INTRODUCTION BY ROBIN AGNEW
As a bookseller, I receive literally hundreds of advanced reading copies every year. I use the scientific method of reading “what calls to me”—so a vast majority of the “pile” goes unread. Several years ago of course I got an advanced reading copy of Still Life, which languished in the pile. The cover didn’t call to me. But then I got a letter from Julia Spencer-Fleming, who uses her powers for good: she sometimes sends around a letter to booksellers highlighting a book she feels passionately about, and Still Life was the topic of one of the first of these letters.
So, loving Julia’s books and trusting her taste, I dug out my (now somewhat battered) copy of Still Life and started reading. Dear Louise Penny fans, you know what happened next—I fell under the spell of Three Pines and Louise’s writing and was so excited to find a new writer I now felt passionately about, that I emailed Louise and asked to interview her via email. She of course agreed, and a correspondence and friendship began.
The Cruelest Month is one of my favorites in the series for many reasons. It felt like Louise’s assurance as writer was growing, and had coalesced in this wonderful novel. I saw Louise recently and I told her I was reviewing this one and she said, “Oh, I loved the concept of the near-enemy in that book.”
So do I. I also told her as I was re-reading it I had forgotten whodunit. She got a twinkle in her eye as she remembered who it was. As I got closer to the end I remembered too, but really great mystery writers have a dual skill: they tell a compelling and interesting story, and then they also tell a mystery with a puzzle and clues for you to solve. It makes the best of them, to me, magical.
RECAP
Ch. 1-23: The book opens with an Easter Egg hunt, and the rebirth symbolized by Easter becomes a recurring theme throughout the novel, for good or ill. As the children hunt for wooden eggs on the village green, Clara Morrow and Ruth Zardow, the acerbic, cranky, nationally known poet who lives in Three Pines have a revealing exchange.
As Clara points out to Ruth the beauty of spring Ruth says “Nature’s in turmoil. Anything can happen.” At Clara’s protest she also points out “That’s the miracle of rebirth…But some things are better off buried…It’s not over yet. The bears will be back.” Ruth’s sadly practical voice of doom sets up what happens next though Clara’s optimism is also ultimately rewarded.
Meanwhile Gabri, at the local B & B, has decided to spice things up by booking in a psychic, Madame Blavatsky. Like many things to do with Gabri, the Madame Blavatsky part is a bit of an exaggeration; “Madame” turns out to be the more ordinary seeming Jeanne Chauvet, a mousy, non-threatening type. She holds a séance at the B & B on her arrival attended by Madeleine Favreau; a grocer, Msr. Beliveau; Odile, an herbalist; Gilles, a woodworker; and Gabri.
The séance is intruded on by a cursing Ruth Zardo, who has taken under her wing two baby ducks, to everyone’s surprise. Meanwhile, Peter Morrow has gone into Clara’s studio. Both Morrows are artists; Peter is the successful one but what he sees on Clara’s easel disturbs him because it is so good and he is consumed with jealousy.
When the first séance is concluded they agree that there should be another, in the Old Hadley House, a place of wickedness in the past two novels and almost a dead zone as far as the residents of Three Pines are concerned. For the next séance, the original group is joined by Hazel, housemate of Madeleine Favreau, and Hazel’s daughter Sophie. From the start this séance feels more serious; the house is dark; and everyone’s nerves are on edge. As Madame Chauvet calls the dead the lights go out, there’s a shriek and a thud, and a dead body falls to the floor, scared to death by the séance and the house.
Moving back to Montreal we encounter Chief Inspector Gamache and his family, including his son, daughter-in-law and granddaughter, who must shortly leave for Paris. Gamache’s wife Reine Marie reads of the death in Three Pines and of course it becomes Gamache’s assignment.
In Three Pines, Gamache and his second in command Beauvoir head to the Hadley house to check out the crime scene. The dead woman turns out to be Madeleine Favreau, scared to death, though her system shows high quantities of the diet drug ephedra. Gamache knows she has been murdered. As Gamache reconnects with the villagers who are now his friends, they recount the terrifying death scene. Gamache and Beauvoir then head off to interview Hazel Smyth, Madeleine’s housemate. Meanwhile it becomes clear that Lemieux is working for Inspector Brebeuf back in Montreal as Brebeuf looks for revenge on the outcome of the notorious Arnot case, which divided and shook up the entire Surete.
Hazel describes her life with Madeleine and how much they enjoyed each other. Then she asks if Madeleine was murdered by “the witch” Jeanne Chauvet? Gamache notes that she is full of rage. Meanwhile Beuvoir talks to Hazel’s daughter, Sophie, who appears jealous of the relationship between Hazel and Madeleine. He discovers ephedra in the bathroom.
Gamache and Beauvoir head back to Three Pines where the search for Jeanne Chauvet is ongoing. When Gamache phones home, Reine Marie mentions how Brebeuf has made her feel uneasy of late, and Gamache also speaks with his son Daniel before he heads off to Paris.
Negative stories about Gamache begin to appear in the Montreal press, the first questioning his lifestyle and the fact that he lives so well. His friends in Three Pines try and shield him from the stories. The ephedra rumor begins to make it through the citizens of Three Pines, and it’s clear the information was leaked by a mistake on Lemieux’s part.
Gamache and Beauvoir finally interview Mme. Chauvet. She freely admits to being a Wiccan and said she was drawn to Three Pines by a brochure. She says séances are a method of healing—people connect with the dead in order to move forward.
