See, in fiction I would have let him write two odes, just in case, one to Fritz and one to MT, and then by accident mail them to the respective wrong recipient.
OMG. That would be so awesome!
I hadn't see the first sketch, thank you!
What are you playing at, Algarotti?
Beats me. Is the whole poem given?
If I read nothing else, I do need to read the Algarotti chapter (and subsequent Algarotti mentions) at some point.
I also meant to say in the other comment that I'm glad they managed to be friends in the last few years of their lives. Especially since those unrequited love letters I summarized a while back are so painful. :/
No, the whole poem isn't given, just what I quoted to you.
Painful: I know what you mean. It reminded me of Charlotte Bronte's letter to her Belgian professor. In both cases, you have someone who just isn't romantically interested, and a smart, passionate woman basically throwing herself at his feet again and again. Mind you, neither Monsieur Heger in Charlotte's case nor Algarotti in Lady Mary's is at fault for being unable to return those feelings, but Monsieur Heger at least never flirted with her and made it very clear from the get go that he wasn't available. Algarotti, for all that he did send plenty of "not just into you" signals, at least seems to have done some flirting, if that poem is anything to go by, and of course he accepted her money when it suited him. BTW, the Hervey biography ends thusly, after our main character is dead, in an "where are they now?" epilogue about the rest of the cast:
Lady Mary, after her four-year sojourn in Avignon , settled in the Venetian province of Brescia ; and in 1756 she moved to Venice and resumed her correspondence with Algarotti, this time as a witty bel esprit instead of a lovesick matron . “When we meet,' she wrote to him in 1758 (four years before her own death ), ‘the Memory of Lord Hervey shall be celebrated ; his Gentle Shade will be pleas'd in Elysium with our Gratitude . I am insensible to every thing but the remembrance of those few Freinds that have been dear to me.' Perhaps, then, Hervey enjoys eternity in the company of the enchanting Algarotti and the witty Lady Mary.
Last line of the biography. Leaving aside the part where this might indeed be Hervey's idea of paradise, and even Lady Mary's, but probably not Algarotti's, it's a neat note to go out on. Both Halsband and Grundy agree that the Lady Mary & Lord Hervey friendship was one of the most important in their respective lives to them. It surviving the crisis to it which the initial triangle situation with Algarotti was (when Hervey did see Lady Mary as a rival and wasn't yet sure which way Algarotti would go) was a great relief to both biographers.
It reminded me of Charlotte Bronte's letter to her Belgian professor. In both cases, you have someone who just isn't romantically interested, and a smart, passionate woman basically throwing herself at his feet again and again.
Oof, yeah. I haven't read them in full, but the excerpts I have are painful enough.
Have you read The Bronte Myth? If not, you might find it interesting.
Monsieur Heger at least never flirted with her and made it very clear from the get go that he wasn't available. Algarotti, for all that he did send plenty of "not just into you" signals, at least seems to have done some flirting, if that poem is anything to go by, and of course he accepted her money when it suited him.
Yeah. :/ I can excuse Algarotti the initial flirting, as I don't think he could have predicted she would fall head over heels so quickly, enduringly, and hopelessly, but once he realized what was going on, he really should have been more careful not to lead her on.
Leaving aside the part where this might indeed be Hervey's idea of paradise, and even Lady Mary's, but probably not Algarotti's, it's a neat note to go out on.
Agreed on both counts.
It surviving the crisis to it which the initial triangle situation with Algarotti was (when Hervey did see Lady Mary as a rival and wasn't yet sure which way Algarotti would go) was a great relief to both biographers.
I too am glad they were able to hang onto their friendship. Especially since the relationship with Algarotti wasn't worth losing an important friendship over for either of them, not even Hervey, who "won".
It is really great so far, both very readable and you can tell that it's deeply embedded in actual history. Which I would have expected from a rec from you :D
(Also, being unlike you and novels being easier for me than nonfic, it's good rest from doing Ziebura, whom I love but which is heavier going!)
Oh, good, I'm glad you're enjoying it! (Lol, especially since I apparently recced it to you practically every April and September since 2018, according to Gmail comment notifications. I would hate for it to be a dud.)
I not only find it readable, but it makes me feel completely immersed in the sheer passion and intensity of the characters' personalities. I would have liked more Anne, but it does do a good job of acknowledging her hidden steel, as well as Charlotte's discomfort with it.
