fandomsecrets | [ SECRET POST #2707 ]

[ SECRET POST #2707 ]

⌈ Secret Post #2707 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.

__________________________________________________

02.

__________________________________________________

03.

__________________________________________________

04.

__________________________________________________

05.

__________________________________________________

06.

__________________________________________________

07.

__________________________________________________

08.

__________________________________________________

09.

__________________________________________________

10.

__________________________________________________

11.

__________________________________________________

12.

Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 03 pages, 066 secrets from Secret Submission Post #387.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 1 (also a repeat x 3) - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

Firstly let me apologise for my shitty behaviour yesterday. I have an explanation (not a good one) and I'll give it if anything feels it's owed, but otherwise, let's just say I had a funny turn and leave it at that.

Thanks and specific apologies to Diet_Poison, who I put in a particularly awkward situation.

Ok now that's out the way:

What did we think of the book?
I'll start.

Fucking loved it. Just the right amount of "Oh shit this is going to be miserable" to grip me, without throughally depressing me.

No worries man! I hope you're doing okay.

I loved it too, oh man. The twists were so unexpected. And the ending hngggh. Right around the end of the first part I had this idle thought, "lol, what if Maud and Sue fell in with each other?" and then like ten pages later it actually happened. I spent the rest of the book knowing I'd rage if they didn't get their happy ending, and then they did and it was beautiful.

I hate hate hate Gentleman, I mean he was a great character but what an enormous prick. I'm glad he died. I was really hoping either Sue or Maud would kill her, and it seems pretty clear at this point it was Maud. He also provides an interesting contrast to Mrs. Sucksby. I'm surprised that I still kind of liked her even after figuring out that she was essentially as bad a person as Gentleman - that she pulled the wool over Sue's eyes for 17 years. But I think it helped that she had at least a partial redemption at the end in sacrificing herself to save Maud and Sue from the law.

There was some really good foreshadowing and some really nice parallels (the kid glove and the thimble). One thing I just realized now is Maud's line when she stole her uncle's razor - "but this is not that kind of story - at least, not yet". I was like hmmm, is she going to kill him later? But I think that was actually there because of her attacking Gentleman at the end. Also, the bit about Maud's mother being Mrs. Sucksby, and Mrs. Sucksby saying that Maud's mother had been hanged as a murderess - she obviously made that story up, but it ended up being true anyway. (at least the hanging bit, and the conviction, even if Mrs. Sucksby didn't wield the knife herself.) I'm still not sure though why she made it up though, and didn't just tell Maud the truth, when she told her everything else.

As for the other characters:

Christopher Lilly - creeper with a capital C. Yuck. Glad he's dead as well. I approved of Maud's destruction of his library, saw it as a way for her to get some recompense for the sick way he used her.

Dainty and John - I actually rather liked Dainty, even if she was supposed to be what...an airhead? I'm not sure what they were trying to do with her. But she had a good heart and in the end made a big difference for Sue. I think she was like Sue's older sister. John was a giant douche, but for some reason I liked him too. A good character I think.

Mr. Ibbs - I think it's a nice subversion to make Mrs. Sucksby the interesting character and Mr. Ibbs, the male proprietor of the house, basically a prop. I mean he served no narrative purpose except to set up Sue's background as a thief and provide the setting.

Charles - oh man, I don't know how I feel about Charles. I felt really bad for the way Sue used him, but Sue was desperate, and she was also right about Charles having nowhere else to go (although he did end up going back to Mrs. Cream's in the end? IDK.) But Sue was also kind of right about him being a big crybaby. He was clearly at least her age and had no nerve whatsoever. Then again, he was brought up as a servant in a giant empty house, with no street smarts and no experience with dangerous people. Poor guy has his entire world shattered in a matter of weeks.

Dr. Christie and the nurses I just hated. Fuck 'em all.

There's a lot of interesting commentary here on the culture of the time - mainly, gender expectations and attitudes towards/treatment of mental illnesses. It was all rather dreary and I'm glad it's changed in the past two centuries of so, oh man.

And at the end I was left wondering - was Maud and Sue's relationship actually realistic? I wonder if f/f couples were able to stay together in the Victorian era, I mean obviously they'd have to do it under cover, but is that feasible given the freedom (or lack thereof) women were usually granted? I think it was wonderful how they both got out from under Gentleman's thumb and were able to have a hand in determining their own fate. It was rage-inducing throughout the book how Gentleman's word was always taken over theirs just because he was a man - so ironic since he was such a villain - and he held a string around both of their necks.

There are so many other little comments I could make, but I'll stop now and see what others have to say...XD

Mrs Sucksby is definitely a good character. I completely agree that she's ultimately a lot more likable than Gentleman. Which is strange, in a way - for one thing, she is essentially as bad as Gentleman. And it's weird that we even expect her to be more likable - she's a thief who's only really out to make money all the way from the start of the story, after all, it's not like she's ever presented as some paragon of morality. But we do like her, and she is more likable than Gentleman, probably because she doesn't seem to take so much pleasure in it.

