To begin class on Tuesday, we discussed some of the reading questions assigned for the day. We reread the passage on page 62 when George and Robert are trying to get in to Lady Audley’s dressing room. We questioned why Alicia said no at first, and why the scene was structured that way. Ideas were that it was to create suspense and to make readers interested because at first they couldn’t get in. We then analyzed the language Alicia uses in the scene, and found that it was very descriptive, which made the process of getting to the dressing room seem complicated. The comparison between George and Robert to burglars shows the gravity of what the men are doing, and how at the time a woman’s dressing room would be their most private space.
The class was then split in to pairs and analyzed when the room is first described (bottom of page 63-page 64), or when George is looking at the portrait (top of page 65- middle of page 66). We looked at the constellation of characters, Robert and George’s reactions, how Alicia is portrayed, and how the painter is portrayed. The first group questioned why we got a taste of the portrait before the men looked at it, and found that it gave a unbiased view, or a different bias than the characters. We looked up the term “bonne bouche” which meant to save the best for last. Professor Bergren defined the use of this term as synesthesia, which is “the production of a sense impression relating to one sense or part of the body by stimulation of another sense or part of the body.” The visual aspect of seeing Lady Audley’s portrait was described by taste, which lets us see Lady Audley as an object to be consumed rather than a person. After, we analyzed Robert’s body language, which we read in much less detail than George’s. Robert’s body language was acquisitive and relaxed, as he rearranged the scene to the way he wanted it to be. The second group started by analyzing Lady Audley as George viewed the portrait. We thought that Lady Audley looked like an important person of high status. Her portrait seems to contrast her past, as her clothes and accessories give class markings. We pointed out that the portrait is several levels removed of what she is actually like, and may highlight her secret, as she looks so mean. We questioned why it would be included in the novel if it didn’t show something about her, even though it is different from everything we have heard about her so far. The portrait hints that Lady Audley is not as genuine as she seems. We discussed the painter, who could have felt something about her that shows in the portrait. His depiction of Lady Audley may be accurate, as the Pre-Raphaelite genre is supposed to be, and may show something that others can’t see. The question was raised whether it was her character that showed, or it was his technique.
We then discussed the differences in George and Robert’s reaction to viewing the portrait. Robert’s reaction was easy to understand, and he was accepting of Lady Audley’s appearance. George’s reaction was strange, he was quiet and still and seemed underwhelmed. Professor Bergren mentioned the idea of the “male gaze,” meaning the audience is forced to see the perspective of a male in classic Hollywood. In this part of the novel, the reader sees from George’s perspective, and sees Lady Audley as an object as he does. From that, we talked more about sensation literature and why it would be looked down upon by contemporaries. We thought it was because it appeals to the senses, not the intellect. The genre of literature could be looked down upon because it covers everything that is frowned upon being written about, and is more of a sensory experience of detail that distracts from the plot. Before the end of class, we reviewed the section of the Robin Goodfellow reading that comes before the first part of Lady Audley’s Secret. It is said to be an apolitical journal, and they described themselves by what they are not. Overall, the journal was trying to be unbiased, to step out of aesthetic judgment, and to choose a broad purpose.
The majority of Thursday’s class was spent close reading different passages in groups of three. Professor Bergren and Maddie did an example using the description of Harcourt Talboys on page 156. They analyzed the content and the form, and how the form creates the content. The content was describing Harcourt as straight edge with a “his way or the highway” mentality. The form focused on extremities, outsider information, repetition, and imagery related to Lady Audley and Audley Court. We then combined the two, discussing how the form creates the content. The inconsistent imagery creates the fact that there is more to him than described, the extreme diction plays in to his character, the imagery relating toward Lady Audley and Audley court makes us think that he may have a secret, and the repetition of vain opposed the sentence before it (“If he could be possessed…”) and could reveal more of his character.
We were able to discuss two groups’ work before the end of class. The description of Phoebe Marks on page 26-27 described her through what she was not. It was repetitive and focused on the lack of colour and the use of the adjective pale. Pale is used negatively, when at the time being pale was a sign of refinement. The class found that it seemed to be an inverse description of Lady Audley. We then reviewed the description of Robert Audley on page 32. He lived like a barrister, but did it for the title, and was lazy. There was little figurative language used because he is straightforward and not complex himself. The adjectives in the description contribute to his character, and the nouns contribute to his job. The class ended before we were able to discuss the passages of the three other groups.