I just had comment to share my excitement that I was able to see Lucrezia's actual marriage portrait in person! When I was researching the history behind the book I discovered that by some extraordinary luck the original painting that helped inspire the author is in the NC Museum of Art in Raleigh, roughly 10 minutes from my house! This is not the marriage portrait in the book (which likely never existed), but one of the few surviving portraits of Lucrezia. It was painted I believe after she was married but before she left Florence, by either Allesandro Allori or Bronzino. It was really something special to see this IRL and be only a few feet from it, as it's very striking how real it looks (there are copies of this portrait in other museums but IMO they aren't as well done.) It's hard not to project after reading the book but she looks sad and lonely, but resigned to her fate. Whether that's actually the case, it's odd considering it's a marriage portrait of sorts, she doesn't seem all that happy. (And if the events of the book are true to any degree, it's hard not to blame her!)
Here's a link to a photo I took since I can't post it here - [https://imgur.com/a/PFWuIPT](https://imgur.com/a/PFWuIPT)
Melancholic is the perfect word. Even without the drama of the story involved, she was a 14-15 year old kid about to be shipped off to a strange land with a man she barely knew. Poor kid!
What an amazing experience to see the portrait! You can definitely see the sadness, anger, and resolve in her eyes. It is really tragic to think she died so soon after this!
Incredible you were able to see this! Agree with your analysis of how she looks and appears in this portrait. Absolutely amazing framing on this one as well, such a great picture.
That's a great story. Thanks for sharing the picture! She looks older than I imagined her in my minds eye. Putting a face to the story (even though it is still fiction) makes it even more poignant
My guess is the combination of the Renaissance fertility fad diet (which probably made her more malnourished than anything), being forcibly confined, having her painting implements taken away from her just broke her body, mind, and spirit. And almost dying from possible poisoning doesn’t help much, either.
Yes, these measures to ostensibly help her conceive must have had such a dramatic effect on her mental health that it would have affected her physical health and also probably stopped her from really taking care of herself.
I agree that the doctor's recommendations did just as much if not more damage to her health than poison. It's amazing anyone was ever able to survive the Renaissance fertility treatment!
It's really hard to tell if she was actually sick or poisoned. The way Alfonso kept her locked up and took away basically everything drastically impacted her mental health as well.
Yes I completely agree with you, Lucrezia is convinced that she was poisoned but as the reader we don’t know whether this is true or her imagination running away with her as her mother suggested in her letter. This is where O’Farrell has told the story so well because there is so much left open to interpretation for us as the reader but at the same time we are absolutely hoping that Lucrezia will be ok because we have really come to care for her.
>This is where O’Farrell has told the story so well because there is so much left open to interpretation for us as the reader
I agree! This was so well done. It can be seen as a straightforward poisoning or as a deterioration due to stress, trauma, and terrible medical advice. Either way, she was definitely in danger. Since the historical record is full of rumors about Lucrezia's death, O'Farrell really helps us feel that uncertainty as readera with the various clues in both directions.
This is exactly it - I wondered how reliable Lucrezia was as a narrator from the very beginning, but ultimately, it doesn't matter. She was in danger no matter how you look at it, and we won't know what happened to her in real life, nor will we know exactly what caused her deterioration here, but it happened. I love how deft this writing was done to leave it open to interpretation but still feel so satisfying and interesting an outcome.
It could be any number of reasons. As shown in this last section, premodern medicine was extremely unreliable and diets were not much better. Poison is a possibility as well, but maybe not since they just decided to strangle her anyway
While I agree, I wonder what options she has. Presumably she's decided at this point to stay with him vs. going off with her mother and other siblings and trying to question the ruling line that way. She looked at her options and decided this is her best. While I can't blame her, I can't imagine being in her shoes and making that choice, particularly when the person being terrorized is legitimately a child.
While I don’t think very favourably of Nunciata, I do think anyone with any sanity *has* to stay loyal to Alfonso to stay alive/healthy.
She knows him better than anyone and knows that her only way to survive in that environment is to stay on his good side.
Yes to people having to stay loyal to Alfonso to survive. Part of kept hoping Lucrezia would just submit to save herself even if it breaks her. Now I'm wondering what that says about me lol
She definitely knows, and she definitely realizes that loyalty is the best way to survive. The problem with this strategy, as in any harsh authoritarian scenario, is that the wrath always ends up coming for you eventually. You can play the game only so well, for only so long, before you make a mistake and fall out of favor. So Nunciata is walking a really narrow path to safety. In her own way, I do think she was trying to point Lucrezia in a more prudent direction with her comments about loyalty and her insistence that they not question anything.
She has to know. She’s too smart not to. I think she was jealous of Elisabetta in a lot of ways: she was prettier and more likeable than Nunciata, and I think the sisters saw each other as rivals (or at least Nunciata did). Maybe Nunciata has a similar nasty streak as Alfonso, but less violent and less direct.
Oh, Nunciata definitely knows how awful her brother is, but she didn't come across as the nicest or most welcoming person either. I think she liked being near a person of power (thus giving her a semblance of power) and the fact that Lucrezia took the brunt of everything, allowing Nunciata to live her life the way she mostly wanted.
8. What is Alfonso’s aim with bringing Lucrezia out to the country? Do you think he really poisoned her? Why didn’t he kill her while they were still alone?
I think he wanted to hide his intention to murder for a couple of reasons. First of all, the marriage was a political marriage and undoubtedly killing the daughter of the man he is trying to remain allies with is not helpful for that cause. Also, he cares about his public image and we see how he wants others to perceive him as the nice guy. If his wife dies of natural causes, one he is not a killer, and two he perhaps gets sympathy from the public.
I think he brought her to the countryside because it was more isolated and, more importantly, Lucrezia would be isolated from her entourage. Clelia had been ordered to stay behind (maybe for plausible deniability?), and Emilia wasn’t supposed to be there, either. Fewer people means fewer witnesses. As for why Alfonso didn’t try to finish her off when they were alone, maybe he was waiting for the poison to take effect? And when he realized it hadn’t finished her off, he and Leonello decided to go for Plan B?
I think that Alfonso did poison her (at least in this book, the real history being far less convinced of murder). I assume both the country viait and the hands-off poisoning were meant to keep up appearances of his innocence, and we all know how important appearances are to Alfonso. Similarly to killing Elisabetta's lover in the middle of the night instead of a public, formal execution, he wanted Lucrezia to die in a way that left no one questioning him or his involvement. I also think his apparent infertility and his need for assistance when murdering people is an interesting parallel. With Contrari, he needed Leo to step in rather than do it himself. With Lucrezia, he tries to do it with poison but couldn't seal the deal, so again, he had to call on Leo.
I think he brought her out there to isolate her before killing her.
I don't think he necessarily poisoned her (kind of redundant when you're just going to strangle her with help anyway)
I think it might be a bad look for him to kill her closer to his court so that's why he took her to the fortezzo
Edit: ok reading some other responses the poison makes more sense if it was just to make it seem like she died of natural causes actually
I think he definitely brought her there to murder her, but he didn't do it when they were completely alone because that would have appeared too suspicious. Also, I think deep down Alfonso is a bit cowardly and couldn't do it without his goon, Baldassare. We know Baldassare doesn't mind getting his hands dirty for his duke.
I had been thinking all along that there would be a swap, but I think it was very well done. There was tension and fear and paranoia. It also called back to the tiger being attacked by the lions, which I thought was very well done.
But I had a thought after I had finished the book and was walking to get the mail. The last section had a very dreamy quality to it. What if . . . Lucrezia never escaped and this was just her way to rewrite her ending? While the ending was satisfying for Lucrezia (poor Emilia), we know that in reality Lucrezia didn't survive. So as I was reflecting on the book, letting the story settle, it felt to me that the ending could still be open to interpretation.