I'm also glad it's providing a much needed break in 18th century history. :)
By Lucasta Miller? Yes, I did, and agree it's very interesting. And occasionally darkly hilarious, like the descriptions of the early Hollywood movie where Charlotte ends up in a love triangle with Emily and the Reverend Arthur Nichols...
Especially since the relationship with Algarotti wasn't worth losing an important friendship over for either of them, not even Hervey, who "won".
Indeed. They were among each other's favourite people and loyal through a great number of ordeals (among other things, being attacked by the foremost English poet of their age, Alexander Pope, who first praised Lady Mary to the skies and then turned against her - whether or not it was because he finally did dare a pass and she laughed at him is debated - with a vengeance), and it would have been a shame to lose this over the most fickle of swans. Something remarkable: Lady Mary got attacked not just by Pope but later Horace Walpole wiht every accusation misogyny can inspire, including, of course, sexual licence. And yet neither of them when accusing her of having lovers, including younger lovers, names Algarotti. Her unrequited love for him and Algarotti ending up with Hervey (for a while) would have been a gift to satirists hating both her and Hervey. And Algarotti was such a prominent figure at that point: the story would have been eaten up with relish by a wide audience, especially since it ended up with Lady Mary humiliated. And yet - neither Pope, who accuses Lady Mary of "poxing her lovers" (which is a nasty pun on her inoculation work against small pox, mixing it with the accusation of inflicting STD) nor Walpole, who when she returned near the end of her life to die in England said she shold be quaranteened because she was sure to be so dirty, ever caught wind of the Algarotti situation. Which must mean that both Hervey (who usually loved to gossip) and Algarotti kept absolutely mum.
By Lucasta Miller? Yes, I did, and agree it's very interesting.
Yep, that's the one. I figured if you liked Hahn's account of the evolving historiography of Fritz, you'd like the same being done with the Brontes, especially with an eye toward methodology. I'm glad I read Miller *before* I read Gaskell. Miller may not be right in all of her conclusions, but she at least gets you thinking critically.
it would have been a shame to lose this over the most fickle of swans
Indeed, and I love the way you phrased this.
Which must mean that both Hervey (who usually loved to gossip) and Algarotti kept absolutely mum.
That is really interesting, and good for them! Algarotti had better keep mum *frowny face*, but good for Hervey, rival love interest yet loyal friend.
My first book on the Brontes was the sibling biography by Elsemarie Maletzke, who also translated a selection of the Angria and Gondal poems and novellas into German, and while paying respect to all the original research Mrs. Gaskell did back in the day points out her flaws as a biographer already. I also, years later, read Juliet Barker's magnum opus, and she's really taking up a Koser to Catt position re: Mrs. G, see also quotes here.
Since I also had read a lot on and about Sylvia Path and Ted Hughes (who was born none too far from Haworth) by the time I came across Lucasta Miller, the part where she she deals with Plath and Hughs and the Bronte myth was of particular interest back then.
That was a very interesting write-up, thanks for the link. I had run across Barker's work, but couldn't tell from the reviews if it was worth the buy. I'll put it on my someday list, then.
One nice thing about Dark Quartet (and its sequel), published in the 1970s, is it includes most of the things in the italicized paragraph that Gaskell is taken to task for not including. Some of the anecdotes it includes are called out by Miller as unsupported or even contradicted by the evidence, but for a work of fiction, I have no problem with that.
It surviving the crisis to it which the initial triangle situation with Algarotti was (when Hervey did see Lady Mary as a rival and wasn't yet sure which way Algarotti would go) was a great relief to both biographers.
This makes me happy too :D Yay friendship, I say with Heinrich :D (As opposed to love triangles, for sure!)
See, in fiction I would have let him write two odes, just in case, one to Fritz and one to MT, and then by accident mail them to the respective wrong recipient.
MT: gets the one with praise for the lone eagle, complete with homoerotic banter Fritz: gets the one with praise for the Juno of the Alps, the Mother of Europe surely in need of a tasteful art collector now that peace has been restored.
Do you realise one would then have to compose fake Algarotti odes to MT and Fritz respectively? To quote from? In overblown 18th century style?
As for the reactions:
MT: ...So now he's forwarding his fanmail to me? Is this supposed to be a new humiliation tactic? And what does this "reams and rears" and "Your pushes, forward and divine" stuff mean? FS: Trust me, darling, you don't want to know.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
Re: Algarotti
Date: 2020-09-05 10:19 pm (UTC)OMG. That would be so awesome!
I hadn't see the first sketch, thank you!
