D.H. Lawrence's Short Stories Thread

[Virgil]

I think finally the story rests on the relationship between Elizabeth and Walter, both before his death and after. Bringing in Walter's mother throughout the second half of the story is in counterpoint to Elizabeth, presenting a distinction between a wife's relationship with a mother's. Even before they know of his death, the mother points out that their relationship with Walter is different:

"But he wasn't your son, Lizzie, an' it makes a difference. Whatever he was, I remember him when he was little, an' I learned to understand him and to make allowances. You've got to make allowances for them--"
This is ironic because Lawrence by the end of the story will point out that it is different because Elizabth and Walter have been joined in flesh.

We also are made aware of the two relationships between mothers and children. When they bring the body, both mothers think of their children:

The old woman, who stood just behind Elizabeth, dropped into a chair, and folded her hands, crying: "Oh, my boy, my boy!"

"Hush!" said Elizabeth, with a sharp twitch of a frown. "Be still, mother, don't waken th' children: I wouldn't have them down for anything!"
Mother and wife go on to clean his naked body. Elizabeth strives to understand his dead body:

Elizabeth embraced the body of her husband, with cheek and lips. She seemed to be listening, inquiring, trying to get some connection. But she could not. She was driven away. He was impregnable.

They react to his body differently, one as mother, one as wife:

They worked thus in silence for a long time. They never forgot it was death, and the touch of the man's dead body gave them strange emotions, different in each of the women; a great dread possessed them both, the mother felt the lie was given to her womb, she was denied; the wife felt the utter isolation of the human soul, the child within her was a weight apart from her.

As mothers they have a distinct relationship with their children, but as we will see, it is not the blood relationship (although Lawrence doesn't actually say that; this story was written prior to when he formulated his blood knowledge theory, but we can see that the roots of it are here) of male and female lovers.

Elizabeth looked up. The man's mouth was fallen back, slightly open under the cover of the moustache. The eyes, half shut, did not show glazed in the obscurity. Life with its smoky burning gone from him, had left him apart and utterly alien to her. And she knew what a stranger he was to her. In her womb was ice of fear, because of this separate stranger with whom she had been living as one flesh. Was this what it all meant--utter, intact separateness, obscured by heat of living? In dread she turned her face away. The fact was too deadly. There had been nothing between them, and yet they had come together, exchanging their nakedness repeatedly. Each time he had taken her, they had been two isolated beings, far apart as now. He was no more responsible than she. The child was like ice in her womb. For as she looked at the dead man, her mind, cold and detached, said clearly: "Who am I? What have I been doing? I have been fighting a husband who did not exist. He existed all the time. What wrong have I done? What was that I have been living with? There lies the reality, this man."--And her soul died in her for fear: she knew she had never seen him, he had never seen her, they had met in the dark and had fought in the dark, not knowing whom they met nor whom they fought. And now she saw, and turned silent in seeing. For she had been wrong. She had said he was something he was not; she had felt familiar with him. Whereas he was apart all the while, living as she never lived, feeling as she never felt.
Despite an imperfect marriage, they "had exchanged their nakedness repeatedly." They had lived "by the heat of living," a reference to the hearth, and though "his smoky burning" is now gone, they had lived "as one flesh." But ultimately the marriage did not cross over into a spiritual union: "Each time he had taken her, they had been two isolated beings, far apart as now." And she puts the blame on herself: " And now she saw, and turned silent in seeing. For she had been wrong." She had not realized the blood living within him, the rejection of him through her rational living. It is not that they could not have merged to a transfiguration, she with her rational mind has prevented it. He lived as "she never lived." There relationship is carnal, but not complete.


He and she were only channels through which life had flowed to issue in the children. She was a mother--but how awful she knew it now to have been a wife. And he, dead now, how awful he must have felt it to be a husband. She felt that in the next world he would be a stranger to her. If they met there, in the beyond, they would only be ashamed of what had been before. The children had come, for some mysterious reason, out of both of them. But the children did not unite them.

This is her epiphany, that they had never connected and that their relationship, while physical, never reached a spiritual union. This is opposite of the Tom and Lydia's relationship in The Rainbow and the Birkin and Ursula's relationship in Women In Love.

[Quark]

Definitely. The darkness represents the unknown and death. If you notice the son is often described sitting in shadow. I thought that was interesting. The miners worked in dark pits. Ironically the very substance that sustains the light and the warm of the house and family kills the man in the end. The coal falling and trapping him in to suffocate. The darkness is suffocating and surely means certain death.

Certainly, the darkness and gloom is reminiscent of death and the unknown. It foreshadows Mr. Bates' death. Also, it reminds us of Mrs. Bates "sullen struggle" with her husband. At the end Mrs. Bates tells us that she and her husband had, "met in the dark and fought in the dark". The dim surroundings in the story mirror this figurative darkness.


I believe she makes mention of the husband and how he would want the light as well and be annoyed if the light of the fire was burning low. Could this represent his desire to avoid the darkness and death? Everyday he must work in close proximity to death and darkness in the pit, so on coming home he would definitely crave the light of the hearth and the 'life' of the family.

The light and fire is both comforting and deluding. Both Mr. and Mrs. Bates are consoled by warmth and light, but they are also fooled by it.


Quark - well, I hope so...I don't want to be left out...hha:lol: Also did you think about the bathing being a Christ-like ritual...my last question?

Now, onto the Chrysanthemum question. They serve two functions. One, they're another foreshadowing detail. The flower's connection to death would be understood by Lawrence's audience, and they would know that something is wrong. Foreshadowing in this story is critical. There wouldn't be any suspense or tension in the first part of the story without it. The Chrysanthemums help with this. Besides being an ominous warning to the reader, the flowers reflect Mr. and Mrs. Bates' relationship. Chrysanthemums are present whenever their relationship advances, and the vase containing them is broken when their relationship is severed by the husband's death.

Is the washing of Mr. Bates a Christ-like ritual? Do you mean the washing the foot thing? Or, do you just mean that it's a selfless, altruist act in general? I thought she bathed him because she was trying to reestablish her connection with him through a physical act.


I think finally the story rests on the relationship between Elizabeth and Walter, both before his death and after. Bringing in Walter's mother throughout the second half of the story is in counterpoint to Elizabeth, presenting a distinction between a wife's relationship with a mother's. Even before they know of his death, the mother points out that their relationship with Walter is different:

Yeah, the most important relationship in this story is that between the married couple. Mr. Bates' mother is an interesting foil for Mrs. Bates.


Despite an imperfect marriage, they "had exchanged their nakedness repeatedly." They had lived "by the heat of living," a reference to the hearth, and though "his smoky burning" is now gone, they had lived "as one flesh." But ultimately the marriage did not cross over into a spiritual union: "Each time he had taken her, they had been two isolated beings, far apart as now." And she puts the blame on herself: " And now she saw, and turned silent in seeing. For she had been wrong." She had not realized the blood living within him, the rejection of him through her rational living. It is not that they could not have merged to a transfiguration, she with her rational mind has prevented it. He lived as "she never lived." There relationship is carnal, but not complete.

This is her epiphany, that they had never connected and that their relationship, while physical, never reached a spiritual union. This is opposite of the Tom and Lydia's relationship in The Rainbow and the Birkin and Ursula's relationship in Women In Love.

It's hard to tell in what way Mrs. Bates feels separated from her husband at the end. We know that she believes he is somehow different from what she thought him to be, but any more specific details are curiously missing. Unlike in Sons and Lovers where Lawrence gives the reader a careful description of the differences between husband and wife, we can't get a clear idea of what separates the married pair. Mrs. Bates could mean that she feels spiritual alienated from her deceased husband, or she could simply mean that his personality was different from what she supposed. In either case, she thinks she may have ruined Mr. Bates' life (and possibly her own) with her misconception.

[Janine]

Two excellent posts,Virgil and Quark. I am glad I came back on here late to read them. Both of you bring out good points about the relationship of husband and wife and it's complexity, as he lay dead. The intense and honest feelings of his wife and the thoughts of his own mother as well, as they prepare the body, is well illustrated by Lawrence and you have hit upon the key lines and the ideas behind them, their ironies and connections to each of the woman - such as the connection in flesh of the husband and wife....but I was also thinking of the flesh connection of the unborn child and also Walter's own mother's pregnancy and how, as an unborn child, Walter and his mother also had a flesh connection (blood connection).
It is late now so that I won't go into more detail than this but I hope to do so with each post tomorrow.
Again good work on these two interesting posts....a lot of interesting comments.

[Janine]

I think finally the story rests on the relationship between Elizabeth and Walter, both before his death and after. Bringing in Walter's mother throughout the second half of the story is in counterpoint to Elizabeth, presenting a distinction between a wife's relationship with a mother's. Even before they know of his death, the mother points out that their relationship with Walter is different:

Virgil and Quark, Sorry it took me so long to come back here. Been busy with the S&L thread, I guess, and did not feel well and only had energy for one for now.
Virgil,
I think the point you bring up here about the difference in the relationships - mother to son and wife to son is a good one. It is worthy of note in the significance of having his mother present in the story. They both react quite differently to the death.


This is ironic because Lawrence by the end of the story will point out that it is different because Elizabth and Walter have been joined in flesh.
Yes, I too see this irony and it is a good thing to ponder. I wonder how this relates to Lawrence's ideas/thoughts
that were present in S&L, having to do with his own mother, etc.


We also are made aware of the two relationships between mothers and children. When they bring the body, both mothers think of their children:
Good point.

Mother and wife go on to clean his naked body. Elizabeth strives to understand his dead body:
Yes, I thought this scene so interesting, like nothing I had ever read before. It is quite unique and internal to the thoughts of Elizabeth.


They react to his body differently, one as mother, one as wife:

Good to quote this part and it is quite distinctly different, as it should be.


As mothers they have a distinct relationship with their children, but as we will see, it is not the blood relationship (although Lawrence doesn't actually say that; this story was written prior to when he formulated his blood knowledge theory, but we can see that the roots of it are here) of male and female lovers.
Yes, interesting as well concerning the 'blood knowledge' theory. Was this story written before or after "Women in Love"? I guess I will have to look that up.

Despite an imperfect marriage, they "had exchanged their nakedness repeatedly." They had lived "by the heat of living," a reference to the hearth, and though "his smoky burning" is now gone, they had lived "as one flesh." But ultimately the marriage did not cross over into a spiritual union: "Each time he had taken her, they had been two isolated beings, far apart as now." And she puts the blame on herself: " And now she saw, and turned silent in seeing. For she had been wrong." She had not realized the blood living within him, the rejection of him through her rational living. It is not that they could not have merged to a transfiguration, she with her rational mind has prevented it. He lived as "she never lived." There relationship is carnal, but not complete.

Again the duality of Lawrence and his ideas. The merging of the flesh and the union spirtualisticly seem to be in opposition in the first part of this paragraph but then he writes that "she had not realized the blood living within him, the rejection through her rational living." This again is like Lawrence's own parents and Mr. and Mrs. Morel. The wife is the rational one and the husband the one of "smoky burning" - does Lawrence also mean he is the one intune with the blood? Interesting that Lawrence now uses the word 'transfiguration' in this story. He states that her "rational mind has prevented it" so he is blantantly telling us what will prevent the true marriage of this couple - the lack of this 'transfiguration'. As you said to me before, he is placing the blame now on the woman in this story. I see in Lawrence the progression from S&L to this new stage, because S&L he does not really come out and blame the woman, for the distance and strife and aloneness in her marriage, but tends to put more blame on the father, Mr. Morel; by the close of the novel there is perhaps no real blame but he seems to be favoring the mother's position and yet in his own dealings with women he is favoring the 'blood' union and not the intellectual union. This is quite interesting.


This is her epiphany, that they had never connected and that their relationship, while physical, never reached a spiritual union. This is opposite of the Tom and Lydia's relationship in The Rainbow and the Birkin and Ursula's relationship in Women In Love.

Yes, quite opposite these two sets of characters/couples, as well.

[Virgil]

Yes, interesting as well concerning the 'blood knowledge' theory. Was this story written before or after "Women in Love"? I guess I will have to look that up.

I lent that book out that had the calandar of his life. ;) You will have to look that up now.


Again the duality of Lawrence and his ideas. The merging of the flesh and the union spirtualisticly seem to be in opposition in the first part of this paragraph but then he writes that "she had not realized the blood living within him, the rejection through her rational living." This again is like Lawrence's own parents and Mr. and Mrs. Morel. The wife is the rational one and the husband the one of "smoky burning" - does Lawrence also mean he is the one intune with the blood?
I think so. I took smoky burning to be a reference to the fact that his fire of life burns out; perhaps Lawrence meant it as blood knowledge as well.


Interesting that Lawrence now uses the word 'transfiguration' in this story. He states that her "rational mind has prevented it" so he is blantantly telling us what will prevent the true marriage of this couple - the lack of this 'transfiguration'. As you said to me before, he is placing the blame now on the woman in this story. I see in Lawrence the progression from S&L to this new stage, because S&L he does not really come out and blame the woman, for the distance and strife and aloneness in her marriage, but tends to put more blame on the father, Mr. Morel; by the close of the novel there is perhaps no real blame but he seems to be favoring the mother's position and yet in his own dealings with women he is favoring the 'blood' union and not the intellectual union. This is quite interesting.
I'm now curious to see if he wrote this before or after S&L. It was around the same time. Interesting that he blames women more and more for failed relationships as he gets older. He did get married and that is what having a wife can do to you. :p :D

[Janine]

Certainly, the darkness and gloom is reminiscent of death and the unknown. It foreshadows Mr. Bates' death. Also, it reminds us of Mrs. Bates "sullen struggle" with her husband. At the end Mrs. Bates tells us that she and her husband had, "met in the dark and fought in the dark". The dim surroundings in the story mirror this figurative darkness.

Hi Quark, Yes, I thought this also. This is not a cheery story by a long shot. I think the play of light and darkness is well constructed in the story and adds the atmosphere that is needed, both at the time of dread of something bad having happened, there is a sort of forbodding in the way Lawrence presents the home, even though this is the normal everyday environment with the darkness and the family near the hearth. Still I think that Lawrence plays up this darkness in this story - such as the part where he describes the son sitting in the shadow. It is as it the shadows represent the 'shadow of death'.
I think all along when, Elizabeth is surmissing her husband is late because he is in a pub drinking she knows in her heart something terrible may have happened and she won't admit that to herself. She simply waits in anquish. I believe she has a kind of forboding which takes up much of the story. I think realistically one could relate to this feeling of waiting for someone to arrive home and not know if they were safe or not and imagining the worse at times but denying it at the same time. I know I have done this in the past. Thank God I have been wrong and the person was safe. But there have been times I have done this and the person was not so I can imagine this whole story in a very realistic way.




The light and fire is both comforting and deluding. Both Mr. and Mrs. Bates are consoled by warmth and light, but they are also fooled by it.

I don't know if they are 'fooled by it' - because I think both light and dark and what they represent are a part of life. It is natural and something we have to accept. If they represent life and death, this too is something we all must accept eventually. Yes, the darkness could be something we all delude ourselves about - the thought of our own life entering into a darkness of death. I don't know - I may just be babbling on. The thought just came to me that the ending with the washing and laying out of the body seems to represent to me, in a broader sense and asside from the marital differences, our own experiences when someone dies and we see them layed out for burial. We seem then to come in direct contact with death, something we all try not to think about from day to day. I think this story is more universal and meaningful in this respect. A living being is now preparing a lifeless form - it makes one ponder on the whole meanin of life and death.


Now, onto the Chrysanthemum question. They serve two functions. One, they're another foreshadowing detail. The flower's connection to death would be understood by Lawrence's audience, and they would know that something is wrong. Foreshadowing in this story is critical. There wouldn't be any suspense or tension in the first part of the story without it. The Chrysanthemums help with this. Besides being an ominous warning to the reader, the flowers reflect Mr. and Mrs. Bates' relationship. Chrysanthemums are present whenever their relationship advances, and the vase containing them is broken when their relationship is severed by the husband's death.

Yes, definitely the flower begins as a foreshadowing detail and this idea progresses with more significance and meaning...really brilliant writing on Lawrence's part. Lawrence knew flowers and plants well, since he loved botany and studied it extensively, so no doubt he got this idea when learning the meaning of the flowers and how they could be interwoven in this story. The title is perfect, too. Lawrence wrote a poem called "Violets" - in it he contrasts the scent of death and the scent of violets. It is a very poignant poem.
I forget - was there an actual 'vase' in the story?


Is the washing of Mr. Bates a Christ-like ritual? Do you mean the washing the foot thing? Or, do you just mean that it's a selfless, altruist act in general? I thought she bathed him because she was trying to reestablish her connection with him through a physical act.

This she last part she is doing as, you say; but yes, I find the idea of the scene being 'Christ-like' an interesting one. I will look up more on the commentary concerning these thoughts.


Yeah, the most important relationship in this story is that between the married couple. Mr. Bates' mother is an interesting foil for Mrs. Bates.

Yes, the relationship is what is being fully explored but the universal meanings I believe go even further.


It's hard to tell in what way Mrs. Bates feels separated from her husband at the end. We know that she believes he is somehow different from what she thought him to be, but any more specific details are curiously missing. Unlike in Sons and Lovers where Lawrence gives the reader a careful description of the differences between husband and wife, we can't get a clear idea of what separates the married pair. Mrs. Bates could mean that she feels spiritual alienated from her deceased husband, or she could simply mean that his personality was different from what she supposed. In either case, she thinks she may have ruined Mr. Bates' life (and possibly her own) with her misconception.

Yes, short stories tend to be this way. We are left to fill in the blanks. I think that is ok and in this case I do think we can only go so far in understanding Mrs. Bate's feeling towards her husband and facing his dead body. Remember, too, she still has ahead of her the task of telling her beloved children. They had asked about their father often and it will be a very sad affair to know he is now gone from them.

Be sure to read my last two (long) posts, guys, but I wanted to ask these questions and forgot.

What do you think of the mention of Elizabeth's father in the beginning of the story and the fact that he is going to remarry? What part does this play in the story or what significance does it have, do you think?

[Virgil]

Be sure to read my last two (long) posts, guys, but I wanted to ask these questions and forgot.

What do you think of the mention of Elizabeth's father in the beginning of the story and the fact that he is going to remarry? What part does this play in the story or what significance does it have, do you think?

That is a good question. I'm not sure i understand that. I'll have to re-read it. It does create a series of generations, the protagonist's parents, the protagonists themselves (Walter & Elizabeth), and the protagonist's children.

[Janine]

That is a good question. I'm not sure i understand that. I'll have to re-read it. It does create a series of generations, the protagonist's parents, the protagonists themselves (Walter & Elizabeth), and the protagonist's children.

Virgil, Oh how funny - we posted same time in here, too. I was writing to Quark and then that final question post that followed and you beat me out again. Same in S&L - so glad I did not loose that post over there - it took a while to type out.

Yes, I think the husband represents the 'blood philosophy' ideal. I have to look that up in one of my many books - the date of the story and novel.
I laughed about him being married and that is what married life does to you. Yes, it did seem that way with Lawrence and Frieda. He did evolve to a different code of thought, especially by the time he got to "Plumed Serpent", which, by the way, I just completed last night. Thank godness!

Virgil, maybe it is just establishing the thought of generations, as you say; but I thought there might be more significance to it, actually...but not sure what it is. Elizabeth did not seem in favor of the father marrying. Could he also represent the blood philosophy and the working man - sort of salt of the earth type guy who drives the train that delivers the coal? Would he be aligned to her husband in a sense?

[Janine]

In this story, did not the children go out to play (after dark) under a street light? Hope I am not mixing this up with S&L. Anyway, if I am correct, what did you think of that scene and it's significance to the story?

[Quark]

In this story, did not the children go out to play (after dark) under a street light? Hope I am not mixing this up with S&L. Anyway, if I am correct, what did you think of that scene and it's significance to the story?

Is that right? I can't remember that. I thought that the son was out playing in the dark and the mother brought him in.

[Virgil]

Virgil, maybe it is just establishing the thought of generations, as you say; but I thought there might be more significance to it, actually...but not sure what it is. Elizabeth did not seem in favor of the father marrying. Could he also represent the blood philosophy and the working man - sort of salt of the earth type guy who drives the train that delivers the coal? Would he be aligned to her husband in a sense?

Perhaps he does reflect the opposite of Elizabeth, although it's not really fleshed out. The train is associated with flames and the father has a beard (a Lawrentian signal for blood consciousness) and the father is getting married. I found what he says very interesting:

"I didn't expect you," said his daughter.

The engine-driver winced; then, reassuming his cheery, airy manner, he said:

"Oh, have you heard then? Well, and what do you think--?"

"I think it is soon enough," she replied.

At her brief censure the little man made an impatient gesture, and said coaxingly, yet with dangerous coldness:

"Well, what's a man to do? It's no sort of life for a man of my years, to sit at my own hearth like a stranger. And if I'm going to marry again it may as well be soon as late--what does it matter to anybody?"
"It's no sort of life for a man of my years, to sit at my own hearth like a stranger." Notice how he refers to hearth as a center of life.

I also did notice at the beginning how the little boy gets lost in the dark.

She was a till woman of imperious mien, handsome, with definite black eyebrows. Her smooth black hair was parted exactly. For a few moments she stood steadily watching the miners as they passed along the railway: then she turned towards the brook course. Her face was calm and set, her mouth was closed with disillusionment. After a moment she called:

"John!" There was no answer. She waited, and then said distinctly:

"Where are you?"

"Here!" replied a child's sulky voice from among the bushes. The woman looked piercingly through the dusk.

"Are you at that brook?" she asked sternly.

For answer the child showed himself before the raspberry-canes that rose like whips. He was a small, sturdy boy of five. He stood quite still, defiantly.
It seems people are in and out of the darkness throughout the story. And this is what I think: I believe Lawrence is suggesting that we come out of the darkness as infants (remember the children and the unborn child Elizabeth is carrying and even the fact that the story is built around three generations, like The Rainbow by the way) and we go into the dark to death. The dark is a sort of mystical place from which life formulates and returns.

[Janine]

Is that right? I can't remember that. I thought that the son was out playing in the dark and the mother brought him in.

Quark and Virgil, It is weird, I could have sworn I read about a scene where the kids went outside for about an hour to play and it was dark with a streetlamp glowing. Maybe it was in S&L, but I just scanned the first chapter, and seemed the children were put to bed at 7:00PM. Maybe it is later in the book, when they are older. I scanned the short story and do not see it either. Bizzare, maybe I am dreaming these scenes up while I sleep. :eek2:


Perhaps he does reflect the opposite of Elizabeth, although it's not really fleshed out. The train is associated with flames and the father has a beard (a Lawrentian signal for blood consciousness) and the father is getting married. I found what he says very interesting:....



Virgil, I am glad you see my point. I knew there had to be more significance to that scene for Lawrence to include this meeting and the idea that he is a train conductor and connected with the coal industry. Yes, good point, the train would be associated with flames. Where did you find the reference to the beard being a Lawrentian signal for blood consciousness? From several of my books I understood Lawrence's own growing of the beard to be something he did during his first serious attack of his illness. He seemed to have the idea it kept him from colds because it kept his face warm and his neck as well - that is why it was so long. I just read where it was untrimmed because Lawrence had some kind of hang-up about strange barber shops and he traveled so much he just did not bother going to them. Maybe he was a germ freak. He was kind of fastitious with his cleaning and his scrubbing of floors which we discussed in S&L. From old pictures, you would not gather so, but I think the beard and his thinning physical appearance, as he got older (due primarily to his illness), make him look a little shabby and unkept. From what I have read he did not appear so to his friends. He always seemed to wear suits. I even have a photo of him baking bread and he was wearing a suit. That was the fashion back then for men. I suppose it was a sign of respectability/authority.
Well, sorry to go off on that tangent and back to what you pointed out. The comparison of the train to fire and flames is a good one and to the hearth, as well. Also this man is acting on his instinct and wants closeness and intimacy - he says why wait? He wants to be married again and connected to a woman in the flesh. I think this is the significant point in adding this to the story. Also, often grown children will feel resentment, even jealousy, when a parent wishes to remarry or even to date. The grown child can feel threatened some how - thinking they will lose the parent's affections. This scene also reveals to us that Elizabeth's mother is dead and gone from their lives. I think I read this was based, only in part on Lawrence's mother's family, and in that case the father (L's grandfather) did remarry, I believe - another fact I need to look up and confirm. I had started to read the "Cambridge Early Years" biography and I believe I read it in there. That book is very detailed about family history. I need to get my facts right and my sources quoted as they are written....sorry about that. Be patient and I can find it, maybe along with that scene with the children playing outside by the lamp-post. :lol:

It seems people are in and out of the darkness throughout the story. And this is what I think: I believe Lawrence is suggesting that we come out of the darkness as infants (remember the children and the unborn child Elizabeth is carrying and even the fact that the story is built around three generations, like The Rainbow by the way) and we go into the dark to death. The dark is a sort of mystical place from which life formulates and returns.
I think your theory is perfectly feasible and valid. I really like it. Yes, there is so many instances in this story of light and dark playing against each other. It even brings to mind to me the chysanthemum that Elizabeth had carefully concealed in her (darkened pocket/a personal space) which lights up with the lamp and shows through to the girl child. Isn't that image highly significant? Perhaps this one single detail and gesture suggests a looking deeper into what Elizabeth is concealing about her marriage. It is just a thought, but it just came to me as an answer to the way Lawrence really highlighted that scene and named the story as he has. The lines that Elizabeth blurts out to the children, concerning chysanthemums in three stages of life and decay, is really brilliant and encompasses these three stages, perhaps those you are referring to - the three generations, in effect, but also three events in different stages of their marriage.

"It was chrysanthemums when I married him, and chrysanthemums when you were born, and the first time they ever brought him home drunk, he'd got brown chrysanthemums in his button-hole."
Could this represent hope of marriage and love, birth of the children and then disillusionment and dispair and their separateness/alienation? The last chysanthemum is withered and 'brown', reflecting the state of their marriage at this point. Also, it is a bitter statement of disgust and criticism, that she displays/reveals to her children in the last reference. In a sense she puts the man down in front of the children repeatedly throughout the story. Elizabeth Bates is a very bitter and hard-edged woman by this stage in her life and marriage. She does not seem all that loving or connected, even to her children...what do you think?

[Virgil]

Virgil, I am glad you see my point. I knew there had to be more significance to that scene for Lawrence to include this meeting and the idea that he is a train conductor and connected with the coal industry. Yes, good point, the train would be associated with flames. Where did you find the reference to the beard being a Lawrentian signal for blood consciousness?
The more I think about it the more convinced I am that your point is correct. The beard significance runs through many of Lawrence's works, mostly his later works The most prominant from what I remember is in the short novel St. Mawr. Don't know if you've ever read that. Also didn't Mellors in Lady Chatterly's Lover have a beard? I can't quite remember. But trust me, it's a signifier in later Lawrence work. Of course this story is an early work, so it could be a coincidence. But I think not.


From several of my books I understood Lawrence's own growing of the beard to be something he did during his first serious attack of his illness. He seemed to have the idea it kept him from colds because it kept his face warm and his neck as well - that is why it was so long. I just read where it was untrimmed because Lawrence had some kind of hang-up about strange barber shops and he traveled so much he just did not bother going to them. Maybe he was a germ freak. He was kind of fastitious with his cleaning and his scrubbing of floors which we discussed in S&L. From old pictures, you would not gather so, but I think the beard and his thinning physical appearance, as he got older (due primarily to his illness), make him look a little shabby and unkept. From what I have read he did not appear so to his friends. He always seemed to wear suits. I even have a photo of him baking bread and he was wearing a suit. That was the fashion back then for men. I suppose it was a sign of respectability/authority.
Very interesting. Thanks for filling me in on some of the subtle biographical details.


Well, sorry to go off on that tangent and back to what you pointed out. The comparison of the train to fire and flames is a good one and to the hearth, as well. Also this man is acting on his instinct and wants closeness and intimacy - he says why wait? He wants to be married again and connected to a woman in the flesh. I think this is the significant point in adding this to the story. Also, often grown children will feel resentment, even jealousy, when a parent wishes to remarry or even to date. The grown child can feel threatened some how - thinking they will lose the parent's affections. This scene also reveals to us that Elizabeth's mother is dead and gone from their lives.
Yes, you are definitely correct about this. I like the way Lawrence uses this natural reaction a daughter might have to isolate her into the world of reason. It works perfectly in the narrative.


I think your theory is perfectly feasible and valid. I really like it. Yes, there is so many instances in this story of light and dark playing against each other. It even brings to mind to me the chysanthemum that Elizabeth had carefully concealed in her (darkened pocket/a personal space) which lights up with the lamp and shows through to the girl child. Isn't that image highly significant? Perhaps this one single detail and gesture suggests a looking deeper into what Elizabeth is concealing about her marriage. It is just a thought, but it just came to me as an answer to the way Lawrence really highlighted that scene and named the story as he has. The lines that Elizabeth blurts out to the children, concerning chysanthemums in three stages of life and decay, is really brilliant and encompasses these three stages, perhaps those you are referring to - the three generations, in effect, but also three events in different stages of their marriage.
and

Could this represent hope of marriage and love, birth of the children and then disillusionment and dispair and their separateness/alienation? The last chysanthemum is withered and 'brown', reflecting the state of their marriage at this point. Also, it is a bitter statement of disgust and criticism, that she displays/reveals to her children in the last reference. In a sense she puts the man down in front of the children repeatedly throughout the story. Elizabeth Bates is a very bitter and hard-edged woman by this stage in her life and marriage. She does not seem all that loving or connected, even to her children...what do you think?

You know, given this new dimension to the story (darkness as symbolic for the mystical place of pre-life and post-life) I think the chrysanthemums take on even greater symbolic weight. They are flowers which need the short day and longer nights to stimulate bloom, and so they come from and touch this mystical unknown. And remember flowers are Lawrence's ideal for perfect life.

Wow, this story is very rich. When I first read it I thought this is just a slice of life realism. I take that back. It is not. Even in this story we see the spiritual/mystic element of Lawrence's ideas. You know I just recently read another article by a recent critic slamming Lawrence. She found him shallow. I just don't get it. She may not like his ideas; she may not agree with his ideas. But to say he's shallow is rediculous. (Who today agrees with Shakespeare on the devine rights of kings?) She does admit he's a gifted writer. The previous generation of critics perhaps over valued Lawrence. The current generation definitely undervalues him. Anyway.

[Janine]

The more I think about it the more convinced I am that your point is correct. The beard significance runs through many of Lawrence's works, mostly his later works The most prominant from what I remember is in the short novel St. Mawr. Don't know if you've ever read that. Also didn't Mellors in Lady Chatterly's Lover have a beard? I can't quite remember. But trust me, it's a signifier in later Lawrence work. Of course this story is an early work, so it could be a coincidence. But I think not.

:wave: (look it is manolia's waver - she uses him all the time!:lol: )
Hi Virgil,
Yes, I do believe it turned into more significance, as you say, in the later works. I think this beard thing was a very personal symbol to Lawrence, eventually. For one thing, I also read, where to protest war, one sported a long beard. Odd that his own father also had this long, never trimmed beard, going back in Lawrence's childhood. You would think Lawrence would have shunned that style as 'old-fashioned', especially if his father wore one. But then again, Lawrence did remain sort of 'old-fashioned' in some of his ways and beliefs, even stodgy at time.


Very interesting. Thanks for filling me in on some of the subtle biographical details.

Hey, I have enough research books by now, I should be able to come up with stuff like this.;) You are very welcome!:D



Yes, you are definitely correct about this. I like the way Lawrence uses this natural reaction a daughter might have to isolate her into the world of reason. It works perfectly in the narrative.

I was thinking about a friend, when I read this part of the book; that is why it stood out so to me. My friend's father began to date and her mother has been dead for years. When she writes to me, I can always see this feeling she has of being 'threatened' by the father's new relationship with this woman. Somedays she likes her and others the woman is definitely 'on the rack'. My friend is a very nice person herself and smart, but I think it is the natural instinct of the daughter to be protective with the father, especially if he is 'up there' in years, as hers is. I also, see this sometimes - just really a hint of it in my own son. He thinks me old, I know...;) :lol: Everyone over 40 is to him - hey wait till he gets there, right? ;) So if some man comes around or calls me he is curious and protective to know all about this person. Both came to my mind when reading this part of the book. It also does not even have to be with sibblings. I saw this happen with someone else when her brother died and then his wife began to date. The person was highly critical. Life does go on and so people should follow their hearts and inclinations, provided they are upstanding and worthwhile pursuits.




You know, given this new dimension to the story (darkness as symbolic for the mystical place of pre-life and post-life) I think the chrysanthemums take on even greater symbolic weight. They are flowers which need the short day and longer nights to stimulate bloom, and so they come from and touch this mystical unknown. And remember flowers are Lawrence's ideal for perfect life.

I think the flowers definitely do, too. It is the title for the story so I feel it has great weight and significance. Lawrence did not choose roses or daisies or lilies, he chose chrysanthemums - as you pointed out a fall/autumn flower and one needing little light to bloom. Also they are the last hurrah in autumn and nice weather. Then winter comes on and all is darkness and cold and indiciative/representative of sleep and death. So the chrysanthemum is the perfect flower to choose for this particular story. It is highly symbolic. It signals the coming of winter and the death or sleep/domancy of many flowers and plants and trees and grasses, crops, etc.


Wow, this story is very rich. When I first read it I thought this is just a slice of life realism. I take that back. It is not. Even in this story we see the spiritual/mystic element of Lawrence's ideas. You know I just recently read another article by a recent critic slamming Lawrence. She found him shallow. I just don't get it. She may not like his ideas; she may not agree with his ideas. But to say he's shallow is rediculous. (Who today agrees with Shakespeare on the devine rights of kings?) She does admit he's a gifted writer. The previous generation of critics perhaps over valued Lawrence. The current generation definitely undervalues him. Anyway.

Very rich indeed! I don't think there is such a thing in all of Lawrence's works that one could call pure realism or shallow - those critics really infuriate me.:rage: Have they actually read Lawrence and looked beneath the surface? Perhaps she is a hardened realist or feminist. I don't know how she could possible say this. I have a friend who read "Sons and Lovers" and gave it only 2 stars out of 5 on another site. I gave her a thrashing (in a humorous way). She does tend to be a hard marker in book ratings but I said "how could you possibly give it only 2 stars?" She laughed and so did I. I don't think she really read it or understood it. But the critics are not changing I don't think in this time. That critic must have been an isolated case. Mostly lately I have heard all positives about Lawrence's work. People are taking the time to understand it better and he is getting more recognition now in England than ever before. Cambridge put out that whole set of biographies and I can tell you they are detailed and marvelous. When I search on Amazon there are always new books on Lawrence cropping up. I don't see that his popularity is waning at all. It all depends on where you look. The Nottingham Univeristy and Cambridge both have online displays/exhibits that are totally facinating.

As far as Shakespeare is concerned - no one much believes that now - Divine Right of Kings - but now people are placing works more realistically into the social/historical time frame they were written in. This has broadened perspectives and made people more tolerant of ideas that existed in our histories. This is happening widely in the film media, since there is a great interest and popularity presently of book adaptations and period pieces. It is good because people view history in a new light - they can see the time frame and the way people lived then and why they thought/acted as they did. Often this is due to social conditions of the time. Even with Lawrence we have to know some biography and some history of the time to place his work into proper perspective. His ideas and themes may exceed that time boundry and become 'universal' in these ideas and themes, but their origins were born in the early part of the 20th century. This, in the long run, is a very significant fact.

[Quark]

I could see how some readers might construe this story as shallow. I've read some critics who believe there is a moral to the story--that Lawrence was teaching a lesson through the thoughts of Mrs. Bates. Of course, it's complete nonsense to argue that. If any of those critics try to define what the argument of the story is, they would falter and get quiet because the words at the end of the story are so vague. Besides, it's hard to know which thoughts Mrs. Bates is actually having and which are the conclusions of the author. And, to make things more complicated, the speech is utter in such an impassioned state that we can't decide how much is really sincere and not overstatement. While it's true that Lawrence uses most of the beginning of this story to give foreshadowing and context for the end, that doesn't mean that the ending necessarily contains a moral. I would say that the story is artificial, yes, but not shallow or instructional.

[Virgil]

Good post Quark. :thumbs_up

[Janine]

Yes, Quark it was a good post and it made me think. In fact, I am still thinking about what you wrote. I read it now several times. It is hard to tell how much is coming from L and how much is truly the character's own thoughts.
I just read that this story has always been acclaimed as one of L's best but this is disputed by some. I still think there is much in the story that is brilliant and shows pure genius.
Are you saying in your last line "I would say that the story is artificial, yes, but not shallow or instructional." - that the story is not at all 'realistic'? Can you define the word 'artificial', as you use it in this context/statement?

Virgil here is the chronology. Odour of Chysanthemums was started in 1911 and completed (after all revisions) in 1914; "Sons and Lovers" was started in 1911 and copyrighted in 1913. This proves that the two were written in the same time frame..interesing, isn't it?

[Virgil]

Virgil here is the chronology. Odour of Chysanthemums was started in 1911 and completed (after all revisions) in 1914; "Sons and Lovers" was started in 1911 and copyrighted in 1913. This proves that the two were written in the same time frame..interesing, isn't it?

Oh thank you very much. That book is very useful. ;)

[Janine]

I found this story date in my book, by Michael Black, and then looked up the publisher's date of "Sons and Lovers" in the front of my novel, then further researched it in my book entitled:
"Sons and Lovers" ~ Casebook Series ~ D.H.Lawrence ~ A Selection of Critical Essays Edited by Gamini Salgado

This is a fine and very helpful book. I wanted to mention it, since you might be able to secure it at your library. I first found it there in mine and I liked it so much I bought it (used) from Amazon. It is probably out of print, by now, but is quite an aid to studying the book, S&L.


Virgil, Glad I could be of assistence in the dating of the two works. What do you think of it being written around the same time as S&L?

[Virgil]

I found this story date in my book, by Michael Black, and then looked up the publisher's date of "Sons and Lovers" in the front of my novel, then further researched it in my book entitled:
"Sons and Lovers" ~ Casebook Series ~ D.H.Lawrence ~ A Selection of Critical Essays Edited by Gamini Salgado

This is a fine and very helpful book. I wanted to mention it, since you might be able to secure it at your library. I first found it there in mine and I liked it so much I bought it (used) from Amazon. It is probably out of print, by now, but is quite an aid to studying the book, S&L.


Virgil, Glad I could be of assistence in the dating of the two works. What do you think of it being written around the same time as S&L?