Beauvoir interviews Odile at her herbal and natural grocery store and he notices the beautiful chairs that Gilles makes. Odile tells Beauvoir that Gilles is in the woods talking to the trees, looking for those that want to be made into furniture. Beauvoir thinks everyone in Three Pines is nuts.
Lemieux interviews the grocer, Msr. Beliveau who reveals that he lost his beloved wife several years back and had been in love with Madeleine. He also recalls Gamache’s four rules of detection: “I don’t know. I’m sorry. I need help. I was wrong.” Lemieux sees no value in these simple rules.
Meanwhile Beauvoir finds Gilles in the woods, where is talking to trees. He tells Beauvoir Madeleine was “full of love” and that she and Hazel seemed very happy living together. He insists that everyone had loved Madeleine, and Beauvoir points out that someone didn’t.
Jeanne Chauvet discovers from talking with Gamache that the Ruth Zardo of Three Pines is the well known poet. Jeanne loves Ruth’s poem about a woman accused of being a witch and says she’s well regarded in Wiccan circles. She also tells Gamache to be careful—”something’s coming.”
Ch. 24-44: In the second half of the book, things begin to amp up, and the damaging newspaper articles about Gamache begin to get worse. Beauvoir encounters Gamache and Chauvet sitting together, and is angry as he thinks she’s a charlatan. She says “I was born with a caul . . . and you were too.” The meaning of this becomes clear later.
Hazel plans Madeleine’s funeral and thinks “Everything had changed. Even her grammar. Suddenly she lived in the past tense. And the singular.” What a profound description of grief. Hazel is busy waiting on Sophie, who has injured her foot.
As the team reviews the latest evidence, it comes out that Madeleine was suffering from breast cancer and that’s the reason she left her husband and moved in with Hazel. It’s also clear there’s another newspaper article about Gamache but he refuses to discuss it or show that it might bother him.
Beauvoir and Nichol go to re-interview Hazel, who is apprehensive when she sees them and focused on Sophie. Gamache, Lacoste and Lemieux go back to the Old Hadley House. Gamache asks them what’s different about the house. Gamache goes off to explore on his own, leaving Lacoste and Lemiux alone. Lacoste can’t wait to escape and takes the first excuse to leave, while Lemieux takes a call from Brebeuf. As Gamache explores the basement he’s discovered by Lemieux, who is holding a gun, which Gamache thinks correctly is no accident.
Then Lacoste demands Beauvoir tell her about the Arnot case which is the ominous sword hanging over Gamache’s head. Beauvoir relates how Arnot and Gamache began their careers at the same time, both rising stars. Gamache took in the oddballs on his team, seeing something worthy in them, while Arnot took the best and the brightest, but was a bully and demanded conformity.
Things came to a head when violence on the native reserved were allowed to go unchecked as Arnot felt it was an internal issue, best handled by the natives. Then Arnot put agents in place to first stir up trouble, and then to kill, and some of the young native men began to disappear. The Surete closed ranks and there was no one for the natives to complain to.
One Cree woman whose son is missing goes to Montreal and sits outside what she thinks is the National Assembly, but it really a hotel. Gamache, with his noticing and listening skills, first notices her then listens and conducts his own investigation. What he finds rips apart the Surete and tests loyalties.
Meanwhile Gamache confronts Lemieux about drawing his gun and Lemieux pretends it was a mistake. Gamache tells him “It’s our secrets that make us sick”. This could really be the theme of the novel as a whole, as it’s the secrets kept hidden and left to fester that cause all the damage.
The latest newspaper article accuses Gamache of passing drugs to his son Daniel, who had a problem in the past. As these attacks hit his family, Gamache begins to plan how to take action.
As Gamache waits to talk with the medical examiner, he encounters Ruth, who displays her two ducklings—one strong and healthy and one weaker and more delicate. Ruth is equally proud and loving of both of them.
The doctor tells Gamache that Madeleine was in fact scared to death, as the ephedra alone would not have killed her, she also would have had to have had a heart condition, which she did. Now it’s up to Gamache to discover who knew about Madeleine’s heart condition. The doctor also tells Gamache that Madeleine’s cancer had returned and that she certainly was aware of it, as she tells him even if a doctor hadn’t told her, cancer patients are very much in touch with their bodies. Gamache also now wonders who would want to kill a dying woman.
Gamache retreats to the bookstore and Myrna, who talks with him about the concept of the “near enemy.” She tells him about emotions that look the same but are in fact opposites, one healthy, the other twisted. They couplings are attachment masquerading as love; pity as compassion; and indifference as equanimity. Myrna explains that it’s hard to tell one from the other, even for the person feeling it.
Back at the Bistro in a spring snowstorm, Gamache and Beauvoir look through Madeleine’s yearbook and find she was involved in everything—she was a cheerleader, starred in the school play, was involved in sports.
Jeanne Chauvet sits with them but apart reflecting on how Three Pines had been an unexpected safe haven for her until she saw Madeleine. She and Gamache do talk and she tells him about how she discovered she was a psychic, and it’s clear her gift has always made her feel like an outsider. Seeing Madeleine had made her so angry she couldn’t decline the second séance.
Beauvoir had called his mother to ask about what it meant to be born with a caul. His head was covered with a membrane when he was born, his mother tells him—a caul—which meant he was either blessed or cursed. His family had ignored him when he said anything odd. Beauvoir wonders if the reason he joined homicide wasn’t more intuitive than he’d previously thought.
At Peter and Clara’s house, Clara is struggling in her studio with her painting after Peter told her the color was slightly off. She’s anticipating a visit from an important Montreal gallery owner and is getting frantic, so Peter suggests a dinner party to take her mind off her work, but he’s really trying to sabotage her.
