Sorry, vw. The only person that I was trying to mock was the author.

I think it's understood that the craziness is entirely the author's.

Sure, to you, but you don't have a personal investment in it. I think vw has the right to call out when she's feeling uncomfortable- and this has been going on for *days*. It's not like it's just come up.

Yeah, a lot of it is the author, but a lot of it is the discussion of the lifestyle being portrayed.

Doesn't make participants in the discussion wrong in any way, but vw is just speaking up on something that pings her.

Sorry, vw. The only person that I was trying to mock was the author.

It's fine. I don't want to start a thing. It's just that the discussion has been going on and on. I'll step back and get back to the work I'm supposed to be doing.

It's fine. I don't want to start a thing. It's just that the discussion has been going on and on.

And we're on the second of twenty books!

My question about theatre and opera, by the way, was a serious one -- I was trying to understand why there was an objection to theatre as a whole, rather than just some plays being not allowed but other plays being OK and wholesome, since they'd already said that some storybooks and novels were OK, and others weren't, so I'd assumed that the same standard would apply to all sorts of narrative.

And the parts of this book that I've been mostly boggling at, other than the creepy pseudo-incestuous parts (which are way beyond anything of the sort that I've seen in other books from the same period), are mostly the weird constructions of Elsie's Christianity, in particular. Like, there are plenty of things that other Christian characters do, with seemingly no judgment on them from the author, but Elsie insists that, as a Christian, she can't do it. Just about every single other character in this book, including the very devout Christians, have commented on Elsie and her father's relationship being weird, and that her father is much too strict and that Elsie takes obedience to an insane level. What I'm mostly trying to work through is, what on earth is the author's message here? Is the message to be like Elsie, even though all these other characters who we're supposed to like and respect think that she takes the whole obedience thing way too far?

And we're on the second of twenty books!

(third, actually. It's Spring Break, and I was bored. I'll find new entertainment.)

And we're on the second of twenty books!

And contemplating the one entitled "Elsie's Womanhood" really makes me leery. Unless she marries someone a bit saner than her father.

Elsie's Dad reminds me of those Father-Daughter dances where the daughter promises Daddy that she'll be pure until she's married. Do the boys promise Mommy that they'll be pure until marriage?

I'll find new entertainment

No, I've found it fascinating, especially with the characters who are commenting on what's going on. I wonder if the author is being satirical in some way.

As for the theatre, I think some of the objection was witnessing the actors pretending to be something they weren't. I think I read somewhere that actors were banned from "respectable" boarding houses as much for the play-acting as for the transience of the lifestyle.

Do the boys promise Mommy that they'll be pure until marriage?

Motherboy!

I know that when they first started letting women act on the stage a lot - most, I believe - of them supplemented their income through prostitution. And actors tended to travel a lot, so that added to the lack of respectability.

I believe New York's Little Church Around the Corner was originally the only one that would allow actors in.