D.H. Lawrence's Short Stories Thread

[Janine]

Virgil, thanks for looking all of that up. It is very interesting. Wow, that picture is pretty - such a variety of colors! Yes, seems as if the meaning is significant and it all depends on where you are from as to what meaning it has. I find this part of your research highly interesting -

"The chrysanthemum has been the focus of Oriental adulation for centuries.
In China, the chrysanthemum's association with autumn stems from its tendency to bloom in the fall. Consequently, the ancient Chinese chose the Chrysanthemum ("chu hua") as their Flower for October, a symbol of the rest and ease that followed the season's final harvest. Mums were considered one of the four Chinese "noble plants" (the others being bamboo, the plum, and the orchid), and were the official badge of the Old Chinese Army. Since chrysanthemums were considered the flower of the chinese noble class, they were prohibited in a lower-class person's garden. The Chinese believe that a chrysanthemum given to one's beloved, after its being used to wipe one's mouth after drinking wine, will ensure undying love and fidelity.
Called "kikus" in Japanese, chrysanthemums were featured on the Imperial Crest of Japan, and were so beloved by Japanese emperors that they sat upon chrysanthemum thrones. The Japanese still hold the chrysanthemum as a symbol of the sun, and they consider the orderly unfolding of the mum's petals to be a symbol of perfection.They also presume that a single chrysanthemum petal placed in the bottom of a wine glass encourages a long and healthy life."

In this story, if you think of the toil of the miner, and now that he is dead he is at his 'rest and ease' I think the flower takes on a lovely meaning. "official badge of the Old Chinese Army" - didn't the miner wear one in his lapel or on his jacket? and...could that be significant? Also, this part ties in with your idea of the fire and my idea of the sun - "chrysanthemum as a symbol of the sun, and they consider the orderly unfolding of the mum's petals to be a symbol of perfection".
Finally, the Italian meaning of a symbol of death. This too is very poignant and significant to the story. Knowing how much Lawrence liked to read of various cultures at this time in his life, I think he might have been aware of this and also he was an avid student of botany and may have found various significant meanings for the flower, while studying the various flowers and plants.

[Quark]

Am I the only one discussing the short story? Where is everybody?

Janine, you're making me laugh. We're here. We just haven't been that forthcoming, yet.

The fire is associated with domesticity, the kitchen, the hearth, sitting around the table, mother and children waiting for father. Second it provides nourshment, tea and bread are warmed by it. Nourishment is the heart of family, and they are "transfigured" by it. Now this is an early Lawrence story, so the word "transfigure" (as you can see it comes up repeatedly in Lawrence's works) does not yet carry the same religious weight that occurs in the later Lawrence stories. Nonetheless it shows the power of the hearth fire. Third, the fire is symbolic for life. From the very first quote I presented here: "All the life of the room seemed in the white, warm hearth and the steel fender reflecting the red fire." The fire is what holds life together and is also symbolic for life burning on. As those who have completed the story know, the fire of the father's life has run out. Something else too. The mother is outraged at what she perceives as her husband whittling his time away at a bar drinking:

This is a domestic crisis, the husband coming home drunk and wasting his money away in drink. But the irony that runs through here is that it will be an even greater domestic crisis than is at first perceived. A dead husband is one who cannot take care of the family. The fire in the hearth does not burn from fire wood, but from coals. As a miner, the father brings home coals to provide nourishment to the family.

The fire is a key image in the story. It's interesting, though, that the mother seems to be opposed to it. She wonders at other people's fascination with the fire, and she constantly dims the room. If the fire means domesticity or sustenance, could the mother really be opposed to it? Also, can the fire mean "life"? If we mean vitality, then maybe yes. But, if we use the word symbolically--like Mrs. Bates does at the end--we run into the same problem. The last words of the story are, "She knew she submitted to life, which was her immediate master. But from death, her ultimate master, she winced with fear and shame". So, if Mrs. Bates accepts life definitively, why would she try to muffle it symbolically. The fire could just be an image of vigor and liveliness. The flames do shoot out of the mine when the husband is still alive, and the flames fade as the story progresses. The action of fire in the story could just be an indicator of the husbands death. But, if that were true, why would the characters respond to the fire before they realized that Mr. Bates had died? I think the fire might represent something else. Rather than life, I think the fire might represent death and the truth that comes with it. Death reminds the mother that people are separated from each other by an uncrossable distance. She realizes that her husband lived his own life, and that she couldn't change that. This idea horrifies Mrs. Bates, though. She can't grasp it. The fire seems to represent this epiphany that Mrs. Bates has more than anything else. Hence, when the children express a desire or fascination for fire and light, what they signify to their mother is that they want separation. The mother refuses to accept this distance, and she keeps both them and herself in the dark.

