Printable View
I'll put in one quick comment, here, before we start the next story.
I understood the "their" to refer symbolically to Elsie's vanity. He's forgiving Elsie in this moment as well as the jewelery. That same vanity is what makes Elsie keep the gems when it would be far more rational to return them.Quote:
Originally Posted by Janine
Now, you've rode out the suspense as far as it can go. What's are we reading next?
The next story we will be reading and discussing is:
Odour of Chrysanthemums
This is considered, by many, as one of Lawrence's finest short stories. It is often studied in schools and universities and is very well-known.
I wanted to do "Daughters of the Vicar", because one of the characters carries over into this later story, but unfortunately, DOTV is 50 pages long, too long for a one month disussion. I will probably read it independently.
Quark, glad you see your response. I was wondering where you ran off to. This is great.
That really clarifies it nicely. Nice thought that it was also a gesture of forgiving. Whiston is being rational in this act of mailing the gifts back to SA, you are quite right.Quote:
I understood the "their" to refer symbolically to Elsie's vanity. He's forgiving Elsie in this moment as well as the jewelery. That same vanity is what makes Elsie keep the gems when it would be far more rational to return them.
Now, you've rode out the suspense as far as it can go.
I might have a few more comments on the last story taken from a book I have been reading on Lawrence's Early Fiction. I have to scan some of the pages. So while we are all reading the next story, I will do so and post it 'in conclusion', if you don't mind.
"Odour of Chrysanthemums" oh that is a good story. I will try to participate on this one. I'll read it over the weekend.
Janine, Odour of Chrysanthemums seems very interesting. I would try my best to participate in it (at least appear now and then) and hope school which would open now don't prove to be an obstacle. :)
Pensive and Virgil, glad you plan to participate. Yes, I have been reading some commentary on this story and it sounds interesting. I may have read it years ago, but don't remember it too well.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pensive
Pensive, since you read "Sons and Lovers" I think you will see some links to the book.
How funny, Pensive, that you should say that you hope school does not become an 'obstacle'. :lol: I really laughed at that one! I hope in the end that our discussions support your school studies; I believe that this story is often studied in schools and should prove beneficial to you someday, if you study any Lawrence in your classes.;)
Unfortunately, they don't teach Lawrence's work at this level.Quote:
Originally Posted by Janine
True, but maybe you will retain some of what you are learning for the future. It could help you emensely someday. Also just learning to think and view stories in a new way will help with with other authors. One has to learn to interpret and analysis. I am sure we are all learning something new everday on Lit Net, don't you agree? Even about human nature.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pensive
Well, we are learning something all the time. Even when we are not seeking it. They say the silence teaches well too. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Janine
But the thing is teachers in school want the work they assign completed before anything else. Though of course one doesn't have to study all day along but my school is quite famous for making students even do that! (well all the day is still exaggerated as there are other things one does.) :p
Gee, Pensive, I hope you get a little time of your own. Do they expect you to learn while you are asleep with subconscious recordings like in the book "Brave New World". I would imagine your schedule would be strick, way stricker I think that over here in the states, but most countries give me the impression of being more advanced or more intense and dedicated to education and that is something to be proud of. But one does need to learn 'from silence' and the restful periods are equally important to human stability. One can't work 24 hours a day. Rest and relaxation are important, too.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pensive
Like Virgil, I don't think I will read this new story until the weekend. This week so far is rather busy for me. I went out most of yesterday and had a nice time - I called it my 'mental health' day. Went to the Philadelphia Art Museum which I love. Nice to see something different for a change and not be glued to my computer all day long.
I still have not scanned the parts of my book on White Stocking commentary but will try and do that tomorrow, realistically. Sorry for the delay. My rest period was necessary.
How are we going to read this story? Do you want to post sections for discussion, or can I interject random thoughts?
Quark, I suppose I have a systematic mind because I always find it easier and more efficient and effective in discussion to post parts of the book and discuss them in the order they develop in the story/book. I feel so aimless when we all just throw out random thoughts. I found that to be the problem in "To the Lighthouse". If you notice I have not participated too much in that thread. I feel as though people keep getting caught up on one issue and can't move forward. There were a lot of aspects to that book we could have discussed but now we are nearing the end of the monthly discussion and people will just drift off. To me posting from the beginning of the story shows the great way it is crafted and thought out. Tell me what you think on the idea. If I don't do it this way I feel horribly lost or floundering and aimless. Maybe it is just me but watching the story develop and change and the characters doing the same is part of the thrill and interest of reading these short stories.
