#north and south weekly

[thethirdromana]

We tell them we may have to lower wages; but can’t afford to raise.

I'm a bit out of my depth here but I think it's useful to note that the 1850s (in fact, most of the Victorian age) was a time of very very low inflation in the UK. From 1850 to 1860, inflation averaged just 1% a year, and over the whole of Queen Victoria's reign it averaged -0.1% per year.

So the workers wouldn't need regular pay rises just to keep up with inflation in the way that we do today. They would, of course, need pay rises for other reasons, such as being paid poverty wages, but the relative value of their pay is not going down over time. This is bad - he's still threatening to lower wages! - but maybe not quite as bad as it sounds to us.

[thatscarletflycatcher]

I have been noticing something about North and South Weekly, and that is the very low engagement/commentary on the Higgins/Bessy weeks. And I don't mean this post in a "silly shallow readers only engaging with the romance plot" way at all, because it is a very good dynamic and I love romance and I'm not ashamed of loving romance. It's more about my experience of revisiting the text, and the Higgins plotline growing on me more and more each time.

Part of it is learning about how much Gaskell loved the character of John Barton in Mary Barton -and how Nicholas and Bessy Higgins are a remix of those characters, but besides that...

Under Bessy's "victorianness" there's such a gut punching story of a young woman who has always only known toil and the relative seclusion of industrial town life, something that Gaskell brings across so well with the soundscape of the novel in the neverending industrial noise that tortures Bessy and the sense of oppression Margaret gets in Milton. And you can almost touch Bessy's feverishness and horror mixed with her delirious craving for Heaven and peace and quiet and rest. Margaret, besides her own, reflects our shock and discomfort with this picture.

And then there's Nicholas, who is written as intelligent and noble but also full of pathos. In my last reread, I found myself tearing up at his scenes more than any other. Granted, some of his best moments and lines come much later on than this point, but even so far, bits like this one in chapter XI:

Bessy leant back against her father, who prepared to carry her upstairs; but as Margaret rose to go, he struggled to say something; “I could wish there were a God, if it were only to ask Him to bless thee.”

that show his love for Bessy and his inner conflict, are so touching.

I guess what I'm trying to say is to extend an invitation to look more closely into these chapters, because there's good stuff in them too, and nothing in this novel is filler.

[smolgreybunny]

Mrs. Thornton was shy. It was only of late years that she had had leisure enough in her life to go into society; and as society she did not enjoy it. As dinner-giving, and as criticising other people's dinners, she took satisfaction in it. But this going to make acquaintance with strangers was a very different thing. She was ill at ease, and looked more than usually stern and forbidding as she entered the Hales' little drawing-room.

Gah, I love Elizabeth Gaskell so much! The way she describes both how a person presents to others, and the feelings and experiences that cause them to present that way. Mrs. Thornton is shy and uncomfortable meeting and conversing with strangers, very understandable feelings that merit sympathy from the reader. But those feelings cause her to present as more stern and forbidding than she usually is, something that probably will not recommend her to Margaret and Mrs. Hale.

[vickyvicarious]

So... Masters and Men, eh? There are several different perspectives at play in this chapter:

Mrs. Thornton

"[Workers strike] For the mastership and ownership of other people’s property [...] they are a pack of ungrateful hounds [...] they want to be masters, and make the masters into slaves on their own ground. They are always trying at it; they always have it in their minds".

Mrs. Thornton speaks very harshly of the workers, and she seems to explicitly view the situation as opposing sides, with the 'lesser' one being the aggressor. Part of the pride she takes in her lifestyle is linked to being brave enough to face them and 'fight' against them. In fact, the quote about that is really interesting to me, because she claims they're "a people who are always owing their betters a grudge, and only waiting for an opportunity to pay it off," but in some ways, she could be seen that way as well. At least in the sense of family history/social status, the Hales are supposedly the Thornton's superiors, right? And Mrs. Thornton is very prickly about being seen as inferior herself. A lot of it seems to be genuine pride and dislike of their (Southern) priorities, but some is definitely defensive. And I could see some nasty high society person using similar wording about Mrs. Thornton herself having a grudge against her betters. Certainly, as someone who herself had to struggle tremendously to climb to the point she's at now, I find it easier to see her believing others will want to do the same (though she attributes more malevolence to their actions).

Mr. Hale

"I should say that the masses were already passing rapidly into the troublesome stage which intervenes between childhood and manhood, in the life of the multitude as well as that of the individual. Now, the error which many parents commit in the treatment of the individual at this time is, insisting on the same unreasoning obedience as when all he had to do in the way of duty was, to obey the simple laws of ‘Come when you’re called,’ and ‘Do as you’re bid!’ But a wise parent humours the desire for independent action, so as to become the friend and adviser when his absolute rule shall cease."

