Crotchet Castle

Sigh. I just don’t know how to explain my reading habits. I sometimes have conversations with people who react in drop-jawed surprise that I have a book blog but haven’t read A Thousand Splendid Suns or Snow Flower and the Secret Fan. It’s not because I object to reading popular books. I read them. I have lots on my TBR. But when there are wonderful odd things tucked in corners like Thomas Love Peacock’s Crotchet Castle to read, I just can’t fit everything in.

Crotchet Castle is one part meandering romance story, two parts satire, three parts pseudo-philosophical dialogue, and a dash of a menu for a very good dinner, all placed in a Rabelaisian flask and shaken well. (With or without olive. I don’t think Peacock expresses any opinions about olives.) I was laughing from the very first page:

It is said that a Scotchman, returning home after some years’ residence in England, being asked what he thought of the English, answered:  “They hanna ower muckle sense, but they are an unco braw people to live amang;” which would be a very good story, if it were not rendered apocryphal by the incredible circumstance of the Scotchman going back.

The cast of characters includes Mr. Mac Crotchet, the owner of the castle; Mr. Mac Quedy (that would be Mr. Mac Q.E.D.), political economist; Mr. Skionar, the transcendental poet, who utters nothing but sentimental goop; Mr. Firedamp, who is terrified of malaria, and hence of all water; and a host of others — crowned by the Reverend Doctor Folliott, who is “learned and jolly.”

And that’s really the point. As these characters come and go from Crotchet Castle, as they drink wine and discuss paper money, as they eat their fine suppers and talk about the value of unclothed statues of Venus, as they ask one another to pass the breakfast-fish and argue over the “modern Athenians” (the Scots), they are all learned and jolly. Even the hard-hearted Lady Clarinda, who knows very well what her value is and how she must sell herself for a carriage and an opera-box, is learned and jolly enough to soften by the end, and this outcome is never much in doubt.

Peacock’s satire, while fairly transparent (Skionar, for instance, is a delicious portrait of Shelley), is gentle. He may have a castle full of fools, but no one is malicious, wicked, or even irremediably worldly. The arguments are civil, and bubble just beneath the surface with restrained laughter. Here, a conversation with the practical Mr. Mac Quedy and Mr. Skionar on the age of a nearby Roman camp:

MR. SKIONAR.  And call up the days of old, when the Roman eagle spread its wings in the place of that beechen foliage.  It gives a fine idea of duration, to think that that fine old tree must have sprung from the earth ages after this camp was formed.

MR. MAC QUEDY.  How old, think you, may the tree be?

MR. CROTCHET.  I have records which show it to be three hundred years old.

MR. MAC QUEDY.  That is a great age for a beech in good condition. But you see the camp is some fifteen hundred years, or so, older; and three times six being eighteen, I think you get a clearer idea of duration out of the simple arithmetic, than out of your eagle and foliage.

MR. SKIONAR.  That is a very unpoetical, if not unphilosophical, mode of viewing antiquities.  Your philosophy is too literal for our imperfect vision.  We cannot look directly into the nature of things; we can only catch glimpses of the mighty shadow in the camera obscura of transcendental intelligence.  These six and eighteen are only words to which we give conventional meanings.  We can reason, but we cannot feel, by help of them.  The tree and the eagle, contemplated in the ideality of space and time, become subjective realities, that rise up as landmarks in the mystery of the past.

MR. MAC QUEDY.  Well, sir, if you understand that, I wish you joy. But I must be excused for holding that my proposition, three times six are eighteen, is more intelligible than yours.

I kept being reminded of Rabelais, minus the belching: Peacock is an heir, here, doing some of the same juggling of ideas, laughter, food, learning, religion, satire, and wine.

This post probably hasn’t given you much of an idea of the book, or why I liked it. Try again: Amateur Reader at Wuthering Expectations recently did a few posts on this and several other of Peacock’s novels, and he, as usual, did far better than I did. But I do recommend wedging these in between whatever else you’re reading. Not all of us can be learned and jolly, but it’s nice to read about someone who can.

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Classics, Fiction. Bookmark the permalink.

12 Responses to Crotchet Castle

  1. Stefanie says:

    When Amateur Reader posted about Peacock I meant to get some of his books but never managed it. Before I even finished your post I went to Amazon and downloaded a free copy of this to my Kindle. Thanks!

    • Jenny says:

      I read mine on the Kindle, too. I think I might put the others on there as well, and enjoy them at my leisure.

  2. Christine says:

    I’ve never read any Thomas Love Peacock. Gentle satire of Shelley and tickling jokes about Scots, Rabelais without the dyspepsia: what am I waiting for??

  3. Learned and jolly – just what I want to be!

    You must be right about Rabelais – I felt that even more strongly in Gryll Grange. What else is in the mix – Ben Jonson’s “humours,” a Swift who likes people, which is really not Swift at all, the learned and jolly side of Dr. Johnson. I wonder what Peacock made of Voltaire.

    The earlier is Nightmare Abbey is a bit meaner or more cruel than this one. The much later Gryll Grange is, if anything, sweeter.

    If it is at all encouraging to anyone, Crotchet Castle and Nightmare Abbey are very short, 90 or 100 pages. For all of the parodic debate and ponderous nonsense (see Jenny’s quote from Mr. Skionar), I think Peacock’s novels really skip right along.

    • Jenny says:

      Oh, good call about Swift. Voltaire, of course, is much sharper-edged, but Voltaire wasn’t a misanthrope, far from it. (Except in the case of Rousseau.) He might have thought that only fools could be this nice.

      You are quite right that this moved at a brisk pace. And the poetry! I never mentioned the poetry! Dang.

  4. I love how you described this — “wonderful odd things tucked in corners” — an apt way to talk about wonderful books that aren’t the hot trendy ones!

  5. Lisa says:

    I think it’s these kind of reading habits that draw so many of us together, and to the blogs that resonate with us. And then we discover even more books that we didn’t know we needed to read!

    • Jenny says:

      Exactly! More and more, I seem drawn to blogs that do close analysis of literature, that really engage with text. Often, texts I’ve never heard of. Need-to-read is precisely the sensation.

  6. Juxtabook says:

    I love Peacock, I really love Peacock! I also have not read A Thousand Splendid Suns or Snow Flower and the Secret Fan!

Leave your comment here, and feel free to respond to others' comments. We enjoy a lively conversation!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.