
Mélanie seeing me off to the Merola Grand Finale last weekend. A fabulous end to a great summer program!
Last week’s survey post yielded some fascinating discussion on the series and characters. One point that particularly intrigue me was the idea of how the various characters might be happy and if it’s even desirable for every major character in the series to have a “happy and settled life.” Of course, in a series, as in real life, there’s no such thing as a “happy ending.” As Cordelia says “there’s always an after.” Even characters with the most seemingly settled lives could find their lives upended, which I think is part of what makes a series interesting, both to read and to write. That, and the fact that characters can arrive at happy lives and loves (at least “happily for now”) over multiple books.
But posters also raised the question of if we even want every character in a series to have a happy and settled life. Is that too easy? Should it be more like real life, with some characters remaining alone, some relationships falling apart, some perhaps proving less ideal than they seemed at the start? How do you feel about this, both in this series and in other series you read?
And even if one ultimately wants the major characters to arrive at a happy and settled life, what does that look like? Right now in the series, Rupert and Bertrand are happier and have a more settled life than they ever expected. They’re together, they’ve worked out an amicable relationship with Rupert’s wife Gabrielle (who has her own lover) and sharing the care of Rupert and Gabrielle’s son. Rupert’s father is essentially out of the picture. But their relationship still has to remain secret from all but their closest friends. It’s still, in fact, a hanging offense. Rupert isn’t on speaking terms with his father. We haven’t really dealt with Bertrand’s parents, but they probably at best only acknowledge the relationship by deliberately turning a blind eye to it. Are Rupert and Bertrand settled and happy?
What about Simon and David? Their relationship in some ways is more stable than that that of most of the married couples in the series. They’ve been together for a decade. But David is under increasing pressure to marry and produce an heir, from his family and from his own sense of responsibility. And there are ongoing political tensions between David, the liberal Whig who is still an aristocrat, and Simon, the Radical reformer.
Laura and Raoul seemed to be tentatively beginning a relationship of sorts at the end of Mayfair Affair. But Raoul was leaving for Spain, where rebellion against the restored monarchy is brewing, and warned Laura that he couldn’t promise he’d survive. He also pointed out that he had very little to offer her, including marriage. He has an estranged wife in Ireland. If Laura and Raoul’s emotional bonds grow but he’s away much of the time and their love affair has to remain more or less secret (like Rupert and Bertrand and Simon and David in a sense) are they settled and happy? If they were somehow able to marry but Raoul still disappeared for long stretches of time running crazy risks would that be settled and happy?
Though it hasn’t been discussed in the Rannoch universe, Bow Street Runner Jeremy Roth also has an estranged wife, who ran off years ago leaving him and their two sons, whom his sister is helping him raise. A number of readers have mentioned they’d like Roth to fall in love, but at present he’s in no position to marry. He too could have a secret relationship. Or, not being part of society, he might more easily be able to live with a lover without being married to her. Would that be settled and happy?
Of course even the couples who are married and more or less settled have tensions. Harry, I think, still wonders about Cordelia’s past, and Harry’s own past in the time they were apart may become an issue in the next book. Malcolm and Suzanne live with the threat of her past being exposed. Not to mention that they are still adjusting to the impact of Malcolm learning about her past (Suzanne says in Mayfair that she has more than she ever thought to have but it will never be the same), and their loyalties are almost bound to conflict at some point.
What do you think? Do you ultimately want settled and happy lives for the major characters? Do you at least want to feel they are moving towards them? Or do you prefer real world messiness? And if the former, how do you define settled and happy?
Have a great weekend!
Tracy
August 28, 2015 at 4:03 pm
I want to feel the characters are moving toward settled and happy lives. I don’;t feel the need for absolute demonstration of it for all, but at least moving toward it.
I desperately want a happy ending for Simon and David, but can’t see how that could happen
August 28, 2015 at 5:32 pm
Thanks for posting, Kay. How would you define a happy ending for David and Simon?
August 28, 2015 at 7:21 pm
I want the characters to have some stability but still be interesting. I love David and Simon and wish their was a way for them to be together without worry of hanging. (maybe Lady Carfax could have a late pregnancy, just kidding) I would like Harry and Cordelia to stop knifing each other regarding her past. If Harry has moved past the betrayal then let it go already. The same with Malcolm, he needs to decide how he really feels about Suzanne before it effects their work. That could get really messy and then Carfax would know something was very wrong. As for Roth, I would just like more his character to be more central during the investigations, I know he does run in the same circles as Malcolm and etc., but as crime and murder go the Bow Street Inspector should at least be consulted. As or his personal life since he is working class he could always just have a girlfriend.
