Printable View
Contentment is a little different than just reconciliation. I wasn't saying that the stories ended happily, just that they ended with characters connecting.Quote:
Originally Posted by islandclimber
Alright, I'll wait.Quote:
Originally Posted by Janine
That's a good observation. Do you think Lawrence uses that fairy-tale tone sarcastically, or is he in earnest here?Quote:
Originally Posted by islandclimber
Hi Everyone, I am back and now awake finally....wait until you see just how awake and alert I am...this post is gigantic...I wrote it offline and it took me forever, so I do hope someone reads it. Sorry I was so out of it yesterday; apparently I just needed sleep.
Ok, the only way to stay focused for me, was to go back to the posts and review them and recap somethings that already have been said. I felt much had gotten skipped over. I have requoted some; some of my own quotes with highlights in bold, also…please forgive these repeats, but mostly I have commended on them after re-thinking the story and reviewing some text..
Pg. 87 #1296 Posted Introduction; discussion officially began
#1299
Quote by Janine
#1302Quote:
One thing I noticed about this Lawrence story, that seems so much different in form from other stories we read so far, is that even though there is a first person narrator, I feel that the things being thought and said, come directly from the wife's viewpoint. I also get the sense, throughout the story, that this is from the wife's point of view, entirely. I guess that would make sense since, in fact, Faith Mackenzie, who the story was fashioned after, was the one narrating her personal business, about her marriage to Lawrence, directly confiding in him, over a casual lunch. In this way, the story almost, but not quite, feels like a frame story.
Quote by islandclimber in answer
#1304Quote:
I also saw the story as basically told by the wife and from her own viewpoint entirely... I think this was necessary to make the wife have some redeeming features... for if we did not have her thoughts to accompany the story, I would see her as pretty awful... but her thoughts put her actions and words into a more positive light... which is why I assume Lawrence wrote from the wife's perspective, so we all don't hate her...
My request
Quote by Janine
Quote by JanineQuote:
The discussions, where we 'refrained from' charging head-first to the very end of the story in the initial 24 hours, were the best in the long-run, so let's all take it s l o w l y and post segments, as the story progresses: highlight certain phrases and talk about them, as they develop. This worked well in the previous (successful discussions) so stay in the same frame of mind...chronological. We will get more out of it that way. There is a lot here to discuss and many of the lines are just so witty and great to think about in different contexts. This should be great fun!
I will have to dig up some of Lawrence’s best insults and share them with you all. They are so laughable. Leave it to Lawrence and his endless sense of creativity, even in insults.Quote:
Lawrence knew first-hand how to dish out creative insults, he being constantly attacked and rejected, by former friends, publishers and the public. I think this comes out in this story. Lawrence could get so angry and say something when lashing out it, was actually funny to hear. He used the word 'swine' liberally. I laugh when I read his letters - they're so entertaining!
#1305
Quote by Dark Muse
These are 3 interesting points to bring up and something we might want to talk about further. Was the wife really ‘independent’, if she had to live/rely on her husband’s income? Also, how strong was she, if she gravitated back to her husband, a person she did not truly feel emotionally connected to or did she? I am not sure at all that she was strong or independent in truth. I am also in question as to whether the husband and wife are indeed on equal footing. I don’t see that they are, financially, not if the wife depends on the husband’s money for her countless trips abroad.Quote:
I rather enjoyed the way the story was written from her point of view, and though I cannot say I entirely agree with her, in someways I can understand/relate to her feelings…… I did not dislike her, I also would not say I completely sympathized with her, than I do not think she was seeking any sympathy…….
One of the things that really struck me about her, and perhaps contributed to my feelings toward her, is the fact that she came off as being both a very strong woman as well as independent. And in many ways, she does admit her own faults…….
I must admit that I also do enjoy her sardonic cynicism
Pg 88
#1307
Quote by Janine
#1310Quote:
True - a more modern thinking woman perhaps and one has to consider the time this is set in. Women were not known to work, if they were married, unless they were established authors/artists. I felt she was somewhat like Lawrence's own wife, who was known to have a some casual affairs, from time to time during their marriage, but felt it was nothing that affected their marriage or love for each other. That is questionable on Lawrence's end for I think it did bother him to an extend; but it seemed her attitude was more liberated, although I don't personally subscribe to infidelity.
So, in this story, I think Lawrence is merely exploring that idea and the fact, that eventually, the wife returns home and does have some feelings of resentment and being left out of her husband's life. It sets up an interesting case to look at. True she can see her own faults. She later says that she could not do the things that his secretary does for him. I don't think the wife is practical minded at all or does any bit of work. She's much like a 'kept woman', enjoying the benefits of her husband's income, but that always does have it's downside.
Quote by DarkMuse in answer
Quote by Janine in answerQuote:
Yes I agree with this, and in fact she herself says how incompetent she really is, and this seems to be a source of some of her resentment, the fact that she knows she could never do the things for her husband that the secretly can and the fact that perhaps in some ways she feels a burden because she knows she is not good for any sort of work.
…. similar aspects to the last story…. As it seems in some ways the wife does leave and get away from her husband to escape the fact that there is an aspect of her husband’s life she can never truly be a part of and she does not want to have to live with that every day. So she goes away to distract herself.
So in answer to your post, Quark, about this being a much different story for Lawrence; I don’t think it is at all. I find the ending in ‘Sun’ just a bit ambivalent in the end too, but maybe a little more resolved, than this one, at least hinting at some ‘hope’ in the future. This story, ‘Two Bluebirds’. is much more cynical and bitter (at the end), in it’s tone; but, Lawrence has left us hanging like this, in other stories we read, where the bitterness is more apparent at the end and leaves us with a sort of endless questioning.Quote:
It seems to me they both are somewhat in a state of 'inertia' in the marriage, although she takes the step to try and escape it. Apparently, when she does so, she can't really leave her life behind; it trails along with her, even if she tries to shut out thoughts of him. We will get to those passages, later on.
….. the story following this one, is similar in that the wife leaves the gray existence, which is restrictive and stagnant, with her husband in the states, and then gravitates to warmer, sunnier climates. It seems that in the next story, Lawrence advances the characters to find the 'sun' and the healing powers, it can provide. In this story we see only the bitter conflict.
Quote by Janine in answer (husband being caddy):
Quote by DarkMuseQuote:
I do notice this is entirely from the wife's opinion, but I do like that she is saying this. Then she turns it to whimsy and to her husband as being adorable when whimsical.. .In one paragraph, she is criticizing him, and then by the end, she is admiring him. In fact, she is defending him by the last statement. She is basically saying it is not his fault for being vain; women made him that way. This paragraph is quite intricate and 'telling' of the wife's truer impressions of her husdband.
Quote by Janine in answerQuote:
Imagine a wife writing down anything her husband said to her!
Some wives say ‘I won’t be your mother or your secretary!:lol:Quote:
Exactly! Lawrence even complained about having to retype "David" which his wife, Frieda, had typed for him, filling in for his usual typist. He was grumbling and annoyed, just about the time he was also writing this story. I think that comes through in this story. What wife could take on the secretary job realistically???
Quote by DarkMuse
If we read the whole first two paragraphs, and other paragraphs early in the story from which this quote was extracted, it will tell us more I think. For one, we do see the word ‘love’, but only on the part of the woman, but not of the man. Here is the complete quote:Quote:
I liked the part where it said: “They had the most sincere regard for one another, and felt, in some odd way, eternally married to one another.”
Dark Muse, I only bolded up what I was trying to stress – there are other facts you stressed before. I did not bold the fact, that neither could not live with each other. We discussed that part.Quote:
There was a woman who loved her husband, but she could not live with him. The /b]husband, on his side, was sincerely attached to his wife,[/b] yet he could not live with her. They were both under forty, both handsome and both attractive. They had the most sincere regard for one another, and felt, in some odd way, eternally married to one another. They knew one another more intimately than they knew anybody else, they felt more known to one another than to any other person.