As for Chrysanthemums, yes, they are a symbol for death and mourning--universally, not just in this story. Never give your girlfriend mums--it might send the wrong message. However, in this story, where life and death have meanings of their own, Chrysanthemums may have more implications than just death.

[Janine]

Janine, you're making me laugh. We're here. We just haven't been that forthcoming, yet.

Hello Quark! Now you are making me laugh, too...so you have been here all the time, just behind the scenes reading posts, the invisible man.
I had to turn my computer off tonight, due to thunderstorms in my area; I even unplugged, after the experience I had a few months back when a surge killed my DSL modem. I did not want to chance a repeat of that. So it seemed a good time to clean - well, really there is never a good time to do so - but since I had to forgo the computer, I made myself; so what I am saying with a zillion too many words, is that I only just am checking in on the computer and this thread. Glad, anyway, to see you posting.

The fire is a key image in the story. It's interesting, though, that the mother seems to be opposed to it. She wonders at other people's fascination with the fire, and she constantly dims the room. If the fire means domesticity or sustenance, could the mother really be opposed to it? Also, can the fire mean "life"? If we mean vitality, then maybe yes. But, if we use the word symbolically--like Mrs. Bates does at the end--we run into the same problem. The last words of the story are, "She knew she submitted to life, which was her immediate master. But from death, her ultimate master, she winced with fear and shame". So, if Mrs. Bates accepts life definitively, why would she try to muffle it symbolically. The fire could just be an image of vigor and liveliness. The flames do shoot out of the mine when the husband is still alive, and the flames fade as the story progresses. The action of fire in the story could just be an indicator of the husbands death. But, if that were true, why would the characters respond to the fire before they realized that Mr. Bates had died? I think the fire might represent something else. Rather than life, I think the fire might represent death and the truth that comes with it. Death reminds the mother that people are separated from each other by an uncrossable distance. She realizes that her husband lived his own life, and that she couldn't change that. This idea horrifies Mrs. Bates, though. She can't grasp it. The fire seems to represent this epiphany that Mrs. Bates has more than anything else. Hence, when the children express a desire or fascination for fire and light, what they signify to their mother is that they want separation. The mother refuses to accept this distance, and she keeps both them and herself in the dark.

Ok, good. I like reading this and want to read it over again tomorrow (when I am more wide-awake). Interesting to hear some slightly different perspectives on the aspect of fire and it's meaning/meanings. Now as I re-read the story, I will look more closely at this aspect and probably form my own ideas about it as well.

As for Chrysanthemums, yes, they are a symbol for death and mourning--universally, not just in this story. Never give your girlfriend mums--it might send the wrong message. However, in this story, where life and death have meanings of their own, Chrysanthemums may have more implications than just death.

Yes, and if a boyfriend gives me chrysanthemums, I will definitely run the other way! haha. What other 'implications' other than death do you think they have? I would be interested in knowing, just incase . Seems in context with how they are seen in this story, there are different meanings for them throughout the story that change through time. Do you think this the case? So you think it significant?

[Virgil]

The fire is a key image in the story. It's interesting, though, that the mother seems to be opposed to it. She wonders at other people's fascination with the fire, and she constantly dims the room.

Glad you're joining the discussion Quark. Hmm, I had not noticed she was constantly dimming the fire. I will have to go back and check. Is this what you are referring to?

She went out. As she dropped piece after piece of coal on the red fire, the shadows fell on the walls, till the room was almost in total darkness.

"I canna see," grumbled the invisible John. In spite of herself, the mother laughed.

"You know the way to your mouth," she said. She set the dustpan outside the door. When she came again like a shadow on the hearth, the lad repeated, complaining sulkily:

"I canna see."

"Good gracious!" cried the mother irritably, "you're as bad as your father if it's a bit dusk!"

Nevertheless she took a paper spill from a sheaf on the mantelpiece and proceeded to light the lamp that hung from the ceiling in the middle of the room. As she reached up, her figure displayed itself just rounding with maternity.

