Chapters 32 – 47 (the end)
Hello there! I totally didn’t mean to fall off the face of the earth – I’ve been mostly keeping busy with the Xman’s pulled hamstring (requiring Physical Therapy and a good bunch of co-pays from me), football practice, baseball watching, and workout avoidance (even though, I can read on the treadmill, why am I not?)
So, without further ado, here are the final questions:
1) I was intrigued by Jo’s hiding her writing ventures from Professor Bhaer. Then, I found this website which helped me understand. Do you think she should have been embarrassed about her stories? Why or why not?
2) The absolutely fantastic and delightful Marsha (and if you ever run a read-along of Don Quixote, I’m totally in) pointed out that this was the most religious of the sections. And, after the Pilgrim’s Progress framework had been left off, it came back in full-force. In fact, this is the section where we finally see overt references to God. This particularly comes out as Beth’s health is failing in Chapter 40 – The Valley of the Shadow. What did you think about this renewed fervor, and was there any particular part that struck you?
3) In Chapter 36 (Beth’s Secret), Jo and Beth travel to the seashore and Jo truly sees Beth’s illness. My favorite part of this chapter was Beth’s description of the sisters: “I like peeps better than the gulls: they are not so wild and handsome, but they seem happy, confiding little things. I used to call them my birds last summer, and Mother said they reminded her of me – busy, quaker-colored creatures, always near the shore and always chirping that contended little song of theirs. You are the gull, Jo, strong and wild, fond of the storm, and the wind, flying far out to sea, and happy all alone. Meg is the turtledove and Amy is like the lark she writes about, trying to get up among the clouds, but always dropping down into its nest again. Dear little girl! she’s so ambitious, but her heart is good and tender, and no matter how high she flies, she never will forget home.” Do you think this is an apt description? Why or why not?
4) I always remember Beth’s death as a long, drawn out scene, but in re-reading, I’m remembering her bout with Scarlet Fever. What did you think of the way her death was handled?
5) This read, I finally get why Jo marries Professor Bhaer, and why Laurie and Amy marry. Did you find that the decision made sense to you?
6) And, lastly – what do you think of the last chapter? Did you feel this ties up the story well?
Thank you everyone! This has been lovely, and I am enjoying the back and forth of the discussion. It was a very profitable read for me, and I’ve already ordered both Belladonna’s suggestion of Invincible Louisa about Louisa May Alcott, and Little Men.
(photo credit by popular demand of Gabriel Byrne as Professor Bhaer. It is far better than the photos of William Shatner as the Professor.)
posted by Mimi @ 8/12/2009 02:33:00 PM
17 Comments
17 Comments:
Do you think she should have been embarrassed about her stories? Why or why not?
I still don't actually think she should have been, because she was able to bring in money - and use that money for her family. But, I did find it sweet, because she didn't want to be seen as flighty.
In fact, this is the section where we finally see overt references to God. This particularly comes out as Beth’s health is failing in Chapter 40 – The Valley of the Shadow. What did you think about this renewed fervor, and was there any particular part that struck you?
Well, obviously, the title of the chapter is a hint about how religious Beth was, and I think through that, it was easier for Alcott to portray the family as religious. Even though Mr. March is a minister, it wasn't until this section that you heard him discuss God at all. I loved that Beth was reading "her little book" but found it odd that Alcott never did say what it was, but mentioned Pilgrim's Progress by name in the same section.
Do you think this is an apt description? Why or why not?
- I really loved Beth's descriptions of the sisters in this way, and think that her description of Jo is why every one of us, to a person, thinks that she is our favorite.
What did you think of the way her death was handled
We've had a lot of discussion about how Victorian and drawn out Beth's illness was, and therefore I was kind of shocked at the fact that it was handled so discretely. I was reading it in the morning and Dh said, "do you need me to put it in the freezer" and I said breezily, "no, Beth died a few chapters ago."
What was particuarly sweet, I thought, was how Beth was prepared and ready to die, so that while sad, it wasn't a shock. I also really liked how through Jo's trip with her, she was able to come to terms with Beth's terminal illness. In a way, though, it is one of those situations where Beth was written as someone who couldn't go into adulthood as she'd lose her innocence.