Mr. Hale doesn't attempt to dispute the idea that the workers are inferiors, and he's clearly not willing to go too far because he wants to keep the peace. But he tries to suggest that Mr. Thornton look upon them as growing and learning, and be indulged of their 'mistakes' or 'outbursts', so to speak. When talk again turns to the two sides as being opposed to one another, Mr. Hale says, "is not that because there has been none of the equality of friendship between the adviser and advised classes?" He's certainly in favor of mending relations, and he doesn't believe that opposition is inherent/necessary, but his approach is sort of benevolently condescending. This too fits well with his background and the kind of thing Margaret was used to before they move here.

Nicholas Higgins

...it were the interest of the employers to keep them from acquiring money—that it would make them too independent if they had a sum in the savings’ bank. [...] I heard, moreover, that it was considered to the advantage of the masters to have ignorant workmen... [...] But he—that is my informant—spoke as if the masters would like their hands to be merely tall, large children—living in the present moment—with a blind unreasoning kind of obedience.

Higgins (who isn't here and whose words are being relayed second-hand) is the one who first brought up the workers-to-children comparison, but he did so in a distinctly scathing way. He's very bitter about the 'masters' and is definitely displeased at being looked down on. But it's not just resentment. He recognizes the balance of power that is at least in many cases being deliberately maintained. The workers aren't allowed to be too independent because then they can't as easily be used however the masters want. His views are sort of a reverse of Mrs. Thornton's... the employers are the aggressors constantly shoving the workers back down. Wanting them to be ignorant, never to think for themselves, to be dependent and unquestioning. As someone who has very few options even when it comes to helping his daughter dying due to a factory-related illness, his bitterness is fully understandable.

John Thornton

"But because we don’t explain our reasons, they won’t believe we’re acting reasonably. We must give them line and letter for the way we choose to spend or save our money." [...] "I agree with Miss Hale so far as to consider our people in the condition of children, while I deny that we, the masters, have anything to do with the making or keeping them so. I maintain that despotism is the best kind of government for them; so that in the hours in which I come in contact with them I must necessarily be an autocrat." [...] "And I say, that the masters would be trenching on the independence of their hands, in a way that I, for one, should not feel justified in doing, if we interfered too much with the life they lead out of the mills. Because they labour ten hours a-day for us, I do not see that we have any right to impose leading-strings upon them for the rest of their time. I value my own independence so highly that I can fancy no degradation greater than that of having another man perpetually directing and advising and lecturing me, or even planning too closely in any way about my actions."

Mr. Thornton has quite an interesting mix of views here. He claims that it is necessary for him to be a despot; but he feels he has no right to interfere with their personal lives. He talks scornfully of their strikes and says if they knew why he's taken his stance, then they would act differently, but he refuses to tell them why. He agrees that they're like children, but then says he respects their independence and is treating them like he'd want to be treated. Thornton does seem to have a better understanding of the independent nature of the people here, but he uses that reasoning to justify remaining completely uninvolved in bettering the situation. He asks if he has any right to impose his own views on them just because he's their boss - and that's a fair point, but also, he's kind of doing that regardless? It's his belief that an honest and straightforward, if demanding 'master' is both more respectable and incurs loyalty/becomes an example to follow. It's his belief that the workers should blindly obey him because he's in charge, and that this is better for them. And as someone with so much power over their livelihoods, he can operate based on these views. If they feel otherwise, they don't have the power to change that. When they try with strikes, he's willing to get into a power struggle that he admits will hurt him as well as them, rather than let them 'win' even just enough to make him admit his reasons why. Even though he claims their interests align with his, he seems to feel that they don't or can't understand this, and thus conflict is inevitable. In fact, I think he was the first one to call it a "battle of the classes." Thornton's backstory is very much a "pulled myself up by my own bootstraps" success story, and because he did it by working really hard and practicing lots of self-discipline, he seems to think anyone else who fails to succeed is at fault for not working hard enough. He didn't question his bosses, he just put the work in! And so on. Of course, pretty sure he was always of a higher class, and that's going to be a factor for all of these people regardless, but still, I can easily see him thinking that it's their fault for not knowing how to save their money carefully enough. And thus dismissing their complaints.

Margaret Hale

All I meant to say is, that there is no human law to prevent the employers from utterly wasting or throwing away all their money, if they choose; but that there are passages in the Bible which would rather imply—to me at least—that they neglected their duties as stewards if they did so. [...] ...I see two classes dependent on each other in every possible way, yet each evidently regarding the interests of the other as opposed to their own: I never lived in a place before where there were two sets of people always running each other down. [...] ...you are a man, dealing with a set of men over whom you have, whether you reject the use of it or not, immense power, just because your lives and your welfare are so constantly and intimately interwoven. God has made us so that we must be mutually dependent. We may ignore our own dependence, or refuse to acknowledge that others depend upon us in more respects than the payment of weekly wages; but the thing must be, nevertheless.

