Heaven 2024: November Book Club: The Blue Castle by L.M. Montgomery
This month's book is The Blue Castle, first published in 1926 by Canadian writer Lucy Maud Montgomery, who is best known as the author of Anne of Green Gables. The Blue Castle, beloved by many Montgomery fans, differs from many of Montgomery's best known works in a few ways: it is a stand-alone novel, rather than part of a series like the Anne, Emily, or Pat books, and we meet the heroine, Valancy Stirling, when she is already a woman in her late 20s, rather than a child (Montgomery's best-known works begin with the main characters as girls of 11 or 12, and follow those characters through adolescence into adulthood).
In many ways The Blue Castle has a lot of the tropes of the classic romance novel, but it's interesting to see the way in which Montgomery plays with those tropes, and how her exploration of romance and womanhood is both similar to, and different from, her other works, and other popular women's fiction of her era.
Let me know who's in for this reading! I'll also be curious to know if it's a reread for anyone, and if you have read anything else by Montgomery. I will post discussion questions around the 20th of the month, as usual, so please refrain from spoilers in this thread until then.
In many ways The Blue Castle has a lot of the tropes of the classic romance novel, but it's interesting to see the way in which Montgomery plays with those tropes, and how her exploration of romance and womanhood is both similar to, and different from, her other works, and other popular women's fiction of her era.
Let me know who's in for this reading! I'll also be curious to know if it's a reread for anyone, and if you have read anything else by Montgomery. I will post discussion questions around the 20th of the month, as usual, so please refrain from spoilers in this thread until then.
Comments
I re-read my childhood favourites from LM Montgomery every so often. I read The Blue Castle most recently during the pandemic. This fall, I was going to read A Tangled Web, but am happy to return to the blue castle! My copy is McClelland and Stewart, 1974.
This book contains one of my absolutely favourite character sketch lines, concerning a clergyman, which I have had cause to reflect on during discussions on the Ship.
I hope other shipmates will be interested! I realize that it may be less familiar to many shipmates. But this book has been a dear old friend to me. As ruthless as I am with necessary book culling, this has survived decades and cross-country travels with me.
I haven't read for a long time; time to get back into it.
I enjoyed two or three "Anne of Green Gables" in my younger years, so looking forward to this. Prince Edward Island seemed another world away! Still wouldn't mind getting there one day.
Thank you, Trudy.
I did read The Blue Castle many years ago and am keen to go back and reread.
I've read Anne of Green Gables, Anne of Avonlea and Anne of the Island. I own a copy of the first one and have reread it several times over the years. I don't feel desperately inclined to reread the others - not because I didn't enjoy them but because, you know, so many books, so little time...
I hadn't heard of The Blue Castle until it was suggested here and am looking forward to reading it.
So I'd read the first 6 chapters and found nothing to encourage me to read on - with nothing happening except the key player hates her relations and they despise of her. Not even a nice turn of phrase - unlike in the same author's Anne of Green Gable, which invited me to read on from the first page.
Before I threw the book away as a complete waste of reading, I looked up its summary on Wikipedia. At least it did imply that there is a story somewhere in the book, so I will persist for a few more chapters before I throw it away.
My Nanna introduced me to the 1980s Anne Shirley miniseries and then gave me three of the the books when I was 13. I have read that entire series and own most of the books. A family friend gave me the Emily series when I was 15 and in hospital with appendicitis and I have since bought the two Chronicles of Avonlea and read other short stories online. The books aren't perfect, but they are the type I return to when the real world is stressful or after reading a really heavy going novel. It's sad the author had such a difficult life when her books have given such joy to so many generations.
I'm trying to break up with Amazon, and I'd forgotten about Project Gutengerg, so thanks for the reminder!
I read all the Anne books as a kid and loved them, but none of Montgomery's others. So I'm in.
I found it a very easy read and didn't focus too much on descriptions, it was all about the interactions with people for me.
As a long-time off-and-on romance reader, I'm finding these aspects of the book fascinating.
Will be interested to see the questions, when posted.
In the meantime, does anyone know how "Valancy" is pronounced? My guess was vuh-LANCE-ee.