Well, they are similar in style. But there are differences. Mrs. Morel in S&L defeats her husband. She comes across as the one who's justice is on her side. But in OofCh, Elizabeth in a way is defeated by her husband. It turns out that Walter has some sort of justice on his side in this relationship.

[Pensive]

Yes, Quark it was a good post and it made me think. In fact, I am still thinking about what you wrote. I read it now several times. It is hard to tell how much is coming from L and how much is truly the character's own thoughts.
I just read that this story has always been acclaimed as one of L's best but this is disputed by some. I still think there is much in the story that is brilliant and shows pure genius.

I haven't read all Lawrence's short stories but out of those which I have read (only three, I would have to say, embarrassed :blush:), I have liked it the best. The 'chrysanthemums' reference and the discription is very good!


Are you saying in your last line "I would say that the story is artificial, yes, but not shallow or instructional." - that the story is not at all 'realistic'? Can you define the word 'artificial', as you use it in this context/statement?

If Quark is referring to the chrysanthemums being present everywhere which turns out to be a significant event in their life, I think I agree with him (?) that it's not realistic but that can't be taken as a negative point because this reference has been meant to be symbolic.


Virgil here is the chronology. Odour of Chysanthemums was started in 1911 and completed (after all revisions) in 1914; "Sons and Lovers" was started in 1911 and copyrighted in 1913. This proves that the two were written in the same time frame..interesing, isn't it?

That's an interesting piece of information you have provided us, Janine. :)

[Quark]

Are you saying in your last line "I would say that the story is artificial, yes, but not shallow or instructional." - that the story is not at all 'realistic'? Can you define the word 'artificial', as you use it in this context/statement?

I meant that the plot, setting, descriptions, and symbols are all setup for the final realization at the end. I find that kind of story telling kind of artificial. Compare this story with "The Lady with the Dog" by Chekhov, for example. In Chekhov's story, the action picks up in the middle of the story and ends in the middle. Instead of manipulating every literary device imaginable to drive the story to a single conclusion, Chekhov creates many different points. Plus, he makes his points in a much more casual and realistic way. In "The Odour of Chrysanthemums", Lawrence gives us his main idea in an impassioned moment of intense clarity which I doubt many of us have had.

Yet, I don't think the Lawrence story is a poor story. I just thought it was artificial.

[Janine]

I meant that the plot, setting, descriptions, and symbols are all setup for the final realization at the end. I find that kind of story telling kind of artificial. Compare this story with "The Lady with the Dog" by Chekhov, for example. In Chekhov's story, the action picks up in the middle of the story and ends in the middle. Instead of manipulating every literary device imaginable to drive the story to a single conclusion, Chekhov creates many different points. Plus, he makes his points in a much more casual and realistic way. In "The Odour of Chrysanthemums", Lawrence gives us his main idea in an impassioned moment of intense clarity which I doubt many of us have had.

Yet, I don't think the Lawrence story is a poor story. I just thought it was artificial.

Hi Quark, This might be true comparing these two stories, but in 'Rothchild's Fiddle', I felt the story had some manipulation, especially the ending. 'Lady and the Dog' might appear to be realistic, but is it really? I could see somethings that were not so, in my total assessment. I agree that pointing out the chrysantemums in various ways was a device or manipulation to create symbolism. I even think the bathing scene is somewhat devised to symbolise or evoke feeling of religion or ceremony. Some people might feel this 'impassioned' sense, when starring 'death' blantantly in the face, as Elizabeth is doing. Shock can bring on revelations, such as the one she seems to be having. In a sense it is like a funeral, where one works through grief and all seems totally 'unreal' or more 'real' for a time - such as during wakes. This intense experience, of bathing the body and readying it for the funeral, seems to be realistic to me. Haven't you ever felt 'otherworldly' in situations like that, as though you were not really there at the scene, or viewing it from a whole new and strange perspective? When I see a body with no life in it, I feel as Elizabeth did. It is not an everyday experience unless you deal with this everyday, being an undertaker.

Pensive, glad liked this story best - I think it is a fine one. Glad we did it this month.

Virgil and Pensive, glad you found that information of help.

Virgil, I agree with this "Well, they are similar in style. But there are differences. Mrs. Morel in S&L defeats her husband. She comes across as the one who's justice is on her side. But in OofCh, Elizabeth in a way is defeated by her husband. It turns out that Walter has some sort of justice on his side in this relationship." I realised they were quite different stories with different themes.

Here is some more of the commentary from the Michael Black book. I hope I did not post this earlier.

The hardness and bitterness of Elizabeth Bates, the central woman of the tale, is well led up to by this initial description. The story concerns the domestic situation of the Bates family and the strained and awkward relationship of the man and wife, although the husband never comes before us until he is dead, killed in a mining accident. The situation is simple enough, and the mining accident a stereotype of a thousand similar stories of mining villages, but Lawrence invests the situation with a deep and moving significance. In the first part of the tale the tension and harshness of the household is well built up as the rest of the family wait for the husband to return from work, but it is assumed that he has once more gone straight from work to the public house; in the second part the tone changes, with the ten¬sion switching to a different key as the husband's continued absence becomes more ominous. Eventually he is brought home dead, and the fact of his death throws into another perspective the lives of the man's wife and mother. The tone is perfectly caught, for the miner's death is not sentimentalised over; rather, the wife, Elizabeth, is made aware of the transitoriness of life and her own past error in allowing the ordinariness and mundaneness of her lot to stifle her feelings and demean her character. Now he is dead she realises with tragic immediacy the fact that he was different from her and different from her conception of him:

"Life with its smoky burning gone from him, had left him apart, and utterly alien to her. And she knew what a stranger he was to her. In her womb was ice of fear, because of this separate stranger with whom she had been living as one flesh. Was this what it all meant-utter, intact separateness, obscured by heat of living? In dread she turned her face away .... For as she looked at the dead man, her mind, cold and detached, said clearly: 'Who am I? What have I been doing? I have been fighting a husband who did not exist. He existed all the time. What wrong have I done? What was that I have been living with? There lies the reality, this man.' And her soul died in her for fear: she knew that she had never seen him, he had never seen her, they had met in the dark and had fought in the dark, not knowing whom they met nor whom they fought. And now she saw, and turned silent in seeing. For she had been wrong." pp. 300-I

The passage is interesting, not only in that it shows Lawrence's own awareness of the fact of death, but also in its effect in the story as a whole. The 'ice of fear' in her 'womb' (a word so annoying to some readers of Lawrence, not always without cause) here is effectually used to cast the reader's mind back to a previous scene where the contrast of life and death, and the meanness of the woman in her 'death-in-life', is well shown when, as she reaches up to light the lamp, her daughter remarks at the chrysanthemums which she had earlier placed in her apron-band. The parallel between her wearing the flowers and her pregnancy is symbolic oflife:

"As she reached up, her figure displayed itself just rounding with maternity.
'Oh, mother- l' exclaimed the girl.
'What?' said the woman, suspended in the act of putting the lamp-glass over the flame. The copper reflector shone handsomely on her, as she stood with uplifted arm, turning to face her daughter.
'You've got a flower in your apron!' said the child, in a little rapture at this unusual event.
'Goodness me l' exclaimed the woman, relieved. 'One would have thought the house was afire.' she replaced the glass and waited a moment before turning up the wick. A pale shadow was seen floating vaguely on the floor.
'Let me smell!' said the child, still rapturously, coming forward and putting her face to her mother's waist.
'Go along, silly l' said the mother, turning up the lamp. The light revealed their suspense so that the woman found it almost unbearable. Annie was still bending at her waist. Irritably, the mother took the flowers out from her apron-band.
'Oh, mother-don't take them out!' Annie cried, catching her hand and trying to replace the sprig.
'Such nonsense!' said the mother, turning away."

The symbolism of the scene is wonderfully suggestive of the child's delight in life and the mother's dismissal of it, and it is remarkable that the symbolism Lawrence is employing here to parallel the flowers and the woman's pregnancy is typical of the symbolism of many English folk songs, such as 'The Seeds of Love'; Lawrence may well have been writing consciously or unconsciously in a folk-convention at this point. (It is not out of place to remind ourselves that Lawrence is one of the first writers in English of truly working-class origins.) However, Lawrence is not perfect in his handling of this scene, for although it is beautifully formed as it is quoted above, its effect is slightly spoilt by the way in which one aspect of its significance is hammered home in the next few lines, in which the woman's conscious antipathy to the flowers is shown:
" 'It was chrysanthemums when I married him, and chrysanthe¬mums when you were born, and the first time they ever brought him home drunk, he'd got brown chrysanthemums in his button¬hole.' p. 289
The story as a whole, however, is near-faultless, and is one of the best possible introductions to Lawrence's work."

[Virgil]

From Michael Black:

The passage is interesting, not only in that it shows Lawrence's own awareness of the fact of death, but also in its effect in the story as a whole. The 'ice of fear' in her 'womb' (a word so annoying to some readers of Lawrence, not always without cause) here is effectually used to cast the reader's mind back to a previous scene where the contrast of life and death, and the meanness of the woman in her 'death-in-life', is well shown when, as she reaches up to light the lamp, her daughter remarks at the chrysanthemums which she had earlier placed in her apron-band. The parallel between her wearing the flowers and her pregnancy is symbolic oflife
Not sure what to make of the phrase 'ice of fear' in her 'womb'. It was startling when I read it. I'm not eally sure what Michael Black is saying there.

[Janine]

From Michael Black:

Not sure what to make of the phrase 'ice of fear' in her 'womb'. It was startling when I read it. I'm not eally sure what Michael Black is saying there.

Virgil, I found that phrase curious myself. I did not know what to make of it since later Lawrence refers to life as a flame or column of fire. I think I will have to read that part again in Black's commentary and try to understand, also, what he is getting at.

Hmmm...I just looked at that part again and I think one has to look at Elizabeth's complete thought:


In her womb was ice of fear, because of this separate stranger with whom she had been living as one flesh. Was this what it all meant-utter, intact separateness, obscured by heat of living? In dread she turned her face away.

[Quark]

From Michael Black:

Not sure what to make of the phrase 'ice of fear' in her 'womb'. It was startling when I read it. I'm not eally sure what Michael Black is saying there.


Virgil, I found that phrase curious myself. I did not know what to make of it since later Lawrence refers to life as a flame or column of fire. I think I will have to read that part again in Black's commentary and try to understand, also, what he is getting at.

Hmmm...I just looked at that part again and I think one has to look at Elizabeth's complete thought:

I think that Elizabeth is discovering that the children are not a tie between her and her husband. She thinks to herself, "There were the children - but the children belonged to life. This dead man had nothing to do with them. He and she were only channels through which life had flowed to issue in the children". Elizabeth notices that her kids do nothing to unite her with her husband, and the child she's carrying turns to ice.

[Janine]

I think that Elizabeth is discovering that the children are not a tie between her and her husband. She thinks to herself, "There were the children - but the children belonged to life. This dead man had nothing to do with them. He and she were only channels through which life had flowed to issue in the children". Elizabeth notices that her kids do nothing to unite her with her husband, and the child she's carrying turns to ice.

Quark, that is an interesting thought on the idea of the children and the connection between the parents. It does seem the family is not so close but sort of alien from the mother. I never truly get the sense that Elizabeth is close or connected to her children. The ice reference is pretty extreme, and brave or brazen of Lawrence to refer to the unborn child as such. I can see why some, in that period of time, reading that line, might cringe at the reference. The dark place of the womb could also signficy the opposite of death - the dream state prior to life or the state of not being born or breathing and therefore not being alive fully (in the mother's eyes), therefore hidden in the darkness of her womb - alone, alone as the husband is in death...and Elizabeth, herself is alone. I am not sure; just merely throwing that out there for thought, knowing how Lawrence uses 'contrasts' continually throughtout the story and his other works.

[Quark]

The dark place of the womb could also signficy the opposite of death - the dream state prior to life or the state of not being born or breathing and therefore not being alive fully (in the mother's eyes), therefore hidden in the darkness of her womb - alone, alone as the husband is in death...and Elizabeth, herself is alone. I am not sure; just merely throwing that out there for thought, knowing how Lawrence uses 'contrasts' continually throughtout the story and his other works.

Normally, we would think of the dead as the opposite of the unborn. One is finished; the other is just beginning. In this story, though, they are connected in Mrs. Bates revelation about death; and, it's in this context we need to think about the icy child. Both cold and dark signify the death of Mr. Bates, and the husband's death signifies separation, fear, and isolation. When Elizabeth's womb turns to ice, we need to ask ourselves which association Lawrence wants us to make. It seems like it's either another realization about the wife's separation from her husband, or it's anxiety about the unborn child. It's hard to tell which this statement is directed at.

[Janine]

Normally, we would think of the dead as the opposite of the unborn. One is finished; the other is just beginning. In this story, though, they are connected in Mrs. Bates revelation about death; and, it's in this context we need to think about the icy child. Both cold and dark signify the death of Mr. Bates, and the husband's death signifies separation, fear, and isolation. When Elizabeth's womb turns to ice, we need to ask ourselves which association Lawrence wants us to make. It seems like it's either another realization about the wife's separation from her husband, or it's anxiety about the unborn child. It's hard to tell which this statement is directed at.

Hi Quark, I think what you wrote here is pretty good - accurate. I still don't know the answer completely, either. When all else fails, I say go to the internet and research - there might be something on it listed. Of course, the first thing to come up was our discussion on here.:lol: Lit Net is quite prominent on L these days!
Funny, during my search I found this quote and this little tidbit from Shakespeare:
"The earth that's nature's mother is her tomb; What is her burying grave that is her womb." Romeo and Juliet , II, iii

More specifically, I also found this passage online, but could not copy it to my file, so you could just go there and read it if you like. It is from a commentary book still under copyright. Only the first paragraph seems to relate to the statement, about the "fire in the womb". See what you think.

http://www.google.com/search?q=ice+of+fear+in+her+womb+lawrence

Note: this is the link to general page of my 'search' - go to bottom of page and click on 'Writing in Society - Google Books Search' and it will take you to the right page.

If the link does not work, or does not take you to the exact spot, in the manuscript, I will have to type it out later on today or tomorrow.

Hey, Quark, remember the outdoor scene I was recalling with the children playing beneath a streetlamp? I came across it when I was posting some commentary in the S&L thread - it's in that story and not this one! My mistake. I was mixing them up, scenerios are so similar with the children/miners/setting.

[Quark]

More specifically, I also found this passage online, but could not copy it to my file, so you could just go there and read it if you like. It is from a commentary book still under copyright. Only the first paragraph seems to relate to the statement, about the "fire in the womb". See what you think.

I couldn't get to the passage from the link. The google search list doesn't show the page. Could you just paraphrase the argument?

[Janine]

Quark, it is not long, so I will try and type it later on. I can't do it now - too busy with real life things and have to get off of here presently and attend to them. Sorry that link did not work for you. I hate those passages one cannot copy. In the meantime try putting in the top search: Writing in Society - Google Book Search - see if that takes you to the page. Forget that idea - that does not work either. I will have to type it up for you.

[Janine]

Quark, this is really funny. That link did take me to that writing directly yesterday, but now it doesn't; I can't locate it for some strange reason. Instead, in searching through the listings I found this article instead and it seems to be better anyway.

I don't know who wrote it - it does not seem to state:


Death in a Flower
Ralph Waldo Emerson once said “Is not marriage an open question, when it is
alleged, from the beginning of the world, that such as are in the institution wish to get out, and such as are out wish to get in?”(Brainy Quote). Emerson’s expressions are all too true for many married people as well as those in serious relationships. It seems that engaging in marriage is a step that many take only to find out it was a mistake. Nothing is ever perfect in relationships as well as in life and in death. D.H. Lawrence similarly illustrates the theme of relationships and their unsuccessfulness in life in his short story “Odour of Chrysanthemums”. He realistically demonstrates these themes with “the pitiless self-discovery sometimes brought about only through the death of another” (72). In the story, Mrs. Elizabeth Bates, the protagonist, realizes the harsh realities of marriage as she waits for her husband to come home from the mineshaft one night. She is bombarded with the thought of him getting drunk at the local tavern and is furious at his inconsiderateness to the children and her. When Elizabeth discovers the death of her husband, she deals with the fact that she never loved him; he was simply a stepping stone for her two children and her unborn child into the world. Through diction in “Odour of Chrysanthemums” , a depressing and thought provoking story, Lawrence majestically uses beautiful language and vivid scenes through imagery, foreshadowing, and symbolism to portray the hard times in Elizabeth’s life. The main theme in the story is that truth and the relationships in life are often difficult and are sometimes not figured out
until the ultimate tragedy, death.
Conflict is very strong in Elizabeth’s life. As the plot thickens, she begins to discover the truths in her life through the events during the day. Realizing that her husband is the root of much of the conflict, Elizabeth takes a deeper look at his own flesh and blood: her son. “She saw herself in his [her son’s] silence and pertinacity; she saw the father in her child’s indifference to all but himself” (75). Lawrence characterizes Elizabeth through her son’s action. She starts to see traits in her son that she had not noticed before; moreover, the fact that she sees herself as quiet and determined in her son’s personality makes her look like a warm nurturing mother. In contrast, she sees a selfish image in the child inherited from the father, characterizing the father as a bad influence to the son. Her thoughts foreshadow to the reader and to her that the marriage is having problems because she cannot even find a moral trait in her husband let alone her son. Her thoughts also demonstrate her feelings of anger towards her husband becauseshe thinks about the negative characteristics that her son possesses from the father rather than the positive. While waiting for her husband to return home from work or the bar rather, she regrets ever moving in with him, “…what a fool I’ve been, what a fool! And this is what I came here for, to this dirty hole, rats and all, for him to slink past his very door” (78). She feels threatened and upset that her husband is so selfish as to not even come home to his family when she has given up so much for him. Growing suspicion proves that Elizabeth no longer trusts her husband, and she faces with the reality of herdiminishing marriage.
The conflict in Elizabeth’s marriage is escalated by the representation of fire. Throughout the entire story, fire is forthcoming. As the fire starts to dwindle the climax rises and death becomes more evident. The mood is set in the beginning of the story when the miners are described as “shadows diverging home” (73). A gloomy, lonely emotion is felt by the scene, and fire is the only source of light and brightness. It is quickly obliterated as death approaches. “As she [Elizabeth] dropped piece after piece of coal on the red fire, the shadows fell on the walls, till the room was almost in total darkness” (77). Elizabeth becomes restless as her husband is no where to be seen or heard. To keep the fire burning all night would be absurd, so she slowly lets the glowing ambers disperse into nothingness in hopes he will return home soon. Her hopes weaken in this ironic statement, “what a fool she had been to imagine that anything had happened to him!” (79). Whereas she may not be serious; her words will come back to haunt her when she finds out that her husband has died. The strange thing is “‘E [the husband] wor smothered [in the mine]!” (83). The fire at the home gradually disappearing, symbolizes the very ashes at the mine that smothered Mr. Bates to death. Deep down Elizabeth feels that it was a long time coming because he was always coming home drunk and inconsiderate, but her feelings of guilt creep on—for she had inadvertently hoped that something had happened to him.
As fire represents the feeling of death, so too do chrysanthemums represent a deeper emotion. The powerful use of symbolism and imagery is evident in the story through the representation of chrysanthemums. The essence of these mums is far beyond their pink, purple, yellow, or white colors. They effectively symbolize the ups and downs in life. “It was chrysanthemums when I married him, and chrysanthemums when you were born, and the first time they ever brought him home drunk…” (78). Getting married and having kids is an exiting time in life but associating mums with the hard times in life, such as drunkenness, foreshadows that the events to come are not so bright and thrilling. It appears that Elizabeth loves her kids but is very reluctant to her husband. When her little daughter Annie tells her that the mums smell good, Mrs. Bates disagrees immediately, “…he’d got brown chrysanthemums in his button hole”
(78). To smell the beauty of the flowers was awkward to Elizabeth because whenever her husband was brought home drunk he would have flowers for her that were like rotted bananas that never got eaten. When her husband dies and is lying on the parlor floor “there was a cold, deathly smell of chrysanthemums” (84). Through imagery, the desolate odor of dead, decaying mums is tangible to the reader. Just as Elizabeth and her husband’s marriage began with chrysanthemums, their relationship coincidentally ended with chrysanthemums. “One of the men had knocked off a vase of chrysanthemums…As soon as she could get in the room, she went and picked up the broken vase and flowers” (84). The breaking of the vase that held the mums symbolizes an end to their lives together and hopefully the beginning of a new life for Elizabeth.
While the chrysanthemums symbolized death and a new beginning, Elizabeth’s feelings leading up to her husband’s death were very expected through foreshadowing earlier in the story and the feelings she had after his death were almost predictable. “’Is he dead?’ she asked, and at the words her heart swung violently, though she felt a slight flush of shame…” (82). Asking the question makes Elizabeth seem eager to know that her husband is dead. Showing little emotion during the ordeal, Elizabeth grasps that she is not very upset about her husband’s death and has cold feelings towards it. At that very moment she starts to realize that she is no longer and never was a part of him. “She saw him, how utterly inviolable he lay in himself. She had nothing to do with him. She could not accept it” (86). Feeling disturbed and searching for one last hope “…she seemed to be listening…to get some connection. But she could not. She was driven away. He was impregnable” (86). His disconnectedness hit home hard for her. The reality had set in that she never had a connection with this man whom she loved for so long. He was a stranger to her even when it seemed they were so close. Having kids together was the only thing they shared, yet “the utter isolation of the human soul, the child within her was a weight apart from her…in her womb was ice of fear…” (86-87). She now has the hinder of his child in her. Finding no love from her husband’s dead malicious body, how could Elizabeth find the strength to love her unborn child? The fear inside of her reaches far beyond her child, “She was grateful to death, which restored the truth…But from death, her ultimate master, she winced with fear and shame” (87-88). It was as she was reborn. Now she has to move on by living rather than dwelling on what had been or rather what had not been in life. Realizing that she had kids to provide for and a home to maintain, Elizabeth found the strength to move on.
Through experience and struggle, truth is found, whether it is painful or not, truth is found. Lawrence successfully embodied symbolism along with imagery and other literary elements to portray the theme of death, life, and relationships. Elizabeth discovered the truth in her own personal relationship through the death of her husband.
No matter how they are represented in life, as chrysanthemums or as fire, difficulties are evident in everyone’s lives. These difficulties might just be in a different form. Forexample, Jesus had difficulties in his life everyday. From the criticism of his peers to the devil’s persuasion, Jesus had to overcome temptations to pursue the true calling in his life. In the same way Elizabeth too had to bypass the horrid events in her life and continue existing. A dose of truth did not shut down Elizabeth’s life. People have to deal with unpleasant circumstances all of the time; it is a part of life. Hiding from problems, running from fear, and avoiding death is only natural but with a truthful understanding of all of life’s stages one can conquer anything.

Works Cited
“Brainy Quote.” 2005. XploreInc. March 6,
2005<http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/topics_love.htm


Interesting - gets a little preachy at the end, but still thought it enlightening. Until I find that other short commentary I thought this was worth reading.

[Janine]

SO.... where is everybody - speechless? I am not complaining since I could use a little break myself today. I am going out and will check in later to see if anyone has posted.

[Virgil]

I don't know Janine. It doesn't feel like a great reading to me. Was that an essay by a college student or something like that? But I've only skimmed.

[Janine]

I don't know Janine. It doesn't feel like a great reading to me. Was that an essay by a college student or something like that? But I've only skimmed.

I don't know really - I just found it online, when randomly searching for some comments on O of C - the listings kept pointing me back to our thread....;) :lol: When I found it, it did not prevent me from copying and I thought a few things seemed to be worthwhile, so I posted it. Only really just read it completely through last night (pretty dumb, huh?). I liked the part about the 'fire' and the 'chrysanthemums'. Of course, most of that we already have discussed and pointed out the significance of. I guess you could say it is just someone's individual view on the story, so please, everyone, do view it that way. I could not see where the person signed their name or who (if a critic) this writing was attributed to.

You know in the chapter I just read in S&L (last night) there were a lot of references to fire and in different ways or meanings. I had never noticed that before but now it stands right out to me. Also, when seaching on the net, about this short story, I saw other short stories that he had written that pointed out the fire reference(s) - I thought that was interesting. Guess most of L's work had fire explored throughout, as a theme. I recall a prominent scene in his travels through Italy - think is "Sea and Sardina" when he and Frieda stopped the night at a small inn and the hearth and fire were a prominent feature, almost like they were a character all in their own. I will have to go back and re-read that scene. It was quite impressive.

[Virgil]

I read the essay more carefully. Some thoughts here. First I'm pretty sure this is an essay by an undergraduate student.


When Elizabeth discovers the death of her husband, she deals with the fact that she never loved him; he was simply a stepping stone for her two children and her unborn child into the world.
How does he know she never loved him. She's angry with him. Perhaps one might argue she does not love him at the present time of the story. But did you see anywhere that she has never loved him?


Through diction in “Odour of Chrysanthemums” , a depressing and thought provoking story, Lawrence majestically uses beautiful language and vivid scenes through imagery, foreshadowing, and symbolism to portray the hard times in Elizabeth’s life.
That is certainly an undergrad writing. :D I remember even I throwing a useless sentence like that in an essay. :D


Realizing that her husband is the root of much of the conflict, Elizabeth takes a deeper look at his own flesh and blood: her son. “She saw herself in his [her son’s] silence and pertinacity; she saw the father in her child’s indifference to all but himself”
This is an interesting observation. I did a cursory look through the story but couldn't find the quote. But I trust him. Perhaps there is another element to the story we haven't talked about in the way the children reflect their parent's personalities.


As fire represents the feeling of death, so too do chrysanthemums represent a deeper emotion. The powerful use of symbolism and imagery is evident in the story through the representation of chrysanthemums. The essence of these mums is far beyond their pink, purple, yellow, or white colors. They effectively symbolize the ups and downs in life. “It was chrysanthemums when I married him, and chrysanthemums when you were born, and the first time they ever brought him home drunk…”
This is kind of weak. He's trying to articulate the significance of the fire and Mums and he's grasping, I'm afraid. Both I think symbolize life and death simultaneously.


His disconnectedness hit home hard for her. The reality had set in that she never had a connection with this man whom she loved for so long.
:lol: He just said above (in the first quote I copied above) that she never loved him and now says she loved him for so long.


He was a stranger to her even when it seemed they were so close. Having kids together was the only thing they shared, yet “the utter isolation of the human soul, the child within her was a weight apart from her…in her womb was ice of fear…” (86-87). She now has the hinder of his child in her. Finding no love from her husband’s dead malicious body, how could Elizabeth find the strength to love her unborn child?
:confused: Huh? Where does it say she will not love her unborn child? I give this guy a B-. :D

[Quark]

How does he know she never loved him. She's angry with him. Perhaps one might argue she does not love him at the present time of the story. But did you see anywhere that she has never loved him?

:lol: He just said above (in the first quote I copied above) that she never loved him and now says she loved him for so long.

I think what he was trying to say is that Elizabeth hadn't understood her husband while she was living with him. It's possible, too, that the person may have completely lost track of what they were arguing. I'm trying to give him the benefit of the doubt and just call him a poor writer.


This is an interesting observation. I did a cursory look through the story but couldn't find the quote. But I trust him. Perhaps there is another element to the story we haven't talked about in the way the children reflect their parent's personalities.

I wouldn't go so far as to say that the children are a mirror to the parents, but there are moments where Mrs. Bates sees herself and her husband in their kids. The part he's referring to is: "As the mother watched her son's sullen little struggle with the wood, she saw herself in his silence and pertinacity". While, yes, Elizabeth sees herself in her son, this is really a characterization of Elizabeth's struggle not her son. There isn't a greater scheme to link the parents to the children--just occasional comparisons to bring out an idea. In this case, Elizabeth's household management is compared to a morose youngster carving a piece of wood.


This is kind of weak. He's trying to articulate the significance of the fire and Mums and he's grasping, I'm afraid. Both I think symbolize life and death simultaneously.

Actually, I thought he was hitting on many of the same points we were making--in his clumsy way.


:confused: Huh? Where does it say she will not love her unborn child? I give this guy a B-. :D

This argument lost me, too.

[Janine]

I read the essay more carefully. Some thoughts here. First I'm pretty sure this is an essay by an undergraduate student.


How does he know she never loved him. She's angry with him. Perhaps one might argue she does not love him at the present time of the story. But did you see anywhere that she has never loved him?


That is certainly an undergrad writing. :D I remember even I throwing a useless sentence like that in an essay. :D


This is an interesting observation. I did a cursory look through the story but couldn't find the quote. But I trust him. Perhaps there is another element to the story we haven't talked about in the way the children reflect their parent's personalities.


This is kind of weak. He's trying to articulate the significance of the fire and Mums and he's grasping, I'm afraid. Both I think symbolize life and death simultaneously.


:lol: He just said above (in the first quote I copied above) that she never loved him and now says she loved him for so long.


:confused: Huh? Where does it say she will not love her unborn child? I give this guy a B-. :D

:lol: :lol: :lol: Well, I would take a B- and be greatful. ;) :lol: :lol:
Yes, right - I did notice some funny discrepacies in the writing and the 'thought process' going on here, like 'she did not love him, then she loved him'...quite odd. This poor guy/gal is being put 'through the mill' now with us brilliant, exceptional minds. Please forgive me, whomever you are and wrote this essay or paper.:(
I also wondered about that quote - like where did it come from, but actually it does bring up some interesting thoughts. If nothing else we can disagree with this person and essay but we can salvage some ideas from it and different ways of looking at the themes and story.
At least it got you guys writing some new posts! ;) :D

[Janine]

Quark, pretty much answered it all in Virgil's post. Sorry to have posted this but at least it got some conversation going again. I do think the child reflection had some significance that we could further delve into.


Well, let's give the guy a break, everybody - he struggled with his thoughts and this was the result. It was not that bad. Guess I was tired trying to locate the right quotes, I had found the night before, got desperate from frustration and posted this. I never did come up with that site. It seemed it just disappeared for some strange reason.

[Quark]

If nothing else we can disagree with this person and essay but we can salvage some ideas from it and different ways of looking at the themes and story.

That's fair enough. Let's look at the ideas; specifically, let's look at his explanation of the phrase "in her womb was ice":


Having kids together was the only thing they shared, yet “the utter isolation of the human soul, the child within her was a weight apart from her…in her womb was ice of fear…” (86-87). She now has the hinder of his child in her. Finding no love from her husband’s dead malicious body, how could Elizabeth find the strength to love her unborn child? The fear inside of her reaches far beyond her child, “She was grateful to death, which restored the truth…But from death, her ultimate master, she winced with fear and shame” (87-88). It was as she was reborn. Now she has to move on by living rather than dwelling on what had been or rather what had not been in life. Realizing that she had kids to provide for and a home to maintain, Elizabeth found the strength to move on.

The argument is a little weak. Elizabeth is worried about providing for her children early in the story, but her attitudes change dramatically in this part of the story. Mrs. Bates' womb turns to ice when she contemplates the individuality of her husband's character. She isn't worried about providing for the family at this point. Context is crucial for understanding this passage, and I don't think our critic took that into consideration. As for the other argument--that Mrs. Bates is anxiety-stricken about the demands on her love that the children will make--I don't know where this is coming from. I don't remember reading anywhere that Elizabeth believes she doesn't have enough love to give to her children. She actually considers herself an excellent mother. We, the readers, might want to qualify that assessment, but I don't think anyone would suggest she didn't love her son and daughter. The argument seems to mistake Elizabeth's bitterness for genuine hatred, and I think readers would lose much of importance of this story if they believed that.

[Janine]

That's fair enough. Let's look at the ideas; specifically, let's look at his explanation of the phrase "in her womb was ice":



Quark, I read your post and enjoyed reading it. I can't comment now - going out again. I need a short break, but will be back later to post on these thoughts.

[Janine]

Quark, sorry, I can't comment today, either. I have a bad stiff neck - came on me in the night. I hope it improves today but I must limit my time on this computer at least for today. Hopefully I will be back soon. J

[Janine]

Found some interesting things online in reference to chrysantemums. Thought I would share them:

Interesting to note is that John Steinbeck also wrote a short story entitled “The Chysanthemums” and uses the fall flower symbolically.


"The Chrysanthemums" by John Steinbeck illustrates through subtle symbolism a woman's struggle for sexual identity. Elisa Allen, the protagonist of the story, cultivates a likeness of herself through her chrysanthemum garden, but fragments of her are also depicted by key objects encountered during the story. Elisa tries hard to project a tough, masculine image of herself rather than the feminine alternative, but the effort results in nothing but a facade.

http://www.northharriscollege.com/30939/
about the story


an essay on O of C

http://www.azete.com/view/5929


Odour of Chrysanthemums as a Classic


The claim that "Odour of Chrysanthemums" is a well-crafted story is hardly brave or risky, for many would agree. For instance, the man who in a sense discovered Lawrence, English Review editor F. M. Ford, said this about "Odour of Chrysanthemums":

"The very title makes an impact on the mind. You get at once the knowledge that this is not, whatever else it may turn out, either a frivolous or even a gay springtime story. Chrysanthemums are not only flowers of the autumn: they are the autumn itself. . . This man knows what he wants. He sees the scene of his story exactly. He has an authoritative mind. (Ford 257)"

As a fiction editor, he is quite receptive to Lawrence's descriptive gifts. He is impressed with Lawrence's sense of purpose. But readers needn't assess the short story by Ford's methods alone. Modern readers have a very different perspective than Lawrence's contemporaries, ensuring that many different analyses of "Odour of Chrysanthemums" are possible.

[Janine]

some photos of chysanthemums - thought we could use some color in this thread! haha - enjoy!

http://i125.photobucket.com/albums/p70/sealace/Chrysanthemums.jpg

http://i125.photobucket.com/albums/p70/sealace/blue-chrysanthemums.jpg

http://i125.photobucket.com/albums/p70/sealace/chrysanthemum-annual.jpg

http://i125.photobucket.com/albums/p70/sealace/chrysanthemums-viceroy.jpg

A splash of color for the season ~ Happy autumn!

[Virgil]

some photos of chysanthemums - thought we could use some color in this thread! haha - enjoy!

http://i125.photobucket.com/albums/p70/sealace/chrysanthemum-annual.jpg

A splash of color for the season ~ Happy autumn!

Thanks Janine. I've never seen a mum with a pattern before. I thought they were all solid colors. Pretty.

[Janine]

Thanks Janine. I've seen a mum with a pattern before. I thought they were all solid colors. Pretty.

Virgil, I thought this one was unusual but I found it listed in the section of a flower site as a chrysanthemum. I think it looks something like a gloriosa daisy. Not sure I spelled that right. Maybe those are in the chrysanthemum family, who knows? Thought a little spash of color to this thread might liven things up and get some attention.

Happy to report that my neck seems to be getting better. I just ate some 'coffee' ice-cream - maybe that is why....haha...also ate chicken soup two days now - they say that will cure colds; maybe it cures sore necks, too.:lol:

Quark, Here is what you wrote before and has been awaiting my reply:



The argument is a little weak. Elizabeth is worried about providing for her children early in the story, but her attitudes change dramatically in this part of the story. Mrs. Bates' womb turns to ice when she contemplates the individuality of her husband's character.
Yes, the argument is weak and also inconsistent. I agree with that. Was it when she felt her husband individual, or appart from her, or having little to do with her at all, that she felt "in her womb was ice of fear"? To be honest with you I can't clearly come up with a concise idea in my own brain as to what that means exactly or exactly what Lawrence meant it to mean. We would have to have Lawrence here himself to be sure of the correct interpretation.


She isn't worried about providing for the family at this point. Context is crucial for understanding this passage, and I don't think our critic took that into consideration.
Most likely that is true. One would have to place it into the proper context to see how she feels about her future. How she will provide without a husband for her children, one being unborn, as yet, will be a big deal and a large responsibility...I don't think she has fully thought about that yet. At this juncture in the story she would still be in the 'shock' stage and then 'grieving' would have to follow, so it would take time to consider her real future and the children's. It would be a tough situation for any woman to be faced with, let alone one from that era.

As for the other argument--that Mrs. Bates is anxiety-stricken about the demands on her love that the children will make--I don't know where this is coming from. I don't remember reading anywhere that Elizabeth believes she doesn't have enough love to give to her children. She actually considers herself an excellent mother. We, the readers, might want to qualify that assessment, but I don't think anyone would suggest she didn't love her son and daughter. The argument seems to mistake Elizabeth's bitterness for genuine hatred, and I think readers would lose much of importance of this story if they believed that. I agree that I don't see her bitter against her children or not loving them. I think she might be in so much shock and then being pregnant would cause her to feel this cold fear in her womb suddenly, but I don't think she feels any hatred for the unborn child, or her other children. She seemed to be a good mother, but we only get a short glimpse into her in this mother role in this story, don't we? So we have to assume she is responsible and a good mother and will provide for the welfare of her children, now that the husband is gone.

[Quark]

Janine, should I reply to your post, or are we going to read something else here soon? The conversation has thinned out somewhat, so it might be time we move on.

[Janine]

Janine, should I reply to your post, or are we going to read something else here soon? The conversation has thinned out somewhat, so it might be time we move on.
Hi
Quark, I don't know; is there anything to respond to? I was mostly responding to your post. Yes, it is probably time to move on, as you said. We could have discussed a few other small points, but I think probably, we did cover the basics and main themes, what do you think?

I have good news for you! I have ordered tonight a audio set - 3 CDs of "The Ravine and Other Short Stories" by Anton Chekhov. I found it on Amazon when searching for Kenneth Branagh items since I am a big fan and he is narrating them. On the Naxo site I could sample one - quite animated and good. So I figure after "Sons and Lovers" winds down and this thread goes to another 'shorter' short story; we have a few in mind, then I can probably rejoin the Chekhov thread, what do you think? Could we do one of the stories in the Naxo book collection next? I will send you the list.

[Virgil]

Any chance we could do a short story called "Sun"? I mentioned it in the Sons and Lovers thread.

[Janine]

Any chance we could do a short story called "Sun"? I mentioned it in the Sons and Lovers thread.

Virgil, Yes, sure....let's start "Sun" - at least reading it. I just found it in my books -"Volume II" of "The Complete Short Stories - D.H.Lawrence". Is it listed on this site as well? I will go check after I post this. I like to be able to quote from the story. It is not a real long story which is good....will give us a bit of a break.:D Why don't you introduce it formally to the group this time, but don't give away the story.

