D.H. Lawrence's Short Stories Thread [Archive] - Page 10

Nossa

08-26-2008, 04:24 AM

I'm behind as usual, but I'll try to catch up a bit :D

We learn later that the baker is the father of the child. What do you see in this exchange? Is he upset that he is shut out from Emma? I don't get the feeling he has abandoned Emma. But it's really not clear. I think this is the only failing of an otherwise a perfect story. I'm not sure what to think of the baker. I want to say that it's Emma who has left him but I'm not sure. What are your thoughts on Berryman?

I have to say, I also didn't notice the fact that the baker was the father :blush: That's why my first reaction towards him was anger at how he treated Hilda and I think in a previous post I even called him an insensitive brute..lol. Now that things are clear I can understand his attitude better.
Did it ever occur to anyone that maybe he is feeling asahmed as well? It shows in how he treated Hilda and how he asked about Emma without even saying her name. Maybe he's not sad or frustrated (cuz Emma left), maybe he's just as ashamed.

Within the moral framework of the story (not mine or yours or contemporary times) I think the women's subordination to their husbands is the norm and the willful women of the Rowbotham household are dysfunctional. The two women hurrying home is a strong contrast to the three daughters bossing their father around.

That's actually what I meant. The two women affirm the male domination of that time, while in the Rowbotham household, the situation is a bit different. The father is a weak character, and his daughters are taking control (either Hilda as being the educated woman in the family, or Berta as being the one who's taking care of things at home).

I wonder if the torture of her walk home was just from her declining health and illness, or part of it was also brought on by her sense of shame, though she herself did not do anything wrong, she feels the guilt of her family, and as with the women in the beginning, as the way she is flushed with shame, and the encounter with the baker, it is as if she can feel everyone watching her, and their thoughts about her and her family situation. So she feels under scrutiny when she is in town.

I personally think the torture was essentially out of her feeling of shame. I agree that she probably felt that everyone was watching her and judging her and her family cuz of what her sister did. I also agree that in such a society, a whole family feels the shame of the mistake of one person, as the rest of the community blames them for 'letting it happen'.

I'll have to think more about the significance of the red moon and the repitition of the color white in the paragraph. But I did like how Lawrence described the countryside. How he contrasted the beauty and peacefullness of the outside world, to the trembling, shameful inside of Hilda.

Yes, it does seem to draw attention to that moon - flamingo colored; I thought of the first part, when L mentions the flush on Hilda's face - I think that corresponds visually to the moon, both a sort of pink or blush color. I feel this whole paragragh indicates the close relationship humans have to nature and how nature can sooth even the most distressed person, even if only temporarily.

I totally agree. This is more like the microcosm and macrocosm relationship, where Nature reflects the human feeling. Great point!
I do think both the red moon and the flamingo go along with the flush on Hilda face, it's as if nature itself is sympathying with Hilda's feeling and shame.

I'll re-read this part again. There's more to it than what was said, that's for sure.

Did it ever occur to anyone that maybe he is feeling asahmed as well? It shows in how he treated Hilda and how he asked about Emma without even saying her name. Maybe he's not sad or frustrated (cuz Emma left), maybe he's just as ashamed.

Yeah, I agree. The baker is more interested in getting rid of Hilda than confronting or arguing with her. That makes it seem more like shame than anything else. He can't even look at Hilda when he's talking to her. Lawrence says that he speaks his words more toward the inanimate objects around him than toward the person he's speaking to. His averted gaze and his short, eliptical expressions make it seem like he's more embarrassed than anything else. Good point, Nossa.

That's actually what I meant. The two women affirm the male domination of that time, while in the Rowbotham household, the situation is a bit different.

What do you make of the conclusion, though? There the two daughters cringe under the power of the father's voice. Why does Lawrence give him this power?

I personally think the torture was essentially out of her feeling of shame. I agree that she probably felt that everyone was watching her and judging her and her family cuz of what her sister did.

Interestingly, that links her with the baker.

I'll have to think more about the significance of the red moon and the repitition of the color white in the paragraph.

I'd like to get into that, too, but I don't know as if we've gotten to it yet. I may have moved us too far ahead when I brought it up.

Janine

08-26-2008, 03:34 PM

Quote by Dark Muse (earlier)

When I read this, it made it seem as if Hilda herself was like a flower when she entered the field. It made me think of a wilting flower.

DM, I like the way you put this. I think that Lawrence prominetnly identified people as flowers so this goes right along with his idea of a blossoming; in this case Hilda is wilting.

I'm behind as usual, but I'll try to catch up a bit :D

Nossa, glad to see you here again. I haven't been feeling well, so I fell a little behind, also. No problem really; we are moving along slowly with the text. I will try and post more today. So far I think we have had some great comments and discussion and we have all brought out good points about the story and the 'power struggles' here; these are often seen in Lawrence's work - more on that later.

I have to say, I also didn't notice the fact that the baker was the father :blush: That's why my first reaction towards him was anger at how he treated Hilda and I think in a previous post I even called him an insensitive brute..lol. Now that things are clear I can understand his attitude better.
Did it ever occur to anyone that maybe he is feeling asahmed as well? It shows in how he treated Hilda and how he asked about Emma without even saying her name. Maybe he's not sad or frustrated (cuz Emma left), maybe he's just as ashamed.

So funny, that most of us did not realise he was the father. I hope we don't discover it was someone else, but I doubt it is. I do think in the beginning of the story, Lawrence wants us to merely wonder about him because only until later on nearer the end of the story does he blantantly reveal his role in the family's shame. I think by revealing it in the little song by the brother is more shocking or surprising to us, and brings the whole story together full-circle.

That's actually what I meant. The two women affirm the male domination of that time, while in the Rowbotham household, the situation is a bit different. The father is a weak character, and his daughters are taking control (either Hilda as being the educated woman in the family, or Berta as being the one who's taking care of things at home).

Yes, that does set up a good contrast. Your last statement would be somewhat representative of Lawrence's own disfunctional household. His father drank and so eventually declined with the fact his wife was quite overbearing and dominent. The marriage began with his dominence buy then the man simply faded into the background much like this man is doing. Sad, isn't it? It is a whole reversal of the male/female dominence factor and this is why I said above a 'power struggle'.

I personally think the torture was essentially out of her feeling of shame. I agree that she probably felt that everyone was watching her and judging her and her family cuz of what her sister did. I also agree that in such a society, a whole family feels the shame of the mistake of one person, as the rest of the community blames them for 'letting it happen'.

Definitely. I would agree with all of this. Even today people might feel some shame - depends on your family and how they would accept this. People still gossip too but back then the gossip would probably be more prominent and hurtful/damaging to those it is directed towards.

I'll have to think more about the significance of the red moon and the repitition of the color white in the paragraph. But I did like how Lawrence described the countryside. How he contrasted the beauty and peacefullness of the outside world, to the trembling, shameful inside of Hilda.

I think this is common with Lawrence's writing style. His style does set up a kind of natual rhythm which flows nicely. He does connect the characters closely to the landscape around them and one feels his own closeness to nature and how he perceived each natural element and then saw it all as a whole....interconnected....
and Nossa, I like your last statement - that makes a lot of sense to me. He also shows briefly the industrial world infringing slowly on the natural world. The smoke of the collery may also be connected with the shame in someway in Lawrence's mind and that is why he is showing the white bag so prominently. Hilda herself is a contrast of elements - black and white. The smoke in also representative of the way in which the poor father has laboured in order to provide the fine house they all now live in. Now Hilda labours at her job and in poor health to hold the family together.

I totally agree. This is more like the microcosm and macrocosm relationship, where Nature reflects the human feeling. Great point!
I do think both the red moon and the flamingo go along with the flush on Hilda face, it's as if nature itself is sympathying with Hilda's feeling and shame.

Yes, exactly! This is a good observation - the way you phrased it...."sympahizing with Hilda's feelings and shame" - interesting; I agree with that thought.

I'll re-read this part again. There's more to it than what was said, that's for sure.[/QUOTE]

I agree; it is always that way with Lawrence's work; this is why these stories now fascinate me so. Lawrence has a lot of subtext going on - one must read between the lines to see more significance and the individual words and phrases and images are vital to the story; often they reappear later in the same story, which is interesting.

Yeah, I agree. The baker is more interested in getting rid of Hilda than confronting or arguing with her. That makes it seem more like shame than anything else. He can't even look at Hilda when he's talking to her. Lawrence says that he speaks his words more toward the inanimate objects around him than toward the person he's speaking to. His averted gaze and his short, eliptical expressions make it seem like he's more embarrassed than anything else. Good point, Nossa.

I like what you wrote about the baker here; I agee and what you say is very observant, Quark. Perhaps he is more ashamed than anyone.

What do you make of the conclusion, though? There the two daughters cringe under the power of the father's voice. Why does Lawrence give him this power?

Not sure yet, maybe wait until we get to it. I think that often Lawrence does this flip-flopping back and forth with male/female dominence. Haven't we seem it before in other stories? Even the last one we did 'Old Adam'...remember how that ended, with the wife being more subserviant to the men

I'd like to get into that, too, but I don't know as if we've gotten to it yet. I may have moved us too far ahead when I brought it up.

Maybe wait till we get to that part.

I just came in here and edited. It does not seem that we discussed this paragraph which I earlier posted.

Across the field, and she was at home. It was a new, substantial cottage, built with unstinted hand, such a house as an old miner could build himself out of his savings. In the rather small kitchen a woman of dark, saturnine complexion sat nursing a baby in a long white gown; a young woman of heavy, brutal cast stood at the table, cutting bread and butter. She had a downcast, humble mien that sat unnaturally on her, and was strangely irritating. She did not look round when her sister entered. Hilda put down the bag of cakes and left the room, not having spoken to Emma, nor to the baby, not to Mrs Carlin, who had come in to help for the afternoon.

*******

Here is the next part of the text:

Almost immediately the father entered from the yard with a dustpan full of coals. He was a large man, but he was going to pieces. As he passed through, he gripped the door with his free hand to steady himself, but turning, he lurched and swayed. He began putting the coals on the fire, piece by piece. One lump fell from his hand and smashed on the white hearth. Emma Rowbotham looked round, and began in a rough, loud voice of anger: "Look at you!" Then she consciously moderated her tones. "I'll sweep it up in a minute--don't you bother; you'll only be going head first into the fire."

Her father bent down nevertheless to clear up the mess he had made, saying, articulating his words loosely and slavering in his speech:

"The lousy bit of a thing, it slipped between my fingers like a fish."
As he spoke he went tilting towards the fire. The dark-browed woman cried out: he put his hand on the hot stove to save himself: Emma swung round and dragged him off.

"Didn't I tell you!" she cried roughly. "Now, have you burnt yourself?"
She held tight hold of the big man, and pushed him into his chair.

"What's the matter?" cried a sharp voice from the other room. The speaker appeared, a hard well-favoured woman of twenty-eight. "Emma, don't speak like that to father." Then, in a tone not so cold, but just as sharp: "Now, father, what have you been doing?"

Emma withdrew to her table sullenly.

"It's nöwt," said the old man, vainly protesting. "It's nöwt, at a'. Get on wi' what you're doin'."

"I'm afraid 'e's burnt 'is 'and," said the black-browed woman, speaking of him with a kind of hard pity, as if he were a cumbersome child. Bertha took the old man's hand and looked at it, making a quick tut-tutting noise of impatience.

"Emma, get that zinc ointment--and some white rag," she commanded sharply. The younger sister put down her loaf with the knife in it, and went.

To a sensitive observer, this obedience was more intolerable than the most hateful discord. The dark woman bent over the baby and made silent, gentle movements of motherliness to it. The little one smiled and moved on her lap. It continued to move and twist.

I don't know quite why but I found this line rather curious:

"To a sensitive observer, this obedience was more intolerable than the most hateful discord."

Any thoughts on that line, anyone?

Dark Muse

08-27-2008, 12:01 AM

Almost immediately the father entered from the yard with a dustpan full of coals. He was a large man, but he was going to pieces. As he passed through, he gripped the door with his free hand to steady himself, but turning, he lurched and swayed. He began putting the coals on the fire, piece by piece. One lump fell from his hand and smashed on the white hearth. Emma Rowbotham looked round, and began in a rough, loud voice of anger: "Look at you!" Then she consciously moderated her tones. "I'll sweep it up in a minute--don't you bother; you'll only be going head first into the fire."

When I read this it made me think of Mr. Morel. And much like Sons and Lovers, we have another example of the man of the household being reduced to little more than just another child which needs to be taken care of, and bossed around by the women. And proving to be really more of a burden than a functioning member of the household, resented by the others because of the trouble he causes, and under appreciated in his role within the house.

Her father bent down nevertheless to clear up the mess he had made, saying, articulating his words loosely and slavering in his speech:

"The lousy bit of a thing, it slipped between my fingers like a fish."
As he spoke he went tilting towards the fire. The dark-browed woman cried out: he put his hand on the hot stove to save himself: Emma swung round and dragged him off.

"Didn't I tell you!" she cried roughly. "Now, have you burnt yourself?"
She held tight hold of the big man, and pushed him into his chair.

If we were not fold already that his was the father, and if we did not know any better, one might just as easily think this was a mother addressing her child. He is portrayed as being foolish within the story and something to be ridiculed.

"What's the matter?" cried a sharp voice from the other room. The speaker appeared, a hard well-favoured woman of twenty-eight. "Emma, don't speak like that to father." Then, in a tone not so cold, but just as sharp: "Now, father, what have you been doing?"

Emma withdrew to her table sullenly.

There seems to be a hierarchy of women within the household, with Hilda being above the others, but here Emma retreats from her others sister, seeming to be in a lower rank.

At first it seems as if the other is going to come into defense of the father as she reproaches Emma, but than she in turn scolds him as well. Showing no true respect. But establishing her authority over both her sister and the father.

To a sensitive observer, this obedience was more intolerable than the most hateful discord. The dark woman bent over the baby and made silent, gentle movements of motherliness to it. The little one smiled and moved on her lap. It continued to move and twist.

I think what is being said here, is that the pitifulness of the father being bossed around like a child by his daughters, as well as the sisters ruling over each other, would be a more painful sight to see than if the father had tried to assert himself and the women stood up for themselves instead of just sullenly and meekly doing as they were told.

I was already typing this when you made your edit, so I will come back later to look at the new paragrpah you just posted.

Dark Muse

08-27-2008, 02:01 PM

Across the field, and she was at home. It was a new, substantial cottage, built with unstinted hand, such a house as an old miner could build himself out of his savings.

Here is further evidence of how the Rawthbones are more "Well-to-do" or see themselves as such above the other workers. Perhaps thier status is meant to make thier shame even greater, as the fatherless child would perhaps be less "shcoking" or less note-worthy, if it had occured within a pooer household.

In the rather small kitchen a woman of dark, saturnine complexion sat nursing a baby in a long white gown

This made me think of Witch A la Mode, where one of the women was described as looking like a nut and I think in that story the word sanguine was used, while here it is saturine. Also interesting the use of white coming up again. I am not completely sure what is meant by it in this story.

Of course usually white is used for purity and innocnece. So it is interesting how it is contrasted in this story. First Hilda dressed in black with the white back, and now this dark woman wearcing a white gown.

a young woman of heavy, brutal cast stood at the table, cutting bread and butter. She had a downcast, humble mien that sat unnaturally on her, and was strangely irritating. She did not look round when her sister entered. Hilda put down the bag of cakes and left the room, not having spoken to Emma, nor to the baby, not to Mrs Carlin, who had come in to help for the afternoon.

This seems to express the tension in the household, the sisters do not even address each other, unless it is to give some order, or to scold one another. Here also Hilda seems to give her sister the same attitude the baker had given her, as she just strides in sets the bag down and walks out of the room without greeting anyone.

Janine

08-27-2008, 09:53 PM

When I read this it made me think of Mr. Morel. And much like Sons and Lovers, we have another example of the man of the household being reduced to little more than just another child which needs to be taken care of, and bossed around by the women. And proving to be really more of a burden than a functioning member of the household, resented by the others because of the trouble he causes, and under appreciated in his role within the house.

Dark Muse, I guess I should answer this one now (maybe the other tomorrow) I also thought of Mr. Morel and also Lawrence's own father whom the character was fashioned after. Yes, he certainly is reduced to a the status of a child and bossed around by the woman in the story. He apparently is broken now with illness and weakened and so the daughters and even the son take over and treat him poorly with very little respect. He seems only to be something to be tolerated. I do think they feel he is a burden to them.

If we were not fold already that his was the father, and if we did not know any better, one might just as easily think this was a mother addressing her child. He is portrayed as being foolish within the story and something to be ridiculed.

That is basically true.

There seems to be a hierarchy of women within the household, with Hilda being above the others, but here Emma retreats from her others sister, seeming to be in a lower rank.

I noticed that also. I think this would be normal between sibblings in the idea of the oldest being expected to run the show when the parents no longer do or can. I think that Hilda, also holding the job position and keeping the finances steady would feel she did have the right to be the boss. I can see the younger daughter cowing before her and just putting up with or ignoring her bossiness.

At first it seems as if the other is going to come into defense of the father as she reproaches Emma, but than she in turn scolds him as well. Showing no true respect. But establishing her authority over both her sister and the father.

Yes, true again.

I think what is being said here, is that the pitifulness of the father being bossed around like a child by his daughters, as well as the sisters ruling over each other, would be a more painful sight to see than if the father had tried to assert himself and the women stood up for themselves instead of just sullenly and meekly doing as they were told.

Well, they are dysfunctional on many levels here and the family has fallen into this habit and really one can't change it. It is sad. Also, at the end I felt the man was falling into senility but maybe I am going too far with that thought, not sure yet. He seemed to repeat himself and ramble quite a bit.

I was already typing this when you made your edit, so I will come back later to look at the new paragrpah you just posted.

Oh, good - I guess that would be the post after the one I am answering now.

Quark

08-27-2008, 11:43 PM

I think what is being said here, is that the pitifulness of the father being bossed around like a child by his daughters, as well as the sisters ruling over each other, would be a more painful sight to see than if the father had tried to assert himself and the women stood up for themselves instead of just sullenly and meekly doing as they were told.

Isn't that line referring to the younger sister's obedience? I think this part comes right after she's ordered to go fetch something.

Dark Muse

08-28-2008, 12:02 AM

I think the line is refering to the whole family scene, at least that is my interpitation of it.

Virgil

08-28-2008, 07:18 AM

I agree with everything being said. The father is rediculed and athere is a hiearchy between the girls. But there also seems to be friction and challenging of that hiearchy. A sort of Queen Bee syndrome. :D

Janine

08-28-2008, 02:10 PM

Quark

08-28-2008, 02:58 PM

I think the line is refering to the whole family scene, at least that is my interpitation of it.

Oh, I see what mean. You taking that line as a conclusion of all the preceding action. I'd have to look back over the text to check if that's true. Before I had just glanced over the bit Janine posted, so I didn't catch the part with the obedient father.

Also, did a post of mine get deleted? I thought I responded to Nossa above, but LitNet doesn't have my post.

Dark Muse

08-28-2008, 03:07 PM

Hmm, maybe the post did not go through. I do not think anyone would have the ability to delete a post excepet the Mods, and I don't see why they would.

Janine

08-28-2008, 03:57 PM

It must not have gone through, Quark...I think they would have warned/told you if the deleted it. As DM said it is highly unlikely they would do that. That is a shame; it has happened to me before, too. Sometimes I just right click and copy my post into my mouse, in case it does not go through.

I agree with everyone so far also. Shall I post more text soon; maybe tonight?

Scheherazade

08-28-2008, 05:09 PM

Also, did a post of mine get deleted? I thought I responded to Nossa above, but LitNet doesn't have my post.It might have been a glitch, Quark.

According to our logs, no posts have been deleted in this thread recently.

Virgil

08-28-2008, 05:44 PM

Maybe you wrote it up and forgot to hit post reply. ;) I think I did that once. :blush:

Janine

08-28-2008, 05:48 PM

Maybe you wrote it up and forgot to hit post reply. ;) I think I did that once. :blush:

:lol:You guys!

Quark

08-28-2008, 05:55 PM

No, I didn't forget to post it. What actually happened is that it got combined with Nossa's post at the top. If you look at the bottom of that post you'll see my response to it. Nossa's post somehow took over mine.

Janine

08-28-2008, 05:57 PM

Yikes, now the women are taking over the men!? very strange....

Quark,I just looked at it and you are right - Nossa would not be quoting herself...oops something went wrong.

Virgil

08-28-2008, 05:58 PM

Yikes, now the women are taking over the men!? very strange....

:lol: Just like in the short story. :D:D

Janine

08-28-2008, 06:00 PM

:lol: Just like in the short story. :D:D

:lol:I know...but it really did merge them...actually their avatars are similiar at first glance....hummmm.....we must look into this mystery my dear, Watson.;)

Nossa

08-29-2008, 07:20 AM

Virgil

08-29-2008, 10:31 AM

Okay...this is just weird! I didn't quote myself, that's for sure (I love myself but not that much :lol:). I didn't even reply to Quark's post yet! Something wrong happened, it seems your post, Quark, was somehow merged into mine! I swear I wasn't trying to take over anyone :lol: I'm a peaceful person :p

:lol: I think Janine had it right. Nossa's and Quark's avatars on quick glance look similar and I bet one of the mods who was consolodating consecutive posts merged the two together thinking that they were both from the other person. :D Shall we tell a mod to correct it?

Scheherazade

08-29-2008, 10:35 AM

I have already PMed Quark (last night). Not sure what happened but it will be corrected as soon as he replies.

:D

Virgil

08-29-2008, 10:38 AM

I have already PMed Quark (last night). Not sure what happened but it will be corrected as soon as he replies.

:D

Thank you Scher.

Janine

08-29-2008, 02:31 PM

Okay...this is just weird! I didn't quote myself, that's for sure (I love myself but not that much :lol:). I didn't even reply to Quark's post yet! Something wrong happened, it seems your post, Quark, was somehow merged into mine! I swear I wasn't trying to take over anyone :lol: I'm a peaceful person :p

:lol:Anything you want to confess to us, Nossa?....like maybe a budding new Lit Net romance with a similiar avatar member....:lol:

Maybe the mod did not mess up; maybe the new computer program read the avy's as the same. When in doubt, blame it on the computer! ;) :lol:

Quark

08-30-2008, 04:26 PM

I swear I wasn't trying to take over anyone :lol: I'm a peaceful person :p

That's okay. I didn't take it personally. In fact, I didn't really take it as anything. I just thought it was a weird glitch.

Janine

08-31-2008, 02:49 PM

Since the weird glinch (hope it is straightened out by now), I think we got off the beaten path. Therefore, I read back and believe we are ready to go onto the next part of the story, so here is

The Next Part of the Text:

"I believe this child's hungry," she said. "How long is it since he had anything?"
"Just afore dinner," said Emma dully.
"Good gracious!" exclaimed Bertha. "You needn't starve the child now you've got it. Once every two hours it ought to be fed, as I've told you; and now it's three. Take him, poor little mite--I'll cut the bread." She bent and looked at the bonny baby. She could not help herself: she smiled, and pressed its cheek with her finger, and nodded to it, making little noises. Then she turned and took the loaf from her sister. The woman rose and gave the child to its mother. Emma bent over the little sucking mite. She hated it when she looked at it, and saw it as a symbol, but when she felt it, her love was like fire in her blood.
"I should think 'e canna be comin'," said the father uneasily, looking up at the clock.
"Nonsense, father--the clock's fast! It's but half-past four! Don't fidget!" Bertha continued to cut the bread and butter.
"Open a tin of pears," she said to the woman, in a much milder tone. Then she went into the next room. As soon as she was gone, the old man said again: "I should ha'e thought he'd 'a' been 'ere by now, if he means comin'."
Emma, engrossed, did not answer. The father had ceased to consider her, since she had become humbled.

Tomorrow I will add to this; the next part introduces the parson.

Dark Muse

08-31-2008, 03:54 PM

I did find it interesting, how compared to everyone else, Bertha seemed to be so maternal toward the child and the only one who seemed to truly care about the child and not just view it as a stain upon the family, or a burdon that has to be taken care of, or a duty of family obligation.

Janine

08-31-2008, 05:55 PM

Well, it seems she is more responsible with the child and yet she does tend to boss the younger sister. I can relate to all of this since I have two younger sisters myself.
Actually, this is how the mother, Emma,the youngest feels:

"The woman rose and gave the child to its mother. Emma bent over the little sucking mite. She hated it when she looked at it, and saw it as a symbol, but when she felt it, her love was like fire in her blood."

Even thought she hates it and sees it as a symbol - symbol of the family strife or tension and the shame she has caused them (?)...her true self cannot but feel and her deepest feeling is on "love"..."like fire in her blood." Here once again, I think that Lawrence shows that 'blood' rules in the end; not the intellect or simple reasoning. This child has brought on the shame and the tension and yet the child is innocent. The symbol also to Emma would be of her actions in conceiving this unwanted pregnancy. So that we could say she has very mixed feeling about the baby and yet her deepest 'blood' love wins out.

Dark Muse

08-31-2008, 06:01 PM

Yes, though I do not think I would say Emma is truly maternal, even if she has moments where she loves the child,

"I believe this child's hungry," she said. "How long is it since he had anything?"
"Just afore dinner," said Emma dully.
"Good gracious!" exclaimed Bertha. "You needn't starve the child now you've got it. Once every two hours it ought to be fed, as I've told you; and now it's three. Take him, poor little mite--

She does not even know when her own child is hungery or how often she should feed it. And the way she anwerers her sister, as if she does not really care. I do not think her just being young, is enough of an excuse for that.

She has to be told to take care of her own child, and how to care for it.

She bent and looked at the bonny baby. She could not help herself: she smiled, and pressed its cheek with her finger, and nodded to it, making little noises.

In addtion to be more responseable Bertha acts much more affectionately towrd the child.

Quark

09-01-2008, 12:34 AM

In addtion to be more responseable Bertha acts much more affectionately towrd the child.

Perhaps Bertha doesn't think of the baby as a symbol like the rest of the family does. I know Lawrence only accuses Emma directly of interpreting the baby as a symbol, but clearly that sentence is applicable to the other members of the family. It might also explain why Bertha is more maternal toward the child.

Janine

09-01-2008, 02:53 PM

Yes, though I do not think I would say Emma is truly maternal, even if she has moments where she loves the child.

Well, sometimes first time mothers are not as 'maternal' as one would think; not 'immediately', as all would expect from them to be. Afterall, if this a tremendous responsibility that has been thrust on this young woman; and without the support of a loving husband/father, it has to be difficult for her. I don't condemn the mother, here at all. Does it say how young the baby is? If an infant and a week or two old, Emma still could be suffering a sort of 'post pardem depression' and her demeanor/attitude might be quite subdued or numbed, to what it normally would have been, or her nerves might not allow her feelings to totally surface towards the child. For some women, it takes a bit of time to bond with the child, especially an illegitimate child, which was not planned. Perhaps since the older sisters tends to take over so much and rule the family, this material 'bonding' does not happen as quickly....it is delayed. I don't think Emma hates the child; her deep-down feelings are those of love.

She does not even know when her own child is hungery or how often she should feed it. And the way she anwerers her sister, as if she does not really care. I do not think her just being young, is enough of an excuse for that.

Well, first time mothers don't always adhere to a strict schedule, either. If the baby was not crying for food, and was she was nursing, the baby might not need to be feed within the confines of the strict two hour schedule, the older sister has layed out for her. Sometimes babies will feed all the time and others will not. I know this from my son and his wife's new experience with their first child/infant. It was not always easy to know when to feed the child and even when fussy the baby would not always want food. I saw this part of the story more like a way of putting down the younger sister and being more dominent and bossy towards her.

In a multi-faceted way this seeing the child as a 'symbol' is understandable in different aspects within the dynamics of this dysfunctional family. The fact that his child has arrived, and is now visible and real, is a sore spot to their reputation, also now the child means more work for everyone and this would cause the younger daughter to feel resentment towards them and to the 'cause'(the child) of that added work - her unwanted (shameful) pregnancy and now the presence of the child, who represents a sort of undermining of any bit of peace, that might have existed in this family. It is a complicated situation and I think feasible, that now they all feel that they have more than they can handle, with the small baby to help raise, and with the aging father, who to me sometimes seems to be 'losing touch' with reality; not to mention the feeling of shame/disgrace, they can't seem to escape.

She has to be told to take care of her own child, and how to care for it.

Some new mother's don't know exactly what to do with a small child, especially being on one's own basically with no husband. Nowdays they have baby classes to prepare one for babycare. My son and daughter-in-law took one and still they had to struggle through learning so much the first two weeks or so. It is not easy at first to care for a helpless infant. I don't feel harsh towards the mother here. I think she does love the child and she is being put down by her sisters. They are enabling her to be helpless if she truly is that way, by taking over and being dominent. There is a true power struggle going on here - not just between daughters and father but also among the sibblings themselves.

In addtion to be more responseable Bertha acts much more affectionately towrd the child.

Well, she can...she does not have total responsibility of the child; neither does she share the complete quilt or shame, of the actions lead to this baby's existence. Bertha may do the chores and tend to many things in the house, even her father, but still the baby is connected directly to her sister, the babe's mother. Some new mothers can feel totally overwhelmed at first. This passes normally and they are more close to their babies in the end. Giving birth does not always assure immediate material response.

In someways but ofcourse nothing as extreme this recalls me to "Sleepy" in the Chekhov thread because there the child also became a symbol. In that case a symbol of depriving the young woman who tended the child her much needed sleep. In the Lawrence story the baby is again a symbol - but this time a symbol of the shame that now will become part of the family. They can't see past the shame at this point and see the baby as a good and wonderful thing. In both stories the perception of the child is altered because of the circumstances.

Quote by Quark

Perhaps Bertha doesn't think of the baby as a symbol like the rest of the family does. I know Lawrence only accuses Emma directly of interpreting the baby as a symbol, but clearly that sentence is applicable to the other members of the family. It might also explain why Bertha is more maternal toward the child.