Just started the book
1. Did you like Valancy as a character? Did her transformation throughout the story feel believable?
2. How did you feel about the pacing of the book? This is partly in response to Tukai's post above, but I did notice on this re-read that although we are told on the first page that a major change is coming in Valancy's life, we are a third of the way into the book before that change becomes evident. Is the first third of the book, which establishes Valancy's character, her family, her community, too slow for you? Or did you find it a necessary background to the rest of the story?
3. For those familiar with romance as a genre, do you think this story is primarily a romance? What romance tropes does it employ? Is the Valancy/Barney romance the main focus of the story, or is Valancy's own self-discovery and change the most important thing?
4. Was there a minor character (ie anyone apart from Valancy or Barney) that you particularly enjoyed? If so, who and why?
5. L.M. Montgomery's love of nature is very much on display in this book, both in the direct narration and in the passages quoted from "John Foster's" books. Did you enjoy this aspect of the story? (Note that this is rare among Montgomery's books in not being set on Prince Edward Island, but in Ontario where the author spent her later years, but she seems to love the Muskoka landscape just as much as she loves PEI).
6. Among the many references to the Anglican church, the Presbyterians, and the Free Methodists (and the three different clergy of those churches), what role do you think religion plays in this story?
7. Did you find the ending satisfying? Why or why not?
8. If you have read other L.M. Montgomery books, how does this one compare, for you? If you haven't, do you now want to read any others?
As always, feel free to discuss any of these questions, all these questions, or none at all if there's something entirely different you want to talk about! I loved rereading this as it's been many years since my last reading and I'm eager to hear what others think.
(No, I know he just didn’t want to let Valancy know who he was, but he rises in my estimation if I can think he was ashamed of how he wrote.)
I think what turns the story into a romance is Valancy’s idiotic reaction at the end when she realises she is not dying. Up to then it is mainly about her growth and self-discovery, but one of the tropes of romance is that the main characters should have a misunderstanding. Usually it happens near the beginning, so that the story can be about how they eventually sort themselves out. Here it happens near the end, and is, I think, rather unbelievable that two people who have grown as close as Valancy and Barney would not be able to wait and talk their realisations through. It is as if all her growth is for nothing, and she becomes the typical dependant romantic heroine.
Overall it's a fairytale in the ugly duckling/Cinderella/little princess genre which is always appealing. Who hasn't felt slighted or condescended to and imagined a dazzling - but of course gracious - revenge?
I liked Valancy very much. The trope of having the gumption to live one’s own life under the shadow of death has been used many times. I don’t know if it would have felt fresh in 1926.
2. How did you feel about the pacing of the book? This is partly in response to Tukai's post above, but I did notice on this re-read that although we are told on the first page that a major change is coming in Valancy's life, we are a third of the way into the book before that change becomes evident. Is the first third of the book, which establishes Valancy's character, her family, her community, too slow for you? Or did you find it a necessary background to the rest of the story?
The book could have been shorter. The first third might have established what it needed to it in half as many pages. That said, when I read it I found the pacing to be reminiscent of books of that time period.
3. For those familiar with romance as a genre, do you think this story is primarily a romance? What romance tropes does it employ? Is the Valancy/Barney romance the main focus of the story, or is Valancy's own self-discovery and change the most important thing?
I am not sure it is primary a romance. It does have some damsel in distress elements ex. Being saved at the train tracks, estranged from her family I think Valancy’s self-discovery and transformation is the main focus.
4. Was there a minor character (ie anyone apart from Valancy or Barney) that you particularly enjoyed? If so, who and why?
Cissy. I felt great compassion for her.
5. L.M. Montgomery's love of nature is very much on display in this book, both in the direct narration and in the passages quoted from "John Foster's" books. Did you enjoy this aspect of the story? (Note that this is rare among Montgomery's books in not being set on Prince Edward Island, but in Ontario where the author spent her later years, but she seems to love the Muskoka landscape just as much as she loves PEI).
The John Foster passages were quite enjoyable. I did find Barnet being Foster was a bit contrived.
6. Among the many references to the Anglican church, the Presbyterians, and the Free Methodists (and the three different clergy of those churches), what role do you think religion plays in this story?
7. Did you find the ending satisfying? Why or why not?
And they all lived happily ever after. A bit of a fairytale wrap up.