What are you playing at, Algarotti?
Beats me. Is the whole poem given?
If I read nothing else, I do need to read the Algarotti chapter (and subsequent Algarotti mentions) at some point.
I also meant to say in the other comment that I'm glad they managed to be friends in the last few years of their lives. Especially since those unrequited love letters I summarized a while back are so painful. :/
Re: Algarotti
Date: 2020-09-06 04:58 pm (UTC)Painful: I know what you mean. It reminded me of Charlotte Bronte's letter to her Belgian professor. In both cases, you have someone who just isn't romantically interested, and a smart, passionate woman basically throwing herself at his feet again and again. Mind you, neither Monsieur Heger in Charlotte's case nor Algarotti in Lady Mary's is at fault for being unable to return those feelings, but Monsieur Heger at least never flirted with her and made it very clear from the get go that he wasn't available. Algarotti, for all that he did send plenty of "not just into you" signals, at least seems to have done some flirting, if that poem is anything to go by, and of course he accepted her money when it suited him. BTW, the Hervey biography ends thusly, after our main character is dead, in an "where are they now?" epilogue about the rest of the cast:
Lady Mary, after her four-year sojourn in Avignon , settled in the Venetian province of Brescia ; and in 1756 she moved to Venice and resumed her correspondence with Algarotti, this time as a witty bel esprit instead of a lovesick matron . “When we meet,' she wrote to him in 1758 (four years before her own death ), ‘the Memory of Lord Hervey shall be celebrated ; his Gentle Shade will be pleas'd in Elysium with our Gratitude . I am insensible to every thing but the remembrance of those few Freinds that have been dear to me.' Perhaps, then, Hervey enjoys eternity in the company of the enchanting Algarotti and the witty Lady Mary.
Last line of the biography. Leaving aside the part where this might indeed be Hervey's idea of paradise, and even Lady Mary's, but probably not Algarotti's, it's a neat note to go out on. Both Halsband and Grundy agree that the Lady Mary & Lord Hervey friendship was one of the most important in their respective lives to them. It surviving the crisis to it which the initial triangle situation with Algarotti was (when Hervey did see Lady Mary as a rival and wasn't yet sure which way Algarotti would go) was a great relief to both biographers.
Re: Algarotti
Date: 2020-09-06 10:11 pm (UTC)Oof, yeah. I haven't read them in full, but the excerpts I have are painful enough.
Have you read The Bronte Myth? If not, you might find it interesting.
(
Monsieur Heger at least never flirted with her and made it very clear from the get go that he wasn't available. Algarotti, for all that he did send plenty of "not just into you" signals, at least seems to have done some flirting, if that poem is anything to go by, and of course he accepted her money when it suited him.
Yeah. :/ I can excuse Algarotti the initial flirting, as I don't think he could have predicted she would fall head over heels so quickly, enduringly, and hopelessly, but once he realized what was going on, he really should have been more careful not to lead her on.
Leaving aside the part where this might indeed be Hervey's idea of paradise, and even Lady Mary's, but probably not Algarotti's, it's a neat note to go out on.
Agreed on both counts.
It surviving the crisis to it which the initial triangle situation with Algarotti was (when Hervey did see Lady Mary as a rival and wasn't yet sure which way Algarotti would go) was a great relief to both biographers.
I too am glad they were able to hang onto their friendship. Especially since the relationship with Algarotti wasn't worth losing an important friendship over for either of them, not even Hervey, who "won".
Re: Algarotti
Date: 2020-09-07 04:02 am (UTC)Re: Algarotti
Date: 2020-09-07 06:52 pm (UTC)Re: Algarotti
Date: 2020-09-09 04:21 am (UTC)(Also, being unlike you and novels being easier for me than nonfic, it's good rest from doing Ziebura, whom I love but which is heavier going!)
Brontes
Date: 2020-09-09 06:31 pm (UTC)I not only find it readable, but it makes me feel completely immersed in the sheer passion and intensity of the characters' personalities. I would have liked more Anne, but it does do a good job of acknowledging her hidden steel, as well as Charlotte's discomfort with it.
I'm also glad it's providing a much needed break in 18th century history. :)
Re: Algarotti
Date: 2020-09-07 07:50 am (UTC)By Lucasta Miller? Yes, I did, and agree it's very interesting. And occasionally darkly hilarious, like the descriptions of the early Hollywood movie where Charlotte ends up in a love triangle with Emily and the Reverend Arthur Nichols...
