More On Mary Stewart’s “Madam, Will You Talk”: What I’m Not So Keen On
Yesterday I talked about what I loved best about Mary Stewart’s Madam, Will You Talk: namely a brave and resourceful heroine, Charity Selborne, with a clear moral compass, who is still has a great deal to offer readers fifty nine years after first publication in 1955.
There is one aspect of the book though, that I am not so keen on, which is that Stewart does stick with the persistent ‘romantic’ trope that it is credible for a woman to fall in love with a man who has terrified and threatened her — before the misunderstandings on both side that have led to this situation are clarified and resolved.
To be fair, the book is still not repugnant in this respect, because the male protagonist plays on Charity’s belief that he is a murderer rather than actually committing wrongdoing, but nonethless Charity believes he is an evildoer and is in fact — unsurprisingly — terrified of him. But still, to fall in love with someone under those circumstances, seems unlikely at best, but is more likely wildly improbable.
And may I say, it’s really hard to see where the attraction in such characters lies.
I’d also like to argue that it’s an element that is of the book’s time and to read it in that context—but since the trope not only persists but is still widespread in “romantic” scenarios I can’t do that. To give Stewart credit though, it’s really the only time she uses it amongst those of her novels I’ve read — and as aforesaid, her use of the trope in this case is in a sufficiently mild form that it does not negate the numerous excellencies of the story.
So Madam, Will You Talk is still recommended reading, despite an element that I’m not so keen on.
Hi Helen, as a librarian in an all girls school I was interested to have a discussion with the book club this week about just this thing. The book I had read was A touch of power by Maria Snyder. The main character a young woman fell in love with the man who had tied her to a tree and physically and mentally abused her. I thought that she wouldn’t/shouldn’t. The girls who have read the next book all assured me it will all be clear in the second book, and that yes she should be in love with him. I’m not convinced. Thought I might be too old and too cynical. Loved Madam will you talk when I read it about 100 years ago!
I am with you 100% on this one, Loretta. all very well to fall him after she realizes he’s actually OK (Darcy & Elizabeth) but the whole trope of falling in love with one’s abuser is one that worries me, in that young women may actually think it’s is how life works, rather than ending badly, often very badly for the woman as it almost always does. The only thing I would add is that I have always thought this way, even when a teen myself, so it’s not necessarily an age and life experience thing!
Thank you for your comment, Loretta.
She always uses the current tropes, but she usually twists them or reminds us they’re dangerous. One of the more interesting twists was when the tortured hero who might have been a villain is *not* trusted in “Nine Coaches Waiting” and he accuses her of, basically, not loving him enough to put trust in him above everything (to not come to him for help, despite appearances). She pointed out (in language that didn’t say this directly and was more melodramatic than we’d accept today, I think) that the safety of a child was more important than his ego. And the relationship was not riven in twain thereby, demonstrating at that point that there was potential life beyond the romance.
“Nine Coaches Waiting” is one of my favourites, both for the story but also for that subtle undermining of prevalent “romantic” (so not!) tropes.