8. If you have read other L.M. Montgomery books, how does this one compare, for you? If you haven't, do you now want to read any others? Only LMM book I have ever read. My sister is an Anne freak.
I thought she was a very believable character, and the transformation was well done. She seemed the sort of person I would like to meet, though I'm not sure of her taste in books.
2. How did you feel about the pacing of the book? This is partly in response to Tukai's post above, but I did notice on this re-read that although we are told on the first page that a major change is coming in Valancy's life, we are a third of the way into the book before that change becomes evident. Is the first third of the book, which establishes Valancy's character, her family, her community, too slow for you? Or did you find it a necessary background to the rest of the story?
It was slow to get going and the amount of relatives Valancy made it rather confusing. However I think the slow build up was needed to show the contrast when she decided to start living the way she wanted to do.
3. For those familiar with romance as a genre, do you think this story is primarily a romance? What romance tropes does it employ? Is the Valancy/Barney romance the main focus of the story, or is Valancy's own self-discovery and change the most important thing?
This is very much a fairy tale romance. The heroine gets the life she dreams of and the man of her dreams too. I thought the flip when she nearly was killed by the train was needed.
4. Was there a minor character (ie anyone apart from Valancy or Barney) that you particularly enjoyed? If so, who and why?
I liked Roaring Abel and his take on predestination. Cissy with her honour over not marrying the student who no longer loved her and her moving description of her son's death seemed a cut above the usual doomed to die sad character. I also had the soft spot for the cousin (Georgina?) who wanted to help Valancy but was scared to do it openly.
5. L.M. Montgomery's love of nature is very much on display in this book, both in the direct narration and in the passages quoted from "John Foster's" books. Did you enjoy this aspect of the story? (Note that this is rare among Montgomery's books in not being set on Prince Edward Island, but in Ontario where the author spent her later years, but she seems to love the Muskoka landscape just as much as she loves PEI).
The descriptions were good, though the John Foster passages weren't great. I kept on thinking how cold a winter in a wooden building on a lake in Canada would be.
6. Among the many references to the Anglican church, the Presbyterians, and the Free Methodists (and the three different clergy of those churches), what role do you think religion plays in this story?
I've mentioned Abel and predestination, but the Free Methodist minister was an obvious 'good' clergyman and the Anglican was not.
7. Did you find the ending satisfying? Why or why not?
I liked all the family suddenly realising that they had a very wealthy man in their midst and that he had married their overlooked and scandalous relative.
8. If you have read other L.M. Montgomery books, how does this one compare, for you? If you haven't, do you now want to read any others?
I'm a big fan of the Ann books and this held up well. I've read the Emily books, but so long ago that I can't remember anything about them other than that I liked them.
I was thinking this could translate quite well into a modern romance with a few tweaks. I'd certainly enjoy watching the film.
Two of the things that stood out most to me on this re-read are, I think, related: the novel's view of nature and of religion.
For those who haven't read more of Montgomery, the purple prose rhapsodizing about nature is very typical of her writing, to a degree that I think is extreme even for the time period. All of her heroines are deeply in touch with nature, happiest when they are outdoors, at one with the trees and the flowers. Characters and narrator alike are given to lengthy digressions on the beauty of the landscape (and, as @Firenze and @Sarasa have both pointed out, no mention of any of the negative aspects of living close to the natural world - no flies, no mosquitos, no shivering in the bitter cold). I'm quite sure there's no irony in Montgomery's rendering of John Foster's over-the-top nature writing; she genuinely loved this kind of thing.
I actually wrote an essay a little while ago about how L.M. Montgomery's (and her characters') attitudes towards nature impacted my own experience of the natural world as I was growing up -- basically, feeling like I was somehow inferior because I didn't have this intense relationship with nature that Anne, Emily, Valancy and other Montgomery heroines have.
It's really interesting to me to contrast the way she writes about nature and about religion. There's always religion in her book -- church services, churchgoers, good and bad clergy people -- as she lived in, and was writing about, a deeply religious time and place. But the descriptions of religious services and beliefs always feel like they are focused on the human element -- the way church culture brings out the good and bad in people -- never on God. There's never any sense, when she writes about religion, of the transcendence and wonder that permeates her nature writing.