The next morning Gamache is awoken early by Gabri with the morning paper, which has a photo of Gamache’s married daughter Annie with her married boyfriend. Gamache talks to his wife, Annie, and then calls Brebeuf, who is Annie’s godfather. Of all of them Annie is the least concerned.
At the dinner party Clara is uncomfortable and worried. Talking to Gamache she thinks “She often felt foolish, ill constructed, next to others. Beside Gamache she only ever felt whole.” Gamache asks her what she thought of Madeleine. She says she liked her and mentioned it was lucky she took over leadership of the Anglican Church Women so Hazel wouldn’t have to do it.
She also tells him she was fond of Msr. Beliveau and thinks Odile is a terrible poet. She then worries to herself about her own work.
Lacoste interviews Madeleine’s ex-husband, who tells her living with Madeleine was like “living too close to the sun”, in other words, too close to constant perfection. Lacoste also goes by Madeleine’s high school and picks up her old year books and report cards. A photo Nichol found at Hazel’s house shows a much heavier Sophie eating cake.
Gamache and Beauvoir return to re-interview Hazel and Sophie, asking both if they knew Madeleine’s cancer had returned. Neither seemed to.
When the team meets up again to share what they found, Nichol’s rude outbursts are too much, and Gamache sends her far afield, to Sophie’s college, to ask questions there. The rest of the team is pretty certain Sophie is the killer.
Later, Gamache and Beauvoir hit the road and Gamache reveals more details about the Arnot case. When Gamache presented the evidence against Arnot to the Surete, they let Arnot leave to get his affairs in order. The rest of the Surete hoped he would kill himself but Gamache finds him and two other officers and prevents it. Because Arbot was very popular, some parts of the Surete and the public distrust and dislike Gamache for his part in bringing him to justice.
Finally at the side of the road Beauvoir angily demands that Gamche hold nothing back, and Gamache finally tells all, leaving the two men as bonded as father and son.
A new accusation in the paper points the finger at Gamache, saying he’s a drunk and again linking him with Arnot. Gamache takes himself off to talk to his family and make sure everything is fine with all of them.
At the Morrows’ dinner party, Clara closes the door to her studio to shut her guests out and seems distracted. The dinner guests discuss the cruelty of April—beautiful days and killing frosts or snowfalls that lay waste to the new flowers. There’s also a discussion of the solstice and how every culture has a spring ritual. They talk about how Hazel is willing to give help but unwilling to accept it, and had turned down the dinner invitation to nurse Sophie.
Ruth then relates the story of her two ducks hatching—Rosa, the stronger one, hatched out easily, but the more delicate Lilium had trouble breaking out of the shell and Ruth had helped her. Everyone silently suspects Lilium won’t make it but a feisty Ruth leaves early to tend to her babies.
At the B&B that night, Gamache, Beauvoir and Jeanne Chauvet all have trouble sleeping and meet in the middle of the night over tea. Also up late, Ruth realizes her kindness had killed little Lilium, and in her studio, Clara gets back to work with a clear mind.
The latest reports from the media show that Daniel has been arrested in Paris of suspected drug possession. Gamache leaves to go back to Montreal and set everything straight, possibly to resign.
Meanwhile, as the team plans to arrest Sophie, a broken Hazel appears protesting Sophie’s innocence. She’s given over to Clara’s care for the day. Nichol reports that Sophie is well liked at college and never injured when she’s away from home. Gamache also finds that Odile sells the herb ephedra is derived from, Ma Huang, at her store.
When Gamache arrives at the Surete and meets with all the department heads, including his enemy, Francoeur, he offers his resignation. Gamache returns to Three Pines to reveal the killer, assembling everyone who was at the séance back at the Old Hadley House. He first turns his attention to Sophie. He says she loved Madeleine and then talks about how the near enemy of love is attachment, which is what Sophie felt for Madeleine.
Then he turns to Jeanne Chauvet, who it appears, knew Madeleine in another lifetime and deliberately set out to scare her at the séance. But then Jeanne talks about how she’d realized Three Pines was a magical place full of good energy. But she also reveals she was at high school with Madeleine and Hazel and both hated and envied Madeliene and tried to make herself over for her, so become superficial and pretty.
Gamache then gets up abruptly and leaves to confront Brebeuf, who has come to Three Pines. Gamache had realized that Lemieux was working for Brebeuf and that Brebeuf, not Francour, was the enemy within the Surete as the friendship the two men shared from boyhood had for Brebeuf become a jealous competition. Breboeuf still can’t figure out why Gamache is happier than he is despite his success.
Then Lemieux draws a gun on Gamache and fires; Gamache is saved by Nivhol, who proves herself loyal to him. Gamache reveals that he put the hateable Nichol in place on his team as a distraction, so that he could observe Lemieux. Gabri, Myrna and Jeanne then turn up to rescue Gamache.
They all return to the séance room where the killer is revealed. Gamache recounts how Madeleine was the high school sun; she starred in the school play while Hazel produced it. They were both on the basketball team, but Madeleine was the captain. They were on the debating team, but Mad was the captain. Hazel’s high school motto was “she never got mad”, meaning literally that she never caught up to Madeleine.
Hazel’s near enemy turns out to be pity, which she has substituted as compassion. She makes a life for herself in Three Pines but Madeleine turns up, taking her daughter’s affection; taking over the Anglican Church Women group and finally capturing Msr, Beliveau. And Hazel had known that Mad’s heart was bad, though not how sick she was, when she gave her the ephedra herb. She is arrested.
