Virgil, that would be great if you could do so. I would read them, there is such interesting phrasing of words, don't you think? Lots of time, so don't rush.Quote:
Originally Posted by Virgil
Printable View
Virgil, that would be great if you could do so. I would read them, there is such interesting phrasing of words, don't you think? Lots of time, so don't rush.Quote:
Originally Posted by Virgil
Perhpas I should re-read over the story and post a few of my faveorite passages.
Dark Muse, It is always good to re-read the story,review and then post some things that stand out to you. You might notice something you had not, on your first reading. Hopefully Quark will be joining in tomorrow and can add some comments/ideas to what has already been said.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dark Muse
I am not having a good day, so I am going to take a break tonight. I will try and be back tomorrow when I feel better.
You know, as I'm going back through the old posts n this story, I think this is a very interesting observation that was not discussed. Now at some point on all three islands it does turn for the worse, but the shear beauty and idyllic life just before that turn does suggest a utopia. The utopia is not possible to sustain, but it is there. Perhaps the fault lies in Cathcart. Certainly on the second island what would have been wrong to live with the wife and child? And even on the first one, so it was losing money. Is that a reason to just give up? Lawrence wouldn't consider it so. So look toward the end of the first part:Quote:
Originally Posted by amalia1985
So the problem really is in him. He is not like Julia fron "Sun." He just can't find contenment. It's like the utopia is there, but the problem is in himself, either in dealing with people or in committing to it.Quote:
The people were not contented. They were not islanders. "We feel we're not doing right by the children," said those who had children. "We feel we're not doing right by ourselves," said those who had no children. And the various families fairly came to hate one another.
Yet the island was so lovely. When there was a scent of honey- suckle, and the moon brightly flickering down on the sea, then even the grumblers felt a strange nostalgia for it. It set you yearning, with a wild yearning; perhaps for the past, to be far back in the mysterious past of the island, when the blood had a different throb. Strange floods of passion came over you, strange violent lusts and imaginations of cruelty. The blood and the passion and the lust which the island had known. Uncanny dreams, half-dreams, half-evocated yearnings.
The Master himself began to be a little afraid of his island. He felt here strange violent feelings he had never felt before, and lustful desires that he had been quite free from. He knew quite well now that his people didn't love him at all. He knew that their spirits were secretly against him, malicious, jeering, envious, and lurking to down him. He became just as wary and secretive with regard to them.
Your first sentence I think is right on Amalia, but now I think it's not the people who are the problem, but his inability to accept and find happiness.Quote:
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.
Yes, you're right he strikes that balance and he does it to show that Cathcart is inherently at fault. Perhaps that's why that Mckenzie guy wanted to sue Lawrence.Quote:
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.
I started a thread a while back ago about failure in Modernist literature, and if I had read this story then I would have included it in my original point. This story is series of hopes, frustrations, then failures. Despite his high hopes, he fails to live in a community (first island), fails in his romantic, familial, and professional roles (second island), and fails as an individual on the third island. On each island, he adopts a different attitude and means for success, but none of them actually work. Instead, he suffers from frustration and depression. In the face of all of this, you can only laugh or cry, and the moods of the story reflect this. Early in the story the mood is comical and light-hearted, but in the last parts it's morbidly gloomy. I think if you tried hard enough to moralize on this story you could. One could try to find where the islanders Utopian plans went wrong. Or, you could try to define nature in the story and show how the islander deviated from its precepts. I don't think this kind of analysis would really help us understand the story, though. The story, itself, is more invested in what happens to its main character.
I have some more to say, but I think I should go back and look at the other posts before I get too carried away.
Good observation. You make a good point with this. Glad to have you join in on the discussion.Quote:
Originally Posted by Quark
Quark, so glad to see you here! I like how you summed up this story and how you are looking at it. I think if you go back and read the posts, you will get much from that, many varied ideas. There have been some very good comments and I am sure you could expand on those, as well.Quote:
Originally Posted by Quark
Did you like the story? Interesting about the thread you started with this very point in mind. I will have to go back and review that thread. Yes, the story does entail a failed effort, even though it began so hopeful. I do think it has a moral or a lesson and as Virgil mentioned pointed this out in a comparison to a Tolstoy story, and also to Robinson Crusoe, and the fact that the C did succeed in making his island paradise work, by working along with obstacles and nature. Nature here is a key element. As one knows, you cannot control the weather or the seasons.
Quark, I know this is off-topic but will you be starting up the Chekhov thread again soon? I hope to participate again.
Virgil, I will answer your post later on. I know some of the things you brought up were discussed earlier; you bring up some other good points.
Dark Muse, good to see you today and commenting again. This is a good group in this thread. Let's keep it going for awhile longer, more people have shown an interest to me personally, in reading this story.
I hope someone posts some of the lovely passages in the story - quite poetic and I am sure some speak to us in certain broader 'universal' ways.
I hope to have some to post soon.Quote:
Originally Posted by Janine
This sentence I found intresting becasue it seems to suggest that his original intent was not in fact isolataion, but simply to escape the world at large and become master of his own demain, to create his own world, but one that others might inhabit, as long as it was his.Quote:
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 thought this was a great passage, and it used some really good examples of foreshadow. The stealing mist, and glare of the sea, seem to give us a clue that all might not be well. I also love the way the foghorn moo's.Quote:
Before the mist came stealing, and you went home through the ripening oats, the glare of the sea fading from the high air as the foghorn started to moo on the other island. And then the sea-fog went, it was autumn, and the oat-sheaves lying prone; the great moon, another island, rose golden out of the say, and rising higher, the world of the sea was white.
The last line, "the world of the sea was white" seems to suggest the wintery cold end that is to come.
