The CBB :: View topic - L. M. Montgomery v Elinor M. Brent Dyer

through

[^/[^Print]\]

The CBB -> Formal Discussions

#1: L. M. Montgomery v Elinor M. Brent Dyer Author: Jennie, Location: Cambridgeshire

Posted: Thu Dec 14, 2006 4:32 pm
—
I think that I prefer L.M. Montgomery as a writer in many ways. What do you think?

Against LML I feel her sentimentality is against her in places. For example, when Anne is grown up, I do wish that Susan wouldn't call her Mrs. Doctor Dear every five minutes, but LML has a better sense of real humour than EBD ever did. EBD describes the effect on the audience, but rarely gives us the text of what is so funny, and could certainly not have written such a small comic masterpiece as Cousin Ernestine Bugg in Anne of WW.

#2: Author: Róisín, Location: Gaillimh

Posted: Thu Dec 14, 2006 7:17 pm
—
I definitely find LMM a more poetic sort of writer than EBD. I love her sentence construction and her flowery language - she is a most quotable authoress.

I also like the way that she deals with more intimate issues of Anne's life than EBD ever does with any of her main characters. We are present for all of the important life-changing events for Anne, whereas there are a lot of gaps for Joey or Mary-Lou - for example we don't see Joey's wedding. Boys are allowed to be present while Anne is growing up - but I think this is a Canadian/British thing - in the North American GO canon, there is romantic-style interaction allowed between the sexes even at a relatively young age, whereas in the British stories, the girls aren't supposed to show any romantic interest in the opposite sex until they have left school.

Another thing that might be interesting to compare is how death is dealt with. I haven't done a read-through of LMM in a while (about 4 or 5 years) but one of the lasting images to me is Ruby's death. Does she die of TB too? I wonder how EBD would have dealt with Ruby differently. (Assuming of course that characters are their own people and wander among bookpages looking for authors to adopt them! Laughing

)

#3: Author: Tan, Location: London via Newcastle Australia

Posted: Thu Dec 14, 2006 7:29 pm
—
I really love LMM. The entire Anne series was one of my favourites when growing up, and I quite enjoyed a lot of her other books as well.

She certainly is more in-depth in her writing than EBD, but the genres are very different. We get to see a lot more of Anne growing up (as mentioned previously). LMM doesn't gloss over death either (Mathew, Ruby and baby Joyce are all good examples). We get to see the effect of these events on Anne and how it helps to mature her as a person.

I think that LMM is able to portray life in a small community. EBD does this to an extent but you don't get to know a lot of her characters in the way that you do Anne.

#4: Author: Róisín, Location: Gaillimh

Posted: Thu Dec 14, 2006 8:10 pm
—
One thing I think the two have in common is the realistic portrayals of contemporary events. I learned a lot of history and geography from both series.

#5: Author: Jennie, Location: Cambridgeshire

Posted: Thu Dec 14, 2006 9:12 pm
—
I agree with you abgout LMM's portrayal of death. It's far more realistic than EBD's. EBD found her formula and stuck to it,'Falling asleep etc.' and very rarely showed the real effects of the death and 'consoled' people by telling them that the deaths were the best thing. LMM was more realistic because Matthew's death was sharply realised in its effects on Marilla and Anne.

We also see the effect of Ruby Gillis' illness as she fought hard against the TB, and how she and her family refused to acknowledge it.

#6: Author: jennifer, Location: Taiwan

Posted: Fri Dec 15, 2006 2:14 am
—
I would say that LMM is the better author. Her work is certainly a lot more realistic emotionally and, as others have said, goes into more emotional depth regarding the realities of life.

EBDs characters are kept asexual until leaving school, after which they marry the first man who expresses vague interest in them. Death is idealised (falling asleep) and romantic content is painfully akwkard (like Len's proposal to Reg) or syrupy sentimental, and both are usually offscreen. Implicit, unquestioning obedience is seen as ideal in children. People are expected to keep the stereotypical stiff upper lip when faced with things like the death of a parent, serious illness or injury or other hardships.

