
Having said that, I didn’t like the way Newhaven was trying to force Rachel to marry Dick, even from beyond the grave.And Dick tried to enlist Hester’s help by the exaggerated, ‘she won’t even look at me.’ No wonder if she is love with someone else!
sabagrey wrote: "... about Rachel and Hugh. MC lets us know in detail that Rachel's love is based on her misinterpretation of Hugh. Only we have to follow the text rather closely to find and put together the disper..."My view on Hugh is entirely different. Henry Crawford was a predator who, given the opportunity and a little more time, would have gobbled up Fanny on his way to his next victim. Hugh was far too weak to abuse women in the way Henry did.
Earlier in the book, the author explained Hugh’s naivety around women, his love for his sister and mother and his lack of strength of conviction. All these have conspired for him to become the willing victim of Lady Newhaven, who is the character most like Henry Crawford in this novel. Whilst most condemnation today is rightly laid at the feet of the powerful male Victorian gentlemen who abused women, there were plenty of women, usually older and married who used their power to prey on (usually) younger men in much the same way.
Rachel’s love for Hugh came from her passion for Hugh and her need for challenge. Even Lord Newhaven recognised that ‘ she would reform him.’ Her passion might have been misguided but it was passion nevertheless. His character both ‘attracted and repelled’ her, but she could not stop thinking about him. She was only ever disturbed by Dick when in his presence but she was disturbed by Hugh all the time. Dick was great to have as friend to rely on but she had no passion for him.
The author is more ambiguous about the reason for the attraction but is absolutely certain of it.
’ It was, alas! easy to say why she was repelled. But who shall say why she was attracted? Has the secret law ever been discovered which draws one man and woman together amid the crowd? Hugh was not among the best men who had wished to marry her, but nevertheless he was the only man since Mr. Tristram who had succeeded in making her think continually of him. And perhaps she half knew that though she had been loved by better men, Hugh loved her better than they had.’
(just a note in between comments to say how much I love this discussion - thank you all!)
I was shocked by Lord Newhaven's death, but it never occurred to me that it might have been done on purpose. I can see it now from all the comments by my fellow readers, but it still seems to be a really drastic solution, no matter how much he hates his wife (and who can blame him for that - she has no real love for anyone but herself). Thanks for the insight. This is why reading a book in a group is so helpful.
I keep ruminating about MC's idea of a "birthright" - to idealism, truth, ethics .... As I read it, this is her formulation of the "Divine Spark" (in Christian tradition), or the belief in the fundamental human potential for Good (more Kantian, I think). It is not by coincidence that my mind circles around this idea these days. This thought is at the foundation of the Enlightenment, of democracy, which relies on citizens who play by the rules and act for the common good, as well as of socialism which strives to bring the "New Man" into being (with questionable methods where socialism became state communism).
These days, I ask myself whether this thought has not always been a mere fairy tale to keep us going. Reasonable people in Germany of the 30ies must have felt like somewhat like me when they saw how hatred won elections.
To return to the novel: it is interesting that the author is not very much concerned with the "birthright" of her secondary characters. Either she takes it for granted that most of them have preferred their red pottage, or she reserves this "higher" potential to a few selected human beings from the start.
Mod
It's understandable that Newhaven wouldn't want Hugh to marry Rachel and be happy himself, but that means interfering with Rachel's choices as well and he didn't have the right to do that. She's too good for Hugh, but she chose him, and someone like her might not have the capacity to fall in love a third time.
Robin P wrote: "So Newhaven thinks guilt over his death will stop Hugh from marrying Rachel? Neither of the men knew that Rachel and Lady Newhaven both found out about the drawing of lots."I think Lord Newhaven figured it out, when Rachel was staying with them in November:
...I am obliged to go to London on business by the night express."
He was amazed at the instantaneous effect of his words. Rachel's face became suddenly livid, and she sank back in her chair. He saw that it was only by a supreme effort that she prevented herself from fainting. The truth flashed into his mind.
"She knows," he said to himself. "That imbecile, that brainless viper to whom I am tied, has actually confided in her. And she and Scarlett are in love with each other, and the suspense is wearing her out."
The brainless viper = his wife.
