Å·±¦ÓéÀÖ

Brideshead Revisited by Evelyn Waugh is our July 2020 New School Classic Group Read.

This is the Spoiler Thread

This is more a matter of speculation than information: I'm wondering why an author generally known for scathing satire like SCOOP, THE LOVED ONE or VILE BODIES would have produced this gentle, elegaic work?

ALLEN wrote: "This is more a matter of speculation than information: I'm wondering why an author generally known for scathing satire like SCOOP, THE LOVED ONE or VILE BODIES would have produced this gentle, eleg..."

I'm rather confused about all I'm reading about this book. I've never read any Waugh, so I know nothing about him beyond what I've read this week. I know he writes satire, but this seems to be different. I don't know how to approach this book. I guess just dive in? I've read the prologue, so have seen the set up of the story, but I'm not sure how to read this. Take it serious? See the humor? Maybe some of both? We'll see!

Ok I’ve realized it’s not satire like his other books. I am still unsure of how to digest this book. I’m about 100 pages in and am still trying to settle in. So far it feels a little bit like Gatsby, with the wealth and parties. Charles is being introduced to Catholicism, which I assume will be a slow transition.

I do wonder if his relationship with Sebastian will become outwardly homosexual, or it one of those things that people attribute to older books in our modern times. Does anyone know if Waugh talked about this? Was it his intention? Are readers assuming (whether rightly or not)?

ALLEN wrote: "This is more a matter of speculation than information: I'm wondering why an author generally known for scathing satire like SCOOP, THE LOVED ONE or VILE BODIES would have produced this gentle, eleg..."

I think I heard once that he wrote this in tribute to his Catholic faith and how it sets him apart from his fellow Englishman. I could be wrong, though.

Some BBC radio programs on Waugh:

Great Lives: Russell Kane on Evelyn Waugh


Evil Genius; Evelyn Waugh


Free Thinking: Evelyn Waugh


Open Book: Iain Banks, and the Inspiration for Brideshead Revisited

So I didn’t know until a few years ago that the Jesuit faith is a sext of Catholicism. But from my understanding, they are more evangelical, is that correct? Meaning they attempt conversion more than the more traditional/orthodox sects of Catholicism. Am I correct in saying more Orthodox Catholics do not focus on converting others as some other Christian faiths do? And then is it also correct Jesuits do? I have read about these things, but I love to hear from someone more knowledgeable! Also, are their rites and practices less rigid and traditional? Or is it a difference in some theologies that makes them different? I will keep reading and share if I can, but again, please chime in if you know these things!

I don’t know exactly what it is about this book, but I’m loving it! I’m just over half way through and I still have no idea where it’s going or really what it is- how to explain it other than a study of characters (and from background reads I know it’s going to end in a conversion, so it’s a story of that). I love good writing and love well written characters. This has both of those things, so maybe that’s what it is. It’s also an easy read. How are other faring?

My comment about the book itself now: I am reading about Rex’s conversion. Knowing that this is really a story of Charles� conversion (based on the back of the book- haha) I am comparing the two. Charles has know they Marchmain family for at least a year and a half now, maybe Sebastian longer, and he has no interest in the religion. But he is influenced by the type of people this family are. So I assume the conversion is going to be based on this long building of relationships and knowledge and it will all come together in the end as he changes. But here we have Rex who thinks it’s bad to have a “mixed marriage� (because his fiancée said it was) and doesn’t want to have a house with 2 different religions, so he says he’ll convert, no questions asked. He doesn’t absorb anything the father is teaching him. He looks at it or listens, but isn’t connecting any dots or really understanding anything, he’s just like sure let’s do this.

What parts have you enjoyed? What connections have you made in the book or to your life? What questions have been answered as you read? Did you come into the book with any ideas or questions to guide you? Any other thoughts?

Ashley, the Jesuits are an order of Roman Catholic priests and brothers. They are known for their excellent schools and universities, and highly educated priests. They also have ministries helping the poor. The Jesuits are Catholics, not a separate religion or sect. I can't give you lots of information about them.

(There are no mentions of the Eastern Orthodox or Russian Orthodox religions in the book. They have their own churches and leaders, not the Pope in Rome.)

Rex is concerned mostly with social standing, money, and politics. He is not converting for religious reasons, just to expedite the wedding preparations.