LMMs characters tend to be more fully drawn - she's much better at portraying the foibles and complexities of normal humans. There are many people who have faults and irritating habits but aren't *bad* characters - Ruby is silly and shallow and boy crazy, the Pyes are catty, Marilla is somewhat stiff and awkward, Matthew is painfully shy - but they have good characteristics as well. The girls go through failed romances and misunderstandings before marrying, and there is a boy/girl dynamic from a young age. Death is shown much more honestly - Matthew's sudden death, Anne's first baby's death and Walter's death in WWI are raw and painful and require grieving to come to terms with.

The marriages aren't perfect either. Anne is jealous and feels neglected at the end of Anne of Ingleside, even in a generally strong and affectionate marriage. Lesley in Anne's house of Dreams has a horrible home life - her brother was killed in an accident, her father committed suicide, she was pressured into marrying a nasty man at a young age by her mother (the reference to the incident with the fisher girl implies that he has at best taken advantage of other women), and then, when he is mentally incapacitated, spends her 20s caring for a man she hates.

The contrast between Susan and Anna is interesting - They are both faithful, loyal servants who love their mistress. Susan has dinner with the family most nights, has no problem stating her opinions or disagreeing when it comes to child rearing decisions, and has much more autonomy than Anna, who is shown as worshipful and deferential on all occasions.

They write about very different classes, though. EBD writes about upper class British children, with multiple servants, summer homes, and her definition of 'really poor' is 'doesn't have a private income and has trouble affording private school fees' - attending university is a given for most of the girls, if they want it. The village children and peasants are regarded with condescension.

LMM writes about rural people, primarily - farmers, teachers, doctors in rural practice (rather than at a posh Sanatorium). Going to highschool is a big deal and requires boarding away from home and most of the kids finish school at about age 15 and go to work on the farm. Gilbert and Anne both require a combination of scholarships and working their way through school to make it. Poor in her lexicon means 'can't feed the children'.

#7: Author: Róisín, Location: Gaillimh

Posted: Fri Dec 15, 2006 8:39 am
—

jennifer wrote:

They write about very different classes, though. EBD writes about upper class British children, with multiple servants, summer homes, and her definition of 'really poor' is 'doesn't have a private income and has trouble affording private school fees' - attending university is a given for most of the girls, if they want it. The village children and peasants are regarded with condescension.

LMM writes about rural people, primarily - farmers, teachers, doctors in rural practice (rather than at a posh Sanatorium). Going to highschool is a big deal and requires boarding away from home and most of the kids finish school at about age 15 and go to work on the farm. Gilbert and Anne both require a combination of scholarships and working their way through school to make it. Poor in her lexicon means 'can't feed the children'.

This is very true. It's a different set of references completely, isn't it?

#8: Author: Jennie, Location: Cambridgeshire

Posted: Fri Dec 15, 2006 3:21 pm
—
And there's the question of imagination. Anne had a dreadful childhood, working like a slave for those two women, so she needed her imagination to get her away from her everyday life, whereas Jo lacks for nothing.

Anne knows about poverty, having experienced it, but Jo is always well-treated and cossetted, and never has any real experience of life as most people live it. The CS solution for poverty is for the school to house Zita for the winter, and sew nighties for poor children, and on one occasion, the collection from their Nativity play goes to a poor parish in Innsbruck.

Life in Avonlea is never idealised, whereas it is in CSland.

#9: Author: Caroline, Location: Manchester

Posted: Fri Dec 15, 2006 3:31 pm
—

Jennie wrote:

Life in Avonlea is never idealised, whereas it is in CSland.

I can't comment on the Anne books really, as I haven't read them, but it seems from what others have said that the two sets of books are just dealing with people from different social stratas.

So, I wouldn't say life is idealised in CS land - the books just deal with people who don't actually suffer any genuine poverty or hardship, so we only ever see poverty from the outside - from the point of view of the benefactor.

