Dear Book Readers: I Have A Question

[Llywela]

On 20/04/2015 at 11:24 PM, Glaze Crazy said:

What is going on with Jud?  Why the drunken rant about Ross?  I guess I missed something that turned him against Ross.  Is it some connection to the MarkDr.Enys drama?

 

I caught Mark's comment about hiding in Ross's Wheal Easy mine and finding the copper vein.  I'm guessing Ross will follow up on that information.  I now wonder why, if Ross has more than one mine, he hadn't sent in some surveyors to check for copper, once he switched from tin to copper mining at Wheal Leisure.

I don't think there is a reason why Jud went off on one like that. There isn't in the book - where it happens slightly earlier, before Jim's death. In the book it catches everyone completely off-guard because Jud has been so docile and well behaved for so long, they've all forgotten what a mean, wretched drunk he can be. He just randomly gets into Ross's gin one day, gets plastered, and starts spewing venom - a lot of it gossip from the villages that he's just repeating. It comes not long after Ross has taken Jinny to Bodmin to visit Jim, an overnight stay because of the distance - he'd warned Demelza when they planned to make the offer that folk would talk, and this is the proof of that. And the malicious gossip hooks into all kinds of other stuff, like that Jim and Jinny's firstborn is called Benjamin Ross because Ross has been so good to them, and little Benjy has a scar very like Ross's because he and Jinny were attacked by a stalker when he was a baby - all kinds of stuff that didn't make it into the TV show, where the slander comes even more from out of left field.

 

Ross's other mine is Wheal Grace, not Wheal Easy - named for his mother, Grace. Although there probably is a Wheal Easy. Actually I think he has more than two mines, but all the others lie derelict, they've been closed a very long time. It was definitely Wheal Grace that Mark Daniel hid out in. It took over a year of hard labour and investment to reach the copper in Wheal Leisure, and that with knowing it was there from the samples. Ross simply doesn't have the means to investigate Wheal Grace or any other mines just on an off-chance, he's over committed as it is.

[Skylark]

It's been so long since I read the books, but I seem to recall that Jud threatens Julia in his drunkeness (or was that in the 70s version?).

Edited April 21, 2015 by Skylark

[Llywela]

It's been so long since I read the books, but I seem to recall that Jud threatens Julia in his drunkeness (or was that in the 70s version?).

In the book, when Prudie finds him, he's absolutely sozzled and is sat rocking the baby's cradle with a stick. Prudie tries to talk him down gently, because she's worried about the baby, but he's all obstinate and mean. So she starts drinking with him instead. I don't think he threatens the baby directly, but she is definitely at risk and that's a big factor in Ross's determination to get rid of him - he doesn't want Julia left to Jud and Prudie's care ever again because they can no longer be trusted with her.

[Llywela]

I'm slightly confused.  Is Elizabeth living with Francis and Verity (and their father, Charles)?  She's not yet married to Francis, so that seems strange to me.  

Elizabeth lives with her parents, the Chynoweths, until her marriage - they are, in the books, an ancient noble family rather gone to seed, living in genteel poverty. We do see Elizabeth at Trenwith a fair bit prior to the marriage, though - I'm not sure the show ever makes it clear whether she was just visiting most days or actually staying there. It was common for people of noble birth to stay with one another sometimes for months, though, even just in general circumstances. If a courtship and marriage was brewing, the young folk would be encouraged by their families to spend time together, and inviting the one to stay at the home of the other was often the simplest way to contrive it, given that transport wasn't easy in those times, even over relatively short distances - all very formal and proper, living in guest rooms.

[photo fox]

The episode topics are getting a lot of "to those who have read the books" questions, so I wanted to make one space to consolidate them.

 

If you're confused by something on the show and need clarification from a book reader, this is the place to ask!

 

Book readers, if you refer to something that hasn't aired in North America yet, please spoiler tag it as per our overall Poldark spoiler policy.

