I recently spent a very fun afternoon seeing the movie “Enchanted” with a good friend and her twelve-year-old daughter. In the movie (which really is quite enchanting) a fairy tale princess winds up (due to the machinations of a wicked queen and her henchman) in modern-day New York, where she meets a divorce lawyer who doesn’t believe in happily ever after. The question of whether or not happily ever after is possible runs through the movie. Watching the opera “Madama Butterfly” this weekend, I realized that in it too the heroine believes steadfastly in happily ever after, while the hero (though it’s difficult to call Pinkerton a hero), goes into their “marriage” knowing it will only last as long as he finds convenient. In “Madama Butterfly” this leads to tragedy, while I don’t think it’s a huge spoiler to say that “Enchanted” ends quite differently.
Both Mélanie and Charles have difficulty believing in happily ever after, for different reasons. They confront the question in an early scene in “The Mask of Night.” Since I got some nice feedback on the teaser last week, I thought I’d post another, this one from early in the book. A dead body has just been discovered floating in a fountain at their friends’ Oliver and Isobel Lydgate’s masquerade ball.
_________________
The French windows clicked closed and Mélanie was alone in a cold, moonlit garden with her husband and a dead man.
“We need more light,” she said, looking round the stone statues and clipped hedges. “The victim or the killer might have dropped something.”
“Roth will be here shortly.”
“Yes, but we might as well see—”
“Mel—”
“We said we’d stay out here. No sense wasting the time.”
“Damn it, Mélanie.” He crossed to her side and gripped her shoulders. His eyes had gone from gray to charcoal. “It’s been two months. Two months since we almost lost—”
“Everything.” Child, marriage, trust. Life, and all the things that went to make up a life.
“We don’t need to be dragged into more damned intrigues.”
“I don’t,” she said, all too well aware that she was not being entirely truthful, “see how this could possibly have anything to do with—”
“We can’t tell how this may twist and turn. We’re staying the hell out of it. We’ll show Roth the scene of the crime, we’ll do what we can for Oliver and Isobel, and we’ll go home to our children.”
Check. The tie that bound them, the debt and responsibility she could not ignore. “You said yourself we can’t hide forever.“
“That was about going to a ball. This is about a murder.”
She pulled away from his grasp. “I wasn’t made for safety and cotton wool, Charles. Sometimes I don’t think I was made for happily-ever-after.”
“Perhaps not. But you owe it to your family to try.”
She spun toward the fountain, hands pressed to her face. “Damn it all, I didn’t mean— I owe you and the children more than I can possibly repay.”
“Don’t turn maudlin, Mel. I wasn’t trying to call in a debt.”
“You’d be entitled to do so. But—” Beyond her fingers, something glinted in the murky depths of the water. “Look. By the base of the fountain.”
“For God’s sake, Mélanie—”
“We can’t just leave it there. Hold on to me, Charles.” She knelt on the edge of the fountain without waiting for a reply. Charles drew a sharp breath, but his hands closed on her waist as she leaned forward and reached a velvet-clad, lace-cuffed arm into the cold, blood-filmed water. Her nails scrabbled against stone. She leaned farther forward and would have lost her balance were it not for Charles’s hands at her waist.
Something bumped against her shoulder. The dead body. She sucked in her breath. Her fingers brushed something smooth and thin and sharp. She straightened up, holding a dripping, six-inch object. “The sort of weapon that’s meant for business. Whoever brought it here didn’t intend it as part of a costume.”
“No.” Charles helped her to her feet and took the knife from her numb fingers. His gaze moved over it, sharp with an interest that he quickly masked. Or tried to.
She tugged a handkerchief from her dry sleeve and wiped her hand. “He was stabbed in the chest not the back. That means he probably knew whoever the killer was.”
Charles glanced round the walled garden. “There’s no sign of a struggle.”