August 28, 2015 at 7:51 pm
Thanks, Kim! Unfortunately without time travel there’s no way to change the laws David and Simon live under. Which doesn’t mean they can’t be together, but at best their relationship will always have to be somewhat secret.
Interesting comment about Harry and Cordy – I think he mostly brings up Cordy’s past when they encounter one of her ex-lovers and then in a joking way meant to diffuse tensions. As I mentioned in the next book we encounter a bit of his past which at least should shift the dynamic some.
As for Malcolm, I think he still has a lot to sort through when it comes to Suzanne. I think both couples are dealing in different ways with the fact that it’s one thing to decide to move forwards despite the past and another to actually do so.
Roth will never be the central investigator in the series, but he should have more screen time in upcoming stories.
August 29, 2015 at 12:29 am
Hi Tracy, I understand about David and Simon so I assume it will have to remain with just their friends… I didn’t mean Roth as a central investigator. I was thinking more in line with Malcolm talking to him about working class issues, but since most crimes concern peers, I guess that wouldn’t really work. Sorry for the confusion.
August 29, 2015 at 12:39 am
Thanks for elaborating, Kim! That is a great thought. Actually the next full novel begins with a petty thief who is a former enlisted soldier found dead in a warehouse by the docks. Partly because I wanted to delve into the non-aristocracy a bit (though the mystery does wind its way back to Mayfair).
August 28, 2015 at 7:53 pm
settled usually means married even in this day and age –now weather that marriage is happy–still problems in this day and age.
I think Malcolm and Suzanne are as settled as they are gonnal be–with Malcolm still feeling responsible for everything that goes wrong and Suz still trying to fit in that aristocratic world and the fact they investigate some pretty rough cases. David and Simon are settled for now–but I don’t see happy when Carfax dies–how old is he anyway? I don/t see settle for Raoul or Roth
Harry and Cordy–still have some issues but I think pretty settled
August 28, 2015 at 8:20 pm
True, Patti – settled still tends to mean marriage and children and a home (with or without white picket fence 🙂 but not for everyone. I’m a single mom and I feel pretty settled and very happy. And as you say whether or not marriages are happy still varies. So does what those marriages/relationships look like. Some people can be very happy in situations that don’t look very settled from the outside. I think you’re right, Malcolm and Suzanne will always live with myriad tensions and they probably can’t get too much more settled, though I think they can continue to work through the tensions between them. For Raoul (and Laura) and Roth I think the definition of settled is particularly interesting as if whether and how they can happy – and what works in the context of the series.
Thanks for chiming in – loving the comments!
August 29, 2015 at 6:29 pm
Settled and happy could mean many things as each person has discussed. I think it is fine for characters to be settled and happy, but nevertheless having to face tensions or dilemmas that would make their lives interesting. The way they deal with these could strengthen or erode their relationship. All relationships face problems from time to time, but it doesn’t have to mean the relationship isn’t settled. My husband was in the Marine Corps for 20 years, putting him in dangerous situations and causing us to move frequently. However, I never thought of us as not “settled”, even when we were moving, because that was just part of the life we faced. I see a similarity in Malcolm and Suzanne’s realtionship regarding their investigations that can throw their lives into turmoil. Also, the same with Laura and Raoul as they may embark on a relationship. Laura understands his life, and she has lived a fairly dangerous existance herself, so I don’t believe it would affect their relationship, other than causing normal worry and anxiousness.
I agree with Kay that I want to see my characters moving toward a happy lifestyle, understanding that their problems and challenges will make the story interesting and perhaps help their characters grow. I think you do a great job of supplying suspense, but at the same time having characters be realistic in their lives. And you have written plenty of situations where secondary characters don’t have a happy ending – Louisa and Jack for one. Whereas I was sad about Louisa, and in the back of my mind wanted Jack to still be alive and reformed, the ending you wrote for them was understandable and acceptable. Also, you have enough dastardly characters in your series to provide reality and lead to unhappy endings.
There are so many things to think about in your post:
– Bertrand, Rupert, and Gabrielle – I think they all seem to be happy and as settled as possible for the times they live in.