Quote from story
Right away, the narrator, is telling us just what the score is between the husband and wife, and yet it is such a potpourri and complexity of feelings underlying the whole arrangement, don’t you think? The wife is neither happy living away from the husband, or with him. It is a rather impossible situation. Again, England is depicted as grey; whereas, the wife is seeking the sun. Maybe it is not entirely the husband she is fleeing from, but the whole environment in which the husband has determined to live and center his life and be a part of. If you take a look at the next story ‘Sun’, the husband was very ‘rooted’ in his northern residence in NYC. Only after a time, does he follow after the wife to her new found sunny environment, where she intices him to stay for a time. This husband, in “Two Bluebirds”, also seems very rooted and unwilling to budge from his ‘inert’ existence. Also, he appears to be a chronic workaholic. Somewhere in the text it told just how many countless hours this man worked….all the time or most, of course, with the secretary. I think the existence of the secretary, just added fuel to the fire. I don’t think the secretary, per ce, is the problem, nor true jealousy. Those are just symptoms of a much deeper/broader problem. Perhaps the wife truly does love and admire her husband, but he will not connect with her, on that deeper physical level she desires. I can see this more clearly now; maybe the ‘blood consciousness’ idea does indeed exist, just below the surface, in this story. The wife seeks the more ‘sensual’ life in the warmer climates, trying to make up for the loss of her love life with her husband, and in the end it does not really work for her. The husband is rooted, not only in his physical environment in the north, but in his cold ‘intellectual’ world and this closed environment he has established around himself. In a sense, the husband is in his own little shell/world and will not venture out of it. The secretary comes to him and is always readily available, at his ‘beck and call’. How different is this from the the way Lawrence thinks in other stories, especially in ‘Sun’, when the wife discovers her own ‘blood-consciousness’ and sensuality? Except in that story, by the ending, there some shred of hope that the husband might be able to break out of his inertia and routine, and eventually join the wife entirely.Quote:
Yet they could not live together. Usually, they kept a thousand miles apart, geographically. But when he sat in the greyness of England, at the back of his mind, with a certain grim fidelity, he was aware of his wife, her strange yearning to be loyal and faithful, having her gallant affairs away in the sun, in the south. And she, as she drank her cocktail on the terrace over the sea, and turned her grey, sardonic eyes on the heavy dark face of her admirer, whom she really liked quite a lot, she was actually preoccupied with the clear-cut features of her handsome young husband,…. thinking of how he would be asking his secretary to do something for him, asking in that good-natured, confident voice of a man who knows that his request will be only too gladly fulfilled.
In this story, the next line changes focus abruptly focusing on the man’s secretary:
I don’t believe it says the husband adores the secretary, (but I will check the text). Basically, the wife is right. The husband uses the secretary, but the secretary adores him, so she puts up with anything from him. “He dictated to her, she slaved for him and adored him, and the whole thing went on wheels.”Quote:
The secretary, of course, adored him. She was very competent, quite young, and quite good-looking. She adored him.
Ok, I did find some text indicating the man’s feeling towards his secretary:
As I said before, Lawrence was retyping his wife, Frieda’s terrible typing, around the time he was wrting this story. This amuses me. I can see where all the animosity comes from. Like this man, Lawrence ‘could not rely on his wife’…why should he really? Frieda was not his secretary, it is not the definition of wife – ‘must type 1000 words per minute!’ This is exactly how Lawrence would feel about Frieda, I believe ‘that she didn't intend to be relied on’…I can see how Lawrence could relate/connect easily to this story. Sometimes, Lawrence, himself was quite unreasonable. Haha.Quote:
He didn't 'adore'her. A man doesn't need to adore his secretary. But he depended on her. "I simply rely on Miss Wrexall." Whereas he could never rely on his wife. The one thing he knew finally about her was that she didn't intend to be relied on .
Quote by DarkMuse
Does everyone think this is true? I am not sure why they feel this way. I can now see it from the wife’s point of view that maybe truly she does deep down love him; I don’t see the same sentiment for the husband, but then again his may translate to a deep need for her and not truly a love.Quote:
Though they cannot stand to actually be together, they are still forever bonded to each other. They can never completely escape one another.
Quote by DarkMuse
Quote from storyQuote:
…. that it does mention within the story, how much the husband and wife had gotten along so well before they were married, but now that they are married they only seem to serve to irritate each other.
Quote by DarkMuseQuote:
So they remained friends, in the awful unspoken intimacy of the once-married. Usually each year they went away together for a holiday, and if they had not been man and wife they would have found a great deal of fun and stimulation in one another. The fact that they were married, had been married for the last dozen years, and couldn't live together for the last three or four, spoilt them for one another. Each had a private feeling of bitterness about the other.
I agree, DMit is as though they are half-divorced or separated at least. However, I think they are too inert to actually divorce and move on and so they try the vacation together each year. Obviously it does not work for them and they are right back where they started. It seems they are so used to each other there is no stimulation or fun left in their relationship. It does not actually say here that they ever were truly in-love. The last line clearly states that they both are ‘bitter’. I think that is an important factor here. They obviously resent each other.Quote:
Though they are still married, this brought to mind the sentiment, and relationship that sometimes seem to exist between divorced couples whom seem to still get along and care for each and yet can never manage to live with each other.
Quote by Quark
I don’t think that the ‘caustic banter’ of the wife heals anything at all, let alone the relationship. I personally think the relationship is beyond hope but I could be wrong. I think that these two people are too set in their ways by now. I actually met this couple once who could not live with each other and yet professed to be in-love; they had houses right next to each other – isn’t that a strange one? Hey, maybe it works for some people, who knows. Years ago it was not that uncommon for men to be away for long periods of time from their wives, many sailed ships and were away most of the time, many explorers didn’t see their wives for years. I don’t say it is the ideal way – hardly, but I don’t think it was that uncommon in England or Scotland for this to be the case. Perhaps, in writing this story, Lawrence is showing just how poorly, this separate way of life works for everyone.Quote:
It seems odd that Lawrence would use the caustic banter of the wife to heal their relationship. Isn't that un-Lawrencelike?
Quark, let’s hold off to discuss this scene until later. I think we can say much about it and the significance of the two bluebirds. It was an interesting scene, wasn’t it. But I must tell you – get used to Lawrence surprising us. It happens more than you would think. You really can’t ever second guess Lawrence, but that makes his writing more interesting, I think.Quote:
…When she sees the bluebirds in the garden….
Quote by islandclimber
Islandclimber, I might have agreed with this last night, but now after reviewing all the posts and some of text, I see that it does state that the wife did love her husband. I can see now how she would feel left out/shut out of his life. I don’t think it is all vanity and illusion, and even when she makes a later statement that maybe she will buy something and spend his money (which seems like a vain gesture), I think she is doing that to get attention from him, or get back at him the only way she knows how to. If she did not care about him at all, she would be bothered.Quote:
....wives knowing there is an aspect of their husbands they do not have access to, and seemingly cannot.. but in the last one it was on a deep level, that blood-conscious level... this one it is more of a vanity, an external thing, an illusion, that they put between themselves I think.... she can't be part of it, partly because she thinks it is beneath her,, and she doesn't want to be.. I don't think she is overly interested in her husband outside of the fact he is her husband...
During this period of Lawrence’s writing there was a number of stories that followed the more fairytale format. If you go online and look up ‘Rocking Horse Winner’, you will come up with some commentary that expresses this idea and talks about this period in Lawrence’s writing; when his stories are not quite realistic, but more fantasy-like and fable-like and meant to convey a deeper meaning. ‘The Man Who Loved Islands’ is another good example of this. There is much symbolism and irony in that story.
Quote by islandclimber
I agree – those are interesting thoughts and you expressed them well here. Seems the distance enhances their feelings, and then in ‘close proximity’ they can’t handle any bit of intimacy. I wonder though, if that cannot be somehow resolved. I don’t know if their relationship is totally based on idealism, but it might be so. Maybe they each went into the marriage, with the wrong impressions and expectations. Whatever; the marriage,the way it stands, is not working for them. “I think that proximity, and nearness, physical intimacy sour this for her with him” – do you think they truly have any nearness or physical intimacy between them? I don’t see that they do but that might be unwritten here.Quote:
And these lines as well from the start impressed me, and gave me a feel for the essence of the relationship
"So they remained friends, in the awful unspoken intimacy of the once-married."
it is quite the cynical statement about the wonders of marriage... as though a friend is the best one could hope for, never a lover, definitely never a passionate lover.. he almost puts an exclamation point on that with this line... they have this conscious intimacy that needs no words, but it is more of a trouble than a good thing coming out of a great love... they love each other at a distance, but as he states later in that same paragraph, they both have private feelings of bitterness towards the other... so it seems they love an idealized version of the other they have in their minds, and can't handle the real, living version when they are together... the wife's idle thoughts about the nature of her husband kind of seem idealistic, idyllic, in a sense... and she only thinks that at a distance... but I think that proximity, and nearness, physical intimacy sour this for her with him, she finds he doesn't live up to that idyllic perfection she builds up in her mind while apart....
Quote from story
Quote:
…Nothing you could call adultery, to come down to brass tacks. No, no! They were just the young master and his secretary….
I thought so too. It seemed like the old double standard in reverse. The woman having the affairs of no consequence or importance and the husband remaining faithful sexually towards his wife. It therefore seems, symbolically, like the wife sees the devotion of the secretary and her adoration of her husband even more threatening than if he was having casual affairs with other women. Interesting….and I can sort of understand that.Quote:
so it is okay for her to be adulterous, but not for him??? that is an interesting idea and definitely a very one sided morality...
