Losing family members of all ages was common in the mid-1800s. Did the characters move past loss differently than we do today?
Grief is individual and personal. I think the characters were realistic in their handling of grief and time wasn’t a factor.
1 Like
I agree; grief is intensely personal. We all handle it differently.
yes, grief resilience differs by individual and the size the tragedy. immigrants that lived through the famine and witnessed the suffering had more difficulty than the ones that left before the famine.
There was so much loss – the characters in the book moved past it, but it seemed to subsume a large part of their lives.
They accepted death as part of their everyday life. While they missed those who died, they realized that life goes on and they did what had to be done. It was sad that Frank died since he was a good man and brother. Also the death of Catherine’s daughter was a catalyst for a big part of the story.
During that time period the loss of family members occurred frequently because of the poor sanitary conditions and lack of proper medication. I am sure it was devastating for them but many families faced the same sorrows. That is why the families were much larger than today’s standards.
Each character dealt with death and grief in their own way. I don’t think that the era of history changed that.
With life’s difficult survival by immigrants in the 19th century facing poverty, lack of proper medical care and the need to focus on hard work every day to care for sometimes large extended family, there was little time to grieve.
I felt it was different then as a lot of people suffered their grief in private and alone. Thankfully today we are more open and understanding of the process.
Death of someone close is ALWAYS hard, now and then. Welcoming death? Not so sure about that, although at 82 and still physically and mentally independent, I realize that my attitude toward death is definitely not the same as when I was younger. Still happy to be okay now!!