Quark, I think this may be true. Afterall, the members of this family are all individuals and may think somewhat differently in this situation. Perhaps Bertha is more open-minded about the child. As I said also she can feel maternal since she is not the mother - I know that does not make sense, but if you read the rest of my post you will see what I mean. She is not directly linked to the 'shame'.

Dark Muse

09-01-2008, 06:44 PM

Janine

09-01-2008, 11:31 PM

I can understand Bertha's feelings and actions towrd her sister Emma, Emma really does not seem to contribute anything to the household and the family, but rather is a source of a burdon to them, and whatever happend, she is not completely free of blame from her siutation, as she did have an affair with the baker, without having any furture plans to stay with him.

:lol:Oh good, we are finally disagreeing, DM; I was wondering what was going on lately.;) I don't know if we can assume all of that from the scant information that is given in the story but maybe we can surmise somethings about Emma. I will have to re-read that part over again, because I really can't recall exactly my impression on her quality of mothering.

Even the father and brother work out of the house to provide some income, even if they are burdonsome when they are home, the very house that they live in, is on account of the father's wages.

Yes, they do. But women in the house do the chores and housework - doesn't that count for anything? Times were tough back then; they did not have automatic washers and sometimes water had to be drawn from wells. I am sure that this is a strain on all, and mostly the women, having a baby to care for.

And Hilda works inspite of being sick as well as taking charge of order within the house. While Bertha has to look after the father, and tend to household chores.

Yes, true but I got the impression she did so with some bit of resentment. I think that might be true now of Bertha as well - having to take care of the father and look after the welfare of the baby.

Emma dose not do anything but sulk over her baby of which she ineffectively cares for, for whatever reasons. She has added another mouth to feed in the house, and cause the family shame, but does nothing.

Well, we are only given a small window into one day's activity in this household. Can we make the assumption that Emma always sulks over the baby or neglects it as far as care is concerned? How do you know she does nothing? Is there additional text to support that assumption?

Dark Muse

09-01-2008, 11:36 PM

Janine

09-01-2008, 11:49 PM

I do not think I assumed any more than you did about her. There is no proof within the story that she is suffering from 'post pardem depression' you yourself had imposed a lot of your own personal experince upon Emma, that really is not shown within the story, and is just speulcation.

True, I only sited it as a possibility, in conjuction with her not appearing to be express her maternal feelings towards her baby, at this particular time. Alone with the child I don't know how she would react or be. Right now they are all nervously awaiting the arrival of the parson. I don't think any of them could be said to be entirely behaving, as they do on a daily basis, but I could be wrong. There is no evidence either way.

Janine

09-04-2008, 01:21 PM

I will post more of the text to discuss, hope that is ok with everyone. Where is everyone anyway?

Here is the next section of text:

"E'll come--'e'll come!" assured the stranger.
A few minutes later Bertha hurried into the kitchen, taking off her apron. The dog barked furiously. She opened the door, commanded the dog to silence, and said: "He will be quiet now, Mr Kendal."

"Thank you," said a sonorous voice, and there was the sound of a bicycle being propped against a wall. A clergyman entered, a big-boned, thin, ugly man of nervous manner. He went straight to the father.

"Ah--how are you?" he asked musically, peering down on the great frame of the miner, ruined by locomotor ataxy.

His voice was full of gentleness, but he seemed as if he could not see distinctly, could not get things clear.

"Have you hurt you hand?" he said comfortingly, seeing the white rag.
"It wor nöwt but a pestered bit o' coal as dropped, an' I put my hand on th' hub. I thought tha worna commin'."

The familiar 'tha', and the reproach, were unconscious retaliation on the old man's part. The minister smiled, half wistfully, half indulgently. He was full of vague tenderness. Then he turned to the young mother, who flushed sullenly because her dishonoured breast was uncovered.

"How are you?" he asked, very softly and gently, as if she were ill and he were mindful of her.

"I'm all right," she replied, awkwardly taking his hand without rising, hiding her face and the anger that rose in her.

"Yes--yes"--he peered down at the baby, which sucked with distended mouth upon the firm breast. "Yes, yes." He seemed lost in a dim musing.
Coming to, he shook hands unseeingly with the woman.

Presently they all went into the next room, the minister hesitating to help his crippled old deacon.

"I can go by myself, thank yer," testily replied the father.

A few things stand out in this section concerning the father...his 'locomotor ataxy' is again emphasised. I am not sure what that is; but will try looking it up online. Then this statement: "The familiar 'tha', and the reproach, were unconscious retaliation on the old man's part." This part is interesting. 'tha' would indicate the common language of Lawrence's father, as well...sort of a model for this father. I was curious about the part 'unconscious retaliation'...I imagine the man feels very much in the background and when addressed he is addressed directly this is new to him and sort of uncomfortable at this time; then he retreats back into the background again or his 'unconscious relaliation'. The last statement indictes his independence in not needing or wanting the parson's help.

What impression do you have of the parson, Dark Muse?

Dark Muse

09-04-2008, 05:55 PM

locomotor ataxy is a nervous system disorder. It talks a lot about it here in detail.

http://www.1911encyclopedia.org/Locomotor_Ataxia

His voice was full of gentleness, but he seemed as if he could not see distinctly, could not get things clear.

I found this discription to by quite currious. Particuarly the way it says "He could not get things clear" and I had wondered at just what was meant by that, though I am not completely sure.

"How are you?" he asked, very softly and gently, as if she were ill and he were mindful of her.

I found it intersting in the way in which the parson here views the mother as if she were ill, on account of her shameful situation. He treats her as if she had some sort of disease.

It is a bit ironical considering the father truly is ill, and yet the parson is comftrable with him. While he is awakard around the women.

"Yes--yes"--he peered down at the baby, which sucked with distended mouth upon the firm breast. "Yes, yes." He seemed lost in a dim musing.
Coming to, he shook hands unseeingly with the woman.

Here he does not seem to quite know what to do with himself, as he just keeps repeating himself.

And once more it refers to his inablity to "See" though I do not think that this is meant to be taken as litteraly as if the Parson truly has a problem with his eyesight, but the way in which there seems to be something about him, that makes what is happening around him unclear in his view. I cannot quite make out.

Janine

09-05-2008, 11:05 AM

locomotor ataxy is a nervous system disorder. It talks a lot about it here in detail.

http://www.1911encyclopedia.org/Locomotor_Ataxia

Thanks for the link. I just checked it out and read/skimmed part of it. Seem being neurological in nature I could see how his mind might be somewhat affected and explain that statement you say below is curious. Perhaps he could not think being distracted from pain or discomfort. Also it says their eye-sight is affected so maybe the last part of the line refers more to his sight. Even a small loss of sight can make one confused and disoriented. Perhaps this is why 'he could not get things clear'.

I found this discription to by quite currious. Particuarly the way it says "He could not get things clear" and I had wondered at just what was meant by that, though I am not completely sure.

I found it intersting in the way in which the parson here views the mother as if she were ill, on account of her shameful situation. He treats her as if she had some sort of disease.

I did, too. Plus it he felt embarrassed seeing the mother's breat naked feeding the baby. In someway he feels intrusive and so he treats her as though ill. It is nice he askes how she is though; she did give birth to the child and her situation must be stressful.

It is a bit ironical considering the father truly is ill, and yet the parson is comftrable with him. While he is awakard around the women.

Does he relate better to a man? Perhaps that is the case.

Here he does not seem to quite know what to do with himself, as he just keeps repeating himself.

Perhaps that is nervousness, given the situtation and as you said 'he does not seem to quite know what to do with himself' being now the central figure in the family and the situtation there.

And once more it refers to his inablity to "See" though I do not think that this is meant to be taken as litteraly as if the Parson truly has a problem with his eyesight, but the way in which there seems to be something about him, that makes what is happening around him unclear in his view. I cannot quite make out.

Oh, maybe I mistoke the words in your first comments to mean from the father. If so that is not true - it being due to his illness. The parson does not seem to be able to see clearing would be curious; however he is basically an outsider and he probably feels so out of place there. He can't quite grasp the circumstances and the situation around him.

Dark Muse

09-05-2008, 11:27 AM

Oh, maybe I mistoke the words in your first comments to mean from the father. If so that is not true - it being due to his illness. The parson does not seem to be able to see clearing would be curious; however he is basically an outsider and he probably feels so out of place there. He can't quite grasp the circumstances and the situation around him.

No, the first part is speaking of the Parson, not the farther, here is the full quote:

"Ah--how are you?" he asked musically, peering down on the great frame of the miner, ruined by locomotor ataxy.

His voice was full of gentleness, but he seemed as if he could not see distinctly, could not get things clear.

Janine

09-05-2008, 11:41 AM

No, the first part is speaking of the Parson, not the farther, here is the full quote:

Oh yes, then that is interesting. One would expect that statement to be more about the father - well maybe not the 'gentleness' part, but he does seem subdued at times, though sad.

Janine

09-08-2008, 12:48 PM

DM, seems it is basically you and I left in here, so please let me know if you think I should post more text so that we can advance towards the ending.

Dark Muse

09-08-2008, 12:50 PM

Yes I think I am ready for the next part of the text.

Janine

09-08-2008, 03:54 PM

Ok, will post it tomorrow.

Virgil

09-09-2008, 09:23 AM

I'm back. I will need to catch up, and perhaps reread the story. Perhaps by tonight.

Dark Muse

09-09-2008, 11:54 AM

Welcome back

Janine

09-09-2008, 02:24 PM

Yeah, good to see you back, Virgil. Take your time catching up.

Janine

09-10-2008, 05:32 PM

Here is the next part of the text:

Soon all were seated. Everybody was separated in feeling and isolated at table. High tea was spread in the middle kitchen, a large, ugly room kept for special occasions.

Hilda appeared last, and the clumsy, raw-boned clergyman rose to meet her. He was afraid of this family, the well-to-do old collier, and the brutal, self-willed children. But Hilda was queen among them. She was the clever one, and had been to college. She felt responsible for the keeping up of a high standard of conduct in all the members of the family. There was a difference between the Rowbothams and the common collier folk. Woodbine Cottage was a superior house to most--and was built in pride by the old man. She, Hilda, was a college-trained schoolmistress; she meant to keep up the prestige of her house in spite of blows.

She had put on a dress of green voile for this special occasion. But she was very thin; her neck protruded painfully. The clergyman, however, greeted her almost with reverence, and, with some assumption of dignity, she sat down before the tray. At the far end of the table sat the broken, massive frame of her father. Next to him was the youngest daughter, nursing the restless baby. The minister sat between Hilda and Bertha, hulking his bony frame uncomfortably.

There was a great spread on the table, of tinned fruits and tinned salmon, ham and cakes. Miss Rowbotham kept a keen eye on everything: she felt the importance of the occasion. The young mother who had given rise to all this solemnity ate in sulky discomfort, snatching sullen little smiles at her child, smiles which came, in spite of her, when she felt its little limbs stirring vigorously on her lap. Bertha, sharp and abrupt, was chiefly concerned with the baby. She scorned her sister, and treated her like dirt. But the infant was a streak of light to her. Miss Rowbotham concerned herself with the function and the conversation. Her hands fluttered; she talked in little volleys exceedingly nervous. Towards the end of the meal, there came a pause. The old man wiped his mouth with his red handkerchief, then, his blue eyes going fixed and staring, he began to speak, in a loose, slobbering fashion, charging his words at the clergyman.

"Well, mester--we'n axed you to come her ter christen this childt, an' you'n come, an' I'm sure we're very thankful. I can't see lettin' the poor blessed childt miss baptizing, an' they aren't for goin' to church wi't--" He seemed to lapse into a muse. "So," he resumed, "we'v axed you to come here to do the job. I'm not sayin' as it's not 'ard on us, it is. I'm breakin' up, an' mother's gone. I don't like leavin' a girl o' mine in a situation like 'ers is, but what the Lord's done, He's done, an' it's no matter murmuring. . . . There's one thing to be thankful for, an' we are thankful for it: they never need know the want of bread."

Alexei

09-11-2008, 04:48 PM

Janine

09-11-2008, 05:24 PM

Since I am back I want to re-join this discussion as well, but I can't really understand what's going on (yeah, I am slow, but there are so many changes around here :lol:). I am not sure which story are you actually reading (is it "The Christening" or I have missed something while trying to find the story title), but I would be glad to read it and discuss it, I think I can catch up with you if I try hard enough. I can of course just wait till you start reading another short story, but since catching up look like a kind of challenge I think it will be more fun :lol:. I hope you won't mind. I have to confess that you seems to have a very nice and interesting discussion and I'd like to join the party :lol:;)

Alexei, welcome back and do join-into this discussion. Virgil has to catch up, also. We can wait until you read the story, and I know you are a rapid reader! Yes, it is "The Christening"...you can find it online and it is not very long a story or complicated. If you need to link to the story, let me know. Also, I will point you to the first page of this discussion if you want to review it.

Next month we probably will take a break; I have already discussed this with Virgil and Quark and I feel sure Dark Muse is in agreement; she seems involved in a lot of the new things.

Therefore, we have the rest of this month to finish out this story. In between, I plan to post some material about Lawrence, where he lived and wrote, maybe some photos, etc to fill in the month's time (the break). I have to break due to some personal problems, but will continue to post daily.

Alexei, glad to be your first friend in your profile page. Hope you had a good summer!

Dark Muse

09-11-2008, 05:57 PM

Soon all were seated. Everybody was separated in feeling and isolated at table. High tea was spread in the middle kitchen, a large, ugly room kept for special occasions.

I really liked this discription. I can see them each sitting at thier own places at the table not really connected to each other even though they are gathered around together. The family really does not seem to have any true unity to it.

I also found it interesting the way in which the room itself is said to be ugly.

Hilda appeared last, and the clumsy, raw-boned clergyman rose to meet her. He was afraid of this family, the well-to-do old collier, and the brutal, self-willed children. But Hilda was queen among them.

The clergry man seems to be comical, first he comes in nervous and the way in which he fars the family, and is described as being bony and clumsy, it is hard to really take him seriously.

She felt responsible for the keeping up of a high standard of conduct in all the members of the family. There was a difference between the Rowbothams and the common collier folk. Woodbine Cottage was a superior house to most--and was built in pride by the old man. She, Hilda, was a college-trained schoolmistress; she meant to keep up the prestige of her house in spite of blows.

It seems that Hilda is just leaving in a dream, her ideas about thier family is just an illusion, though they may really be more well-off compared to some of the other families, but they are completly falling apart. It seems Hilda is just trying to hold on to some ideal instead of acknowleding the reality.

She had put on a dress of green voile for this special occasion. But she was very thin; her neck protruded painfully. The clergyman, however, greeted her almost with reverence, and, with some assumption of dignity, she sat down before the tray.

I wonder if there is any particular reason for why she choose to ware a dress of green.

Also I find the clegryman's reaction to Hilda to be interesting considering how he reacts to the rest of the family. The way in which he is frightend of the other children and nervous within the household.

The young mother who had given rise to all this solemnity ate in sulky discomfort, snatching sullen little smiles at her child, smiles which came, in spite of her, when she felt its little limbs stirring vigorously on her lap. Bertha, sharp and abrupt, was chiefly concerned with the baby. She scorned her sister, and treated her like dirt. But the infant was a streak of light to her. Miss Rowbotham concerned herself with the function and the conversation. Her hands fluttered; she talked in little volleys exceedingly nervous. Towards the end of the meal, there came a pause. The old man wiped his mouth with his red handkerchief, then, his blue eyes going fixed and staring, he began to speak, in a loose, slobbering fashion, charging his words at the clergyman.

Here you can see the way in which the family members are seperated from each other. Emma seems more or less oblvious to what is going on, and does not really seem concenred with the activities around her, she is sulky over her baby and picking at food, while Bertha's primary concern is for the baby, and the father seeks out the clegry man, and Hilda, is trying to rule over everything and concenrting herself with the event itself.

Alexei

09-11-2008, 07:10 PM

Alexei, welcome back and do join-into this discussion. Virgil has to catch up, also. We can wait until you read the story, and I know you are a rapid reader! Yes, it is "The Christening"...you can find it online and it is not very long a story or complicated. If you need to link to the story, let me know. Also, I will point you to the first page of this discussion if you want to review it.

Next month we probably will take a break; I have already discussed this with Virgil and Quark and I feel sure Dark Muse is in agreement; she seems involved in a lot of the new things.

Therefore, we have the rest of this month to finish out this story. In between, I plan to post some material about Lawrence, where he lived and wrote, maybe some photos, etc to fill in the month's time (the break). I have to break due to some personal problems, but will continue to post daily.

Alexei, glad to be your first friend in your profile page. Hope you had a good summer!

That's great. Fortunately, I actually have it. Recently I found a book at home with short stories by L. I was very happy when I found it. It turned out it was my mother's, but she have forgotten about it. I've already started and if the quotation marks the part you're going to discuss, I've already read it, but I would like to read your previous posts on the story, so I will take a day or two.

As for the next month it's fine with me. I am last year in my school so I have a lot of things to do (well, I know it sounds stupid to say I have things to do, when compare it with someone who actually works, but still it's amazing how something like homework could take a lot of time :lol:).

And the L'photos&info idea is very good :thumbs_up. Ill be glad to see it, I am not well acquainted with L's biography so I will use this great opportunity to fill the knowledge gaps. So, I am looking forward to it ;)

Janine

09-11-2008, 09:06 PM

First, good post and observations, Dark Muse. I think I agree with all your said. I will read it over again later tonight.

That's great. Fortunately, I actually have it. Recently I found a book at home with short stories by L. I was very happy when I found it. It turned out it was my mother's, but she have forgotten about it. I've already started and if the quotation marks the part you're going to discuss, I've already read it, but I would like to read your previous posts on the story, so I will take a day or two.

How fortunate you found that copy of his stories. So your mother liked Lawrence at one time, too. You mother is probably younger than me. I discovered his work in my late 20's. Before that I read Hesse, like you say in your profile and many other authors. Mostly though I was busy with art college and then babycare. My son will be 35 end of this month.
Glad you read the story already, Alexei; I figured as much with your history of reading fast. Good idea to look over and review all the posts. The very first post to this story - my introduction - is #2194 and page 147 - you will see a photo with white baby shoes and some background on this particular story. A few posts later I begin to post the actual text.

As for the next month it's fine with me. I am last year in my school so I have a lot of things to do (well, I know it sounds stupid to say I have things to do, when compare it with someone who actually works, but still it's amazing how something like homework could take a lot of time :lol:).

Oh, that is wonderful. I wish you all good luck this coming year. No, don't feel that way; school can be just as taxing as work, maybe even more so. I hear some many young people say they get tons of homework these days. It must really bog your down.

And the L'photos&info idea is very good :thumbs_up. Ill be glad to see it, I am not well acquainted with L's biography so I will use this great opportunity to fill the knowledge gaps. So, I am looking forward to it ;)

Oh, good; I am so glad you will be interested. I know much about Lawrence's biography; I have read several full-length ones so far and plan on still others. I have a file of photos of places central to his life. I have some on Photobucket that will be easy access, along with others I can upload to the site from my files.

Virgil

09-11-2008, 09:08 PM

Hilda appeared last, and the clumsy, raw-boned clergyman rose to meet her. He was afraid of this family, the well-to-do old collier, and the brutal, self-willed children.
Our introduction to the clergyman is not positive. He comes across as inexperienced in the ways of the world. Also it is important to note that Lawrence characterizes the children as "self-willed". For Lawrence this is not a positive thing.

...The old man wiped his mouth with his red handkerchief, then, his blue eyes going fixed and staring, he began to speak, in a loose, slobbering fashion, charging his words at the clergyman.

"Well, mester--we'n axed you to come her ter christen this childt, an' you'n come, an' I'm sure we're very thankful. I can't see lettin' the poor blessed childt miss baptizing, an' they aren't for goin' to church wi't--" He seemed to lapse into a muse. "So," he resumed, "we'v axed you to come here to do the job. I'm not sayin' as it's not 'ard on us, it is. I'm breakin' up, an' mother's gone. I don't like leavin' a girl o' mine in a situation like 'ers is, but what the Lord's done, He's done, an' it's no matter murmuring. . . . There's one thing to be thankful for, an' we are thankful for it: they never need know the want of bread."
Here we see the simplicity of the old man, which stands in sharp contrast to his "self-willed" daughters. He's humble and God respecting and his accent signifies earthiness.

Janine

09-11-2008, 09:15 PM

Our introduction to the clergyman is not positive. He comes across as inexperienced in the ways of the world. Also it is important to note that Lawrence characterizes the children as "self-willed". For Lawrence this is not a positive thing.

Well, hello ghost-man! ;) Finally a post from you. I would agree with what you say here. I do think that Lawrence sees women with strength but in this case the woman mostly seem over-bearing, like his own mother. The father seems to relate more to his father don't you think, Virgil? He seems like a very 'broken' man.

Here we see the simplicity of the old man, which stands in sharp contrast to his "self-willed" daughters. He's humble and God respecting and his accent signifies earthiness.

Yes, he is humbled now and I think he acts quilty about his position in the family when actually he worked hard to give them all a softer existence. Hilda seems to me to play the martre somewhat. She seems to bask in her own suffering.

Virgil

09-11-2008, 09:30 PM

Well, hello ghost-man! ;) Finally a post from you.
:p I'm back, like it or not. ;)

I would agree with what you say here. I do think that Lawrence sees women with strength but in this case the woman mostly seem over-bearing, like his own mother. The father seems to relate more to his father don't you think, Virgil? He seems like a very 'broken' man.
Do you mean Lawrence's father? I don't know. He has the same earthiness. But this fellow seems more religious and spiritual than his father. He may be broken but he has the best speech of the story and I take him to be the hero.

Janine

09-11-2008, 09:42 PM

:p I'm back, like it or not. ;)

Hey, you under estimate me....

Do you mean Lawrence's father? I don't know. He has the same earthiness. But this fellow seems more religious and spiritual than his father. He may be broken but he has the best speech of the story and I take him to be the hero.

Yes, true. I didn't think of him exactly as the 'hero', but maybe you are looking at it more from the male perspective. I will have to think about that for awhile. Wonder what Quark things. I wonder where he ran off to also...guess he is busy with classes.

Alexei

09-12-2008, 08:56 AM

I finished the story and managed to catch up with your previous post. Thanks, Janine, without knowing what page/post to start from I was going to lose an hour trying to find out the beginning of the current discussion.

I will start discussing the last part of the text posted, because I don't see any sense in going back to the beginning of the story especially after you've made such good analysis.

Dark Muse, I generally agree with what you've said, it seems we have similar ideas about the text - when I read you post I though that you've been interested in the same details as I was :D

I also found it interesting the way in which the room itself is said to be ugly.

I was curious about it. Still, I am more interested in the fact that this ugly isn't any other room that the family uses daily, but the room for the special occasions. The thing that bothers me is that such room is supposed to be somehow the best in the house - the one cleanest, brightest, with newest furnitures and so on...

It seems that Hilda is just leaving in a dream, her ideas about thier family is just an illusion, though they may really be more well-off compared to some of the other families, but they are completely falling apart. It seems Hilda is just trying to hold on to some ideal instead of acknowledging the reality.

Yes, you are right, but there is something else after this passage that makes me wonder. You've notice how suddenly Hilda becomes Miss Rowbotham. It is much more formal and it sounds more like some kind of title. This is in accord with the queen bee theory - it seems like some final evidence that she is in charge.

Dark Muse

09-12-2008, 12:20 PM

I was curious about it. Still, I am more interested in the fact that this ugly isn't any other room that the family uses daily, but the room for the special occasions. The thing that bothers me is that such room is supposed to be somehow the best in the house - the one cleanest, brightest, with newest furnitures and so on...

Yes I thought that was curious. It could indicate that they do not really have many special occasions, so they have not really taken the time to fix up the room, but just use it on special occasions, because it is the biggest room in the house.

And it also refelcts the state of the family itself. When they get together, inspite of Hilda's efforts, it is a choatic event, they do not truly "come together"

Yes, you are right, but there is something else after this passage that makes me wonder. You've notice how suddenly Hilda becomes Miss Rowbotham. It is much more formal and it sounds more like some kind of title. This is in accord with the queen bee theory - it seems like some final evidence that she is in charge.

Yes, and the clegryman does himself refer to her as being the Queen of them all.

Janine

09-12-2008, 02:53 PM

Only a few words for now. Keep in mind that Lawrence referred to his own wife, Freida as the QB or the Queen Bee; interesting isn't it? His biography always creeps into his work.

Alexei and DM, you both seem to be doing a good job discussing this. Know that I am reading along. I just have to be brief now as there are somethings I must attend to on the phone.

Hopefully also by tonight Virgil will catch up and comment some more.

Be back later on.

Virgil

09-12-2008, 06:15 PM

Here you can see the way in which the family members are seperated from each other. Emma seems more or less oblvious to what is going on, and does not really seem concenred with the activities around her, she is sulky over her baby and picking at food, while Bertha's primary concern is for the baby, and the father seeks out the clegry man, and Hilda, is trying to rule over everything and concenrting herself with the event itself.
You know I have a hard time figuring out Emma. She is sulky and doesn't say much. Obviously she is inexperienced in raising the child and we do know that her decision to not acknowledge the father is the center of the story. But there is nothing else, at least that I remember.

Alexei

09-14-2008, 06:59 AM

Dark Muse, I completely agree with you.

You know I have a hard time figuring out Emma. She is sulky and doesn't say much. Obviously she is inexperienced in raising the child and we do know that her decision to not acknowledge the father is the center of the story. But there is nothing else, at least that I remember.

I can't see Emma feeling ashamed or may be a bit guilty for the way her actions result on the whole family. I find this interesting. Especially, after we know that Hilda is ashamed. I think that somehow, Emma is the one that has already realised the whole situation - it seems like she is already beyond this point when you are still trying to figure out what exactly is happening and it is going to happen and she has already been reconciled with the thought. To me it seems like she is absolutely sure her life is ruined by the child and she can't do anything about it, it results in this bitter disappointment.

Virgil

09-14-2008, 09:38 AM

Dark Muse

09-14-2008, 12:26 PM

I remember her blushing at least once in the story, if not more. But she does seem that other than a superficial embarressment, she does not seem to care about it. Remember it was her decision to disregard the father.

She blushes when the clegryman comes in and her breast is exposed becasue she is nursing the child.

And it said early in the story, that when she looked at the child she hated it becasue she saw it as a symbol

Janine

09-14-2008, 01:00 PM

Dark Muse, I completely agree with you.

I can't see Emma feeling ashamed or may be a bit guilty for the way her actions result on the whole family. I find this interesting. Especially, after we know that Hilda is ashamed. I think that somehow, Emma is the one that has already realised the whole situation - it seems like she is already beyond this point when you are still trying to figure out what exactly is happening and it is going to happen and she has already been reconciled with the thought. To me it seems like she is absolutely sure her life is ruined by the child and she can't do anything about it, it results in this bitter disappointment.

Not sure what you are saying here, Alexei when you say 'can't see Emma feeling ashamed....' did you mean can't or can?
Ohterwise I think you are right - Emma is resigned and accepts her situtation as a woman and feeling her life is now ruined or over. Perhaps she has not exactly bonded entirely with the child; maybe she will and maybe she always will feel resentment and distance from her own child, who knows?

As far as her blushing when exposing her breast to the clergyman, I would think that would pretty much be natural for most woman even today. I know my daughter-in-law was modest about that. Some women are more open about nursing and some are not.

Virgil

09-14-2008, 01:10 PM

She blushes when the clegryman comes in and her breast is exposed becasue she is nursing the child.

And it said early in the story, that when she looked at the child she hated it becasue she saw it as a symbol

As far as her blushing when exposing her breast to the clergyman, I would think that would pretty much be natural for most woman even today. I know my daughter-in-law was modest about that. Some women are more open about nursing and some are not.

Yes, exposing a breast would be embarressing. If that is the only reason she blushes, then Alexei is probably right, she does not feel ashamed over her situation. And that would be significant.

Dark Muse

09-14-2008, 02:00 PM

Here is what is says

Then he turned to the young mother, who flushed sullenly becasue her dishonoured breast was uncovered.

"How are YOU?" he asked, very softly and gently, as if she were ill and he were mindful of her.

"I'm all right" she replied, awkwardly taking his hand without rising, hiding her face and the anger that rose in her."

Janine

09-14-2008, 02:11 PM

Virgil

09-14-2008, 05:16 PM

Two significant words in that passage Dark Muse - 'dishonoured' in reference to her uncovered breast....and 'anger' ...that rose up in her.

I do feel with the inclusion of these two words they are meant to be more significant than mere embarrassment. I think she does feel dishonored and is now quite angry about her current situtation - woman who had children out of wedlock back then were pretty much disgraced. What would be next for her life? I guess the woman feels quite hopeless now.

I'm not sure I agree with that Janine. She feels embarressed over her exposed breast, yet she feels nothing about her situation. I may be wrong but I think Lawrence by emphasizing an embarressment over her breast is bringing to attention that she doesn't quite care about her personal situation. Like I said I may be wrong.

Dark Muse

09-14-2008, 05:23 PM

I do think the word "dishonored" was put thier intentionally, and though she may feel embrassed about being exposed, I think more is meant to it than that. As well, I do not think she would truly be angery, if she was only embrassed about being caught nursing.

And if she did not feel any sense of shame, then why early does it say:

She hated it when she looked at it and saw it as a symbol.

If she did not feel any sense of shame, than I do not think she would view the baby as a hateful symbol.

Janine

09-14-2008, 07:15 PM

On this one Virgil, I would have to agree with Dark Muse's thinking. I think Alexei agrees as well, but not sure.

Virgil

09-14-2008, 08:00 PM

I do think the word "dishonored" was put thier intentionally, and though she may feel embrassed about being exposed, I think more is meant to it than that.
Wel, that goes for both our readings. I agree with that. More is meant by it.

And if she did not feel any sense of shame, then why early does it say:

If she did not feel any sense of shame, than I do not think she would view the baby as a hateful symbol.
Yes hateful symbol, but why is that shame for her situation? She created her situation.

Like I said above, I don't really understand Emma. You guys may be right about this, but it's ambiguous.