Did you find that the decision made sense to you?
Absolutely. NOW I get it, and don't think I would have ever if I'd not read it again as an adult. Jo is intellectually engaged with Professor Bhaer, and Laurie needs to take care of Amy. And, now I see Jo's marriage as a love match, and I don't think as a younger woman, I did.
And, lastly – what do you think of the last chapter? Did you feel this ties up the story well?
I always love these wrap up chapters - the story tied up well, although I did find it a bit maudlin that Amy's daughter Beth, was sickly. What truly shocked me is that I'd remembered that Jo and the Professor didn't have any kids, and lo and behold, they had two sons! Wow. I can't believe I'd misremembered that.
All in all, it was a great re-read!
I was amazed to discover, a few years ago, that there were people out there who actually disapproved of Jo marrying Professor Bhaer! It always made perfect sense to me, even as a child. He understood her on an adult level, in a way that Laurie was unable to. He appreciated things about her that escaped Laurie. And he needed her much more than Laurie did.
Plus, if he really did look like Gabriel Byrne...well, duh, that's a no-brainer. :-p
The thing that's always struck me about Beth's death is what a turning point it is for Jo's character. She learns and grows so much through that experience of grief. I always feel sadder for her than for Beth.
And I used to get impatient with Jo's embarrassment over her stories. Part of me thinks she needed to do what she could to bring in money, and part of me thinks that it's wrong to not work to your full potential. I don't know how I feel about it at this point!
1 - Had to use my imagination, since I have no idea how this writing was, but I imagine that it would be like a woman admitting to a man she really admires (and may be getting a little crush on) that she writes those really awful "corset ripper" books that always look like Gone with the Wind on the cover. I thought it was interesting for Alcott to use Bhaer to lecture on the subject, because I'm betting that she wrote a number of these things herself.
2 - I didn't pick up on that, except, as you say, at the time of Beth's dying. I remember seeing the word 'God' in one place and thinking that was the first time.
3 - I thought that might have been the longest and most insightful speech that Beth ever gave. I also thought it was interesting for Beth to say that it seemed to her like she had always known that she wouldn't live long.
4 - Kind of glad of the light touch at this point. It would have been so easy to do something maudlin and utterly unbelievable, but if she had, Alcott would have pushed Beth over the line into being a kind of plastic Madonna.
5 - I always knew how things would wrap up romantically, and I don't know if that colored my reading of things. But I think Marmee was right when she said that Laurie and Jo are much too similar (and maybe too willful) to have been a good couple. Both of them needed an appointed grown-up. I thought it showed some real astute knowledge of people to figure out a character that Jo really could fall in love with (though perhaps Alcott based it on her own tastes. Did I hear you guys say you knew who Bhaer is based on?)
6 - It did have the feel of the Big Finale with choruses singing "Happy ending! Happy ending!" over and over again. And maybe also with Alcott getting to the last period and saying "GoodBYE!" I couldn't help thinking that the reality of running a home for wayward boys wouldn't have been nearly so precious, but oh well. I was surprised to find that Alcott left it with Jo doing just this. I assumed she'd start up writing again (though not something that Bhaer would disapprove of).
This was a REALLY satisfying book to read, overall. I haven't been that caught up in anything I've read for awhile. Mimi, make sure to let me know how the other Alcott books you're getting stack up. I find I'm just sorry to get to the end.
1978 movie with William Shatner as Prof. Bhaer -- Boy, I'll bet that's bad. Boy, BOY, I'll bet that's bad. Shatner attempting a German accent. Susan Dey from the Partridge Family being Jo. Oh my.
Mimi,
I have to confess to being slightly baffled when I started reading my copy of Little Women. The chapters I was reading just didn't dovetail with yours, and it was only when I went haring down the thrift shop to pick up a copy of the sequel I remembered reading as a child that I realised why.......in the UK, "Little Women" is published as two separate books - Little Women and Good Wives. Aha !
