Quote:
Originally Posted by
Sapphire
That war came to my mind too, but I think we're jumping a bit too far here. If that is what the narrator wants to allude too, why does he not talk about red and white roses? He mentions "a common pink rose" vs. "a born rose". I think this is rather pointing towards "common people" vs "noble people", the Marshalls being common and the southern Egbert being of higher breeding. Mind you, I am not too sure about this. After all, it is mentioned nowhere that Egbert is of nobility.
Yes I agree. It was a thought to consider but I didn't put too much stock in it myself. I think you got it right.
Quote:
And I do not think that calling the Marshalls "true English" means that Egbert is not (not that you say that). You mention it might be that there are two sides of an "English" character, I think there are different English characters - either North vs South or common vs noble. One thing I do know for sure, is that all characters are "really English". Egbert and Godfrey are even said to be "two real Englishmen, and their instincts were almost the same" towards the end of the story.
I say two sides because Lawrence is known for his dualism. He always seems to think in opposing contrasts: male/female, north/south, industrial/rural.
Quote:
Any special story you have in mind? I actually only know Ivanhoe :redface: And I do not see the similarities there.
No, just the fact that it's historical fiction set in England.
Quote:
And though Egbert’s paste will be explained, his past will not. We know what house Winifred is from, but we do not know what Egbert’s parents are like. His mother is named later on, but even shorter than Winifred’s mother. He really marries into the Marshall family :nod: Compare this to how women become a part of their husbands family… I wonder though: was that the case in England? I think I am comparing to Middle Eastern and Southern Europe families now :brickwall
Interesting that Egbert's past isn't more defined. Perhaps the story was getting too long. But it does seem like a hole in the story.
Quote:
“True English”. But if the father is from the North, he’s rather from Wales and thus British instead of English :angel: I am sorry, I just had to point that out :p It is a little pet peeve of me: do not call the Netherlands Holland and do not call the United Kingdom England ;)
:blush: I'm so sorry if I did. I did not realize there is a distinction. I find it easier to trype out Holland.
Quote:
“North” can of course also just mean “Northern England”, it is not necessarily the extreme north of the British Island. I do think Lawrence just meant the country… it is probably not really important. “ Great Britain, My Great Britain” would just sound stupid for a title, would it not? :lol:
:lol: :lol: Yes.
Quote:
“English as holly trees and hawthorn are English”. I never especially linked those two with England. I do connect holly with Christmas, and hawthorn with the start of spring (it is called May-thorn over here). I guess both are native plants?! I see the connection with the Marshalls and especially Godfrey: strong plants, with a tough shell (thorns).
I like the metaphor of the rose. It really helps to explain the point. Though I did need the sentence “it did not alter their blood” to completely grasp its meaning ;) And I do wonder why it has to be a “common pink rose”. All the other roses in the story are white or red, as are the famous symbols of roses in England itself (York and Lancastre). Are wild roses usually pink? I can not say I see those often around, but the huge question for red roses might have changed that over the years.
Don't know if there is a particular color to wild roses. What do you think Lawrence is alluding to by comparing Egbert to a rose? Delicate? pretty?
Quote:
Note how it is stressed that he’s the last in a long line of breeding. I almost wanted to say he is of noble heritage, but that is never explicitly stated. I really got that impression - most be the “born rose” part :wink5:.
Oh that's a possibility too, though we never get his background. That may be why he's so wasteful and not a worker.
Quote:
What is this “higher not deeper” stuff? I kind of grasp it, but I really can not put my finger on it.
I would associate that with the Nordic. Lawrence associates Nordic with idealism and etheral, more abstract.
Quote:
I see how Winifred puts him above herself in this stage of her life, sees him as a higher and maybe even better being. But what would Egbert have been if he was a “deeper” being? Would he be more grounded, more in touch with the world. Less of a dreamer. Or would it be a matter of knowing himself thoroughly?
I think the reference is that he is less grounded in hard reality.
Quote:
He needs her to be happy. He not just loves her, he loves her with passion. Is it too much to make the connection: passion – warm – flame? :aureola:
Ah yes, lots of flames in the story. :wink5:
Quote:
One day Winifred heard the strangest scream from the flower-bed under the low window of the living room: ah, the strangest scream, like the very soul of the dark past crying aloud. She ran out, and saw a long brown snake on the flower-bed, and in its flat mouth the one hind leg of a frog was striving to escape, and screaming its strange, tiny, bellowing scream. She looked at the snake, and from its sullen flat head it looked at her, obstinately. She gave a cry, and it released the frog and slid angrily away.
And here is that passage with the sanke. That littel drama with the frog in the mouth is fascinating. Very suggestive of something, but of what?