1. "A Kind Lizzie"
Posted by haulover on Apr-7th-03 at 9:21 PM

i recently re-read radin.  in the discussions we've had about "who lizzie really was" or "what she was like" the following is interesting.  radin interviewed several people who had personal memories of her.  you can only take his word for it or not -- he is his own source.  this is what radin was told by the head clerk in the office of the superior court in taunton.  i do notice that first-hand observations of lizzie having altercations with abby are lacking, while lizzie the humanitarian seems to have had more witnesses.  those who haven't read this might be interested.

mrs. estella margarido tells radin this story:

"Well, I know something about her," she said unexpectedly.  "When I was a little girl I went to the Hornbine School.  It was a one-room schoolhouse at the edge of Swansea.  There was a boy attending the school who you might say was feeble-minded.  He never learned anything, but he sat quietly and it was a way of keeping him out of mischief.  Every year on the day school opened, a large black car, with a woman in back and a chauffeur in front, would pull up to the school and the boy would run to the car.  The woman always had some presents for him:  clothes, some simple toys that could keep him amused, and some pocket money.  This went on year after year while I was attending the school.  The woman was Lizzie Borden.  The boy lived on a farm not far from her place in Swansea."

She paused and looked out of a window at the busy stream of traffic beyond the courthouse square.  "You know," she said softly, almost as if speaking to herself, "they say so many terrible things about Lizzie Borden.  I saw those gifts and I realized how much care and thought went into selecting them to make certain they would be appropriate for a boy like that.  I have never believed she could be as bad as they say."

there are several other examples.  i don't presume that a humanitarian could not have committed those murders, but such accounts do raise questions about the legendary lizzie who murdered out of hatred, greed, and selfishness.

Thank you for that, haulover.  I haven't read Radin.

I have several theories/observations re Lizzie that I'm working on.  I don't believe she is "guiltless" in the murders.  However, I also don't believe she was the monster many make her out to be either. 

I'm a student of human nature.  One thing I strongly believe is that there was far more involved than "hatred, greed & selfishness".  These things do not exist in a vacuum.  People who raise children with love, honesty & integrity do not get murdered by them a few decades later.

It could be one of those apocryphal tales, of course.

Maybe Lizzie was making up for her father's perceived lack of love and attention by giving this boy so much, a boy she was not related to. Perhaps this boy's father was similar to hers and she was protecting him somehow.

That the family allowed her to help out their son is most telling, I think. If she was as shunned as reported in other sources, nobody would let their kids near her.

He must have been the safest kid in school. You mess with him or call him names and you've got Lizzie Borden to answer to!!

I remember an old discussion of this.  There would be a topic here on this somewhere.
I'll not go looking only because those who might be interested can check.

I remember thinking why Lizzie did that in front of the other children?
If she knew the boy she could deliver his presents at his home.
I think the other children would feel badly or left out, for such a fuss to be made of one of their number.  Not all the children would see an act of charity,  which was rather at the expense of the rest, in such a gracious light.
I think this tells a bit about the character of the woman who had the memory.
It is my feeling that possibly Lizzie was acting out of kindness and concern, but that she did enjoy the audience, and did not know that the feelings of the others might be hurt.  That leaves still a Lizzie who was not really considerate.

I interpret this story as being kind to another relative (Andy's illegitimate child?). Makes more sense that way?

Unless we know of any relationship, we can't say this is altruism. Why this child out of all the others?

I remember talking about this too -- I think it was in
the Privy last year. Doesn't it seem like that would
make a child an outcast? Being singled out for gifts
and attention? That seems like it would get someone
beat up on the playground.

that's a good point, which brings us back to the psychology of lizzie borden.  i suppose this kid might have been someone she was aware of through some organization she belonged to.  it might have been easier for her to deliver at the school as opposed to the home.  he was probably picked out for being unfortunate in some particular way -- mental retardation, poverty.

i have gotten the sense that lizzie liked to "deliver" kind acts.  to alleviate her crime?  or was this just her nature?  i'm not usually one to take up for lizzie, but didn't she do this kind of thing before the murders?  teaching sunday school for a chinese group of people?  working in that "fruit and flower" mission? 

when we were talking astrology, i was struck by what looked like a sure and certain sign of humanitarianism in her.  then i saw how the hateful mars afflicted it.  the astrological evidence is exactly like the other evidence.

I'm not sure how long Lizzie dedicated herself to the Church or Mission sponsered acts of public charity.
I was under the impression that she probably joined to get her social legs, to meet her equals in a social setting, finally, and to also see her name on those organizational rosters.
Andrew had his name on Boards...this was her woman's outlet to compete with that, get her name on Boards which were acceptable for women.
I actually see her in competition with the *old man*.
There would then be a self-centered reason for doing what she did.  Self-aggrandizement.
When you say Mars Afflicted, can that mean that her intensions may start out good but the result can be self-centered, after all?
Like having the urge toward humanitarian acts but it getting twisted in a way which would reflect ulterior motives?

"It is better to give than to receive."
This is 1000% true, because you can usually do this if you are much better off than the receiver. Or are very secure in your life.