[Virgil]

OK let's start the Lawrence short story "Sun." I will post a hort summary shortly, but if you don't have the story in hardcopy, you can read it electronically here: http://www.geocities.com/andtherewaswater/Archive/Sun.htm.

It may be short enough to print outright if you don't want to read off the computer screen. Just check print preview for the amount of pages it will consume.

[Quark]

"The Sun"? Hmm, I haven't heard of that one. What's it about? I'll probably join in the discussion in a week or two.



Hi [B]I have good news for you! I have ordered tonight a audio set - 3 CDs of "The Ravine and Other Short Stories" by Anton Chekhov. I found it on Amazon when searching for Kenneth Branagh items since I am a big fan and he is narrating them. On the Naxo site I could sample one - quite animated and good. So I figure after "Sons and Lovers" winds down and this thread goes to another 'shorter' short story; we have a few in mind, then I can probably rejoin the Chekhov thread, what do you think? Could we do one of the stories in the Naxo book collection next? I will send you the list.

Oh, I'm not going to be able to restart the Chekhov discussion until after Thanksgiving. I have applications due Dec. 15! Everything should be done and in the mail by Dec. 1, though. After that I have nine long months I can devote to nothing but writing these frivolous posts.

[Janine]

"The Sun"? Hmm, I haven't heard of that one. What's it about? I'll probably join in the discussion in a week or two.

Hummm....I would surmise it is about the sun....:lol: so better wear your dark glasses:cool: when you are reading...also use sunscreen...we might all get a sunburn....:blush: ;)



Oh, I'm not going to be able to restart the Chekhov discussion until after Thanksgiving. I have applications due Dec. 15! Everything should be done and in the mail by Dec. 1, though. After that I have nine long months I can devote to nothing but writing these frivolous posts.

:bawling: Boo..hoo - No, just kidding...Well, that is fine with me! First off, my CD set won't come for awhile yet - could be weeks. Then, I have to listen to it, so that I can get ahead of you this time around.:brow: Ok, so that should take us well into Dec., when you can devote your precious time to frivolous posts, like this one.
Hey, Quark....frivolous...?...frivolous...?....*gasping *....I thought we were doing the world a great service on here.....all the countless hours I have spend...and now you call them frivolous!....Well 'frivoli' to you, too! ::smash: : :nod: :lol:


OK let's start the Lawrence short story "Sun." I will post a hort summary shortly, but if you don't have the story in hardcopy, you can read it electronically here: http://www.geocities.com/andtherewaswater/Archive/Sun.htm.

It may be short enough to print outright if you don't want to read off the computer screen. Just check print preview for the amount of pages it will consume.

:lol: Virgil is it me or am I am I in a silly mood tonight? Be sure and read my post to Q.
Hey, V, what is a 'hort' summary? :lol: :lol:...
And if I read it 'electronically'... will it hurt my vision????:cool:

:eek: Should have a disclaimer *read at your own risk*:lol:

You two are a comedy team!

[Quark]

Hummm....I would surmise it is about the sun....:lol: so better wear your dark glasses:cool: when you are reading...also use sunscreen...we might all get a sunburn....:blush: ;)

You're really getting into a silly mood here tonight. Of course, I would be too if I stayed up until 3:00 in the morning every day. Seriously, get some sleep. I check the forum at about 6 and see you posting. Then, I leave for the bar, proceed to get drunk, go to a friend's house, drive home however unsafe it may be, and find you're still posting at 2:27 A.M. Something is wrong about this.


Hey,Quark....frivolous...?...frivolous...?....*gas ping*....I thought we were doing the world a great service on here.....all the countless hours I have spend...and now you call them frivolous!....Well 'frivoli' to you, too! ::smash: : :nod: :lol:

Don't be offended. I only meant my posts were frivolous. Have you noticed how freely I'm making these completely groundless assertions? Look at the Sons and Lovers thread. I just argued that the novel wasn't worth rereading. What was I thinking? I didn't mean it like that; but, there you go, totally frivolous remarks from me without any second thought.

[Janine]

You're really getting into a silly mood here tonight. Of course, I would be too if I stayed up until 3:00 in the morning every day. Seriously, get some sleep. I check the forum at about 6 and see you posting. Then, I leave for the bar, proceed to get drunk, go to a friend's house, drive home however unsafe it may be, and find you're still posting at 2:27 A.M. Something is wrong about this.

:yawnb: I don't know, but if you keep this up, I will be up till 5 in the morning today - already it is 12:15 AM - the next day, just dark out still! I have never been so entertained in my life as tonight!
Thanks!.... and you probably were not even trying to be funny.:brow:
And did I happen to mention *I have had coffee!!!*?:eek:

But seriously...you are correct....and then I go to bed at 3, try to read, get sleepy and then I get insomnia - that is my newest ailment! :( It is called 'brain overload' and 'fear of senility'! ;)



Don't be offended. I only meant my posts were frivolous. Have you noticed how freely I'm making these completely groundless assertions? Look at the Sons and Lovers thread. I just argued that the novel wasn't worth rereading. What was I thinking? I didn't mean it like that; but, there you go, totally frivolous remarks from me without any second thought.

:D Hey, I know my words are of value! ;) :lol: duh, what was I saying.....(that senility setting in, most likely) ....well, value some nights... my words are of value, but very very doubtful tonight. These are the most frivolous posts, I have written on Lit Net. I hope no one goes researching on the web and is directed to these non-sensical (is that even a word?) Lawrence posts. :blush:

Yes, I was just over there in S&L - say what (?) - what where you thinking anyway???? Yes - it was a pretty 'frivolous' statement you made. Did you see my comments?

And by the way it depends on where you live and how many beers you consume to consider that I stay up late!:)

[Quark]

:yawnb: I don't know, but if you keep this up, I will be up till 5 in the morning today - already it is 12:15 AM - the next day, just dark out still! I have never been so entertained in my life as tonight!

I probably should go to bed then. Besides, we're burying the Lawrence discussion with our little back-and-forth.


and you probably were not even trying to be funny.

Were you laughing at me?


Yes, I was just over there in S&L - say what (?) - what where you thinking anyway???? Yes - it was a pretty 'frivolous' statement you made. Did you see my comments?

Yes, and I tried to set everything right, but then I used the word "contented" in a weird, misleading way. So, tomorrow I will have to explain that I meant that I thought that Paul was in a better place at the end, not that he was contented at the end. How could he be contented? He's almost suicidally depressed at the end.

[Janine]

I probably should go to bed then. Besides, we're burying the Lawrence discussion with our little back-and-forth.

Yes, I am feeling a little dizzy - going back-and-forth...like on a see-saw or something. Now everyone can see why I am suffering a stiff neck this week. I should head to bed and work on reading the rest of the novel.



Were you laughing at me? Never...'at you', only 'with you'......but you are really funny sometimes! :lol:




Yes, and I tried to set everything right, but then I used the word "contented" in a weird, misleading way. So, tomorrow I will have to explain that I meant that I thought that Paul was in a better place at the end, not that he was contented at the end. How could he be contented? He's almost suicidally depressed at the end.

I saw that and I am proud of you. It was a very good post. I understood what you meant. It is not easy to understand the feelings at the end of that book. I don't think Lawrence meant it to be fully understood or realised. He knew one would think on it for a long time. He wrote something to this effect in a letter. I will try and dig it up to post. He felt if you read a book once, it was not enough, and if you did and had it all figured out, it was not a good book. One had to appreciate a book by reading it countless times, at least twice. He did so himself - amazing don't you think?... considering the body of work he produced in his short life - died in mid 40's of TB. I have to admire the man - he really did a lot under many obstacles.
Anyway, Paul is not 'content' as you say, and yet there is a sense of his 'accepting' his mother as his fate, even though she has died. That makes it very sad and tragic because what is there for him then? Where does that leave him or lead him - just a dead end really.

[Virgil]

:lol: Virgil is it me or am I am I in a silly mood tonight? Be sure and read my post to Q.
Hey, V, what is a 'hort' summary? :lol: :lol:...
And if I read it 'electronically'... will it hurt my vision????:cool:

:eek: Should have a disclaimer *read at your own risk*:lol:

Boy you two were in some silly mood that night. How much did you guys drink? :p


OK let's start the Lawrence short story "Sun." I will post a hort summary shortly, but if you don't have the story in hardcopy, you can read it electronically here: http://www.geocities.com/andtherewaswater/Archive/Sun.htm.

It may be short enough to print outright if you don't want to read off the computer screen. Just check print preview for the amount of pages it will consume.

OK, let's get the discussion going. A short summary as I promised. This is the story of Juliet and Maurice, husband and wife who are having some marital problems, and where Juliet is having a sort of nervous breakdown. She is told by doctors to go to a mediterranian island and rest by taking in the sun. The story is mostly of her at the island, slowly giving herself to the sun, and the psychological change that occurs. I think Amalia in a PM to me said it best, this is a peotic story, and yes since the plot is relatively simple, Lawrence hieghtens his language to a poetic level. At the end, Maurice meets up with her at the island, where Juliet is in a quandry about what to do next. I think that is a succinct summary. If anyone has anything to add, pleaswe do so. Otherwise I'm willing to start talking about th openning paragraghs. Perhaps I'll start on that tonight.

[Janine]

Virgil, ahead of me again? *groan groan*...why am I such a 'slow-poke' these days?
I was hoping to read the story tonight, in full, so I can be in this discussion at the same time as all of you. I was thinking we could get started tomorrow; but I guess if you comment tonight and keep it to the first part, first paragraphs or first page, and don't jump ahead, that would be logical and workable for me.

I did read the first page (online) the other night. I liked it so far very much. Know I will like this one if it is poeticly written. I could sense that from just the very first page; the text flowed so beautifully.

Good summary/introduction, Virgil, and glad you did not tell the ending. I want to be surprised on that note.

Yes, pretty silly the other night - but hey, aren't we here to have some fun, too? Everyone had departed and gone to bed. Late night fatique can encourage silliness. I am getting out my sunglasses for my reading of 'sun' just the same. :lol:

Hey V, don't you like it when I am Bad, but not Mad, and probably Dangerous!??? :lol:

Check out S&L's thread - I actually wrote a pretty sensible post in there today and a long one at that!

[Janine]

GOOD NEWS!!!!

Hello all - Quite to be marveled at is that me, Janine, the 'slow-poke' reader has read the short story - the whole thing last night - before bed. I felt totally 'sundrenched' and 'aglow', as I faded off to 'dreamland'.

Yes, I liked it very much, Virgil; you choose a good one this time. Good thinking and it was not so long. It was a lovely relaxed fluid poetic read also which I find to be so enjoyable in Lawrence's work. I thought descriptions were simplistic at times and yet behind them was a much deeper meaning. I will be anxious to hear what you have to say about the story and the various elements in it. It reads very much like a fairytale fable or a dream; at least this is what I felt as I was reading it. I thought that towards the end there was also a bit of humor which I have never considered in L's work and yet I have heard some critics say this about various scenes in his writings. It may very well be so, since I now noticed little parts or comments, in the last story we did, that seemed almost laughable or brought a bit of a chuckle as I was reading. Although the story was so serious, I felt at times that the mother was so angry, she was nearly 'commical' in her comments, perhaps to the children, before she found out the true fate of her husband. I would have to go back and review it, and I am not going to now. I am happy to be going onto other stories. But the point is that Lawrence was not a dire person - he did have some humorous times in his own life. He loved to play charades and he loved to imitate people. I have read accounts where he got a roomful of people quite in a roar of laughter. I suppose he was pretty well rounded. If you read his comments on his critics some of them are truly hilarious.
I laughed a number of times towards the end of this story - 'Sun' - when the husband arrived. I thought that scene so humorous.

Another thought stood out to me and that was to recall the role the sun played in the L book I just read, "The Plumed Serpent". I feel in that the 'sun' tranformed, or 'transfigured', Kate, am I correct? We did not get a chance to discuss the book, but maybe someday, in the future. I realise you would have to review it and re-read probably and there are so many books yet to be read and so many other authors that time is of the essense. But we could just loosely discuss. I know you did not feel it to be L's best, and neither did I but it does contain some interesting aspects and some lovely passages.

Interesting that this story 'Sun' begins in NYC apparently and they travel down the Hudson to the sea and across the Atlantic to is it Greece? Somewhere 'Grecian' was mentioned. Do you know when this story was published. It is in the second volume of Short Stories. I wondered if it was written when L spend some brief time in the northern part of NJ; I have read that in a biography recently and really was surprised to hear it. I imagine it was to be in close contact with his publishers. I like the way the text suggested but did not say outright that they were passing the Statue of Liberty:


The ship ebbed on, the Hudson seemed interminable. But at last they were round the bend, and there was the poor harvest of lights at the Battery. Liberty flung up her torch in a tantrum. There was the wash of the sea.

Wow, that is simple, but amazing prose. It is appropriate and one feels the 'journey of departing' in one simplistic paragraph. I love the line 'Liberty flung up her torch in a tantrum' and the last line leaves me thinking now on the upcoming journey, across the wide ocean, in the suggestion of this line 'There was the wash of the sea' - marvelous!

I think that it is interesting that she is leaving Liberty to find liberty. Also, in Lawrence's statement 'Liberty' becomes a character in the story, as does later - the 'sun'. Fascinating and quite different than other things I have read by L. In fact, this passage reminded me of the poem by Carl Sandburg - "Fog' where he very simplistically describes 'fog', as though it were a cat. One gets such a sense of the fog infiltrating one's senses. Do you know the poem? I believe it is by Sandburg, but I will check that in some books or online to be certain.

I guess I beat you to your first post, Virgil. Sorry, since I know you were holding up waiting for me to finish reading. Thanks so much for that!Hope you don't mind that I posted these few comments first. I guess I was anxious to make a comment, now that I read the story and it is so fresh in my mind. But do back up a bit if you would, and tell us what you think of the opening passages because I know you will have some really good ideas and comments on that great opening to the story.

[Virgil]

Glad you like it Janine. I'll post something on it later.

[amalia1985]

I think that the "sunny" place is in Italy, and I agree with everything Janine said before, so I won't say much. What I have to say is that I was attracted by the ending, Maurice's attitude, and Juliet's closing thoughts, but we will discuss much more about it, so I won't say anything. Virgil, you made a great choice!!!

[Janine]

I think that the "sunny" place is in Italy, and I agree with everything Janine said before, so I won't say much. What I have to say is that I was attracted by the ending, Maurice's attitude, and Juliet's closing thoughts, but we will discuss much more about it, so I won't say anything. Virgil, you made a great choice!!!

Amalia, I thought it was Italy, too, at first but then things lead me to think of Greece. I thought Italy since Lawrence, called Lorenzo there, lived in Italy a long stretch of time, so he would know it well, and the sun in Italy is something he wrote often about. It is prominent in his travel works. If you have not read them, amalia, you must. They are so intimate and interesting. One feels you are taking the journey at the side of Lawrence, himself. I loved those books!

Yes, please don't jump ahead to the ending, but I just wanted to mention the little bits of humor that were there near the end. Did you think so, as well as I? The 'glancing', etc. I don't want to say anymore, for others who have not read the story yet. Let us try and take this story sequencually, and see how it develops and builds up to a change in Julliet. Don't you agree that that would be less confusing and more logical? Oft times in these threads, we seem to charge right ahead to the ending and the main theme. I would like to mull it all over, since we do have a month or more to discuss it. I know that our best discussion on here and on book threads have had some kind of 'construct' such as this and they were more all-encompassing and engrossing.

[Virgil]

As to whether it's a Greek or Italian island, I've come to the conclusion that it's an Italian that was Greek in ancient times. Here are a few of the Greek references:

Marinina was a woman of Magna Gracia, and had far memories. and

So she remembered that the Greeks had said, a white, unsunned body was fishy and unhealthy.and

Maurice was standing grey-faced, in his grey felt hat and his dark grey suit, at a loss among the vine terraces. He looked pathetically out of place, in that resplendent sunshine and the grace of the old Greek world; like a blot of ink on the pale, sun-glowing slope.

But Marinina is referred to as the "Signora" and I think I caught a couple of other Italianism. Perhaps Lawrence just blurred it togther, but I think there is significance that there are allusions to the ancient Greek world.

Does anyone know what "Magna Gracia" means or refers to?

Oh edit. I found this:

The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language: Fourth Edition. 2000.

Magna Graecia

SYLLABICATION: Magna Grae·cia
PRONUNCIATION: grsh
The ancient Greek seaport colonies of southern Italy and Sicily from the eighth to the fourth century b.c. Cumae and Tarantum (modern Taranto) remained significant after the decline of the other colonies.

That settles that. My suspicion was correct.

Interesting the story starts at midnight, where Maurice and Juliet are departing. Yes, Janine it is significant that they are departing from NY, the heart of the modern world. And very interesting observation Amalia that she is departing from the supposed freedom under the Statue of Liberty to the freedom of the island. I found these paragraphs significant from the openning:


She remembered how bitterly they had wanted to get away from one another, he
and she. The emotion of parting gave a slight tug at her emotions, but only
caused the iron that had gone into her soul to gore deeper.

So, they looked at their sleeping son, and the father's eyes were wet. But it
is not the wetting of the eyes which counts, it is the deep iron rhythm of
habit, the year-long, life-long habits; the deep-set stroke of power.

And in their two lives the power was hostile, his and hers. Like two engines
running at variance with each other, they shattered one another.

Notice the metaphors and similies: "hot iron into her soul," "iron rythm of habit," and "two engines running at variance." This story is a story of regeneration by abandoning the modern world to repose in the old ancient world. Unfortunately we do not really know what has caused this relationship to reach this crisis, but we can suspect that it has to do with the rituals of the modern world are not conducive a good relationship, in opposition of course the rituals of the old world.

[Janine]

Interesting the story starts at midnight, where Maurice and Juliet are departing. Yes, Janine it is significant that they are departing from NY, the heart of the modern world. And very interesting observation Amalia that she is departing from the supposed freedom under the Statue of Liberty to the freedom of the island. I found these paragraphs significant from the openning:


She remembered how bitterly they had wanted to get away from one another, he
and she. The emotion of parting gave a slight tug at her emotions, but only
caused the iron that had gone into her soul to gore deeper.

So, they looked at their sleeping son, and the father's eyes were wet. But it
is not the wetting of the eyes which counts, it is the deep iron rhythm of
habit, the year-long, life-long habits; the deep-set stroke of power.

And in their two lives the power was hostile, his and hers. Like two engines
running at variance with each other, they shattered one another.

Yes, that does seem to be significant that she is leaving at midnight and this starts the story.
Hey, Virgil, am I crazy or what? Didn't I say that, about the 'freedom of the statue and the freedom of the island'. Note:


Wow, that is simple, but amazing prose. It is appropriate and one feels the 'journey of departing' in one simplistic paragraph. I love the line 'Liberty flung up her torch in a tantrum' and the last line leaves me thinking now on the upcoming journey, across the wide ocean, in the suggestion of this line 'There was the wash of the sea' - marvelous!

I think that it is interesting that she is leaving Liberty to find liberty. Also, in Lawrence's statement 'Liberty' becomes a character in the story, as does later - the 'sun'. Fascinating and quite different than other things I have read by L. In fact, this passage reminded me of the poem by Carl Sandburg - "Fog' where he very simplistically describes 'fog', as though it were a cat. One gets such a sense of the fog infiltrating one's senses. Do you know the poem? I believe it is by Sandburg, but I will check that in some books or online to be certain.



Notice the metaphors and similies: "hot iron into her soul," "iron rythm of habit," and "two engines running at variance." This story is a story of regeneration by abandoning the modern world to repose in the old ancient world. Unfortunately we do not really know what has caused this relationship to reach this crisis, but we can suspect that it has to do with the rituals of the modern world are not conducive a good relationship, in opposition of course the rituals of the old world.

Nice observations. Those are great metaphors/similies! I also like "..,they shattered one another." Yes, so right - leaving the modern world to enter into the ancient one for renewal and regeneration. It does seem the relationship has suffered under the restrictions of society and the industrial world, doesn't it? Good word - rituals. :)

[amalia1985]

You two made excelelnt remarks, in fact, you answered a lot of my questions regarding the beginning of the story. I would like to ask whether the choice of the heroine's name has any special significance. I would dare to suggest- although, I'm probably wrong, but never mind- that "Juliet" may stand for the "freedom" theme, influenced by Shakepeare's heroine. It is an exaggeration, but I wanted to say that.

I would also want to say that we have, again, the influence of Nature in the beginning. The sea, the sun, notice how black colour is once again significant, "the black night", and I think that the phrase "...the serpent of chaos that has lived forever", is important. I think-and correct if I am wrong-that the serpent is the symbol of wisdom, and temptation, of course. I believe the "Temptation" here is the escape from the suffocating life she has led up to this point.

In the three paragraphs you emntioned, which are some of the most telling in the story, I could see another example of an unhappy marriage, coming from Lawrence. The phrase "...they had wanted to get away from one another..." is very important. Also, the word "power" is something to contmplate on. I think that Maurice wants the power to prevent his wife from the Change, and Juliet would want the chance to lead her own way of living. I think that the contrast in the phrases "All ashore", "Out to Sea", depicts this ''fight", respectively. Maurice' s attitude towards life has to do with the safety of habbit, as I would say, and the "Out to Sea" command emphasises Juliet's desire for the freedom of exploring life.

[Virgil]

Hey, Virgil, am I crazy or what? Didn't I say that, about the 'freedom of the statue and the freedom of the island'. Note:

Oh I'm sorry janine. I had read the posts earlier in the day and I guess i mixed up who said what.


You two made excelelnt remarks, in fact, you answered a lot of my questions regarding the beginning of the story. I would like to ask whether the choice of the heroine's name has any special significance. I would dare to suggest- although, I'm probably wrong, but never mind- that "Juliet" may stand for the "freedom" theme, influenced by Shakepeare's heroine. It is an exaggeration, but I wanted to say that.

Very good Amalia. I think you're right. That is a play where sun and moon and light and dark are in constant play. You reminded me of this famous line from the play: "But soft! What light through yonder window breaks? It is the east and Juliet is the sun."


I would also want to say that we have, again, the influence of Nature in the beginning. The sea, the sun, notice how black colour is once again significant, "the black night", and I think that the phrase "...the serpent of chaos that has lived forever", is important. I think-and correct if I am wrong-that the serpent is the symbol of wisdom, and temptation, of course. I believe the "Temptation" here is the escape from the suffocating life she has led up to this point.
I have to say that the serpent confuses me. Yes there is that metaphor of the serpent at the beginning, but there is also the snake that shows up in part II I think that threatens the boy. I'm not sure what to make of it. But certainly Lawrence was after something. Wisdom and temptation is certainly one part of the symbol, I agree. I can't help but feel that this is a rather complex symbol, multifaceted. Perhaps we can figure it out by the end of our discussion of this story. The snake is a creature that likes to sit in the sun.


In the three paragraphs you emntioned, which are some of the most telling in the story, I could see another example of an unhappy marriage, coming from Lawrence. The phrase "...they had wanted to get away from one another..." is very important. Also, the word "power" is something to contmplate on. I think that Maurice wants the power to prevent his wife from the Change, and Juliet would want the chance to lead her own way of living. I think that the contrast in the phrases "All ashore", "Out to Sea", depicts this ''fight", respectively. Maurice' s attitude towards life has to do with the safety of habbit, as I would say, and the "Out to Sea" command emphasises Juliet's desire for the freedom of exploring life.
Good points on power. Juliet seems to have all the power in this story, which is quite different from most of Lawrence's stories. Yes, on Maurice's safety of habit, but Juliet goes on to form another habit. The bulk of the story is Juliet's habit of sitting in the sun. So it's not so much habit, but the type of habit.

You know on reconsideration I take back my statement that Lawrence doesn't write stories with women having power. But usually women having power is not a good thing in a Lawrence story. (Sorry, he would definitely be considered a male chauvinist by today's standards.) But here it is a good thing. Juliet (and by suggestion even Marianina) have established what Lawrence would consider a wholesome life. Let me also prefigure what I'll argue later in that there is a male power in this story that orients that wholesome life, and it's not Maurice, but the sun as male diety. But that's for later discussion. ;)

[Janine]

Oh I'm sorry janine. I had read the posts earlier in the day and I guess i mixed up who said what.

Oh...ok....you are forgiven...:) Anyway, Amalia might have said it too...we are like twins sometimes....haha;) right, A?


Very good Amalia. I think you're right. That is a play where sun and moon and light and dark are in constant play. You reminded me of this famous line from the play: "But soft! What light through yonder window breaks? It is the east and Juliet is the sun."

Funny, Amalia and I think the same way. I had noticed the significance of the name 'Juliet', as well, and wondered about it relating to Shakespeare's heroine. I think this quote is terrific and makes this connection so evident and clear now to us all. I agree with the idea and the aspects of the contrasts of 'dark and light' and 'shadow and sunlight' and the 'moon and the sun'...there are many more I am sure, throughout the story. Very significant. Imagery is everything to Lawrence. He paints with words exquisitely.

This story also reminds me so of "The Plumed Serpent" - the sunlight plays such a huge part in that story. I think this all ties in with the themes presented in that book - the sun worship and the various other symbolic ritualistic meanings; also the moon. I don't know exactly the connection, but it is suggesting this to me very strongly. Was it written around the same time period, do you know, V?


I have to say that the serpent confuses me. Yes there is that metaphor of the serpent at the beginning, but there is also the snake that shows up in part II I think that threatens the boy. I'm not sure what to make of it. But certainly Lawrence was after something. Wisdom and temptation is certainly one part of the symbol, I agree. I can't help but feel that this is a rather complex symbol, multifaceted. Perhaps we can figure it out by the end of our discussion of this story. The snake is a creature that likes to sit in the sun.

Right away I thought of a poem L wrote about a 'snake' or 'serpent' in the grass. I will look it up and post later. I also thought of "The Plumed Serpent", as well, again in the tribal mystical sense of the way it is presented in that book. So true that the sun is serpent-like and masters Juliet in the beginning of the story. It seems that she is filled with it's warm and sexuality and the full spirit of the sun. She gives herself over to the sun's power and only then does she relax and become her true self. She becomes complete and sensual after bathing in the sun and absorbing it's power and warmth. It is all quite complex, I believe, and as you said - mulifaceted. It all relays to me this whole unique concept L had in his later novels; and as you know, some were 'way out' and pretty extreme. Their meanings are not easily comprehended or fully understood. I keep on trying to understand it all though which makes it more fascinating.

Hey, Virgil, maybe you need to go back and read your thesis again and fill us in. You know more about "Transfiguration" in L's work than we all do....haha...what do yo say?


Good points on power. Juliet seems to have all the power in this story, which is quite different from most of Lawrence's stories. Yes, on Maurice's safety of habit, but Juliet goes on to form another habit. The bulk of the story is Juliet's habit of sitting in the sun. So it's not so much habit, but the type of habit.

I am thinking of' Lady Chatterly' as well. I think she had some power and some strength as a woman, to confront her husband, as well as Juliet does. I was thinking of Connie, as I read this book. She, too, goes through a whole transformation. I see L's mother as a powerful force in "Sons and Lovers" - don't you and I see her as a strong woman - although it was not necessarily good for Paul in the end. I don't usually feel as though L is all for the men either. I think in his work there is a definite 'war of the sexes' in some sense of the phrase. There is always some sort of struggle between man and woman.



You know on reconsideration I take back my statement that Lawrence doesn't write stories with women having power. But usually women having power is not a good thing in a Lawrence story. (Sorry, he would definitely be considered a male chauvinist by today's standards.) But here it is a good thing. Juliet (and by suggestion even Marianina) have established what Lawrence would consider a wholesome life. Let me also prefigure what I'll argue later in that there is a male power in this story that orients that wholesome life, and it's not Maurice, but the sun as male diety. But that's for later discussion. ;)

Oops ...I see you took back your statement. Oh well, I wrote a few of my own thoughts above. Also is not the man at the end of the story - the one having a picnic with wine outside with his wife representative, in Juliet's eyes, as a sort of sun-god to be longed for? In some sense the sun is now embodied in a real life breathing blood male. I felt that was interesting. I guess I acquired this idea from the book "The Plumed Serpent" since I recently finished that novel. Amalia, maybe you should read it. I think you would see things in it that I did not even interpret - you are so keen and perceptive.

[Virgil]

This story also reminds me so of "The Plumed Serpent" - the sunlight plays such a huge part in that story. I think this all ties in with the themes presented in that book - the sun worship and the various other symbolic ritualistic meanings; also the moon. I don't know exactly the connection, but it is suggesting this to me very strongly. Was it written around the same time period, do you know, V?

Right away I thought of a poem L wrote about a 'snake' or 'serpent' in the grass. I will look it up and post later. I also thought of "The Plumed Serpent", as well, again in the tribal mystical sense of the way it is presented in that book. So true that the sun is serpent-like and masters Juliet in the beginning of the story. It seems that she is filled with it's warm and sexuality and the full spirit of the sun. She gives herself over to the sun's power and only then does she relax and become her true self. She becomes complete and sensual after bathing in the sun and absorbing it's power and warmth. It is all quite complex, I believe, and as you said - mulifaceted. It all relays to me this whole unique concept L had in his later novels; and as you know, some were 'way out' and pretty extreme. Their meanings are not easily comprehended or fully understood. I keep on trying to understand it all though which makes it more fascinating.

Hey, Virgil, maybe you need to go back and read your thesis again and fill us in. You know more about "Transfiguration" in L's work than we all do....haha...what do yo say?

Just read a few pages of my thesis, looking for what my ideas were back then. Let me say that this story, "Sun", was written just about immediately after The Plumed Serpent, sometime in 1925. I bet that the imaginative spark for the story occured because he was ill with TB and had to return to Europe. Janine can you look up the details of when the story was written, whether in Eurpoe or while in the US? You have that book on Lawrence's calandar. Also he was having many marital problems with Frieda at this time, so one can see how Lawrence projects himself into Juliet: the trip back to Europe, the return to Italy, the recooping from illness.


So true that the sun is serpent-like and masters Juliet in the beginning of the story. It seems that she is filled with it's warm and sexuality and the full spirit of the sun.
That is an interesting statement, and it may fit, but where do you see that the sun is serpent like?


I am thinking of' Lady Chatterly' as well. I think she had some power and some strength as a woman, to confront her husband, as well as Juliet does. I was thinking of Connie, as I read this book. She, too, goes through a whole transformation.
Yes, over her husband, and how natural was that relationship? And isn't the process of the story her giving up her will to Mellors?

[Janine]

:lol:
Just read a few pages of my thesis, looking for what my ideas were back then. Let me say that this story, "Sun", was written just about immediately after The Plumed Serpent, sometime in 1925. I bet that the imaginative spark for the story occured because he was ill with TB and had to return to Europe. Janine can you look up the details of when the story was written, whether in Eurpoe or while in the US? You have that book on Lawrence's calandar. Also he was having many marital problems with Frieda at this time, so one can see how Lawrence projects himself into Juliet: the trip back to Europe, the return to Italy, the recooping from illness.

Here is what I dug up in a book by Sagar; D.H.Lawrence, "A Calender of his Works"...hummm very nice book and quite informative...:)



December 1925 At Villa Bernarda, Spotorno, Italy.

*12 Dec. To Hon. Dorthy Brett: I had the typing...I send you 'Sun'....I'm still struggling with my 'Gay Ghosts'. Alas and a thousand times alack, it's growing long --too long. Damn it! Even 'Sun' is a bit too long . The typing was probably 'Smile', which Lawrence sent to Nacny Pearn a week later. It was published in New Massesm June 1926 [Finney 3].

'Sun' exists in two versions. Lawrence's own comments suggest that his original story was expurgated for publication in New Coterie, autumn 1926, and the Archer [I]Sun [A35a] and 'The Woman Who Rode Away' [A41] and was not printed in its original form until the Black Sun Press edition in October 1928 [A35b]. On 29 April 1928 lawrence was to write to Harry Crosby: 'Sun is the final MS, and I wish the story had been printed as it stands there, really complete [Huxley 730]. It seems more likely, however, that lawrence was practising a little mild deception on Harry Crosby, and that the original MS corresponded to the first purblished version, and was subsequently burned by Lawrence. See April 1928.
'Gay Ghosts' became 'Ghost of Silence', and, finally, 'Glad Ghosts'.

I thought that whole entry was really interesting from several standpoints. Interesting that the story had several versions, and what Lawrence said about it, being too long.
Yes, you are correct, Virgil, in assuming Lawrence was back in Italy, for convalesent purposes, no doubt. I think after leaving Mexico and New Mexico (he was then diagnosed positively with the TB) he came back to Italy to seek a more restorative environment, in hopes of reviving and recovering his health. This entry above was 1925, so that he lived another 5 yrs and in that time he wrote a number of notable things such as "The Escaped **** (The Man Who Died) and LCL and then the Travel novels. God knows what else - tons of stuff in those 5 yrs. Amazing...and you thought him near death when writing this story....not quite; L was not going to give in to his illness. One his 40th birthday he wrote this entry:


January 1926 At Villa Bernardo, Spotorno.

SUMMARY No, no! I'm forty, and I want, in a good sense, to enjoy my life. Saying my say and seeing other people sup it up doesn't amount to a hill o'beans, as far as I go. I want to waste no time over it. That's why I have an agent. I want my own life to live [Moore 876]. Lawrence wrote The Virgin and the Gypsy [A54], 'Mediterranean in January' and 'Beyond the Rockies' [C139 and CP]

Amazing to think those were the words of someone as ill as Lawrence was.


That is an interesting statement, and it may fit, but where do you see that the sun is serpent like?

Ok, I think maybe you are right and there is no direct reference to the sun as a serpent. I probably was putting the thoughts of the sun together with what I had read in "The Plumed Serpent"...there I believe the sun is referred to at times serpent like or as a serpent. I did recall in this story the beginning with the line "At that moment the sea seemed to heave like the serpent of chaos, that has lived for ever." - therefore I was thinking of Lawrence's reference to things of the past and rituals and traditions, such as with the American Indians in Mexico, and the connection to their manliness and their virility and their sun serpent-like power, because then later, in "Sun" is this part, when Julliet wakes in the morning:


Again a morning when the sun lifted himself naked and molten, sparkling over the seas rim. The house faced south-west. Juliet lay in her bed and watched him rise. It was as if she had never seen the sun rise before. She had never seen the naked sun stand up pure upon the sea-line, shaking the night off himself.

Then a little later are these passages:


She was thinking inside herself, of the sun in his splendour, and her mating with him. Her life was now a whle ritual.She lay always awake, before dawn, watching for the sea's edge. Her joy was when he rose all molten in his nakedness, and threw off blue-white fire, into the tender heaven.
But sometimes he came ruddy, like a big, shy creature. And sometimes slow and crimson red, with a look of anger slowly pushing and shouldering. Sometimes again she could not see him, only the level cloud threw down gold and scarlet from above, as he moved behind the wall.

Wow, that whole passage and the one before is certainly sensual and sexually suggestive, don't you think? Also, I was putting two and two together ,when I came up with this analogy with the snake, which is a deity symbol in Mexico and other places in the world - didn't King Tut's mask have a serpent at the top showing royalty? Ok, so now read the snake passage:


The snake had sunk down, and was reaching away from the coils in which it had been basking asleep, and slowly was easing it's long, gold-brown body into the rocks, with slow curves.......

Hmmm, very suggestive of the male sexual organ/the woman as the 'body of the rocks'. Snakes are usually phallic symbols; I am sure that L was well aware of this fact. Getting all of this down, Q?
then this:

The curious soothing power of the sun filled her, filled the whole place like a charm, and the snake was part of the place, along with her and the child.
This part suggests the 'interconnectability' of all things in nature, cosmos; so that lead me to think and compare passages of the 'sun' and of the 'snake' and I can see similarities in each passage, can you see them? Also, Lawrence uses here the word 'like a charm'....suggesting strongly snake charmers or myticism in my mind. snakes as symbols in various 'sun' worshipping cultures.


Yes, over her husband, and how natural was that relationship? And isn't the process of the story her giving up her will to Mellors?

Well, that is to be debated, probably more so when we read the novel LCL. I would say for now that is a hard question to definitively answer. Is she really giving over to Mellors or is she freeing herself and meeting him in the middle. I am not so sure he is being dominent as far as Connie is concerned. Now who is to know exacly what will happen with Julliet and her husband. He, too, might be transfigured by the sun. He said he would try it in the nude - wow, he is being rather co-operative I would say for such a 'stuffed-shirt'. So maybe he will realize the restorative qualities of basking in the sun and also become part of the snake, woman, child scene. The story is open-ended and so one can draw their own conclusion to how it will go from here on in. It all depends on ones outlook and how you view the ending. Is it sad or is it actually hopeful?

[amalia1985]

I will tempt to link the serpent question-which has attracted my attention, and has greatly confused me, as well- with the following beautiful description of Lawrence, which depicts the influence of Nature, once again.

[QUOTE:
“And though the Atlantic was grey as lava, she did come at last into the sun. Even she had a house above the pluest if seas, with a vast garden, or vineyard, all vines and olives steeply, terrace after terrace, to the strip of coast- plain; and the garden full of secret places, deep groves of lemon far down in the cleft of the earth, and hidden, pure green reservoirs of water; then a spring issuing out of a little cavern, where the old Sicules had drunk before the Greeks came; and a grey goat bloating, stabled in a ancient tomb, with all the niches empty. There was the scent of mimosa and beyond the snow of the volcano” QUOTE]

I think that this is a description of an Eden- like place, and the garden has a certain connotation, as a symbol of the unknown, if you like, something mysterious. I would venture to say that it can be another image for the temptation of escaping the present life.

The repetition of “lava”, and “volcano”, is significant too, in my opinion. I have read that volcano often stands as a symbol for the hidden female nature, at least, in poetry, especially in poems by Elizabeth Bishop and Louise Bogan, but there is a possibility that this symbolism is eligible in our story, as well. You know, just as an idea.

[Dark Muse]

I just fininnsed reading the Sun, and I must say I really did enjoy it. I thought the story read almost like poetic verse. I loved the discription of Juliet's love affair with the sun and the errotic emagery that Lawrence used in the way in which the sun caressed her and penetrated her, embraring her within its warmth and the way she was cast almost as some nymph, frolicking naked under the light of the sun.

One of the things I really enjoyed about the story, was the way Juilet's relationship to her son was portrayed particuarly towrd the beginning.

"The child irritated her, and preyed on her peace of mind. She felt so horribly, ghastly responsible for him: as if she must be responsible for every breath he drew. And that was torture to her, to the child, and to everyone else concerned."