I really like this passage, I have also noticed that Lawrence uses repition alot, as other quotes posted here have shown. The word time, and mystery, also appear in several places throughout the story, as well as references to space.Quote:
Strangely, from your 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 thier vast, strange errands. The little earthly island had 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 sperated off.
I just love this passageQuote:
But once you 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 so-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 another infinity.
I found this interesting after he departs from the world to form is own perfect world, he begins to try and bring in the world he left in order to make his own world feel more like Paradise.Quote:
He began, as we begin all our attempts to regain Paradise, by spending money.
The idea not liking anyone as an individual or for who they were as people is another demostration of his inability to really have any sort of relationship with anyone. He wanted them to be happy in a general way, simply becasue it was his own world and he wanted it to be his utopia.Quote:
It is doubtful whether and of them really liked him man to man, or even woman to man. But then it is doubtful if he really liked any of them as man to man or man to woman. He wanted them to be happy, and the little world to be perfect. But still any one who wants the world to be perfect must be careful not to have real likes or disliked. A general good-will is all you can afford.
Aslo it is a very Buddist like philosophy to love man or woman not personaly or individually but to just generally want goodness for everyone becasue they are a part of the world that you share with them.
Loved thisQuote:
Yet the island was so lovely. When there was a scent of honey-suckle, and the moon brightly flickering down on the sea, then even the grumblers felt a strange nostalgia for it. It set you yearning, with the wild yearnings; perhaps for the past, to be far back in the mysterious past of the island, when the blood had a different throb. Strange floods of passion come over you, strange violent lusts and imaginations of cruelty. The blood and the passion and the lust which the island had known. Uncanny dreams, half-dreams, half-evocated yearnings.
I found it inresting that with this move to the second island, his view and wants began to change as well. Now it seems that he is begining to shift more toward the longing of isolation.Quote:
The island was not longer a "world." It was a sort of refuge.
I loved the line
Quote:
The silent mystery of travelling birds.
Loved the imagery, words and discriptions here.Quote:
The strange stillness from all desire was a kind of wonder to the islander. He did not want anything. His soul at last was still in him, his spirit was like a dim-lit cave under water, where strange sea-foliage expands upon the watery atmosphere, and scarecely sways, and a mute fish shadowily slips in and slips away again. All still and soft uncrying, yet alive as rooted sea-weed is alive.
It seems here the transistion is complete, as on the second island he began to loose desire, and mentioned that he did not care if he got published, now he loseses his will to even attempt anything, but becomes lethargic. Nothing no longer really matters to him. Perhaps this is a warning aganist general good will and not forming personal attachments?Quote:
He no longer workd on his book. The interest has gone.
I love the way the birds momentairly revive him. And the fact that birds play an important and predominant role through the story. They are given almost an etheral quality. The islander does not truly view them as a part of the world, and so they are the only things that do not seem to intrude upon his isolation.Quote:
Many gulls were on ths island now: many sea-birds of all sorts. It was another world of life. Many of the birds he had never seen before. His old impulse came over him, to send for a book, to know thier names. In a flicker of the old passion, to know the name of everything he saw, he even decided to row out to the steamer. The names of the birds! he must know their names, otherwise he had not got them, they were not quite alive to him.
I loved this passage, and noticed that on the third island the writing becomes very Poe like in nature.Quote:
The dark days of winter drew on. Sometimes there was no real day at all. He felt ill, as if he were dissolving, as if dissolution had already set in inside of him. Everything was twilight, outside and in his mind and soul. Once when he went to the door, he saw black heads of men swimming in his bay. For some moments he swooned unconcious. It was the shock, the horror of unexepcted human apporach. The horror in the twilight! And not till the shock had undermined him and left him disembodied, did he realize that the black heads were the heads of seals swimming in.
Dark Muse, this is great! Good work and good thinking on your part. Thanks for quoting all of those. I will try and comment on each passage later. I love the ones you chose to post. Aren't they deeply poetic? I love things about the sea and some of these are lovely to read independent of the story. I used to write passages, I particularly liked, in a small notebook to read later on, and some of these would be fine to add to that collection. I may just do so.
LOL I use to do that too. Glad you enjoyed the passages I selected.
Absolutely loved the passages you posted too!
"The silent mystery of traveling birds" ~ Beautiful.
"The strange stillness from all desire was a kind of wonder to the islander. He did not want anything. His soul at last was still in him, his spirit was like a dim-lit cave under water, where strange sea-foliage expands upon the watery atmosphere, and scarecely sways, and a mute fish shadowily slips in and slips away again. All still and soft uncrying, yet alive as rooted sea-weed is alive."
~ Such a wonderful image-evoking description for that stillness, desirelessness.
Let me just say you ladies are really carrying a wonderful conversation on this story and making such interesting observations. I must admit I'm the slacker here. Now I was searching through for the meaning of the infinity referesences and only to find that Janine has figured it out.
Eternity is a form of infinity and does starkly contrast. As I was going through the story looking through the infinty references, I continually found along side, references to the opposite, to finiteness. We've all seen the infinity passages, but look at this passage near the beginning of the story:Quote:
Originally Posted by Janine
"Cosy," "four miles if you walked around," "If you walked straight over the two humps of hills, the length of it, ... it took you only twenty minutes," "when you came to the edge," these are all references to the opposite of infinity, to finiteness.Quote:
What could be more cozy and home-like? It was four miles if you walked all round your island, through the gorse and the blackthorn bushes, above the steep rocks of the sea and down in the little glades where the primroses grew. If you walked straight over the two humps of hills, the length of it, through the rocky fields where the cows lay chewing, and through the rather sparse oats, on into the gorse again, and so to the low cliffs' edge, it took you only twenty minutes. And when you came to the edge, you could see another, bigger island lying beyond. But the sea was between you and it. And as you returned over the turf where the short, downland cowslips nodded you saw to the east still another island, a tiny one this time, like the calf of the cow. This tiny island also belonged to the islander.