“The victim was probably standing at the edge of the fountain. He stumbled back with the blow and fell into the water. You can see where water splashed onto the flagstones. It could be an hour or more before Mr. Roth can get here. If the victim has papers on him—”
“No.” Charles set the knife down on wrought iron table.
“But the water could ruin the evidence before—”
A French window clicked open. Mélanie looked round to tell whomever it was to go back inside, but when she recognized the new arrivals, she held her tongue.
_________________
Do you like happy endings? Do you like them to be Disney-perfect happily ever afters or something in between? Or does the type of ending you like differ depending on the characters and their situation?
Lady Frances expresses some view on happily-ever-afters in a letter to Geoffrey Blackwell in this week’s addition to the Fraser Correspondence, in which she also talks about Charles and Mélanie’s adventures on the Continent and preparations for the approaching holiday season.
As an additional note, my friend and one of my brainstorming partners Veronica Wolff, whose first book will be out in February, has launched her new website. It has some fabulous pictures of Scotland and an excerpt from her forthcoming book.
December 3, 2007 at 12:26 pm
[…] Happily Ever After and another teaser from “The Mask of Night”By Tracy GrantIn the movie (which really is quite enchanting) a fairy tale princess winds up (due to the machinations of a wicked queen and her henchman) in modern-day New York, where she meets a divorce lawyer who doesn’t believe in happily ever …Tracy Grant – Novelist – https://tracygrant.wordpress.com […]
December 3, 2007 at 12:29 pm
[…] Happily Ever After and another teaser from “The Mask of Night”By Tracy GrantIn the movie (which really is quite enchanting) a fairy tale princess winds up (due to the machinations of a wicked queen and her henchman) in modern-day New York, where she meets a divorce lawyer who doesn’t believe in happily ever …Tracy Grant – Novelist – https://tracygrant.wordpress.com […]
December 4, 2007 at 6:01 am
You’re so sweet to tout my site. 🙂
I can’t wait to read your book!! As for happy endings, I confess, I’m a total HEA kinda gal. But I don’t need them to be picture-perfect. This goes just for romance, though. All other genres, I’m happy to wallow in despair. But a love story, any love story, I need it to have a good ending.
December 4, 2007 at 8:52 am
Thanks so much for commenting, Veronica! I love happy endings too, but I also don’t need them to be picture perfect (picture perfect can be a bit dull, as I think the heroine in “Enchanted” realized when she spent a bit more time with her cartoon-perfect fairy tale prince charming in contrast to the divorce lawyer she meets in New York). And much as I love happy endings, I can enjoy books without them. Sometimes I find the contrast makes happy endings that much more powerful.
December 5, 2007 at 4:15 am
I love happy endings. I want happy endings.
But… I *don’t* love “pat” happy endings. For instance:
1) Heroine’s Evil Husband conveniently drops dead – no scandalous divorce.
2) Hero/Heroine’s abusive relatives/friends suddenly become wonderful, loving people in the last five pages and All Is Forgiven. “Gee, Mom/Dad/Sis/Bro/Cousin/In-Laws/etc, I forgive you for the YEARS of abuse you heaped on me.”
3) Infertile Hero/Heroine suddenly becomes fertile. Babies. Babies. More babies. Can’t have a happy ending without lots of babies! Bleah.
4) Blind hero/heroine regains sight magically. Disabled hero/heroine jumps out of wheelchair.
5) Courtesan/Mistress heroine is whitewashed and the entire *Ton* kneels at her feet in adoration. (Ok, a man of high rank could marry a scandalous woman, but they weren’t whitewashed.)
December 5, 2007 at 6:05 am
Totally agree about “pat” happy endings, JMM. I find the fact the characters still have to deal with real world problems but can be happy despite them is much more powerful than everything being tied up with a bow. Barbara Hambly’s Darwath Triology has one of my favorite happy endings ever (in part because I wasn’t sure the end *would* be happy). Despite the immediate threat being dealt with, the characters still have major challenges to face, but you believe they can do so. I also love the ending of Georgette Heyer’s “An Infamous Army”–both the hero and heroine are scarred by Waterloo emotionally (and his face physically) and you don’t think the future will be perfect but you do believe the love they’ve fought their way back to will survive. One thing I love about series is being able to explore those future challenges.