Margaret relays Higgins' words, and speaks on his behalf. She seems to have a position closest to her father, in the sense that she feels it is Mr. Thornton's duty to aid the people under his rulership. She seems guided ultimately by religious ideals of the relationship between people, but also recognizes that the situation involves an inherent power imbalance and thus responsibility on the part of the one who is at the top. As much as Thornton might deny it, he does have incredible power over the people. But he is also dependent upon them. Her talk about dependence is really interesting because she's the first person to portray it as extending in both directions. They are dependent upon him to employ them; but he is equally dependent upon them to work for him. In this way, she goes a step further than Mr. Hale seemed to, and recognizes both sides as at least closer to equals. She clearly isn't suggesting that every worker should be seen as having the same rights and roles as Thornton, but neither does she view them as either entirely isolated in their independence, or entirely subservient in their dependence. It's a complicated web in which everyone plays a valuable part. Fighting against one another is by necessity acting against your own interests, in a way. Once again, I think her having these beliefs fits very well with her background as someone who did operate in a more noblesse oblige way and clearly felt she was better than certain other classes, but also experienced being the social lesser/supported one when taken in by her Aunt.

[fangirlinglikeabus]

you know, there are many truly disastrous ways to start a proposal, but i think henry lennox saying he wished margaret didn't love her beloved childhood home so much is a real contender

[serial-serializednovelreader]

What other novels to your inbox do you recommend? I have done Dracula Daily for years and I want to expand my horizon. War is pretty much the only thing that I don't like. Thanks

Hi!

So funny story, contrary to my username and bio…I have not been keeping up with the classic novels in my emails lately. BUT. That does not mean I don’t have some recommendations for you!

Also, since you did mention you don’t like war, I made sure not to recommend any novels that heavily involve war (War & Peace & Emails, for instance). However, I do know some characters in these recommendations have history with war (e.g. Watson was a war doctor) and I’ve made sure to make mention of that wherever possible. So, I apologize if that comes off as annoying or stating the obvious, I just want you to be fully informed before you read. I’m also listing general content warnings as a rule to inform anyone who might be interested in these Substacks. :)

On to the recommendations!

If you’re looking for mystery…

Learn about the greatest detective of all time from his faithful partner — that’s right! Read Letters from Watson to get the scoop on Sherlock and solve mysteries alongside the legendary duo. I thought this was such a cool concept and I wish I had been able to keep up with it. But it was very fun for the time I did. It goes through the entire chronology of Sherlock stories (which is a lot, by the way) and they just started going through the “more complex cases” (aka, the 4 Sherlock novels) back in January. So, it might be a good time to start! There isn’t war in these cases (at least as far as I know, each email does have a list of content warnings for specifics), but Watson was a war doctor and this does come up frequently, just as a heads up.

If you’re looking for epistolary stories…

Literary Letters takes obscure epistolary novels from the public domain and puts them into your inbox! Right now they’re reading The Sorrows of Young Werther, which is about a guy who’s in love with a girl who’s betrothed to another and writes very passionate letters on the subject.

For a content warning, I’ve included the publisher’s note on this one: “There are passages where the book discusses Werther’s depression, despair, rationalizations for suicide, and the suicide itself at length, so please take whatever precautions you need to read the book safely, which may include buddy reading, mental health breaks, or skipping it altogether.”

So with that being said, the reason I got into this email chain was actually for their first novel they emailed - The Lightning Conductor. I absolutely loved this novel and I heavily recommend going back into the archives to read it and its sequel if you can (that one is in the “Side Stories” archive). It’s a very lighthearted read and a romance, told in epistolary format! Basically, it’s about this smart (yet a bit scatterbrained — not judging, because, same) woman who goes to Europe for the first time and she ends up meeting a gentleman when her car breaks down. Said gentleman is mistaken for a chauffeur and he goes along with it, just because she’s dreamy and he’s already smitten with her. Then there’s her “best guy friend” and her mom trying to throw a wrench in their plans. It’s utter chaos and I love it. I could go on for hours about this novel, but I won’t! I do highly recommended reading it if you ever get the chance.

If you’re looking for a read in verse format…

Check out Divine Comedy Weekly! It’s telling Dante’s Divine Comedy every Tuesday and Thursday. There’s not much to say about this one because I dropped out pretty early in the game, unfortunately. For some reason, stories told in a lyrical/verse format don’t seem to be my thing, but maybe they’re your thing! I think it’s a great concept and for that reason, I will recommend this.