#10: Author: ibarhis, Location: Dunstable

Posted: Fri Dec 15, 2006 3:43 pm
—
In my mind, the difference between the books reflects the difference between the authors.

LMM was married, and had children iirc. Her description of a community is a village rather than a school so has to include people of both sexes and all ages. Hence she writes in a different genre!

#11: Author: Róisín, Location: Gaillimh

Posted: Fri Dec 15, 2006 5:16 pm
—

ibarhis wrote:

Hence she writes in a different genre!

And yet many people would claim that the two authors are from the same genre - a loose GO genre - and were aimed at the same type of audience.

#12: Author: ibarhis, Location: Dunstable

Posted: Fri Dec 15, 2006 5:23 pm
—
I agree entirely... but iirc, LMM started writing about 1895... EMB finished writing about 70 years later. And the social background was very different too.

#13: Author: jennifer, Location: Taiwan

Posted: Sat Dec 16, 2006 4:47 am
—
I think it's culture as well as class - the British class system was still pretty rigid in many ways when EBD was writing, with clear boundaries between peasants/lower class, working class, professional class, well to do and nobility. In EBDs books the peasants are peasants and stay that way, as are the servants. Working class might aspire to improve themselves by aping their betters, professionals might come into money and land, and the well to do might marry into the aristocracy, or be knighted, but the class distinctions were very clear. Think of all of the descriptions like "with her well bred face and graceful carriage".

In Canada, with immigrants from different countries, many of whom were farm folk or working class, there was less importance placed on the family someone came from and their background, and there was more opportunity through hard work and luck to move from one class to another. I imagine the mix of accents helped too. Thrown in various British, Irish, Scottish and Welsh accents with some German, Ukranian, French, Dutch and so on, mix and let sit for a generation or two, and it's a lot harder to determine someone's class based on accent.

#14: Author: Fiona Mc, Location: Bendigo, Australia

Posted: Sat Dec 16, 2006 5:45 am
—

jennifer wrote:

In Canada, with immigrants from different countries, many of whom were farm folk or working class, there was less importance placed on the family someone came from and their background, and there was more opportunity through hard work and luck to move from one class to another.

Yes and no. How many times did LMM characters stress importance on family heritage and look down on disdain those whose fathers were hired boys or whom were hired boys themselves such as Perry in Emily of New Moon. And there were certainly old families in towns.

I liked both writers and both are very different in some ways and very similar in others. They both have an emphasis on who you are as a person and the belief in God is prevalent through out the books of both writers. I do like EBD's earlier work a lot better than her latter work but then I am a big believer that writers should know when they should either stop writing or stop the series they are writing because otherwise it all starts sounding the same. I do also think EBD's books should never had been hacked the way they were because it does make her sound a lot worse than what I think she is otherwise. Whereas there is rarely a series of LMM that I think that in.

I also think that EBD doesn't write much about boys in the CS series because for the main it is about a girls boarding school. In a lot of her other books for example The La Rochelle series she writes about them as much as she does about the girls especially in Seven Scamps.

#15: Author: keren, Location: Israel

Posted: Sat Dec 16, 2006 10:41 pm
—
I think that they are different enough that they cannot be compared, each are something else
However, on a different point EBD did read LMM.
this was discussed once on GO,
I can't remember all the points, but in a tableaux they did Anne breaking the slate on his head

And Felix and felcitiy are names from the story girl (the golden road), there are a whole lot more references in EBD to LMM

#16: Author: Alison H, Location: Manchester

Posted: Sat Dec 16, 2006 11:05 pm
—
I think it's hard to compare them because they write about very different subject matter - time, place, setting (school v home/university), social background, age group (sometimes) etc.

However, when it comes to "universal" areas, such as family life, friendship and romance, I think LMM deals with them more realistically. & her books are more realistic in general, e.g. her characters get into commonplace scrapes such as climbing on the roof as a "dare" or messing about in a boat, rather than things like chasing after princesses who've been kidnapped by deranged relatives or nearly dying after rescuing people from mountains/frozen lakes, but the incidents still seem interesting because of the way we see them though the characters' eyes. I hope that makes sense!

