tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30203557.post1583209204087902240..comments2024-03-26T01:10:13.720+00:00Comments on Teach Me Tonight: Mary Balogh - The Secret Pearl (2)E. M. Selingerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00426524354823232002noreply@blogger.comBlogger16125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30203557.post-72557299180804421982007-09-02T22:28:00.000+01:002007-09-02T22:28:00.000+01:00The language of "good" versus "evil" there does ec...<I>The language of "good" versus "evil" there does echo the moral values I'm finding in The Secret Pearl. And perhaps for some people seeing at least one lover taking on a sort-of Christ-like role sets up parallels with God's unconditional love, so that the human, romantic love story is strengthened by the allusions/comparisons with spiritual, heavenly love.</I><BR/><BR/>I think you're right Laura, and I also think that the much of Romance is concerned with the relationship between earthy and divine love. The very concept of the grand love story and the HEA implicates transcendence of the physical realm, don't you think? <BR/><BR/>But the nature of that relationship as it plays out in Romance doesn't implicate the same moral compass, or the same spiritual doctrine. <BR/><BR/>It's interesting how different authors take on the emotional justice issue in Romance. Having just finished Jo Goodman's latest book, I'm struck once again by how strongly she sets out to establish a very strong moral center to her work without one iota of religion or spirituality. Then there's Patricia Gaffney's wonderful To Love and to Cherish, where Christy's spiritual crisis can only be resolved with a strengthening of his spiritual confidence as entwined with his romantic love for Anne (who undertakes her own spiritual awakening, of sorts). And while I adore the books of both authors, I think that Goodman's books present a much stronger sense of good and bad than Gaffney's books do, including TLATC. Then there's Laura Kinsale's incredible Flowers From The Storm and the relationship between the devout Quaker Maddy and the atheist(?) Jervaulx and the whole question of how her faith and sense of religiosity can be compatible with her very earthy feelings of desire for Jervaulx. IMO one of the real triumphs of that novel is the way in which Maddy becomes even an even stronger Quaker in her relationship with Jervaulx, despite the fact that I wouldn't really associate either character with a Christ-like role.<BR/><BR/>For me, there is a definite moral character to all of Balogh's work, and IMO it often works really well on the level of the love story. TSP strikes me as more overtly allegorical than the other books of hers I've read. And had Balogh worked through some of the stranger aspects of TSP more carefully -- that is, the IMO somewhat creepy circumstances of Adam's bringing Fleur into his house to care for his daughter after meeting her once, and also the passive-aggressive way he brings his mistress home with his wife, all the while not challenging Sybil directly -- I might have been better able to find the book romantic.Robinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13207356680976258434noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30203557.post-11043156925583723372007-09-02T15:53:00.000+01:002007-09-02T15:53:00.000+01:00your analysis here has given me more clarity about...<I>your analysis here has given me more clarity about why TSP didn't work for me *as a Romance* -- as a conversion narrative, yes, but as a tale of romantic love, no.</I><BR/><BR/>I wonder if for some people the theology underpinning the novel actually makes it a stronger and more romantic novel? Perhaps for them it makes the ending seem more right? The <A HREF="http://www.rwanational.org/cs/the_romance_genre" REL="nofollow">RWA definition</A> of romance includes the explanation that the "emotionally satisfying and optimistic ending" is <BR/><BR/><I>based on the idea of an innate emotional justice -- the notion that good people in the world are rewarded and evil people are punished. In a romance, the lovers who risk and struggle for each other and their relationship are rewarded with emotional justice and unconditional love.</I><BR/><BR/>The language of "good" versus "evil" there does echo the moral values I'm finding in <I>The Secret Pearl</I>. And perhaps for some people seeing at least one lover taking on a sort-of Christ-like role sets up parallels with God's unconditional love, so that the human, romantic love story is strengthened by the allusions/comparisons with spiritual, heavenly love.<BR/><BR/>That's just speculation on my part, though.Laura Vivancohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00906661869372622821noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30203557.post-3068192607589405912007-09-01T21:03:00.000+01:002007-09-01T21:03:00.000+01:00it seems to me that within the novel she functions...