Date: Sun, 5 Jul 1998 At last we are into Volume II!
The house of cards that constituted the Harrel finances began their tumble
down in this chapter, much to Cecilia's cost. One of Mr. Harrel's numerous
debtors finally tired of his unpunctuality in paying bills, and turned the
debt over to an attorney for collection. It was indeed unwise for Mr. Arnott
to ever pay any of Harrel's bills, because of course he was the first person
the spendthrift turned to when creditors became insistent. When Mr. Arnott
hesitated, saying that it would be difficult to lay hands on the money for a
few days without serious loss to himself, Cecilia foolishly offered to advance
the money herself. She felt sorry for the unfortunate brother, who Cecilia
now saw Harrel draining dry without compunction. What made her think he would
not do the same to her? Especially considering this passage;
" ... Mr. Harrel seemed rather to prefer it [Cecilia advancing the money
rather than Mr. Arnott], yet spoke so confidently of his speedy payment, that
he appeared to think it a matter of little importance from which he accepted
it."
To obtain the money she wanted to advance the Harrels, as well as for repaying
her favorite bookseller and further helping the Hills, Cecilia determined to
call upon the guardian of her money (discarding Briggs' pretense of being a
guardian to Cecilia herself). She avoided the fuss attendant on summoning a
chair to the Harrel household by walking a few blocks, accompanied by a
servant, to where she could commission a chair to transport her to the home of
Mr. Briggs. Hopefully, she could achieve her aims and return by the time the
Harrels usually breakfasted.
The route to Mr. Briggs' home was detoured by a crowd eager to catch sight of
a criminal en route to the gallows. Cecilia ducked into a large home,
requesting permission to remain while she sent her servant for a chair. When
he returned and Cecilia was readying to depart whom should she see but
Mortimer Delvile, who asked some rather cryptic questions. Cecilia hastily
informed him she had not time to speak, but puzzled over the queries all the
way to Mr. Briggs'.
' News?' repeated she, ' No, I have heard none!'
' You will only, then, laugh at me for those officious offers you did so
well to reject?'
' I know not what offers you mean!'
' They were indeed superfluous, and therefore I wonder not you have
forgotten them.' " Cecilia did not exactly receive a warm welcome at the Briggs household. The
young servant told her that his master was ill. Cecilia asked when she could
see him, and, not liking the answer, in a week, asked for pen and paper she
could use to write him a note. She was given a small slate and pencil, for
Briggs did not wish to waste paper and ink on any insignificant thing Cecilia
might have to say. The shocking (to Briggs) request for 600 pounds was enough
to bring him down stairs in person. It turned out that the true reason Briggs
was reluctant to see Cecilia was that he normally " ' ... wears no great
matters of cloaths when he is alone. ' " Probably to save on wear and tear.
A recitation of complaints about the boy's stingy master was cut short by the
appearance of Briggs himself. He had fallen into a ditch on his way home from
the masquerade, injured himself, and had been ill. Of course he was too cheap
to use the services of a physician, which at that point in history may have
been just as well. Cecilia had chosen the worst possible time to ask Briggs
for an advance of money. He was in an even less generous mood than usual. He
flatly refused, and ordered her to return the books she had purchased. She
overcame her aversion to asking a favor of Mr. Delvile senior, and determined
to take her chair to his home to request his intervention in her favor.
I guess she didn't make it back for breakfast.
Jill Spriggs
Re: Group Hangings in Progress
In her posting on this chapter Jill concentrated on the Harrels'
coming bankruptcy and Cecilia's efforts to extract £600 from
Mr Briggs. It is a big sum, and perhaps we are to
believe Cecilia paradoxically lucky that Briggs will not
hand it over. On the other hand, I worry about her signing
a bill for that sum, and wonder if she won't be threatened
with debtors' prison before the book's end.
I'll concentrate on the crowd and what is happening
all about Cecilia--again we have a kind of scene we don't find
in Austen. I don't know if others have ever noticed Austen
characters rarely find themselves in crowds in the streets.