Gamache misses his friend Brebeuf who has resigned in disgrace from the Surete. He has tea at Agent Nichol’s house in an effort to better understand her. The Gamaches return to Three Pines where a community spring cleaning of the Old Hadley house is going on. And finally Clara reveals her painting, which is so beautiful Peter only feels happy in front of it.
FAVORITE QUOTE
“Gamache loved to see inside the homes of people involved in a case. To look at the choices they made for their most intimate space. The colors, the decorations. The aromas. Were there books? What sort? How did it feel?”
“Our secrets make us sick because they separate us from other people. Keep us alone. Turn us into fearful, angry, bitter people. Turn us against others, and finally against ourselves. A murder almost always begins with a secret. Murder was a secret spread over time.”
CONCLUSION
One of the things I love most about this book is the unsettling concept of what jealousy can do to you and how destructive it can be. Louise takes it to an extreme to tell her story, but as always with her books, the ordinary becomes extraordinary and makes you think about your own behavior. But the “love” part comes when the wrap up to the story also includes redemption.
Re-birth, a theme carried through the book as much as jealousy is shown to be painful as much as it is necessary, another profound concept. While Louise uses the standard form of the mystery novel—red herrings, clues, even the inspector drawing together his suspects to reveal the killer, a la Poirot—she has such profound concepts she’s illustrating with her story, that again, the ordinary becomes extraordinary.
And what stays with you when you are finished? A glimpse of Three Pines through Louise’s words; characters we look forward to seeing in each novel; new characters to think about in this one (for me, especially Hazel and Jeanne); and the wrap up and explication of the Arnot case, hinted at and foreshadowed in the first two books.
DISCUSSION QUESTIONS
- Do you believe a house can be haunted or malelovent? Penny certainly makes the case for the Hadley House being actually evil, and it’s mentioned as the place where all the sorrow from Three Pines goes.
- Gamache’s approach to detection is very intuitive. I love how he “feels” a place or situation and gets to the heart of it. What’s your favorite thing about his technique?
- Gamache is also intuitive about his friend Brebeuf who in fact is working against him, but Gamache isn’t sure. If you were Gamache, do you think you would know your friend had turned against you?
- I love Gabri, he’s one of my favorite characters. In chapter nineteen he’s reflecting on where he’s been clever or cutting instead of kind, and that would be a reason for someone to kill him. Then he thinks what he loves about Three Pines is it’s a place “where kindness trumped cleverness.” Who is your favorite character and why?
- One of the most interesting things about Louise Penny’s books to me are Gamache’s rules: “I don’t know. I’m sorry. I need help. I was wrong.” To me they seem like a useful life guide. Have any of you thought of these rules at challenging times in your own lives?
- What do you like or dislike about Ruth Zardo? I like that she’s such a cranky old lady but she writes such lovely poems, and in this one I love her attachment to the ducks. They become a symbol of the rebirth theme that runs through the book. Did you think the ducks were a corny touch, or did you like them?
- There are many sort of ordinary emotions that fester in this novel but jealousy is the main one and it’s the cause of every conflict in the story, basically. Do you think this is realistic?
- Did you cry when you read about Ruth’s Lilium?
- One of the things I love about Louise’s books is that she always ends on a positive note, even though the things she writes about are pretty dark and profound. She makes the joy profound as well. Do you like or dislike this aspect of her books?
- I was really captured by the portrait of Madeleine in this book and her effect most obviously on Hazel. Have you encountered this kind of perfection from someone in your own life? How did it affect you?
- Who was your favorite character in this book? I came to really like Jeanne Chauvet.
- Finally what are your thoughts on the percolating jealousy of Peter for Clara’s work?
299 replies on “Series Re-Read: The Cruelest Month”
in response to # 5: I love those life lessons! I am a physical therapist and have the great and humbling opportunity to be a clinical instructor to PT students in my setting. I actually sneak these in somewhere along the way! What good is it if you get straight A’s in all your classes but cannot humbly admit you were wrong, or contritely state you’re sorry, or have the strength and courage to admit you don’t know something or need help?
I do believe that houses project something. Once one has gone house hunting, the phrase I knew this was the house the minute I walked in…or there was something about the house that made me uncomfortable becomes part of the litany of living.
What surprised me was that there would be such a home in Three Pines…it made the village more believeable and real for me.
Your comment about house hunting reminded me of my husband and I going with a realtor to see a house I thought was THE House.It was in a very good area and the price had been considerably reduced. However, when we were in the house, I could not get out fast enough. Just a bad odd feeling. I do think that some people are more aware of these “feelings” than others. My husband never did understand.
#3 I don’t know if I would know or not. It is always hard to totally accept when a friend betrays you – this is a theme through his books with other friends who betray or at least turn against him.
Regarding the Hadley House, I think that the remainder of the series will reveal that the evil of the house, like many of our most treasured betes noirs, proves to be more about projections of the shadow from within ourselves than about any resident evil. For me, the way people feel about the house reveals a great deal about their capacity like ours, despite all rational gifts, despite intuition and insight, despite intelligence most rare, to be very wrong about what we perceive. Even Gamache is wrong, doesn’t know, needs help, and should be sorry about this place!
We do keep on about the Hadley house. It’s almost a character in and of itself isn’t it? We chew and chew this bit of gristle.
This morning I’m chewing it again because I came upon a side of the house not yet considered.
The house itself is an inanimate object, but let’s look at the picture that has been painted of the house. It sits a bit isolated, close enough to walk to, but not a pleasant walk. Poor path. Bad or non existent lighting, shadowed if you will. Poor paint, in disrepair. Abandoned, though interestingly still contains some furnishings. A bird has been trapped inside and there’s noises, banging, creaks unexplained.
