Jeeves - Gay?
Soulpatch6
>Is Jeeves gay?
Sorry to disapoint laddie, but not on your Nelly.
I suppose it would of been a perfect set up in some sort of young master male
domination thing.
However Jeeves actually weeds out the bitches & shows Bertie how to get more
tail for less money.
(As in "What ho, Hoe!" & "A Spot of G, Jeeves")
Actually, you may wonder what Jeeves motivation is.
No, he really isn't interested in the tasty young master.
It's just that, Gentelmen's personal Gentelmen were not usually kept on,
once the employer got married, & Old Jeeves must of liked being in Wooster's
employ as he was a generous sort.
De
Soulpatch
}:0)>
Samara Weiss
I say! There are ladies present - not to mention the gentlemen, and the
innocent youth - and this is a bit over the top. I'm sure the smoking room of
your club is happy to hear it, but in these gentle fields, the glasses rattle
and the souls are harrowed.
-Gladys
Ian
*remove
>Hi,
>Is Jeeves gay?
Jeeves would be guilty of flaunting the laws of his guild were he to indulge
in gaiety or some similar expression of mirth while on the job. As you may
know, if you've taken the trouble of reading the books, he sometimes raised
his eyebrow the allowed sixteenth of an inch and there he checked himself.
So most definitely, Jeeves, as we know him, was a credit to his guild. He
was all profession and sheer efficiency.
I hope this addresses your question adequately. And if there is nothing more,
I'll take your leave now with the hope that this wasn't an attempt at starting
a flame war on AFW but rather a naive query. More to be pitied than censured,
don't you know. There are other infinitely more interesting topics related to
Wodehouse that one could write essays on.
pip-pip,
Gussie
Bianchi
Ian, dear boy, why are you writing aan essay on the Wodehouse booo\ks if you
haaven't read them and don't have your own opinion? No, Jeeves is NOT gay. He
has many girlfriends. Bertie is not gay. They do not have a homosexual
relationship. They like girls. Lady Constance and she means it to sting.
Hi,
Is Jeeves gay? It's just I've an essay to write on some PG Wodehouse books,
someone mentioned that Jeeves was gay - I didn't think so, but then I read
that Bertie didn't know that "Jeeves was such an authority," on dresses.
A quick reply would be appreciated,
Thanks
Ian
"..Greetings from Blandings on the Bayooo.."
Joann Zimmerman
anne.b...@att.net wrote:
> "Ian" <ian_...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > Is Jeeves gay? It's just I've an essay to write on some PG Wodehouse books,
> > someone mentioned that Jeeves was gay - I didn't think so, but then I read
> >that Bertie didn't know that "Jeeves was such an authority," on dresses.
> >Ian, dear boy, why are you writing aan essay on the Wodehouse booo\ks if you
> >haaven't read them and don't have your own opinion? No, Jeeves is NOT gay. He
> >has many girlfriends. Bertie is not gay. They do not have a homosexual
> >relationship. They like girls. Lady Constance and she means it to sting.
Perhaps the confusion arises from the all-too-well-known orientation of
Stephen Fry, who played Jeeves in the "Jeeves and Wooster" series on
TV? It would seem that it is time for a quick lesson on role-playing.
i.e., the actor and the role are not twinned beings.
Honoria Glossop, Totleigh-in-the-Stacks
--
"I never understood people who don't have
bookshelves." --George Plimpton
Joann Zimmerman jz...@bellereti.com
Ian
doubt your own opinions have led to this in the past) by making wrongful
predictions I thought I that I could gather some information from this
newsgroup.
I also believe this newsgroup is designed for exchanging info on PG's
books - that that was the point in my message. Do Not Go Off The Rails.....
Ian
Ian
English I have to write an essay on a book of my choice. I like humour so I
decided that PGW would be a good choice - and indeed it was. I didn't think
that any book could make me laugh - but PG's writing has certainally
shattered my idea.
I am only 16 and I have only read 3 PGW books.
I do not know who this AFW person is, so I could not make any comment about
him/her/it.
Please be more light hearted though. A couple of the message I have read
seem to me to have come from the narrow minded people that PGW was
satirising, or whatever the word I am looking for is. Reading is meant to
be for everyone, and it is annoying to see such messages as "Why are you
writing an essay on the Wodehouse books if you haven't read them?" when I
have read enough to write an essay. Surely I should be entitled to a
comment even though I have not read as many books as others. I just hope
the next comment will not be "No you can't have any books. They're all
mine. I know the most about PGW, and therfore I am the best."
0906 2517517
I hope I haven't offended anyone, and I hope many can appriciate what I am
saying,
Thank you
Ian
PS. That last comment was aimed at Bianchi,
the type of person who seems to take a light hearted topic (ie PGW) and
makes it into a dull un-entertaining whats-it-called.
