Mann Ramblings Innocence & Carnality

[Timothy M.]

Who said, that this would have been his fate in Victoria? We simply do not know, can only speculate. What should have been his husband like, if he would have grown up under Victorian circumstances as Nathan, suppressed like him. But that´s just an intellectual game.

 

I'm not clear on why Nathan would've been a trophy husband in Victoria too? What makes you say that?

 

Quotes from chapter 1 and 3 of the story. Nathan certainly compares himself to a trophy wife, and I give nothing for his mother's objection since she is one herself.

 

I knew this day (of his arranged marriage) would eventually come, but the proof brought me to a morose silence.

Women of Victorian lords were expected to fill their days with arts and crafts, while providing the proper trophy for their husbands.

Being born to privilege had its immense backlash. You were held to a different standard, and required to maintain a certain kind of decorum. Every step in your life was measured by the manner in which you bore yourself.

 

“Finn is oldest and will inherit the manor. Thomas will wed a wealthy heiress. Both of them will become partners in the family business. Their futures are looking quite grand. I, on the other hand, am being married off like a trophy daughter to the highest bidder.”

“That's not true.”

“Don't you think I noticed how my tutors changed my studies after my orientation was determined? I went from finance to protocol lessons overnight. If I hadn't befriended the blacksmiths and clockworkers in the city, I'd have no useable skills at all.”

 

Edited March 24, 2016 by Timothy M.

[dughlas]

Let the record shoe we are in agreement.

I don't think the issue of Rother feeling justified or not is important other than as regards their relationship with the rest of society. I look more to their own private relationship.

They are married , but right now I can't see why Rother chose to marry. He could have employed a co-host. If he only wanted another servant, why a husband? To me, his desire to marry and a virgin at that, should tell us something. Question is what? Right now, Rother is steering their marriage to a business arrangement. I'm not sure that's what he actually wants.

I'm not clear on why Nathan would've been a trophy husband in Victoria too? What makes you say that?

I believe Rother chose a virgin trophy husband because he wanted someone who was only his. Everything/everyone else in his house is available for money. Nathan is the only thing he seems to keep strictly for himself. The fact Nathan judges him as flawed offends his sense of self. This is gonna get interesting ...

[Puppilull]

Yes, their embarrassment meant they intended to get rid of Nathan any way they could and get him far away from the family, but I still don't understand why he inevitably would take the wife part. He's gay but he's a man marrying another man.

[Timothy M.]

Yes, their embarrassment meant they intended to get rid of Nathan any way they could and get him far away from the family, but I still don't understand why he inevitably would take the wife part. He's gay but he's a man marrying another man.

 

But he's clearly the submissive partner and taking the traditional role of 'wife.' And I'm not only thinking of sex.

 

A few quotes to back up my claim:

I held worth in his eyes. A worth beyond my Father's narrow vision. Could I be the spouse Lord Rother required and find a place for myself in his home?

By law, as the elder member of our marriage, it was his prerogative to decide when to consummate.

“You’ll be my co-host. On my arm at all times and using your precious protocol lessons to dazzle my high-end clients.”

[Puppilull]

That's society's and Rother's expectations. I haven't heard what Nathan actually likes. Other than he seems satisfied with the time spent intimate with Rother. With another partner, who knows?

[Drew Espinosa]

Hey everyone, Just read through to the latest chapter of "Innocence & Carnality" and I love it!

 

So, here are my thoughts on the latest developments: I kinda agree with both sides about Nathan. On the one hand, he should know what to expect from an arranged marriage. He was in fact raised as a child to know it.

 

But, even though children in this society know what's expected from them, they still have dreams, especially about their future spouse; they'd marry a beautiful princess, a handsome prince, or some other romantic view.

In our own world, we have tales like Cinderella, Snow White, Sleeping Beauty, etc. And I'm sure Victoria and Francine have their own fairy tales that end in "happily ever after." So it wouldn't surprise me if Nathan had heard those stories and imagined himself as one of the characters: a dashing knight that saves the day, being rescued by a noble prince, and so on.

What I'm trying to get at is this: even though Nathan knows what his expectations and responsibilities are, he still dreamt like any of us did as children.