Quote by DarkMuse
Yes, and these two statements of yours, Dark Muse, support my last statement. I think the wife is now in a ‘no win’ situation. She can’t be devoted to her husband as the secretary is and yet she resents that in the secretary as a woman who she now feels threatened by.Quote:
Yes, that is true, but than she does have those couple of moments where she seems almost annoyed with her husband that he does not actually give more intimacy to his secretary for all she does for him……….
Some of the wife’s agitation seems to be over the devotion that the women give to her husband, without seeming to get any real benefit in return from him. Though in part this could be, because she knows she herself would never be so selflessly devoted to him in such a way. And that she would be incapable of working for him.
Well when I refered to as being independent, I was not finically speaking, I think there are other ways to be independent than just for one to be able to provide for themselves. She is independent in the way in which she lives very much her own life seperate from her husband. She is also very much of her own mindQuote:
Originally Posted by Janine
In other Lawrence stories it seems in varrious different ways the women are more dependent upon thier husbands, emotionally. For example in the story Sun, the woman romanticies about having an affair with the peasent man, but in the end she would not acutally do it.
While the woman in this story, would not think twice about it.
And thought she still remains conntected to her husband, and peridoically returns back to him, I think she is still a strong personality and when I said they were on equal footing, I did not mean so much, finiance wise, but more in the fact that to me the husband in this story did not seem as downtrodden by his wife as the one in The Shadow in the Rose Garden. They meet on equal terms with each other. I do not think she is truly taking advantage of her, becasue he knows her just for what she is, and he allows it.
Yes I agree, though it seems that most of the struggle is with the wife, perhaps just becasue it is told from her point of view, but the husband seems in his own way content with whatever happens, though he does implore his wife to stay at one point:Quote:
Originally Posted by Janine
But he seems to suffer no anxeity from her commings and goings.Quote:
"You have got your secretary and your work" she said, "There is no room for me."
"There is a bedroom, and a sitting-room exclussively for you" he replied. "And a garden and half a motor-car. But please yourself entirely. Do what gives you most pleasure"
Yes, everything seems to just revolve around the husband, even within the story he is not seen as being very physcialy active, he is always lounging somewhere, while everyone else is moving around him, attending to his choresQuote:
Originally Posted by Janine
Yes this is very true. In this story, there does not seem to be any change by the end of the story, but only that everything appears it will remain just the same as it has always been.Quote:
Originally Posted by Janine
I agree that the secretary is not truly the problem, and I do not think that the wife acutally does feel any true jealously for the woman, but seems more annoyed with her husbands own actions, and how content he is to just be served upon by this women and to have all his own needs provided for, without giving much thought to others.
It could be that one of the problems the wife has with her husband is the fact that he does not give her the attention which she seeks, as she says at one point
Quote:
He never kissed anybody
Here she seems to express her desire to try and break her husband free from his rut and routine.Quote:
Being his wife, she felt she ought to do something to save him. But how could she? That perfectly devoted marvellous secretarial family, how could she make an attack on them? Yet she'd love to sweep them into oblivion. Of course they were bad for him: ruining his work, ruining his reptuation as a writer, ruining his life. Ruining him with thier slavish service.
Wow, I haven't read these posts yet, but they are awfully long. You guys must really be into this story. ;)
We are into all the stories - has there been a bad one yet???:lol: I feel the same way in the Chekhov thread - awfully long and I am totally lost in there, and lost my footing and am behind now. I finally copied everything out and trimmed the posts and will print out to read, later tonight; I also have to reread the story. I hope that helps me organise my feeble little brain waves.:eek2: Virgil, I did the same in here today; put everyone's former posts into my Word program and recapped a lot of it in my new post...see my very long post - Today 7:16 PM. You might be able to catch up just reading that for now - it is like a review; I copied the most important parts of each person's posts. I was getting totally lost and confused myself. I think soon I will post some passages directly from the story, more of the beginning parts to start with. Then we can talk about them. Because we seem to be jumping around a little for now.Quote:
Originally Posted by Virgil
Okay, you win for longest post. #1322 is truly an epic. It's difficult to respond to all that at once, so I'll break it down into a few separate responses. First, this idea:
I agree with Dark Muse on this one. While the wife is financially dependent on the husband, I think she does maintain an independent lifestyle and attitude. Her affairs and just her general manner speak to that. Lawrence tells us that she always has her back half-turned to everything which creates this image of a reserved, independent, and somewhat haughty woman. Even though her affection for her husband makes her return, she still projects this kind of strength.Quote:
Originally Posted by Janine
Dark Muse, I hope you laugh at this but when I put your quotes (really applies to all of us) in my Word program it corrected the typos and the spelling. At least that has spell-check! So your quotes might look a little altered to you.;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Dark Muse
Well, considering the word 'independent' what definition can you give to it, if indeed this person, the wife, is not finanically 'independent'? I am trying to say this: if that be the case, and the woman must rely solely on her husband's support how can you say she is actually 'independent'? She might think 'independenly', but she is not in reality 'independent', she is 'dependent' on her husband who is providing for her. How does she truly live her own life, separate from her husband? He is all the time footing the bill. I don't agree at all. She is not truly independent and I think she probably is quite aware of that fact, which would only lead to added resentment towards him. If she was independent, she would take off and leave him far behind. She would have the means and funds to do so.
But in Sun is the woman really romantic at all about her own husband? I don't think she has such an emotional connection to him at the point that story takes place. They seem more distant with each other. I don't see that this woman in TBB's is any more independent. They both live in a time when the husband paid their way, in return they raised the children perhaps. It seems not to be the case in TBB's. This wife seems to me to be more spoiled and not needful in anything she wishes for. Her husband may be distant towards her and in a world of his own but he doesn't seem to deny her anything material. She could not be independent if she did not have the means from him to be so. She would then be at his mercy and stuck at home.Quote:
In other Lawrence stories it seems in varrious different ways the women are more dependent upon thier husbands, emotionally. For example in the story Sun, the woman romanticies about having an affair with the peasent man, but in the end she would not acutally do it.
That is true, but I still don't believe, that having extra-martial affairs liberates a person or makes them independent. The only way I would agree with you, anyway close, would be to say she is not inert, like her husband but takes the inititive to go places/travel and see other people and socialise and even take on lovers; but I still don't feel that is being independent. In spirit, maybe but not truly so. She is getting a free pass for her independence.Quote:
While the woman in this story, would not think twice about it.
Well, who is to say what his true feelings really are. Maybe he is just good at hiding them. Some men are. He seems self-centered with his work, but under his veneer there actually might be a feeling human-being, and he could feel hurt without showing it. I will have to review the text and see if there is even a hint of that about him.Quote:
And thought she still remains conntected to her husband, and peridoically returns back to him, I think she is still a strong personality and when I said they were on equal footing, I did not mean so much, finiance wise, but more in the fact that to me the husband in this story did not seem as downtrodden by his wife as the one in The Shadow in the Rose Garden. They meet on equal terms with each other. I do not think she is truly taking advantage of her, becasue he knows her just for what she is, and he allows it.
Yes, he does request her to stay home, but then he seems to know he will not be able to win in the end, so he is very resigned. I don't know how much struggle there is going on within the husband. He may act accepting of his wife's activities but actually be very disturbed beneath about them. Who knows? Like I said, we don't know what is going on inside him, because basically we are being given the story from the woman's point of view, which of course is tainted to suit her and colored with her sarcasm.Quote:
Yes I agree, though it seems that most of the struggle is with the wife, perhaps just becasue it is told from her point of view, but the husband seems in his own way content with whatever happens, though he does implore his wife to stay at one point:
How do we know that?Quote:
But he seems to suffer no anxeity from her commings and goings.
Yes, interesting that he is lounging about. I found that image of him that Lawrence paints quite revealing of his state and his personality. It adds to this inert and inactive idea. His body language tells much....again it seems to me to mirror his resigned state with his wife.Quote:
Yes, everything seems to just revolve around the husband, even within the story he is not seen as being very physcialy active, he is always lounging somewhere, while everyone else is moving around him, attending to his chores
Still not entirely sure of that but a second reading should make up my mind. I tend to think there will be no change but I don't really know.Quote:
Yes this is very true. In this story, there does not seem to be any change by the end of the story, but only that everything appears it will remain just the same as it has always been.
Oh, good we do agree on something.;) :lol: I like the way you put that last part. Of course, this again is how the wife is perceiving it. Lawrence should have re-written this story from the husband's point of view - might have been much different take....:lol:Quote:
I agree that the secretary is not truly the problem, and I do not think that the wife acutally does feel any true jealously for the woman, but seems more annoyed with her husbands own actions, and how content he is to just be served upon by this women and to have all his own needs provided for, without giving much thought to others.