If you’re looking for an all-new read…

North and South by Jane Austen is coming to your inbox this June! It’s apparently a bit like Pride and Prejudice but with the Industrial Revolution and labor relations. I actually just subscribed to this one and I’m excited to see how I enjoy it!

If you’re looking for a long haul read…

Buckle in! It’s time for Whale Weekly! That’s right, you’re in for a THREE YEAR TRIP with this bad boy because Ishmael is emailing you the tale of Moby Dick. Life has gotten in the way and I’ve fallen behind (though this is motivating me to catch up again), but this is actually really good as an email read because this guy goes on so many tangents, it’s more fun for me to absorb his thoughts in spaced out emails, rather than if I tried to read the book.

The memes are very fun with this one, but please keep in mind there is racism and foul language in this, as well as other heavy topics I can’t remember off the top of my head. Also, this does not take place in a war setting, but I do believe some characters have been in war in the past, so that is probably something to keep in mind with this one!

This one is coming to an end fairly soon (I didn’t realize we were on chapter 113/135 OOF), so I don’t know if they’re going to do another round after this or leave it. I imagine it would probably be hard to catch up at this point, but I’m going to link it anyway because I typed all of this up before realizing how far along we were and I do still recommend the read in email format rather than a novel format.

If you’re looking for horror…

I would recommend “The Beetle Weekly”. I wasn’t able to finish this one because LifeTM got in the way, but it is, for sure, one of the reads of all time. Probably the best and worst thing you could read ever tbh. It’s not very enjoyable and I’m not pitching it well at all, but for some reason, I am legitimately recommending this because it is hilarious to read with Tumblr memes by your side. As a heads up, this book does include racism, gore, sexism, transphobia (iirc?) and likely more content warnings I can’t remember. The reason I’m recommending it at all is because it does carry some of the same themes as Dracula and the characters are interesting. Plus, love it or hate it, I reacted while reading this book - a lot. Did I mention I have a bug phobia? Also, fun fact: it was published at the same time as Dracula and was actually MORE POPULAR than Dracula for a while before fading into obscurity.

The only thing is, it did just end last April so you might have to wait until December for it to crawl back into your inbox if you’re interested.

If you’re looking for a thriller…

Jekyll and Hyde Weekly. I absolutely LOVED THIS ONE!!!! Very much vibes of Dracula Daily. Immaculate stuff right there. This one has a lot more comedy than you’d think and was very enjoyable. Content warnings for violence against a child (mentioned, not shown), body horror, and there is one more I can’t say without spoiling the book (feel free to DM me if you’re interested in knowing).

Again, this is pretty short and it’s not currently active; it runs November through January, so that’s when you can look out for it!

I was hoping to recommend some more via a masterlist, I know someone made a post waaay back in 2022 when this serialized email novel thing first got started, but it looks like it got deleted, so if there is a new one, I would love for anyone to share it just for future reference!

I do have a couple of honorable mentions I’ll link that I haven’t read and know next to nothing about, but just so you can have even more recommendations. Please feel free to share your favorites!

[bluecatwriter]

"Some folk have a great wheel at one end o’ their carding-rooms to make a draught, and carry off th’ dust; but that wheel costs a deal of money—five or six hundred pounds, maybe, and brings in no profit; so it’s but a few of th’ masters as will put ’em up; and I’ve heard tell o’ men who didn’t like working in places where there was a wheel, because they said as how it made ’em hungry, at after they’d been long used to swallowing fluff, to go without it, and that their wages ought to be raised if they were to work in such places. So between masters and men th’ wheels fall through."

This is such a heartbreaking description of life in the factory that unfortunately rings true with a lot of work experiences today. On one hand are the bosses who see no benefit in doing anything that will cut into their profit... and on the other are the workers who, in response and as a coping mechanism, take a certain pride in "toughing it out" in terrible work conditions. When the conditions are so terrible and there is no clear way to change things, workers will weave whatever stories they can to get through.

[dodger-chan]

Mr. Thornton, representing a position that I think reads a lot worse today than it would have at the time:

“Mine were altered by my own will, before parliament meddled with the affair. It was an immediate outlay, but it repays me in the saving of coal. I’m not sure whether I should have done it, if I had waited until the act was passed. At any rate, I should have waited to be informed against and fined, and given all the trouble in yielding that I legally could. But all laws which depend for their enforcement upon informers and fines, become inert from the odiousness of the machinery. I doubt if there has been a chimney in Milton informed against for five years past, although some are constantly sending out one-third of their coal in what is called here unparliamentary smoke.”

Well, the environmental aspect of it, at least. The idea that a business would purposefully spend more money just because the boss didn't like the concept of government regulation might bother me more than other readers. It suggests an obstinacy in Mr. Thornton's character, one that I presume he'll have to overcome. It feels like the first really negative aspect of him we've been shown.