Dark Muse

09-14-2008, 08:47 PM

I do agree, and have mentioned earlier in one of my posts that she does bear responsablity for her situation to some degree, but, I think by the way others might look at her and judge her, she could still feel shame about having a child out of wedlock, even if she choose to leave the father, we do not know what happend between them. She is not completely innocent, but that does not mean she cannot feel shamed by what happend.

Virgil

09-14-2008, 09:12 PM

Alexei

09-15-2008, 02:08 PM

Not sure what you are saying here, Alexei when you say 'can't see Emma feeling ashamed....' did you mean can't or can?
Ohterwise I think you are right - Emma is resigned and accepts her situtation as a woman and feeling her life is now ruined or over. Perhaps she has not exactly bonded entirely with the child; maybe she will and maybe she always will feel resentment and distance from her own child, who knows?

Yes, Janine, I meant "can't" I agree with what you've said. I am sorry about the previous post, but I haven't had the chance to practice my English for a while so I'll probably make more mistakes than usual for a week or two, till I a get used to it again :blush::blush::blush:

Two significant words in that passage Dark Muse - 'dishonoured' in reference to her uncovered breast....and 'anger' ...that rose up in her.

I do feel with the inclusion of these two words they are meant to be more significant than mere embarrassment. I think she does feel dishonored and is now quite angry about her current situtation - woman who had children out of wedlock back then were pretty much disgraced. What would be next for her life? I guess the woman feels quite hopeless now.

That's what I think too. That's why I think she isn't ashamed. In my opinion she beyond that point now. I suppose there was some shame, but now it is replaced by anger and disappointment.

Dark Muse

09-15-2008, 02:26 PM

Janine

09-15-2008, 03:12 PM

To me feelings of anger and dissapointment are linked with feeling shame, for it is a sign she has not truely "moved one" or "made peace" with what happend. If she was really past that point than she would not be sulky with the baby, she would not longer be connected to such feelings of resenement if she had got over her feelings of shame about what happend.

I do not think she would still be angry about it if she was free from all feelings of shame. I think her anger is drawn from the shame.

Well, really who knows exactly what Emma does feel or is she feels true shame or not? Is that this significant to the story? I think if one had the live with the constant reminder of having had the baby out of wedlock and she will, seeing the baby everyday (as she said 'a symbol') and also having to put up with outsiders opinions of her as long as she lives then I do think she feels something negative. Whether it is now beyond true shame and more of 'disgust' or 'apathy', is to me, not that significant. I only know the woman is now in a bad position and obviously she and the whole family realise there is no going back and they must accept their lot in life, and the fact that now they will be viewed as the tainted family.

Janine

09-16-2008, 10:28 PM

Should I post some more of the story to discuss so we can move along towards ending this discussion?

Next Part of the Text:

Miss Rowbotham, the lady of the family, sat very stiff and pained during this discourse. She was sensitive to so many things that she was bewildered. She felt her young sister's shame, then a kind of swift protecting love for the baby, a feeling that included the mother; she was at a loss before her father's religious sentiment, and she felt and resented bitterly the mark upon the family, against which the common folk could lift their fingers. Still she winced from the sound of her father's words. It was a painful ordeal.

"It is hard for you," began the clergyman in his soft, lingering, unworldly voice. "It is hard for you today, but the Lord gives comfort in His time. A man child is born unto us, therefore let us rejoice and be glad. If sin has entered in among us, let us purify out hearts before the Lord. . . ."

He went on with his discourse. The young mother lifted the whimpering infant, till its face was hid in her loose hair. She was hurt, and a little glowering anger shone in her face. But nevertheless her fingers clasped the body of the child beautifully. She was stupefied with anger against this emotion let loose on her account.

From these passages, I don't get the impression that Emma is such an unloving or uncaring mother. It says "her fingers clasped the body of the child beautifully." I think also these passages indicate the feelings of shame she and her sisters have now been forced by society to endure, from her actions. I think that probably she feels more 'guilt' over bringing this shame upon her whole family. I also found this paragraph describing how Miss Rowbothan felt about the baby and her little sister of key interest to the story: "She felt her young sister's shame, then a kind of swift protecting love for the baby, a feeling that included the mother." In this she does not seem cold but more understanding of her sister's situation and she seems to feel true love and concern for the baby.

Any other thoughts, anyone?

Dark Muse

09-17-2008, 06:18 PM

It was always my feeling that Bertha cared more about the baby than anyone else within the family.

While Emma might not be an uncaring mother, it seems to me her love for the child is stemmed more just from an instinct. There is something primitive about her love for the baby, and her feelings of love, are always tied into opposing feelings.

First it said she saw the child as a hateful symbol but than loved it when she held it.

And here it says, that she held the child beautifully inspite of the anger she felt.

Though I do think Emma may feel shame about the situation, I do not think she truly feels guilt about what she has put the family through, she seems completely unconcenred with the family, and seems to think primairly of herself as she is always either sulking or seething.

And her anger seems a bit misplaced sense she does bear some responsibility for what has happened. She did through actions of her own put herself in the situation she is in. Though we do not know for sure who left who, she was having an affair with a man of whom she did not have a real commitment with. She took the risk.

And right or wrong, in that time period, that was something women had to be mindful of, they knew the view soceity held, and what would become of them if they should get themselvesd in such a situation.

Virgil

09-17-2008, 08:05 PM

It was always my feeling that Bertha cared more about the baby than anyone else within the family.

While Emma might not be an uncaring mother, it seems to me her love for the child is stemmed more just from an instinct. There is something primitive about her love for the baby, and her feelings of love, are always tied into opposing feelings.

First it said she saw the child as a hateful symbol but than loved it when she held it.

Where does it say she loved the child? That's her sister who feels the protective love.

Though I do think Emma may feel shame about the situation, I do not think she truly feels guilt about what she has put the family through, she seems completely unconcenred with the family, and seems to think primairly of herself as she is always either sulking or seething.

Yes I think we're in agreement after all. She feels guilt like a criminal who feels sorry he got caught.

And her anger seems a bit misplaced sense she does bear some responsibility for what has happened. She did through actions of her own put herself in the situation she is in. Though we do not know for sure who left who, she was having an affair with a man of whom she did not have a real commitment with. She took the risk.

And right or wrong, in that time period, that was something women had to be mindful of, they knew the view soceity held, and what would become of them if they should get themselvesd in such a situation.
Well, she could have avoided this by marrying the father. We get no insight as to why she rejects him.

Dark Muse

09-17-2008, 08:09 PM

Where does it say she loved the child? That's her sister who feels the protective love.

Well it said at one point

She hated it when she looked at it, and saw it as a symbol, but when she felt it, her love was like a fire in her blood

Well, she could have avoided this by marrying the father. We get no insight as to why she rejects him.

The thing about that is, we do not really have any definite proof that she was not the one who was rejected by the father.

Virgil

09-17-2008, 08:12 PM

Well it said at one point

Oh yes, quite right.

The thing about that is, we do not really have any definite proof that she was not the one who was rejected by the father.
No? I thought it was certain but I have forgotten. I really need to read this again.

Janine

09-17-2008, 09:36 PM

I never got the impression about just who left who or why the couple did not end up together. Perhaps the family kept them apart - afterall, I don't believe they approved at all; but anyway you look at it, I doubt the story actually states the case between the mother and the father of this child. The only facts we are given here, are that they are no longer (apparently) together and do not seem to be intending to marry. I read the story several times now, and I think I would have picked up, on which of the two people was jilted, if that were the case. I don't recall any of the actual text indicating that fact. Just because the baker asks how Emma is doing does not prove to us that he was the one who was rejected, nor does that indicate that he did the rejecting.

Dark Muse

09-17-2008, 09:39 PM

Yes, the story leaves it rather vauge just what really happend between mother and father, and why things ended the way they did. It never really states it, and there are things within the story that could suggest either one of them was the rejected or rejecter depending on how you look at it.

Janine

09-17-2008, 11:40 PM

Dark Muse

09-18-2008, 11:17 PM

Yes what you say makes sense. I think in a way the act of the Christining was an act for the family itself not just for the baby, but it was something which they all went through, and I think it was thier hope that it would purify them as a whole.

Virgil

09-18-2008, 11:22 PM

I think maybe Lawrence intended it to be that way so that the reader would concentrate more on the dynamics within that particular family of mostly women, and one brother and the father, who is prominent to the story as well. Perhaps it is unimportant that we know the details between the mother and fathrer of the illegitimate child - only necessary is to know the child has been born out of wedlock and now the family feels disgrace concerning that fact. I think all the characters have mixed emotions in regard to this baby. The baby is innocent and pure, as babies are, so that it's presence makes it hard to ignore or to hate the child or feel totally shameful or angry towards the babe all of the time. I think the fact of the Christening is in a sense a way of redeeming themselves and the child. At least, they will know the child is now accepted by God, if not by the family totally. I don't know, does that make any sense?

Yes what you say makes sense. I think in a way the act of the Christining was an act for the family itself not just for the baby, but it was something which they all went through, and I think it was thier hope that it would purify them as a whole.

If that is the case, why does Lawrence start the story with the sister at the baker? No I think Emma's turning her back on the father is critical to the story.

Dark Muse

09-18-2008, 11:42 PM

Janine

09-19-2008, 01:33 AM

I do not think there is anything in the story to say for certain that Emma did reject the father. It is all just speculation. Though I am not really saying for sure one way or the other. But just looking at the story, if Emma did reject the father, than why is she so angery with him if it was all her choice?

I have to agree with you this time, Dark Muse, and not with you Virgil. Sometimes if I stand away and read these posts, I think you are all making up your own story. I still can't find one shred of text saying who rejected who. If you can back it up with text references, Virgil, I wish you would and set this impression right. I think pretty much we are left in the dark as to exactly what the romantic situation was between the baker and the mother of the child. The story begins over 9 month since they had any contact apparently, due to the results of their actions. I would say the sister is young and the older sisters mother her; perhaps they forbade her to see him again. We really could make up any story we pleased about what went wrong between them. Hey, Virgil, why do you guys always assume you are the ones being rejected. I think woman are rejected much more so than men.;)

Dark Muse, I also am in agreement with what you said above in answer to my last post. I agree - the Christening is a sort of purging process for the entire family. Somehow they are all interconnected and they seem to all share in the guilt of the youngest sibbling, at least the woman do. I don't know about the smart aleck brother; but the father seems to feel the guilt about the entire family - at least I get the impression with his outburst of emotion that he is taking on all the guilt at the end. Perhaps he is playing the martre. I wonder if the others are not joining in the same vane. I would say that no one is totally sincere here. They all are dysfunctional on their own and within the family. They all have their issues.

Virgil

09-19-2008, 12:28 PM

Janine

09-19-2008, 02:30 PM

I went back an reread the story and i have to admit that you ladies are correct. There is nothing definitive that says that Emma left him. It just strikes me that way. Why is that scene at the beginning between Hilda and the baker? And given that the three girls are described as strong willed, and we see how they treat their father, I just assumed Emma left him. If he left her than this is a rather ordinary story. But if she left him then the story is much more insightful. But I can't make up my mind which it is now. I will have to go with the notion that she left him since that offers us the most possibilities. But I grant you that it could be otherwise.

Well, Virgil, glad that you read it again and reconsidered your position. I did not really feel like reading it a third, or will it be fourth? eek... I think that we truly cannot assume, either way, the history between the two. I can't see an indication of either. If Hilda met up with the baker in the beginning, it could just be a way of introducing him into the story and later revealing his significance; afterall, if he is the father, he is being quite left out of the Christening, isn't he? He is left out of the baby's life altogether apparently. I don't believe he asked anything about the child; he only asked how Emma was; am I correct?I think Lawrence only hints at the fact, that they got together. He never even tells us how long - was it just a one night stand or a short term thing, even longer term? I don't think L cared that we knew that part of the story. Just because the two older sisters are strong willed, what makes you convinced the younger one is, as well? Perhaps she is not strong willed and gave into the father's advances? I have two sisters and know this to be true: sisters can be quite different in personality.

I think to assume or decide exactly how they normally are is inappropriate in this instance. They all are acting under unusual conditions, having this virtual stranger (the parson) stop in their house to Christen the baby; it is an uncomfortable situation for all, including this rather nervous shy parson.

Christening is a major event for many and signifies a lot of things connected with emotions and beliefs. It usually takes place after the wedding/marriage...in this case, that is not true and not a joyful even as it should be, because of the illegitimate child; their situation is altered and tainted by the shame they all are taking on themselves. Even though the neighbors and townspeople talk, the family itself, are the main ones accepting and putting on this shame - this 'scarlet letter', so to speak. In doing so they point the finger at the perpetrator of the action and that is Emma. Perhaps Emma has good reason to feel as she does, sulky and downtrodden. Afterall ,she is the one who brought this shame into their house, and none of them can ever forget it; nor can she alter the fact. The child is there and in a way the child is a symbol of her shame to all present.

Dark Muse

09-19-2008, 02:45 PM

Yes, you are correct that the Baker only asked Hilda how her sister was. He did not say anything of the child.

Though we are not to know how things were between the two of them. I do think that it is an important part of the story that he is being left out of the Christening. Though I can see where Virgil is coming from, if you look at the way the father is in the house is being treated by the women, the Baker in a way is just another example of a father being degraded, or having his roll "lessened" by women. He is being excluded from the life of the child. The mother is being given more importance over him in this way.

I think this story does reflect the ideas of the woman's positioning for power or authority over men and the effects in which the struggle has upon family life, and the household at large.

The women are trying to rule the roose here, and in a way express the fact that they haven't any real need for the men in thier lives, in spite of the fact that other than Hilda, the men are the ones who are earning the money.

Virgil

09-19-2008, 04:21 PM

If Hilda met up with the baker in the beginning, it could just be a way of introducing him into the story and later revealing his significance;
What significance would that be? If his significance were only to have jilted Emma, why not just say that and never have him appear at all?

afterall, if he is the father, he is being quite left out of the Christening, isn't he? He is left out of the baby's life altogether apparently. I don't believe he asked anything about the child; he only asked how Emma was; am I correct?
Yes that is correct, but it strikes me that he is bitter.

I think Lawrence only hints at the fact, that they got together. He never even tells us how long - was it just a one night stand or a short term thing, even longer term? I don't think L cared that we knew that part of the story.
It's rather vague, which was my point earlier. It's very strange that a story about Christening a bastard child gives nothing about the relationship of the parents.

Just because the two older sisters are strong willed, what makes you convinced the younger one is, as well? Perhaps she is not strong willed and gave into the father's advances? I have two sisters and know this to be true: sisters can be quite different in personality.
Wasn't it Emma who excoriated her father? And not only that she physically "pushes him into his chair." She's strong willed. I think there is evidence that all three are strong willed.

Christening is a major event for many and signifies a lot of things connected with emotions and beliefs.
Christening is the central event of the story; we haven't gotten to the religious themes yet.

Though we are not to know how things were between the two of them. I do think that it is an important part of the story that he is being left out of the Christening. Though I can see where Virgil is coming from, if you look at the way the father is in the house is being treated by the women, the Baker in a way is just another example of a father being degraded, or having his roll "lessened" by women. He is being excluded from the life of the child. The mother is being given more importance over him in this way.

I think this story does reflect the ideas of the woman's positioning for power or authority over men and the effects in which the struggle has upon family life, and the household at large.

The women are trying to rule the roose here, and in a way express the fact that they haven't any real need for the men in thier lives, in spite of the fact that other than Hilda, the men are the ones who are earning the money.
Exactly!! That's why I must make the assumption that Emma left the baker. I guess if you guys don't accept that, then I understand. It's not clear. But to me the story doesn't hold together if I don't make that assumption.

Janine

09-19-2008, 05:16 PM

What significance would that be? If his significance were only to have jilted Emma, why not just say that and never have him appear at all?

Virgil,The significance I was referring to was just the fact of him being the father, that was all and also perhaps the fact that he was the baker of the town and so was quite familiar already to Hilda; this I would assume since in those day there might be only one baker in a small town. Usually one becomes kind of familar or friendly with a tradesmen such as the local baker.

Yes that is correct, but it strikes me that he is bitter.

I didn't say he couldn't be bitter. I would have to re-read that part to get that sense. I don't recall it that well now - the scene between them. I will try and re-read that tonight. I will probably end up reading the whole story again.;)

It's rather vague, which was my point earlier. It's very strange that a story about Christening a bastard child gives nothing about the relationship of the parents.

Why? It is merely a short story, not a novel.

Wasn't it Emma who excoriated her father? And not only that she physically "pushes him into his chair." She's strong willed. I think there is evidence that all three are strong willed.

I don't know...now you have me confused. I thought it was the other sister. I will have to re-read the story I suppose, like I said. I will do it for your benefit, Virgil.;)

Christening is the central event of the story; we haven't gotten to the religious themes yet.

Will we get to them - the religious themes?

Exactly!! That's why I must make the assumption that Emma left the baker. I guess if you guys don't accept that, then I understand. It's not clear. But to me the story doesn't hold together if I don't make that assumption.

Well, I still can't fully make that assumption, but if you want to, then go ahead. Maybe you think that way, due to knowledge of other works of Lawrence's, such as your favorite novel - "The Rainbow"...I only watched the film version recently, but read the book years back; but I can see how the women were more prominent and willful, especially the will of Ursula towards two men in her life.

I don't quite get what you are driving at when you make the statement "The story doesn't hold together if I don't make that assumption." Can you explain further? I don't see, as you do perhaps, that all things must hold together in life...I don't think things can be so neatly organised and so logical....so why must it be true in this short story?

Dark Muse

09-19-2008, 06:44 PM

I don't know...now you have me confused. I thought it was the other sister. I will have to re-read the story I suppose, like I said. I will do it for your benefit, Virgil.;)

Her father bent down nevertheless to clear up the mess he had made, saying, articulating his words loosely and slavering in his speach:

"The lousy bit of a thing, it slipped between my fingers like a fish."

As he spoke he went tilting towards the fire. The dark browned woman cried out: he put his hand on the hot stove to save himself: Emma swung round and dragged him off.

"Didn't I tell you!" she cried roughly. "Now you have burnt yourself?"

She held tight hold of the big man, and pushed him into his chair.

I don't quite get what you are driving at when you make the statement "The story doesn't hold together if I don't make that assumption." Can you explain further? I don't see, as you do perhaps, that all things must hold together in life...I don't think things can be so neatly organised and so logical....so why must it be true in this short story?

Though I myself will still not make an assumption one way or the other, as I think it can still go either way, I do understand what Virgil is trying to get at. The focus of the story is about the group of these willful women whom have or are struggling to take over the household and usurp power from the men. If Emma rejected the rather, that would help to further emphasize that portion of the story and reflect the view point about the consequences of women trying to take power away from men, and degrading men.

But if Emma was rejected by the rather, than that piece of the story would not really fit in. And was Virgil had stated earlier, it would just be a rather common occurrence. Less common would be a woman taking initiative to leave the father.

And a point is made of portraying each of these women as being willfully independent in someway or another.

Virgil

09-19-2008, 11:34 PM

Good summary Dark Muse. I think we can now move on. :)

Janine

09-20-2008, 12:40 AM

I will post more text tomorrow. We have to wrap up this story soon...I do want that break for October, and I don't want to end this story midway through. I need a full month's break and from the Chekhov, as well. It will give us all time to revamp and get a breather. I can catch up with other threads I have been neglecting, such as Shakespeare and "The Idiot".

Janine

09-20-2008, 11:25 PM

Here is the next part of the text:

Miss Bertha rose and went to the little kitchen, returning with water in a china bowl. She placed it there among the tea-things.

"Well, we're all ready," said the old man, and the clergyman began to read the service. Miss Bertha was godmother, the two men godfathers. The old man sat with bent head. The scene became impressive. At last Miss Bertha took the child and put it in the arms of the clergyman. He, big and ugly, shone with a kind of unreal love. He had never mixed with life, and women were all unliving, Biblical things to him. When he asked for the name, the old man lifted his head fiercely. "Joseph William, after me," he said, almost out of breath.

"Joseph William, I baptize thee. . . ." resounded the strange, full, chanting voice of the clergyman. The baby was quite still.

"Let us pray!" It came with relief to them all. They knelt before their chairs, all but the young mother, who bent and hid herself over her baby. The clergyman began his hesitating, struggling prayer.

Just then heavy footsteps were heard coming up the path, ceasing at the window. The young mother, glancing up, saw her brother, black in his pit dirt, grinning in through the panes. His red mouth curved in a sneer; his fair hair shone above his blackened skin. He caught the eye of his sister and grinned. Then his black face disappeared. He had gone on into the kitchen. The girl with the child sat still and anger filled her heart. She herself hated now the praying clergyman and the whole emotional business; she hated her brother bitterly. In anger and bondage she sat and listened.

Virgil

09-20-2008, 11:36 PM

I found the little side scene with the brother somewhat distracting. This story seems to have a lot going on, perhaps too much. What's the point of the brother?

Just then heavy footsteps were heard coming up the path, ceasing at the window. The young mother, glancing up, saw her brother, black in his pit dirt, grinning in through the panes. His red mouth curved in a sneer; his fair hair shone above his blackened skin. He caught the eye of his sister and grinned. Then his black face disappeared. He had gone on into the kitchen. The girl with the child sat still and anger filled her heart. She herself hated now the praying clergyman and the whole emotional business; she hated her brother bitterly. In anger and bondage she sat and listened.
I found the last sentence interesting. Who is she angry with, the brother or the preacher? Perhaps both, but why the brother? It's significant that she fees bondage while the preacher is preaching.

Dark Muse

09-21-2008, 02:17 AM

"Well, we're all ready," said the old man, and the clergyman began to read the service. Miss Bertha was godmother, the two men godfathers.

I found this a bit currious, why are both men godfathers? Isn't usually just a godmother and a godfather.

I found the last sentence interesting. Who is she angry with, the brother or the preacher? Perhaps both, but why the brother? It's significant that she fees bondage while the preacher is preaching.

Sense it states that she hates them both, than my guess would be she is angery at them both, and well being she seems to be angry at everyone and everything.

Though it is hard to say just way she is angry, it is clear the brother is a disruptiive pressence within the household which could be way she feels that way toward him. There is animosity between the brohter and the other members of the house.

It is hard to say exzactly why she would be angry with the preacher, other than the fact that he serves as a further reminder to her of her situation in general. Perhaps she does not like being more or less the focus of attention, though the Christining is about the child, as the child's mother she would be tied in and well it puts the shameful event sort of in the spotlight.

Virgil

09-21-2008, 08:58 AM

I found this a bit currious, why are both men godfathers? Isn't usually just a godmother and a godfather.

Not necessarily. You can have more than one. But which two men is Lawrence alluding to? The only men in the room are Emma's father and the preacher. Why would the preacher be a godfather? He's a stranger, isn't he?

Dark Muse

09-21-2008, 01:30 PM

I just presumed it ment the brother even though he was not acutally in the house yet. Though it is a bit strange the way it is wordered. And I do not see why the Preacher would be a Godfather.

Janine

09-21-2008, 02:58 PM

In "Sons and Lovers" Paul's mother asked her preacher to be the godfather to Paul; however, they did seem to be friendly and know each other, even before Paul was born. I had assumed it was the son and the father; but was the son present when that was stated or was he in the actual room, or just in the background in the kitchen, chiding his sisters with his 'bakersman' ditty?

Dark Muse

09-21-2008, 03:06 PM

When they first began the borther had not even entered the house yet. Emma saw him through the window as he began to come up the path to the house.

Just then heavy footsteps were heard coming up the path, ceasing at the window. The young mother, glancing up, saw her brother, black in his pit dirt, grinning in through the panes

Janine

09-21-2008, 03:19 PM

Maybe they did mean the pastor then.

Dark Muse

09-21-2008, 03:22 PM

Yes, though it seems odd they would include the pastor, as they do not seem to know him that well. Why not just have the father as the godfather

Janine

09-21-2008, 03:31 PM

Maybe, in asking him to come to their home to christen the child, this being not very usual or accepted, they also asked him to be a godfather to sort of get him to comply with coming to the house to perform this sacred rite. He seems to be the type to be easily flattered or feel honored and would have easier accepted their request.

Dark Muse

09-21-2008, 03:37 PM

Yes that could be. I got the impression that by his constnatly being nervous or "frightend" that perhaps he was not completely comftrable with the situation and perhaps did not really approve of the family.

Virgil

09-21-2008, 04:00 PM

It would have to be the pastor. Maybe it's a local custom.

Dark Muse

09-21-2008, 04:02 PM

Maybe it was something common in that period of time

Janine

09-22-2008, 12:10 AM

When I reviewed this part, I did not see it as distracting at all. The story does not have a lot of plot and I think suddenly, to shift our attention to the brother, makes sense. It breaks into this very emotional scene, as the youngest daughter sees it and yet brings out her full anger, at both him, the parson and the emotional aspect of this scene, which she is witnessing which revolves around her own past actions.

Here is the passage again:

Just then heavy footsteps were heard coming up the path, ceasing at the window. The young mother, glancing up, saw her brother, black in his pit dirt, grinning in through the panes. His red mouth curved in a sneer; his fair hair shone above his blackened skin. He caught the eye of his sister and grinned. Then his black face disappeared. He had gone on into the kitchen. The girl with the child sat still and anger filled her heart. She herself hated now the praying clergyman and the whole emotional business; she hated her brother bitterly. In anger and bondage she sat and listened.

Those last lines are the ones that most spoke to me "She herself hated now the praying clergyman and the whole emotional business; she hated her brother bitterly. In anger and bondage she sat and listened."

By the brother breaking in so rudely, it breaks up the emotion and turns the story a different direction. The tone now changes back to one of anxiety, and resentment, so that the peaceful scene of the baby actually being christened (even the baby is quiet), suddenly reverts back to the antagonism that plagued the family and parson in the beginning of the story. During the christening all kneel, except the young mother, who is said to bend over her child. When the brother enters the scene, he looks directly at her and she alone sees him first through the glass and then all hear his commotion in the kitchen and know of his presense.

Dark Muse

09-22-2008, 12:14 AM

I have to admit, though the brother was quite annoying, in someways I could not help but to find him somewhat amusing. Though I know this was not the intent, his character was like comic releif to me, and made me kind of laugh.

Janine

09-23-2008, 09:29 PM

Yes, he was rather devious and annoying, but someone in a strange way perhaps amusing. Still I don't think the sister's would have viewed his little song in that light. He is being disrespectful and intrusive, during what should be a serious and holy ceremony..

Here is the next part of the text:

Suddenly her father began to pray. His familiar, loud, rambling voice made her shut herself up and become even insentient. Folks said his mind was weakening. She believed it to be true, and kept herself always disconnected from him.

"We ask Thee, Lord," the old man cried, "to look after this childt. Fatherless he is. But what does the earthly father matter before Thee? The childt is Thine, he is Thy childt. Lord, what father has a man but Thee? Lord, when a man says he is a father, he is wrong from the first word. For Thou art the Father, Lord. Lord, take away from us the conceit that our children are ours. Lord, Thou art Father of this childt as is fatherless here. O God, Thou bring him up. For I have stood between Thee and my children; I've had my way with them, Lord; I've stood between Thee and my children; I've cut 'em off from Thee because they were mine. And they've grown twisted, because of me. Who is their father, Lord, but Thee? But I put myself in the way, they've been plants under a stone, because of me. Lord, if it hadn't been for me, they might ha' been trees in the sunshine. Let me own it, Lord, I've done 'em mischief. It could ha' been better if they'd never known no father. No man is a father, Lord: only Thou art. They can never grow beyond Thee, but I hampered them. Lift 'em up again, and undo what I've done to my children. And let this young childt be like a willow tree beside the waters, with no father but Thee, O God. Aye an' I wish it had been so with my children, that they'd had no father but Thee. For I've been like a stone upon them, and they rise up and curse me in their wickedness. But let me go, an' lift Thou them up, Lord . . ."

Dark Muse

09-25-2008, 08:04 PM

Janine

09-26-2008, 03:53 PM

This was an interesting speech by the father, in which he is blaming himself for the way his children now act. In a way in doing so he is taking the responsibility for their neglect of him away from them. He is forgiving them of their treatment to him, by putting it upon his shoulders, and saying it is because of him that they are now so corrupt. He does not seem to harbor any true bitter feelings towards them in this speech.

Dark Muse, glad to see you comment, so we can move along towards the ending. I agree, it as an interesting speech by the father and he did seem to be putting the blame finally upon himself. I felt sorry for him and felt he was so downtrodden by then it seemed the only thing he knew to do. He was trying to alleviate the tension and in actuality it only made things worse. I don't know if I felt he was feeling also totally sorry for himself in stating all of these things and his blame as to the way the family has turned out. I suppose you are right, he is trying in his own way to forgive them for their abuse of himself and maybe each other. Right - he does not say this in a bitter tone but one of being resigned to the position he has fallen into. It so sad to me to hear him go on like this.

He does seem to truly wish the best for them, as well it seems he sees within the child a hope that the boy might have a better life or a chance, though I do not see how the child could turn out any differently under Emma and Bertha.

I will have to review that part. I don't recall him mentioning the child but I guess it is just my failure right now of memory. I think he asks for the child to be blessed. Yes, maybe the child is his only hope for a better future, when he is gone.

Considering the way the women in the house act toward the father, and the fact that the father of Emma's baby is completely excluded from the child's life, perhaps it is understnable why the brohter might behave in the way he does, I can imagine he hardly gets treated any better by the women, as they do not even treat each other well. I can understand him being bitter toward his sisters, as I cannot see them having any resepct for him.

Wait a minute. How can you assume the mother is completely excluded from the child's life? I don't quite see it that extreme. She is nursing the child and said she felt a burning love for him, even though he is a symbol of her wrong- doing.

I would not imagine the son would be treated any better and he is surrounded by women and probably has built up his own defenses, don't you think. He is merely striking out at all of them in the only way he knows how to be. He does not directly criticise them but used the little song to make his scathing demeaning point. Ironic also that the song is a baby/child song, one commonly played with them.