Yeah, I think the ending is open to interpretation. Were told Lucrezia is looking at herself. This could be her imagining escaping, and thinking about how it could all have worked out for her. All the while, the reality was she never left her bed.
Yes, you put it so well! It seemed dream-like and a way for her to re-write it. Perhaps it was also a way for the author to signify the drastic departure in the accuracy of her storytelling (obviously other liberties were taken but this is the biggest)
Well said! You make excellent points here about the tiger-lions parallel and the dreamlike ending that could be open to a different interpretation! I enjoy this about O'Farrell's treatment of history in this book - rather than completely making things up and changing history definitively, the reader is given enough breadcrumbs to consider multiple stories as possible. She takes liberties but doesn't demand that we believe "her version".
This is a cool interpretation of the ending! I hadn't thought of it that way at all, but I think I prefer i
this interpretation over the actual ending. Beautiful and tragic.
I thought the exact same as you about the very end - it felt so dreamlike I wondered similarly about its reality. I also wonder since Emilia kept saying that she wasn't seen/heard, and we learned from Alfonso taking her to a different place than originally decided that she *also* didn't know exactly where to go, so how did she show up at the *fortezza*?
In my least favorite version of this ending, Lucrezia was imagining Emilia being there as well, when really she was just alone and very mentally and physically ill. She imagines herself escaping but it's all a dream; she's just in her bed instead.
Here's another thing to add to your theory: Lucrezia never saw (adult) Emilia until her wedding day. I started wondering too if Emilia was ever there and not just a figment of Lucrezia's imagination as a way to cope being sent off with a stranger.
Got chills reading this. I went back and checked because I remember Alfonso referring to her maids just before they left and saying she could only take one maid; he indicates to Clelia specifically and says she will stay behind. There's mention of "her maids" and says "we will take only one of these women" but this section is strangely lacking in particulars including where Emilia is standing, so I'm inclined to believe this theory is possible, especially given his much detail O'Farrell gives us otherwise.
There's also some other scenes (cutting her hair is an example) where Emilia says something or has a reaction and another person reiterates her same words or actions, almost as if they didn't happen. Obviously there are some gaps, like when she's cared for or prepared by Emilia in some way that would be unlikely if she were to do it herself, but I think these instances could be explained. It also makes sense why Nunciata assigned Clelia to her; it was like she'd not had a maid prior.
I had sort of expected it with all the talks of Lucrezia and Emilia looking a like. I didn't know how, but I thought there may be a swap. I was happy Lucrezia made it out, but then felt bad that I was rooting for her over Emilia. I wonder how that plays into the broader conversation of some lives being seen as more important i.e. men are more important that women, rich over poor, etc.
Almost like Emilia’s scar she got in childhood while they were both playing under the table was a foreshadowing of her (unchosen) sacrifice to save Luc in adulthood. 😩
I completely missed this foreshadowing but you are so right, there is lots of mention of how alike they are and in hindsight this is clearly something significant but the author does it so well that at the time of reading the significance of their similarities completely passed me by
I was surprised and happy for Lucrezia but poor Emilia! My guess was that Lucrezia would realize that if she is found missing Emilia would be killed in retribution/punishment and Alfonso would then still hunt her down and take her back, so she would stay to save Emilia at least.
I also thought there would be a swap of some sort because it was mentioned multiple times that they looked similar. I liked the way it turned out but I also feel so sad for Emilia! And I really like u/Kas_Bent’s theory too.
Was so relieved, I was actually rooting for that! I recalled about halfway through that Hamnet sort of had a 'twist' ending (which IMO didn't work as well if you knew what actually happened), so I was hoping she was setting up something similar. I felt horrible for her poor maid though, definitely bittersweet overall. And Alfonso getting away with it too was obviously not preferable.
It was kind of confusing to me (Lucrezia is delirious and describes the one on the bed as being herself so I wasn't sure if it was actually Emilia or she was just hallucinating)
Assuming she did survive, it was about as good an ending as she was going to get. She's better off with the freedom that she always wanted than being constrained as a duchess
I was not surprised by his reaction, but I was surprised by the brutality of his actions, if that makes any sense. The reader already has a sense that Alfonso likes to project an image of control and honour, and Elisabetta’s fling with Contrari goes against that. But Alfonso could have easily shipped Contrari away from Ferrara to some other region far away from his sister. Instead, he chose brutality. That showed Lucrezia just how cold, calculating, and downright cruel he could be to his own family.
>Alfonso could have easily shipped Contrari away from Ferrara to some other region far away from his sister. Instead, he chose brutality.
I agree! He was making a point here, not simply solving a problem or administering a punishment.
Alfonso says later to Lucrezia that it is his job to guard against anything that would weaken his rule, thereby protecting Lucrezia even if she doesn't understand. I think he believes anything that could cause questions or rumors to swirl around his family house would be a sign of weakness. He actually sees himself as doing the right thing here. I wasn't surprised at the retaliation, but the murder was so much worse than I expected. I had anticipated a sword fight or a good old-fashioned beheading. Strangulation with forced witness by Elisabetta is next level sadistic.
I was surprised when I read it but it's not that unusual given how he had been shown to be very desperate to maintain authority. It was needlessly brutal though
I wondered if Elisabetta had instead been honest with Alfonso about her affair it might have been able to keep quiet OR the brutality against Contrari would have been lessened (like others here have speculated was far out of line given the circumstances). That said, I don't think I'd trust Alfonso with anything, given the history there. He's ruthless and absolutely using the image of control as an excuse to do whatever he wants.
There were a few references to her having saved his life so I think this was in part because he felt a debt of gratitude to her but I also think they had a genuine connection; this was quite evident when he chose to speak to her when up until that point we had been led to believe that he was a mute.
I think he definitely owed her one! I didn't get much from their relationship TBH excep that they obviously felt a connection after her saving his life. I'm mainly just glad O'Farrell didn't go for the full-on 'forbidden romance' with secret trysts and torrid scenes. To me it was much more effective that they just shared whispers in an almost secret language a few times.
>mainly just glad O'Farrell didn't go for the full-on 'forbidden romance' with secret trysts and torrid scenes.
Good point! I like how this way it wasn't an escape for a lover, it was an escape for freedom and even if she and Jacopo end up just friends she's taken a chance to be herself and pursue her art.
Yes! I was happy that the last we see of Lucrezia, she is an artist, not a wife. She might also be that, of course, but she got to be a person first and foremost!
I agree with the other commenters who point out that she saved him, and he is now returning the favor. I also think the connection of language and culture help form an instant and powerful bond. They don't trust others easily, but they feel immediately at ease with each other, much like Lucrezia with Emilia. Finally, I think as an artist, Jacopo recognized her talent and respected her for it. He wanted to save a kindred soul.
I agree with this take - language binds people together because it's shared experience. On top of that they are both true artists, and have to hide their work (Lucrezia hides her painting, Jacopo hides that it's him painting as an understudy instead of his master). Kindred souls is the perfect way to put it.
The children (her future children, she supposes) stood out to me. It seemed more like a nightmare than a hopeful vision. She expressed ambivalence or even fear about pregnancy and motherhood, and these children in the dreams seemed more like spirits she would meet after death than they did real children she would raise. It was foreboding, at least to me!
They stuck out to me, and like a few other theories that have floated around this thread, I think they point to the mental and physical illnesses Lucrezia is experiencing throughout, but particularly at the end. She's not well, and these dreams speak to her fears but also to me represent her body ultimately failing her.
4. Why does Lucrezia’s mother dismiss the letter full of concerns about her circumstances? Does she not understand Lucrezia’s situation or does she understand and choose to ignore it?