Thanks for the info! My research made them sound separate from the main church, possibly with different leaders. But then the book mentioned the Vatican. Maybe my sources were comparing it to the actual Orthodox Church. I did know that was different, but when I was using the word orthodox I meant the mainstream Catholic Church. Confusing, I know! But it sounds like neither is more “orthodox� or “strict� than the other. And that the Orthodox or Roman Catholic Churches are the ones that have differences. That actually makes a lot of things clearer!

Ashley wrote: "So I didn’t know until a few years ago that the Jesuit faith is a sext of Catholicism. But from my understanding, they are more evangelical, is that correct? Meaning they attempt conversion more th..."

Catholic here!

To add to what Connie said- when you become a priest you can either become a local parish priest or you can join a religious order, like the Jesuits. Monks and nuns also join religious orders. Different orders have different focuses, or personalities, but they are all Catholic. They do have their own leaders, but they are still subordinate to the Pope in Rome. Jesuits focus more on education, others focus more on evangelization, helping the poor, political activism, etc. In general Catholics tend to focus less on conversion than some of the more evangelical Protestant denominations.

As for the use of the word 'orthodox', it depends if you are using it with a capital O or not. With a lowercase o, orthodox is an adjective describing how faithful one is to traditional Church teaching. With a capital O it most frequently refers to the Greek Orthodox church with split from the Catholic church about 1000 years ago over some very technical theological differences. The main difference between the Catholic and Orthodox churches right now is just whether or not the Pope is in charge lol.

Hope this helps. I could go into a bunch more detail but I don't want to overwhelm/confuse anyone! If you have any other questions about Catholicism let me know and I will do my best to answer.

Thank you Emily! That’s is very helpful! I actually had no idea until recently that the Orthodox Church did not follow the Pope. I find religions fascinating, so the details always interest me, especially in a book like this.

How is anyone doing? I have one more chapter to go and will finish today. It’s strange to me that this is going to be one of my favorite books this year because not a lot happened. It’s not a book with a lot of amazing lessons or shareable quotes. In fact some sad things happen, like infidelity and broken families. It’s just amazing writing and enjoyable to read. I guess the characters are great too and that usually draws me in to a book- good characters. I didn’t mark up my book as usual, but I really enjoyed the read and will come back to it. I’d love to hear thoughts from others.

I am new to the group but I have finished the book as a reread and haven't reviewed it.

When I first read the book, it was after seeing the BBC miniseries and Jeremy Irons is stuck in my head as Charles Ryder, so I listened to Irons narrating the audiobook after reading and was pleased with his narration.

Overall, I liked this quite a bit. I think Waugh may have spoiled it a little with the Catholic conversions that seemed forced and IMO, did not seem believable, but that was a minor quibble. Waugh did two things in this novel that I loved. First, he writes these extended conceits, usually similes, as Charles artistically expands on a thought. One early example is while he riding a train and in a later example he compares Sebastian to a "Polynesian", "happy and harmless," till "the big ship dropped anchor... and, up the slope that had never known the print of a boot, there trod the grim invasion of trader, administrator, missionary, and tourist..."

The second thing I like was Waugh's juxtaposition of sentences in a scene that often results in what I would compare to jump cuts or reaction shots in film. An example would be where he describes a tortoise studded with Julia's initials in diamonds given to her as a present. Waugh gives us a paragraph of description that reads like description of a dinosaur from an article on natural history, followed by,

'Dear me," said Lady Marchmain. "I wonder if it eats the same sort of things as an ordinary tortoise,"
and then,
" What will you do with it when it's dead?" asked Mr. Samgrass. "Can you have another tortoise fitted into the shell?"

before we return to the original discussion about the problem of what to do with Sebastian. Things like that make this a classic.

An earlier question in the topic asked to the homosexuality. I think it's there but also think that a focus on that can cause the reader to miss out on other themes in the book.

I agree about the homosexuality. I don’t think it’s a major part of the book by any means, now that I have finished. He does tell Julia that Sebastian was his first love, so there may have been something there (whether a “crush� or relationship we don’t know) but it’s really makes no difference to the story or the beauty of it all. It’s strange that all my pre-reading kept bringing that up. Maybe because it wasn’t openly talked about 75 years ago, so it was rare to see.