Janine I think you're right. There is a sort of contrast set up where the infinity passages tie into a religious concept against the finiteness of reality. Here I think is a very important passage:Quote:
While reviewing I recalled two passages where Biblical references were made and wondered if anyone had any ideas on these two passages:
Oddly enough later, the islander does just that and breeds, only to spur him to separate himself even more from humanity.Quote:
Quote:
if you are like Abraham, and want your offspring to be numberless as the sands of the sea-shore, you don't choose an island to start breeding on.
Especially, this second statement fascinates me, which I find curious and I think must have some definitel significance to the story. I have one idea. This is that Christ suffered on earth from earthly imperfection and he died in the end. He was isolated as the islander was. The islander, like Christ, is seeking perfection on earth and he must also die at the end of the story, because on this earth 'perfection' cannot be realised. Only in the realms of eternity and infinity, can this perfection be realised and obtained.Quote:
Quote:
He was wonderful with children, talked to them simply wonderful, made you think of Our Saviour Himself, said the woman.
Circles is the aesthetic principle of the story I think. An island is a circle, a circle is perfection (an endless loop) but a circle is also finite too, it completes. Circles tie in with the concept of circular time as one of you ladies pointed out. I don't think Lawrence is aiming so much at primitive time versues modern time (as I think some one said) but in the religious time of infiinity versues the linear time of mankind.Quote:
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 so- 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.
I probably said too much there and jumbles a bunch of thoughts. I hope it made sense.
If I had realized this religious sense of the story i would have used this in my thesis on Lawrence's use of transfiguration. Does Cathcart reach transfiguration?
Yes that is probably true, but I think in a way the Islander had to go back to the more primitive sense of time, and escape the constant press of civilization and man construrcted time, in order to truly gain the ablitly to experince the religous sense of infinity without being intruded upon by having to conform to mans linear time.Quote:
Originally Posted by Virgil
Actually I should have qualified my statement. Primitive time is religious time for Lawrence. Paradise is that primitive state for him. So your statement is right on, Dark Muse.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dark Muse
Virgil, you are an real ace. Thanks so much for going back and reading the posts and commenting. That means a lot to me, especially today. It is fine you have not been here too much lately; I know the 'Aeneid' is keeping you plenty busy, also your Christmas poem discussion. We still have plenty of time to discuss the deeper elements of the story; it is only the 15th today. It is always good to have your keen sense of perception a part of the discussion.Quote:
Originally Posted by Virgil
First, thanks everybody, for posting those great quotes. I have been the slacker lately. Sorry about that. All of your comments are so important to me, I learn more this way. You are all doing a great job on this discussion.:thumbs_up
The passage with the 'fish' image is so reminescent of something Lawrence wrote (early on) in his first novel "The White Peacock". I must look this up, with some commentary on this idea, since it goes back to primitive man and some interesting ideas, that are definitely unique to 'Lawrence'; they keep cropping up in various pieces of his literture.
Virgil, I had wondered if you would notice the passages I had posted about the biblical references; I had you in-mind when I had posted them. I could not imagine Lawrence including them, unless they had a definite meaning. significance to the story. I like how you have linked them.
Wow, this 'time' thing is really interesting to me. I don't know if I have figured anything out really but thought it was good to throw out here for discussion the various elements of contrast concerning the time. You have expanded on that nicely. Now I really like the idea of the circle; islands being circles; time being a circle, perfection. Everything you wrote below makes perfect sense to me and then the statement:"when you came to the edge," ....then there is this paragraph:
I just love that last sentence! Wow, does this speak of 'infinity' to you, or what?Quote:
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.
Thanks V, I had gone back over the story paragraph by paragraph and I noticed that it seemed that these contrasts would follow each other, often in the passages. Yes, I agree, I think the 'infinity passages do definitely tie into religious concepts against the finiteness of reality.' That is an excellent way of expressing it.Quote:
Janine I think you're right. There is a sort of contrast set up where the infinity passages tie into a religious concept against the finiteness of reality. Here I think is a very important passage:
See, you did a similiar thing. It is so good to review the text, one sees things not noticed, on a first reading, or even a second.Quote:
Eternity is a form of infinity and does starkly contrast. As I was going through the story looking through the infinty references, I continually found along side, references to the opposite, to finiteness. We've all seen the infinity passages, but look at this passage near the beginning of the story:
Yes, it is cosy and you are right - so opposite the concept of 'infinity'. The island is finite still - perhaps this is why it does not work for Cathcart. Maybe this story is more than a story about 'isolation' and more about impending 'death', and maybe it is about Lawrence's thoughts on that and infinity? Just a wild thought. But think of the ending, with the snow obliterating the shape of the island - the island's restrictions of finiteness, no longer evident. Now Cathcart has achieved what he wanted all along - 'infinity', and yet this can only be achieved by death. As he also wants 'perfection', this too can only be achieved with death and the infinite. Interesting, isn't it?Quote:
"Cosy," "four miles if you walked around," "If you walked straight over the two humps of hills, the length of it, ... it took you only twenty minutes," "when you came to the edge," these are all references to the opposite of infinity, to finiteness.
This term 'primitive time' and 'religious time' interests me. I must learn more about these.Quote:
Circles is the aesthetic principle of the story I think. An island is a circle, a circle is perfection (an endless loop) but a circle is also finite too, it completes. Circles tie in with the concept of circular time as one of you ladies pointed out. I don't think Lawrence is aiming so much at primitive time versues modern time (as I think some one said) but in the religious time of infiinity versues the linear time of mankind.
You know, I picked up a book on 'Time' once and I will have to dig it up and read it. It is all about all the concepts of time in the world and history. Now I am intrigued.
