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

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.

Christopher Lilly I came to hate as much as the asylum nurses.

I thought his part in the story was a really interesting commentary on erotic fiction. A common thing that's said about written porn is that it doesn't hurt anyone because it's all fiction. I thought this was a clever way of discussing this, because Maud is terribly hurt by her exposure to it, although mostly through how it's done and not by the material itself.

What disturbed me, was how much I really wanted to like Maud Lilly's uncle purely because of his interest in Victorian erotica. It's an interest which I share and which gets short shrift from the general population.

His cruelty was unveiled so slowly and so shockingly that by the end of it, I did want Maud to kill him.

I couldn't decide if the writer had meant her uncle's obsession with written porn to be a symptom of his extreme cruelty or not. Added to that, if his cruelty to her was meant to be a commentary to the treatment of all women generally in erotic stories. Or was the subject of his obsession irrelevant?

I have confused thoughts about it, even though I know I definitely hate him.

That's an interesting point.

I don't think the story can possibly be a critique of erotica as such, given the ending, and given that the book is not lacking in erotic moments for itself. At the same time, its portrayal of Lilly and his friends is definitely not positive - none of the men associated with erotica in the book come off well at all. IE, that specific kind of erotica, and the obsessive cataloging interest in erotica, in a society that gives so little agency to women, is harmful. It reduces women to objects, entrenches them in their accustomed roles, etc. So it's bad as part of a larger social context but not intrinsically. Just a thought tho.

God, though. Lilly. Such a hateable character. Just gave me the creeps constantly when I was reading stuff to do with him.

Re: Fingersmith Discussion

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

That's a good point. She's not sadistic and she does whatever she can to minimize suffering. What she did is absolutely horrifying, but to me the big thing was: she found some redemption. She gave up her life to achieve that redemption. It doesn't undo her past action, BUT it's also more than I can say for either Gentleman or C. Lilly, the former of whom died a coward and the latter of whom wasted away in bitterness.

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.

It seems I'm in the minority. By the end, when it was clear Mrs Sucksby had manipulated everyone - Sue, Mr Ibbs, Gentleman, and through him Maud as well, I lost all sympathy.

Mrs Sucksby only started to show remorse when she was found out.

Add to that, the countless children Mrs Sucksby killed during her baby farming. She's literally a mass murderer.

Yeah, but the gentlaman showed no remorse. ever.
I dunno. I agree that logically Mrs Sucksby is far worse, Gentleman just provokes a more visceral gut hatered in me

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

me too anon. It was a great choice for first book club book. I'm hearing good things about this month's book too, so I think f!s has great taste :3

Yeah, I actually finished that one already too. it was pretty good, though I didn't love it. Definitely not bad!

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only