Was this saying invented by Joe Lewis?

to your astrology question, i would say this is like actions to one's own detriment.  so your way of putting it is close.  difficult for her to do things that benefit herself.  like she is her own enemy when she asserts herself.  or she has to sacrifice a lot to get what she wants.

i think you're referring to a common habit of the rich.  i've seen it often enough.  they like to invest in "charitable causes" to "show" their goodness.  it makes them feel better about themselves, and therein lies the motive.  i've seen them do things for people, and it's like they are as sincere as they can be, but they can't be completely -- a part of them is looking at this unfortunate like it's some pitiful alien creature they can scarcely imagine.

but i don't rule out that lizzie had a genuine humanitarian instinct. there are certainly more accounts of it -- than accounts of fights with abby, for example.  there's practically no evidence of this murderous hatred she had for abby.  yet so many more accounts of the kind lizzie.  you would think it would be the other way around.

some more from radin:

"The son of a house painter, whose services were used by Lizzie for many years, quoted his father as saying that Lizzie always supplied his workmen with cold drinks, and if the weather was exceptionally hot, she would ask that they stop work until it became cooler and would pay the bill for their full time.  Neighborhood boys, contrary to the legend, found her an easy mark; she always bought church raffle tickets and other things from them."

That qoute from Radin somehow doesn't impress me.
Sounds like a human being treating others like human beings.  I would hope that was no exception.

I give my neighbor's lawn guys my whole jug of lemonaide if it's August and steamy.

A "cold drink" is not necessarily lemonade. Aside from being in the WCTU, a cold pitcher of brew would be more appreciated, but may require the men to be sent home early.

I don't drink *brew* but I did drink lemonade.
I had just made Myself a new batch yet gave it to the neighbor's lawn guys.  Gave the youngest one a book, too.

Giving when you don't have much is more charitable and philanthropic than giving when it's no inconvenience to you.
That's why Lizzie's supposed *acts of kindness* with her murdered father's money doesn't quite impress me.

okay, okay.  i was trying to give a charitable lizzie a chance.

i'm a good bit better to my yard people as well.  i give them periodic raises without their asking, and sometimes bonuses.  which is basically self-serving, because i know i'll get better service that way and they're less likely to try to cheat me.  i guess it's a decision about how to do business.

do you think one of the reasons we are sometimes tempted to find her innocent is because we just find it so hard to believe that she could do that -- and then come into a fortune and have everything she wants and carry on and enjoy life as though she's innocent?  i'm reminded from something from the movie, "the talented mr ripley."  the character says, in reference to a murder, "i mean, how do you just get up and have your coffee? you've murdered someone."  ripley replies that no one thinks of himself as a bad person and you just bury it all in the basement.  is that what she did?

we think, how could she have been so naive as to think that she could do that and get away with it?   yet if she's guilty, that's exactly what she did.  a part of us resists believing it -- even though we know that criminals do often succeed.

I think if Lizzie were on the periphery of the crime, she very well could act as she did and not have much remorse. 
I think it has to do with her degree of culpability.
Whether HER standard is different than ours is really what we are seeking.

if she knows that she herself did not swing the axe, that might be sufficient for her to believe in her innocence -- irregardless of what else she knows.  if she did swing the axe, god only knows where she's coming from.

where her standards are different from ours, i think is to be found in her position of wealth and leisure.  as you said earlier, her acts of kindness are not sacrifices. in fact, they are more like privileges.  and as i said, the rich do these things to feel better about themselves.  actually, lizzie appears to be a social climber; often these people feel the need to publicly cultivate a magnanimous "image."  oftentimes it seems to be out of a feeling of guilt.  like the hollywood crowd with their speeches at awards shows and their wearing ribbons or whatever -- they seem compelled to do it as though something were knawing at their conscience. 

as for my own behavior -- it feels good to be nice.  it seems best for all concerned.  i don't carry psychological baggage about it.

if only we had more information about the real lizzie borden.  one thing i was thinking about was this:  how much does the real lizzie borden have to do with the legend of lizzie borden?  it seems this is someone we just don't know.  but the legend is so seductive it's hard to get around.  could she have possibly conceived of her legacy as the icon of parricide? 

You delve deeply and ask interesting questions as to Lizzie's true character.
I'll be glad to help find "good Lizzie" sources.
I don't see why we can't collect the articles and remberances of a decent view of Lizzie.
A lot of people are sick of her so-negative characterizations..

i have had two people i consider to be very wise tell me, and i quote:  "you never really know anybody."  monsters are known as wonderful people, and conversely, innocents are hated and condemned.

From the Privy:

A partial reproduction of this article appears in Rebello's Past and Present, pg. 229.  Here is it in it's (probable) entirety, from The Lizzie Borden Sourcebook, David Kent, pgs. 14 & 15:  (Read at your own risk...)

"THE BOSTON HERALD

LIZZIE BORDEN

Her School and Later Life - A Noble Woman, Though Retiring

Fall River,  Aug. 6.- It is the men who have, since the murder, been accorded the space to talk to Lizzie A. Borden, the younger daughter, during the past few days.

It is the gentlemen with whom she was acquainted who have given her character and her personality to the world since the public cared to know about her.

None of her lady friends, the women who knew her, with whom she grew up, those with whom she has been associated day by day and year by year, have yet presented their Lizzie Borden.

A woman's opinion of a woman is a consideration Lizzie Borden has not yet been allowed.

Desiring to present this young woman as her friends have known her, to picture her as she daily appeared among women, the writer spent the greater part of the afternoon and evening in conversation with Lizzie's friends.

They talked of her life, of her inclinations, her interest in church work, her modesty of manner, unswerving sincerity, gentle forbearance and aspirations to be and to do all that is best and right in life.

From the consensus of opinion it can well be said:  In Lizzie Borden's life there is not one unmaidenly nor a single deliberately unkind act.

Lizzie Borden's life is full of good works, kindly offices in the church and in the society of her friends.

As Lizzie Borden appeared today, as she was stepping into the carriage to follow her parents remains to the cementery, to the writer, who had never seen her before, it seemed as if she was well-deserving of the ecomiums of her friends and of the kind words which follow.

She makes an exceedingly favorable impression and her dignity and her reserve are at once impressed.