I think that is part of the problem. I think that there are direct things in the story that point to that fact. Being a writer it would make sense that he is absorbed in his own world of literature and sort of has blinders on most of the time as to what is going on with his wife and the outside world. I think the wife does grave attention from her husband. I think this is why she is so resentful towards the secretary being so much in his sphere. She isn't jealous of her in a sexual way, but she is in an 'attentive' way. Let's face it this man, who gives no one much attention is focused on the secretary all the time. Sure he is working and dictating to her but the focus it there and the wife reads this as a place that she is shut out of. So, in some rudimentary way she is jealous of the secretary because she has commanded his attention. I think the wive's anger is basically directed towards the husband but by attaching the secretary she know it will bounce off and hit her husband at his weakest part.Quote:
It could be that one of the problems the wife has with her husband is the fact that he does not give her the attention which she seeks, as she says at one point
Quote:
Here she seems to express her desire to try and break her husband free from his rut and routine.
Most of this emorously long post #1322, was recapping/reviewing/ extracting the good parts/then adding some new comments. Basically, now it is all the important/key things we said, and not the others that were tending to distract me.;) If you could take that post piece by piece, I would greatly appreciate it, Quark, since it took me so long to write...hours really.Quote:
Originally Posted by Quark
I still don't agree and I gave my reasons in the post above. You said the word - 'image' - she may have acquired/created this image of an 'independent woman', but I don't consider her truly one. If she were self-sufficient and an author/artist/professional woman, then I might agree, even a working class woman who is supporting herself. We might be mixing up the term 'modern thinking' woman with 'independent'.Quote:
I agree with Dark Muse on this one. While the wife is financially dependent on the husband, I think she does maintain an independent lifestyle and attitude. Her affairs and just her general manner speak to that. Lawrence tells us that she always has her back half-turned to everything which creates this image of a reserved, independent, and somewhat haughty woman. Even though her affection for her husband makes her return, she still projects this kind of strength.
I still personally believe that there are different types of indecency, and dependency, and the finance is not the only possible definition for the word. The husband and the wife live independently from each other. And it is the wife that takes the initiative. While the husband remains at home, she is the one that ventures out into the world.Quote:
Originally Posted by Janine
Just as you can say that her husband is dependent. Though he might be financially secure, he relies and depends upon his secretary, as well as her family to do everything for him. In this way, he is not independent.
Well I said "seems" to be, becasue there is nothing within the text in which to tell us that he does feel any anexity over his wife's behavior.Quote:
Originally Posted by Janine
Yes this is true, though I think some of her frustration is directed at herself as well, she is angry with the fact that the secretary is a part of her husband's world that she is not, and at the fact that he relies upon her, but I think part of that comes from her knowledge that she could never replace the secretary, that she could not be relied upon by her husband. She projects her anger upon her husband, and the secretary, but I think that is in part her projecting her anger at herself upon them, because she feels so incompetent.Quote:
Originally Posted by Janine
Though she would never actually want to do what the secretary does, I think she is jealous of the fact that the woman can do one thing of which she knows she never could.
Quote by Dark Muse
DM, Wow, you are quick posting tonight. haha.Quote:
Yes this is true, though I think some of her frustration is directed at herself as well, she is angry with the fact that the secretary is a part of her husband's world that she is not, and at the fact that he relies upon her, but I think part of that comes from her knowledge that she could never replace the secretary, that she could not be relied upon by her husband. She projects her anger upon her husband, and the secretary, but I think that is in part her projecting her anger at herself upon them, because she feels so incompetent.
This first part is an interesting thought, and I believe I agree with you on the fact, that in reality, she is angry with herself as much, as she is with her husband and the secretary. I do also, think she feels 'incompetent'...but see this is my point, woman who are 'incompentent', do depend on others, so I can't envision her totally independent. I had a 'so called' friend like this. She thought she was the most modern progressive independent woman in the world and she always ended up being dependent on her husbands (married twice) and they both indulged her. All she need do, was ask for something and she got it. Like this woman she was never truly happy or satisfied. I just have to stick to my own opinion here on true independence. Maybe we should look the definition up and see exactly what is says. Ok here is what my dictionary says:
Obviously, 1. c and 1. d. don't apply here. Ok, 1.free from the influence or control of others....if she was that, she would be totally free of her husband's influence - how can she be entirely? The very fact that she is married to him influences her life. 1. b) self-determined - this might be be true, but this could apply to a happily married woman, as well. 'self reliant' in my opinion does not fit her because she is reliant on her husband for her very existence. Even if far from home in another country she can't be self-reliant' if she is living on his money.Quote:
independent (-dant) adj.1. free from the influence or control of others; specif., a) self-governing b) self-determined, self reliant, etc. c) not adhering to any political party d) not connected with others (ex: an independent grocer). 2. not depending on another for financial support --n. one who is indedpendent in thinking, action, etc.
If you refer to the word 'independent' as a noun, then you can say it is one who is independent in thinking, action, etc.
Therefore, you might say that she was an independent 'thinking' and 'acting' woman, but to me she is not truly independent.
She might not be independent in all ways, I just do not think fiance is everything. And I think comparatively she is more independent than the previous women we have read about in other stories. She might still rely upon her husband finically but in other ways she is over her own mind, and makes her own decisions. She has control over her own actions.
I guess for me she just really had a presence that I did not notice in women of previous stories. Perhaps progressive, or modern would be a better word for her than independent. In many ways I think she is her own woman. Another thing which I noticed about her, is that she seems to have more witty discourse with her husband, and talk to him on more of an equal level than previous women we have discussed.
There is one description of her I really love, but I do not want to jump too far ahead so I will save it for later.
But there is one passage I really loved, that is towards the beginning I wanted to share.
For one thing I loved the bird symbolism which held throughout the story. And the fact that she herself would fly south for the winter, and than come back again to her roost in the spring. In fact her connection to her husband can be seen as being very bird like in nature. The way in which many birds always return back to the exact same nesting sites time and time again. And even the hatchlings, when they grow will return to their parents nesting site. In this way she is always drawn back to her husband, as if by some instinct within her.Quote:
So the winter wore away, and it was spring, when the swallows homeward fly, or northward, in this case. This winter, one of a series similar, had been rather hard to get through. The bit of grit in the gallant lady's eye had worked deeper in the more she blinked. Dark faces might be dark, and icy cocktails might lend a glow; she blinked her hardest to blink that bit of grit away, without success. Under the spicy balls of the mimosa she thought of that husband of hers in the library, and that neat, competent, but common little secretary of his, for ever taking down what he said.
I also loved the descriptions of the "grit" within her eye, and her struggles to free herself of it. I think this is quite a humorous view of it. As her husband in someway's is a constant irritation to her she can never be completely free from.
I love the description of the fairy prince here. And it goes along with the fairy tale idea which others have discussed.Quote:
And if he had been a fairy prince who could call all the ants to help him, he would not have been more wonderful than securing this secretary and her family. They took hardly any wages. And they seemed to perform this miracle of loaves and fishes daily.
Oh my!!! I go to the opera tonight.. and 10 new long posts spring up!!!!!!! ahhhh... so I am going to have to review these and post tomorrow, when with my luck, there will be 10 more, undoubtedly... :p and then the Chekhov thread.. I dread to look!!!!
Well, let me just say this - remove the financial security and see just how long she would be independent. I don't think, we will ever fully agree on this idea, of her being independent. I think, to be as she is, is a false sense of independence. If she were to leave her husband, or he her, and be poor would she then be independent? When I do think of independent, I think of someone like Clara in "Sons and Lovers', who left her husband and worked for a living, and had progressive ideas on woman's rights, etc. I think that this woman in TBB's, is independent, as long as she doesn't have to be bothered, worrying about where her next meal comes from or where she will sleep or how she will travel to such exotic sunny locations. Take the means for all that away and I don't think she would be too independent or modern or liberated. Her type independence, to me is a false sense of independence, that could easily dissolve away.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dark Muse
Actually, she is much like Frieda this way, Lawrence's wife; she was a strong independent woman, also. She was a 'force to be reckoned with' and Lawrence and she fought it out often, but they seemed to really love and repect each other. Their relationship was complicated. I can't help but feel, that Lawrence is projecting some of that friction between them, into this story. I read that, when he wrote this story, he and Frieda were not getting along well, at all. One would have to be affected. The only thing about Frieda, that is different in independence and strength, is that she did come from family that had some source of money. However, following her husband faithfully around the world, did not insure her any bit of financial independence. I prefer to think of the difference, in that these two women, were more modern thinking and progressive. In Frieda's case she did take an active role at times in Lawrence's work, so she definitely earned her way and she did housework and did not depend on servants as this woman in 'Two Blue Birds' does. This woman strikes me more as a pampered type, who doesn't have to lift a finger, if she chooses not to. She has no source of income of her own, and does not help her husband with his. She admits she would be inept at that. I get the sense she has no interest at all in his writing or his work and does not lend him support in that way.Quote:
I guess for me she just really had a presence that I did not notice in women of previous stories. Perhaps progressive, or modern would be a better word for her than independent. In many ways I think she is her own woman. Another thing which I noticed about her, is that she seems to have more witty discourse with her husband, and talk to him on more of an equal level than previous women we have discussed.