(Unless we're supposed to think less of him for being in trade? I'm not sure how much the intended audience was expected to share Margaret's opinion.)

[lady-vetinari]

I have forgotten most of the finer details of my last time reading North & South, so while I did remember Margaret's brother and how his absence plays into the story later on, I didn't remember the reason he couldn't return to England, and I think it's interesting how well his story can be linked to worker strikes - he's part of the navy so that's not what anybody would call it, but in a way that's exactly what he and the crew did. So the insistence of Margaret and Mrs Hale that what he did was right and proper (not that I disagree with them) feels like something that could come back in relation to strikes in the factories, either as a reason for Margaret to support them, or as a way to show bias if she doesn't.

[mollywog]

But the cloud never comes in that quarter of the horizon from which we watch for it.

[thethirdromana]

I had a bit of time so I've just loaded 52 chapters of North and South onto Substack. Which means that North and South Weekly is go!

It'll run every Wednesday from 12 June. Originally, North and South was published in 20 instalments, but that would mean emails of nearly 10k words each (!). I've set it up to send out a chapter a week for a year instead so the chunks are more manageable.

What's it about?

It’s the story of Margaret Hale, a young woman from a rural background in the south of England. She’s forced to move to the northern city of Milton, where she’s shocked by the impacts of the Industrial Revolution and clashes with mill owner John Thornton.

Why read it?

Such good characters!!

It's a romance but it's also about LABOUR RELATIONS.

There's literally a chapter titled "What is a strike?"

No sidelining of female characters: this is a novel that pushes back against the idea of separate spheres.

It's a really good read!

@lurking-latinist and @vickyvicarious, you said you might be interested - anyone else?

[thatscarletflycatcher]

Now that North and South Weekly has reached chapter 10, I think it is time to highlight this interesting contrast:

"When she had left the room, he [Mr. Lennox] began in his scrutinising way to look about him. The little drawing-room was looking its best in the streaming light of the morning sun. The middle window in the bow was opened, and clustering roses and the scarlet honeysuckle came peeping round the corner; the small lawn was gorgeous with verbenas and geraniums of all bright colours. But the very brightness outside made the colours within seem poor and faded. The carpet was far from new; the chintz had been often washed; the whole apartment was smaller and shabbier than he had expected, as back-ground and frame-work for Margaret, herself so queenly. He took up one of the books lying on the table; it was the Paradise of Dante, in the proper old Italian binding of white vellum and gold; by it lay a dictionary, and some words copied out in Margaret’s handwriting. They were a dull list of words, but somehow he liked looking at them. He put them down with a sigh. “The living is evidently as small as she said. It seems strange, for the Beresfords belong to a good family.”

(Chapter III)

"He [Mr. Thornton] was ushered into the little drawing-room, and kindly greeted by Mr. Hale, who led him up to his wife, whose pale face, and shawl-draped figure made a silent excuse for the cold languor of her greeting. Margaret was lighting the lamp when he entered, for the darkness was coming on. The lamp threw a pretty light into the centre of the dusky room, from which, with country habits, they did not exclude the night-skies, and the outer darkness of air. Somehow, that room contrasted itself with the one he had lately left; handsome, ponderous, with no sign of female habitation, except in the one spot where his mother sate, and no convenience for any other employment than eating and drinking. To be sure, it was a dining-room; his mother preferred to sit in it; and her will was a household law. But the drawing-room was not like this. It was twice—twenty times as fine; not one quarter as comfortable. Here were no mirrors, not even a scrap of glass to reflect the light, and answer the same purpose as water in a landscape; no gilding; a warm, sober breadth of colouring, well relieved by the dear old Helstone chintz-curtains and chair covers. An open davenport stood in the window opposite the door; in the other there was a stand, with a tall white china vase, from which drooped wreaths of English ivy, pale green birch, and copper-coloured beech-leaves. Pretty baskets of work stood about in different places: and books, not cared for on account of their binding solely, lay on one table, as if recently put down. Behind the door was another table decked out for tea, with a white table-cloth, on which flourished the cocoa-nut cakes, and a basket piled with oranges and ruddy American apples, heaped on leaves. It appeared to Mr. Thornton that all these graceful cares were habitual to the family; and especially of a piece with Margaret."

(Chapter X)

Something something the "gentleman" looks at a scene of beauty and can only think of money, status, and family connections. The "man in trade" is presented with a humbler version of the same scene, and thinks of warmth, home-likeness, and feminine care something something.