It was a trying ordeal to pass before the eyes of a crowd of 1500 morbidly curious spectators.

She wore a tight fitting black lace dress with a plain skirt and waist of equally modest cut and finish, while a dark hat, trimmed with similar material, rested upon her head.

Of medium height, she is possessed of a symmetrical figure with a retiring manner and a carriage which would dignifedly repel the attention
HER PERSONAL CHARMS
might attract.

A wealth of black hair is revealed under the hat which, arranged on top of her head, is trained about her forehead in short curls, parted in the centre and thrown over to the sides.

Her dark, lustrous eyes, ordinarily flashing, were dimmed, and her pale face was evidence of the physical suffering she was undergoing and had experienced.

To sum up, Miss Lizzie Borden, without a word from herself in her own defence, is a strong argument in her own favor.

Although over 30 years old, it cannot be said that she looks it.

In contradistinction from her sister, she looks as much as six years younger than she is as Emma L. Borden looks as many years older than she is.

Lizzie was born in the old family homestead on Ferry street, in which her father has lived and his father before him.

It is the same estate which the dead Andrew J. Borden deeded to the two girls in 1887.

As a child she was of a very sensitive nature, inclined to be non-communicative with new acquaintances, and this characteristic has tenaciously clung to her all through life, and has been erroneously interpreted.

Her sister, being older, was a constant guide and an idolized companion.

An unusual circumstance is that of her practically having no choice of friends until she attained womanhood.

At the usual age she was sent to the Morgan street school, embracing primary and grammer grades.

Her school days were perhaps unlike most girls in this lack of affiliation with her fellow pupils.

As a scholar she was not remarkable for brilliancy, but she was conscientious in her studies and with application always held a good rank in her class.

She entered the high school when about 15 or 16 years old.  It was then held in a wooden building on the corner of June and Locust sts., which was removed when the present mammoth structure was presented to the city.

Her life was uneventful during the few years following her leaving school.  She abandoned her piano music lessons because, although making encouraging progress, she conceived the idea that she was not destined to become a good musician.

If she could not excel in this accomplishment she did not wish to persue the study, and so her friends heard her play thereafter but little.

Her father and mother were religious and regular church attendants, and she has been surrounded by
CHRISTIAN HOME INFLUENCES.

When a young girl, she accompanied her parents to Chicago, and was there a member of the Sunday school class and punctual in attendance.

She was, however, a girl with anything but an enthusiastic idea of her own personal attainments.

She thought people were not favorably disposed toward her and that she made a poor impression.

This conduced to the acceptance of this very opinion among church people, and consequently the young woman was to some extent avoided by the young women of the church.

There was a remarkable change in her some five years ago and at that time she first began to fraternize with church people.

Then, of course, when she was thoroughly understood, when the obnoxiously retiring manner was dissipated and the responsive nature of the girl came to view, she became at once popular and then came the acquisition of the friends who today sound her praises."

Could it be our Lizzie was painfully shy?  Could this obnoxiously retiring manner be the basis for the 'Lizzie is odd' talk.  Like when there were visitors at the Borden house that she would pretend weren't there, so shy she couldn't even acknowledge them?  Hmmmm. 

And all that black hair and dark eyes?  Who were they looking at, Emma or Lizzie?  I know, I know, I read at my own risk and questions arise. 

I don't know.  I look at this and think there could be reasons why Lizzie had no friends of her own age.
Maybe even then, she longed to associate with higher society girls?
Like Diana, Princess of Wales, if you believe that quote, that Diana always felt she was *saving herself* for something bigger, greater.
Or maybe Lizzie had some affliction, and was not like everyone else and felt shunned, therefore She shunned first?

An afflication to a young lady could be  even acne or a bad complexion, especially if Lizzie was always aware of her impact on people and how she looked and sounded and carried herself, as it states in her astrological workup in the Personology book.

Maybe, growing up in Ferry Street with everyone older except cousin George who died, Lizzie didn't feel comfortable with girls her own age, and maybe also, Emma had an influence over that?

Kat, I don't remember who posted it, perhaps even you, but, it was an article about Lizzie when she was a girl at school.  She was portrayed as chunky and had a sarcastic tongue.  Do you think she was ridiculed before in the past, possibly for being a Borden and living where she did?  The sarcasm sounds to me like a protective device, but, protection from what?

Perhaps she was ashamed of where she lived?  And what of her friend, Isobel, that the matron remembers Lizzie playing with as a girl?  I'm sorry, more questions and more questions. 

i guess concerning this i might as well fall back on astrology.  it isn't unusual for a cancer to be extremely shy.  and sensitive in ways that might seem peculiar to some.  or some might use the word "odd."  for example, that bit i've read about her entering a room of company and going about something without acknowledging anyone -- that doesn't surprise me; she'd be in her own world and in a mood. 

(i can understand this personally in an astrological context, having a cancer ascendant with moon conjunct mars right on it.  i've done this same type thing myself.  it has gotten back to me later that someone was offended or didn't know what to think, whereas i had thought nothing of it.) 

also this:  a cancer is probably less inclined than any other sign to "reveal oneself."  it's a personal security issue.  approaching it from this angle, her reticence in her testimony is a bit more understandable -- i mean that in terms of attitude, not facts.  now looking at her whole life, it is not surprising that a cancer would reveal to the public as little as possible, especially considering what happened.  her natural inclination would be to retire into a shell, so to speak.