Not at all. I understood all you said perfectly.Quote:
I probably said too much there and jumbles a bunch of thoughts. I hope it made sense.
Yes, that is true. And this is his later fiction, too. Is it too late to add on to it?....hahah...Lawrence would have done a complete rewrite. ;)Quote:
If I had realized this religious sense of the story i would have used this in my thesis on Lawrence's use of transfiguration. Does Cathcart reach transfiguration?
By the way, I came across a book on Amazon that sounded a lot like your thesis. Are you published now? :lol: I will have to look it up again and send you the title; might be something you would be interested in reading.
There have been many good posts, and they've had a surprising wide focus, too: everything from the story to Pre-Raphaelite art to vampires. If anyone accuses me of sidetracking the conversation, I'll know they're joking.Quote:
Originally Posted by Janine
Upon review of the posts, I also noticed how much of a jerk I must have looked telling everyone about the hopelessness of treating the story allegorically right after multiple people attempted precisely that. Sorry. I probably should have gone back and looked--rather than jumped in, totally unaware. Really, though, my point is harmless. I'm only saying that it's difficult to give a point to the story from only the text itself. If you have some other knowledge of Lawrence--which many of you do--you can apply it to this story and perhaps find some instructions encoded in the story. Or, one could follow the symbols and references and link the islands and the main character with certain ideas. From there, you could point to specific actions of the main character that have positive or negative effects on the story. Either way, though, you have to go outside of the story to make you're point, and this is always difficult.
I like what people have been posting about time and the ocean. I'll try to post something on that in a couple of hours when I come back to the computer.
Please do Janine. I'm curious.Quote:
Originally Posted by Janine
Thanks.Quote:
Virgil, I had wondered if you would notice the passages I had posted about the biblical references; I had you in-mind when I had posted them. I could not imagine Lawrence including them, unless they had a definite meaning. significance to the story. I like how you have linked them.
Wow, this 'time' thing is really interesting to me. I don't know if I have figured anything out really but thought it was good to throw out here for discussion the various elements of contrast concerning the time. You have expanded on that nicely. Now I really like the idea of the circle; islands being circles; time being a circle, perfection. Everything you wrote below makes perfect sense to me and then the statement:"when you came to the edge,"
I thought that was worth repeating. I think it's the heart of the story.Quote:
I just love that last sentence! Wow, does this speak of 'infinity' to you, or what?Quote:
Quote:
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.
At first when I read that I thought how couod that be? But I think you're right. Life is finite and the spirit/soul is part of eternity/infinity.Quote:
Yes, it is cosy and you are right - so opposite the concept of 'infinity'. The island is finite still - perhaps this is why it does not work for Cathcart. Maybe this story is more than a story about 'isolation' and more about impending 'death', and maybe it is about Lawrence's thoughts on that and infinity? Just a wild thought.
Absolutely very interesting. I think we've got it!Quote:
But think of the ending, with the snow obliterating the shape of the island - the island's restrictions of finiteness, no longer evident. Now Cathcart has achieved what he wanted all along - 'infinity', and yet this can only be achieved by death. As he also wants 'perfection', this too can only be achieved with death and the infinite. Interesting, isn't it?
Oh you should skim that. Time in fiction is very important, and how a writer uses time is pertinent.Quote:
This term 'primitive time' and 'religious time' interests me. I must learn more about these.
You know, I picked up a book on 'Time' once and I will have to dig it up and read it. It is all about all the concepts of time in the world and history. Now I am intrigued.
What book is that? I would like to check it out. :)Quote:
Yes, that is true. And this is his later fiction, too. Is it too late to add on to it?....hahah...Lawrence would have done a complete rewrite. ;)
By the way, I came across a book on Amazon that sounded a lot like your thesis. Are you published now? :lol: I will have to look it up again and send you the title; might be something you would be interested in reading.
Quark, glad to see you back. Yes, this has been a wide focus and we went a little of-topic one night but hey, we all need to lighten up a little and the art was nice wasn't it. Even Shakespeare realized the need for 'comic relief' once in awhile. If anyone has taken offense to that, then that is truly their problem. We got back on-track and no harm was done. Quark, anytime you feel like 'sidetracking' a bit, I promise to be tolerant! :lol: Anyway, vampires might fit right in with Cathcart's ghostly images, what do you think? ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Quark
You are right, it is difficult and it seems the more we studied this particular story the more these ideas emerged. I think a good discussion is built this way. I don't think one has to know a great deal about Lawrence, but true it was quite helpful, to know that digging in deeper to these meanings of Lawrence's, such as the hope of one day forming his own utopian society, gave the story more dimension. I think if you merely take the time, to read the short biographical sketch (on this site) it will reveal these basic facts about Lawrence and his life's journey of discovery. Then you can relate some of his biographical facts directly to this story. I know we have had discussions, about separating the biography of the author from his work, but in this case to better understand this story and the meaning one needs to delve below the surface and seek additional facts that help define the story more clearly.Quote:
Upon review of the posts, I also noticed how much of a jerk I must have looked telling everyone about the hopelessness of treating the story allegorically right after multiple people attempted precisely that. Sorry. I probably should have gone back and looked--rather than jumped in, totally unaware. Really, though, my point is harmless. I'm only saying that it's difficult to give a point to the story from only the text itself. If you have some other knowledge of Lawrence--which many of you do--you can apply it to this story and perhaps find some instructions encoded in the story. Or, one could follow the symbols and references and link the islands and the main character with certain ideas. From there, you could point to specific actions of the main character that have positive or negative effects on the story. Either way, though, you have to go outside of the story to make you're point, and this is always difficult.
