Flight of the Heron read-along: Part III chapters 1-2

[regshoe]

Charlie chose the place himsel', the graveyard of Culloden...

Well, it looks like Keith's prophecies about the fate of the Jacobites, at least, weren't too inaccurate...

Next week we'll read chapters 3 and 4 of part III.

Comments

[regshoe]

I don't know how much Broster's original target audience in 1925 could be assumed to know about the '45—I suppose it is long enough ago that it was substantially less far back in history when she was writing than it is for us now! It's a trade-off, I suppose—if the reader is familiar with Culloden, I think not describing it explicitly and letting the significant silence stand on its own is very effective (the general writing technique of writing around horrible things that the audience can be expected to know/infer is something I admire a lot when done well)—but if they're not, the author does risk being confusing.

That's a very insightful comment about the parallels between Keith and Alison—I've noticed some of those details, but I like your way of linking them together. And I think—hmm, going off on a tangent here, spoilers for The Wounded Name and "Mr Rowl" as well as FotH in the rot13:

Oebfgre unf ol abj jevggra guerr obbxf jvgu obgu na vqrnyvfrq urg pbhcyr jub trg n ebznagvp unccl raqvat naq shyy nhgubevny nccebiny, naq n fhogrkghny z/z eryngvbafuvc, naq fur frrzf njner guebhtubhg gung gurfr ner va pbasyvpg, ohg va gur svefg gjb obbxf fur qbrfa'g ernyyl erfbyir vg. Ynherag vf unccl sbe Nlzne naq Niblr, naq jvfgshyyl ohg jvyyvatyl fnpevsvprf uvf bja qrfverf juvyr gurl trg gurve unccl raqvat; Ureirl Oneevatgba fbeg bs vapbapyhfviryl snqrf njnl ng gur raq bs "Ze Ebjy" jvgubhg uvf eryngvbafuvc jvgu Enbhy ernyyl erfbyivat vagb nalguvat. V guvax va Syvtug bs gur Ureba Oebfgre svanyyl npxabjyrqtrf gur vapbzcngvovyvgl naq gnxrf vg gb vgf ybtvpny, gentvp pbapyhfvba va xvyyvat bss Xrvgu rira nf uvf npgvbaf ranoyr Rjra naq Nyvfba'f unccl raqvat. Naq V ernyyl yvxr gur vqrn gung fur qbrf gung ol znxvat Xrvgu na rkcyvpvg grkghny cnenyyry gb Nyvfba—cerfreivat fbzr bs gur fvtavsvpnapr nzvqfg gentrql, be fbzrguvat.

...but that's for my comment on the epilogue! :D

Ewen is so unlike Keith in this respect: he is deeply embedded in a wide circle of people who love deeply, devotedly, and unreservedly.

Very true, and I especially like your observation about love and honour—while honour and duty are important to both Keith and Ewen, for Ewen they go along with love while for Keith they replace them, or at least he tries to make them. That's a central part of what makes their relationship (as it is on the page, and for slash potential) so very interesting and good.

[greerwatson]

"I don't know how much Broster's original target audience in 1925 could be assumed to know about the '45"

My impression is that, through the first half of the twentieth century, it's not so much that people necessarily remembered all the details of the actual history, even if they learned them at school, so much as that they became entranced in childhood with the myth of the Jacobite Rebellion.

Tales of Bonnie Prince Charlie (like knights in shining armour, Mary Queen of Scots, and gallant Royalists vs wicked Roundheads) were mainstays in romantical children's historical fiction, at least in Britain. This means that, to contemporary readers, Culloden would indeed be a familiar battle, at least by name, along with the exciting story of the Prince's escape afterwards.

[sanguinity]

Ah, that makes a lot of sense. The only place I'd ever heard of the Rising before this was in Stevenson's Kidnapped, which I presume is an example of the kind of thing you're talking about.

I was assuming that history education of a century and more back used to put more emphasis on "dates of famous battles" than mine did -- and of course that a British education covers the history of the English and Scottish thrones, which an American education does not at all. But yes, if it was part of the cultural osmosis of a British childhood, then she wouldn't need to summarize it at all.

[luzula]

I remember the first time I came across Jacobites I mixed them up with Jacobins. *g* Not at all the same thing!

[sanguinity]

Heh. At the beginning of this read-along I sat down and made myself learn the terms Jacobean, Jacobite, and Jacobin. If I ever go to a party again, distinguishing the three can be my dumb party trick that will make all but one person go away to talk to other people, and that remaining one person will either become my best friend for the rest of the night or will be the person I spend the rest of the party desperately trying to escape.

[regshoe]

Hehe, those three are always good to try and sort out! I suppose Jacobeans and Jacobites relate to the same set of Jameses/Jacobuses, at least.