PS: I just read your post in Chekov and found both to be really good. I will comment further later on.
I agree with you, Janine. It looks better if we discuss it by 'parts' because it adds up a proper sequence. :) But shouldn't we discuss them in a manner that we wouldn't have to quote every single line? Only those paragraphs, lines or words that we find interesting from the specific part of the story which we are discussing I think we should comment upon. But the present way is quite okay as well, though sometimes I find it a bit difficult to comment on every aspect of the story.Quote:
Originally Posted by Janine
As for the story, hopefully I would have it completed over the weekend. See you all! :)
You're certainly the most organized person, Janine. You're posts actually have paragraphs with a coherent flow from proposition to conclusion. I just say things in a big block of words; a sort of stream of consciousness. I like to think it's charming its own way, but most likely it's just annoying. As for posting chunks of the text, I think it has its positives. It does pace the conversation; and, it gives people common reference points to use. They don't have to introduce their own evidence--just point to the text already posted. Although, that isn't to take anything away from the way we've done things in the other threads--the To The Lighthouse discussion has consistently drawn attention and there have been 275 posts. There, rather than post sections of the story, we introduced a character or theme for discussion. I don't know which is better, but I'm not horribly opposed to either. I probably should decide since I'm leading the Chekhov discussion. Here, though, I think Janine has earned the right to decide.
Can't wait until we get the discussion going.
Quark, thanks, first statements here sound like a compliment. I am not (let me reiterate this fact) an organised person, well not entirely...I am always striving for it, but you should see my living quarters since I joined Lit Net! ugh. In fact, I am trying to address that unorganised mess right now today and this week. I do actually have an organised mind naturally, when I zero in on something. I think that is part of my apparent or suspected ADD (needing a framework), but actually if I discuss things randomly, in no consistent order or sequence/direction, I seem to falter and flounder and not function well in the discussion at all....I feel totally lost, even when your 'random stream of consciousness' posts do indeed seem charming to read. I have had emense problems discussing and posting in "To The Lighthouse"; I think because the discussion is so disjointed to me...I really feel lost. I feel it is random and I can't function in that random way of thought. There might be tons of pages but so much of the discussion to me seemed to go back and forth and not get anywhere - like in a circle. Also I have found in discussion of this nature they often just fade out quickly, but then maybe they would have anyway.Quote:
Originally Posted by Quark
It might be ridiculous to discuss a 'book' by quoting long passages and one can't post all of the book to discuss, of course - it would take a year! However, if you check out our recent discussion in "Women in Love" it was fairly organised and sequencial and organised, probably since we were all reading pretty much at the same time as the discussion was taking place - so the discussion progressed with our reading. There was much text quoted in that discussion and analysis of the symbolism and the various devices and ideas that Lawrence used in the book. It is not a completely plot driven book, but one that relied on the various charaters and their intricate relationships to each other. It was a great discussion and I think it stayed on track throughout and did not get wishy-washy or aimless/directionless. Points were concentrated on and stated and debated, but the discussion went along smoothly addressing many aspects of the book and stayed on-track. It was a great month and a great discussion! We learned much about Lawrence and his work.Quote:
As for posting chunks of the text, I think it has its positives. It does pace the conversation; and, it gives people common reference points to use. They don't have to introduce their own evidence--just point to the text already posted. Although, that isn't to take anything away from the way we've done things in the other threads--the To The Lighthouse discussion has consistently drawn attention and there have been 275 posts. There, rather than post sections of the story, we introduced a character or theme for discussion. I don't know which is better, but I'm not horribly opposed to either. I probably should decide since I'm leading the Chekhov discussion. Here, though, I think Janine has earned the right to decide.
With short stories, I do find it beneficial to adhere (loosely, of course) to a sense of beginning progressing to climax to ending. This way we can see how the story builds up and how the author developed the story and the characters. We have this advantage of posting text, since we have an entire month or more to discuss the story. Really it is the same in this thread as Chekov - no set time limit, so don't feel any pressure. Post when you can. I think mostly we started off slow and aimless with 'Things' and then when we got to "Horse-Dealer's Daughter" and Virgil started to post large segments of the text and really got the ball rolling in this method of discussing the story. Also, he got me underlining 'key words' and this is especially helpful. I know when we did the 'Lawrence Tortoise Poems' this was beneficial, and Virgil instigated it. So, I really have to give the credit to Virgil - he taught me this great way of discussing...the engineering mind. Actually though artists think/function better in this frame work, also.