 

 

The question is, will Nathan continue hoping for that dream, or live with the reality that is Rother?

Edited March 24, 2016 by Drew Espinosa

[Puppilull]

I agree Drew. I just wanted to add that being in an arranged marriage doesn't mean one spouse is free to act like a bully. Respect does not require love.

[Carlos Hazday]

It seems I'm the only one who likes Rother around here. I have no special knowledge but I can't fail to think dismissing him as easily as so many of you do is shortsighted. Have any of you considered the possibility we have TWO main characters? That both are deeply flawed? Or that both have the potential to change?

 

I know it won't hapen, but I'd love it if Natah turned out to be more of a jerk than you guys think Rother is. Part of the reading experience is being surprised by an author's twists and Mann has shown us he can do that. I refuse to accept the premise that a succesful relationship must be between equals.

 

My wedding gift to them was a roll of Saran Wrap and a gas mask. Hopefully they'll be put to good use sometime soon!

[Puppilull]

I'm not dismissing Rother. I was very optimistic in the beginning that he would in his own way show Nathan he was worth something as Nathan, not merely as a trophy wife accessory.

 

Right now, however, Rother is acting like an abusive bully. That has nothing to do with them being equal or not. He can be the head of the household and super Dom top extraordinaire for all I care and Nathan would probably have no objections based in his upbringing. He would perhaps even enjoy it, who knows?

 

My point is I have not dismissed the man, I have serious objections to his actions and the way he treats Nathan. Being physically and verbally abusive is never OK, no matter what troubles Rother has suffered himself.

[Carlos Hazday]

I'm not dismissing Rother. I was very optimistic in the beginning that he would in his own way show Nathan he was worth something as Nathan, not merely as a trophy wife accessory.

 

Right now, however, Rother is acting like an abusive bully. That has nothing to do with them being equal or not. He can be the head of the household and super Dom top extraordinaire for all I care and Nathan would probably have no objections based in his upbringing. He would perhaps even enjoy it, who knows?

 

My point is I have not dismissed the man, I have serious objections to his actions and the way he treats Nathan. Being physically and verbally abusive is never OK, no matter what troubles Rother has suffered himself.

Why would it be wrong for Nathan to be strictly a trophy spouse?  He seems to fit into the role quite well. Once again, I have zero knowledge of what Mann has planned but I really object to everyone trying to make these two fit into molds and conceptions from the 21st Century in our reality.

 

I may have to go back and read it all over again but I can't recall Rother being physically abusive. Hell, it was Nathan who bitch slapped Vivian. He's the violent one right now.

 

Verbal abuse can be quite a turn on for some people (I know a couple of them) and they'd scream bloody murder if you told them it was wrong for them to be in a relationship where that took place. What you label as abusive I call frank and honest. Maybe it's because there's no lovey-dovey pillow talk his comments are labeled as abusive?

 

And what happens when both of them seek verbal or physical abuse?

[impunity]

Why would it be wrong for Nathan to be strictly a trophy spouse? He seems to fit into the role quite well. Once again, I have zero knowledge of what Mann has planned but I really object to everyone trying to make these two fit into molds and conceptions from the 21st Century in our reality.

 

I may have to go back and read it all over again but I can't recall Rother being physically abusive. Hell, it was Nathan who bitch slapped Vivian. He's the violent one right now.

 

Verbal abuse can be quite a turn on for some people (I know a couple of them) and they'd scream bloody murder if you told them it was wrong for them to be in a relationship where that took place. What you label as abusive I call frank and honest. Maybe it's because there's no lovey-dovey pillow talk his comments are labeled as abusive?

 

And what happens when both of them seek verbal or physical abuse?

I've been staying out of this argument because it seems a bit pointless; however, I figured I would respond to this.

 

What makes it wrong, in this case, is that Nathan doesn't want to be a trophy spouse; nor does he want to be verbally abused. It's not a turn on and he isn't seeking it. In fact, it is pretty clear from the first-person narrative that he hasn't bought into any of this.

 

As for his slapping Vivian, I'd say she thoroughly deserved it.