[Llywela]

I thought Demelza had scars on her back from her father's beatings? But she doesn't seem to have them anymore. Perhaps the beatings weren't bad enough to cause permanent damage?

This is one of those occasions where I automatically want to say, 'the books explain...'

 

We're to assume the marks left by her last beatings before leaving home have healed and faded over time - even in the show, quite a bit of time has passed since Demelza came to Nampara. In the book,

we're told that all the marks heal except two, which scar permanently where the buckle of her father's belt caught her.

[Milz]

This is one of those occasions where I automatically want to say, 'the books explain...'

 

We're to assume the marks left by her last beatings before leaving home have healed and faded over time - even in the show, quite a bit of time has passed since Demelza came to Nampara. In the book,

we're told that all the marks heal except two, which scar permanently where the buckle of her father's belt caught her.

 

This is falls more into the WTF category (with the other WTFs).

[skyways]

Sorry Attica (and everyone else who hates book references) but by now Demelza discovered an old instrument (was it a piano or so, Llywela can help) that she was sneaking in to the library to play and (practice on). She wasn't very good at the beginning but she was playing it. So when she picked the string in that scene, my mind quickly filled in the 'gaps' from my prior knowledge of her trying to play when she first came to Nampara.

But if you were following previous episode only it will be a  bit jarring and incomprehensible that she would know that.

Also that Jud and Prudie scene where they are discussing what Demelza had said about 'educat'n me' should not have been cut. Their self-congratulation and Elizabeth-reference as a 'fudgy-faced baggage with drop-curls' was hilarious.

Edited July 13, 2015 by skyways

[NumberCruncher]

Someone can correct me if I'm wrong but I seem to recall that in the book (sorry again for non-book readers) Demelza didn't know which string to pluck. She just does so as to appear to know exactly what she's doing in front of the gentry, but in fact, has no idea.

[Milz]

Someone can correct me if I'm wrong but I seem to recall that in the book (sorry again for non-book readers) Demelza didn't know which string to pluck. She just does so as to appear to know exactly what she's doing in front of the gentry, but in fact, has no idea.

 

Demelza doesn't know which string to pluck, but she has an innate musical talent that's been strengthened by "playing" the spinnet in the library whenever she had a chance. She would hit the keys and pick out tunes and would make up tunes to lyrics of existing songs. The scene where she and Verity are moving the spinnet into the sitting room was so Demelza could play the spinnet, not so she could learn how to dance.

 

As attica wrote, she had prior knowledge of how notes sound, so plucking a random string gave her a note or a key for her song.

[Llywela]

Yeah, it's mainly just luck that Demelza finds a suitable note to start her off - she's on a roll at that point, fortified by port!

[Nampara]

Also that Jud and Prudie scene where they are discussing what Demelza had said about 'educat'n me' should not have been cut. Their self-congratulation and Elizabeth-reference as a 'fudgy-faced baggage with drop-curls' was hilarious.

I don't think that was a reference to Elizabeth, who by that point had been married to Francis for several years. It might have been a reference to Ruth Teague, who had been pursuing Ross. I think it was really just a general reference to the sort of mistress they were likely to acquire should Ross do what was expected of him and choose a wife from among the gentry. They decided that they were better off with Demelza than with some unknown, snobbish interloper.

[Llywela]

I wonder if red dresses have the same connotation in that period as they did in later periods, i.e., a color worn more by loose women? Red is a very attractive color, at least to me, so I can see why Demelza would select it, not thinking about how it might look against pale pinks, blues, yellows, and other more "acceptable" shades that a decent woman would wear.

Moved this from the episode thread because of spoilers - just to add, I don't know about those connotations, but when Elizabeth wears a bright red dress to Julia's christening party (in the book), she does so with deliberately provocative intent. The colour is chosen to be striking, to catch Ross's eye and remind him of their old love.