I don't know how coals in a fire work (I've never done it), but I take that to mean that there is a delay before the coals start burning and a period of darkness occurs before they start to burn. The intent is to feed the fire. The mother does light a lamp. There is certainly a play thoughout the story between light and darkness, life and death.

If the fire means domesticity or sustenance, could the mother really be opposed to it?

Where do you see she's opposed to it? I think you're pushing the symbolism a little too far. The hearth creates a scene of domesticity. You use the the word "means" as if this is an equation. This is not allegory.

Also, can the fire mean "life"? If we mean vitality, then maybe yes. But, if we use the word symbolically--like Mrs. Bates does at the end--we run into the same problem. The last words of the story are, "She knew she submitted to life, which was her immediate master. But from death, her ultimate master, she winced with fear and shame". So, if Mrs. Bates accepts life definitively, why would she try to muffle it symbolically.

Where is she muffling it? She's putting coals into the fire.

The fire could just be an image of vigor and liveliness. The flames do shoot out of the mine when the husband is still alive, and the flames fade as the story progresses. The action of fire in the story could just be an indicator of the husbands death. But, if that were true, why would the characters respond to the fire before they realized that Mr. Bates had died? I think the fire might represent something else. Rather than life, I think the fire might represent death and the truth that comes with it.

Yes, I like that. Life, death, two faces on the same coin. Symbols carry multiple meanings. Be aware though that a burning substance is traditionally looked on as life. I think Janine above already mentioned a few. My favorite is from MacBeth: "And all our yesterdays have lighted fools the way to dusty death. Out, out brief candle."

Death reminds the mother that people are separated from each other by an uncrossable distance. She realizes that her husband lived his own life, and that she couldn't change that. This idea horrifies Mrs. Bates, though. She can't grasp it. The fire seems to represent this epiphany that Mrs. Bates has more than anything else. Hence, when the children express a desire or fascination for fire and light, what they signify to their mother is that they want separation. The mother refuses to accept this distance, and she keeps both them and herself in the dark.

That is an intersting reading. I can agree with all but the last sentence, though I'm not quite convinced that the story is about the uncrossable distance between people. The uncrossable distance between life and death, that I am in full agreement. I don't find Mrs. Bates trying to keep anyone in the dark. She is feeding the fire and then lighting a candle.

As for Chrysanthemums, yes, they are a symbol for death and mourning--universally, not just in this story. Never give your girlfriend mums--it might send the wrong message. However, in this story, where life and death have meanings of their own, Chrysanthemums may have more implications than just death.

You've heard that too then. When i went searching on the internet for it I had expected it to be everywhere. But I found just the opposite. Overwhleming mums were said to be symbols of life, except for a rare reference. I was beginning to think i was crazy.

[Janine]

Glad you're joining the discussion Quark. Hmm, I had not noticed she was constantly dimming the fire. I will have to go back and check. Is this what you are referring to?

Virgil, Yes, I second that. Glad you are here Quark. Things should get lively now, with more participants. The more the merrier...or so I hope.

I don't know how coals in a fire work (I've never done it), but I take that to mean that there is a delay before the coals start burning and a period of darkness occurs before they start to burn. The intent is to feed the fire. The mother does light a lamp. There is certainly a play thoughout the story between light and darkness, life and death.

I think one would have to feed the fire to keep it burning. Of course the coal's would naturally burn down the then ignite new coals which would take time to really get burning and glowing. I don't think of a coal fire with a lot of flame but I just thought of when one uses them in a barbecue and then inigially there is flame. Perhaps some wood is also added to these fires in England. I think the important thing here is the ebbing and waning of the light that eminates from the coals and the hearth. I have just been looking up countless reference to fire and flame in Lawrence's works in my critical analyasis book and I have come up with some good stuff. I will be scanning some to post later on. I think you will find them quite interesting. Fire definitely represented to Lawrence life.

Where do you see she's opposed to it? I think you're pushing the symbolism a little too far. The hearth creates a scene of domesticity. You use the the word "means" as if this is an equation. This is not allegory.

Also. the hearth represents 'life' in the glow of the flames. My references will clearly show this. Therefore I do agree that the mother cannot be against that. In some of the lines you quoted at the end of the story she is all for life being her master, but is in fear of death. Death would be the darkness. I agree that when the fire burns low she then lights a lamp to keep light in the room. There is a constant play in this story of light and dark and only now do I see how much it plays a major role in unfolding the story and the two people and their feelings towards each other.

Where is she muffling it? She's putting coals into the fire.