And Quark, you were not a jerk at all. Everyone on this thread and the forum have a right to their opinions. At that time, less had been revealed and this is how you saw the story personally...nothing wrong with that. I think probably, there are so many different ways, to look at and interpret this story, which makes this discussion even more interesting and mulifacted. This has truly been a great discussion and a good group of participants. I think we are all here to learn. We all have to be humble in order to open our minds to new idea and concepts of the story. If not, we will miss the point entirely.
Quote:
I like what people have been posting about time and the ocean. I'll try to post something on that in a couple of hours when I come back to the computer.
Yes, the 'time' elements have been fascinating. They start one thinking in much broader terms. 'Infinity' is a big word - expansive and evoking such need for deeper considerations and ideas. Now we are getting into a more philosophical realm of discussion, don't you think? Yes, I would like to hear more of your ideas on this, 'time and the ocean'. I recently saw a program on the oceans and these are vastly unexplored areas of this planet, they are still very mysterious and unknown, perhaps relating to 'infinity' , plus the thought has come to me how changable they are. This whole planet is 'ever-changing'. Nothing is truly fixed. All these thoughts make the story even more intriguing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Virgil
Quote:
Originally Posted by Janine
Time or timelessness keeps being brought up. Specifically, the kind of time introduced in the first part of the story:Quote:
Originally Posted by Dark Muse
Lawrence conjures up the idea of a timeless infinity at contrast with the usual limited perspective. I think we're right to think of "infinity" as an important concept in the story, but I think we're wrong to consider the islander somehow willfully embracing "infinity" or timelessness. It seems quite the opposite. Cathcart's Utopian aspirations are not bringing him any closer to infinity; they are a way of overlooking the truth that he sees at night. After Lawrence explains the "infinity" of the island in the dark, he goes on to say, "To escape any more of this sort of awareness, our islander daily concentrated upon his material island. Why should it not be the Happy Isle at last?". Most of the rest of the story is dedicated to Cathcart's attempts to be happy: no more brooding reflections after the sun has gone down. At the end, the islander grudgingly accepts that he is not in control--this could be seen perhaps as a return to infinity. But, during the action of the story Cathcart resists the kind of awareness we have in the beginning of the story. To put this in literary, rather than philosophical, terms, we could say that the timelessness or "infinity" makes up something like the antagonist to Cathcart. It counters the islander and pushes the story to crisis.Quote:
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 so- 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.
This is an intresting observation. And It can be seen as a struggle for control or perhaps to find some sort of balance with it. In a way the Islander does seem huanted by this idea of infinity and timelessness, but I agree that in some reguards it does not appear as if he is seeking it, for he is constnatly trying to fill his world with the material with bits of civilization when the infinity gets too much for him.Quote:
Originally Posted by Quark
You can see in the second island how slowly he starts to give up his attempts for control and began to accept more this idea of the infinte and then by the last island he has completly given up and simply accepts his fate.
Yeah, it is odd. It's hard to exactly peg Cathcart's relationship with the infinite beyond. In some moments, he appears to hide from it and at other times he welcomes it. On the third island, Lawrence even says, "He wanted only to hear the whispering sound of the sea, and the sharp cries of the gulls, cries that came out of another world to him. And best of all, the great silence." This sounds like a reprise for the thoughts in the beginning--except this time the islander is more attentive. Perhaps a better way of looking at the "infinite" in this story is to consider it as something tempting or luring him. I think you said "haunted"; this would be a good word. I'm starting to think we have to separate Cathcart's idealism in the first part to his ideals later in the story. His Utopian social plan is a communal goal, whereas his hope for a more numinous life at the end is something different from this. The later ambition appears to be driven by the voices that cry out from the ocean that remind him of the "infinite".Quote:
Originally Posted by Dark Muse
The only problem with this approach, though, is the very end. If Cathcart is embracing the "infinite", why is he overcome?
Yes this is very true, and a good point. He does seem to want a Utopia for everyone, not just for himself, but later in the story he seems to be driven more into the need for isolation.Quote:
Originally Posted by Quark
This is a good question, though at the end, I do not know if he is truly embracing it, or if he simply relizes he can no longer fight it, just as his death. A person knows they cannot escape thier death, but that does not mean they always will welcome its comming, but must eventurally simply accept the fact of it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Quark
It could also be the fact that he cannot truly know just what the infinite is like untill he is experincing it. So perhaps, he just begins to get overwhelmed by the idea of it, perhaps it is even more then he had first thought it would be once he was experincing it.
Well, the "infinite" concept may be different from the snow at the end. I think the snow belongs more to what Cathcart calls the "invisible hand". Lawrence explains thatQuote:
Originally Posted by Dark Muse
The "infinite", on the other hand, is what is haunting Cathcart. It's what makes him want to isolate himself on the island. Once again, Lawrence explaining:Quote:
"As sure as the spirits rose in the human breast, with a movement of joy, an invisible hand struck malevolently out of the silence. There must not be any joy, nor even any quiet peace."
The snow is this mysteriously destructive object that we're probably supposed to connect with Cathcart's other failures, but it's still unclear how the "infinite" thing works into any of this.Quote:
"It set you yearning, with a wild yearning; perhaps for the past, to be far back in the mysterious past of the island, when the blood had a different throb. Strange floods of passion came over you, strange violent lusts and imaginations of cruelty. The blood and the passion and the lust which the island had known. Uncanny dreams, half-dreams, half-evocated yearnings."
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quark
Sorry if I did not make myself clear, I was not trying to say that the snow or death and the infinte were the same. Only that perhaps the reason Cathcart was overcome was becasue perhaps he did not welcome the infinite with open arms but simply accepted the fact that he could not escape it and that death is also like this, but not to say they are the same thing just a similar idea surrounding the two.
