The lovely Bloombsury edition I borrowed from the library. |
It
may sound similar to Frank Baker’s ‘Miss Hargreaves’, where Norman makes
up a story about an eccentric, elderly spinster and is horrified when she comes
to life (http://chriscross-thebooktrunk.blogspot.co.uk/2012/02/batty-but-beautiful-story.html).
But this is different. Mrs Carne and her daughters - journalist Deirdre, drama
student Katrine, and Sheil, who is still in the schoolroom with a governess - spin
intricately detailed stories about real people, making it difficult to
determine what (or who) is real and what is pretence. Then, when one of their
characters dies, and they actually meet another, reality intrudes on their
imaginary world.
Anne, Emily and Charlotte painted by their brother Branwell.He took himsel out of the picture, but the ghost image can still be seen. |
One
of their favourite fabrications is Toddy, or Judge Todddington, who they
encounter (at a distance), when Mrs Carne is called for jury service. She never
sits through a case, spending the week in reserve, but Deirdre, who narrates
most of the novel, attends court and becomes obsessed with the elderly judge.
“From that moment I think, he owned, occupied and paid taxes on our
imagination,” she says. She collects photos of the judge, researches his life,
tracks down people who know him, walks past his house, looks through his
windows, and tells stories to the rest of the family.
After
meeting him she tells us: “Toddy, from negative, had turned into a print, and
inevitably during our half-hour together he had spoken out of character, and
shown himself to be possessed of his own personality as against the semi-fit
that we had allocated him. I had expected this, but the little shocks were no
less real.” Fortunately, from her point of view, the judge and his wife join
the game and even close ranks with the family to maintain the fantasy and protect
Sheil from hurtful reality.
Author Rachel Ferguson may have used her knowledge of the theatre - she was an actor and drama critic - when writing the book. |
Strangely, the girls don’t play conventional games, don’t believe in fairies or Father Christmas, and don’t like Peter Pan or dolls (with exception of plain Ironface, who ran off and married a French aristocrat, but returns to offer observations on life). Similarly, they have scrapped the usual ‘fairytale nonsense-literature’ for Sheil’s toy theatre, and instead stage their own pantomimes with ‘genuine illusions’, for ‘charities’, like the Tabbies’ Protection Union (with offices in Great Cream Street). Presumably, all this indicates that they want to concoct their own fancies, rather than relying on the dreams of others.
The
Woolwoths store in Wavertree Road, Liverpool, pictured
in 1931. The photo, commisioned by FW Woolworthe and Co Ltd can be seen at, http://www.liverpoolmuseums.org.uk . |
It’s
never clear why they go to such lengths to transform living people into
imaginary characters. I assume they are unable to deal with the father’s death
(indeed, at one point Deirdre wishes Toddy was her father), but the fantasy
goes beyond that: they have retreated into the refuge of a made-up world, unable
to cope with actuality.
And what about poor Agatha Martin, the first
governess, who obviously feels threatened by the Carnes, and is desperate to
shock Sheil out of her make-believe world, yet has a pretty shaky grip reality
herself. She fantasises about a curate whose unsatisfactory letters are
brotherly and matter-of-fact – so she's written love letters from him to
herself, and is as obsessive about him as the sisters are about Toddy and all
their other creations.
Window
display in Woolworth's store, London Road,
Liverpool,
in 1931, the year The Brontes Went to
Woolworths
was published.
|
The
three sisters and their mother live in an enclosed world in which they play an
elaborate game with rules of their own devising that few others can understand.
It raises issues about the way we treat life and death, the transition from
childhood to adulthood, and the differences between illusion and reality. But
they never break free: as the novel progresses they don’t grow, or learn, or change
– which makes me wonder what kind of novel might have emerged if Ferguson had allowed
the judge and his wife to reject the peculiar saga played out by the Carnes.
On
a second reading I noticed how many references to the Brontes are scattered throughout
the book – even the family’s name owes a debt to Brontes because, apparently,
Maria Branwell's mother was a Carne. And, of course, there is the imaginary
trip to Woolworths which, claims Deirdre, Charlotte described as ‘a queer shop,
much favoured with their custom by a class which I do not think to be our own’.
Theatrical references abound (even the court
can be seen as a performance where the judge plays a role) and there’s a quote
from Lewis Carroll’s looking glass world: “How right was Humpty Dumpty to abuse
words and then pay them on a Saturday night! It was a really magnificent
gesture, and one which slaves to split-infinitives would do well to copy.”
Perhaps that choice from an author whose work abounds with puzzles about
illusion and reality, and the real meaning of things, offers a clue to the way
we should look at Ferguson’s novel. Perhaps life, like words, can be shaped to
make what we want, and we can take control by abusing the conventional view of
reality and forging a new version of the world for ourselves. Or perhaps the
whole novel is a fairy tale, or a dream, and not to be taken seriously at all.
A Tenniel drawing of Humpty Dumpty - does Lewis Carroll's 'Alice Through the Looking Glass' offers clues about Rachel Ferguson's novel? |
This is not a book I want to read, but your report on it is so wonderful, so in-depth. I think you could publish it in some literary review. It really is special.
ReplyDeleteNan,I just love reading and writing... the nice thing about being redundant is that it's given me more time to read, and to think about what I read.
ReplyDeleteI just finished this book, and I agree with so much of what you said. I think the book is about layers of what we think is reality but may well be wishful thinking. For instance, after I read how Deirdre described all four women joined together for a quick Can-Can on the landing, I asked myself, "Did that really happen, or is it fantasy?" And then I remembered - it's a novel. By definition, the whole book is a fantasy, created completely in someone's imagination.
ReplyDeleteAlong the same lines, I was fascinated by how the 'real' and the 'fantasy' constantly intertwined. Miss Martin seems solidly real with a resentment towards the Carnes' fantasy life. And then it is revealed that she is writing herself love letters from a man whose interest in her is probably just platonic. And the Brontes come to visit HER!! Similarly, the Carnes build up a detailed fantasy about the Toddingtons, meet them in reality, and then the Toddingtons ultimately grow into the Carnes fantasy of them, concluding, brilliantly, with the remark about seeing the Brontes in Woolworths.
I am obsessed about the role the governesses play. How they seem to represent the harsh realities of life, how they are excluded by the limits of class from knowing what these strange women are talking about, and how, ultimately the governesses' efforts to bring the family back to 'reality' are foiled by the much more appealing fantasies the family has spun.
I haven't expressed myself very well, but I was so excited to read someone else's take on the book, I couldn't wait to compose my thoughts in a cogent form.
Thank you Elizabeth. The governesses intrigued me as well, especially Miss Martin, and I like your point about a novel being, by definition, a fantasy. I keep thinking about the theatrical references, and the fact that a court is also a kind of drama, with the judge and lawyers all dressed up and the various people all playing roles, and this seemed to reinforce questions about the nature of reality. It is one of the oddest books I have ever read and, like you, I felt it was not easy to come up with a coherent view. I borrowed it from the library, but want my own copy so I can read it again, not because I love the book, but because I keeping thinking about it and wanting to explore different aspects and characters.
Delete