I think if she'd lived in a place and time that allowed less conventional choices, Montgomery wouldn't have been particularly Christian. Maybe she would even have been a neo-pagan, but certainly someone who finds her spirituality in nature rather than in a church building. As it was, by the time she wrote The Blue Castle she was married to a Presbyterian minister and expected to fill the conventional minister's wife role (and apparently didn't like it much). It's telling to me that of the three churches in this story, Valancy finds a home in the one that is the smallest and simplest -- but I think if Montgomery hadn't been a minister's wife and felt the need to pay lip service, at least, to Christianity, then Valancy probably wouldn't have gone to church at all.
Yes, I liked her and she was in keeping with the nature of the story. Her transformation was believable in the context, I thought.
2. How did you feel about the pacing of the book? This is partly in response to Tukai's post above, but I did notice on this re-read that although we are told on the first page that a major change is coming in Valancy's life, we are a third of the way into the book before that change becomes evident. Is the first third of the book, which establishes Valancy's character, her family, her community, too slow for you? Or did you find it a necessary background to the rest of the story?
I confess to skimming a bit, just to see how it all worked out, and then returned to read it in more detail. I knew what the change was that was coming as the blurb on the back of my copy gave it away :rolleyes: . I thought the lengths of descriptions of her family and the other characters were fine - they helped us to see just how odious they all were!
3. For those familiar with romance as a genre, do you think this story is primarily a romance? What romance tropes does it employ? Is the Valancy/Barney romance the main focus of the story, or is Valancy's own self-discovery and change the most important thing?
Tropes... ugly duckling to lovely and beloved swan... change of character and direction after a life-changing event... I thought the romance and the self-discovery and change were interwoven, but it was the self-discovery that made me want to cheer her on.
4. Was there a minor character (ie anyone apart from Valancy or Barney) that you particularly enjoyed? If so, who and why?
Cissy. I really felt for her and wanted to cry at her description of her baby son. We have a year old baby in the family at present which heightened it even more. Also the lovely, mild, inclusive minister who married Barney and Valancy.
5. L.M. Montgomery's love of nature is very much on display in this book, both in the direct narration and in the passages quoted from "John Foster's" books. Did you enjoy this aspect of the story? (Note that this is rare among Montgomery's books in not being set on Prince Edward Island, but in Ontario where the author spent her later years, but she seems to love the Muskoka landscape just as much as she loves PEI).
Yes, I enjoyed the descriptions although I skimmed them a bit on first reading. The voice of "John Foster" was a bit verbose and overdone, I thought.
6. Among the many references to the Anglican church, the Presbyterians, and the Free Methodists (and the three different clergy of those churches), what role do you think religion plays in this story?
Not really a huge part - the main thing was that it was part of Valancy's rebellion.
7. Did you find the ending satisfying? Why or why not?
Like others have said, I saw it coming - apart from the fact that Barney was John Foster. I got a bit impatient with Valancy's agonisings over the fact that she wasn't going to die after all and how dreadful that was for Barney. His feelings for her were obvious by then. It was the cherry on the cake that he came from such a rich family.
8. If you have read other L.M. Montgomery books, how does this one compare, for you? If you haven't, do you now want to read any others?
I've read - and reread Anne of Green Gables and I think one of the sequels which was not, in my opinion, nearly as good. I hadn't heard of this book until now and if I ever see it in a second hand bookshop I'll be buying it. I didn't like it quite enough to want to buy it new.
I did write down a few quotes from it in my journal that I particularly liked:
"'Isn't it better to have your heart broken than to have it wither up?' queried Valancy. 'Before it would be broken it must have felt something splendid. That would be worth the pain.'"
"It was three o'clock in the morning - the wisest and most accursed hour of the clock. But sometimes it sets us free." (A nice thought for an insomniac like me.)
It was a lovely, easy, heartwarming read. Thank you!