Did they do the same thing with "Little Men" ? I remember reading both that and "Jo's Boys" long ago. I must get them both ASAP !
Laurie and Jo would probably have driven each other mad within a few years; Jo is much better suited to her Friedrich :-)
I think one of the reasons Jo was secretive about her work was the realisation that she probably wasn't working up to her family's inculcated high ideals by simply writing "potboilers" to earn money , rather than crafted pieces which would really have reflected her integrity and character.
Beth's death was beautiful. Painless, blameless,unashamed and I am sure she had a good defence before the Judgement seat.
The last chapter was good but I always hate getting to the end....
This has been so much fun, Mimi ! Can we do another for Nativity Fast ?
#1. The embarrassment was not about what Prof. Bhaer thought IMO, but that she was not working at her greatest potential. She wa writing junk. It's interesting how the "good" was held in higher esteem back then at least nominally and "utility" seems to be our goal in modern times. Kwim?
Anyway, I think she was embarrassed because she was raised to use her gifts for good, and she was using them for trashy stories that were like candies to kids or young people. And of course Prof. Bhaer disapproved, since he had to be a character she could look UP to, you know? (My take on it anyway).
#2. I often wonder how we'd handle this nowadays. The whole dying thing though I've called it maudlin and Victorian was actually as someone else mentioned handled very healthily. I wonder if it isn't healthier than the trying every medical thing out there and dying in the hospital thing that we do. I often think she had cancer or something like that.
#3.I thought it was apt, though a bit, I dont' know, SWEET and very Alcott in her later books. I'll explain later.
#4. Oh, I guess I answered this in #3. So I'll talk more about God. I LOVED how Jo worked through her anger and sadness. I wonder how we'd do this now. I am really learning a lot from these books, I guess, about character and self-control. And Jo needed this in order to deepen her character. I love how she finally came to her dad, and asked for his help (though I continue to not care for him as a character because he seems so above it all).
#5. Yes, this time around I totally loved Prof. Bhaer and didn't see him as "second choice" or "settling". In fact, I like the match much better than Laurie and Amy who seem annoying in the extreme together, but that's just me, I guess, they seem so childish and rich or something. But well-matched in mental age and intellect.
#6. hated it. The whole book, for the most part, rings so very true with us because it feels like real people, even if they lived in a time we find hard to imagine. But in reading more about her, and her ideals (Alcott, that is), Plumfield was her dream, her version of her dad's Utopia. She had enjoyed some parts of the commune, and by all accounts was the only one who did, so she wrote a new one with more food and fun, like her child's imagination.
So, it rang so absolutely false and hunky-dory and jolly for me. Jo running around with a baby under her arm ,a nd everyone singing from the trees and Marmee sitting there all blessed and stuff....IDK, it just felt too forcedly happy to me. And wow, what a touch to have Amy's baby be sickly. Methinks Alcott did indeed have some issues with her younger sister.
I'm reading the book that follows "Little Men" and while enjoyable, and I don't want to ruin it for anyone, I find it written in the same style as the last chapter: pure imaginary bliss as written by a tomboy. Boys tumbling, and talking, and racing, and playing checkers.....perhaps I'm just feeling acerbic at the moment, but it has a false gaiety about it to me.
And thank you all. I have thoroughly enjoyed the adult re-read of "Little Women" and discussing it with other adults who are rediscovering it as well.
1.I think it was understandable that she was embarrassed by her stories. It may be that she actually enjoyed that kind of literature and was embarrassed as she came to realize that others thought them trashy. In the beginning she did seem to think them good. There was never any mention, that I remember, of her intentionally writing what would sell while knowing it was beneath her ability. I think she grew embarrassed as her tastes and abilities became more refined.
2. I liked this part. It seemed very real that, in the face of death, people focus more on God and eternity in a more sincere and ardent way.
3. Loved the birds metaphor and, yes, it seemed apt. Very poetic and sweet.
4. I appreciated the way Beth's death was handled. It was tasteful and didn't force us to be there with too many of the horrible details. I remember reading this as a girl and crying my eyes out when she died. The discretion seems appropriate for the young readers of this book.