December 5, 2007 at 10:23 am
JMM – it’s interesting you should raise point 5, about mistresses and courtesans, as I am currently reading about nineteenth century courtesan Harriette Wilson, and a comparison with the fictional Marguerite St Just (an actress and not a courtesan, but the association is there). The family of one of Harriette’s young ‘protectors’, a lord in line to inherit a Dukedom and a massive estate, were frightened that their son’s infauation with such a notorious courtesan would lead to marriage, and tried to pay her off; the irony was that Harriette never had any intention of becoming a ‘lady’, like her sister did, as she would have lost her freedom, her control, and could never have adjusted to the restrictive and monotonous life as lady of the manor. It just started me wondering about what Marguerite gave up, and how she would really have been accepted by polite English society, mid-Revolution: she was French, republican, and a former actress, for heaven’s sake! Percy’s position and wealth would never have persuaded all but the most unconventional society women – like Lady Portales, her champion in TSP – to accept and visit Marguerite at Blakeney Manor, and yet Orczy paints her a rapturous, popular welcome as soon as she arrives in England. Is this a ‘pat’ happy ending?
December 5, 2007 at 10:25 am
Sorry, not to mislead – I’m making the comparison between Harriette and Marguerite, I’m not reading about it!
December 5, 2007 at 2:22 pm
LOL!
Well, in TSP, they did have the “protection” of the Prince of Wales. And Percy is supposed to be one of the richest men in England (Probably the reason the Prince liked Percy – George was notoriously short on funds).
Not to mention, Margot is supposed to have “entertained” well. So, society would have had to accept her outwardly while Percy and Margot established themselves.
And I don’t think Lady Portarles was actually defending Margot, she was pointing out to the Comtesse the cold hard facts; the Comtesse (a poor foreign refugee in England) was NOT in a position to spurn the wife of one of the richest men in England, who was the friend of the English Prince.
Remember the scene where Margot stands beside the Prince while he introduces her to the Comtesse? (Or vice-versa) That’s a lovely bit of manipulation.
Tracy, the bit about dealing with the Real World was exactly what I was trying to say. So many romances end with all problems either magically “solved” or glossed over, and I’m left saying, “But what if…” and not believing the couple will be together in another year.
December 5, 2007 at 3:20 pm
JMM – the Prince may have swayed a few critics of the new Lady Blakeney, especially directly as in the case of the Comtesse (there was a strict hierarchy at work), but Percy’s wealth wouldn’t be enough to influence any wives of the nobility who refused to associate with a former actress (and Percy was only a baronet, so his ‘position’, bar being in with the Prince, wouldn’t have won him any consideration, either). New money was acceptable, but there seems to have been the same enduring double standards in existence with regards to a woman’s reputation, and family honour – associating with ‘fallen’ women, or women of dubious circumstances, was rather risky for respectable wives and daughters (the men, of course, could do as they liked!)
As to the Comtesse’s opinion of Marguerite, it all depends on which prejudice was most overwhelming – class, or nationality! I think the Comtesse’s ‘cutting’ of Marguerite, until forced into polite acceptance by the Prince, is more believable than everyone loving Marguerite wherever she goes – did the woman have any enemies?