Ok, thanks for that. I know, sometimes it is so hard to hold back, when a though just comes to you.Quote:
There is one description of her I really love, but I do not want to jump too far ahead so I will save it for later.
Good quote indeed!Quote:
But there is one passage I really loved, that is towards the beginning I wanted to share.
Lawrence very often refers to birds; bird references and symbolism is found widely throughout his literature. I just love that one aspect of his writing. I have even heard him refer to a baby tortoise, in his poetry, as having a 'beak like a bird'. I am so interested in the significance of the two blue birds at the end of the story and why 'blue' - the bluebird of happiness? We should wait to discuss that part; but, you are right I believe; this earlier reference is very representative of the woman flying south for the winter, just like the birds and then flying back home in the summer. Everything you say here is right-on and accurate, I think. Good interpretation, DM. Although, I know some birds mate for life; this set did not, apparently; but then again, their dedication to staying married seems to be for life, I suppose. Yes, instinct does bring her back to him, and to their home (nest), and perhaps that annoying bit of 'grit' lodged in her eye!;)Quote:
For one thing I loved the bird symbolism which held throughout the story. And the fact that she herself would fly south for the winter, and than come back again to her roost in the spring. In fact her connection to her husband can be seen as being very bird like in nature. The way in which many birds always return back to the exact same nesting sites time and time again. And even the hatchlings, when they grow will return to their parents nesting site. In this way she is always drawn back to her husband, as if by some instinct within her.
Yes, I thought, symbolically, that was just great. It was, as if the 'irritation' she felt towards her husband was manifest within her eye. Also, since earlier on, it said that when she looked at her lover, she only could see the handsome face of her husband, back in the north. This passage combined humor, with an underlying serious element and was very cleverly written.Quote:
I also loved the descriptions of the "grit" within her eye, and her struggles to free herself of it. I think this is quite a humorous view of it. As her husband in someway's is a constant irritation to her she can never be completely free from.
I love that passage too, and I love the witty way Lawrence wrote the last couple words, referring to the bible - the "loaves and fishes"...when I first read this line, I actually laughed out loud, thinking how clever this whole paragraph was. God, I love reading Lawrence!....and there is always something new to marvel at, in his prose.Quote:
I love the description of the fairy prince here. And it goes along with the fairy tale idea which others have discussed.
LoL yes I think we are going to have to put this issue to rest, and just agree to disagree, as I still beleive there are different types of independnceQuote:
Originally Posted by Janine
Acutally, in one of my classess, we are going to be discussing Lawrence, and the first day Tuesday we watched a video about his life, and it talked a lot about his relationship to Fredia within the movie.Quote:
Originally Posted by Janine
Yes I found that part tword the end interesting as well, and look forward to dicussing it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Janine
Yes in a way they do seem to be mated for life, for the fact that they always end up coming back to each other, or her to him. And perhaps sense it did mention they have been married for a significant amount of time, it has just become almost habtitial for them. Maybe they just do not know how to live any other way anymore, they fell into this pattern together.Quote:
Originally Posted by Janine
Eyes do seem to be imporant to this story. There was also the fact that when she was "looking" back toward England, her eyes were descirbed as being grey, as the greyness of England was, where she left her husband behind.Quote:
Originally Posted by Janine
Dark Muse, I don't think we need to say a thing more. We simply disagree and that's all there is to it. It really does not matter at all. Just petty to keep talking about it, don't you think? Let's go onto more interesting topics in the story.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dark Muse
Oh, that is so great! DM, I wish I could attend you class. Now I am truly jealous; I want to see that video...do you know what it was called? Yes, Frieda was a huge part of Lawrence's life and I think, a definite influence on his writing, past a certain time. Will you be reading some Lawrence works - book, stories, etc? You must keep me informed as you go along. I hope this class does not make you more Lawrence informed than me;) ...just kidding with you. You might be 'setting me straight', on things I post about his background/concepts/life.Quote:
Acutally, in one of my classess, we are going to be discussing Lawrence, and the first day Tuesday we watched a video about his life, and it talked a lot about his relationship to Fredia within the movie.
So do I; we will get there eventually. Just have to be patient. I think I will once again re-read this story. I already read it twice. I don't mind though - Lawrence's stories are so good, that repeat readings always seem to reveal more to me, and I enjoy them even more.Quote:
Yes I found that part tword the end interesting as well, and look forward to dicussing it.
So, maybe the way they gravitate back to each other, is more 'instinctive' and a pattern they have fallen into? They sound like ducks! But seriously, I agree with that idea.Quote:
Yes in a way they do seem to be mated for life, for the fact that they always end up coming back to each other, or her to him. And perhaps sense it did mention they have been married for a significant amount of time, it has just become almost habtitial for them. Maybe they just do not know how to live any other way anymore, they fell into this pattern together.
Always, the mention of eyes with Lawrence. It is interesting, isn't it? Yes, and 'grey' would definitely be the color Lawrence would view for the Bristish Isles and also anywhere cold in the North. Remember the 'greyness' and 'whiteness' in "The Man Who Loved Islands"....I am sure eyes were also mentioned in that story, with color significance.Quote:
Eyes do seem to be imporant to this story. There was also the fact that when she was "looking" back toward England, her eyes were descirbed as being grey, as the greyness of England was, where she left her husband behind.
AgreedQuote:
Originally Posted by Janine
I fear I do not recall what it was called but I think it was something that was recorded off of TV. But it says on the syllabals, next class we will be watching more about Lawrence so I will have to pay attention and let you know if it is interesting.Quote:
Originally Posted by Janine
We are doing Sons and Lovers, with just my luck, I already read that one haha. It was interesting watching the video though, how much the book paralled with his own life, and after acutaly watching more background information on him, you can see more of how he incoperatres his life into his stories and characters.
Hehe, I do not think you have to fear, I think you shall still remain the expert.
I have also noticed how much flowers and gardens seem to be incorperated and play a role within his stories.Quote:
Originally Posted by Janine
:D Good! We agree on something then - not agreeing.:lol:Quote:
Originally Posted by Dark Muse
I fear I do not recall what it was called but I think it was something that was recorded off of TV. But it says on the syllabals, next class we will be watching more about Lawrence so I will have to pay attention and let you know if it is interesting.
One film I have seen and actually own, is "Coming Through", but that only explored his life during the time shortly before he meet Frieda. Mostly, it highlights his life connected to his poetry. I really like the film and it was a TV production, but some think it is boring. I don't, because anything to do with Lawrence's life I find fascinating; besides one of my favorite actors plays the young Bert Lawrence. The other film I own, is the newer adaptation of "Sons and Lovers"...it follows the story pretty closely, but it does deviate some and they even added somethings (never know why they do that). I like the characterizations though. They are quite well done and well acted.
The book is still good for a second reading and you will appreciate it so much more, when you know more of the biographical facts...it certainly does run parallel to Lawrence's real life; the story is so personal. I actually, never read the book, not until I did read a few biographies first. I just couldn't get into it, when I was younger and then, reading is not long ago, I just loved it.Quote:
We are doing Sons and Lovers, with just my luck, I already read that one haha. It was interesting watching the video though, how much the book paralled with his own life, and after acutaly watching more background information on him, you can see more of how he incoperatres his life into his stories and characters.
Oh, Dark Muse, I am far from the 'expert'. I have just read much on Lawrence and retained some of it. I have to look so many facts up. At least, I do own and have assess to additional books now, to do so.Quote:
Hehe, I do not think you have to fear, I think you shall still remain the expert.
Zillions! Someone once did a study of one of his books and counted just how many species were mentioned - it was thousands. Lawrence spend some time in school studying and loving botony. He made it is business to learn so much about it independently, too. He was quite passionate about flowers and plants, and naturer. In these ways he reflected the influence of Thomas Hardy's work in his early work - like "The White Peacock" which is very pastoral in tone. That may be the one the plant count was done on. Every page was had mention of some plant or more. I personally loved the book, although it is a very young work.Quote:
I have also noticed how much flowers and gardens seem to be incorperated and play a role within his stories.
Yes I was quite annoyed when they did that with the movie Pride and Prejudice, it was a good movie, but they changed some of the Dialogue and deviated from the book, in which they had Elizabeth in the movie say things, which Darcy said in the bookQuote:
Originally Posted by Janine
One thing kind of interesting, which I noticed now that I am reading Sons and Lovers again, while we are doing this story, is certain similarities within this story to some of the things within the book. It is kind of an interesting comparison reading the two together.Quote:
Originally Posted by Janine
As there was one part within the book in which, it was William's fiance I think, was said to be wearing a dress blue like a jay
Hehe well you are the expert on this forumQuote:
Originally Posted by Janine
I was re-reading over the story again, and there were a few passages I wanted to address.