Edited March 29, 2016 by impunity

[Puppilull]

Why would it be wrong for Nathan to be strictly a trophy spouse? He seems to fit into the role quite well. Once again, I have zero knowledge of what Mann has planned but I really object to everyone trying to make these two fit into molds and conceptions from the 21st Century in our reality.

 

I may have to go back and read it all over again but I can't recall Rother being physically abusive. Hell, it was Nathan who bitch slapped Vivian. He's the violent one right now.

 

Verbal abuse can be quite a turn on for some people (I know a couple of them) and they'd scream bloody murder if you told them it was wrong for them to be in a relationship where that took place. What you label as abusive I call frank and honest. Maybe it's because there's no lovey-dovey pillow talk his comments are labeled as abusive?

 

And what happens when both of them seek verbal or physical abuse?

I don't know what in my posts or reviews has made you think I want to push them into a modern context or that I'm oblivious to the diversity of human sexuality. If you read my previous reviews, it's pretty clear I had high hopes for Rother being just what Nathan needs, even if he didn't exactly have a say on the question of marriage. I was even sympathetic to Rother and his tough life.

 

That said, I have yet to see any evidence of Nathan enjoying the treatment he's receiving in the last few chapters. That made me conclude he doesn't like verbal abuse. So please don't imply I have any objections to what people do or don't do in general. I'm only talking about Nathan.

 

As for the physical, getting slammed into a wall and being pinned by the throat is pretty physical on my opinion. And I don't think Nathan was in the right to slap Vivian. I can perhaps understand both reactions, but they are wrong nonetheless.

 

And no, I'm not unaware of some people liking to be slapped around, just so we're clear.

Edited March 29, 2016 by Puppilull

[Carlos Hazday]

I don't know what in my posts or reviews has made you think I want to push them into a modern context or that I'm oblivious to the diversity of human sexuality. If you read my previous reviews, it's pretty clear I had high hopes for Rother being just what Nathan needs, even if he didn't exactly have a say on the question of marriage. I was even sympathetic to Rother and his tough life.

 

That said, I have yet to see any evidence of Nathan enjoying the treatment he's receiving in the last few chapters. That made me conclude he doesn't like verbal abuse. So please don't imply I have any objections to what people do or don't do in general. I'm only talking about Nathan.

 

As for the physical, getting slammed into a wall and being pinned by the throat is pretty physical on my opinion. And I don't think Nathan was in the right to slap Vivian. I can perhaps understand both reactions, but they are wrong nonetheless.

 

And no, I'm not unaware of some people liking to be slapped around, just so we're clear.

 

MANY of your posts have given me the idea you're trying to fit Nathan and Rother into preconceived relationship patterns. Here's a quote from just this morning:

 

I was very optimistic in the beginning that he would in his own way show Nathan he was worth something as Nathan, not merely as a trophy wife accessory.

 

Why do you want Rother to show Nathan he's worth more than just a trophy spouse? Isn't that your own feeling about relationships coming through? Maybe that's all Nathan's good for in his eyes and the boy hasn't done much to disprove him. Maybe that's all Nathan's good for period. We don't know but I don't want to pigeonhole them into the type of relationship you've been advocating for them from the beginning. However it winds up I hope it's their own and should not be influenced by our modern views.

 

We disagree again. Vivian deserved the slap and more. I recognize the value of physical violence as a useful tool. But I'm sure my view will not conform with more pacifist readers.

[dughlas]

I don't think Nathan will be satisfied as a trophy. Keep in mind that until his "proclivities" became known he was treated just as his brothers. It was after that his father changed his course. Nathan did not like it but saw no other recourse than to submit. Yet still he rebelled in the small ways left to him. It seems appropriate to think he hoped for better. Rother seemed to enjoy Nathan's response to his brother's goading when they were still in his father's house. To say we shouldn't apply our modern values is a bit absurd because this is a "steampunk" world. Steampunk is a modern interpretation of what we think of an earlier time overlayed by fantasy. Additionally, Francine is not Victorian England, it has considerably looser mores. Carlos, I am not saying you are wrong in the direction you would like to see this relationship go. Myself, I would like to see Rother treat Nathan with the same respect his does Samantha. While, I agree with you in the slap to Vivian, it seems the only way for Nathan to establish his superior place in the household. It should not be necessary for Rother to slam Nathan to the wall by his throat. We already know Rother is the larger and from Nathan's view the senior partner. He needs to use reason with Nathan. Nathan is not a person raised in the street. Violence is an extreme and counterproductive response likely to promote rebellion not acquiesence.