5. The decision makes sense. Especially by the end of the book I thought that if Jo had married Laurie their whole marriage could consist of teasing each other endlessly. He just didn't have the depth of character that Jo and the professor did. But I must say that we come to like Laurie so well that I REALLY felt for him when Jo turned him down. And the thought of marrying such a close friend is really appealing. It does make sense though that He was just too much of a brother to be a lover. Still, just as when I read it as a girl, I felt myself longing for Jo to say yes.
6.Yes, I think it wraps it up well. Interestingly, Mimi, I also remembered the story as her not having had any children of her own. Maybe because there were so many there that were not her own?
Yes, it's a little "isn't this all wonderful?" But then, so is the whole book. There are light-hearted mentions of the problems and the ominous mention of Little Beth's health, but the tone is so joyous and hopeful that it doesn't seem entirely real. I actually find that rather pleasant compared to much literature that is so dark and painfully realistic that it's a relief to finish the book.
Hey, this was fun. I may come back and write a little more when I have more time. Thanks, Mimi!
I am mad at myself. I said I had the book and then I couldn't find it. I had forgotten the bird analogy but it is apt. Meg is a turtledove, she is in love and happy, her songs are of contentment. The Bible speaks of the voice of the turtledove being heard in in the land and a society where most women are like Meg will be a happy, desirable one. Jo is a gull, she's loud by the standards of her day, not a beauty, opinionated, yet some of us love her (I also love gulls). Amy, a lark? Maybe. I had to make a few mistakes in life before I appreciated Amy, perhaps she is the lark because she rises above her own.
Beth's death, I don't know. As a child I was angry and felt Louisa was 'killing her off'. My mum said she had to die because she was innocent, but innocent of what? She had seen more misery than her sisters and tried to alleviate it. What did Meg and Amy know of life that Beth didn't? She's often likened to Milly in 'Wings of a Dove' and Fanny in 'Mansfield Park' and I still feel that her death, like Milly's, was unfair. Beth is my favourite, even as a little girl I loved Jo because Jo loved Beth.
Janelle - It always made perfect sense to me, even as a child. He understood her on an adult level, in a way that Laurie was unable to. He appreciated things about her that escaped Laurie. And he needed her much more than Laurie did.
I think you are very observant about relationships and even were as a child - I am in awe. I definitely fell into the first camp until this read.
That's a good point about Jo's reaction to Beth's death.
Grace - I remember seeing the word 'God' in one place and thinking that was the first time.
I noted that too - Oh, *there's* the reference to God. The fact it sticks out definitely reminds me that it wasn't there all along.
Yes, I think this time reading I was struck by Beth's acceptance and maturity about her death. And, I think that's part of the way that it wasn't so maudlin was that gradually those around her realized and accepted it as well, so it wasn't this long, drawn out, plastic shocking thing.
And,
1978 movie with William Shatner as Prof. Bhaer -- Boy, I'll bet that's bad. Boy, BOY, I'll bet that's bad. Shatner attempting a German accent. Susan Dey from the Partridge Family being Jo. Oh my.
I KNOW! I don't have any recollection of it, I just found it through Googling. But, Jan Brady as Beth. The whole thing just sounds so bad (and I liked Susan Dey in LA Law and have always liked Meredith Baxter Birney)
Elizabeth - I think one of the reasons Jo was secretive about her work was the realisation that she probably wasn't working up to her family's inculcated high ideals by simply writing "potboilers" to earn money , rather than crafted pieces which would really have reflected her integrity and character.
I agree - and perhaps Frederich (Thank you!) wasn't so much judging her as she was judging herself. I also think Grace is on point when she says that I'm sure Alcott paid a few bills that way herself. And, I can see both sides, Janelle - the embrace what works and makes money and resist selling yourself out for money. I also think that perhaps this would have been wrapped up in the spiritual, neo-Puritan, unitarian beliefs that she was raised in.
