I still want to say something about the laughing, but I can't yet. I'll come back to this. But other than that we may be finished. If you see my closing post you may want to respond.
Printable View
I still want to say something about the laughing, but I can't yet. I'll come back to this. But other than that we may be finished. If you see my closing post you may want to respond.
Quote by Virgil
Quote:
I found this to be a guy buddy/buddy bond that I think is the sdource of Dark Muse's hatred for the characters. There is no understanding for the Belgian girl. But in fairness to the narrator, I do get the sense now that he's just playing along. I don't think he wants to provoke Alfred.
No, Virgil,I think I messed up here. 'Taller than your wife, I suppose' should be on the next line and was spoken by the narrator, referring to Maggie, not to the narrators own wife. I do still maintain the inference in the story when using the 'we' several places in the text indicates that the narrator is most likely a married man. That makes more sense to me. It may also have been his sister; since at this time, Lawrence's sister had been staying with him to nurse him back to health. I think though, it more likely, that L would want us to believe it was his wife he referred to included in the 'we'. Married people often use that expression as a substitude for actually saying 'my wife and I'.Quote:
:
'Poor little Elise,' he murmured.
'Was she small--_petite_?' I asked. He jerked up his head.
'No,' he said. 'Rather tall.' 'Taller than your wife, I suppose.'
Yes, this is the impression I got right off the bat. I never really thought otherwise.Quote:
You guys were right about the narrator living with someone when we were discussing how he nursed the peacock to health at his house. I've read the story three times now and just now I picked up the narrator had a wife. These discussions are invaluable.
Quote by jinjang
Oh, no problem, jinjang; I guess you just read it a little wrong and since English is not your native language I can well understand why. I have to hand it to you, the way you can understand the father's form of speech. Some of this story is hard for me to even understand.Quote:
I really misread the part. Thank you for correcting me! A knockout is a blow that knocks out an opponent according to a dictionary.
Yes, I think that saying 'it's a knockout' he has just realised he now has the upperhand since basically Maggie has not proof of what he has been up to in France. If she truly burned the letter, she burned the evidence. Alfred at least thinks she burned the letter, so now he thinks he got away with the entire afair. Out of sight, out of mind. He now finds it totally laughable from his perspective. He is of course a cad and a jerk but he is all powerful now in the ending of the story, or so he believes he is. Time will probably tell about that.Quote:
...Maybe then we can align this quote:....
....with this one:...
Alfred is laughing a triumphant laugh over the fight with Maggie. The narrator got the influence of the laugh, laughing along with Alfred.
Yes, I agree, that is very helpful; thanks again, Virgil. Indeed, jinjang, I did notice a lot of times that discomfort or uneasiness is mentioned; mostly, wasn't it in regards to Maggie or to Alfred before he knew that Maggie did not know the absolute truth?Quote:
Virgil, thank you for collecting the laughing scenes for us. I notice Maggie's laugh is not so natural as Alfred's. Maggie's laughs are awkward and uneasy and they seems to be an attempt to hide her discomfort or uneasiness. I do not yet find any other coherence.
As I am...and agreeing with what I said originally about it as well. I think it was a spontaneous reaction on the part of the narrator. I was just reading L's own words about being spontaneous.....hope I spelled that right. The word comes up often in "Women in Love".Quote:
Originally Posted by Sapphire
Yes, I noticed that also. Good observation. I think the 'indifferent' aspect could also be applied to wartime, when people became indifferent after a time, concerning the war effort. This again is reflecting the way the world was becoming, more 'unnatural', losing it's sense of caring and connection. Families and married couples were distanced by the war - torn appart were the relationships due to conflict, until 'indifference' replaced deep/connected feelings between people.Quote:
By the way, is anybody else stricken by the magnitude of the use of the word "indifferent" in this story? It just came to me as I reread the first paragraph: those peacocks are indifferent to the narrator, though he "might have touched them". Was that a forecast to what was going to happen? Maggie being quite indifferent about him (out of sight, out of mind), Alfred only interested in his intervention (never asks about the narrator's life). I can not really find the words for it now but I think indifference of ones own life and other people's life is quite a thing in this story. Really not sure why... just a hunch I get...