:-)
Ian
Frank R.A.J. Maloney
Well, young Ian, if you want to really snooter your critics, ask why Jeeves
belongs to the Junior Ganymede Club. If you don't recognize the reference, do a
little research in Greek mythology on Ganymede the Cupbearer (not the Jovian
moon).
Not that I'm endorsing any implications, just encouraging you to be a gadfly.
Some of the county crowd do get a little set in their ways and could use the
exercise.
But AFW, young Ian, is not a person but the newsgroup you posted your query to,
viz., alt.fan.wodehouse.
Mortimer Rackstraw, the Great Boloni
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Frank Richard Aloysius Jude Maloney
http://members.aol.com/frajm/
"All over the room throats were being strained and minds broadened."
-- P. G. Wodehouse, Piccadilly Jim
Ken Cashion
<snip of adult logic>
> I just hope
>the next comment will not be "No you can't have any books. They're all
>mine. I know the most about PGW, and therfore I am the best."
No, you can't have any books. They're all mine. I know the
most about PGW, and therefore, I am the best.
;-)
>I hope I haven't offended anyone, and I hope many can appriciate what I am
>saying,
Ian, I am having trouble with a student in a college course
and if the student takes my next course, I will put a sign on the wall
-- "If you make people think they are thinking, they will love you --
if you really make them think, they will hate you."
There is a ton of pretension and affectation in/on the group
and that is what makes it all so much fun -- but don't worry about
this stuff. Virtual slings and arrows are easier to bear than the real
kind.
The male/male relationships in 1920s England would certainly
be a fit topic for your discussion and essay, and I encourage you to
pursue it..
Cheers -- Ken Cashion
--------------------------------------------------------------
Frank R.A.J. Maloney
[deletions]
> The male/male relationships in 1920s England would certainly
>be a fit topic for your discussion and essay, and I encourage you to
>pursue it..
To say nothing of all those lifelong bachelors.
emmeline
young Rackstraw. Hit 'em on the soft underbelly with intense
academic/literary research into piddling details. You'll have those teacher
types rolling in the aisles howling for more. Works every time.
Emmeline, former student
Frank R.A.J. Maloney <fr...@aol.comnojunk> wrote in message
news:20000228135642...@ng-bh1.aol.com...
emmeline
which is what the dog does every time she gets excited.
emmeline <davisr...@home.com> wrote in message
news:coBu4.19969$hT2....@news1.rdc1.ct.home.com...
Bianchi
dear Ian, Now, now, perhaps I owe you an apology of sorts. This subject comes up
every now and then and since I have heard this question put forth several times,
I find it tedious. However, I am very happy that you are reading Wodehouse
books and enjoying them enough to want to write an essay on them. This shows a
superior intelligence and appreciation of good literature that is very
gratifying in a sixteen year old. or anyone of any age for that matter. So,
let's not jump to conclusions on either side (and yes I have made a fool of
myself in the past and will probably do so in the future, but that is life) and
perhaps find lots of things to think and discuss in Wodehouse. Lady Constance
Ian
The Mixer
>
> slight change: That was supposed to be "niddling detail," not "piddling,"
> which is what the dog does every time she gets excited.
>
> emmeline <davisr...@home.com> wrote in message
Sorry to be niddling, or even piddling, but shouldn't that be niggling?
The Mixer, puddled and befuddled, but wishing he was being cuddled.
emmeline
this millier without a lot of pesky interferoning hoity polloi jumping all
over her Ann Mass?
befuddled but not untainted,
Aunt Emmeline Malaprop (named for the Worchester branch of the family)
Deverill
The Mixer <ian_m...@bc.sympatico.ca> wrote in message
news:38BB1494...@bc.sympatico.ca...
William F. Deeck
adjective? Doesn't it mean insignificant or trivial?
Constable Eustace Oates
emmeline <davisr...@home.com> wrote in message
news:nqBu4.19970$hT2....@news1.rdc1.ct.home.com...
Bonzo
>Thanks to everyone for their help. I am not the greatest of readers, but in
>English I have to write an essay on a book of my choice. I like humour so I
>decided that PGW would be a good choice - and indeed it was. I didn't think
>that any book could make me laugh - but PG's writing has certainally
>shattered my idea.
>
>I am only 16 and I have only read 3 PGW books.
I say, Ian, young bird,
I fear you stuck your oar into some murky waters; nothing raises the
hackles of some of the chaps and gels more than the mention of the
dreaded h-word. Those who have been here for more than a few years
will recall the tempestuous brou-ha arising from a suggestion that
there might be a homosexual subtext in the Jeeves and Wooster
relationship. The poor sap who asked the question was bombarded for
several weeks with everything ranging from good-humored bread rolls to
downright nasty vituperation. The latter proved that not everyone in
this jolly band on a.f.w. awakes each morn with a song on his or her
lips and good will towards all the world. But there are always a few
swine amongst the pearls, what?