 

I'm not sure we can compare that with Demelza's red dress for Christmas at Trenwith in P15, though, because I don't think she wears a red dress in the book. (makes mental note to check later)

Edited July 16, 2015 by Llywela

[Milz]

Moved this from the episode thread because of spoilers - just to add, I don't know about those connotations, but when Elizabeth wears a bright red dress to Julia's christening party (in the book), she does so with deliberately provocative intent. The colour is chosen to be striking, to catch Ross's eye and remind him of their old love.

 

I'm not sure we can compare that with Demelza's red dress for Christmas at Trenwith in P15, though, because I don't think she wears a red dress in the book. (makes mental note to check later)

 

No she doesn't wear a red printed calico to the Trenwith Christmas in the book. I think it's apple green and lilac. And it was formal enough that she wears it to a ball in book 2 or 3. 

[chocolatetruffle]

I like the relationship between Ross and Capt. Henshaw (sp??) and would like to know how they know each other.  If it was mentioned in an earlier episode, I must have missed it.  Was he with Ross in the war or do they know one another from before?  What's their history?  I'm trying to remain unspoiled, so I'd appreciate history only, not anything that may happen between them in the future. Thanks!

[stinkogingko]

IIRC in the book Captain Henshaw had worked at Grambler. The term captain referred to his position as a boss than any military experience--which is partly why Ross goes on being Captain Poldark long after he returns from America.

[Llywela]

That's right. I believe Henshaw worked with Ross's father years ago, before old Joshua's mines closed and Henshaw moved on to Grambler, so Ross knows him from way back.

[Nidratime]

I googled "mining captain" to get the precise duties of such a person and a page describing Michigan's copper mining popped up. It has a relationship to Cornish mining, it seems. This is the relevant paragraph:

 

http://ethnicity.lib.mtu.edu/scene_Miners.html#1a
 

Mining captain, assistant captains and shift bosses

 

Historically, the use of the word captain comes from a Cornish tradition in which the “man in charge of mining work” was termed a captain. The mining captain is the executive officer underground. Mining captains, assistant captains and shift bosses managed the underground work force, assigning employees to different jobs underground and taking direct oversight of all work. In the early years of Michigan’s copper mines, mining captains were almost always Cornish immigrants who brought decades of underground experience with them (in later years, the work of the experience-bred mining captain gave way to the college-educated mining engineer). mining captains are often identified in photos by their white clothing.

 

Underground work was overseen by a hierarchical structure of managers. A single mining captain might manage an entire mine operation, with assistant captains in charge of individual shaft or underground working area. Shift bosses were responsible for individual groups of men and might be more directly involved with actual underground work.

 

ETA: I wanted to add ... on another page, dealing with Cornish mining, there's a different spin on the term:

 

https://www.cornish-mining.org.uk/delving-deeper/mining-bosses-and-businesses
 

 

Mine agents, more usually known in Cornwall as captains, imposed workplace discipline and social leadership. This was often reinforced by their position as lay preachers in the Methodist chapels which dominated the Cornish religious landscape after the Revivals of 1799 and 1814. Some, like Captain Thomas of Dolcoath, could make or break a mine

 

Edited July 16, 2015 by Nidratime

[chocolatetruffle]

Thanks everyone for the answers and extra info!!  I am really enjoying the show so far and like that Henshaw is a loyal friend to Ross.  I hope we see a lot more of him. 

[Llywela]

If Grambler was still producing ore, that would make sense. But Grambler, supposedly, has been worked out so it would have shut down regardless. Not to mention the price of ore was low. I'm not sure if the UK in the 1790s had the same taxation practices as it did in the Victorian era, but I would suspect the property taxes on a mine would be a pain in the neck. Grambler seems like a white elephant.

Grambler was still producing, or it wouldn't have been open to be closed, so to speak. It wasn't profitable, costing as much or more to run than it earned, but it was still open - nearly exhausted but not quite - and so still sending copper to the markets (even if low grade), with the prospect always of a rich new vein being struck - the hope of which would be why Francis kept it limping along as long as possible. It wouldn't have been much competition to the Warleggans' main ventures, but competition enough to be worth their while destroying, and shutting it down early also removes that remote possibility of a new vein being found, which would have turned the mine's fortunes around.