<I>it seems to me that within the novel she functions as a saviour</I><BR/><BR/>Which is another reason, I think, the book doesn't work very well for me. That Adam, for example, becomes more angry with Fleur's stoicism makes perfect sense to me; I thought all of that psychological characterization was very well and realistically done by Balogh. But again, I wanted more of that complexity of character once Fleur moves into the same house as his wife occupies. When you think of the set up there, the potential ramifications, IMO the book could have been so much more interesting. I mean, think about it: the guy brings the prostitute he deflowered into his house to care for his daughter, under the same roof as his wife -- that is BIZARRE behavior, and IMO it's virtually ignored while Balogh focuses instead on the process of Adam's redemption and reward. Instead of real characters, Adam, Fleur, Sybil, etc. feel more like types to me, Adam is let out of his box only once, and only so he can be put back together again as he *should* be. <BR/><BR/>And unfortunately, it's really only that first scene that feels compelling to me, the scene in which Adam is dissembling. And then the book -- to me, anyway -- really turns into a bit of a morality tale that does not have to, IMO, be as precisely allegorical as it is. There's a sense in which I feel that Fleur is sacrificed for Adam, as a vessel for his anger, as the recipient of his guilt, and later, as the object of his love and purveyor of his redemption. <BR/><BR/>I'd be interested to see how you read A Precious Jewel next to this book, Laura, as I enjoyed APJ much, much more. I think there are some similar, perhaps even overlapping themes, IMO APJ isn't as overtly moralizing as I think TSP is. But finally your analysis here has given me more clarity about why TSP didn't work for me *as a Romance* -- as a conversion narrative, yes, but as a tale of romantic love, no.Robinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13207356680976258434noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30203557.post-82937728710540835512007-09-01T19:13:00.000+01:002007-09-01T19:13:00.000+01:00That last bit should, of course, read "the repenta...That last bit should, of course, read "the repentant sinner reaching heaven", which theologically is near enough to being "good".Laura Vivancohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00906661869372622821noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30203557.post-62545223833913525692007-09-01T19:06:00.000+01:002007-09-01T19:06:00.000+01:00For me, when Adam takes Fleur so cruelly, it's an ...<I>For me, when Adam takes Fleur so cruelly, it's an expression at all the anger he has repressed over his failed relationship with Sybil, the problem of his brother, and the many duties and disappointments that press on him so strongly. [...] I wanted to see more of that same anger and resentment that he unleashes on Fleur come out in other parts of the book. Clearly he's been swallowing it for a long, long time, and one little tantrum is all it takes to clear that stuff out?</I><BR/><BR/>As you say, it is a little difficult to understand how/why he can behave so brutally to Fleur when he shows so much restraint with others. The explanation he gives at the time is that "it angered him to feel ugly in the eyes of a common whore" (3) and<BR/><BR/><I>He was angry. Angry with himself for returning to whoring, something that he had given up years before. Angry that he felt self-conscious and ashamed with a prostitute. And angry with her for being so much in control of her feelings that she would not even show her revulsion at his appearance. If she had done so, he could have used her accordingly. And the thought revolted him and angered him further.</I> (5)<BR/><BR/>Why would a "common whore"'s revulsion justify him "using her accordingly" but his unfaithful fiancée's revulsion doesn't? It's also interesting that he's "angry with her for being so much in control of her feelings that she would not even show her revulsion at his appearance", which possibly mirrors the way in which Sybil hates Adam more because he does control himself with her: "I hate you for being so noble and so understanding." (371)<BR/><BR/>Perhaps that's the key to understanding why Adam gets so angry with Fleur but not with the others: his anger, like Sybil's, is intensified by guilt and the knowledge of his own wrong-doing. Fleur's status as a "whore" makes his sin in choosing to be with her clear, yet simultaneously her behaviour is such that his sin (not hers) is emphasised: his lust is propelling him, not her seduction, and her calm contrasts with the anger he feels. Lust and anger are mortal sins, it's Adam who's experiencing them, and he can't blame Fleur for them, which makes him even angrier. It reminds me slightly of what happens when Pilate "knew that for envy they had delivered" Jesus over to him (Matthew 27:18) and when Pilate asks "Why, what evil hath he done? [...] they cried out the more, saying, Let him be crucified" (Matthew 27: 23).