D.H. Lawrence's Short Stories Thread

These Lawrence stories keep getting more and more mysterious. I have even less of an idea what's going on in this one than I did in last story. Who is the narrator, and what are they doing here? Are they just an interloper, or can we say something more about them? This person appears somewhat urbane--at least more so than the other characters. What connection is this person to the family, though? Is it important? It seems like Lawrence could have told this story in the third person without losing much.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Virgil

it's an assumption that the narrator satnds for Lawrence. But ok, I'll accept it.

---

The narrator is certainly author-like, if not Lawrence-like. His impressions of the landscape and characters make up the bulk of the story, and these impressions are largely there for thematic and plot reasons--nothing to do with his separate character. This puts him in an author's position. It's difficult to say whether this author-like character is really a stand-in for Lawrence since what we know about the narrator is so slight.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jinjang

I admit it is confusing

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Virgil

Can someone translate that for me? I can't understand it.

---

I'm a little confused too. The dialogue is hard to decipher in some place. I will take a stab at this line:

Quote:

---

"We mun tell 'im it's come"

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Virgil

Very strange passage. "We mun tell 'im it's come"? What's he referring to? What's come?

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sapphire

I guess it means "We must tell him (Albert) it (Joey) is come".

---

He could also be refering to the letter. The father is aware of it, and seems to be trying to help his son through this problem.

Quark, I hate to say this, but I think you need to go back and review all, or most of our posts; and I know, there are tons now to wade through; but, this story turned out to be more complex and complicated, than I first anticipated. We discussed, in detail, the whole matter of the stand-in for the narrator being Lawrence; also themes concerning the war, that was taking place in Europe at the time; also, the fact, that Lawrence had recently nearly died of flu (there was a severe epidemic in England and in Europe that claimed many lives). The descriptions in the story are not there for no apparent reason, but to entertain the author. They are all interconnected with this idea or war and the struggle and strife between husband and wife. I will write more tomorrow. Let me just say, a few pages or posts back, that Saphire did an excellent job of interpretting the text. I believe it was Saphire, or maybe it was jingjang. I would check it out. It's been quite a stimulating discussion!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Janine

I think you need to go back and review all, or most of our posts

---

That's a tall order, Janine. Let me just say that the narrator's lack of identity is odd, and then I'll wait and catch up to everyone else in the conversation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Quark

That's a tall order, Janine. Let me just say that the narrator's lack of identity is odd, and then I'll wait and catch up to everyone else in the conversation.

---

I know....*sigh*...It's just that you are popping in so late, Quark, and so many of the things you questioned, in your post (above) have been explored thoroughly and answered as close as we all could come up with an explanation; that is asside from having to summons Lawrence, himself, from the beyond. I am sorry, I hope I didn't offend you by requesting you review the posts. It would help to answer a lot of the questions you brooched. Maybe, Virgil can answer you more simply than I can. I felt overwhelmed when I read your post. I am super tired out right now and trying to get offline, so I can head for bed in decent time tonight. It's nearly 1AM already. If you just go back to some of the biographical background information I dug up that would give you better insight into this story. I didn't realise this would be such a tough one for everyone, when I picked it. I thought it way less complex and to my astonishment, it has turned out to be super complicated.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Janine

I hope I didn't offend you by requesting you review the posts.

---

Not at all. I'm just glad there are some answers to my questions.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Janine

I thought it way less complex and to my astonishment, it has turned out to be super complicated.

---

Super complicated is probably better than super simple. If it were easy, there wouldn't be anything to talk about, and the discussion would have ended long before I got here to rehash things.

I got up late and had coffee in the afternoon...and so I am up owling again.

My impressions from several participants of the discussion of Wintry Peacock:

Dark Muse adamantly disliked the story on the fact that the narrator and Alfred had a silent pact to deceive Maggie and that they laughed together how they fooled Maggie at the end of the story.

Virgil triumphantly-excuse my impression-thought that the men had their dominance back at home, even though Virgil disliked Alfred and his behavior, while fearing there is still a female power over men.

Emmy Castrol reluctantly blamed Maggie for the fact that she could not keep her husband and indicated that Maggie may have some distasteful qualities. I am inclined to agree with Emmy Castrol, wherever she is.

I naively believed that the narrator meddled, though forced into the meddling, the affair of Maggie and Alfred by hiding the painful truth to Maggie thus temporarily relieving them from their troubles. I agree also with the father-in-law's wisdom not to take any notice to distant troubles without condoning Alfred's misbehavior.

Janine less naively believed that the narrator is a simple observer of the lives of Maggie and Alfred. Janine did not give me a solid ground so far to me where she stands. Neither did BienvenuJDC, even though he thought white lies are good for people sometimes.

Sapphire and Quark recently joined the discussion and I am not sure where they stand, either.

Now, I may be upsetting a lot of participants.

I know I have not been around much I have tried to keep up but I have been terribly busy.

but to Virgil and anyone else who might be currious. I do have this small contribution to make.

According to my research Nesh is: being either afraid of the cold or feeling the cold a lot

It is English slang.

Hello there,
You should join in because we are quite baffled on this part. What does "she has been northeast" mean in the context, for example? You may have been right all along as a woman's point of view? So may be Virgil.