THE WOONSOCKET CALL--(no date)

"SAYS SHE IS INNOCENT.
________________
A Former Teacher of Lizzie Borden Speaks About Her Case

Mr. Horace Benson, a former Woonsocket boy, and at one time a successful teacher here, who has for some 12 years or more been making his mark in one of the best schools in Fall River, was in this city Saturday and visited his old friends, one of whom was a former teacher, Mr. L. L. Chilson (?).  In speaking of the Borden case to a friend, Mr. Benson said that he knew the family very well and that Lizzie was one of his former pupils.  He said that as a pupil she was an average scholar, neither being exceptionally smart nor noticeably dull.  She was subject to varying moods, and was never fond of her stepmother.  She had no hesitation in talking about her, and in many ways showed her dislike of her father's second wife.

Mr. Benson boarded at the next house but one to the Borden house, and as was his duty, he became acquainted with Mrs. Borden, whom he grew to know as a kindly hearted, lovable woman, who tried, but ineffectually, to win the love of the stepdaughters.  Still the household was far from being an unhappy one.

When asked if he believed that Lizzie committed the murder, he replied quickly and emphatically, 'No, I do not.  It is impossible, and I know the girl and have known her for years.  I believe that she is innocent and that her innocence will soon be established.'

Mr. Benson in his capacity as a teacher and with his wide experience understands, as every successful instructor must, the study of human nature, and the relations that subsist between teacher and pupli are such as to give the former a deeper insight into the character of a child, as it unfolds day by day, than is given to any save the parents, and even in many cases a deeper knowledge than the parents possess.  His belief is shared by hundreds of the other citizens of Fall River, who cannot bring themselves to believe her guilty.  Mr. Benson was warmly greeted by his many friends in this city, who rejoice at his success in his chosen profession."

--From THE LIZZIE BORDEN SOURCEBOOK, David Kent, Branden Publishing Co., Inc., Boston, Mass., 1992, pg.171.
--This undated article is posted to the book after a dated article of August 30.  The year is probably 1892, as the previous reference is to the "Hearing".
-----------------

--The previous expose of Lizzie's youthful character, in that news article of the Boston Herald, was probably the opinion of Mrs. Holmes.
--If we find more pro-Lizzie articles maybe we can get a balance?  (Tho this doesn't sound too *pro-Lizzie*-- More like *pro-Abby* !) 

(Message last edited Apr-17th-03  12:46 AM.)

See the picture of Andy? Note his eyes (remind you of American Indians?). Note the "large jaw" on Lizzie. Could she have been teased about her ancestry? People who are teased a lot may not be outgoing.

Thanks for posting this Kat.  It gives a good overall picture
of Lizzie in her youth, if we believe it but I think safe to
believe bottom line she was a bit different. 
As to the astrological reference Haulover I want to add that
Cancer symbolized by the crab can be studied by watching a
crab move. They never move forward, always side-to-side to get
where they're going.  They don't move fast, but steady and
determined! (The answer Lizzie gave when asked why it took her
so long to eat 2 pears "I don't do things fast" sticks in my mind).

yes, you're right.  indirect but tenacious.

This quoting, probably from Mrs. Holmes, states that "There was a remarkable change in her [Lizzie] some five years ago and at that time she first began to fraternize with church people."

Five years before, Lizzie was given property in her own name.
And stopped calling Abby, "Mother".
Hiram & Laurana moved to Freetown, out of the Ferry Street property.

So at the time Lizzie was beginning to bloom and make friends she had just become a landholder and landlord, and her aunt and uncle may have had to move because of it.

She would finally be asserting herself?
Was all it took to help Lizzie bloom  a piece of property?

Maybe Lizzie went to a regular school -- not one that was
upscale like the other children of Fall River's richest
families & she might have been resented because her family
was rich? Since she lived downtown she would have gone to
school with her neighborhood peers not the ones from the Hill.

(Message last edited Apr-18th-03  12:09 AM.)

i would think the change would have a lot to do with the people she came in contact with at church.  i would say she found a comfortable and rewarding "place" there.  and that she was getting a lot of appreciation and attention she had not been used to.

Boston Herald:
"She thought people were not favorably disposed toward her and that she made a poor impression.

This conduced to the acceptance of this very opinion among church people, and consequently the young woman was to some extent avoided by the young women of the church.**

There was a remarkable change in her some five years ago and at that time she first began to fraternize with church people."

--**This sounds like her old pattern of behavior.  She had joined the church c. 1885.  By 1887 was when she changed, and coincidentally that was the year she got some property.  I just think it's odd, the timing.
If Mrs. Holmes was the source for this article, I don't think she realized the significance implied.  And it just may BE implied, and not the whole story...but....

i see what you mean.  you have it narrowed down.  owning property may have made her feel more important?  more inline among the upper crust?  the status thing.  this is where you have to question her church motives.  a humanitarian or a social climber? or in her mind, the one interchangeable with the other? 

I think some would totally disagree with me.
But I will say, after spending 50 to 60 hours on an original timeline from 1789 to the date Aug. 4th, 1892, and hours on the individual timelines,  it is my opinion that Lizzie did get a boost in her confidence when that property was turned over.  Also she WON.  She won that particular prize.  She may have started on a road to ruin.  That giving up to her that which she did not earn except for bitching about it, by Andrew, she may have seen as a victory, a capitulation.
What follows?
A trip to Europe.
A bigger bedroom.
MORE.