Coals may muffle, or die down, at first, but then the flames will be rekindled or the light will brighten from the glow of the increasing light of the burning coals.

Yes, I like that. Life, death, two faces on the same coin. Symbols carry multiple meanings. Be aware though that a burning substance is traditionally looked on as life. I think Janine above already mentioned a few. My favorite is from MacBeth: "And all our yesterdays have lighted fools the way to dusty death. Out, out brief candle."

I agree. This is good. The story has many dualities and multiple meanings. Yes, there are countless references of fire and burning meaning life. The 'flame of life' and Lawrence must have drawn heavily from this idea from the ancients, the Indians with their fire dances, and throughout literature. Many many references exist in Shakespeare about the fire in relation to life and the sun as well, which consists of fire. Good line from MacBeth! Also lines in Othello I believe when he smothers Desdemonia in her bed. He extinquishes the candles and then proceeds to kill her in the darkness.
After he kills her, he says:

Methinks it should be now a huge eclipse
Of sun and moon, and that the affrighted globe
Should yawn at alteration.

Therefore darkness is apparent and death reigns.

No doubt. countless other references can be found. contrasting light and dark in conjuction with life and death throughout Shakespeare and other novelists.

That is an intersting reading. I can agree with all but the last sentence, though I'm not quite convinced that the story is about the uncrossable distance between people. The uncrossable distance between life and death, that I am in full agreement. I don't find Mrs. Bates trying to keep anyone in the dark. She is feeding the fire and then lighting a candle.

I have something on this I will post later. I have to copy or scan it from my book. I will come back to this idea.

You've heard that too then. When i went searching on the internet for it I had expected it to be everywhere. But I found just the opposite. Overwhleming mums were said to be symbols of life, except for a rare reference. I was beginning to think i was crazy.

I have heard it before, also, but maybe it depends on when it is referenced in time. Perhaps now Chrysanthemums are a more positive symbol and also it seems that it depends on where the flowers are grown and what they represent to the people of that nation.

This story was not an very early story, as you would think. It is actually in 'Volume II' of the short stories and written after "Sons and Lovers". Michael Black says:
[QUOTE]Their (referring also to 'Daughters of the Vicar') completion takes us into the first period of his marturity, so that they represent a substantial advance on "Sons and Lovers," in his own grasp of what he wanted to say, and his ability to express it. Yet they are related to the material f that novel, as well as to the stories already considered. This story, along with 'Daughters of the Vicar', is widely accepted as among Lawrence's masterpieces.
Michael Black states:

We are back in another cottage by the railway-side; the story is shorter, very concentrated, and 'dramatice' in that the events take place in a few hours and have the weight and inevitability of those climactic moments in which a fate is worked out. There is a sense of years being summed up and given a meaning; but no eventful 'plot', and only one central character - the miner's wife. All others are mere attendents. The anger is because she thinks he is getting drunk at the pub. But he is brought in dead, smothered by a fall of rock at the coal face. The wife and this mother lay out and wsh the body in the greatest of all Lawrence's ritual lavings: and in the course of this Elizabeth, like Louisa in 'Daughters of the Vicar', seeing the body before her, comes, too late, upon an essential truth, a revelation about the otherness of the man - what he was.

I ask you to think on this statement (new aspect of the story) by Michael Black:

In the page or two in which the laying-out is described - like a Desposition or a Pieta by a great artist - the simple languages is again both Biblical and peculiarly Lawrentian. These paragraphs are one of the great set-pieces in the language. The passage begins:

When they arose, saw him lying in the naive dignity of death, the women stood arrested in fear and respect. For a few moments they remained still, looking down, the old mother whimpering. Elizabeth felt countermanded. She saw him, how utterly inviolable he lay in himself. She had nothing to do with him. She could not accept it. Stooping, she laid her hands on him, in claim....

The beginning lines of this reminds me so of the biblical account of the two women in Christ's tomb.


I will add more to this later tonight on what Michael Black has to add to this observance of this paragraph. Also I will post some of the references throughout Lawrence's work about fire/light/flame.