“The house attracts evil.” When said thus, it sounds ominous. However, it is just a fact that those intent on nefarious acts are much more likely to try to commit those acts in just such a location as the Hadley house. They lure the victim or as in Clara’s case, drag the victim away from the light and away from the goodness and warmth of protective friends and happy neighbors. The warm bistro or Myrna’s book shop would be unlikely places for an attack.
If the house were painted and repaired. If the path was lighted and smoothed. If the trapped bird were released, replaced by the sound of laughter and pleasant conversation — then the Hadley house would be a repository of peace and a beacon of safety just as surely as the three pines after which the town was named.
People are like that also. A sad and miserable outer shell often drives those we love away. We snarl from pain, temper, and exasperation. Those of us that need love the most drive others away.
When my children seem to deserve a hug the least is when they need love the most.
Linda, that’s brilliant about the Hadley house but also when our kids need the most love.
Thanks for that insight.
Brilliant! I am remembering when Gamache made his thorough walk/search through the house, and he came upon the dining room, and detected a lingering aroma of a delicious meal. He felt it was from a time, perhaps long ago, when love and laughter had filled the house. Maybe all the memories created there are lingering somewhere…
All great comments about the Hadley house and yes I had forgotten that dining room scene where Gamache almost sees a scene from the distant past where people were happy there! But how easily that was lost over time and the current manifestation of the Hadley house is a haunted and evil place. Perhaps it is my upbringing in South Louisiana and living for a time in New Orleans as well as a lot of time there and touring plantations as a child but I do believe a place, a house can be haunted not by ghosts as much as by its own past.
And did anyone notice that the “Lyon family” having used the house for a year at least on weekends had never changed Timmer Hadley’s bedroom? And that bedroom itself is described as a mausoleum with furnishings that really sounded like Timmer herself had never redecorated it during her life in that room. All of this is totally unlike Three Pines where antiques and old homes and decor all are warm and vibrant. Like Three Pines, the Hadley House is a character. A dark one perhaps haunted by neglect and unlove.
I agree, K.E. – it is very odd that everything else in the village is so warm, and, as you say, vibrant, yet the rooms in the Hadley house were almost grotesque. That may have been partly why Peter and Clara were so easily convinced by Ben that Timmer was so awful. I thought it was hilarious that C.C. lived there a year and never decorated, given that she was supposed to be a “wonderful designer!” Of course that had to be because she was not successful, and had no money, but you’d think that her obsession with “appearances” would have driven her to paint everything white!
Or at least run a vacuum cleaner! Off to check description of living room in Fatal Grace… I don’t think it was horror house central in that book.
Questions 1-5 are closely entwined, and it is #2 that binds them together. Gamache is intuitive, sensing when things are amiss and in what way they are amiss, but the closer to him that things are amiss, the less clearly he is able to see them. He once had a horrific experience in the Hadley House; he is now friends with many of the residents of Three Pines; his unmasking of a crooked cop has caused him to be alienated from many of his colleagues, all things which are close to him. When even someone as flip as Gabri pauses to consider if his own actions would drive someone to murder him, it’s as if we could also assume that Gamache has experienced the same pause. The four rules are things that Gamache himself must say about his own life and career, let alone the detectives under his wing.
The Hadley House is a metaphor, not a red herring. It’s where all the sorrow goes, and the way each detective and resident experiences the house helps them to come to terms with the doubts and losses in their lives. Thus the metaphor (and a few others like the bears, the wood and chocolate eggs, the talking trees, and the dead and living baby birds) extends and makes The Cruelest Month an allegory.
Gabri knows it is good when kindness trumps cleverness. I find it interesting, then, to note that Gamache plays on his reputation for kindness in order to execute a very clever checkmate on those who would do him harm. Terrific book!
Ruth Zardo remains one of my favorites. She shines a spotlight on the idiocy of the human condition, with all its contradictions and blends of softheartedness and cynicism.
I think Gamache is very intuitive. He did not miss the slights visited on him by his friend. His wife also noticed. I believe Gamache sometimes knows or intuits more than he voices out loud to others. He had quietly prepared contingency plans for a betrayal he hoped wouldn’t come.
I think what you just said is true and very important. Gamache often keeps quiet about his plans and opinions. We are sure to be surprised if we assume his silence to mean agreement with those around him.
Briefly … I hope:
1. Inhabited houses “feel” like their inhabitants, but an empty house that feels “haunted” is, I think, only reflecting the feelings people have about the previous occupants. Does that make sense to anyone except me?
2. I admire Gamache’s patience.
3. Gamache can sense the perfidy, I’m sure, but doesn’t want to give it room to grow. I’m always clueless!
4. First, last, and always Ruth.
5. The hardest for me (I should write them down and post them, too) is “I need help.” Very hard!
6. The ducks aren’t corny to me because I believe Ruth needs the attachment since I also believe she fears attachment to people. What she learns, I guess, is that attachment may–and frequently does–lead to a sad heart, even with our beloved pets. It’s a hard part of life, n’est-ce pas?
Totally agree that empty houses hold energy left by previous inhabitants. You make very good sense!
I was struck by the question on my favorite character. I have always wanted to be Clara and I love Ruth and her poetry and Rosa the duck with all my heart. I reflect on Ruth’s poems often; they touch me deeply. I also love Myrna and her wisdom and Gabri’s robust love and wicked humor. But I never thought of Gamache as my favorite until now–I have yearned to be Reine-Marie and have him as my life partner to love and to cherish and to be loved the way he loves her. Thank you Louise Penny for bringing us these wonderful characters and showing us their many sides.