However, it is understood that Lizzie and Emma did not appreciate the gift after all.  That they found being landlords was too much trouble (ask Lorna, our member)...they sold the property back and made a bunch of money!
Lizzie triumphant.  Lizzie still dissatisfied?

i've always thought that her trip to europe opened horizons for her that made her life in that house more unbearable.  that much of it i can understand.  it is very understandable.  she wanted OUT.  you have only to look at what she did when the trial was over to know what she wanted.  she was more open-minded and inquisitive in comparison to how she was raised.  (actually this sounds very familiar.)  willing to commit murder to get it?  that will always be a possibility.  you'd have to really know lizzie to know what she was capable of -- but even then, as i've mentioned -- how can you ever be sure that you totally know anyone?  this is why we try to understand her nature.  was she selfish enough, in the privacy of her hidden self, to actually do this crime?  her record of charity doesn't prove it one way or the other.  another thing i object to is when people talk about how much she loved animals as a sort of proof that she could not have possibly done such a thing.  i say, wrong.  in fact, i am suspicious about it.  i've said this before too, but i speak from personal experience with certain types of people.  someone is lacking in ability to have an intimate relationship with another person (something hateful and resentful is buried there) -- and what happens is that they find an outlet in bestowing love on dumb animals who don't pose a challenge to that nature but dumbly accept it.  there is something seductive about the love of that helpless creature that you could crush -- therefore you love it.  but that person knows who is in control.  i'm not trying to define in general people who love animals.  but what i'm talking about is someone with a limited ability to love, and how they might work that out in practice.  does this make any sense to you?  do you see what i'm getting at?  i think it's close to your speculation about her being narcissistic.  it is very feasible that her attachment to animals is based on a coldness, a hostility about mutual human love.  i do want your opinion on this particular insight.  do you see where i'm coming from?

I think if Lizzie was born later people wouldn't have
been generous enough to call her "odd" and "sarcastic"
she would get called a b*tch. Maybe that was the word
they were trying to come up with & couldn't really say
that word in public. But that is what headstrong, bossy,
self-assured women get called. She doesn't seem like she
was as bad with her friends in her adult life -- but maybe
she was in school?

I could see that use of animals as an outlet for undemanding attention and affection.
I have known a person who was not naturally affectionate bestow love and care on animals.
In fact, I can think of 2 females right now.
They weren't abnormal, as in outcast status, but they were rather cold in personal relationships, and did seem selfish or self-interested, and I knew them both rather well.
I suppose some people are born with a LACK
and some are raised lacking.
In these two cases I think one was both
and the other I will never know why.

I don't know especially that Lizzie *loved* her animals.
She may have found them *interesting*, for all I know.
Someone who feeds squirrels may not necessarrily do so because they Love them, but maybe might do so just as readily because they enjoy being outside and have time on their hands.

That reminds me of the note Lizzie sent to her neighbor, Brayton.
The "Little Bird" note.
She loves birds right?
We've come to *understand* that she feeds the birds.
Yet she writes a note to her neighbor asking him to please remove the *little bird* that makes too much noise as it bothers her and she is nervous.
Maybe she could have turned on that *little bird*?

I think she was one way with her friends and one way with her family.
But sometimes it is just as much the family's fault because they still see the child in the woman, they expext the child behavior, keeping every member frozen in their *assigned* roles, and a person can't break free of that.

Kat:
Wasn't that "little bird" a rooster?
Bill

i see you understand my point about the animals.  i just think in trying to understand who lizzie was, this is something we can't discount.  to think she's too good to commit murder because of a preoccupation with animals is just naive.  some people understand this and some don't.

i've read the note about the bird.  the theory i suggest is not that she truly loved the animals.  if my theory has merit, she was "using" them to fill a void.  she could not successfully use her fellow human beings in this way.  the natural need to give and get affection through pets will work for a totally selfish person.  but it won't get far in human relationships.  i would say such a person is puzzled and/or offended by what is required in intimate human relationships.

your statement that some are born with a LACK -- i agree completely.  having been involved with such people, i know what i'm talking about and have learned to recognize the "moral phenomenon."

i remember an interview i read with truman capote.  apparently he loved his pets and talked about taking care of them and how they were basically good in the sense that they would not make war or build concentration camps.  then he showed his wisdom by adding this statement:  "but i have noticed that many people who seem to love only their pets have a cruel streak within them."

I never knew that.
I couldn't read all of her handwriting.
Why does she call it a little bird?
Is a rooster the only thing that crows?
You'd think Lizzie would be used to that summering at the farm.

Well, if it's a rooster Brayton's lucky it wasn't shot!
By ME!

Thanks, Bill.

OK on those hens; but did they also keep a cow?

I once read that it was the custom in those days to keep chickens around the house as ornamental birds. Particularly Buff Orpingtons, etc. Peacocks may not have wintered well? They would pick out bugs, and fertilized the lawns, etc. Anyone else read about this?

I think this was a test by Andy. To see how well his daughters would do as landladies. Their complaint about repairs eating up the rent shows they couldn't cut it.
Andy would tell them: "Tough about the repairs, just fix it yourself!", or, he would look up plumbers who owed him, and get them to work for nearly free "Either do it, or I'll foreclose on your mortgage!"

That 1963 book 'Trial of LB' edited by G Gross from E Pearson noted that Andy did this to the carpenters whose mortage he held so they would fix up the 92 Second St house as a one-family.

Do you agree?

Actually, you need MONEY or POWER to be called that. I wonder if Bertha Manchester was ever called that?

I think it takes a lot of mean abuse (Pavlovian conditioning) to make a person act like you describe. Also being limited in their experience (because they can't move away!).
...
This contradicts the Legend of Lizzie and Abby's cat! LAB did not mistreat the "little bird". But a chicken is a lot harder to catch than a tame cat!


(Message last edited Apr-21st-03  11:13 AM.)

Hey Kat!

Maybe it was a BANTAM rooster?
Bill

I agree. Very interesting animal concepts though. According to recent posts we now we have the fact Lizzie was kind to her dogs and fed the squirrels as compensation, that she was so mean she was able to kill the Borden's because she really didn't know how to love humans but she was able to love animals because they weren't humans.  I wonder that if she had said on her way out of the barn she through the pear core to the oppossum lurking about the fence that someone would take that to mean she had a guilty conscience.