December 5, 2007 at 5:33 pm
Excellent points, JMM and Sarah! I think it would have been difficult for Marguerite, perhaps more difficult than we see in the books. The Prince of Wales’s patronage would have helped–if it was known that in order to get the Prince to attend your entertainment you had to send cards to the Blakeneys, the Blakeneys would have been invited. One has a sense in the books that Marguerite is so glamorous, witty, and charming, that she sets a fashion. In real life, at about the same time, the actress Elizabeth Farren married the Early of Derby and apparently was accepted by society (like Marguerite, she had a virtuous reputation). But I think there’d still have been talk about Marguerite whispered behind fans, particularly by some high-sticklers. Your so right that her nationality would have been an issue as well as her having been an actress, Sarah. In my books, London society doesn’t know about Mélanie’s past, but they do know she’s French/Spanish. There’s a lot of gossip and curiosity about her and as Mélanie says to David early on in “Beneath a Silent Moon,” a lot of people “think that Charles ought to have married a nice British girl.” She overcomes a lot of the prejudice, but she’s well aware that if society had the least idea of even a portion of the truth of her past they’d shun her. By “The Mask of Night,” Charles knows this too, which creates an interesting dynamic. It’s his world, and his wife would not be welcome in it.
December 5, 2007 at 6:06 pm
How ironic! I’ve been debating over whether to add Emma Donoghue’s ‘Life Mask’ to my long reading list, and Eliza Farren and the Earl of Derby are two of the main characters in her book. I never need much of a push, but I shall borrow a copy immediately and compare the two stories 😉
Nationality is important, especially considering when TSP and your trilogy of Charles and Melanie stories are set – up until the Revolution, it would probably have been very attractive to marry an exotic French or Spanish lady, but after about 1793, there was a distinct lack of ‘entente cordiale’ between England and France, at least, which has never entirely been erased, and marriages such as the Frasers and the Blakeneys would probably have been carried on the reputation of the English husband – Jellyband in TSP thinks the worst of Marguerite when she appears at the Fisherman’s Rest with Sir Andrew, but is eager to trust both men’s honour that nothing untoward is going to happen, and of course the Comtesse is warned that Marguerite is married to one of the richest men in the country.
This is why I prefer the idea that Marguerite did not feel totally comfortable during her first year in England, when she was unsure of Percy’s feelings for her; she would have been utterly alienated, cut off from her own country and only politely accepted in her husband’s. It heightens the tension somewhat!
December 5, 2007 at 6:37 pm
Do let me know what you think of “Life Mask”–it’s in my tbr pile too!
I definitely think Marguerite, like Mélanie, would have made her way in society largely on her husband’s name, which does heighten the tension and add an interesting dynamic to both marriages!
December 5, 2007 at 7:02 pm
I was just thinking of the parallels between Melanie and Margot’s situations. Both beautiful foreigners who have to make their way in a very different world from the one they came from.
And the letters in your “correspondence” section, showing the gossip surrounding Charles’ marriage and the “oh, she had a baby only a few months after the wedding!” snipes.
I bet there would have been some people quite surprised that Marguerite didn’t have a baby within a year of her wedding!
One thing I noticed; in TSP, Margot is often mentioned as being surrounded by *male* admirers. 😉 It’s never mentioned what the women think.
And she is lonely at times; that’s mentioned in the chapter where she runs into Chauvelin.
I don’t think she felt comfortable during her first months in London, but she obviously made a splash, like the Diva we know and love!
December 5, 2007 at 8:47 pm
Very interesting snippet.
I really need to find a copy of TSP so I can follow all those discussions. Having grown up in Germany made me miss some books. 😦
December 6, 2007 at 5:39 am
JMM, I think there are definitely parallels between Margot and Mélanie–not surprising, perhaps, as the TSP books were one of my inspirations for the Charles & Mélanie books. I enjoyed fleshing out the way Charles’s sudden marriage was viewed at home in the Fraser Correspondence section. I hadn’t thought about it, but I suspect there would have been a lot of speculation that Marguerite would have a baby less than nine months after the wedding. Marguerite definitely is surrounded more by men than by women in TSP. I think that’s part of the reason she’s so excited to see Suzanne, and it makes it particularly sad that Suzanne’s mother forbids Suzanne to have contact with her. I imagine having Suzanne as a friend after her marriage to Andrew made a big difference to Marguerite. (Cate, if you’re reading this, I’d love to hear what you think as someone who’s written sequels to the Scarlet Pimpernel books. Mélanie doesn’t have a great many friends in England in “Beneath a Silent Moon.’ She starts with Charles’s close friends, like David and Simon and David’s sister Isobel and her husband Oliver and gradually wins over more of society. I think she, too, is frequently lonely.