Ashley wrote: "So I didn’t know until a few years ago that the Jesuit faith is a sext of Catholicism. But from my understanding, they are more evangelical, is that correct? Meaning they attempt conversion more th..."

I echo what Connie said. I have known two Jesuit priests. They follow a particular set of Religious Exercises which may give them the reputation of being strict. They are known for evangelical work, especially to Japan, whereas other groups (they are called Orders ) in the Catholic Church may be "cloistered". The cloistered brothers and sisters do not leave their monasteries for the most part.

Jesuits priests must complete many years of school earning a Phd in religion and theology, but the two I knew were graduate students in Mathematics at a major Engineering University in the United States. They said it was not unusual for Jesuits to have the equivalent of two Phds.

Ashley wrote: "Thank you Emily! That’s is very helpful! I actually had no idea until recently that the Orthodox Church did not follow the Pope. I find religions fascinating, so the details always interest me, esp..."


This is one of my favorite books. I am so glad that you enjoy it.

Ashley wrote: "Ok I’ve realized it’s not satire like his other books. I am still unsure of how to digest this book. I’m about 100 pages in and am still trying to settle in. So far it feels a little bit like Gatsb..."


I agree that I do not think this is satire at all. I realize that some people do. I think it is Christian Apologetics. Here I am using the word apologetics to mean making an argument in the support of Christianity. Throughout the book is filled with symbols.

Brideshead - the Bride of Christ is the Church - all the people in the church. The Head of the Church is the Bridegroom Jesus Christ. To revisit the Brideshead is to return to the faith.

The narrator never enters the faith, although he loves the family. The three siblings all find themselves back in the church after straying. Their mother is both wonderful and terrible, which are words that have been used to describe the Christian faith.

The part of this book that makes me love it so much is the candle at the end. Unfortunately, if you have seen the miniseries, they mess up the candle. I loved the miniseries, until they had a plain candle on a table at the end. The symbolism here is that Christ is called the Light of the World. Yet, in the book it is an even stronger symbol....

Background - Waugh was deeply saddened at what he saw as the secularization of English society especially in the early 20th century. He longed nostalgically for the time before Henry the VIII when England was the Jewel in the Crown of Christianity. Another title for this Catholic version of England is "Merry Old England".

So the candle... it was unusual for a working chapel to be in a private residence and it was grandfathered in so to speak due to the ancient prominence of the family. This candle in the chapel would only be lit when there are consecrated hosts (communion) reserved in the tabernacle. Catholics would believe that the consecrated host is the Body and Blood of Christ. So the candle blinking red at the end with the elder brother attending to prayers, would be Jesus always ready to call people unto himself. Charles Ryder, as an embodiment of modern man or modern society, is called but does not turn to Jesus.

I realize some people think the book is ironic or just a dramatic story. Some think it is a symbolic apologetic.

Emily, your explanation was wonderful and helpful. You fit a lot in a few words--thank you!

Lynn, I have a question. I read this last year, so am fuzzy on the details, but in the symbolic view you are describing, I'm curious how Sebastian is seen? His sister called him a holy man. If you--or anyone!--have any thoughts, I'd love to hear!

Lynn wrote: "Ashley wrote: "Ok I’ve realized it’s not satire like his other books. I am still unsure of how to digest this book. I’m about 100 pages in and am still trying to settle in. So far it feels a little..."

I love your analysis Lynn! You have so many great points. I felt the religious tones but didn't necessarily consider them apologetics. I think it was subtle enough and artistic enough to mean different things to different people as good art should. If you are a Christian, you definitely get more out of the ending, but I think it stands alone too.

Lynn- thank you! So beautiful! I also loved all the symbolism at the end. Charles may not have converted, but he was changed! He said the prayer at their fathers deathbed and at the end in the chapel. There is a question in the back of my book about the last conversation with Cordelia. Waugh wrote in a letter that “I hoped the last conversation with Cordelia gave a theological clue�. I need to go back to read it and see what he’s referring to. The example of the family impacted Charles and he changed!

I need to pick this one back up and finish. I just haven't gotten into the story or characters yet.

Katy, I don’t think you’ll be disappointed. Of course, I was enamored with the British television series, so that carried me a long way into the book, but I found the book to be an even richer experience (as I most often do).