#17: Author: Dreaming Marianne, Location: Second star to the right

Posted: Sun Dec 17, 2006 9:37 pm
—
I think the points about cultural differences is very well expressed, but it's also interesting to note that, although of course Canada was populated by many different cultural groups, I can't think of a main character who didn't originate from the UK, so presumably some customs would persist (including an element of the class structure so beloved of us Brits - cf Emily of New Moon ad nauseam!).

I would vote LMM over EBD every time - much as I love EBD, I think her characterisation can be a little sketchy at times - a bit paper-doll-ish. And she can be coy in the extreme - more so bizarrely than LMM who was a Victorian writer (aside - when was EBD born? Was she a Victorian?) And I hated EBD's descriptions of death - no death I ever saw was like falling asleep. And little Joyce's death was heart-wrenchingly awful - right up until the end I never though that LMM would let it happen.

LMM for me.

#18: Author: Cath V-P, Location: Newcastle NSW

Posted: Mon Dec 18, 2006 2:19 am
—
EBD was born in 1894, and LMM's dates are 1874-1942, so I think you could regard EBD as an Edwardian rather than a Victorian, and there was a shift in thinking and social identification around the turn of the century. Plus EBD learned early, after the departure of her father, that concealment and the maintenance of at least an appearance of respectability was absolutely crucial to hanging on to a social status that could be extremely precarious. And I think some of the coyness might stem from this reticence.

#19: Author: jennifer, Location: Taiwan

Posted: Mon Dec 18, 2006 3:35 am
—
Of course, half the fun in discussing EBDs works are the odd additudes, coy circumlocutions, overdrawn characterisations and EBDisms. You couldn't really do Anne or Emily bashing they way we take after Mary-Lou or Joey.

#20: Author: Hannah-Lou, Location: Glasgow

Posted: Mon Dec 18, 2006 4:07 pm
—

keren wrote:

However, on a different point EBD did read LMM.
this was discussed once on GO,
I can't remember all the points, but in a tableaux they did Anne breaking the slate on his head

And Felix and felcitiy are names from the story girl (the golden road), there are a whole lot more references in EBD to LMM

I haven't noticed many references to LMM, but I've not read much more than the Anne books. What surprised me was that when they did the Anne scene in the tableaux, no-one knew the book. For me, it was the only one I did recognise. Did EBD think that LMM was not well known in the UK, or was this actually the case then?

#21: Author: Jennie, Location: Cambridgeshire

Posted: Mon Dec 18, 2006 6:05 pm
—
I have no idea about that, but quyite often when reading LMM, I find a phrase that EBD uses in her books, so I think quite a bit of borrowing went on.

#22: Author: Tara, Location: Malvern, Worcestershire

Posted: Mon Dec 18, 2006 9:52 pm
—
It's quite easy to find 'better' writers than EBD in some (though only some) ways. It's fun to laugh at the EBDisms (though how many of us would have managed any better, in a series that spread over so many years, particularly when she had no idea at the beginning of how long it would last), easy to find older fashions of thinking and behaving a little strange.

What EBD did do, however, perhaps partly because of the momentum of a series, partly because she 'lived' it so intensely herself, was create a world that grips us totally, though not uncritically. Why do so many of us, of all ages, with very different cultural and ideological backgrounds spend so much time on the board and immersed in EBD's world? It clearly gives us something very precious to us and important in our lives, and is, by anyone's standards, a startling and significant achievement.

#23: Author: Cath V-P, Location: Newcastle NSW

Posted: Mon Dec 18, 2006 11:33 pm
—
[b[Hannah-Lou wrote:[/b]

Quote:

Did EBD think that LMM was not well known in the UK, or was this actually the case then?

