Companion Pieces

"Someone" has been not so gently nudging me to resurrect this topic to resume discussion of the book Girl With a Pearl Earring. There was one in the Books Conference last November, but interested has reignited, so I'll copy off the discussion and repost it here. That same "Someone" would like to do TEOR next, which I think is a lovely idea. But that can be worked out AFTER the GWAPE one is done. I'll post all the previous messages in the next one, but I need to clean up the formatting.

Well, thank "Someone" for me, at least. I think a book discussion would be grand. Thank you Karen. ;-)

First installment: Response 3 of 151: Evelyn (lafn) * Sat, Nov 16, 2002 The book website gives this guide...good leading questions. http://www.tchevalier.com/guides/index.html Response 6 of 151: Dorine (gomezdo) Sat, Nov 16, 2002 I feel like I'm in college again reading some of those questions. I find 4,10 to 16 (and maybe 2) the most interesting of those. I'm sure there are a boatload of questions and comments of our own. Response 8 of 151: Tress (Tress) * Sat, Nov 16, 2002 (Dorine) I feel like I'm in college again reading some of those questions. I find 4,10 to 16 (and maybe 2) the most interesting of those. I agree with your college statement! They're like the exam questions during finals week. I like 2, 8,10 and 14 (two of those are 'Vermeer' questions, but I find that I'm really curious about how he sees things...since the novel is through Griet's eyes). Thanks for the link Evelyn... Response 9 of 151: Sandy Miller (sandym) * Sun, Nov 17, 2002 (Dorine) I feel like I'm in college again reading some of those questions. I find 4,10 to 16 (and maybe 2) the most interesting of those. I'm sure there are a boatload of questions and comments of our own. #12 looks particularly intriguing. :-D Response 10 of 151: Karen (KarenR) * Sun, Nov 17, 2002 Yeah, those reading guide questions do sound ominously like college exam ones. ;-) I like the idea of discussing the book in sections, as is usually done with books. Films are different because you can't easily divide them up and the discussant has usually seen the entire movie and knows the ending, etc. Rika's suggestion back at Drool about going by year sounds good to me, but I will go with the majority on this one. (As you can tell, I am a structure-junkie.) ;-)))) Then we might use some of the reading guide questions (simplified) at the end if the subject matter hasn't been addressed already. Response 11 of 151: linda (lindak) * Sun, Nov 17, 2002 (11:26) The questions are a bit staggering, but 2,10, and 14 made me sit up and take notice. These questions, for me, get to the heart and soul of the characters, and were some of the very things I questioned as I read. #12 is also significant and I think will be a geat source of exploration as we get underway. If we still have a vote, I'd love to see it discussed in sections with the flexibility of being able to move back and forth as need be for discussion. Thank you Evelyn, for the link. V. informative and a great source for the themes that I'm sure we'll want to cover. Response 12 of 151: Moon Dreams (Moon) * Sun, Nov 17, 2002 I don't happen to own the book. I borrowed it from Lora, so it might be harder for me to stick to structure, but I shall try. ;-D I guess it is too soon to get a copy of the script? Response 13 of 151: Karen (KarenR) * Sun, Nov 17, 2002 (Moon) I don't happen to own the book. I borrowed it Do you have a library card? ;-) How is the voting going on structured vs. unstructured? Rika - structured Evelyn - unstructured Dorine - unstructured Linda - both Karen - structured Moon - wouldn't know the structure if it "struck" her in the face. ;-) What other countries haven't been heard from? This is your UN Secretary-General asking for floor discussion before the Hall Proctor raps my knuckles. Response 14 of 151: Evelyn (lafn) * Sun, Nov 17, 2002 If we still have a vote, I'd love to see it discussed in sections with the flexibility of being able to move back and forth as need be for discussion. OK. I rescind my suggestion for free- for- all :-))))) Actually, I don't give a rat's ass what format we use. While this is a book discussion...really, we're going to have the film and the cast in mind ; and be part of the postings.Since this is the only reason why we're discussing the book in the first place. So it's a combination of both. HS was done in a haphazard way and no one complained:-D Response 15 of 151: Evelyn (lafn) * Sun, Nov 17, 2002 I'm going to ask other non-Drool folks who read the book to join in. Response 16 of 151: Dorine (gomezdo) * Sun, Nov 17, 2002 (Linda) If we still have a vote, I'd love to see it discussed in sections with the flexibility of being able to move back and forth as need be for discussion I'm all for this with *flexibility* the key word. Response 17 of 151: Leona M (WinniePeg) * Sun, Nov 17, 2002 Hello everyone... Hope you don't mind if I join in on discussion. I'm kind of new at this so please be gentle with me.. Response 18 of 151: linda (lindak) * Sun, Nov 17, 2002 (Leona)I'm kind of new at this so please be gentle with me.. Welcome, Leona. Don't worry, in a very short while you'll be just as rough and tumble as the rest of us :-)) Stick around, please. Our discussions are fantastic Response 19 of 151: Karen (KarenR) * Sun, Nov 17, 2002 Don't you worry, Leona has a wicked sense of humor. ;-) Pssst! She's been around for years, mainly lurking but she has posted a little way back when. Response 21 of 151: Moon Dreams (Moon) * Sun, Nov 17, 2002 Welcome, Leona! We are always kind, but never gentle. ;-) (Karen) Moon - wouldn't know the structure if it "struck" her in the face. ;-) ROTF! I am not so rigid. My vote goes to unstructured because, fGs, we are not discussing Shakespeare or Dante. (Dorine), I'm all for this with *flexibility* the key word. Hell, yes. If a bar doesn't serve Martinis with Bombay gin I would still have one with Tanquerey. ;-) Response 22 of 151: Leona M (WinniePeg) * Sun, Nov 17, 2002 I read GWAPE a while back so will now start my re-read with questions in mind. Response 24 of 151: Evelyn (lafn) * Sun, Nov 17, 2002 (Moon)We are always kind, but never gentle. ;-) Well put Moon. I must remember that. fGs, we are not discussing Shakespeare or Dante. LOL... and not getting a grade. Welcome Leona..I like a good sense of humor. Response 25 of 151: Tress (Tress) * Sun, Nov 17, 2002 I'm like Griet...I (try to) do what I am told. Whatever structure everyone else decides...be it a "free for all" or "boot camp", I'm all for it! ;-D Welcome Leona! Response 26 of 151: SandyM (sandym) * Mon, Nov 18, 2002 Is it time? Is it time? Can we start? :-) Response 27 of 151: Karen (KarenR) * Mon, Nov 18, 2002 Yes, it's time. :) Response 28 of 151: SandyM (sandym) * Mon, Nov 18, 2002 Okay, I'll jump in first. I've begun rereading GWAPE and there's an event at the very beginning that still puzzles me, even after two readings. Okay, perhaps better said that it nettles me because IMO it doesn't quite have the ring of truth to it. Why did Griet slap Cornelia on her very first day in the Vermeer household, practically within the first hour of meeting the little girl? Yes, yes, I know that Cornelia was laughing at Griet, but really, that hardly seems like proper motivation for Griet's actions. It seems to me, Griet would have felt entirely out of her element at this point in the story, what with the newness of becoming a maid, leaving her family, meeting Catholics for the first time, etc., not to mention the fact that her family was depending on her to keep this job, and therefore, would have been guarding all of her reactions, emotions, etc., until she'd found her footing. I know this action sets the stage for later tension in the novel, but it seems out of place at this stage in the narrati e. Just MHO. Response 29 of 151: Moon Dreams (Moon) * Mon, Nov 18, 2002 I agree that it was out of place. I thought it might be a reaction she might had had with her own sister at home, had she been provoked. It just came out. Response 30 of 151: linda (lindak) * Mon, Nov 18, 2002 Sandy, I was uncomfortable with that scene as well. I thought she would have to answer to that, but she didn't. Maybe it was an accepted thing. However she was not hired as a governess, she was hired to clean Vermeer's studio, which IMO did not give her authority to discipline the children. One of my favorite things throughout this book was knowing when Vermeer was around or about to be around through Griets words. My favorite was early on when she first arrives. Griet is outside the studio and I looked around and saw the closed door. Behind it was a silence that I knew was him. Now, I don't know why I was so affected by that line. OK, I do know...because we know who is behind the door-literally. But, right off the bat we know that Griet is connected to him. Even before this, the day Vermeer and his wife go to Griet's house, we have the scene with the vegetables. I wanted to reach over and tease it into place. I did not, but he knew that I wanted to. He was testing me. This is from Griet's POV, but I wonder if at this early stage this is her infatuation (then it was immediate), or does she really feel all this, barely knowing him. Do we have any indication that he has done something to make her so in touch with his feelings? Response 31 of 151: Tress (Tress) * Mon, Nov 18, 2002 (lindak) This is from Griet's POV, but I wonder if at this early stage this is her infatuation (then it was immediate), or does she really feel all this, barely knowing him. Do we have any indication that he has done something to make her so in touch with his feelings? This is an interesting question, because we do only have Griet's view. I thought about what I was like as a fifteen year old. Griet has been fairly sheltered all her life (we realize she has never been to Papist Corner, or much beyond the Meat Market prior to her going to the Vermeers). I wonder how many men she has known besides her father (and brother if we want to count him)? What kind of reaction would a sheltered teenage girl have to a handsome man? She described his voice even before she saw him...it seemed she was intrigued by him prior to his apprearing before her. I don't have the book in front of me right now, but doesn't she even 'wet her lips' and straighten her apron before her mother brings the Vermeers into the kitchen? IMO, I think her infatuation was immediate, that she was ready to connect with someone (of the opposite sex) outside her family circle and this made her pay particular attention to Vermeer...I'm not saying that if just anyone walked into the room, she would have made the connection. I think she was just open to it. Also, has anyone noticed that they never mention Vermeer by name? It is always "he", "him", "my husband"...Catharina, Maria Thins, Tanneke are all called by their names (when addressing each other or when Griet speaks of them). Response 32 of 151: Kathy C (kasey) * Mon, Nov 18, 2002 I found the slap somewhat jarring, and out of proportion to Cornelia's action. Granted there is an immediate tension between the two which only escalates but as SandyM said, Griet is out of her element and I too would expect her to be more tentative and cautious as she feels her way and finds her place in the household. Granted, she was not raised to be a maid, it's only due to her father's accident that she finds herself in the role of a servant but I would still not expect such an action on her part given the circumstances. Response 33 of 151: SandyM (sandym) * Mon, Nov 18, 2002 (Tress) What kind of reaction would a sheltered teenage girl have to a handsome man? Overwhelming, especially if he were not only handsome, but powerful. Because he is the head of the guild, Griet's whole family is depending on Vermeer to save them from poverty, or worse. Their entire futures are dependent on him, until the brother finishes his apprenticeship. I think, to Griet, this would have given Vermeer an almost messianic appeal. To further mine that vein... (Linda) My favorite was early on when she first arrives. Griet is outside the studio and I looked around and saw the closed door. Behind it was a silence that I knew was him. ...there are many, many references to this charismatic "aura" that surrounds Vermeer. Griet doesn't have to actually see him to know he is there... or has been there. She can simply feel this aura that surrounds him. When she is in his presence, this "aura" is almost more than he can bear. And yet, at the same time, she is magnetically attracted to it. I once met someone who had this same type of charisma when he entered a room. It was almost electrical, and it even seemed as if the air crackled and the lights burned a little brighter when he was around. He'd had an extensive near-death experience after being struck by lightening. I've never forgotten what that felt like. It was a very attractive force... but also frightening at the same time. That type of energy would have been intoxicating to a teenager on the threshold of her sexual awakening. (Tress) Also, has anyone noticed that they never mention Vermeer by name? It is always "he", "him", "my husband"...Catharina, Maria Thins, Tanneke are all called by their names (when addressing each other or when Griet speaks of them). Very good point. I hadn't noticed until you mentioned it. Response 34 of 151: Tress (Tress) * Mon, Nov 18, 2002 (SandyM re: the slap) I know this action sets the stage for later tension in the novel, but it seems out of place at this stage in the narrative. Just MHO. (Kathy C) I found the slap somewhat jarring, and out of proportion to Cornelia's action. I had not thought about this until I read SandyM's post. It really is out of bounds. I cannot imagine slapping the child of your boss the first day on the job....regardless of what that child had done. And not only does she slap her, but (I am now home and have the book in front of me), she threatens to do it again! Cornelia threatens Griet with "I'll tell our mother. Maids don't slap us." and then Griet comes back with "Shall I tell your grandmother what you have done?" My goodness! Then