Hi there Quark :) Glad you have the time again to give your ideas to this story - lets join minds :D

@the word Nesh
Thank you for clarifying that Dark Muse :) Do you by any chance also know what "being northeast" means? I tried to google it, but can not really find any meaning to it in relation to human emotion.
I like Janine's idea on aligning Lawrence with the bird, and the women in his life with the women in the story. I think it is a bit far fetched though. I would rather think of Joey as a soldier wounded in battle (WWI), getting into a conflict which is not really his fight (Albert and Maggie their relationship).

@JinJang

Quote:

---

Joey is a minor comfort to Maggie

---

I think I misunderstood this. I read this first like Joey is of minor importance to Maggie - as in that the bird does not really comfort her so (and here comes my wrong conclusion) he's not that much of an important figure in this story. I now get that is not what you mean - or at least I think so as I went back to the earlier posts you talked about. I get that you rather mean that Joey is in the way between Maggie and Alfred, and that he can never give her the comfort a husband can. This does not diminish his role in the whole story :brickwall: Sorry that I made that connection, it is not in your statement at all!

Quote:

---

This shows simply that men - not referring to you though, should I?-lose their heads too much to think straight over sex, ruining their marriages and their lives sometimes like Alfred on the expense of happiness of others.

---

Same goes for women.

Quote:

---

Sapphire and Quark recently joined the discussion and I am not sure where they stand, either.

---

I am afraid I agree with everybody - kind of makes me feel like I don't have an opinion of my own :lol: Like Dark Muse I dislike the attitude of the narrator and Albert to deceive Maggie and how they seem to brag about it and talk about whether the women were small or not (what's that about?!). I am not sure about Virgil's "dominancy back home", as I think Maggie feels like she is the mistress of the house after she feels like she knows all about the letter and Albert does not - which would not make me fear but acknowledge that there's a female power over men like there's a power of men over women ;) Emmy Castrol might be right or not about Maggie, she could be a bit promiscious - keep in mind though, she has been 4 years without a man (who's coming back that day - maybe the reason why she's dressed like that?). I don't see much pain in flirting a bit :) I agree with JinJang in the forced meddling of the narrator, making the (in his eyes) best of it when he realized what he was being asked. I am not sure about the Father's wisdom though... If he knows that much he could make the household a bit more truthful - he's quite a believer of ignorance is bliss (as long as he's not the one being ignorant).
I am still trying to figure out where I stand. I intuitively feel like the narrator is doing the wrong thing, but I can not really find the arguments to where he goes wrong as he does try to make it such that least pain is caused... I guess I just like the truth too much, even though the whole truth (about the affair) is not clear in this story and also very difficult to find in real life.
I would have made other decisions than the narrator. But then again, I do not know French well enough to translate it to the girl :p And it is always easy to judge in hindsight.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sapphire

I get that you rather mean that Joey is in the way between Maggie and Alfred, and that he can never give her the comfort a husband can.

---

Yes, I said that. Could Joey make Maggie completely happy? I would say, no and obviously not.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sapphire

I am afraid I agree with everybody - kind of makes me feel like I don't have an opinion of my own

---

I definitely feel the same and I have not been able to make up my minds. Sometimes Dark Muse is very convincing and sometimes so is far-fetching Virgil.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sapphire

I don't see much pain in flirting a bit.

---

I know it is irrelevant. Is it common to flirt between men and women, though they are married to someone else, in your part of the world as it is in France?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sapphire

I am not sure about the Father's wisdom though... If he knows that much he could make the household a bit more truthful - he's quite a believer of ignorance is bliss.

---

I am not sure now since I can see the father-in-law has been paying too much attention to Maggie. The first time I read the story I exclaimed that the father-in-law was my favorite. Then the wise Janine told me that she does not side with anyone or favor anyone in particular. They are all meddlesome and manipulating bunch of miserable people!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sapphire

I am still trying to figure out where I stand. I intuitively feel like the narrator is doing the wrong thing, but I can not really find the arguments to where he goes wrong as he does try to make it such that least pain is caused... I guess I just like the truth too much, even though the whole truth (about the affair) is not clear in this story and also very difficult to find in real life.

---

You are with Dark Muse here. Her insight was right, I think.

I will have to go back and re-read that part about northeast and see what I might be able to conclude from that part.

I could not find any sort of slang difinetion for any possible meaning for "north-east"

But from the passage

Quote:

---

"'Er's got 'er colour back this mornin'," continued the father-in-law
slowly. "It's bin heavy weather wi' 'er this last two days. Ay--'er's
bin north-east sin 'er seed you a Wednesday."

---

I can only presume that it must somehow mean, unwell, or ill, or something of that nature becasue it says that she "got her color back" and the weather was heavy.

And prior to that he walks about how she has not been very "bright" since Alfred returend and Joey left, so I presume that to be "north-east" is to allude to ailing in someway.

or pehraps it means to be pale, or "down" or depressed. Something along those lines.

That is the best I can make from it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jinjang

Neither did BienvenuJDC, even though he thought white lies are good for people sometimes.

---

No...no...not upsetting anyone at all. (or at least not upsetting me...)

Despite what I may have commented earlier. I wouldn't say that white lies are good, but I would say that it is not necessarily good for everyone to know everything. Sometimes ignorance is to our benefit.

I think a wife does deserve to know that her husband is cheating on her though. I do not think there is any blissful ignorance or benifit in that.

I would agree! A wife deserves to know that a husband IS cheating on her. But I am not so sure that it is beneficial that a spouse knows every little thing that the other as ever done.