That struck me as very real, I could see, how having a child paricuarly if it is a first child could make a woman feel repressed in a way and as if some of her own freedom and independnce is taken away becasue she has to put so much of herself in the care for this other being.

That is one of the thing I really like about Lawrence the way he likes to expose these seceret parts of the mind and bring them to light and to the surface, though and emotions that most people keep locked away and hidden deep within, he seems to understand so well.

[Janine]

I will tempt to link the serpent question-which has attracted my attention, and has greatly confused me, as well- with the following beautiful description of Lawrence, which depicts the influence of Nature, once again.

Hi amalia, did you read my post directly before yours, long one with the quotes about serpents and their possible significance, or connection to the sun. I hope that did not confuse you; sorry if it did.
I see perfectly what you are getting at here and this is a fascinating thought and idea. 'The Garden of Eden' is certainly an interesting aspect to look at in this story. The text does seems to imply this in that one paragraph; everything is so pure and perfect. I requoted below:



“And though the Atlantic was grey as lava, she did come at last into the sun. Even she had a house above the bluest if seas, with a vast garden, or vineyard, all vines and olives steeply, terrace after terrace, to the strip of coast-plain; and the garden full of secret places, deep groves of lemon far down in the cleft of the earth, and hidden, pure green reservoirs of water; then a spring issuing out of a little cavern, where the old Sicules had drunk before the Greeks came; and a grey goat bleating, stabled in a ancient tomb, with all the niches empty. There was the scent of mimosa and beyond the snow of the volcano”


I think that this is a description of an Eden- like place, and the garden has a certain connotation, as a symbol of the unknown, if you like, something mysterious. I would venture to say that it can be another image for the temptation of escaping the present life.

amalia, smart thinking - this is really good, I had not thought of that exactly in this way, but Virgil did mention before, that this story is a revisiting of an ancient time and world; and your idea is perfect, too. There is a lot going on here, in this one paragraph, don't you agree? It certainly does seem to indicate a sort of paradise and 'Eden' for Juliet, and from what I have read after "Plumed Serpent" Lawrence went back to Italy and turned futher away from the Indian myths, he had explored in that book, and went more in the direction of exploring Christinanity, but not in a 'conventional' way as well know, by reading the book "The Man Who Died". Interesting also to note that in his Italian Travel books, the first book, "Twilight in Italy", Lawrence goes on a long hike/kind of quest into the mountains and observes crossed and shrines enroute and ponders on these. His vision of this road is quite extraordinary. So what I am trying to say, is that at this period in L's writing, I think it totally conceivable, that he is thinking in terms of Eden and Biblical references. Didn't the serpent tempt Eve? I would think this something to think about in reference to the story, as well. At the end the woman, Juliet, is tempted to have an affair with the peasant. This all seems curious to me - the connections.

In the passage you quoted the imagery is lovely and 'idllyic' and very much rooted in the old world, or the Bible, and it's naturalic qualities. I like the reference to "the garden full of secret places". I think this is a direct analogy to a woman's body, since Lawrence used this phrase often in his poetry and in "Lady Chatterly's Lover", etc. Perhaps the woman, Juliet, personifies or embodies the whole idea of the Garden of Eden. She has not only undergone a 'tranformation/transfiguration', but moved back into a time of complete beauty and paradise, and purity. Also, if Lawrence is embodying the Garden of Eden in Juliet, then I would think he is saying that sexuality is totally natural and goes back to day #1 on the earth. This would support all his naturistic ideals. Probably there are direct references in Genesis to that paragraph and each element - like the blue sea, the lemons, reservoirs of water, etc.


The repetition of “lava”, and “volcano”, is significant too, in my opinion. I have read that volcano often stands as a symbol for the hidden female nature, at least, in poetry, especially in poems by Elizabeth Bishop and Louise Bogan, but there is a possibility that this symbolism is eligible in our story, as well. You know, just as an idea.

Oh, I like this symbolism. It is such an interesting thought and would definitely fit the way in which Lawrence thought and wrote. The lava I am sure would indicate the male's role, don't you? I don't know the works of those poets you listed, but I will have to look them up...sounds interesting.

Lawrence wrote a poem called "Snake". I find it strange that in the poem he uses these words to describe the snake:


Being earth-brown, earth golden, from the burning bowels
of the earth
On the day of Sicilian July, with Etna smoking.

In "Sun" he refers to the snake this way: "The snake had sunk down, and was reaching away from the coils in which it had been basking asleep, and slowly was easing it's gold-brown body into the rocks, with slow curves."

Rather similiar, I think, plus again, there is the reference to a 'volcano' in the line the "burning bowels of the earth" (quote from the poem, above) and the name of one. This would certainly correspond to your idea of the volcano and what it suggests or represents. Other parallels seem to be the mentioning of a Siciian July and Etna smoking...again the volcano.
You sent me in an interesting direction thinking, amalia - thanks; good post!:thumbs_up

Then the last three stanzas:


And I thought of the albatross,
And I wished he would come back, my snake.

For he seemed to me again like a king,
Like a king in exile, uncrowned in the underworld,
Now due to be crowned again.

And so, I missed my chance with one of the lords
Of life,
And I have somethings to expiate;
A pettiness.

It would be good to read the entire poem, of course, but one can see what direction Lawrence's mind and thoughts took...snake, serpent, king, diety, etc. Not sure when this poem was written. I will try to look that up. It maybe around the same time period. I believe it was when he lived in Italy but not sure which time period that was.

[Dark Muse]

And I thought of the albatross,
And I wished he would come back, my snake.

For he seemed to me again like a king,
Like a king in exile, uncrowned in the underworld,
Now due to be crowned again.

And so, I missed my chance with one of the lords
Of life,
And I have somethings to expiate;
A pettiness.

That makes me think of the Ancient Mariner by Coleridge

It is intresting the similarties between the imagery of the snake, in the poem Snake, and the story Sun, as well as both having a volcanic reference.

[Janine]

I just fininnsed reading the Sun, and I must say I really did enjoy it. I thought the story read almost like poetic verse. I loved the discription of Juliet's love affair with the sun and the errotic emagery that Lawrence used in the way in which the sun caressed her and penetrated her, embraring her within its warmth and the way she was cast almost as some nymph, frolicking naked under the light of the sun.

Hi Dark Muse, so good to see you here and glad you enjoyed the story. I think everyone who read it liked it very much. It is hard to dislike a story about something as bright and beautiful as the sun. Yes, some others in the thread also thought it read like a long prose poem. I fully agree; it flows so easily and beautifully, with uncomplicated words which put together makeup some lovely poetic prose, with a deeper meaning/symbolism and great 'errotic imagery' - good observation, on your part, and good way of expressing that. I had not thought of the 'nymph' idea, but it certainly could be another thing to consider.


One of the things I really enjoyed about the story, was the way Juilet's relationship to her son was portrayed particuarly towrd the beginning.

Yes, and I think this aspect of the story very worthwhile to review and look at. For one things she has a full 'transformation' about the child, as well as herself. In fact, by the end of the story, she is considering having an affair with the peasant man, just to concieve a child. Strange, when in the beginning of the tale, she could hardly even look at, touch or warm up to her young child.


"The child irritated her, and preyed on her peace of mind. She felt so horribly, ghastly responsible for him: as if she must be responsible for every breath he drew. And that was torture to her, to the child, and to everyone else concerned."


That struck me as very real, I could see, how having a child paricuarly if it is a first child could make a woman feel repressed in a way and as if some of her own freedom and independnce is taken away becasue she has to put so much of herself in the care for this other being.

I think this is realistic and your expressed it very well. Often too, women do suffer true depression, after the birth of a baby. I seems that somewhere the husband eludes to this fact or mentions it to have been the case with Juliet.




That is one of the thing I really like about Lawrence the way he likes to expose these seceret parts of the mind and bring them to light and to the surface, though and emotions that most people keep locked away and hidden deep within, he seems to understand so well.

Yes, I fully agree with your assessment. Lawrence delves far below the surface, and shows what is going on beneath, with 'though and emotions', and also 'subconsious' realms of the mind.

[Dark Muse]

I thought the ending was kind of bittersweet in a way. To a degree Juilet seems to have found a certain peace of mind and contement in the freedom she has found, and yet still she finds herself trapped there, when she is desparing about her dreams of having the affair but instead she will bare another child by Maurice.

It almost makes you wonder, if perhaps the fact that it was Maurice's child the first time, led to her feelings about it in the beginning. For she began to wam up to the child more it seemd when the child began to embrace the sun as she had and become more like her.

One of the things if found intresting was the way in which Maurice seemed at first so timid and awakard around her when he came to visit, almost as if he was afried of her wildness. It was as if her will and perosnality overwelmed him. And I love the way he was descirbed as being all in gray alongside her sun kissed and raidant body, casing him almost as her shadow. Something of which she has to drag along with her, and will never be completely free of.

It is kind of ironic the way Juilet talks of Maurice:

Sometimes he glanced at her frutively, from under his black lashes. He had the gold-gray eyes of an animal that has been caught young, and reared compeltely in captivity"

In a way I think the same could be applied to her, she is like an animal that has been kept in the bond of captivity and yet still yearns for that feralness.

[Virgil]

Wow, such great participation.



I thought that whole entry was really interesting from several standpoints. Interesting that the story had several versions, and what Lawrence said about it, being too long.
Yes, you are correct, Virgil, in assuming Lawrence was back in Italy, for convalesent purposes, no doubt. I think after leaving Mexico and New Mexico (he was then diagnosed positively with the TB) he came back to Italy to seek a more restorative environment, in hopes of reviving and recovering his health. This entry above was 1925, so that he lived another 5 yrs and in that time he wrote a number of notable things such as "The Escaped **** (The Man Who Died) and LCL and then the Travel novels. God knows what else - tons of stuff in those 5 yrs. Amazing...and you thought him near death when writing this story....not quite; L was not going to give in to his illness. One his 40th birthday he wrote this entry:

I think now we have the context under which the story was written down pat. We can see how this reflects his personal life, though I still maintain that doesn't really mean that much.


Hmmm, very suggestive of the male sexual organ/the woman as the 'body of the rocks'. Snakes are usually phallic symbols; I am sure that L was well aware of this fact.
I can buy into this, but still it doesn't seem complete does it?


This part suggests the 'interconnectability' of all things in nature, cosmos; so that lead me to think and compare passages of the 'sun' and of the 'snake' and I can see similarities in each passage, can you see them? Also, Lawrence uses here the word 'like a charm'....suggesting strongly snake charmers or myticism in my mind. snakes as symbols in various 'sun' worshipping cultures.
I like the interconnectivity of things. Let go back and see.


Well, that is to be debated, probably more so when we read the novel LCL. I would say for now that is a hard question to definitively answer. Is she really giving over to Mellors or is she freeing herself and meeting him in the middle. I ...?
Well, we can leave that discussion for the spring.

[Virgil]

I will tempt to link the serpent question-which has attracted my attention, and has greatly confused me, as well- with the following beautiful description of Lawrence, which depicts the influence of Nature, once again.

[QUOTE:
“And though the Atlantic was grey as lava, she did come at last into the sun. Even she had a house above the pluest if seas, with a vast garden, or vineyard, all vines and olives steeply, terrace after terrace, to the strip of coast- plain; and the garden full of secret places, deep groves of lemon far down in the cleft of the earth, and hidden, pure green reservoirs of water; then a spring issuing out of a little cavern, where the old Sicules had drunk before the Greeks came; and a grey goat bloating, stabled in a ancient tomb, with all the niches empty. There was the scent of mimosa and beyond the snow of the volcano” QUOTE]

I think that this is a description of an Eden- like place, and the garden has a certain connotation, as a symbol of the unknown, if you like, something mysterious. I would venture to say that it can be another image for the temptation of escaping the present life.

The repetition of “lava”, and “volcano”, is significant too, in my opinion. I have read that volcano often stands as a symbol for the hidden female nature, at least, in poetry, especially in poems by Elizabeth Bishop and Louise Bogan, but there is a possibility that this symbolism is eligible in our story, as well. You know, just as an idea.

Yes, to me the snake suggests the garden of eden and the paradise Juliet is in. Not sure about vulcanos though. I always thought they might be a phallic symbol.

[Janine]

Yes, to me the snake suggests the garden of eden and the paradise Juliet is in. Not sure about vulcanos though. I always thought they might be a phallic symbol.

Hahaha, volcanos, not 'vulcanos' ;) and it depends on which direction you are looking at them, from the summit or the base. :lol:

Hey, Virgil, can you give me some feedback on my previous post about connecting the serpent and the sun - it was in answer to you post questions. It is about 3 or 4 back now (on previous page). Thanks! :D


Oh sorry, I see you did answer some of it....I did a lot of typing and preparation - real mind boggling thought - my brain even hurts from thinking so hard for that post:eek: . I thought I had some good ideas, but I guess not, unless you skimmed....:( It is post #570

[Virgil]

amalia, smart thinking - this is really good, I had not thought of that exactly in this way, but Virgil did mention before, that this story is a revisiting of an ancient time and world; and your idea is perfect, too. There is a lot going on here, in this one paragraph, don't you agree? It certainly does seem to indicate a sort of paradise and 'Eden' for Juliet, and from what I have read after "Plumed Serpent" Lawrence went back to Italy and turned futher away from the Indian myths, he had explored in that book, and went more in the direction of exploring Christinanity, but not in a 'conventional' way as well know, by reading the book "The Man Who Died". Interesting also to note that in his Italian Travel books, the first book, "Twilight in Italy", Lawrence goes on a long hike/kind of quest into the mountains and observes crossed and shrines enroute and ponders on these. His vision of this road is quite extraordinary. So what I am trying to say, is that at this period in L's writing, I think it totally conceivable, that he is thinking in terms of Eden and Biblical references. Didn't the serpent tempt Eve? I would think this something to think about in reference to the story, as well. At the end the woman, Juliet, is tempted to have an affair with the peasant. This all seems curious to me - the connections.

You have to be careful Janine. He was in Italy before he went around the world and ultimately New Mexico and now here he is returning to Italy. There are several Italy travel books: Twilight in Italy and Other Essays (1916), Sea and Sardinia (1921), Sketches of Etruscan Places and other Italian essays (1932). I'm not sure which one you are referring to.


In the passage you quoted the imagery is lovely and 'idllyic' and very much rooted in the old world, or the Bible, and it's naturalic qualities. I like the reference to "the garden full of secret places". I think this is a direct analogy to a woman's body, since Lawrence used this phrase often in his poetry and in "Lady Chatterly's Lover", etc. Perhaps the woman, Juliet, personifies or embodies the whole idea of the Garden of Eden. She has not only undergone a 'tranformation/transfiguration', but moved back into a time of complete beauty and paradise, and purity. Also, if Lawrence is embodying the Garden of Eden in Juliet, then I would think he is saying that sexuality is totally natural and goes back to day #1 on the earth. This would support all his naturistic ideals. Probably there are direct references in Genesis to that paragraph and each element - like the blue sea, the lemons, reservoirs of water, etc.
That is an interesting idea you two have come up with. The snake posing a danger can be seen as the male intruding into their woman's world. But the snake is essentially powerless here. Juliet does have him under control. Interesting. But how does the snake fit with the sun diety theme?

[Janine]

You have to be careful Janine. He was in Italy before he went around the world and ultimately New Mexico and now here he is returning to Italy. There are several Italy travel books: Twilight in Italy and Other Essays (1916), Sea and Sardinia (1921), Sketches of Etruscan Places and other Italian essays (1932). I'm not sure which one you are referring to.
Opps, to my eternal shame :blush: - you are correct. I am sorry for posting that wrong. Am I forgiven? Anyway, he did write other travel books or sketches, but not those first two; however, "Etruscan Places" was written after the short story "Sun". That would make sense wouldn't it? I had thought he visited them not much before he died; in fact, he died in 1930 so they published those posthumously, right? Gee, this book is fascinating with the timetable in it. I started to read it, here and there, and now I want to read the entire thing. Thanks for the suggestion, V. This is a great source book.


That is an interesting idea you two have come up with. The snake posing a danger can be seen as the male intruding into their woman's world. But the snake is essentially powerless here. Juliet does have him under control. Interesting. But how does the snake fit with the sun diety theme?

Virgil, I am kind of getting annoyed with you now, yes... seriously:rage: :brickwall You are not the only one who can be BM&D... just because you are Italian, you know! :lol:

Did you only 'skim' my very involved post about this subject of the snake and the deity idea?
It is post #570 on the previous page, and I think it got buried by now.:( I was trying to express the various ways serpents were used to symbolise deities. The yellow snake and the way it absorbs the sun suggests to me the connection. I quoted a number of passages there (which I hand-typed in). In "The Plumed Serpent", which he wrote just prior to "Sun" he uses the symbol in conjuction with plumed or a bird-like creature and these combine to represent the deity - don't you recall the men wearing the Serpent symbol? I think it was on their head or a band around their forhead. It was so prominent in that book. The sun also, was prominent in this symbol and their connection to the sun and the stars and the cosmos. In that book it is true that the 'morning star' and the 'evening star' were most prominent, but the sun also played a huge role in the story. In one scene Cipriano goes into the water and is lighted up by the sun and appears to Kate as a column of fire. Also, in the book is interwoven the whole idea of sexuality/sensuality, as is prominent, in this story "Sun".

If you read the entire poem of "Snake" there are a few stanzas, that indicate that the snake entering a crack in the stone wall, actually frightens the author. I kept thinking that sexually, Lawrence had this strange fear of being swallowed up by the female. This probably originated with his mother. I may be why predominently in his works the male dominates. I have read various theories on this idea, so I think it possible. In this story, the woman is not in fear of the man, but is the man in fear of the woman? The snake is powerless by choice, and perhaps, so is the husband. Also, he has not had the benefits yet of the sun. Who knows - maybe he will become sensual, when softened by the mystical sun and lose his fears. In his present state he can only glance at his naked wife. Is he showing shyness or fear?

[Virgil]

Opps, to my eternal shame :blush: - you are correct. I am sorry for posting that wrong. Am I forgiven? Anyway, he did write other travel books or sketches, but not those first two; however, "Etruscan Places" was written after the short story "Sun". That would make sense wouldn't it? I had thought he visited them not much before he died; in fact, he died in 1930 so they published those posthumously, right? Gee, this book is fascinating with the timetable in it. I started to read it, here and there, and now I want to read the entire thing. Thanks for the suggestion, V. This is a great source book.

You're forgiven. :p :D It does look like the Etruscan essays came out as a book after he died, but they may have individually been published in magazines. I bet you calandar of days book would say.


Virgil, I am kind of getting annoyed with you now, yes... seriously:rage: :brickwall You are not the only one who can be BM&D... just because you are Italian, you know! :lol:

Did you only 'skim' my very involved post about this subject of the snake and the deity idea?
It is post #570 on the previous page, and I think it got buried by now.:( I was trying to express the various ways serpents were used to symbolise deities. The yellow snake and the way it absorbs the sun suggests to me the connection. I quoted a number of passages there (which I hand-typed in). In "The Plumed Serpent", which he wrote just prior to "Sun" he uses the symbol in conjuction with plumed or a bird-like creature and these combine to represent the deity - don't you recall the men wearing the Serpent symbol? I think it was on their head or a band around their forhead. It was so prominent in that book. The sun also, was prominent in this symbol and their connection to the sun and the stars and the cosmos. In that book it is true that the 'morning star' and the 'evening star' were most prominent, but the sun also played a huge role in the story. In one scene Cipriano goes into the water and is lighted up by the sun and appears to Kate as a column of fire. Also, in the book is interwoven the whole idea of sexuality/sensuality, as is prominent, in this story "Sun".
Oh you are angry at me too. Well, get on line. I bet half of lit net is angry at me. :p It goes with being Mad, Bad, and Dangerous to Know. :D I did read you post #570 and i even replied to it. I didn't exactly reply to that specific part of your post directly, I combined Amalia's and your thoughts together. Didn't i say it was an interesting idea you two have come up with? Let me double highlight what you just said that I think is very important:

The sun also, was prominent in this symbol and their connection to the sun and the stars and the cosmos.
The power of the sun is interwoven with the overall power of the cosmos, which is a sort of godhead for life.


If you read the entire poem of "Snake" there are a few stanzas, that indicate that the snake entering a crack in the stone wall, actually frightens the author. I kept thinking that sexually, Lawrence had this strange fear of being swallowed up by the female. This probably originated with his mother. I may be why predominently in his works the male dominates. I have read various theories on this idea, so I think it possible. In this story, the woman is not in fear of the man, but is the man in fear of the woman? The snake is powerless by choice, and perhaps, so is the husband. Also, he has not had the benefits yet of the sun. Who knows - maybe he will become sensual, when softened by the mystical sun and lose his fears. In his present state he can only glance at his naked wife. Is he showing shyness or fear?
Now that is interesting. Yes, the snake could represent the husband! I think you're right. I will have to re-read the story to be sure. And by the way, the poem "Snake" does compliment this story. I had my doubts when you brought it up, but now that I've read the entire poem, I see the connections.

[Janine]

You're forgiven. :p :D It does look like the Etruscan essays came out as a book after he died, but they may have individually been published in magazines. I bet you calandar of days book would say.

Glad of that....now will you forgive me for getting annoyed (angry) with you? :D You know I could never be angry too long.

Virgil, you sure have me doing a lot of homework;) You and Quark advise me to slow up; and I am the one looking up all this stuff and...
now Quark wants me to state 'specific chapters' in S&L's and here I thought he had those bits pretty well highlighted in his book! ;)
Grrr...Eekkk...ok, going now to look up the Etruscan essays - it might also say in my Italian tavel book 'forward'.
Ok, looking them up seems to reveal that he was visiting the tombs, as far back as 1927, then he mentions being half-way through writing the essays sometime in 1929, but from there I don't see an entry as to when he completed "Etruscan Places". I also just looked in the forward to "L.H.Lawrence and Italy", and I can't see anywhere, that it actually states anything about that, but it shows copyright for that one book to be 1932 and L died in the early part of the year of 1930, so I would assume it.


Oh you are angry at me too. Well, get on line. I bet half of lit net is angry at me. :p It goes with being Mad, Bad, and Dangerous to Know. :D I did read you post #570 and i even replied to it. I didn't exactly reply to that specific part of your post directly, I combined Amalia's and your thoughts together. Didn't i say it was an interesting idea you two have come up with? Let me double highlight what you just said that I think is very important:
The sun also, was prominent in this symbol and their connection to the sun and the stars and the cosmos.

Yep, I was mildly perturbed, not really angry. In fact I went back and changed my original 'flaring red mad' emoticon to something a little more subtle..:lol: Yes, it was inevitable, that someday, I too, would join the club and be annoyed with you! ;) :lol:

Well, thanks for at least reading my post #570, and your comments were good ones. I still think you might have missed a little there, like the symbol of the serpent used as a deity or divinity, and it was usually 'golden' like the sun or the stars, which are 'burning' gases as the sun is. Serpent symbolism was actually used in "Plumed Serpent", most prominently, and I had also, thought how so many ancient civilizations used this as a symbol of power and royalty - such as with King Tut - his famous gold mask has a gold serpent at the top - a cobra, I believe.


The power of the sun is interwoven with the overall power of the cosmos, which is a sort of godhead for life.

Yes, and somehow this all fits in, within Lawrence's mind and ideas - the serpent or snake. I know it is all quite complex. The PS book was confusing in this respect, but now after reading some of these snake references in "Sun" I feel I see more clearly what Lawrence was aiming at in the other book and this story. I think the serpent does represent a man in all his power and sexuality, which Lawrence beleive ultimately came from the cosmos and the sun. Therefore the male was the 'sun-god' or 'god-head'. In this story is not the sun male for Juliet? The sun is the supreme male is virility and power and sensuality to Juliet.




Now that is interesting. Yes, the snake could represent the husband! I think you're right. I will have to re-read the story to be sure. And by the way, the poem "Snake" does compliment this story. I had my doubts when you brought it up, but now that I've read the entire poem, I see the connections.

Yes, if one reads the entire poem (should I post it?) you can see exactly what Lawrence is getting at. Great poem, is it not? I will look it up online, but in my book seems to be a fuller length version of the poem. Years ago a friend sent me this poem and I believe that was a much shorter version. I hope I can find the entire verison online. Otherwise it is back to the old scanner or typing it in...ugh. I will also look up the date 'Snake' was published. Found the poem and I will post later - after you answer this post, or someone else does. It was written in Taormina, 1923. Not sure of date of publication, because this is the date giving on the internet below the poem, so I now assume this is the publication date -1923. Confusing though because he, lawrence states he has written, or is writing it in July 1920 - he is in Taormina and the book states that it is the only July Lawrence ever spend there, due to the excessive heat. He even states in this entry that he has been wearing for days, only pajama pants, because it is so hot. Interesting. I read that Balzac only wore a robe to write and Mark Twain liked to write in his jammies in bed. Gee, I guess I am a really creative person and not a bum! Haha :lol:....I thought I was just abnormal, but guess I have that artist temperment.

[amalia1985]

The power of the sun influences Juliet in many, many ways as you have excellently described.

I would also suggest that although her feelings were "anger", "frustration", "numb", now we see a different woman under the inlfuence of the sun. The "sunrising" described can be seen as a metaphor fro Juliet's rebirth, and her attempts to persuade her son to "play", and "run in the sun", is, again, a proof of how much this male deity has changed her life. She wants her boy to experience the freedom she has experienced.

[Virgil]

Oh, look at Wiki's entry on Taormina. it gives a nice description with some photos of the area, which is what I think Lawrence is basing his story on: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taormina.


Glad of that....now will you forgive me for getting annoyed (angry) with you? :D You know I could never be angry too long.

You're such a sweet person Janine.


Virgil, you sure have me doing a lot of homework;) You and Quark advise me to slow up; and I am the one looking up all this stuff and...
now Quark wants me to state 'specific chapters' in S&L's and here I thought he had those bits pretty well highlighted in his book! ;)
Grrr...Eekkk...ok, going now to look up the Etruscan essays - it might also say in my Italian tavel book 'forward'.
Ok, looking them up seems to reveal that he was visiting the tombs, as far back as 1927, then he mentions being half-way through writing the essays sometime in 1929, but from there I don't see an entry as to when he completed "Etruscan Places". I also just looked in the forward to "L.H.Lawrence and Italy", and I can't see anywhere, that it actually states anything about that, but it shows copyright for that one book to be 1932 and L died in the early part of the year of 1930, so I would assume it.
Thank you for doing all that work.


Well, thanks for at least reading my post #570, and your comments were good ones. I still think you might have missed a little there, like the symbol of the serpent used as a deity or divinity, and it was usually 'golden' like the sun or the stars, which are 'burning' gases as the sun is. Serpent symbolism was actually used in "Plumed Serpent", most prominently, and I had also, thought how so many ancient civilizations used this as a symbol of power and royalty - such as with King Tut - his famous gold mask has a gold serpent at the top - a cobra, I believe.
Yes, that is interesting. I'm sure Lawrence was aware of it.


Yes, and somehow this all fits in, within Lawrence's mind and ideas - the serpent or snake. I know it is all quite complex. The PS book was confusing in this respect, but now after reading some of these snake references in "Sun" I feel I see more clearly what Lawrence was aiming at in the other book and this story. I think the serpent does represent a man in all his power and sexuality, which Lawrence beleive ultimately came from the cosmos and the sun. Therefore the male was the 'sun-god' or 'god-head'. In this story is not the sun male for Juliet? The sun is the supreme male is virility and power and sensuality to Juliet.
Yes, I think the sun as diety is male to Juliet's female. And we see how Maurice falls so short of his male glory. And we see in the story that the snake slithers and hides and is somewhat impotent. Don't you think?


Yes, if one reads the entire poem (should I post it?) you can see exactly what Lawrence is getting at. Great poem, is it not? I will look it up online, but in my book seems to be a fuller length version of the poem. Years ago a friend sent me this poem and I believe that was a much shorter version. I hope I can find the entire verison online. Otherwise it is back to the old scanner or typing it in...ugh. I will also look up the date 'Snake' was published. Found the poem and I will post later - after you answer this post, or someone else does. It was written in Taormina, 1923. Not sure of date of publication, because this is the date giving on the internet below the poem, so I now assume this is the publication date -1923. Confusing though because he, lawrence states he has written, or is writing it in July 1920 - he is in Taormina and the book states that it is the only July Lawrence ever spend there, due to the excessive heat. He even states in this entry that he has been wearing for days, only pajama pants, because it is so hot. Interesting. I read that Balzac only wore a robe to write and Mark Twain liked to write in his jammies in bed. Gee, I guess I am a really creative person and not a bum! Haha :lol:....I thought I was just abnormal, but guess I have that artist temperment.
I was thinking of posting it, but I'll let you. Good thing they wore jammies. Some men go to bed in their underwear, or less. :lol:

[Virgil]

I googled images of Taormina and I have to post some. It will give a feel for the setting in "Sun."

http://atangledweb.typepad.com/photos/uncategorized/taormina.jpg

http://www.etnamare-holiday.ch/images/Taormina_anfiteatro.jpg

http://www.hotelpensionesvizzera.com/img/taormina_hotel.jpg

http://www.destination360.com/europe/italy/images/s/taormina.jpg

http://p.vtourist.com/908774-View_towards_Mt_Etna_from_Taormina-Taormina.jpg

I think you can see some of the cypress trees that are mentioned in the story.

[Janine]

Virgil, those photos are wonderful! THANKS for finding them and posting! Wow, I am booking my airfare, as we speak. I think I need a little sun! :yawnb:

I'll answer you last post after I have my dinner.

For now here is the poem:



Snake

A snake came to my water-trough
On a hot, hot day, and I in pyjamas for the heat,
To drink there.
In the deep, strange-scented shade of the great dark carob-tree
I came down the steps with my pitcher
And must wait, must stand and wait, for there he was at the trough before
me.
He reached down from a fissure in the earth-wall in the gloom
And trailed his yellow-brown slackness soft-bellied down, over the edge of
the stone trough
And rested his throat upon the stone bottom,
i o And where the water had dripped from the tap, in a small clearness,
He sipped with his straight mouth,
Softly drank through his straight gums, into his slack long body,
Silently.
Someone was before me at my water-trough,
And I, like a second comer, waiting.
He lifted his head from his drinking, as cattle do,
And looked at me vaguely, as drinking cattle do,
And flickered his two-forked tongue from his lips, and mused a moment,
And stooped and drank a little more,
Being earth-brown, earth-golden from the burning bowels of the earth
On the day of Sicilian July, with Etna smoking.
The voice of my education said to me
He must be killed,
For in Sicily the black, black snakes are innocent, the gold are venomous.
And voices in me said, If you were a man
You would take a stick and break him now, and finish him off.
But must I confess how I liked him,
How glad I was he had come like a guest in quiet, to drink at my water-trough
And depart peaceful, pacified, and thankless,
Into the burning bowels of this earth?
Was it cowardice, that I dared not kill him? Was it perversity, that I longed to talk to him? Was it humility, to feel so honoured?
I felt so honoured.
And yet those voices:
If you were not afraid, you would kill him!
And truly I was afraid, I was most afraid, But even so, honoured still more
That he should seek my hospitality
From out the dark door of the secret earth.
He drank enough
And lifted his head, dreamily, as one who has drunken,
And flickered his tongue like a forked night on the air, so black,
Seeming to lick his lips,
And looked around like a god, unseeing, into the air,
And slowly turned his head,
And slowly, very slowly, as if thrice adream,
Proceeded to draw his slow length curving round
And climb again the broken bank of my wall-face.
And as he put his head into that dreadful hole,
And as he slowly drew up, snake-easing his shoulders, and entered farther,
A sort of horror, a sort of protest against his withdrawing into that horrid black hole,
Deliberately going into the blackness, and slowly drawing himself after,
Overcame me now his back was turned.
I looked round, I put down my pitcher,
I picked up a clumsy log
And threw it at the water-trough with a clatter.
I think it did not hit him,
But suddenly that part of him that was left behind convulsed in undignified haste.
Writhed like lightning, and was gone
Into the black hole, the earth-lipped fissure in the wall-front,
At which, in the intense still noon, I stared with fascination.
And immediately I regretted it.
I thought how paltry, how vulgar, what a mean act!
I despised myself and the voices of my accursed human education.
And I thought of the albatross
And I wished he would come back, my snake.
For he seemed to me again like a king,
Like a king in exile, uncrowned in the underworld,
Now due to be crowned again.
And so, I missed my chance with one of the lords
Of life.
And I have something to expiate:
A pettiness.

Taormina, 1923

[Janine]

Oh, look at Wiki's entry on Taormina. it gives a nice description with some photos of the area, which is what I think Lawrence is basing his story on: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taormina.

Oh, good Wiki is back again! I have to go now and check that link. I saw your photos of the place you posted. Those are very pretty. No wonder L liked going there and living there - it looks wonderful.:yawnb:Nice and sunny; yes, that must be the sea he speaks of, and how blue and gorgeous it is.


You're such a sweet person Janine.
So they tell me :) ..But just don't ask my mother.:lol:


Thank you for doing all that work.

You are graciously welcome, Mr.Virgil!


Yes, that is interesting. I'm sure Lawrence was aware of it.

So am I, he told me so himself.:nod: *halucinating again*


Yes, I think the sun as diety is male to Juliet's female. And we see how Maurice falls so short of his male glory. And we see in the story that the snake slithers and hides and is somewhat impotent. Don't you think?
Ah, I had not thought of the snake being impotent; only a man would think of that one. Well, maybe not impotent, but you know snakes are actually quite shy. Think on that awhile.;)


I was thinking of posting it, but I'll let you. Good thing they wore jammies. Some men go to bed in their underwear, or less. :lol:

;) I know all about that , Virgil.....:lol:

[Awod]

Hey Janine, guess who? :D

[Janine]

The power of the sun influences Juliet in many, many ways as you have excellently described.

amalia, I don't know how you snuck in there, without me noticing you, but sorry about that. I just now saw your post. Maybe we were posting same time. Oh, now I see, you were right before Virgil posted about Wikipedia.
Yes, I think you are correct - the power of the sun does influence her is various ways. She certainly seems like an entirely different woman - one who now is fully-awakened and aware of her own self and her own natural beauty.



I would also suggest that although her feelings were "anger", "frustration", "numb", now we see a different woman under the inlfuence of the sun. The "sunrising" described can be seen as a metaphor fro Juliet's rebirth, and her attempts to persuade her son to "play", and "run in the sun", is, again, a proof of how much this male deity has changed her life. She wants her boy to experience the freedom she has experienced.

oops - sorry you were just saying the same thing. It is so true - how transformed and different Juliet appears, not only in attitude, but in appearance and expression. Yes, she seems to have shed those feelings you have listed and forgotten she ever was harboring such thoughts or attitudes. It is interesting to see the effect it is having on her child as well, and how she now feels the power of the male deity of the sun extended to the boy. He, too, becomes revived and a totally different 'newborn' child, without his whininess, his grasping for Juliet, with all his neediness and clinging. One passage said that he was now able to play quiely by himself. The child, also, is quite transformed and now becomes beautiful.

;) Now, if the husband would be tranformed as well, by the restorative properties of the sun and light, it might be a happy family scene.:yawnb:


Hey Janine, guess who? :D

Hey, Is this Mr. Pharmacist? :lol:

I have to admit you did give me a jolt with that question!


PS: and by any chance are you a 'Steven Brust' fan?

[Awod]

Hey, Is this Mr. Pharmacist? :lol:

I have to admit you did give me a jolt with that question!


PS: and by any chance are you a 'Steven Brust' fan?


Heh would be nice.

I'm not a pharmacist, I'm a Certified Pharmacy technician. I would enjoy the pay increase though :P

Yep, I love Brust theres only a few of his novels I haven't read.

[Janine]

Heh would be nice.

I'm not a pharmacist, I'm a Certified Pharmacy technician. I would enjoy the pay increase though :P

Yep, I love Brust only a few of his novels I haven't read.

Awod, Like I said you did give me a shock. How funny - had to think fast on that one and since you only had 3 now 4 postings it struck me.

Well, you have to work your way up to that very important position. Yes, more money would be nice. I won't give away any more of your vital information. I see your profile page is really revealing.:lol: Take a look at mine. I tell all! - a real blabber-mouth!

Hey, honestly so glad you found the site and signed up. Cool place, huh? :D There is lots to offer here. You must go onto the thread 'what you are reading' - something like that it is called, or start a thread about your author. Now I can remember his name. Sure others will find you who like his work...well, eventually.

Maybe you will try reading one of our Lawrence short stories and join in our discussions. This last one we did was rather interesting, to say the least, plus we need more guys in this thread. haha:lol:

We really do have fun in here, even though we can be quite serious minded at times, actually talking about literature. You would never know that by this last page in this thread. Movie thread is fun, too! I am in there often.

Well, go explore the site and have fun!:thumbs_up

Hey, just edited this post - looked up Brust website - it is hysterical! I laughed and laughed...really funny stuff. You need one of his book images for your avatar picture.

[Virgil]

I think this passage suggests what Amalia states in her last post:


Now a change took place. She was no longer vitally interested in the child,
she took the strain of her anxiety and her will from off him. And he thrived
all the more for it.

She was thinking inside herself, of the sun in his splendour, and her mating
with him. Her life was now a whole ritual. She lay always awake, before dawn,
watching for the grey to colour to pale gold, to know if cloud lay on the
sea's edge. Her joy was when he rose all molten in his nakedness, and threw
off blue-white fire, into the tender heaven.

But sometimes he came ruddy, like a big, shy creature. And sometimes slow and
crimson red, with a look of anger, slowly pushing and shouldering. Sometimes
again she could not see him, only the level cloud threw down gold and scarlet
from above, as he moved behind the wall.

She was fortunate.Weeks went by, and though the dawn was sometimes clouded,
and afternoon was sometimes grey, never a day passed sunless, and most days,
winter though it was, streamed radiant. Then thin little wild crocuses came up
mauve and striped, the wild narcissi hung in their winter stars.

Every day she went down to the cypress tree, among the cactus grove on the
knoll with yellowish cliffs at the foot. She was wiser and subtler now,
wearing only a dove-grey wrapper and sandals. so that in an instant, in any
hidden niche, she was naked to the sun. And the moment she was covered again
she was grey and invisible.

She knew the sun in heaven, blue-molten with his white fire edges, throwing
off fire. And though he shone on all the world, when she lay unclothed he
focussed on her. It was one of the wonders of the sun, he could shine on a
million people and still be the radiant, splendid, unique sun, focussed on her
alone.