Cecilia gets caught up in a mob on their way to enjoy a group
hanging. Doody includes a note which reminded me that in his
Rambler No. 114, Johnson wrote passionately against capital
punishment as meted out in his period. (He also wrote
equally eloquently against imprisoning someone for debt,
but that's another part of this novel and post.) Burney
not only imitates Johnson's style; she shares his attitudes.
People might like to know something of what Johnson
wrote. Basically his argument is that those who are powerful
never think they will be murdered by their machinery;
their pride and sense of superiority leads them to govern
through terror and force rather than persuasion. One
can observe again and again that after any long period
of time governing bodies who practice terror and force
are led by the political arrogance of the few
to accumulate many crimes for which the punishment is
capital, and the result is 'so many disprporitons
between crimes and punishments, such capricious distinctions
of guilt, and such confusion of remissness and severity, as
can scarcely be believed . . . " As so many have argued
since then is that far from deterring murder, the fear
of capital punishment encourages robbers to murder those
who could bear witness against them. Johnson is not
against capital punishment per se but against its
use in all cases but that of murder and even there
to be used "as a last resort." He talks of the hardening
of people from indiscriminate use of public executions,
and how it poisons society by destroying trust (informers
were paid). The piece would be modern but for his savagery
towards those in power (to whom many people now pay
pious respect) and his style--which is that of Cecilia.
Here is the paragraph which Burney may be alluding to
in her depiction of the malefactors on their way to
to their graves:
"Prisons of the city emptied into the grave" and "legal
massacre" are good.
He argues that if the state murders so ceaselessly and
carelessly, "on what principle shall we bid them [criminals]
to forbear?"
The mass hanging is of course a backdrop to Cecilia's distress,
but it is not irrelevant. It is part of the amoral and violent
world of the Harrels. I think Burney does succeed in creating
an atmosphere of frenetic haste, high noise, fear, crowds,
through the nervousness of Cecilia and what she observes.
It is reinforced by Delvile's indifference to what is going
on round them. He comes off badly in this scene--in fact
thus far if we grant Monckton a natural predilection to be
jealous and possessive over the woman he wants (Cecilia),
if anything Monckton's behavior as a whole is
more decent and reasonable and kind than that of Delvile.
Ellen Moody
To Austen-l
July 5, 1998
Re: Burney: Cecilia: Mortimer Delvile
Both Nancy and Jill have suggested that Mortimer Delvile is too
soft by half. Remember most of the other people Cecilia
has met are heartless. The conception here is similar to a
new ideal of manliness which also lies behind Austen's Edward
Ferrars and George Knightley. Remember how sensitive Knightley
is; Edward seems to dread hurting other people's feelings.
Compare this to Mrs Harrel and you will see Burney's point.
I like Delvile thus far; he is a combination of Henry Tilney
and a young George Knightley--thus far.
But wait. We have more to come. Also look at the name: Delvile.
There's that "vile." Not "ville" (as I had been mistakenly
typing). And "Mortimer" includes a "mort" which suggests
death as well as earlier English heroes (the name Mortimer
would have similar resonances to the name Edmund).
I admit to me the really interesting character is Monckton.
Has anyone noticed that neither Burney nor Austen choses
a coquet for a heroine. But then again women who flirt with men are
still not an ideal type for women readers. George Eliot
loathed the Rosemary Vincys of the world (a coquet in
Middlemarch). There is also no Valancourt.
To Nancy: Burney writes with a different ideal in mind. She is not writing
psychological fiction which moves. Think of her book as an
outgrowth of the journalism of the day, of the exemplary
fictions and ironical meditations thereon that we find
in Johnson's Ramblers, Idlers, and Adventurers.
We have to remember this book was written at least 10 years
before the sudden pouring out of fiction that occurred
in the 1790's.
Maria quotes the following passage:
I take this to be descriptive. Men were allowed to exhibit their
impulses more freely than women.
Ellen Moody
To Austen-l
July 7, 1998
Re: Cecilia: Why It's Good Despite the Style
This is written in response to Jill's intriguing comment, Why is it
she enjoys Cecilia and it has many passages which are written
in a difficult and abstract Johnsonian style which plays games
with psychological and moral antitheses in a way which no longer
appeals. She placed this against James's Golden Bowl where
the style, she thought, got in the way.