There actually is a plot in TBC, while the Anne books have a bildungsroman structure without having a strong plot pushing throughout each book. As I've read uncountable genre romance novels, it seemed like an incredibly obvious plot, and I figured out everything that was going to happen well before it did. I remain convinced that LMM is not good at plotting; IMO the book did not need five chapters to establish what Valancy's life was like before change was afoot. That could have been quickly sketched; think of how JK Rowling tells us all we need to know about Harry Potter's life before owls start showing up just by making his room the closet under the stairs. But once TBC got going, I enjoyed it, obvious as it was; for me there's a lot of enjoyment in knowing what's going to happen but not how the author is going to pull it off. I saw a mile off that Barney would turn out to be rich and famous, and how all that happened was delightfully bonkers.
Which leads me to 3. "Is the Valancy/Barney romance the main focus of the story, or is Valancy's own self-discovery and change the most important thing?" A lot of genre romances combine these self-discovery and a love story, especially the ones not written in dual points of view, with the love story being an integral part of the self-discovery, and I think that's what LMM does. The relationship with Barney is not just bolted on; that Valancy dreams of marriage and children is clear, and her dreams can't be fulfilled without the romance.
Yes. I grew up as relatively, not entirely, shy and retiring and pleasing people and "broke out" in my 30s, and am still working through it to some extent (I'm a slow learner). My life did not take the path she took re love, but I enjoyed being taken along.
How did you feel about the pacing of the book?...
I enjoyed it. I understand people thinking some parts were excessive or could be trimmed, but the vivid descriptions, the stories and interactions, etc. greatly engaged and interested me. I could have read more.
For those familiar with romance as a genre, do you think this story is primarily a romance? What romance tropes does it employ? Is the Valancy/Barney romance the main focus of the story, or is Valancy's own self-discovery and change the most important thing?
I have a heart of stone and am not attracted to the romance genre generally. For me the self-discovery and change was the main plot, with the romance being important but as a means to furthering and explaining the self-discovery.
Was there a minor character (ie anyone apart from Valancy or Barney) that you particularly enjoyed? If so, who and why?
Uncle Benjamin. I'm a fan of bad jokes.
Roaring Abel. Seemed down-to-earth and a guy doing his best to live a good life.
L.M. Montgomery's love of nature is very much on display in this book, both in the direct narration and in the passages quoted from "John Foster's" books. Did you enjoy this aspect of the story?...
Yes, very much so. I'd be happy with even more Foster. I adore nature, find beauty, strength and wonder in it, it speaks of God in ways important to me, and could happily live on an island on a lake if I had any practical survival skills (I don't).
Among the many references to the Anglican church, the Presbyterians, and the Free Methodists (and the three different clergy of those churches), what role do you think religion plays in this story?
The Anglican minister seemed to be reflected as a stern character, as opposed to the Free Methodist one; I took that as part of Valancy's escape from and contrast with her previous life.
Did you find the ending satisfying? Why or why not?
Referencing my heart of stone above I do go more for tragedy and despair than happy endings, but I was filled with joy at the resolution and ending. Maybe there's hope for me yet! Unlike others I can never guess endings... I just go along for the ride.
If you have read other L.M. Montgomery books, how does this one compare, for you? If you haven't, do you now want to read any others?
I read some Anne books when younger; I greatly enjoyed those as they were a world, and time, away from me in 1980s Australia. I think I liked this better; I was just completely absorbed (and read it in one sitting, I wanted to keep going...)
---
Thank you Trudy. As I mentioned above I have not read a novel for a very long time; this was a great one to begin back on the reading path. And thank you all who have shared their views so far.
2. How did you feel about the pacing of the book? This is partly in response to Tukai's post above, but I did notice on this re-read that although we are told on the first page that a major change is coming in Valancy's life, we are a third of the way into the book before that change becomes evident. Is the first third of the book, which establishes Valancy's character, her family, her community, too slow for you? Or did you find it a necessary background to the rest of the story? I do think it was necessary background to the story. It might have been more dramatic had the transformation begun earlier, but perhaps less believable, particularly for someone who was as disgruntled as Valancy was, but who needed a catalyst to get her moving!
3. For those familiar with romance as a genre, do you think this story is primarily a romance? What romance tropes does it employ? Is the Valancy/Barney romance the main focus of the story, or is Valancy's own self-discovery and change the most important thing? To me it didn’t feel as much a romance, as a coming of age story. Even though Valancy was not particularly young, she was living a period of extended adolescence, in the sense that she was suppressing her own ideas and behaviours to suit others in her family. Once she made the decision to stop pandering, that’s when her personal growth occurred. Would it have happened without the health misdiagnosis, who knows??
