The Small House at Allington by Anthony Trollope
published 1864
[excerpt] They were standing together at the window of the
billiard-room, in that idle half-hour which always occurs before the necessity
for dinner preparation has come. She had been riding and was still in her
habit, and he had returned from shooting. She knew that she looked more than
ordinarily well in her tall straight hat and riding gear, and was wont to hang
about the house, walking skilfully with her upheld drapery, during this period
of the day.
It was dusk, but not dark, and there was no artificial light
in the billiard-room. There had been some pretence of knocking about the balls,
but it had been only pretence. “Even Diana,” she had said, “could not have
played billiards in a habit.” Then she had put down her mace, and they had
stood talking together in the recess of a large bow-window.
comments: I’ve already done two posts on his book, but I very much enjoyed this moment, and also found this excellent picture (from NYPL).
This is the Lady Alexandrina: she’s not a wonderful person,
but Trollope doesn’t judge this little vanity too harshly. Her ultimate fate
is…. interesting.
The whole 19th century (and later) marriage plot
is a vicious circle for women. Lady A and her sisters have to get married –
there is nothing else for them in life. They then get clobbered for the actions
they take to achieve their aim, and their unhappiness at various points along
the way. I think they are entitled, thoughtless and lazy, but there were some
grim aspects to their lives. In this book there is the extreme case of Mrs
George, who has brought money with her. The family
treat her as though she were a figure of a woman, a large well-dressed resemblance of a being, whom it was necessary for certain purposes that the de Courcys should carry in their train.
- - ‘figure’ here suggesting a model or mannequin.
Trollope sympathizes with women’s dilemmas more than some of
his contemporaries do, and as ever he is someone who looks on the dark centre of
human nature, is unflinching, but is also forgiving and good-hearted. He is
always interested in forgiveness – there is of course his book called Can You
Forgive Her? (On
the blog here) – and I was very taken with his look at it here, where a man
is discarding one woman for another. The point he makes – that the new love will
forgive because it is in her own interests – is kind of obvious, yet not…
How very prone she would be to forgiveness in this matter, he had not divined, having not as yet learned how easily such a woman can forgive such a sin, if the ultimate triumph be accorded to herself.
He was a great writer, and his knowledge of human thoughts and ways is wonderful.
I haven't read Trollope lately, Moira. I truly must. His description of the riding habit and her little vanity in wearing it is really effective, and I think it shows, as you point out, that he had some sympathy for the no-win situations in which most women found themselves. I like the hint of wit in there, too.
ReplyDeleteI think when it comes to the classic novels, some of them are as hard work as you fear - but others are very entertaining, and sometimes feel quite modern. Trollope is definitely in that better category in my view.
DeleteI like Trollope, I guess I was a little surprised that he was "of his time" in some respects!
DeleteHe wrote so much, maybe hard to pin down, but I do believe in his basic good-heartedness.
DeleteI've just read a non-fiction book, Love and Marriage in the Age of Jane Austen. The author shows how accurate contemporary novelists were in their accounts of the marriage market and marriage once achieved. Trollope is later, of course, but still, I'm sure, reflects the times accurately.
ReplyDeleteYes, and realistic writers of the era have to hold two views simultaneously: that money does matter and that it shouldn't. The logic of the verdicts on the decisions in the books doesn't always add up. Charlotte Lucas gets terrible stick for marrying Mr Collins, but it was probably very sensible, and she was no worse off than other women in other marriages. Mr Collins was annoying but not wicked. I think she did better than Lydia...
DeleteI was a Senior Lecturer in English at a Swedish university before i retired two years ago. When I taught Pride and Prejudice to my first year students I used to tell them that Mr Darcy is a woman's dream: not only is he tall, rich and handsome but HE CHANGES because HE REALISES THAT THE WOMAN HE LOVES IS RIGHT AND HE IS WRONG and HE TELLS HER SO. ("You taught me a lesson,...") In reality there might - at best - have been Mr Wickham and Mr Collins to choose between. Then I made them choose. I told them it was not possible to chicken out by deciding to be an old maid and/or a governess; they would have to marry one of these, and each and every one of them (yes, the male students too) would have to tell me which one they chose. When I first did this, I expected all of them to go for the dashing young officer, but here is the interesting fact: almost all of them chose Mr Collins. Yes, they realised exactly how obnoxious he was, but they also realised that Wickham would most certainly cheat on them, quite apart from the fact that there would never be enough money to live on. Some of them said rather sadly that they would have to take Mr Collins for the sake of the children. (But one plucky girl said she would marry Mr Collins but cheat on him with Wickham.)
DeleteOh that is fascinating, and what a great way to teach! Did you see the book I just reviewed about teaching English in schools? https://clothesinbooks.blogspot.com/2024/03/reviewing-for-i-paper-reading-lessons.html - I think you would have a lot to discuss with Carol Atherton if you ever met!
DeleteDid the proportions choosing change over time? - we hear so much about the different generations, would their attitudes be different?
Have you read A Suitable Boy by Vikram Seth? - a book I love. It is very interesting on people's choices, and of course the whole book is about finding the eponymous Mr Right. My husband and I found a lot to discuss on the woman's final choice.