[Quark]

Virgil, I assume you're right. Most readers conclude that the fire alludes to life. Certainly, now that I read over it again, I can see this more clearly. Mrs. Bates (I shouldn't simply refer to her as the mother since there are two mothers) does light candles and lamps. She even feels comforted by the presence of light. Really, it's the dark she's terrified of. Lawrence demonstrates during Mrs. Bates walk from her house:

The night was very dark. In the great bay of railway lines, bulked with trucks, there was no trace of light, only away back she could see a few yellow lamps at the pit-top, and the red smear of the burning pit- bank on the night. She hurried along the edge of the track, then, crossing the converging lines, came to the stile by the white gates, whence she emerged on the road. Then the fear which had led her shrank. People were walking up to New Brinsley; she saw the lights in the houses; twenty yards further on were the broad windows of the 'Prince of Wales', very warm and bright, and the loud voices of men could be heard distinctly. What a fool she had been to imagine that anything had happened to him!

Mrs. Bates is relieved when she sees the light and imagines the warmth of the pub. Her fear is associated with the cold darkness outside.

Where do you see she's opposed to it?

No, I don't think she's opposed to the fire, now. It seems she's actually allied with it.

I think you're pushing the symbolism a little too far. The hearth creates a scene of domesticity. You use the the word "means" as if this is an equation. This is not allegory.

This isn't allegory. But, at the same time, this isn't a realist tale about mining towns in the early twentieth century. Lawrence isn't simply trying to render the physical and mental plight of some families in northern England. The story does a poor job of that. Lawrence seems more interested in developing recurring themes in his main characters and exploring them by manipulating the plot and environment to bring his character to complete understanding of those themes. So, we do need to read much of this story symbolically. One to one relationships may be a little simplistic, though.

I'm not quite convinced that the story is about the uncrossable distance between people.

The story isn't only about the distance between people. It's also about Mrs. Bates misguided attempts to control her family. As Mrs. Bates realizes that she hadn't been fair to her husband she says, "She had denied him what he was--she saw it now. She had refused him as himself. And this had been her life, and his life. She was grateful to death, which had restored the truth". The story is also about Mrs. Bates lamenting her controlling nature. Remember that Mr. Bates dies trapped and suffocating, and that the doctor says, "seems as if it were dont o' purpose". The details of the death are given very minutely. It appears like Lawrence was intimating something. Perhaps, Mr. Bates death is an allusion to Mrs. Bates treatment of him--her rejection and chastisement of him.

The uncrossable distance between life and death, that I am in full agreement. I don't find Mrs. Bates trying to keep anyone in the dark.

It's not just in death that the married couple are separated. As Mrs. Bates concludes, "they had met in the dark and had fought in the dark, not knowing whom they met nor whom they fought. And now she saw, and turned silent in seeing. For she had been wrong. She had said he was something he was not; she had felt familiar with him. Whereas he was apart all the while, living as she never lived, feeling as she never felt". Mrs. Bates believes they were separated during their lives. Notice she says they "had" met in the dark and he was apart "all the while". These words indicate that the distance between them was always there and that she hadn't been aware of it. Death isn't another state; it's only the means through which Mrs. Bates can finally understand her husband. When Mr. Bates is dead, she can no longer silence his will to be his own person--he becomes "inviolable". The fire and heat that Mrs. Bates desires is only an illusion. In her moment of clarity at the end she asks herself, "Was this what it all meant--utter, intact, seperateness, obscured by the hear of living?". That may be an overstatement, but I think we have to agree with her somewhat.


Oh, and Janine, I will write something about the flowers. My ideas on this are still somewhat vague, and I'd prefer to wait and think it through. I wouldn't want to discredit myself this early in the discussion by posting something as wrongheaded as my first post.

[Janine]

Virgil, I assume you're right. Most readers conclude that the fire alludes to life. Certainly, now that I read over it again, I can see this more clearly. Mrs. Bates (I shouldn't simply refer to her as the mother since there are two mothers) does light candles and lamps. She even feels comforted by the presence of light. Really, it's the dark she's terrified of. Lawrence demonstrates during Mrs. Bates walk from her house:

Good observation on seeing the inn and the light and warmth within. I have been reading how certain types of light were perceived with different meanings within Lawrence other works - such as cool/cold light of street lamps in London as compared to warm light of the home, hearth, etc. This is just one example. I think firelight and candlelight and light coming from a tavern would be warm glowing type light and associated with life. Also in Lawrence's later works he fully explores this notion of light and it coming from the source of all life - the sun. Many cultures worship the sun or the sun-god. It all seems to tie in with Lawrence's ideas.

Mrs. Bates is relieved when she sees the light and imagines the warmth of the pub. Her fear is associated with the cold darkness outside.