I have an answer :). It is probably wrong. But here goes.
Cecilia has content. It fills the mind. This week's chapters
are a good example of this: a hanging, debt, poverty, sickness,
misers, people dying from a duel, a heroine in an attic who
recalls Marmontal's opera-like sentimental maidens on the Alps
of France. It engages thought; it teases the heart in its
way. Many of the characters lack depth; they are antitheses.
There are too many of them to remember. They speak in stilted
ways at times. But in each scene there is plenty of intelligent
thought and a serious criticism of life attached to real life
as Burney knew it.
The problem with James's Golden Bowl is we are in an elusive
world where we are not sure what is bothering people. They have
plenty to eat; the problems are often so supersubtle that we
are not quite sure what they are. Equally important you can't
parse the sentences. You are not sure what they are saying.
Sometimes after much effort you can reduce them down to a few
words. I have here summarized and paraphrased a common complaint
against James's late books voiced by some of his contemporaries.
It is partly unfair, but not wholly.
In sum, with all its faults, Cecilia conveys much concrete
content and intelligent thought about it for us to engage
one. This is one problem with Radcliffe (in comparison).
An awful lot of her book is so much "poetry," intimations
and glimpses of some beauty she can't quite express, a sense
of stillness, a way of conveying irrational fear, uncanny
dread, and sadomasochism in its more polite manifestations. I like
Radcliffe. But there are those who can't understand why we have
all these words on the page.
Ellen Moody
From: "Jill L. Spriggs" When Cecilia gave the Harrels the bad news of her failure to obtain money from
Briggs, Harrel shared the idea he had which doubtless he had ready. Surely he
must have known what Briggs' answer would be. I find the aversion to "Jew
moneylenders" that I find in many novels of the eighteenth and nineteenth
centuries, distasteful. Antisemitism was pervasive and signs of it was seen
even in a novel by our Divine Miss Jane. At least it was comparatively mild
in what I remember of Burney's novels, especially when contrasted with that
seen in Dickens and Wharton. I think the horror with which the moneylenders
were regarded must compare to the way we would react to borrowing money from a
loan shark.
Mr. Arnott bore most of the blame for getting Cecilia into the pickle
she found herself in, eventually. When the news of Cecilia's failure became
apparent, he again renewed his offer to help, in spite of the cost he would
incur when liquidating his assets. The pivotal conversation:
'Don't mention it,' cried Mr Arnott, ' I am very sorry I let you know it;
be certain, however, that while I have anything, it is yours and my sister's.'
The two gentlemen were then retiring together; but Cecilia, shocked for
Mr. Arnott, though unmoved by Mr. Harrel, stopt them to enquire what was the
way by which it was meant she could borrow the money?
... The heart of Cecilia recoiled at the very mention of a Jew and taking
up money upon interest, but, impelled strongly by her own generosity to
emulate that of Mr. Arnott, he agreed, after some hesitation, to have recourse
to this method. " Mr Harrel was surprised at the sum Cecilia wished to borrow, 250 pounds more
than that which he had requested, but did not question her. Of course, he
tried to get 200 of it for his own purposes, but by then the exasperated
Cecilia had had her well of generosity run dry. " ... she answered very
gravely that the money she had just received was already appropriated to a
particular purpose, and she knew not how to defer making use of it."
Mr. Harrel certainly did his best to wheedle the money from Cecilia, and she
finally relented. leaving only 50 pounds for her bookseller. She must have
had a pretty good idea what her chances of repayment were. About as good as
the Hills'.
The silly Cecilia thought to take advantage of Priscilla's momentary gratitude
to lecture her on economy and frugal living. She had the same success such
lectures generally do. " They then separated; Mrs. Harrel half angry at
remonstrances she thought only censorious, and Cecilia offended at her
pettishness and folly, though grieved at her blindness."