Edited March 29, 2016 by dughlas

[Carlos Hazday]

I don't think Nathan will be satisfied as a trophy. Keep in mind that until his "proclivities" became known he was treated just as his brothers. It was after that his father changed his course. Nathan did not like it but saw no other recourse than to submit. Yet still he rebelled in the small ways left to him. It seems appropriate to think he hoped for better. Rother seemed to enjoy Nathan's response to his brother's goading when they were still in his father's house. To say we shouldn't apply our modern values is a bit absurd because this is a "steampunk" world. Steampunk is a modern interpretation of what we think of an earlier time overlayed by fantasy. Additionally, Francine is not Victorian England, it has considerably looser mores. Carlos, I am not saying you are wrong in the direction you would like to see this relationship go. Myself, I would like to see Rother treat Nathan with the same respect his does Samantha. While, I agree with you in the slap to Vivian, it seems the only way for Nathan to establish his superior place in the household. It should not be necessary for Rother to slam Nathan to the wall by his throat. We already know Rother is the larger and from Nathan's view the senior partner. He needs to use reason with Nathan. Nathan is not a person raised in the street. Violence is an extreme and counterproductive response likely to promote rebellion not acquiesence.

One comment about the way I wish this relationship would go forward: In the end, Nathan ends up in charge of running Delaga House. Blythe and Samantha transfer his loyalties to him. Rother is kept happy by being charge of the casting couch. He and Nathan argue constantly but whenever one of them snaps his fingers the other one drops to his knees and the argument is over for at least a day or two. (Don't make me start writing fan fic stories )

 

As for our values being superimposed on the story I think it's up to the author. Mann's description of Victorian society certainly runs counter to a modern view. The way I look at it, technological advances all but froze at a point in time. From then on society evolved in a way which varied from previous standards (the plague had something to do with that) and which differs from current ones.

 

I like Rother because I see him as a decisive, take action individual. I feel Nathan has the potential to evolve into a similar person. And I'd rather see that, than to see Rother devolve into a wimpering fool.

[Timothy M.]

As for the physical, getting slammed into a wall and being pinned by the throat is pretty physical on my opinion. And I don't think Nathan was in the right to slap Vivian. I can perhaps understand both reactions, but they are wrong nonetheless.

 

Uhm, Nathan tried to strike Rother first and had just slapped Vivian - who very much deserved it - and I recall Rother held her jaw hard when he told her to behave when Nathan first met her. He had no problem with Nathan hitting her, except he didn't want his property / whore too damaged to work. But Nathan trying to hit Rother was quite another matter and he retaliated in kind. 

 

I cannot fault him for that - but I still blame him for not giving Nathan the information he needs to adapt and accept his new life. By failing to do so he made it possible for Vivian to humiliate Nathan by springing this on him as a surprise - because from Rother's reaction he had not sent for his husband at all. Did he really think the vaunted ability of Victorian nobles to do the stiff upper lip trick would carry Nathan through everything? Nathan himself sees the futility of that:

Every lesson on comportment and civility was far beyond my reach. Years of conditioning gone in one indiscretion. ... My instructions never covered such an event and I had no idea how to temper what I felt.

and Rother even says it himself:

Perhaps I overestimated your ability to conform, which is odd. Victorians are well known for following dictates without reservation.

He believes he only has to dictate Nathan to accept his profession and act as the pure spouse displayed on the Master's arm and his boy husband will be able to do it with no understanding of what Rother's position in Delaga House entails. What if one of the clients had come up to Rother and asked if Nathan was available together with Rother? He would have been given a no, of course, but his reply might have been: "Well, I guess I shall have to make do with you and one of the boys here to sate my needs." (I'm imagining the client as filling in a sandwich, if you're in doubt, lol). Can you imagine Nathan's reaction?

And Rother would only have himself to blame, idiot.

