Great Expectations

I have watched many films of Great Expectations and disliked them intensely while all around me enjoyed them and think Pip wonderful, Miss Havisham an icon, Dickens simply marvellous etc. In order to write on my blog about why Great Expectations does not actually merit all this praise I thought I'd better read the book. Oh DEAR. WHAT a struggle.

At first I thought "Damn! This is good stuff! I won't be able to get a blog post out of this." My change of heart lasted about 20 pages before all my prejudices were happily restored to me. And here is why.

Now, I like Victorian prose. I like to read books made up of proper sentences, like Thomas Hardy books are. On this front Dickens is fairly sound - credit where due. 

BUT :

i) Pip! Oh SPARE me do. For a start Pip is a silly unmanly name. Mistake, Charles, take it from me. We women like a manly hero. I took against Pip in a big way early on in the book and subsequent events did nothing to bring me round. He is a total WEED in all respects.

We (the readers) are I think expected to like him for being fond of Joe, Herbert, Wemmick, and for feeling ashamed for being unkind to Joe; however it is easy to be nice about fine people like those and ashamed of behaviour like that; he is ungrateful and spiteful about Pumblechook, his sister, the bad Pockets, unaware that without them he would be grovelling the streets for his living and keeps on and on about their faults. He was jolly lucky to be fed and housed and does he not realise that ALL children are subject to being constantly asked to name the pluperfect of moneo and what 13 times 13 is. He seemed to believe that Mr Pumblechook was not normal in asking these things and that it was unfair and malicious. In my experience this is part of being a child and you just put up with it unremarkingly. [This is for you, infants: monueram; 169]

ii) Miss Havisham! What an unlikely character. No-one could have the will-power to carry on like that for years. What good did it do her? None. What harm did it do her traitorous intended? None. And she would have noticed after a while and realised it would be better to sue the cad for breach of promise instead of sitting around moping and sulking.

iii) Estella! Estella makes me ashamed to be of the same sex. Even a twerp like Pip would not have loved her in real life. She was, in the Minehead parlance, "a right cow".

iv) Coincidence Overload. The plot of this book is preposterous.

Finally,

iv) The last sentence of the book is incomprehensible which is unfair on readers who have ploughed through 443 pages of Pip's whining. Though if it made it clear the uncongenial pair were going to marry and live out their days happily I would be jolly cross - so perhaps it is for the best that you can't tell whether that's what happened or not. Either way, they are welcome to each other.

Below are some draft questions for G-AHLK Examining Board Great Expectations exam.

1. Pumblechook is a ridiculous name and most unrealistic. Why did Dickens give his characters such daft names?  Was it because

      a) he had a personality disorder that made him want to insult his readers by using names that would be more at home in books for pre-schoolers

      b) he suffered from a neurological condition that caused him to imagine that these names were perfectly normal

      c) he was lazy

      d) he thought he was being humorous

      e) people really had those sort of names in those days 

2.  List the ways in which Miss Havisham’s situation is unfeasible. 

3.  Explain why Great Expectations lends itself ill to film treatment.

Answers:

1.  a) is the correct answer because it is clear from all the attributes of his books – plot, characterisation, style, names – that Dickens wished to insult and offend his readers. 

     b) is wrong. There is no such neurological condition recorded in the history of neuropathology.

     c) Certainly Dickens was lazy and could not be bothered to think up realistic names. However a) gives a fuller explanation and candidates will be awarded only 1 mark for choosing c).

     d) is not the explanation. The names are not in the least bit amusing.

     e) is incorrect. No-one ever had or will ever have such silly names.

2.   Miss Havisham’s situation involved her sitting permanently among her years-old wedding feast wearing her wedding finery, bemoaning her miserable fate. There are a number of reasons why this would not have worked in real life :

     i) the food would have begun to smell very smelly quite early on in the proceedings

    ii) rats would have come and Miss Havisham would have been screeching her head off at the first sight of one

    iii) she would have been bored to tears after a few weeks of this

    iv) once she got middle-aged her dress would not have fitted any more

     v) she must have gone to bed every night and she would soon have started to feel pretty silly putting the wedding dress back on in the mornings

    vi) what did she wear while the wedding dress was in the wash? Doing the Laundry in the 19th Century took all day and there weren't any tumble driers to speed things along 

   vii) whoever was paying for all this nonsense would have demanded it had to stop

  viii) she would have got the worst pressure sores ever seen in the history of nursing, and many other medical complications associated with inactivity.

3. Great Expectations should not be filmed because:

                                                                                                                                                                                                       

 a) The protagonists are each given a single attribute, which then defines them and they show no other subtleties  - eg. Pip - a weed; Estella - a right cow; Miss Havisham - an old misery; Joe - can do no wrong; Pip's sister - horrible. This is rigid and unadorned. These simple, unnuanced characterisations cause actors to over-act in a most irritating way. For example, the Christmas meal early in the story is treated in all films as an opportunity for absurdly exaggerated behaviour by the cast and it annoys me. You might expect at least ONE of the directors to exercise a little restraint but no! They are unable to resist trying to make it funny, and yet they all fail, and fail catastrophically. Look, lads, it ISN'T funny and there's nothing you can do to make it so, so don't try.

