Victorian Readalong Q3: Hester by Margaret Oliphant

Hester by Margaret Oliphant

A 3 volumes novel from 1883 which uses the format to its advantage and tells a different part of the story in each volume.

If you are reading the novel with the group, come and tell us what you think about it, :)

Last year, some of us from the Virago Group started reading Margaret Oliphant's Chronicles of Carlingford series with Liz (lyzard).
With the first stories (The Executor and The Rector) in the series, Liz provided some background on Oliphant, which you can read here:

https://www.librarything.com/topic/331164

>2 kac522: Thanks for that — interesting!

I finished Vol.1 a couple of days ago and have started in on the first few chapters of Vol.2.

Can’t say that I’m blown away yet: I’m enjoying the idea of the Vernonry, a sneaky way to introduce the French-novel plot device of apartment-building neighbours into a country where middle-class people don’t live in apartments, but I’m rather disappointed by the lack of psychological depth in the characters. They all seem for the moment to be robots who just keep doing the same thing each time we see them. And I could be wrong, but it’s looking very like a straightforward three-suitor plot (the rich one, the amoral one, and the humble one).

>3 thorold: I'll be starting in August.

One thing we've noticed in the Carlingford books: Oliphant tends to focus on the middle-classes--you won't find many Lords or very poor. And she gives you subtle descriptions to differentiate the middle classes: what they wear, how they talk, where they live (even on which street), what type of furnishings in their home, etc. These details are important to Oliphant's characterizations (at least in Carlingford).

>3 thorold: I was wrong about the plot: after a long stretch in Vol.2 where it all seems very dull and predictable, Vol.3 manages to stir things up quite a bit. And there’s an interesting thread of criticism of the “Angel of the hearth” orthodoxy of the times.

>4 kac522: Yes, I think there’s a lot of that kind of characterisation through subtle social and linguistic clues in Hester too. And they are often just dropped in without the narrator telling us what to conclude from them.

...and my review: I used spoiler tags since most people won't have read very far yet and might prefer to go in blind, but I'm not actually revealing any important plot twists.

Hester : a story of contemporary life (1883) by Margaret Oliphant (UK, 1828-1897)

  

(I'm using the Virago cover, but actually read this as a Gutenberg ebook)

After her father's death Abroad, teenage Hester and her widowed mother are offered a home in the generic English town of Redborough by their rich cousin Miss Catherine Vernon. There's a kind of Mansfield Park setup, where Hester is presented with a range of potential suitors from among the assembled cousins, with a range of different obstacles to overcome.

But this turns out not really to be what the book is about at all: Hester is determined to challenge the prevailing "Angel of the hearth" idea of what the role of middle-class Woman should be in life. Hester is not content to provide sympathy, moral guidance and domestic efficiency while some man goes out and does things for her; she wants to work and have a real part in informed decision-making. Catherine is the key example that proves it can be done: when the family banking firm was teetering on the edge of collapse (the fault of Hester's father, although Hester doesn't know this) Catherine stepped in to rescue it and ran it successfully for twenty years. Mrs Oliphant, a widow herself, had been supporting her family by her writing for 25 years when this was published, so she knew what she was talking about.

Of course Catherine and Hester dislike each other at sight — they are far too alike — and of course Catherine manages to hold conservative opinions completely inconsistent with her own history, so sparks fly between them.

That part of the plot is all quite fun, but it doesn't really get going until Volume 3, and there are a lot of balls and tea-parties to get through before then, mostly rather repetitive. For a long stretch of Volume 2 it feels as though the plot isn't advancing at all, whilst Oliphant tries to dig out subtle social distinctions through close examination of furniture, dress, hair and speech patterns. There are some jokes — the comic chorus of poor relatives, the notion that "Abroad" is a specific place (like Basingstoke but more exotic), the single-minded husband-hunting of Emma, etc. — but on the whole it's rather heavy going. Oliphant is clearly best at getting inside the heads of her older characters, so Hester and her male cousins often seem surprisingly opaque to the reader, whilst Catherine and old Captain Morgan (not-a-pirate) are very human and believable.