We’ll have to remember to chew on this when we read “Bury Your Dead.” Whew, that’ll give me some time to ruminate.
Sorry! Copied the last part twice, and couldn’t see it come up, so I thought I hadn’t posted it. Couldn’t figure out how to delete the second version, either! Drat!
I deleted it, Jane. Thanks!
That’s a relief! Thank YOU, Paul! 🙂
Unreal City,
Under the brown fog of a winter dawn,
A crowd flowed over London Bridge, so many,
I had not thought death had undone so many.
Sighs, short and infrequent, were exhaled,
And each man fixed his eyes before his feet.
Flowed up the hill and down King William Street,
To where Saint Mary Woolnoth kept the hours
With a dead sound on the final stroke of nine.
There I saw one I knew, and stopped him, crying: “Stetson!
“You who were with me in the ships at Mylae!
“That corpse you planted last year in your garden,
“Has it begun to sprout? Will it bloom this year?
“Or has the sudden frost disturbed its bed?
“Oh keep the Dog far hence, that’s friend to men,
“Or with his nails he’ll dig it up again!
“You! hypocrite lecteur!—mon semblable,—mon frère!”
Thanks to the poetry foundation for the replication of this poem online. One further note: the poem here is not titled The Cruelest Month, but The Burial of the Dead, which is the first part of The Waste Land.
THAT should give us something to chew on, eh?
Thank you, Jane, for posting the poem – I’d forgotten so much about it! Isn’t it funny, the things we know, and that we KNOW we know – we know them in our bones somehow while blithely forgetting the details… with poetry, especially, I think long after the words are gone, we are left with the feelings they evoked in us. Poetry is so important to the Gamache series, yet it’s woven in almost inobtrusively, and I missed a lot of it in the first reads. That’s why I am loving this “second chance” – there is much richness to be had in these books. And to think, as I started the first one, I was expecting nothing more than another “cozy” mystery! I came prepared to like the series, and fell head-over-heels in love!
Wo weilest du?
“You gave me hyacinths first a year ago;
“They called me the hyacinth girl.”
—Yet when we came back, late, from the Hyacinth garden,
Your arms full, and your hair wet, I could not
Speak, and my eyes failed, I was neither
Living nor dead, and I knew nothing,
Looking into the heart of light, the silence.
Oed’ und leer das Meer.
Madame Sosostris, famous clairvoyante,
Had a bad cold, nevertheless
Is known to be the wisest woman in Europe,
With a wicked pack of cards. Here, said she,
Is your card, the drowned Phoenician Sailor,
(Those are pearls that were his eyes. Look!)
Here is Belladonna, the Lady of the Rocks,
The lady of situations.
Here is the man with three staves, and here the Wheel,
And here is the one-eyed merchant, and this card,
Which is blank, is something he carries on his back,
Which I am forbidden to see. I do not find
The Hanged Man. Fear death by water.
I see crowds of people, walking round in a ring.
Thank you. If you see dear Mrs. Equitone,
Tell her I bring the horoscope myself:
One must be so careful these days.
What are the roots that clutch, what branches grow
Out of this stony rubbish? Son of man,
You cannot say, or guess, for you know only
A heap of broken images, where the sun beats,
And the dead tree gives no shelter, the cricket no relief,
And the dry stone no sound of water. Only
There is shadow under this red rock,
(Come in under the shadow of this red rock),
And I will show you something different from either
Your shadow at morning striding behind you
Or your shadow at evening rising to meet you;
I will show you fear in a handful of dust.
Frisch weht der Wind
Der Heimat zu
Mein Irisch Kind,
Wo weilest du?
Summer surprised us, coming over the Starnbergersee
With a shower of rain; we stopped in the colonnade,
And went on in sunlight, into the Hofgarten,
And drank coffee, and talked for an hour.
Bin gar keine Russin, stamm’ aus Litauen, echt deutsch.
And when we were children, staying at the arch-duke’s,
My cousin’s, he took me out on a sled,
And I was frightened. He said, Marie,
Marie, hold on tight. And down we went.
In the mountains, there you feel free.
I read, much of the night, and go south in the winter.
So sorry! I guess my memory is not what it should be. After I wrote my last entry, I went to re-read Eliot’s poem, and the flowers there are lilacs and hyacinths, not daffodils. ( For some reason I always associate daffodils with spring!)
Anyway, the poem itself is part of Eliot’s epic poem The Waste Land. In re-reading it, I found that there’s even reference to a Madame Sosostris, who reads tarot cards! Thought it might be interesting for us to take a look at the actual poem itself, so here’s the first part:
April is the cruellest month, breeding
Lilacs out of the dead land, mixing
Memory and desire, stirring
Dull roots with spring rain.
Winter kept us warm, covering
Earth in forgetful snow, feeding
A little life with dried tubers.
Lilacs bloom on older growth.
I have several plants I cut to the ground in fall, knowing melting snow and spring rain will stir the dormant roots (and the dried bulbs and tubers of the daffodil and crocus) to produce new growth.
BTW, it’s not my lilacs I cut to the ground. That would be a calamity.
I had not read Penny’s books in order and I am really enjoying that perspective. I appreciate the reader who googled names in the story that adds another layer of meaning and highlights Penny’s intentions. April is “the cruelest month”, seasonally, and it emphasizes a difficult concept: death must occur for new life to begin. I love reading about new life, or hope, that seems to be fundamental to Louise Penny’s books.