Animals are often used for therapy. Human societies have programs where dogs are taken to rest homes for the patients to pet, it improves their dispositions greatly. I'm sure not many of the patients were killers just too old to get around and socialize with their peers.

I study sheepherders. Many writers have dwelled on the fact sheepherders were lonely people because they were only with their sheep for months at a time. And being with the sheep rules out being totally alone. Sheepherders were really people who were comfortable with their aloneness.  People are alone for various reasons and animals are not always only a substitution or there because the person doesn't like human company.

Hi All,

I'd like to add a different perspective to possibly understanding Lizzie's psychology.

We live in a time where we know so much more about child development than they did in Lizzie's time. Parenting books are full of theories about raising children in a positive, loving environment, where their needs are respected and their opinions are listened to.

In Lizzie's time, when she was a child, children were expected to behave as small adults. Punitive discipline was the parenting style and children were expected to tow the line. Especially little girls. They were thought inferior to boys in every way and had very little expected of them intellectually or otherwise.

I imagine for Lizzie, losing her bio mom at such a young age and then being placed in the care of a stranger with no parenting experience, must have been very difficult.

It wasn't until a few decades later that children began to be pampered and adored. IMO, Lizzie was a victim of the times she lived in.

People were so repressed in those times. From an early age they were encouraged to keep quiet and not make waves. Maybe a life time of holding it all in proved to be too much for Lizzie. Her society was a difficult one for females of any age. Imagine being young and intelligent, full of energy and life and having to live like she did? Barf- o - rama! 

Anyhoo, that's my two cents.

(Message last edited Apr-21st-03  2:13 PM.)

I truly believe that Lizzie cared for all animals, cats included.
Not that this has anything to do with the fact that she probably killed her Mom and Dad. . .

Robert Stroud, the "Birdman of Alcatraz" committed a double homicide; yet he raised canaries in his cell and wrote books about them.
He was an all-around mean guy, with nothing to recommend him, except his relationship with his birds.

You may think the girls didn't pass the test as landlords holding that Ferry Street property and you may be right.

But, within a year or a bit more, they held ALL the property and even by splitting it in half, when they each died they each had almost the equivalent of the original whole.  They sure learned fast and were doing something right.

Yes, it is rather amazing that they did that.  Do you think Andrew passed on his business smarts to the girls, or possibly, to just Lizzie?  Or, do you think they learned as they went? 

That's a good question.
They did have the benefit of Charles Cook.  Lizzie took advantage of that before she passed back the Ferry Street property. 
Imagine being GIVEN a property and then going to your father's man of business to find out it's worth BEFORe you passed it back!?
It was free!  ANYthing is profit after FREE!

So yes, maybe Andrew taught Lizzie that.
Emma would up with something like $100,000 more than Lizzie but Lizzie lived large.

(Message last edited Apr-21st-03  9:26 PM.)

I've been reading Sylvia Browne's book, Astrology Through A Psychic's Eyes, and thought it might be helpful to post what she says about Cancers, which our Lizzie was.  See if you can find her here with what we know of her.  I have left some of the description out that doesn't have much to do with Lizzie, like children and gardening.

"Physical traits: Tall; large bones; full bodied; round face; cherubic looking; limpid eyes; hesitant in speech.

Emotional traits: Martyred, home-loving, security conscious.

Cancer is a water sign-a maudlin, martyred sign.  Cancer is rreally the sign that carries a cross around, and sure enough, people will hoist them up on it. 

  Cancers are home-loving, protective individuals.  Cancers find parting with money very difficult.  They will be unbelivably frugal in some areas, and absolutely frivolous in others.  They also tend to be immaculate in their grooming, but quite messy in their surroundings.

   Cancers view life almost too mystically and romantically.  No matter how old they get, they really love love.  They love the romance and wine of life.  They must guard against alcohol and drugs, as they can fall into excesses very easily.  They are also painfully shy and often-times demure in affairs of the heart. It does not come easily for them to speak eloquently, but they can write very well.

  Cancers adore animals, and while they lean toward cats and large animals, their love encompasses all living things.  The simple life is best for Cancers.  Too much stress puts a strain on their delicate balance, and their nerves will give out.

  Cancers are very selective, probably one of the most particular signs of the zodiac.  They do not have a massive number of friends during their life.  If they are honest, they will admit to having just one true friend. 

  If Cancers are attached to an organization, they will give endless time and service, far beyond the call of duty, to the group.  They make marvelous employees; in fact, you can give them an impressive title and lower their salary!

  If you ever tell Cancers that they can't do something, they will immediately say, "Why not?" then go right out and do it.  So the one thing not to tell a Cancer is, "I do not think you should...."

  Cancers do have moods, but they have been given a very bad reputation in astrology because although they're prone to moodiness, a Cancer will actually try harder to get out of the mood.  They fight an innate, depressing type of metabolism, so it's a pathological problem.  You'll find them having problems with the thyroid, gall bladder, pancreas, blood sugar, and gland-related areas.

  If you hurt a Cancer, you'll think you've committed a cardinal sin.  When you hurt them, they do not slap back at you.  Instead, they give you a really doe-eyed, "You killed me" look that makes you feel extremely guilty.  It's a classic "Sarah Bernhardt" all the way, and you know that you're the villian.  You've killed them, it's all over, and you've destroyed their life.  You say, "I'm sorry, I'm sorry, I'm sorry."  Then when you ask them what is wrong, they say, "Nothing!"  Yet four days later, they'll say, "Remember when you said balh, blah, blah--well, it hurt my feelings."  And they're still hurt, deeply.  The nice thing about Cancers is, even though they're hurt and sustain it for days, they forgive you later.