 

It is a departure from the books, but the Warleggans' angle on it does make sense to me here, unlike many of the other changes made.

Edited July 20, 2015 by Llywela

[eleanorofaquitaine]

One point of clarification - did Francis not lose Grambler in the book?  I don't mean the mechanism by which Francis lost it, I mean did he not lose Grambler to the Warleggans?  Because, if so, I am not sure how the writers of this production can be blamed for what would seem to be a major plot point. But if not, then, yes, it seems reasonable to wonder why they would change that.

[skyways]

He didn't invite him. It was Jud who blabbed in the village that they were planning 2 christenings - one for the villagers and another for Ross's landed friends. Her father heard about this and decided to invite himself for the 'genteel' one which if I remember correctly was to be held first. That's really how it happened. In the old version (and in the books, sorry!) that event was a lot more dramatic and potentially embarrassing  than it played out in this version. I remember watching this when it first aired and expecting the fireworks and was soooooo disappointed it was soooo tame. Her father was a lot more disruptive than that -  Ross did a lot more delicate dancing around his comments, vocal condemnations and general aggression. The gentry gently laughed behind their fans while Demelza was soo mortified she ran upstairs.

Also the sight of the miners rubbing shoulders with the gentry and holding wine glasses! was RIDICULOUS.

Edited July 21, 2015 by skyways

[Milz]

Just as an aside.....years ago I had classmates who got married. Her family were very devout Christians. His was not. Both families like the couple. However they "eloped". When they got back, they had a reception in his hometown with his family and friends (which included things like alcohol, etc.) and a week later in her hometown, they had a reception with her family and friends (no alcohol, etc.). They're still married as far as I know and have children. But their reasons for separate receptions was very practical, imo, and very Poldarkish.

[Big Bad Wolf]

One point of clarification - did Francis not lose Grambler in the book?  I don't mean the mechanism by which Francis lost it, I mean did he not lose Grambler to the Warleggans?  Because, if so, I am not sure how the writers of this production can be blamed for what would seem to be a major plot point. But if not, then, yes, it seems reasonable to wonder why they would change that.

 

Francis did lose Grambler in the book, but because he had to close it down because his mismanagement made it impossible to continue to keep it open. It wasn't lost to the Warleggans, though, as I recall, but it did have to be closed and Francis and his side of the family lost the income and became substantially poorer as a result. Francis did lose substantial sums to Sanson via gambling, though,

and is compensated by the Warleggans for this in the same way as on the show

, so there aren't really any changes made on the show that are of significance.

[Llywela]

Francis did lose Grambler in the book, but because he had to close it down because his mismanagement made it impossible to continue to keep it open. It wasn't lost to the Warleggans, though, as I recall, but it did have to be closed and Francis and his side of the family lost the income and became substantially poorer as a result. Francis did lose substantial sums to Sanson via gambling, though,

and is compensated by the Warleggans for this in the same way as on the show

, so there aren't really any changes made on the show that are of significance.

Personally, I think it is significant that the show chose to have Francis lose Grambler in a game of cards rather than showing it succumbing to inevitable economic pressures. It isn't Francis's mismanagement that kills Grambler in the books, although his inefficiency and gambling don't help. It is made very clear that Grambler is already beginning to struggle when Charles is at the helm and that it's closure was inevitable for years before it finally happened, because the mine was very old and very large and increasingly inefficient to run. It succumbs to economic pressure, not mismanagement. Altering that so that a workable mine is lost on a game of cards is very damaging to a character who has already had all his faults exaggerated and his strengths removed. It was done for sheer plot convenience.

[skyways]

I have a question although as a book reader myself it seems odd. I remember a scene in the old series where Ross rescued Elizabeth and George form a burning house and from a mob. I don't remember any of this happening in the book. Can anyone verify this? Thanks in advance.

