[quote] text [/quote]
Except remove the asterisks! I had to put those in there so my sample wouldn’t just show up in a quote box.
That’s how I’ve always done it. For some unknown reason, I was having a problem with my first post the other day, but now it works like it always did.
Benjamin HaLevy wrote Manuel’s name because he was still grieving the death of his son, and knew that Manuel was the one who should have married Ester. Ester sees him write Manuel’s name:
Alvaro didn’t have have to masquerade as Manuel. Benjamin was able to get away with writing the wrong name because the Magistrate didn’t care (he just wanted to be out of there, away from the London fire) and the rabbi was a stranger to the family (“the sole learned Jew Benjamin HaLevy had been able to procure on short notice” [p. 512]).
Actually there is now a quote option at the bottom of everyone’s post. If you click on it it will give you the whole post and then you can delete whatever parts you don’t want to include.
Alvaro’s father still feels shamed by his homosexuality. This is his way of denying the truth. I thought it was kind of Esther to let him have his way. Ultimately harmless, though it did confuse the historians trying to figure out the timeline.
I did think the philosophy was interesting and would like to spend a little more time with it. I think Esther, does go beyond Spinoza in questioning God’s existence, but also think that she’s in the line that leads to the Enlightenment and transcendentalism. Where God is seen more as the force of nature. At one point she and Spinoza talk about “Conatus” a word I had never seen before. According to Wikipedia.
. It’s been used in a lot of different ways by different people. It’s almost the opposite of inertia. Very interesting concept.
I feel it’s significant that Aaron’s last name is Levy. There are many other surnames that the author could have chosen for Aaron. Is it to subtly strengthen the bond that Aaron feels toward the long-dead people that he is studying? (The name means “joining.”) Is it to suggest that he has some HaLevy in him — the arrogance of Manuel, with the underlying gentleness of Alvaro? Or could it be a way to link the generations, conveying that the Jewish line lives on through the centuries, persevering through all trials?
I don’t think John was good or bad, just too weak to be the man for Ester over the long term.
Agree.
John runs too easily to be considered a good man. How does he even know whether or not Esther is with child? Also he shares their lovemaking with Thomas who shares it with Bescos, who then taunts Esther. I mean, really … If I remember correctly he doesn’t even try to find her at any point after all’s said and done.
Speaking of Manuel (and father), Manuel saves Ester in the end. First with the needed bags of coin and then by giving her a place to turn when she leaves London. Manuel’s father acknowledges her importance to his son when he answers the door with his “You’re the one he wanted. Aren’t you?” Without that, I doubt Benjamin HaLevy would have allowed her in the house at all. Signing Manuel’s name as groom is more of the same.
I don’t think John did that to brag, but because he was too trusting and too easily manipulated by his friends. Thomas probably feigned concern and got John to spill the beans. Whatever the motive, it still makes John a fool. Which makes Ester’s judgement pretty questionable and her attraction to him hard to fathom. Such is love, I guess.
I am deep in the midst of the book, avoiding this discussion for now so I can see for myself how it plays out. Looking forward to joining you all here later in the month.
Oh I don’t think he did it to brag. I just think he has questionable judgment and friends. And he knows better - really …
Of the men in the book I like dhim least (pretty much from the beginning). Maybe that’s why I’m not giving him much of a pass behavior-wise.
^ I hope you liked him better than Bescós and Thomas!
Thomas was a beast. Bescos was a brute.
I remembered them after I posted and knew someone would call me on it. LOL
Let’s just say I liked John less than the rabbi or Alvaro or Manuel. I also included Aaron and Dror in my thoughts when I dropped John down to the bottom. So not just Ester’s men but Helen’s gang. (No, I didn’t like Jonathan Martin either.)
Re Thomas, that was quite a wild ride he took them on down the river! I assume his goal was to shake up Mary so much that she’d lose the baby.
And what did we think of Mary? Any sympathy for her or was she purely annoying? I lean toward the latter.
Just posting to say I haven’t finished this book, yet. Glad to see lots of people read this selection, welcome to all the newbies,
13 month old grandson visiting for the week, from Chicago, doubt I will find the time to finish anytime soon, too busy getting my baby hugs.
Re: Mary – the first thing that popped into my head was: “Looking for love in all the wrong places.” After her mother died, who cared about her? Certainly not her father. (Which is not to say she wasn’t annoying even when her mother was alive.)
Just popping in to say hi - I am hoping to join in on one of these discussions. I started this book but I had a hard time concentrating enough to get into it. Kind of related - a distant cousin of mine contacted me and said I should go on Ancestry since someone in my family mapped out my family tree. I knew very little of my mom’s father’s side and just learned he had 12 siblings! I’ve been going back in time and trying to put some pieces together, not easy with such limited information. I wish I could stumble across a stack of hidden papers!
@SouthJerseyChessMom, enjoy the baby hugs!
@psychmom, what fun! You’re going to have cousins coming out the woodwork.
Catherine saw the writing on the wall as far as her daughter’s fate was concerned. She hoped Ester would be able to keep Mary on the right path, but Ester was fairly useless in that regard. She had no control over headstrong Mary.
An unsung hero (heroine) of the novel is Rivka. She keeps the members of the household fed and clothed, tends to them in illness, and does the lion’s share of the household work so that Ester can be with the rabbi. I don’t think there’s much love lost between Ester and Rivka, but they need each other and understand that each provides an essential service for the rabbi, whom they both love very much.
Rivka was definitely full of surprises. She quietly got things done and made it possible for first the rabbi and then Ester to get on with things.
Kind of a parallel with the Patricias, whose work in the archives made it possible for Helen and Aaron to do the more glamorous work.
So true! In the end, Aaron observes about one of the Patricias that her “worry took the form of anger at the world for its failure to remain safe,” and that her “terseness was love–that all of it was love.” The same could be said of Rivka.
And when the rabbi is dying and calls out in Portuguese, Rivka asks Ester what he said – hoping he had called out for her. Ester said he had called out for his mother. I agree that she was the one who held everything together. She also, very much against her gut, agreed to be baptized (or whatever --) when Ester and Rivka left Mary’s house with the vicar. Ester had no qualms; Rivka did.