if you read on down a bit...Griet senses "him" in the middle window on the first floor..."I stared but could see nothing except the reflected light". Does this mean Vermeer saw everything? The slap? Then Cornelia trying to sink the pot in the canal? I sense that he thinks the children are indulged by their mother (hope I'm not getting too far ahead here)...but do you think he would watch his child be slapped and do nothing? Response 35 of 151: Moon Dreams (Moon) * Tue, Nov 19, 2002 (Sandy) there are many, many references to this charismatic "aura" that surrounds Vermeer. Griet doesn't have to actually see him to know he is there... or has been there. She can simply feel this aura that surrounds him. Griet also has the painter's eye. She feels the aura of colours like him and in the end she even suggests changes to his painting and he does abide. The colour arrangement of the vegetables on their first meeting speaks volumes. (Tress) Does this mean Vermeer saw everything? The slap? Yes. But he can't be bothered to interfere in the household routine. (Tress) I cannot imagine slapping the child of your boss the first day on the job....regardless of what that child had done. But the author wanted to set up the tension between those two. I guess she had no other way to do it. Mayor flaw or mayor imposition? :-) Response 36 of 151: Lizza (Lizzajaneway) * Tue, Nov 19, 2002 In the Sunday Times travel section this week , someone had asked for suggestions for what to do on a visit to Delft. Someone wrote back (one of you?;-) that the visitors should read this rather than a guide book as it gave a marvellous sense of old Delft and was very relevant for a current visit. For me the picture painted for us by TC of the city was one of the stronger themes in the novel, very visual, linking in with (Moon) ...the painter's eye . I agree that the slap felt manufactured but (Moon) I guess she had no other way to do it is probably right! Response 37 of 151: Mari (mari) * Tue, Nov 19, 2002 I really need to go back and review the book, but just a thought: modes of behavior and child discipline were very different in the 1600s. Response 38 of 151: Evelyn (lafn) * Tue, Nov 19, 2002 I am not a big fan of Griet's character:"The maid from hell". I read the book twice. Could not abide it the first time. Although I admire TC's imagination. The second time, thanks to Sue, I saw it in a different light."A coming of age"novel...an insight into the lives of the people of Delft at the time etc. And as Lizza says: For me the picture painted for us by TC of the city was one of the stronger themes in the novel,... (Mari)..but just a thought: modes of behavior and child discipline were very different in the 1600s. Even the manner of a maid disciplining a child ? At first I thought it was to keep Cornelia from getting too close to the canal.But it was because she 'laughed'. The author's telling us that trouble is in store with Catharina. "This is how it will be with her mother I thought except I will not be able to slap her" Response 39 of 151: SandyM (sandym) * Tue, Nov 19, 2002 (Evelyn) I am not a big fan of Griet's character:"The maid from hell". LOL!! I don't know if I felt quite that strongly about it, but at times, I didn't find Griet's character sympathetic either, which is bothersome when she is your window to everything else in the novel. However, even with the prickles, I thought she was interesting. Vermeer was also a bit of a struggle at times. One minute, kind and compassionate, the next, aloof and cold, swinging from one extreme to the other with little provocation. That's probably an accurate portrayal of an artist's temperament, but it doesn't make him the easiest character for a reader to identify with. Perhaps, it was because we could only view him from Griet's POV. And though I enjoyed the tension of the attraction between these two less-than-perfect individuals, I couldn't help wishing I knew more of Vermeer's side of things, as it was hard to know if Griet's perceptions were accurate, or just the product of adolescent infatuation. Response 40 of 151: linda (lindak) * Tue, Nov 19, 2002 (SandyM) I couldn't help wishing I knew more of Vermeer's side of things, as it was hard to know if Griet's perceptions were accurate, or just the product of adolescent infatuation. As much as I loved this book, I always went back to reread Griets thoughts and dialogue with Vermeer. I have a hard time figuring out if she is giving us the real thing or is what she says coming from her growing infatuation. Was he cool and aloof, after Pieter comes to deliver the meat for the feast, or is she feeling overly sensitive because she is infatuated with Vermeer. Griet seems to think Vermeer is avoiding her because he saw Pieter smile at her. I agree, Sandy. I do wish we had another POV concerning Vermeer's character. Response 41 of 151: Tress (Tress) * Tue, Nov 19, 2002 (SandyM) I couldn't help wishing I knew more of Vermeer's side of things, as it was hard to know if Griet's perceptions were accurate, or just the product of adolescent infatuation. (lindak) I agree, Sandy. I do wish we had another POV concerning Vermeer's character. I also wish we could have had a 'second opinion' on the relationship. Not even necessarily Vermeer's version (though he would have been my first choice), but I would like to get Maria Thin's account! If we believe Griet's narrative (and let's say she exaggerates her encounters with V), are we to believe what she says about Maria Thins as well? MT seems very in tune with the house (again Griet's POV). She seems to sense the attraction between her son-in-law and the maid. I often wondered, if what Griet is saying is true, why MT just observed? I would think MT would pull her daughter aside and have a little heart to heart. I am not sure I buy the fact that MT would keep the status quo just because Griet made V work faster. I also got the idea...a feeling maybe...that MT was a bit infatuated with V herself. Or at least, she appreciated his work in a way her daughter could not and it bordered on adulation...there are a couple of lines, after Griet is found looking at the painting of Van Ruijven's wife in the yellow mantle...."I gathered my broom and bucket and cloth. When I left the room, Maria Thins was still standing in front of the painting." Response 42 of 151: Dorine (gomezdo) * Wed, Nov 20, 2002 (Tress) if what Griet is saying is true, why MT just observed? I am not sure I buy the fact that MT would keep the status quo just because Griet made V work faster. You have to look at what would be gained vs. what would be lost if MT said something. Gained: 1. V paints faster, therefore more money brought into the house to feed the ever growing household. Lost: 1. If MT said something, C would go ballistic (as she eventually did), and have Griet dismissed. If Griet were dismissed, they would have to take the time to find and train a new maid. 2. Also, if Griet were dismissed, any kind of "peace" or status quo that is keeping that household running would be severely disrupted which would more than likely disrupt V's productivity, therefore affecting their income. 3. With no income, they go bankrupt and lose all their possessions. And who knows where they'd all end up. They need to be sure to keep V happy and working. Plus he is still the head of the household and is to be obeyed. Response 43 of 151: Moon Dreams (Moon) * Wed, Nov 20, 2002 (Dorine) They need to be sure to keep V happy and working. Plus he is still the head of the household and is to be obeyed. That is the material point. Without him they would not eat. I agree with all your points. (Tress) I also got the idea...a feeling maybe...that MT was a bit infatuated with V herself. She appreciated him as a painter. And, she knew Griet was a great help to him. There was always another baby on the way and he needed to paint. He did take a very long time with each painting. Response 44 of 151: Evelyn (lafn) * Wed, Nov 20, 2002 (Sandy) Vermeer was also a bit of a struggle at times Agree. But I didn't want to hit-on both of them at once. (Dorine) They need to be sure to keep V happy and working. (Moon)That is the material point. Without him they would not eat. IRL MT had other income from husband's estate. but it did not cover all the expenses.She is the head. But C. rules! I became frustrated with the paltry amount of V. bio in the book (can you tell I expected more ;-). so I checked out a book TC used as a source; "Vermeer and His Milieu" It's a dull, dry book, but full of documented facts. Part of the intrigue of the book is Griet's imagination. She is intoxicated with V.. Her father had taught here to revere art. So even though she disliked the position as a maid (sleeping in a hole in the ground, FGS)she was excited about being so close to the artist that she had admired. Remember her dad pointed out The View of Delft by V.to her. Response 46 of 151: linda (lindak) * Wed, Nov 20, 2002 (Moon) That is the material point. Without him they would not eat. Didn't Taneke say early on to Griet that they could barely pay her wages? So, even if MT had some sort of income, they were in a bad way financially. I got the impression that MT was willing to look the other way with the infatuation, because his paintings were needed to pay the bills. I think she knew that Vermeer had to be kept happy in all areas. I also believe she knew what made him tick better than her daughter. Yes, Vermeer and Catharina had several children, but IMO, MT knew that C was not the warmest body in the house. Response 47 of 151: Rika (Rika) * Wed, Nov 20, 2002 (Tress) IMO, I think her infatuation was immediate, that she was ready to connect with someone (of the opposite sex) outside her family circle and this made her pay particular attention to Vermeer... And she says (p.42), "No gentleman had ever taken such an interest in me before." So I think the combination of his noticing her at all, the connection they made over the arrangement of the vegetables, and (as Evelyn pointed out) her admiration of him as a respected artist would be enough to tip her over into infatuation. (Linda) Yes, Vermeer and Catharina had several children, but IMO, MT knew that C was not the warmest body in the house. As others have commented, it's frustrating that through our Griet's-eye view of Vermeer, we really don't know that much about the kind of husband and father he was. We see only small glimpses. Catharina seems extremely jealous where her husband was concerned - was this solely because she noticed something in his treatment of Griet, was she just a jealous person, or had he given her other reasons? Hard to say from the evidence we're given. (Tress) Also, has anyone noticed that they never mention Vermeer by name? Yes; that fascinates me. And at first Griet doesn't even explain who she's talking about - she just says "he" or "him". He so totally inhabits her thoughts that it's not necessary to explain. She calls him "my master" on occasion later in the book, but otherwise it's taken for granted who "he" is. And on another topic.... One thing I really enjoyed about the novel was TC's imagery. I also came away from the book with a sense that Griet's world was very quiet, and I wasn't sure why. This afternoon I had a chance to re-read the first 50 pages or so, and I paid special attention to the descriptions and analogies (as when she says she "could hear rich carpets in their voices" when describing Vermeer and Catharina). I notice now that Griet is primarily a visual observer of the world - most of the things she describes are things she sees, not things she hears or smells or touches. (Notice that even her description of their voices which I quoted above offers a visual analogy for the sound that she hears.) She doesn't describe the splashing of the water in the canal as the boats go by, the crackling of a fire, or the sizzling of the chops as they grill, as an auditory observer would. There are a few exceptions (including the jangling of Catharina's keys), but overall I think this is a fairly accurate generalization. Yet where Vermeer is concerned, she tells us about sounds and scents too. The first time she stands outside the studio, she refers to sound by its absence - behind the door, "the silence that I knew was him." Later, at times when she doesn't see him, she still reports hearing him talking to others. When she first enters the studio, she reflects on the sounds that would be muffled by the door, and she reports on the smell of linseed oil. It makes sense that Griet would be visually oriented, given that she is established from the start as someone who shares Vermeer's eye for color and composition, but it's interesting that her feelings for this equally visually-oriented man would bring out her other senses. I don't know if TC intended this, or if I'm reading too much into it, but Griet's multi-sensory experience where Vermeer is concerned shows her heightened awareness of him, vs. the others in the household who are for the most part peripheral players to her. Response 48 of 151: Dorine (gomezdo) * Thu, Nov 21, 2002 (Rika) Griet is primarily a visual observer of the world - most of the things she describes are things she sees, not things she hears or smells or touches. it's interesting that her feelings for this equally visually-oriented man would bring out her other senses. I don't know if TC intended this, or if I'm reading too much into it, but Griet's multi-sensory experience where Vermeer is concerned shows her heightened awareness of him, vs. the others in the household who are for the most part peripheral players to her. This is a very interesting observation and, too, wonder if this was TC's intention. The lack of Griet's sensory "awareness" may be a manifestation of a depression she may feel from being in a strange household with people who are certainly less than hospitable and, at times, hostile. She may even dull her other senses subconsciously (yet in a way deliberately) during times she is not with Vermeer to help her cope with her unhappiness. Then these other senses are "turned on" whenever she is in the studio and with or senses Vermeer nearby.