Dark Muse

09-26-2008, 04:53 PM

Dark Muse, I will have to review that part. I don't recall him mentioning the child but I guess it is just my failure right now of memory. I think he asks for the child to be blessed. Yes, maybe the child is his only hope for a better future, when he is gone.

Well in his speach he implies the child will be better off becasue it will only have its heavenly father, and not be corrupted by the pride of a mortal father.

[Wait a minute. How can you assume the mother is completely excluded from the child's life? I don't quite see it that extreme. She is nursing the child and said she felt a burning love for him, even though he is a symbol of her wrong- doing.

I said the child's father is completely excludeded

and the fact that the father of Emma's baby is completely excluded from the child's life,

Janine

09-26-2008, 05:23 PM

Well in his speach he implies the child will be better off becasue it will only have its heavenly father, and not be corrupted by the pride of a mortal father.

Ok, I get it now. I did not consider that part. You are right.

I said the child's father is completely excludeded

Sorry, I mistook that for the mother.

Virgil

09-26-2008, 06:32 PM

Hey gals, I was on a business trip and cold not get onto the internet. I have a lot of catching up to do.

Dark Muse

09-26-2008, 06:47 PM

Welcome back

Janine

09-27-2008, 07:13 PM

Virgil, welcome back; glad you are home safely. We are almost done this story, but can hold up, until you post some more comments. I only have one more segment of text to post and hope to wrap this one up by the end of Sept. I need that October break we all discussed.

Virgil

09-28-2008, 09:39 PM

If there is any doubt that the paternity of the child is important to the story, then the father's speech should relieve one of that doubt. Notice how everything in the speech is about fatherhood:

"We ask Thee, Lord," the old man cried, "to look after this childt. Fatherless he is. But what does the earthly father matter before Thee? The childt is Thine, he is Thy childt. Lord, what father has a man but Thee? Lord, when a man says he is a father, he is wrong from the first word. For Thou art the Father, Lord. Lord, take away from us the conceit that our children are ours. Lord, Thou art Father of this childt as is fatherless here. O God, Thou bring him up. For I have stood between Thee and my children; I've had my way with them, Lord; I've stood between Thee and my children; I've cut 'em off from Thee because they were mine. And they've grown twisted, because of me. Who is their father, Lord, but Thee? But I put myself in the way, they've been plants under a stone, because of me. Lord, if it hadn't been for me, they might ha' been trees in the sunshine. Let me own it, Lord, I've done 'em mischief. It could ha' been better if they'd never known no father. No man is a father, Lord: only Thou art. They can never grow beyond Thee, but I hampered them. Lift 'em up again, and undo what I've done to my children. And let this young childt be like a willow tree beside the waters, with no father but Thee, O God. Aye an' I wish it had been so with my children, that they'd had no father but Thee. For I've been like a stone upon them, and they rise up and curse me in their wickedness. But let me go, an' lift Thou them up, Lord . . ."

"We ask Thee, Lord," the old man cried, "to look after this childt. Fatherless he is.
And so I think this is the central question of the novel. A fatherless child before God. What is this story about but a bastard child getting babtized. How is the child going to get on?

But what does the earthly father matter before Thee? The childt is Thine, he is Thy childt. Lord, what father has a man but Thee? Lord, when a man says he is a father, he is wrong from the first word. For Thou art the Father, Lord. Lord, take away from us the conceit that our children are ours. Lord, Thou art Father of this childt as is fatherless here. O God, Thou bring him up.
This is certainly more inspirationaly religious than the pastor's speech. It links the father with religious elements.

For I have stood between Thee and my children; I've had my way with them, Lord; I've stood between Thee and my children; I've cut 'em off from Thee because they were mine. And they've grown twisted, because of me.
Yes he takes the blame for the daughters, but notice the rationale, because he has cut them off from God.

Who is their father, Lord, but Thee? But I put myself in the way, they've been plants under a stone, because of me. Lord, if it hadn't been for me, they might ha' been trees in the sunshine. Let me own it, Lord, I've done 'em mischief. It could ha' been better if they'd never known no father. No man is a father, Lord: only Thou art. They can never grow beyond Thee, but I hampered them. Lift 'em up again, and undo what I've done to my children. And let this young childt be like a willow tree beside the waters, with no father but Thee, O God. Aye an' I wish it had been so with my children, that they'd had no father but Thee. For I've been like a stone upon them, and they rise up and curse me in their wickedness. But let me go, an' lift Thou them up, Lord . . ."
And notice that metaphors. By cutting the daughters off they have grown twisted and could have grown as "trees in the sunshine," and by freeing the child he will be like a " willow tree beside the waters." The tree metaphor is a variation of the recurring Lawrentian flower imagery of perfect life.

So is it a good thing then that the child is fatherless? Or is this ironic?

Janine

09-29-2008, 01:06 PM

If there is any doubt that the paternity of the child is important to the story, then the father's speech should relieve one of that doubt. Notice how everything in the speech is about fatherhood:

Virgil, I like all that you have said in this post. You have zeroed in on some very good points. You are right in that the speech does indeed center around the idea or concept of fatherhood.

And so I think this is the central question of the novel. A fatherless child before God. What is this story about but a bastard child getting babtized. How is the child going to get on?

Yes, and I think now I know why the meeting with the baker, in the beginning was important to the story. It now becomes an integral part of the plot and the theme, as well. This father has felt alienated and set appart from his children and so does the father of this man's grandchild; and even though God is present, the father feels he has alienated his own children from that God. The full reason he seems to feel this way and take on all the blame is not quite evident to me, but it must as he says, or at least this is the perception he has, about his causing the demise of his own family.

This is certainly more inspirationaly religious than the pastor's speech. It links the father with religious elements.

That is certainly does seem to do and the pastor's speech now seems so cold in comparison to the emotional speech of the father.

Yes he takes the blame for the daughters, but notice the rationale, because he has cut them off from God.

Why do you think it was his doing, or the mere fact, that he believes he is to blame, for cutting them off from God? I tend to agree with you, but wonder why is it so...how that came to be the case, to begin with.

And notice that metaphors. By cutting the daughters off they have grown twisted and could have grown as "trees in the sunshine," and by freeing the child he will be like a " willow tree beside the waters." The tree metaphor is a variation of the recurring Lawrentian flower imagery of perfect life.

Aha! I had not noticed that before. That is right and it is so well stated and worded. I think trees also were as significant to L as were flowers - both have roots and a stem/trunk and some trees even flower/all have leaves like petals. This metaphor is wonderful.

So is it a good thing then that the child is fatherless? Or is this ironic?

This I can't personally determine. Perhaps because of Lawrence's own father he feels it is good. I am still not sure of what I just said. At the time this story was written he may have felt differently about his father than later in his life. I don't know if it is truthful or ironic in it's meaning. Which do you think,
Virgil?

Virgil

09-29-2008, 02:58 PM

Yes, and I think now I know why the meeting with the baker, in the beginning was important to the story. It now becomes an integral part of the plot and the theme, as well. This father has felt alienated and set appart from his children and so does the father of this man's grandchild; and even though God is present, the father feels he has alienated his own children from that God. The full reason he seems to feel this way and take on all the blame is not quite evident to me, but it must as he says, or at least this is the perception he has, about his causing the demise of his own family.

Yes, it's not evident to me either. That's why I can't come to any conclusion. Maybe the last part of the story will reveal something.

Why do you think it was his doing, or the mere fact, that he believes he is to blame, for cutting them off from God? I tend to agree with you, but wonder why is it so...how that came to be the case, to begin with.
There isn't enough background to fill us in. Was he a weak father? It's not just the daughters, but the son seems to be dysfunctional too. I just don't know.

Aha! I had not noticed that before. That is right and it is so well stated and worded. I think trees also were as significant to L as were flowers - both have roots and a stem/trunk and some trees even flower/all have leaves like petals. This metaphor is wonderful.
Yes I just noticed that after you posted it.

This I can't personally determine. Perhaps because of Lawrence's own father he feels it is good. I am still not sure of what I just said. At the time this story was written he may have felt differently about his father than later in his life. I don't know if it is truthful or ironic in it's meaning. Which do you think,
This is still a relatively early story and perhaps he still sides with his mother over his father. But then the way he protrays the daughters wouldn't fit. I don't think Lawrence is being sympathetic to the daughters. I know you may disagree with that. But is he really balming the father? Let's see what the ending brings up.

Janine

09-30-2008, 05:21 PM

Yes, it's not evident to me either. That's why I can't come to any conclusion. Maybe the last part of the story will reveal something.

It might; I will post that part tonight, so we can be done with this story soon; wrap up our comments, then take that much needed month's break.:)

There isn't enough background to fill us in. Was he a weak father? It's not just the daughters, but the son seems to be dysfunctional too. I just don't know.

I don't know. I feel he is 'weak' now from his illness. but whether he was a 'weak' father is unknown. Was there ever any mention of this wife - the mother of these children? I don't recall any text, that referred to her; it might just be my memory. He was mentioned in the beginning, in regards to their nice house and for providing well for the family.

Yes, the son surely is dysfunctional as well. He has to be being brought up in this family. I would image by his display he is also rebelling against the authority of his sisters.

Yes I just noticed that after you posted it.

Oh good.

This is still a relatively early story and perhaps he still sides with his mother over his father. But then the way he protrays the daughters wouldn't fit. I don't think Lawrence is being sympathetic to the daughters. I know you may disagree with that. But is he really balming the father? Let's see what the ending brings up.

I was thinking the same about the male attitude, but then like you, the strong woman dominating does seem to contradict that,... or does it? Maybe in Lawrence's view, his own father (who did has many weaknesses) was poorly treated by his mother and even his children (last in response to siding with thir mother). Therefore, in the final analysis the 'domineering' aspect of the women comes out in this story, even though he is giving sympathy to the father. He is maybe, seeing the women in two respects: strong, yet holding the power in the family; capable, yet domineering. Lawrence is surely reflecting some of the atmosphere that did exist in his own family.

Be back later to post the end of the story. Feel free to comment on what I just wrote. Hope that last part makes some kind of sense.;)

Virgil

09-30-2008, 09:56 PM

I don't know. I feel he is 'weak' now from his illness. but whether he was a 'weak' father is unknown. Was there ever any mention of this wife - the mother of these children? I don't recall any text, that referred to her; it might just be my memory. He was mentioned in the beginning, in regards to their nice house and for providing well for the family.

I thought there was a mention of the old man's wife, but I could not find it.

Yes, the son surely is dysfunctional as well. He has to be being brought up in this family. I would image by his display he is also rebelling against the authority of his sisters.
I think we'll see that shortly.

I was thinking the same about the male attitude, but then like you, the strong woman dominating does seem to contradict that,... or does it? Maybe in Lawrence's view, his own father (who did has many weaknesses) was poorly treated by his mother and even his children (last in response to siding with thir mother). Therefore, in the final analysis the 'domineering' aspect of the women comes out in this story, even though he is giving sympathy to the father. He is maybe, seeing the women in two respects: strong, yet holding the power in the family; capable, yet domineering. Lawrence is surely reflecting some of the atmosphere that did exist in his own family.
By jove I think you've hit on it! Yes it's a problem that the women are domineering but it's come about because of the father's weakness. They are all to blame in their own way. Now isn't that a complicated theme for a short story. Even the father's wealth is something that Lawrence is adding as a reason for his weakness as a father. He was too concerned with earning a living and creating prosperity for his kids rather than building their spiritual life. But in the end the father realizes that spirituality and hopes to pass it on the the little child. This is the child's true babtism! Now I think it all fits!!:)

Be back later to post the end of the story. Feel free to comment on what I just wrote. Hope that last part makes some kind of sense.;)
Ok I'm ready for the next part. :)

Janine

10-01-2008, 01:50 PM

I thought there was a mention of the old man's wife, but I could not find it.

Virgil, Last night I was answering this post and I went to get the rest of the text to post and could not find it in my file. Actually it was there listed but then when I clicked on it the file said now it is missing or unavailable - there is now a N/A after much of the things I put into this new Works file.:crash: I seriously need to buy Word! I don't know what has happened, but then I had renewed my virus protector, so maybe that has something to do with it, who knows. Also something told me to fix some cookies and that is when it happened - after that. I should have ignored it since the threat said low. I think those are just glinches in the program. Good news is that I recently backed all that up onto my external HD unit and it apparently is still there.

Anyway, I had this whole post written and then I closed the window by accident - horrors! I lost the whole post!!! Then to top it off, it suddenly (out of nowhere) started to thunder outside loudly and I had to unplug the computer; so I gave up for the night. Well, now I have to start all over again; hope I recall what I had written.

I think we'll see that shortly.

Hopefully we will.

By jove I think you've hit on it! Yes it's a problem that the women are domineering but it's come about because of the father's weakness. They are all to blame in their own way. Now isn't that a complicated theme for a short story. Even the father's wealth is something that Lawrence is adding as a reason for his weakness as a father. He was too concerned with earning a living and creating prosperity for his kids rather than building their spiritual life. But in the end the father realizes that spirituality and hopes to pass it on the the little child. This is the child's true babtism! Now I think it all fits!!:)

First when I read this I was not sure if your tone was sarcastic or sincere? If it was sincere, thanks so much. I was not sure exactly that I was explaining my thoughts clearly. I do think the women strong or portrayed that way but then again in all of Lawrence's work I see him portraying women with strength and so I did not find that particularly peculiar in this story. I do think the husband was strong in areas - such as providing for his family and earning a good living but he seemed to have missed out, as you said or implied on his lack of instilling the spirituality in his children that would make them compassionate and understanding human beings. I think, now in retrospect, her realises this short coming and how weak he was in this area. Children need more that mere providing for - the need nurturing and a sense of values and I would surmise he overlooked this part of his parenting. In this way the father is weak or was weak with them. Perhaps he even indulged them instead of guiding them for the future. If he raised the family without his wife - say she died awhile back, then he was focused on providing. Most men are; but he now realises he has failed in some aspect of their upbringing. He is certainly trying to redeem himself by the prayer and the admission of his faults and now looking to the grandson to be his salvation or redeption. Thus this prayer for the babe comes out in an emotional but strong manner.

Ok I'm ready for the next part. :)

I will go and find it in my backup file and be back. I will however, post this first, because I don't want to lose it like last night's.

Janine

10-01-2008, 02:09 PM

The Rest of the Text:

The minister, unaware of the feelings of a father, knelt in trouble, hearing without understanding the special language of fatherhood. Miss Rowbotham alone felt and understood a little. Her heart began to flutter; she was in pain. The two younger daughters kneeled unhearing, stiffened and impervious. Bertha was thinking of the baby; and the younger mother thought of the father of her child, whom she hated. There was a clatter in the scullery. There the youngest son made as much noise as he could, pouring out the water for his wash, muttering in deep anger:

"Blortin', slaverin' old fool!"

And while the praying of his father continued, his heart was burning with rage. On the table was a paper bag. He picked it up and read, "John Berryman--Bread, Pastries, etc." Then he grinned with a grimace. The father of the baby was baker's man at Berryman's. The prayer went on in the middle kitchen. Laurie Rowbotham gathered together the mouth of the bag, inflated it, and burst it with his fist. There was a loud report. He grinned to himself. But he writhed at the same time with shame and fear of his father.
The father broke off from his prayer; the party shuffled to their feet. The young mother went into the scullery.

"What art doin', fool?" she said.

The collier youth tipped the baby under the chin, singing:

"Pat-a-cake, pat-a-cake, baker's man,
Bake me a cake as fast as you can. . . ."

The mother snatched the child away. "Shut thy mouth," she said, the colour coming into her cheek.

"Prick it and stick it and mark it with P,
And put it i' th' oven for baby an' me. . . ."

He grinned, showing a grimy, and jeering and unpleasant red mouth and white teeth.

"I s'll gi'e thee a dab ower th' mouth," said the mother of the baby grimly. He began to sing again, and she struck out at him.

"Now what's to do?" said the father, staggering in.

The youth began to sing again. His sister stood sullen and furious.

"Why, does that upset you?" asked the eldest Miss Rowbotham, sharply, of Emma the mother. "Good gracious, it hasn't improved your temper."

Miss Bertha came in, and took the bonny baby.

The father sat big and unheeding in his chair, his eyes vacant, his physique wrecked. He let them do as they would, he fell to pieces. And yet some power, involuntary, like a curse, remained in him. The very ruin of him was like a lodestone that held them in its control. The wreck of him still dominated the house, in his dissolution even he compelled their being. They had never lived; his life, his will had always been upon them and contained them. They were only half-individuals.

The day after the christening he staggered in at the doorway declaring, in a loud voice, with joy in life still: "The daisies light up the earth, they clap their hands in multitudes, in praise of the morning." And his daughters shrank, sullen.

Aha, now I see that Hilda does not know about the baker apparently - that he is the father of the child. Why would she say to Emma (the baby's mother) this if she knew? Or is she really that callous and unfeeling?

"Why, does that upset you?" asked the eldest Miss Rowbotham, sharply, of Emma the mother. "Good gracious, it hasn't improved your temper."

This line also stands out to me:

....and the younger mother thought of the father of her child, whom she hated.

You know the father also could have forced his way with the youngest daughter. Maybe she was not strong enough or smart enough to stay out of trouble. We really don't know what her circumstances with the father were to begin with. We do know that now she hates him. That could also be for another reason - the opposite...she could feel abandoned by him, is she had cared for him at one time. Hate is a strong emotion, unlike an apathy towards him or plainly not caring for him. To me hate seems to indicate that once she did love the man or thought she did. Of couser, all of the above is merely conjecture on my part.

Hey, did everyone know that they can vote on this thread - I found that at the top yesterday - "Rate Thread". I was wondering why some threads have 5 stars, and ours didn't have any, with this many posts - over 2000 now. Then I saw that one had to vote on the thread.

Well, every vote counts, so please do vote for our great thread, everyone...rah rah!

Dark Muse

10-01-2008, 02:53 PM

Aha, now I see that Hilda does not know about the baker apparently - that he is the father of the child. Why would she say to Emma (the baby's mother) this if she knew? Or is she really that callous and unfeeling?!

I did find her reaction to be a bit currious, as if she did not know the baker was the father why did she behave the way she did with him? Though her reaction to Emma now, might suggest that the Emma was the one who rejected the father. As Hilda could be questioning why she should become so upset when she was the one who made the choice, and put herself in that posistion.

You know the father also could have forced his way with the youngest daughter. Maybe she was not strong enough or smart enough to stay out of trouble. We really don't know what her circumstances with the father were to begin with. We do know that now she hates him. That could also be for another reason - the opposite...she could feel abandoned by him, is she had cared for him at one time. Hate is a strong emotion, unlike an apathy towards him or plainly not caring for him. To me hate seems to indicate that once she did love the man or thought she did. Of couser, all of the above is merely conjecture on my part.

Emma's feelings are really not all that reliable though. She throws the word hate around an awful, to a degree which I think really lessoned her use of it here. Emma seems to just be a generally angery person. After seeing her general behaior throughout the story, I did not find the use of hate here to be so very strong, or to really stand out, becasue well it just seemed typical of Emma at ths point that she would hate him.

I do not think there is anything in the story to suggest that Emma was raped, and I really do not think that is intended within the story. And if he did force himself upon her, I do not think he would have asked Hilda how she was doing.

When I have more time I will comment upon the secton of the story posted.

Janine

10-01-2008, 03:35 PM

I did find her reaction to be a bit currious, as if she did not know the baker was the father why did she behave the way she did with him? Though her reaction to Emma now, might suggest that the Emma was the one who rejected the father. As Hilda could be questioning why she should become so upset when she was the one who made the choice, and put herself in that posistion.

I don't know for sure what I think about the past - it really could have been either way. Maybe Hilda was always a little rude to the baker, who knows?

Emma's feelings are really not all that reliable though. She throws the word hate around an awful, to a degree which I think really lessoned her use of it here. Emma seems to just be a generally angery person. After seeing her general behaior throughout the story, I did not find the use of hate here to be so very strong, or to really stand out, becasue well it just seemed typical of Emma at ths point that she would hate him.

It is true that she is angry and upset, but this particular passage just seemed to stand out to me for some reason. I suppose because of Hilda's question.

I do not think there is anything in the story to suggest that Emma was raped, and I really do not think that is intended within the story. And if he did force himself upon her, I do not think he would have asked Hilda how she was doing.

I didn't say or imply rape. If you want to be technical it could be date rape. The man could have just been coercive and forced his sexuality on her against her true wishes. In "Tess of the D'Urbervilles" by Hardy, Alex takes advantage of Tess and she gets pregnant as a result. That does not stop Alex from asking about her or later pursuing her, even against Tess's wishes.

When I have more time I will comment upon the secton of the story posted.

Ok, good.

Dark Muse

10-01-2008, 07:33 PM

I didn't say or imply rape. If you want to be technical it could be date rape. The man could have just been coercive and forced his sexuality on her against her true wishes. In "Tess of the D'Urbervilles" by Hardy, Alex takes advantage of Tess and she gets pregnant as a result. That does not stop Alex from asking about her or later pursuing her, even against Tess's wishes.

To me saying "he forced himself" upon her is implying rape. The way I see it, either she consented to it or she did not consent. And if she did consent to it, no matter the circumstances she beares reponseablity for what happend.

The minister, unaware of the feelings of a father, knelt in trouble, hearing without understanding the special language of fatherhood. Miss Rowbotham alone felt and understood a little. Her heart began to flutter; she was in pain.

I found this interesting, why is it that Hilda alone understands what the father says? Is it becasue she has now taken on so much of the reponsebality of the family. Hilda does not seem to be much better then the others. She never steps in on the fathers behalf, and treats everyone in a sort of uppity scolding way.

The two younger daughters kneeled unhearing, stiffened and impervious. Bertha was thinking of the baby; and the younger mother thought of the father of her child, whom she hated. There was a clatter in the scullery.

Here again we can see the total disregaurd the others have for thier father, they do not even listen to him while he is speaking but are pre-occupied within thier own thoughts, not caring what is happening around them.

There the youngest son made as much noise as he could, pouring out the water for his wash, muttering in deep anger:

Considering that within the story he appears to be the only son, I just found it odd how they worded it here "the youngest son" as there is no mention of any other brothers within the house.

And while the praying of his father continued, his heart was burning with rage. On the table was a paper bag. He picked it up and read, "John Berryman--Bread, Pastries, etc." Then he grinned with a grimace. The father of the baby was baker's man at Berryman's. The prayer went on in the middle kitchen. Laurie Rowbotham gathered together the mouth of the bag, inflated it, and burst it with his fist. There was a loud report. He grinned to himself. But he writhed at the same time with shame and fear of his father.

Considering how inffectual the father appears to be in the household I found it interesting how the brother here states he has fear of the father, while the women boss the father about like a child.

And I cannot really blame him for treating the ceremony as a joke, considering they started without him, it seems he was not really included and well the father and perhaps Hilda are the only ones who are taking it seriously anyway. Bertha and Emma could really careless, and the preacher does not seem as if he truly wants to be there.

"Why, does that upset you?" asked the eldest Miss Rowbotham, sharply, of Emma the mother. "Good gracious, it hasn't improved your temper."

Considering the tension between Hilda and the Baker at the begining of the story, this does seem a bit odd and I am not sure entierly what to make of it.

And I was not sure ezactly what the meant by "it hasn't improved your temper" what is she refering to by the "it" does she mean that motherhood has not improved her temper? Or the child?

Janine

10-01-2008, 08:13 PM

To me saying "he forced himself" upon her is implying rape. The way I see it, either she consented to it or she did not consent. And if she did consent to it, no matter the circumstances she beares reponseablity for what happend.

I still don't mean rape. What I mean is coercian or persausion; therefore, she would have had the choice, but gave into the man and did not exercise her right to say 'no' to him. I don't believe any rape has been committed; I never said I did. It might now be that Emma realises her mistake, but doesn't really want to 'own up' to it, and therefore, shuts it out. Her anger might actually be channeled outward, when really it is all about herself and her anger at her own actions and shortcoming.

I found this interesting, why is it that Hilda alone understands what the father says? Is it becasue she has now taken on so much of the reponsebality of the family. Hilda does not seem to be much better then the others. She never steps in on the fathers behalf, and treats everyone in a sort of uppity scolding way.

Well, she is older, so she has known the father longer and maybe, when he was in a much better state of mind and temperment. I think now she would be the one to understand him, more so than her younger sibblings. Also, Hilda knows what it is like to have responsibilty and the father has certainly had that in his life. They both can relate in supporting the rest of the family.

Here again we can see the total disregaurd the others have for thier father, they do not even listen to him while he is speaking but are pre-occupied within thier own thoughts, not caring what is happening around them.

Perhaps. They do seem to see him as an object or an annoyance and not really a father or someone liked, let alone loved.

Considering that within the story he appears to be the only son, I just found it odd how they worded it here "the youngest son" as there is no mention of any other brothers within the house.

There could be another son, just because he is not mentioned, doesn't mean there could not be one son working or out somewhere. I think most of the story focus on the women - the sisters.

Considering how inffectual the father appears to be in the household I found it interesting how the brother here states he has fear of the father, while the women boss the father about like a child.

I don't think that so unusual. Sometimes fathers will indulge daughters, but be harder on sons. I have seen this in many families. It just operates that way, in many dysfunctional families.

And I cannot really blame him for treating the ceremony as a joke, considering they started without him, it seems he was not really included and well the father and perhaps Hilda are the only ones who are taking it seriously anyway. Bertha and Emma could really careless, and the preacher does not seem as if he truly wants to be there.

Maybe he never expressed a desire to attend the christening; did that ever dawn on you? Maybe he is 'crashing the party', so to speak.

Considering the tension between Hilda and the Baker at the begining of the story, this does seem a bit odd and I am not sure entierly what to make of it.

Nor I....Maybe Virgil has some idea on that.

And I was not sure ezactly what the meant by "it hasn't improved your temper" what is she refering to by the "it" does she mean that motherhood has not improved her temper? Or the child?

I think she means 'motherhood'....but then again she could be referring to the child as 'it'. If so that would be sad.

Dark Muse

10-01-2008, 08:20 PM

I don't think that so unusual. Sometimes fathers will indulge daughters but be harder on sons. I have seen this in many families. It just operates that way in many dysfunctional families.

This may be true, but inspite of his moment of fear, he still calls his father a fool, and his father clearly does not repremend him in anyway either for his disresepct to him or his genreal behavior and the way he treats his sisters. The father in his usual nature does nothing but let the others do as they please.

Maybe he never expressed a desire to attend the christening; did that ever dawn on you? Maybe he is 'crashing the party', so to speak

If he is "crashing" the party I cannot really blame him. He does not seem to stand much of a chance in that family. This is one case where the more I read of the story the more I grew to dislike the characters. I truly did not start out not liking anyone, but now I am finding the women progreassively more dislikable. The father is growing to be my favorite character and with sisters like his, I can understand why the brother acts as he does. And well it is normal for a brother to taunt his sisters anyway.

Virgil

10-01-2008, 08:46 PM

First when I read this I was not sure if your tone was sarcastic or sincere? If it was sincere, thanks so much.
Of course I was sincere.

I
was not sure exactly that I was explaining my thoughts clearly. I do think the women strong or portrayed that way but then again in all of Lawrence's work I see him portraying women with strength and so I did not find that particularly peculiar in this story. I do think the husband was strong in areas - such as providing for his family and earning a good living but he seemed to have missed out, as you said or implied on his lack of instilling the spirituality in his children that would make them compassionate and understanding human beings. I think, now in retrospect, her realises this short coming and how weak he was in this area. Children need more that mere providing for - the need nurturing and a sense of values and I would surmise he overlooked this part of his parenting. In this way the father is weak or was weak with them. Perhaps he even indulged them instead of guiding them for the future. If he raised the family without his wife - say she died awhile back, then he was focused on providing. Most men are; but he now realises he has failed in some aspect of their upbringing. He is certainly trying to redeem himself by the prayer and the admission of his faults and now looking to the grandson to be his salvation or redeption. Thus this prayer for the babe comes out in an emotional but strong manner.
It was a combination of putting some of my thoughts with some of yours and I think we figured this story out. :)

Aha, now I see that Hilda does not know about the baker apparently - that he is the father of the child. Why would she say to Emma (the baby's mother) this if she knew? Or is she really that callous and unfeeling?

I've been saying that from the very beginning. :D Does anyone liste:Dn to me? :p

Hey, did everyone know that they can vote on this thread - I found that at the top yesterday - "Rate Thread". I was wondering why some threads have 5 stars, and ours didn't have any, with this many posts - over 2000 now. Then I saw that one had to vote on the thread.
Just voted for five stars. :)

I do not think there is anything in the story to suggest that Emma was raped, and I really do not think that is intended within the story. And if he did force himself upon her, I do not think he would have asked Hilda how she was doing.

I agree, there is nothing to suggest rape. I don't think you can make that jump. There doesn't seem to be any allusion to Tess.

I found this interesting, why is it that Hilda alone understands what the father says? Is it becasue she has now taken on so much of the reponsebality of the family. Hilda does not seem to be much better then the others. She never steps in on the fathers behalf, and treats everyone in a sort of uppity scolding way.
Not sure why Hilda would understand somewhat, but Lawrence makes it this way. I don't think it has too much significance.

Considering that within the story he appears to be the only son, I just found it odd how they worded it here "the youngest son" as there is no mention of any other brothers within the house.
Hmm, that is odd. I read it as he's the youngest. Perhaps a little slip on Lawrence's part.

Considering how inffectual the father appears to be in the household I found it interesting how the brother here states he has fear of the father, while the women boss the father about like a child.
That is interesting. I think it suggests the son will be even weaker than the father.

And I cannot really blame him for treating the ceremony as a joke, considering they started without him, it seems he was not really included and well the father and perhaps Hilda are the only ones who are taking it seriously anyway. Bertha and Emma could really careless, and the preacher does not seem as if he truly wants to be there.
Not sure I agree with that. The son was working, which of course is replicating the sins of the father: working instead of concern with his spiritual needs.

