D.H. Lawrence's Short Stories Thread

[Quark]

This is Lawrence stating his belief that perfection is the loss of our self, our egos as he refers to it. That is why Cathcart cannot achieve utopia, at least not until death. His ego (and I use this in the Lawrencian sense, not the common sense or the Freudian sense; Lawrence's use is different, almost synonmous with self or an individual's personality or individual's persona) conflicts with others and with nature and the elements. Like I've said, for Lawrence the ultimate perfection of existence is a flower, the absense of ego. So as you read this passage again, think of ego as I've extracted the meaning from Lawrence's writings. So let me also say that when you see in a Lawrence work an exertion of will, that is an outpouring of a character's ego, and that's contrary to the religious ideal that Lawrence wants. I hope that answered it Hira and Janine, who was asking for my opinion in this.

Interesting. How do you think this relates to symbolism and action in the story? Dark Muse and I were having some problems (or, rather, I was) explaining how the island, snow, and the ocean compare with notions like utopia or that "infinite" we've talked so much about. If you're right that Lawrence is opposed to any expression of the "ego", then why does the story take such a depressing turn as Cathcart gives up on his utopian ambitions. If the story were about Cathcart's disillusionment with his own "ego" or will, you would think that the that the ending wouldn't be so bleak. One of the final observations Cathcart makes is how the warmth and sunshine have receded to the south which is where his previous islands were. The islander has moved away to the desolate north. So, despite Cathcart's rising asceticism, the setting becomes more and more depressing. Why is this? Is it because Cathcart's moves are still motivated by Lawrencian "ego"? Clearly, I need some help here.

[Dark Muse]

If you're right that Lawrence is opposed to any expression of the "ego", then why does the story take such a depressing turn as Cathcart gives up on his utopian ambitions. If the story were about Cathcart's disillusionment with his own "ego" or will, you would think that the that the ending wouldn't be so bleak. One of the final observations Cathcart makes is how the warmth and sunshine have receded to the south which is where his previous islands were. The islander has moved away to the desolate north. So, despite Cathcart's rising asceticism, the setting becomes more and more depressing. Why is this? Is it because Cathcart's moves are still motivated by Lawrencian "ego"? Clearly, I need some help here.

Yes I can see your concerns and confussion, and though I can understand what Virgil is saying about Lawrence's idea of the ego, and it makes sense, you do bring up an intresting point. As it seems by the end, Cathcart has given up the idea of his ego, and completely loseses himself, but this seems only to have ill consequences upon him.

If the story were about Cathcart's disillusionment with his own "ego" or will, you would think that the that the ending wouldn't be so bleak

This reminds me of a quote I read in a book I am reading, which made me think of this story:

There is no light for me to mark time so I have slipped into a delirium of eternity

[Virgil]

Interesting. How do you think this relates to symbolism and action in the story? Dark Muse and I were having some problems (or, rather, I was) explaining how the island, snow, and the ocean compare with notions like utopia or that "infinite" we've talked so much about. If you're right that Lawrence is opposed to any expression of the "ego", then why does the story take such a depressing turn as Cathcart gives up on his utopian ambitions. If the story were about Cathcart's disillusionment with his own "ego" or will, you would think that the that the ending wouldn't be so bleak.

Well, the story is not about Cathcart's disillusionment with his ego. Cathcart is not conscious of the ego phenomena. That's Lawrence. The story is about Cathcart's disillusionment with finding a utopia. It's his ego that prevents him from finding or establishing it.

One of the final observations Cathcart makes is how the warmth and sunshine have receded to the south which is where his previous islands were. The islander has moved away to the desolate north. So, despite Cathcart's rising asceticism, the setting becomes more and more depressing. Why is this?

That is a good observation. Cathcart's movement northward is the opposite of the story "Sun" where the warm setting of the mediteranian is where health and good life (if not quite utopia) is found. This is not uncommon in other Lawrence works. I can't quite answer it difintively. All I can say is that Lawrence associated the cold north with degeneration and the warm south with generation. I always go back to the flower as the ideal state of life for Lawrence, and flowers die in the cold and prosper in the warmth.