Oh, sh.. are we starting a GWAPE book discussion? (she says sipping her Bombay saphire martini) ;-)

Response 49 of 151: Tress (Tress) * Thu, Nov 21, 2002 (Rika) Griet's multi-sensory experience where Vermeer is concerned shows her heightened awareness of him, vs. the others in the household who are for the most part peripheral players to her. Very good point. Griet's descriptions do become fuller when she is speaking of Vermeer. '"Catharina" the man said calmly. He spoke her name as if he held cinnamon in his mouth.' (sorry, just had to include that line...I love it). (me) I am not sure I buy the fact that MT would keep the status quo just because Griet made V work faster. (Dorine) Gained: 1. V paints faster, therefore more money brought into the house to feed the ever growing household. I just found a couple of lines that negates my 'MT wants Vermeer to work faster assumption' (because I thought she did want him to work at a quicker pace)...from Tanneke: "Mistress and young mistress disagree sometimes. Young mistress wants him to paint more, but my mistress says speed will ruin him." But now I wonder about Catharina. Does she have more children simply to make Vermeer paint faster? There are several times when it is mentioned that they have no money. More children cost more money. She could slow that process down by nursing them, but instead hires a wet nurse (more money) to feed them (and at the rate she has them, I think the wet nurse is practically a permanent employee). The house being full of children could possibly be more of a distraction to her husband than a motivator to paint faster...hmmmm... BTW has anyone else noticed Griet's hand obsession? Several times she notes Vermeer's clean hands, Pieter the son's dirty, bloody hands and her cracked and bleeding hands (I apologize for the reference...it couldn't be helped). This seems important to her Response 50 of 151: Annette (anjo) * Thu, Nov 21, 2002 Just a short note to let you know, that I'm lurking. I do have a library card, and I've been waiting for the book from the library for 2 months, but until I get a chance to read it, I'll just enjoy your postings. Since this is the only topic, where I can submit anything, I'll introduce myself later where it is apropriate (I hope to hear from Karen). Response 51 of 151: Moon Dreams (Moon) * Thu, Nov 21, 2002 (Dorine), She may even dull her other senses subconsciously (yet in a way deliberately) during times she is not with Vermeer to help her cope with her unhappiness. Do she ever say she is unhappy? I don't think so. Sure cleaning was a drag and hard work but she did it to help her family. (Tress), has anyone else noticed Griet's hand obsession? Several times she notes Vermeer's clean hands, Pieter the son's dirty, bloody hands and her cracked and bleeding hands (I apologize for the reference...it couldn't be helped). This seems important to her. And especially at the end, when she is summoned to Vermeer's house. She notices her dirty nails from the blood of the meat. Her aesthetic sense overall is high, even in her humble job. When she first starts working at the V house, she notices wrinkle sheets and yellow stained sheets. Young mistress wants him to paint more, but my mistress says speed will ruin him." This is another clue that tells us that MT appreciates him as a painter. Griet knows this and considers her an allied. This is also why MT lets Griet help him with the colours. Response 52 of 151: Dorine (gomezdo) * Thu, Nov 21, 2002 (Moon) Do she ever say she is unhappy? I don't think so. Sure cleaning was a drag and hard work but she did it to help her family. Does she have to come out and say it to make it so? And just cause she did it to help her family doesn't mean it wouldn't depress her or at least make her sad. Many people do things for their families that make them personally unhappy, esp if the course of their life and lifestyle was dramatically altered as was Griet's. If that were the case, there wouldn't be as many people in therapy. Unfortunately I don't have the time at the moment to find examples of how I specifically would illustrate my point. Hopefully when I return late tonight I will. Response 53 of 151: linda (lindak) * Thu, Nov 21, 2002 (Dorine) Does she have to come out and say it to make it so? I agree. I don't have a specific reference to her unhappiness, but I never get the feeling that she is happy in the situation. Except of course for her infatuation with Vermeer. I think she was uneasy from the moment she arrived. We don't have verbal complaints, though, even when she describes the long days of endless laundry and cleaning. I just sense that she is not happy. Will look for specifics, if there are any, later this evening. Response 54 of 151: Evelyn (lafn) * Thu, Nov 21, 2002 She wasn't exactly thrilled when her mother told her she had to take the job as a maid to help the family. "Mother: "You are to start tomorrow as the maid. If you do well, you will be paid 8 stuivers a day [ed note;how much is that?]. You will live with them" I pressed my lips together [ed note:she is v. obsessed with her lips] Mother:"Don't look at me like that, Griet....we have to, now your father has lost his trade" ...is not with Vermeer to help her cope with her unhappiness. I submit that her infatuation (read:fantacizing)with Vermeer was a coping tool to mollify her unhappiness . (Tress)Also, has anyone noticed that they never mention Vermeer by name? By doing this she de-personalizes her fantasy. Welcome Annette..hope you can join us soon. (I bought my book online second-hand for four bucks) Response 55 of 151: Tress (Tress) * Thu, Nov 21, 2002 (Evelyn) you will be paid 8 stuivers a day [ed note;how much is that?]. Today it is a 5 cent piece...which doesn't help us out much. It appears to be our version of a penny (?). I don't see any lower denomination. (Evelyn) By doing this she de-personalizes her fantasy. But none of the women call him by his name....Maria Thins and Catharina also refer to Vermeer as "him", "he", "my husband", "my son-in-law". Maybe TC wants us to feel he is an outsider in his own home. He doesn't participate in the running of the household, leaving that to his wife (and MT who I think is really in charge). He paints and takes care of Guild business. Maybe his 'outsider' status makes us forgive him for his fascination with Griet. I think if they personalized him (called him Johannes), we may have a harder time with him grinding colors with the maid. Response 56 of 151: kathleen (townranny) * Thu, Nov 21, 2002 (Tress) I got the idea that MT was a bit infatuated with V. herself. I read that MT had a bizarre quarrelsome family and liked V because he was not. (Tress) Has anyone noticed Griet's hand obsession? I think the Dutch at that time were fastidious people in general in comparison to other cultures. Does anyone else have any comment on that? (Tress) Has anyone noticed they never mention V. by name? TC was hard pressed to put this book together because so little is known about V. I think she probably felt more comfortable telling the story of a totally fictional character. His character is in shadow. TC sets up distance between V and G. "He" was also in a predominantly female household. The Master. I think V. really liked women. Response 57 of 151: Rika (Rika) * Fri, Nov 22, 2002 (Kathleen) "He" was also in a predominantly female household. The Master. Yes, I suppose when you're the only male in the house (except one or two babies) it's unambiguous. I think it's a little more notable the way Griet does it, though. The rest of them are talking to one another; Griet is talking to a listener who isn't part of the household, and yet still takes entirely for granted that everyone will understand who she's talking about. Did anybody else find it odd that Griet is a little politician sometimes? The way she handled Tanneke, for example - asking her if she really did all the work herself, and flattering her about her painting being at van Ruijven's house and so on. Where would she have learned that, at her age? It sounds like she's lived a fairly sheltered existence and there's no indication that getting by in her family required any excessive level of diplomacy. Response 58 of 151: SandyM (sandym) * Fri, Nov 22, 2002 Did anyone else get the feeling that Griet was also a bit of a narcissist? She comments at the beginning how the laundry had been carelessly done; then proceeds to do it in a better way (ed. note - read HER way). She thinks herself better at obtaining meat from the butcher than Tanneke had been. Later on, when Tanneke compliments herself on her cooking ability, Griet thinks to herself about how SHE has really made the pheasant better by basting and salting it when Tanneke wasn't looking. She even feels that she can prepare a better composition for a painting than V. can by changing the way the tablecloth is situated. Maybe she had an air of superiority around her that made the most of the other women in the household (Tanneke, Catharina, Cornelia) bristle. Only Maria Thins, who struck me as the "big picture" thinker of the household and thus, wouldn't allow tiny annoyances to cloud her emotions, was largely unaffected. Response 59 of 151: kathleen (townranny) * Fri, Nov 22, 2002 Does anyone think the Girl With A Pearl Earring looks like Shelly DuVal? I think of her everytime I look at it.I saw the same exhibit that Tracy Chevall probably saw in in DC many years ago. The paintings were unbelievably beautiful. Luminous. I can see why they inspired her to write. Do you buy TC's story about the headress? Seems a little dodgy to me. Anyone know anything about it? Also who do you all think GWAPE really was? Response 60 of 151: Dorine (gomezdo) * Fri, Nov 22, 2002 (Sandy) Did anyone else get the feeling that Griet was also a bit of a narcissist? Maybe she had an air of superiority around her that made the most of the other women in the household (Tanneke, Catharina, Cornelia) bristle. That is an excellent point! Some women (can't speak for men) can pick up a negative vibe in another with or without being able to identify it or articulate it. How each person chooses to react and interact with the person they pick up the vibe from is individual. Response 61 of 151: Evelyn (lafn) * Fri, Nov 22, 2002 (kathleen) Also who do you all think GWAPE really was? Art historians differ. But most think it was one of his daughter. Do you buy TC's story about the headress? Seems a little dodgy to me. Anyone know anything about it? **The turban-like headress appears in another one of his paintings"Head of a Girl" at the Met in NY.These two "tronien (faces) were painted in a Turkish fashion" **Vermeer "social biography". You really have to hand it to TC . She is v. inventive to weave a story out of such little source material. Response 62 of 151: Moon Dreams (Moon) * Fri, Nov 22, 2002 (Evelyn) You really have to hand it to TC . She is v. inventive to weave a story out of such little source material. (Rika) Where would she have learned that, at her age? It sounds like she's lived a fairly sheltered existence and there's no indication that getting by in her family required any excessive level of diplomacy. To weave such a story from little source material requires a few flaws. We also saw it with the slap. (Sandy) Maybe she had an air of superiority around her that made the most of the other women in the household (Tanneke, Catharina, Cornelia) bristle. True! Tanneke was jealous of her. Cath. was bothered by her and Cornelia resented her. All this made Griet appreciate V even more. To the point that even when he used her pretty much as a personal slave she still looked forward to meeting with him again. Response 63 of 151: Rika (Rika) * Sat, Nov 23, 2002 Sandy, excellent point about the narcissism. She may have had no chance with Catharina in any case (since she may have taken umbrage at V's paying attention to Griet the first time they met), but she probably didn't help her cause. The reason it didn't seem to bother MT was probably that she was strong enough not to be threatened by it. (But, oh dear, now I'm imagining the Church Lady doing the Superior Dance. (kathleen) Also who do you all think GWAPE really was? (Evelyn) Art historians differ. But most think it was one of his daughter. At least some of them claim he didn't have any daughters old enough at the time it was painted, don't they? I think I read that somewhere though I'm not remembering the details. It's an interesting mystery, for sure. (Kathleen) Does anyone think the Girl With A Pearl Earring looks like Shelly DuVal? You know, there is a resemblance. (Moon) To weave such a story from little source material requires a few flaws. We also saw it with the slap. True. Another example for me is Cornelia. We've already discussed the role of the slap as a set-up for their antagonism, but wasn't Cornelia about eight? She seemed a bit too sophisticated in her revenge at times (as when she offers Griet the discarded doll to take to her sister right after Agnes dies of the plague). Unless, that is, Catharina was pulling the strings. Response 64 of 151: Evelyn Boake (lafn) * Sat, Nov 23, 2002 I read the slap as erratic behavior on Griet's part. I tell ya'...I see a personality disorder here. Response 65 of 151: Rika (Rika) * Sat, Nov 23, 2002 On Evelyn's personality-disorder point, there does seem to be plenty of evidence: * Narcissistic tendencies * The slap * Obsessive fear of showing her hair What else? Response 66 of 151: kathleen (townranny) * Sat, Nov 23, 2002 (Evelyn) I tell ya I see personality disorder here. I don't see the slap as part of personality disorder.In a large family there is not a lot of attention to go around and at least one of the kids may act out to get negative attention. I think Griet was very intuitive that Cornelia was one of these kids and went toe to toe with her from the first confrontation. Otherwise, Cornelia could have made her life hell in the house. Children with power can be scary little things. Slapping a child who got out of line was probably typical then. Response 67 of 151: Moon Dreams (Moon) * Sat, Nov 23, 2002 (Kathleen), Slapping a child who got out of line was probably typical then. Exactly. As I stated before. Griet might have done the same to her sister in a similar circumstance. (Rika),What else? Her clean hands obsession. What I found strange was Griet bringing Pieter to the alley. There is a progression of how many things she allows him to do and all at a time when we know she is bothered by him. Why would she do that? Response 68 of 151: linda (lindak) * Sat, Nov 23, 2002 (Rika) Unless, that is, Catharina was pulling the strings. I felt that in the case of Cornelia, Catharina was involved. Maybe not overtly, but I think Cornelia sensed her mother's unease with Griet. Children, even at a young age, definitely can sense when something is going on in the household-especially between the parents. At first, I don't think she puts it all together, but as time goes on, Cornelia becomes increasingly antagonistic. However,(Kathleen) she is a scary little thing, and was probably so even before Griet enters the household. The turmoil that Griet created was all she needed. Response 69 of 151: kathleen (townranny) * Sat, Nov 23, 2002 (Moon) Her clean hands obsession. Absolutely! (Moon)What I found strange was Griet bringing Pieter to the alley. I agree, I think Pieter took her to the alley the first time and she was unwilling. After Vermeer sees her hair, she makes some explanation about loss of innocence at his hands. Then she goes and finds Pieter. Vermeer violated her and so she self-inflicts another violation? Don't quite follow that. Maybe she wanted Vermeer, couldn't have him, went to find Pieter. (Rika) Unless that is, Catharina was pulling the strings. I think so to. I'd read that MT's family was a bit wacky and Catharina is portrayed as unstable, temperamental in the book. Of all the children, Cornelia seems to identify w/Catherina and feeds off of her response. To Griet coming from a warm stable family it must have been like going to live with the Osbournes! Response 70 of 151: Rika (Rika) * Sat, Nov 23, 2002 (Moon) Her clean hands obsession. Yup. After the hands business was mentioned here, I was re-reading the scene where Griet and Vermeer have their first real contact at his house (the scene with the camera obscura), and sure enough, she comments on how clean his hands are. (Kathleen) Vermeer violated her and so she self-inflicts another violation? Don't quite follow that. Maybe she wanted Vermeer, couldn't have him, went to find Pieter. That's how it seemed to me. It may not have been a deliberate choice on her part, but I think her frustrated desire for Vermeer drove her to Pieter. Of all the children, Cornelia seems to identify w/Catherina and feeds off of her response. Agreed, but I felt as though Catharina might also have been more actively involved in some of Cornelia's specific actions towards Griet. As I mentioned before, some of the things Cornelia does to Griet seem to be unusual choices for a child of her age. I'm laughing about the Osbournes reference, Kathleen! Response 71 of 151: Tress (Tress) * Sat, Nov 23, 2002 (Kathleen) Vermeer violated her and so she self-inflicts another violation? Don't quite follow that. Maybe she wanted Vermeer, couldn't have him, went to find Pieter. (Rika) That's how it seemed to me. It may not have been a deliberate choice on her part, but I think her frustrated desire for Vermeer drove her to Pieter. Griet's hair and how she feels about it fascinated me. I think that once Vermeer saw her with her hair down, she felt 'used'. It was almost like her virginity. Something she wanted to keep and not just give away. Griet talked about her hair when Pieter asked her what color it was and how long it was...she lied to him. Told him it was dark and just past her shoulders, then she tells us: "I had hesitated because I did not want to lie but did not want him to know. My hair was long and could not be tamed. When it was uncovered it seemed to belong to another Griet-a Griet who would stand in an alley alone with a man, who was not so calm and quiet and clean [again with the clean reference]. A Griet like the women who dared to bare their heads. That is why I kept my hair completely hidden-so that there would be no trace of that Griet." Her hair became a symbol to her...once Vermeer saw it, she didn't have anything to hide from anyone. Hence the odd alley behaviour? I do think there was a frustrated desire as well, but I also think that she felt that now that V had seen her, nothing else mattered. V's reaction was odd as well. When he saw her hair, Griet says "At last he let me go with his eyes." Did Vermeer realize then that she was not his to have? Kathleen I also liked your Osbourne reference! Was trying to picture Vermeer yelling for Catharina the way Ozzy does "Sha-roooooon! Response 73 of 151: linda (lindak) * Sun, Nov 24, 2002 (Rika)(the scene with the camera obscura) I couldn't figure out why she had Vermeer leave the room so she could look through the box alone. Another one of her disorders, I guess. Response 74 of 151: Evelyn (lafn) * Sun, Nov 24, 2002 Slapping a child who got out of line was probably typical then A parent, yes...but by a maid? Did she not think she could lose her job and deprive her family of some extra stuivers? This is v. abrupt behavior.(Had I been Catharina, I would have canned her.) All these instances are contrived by the author, IMO.Griet's impetuous behavior in in direct contrast to the confrontation with Catharina at the end. (Rika),What else? (Moon)Her clean hands obsession. At the end...Pieter's father:"Now you know the world a little better you see there's no reason always to keep your hands clean. They just get dirty again" The author is constructing an arc for the coming of age finale. She wets her lips, presses her lips... Response 75 of 151: Rika (Rika) * Sun, Nov 24, 2002 (Linda) I couldn't figure out why she had Vermeer leave the room so she could look through the box alone. Another one of her disorders, I guess. I almost forgot what topic I was on and made a remark better suited for 166. Deep breath. Center. Remember where you are. I can see her being very self-conscious at being unable to see him while she looked through the camera, and he must have understood because he readily agreed when she made the request. But more to the point, I think she was in emotional overdrive from the sensuality of putting on the robe and sensing the warmth and scent of his body. That could have been overwhelming for someone as innocent as she was, given that she was already infatuated with him. Response 76 of 151: Moon Dreams (Moon) * Mon, Nov 25, 2002 At the end...Pieter's father:"Now you know the world a little better you see there's no reason always to keep your hands clean. They just get dirty again" We can say that Griet's saw the world as clean or dirty. V and her family even MT were clean. The other's were dirty. She lived in black and white but was always attracted to colours. When she was allowed the privilege of looking through the box she felt herself closer to the colours, closer to V. She could not have done it with him in the room because it felt dirty to her. Of course, after he sees her hair, there is stronger connection. He had seen through her "box" something no one saw. (Rika), That could have been overwhelming for someone as innocent as she was, given that she was already infatuated with him. And that goes for when he caresses her face and puts his finger in her mouth. Of course, the events that transpire following this eventually drive her to marry Pieter and thus she herself becomes dirty.