What it all really comes down to at the end of the day is that it
really doesn't matter whether one reads deeper meaning into the Jeeves
and Wooster relationship. If that amuses or entertains some, so be it.
The stories and novels stand on their own merits without the
implication of subtexts. Wodehouse himself was certainly of the
heterosexual persuasion, and as a product of Victorian and Edwardian
times was too much a gentleman to get very steamy about sex of any
kind; "cover her upturned face with burning kisses" is about as
hotsy-totsy as Plum allowed himself to go. I think the innocence, if
you will, of his work is one of its aspects which appeal to modern
readers who have been bludgeoned over the head with sex and gore from
various media since the 1960's. Wodehouse is a pleasant oasis in a
world which has become ugly and dangerous. The good cheer and happy
endings in Wodehouse are in stark contrast to modern grittiness and
vulgarity.
I was delighted to know that a 16-year-old is reading Wodehouse. I
hope the three books you have read thus far will encourage you to
continue further. The world of Wodehouse is a welcome and much-needed
respite from the blighted times in which we live.
Good luck and don't be afraid to ask questions about anything, despite
the occasional brickbat tossed your way for doing so. Those who
dislike questions are usually afraid of the answers.
Pip-pip,
Bonzo (who was born way too late in the 20th Century for his own good)
Soulpatch6
Oh Yes, The Lezbonic angle is even less present in the master's work, No?
>not to mention the gentlemen,
Ladies & Gentelman(?)
Who/What else reads this? (stringvestites?)
>innocent youth -
( damn randy, if you ask me!)
>and this is a bit over the top.
Yas, the whole question was a bit O.T.T.,
so I'm glad my subtleties were not lost on you....
>I'm sure the smoking room of
>your club is happy to hear it, but in these gentle fields, the glasses rattle
>and the souls are harrowed.
> -Gladys
Rather well put;Your own?
}:0)>
P.S.
This is the nicest group of Posters on the net.
I quote Kirsten Thompson's introduction to
"WOOSTER PROPOSES, JEEVES DISPOSES" (or Le Mot Juste);
"Either a love of P.G. Wodehouse's work tends to make people kind, or kind
people tend to love Wodehouse, or perhaps these traits reinforce each other."
Either way, tis' applicable.
Rick Rashid
>What it all really comes down to at the end of the day is that it
>really doesn't matter whether one reads deeper meaning into the Jeeves
>and Wooster relationship. If that amuses or entertains some, so be it.
>The stories and novels stand on their own merits without the
>implication of subtexts.
Well said. Plum's works are fairly elastic in that regard. You can enjoy
them because of the masterful use of the English language, or because of the
complex plot twists. You will find young Ian, as time goes on and you read
and re-read these books that the plot, through familiarity, becomes
secondary to Plum's linguistic brilliance. That may be why some long term
PGW fans resent newcomers trying to read subtle implications into Plum's
stories.
Merolchazzar, King of Oom
beach_th...@hotmail.com
> I have read Wodehouse books, but rather than making a fool of myself
> (no doubt your own opinions have led to this in the past) by making
> wrongful predictions I thought I that I could gather some information
> from this newsgroup.
>
> I also believe this newsgroup is designed for exchanging info on PG's
> books - that that was the point in my message.
Ahem,
I'm afraid it is here that the young master misunderstood. AFW
(alt.fan.Wodehouse) is much more of a collecting place for those who
admire the works of Wodehouse rather than a scholarly Senior Common Room
for the dry discussion of academic matters arising from the works.
I am also sure that, had the young gentleman picked on any other topic,
the response here would have been a hearty welcome. Unfortunately we
have had many queries along the same lines, some from people who seem
unwilling to believe that the stock answer (Bertie and Jeeves are both
depicted in the books as falling in love with women) actually meets the
case. They keep returning and pointing out that Jeeves and Bertie share
living space, and Jeeves is responsible for keeping the young master
free of entanglements.
This does not, however, imply a sexual (fulfilled or otherwise)
relationship between the two. Sometimes - as even Freud was forced to
admit - a cigar is just a cigar.
Beach. The Butler's Pantry, Blandings Castle.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Ken Cashion
Maloney) wrote:
>kcas...@datasync.com (Ken Cashion) wrote:
>
>[deletions]
>
>> The male/male relationships in 1920s England would certainly
>>be a fit topic for your discussion and essay, and I encourage you to
>>pursue it..
>
>To say nothing of all those lifelong bachelors.
It is interesting to think about any number of works of
fiction, or nearly so, from the Victorian period when commercial
popular fiction really hit its stride in England.
There were the general absence of women and yet the men were
having a great sporting time anyway.