Quark and Dark Muse,
Good discussion going on here - sorry I missed it, but you two have come up with plenty of new ideas or expanded ones on things earlier discussed and I will think more about all this. I will try to post some comments tomorrow. Keep discussing! I'm listening.
Let me say one thing. I see this story as a progression/regression of life and the path to inescapable 'death', as all must face. In this way death is the pathway to that infinity or eternity...."the vast unknown from which no traveler returns".
Yep. Good Discussion!:thumbs_up Keep it going.
Just wanted to post an excerpt from a letter D.H.Lawrence wrote, which I thought interesting.
I don't know why I thought this passage from 'Twilight in Italy' might be important in some way. There is more too over here. I don't really get all of it or most of it. Janine, since you've read the book, could it have any role in explaining the story?Quote:
I have been reading the poems and am more struck by those I have never seen before. They have got the other-world in them, which is the world of poetry. They are in the other-world. One must either be in this world or in the world beyond, in the temporal or the eternal life. One cannot have one foot on sea and one on shore. And your best poems belong to the eternal world altogether. ‘Loneliness’ is almost perfect.
‘And what has the melodied soul to do
With aught but what is blest?
It cannot laugh, nor blame, nor teach
Defend nor interest.
This is quite perfect and a very great truth. Such loneliness where one lives in the presence of things blest, in the knowledge of the Infinite, the Eternal, where each thing is consummate and completed, this is the very antithesis of loneliness. Loneliness is part of temporality and partiality, it has no place in eternality. Milton’s God is the great Absolute, the Eternity interpreted by us, from mortality, into loneliness. But it is just this which is not loneliness which avails against all loneliness.
Quote:
It is the inevitable philosophic conclusion of all the Renaissance. The deepest impulse in man, the religious impulse, is the desire to be immortal, or infinite, consummated. And this impulse is satisfied in fulfilment of an idea, a steady progression. In this progression man is satisfied, he seems to have reached his goal, this infinity, this immortality, this eternal being, with every step nearer which he takes.
And so, according to his idea of fulfilment, man establishes the whole order of life. If my fulfilment is the fulfilment and establishment of the unknown divine Self which I am, then I shall proceed in the realizing of the greatest idea of the self, the highest conception of the I, my order of life will be kingly, imperial, aristocratic. The body politic also will culminate in this divinity of the flesh, this body imbued with glory, invested with divine power and might, the King, the Emperor. In the body politic also I shall desire a king, an emperor, a tyrant, glorious, mighty, in whom I see myself consummated and fulfilled. This is inevitable!
But during the Middle Ages, struggling within this pagan, original transport, the transport of the Ego, was a small dissatisfaction, a small contrary desire. Amid the pomp of kings and popes was the Child Jesus and the Madonna. Jesus the King gradually dwindled down. There was Jesus the Child, helpless, at the mercy of all the world. And there was Jesus crucified.
The old transport, the old fulfilment of the Ego, the Davidian ecstasy, the assuming of all power and glory unto the self, the becoming infinite through the absorption of all into the Ego, this gradually became unsatisfactory. This was not the infinite, this was not immortality. This was eternal death, this was damnation.
The monk rose up with his opposite ecstasy, the Christian ecstasy. There was a death to die: the flesh, the self, must die, so that the spirit should rise again immortal, eternal, infinite. I am dead unto myself, but I live in the Infinite. The finite Me is no more, only the Infinite, the Eternal, is.
At the Renaissance this great half-truth overcame the other great half-truth. The Christian Infinite, reached by a process of abnegation, a process of being absorbed, dissolved, diffused into the great Not-Self, supplanted the old pagan Infinite, wherein the self like a root threw out branches and radicles which embraced the whole universe, became the Whole.
There is only one Infinite, the world now cried, there is the great Christian Infinite of renunciation and consummation in the not-self. The other, that old pride, is damnation. The sin of sins is Pride, it is the way to total damnation. Whereas the pagans based their life on pride.
And according to this new Infinite, reached through renunciation and dissolving into the Others, the Neighbour, man must build up his actual form of life. With Savonarola and Martin Luther the living Church actually transformed itself, for the Roman Church was still pagan. Henry VIII simply said: ‘There is no Church, there is only the State.’ But with Shakespeare the transformation had reached the State also. The King, the Father, the representative of the Consummate Self, the maximum of all life, the symbol of the consummate being, the becoming Supreme, Godlike, Infinite, he must perish and pass away. This Infinite was not infinite, this consummation was not consummated, all this was fallible, false. It was rotten, corrupt. It must go. But Shakespeare was also the thing itself. Hence his horror, his frenzy, his self-loathing.
The King, the Emperor is killed in the soul of man, the old order of life is over, the old tree is dead at the root. So said Shakespeare. It was finally enacted in Cromwell. Charles I took up the old position of kingship by divine right. Like Hamlet’s father, he was blameless otherwise. But as representative of the old form of life, which mankind now hated with frenzy, he must be cut down, removed. It was a symbolic act.
The world, our world of Europe, had now really turned, swung round to a new goal, a new idea, the Infinite reached through the omission of Self. God is all that which is Not-Me. I am consummate when my Self, the resistant solid, is reduced and diffused into all that which is Not-Me: my neighbour, my enemy, the great Otherness. Then I am perfect.