For context, John Ruskin (who counts as a pretty advanced thinker) on the roles of men and women:

We are foolish, and without excuse foolish, in speaking of the “superiority” of one sex to the other, as if they could be compared in similar things. Each has what the other has not: each completes the other, and is completed by the other: they are in nothing alike, and the happiness and perfection of both depends on each asking and receiving from the other what the other only can give.

Now their separate characters are briefly these. The man’s power is active, progressive, defensive. He is eminently the doer, the creator, the discoverer, the defender. His intellect is for speculation and invention; his energy for adventure, for war, and for conquest, wherever war is just, wherever conquest necessary. But the woman’s power is for rule, not for battle,—and her intellect is not for invention or creation, but for sweet ordering, arrangement, and decision. She sees the qualities of things, their claims, and their places. Her great function is Praise; she enters into no contest, but infallibly adjudges the crown of contest. By her office, and place, she is protected from all danger and temptation. The man, in his rough work in open world, must encounter all peril and trial;—to him, therefore, must be the failure, the offence, the inevitable error: often he must be wounded, or subdued; often misled; and always hardened. But he guards the woman from all this; within his house, as ruled by her, unless she herself has sought it, need enter no danger, no temptation, no cause of error or offence. This is the true nature of home—it is the place of Peace; the shelter, not only from all injury, but from all terror, doubt, and division. In so far as it is not this, it is not home; so far as the anxieties of the outer life penetrate into it, and the inconsistently-minded, unknown, unloved, or hostile society of the outer world is allowed by either husband or wife to cross the threshold, it ceases to be home; it is then only a part of that outer world which you have roofed over, and lighted fire in. But so far as it is a sacred place, a vestal temple, a temple of the hearth watched over by Household Gods, before whose faces none may come but those whom they can receive with love,—so far as it is this, and roof and fire are types only of a nobler shade and light,—shade as of the rock in a weary land, and light as of the Pharos in the stormy sea;—so far it vindicates the name, and fulfils the praise, of Home.

And wherever a true wife comes, this home is always round her. The stars only may be over her head; the glowworm in the night-cold grass may be the only fire at her foot; but home is yet wherever she is; and for a noble woman it stretches far round her, better than ceiled with cedar, or painted with vermilion, shedding its quiet light far, for those who else were homeless.

This, then, I believe to be,—will you not admit it to be,—the woman’s true place and power? But do not you see that, to fulfil this, she must—as far as one can use such terms of a human creature—be incapable of error? So far as she rules, all must be right, or nothing is. She must be enduringly, incorruptibly good; instinctively, infallibly wise—wise, not for self-development, but for self-renunciation: wise, not that she may set herself above her husband, but that she may never fail from his side: wise, not with the narrowness of insolent and loveless pride, but with the passionate gentleness of an infinitely variable, because infinitely applicable, modesty of service—the true changefulness of woman.
Sesame and Lilies, lecture II (1865)

I've started Hester and am up to Chapter XIV--my OUP text (with 45 chapters) is from the one-volume 1884 edition, so I don't know where the original 3 volumes divide. Oliphant deep-dives into each character's psyche, although so far there isn't anyone especially likeable, except perhaps Captain and Mrs Morgan. Like Oliphant's Carlingford books, the neighbors are gossipy, spying from their windows, and come up with their own general "truth" about life in Redborough. Amazingly, it does keep me turning pages.

Project Gutenberg to the rescue:

Volume 1: 16 chapters: https://www.gutenberg.org/files/48197/48197-h/48197-h.htm
Volume 2: 14 chapters: https://www.gutenberg.org/files/48198/48198-h/48198-h.htm
Volume 3: 15 chapters: https://www.gutenberg.org/files/48199/48199-h/48199-h.htm

So sounds like you are nearing the end of part/volume 1. :)

>9 AnnieMod: Thank you! My initial guess was 15 chapters each, so not far off.