I still don't mean rape. What I mean is coercian or persausion; therefore, she would have had the choice, but gave into the man and did not exercise her right to say 'no' to him. I don't believe any rape has been committed; I never said I did. It might now be that Emma realises her mistake, but doesn't really want to 'own up' to it, and therefore, shuts it out. Her anger might actually be channeled outward, when really it is all about herself and her anger at her own actions and shortcoming.

Frankly Janine if Lawrence meant this that it would be bringing in themes that aren't in the rest of the story. There is nothing to suggest that it wasn't mutual passion, and given how strong Emma is it woud not surprise me if she initiated it.

There could be another son, just because he is not mentioned, doesn't mean there could not be one son working or out somewhere. I think most of the story focus on the women - the sisters.
I guess there could be.

Nor I....Maybe Virgil has some idea on that.

"Why, does that upset you?" asked the eldest Miss Rowbotham, sharply, of Emma the mother. "Good gracious, it hasn't improved your temper."
Hmm, not quite sure either what to make of it. It does seem that she dosn't know what happened between Emma and the baker.

Janine

10-01-2008, 09:15 PM

This may be true, but inspite of his moment of fear, he still calls his father a fool, and his father clearly does not repremend him in anyway either for his disresepct to him or his genreal behavior and the way he treats his sisters. The father in his usual nature does nothing but let the others do as they please. [quote]

Well, I think his father is resigned now to being bullied or being in this reduced condition with his degenerative illness and so he has a lot of apathy. 'What good would reprimanding him do now' - that is probaby the father's attitude. He has kind of given in and given up.

[quote]If he is "crashing" the party I cannot really blame him. He does not seem to stand much of a chance in that family. This is one case where the more I read of the story the more I grew to dislike the characters. I truly did not start out not liking anyone, but now I am finding the women progreassively more dislikable. The father is growing to be my favorite character and with sisters like his, I can understand why the brother acts as he does. And well it is normal for a brother to taunt his sisters anyway.

Well, not one has to like anyone in the story. Back to your characteristic dislike for characters, Dark Muse.;). I can't say though that I warmed up to any of the characters myself this time around. The value of the story for me does not really depend on that aspect.

Whoa, Virgil, what happened here - you posted twice while I was posting to
DM. - ok....I get it. You are quick. Also I just asked you in email to post something and then I saw your first post - sorry about that.

Of course I was sincere.

Oh thank you so much. I appreciate that, coming from you.

It was a combination of putting some of my thoughts with some of yours and I think we figured this story out. :)

Yes, as they always say "two heads are better than one!".:D

I've been saying that from the very beginning. :D Does anyone liste:Dn to me? :p

I listen, but I guess I just did not recall you saying it; that was awhile back....

Just voted for five stars. :) Great! Campaign of votes for our thread, ok? I will ask some friends of mine to vote for it.

I agree, there is nothing to suggest rape. I don't think you can make that jump. There doesn't seem to be any allusion to Tess.

No, I was not exactly saying that and if I was, I guess that was a bad example. I just meant to point out that, even after she broke off with Alex, it did not prevent him from persuing her later on. I don't believe Emma was raped, but it might have been like with Jesse in "Sons and Lovers" where the male was dominent and wanting her to give in to him sexually. Emma could be a flirt too but not really want to go all the way or he could be older and she was under his influence. Obviously they were not right for each other - they parted so it did not work out for them. That is where I was going with that statement.

Not sure why Hilda would understand somewhat, but Lawrence makes it this way. I don't think it has too much significance.

Well, I think it has some minor significance, but it is not that important. Maybe it just showed, that Hilda could have a shred of feeling and understanding for someone else.

Hmm, that is odd. I read it as he's the youngest. Perhaps a little slip on Lawrence's part.

Will the older brother please stand up.:lol:....hummm... Maybe it is a misprint or a typo.;)

That is interesting. I think it suggests the son will be even weaker than the father.

Probably so; that is a good point.

Not sure I agree with that. The son was working, which of course is replicating the sins of the father: working instead of concern with his spiritual needs.

Oh, hadn't thought of it that way, really. Also, he came home late and when the christening had already taken place. He was outside the sphere of things, so to speak....so he was not involved or particating in the spirtual business of the family.

Frankly Janine if Lawrence meant this that it would be bringing in themes that aren't in the rest of the story. There is nothing to suggest that it wasn't mutual passion, and given how strong Emma is it woud not surprise me if she initiated it.

Well, it all conjecture - who really knows. I just thought the girl is 'young' and seems lazy, so I don't really know.

I guess there could be.

At least, that is what I thought....or a typo...OR..... maybe he meant it literally - like "the youngest (the) son. Let's not crucify poor Lawrence over it. Maybe he left out the the comma and 'the'.

Hmm, not quite sure either what to make of it. It does seem that she dosn't know what happened between Emma and the baker.

It seemed that way to me.

Virgil

10-01-2008, 09:50 PM

I found the most interesting part of this last section was the conclusion:

The father sat big and unheeding in his chair, his eyes vacant, his physique wrecked. He let them do as they would, he fell to pieces. And yet some power, involuntary, like a curse, remained in him. The very ruin of him was like a lodestone that held them in its control. The wreck of him still dominated the house, in his dissolution even he compelled their being. They had never lived; his life, his will had always been upon them and contained them. They were only half-individuals.

The day after the christening he staggered in at the doorway declaring, in a loud voice, with joy in life still: "The daisies light up the earth, they clap their hands in multitudes, in praise of the morning." And his daughters shrank, sullen.

After that little scene with the son and Emma and Hilda, the focus returns to the father. Lawrence could have ended the staory with a surprise ending of revealing that the father was the baker. But he didn't. And we see the father in his body, "physique," in dissolution. Interesting that Lawrence calls only the father as having lived; the rest are "only half-individuals."

But then Lawrence fast forwards past the Christening scene to the next day, and he brings into the house the that religious element: "The daisies light up the earth, they clap their hands in multitudes, in praise of the morning." This is Lawrence's religion, the natural world alive. Notice also it's the flowery world, but it's nature that contains spirituality. Lawrence, at his core, is really a Romantic in his world view. Notice also that the daughters "shrank" and were "sullen" over it.

Janine

10-01-2008, 11:21 PM

I found the most interesting part of this last section was the conclusion:

After that little scene with the son and Emma and Hilda, the focus returns to the father. Lawrence could have ended the staory with a surprise ending of revealing that the father was the baker. But he didn't. And we see the father in his body, "physique," in dissolution. Interesting that Lawrence calls only the father as having lived; the rest are "only half-individuals."

But then Lawrence fast forwards past the Christening scene to the next day, and he brings into the house the that religious element: "The daisies light up the earth, they clap their hands in multitudes, in praise of the morning." This is Lawrence's religion, the natural world alive. Notice also it's the flowery world, but it's nature that contains spirituality. Lawrence, at his core, is really a Romantic in his world view. Notice also that the daughters "shrank" and were "sullen" over it.

Ok, I agree with most of what you said here but I think you left out one vital part of that line:
"They had never lived; his life, his will had always been upon them and contained them. They were only half-individuals."

Doesn't this say to you, that the father was willful at one time and exerted his will over his children? Now he may be broken and withdrawn, and even docile, and under their control and 'will'; but this line suggests to me that it was not always that way for this family. Could it be, that now the roles are somewhat reversed?

I also think the word 'lodestone' is an interesting word and used well here. I am going now to look up the exact meaning of that word.

Yes, the last part after the day of the Christening, reverses everything and seems to bring this feeling of hope. Can it be that the new life of the baby is related to the flowers of the earth and this child, brought out by his Christening, also brings new hope?

Yeah, we have our 5 stars showing. I can't believe it. Wonder who else voted? Maybe it only takes a few to get those nice shining gold stars. I am so proud of my participation in this thread and proud of all of your participation, as well. Hey, we did pretty good didn't we? We have 2388 posts! That, to me, is super cool!

Virgil

10-02-2008, 07:09 AM

Ok, I agree with most of what you said here but I think you left out one vital part of that line:
"They had never lived; his life, his will had always been upon them and contained them. They were only half-individuals."

Doesn't this say to you, that the father was willful at one time and exerted his will over his children? Now he may be broken and withdrawn, and even docile, and under their control and 'will'; but this line suggests to me that it was not always that way for this family. Could it be, that now the roles are somewhat reversed?

No question, that is a very important sentence at the end there. I didn't touch on it because i don't know how to explain it. The concept of "will" is very oimportant in Lawrentian thought, and is almost always a negative. Flowers have no will, that is Lawrence's ideal. Apparently the father's will is what has caused the dysfunctionality. But we don't really see it in the story and is almost a last minute add on. If I wqere to speculate, I would guess that the father's will to have a properous home is at the root cause of the dysfunctionality.

The very ruin of him was like a lodestone that held them in its control.
I also think the word 'lodestone' is an interesting word and used well here. I am going now to look up the exact meaning of that word.

lode·stone /ˈloʊdˌstoʊn/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[lohd-stohn] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–noun 1. a variety of magnetite that possesses magnetic polarity and attracts iron.
2. a piece of this serving as a magnet.
3. something that attracts strongly.
I guess Lawrence means it as an attracting force. It's symbolic for his will I think.

Yes, the last part after the day of the Christening, reverses everything and seems to bring this feeling of hope. Can it be that the new life of the baby is related to the flowers of the earth and this child, brought out by his Christening, also brings new hope?
Not sure about bringing hope. Perhaps for the father. The daughters "shrink" from it. I think the father has reached an enlightenment, almost a transfiguration, if you will. ;) But not the daughters.

Janine

10-02-2008, 01:15 PM

No question, that is a very important sentence at the end there. I didn't touch on it because i don't know how to explain it. The concept of "will" is very oimportant in Lawrentian thought, and is almost always a negative. Flowers have no will, that is Lawrence's ideal. Apparently the father's will is what has caused the dysfunctionality. But we don't really see it in the story and is almost a last minute add on. If I wqere to speculate, I would guess that the father's will to have a properous home is at the root cause of the dysfunctionality.

Yes, I was thinking about the 'will' and how often that appears in Lawrence's writing. I think you were the first to point that out to me and the group. It really does make more sense to me now. Often in this type of family unit, with 3 woman and one(?) brother and a father - the father may be prominent at one time and exert his will over them; say when they were children and under his rule. Even now the youngest - the son - is afraid of him. The daughters have outgrown that fear, with the appearance of this man's illness, into more of a person needing to be watched over and protected. The roles have reversed. The daughters now treat him as though they are his caretakers, even his mother. This is not so unusual in families where older adults become ill or have a degnerative condition. Often too it is necessary; you saw how he burned himself. If left on his own entirely he could cause himself more harm perhaps. The fact that they have a rough manner and seem angry, in their treatment of him, also speaks to me. It says that they are feel deep 'resentful' now that they have his care on their hands. This family does not seem to have much compassion for one another.

I guess Lawrence means it as an attracting force. It's symbolic for his will I think.

Oh, thanks for looking that up. I forgot myself and did not venture to do so last night. I got distracted with other things. Yes, I would think that is what he meant - the attracting force being his 'will'. In someways by his passionate speech after the Christening he was exerting his 'will' upon them. All of them shrank and were embarrassed concerning that speech.

Not sure about bringing hope. Perhaps for the father. The daughters "shrink" from it. I think the father has reached an enlightenment, almost a transfiguration, if you will. ;) But not the daughters.

I agree and I think that is basically what I meant. Still the tone at the end was more of one of 'hope' than dispair, especially compared to his former speech.

Janine

10-04-2008, 04:01 PM

Where is everyone??? I wanted to finish up this story soon. It is already October. Helloooooo, anybody there?

Dark Muse

10-04-2008, 04:07 PM

Hey, I am still here, I just got a little behind

Janine

10-04-2008, 04:33 PM

Hey, I am still here, I just got a little behind

Well, Dark Muse, you are always here somewhere...;)..usually when I post a call you do respond..thanks for that. I am wondering where Virgil ran off to. If I say his name he might also arrive and comment on what I wrote last; I guess mostly that post was directed at his comments.

I am anxious now to put this story to rest. Then, I will periodically, post interesting things about Lawrence, in general, to keep this thread active; that is until we return in November for a brand new story. I have to think about what that one will be; but it should not be difficult, since I have read many more SS's that we still have not discussed. Lawrence wrote a ton of stories, so it is not hard to find a good one or one of interest.

Dark Muse

10-04-2008, 04:40 PM

Hehe yes, I usually am around somewhere

Janine

10-04-2008, 04:49 PM

Hehe yes, I usually am around somewhere

Yes, and how many social groups have you started now and how many new threads recently? :lol:

Dark Muse

10-04-2008, 04:50 PM

LOL, I know, far too many.

Janine

10-04-2008, 05:07 PM

LOL, I know, far too many.

No wonder you are behind in here....they call it distracted....;):lol:

Dark Muse

10-04-2008, 05:13 PM

LOL, no acutally the reason I got behind is I am back in school now, and you and Virgil got ahead of me one of the days, while I was in class. When I got home, there was a ton of new posts here LOL.

The social groups I usually just pop in on when I am sitting here without anything else going on.

Virgil

10-04-2008, 05:51 PM

I don't have anything more to say on the story. If there is a comment that striks me one way or the other by someone else I may repsond to it. Otherwise I feel we have done the story. :)

Janine

10-04-2008, 08:46 PM

So Virgil, does that mean you do agree with my post below (was from above)?

Yes, I was thinking about the 'will' and how often that appears in Lawrence's writing. I think you were the first to point that out to me and the group. It really does make more sense to me now. Often in this type of family unit, with 3 woman and one(?) brother and a father - the father may be prominent at one time and exert his will over them; say when they were children and under his rule. Even now the youngest - the son - is afraid of him. The daughters have outgrown that fear, with the appearance of this man's illness, into more of a person needing to be watched over and protected. The roles have reversed. The daughters now treat him as though they are his caretakers, even his mother. This is not so unusual in families where older adults become ill or have a degnerative condition. Often too it is necessary; you saw how he burned himself. If left on his own entirely he could cause himself more harm perhaps. The fact that they have a rough manner and seem angry, in their treatment of him, also speaks to me. It says that they are feel deep 'resentful' now that they have his care on their hands. This family does not seem to have much compassion for one another.

Basically I was waiting for your response on this one thought of mine.

Virgil

10-04-2008, 09:26 PM

I guess I would agree with most of that. You speculate a little more than I feel comfortable. I prefer to only go on what the author shows us. But everything you say is possible.

Dark Muse

10-04-2008, 10:36 PM

Yes I agree with you there Virgil I usually always try to just stick with what is acutally shown within the story

Janine

10-04-2008, 11:50 PM

Oh good, glad that you both responded and I will agree with you; I was indeed speculating somewhat. I guess I like to make my own conclusions; my imagination runs away with me sometimes.

Soooo - I suppose now we are officially on break for the month. Please check in from time to time, since I will post some filler material about Lawrence that should interest you. This has been a great group with many good discussions. I hope soon, when we resume in November, it will continue as enthusiastically.

Hey, everyone, when we reach 3000 posts we will have to have a cake!

Janine

10-22-2008, 03:25 PM

Hi Everyone, I am thinking of which story we can do next. I will try and post some commentary or something interesting about Lawrence tomorrow. I have been kind of slow this month but was glad to get this short break from this thread and will pick up again in November. I will review some new stories soon for possibilities. Hope all of you are enjoying your break.

Dark Muse

10-22-2008, 03:43 PM

Hehe well without you keeping my occupied here, I have been running amok getting myself in trouble elsewhere.

Janine

10-22-2008, 05:54 PM

Hehe well without you keeping my occupied here, I have been running amok getting myself in trouble elsewhere.

No doubt...hhahaah...but you started all those great social groups so don't be too hard on yourself. I love those groups and my art files have been rapidly growing.
Don't worry, we will get back on track soon and I will pick a new story for November 1st. Going out now so will try and post something about Lawrence later if I am not too tired out.

Virgil

10-22-2008, 06:24 PM

Can I pick the story this month? :D

Janine

10-22-2008, 11:19 PM

Can I pick the story this month? :D

Sure thing, Virgil. Did you have a particular one in mind? I've read most of the stories by now, so I will PM you about it further.

We won't anounce it until the 1st of the month though - OK?

Virgil

10-23-2008, 10:11 PM

Sure thing, Virgil. Did you have a particular one in mind? I've read most of the stories by now, so I will PM you about it further.

We won't anounce it until the 1st of the month though - OK?

First of November works great for me. Thanks. :)

Janine

10-24-2008, 04:27 PM

First of November works great for me. Thanks. :)

Great! I will back in the 'Lawrence mode' by then.:D

Virgil

11-01-2008, 10:31 PM

I'll identify the new story for discussion tomorrow. :D Is Dark Muse going to join in? Quark is a lost cause.

Janine

11-01-2008, 11:36 PM

I'll identify the new story for discussion tomorrow. :D Is Dark Muse going to join in? Quark is a lost cause.

Ok, I guess tomorrow will be ok; Monday would be better for me, but it will take awhile to read this next story, right? Let's not discuss it, until we all are done reading, what do you think?

Dark Muse

11-02-2008, 12:36 AM

Yes I am still here and plan on joining in

Janine

11-02-2008, 02:51 PM

Virgil, will you be writing up an introduction today? Can you post a nice photo or painting with the introduction? I find that eye-catching. If you need one, I will go on the net and look for one for you; also I have tons of files of pictures and one might fit the story. Can't wait until you announce it now. I missed our little Lawrence story discussions.

Virgil

11-02-2008, 10:14 PM

Ok I've selected "The Princess" written in 1925 while Lawrence was living in New Mexico. We've read several stories of Lawrence characters who achieve or come lose to acieving a transfiguration, but this story is about a character, Dollie Urquhart, who is incapable of such a trasformation. She is a woman who is fascinated by nature, but a fascination that is in the head not the spirit. She wants to go see "the wild animals move about in their wild unconsciousness" and "look over the mountains into their secret heart." But she cannot handle the intensity of the experience.

Here's the link for the story: http://gutenberg.net.au/ebooks04/0400311h.html#s12. Now this is a long story, so we'll have to break it up into parts. Let's give everyone a number of days to read it before discussing.

As to a painting, this is the best I could do:

http://www.treadwaygallery.com/ONLINECATALOGS/MAY2005/images/0554.jpg

Janine

11-02-2008, 10:50 PM

Ok I've selected "The Princess" written in 1925 while Lawrence was living in New Mexico. We've read several stories of Lawrence characters who achieve or come lose to acieving a transfiguration, but this story is about a character, Dollie Urquhart, who is incapable of such a trasformation. She is a woman who is fascinated by nature, but a fascination that is in the head not the spirit. She wants to go see "the wild animals move about in their wild unconsciousness" and "look over the mountains into their secret heart." But she cannot handle the intensity of the experience.

Here's the link for the story: http://gutenberg.net.au/ebooks04/0400311h.html#s12. Now this is a long story, so we'll have to break it up into parts. Let's give everyone a number of days to read it before discussing.

As to a painting, this is the best I could do

Good introduction, Virgil , and hey, that picture is not half bad either. I was thinking of just trees - aspen trees if possible and mountains. I read the story before, but will be reading it again to refresh my memory - thanks for the online text - that always helps. Yes, a few days would be great -maybe start discussing middle of the week, what do you think?

Virgil

11-02-2008, 10:53 PM

Good introduction, Virgil , and hey, that picture is not half bad either. I was thinking of just trees - aspen trees if possible and mountains. I read the story before, but will be reading it again to refresh my memory - thanks for the online text - that always helps. Yes, a few days would be great -maybe start discussing middle of the week, what do you think?

Sounds good.

Janine

11-03-2008, 01:03 AM

Great - will read it tonight...

Dark Muse

11-03-2008, 01:19 AM

I will try and get it read on time, but I will have to squeeze it in between a bunch of other stuff I have to do.

Janine

11-03-2008, 01:33 AM

I will try and get it read on time, but I will have to squeeze it in between a bunch of other stuff I have to do.

Take your time; that is understandable. We won't start discussing without you. We can all wait till we all have it read. I have some notes on it also in a few other books which should help with our full understanding. I want a chance to read those first anyway.

Virgil

11-03-2008, 07:39 PM

I will try and get it read on time, but I will have to squeeze it in between a bunch of other stuff I have to do.

Do you need another weekend for this D-M? We can wait until Sunday. I have very busy week.

Dark Muse

11-03-2008, 07:42 PM

I have just started reading the story today. If it is not inconvenient to wait that would be good for me, but I don't want to hold up the discussion.

Virgil

11-03-2008, 07:44 PM

We will defintely wait. I suspect you will really like this one. So is starting Sunday reasonable?

Dark Muse

11-03-2008, 07:46 PM

Yes, that should be enough time for me to get the story finnished.

Janine

11-03-2008, 08:53 PM

Yeah, Sunday would be good for me, as well. This week seems kind of busy already. I did read the story last night and like it very much. I will probably look at some other books that refer to the story and get some other perspectives on it. This will give me time to do so.

Dark Muse

11-08-2008, 06:17 PM

I just finished reading The Princess, and for the most part I LOVED it. It was an awesome story, by far my favorite thing I have read by Lawrence so far. At least short story wise.

But when I got to the end, that very last sentence was really disappointing, and I felt like it cheapened the whole of the story. It felt so much like a cheesy "Hollywood" ending.

It felt just tagged on there unnecessary serving no real purpose. It is like Lawrence just went too far and spoiled the masterpiece.

If that last line was left out. It would have been so much more powerful and left such a greater stronger impression.

When I read:

"Since my accident in the mountains, when a man went mad and shot my horse from under me, and my guide had to shoot him dead, I have never felt quite myself."

So she put it.

That was totally just like BAM!

Then you read the last tagged on sentence and it is totally crippling. And deflated what I felt.

Virgil

11-08-2008, 06:52 PM

I knew you would love this one Muse. :D I guess we'll discuss that last line when we get to it.

Dark Muse

11-08-2008, 06:58 PM

LOL in my mind I just want to edit that line out and pretend it does not exisist

Janine

11-09-2008, 10:38 PM

Dark Muse, you could have your version and Lawrence's version. :lol:

Dark Muse

11-09-2008, 10:39 PM

Hahaha, yes that is quite tempting

Virgil

11-09-2008, 10:46 PM

Ok it's Sunday, how about we start. How about we discuss the early years of Dollie's life.

To her father, she was The Princess. To her Boston aunts and uncles she was just Dollie Urquhart, poor little thing.

Colin Urquhart was just a bit mad. He was of an old Scottish family, and he claimed royal blood. The blood of Scottish kings flowed in his veins. On this point, his American relatives said, he was just a bit "off". They could not bear any more to be told which royal blood of Scotland blued his veins. The whole thing was rather ridiculous, and a sore point. The only fact they remembered was that it was not Stuart.

He was a handsome man, with a wide-open blue eye that seemed sometimes to be looking at nothing, soft black hair brushed rather low on his low, broad brow, and a very attractive body. Add to this a most beautiful speaking voice, usually rather hushed and diffident, but sometimes resonant and powerful like bronze, and you have the sum of his charms. He looked like some old Celtic hero. He looked as if he should have worn a greyish kilt and a sporran, and shown his knees. His voice came direct out of the hushed Ossianic past.

For the rest, he was one of those gentlemen of sufficient but not excessive means who fifty years ago wandered vaguely about, never arriving anywhere, never doing anything, and never definitely being anything, yet well received in the good society of more than one country.

He did not marry till he was nearly forty, and then it was a wealthy Miss Prescott, from New England. Hannah Prescott at twenty-two was fascinated by the man with the soft black hair not yet touched by grey, and the wide, rather vague blue eyes. Many women had been fascinated before her. But Colin Urquhart, by his very vagueness, had avoided any decisive connection.

Mrs. Urquhart lived three years in the mist and glamour of her husband's presence. And then it broke her. It was like living with a fascinating spectre. About most things he was completely, even ghostly oblivious. He was always charming, courteous, perfectly gracious in that hushed, musical voice of his. But absent. When all came to all, he just wasn't there. "Not all there," as the vulgar say.

He was the father of the little girl she bore at the end of the first year. But this did not substantiate him the more. His very beauty and his haunting musical quality became dreadful to her after the first few months. The strange echo: he was like a living echo! His very flesh, when you touched it, did not seem quite the flesh of a real man.

Perhaps it was that he was a little bit mad. She thought it definitely the night her baby was born.

"Ah, so my little princess has come at last!" he said, in his throaty, singing Celtic voice, like a glad chant, swaying absorbed.

It was a tiny, frail baby, with wide, amazed blue eyes. They christened it Mary Henrietta. She called the little thing My Dollie. He called it always My Princess.

It was useless to fly at him. He just opened his wide blue eyes wider, and took a child-like, silent dignity there was no getting past.

Hannah Prescott had never been robust. She had no great desire to live. So when the baby was two years old she suddenly died.

A couple of things cross my mind as I look at this beginning. First her name, "Dollie". It echoes A Doll's House and for similar reasons it I think characterizes Dollie as child like. She sort remains in her childish outlook throughout her life.

Another thing that I see is the class distinctions that are in so many of Lawrence's works: the "Princess" versus the common people she encounters. I'm not sure I can piece together the significance of it, other than to say it has removed her from the vitality of life. For Lawrence the lower classes are more connected to blood consciousness. Dollie and her father are definitely ethereal. In fact Colin is described as "a fascinating spectre" and a "ghost." That's as far from blood vitality as possible.

Third there is the celtic and the Scottish and the American elements to the story. I'm not sure what Lawrence is after but there does seem to be associations that Lawrence is trying to make.

Dark Muse

11-09-2008, 10:51 PM

For Lawrence the lower classes are more connected to blood consciousness. Dollie and her father are definitely ethereal. In fact Colin is described as "a fascinating spectre" and a "ghost." That's as far from blood vitality as possible

I will get back to the rest shortly, but I just wanted to take a moment to add a bit to this thought. As to what you say about her being more "etheral" she is always refered to as a fairy, or fairy-like throughout the story. Which can also reflect on the Scottish part of the star as well. Considering they have many myths and superstions which revolve around the fairy-folk, and it also gives if a sort of "Pagan" feeling. Her and her father seem to be more "old world"

Dark Muse

11-10-2008, 12:27 AM

Colin Urquhart was just a bit mad. He was of an old Scottish family, and he claimed royal blood. The blood of Scottish kings flowed in his veins. On this point, his American relatives said, he was just a bit "off". They could not bear any more to be told which royal blood of Scotland blued his veins. The whole thing was rather ridiculous, and a sore point. The only fact they remembered was that it was not Stuart.

This reminds me of the Great Gatsby, towrd the begining, where Nick talks about how his family is in the habbit of bragging about be descended from Dukes, when in fact that was not the acutal truth. Though in his bragging, I do not find him to be truly mad, I take it more as just a genreal Scottish pride.

He was a handsome man, with a wide-open blue eye that seemed sometimes to be looking at nothing, soft black hair brushed rather low on his low, broad brow, and a very attractive body. Add to this a most beautiful speaking voice, usually rather hushed and diffident, but sometimes resonant and powerful like bronze, and you have the sum of his charms. He looked like some old Celtic hero. He looked as if he should have worn a greyish kilt and a sporran, and shown his knees. His voice came direct out of the hushed Ossianic past.

I just adored this description of the father. It really paints the image of this figure out of Celtic lore, some great chieftain king. And it also really sets him apart from the others, particularly the American relatives. Tough we do not really see much of them, they come off as a bit snobbish. I cannot help but to feel for him, for the way in which they treated him and seemed to look down to him. But he was so full of this robust pride. I found him to be really quite endearing, and charming.

with a wide-open blue eye that seemed sometimes to be looking at nothing

This line struck as a bit odd. It made me think of like lazy-eye, or something like that.

Add to this a most beautiful speaking voice, usually rather hushed and diffident, but sometimes resonant and powerful like bronze,

I loved this description of his voice. Soft, and yet powerful. He does not have to raise his voice to make himself heard. It adds to the sense of nobility about him.

He did not marry till he was nearly forty, and then it was a wealthy Miss Prescott, from New England. Hannah Prescott at twenty-two was fascinated by the man with the soft black hair not yet touched by grey, and the wide, rather vague blue eyes. Many women had been fascinated before her. But Colin Urquhart, by his very vagueness, had avoided any decisive connection.

Here we can see his disconnection from other people, as though he is set up to be an attractive man and one who is at least well off enough not to have to work, while still travel over the world, he does not marry until late in life. What makes him decide to marry now is unknown, perhaps it was for her wealth? For his very disconnectedness it does not seem as if he was driven by any true feelings of love.

Mrs. Urquhart lived three years in the mist and glamour of her husband's presence. And then it broke her. It was like living with a fascinating spectre. About most things he was completely, even ghostly oblivious. He was always charming, courteous, perfectly gracious in that hushed, musical voice of his. But absent. When all came to all, he just wasn't there. "Not all there," as the vulgar say.

I just love this line

Mrs. Urquhart lived three years in the mist and glamour of her husband's presence

The use of the word mist, seems to touch back to the old Scottishness of Mr. Uruhart. It also adds to that vague feeling about him. That there was something obsecure about him, something drifting and elusisive.

It was like living with a fascinating spectre. About most things he was completely, even ghostly oblivious. He was always charming, courteous, perfectly gracious in that hushed, musical voice of his. But absent. When all came to all, he just wasn't there. "Not all there," as the vulgar say.

This gives him the impression of being something of an empty shell. He lives within his own world, and has no real concern or care for the physical world around him. Though it is suggested again that he is not right in his mind. I think he is simply a bit eccentric, he does not fit into the norms of soceity and so it is presumed that something must be wrong with him.

He was the father of the little girl she bore at the end of the first year. But this did not substantiate him the more. His very beauty and his haunting musical quality became dreadful to her after the first few months. The strange echo: he was like a living echo! His very flesh, when you touched it, did not seem quite the flesh of a real man.

This is just stunningly beautiful.

he was like a living echo!

I love that.

The language in this passage is without compare. It has such a romanticism to it. It is quite poetic.

His very beauty and his haunting musical quality became dreadful to her after the first few months.