As we mentioned early the biblical reference to loaves and fishes, I really liked the reference here to the story of Job, as well as finding it very ironic, considering within the story, Job's wife is turned into a pillar of salt because she looks back, while in this story, the woman, is always "turning back" to her husband.Quote:
However they were awfully kind. He was the soul of generosity, and held her in real tender esteem, no matter how many gallant affairs she had. Her gallant affairs were part of her modern necessity. "After all, I've got to live. I can't turn into a pillar of salt in five minutes just because you and I can't live together! It takes years for a woman like me to turn into a pillar of salt. At least I hope so!
Honestly, the wit here quite looses me, I haven't a clue what they are talking about. I just scratch my head over these lines, so I thought perhaps someone more clever than I, could offer better insight on what I am missing. I have perhaps some vague notion, but I am not at all certain.Quote:
"Quite" he replied. "Quite! By all means put them in pickle, make pickled cucumbers of them, before you crystallize out. That is my advise"
He was like that: so awfully clever and enigmatic. She could more or less fathom the idea of the pickled cucumbers, but the "crystallizing out" - what did that signify?
And did he mean that he himself had been well picked and that further immersion was for him unnecessary, would spoil his flavor? Was that what he meant? And herself, was she the brine and the vale of tears?
Though it is made quite clear and stressed that the husband does not have any real intimacy, with the secretary, and as far as we know, no relationship with any of the other women in the house, this scene to me seemed very haremesque in a way. Patricianly with the already discussed imagery of him, mostly remaining stationary, lounging, almost like a sultan, in his palace. That is what I think of in these line.Quote:
What was to be done? Matters, instead of improving had grown worse. The little secretary had brought her mother and sister into the establishment. The mother was a sort of cook-housekeeper, the sister was as sort of upper maid-she did the fine laundry, and looked after "his" clothes, and valeted him beautifully. It was really an excellent arrangement. The old mother was a splendid and plain cook, the sister was all that could be desired as a valet de chambre, a fine laundress, an upper parlor-maid, and table-waiter. And all economical to a degree. They knew his affairs by heart. His secretary flew to town when a creditor become dangerous, and she always smoothed over the finical crisis.
I loved these lines. Particularly the imagery of the knight, sense the word "gallant" is often used in discretion of her, and such is a word that is often associated with knights as well. And the idea that she feels like the Queen whom never can completely trust her servants in spite of their loyal service to her. She always remains in doubt of herself.Quote:
The knight returning from the Crusades didn't create a greeter stir. She felt like Queen Elizabeth at Kenilworth, a sovereign paying a visit to her faithful subjects. But perhaps there lurked always this hair in her soup! Won't they be glad to be rid of me again!
Some of these exchanges lost me too. Pickles and crystals? Where is he going with this exactly? To some extent it's supposed to be sort of mysterious. She actually talks about that elusiveness as part of his charm. Clearly, though, it's also confusing. I mean what is a pickle crystal?Quote:
Originally Posted by Dark Muse
She seems sure of herself. She's just doubtful of the servants. They put on elaborate shows care and concern for her, but she knows that its all just ceremony.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dark Muse
Quark and DarkMuse .. I agree with you the lines are a bit confusing... Which is I think what Lawrence is going for in having her mention how the elusiveness is part of his charm...Quote:
Originally Posted by Dark Muse
I think though, that he is telling her to preserve these affairs as memories (hence the pickling process), because eventually she will turn into that pillar of salt, that she mentions above (the crystallizing out...)... or that is what I took from it... preserve these memories, because eventually you will no loger be able to have the affairs, and it will only be the memories that last...
I quite enjoy the biblical references too...
Yes, I agree Quark with your last point as well.. she is sure of herself, she is just uncertain and doubtful of the servants in relation to herself.. she knows like you say that the elaborate show is just for ceremony and their private viewpoints must be different... or so she supposes..
Overall I do not think she is that sure of herself, as she is constantly comparing herself to the secretary, and I think perhaps part of her ironic cynicism is a way of her making fun of herself, because I think in some ways she feels she fails compared to the secretory who can offer her husband something she cannot.Quote:
Originally Posted by islandclimber
I think perhaps this is way she so often refers to the woman as being "common" it is a way to put the secretary down to try and reassure herself.
I think I agree with this, but I do think, we can find a meaning in his words, if we look hard enough. I think this is close, islandclimber:Quote:
Originally Posted by islandclimber
Quote by islandclimber
Quote by islandclimberQuote:
I think though, that he is telling her to preserve these affairs as memories (hence the pickling process), because eventually she will turn into that pillar of salt, that she mentions above (the crystallizing out...)... or that is what I took from it... preserve these memories, because eventually you will no loger be able to have the affairs, and it will only be the memories that last...
.....I quite enjoy the biblical references too...
Quote by Dark MuseQuote:
Yes, I agree Quark with your last point as well.. she is sure of herself, she is just uncertain and doubtful of the servants in relation to herself.. she knows like you say that the elaborate show is just for ceremony and their private viewpoints must be different... or so she supposes..
Here is where, I actually agree with both of you, and I don't see that you are in opposition against each other on these points, about the wife's surety and confidence. I feel the wife is sure of herself in some situations, true...but then in others, she alows her vulnerable side to come through. I think the first hint of this is, the annoying grain of irritation in her eye. This 'forshadows' what will follow, when she returns home. Afterall, she is only human and she does have flaws and weaknesses, as we all do. Ok, so to the servants she might appear to be very much her own lady and lord her confidence over them and they respond to it accordingly, she is the lady of the estate! But then then in a conversation with her husband, she is somewhat miffed as to just what he means, calling him enigmatic. When the element, being the third party, enters the picture this throws the wife way off kilter; I refer to the secretary (and even her family) First off, it is representative as a sort of triangle, even though the secetary is not sleeping with her husband, or anything of the nature; however there does exist a sort of 'intimacy' between them, that the wife cannot penetrate. Think of how the secretary writes down every word he says, and how this gives the wife the impression that the girl understands his deeper side, far better than the wife could ever begin to...that 'enigmatic' side. I think in this way, the wife does begin to feel inferior, to the secretary. She also feels inferior, in the fact, that the secretary can provide to her husband wtih undivided attention/focus, while the wife knows perfectly well, she is totally incapable of such devotion. 'Devotion' here is a big factor and the wife is not devoted to her husband. She moves and acts on equal terms with him, almost as a sparring partner and not a love partner. Their wills are often matched and this is a big theme very often Lawrence stories - the theme of the 'will' of one person, against the other. By being caddy and critical, towards the secretary, and her devotion to the husband, the wife is indirectly attacking her husband, not the secretary. The secretary's existence is quite insignificant except, to say she is also a woman and so the wills are matched and their is this element of jealous that probably would not exist if the secretary were a male. But the true foe of the wife, at this point, is the husband and she is fighting him, the only way she knows how, and that is indirectly, yet through a means where it will undermine his sensitivities. The secretary is a way to exert her will against him.Quote:
Overall I do not think she is that sure of herself, as she is constantly comparing herself to the secretary, and I think perhaps part of her ironic cynicism is a way of her making fun of herself, because I think in some ways she feels she fails compared to the secretory who can offer her husband something she cannot.
I think perhaps this is way she so often refers to the woman as being "common" it is a way to put the secretary down to try and reassure herself.
I want to review the lines about the crystalising out. I was miffed at first and curious about those lines, too and I wanted to work out exactly what they do mean or meant to Lawrence when he wrote them. It is highly unlikely they mean nothing and are just inserted into the story to be totally enigmatic.
I don't know about all of you but here I began to question their marriage and realtionship. Ok, so what was meant by then being awfully kind and he the soul of generosity and tender esteem? I didn't know if this was true or just a facade of how they appeared to be in their relationship. It does seem one is true - that he was generous with her. I felt that when it came to her gallant affairs, Lawrence was saying that sort of rolling his eyes or dubiously or sarcasically. The next line seemed to rub it in even more so "Her gallant affairs were part of her modern necessity". It sounds more like the husband quoting what the wife would have said. I can even picture, Lawrence saying this about his wife, Frieda, and actually underneath it all not liking it at all but putting up with it...what else could he do? Frieda did her own thing always. Ok, let's go on.....Quote:
However, they were awfully kind. He was the soul of generosity, and held her in real tender esteem, no matter how many gallant affairs she had. Her gallant affairs were part of her modern necessity.....