I finished last week, but have been struggling to come up with how I feel about the novel. I didn't hate it, but I had a hard time liking it, mostly I think because I couldn't warm up to any of the characters. I won't go into the story, as >6 thorold: has done an excellent job of that here. So I just have some random thoughts, which I will put in spoilers, in case there is anyone else reading this tale:


-I did enjoy they way Oliphant seems to get inside the heads of characters, and as >6 thorold: points out, mostly the older characters, especially Catherine. The younger ones are less complex and are more predictable, including Hester herself. In the end I still only liked Mr & Mrs Morgan, and maybe felt a bit sorry for Harry.
-At the same time, I found some of this rambling through the character's thoughts repetitive and just wearying. The book felt at least 100 pages too long because of it.
-I couldn't help comparing this to Oliphant's Carlingford books I've read: they are lighter and funnier, whereas Hester felt serious and almost bitter. Although some of her other books have a streak of the "sensation" novel in them (damsels in distress, kidnapping, etc.), in Hester she toys with that plot, but eventually doesn't take that road. Also, the ending here is much like her other books: there is an open-ended feeling: like life, everything is not neatly resolved. What will happen to the bank? Will Hester marry Harry or Roland or someone else or follow in the steps of Catherine?
-What struck me is how the 3 main characters--Catherine, Edward and Hester--had "tragic" flaws. In Catherine's case, she completely misunderstands people, and in particular is totally blind about Edward. Edward's flaw is his risk-taking. And Hester's "flaw" is her parentage--a father who was a failure and a weak mother--seem to hang over her throughout the book. She is doomed because others cannot see past her parents' failures, and although she doesn't know why, she can feel this judgment.

Oliphant wrote hundreds of novels, short stories and articles that sold well, but were only mildly acclaimed. She acknowledged that although she worked hard at her craft, she would never be considered on the same level as George Eliot. I wonder whether Oliphant in this novel is trying to justify her own path. The novel takes on the seemingly great, clever and successful (like Catherine and Edward) with their tragic flaws and falls, and shows that they are eventually out-lived by the likes of the less talented but hard-working Harry, Roland and (maybe?) Hester, who will carry-on.

Guessing most people have finished reading Hester by now. It's been good to follow along with others' thoughts and to compare them with my own. This is my review from 2016, when I read a couple of other 19th C novels about money:



Hester by Margaret Oliphant
first published in three volumes in 1883, published slightly revised in 1884, the text used here

Hester has not one, but two strong-minded and independent women. Catherine Vernon, sixty-five years old when we first meet her, was the head of a small bank in the Home Counties, a role she had come to years earlier when she saved it from the mismanagement of her cousin, John Vernon. Her position meant she was a person of influence, worthy of respect, in her rural community of Redborough. Her wealth gave her a very comfortable life, but she also made sure to provide for a varied assortment of relatives, whom she housed down the road in a group of apartments know as the Vernonry. Catherine was unmarried, but her cousin Edward lived with her, a young man whom everyone viewed as her successor.

Catherine's pleasant life seemed to be on track to run its natural course, when into her world came fourteen year old Hester. Hester was the daughter of that cousin John Vernon from long ago; the John Vernon whom Catherine had been going to marry when he left her for Hester's mother, now widowed.

Hester and her mother came back from France and moved into the Vernonry with the other poor relations. While these relations constantly tried to curry favour with Catherine and get her attention, while infighting amongst themselves, Hester was too proud to play that game. She knew nothing of the story of her father, the bank, and Catherine Vernon. Over the next few years, Hester on her side grew toward maturity. Catherine, in her grand house, turned over more and more of the bank's management to young Edward.