                                                                                                                                                                                                                         

    b) Apart from this, the book has descriptive passages that are not demonstrable by any acting; they have to be read. They are the best bits. The book is just NOT SUITABLE to make a film out of.

Well, there you have it. I have spake. I apologise to you all.

A Horrible House much admired by its owner

Here's a house worth Lord knows how many million pounds, but I DON'T CARE! I don't want the beastly place so that saves me £Lkhmm! Aren't I lucky. So will you be when you see these pictures. I have put in a few comments in red, about my own domestic arrangements, for comparison. 

Insider Information: In the Times Saturday Magazine they always have one of these articles, where they go to some non-enitity's house and then write a fawning article pretending to think the house is marvellous. Here we have a French femme fatale's mansion de Paris.

"The place screams luxury," the journalist informs us. A bit cold and spikey, I'd call it (left). That thing that looks like a rug on the floor, is a mosaic. It is not nearly as pleasing as the Roman mosaic in Taunton museum and I bet it doesn't feel as pleasant underfoot either. I can recommend going to see that, and touching it to appreciate how lovely it feels, before they stop allowing such liberties to be taken.

Notice also the hideous light fitment which is fully in keeping with all the other nasty shiny decor in this most unwelcoming of entrance halls. The owner boasts that she has "brought the subtle glamour of a 5star hotel into our home".


Roman mosaic at Taunton Museum.
Shows story of Dido and Aeneas.
Infinitely preferable.

Our entrance hall is furnished with boots all over the floor, a coat rack BULGING with a thousand never-used coats, baskets awaiting collection or repair, the cat, long-forgotten homework, bills and empty beer bottles. Very homely.

This is called the Chill-Out Zone. The family must be midgets as that little footbath is called the Swimming Pool. This basement area also boasts a hammam, whatever that is, and a spa, massage room and cinema. "It's our fun floor," says the owner, proudly. "I don't want anyone getting bored. Each floor has something different to offer." 
We don't have a Fun Floor in our house. There's a ground floor with bicycles in it and some camping equipment and hammers and stuff like that. The 1st floor has a kitchen and an area with chairs, music stands, bookcases etc. and stacks of papers, some of them vital like passports and chequebooks. The top floor has a few cramped bedrooms of which those occupied by the younger members are so untidy that they are eligible for World Heritage status, and a bathroom where we all bang our heads due to the sloping ceiling under the eaves.

The dining room, which has a leather ceiling. I shall say nothing on this matter.
The walls are of alabaster. 

Compare the G-AHLK dining area, where every surface is covered in junk, the chairs are all broken and none of the plates match. We have got MUCH better paintings though and the wines are many and various.

Horrid uncomfortable kitchen. White marble throughout; no expense spared here. Slaves have been in and done the washing up etc., which is nice. It has the air, though, of a hospital treatment room where one might take bloods or administer some other nasty medical procedure. Perish the thought of whipping soufflés or roasting any peacocks etc. in there.
The mere act of making a cheese sandwich in my kitchen can make the area into a bloodbath where it looks as though an 8-course banquet for 40 has been prepared. Countless implements are employed. Crumbs, crusts, wrapping, plates and knives are left about, and other members of the family then enter and complain that there's no bread left.

What???? What is this (left)? A washbasin? A birdbath?

Well, - it's a very expensive alabaster vase water installation designed by the owner of the house. Hmmm. The alabaster may well "echo the material used in the dining room" but if I was going to spend that sort of money I would procure an early Victorian quince dish, or a bit of  Ming.

This picture on the wall is of a frightening tribesman with a machine gun. It is not likely to enhance your concentration when you sit below it for a game of chess. An inexplicable choice of artwork.

Look at that piano. They have covered it in silver foil; and yet they are proud of the fact. They also obviously NEVER play it. Real pianos have their mouths open and are covered in piles of music and the keyboard has every pencil in the house, stored along the upper registers. N.B. Grand pianos have the advantage that the floor underneath them can be covered with piles of music as well. This (shown) is a waste of a piano. There is an old bedspring on the sideboard behind the sofa. You'd think they'd have put that out of sight for the photographers. There is a bit of sheep fleece I think, next to it. VERY odd wall decoration above those. I think perhaps the artist was pulling A Fast One. Anyway, I'm not keen on it. As for the "crocodile-hide and murano glass back-lit coffee table", I have rarely seen a less practical item of furniture. In real life the glass surface would be all smeary and have coffee rings, and the greenery would be long dead. If we had such a table in our house people would put their feet up on it and get it all muddy, before breaking it to smithereens.

The house has 3 floors as well as the basement. There are 3 bedrooms, 4 bathrooms, countless dressing rooms, living rooms for the children and silk rugs galore along with mother of pearl and ebony inlays, and more mosaics which get everywhere including into the kitchen. 