Unfortunately I think that's Lucrezia's childhood demeanor (or at least how it was perceived) coming back to bite her. Another child might have been believed, but it was easier to dissmiss Lucrezias concerns as her just being her wild self, all imagination and stubbornness.
Oh no. That is so sad! Poor Lucrezia. She was always so misunderstood. Her creativity and spirit were never really a good fit for the role of an obedient, silent, baby-making Duchess was it!
As others have pointed out, Lucrezia was known for being overly emotional and imaginative, so this makes her letter easier to brush off. I also got the sense that, just as her mother warned her about the sisters' real intentions in bonding with her, Eleanora was again giving advice to Lucrezia as a dutchess. It is her place to produce an heir, so if she wants salvation or rescue, it can only come from successful procreation. The worst kind of "make yourself useful/indispensable."
In the author's note at the end, O'Farrell explains that Lucrezia's sister and cousin were both likely murdered by their husbands, and the family didn't retaliate. So perhaps this was the author's nod to the Medici view of their daughters as political tokens to trade, coldly ignoring what the new "owners" did with those coins.
Agreed - these extra notes were incredibly helpful in understanding the reality of the situation, but in so many ways they were as horrifying, if not more so, than the fictionalized version O'Farrell presented us with.
I think it's a little of both. Lucrezia's mother probably thinks her concerns are exaggerated or imaginary, a product of her immaturity. But also, Lucrezia, as a daughter, is essentially just a political pawn for her parents, a role she has already played by helping them establish a strong alliance with Ferrara. They would never risk undoing all that diplomatic work by confronting Alfonso about her claims in the letter or bringing her to Florence without his approval. Her mother has to pretend everything is fine for the sake of the politics involved, even if she suspected something was wrong. That's why they don't kick up much fuss when she turns up dead.
I *hated* this part. Alfonso keeping her hair was another way to exert control over Lucrezia while keeping the thing he found beautiful. It was manipulative and controlling. *She* couldn't keep her hair, but *he* could. It's a level of control over Lucrezia's body that he had even when parts of herself were literally separated from her body.
When I was studying history in college i wrote a paper that involved some research on the power and symbolism of women's hair. It often represented power, sensuality, fertility, and depending on color and context could symbolize either purity and maidenhood or a dangerous form of sexuality and temptation... Guess which category Lucrezia's lush red hair falls into! ;)
To me, Lucrezia’s hair symbolizes her independence and “wild” nature. Cutting it off had to have been traumatic for her. It must have felt like severing her own limb and hacking off a vital part of herself. My guess is that Alfonso wanted to keep her hair as a reminder to Lucrezia that he is in charge, that he has tamed her wild nature, that he controls her.
Cutting her hair off seemed to symbolize the end of her life. This was the moment she realized she was doomed. It was the last severing between herself and Florence. The description of the tips of the hair being with her from infancy was so devastating. Her childhood, her family, and her hope were all taken from her, along with her hair.
It's yet another way that Alfonso is deciding to oppress her for his own benefit, this time even worse than her earlier situation.
Alfonso keeping her hair might just be a wacky result of premodern medicinal practices or maybe it's symbolic of him wanting control over her more wild side.
10. The true Duke and Duchess of Ferrara served as inspiration for this story as well as “My Last Duchess” by Robert Browning. What makes their story so compelling for retelling?
I think it's the tragedy and the mystery. She died so young so soon after marriage, and under mysterious circumstances. IIRC her death was listed as 'putrid fever' which was basically a catch-all, not much different than saying she died of 'a bug' or something. It seems only normal that all kinds of wild rumors might start, the same thing still happens today, just online!
>It seems only normal that all kinds of wild rumors might start, the same thing still happens today, just online!
Yes, she would definitely be the subject of a murder mystery podcast nowadays!
The historical record is vague, the portrait we do have is beautiful but somewhat mysterious, and the girl herself was so young! It's all ripe for speculation and romanticization!
I really enjoyed it! I thought the book was beautifully written. Maggie O’Farrell’s use of imagery and vivid prose made the story, setting, and characters come to life.
I loved loved loved Hamnet, one of the best books I've read in a decade. So I was both excited and nervous to read her follow-up, wondering if it could compare. I think Hamnet edges out as the better book, but just barely (I think personally I'm just more interested in 17th century England/Shakespeare than I am 16th century Italy). O'Farrell clearly has a real gift for some of the most immersive writing I've ever read. Down to the sounds and smells, you feel like you're right there in the room with the characters. Also it managed to be both very literary and an absolute page turner like a beach-read mystery. I couldn't put it down! \*\*\*\*\*
I agree with all of this. LOVED Hamnet, and still loved this book too. The themes in Hamnet spoke to me more on a personal level, but Portrait’s writing is just as lush and engaging here. Really glad I joined for this one.
1000% agree with all of this!! I still think of the scene in Hamnet where >!the apples are rattling around on the shelves while they’re making love!<, her sensory writing is honestly unparalleled and I don’t think I’ve ever felt as immersed in scenes as she makes me feel. It’s transporting. I LOVED Hamnet and I was also nervous I wouldn’t love this as much but I loved it only about 1% less.
The more I read of people's love of *Hamnet* I'm realizing I need to read that book immediately! I loved this book (5 stars for me), so I hope I love Hamnet just as much!
I hate to say it but while I was very impressed in many ways (and I’m certainly glad I read it) I did not love this book, I think because it just didn’t mesh with a couple of strong personal preferences. Here’s what bothered me:
- Maggie O’Farrell is certainly a virtuosic writer. It seemed like every single sentence was displaying some kind of verbal flourish or clever metaphor or string of lush adjectives. While that was impressive it also became tedious to me. I like prose that has variety and rhythm, punchy parts and languid parts. She wore me out.
- This actually surprises me because the deftness of the writing obscured it, but in the end it seemed to me that all the characters, Lucrezia included, were rendered in black and white terms. I missed seeing the nuance of human ambiguity. Alfonso was just a bad dude - his more gentle and generous moods were nothing by sociopathic symptoms. Elisabetta: good. Nunciata: bad. Emlia: good. Clelia: bad.
The historical detail and the plot were very skillfully done, and I do think she made some very powerful and effective representations about women’s role and experiences in that time (and of course not just in that time). That was very vivid (especially in that amazing portrait-painting episode, but really throughout). I think the book extended my empathy for all those women in all those Renaissance portraits, in which they are absolutely treated like property. And I’m grateful for that. But for me, as a piece of literature it had some key flaws that compromised my enjoyment.
I totally agree with you. I liked the story but it after a while it bothered me that almost every sentence seemed to have, as you put it, some kind of verbal flourish. English is not my first language so I think I also missed some of the meanings of this verbal flourish. For instance, one part that stuck with me and that I completely didn’t understand the meaning was about one of the horses that had a „rolling, liquid eye“. What does this even mean?
I have been lurking in these discussions waiting for exactly this! I read this a few months before the sub, and it didn't land with me for the exact reasons you mention: too verbose, not nuanced enough. The result felt heavy-handed, which took away from her message for me.
I absolutely loved it. I'm not one for literary or historical fiction, but this was so beautifully written that I couldn't help but be enamoured with it. I'm definitely going to be diving into more of O'Farrell's work and will be recommending this to my local book club.
I finished the book and immediately texted my mom she needs to read this now. I had previously recommended to my book club and sent a followup afterward indicating it turned out great!
I loved it! I adored Hamnet as well, and this one was just as good. I don't know that I could pick between the two. 5 stars, and I'll be reading everything I can by Maggie O'Farrell!
I really liked it and I was worried that wouldn't as I couldn't help but go into this one with too high expectations after Hamnet. I think pondering over the ending after reading the discussion points has made me love it even more. It is so tragic and so well written. A great one for a bookclub read along.