   Cancers will categorize--by date, hour, and minute--every hurt ever dealt to them.  Even though they'll forgive you, they don't forget about the event.

   Cancers have more than an insecurity; it is actually an inferiority that they're born with.  They have an obsession with appearing stupid, sometimes so much so that they get harassed and fulfill their own dreaded prophecy of being dumb.  There is always a subliminal depression they operate with, which is due to their glands.

     Cancers have a marvelous laugh.  You can always tell a Cancer by their very hardy, full laugh.  They're usually amused by anything that's not in correct order--in other words, not so much by slapstick, but anything that is offkilter.

     Cancers are usually sweet-looking, with oval faces.  You want to crawl into their laps and tell them all your problems.  The Cancer is always very sympathetic, very maternal and nurturing."

I apologize to our resident Cancer if she finds any of this offensive, just one person's opinion on Cancers.  I thought it might be helpful to share with all, I do see our Lizzie in there! 



 

Astrology is so interesting. If you have a chance to read any of Liz Greene's books she goes into the psychology of signs. To my mind she is the best of the psychological astrologers around.  If I had a way to scan I might post what she says of the sign Cancer but I don't. If we had the time of Lizzie's birth I would send in for one of her psychological profiles on Lizzie.  That would be excellent. Will the person who has the family bible listing the times of the Borden's births please come forward.

Forgot to add, regarding the physical appearance.  It's the Ascendant that has a lot to do with that part, especially strong if the sun is also on the Ascendant.

That describes my Leo self perfectly! Maybe I was born too
late? I was actually born a month early. That reminding people
of what they said or did to hurt your feelings is what
really bugs people the most about me. Odd, people don't
like to be reminded of things they have done but they
don't mind doing them.

Carol, I will have to check for Liz Green next time I go to the library, sounds interesting!

Kimberly, I'm a Leo too and let me tell you, I never forget the wrongs and injustices myself.  Cancer is just before Leo so maybe it has something to do with the planets being in the same house during the 2 months? 

Is "astrology" a science? Do they teach it in colleges so you can get a degree? Are there many jobs in corporations?

Of course, it makes a good "cover name". "His astrologer said he shouldn't do it at this time." An argument that leaves no rational discussion.

What is the sign after Leo? Virgo? I've never thought I could
have suited that sign but the description you wrote of Cancer
was perfect to describe me. I always thought Lizzie seemed
like a Leo, or at least a sterotypical Leo -- bold & strong
with big hair & the dressy style. Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis
was a Leo & it seemed to suit her, Lizzie has always seemed
like the Victorian Jackie O, mysterious & flamboyant & stalked.

Astrology is based on astronomy which is a science, it has to do with what planets were where on the moment that you were born.  Each planet has a name that is based on a character such as Mars; fiery, hot, the color red, the god of war, and these aspects are used in determining your astrological path.  Theres much more to it, but, I'm not an astrologer.  Wouldn't you agree that that description of a Cancer has quite a few items in it that sounds like the things that we do know about Lizzie?

And you would have to admit, the moon, our closest planet, does affect things here on earth; the tides, the full moon affecting people's behaviour hence lunacy, lunatic, etc.  You can take it from there whether you agree or disagree with astrology, but, its been around for quite some time.  There must be something to it. 

Lizzie was a cusp and to me that means she wasn't fully a Cancer nor yet fully a Leo, but could swing between the two.
Coming out of Cancer toward Leo she might be a bit more Leo, just beginning to reach those attributes.

BTW:  What Susan transcribed as Cancer sounds a bit to me like a *primitive* Cancer.  One not yet formed as to their full character potential.

kat:

lizzie's moon is in leo.  there is a theory, which i'm inclined to believe -- that the sun or a planet has to be in one sign or the other, that there is really no such thing as "in between."  that it has to operate in one or the other.  when it's close, more exactitude is required, but it has to be determined.  often cusp-type people have planets in the cusp sign.  for example, my sun is 1 degree in taurus.  but i have a mercury/venus conjunction in aires, which is an important part of the overall chart.  i was born on the 21st of april.  depending on the year, the sun can still be in aires on the 21st; sometimes it's in taurus on the 20th.

I've always pictured it as one thing and another thing, with an overlap or blending where the signs collide/collude, on cusp.

I believe you, because it does make sense.
BUT can a person be one way one day and one way another day, as long as it is solidly in that sign that day?

I seem to know a lot of cusp people and they get some sympathy from me.  (by also being pretty changeable.)

"there is a theory, which i'm inclined to believe -- that the sun or a planet has to be in one sign or the other, that there is really no such thing as "in between."

Right on, Haulover. Time is all important. In order to determine the sign a planet is in the time of birth has to be known, especially important for the moon. The cusp is the point at which signs change or houses change but a planet is either in one sign or another not both or a blend.     

Rays, there are schools of astrology, one of the best is in Britain. 

kathryn:

the "cusp" idea is too fuzzy to work with.  some people would say i'm an aires/taurus cusp.  but no.  the sun is operating in taurus.  aires figures prominently in my chart, though, because mercury and venus are in conjunction in the 10th house; it also closely aspects other planets.  i do have some aires type issues and problems -- but i look to mercury/venus for that.

if i understand your question -- i don't think i am more aires when the sun is in aires or more taurus when it's in taurus.

send me your birth info.  in fact, i'd like to have a look at it.  date/year/time/place.  i haven't tried a chart in years, but i might make an exception for you.

Thanks for the info.
And for the offer!
Stef did my chart years ago.
She is very good too.

kat:

thank god it's done then.  send it to me.  i'd love to look it over -- not to "tell you about yourself" but for my own info.