Definitely. The darkness represents the unknown and death. If you notice the son is often described sitting in shadow. I thought that was interesting. The miners worked in dark pits. Ironically the very substance that sustains the light and the warm of the house and family kills the man in the end. The coal falling and trapping him in to suffocate. The darkness is suffocating and surely means certain death.

No, I don't think she's opposed to the fire, now. It seems she's actually allied with it.

I believe she is. I see what you mean on a second reading about her reluctance to light the lamp - she tells the children it is just dust yet and I believe she makes mention of the husband and how he would want the light as well and be annoyed if the light of the fire was burning low. Could this represent his desire to avoid the darkness and death? Everyday he must work in close proximity to death and darkness in the pit, so on coming home he would definitely crave the light of the hearth and the 'life' of the family.

This isn't allegory. But, at the same time, this isn't a realist tale about mining towns in the early twentieth century. Lawrence isn't simply trying to render the physical and mental plight of some families in northern England. The story does a poor job of that. Lawrence seems more interested in developing recurring themes in his main characters and exploring them by manipulating the plot and environment to bring his character to complete understanding of those themes. So, we do need to read much of this story symbolically. One to one relationships may be a little simplistic, though.

True, I found this in enotes on the web: http://www.enotes.com/short-story-cr...m/lawrence-d-h

Most critics concur that “Odour of Chrysanthemums” marked the emergence of a second stage in the development of Lawrence's short fiction. Composed in 1911 and published in The Prussian Officer, and Other Stories (1914), this piece incorporates the heightened realism of Henry James, Joseph Conrad, and Leo Tolstoy, and like most of Lawrence's stories from the years 1909 to 1912, focuses on the familiar events and problems of twentieth-century industrial society, while displaying concern for the lives of ordinary men and women............................................. ..................................other works of the period before 1925 imply the depth and complexity of ordinary experience and retain Lawrence's sharp observation of character and place.

The story isn't only about the distance between people. It's also about Mrs. Bates misguided attempts to control her family. As Mrs. Bates realizes that she hadn't been fair to her husband she says, "She had denied him what he was--she saw it now. She had refused him as himself. And this had been her life, and his life. She was grateful to death, which had restored the truth". The story is also about Mrs. Bates lamenting her controlling nature. Remember that Mr. Bates dies trapped and suffocating, and that the doctor says, "seems as if it were dont o' purpose". The details of the death are given very minutely. It appears like Lawrence was intimating something. Perhaps, Mr. Bates death is an allusion to Mrs. Bates treatment of him--her rejection and chastisement of him.

This interests me but I need to quote somethings and don't have time now. I think you will find them of interest. I hightlighted some passages that I think supports these or some of these ideas. I will be back later on with those quotes.

It's not just in death that the married couple are separated. As Mrs. Bates concludes, "they had met in the dark and had fought in the dark, not knowing whom they met nor whom they fought. And now she saw, and turned silent in seeing. For she had been wrong. She had said he was something he was not; she had felt familiar with him. Whereas he was apart all the while, living as she never lived, feeling as she never felt". Mrs. Bates believes they were separated during their lives. Notice she says they "had" met in the dark and he was apart "all the while". These words indicate that the distance between them was always there and that she hadn't been aware of it. Death isn't another state; it's only the means through which Mrs. Bates can finally understand her husband. When Mr. Bates is dead, she can no longer silence his will to be his own person--he becomes "inviolable". The fire and heat that Mrs. Bates desires is only an illusion. In her moment of clarity at the end she asks herself, "Was this what it all meant--utter, intact, seperateness, obscured by the hear of living?". That may be an overstatement, but I think we have to agree with her somewhat.

Again I just dug up something interesting that has reference to this part of your post. This is good. I will come back to it later. No time presently - darn.

Oh, and Janine, I will write something about the flowers. My ideas on this are still somewhat vague, and I'd prefer to wait and think it through. I wouldn't want to discredit myself this early in the discussion by posting something as wrongheaded as my first post.

Quark - well, I hope so...I don't want to be left out...hha Also did you think about the bathing being a Christ-like ritual...my last question?

[Virgil]

I wouldn't want to discredit myself this early in the discussion by posting something as wrongheaded as my first post.

Oh that is alright Quark. You didn't discredit yourself. You weren't that far off in your reading, just in one symbol. I like much of what you say in that last post.

[Virgil]

Also did you think about the bathing being a Christ-like ritual...my last question?

I never considered that. I think you are right about that Janine.