I liked that part, too. But I also liked the part where the narrator saved the bird and I loved the winter decriptions and found those totally prose poetic. Lovely sensitive intuitive writing.Quote:
And I wondered: maybe it is nice to mention a favourite part in the story? Just to wrap it all up? :p Though of course it is the story as a whole that makes it a good read.
I just want to mention that I really enjoyed the part where Maggie tells about her husband. She's obviously answering questions that the narrator asks her, but we do not hear the questions - we can make those up ourselves, like Jeopardy :D
Oh yes, I get that from that statement as well. I love how subtle that is. Lawrence often does that sort of thing and you have to pay close attention to pick up on it. It's a true sign of his genius, I believe....his use of sublty.Quote:
AND I really liked the irony/double meaning in this one sentence uttered by the narrator after Maggie says there's too many Alfred's in the letter - that's how she knows it's a love-letter.
I think Lawrence intended it that way; to take the reader by surprise and make him chuckle a bit at this or feel amused. I was amused, when I first read this interchange, between Maggie and the narrator, while discussing the letter. I even thought it so funny, she thought the other woman was Eliza and the narrator corrected her saying she was Elise; later on Maggie still refers to the woman as Eliza. That sort of cracked me up at the time...I know, I have a weird sense of humor.:D I kept thinking of Eliza in the musical "My Fair Lady". This even felt to me like a class distinction or is the difference just English verses the French?Quote:
At first I thought he was probably making quite an understatement there. I imagined him saying it in a dry tone, with a bit of a snugger that indicated "fools in love do crazy things, like saying each others name way too often". Then it hit me. There was one little Alfred too many! The baby. :eek: Maybe that's why I like it so much, because it took me a little while to figure it out - now it seems so obvious :D
I have always held to the idea of posting the text, as we go along. In that way, we always discover so much more, than we did on our first or even second read-through individually. In a short story, ALL of the text is significant and I think you can now see so many details, which we first missed. The story discussion transcends, those overlooked words or phrases or emphasis or ideas, by the end/conclusion of the discussion and often reveals a whole new idea or new emphasis on the story - new meanings. When this happens I think it is pretty marvelous to behold. I really love these discussions and learn so much more as a group. I think you will all agree with this idea.Quote:
All in all, I really enjoyed this story - though this might mainly be caused by the fact that we went so deep into it and had such an interesting talk about it! Thank you all for your opinions, and a special thanks for Virgil to invite me and Janine to post new parts of the story so consistently!
I think he was just laughing at the entire situation. By then he was not really connected to them in anyway; as he said, Maggie forgot him as soon as he left the house. I am sure that Alfred will do the same. By the end, the narrator is out of the fray. Maybe the laugh is even now from relief.Quote:
Originally Posted by jinjang
Thanks, jinjang, it feels good to be appreciated. :lol: I could see you mischievous smile indeed. :brow:Quote:
I wholeheartedly agree with you, being grateful to Janine and Virgil. I much preferred people I met here to the story itself, though. Did Janine say that some of us are too serious? I hope she is not referring to me. She did not see my mischievous smiling face each time I joined this discussion. :D
How 'bout some nice cake and ice-cream? Or we could all take a tropical vacation on a deserted island? Dream on, Janine.....Quote:
How do we celebrate when we finish the discussion? I was waiting for either Virgil or Janine to give an ending.
hahah....I love this part. I do think Bien and Sapphire contributed well to the discussion. Thanks to you also, jinjang! :thumbs_upQuote:
Quark, how did you manage to agree with everyone? You should be a diplomat.
Dark Muse, Thank you for stimulating discussions!
BienvenuJDC, Thank you for trying to distract us here and there! You would have preferred us going slower.:D
Sapphire, Thank you for being so cheerful!
:lol: Like I said - thanks. Seriously, you were great, also very diplomatic at times. :)Quote:
It was my first discussion and you all bore with me well and I am grateful to all!