He is like something come from Avalon. Or some sort of Fae

Janine

11-10-2008, 12:34 AM

Virgil, it is interesting how her mother refers to her as "My Dollie" and her father "My Princess." I had not even thought of a reference to the Ibsen play - "A Doll's House"...how do you see that connection exactly? Do you think Lawrence did think of that story when calling her Dollie? Also, what do you mean by the following statement? "Dollie and her father are definitely ethereal."

Colin, the father, is described as "a fascinating spectre" and a "ghost," but is Dollie also described as being the same? I didn't notice that in my reading. It is a good observation that this aspect of the father would be the farthest from the blood consciousness reality or 'vitality', as you worded it. I didn't see Dollie as exactly like her father in his vague ways; described in the text as being "ghostly oblivious" or "absent" . I see 'The Princess' more so as a woman struggling against her own consciousness of blood vitality, but wanting it at some point, even though she rejects it at the same time within herself. This is jumping too far ahead, I know, but I think we will see that she is driven on by an unconscious desire to find that aspect of herself, and connect with the natural world and herself. In time, we will see the duality of this/her position, which is the core source of conflict in this story, I believe. It is the same sort of duality we always see in Lawrence's works and in Lawrence himself.

In response to your last question, this may help. I just got a little insight while reading a passage from one of my references books about this story. The book is "The Minoan Distance, The Symbolism of Travel in D.H.Lawrence" by L.D Clark.

Clark states:

Dollie Urquhart, a "princess" because her eccentric father always calls her that, is brought up to believe that he and she are the last of a royal race. Collin Urquhart sounds quite like Lawrence himself when he says tht a "demon" rules at the core of everyone, and that a certain few of these demons form a natural nobility. The aloneness that Urquhart cultivates in the midst of a busy and much traveled life, and teaches his daughter to cultivate, on the surface appears Laurentian enough. But it is all sham, in fact, for Colin Urquhartdoes does not draw his isolation from a profound inner source. He is simply vague and absent and draws only on a vain pride.

I think this line is quite interesting in the part that you quoted above:

His very beauty and his haunting musical quality became dreadful to her after the first few months. The strange echo: he was like a living echo! His very flesh, when you touched it, did not seem quite the flesh of a real man.

Sorry, DM, we were actually posting around the same time. This is an edit on my part. I will let Virgil answer your post and mine, probably tomorrow.

Virgil

11-12-2008, 08:12 PM

Quote:
He was a handsome man, with a wide-open blue eye that seemed sometimes to be looking at nothing, soft black hair brushed rather low on his low, broad brow, and a very attractive body. Add to this a most beautiful speaking voice, usually rather hushed and diffident, but sometimes resonant and powerful like bronze, and you have the sum of his charms. He looked like some old Celtic hero. He looked as if he should have worn a greyish kilt and a sporran, and shown his knees. His voice came direct out of the hushed Ossianic past.
I just adored this description of the father. It really paints the image of this figure out of Celtic lore, some great chieftain king. And it also really sets him apart from the others, particularly the American relatives. Tough we do not really see much of them, they come off as a bit snobbish. I cannot help but to feel for him, for the way in which they treated him and seemed to look down to him. But he was so full of this robust pride. I found him to be really quite endearing, and charming.

Quote:
Add to this a most beautiful speaking voice, usually rather hushed and diffident, but sometimes resonant and powerful like bronze,

I loved this description of his voice. Soft, and yet powerful. He does not have to raise his voice to make himself heard. It adds to the sense of nobility about him.

I forgot to mention how the father is not just associated with ghost or spectres but with voices and echoes. So non-corporeal.

Lawrence also makes a deal of his Scottishness and Celtic roots. Why? Any particualr reason. Again he has this northern person and southern person identities. Northern seems to be less corporeal.

Quote:
He did not marry till he was nearly forty, and then it was a wealthy Miss Prescott, from New England. Hannah Prescott at twenty-two was fascinated by the man with the soft black hair not yet touched by grey, and the wide, rather vague blue eyes. Many women had been fascinated before her. But Colin Urquhart, by his very vagueness, had avoided any decisive connection.

Here we can see his disconnection from other people, as though he is set up to be an attractive man and one who is at least well off enough not to have to work, while still travel over the world, he does not marry until late in life. What makes him decide to marry now is unknown, perhaps it was for her wealth? For his very disconnectedness it does not seem as if he was driven by any true feelings of love.
There is no question his disconnection for society is important. It reminds me of the central character of The Man Who Loved Islands. Remember him? But certainly this disconnect is important here in its own right. Dollie apparently inherets this quality. How many of his other characteristics does Dollie inherent?

The use of the word mist, seems to touch back to the old Scottishness of Mr. Uruhart. It also adds to that vague feeling about him. That there was something obsecure about him, something drifting and elusisive.
Yes I agree.

He lives within his own world, and has no real concern or care for the physical world around him.
I do think that is the heart of his character, and perhaps what he passes on to Dollie.

Virgil, it is interesting how her mother refers to her as "My Dollie" and her father "My Princess." I had not even thought of a reference to the Ibsen play - "A Doll's House"...how do you see that connection exactly? Do you think Lawrence did think of that story when calling her Dollie?
I think he does. But the connection is that Dollie is a forever child. She has been under her father's care and has not grown up. She's like a doll, much like the Ibsen character prior to leaving her husband.

Also, what do you mean by the following statement? "Dollie and her father are definitely ethereal."
That's another reference to their non-corporeal nature. Actually I'm glad you found that. It was clear the father was non-corporeal; I wasn't sure if Lawrence referred to Dollie this way too. Apparantly yes.

Colin, the father, is described as "a fascinating spectre" and a "ghost," but is Dollie also described as being the same?
I had the same question and you answered it yourself just above. ;)

I didn't notice that in my reading. It is a good observation that this aspect of the father would be the farthest from the blood consciousness reality or 'vitality', as you worded it. I didn't see Dollie as exactly like her father in his vague ways; described in the text as being "ghostly oblivious" or "absent" . I see 'The Princess' more so as a woman struggling against her own consciousness of blood vitality, but wanting it at some point, even though she rejects it at the same time within herself. This is jumping too far ahead, I know, but I think we will see that she is driven on by an unconscious desire to find that aspect of herself, and connect with the natural world and herself. In time, we will see the duality of this/her position, which is the core source of conflict in this story, I believe. It is the same sort of duality we always see in Lawrence's works and in Lawrence himself.
Good point. I guess Lawrence is having it both ways. She is already ethereal, but there is something in her that is pushing toward blood vitality. But no matter how it's pushing it will never get there.

In response to your last question, this may help. I just got a little insight while reading a passage from one of my references books about this story. The book is "The Minoan Distance, The Symbolism of Travel in D.H.Lawrence" by L.D Clark.

Clark states:
Quote:
Dollie Urquhart, a "princess" because her eccentric father always calls her that, is brought up to believe that he and she are the last of a royal race. Collin Urquhart sounds quite like Lawrence himself when he says tht a "demon" rules at the core of everyone, and that a certain few of these demons form a natural nobility. The aloneness that Urquhart cultivates in the midst of a busy and much traveled life, and teaches his daughter to cultivate, on the surface appears Laurentian enough. But it is all sham, in fact, for Colin Urquhartdoes does not draw his isolation from a profound inner source. He is simply vague and absent and draws only on a vain pride.
We haven't gotten to the demon part of him yet. I think that is very significant.

Dark Muse

11-12-2008, 08:27 PM

Lawrence also makes a deal of his Scottishness and Celtic roots. Why? Any particualr reason. Again he has this northern person and southern person identities. Northern seems to be less corporeal.

The imporatnce placed upon the Cletic/Scottishness is interesting within the story. It seems to be this sort of conflict between the "old world" and the "new world" which appears in varrious ways in some of his other stories I have noticed. As you further down mentioned The Man Who Loved Islands, that story as well contained Celtic elements to it.

There is no question his disconnection for society is important. It reminds me of the central character of The Man Who Loved Islands. Remember him? But certainly this disconnect is important here in its own right. Dollie apparently inherets this quality. How many of his other characteristics does Dollie inherent?

Yes his disconnection is an important part of his character, and a central role within this story. His daughter does go one to take up many of his aspects. She is not truly concerned with they physical world around her, and she holds herself apart from others. It is interesting that her mother really has no true significance as The Princess does not seem to share any of her mothers traits. Even physically she is made to resemble her father. Though she may not be quite as truly etheral as her father was.

That's another reference to their non-corporeal nature. Actually I'm glad you found that. It was clear the father was non-corporeal; I wasn't sure if Lawrence referred to Dollie this way too. Apparantly yes.

The Pricness is refered to as being fairy like many times throughout the story. In this way I think she like her father is being viewed in a non-copperal sense, being that Fae are etheral beings. It is also another connection to the Celtic roots of the story and the imporance of The Princess being tied to that Scottishness.

Virgil

11-12-2008, 08:39 PM

The imporatnce placed upon the Cletic/Scottishness is interesting within the story. It seems to be this sort of conflict between the "old world" and the "new world" which appears in varrious ways in some of his other stories I have noticed.

Yes you are right. You mentioned this before and it didn't register. I was focused on the Mexican/Indian culture as part of the new world and that didn't fit. There is the culture of her American relatives which is new world, but the Mexo-Indian culture I think brings it back to older, perhaps even older than celtic in Lawrence's eyes.

The Pricness is refered to as being fairy like many times throughout the story. In this way I think she like her father is being viewed in a non-copperal sense, being that Fae are etheral beings. It is also another connection to the Celtic roots of the story and the imporance of The Princess being tied to that Scottishness.
Oh yes, good point. Fairy is non-corporeal too. I didn't catch that.

Janine

11-12-2008, 08:42 PM

Virgil this phrase was by Dark Muse: "Dollie and her father are definitely ethereal." not me. I was asking if Dolly was described as being ethereal anywhere in the actual text. I don't recall that she was, only her father.

Virgil, To one of your comments the commentary book author notes, that the man she goes up the mountain with, is one of dark color; this is often seen in Lawrence's works. He is suppose to be a sort of Tony Luhran (American Indian blood) who in reality lived with the woman who invited Lawrence out to the ranch to begin with - Mabel Dodge. In "The Plumed Serpent", which follows this story the men are also of a darker race. This racial thing can be seen throughout Lawrence's work during this time period. I think in the story, "The Woman Who Rode Away" it is also evident. I know it is a main part of the "The Virgin and the Gypsy". I just watched the film adaptation of that book. I think, not only does Lawrence contrast cultural differences and colors of the skin, but also the idea of the darkness and light, and the future and the past, or old and new. As we get into this story further, I will show evidence of this idea. I do think that Ramono was representative of this 'mysterious' Indian darkness, most likely the 'darkness of the blood', knowing how Lawrence thought of these things.

I will read both your posts again when I get back from the drugstore.

Dark Muse

11-12-2008, 08:49 PM

Yes you are right. You mentioned this before and it didn't register. I was focused on the Mexican/Indian culture as part of the new world and that didn't fit. There is the culture of her American relatives which is new world, but the Mexo-Indian culture I think brings it back to older, perhaps even older than celtic in Lawrence's eyes.

Sorry, did not mean to confuse. I was contrasting the Celtic as the old, vs. the American as the new when I had first mentioned it. That Mexico/Indian culture had not even crossed my mind. I was thinking more of the Pagansim of the Celts.

Dark Muse

11-12-2008, 08:50 PM

Dark Muse

11-12-2008, 09:01 PM

I did not re-read the whole story, but here are just a few of the exmples that I found which descirbe The Princess in an etheral way:

She was something like a changeling, not quite human.

The Princess she was, and the fairy from the North

She looked at her interlocutor with that cold, elfin detachment of hers.

And she had that quality of the sexless fariries, she did not change.

Janine

11-13-2008, 12:14 AM

Dark Muse, those references are good and perhaps Lawrence is referring back to the Celtic heritage of the father. They lived in England first, didn't they? I read this story about a week or more ago and now I already forget the details.

Thanks for listing those. She is seen as very fairy-like. I think this is really key - "she had that quality of the sexless fariries"...sort of like a other-being....interesting...."she is described as cold and detached." That is perfect to set up the story and what will ensue. 'Changling' also would indicate that she does not truly fit into either world, the new or the old, the one of sensual world of nature or her father's cold world of vagueness. Both the world of the Celts and the world of the American Indians bring up the idea of myth which is very characteristic Lawrence's texts and ideas. I read "The Plumed Serpent" and the Irish woman in the story seems to exist somewhere between two worlds as well, the world of Irish legend and myth and the pagan gods and the world of Mexico and the ancient gods. I think this story lead up to this novel. They both incorporate the two cultures and they find common ground in the idea of myth.

I am kind of exhausted tonight and can't post anything else but this.

Virgil

11-14-2008, 07:47 PM

Ok here's the next section.

The Prescotts felt a deep but unadmitted resentment against Colin Urquhart. They said he was selfish. Therefore they discontinued Hannah's income, a month after her burial in Florence, after they had urged the father to give the child over to them, and he had courteously, musically, but quite finally refused. He treated the Prescotts as if they were not of his world, not realities to him: just casual phenomena, or gramophones, talking-machines that had to be answered. He answered them. But of their actual existence he was never once aware.

They debated having him certified unsuitable to be guardian of his own child. But that would have created a scandal. So they did the simplest thing, after all--washed their hands of him. But they wrote scrupulously to the child, and sent her modest presents of money at Christmas, and on the anniversary of the death of her mother.

To The Princess her Boston relatives were for many years just a nominal reality. She lived with her father, and he travelled continually, though in a modest way, living on his moderate income. And never going to America. The child changed nurses all the time. In Italy it was a contadina; in India she had an ayah; in Germany she had a yellow-haired peasant girl.

Father and child were inseparable. He was not a recluse. Wherever he went he was to be seen paying formal calls going out to luncheon or to tea, rarely to dinner. And always with the child. People called her Princess Urquhart, as if that were her christened name.

She was a quick, dainty little thing with dark gold hair that went a soft brown, and wide, slightly prominent blue eyes that were at once so candid and so knowing. She was always grown up; she never really grew up. Always strangely wise, and always childish.

It was her father's fault.

"My little Princess must never take too much notice of people and the things they say and do," he repeated to her. "People don't know what they are doing and saying. They chatter-chatter, and they hurt one another, and they hurt themselves very often, till they cry. But don't take any notice, my little Princess. Because it is all nothing. Inside everybody there is another creature, a demon which doesn't care at all. You peel away all the things they say and do and feel, as cook peels away the outside of the onions. And in the middle of everybody there is a green demon which you can't peel away. And this green demon never changes, and it doesn't care at all about all the things that happen to the outside leaves of the person, all the chatter-chatter, and all the husbands and wives and children, and troubles and fusses. You peel everything away from people, and there is a green, upright demon in every man and woman; and this demon is a man's real self, and a woman's real self. It doesn't really care about anybody, it belongs to the demons and the primitive fairies, who never care. But, even so, there are big demons and mean demons, and splendid demonish fairies, and vulgar ones. But there are no royal fairy women left. Only you, my little Princess. You are the last of the royal race of the old people; the last, my Princess. There are no others. You and I are the last. When I am dead there will be only you. And that is why, darling, you will never care for any of the people in the world very much. Because their demons are all dwindled and vulgar. They are not royal. Only you are royal, after me. Always remember that. And always remember, it is a great secret. If you tell people, they will try to kill you, because they will envy you for being a Princess. It is our great secret, darling. I am a prince, and you a princess, of the old, old blood. And we keep our secret between us, all alone. And so, darling, you must treat all people very politely, because noblesse oblige. But you must never forget that you alone are the last of Princesses, and that all other are less than you are, less noble, more vulgar. Treat them politely and gently and kindly, darling. But you are the Princess, and they are commoners. Never try to think of them as if they were like you. They are not. You will find, always, that they are lacking, lacking in the royal touch, which only you have--"

The Princess learned her lesson early--the first lesson, of absolute reticence, the impossibility of intimacy with any other than her father; the second lesson, of naïve, slightly benevolent politeness. As a small child, something crystallised in her character, making her clear and finished, and as impervious as crystal.

"Dear child!" her hostesses said of her. "She is so quaint and old-fashioned; such a lady, poor little mite!"

She was erect, and very dainty. Always small, nearly tiny in physique, she seemed like a changeling beside her big, handsome, slightly mad father. She dressed very simply, usually in blue or delicate greys, with little collars of old Milan point, or very finely-worked linen. She had exquisite little hands, that made the piano sound like a spinet when she played. She was rather given to wearing cloaks and capes, instead of coats, out of doors, and little eighteenth-century sort of hats. Her complexion was pure apple-blossom.

She looked as if she had stepped out of a picture. But no one, to her dying day, ever knew exactly the strange picture her father had framed her in and from which she never stepped.

Her grandfather and grandmother and her Aunt Maud demanded twice to see her, once in Rome and once in Paris. Each time they were charmed, piqued, and annoyed. She was so exquisite and such a little virgin. At the same time so knowing and so oddly assured. That odd, assured touch of condescension, and the inward coldness, infuriated her American relations.

Only she really fascinated her grandfather. He was spellbound; in a way, in love with the little faultless thing. His wife would catch him brooding, musing over his grandchild, long months after the meeting, and craving to see her again. He cherished to the end the fond hope that she might come to live with him and her grandmother.

"Thank you so much, grandfather. You are so very kind. But Papa and I are such an old couple, you see, such a crochety old couple, living in a world of our own."

Well, we definitely see the dichotomy that Dark Muse was alluding to between the father's world and the American relative's world.

Another important detail is the inseparability of the father and child. It's as if his personality is being transfered over to the daughter. Or at least part of his personality.

This sentence is the key to her personality and the key to the whole story:

As a small child, something crystallised in her character, making her clear and finished, and as impervious as crystal.
Crystal is a very important word for Lawrence. It is the opposite of a personality that has the capacity to melt, to change state, to become something else. I'll show later in the story the significance.

Here's also a subtle forshadowing:

Each time they were charmed, piqued, and annoyed. She was so exquisite and such a little virgin. At the same time so knowing and so oddly assured. That odd, assured touch of condescension, and the inward coldness, infuriated her American relations.
This forshadows the climax of the story perfectly, the virginity, the self assuredness, the ay she infuriates people. :D

Dark Muse

11-14-2008, 08:23 PM

The Prescotts felt a deep but unadmitted resentment against Colin Urquhart. They said he was selfish. Therefore they discontinued Hannah's income, a month after her burial in Florence, after they had urged the father to give the child over to them,

It sounds to me here, as if they blame the father for the death of his wife. It is also funny to me the way in which they call him selfish, and yet though we do not ever meet the relatives face to face in the story, they are presented I think in a rather unsavory way and as being quite snobbish. And what could be more selfish then wanting to take the child from its father?

I do not think that it is being presented here in some act of intended goodwill. But I think the relatives are made to be generally dislikable. Particularly when contrasted with Colin's response to them

and he had courteously, musically, but quite finally refused.

I think it is hard not to root for him here, and see him as some sort of "hero" figure in his resistince against the Americnas.

He treated the Prescotts as if they were not of his world, not realities to him: just casual phenomena, or gramophones, talking-machines that had to be answered.

Perhaps I am just biased becasue everyone in my family hates my sisters in-laws, but I think this is just hysterical.

talking-machines that had to be answered

That is just great!

But of their actual existence he was never once aware.

I think when the Princess is with Romero at some point, a similar statement is made about her, and how she is no longer really aware of Romero's physical exisistince.

Father and child were inseparable. He was not a recluse. Wherever he went he was to be seen paying formal calls going out to luncheon or to tea, rarely to dinner. And always with the child. People called her Princess Urquhart, as if that were her christened name.

I found this part to be quite interesting. In spite of the fact that he was so removed from others, and from the "physcial" reality, and the fact that he was not truly connected to anyone, except maybe his daughter. There is an importance placed on the fact that he was not a reculse. He still moved within social circles. And there is a genral feeling that others liked him.

She was a quick, dainty little thing with dark gold hair that went a soft brown, and wide, slightly prominent blue eyes that were at once so candid and so knowing. She was always grown up; she never really grew up. Always strangely wise, and always childish.

This is an intersting contradiction within her charachter. And as I cannot remember now, if it was Janine or Virgil who pointed out, that in this way she is sort of like a doll. On the one hand she always remains somehow child like, and yet on the other hand she is never truly like a child. It kind of reminds me of those freaky paintings of Christ, where they paint him just looking like a miniture man. Instead of looking like an acutal baby, he just looks like a 3ft tall man sitting in Mary's lap.

She looked as if she had stepped out of a picture. But no one, to her dying day, ever knew exactly the strange picture her father had framed her in and from which she never stepped.

I found these lines to be quite interesting. Because of her physical apperance, and her foundness of "out of date" clothing, she appears as if she has emerged from a picture. While her inner self, is forever trapped within this ideal which her father has placed her inside.

Only she really fascinated her grandfather. He was spellbound; in a way, in love with the little faultless thing. His wife would catch him brooding, musing over his grandchild, long months after the meeting, and craving to see her again

Does anyone else find this at least somewhat disturbing? I am not suggesting that anything inapproprate acutally happend. But just something about this, I cannot help but to find a tad unsettling. His fascination/Obcession with her seems to go a tad beyond just normal and completely "innocent" affection.

"Thank you so much, grandfather. You are so very kind. But Papa and I are such an old couple, you see, such a crochety old couple, living in a world of our own."

This is another of my favorite little wits. I found this quite amusing.

I do wish to address the speach ther father gives to her, it is not my intent to completely ignore it. But it is such an interesting and detatiled speach, I thought it would be best to address sperate from this post. As well as keeping this post from being too long.

Janine

11-14-2008, 10:06 PM

I am reading for once and not writing a lot for now. I don't really feel good tonight and can't fully concentrate. One passage does strike me though;

She was a quick, dainty little thing with dark gold hair that went a soft brown, and wide, slightly prominent blue eyes that were at once so candid and so knowing. She was always grown up; she never really grew up. Always strangely wise, and always childish.

Such opposites in this paragraph show us what Princess Urquhart is up against, within her own being. This predicts the conflict that will take place throughout her life as an adult; especially in the incident in the story we are discussing. Because Lawrence chose to place the two statements, back to back, one feel the meaning of the word 'wise' is related to age; especially since she also made reference to the fact her father and she were "such an old couple". Therefore 'wise' and 'childish' seem to be at odds with each other and show the divided aspects of her personaliy.

Hope that makes some sense. I can't think too clearly tonight - sorry.

Thanks for posting this next section, Virgil and interesting commentary, Dark Muse. I will have to read it all again tomorrow.

Dark Muse

11-14-2008, 10:13 PM

By that statement and the use of the word wise, I pictured her as being something of a precocious child. As being "wise" beyond her years. As well as saw it as another way which connects her more with the "old"

And by the way she lived her life, traveling all over with her father, it also strikes me she probably did not have a normal childhood. We are not given any indication of playmates, and it is hard to imagine her doing typically child like things.

Her childishness in adulthood I think partly is related to her physical appearance, and the fact that she always remains this rather dainty little figure of a woman, as well I see it as having to do with her naivety, the fact that she never truly connects with reality, and her virginity which comes up often. There is something of an untouched innocence about her.

Janine

11-14-2008, 10:21 PM

Yes, all of that is very true, Dark Muse. The shaping of the woman from a child was never developed because she had no playmates and so was forced into the adult world right of the bat and even though she was acting out as a adult she was actually more of a child who never grew up - sort of like a Peter Pan, but female. She then had no desire to actually grow up. Her father's shaping of her, ruined her to a great degree. Sad....

Dark Muse

11-15-2008, 12:40 AM

She then had no desire to actually grow up. Her father's shaping of her, ruined her to a great degree. Sad....

I would have to disagree with this. Just because she is different does not make her ruined. One need not conform to the norms of soceity. I did not find her to be truly unhappy. And I cannot say I was really saddened by her. I quite admired her.

Virgil

11-15-2008, 12:46 AM

I would have to disagree with this. Just because she is different does not make her ruined. One need not conform to the norms of soceity. I did not find her to be truly unhappy. And I cannot say I was really saddened by her. I quite admired her.

I understand what you're saying D-M, but I think Lawrence's point is that she is a case of arrested development. I don't think Lawrence intends her to be admired.

Dark Muse

11-15-2008, 12:50 AM

Yes, that may be quite true, but I cannot help myself. It is my general nature to find myself siding with those who tend to be abnormal. I do not doubt that you are right on the intent, but that does not change my opinion or thoughts of her.

Virgil

11-15-2008, 12:54 AM

Janine

11-15-2008, 03:59 PM

I think we tend to project our own feeling about the woman; then come up with the interpretation of her character, Dark Muse, and that is fine; but I am with Virgil on this one; knowing Lawrence and how he did think in all the novels/stories I have read, I agree that the princess is a "case of arrested development". She wants to connect with a man and with nature, but she also cannot allow herself to do so; she just can't let go. I have to agree that Romano might be far from the right man for her; he seemed quite cruel at times. I am jumping too far ahead of the story; we can discuss that when we get to it; but she was the one who sought him out by putting herself into this vulnerable situation with him all alone on a mountaintop.

I think the story was fashioned after his friend and typist, Dorothy Brett, who we discussed a few stories back. I will try and find something about this fact in my biography books. I know I read something revealing before. I think I know which book it is in.

Dark Muse

11-15-2008, 05:24 PM

She wants to connect with a man and with nature, but she also cannot allow herself to do so; she just can't let go.

I do not know if I believe that she genuinely really wants to connect with a man, but rather she just feels that is something she "ought" to do. As when she discuses marriage. It does not seem she truly desires to be married, but as she says. Marriage is just the thing she ought to do. But it was not something she had the genuine desire to do.

Romero just happened to be a man whom was able to illicit some feeling within her, but even so, she said she could not actually see herself married with him.

It seems to me she was more driven by outside pressure to feel as if she should make some sort of connection. But it does not seem to me that it is something she acutally wants for herself.

Janine

11-15-2008, 05:36 PM

I do not know if I believe that she genuinely really wants to connect with a man, but rather she just feels that is something she "ought" to do. As when she discuses marriage. It does not seem she truly desires to be married, but as she says. Marriage is just the thing she ought to do. But it was not something she had the genuine desire to do.

Romero just happened to be a man whom was able to illicit some feeling within her, but even so, she said she could not actually see herself married with him.

It seems to me she was more driven by outside pressure to feel as if she should make some sort of connection. But it does not seem to me that it is something she acutally wants for herself.

Dark Muse, From what I read in a commentary about this story, she felt a void where her father had once been and needed to fill it. I think that the ending stating she married a much older man, sort of confirms this idea. I think that she did need something and indeed Romero stirred this need and want within her. She just could not let go and realise any true connection with him; which knowing of her childhood and her past young life one would totally understand about her. I sympathised myself with her, and yet the fact, she gave in to him entering her bed (even invited him to do so), was definitely a poor decision on her part, even if she was cold; considering what happened after. No, I don't see that she wanted or desired to marry Romero at all; this is true. This story is interesting to compare with Lawrence's "The Virgin and the Gypsy" because the woman protagonist in that story also feels a strong physical attraction to a man with a darker countence, complexion - the gyspsy. However, in that story there is eventually a connection, and as Virgil would point out, Lawrence's idea of 'transfiguration' is evident. In 'The Horse-Dealer's Daughter' ; were you here, when we read and discussed that story? If so, you might recall the woman being rescued from the lake and in warming her up, to save her, they do undergo a tranfiguration by their physical contact. This is often a theme in Lawrence's works.

Dark Muse

11-15-2008, 07:20 PM

I feel the very end of the story was something of a cop out, and I am not convinced that it is what she truly wanted. It seems to me this story is just a way of criticizing those who do not fit normally into society and trying to force her into that acceptable convention. I do not think there is anything wrong with the way she was before, or with the way her father was. The way in which both of them are called to be "mad" And making her marry at the end is just a way of saying that everyone must in the end conform to society.

After her encounter with Romero she more or less returns to the way she always was before, as it says "she was a virgin again" I do not think she ever truly wanted to marry anyone but simply did not know what else to do.

I think with the Scottish elements of the story (The old) conflicted against the American elements of the story (The New) her being married off in the end, was the final conquer of the old over the new, and the fact that the old world could not longer be allowed to survive. As she was "The Last Princess" ultimately she was conquered by this new world. The very last of her kind no able to resist any further for the ancient bloodline.

Janine

11-15-2008, 08:29 PM

A cope out for who? The princess or Lawrence's writing, his conclusion? I thought she did not truly want to marry either; this being the exact point at what Lawrence is getting at in those final lines...can't you see the irony in them and the idea of her marrying an older man (to replace her father)? I agree that, in doing so, she conformed to society; it was no longer an issue of free will.

Dark Muse

11-15-2008, 08:31 PM

When I first red the story I felt it was a cop out for Lawrences Writing. I felt the story would have been so much powerful if it ended on the note right before the inclusion of the line. I felt that last line defleated the effect the impact.

Janine

11-17-2008, 10:26 PM

Dark Muse, I was waiting for Virgil to return to post some more of the text; it does not look too hopeful though - he said he is off on another business trip; I think tomorrow.
If you don't mind I think it best that we discuss that ending at the end of this discussion, because I don't want to jump too far ahead. If it ended with those few taglines, you can be sure Lawrence meant it to. He would write and re-write these stories numerous times, so I feel he had a very good reason for wanting this story to end in just that way. When we get to the end, I will post the commentary and what they author has to point out about that part of the text, and why he felt it ended appropriately.

Until then I guess we should hold up and wait for Virgil. I am in no rush. Not feeling well this week anyway.

Virgil

11-19-2008, 12:26 AM

Let's move on. Next section:

Her father let her see the world--from the outside. And he let her read. When she was in her teens she read Zola and Maupassant, and with the eyes of Zola and Maupassant she looked on Paris. A little later she read Tolstoi and Dostoevsky. The latter confused her. The others, she seemed to understand with a very shrewd, canny understanding, just as she understood the Decameron stories as she read them in their old Italian, or the Nibelung poems. Strange and uncanny, she seemed to understand things in a cold light perfectly, with all the flush of fire absent. She was something like a changeling, not quite human.