4. Was there a minor character (ie anyone apart from Valancy or Barney) that you particularly enjoyed? If so, who and why? Even though she only appears as a reported character, I think the life and death of Cissy are important in setting up the situation for Valancy to become useful person, developing her self-confidence and ultimately leading to her thriving and ready to participate in marriage as an equal.
5. L.M. Montgomery's love of nature is very much on display in this book, both in the direct narration and in the passages quoted from "John Foster's" books. Did you enjoy this aspect of the story? (Note that this is rare among Montgomery's books in not being set on Prince Edward Island, but in Ontario where the author spent her later years, but she seems to love the Muskoka landscape just as much as she loves PEI). I enjoyed the quoted passages, but for me the focus was on Valancy as a person and her character development, the rest of it was just background and a means of the two most important characters realising they were “kindred spirits”.
6. Among the many references to the Anglican church, the Presbyterians, and the Free Methodists (and the three different clergy of those churches), what role do you think religion plays in this story? I think religion and the façade of uncharitable piousness plays a very major role in the story. The whole community exhibited may characteristics of the Pharisees and yet seemed completely unaware of this. Each considering their own denomination being the right way, dating the whole story because we live in a much secular period.
7. Did you find the ending satisfying? Why or why not? Well, who doesn’t like a happy ending? I did find it a bit too romantic though, for my pragmatic way of thinking. However, I do have to admit that I was quite pleased to know that Valancy would never again be in the position of ever having to kow-tow to her revolting family.
8. If you have read other L.M. Montgomery books, how does this one compare, for you? If you haven't, do you now want to read any others? As a teenager I read nearly all the Anne books, plus a couple of others when they had a resurgence in the 1980’s, even before the Megan Fellows TV series. My Aunt had nearly a full set and I loved reading them in the school holidays, I think that may have been what started my own Anne period.
I also liked Roaring Abel, a bit of a caricature but someone who typified the backwoods 'wild men' or reprobates of that society. I find traces of that eccentric bohemian type in the short stories of Alice Munro, although her work is much more realistic and LM Montgomery for me tends to romanticise everything from nature to romantic escapes.
1. Did you like Valancy as a character? Did her transformation throughout the story feel believable?
I liked Valancy, who somehow had not managed to be utterly cowed by her upbringing. I felt her transformation was believable. It began with very small rebellions which gave her satisfaction and courage to proceed with larger ones.
2. How did you feel about the pacing of the book? Is the first third of the book, which establishes Valancy's character, her family, her community, too slow for you? Or did you find it a necessary background to the rest of the story?
I didn’t find it slow, but I’m used to LM Montgomery’s pacing. In comparison with some of her other novels, this one moves at a good clip. I found the background details of her home life and family members helpful.
3. For those familiar with romance as a genre, do you think this story is primarily a romance? What romance tropes does it employ? Is the Valancy/Barney romance the main focus of the story, or is Valancy's own self-discovery and change the most important thing?
I think it’s mostly about Valancy’s self-discovery, with the romance supporting that goal. It reminded me of screwball comedies of the 1930’s and 40’s, with a woman and man being “married-but-not-really” as a device for examining new possibilities for relationships. (thinking of “It Happened One Night”, 1934).
Btw I think Barney is the most developed character among LM Montgomery’s romantic male leads, but that’s a low bar to clear. Gilbert and Teddy are little more than vague collections of desirable qualities, with no independent personalities.
4. Was there a minor character (ie anyone apart from Valancy or Barney) that you particularly enjoyed? If so, who and why?
Enjoyed may not be the right word, but I’d choose Mrs. Frederick. Her rigidity, her over-the-top anxiety, her emotionally abusive use of silence, seemed like a few difficult personalities rolled into one. Her astonishment at the idea that she might have to “forgive” Valancy was a beautiful moment.
5. L.M. Montgomery's love of nature is very much on display in this book, both in the direct narration and in the passages quoted from "John Foster's" books. Did you enjoy this aspect of the story?
Her rapturous descriptions of nature are something I endure more than enjoy.