Response 77 of 151: Maria T * Mon, Nov 25, 2002 (Kathleen) I agree, I think Pieter took her to the alley the first time and she was unwilling. After Vermeer sees her hair, she makes some explanation about loss of innocence at his hands. Then she goes and finds Pieter. Vermeer violated her and so she self-inflicts another violation? Don't quite follow that. Maybe she wanted Vermeer, couldn't have him, went to find Pieter. It seems that so much of Griet's life was beyond her control, where she lived, what she had to do, when she could do it.. Her going to find Pieter almost seemed an act of her taking charge of the very little she was able to control. Response 78 of 151: Evelyn * Mon, Nov 25, 2002 (Maria) It seems that so much of Griet's life was beyond her control, where she lived, what she had to do, when she could do it.. Her going to find Pieter almost seemed an act of her taking charge of the very little she was able to control. And even then, one wonders...what choice did she have? Her world was minuscule. Marrying Pieter not only rescued her from the life of a servant, but provided food for her family. I find this another facet of this novel: the struggle of women in the 17th C. to find their own values and place in a male hierarchy. Response 79 of 151: SandyM * Mon, Nov 25, 2002 Not to change the subject, but how about that Maria Thins? She certainly knows how to work both ends against the middle. On page 152 she orchestrates events so that Griet must serve Van Ruijven at dinner knowing full well that Van R. will probably insist that Griet pose with him in V.'s next painting. She also knows that V. will object. V. has already expressed displeasure in the idea that Griet should pose at all. ... he(meaning Van R.) may ask that she (Griet I assume?) be in it. Yet, starting on page 157 she begins conspiring with Griet on how to avoid Van R., knowing all the time that the deal is already done (ed note: my interpretation). What was the point of these machinations? My guess is that it was to cool V.'s escalating interest in Griet by getting Van R. involved, and at the same time put Griet on notice that she was no more important to the household (V. included) than a puppet on a string, perhaps sensing that Griet, because of her color grinding duties, felt her self to be something more than that. However, because she didn't want to overplay that hand, Maria T. also makes herself a (false) ally to Griet to help ensure that not only will Griet stay on in the household (after all, she was helping V. ) but also that Griet, from that point on, would have a more realistic sense of her place in the household's pecking order. Tricky, very tricky. Response 81 of 151: Dorine * Mon, Nov 25, 2002 (Sandy) My guess is that it was to cool V.'s escalating interest in Griet by getting Van R. involved But as smart as she obviously is, I would think that MT would realize that could backfire and stoke V's interest and jealousy over Van R's attentions to Griet especially knowing his reputation. Response 82 of 151: SandyM * Mon, Nov 25, 2002 (Dorine) But as smart as she obviously is, I would think that MT would realize that could backfire and stoke V's interest and jealousy over Van R's attentions to Griet especially knowing his reputation True...My guess is she weighed the risks first, but then went ahead, knowing that something must be done to halt the progression of emotion between Griet and V. The future of the household was hanging in the balance. Catharina went about things differently. She just got herself pregnant every chance she could. ;-) Response 84 of 151: Annette * Wed, Nov 27, 2002 Just a short note to say, that I have finished reading the book, and agree on most of your observations. To me it was a very pictures book, and very valuable indeed to be able to put a face on most of the caracters. I found myself looking from the page, I was reading to the cover of the book to follow the painting, as it proceeded. As much as I wantet to feel sympathy for V, I found it hard. Perhaps he let himself be guided to much by Maria Thins. Tomorrow I will go through the earlier postings and that way enjoy the book once more. There's a lot more in my head about this book, but I'm afraid it will be borderline topic 166, so I'll just put a sock in it. Oh - heck, I picture V to look a little like Richard Curtois. So tonight I'll probobly be dreaming of Vermeer whispering old gypsy poems in Griets (no forget in my) ear Response 85 of 151: NitaE * Sat, Nov 30, 2002 I have just started reading GWAPE for the second time to refresh my memories of it. (The first time was quite a long time ago) It is interesting to read it with concrete faces in mind. As soon as I am a bit further into the book I hope to join the discussion. Response 86 of 151: Rika * Sun, Dec 1, 2002 (SandyM) True...My guess is she weighed the risks first, but then went ahead, knowing that something must be done to halt the progression of emotion between Griet and V. The future of the household was hanging in the balance. Setting up a situation where the two of them were forced to spend much time together in a very intimate setting seems an odd way to halt the progression of emotion, though, doesn't it? I wonder if MT's motives were different. Getting van R. interested in a painting of Griet meant that V. got another commission, thus bringing more money in the door. Perhaps her greed temporarily overcame her common sense. Or she may have underestimated the sexual tension between V. and Griet. (Annette) There's a lot more in my head about this book, but I'm afraid it will be borderline topic 166, so I'll just put a sock in it. Yeah, I've had that problem too. Oh - heck, I picture V to look a little like Richard Curtois. If it turns out that way that wouldn't be all bad! Response 87 of 151: Annette * Sun, Dec 1, 2002 (Rika) Or she may have underestimated the sexual tension between V. and Griet. I think someone stated before, that everything in the book, is from Griets point of view. Reading the book, I didn't find anything in V's behaviore, that implicates any sexual attraction - except perhaps his last will; that she was to get the pearl earrings. Then again, that might just be a recognition to her eye for art? (The way, she handled the studio (the settings), and her correcting of the cloth). I was never any good at analyzing books, so just skip this post, if its to far out. Response 88 of 151: linda * Sun, Dec 1, 2002 (Annette) I didn't find anything in V's behaviore, that implicates any sexual attraction I think the interpretation of sexual tension between Griet and Vermeer is going to be one of those things that people will have opposite opinions about for a long time. If we choose to believe that this is strictly Griets POV, born out of her infatuation, then everything Vermeer does could be interpreted as exaggerated. If we choose to believe her, then I think there was a highly charged sexual tension between them-both before and during the time he painted her. We also have the will to think about. It could then be traced back to the first day with the vegetables. Was Griet's infatuation stirred because of his actions in the first place? I will be very interested in the film...I am anxious to know how this will be played out. Response 89 of 151: Tress * Sun, Dec 1, 2002 (Annette) I didn't find anything in V's behaviore, that implicates any sexual attraction (linda) If we choose to believe that this is strictly Griets POV, born out of her infatuation, then everything Vermeer does could be interpreted as exaggerated. If we choose to believe her, then I think there was a highly charged sexual tension between them-both before and during the time he painted her. I read this book thinking that Griet had exaggerated many points...but when I came to the part about him putting in the earring...and putting his hand on her face and rubbing his thumb over her lower lip! Whoa! IMO, there was something there. Even if Griet exaggerated (she has no reason to 'make up' something that we are reading, so I tend to think there is truth in what she says, but that her view of things may be skewed). I try to imagine any other situation (except an infatuation) where a man would rub his thumb on a woman's lips. I don't think it could be viewed as totally innocent. I think if MT or Catharina had seen this, they would have been more than a bit upset. I think Catharina knows her husband enough to sense that what she sees in the painting, may be only what is on the surface. Response 90 of 151: linda * Sun, Dec 1, 2002 (Tress)Whoa! IMO, there was something there That scene was probably the closest thing I ever read that screamed sexual intercourse, without there being any. Response 91 of 151: Rika * Sun, Dec 1, 2002 (Tress) and putting his hand on her face and rubbing his thumb over her lower lip! Whoa! IMO, there was something there. I agree. Unless she invented the whole thing, this sure suggests that he was attracted to her, at least in the moment. But I wonder if that came only after she became his model and he started concentrating on her for long periods of time? (Linda) That scene was probably the closest thing I ever read that screamed sexual intercourse, without there being any. Absolutely. The need for her to pierce her ears, the bleeding, and that she asked him to be the one to penetrate her ear with the earring....that's all very overt. Response 92 of 151: Evelyn * Sun, Dec 1, 2002 He wouldn't be the first painter who fell in love with the subject of his painting. Not the person herself. Goya ...Pissaro.. Picasso...Gaugain; they all did at one time. Response 93 of 151: Tress * Sun, Dec 1, 2002 Don't know if this should be here or not, but I just watched 60 Minutes and they had a segment on the camera obscura. I didn't realize that this was such a controversial topic. Seems that most art historians don't believe that artists used it (it was stated that they 'traced' an image before painting it). A man named David Hockney wrote a book about it (he believes that Van Eyck, Rembrandt, Vermeer and many others used it as a painting tool). Hockney says you can tell that a camera obscura was used because the images are reversed in many paintings from the 1500-1600s. People appear to be left handed during this period. He also mentioned that the camera obscura helped the artist see reflections and light more realistically. The story was very interesting. Response 94 of 151: SandyM * Mon, Dec 2, 2002 (Rika) Setting up a situation where the two of them were forced to spend much time together in a very intimate setting seems an odd way to halt the progression of emotion, though, doesn't it? Absolutely. I think the plan definitely backfired. When she set it up, Maria T. thought that Van R. would be in the painting, too. But V. decides to paint G. alone in one painting, and simultaneously begins a different painting with Van R. and two other women. (Odd, that. V. usually takes months just to finish one painting and all of a sudden, he's working on two at the same time). We find out later in the narrative that he is painting G. in secret. Before this, G. and V. were already spending time together up in the attic room (he painting; she grinding colors). (Tress) and putting his hand on her face and rubbing his thumb over her lower lip! Whoa! IMO, there was something there. (Rika) I agree. Unless she invented the whole thing, this sure suggests that he was attracted to her, at least in the moment. I agree with you both. Response 95 of 151: Annette * Mon, Dec 2, 2002 (Tress) and putting his hand on her face and rubbing his thumb over her lower lip! Whoa! IMO, there was something there. (Rika) I agree. Unless she invented the whole thing, this sure suggests that he was attracted to her, at least in the moment. (SandyM) I agree with you both. I have to correct myself. Odd as it sounds, I had totally forgotten the "thumb on the lip" part. There must be something in the air. And off course V's resistance against painting Griet with Van R. should have set me straight. I think I was in a hurry, the first time I read the book, and will have to read it again more carefully. Response 96 of 151: Evelyn * Mon, Dec 2, 2002 (Tress) Don't know if this should be here or not, but I just watched 60 Minutes and they had a segment on the camera obscura I also saw this. But I had read an article in the "Smithsonian" re: this procedure. David Hockney maintains that it's not cheating [oh yeah!] Not everyone can take an image and trace it to perfection on a canvas. Still.... (Tress) and putting his hand on her face and rubbing his thumb over her lower lip! Whoa! IMO, there was something there. Well, I certainly hope there's *something* in the film. But in the book I just saw Griet as the model for his canvas. IMO, He was in love with the "Girl with the Pearl Earring" not G. "Now that the painting was finished he no longer wanted me".... Of course, we don't know Vermeer's feelings...and that's where Colin's interpretation will come in. The first time I read the book, I took the story literally. The second time, I saw it on a different level. Response 97 of 151: Moon * Mon, Dec 2, 2002 (Annette) And off course V's resistance against painting Griet with Van R. should have set me straight. V knew what happened to the girl he painted with Van R and he didn't want it to happen to G. He liked having G around. She was sure a great helper too. I thought that MariaT had suggested G for the Van R painting so that G would end up disgraced by association and no longer in V's good graces. That would have taken care of the tension with Catarina. I was very surprised when he did caress her lips. I am curious to see if that scene will stay the same in the film. Response 98 of 151: Rika * Tue, Dec 3, 2002 (Evelyn) He wouldn't be the first painter who fell in love with the subject of his painting. Not the person herself. True, and I do think that was a big part of the attraction for him. But I thought he seemed to take somewhat of an interest in her beforehand too, probably because he recognized in her someone who shared his visual orientation. Then again, as a few people have pointed out, we're only hearing the story from Griet's perspective. (SandyM) When she set it up, Maria T. thought that Van R. would be in the painting, too. But V. decides to paint G. alone in one painting, and simultaneously begins a different painting with Van R. and two other women. I had forgotten about that. So V. outmaneuvered Maria T. Thanks, Tress, for the report on the camera obscura piece on 60 Minutes. Great timing for it to be shown (for us, anyway)! Response 99 of 151: Leah * Tue, Dec 3, 2002 I read the book a month ago, and my impression of V was that he used G and never stood up in her defence. I think I need to read it again. You have all brought up good points to look out for. Response 100 of 151: linda * Tue, Dec 3, 2002 (Rika) I had forgotten about that. So V. outmaneuvered Maria T I agree, and then I have to ask the question...Why? Obsession with his subject, or something more? As Evelyn said, we'll just have to wait for the film interpretation. Response 101 of 151: Evelyn * Tue, Dec 3, 2002 (Leah) I read the book a month ago, and my impression of V was that he used G and never stood up in her defence. Depends what you mean by the word used (;-) . I felt the same as you the first time I read it...that he used his position as her employer to gain advantage by securing her affections as a model. He knew she was smitten with him; he was a man of the world. "No gentleman had ever taken such an interest in me before" (p.42) But I saw it in a different light the second time. His world was art and G. was part of that world while he was painting her. He didn't feel he had to come to her defense because his allegiance was to the Girl in the picture. I was disappointed with Maria Thins whose world was not art...she was the greedy one who set up the whole thing, gave her the earrings and then let Griet take the hit alone. Response 102 of 151: Tress * Tue, Dec 3, 2002 (Leah) I read the book a month ago, and my impression of V was that he used G and never stood up in her defence. (Evelyn) His world was art and G. was part of that world while he was painting her. He didn't feel he had to come to her defense because his allegiance was to the Girl in the picture My impression is that V was very aloof. He couldn't be bothered by anything having to do with the running of the house. Like Evelyn says, his world was art (and the Guild). He let the women of the house sort things out themselves, without bothering to step in and come to anyone's defense. Remember he didn't even come to his child's defense when Griet slapped Cornelia (assuming that he did see G do it). V doesn't seem to care about the consequences of his requests or actions. The fact that he tells Griet to pierce her ear (does he care that she may not want it pierced?) or that by asking G to wear the earring she could lose her job (and it is very important to her family that she stay employed). The only time I recall V coming to anyone's defense is when he refuses