Both my children were born in April, one on Easter Sunday, the other on Good Friday. It may be the cruelest month, but it’s also gloriously wild with flowers in the snow, babies in baskets, and death which is really just birth into new beginnings.
Claudia, I read your post with interest. Agree that it’s usually necessary for death to occur before new life can appear. However, in the poem by Eliot, he explains that it’s the cruelest month, because it’s the one where daffodils start to bloom because they feel the sun of spring inviting them to spring up, only to be doomed shortly thereafter by a blast of snow. In other words, April is the month where Spring and Winter still can collide– sometimes within days of each other. I suspect Louise Penny chose the title because there are going to be some examples where there’s going to be something that looks like a chance of life, but it’s a false hope. ( Didn’t want to write a spoiler for those who haven’t read the book before).
Ah, Jane. That’s precisely what happened to my daffs this year! Glorious golden trumpet heads cheered me every time I looked out of my kitchen window — then a temp drop and snow did them all in in one night! Winter was sooooo long this year that the appearance of those first bulbs cheered all of us.
Thank you for including “The Wasteland” Haven’t been able to find my paper copy of it. Am going back to reread the one you’ve posted for us.
1~ I don’t believe a house can be haunted but they can appear to have a personality. In my childhood we had a ‘haunted’ house that kids would dare others to walk by. It was in reality a run-down, unloved house. Our imaginations are powerful and we can perceive many projections that a house may be telling us.
2~Like others, I love how Gamache listens, I love his humble spirit. He sees you as a person and as someone with value.
3~I don’t know. I might perceive, but deny it. With all my heart I would deny it, because how can a true friend do that?
4~Oh my, I love each character! Gamache of course is my favorite.
5~ I love his rules. A backbone for life. Saying I’m sorry can be hard along with I was wrong. Of course it’s easier to say those words to different people.
6~I do love Ruth. I do wish she didn’t use the F word as I tend to be sensitive to that word. Love the ducks! It’s a great touch to show what Ruth is really like.
What I love about Louise is how she can get inside people and vividly describe emotions. For example with Beauvoir, ( how do you pronounce that?) he is struggling with anger. As Penny describes it, “Rage that rips and claws indiscriminately. Blind and powerful and without conscience or control.”
And the way she describes Hazel’s loss: How each footfall or creak made her think how Madeline was coming home and how she would look up expecting to see Madeline and how every minute of the day she lost Madeline again. I thought that was quite powerful and so true.
Penny ‘s website provides pronounciation for many characters’ names and places. She also explains some of the French sayings she uses.
There’s one small inconsistency introduced in this book when we learn that Gamache’s parents died when he was a child. In Still Life, Gamache is reflecting on how people react to death and remembers that his mother’s reaction to finding that her husband has passed away peacefully during the night next to her in bed, is to call and make a hair salon appointment.
I prefer listening to these books and I would think for days about the themes and characters. I do think that places feel evil because of the evil that occurred. In the United States, the Sandy Hook school is being destroyed and rebuilt due to the terrible massacre.
It was not Gamache’s mother that woke up next to her dead husband in bed, it was his aunt.
This takes place after Jane’s niece learns about her aunts death and asks when she can get into the house.
Ruth and Linda–you are both right. In the original edition of STILL LIFE, published in 2005, Louise says, “Gamache had seen enough grief in his time to know that people handle it in different ways. His own mother, upon waking up next to her husband of fifty years dead in the bed, called her hairdresser first to cancel her appointment.” Astonishingly, it seems that no one noticed the contradiction with the early death of Gamache’s parents in subsequent books until a reader wrote to Louise about it late in 2011 — whereupon we changed subsequent editions of STILL LIFE to say that it was Gamache’s aunt who responded to her husband’s death in that way.
As far as I know, the audio edition was recorded only once, so that would be unlikely to include the correction. Since it wasn’t possible to recall all the print and e-books that had been distributed by the end of 2011, earlier editions still include the reference to the 50-year marriage of Gamache’s parents, which turns out to be cut short in THE CRUELEST MONTH.
Thank you for this explanation. I downloaded an ecopy to my iPad for the re-read. After seeing your note I went looking for my older printed copy — there was Gamache’s mother!
Thank you for explaining this! I borrowed an old copy of Still Life and noticed this when I read it. I love authors that build their writing around a specific place and characters and this is an interesting example of that process. As the series progresses, considering Gamache as an ‘orphan’ impacts his decisions and heartaches.
Hope, thank you! I went back and re-listened to all the books (I don’t currently have print copies to check) and this has been bothering me ever since I came across the first mention of the automobile accident.
I also noticed the change regarding the death of Gamache’s parents. Has Louise Penny ever explained why she made the change? Did she thunk no one would notice? I’m such a fan, having read and re-read all her books, but this detail has always bothered me.
Ruth’s duck introduce a theme that will reach fruition in later books — the life lesson that baby ducks need to struggle during the hatching in order to have the strength to live full healthy lives.
Many of the struggles in these early books leads to more complete individuals in future books.
Sometimes we can love someone too much, stepping in to alleviate life’s trials before they have had the opportunity to learn and to grow.
Or, we ourselves can give up before we have gone through the trial to find the treasure at the end of the refiners fire.
Linda, in this post you reminded me of something I forgot to mention in our first discussion. The very first time that we met Clara Morrow and her appearance was described – I immediately made a connection to Ruth in later books. Clara was her messy self with crumb in her hair and on her clothing, but a bit of her tresses was held back by a duck barrette! That image of a middle-aged woman with a kid’s plastic duck clip in her hair made me smile then and reminded me of Ruth’s ducks to come!
