tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9002438504617561405.post1828228161536828605..comments2024-01-19T19:53:04.386+00:00Comments on CDoart: North & South - Groupwatch and InterpretationCDoarthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02768482276143704993noreply@blogger.comBlogger14125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9002438504617561405.post-46225651649554774962013-09-21T20:00:28.144+01:002013-09-21T20:00:28.144+01:00Thank you very much for your feedback and a warm w...Thank you very much for your feedback and a warm welcome here on the blog, corrflutes.<br />I hope your business runs well now and wish you all the best and lots of success !CDoarthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02768482276143704993noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9002438504617561405.post-65299677981986926242013-09-09T11:37:47.971+01:002013-09-09T11:37:47.971+01:00I've come even later to this discussion, but w...I've come even later to this discussion, but wanted to express my appreciation for your insightful interpretation and commentary on the 'cause and effect' aspects concerning the failure of Mr Thornton's mill. <br /><br />Perhaps I concur with your assessment and opinions, as well, through a similar lens of my own business experience. Indeed a perfect storm of misfortune through circumstance and timing, in which I agree with Mr Thornton, in that I don't see what he could/should have done differently, to have avoided what was clearly beyond his control, at the point of his meeting with Latimer. <br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9002438504617561405.post-62241133124469263852012-06-01T22:55:31.759+01:002012-06-01T22:55:31.759+01:00I think, Mr. Thornton is prepared to have ups and ...I think, Mr. Thornton is prepared to have ups and downs in markets and even have extraordinary risks to cover, e.g. the burned down mill. That is no small loss. What in my opinion is the disaster for him is, that the loss of the mill, material, full production and workers (I know it is phrased quite unconcerned in blank business terms and the workers come in last, as they are 'replaceable') and the strike come in a close range and in the combination extend the money he has as an emergency backing for such cases.<br />It in my view is the combination of bad events (I don't think they had discovered Murphy's law at that time in the 19th century), which extend his negative prediction and security measures and which are the cause for him to go under.<br /><br />Regarding his work ethic, I agree. I don't see Mr. Thornton especially concerned to do 'honest work', but more in a sense (topic and problematic depicted in German literature of the late 19th century) do the work and do it right, whatever your share in it is.<br /><br />I think where we differ is, that I don't see his ethic principles at work, but his risk management in a clear business planning environment, where an accumulation of negative events hit him in an inconvenient moment, when he already had done investments and had touched his resources. This in combination does not leave him much of a choice but to pray, as he does, for a good payment moral of his debtors.<br />That his ethical decision to install the ventilation out of consideration for the health of his workers, might have further enlarged the problem, but only in the combination with the other unlucky events lead to the disaster.<br /><br />I think your spreading the risk approach to his investment decisions is a rather modern approach. I don't think is was used in the 19th century by mill owners or business owners in general. They had their money in their own business and investing elsewhere to compensate own crises, is more an approach of Margaret Hale's social class, where money is invested elsewhere rather than used for an own trade / factory.<br /><br />Perhaps the combination between Margaret Hale and John Thornton is a good one in a business sense, not only because of her money, but because of her likely different approach to business investment. I hope they both in combination can withstand the upheavals of the money market and the industrial revolution.CDoarthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02768482276143704993noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9002438504617561405.post-37218418623687459852012-06-01T22:19:00.355+01:002012-06-01T22:19:00.355+01:00I don't see us generally disagreeing, but thin...I don't see us generally disagreeing, but think the only point we differ is, that I don`t see Mr. Thornton’s financial basis solid enough to allow him to ‘invest’ in anything or secure his situation more. For that one really needs a sound basis of money one needs no immediate access to.<br />And here I see the crux for Mr. Thornton. He does need all the money he has and can get hold of and even has to lend money from the bank to keep his investments afloat. This runs smoothly as long as the production goes on and the orders are paid in time or only with calculable delays. <br />In my opinion he is not yet well off enough to have enough spare money. I see that in his cloths, which are not new, but even his evening pair of trousers are repaired. Unfortunately one only sees that in the promotion shot with Margaret and I never realized that in the film itself.<br />He struggled to repay his father’s debts, set up his mother and sister with an adequate surrounding and is operating the mill on a small money basis, where most of the operative money comes either from his contractors/last orders paying the new materials or from the bank. In this case I am still wondering, why Mr. Thornton's opinion of Mr. Bell is so bad. I never got to the ground of that. Is there an explanation for this in the book, as the film does not care to explain it at all, but takes it for granted.<br />Mr. Thornton would need to loan money to do investments and that in my opinion is the basis which drove his father into ruin.<br />Also, as an entrepreneur, the investment in his own enterprise is an investment as well. He could spread risk by investing in the business branches as well, but here I don’t see his money basis sound enough. <br />Mr. Bell and well established mill owners depending on their old families fortunes can do that. Mr. Bell can even negligently spend the amount Mr. Thornton owes the bank, 500 GBP and spend it in the risky venture of Fanny's husband, risking to lose it all, without care for the loss.<br />But I don’t see that Mr. Thornton has that option already.<br />So I don't see him forced by his principles and unable to adjust, as you do, but forced by circumstances, which do not allow him to act differently. Acting differently and loaning more money from the bank to do investments would in my opinion be irresponsible of him.CDoarthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02768482276143704993noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9002438504617561405.post-70028866335204196962012-06-01T22:02:25.578+01:002012-06-01T22:02:25.578+01:00Thank you very much, bccmee.