<BR/><BR/>Maybe I'm wrong and I'm picking up something that isn't there in either <I>The Secret Pearl</I> or the Bible, but I have the impression that in both cases the reminder of the innocence of the other party makes the guilty individual(s) more vehement about how much punishment they want to inflict on him/her.<BR/><BR/>When he knows he's not in the wrong it's easier for Adam to be forgiving and gentle.<BR/><BR/><I>Frankly, I never thought that either Adam nor Daniel ever really *saw* Fleur for who she was, separate from their own need of her.</I><BR/><BR/>Maybe I'm not seeing her for who she is either ;-) but it seems to me that within the novel she functions as a saviour, <A HREF="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=luke%2018:16;&version=9;" REL="nofollow">suffering the little children to be brought unto her</A>, suffering for the sins of others and in her humility making others recognise their pride and sin. So while I agree that the happy ending does depend on a "fortuitous and Romance-novely event", if it's supposed to be an earthly version of the sinner reaching heaven, then it makes sense that the wicked have to die/be banished while the good inherit the country estate.Laura Vivancohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00906661869372622821noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30203557.post-87677179909483623752007-09-01T17:29:00.000+01:002007-09-01T17:29:00.000+01:00I'm finally getting a chance to catch up on my blo...I'm finally getting a chance to catch up on my blog reading, and wanted to come back to follow up on my previous comment. Reading through these two posts, Laura, I think it's some of what you talk about here that makes TSP difficult for me, especially vis a vis Adam's character. <BR/><BR/>For me, when Adam takes Fleur so cruelly, it's an expression at all the anger he has repressed over his failed relationship with Sybil, the problem of his brother, and the many duties and disappointments that press on him so strongly. After that, being somewhat horrified by what he did, he takes in Fleur as governess (a virtual stranger, mind you!), which creates a different type of struggle. I guess in Balogh's terms, Adam would be transforming from sinner to sanctified lover, but I just can't get past a) the martyrdom he shows and that I think we're supposed to read as nobility, and b) the sense I have that Adam and Fleur are "rewarded" with love in a way that necessitates a ridiculously fortuitous and Romance-novely event. It's been a while since I read the novel, but rather than seeming noble to me, Adam comes off more as self-absorbed, both in his martyrdom and his guilt over/attraction to Fleur. There's an obsessive quality to some of his behavior that is continually reigned in by the contours of the narrative, something else which bothers me. <BR/><BR/>For example, I wanted to see more of that same anger and resentment that he unleashes on Fleur come out in other parts of the book. Clearly he's been swallowing it for a long, long time, and one little tantrum is all it takes to clear that stuff out? I think I would have been so much more convinced if Adam had continued to struggle with that angry part of himself, instead of just the guilt, because IMO the guilt made him do some creepy things. For example, bringing a virtual stranger into his household as governess and then hang out in the nursery while lessons were ongoing so he could obsess over Fleur. Frankly, I never thought that either Adam nor Daniel ever really *saw* Fleur for who she was, separate from their own need of her.Robinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13207356680976258434noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30203557.post-15562068955608881912007-08-15T04:34:00.000+01:002007-08-15T04:34:00.000+01:00Thanks, Laura, for your fascinating analysis of TH...Thanks, Laura, for your fascinating analysis of THE SECRET PEARL. That is my favorite among Mary Balogh's books--when I first read it I was amazed that a traditional Regency romance novel not only addressed such deep issues, but also did it so well. I have read all of Balogh's other books (except for a few very early ones, now out of print, which I've been unable to obtain). Many of her books thoughtfully deal with issues that most other Regency romance authors would not touch. I believe she has tried to show real things that could have happened in that era, and how the limited roles available to women of the time could have forced them to make choices that contemporary women may disdain. I think she wants her readers to think about what they would have done, had they been in the heroine's place. Would