This also sounds so much, like something Lawrence's own wife would say, sometime or other, in their marriage. The couple matched wills and wit often, much like this couple expressing themselves as these phrases are written. No doubt Frieda found Lawrence quite enigmatic, many times over, just as the wife does.Quote:
"After all, I've got to live. I can't turn into a pillar of salt in five minutes just because you and I can't live together! It takes years for a woman like me to turn into a pillar of salt. At least I hope so!"
So above, in the quote, the wife is thinking she is going to be able to carry on in her current lifestyle for years, without giving out, and turning into 'a pillar of salt' - she brings up the idea, to begin with. That should tell you something.
Now, he returns that with a retort of his own and a clever one, one must admit. He picks right up on the idea and expands the bible symbolism. Ok, if one does put salt into water to make brine(pickle) you can pickle or preserve something before it crystallises.Quote:
"Quite!" he replied. "Quite! By all means put them in pickle, make pickled cucumbers of them, before you crystallise out. That's my advice."
Well, in the Bible, Lot's wife did look back after being forwarned and she turned to the pillar of salt. She looked back at the sinful city, right? I am not totally up on this story of late. I forget the details. So isn't turning into a pillar of salt the same as 'crystalizing out'? After that Lot's wife was quite 'done for'. So maybe the husband is warning her to not look back at her sins, or this will eventually happen to her. She will be extinquished.Quote:
He was like that: so awfully clever and enigmatic. She could more or less fathom the idea of the pickled cucumbers, but the 'crystallising out'--what did that signify?
So now, the wife seems to be turning that idea around, in her own mind to mean her husband will be the one who is crystalized in the end or spoiled totally for her excesses and alternate lifestyle and for her his flavour would then be spoiled? Is that what she is saying or interpreting her husband as meaning? She seems to be redirecting the blame towards herself and her actions, by saying she might be 'the brine and the vale of tears' that brings about that result in her husband, not in herself. Is she thinking her actions will end up causing his demise? This last part is confusing to me and I am not sure what to make of it entirely. Any ideas, anyone?Quote:
And did he mean to suggest that he himself had been well pickled and that further immersion was for him unnecessary, would spoil his flavour? Was that what he meant? And herself, was she the brine and the vale of tears?
These all seem to be characteristics that had attracted her and still apparently do. Interesting. This man is very complex and fascinating to her; quite obvious from this paragraph. The last line, and then the first, in the following paragraph seem to indicate to me a 'forshadowing' of the theme of the jealousy the wife seems to exhibit towards the secretary. The jealousy is not really for the secretary, who is actually no one to anyone, but of the man and his attention to the secretary. In my opinion the true battlefield exists only between the husband and the wife and the 'will' of each set against each other.Quote:
You never knew how catty a man was being, when he was really clever and enigmatic, withal a bit whimsical. He was adorably whimsical, with a twist of his flexible, vain mouth, that had a long upper lip, so fraught with vanity! But then a handsome, clear-cut, histrionic young man like that, how could he help being vain? The women made him so.
Quote:
Ah, the women! How nice men would be if there were no other women!
I know I have not been here lately, but I have been busy. I hope what I said, makes some sort of sense, and adds to what has already been posted. Sorry about not posting yesterday. It got too late.
You have made some good points, and I hope to be able to come back to it later and make a more detailed response to what you have said, but I am unsable to at this moment.
Dark Muse, hope you are ok. Rest up and get better. I can wait. At least, today I resurfaced and made some bit of effort. I am also making headway with my emails, I owed my friends, from awhile ago. Finally, think I am catching up on everything.:) I been feeling unstable myself lately.:( Relax tonight; it is the weekend.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dark Muse
We all have tons of time with this story - it is only the 4th of the month and look how far we already got. :D Good group here!
Thank you, hopefully tomorrow, I will be able to come back to this and give your post closer examination, for now I shall shortly be off to bed
I was concerned about you. Hope you are feeling better. I am off to bed, alsoQuote:
Originally Posted by Dark Muse
...."sleep that knits up the raveled sleeve of care" Macbeth...
It is quite late here again; too late really. I should be in bed by now, even if just to read.
Night, Dark Muse!
I'm not following the conversation, but I did quickly catch this. You mispelled a keyword there Muse, "unsable". Now you could have meant either "unstable" or "unable." Either way I hope you're ok.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dark Muse
Hehe yes I realized that, it was quite late at the time and I was not thinking clearly. I have been sick
OK, I read the story once, and before I comment I will read through the posts and reread the story. Interesting story, though I don't know if I would consider this a great one. Perhaps I'll be surprised on reread. :)
Well it's not overly sublime, but it is quite clever. I'm not sure where I'd put it on my list of favorite Lawrence stories--somewhere in the middle, I think. The discussion of the story has sure been active. I struggle to keep up. Janine wrote a post on the last page that I had scroll down for thirty seconds just to get the bottom of it. Tonight I'll make an effort in earnest (no half effort) to write a comprehensive reply that will blow everyone away.Quote:
Originally Posted by Virgil
Quark, :lol: It is not that long! So where is the response - this 'brilliant bit of writing' you conjured up, that will blow everyone away? Oh, now I see, it is in the works and will be posted tonight. I will tune-in later. ;) :lol: Can't wait to read it.:DQuote:
Originally Posted by Quark
Virgil, I have read the story at least 3 times so far. I think I will, no doubt, read it again. I keep trying to figure out, just what to say about it. I was hoping you would arrive soon....rescue me. It is quite unlike other stories by Lawrence, but I quite enjoyed it, even better on additional readings. I found it humorous at times and clever, too although there is definitely an underlying seriousness to it. I like the last line but still not sure what to make of it. We have been trying to work slowly up to the ending so don't fly too far ahead, if you can. Or if you think it benificial to do so, I think everyone has read the story by now. It is up to you.
Later, I will try and post some more of the next part of the story to discuss and I will underline important parts and phrases. It is still early in the month and we can go slowly. Although, I am starting to see this story more in-line of a sketch and simply something Lawrence observed and wrote a witty story about. I don't know if it has terribly deep meanings, as his other stories impart. One critic I read, mentioned this story as a 'sketch' and no more. What would be your opinion on that, Virgil? Answer that, maybe after you review the posts and re-read the story. Glad you are back in the thread. :)
Yes I agree that the wife is confident in some reguards. She does seem to be a very proud woman, but I like your "thrid-wheel" analogy, when she comes back into the house, becasue the scercatray and her family have estrablished thier own little world there with her husband.Quote:
Originally Posted by Janine
The wife does not feel as if she truly belongs within her husbands home. She suddenly feels like an outsider. The world in the house is not truly "her world" anymore, it has been overtaken, so here she is not sure of herself, and she is threatened by the efficiency and devotion of the secretary and her family to her husband. She does not really feel like she belongs there.Quote:
Could anything be more impossible! They had the house spotless and running like a dream; how could an incompetent extravagant wife dare to interfere, when she saw their amazing and almost inspired economy. But they rant the place on simply nothing!
I agree that her attacks against the secretary are not really out of any direct feelings she has toward the secretary, but is indeed meant to strike against her husband, whom is the real issue for the wife. As she states somewhere else, that he could not bear it to be mocked for his work, and the secretary was such a intricate part of his work, that it was the best way she had at striking against him.
I was a bit stuck by these lines and found them a bit curious myself, as "generous" seems to be just the opposite of how she later own begins to portray her husband, though it might be true he continued to pay her way for her vacations, throughout the story, the wife is constantly criticizing her husband for being so selfish, in not actually doing anything for the secretary for all that she does for him, and in how little he pays them for their work. But more or less seems to take them for granted.Quote:
Originally Posted by Janine
It seems in someway's, she is almost trying to struggle to understand just how they could be happy in such a situation because she knew she could never be content living the way the secretary and her family does. Though in someway's, I wonder if she does not think that they are indeed more noble than she is for she always seems to speak of them with a certain sarcasm and goads the secretary in someway's for not having the same standards, that she herself has. Though I think this might come from her own insecurities.
Yes I found that whole part quite confussing as well, and could not make anything from it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Janine
I think (and let me emphasize only think) I understand the heart of the story. But let me reread it to make sure. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Janine
Virgil, Great, I will be anxious to know what you think the 'heart' of the story is. Take your time. I need a break; going now to catch up on my emails....:DQuote:
Originally Posted by Virgil
The Lawrence guru is here. :lol: :lol: Just trying to catch up.Quote:
Originally Posted by Quark
I can understand why you feel this goes against the Lawrence grain Quark. This is a very satiric story, and I don't thnk we covered a Lawrence satiric story yet. He does get satiric at times (I'm thinking of novellas The Fox and St. Mawr), and when he gets satiric he can be very biting. And I think the characters here are portrayed in a caustic tone.