6. Among the many references to the Anglican church, the Presbyterians, and the Free Methodists (and the three different clergy of those churches), what role do you think religion plays in this story?
Someone pointed out how “human” Montgomery’s perception of church is, and I agree. Church life here functions as just another aspect of society. I’d say spirituality is most often represented in descriptions of nature, with non-Christian references (banquets of Lucullus, snowy version of the beauty of old Greece and Rome). The only exception is the old Free Methodist minister, who gives a gentle blessing.
7. Did you find the ending satisfying? Why or why not?
Yes. I didn’t mind the cascade of revelations. Come-uppance was served to those who deserved it, but overall I thought it was redemptive toward Valancy’s family.
8. If you have read other L.M. Montgomery books, how does this one compare, for you? If you haven't, do you now want to read any others?
I like it more than the Anne novels. At one point I was damn near convinced I was Emily of New Moon, but I’ve mostly recovered. With all due respect to Lily Pad and other Shipmates, it’s a bit of a relief to not have PEI geographic hagiography, though I’ve seen why it had such an impact on Montgomery. The colours of the PEI landscape can be intense to the point of oversaturation.
Colours: I wonder if Montgomery had been accused of purple prose in her life, because this novel is determinedly, obsessively purple. Of ten or so prolonged descriptions of nature, eight mention purple or amethyst or violet. I suppose blue would have been a bit too ‘on the nose’. Valancy’s transformation in chapter 21 is described thus: “As far back as she could look, life had been dull – colourless – savourless. Now she had come to a little patch of violets, purple and fragrant – hers for the plucking.” Barney has violet eyes. The revelations begin with the arrival of a screaming purple car.
I was also struck by the theme of lonely children. Valancy, Barney, Cissy have no siblings. (I couldn’t keep track of siblings in the older generation, but it mostly seems to be cousins rather than brothers and sisters.) In an age of larger families, the overall lack of siblings seems notable. I guess it points to what is now called “found family”, as lonely people make a family of choice.
Yes, it's got so many of the classic romance tropes. The "fake marriage" -- not entirely fake, but marriage on false pretenses -- which, of course, ends in true love, is another classic one.
It has that beautifully predictable romance structure too - you know from the first time local mysterious bad boy Barney is mentioned that he and Valancy will end up together, though they have to jump through the requisite misunderstanding/miscommunication hoops. It's perhaps a bit unique in that the apparent ne'er-do-well has not one but TWO secret identities: as the wealthy son of Redford's Purple Pills AND as the famous writer John Foster. Double whammy!
The only part that disappointed me on this re-read (I can't remember if it bothered me in earlier readings) is that Valancy turns back into such a wet rag after the shock of finding out she's not going to die. I understand (within the conventions of the genre) that she feels she has to honourably confess the misunderstanding to Barney and release him from the marriage, but the fact that she can't think of anything to do but go back home and subject herself to her mother and Cousin Stickles again, is disappointing. After all, she defied the whole clan and moved in with Cissy and Roaring Abel BEFORE the engagement to Barney; he wasn't the motivation for that. The fact that she collapses like a pricked balloon at the end could be partly attributed to shock, but it does kind of undercut all the great character development she's been through. This book is stereotypical romance, but also more than "just" romance in that it is about Valancy's personal growth -- but in the romance story seems to overtake the personal growth one, and without Barney it seems she will have to go back to being poor pathetic Doss, until Barney sweeps back in to rescue her.
The young Emily from Emily of New Moon and Emily Climbs was one of the most inspiring characters I found as a child and then adolescent -- like @Leaf, I [over-] identified with the quirkiness and literary daydreaming, the passionate love of nature and grey cats, the odd boyfriends. I kept hoping Emily would not settle for less as an adult the way Anne had done. But the demands of genre are quite inflexible (certainly back then) and much of the success of a romance trope is that happy-ever-after ending. Cissy's life story would have been too sad and realistic for readers then or even now. What I miss in LM Montgomery is that tongue-in-cheek irony we get in Jane Austen who manages to imply that her heroines get what they deserve in marriage, some companionship certainly and a great deal of witty conversation and respect as well as romantic love, but some disappointment too and the occasional regret.