I love the theory that many if the events late in the book didn't actually happen and Lucretzia was just losing touch with reality. Though there were speculations Lucrezia was poisoned it is more widely accepted that she died of pulmonary tuberculosis. Perhaps the end was all just a fever dream. Could Emilia have been a figment of her imagination? I think so at least in the last scenes when she arrives alone to be at Lucrezia's side! Her once saviour in the kitchen come back to save her again. Also Jacopo as the silent hero that only she can communicate with come to her rescue her. It certainly seems convenient. I live the ambiguity and also that we were set up for Lucrezia to die from the beginning only for O'Farrell to leave us with options. Brilliant!
>Then he adds:
“My first duchess.”
So he _does_ intend to kill her. Why though? I originally assumed he would try to kill her because she couldn't produce an heir and the church doesn't allow divorce.
>Would Elisabetta care to take a turn around the terrace?
Clelia comes back saying that there was no answer at the door.
I'm guessing Alfonso found out about her relationship and killed her paramour.
>Lucrezia sees, for the first time, that he has an injury to the left
side of his face. Under his cheekbone, just in front of his ear, are
three scratches, fresh and vivid, cut deeply into the skin.
Either he dueled the man or Betta scratched him.
>I am your husband and also, yes, your
protector. So allow me, please, to protect you.”
Keeping someone in the dark isn't protection.
>“But your father is one man and I am another. And you,
my love, are no more than a child.”
Then you shouldn't have married her.
>she sees that Jacopo has
reached the door of the salon. He seems to hesitate on the threshold
for a second or two, placing a hand on the door latch.
Ordinarily I would predict that this man is going to save her. But we already know how this story ends.
>he ordered that Contrari be strangled to death
and the Lady Elisabetta be forced to watch.
CHE DIAVOLO!!! Believing you're doing your duty in keeping the common rabble out of your family tree is one thing. This is purposeful cruelty. His dukedom has nothing to do with it. This man is actually demented.
>“We…we are friends,” Lucrezia stutters, appalled. “I didn’t tell
him! I promise you.”
It was Nunciata.
>Do you understand me? It is rumoured that he will never
produce an heir, that the duchy cannot remain in our lineage, which
of course makes him angry beyond reason, because he always
knows what is being said about him, I don’t know how, but what I
do know is that one person will be blamed for this, and you know
who it is?”
So infertility _does_ have something to do with it. Just not Lucre's.
>What a wild and worried letter was your last! You must be
careful not to let your imagination run away with you—you are
aware, I’m sure, how that tendency has been in you from a
very young age. Remember that your Alfonso is an honourable
man, so let him be your guide,
I don't know why, but this feels like such a betrayal. Why trust a family you don't know more than your own daughter?
>“You are in danger,” he says to her
I have an inkling. Is she going to fake her death?
>They don’t assume a clear corporeal form
but she knows, with the clarity of a dream, that they are her
children, those yet to be born. The ones waiting, like actors poised
to enter a stage, ears cocked for the cue that will summon them
forth.
Makes sense. Women have all their eggs in place from birth, it is the man who fertilizes them. You could think of it as locked characters in a videogame and the man as the McGuffin you need to make them playable.
>“I believe it is unlikely that Her Grace is with child. The stomach is
soft, the veins are not enlarged, and I would venture to suggest that
there is an excess of choler in Her Ladyship. She seems low in spirits
and perhaps might benefit from—”
Alfonso slams a hand against the wall, startling both Lucrezia and
the doctor.
“You think her spirits,” he spits out, “are my concern here?”
Now I know fer certain that he was planning to get rid of her once he had his child. Nothing was going to save Lucre. All his adoration was a mirage, once he had a son, he'd kick her to the curb and go back to cuddling with Baldassare.
>This has proved a most efficaciousmethod, in accordance with Greco-Roman science.
🤣🤣🤣🤣
>“We will take only one of these women,” he says, and
points at Clelia. “This one will stay behind.”
Why, everything so far has led us to believe he'd rather split her from her supporters and get her truly alone for his plans. Or was Clelia sent to actually protect Lucre. Have we been bazinga'd? Is Nancy actually putting on a show of hostility while actually trying to protect Lucrezia?
>None of the country servants, bar the two who served at
dinner, have ever seen the Duchess, but still, they weep and lament
over her young body, which is so battered and abused by the seizure
that killed her, her face quite ravaged.
Poor Emilia. Yeah I can't be happy about Lucre's escape when it involves the death of an innocent party like this.
>Her mother will weep throughout; her father
will grip his wife’s hand, his face white, his teeth set.
I hope that mother blames herself for not listening to her daughter's plea.
>The marriage portrait is hung in the Duke’s private chamber,
covered at all times in heavy velvet drapes. No one is permitted to
pull back the curtain and look upon the Duchess’s face without the
Duke’s express permission. He keeps her there, hidden from view.
Finally, a wife he can fully control. What I still don't understand though is why. If he's trying to get his dukedom under control, wouldn't the loss of a spouse be a signal to his enemies that now is the time to attack? Isn't he only putting himself at risk, especially when he knows that _he_ is the problem as far as fertility is concerned. He doesn't seem the type to lack self awareness.
>As the summer approaches its end, it is said on the streets of
Ferrara that the Duke has entered into negotiations with an Austrian
family, for the hand of their daughter.
This man has lost two women. How desperate are you to risk this?
>Later—much later—there will be a craze in the city for the work of
one particular artist.
I find it hard to take any joy in this given Emilia's death. There's no reason why Lucrezia's life should be considered more valuable than hers. This isn't a sacrifice for the greater good. Lucre isn't some hero on a mission to save society that needs to be protected, or an innocent child. She and Emilia have the same value in my eyes and one life should not be traded for the other.
Quotes of the week:
1)Also, with the
utmost respect, and the forgiveness of Your Grace, at such a time, it
is considered best that a man should confine himself solely to the
embraces of his wife, not to expend himself elsewhere, in—”
2)There is something at the core of her, a type
of defiance. There are times when I look at her and I can feel it—it’s
like an animal that lives behind her eyes. I had no knowledge of it
prior to our marriage, no sense of it. I was assured of her balanced
disposition, her good health. She seemed so biddable, charmingly
so, young and innocent. But now I see it I do not know how I
missed it. It makes me fear that there will always be a part of her
that will not submit or be ruled.”
3)Those who have done
so, it is said, have discovered quite a different scene underneath:
classical compositions of warring deities or landscapes never seen by
a human eye, or triptychs of portraits, gazing back at the viewer.
4)Look. Here is Lucrezia, a small figure in the corner of a landscape
with a river, a forest, an imposing stone building. She is moving
across open ground, through the dark winter night, running,
running, with all her strength, towards the merciful canopy of trees.
I just had comment to share my excitement that I was able to see Lucrezia's actual marriage portrait in person! When I was researching the history behind the book I discovered that by some extraordinary luck the original painting that helped inspire the author is in the NC Museum of Art in Raleigh, roughly 10 minutes from my house! This is not the marriage portrait in the book (which likely never existed), but one of the few surviving portraits of Lucrezia. It was painted I believe after she was married but before she left Florence, by either Allesandro Allori or Bronzino. It was really something special to see this IRL and be only a few feet from it, as it's very striking how real it looks (there are copies of this portrait in other museums but IMO they aren't as well done.) It's hard not to project after reading the book but she looks sad and lonely, but resigned to her fate. Whether that's actually the case, it's odd considering it's a marriage portrait of sorts, she doesn't seem all that happy. (And if the events of the book are true to any degree, it's hard not to blame her!) Here's a link to a photo I took since I can't post it here - [https://imgur.com/a/PFWuIPT](https://imgur.com/a/PFWuIPT)
Wow, what a great experience! It is an amazing portrait and how wonderful you got to see it in person!
