![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
felicitykingGaskell is one of my favorite writers. I only discovered her two or three years ago, but she's quickly ascended the ranks to the top. She's a Victorian writer who wrote about issues such as the Industrial Revolution, workers rights, gentility, women's rights and roles in the world, etc.
I did not like this book, but since finishing it, I can't help but feel it remains relevant to this day. Yes, it's dated due its melodramatic plot points, but the heart of the book, the issues that it is trying to bring to the forefront has arguably made it more relevant to contemporary times than to Gaskell's era.
Wait! You say. How can a book be both dated and completely timely? It mostly has to do with the plot. The book centers on a love triangle between Mary Barton, her working class lover ,Jem Wilson, and her wealthy suitor, Henry Barton. Against this main plotline, the book reveals the plight of the Manchester loom workers--and their rise and fall in workers over a number of years. One of the main figures in the workers fight is John Barton, Mary's father, who is set in opposition to Henry and his family.
The book is also cleverly written. It's a "murdery mystery not." When Henry gets shot down, we already know who is the killer, but it's how and why the killing happens that is striking and how the wrong man--and why his real killer is so logically overlooked. BUT
BUT BUT BUT
The book is so manipulative. Gaskell uses the same formula from chapter to chapter to "force" the situation to happen the way she wants it. She even comments on it once or twice. "If only the characters had actually talked, this situation could have been averted." "If only the character X had been honest about how desparate her situation was to character Y, this tragedy could have been averted." I don't mind when characters get shitted on, I do mind when the author knowingly tells me she is doing to make her plot work. And she really slogs you with "oh sorry! bad shit that could have been avoided just happened again" chapter after chapter after chapter.
That is what dates the book. Because she is being purposely soap opera-ish. Purposely! It's offensive! I was finally able to make peace with it when I finished the book, because it occurred to me that the trials of the Barton family are like that of the Biblical Job. Except, Job is rich and has everything taken away and then gets a new life start from God. While the Bartons are poor and get everything taken away and then get a new start from sympathetic ears and eyes.
The part of the book that remains timely is the bit about workers rights. How many shootings do we read about or see on the news where somebody went and murdered their co-workers because they were frustrated by the lack-of help, the lack-of ability to survive, the broken dreams? Underneath all the extra soap opera, that part still resonates. As well as the fight between workers for the ability to survive vs corporations who are only interested in the bottom line but mistake workers rights for wanting "power only."
This isn't a book I plan to read again. It was too heartwrenching and parts of it hit too close to home. But I'm glad I read it. This is a book all wealthy people should be required to read. Not that some of them would understand it (looking at you Mitt and Rick), but I think some would.
PS: If you've read "North & South," you'll be more prepared for that book as it is similar in that vein. (Except N&S doesn't do the tragedy for tragedy's sake narrative.)
I did not like this book, but since finishing it, I can't help but feel it remains relevant to this day. Yes, it's dated due its melodramatic plot points, but the heart of the book, the issues that it is trying to bring to the forefront has arguably made it more relevant to contemporary times than to Gaskell's era.
Wait! You say. How can a book be both dated and completely timely? It mostly has to do with the plot. The book centers on a love triangle between Mary Barton, her working class lover ,Jem Wilson, and her wealthy suitor, Henry Barton. Against this main plotline, the book reveals the plight of the Manchester loom workers--and their rise and fall in workers over a number of years. One of the main figures in the workers fight is John Barton, Mary's father, who is set in opposition to Henry and his family.
The book is also cleverly written. It's a "murdery mystery not." When Henry gets shot down, we already know who is the killer, but it's how and why the killing happens that is striking and how the wrong man--and why his real killer is so logically overlooked. BUT
BUT BUT BUT
The book is so manipulative. Gaskell uses the same formula from chapter to chapter to "force" the situation to happen the way she wants it. She even comments on it once or twice. "If only the characters had actually talked, this situation could have been averted." "If only the character X had been honest about how desparate her situation was to character Y, this tragedy could have been averted." I don't mind when characters get shitted on, I do mind when the author knowingly tells me she is doing to make her plot work. And she really slogs you with "oh sorry! bad shit that could have been avoided just happened again" chapter after chapter after chapter.
That is what dates the book. Because she is being purposely soap opera-ish. Purposely! It's offensive! I was finally able to make peace with it when I finished the book, because it occurred to me that the trials of the Barton family are like that of the Biblical Job. Except, Job is rich and has everything taken away and then gets a new life start from God. While the Bartons are poor and get everything taken away and then get a new start from sympathetic ears and eyes.
The part of the book that remains timely is the bit about workers rights. How many shootings do we read about or see on the news where somebody went and murdered their co-workers because they were frustrated by the lack-of help, the lack-of ability to survive, the broken dreams? Underneath all the extra soap opera, that part still resonates. As well as the fight between workers for the ability to survive vs corporations who are only interested in the bottom line but mistake workers rights for wanting "power only."
This isn't a book I plan to read again. It was too heartwrenching and parts of it hit too close to home. But I'm glad I read it. This is a book all wealthy people should be required to read. Not that some of them would understand it (looking at you Mitt and Rick), but I think some would.
PS: If you've read "North & South," you'll be more prepared for that book as it is similar in that vein. (Except N&S doesn't do the tragedy for tragedy's sake narrative.)
