After Jock's drunken attack, D fires Beryl. Do you understand his decision? Do you feel it's fair that Beryl was being judged so harshly for the incident?

After Jock's drunken attack, D fires Beryl and sends her away. Do you understand his decision? Despite all the philandering and indulgent behaviors of the community, do you feel it's fair that Beryl was being judged so harshly for the incident?

D was acting in accordance to the mores of the day. Although Beryl was innocent, it was scandalous and D didn't want the scandal on his doorstep. No, it wasn't fair to Beryl as she wasn't at fault.

Beryl got the short end of that deal for sure. It was a cowardly and selfish move on D's part. Beryl was trying to get a divorce, that was no secret. D could have stood by his friend. She looked up to him as a father figure. He, however cared more for his reputation than her. Yet one more person who let her down. It's amazing she survived at all!

Gosh this was a complicated situation in the book. I think D might have had ulterior motives here, trying to act for not only his safety and his staff's but also ultimately Beryl's safety. If Jock had come to the point that he has violent, who is to say he wouldn't attack Beryl on the street one night? Is it possible that D was trying to push her away to get her out of danger for a short time? I'm not sure but I did wonder about it.

Beryl was immature enough to believe that because D let her work for him doing a man's job and because she was visible in her community doing so, she would be able to enjoy the privileges of men. Yes, I understand his decision.

I thought it was a harsh decision on D's part. Jock's behavior was in no way Beryl's fault and she should not have been judged for it. However, I think from a personal safety standpoint, after being attacked by Jock, perhaps it was the only choice D could see to distance himself from future engagements with Jock if Beryl was still on his premises.

Very hard for me to understand how society would allow Jock to get away with that -- and why Beryl was blamed. I should probably re-read Beryl's book -- maybe she offered more details that I don't remember!

While I understand why D behaved the way he did, which was exactly the he was expected to behave by society during that time period, I do not think it was fair to Beryl. It was a sad time for Beryl because she really did care about D and their friendship. It was just one more time that Beryl was let down by a man.

No, it wasn't fair but not much was fair to women at that time. The sad part was that D was willing to break society's rules when he was making money but not during the hard times.

Maybe it wasn't fair by today's standards, since the attack wasn't Beryl's fault, but by the standards of that time and place, D would have felt he had no choice. D also may have been rightly concerned for his own safety and by firing Beryl, he was protecting himself.

It is a great representation of how society's views and the desire to not be the brunt of jokes and gossip could override the loyalty of caring for a girl that he had been as close to his as family. it is a sad and heartbreaking example of the use of women in the early 1900's among the British aristocracy. What is astounding is taht this was not the 1600's but early to mid-1900. Not that long ago.

It was so unfair. D seemed more concerned with his reputation than caring about Beryl. Jock was at fault and blame should have been on him, not Beryl. I was very disappointed at D for the way he treated Beryl.

I agree with Rebecca L. I thought it was as much for Beryl's safety as his own.