– David and Simon – the same goes for them, but I know they will face challenges in the future, and I love seeing how they deal with their political differences, especially their interaction during the Battle of Waterloo.
– Harry and Cordelia – I feel they are happy and settled and that Harry has shown remarkable forgiveness and understanding of Cordelia’s situation in carrying on without him. She did bare the stigma while he was away. I agree that his comments about the past only come up when a former lover appears, and his dialogue to me shows he has gotten over it – at least for the most part.
You asked a question about happy and settled in other series. For the most part, I have gotten to know what to expect from my favorite authors. I know the ones who will eventually let their characters end up happy, but it’s the journey along the way that makes the story interesting, and sometimes there is just that small wonder of whether things will work out for HEA (but I don’t think ‘after’ means always). One author that I was used to working to a happy/settled resolution for her characters, completely surprised me by having the main characters die, and I was not happy!! It took me a long time to adjust to that ending, even though the book was very interesting, and well-written. Again, I think a lot depends on expectations. As I mentioned above, you do a wonderful job of keeping the reader guessing and supplying the reality and messiness when necessary.
August 29, 2015 at 7:22 pm
Thanks so much for the thoughtful comments, Betty! I think it’s an excellent point that “settled” doesn’t have to mean “settled down”. It can be meaning settling into routine (which perhaps is only routine in that one gets used to unpredictability) that works for both people. I think that applies to Malcolm and Suzanne now, though they still have issues to work through. They were also “settled” before Malcolm learned the truth about Suzanne and then that threw their lives into chaos. They’ve established a new version of “settled” but events (her past being revelaled to others, their loyalties pulling them too much in different directions) could still throw their lives into turmoil (one of the things that makes them fun to write about over an o going series).
And I think it’s possible that “settled” for Laura and Raoul could look even less like a conventional relationship and perhaps only be stable in that their feelings for each other are stable and they know the relationship will endure.
I’m curious about Jack – did you see him being alive and reconciling with Laura? I could see that seeming a possibility, at least at some points in the story.
I don’t know if I’ve mentioned this on the blog, but when I started Paris Affair Bertrand really was dead. I was thinking through the plot at one point and thought “this is so sad” and then thought “what if he’s not dead?”So glad about that, for lots of reasons.
August 30, 2015 at 12:26 am
Regarding Jack and Jane, I think I began to wonder about them when it was mentioned that their bodies were not found and also because of the fact that Trenchard was in India. Then once Laura was revealed as Jane, I began to think maybe Jack had survived, but was badly injured. For a brief moment it occurred to me that perhaps this injury would make him rethink his life and realize he loved Jane. However, once I found out about Lily Duval, I was thinking he could return to her, especially since it seemed that Raoul was interested in Laura – and I much prefer that plot turn!
Bringing Bertrand back from the dead was a stroke of genius! Your sel-questioning technique does provide many intriguing plot twists. Thanks for sharing the working’s of an author’s mind. I am amazed at how much you weave into the historical events of your time period. The escape from France of Manon and also Paul St. Gilles and his family was spellbinding.
August 30, 2015 at 12:34 am
Thanks for sharing your thoughts on Jack and Jane. It makes sense, given that the bodies weren’t found and then that Jane survived, to have wondered if Jack had survived as well. Although that would have created all sorts of complications for Laura, as she’d still have been married to him. Raoul’s wife is at least out of the picture. I don’t think a returned Jack would have been.
The funny thing about Bertrand being alive is that I already knew I wanted the book to end with breaking a Bonapartist out of prison – I didn’t know it would be Paul St. Gilles yet, and I’m not sure where I was with the Manon storyline. But having Bertrand be alive and be the Kestrel not only gave a happy ending to his and Rupert’s love story, it really fit in with the rest of the book.
Even though I had set up Manon going to work at the Tavistock, when I began Berkeley Square and had the idea of the manuscript being found by an aristocrat whose mistress was an actress, I didn’t at first plan for that woman to be Manon. Now it seems so natural I can’t believe I didn’t think of it from the first. But then even though I plot a lot in advance, my books always evolve a good deal as I write them.
I love thinking about the writing process, both my own and that of other writers! (One of the things I love about Lauren’s site as well).
August 31, 2015 at 12:41 am
Thank you for keeping Bertrand. I couldn’t imagine the ending any other way. It especially works to understanding Rupert’s anger with his father. I also understand Betty’s POV that settled doesn’t mean happy and boring. Everyone’s “normal” is different and that doesn’t need to mean bad or unhappy it just means “normal”.