they have been able to choose differently and still survive? <BR/><BR/>Thanks again for the excellent discussion of the book.Sphinx Inkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03429797402360703839noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30203557.post-24394702821539539552007-08-13T17:10:00.000+01:002007-08-13T17:10:00.000+01:00Wow.Wow.Eva Galehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08834856467514439544noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30203557.post-62404666724309221792007-08-12T23:46:00.000+01:002007-08-12T23:46:00.000+01:00You're right, Eva. The Wiki article gives more of ...You're right, Eva. The Wiki article gives more of the details, but the <A HREF="http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/09761a.htm" REL="nofollow">New Catholic Encyclopedia</A> gives a very concise list of the main differing traditions regarding this issue, so I'll quote it here:<BR/><BR/><I>The Greek Fathers, as a whole, distinguish the three persons:<BR/><BR/> * the "sinner" of Luke 7:36-50;<BR/> * the sister of Martha and Lazarus, Luke 10:38-42 and John 11; and<BR/> * Mary Magdalen. <BR/><BR/>On the other hand most of the Latins hold that these three were one and the same. Protestant critics, however, believe there were two, if not three, distinct persons.</I>Laura Vivancohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00906661869372622821noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30203557.post-52274639329256374822007-08-12T23:25:00.000+01:002007-08-12T23:25:00.000+01:00I don't believe the bible actually states that Mar...I don't believe the bible actually states that Mary Magelene is a whore. (an aside I know but it twists my knickers) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_MagdaleneEva Galehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08834856467514439544noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30203557.post-45216286413153955842007-08-12T21:58:00.000+01:002007-08-12T21:58:00.000+01:00Thank you very much for that additional informatio...Thank you very much for that additional information, Anonymous. My background's in medieval Spanish, so my knowledge of English literature isn't as extensive as it would be had I specialised in that subject. I've read some poems by Blake, of course, but not the <A HREF="http://www.english.uga.edu/nhilton/Blake/blaketxt1/visions_of_the_daughters_of_albion.html" REL="nofollow">Visions</A> you mention, and I didn't know his opinions concerning original sin, though it was clear even from reading just <I>To the Accuser Who Is the God of This World</I> that his views were, to put it mildly, unusual for his time.Laura Vivancohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00906661869372622821noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30203557.post-62230076242549637972007-08-12T21:32:00.000+01:002007-08-12T21:32:00.000+01:00Hi Laura: I admire your discussion here very much ...Hi Laura: I admire your discussion here very much and am especially pleased to see references along the way to my favorite poet William Blake. It is worth noting that Blake was actually a strong supporter of women's rights in his time, and his poem "Visions of the Daughters of Albion" can be read as a rallying cry for women's liberation. Blake does not believe in "original sin" ( as you know), and he does not "blame" women for "the fall" (fortunate or not). In the context you are developing, Blake would probably want to remind us that, in his view, Mary Magdalene might have been a "whore" but she was certainly a woman of purity, a virgin with illuminated lineaments of visionary desire fulfilled.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30203557.post-14635888042056271882007-08-12T16:37:00.000+01:002007-08-12T16:37:00.000+01:00I don't think so, Eva, because it's Adam's wife, S...I don't think so, Eva, because it's Adam's wife, Sybil, who is the unfaithful wife (like Gomer) but then Adam is unfaithful to her with a prostitute (Fleur/Isabella) and the prostitute is less promiscuous than the wife, and the husband is certainly no prophet and there is no divorce. I suppose Adam is parted from Sybil, who then ends up pregnant and he takes her back, but then she dies.<BR/><BR/>I think you're right that there are some similarities (the adulterous wife, prostitution, a child who is not the husband's) but I don't have the impression that they fit together in the same way. That said, it could be that I need to reread Hosea because I'm depending on <A HREF="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Hosea" REL="nofollow">Wikipedia</A> to refresh my memory.Laura Vivancohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00906661869372622821noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30203557.post-88038771388497788472007-08-12T16:18:00.000+01:002007-08-12T16:18:00.000+01:00I haven't read the Secret Pearl, but have been kee...I haven't read the Secret Pearl, but have been keeping up with your posts. Do you think there is a Hosea/Gomer type story being told?Eva Galehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08834856467514439544noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30203557.post-54685071453474287862007-08-12T13:49:00.000+01:002007-08-12T13:49:00.000+01:00I'm not sure I'd call Adam contrite in the same se...