[smolgreybunny]

And now here is Mrs. Thornton! We get such a clear picture of her from the start: decided, imposing, blunt, strong opinions, fiercely protective of her son. And what a familiar mother-son interaction! First she's warning her son against a girl, then she's upset when she finds out the girl isn't interested. 🤣

[vickyvicarious]

The way Mrs. Thornton's previous poverty influences her attitudes is a nice touch. She is certainly able to afford things for herself now, but she isn't comfortable doing so. Her instinct is to refuse the horses, to plan to hire a cab for her own travel, not to consider buying a cab for someone else. She does chores that normally would be done by servants, she respects practical crafts more than decorative ones. Even though she treats her daughter lovingly, she doesn't respect her in the same way she respects her son, because he is hard-working and practical in a way Fanny isn't.

[serial-serializednovelreader]

Nova’s Notes - North and South Weekly - Wk 1

So, today was the first entry of North and South and because of the Droughtula, I’m glad to have a beast of an entry to analyze! Also, as a note, I’m probably not going to quote as much of this, since there is so much of it — I’ll just refer to the part I’m talking about. One more thing: this is my first time reading this book. Feel free to share your responses, but no spoilers please! (I know this is a 100+ year-old book though, so I’ll probably filter tags)

Reading the first long paragraph, we can already get a glimpse of Margaret and Edith’s dynamic. They’re cousins and raised together from childhood and Edith is called pretty by all — except Margaret. But now, Margaret is starting to see her better qualities, since Edith is about to leave her and get married and Margaret is going home to live with her father.

What does that tell me? They may not be on the best of terms (at least on Margaret’s side), but even so, Margaret can’t help but feel sad at the upcoming “loss” of her cousin. There’s more evidence to support this: in later paragraphs, she’s referred to as “spoiled” and weak-willed, though it’s unclear whether that’s Margaret’s opinion or Gaskell’s omniscient opinion (which I think is something to watch out for). Then again, she also refers to her as “dear” and observes that Edith would stay with her fiancé even if someone came along with more money and comfort (since she’s so spoiled). Needless to say, I think Margaret has some complicated feelings.

I believe Margaret sees her for what she is — as spoiled and a bit of a child (which we’ll get to later) — but she’s still her cousin and can only see her as more dear. I love that Gaskell writes about this feeling of idealizing a person more when you know they’re about to leave (moving, marriage, etc.) because, as someone’s who been through this, I can very much relate and I appreciate her writing about this. Even if you’re not on the best of terms, you find yourself missing their annoying mannerisms too (unless they’re like, super bad or something lol)!

Moving on, Margaret overhears her aunt — Mrs. Shaw — talking to her friends about Edith’s marriage and her own marriage. What’s interesting here is that her main concern was making sure a) Edith married someone within her age range (unlike her own marriage) and b) love is of the utmost importance. Obviously, this is something pretty common in today’s society — in fact, it’s encouraged — but I do wonder how this was taken when it was first published. Was the aunt seen as frivolous and privileged, or revolutionary and modern? I did some research and it turns out by the time this was published (1854), this was already a well-established belief. So I guess she was simply echoing what most of society was already thinking!

What does stand out to me is that the aunt does talk about the age difference in her own marriage being a “drawback”. I don’t think I need to discuss how our society views age-gap relationships today (let’s just say it’s a hot topic), but I do find it interesting how very relevant this conversation from Mrs. Shaw still resonates with me so many years later.

However, Gaskell doesn’t seem to hold Mrs. Shaw in the highest regard, either. She describes her as “considering herself a victim to an uncongenial marriage” and now that her husband is dead, tries to find something else to be anxious about. Furthermore, she only does things because someone else wants to (and complains about it) while “all the time she was in reality doing just what she liked”. While these aren’t the worst things ever, I wouldn’t call this a glowing character review either. I would almost compare this to Mr. Woodhouse from Jane Austen’s Emma, who bemoans every little illness and thing that befalls him when he is actually pretty healthy.

Not that she’s seen to be a horrible aunt or mother to Margaret or Edith — it’s pretty evident that she cares for both of them by the way she dotes on Edith and how she took Margaret in as a child (I’m not entirely sure why — I think it was to teach her how to be a lady?). I like that Gaskell is already showing a lot of different sides to these characters!

Margaret is asked to model Edith’s wedding shawls, since she is currently down for a nap. She goes up to the nursery and reflects on when she first came to this house as a child. She was considered a wild thing — playing in the forest and all that. On the first night there, her new nurse already seemed intimidating and the nursery itself more akin to a prison. Poor little Margaret began to cry, but the nurse demands her to stop so as to not “disturb Miss Edith”. Then, she was all the quieter when her father and aunt went to check on her later, since she felt bad for being upset. I can well imagine a child of nine fostering a bit of resentment for her cousin after an introduction like that — not a big one, because I don’t think she’s that kind of character, but just a little one. How would you feel if you were thrust into an unwelcoming environment and told your emotions were a problem? It’s not Edith’s fault, but it’s not Margaret’s either. The upside is their relationship remarkably improved after that and she can look upon the nursery with fondness.