Is it because Cathcart's moves are still motivated by Lawrencian "ego"? Clearly, I need some help here.

His ego forces his actions, makes his decisions. I'm not sure what you mean by motivated.


Good questions and post Quark.

[Virgil]

Yes I can see your concerns and confussion, and though I can understand what Virgil is saying about Lawrence's idea of the ego, and it makes sense, you do bring up an intresting point. As it seems by the end, Cathcart has given up the idea of his ego, and completely loseses himself, but this seems only to have ill consequences upon him.

That too is a good observation. He does seem like he gives up his ego in the end. Perhaps it was forced on him. Perhaps an irony. Perhaps a complex ending to imply that he has reached finally his utopia. I'm not sure how to interpret it. There's probably only so much one can put into a short story. Other character's who's fate ends in death in Lawrence's work, seem to find a certain peace. I'm thinking of "The Prussian Officer" and even the ending of Women In Love. But death is not an earthly utopia.

[Dark Muse]

There's probably only so much one can put into a short story.

Yes, that is so very true

[Quark]

This reminds me of a quote I read in a book I am reading, which made me think of this story:

Yeah, the dejected feeling at the end of this story certainly isn't new to literature. It made me think of "The Wanderer" actually. "I left that place in wretchedness,/ plowed the icy waves with winter in my heart."

Well, the story is not about Cathcart's disillusionment with his ego. Cathcart is not conscious of the ego phenomena. That's Lawrence. The story is about Cathcart's disillusionment with finding a utopia. It's his ego that prevents him from finding or establishing it.

Right, but don't you think that Cathcart's utopia is an egotistical one. From the very beginning he looks at islands as a personal retreat into himself:

He was born on one, but it didn't suit him, as there were too many other people on it, besides himself. He wanted an island all of his own: not necessarily to be alone on it, but to make it a world of his own.

Saying that he loves islands is much like saying he loved himself--including that Lawrencian "ego" sense. How does his "ego" sabotage his utopian designs? It sounds like his "ego" is what he's gratifying with his plans. How can that also be the cause of his downfall? The forces that overcome him in the end actually come from without rather than within. Things like the snow at the end appear alien to him. When the snow blankets the island, Cathcart remarks how everything looks entirely different from when he was in control. That means that the snow is the contradiction of will and ego. The snow is aligned more with that "invisible hand" which maliciously and inexplicably destroys. I don't think that the snow or weird hand are really meant to represent anything; they're probably just plot devices to get Cathcart to his depressed final state. I just wanted to point out that "ego" doesn't necessarily prevent Cathcart from reaching his utopia.

I'm not sure what you mean by motivated.

That's funny. I thought you'd be more thrown by the way I used "moves". Sometimes I'm not even sure what I mean. If it sounds good, I just go with it.

There's probably only so much one can put into a short story.

Sorry, I don't mean to over-analyze the story. I'm just trying to keep the conversation going long enough for Janine to post something.

[Janine]

Sorry, I don't mean to over-analyze the story. I'm just trying to keep the conversation going long enough for Janine to post something.

Quark,Gee, am I missed that much? I feel flattered. I have been in the background reading the posts...just been 'invisible' this week.
I guess I let you down, Quark; I am sorry about that. I need to go back to your post, a page or two ago, that I promised to address. So sorry, I got busy and overly tired out. I guess Christmas took a lot out of me and now I have been trying to recouperate.

[Quark]

Quark,Gee, am I missed that much? I feel flattered. I have been in the background reading the posts...just been 'invisible' this week.
I guess I let you down, Quark; I am sorry about that. I need to go back to your post, a page or two ago, that I promised to address. So sorry, I got busy and overly tired out. I guess Christmas took a lot out of me and now I have been trying to recouperate.

Well, I thought I would put you on the spot.

[Janine]

Quark, and you have!

Seriously though, I am just now going out for the rest of the day and early evening.... and will try to think of something brilliant to write...so that when I come back I will stun you!.... Hahaha

[Quark]

I'll fold my arms and wait impatiently then.

[Virgil]

Right, but don't you think that Cathcart's utopia is an egotistical one. From the very beginning he looks at islands as a personal retreat into himself:

Quote:
He was born on one, but it didn't suit him, as there were too many other people on it, besides himself. He wanted an island all of his own: not necessarily to be alone on it, but to make it a world of his own.

Saying that he loves islands is much like saying he loved himself--including that Lawrencian "ego" sense. How does his "ego" sabotage his utopian designs? It sounds like his "ego" is what he's gratifying with his plans. How can that also be the cause of his downfall? The forces that overcome him in the end actually come from without rather than within. Things like the snow at the end appear alien to him. When the snow blankets the island, Cathcart remarks how everything looks entirely different from when he was in control. That means that the snow is the contradiction of will and ego. The snow is aligned more with that "invisible hand" which maliciously and inexplicably destroys. I don't think that the snow or weird hand are really meant to represent anything; they're probably just plot devices to get Cathcart to his depressed final state. I just wanted to point out that "ego" doesn't necessarily prevent Cathcart from reaching his utopia.

You make very good points and observations Quark. Yes, apparently his quest was ego driven as you finely point out. So the irony is that the seeds of his failure are in the very quest itself. I can see this as a later Lawrence acknowledgment to the failure of his inability to find utopia. I don't think this invalidates anything I've said above, but I think, Quark, you found another layer to the story.

That's funny. I thought you'd be more thrown by the way I used "moves". Sometimes I'm not even sure what I mean. If it sounds good, I just go with it.

Do you do that on term papers too?

Sorry, I don't mean to over-analyze the story. I'm just trying to keep the conversation going long enough for Janine to post something.

No, you made a very good obseration. I'm glad you did. Janine seems to be preoccupied these days.

[Janine]

I'll fold my arms and wait impatiently then.

WeLLLL,You might have your arms folded for quite awhile ....just got home, not long ago, had to eat some ice-cream, of course, and now I definitely have run out of energy; I am typing with only one eye opened! I don't think I can coherently think to post anything 'brilliant' or even half-way 'intelligent' tonight. Quark, most 'impatient' person you admit to be, I guess you will just have to wait until I do get around to posting.... Hopefully, tomorrow this event will take place. I plan on being home, so that is a good sign.

Janine seems to be preoccupied these days.

Definitely! Today, I had to get out of this house - cabin fever!
I was starting to hate my and we don't want that to happen, do we?
Well, now that I have said absolutely nothing of worth in this post I will depart to finish watching my miniseries. Till I get back, with great pearls of wisdom,... yours truly....

[Nossa]

Hey everyone
I know it's been a while since I came here. I had my exams for the past couple of weeks, and they didn't exactly go as expected, but it's all good.
I just wanted to know what you guys are gonna read next month? are you done with The Man Who Loved Islands?! I'd love to re-join the dicussion

[Virgil]

Hey everyone
I know it's been a while since I came here. I had my exams for the past couple of weeks, and they didn't exactly go as expected, but it's all good.
I just wanted to know what you guys are gonna read next month? are you done with The Man Who Loved Islands?! I'd love to re-join the dicussion

I guess we're just about wrapped up with The Man Who loved Islands. Since I'm currently reading The Aeneid and I did want to participate in the Book Forum read (I think it will The Name of the Rose) I was hopig to take a break next month from this short story. I'm a little overwhemed. But if really want to, I think I could squeeze it in.

[Janine]

Quote by Hira (few pages back)

Where did this progression lead to Janine? These letters, they were written quite early. I suppose there has been a lot of change in his opinions between 1915 and 1929. There are a lot of things that are familiar though.

Where did this progression lead? In Lawrence's own life, it lead to a sort of 'quest for the truth', and an exploration in his novels, stories, poems, writings, etc.; and a forming of his own ideas on eternity or life after death. I don't know if this could be easily explained at all. Hira, I think one has to study the author for sometime, reading various writings which convey his ideas, and from various periods of his life and then come up with some satisfying personal answer, but I don't think one can be at all definitive about it. I question whether Lawrence, himself, actually was definite in the end. I would not say he totally changed his concepts but he modified them or redirected them. This is quite hard to explain, especially having just read "The Plumed Serpent" and then knowing he wrote "Etrucan Tombs"; it was unclear to me what his final ideas on eternity exactly were, let alone relay them to others or to you. I also read "Apocalyspe", which was published after his death. If you read all three of these, you may be as confused as I am. Maybe Virgil would have a word on that. I think he read them all. These three were written towards the end of L's life.

Yes, I agree with Dark Muse, it does make a lot of sense now. So he had to suffer, the way he did, fade out, suffer crucifixion like the Christ so to speak and then finally after all that be elevated up to perfection.

Yes, one could almost say this is how Lawrence viewed his own life, but I don't know if he was looking to be elevated to pure perfection. Perhaps by the burning down of the Phoenix bird to ash, being reborn, would achieve that 'perfection' in infinity, eternity. Maybe Virgil would add to this or perhaps he has already addressed it in his posts. I know this would relate to his thesis idea of 'transfiguration'. It is all pretty complicated. Lawrence often used the word 'crucifixion'. when referring to his adversaries; such a friends who rejected him, publishers, critics, even the authorities who confiscated his paintings; so I think the word was often on L's mind. He wrote the story "The Man Who Died" late in his life and this deals with crucifixion directly.


Quote by Quark (way back, 2 pages or so...haha)

Lawrence conjures up the idea of a timeless infinity at contrast with the usual limited perspective. I think we're right to think of "infinity" as an important concept in the story, but I think we're wrong to consider the islander somehow willfully embracing "infinity" or timelessness. It seems quite the opposite. Cathcart's Utopian aspirations are not bringing him any closer to infinity; they are a way of overlooking the truth that he sees at night. After Lawrence explains the "infinity" of the island in the dark, he goes on to say, "To escape any more of this sort of awareness, our islander daily concentrated upon his material island. Why should it not be the Happy Isle at last?". Most of the rest of the story is dedicated to Cathcart's attempts to be happy: no more brooding reflections after the sun has gone down. At the end, the islander grudgingly accepts that he is not in control--this could be seen perhaps as a return to infinity. But, during the action of the story Cathcart resists the kind of awareness we have in the beginning of the story. To put this in literary, rather than philosophical, terms, we could say that the timelessness or "infinity" makes up something like the antagonist to Cathcart. It counters the islander and pushes the story to crisis.

Well, I think after reading this several times, I understand what you are getting at, Quark. I do agree that Cathcart does resist or avoid the awareness of infinity, and finally, his own death; only at the end does he seem to give in to the idea, when death cannot be avoided. I see this very much like Lawrence himself in his final hours. He fought death for nearly his entire life and finally death overcame him, as it must all humans. I think this whole story is a statement of avoiding thoughts of infinity and then having to eventually accept these thoughts. If you follow the progression of Lawrence's writings and mind and thoughts on infinity and death you can see how this would lead. Lawrence also had an idea of a utopia and at sometime he had to know this would never be realised in his lifetime. I think this is true of Cathcart but also there is a strong element in the story of irony. This irony I see as Cathcart's own search in life for perfection and his inability to compromise or modify his 'perfectionist views' caused his downfall and demise. He truly brought on the lose of island #1, island #2 and was left to the desolate and undesirable island #3, which would be his tomb. BY the end this human had totally alienated himself from other human beings, and resides in a most 'unnatural' state of isolation on island #3. As we suggested before, I think it was Dark Muse, the three islands could represent stages in a man's life, the seasons, even the great circle, cycle of life. Nature is a huge element to this story. I think in a broader sense this story says much about human tendencies and how people react to things and situations. How many people are disillusioned with life and don't live as they had hoped to live, or don't meet their goals?

I see this story encompassing many ideas. We may be over-analysising, it by now, of course. I think we all can take from the story, the ideas everyone presented in all these fine posts, and form our own conclusion. I know I received much from the discussion and saw more in the story, than I did when I read it on my own initially, which was quite rewarding. Thanks for all the insight from everyone! Sorry I couldn't post more often, but I was reading along all the time. I think the discussion was great this month, one of the best we ever have had!

Perhaps we can do an easier story next month? My brain is aching.