1. I also thought Newhaven's death was an actual accident. I mean, that is just crazy for him to kill himself ? With two little kids? And the possibility that Hugh would not be punished but live and go on to be happy?2. This feels so modern, even though written 125 years ago, how Rachel thought about Hugh:
Hugh attracted and repelled her.
It was, alas! easy to say why she was repelled. But who shall say why she was attracted? Has the secret law ever been discovered which draws one man and woman together amid the crowd? (Chapter XXX)
Lori wrote: "But I don't think he's relying on this to keep Hugh and Rachel apart. He will have carefully sent something to Hugh before he died. ."I have my doubts about this: it does not seem in character to me. He is very perceptive of characters, and seems to know Hugh and Rachel better than they themselves. There is no need to tell/send Hugh anything: Hugh knows exactly what has happened. Maybe Newhaven thinks that Hugh will confess to Rachel at some point, and will be rejected by her consequently? Or maybe that Hugh will be unable to live on, or at least to live happily, with his shame?
My first question of WHY on earth Newhaven killed himself has gone unanswered so far. Is this something Cholmondeley's contemporaries would have understood better than we do?
Period question. Why can not Hester go live with Rachel? Especially now that Rachel has bought a place. Is that not acceptable with the mores of the time? But, in earlier times it would not have been smart for Rachel to spend so much time alone ("unchaperoned") with Dick or with Hugh, and she has done that.
Mod
Why can not Hester go live with Rachel? Especially now that Rachel has bought a place. Is that not acceptable with the mores of the time? But, in earlier times it would not have b..."
Supposedly the Gresleys "need" her to help with the children, but yes, it's a good question.
Mod
Don't forget she is also paying them some sort of rent on which they also rely.
They lived without it (her 100 pounds a year) until last year. They could again.
In thinking of his affair with Lady Newhaven, realizing that only with Rachel has he truly understood love, Hugh thinks "He had sold his birthright for a mess of red pottage"
From Wikipedia:
A mess of pottage is something immediately attractive but of little value taken foolishly and carelessly in exchange for something more distant and perhaps less tangible but immensely more valuable. The phrase alludes to Esau's sale of his birthright for a meal ("mess") of lentil stew ("pottage") in Genesis 25:29–34 and connotes shortsightedness and misplaced priorities.
This section begins with humorous commentary on Mr. Gresley's suprise at "the worm turning" and the charity sale. At this sale, everyone is judging everyone else on their clothing, appearance, how much they spend, and their general behavior. But a more serious note arrives when Lady Newhaven tries to see Hugh but is prevented by her husband (to Hugh's relief, in a sense the two men are allies in this.)
We find out that the allotted period is almost up, and Hugh has offered a duel instead of the agreement, only to be refused. Meanwhile Rachel has decided that she loves Hugh and that she forgives him for his adultery. His hints lead her to believe that Lord Newhaven lost the wager, especially when the latter leaves for London just before the end date of the agreement.
Many Victorian novels have sick children, a means to add emotion to a story, but also reflecting the times when many families lost one or my children to illness. In this case, Regie's plight causes his father to become almost human, though Hester knows that won't last. Hester, regularly judged by her brother and sister-in-law as a not-quite-good-enough Christian, sacrifices her own comfort in nursing the child. Suddenly summoned away by the Bishop, Hester observes a typical scene with her brother insisting he knows all about his bicycle and his portico, only to be shown up by the practical Dick.
There are some interesting passages of description. In Ch XXXV, as Rachel waits impatiently for the outcome of the agreement, she observes something that seems to be an omen, and indeed it is followed by bad news.
"And suddenly from east to west, from north to south, as far as the trees and wolds in the dim, forgotten east, the exhausted livid clouds blushed wave on wave, league on league, red as the heart of a rose. The wind-whipped earth was still. The trees held their breath. Very black against the glow the carved cross on the adjoining gavle stood out. And in another moment the mighty tide of color went as it had come, swifly ebbing across its infinite shores of sky. And the waiting night came down suddenly."
Were you surprised by anything in this section? And the big question - did Lord Newhaven do it on purpose? If so, why wait two days? We haven't yet seen Hugh's reaction to the news, or indeed whether Hugh himself took action of any kind. What do you think will happen next?