This is so cool! Thank you for sharing.
That is so cool that you got to see her portrait! It was beautifully done. There is a melancholic look to her.
Melancholic is the perfect word. Even without the drama of the story involved, she was a 14-15 year old kid about to be shipped off to a strange land with a man she barely knew. Poor kid!
What an amazing experience to see the portrait! You can definitely see the sadness, anger, and resolve in her eyes. It is really tragic to think she died so soon after this!
Incredible you were able to see this! Agree with your analysis of how she looks and appears in this portrait. Absolutely amazing framing on this one as well, such a great picture.
That's a great story. Thanks for sharing the picture! She looks older than I imagined her in my minds eye. Putting a face to the story (even though it is still fiction) makes it even more poignant
5. Lucrezia’s health declines rapidly in the last tenth of the book. What factors are to blame for her demise?
My guess is the combination of the Renaissance fertility fad diet (which probably made her more malnourished than anything), being forcibly confined, having her painting implements taken away from her just broke her body, mind, and spirit. And almost dying from possible poisoning doesn’t help much, either.
Yes, these measures to ostensibly help her conceive must have had such a dramatic effect on her mental health that it would have affected her physical health and also probably stopped her from really taking care of herself.
I agree that the doctor's recommendations did just as much if not more damage to her health than poison. It's amazing anyone was ever able to survive the Renaissance fertility treatment!
It's really hard to tell if she was actually sick or poisoned. The way Alfonso kept her locked up and took away basically everything drastically impacted her mental health as well.
Yes I completely agree with you, Lucrezia is convinced that she was poisoned but as the reader we don’t know whether this is true or her imagination running away with her as her mother suggested in her letter. This is where O’Farrell has told the story so well because there is so much left open to interpretation for us as the reader but at the same time we are absolutely hoping that Lucrezia will be ok because we have really come to care for her.
>This is where O’Farrell has told the story so well because there is so much left open to interpretation for us as the reader I agree! This was so well done. It can be seen as a straightforward poisoning or as a deterioration due to stress, trauma, and terrible medical advice. Either way, she was definitely in danger. Since the historical record is full of rumors about Lucrezia's death, O'Farrell really helps us feel that uncertainty as readera with the various clues in both directions.
This is exactly it - I wondered how reliable Lucrezia was as a narrator from the very beginning, but ultimately, it doesn't matter. She was in danger no matter how you look at it, and we won't know what happened to her in real life, nor will we know exactly what caused her deterioration here, but it happened. I love how deft this writing was done to leave it open to interpretation but still feel so satisfying and interesting an outcome.
It could be any number of reasons. As shown in this last section, premodern medicine was extremely unreliable and diets were not much better. Poison is a possibility as well, but maybe not since they just decided to strangle her anyway
6. Why does Nunciata remain loyal to her brother in Elisabetta’s absence? Is she aware how wicked he is?
She shares his wickedness.
While I agree, I wonder what options she has. Presumably she's decided at this point to stay with him vs. going off with her mother and other siblings and trying to question the ruling line that way. She looked at her options and decided this is her best. While I can't blame her, I can't imagine being in her shoes and making that choice, particularly when the person being terrorized is legitimately a child.
Sure she can't undermine. But she doesn't have to take such delight in the torment of Lucrezia.
Oh absolutely, I think of her like the embodiment of "wicked". She's just cruel.
While I don’t think very favourably of Nunciata, I do think anyone with any sanity *has* to stay loyal to Alfonso to stay alive/healthy. She knows him better than anyone and knows that her only way to survive in that environment is to stay on his good side.
Yes to people having to stay loyal to Alfonso to survive. Part of kept hoping Lucrezia would just submit to save herself even if it breaks her. Now I'm wondering what that says about me lol
She definitely knows, and she definitely realizes that loyalty is the best way to survive. The problem with this strategy, as in any harsh authoritarian scenario, is that the wrath always ends up coming for you eventually. You can play the game only so well, for only so long, before you make a mistake and fall out of favor. So Nunciata is walking a really narrow path to safety. In her own way, I do think she was trying to point Lucrezia in a more prudent direction with her comments about loyalty and her insistence that they not question anything.
She has to know. She’s too smart not to. I think she was jealous of Elisabetta in a lot of ways: she was prettier and more likeable than Nunciata, and I think the sisters saw each other as rivals (or at least Nunciata did). Maybe Nunciata has a similar nasty streak as Alfonso, but less violent and less direct.
Oh, Nunciata definitely knows how awful her brother is, but she didn't come across as the nicest or most welcoming person either. I think she liked being near a person of power (thus giving her a semblance of power) and the fact that Lucrezia took the brunt of everything, allowing Nunciata to live her life the way she mostly wanted.
8. What is Alfonso’s aim with bringing Lucrezia out to the country? Do you think he really poisoned her? Why didn’t he kill her while they were still alone?
I think he wanted to hide his intention to murder for a couple of reasons. First of all, the marriage was a political marriage and undoubtedly killing the daughter of the man he is trying to remain allies with is not helpful for that cause. Also, he cares about his public image and we see how he wants others to perceive him as the nice guy. If his wife dies of natural causes, one he is not a killer, and two he perhaps gets sympathy from the public.
I think he brought her to the countryside because it was more isolated and, more importantly, Lucrezia would be isolated from her entourage. Clelia had been ordered to stay behind (maybe for plausible deniability?), and Emilia wasn’t supposed to be there, either. Fewer people means fewer witnesses. As for why Alfonso didn’t try to finish her off when they were alone, maybe he was waiting for the poison to take effect? And when he realized it hadn’t finished her off, he and Leonello decided to go for Plan B?
I think that Alfonso did poison her (at least in this book, the real history being far less convinced of murder). I assume both the country viait and the hands-off poisoning were meant to keep up appearances of his innocence, and we all know how important appearances are to Alfonso. Similarly to killing Elisabetta's lover in the middle of the night instead of a public, formal execution, he wanted Lucrezia to die in a way that left no one questioning him or his involvement. I also think his apparent infertility and his need for assistance when murdering people is an interesting parallel. With Contrari, he needed Leo to step in rather than do it himself. With Lucrezia, he tries to do it with poison but couldn't seal the deal, so again, he had to call on Leo.
I think he brought her out there to isolate her before killing her. I don't think he necessarily poisoned her (kind of redundant when you're just going to strangle her with help anyway) I think it might be a bad look for him to kill her closer to his court so that's why he took her to the fortezzo Edit: ok reading some other responses the poison makes more sense if it was just to make it seem like she died of natural causes actually
I think he definitely brought her there to murder her, but he didn't do it when they were completely alone because that would have appeared too suspicious. Also, I think deep down Alfonso is a bit cowardly and couldn't do it without his goon, Baldassare. We know Baldassare doesn't mind getting his hands dirty for his duke.
9. What did you think of the twist ending?
I had been thinking all along that there would be a swap, but I think it was very well done. There was tension and fear and paranoia. It also called back to the tiger being attacked by the lions, which I thought was very well done. But I had a thought after I had finished the book and was walking to get the mail. The last section had a very dreamy quality to it. What if . . . Lucrezia never escaped and this was just her way to rewrite her ending? While the ending was satisfying for Lucrezia (poor Emilia), we know that in reality Lucrezia didn't survive. So as I was reflecting on the book, letting the story settle, it felt to me that the ending could still be open to interpretation.
Yeah, I think the ending is open to interpretation. Were told Lucrezia is looking at herself. This could be her imagining escaping, and thinking about how it could all have worked out for her. All the while, the reality was she never left her bed.