She was certainly published later in the UK. Judging by the information on some of my hardbacks Harrap published her for the UK market in the mid-1920s, and she doesn't seem to have been available in Australia much before that date either. And in Judy the Guide (1928) EBD has Canadian Judy carefully explaining to the library prefect just what the "Anne" books were, which would make sense if they'd only recently been widely available in the UK.

#24: Author: Dreaming Marianne, Location: Second star to the right

Posted: Tue Dec 19, 2006 12:30 pm
—

Tara wrote:

Why do so many of us, of all ages, with very different cultural and ideological backgrounds spend so much time on the board and immersed in EBD's world? It clearly gives us something very precious to us and important in our lives, and is, by anyone's standards, a startling and significant achievement.

Good point. I agree entirely. EBD - for me - is like slipping on a pair of comfy tracksuit bottoms and a disreputable old sweater and snuggling down on the sofa. And I like CBB because there are so many intersting people from just so many different walks of life, and yet in many ways we all seem sympathetic. Maybe what Anne would call "the race that knew Joseph" (though I never really understood that, enlighten me please someone!)

#25: Author: Elle, Location: Peterborough

Posted: Tue Dec 19, 2006 12:43 pm
—

Dreaming Marianne wrote:

Maybe what Anne would call "the race that knew Joseph" (though I never really understood that, enlighten me please someone!)

I have always taken that to mean people with 'imaginations' who can see beyond the ordinary day to dayness of life, dreamers, like Joseph.

#26: Author: LizB, Location: Oxon, England

Posted: Tue Dec 19, 2006 1:10 pm
—

Elle wrote:

Dreaming Marianne wrote:

Maybe what Anne would call "the race that knew Joseph" (though I never really understood that, enlighten me please someone!)

I have always taken that to mean people with 'imaginations' who can see beyond the ordinary day to dayness of life, dreamers, like Joseph.

I wouldn't think imagination is necessary - because it was Miss Cornelia who coined that phrase, and she always comes across as a very practical down-to-earth person. Anne's term 'kindred spirits' makes a bit more sense to me - I take it to mean people with whom she had a rapport - often instant, but sometimes (as in Katherine Brook) discovered after some time.

#27: Author: Miriam, Location: Jerusalem, Israel

Posted: Wed Dec 20, 2006 8:25 pm
—
I always assumed that the reference came from Exodus 1:8 "And there arose a new king in Egypt, who had not known Joseph". The previous king (or Pharoah) had had quite an extensive relationship with Joseph, who had saved his country from famine, and in consequence gave considerable houner to him and his extended family. This sentence is used as an introduction to the begining of the enslavement of Josephs family. THe implication is that not only did this new king not know Joseph, but also that he had no desire to develop any kind of relationship with him (other than directing his family to do a lot of hard work).

In terms of the Anne books, I always read it as 'someone who I can trust and develop a relationship with'. We might use the phrase 'speaks my language' in the same way today.

(Biblical commentary due to the fact that I will be teaching this in two weeks, and have been taking advantage of some free time this week to get ahead in my preparation. Sorry to anyone who was bored.)

#28: Author: CatherineS, Location: Smalltown, West of Scotland

Posted: Thu Dec 21, 2006 1:03 am
—
Thank-you very much for that, Miriam - very interesting, rather than boring. My husband bought me a lovely old bible two Easters past as I always wanted to be able to read and understand as far as I could ('as in me lay', I wanted to write!) the books which were a foundation for so much of our culture. I read the Old and New Testament in a children's version when I was about nine, but I don't remember much now. I can't seem to find the time these days for such a project, but look forward to it when my kids are a bit older and recognise when a decent person takes to bed!

#29: Author: Bess, Location: Cambridge UK

Posted: Fri Dec 22, 2006 11:05 pm
—
Reading a transcript of 'Kennelmaid Nan' by EBD, I was struck by Nan's 'Anne-ish-ness' - her red hair (with temper to match) and big grey eyes, much wearing of green and but complaining that her fave colour was pink or scarlet and she could never wear them because of her hair.