[Janine]

Quark's post:

The story isn't only about the distance between people. It's also about Mrs. Bates misguided attempts to control her family. As Mrs. Bates realizes that she hadn't been fair to her husband she says, "She had denied him what he was--she saw it now. She had refused him as himself. And this had been her life, and his life. She was grateful to death, which had restored the truth". The story is also about Mrs. Bates lamenting her controlling nature. Remember that Mr. Bates dies trapped and suffocating, and that the doctor says, "seems as if it were dont o' purpose". The details of the death are given very minutely. It appears like Lawrence was intimating something. Perhaps, Mr. Bates death is an allusion to Mrs. Bates treatment of him--her rejection and chastisement of him.

Quark,This might add to your thoughts on Mrs. Bates; more commentary by Michael Black:

"A large bony vine clutched at the house, as if to claw down the tiled roof. Round the brick yard grew a few wintry primroses. Beyond, the long garden sloped down to a bush-covered brook course. There were some twiggy apple trees, winter-crack trees, chrysanthemums, like pink cloths hung on bushes."

The hardness and bitterness of Elizabeth Bates, the central woman of the tale, is well led up to by this initial description. The story concerns the domestic situation of the Bates family and the strained and awkward relationship of the man and wife, although the husband never comes before us until he is dead, killed in a mining accident. The situation is simple enough, and the mining accident a stereotype of a thousand similar stories of mining villages, but Lawrence invests the situation with a deep and moving significance. In the first part of the tale the tension and harshness of the household is well built up as the rest of the family wait for the husband to return from work, but it is assumed that he has once more gone straight from work to the public house; in the second part the tone changes, with the tension switching to a different key as the husband's continued absence becomes more ominous. Eventually he is brought home dead, and the fact of his death throws into another perspective the lives of the man's wife and mother. The tone is perfectly caught, for the miner's death is not sentimentalised over; rather, the wife, Elizabeth, is made aware of the transitoriness of life and her own past error in allowing the ordinariness and mundaneness of her lot to stifle her feelings and demean her character. Now he is dead she realises with tragic immediacy the fact that he was different from her and different from her conception of him:
"Life with its smoky burning gone from him, had left him apart, and utterly alien to her. And she knew what a stranger he was to her. In her womb was ice of fear, because of this separate stranger with whom she had been living as one flesh. Was this what it all meant-utter, intact separateness, obscured by heat of living? In dread she turned her face away .... For as she looked at the dead man, her mind, cold and detached, said clearly: 'Who am I? What have I been doing? I have been fighting a husband who did not exist. He existed all the time. What wrong have I done...

Quark's post:

It's not just in death that the married couple are separated. As Mrs. Bates concludes, "they had met in the dark and had fought in the dark, not knowing whom they met nor whom they fought. And now she saw, and turned silent in seeing. For she had been wrong. She had said he was something he was not; she had felt familiar with him. Whereas he was apart all the while, living as she never lived, feeling as she never felt". Mrs. Bates believes they were separated during their lives. Notice she says they "had" met in the dark and he was apart "all the while". These words indicate that the distance between them was always there and that she hadn't been aware of it. Death isn't another state; it's only the means through which Mrs. Bates can finally understand her husband. When Mr. Bates is dead, she can no longer silence his will to be his own person--he becomes "inviolable". The fire and heat that Mrs. Bates desires is only an illusion. In her moment of clarity at the end she asks herself, "Was this what it all meant--utter, intact, seperateness, obscured by the hear of living?". That may be an overstatement, but I think we have to agree with her somewhat.

Quark,more commentary by Michael Black:

The passage below is interesting, not only in that it shows Lawrence's own awareness of the fact of death, but also in its effect in the story as a whole. The 'ice of fear' in her 'womb' (a word so annoying to some readers of Lawrence, not always without cause) here is effectually used to cast the reader's mind back to a previous scene where the contrast of life and death, and the meanness of the woman in her 'death-in-life', is well shown when, as she reaches up to light the lamp, her daughter remarks at the chrysanthemums which she had earlier placed in her apron-band. The parallel between her wearing the flowers and her pregnancy is symbolic of life:

As she reached up, her figure displayed itself just rounding with maternity.
'Oh, mother- l' exclaimed the girl.
'What?' said the woman, suspended in the act of putting the lamp-glass over the flame. The copper reflector shone handsomely on her, as she stood with uplifted arm, turning to face her daughter.
'You've got a flower in your apron!' said the child, in a little rapture at this unusual event.
'Goodness me l' exclaimed the woman, relieved. 'One would have thought the house was afire.' she replaced the glass and waited a moment before turning up the wick. A pale shadow was seen floating vaguely on the floor.
'Let me smell!' said the child, still rapturously, coming forward and putting her face to her mother's waist.
'Go along, silly l' said the mother, turning up the lamp. The light revealed their suspense so that the woman found it almost unbearable. Annie was still bending at her waist. Irritably, the mother took the flowers out from her apron-band.
'Oh, mother-don't take them out!' Annie cried, catching her hand and trying to replace the sprig.
'Such nonsense!' said the mother, turning away.

The symbolism of the scene is wonderfully suggestive of the child's delight in life and the mother's dismissal of it, and it is remarkable that the symbolism Lawrence is employing here to parallel the flowers and the woman's pregnancy is typical of the symbolism of many English folk songs, such as 'The Seeds of Love'; Lawrence may well have been writing consciously or unconsciously in a folk-convention at this point. (It is not out of place to remind ourselves that Lawrence is one of the first writers in English of truly working-class origins.) However, Lawrence is not perfect in his handling of this scene, for although it is beautifully formed as it is quoted above, its effect is slightly spoilt by the way in which one aspect of its significance is hammered home in the next few lines, in which the woman's conscious antipathy to the flowers is shown:
'It was chrysanthemums when I married him, and chrysanthemums when you were born, and the first time they ever brought him home drunk, he'd got brown chrysanthemums in his button-hole.' p. 289

As I was reading the story earlier, I highlighted some parts of the text and this 'ice' word in the text caught my eye particularly and in conjunction with the unborn child. I thought Michael Black's commentary on it was interesting.

[Janine]

Virgil,thanks, I know I am right because I read it in the commentary book....haha. I will post more on it so you can read the theory behind it all. It is quite interesting. But for now, I am exhausted. I just wrote a long post and I had better resume my domestic duties.

[Virgil]

Virgil,thanks, I know I am right because I read it in the commentary book....haha. I will post more on it so you can read the theory behind it all. It is quite interesting. But for now, I am exhausted. I just wrote a long post and I had better resume my domestic duties.

Well, commentary books aren't always right either. Lots of critics disagree, and then someone is right and someone has to be wrong. I don't seem to recall a Michael Black when I was researching Lawrence for my thesis. What year is that book copywrited?

edit: I just looked him up and yes I did come across his book. He writes mostly on Lawrence's early works, and I did my thesis on Lawrence's later works.

[Janine]

Well, commentary books aren't always right either. Lots of critics disagree, and then someone is right and someone has to be wrong. I don't seem to recall a Michael Black when I was researching Lawrence for my thesis. What year is that book copywrited?

edit: I just looked him up and yes I did come across his book. He writes mostly on Lawrence's early works, and I did my thesis on Lawrence's later works.

Hi Virgil, are you being hostile to me again?
I have read quite a bit of Michael Black's book and he has displayed, in my humble opinion, some very good insight into Lawrence and his early work. I bought this book after I read "The White Peacock", since I did not know of anyone I could disguss the book with; no one I know has heard of it, let alone read it. I found the things he pointed out very helpful and gave much scope to my own thoughts on the symbolism/imagery presented in the book. The book was published by Cambridge University Press and it came out in 1986. Of course, that hardly matters to me, since it does deal with the early fiction only. The novels go from "The White Peacock" up to "Sons and Lovers", then he explores the short stories, which has been very helpful so far to me.
There are a ton of critical anyalysis books on Lawrence currently available. I try to read several authors and sources, to get a more unbiased opinion. I like Michael Black's writings very much and agree mostly with what he has pointed out about the stories, so far of what I have read.

PS: Well, Lit Net poster aren't always right either. Lots of people disagree, and then someone is right and someone has to be wrong.

[Virgil]

Noooo, I'm not being hostile. And what do you mean "again"? I don't recall being hostile to you.

[Janine]

Noooo, I'm not being hostile. And what do you mean "again"? I don't recall being hostile to you.

I am only kidding with you! I thought you could take it. I was referring to the S&L comment; I have just been in there again, so it was on my mind. YOU were not hostile at all. I was joking with you and exaggerating to make you laugh. Usually you and I are so peaceful and agree mostly, so two posts with opposition set me off today...but seriously...I was just having some fun with you....lighten-up, will you?