Oh I love this reminder, Meg! I had forgotten about the hair clip.
So, so right!
ODDS & ENDS TO ADD TO THE SOUP POT!
There were a few things that caught my attention early in this book – and most of them had to do with names that either sounded familiar for some reason or other – or caught my attention. So, I went ‘googling”!
MADAME BLAVATSKY: Think it’s Gabri who initially announces that the psychic Madame Blavatsky would be appearing/ performing & staying at the B & B. There was a real Madame B! Helena Blavatsky (1831-1891) was Russian, and studied extensively Eastern religions. She sought the commonalities of those and western faiths. She was one of the founders of the Theosophy Society in the U.S. It’s teachings about God and the world were based on mystical insights traced back to those originated in the ancient world.
SARAH BINKS: For some reason this name tickled my funny bone. Think it was Ruth who ‘complimented” Odile’s poetry as being of the Sarah Binks style. Had to look this one up. Sarah Binks is a fictional character in a novel by University of Manitoba prof, Paul Herbert called “Sarah Binks.” In it, he “satirizes the literary pretensions of both critic and poet by presenting a poet and critic (the author) whose productions are awash with misreadings and sentimental claptrap.” It was originally published in 1947.
ODILE: This is the name of the black swan in the ballet “Swan Lake”. There was also a St. Odile of Alsace (alternate spellings – Odilia or Ottila). She was the patron saint of Alsace and the patron saint of good eyesight. Sounds like maybe our author is doing a little ‘Sarah Binksing here too! :~}
JEANNE CHAUVET: Jeanne’s surname also sounded very familiar & when I looked it up, remembered why! Chauvet-Pont-d’Arc Cave is in the Ardeche department of southern France and it contains some of the earliest known cave paintings. There seems (to me) to be something really mystical about some of those early, early drawings! Good choice for Jeanne’s name too!
Isn’t “googling” names, places and events mentioned in a novel FUN. I have learned so much history this way. I keep notes as I read so I can google them later. One site leads to another until I am far afield of where I started and with many additional notes to return to later. Nice to meet another curious mind.
My daughter, a first time reader of the series and who is now reading the books with me so we can have the fun of discussing them each morning, is a fluent French speaker and she is also intrigued by the choice of names. She has updated me about their literal meanings and how much each person’s name underpins their character or their presence in the plot. I didn’t know any of this in my first two reads of the series and it’s so much fun to get her little asides and insights regarding the names. What clever choices.
Bronwen, I would dearly love to read your daughter’s comments on the names!
“John-Boy Beautiful Vision?”
“Pretty-Boy John?”
Robin, that is funny, that you know someone who apparently is “channeling” Ruth Zardo. I know a lot of us in the discussion group really like Ruth, but I have to say, if I were going to claim to be like someone in a book, Ruth Zardo would not be my first choice! However, I must admit she does touch my heart with the ducks, and I bet that’s one reason your friend feels so aligned with her.
KB, I also wish we could have gotten to know Madeleine AND Jane better.
Now on to a couple of questions about Gamache:
2. Gamache’s approach to detection is very intuitive. I love how he “feels” a place or situation and gets to the heart of it. What’s your favorite thing about his technique?
Have to say, that as soon as I read this question, I thought about Lord Peter Wimsey, and I think it was in the book Clouds of Witness where his mother, the Dowager Duchess, makes a remark to the effect that when men use intuition, they are using “mother-wit”. That’s one of the reasons I, and I would venture to say, many of Penny’s readers can identify with Gamache. It isn’t all “Just the facts, M’aam” with him, but he has learned to listen to his instincts.
3. Gamache is also intuitive about his friend Brebeuf who in fact is working against him, but Gamache isn’t sure. If you were Gamache, do you think you would know your friend had turned against you?
Note that it isn’t that Gamache doesn’t have suspicions of Brebeuf, but that he “isn’t sure.” It’s kind of like he sees the signs that there’s something off about Brebeuf, but this is his childhood friend.I think here Gamache is having problems with deciding which is more important–the present(Brebeuf acting funny) versus the past(Brebeuf his childhood friend who comforted him when his parents died, and he feels helped save his life). Therefore, he’s reluctant to pass judgment without giving Brebeuf enough rope to hang himself with.
As for whether I would be able to tell if one of my friends had turned against me, I think I would. Good friends support each other, even when they may have something critical to say. Say for example, I had a friend whom I had known for decades, and we shared common interests and outlooks on life, and suddenly I felt whenever I was around my friend there was an air of discontent, and she seemed to be saying negative things about me and my judgment, not just once, but a number of times, I think I would know our friendship was in trouble, if not already dead.
Oh, Jane, your comment about Peter Wimsey reminds me of another favorite detective of mine, Ngaio Marsh’s Alleyn, who has a close relationship with his mother and often asks her for advice. He is also intuitive. Gamache seems like an updated version of those wonderful characters – he’s contemporary but he also draws on the past. He would be at home with Wimsey and Alleyn.
Exactly, Robin!
Since Gamache was deprived of his parents at an early age, it’s difficult to see how he could belong to the same club as Wimsey and Alleyn, except, one might hypothesize, through an inherited sense of “mother-wit.” In so many ways, Gamache seems to be comfortable with his intuitive, or dare I say, “feminine” side. I bet that THAT is one reason so many of the men in higher positions at the Surete are uncomfortable being around Gamache. There’s nothing about his appearance that would suggest to them the effeminate, but his refusal to play the “old boys” game has them baffled and upset.