With her knowledge of the sun, and her conviction that the sun knew
her, in the cosmic carnal sense of the word, came over her a feeling of
detachment from people, and a certain contempt for human beings altogether.
They were so un-elemental, so unsunned. they were so like graveyard worms.

[amalia1985]

The paragraphs that Virgil posted are extremely rich in symbolisms, I think.

The cypress can be another sexual metaphor, suggested by Lawrence. The emphasis on the CHANGE shows the emotional transformation of Juliet. Also, “matting with the sun” is a very telling expression, don’t you think?

I believe that the phrase “never a day passed sunless” describes Juliet’s present life, indicating happiness, I would say. I have noticed the repetition of the starry image, and I’d consider important the fact that Lawrence chooses the adjectives “wiser’, and “subtler”, to characterize Juliet, unfolding this “change” in her personality, under the influence of the sun. Notice that she feels happier when she is naked, while her feelings change into “grey” when she is “covered again”. I was captivated by Lawrence’s description of Juliet’s current attitude towards the others. She feels “detached”, and regards them as small creature, I would say.

I think that the metaphor of the “graveyard worms” is very vivid. I linked this one with her previous protest to her mother, in the 1st part of the story, where Juliet tells her “leave off wanting to de me good”. I believe this is another hint of Juliet’s desire to take her life into her hands, to escape the patronization of her environment.

[Janine]

f
The paragraphs that Virgil posted are extremely rich in symbolisms, I think.
amalia, I agree with you - these are really great to quote and 'rich in symbolism' as you pointed out. Thanks, V, for posting this section.



The cypress can be another sexual metaphor, suggested by Lawrence. The emphasis on the CHANGE shows the emotional transformation of Juliet. Also, “matting with the sun” is a very telling expression, don’t you think?

That is an interesting thought about the trees, but I am not quite sure of it, still something to consider. I think I will have to re-read the part where the trees are so vividly described. That did stand out to me at first but then I went quickly onto the next part and forgot about the trees and what significance they play. Yes, the 'mating with the sun' is a key part of the story, I think, maybe the main theme(?) The sun does not just shine on Juliet on the surface of her skin or being, but penetrates her to the core and and infiltrates her whole being, transforming her - a transfiguration.


I believe that the phrase “never a day passed sunless” describes Juliet’s present life, indicating happiness, I would say.

Good observation and something to think about further.


I have noticed the repetition of the starry image, and I’d consider important the fact that Lawrence chooses the adjectives “wiser’, and “subtler”, to characterize Juliet, unfolding this “change” in her personality, under the influence of the sun.

Those words are interesting to consider. Why does he use these particular words, do you think?


Notice that she feels happier when she is naked, while her feelings change into “grey” when she is “covered again”. I was captivated by Lawrence’s description of Juliet’s current attitude towards the others. She feels “detached”, and regards them as small creature, I would say.

I think that 'naked' she feels freedom and clothed she feels 'restrained' and sliding back to her old world which is 'sunless' and unhappy. That is interesting that you picked out the word 'grey' when she is covered. Was her garment, her wrap - 'grey'? I will have to review. If so shadowlike I would imagine. She now would become like a 'shadow' of the sunlight she had basked in or she is going back into the 'shadows of the past'.
Yes, the people are distant from her now; they do not live in the glory and warmth of the sun. They do seem like small creatures or animals in her new sight. Good thought.



I think that the metaphor of the “graveyard worms” is very vivid. I linked this one with her previous protest to her mother, in the 1st part of the story, where Juliet tells her “leave off wanting to de me good”. I believe this is another hint of Juliet’s desire to take her life into her hands, to escape the patronization of her environment.

That is, isn't it? Really a strong image and says so much. 'Graveyard worms' can conjure up all kinds of images of mortality, also. The phrase is used so often in "Hamlet". He often mentions worms in this way because the play looks at mortality and death continually.
Yes, I had forgotten her mother's comment to her. That is good to reflect on, now that we read the entire story. It takes on newer meaning since J's transformation has taken place. She not only pulls away from her environment but her mother and her husband's authority, or 'patronization', as you stated so appropriately. Most of the people Juliet has been associated with prior to coming to Italy have in a sense been dead or half-dead beings. Now Juliet has discoverd 'life' anew from the sun. She has been reborn.

Good post amalia! :thumbs_up

[Dark Muse]

I think that the metaphor of the “graveyard worms” is very vivid. I linked this one with her previous protest to her mother, in the 1st part of the story, where Juliet tells her “leave off wanting to de me good”. I believe this is another hint of Juliet’s desire to take her life into her hands, to escape the patronization of her environment.

This was a good observation, and yes I can see the truth in it. As I did find it intresting, when her mother was trying to get her to go naked into the sun on the orders of the doctor she refused at first, but it was not untill she was doing it of her own conviction and not becasue someone else mandated it to her, that she embraced the idea, and found freedom within it.

The other thing I found intresting was the line.


And she thought to herself: For him it is All Ashore! For me it is Out To Sea!

This made me think of the old days, in which women whom were considered disobedent, or rebellious or otherwise troublsume would be "sent out" or "put out" uusally to be shut away within a convent.

And the idea that men were the ones that were suppose to be adventurous and go out into the world to explore new lands.

[Virgil]

The paragraphs that Virgil posted are extremely rich in symbolisms, I think.

The cypress can be another sexual metaphor, suggested by Lawrence. The emphasis on the CHANGE shows the emotional transformation of Juliet. Also, “matting with the sun” is a very telling expression, don’t you think?

I believe that the phrase “never a day passed sunless” describes Juliet’s present life, indicating happiness, I would say. I have noticed the repetition of the starry image, and I’d consider important the fact that Lawrence chooses the adjectives “wiser’, and “subtler”, to characterize Juliet, unfolding this “change” in her personality, under the influence of the sun. Notice that she feels happier when she is naked, while her feelings change into “grey” when she is “covered again”. I was captivated by Lawrence’s description of Juliet’s current attitude towards the others. She feels “detached”, and regards them as small creature, I would say.

I think that the metaphor of the “graveyard worms” is very vivid. I linked this one with her previous protest to her mother, in the 1st part of the story, where Juliet tells her “leave off wanting to de me good”. I believe this is another hint of Juliet’s desire to take her life into her hands, to escape the patronization of her environment.

I agree with everything you say Amamlia except I'm not so sure the cypress trees are intended as phallic. Seems like Lawrence is only describing the setting, but I guess one can extend description a bit. I see the cypress trees if anything more as a worshiper of the sun, another of the flower/vegetaton imagery that Lawrence loves.

I think we can see from the story how Lawrence regards flowers/vegetation/trees as the ideal form of life. They blossom and grow from the sunshine. I always get the feeling that for Lawrence heaven will be a state where we are mindless blossoms.

[Janine]

I agree with everything you say Amamlia except I'm not so sure the cypress trees are intended as phallic. Seems like Lawrence is only describing the setting, but I guess one can extend description a bit. I see the cypress trees if anything more as a worshiper of the sun, another of the flower/vegetaton imagery that Lawrence loves.

I think we can see from the story how Lawrence regards flowers/vegetation/trees as the ideal form of life. They blossom and grow from the sunshine. I always get the feeling that for Lawrence heaven will be a state where we are mindless blossoms.

Virgil, only can answer the last part, since I forgot to read about the cypress trees again, but I think it is simply as you stated, unless I see something else in my additional reading.

That last statement of yours is a truly beautiful thought. I hope it is so, also. Ever see a film called 'What Dreams May Come'? What you just said somehow reminded me of that film, sort of 'perfect heavely realm' on earth. I also, just saw a film called 'The Fountain' - interesting film, with ideas that I kept thinking, Lawrence would have liked and supported. In fact, I wondered if the two young screen writers had ever read Lawrence's later books, such as "The Plumed Serpent". This film even had Central American myths/culture/Mayan civilization/ customs, ritual and a 'tree of life', a 'sword of fire', connection to the cosmos and the stars and a nebula, that would burn itself out to become transformed or transfigured, into forming other new stars, rebirth....and a question of mortaliy/immortality - the idea of connecting all things on earth/cosmos. Flowers and plants played prominently into the web of this idea and this film. Interesting.

[Janine]

HELLO! Where is everybody this weekend??? haha - I am just kidding because I, too, am trying to take a bit of a break! Probably will be back Monday to comment. Enjoy your weekend everyone! J

[Virgil]

HELLO! Where is everybody this weekend??? haha - I am just kidding because I, too, and trying to take a bit of a break! Probably will be back Monday to comment. Enjoy your weekend everyone! J

:lol: Enjoy your break Janine. I'll try to push the conversation along later tonight.

[Janine]

:lol: Enjoy your break Janine. I'll try to push the conversation along later tonight.

OK, thanks, Virgil....I really need a break from computer; but of course, I am doing about 5 things at once - only they are offline in real life space, not cyber-...hahah...laundry, switching winter/summer clothes, taping something, going to watch a movie now, etc....

Good news - I received the audiobook yesterday, of the Chekhov plays. Will not listen to them till I am done the current L readings/discussions. S&L's I still have not completed the book. :( I dispair I will even finish it but I am trying to. I guess first time one is in some suspense and second reading I know the outcome so I don't charge ahead.

Ok, going now to watch that film/films(?)

[amalia1985]

I think that one of the important issues that the story raises is Juliet's relationship with her son which has really attracted my attention. The phrases that Lawrence uses describe it in an excellent way.

We have already commented on her prompting the child to "run and play in the sun". I believe that Johny's reaction to her behaviour is important. Lawrence depicts the restrictions and influence of the society that Juliet desires to escape, in the face of the little boy, using strong expressions, like the repetition of Johny's desire to "cry". I think that he points to us that the boy is frightened of freeedom, having been raised differently.

Another expression that depicts this chain of the restrained, almost stiff, attitude towards the new life that his mother suggests to him, is the "confession" of Juliet's thought that Johny "shall not grow up like his father." I think this "wish" is very important, and although we have been told earlier in the story that Johny "does not allow Juliet to be free", now we see her desire to "take him with her" in this new life, something that she, actually, manages to do.

[Janine]

I think that one of the important issues that the story raises is Juliet's relationship with her son which has really attracted my attention. The phrases that Lawrence uses describe it in an excellent way.

We have already commented on her prompting the child to "run and play in the sun". I believe that Johny's reaction to her behaviour is important. Lawrence depicts the restrictions and influence of the society that Juliet desires to escape, in the face of the little boy, using strong expressions, like the repetition of Johny's desire to "cry". I think that he points to us that the boy is frightened of freeedom, having been raised differently.

Another expression that depicts this chain of the restrained, almost stiff, attitude towards the new life that his mother suggests to him, is the "confession" of Juliet's thought that Johny "shall not grow up like his father." I think this "wish" is very important, and although we have been told earlier in the story that Johny "does not allow Juliet to be free", now we see her desire to "take him with her" in this new life, something that she, actually, manages to do.

amalia,so glad that you have posted your ideas. Our beloved,Virgil, seems to be ill with flu or a cold, so I think he is taking a short break. This post of yours is very good and I think you bring up such a fine point. I think that Juliet's son, still being in the 'formative years' and so very young, can go in this 'free' direction she is indicating, after being influenced by the sun and experiencing this 'freedom', unlike his father who has the retrains of society to shackle him to his past way of life. I guess what I am trying to say is, with the child there is more of a chance of escaping that old restrained way of thinking and living; in this new 'sunny' way he can now grow into and become a 'free' human being. With his father, it might be too late for this transformation, but then again, it was not 'too late' for Juliet, so that maybe, just maybe, this all-powerful sun can transform him, as well.

I hope that you might quote other direct instances and passages, in reference to the child and his transformation. I would like to read your comments since the above is so intuitive and well written.

After-all, I do know you can write a good amount and you express youself very well, indeed!....;) :lol:

[amalia1985]

Oh, I didn't know that Virgil was ill! Hey, Virgil, get well soon, return to us!!!

I don't think I have more to add regarding this issue, apart from the very interesting part in the end of the story, where Maurice returns and notices the change in the boy, the obvious influence of Juliet on his developing personality. Notice that father and son seem not to know each other at first, while earlier the person that felt more distanced from Johny was, actually, Juliet.

What you said about Maurice is true. Still, I think that the end is open, as you have already said, and I believe we could say that there may be a "hope" that the father will follow the son's steps, under Juliet's direction.

[Janine]

Oh, I didn't know that Virgil was ill! Hey, Virgil, get well soon, return to us!!!

I don't think I have more to add regarding this issue, apart from the very interesting part in the end of the story, where Maurice returns and notices the change in the boy, the obvious influence of Juliet on his developing personality. Notice that father and son seem not to know each other at first, while earlier the person that felt more distanced from Johny was, actually, Juliet.

What you said about Maurice is true. Still, I think that the end is open, as you have already said, and I believe we could say that there may be a "hope" that the father will follow the son's steps, under Juliet's direction.

:lol:amalia, and I plan to make this short :lol:...I know you get that joke!

You bring up a very good point here - that at first, Juliet is the one who is so distant with her son and now it is she that is closer and her husband is the distant one - interesing, isn't it? I did not see that either were extremely close to the child, but Juliet now could enjoy the child more so, since he is not as 'needy' or filled with axieties, and he can entertain himself in the sunlight. I think this tyep of closeness is genuine and more real than a clinging type of closeness - don't you?

I would love to see you quote some parts from the end of the book when the husband first encounters the much 'changed' child. I did feel that the father was tender with him or loved him but he is just set in a different kind of world - the one of restraints and restrictions. Even when he see the beauty of his wife he can't seem to view her straight-on. The scene is almost comical and yet is it sad that he can't see her in her natural state, he being her husband. There is a scene in Lady Chatterly's Lover where Connie sheds her cloths and appears nude in front of her crippled husband and he is appalled by her boldness and nakedness and he is her husband. This reminded me of that scene, and yet Juliet's husband was not at all 'apalled', just 'restrained', don't you think? He is willing to try sunbathing in the nude himself, by the end of the book. I would say that is a huge step for him to take, considering.

[amalia1985]

Here is a phrase that attracted my attention:

"Do you know, Daddy, Johny?"

I don't think there is a more telling depiction of this new distance between the father and the son. Maurice feels "lost", as Lawrence himself tells us. I admit I almost felt sorry for him at this point...

[Janine]

Here is a phrase that attracted my attention:

"Do you know, Daddy, Johny?"

I don't think there is a more telling depiction of this new distance between the father and the son. Maurice feels "lost", as Lawrence himself tells us. I admit I almost felt sorry for him at this point...

amalia, now that is a short post!:lol: You and I are online same time on here...haha....ESP! Actually, I am trying to pull myself away from the computer, can you believe it?

Yes, seriously, that one statement is a very 'telling' depiction of the father and our initial reaction to his relationship with the child, now that his child has been transformed. I would imagine 'lost' is a good way of describing Maurice at this point. But remember that Juliet was 'lost' in the beginning, also. Therefore, I suppose, being the optimist I am, I hope for a 'transfiguration' for poor Maurice, so that this family might become a happy one eventually. I think Juliet's fantasy involving the man from Italy, is not at all realistic, so that I feel her husband, if transformed, might just turn out to be a great guy afterall and a sensual lover, as well;)

[Virgil]

Hey, I'm back. Thanks for your well wishes. Here's the passage with the child and the snake:


Juliet had ceased to trouble about anything. Now, most of the day, she and the
child were naked in the sun, and it was all she wanted. Sometimes she went
down to the sea to bathe: often she wandered in the gullies where the sun
shone in, and she was out of sight. Sometimes she saw a peasant with an ***,
and he saw her. But she went on simply and quietly with her child; and the
fame of the sun's healing power, for the soul as well as for the body, had
already spread among the people; so that there was no excitement.

The child and she were now both tanned with a rosy-golden tan all over. 'I am
another being !' she said to herself, as she looked at her red-gold breasts
and thighs.

The child, too, was a another creature, with a peculiar, quiet, sun-darkened
absorption. Now he played by himself in silence, and she hardly need notice
him. He seemed no longer to know when he was alone.

There was a breeze, and the sea was ultra marine. She sat by the great silver
paw of the cypress tree, drowsed in the sun, but her breasts alert, full of
sap. She was becoming aware that an activity was rousing in her, an activity
which would carry her into a new way of life. Still she did not want to be
aware. She knew well enough the vast cold apparatus of civilisation, so
difficult to evade.

The child had gone a few yards down the rocky path, round the great sprawling
of a cactus. She had seen him, a real gold-brown infant of the winds, with
burnt gold hair and red cheeks, collecting the speckled pitcher-flowers and
laying them in rows. He could balance now, and was quick for his own
emergencies, like an absorbed young animal playing silent.

Suddenly she heard him speaking: 'Look Mummy ! Mummy, look !' A note in
his bird-like voice made her lean forward sharply.

Her heart stood still. He was looking over his naked little shoulder at her,
and pointing with a loose little hand at a snake which had reared itself up a
yard away from him, and was opening its mouth so that its forked, soft tongue
flickered black like a shadow, uttering a short hiss.

'Look, Mummy !'

'Yes, darling, it's a snake !' came the slow, deep voice.

He looked at he, his wide blue eyes uncertain whether to be afraid or not.
Some stillness of the sun in her reassured him.

'Snake !' he chirped.

'Yes, darling. Don't touch it, it can bite.'

The snake had sunk down, and was reaching away from the coils in which it had
been basking asleep. and slowly was easing its long, gold-brown body into the
rocks, with slow curves. The boy turned and watched in silence. Then he said:

'Snake going !'

'Yes ! Let it go. It likes to be alone.'

He still watched the slow, easing length as the creature drew itself apathetic
out of sight.

'Snake gone back,' he said.

'Yes, it's gone back. Come to Mummy a moment.'

He came and sat with his plump, naked little body on her naked lap, and she
smoothed his burnt, bright hair. She said nothing, feeling that everything was
passed. The curious soothing power of the sun filled her, filled the whole
place like a charm, and the snake was part of the place, along with her and
the child.

I think everything important to the story is in this passage. The place that Lawrence presents is a heaven, a place where snakes slither harmlessly away and civilization is vague and have no sway. The sun is a diety and it soothes and heals.

[amalia1985]

Virgil, welcome back!!!! We missed you!!!

What you say about the passage sums up everything we could say. The only thing I would like to add is a further -perhaps, incorrect- thought. Can the snake also stand as a hint that in every situation, even in this one of almost absolute freedom,a hidden danger can always occur? Something similar can also be implied by the presence of the thorns.

[Virgil]

Virgil, welcome back!!!! We missed you!!!

What you say about the passage sums up everything we could say. The only thing I would like to add is a further -perhaps, incorrect- thought. Can the snake also stand as a hint that in every situation, even in this one of almost absolute freedom,a hidden danger can always occur? Something similar can also be implied by the presence of the thorns.

Thank you Amalia. And yes i think the snake can and does stand for hidden dangers. Like I said earlier I don't fully understand the snake in this story, and I suspect that Lawrence never completely developed his intentions. It seems like the snake should be more defined as a theme. I don't know if this was intentional or if Lawrence dropped the ball or I'm completely missing sometheing. There was certainly that snake metaphor at the beginning of the story: "At that moment the sea seemed to heave like the serpent of chaos that has lived forever." I guess there is a contrast here. When Juliet is in the modern world, the snake is truely threatening; but the snake on the Mediterranian island is in check, tamed if you will. The threat perhaps is that civilization will invade Juliet's worldd and the snake will truely bring back that chaos. Yes, I think this is what Lawrence intended with the sanke. Perhaps he could have developed it more as a theme but this is a short story and limited in scope. It's here as a suggestion. What do you all think about that?

[Janine]

Hi everybody, I feel like letting you and amalia debate this snake question, not interferring right now. I think it is a good one and both of you bring up excellent points.
Thanks for posting that long segment on the story, Virgil. It was quite helpful - always is better to review the actual text, don't you think?

I had also noticed the various references to the serpent or the snake - beginning to end. I don't think L needed to develop this idea any furthre. Afterall it is a short story and much can be implied; also the outcome is so open-ended that I feel sensing the snakes importance in the story is enough. Just my own opinion on that aspect.

[Virgil]

It seems a lot quieter in this thread. :blush: :)



I had also noticed the various references to the serpent or the snake - beginning to end. I don't think L needed to develop this idea any furthre. Afterall it is a short story and much can be implied; also the outcome is so open-ended that I feel sensing the snakes importance in the story is enough. Just my own opinion on that aspect.
Great point Janine. I would like to talk about the open ending. And I can't help feeling that it's related to the unresolved theme of the snake. Don't have time to go further, though. I'll be back later.

[amalia1985]

Yes, Virgil, I agree with you. I think that your point is really significant, because I tend to relate the snake with creation, in general. If we consider the function of the snake both in the short story and in the Genesis, what you imply takes on an additional value.

[Janine]

It seems a lot quieter in this thread. :blush: :)

Yes, I get a 'peaceful, easy feeling' in this thread, don't you? ;) :lol: A lot quieter than some.:D


Great point Janine. I would like to talk about the open ending. And I can't help feeling that it's related to the unresolved theme of the snake. Don't have time to go further, though. I'll be back later.

Thanks, Virgil, I see you are still talking to me....:) Yes, interesting idea of the open ending relating to the snake. I had not thought of this and it is a good idea to consider:


The threat perhaps is that civilization will invade Juliet's world and the snake will truely bring back that chaos.

Additionally,this would go along with the tie that amalia has made to Genesis and the snake; the way his intervention had Adam and Eve expelled from the Garden of Eden. Juliet's new haven or heaven is a kind of Garden of Eden. The modern world is the one of chaos. Chaos is mentioned in the very beginning of the story in conjuction with the snake, or serpent reference and the sea.

[jlb4tlb]

Yes, Virgil, I agree with you. I think that your point is really significant, because I tend to relate the snake with creation, in general. If we consider the function of the snake both in the short story and in the Genesis, what you imply takes on an additional value.


Greetings

Me thinks Lawrence is getting lots of uses with snakes in this tale. Note that the first encounter with a snake gets Juliet asking questions about them. She is told about good and bad snakes. Note that she is also questioning her own life. Lawrence is using the animal to define good and evil(sin). It is also a form of foreshadowing for her lust(sin) for the peasant man.

Lawrence also uses the snake as a plot device in "England, My England."

I am rather new to Lawrence, so I might be way off base here. What do you think?

Jeff

[Janine]

Greetings

Me thinks Lawrence is getting lots of uses with snakes in this tale. Note that the first encounter with a snake gets Juliet asking questions about them. She is told about good and bad snakes. Note that she is also questioning her own life. Lawrence is using the animal to define good and evil(sin). It is also a form of foreshadowing for her lust(sin) for the peasant man.

Lawrence also uses the snake as a plot device in "England, My England."

I am rather new to Lawrence, so I might be way off base here. What do you think?

Jeff

Hi Jeff, so glad to see you here today. I hope you can read along with each story we plan, and discuss with us. I say 'welcome' to you! The 'more the merrier' - right? Many of the participants in this thread had little prior knowledge of L's work - that is no draw-back, at all; so you will learn more, right? Exposure to a new author is always a good experience; and Lawrence is an author that is definitely not just read but 'experienced'.

No, I don't think you are off base one bit, considering the major significance of the snake images. I have just read a later book of L's, titled "The Plumed Serpent". Lawrence was quite taken with 'snake' or 'serpent' myth and symbolism, imagery. Your observations in this story and "England, My England" are accurate, I think. I also read 'EME' awhile back and will have to review that story. Perhaps we can pick that one soon, to discuss in this thread - it is a very good story, indeed. I had forgotten about the snake in the story. I have all of the three books, of the complete short stories; I will review it tonight. That way I can answer your post more precisely.

For now, if you read back several pages, or review this entire discussion ( this story, 'Sun'), you will see that we did discuss the 'snake' quite extensively, in terms of myth, symbolism, sexual references, sin, original sin, Biblical connections and the Garden of Eden. Therefore, you have observed well the connections. I recommend reading the prior posts, if you have not already.

Your last statement is an interesting one, about the peasant man, and I believe it to be a good idea and consideration. I do agree with you.

Again, Jeff, so pleased that you took my and Virgil's suggestion to join in our discussions on the short stories. You will like this thread - it is always very interesting and lively. :)

[amalia1985]

Yes, Jeff, I agree with you. The points you mentioned were very precise, very well-put. Welcome to our discussion!!!

[Virgil]

Let's look at the closing of the story. Here is that last section:


She knew him, in the distance, perfectly. He was a rather fat, very broad
fellow of about thirty-five, and he chewed large mouthfuls of bread. His wife
was stiff and dark-faced, handsome, sombre. They had no children. So much
Juliet had learned.

The peasant worked a great deal alone, on the opposite podere. His clothes
were always clean and cared-for, white trousers and a coloured shirt, and an
old straw hat. Both he and his wife had that air of quiet superiority which
belongs to individuals, not to a class.

His attraction was in his vitality, the peculiar quick energy which gave a
charm to his movements, stout and broad as he was. In the early days before
she took to the sun, Juliet had met him suddenly, among the rocks, when she
had scrambled over to the next podere. He had been aware of her before she saw
him, so that when she did look up, he took off his hat, gazing at her with
shyness and pride, from his big blue eyes. His face was broad and sunburnt, he
had a cropped brown moustache, meeting under his low, wide brow.

'Oh !' she said. 'Can I walk here ?'

'Surely !' he replied with that peculiar hot haste which characterised his
movement. 'My pardone would wish you to walk wherever you like on his land.'

And he pressed back his head in the quick, vivid, shy generosity of his
nature. She had gone on quickly. But instantly she had recognised the violent
generosity of his blood, and the equally violentfarouche shyness.

Since then she had seen him in the distance every day, and she came to realise
that he was one who lived a good deal to himself, like a quick animal, and
that his wife loved him intensely, with a jealousy that was almost hate;
because, probably, he wanted to give himself still, still further, beyond
where she could take him.

One day, when a group of peasants sat under a tree, she had seen him dancing
quick and gay with a child - his wife watching darkly.

Gradually Juliet and he had become intimate, across the distance. There were
aware of one another. She new, in the morning, the moment he arrived with his
***. And the moment she went out on the balcony he turned to look. But they
never saluted. Yet she missed him when he did not come to work on the podere.

Once, in the hot morning when she had been walking naked, deep in the gully
between the two estates, she had come upon him, as he was bending down, with
his powerful shoulders, picking up wood to pile on his motionless, waiting
donkey. He was her as he lifted his flushed face, and she was backing away. A
flame went over his eyes, and flame flew over her body, melting her bones. But
she backed away behind the bushes, silently, and retreated whence she had
come. And she wondered a little resentfully over the silence in which he would
work, hidden in bushy places. He had that wild animal faculty.

Since then there had been a definite pain of consciousness in the body of each
of them, though neither would admit it, and they gave no sign of recognition
but the man's wife was instinctively aware.

And Juliet had thought: Why shouldn't I meet this man for an hour, and bear
his child ? Why should I have to identify my life with a man's life ? Why not
meet him for an hour, as long as the desire lasts, and no more ? There is
already the spark between us.

But she had never made any sign. And now she saw him looking up, from where he
sat by the white cloth, opposite his black-clad wife, looking up at Maurice.
The wife turned and looked, too, saturnine.

And Juliet felt a grudge come over her. She would have to bear Maurice's child
again. She had seen it in her husband's eyes. And she knew it from his answer,
when she spoke to him.

'Will you walk about in the sun, too, without your clothes ?' she asked him.

'Why - er - yes ! Yes, I should like to, while I'm here - I suppose it's quite
private ?'

There was a gleam in his eyes, a desperate kind of courage of his desire, and
a glance at the alert lifting of her breasts in her wrapper. In this way, he
was a man, too, he faced the world and was not entirely quenched in his male
courage. He would dare to walk in the sun, even ridiculously.

But he smelled of the world, and all its fetters and its mongrel cowering. He
was branded with the brand that is not a hall-mark.

Ripe now, and brown-rosy all over with the sun, and with a heart like a fallen
rose, she had wanted to go down to the hot, shy peasant and bear his child.
Her sentiments had fallen like petals. She had seen the flushed blood in the
burnt face, and the flame in the blue eyes, and the answer in her had been a
gush of fire. He would had been a procreative sun-bath to her, and she wanted
it.

Nevertheless, her next child would be Maurice's. The fatal chain of continuity
would cause it.

Let me summarize how Lawrence got us here. The story starts with Julia in a sort of nervous breakdown in living in the actual, complex modern world. She retreats to this isalnd where she lives in sort of a paradisiacal life, a sort of primitive pagan life and where she has developed a sort of religious relationship with the Sun, a sort of diety. Next her son enters the situation which adds a layer of complexity to her new life, but one that is easily resolved. Next her husband returns, and that adds a further complexity but after some negotiation they sort of come to an agreement. But now another enters the situation, the peasant, and adds still another layer of complexity. Julia expresses a wish at this point:

And Juliet had thought: Why shouldn't I meet this man for an hour, and bear
his child ? Why should I have to identify my life with a man's life ? Why not
meet him for an hour, as long as the desire lasts, and no more ? There is
already the spark between us.
Well, that wish adds still another huge layer of complexity. This is a wish outside the norms of civilized society. This isn't just a sexual excursion that no one has to know about but a wish of bearing his child, and given the peasant's jealous wife and her husband and her child, we can expect that this situation can only lead to complexity that brought her to a nervous breakdown. The increasing complexities have brought back society into her life. The idyllic utopia that she had retreated to is slowly being invaded first by the outside world and then I think even by her ego and desires. The complexity of society is being reconstructed; and she is a living being with a will, not that ideal flower/spirit that lives in paradise. People have relationships and in the real world there are boundaries that create rules if people are to get along. And there are desires which complicate our lives.

And now I see the significance of the snake. The snake is what brings Adam and Eve out of paradise, and here too the snake is working it's way. While things are in the ideal state, the snake is in check. Julia has power over it. But Julia is warned about the dangerous kind of snake that does pose a danger. And I see the ending as a prefigure for that snake to come back into power. Remember that metaphor at the beginning: "At that moment the sea seemed to heave like the serpent of chaos that has lived forever." Forever refers to the beginning of the earth when the apple is bit and humanity loses paradise. And the chaos is what will occur if Julia bears the peasant's child.

I hope that makes sense. I can see how some might disagree with this reading.

[Janine]

Let's look at the closing of the story. Here is that last section:



Let me summarize how Lawrence got us here. The story starts with Julia in a sort of nervous breakdown in living in the actual, complex modern world. She retreats to this isalnd where she lives in sort of a paradisiacal life, a sort of primitive pagan life and where she has developed a sort of religious relationship with the Sun, a sort of diety. Next her son enters the situation which adds a layer of complexity to her new life, but one that is easily resolved. Next her husband returns, and that adds a further complexity but after some negotiation they sort of come to an agreement. But now another enters the situation, the peasant, and adds still another layer of complexity. Julia expresses a wish at this point:

Well, that wish adds still another huge layer of complexity. This is a wish outside the norms of civilized society. This isn't just a sexual excursion that no one has to know about but a wish of bearing his child, and given the peasant's jealous wife and her husband and her child, we can expect that this situation can only lead to complexity that brought her to a nervous breakdown. The increasing complexities have brought back society into her life. The idyllic utopia that she had retreated to is slowly being invaded first by the outside world and then I think even by her ego and desires. The complexity of society is being reconstructed; and she is a living being with a will, not that ideal flower/spirit that lives in paradise. People have relationships and in the real world there are boundaries that create rules if people are to get along. And there are desires which complicate our lives.

And now I see the significance of the snake. The snake is what brings Adam and Eve out of paradise, and here too the snake is working it's way. While things are in the ideal state, the snake is in check. Julia has power over it. But Julia is warned about the dangerous kind of snake that does pose a danger. And I see the ending as a prefigure for that snake to come back into power. Remember that metaphor at the beginning: "At that moment the sea seemed to heave like the serpent of chaos that has lived forever." Foever refers to the beginning of the earth when the apple is bit and humanity loses paradise. And the chaos is what will occur if Julia bears the peasant's child.

I hope that makes sense. I can see how some might disagree with this reading.

Virgil, glad to see you recapping and wrapping up this short story. You did a good job of it; you bring out some interesting points here. Seems leaving the story alone for awhile, you were able to come up with a deeper understanding and meaning for the ending. It all makes more sense to me now - the peasant, the snake, Adam and Eve, paradise, temptation, etc. Yes, I think you hit the nail on the head. I had wondered at that ending and this interpretation of yours makes perfect sense to me. This return to chaos or a chaotic world and chaotic existence is a very interesting thought to ponder. I had not, so clearly, considered this before and now I see the ending from a whole new perspective. Layering and complexity could surely lead Juliet back to where she had escaped from....civilization. Also, the mention of and the true significance of the two types of shakes, one harmless and one deadly - that, in itself, is most interesting. Thanks, this has been very enlightening.

[Virgil]

Thank you Janine. I've read this story many times and have always been puzzled by the ending. Somehow when I made that comment earlier about how the snake may play a role with the ending, it sent me thinking, and finally I see how it all comes together now. It's a richer story than "this is how paradise is" as I had originally thought.

I must say these Lawrence discussions of his stories have really enriched my understanding of his stories quite a bit. Thanks to all who participate and continue to participate.

[Dark Muse]

Not to get off topic here but I was just wondering if you guys have already read and discussed either The Man Who Loved Islands or The Man Who Died both have been recomended to me, but I have not yet had the oppertunity to read them.

[Virgil]

Not to get off topic here but I was just wondering if you guys have already read and discussed either The Man Who Loved Islands or The Man Who Died both have been recomended to me, but I have not yet had the oppertunity to read them.

We have not Muse. The Man Who Died is a little long for this thread; it's closer to a short novel. Perhaps we can read it as its own thread. If you like, once we are complete with this story we can pick "The Man Who Loved Islands" next.

[Dark Muse]

We have not Muse. The Man Who Died is a little long for this thread; it's closer to a short novel. Perhaps we can read it as its own thread.

Ahh ok I was not aware of how long it was.

[jlb4tlb]

Virgil Wrote

"Well, that wish adds still another huge layer of complexity. This is a wish outside the norms of civilized society. This isn't just a sexual excursion that no one has to know about but a wish of bearing his child, and given the peasant's jealous wife and her husband and her child, we can expect that this situation can only lead to complexity that brought her to a nervous breakdown. The increasing complexities have brought back society into her life. The idyllic utopia that she had retreated to is slowly being invaded first by the outside world and then I think even by her ego and desires. The complexity of society is being reconstructed; and she is a living being with a will, not that ideal flower/spirit that lives in paradise. People have relationships and in the real world there are boundaries that create rules if people are to get along. And there are desires which complicate our lives.

And now I see the significance of the snake. The snake is what brings Adam and Eve out of paradise, and here too the snake is working it's way. While things are in the ideal state, the snake is in check. Julia has power over it. But Julia is warned about the dangerous kind of snake that does pose a danger. And I see the ending as a prefigure for that snake to come back into power. Remember that metaphor at the beginning: "At that moment the sea seemed to heave like the serpent of chaos that has lived forever." Forever refers to the beginning of the earth when the apple is bit and humanity loses paradise. And the chaos is what will occur if Julia bears the peasant's child.

I hope that makes sense. I can see how some might disagree with this reading."

Interesting thoughts Virgil and thank you for sharing them. However I get a bit of a different take on the ending. Please bear with me.

Me thinks that Judith is torn betwen two worlds when her husband returns. Notice how Lawrence decribes his clothing. He is a intrusion to her world now. The Peasant however is one with the land.

Being that I am a somple guy, I get the feeling that she wants to become part of the simple world. But, she knows that she is an outsider and can never fit in. Thus we see that she knows that she will go back to her real world and become one with civilization again.

A rather sad ending for her, or just life its self?

Again thank you all for inviting me to join this most enlighting chat.

Jeff :thumbs_up

[Dark Muse]

Me thinks that Judith is torn betwen two worlds when her husband returns. Notice how Lawrence decribes his clothing. He is a intrusion to her world now. The Peasant however is one with the land.

Being that I am a somple guy, I get the feeling that she wants to become part of the simple world. But, she knows that she is an outsider and can never fit in. Thus we see that she knows that she will go back to her real world and become one with civilization again.

A rather sad ending for her, or just life its self?

Again thank you all for inviting me to join this most enlighting chat.

Jeff :thumbs_up


Yes I can see that, in a way I think one does get the feeling in a way, that her desires to sleep with the peseant are almost more of a dream, though I wonder, if her husband had not come back, would she have acutally done it? Or would it remained only a thought in her mind, as it was not untill his arivial that she even seems to enterain the idea or suggest it.

But the last line.

Nevertheless, her next child would be Maurice's. The fatal chain of continutiy would cause it.

It seems almost as if she accepts the fact that she knows she will never be completely part of the new world she found in the sun, the simple life, but that a part of her will always be tied to her otherself and the civilized world.

[jlb4tlb]

We have not Muse. The Man Who Died is a little long for this thread; it's closer to a short novel. Perhaps we can read it as its own thread. If you like, once we are complete with this story we can pick "The Man Who Loved Islands" next.


That would be fine with me. While looking in my local used book store I found and purchased vol 3 of the complete short stories that contains "The Man That Loved Islands" and a volume that has "St. Mawr" and "The Virgin And The Gipsy." I have gone from borrowing from the library to owning Lawrence in a very short time.

Jeff


Yes I can see that, in a way I think one does get the feeling in a way, that her desires to sleep with the peseant are almost more of a dream, though I wonder, if her husband had not come back, would she have acutally done it? Or would it remained only a thought in her mind, as it was not untill his arivial that she even seems to enterain the idea or suggest it.

But the last line.

Nevertheless, her next child would be Maurice's. The fatal chain of continutiy would cause it.

It seems almost as if she accepts the fact that she knows she will never be completely part of the new world she found in the sun, the simple life, but that a part of her will always be tied to her other self and the civilized world.

Judith knows she can never fit in, Looking into the face of the peasants wife shows a denial of passage into this simple life. So it is just a dream. In the end she will submit to her husband and bear his children, thus returning to her real world.

Jeff

[Dark Muse]

Once again sorry to step off topic here, but I just stumbled upon something that I thought might be helpful and useful. I happend upon this site, which has a list of both short stories and novels by D.H. Lawerence that can be read online.

http://www.literature.org/authors/lawrence-david-herbert/the-woman-who-rode-away-and-other-stories/index.html

[Janine]

That would be fine with me. While looking in my local used book store I found and purchased vol 3 of the complete short stories that contains "The Man That Loved Islands" and a volume that has "St. Mawr" and "The Virgin And The Gipsy." I have gone from borrowing from the library to owning Lawrence in a very short time.