Hira, I like the first exerpt very much. Can you tell me what letter it is from and what the date of the letter is. I wish to look up the entire letter.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hira
This second exerpt from "Twilight in Italy", I must have read before, since I read all three of the travel books. I have been thinking back to the "Sea in Sardinia" book as relating more closely to this story, but now that you present us with this passage, this may directly relate or at least some elements of this writing may; although I have to tell you, Lawrence often changed his mind later about things or modified his ideas. I do think much of this writing does embody many of his beliefs, but I find it confusing, to some degree, as though Lawrence was gropping for the answers to eternity. I will ask Virgil to take a look at this writing and try to explain. My attempts may be somewhat limited or even lame at explaining this. Lawrence often placed long 'sermons' in his books and these have to be read over and over to really comprehend just what he meant by them. This passage is setting forth to the reader all, or some of the various belief systems predominent in the world or throughout history and showing how the idea of 'self' was basically annilated. Or so I think this is what he is saying. Lawrence did believe in some strange things, like the thought of a man's own divinity or a ruling person. I just read "The Plumed Serpent" and this idea is explored in this novel. Two men become as gods on the earth exchanging the place of the 'crucified Christ'. In other words these old gods come to earth to replace the dead Christ present in the Christian churches (crucifixes play heavily into this equation) and therefore Christ ascends to Heaven to be at last with his Father. Now worship turns to these two former, now 'new', Mexican gods to rule the country. What exactly Lawrence was getting at, is difficult to say. He wanted the divine to be present in a real live human being and not in a dead image. This is one thing I believe he was saying in the book. Where one would take this theory is not of my saying.
I am hoping Virgil can shed some light on all this. This is getting deeply into the philosophies of the author, which takes years to really study and analysis. I don't think most people in the thread would be aware of other Lawrence works and how this relates. Virgil might see the relation to this story. I do in a remote way, but I can't really find the word to express that.
Which part of the story do these thoughts take place? Also, I will look up the exact year that Lawrence wrote "Twilight in Italy". This might prove to be very significant.
I did not re-post your passages, so all, please see above to Hira's entry.
I am editing this now since I just looked up somethings about the letter - I now see your link, Hira, about and the letter is around 1915 -this is early in Lawrence's life and career. At about the same period he began writing "Twilight in Italy" so these are very early thoughts coming from the author. Actually, the earliest reference I find in my book is that he was beginning to write this book in 1912, so from what I can see by 1915 he had named the novel and was sending proofs off to his publisher. This all coincides with the same time period he is writing "Sons and Lovers". This is quite interesting to me.
The Plumed Serpent is a much later work and so is this story "The Man Who Loved Islands". The philosophies of Lawrence's presented in a sketchy way in this writing may only be the mere seeds of ideas to be more developed and explored in greater depth, in Lawrence's later work and ideas on 'transfiguration'. Virgil knows greatly of "Transfiguration" concepts in Lawrence works and can tell you more about this idea, since he wrote his thesis on this aspect of Lawrence.
Here is the link to the letter (Its in my first post too though). Written to Margaret Radford, June 1915.
I took it from here. Its part 3 of 'On the Lago di Garda' ,'The Theatre'. Almost beyond half-way down the page is where I took the excerpt.
P.S. I haven't at the moment though fully read or digested what you've written.
Hira, I edited above and found the letter - thanks anyway, sorry to have troubled you about it. I had not noticed your link.
How interesting - you found the whole book online of "Twilight in Italy"...I have been checking out that site and it is just a shame they don't also have "Sea and Sardinia" and "Etruscan Tombs" as well. I guess that would be asking a lot, right; Hira, you are good, finding this rare book online. You are a research analysis like me! haha. I also looked to see if they might have "The White Peacock", but they don't....oh well.
Quark and Dark Muse, I must address your discussion and debate later on, since I have to go out now for the evening. Sorry.
It is alright, take your timeQuote:
Originally Posted by Janine
I've read the Rocking Horse Winner and actually had to do a project on it.
Hi Santé, welcome to the forum. I see you are a new member. There is much here to offer a person. We have a monthly reading of one of Lawrence's short stories; if you check back you will see we have discussed several so far. This month the story is "The Man Who Loved Islands". I believe Lawrence wrote this around the same time as he wrote "The Rocking Horse Winner". This was the late period in Lawrence's career and his short life. This second story, that you mention may be a possibility for one of our discussions. I can't promise when. If you are interested in Lawrence's writing, please feel free to join in our next discussion. We have not decided on a story as yet.Quote:
Originally Posted by Santé
How did you like the story? I can't recall if I read it years ago or not. I think it was presented in most high schools or universities, as a required short story read and essay. I believe I did read it - I have a vague memory but I think I do definitely need a re-reading soon. It has been brought up to me so often - one of his most popular stories I believe.
Hira, If you were to read all three of Lawrence's travel books you would see a progression and changes in his attitudes towards eternity. I also read his "Apocalyse" and this is quite an interesting book, although I don't believe what Lawrence writes to be true I find his theories quite fascinating. I need to re-read this book someday.
Dark Muse and Quark and whomever else is here, I have to delay some more till this coming week; I am quite busy today, it being a weekend day. Keep posting if you all want to. I will go back and read all and comment later.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hira
Absolutely this is relavant Hira. This encapsulates a lot of Lawrence's ideas about religion. Let me recopy this last paragraph:Quote:
Quote:
It is the inevitable philosophic conclusion of all the Renaissance. The deepest impulse in man, the religious impulse, is the desire to be immortal, or infinite, consummated. And this impulse is satisfied in fulfilment of an idea, a steady progression. In this progression man is satisfied, he seems to have reached his goal, this infinity, this immortality, this eternal being, with every step nearer which he takes.
And so, according to his idea of fulfilment, man establishes the whole order of life. If my fulfilment is the fulfilment and establishment of the unknown divine Self which I am, then I shall proceed in the realizing of the greatest idea of the self, the highest conception of the I, my order of life will be kingly, imperial, aristocratic. The body politic also will culminate in this divinity of the flesh, this body imbued with glory, invested with divine power and might, the King, the Emperor. In the body politic also I shall desire a king, an emperor, a tyrant, glorious, mighty, in whom I see myself consummated and fulfilled. This is inevitable!