Gabriele, TSP and its sequels are a lot of fun. I believe all the books are available online at http://www.blakeneymanor.com.
December 6, 2007 at 9:02 am
That’s a very good point about Marguerite drawing more men than women to her – ‘It’s not the men who don’t like the shape of my nose’, and the crowd who flock to escort her to her carriage when she leaves the ball (I love that moment) – and it rather fits in with my purely speculative theory about her initial year in England: the men would have been free to associate with her, the women unsure. I also think Marguerite is more of a man’s woman – she made a stronger, faster friendship with Sir Andrew than with Suzanne, who is barely mentioned after the first couple of books (Marguerite could have done with a friend like Louise, in the 1982 film – someone more dynamic and from the same background of the theatre).
So much is left unsaid in Orczy’s books – much ammunition for fan fiction and sequels, but so time consuming for the reader with an active imagination! I agree there would have been lots of tongues wagging about the lack of an heir, particularly amongst those who knew the Blakeney family history (Percy’s mother). Was it intentional? A slur on their marriage? Would Marguerite have shouldered the blame?
December 6, 2007 at 5:53 pm
I think it would have been difficult for Marguerite that first year–Percy’s friends accept her, but Percy’s friends aren’t marriage and Percy doesn’t have a mother or sister to take Marguerite under her wing, so there’s no lady in English society to introduce Marguerite around. I really liked the friendship between Marguerite and Louise in the the 1982 film–I miss that in the books. And I do wish in the books we got a few more glimpses of the characters’ “real life” (apart from their adventures) though it does make for lots of great fan fiction opportunities!
December 8, 2007 at 9:51 am
Tracy,
I’d read your sneak peeks for Mask of Night when you first posted them, and I have to say they are exactly what I hoped for. A few more wouldn’t hurt anyone right?
P.
December 8, 2007 at 9:58 am
Hi Perla! So glad you enjoy the sneak peeks from “The Mask of Night”! I will definitely be posting more–not every week, but fairly often (as well as mentioning the book and the other Charles and Mélanie books in blogs). So do check back frequently!
December 15, 2007 at 9:27 am
Tracy, I’m still reading ‘Life Mask’ – Donoghue’s ‘infodumps’ are clumsy, but she brings the three main characters to life. It’s interesting that Eliza, as with Marguerite, is mostly accepted by the men, and then politely by society women, because of her relationship with Derby; at one point, after her rift with Anne, she wonders if a beautiful, famous actress can have any close friends, or if all women must be rivals. Eliza and Derby are the most vivid, realistic characters in the book, though not as a couple – she has her ‘little sins’ of pride and vanity, like Marguerite, and he is wonderfully male, drinking too much at the club and relieving the frustration of his virtuous courtship of Eliza by sleeping with women who vaguely resemble her. As a study of the late eighteenth century, it’s rich with trivia and atmosphere, though the author does get some facts wrong – I would recommend it!
December 15, 2007 at 7:16 pm
Thanks for the update on “Life Mask,” Sarah! It sounds fascinating. One of the things that’s fun for me to write in “The Mask of Night,” is that Isobel Lydgate, the first English lady (other than Charles’s aunt) to become Mélánie’s friend and support her in society plays an important role. Isobel has known Charles since he was at Harrow with her brother David, so she at first supports Mélanie out of loyalty to Charles, but then the two women become close friends. Isobel doesn’t see Mélanie as a rival, though she is sometimes overwhelmed by Mélanie’s ability to juggle so many different aspects of her life (Mélanie would say it’s all an act :-).