Honestly it gives me the same vibes as Charlotte Brontë’s Villete, which was published almost around the same time (though the roles are reversed in this case). At the beginning of the book, the protagonist, Lucy Snowe, is visiting her godmother but they have a new visitor: Polly. Tensions clash when they both have to stay in the nursery and Lucy sees Polly as a spoiled brat, while Polly sees Lucy as unfeeling and unkind to her. Obviously, not the same situation, but I think it’s a little peek into what this kind of dynamic is like!

Moving on, Margaret models the wedding shawls and they actually seem to fit her better than Edith (she has the height for it). The key point here is that “no one thought about it” though: they don’t seem to notice or appreciate Margaret’s beauty. While Gaskell remarks that Edith is known for her prettiness, the same attention does not seem to be applied to Margaret. I wonder if this will be a running theme? What I do appreciate is that when Margaret looks at herself in the mirror, she smiles and poses — she seems to know her own beauty and be somewhat self-confident, even if others don’t tell her. Or at least, she’s having fun dressing up like a princess, which is super cute and I love that for her!!! Why shouldn’t she have fun with this?

Enter Henry Lennox, Edith’s fiancé’s brother — a mouthful. He, understandably, causes a stir amongst everyone and even Edith wakes up from her nap as if she feels the vibes that her future in-law has arrived (to paraphrase the author, lol). While they ask him questions, a very interesting line pops up about Edith’s soon-to-be sister-in-law that I wanted to share and had to do some research on to figure out the meaning of:

“[Edith] had a multitude of questions to ask about dear Janet, the future, unseen sister-in-law, for whom she professed so much affection, that if Margaret had not been very proud she might have almost felt jealous of the mushroom rival…”

After googling what a mushroom rival was (because, what????), the consensus I found was that it means “an unimportant rival”. It was also a way to jab at the “nouveau riche” who found themselves in upper-class circles, but came from lower-class origins. I think ultimately what Gaskell is saying here is that Margaret sees her cousin’s sister-in-law as someone that may try to “steal” her cousin’s affections, but in the end there’s not much to worry about, since Margaret has established affection with Edith (almost like people with generational wealth) and Janet doesn’t have much to compete with because she is too new to Edith’s acquaintance (thus making her like the nouveau riche). Just my interpretation, though, please feel free to sound off in the comments!

Henry goes to sit next to Margaret after Edith’s questioning and Margaret seems very happy to seem him. Not shy at all! Their conversation is interesting. First he starts off with (kind of) mocking her and the ladies “playing with shawls” and how it’s “very different” compared to his “real true law business”. So yeah, not winning any points with me right off the bat, but let’s see where it goes, I guess? I mean, it could be just a joke, right?

He comments on how he’s noticed her doing all the hard work for the wedding and how he hopes she gets a break from that soon. She tries to deflect and mention Edith as also working hard, but he sticks by his assertion that she has been the one doing all the planning work for his brother and Edith’s wedding, which she can’t really deny. Even if she has not done all the work (I imagine Mrs. Shaw has taken up some of the heavy-lifting), it seems that the emotional toil of all the planning is what has made an impact on Margaret.

She wonders if a wedding must always be this way and even suggests that she would like her wedding to be more calm without all of the extra fluff Edith’s has (a bit of a controversial topic in those days I think — in my research I found that Victorian marriages were modeled after Queen Victoria’s ceremony, which included many traditions we still see today). That leads to this passage:

“‘The idea of stately simplicity accords well with your character.’

Margaret did not quite like this speech; she winced away from it more, from remembering former occasions on which he had tried to lead her into a discussion (in which [Henry] took the complimentary part) about her own character and ways of going on. She cut the speech short…”

I find this interesting — that Henry being complimentary is inherently distasteful to her and she immediately turns him away from it. I’m not sure if it’s because a) his compliments suck (who calls someone’s character simplistic — I don’t think that’s the compliment you think it is buddy) b) that’s her future relative-in-law and she thinks it’s weird for him to compliment her or c) she’s just not good at taking compliments in general. I’m actually not sure which it is — I need to see more of her character — but I do know the conversation does not improve from here on out.

She makes a rebuttal to his compliment by saying she is only thinking of her home in Helstone and it’s not a character trait. He tries to get her to talk more about it, but she will not be drawn in. At least not completely. She converses, but also gets quickly annoyed with him. You kind of have to read along to get what I mean, but their conversation is like two steps forward and one back.

