Now THAT is how you use free indirect discourse. Maria is the type to use a euphemism for drinking or drunkenness, but Joyce brings it out of her head using FID.

From the OED: suit, v.: 12a. transitive. Chiefly Scottish. Of a man: to engage in behaviour intended to persuade (a woman) to marry him; to court, woo.

Choice of words clearly meant to parallel with her sense of independence. Her marriage is to herself.

As opposed directly to the genteel nature of the Protestants.

Her eyes are just like Polly Mooney's.

What is morality for Mr. Doran if his relationship to the church is one of economic necessity rather than faith? His morality is based in public perception and ridicule that he fears from his friends and family, i.e. social standards. How does this key in with Mrs. Mooney's cleaver morality?

This is a good joke. "Bob" and "tanner" are both slang words for a sixpence, but "bob" can also mean a "knob," or the weight at the end of a line of tackle. Since Dillon hasn't shown, there would only be two sixpences available to the two boys, but they would be freed from the dragging weight of Dillon.

The public perception of Reverend Flynn as an eccentric or an occultist, though in jest, does it just come from his nervous breakdown and eccentric behavior? What caused the nervous breakdown?

His life's work should be his "ideal family." Yet even before we get to the strange final scene, we see that Neave barely sees his family as that at all. They're more like another business venture but one that has not gone off completely right. His relation to each of them is unfulfilling.

As in the other stories, the crowd are only interested in what is "new" and "novel". They are tourists in life, seeking out new experiences. Those who are embarking on a path which they've already walked hold no interest for them.

Although William disdains Isabel and her friends for their genteel detachment, he suffers from it all the same. Their gentility is expressed as a gay, fun-loving refusal to take seriously any of the emotions of life while his is expressed most directly in his active repugnance at the dirt and grime of the working class. N.b. William is, as Alexander alludes to, probably a class traitor, which would explain the difference of expression of the genteel.

What kind of baby has a "sense of form"?

The use of third person pronouns in this story has an odd effect of distancing, and I think we see it most pronounced in this sentence. The she/her pronouns almost universally apply to the young girl, but they are used jarringly. Here, the subject shifts in the second clause although you would expect it to refer back to the subject of the first sentence as in something like, "Hennie did this, but he wanted to do that." Here we see that the narrator lets the third person pronoun do all the work that a proper noun would normally do out of the deep-seated aversion to speaking the young girl's name.

Hennie's hesitation to use the word "owner" or "master" is interesting. What is Hennie's relationship to the narrator? Is he a servant? Is there a race issue at play?

Despite her desire to "see all", she is unable to shake her class consciousness. It asserts itself violently in her thoughts, words, actions, and in the narrative itself as the adjectives shift into the language of derision and snobbery.

Lack of tact is the cardinal sin of the bourgeoisie. It upsets the order of gaiety and wit which leisure needs in order to be kept from self-reflection. Brooding or awkwardness are traits to be avoided except in the Byronic hero.

How odd to order flowers for your garden party! It's instances like this that point to the gentility of the family being expressed in their need for ornament to the point of excess.

This is strange. Jennings is intentionally distancing Mr. Bruff's feelings from his action. Is this discorporation a common tendency for Jennings as a coping mechanism? When one does this, they do it in a way that removes agency from the person, instead assigning the the driving force in their actions to things they can't control, such as social conditioning.

Edit: More directly, the action is its own actor.

Is Jennings here talking about the disease that initially caused him to take up the opium, or is he talking about the disease we know now as withdrawal, the disease which now he must take opium to assuage? Important to note that Collins, by nesting this within Blake's tobacco withdrawal, is here showing that the effects of withdrawal from a legal substance can be just as devastating as the effects from an illegal or morally repugnant one.

Although it seems like Betteredge is being trifling about unimportant details, he is pointing out important considerations. These small instances are still variables despite their smallness. If the experiment goes off in an unexpected way, what are we supposed to do if the variables are wrong? This, of course, segues into one of the main questions at the heart of the novel: how do we determine which details are the important ones?

Before we finish the first chapter, the narrator begins to point to a self-consciousness about his abilities as a writer as well as to an awareness of his readerly tendencies. This opens up a chasm between the narrator and the writer which points to a meta-textual examination of writerly and readerly sensibility.

It may be interesting to track the incidence of words of violence like "dagger" and "slaughter" with large plot events, as in the examination of loudness in Pride and Prejudice.