Lydia's lucky that she has relatives who've demonstrated that they'll make it worth Wickham's while to stick around - without that incentive it seems likely he'd abandon her altogether rather than just cheat on her.
DeleteThat's a very good point - she could've been in real trouble. And Darcy presumably has some hold over Wickham.
DeleteOh yes, I read your review of Carol Atherton's book with great interest! As for the students' reactions - during the last ten years or so I didn't teach that particular course module, so I don't know whether the attitudes changed. I missed P&P sadly - but I got to do Jane Eyre with the second-years, which I also loved. Just imagine having the chance to give the experience of that wonderful novel to a score of young women who have never heard of it... About half of the group usually had read it before (and loved it, of course) so with them it was a matter of making them see more in the text than they had the first time, which was fun and rewarding, but it was often the ones who came to it for the first time and who were overwhelmed, telling me that they had been up all night reading, that were closest to my heart.
DeleteAnd no, I haven't read A Suitable Boy, but this makes me think I should. Also, I remember a comment made by an Indian young woman on a Jane Austen fan site. She said she was surprised that European readers could still appreciate Jane Austen's novels, whereas to her and her friends there was total recognition - Mrs Bennet is the prototype of an Indian mother.
DeleteWhen I was about 12, an English teacher was introducing a new book to the class. She asked if anyone had read it and I put my hand up. She raised her eyebrows and said 'Oh you've read it? Perhaps you can tell us what happens in it?' So I started describing the plot. then I stopped and she said 'is that all you know, you don't know what happens next' and I tried to explain that I didn't want to spoil it for people who hadn't read it, but was stumbling a little and she mockingly said 'are you sure you've read it?' I still can't credit that a teacher did that to a harmless young girl who most certainly had read the book (and just about every other book we ever read in school) - and that she didn't think that NOT knowing the plot was a good idea for anyone coming new to the book (any book, or Shakespeare play, in my view). Oh well. I do envy those people who had wonderful teachers of English, as you and Carol Atherton are!
DeleteOh what a wonderful perception about Mrs Bennet as Indian mother!
DeleteI NEVER say this about books, and particularly books that are 1000 pages long, but I wanted A Suitable Boy to be longer...
There is a wonderful movie retelling of P&P set in India called Bride and Prejudice.
DeleteI think I saw that years ago, must try to find it again. I remember it as being great fun.
DeleteYes, Trollope is so good on marriage and its necessity for women - and the ways in which they were castigated for trying too hard to bring that about. He really understood people and, as you say, his instincts are usually so good. However I have just read The Vicar of Bullhampton. There's a interesting marriage plot there, but I am not sure Trollope quite appreciates what a narrow escape the young woman has in not marrying the man who has set his heart on her. What some of the other characters regard as devotion we might see as obsessive and controlling. Chrissie
ReplyDeleteHa! So first of all I love it that there is always a Trollope title I've never heard of, let alone read, even though I feel I have read a lot.
DeleteAnd secondly, that is very interesting and I will have to add it to my list.
I have a friend who was a solicitor doing a lot of family law and divorce work. She had a very good eye for red flags and 'loving' behaviour which is something else: you could feel her going quiet when someone described a new boyfriend, while she decided whether to say anything...
I agree that Trollope was more sympathetic towards women's lot than other male Victorian novelists. Still, there are a couple things in his attitude that bother me. As Chrissie remarked, the men can be very controlling. Of course the laws supported them, but even Trollope seems OK with husbands having complete control over wives. He was no supporter of "women's rights" and ridiculed suffragists. He has sympathetic characters say that women already have enough power, in their own way (and of course Mrs Proudie is a prime example). Even the love matches assume the husband's supremacy. One of his prerequisites for True Love in a heroine is her acceptance of a man as her "lord" and master. And some of his heroines have the exasperating habit of staying in love with unworthy men instead of moving on with their lives. I admire loyalty, but it can be misplaced!
ReplyDeleteWith a writer I like, I will say 'views very much of his time', while if I don't like them I'll say 'completely unacceptable'. I haven't taken his views as strongly as you have, I will think about this, and notice in the next one I read!
DeleteCan't resist commenting again. Trollope was conservative in his views as Marty says, and yet his understanding of human nature was such that when it came to writing about bad marriages, he could not help but be sympathetic to the plight of the woman in thrall to her husband. I am thinking here of He Knew He Was Right, and the awful situation of Lady Laura Kennedy in the Palliser novels.
ReplyDeleteLady Laura's marriage was definitely a disaster. Yet Trollope also made her into almost a stalker, deteriorating into obsession. She was so bright and confident at the beginning, and then she had to go off and marry for money!
DeleteShould have said that was me again! Chrissie
ReplyDeleteI absolutely LOVE that we are having an informed discussion on Trollope, the marriage plot and attitudes to women in these comments! Nothing could make me happier.