Re: f/f couples - obviously it was frowned upon but I think having the financial wherewithal to live independently would probably be the most significant thing. I mean, as long as they're able to keep their estate, who's really going to be able to say anything? And IIRC there are examples of women who lived together in what were probably lesbian relationships although it wasn't common. So it's rare but not impossible I guess.

I think both of your comments are spot on. Mrs. Sucksby just kind of went about her life doing her business - dirty business, but she didn't relish it. And yeah, the financial situation for Maud and Sue will be a huge boon. Frankly, in as isolated a place as Briar, nobody's even going to think about it. Maud's 18, she's the lady of the house* and she has servants to look over her, so I'm pretty sure nobody would be like "lol u can't live alone" since I think that wasn't unheard of even in that time - if a woman was nobly born or otherwise well-off, she could live alone. Oh, and she's also technically a widow (though is she? I'm not sure what the laws were, but her "marriage" to Gentleman was never consummated, so would it have been legal?) - that helps too. She can call Sue her "companion" and they can live off her fortune.

I have to think, though, that Sue would probably get bored. Hopefully she'd find something to do with herself that's fulfilling and productive.

*well, technically Sue is the lady of the house, but people will perceive it as being Maud

Edited 2014-06-01 21:20 (UTC)

Really? I found Mrs Sucksby worse even than Gentleman. She's planned Sue's downfall from day one. By the end, I did not like her at all.

She's definitely not a good person, but she's more likable than either of the other people who play similar roles in the story, IE Gentleman and Christopher Lilly. Because you get the sense that she is, at least to some degree, doing what she has to do to survive, and she's capable of some kind of real affection, and she's not wantonly cruel like Gentleman and Lilly are. Maybe it's just process of elimination.

Re: Fingersmith Discussion

inevitableentresol - 2014-06-01 22:02 (UTC) - Expand

Re: Fingersmith Discussion

cushlamochree - 2014-06-01 22:16 (UTC) - Expand

Re: Fingersmith Discussion

inevitableentresol - 2014-06-01 22:20 (UTC) - Expand

Re: Fingersmith Discussion

diet_poison - 2014-06-01 23:47 (UTC) - Expand

I concur. The role she played, the fact that all the horrible events were set in motion by her, mean that from a purely factual POV she was the worst of the characers. BUT the redemption=death thing, the fact that at some points she showed genuine emotion, Remorse, of a sort, and the capability of actually caring for someone. I couldn't hate her as much as I hated Gentleman.

Re: Fingersmith Discussion

inevitableentresol - 2014-06-01 22:17 (UTC) - Expand

Re: Fingersmith Discussion

the_missing_y - 2014-06-01 22:27 (UTC) - Expand

Oh, that thimble.

Anyone else have their teeth set on edge with that scene where Sue files Maud's teeth with the thimble? It was supposed to be sensual, I think, but it creeped me out.

Eee yeah, I wanted to get all pumped about them making physical contact!! but all I could think of was dentists and teeth scraping and eeeurgh

I was indifferent to it. It was just kind of there.

I liked it! But I wasn't thinking about... that.

It came across as sensual to me, not creepy.

Oh, I think their relationship is definitely plausible. They seem to have financial independence by the end, and there have been plenty of women throughout history who lived together in similar situations. I can't think of their names right now, but I read about them in Intimate Friends: Women Who Loved Women, 1778-1928 by Martha Vicinus, which I read a few months ago for a research project.

I was surprised by how much I liked John by the end of the novel, actually. In the beginning I disliked him, but... even though he was a jerk, I felt like he was better than people like Gentleman and Mrs. Sucksby. Perhaps it was because he wasn't as manipulative as them.

On that note, while I think I hated the Gentleman more, I was more horrified by Mrs. Sucksby than I was by him. That she could raise Sue and treat her with love and care for so many years, and then send her off to an insane asylum like she was nothing worth... I found it utterly chilling.

There have been many women who've lived together without men. We mostly know this because there have always been others throughout history bemoaning it and saying how immoral it is.

I also liked John Vroom at the end. It was that last part where he's suddenly jealous of Gentleman's interest in the boot boy, and we get to see that perhaps there was more going on behind the scenes than we realised. John may have been a careless idiot, but he was raised badly by Mrs Sucksby, and he had feelings too.

I wanted him and Dainty to go off and have a happy life together. I admired John for having survived that far at all.

Agreed about John and Dainty. I think they did, or at least would like to think they did, since they wound up together. I also think his concern for Dainty's safety before anything else when Charles ran to the street to announce the murder was sweet. He did care about her even if he felt he couldn't show it.

Good point about John. He was very straightforward about what he wanted. He was a dick, but he was rather transparent. And I think his bark was way, way worse than his bite.

Yeah, she was pretty chilling. I kept waiting, when she was telling Maud her story, for the part where they go rescue Sue. It never came.