I'm looking forward to seeing Nathan's reaction tomorrow - but I'm hoping to see Samantha's reaction to Vivian and Rother destroying what little peace of mind Nathan had. Do you recall the exchange between her and Nathan a couple of chapters ago:

“I run the operations of Delaga House on and off business hours. And I take a special interest in the welfare of everyone under its roof. Not only the staff.”

“You have enough to tasks to govern. I wouldn’t want to burden you.”

“It’s only a burden when something goes wrong when it doesn’t need to.”  (a pretty good description of what happened in ch. 37, eh?)

Edited March 29, 2016 by Timothy M.

[Drew Espinosa]

I gotta admit, I'm on the fence with this. I mean, all of you bring such good arguments for your side, that I can't choose one over the other. If I'm gonna be neutral on this, I might as well declare myself the Switzerland of Innocence & Carnality

[dughlas]

Oh mistake not, I like these characters. Each is true to themself, even Vivian, I don't like her but do understand her. My view is that Rother and Nathan have equally failed to understand his husband. Rother does not comprehend what it truly means to be Victorian noble and so has failed to provide the information for Nathan to adapt. Nathan has no understanding of what it means for Rother to have survived and prospered on the streets so he expects him to behave according to other mores. Fortunately they have Samantha ...

I do have to admit it's pretty frustrating that two gay men need a woman to sort them.

 

Side note: it's convos like this that make GA outstanding.

[Carlos Hazday]

I gotta admit, I'm on the fence with this. I mean, all of you bring such good arguments for your side, that I can't choose one over the other. If I'm gonna be neutral on this, I might as well declare myself the Switzerland of Innocence & Carnality

 

You just want a job at Delaga House!

[Reader1810]

I gotta admit, I'm on the fence with this. I mean, all of you bring such good arguments for your side, that I can't choose one over the other. If I'm gonna be neutral on this, I might as well declare myself the Switzerland of Innocence & Carnality

 

 

I've been staying out of this conversation because I'm a fence sitter too. I agree with a lot of points from both sides but with each new point and counterpoint, I feel like I'm at Wimbleton. lol

 

I think I'll go join Drew in Switzerland and let Mann tell the story and just enjoy seeing where it goes. 

[dughlas]

Volley and serve ... ball is in Mann's court.

[Drew Espinosa]

Yeah... Nathan's making a stupid mistake going back to Victoria. And, really? His father will be okay with his return? To top it off, I doubt even Nathan's mother will be fine with it.

 

I honestly want to shake some sense into him. He's in a new country with greater mobility and independence for its citizens than in Victoria, so instead of going back home he should either own the role of "trophy husband" or pursue his own path.

[Former Member]

I like that he left. I am sure he will have a hard landing in Victoria, but still he is in power of his actions. Have to be on the fance too, because I am out of internet for the next days.

[Timothy M.]

Does anyone truly believe Nathan will be able to make his way out of Delaga House undetected?  Much less make his way home to Victoria. I'm disappointed in Harston for not making Nathan face the truth: if he wants to get away from Rother it's gonna take a lot more plannng and intelligence than he has shown himself capable off so far.

Oh well, I'm sure Samantha will come and check up on Nathan before he has managed to pack more than half his things and she will be able to make him see sense. It pains me to see him behave more stupidly for every chapter of the story.

[Drew Espinosa]

Does anyone truly believe Nathan will be able to make his way out of Delaga House undetected?  Much less make his way home to Victoria. I'm disappointed in Harston for not making Nathan face the truth: if he wants to get away from Rother it's gonna take a lot more plannng and intelligence than he has shown himself capable off so far.

Oh well, I'm sure Samantha will come and check up on Nathan before he has managed to pack more than half his things and she will be able to make him see sense. It pains me to see him behave more stupidly for every chapter of the story.

True, now I'm wondering how Rother will react when he finds out his husband tried to run off to Victoria.

 

Tim, I actually think Nathan is more of an emotive person, rather than logical. His decisions and actions are often based on what he feels at the moment; happiness, sadness, anger, etc. Does that make him less intelligent to not think rationally? Not really. Because even highly intelligent people can make dumb mistakes.

 

 

PS: Tim, why are you up so early?

Edited March 31, 2016 by Drew Espinosa