That is interesting. I wonder what Lawrence was going for. I wouldn't call many of the characters in the story indifferent--maybe Alfred, but the others are all quite involved. The narrator considers the couple on his walk, the father is pushing for a reconciliation, and Maggie is consumed with the whole affair.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sapphire
The conversation at the beginning was quite comical, and the description of the landscape was very well-done. The phrase "abstracted as a grove of death" might have been a little over-the-top, but the rest of the description was perfectly vivid and real.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sapphire
Too serious? Really? When did that happen?Quote:
Originally Posted by jinjang
Hopefully you'll be around for the next story. I'm sure it will be good. There hasn't been a dud, yet.Quote:
Originally Posted by jinjang
The story was a good one. Any ideas for the next one?Quote:
Originally Posted by Janine
Yeah, the Chekhov discussion is in the works. It looks like we'll start sometime around this weekend. I promise outrageous amounts of insightful discussion and witty conversation. Or not, we'll see what happens.Quote:
Originally Posted by Janine
Good, will you be writing a 'closing post'? I will anxious to read it and may want to comment as well.Quote:
Originally Posted by Virgil
Quark, here is what I had to say about it a few posts back. Basically, I was just thinking out loud; throw this out there and see what everyone might think of this idea, since we earlier talked about the unnatural aspect the war would have on a couple or a family.Quote:
Originally Posted by Quark
Quote:
Yes, I noticed that also. Good observation. I think the 'indifferent' aspect could also be applied to wartime, when people became indifferent after a time, concerning the war effort. This again is reflecting the way the world was becoming, more 'unnatural', losing it's sense of caring and connection. Families and married couples were distanced by the war - torn appart were the relationships due to conflict, until 'indifference' replaced deep/connected feelings between people.
Wow, Janine, how did you post 6 posts in less than 2 hours? What energy drink did you take this afternoon? :D Because I need it, too.
I am procrastinating my work but I should get to it instead of lingering here.
Was it really six? It seemed like more time than an hour. No, actually by then, I had only eatten my breakfast/brunch and it was nearing dinner hour. Now I had coffee; reved up and ready to go. Well, maybe the small cup earlier, had not quite wore off. I was just determined to answer everyone. Not sure now I answered Quark's fully, but most of his I agreed with. Also, most of my posts were at least half, if not more so, quotes from everyone else. Of course, I can write up a storm, when the mood strikes me, especially in this thread.Quote:
Originally Posted by jinjang
I am procrastinating my work too - laundry and organizing, sorting out junk to donate somewhere. My house is a mess and it needs help. I spend too many hours on here and don't get anything else done, like the housework, or even catch up on my reading. :(
Edit:
You know what I just noticed? I think the moderator merged a few of my posts. I thought they might do that and was going to tell them I fully expected it and that was just fine with me. I think it was over an hour of posting though, all told.
Late edit:
Some additional thought I happen to have today and wish to share with you.
It's about this part of the text:
I just thought it was interesting to note that #1. the woman is feeling empathy for the other woman, #2. the narrator is stating that probably the other woman was more experienced than Alfred, not naive at all, and #3. Maggie believes Alfred did father the child.Quote:
So I began--'I have been thinking of you sometimes--have you been thinking of me?'-- 'Of several others as well, beside her, I'll wager,' said Mrs. Goyte.
Suddenly she lifted her face, and her eyes flashed.
'Oh, but I call it beastly, I call it mean, to take a girl in like that.'
'Nay,' I said. 'Probably he hasn't taken her in at all. Do you think those French girls are such poor innocent things? I guess she's a great deal more downy than he.'
'Oh, he's one of the biggest fools that ever walked,' she cried.
'There you are!' said I.
'But it's his child right enough,' she said
Another edit:
See jinjang, I am worse than you! :lol:
well ho hum....where is everybody? I thought Virgil had some closing remarks to make....so we can officially close this discussion once and for all....not the thread but the discussion on 'Wintry Peacock', which I really really enjoyed!
Let me close this out with my thoughts on the laughters. Here's how i see why the person is laughing. I'm just going to reference the laughs by the number I established in my post #3054. So you may have to look back.
Laugh# 1: Maggie seems to laugh out of nervousness.
#2: The narrator is laughing based on his personal reading of what's in the letter.
#3: Maggie is laughing from Joey's affection.
#4: Maggie is laughing based on what she hears is in the letter.
#5: Maggie is laughing at the irony of her sending packages to Belgium for Alfred.
#6: Maggie is laughing upon leaving for some mysterious unknown reason. Possibly nervousness, possibly having learned of what the letter says.