to paint G with Van R, and I'm not even sure his refusal is because he is 'defending' Griet. He may just be jealous because he does not want Van R to have what he feels he cannot (remember that Griet is warned by L to not get between these two men That V has a special gift and G is just an object to him...I don't have the book in front of me, so excuse me if that is poorly paraphrased). Does he realize that the girl in the red dress is now ruined and feels responsible? Or does he truly care what happens to G? If he does, then his choice to have her grind colors, wear his wife's earrings and sit for him (all behind Catharina's back) seems odd. Unless he is just so absorbed in his needs, that he cannot be bothered with what will happen to G (that she is just an object to be painted). I do think that there was an attraction, but am interested to see how it is played out for us to see (is the attraction to Griet or The Girl with a Pearl Earring)? Response 103 of 151: Evelyn * Wed, Dec 4, 2002 He let the women of the house sort things out themselves, without bothering to step in and come to anyone's defense. Women , esp. servants had a v. low standing in 17th C. Delft. Anton van Leeuwenhoek, Vermeer's friends warns G. when he sees her posing for "Girl": "His eyes are worth a room full of gold...But sometimes he sees the world only as he wants it to be, not as it is. He does not understand the consequences for others of his point of view. He thinks only of himself and his work, not of you....the women in his paintings...he traps them in his world. You can get lost there." The triumph of the novel is that she refuses to get lost...she escapes. Response 104 of 151: Moon * Wed, Dec 4, 2002 (Evelyn), The triumph of the novel is that she refuses to get lost...she escapes. Actually, she has no other choice but to leave. Why would you say she escapes? Response 105 of 151: Tress * Wed, Dec 4, 2002 (Evelyn) The triumph of the novel is that she refuses to get lost...she escapes. (Moon) Actually, she has no other choice but to leave. Why would you say she escapes? I think she is trapped. She has dreadful choices: (1) Be ruined by Van R;(2) be ruined by Vermeer (she says so when he asks her to lick her lips and leave her mouth open for the painting...she also realizes that as soon as C sees the painting, she will lose her job, possibly ruining her family) or (3) marry a man (boy) who she does not love to make her family happy. Not many options for a maid in the 1600s...I think she knew she would be marrying Pieter (she alludes to that early in the book, saying something about "I know what that look meant for me." Again, don't have the book in front of me, so sorry for the poor paraphrasing). I think she put off the marriage (knowing it was inevitable) so that she could stay longer with V. Response 106 of 151: Evelyn * Wed, Dec 4, 2002 (Evelyn), The triumph of the novel is that she refuses to get lost...she escapes. (Moon) Actually, she has no other choice but to leave. Why would you say she escapes? She escapes from this other world that she was infatuated with and grows up...to reality in her own milieu. She could have protested the accusations and told Catharina the real truth. Confronting both V. and MT...but instead she bore the consequences with head held high. She is triumphantly the real hero...the other characters wither beside her. I found the ending exhilarating. Response 107 of 151: Rika * Wed, Dec 4, 2002 (Tress) I think she knew she would be marrying Pieter (she alludes to that early in the book, saying something about "I know what that look meant for me." Her early knowledge that she'd wind up with Pieter really struck me too. Griet seems to see herself as powerless in most situations, which I suppose was pretty much the case. Response 108 of 151: Tress * Wed, Dec 4, 2002 (Rika) Griet seems to see herself as powerless in most situations, which I suppose was pretty much the case. Maybe the reason she keeps her hair hidden? She sees that she cannot control her environment, so she controls the one thing she has possession of...as long as no one sees her hair, she is safe and has some control. Once V sees her with it down, she realizes she has lost that last bit of control (she is ruined), so she may as well give Pieter what he wants (it now makes no difference)? I'm still trying to work out the hair issue (as you can tell)... Response 109 of 151: linda * Wed, Dec 4, 2002 (Evelyn)Confronting both V. and MT...but instead she bore the consequences with head held high. She is triumphantly the real hero...the other characters wither beside her I agree, MT and V were pathetic when Catharina confronts G about the earrings. They each maneuvered Griet for their own purposes and, in the end, neither claimed any responsibility for their actions. I think V's actions are in keeping with the recent comments-he was aloof, she may have been just an object to paint, women were not important, etc. therefore his actions did not surprise me. MT, on the other hand not only pulled the strings where G was concerned, she also deceived her own daughter. (Moon)Actually, she has no other choice but to leave. I agree, and if she didn't she would have no chance at her only salvation, marriage to Pieter. Response 110 of 151: NitaE * Thu, Dec 5, 2002 After the hands business was mentioned here, I was re-reading the scene where Griet and Vermeer have their first real contact at his house (the scene with the camera obscura), and sure enough, she comments on how clean his hands are. I think this may have to do with the fact that her father always had blue hands from painting the tiles and still had after months of not working (p.7). She must have wondered how he could keep his hands so clean. Response 112 of 151: Karen * Sun, Dec 8, 2002 Excellent comments and observations about the book, which I've just enjoyed catching up on. I wanted to reread the book first - an activity that hasn't exactly been a picnic for me - but it is done. I'll just try to pick up on a couple of earlier comments that I feel the need to stick in my two cents and then join in the current topics under the microscope. (Tress) Griet's descriptions do become fuller when she is speaking of Vermeer. '"Catharina" the man said calmly. He spoke her name as if he held cinnamon in his mouth.' (sorry, just had to include that line...I love it). That description stood out for me as well but for another reason. What did it mean? From a purely culinary standpoint, I wouldn't want a cinnamon stick in my mouth; it would taste bitter. A cinnamon-flavored candy might not be appropriate for the times. Cinnamon, being a spice, was a very expensive item at that time, just like the exotic materials V used to make his paints or the dyes used on fabrics that only rich people could afford (the yellow mantle vs Griet's brown clothing). Is Griet picking up on other senses here? The smell of cinnamon being so sweet? The richness of it? This is an interesting observation, but one that was not completely thought out IMO. (Tress) But now I wonder about Catharina. Does she have more children simply to make Vermeer paint faster? I get the impression that she loves having children, that it's not only her "only" contribution, but that she can be the center of attraction. Moreover, it is her only way to show the world how much V must love her, despite the fact that she has no role whatsoever in his world. (SandyM) Did anyone else get the feeling that Griet was also a bit of a narcissist?...Maybe she had an air of superiority around her that made the most of the other women in the household (Tanneke, Catharina, Cornelia) bristle. That "air of superiority" was noticed by everyone from Pieter the father to vanR to Cornelia. But there's a source for it. Griet came from a family who had only recently lost its livelihood. Her father was a "master" tile painter; he was nearly an equal to Vermeer, the only difference being V was the headman of their guild. They were a respected family. The father's master status not only entitled them to benefits from the "disability fund" but his son was given more latitude than others at the tile factory; another boy would've been chucked out immediately. (Kathleen) After Vermeer sees her hair, she makes some explanation about loss of innocence at his hands. Then she goes and finds Pieter. Vermeer violated her and so she self-inflicts another violation? Don't quite follow that. Maybe she wanted Vermeer, couldn't have him, went to find Pieter. (Tress) I'm still trying to work out the hair issue (as you can tell)... Try thinking of hair as a woman's crowning pride and joy, one of her treasures, kept hidden, never cut, brushed nightly to a luxuriant sheen, not to be seen by other men unless she was a common tramp whose heads were not covered. Her hair defined the real her. V had seen the "real G" that only a husband would've on their wedding night. It was logical in G's mind to consummate the act. She was aroused by what V had done and , you know the rest. ;-) (Annette) Reading the book, I didn't find anything in V's behaviore, that implicates any sexual attraction (Tress) the part about him putting in the earring...and putting his hand on her face and rubbing his thumb over her lower lip! Whoa! Could there be a more erotic moment, but we still don't know if V was touching Griet or the girl in his painting. V is in another world when he paints, and it almost seems like his entrance into the backroom, where he observes her hair down, is like an out of body experience for him. That he never goes back tells me that it isn't a matter of the man knowing he's acted inappropriately, but that the artist has what he wants: that glimpse of her hair to use in the painting. That's all. When he's feeling the face, it is erotic to Griet (and us and possibly him), but I'm drawn to the theory that it's the girl in the painting he's feeling. As Evelyn quoted van Leeuwenhoek (on p. 186): His eyes are worth a room full of gold...But sometimes he sees the world only as he wants it to be, not as it is. He does not understand the consequences for others of his point of view. He thinks only of himself and his work, not of you....the women in his paintings...he traps them in his world. You can get lost there." He also says, just before this: "You see, competition makes men possessive. He is interested in you in part because van Ruijven is." (Rika) They each maneuvered Griet for their own purposes and, in the end, neither claimed any responsibility for their actions....MT, on the other hand not only pulled the strings where G was concerned, she also deceived her own daughter. Did she deceive her own daughter? Her daughter seemed to know what had really transpired, and surely knew her mother's involvement in the sale/negotiation (aiding and abetting) of V's works. Instead, Catherina chose to make an issue out of a superficial issue, which could be easily disproved, so that they had "cause" to dismiss G out. I believe this was for public consumption and all knew it. Response 113 of 151: Evelyn * Sun, Dec 8, 2002 (Rika) They each maneuvered Griet for their own purposes and, in the end, neither claimed any responsibility for their actions....MT, on the other hand not only pulled the strings where G was concerned, she also deceived her own daughter. (Karen) Did she deceive her own daughter? Her daughter seemed to know what had really transpired, and surely knew her mother's involvement in the sale/negotiation (aiding and abetting) of V's works. You think Catharina knew that MT had given G. the earring? I don't. IMO they were all afraid to take on this pregnant woman who was obviously in a jalous rage. I did feel sorry for C. when she said to her husband: "Why didn't you ever paint me"? Response 114 of 151: Karen * Sun, Dec 8, 2002 (Evelyn) You think Catharina knew that MT had given G. the earring? Certainly, even if only at a subconscious level. He didn't get things himself. ;-) Of course, the conspirators didn't want to make matters worse with Catharina in this state, but I think everyone knew what was going on and it was a convenient excuse. Response 115 of 151: Karen * Sun, Dec 8, 2002 Here we go (p. 213) "Did you steal the key to my jewelry box and take my earrings?" Catharina spoke as if she were trying to convince herself of what she said. Her voice was shaky. Catharina knew from the minute that V took her side in the comb incident that G had a special relationship with her husband, and she would also know that he trusted her and she wasn't about to steal. That "all maids steal and listen at doorways" was common knowledge. Catharina (and MT) chose to take that accepted route vs one that would publicly humiliate them if known. Response 116 of 151: Rika * Sun, Dec 8, 2002 (Karen)(Rika) They each maneuvered Griet for their own purposes and, in the end, neither claimed any responsibility for their actions....MT, on the other hand not only pulled the strings where G was concerned, she also deceived her own daughter. No big deal, but just to clarify, I don't believe I was the one who said this. Response 117 of 151: Karen * Sun, Dec 8, 2002 OK, right. This belonged to Linda. Sorry. (Linda) They each maneuvered Griet for their own purposes and, in the end, neither claimed any responsibility for their actions....MT, on the other hand not only pulled the strings where G was concerned, she also deceived her own daughter. Response 118 of 151: linda * Mon, Dec 9, 2002 (Karen) Did she deceive her own daughter? Her daughter seemed to know what had really transpired, and surely knew her mother's involvement in the sale/negotiation (aiding and abetting) of V's works. I still think she deceived her own daughter on a variety of levels. I do believe that C was aware of somethings, but I beleve MT deceived her more on an emotional level. (Evelyn)You think Catharina knew that MT had given G. the earring? I really don't think she did. If she did, then why the explosion? Surely if MT was not trying to deceive C, then wouldn't she have told her that Vermeer need G to wear the earrings? She didn't have a problem with other women borrowing her things for his paintings. Maybe deceive is not the word I'm looking for. Perhaps MT was trying to hide her dealings with V and G so that C would not suffer. Especially since MT obviously thought her actions were for the good of the household. She probably figured her son-in-law's infatuation and involvement would end once the painting was finished. Response 119 of 151: Karen * Mon, Dec 9, 2002 (Linda) I really don't think she did. If she did, then why the explosion? I don't think it was the earrings; it was the fact that he had painted G in that fashion, alone, just looking at him, something he hadn't done before. When it came to supplying V's models, G would fetch C's mantle, powder brush, etc. But the jewelcase was off limits to her. MT handled that alone. Remember how C was going nuts when the jewelcase and its contents were part of another painting and how she didn't trust it in the same room with G? On any logical level, C would know that G wouldn't just take the earring to wear in his painting. Either V or MT would've had to have given it to her. On another level, yes, that "maid from hell," who her husband sided with, was wearing her earring. It was not to be borne. Everyone would know. Public shame was involved, and surely she heard all the gossip too. Response 120 of 151: Evelyn * Mon, Dec 9, 2002 (Karen) Of course, the conspirators didn't want to make matters worse with Catharina in this state, but I think everyone knew what was going on and it was a convenient excuse. Convenient excuse for what? To can Griet? I can see where C. would be humiliated when everyone saw the painting with the maid wearing C's earring. So you think MT and C. conspired to blame G. for stealing the earring in order to appear blameless to the public? That's a stretch, IMO. You're giving those women more credit than I would. Response 121 of 151: Karen * Mon, Dec 9, 2002 (Evelyn) So you think MT and C. conspired to blame G. for stealing the earring in order to appear blameless to the public? Not explicitly. They didn't get together to cook up this scheme. This is how I see it happening. Catharina sees the pic and goes nuts. Everyone goes to see what is happening. She is sobbing her eyes out, screaming and pointing to picture, blubbering, "Y-y-you painted her and she's wearing my earrings." V goes to look out of the window. MT sends Cornelia the troublemaker out of the room and tries to console her daughter, saying, "It won't be so bad. Only VR will see the picture." Catharina blubbers through her tears, "but my earrings, they will know....ah, she must have stolen them." MT: "yes, that is what must have happened." MT looks at V who has turned back from the window; their eyes meet and he shrugs. Well, something like that. As you can see, I'm no screenwriter. ;-) Response 122 of 151: Evelyn Boake * Mon, Dec 9, 2002 (Karen)This is how I see it happening...Well, something like that. As you can see, I'm no screenwriter. ;-) OK, boss...I get it. Just keep your day