Kathleen wrote: "Emily, your explanation was wonderful and helpful. You fit a lot in a few words--thank you!

Lynn, I have a question. I read this last year, so am fuzzy on the details, but in the symbolic view you..."

I read that Waugh had a brother who was involved in a sexual scandal at boarding school. I think that Sebastian is shown as a brother who people love. In the end Sebastian is living a quiet, chaste life. I do not know at what point in the story she says that. She also turns to a chaste life. Some of the most revered saints lived a wild life in their youth, then changed.

Ashley wrote: "Lynn- thank you! So beautiful! I also loved all the symbolism at the end. Charles may not have converted, but he was changed! He said the prayer at their fathers deathbed and at the end in the chap..."

I would love to think that in the end Charles found peace and happiness. Maybe if there had been another chapter we could have seen him enter the church, maybe not. I went and read some literary analysis of the book online. Vanity Fair has an article where they say Charles is really Waugh, and we know Waugh had converted. But Waugh himself said there were some similarities to his life, but it was truly meant to be a work of fiction.

Lynn wrote: "Kathleen wrote: "Emily, your explanation was wonderful and helpful. You fit a lot in a few words--thank you!

Lynn, I have a question. I read this last year, so am fuzzy on the details, but in the ..."

Thank you, Lynn! It's so interesting the many ways we can see a story and a character.

I had a really hard time with this book and did not like the characters very much at first. I found it very slow and at times I was just confused by the characters. I did find some similarities with not Gatsby so much but another F. Scott Fitzgerald book, Tender is the Night, I think, especially all the drinking and partying. I did see the spiritual awakening coming and I was quite moved by it. I also see that even though Charles did not join the church, he did definitely have a change as shown by his prayer in those two instances at the end. It was well worth reading but just not enjoyable reading for me, but I did love the ending.

Very slowly moved through this book, and had difficulty with references to British culture that the reader of the time must have been familiar with (stopped reading to google Polly Peachum, etc). Finished and then started watching the TV series on Amazon Prime and it helped flesh out some scenes. It made the painfully boring dinner party hosted by Charles� dad even more painful. So if you enjoyed the book and have 11 hours to spare (don’t we all right now), it’s quite spiffing.

11 hours??? Why?? The book doesn't seem THAT long. Wow. Haha. I was going to look up the series today, but didn't find time. Is that the only version? I don't watch a ton of miniseries/movies of classic novels, but I've read a lot of the novels and want to start watching. North and South is another one I finished recently that I want to find a good version of.

The series with a Jeremy Irons and Anthony Andrews is really good, Ashley, so don’t give up looking for it!

I didn’t have the book open while watching, but it seemed like every line of dialogue in the book was repeated verbatim onscreen.

I liked how Charles� father is described quite a lot. Those conversations and the tension between them. Tense and funny in a way. And even though Charles is the narrator, it feels a little bit like the father is right in not giving him the money. He really have to learn a lesson.

"“Won’t you find it rather a bore having me at home for so long?� “I trust I should not betray such an emotion even if I felt it,� said my father mildly and turned back to his book."

I felt that a lot of the theology was lost on me. The book is supposed to be mainly about Catholicism? For me it was mainly about aristocracy and a “house� in both senses that suddenly ended - also in both ways. Non of the four children had any children, and the house was invaded by an army.

Charles really did live a second-hand way of life: He had to turn Catholic for it all to make sense? If he did not become a Catholic not marrying Julian would have been a waste.

I struggled with this book in the beginning, as it was like The Great Gatsby or some of Somerset Maugham´s novels, quite boring. I liked the discussions about religion, esp. Catholicism, and the problems of Sebastian´s alcoholism and the several relationships, otherwise it was only okay imo.

I just started reading the book again, after a long time. Of course I'm lot older now and appreciate it more.

I was wondering if there is a good place I can go to read more analyst/discussion on Charles Ryder?

I noticed there is very little discussion on Charles. I saw some mention of him being a bad artist, etc. But nothing in detail.

I'm curious as to how other readers perceive Charles.

I didn't get this read with the group. Now I'm interested. I'll see if I can work it in and get a feel for Charles.

Sparknotes has a couple of paragraphs on Charles if you are interested: