Sons and Lovers

[amalia1985]

I would say that Miriam's attitude towards the "platonic love" idea can be justified, if we examine both the religious and the social upbringing of the era, which has, obviously, influenced Miriam, as Janine already mentioned.
No matter how much in love she might be with Paul, it is possible that she has been raised with the view that sexual intercourse before marriage is a dreadful sin, while today this view is actually a "laughable" one.

Regarding Mrs. Morel' attitude towards Miriam, I would risk to say that she may not "agree" with the pious, devoted attitude of the girl, whereas she may find the independent Clara more interesting.
On the other hand, I also believe that Mrs. Morel-perhaps, instictively- knows that Clara is not a likely candidate to be Paul's wife, so she turns her attention to Miriam, exposing her dislike towards a potential marriage. I think that she is the type of woman who would dismiss every woman her son would present as his future wife...

[Virgil]

I just found this in the book: Who's Who in D.H.Lawrence Graham Holderness, page 35.

Again from the same book here is what Holderness says about Miriam:

That book is coming in handy.

[Janine]

That book is coming in handy.

Yes, it is - thanks!

Only think I thought it told in there who the characters were based after. I think I have another book that tells me that. I have so many books now to refer to that it is getting really confusing - guess I have 'Lawrence' overload!

[Virgil]

I know I'm not reading along. But this has always been on my mind. Does Miriam have the same personality/type/disposition (I'm not sure what is the right word) as Paul's mother and Clara the same as Paul's father?

[Janine]

I would say that Miriam's attitude towards the "platonic love" idea can be justified, if we examine both the religious and the social upbringing of the era, which has, obviously, influenced Miriam, as Janine already mentioned.
No matter how much in love she might be with Paul, it is possible that she has been raised with the view that sexual intercourse before marriage is a dreadful sin, while today this view is actually a "laughable" one.

Regarding Mrs. Morel' attitude towards Miriam, I would risk to say that she may not "agree" with the pious, devoted attitude of the girl, whereas she may find the independent Clara more interesting.
On the other hand, I also believe that Mrs. Morel-perhaps, instictively- knows that Clara is not a likely candidate to be Paul's wife, so she turns her attention to Miriam, exposing her dislike towards a potential marriage. I think that she is the type of woman who would dismiss every woman her son would present as his future wife...

amalia, I certainly agree with you. One has to put the book into the context of the time. Back then it was the norm for a young girl to wait till marriage to have sexual intercourse, so that actually Miriam's behavior is probably typical, and especially when if a young man, such as Paul, (whom we have no doubt she does loves), pressures her into the act. I don't think either of them were wrong, but Miriam was not ready for sex and so it is sad because most likely it is a social and moral issue with her and part of her upbringing. As you pointed out, in today's world, Paul's behavior would not have been frowned upon; unless one was strickly religious and still believed in this way...in that case I would not call the behavior 'laughable' but respect whatever a person decides to do. It is true that at this time the book was written at a time when attitudes were slowly changing, but only for some. Lawrence paved the way, in many instances, with his writings and books for more openness on these issues. Another thing is that his books were often censored. Nowdays they would not be so - rather they would be considered mild compared to many. Also, if you read further into Lawrence's writings, he believed people actually thought too much and were too intellectualized and lost the essense of enjoyment in sexual relationships. Remember me referring to Paul's (and Lawrence's) mother and father as having 'head speech' and heart speech'. I know all this gets confusing, but Miriam and Paul, in my eyes overlapped when it came to issues of the heart and love of nature, interests such as art and literature, but when it came to the 'physicality' of life and living and relationships, Miriam could not let herself go and give herself up fully to Paul. I think that Mrs. Morel had her relationship with the visiting preacher who was on this same plane of intellectual thinking, but of course that was loveless and not physical. I think that Miriam posed a threat because she, too, was intellectual and less physical. Remember the father was more physical and the Mrs. Morel retired, recoiled from him. Isn't it sort of the same with Miriam? Now Clara comes along and she is so much different - more independent and spirited - and Mrs. Morel probably does not feel she can have control over Clara, and as you said most likely she does not see him marrying her or see her as a threat, in one way, for the future of Paul. She knows she will be a 'temporary' thing with Paul and a part of his growing up, whereas the potential to work it out with Miriam still exists and that could turn into a permanent union. Perhaps too, she sees, if he did continue with Miriam and marry, this would be mimicing the bad marriage she has as a result, for she knows ultimately that Paul will not be happy in that type of union.
Mostly, I think that Mrs. Morel does want to keep Paul for herself. I think that had she not died, she would have kept exerting her control over him. As he said, in one part of the book, his goal was to have a small house and paint and live alone with his mother. Of course, this is not a 'normal' thing for a young man to long for, although in the book he was quite young when he was thinking in that vane.

I know I'm not reading along. But this has always been on my mind. Does Miriam have the same personality/type/disposition (I'm not sure what is the right word) as Paul's mother and Clara the same as Paul's father?

Hahaha...read my last post. We must think alike!

[manolia]

Isn't Clara married or am I mixing her up with someone else? I thought she was separated from her husband when Paul pursues her. Opps, answered my own question.

Yes quite right! She is separated and "bonded for a life time". Thank you very much for the book quotes. They were very helpfull. They summarize nicely what it is said in the book. It is better to read all those information together, since all these things were spread in the book and somehow i at least couldn't focus on all of them

So, I don't think Paul's mother, with her negative influence towards Miriam, is the only or key reason Paul breaks off with Miriam. I feel it is like the above statements by Hollerness that so well describes what is going on between them and how they are not meeting with each other's expectations

Ah yes. Now that i think about it i think that this exact phrase (the one i have highlighted) exists somewhere in the book..

I do, however, think that the relationship between Paul and his mother are at times quite abnormal. Most critics and readers of Lawrence agree upon this idea. Thus many site the Odeipus complex idea and other phychological reasons for the closeness.

These were exactly my thoughts. But then again i tend to see Odeipus syndrome in many books so i was afraid that i could be very wrong.
Anyway, i read the part where Paul takes his mother on a trip and he is really frustrated with the fact that she is getting old..this was the part that made me think intensely of the "weirdness" of their relationship.

The death of the oldest son was a key element or reason Paul and his mother became so close, also the unhappy marriage of Mrs. Morel, but I think from the beginning she knew that there was something very special about Paul.

Hmmm...i remember at the begining of the book, the scene where Mrs Morel is holding baby Paul and she describes his eyes and how strange and "knowing" is his expression..so we could say that there is something special about Paul and his mother is aware of it. But later on i got the feeling that Mrs Morel was neglecting Paul or at least he wasn't paying much attention to him and she was rather absorbed by William..

She has some similarity perhaps to Gudrun, but I think she is more focused and knows in the end what she wants as a woman, whereas Gundrun is still searching for that at the end of WIL, don't you think

I haven't read enough about Clara. She is mentioned twice so far in the book, so i'll answer that later on when i get there

I hope all this makes sense. I did my best. This book helped and made it a little clearer even for myself. Of course this is just one commentators opinion but I thought it was pretty accurate.

They make perfect sense. Thanks again for sharing

I would say that Miriam's attitude towards the "platonic love" idea can be justified, if we examine both the religious and the social upbringing of the era, which has, obviously, influenced Miriam, as Janine already mentioned.
No matter how much in love she might be with Paul, it is possible that she has been raised with the view that sexual intercourse before marriage is a dreadful sin, while today this view is actually a "laughable" one.

Quite right. I agree. Of course sexual intercourse before marriage was out of the question for a decent girl of that era. But i was wondering why she said "no" when Paul offered her an engagement. (Mrs Morel says to Paul that if he continues to visit Miriam so often he must consider himself engaged and Paul asks Miriam if they should be engaged and she says no)

On the other hand, I also believe that Mrs. Morel-perhaps, instictively- knows that Clara is not a likely candidate to be Paul's wife, so she turns her attention to Miriam, exposing her dislike towards a potential marriage.

That's is what i think too

I know I'm not reading along. But this has always been on my mind. Does Miriam have the same personality/type/disposition (I'm not sure what is the right word) as Paul's mother and Clara the same as Paul's father?

Hmmm..this hadn't occured to me but now that i think of it, i believe you are right.

[Janine]

Yes quite right! She is separated and "bonded for a life time". Thank you very much for the book quotes. They were very helpfull. They summarize nicely what it is said in the book. It is better to read all those information together, since all these things were spread in the book and somehow i at least couldn't focus on all of them

Oh, I am the same way - thoughts keep drifting around or rattling around in my head. Actually when you mention certain scenes the book comes back to me and although I don't know the exact quotes or the passages offhand the essense and meaning comes back into focus and I can usually dig up something in reference to it. Just call me the 'reference consultant!' manolia, are you still the 'mythology consultant?' Anyway, glad the book quotes helped you. I thought it was insightful and summed it all up nicely and accurately. That puts things into better perspective.

Ah yes. Now that i think about it i think that this exact phrase (the one i have highlighted) exists somewhere in the book..

Yes, I think it does also. Don't ask me where but someplace or the other.

These were exactly my thoughts. But then again i tend to see Odeipus syndrome in many books so i was afraid that i could be very wrong.
Anyway, i read the part where Paul takes his mother on a trip and he is really frustrated with the fact that she is getting old..this was the part that made me think intensely of the "weirdness" of their relationship.

Never be afraid to throw a thought out there. If it is way off someone will tell you and if you hit it on that is even better but no one here cares. Everyone has his own ideas on the deeper meanings in this book. Lawrence books are not easy to study, so you have all achieved much and are to be commended. Hey, everyone - take a bow! His stories and novels are so complex, with much layering of meaning and conflicts and dualities, that we might never fully explain them. Only Lawrence could do that, if he were here now. Maybe his intention was to present stories that would be wondered at long after the last pages were closed. I think this is partly true.
Yes, that trip part was a little strange, I agree...not so normal between a mother and a son.

Hmmm...i remember at the begining of the book, the scene where Mrs Morel is holding baby Paul and she describes his eyes and how strange and "knowing" is his expression..so we could say that there is something special about Paul and his mother is aware of it. But later on i got the feeling that Mrs Morel was neglecting Paul or at least he wasn't paying much attention to him and she was rather absorbed by William..

manolia, you are reading my mind; that is the precise scene I was thinking of. I thought that was one of the most interesting moments, also...sort of an epiphany on the part of the mother. Hope I spelled the right.

I haven't read enough about Clara. She is mentioned twice so far in the book, so i'll answer that later on when i get there

It is funny, I really have a vague image now of Clara so I have to wait till I read up to that part to make any further comments on here, same as you.

They make perfect sense. Thanks again for sharing

Oh good, I typed them straight from the book (didn't feel like scanning today) so not sure if they might have some typos. I was too worn out to proof-read. I hope they are correct, but glad they all did make perfect sense and were helpful.

Quite right. I agree. Of course sexual intercourse before marriage was out of the question for a decent girl of that era. But i was wondering why she said "no" when Paul offered her an engagement. (Mrs Morel says to Paul that if he continues to visit Miriam so often he must consider himself engaged and Paul asks Miriam if they should be engaged and she says no)

Well, I think that if she said she would become engaged to Paul then she would be committed and would feel even more pressure to have sex with him. I think that also she had her own misgivings. When they do finally split if you notice she is relieved in some sense. The pressure is off of her and she is free to be her own person again.

That's is what i think too

Oh, good - then we agree. Good post manolia!

Hmmm..this hadn't occured to me but now that i think of it, i believe you are right.

Well, think of the differences in the two parents of Paul. It makes sense. One parent is more cerebral and the other more physical.

[Quark]

These were exactly my thoughts. But then again i tend to see Odeipus syndrome in many books so i was afraid that i could be very wrong.
Anyway, i read the part where Paul takes his mother on a trip and he is really frustrated with the fact that she is getting old..this was the part that made me think intensely of the "weirdness" of their relationship.

No one can talk about this book without bringing up the word Oedipal, but I've never been convinced that we should call it that. Paul and his mother grow closer over time because circumstances make them more intimate; think of when Paul catches pnemonia after William's death. Sometimes the mother-son relationship becomes weirdly amorous, but usually because of misplaced sexuality. Both Mrs. Morel and Paul are unsucessful in their love affairs, and since they are friendly and close they engage in some weird moments. I wouldn't say intercourse is what they're after, though. Oedipal is a poor adjective for this; consoling might be a better one.

amalia, I certainly agree with you. One has to put the book into the context of the time. Back then it was the norm for a young girl to wait till marriage to have sexual intercourse, so that actually Miriam's behavior is probably typical, and especially when if a young man, such as Paul, (whom we have no doubt she does loves), pressures her into the act. I don't think either of them were wrong, but Miriam was not ready for sex and so it is sad because most likely it is a social and moral issue with her and part of her upbringing. As you pointed out, in today's world, Paul's behavior would not have been frowned upon; unless one was strickly religious and still believed in this way...in that case I would not call the behavior 'laughable' but respect whatever a person decides to do. It is true that at this time the book was written at a time when attitudes were slowly changing, but only for some. Lawrence paved the way, in many instances, with his writings and books for more openness on these issues. Another thing is that his books were often censored. Nowdays they would not be so - rather they would be considered mild compared to many. Also, if you read further into Lawrence's writings, he believed people actually thought too much and were too intellectualized and lost the essense of enjoyment in sexual relationships. Remember me referring to Paul's (and Lawrence's) mother and father as having 'head speech' and heart speech'. I know all this gets confusing, but Miriam and Paul, in my eyes overlapped when it came to issues of the heart and love of nature, interests such as art and literature, but when it came to the 'physicality' of life and living and relationships, Miriam could not let herself go and give herself up fully to Paul. I think that Mrs. Morel had her relationship with the visiting preacher who was on this same plane of intellectual thinking, but of course that was loveless and not physical. I think that Miriam posed a threat because she, too, was intellectual and less physical. Remember the father was more physical and the Mrs. Morel retired, recoiled from him. Isn't it sort of the same with Miriam? Now Clara comes along and she is so much different - more independent and spirited - and Mrs. Morel probably does not feel she can have control over Clara, and as you said most likely she does not see him marrying her or see her as a threat, in one way, for the future of Paul. She knows she will be a 'temporary' thing with Paul and a part of his growing up, whereas the potential to work it out with Miriam still exists and that could turn into a permanent union. Perhaps too, she sees, if he did continue with Miriam and marry, this would be mimicing the bad marriage she has as a result, for she knows ultimately that Paul will not be happy in that type of union.
Mostly, I think that Mrs. Morel does want to keep Paul for herself. I think that had she not died, she would have kept exerting her control over him. As he said, in one part of the book, his goal was to have a small house and paint and live alone with his mother. Of course, this is not a 'normal' thing for a young man to long for, although in the book he was quite young when he was thinking in that vane.

Janine, these are some monster paragraphs you're composing here. I think I'll comment on these one idea at a time. First, I think Miriam is prudish, not because of social conditioning, but because she is snobish. I like what your book told us about her character. She is very romantically inclined with a preponderance of imagination and a lack of empathy for anyone or anything not in her dream world. Miriam desires to transcend her physical surroundings. Unfortunately for Paul, this means abstaining from sex. For all this, though, I like her. Something about her is very endearing, and I actually hoped that Paul would fall in love with her and not the confused Clara.

[Virgil]

No one can talk about this book without bringing up the word Oedipal, but I've never been convinced that we should call it that.

No question that Oedipal has to be brought up in reference to this novel. Let me say that Lawrence, very knowledgable on the psychological thoeries of his day, did not consider himself a Freudian. He was much closer to a Jungian, though he kind of created his own theories. (Side note, all them a bunch of hogwash, but those were the theories of the day. ) This novel though is an early Lawrence novel, and while he was definitely aware of Freud at this time, he is I think in the middle of formulating his understanding of psychology. I think it's a bit of a mix here, and I think he is conscious of Freud's Oadepal complex, but i think he tries to vary it too. I don't recall any sexual desire for his mother, but I do think the implication is there given Paul's overt attachment to her and the sexual conflicts that Paul has.

[Janine]

No one can talk about this book without bringing up the word Oedipal, but I've never been convinced that we should call it that. Paul and his mother grow closer over time because circumstances make them more intimate; think of when Paul catches pnemonia after William's death. Sometimes the mother-son relationship becomes weirdly amorous, but usually because of misplaced sexuality. Both Mrs. Morel and Paul are unsucessful in their love affairs, and since they are friendly and close they engage in some weird moments. I wouldn't say intercourse is what they're after, though. Oedipal is a poor adjective for this; consoling might be a better one.

Hi Quark, glad to see you here again. I agree about the Oedipal thing and this book. I do not personally subscribe to the belief that it was that at all. I think it was various conditions and events that lead up to the closeness between the mother and his son. I stated to manolia, earlier:
"I do, however, think that the relationship between Paul and his mother are at times quite abnormal. Most (I might have changed this to say some and not most) critics and readers of Lawrence agree upon this idea. Thus many site the Odeipus complex idea and other phychological reasons for the closeness." I think this is of true of the critics, although as I said, I don't believe it is Oedipal in the final anaylsis.
"They are unusually close and intense with each other, especially as the book progresses." I do think they become closer as time goes by.

Janine, these are some monster paragraphs you're composing here.

Oh sorry,...yes, but I thought you could handle it.

I think I'll comment on these one idea at a time.

Good idea and no rush.

First, I think Miriam is prudish, not because of social conditioning, but because she is snobish. I like what your book told us about her character. She is very romantically inclined with a preponderance of imagination and a lack of empathy for anyone or anything not in her dream world. Miriam desires to transcend her physical surroundings. Unfortunately for Paul, this means abstaining from sex. For all this, though, I like her. Something about her is very endearing, and I actually hoped that Paul would fall in love with her and not the confused Clara.

Well, yes I think I mostly agree with you in this paragraph - 'snobbish' I am not quite sure of, but in a way, you might be correct. She might have a feeling of being 'superior' in that she has helped Paul in many respects and seems to sometimes take on the teacher/leader role with him. I thought the additional writing helpful and that he pegged her pretty well. I like Miriam, also. She seems to have sense of finer ideas and thoughts and I guess I have a weakness for people who are dreamers (because I too am one). I also hoped that he would choose Miriam over Clara. I could tell that the Clara relationship was not one of permanence. She was too confused and on the rebound from her husband and that relationship - not a good thing. Actually, now that I think of it, they both were on the rebound, which normally does not turn out well in the end. Both were transition people for each other at that time.

No question that Oedipal has to be brought up in reference to this novel. Let me say that Lawrence, very knowledgable on the psychological thoeries of his day, did not consider himself a Freudian. He was much closer to a Jungian, though he kind of created his own theories. (Side note, all them a bunch of hogwash, but those were the theories of the day. ) This novel though is an early Lawrence novel, and while he was definitely aware of Freud at this time, he is I think in the middle of formulating his understanding of psychology. I think it's a bit of a mix here, and I think he is conscious of Freud's Oadepal complex, but i think he tries to vary it to. I don't recall any sexual desire for his mother, but I do think the implication is there given Paul's overt attachment to her and the sexual conflicts that Paul has.

Virgil, this is good and I agree with most of what you have written here, too. I don't really envision that Paul wanted to have sex with his mother but I do agree with you that Lawrence's ideas at this point were not fully formed so it is more of an exploratory type novel and coming of age. Later Lawrence's own individualistic theories will become fully formed in his novels and stories.

[manolia]

First, I think Miriam is prudish, not because of social conditioning, but because she is snobish. I like what your book told us about her character. She is very romantically inclined with a preponderance of imagination and a lack of empathy for anyone or anything not in her dream world. Miriam desires to transcend her physical surroundings. Unfortunately for Paul, this means abstaining from sex. For all this, though, I like her. Something about her is very endearing, and I actually hoped that Paul would fall in love with her and not the confused Clara.

Yes, i agree. Miriam is pretty snobbish. I can recall in various places where she thinks herself superior to her brothers etc

Virgil, this is good and I agree with most of what you have written here, too. I don't really envision that Paul wanted to have sex with his mother but I do agree with you that Lawrence's ideas at this point were not fully formed so it is more of an exploratory type novel and coming of age. Later Lawrence's own individualistic theories will become fully formed in his novels and stories.

When we talk of Oidepus complex it doesn't necessarily mean that there is a craving for sex..but merely an attraction between mother and son which is very excessive and not normal..this is at least how we use it nowadays. (After all, poor Oidepus when he did what he did with his mother he didn't know she was his mother, whereas Mrs Morel knows who Paul is so it'd be very weird if L implied a sexual attraction between them, wouldn't it?).
I don't believe there is sexual attraction between Paul and his mother. There is a strong bond and they are very tense two each other and they behave very strangely to each other. And sometimes the things they say and do aren't very "normal".

[Virgil]

When we talk of Oidepus complex it doesn't necessarily mean that there is a craving for sex..but merely an attraction between mother and son which is very excessive and not normal..this is at least how we use it nowadays.

I guess to be fair to Freud, I think he meant that the sexual desire in Oedipal complex is sub-conscious. Reminds me what a crock this sort of psychology is. Whenever you can't prove something exactly, just say it's in the sub-conscious and you can always win.

(After all, poor Oidepus when he did what he did with his mother he didn't know she was his mother, whereas Mrs Morel knows who Paul is so it'd be very weird if L implied a sexual attraction between them, wouldn't it?).

Ah yes, I have always thought the same thing. Poor Oedipus. But it could have been in his sub-conscious.

I don't believe there is sexual attraction between Paul and his mother. There is a strong bond and they are very tense two each other and they behave very strangely to each other. And sometimes the things they say and do aren't very "normal".

Actually you raise a good point. Oepidal complex refers to a son's attraction to his mother, not the mother to her son; but here Mrs. Morel is just as attached to her son. But I agree, none of this is sexual.

[manolia]

I guess to be fair to Freud, I think he meant that the sexual desire in Oedipal complex is sub-conscious. Reminds me what a crock this sort of psychology is. Whenever you can't prove something exactly, just say it's in the sub-conscious and you can always win.

Yeah, i know what you mean. I don't like these stuff either. I have read a bit of Freud but it didn't interest me much. It is better when you watch those things in movies
EDIT Before your mind works in..mysterious ways..i meant just David Lynch.

I am currently reading chapter 11 and i think this chapter provides some of the answers i was looking for. In the first paragraph it is explained why Miriam and Paul behave like that to each other and make matters difficult.

Perhaps the recoil and the shrinking from her was love in its first
fierce modesty. He had no aversion for her. No, it was the opposite;
it was a strong desire battling with a still stronger shyness
and virginity. It seemed as if virginity were a positive force,
which fought and won in both of them. And with her he felt it
so hard to overcome;

In the following paragraph i think Lawrence describes the situation of his generation and the "disfunction" perhaps?(speaking strictly about his class). I think in this paragraph we can see how deeply wounded he is by his father behaviour to his mother. And how in this time of his life he views sex between the married couple. Can we say that he thinks that sex is something dirty and unholy?

He looked round. A good many of the nicest men he knew were
like himself, bound in by their own virginity, which they could not
break out of. They were so sensitive to their women that they would
go without them for ever rather than do them a hurt, an injustice.
Being the sons of mothers whose husbands had blundered rather
brutally through their feminine sanctities, they were themselves
too diffident and shy. They could easier deny themselves than incur
any reproach from a woman; for a woman was like their mother, and they
were full of the sense of their mother. They preferred themselves
to suffer the misery of celibacy, rather than risk the other person.

There seemed an eternal maidenhood
about her (Miriam); and when he thought of her mother, he saw the great
brown eyes of a maiden who was nearly scared and shocked out of her
virgin maidenhood, but not quite, in spite of her seven children.
They had been born almost leaving her out of count, not of her,
but upon her. So she could never let them go, because she never had
possessed them.

[amalia1985]

I would agree that the Oedipal Complex is something we could take in mind, regarding our analysis here, as it is often used to describe similar relationships,
e.g. Hamlet and Gertrude in Shakespeare’s masterpiece, but I would say that Mrs. Morel’s attitude is an example of pure possessive behavior, which is partly justifiable and partly tyrannical, but in any case, rooted in actions, choices, and experiences of the past, which have influenced her immensely.

And to clear any misunderstanding, I used the word “laughable” wrongly, I never mean to be disrespectful to anyone, even to those who clearly provoke me in my life. I admit, though, that I am extremely spontaneous and express what comes in my mind, the rush of youth, perhaps.

Nevertheless, I find any strict religious rules abhorrent, limiting the freedom we all earn, as long as it does not provoke any negative consequences to others, of course. To connect this opinion of mine- which may be wrong, of course- I’ve always found myself attached to Clara, whereas Miriam was someone I tried hard to understand and come to terms with her ideals, but I simply could not…However, I admire her closeness to Art, and her firm character, true to her beliefs, although they may not be something I agree with.

[manolia]

Hehehe Amalitsa being spontaneous is a good thing It shows that you are a sincere and warm person . I wish i was spontaneous..

Anyway, i have another one of those questions were i ask your opinion..Isn't it a bit odd -for a man of his era- that Paul does all those house chores?? I know this question is a bit silly, but since we are a nice and causy discussion group i said i'd venture to ask