What gets me the most about Mrs. Sucksby is that I don't think she ever realized the extent to which Sue loved her. I mean, she must've known to some degree, but maybe after a lifetime of dealing with other people's babies, she just never put as much thought into as she could have. I really felt like her shock at Sue tricking her way out of the asylum and coming back wasn't so much because she didn't think Sue was smart enough, but because she had no idea the lengths to which Sue would go to be with her again. I think that's ultimately what made her choose to sacrifice herself, and to me it felt like she regretted what she did and spent her last days questioning her decisions.

IDK I really adored this book and the whole thing with Mrs. Sucksby was what got me the most. It's just such a complex and interesting relationship. Since Gentleman was the obvious smarmy villain, having her in there as a completely different--yet equally manipulative--person was a really good contrast.

I also loved Dainty but I hated John. I didn't feel like he served any real purpose, aside from being there at the end, with the trial and stuff.

That's some really interesting insight about Mrs. Sucksby. I like the way you think about it.

John was a prop, imo, like Mr. Ibbs but more interesting. He was just there to be part of the setting Sue grew up in and part of what defined her Lant Street home. I liked him for that, but he certainly wasn't much of a standalone character.

Edited 2014-06-02 14:45 (UTC)

I find her really fascinating. I think she may be the most interesting characters in the book, with Maud a close second. It's not that I think she's a good person or that she didn't know what she was doing was bad, she definitely did. But she was so focused on Maud and getting her back that I really don't think she ever expected Sue to love her the way she did. And that fucked with her and made her question what she was doing for the first time, but it was too late.

i just love this book augh

Re: Fingersmith Discussion

diet_poison - 2014-06-03 00:01 (UTC) - Expand

Re: Fingersmith Discussion

(Anonymous) - 2014-06-03 07:55 (UTC) - Expand

I thought it was good. The plot was a little tenuous at times - there were a lot of fortuitous chances, double-crossings, secret and forgotten knowledge, etc. It got a little hard for me to take seriously when you get to the point in the second part about the babies being switched. It was a little too much. But I liked the characters a lot, more than enough to make up for it.

I got a little bit of a Wilkie Collins vibe especially in the first part, with the extreme amount of doublings, and the weirdo uncle obsessed with drawings and books keeping the young lady penned up in the house, and the atmosphere. It diminished somewhat going further on, but it was definitely there. I think in general I liked the parts at Briar a lot more than the parts in London. More atmospheric, I guess.

e: also it's completely juvenile but every time someone said "fuck" I was delighted. It was great. That really entertained me.

Edited 2014-06-01 22:01 (UTC)

- I loved the Dickensian opening, the references to Oliver Twist, which came back full circle at the end with the story of Sue's true parentage. Very tortuous and unbelievable. I enjoyed the homage to that kind of story even though normally I would find it silly. I don't even like Dickens, but it enchanted me.

- The period slang was a delight, and so well wielded.

- The book was so erotic. Astonishingly so. I forgave Gentleman a lot for his jaw dropping double entendres, and later on, Sue and Maud shocked me with their serial callousness, but I equally forgave them for the amazing sensuality of their scenes.

- The twists had me genuinely hooked. I read the book so quickly, especially at the end. I haven't read a published book this fast since the Hunger Games.

- All the way through, I was planning how I was going to read this book again, and what pleasure the second read would give me.

- Except the asylum scenes, which I will definitely skip. They were perhaps necessary at that length (perhaps?) but they felt far too painfully long for me.

- That opening scene especially, at the fire in the house, was just beautiful.

- It will be interesting reading it a second time, with what I know now about Sue and Maud. Will I feel as sympathetic to their relationship when I know both of them will betray each other?

I agree with you 100% about the asylum scenes. I can see why they were there, but they were almost painful to read.

I don't have a problem with Sue and Maud's relationship even knowing that they're going to betray each other, because so much of that betrayal is a result of how they've been raised and how they've been manipulated by others, and the complex processes by which they even came to meet each other in the first place.

They betray each other because of their awful upbringings and the schemes of others, and their relationship is part of what allows them to move beyond that upbringing, I guess.

e: agreed re the asylum scenes and the Dickens stuff

Edited 2014-06-01 22:00 (UTC)

I'm unsure about Maud and Sue. I loved that they had a happy ending. The book really needed it, and I couldn't believe the author was going to give them one, but was so happy when she did.

I think I'll have to wait for my second read to figure out how I feel about them. Both of them are definitely manipulated. But so are others in the story as well, who don't get happy endings. I felt especially sorry for that poor boot boy who followed Gentleman to London and caused everyone's downfall.

Re: Fingersmith Discussion

diet_poison - 2014-06-01 23:58 (UTC) - Expand

Agreed about the period slang. The language and word use was delightful.

Agreed also about the asylum scenes. Those were hard to read and man, I just wanted that part to be over so bad. D:

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only