DeleteIt wasn't just money for Lady Laura, even though lack of it was the reason that she didn't marry Phineas. She thought she could have political influence through her husband. I imagine that in real life some marriages were at least partly for money and I expect some of them were reasonably successful as long as both parties knew what they were getting into - and Trollope must have known this - but in fiction the convention that marriage had to be for love had to be maintained. And yes, great to be able to discuss like this! Chrissie
ReplyDeleteI agree about Lady Laura's wish for political influence. Unluckily she married a man who wouldn't be influenced, but wanted total control of his wife! One of those "my way or the highway" types, except for Laura even the highway wasn't an option. (I was kind of surprised by the way Kennedy went from being fairly reasonable, if reserved, to being a raging religious fanatic.) I think the "power" Trollope said women had, depended way too much on the malleability of the husband.
DeleteI love hearing both your views - you are both more knowledgeable about Trollope than I am. And am finding it fascinating.
DeleteBack to Birgitta's question, I think I might have gone for Col. Fitzwilliam. He's single, competent, good-natured, good family, quite likable.... There seems to be no woman looking his way at all.
ReplyDeleteI absolutely agree with you. Funnily enough - when I first read the book, I had no idea of the plot and the characters did not have the iconic status they had now, so I did not know what was going to happen - and definitely for a period thought it would be Col Fitzwilliam. And even when it was obvious where Lizzy Bennet was going, I thought he would come back and end up with someone. He deserved better.
DeleteI think Elizabeth might have been quite willing to accept Colonel Fitzwilliam - if he had proposed. But he makes it quite clear to her that this will not happen, that as a younger son he will have to marry for money. So, I'm very sorry, but you will have to take one of the two on offer. It's a terrible choice, isn't it? And as one critic, I cannot remember which one, has commented regarding Mr Collins: Charlotte may be able to keep him out of her parlour, but she cannot keep him out of her bedroom. (Yes, I pointed this out to my students as well: "Remember, you will have to sleep with him; it's part of the marriage contract and you can't refuse." Very vulgar teaching methods - I prefer not to think of what the more theoretically inclined among my colleagues would have said had they known.)
DeleteThat must have made for entrancing lessons!
DeleteObviously I revere Jane A, but her internal logic doesn't always stand up with regard to who we are marrying and why...
of course unlikely people might be Good or Bad in Bed? Mr Collins might be thoughtful and caring, Mr Darcy selfish and lacking in understanding. (I really didn't want Dorothy L Sayers to tell us how good Lord Peter was in bed, and how he surprised and 'awakened' Harriet)
Thackeray once said how annoying it was that he couldn't deal with the sex lives of his characters in his novels - I think he was specifying males, but even so, it's an interesting idea: he thought a whole section of life was missing.
I think Dickens would never follow his characters into the bedroom, but Wilkie Collins would have been there if possible.
George Eliot the eternal mystery! Did Casaubon and Dorothea consummate....?
Trollope isn't wrong the new love will forgive because it is in her own interests but it is also because she believes *her* situation is different. There was a very well-done book called The Other Woman by Joy Fielding in which second wife, talented Jill, is dealing with (as I recall) a child, stepchildren, an annoying husband, his ex-wife, and a young woman who works with her husband, who announces that she is going to marry him. Jill didn't let David's being married stop her from having an affair and marrying him, and now she is faced with the same situation. I and some readers sympathize with Jill and think she should fight for her marriage. Others think she deserves the same treatment the first wife got. Not sure if anyone but me despised the husband!
ReplyDeleteI love Birgitta's Austen curriculum - I suppose I'd have gone with Mr. Collins too but in addition to his absurdity one would have to spend an awful lot of time in church and caring for the downtrodden. But better than being a governess!
The "awakened" sounds condescending but didn't Harriet deserve a good experience after the awful lover? Admittedly, Dorothy told us because she was so infatuated by Lord Peter and she could have been more subtle!
The Other Woman does sound interesting. Miss Marple-type aunts in my day would say in that situation 'if he left his first wife for you, he'll do the same to you'. Obviously a sweeping generalization. But it happens.
DeleteI just want to be in Birgitta's class! I guess being a vicar's wife did enable you to have a life and interests, despite some downsides.
Yes Harriet did deserve some happiness! In the Pursuit of Love Linda says that she has come to the conclusion (based on her 3 lovers) that Englishmen haven't the faintest idea about sex, and Fanny is quite put out and says loyally 'Alfred is wonderful' but Linda doesn't seem convinced...
Between Collins and Wickham, no contest, Collins: it's much less likely that you'd wind up with incurable VD that you'd also risk passing to your children. (Not impossible; see the oily Mr Osborne in Winston Graham's Poldark series; but in terms of what Austen observes, I think a woman would be much safer with Mr Collins.) Perhaps I should apologize for lowering the tone, but it is something I think about every time I cross one of the "reform a rake" Regency romances written in modern times: those heroines are risking not only themselves but their offspring.
ReplyDeleteYes, that thought has crossed my mind from time to time too, it's a very good point. I wonder how aware of the possibility a well-brought-up young lady would be? (not that Lydia Bennet seems well-brought-up, but you feel she'd be ready to take her chances on anything)
DeleteIt's a horrible thought.
I am surprised by the strength of my feeling that Mr Collins is a bearable prospect!