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):

Tuesday, May 28, 16:27:32

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, [7], 8, 9 ]

• Bring it on, Girlfriend!! :-D I think there was ample opportunity for parallel reactions given the brands of justice used at the times. Gavin was hanged by the English also. I think it may have been a common last wish to have a familiar and not wholly unfriendly face to witness your last moments. That John could do this for Bates even though he felt somewhat trapped into it speaks to his sense of honor, the same sense we admire in Jamie. It didn't strike me as "been there, done that" as John risked much more by finishing the job. What I suspect is that in the course of her research Diana came upon the leg-pullers and wanted to include them for our edification. She does that quite a bit. (NT) -- kgp, 09:48:49 10/15/07 Mon
  • good point- yes, she does do that and its very informative. I had never heard of leg pullers but then I shy away from reading about violent deaths. (NT) -- susiej, 11:47:17 10/15/07 Mon
  
  

  ---

  
  
• Oh yeah! Thanks for coming on over , Susie. I agree with Karen's take on it, that this scene, while similar, and, I think, a deliberate echo of DOA, also has strikingly different characteristics that keep me from thinking it's "old hat." The fact that John ends up delivering the killing "blow", standing in for the missing leg-puller, takes this to a different place, as do the more complicated undercurrents here, which Cathy suggested above. My big question here is whether this parallel scene is part of a deliberate strategy on DG's part to "show" us how John and Jamie are similar, in the same book where she has them at their most distant and hostile???? Anyone have thoughts? (NT) -- pamelalass, 10:01:56 10/15/07 Mon
  • I was thinking along those lines too- a deliberate echo of scenes and wondering why? to feed into the jamie fans for sure, but to what purpose? I suppose given all good literature, the outcome would be as varied as the ideas of those that read it. (NT) -- susiej, 11:38:45 10/15/07 Mon
  • I agree. When we (most of us) finished the book, how many were completely flummoxed? How were Jaime and John ever to overcome their differences? I think that in many ways Diana is challenging us to see how similar these men are, how bound by the brotherhoods of the blade, of loyalty to family, of honour, they are. Following the coin theme above, we can see Jaime and John as opposite sides of a coin in a sense- alike in many respects but fundamentally different in others. Despite these differences, it is their very human relationship which transcends because they understand each other as men of honour, of men who have fought and led others. (NT) -- Oleander, 13:19:38 10/15/07 Mon
    • Bravo! You've articulated my inarticulate "co-mingled" themes! While I did not start out with this in mind, when I started to look for quotes that spoke to me of John's various "brotherhoods", and the double-edged sword of trust/risk that cuts across many of them, I just kept finding things that reminded me of Jamie. And, yes, I was struggling with the fact that BOTB has their friendship at such a nadir. I don't know if it is deliberate or not, but the fuller, richer portrait of John that we get in this book makes me see how many traits and values these two share, and it's an interesting paradox to see them driven farther apart while noticing a new level of "closeness." (NT) -- pamelalass, 15:49:38 10/15/07 Mon
  • In the stable scene I think the friction ignites into violence because Jamie has effectively characterized all homosexuals as pedarasts while John has challenged this notion, brought to light what I think most men fear (I know DH does) - that fraternal affection can become man-crush can become love as between men and women - and has inadvertantly unearthed the Wentworth nightmare and Jamie's disgust with himself that he could not keep from being roused by BJR despite himself. It violates Jamie's sense of manliness which he is trying even harder to hold the line on because of that. I think John's need to do violence to himself after Jamie's fist hits the wall is a reaction to the passion of the moment of battle as well as realization of Jamie's words and the dawning that perhaps Jamie had been molested by a pedarast. We know Jamie's interactions with Sandringham came darn close. (NT) -- kgp, 15:32:03 10/15/07 Mon
  
  

  ---

  
  