The owner said she wanted to create a feeling of warmth and comfort. I am sorry but despite spending £Lkhmm she has failed spectacularly.

Here is a charming interior: Coleridge's cottage at Nether Stowey. The rug perhaps a little ill-advised but apart from that it's delightful. Despite Nether Stowey's proximity to the International Alabaster Hub that is Watchet there is not a speck of alabaster to be seen.

Christmas Presents no one will be pleased with

Advent Sunday is now not 8 weeks away and therefore loads of Xmas Gift Catalogues have begun to arrive through the letterbox;  and here is a selection of things I do not recommend: 

"Picture Keeper" - also known as a memory stick. Spend £34.99 on an 8GB memory stick if you want to, but they are available for £2.99 on eBay, the only difference being that eBay ones don't have Picture Keeper written on them. You can achieve the same effect by writing "Photos" on the memory stick casing, with a common felt tip pen. Then you will have saved £32 which can be spent on gin.

Now HERE is a useful commodity. A deer deterrent which makes an inaudible sound so you have no way of knowing whether it's working or not. Every Londoner is subject to deer-terror I am sure on his daily commute. Even here on Exmoor we occasionally see a deer but I can assure you they have got the sense to run away from cars anyway and have no need of inaudible sound warnings. A saving of £7.99.

Another marvellous idea. How often have you taken the wrong set of keys and consequently locked yourself out? Increase the likelihood of it happening again by having these decoy keys all over the place. I strongly question the claim that they will create any air of mystery or magic in your house or garden. Intense irritation perhaps but not mystery or magic. A total waste of £8.99.

Oh DEAR NO not the Tree Faces again. They had these last year as well and tried to tell us that Mrs G of Doncaster had said "My grandchildren just LOVE my tree faces. They are fascinated by them." Don't delude yourself, Mrs G. Grandchildren are notorious for their execrable taste; and in any case Fascination may be borne of disgust as well as pleasure. Edward Jenner was fascinated by smallpox, remember. Not that tree faces are likely to lead to any inventions on a par with vaccination or anything else. The flat-head nails are not even included.

This preposterous item looks like wine but is actually an umbrella. I defy anyone receiving this as a present to succeed in concealing their disappointment when they realise. A cruel trick to play on anyone. You could have got them £17.99-worth of real wine with that money.

Aurora Borealis Projector indeed. What  a world we live in. £23.24 by the time you have paid for the batteries. Plays a selection of annoying noises too. You do not need this, and nor do any of your acquaintances. A vain attempt by the catalogue people to obtain your money. I would be v surprised if they sell a single one of these.

A 'reflexology massage mask' which claims to relieve puffy tired eyes, remove tension and ease headaches leaving you feeling deeply relaxed. This can also be achieved with gin and I think we all know which method is more enjoyable. Once again gin provides the intelligent answer. £19.99 will buy you a big bottle of quality stuff such as Bombay Sapphire.

A repulsive jug which is both vulgar and impossible to clean. In keeping with common practice in such catalogues they have used this as an excuse to make a feeble pun which irritates the reader and causes you to want to hurl the whole booklet to perdition. An insult to me and to cows.

A prime example of what passes for humour in Catalogue World. I despise them. These things are £9.99 each. Anyone who orders one should be soundly thrashed. For crying out loud. The more I think about these the more furious I become.

Look. I don't like squirrels. Why would I want an ugly toy one in 10 X actual size hanging around in my garden attracting real squirrels? This is horrible, and £14.99 is not, so I'll be keeping the £14.99 thanks.

"Cause your dog to look ridiculous." This is cruelty to animals. It would be better for the human master to wear a badge saying "I am a turkey" than to be seen in public with a pet wearing one of these. 

This is similar to the dog bow tie outfit. Do not make your defenceless child wear things like this. Babies are idiotic enough in their own right, without their adults colluding to make them look even sillier. You should dress your young in dignified clothing.

N.B. They ought to stop the poor little mite climbing up the stairs as it is bound to fall down.

An inflatable sledge. How long do you suppose THAT'S going to last? 2 seconds? 3? It will DEFINITELY pop very shortly after the hapless adults have blown it up. Even if it lasts a full minute that will represent a cost of 21.65 pence per second of use. Poor value for money.

Finally, a useless Periodic Table mug. I admire the Periodic Table - heaven knows why, it is aesthetically displeasing by all my normal criteria - so I looked into this. Thank the Lord I will not have to buy one as closer examination discloses that this Periodic Table does not include the atomic weights and is therefore not much good to anyone. It's like a... a... a... bunch of notes without any stave, or a Times crossword where they have forgotten to print half the clues.

In conclusion, remember this: People like booze. I have just saved you £201.11 by stopping you from buying any of this stuff* so I suggest you go to the Wine Society website.

*£198.12 if you decided to buy a cheap memory stick as suggested.