But during the Middle Ages, struggling within this pagan, original transport, the transport of the Ego, was a small dissatisfaction, a small contrary desire. Amid the pomp of kings and popes was the Child Jesus and the Madonna. Jesus the King gradually dwindled down. There was Jesus the Child, helpless, at the mercy of all the world. And there was Jesus crucified.
The old transport, the old fulfilment of the Ego, the Davidian ecstasy, the assuming of all power and glory unto the self, the becoming infinite through the absorption of all into the Ego, this gradually became unsatisfactory. This was not the infinite, this was not immortality. This was eternal death, this was damnation.
The monk rose up with his opposite ecstasy, the Christian ecstasy. There was a death to die: the flesh, the self, must die, so that the spirit should rise again immortal, eternal, infinite. I am dead unto myself, but I live in the Infinite. The finite Me is no more, only the Infinite, the Eternal, is.
At the Renaissance this great half-truth overcame the other great half-truth. The Christian Infinite, reached by a process of abnegation, a process of being absorbed, dissolved, diffused into the great Not-Self, supplanted the old pagan Infinite, wherein the self like a root threw out branches and radicles which embraced the whole universe, became the Whole.
There is only one Infinite, the world now cried, there is the great Christian Infinite of renunciation and consummation in the not-self. The other, that old pride, is damnation. The sin of sins is Pride, it is the way to total damnation. Whereas the pagans based their life on pride.
And according to this new Infinite, reached through renunciation and dissolving into the Others, the Neighbour, man must build up his actual form of life. With Savonarola and Martin Luther the living Church actually transformed itself, for the Roman Church was still pagan. Henry VIII simply said: ‘There is no Church, there is only the State.’ But with Shakespeare the transformation had reached the State also. The King, the Father, the representative of the Consummate Self, the maximum of all life, the symbol of the consummate being, the becoming Supreme, Godlike, Infinite, he must perish and pass away. This Infinite was not infinite, this consummation was not consummated, all this was fallible, false. It was rotten, corrupt. It must go. But Shakespeare was also the thing itself. Hence his horror, his frenzy, his self-loathing.
The King, the Emperor is killed in the soul of man, the old order of life is over, the old tree is dead at the root. So said Shakespeare. It was finally enacted in Cromwell. Charles I took up the old position of kingship by divine right. Like Hamlet’s father, he was blameless otherwise. But as representative of the old form of life, which mankind now hated with frenzy, he must be cut down, removed. It was a symbolic act.
The world, our world of Europe, had now really turned, swung round to a new goal, a new idea, the Infinite reached through the omission of Self. God is all that which is Not-Me. I am consummate when my Self, the resistant solid, is reduced and diffused into all that which is Not-Me: my neighbour, my enemy, the great Otherness. Then I am perfect.
This is Lawrence stating his belief that perfection is the loss of our self, our egos as he refers to it. That is why Cathcart cannot achieve utopia, at least not until death. His ego (and I use this in the Lawrencian sense, not the common sense or the Freudian sense; Lawrence's use is different, almost synonmous with self or an individual's personality or individual's persona) conflicts with others and with nature and the elements. Like I've said, for Lawrence the ultimate perfection of existence is a flower, the absense of ego. So as you read this passage again, think of ego as I've extracted the meaning from Lawrence's writings. So let me also say that when you see in a Lawrence work an exertion of will, that is an outpouring of a character's ego, and that's contrary to the religious ideal that Lawrence wants. I hope that answered it Hira and Janine, who was asking for my opinion in this.Quote:
The world, our world of Europe, had now really turned, swung round to a new goal, a new idea, the Infinite reached through the omission of Self. God is all that which is Not-Me. I am consummate when my Self, the resistant solid, is reduced and diffused into all that which is Not-Me: my neighbour, my enemy, the great Otherness. Then I am perfect.
Virgil, that helped emensely. Thanks so much. I knew you could explain it much better than I could. My attempt was somewhat feeble, I am afraid. I know how L throught, but I just can't explain it, or write it properly. You did a great job here and in minimal words. I perfectly understand what you wrote here. I hope this helps Hira, to grasp the meaning behind the passage quoted.Quote:
Originally Posted by Virgil
It is curious to note just when L wrote the passage - quite early in his life and career. What do you make of that in regard to 'Islands' being written much later?
I really like your definition of the Ego, in the sense of Lawrence, I found it very interesting, and can definately see what you are seeing. It does make a great deal of sense.Quote:
Originally Posted by Virgil
There was no trouble. I just copy/pasted the link!Quote:
Originally Posted by Janine
Where did this progression lead to Janine? These letters, they were written quite early. I suppose there has been a lot of change in his opinions between 1915 and 1929. There are a lot of things that are familiar though.Quote:
Originally Posted by Janine
I would try to read them, the 'Twilight in Italy' is available online so I can read that. Will try to find the others.
Yes, I agree with Dark Muse, it does make a lot of sense now. So he had to suffer, the way he did, fade out, suffer crucifixion like the Christ so to speak and then finally after all that be elevated up to perfection.Quote:
Originally Posted by Virgil
response to post #834...Holy Moses, Virgil!
Will come back tomorrow with more comments. Sorry again, I have been attending to other online and offline matters that are important to me. I feel I have sort of neglected this discussion lately.
Hira, one thing. Lawrence had the Phoenix for his symbol. This mythological bird burns down to ash, only to rise again to rebirth, or eternal life. You might research more about the Phoenix and Lawrence online. In fact, on Lawrence's memorial gravesite, in New Mexico, there is a small chapel that houses a mosiac of this symbol. I found photos of it online. If I can find the link, I will send it to you.
The point is this would be relative to your last statement, to Dark Muse.
Quasi, I will let Virgil answer your post.
I hope that means you liked what I wrote. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by quasimodo1