job;-) Response 123 of 151: Rika * Tue, Dec 10, 2002 (Karen) V goes to look out of the window. I had a serious Mr. Darcy flashback when I read this. Karen mentioned something a few posts back about re-reading the book, and finding that quite a chore. The comment reminded me of a question I wanted to ask. We've talked about our liking or dislike for some of the characters (Griet in particular), but I don't think we've really talked about whether or not we enjoyed the book, have we? Response 124 of 151: Karen * Tue, Dec 10, 2002 (Rika) about re-reading the book, and finding that quite a chore Not because of the book, for other reasons. However, I did want to bring up another character/plot line that I thought were truly superfluous: Frans. I felt he served no purpose whatsoever and actually turned into a red herring at one point. Griet becomes very concerned because her brother is asking questions about the valuables within the V household and she fears trouble. Later, she mentions it again. As a reader, I expected something to come of this foreshadowing, but nothing did, much like Fran's role. Response 125 of 151: Moon * Tue, Dec 10, 2002 "It won't be so bad. Only VR will see the picture." But the painting never leaves their house. V does not sell it. He has it where he can look at it everyday. He is one annoying prick. Not only does G lose her job becase of him, but the painting remains where C has to see it everyday. Is there any likable character in the book? Response 126 of 151: Karen * Tue, Dec 10, 2002 (Moon) But the painting never leaves their house. V does not sell it. He has it where he can look at it everyday. The painting was sold to vanR as promised. It only came back into the house so he could see it while on his deathbed. Now what do we make of that? Response 127 of 151: Tress * Tue, Dec 10, 2002 '"Catharina" the man said calmly. He spoke her name as if he held cinnamon in his mouth.' (Karen) Is Griet picking up on other senses here? The smell of cinnamon being so sweet? The richness of it? This is an interesting observation, but one that was not completely thought out IMO. I think that when Griet describes Vermeer, she has a tendency to incorporate all her senses...she always describes textures, colors and smells more intensely when she is around V. I thought about it, and I don't think that G would have ever tasted cinnamon. She would have known about it, but I don't think her family could afford such a thing. Vermeer and his wife come from money. Griet's first encounter with them she says "I could hear rich carpets in their voices, books and pearls and fur." These first few sentences that are spoken about V set the tone for the infatuation IMO. He is different, exotic....so her senses perk up a bit when she does describe him... (Evelyn) I did feel sorry for C. when she said to her husband: "Why didn't you ever paint me"? I actually felt badly for her as well...even though I didn't like her through most of the book. She does want to be part of his world and he shuts her out of it. I don't know if it is because V is trying to protect C (he knows how men look at women in paintings) or because he feels C does not belong to the 'painting world' (she can't appreciate it, has no real interest in it). I do think that V loves C...he mentions converting to Catholicisim for her (a very big deal today, but I imagine in the 1600s it was even a bigger deal), and even G mentions how his eyes follow C at the birthing feast, and how "I had often seen him look at her, touch her shoulder, speak to her in a low voice laced with honey" The paragraph after that last sentence is interesting, because it shows the depth of Griet's infatution IMO: "I did not like to think of him in that way, with his wife and children. I preferred to think of him alone in his studio. Or not alone, but with only me." Yikes! (Karen) However, I did want to bring up another character/plot line that I thought were truly superfluous: Frans. I agree. I expect not to see him in the film...the only reason I could see to have him in the book was to contrast their (Frans/Griet) situations. A man can leave, start fresh again somewhere else, while a women is stuck, dependant upon others....I am probably reading waaaay too much into it, but that is the only reason I can see Frans being in the book. Response 128 of 151: Evelyn * Wed, Dec 11, 2002 (Karen) The painting was sold to vanR as promised. It only came back into the house so he could see it while on his deathbed. Now what do we make of that? What's more he left the earrings to her in the will. Of course he must have known that C. never wore them again. So it could have been in compensation for the trouble he caused. I am sure these scenes will be in the film. They just have to build -up the romance angle. mixing paints in the studio just isn't gonna do it. Response 129 of 151: linda * Wed, Dec 11, 2002 (Evelyn) I am sure these scenes will be in the film. They just have to build -up the romance angle. mixing paints in the studio just isn't gonna do it I was just thinking this same thing. If all we have are Griet's thoughts and infatuations then we have nothing. (Karen) Now what do we make of that? I think that at the end of the book, I realzed that this wasn't just infatuation on Griet's part, what she felt was true. He desired her as well. I think the picture coming back to the house, more so than leaving her the earrings speaks volumes about what he felt. Response 130 of 151: Evelyn * Wed, Dec 11, 2002 (Linda)I think the picture coming back to the house, more so than leaving her the earrings speaks volumes about what he felt. I'm not trying to be adverserial here...but art and painting was his whole world. It could be that GWAPE was his favorite painting and he wished to see it one last time. Not necessarily because of the model. The other characters don't expand on why he wanted it back...only that "Papa asked to have the painting on a short loan". Of course this only adds to the ambiguity . Obviously TC likes to tease the reader this way. She does it constantly which is part of the mystique of the book. Response 131 of 151: linda * Thu, Dec 12, 2002 (Evelyn)I'm not trying to be adverserial here... I brought my swords and dueling pistols;-) I know that art was his whole world, he could have borrowed the painting at anytime, but probably knew C would throw a fit. But she could not deny him on his deathbed. I think the timing of wanting to see it (knowing he was going to die makes me think he had a deeper reason to see it.) Response 132 of 151: Evelyn * Thu, Dec 12, 2002 (Linda) I think the timing of wanting to see it (knowing he was going to die makes me think he had a deeper reason to see it.) Put away the swords and pistols.....I'm into this romantic stuff...and desperately want to agree with you.;-) Response 133 of 151: linda * Thu, Dec 12, 2002 (Evelyn) Put away the swords and pistols.....I'm into this romantic stuff...and desperately want to agree with you.;-) LOL. I desperately want to agree with me. I guess I am very wishfully thinking about the film and CF's interpretation being romantic. Response 134 of 151: Rika * Thu, Dec 12, 2002 (Evelyn) Obviously TC likes to tease the reader this way. She does it constantly which is part of the mystique of the book. I think this is the key. She's left the door open to multiple interpretations. It'll be interesting to see what interpretation they adopt for the film, because I don't think they'll get away with the same degree of ambiguity. Response 135 of 151: Karen * Thu, Dec 12, 2002 "I could hear rich carpets in their voices, books and pearls and fur." These descriptions I can understand, but still the cinnamon doesn't cut it for me. G's trying to get across a spicy sweetness when V says C's name. Uh uh. She could have just said "his voice had the spicy sweetness of cinnamon...." Poor editing to say he was holding cinnamon in his mouth. (Linda) I think the picture coming back to the house, more so than leaving her the earrings speaks volumes about what he felt. I too enjoy the ambiguity that surrounds their relationship. Did he or didn't he? Actually, I am looking forward to the "looks," the "touches" and grinding the paint in the attic. Plenty of opportunities for erotic romanticism there. Don't you doubt it. Response 136 of 151: kathleen * Thu, Dec 12, 2002 Rika asked if we liked the book. I probably wouldn't have read it if not for the CF connection. Never found the GWAPE painting particularly engaging although I love many of Vermeer's other works. Even so, any picture can speak volumes. TC's story doesn't ring true to me for this painting. But still enjoyed reading about life in Delft at the time. Also liked learning more about Vermeer. Would have like to have read TC's take on the Procuress. What was that nice Catholic boy Vermeer doing in that brothel with a big smile on his face? Response 137 of 151: Evelyn * Fri, Dec 13, 2002 (Linda) I guess I am very wishfully thinking about the film and CF's interpretation being romantic. I'm trying to be v. optimistic about this. The first time I read GWAPE the eroticism came across a little like "Lolita". Scenario: Wife is in her last trimester of pregancy with child # 6 , was it? I'm thinking: "What is this old guy doing fondling this maid's face anyway...is he looking for a place to park his salamy?" I doubt Colin will play it that way. But it was a big turn-off in the book for me.I could never get a romantic element out of this book. Response 138 of 151: linda * Fri, Dec 13, 2002 (Karen) Plenty of opportunities for erotic romanticism there. Don't you doubt it. Not for a minute, I'm counting on it. Response 139 of 151: Annette * Sat, Dec 14, 2002 (Tress).....cinnamon in his mouth.' (sorry, just had to include that line...I love it). (Karen) That description stood out for me as well but for another reason. What did it mean? After reading the english version, I just got the danish translation from the library. In the danish translation, the cinnamon is just translated to "something", so I guess the translator couldn't find any meaning in the use of cinnamon. Neither do I. I think the phrase sounds nice, but why? Just to clearify the "cinnamon" posting above: the english version: "Catharina, the man said calmly. He spoke her name as if he held cinnamon in his mouth" the danish translation: "Catharina, the man said calmly. He spoke her name without moving his lips, as if he had something in his mouth". I guess the danish translation wanted to show, that the "correction" of Cathrina was very discreet. Response 141 of 151: NitaE * Sat, Dec 14, 2002 "Why didn't you ever paint me"? Would V paint a picture without the order of a patron (could he afford the time and the money)? Or would he even accept the order if a patron wanted a picture of Catharina? Response 142 of 151: Evelyn * Sat, Dec 14, 2002 "Why didn't you ever paint me"? (Nita) Would V paint a picture without the order of a patron (could he afford the time and the money)? Or would he even accept the order if a patron wanted a picture of Catharina? Good point , Nita. Too bad V. didn't think of that answer. He might have averted a lot of trouble;-) Instead he gave her an inane answer. But then TC would not have had the bitter-sweet ending. Response 143 of 151: Rika * Sat, Dec 14, 2002 Annette, thanks for the translation. That's what I presumed the "cinnamon in his mouth" description meant - that he spoke carefully, perhaps just murmuring without moving his lips much. But I agree with Karen - it's unnecessarily ambiguous. Response 144 of 151: Karen * Sun, Dec 15, 2002 Sorry to have made an issue about the cinnamon, but ambiguity isn't the problem nor is the Danish translation any help (sorry, Annette, but we're going with the book as written in its original language). The set up is Catharina has caught her mantle on a knife, which has fallen and spun across the floor. She cries out and then V says her name "calmly." Griet interprets the way he said her name as if he held cinnamon in his mouth. My feeling is that she is thinking it has a spicy sweetness to it, like a baking smell, or as if it were a candy. Griet would be getting her first intimations of the couple's attraction for each other. But obviously TC has no idea what having cinnamon in one's mouth would really be like. Ugh! Tree bark! ;-) Many painters painted without specific commissions during later periods, but at that time and prior it seemed more commercial. Response 145 of 151: Annette * Mon, Dec 16, 2002 (Karen)(sorry, Annette, but we're going with the book as written in its original language). It was never my intention to do otherwise, just to show another "point of view". I see, what your feelings around the "cinnamon" part is, and I can easily follow that line. I guess, this is my problem (problem is not the right word, more like challenge) with this board, that you are offered so many different interpretations/opinions, that you tend to see the meaning of most of it. So - as I said from the beginning - I don't expect to have anything to contribute (sorry), just to observe and learn. Another observation. I found it interesting, that V is supposed not to be bothered with "domestic" issues and spends most of his time at the Guild or in his studio, but at the same time, TC gives the impression, that he is close to his children. We learn, that he carries them around the house, and they jump at him, when he enters the house (as far as I remember). This makes me a bit "uneasy". I can't quite find "the red thread" (if you know that expression) Response 146 of 151: Karen * Mon, Dec 16, 2002 (Annette) So - as I said from the beginning - I don't expect to have anything to contribute (sorry), just to observe and learn. Pish tosh (do you know that expression, as I have no idea what a "red thread" might be). ;-) You have as much to contribute as anyone here. It was just that the Danish translation seemed to take a completely different slant on what TC wrote, by making it appear as though V was mumbling because he had "something" in his mouth. It changed the meaning by giving it a physical rather than sensual description. OK, what's the "red thread"? Insofar as V playing with his children, it seems analogous to Bridget's comment about men twiddling a fork under a running faucet as their contribution to cleaning up. ;-) Response 147 of 151: Annette * Mon, Dec 16, 2002 (Karen)Pish tosh (do you know that expression, as I have no idea what a "red thread" might be). Oh yes, I think I get that one.;)D The red thread: Once again, words fail me (imagin Ken Scott). It is when something sort of connects a line of events. Ex, BJD the diary part keeping the story connected. Or FP (which I think you've heard of ;)D) where the red thread would be Paul and Arsenal. Sorry for the very unarticularly way of expressing my self. It's getting late, and english isn't my best! (I hope, I've got the "winking part" right). Back to GWAPE, I can too relate to Bridgets comment. It's just that in many of the books from that time, the children are often very "distanced" from their father. Perhaps, it's just TC putting some observations to the story to get an opertunity to describe V and Griets observations of him. Now, I'll stop. I hardly understand myself. Response 148 of 151: linda * Mon, Dec 16, 2002 (Annette)Now, I'll stop. I hardly understand myself. Hang in there Annette. Just like I said, I'm desperately trying to agree with myself on how this will be portrayed in the film. I think it is the nature of the story itself, we have only one point of view--that of a young girl. Everything we try to read into it comes from her interpretation of events in the first place. So you are not alone, Annette. Hang in there. I don't know about red threads but maybe they are kind of like red herrings in mystery novels. Lots of things pointing to a particular scenario, but in the end it wasn't that way at all. They were just put in our way to confuse the heck out of us. Response 149 of 151: Karen * Mon, Dec 16, 2002 I'm not sure we have a specific expression like "the red thread" but as you've explained it sounds like a continuing motif of sorts. One last comment (I swear) on the cinnamon issue, TC just wrote it badly and her descriptions are not terribly unique. The most lasting descriptions come from The Great Gatsby, when Gatsby describes Daisy's voice as "full of money." Simple yet vivid and one of the best in lit. Response 150 of 151: Evelyn * Tue, Dec 17, 2002 (Karen) on the cinnamon issue, TC just wrote it badly and her descriptions are not terribly unique. I dunno about bad...not unique, as you said...Gabriel Garcia Marquez uses cinnamon as an adjective to convey sensuality. Response 151 of 151: kathleen * Wed, Dec 18, 2002 Have it on good authority that Tracy thinks the cinnamon part should have been edited out - no meaning to it. If you want to read a couple of quick little blurbs about life in the Netherlands, servant girls, role of women, street life many others: http://www.olivetreegenealogy.com/nn/amst_intro.shtml Make sure to page down to see the table of contents.