Especially since the relationship with Algarotti wasn't worth losing an important friendship over for either of them, not even Hervey, who "won".
Indeed. They were among each other's favourite people and loyal through a great number of ordeals (among other things, being attacked by the foremost English poet of their age, Alexander Pope, who first praised Lady Mary to the skies and then turned against her - whether or not it was because he finally did dare a pass and she laughed at him is debated - with a vengeance), and it would have been a shame to lose this over the most fickle of swans. Something remarkable: Lady Mary got attacked not just by Pope but later Horace Walpole wiht every accusation misogyny can inspire, including, of course, sexual licence. And yet neither of them when accusing her of having lovers, including younger lovers, names Algarotti. Her unrequited love for him and Algarotti ending up with Hervey (for a while) would have been a gift to satirists hating both her and Hervey. And Algarotti was such a prominent figure at that point: the story would have been eaten up with relish by a wide audience, especially since it ended up with Lady Mary humiliated. And yet - neither Pope, who accuses Lady Mary of "poxing her lovers" (which is a nasty pun on her inoculation work against small pox, mixing it with the accusation of inflicting STD) nor Walpole, who when she returned near the end of her life to die in England said she shold be quaranteened because she was sure to be so dirty, ever caught wind of the Algarotti situation. Which must mean that both Hervey (who usually loved to gossip) and Algarotti kept absolutely mum.
Re: Algarotti
Date: 2020-09-07 02:30 pm (UTC)Yep, that's the one. I figured if you liked Hahn's account of the evolving historiography of Fritz, you'd like the same being done with the Brontes, especially with an eye toward methodology. I'm glad I read Miller *before* I read Gaskell. Miller may not be right in all of her conclusions, but she at least gets you thinking critically.
it would have been a shame to lose this over the most fickle of swans
Indeed, and I love the way you phrased this.
Which must mean that both Hervey (who usually loved to gossip) and Algarotti kept absolutely mum.
That is really interesting, and good for them! Algarotti had better keep mum *frowny face*, but good for Hervey, rival love interest yet loyal friend.
Bronte excursion
Date: 2020-09-08 10:00 am (UTC)Since I also had read a lot on and about Sylvia Path and Ted Hughes (who was born none too far from Haworth) by the time I came across Lucasta Miller, the part where she she deals with Plath and Hughs and the Bronte myth was of particular interest back then.
Re: Bronte excursion
Date: 2020-09-08 10:53 pm (UTC)One nice thing about Dark Quartet (and its sequel), published in the 1970s, is it includes most of the things in the italicized paragraph that Gaskell is taken to task for not including. Some of the anecdotes it includes are called out by Miller as unsupported or even contradicted by the evidence, but for a work of fiction, I have no problem with that.
Re: Bronte excursion
Date: 2020-09-09 04:55 am (UTC)Re: Algarotti
Date: 2020-09-07 03:59 am (UTC)It surviving the crisis to it which the initial triangle situation with Algarotti was (when Hervey did see Lady Mary as a rival and wasn't yet sure which way Algarotti would go) was a great relief to both biographers.
This makes me happy too :D Yay friendship, I say with Heinrich :D (As opposed to love triangles, for sure!)
See, in fiction I would have let him write two odes, just in case, one to Fritz and one to MT, and then by accident mail them to the respective wrong recipient.
MT: gets the one with praise for the lone eagle, complete with homoerotic banter
Fritz: gets the one with praise for the Juno of the Alps, the Mother of Europe surely in need of a tasteful art collector now that peace has been restored.
I WANT THIS NOW. LOL!
Re: Algarotti
Date: 2020-09-07 06:52 pm (UTC)Re: Algarotti
Date: 2020-09-08 09:05 am (UTC)As for the reactions:
MT: ...So now he's forwarding his fanmail to me? Is this supposed to be a new humiliation tactic? And what does this "reams and rears" and "Your pushes, forward and divine" stuff mean?
FS: Trust me, darling, you don't want to know.
Fritz: OH MOST FICKLE OF ALL SWANS!
Re: Algarotti
Date: 2020-09-08 09:47 pm (UTC)Re: Algarotti
Date: 2020-09-12 05:32 am (UTC)okay, I guess I don't need the fic now, this really does sum it up so hilariously
(though I would still not say no to it)
Do you realise one would then have to compose fake Algarotti odes to MT and Fritz respectively? To quote from? In overblown 18th century style?
I mean, it's not a con for me, not being the writer :D