It is in Hester's growing awareness of the world that Margaret Oliphant examines some of the big questions of the Victorian period. The Vernon Bank operated in the traditional ways of receiving deposits and lending money based on collateral. As a rural bank, it had been largely immune to the speculation in shares gripping the large financial centres. However, fever spreads and by 1860 or so, the period of the novel, there were those in Redborough who had been caught up in the contagion. Published in 1883, one of the questions raised by the book was the nature of shares. Was it a form of gambling, and so something immoral, or was it an investment in industry for the good of all? Coincidentally, this same preoccupation with speculation in that era turned up in two other books I've read recently: Trollope's The Way We Live Now from 1875, and Zola's L'Argent which would be published in 1891.

Another concern Oliphant raises is the role of educated unmarried women in society. Hester was an intelligent young woman of good family, but her reduced circumstances made her prospects for a good marriage dim. Should she accept a "good" proposal, even if it meant little to her? Less conventionally, if she should decide not to marry, what avenues were open to her? Catherine Vernon had made a career for herself, but Hester did not have the financial resources to follow in her footsteps.

There is a tension between Catherine and Hester throughout the novel, one that involves not only the normal intergenerational divide, but almost a competition, for Hester is the young Catherine without her prospects. Catherine had the benefit of worldly success, but the fatal flaw of self deception around the reasons for that success. Hester was far more introspective, and puzzled over how to succeed.

Hester has an ambivalent ending, albeit one which satisfies the reader, for to suddenly wrap up the ambiguities of the characters and plot would ring false. After all, this is a novel where in one of the most significant conversations Hester had, she was told

...this world is a very strange place. Right and wrong, are like black and white; they are distinct and easy. The things that baffle us are those that perhaps are not quite right, but certainly not wrong.

>12 SassyLassy: Great observations, especially about speculation. I have not yet gotten to The Way We Live Now, as I'm reading Trollope's stand alone books in publication order, and I have a ways to get there.
Both Gaskell's North and South (1855) and Dickens' Little Dorrit (1857) have speculation sub-plots.

That last quote reminds me of many of Trollope's novels: there's often ethical decisions that must be made about things that are not quite right, but not quite wrong. I find that Oliphant and Trollope have some of the same themes, but approach (and resolve) them in different ways.

>12 SassyLassy: Yes, on hindsight, that idea that there aren’t always straightforward answers to moral (…and plot…) questions might be one of the most striking things about Hester compared to the certainties in the final section of a typical Victorian novel. Interesting point.

Other things that strike me a few weeks on:
- Hester usually behaves like an educated young woman, but she can’t have had more than a brief, foreign schooling. They aren’t rich enough for governesses, and her mother doesn’t show any sign of being competent to teach her.
- What about Catherine’s conviction that it was only acceptable for her to have a career because (a) it was forced upon her to save the family’s honour and (b) she accepted a life of celibacy in exchange? Why does Hester never quite get the chance to challenge that set of assumptions directly? Is Oliphant afraid that Hester would win the argument and create a scandal for the author?

>13 kac522: I admire the way the Victorians took on the "big questions" in their novels, even novels that were serialized and read by families. That's something that seems to be missing in so much of contemporary fiction.

I have hardly read any Trollope, but feel it is something I will correct in the months to come. This whole Victorian year has been such a good way to immerse myself once more in the era.

>14 thorold: Have been away without communication devices, but thinking about your comments:

- I hadn't considered how Hester acquired her education, or how far it went, but I think she would certainly have had one in manners (beyond etiquette), and that can go a long way toward having people think you are educated.

- with regard to Catherine, I have no idea where I got this notion, but I felt she had definitely had a 'connection' in her past, although she was probably technically celibate. I thought it was a matter of "the lady doth protest too much" with regard to her justifying a career. This was something she wanted.

- Perhaps Hester doesn't challenge Catherine's assumptions head on because they are the same ones she would have had to make in her position.
I do like the idea though that Oliphant is ...afraid that Hester would win the argument and create a scandal for the author

>15 SassyLassy: Wasn't there the idea that Catherine had been in love with Hester's father a long time ago, but he rejected her?

>16 thorold: Yes, and it's part of Catherine's resentment against Hester's mother.