#7: Alfred is laughing based on what he hears is in the letter.
#8: Alfred is laughing based on his winning against his wife.
#9: Alfred is laughing based on abandoning Else.
#10: Narrator is laughing based on Alfred's hatred of the bird.
#11: Narrator is laughing upon leaving for some unknown reason.
The only common denominator that I see of these laughs is that whomever is laughing seems to think they know more than someone else. Maggie essentially laughs from learning the contents of the letter, Alfred laughs by thinking he has pulled a fast one on both women, and the narrator seems to laugh by knowing the total of the story, which neither Maggie or Alfred know. The laughing seems to be a feeling of superiority. This in a way goes back to the morality theme. Ultimately the last laugh is directed at the immorality and dysfunctionality of the Maggie/Alfred realtionship.
Virgil, I think this about sums it up. Thanks for listing all of those. I said from the beginning, that I thought this was an ironical story, in many respects. I think the narrator, knowing all, knowing they each doesn't know all, laughs ironically as he runs down the hill. That was a good observation and thing to point out. It is totally significant, in my opinion. This was a very good story and I am glad of all the wonderful new participation. Thanks everyone for such a great learning experience and terrific 'enjoyable' discussion.Quote:
The only common denominator that I see of these laughs is that whomever is laughing seems to think they know more than someone else. Maggie essentially laughs from learning the contents of the letter, Alfred laughs by thinking he has pulled a fast one on both women, and the narrator seems to laugh by knowing the total of the story, which neither Maggie or Alfred know. The laughing seems to be a feeling of superiority. This in a way goes back to the morality theme. Ultimately the last laugh is directed at the immorality and dysfunctionality of the Maggie/Alfred realtionship.
Wow, we should do the story 'The Last Laugh', Virgil, first reason - all the 'laughs'; I could just envision you listing them all and interpretting them; now that would be a challange; second, because I for one didn't really understand that story at all. It's from L's last stage of stories and I believe it's either psychological or supernatural; I am still not sure which or perhaps a little of both.
I accept my defeat on editing! :D Have you read the game Character Brawls? Those little ones are hilarious. Some mature people are humoring the young ones there, too. We could head down there and throw each other editing pens.:DQuote:
Originally Posted by Janine
Wisdom! Should I imagine your superior laugh:D over all of us?Quote:
Originally Posted by Virgil
This little corner of the forum will have a special place at my heart and I look forward to joining your discussions next time around if I can.
No defeat; I believe we are about even. No, I didn't read the game Character Brawls; is it on this site? :lol: editing pens; yes we need a whole box of them!Quote:
Originally Posted by jinjang
Is this to Virgil? hahaha...maybe V had the last laugh and it was superior!:lol:Quote:
Wisdom! Should I image your superior laugh:D over all of us?
This is lovely to hear. I am so happy you feel this way; I know we will have more great discussions on here in the future. Glad to have you onboard, jinjang! You and the newcomers really made this last discussion exciting. It also kept us on our toes. No slacking in this discussion. It was great!Quote:
This little corner of the forum will have a special place at my heart and I look forward to joining your discussions next time around if I can.
No. I am not superior in any way. I just happen to know Lawrence well.Quote:
Originally Posted by jinjang
That is very knid of you Jin. I really enjoyed your thoughts and company here. :)Quote:
This little corner of the forum will have a special place at my heart and I look forward to joining your discussions next time around if I can.
:pQuote:
Originally Posted by Janine
It's looks like I was a little late for the group hug, but let me say that I thought the discussion went really well. I've never seen it that active.
Oh, and Virgil is most certainly superior.
Quark, never to late for the group hug - here is a*big teddy bear hug*! ;) Yes, it certainly was a good lively discussion, wasn't it? and no doubt Virgil had some very superior remarks, truly insightful. Quark are you keeping a thread post count here. We are nearing another milestone, I believe....we must have a party!:DQuote:
Originally Posted by Quark
The thread just past a milestone, actually: 3000. You're only 926 away from 4000, though. It's something to shoot for.Quote:
Originally Posted by Janine
Oh heck, you are right....can we have a belated party. The rate we have been posting we will hit 4000 in no time....guess we should wait....:(Quote:
Originally Posted by Quark