Create a New Forum Admin Login Member Login Contribute to Voyager Search VoyForums Help Desk VoyForums Exchange VoyForums Directory/Categories VoyForums Homepage VoyForums News FAQ - Frequently Asked Questions

[ Show ]

Support VoyForums

[ Shrink ]

VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

Monday, April 20, 0:16:39

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, [5], 6, 7, 8 ]

• I had to look that up. Inside for anyone else who might need it too.... Nota Bene >>>> -- MelvaT, 22:57:41 10/24/07 Wed
  • I went to Catholic school and the way the nuns used it I just figured it meant "PAY ATTENTION YOU IDIOTS!" Thanks for posting the definition. I would have never bothered looking it up thinking I already knew what it meant. (NT) -- Jane, 06:05:52 10/25/07 Thu
  
  

  ---

  
  
• But in the end, isn't the honor of your name all that's left? Your reputation? Unless Longstreet is talking of men whose public persona hides back stage double dealings or personal failings. This is a toughy and I hope someone can clear this one up for me. (NT) -- kgp, 05:32:52 10/25/07 Thu
  • I think that what Longstreet is saying is that honor can be viewed two ways. A man's name can be remembered with honour, but that doesn't mean he really lived honourably. A man can live honourably and die without honour to his name. Longstreets is saying that they aren't mutually exclusive. How important was the honour of his father's name when John already knew in his heart that his father had been an honourable man? (NT) -- Oleander, 07:11:01 10/25/07 Thu
    • Certainly Gerald was an honorable man. Is Longstreet asking how much does it mean to John to clear any aspersions cast upon him after his death? Nothing was ever proven but his supposed suicide was taken as admission of guilt along with some spiteful fingerpointing by Longstreet's brother and Adams. I haven't had the time to go back and truly figure out that whole business. But it's not only his father's honor for John, it's also Hal's right to proudly bear his father's title. Hal's honor is weighing on John as well. (NT) -- kgp, 07:47:58 10/25/07 Thu
      • I don't think Longstreet is talking about Gerard Grey. He's preparing to explain his own actions, by stating the premise of his dilemma. He had the choice of exposing his cousin as a Jacobite, which would have meant his cousin's death or imprisonment, but which would also have exonerated the Duke. Figuring that after all, Grey was dead, he ultimately chose his cousin's life over the Greys' family honor, but now that the cousin has also died, he feels a need to tell the truth. (NT) -- maddiej, 08:14:44 10/25/07 Thu
        • I guess this is how I saw it as well. Certainly protecting the honour of your family name is important. Is it more important than your actual honour? Your knowledge of yourself as an honourable man? I think that John does know his father was honourable (hence he chose to keep his title as a dukes son), but feels the weight, as pam said, of Hal's descision not to carry the title. Remember that personal honour is something John struggles with this whole book. Is it more important to protect his family name, or to do what his conscience tells him an honourable man would do, and save Percy? (NT) -- Oleander, 08:38:03 10/25/07 Thu
        • Thank you, it makes much more sense in that context. But why did he wait so long? Because being so near death any repercussions from fianlly telling the truth wouldn't matter any more? I'm going to have to go back for a third read I think. (NT) -- kgp, 09:05:43 10/25/07 Thu
          • Yes, Longstreet said that his cousin was near death and "almost beyond the reach...of law or man." (NT) -- Lady Jay, 09:15:46 10/25/07 Thu
        • This is how I'd interpreted it as well. Longstreet originally chose his cousin's life over the Grey family honor. Now with his cousin dead and with him being near to death himself, he was prepared to tell the truth and restore the Greys' honor as well as his personal sense of honor at the price of the Creemore name. (NT) -- Lady Jay, 09:37:35 10/25/07 Thu
          • Yes, I think that's right. Have any of you heard the podcast where DG boils down each of her books to one word? I don't remember whether it was another podcast or an interview, but I did hear her say somewhere that the one word this book comes down to is "honor." I think this passage and the conversation with Jamie in the stable are where she lays out all the different strands of honor that Lord John is dealing with. (NT) -- maddiej, 09:45:17 10/25/07 Thu
            • It was in a podcast of two or three weeks ago now, I think, and yes, Herself said that honor is at the center of the story and of the conflict. I agree that this scene with Longstreet and the one with Jamie later really get to the heart of LJG's dilemma regarding honor and personal integrity. You've given me a nice segue into tomorrow's quote, btw, maddiej. *G* (NT) -- Lady Jay, 10:35:51 10/25/07 Thu
  
  

  ---

  
  