Her first visit from Mrs. Delvile provided a grateful diversion, followed by
news brought by Mr. Arnott that Belfield was well enough to leave his lodgings
and go into the country. Cecilia wondered if Mortimer's hints as to
Belfield's health were constructed to elicit information about her feelings
for him (Belfield). Her knowledge of his character made it seem that this
reason for his teasing was not true. She worried that Belfield's reason for
leaving was his "impatient spirit" and that he had travelled prematurely, but
she had no way of hearing of him since he was gone.
Mr. Monckton visited that evening, and Cecilia as usual shared all her
concerns, then with the Harrels' extravagance. She considerately withheld the
news of her assistance, and the means by which she achieved it. "Mr.
Monckton ... pronounce[d] Harrel a ruined man, and thinking Cecilia, from her
connection with him, in much danger of being involved in his future
difficulties, he most earnestly exhorted her to suffer no inducement to
prevail with her to advance him any money, confidently affirming she would
have little chance of being ever repaid."
It's too late, baby, now it's too late ...
Cecilia expressed disappointment in her childhood friend, and embarrassment
that she could ever have selected her as a friend. Monckton tried to console
her, but one wonders if he realized the irony of her response: " ' Well, then
... at least it must be confessed I have judiciously chosen you!' "
No, Cecilia, it seems that you were no better at choosing friends than lovers!
Cecilia then told Monckton of Mrs. Delvile's visit, wishing he could know her
as she did, then of Belfield's improved health and departure from town, which
he confirmed. Monckton cautioned Cecilia against the artifices of the
Delviles, he suspecting that they were trying to ensnare her for their son.
The artificer suspecting all about him of artifice!
Jill Spriggs
To Austen-l
July 9, 1998
Re: Cecilia, II:3:3: Cecilia & Mrs Delvile/Cecilia & Mrs Harrel
I was wondering if anyone else has noticed how when Cecilia meets
Mrs Delvile and they sit and talk, we are repeatedly told what
a kind, gracious woman Mrs Delvile is, what a delight to talk to,
and how they spent hours in happy chat. But we are not shown
this. I have no sense of Mrs Delvile as a living character at
all.
In comparison each time Miss Larolles appears, we hear her voice,
get a gesture, and then there she is, vividly before us.
But she is a caricature; she is "built" like a Dickens or humors
character. These are figures who each time they appear make
the same sort of gesture or even the same one, say the same
kinds of things. But we are laughing at a similar kind of
joke; a real presence is not quite there.
Now the scene Jill described between Priscilla Harrel and Cecilia
is one of the best so far between women. Cecilia versus this
or that man we have had. We have had Cecilia and Mrs Harrel
in brief before. This is extended. I at any rate have met people
just like this; there is nothing exaggerated about her indifference
which shades into irritation at Cecilia. As in life, it's hard
to tell whether she doesn't understand or not. Experience has
taught me such types do understand. The pretend not to.
I also notice that Burney is aware of how important it is to keep
actual dialogue reasonably short. No antithesis inside suspended
sentences here.
Perhaps one could conclude it is easier to write about unhappiness,
conflict, and trouble than gracious kind talk. Though I believe
the latter exists, and in a way we see a bit of it occur between
Monckton and Cecilia who seem to live on the same wave length.
They understand one another.
Ellen
Subject: Cecilia, Volume II, Book III, Chapter III, An Admonition OK. This chapter made me start to wonder if Cecilia is any less naive than
Evelina. I am really reading in agitation now thinking 'What's next?'. She
must know the Harrels will never pay her back. She must know what it means
to borrow from a Jew. She does it to save Mr Arnott. She has a good heart
but this is too much. Who is Mr Arnott to her? If she had been in love with
him I would have understood. The problem is once you lend money to such
people they will keep asking until they suck your blood dry. Cecilia
borrowed L600, gave Harrels L350 and kept the rest for her bookshop bill and
help the Hills.
Surely, the next morning at breakfast Mr Harrel is in dire need of L200.
Cecilia understands his hints but "was too much displeased both by his
extravagance and his indelicacy, to feel at all inclined to change the
destination of the money she had just received". When Mr Harrel stooped
hinting and directly asked for it "Cecilia, whose generousity, however
extensive, was neither thoughtless nor indiscriminate, found something so
repulsive in this gross procedure, that instead of assenting ti his request
with her usual alacrity, she answered very
gravely that the money she had just received was already appropriated to a
particular purpose, and she knew not how to defer making use of it."