Yes, you put it so well! It seemed dream-like and a way for her to re-write it. Perhaps it was also a way for the author to signify the drastic departure in the accuracy of her storytelling (obviously other liberties were taken but this is the biggest)
Well said! You make excellent points here about the tiger-lions parallel and the dreamlike ending that could be open to a different interpretation! I enjoy this about O'Farrell's treatment of history in this book - rather than completely making things up and changing history definitively, the reader is given enough breadcrumbs to consider multiple stories as possible. She takes liberties but doesn't demand that we believe "her version".
This is a cool interpretation of the ending! I hadn't thought of it that way at all, but I think I prefer i this interpretation over the actual ending. Beautiful and tragic.
I thought the exact same as you about the very end - it felt so dreamlike I wondered similarly about its reality. I also wonder since Emilia kept saying that she wasn't seen/heard, and we learned from Alfonso taking her to a different place than originally decided that she *also* didn't know exactly where to go, so how did she show up at the *fortezza*? In my least favorite version of this ending, Lucrezia was imagining Emilia being there as well, when really she was just alone and very mentally and physically ill. She imagines herself escaping but it's all a dream; she's just in her bed instead.
Here's another thing to add to your theory: Lucrezia never saw (adult) Emilia until her wedding day. I started wondering too if Emilia was ever there and not just a figment of Lucrezia's imagination as a way to cope being sent off with a stranger.
Got chills reading this. I went back and checked because I remember Alfonso referring to her maids just before they left and saying she could only take one maid; he indicates to Clelia specifically and says she will stay behind. There's mention of "her maids" and says "we will take only one of these women" but this section is strangely lacking in particulars including where Emilia is standing, so I'm inclined to believe this theory is possible, especially given his much detail O'Farrell gives us otherwise. There's also some other scenes (cutting her hair is an example) where Emilia says something or has a reaction and another person reiterates her same words or actions, almost as if they didn't happen. Obviously there are some gaps, like when she's cared for or prepared by Emilia in some way that would be unlikely if she were to do it herself, but I think these instances could be explained. It also makes sense why Nunciata assigned Clelia to her; it was like she'd not had a maid prior.
I love this theory! It definitely makes me look at the story in a different way.
I had sort of expected it with all the talks of Lucrezia and Emilia looking a like. I didn't know how, but I thought there may be a swap. I was happy Lucrezia made it out, but then felt bad that I was rooting for her over Emilia. I wonder how that plays into the broader conversation of some lives being seen as more important i.e. men are more important that women, rich over poor, etc.
Almost like Emilia’s scar she got in childhood while they were both playing under the table was a foreshadowing of her (unchosen) sacrifice to save Luc in adulthood. 😩
This is such a good observation
Great point! I didn't make that connection!
I completely missed this foreshadowing but you are so right, there is lots of mention of how alike they are and in hindsight this is clearly something significant but the author does it so well that at the time of reading the significance of their similarities completely passed me by
All my hopes and dreams have come true! (except for her poor maid being murdered, that sucks)
Sad that they killed Emilia. 😢
So sad! I have been worried about her ever since she snuck into the fortezza and we all started speculating about a body-double switch scenario.
I was surprised and happy for Lucrezia but poor Emilia! My guess was that Lucrezia would realize that if she is found missing Emilia would be killed in retribution/punishment and Alfonso would then still hunt her down and take her back, so she would stay to save Emilia at least.
I also thought there would be a swap of some sort because it was mentioned multiple times that they looked similar. I liked the way it turned out but I also feel so sad for Emilia! And I really like u/Kas_Bent’s theory too.
Was so relieved, I was actually rooting for that! I recalled about halfway through that Hamnet sort of had a 'twist' ending (which IMO didn't work as well if you knew what actually happened), so I was hoping she was setting up something similar. I felt horrible for her poor maid though, definitely bittersweet overall. And Alfonso getting away with it too was obviously not preferable.
I liked it and wasn’t expecting it at all, especially with how foreboding this last part of the book felt. Poor Emilia, though…
It was kind of confusing to me (Lucrezia is delirious and describes the one on the bed as being herself so I wasn't sure if it was actually Emilia or she was just hallucinating) Assuming she did survive, it was about as good an ending as she was going to get. She's better off with the freedom that she always wanted than being constrained as a duchess
1. Why does Alfonso retaliate against Elisabetta after news of her tryst with Contrari? Were you surprised by Alfonso’s actions?
I was not surprised by his reaction, but I was surprised by the brutality of his actions, if that makes any sense. The reader already has a sense that Alfonso likes to project an image of control and honour, and Elisabetta’s fling with Contrari goes against that. But Alfonso could have easily shipped Contrari away from Ferrara to some other region far away from his sister. Instead, he chose brutality. That showed Lucrezia just how cold, calculating, and downright cruel he could be to his own family.
>Alfonso could have easily shipped Contrari away from Ferrara to some other region far away from his sister. Instead, he chose brutality. I agree! He was making a point here, not simply solving a problem or administering a punishment.
Alfonso says later to Lucrezia that it is his job to guard against anything that would weaken his rule, thereby protecting Lucrezia even if she doesn't understand. I think he believes anything that could cause questions or rumors to swirl around his family house would be a sign of weakness. He actually sees himself as doing the right thing here. I wasn't surprised at the retaliation, but the murder was so much worse than I expected. I had anticipated a sword fight or a good old-fashioned beheading. Strangulation with forced witness by Elisabetta is next level sadistic.
I was surprised when I read it but it's not that unusual given how he had been shown to be very desperate to maintain authority. It was needlessly brutal though
I wondered if Elisabetta had instead been honest with Alfonso about her affair it might have been able to keep quiet OR the brutality against Contrari would have been lessened (like others here have speculated was far out of line given the circumstances). That said, I don't think I'd trust Alfonso with anything, given the history there. He's ruthless and absolutely using the image of control as an excuse to do whatever he wants.
2. What do you make of Lucrezia and Jacopo’s relationship? Why does he choose to risk his own status to warn her and eventually rescue her?
There were a few references to her having saved his life so I think this was in part because he felt a debt of gratitude to her but I also think they had a genuine connection; this was quite evident when he chose to speak to her when up until that point we had been led to believe that he was a mute.
I think he definitely owed her one! I didn't get much from their relationship TBH excep that they obviously felt a connection after her saving his life. I'm mainly just glad O'Farrell didn't go for the full-on 'forbidden romance' with secret trysts and torrid scenes. To me it was much more effective that they just shared whispers in an almost secret language a few times.
>mainly just glad O'Farrell didn't go for the full-on 'forbidden romance' with secret trysts and torrid scenes. Good point! I like how this way it wasn't an escape for a lover, it was an escape for freedom and even if she and Jacopo end up just friends she's taken a chance to be herself and pursue her art.
Yes! I was happy that the last we see of Lucrezia, she is an artist, not a wife. She might also be that, of course, but she got to be a person first and foremost!
Something tells me she won’t be in any hurry to be a wife again anytime soon!
I would bet not! Alfonso could put anyone off marriage!
I agree with the other commenters who point out that she saved him, and he is now returning the favor. I also think the connection of language and culture help form an instant and powerful bond. They don't trust others easily, but they feel immediately at ease with each other, much like Lucrezia with Emilia. Finally, I think as an artist, Jacopo recognized her talent and respected her for it. He wanted to save a kindred soul.
I agree with this take - language binds people together because it's shared experience. On top of that they are both true artists, and have to hide their work (Lucrezia hides her painting, Jacopo hides that it's him painting as an understudy instead of his master). Kindred souls is the perfect way to put it.
>top of that they are both true artists, and have to hide their work Great point! This would definitely bond them!
I totally agree! Very well said.
3. What is the meaning of Lucrezia’s dreams in the last chapters? Did any stick out to you?
The children (her future children, she supposes) stood out to me. It seemed more like a nightmare than a hopeful vision. She expressed ambivalence or even fear about pregnancy and motherhood, and these children in the dreams seemed more like spirits she would meet after death than they did real children she would raise. It was foreboding, at least to me!