Does ANY state license astrologers, like barbers, beauticians, plumbers, or electricians?
Does ANY university (or college) give a degree in astrology.

Note that you can get degrees in religion. So what is more important or scientific?

rays:

you consistently question this in such a way that i sense you'd sincerely like some sort of explanation.

my own view on just what astrology is:  it's a remnant of what was once a complete body of knowledge.  there is truth in it -- but can it be truly apprehended?  probably not.  but so it is with all knowledge.  all that we can know or do is never enough, in the sense that there is a limit on everything , and at some point anything will fail.  psychic gifts in general cannot really be explained.  how can any talent be explained?  someone can study painting all their life and never paint one exceptional picture.  william faulkner was a high school dropout.  so where do talent, ability, insights, etc. -- come from?

i think the reason some of us look at astrology in trying to understand lizzie borden is basically because we're using everything we can get our hands on. 

I still think, through actually experiencing people and their traits and characters, and how they flucuate, that a person can straddle two signs.
Also, in the book Secret Language of Birthdays, they give a breakdown of Season as important, AND Week as important.
I've often told those to whom I have referred to this book, that if you don't quite believe what you read about yourself on your day check the day before or the day after, if born near either midnight.
Also, if that does not seem to suit what they think of themselves, they should check their WEEK.  (A 'week' can be broken down by the authors into 5 days, 6 or 7)
THAT 'week' definition has sold a lot of people.
And it does encompass transition.
Since the Universe is always 'in transition' I think astrological signs would be too.
............................
There is a book on coincidences that tells the story of a famous scientist who lost his whole reputation because he desired to prove some elements of astrology.
Later, the next century another guy tried to re-examine that man's findings.  He discovered the scientist was pretty much right.  And what a shame he died in slander.

One of the things the next guy did was to verify a large group of professional people's birthdays and OCCUPATIONS.
There seemed to be a large percentage of people born in a season  who shared similar lifetime occupations.  He found numbers greater than the average, and greater than randomness or coincidence.  He broke down the seasons, then, into areas of life interest.  It was amazing.  This was basically what the scientist had been working on a century before, proven lately.

I can't answer whether any state licenses astrologers but you could find out from writing the American Federation of Astrologers (AFA).

Some universities and colleges offer classes in genuine astrology,  (not a blend of numerology/seasonal or weekly combinations of non-chart based paranormal reflections/animal spirits/general birthdays/etc). My first class was years ago in Portland at the community college.  Unfortunately with these classes someone often writes the school that they are offering garbage and the class gets pulled because the person who calls either gives a lot of money to the school or has influence.  There are also mail order classes from professional astrologers.  Astrologers also have annual conventions with speakers, etc. plus there are a number of magazines on astrology on the market.  One of them with articles is "The Mountain Astrologer" in which I was once fortunate enough long ago to have printed a poem I wrote on astrology.

kat:

***I still think, through actually experiencing people and their traits and characters, and how they flucuate, that a person can straddle two signs. ***

i'm not surprised to see you sticking to your guns on the cusp issue.  go for it.  you may prove me wrong.  i wouldn't exactly be shocked.

but remember my point that frequently this "straddling" can be traced to the fact that the "other sign in question" is represented by a number of other planets that figure prominently in the chart.  from what i've looked at, that usually seems to be the case.

what you're getting at though is -- how exact can that moment of transition be?  if someone is born at that very moment when one sign changes to another -- which one is it?  or can it somehow be both?

if it's that close, a chart will usually clarify the matter.  for example, you'll find that other sign on the ascendant. or the chart ruler is in that sign.  or you have a collection of planets in that sign.

but it's only a theory either way.  i'm convinced that my sun is 1 or 2 degrees of taurus, but according to some books -- i'm on the tail end of aires.  but even with a taurus sun, aires is prominent in my chart -- so there you have it. 

you could be on to something, but what i'd ask you to consider is -- are these other-sign characteristics embedded somewhere else in the chart?  meaning you're right to recognize the blend, but is the blend truly in the sun sign?

you've made it clear you're not an astrologer, but your astrological insights have often been those of a true astrologer.  your metaphors for the three different perspectives on the elements, for example.  that was brilliant.

i guess the question is:  can a planet truly straddle or does it at some definitive moment have to fall either way?

I understand what you mean

I have this feeling tho, that in the last century people tried very hard to make Astrology respectable and more like a science, because that might gain more support and less disbelief and derision.
...By making it so stict with *standards* that it was beginning to lose it's intuitiveness, and the mysterious wonder which it should be steeped in.

I don't subscribe to an Astrology that can plot a perfect and exact path for each individual.  Nor one that can define a person so strictly that there almost is no room for free will or change.
If planets are *set* at birth, that implies no change.  They are stuck there forever, all those alignments.

That sounds like a roulette wheel.
Spin the wheel and the outcome is set once the ball falls into it's slot.
I look at a broader view, while still acknowldging patterns.
It's the patterns I believe in, not the book that says oh the moon is in the 7th house and you're stuck with that.

It does not make sense, in a Universe of change, that anyone can state exactly some trait of a person, fixed at birth because the planet was fixed at the time.
Planets aren't fixed...they live and breathe and give off discharge and detritus.  They spin and orbit and are constantly moving and changing.
This Astology that can be looked up in a book defining what one moment in time has fixed, does not sound like the mystical wonder this really should be.

So what about feng-shui or geomancery?

Talent comes from inborn ability plus Hard Work.
Writer don't just sit down one day and write a Nobel Prize book.

"i guess the question is:  can a planet truly straddle or does it at some definitive moment have to fall either way?"

Can a woman be a little bit pregnant?