Welcome to Read With Us Discussion Day
Bonny and Carole and I are posting discussion question(s) today for our latest RWU book . . . The Marriage Portrait by Maggie O’Farrell. Join the discussion (which you’re welcome do even if you didn’t read the book) by commenting on our blogs. I’ll be answering your posts within the comment section for this discussion — and you can comment on other people’s comments, as well. Y’know . . . like in a real book group.
Let’s begin!
First . . . I’d really like to know what you thought of the book. What did you like best (or least) about the book? If you’ve read any other Maggie O’Farrell’s books (Hamnet, maybe?), how did The Marriage Portrait compare for you?
Second . . . From the start, Lucrezia’s temperament is difficult for her mother to tolerate. Are Lucrezia’s intellect and willfulness a liability or a benefit in shaping the course of her life?
Third . . . When I was reading The Marriage Portrait, I was intrigued by all the references to things being “hidden” or “more interesting” underneath. One passage particularly caught my eye . . .
“She turns the hoop over and inspects the underside. She has always had a secret liking for this part of the embroidery, the “wrong” side, congested with knots, striations of silk and twists of thread. How much more interesting it is, with its frank display of the labour needed to attain the perfection of the finished piece.”
— Maggie O’Farrell in The Marriage Portrait
What do you think? Was this a good metaphor for Lucrezia’s assessment of herself and the world she wished she could inhabit? As a crafter, what do you think of the “underside” of your own work?
I can’t wait to hear what you think!
==
Don’t forget: We’ll be discussing the book on Zoom tonight – 7:00 pm Eastern Time. There’s still time for you to join us! Just let me know of your interest either with a comment or by sending me an email (see sidebar, above) — and I’ll send a Zoom invitation.
PS – If you are planning to join us on the Zoom, but haven’t received an invitation from me (I sent them yesterday), please let me know so I can get the Zoom link to you today.
That passage made me think of how much I love the “wrong side” of color work. There is something so magical about those strands playing across the fabric, so yes… I do like to back into things, sometimes.
For me though, this book was no Hamnet (which I loved so much!) I found it too predictable… to an almost laughable level. I found Lucrezia’s eventual realization of who Emilia was so disappointing. Any love I had for Lucrezia ended at that moment in the book.
I really loved all the references to the “undersides” — of stitching, artwork, etc. — and feel that was one of the main themes of the book. What looks so “perfect” on the surface is usually the result of hard labor and hidden “reality.”
As for Lucrezia and her “realizations” (about Emilia, or Alfonzo, or her sisters-in-law, or even her own mother. . . ) were all contextual, to me. She was held so captive and in such extreme social constraints, I wonder how could she have the “knowledge” and experience to understand others’ motivations and feelings? She was raised to be a duke’s daughter/a duke’s wife . . . and not much else.
(I liked Hamnet better, too, but upon reading The Marriage Portrait for a second time, I appreciate what Maggie O’Farrell accomplished much more — and would put it closer to Hamnet. The first time I read Marriage Portrait, I wanted to just get to the ending to see how it would unfold. The second time, I found much more nuance in the writing.)
Hi! I need a link for tonight. Thanks!
Sent! See you tonight. 🙂
I liked the book, but I think I liked it slightly less with my second reading. I love that Maggie O’Farrell takes little-known (to me, anyway) historical figures and writes a whole story around them. I did like Hamnet better because I felt she didn’t attribute too many modern-day attributes to her characters. Lucrezia’s temperament made it difficult for her to live at the time she did when women and marriages were solely for strategic marriages and producing heirs. I also like the “underside” references. It seems that the underside reveals the truth at court and in interactions with other people. In this book anyway, the underside and the hidden were where the real personalities were revealed.
I can’t imagine how anyone in that time/in those circumstances with Lucrezia’s attributes and talents . . . would have survived. (Well. And I guess . . . she actually didn’t.) I think it’s interesting that Maggie O’Farrell chose to create her Lucrezia with those attributes (but the book would have been kinda dull if she’d been just like her sister. . . ) I hope there were ways back then . . . for women of “challenging temperaments” to be able to escape their cages. I mean . . . I’m betting that Maria (having the temperament to BE a duke’s daughter/duke’s wife) would have met the same fate as Lucrezia, but unable to escape. (Maybe?) It’s interesting to think about. . .
Hi, I follow Carole’s blog and I have read this book and would love to join you all if it is ok. I’m not sure I’ll be home by 7:00 but if I am it would be fun.
To address your question obliquely, the other interesting structure that is used in the story is layers. We get the sense of the layers of Lucrezia’s life being very shallow at first but deepening as she leaves her home and enters her married life. She also explores layers via her paintings. She paints her deepest impressions of life first and then covers over them with more conventional or socially acceptable images of the world around her.
Yes! I really loved the layering in this book, and thought it was a rather brilliant way to tell the story. She was so aware that she needed to “hide” or “cover” her true self, her true painting style/content, her true feelings. There was much more to this story than meets the eye.
I have sent you the Zoom invitation for tonight, and look forward to having you join us.
Sadly I won’t be able to join the zoom tonight! But have fun.
The ‘hidden’ thing is so interesting. Wasn’t it a hallmark of art during that period to put in secret meanings in art work? I think first of the hidden zoo in the basement of the castle, and how hidden in that case can translate to trapped or caged. Lucrezia, as a girl in that family, was also hidden/trapped, only being allowed to be in certain rooms. The same when she went to her husband’s house.
And in response’s to Bonny’s interesting comment, part of a woman’s ‘job’ was to keep the volatile/emotional aspects of their lives hidden, so Lucrezia not being able to hide it (and to accept that things were hidden) was part of her downfall, I think.
So many layers and undersides to consider! I have not read anything else by O’Farrell but I plan to give Hamnet a try (it never appealed to me, but I enjoyed her writing so much in Marriage Portrait). Looking forward to tonight!
I really think her writing in this book was her best yet — those descriptions are just amazing! The first passage that really made me stop and reread was about the fur of the tiger. I loved this one maybe as much as Hamnet, though it didn’t have the same emotional punch. But I was happier with the ending, which I’m sure we’ll discuss tonight!
I haven’t read Hamnet and will have to admit I really wasn’t fond of this book. I was glad to read a book though that I wouldn’t have picked up without this book club. Lucrezia’s life was just so sad which I guess is what it was like back then.