<I>I'm not sure I'd call Adam contrite in the same sense. Isn't he initially more upset at the way he deflowered Fleur, than at having done it? He seems focused on the smaller "sin" (her pain), not the larger. Perhaps I'm misremembering?</I><BR/><BR/>Well, I'm certainly no <A HREF="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decretum" REL="nofollow">Gratian</A> or a <A HREF="http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03064a.htm" REL="nofollow">Burchard of Worms</A> so the precise ranking of sins isn't something I'm an expert at, but in general fornication was viewed less seriously than adultery (and we see that Adam's sexual sin is downgraded from adultery to fornication because he has strong grounds for an annulment). Furthermore, fornication was viewed less seriously depending on the status of the parter, for example in the Middle Ages/Renaissance<BR/><BR/><I>Penalties for fornication were influenced by the age and the social, religious, and marital status of the offenders. Punishment was harsher for the old than for the young, as sexual behavior was to be expected of the latter but exceedingly inappropriate for the former. Female peasants were often considered "fair game," and any man who fornicated with one of them was usually treated leniently, even if there was violence involved - as there often was.</I> (<A HREF="http://www.brown.edu/Departments/Italian_Studies/dweb/society/sex/fornication-adultery.shtml" REL="nofollow">Decameron Web</A>).<BR/><BR/>In making use of a prostitute Adam's sin would have been considered to have been less severe than had he had an affair with a married woman or seduced a virgin. And yet, Fleur is a virgin, so that perhaps makes him feel more sinful than he would had she been more sexually experienced.<BR/><BR/>I suspect that according to canon law Adam's main sins would be minor fornication and the unnecessary pain (caused by anger) inflicted on Fleur.<BR/><BR/>He does regret having broken his vow of chastity: <BR/><BR/><I>"[...] Sometimes it is difficult not to feel certain cravings. But I was faithful to my marriage until that one occasion with you." (322)</I><BR/><BR/>He sees the use of a prostitute as a "lapse": "I will recommit myself to my marriage. I hope I will have the strength to live with that commitment for the rest of my life, with no more lapses." (349)<BR/><BR/>But I don't get the impression that, were it not for his marriage, he'd be very worried about such "lapses" since clearly prior to his marriage he'd been quite promiscuous: "Before my marriage [...] I slept with more than a dozen women. I could not possibly put a number on them, the women I bedded." (397)<BR/><BR/>And I don't think he really thinks about the wider social pressures which bring women into prostitution. As he says, it's probably mostly because Fleur was a virgin that he remembers her and wants to help her.<BR/><BR/>In <I><A HREF="http://www.likesbooks.com/cgi-bin/bookReview.pl?BookReviewId=1976" REL="nofollow">A Precious Jewel</A></I> Balogh has another heroine who's a prostitute and isn't a virgin, and still marries her hero. I think I'd have to read that to get a clearer idea of Balogh's ideas about prostitution and whether she sees it as a symptom of the commodification/oppression of women and/or how she regards the men who use these women.Laura Vivancohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00906661869372622821noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30203557.post-36511087194663007032007-08-12T12:52:00.000+01:002007-08-12T12:52:00.000+01:00Adam reaches [contrition] when... [he] regrets the...<I>Adam reaches [contrition] when... [he] regrets the pain he has caused Fleur: 'If he had known [that she was a virgin], he could have done it differently' (2005: 14).</I><BR/><BR/>I'm not sure I'd call Adam contrite in the same sense. Isn't he initially more upset at the <B>way</B> he deflowered Fleur, than at having done it? He seems focused on the smaller "sin" (her pain), not the larger. Perhaps I'm misremembering?<BR/><BR/>That type of thought process is common in romance heroes.<BR/>- Sex with a woman who obviously isn't experienced or promiscuous or whatever he's thinking<BR/>- Minor contrition over the way it happened<BR/>- Evading responsibility for the act itself: "but you wanted it". (I take this to be unacknowledged discomfort over his decision making and actions.)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com