Jeff

Hi Jeff and Hi Dark Muse, I am delighted to see both of you here again and actively commenting. I think we have some new Lawrence recruits, Virgil. This is wonderful!
Yes, Jeff, I know what you mean. Actually, my library had very few Lawrence books and I have been buying them like crazy. Manolia once asked me to count them and I counted over 22....so far...and probably will buy more. I am a bit of a Lawrence fanatic now;); obsessed. I am glad you found Volume 3 of the short stories. I had to order mine 'used copy' from Amazon. The books you mentioned I have read before (years ago); I know you will find them highly interesting and enjoy them very much. These are very thought-provoking stories indeed. I think that Dark Muse is interested in 'The Man Who Loved Islands' and Virgil said we could do that one next.

I enjoyed reading everyone's comments and I am glad you both had your own thoughts on the ending. I think the ending here is definitely one that is open to personal interpretation. There is one thing for certain, Lawrence often leaves us with much to comtemplate and ponder about, long after the story is finished...or is it ever truly finished? I think Lawrence perferred stories were not completed, as is true in real life.

[Virgil]

Interesting thoughts Virgil and thank you for sharing them. However I get a bit of a different take on the ending. Please bear with me.

Me thinks that Judith is torn betwen two worlds when her husband returns. Notice how Lawrence decribes his clothing. He is a intrusion to her world now. The Peasant however is one with the land.

Being that I am a somple guy, I get the feeling that she wants to become part of the simple world. But, she knows that she is an outsider and can never fit in. Thus we see that she knows that she will go back to her real world and become one with civilization again.

A rather sad ending for her, or just life its self?

Again thank you all for inviting me to join this most enlighting chat.

Jeff :thumbs_up

Thanks Jeff. It sounds like we're saying similar things.

[Janine]

Thanks Jeff. It sounds like we're saying similar things.

I seems like all of you are saying similar things, but not exactly.
Virgil, you seem to be proposing or suggesting, that should Juliet give into her impulse to have a child with this peasant man, who is a stranger and married, she will ultimately be drawn back to the world of complications and therefore lose the world of peaceful and happy repose in the sun that she has come to adapt herself to and become as a new person - reborn.

However, it is true that in the last lines of the story Lawrence does put forth that the she will have her next child with her husband and he uses the phrase 'fatal chain of continuity', which suggests a kind of irony to me or a cynicism - as though he is saying 'look how far Juliet has come only to continue in the same fatal chain of her existence'....strange, if you think of it. Is there then no true hope at the end of this story? I just wonder on this fact. It seems that to go witht the peasant would hardly be her answer and to go with the husband may not be her answer in her new goal to free herself of the bonds of civilization.


Nevertheless, her next child would be Maurice's. The fatal chain of continutiy would cause it.

[Virgil]

However, it is true that in the last lines of the story Lawrence does put forth that the she will have her next child with her husband and he uses the phrase 'fatal chain of continuity', which suggests a kind of irony to me or a cynicism - as though he is saying 'look how far Juliet has come only to continue in the same fatal chain of her existence'....strange, if you think of it. Is there then no true hope at the end of this story? I just wonder on this fact. It seems that to go witht the peasant would hardly be her answer and to go with the husband may not be her answer in her new goal to free herself of the bonds of civilization.

The last lines indicate that the bonds of civilization (as you beautifully and perfectly label it) are inevitable, "the fatal chain." It makes sense even from a biographical point of view. Remember this is Lawrence after he has developed his tuberculosis and is forced to go back to Europe. His ideal world that he wanted to create in the Americas must seem to him to be beyond human reach. It's quite possible he shed his vision of a utopia here.

[Janine]

The last lines indicate that the bonds of civilization (as you beautifully and perfectly label it) are inevitable, "the fatal chain." It makes sense even from a biographical point of view. Remember this is Lawrence after he has developed his tuberculosis and is forced to go back to Europe. His ideal world that he wanted to create in the Americas must seem to him to be beyond human reach. It's quite possible he shed his vision of a utopia here.

Thank you for you compliment on my wording.:)
:lol: Hey, Virg, I thought you always said the biography was not significant(?)...one has to separate the author from his work....just opposite what I usually do.;)
SO, I definitely agree with you (in referring to the biography of L) - yes he had to give-in and return to Europe, probably knowing 'subconsciously' that he was not long for this world, he knew his 'utopia' would never be realized in his lifetime.

[Dark Muse]

However, it is true that in the last lines of the story Lawrence does put forth that the she will have her next child with her husband and he uses the phrase 'fatal chain of continuity', which suggests a kind of irony to me or a cynicism - as though he is saying 'look how far Juliet has come only to continue in the same fatal chain of her existence'....strange, if you think of it. Is there then no true hope at the end of this story? I just wonder on this fact. It seems that to go witht the peasant would hardly be her answer and to go with the husband may not be her answer in her new goal to free herself of the bonds of civilization.

I think in someways it is a statement for life itself, and how many people are stuck in the drudge of life and romantize about past times that they imagine are more free and simplar, but they knew in the end there is no true escape, they may get a taste every now and then of that freedom, but in the end it will end and they will have to return.

[Janine]

I think in someways it is a statement for life itself, and how many people are stuck in the drudge of life and romantize about past times that they imagine are more free and simplar, but they knew in the end there is no true escape, they may get a taste every now and then of that freedom, but in the end it will end and they will have to return.

Dark Muse, It may be so, as you stated; I think we would all like to 'escape' sometimes and Lawrence, himself, made a noble effort to do so, but really he was not successful, in a physical sense. He still had to deal with the real world and have his work published. I think many artistic people especially are apt to want this escape and this drives them onto great things sometimes such as fine works of art and expression or to fine and wonderful writing. Perhaps that is why there have been in the past so many suicides by the very artistic writers such as Woolf and Plath and Edna St. Vincent Millay - just to name a few. I am sure visual artists as well and creative people. One sees the world and it is not so much to our total liking or sensibilities. We all have to look past that and own a world that we choose to and love it. In art and expression one can find solitude and peace I believe. I think Lawrence was a fine example of this. If he could not find his 'utopia' he wrote about it just the same and conveyed much to the world and to us. We have so many things to think about due to reading Lawrence. He inspired in each of us a notion of free thought. I think this is the important thing. I think Juliet looked beyond her so called 'normal' existence and embrassed the natural world and found it to be wonderous, and she knew this was the true spiritual world, even though she might have to return to the life she had known. Who knows, perhaps there could then be a compromise between her and her husband in the future. I like to look on the positive side and think she will exist and live in the her future and be transformed from her experience.

I think Lawrence did this himself. He never gave up on life and lived fully until the end of his existence. He fought such great odds with his terminal illness and yet he never gave into it and took as much as he could from life and perhaps from the sun. He had been transfigured himself and it would never depart him no matter where he traveled.

[amalia1985]

I think that what attracted me more in the story was the ending. The way I see it-and I think I have stated that previously in our thread-is that there is no absolute freedom. However, I look upon the ending in an optimistic manner, I think I would like to believe that there are some glimpses of Maurice's transformation.

[Janine]

I think that what attracted me more in the story was the ending. The way I see it-and I think I have stated that previously in our thread-is that there is no absolute freedom. However, I look upon the ending in an optimistic manner, I think I would like to believe that there are some glimpses of Maurice's transformation.

amalia, I could not have said that better. I fully agree with your assessment. :thumbs_up

[jlb4tlb]

The last lines indicate that the bonds of civilization (as you beautifully and perfectly label it) are inevitable, "the fatal chain." It makes sense even from a biographical point of view. Remember this is Lawrence after he has developed his tuberculosis and is forced to go back to Europe. His ideal world that he wanted to create in the Americas must seem to him to be beyond human reach. It's quite possible he shed his vision of a utopia here.

Does any of the esteemed posters know of a good on line (print editions as well} bibliography of Lawrence's short stories. Knowing the time period of the stories writing can be extremely important. The same holds true in music, painting and other visual arts as well.

Jeff

[Virgil]

Does any of the esteemed posters know of a good on line (print editions as well} bibliography of Lawrence's short stories. Knowing the time period of the stories writing can be extremely important. The same holds true in music, painting and other visual arts as well.

Jeff

Unfortunately Jeff, no. I haven't found a perfect site. Wiki's entry is about as good as available. I think Cambridge has a site and University of Nottingham too. You might want to check them out. If you find a good web site, let me know. :)

edit: Cambridge doesn't haven't a Lawrence site at all. I was under the wrong impression.

[jlb4tlb]

I think in someways it is a statement for life itself, and how many people are stuck in the drudge of life and romantize about past times that they imagine are more free and simplar, but they knew in the end there is no true escape, they may get a taste every now and then of that freedom, but in the end it will end and they will have to return.

Dark Muse empresses the same feelings that I come away from it. Think of the times in your past that you dreamed of never leaving and settling down in that vacation spot, only to be pulled away to your "real World."

I am not sure if it is sad but it is reality.

Reading the various thoughts on the ending has been quite enjoyable.

Jeff

[Dark Muse]

I am not sure if it is sad but it is reality.

Reading the various thoughts on the ending has been quite enjoyable.

Jeff

To me it seems almost to be bittersweet, I do not know about others, but with me, when I am on vaccation there is always that part that is torn when it nears an end, on the one hand you wish sometimes you could just stand and it would never end, but another part does look forwrd to returning back to thinks you know and remember.

[Janine]

Does any of the esteemed posters know of a good on line (print editions as well} bibliography of Lawrence's short stories. Knowing the time period of the stories writing can be extremely important. The same holds true in music, painting and other visual arts as well.

Jeff

Jeff, do you mean a critical analysis of the stories or just a bibliography with timeline? I did buy one critical analysis book online from Amazon that deals with Lawrence's early fiction and this includes some of the early short stories, this would tell you the dates, as well. Other than that I would have to tell you to run a search through Amazon for Lawrence books and you may find one. I have about 22 books connected to Lawrence and a couple of borrowed books, on top of this. There is one book that deals with the time periods in particular; such as the years these stories were written and compares them to what Lawrence was doing at the time and/or where he resided. I think this book is now out of print, so one must search for a 'used' one online or at a used bookstore - good luck.
If you want I can list the two books I have just mentioned in this post. As far as free commentary or bibliograhy online, I don't think you will find this too readily, but you could try running a search in Google - you just never know what will surface. I have run many myself and found some very interesting sites; even some obscure ones by hunting back several pages in the listings. One is the Nottingham University site - which I have posted the address in these L threads several times now. It is wonderful for Lawrence's biographical information. Let me know if you can't find it, and I will re-post this link for you -it is a great site!

If you have any questions on Lawrence's biography I know quite a lot now, so does Virgil. I read three biographies and I am planning a 4th and 5th one soon. The man's life is totally fascinating.

[Virgil]

One more thing on the story "Sun." In his last work before he died (Apocalypse), a philsophic book that kind of explained a lot of his philosophy, Lawrence wrote the following:


Perhaps the greatest difference between us and the pagans lies in our different relation to the cosmos. With us, all is personal. Landscape and the sky, these are to us the delicious background of our personal life, and no more. Even the universe of the scientist is little more than an extension of our personality, to us. To the pagan, landscape and personal background were on the whole indifferent. But the cosmos was a very real thing. A man lived with cosmos, and knew it greater than himself.
Don't let us imagine we see the sun as the old civilisations saw it. All we see is a scientific little luminary, dwindled to a ball of blazing gas. ... We may see what we call the sun, but we have lost Helios forever, and the great orb of the Chaldeans still more. We have lost the cosmos, by coming out of responsive connection with it, and this is our chief tragedy. What is our petty little love of nature – Nature!! – compared to the ancient magnificent living with cosmos, and being honoured by the cosmos!
-- Apocalypse, V

I think he had this in mind as he wrote the short story a few years prior.

[Janine]

One more thing on the story "Sun." In his last work before he died (Apocalypse), a philsophic book that kind of explained a lot of his philosophy, Lawrence wrote the following:



I think he had this in mind as he wrote the short story a few years prior.

Thanks for posting this Virgil. As you know I read "Apocalypse" and I was actually quite fascinated with the book. This does explain more clearly Lawrence's affinity with the sun and his reasons for writing this short story.


To me it seems almost to be bittersweet, I do not know about others, but with me, when I am on vaccation there is always that part that is torn when it nears an end, on the one hand you wish sometimes you could just stand and it would never end, but another part does look forwrd to returning back to thinks you know and remember.

Dark Muse, Yes, I too felt there was an element of 'bittersweetness' in the ending, knowing things would not be as they were before, when Juliet could worship or bask alone in the sun freely with her child. I think, too, she had a kind of realm of privacy that she probably never felt she had before, and now she would feel had been invaded and would be lost. It is something like the feeling one gets at the end of a vacation knowing one must now return to the quote 'normal' world of existence. That was a good analogy. There is a certain let-down knowing the time away is nearing it's end.

[Janine]

Are we done with this short story "Sun"? I just wanted to say to Virgil that it was an excellent choice and I think we all seemed to like it very much. It was quite unique and different, being as a sort of long prose poem, in style. Will Lawrence cease to amaze us?

[Dark Muse]

Yes it was a good choice and I must thank Janine for making me aware of it and this discussion. I rather enjoyed this story and look forward to reading more.

[Virgil]

Thank you for you compliment on my wording.:)
:lol: Hey, Virg, I thought you always said the biography was not significant(?)...one has to separate the author from his work....just opposite what I usually do.;)

I was thinking of you when I said that and had a feeling you would catch me in my use of his biography. ;) I still don't think it makes the story better or worse, but it is an interesting observation.


Are we done with this short story "Sun"? I just wanted to say to Virgil that it was an excellent choice and I think we all seemed to like it very much. It was quite unique and different, being as a sort of long prose poem, in style. Will Lawrence cease to amaze us?

I don't have any more to say on "Sun." If everyone is finished discussing it we can move on to Dark Muse's suggestion of "The Man Who Loved Islands." I remember that being an interesting story.

[Janine]

OK - geez... I was going to put merely 'ok'... then a window popped up saying my message was too short. I was going to post another one saying the last one is the shortest post I have ever had.....:lol:

Ok, instead I will answer Dark Muse and say that I am delighted you came into the discussion and glad you are looking forward to the next one. I was also happy to see Jeff commenting and hope he also returns for the next story. I always try to recruit new Lawrence people, just ask Virgil.;) I work hard at the task; new faces are always exciting.


I was thinking of you when I said that and had a feeling you would catch me in my use of his biography. I still don't think it makes the story better or worse, but it is an interesting observation.

Yeah right, sure Virgil....hummm...just posting that for my sake....am I suppose to believe this really....?:lol:

I am ready for the next story; is that one in Volume 3? I am sure I have that one here in one of my books. Tell me when you wish to start - perhaps Monday?

[Virgil]

Yeah right, sure Virgil....hummm...just posting that for my sake....am I suppose to believe this really....?:lol:


No really, it was the truth.



I am ready for the next story; is that one in Volume 3? I am sure I have that one here in one of my books. Tell me when you wish to start - perhaps Monday?
That sounds good. It will give us the weekend to read it. Yes it is in volume three. Let me see if I can find it on the internet. Somehow I don't think we will on this one.

edit: I found it!! It is on the internet: http://www.literature.org/authors/lawrence-david-herbert/the-woman-who-rode-away-and-other-stories/part-09/index.html

[Janine]

No really, it was the truth.

Oh silly me; you know I read that statement of yours wrong. I thought it said you posted the biography reference for my sake. I just read it again...oops:blush:


That sounds good. It will give us the weekend to read it. Yes it is in volume three. Let me see if I can find it on the internet. Somehow I don't think we will on this one.



edit: I found it!! It is on the internet: http://www.literature.org/authors/lawrence-david-herbert/the-woman-who-rode-away-and-other-stories/part-09/index.html

Oh good. Good work finding it online, Virgil. How you locate these things is beyond me and free. I went hunting for my actual paperback book and it is eluding me; volume 3. It is around here somewhere; had to tear my room appart yesterday, so that the guy taking out my airconditioner from the window, could find a small path to that window:idea: . All the books got stuck here and there around the room and I failed to put the room back together today....excuse is have to clean the window (now that it is assessable) ugh...also other things in the area. More fun being on here. ;) :lol:

[amalia1985]

Virgil's choice was great, I enjoyed both reading "Sun" and taking part in the discussion. As you know, I have recently read "The Man Who Loved Islands" so when the discussion is about to start, PM me and I will be there. May I say that this is a great choice too?

[Dark Muse]

I look forward to reading the next story and will print it out today.

[Janine]

Virgil's choice was great, I enjoyed both reading "Sun" and taking part in the discussion. As you know, I have recently read "The Man Who Loved Islands" so when the discussion is about to start, PM me and I will be there. May I say that this is a great choice too?

Hi Amalia, So glad you already read it. It is a long story - but I was reading it last night between watching a movie - you see my stupid DVD player is on the blink and keeps stalling every 30 or so seconds, so I just glanced at the story and read a paragraph between. Now that is what I call really 'multi-tasking'! Nothing like overloading one's brain:eek2:

What I want to say is I actually read about 1/3 so far and I like it very much. Somehow the story tone reminds me of Lawrence's story "Things" which I like very much. I think I can sort of see where this story is going to lead us. Yikes, I am starting to think like DHL! ;) Do you think that is overexposure to the author?:lol:

Dark Muse, hi and glad you are happy with the choice. Glad that Virgil found it online for everyone; thanks again, V. If it was not as long as it is, I would print it out, too; maybe mark certain passages. I think, actually, I read this story years ago, but re-reading any L work is a whole new adventure. They never tire me at all and seem as fresh after two or even three readings. So far I really like this story about the man on the island. I love the sea and islands anyway.

I had wanted to do a few more of the earlier stories, but I guess sometime we can backtrack to that time-period. We have so quickly progressed to Lawrence's later work with Volume 3 of the "Collected Short Stories".

[Quark]

You're moving on already? I'm going to be two stories behind by the time I rejoin the thread. Someone's going to have give me an abbreviated summary of the discussion when I come back so I'm not completely in the dark.

[Janine]

You're moving on already? I'm going to be two stories behind by the time I rejoin the thread. Someone's going to have give me an abbreviated summary of the discussion when I come back so I'm not completely in the dark.

Hi Quark,glad you see you back and don't worry about it..missing the two stories. You can catch up eventually. I am so fanatically stuck on Lawrence's work lately, I can discuss more about the other stories or summarize them for you. I am sure Virgil will come to your aid, as well. Yes, I actually thought of taking a break this next story, but now once again, became intrigued in starting to read the story, and I want to read it all, so I am still in. It is a good one!

Hurry back as soon as you can...we all miss you!

[Janine]

Sorry, I am lagging behind again with my reading. I did not progress any from the other night. I got so busy and still am. I hope everyone else is still reading the story. Maybe we can get started discussing next week?

[Virgil]

I'm way lagging too. I have yet to start. Sorry, but completely overwhelmed right now.

[Janine]

I'm way lagging too. I have yet to start. Sorry, but completely overwhelmed right now.

Virgil, you know, I really wanted to skip this month and postpone till January. I feel too pressured already with Christmas coming. Do you think the others would mind? I haven't been feeling well either. I hate to miss this story but if we could delay it it would be so much better for me and apparently for you, too.

[Dark Muse]

I would not mind if we delay it, as it might be a better discussion if people are not busy and preoccupied with the holidays comming up, so I would be fine with that.

[Virgil]

I don't mind. Dark Muse, do you mind if we start after Christmas?

edit: You beat me to it. :)

[Janine]

Virgil and Dark Muse, thanks for being so understanding. Already, I feel the holiday crunch or tension, and I know my mind is not going to be on this thread whole-heartedly. I luckily, already did read the Christmas book, so I could probably discuss some aspects of that one and review a little. I am sure amalia will be in agreement and manolia, as well. I guess just Jeff and Quark are left and I am sure they will agree. Gee, we are such an agreeable group, aren't we? :D So it will be in January for the read, Virgil? Shall we make an announcement? or it this good enough.

[Virgil]

Virgil and Dark Muse, thanks for being so understanding. Already, I feel the holiday crunch or tension, and I know my mind is not going to be on this thread whole-heartedly. I luckily, already did read the Christmas book, so I could probably discuss some aspects of that one and review a little. I am sure amalia will be in agreement and manolia, as well. I guess just Jeff and Quark are left and I am sure they will agree. Gee, we are such an agreeable group, aren't we? :D So it will be in January for the read, Virgil? Shall we make an announcement? or it this good enough.

OK, we are officially on break. We will read "The Man Who Loved Islands" as our January Lawrence short story read.

[Janine]

OK, we are officially on break. We will read "The Man Who Loved Islands" as our January Lawrence short story read.

Thanks Virgil, I really needed this break! Yeah! :D

[amalia1985]

I'm in favor of it too!!! Pretty busy with exams right now!!! January would be ideal!!!

[Janine]

I'm in favor of it too!!! Pretty busy with exams right now!!! January would be ideal!!!

Great, Amalia, thanks! Everyone is so considerate. :)

[jlb4tlb]

Fine by me finished "Islands" today.

Jeff

[Janine]

Fine by me finished "Islands" today.

Jeff

Jeff, ok, to delay then; thanks for being so understanding. We are all so busy with holiday stuff. How was the story? Interesting? Hope you enjoyed it. We will be back in here in January to discuss it. J

[jlb4tlb]

Greetings all

It is my hope that everybody had a great Christmas and a hppy new year.

I for one would enjoy resuming our discussions on the stories of D.H.L. At this time I am reading Maugham's "Of Human Bondage" very good but not up to "Sons and Lovers."

Anybody else up to some short fiction chat?

Jeff

[Janine]

Greetings all

It is my hope that everybody had a great Christmas and a hppy new year.

I for one would enjoy resuming our discussions on the stories of D.H.L. At this time I am reading Maugham's "Of Human Bondage" very good but not up to "Sons and Lovers."

Anybody else up to some short fiction chat?

Jeff

Hi Jeff, glad you see you back here with your avid interest in Lawrence works. Hira has emailed me about the next short story, questioning when it will begin. Good news is that we are gearing up for the next round of Lawrence discussions! Most likely they will begin on Monday, but all of us can start reading the story now; hopefully we will complete reading in a few days time. I talked to Virgil, and he said he would read this next story: "The Man Who Loved Islands" this weekend; he would start posting on Monday. This coincides nicely with my own schedule, since I am finishing up the Christmas read of "Fathers and Sons"; I have but one or two chapters, to read tonight, and then I will be done with the book and can post some comments in that repective thread and proceed to my Lawrence reading.

Jeff, I hope you had a fine holiday, too. If you are like me, you are adjusting to getting back to normal routine and recovering from all the holiday rush. Happy New Year to you and everyone here.

How interesting, "Of Human Bondage", I saw the film and thought I might like to read the book someday. You will have to let me know how it was when you complete it. However, my current plans include two more Lawrence books, that I will be reading independently, so I don't have the time for another novel right now. One is a more obscure work, of the time period when he and his wife resided in Australia (Lawrence traveled extensively to many countries to live) entitled "Kangaroo". The second book will be a re-reading for me of "The Rainbow". I will try to read that in a few months and hopefully start a thread on it. I hope you and others can join in, since you enjoyed "Sons and Lovers" so much. Jeff, have you read "Women in Love"? That is a very fine book, as well. In reality "WIL" is the sequel to "TR" but the order in which one reads them is not at all significant, in my opinion.

This is great, discovering more Lawrence enthusiasts! :thumbs_up

[Dark Muse]

Cannot wait untill the discussion starts, now if only I can remember the story, LOL.

I loved The Rainbow.

[Janine]

Cannot wait untill the discussion starts, now if only I can remember the story, LOL.

I loved The Rainbow.

Yes, it should be great! We have so many new Lawrence fans. You must have been posting, Dark Muse, just as I was revising my post (see above). DM, it is good to see you back here again. Wow, everyone is really anxious to get started. I often re-read these stories, because I find I can post better and see more of the details, symbols and themes, after two read-throughs. I would consider that option, since we have until Monday, or at least to review the text quickly, if you have limited time.
I think the text is here online, so that we can use it to quote certain passages. I can't wait now to read the story; what I had read so far greatly interested me. I will start over again, because definitely I don't recall too much about the story. I need to refresh my own memory.

DM, I hope you can join in when we have our discussion group on "The Rainbow". I know it is Virgil's favorite Lawrence novel, or at least it was, before we read and discussed "Women in Love". I think he still puts it, as his favorite, but "WIL" was a close second. It has been years since I read the book. Anxious to get back to it this year.

See you all soon. Have a nice weekend! :)

[Virgil]

Oh great. We will start soon. I'll need the weekend to read the story and we'll start discussing it right after if that's ok with all. Happy holidays all.

[Nossa]

Hey guys!! It's been a while since I came here :D
I was just checking the thread, and found out that you're reading The Man Who Loved Islands. It was one of the short stories I read at the beginning of this year, as I wanted to join you for the discussion, but hardly had a time to come online, so I read a book of short stories that I had. Since everyone is having the weekend off, and I kinda forgot the story(since it's been a year since I read it), I'll get a head start, and read it starting from today (which is officially MY weekend..lol). I'll hopefully come online and join the discussion.

[Virgil]

Hey guys!! It's been a while since I came here :D
I was just checking the thread, and found out that you're reading The Man Who Loved Islands. It was one of the short stories I read at the beginning of this year, as I wanted to join you for the discussion, but hardly had a time to come online, so I read a book of short stories that I had. Since everyone is having the weekend off, and I kinda forgot the story(since it's been a year since I read it), I'll get a head start, and read it starting from today (which is officially MY weekend..lol). I'll hopefully come online and join the discussion.

Great to have you join us Nossa. I look forward to your thoughts. :)

[Janine]

Great to have you join us Nossa. I look forward to your thoughts. :)

Virgil, glad you will be part of the discussion, between your time on the Aeneid thread.

Nossa, I second what Virgil said. So glad you will join us. Wow, our Lawrence group has certainly grown! I am so glad to see all this interest; it is a good intelligent group. :thumbs_up
I probably read this story, years ago, but now I will be reading it during the coming weekend...that starts tomorrow night here.;) Actually, will try to start it tonight - I just finished the Christmas book read....better late than never, I guess.:lol:

[Dark Muse]

DM, I hope you can join in when we have our discussion group on "The Rainbow". I know it is Virgil's favorite Lawrence novel, or at least it was, before we read and discussed "Women in Love". I think he still puts it, as his favorite, but "WIL" was a close second. It has been years since I read the book. Anxious to get back to it this year.

See you all soon. Have a nice weekend! :)

Sounds interesting, I will have to keep an eye for when that starts.

[Janine]

Sounds interesting, I will have to keep an eye for when that starts.

It will be awhile from now....hey, but great! :thumbs_up

I will let you know at the time, DM.

[Dark Muse]

Cool I will look forward to it

[Janine]

Great! Glad you will be in the discussion.

[Janine]

Hi Everyone! I started the story again last night and today I reached part II. I really love the story so far. I am happy to be back reading Lawrence again! I love the way he describes the islands, and the flowers particularly interest me. Lawrence, himself, was an avid botonist and studied it extensively in college and his work is always so peppered with lovely floral descriptions; no wonder. He truly knew his flowers and plants, and at times I feel again, as in "Sun" that I am reading a long epic poem....it flows like poetry. I particularly was interested in the man in the story (who seems to be nameless) taking time to rename all the flowers and plants on the island, in their Latin names. I have a garden of my own and a friend has a great garden and I have always been envious that she can so easily name the various flowers and plants, with their Latin names.

I think some of the decriptions of the austerity and separateness, isolation of the island is interesting as well, as the idea of it being as a ship out to sea. This was mentioned during a storm, I believe.

Hope everyone does not mind me making a few preliminary comments. I will read more tonight and I am sure I will finish the story before the weekend is through....I am enjoying it very much....now that all the reading and holiday pressure is off.

I am going out now, so I will check in later on tonight. You can all wait until Monday to post or post some comments now, if you wish to.

[Nossa]

I'm done with part one too. I'll hopefully start reading Part II tonight :D Can't wait for the discussion.:D

[Nossa]

Okay, few comments on Part I :D
I totally agree with you Janine, I loved the description. At the beginning of the story, he managed to describe the beauty of the island, and the beauty of nature there, but I still had that feeling of loneliness and even gloominess while reading it. I loved how he likened the caves and the ruins on the island at night to priests and pirates, it kind of reminded me of when we're children, afraid of dakrness to the extent that we imagine that things around us look like something else.
The part where he was describing the idea of time in solitude, and how minutes when you're alone expand to endless hours (he didn't say that exactly). I just loved the description!!
I don't know if I should say more comments without spoiling the story..lol
I'll keep them till everyone joins in :D

[Dark Muse]

One of the things I really loved about Part 1 is the way in which he talked about the ancient Celtic Ghosts that in his mind still haunted the island, and the way in which there was this balance, or conflict between both the idea of solitude, and peace, and isolation and lonliness. The island was painted as being beutiful, but at the same time, it had these hidden and frightining asepcts to it.

[Nossa]

One of the things I really loved about Part 1 is the way in which he talked about the ancient Celtic Ghosts that in his mind still haunted the island, and the way in which there was this balance, or conflict between both the idea of solitude, and peace, and isolation and lonliness. The island was painted as being beutiful, but at the same time, it had these hidden and frightining asepcts to it.

I totally second that :D

[Janine]

Okay, few comments on Part I :D
I totally agree with you Janine, I loved the description. At the beginning of the story, he managed to describe the beauty of the island, and the beauty of nature there, but I still had that feeling of loneliness and even gloominess while reading it. I loved how he likened the caves and the ruins on the island at night to priests and pirates, it kind of reminded me of when we're children, afraid of dakrness to the extent that we imagine that things around us look like something else.
The part where he was describing the idea of time in solitude, and how minutes when you're alone expand to endless hours (he didn't say that exactly). I just loved the description!!
I don't know if I should say more comments without spoiling the story..lol
I'll keep them till everyone joins in :D

Hi Nossa,
I always love Lawrence's descriptive passages and especially how well he can depict nature and natural surroundings. I liked that idea, too, of the caves the the way he associates these with the 'ancient Celtic ghosts', as Dark Muse has pointed out, and the 'priests and pirates', as you stated. Two good points and very significant to the story and perhaps a little ominous I think in our anticipation of what will be coming next in the story.

Yes, I found that time passage fascinating also and so well thought out and so true. Time is a very relative concept if you think about it. You know how people will say "my, time flies!" or "where has the time gone" or "time is of the essence" - there are a zillion sayings about time; I think this is because we really don't fully understand the whole concept of time; we cannot perhaps. Time is only a measurement and an abstract in our minds. This passage perfectly stated this whole idea of time and presented us with something to consider, ponder. I thought, when reading this passage that this was completely brilliant writing, on Lawrence's part.

Yes, Nossa and anyone commenting, please don't go beyond Part, because I really want to be surprised at how this story will end; in fact, I can't wait to read more tonight. No spoilers, please, until after Monday when we all will have read the story completely through. Thanks so much!

Glad you are all enjoying it so and good to see a few posts with preliminary comments. This is going to be a great discussion.

[Virgil]

I finished my first reading of the story last night. It was such a pleasurable read. I kept getting more and more interesting as it went along. I want to read it one more time, this time scribbling some notes in the margins, and I'll be ready to discuss this by tomorrow night. :)

[Janine]

I finished my first reading of the story last night. It was such a pleasurable read. I kept getting more and more interesting as it went along. I want to read it one more time, this time scribbling some notes in the margins, and I'll be ready to discuss this by tomorrow night. :)

Hi again Everyone! I finished this morning, too and I will take your suggestion and re-read through again, V. I will also take some notes as I do, and will try to be better prepared this time around.
I liked the story so much. It read like poetry, I thought, and as you said, Virgil, 'I kept getting more and more interested as it went along.' That ending gave me much to think about today.

[Dark Muse]

Yes I found that the ending was quite thought provoking when I read it.

[Janine]

Yes I found that the ending was quite thought provoking when I read it.

DM, funny it has been coming back to me all day long...sort of subtly....
I guess when we get to the ending I will have a lot of questions in my mind and I am sure we will all have a lot of thoughts on that, too.

First, we should discuss the story as it develops; we usually do it that way, and it works out so well. I will at least review the first Part I and makes notes, for Monday. I also want to look up when Lawrence wrote this story. It must be a later one since it is in Volume III of the Short Stories.

[Dark Muse]

Sounds good, cannot wait

[Virgil]

First, we should discuss the story as it develops; we usually do it that way, and it works out so well. I will at least review the first Part I and makes notes, for Monday. I also want to look up when Lawrence wrote this story. It must be a later one since it is in Volume III of the Short Stories.

Janine, in that book you have, can you look up when lawrence actually wrote it. And if memory serves me correctly, he actually had a real person in mind that he based the story on. What background info does that book provide on this story?

[Janine]

Janine, in that book you have, can you look up when lawrence actually wrote it. And if memory serves me correctly, he actually had a real person in mind that he based the story on. What background info does that book provide on this story?

Virgil,Yes, I was intending to do that. I have to go eat something now, but will look it up, while I eat my breakfast. I thought in the same vain, that it would be interesting to know just when this story was written and even more interesting now to know he based it on someone real. I will also check my other reference books and see if I can find out more about that person, when I find out who he is.

[Virgil]

Virgil,Yes, I was intending to do that. I have to go eat something now, but will look it up, while I eat my breakfast. I thought in the same vain, that it would be interesting to know just when this story was written and even more interesting now to know he based it on someone real. I will also check my other reference books and see if I can find out more about that person, when I find out who he is.

I remembered who that man was: Compton Mackenzie and I looked him up and he has a Wiki entry: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compton_Mackenzie.

It sounds like it's just vaguely based on his person, so i don't think there's much to be gained by looking up the details of his life.

[Nossa]

I got caught up in studying today, I couldn't finish the story. I'll finish it tonight hopefully, and join the discussion starting from tomorrow :D Hope that's okay with everyone?

[Janine]

I got caught up in studying today, I couldn't finish the story. I'll finish it tonight hopefully, and join the discussion starting from tomorrow :D Hope that's okay with everyone?

Nossa, that is no problem at all. Take your time. We will start tomorrow to discuss the story. I read it through once and hope to read through again and make some notes, but I know I will not accomplish all by tomorrow. My own plan is to re-read through Part 1, up to Part 2; I figure we can discuss up to that point to observe the develpment of the story and certain key elements as presented, in the first part. So you will have time to finish the story this week.

[Nossa]

Nossa, that is no problem at all. Take your time. We will start tomorrow to discuss the story. I read it through once and hope to read through again and make some notes, but I know I will not accomplish all by tomorrow. My own plan is to re-read through Part 1, up to Part 2; I figure we can discuss up to that point to observe the develpment of the story and certain key elements as presented, in the first part. So you will have time to finish the story this week.

Great :D I'm planning on finishing it tonight, I'll take a break after studying, and finish it then. Sometimes I wish I was studying these stories! I'd have had a whole lot better studying hours than those I'm spending in studying The Canterbury Tales :lol:

[Janine]

Great :D I'm planning on finishing it tonight, I'll take a break after studying, and finish it then. Sometimes I wish I was studying these stories! I'd have had a whole lot better studying hours than those I'm spending in studying The Canterbury Tales :lol:

Take your time, Nossa. You can just finish through Part 1; we can stay up to that point a few days, or so - to discuss. The story does move smoothly and quickly though. I read it in two nights, but easily could have done so in one night, had I not fallen asleep reading. :(
So how are the Canterbury Tales?

[Nossa]

Take your time, Nossa. You can just finish through Part 1; we can stay up to that point a few days, or so - to discuss. The story does move smoothly and quickly though. I read it in two nights, but easily could have done so in one night, had I not fallen asleep reading. :(
So how are the Canterbury Tales?

:lol: I'm glad I'm not the only one who falls asleep while reading. Just last night, I was reading something I printed out about North and South and the next I know I was awake at 7 am :D It's always the same story, I study till late at night, and it's always my dad who comes in and switches off the light, it's kind of a routine now for him..lol
The Canterbury Tales is boring! I mean, nothing interesting ever happens. The only tale that got my attention was the Pardoner's.Right now I'm studying the Nun's Priest's Tale and it's SO boring. Why should I care of a cok gets eaten by a fox anyways? lol Lawrence is WAY better!!

[Janine]

:lol: I'm glad I'm not the only one who falls asleep while reading. Just last night, I was reading something I printed out about North and South and the next I know I was awake at 7 am :D It's always the same story, I study till late at night, and it's always my dad who comes in and switches off the light, it's kind of a routine now for him..lol
The Canterbury Tales is boring! I mean, nothing interesting ever happens. The only tale that got my attention was the Pardoner's.Right now I'm studying the Nun's Priest's Tale and it's SO boring. Why should I care of a cok gets eaten by a fox anyways? lol Lawrence is WAY better!!

:lol: I never had a desire to read those tales and now I know why.;) I thought they might bore me.

Yes, I know well enough about falling asleep...it is awful, isn't it? One minute you are reading and then your eyes get so heavy, you close them for a short rest, or so you think; next thing you know, you wake up hours later and the lights are still on and the book has fallen off your chest. I fell asleep, last night, listening to a book on my MP3 player - now that is a sure cure for insomnia! I will now have to back-track and try to figure out where I was in the book. All I know is, I woke up about 3 hours later, battery was almost exhausted, and I think I missed hearing about 2 chapters!:lol:

Wow, we made a real 'Lawrence' advocate out of you!

[Dark Muse]

I picked up the Canterbury TaLels somewhere, I started reading them when I was at my sister's house, and finnished the book I brought to read and did not have anything else, but I did not get that far, and then when I got home I went back to my regular reading, but I do wish to pick them up and finnish them eventually.

[Nossa]

:lol: I never had a desire to read those tales and now I know why.:lol: I thought they might bore me.

Yes, I know well enough about falling asleep...it is awful, isn't it? One minute you are reading and then your eyes get so heavy, you close them for a short rest, or so you think; next thing you know, you wake up hours later and the lights are still on and the book has fallen off your chest. I fell asleep, last night, listening to a book on my MP3 player - now that is a sure cure for insomnia! I will now have to back-track and try to figure out where I was in the book. All I know is, I woke up about 3 hours later, battery was almost exhausted, and I think I missed hearing about 2 chapters!:lol:

:lol::lol: The problem is, I LOVE reading in bed! I mean, it's better to read while sitting on a chair or something, but it's SO much more enjoyable to read in bed, and esp. since it's winter and it's SO cold, it's great just sit it, with a cup of tea in your hand, and just read! Now this is life!!
I don't normaly care about the lights, cuz I know that my dad is there :lol: He takes care of that every night :lol:
And take it from someone who knows..do NOT read The Canterbury Tales, they're bad for health :lol:
And speaking of audio books, I thought about doing this once, cuz I normaly wake up very early to go to college, and it takes at least 45 mins to get there, so I thought I might get something to listen to while on my way there, are they useful when you're out? Or is it only good when you're at home or some place where you can concentrate more?

