While reading I kept thinking about Atul Gawande's book "Being Mortal"—how we live so much longer now and, as a result, require a lot more care as we age. I get to deliver Eucharist two or three times a month to a retirement home, where most of the residents are in their 80s and 90s. When they need more assitance, they move to the nursing home down the street. They do have real community (the kind Sean and Heidi's grandmother would love), but even as healthy and sharp as they are, they have lived long enough to have to do the kind of hard work in old age that Mrs. Palfrey did not live long enough to experience.
Heidi was talking about the lack of a sense of place and how Taylor intentionally makes the Claremont "a placeless place" and that made me think of the Hotel Metropol in A Gentleman in Moscow which has the opposite sort of sense to me, being a place which has a rich inner life and a sense of deep connectedness to the outside world, even if the Count is a prisoner there. The Count is trapped in the hotel and cannot leave but there were many times I forgot he was a prisoner because the Metropol is such a living thriving place where we encounter so many people and where the Count has so many rich relationships, especially with Nina and then Sofia, but also with the staff of the hotel. Whereas Mrs Palfrey is free to come and go as she pleases, but is unable to make the kinds of deeper connections with either her fellow residents or with the staff. The Claremont feels like a wasteland compared to the Metropol's liveliness.
As I listened to this episode, I was reminded of A Gentleman in Moscow. Both Count Rostov and Mrs. Palfrey were a type of prisoner - and both in a hotel, no less! But both brought with them into confinement qualities that helped them survive until...well, until it was time for them to go. Neither wasted away, but they could have.
It's hard to read Mrs. Palfrey at the Claremont and not reflect on your own life and the possibility that you might wind up in a similar situation no matter what you do to avoid it. But my takeaway is to live my life now in a way that will enable me to survive confinement if that's where I find myself one day. As a Christian, a big part of that is knowing where my hope lies. But I think that hope has to be woven deeply into my soul before I am at the point where everything else is stripped away.
I do think the Count and Mrs. Palfrey also learned and grew during their confinement, but they were able to do that because of what they brought with them from the life they had already lived.
Also - I wonder if the reason the characters didn't connect more with each other was pride? In a similar situation, I would want everyone to think I was at the Claremont because I wanted to be there and that my life really was rich and full. But daily life lays reality bare, and it would be hard to hide the extent to which you are really alone and, sadly, sort of forgotten.
What a great Q and A! The very first question about duty made me think of these lines from Mrs. Palfrey's conversation with Ludo at dinner in his flat:
In a rather dreamy voice, Mrs Palfrey went on, 'Sometimes, when I was a young, married woman, I longed to be freed-free of nursery chores and social obligations, one's duty, d'you know? And free of worries, too, about one's loved ones-childish ailments and ageing parents, money troubles, everyone at times feels the longing-to run away from it all. But it's really not to be desired-and I realise that that's the only way of being free-to be not needed.
Musing on how her daughter and Desmond no longer need her, she ends with: "And there's no one I know who could ever be a burden to me now."
Even as an empty-nester, that stopped me in my tracks and caused me to be thankful for the remaining "burdens" in my life!
That's a great passage to ponder! She seems to be shying away from duty here and glad that she doesn't have those ties anymore. But it also feels so empty and lonely.
Thanks for the discussion!
While reading I kept thinking about Atul Gawande's book "Being Mortal"—how we live so much longer now and, as a result, require a lot more care as we age. I get to deliver Eucharist two or three times a month to a retirement home, where most of the residents are in their 80s and 90s. When they need more assitance, they move to the nursing home down the street. They do have real community (the kind Sean and Heidi's grandmother would love), but even as healthy and sharp as they are, they have lived long enough to have to do the kind of hard work in old age that Mrs. Palfrey did not live long enough to experience.
Heidi was talking about the lack of a sense of place and how Taylor intentionally makes the Claremont "a placeless place" and that made me think of the Hotel Metropol in A Gentleman in Moscow which has the opposite sort of sense to me, being a place which has a rich inner life and a sense of deep connectedness to the outside world, even if the Count is a prisoner there. The Count is trapped in the hotel and cannot leave but there were many times I forgot he was a prisoner because the Metropol is such a living thriving place where we encounter so many people and where the Count has so many rich relationships, especially with Nina and then Sofia, but also with the staff of the hotel. Whereas Mrs Palfrey is free to come and go as she pleases, but is unable to make the kinds of deeper connections with either her fellow residents or with the staff. The Claremont feels like a wasteland compared to the Metropol's liveliness.
As I listened to this episode, I was reminded of A Gentleman in Moscow. Both Count Rostov and Mrs. Palfrey were a type of prisoner - and both in a hotel, no less! But both brought with them into confinement qualities that helped them survive until...well, until it was time for them to go. Neither wasted away, but they could have.
It's hard to read Mrs. Palfrey at the Claremont and not reflect on your own life and the possibility that you might wind up in a similar situation no matter what you do to avoid it. But my takeaway is to live my life now in a way that will enable me to survive confinement if that's where I find myself one day. As a Christian, a big part of that is knowing where my hope lies. But I think that hope has to be woven deeply into my soul before I am at the point where everything else is stripped away.
I do think the Count and Mrs. Palfrey also learned and grew during their confinement, but they were able to do that because of what they brought with them from the life they had already lived.
Also - I wonder if the reason the characters didn't connect more with each other was pride? In a similar situation, I would want everyone to think I was at the Claremont because I wanted to be there and that my life really was rich and full. But daily life lays reality bare, and it would be hard to hide the extent to which you are really alone and, sadly, sort of forgotten.
I was coming here to make a Gentleman in Moscow comparison as well! I'm glad I'm not the only one to think of these two novels together.
What a great Q and A! The very first question about duty made me think of these lines from Mrs. Palfrey's conversation with Ludo at dinner in his flat:
In a rather dreamy voice, Mrs Palfrey went on, 'Sometimes, when I was a young, married woman, I longed to be freed-free of nursery chores and social obligations, one's duty, d'you know? And free of worries, too, about one's loved ones-childish ailments and ageing parents, money troubles, everyone at times feels the longing-to run away from it all. But it's really not to be desired-and I realise that that's the only way of being free-to be not needed.
Musing on how her daughter and Desmond no longer need her, she ends with: "And there's no one I know who could ever be a burden to me now."
Even as an empty-nester, that stopped me in my tracks and caused me to be thankful for the remaining "burdens" in my life!
That's a great passage to ponder! She seems to be shying away from duty here and glad that she doesn't have those ties anymore. But it also feels so empty and lonely.