Marsha - I always love when you chime in, thank you! And, do tell! I thought it was apt, though a bit, I dont' know, SWEET and very Alcott in her later books. I'll explain later.
...let me finish in another comment.
I thought I was going to be able to do this, however, wasn't quite able to. I am reading more again! That is a good thing. Glad you all are having such fun with a very good book!
Off topic...workout avoidance keeps me busy! :-)
Hi Mimi, I have given you the Loyal Friend and Visitor Award on my blog. Surely you've already received it from someone else. I think you were one of the very first commenters on my blog and I appreciated your encouragement. And even though we don't always agree on politics (:-) we're still friends. I always appreciate your point of view.
Sweet Rosemary, thank you so much! I'm very honored.
Boy do I know that story, Meadow. Sigh.
Rosemary - I'm glad you also didn't remember Jo having kids, I felt so embarrassed when I read that, I thought how did I miss that?
I agree with your assessment of it being beneath Jo's ability and an internal embarrassment.
Marsha - I am planning on re-reading "Little Men" but haven't gotten it yet.
actually as someone else mentioned handled very healthily. I wonder if it isn't healthier than the trying every medical thing out there -Yes, I agree very much, I think that her acceptance of death was very healthy, and as dear Elizabeth said, the Christian goal.
Margi - I know what your mom meant about Beth being too innocent to live, but as a kid, I didn't understand that and thought it was *so* sad. Now, when I re-read, really she couldn't have lived.
I had to make a few mistakes in life before I appreciated Amy, perhaps she is the lark because she rises above her own.
I think this is very beautifully put, and like Grace - I've had a party that no-one came to. I think she is flighty and hard to understand at first, but then you really realize how like a lark she yearns to be. I think it was very well done.
I also really, really enjoyed this! Thank you so much for joining me. And Suzanne, it's ok to have not made it.
Anyway, it didn't occur to me to have this be a now and then thing, but I could definitely do one for the Nativity Fast. I'd really enjoy it, as I enjoy a book more when I discuss it. I shall.
The discussion definitely makes it more fun, Mimi. And, for me, it ensures the book will be read:-)
William Shatner as Prof Bhaer??? I've been sitting here with my mouth full of tea unable to trust myself to swallow for several moments. What a thought!
I've been sitting here with my mouth full of tea unable to trust myself to swallow for several moments. What a thought!
I know, shove. Shocking, isnt' it?
1)I didn't think she was embarrassed by her writing generally, but that she was specifically embarrassed by writing "sensation stories." I remember a similar type of reference to penny dreadfuls in Alcott's Eight Cousins. In the Victorian era these were quite controversial and considered a bad influence on children. I thought if she didn't want to tell her family about it, she probably should be embarrassed--her work in the first half she was proud and pleased about. I wonder how these stories would seem by modern standards, though.
2) I don't think I really have anything to add here--I did think it seemed quite natural in light of Beth's death.
3) I love how Margaret expanded on this. One thought about Amy being the lark: I immediately associate this with the slang, to have fun, to amuse oneself, which does seem to relate to Amy, but Beth seems to be tying this to Amy's social and artistic aspirations. All the characterizations seemed very apt.
5) It seems so appropriate. They are a much better match. I can't really remember how I felt about the relationships as a kid, but as an adult I found it very satisfying.
6) Marsha has excellent points here--very interesting to see Plumfield as Alcott's idealized version of Fruitland. Even the names are parallel! The chapter is very idealized, but I do enjoy that it jumps into the future again. It's always fun to see what happens to characters later on.
The Beth thing really is too much. It makes sense to add an element of sorrow, a drop of bitterness to this oh-so-happy ending, but to name the child Beth!! Ugh. Of course it makes sense that the first girl one of them has is named Beth, but really, does she have to be the sickly child? It would have been so much more satisfying to see a child named Beth who is healthy--a fulfillment of what Beth's life could have been. It feels like she has inherited the curse of death with her name--no redemption for her!
This really was a lot of fun. I'd love to do another read along during the Nativity Fast, Mimi. I'll make it a point to actually read along next time!
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home