• Hmm, your week just keeps getting more intriguing and challenging! This one's gonna take me more time to ponder... Grey's honor has multiple dimensions, existing in both public and private arenas, and in his own heart. It also cuts (the blade again!) across multiple identities that are both individual to the man and shared with the men of his family and regiment: son, brother, officer, and, eventually, husband and father. (NT) -- pamelalass, 07:02:51 10/25/07 Thu
  • While the story that got us there was complicated, I really appreciate Johns growth and development in this story. He knows himself as an honourable man throughout, but has to come to terms with that that means for him, as you said, in the public and private arenas of his life. I think that this personal growth and journey are a step in the direction of friendship with Jaime. As was said before, their "friendship" before was tinged by the fact that John, ostensibly, held a position of power over Jaime. Not because Jaime would succumb to threats on his own, but because he would do anything to protect his family. Freed from these constraints, I still think it important that John has to come to terms with himself and grow as a person, in order to be a real friend to Jaime. (NT) -- Oleander, 08:42:24 10/25/07 Thu
    • John does grow quite a bit compared to when he began at Ardsmuir and was looking for the gold as a way to redeem himself and get back to London. Jamie in V in the same scene we were talking about earlier wonders about men who were not born to the role they were required to fill and thinks of John and Charles Stuart in that context. John considers himself born to be a soldier like his father. I guess that's significantly different than administering a prison. Do you think John is a "natural"? or has he grown into his duties as Major Grey? (NT) -- kgp, 11:48:31 10/25/07 Thu
      • Good question. Jamie seems to be a natural, though he wasn't born to the actual lairdship, being the second son. John is naive when we first meet him, at 16, but certainly has innate courage and dignity. His "rescue the maiden" fiasco does seem like something a very young Jamie might have done, as someone (was it you??) pointed out earlier this week. Was military service a common thing for second sons ? It's certainly another formative experience these two share. But the kind of leadership John ends up taking on is much more formalized than Jamie's (prison governor, colonial governor, etc.). Leadership would be a great theme, related to the theme we're discussing (honor), yet touching on other strengths and challenges for these men. (NT) -- pamelalass, 13:27:51 10/25/07 Thu
        • Yes, in families with titles and/or property, the oldest son took both. The idea being that to split the estate among several children would dilute it, and thus deprive the family as a whole of influence. So a second son usually did buy a commission and enter the army (the navy, sometimes, but this was considered much lower class), and the third son--if there was one--often joined the church. If you look at the way English society operated during the 14th-late 19th centuries, you can see why this made sense. A family (and family name) would have influence in all three important spheres, and thus be in a better position to gain and exert political power. (NT) -- maddiej, 15:21:22 10/25/07 Thu
          • Right. Thanks maddie. I couldn't remember which order they went in for the "assignments" handed out to the second vs. the third son. Does this mean that the Greys are an unusually military family, since it's not just John with the regiment? I'm not familiar enough with the intersection of military leadership and the landed aristocracy -- presumably as either Pardloe or Melton, Hal (or their father) wouldn't have needed to serve in the military to gain status, recognition, or wealth? Perhaps this was his chosen sphere of influence, akin to the way titled men could take up politics by actively engaging in the Lords, etc. And Maj. John Grey's career does demonstrate that military service could lead to privileged political appointments (not Ardsmuir, perhaps, but his other governorship!). (NT) -- pamelalass, 15:34:49 10/25/07 Thu
            • I think John explains this to Percy while telling him about the family scandal. He says that his father raised a regiment and fought for George I, in 1715 or 1719, don't remember which. But that's why the king made him a Duke. And then Hal raises the regiment again, and goes to fight against the second round of Jacobites, in order to restore the family honor. (NT) -- maddiej, 17:02:23 10/25/07 Thu
  
  

  ---

  
  
• Rereading Lady Jay's comments above, I do think John is suffering depression during his recovery. His indifference to his surroundings, the shrugging off of social interaction, loss of appetite and basically walking in a constant fog are common symptoms of depression and deep grief. I think John has PTS compounded by the disallusionment of his discovery of Percy and Weber and Stephan's mercy killing of Weber. (NT) -- kgp, 18:03:37 10/25/07 Thu
  

  ---

  
  
• Oh wow! Y'all are amazing. Can I add another thank you to maddiej? (NT) -- MelvaT, 19:50:09 10/25/07 Thu
  • My only thought to add is I wonder, if as women, who give up our last names in marriage; can we grasp/understand the importance to a man of a good name? I spent all day (at the VA with Bob) thinking and remembering the privileges that came with my maiden name. A name that my father had spent years building into astounding recognition in the community I grew up in. >>>> -- MelvaT, 20:45:24 10/25/07 Thu
    • It took me a long time (17 years) to change my name after marriage. It was a part of me I didn't want to let go of. My mother was, of course, horrified that I wasn't taking my husband's name. I didn't see why it should matter. (NT) -- kgp, 05:12:53 10/26/07 Fri
    • Melva—I’m not sure I’m posting this correctly because I can’t figure out how to reply to your comment specifically, but I wanted to tell you how much I enjoyed reading your poignant (and eloquently expressed) evocation of the importance men attach to their name. Your comments also made me think about how women today view their own relationship with their family name now that it’s possible, as kgp notes, to continue using it after marrying. There doesn’t seem to be as much controversy over this practice as there once was, but it wasn’t that long ago that many people felt Hillary Clinton’s initial preference to keep her maiden name hurt her husband’s political career. “What’s in a name?” Juliet famously asked. A great deal, apparently, as that play and history itself have clearly demonstrated. (NT) -- JessieR, 06:37:47 10/26/07 Fri
      • Much to the chagrin of my family and friends, I chose to hyphenate my name. I am so proud of my family history and my ancestry. I couldn't give it up, and I wante to pass taht on to my children as well. (NT) -- Oleander, 07:28:49 10/26/07 Fri
    • What's amazing to me is that we weren't rich by any means. My father managed a small town hardware store in the panhandle of Idaho, but his reputation for honesty and square dealing extended into the neighboring states as well. He would only stock the top of the line materials and products, and he stood behind everything he sold. He'd do business with anyone who paid their bill on time, but 'woe' to anyone who didn't. >>>> -- MelvaT, 10:54:10 10/26/07 Fri