This earned her, also, strange antipathies. Cabmen and railway porters, especially in Paris and Rome, would suddenly treat her with brutal rudeness, when she was alone. They seemed to look on her with sudden violent antipathy. They sensed in her curious impertinence, an easy, sterile impertinence towards the things they felt most. She was so assured, and her flower of maidenhood was so scentless. She could look at a lusty, sensual Roman cabman as if he were a sort of grotesque, to make her smile. She knew all about him, in Zola. And the peculiar condescension with which she would give him her order, as if she, frail, beautiful thing, were the only reality, and he, coarse monster, was a sort of Caliban floundering in the mud on the margin of the pool of the perfect lotus, would suddenly enrage the fellow, the real Mediterranean who prided himself on his beauté male, and to whom the phallic mystery was still the only mystery. And he would turn a terrible face on her, bully her in a brutal, coarse fashion--hideous. For to him she had only the blasphemous impertinence of her own sterility.

Encounters like these made her tremble, and made her know she must have support from the outside. The power of her spirit did not extend to these low people, and they had all the physical power. She realised an implacability of hatred in their turning on her. But she did not lose her head. She quietly paid out money and turned away.

Those were dangerous moments, though, and she learned to be prepared for them. The Princess she was, and the fairy from the North, and could never understand the volcanic phallic rage with which coarse people could turn on her in a paroxysm of hatred. They never turned on her father like that. And quite early she decided it was the New England mother in her whom they hated. Never for one minute could she see with the old Roman eyes, see herself as sterility, the barren flower taking on airs and an intolerable impertinence. This was what the Roman cabman saw in her. And he longed to crush the barren blossom. Its sexless beauty and its authority put him in a passion of brutal revolt.

When she was nineteen her grandfather died, leaving her a considerable fortune in the safe hands of responsible trustees. They would deliver her her income, but only on condition that she resided for six months in the year in the United States.

"Why should they make me conditions?" she said to her father. "I refuse to be imprisoned six months in the year in the United States. We will tell them to keep their money."

"Let us be wise, my little Princess, let us be wise. No, we are almost poor, and we are never safe from rudeness. I cannot allow anybody to be rude to me. I hate it, I hate it!" His eyes flamed as he said it. "I could kill any man or woman who is rude to me. But we are in exile in the world. We are powerless. If we were really poor, we should be quite powerless, and then I should die. No, my Princess. Let us take their money, then they will not dare to be rude to us. Let us take it, as we put on clothes, to cover ourselves from their aggressions."

There began a new phase, when the father and daughter spent their summers on the Great Lakes or in California, or in the South-West. The father was something of a poet, the daughter something of a painter. He wrote poems about the lakes or the redwood trees, and she made dainty drawings. He was physically a strong man, and he loved the out-of-doors. He would go off with her for days, paddling in a canoe and sleeping by a camp-fire. Frail little Princess, she was always undaunted, always undaunted. She would ride with him on horseback over the mountain trails till she was so tired she was nothing but a bodiless consciousness sitting astride her pony. But she never gave in. And at night he folded her in her blanket on a bed of balsam pine twigs, and she lay and looked at the stars unmurmuring. She was fulfilling her rôle.

People said to her as the years passed, and she was a woman of twenty-five, then a woman of thirty, and always the same virgin dainty Princess, 'knowing' in a dispassionate way, like an old woman, and utterly intact:

"Don't you ever think what you will do when your father is no longer with you?"

She looked at her interlocutor with that cold, elfin detachment of hers:

"No, I never think of it," she said.

She had a tiny, but exquisite little house in London, and another small, perfect house in Connecticut, each with a faithful housekeeper. Two homes, if she chose. And she knew many interesting literary and artistic people. What more?

So the years passed imperceptibly. And she had that quality of the sexless fairies, she did not change. At thirty-three she looked twenty-three.

Her father, however, was ageing, and becoming more and more queer. It was now her task to be his guardian in his private madness. He spent the last three years of life in the house in Connecticut. He was very much estranged, sometimes had fits of violence which almost killed the little Princess. Physical violence was horrible to her; it seemed to shatter her heart. But she found a woman a few years younger than herself, well-educated and sensitive, to be a sort of nurse-companion to the mad old man. So the fact of madness was never openly admitted. Miss Cummins, the companion, had a passionate loyalty to the Princess, and a curious affection, tinged with love, for the handsome, white-haired, courteous old man, who was never at all aware of his fits of violence once they had passed.

The Princess was thirty-eight years old when her father died. And quite unchanged. She was still tiny, and like a dignified, scentless flower. Her soft brownish hair, almost the colour of beaver fur, was bobbed, and fluffed softly round her apple-blossom face, that was modelled with an arched nose like a proud old Florentine portrait. In her voice, manner and bearing she was exceedingly still, like a flower that has blossomed in a shadowy place. And from her blue eyes looked out the Princess's eternal laconic challenge, that grew almost sardonic as the years passed. She was the Princess, and sardonically she looked out on a princeless world.

She was relieved when her father died, and at the same time, it was as if everything had evaporated around her. She had lived in a sort of hot-house, in the aura of her father's madness. Suddenly the hot-house had been removed from around her, and she was in the raw, vast, vulgar open air.

Lots here, but this paragraph really drives home the character:

This earned her, also, strange antipathies. Cabmen and railway porters, especially in Paris and Rome, would suddenly treat her with brutal rudeness, when she was alone. They seemed to look on her with sudden violent antipathy. They sensed in her curious impertinence, an easy, sterile impertinence towards the things they felt most. She was so assured, and her flower of maidenhood was so scentless. She could look at a lusty, sensual Roman cabman as if he were a sort of grotesque, to make her smile. She knew all about him, in Zola. And the peculiar condescension with which she would give him her order, as if she, frail, beautiful thing, were the only reality, and he, coarse monster, was a sort of Caliban floundering in the mud on the margin of the pool of the perfect lotus, would suddenly enrage the fellow, the real Mediterranean who prided himself on his beauté male, and to whom the phallic mystery was still the only mystery. And he would turn a terrible face on her, bully her in a brutal, coarse fashion--hideous. For to him she had only the blasphemous impertinence of her own sterility.

People treat her with brutalness again comes up and foreshadows the climax. Now here is where we know that Lawrence is against her: "She was so assured, and her flower of maidenhood was so scentless." This is the perfect image of her sterility that Lawrence ends the paragraph with. And the Roman cabman is a stand-in for Romero. But this sentence is really loaded:

And the peculiar condescension with which she would give him her order, as if she, frail, beautiful thing, were the only reality, and he, coarse monster, was a sort of Caliban floundering in the mud on the margin of the pool of the perfect lotus, would suddenly enrage the fellow, the real Mediterranean who prided himself on his beauté male, and to whom the phallic mystery was still the only mystery.
"Phallic mystery," now that is a late Lawrentian term. It's really the culmination of Lawrence's thinking and upon which the feminists competely hate Lawrence. Phallic mystery is the concept that lawrence has that spituality, divinity comes from the male phallus, the cabman priding " himself on his beauté male." And women (a) don't have the power that comes from a phallus and (b) must be subserviant to it. Clearly Dollie is not subserviant to it and it disrupts the natural flow of human relationships. This is at the heart of where Lawrence sees the modern world gone wrong. Women not subserviant to the power of the male phallus. :D Now wish all women were subserviant to a man's phallus. :lol:

And Lawrence continues with this:

Never for one minute could she see with the old Roman eyes, see herself as sterility, the barren flower taking on airs and an intolerable impertinence. This was what the Roman cabman saw in her. And he longed to crush the barren blossom. Its sexless beauty and its authority put him in a passion of brutal revolt.
This is what happens to Romero later on, and we must keep this in mind because Lawrence doesn't explain why Romero goes off.

Janine

11-19-2008, 12:31 AM

Oh good, I will answer this tomorrow or Dark Muse can. I didn't notice this just now, before I wrote you the PM. I am watching a film, so will read this later on. Thanks for posting it, Virgil. Looks like you think clearly when you are away from home.

I just skimmed it and am laughing my head off at this line: "Now wish all women were subserviant to a man's phallus." :lol: ...yeah, right...

Dark Muse

11-19-2008, 02:33 AM

This is what happens to Romero later on, and we must keep this in mind because Lawrence doesn't explain why Romero goes off.

I would have to disagree with this. I did not think it was really all that unclear why Romero went off the way he did at the end. Though his reaction was not a normal one, nor was it one to be defended or seen as justified, but I think it was still understandable just what caused him to go off the way he did. His manhood was insulted after The Princess snubbed him. Her very response to their act of love diminished him and so he was driven with the need to hold power over her to "prove" himself. If she was going to insult him and cast him aside he was going to show her who was boss. I think his being a Spaniard was also an important aspect of this, considering the importance of machismo within the Spanish culture.

Janine

11-19-2008, 02:17 PM

I agree with both of you, actually. I think there were definite reasons shown why Romero 'went off' at the end. His manhood was insulted and diminished, as Dark Muse stated and in this way, so that he relates back to that cabman, who also feels insulted or defensive, towards the Princess. Wasn't he also afraid of being captured and going to prison? Did we ever know much about him or his past? I don't recall that we did.

Are you two actually disagreeing about that ending...or the reason that Romero reacts the way he does? I don't mean to say he acts at all logical or sane by lording his power over her. On the other hand she egged him on to take her to the mountains - she requested he warm her bed - she couldn't have been naive - it said she read Zola; so come on - she must have known what would happen next. Then when suddenly she rejects him; even tells him she didn't like it at all, I can well see how he 'went off'.

Anyway, I think that Virgil is right in saying that paragraph with the cabman does indeed foreshadow the events that will follow and how they play themselves out. I don't want to jump to the ending in too much detail yet; there is a lot going on there, we can discuss in more depth, when we get to that part of the story text.

I really like the line about her being a scentless flower - there again the flower image reappears in Lawrence's mind and writing; the perfect flower representative of the perfect state of being. In this case, the scentless flower, definitely indicates a lack of the full quality of a flower, thus the human-being.

Dark Muse

11-19-2008, 03:19 PM

I was just disagreeing with Virgil saying that Romero's actions were unexplaained. Becasue I felt that they were.

Janine

11-19-2008, 04:16 PM

I was just disagreeing with Virgil saying that Romero's actions were unexplaained. Becasue I felt that they were.

To an extend I felt they were also. Afterall, she egged him on and then put him down, when he was feeling most manly after their intimacy at night. Who wouldn't go a little wild, after the cold way she treated him? I think that was the point, Lawrence was making. I don't think he was condemning either of them; Lawrence seems more forgiving to me than that. I think he sets up the story, with her background to show how she will react. She has definitely been affected by her father's treatment in the past. We don't really know how Romano has been treated in his past, but we can perhaps assume it may not have been too great. Maybe being dark skinned and of Spanish ancestry, living among the white population in this region, he has undergone prejudices, and therefore feels defensive when she rejects him personally. I think Lawrence presents the two people and shows how they both have major flaws in character. I don't see Lawrence as being totally one-sided here. I think he simply set out to tell a story with deeper implications. Like I said, we can delve further into the whole ending, which I think is quite intricate, before we fully understand the complete meaning of the story...also it all takes time to sink in. I know, I now need a second reading of the ending; that way I will get more out of it and see it clearer.

Dark Muse

11-19-2008, 05:46 PM

She was so assured, and her flower of maidenhood was so scentless. She could look at a lusty, sensual Roman cabman as if he were a sort of grotesque, to make her smile. She knew all about him, in Zola. And the peculiar condescension with which she would give him her order, as if she, frail, beautiful thing, were the only reality, and he, coarse monster, was a sort of Caliban floundering in the mud on the margin of the pool of the perfect lotus, would suddenly enrage the fellow, the real Mediterranean who prided himself on his beauté male, and to whom the phallic mystery was still the only mystery. And he would turn a terrible face on her, bully her in a brutal, coarse fashion--hideous. For to him she had only the blasphemous impertinence of her own sterility.

Though I do not know as much about Lawrence as the two of you, just reading this passage, I personally do not find it to be particularly flattering of the Cabman. It does not to me illicit for him any feeling of sympathy. I agree what it is a foreboding of what is late to come within the story, but when first reading it I also felt it was a sign of The Princess' growing into sexual maturity. The fact that she is so child-like and unaware of her coming into womanhood because she does not really think in those terms. She is no confronted with others trying to treat her as a sexual being, because she is now being noticed as a woman in spite of the fact that she herself is not truly aware of such thing.

In spite of what may have been intended, I cannot help but to see her as anything but a heroine here.

Never for one minute could she see with the old Roman eyes, see herself as sterility, the barren flower taking on airs and an intolerable impertinence. This was what the Roman cabman saw in her. And he longed to crush the barren blossom. Its sexless beauty and its authority put him in a passion of brutal revolt.

Considering the importance of her Scottish heritage in this story, I find it quite interesting the use of "Roman eyes" and the Roman Cabman.

And he longed to crush the barren blossom. Its sexless beauty and its authority put him in a passion of brutal revolt.

This seems to be an almost metaphoric reflection of the conquer of the Celts by Rome. The wild heathens being crushed under the foot of Roman authority.

But we are in exile in the world. We are powerless. If we were really poor, we should be quite powerless, and then I should die. No, my Princess. Let us take their money, then they will not dare to be rude to us. Let us take it, as we put on clothes, to cover ourselves from their aggressions."

The importance, and strength of their demons, has no power within the "real" world, the "physical" world in which they are forced to live, and so they know because there spirits alone cannot compete with the physical power of those they place themselves above, they need the protection of physical and material things to make their way within the world.

I think I will stop here for now, sense there was a lot of text posted. I will comment on the rest later.

Janine

11-19-2008, 06:05 PM

Considering the importance of her Scottish heritage in this story, I find it quite interesting the use of "Roman eyes" and the Roman Cabman.

Quote:
"And he longed to crush the barren blossom. Its sexless beauty and its authority put him in a passion of brutal revolt."

This seems to be an almost metaphoric reflection of the conquer of the Celts by Rome. The wild heathens being crushed under the foot of Roman authority.

You trying to start a war with our Virgil? You know he will react to this part - he is an old Roman, himself...:lol:

But seriously, I can certainly see your point of view on this story. I think this is one of Lawrence's more difficult stories to discuss.

Maybe Virgil can better answer your post. I know this is a late Lawrence work and that is significant to point out. Most likely, Virgil, can explain this idea to you, that crops up in his later writing. This story has a lot to do with the theme of the thesis Virgil wrote for his masters. He can shed more light on the idea Lawrence had of 'transfiguration'. In the stories of 'The Horse-Dealer's Daughter' and 'The Virgin and the Gypsy', the women both do experience a 'transfiguration'. In this story, it is just the opposite. The heroine, the Princess, is not affected or altered by her sexual experience with Romano. She is kept intact; exactly why the end states that she remained a virgin. In "Lady Chatterly's Lover", again the awakening of Connie's female sexuality and sensuality is evident and a result of her intimacy with Mellors, the gamekeeper. However, in 'The Princess', this does not occur. In most of Lawrence's work, he has strived for this awakening for the woman. Most likely he did view Dolly as a failed transfiguration.

Dark Muse

11-19-2008, 06:56 PM

You trying to start a war with our Virgil? You know he will react to this part - he is an old Roman, himself...:lol:

Hahahaha! Well I am a Celt

Janine

11-19-2008, 07:16 PM

Hahahaha! Well I am a Celt

Seriously he is....I can't wait to see how responds to what you wrote.:lol: It should be interesting. Anyway, glad you found the humor in that. You know how those hot Italians are.;)

I am English mainly, with some French thrown in and there is suppose to be a bit of American Indian blood, somewhere in my family tree. I guess, if I am English I can relate back to the Celts, too. :) I certainly love Celtic lore and Celtic designs are wonderful - love the intricate knots.

I posted some artwork in the Artist Cafe today - some Thomas Eakins. I also posted a lot in the children illustration thread - hey, Dark Muse, where you been lately? Haven't seen you in the illustration threads I started for awhile now and you always post such interesting illustrators; help, I need some support.

Virgil

11-19-2008, 07:29 PM

I was just disagreeing with Virgil saying that Romero's actions were unexplaained. Becasue I felt that they were.

Oh I see what you're saying. Ok perhaps. I don't remember now. We'll get to it eventually. :)

Hahahaha! Well I am a Celt

:lol: Well, you got part Italian I know. I don't have time right now to read all the posts. Later tonight I hope.

Dark Muse

11-19-2008, 07:52 PM

I posted some artwork in the Artist Cafe today - some Thomas Eakins. I also posted a lot in the children illustration thread - hey, Dark Muse, where you been lately? Haven't seen you in the illustration threads I started for awhile now and you always post such interesting illustrators; help, I need some support.

Yeah I know I have not been around the illustration threads as of late. I will try and pop in again sometime soon.

Virgil

11-19-2008, 09:39 PM

I really like the line about her being a scentless flower - there again the flower image reappears in Lawrence's mind and writing; the perfect flower representative of the perfect state of being. In this case, the scentless flower, definitely indicates a lack of the full quality of a flower, thus the human-being.

Yes!

I guess there isn't anything else in the posts for me to comment on. I guess both of you agree on Lawrence's phallic mystery. Janine, you can now see why I think Lawrence was very sexist, especially his later writing. I think you are right about his early career in that he was somewhat sympathetic to women, but even then there are questionable moments. But they aren't very questionable in the later part of his life. You can almost read Lady Chatterly as a woman who is married to a man who is incable of phallic power but finds a lover who is and in which she succumbs to him.

Janine

11-19-2008, 09:57 PM

Yes!

I guess there isn't anything else in the posts for me to comment on. I guess both of you agree on Lawrence's phallic mystery. Janine, you can now see why I think Lawrence was very sexist, especially his later writing. I think you are right about his early career in that he was somewhat sympathetic to women, but even then there are questionable moments. But they aren't very questionable in the later part of his life. You can almost read Lady Chatterly as a woman who is married to a man who is incable of phallic power but finds a lover who is and in which she succumbs to him.

Well, as true as this may seem to you, I still see Lawrence as a greatly undecided man on the issue of woman; I can't just simply state that he was 'sexist'; I suppose I don't particularly like to label him that or his work. Maybe I am just too loyal to Lawrence.;) It would be nice to hear it from his own mouth. Yet at times, I can see why the feminists were angry with him, but I don't think they looked at the complete picture. I think he had a great deal of fear when it came to women and their power over men; but at the same time he seems to respect them; sometimes even to elevate them in an offhand manner. For instance, even in "Lady Chatterly's Lover", the entire novel revolves around Connie and her physical/psychological needs as a woman. I don't know how you can say Mellors is dominent or all powerful. I think Lawrence paints the clearest picture of Connie - he really delves beneath the surface of the women in his all of his novels. In "The Virgin and the Gypsy", he also basically concentrates on the young woman and her feelings. I don't recall being privy to any of the inner thoughts of the gypsy man, but it has been awhile, since I actually read it. I saw the film version recently. In that, I did not feel that the gypsy forced his will upon her; if he did he did in such a subtle way and he was very sweet actually. There are a lot of decrepencies throughout Lawrence's work and I just still can't bring myself to be definite on this subject. I know that sounds confusing.

At anyrate, I think that when he wrote this short story - 'The Princess' Lawrence was quite perturbed with Brett and the story is fashioned after her. In this same time period he also wrote 'The Woman Who Rode Away' and he fashioned that after Mabel Luhan, I believe. He was perturbed at her during this period, also. Lawrence got perturbed at a lot of people.;) I If he was here today, he might be perturbed at you, too.:lol:

Virgil

11-19-2008, 10:59 PM

Maybe I am just too loyal to Lawrence

If he was here today, he might be perturbed at you, too.:lol:

:lol: Or at you. :p I'm loyal to him and maybe I'm just as sexist. :D

Janine

11-19-2008, 11:23 PM

:lol: Or at you. :p I'm loyal to him and maybe I'm just as sexist. :D

Now that may be a truism! :lol:

Dark Muse

11-20-2008, 04:23 PM

The father was something of a poet, the daughter something of a painter. He wrote poems about the lakes or the redwood trees, and she made dainty drawings. He was physically a strong man, and he loved the out-of-doors. He would go off with her for days, paddling in a canoe and sleeping by a camp-fire. Frail little Princess, she was always undaunted, always undaunted. She would ride with him on horseback over the mountain trails till she was so tired she was nothing but a bodiless consciousness sitting astride her pony. But she never gave in. And at night he folded her in her blanket on a bed of balsam pine twigs, and she lay and looked at the stars unmurmuring. She was fulfilling her rôle.

This seemed interesting to me. All the time they spent in Europe, there was no indication of their engaging in out door activities. They seemed much more inclined to the social scene while they were over seas. More "civil" though now that they are forced to spend time in America, there seems to be this frontier romanticism that begins to take hold. Spending there time camping, canoeing, horseback riding, painting scenes of nature.

Also interesting the places they are mentioned to visit California and the South-West, places that are rooted in the "Wild west." Opposed to spending time in places such as New York, which would seem to be more fitting of their lifestyle over in Europe.

People said to her as the years passed, and she was a woman of twenty-five, then a woman of thirty, and always the same virgin dainty Princess, 'knowing' in a dispassionate way, like an old woman, and utterly intact:

This is a curious contradiction from the rest of the story. The association with her as an old woman here, in contrast to the previous child-like aspect of her nature. It also seems to serve as to paint her in the picture of a spinster, there is almost something cynical about its use here.

So the years passed imperceptibly. And she had that quality of the sexless fairies, she did not change. At thirty-three she looked twenty-three.

Her father, however, was ageing, and becoming more and more queer.

This I found to be interesting, the way in which she seems to pass the years unchanged, the father on the other hand does not remain quite as untouched by time as The Princess. Not only does he begin the physical process of aging, but his looks begin to show signs of it:

handsome, white-haired, courteous old man

Something which never seems to afflict The Princess, but it also changes begins to ravish upon his mind as well.

He spent the last three years of life in the house in Connecticut. He was very much estranged, sometimes had fits of violence which almost killed the little Princess.

who was never at all aware of his fits of violence once they had passed.

He seems to be suffering from a sort of dementia. In this way he does come across as being much more human then The Princess is.

Virgil

11-20-2008, 06:42 PM

This seemed interesting to me. All the time they spent in Europe, there was no indication of their engaging in out door activities. They seemed much more inclined to the social scene while they were over seas. More "civil" though now that they are forced to spend time in America, there seems to be this frontier romanticism that begins to take hold. Spending there time camping, canoeing, horseback writing, painting scenes of nature.

Yes that is interesting. It's connected with your next statement:

Also interesting the places they are mentioned to visit California and the South-West, places that are rooted in the "Wild west." Opposed to spending time in places such as New York, which would seem to be more fitting of their lifestyle over in Europe.
These are the places Lawrence was exploring. I think Janine has mentioned Dollie was based on a woman who came to live on Lawrfence's ranch in New Mexico. Her name is Dorothy Brett and she came to idolize Lawrence. At first Lawrence loved having a devotee around but later he grew tired of her. She had some personality quirks. I think much of the story captures her personality, at least as Lawrence saw it. She was a painter http://medicinemangallery.com/bio/dorothybrett.lassoand I think you can see some of her paintings here: http://images.google.com/images?um=1&hl=en&q=dorothy+brett+&btnG=Search+Images

These are the women that surrounded Lawrence while he lived in New Mexico.

http://www.cla.purdue.edu/waaw/Jacobs/Images/luhanlawrencebrett-m.jpg
From right to left: Mabel Luhan, Frieda Lawrence (his wife), and Dorothy.

This is a curious contradiction from the rest of the story. The association with her as an old woman here, in contrast to the previous child-like aspect of her nature. It also seems to serve as to paint her in the picture of a spinster, there is almost something cynical about its use here.

This I found to be interesting, the way in which she seems to pass the years unchanged, the father on the other hand does not remain quite as untouched by time as The Princess. Not only does he begin the physical process of aging, but his looks begin to show signs of it:

Well that's arrested development. ;)

He seems to be suffering from a sort of dementia. In this way he does come across as being much more human then The Princess is.
Yes there differences between father and daughter. They are not alike. He is constantly referred to as having a "demon" in him. I'll give some thoughts on this later. But his madness too also echoes Romero. I'm not sure what the connection is, but it seems that everyone around Dollie gets enraged in some form or other.

Dark Muse

11-20-2008, 07:00 PM

I'm not sure what the connection is, but it seems that everyone around Dollie gets enraged in some form or other.

Haha that is just becasue they have thier masculinity insulted becasue she turns them all down and is not impressed by thier maleness. :D I say Go Dollie!

Virgil

11-20-2008, 07:01 PM

Haha that is just becasue they have thier masculinity insulted becasue she turns them all down and is not impressed by thier maleness. :D I say Go Dollie!

:lol: Loved that.

Janine

11-21-2008, 12:29 AM

:lol: I loved reading your post, you two. I laughed at your last line, Dark Muse....you just won't give way to Virgil's Italian virility....hope I spelled that right...hehe

Virgil, how in the world did you dig up that link on Brett? Wowy, you know how I love exploring these sites. I have been there looking at all kinds of things. NM really fascinates me. One site said that there is a movement to re-establish/revitatize the original ranch....probably Lawrence's fan club...there is one on line...another site devoted entirely to Lawrence, you know.

You love to post that horrid photo of Frieda with the cigerette hanging out her mouth, don't you? There are some that are a little more flattering that that one. I also found this very nice photo of Brett and will post it tomorrow. I think the group above were older, when that photo was taken, even possibly after Lawrence's death.

Anyway, I found this quote of Lawrence's really interesting...something to think about:

The dialectic between man and woman is a chief theme in Lawrence:

Man the doer, the knower, the original in being is he the lord of life? Or is the woman, the great Mother, who bore us from the womb of love, is she the supreme Goddess?

(Lawrence, Fantasia of the Unconscious)

Just goes to show how Lawrence thought. Maybe he was torn between the two sexes and the power in each. Just a thought, on my part.

I wasn't around tonight because I was out all day and I went to see my grandbaby - the apple of my eye; oh how I adore her. It was a great visit. She is so adorable. I will comment more tomorrow on the story; I am dead tired now.

Virgil

11-21-2008, 12:43 AM

:lol: I loved reading your post, you two. I laughed at your last line, Dark Muse....you just won't give way to Virgil's Italian virility....hope I spelled that right...hehe

Lawrence admired Italian virilty. :D

Virgil, how in the world did you dig up that link on Brett? Wowy, you know how I love exploring these sites. I have been there looking at all kinds of things. NM really fascinates me. One site said that there is a movement to re-establish/revitatize the original ranch....probably Lawrence's fan club...there is one on line...another site devoted entirely to Lawrence, you know.
Just surfing. ;)

You love to post that horrid photo of Frieda with the cigerette hanging out her mouth, don't you? There are some that are a little more flattering that that one. I also found this very nice photo of Brett and will post it tomorrow. I think the group above were older, when that photo was taken, even possibly after Lawrence's death.
I've come to the conclusion Frieda was absolutely horrid to Lawrence. He would have been better off if he had not married her.

Just goes to show how Lawrence thought. Maybe he was torn between the two sexes and the power in each. Just a thought, on my part.
He may have been torn occaisionally or at one point in his life, but he definitely came to a conclusion.

I wasn't around tonight because I was out all day and I went to see my grandbaby - the apple of my eye; oh how I adore her. It was a great visit. She is so adorable. I will comment more tomorrow on the story; I am dead tired now.
That's nice and way more important than this. :)

Janine

11-21-2008, 01:08 AM

Lawrence admired Italian virilty. :D

:lol: Truly he did! :lol: Hey, recall the guy in "Sun"? He was a viril Italian peasant, wasn't he?

Just surfing. ;) Cool, you did good!:D You know I never thought to look her up separately. Her paintings are almost as awful as Lawrence's. Actually though, I did find a few of them slightly interesting. By the way, she did not do the one on the page of the male nudes - I clicked on that one and it was done by another artist; just mentions Brett somewhere on the page. That painting is kind of cool.

I've come to the conclusion Frieda was absolutely horrid to Lawrence. He would have been better off if he had not married her.

I don't know. I think it went both ways. He could be pretty horrid to her also. They seemed to fight like cats and dogs and yet they did truly seem to have this odd kind of deeper love for each other. Hard to explain that; you have to read more biographies - have you ever read one complete book on the two? I would recommend Brenda Maddow. I thought it was really good and informative about the Taos crowd and the Lawrence's. Their time there was complicated; that is putting it mildly...

He may have been torn occaisionally or at one point in his life, but he definitely came to a conclusion.

Oh yeah, when was that? That book it was quoted from, I believe, was quite a late work.

That's nice and way more important than this. :)

It surely is important to me. Brooke is the most important little person in my life right now. She has to be my priority now. You would love her; she is so great and so much fun. I love her so....:)

Virgil

11-21-2008, 11:13 PM

:Oh yeah, when was that? That book it was quoted from, I believe, was quite a late work.

Fantasia of the Unconscious I believe was written in 1921. His New Mexico experiences started in 1924. I think there is enough anti feminist leanings throughout Lawrence from the very beginning to think he had these ideas formulated already. Who knows, maybe felt the need to moderate his views early on.

Janine

11-21-2008, 11:43 PM

Fantasia of the Unconscious I believe was written in 1921. His New Mexico experiences started in 1924. I think there is enough anti feminist leanings throughout Lawrence from the very beginning to think he had these ideas formulated already. Who knows, maybe felt the need to moderate his views early on.

You certainly aren't verbose tonight - did I use the right word? I plead no contest to the above, but where is the answer/response to the rest of my long post??? (above) I guess you are just listening now, too....;):lol:

Virgil

11-21-2008, 11:58 PM

You certainly aren't verbose tonight - did I use the right word? I plead no contest to the above, but where is the answer/response to the rest of my long post??? (above) I guess you are just listening now, too....;):lol:

:lol: I guess so. I didn't think anything else reuired a response. We've had the discussion once before on whether Frieda was good for him.