Those who wrote a generation later had been trained by these
Victorian scholars and shaped by reading such manly writings.
I remember the Jerome statement that it took three girls to
tow a boat -- two to pull the rope and one to run around in circles
giggling.
And I remember that there are photos of Jerome and friends of
both genders, and the women were generally not identified -- in one
case, there was a debate as to what Jerome's wife looked like -- and
this was after he was a success.
Someone wrote that during those days that 'women were pretty,
flighty little things and occasionally nice to have around, but when
it came to the real business of life -- well...that took a man.'
I do not know if this was a writing affectation or a literal
reflection of the attitude of the day, yet, I still see this in some
activities where there are no ladies present.
Bianchi
Greetingsd from Blandings on the Bayou: I'm sure that dear Bonzo is not
referring to Lady constance as a swine among pearls. i offered Young Ian an
apology. I probably add insult to injury by saying that if i had realized you
were 16, Ian, I would have just congratualated you on reading Wodehouse and
wished you good luck. This is a young man is not afraid to ask questions and
Lady C is not afraid to answer them. Lady constance
this jolly band on a.f.w. awakes each morn with a song on his or her
lips and good will towards all the world. But there are always a few
swine amongst the pearls, what?
I was delighted to know that a 16-year-old is reading Wodehouse. I
hope the three books you have read thus far will encourage you to
continue further. The world of Wodehouse is a welcome and much-needed
respite from the blighted times in which we live.
Good luck and don't be afraid to ask questions about anything, despite
the occasional brickbat tossed your way for doing so. Those who
dislike questions are usually afraid of the answers.
Pip-pip,
Bonzo (who was born way too late in the 20th Century for his own good)
braxor
fr...@aol.comnojunk (Frank R.A.J. Maloney) wrote:
>
> >Thanks to everyone for their help. I am not the greatest of
readers, but in
> >English I have to write an essay on a book of my choice. I like
humour so I
> >decided that PGW would be a good choice - and indeed it was. I
didn't think
> >that any book could make me laugh - but PG's writing has certainally
> >shattered my idea.
> >
> >I am only 16 and I have only read 3 PGW books.
> >
comment about
> >him/her/it.
> >
> >Please be more light hearted though. A couple of the message I have
read
> >seem to me to have come from the narrow minded people that PGW was
> >satirising, or whatever the word I am looking for is. Reading is
meant to
> >be for everyone, and it is annoying to see such messages as "Why are
you
> >writing an essay on the Wodehouse books if you haven't read them?"
when I
> >have read enough to write an essay. Surely I should be entitled to a
hope
> >the next comment will not be "No you can't have any books. They're
all
> >mine. I know the most about PGW, and therfore I am the best."
> >
> >I hope I haven't offended anyone, and I hope many can appriciate
what I am
> >saying,
> >
> >Ian
> >
> >PS. That last comment was aimed at Bianchi,
> >the type of person who seems to take a light hearted topic (ie PGW)
and
> >makes it into a dull un-entertaining whats-it-called.
> >
> >:-)
> >Ian
> >
>
Jeeves
> belongs to the Junior Ganymede Club. If you don't recognize the
reference, do a
> little research in Greek mythology on Ganymede the Cupbearer (not the
Jovian
> moon).
>
gadfly.
> Some of the county crowd do get a little set in their ways and could
use the
> exercise.
>
> But AFW, young Ian, is not a person but the newsgroup you posted your
query to,
> viz., alt.fan.wodehouse.
>
> Mortimer Rackstraw, the Great Boloni
>
> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>
> http://members.aol.com/frajm/
> "All over the room throats were being strained and minds broadened."
> -- P. G. Wodehouse, Piccadilly Jim
>
I believe Juvenal wrote about the Romans using the Ganymede statue as
a "meeting" place.I am NOT trying to imply a link between that and
PGW.Just adding to your idea of researching, to include Roman history
It has been made a little too easy ,In todays world,to imply that two
men are more than friends. (e.g.Batman and Robin)
A quote from a Kenneth Grahame book:
"But you know, dear, how much I care about you ; and I did hope that
on that account even a prejudice, however unreasonable, might have some
little weight."
Look at history, people have given weight to some really dumb ideas.
No matter how unreasonable.
braxor
Janneman
To say nothing of all those lifelong bachelors.
Dear Sir!
I must strongly protest your implication in this matter. I am a
bachelor and desperately clinging to this state. This is not the
result of any preference other then my unwillingness to be molded,
shaped or made into something. Being a bachelor, I knew where my socks
are in the morning, know what I will find in my lunch box in the
afternoon and know where my furniture is when I return to my rooms in
the evening.
Yours truly, Jan Kusters
http://www.geocities.com/janneman_nl
OEOEK (OOOOK in translation)
ps: Still working on my refitting