[Nampara]

I have a question although as a book reader myself it seems odd. I remember a scene in the old series where Ross rescued Elizabeth and George form a burning house and from a mob. I don't remember any of this happening in the book. Can anyone verify this? Thanks in advance.

 

That event took place at the end of the 1975 series (episode 16, I suppose). Trenwith was burned down. It did not happen in the books. Would have been at the end of Warleggan, but it did not occur.

[skyways]

Thanks I could have sworn I never read that.

[magdalene]

I have a question - I watched the old series years ago and as I recall the series did not have a proper ending because it was canceled I believe - do the books come to an ending, happy or otherwise?

[Llywela]

I have a question - I watched the old series years ago and as I recall the series did not have a proper ending because it was canceled I believe - do the books come to an ending, happy or otherwise?

The main reason the series didn't have a proper ending was because they caught up with the books! So the 1975-77 show only covered as far as book 7, which does end on a downbeat note. They couldn't continue because the other books hadn't been written yet. The last five books jump forward in time with the children of the main characters becoming prominent. There are many more ups and downs, triumphs and tragedies along the way.

[magdalene]

The main reason the series didn't have a proper ending was because they caught up with the books! So the 1975-77 show only covered as far as book 7, which does end on a downbeat note. They couldn't continue because the other books hadn't been written yet. The last five books jump forward in time with the children of the main characters becoming prominent. There are many more ups and downs, triumphs and tragedies along the way.

Thank you!

[skyways]

Yes that abrupt ending was the worst to say the least. I wanted to see Ross coping with Elizabeth's death since he had a hand in it, by giving her that horrible advice. That 10yrs time gap took the air out of the main story, and abruptly started another.

[Nidratime]

That 10yrs time gap took the air out of the main story, and abruptly started another.

 

 

Yes, Graham should've started back up again where he left off.

[Llywela]

My husband who is a book reader says that Jud's attack is because: 

Jinny's kid in the book has a scar like Ross's due to an attack by a guy that was stalking Jinny. So the town's people gossip that the baby is Ross's. 

I brought this here from the episode thread because it's book related. Yes, in the show there is no build-up to Jud's outburst - there is also no real build up to it in the books, as he just happens to get blind drunk and mean with it that day, but what we do get background for in the book is the local gossip that fuels it. There's been mean-spirited gossip about Ross ever since he brought 13-year-old Demelza home from Redruth Fair that day. So far as Jinny goes, she and Jim have an entire 4-year sub-plot in the book that is completely missing from the show, a sub-plot following them through years of marriage and three children together. Part of that storyline is Jinny's stalker, who, as your husband told you, gets into the house one night when Jinny is alone with her new baby and attacks them with a knife. Not only does the baby end up with a scar similar to Ross, but he is also named after Ross - he is called Benjamin Ross, out of gratitude for all Ross has done for the Carter family. Then when Jim is in prison and has been moved further away, beyond Jinny's reach to visit, Ross takes her to see him, a journey she could never have made without his help - even riding, it is far enough to Launceston that they have to stay overnight. Before making the offer, Ross discusses it with Demelza and both observe that the local gossips will talk, but decide they don't care as what matters is helping Jinny to see Jim. So all those details factor into Jud's outburst - yet none of them is included in the show, which shows the effect but not the cause, so that it seems to come from out of left field. Cause and effect are much more subtly interwoven in the books.

 

ETA and of course the important point is that Jud isn't just making this stuff up off the top of his head because it's what he thinks - he's repeating malicious gossip that is rife through the local villages.

Edited August 4, 2015 by Llywela

[Nampara]

Part of that storyline is Jinny's stalker, who, as your husband told you, gets into the house one night when Jinny is alone with her new baby and attacks them with a knife. Not only does the baby end up with a scar similar to Ross ...

 

Clearly Winston Graham's subtle demonstration, via endorsement by the addled Jud, of the folly of Lamarckism.