They stuck out to me, and like a few other theories that have floated around this thread, I think they point to the mental and physical illnesses Lucrezia is experiencing throughout, but particularly at the end. She's not well, and these dreams speak to her fears but also to me represent her body ultimately failing her.
4. Why does Lucrezia’s mother dismiss the letter full of concerns about her circumstances? Does she not understand Lucrezia’s situation or does she understand and choose to ignore it?
Unfortunately I think that's Lucrezia's childhood demeanor (or at least how it was perceived) coming back to bite her. Another child might have been believed, but it was easier to dissmiss Lucrezias concerns as her just being her wild self, all imagination and stubbornness.
That’s what I got, too. Her mother just dismissed her fears as the product of an overactive imagination, just like when she was a child.
Yes, a bit of "the boy who cried wolf"!
Oh no. That is so sad! Poor Lucrezia. She was always so misunderstood. Her creativity and spirit were never really a good fit for the role of an obedient, silent, baby-making Duchess was it!
As others have pointed out, Lucrezia was known for being overly emotional and imaginative, so this makes her letter easier to brush off. I also got the sense that, just as her mother warned her about the sisters' real intentions in bonding with her, Eleanora was again giving advice to Lucrezia as a dutchess. It is her place to produce an heir, so if she wants salvation or rescue, it can only come from successful procreation. The worst kind of "make yourself useful/indispensable." In the author's note at the end, O'Farrell explains that Lucrezia's sister and cousin were both likely murdered by their husbands, and the family didn't retaliate. So perhaps this was the author's nod to the Medici view of their daughters as political tokens to trade, coldly ignoring what the new "owners" did with those coins.
I couldn't believe the author's note at the end. They really didn't care at all about the women in the family.
I know! Quite shocking!
Agreed - these extra notes were incredibly helpful in understanding the reality of the situation, but in so many ways they were as horrifying, if not more so, than the fictionalized version O'Farrell presented us with.
I think it's a little of both. Lucrezia's mother probably thinks her concerns are exaggerated or imaginary, a product of her immaturity. But also, Lucrezia, as a daughter, is essentially just a political pawn for her parents, a role she has already played by helping them establish a strong alliance with Ferrara. They would never risk undoing all that diplomatic work by confronting Alfonso about her claims in the letter or bringing her to Florence without his approval. Her mother has to pretend everything is fine for the sake of the politics involved, even if she suspected something was wrong. That's why they don't kick up much fuss when she turns up dead.
7. What is the significance of Lucrezia’s haircut? Why does Alfonso want to keep her hair?
I *hated* this part. Alfonso keeping her hair was another way to exert control over Lucrezia while keeping the thing he found beautiful. It was manipulative and controlling. *She* couldn't keep her hair, but *he* could. It's a level of control over Lucrezia's body that he had even when parts of herself were literally separated from her body.
Well said!
When I was studying history in college i wrote a paper that involved some research on the power and symbolism of women's hair. It often represented power, sensuality, fertility, and depending on color and context could symbolize either purity and maidenhood or a dangerous form of sexuality and temptation... Guess which category Lucrezia's lush red hair falls into! ;)
To me, Lucrezia’s hair symbolizes her independence and “wild” nature. Cutting it off had to have been traumatic for her. It must have felt like severing her own limb and hacking off a vital part of herself. My guess is that Alfonso wanted to keep her hair as a reminder to Lucrezia that he is in charge, that he has tamed her wild nature, that he controls her.
Cutting her hair off seemed to symbolize the end of her life. This was the moment she realized she was doomed. It was the last severing between herself and Florence. The description of the tips of the hair being with her from infancy was so devastating. Her childhood, her family, and her hope were all taken from her, along with her hair.
Him keeping her hair just reinforced he saw her as a possession and not a full person.
It's yet another way that Alfonso is deciding to oppress her for his own benefit, this time even worse than her earlier situation. Alfonso keeping her hair might just be a wacky result of premodern medicinal practices or maybe it's symbolic of him wanting control over her more wild side.
10. The true Duke and Duchess of Ferrara served as inspiration for this story as well as “My Last Duchess” by Robert Browning. What makes their story so compelling for retelling?
I think it's the tragedy and the mystery. She died so young so soon after marriage, and under mysterious circumstances. IIRC her death was listed as 'putrid fever' which was basically a catch-all, not much different than saying she died of 'a bug' or something. It seems only normal that all kinds of wild rumors might start, the same thing still happens today, just online!
>It seems only normal that all kinds of wild rumors might start, the same thing still happens today, just online! Yes, she would definitely be the subject of a murder mystery podcast nowadays!
The historical record is vague, the portrait we do have is beautiful but somewhat mysterious, and the girl herself was so young! It's all ripe for speculation and romanticization!
11. What were your overall impressions of the book?
I really enjoyed it! I thought the book was beautifully written. Maggie O’Farrell’s use of imagery and vivid prose made the story, setting, and characters come to life.
I loved loved loved Hamnet, one of the best books I've read in a decade. So I was both excited and nervous to read her follow-up, wondering if it could compare. I think Hamnet edges out as the better book, but just barely (I think personally I'm just more interested in 17th century England/Shakespeare than I am 16th century Italy). O'Farrell clearly has a real gift for some of the most immersive writing I've ever read. Down to the sounds and smells, you feel like you're right there in the room with the characters. Also it managed to be both very literary and an absolute page turner like a beach-read mystery. I couldn't put it down! \*\*\*\*\*
I agree with all of this. LOVED Hamnet, and still loved this book too. The themes in Hamnet spoke to me more on a personal level, but Portrait’s writing is just as lush and engaging here. Really glad I joined for this one.
It’s soooo lush. I got so absorbed every time I picked it up!
1000% agree with all of this!! I still think of the scene in Hamnet where >!the apples are rattling around on the shelves while they’re making love!<, her sensory writing is honestly unparalleled and I don’t think I’ve ever felt as immersed in scenes as she makes me feel. It’s transporting. I LOVED Hamnet and I was also nervous I wouldn’t love this as much but I loved it only about 1% less.
Definitely! The sensory details made me feel like I was walking right alongside Lucrezia. Completely captivating!
The more I read of people's love of *Hamnet* I'm realizing I need to read that book immediately! I loved this book (5 stars for me), so I hope I love Hamnet just as much!
I hate to say it but while I was very impressed in many ways (and I’m certainly glad I read it) I did not love this book, I think because it just didn’t mesh with a couple of strong personal preferences. Here’s what bothered me: - Maggie O’Farrell is certainly a virtuosic writer. It seemed like every single sentence was displaying some kind of verbal flourish or clever metaphor or string of lush adjectives. While that was impressive it also became tedious to me. I like prose that has variety and rhythm, punchy parts and languid parts. She wore me out. - This actually surprises me because the deftness of the writing obscured it, but in the end it seemed to me that all the characters, Lucrezia included, were rendered in black and white terms. I missed seeing the nuance of human ambiguity. Alfonso was just a bad dude - his more gentle and generous moods were nothing by sociopathic symptoms. Elisabetta: good. Nunciata: bad. Emlia: good. Clelia: bad. The historical detail and the plot were very skillfully done, and I do think she made some very powerful and effective representations about women’s role and experiences in that time (and of course not just in that time). That was very vivid (especially in that amazing portrait-painting episode, but really throughout). I think the book extended my empathy for all those women in all those Renaissance portraits, in which they are absolutely treated like property. And I’m grateful for that. But for me, as a piece of literature it had some key flaws that compromised my enjoyment.