Mr Harrel really knows how to play her so he didn't have to work too hard
before Cecilai broke down and gave him the money. Well, that's the last she
is seeing it. L550 gone like that. On top of it, she has to pay it back to
the money-lender with interest. I sarted to hope Mr Harrel would blow up his
brains soon or she'll be in big trouble (BTW for first-time readers like me
can we put spoiler alerts? I know it is irritating for people who has read
it before and I agree it would be ridicilous for Austen's books, but
everytime I read a comment like "Cecilia is gonna be in big trouble for not
doing so now" it takes away my fun. I keep expecting huge disasters every page)
I have been thinking of the above that Ellen wrote on 6 Jul 1998, and
really, up to know we haven't seen anything bad from Monckton aside from
Burney's comments. He is trying to poison Cecilia against the Delviles but
that is understandable due to his jealousy. In this chapter he is very
sensible while explaining her why she was so much deceived in her friend. He
gives sound advice about not to give them money for "she would have little
chance of being ever repaid." Alas, it's already too late for that one. I
wish she would have confessed him that she already lent them money.
"We all love to instruct, though we can teach only what is not worth knowing."
Aysin Dedekorkut
To chime in with Aysin: I agree Cecilia seems either naive or just plain
dumb to think the Harrels will pay her money back to her.
But I wonder if we are not reading psychologically when we
what we have is a plot device and attempt to make a moral
point. As when Austen is not consistent with her portrait
of Catherine Morland, so Burney makes Cecilia suddenly
dumb about the Harrels when (unlike Evelina) she has shown
a consistent worldliness and disillusion in all or most
other cases.
Ellen Moody
From: "Jill L. Spriggs" I found Priscilla's reaction to Cecilia's well meant admonishments, quite life
like. Those of us who are parents learn (hopefully) that all unsought for
advice is tuned out. I remember how, as a child, my mother would lecture me
endlessly about my manifold flaws. She was also a believer in corporal
punishment (wielded by hairbrushes, ping pong paddles, pancake turners, yard
sticks ...) and I remember begging her, "Just hit me and have it over with!"
Unfortunately, that precipitated both another beating and another lecture (now
this hurts me more than it hurts you ...). Both kids and adults detest being
lectured to, no matter how justified the lecturer.
Jill Spriggs
Date: Wed, 8 Jul 1998 Two weeks passed fairly uneventfully. Sir Robert persistently wooed, Mr.
Arnott silently adored, and the Harrels busily blew the bucks. Cecilia for
some unknown reason thought that Mr. Harrel actually would repay the 200
pounds he had borrowed. " ... she began to grow very impatient, but not
knowing what course to pursue, and wanting courage to remind Mr. Harrel of his
promise, she still waited the performance of it without speaking."
Not very wise. Of course, saying something would not have helped either.
The Harrels were preparing to spend their Easter holiday at their country
home, but Cecilia was busy with her pet project, the Hills. The unfortunate
carpenter had just died, and Cecilia, after a few days for the funeral, sent
for Mrs. Hill and repeated her promise of help. Mrs. Hill hesitantly
mentioned an opportunity she had for purchasing a partnership with her cousin
in a haberdasher's shop; Cecilia of course immediately promised the sum
necessary. She them inquired what plans had been made for the children.
When Cecilia found that the exhausted mother had made none, she arranged for
accommodations for her, her sixteen year old daughter, and the two youngest
children with the cousin who was to enter into business with Mrs. Hill. The
two middle children would be placed in an inexpensive school where they would
learn to do plain sewing.
Cecilia's plans for the Hills required ready money, so she plucked the courage
to beard the lion in its den. After breakfast one morning she asked Mr.
