Friday, September 25, 2009
The Situation in Barchester
After the gloomy portrayal of life from Dickens, we move to the pleasant country life of Trollope. Based on volume 1 of the novel (what you read for this week--so please don't give away anything in the next volume for those reading ahead), what do you make of the narrator? Who is the narrator and how does he (or she??) feel about the various characters? Is the narrator a Proudieite or a Grantleyite? Also, how are the class differences that you wrote of so well in your discussion of Dickens addressed in this novel?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
To me, the narrator seems to be someone who is intricately involved at the Cathedral, but I believe him to be a lay person. (I could be completely wrong on this!) As the scene of the church service with Mr. Slope at the pulpit is taking place, the narrator describes the scene as if he is sitting in a position both far away to observe, yet close enough to see the facial expresses and sense the tension that the sermon is producing. I do not believe it to be a woman, only because, although many of the female characters are women who have obvious status within their marriage and/or relationships, they do not seem to make the same strides in the religious world yet. Mrs. Proudie, for example, is surely the one who calls the shots, but her husband is still the “face” of the decisions. I do believe the narrator is a Grantleyite because of the tone he seems to take when describing or relating a story about the characters who fall within the realm of the Proudieites.
ReplyDeleteThe class differences is what has really thrown me for a loop! The women in this novel do possess a higher status within the family and have more confidence in who they seem to be. Madeline, for example, seems to play a type of reverse role. She is the more confident, aggressive, and sexual: characteristics used to previously describe men than women. Her sister, Charlotte, too is very confident in taking charge of all that encompasses within her family’s household. Of course, you have the some wives that are more for show than anything more, but the narrator seems to focus more detail on the characters that hold more status.
Religion still seems to play the same role as it did in Dickens. It is still used to convince those who are in charge that they are right, and ask those who are on lower social strata, that it is necessary for them to obey. It seems to still be run by men, who of course, cannot and do not consider women’s, children’s, or working class people’s physical or spiritual needs.
It will be interesting to see how the novel, with all those characters, continues and eventually ends.
I think that the narrator must be Trollope, because I can’t imagine who else but the author would have as much omniscience to know not only so much about the characters, but also their futures. Trollope writes, “it is not destined that Eleanor shall marry Mr. Slope or Bertie Stanhope” (126). The reader is told this within volume 1 of the novel. I also think that the narrator is a Grantleyite. First of all, the story begins with the illness and death of the bishop, and some background about Dr. Grantly (Jr.), Mr. Harding, etc. The author could have started his story with the Proudies, and begun with a lot of detail about them instead. He also gives much more detail about the Grantley’s then he does about the Proudie’s, and it seems like there is more negative information about the Proudie’s than the Grantley’s. For example, there is a lot of detail about the negative traits of Mr. Slope, but then, almost incidentally Trollope writes, “…the author must beg it to be remembered that Mr. Slope was not in all things a bad man…”(120).
ReplyDeleteThe class differences seem mostly to do with difference in religious philosophy. For example, the Grantley’s are more conservative in their views and sort of look down on the Proudie’s who are more liberal. There is an Oxford vs. Cambridge tension. In addition, the Proudie’s – particularly Mrs. Proudie seems like the type of person that can be very nice to people who she feels can benefit her, or she can be very nice to people that flatter her, but otherwise she seems like a snob. In the description of the Proudie’s party regarding wine it says, “[Mr. Slope] well understood that curates and country vicars with their belongings did not require so generous an article as the dignitaries of the close. There is a useful gradation in such things” (78). It also talks about the “exterior supplementary tables in the corner” (78). It seems that Mrs. Proudie feels that some people should have the good wine and good table, and others were maybe just invited out of courtesy. I think Dr. Grantley is also kind of a snob, but it seems like the author makes more of a point of snobbery with the Proudie’s, which is another reason why I think he is a Grantleyite.
Reply to Zampak:
ReplyDeleteYou got me to thinking about the women. You are right - it seems like the women (at least some) have power over the men. With Mrs. Proudie, she definitely wears the pants and the Bishop is afraid of her. Then with Madeleine, she kind of has some kind of sexual magnetism that she uses to get power over the men. Charlotte, has taken over all the responsibilities of the household and this gives her a lot of control that she would not otherwise have.
I noticed though that these women have power or control by indirect means. Obviously, back then women could not be bishops - but Mrs. Proudie may as well be one. She knows her husband is afraid of her and she takes advantage of this to assume power that she otherwise could not have.
Back then, women had no real power or legal rights of their own, so the women find other ways to have power and control. Madeleine has power/control in manipulating men. Would she be different in this age, where women have so many options? Maybe - but there are women even today who behave like her.
Then, I think Charlotte is very smart. She's taken a lot of work on herself, and the other members of the family know that she will take care of everything, so they do nothing. They think they're living a good life this way, but Charlotte is in control, and that's how she likes things. In this case too, I've known women who do this in our age.
Reply to Allison:
ReplyDelete"Mrs. Proudie seems like the type of person that can be very nice to people who she feels can benefit her"
Allison, this is exactly the character that has really thrown me for a loop coming out of the Dickens novel. She is very assertive and very manipulative in order to get her way. What is strange is that she does not hide it from anyone. Everyone knows she is really the bishop, but uses her husband as the "front man."
As far as the narrator, I can see where you would thin Trollope is the narrarator. There are alot of signs that could point to that. It's been a bit difficult to decipher, but I think there's a clue in Book II!
The narrator is light-hearted and judgmental. You think he is going to be describing someone as nice and then all of a sudden he throws in something that makes you think they are bad. He is very much a Grantleyite. Every description of the Proudies, in their dialogue and just the narrator's description of them makes them seem horrible and truly unbearable.
ReplyDeleteThe issue of class is much more subtle in this novel. Money is an issue for the characters when they are vying for new positions and discussing how much is enough to live on, but the class differences aren't as obvious. This book does bot blatantly separate the classes and create the lower class as good and the upper class as conniving, but it does address the issue of money and the fact that different levels of clergy make different amounts of money and therefore have different attitudes about life and philosophy of religion.
In response to zampak:
ReplyDeleteI don't think the narrator is a lay person because he/she has intricate knowledge of the inner-workings of the families, so he/she must be a person close to the families. Also, the narrator could just be an omnipresent figure who knows everything without having to be an actual person.
Also, I think the novel focuses more on the women, not necessarily that the upper class allows women to rule the family, but in the fact that women actually have minds of their own and can be manipulative in their own right. I like the idea of women having a higher status in upper class families and being the ruler of the family, but it just wasn't so.
I feel that the narrator is a person who was very familiar with the members in Barchester Towers but also very unseen and not of importance. I do not believe that the narrator was a Proudieite or a Grantlyite. The class differences are addressed as the high class having their own church and the low class having a separate place to worship. I was constantly pushed by Slope and the Poudie's how people like "the hands" in Dickens book needed a Sabbath-school.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Joy, I do not see this person who is telling the story as on the side of either the Grantley's or Proudie's but someone who is neutral. The fact that the women in this book, particularly, Mrs. Proudie and Mrs. Q. have very strong personalities it is a possiblty that this no name narrator is a woman.
ReplyDelete