The difference betwee...Thank you very much, bccmee.<br />The difference between Watson and Thornton also astonished me, especially because of the fact that Mr. Thornton is the elected magistrate. I contributed it to the fact, that Mr. Thornton even among the mill owners is not an equal. Watson is 'old' money and has a comfortable fortune to gamble with in the mill business, while Mr. Thornton does it for a living and to provide his sister and mother with an adequate livelyhood and keeping up the required appearances for his business.<br /><br />I will join the European North&South watch tomorrow on Saturday, as the other times are in the middle of even my late nights. Hope to meet you in the chats!CDoarthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02768482276143704993noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9002438504617561405.post-15769792763919602322012-06-01T15:04:07.409+01:002012-06-01T15:04:07.409+01:00@UK Expat
The amount of her fortune to spend was ...@UK Expat <br />The amount of her fortune to spend was a thing that I wondered about in the film. For me the amount sounded enormous and it was so much downplayed in the film.<br />Even my parents still can remember a time when the GBP was well over 20 DMarks, when even the DM still was worth something, so I estimated that here amount just lying around in a bank account must have been a significant sum.<br />Thank you very much for the link to the conversion tool. I repeat it here to make it clickable:<br /><a href="http://www.measuringworth.com/ukcompare/relativevalue.php" rel="nofollow">http://www.measuringworth.com/ukcompare/relativevalue.php</a>CDoarthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02768482276143704993noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9002438504617561405.post-34013192057156746962012-06-01T14:58:03.998+01:002012-06-01T14:58:03.998+01:00@Joanna Thank you very much for your wishes and hu...@Joanna Thank you very much for your wishes and hugs! I wish you all the best and thank you for commenting! Hope to see you tomorrow at the European group watch.CDoarthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02768482276143704993noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9002438504617561405.post-24633308491716370612012-06-01T14:56:07.467+01:002012-06-01T14:56:07.467+01:00Thank you for your comments and please excuse my l...Thank you for your comments and please excuse my late joining in the discussion. I promise to come to it and respond today! <br />I hope you all have a great group watch! I will join the date and time tomorrow (2nd of June), as it is a more convenient time for Europe. I hope to see, chat and meet you there as well!CDoarthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02768482276143704993noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9002438504617561405.post-36917905550820099122012-05-30T19:26:28.267+01:002012-05-30T19:26:28.267+01:00This feels like another gaffe of the series, espec...This feels like another gaffe of the series, especially when you consider that the series has him stating in episode 2 that they owe the bank 400 pounds. So, yeah, 15k would certainly solve his problems. <br /><br />I don't have my Norton Critical Edition of the novel to hand, but iirc this was a matter of dispute even in the original edition. There was apparently a type in the first edition (or the serialization?) that made the amount she was offering him look ridiculously small, which was then corrected in a later edition.Servetushttp://meandrichard.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9002438504617561405.post-38474312395536429462012-05-30T19:06:22.279+01:002012-05-30T19:06:22.279+01:00I think 15,000 GBP was quite a significant sum at ...I think 15,000 GBP was quite a significant sum at the time. <br /><br />A website that tries to measure relative value based on a few different economic indicators: http://www.measuringworth.com/ukcompare/relativevalue.php<br /><br />You can type in a year and amount and it gives several estimations based on different economic measures. <br /><br />The 'economic status' value of 15,000 GBP in 1850 vs 2010 comes out to around 16,900,000 GBP. So Margaret Hale was indeed an heiress!UK Expathttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00811708774336070626noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9002438504617561405.post-39929859592768868482012-05-30T18:28:35.918+01:002012-05-30T18:28:35.918+01:00Yes, he is unlucky. But shocky cotton production m...Yes, he is unlucky. But shocky cotton production markets were standard all through the nineteenth century, so a certain amount of unluck has to be planned for. How could he *not* be aware of this and be the highly skilled producer he claims to be? He clearly contributes to his own demise as manufacturer because he is so inflexible -- because, as Fanny puts it so accurately, he's "such a stick in the mud."<br /><br />As far as his liability goes, you are correct that Marlborough Mills wouldn't have qualified for limited liability until at least 1855 in England. (The book suggests obliquely that he has other arrangements -- he says to his mother that they won't ever be as poor as they were earlier.) It's also correct to say that in essence it doesn't matter because he equates himself with the mill. However: if the mill is *that* important to him, why is he so inflexible?