OK, that's all of it....finally. I had some trouble with the tags but now it's all fixed. As fabulous Fitz would say, "Go to it!" :-)

Karen,I can't believe you're working on your birthday!!! Now that's dedication! Thrilled out of my head that this discussion is back. Thank you, Karen. I think topic 183 is wonderful. Blowing air kisses to "someone" Loved rereading the posts thus far. (Tress)Young mistress wants him to paint more, but my mistress says speed will ruin him." If MT really was looking the other way regarding the fireworks between Griet and Vermeer, to keep him happy, did it never occur to her that something other than speed might ruin him, and bring scandal upon the entire household, as well?

Thank you for resurrecting this topic! Since I'm a big fan of the novel I've been dying to read other people's take on it, and so far I had to make do with reading the reader's comments at Amazon.com. Talking about GWAPE again might not be too interesting for those who already discussed it almost a year ago, but I'm sure at least some of the newbies will be delighted to share their thoughts and observations. I loved reading all the opinions above, and here is my take on some of the things that were mentioned: Some of you guys referred to Griet as innocent, but my feeling is that she is anything but. Or not quite. She seems an odd girl to me, no matter how I look at her. When we "meet" her she is quite young, but her mind is not so. She is strong, forceful, she knows what she wants, and where her place is in her surroundings. She seems precocious, very observant, and although she is a quiet one, in her mind she is talking all the time. She has an opinion about everything, and quite a strong one at that. She sees how things are, and "knows" how they ought to be. Not at any point in the book I felt her innocent. She has such a strong voice, and decided opinions (even though she just thinks them) throughout the story, and I feel her hardened (by her circumstances), so her body was innocent for sure, but her mind not. I felt this way reading her interaction with almost everyone. Even with the "hair thing". I didn't think it was shyness that prevented her from exposing her hair, but the notion that a woman's hair should not be seen by a man (if she couldn't dress it like those fine, wealthy ladies did), and I wonder whether it was the accepted rule, or she made it up for herself, and kept to it, like to every other strong belief she had. As for being sheltered: "After I got home I washed myself with vinegar." How did she know? She just lost her virginity, and back in those days parents didn't exactly educate their children on these things, or did they? I doubt it. Slapping Cornelia: It might have been a big no no in her position, but even if so, it didn't surprise me one bit. It went perfectly with her character. A maid with a very strong character, used to being the older one at home, being the "boss", wanted to establish her authority with the children, and slapping Cornelia was akin to "nipping it in the bud". (Not that it worked...) She surely would've been fired for it today, but back in those days it was most likely acceptable. I had no problem with it at all. The one person I thought Griet was "lost" around was Vermeer. (Rika)And she says (p.42), "No gentleman had ever taken such an interest in me before." She is hooked on him from the beginning. And we know exactly how she feels about him, but to me Vermeer's feelings remain forever a mistery. I could not figure the man out. Even after repeated readings I could not decide whether he really had any real feelings for Griet and was trying to dutifully repress them, or he was only interested in her because he was painting her, and because she shared his eye for colours and detail. Every time they interact we know how Griet feels and what she thinks, but even though she is an astute observer, she never "says" a word about Vermeer's reaction to her. Reactions that would clearly prove the presence of a sexual attraction in him. So I remain undecided. But then again: (Karen) The painting was sold to vanR as promised. It only came back into the house so he could see it while on his deathbed. Now what do we make of that? I'll be darned if I know. Maybe he did have something brewing there, but repressed it as he knew he should, and before he died he needed to make peace with his feelings for her, and face his demons. And he sent Griet the earrings as a token of a confession. It didn't matter whether she kept them or not, he just wanted her to know. Or maybe not. There is no way for me to be sure. It frustrates me, but satisfies me at the same time. I like the mistery of it as much as I hate not knowing.

Okay, I've finally sat still long enough to read the original posts on this site from last year...and here are some thoughts(although it has been a least a year since I read the novel ,GWAPE). When V. enters the kitchen of Griet's family,and observes her display of sliced vegetables,it is really the first time anyone,especially a man , with status (voice?like pearls,rich carpet,fur((not the correct quote)) has ever given CONSEQUENCE to Griet or anything about her. She is astonished and feels the initial pique of simultaneous awe and fascination(later to become specifically with V)with which she has previously had minusule exposure. It's like a love starved child attracted to anyone who displays kindness . I feel this is significant in light of the social/political environment of 1600's Delft society. As for V requesting the canvas for viewing during his final days, I think he wanted to see the evidence of the one risk he took..the one he took but didn't have the courage(or ability)of his convictions to backup. He let Griet suffer the consequences alone..and he asked that Griet be given the pearls to assauge his conscious before death. TC writing from Griet's POV establishes we only see the events from her perspective...Much like that of Elizabeth Bennet in P&P. It allows us to suspend ourselves,like we do in P&P, to interpret the story in a way which we find, not only believable, but desirable. We're free to be romantics about an entire episode which would have been ruinous in that society...and indeed is not now due to being a work of fiction.

(Bonnie)TC writing from Griet's POV establishes we only see the events from her perspective Exactly. Until the end of the book, when Griet receives the earrings, I wavered back and forth. I found myself wanting there to be more between Griet and Vermmer than TC was giving us. I had to keep reminding myself that the story was written through the eyes of an inexperienced young woman whose fantasies were probably, as any young girl, very vivid no matter what century they're living in. Once the earrings were given to Griet, I began to look at the story from an entirely different perspective. What if Griet is telling us exactly like it is, and all the glances, etc. were not being misinterpreted or exaggerated driven by her infatuation? I reread the book with that perspective in mind...that Vermeer was infatuated with Griet from the time he meets her. ( Her emotions were reacting from the powerful draw of his. The sensuality was more sensual, the ear piercing scene more erotic, his aloofness more frustrating. I'm rereading it again. I'm trying to stay neutral this time.

Alright, I've decided to reread the book too. I won't have an opportunity to see the movie until it is distributed in wide release.Although I've been reading the reviews offered and posted here, I really should own up and create definitive impressions from the text before I view the movie.Right? Then I can be more objective with the production and whether or not the book (or least my interpretation of the story )justly. As I write, I am determined to physically remove my other reading material and place GWAPE at the ready!!!!!!

That was supposed to read______*not the book is (or least my interpretation of the story )justly treated on film.

(Linda) Blowing air kisses to "someone" Is this early stage narcicism? ;-) In any event, I am happy to oblige. (Ildi) Not at any point in the book I felt her innocent. She has such a strong voice, and decided opinions...throughout the story, and I feel her hardened (by her circumstances), so her body was innocent for sure, but her mind not Griet certainly *knows* the world in which she lives. Again, though, this is more a contrast of the times, as children went out into the world to work at a much younger age than now. A 10-year-old (perhaps younger) would be apprenticed and bringing in a small wage. So IMO, it is not a question of worldy innocence, but more of intelligence. Griet is pretty sharp, though she cannot figure out how to get herself out of the triangle before everything hits the fan. (Ildi) Even with the "hair thing". I didn't think it was shyness that prevented her from exposing her hair, but the notion that a woman's hair should not be seen by a man I believe I spoke to this earlier too. A woman's hair is her crowning glory and a temptation to men, much in the same way that Muslim women are hidden behind veils. Not all that much has changed over the centuries. I used to laugh that the first thing a woman did after getting married was cut her hair, and she usually gave the excuse that she didn't have time to bother with it anymore. However, most men love long hair on women and it is something used to attract them, whether consciously or unconsciously. (Bonnie) As for V requesting the canvas for viewing during his final days, I think he wanted to see the evidence of the one risk he took..the one he took but didn't have the courage(or ability)of his convictions to backup. He let Griet suffer the consequences alone..and he asked that Griet be given the pearls to assauge his conscious before death. I like this. A symbol of the artistic risk he took, which gave him a sense of pride, but also an act of personal cowardice at the same time. BTW, I stopped reading the Spoilers topic after the initial comments because, well, I really don't want this movie "spoiled" for me. ;-)

(Karen)Griet is pretty sharp, though she cannot figure out how to get herself out of the triangle before everything hits the fan.. True, but I've always wondered just how much she really wanted to get out of the triangle. Being part of the geometric equation, (how's that;-), was certainly stressful, but my impression is that she was so drawn to Vermeer she knew there was no way out. She was astute enough to know the s***t was going to hit the fan, but the emotional/love/sexual attraction/ whatever it was- kept her right there. I don't know if it was so much about not knowing how to get out,(she knew she should have) but down deep not wanting to, either.