Harrel about the money, saying " ... she fancied he had forgotten the 200
pounds which she had lent ..." He thought it could not have been so important
and as she had waited so long, she could wait a little longer. He then
hastily bid her adieu. From that time, Mr. Harrel never allowed himself to be
alone with Cecilia, knowing full well she would not press for her money in the
presence of strangers. She used the 50 pounds left from the moneylender, for
the Hills' immediate needs, and resolved to go without, herself, if more money
was required before her minority was up. The needs of the Hills were met, at
least temporarily.
Jill Spriggs
Subject: Cecilia: II:3:4: An Evasion I found Cecilia's pleasure in helping the Hills quite plausible. I would also
like to be a Lady Bountiful; the difficulty is in finding the money, and
more, helping without weakening.
I wonder what it was that the dreaded Jewish moneylender would do to people
remiss in paying. Were they so feared because they would have your legs
broken, like modern loan sharks? The only interaction I can recall offhand is
Anthony Trollope's Phineas Finn with the moneylender who followed him
everywhere, pleading, "Do be punctual! If you only would be punctual!" I
can't imagine this treatment having much effect on the Harrels.
Jill Spriggs
From: "Jill L. Spriggs" When Cecilia was feeling " ... so light, so gay, so glowing ... " Albany made
one of his characteristically unexpected appearances as she strolled, having
just left her chair. He initially greeted her with indignation, having been
repulsed at the Harrels' door when he attempted to see her. I am sure the way
was barred on orders of Mr. Harrel, who wished to see no more of Cecilia's
money going into hands other than his. I wonder if Albany knew of the
connection between Cecilia and Mr. Belfield, or if he regarded the painful
situation in which Belfield and his sister found themselves as one of the many
in which he took an interest, for no reason other than wanting to obtain help
for them. Cecilia was proud of her benevolence to the Hills, who after all
she found on her own. And Albany was not so all seeing as he pretended, for
he apparently knew nothing of Cecilia's efforts for the Hills. Did it not
count because he did not bring the Hills to Cecilia's attention?
Albany's disregard for the social conventions caused embarrassment for both
Cecilia and the young woman he brought her to see, uninvited. He left them
alone, relying on Cecilia's native compassion to do what needed to be done.
Cecilia's initial distrust due to fear of being imposed upon was disarmed by
the girl's indignant refusal of money, but imagine her feelings of dismay when
she found that the sick relation the apparently "genteel young woman, well
dressed" was nursing, without a physician's assistance, was Belfield, not gone
to the country as he had claimed, but languishing without a doctor because he
lacked the means to pay one. When the sister found that Cecilia was Miss
Beverly, she was appalled, sure Mr. Belfield would be furious with her for
betraying her secret. Cecilia promised to say nothing, but requested
permission to return the next day, to ascertain what assistance she could
provide. Cecilia was also interested in the lovely Miss Belfield, and
intended to help her also if she could.
Too bad that 200 pounds had been given to the infinitely less deserving Mr.
Harrel.
Jill Spriggs
To Austen-l
July 10, 1998
Re: Cecilia: III:3:4: Debtors' Prison
Jill asks,
Jill Spriggs By the time of Phineas Finn when I think one could no longer
be put into prison for debt it is something of a puzzle. It seems
to be a dread of embarrassment, loss of face, and loss of reputation.
If you lost your reputation, you might lose position and therefore
your place. Reputation was acceptance by the community and that
transformed itself into income -- especially for the middle class.
I am not sure when the laws were changed, but feel confident in 1782
you could be thrown into prison for debt. Prison life has always
been awful. It was especially bad before tax money was allocated
for food, beds, and necessaries. It was an ugly system of bribery
and bullying inside. The worst kinds of coercion and human daily
politics went on in such places. Johnson has a powerful Rambler
against throwing people into prison for debt -- the argument is
this makes it impossible for them ever to pay, but the passion of
the piece resides in his evocation of life in prison.
I suppose Cecilia is in no real danger as Briggs would not let them
take her away. Or would he?
Ellen Moody
What fun women could have in those days, no?
Nancy makes a good point about the abduction of heiresses going on
well into mid-eighteenth century England. I really recommend as
a good read as well as a book chock-a-block with startling information
about the private lives of the middle class in this period Lawrence
Stone's Broken Vows and Uncertain Unions. By delving into court
depositions, trials, and various documentary records he goes beneath
the coded language of novels to bring out what life was like for
the gentry.