I totally agree with you. I liked the story but it after a while it bothered me that almost every sentence seemed to have, as you put it, some kind of verbal flourish. English is not my first language so I think I also missed some of the meanings of this verbal flourish. For instance, one part that stuck with me and that I completely didn’t understand the meaning was about one of the horses that had a „rolling, liquid eye“. What does this even mean?
I have been lurking in these discussions waiting for exactly this! I read this a few months before the sub, and it didn't land with me for the exact reasons you mention: too verbose, not nuanced enough. The result felt heavy-handed, which took away from her message for me.
I absolutely loved it. I'm not one for literary or historical fiction, but this was so beautifully written that I couldn't help but be enamoured with it. I'm definitely going to be diving into more of O'Farrell's work and will be recommending this to my local book club.
I finished the book and immediately texted my mom she needs to read this now. I had previously recommended to my book club and sent a followup afterward indicating it turned out great!
I loved it! I adored Hamnet as well, and this one was just as good. I don't know that I could pick between the two. 5 stars, and I'll be reading everything I can by Maggie O'Farrell!
Loved it. Will definitely read Hamnet at some point.
I really liked it and I was worried that wouldn't as I couldn't help but go into this one with too high expectations after Hamnet. I think pondering over the ending after reading the discussion points has made me love it even more. It is so tragic and so well written. A great one for a bookclub read along. I love the theory that many if the events late in the book didn't actually happen and Lucretzia was just losing touch with reality. Though there were speculations Lucrezia was poisoned it is more widely accepted that she died of pulmonary tuberculosis. Perhaps the end was all just a fever dream. Could Emilia have been a figment of her imagination? I think so at least in the last scenes when she arrives alone to be at Lucrezia's side! Her once saviour in the kitchen come back to save her again. Also Jacopo as the silent hero that only she can communicate with come to her rescue her. It certainly seems convenient. I live the ambiguity and also that we were set up for Lucrezia to die from the beginning only for O'Farrell to leave us with options. Brilliant!
>Then he adds: “My first duchess.” So he _does_ intend to kill her. Why though? I originally assumed he would try to kill her because she couldn't produce an heir and the church doesn't allow divorce. >Would Elisabetta care to take a turn around the terrace? Clelia comes back saying that there was no answer at the door. I'm guessing Alfonso found out about her relationship and killed her paramour. >Lucrezia sees, for the first time, that he has an injury to the left side of his face. Under his cheekbone, just in front of his ear, are three scratches, fresh and vivid, cut deeply into the skin. Either he dueled the man or Betta scratched him. >I am your husband and also, yes, your protector. So allow me, please, to protect you.” Keeping someone in the dark isn't protection. >“But your father is one man and I am another. And you, my love, are no more than a child.” Then you shouldn't have married her. >she sees that Jacopo has reached the door of the salon. He seems to hesitate on the threshold for a second or two, placing a hand on the door latch. Ordinarily I would predict that this man is going to save her. But we already know how this story ends. >he ordered that Contrari be strangled to death and the Lady Elisabetta be forced to watch. CHE DIAVOLO!!! Believing you're doing your duty in keeping the common rabble out of your family tree is one thing. This is purposeful cruelty. His dukedom has nothing to do with it. This man is actually demented. >“We…we are friends,” Lucrezia stutters, appalled. “I didn’t tell him! I promise you.” It was Nunciata. >Do you understand me? It is rumoured that he will never produce an heir, that the duchy cannot remain in our lineage, which of course makes him angry beyond reason, because he always knows what is being said about him, I don’t know how, but what I do know is that one person will be blamed for this, and you know who it is?” So infertility _does_ have something to do with it. Just not Lucre's. >What a wild and worried letter was your last! You must be careful not to let your imagination run away with you—you are aware, I’m sure, how that tendency has been in you from a very young age. Remember that your Alfonso is an honourable man, so let him be your guide, I don't know why, but this feels like such a betrayal. Why trust a family you don't know more than your own daughter? >“You are in danger,” he says to her I have an inkling. Is she going to fake her death? >They don’t assume a clear corporeal form but she knows, with the clarity of a dream, that they are her children, those yet to be born. The ones waiting, like actors poised to enter a stage, ears cocked for the cue that will summon them forth. Makes sense. Women have all their eggs in place from birth, it is the man who fertilizes them. You could think of it as locked characters in a videogame and the man as the McGuffin you need to make them playable. >“I believe it is unlikely that Her Grace is with child. The stomach is soft, the veins are not enlarged, and I would venture to suggest that there is an excess of choler in Her Ladyship. She seems low in spirits and perhaps might benefit from—” Alfonso slams a hand against the wall, startling both Lucrezia and the doctor. “You think her spirits,” he spits out, “are my concern here?” Now I know fer certain that he was planning to get rid of her once he had his child. Nothing was going to save Lucre. All his adoration was a mirage, once he had a son, he'd kick her to the curb and go back to cuddling with Baldassare. >This has proved a most efficaciousmethod, in accordance with Greco-Roman science. 🤣🤣🤣🤣 >“We will take only one of these women,” he says, and points at Clelia. “This one will stay behind.” Why, everything so far has led us to believe he'd rather split her from her supporters and get her truly alone for his plans. Or was Clelia sent to actually protect Lucre. Have we been bazinga'd? Is Nancy actually putting on a show of hostility while actually trying to protect Lucrezia? >None of the country servants, bar the two who served at dinner, have ever seen the Duchess, but still, they weep and lament over her young body, which is so battered and abused by the seizure that killed her, her face quite ravaged. Poor Emilia. Yeah I can't be happy about Lucre's escape when it involves the death of an innocent party like this. >Her mother will weep throughout; her father will grip his wife’s hand, his face white, his teeth set. I hope that mother blames herself for not listening to her daughter's plea. >The marriage portrait is hung in the Duke’s private chamber, covered at all times in heavy velvet drapes. No one is permitted to pull back the curtain and look upon the Duchess’s face without the Duke’s express permission. He keeps her there, hidden from view. Finally, a wife he can fully control. What I still don't understand though is why. If he's trying to get his dukedom under control, wouldn't the loss of a spouse be a signal to his enemies that now is the time to attack? Isn't he only putting himself at risk, especially when he knows that _he_ is the problem as far as fertility is concerned. He doesn't seem the type to lack self awareness. >As the summer approaches its end, it is said on the streets of Ferrara that the Duke has entered into negotiations with an Austrian family, for the hand of their daughter. This man has lost two women. How desperate are you to risk this? >Later—much later—there will be a craze in the city for the work of one particular artist. I find it hard to take any joy in this given Emilia's death. There's no reason why Lucrezia's life should be considered more valuable than hers. This isn't a sacrifice for the greater good. Lucre isn't some hero on a mission to save society that needs to be protected, or an innocent child. She and Emilia have the same value in my eyes and one life should not be traded for the other. Quotes of the week: 1)Also, with the utmost respect, and the forgiveness of Your Grace, at such a time, it is considered best that a man should confine himself solely to the embraces of his wife, not to expend himself elsewhere, in—” 2)There is something at the core of her, a type of defiance. There are times when I look at her and I can feel it—it’s like an animal that lives behind her eyes. I had no knowledge of it prior to our marriage, no sense of it. I was assured of her balanced disposition, her good health. She seemed so biddable, charmingly so, young and innocent. But now I see it I do not know how I missed it. It makes me fear that there will always be a part of her that will not submit or be ruled.” 3)Those who have done so, it is said, have discovered quite a different scene underneath: classical compositions of warring deities or landscapes never seen by a human eye, or triptychs of portraits, gazing back at the viewer. 4)Look. Here is Lucrezia, a small figure in the corner of a landscape with a river, a forest, an imposing stone building. She is moving across open ground, through the dark winter night, running, running, with all her strength, towards the merciful canopy of trees.