Janine

11-22-2008, 12:02 AM

:lol: I guess so. I didn't think anything else reuired a response. We've had the discussion once before on whether Frieda was good for him.

Oh that again:bawling:....I guess I will plead the 5th ammendment.....BUT... why do you always insist on putting the very worst photo of her on here? There are nicer ones out there, you know.

Virgil

11-22-2008, 12:05 AM

That was the photo that had Dorothy Brett in it. Ok here's another. :D

http://www.theamericanmag.com/uploaded_images/article_811_FPyXinxHbr.jpg

Janine

11-22-2008, 12:37 AM

That was the photo that had Dorothy Brett in it. Ok here's another. :D

Well, that is an old one, too.....you know people do gain weight when they get older sometimes. Besides it looks like she is squinting from the sun. You are being mean...:mad:

I will have to go find a more attractive photo of her and post it. I have tons of them in my books, but my scanner is not working currently. It is not like any of us are toothpicks. We all do age eventually. Life wasn't easy, I imagine, living with Lawrence.

Janine

11-23-2008, 03:56 PM

Just waiting now for Virgil, our fearless leader, to post some more text to comment on.

Heee...lo, Virgil, where are you?

Virgil

11-23-2008, 08:28 PM

I'm here. :)

Quoi faire? What was she to do? She seemed faced with absolute nothingness. Only she had Miss Cummins, who shared with her the secret, and almost the passion for her father. In fact, the Princess felt that her passion for her mad father had in some curious way transferred itself largely to Charlotte Cummins during the last years. And now Miss Cummins was the vessel that held the passion for the dead man. She herself, the Princess, was an empty vessel.

An empty vessel in the enormous warehouse of the world.

Quoi faire? What was she to do? She felt that, since she could not evaporate into nothingness, like alcohol from an unstoppered bottle, she must do something. Never before in her life had she felt the incumbency. Never, never had she felt she must do anything. That was left to the vulgar.

Now her father was dead, she found herself on the fringe of the vulgar crowd, sharing their necessity to do something. It was a little humiliating. She felt herself becoming vulgarised. At the same time she found herself looking at men with a shrewder eye: an eye to marriage. Not that she felt any sudden interest in men, or attraction towards them. No. She was still neither interested nor attracted towards men vitally. But marriage, that peculiar abstraction, had imposed a sort of spell on her. She thought that marriage, in the blank abstract, was the thing she ought to do. That marriage implied a man she also knew. She knew all the facts. But the man seemed a property of her own mind rather than a thing in himself, another thing.

Her father died in the summer, the month after her thirty-eighth birthday. When all was over, the obvious thing to do, of course, was to travel. With Miss Cummins. The two women knew each other intimately, but they were always Miss Urquhart and Miss Cummins to one another, and a certain distance was instinctively maintained. Miss Cummins, from Philadelphia, of scholastic stock, and intelligent but untravelled, four years younger than the Princess, felt herself immensely the junior of her 'lady'. She had a sort of passionate veneration for the Princess, who seemed to her ageless, timeless. She could not see the rows of tiny, dainty, exquisite shoes in the Princess's cupboard without feeling a stab at the heart, a stab of tenderness and reverence, almost of awe.

Miss Cummins also was virginal, but with a look of puzzled surprise in her brown eyes. Her skin was pale and clear, her features well modelled, but there was a certain blankness in her expression, where the Princess had an odd touch of Renaissance grandeur. Miss Cummins's voice was also hushed almost to a whisper; it was the inevitable effect of Colin Urquhart's room. But the hushedness had a hoarse quality.

The Princess did not want to go to Europe. Her face seemed turned west. Now her father was gone, she felt she would go west, westwards, as if for ever. Following, no doubt, the March of Empire, which is brought up rather short on the Pacific coast, among swarms of wallowing bathers.

No, not the Pacific coast. She would stop short of that. The South-West was less vulgar. She would go to New Mexico.

She and Miss Cummins arrived at the Rancho del Cerro Gordo towards the end of August, when the crowd was beginning to drift back east. The ranch lay by a stream on the desert some four miles from the foot of the mountains, a mile away from the Indian pueblo of San Cristobal. It was a ranch for the rich; the Princess paid thirty dollars a day for herself and Miss Cummins. But then she had a little cottage to herself, among the apple trees of the orchard, with an excellent cook. She and Miss Cummins, however, took dinner at evening in the large guest-house. For the Princess still entertained the idea of marriage.

The guests at the Rancho del Cerro Gordo were of all sorts, except the poor sort. They were practically all rich, and many were romantic. Some were charming, others were vulgar, some were movie people, quite quaint and not unattractive in their vulgarity, and many were Jews. The Princess did not care for Jews, though they were usually the most interesting to talk to. So she talked a good deal with the Jews, and painted with the artists, and rode with the young men from college, and had altogether quite a good time. And yet she felt something of a fish out of water, or a bird in the wrong forest. And marriage remained still completely in the abstract. No connecting it with any of these young men, even the nice ones.

The Princess looked just twenty-five. The freshness of her mouth, the hushed, delicate-complexioned virginity of her face gave her not a day more. Only a certain laconic look in her eyes was disconcerting. When she was forced to write her age, she put twenty-eight, making the figure two rather badly, so that it just avoided being a three.

Men hinted marriage at her. Especially boys from college suggested it from a distance. But they all failed before the look of sardonic ridicule in the Princess's eyes. It always seemed to her rather preposterous, quite ridiculous, and a tiny bit impertinent on their part.

The only man that intrigued her at all was one of the guides, a man called Romero--Domingo Romero. It was he who had sold the ranch itself to the Wilkiesons, ten years before, for two thousand dollars. He had gone away, then reappeared at the old place. For he was the son of the old Romero, the last of the Spanish family that had owned miles of land around San Cristobal. But the coming of the white man and the failure of the vast flocks of sheep, and the fatal inertia which overcomes all men, at last, on the desert near the mountains, had finished the Romero family. The last descendants were just Mexican peasants.

Domingo, the heir, had spent his two thousand dollars, and was working for white people. He was now about thirty years old, a tall, silent fellow, with a heavy closed mouth and black eyes that looked across at one almost sullenly. From behind he was handsome, with a strong, natural body, and the back of his neck very dark and well-shapen, strong with life. But his dark face was long and heavy, almost sinister, with that peculiar heavy meaninglessness in it, characteristic of the Mexicans of his own locality. They are strong, they seem healthy. They laugh and joke with one another. But their physique and their natures seem static, as if there were nowhere, nowhere at all for their energies to go, and their faces, degenerating to misshapen heaviness, seem to have no raison d'être, no radical meaning. Waiting either to die or to be aroused into passion and hope. In some of the black eyes a queer, haunting mystic quality, sombre and a bit gruesome, the skull-and-cross-bones look of the Penitentes. They had found their raison d'être in self-torture and death-worship. Unable to wrest a positive significance for themselves from the vast, beautiful, but vindictive landscape they were born into, they turned on their own selves, and worshipped death through self-torture. The mystic gloom of this showed in their eyes.

But as a rule the dark eyes of the Mexicans were heavy and half alive, sometimes hostile, sometimes kindly, often with the fatal Indian glaze on them, or the fatal Indian glint.

Well, there's a lot here too.

First, this is a Lwarence technique that he uses in many places. He'll bring a charcter to a crossroads and then he asks, Where to? What next? In this story he uses the Italian, "Quoi faire? " and then "What was she to do?" This is what she's faced with: "She seemed faced with absolute nothingness." Now this is a foreshadow of when she stares into the emptyness of the mountains. I'll post this, though we will get to it eventually:

In front now was nothing but mountains, ponderous, massive, down-sitting mountains, in a huge and intricate knot, empty of life or soul. Under the bristling black feathers of spruce near-by lay patches of white snow. The lifeless valleys were concaves of rock and spruce, the rounded summits and the hog-backed summits of grey rock crowded one behind the other like some monstrous herd in arrest.
The emptiness that she sees in the mountains is from the emptiness inside her.

Miss Cummins is also interesting, and suggestive of the repressed sexuality that Dollie has:

Miss Cummins also was virginal, but with a look of puzzled surprise in her brown eyes. Her skin was pale and clear, her features well modelled, but there was a certain blankness in her expression, where the Princess had an odd touch of Renaissance grandeur. Miss Cummins's voice was also hushed almost to a whisper; it was the inevitable effect of Colin Urquhart's room. But the hushedness had a hoarse quality.
Ironic that the virginal woman is named Cummins, a sexual term. ;) Lawrence I think is having a little fun.

Interesting how the term "vulgar" repeats here:

Now her father was dead, she found herself on the fringe of the vulgar crowd, sharing their necessity to do something. It was a little humiliating. She felt herself becoming vulgarised.
This just reminds me of Henry James, who felt that common people were vulgar. There is a sort of James sexual repression in Dollie.

And then we get Romero's background. What's striking about his background is the fatal nature of the Indians. This is another thing that Lawrence seems to repeat, the Indians of the Americas have this sense of doomed fate. Of course that plays into Romero's fate in the story. But there are positive attributes too: strong, natural, handsome. But this is his key to his character as it fits into the story:

But their physique and their natures seem static, as if there were nowhere, nowhere at all for their energies to go, and their faces, degenerating to misshapen heaviness, seem to have no raison d'être, no radical meaning. Waiting either to die or to be aroused into passion and hope. In some of the black eyes a queer, haunting mystic quality, sombre and a bit gruesome, the skull-and-cross-bones look of the Penitentes. They had found their raison d'être in self-torture and death-worship. Unable to wrest a positive significance for themselves from the vast, beautiful, but vindictive landscape they were born into, they turned on their own selves, and worshipped death through self-torture. The mystic gloom of this showed in their eyes.
Waiting either "to die or aroused into passion." Those words carry sexual connotatons.

Janine

11-23-2008, 09:04 PM

I'm here. :)

Yeah! I whistle and you come! ;) Glad you posted more text, but wow, this is a lot to discuss all at once...I will try my best to add to your comments.

Well, there's a lot here too. Definitely.

First, this is a Lwarence technique that he uses in many places. He'll bring a charcter to a crossroads and then he asks, Where to? What next? In this story he uses the Italian, "Quoi faire? " and then "What was she to do?" This is what she's faced with: "She seemed faced with absolute nothingness." Now this is a foreshadow of when she stares into the emptyness of the mountains. I'll post this, though we will get to it eventually:

Good observation. I agree with that. The trip up the mountainside is a journey, not unlike the spiritual journey that Lawrence takes; but in this case the spiritualism is never realised. Obviously, The Princess sees the mountainside much differently because of her emptiness and her lack of insight into being a fully realised woman. She probably longed to be transformed by the experience but we know now that she is not touched by it at all, she never undergoes any form of transfiguration.

The emptiness that she sees in the mountains is from the emptiness inside her.

True and I liked this line

"An empty vessel in the enormous warehouse of the world"

That's a perfect way to describe her.

Miss Cummins is also interesting, and suggestive of the repressed sexuality that Dollie has:

Miss Cummins seems like a whinny prude to me....sort of school marmish or something.

Ironic that the virginal woman is named Cummins, a sexual term. ;) Lawrence I think is having a little fun.

It is? I just looked in the dictionary and can't find it. Oh, maybe one has to check an urban dictionary. I did cumin which is a parsley type plant. Guess that is not it though. Is it street slang, just curious...?:lol:

Interesting how the term "vulgar" repeats here:

This just reminds me of Henry James, who felt that common people were vulgar. There is a sort of James sexual repression in Dollie.

Yes, it reminds me of it too; reminescent of Jame's characters.

And then we get Romero's background. What's striking about his background is the fatal nature of the Indians. This is another thing that Lawrence seems to repeat, the Indians of the Americas have this sense of doomed fate. Of course that plays into Romero's fate in the story. But there are positive attributes too: strong, natural, handsome. But this is his key to his character as it fits into the story:

The fatal aspect does often crop up in Lawrence's work of that time period. One sees it come to a head in "The Plumed Serpent". I think Romero's physical description is almost interchangable with the gypsy in "The Virgil and the Gypsy"....asside from the fatalistic part about the Indians or Mexicans. Both are dark skinned and very alluring in physical aspect. In both cases, no one else has interested them and then they feel this strong animalistic attraction to the dark haired, dark skinned man of natural and strong beauty. It is definitely the old blood philosophy surfacing again.

Waiting either "to die or aroused into passion." Those words carry sexual connotatons.

Most definitely they do. Don't they refer to the dying of 'will' if true transfiguration is realised?

I want to add that, when we get to the descriptions of the mountain climb, I find those some of the most beautiful and awesome that Lawrence has ever written. This part really captivated me. In some sense they are rising above the world they know, and both reject; yet still The Princess cannot really rise above her ingrained ideals or isolated self, and she fails to give in to this experience on the mountaintop, which could tranform her. Hope that makes sense. When we get to that part, I will comment in more depth.

Virgil

11-23-2008, 09:19 PM

It is? I just looked in the dictionary and can't find it. Oh, maybe one has to check an urban dictionary. I did cumin which is a parsley type plant. Guess that is not it though. Is it street slang, just curious...?:lol:

:lol: Janine, it's a play on cumming or cum. :blush: You can try googling that, but be careful what cums up. :D

Janine

11-24-2008, 12:04 AM

:lol: Janine, it's a play on cumming or cum. :blush: You can try googling that, but be careful what cums up. :D

I don't need to google it, thanks, and I won't run a search for fear of certain websites. I figured that is what you were referring to, but thought I would give it the benefit of the doubt. Well, :blush: thanks for spelling it out to me.;):lol: You are so naughty. Surprised that is not being censored. haha. What is that last part - 'no pun intented'?!:D

Virgil

11-24-2008, 08:20 AM

I don't need to google it, thanks, and I won't run a search for fear of certain websites. I figured that is what you were referring to, but thought I would give it the benefit of the doubt. Well, :blush: thanks for spelling it out to me.;):lol: You are so naughty. Surprised that is not being censored. haha. What is that last part - 'no pun intented'?!:D

:lol: Yes, I should have said no pun intended, but I did intend the pun. Hey blame this on Lawrence. He knew what he was doing with the character's name.

Janine

11-24-2008, 01:19 PM

:lol: Yes, I should have said no pun intended, but I did intend the pun. Hey blame this on Lawrence. He knew what he was doing with the character's name.

Oh I got the pun. So did he? Maybe, maybe not. Cummins is a very common name; only you would think of the connection. Ever hear of the actor Bob Cummings?... so I added a g.;) I like how you read our Lawrence's mind. Lawrence's mind was not in the gutter like yours; not so sure he would go that far with this, but you can think what you please. Lawrence hated pornogrpahy, you know.

Dark Muse

11-24-2008, 01:33 PM

Janine

11-24-2008, 04:39 PM

I might have to be inclined with Virgil here. Remember the way in which Lawrence played with things become "aroused" in Witch al Mode" His stories are often highly sexual. And things like this are rarely coincidental when it comes to writers and artists. As you said yourself how often he rewrote his stories, it seems odd he would not be aware of the connection. Particularly considering the many other ways he uses sexual suggestion.

Well, I know they are highly sexual and charged thus...I am the odd man out here, but most likely he was ticked at whomever he based Miss Cummins on. and therefore dreamed up the name. Was it Dorothy, do you know, Virigl? Or was Cummings totally fictious? He was ticked at Brett at the time he wrote this story; he doesn't paint the Princess in too good a light. I don't think Brett appreciated this story of his. I will have to check out the Who's Who Characters book and see if it says anything about this name. Also, I have qualms about Lawrence using a slang expression, apparently cum is a street slang expression, since I looked into my big college dictionary and the word 'cum' and the definition is not what you two are saying it is. I don't know of other instances, where Lawrence used such slang words, and besides, how does that fit that particular character? She was so prudish and fussy. It actually says in this dictionary that the word means this: "with, together with, along with"...that would fit, since the two were together, Miss Cummins as a sort of chaparone to the Princess - there to protect her from Romano or an indecreptancy...ties them together also, since Miss C is so very prudish and later the Princess assumed/maintains the same 'prudish' virginal guality. If Lawrence meant it in a sexual way I think he would have been a little more subtle.

Dark Muse

11-24-2008, 05:37 PM

he doesn't paint the Princess in too good a light.

I do not find the way the Princess is portrayed as being particularly negative or unflattering.

Janine

11-24-2008, 06:21 PM

I do not find the way the Princess is portrayed as being particularly negative or unflattering.

From what I read in the biographies, Brett did find it unflattering and Lawrence admitted the story was based on her. I guess you are the only one finding it flattering to her image, but that is ok. It all depends on how you view this story. I kind of come in halfway on this one. That ending, I am not sure what to make of fully yet, but so many of Lawrence's works leave me asking many more questions. I think that is what attracts me to his work.

Virgil

11-24-2008, 10:16 PM

Oh I got the pun. So did he? Maybe, maybe not. Cummins is a very common name; only you would think of the connection. Ever hear of the actor Bob Cummings?... so I added a g.;) I like how you read our Lawrence's mind. Lawrence's mind was not in the gutter like yours; not so sure he would go that far with this, but you can think what you please. Lawrence hated pornogrpahy, you know.

Well, I know they are highly sexual and charged thus...I am the odd man out here, but most likely he was ticked at whomever he based Miss Cummins on. and therefore dreamed up the name. Was it Dorothy, do you know, Virigl? Or was Cummings totally fictious? He was ticked at Brett at the time he wrote this story; he doesn't paint the Princess in too good a light. I don't think Brett appreciated this story of his. I will have to check out the Who's Who Characters book and see if it says anything about this name. Also, I have qualms about Lawrence using a slang expression, apparently cum is a street slang expression, since I looked into my big college dictionary and the word 'cum' and the definition is not what you two are saying it is. I don't know of other instances, where Lawrence used such slang words, and besides, how does that fit that particular character? She was so prudish and fussy. It actually says in this dictionary that the word means this: "with, together with, along with"...that would fit, since the two were together, Miss Cummins as a sort of chaparone to the Princess - there to protect her from Romano or an indecreptancy...ties them together also, since Miss C is so very prudish and later the Princess assumed/maintains the same 'prudish' virginal guality. If Lawrence meant it in a sexual way I think he would have been a little more subtle.

Oh Janine, haven't you read Lady Chatterly. And there are versions of Lady Chatterly called John Thomas and Lady Jane which are supposed to be slang for male and female gentalia in his day. Goodness didn't you just read The Plumed Serpent. What exactly do you think the serpent is supposed to symbolize? There is no doubt in my mind that Lawrence knew what he was implying with Miss Cummins.

Janine

11-24-2008, 11:27 PM

Oh Janine, haven't you read Lady Chatterly. And there are versions of Lady Chatterly called John Thomas and Lady Jane which are supposed to be slang for male and female gentalia in his day. Goodness didn't you just read The Plumed Serpent. What exactly do you think the serpent is supposed to symbolize? There is no doubt in my mind that Lawrence knew what he was implying with Miss Cummins.

But how does that apply to that character? Why of course, I read those other books and I know the slang well, etc. I am the one with the films and they aren't tame either. I just feel this name thing is stretching it a bit in this particular story. Why not drop this now and just move on. It's totally unimportant really.

Virgil

11-25-2008, 11:17 PM

Here's the next section.

Domingo Romero was almost a typical Mexican to look at, with the typical heavy, dark, long face, clean-shaven, with an almost brutally heavy mouth. His eyes were black and Indian-looking. Only, at the centre of their hopelessness was a spark of pride, or self-confidence, or dauntlessness. Just a spark in the midst of the blackness of static despair.

But this spark was the difference between him and the mass of men. It gave a certain alert sensitiveness to his bearing and a certain beauty to his appearance. He wore a low-crowned black hat, instead of the ponderous headgear of the usual Mexican, and his clothes were thinnish and graceful. Silent, aloof, almost imperceptible in the landscape, he was an admirable guide, with a startling quick intelligence that anticipated difficulties about to rise. He could cook, too, crouching over the camp-fire and moving his lean deft brown hands. The only fault he had was that he was not forthcoming, he wasn't chatty and cosy.

"Oh, don't send Romero with us," the Jews would say. "One can't get any response from him."

Tourists come and go, but they rarely see anything, inwardly. None of them ever saw the spark at the middle of Romero's eye; they were not alive enough to see it.

The Princess caught it one day, when she had him for a guide. She was fishing for trout in the canyon, Miss Cummins was reading a book, the horses were tied under the trees, Romero was fixing a proper fly on her line. He fixed the fly and handed her the line, looking up at her. And at that moment she caught the spark in his eye. And instantly she knew that he was a gentleman, that his 'demon', as her father would have said, was a fine demon. And instantly her manner towards him changed.

He had perched her on a rock over a quiet pool, beyond the cotton-wood trees. It was early September, and the canyon already cool, but the leaves of the cottonwoods were still green. The Princess stood on her rock, a small but perfectly-formed figure, wearing a soft, close grey sweater and neatly-cut grey riding-breeches, with tall black boots, her fluffy brown hair straggling from under a little grey felt hat. A woman? Not quite. A changeling of some sort, perched in outline there on the rock, in the bristling wild canyon. She knew perfectly well how to handle a line. Her father had made a fisherman of her.

Romero, in a black shirt and with loose black trousers pushed into wide black riding-boots, was fishing a little farther down. He had put his hat on a rock behind him; his dark head was bent a little forward, watching the water. He had caught three trout. From time to time he glanced up-stream at the Princess, perched there so daintily. He saw she had caught nothing.

Soon he quietly drew in his line and came up to her. His keen eye watched her line, watched her position. Then, quietly, he suggested certain changes to her, putting his sensitive brown hand before her. And he withdrew a little, and stood in silence, leaning against a tree, watching her. He was helping her across the distance. She knew it, and thrilled. And in a moment she had a bite. In two minutes she landed a good trout. She looked round at him quickly, her eyes sparkling, the colour heightened in her cheeks. And as she met his eyes a smile of greeting went over his dark face, very sudden, with an odd sweetness.

She knew he was helping her. And she felt in his presence a subtle, insidious male kindliness she had never known before waiting upon her. Her cheek flushed, and her blue eyes darkened.

After this, she always looked for him, and for that curious dark beam of a man's kindliness which he could give her, as it were, from his chest, from his heart. It was something she had never known before.

A vague, unspoken intimacy grew up between them. She liked his voice, his appearance, his presence. His natural language was Spanish; he spoke English like a foreign language, rather slow, with a slight hesitation, but with a sad, plangent sonority lingering over from his Spanish. There was a certain subtle correctness in his appearance; he was always perfectly shaved; his hair was thick and rather long on top, but always carefully groomed behind. And his fine black cashmere shirt, his wide leather belt, his well-cut, wide black trousers going into the embroidered cowboy boots had a certain inextinguishable elegance. He wore no silver rings or buckles. Only his boots were embroidered and decorated at the top with an inlay of white suède. He seemed elegant, slender, yet he was very strong.

And at the same time, curiously, he gave her the feeling that death was not far from him. Perhaps he too was half in love with death. However that may be, the sense she had that death was not far from him made him 'possible' to her.

Small as she was, she was quite a good horsewoman. They gave her at the ranch a sorrel mare, very lovely in colour, and well-made, with a powerful broad neck and the hollow back that betokens a swift runner. Tansy, she was called. Her only fault was the usual mare's failing, she was inclined to be hysterical.

So that every day the Princess set off with Miss Cummins and Romero, on horseback, riding into the mountains. Once they went camping for several days, with two more friends in the party.

"I think I like it better," the Princess said to Romero, "when we three go alone."

And he gave her one of his quick, transfiguring smiles.

It was curious no white man had ever showed her this capacity for subtle gentleness, this power to help her in silence across a distance, if she were fishing without success, or tired of her horse, or if Tansy suddenly got scared. It was as if Romero could send her from his heart a dark beam of succour and sustaining. She had never known this before, and it was very thrilling.

Then the smile that suddenly creased his dark face, showing the strong white teeth. It creased his face almost into a savage grotesque. And at the same time there was in it something so warm, such a dark flame of kindliness for her, she was elated into her true Princess self.

Then that vivid, latent spark in his eye, which she had seen, and which she knew he was aware she had seen. It made an inter-recognition between them, silent and delicate. Here he was delicate as a woman in this subtle inter-recognition.

And yet his presence only put to flight in her the idée fixe of 'marriage'. For some reason, in her strange little brain, the idea of marrying him could not enter. Not for any definite reason. He was in himself a gentleman, and she had plenty of money for two. There was no actual obstacle. Nor was she conventional.

No, now she came down to it, it was as if their two 'dæmons' could marry, were perhaps married. Only their two selves, Miss Urquhart and Señor Domingo Romero, were for some reason incompatible. There was a peculiar subtle intimacy of inter-recognition between them. But she did not see in the least how it would lead to marriage. Almost she could more easily marry one of the nice boys from Harvard or Yale.

Well, we get more of Romero's character here. I think this elaborates on what I highlighted in the last section:

Only, at the centre of their hopelessness was a spark of pride, or self-confidence, or dauntlessness. Just a spark in the midst of the blackness of static despair.
This combnation of confidence and despair sets up the climax of the story.
And Dollie catches the spark in his eye:

The Princess caught it one day, when she had him for a guide. She was fishing for trout in the canyon, Miss Cummins was reading a book, the horses were tied under the trees, Romero was fixing a proper fly on her line. He fixed the fly and handed her the line, looking up at her. And at that moment she caught the spark in his eye. And instantly she knew that he was a gentleman, that his 'demon', as her father would have said, was a fine demon. And instantly her manner towards him changed.

I find this notion of a "demon" very interesting. What exactly does Lawrence mean? Certainly Romero becomes a sort of demon at the end of the story. And Dollie's father has that demon in him. It's almost as if it's a spirit, a wld spirit that the person doesn't have control over. Does Dollie have a demon in her? I guess so since their demons were supposed to have married. Very strange notion.

And of course this is important.

She knew he was helping her. And she felt in his presence a subtle, insidious male kindliness she had never known before waiting upon her. Her cheek flushed, and her blue eyes darkened.
Their interaction in nature has stirred a sexual response in her. And notice the very next paragraph:

After this, she always looked for him, and for that curious dark beam of a man's kindliness which he could give her, as it were, from his chest, from his heart. It was something she had never known before.
She has become a follower, tamed by the maleness that Romero projects. Interesting Lawrence uses the metaphor of a "curious dark beam" for the power. I think in The Plumed Serpent he uses the term "dark column." And tink both terms suggest a phallus, the phallic power I mentioned earlier.

Janine

11-26-2008, 02:44 PM

Domingo Romero was almost a typical Mexican to look at, with the typical heavy, dark, long face, clean-shaven, with an almost brutally heavy mouth. His eyes were black and Indian-looking. Only, at the centre of their hopelessness was a spark of pride, or self-confidence, or dauntlessness. Just a spark in the midst of the blackness of static despair.

This is so much like Lawrence's view of the Mexicans in "The Plumed Serpent" and in that novel he often gets repetitious with his observing/describing them and their attitude. He seems to either like the dark aspects of these people, or a brighter light he sees on the horizon for them...actually, I will look it up, but I think at one time Kate observes Ciprano as a tower of light. Lawrence seems here to see a sort of 'demon' in them, also. But to L, the 'demon' was not a bad thing. He rather revered it. If you recall in the film "Coming Through" when he asked advice from the Hopkins, Mrs. Hopkins asked 'have you asked your demon? ' This was referring to his situation with Frieda, and what steps he should take next; he replied he had asked the demon and 'he has recommended crucifixion'. That was biographical; I read it in several of my biographies. He also mentions this demon in many a letter he wrote, even as far back as those early years. When younger he once saw a production with Sarah Bernhardt and ran out of the threater terrified; yet he spoke of her performance as wonderful, even beautiful and 'that all her demons were pouring forth'. I have read several accounts of this experience, he seemed to be highly impressed with that experience and it seemed key for him in later years in his writing. Lawrence also saw God in the darker light. He did not have anytime for the tame God, as seen that way by the majority, but rather wanted the mysterious dark God, even the wrathful God we see in the Old Testment. I think in this story and TPS, which this story leads up to, this idea of the demon is very prevalent and major and it relates back to his father and to the blood-consciousness. He also abhored the dead Christ on the crucifixes in Mexico and the sad devotion people had to those iconic images. He wanted the breathing alive Christ of the flesh and blood and he wanted that he be the resurrected Christ, not the morbid still dead bleeding horrid image of the Christ on the cross, so prevalent and popular in the Mexican culture.

This is just one aspect of this story. I will try and comment more later on about what other things you wrote in this last post, Virgil. Pretty much I agree with all you say and can maybe expand on some of your thoughts here.

I think also what I said above also addresses your question on the demon, here:

I find this notion of a "demon" very interesting. What exactly does Lawrence mean? Certainly Romero becomes a sort of demon at the end of the story. And Dollie's father has that demon in him. It's almost as if it's a spirit, a wld spirit that the person doesn't have control over. Does Dollie have a demon in her? I guess so since their demons were supposed to have married. Very strange notion.

I think that Romero doesn't become the demon, I rather think he had this dark element in his nature all along. It is just that it fully surfaces towards the end. It takes his utmost frustration with The Princess to bring it out full-blown. True that Dollie's father also has that 'demon' aspect within him his makeup and he knows it. Doesn't he mention that he and his daugther have it? I will review the text. It is as though this demon is a wild spirit or a natural spirit unleased in this story at the end. His animal instincts take over. Lawrence probably saw this demon as a sort of 'holy ghost' as well. I definitely think Dollie had the demon as well. In Lawrence's eyes all people possessed a sort of demon; few recognised it; most supressed it. It is a strange notion but demon is not that new an idea. Doesn't this idea occur all throughout literature. In Hamlet surely he was possessed by a personal demon that surfaces and drive him on. In Hesse works he mentions the 'demon' often and it is key to some of much of work. I think any piece of literature that delves into the subconsious aspects of the characters display the demon idea. Isn't it the darker side of man, in essense. I believe that Lawrence believed one must see both sides for the person to be considered whole. For a conventional person, yes, this is a very odd notion, but is it? If one compared the Old and New Testment of the Bible, one can clearly see the darkness and the light and they make up the whole.