[CTrent29]

Quote

 

I brought this here from the episode thread because it's book related. Yes, in the show there is no build-up to Jud's outburst - there is also no real build up to it in the books, as he just happens to get blind drunk and mean with it that day, but what we do get background for in the book is the local gossip that fuels it.

 

The same thing happened in the 1975 series.  It simply happened.

[Jacks-Son]

6 minutes ago, nodorothyparker said:

My hate for the writing and handling of the entire Demelza situation and Prudie's part in it is such that it will have to be relegated to the book vs show thread.  I can still manage to be amused that Prudie apparently replace Jud with Tholly as her partner in random day drinking though.

Apparently, Prudie knew she F'ed up because she couldn't even meet Ross' eyes. Demelza had tears in her eyes when Ross embraced her in bed. Did she feel shame or did she think that perhaps the tryst was not worth the harm she could potentially cause her family. The thing that bothers me about that whole affair is that Demelza was not going to do it until Prudie mentioned Ross' dalliance with Elizabeth. Now, Prudie didn't make her do it, but she had a damn hand in it. I wonder if it will ever come out, that Prudie made it seem like there was more to it than a goodbye kiss.

 

Now, I've been meaning to ask a few posters in this thread: If Debbie Horsfield's adaptation causes so much frustration and anger with the book people, why then continue to watch it? I've never read the books but I did recently buy the Kindle versions of the first 3 books. TBH, I'm kind of glad I haven't read the books because this version seems to upset everyone. It must be frustrating for everyone to watch meanwhile those who haven't read the books just enjoy the show as is. And before the moderator cautions me, I know I could take the question to the "Books, Original, & Remake" section but I fear for my life in there. I'm just curious.

[profdanglais]

For me, it's a hate-watch, I'm interested in seeing how bad things can get. 

Since you're in this thread, @Jacks-Son, I'm going to feel free to tell you that in the books, Demelza and Hugh's affair had nothing to do with Prudie, who by then had a much more reduced role than what the show has given her. I think this business of encouraging Demelza was included mostly to give the actress something to do and out of some bizarre need to make all Demelza's decisions revolve around Ross. Book Demelza's feelings for Hugh were much more nuanced and her decision to sleep with him was one of the more empowering things she ever did. She didn't feel guilty about it, and although they never explicitly discussed it, Ross seemed to understand. 

[Llywela]

I kept watching through Dwight's rescue from France because I really wanted to see how this adaptation would handle that story - the answer was: horribly. But I stopped watching after that, couldn't take it any more - and from everything I've read, it was the right decision to make!

Basically, every time a storyline or character seems really over-simplified, you are safe to assume that it is much more complex and nuanced in the books!

[Jacks-Son]

Well, i guess the hate-watch is probably the predominant reason for the continued watching by all book readers to the remake. Perhaps people do have a tendency to watch a car crash.

Thank you mod for placing my question in the appropriate thread. I did not even realize that this thread existed.

[nodorothyparker]

I'm not hate watching it.  As someone who always reads the source material first if I possibly can, I long ago accepted that a show is a show and a book is a book and sometimes things just don't translate well between mediums or have to be compressed.  For most of my grousing, I'm generally good with the show because I still enjoy the story and pretty people and pretty scenery.  

I've even quite liked some of the changes the show has made, like for example, drawing the straight line between George's seemingly irrational hatred of toads and Ross and maybe Francis bullying him at school.  The books never tell us why he hates toads so much, and while it's implied more than once that Ross and George especially did not care for each other at school and that Ross was more than a handful at that age, they never directly connect the two.  Giving it as a backstory to George gives a character they've significantly reduced to an almost cartoon character some much needed depth and gives the feud between the two characters more proper weight.  But like everyone else, I have my sticking points and completely changing how Demelza and Hugh came about is one because so much of Ross and Demelza's story throughout the next book is built on the how and why it happened and moving beyond it.

[LJones41]

Isn't it sweet that Ross and Demelza had named their third daughter after Elizabeth?