[Janine]

:lol::lol: The problem is, I LOVE reading in bed! I mean, it's better to read while sitting on a chair or something, but it's SO much more enjoyable to read in bed, and esp. since it's winter and it's SO cold, it's great just sit it, with a cup of tea in your hand, and just read! Now this is life!!

The problem is the same for me. Bed is so much more comfy as you said, especially in the cold winter months. It surely is life! I won't give it up, even if I do sometimes fall asleep.



I don't normaly care about the lights, cuz I know that my dad is there :lol: He takes care of that every night :lol:
And take it from someone who knows..do NOT read The Canterbury Tales, they're bad for health :lol:

Well, I don't care about lights much either; I usually only have one on, but one night I woke up and my computer was still one and all the lights in two rooms I occuppy on the second floor and it was hard going around, with one eye open, shutting everything down.



And speaking of audio books, I thought about doing this once, cuz I normaly wake up very early to go to college, and it takes at least 45 mins to get there, so I thought I might get something to listen to while on my way there, are they useful when you're out? Or is it only good when you're at home or some place where you can concentrate more?

Audiobooks... I find them great,...well, if you get a good narrator, that is. Some are animated and some are soooo boring. I can especially appreciate, and pay better attention to a full cast, such as the ones available for Shakespeare plays - I love those! I find when I am out, trying to concentrate, it is harder since one is bombarded with so much eye stimulation, which to me is distracting. This is basically why I do listen when I am in bed, or sometimes, when doing mindless chores, like laundry or cooking dinner. Only trouble listening in bed is that, if you're prone to fall asleep, you might just do so...it is easy to shut your eyes and drift right off. I did manage to get through one chapter last night, I believe. I usually just take the books chapter by chapter, one a night. Also, this is the first full-length book I have attempted, and since I read the novel twice before, if I miss something, I know what I have missed and can find that part easily, when rewinding.

Nossa, you should give it a try. It is a whole new experience, listening to it being read to you or performed (as in Shakespeare). The narrator I am currently listening to, also does various voices for each character and this helps greatly in distinquishing them and keeping your interest in the story, as well.

[Nossa]

I'll give it a try :D Hopefully they're available here in bookstores, though I'm sure if they were, they'll be so expensive.

[Hira]

I once read, ages ago, in a magazine about D.H. Lawrence wishing to form a community of sorts on an island, he named it too, something starting with an R or something. Can't remember. Is anyone of you familiar with this idea of his?
I'll see if I can find it on the internet.

[Virgil]

I once read, ages ago, in a magazine about D.H. Lawrence wishing to form a community of sorts on an island, he named it too, something starting with an R or something. Can't remember. Is anyone of you familiar with this idea of his?
I'll see if I can find it on the internet.

Yes, he wanted to call it "Rananim." There is an internet society by that name devoted to discussing Lawrence. This is an exerpt from the web stire:

Why "Rananim"?

I am often asked, "Why Rananim? What does it mean?" It was the name Lawrence used whenever he spoke of the Utopian society he hoped to create. The word comes from a Hebrew song which he heard sung by his Jewish friend, Samuel Koteliansky.http://web.ukonline.co.uk/rananim/lawrence/rananim.html

I have recently become a member, but I haven't really participated yet. It seems interesting, but you have to be a real fan of DHL in order to find it interesting. I bet there are such societies on all authors.

[Hira]

Thanks Virgil. I just found the article (http://www.dawn.com/weekly/books/archive/070923/books4.htm). Here is the excerpt referring to the island.

He had gathered around him people like Murry, Katherine Mansfield, Catherine Carswell, Rupert Brooke, Edward Marsh and the list goes on. He had been talking Rananim with them. His idea was that they were to get away from England to found an island community where they would establish a new pattern of life, that would spread and spread until the world was regenerated and ennobled. It was a very complete thing in Lawrence’s mind — it even had its symbol, ‘a phoenix, rising on symmetrical wings, from a circle of very beautiful flickering flames that rose upwards from the rim of the cup.’ .

Yet this story is so anti-Utopia. That somehow it can never be achieved. Why this change in views? The ending is so perfectly chilling. I was almost shivering at the end.

[jlb4tlb]

Greetings

"The man Who Loved Islands" is a very interesting read. It should provide some very thought provoking discussion.

I still have not finished "Of Human Bondage," it is a very slow read. At times very thought provoking and at other times a totally boring read.

"woman In Love" is on my short list of upcoming classic novels. I do however read lots of more popular books in the science fiction, fantasy, horror, weird and crime fiction genres. So it will most likely get to it in a few months.

I try to read at least one "classic" per month. Last month I read Baldwin's "Go Tell It To The Mountain." An incredible read, one that is not to be missed.

Jeff

[amalia1985]

I cannot wait...I cannot wait!

[Virgil]

Thanks Virgil. I just found the article (http://www.dawn.com/weekly/books/archive/070923/books4.htm). Here is the excerpt referring to the island.

He had gathered around him people like Murry, Katherine Mansfield, Catherine Carswell, Rupert Brooke, Edward Marsh and the list goes on. He had been talking Rananim with them. His idea was that they were to get away from England to found an island community where they would establish a new pattern of life, that would spread and spread until the world was regenerated and ennobled. It was a very complete thing in Lawrence’s mind — it even had its symbol, ‘a phoenix, rising on symmetrical wings, from a circle of very beautiful flickering flames that rose upwards from the rim of the cup.’ .

Yet this story is so anti-Utopia. That somehow it can never be achieved. Why this change in views? The ending is so perfectly chilling. I was almost shivering at the end.

Yes it is so anti-utopian. It's possible that as Lawrence grew older, he saw the impossibility of such a utopia. "The Man Who Loved Islands" is a late in life story. Sometimes I wonder at how serious he was. The only work that I can recall where a utopian society is actually created is his novel The Plumed Serpent. Perhaps I'm wrong and just not recalling it all.

[Janine]

Yes it is so anti-utopian. It's possible that as Lawrence grew older, he saw the impossibility of such a utopia. "The Man Who Loved Islands" is a late in life story. Sometimes I wonder at how serious he was. The only work that I can recall where a utopian society is actually created is his novel The Plumed Serpent. Perhaps I'm wrong and just not recalling it all.

Virgil, You know, I am not sure about that. I dont know if you can actually say a utopia was created in "The Plumed Serpent" - it was the beginning of what might have been one, but I don't think it was fully realised, by the ending of the book. It could even be questionable, as to whether it would be realised in the lifetime of the novel's characters. That ending left one with a lot of questions, and you almost wished it had a sequel so you could see how things might progress or digress.

I think Lawrence was serious in thought and ideals, but he never knew how to bring it off realistically. He may have become disullusioned, by the time he wrote this short story, and as you said, it was written late in his life. Lawrence wavered so much, with this concept and idea and other concepts, such as religion, it is hard to say just what he truly did believe it. I wonder if that is why Huxley, Lawrence's close friend, went on to write "Brave New World", which entertains a similiar concept of a utopian society. I read in one of my biographies, that the main character in the novel was based on Lawrence himself, and after reading it early this year, I can well envision this being true. I am thinking that Huxley wanted to take Lawrence's concept a step further in expression in his futuristic (idealistic) novel.

[Virgil]

Virgil, You know, I am not sure about that. I dont know if you can actually say a utopia was created in "The Plumed Serpent" - it was the beginning of what might have been one, but I don't think it was fully realised, by the ending of the book. It could even be questionable, as to whether it would be realised in the lifetime of the novel's characters. That ending left one with a lot of questions, and you almost wished it had a sequel so you could see how things might progress or digress.

I think Lawrence was serious in thought and ideals, but he never knew how to bring it off realistically. He may have become disullusioned, by the time he wrote this short story, and as you said, it was written late in his life. Lawrence wavered so much, with this concept and idea and other concepts, such as religion, it is hard to say just what he truly did believe it. I wonder if that is why Huxley, Lawrence's close friend, went on to write "Brave New World", which entertains a similiar concept of a utopian society. I read in one of my biographies, that the main character in the novel was based on Lawrence himself, and after reading it early this year, I can well envision this being true. I am thinking that Huxley wanted to take Lawrence's concept a step further in expression in his futuristic (idealistic) novel.

Very good post Janine. I was thinking similar. One wonders if Lawrence really believed in a utopia or when did he become disillusioned. You're right even The Plumed Serpent is of questionable utopia. I think he believed in a personal approach to a perfect life, sort of like Birkin and Ursula at the end of WIL.

[Dark Muse]

Yes it is so anti-utopian. It's possible that as Lawrence grew older, he saw the impossibility of such a utopia. "The Man Who Loved Islands" is a late in life story. Sometimes I wonder at how serious he was. The only work that I can recall where a utopian society is actually created is his novel The Plumed Serpent. Perhaps I'm wrong and just not recalling it all.

Yes, I would have to agree with that. I had not prevsiously thought of it as a "late in life story" but now that you mention it, it does very much make sense and fit in.

In someways it seems as if it is almost a tale of the age old, grass is always greener on the otherside. It is a struggle to find a Utopia, that does not exisit, and whenever fault is found with one island, the next is imagined to be more perfect only to be discovered to have faults of its own.

It is almost as if in thier own way each of the islans is a mirage, for once one gets close, they are not what they had first appeared to be.

[Janine]

Very good post Janine. I was thinking similar. One wonders if Lawrence really believed in a utopia or when did he become disillusioned. You're right even The Plumed Serpent is of questionable utopia. I think he believed in a personal approach to a perfect life, sort of like Birkin and Ursula at the end of WIL.

Virgil, wow, thanks for the compliment. I was not sure I was expressing that right. You know when I finished "The Plumed Serpent" I felt so unsure of what Lawrence was trying to say but now that we read this book and we are discussing this topic I see a little more clearly what was going on inside of Lawrence's head. Interesting, isn't it?

Your last line is a good way to phrase it "he believed in a personal approach to a perfect life, sort of like Birkin and Ursula at the end of WIL."

Did you notice that on the first island the word 'perfect' was stated quite a number of times; I would be curious to know just how many times. I think tomorrow it would be good to quote some of those phrases. It was funny, when I kept reading that word 'perfect' and then the fact that the Master liked to be so impecably dressed and he seemed to quite particular about everything on the island, his dwelling and his personal self - I thought - geez, maybe this guy has Obessessive Compulsive Disorder (OCD) - it really made me laugh in a way and I began to wonder about Lawrence himself, but I think the point is that Lawrence was stressing how he looked to establish a perfect little world or society appart from the main body of the world (perhaps the dirty disordered industrialised world?). The islands were definitely his way to escape society and maybe with Lawrence, at this juncture in his life, he wrote this almost as a wish that he knew who never be realised in his lifetime. This makes the story even more poignant, I think.


quote by Dark Muse:

In someways it seems as if it is almost a tale of the age old, grass is always greener on the otherside. It is a struggle to find a Utopia, that does not exisit, and whenever fault is found with one island, the next is imagined to be more perfect only to be discovered to have faults of its own.

It is almost as if in thier own way each of the islans is a mirage, for once one gets close, they are not what they had first appeared to be.

Dark Muse, yes, I think that is an interesting idea and partly true. People do always think the 'grass is greener on the other side'; however, I felt his jumping from island to island, also had a lot to do with his financial capabilities - didn't he run out of money when he was on the first island and was finally forced to sell it? It certainly would be struggle, if not impossible, to find a perfect utopia on this earth. However, I felt that each time he went to a new island, he made the most of his fate. I did not feel he had much choice, after he had to sell island #1, and so he 'settled' for what he had and thought of his island as being fine or better than the large island he had to begin with which he seemed to truly love, at first, until problems arose.

[Dark Muse]

yes, I think that is an interesting idea and partly true. People do always think the 'grass is greener on the other side'; however, I felt his jumping from island to island, also had a lot to do with his financial capabilities - didn't he run out of money when he was on the first island and was finally forced to sell it? It certainly would be struggle, if not impossible, to find a perfect utopia on this earth. However, I felt that each time he went to a new island, he made the most of his fate. I did not feel he had much choice, after he had to sell island #1, and so he 'settled' for what he had and thought of his island as being fine or better than the large island he had to begin with which he seemed to truly love, at first, until problems arose.

Yes that is true, though in someways, I wonder if those problems were not invented in a way, as even on the first island which he did seem to love, he complained about the so called "ghosts" and it seemed there was never a true happiness found, whenever it seemed things were going well, something would have to arise to mar that.

It seemed as if it was a struggle to find contentment, while never being able to be truly happy with what he already had.

[Janine]

Yes that is true, though in someways, I wonder if those problems were not invented in a way, as even on the first island which he did seem to love, he complained about the so called "ghosts" and it seemed there was never a true happiness found, whenever it seemed things were going well, something would have to arise to mar that.

It seemed as if it was a struggle to find contentment, while never being able to be truly happy with what he already had.

Wow, Dark Muse, you are really fast answering. I went to check email and came back to check something and you had snuck right in - good for you!
That is another really interesting thought and I feel it is also, partly true. It is sort of a universal fact that some people do indeed sabatoge themselve at times and then end up failing. I wonder if he preordained failure, by his finicky attitude. Nothing truly can be perfect and he seemed to be looking for this microcosmic world of his, to be all perfect with no flaws; rather unrealistic thinking.
I think we could look at the ghosts in different ways. I would have to look more closely at the text, to get some clearer ideas or notions, on that aspect of the story. I will re-read that part tonight, and see what comes to me. Perhaps the idea of ghosts was just a good excuse, in his mind, to bring people onto the island to begin with. Do you think the ghosts were totally fabricated in the mind of the owner of the island? Do you think they sprung from his subconscious and his own deeper fears? The ghosts definitely add a new dimension to the story at that point, and are very ominous as well, perhaps harbingers of bad fortune in the mind of the island owner(?) They also are a great descriptive device to draw us into the mystery of the island and set up a more shadowly, fortelling, uneasy atmosphere.

[Dark Muse]

Wow, Dark Muse, you are really fast answering. I went to check email and came back to check something and you had snuck right in - good for you!

LOL yeah I am just sitting here at the computer not doing much of anything else at the moment.


Nothing truly can be perfect and he seemed to be looking for this microcosmic world of his to be all perfect with now flaws, rather unrealistic thinking.

That is a very good point. It is true, he does seem to be on the quest to find the absolute perfect instead of finding something good and working around the flaws that might occur, as soon as a flaw arises he wants to abandon it altogether and start over again.


I think we could look at the ghost in different ways. I would have to look more closely at the text to get some clearer ideas or notions on that aspect of the story. I will re-read that part tonight and see what comes to me. Perhaps the idea of ghost were just a good excuse in his mind to bring people onto the island to begin with. Do you think the ghost were totally fabricated in the mind of the owner of the island? Do you think they sprung from his subconscious and his own deeper fears? The ghosts definitely add a new dimension to the story at that point and are very ominous as well, perhaps harbingers of bad fortune in the mind of the island owner(?)

I do beleive that the ghosts within this story were congregated within the mind of the owner of the Island, and I think they can be looked at in several different ways. They are an intresting asepct of the story.

In someways I think they might be there as perahps a reminder, or warning against complete solitude and seculsion, and the human need to have some connection and contact and not live in complete isolation.

Though I think they can also be born from our natural fears, and just the way in which our minds are likely to imagine things or play tricks upon us, particuarly when we are left completely alone. It is easy to see how one might imagine ghosts upon an island in the middle of the sea, with the dark waters and the looming fog and sounds of the water. A persons mind could come up with all sorts of stories, and when one is all alone it is easy to convince themselves that those stories are truth.

They do also provide a good excuse to bring over other people to the island, and it is then of corse from this, that the first problems with that island begin to arise.

[Nossa]

I'm not sure if I'd have something new to offer to the already mentioned points.
I agree on the idea that the man in the story is restlessly looking for 'his' place in the world, a place where he can find comfort and peace. It seems that Lawrence doesn't want you to get caught up on one of the islands, so he either shows the island's imperfection from the start (like in the second island) or show it as seemingly 'perfect' but later on shows how it didn't work out (like the first island).
I wouldn't say that it's an anti-Utopia, I think it's just realistic. I mean, it IS true that you cannot find a perfect place on earth, that's why Utopia was a no-place to being with. For instance, the ghosts that haunted the first island, was replaced by the sea voices in the second island. The hostility between people in the first island, is replaced by the greyness and gloominess in the second island. In short, Lawrence is showing that no matter how 'perfect' any place might look, in comparison to elsewhere, it's gonna prove to have flaws sooner or later.

I almost done with the story, I'll hopefully have more to say later :D:D

[Hira]

I don’t have much to add either. I still wonder about the first few lines


He wanted an island all of his own: not necessarily to be alone on it, but to make it a world of his own.

An island, if it is big enough, is no better than a continent. It has to be really quite small, before it feels like an island; and this story will show how tiny it has to be, before you can presume to fill it with your own personality.

What do the lines in bold and italics mean? What does he mean by filling an island with one's personality? How do you fill an island with your own personality? How do you make an island your own? What does the line this story will how how tiny it has to be before you can presume to fill it with your own personality mean? I do not completely understand.

Also I wonder at the infinity passages. They are beautiful aren't they? What does he mean when he refers to infinity? Is it perfection? That the islander longed for. What is perfection anyway? You can never really hope to have what we call infinity. Our humanness limits us. And infinity can annihilate you by its very nature. I am takin it onto a different tangent I suppose. I must sound nonsensical. Cannot find a uniting strand. To make sense of the story.

[Nossa]

I think that the first line was about him being the sole Master of the island. Consequently he'd fill it with himself, with everything he sayd, everything he wants. You saw in the first island how everything he said was agree upon, and everything he wanted was granted. He was the one making all the decisions, he filled the island with himself. Hope that made sense.

[amalia1985]

I agree with all the previous excellent posts. I just want to add some points too, and forgive me if I repeat something which has been already mentioned.

I think that the Island may suggest a "remoteness" that is preferable to him-and to others- instead of a "fake", oppressive society, the way they see it. That's why I would say that it is both "Utopia" and "Anti-Utopia", depending on each percpective.

Notice that we are told that:"He was born on one, but it didn't suit him, as there were too many other people on it." This could be a criticism to the world as it is. The desire to live life as you choose? Then we are told that: "This egg is the islander himself." As a favourite song of mine, named "The Islander", says "God gave him it all, an island for the universe". This is a lyric which can characterise the whole story, in my opinion. Perhaps, one's self is one's best company?

What I love is the way Lawrence retains the balance between the two "sides" of the issue. He mentions something which is a treasure, in my opinion. "Thus, it seems that even islands like to keep each other company." Here, we see that no matter how "lonely" a person may be, company is vital for the continuation of life. Loneliness may be a "trap", there can be dangers in a life like this. It seems that noone can live all alone.

[Virgil]

What a great start to the discussion!!! I think everyone has brought up some great points. The one thing I wanted to start with was the form of the story. It's really a folk tale. It even starts like one: "There was a man who loved islands." The man's name is hardly ever mentioned, just once actually, "Cathcart" I believe. Most folktales have these unnamed characters, as if to imply an everyman implication. Cathcart is everyman. And the form of the tale is the hopping from one island to another and to another, three times, just like most folktales and jokes have a pattern of three examples. The trend is to go from a large island to a smaller one and finally to an even smaller one. Another pattern is to go from a small group of people to just a couple of people and finally to just himself alone. So that as the story goes along the space shrinks and the society around him, by his own choosing, reduces. Certainly there are quite a few implications from that, as already mentioned. Cathcart is searching for a perfect world. He feels that perfect world involves less people, a simplified life, and an immersion in nature. Cathcart is striving to find the Romantic ideal, if you will.

Just a couple of allusions to other works i would like to mention, just to get them out of the way. First, as it pertains to the form of the story, i can't help recalling a Tolstoy story called "How Much Land Does A Man Need". It's a very famous short story, one I'm pretty sure Lawrence would have read, since he had read a bit of Tolstoy. The story is about a poor man who is given the privildge to own as much land as he can get, but he has to run around the perimeter of it in a day, the more he runs the more he gets to keep. He runs so hard and so far that it ultimately kills him. You can read that story here: http://www.online-literature.com/tolstoy/2738/. It's very short, and very didactic. It has a moral to it, just like Lawrence's story has a moral.

The other allusion is to Robinson Crusoe. In a way Lawrence's story is the opposite of Crusoe. Whereas Crusoe is forced by circumstance to live on an island away from society, Cathcart chooses to live on the island. While Crusoe finds means to ways to adapt with nature and form a society with friday, Cathcart fails consistently to make the islands work, either financially or even to live.

That's it for now. I'll respond to some of the points brought up later.

[Nossa]

The other allusion is to Robinson Crusoe. In a way Lawrence's story is the opposite of Crusoe. Whereas Crusoe is forced by circumstance to live on an island away from society, Cathcart chooses to live on the island. While Crusoe finds means to ways to adapt with nature and form a society with friday, Cathcart fails consistently to make the islands work, either financially or even to live.



I agree. I think that the key to Crusoe's sucess was the fact that he was willing to live side by side with nature, and any human beings who might come along. Cathcart didn't want that. Towards the end of the story, anything human, or better say anything 'alive' was repulsive to him. The fishermen, his car, the sheep he had, all were a source of disgust and contempt to him.
Somehow, after I finished the story, I felt that Lawrence is pro being involved in the world and living with other people. He showed gradually, as Virgil stated, that being isolated from the world ends up with despair, and even madness (when the man saw the heads of the seals swimming in, and he was frightened, thinking they were human beings). I also believe that by being alone and away, this even kills natural human feelings, like love. It's shown in his relationship with Flora that it became a mere pulse of desire, nothing more and nothing less. Nothing in thier life together was a show of love, it was 'mechanical'. He only married her because she was giving birth to his child.

I might have some more things to say after I re-read certain parts :D

[Dark Muse]

He wanted an island all of his own: not necessarily to be alone on it, but to make it a world of his own.

I think this means, one needs not be completely isolated, but even with the presence of other people, and even without seculding themselves completely from the rest of the world they can still create a place of thier own. A place of sancuary for themselves.

As it was seen in the first island, where before he brought over the people, becasue of his isolation he began to feel as if the island was haunted. So when he brought others to the island, they all thought of him as "Master" it was his island, they just co-habbited with him, or beneath him, but his pressence overhwelmed it more then any of thiers.


An island, if it is big enough, is no better than a continent. It has to be really quite small, before it feels like an island; and this story will show how tiny it has to be, before you can presume to fill it with your own personality.

This is an intresting passage, and as to the first part of it, I think it is true in a way for if an island is so big that you cannot see, or walk everyside of it, then it does not feel entierly like an island, for you cannot see where the water surrounds everyside of it, and it feels as if there are parts of it out of your reach.

To the last phase, I think that the story was about the islanders attempt to find an island which he could fill entierly with his own personality and which in a way, make it feel as if it was just an extension of himself, and yet his every attempt to do so, failed ultimately. Becasue there was always some other force, or pressence, that seemed to impede upon his efforts, as much as he had tried to completely isolate himself, there was no way he could aviod the intrusion of the world upon him.

[Nossa]

Also I wonder at the infinity passages. They are beautiful aren't they?

I totally agree. I love this part:


But once isolate yourself on a little island in the sea of space, and the moment begins to heave and expand in great circles, the solid earth is gone, and your slippery, naked dark soul finds herself out in the timeless world, where the chariots of the co-called dead dash down the old streets of centuries, and souls crowd on the footways that we, in the moment, call bygone years. The souls of all the dead are alive again, and pulsating actively around you. You are out in the other infinity.

Just beautiful!!

[Janine]

Hi Everyone!

WOWY!
Things are really progressing on here… I went away to sleep and came back to find all these fine posts and interesting comments. This is amazing, for once, I was feeling as though I am the one who got left standing in the dust; so I had to pull up a window in ‘Word’ program to write my post and keep everyone straight, in my mind, and not become overwhelmed.

First, let me go back to newcomers, such as poor, Jeff. I can see you got left back there in the dust, too, which I hope is not discouraging. I just wanted to answer your post (way back there).
Hi Jeff, I know you said you read the story, awhile back. I hope you are enjoying the discussion so far. As you said, this story " is a very interesting read. It should provide some very thought provoking discussion." I think it has already. I am impressed. There are so many elements and layers to this seemingly, simple story. Sorry you are having such a time with "Of Human Bondage;” I wanted to read it, having seen the film. "Woman In Love" is a very good read, an complex book; if you have a chance, do read it. The thread on this forum is very good; was a great discussion last year; check it out. Will keep "Go Tell It To The Mountain" in mind; thanks.

Hello Hira, Sorry you are confused, but I think now some people have answered your post, at least particially; there are some ideas and interesting thoughts on those passages. They were good ones, and good questions, on your part. I love those passages.

Dark Muse, hi again! Last night you posted back to me “It is true, he does seem to be on the quest to find the absolute perfect instead of finding something good and working around the flaws that might occur, as soon as a flaw arises he wants to abandon it altogether and start over again.”
This is a good point, and in Virgil’s post about the contrast of Robinson Crusose and this man, the island owner, he brings out the point that one made the island work and one did not. This islander owner does not seem to be easily satisified with any location, and I wonder if it is not a reflection of Lawrence himself, since Lawrence did not stay put in any one location for long. He wandered always, looking for his perfect home and never did find it.
I agree ‘the ghosts… were congregated within the mind’ Several people have made mention of this idea, as a result of his ‘aloneness’, this being taken to the final point of insanity or lost touch with reality when he sees the swimming dolphins as ‘humans’ threatening his island solitude.
“In someways I think they might be there as perahaps a reminder, or warning against complete solitude and seculsion, and the human need to have some connection and contact and not live in complete isolation.”
I think in the beginning of the story this may be true. The ghosts, in a way, substitute human contact. I like that thought. So the islander has a need for them and yet he is in fear, also. It is a strange dichotomy. Or do you think he sees these ghost as a threat, like the dolphins at the end?


Though I think they can also be born from our natural fears, and just the way in which our minds are likely to imagine things or play tricks upon us, particuarly when we are left completely alone. It is easy to see how one might imagine ghosts upon an island in the middle of the sea, with the dark waters and the looming fog and sounds of the water. A persons mind could come up with all sorts of stories, and when one is all alone it is easy to convince themselves that those stories are truth.

They do also provide a good excuse to bring over other people to the island, and it is then of corse from this, that the first problems with that island begin to arise.
Definitely agree.

Hi Nossa,


I agree on the idea that the man in the story is restlessly looking for 'his' place in the world, a place where he can find comfort and peace.

And as I said above, this man could be Lawrence himself. He was always looking for that same comfort and peace; and Lawrence was eternally restless.


It seems that Lawrence doesn't want you to get caught up on one of the islands, so he either shows the island's imperfection from the start (like in the second island) or show it as seemingly 'perfect' but later on shows how it didn't work out (like the first island).
I wouldn't say that it's an anti-Utopia, I think it's just realistic. I mean, it IS true that you cannot find a perfect place on earth, that's why Utopia was a no-place to being with. For instance, the ghosts that haunted the first island, was replaced by the sea voices in the second island. The hostility between people in the first island, is replaced by the greyness and gloominess in the second island. In short, Lawrence is showing that no matter how 'perfect' any place might look, in comparison to elsewhere, it's gonna prove to have flaws sooner or later.

You know, last night, on second reading of Part 1, it came to me how much ‘nature’ was described on the first island. It all started out like a paradise, or 'Garden of Eden' and then when the seasons changed and winter encroached on the island how it changed his whole opinion of the island. That is when the ghosts began to creep in and all the things seemed to go wrong. It seemed that when the began to go wrong it was like a whole chain of events downward or so he began to look on the island in a negative way. Whereas, at the start of the story he had an optimistic view of his seemingly utopian residence; even though it was not a perfect place; he did try to make it so or envisioned it so. He wasn’t realistic at first, if you think of it and when realism came into the picture he did what? He fled to a new island. You are right, Nossa, certain elements seemed to substitute for other elements depending on the island. That is a very good observation, I think. I think on the first island, the island owner’s expectations were high and then he lowered them on the second island and the third his expectations had diminished greatly

Hira, I think these lines you quoted are just great.


He wanted an island all of his own: not necessarily to be alone on it, but to make it a world of his own.

An island, if it is big enough, is no better than a continent. It has to be really quite small, before it feels like an island; and this story will show how tiny it has to be, before you can presume to fill it with your own personality..

This reminds me of a poem I just love by e.e.cummings called “Maggie, Millie, Molly, and May. These children go to the seaside one day to play and these are the lines, which come at the end of the poem, I love best:

may came home with a smooth round stone
As small as a world and as large as alone.

For, whatever we lost (like a you or a me)
it’s always ourselves we find in the sea.

I think in leaving the island which he is born on, which could really be a continent by what is stated in the paragraph that follows, he wanted to form a world, all unto himself, and have it just the way he wanted it.

I think this second paragraph suggests ‘civilization’ on this continent, which he has left behind. Are not all continents, as islands, surrounded by water? Also, I feel strongly he is talking about the UK or his native England (which Lawrence exiled himself from) - it is well documented that he did indeed fashion this story about a real man, Compton Mackenzie and this man owned an island off the coast of Scottland. I researched this last night and several things about it, which I will post later today. I fathom also to guess that, by one remark made by Lawrence, himself, Lawrence is more the image of the islander, than poor Mr. Mackenzie, who actually sued Lawrence, at one time, for the story. I will annodate this information later.
I think that the last line here, in foretells just what will come by the time he does find an island ‘to fill it with his own personality’…the author (Lawrence) never says it will be successful, in using the one word here to impart doubt that it can ever be accomplished – this utopian existence- by the word ‘presume’. This beginning passage is ‘prophetic’ of the outcome of the story. This islander is presuming he can form this perfect utopia.

Nossa,

think that the first line was about him being the sole Master of the island. Consequently he'd fill it with himself, with everything he sayd, everything he wants. You saw in the first island how everything he said was agree upon, and everything he wanted was granted. He was the one making all the decisions, he filled the island with himself. Hope that made sense.

Absolutely true and I agree. Good observation!


Quote by Amalia:

I think that the Island may suggest a "remoteness" that is preferable to him-and to others- instead of a "fake", oppressive society, the way they see it. That's why I would say that it is both "Utopia" and "Anti-Utopia", depending on each percpective.
Hi Amaila!
Yes, I agree with the idea that it can be both, ‘depending on each perspective’ – “Utopia” or “Anti-Utopia”. In some sense, this island existence was what he was looking for in the beginning of the story; he loved the island and walked around it frequently and loved the natural aspects of it and his life there. All seemed to be in harmony and then things began to go wrong, or as someone said ‘reality’ set in, causing his dissatisfaction and restlessness. I think it was a “Utopia” for a time and the last island definitely was an “Anti-Utopia”, which as Virgil pointed out in his post is similar to the short story of Tolstoy, which I have read Virgil and liked very much.



Notice that we are told that:"He was born on one, but it didn't suit him, as there were too many other people on it." This could be a criticism to the world as it is. The desire to live life as you choose? Then we are told that: "This egg is the islander himself." As a favourite song of mine, named "The Islander", says "God gave him it all, an island for the universe". This is a lyric which can characterise the whole story, in my opinion. Perhaps, one's self is one's best company?

I thought about this particular statement a lot, and the one about the ‘nest’ and the ‘egg’. Interesting, weren’t they? Lawrence also mentioned nest that can be looked into in the beginning of the story. Lawrence had a thing for bird’s nests. I have some absoulutely beautiful passages from his first novel, “The White Peacock” having to do with birds nest. Lawrence’s symbol of his hoped for Utopia was the phoenix bird which is reborn when rising from the flames.
Odd, I know someone who was born on an island and now lives on one and hates islands! Just opposite from this story she is - isn’t that funny? I’ll have to tell her about this story; she’s here on the forum.
You know, Amalia, now that you mentioned it, there are so many songs and lyrics in references to islands. I will have to check this song out. I like the lyrics very much. I know a song called 'Kaylinda, a Magical isle' and I will look up the lyrics of that song because I believe it also like a utopia or paradise of perfection or something to be longed for.



What I love is the way Lawrence retains the balance between the two "sides" of the issue. He mentions something which is a treasure, in my opinion. "Thus, it seems that even islands like to keep each other company." Here, we see that no matter how "lonely" a person may be, company is vital for the continuation of life.

Wonderful balance and I love that line you bolded up in your post. Yes, I was thinking of us on Lit Net how we all are pretty solitary, in reading and doing our own thing but we all do flock to this site to commune with one another. This could be seen as a little microcosmic world of it’s own away from that full aloneness a person feels. Yes, as the song goes “People, needing other people”. I think there is a line in Shakespeare’s play “Much Ado About Nothing” - goes something like this “… the world must be peopled!”

Good way of putting that – ‘company is vital for the continuation of life’, and I would probably add sanity, peace of mind, since the islander loses these by the end of the story.

Ok, I am stopping here and going next post to Virgil’s post.

Sorry, V, I’m not slighting you; just afraid I can’t post any longer a post on here…is there a word limit? I have been working on this post forever, and my brain aches; but your post is longer to quote, so I will pick up from there. Wow, I can’t get over this great response to the story, can you? Everyone has such great observations and ideas, so far. Keep them coming!

[Dark Muse]

“I think in the beginning of the story this may be true. The ghosts, in a way, substitute human contact. I like that thought. So the islander has a need for them and yet he is in fear, also. It is a strange dichotomy. Or do you think he sees these ghost as a threat, like the dolphins at the end?

I do not think the ghots at the begining really present the same threat as the dolphins do toward the end, but I wonder if perhpas, the ghots do not act as a foreshadow in some regaurds as what is to come? Or maybe they are a warning about discontentment, as ghosts are often viewed as restless or lost souls, and in someways the Island Owner can be seen in this light, as he goes from island to island searching for something that is not that, perhaps in the way a ghost my search for what they lost with thier life?


You know, last night, on second reading of Part 1, it came to me how much ‘nature’ was described on the first island. It all started out like a paradise, or 'Garden of Eden' and then when the seasons changed and winter encroached on the island how it changed his whole opinion of the island.

Very good point comparing the Island to the Garden of Eden, and I works in more then one way, as just like Eden does not last forever, nor does the Utopia of the Island.



Wonderful balance and I love that line you bolded up in your post. Yes, I was thinking of us on Lit Net how we all are pretty solitary, in reading and doing our own thing but we all do flock to this site to commune with one another. This could be seen as a little microcosmic world of it’s own away from that full aloneness a person feels. Yes, as the song goes “People, needing other people”. I think there is a line in Shakespeare’s play “Much Ado About Nothing” - goes something like this “… the world must be peopled!”.

That is a very good point, and so true. There are in fact few people I think more reculsive then me, I truly do live very much like a genuine hermit. And one of the things that I really loved about this story, is the fact that it had always been a long time wish of my own that I could just have my own secluded island somewhere and only have who I choose on it, or have no one else at all on it. But even I still ventune into online communities even if I tend to aviod society as a whole.

[Janine]

Hi again! Dark Muse, I will answer your post after dinner. Sorry I can't do it now. I am trying to catch up to all these great posts. Thanks so much for addressing my post I wrote this afternoon - whew, it took me hours and now my brain is aching. I have to take a break to eat something, but first I will post this to answer Virgil's post. I was working on it offline. Hey, this is getting very difficult you know. I think you will find some interesting chronological information (biographical) in what I am about to post.

Hi Virgil, back again. I think that last post of mine might have been my alltime longest and my record. It took forever to write and to post it...but thank God it did go through ok. Amazing turnout here and it took me sometime to catch up; had to catch my breathe, too.


The one thing I wanted to start with was the form of the story. It's really a folk tale. It even starts like one: "There was a man who loved islands." The man's name is hardly ever mentioned, just once actually, "Cathcart" I believe. Most folktales have these unnamed characters, as if to imply an everyman implication. Cathcart is everyman. And the form of the tale is the hopping from one island to another and to another, three times, just like most folktales and jokes have a pattern of three examples. The trend is to go from a large island to a smaller one and finally to an even smaller one. Another pattern is to go from a small group of people to just a couple of people and finally to just himself alone. So that as the story goes along the space shrinks and the society around him, by his own choosing, reduces. Certainly there are quite a few implications from that, as already mentioned. Cathcart is searching for a perfect world. He feels that perfect world involves less people, a simplified life, and an immersion in nature. Cathcart is striving to find the Romantic ideal, if you will.

And I think the form of this story is important to point out. Thanks for doing so. I think this story reminded me greatly of the Russian authors and also somewhat like Oscar Wilde’s fairytales, both having definite morals at the end.
I was trying to locate the exact passage when the woman began to call the island owner “Cathcart”…I thought the wording was curious and almost like she was the one who made up the name. I will hunt through for it. Was that in part 2? I don’t see it in part 1, which I copied off from that internet site with the online text.
I think it is true that this man represents the ‘everyman’ idea, so that it makes this story universal. Yes, and the first line is so characteristic of a folk tale or fairytale or fable. Last night I looked up when this story was written and I found these references in the book:

“D.H.Lawrence A Calender of His Works”.

There are several references of the story.

September 1920 At Villa Canovaia, San Gervasio, Florence, until about 28, then Venice.

Sept. 12. To Compton Mackensie: What is this I hear about Channel Isles? The Lord of the Isles. I shall write a skit on your one day [Mackenzie190]. When, six years later, Lawrence wrote ‘The Man Who Loved Islands’, Mackenzie threatened legal action.


June 1926 At the Villa Mirenda, Scandicci, Florance.

June 14. I have an invitation up to Scotland also – two invitations, Compton Mackenzie wants me to go to an isle off Lewis, in the Outer Hebrides [Moore 918]/ Lawrence must have begun his story based on Compton Mackenzie –‘’The Man
Who Loved Islands’ – at about this time.

June 27. Lawrence told Nancy Pearn he had a story nearly done. He send her a story 10 July, and 19 July asked her if she had received the islands story.

May 1027 At the Villa Mirenda.

5 May. Lawrence send The Escaped **** to Nancy Pearn.
6 May Lawrence send the corrected proofs of ‘The Man Who Loved Islands’ to Nancy Pearn


April 1928 At the Villa Mirenda.