Finally, he says, “You are rather severe to-night, Margaret.” And she seems kind of surprised by this because she didn’t realize she was being “severe”: she genuinely could not describe her home as he wants her to. Her justification is basically you can only understand it if you’ve been there, which she did kind of say before this point.

Don’t get me wrong: I love a good banter session, but this one just feels different in a negative way. I also feel like this back-and-forth banter is a set-up. This is how Margaret interacts with the people around her now, because they don’t seem to quite understand her. They think she’s being “uncooperative” or difficult — I don’t think she is. Or perhaps she is, but it’s also Henry’s fault for not changing the subject when she made it clear that she didn’t want to talk about her home and couldn’t describe it!!! I believe her change of scene will help her find people who do get her and maybe she will have a similar form of banter, but this time it will be different and she will be understood. That’s just my speculation, though!

He continues to talk to her, but they hit a roadblock yet again because he asks her “what she does to occupy herself in the country” and when she doesn’t have a good answer, goes to the point of saying:

“I see, you won’t tell me anything. You will only tell me that you are not going to do this and that. Before the vacation ends, I think I shall pay you a call, and see what you really do employ yourself in.”

Idk if someone told me this, even jokingly, I would not like it. This would be my response:

Like why does he need to know her every move?!?!?! I just feel like he’s not asking the right questions and he definitely seems to be making light of her “quaint” living (which I think she’s playing into just so he’ll leave her be). The problem is, he’s just filling in the blanks for her by describing what she does in her current home and then asks “oh so what will you do at Helstone? Archery, parties? Oh, you’re too poor for that? I see you won’t tell me anything.” He sounds exhausting to talk to!!!! Just be a good listener!!!!! Maybe that’s just me and I’m reading too much into it though. I don’t know how much we’ll see of him since he probably won’t be living where Margaret is going, but I honestly hope it’s not much. Or maybe I do — I want to know why he is this way, I’m nosey. 😂😂😂😂

Honestly, it kind of feels like when a neurotypical person and neurodivergent person have a conversation and it just…doesn’t go that well because both people have a different way of communicating and its frustrating for both sides. I know I’m being hard on Henry and whether he deserves that or not is up for debate (I’ll wait for final judgement), but it could just be a case of that. I’m also not saying people of different neurotypes can’t have a satisfying conversation — they definitely can — but it takes understanding from both sides and I do feel like both sides here are not trying to understand the other’s perspective. Just like I could be misunderstanding this whole conversation, I really don’t know!

Also, I’m pretty sure Henry is romantically interested in Margaret, but I don’t know if she returns the feeling. While she was initially was happy to seem him, she seems more annoyed by his conversation than happy (never a good sign). If he is flirting, I think it needs some workshopping because…uh…that ain’t it, pal.

I also notice that when Henry takes his leave, he remarks that “besides, Aunt Shaw won’t like us to talk.” Ok…what does THAT mean???? That nugget of lore is fascinating, but hard to glean much from. Is it because their conversations are always like this and Mrs. Shaw is just tired of hearing the back-and-forth? *Or* is part of the reason they have back-and-forth like this BECAUSE of Mrs. Shaw? Hopefully I’ll find out!

Enter Edith’s fiancé and that’s when the real stir begins! Edith is so excited she runs out of the room just to walk in with him (we love a dramatic entrance lol). We get the chance to observe both brothers while they observe Edith and Margaret in turn. Compared to the captain (and the whole family) it seems that Henry is the “plain one”, but on the whole seems “intelligent” and “keen”. But his interest in watching both women seems to be “slightly sarcastic” — which, what does mean?????? Henry, you’re so confusing!!!!!

Edith decides to show off how good she is at being a soldier’s wife by doing everything herself! Can you guess how well that goes? Yeah, she immediately can’t carry the tea-kettle because it’s too heavy for her and it gets all over her dress. She shows this to her fiancé “like a hurt child” and her fiancé either hugs her or does a relatable “kiss it better” thing — lol (shoutout to a special user in the comments section for helping me figure out what “the remedy was the same in both cases” meant :D). The chapter mostly ends with discussing how they made the tea and then “all was bustle until the wedding was over.”

I think it’s interesting that we don’t get a clear picture of the aforementioned fiancé — now husband. The only thing I can really mention is that he’s obviously affectionate with Edith and seems to humor her childish moods.

As for Margaret, I avoided talking too much about her character, specifically because I think we get it through the way she interacts with others. This is already long so I’ll make a quick list of what I think we can glean from her character so far, in no particular order:

Reflective

Understanding — for the most part (not with Henry)

Playful (to herself)

Doesn’t like too much attention

Determined

Not afraid of conflict

Speaks her mind

Loves her home

Loves her family, but knows their faults

Values tranquility

Helpful

Observant

Self-confident

I think that’s it! I’m excited to read more and hope you enjoyed my ramblings :)