Still haven't reread so I'm still not jumping in. :p
Yeah, she feels very alien in her own home because her self-enforced distance. She finds she has almost no effect on her husband's life. Everything in the story heightens this feeling of distance. Even Cameron's (isn't that the husband's name?) manner feels cold and distant. He speaks almost cryptically and has an ironic--or as L puts it "hamletish"--demeanor about him. On top of the elusiveness of Cameron is the wife's own detachment. She's constantly characterized as being out of touch--with her husband's work, with the seasons, and even with her own feelings. Everything contributes to this sense of distance.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dark Muse
The generosity of the husband is genuine. He shows it in a number of places by allowing her to have her affairs, trying to make her welcome at home, and even by keeping up his end of the conversation when she interrupts him at work. The wife, though, is looking for something more than just generosity.Quote:
Originally Posted by Janine
The wife does feel displaced by the secretary. This creates that irritation she feels when away. She knows that she's being replaced.Quote:
Originally Posted by Janine
You could define it as a battle between husband and wife. The wife is trying to get the attention of the husband, but the husband is busy insulating himself to the entreaties of the wife. He buries himself in work and the fawning praise of his servants while the wife is wanting his sincere affection. They don't hate each other, though, nor do they fight their battle with hostility. Their civility isn't just a facade. The husband really is generous and the wife does not really care to do household chores, but the unfortunate emotional aftermath of their arrangement leads them into confrontation.Quote:
Originally Posted by Janine
Oh it's very clear that Lawrence doesn't approve of the couple in this story. In certain lines you can see his contempt burst onto the surface. When he describes the wife as a warewolf, you know that character can't be good in the eyes of the narrator. After that he just piles on, too. He makes her pretentious and an admitted parasite. It's not a flattering portrait. The husband fares a little better in the narrator's eyes, but that's only by virtue of being less talked about.Quote:
Originally Posted by Virgil
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dark Muse
I'm jealous tooo!! I would love to be in a class where we do Lawrence. Yes, please keep us abreast. Perhaps we should have done a story you are covering. Then you would really get a good grade. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Janine
Virgil, you always get an A+ in my book! :lol:Quote:
Originally Posted by Virgil
I am freaking out now. :crash: I just typed so much and research: revealing quotes from letters, books; and I lost it all! Apparently, my book hit the esc key. I can't believe it.:bawling: I will have to rethink my whole post and retype it. I came up with such good research too on this time period in L's life. I hope I can recall what I had written. Does anyone know how you can retrieve it? Is that even possible?Quote:
Originally Posted by Virgil
If I can't I will have to do this later. It is getting too late now....:(
I learned my lesson and will write this offline this time. Too easy to lose things on here, when typing. Well, back to the old drawing board. I hope I can recall what I had written.
My poor fingers are so tired of typing all this, and also it was not too easy find these references.... so please, please read it. I think this throws a lot of light on the story.
Hi Lawrence guru! :lol:Quote:
Originally Posted by Virgil
The Lawrence guru is here. Just trying to catch up.
I can understand why you feel this goes against the Lawrence grain Quark. This is a very satiric story, and I don't thnk we covered a Lawrence satiric story yet. He does get satiric at times (I'm thinking of novellas The Fox and St. Mawr), and when he gets satiric he can be very biting. And I think the characters here are portrayed in a caustic tone.
Virgil, that is a very good word for the story – ‘satiric’. Yes, this is the ‘style’ of ‘form’, in which Lawrence wrote this story, and some others from that same time period. The tone certainly is biting and very caustic at times. You and I know how Lawrence could fling comments or insults at his public or publishers and they were quite scathing, in addition to being rather amusing and witty, as well.
It truly helps to see just what was going on in Lawrence’s personal life around this time period. I found this in the introduction ‘Chronology’ in my “Women in Love” book:
Then in 1926:Quote:
1925 Finishes The Plumed Serpent, falls ill and almost dies of typhoid and pneumonia in February; in March diagnosed as suffering from *tuberculosis. Recuperates at Kiowa Ranch, writes David (1926) and compiles Reflections on the Death of a Porcupine (1925). He and Frieda return to settle in Spotorno, Italy; DHL writes first version of *Sun (1926); *Frieda meets Angelo Ravagli.
*Up until this time, Lawrence refused to believe he had TB, this doctor in Mexico diagnosed the disease and recommended a warm climate with sun (see excerpt below), or he will surely die. Up until and even after this Lawrence would only refer to his illness as his ‘broncials’. In actuality, TB, was a death sentence for Lawrence and he pretty much knew it.Quote:
1926 Writes The Virgin and the Gypsy (1930); *serious quarrel with Frieda during visit from DHL’s sister Ada. DHL visits Brewsters and *Brett; has affair with Brett. Reconciled, DHL and Frieda move to Villa Mirenda, near Florence, in May and visit England (his last visit) in late summer. On return to Italy in October he writes first version of Lady Chatterly’s Lover (1944); starts second version in November.
*Sun - The following story ‘Sun’ also explores the idea of a wife retreating, without her husband to a warmer climate. Obviously, Lawrence was expressing the idea that ‘sun’ would heal and restore life, as was recommended in his own case.
*Frieda meets Ravagli, whom she marries after Lawrence is deceased (Lawrence dies in 1930). She meets him while Lawrence is still recuperating from nearly dying. It was believed, she did indeed have on ongoing affair with Ravagli at this time, and leading up to Lawrence’ death. Lawrence knew about it, resented it, most likely, but could not control his headstrong,’modern thinking’ wife; therefore, he was resigned to the fact, she had her little laisons. No doubt, this ‘resentment’ and ‘bitterness’ resurfaces in the work he did during this period. The themes certainly do come forth and Lawrence is hardly condoning ‘affairs outside of marriage’, as is so apparent in this story – ‘Two Bluebirds’ with his cutting satire.
*serious quarrel with Frieda – one can only conjecture what that quarrel was about. I will try and look up that time, and see if I can dig up any sound reason for the quarrel. It states in the passage, that they did 'reconcil' and then move to Italy. Shortly after his last trip to England, he wrote “Lady Chatterly’s Lover”, which seems to me to follow in his same train of thought, but more developed in the novel. Most importantly to note, during this time period, Lawrence was in great distress and his relationship with his wife was on very shaky ground. It was a very tumultuous time in Lawrence’s life. Very shortly before all this his father died, as well. Several so called friends he either split with or they split with him. Add onto this the diagnosis of TB and it was a good receipe for all kinds of resentments and complex feelings.
*Dorothy Brett – The Lawrence’s met her in New Mexico, at the L's ranch; good friend of the Lawrence’s, she even traveled to Mexico, among other locations, with the couple. I have read several accounts to whether she and Lawrence actually did have an affair. At this time, following this bad illness and near death, I believe Lawrence was suffering impotence, so even if they spend a night together in a hotel room, it was not much of an affair. The whole thing is somewhat doubtful, but then later, Lawrence does mention in a letter to Brett that Frieda claimed she would never speak to Brett again. There could be other reasons for that but from what I read I believe that Frieda did become quite jealous of Brett and her attention to Lawrence. Brett even typed for Lawrence, which caused more animosity in Frieda's eyes. Quite a soap opera, isn't it?
‘Two Blue Birds’ was written in Florence and send to Nancy Pearn May 13, 1926:
I just found this very interesting letter concerning Brett – keep in mind this letter was written around the same time Lawrence wrote this story. A few letters before this one, I read another, in which Lawrence professes he will no longer talk to his old friend, Murray because of some critical things Murray said about Lawrence publically. The letter that Brett forwarded to L make him sick and his words were bitter and scathing…”make me sick in the pit of my stomach: the cold, cold insect-like ugliness of it. – I shall avoid meeting Murray.” (January 1925)Quote:
I send you a story, ‘Two Blue Birds’ – probably to be another tribulation to you.[Huxley 658]
This is an excerpt from a letter to Brett a little later:
Then a little later in the same letter:Quote:
To Hon, Dorothy Brett, 11 April 1925
You are, you know, a born separator. Even without knowing that you do it, you set people against one another. It is instinctive with you. If you are friendsly with one, you make that one unfriendly to the others: no matter who it is. It’s just a natural process with you. – But it usually turns everyone into an enemy, at last…………………Among three people, always two against one.
Wow, that last part seems to me to be the theme of “Two Bluebirds”, in Lawrence’s own words! This is truly revealing to me.Quote:
A life in common is an illusion, when the instinct is always to divide, to separate individuals and set them one against the other. And this seems to be the ruling instinct, unacknowledged. Unite with the one, against the other. And it’s no good.
Note: Lawrence died in 1930, so this story was written about 4 yrs earlier, but in a very bad period for Lawrence; besides continually fighting his health (there were many ups and downs with that) and being in a weakened state, he had experienced so much personal woe and rejection by now, he was quite fed-up. Until nearly his last days, he kept writing, but these later writings, definitely reflect a mood and an 'edge', that Lawrence did not previously reveal so intensely. They also reflect a sort of attitude of 'resignment' at times. It is an interesting mixture.