17 April To Harry Crosby: Send you complete book of poems, and I’ll write a little introduction for it….And I’ll snd yo the MSS –‘The Man Who Loved Islands’ – and ‘Sun’ [Moore 1057].

This is interesting because, Lawrence wrote ‘Sun’ apparently, around the same time as he wrote this story. We just discussed ‘Sun’, as you know, so I included this reference. I don’t see the published date in this book of ‘MWLS’, but I will look it up online.

Also, note, that Lawrence apparently wrote “The Escaped ****”, or “The Man Who Died’”, in this time period….interesting isn’t it, to see how Lawrence’s mind was working and in what vane.

So the kernel, or idea, for this story started to form in the spring of June 1926 and Lawrence died in 1930….just 4 years later. Even though he started this story then he was working on it for a time period following that till publication. Another interesting fact is that he wrote his travel book, “Sea and Sardinia’, in 1921. I read this facinating book and it is about he and his wife spending time on an island. I recall him observing parts of the island where he thought to himself it looked like an unspoiled English countryside leading up to the sea. I felt at that time he was longing for the England he had left, but really no longer existed, especially his brief stay in Cornwall, where he was by the seaside and had found realive peace of mind, but only for a time. I think at this time, when he wrote this short story, he would very much have had ideas of islands and isolation and peaceful retirement on his mind; writing ‘Sun’, ‘TMWLI’s’ and “Sea and Sardinia” within a close period in his life and nearing his death seems to reflect that idea to me.
Then following this is the period in which he wrote: “The Plumed Serpent” 1924, then he turned from that idea of one kind of ‘utopia’ to his next travel book “Etruscan Places”, and a lost civilization that seemed to speak to him eternally. This was written around 1927, published after his death, along with “Apocalypse”, 1929, also themes of eternity and life after death.



Just a couple of allusions to other works i would like to mention, just to get them out of the way. First, as it pertains to the form of the story, i can't help recalling a Tolstoy story called "How Much Land Does A Man Need". It's a very famous short story, one I'm pretty sure Lawrence would have read, since he had read a bit of Tolstoy. The story is about a poor man who is given the privildge to own as much land as he can get, but he has to run around the perimeter of it in a day, the more he runs the more he gets to keep. He runs so hard and so far that it ultimately kills him. You can read that story here: http://www.online-literature.com/tolstoy/2738/. It's very short, and very didactic. It has a moral to it, just like Lawrence's story has a moral.

I find that quite interesting and a good parallel. No doubt Lawrence did read the Tolstoy story and filed it away in his incredible mind. He may have unconsciously, formed his story with thoughts of that one as an influence – the way his islands keep getting smaller and smaller. I think this story definitely imparts that same moral to the reader, although I think the Tolstoy one also says something about ‘greed’. But then the island owner was greedy for what he wanted also – solitude, and 'his own way'.



The other allusion is to Robinson Crusoe. In a way Lawrence's story is the opposite of Crusoe. Whereas Crusoe is forced by circumstance to live on an island away from society, Cathcart chooses to live on the island. While Crusoe finds means to ways to adapt with nature and form a society with friday, Cathcart fails consistently to make the islands work, either financially or even to live.

I must find that name reference. Odd that only once or twice it is actually stated in the story.

[Dark Muse]

Hi again! Dark Muse, I will answer your post after dinner. Sorry I can't do it now. I am trying to catch up to all these great posts. Thanks so much for addressing my post I wrote this afternoon - whew, it took me hours and now my brain is aching.

Hehe no worries, take your time I can relate, I was suprised to see how many posts there were already to catch up on when I signed on this morning.

[Janine]

Hehe no worries, take your time I can relate, I was suprised to see how many posts there were already to catch up on when I signed on this morning.

heheh - same here...I was truly overwhelmed!
But we are all doing great on here - what a super discussion already!
:lol: You and I will have to stay up late to catch up.;)We seem to be the 'night owls' and they all must be the 'morning people!' ugh...I hate getting up in the morning...

[Virgil]

Wow, I'm gone a few hours and I can't believe how much was posted. I'm afraid I didn't quite read it all. I will eventually. I definitely agree with (I think it was Janine who brought it up first, but I could be wrong) the comment that Cathcart is searching for paradise. So many Lawrence stories deal with this search, that search for a perfect way of life. For those that have participated before on these Lawrence stories, you may have heard me say that Lawrence's ideal heavenly life is that of a flower. A flower just lives, basks in the glory of godly sunlight, is completely in tune with nature, and, more important of all. has no will, that is a desire for things and an expresson of self, which Lawrence calls ego. A flower just is. That is the pre-lapsarian condition fro Lawrence, the condition before Adam and Eve lapsed in the Garden of Eden and had to then live in the physical world. What we see in this story is contrasts between flowers and humans and other mammals. Notice the woman he marries is named Flora. Notice that all the humans on the variuos islands express their will, and even the mammals do too. Notice that the sheep that he hates in that last island bleats and causes his irritation. That bleat is an expression of its will. Cathcart cannot find hapiness because real people have wills and express it. People expressing wills have conflicts with each other. At least that is the problem of the first two islands. On the third island the problem is his humanity in conflict with the overwhelming natural elements. He cannot escape his humanity because he is not in paradise, but in a lapsed state of flesh and blood humanity. I think that is why Lawrence also contrasts him with the ghosts and spirits. He is flesh and blood human and must survive in society and against the elements. The spirits have transcended humanity; Cathcart has not. At last not until he dies.

[Hira]

Wow, you all post such excellent posts! Wonderful ways to help see. Things start to unjumble. I haven't read or digested all of it at the moment though.

Virgil, didn't he achieve that state of desirelessness on the second island? But then Flora's will came in the way I suppose? And wasn't there his will on the third island too, his will to be alone and shun any other company?

I was searching these letters of D.H.Lawrence, most of the parts are not available online I think and I don't have the book. I came across this in his letter to E.M.Forster


In my Island, I wanted people to come without class or money, sacrificing nothing, but each coming with all his desires, yet knowing that his life is but a tiny section of the Whole: so that he shall fulfill his life in relation to the whole. I wanted a real community, not built out of abstinence or equality, but out of many fulfilled individualities seeking greater fulfillment.
But I can’t find anybody. Each man is so bent on his own private fulfillment – either he wants the love of a woman, and can’t get it complete or he wants to influence his fellow men (for their good, of course), or he wants to satisfy his own soul with regard to his position in eternity. And they make me tired, these friends of mine. They seem so childish and greedy, always the immediate desire, always the particular outlook, no conception of the whole horizon wheeling around.

I wonder if thats relevant.

Also what are the isles of Hesperides? Some sort of paradisal islands? Does anyone know? Will look it up.

[Dark Muse]

The Hesperides are nymphs who live in a beautiful garden, situated in the Arcadian Mountains (Greece) or, alternatively, at the western extreme of the Mediterranean, near Mt. Atlas (hence they are sometimes considered daughters of Atlas). In this garden grows the tree with the golden apples which Gaia had given as a present to Hera on her wedding to Zeus. This garden is guarded by Ladon, a dragon with a hundred heads. The only one who succeeded in obtaining some of the apples was Heracles, who tricked Atlas to get them for him. Thus Heracles completed the eleventh of his Twelve Labors.

[Janine]

Towards the end of the story, anything human, or better say anything 'alive' was repulsive to him. The fishermen, his car, the sheep he had, all were a source of disgust and contempt to him.

Nossa, Yes, interesting, how the man became repulsed by the sight of things that had at first delighted him, such as the sheep, etc. It seems to now the case that he is seeing more realistically, not through 'rose colored spectacles', as they say; now he does not like what he sees and this breeds discontentment.




Somehow, after I finished the story, I felt that Lawrence is pro being involved in the world and living with other people. He showed gradually, as Virgil stated, that being isolated from the world ends up with despair, and even madness (when the man saw the heads of the seals swimming in, and he was frightened, thinking they were human beings). I also believe that by being alone and away, this even kills natural human feelings, like love. It's shown in his relationship with Flora that it became a mere pulse of desire, nothing more and nothing less. Nothing in thier life together was a show of love, it was 'mechanical'. He only married her because she was giving birth to his child.


I don't think Lawrence ever was 'pro-being involved in the world'. He had to live in the real world and he had to deal with publishers and business matters, true, but he always looked to a new world. He was replused by many things he saw going wrong in society. Strangely enough his good friend, Audous Huxley, wrote the novel "Brave New World".
Lawrence did not live conventionally at all. He lived appart and although he liked people emensely, and many liked and even loved him, he also set himself appart and isolated himself quite a few former friends; sometimes they set him asside or cut off relations with him; he has some enemies. I think, for one thing, artists and writers and creative people of this sensibility, do tend to isolate themselves. I am sure we all understand this story, perhaps better than most would.
I think Lawrence always was looking for the answer to how to attain a utopian world, even to the day he died. He even had a name for the society he planned at one time. He called it "Rananim" and there is even a "Rananim Society" online to discuss Lawrence's works and ideas.


Hi Dark Muse,


"He wanted an island all of his own: not necessarily to be alone on it, but to make it a world of his own."

I think this means, one needs not be completely isolated, but even with the presence of other people, and even without seculding themselves completely from the rest of the world they can still create a place of thier own. A place of sancuary for themselves.

Yes, and one can achieve that realistically, and he might have from the beginning of the story, but this islander was not realistic.



As it was seen in the first island, where before he brought over the people, becasue of his isolation he began to feel as if the island was haunted. So when he brought others to the island, they all thought of him as "Master" it was his island, they just co-habbited with him, or beneath him, but his pressence overhwelmed it more then any of thiers.

In a way his presense did overwhelm the others and yet in the begining they all seemed happy to serve him or work for him. I think the fact that he began to see the island differently, (winter months) he began to project a negative attitude on the whole existence of the island, and the people dwelling there. In other words his mood was infectious and nearly all vacated, eventually.


"An island, if it is big enough, is no better than a continent. It has to be really quite small, before it feels like an island; and this story will show how tiny it has to be, before you can presume to fill it with your own personality."

This is an intresting passage, and as to the first part of it, I think it is true in a way for if an island is so big that you cannot see, or walk everyside of it, then it does not feel entierly like an island, for you cannot see where the water surrounds everyside of it, and it feels as if there are parts of it out of your reach.

Good point!



To the last phase, I think that the story was about the islanders attempt to find an island which he could fill entierly with his own personality and which in a way, make it feel as if it was just an extension of himself, and yet his every attempt to do so, failed ultimately. Becasue there was always some other force, or pressence, that seemed to impede upon his efforts, as much as he had tried to completely isolate himself, there was no way he could aviod the intrusion of the world upon him.

I don't know if the 'intrusion of the world upon him' is why the island idea failed. I tend to think the islander brought on his disolution by his own actions and isolation.
I don't know either, if his main goal were to make the island an extension of himself. In a way the island would become part of him if he allowed it to; a harmony of sorts. He could have been happy perhaps, living with a few people, if all existed 'ideally' and not 'realistically'. He was looking to his island to be a perfect place, a 'Garden of Eden' paradise, to reside in and it was not so in reality. It became a human place. Human's have flaws. The island also had flaws.


I do not think the ghots at the begining really present the same threat as the dolphins do toward the end, but I wonder if perhpas, the ghots do not act as a foreshadow in some regaurds as what is to come? Or maybe they are a warning about discontentment, as ghosts are often viewed as restless or lost souls, and in someways the Island Owner can be seen in this light, as he goes from island to island searching for something that is not that, perhaps in the way a ghost my search for what they lost with thier life?
I did point out it was foreshadowing and I agree that they are different but I think they relate - the ghost images and the dolphins appearing as humans. Interesting thought - ghosts being lost souls. Afterall, isnt the islander a ghost himself at the end, being a lost soul. Is this what you are saying about his wanderings?


Very good point comparing the Island to the Garden of Eden, and I works in more then one way, as just like Eden does not last forever, nor does the Utopia of the Island.

Well, prior to this story we discussed "Sun" and we had a similar connection symbolically to the 'Garden of Eden', so it was easy to think of this same concept and knowing it recurs often in Lawrence's novels and stories. Exactly, God drove Adam and Eve out of the garden of Eden after the snake tempted Eve with the apple....this ruined that utopia. In this story there is a passage that even mentions a 'snake' in this personification about the island:


So autumn ended with rain, and winter came, dark skies and dampness and rain, but rarely frost. The island, your island, cowered dark, holding away from you. You could feel, down in the wet, sombre hollows, the resentful spirit coiled upon itself, like a wet dog coiled in gloom, or a snake that is neither asleep nor awake.

Interesting personification of the island, don't you think? The island.... “cowerd dark, holding away from you”, also “the resentful spirit coiled upon itself”, as though it were indeed a human or a distinct character in the story. I like the references of the ‘dog coiled in gloom' and the 'snake' that is neither asleep nor awake....a sort of non-living state, or limbo. This seems to reflect the state of this man.



That is a very good point, and so true. There are in fact few people I think more reculsive then me, I truly do live very much like a genuine hermit. And one of the things that I really loved about this story, is the fact that it had always been a long time wish of my own that I could just have my own secluded island somewhere and only have who I choose on it, or have no one else at all on it. But even I still ventune into online communities even if I tend to aviod society as a whole.

I am also but I do like the communion with others and the interchange of ideas and thoughts and emotions. I think one cannot truly live without these. This story demonstrates that fact and is the moral or lesson imparted.

You may long, as many do, to esape the world and search for a perfect state of solitude, but if you do find your island, DM, I don't think they will have internet service. :lol:



Nossa,



Originally Posted by Hira
"Also I wonder at the infinity passages. They are beautiful aren't they?"

I totally agree. I love this part:
I do too! I like this preceeding passage, in addition to the one below, that Hira quoted for us.


….you felt that your island was a universe, infinite and old as the darkness; not an island at all, but an infinite dark world where all the souls from all the other bygone nights lived on, and the infinite distance was near.
Strangely, from your little island in space, you were gone forth into the dark, great realms of time, where all the souls that never die veer and swoop on their vast, strange errands. The little earthly island has dwindled, like a jumping-off place, into nothingness, for you have jumped off, you know not how, into the dark wide mystery of time, where the past is vastly alive, and the future is not separated off.
This is the danger of becoming an islander. When, in the city, you wear your white spats and dodge the traffic with the fear of death down your spine, then you are quite safe from the terrors of infinite time. The moment is your little islet in time, it is the spatial universe that careers round you.
....and what Hira quoted:


But once isolate yourself on a little island in the sea of space, and the moment begins to heave and expand in great circles, the solid earth is gone, and your slippery, naked dark soul finds herself out in the timeless world, where the chariots of the co-called dead dash down the old streets of centuries, and souls crowd on the footways that we, in the moment, call bygone years. The souls of all the dead are alive again, and pulsating actively around you. You are out in the other infinity.

You said "Just beautiful!!" I agree, brilliant writing.... and this speaks volumes about time. I think it addresses the whole concept of ‘time’ or perhaps ‘time in relation to isolation’, which is embodied here in these statements. I found this so interesting, when I first read it, and the more so on re-reading it. I was thinking of how time chances, or is perceived differently by people who are in captivity or lose sleep or any number of instances. This whole passage also seems to me to question the idea of perception and how we view things from different vantage points. I think this part of the story is very perceptive and wonderful.

[Dark Muse]

In a way his presense did overwhelm the others and yet in the begining they all seemed happy to serve him or work for him. I think the fact that he began to see the island differently, (winter months) he began to project a negative attitude on the whole existence of the island, and the people dwelling there. In other words his mood was infectious and nearly all vacated, eventually.

Yes that is very true, it did seem that the change which occured upon the island was rooted with his own negative thoughts that he started to project out onto everything.


I don't know if the 'intrusion of the world upon him' is why the island idea failed. I tend to think the islander brought on his disolution by his own actions and isolation.
He was looking to his island to be a perfect place, a 'Garden of Eden' paradise, to reside in and it was not so in reality. It became a human place. Human's have flaws. The island also had flaws.

Yes I do think that a lot of what occured was born from his own thoughts and mind, but it seemed particuarly with the last of the islands, he began to feel more sharply the inturstion of the outside world. As you can see it started with the sheep which suddnely became a pain for him to bare, and then it seemed the cat went the way of the people of the first island, at first it seemed he enjoyed the company of the cat, but then it was glad when he discovered the cat turned up missing.


He was looking to his island to be a perfect place, a 'Garden of Eden' paradise, to reside in and it was not so in reality. It became a human place. Human's have flaws. The island also had flaws.

That is a good point.

[Hira]

Were those ghosts and spirits out of the past, his own fabrications? When I first read it, they didn't seem to me his own imaginations. Couldn't they represent something external, beyond his control?

[Dark Muse]

I beleived they were his own fabrication, caused in part by his isolation and I think natural elements of the island and ocean which could easily lend one to invision that there are ghosts, particuarly when it gets dark.

[Janine]

Help! Virgil, I can't catch up.....:lol: I just posted another long post (that you can't read :eek2: do you need glasses, or something?) and now I see about 4 more posts. I never thought I could not keep up on here. This is great though...good posts!



Wow, I'm gone a few hours and I can't believe how much was posted. I'm afraid I didn't quite read it all. I will eventually. I definitely agree with (I think it was Janine who brought it up first, but I could be wrong) the comment that Cathcart is searching for paradise. So many Lawrence stories deal with this search, that search for a perfect way of life.

I was thinking the same thing and posted it above. It is a recurring theme for Lawrence. Also, in the last story we did "Sun". That also took place on an island, didn't it? So quickly my memory fails me...:rolleyes:



For those that have participated before on these Lawrence stories, you may have heard me say that Lawrence's ideal heavenly life is that of a flower. A flower just lives, basks in the glory of godly sunlight, is completely in tune with nature, and, more important of all. has no will, that is a desire for things and an expresson of self, which Lawrence calls ego. A flower just is. That is the pre-lapsarian condition fro Lawrence, the condition before Adam and Eve lapsed in the Garden of Eden and had to then live in the physical world. What we see in this story is contrasts between flowers and humans and other mammals. Notice the woman he marries is named Flora. Notice that all the humans on the variuos islands express their will, and even the mammals do too. Notice that the sheep that he hates in that last island bleats and causes his irritation. That bleat is an expression of its will. Cathcart cannot find hapiness because real people have wills and express it. People expressing wills have conflicts with each other. At least that is the problem of the first two islands. On the third island the problem is his humanity in conflict with the overwhelming natural elements. He cannot escape his humanity because he is not in paradise, but in a lapsed state of flesh and blood humanity. I think that is why Lawrence also contrasts him with the ghosts and spirits. He is flesh and blood human and must survive in society and against the elements. The spirits have transcended humanity; Cathcart has not. At last not until he dies.

That is interesting about the flower and the reference to the woman's name. I had not thought of that before. Also the island owner studied the flowers and plants assigning the Latin names to them. He did this on the first island only, I believe.
Also of interest to me is what you pointed out here about the 'will', even as far as the sheep exerting a will towards the man by their bleeting.
I like the way you described the three islands pointing out their shortcomings or problems, as perceived by the Master.
Finally, good observation and thought about the contrast of the man of 'flesh and blood' to that of the 'ghosts and spirits'. I think this relates back to that statement about asleep or awake. The ghosts also would be in a state of not being asleep or awake - or dead or alive. I think of Hamlet's famous speech and all the sleep references in Shakespeare where sleep represents or means death. Exactly, the man cannot achieve, even the transendence that the ghosts embody, until he is dead.

DM, thanks for that information on the Hesperides. Interesting that apples again are contained in this myth as in the Garden of Eden. Also the idea of forbidden fruit and the loss of a paradise.



Hira Wow, you all post such excellent posts! Wonderful ways to help see. Things start to unjumble. I haven't read or digested all of it at the moment though.

Hira, glad all this is helping you to understand. There are so many ways to look at this story and see it. It has so many layers and so much symbolism and meaning. As we go along more will become 'unjumbled' for you and all of us. It is a lot to digest so review the posts and I think I, for one, will take a break soon. I am getting rather exhausted.



Virgil, didn't he achieve that state of desirelessness on the second island? But then Flora's will came in the way I suppose? And wasn't there his will on the third island too, his will to be alone and shun any other company?

Good point about his own 'will'. I hope Virgil can add to this since you directed this question to him. Sorry I jumped in here.


I was searching these letters of D.H.Lawrence, most of the parts are not available online I think and I don't have the book. I came across this in his letter to E.M.Forster

Quote:
"In my Island, I wanted people to come without class or money, sacrificing nothing, but each coming with all his desires, yet knowing that his life is but a tiny section of the Whole: so that he shall fulfill his life in relation to the whole. I wanted a real community, not built out of abstinence or equality, but out of many fulfilled individualities seeking greater fulfillment.
But I can’t find anybody. Each man is so bent on his own private fulfillment – either he wants the love of a woman, and can’t get it complete or he wants to influence his fellow men (for their good, of course), or he wants to satisfy his own soul with regard to his position in eternity. And they make me tired, these friends of mine. They seem so childish and greedy, always the immediate desire, always the particular outlook, no conception of the whole horizon wheeling around."

I wonder if thats relevant.

Very significant. However, you have to understand that Lawrence wrote reams of letters - I think there are about 8 full volumes of them. I have "The Selected Letters" which does not include them all. I wish I had the time to read them all - they are fascinating.
To understand also is the fact that Lawrence often wavered from his original ideas or concepts. He was never quite 100&#37; sure of what he really wanted his utopia or community to be. He had ideas, as stated above, but as he also stated he could not find anyone to go along with them. There were a few who were interested and the closest he came was his ranch and home in New Mexico, but that soon soured on him, much like the man in the island story became dissatisfied. Things went wrong for Lawrence too, and he had to live realistically in the real world, not one of his making. This is why I said several posts back, this story may have been fashioned after this man Lawrence knew, who owned an island, but if the truth were known, it is more about Lawrence himself, in my own opinion.

DM, I read your post and I won't requote it. I agree with all you just said in your post. Thanks for answering mine. Good point also about the cat and the sheep and how these were like the world encrouching on the islander.

Whew, I think I caught up now!

[Nossa]

Wow! I got a lot of reading to do today..:D

I have a few comments on some of the mentioned points.

First, I agree with you Janine that Lawrence might not be pro living in the world, and that he was, for the most part, disgusted by it. But I also believe that he wasn't pro being alone, on a stranded island, away from any human contact. One of the things I loved about this story, is the idea of balance. I think Lawrence didn't want people to be too absorbed in their everyday world, nor too abosorbed in thier own solitude. There has to be a mixture of both. I think it's very evident from the chronicle of the islander's life that being alone doesn't work eventually, and it leads to being stipped of the simple basic things in life, like sanity, human feelings and even ambition (how he gave up writing the book). I also think that, in comparison with Robinson Crusoe, they both passed through the same phase of being so alone that they were afraid of any human existence, or even the possibility of one. In Crusoe's case, he was terrified when he found a footprint on the island, becasue human being reprsented a source of threat to him after being alone for so long. The islander was in a state of disgust and contempt by the idea of anything human, and anything alive. While Crusoe managed to conquer his fears and restore himself to humanity, and eventually succeed in building his own true world, the islander went crazy.

Another point is that of the ghosts. I agree that the ghosts are an embodiment of his own inner fears and confusions. They only exsited when he was alone on the island, it's like little children when they're left alone in the darkness, they tend to see things that aren't already there. But once he had people with him, nothing was mentioned about the ghosts.

I still have to re-read the posts. I might come back with a few comments still :D:D

[Virgil]

Virgil, didn't he achieve that state of desirelessness on the second island? But then Flora's will came in the way I suppose? And wasn't there his will on the third island too, his will to be alone and shun any other company?

Yes he tried and perhaps achieved it for a little while. I think at some point he's successful on all three islands, but just momentary. And that's important too. Time moves and real life doesn't stands still.



I was searching these letters of D.H.Lawrence, most of the parts are not available online I think and I don't have the book. I came across this in his letter to E.M.Forster


Quote:
In my Island, I wanted people to come without class or money, sacrificing nothing, but each coming with all his desires, yet knowing that his life is but a tiny section of the Whole: so that he shall fulfill his life in relation to the whole. I wanted a real community, not built out of abstinence or equality, but out of many fulfilled individualities seeking greater fulfillment.
But I can’t find anybody. Each man is so bent on his own private fulfillment – either he wants the love of a woman, and can’t get it complete or he wants to influence his fellow men (for their good, of course), or he wants to satisfy his own soul with regard to his position in eternity. And they make me tired, these friends of mine. They seem so childish and greedy, always the immediate desire, always the particular outlook, no conception of the whole horizon wheeling around.

I wonder if thats relevant.

Also what are the isles of Hesperides? Some sort of paradisal islands? Does anyone know? Will look it up.
Goodness, that is very relevant. Great discovery! It seems Lawrence has these ideals in his personal life, but when it comes to writing fiction he is so much more realistic. For instance, in that letter, what does the word "fulfillment" really mean? It's very vague, and in fiction his examples are usually flowers. Flowers live in a state of fulfillment. But humans because they have ego (using Lawrence's language) can't. Hira, does that letter have a date? I would be curious.

[Virgil]

Hi Virgil, back again. I think that last post of mine might have been my alltime longest and my record. It took forever to write and to post it...but thank God it did go through ok. Amazing turnout here and it took me sometime to catch up; had to catch my breathe, too.

This is a great group, isn't it? :thumbs_up ;)


I was trying to locate the exact passage when the woman began to call the island owner “Cathcart”…I thought the wording was curious and almost like she was the one who made up the name. I will hunt through for it. Was that in part 2? I don’t see it in part 1, which I copied off from that internet site with the online text.
It's way past the midpoint of the story. It's shortly after the 2nd island, about the second page in from when that starts.


Last night I looked up when this story was written and I found these references in the book:

“D.H.Lawrence A Calender of His Works”.

There are several references of the story.

September 1920 At Villa Canovaia, San Gervasio, Florence, until about 28, then Venice.

Sept. 12. To Compton Mackensie: What is this I hear about Channel Isles? The Lord of the Isles. I shall write a skit on your one day [Mackenzie190]. When, six years later, Lawrence wrote ‘The Man Who Loved Islands’, Mackenzie threatened legal action.


June 1926 At the Villa Mirenda, Scandicci, Florance.

June 14. I have an invitation up to Scotland also – two invitations, Compton Mackenzie wants me to go to an isle off Lewis, in the Outer Hebrides [Moore 918]/ Lawrence must have begun his story based on Compton Mackenzie –‘’The Man
Who Loved Islands’ – at about this time.

June 27. Lawrence told Nancy Pearn he had a story nearly done. He send her a story 10 July, and 19 July asked her if she had received the islands story.

May 1027 At the Villa Mirenda.

5 May. Lawrence send The Escaped **** to Nancy Pearn.
6 May Lawrence send the corrected proofs of ‘The Man Who Loved Islands’ to Nancy Pearn


April 1928 At the Villa Mirenda.

17 April To Harry Crosby: Send you complete book of poems, and I’ll write a little introduction for it….And I’ll snd yo the MSS –‘The Man Who Loved Islands’ – and ‘Sun’ [Moore 1057].

This is interesting because, Lawrence wrote ‘Sun’ apparently, around the same time as he wrote this story. We just discussed ‘Sun’, as you know, so I included this reference. I don’t see the published date in this book of ‘MWLS’, but I will look it up online.
How interesting about "Sun" being written at this same time. And lucky for us it was our previous story. For those interested, you can go back a few pages in this thread and look up our discussion on the story "Sun." What I find interesting is that "Sun" is the converse of "The Man Who Loved Islands." They are almost opposites, except that julia in "Sun" doesn't quite achieve fulfillment either at the end. She too has people enter her world, but she is much more happy than Cathcart.

[Virgil]

The Hesperides are nymphs who live in a beautiful garden, situated in the Arcadian Mountains (Greece) or, alternatively, at the western extreme of the Mediterranean, near Mt. Atlas (hence they are sometimes considered daughters of Atlas). In this garden grows the tree with the golden apples which Gaia had given as a present to Hera on her wedding to Zeus. This garden is guarded by Ladon, a dragon with a hundred heads. The only one who succeeded in obtaining some of the apples was Heracles, who tricked Atlas to get them for him. Thus Heracles completed the eleventh of his Twelve Labors.

Very good that you bring up the mythic Heserides. I think there is significance in that too. But I believe they are a real set of islands off of Scotland, very far north. So it has a real significance and a mythic significance to the story.

[Dark Muse]

Wow! I got a lot of reading to do today..:D

I have a few comments on some of the mentioned points.

First, I agree with you Janine that Lawrence might not be pro living in the world, and that he was, for the most part, disgusted by it. But I also believe that he wasn't pro being alone, on a stranded island, away from any human contact. One of the things I loved about this story, is the idea of balance. I think Lawrence didn't want people to be too absorbed in their everyday world, nor too abosorbed in thier own solitude. There has to be a mixture of both. I think it's very evident from the chronicle of the islander's life that being alone doesn't work eventually, and it leads to being stipped of the simple basic things in life, like sanity, human feelings and even ambition (how he gave up writing the book).


That is a very good point.


Virgil

Very good that you bring up the mythic Heserides. I think there is significance in that too. But I believe they are a real set of islands off of Scotland, very far north. So it has a real significance and a mythic significance to the story.

I was not aware that they were indeed an acutal real place as well, thanks for sharing that.

And as Janine said, I aslo found it intresting how in the myth of Heserides we have those darn apples again.

[Janine]

Virgil, I just looked up the first time the islander was referred to as Cathcart. I wondered about this wording. Doesn't it sound as though the widow and the daughter made the name up? See bolded type below:


The widow and her quiet, rather delicate daughter of thirty-three worked for the Master, because they loved looking after him, and they were infinitely grateful for the haven he provided them. But they didn't call him "the Master". They gave him his name: "Mr Cathcart, Sir!" softly, and reverently. And he spoke back to them also softly, gently, like people far from the world, afraid to make a noise.

Could the name be significant? Is 'Cathcart' a name from history? I will try looking that up, and see if there is some reason he was named that. As you pointed out, the name 'Flora' is significant to the story; this had me pondering his name, as well.

Quote by Dark Muse

I was not aware that they were indeed an acutal real place as well, thanks for sharing that.


Dark Muse, Yes, there is an actual 'real' series of islands off the coast on Scotland. I just researched it and came up with this information:

About Compton Mackenzie


Sir Edward Montague Compton Mackenzie, (January 17, 1883, West Hartlepool, England; November 30, 1972 in Edinburgh, Scotland), was an English-born Scottish novelist and nationalist. He was educated at St Paul's School and Magdalen College, Oxford where he obtained a degree in Modern History.
He served with British Intelligence in the Eastern Mediterranean during World War I, later publishing four books on his experiences. He was Tenant of Herm and Jethou from 1920–1923 and he shares many similarities to the central character in D. H. Lawrence's short story "The Man Who Loved Islands", despite Lawrence saying "the man is no more he than I am." Mackenzie at first asked Secker, who published both authors, not to print the story and it was left out of one collection.
A co-founder of the Scottish National Party, Mackenzie built a house on the Isle of Barra in Scotland in the 1930s, just one of the islands in Europe where he established a temporary residence. It was on Barra that he gained much inspiration and creative solitude, and where he befriended a great number of people in the community he described as "the aristocrats of democracy". One such friend was John MacPherson, known as "The Coddy". MacPherson's son, Neil, recalled Mackenzie as a man of huge imagination, generosity and talent.

Read more about Compton Mackenzie by clicking on this link:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compton_Mackenzie

Link to Barra, the island inhabited by Compton Mackenzie

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barra


About Barra

Barra
The Isle of Barra or Barraigh/Eilean Bharraigh (in Scottish Gaelic) is a predominantly Gaelic-speaking island, and apart from the adjacent island of Vatersay is the southernmost inhabited island of the Outer Hebrides (Na h-Eileanan Siar) in Scotland.
At the 2001 census the resident population was 1,078, and mostly Roman Catholic. The area of Barra is 35 square miles, the main village being Castlebay (B&#224;gh a' Chaisteil). Barra is now linked by a man-made causeway to the neighbouring island of Vatersay (Eilean Bhatarsaigh).
The west of the island has white sandy beaches backed by shell-sand machair and the east has numerous rocky inlets. Barra is abundant with stunning scenery, rare flowers and wildlife, which can be appreciated by coastal or hill walks, drives or cycle rides along the various small roads. Car and bicycle hire are available locally.
The Isle of Barra or Barraigh/Eilean Bharraigh (in Scottish Gaelic) is a predominantly Gaelic-speaking island, and apart from the adjacent island of Vatersay is the southernmost inhabited island of the Outer Hebrides (Na h-Eileanan Siar) in Scotland.

About The Outer Hebrides Islands

The Outer Hebrides, (officially known by the Gaelic name, Na h-Eileanan Siar) comprise an island chain off the west coast of Scotland.
They form part of the Hebrides, separated from the Scottish mainland and from the Inner Hebrides by the stormy waters of the Minch, the Little Minch and the Sea of the Hebrides. Formerly the dominant language of the Islands, Scottish Gaelic remains widely spoken even though it has now been largely supplanted by English in some parts.
The name for the UK Parliament constituency covering this area is Na h-Eileanan an Iar, whilst the Scottish Parliament constituency for the area continues to be officially known as Western Isles although it is almost always written as Western Isles (Eilean Siar). The islands were known as Su&#240;reyjar ("Southern Islands"; cf. Su&#240;rland) under Norwegian rule for about 200 years until sovereignty was transferred to Scotland in the Treaty of Perth in 1266, which followed the Battle of Largs three years earlier. Colloquially, they are sometimes referred to collectively as An t-Eilean Fada or "The Long Island"; Na h-Eileanan a-Muigh (the Outer Isles) is also heard occasionally in Scottish Gaelic.
Islands
The main islands form an archipelago. With their smaller surrounding islands these are sometimes known poetically as the Long Isle. The major islands include Lewis and Harris, North Uist, Benbecula, South Uist, and Barra. Much of the western coastline of the islands is machair, a fertile low-lying dune pastureland.[1]

If you click on this link,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outer_Hebrides

you will see tons of islands off the northern coast of Scotland and Britian….interesting, isn't it?

[Nossa]

Goodness, that is very relevant. Great discovery! It seems Lawrence has these ideals in his personal life, but when it comes to writing fiction he is so much more realistic. For instance, in that letter, what does the word "fulfillment" really mean? It's very vague, and in fiction his examples are usually flowers. Flowers live in a state of fulfillment. But humans because they have ego (using Lawrence's language) can't. Hira, does that letter have a date? I would be curious.

That is a VERY true statement indeed. I'd love to get my hands on these letters!!!


In my Island, I wanted people to come without class or money, sacrificing nothing, but each coming with all his desires, yet knowing that his life is but a tiny section of the Whole: so that he shall fulfill his life in relation to the whole. I wanted a real community, not built out of abstinence or equality, but out of many fulfilled individualities seeking greater fulfillment.
But I can’t find anybody. Each man is so bent on his own private fulfillment – either he wants the love of a woman, and can’t get it complete or he wants to influence his fellow men (for their good, of course), or he wants to satisfy his own soul with regard to his position in eternity. And they make me tired, these friends of mine. They seem so childish and greedy, always the immediate desire, always the particular outlook, no conception of the whole horizon wheeling around.

This part is so significant in the story. How the islander always sought 'his' comfort and pleasure, and when it didn't suit him any more, he just sells the place and moves on.

I still got a lot of reading to do...but thank you all again for the amazing discussion :D

[Janine]

That is a VERY true statement indeed. I'd love to get my hands on these letters!!!

Hi Nossa, The letters can be easily obtained by buying a book of Lawrence letters; I have the "Selected Letters of D.H.Lawrence"; I bought it on Amazon online. I know they are still in-print. I started to read some of the letters about 6 months or so ago (it was hard to put them down), but I had to put them asside, to get involved in some of the book discussions on this site. I can't wait to get back to them and two new Cambridge series of biographies of the author, I recently purchased; I can't seem to get enough biological* information about Lawrence (I am quite addicted!) and I can tell you that the letters are truly fascinating and very intimate; you learn much about the author reading them. If you really want another very 'intimate' portrait of Lawrence, I suggest the 3 travel books: Twilight in Italy, Sea and Sardinia, Etruscan Places. They can be bought in one volume. I also purchased these online. You feel as though you make the journey, with him, to each place he visits. I was really taken with these fascinating books.

*Revision note: I meant to type 'biographical' not 'biological' - must have been 'subconsicous' on my part. Hahaha!:lol:


This part is so significant in the story. How the islander always sought 'his' comfort and pleasure, and when it didn't suit him any more, he just sells the place and moves on.

I still got a lot of reading to do...but thank you all again for the amazing discussion :D

It is significant, but I just found something that Lawrence said in a letter later in life, that sort of says something new and a little bit opposed to this quote. I must type out this and some more information, from the last book of the Cambridge biography series, called "The Dying Game". There are exerpts online and some specific commentary about this short story. I will look this up later and type it, to post on this thread. Lawrence changed his mind quite frequently or modified what he had said. This is another reason his letters are truly fascinating. One can see a kind of development or progression.

[Virgil]

I can't seem to get enough biological information about Lawrence (I am quite addicted!) and I can tell you that the letters are truly fascinating and very intimate; you learn much about the author reading them. If you really want another very 'intimate' portrait of Lawrence,


Biological? You must really want to get intimate with him. What kind of initimate portrait of Lawrence are you after, a pornographic one? :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

I'm sorry. That had me laughing. I bet you must mean biographical. :p

[Dark Muse]

LOL ok that was just too funny

[Janine]

Haaaaaaaa hhhaaaaaaaaa :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: !!!!!

[Janine]

See below - two went through by accident....

[Janine]

Wow, everyone must need a break. I thought for sure I would be left in the dust again when I came back, and have to catch up again; I have been out all evening. I think I need a short break, as well.

'Biology' should have read 'Biography' in my former post to Nossa:lol:....well, glad I could add some humor to the thread - I did not want things to get dull on here!;)

Virgil, thanks for pointing that fact out and for your funny comments...I was too hysterical :lol: laughing before, to post these comment back to you.

[Hira]

Lolol:lol:

The letter is dated 28th January, 1915. I found it over here (http://books.google.com.pk/books?id=NyudR_ePn8sC&printsec=frontcover&dq=letters+of+D.H.Lawrence&sig=Q5IRgWdhjbX8h5rNOdZjSaewsoM#PPA266,M1).

As an aside, I loved this painting of the Hesperides

http://www.liverpoolmuseums.org.uk/ladylever/collections/graphics/large/hesperides.jpg