<br /><br />re: Margaret -- I will say more about this in the section I write on the romance. I agree that the reason she decides she can marry him is that through her contact with the Higginses, she comes to the standpoint that honest work can make someone genteel, so that a manufacturer stops being a tradesman (something the book makes clearer than the series does). I would hesitate to conclude, however, that her ascriptions to him actually apply either to him, or to his vision of himself. While I think we can say implicitly that "he wants to do honest work," he doesn't ever actually say that of himself. His explicit statements are all about the efficiency of the mill as that relates to the livelihood of the workers. That's why he gets himself in trouble in the first place -- because his definition of efficiency is so poorly formulated and so "weltfremd" that it threatens to, and does in the end, outrun him.<br /><br />Again, I'm not saying that principle are ethics are wrong (I never said that in the post, and I do not believe that). What I said, and am saying, is that his inflexibility about these matters prevents him from developing an honest awareness of the world in which he operates.Servetushttp://meandrichard.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9002438504617561405.post-90923723295845311532012-05-30T18:27:52.056+01:002012-05-30T18:27:52.056+01:00I have to quibble that the early 1850s are just sl...I have to quibble that the early 1850s are just slightly early for the important railway speculations -- the big problems there that generated world economic crashes are still about twenty years off at this point. Also, I think that we're to some extent talking about different things here. I never criticized him for the actions he took, but rather for failing to consider how his attitude is affecting his actions.<br /><br />For instance, while I don't disagree about general awareness of the riskiness of certain kinds of investments in England since the South Sea Bubble (or indeed, before), my remarks did not condemn him for not engaging in *this particular* speculation or risky speculation in general. What I'm criticizing him for is not having engaged in a general investment strategy that would have allowed him to weather market ups and downs. If you read about the cotton industry in England, you know that this kind of boom / crash was entirely par for the course, though it was more severe about a decade after the series plays - but even so, manufacturers *had* to be aware of these problems in advance. His statement that he doesn't know what he should have done thus reflects his general unwillingness to be aware of certain particular circumstances that were clearly applicable to his situation and were made clear all the way through episode 2. When Latimer says, "more modern financial procedures," his next word is "investments." *Thornton* is the one who conflates "investments" with "speculations," and this jump to conclusions is a problem of attitude / prejudice that gets in the way of rational decisionmaking. <br /><br />Secondly, I did not criticize him for his choices regarding the specific business of the mill (buying machinery and raw materials in bulk -- these are normal operations, and indeed, at the beginning of the 1850s, he's standing at the cusp of a general technology boom that threatened to kill manufacturers who *didn't* upgrade, even if it didn't guarantee their success), but rather for his insistence that his knowledge of his particular trade should be sufficient for operating the mill, as opposed to managing his relationship to the market as well, which he seems to refuse to do (or there is absolutely no evidence from the series that he is actually doing it).<br /><br />Also, I think that on the whole (my students have this issue as well -- they *always* take Thornton's side, at least at first) we are way too willing to take Thornton's statements about his inability to pay more at face value. If he really wants to prevent a strike, because that is the thing that is most likely to make his mill go under, there were probably better ways to go than shutting down production completely and then doing something that was *guaranteed* to mess up production (importing unqualified scabs). Again, however, my point of criticism of him is not per se the action he takes in any situation, but the heavily inflexible worldview he displays, to his own ongoing detriment and ultimate downfall.Servetushttp://meandrichard.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9002438504617561405.post-42861861888575681652012-05-30T14:36:25.641+01:002012-05-30T14:36:25.641+01:00Interesting discussion on risks. There was a big d...Interesting discussion on risks. There was a big difference between Watson and Thornton in the investment scheme. Thornton would've been gambling all he had and it was money he needed to pay his workers, while Watson likely only invested a relatively small amount of his portfolio.<br /><br />Thanks for the reminder of the North & South group watch. I plan to participate too!bccmeehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15549577176138160033noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9002438504617561405.post-37140976682917440952012-05-30T06:39:11.900+01:002012-05-30T06:39:11.900+01:00Agree..he has no luck in bizness..but..he is very ...Agree..he has no luck in bizness..but..he is very fortunate in love. Future Mrs.Thornton has a small but decent fortune;) I'm sending hugs,wishing you all sorts of success:*Joannanoreply@blogger.com