I am so looking forward to the character changes in the aftermath of the Mayfair Affair in the novella.
August 31, 2015 at 6:27 am
I can’t imagine the story anyway but with Bertrand alive, Kim, both in Paris Affair and ongoing in the series. Weird to me now I didn’t think of it that way from the first! Lots of interesting things to explore with how the characters are growing and changing post-Mayfair and how “normal” is shifting for some of them. I’m really enjoying writing the novella and London Gambit!
August 31, 2015 at 3:49 am
I’ll just add my two cents worth and say that a balance of happy and settled and real world messiness works for me. I don’t believe that all of our characters will have one or the other. For example David and Simon, who make a fine couple, are going to have to accept the fact that David will have to marry and their world will change. But with the right character as a wife, perhaps David can become settled but the same kind of happiness he has with Simon won’t exist. And Raoul’s wife could die, freeing him to marry again. But Raoul is not really a man to be settle down so is an ongoing (but going nowhere) affair really a form of happiness? I see Malcolm and Suzanne as happy with the spice of being unsettled a lot of the time. But with all that has happened they seem to be almost soul mates who could never easily leave one another. Their bond seems the strongest in spite of everything. I could analyze everyone but my point is that one condition does not preclude nor include the other. What makes these people interesting is their mix.
August 31, 2015 at 6:32 am
Thanks so much for chiming in, Lynne! Love getting your take. You have a really good point that for most characters settled and happy is a balancing act, sometimes happy, and real world messiness is likely to intrude. In some cases settled and happy may conflict. David might be very settled with but would also probably be extremely unhappy. And if Raoul doesn’t change, how happy he can be in an unsettled relationship is probably going to have a lot to do with how Laura feels about it and what she wants long term. And I agree that Malcolm and Suzanne have a bond that seems as though it could endure despite very unsettling circumstances. Doesn’t mean it won’t be tested :-).
September 1, 2015 at 1:42 pm
Absolutely! The mix is awesome!
September 1, 2015 at 5:23 pm
So glad you like it!
September 1, 2015 at 1:28 pm
Hi Tracy, I know this is not part of this week’s discussion, but I just re-read the Mayfair Affair and wondered during your writing process if you always expected Laura to remain part of the central group or did you expect her to fall into the background more like Isobel and Oliver or become more like Cordelia now that she will be returning to being Lady Tarrington. I am curious to see how Malcolm and Suzanne are going to explain her “return” from the dead.
I am looking forward to the new book in November.
September 1, 2015 at 5:23 pm
Cool you reread Mayfair! I knew from Daughter of the Game/Secrets of a Lady that Laura would be an important ongoing character. I knew for quite a while that she would be accused of murder (Mayfair is the book I would have written after Mask of Night if I hadn’t gone back). As I’ve mentioned before, I originally planned to have her get involved with Roth and then decided at someone point in working on Mask that she and Raoul were a very good match.
Laura’s “return from the dead” is an important part of the novella that I really enjoyed writing (and found challenging). What do you see happening with her?
September 1, 2015 at 6:24 pm
oh NOOOO is the friend coming thru the wiindow JACK
September 2, 2015 at 12:20 am
I see her having a hard time adjusting to life stuck somewhere between being Lady Tarrington and Laura Dudley, but enjoying Emily. As for how she moves forward, I am sure your writing will be clever and fun.
September 2, 2015 at 6:53 am
That would be quite a twist, Patti! At the risk of spoilers, it’s not Jack. It’s Raoul, Bertrand, and a French agent named Lisette d’Armagnac.
September 2, 2015 at 5:48 pm
Of course==you said that. Guess I got caught up in the Laura Jack Roth comments
September 2, 2015 at 5:58 pm
oh I meant Raoul and wouldn’t it be just like him to bring Jack back
September 4, 2015 at 1:13 am
That is exactly what I meant–Raoul would help–for Laura’s sake
September 2, 2015 at 7:08 am
That’s pretty close to where she is at the start of the novella, Kim – the ball Suzanne and Malcolm are giving is her first major appearance in society as Lady Tarrington, so nerve wracking for her and she feels a bit like a fish out of water. But she is definitely enjoying Emily.
September 3, 2015 at 6:41 am
I think Raoul would find his life pretty complicated if Jack was still alive, Patti, notably in terms of his relationship with Laura. Though if Jack still was alive, he’d probably try to help him.