[Llywela]

21 hours ago, LJones41 said:

Isn't it sweet that Ross and Demelza had named their third daughter after Elizabeth?

In what way is Isabella-Rose named after Elizabeth?

[Ceindreadh]

2 hours ago, Llywela said:

In what way is Isabella-Rose named after Elizabeth?

Isabella is a Latin form of Elizabeth. 

Presumably Ross would have been taught Latin at school and would have known. I wonder if he or Demelza suggested it. (Don't think it was ever mentioned in the books - Bella being born in the gap between 7 and 8)

[Llywela]

Seriously? That's a huge stretch. Whatever their distant roots, they are very different names and there is no indication that either gave Elizabeth a second thought when they named Bella.

[LJones41]

One has to wonder why Graham had given Ross and Demelza's third daughter that name.  It's probably a coincidence.  Then again . . . one never knows.

[JudyObscure]

My Q for you helpful readers:  After last night (S3 Episode 1) introduced religion via Demelza's brothers, I'm wondering if your overall impression of Winston Graham is that he is an atheist, just dislikes organized religion, or what exactly? Last night both Ross and Demelza seemed to sneer at Christianity and I wonder how true that is to books written in the 1940's.

[Llywela]

26 minutes ago, JudyObscure said:

My Q for you helpful readers:  After last night (S3 Episode 1) introduced religion via Demelza's brothers, I'm wondering if your overall impression of Winston Graham is that he is an atheist, just dislikes organized religion, or what exactly? Last night both Ross and Demelza seemed to sneer at Christianity and I wonder how true that is to books written in the 1940's.

I suspect the tone of books written in the 1940s in general would vary depending on the writer, just as it does today.

It is true to the Poldark novels that neither Ross nor Demelza care for religion in the slightest, but Graham writes that very much as their indivual stance as characters rather than as an authorial judgement projected onto the characters, per se - he also writes highly religious characters with great sympathy. Sam, for instance, while being very much a religious zealot, comes across much better in the novels, which have time and space to explore his perspective, than he does in the show, which does not. Graham is very good at presenting hugely varied points of view from the inside, as it were, presenting the thoughts and opinions of his characters without any authorial value judgements embedded in the text - so that George, for instance, is always completely justified in any and every action in the chapters devoted to him, because that is what he himself believes - the reader is trusted to read between the lines and apply their own critical judgement, based on everything else they know (which makes some of the George chapters highly entertaining to read - his take on Dwight and Caroline's wedding, for instance, is a scream; he's so wonderfully sour about the whole thing). Graham's main concern with the Poldark novels was to explore all the varying facets of Cornish society in the late 18th century - he was writing finely researched historical fiction, rather than the romantic drama TV tends to interpret it as.

So you can't really read Ross and Demelza's opinions on religion as being indicative of what Winston Graham himself believed. He wrote the opinions of his characters based on who they were as characters. rather than using his characters to present his own worldview, and he wrote a lot of widely varying points of view into his novels.

Edited October 2, 2017 by Llywela

[JudyObscure]

37 minutes ago, Llywela said:

I suspect the tone of books written in the 1940s in general would vary depending on the writer, just as it does today.

Yes, of course. I was only talking about Graham's books.  

I could tell, even from the TV show, that he is  giving all the characters their own voice, and letting us see things from their point of view.  I'm probably more sympathetic to George than many people seem to be, because of Graham's talent at this.   I just thought that Ross, as his "hero,"  might be, more than most characters, a reflection of Graham's personal opinions. 

Thanks for your response!

[nodorothyparker]

Ross and Demelza like most people of the time would be nominally Church of England.  As a whole it wasn't a particularly fervent thing.  You made your appearances for weddings and baptisms and the like and supported the local parish and called it good.  It's relevant here that Methodism, on the other hand, particularly the Wesleyan version that the Carnes are all following was a relatively new thing that was considered fairly radical and was thus unpopular among the Poldarks' class.