I'm still in the midst of a reread,however, I wanted to advance some feasible analogies. Griet's slapping Cornelia on her first day at Papist's Corner-pg 22-The correlation is immediately made with reference to Catharina behaving in a like manner,*except that I will not be able to slap her*.Cornelia (Catharina) looks down on Griet and considers her a threat to the status quo but is unable to do anything about the situation due to V. requiring her for the studio. The tension between Cornelia and Griet and Catharina and Griet parallel throughout the text. Griet slapped Cornelia soon after reaching Papist Corner to exert her presence and favoured (?)position-with allusion to triumphing over Catharina later and ultimately. If Vermeer did indeed witness Griet's slapping of Cornelia(from the upstairs middle window), he viewed it as Cornelia's need to be governed occasionally much as he dislayed with Catharina in Griet's family kithen when she was hired. *He spoke her name as if he held cinnamon in his mouth*. The previous discussion on cinnamon notes a bitter taste to cinnamon,however, there is a later reference in the text(can't find it now that I want it!)to the sweetness of the spice. I do believe he very much loves Catharina, as he does his children, while still recognizing the need for shows of discipline-so the slapping goes unacknowledged in this vein. There are continuous mentions of the blood very displeasingly seen by Griet at the Meat Hall-especially detailed on the son Pieter's hands and apron(person). Blood is equated with life(it's stark reality and ever present cruelty). She knows Pieter is her future. She is happiest when allowing herself to be immersed in the studio-Vermeer's realm-a locale where beauty is created-and at the end of each day, Vermeer cleans his brushes and palettes and places them neatly in their place before exiting the studio for the night. Light in the studio is usually filtered throught the windows-not as harsh and glaring. Maria Thins and Catharina hang out in the Crucifixion Room-foreshadowing the sacrifice of Griet. Vermeer always being referenced as *him and *he*... Many individuals even now never voice or write the name of G-D, and refer to *him* or *he*. To do so is considered a type of blasphemy, and dissipates the inherent mystery of the entity.If you allow yourself to extend the analogy,you later identify Griet's disappointment with Vermeer in even more poignant parallels with her disappointment in providence allowing her father to be involved in such a devastating accident and in allowing the death of her sister,Agnes(another symbol of the death of innocence). Does anyone have an insight as to why Griet was so against anyone at Papist Corner seeing her with her sister ,Agnes, at the Meat Hall? Is she fearful, on a subconscious level, that Agnes' innocence will be stolen also? I'm ready to dive back between the jacket covers---GLUB,GLUB,GLUB-(bubbles rising to the water's surface.........

Hello, all! I was so glad to read the previous discussion on GWAPE, as it really enhanced my second reading. As did this handy reference site of Vermeer's works: http://www.cacr.caltech.edu/~roy/vermeer/thumb.html As you're reading about V working on a painting, it's neat to actually see it. I also noticed the repetition of settings and props, including at least 3 others where the pearl earrings are worn. I feel certain that TC noticed this in her research, so it begs the question: If Catharina had been required to loan out the earrings for other models, then why the big deal over Griet wearing them? Or if the dates show that the other models came after Griet's painting, why would V have let them wear the earrings that he so strongly associated her? I think this substantiates the idea that the real issue was indeed G, and not the earrings, and that V knew exactly what he was doing. I do believe there was an attraction on his part, that he knew he could not act on for fear the scandal would destroy his family. He loves his wife, but she's gotta be on the cranky side most of the time, given the wild hormonal ride of being pregnant about every year. She can't understand or appreciate his artistic nature and need for seclusion, and God knows he must not be too involved in the child-rearing. He retreats to his studio, which is off-limits most of the time. Then along comes this quiet, thoughtful, young woman with artistic leanings, who admires his work and seems to be more "like" him than any other female in his life. He's gotta be interested, and he shows it by allowing her into his private world, and teaching her things no one else knows. And this is G's first encounter with a MAN. She's fascinated, scared, intrigued, knows he thinks highly of her, also knows nothing can ever come of it. Talk about sexual tension! I think she was horny as hell when she dragged poor ole Pieter into the alley. (i.e. If I have a very close encounter with CF some day, I'm sure my husband will have a smile on his face the next a.m. without ever needing to know the particulars!) The slapping incident jarred me, but I chalked it up to differences in time. I think we're super-sensitive about child abuse, but perhaps back then it would be more accepted for any older person to discipline a bratty child. Did Cornelia go running to complain to anyone, and try to get G fired? (Gotta read that part again.) And regarding Agnes, I felt that a couple of things were going on there. I think G was a little embarrassed by Agnes, and didn't want Cornelia and the others to see A and make fun of her. I also think G didn't want A to come to V's house, for fear that A would think G had gotten into "the good life" in a richer family and would be alienated from G, and/or that V might be more interested in A than he is in G. I think G was working very hard to keep her 2 worlds, and 2 lives, separate. For as long as she could. The bedroom in the ground creeped me out. I was trying to make out some deep symbolism about being banished to sleep in a hole with a crucified Christ staring at her -- but I never quite sorted it out. I wonder if I'm trying to read more than the author intended? And now I need a little lie down. And maybe a bowl of Cocoa Puffs.

(Deb)If Catharina had been required to loan out the earrings for other models, then why the big deal over Griet wearing them? I assume, primarily, it was because she was a servant in the house. To have Vermeer paint a maid was going to cause enough scandal, but to have that maid wearing the wife's earrings...I think was a bit much for Catharina to bear. Secondly, I think, this, in addition to Catharina's instincts that her husband was attracted to Griet was the last straw. Seeing Griet in the painting with the earrings must have sent her over the edge. She probably thought her husband had is way with her as well, at that point.

(Bonnie) The tension between Cornelia and Griet and Catharina and Griet parallel throughout the text. Don't you think there's pretty much tension between Griet and nearly everybody else in the story? *hee hee* Guess that's what comes from having an uppity maid. (Bonnie) Maria Thins and Catharina hang out in the Crucifixion Room-foreshadowing the sacrifice of Griet Whoa!!! *slapping hand upside head* Love this one. Looking at the name of the room symbolically never occurred to me before. (Bonnie) If you allow yourself to extend the analogy,you later identify Griet's disappointment with Vermeer in even more poignant parallels with her disappointment in providence If you put Vermeer in that godlike role, then Griet would've been disappointed in V for other than his own failings with her. But she wasn't. (Deb) If Catharina had been required to loan out the earrings for other models, then why the big deal over Griet wearing them? I've never believed it was the lending of Catharina's possession themselves, but Griet having them on. Griet was the embodiment of what Catharina lacked, i.e., a soul-mate for her husband's work. Catharina of course knew and acceded to having her possessions featured in the paintings and knew that either her husband or mother did the borrowing. The accusation against Griet was always bogus in my mind, and had more to do with Griet being the subject of a painting (it was beign kept a secret from her), and a unique painting, unlike his others. Jealousy, pure and simple, and tacit lie. (Deb) The bedroom in the ground creeped me out. I was trying to make out some deep symbolism about being banished to sleep in a hole with a crucified Christ staring at her -- but I never quite sorted it out. I wonder if I'm trying to read more than the author intended? Isn't it always? ;-) Yes, the hole in the ground does sound very dungeon-like to me, but Griet doesn't seem to think it all that unusual. Another difference in customs/times, architecture? Am going to have to reread, as am recollecting absolutely nothing about Agnes. :-( Wonderful insights and research, ladies!

(Deb)was trying to make out some deep symbolism about being banished to sleep in a hole with a crucified Christ staring at her Then you can take it a step further. Vermeer, (Bonnie( in the god like role)elevates her to the room above the household. He paints her, lets her wear the earrings and therfore lifts her above her station and starts her on the collision course with Catharina.

Yes, I definitely saw it as a hell/heaven journey. Never thought of the move to the attic being "above her station", but it would then make sense that banishing her to the cellar was a clear message that she had the "lowest" status in the household. I seem to recall that the other maid was quite content to move back to the cellar room, but I don't remember where she had been sleeping before. Surely SHE had not been in the attic room? (Must read again - grrrrrrr.)

Tanneke was in the hole, but was moved out and into the Crucifixation Room for Griet. Another sacrificial move?

(Karen)Guess that's what comes from having an uppity maid. The maid from Hell, IMO. I'd can her in a NY minute. After all she and mum held the purse strings.

(Linda)Then you can take it a step further. Vermeer, (Bonnie( in the god like role)elevates her to the room above the household. He paints her, lets her wear the earrings and therfore lifts her above her station and starts her on the collision course with Catharina. Good one-totally missed that one!!!! (Deb)I seem to recall that the other maid was quite content to move back to the cellar room, but I don't remember where she had been sleeping before. Surely SHE had not been in the attic room? (Must read again - grrrrrrr.) T was never slept in the attic-she complained of being placed in the Cruxifition Room when the nurse entered the household.The nurse's snoring kept her awake. When her complaints were ignored, she began to slack off on her work to impress upon Catharina and Maria Thins her lack of sleep.That was when Vermeer seized the opportunity to apply for Griet being situated in the attic-even had given thought to the logisics of the door being locked and unlocked respectively-quite an endeavour for a man who does not concern himself with the running of a household. (Karen)Am going to have to reread, as am recollecting absolutely nothing about Agnes. :-( Agnes is the abandoned (and regretted) innocence. Griet literally turned her back on her in the Meat Hall,and when she again turned to face her, Agnes had left.That was the last time we know of Griet seeing Agnes alive. (Karen)Tanneke was in the hole, but was moved out and into the Crucifixation Room for Griet. Another sacrificial move? Yes, on page 51 second paragraph,Maria Thins does not defend T from Catharina. Have only a few more pages to go, and am cognizant of all the references to Catharina's father having been abusive...in combination to her being hormonal throughout the novel-very skittish and non-trusting;symtomatic of the syndrome. Catharina's brother also tried to harm her during a visit before the story begins. She was rescued by T-not her husband!!!!! Vermeer is again *painted* as a docile male not willing to step forward on behalf of others.He doesn't take the responsibility of punishing Cornelia,either-he makes Maria Thins do it;says it is not his responsibility, and blames it on Catharina not teaching her children properly. Vermeer lives his life on a different plane.

(Bonnie) If you allow yourself to extend the analogy,you later identify Griet's disappointment with Vermeer in even more poignant parallels with her disappointment in providence. (KarenR) If you put Vermeer in that godlike role, then Griet would've been disappointed in V for other than his own failings with her. But she wasn't. Griet is disappointed in Vermeer's failings ... (*Catharina's brother also tried to harm her during a visit before the story begins. She was rescued by T-not her husband!!!!! Vermeer is again *painted* as a docile male not willing to step forward on behalf of others.He doesn't take the responsibility of punishing Cornelia,either-he makes Maria Thins do it;says it is not his responsibility, and blames it on Catharina not teaching her children properly.) Griet looks for an opportunity to question Griet about the incident with Catharina's brother to clarify that it was indeed she, not Vermeer, that *rescued* Catharina. Likewise notes that he refuses to discipline the children despite his appetite for creating them.

(Bonnie)...Likewise notes that he refuses to discipline the children despite his appetite for creating them. But then she realises that "it must be Catharina who wants many children." He'd rather be alone in his studio where he has peace. I just thought the other day how interesting it is that Vermeer painted men and women, but never any children, despite that he had so many. Curious, isn't it?

(Ildi)Vermeer painted men and women, but never any children, despite that he had so many. Some art scholars think the girl with the pearl earring was, in fact, his daughter. (Bonnie)...Likewise notes that he refuses to discipline the children despite his appetite for creating them. (Ildi)But then she realises that "it must be Catharina who wants many children." He'd rather be alone in his studio where he has peace. But remember....it's Griet who is thinking this. Could be her fantasy.....no?

(Bonnie)...Likewise notes that he refuses to discipline the children despite his appetite for creating them I think a lot of men are loathe to discipline the children...especially in Vermeer's time...Women attended to such matters. Vermeer may have had an appeitie for sex, but creating children (or at least so many of them) may have been largely due to lack of birth control.

(Linda)...may have been largely due to lack of birth control. Catharina was a Catholic...also maybe sheep's intestines were hard to come by;-)

(Evelyn) ...also maybe sheep's intestines were hard to come by;-) LOL....I nearly fell over when I read that! And to think! Another errand Griet could have been sent out on! I'm sure Pieter would have given her a deal (two for the price of one maybe?)! ;-)

Evelyn, Tress, LOL!!! You are killing me. :-) (Evelyn) But remember....it's Griet who is thinking this. Could be her fantasy.....no? It is her observation, and I fully agree with it. From what I read he didn't strike me as the jolly papa who bounces his children on his knee often. :-) He seems more like the artist type :-) who likes to withdraw into his quiet domain and do his stuff in peace. (Evelyn) Some art scholars think the girl with the pearl earring was, in fact, his daughter. I wouldn't be surprised, and she looks younger to me than 17 or so. I'd think around 15, but it's hard to judge. Too bad we'll probably never know.

(Evelyn)...also maybe sheep's intestines were hard to come by;-) You are WICKED!

(Linda)I think a lot of men are loathe to discipline the children... Absolute truth...my husband has always been "present" in our children's lives,but he will be the first one to admit I'm the one who "raised" them....him always wanting to be the "good guy"! Of course, whenever either of them did something less than desirable, it was attributed to my failing to "raise" them properly. That meshes seamlessly with the passage to which I earlier referred(says it is not his responsibility, and blames it on Catharina not teaching her children properly). Good perception on TC's side.