I might not've noticed if I hadn't been reading this thread first though, the whole Kennelmaid story is quite different from EBD.

#30: Author: Fiona Mc, Location: Bendigo, Australia

Posted: Fri Dec 29, 2006 4:33 pm
—

CatherineS wrote:

My husband bought me a lovely old bible two Easters past as I always wanted to be able to read and understand as far as I could ('as in me lay', I wanted to write!) the books which were a foundation for so much of our culture. I read the Old and New Testament in a children's version when I was about nine, but I don't remember much now. I can't seem to find the time these days for such a project, but look forward to it when my kids are a bit older and recognise when a decent person takes to bed!

My brothers and sisters and I tried to read the whole bible during church when we were kids. It was pretty much the only thing we were allowed to do beside sitting there doing nothing. I must admit I managed the whole of the new testament and about half the old. I had to skip a couple of the earlier books such as Leviticus and Numbers etc when they go on about the laws and thing such as this tent should be so big etc. It was just too boring. It is interesting seeing how a lot of our laws are based especially the food and hygiene ones. It would have saved a lot of illnesses.

#31: Author: Alison H, Location: Manchester

Posted: Fri Dec 29, 2006 4:58 pm
—
I'm not very into religion, but I do find it fascinating how many phrases/expressions - things like "turning the other cheek" and "washing your hands of it all" - have Biblical origins.

#32: Author: Loryat,

Posted: Tue Jan 09, 2007 5:20 pm
—
I think LMM is probably a better prose writer than EBD though actually I find EBD to be more funny, especially in the early books, than LMM. (Though to be fair I haven't read all of LMM's). LMM annoys me sometimes a bit though. For example, I don't like how entire families all share the same traits and then all the members are labelled as such. I know this is proably a realistic depiction, but it seemed LMM approved of it.

As regards the class distinctions, I think there is a massive class divide and a lot of snobbishness in LMM, just as much really as in EBD. Anne may be an orphan sent out to work but LMM lets us know that her parents were both respectable, educated people IIRC. Then in the later books I got a definite sense that Anne's family was 'superior' to a lot of the other families roundabout.

I went off LMM a bit after reading Rilla. It was so jingoistic, anti-German and even a bit anti-Muslim. I know that that's how things were but EBD's wartime books are so much more tolerant I think it puts LMM in a bad light.

#33: Author: Kathy_S, Location: midwestern US

Posted: Tue Jan 09, 2007 8:43 pm
—
I'm afraid the attitudes toward Germans and pacifism reflect reality. The WWI period was certainly one in which Americans of German extraction tried desperately to prove their patriotism. Among other things, that's when those of my ancestors who had kept up their German language skills since the 1850s -- there were even German newspapers in their communities -- stopped dead.

I also found the attitudes of LMM's characters toward "The French" a bit much. (Canadian French, not French French.) They seem to fill some of the niches EBD populated with Tirolean peasants, but even the respected roles of Anna & Karen are out of their reach.

I still love the Anne books, though.

#34: Author: macyrose, Location: Great White North (Canada)

Posted: Wed Jan 10, 2007 12:09 am
—
I have quite a few biographies of LMM and read in them that a lot of what went into Rilla was taken from LMM's real life diaries (there are five volumes of them in print).

I agree with Kathy_S about LMM's attitude toward French-Canadians, and also with Loryat when she said LMM labelled entire families, such as a Gillis girl would always be boy crazy (from Anne of Avonlea: "I know," nodded Diana. "It's the Gillis coming out in her . . . she can't help it. Mrs. Lynde says that if ever a Gillis girl thought about anything but the boys she never showed it in her walk and conversation.") or Pyes were not to be trusted.

Still I enjoy LMM's books as much as I do EBD's though both have attitudes that I dislike in them as well as attitudes that I admire.

#35: Author: Cath V-P, Location: Newcastle NSW

Posted: Wed Jan 10, 2007 12:22 am
—
I swallowed the attitudes in Rilla unquestioninglywhen I first read it, aged 12, then reread it four years later and thought "Hang on a minute!" But as KathyS said, this seems to have been typical of the time - there are a lot of short stories written for annuals published during WW1 that reproduce patriotic stereotypes - and some longer stories too. Dorothea Moore wrote several stories for girls, in which one British teenage girl can successfully defeat any number of German officers....

And I'd forgotten LMM labelling entire families like this, although given the way the concepts of eugenics were commonly discussed, this sort of observation was not uncommon - and especially in a rural community which was used to thinking in terms of breeding and pedigree.

Kathy_S wrote:

Quote:

The WWI period was certainly one in which Americans of German extraction tried desperately to prove their patriotism.

This comes out in Betsy's Wedding doesn't it? When Tib comes from Milwaukee to visit Betsy and Tacy?

#36: Author: Caty, Location: New Zealand

Posted: Wed Jan 10, 2007 12:31 am
—
As well as writing a different genre, LM Mongomery's books deal with a wide cast of characters, with one central character. EDB has really 3 types of characters 1. Schoolgirls, 2. teachers and 3. Doctors and though she does have a central character (Joey), it's not to the same extent as any of LM Montgomer's Anne, Emily, Jane, Pat etc.

LM Mongomery can bring in completely new character for a chapter and then you never hear of them again, like a politician or a farmer. These bring the wide variety of village life right onto the page of the book. EBD can't do this, beacuse the story, in the main, must be limited to school life, or it wouldn't work.

The other really important thing is that LM Mongomery wrote about what she knew. EBD is able to tackle school situations, but other things, like marriage, just weren't part of her experience. It's particularly apparent in the swiss books where we are rarely given any sort of descrption of the location, nor do we meet local characters. The first few Austrian books are far more successful in this regard and stand up better to comparision with the quality of LM Mongomery's writing.

#37: Author: Dreaming Marianne, Location: Second star to the right

Posted: Thu Jan 11, 2007 10:30 pm
—
and I think LMM handled graver subjects in more detail than EBD. I know, I know, EBD didn't exactly stint on wartime settings, but LMM doesn't pull punches - Belgian babies and the trenches etc. But then I love Rilla.

One things always always stuck with me after reading it. One of Rilla's friends says - "They can't be starving. It's the twentieth century" And that hit home. A bit like when Sebastian Flyte says to Charles in "Brideshead Revisisted " that "it's strange to think that no matter what happens, you and I can't be involved in a war" I remember reading that aged around 14 and thinking, well, that's true for me. And then my later husband got sent to Iraq ten years later. You never can say things like that.

#38: Author: Aparna, Location: India

Posted: Fri Jan 19, 2007 7:07 am
—

Quote:

For example, I don't like how entire families all share the same traits and then all the members are labelled as such. I know this is proably a realistic depiction, but it seemed LMM approved of it.

I have been reading LMM's Alpine Path recently. In it she says that the different clans in her village inter married a lot resulting in some of the traits being more pronounced. hence some traits/qualities were always attributed to some families. She goes on to say that in her village the outsiders, who were not of the original settlers had a saying

Quote:

"From the conceit of the Simpsons, the pride of the Macneills, and the vain-glory of the Clarks, good Lord deliver us."

so probably she was just showing the attitude of her times rather than making a statement of her own opinions. (what's the difference between conceit, pride and vain-glory anyways) Confused

Also LMM and EBD seemed to have different opinions of who were respectable and of superior class and who not. I think in LMM's books people were respectable irrespective of whether they were farmers, fisher folks, doctor or whatever their profession be as long as they have some basic good qualities. While in EBDs book we dont get such variety. I can only remember Biddy and the girl who was Len's friend (forgot her name)
One thing that irritates me about EBD is the way she keeps justifying her characters or giving their various good qualities to the reader's face. In most of the latter books i think it is mentioned how friendly Jo was, how big hearted and motherly and trustworthy etc. some one or the other was always saying Mary-Lou was a butter in who helped people.
It's only rarely that LMM does that and then with good reason. Mostly she gives the viewer the incidents and lets them make their own inferences.

http://www.tickledorange.com/LMM/Etexts.html
has got most of LMM's work.

#39: Author: JayB, Location: SE England

Posted: Fri Jan 19, 2007 10:19 am
—

Aparna wrote:

Quote:

For example, I don't like how entire families all share the same traits and then all the members are labelled as such. I know this is proably a realistic depiction, but it seemed LMM approved of it.

On another list I'm on there was once an off-topic discussion between two ladies from small Canadian rural communities who said they came across a lot of intermarriage between families in their work (one was a midwife) and that the effects on the children were perceptible and often regrettable. If this was still happening within the last 20 or 30 years, it must have been even more pronounced a hundred years ago on PEI, when many people probably never left the Island in their whole lives.

Quote:

I think there's a diference between 'respectable' and 'superior class'. The Pfeiffens were respectable, although in EBD's world not of superior class. Thekla considered herself to be superior, although not respectable in the sense of being worthy of respect - doesn't someone (Mdlle?) say something like that to her? And Grandma in Gay would have been horrified and angry at any suggestion that she wasn't respectable.

Quote:

One thing that irritates me about EBD is the way she keeps justifying her characters or giving their various good qualities to the reader's face.... It's only rarely that LMM does that and then with good reason. Mostly she gives the viewer the incidents and lets them make their own inferences.

But then, as was mentioned above, LMM and EBD were writing for different readerships. EBD's work was definitely aimed at children and girls no older than their mid teens. And am I right in saying that LMM's books are longer than EBD's? She could take more time in developing her characters, while EBD sometimes had to take shortcuts.

Obviously EBD had her shortcomings as a writer, but I do think she knew her readers extremely well and excelled at giving them what they wanted, and by the later books one of those things was the comfort of familiarity.

#40: Author: Jennie, Location: Cambridgeshire

Posted: Fri Jan 19, 2007 1:01 pm
—
One thing that I would like to add to this discussion is that the people of Avonlea were keen observers of their neighbours, and would see how the family characteristics came out in the individuals and how the ethos of the family made children into what they became.

#41: Author: Hannah-Lou, Location: Glasgow

Posted: Wed Jan 31, 2007 6:45 pm
—

Aparna wrote:

I have been reading LMM's Alpine Path recently. In it she says ... that in her village the outsiders, who were not of the original settlers had a saying

Quote:

"From the conceit of the Simpsons, the pride of the Macneills, and the vain-glory of the Clarks, good Lord deliver us."

I think LMM uses almost the exact same line in another book (possibly with different names!). I haven't read Alpine Path, but I'm sure I've read something very like that, possibly something Miss Cornelia says to Anne. LMM quoting herself? Very Happy

#42: Author: Vikki, Location: Sitting on an iceberg, freezing to death!!!

Posted: Wed Jan 31, 2007 6:55 pm
—
Yes, it's definitely in one of the Anne books. I think you're right about it being Miss Cornelia, but it MIGHT have been Mrs Lynde.

#43: Author: Cazx, Location: London

Posted: Wed Jan 31, 2007 8:22 pm
—
It is Miss Cornelia in House of Dreams I think, she's talking about the Elliott's, the Crawfords and some other family...

#44: Author: macyrose, Location: Great White North (Canada)

Posted: Wed Jan 31, 2007 10:00 pm
—
It does sound like something that Miss Cornelia would say but it's actually Dr. Dave who says it in Anne's House of Dreams:

Quote:

"There are nearly as many Elliotts and Crawfords,"
said Doctor Dave, after the laughter had subsided.
"You know, Gilbert, we folk on this side of Four Winds
have an old saying--`From the conceit of the Elliotts,
the pride of the MacAllisters, and the vainglory of the
Crawfords, good Lord deliver us.'"

The CBB -> Formal Discussions

output generated using printer-friendly topic mod. All times are GMT

Page 1 of 1