I also forgot about the women who took their children to live with
their husbands in prison. Of course if you had the money to buy
food and a bed, it was not that bad. But many didn't. I have
read accounts of prison life of the period which show drunkenness
was very common (liquor was sold), prostitution, and also various
kinds of scary coercion (using dungeon-like cells) on the more
vulnerable personalities.
I am puzzled like Sally. I don't know what to expect from Cecilia's
signing that bill. Poor girl. Her finances are muddled.
Ellen
August 2, 1998:
Jill wrote:
On another list Becky Sharp's observation that she could be a lady with 5,000 pounds a year, and the realization that she was proposing an annual income of around 1 million dollars a year, only points up how ludicrous it was for Cecilia to give 7,000 pounds to Harrel's creditors. And how silly it was to hold herself, as a minor, bound by the signing of documents upon which Harrel coerced her signature.
Jill Spriggs Yes. It points out how unreal and extravagant are the sums Burney has
Cecilia throwing around. Her Cecilia is not connected up to the limitations
of reality.
A second problem I discern are too many suitors. It does seem as if sometimes
Burney just does not know what to do with her heroine so another suitor
pops up. She does not want to unwind the Delvile plot and is not ready
to kill off Monckton's wife and seems unable to find another plot device.
Also too many of the men have names with start with "M:" Monckton, Morrice,
Marriot, Mortimer (Delvile). I expect Mr Harrel to turn out to be a
Maurice. :) If an Irishman should show up he's sure to be a Michael
and fall in love too.
Ellen
Reply-To: Jane Austen List
From: "Jill L. Spriggs"
Subject: Cecilia, Volume II, Book III, Chapter I, An Application
" ' Will you not first, ' said he, handing her in, ' tell me what news you
have heard?'
"The learned, the judicious, the pious Boerhaave
relates, that he never saw a criminal dragged to
execution without asking himself, 'Who knows whether this
man is not less culpable than me?' On the days when the
prisons of this city are emptied into the grave, let every
spectator of the dreadful procession put the same
question into his heart. Few among those that croud
in thousands to the legal massacre, and look with carelessness,
perhaps with triumph, on the utmost exacerbations of human misery,
would then be able to return without horror and dejection."
" Curiosity, however, was universally excited, and her retreat served
but to inflame it: some of the ladies, and most of the gentlemen, upon
various pretences, returned into the pit merely to look at
her... "(Oxford, 1988, p. 139)
Subject: Cecilia, Volume II, Book III, Chapter III, An Admonition
To: austen-l@vm1.mcgill.ca
" ' [Mr. Harrel] Well, my good brother, I hardly know how to suffer you to
sell out at such a loss, but yet, my present necessity is so urgent ---'
To: AUSTEN-L@VM1.MCGILL.CA
thus far if we grant Monckton a natural predilection to be
jealous and possessive over the woman he wants (Cecilia),
if anything Monckton's behavior as a whole is
more decent and reasonable and kind than that of Delvile.
Subject: Cecilia, II:3:3: Cecilia & Mrs Delvile/Cecilia & Mrs Harrel
To: austen-l@vm1.mcgill.ca
Reply-To: Jane Austen List
From: "Jill L. Spriggs"
Subject: Cecilia, Volume II, Book III, Chapter IV, An Evasion
To: austen-l@vm1.mcgill.ca
Subject: _Cecilia_, Volume II, Book III, Chapter V, An Adventure
To: AUSTEN-L@VM1.MCGILL.CA
I wonder what it was that the dreaded Jewish moneylender would do to people
remiss in paying. Were they so feared because they would have your legs
broken, like modern loan sharks? The only interaction I can recall offhand is
Anthony Trollope's Phineas Finn with the moneylender who followed him
everywhere, pleading, "Do be punctual! If you only would be punctual!" I
can't imagine this treatment having much effect on the Harrels.
Re: Catching up on posts;
Home
Contact Ellen Moody.
Pagemaster: Jim
Moody.
Page Last Updated 9 January 2003