• The only similarity I see is the "witnessing" of death by hanging. John actually doesn't do this out of compassion; Bates blackmailed him. (He could have not showed up, but as Bates noted, "officer and gentleman". He gave his word, so he'll go.) He's in no danger of being suspected as a sodomite--until he makes that instinctive gesture to end Bates's suffering. I think *that* is a really major difference. He comes reluctantly, and has no deep feeling for Bates (while Jamie was Gavin Hayes "chief," as well as his friend). But he can't let Bates strangle in front of him. He doesn't think anything about "fellow officer" or "there but for the grace of God go I", nor does he think for an instant about his own safety. He just does what has to be done. Jamie is fulfilling his social obligations to Gavin; John is showing instinctive mercy to a stranger. I think the parallel is actually stronger with Jamie's actions toward Aaron Beardsley. (NT) -- maddiej, 11:05:21 10/15/07 Mon
  • hmm, very interesting as your posts always are. I asked you this once already but don't know if you saw it or just prefer to keep your privacy, so I'll ask again. Are you a history professor or teacher? As for your point, I will have to disagree somewhat- there are bigger differences than I realized (which is not surprising since i don't know the whole story) however, I still do see a big similarity in singling yourself out in the eyes of a crowd, particularly a crowd gathered in the street to see violence done. It is a much bigger risk than what Jamie did with Beardsly and both Jamie and John risked not only the normal rankling of a crowd and being associated with "criminal" but exposure of things they would wish to keep secret. Then there's the whole calling out and the act of compassion to one who is left with so little, one who others can so easily ignore. And thanks to all of you for taking my criticism so well and answering it even better. (NT) -- susiej, 11:55:43 10/15/07 Mon
    • Thanks susiej for your thoughts, there really are some moments in the book that were hard to swallow. In PM LJ would hardly have done anything to stand out of the crowd. And he carefully considered the consequences, here he's so very different. The flogging scene in the barracks was another unbelievable passage. Inside please>> -- Helka, 12:53:47 10/15/07 Mon
      • Helka>>>> -- susiej, 14:49:52 10/15/07 Mon
        • Oh, and Helka this is totally off topic>>>> -- susiej, 14:54:04 10/15/07 Mon
          • Yes definitely >> -- Helka, 01:56:18 10/16/07 Tue
            • susiej, a music link inside >>> -- Helka, 08:15:14 10/16/07 Tue
      • I thought it was an odd scene, but not unbelievable. John had just been reliving Jamie's flogging at Ardsmuir, and Percy was clearly disturbed (maybe excited?) by seeing his first flogging. I thought John's reaction here was a subconscious purging of guilt, as well as a morbid curiosity about just what he'd really done to Jamie, in terms of pain and humiliation. (NT) -- MsNaugha, 14:53:32 10/15/07 Mon
        • oh, good insight- that's a view I can accept. (NT) -- susiej, 14:55:13 10/15/07 Mon
        • Yes! This is how I interpreted it. John's way of punishing himself, and in a strange way, trying to become closer to Jaime. Now he has put himself through what he once put Jaime through. (NT) -- Oleander, 13:54:32 10/16/07 Tue
      • I think in PM that it was literally "a private matter." I mean his circumspection is due to the fact that his family is involved. He wouldn't do anything to risk a scandal that would damage them. In BOTB, though, he's in his military sphere, and while there's a family angle, he's dealing with his father, who's dead and can't be hurt, and with Hal, who can certainly take care of himself. (NT) -- MsNaugha, 15:13:22 10/15/07 Mon
    • Oh, sorry; I must have missed your earlier query. No, I'm a graduate student in English Lit. I've done quite a bit of work on 18th century texts, though, which involved researching supporting cultural references, so I'm fairly familiar with the general attitudes of the time. (NT) -- maddiej, 14:45:24 10/15/07 Mon
      • Well, it shows. I always learn a lot from your posts! (NT) -- susiej, 14:51:24 10/15/07 Mon
  • Thanks, ladies, for helping me think this through. While I know maddiej is right about John's only reason for being present (blackmail), and the unpremeditated instinctiveness of his behavior, I do think it turns into something more, and something that does have parallels with Jamie at Gavin's execution, because of the crowd, and the risk of guilt by association. I think just calling Bates's name the way he does revealed that he knew the man, even before he did the leg-pulling. The inner thoughts we are privy to here don't reveal whether he thinks about Bates as a fellow officer, a convicted (though not actual) fellow homosexual, or a worthless blackmailer, but in the end I see his actions here as a representation of his humanity, and it feels too coincidental for me not to see it as a narrative linking of John to Jamie. But, to kgp's point, of course the book, and this scene, must also stand alone, for a reader who doesn't know anything about Jamie. (NT) -- pamelalass, 13:15:05 10/15/07 Mon
  
  

  ---

  
  
• The other aspect is that these books must stand alone. To have John be a hero for this story he must be free to act as he will rather than be constrained by comparison to another character a novice reader may not be aware of. That said, a parallel between John and Jamie also questions a stereotypic view of a homosexual man as being less capable of heroics than a heterosexual hero. Going to Conmama's remarks above, I like that John is no less "manly" in his duty and life than Jamie, excepting his attraction to Percy rather than Isobel. (NT) -- kgp, 12:46:09 10/15/07 Mon
  • Yes, did you notice the bit where the young soldier who is about to be hanged panics, and Grey thinks, "Can you not die like a man, at least?" He doesn't seem ever to be in doubt of his own masculinity, regardless of his sexual preferences. (NT) -- maddiej, 14:48:33 10/15/07 Mon
    • Yes! It was almost an aside, but it spoke volumes about his sense of masculinity. (NT) -- pamelalass, 15:51:42 10/15/07 Mon