Well, I have gone on long enough with all of this. Hope I have not bored you and eveyone else to death. Glad to see you here and hope the coming discussion will be great. I will read the L story over the weekend and possibly the Chekov, also. I am busy today trying to get a new monitor hooked up to my computer, so may be offline tonight for awhile till I do. Plan is to clean/vacumn first - so dust does not get on my new pretty LCD screen. It is nice 19" - can't wait!:D
Pensive, perhaps you are right -- I might have gotten a little carried away and excessive with quoting. Actually, though most of the last month I had been in here by myself, so I just did it that way - easier for me. We can do whatever seems to come naturally. I know in 'Horse-Dealer's Daughter' Virgil did not quote every line. He will be joining this discussion so maybe he will do the same and kick off the discussion. If you think he or I or anyone missed an important point you can always go back and quote something prior to the last quote. How does that sound? We don't have to be strickly structured.
Me, too!Quote:
Can't wait until we get the discussion going.
Compliment? No, I think I'm a little too self-centered to give those.Quote:
Originally Posted by Janine
I know how that gets. I'm lucky if I can keep my surfaces clean. Usually, when I get to the computer table there's still a pile of books and papers there, and I just swipe my arm across it to clear some space. Next to me there's a huge and growing mound of clutter that nearly touches the ceiling of books, clothes, appliances, and even an empty aquarium. I have no cleaning impulse, though. After I swipe the stuff off my computer table, I just pick up my mouse and keyboard and forget about the pile.Quote:
Originally Posted by Janine
Some of the discussion has gone in a circle, but I don't think that's because of the structure of the thread. The problem we sometimes have over there is that we simply don't know each other yet. We use words in different ways and then can't understand each other--right now I think Virgil and I are bickering about the meaning of the term "heroic". Another problem is we form some idea, then realize that it's defective in some way and then are afraid to change our minds because it would make us look less than perspicacious. Also, some of the ideas in that book are difficult to respond to with short answers. It's a tough book with lots of subtleties. And, it's difficult to read; half of any discussion on a Virginia Woolf novel has to be a reconstruction of just what literally happened. Combined, the difficulty of the book and the anxiety associated with posting make the thread seem forbidding and difficult to engage in. So, in the end, the fact that we've had 276 posts in that discussion is pretty encouraging. It's especially impressive when you look at the fact that most of the activity on LitNet is focused on creative writing and vague, open-ended opinions. To actually sustain voluntary involvement in a focused literary topic and push towards reasonable conclusion is encouraging to say the least. That's not to belittle creative writing and sharing opinions in any way. Nor is this to antagonize those who haven't participated to the full extent in the To The Lighthouse thread (people like Janine, for example). I just wanted to defend, what I think, is the best part of LitNet. Could organization have made it better? Perhaps, I'm not the person to ask about that, though: think about how I clean my desk.Quote:
Originally Posted by Janine
No, I didn't see the "Women in Love" thread. That is to say, I saw it but didn't look into it. I was thinking about taking part in the talk but I turned coward when I went to buy the book. The version they had at Barnes and Noble was $15.00--a little much for a book printed 90 years ago. And, invariably the cashier is always a cute girl and I didn't want to go through the line with a book called "Women in Love"--something seemed a little unmanly about it. The problem was compounded by the fact that I was already buying a book of Auden poems. I didn't think my chances of appearing suave and masculine with both a gay poet and a novel called "Women in Love" was favorable, so I decided to cut the risk in half and only get one. Usually, in that situation, I try to compensate by getting some sports magazine or pornographic calender, but at that point I didn't have enough money to reaffirm my gender. Maybe if we do some Hemingway or Fitzgerald next time I won't have that problem (although, Tender is the Night sounds a little questionable).Quote:
Originally Posted by Janine
No objections to that. I think I'll continue doing to the Chekhov thread in the same random way I've been going about it. The problem there isn't organization; it the fact that there's nothing to organize. We need some more participation before I'm really going to come up with a strategy. Right now, I just want to come up with some topic that people will find entertaining.Quote:
Originally Posted by Janine