D.H. Lawrence's Short Stories Thread

[Quark]

she had a "fine carriage" which I take as busty and larger.

That's Too funny. You must think most women in 18th century fiction had big jugs. I would think that being large chested might actually make it difficult to have a "fine carriage". Their balance would be thrown off, wouldn't it?

Upon my further reading of the story there is one idea that I noticed and which struck me. It had first come about when I was contemplating over the phrase about the Glory roses in the begining of the story. It seems this story plays with a contrast of fire and ice, if you will.

In my reading, and trying to understand the signifigance of that line, I noticed that the roses are often associated with fire, or the sun in some way, but that near the end of her visit to the garden, the imagery becomes colder, particuarly after she encounters her lover.

Then later the warmth seems to fade after she encounters her lover.

Lovely is the profusion of roses that Lawrence gives the garden. Roses all over. Crimson is mentioned, red, white, pink. To be honest i can't decipher the significance of the colors, although it does feel like Lawrence is suggesting something.

Then the key section. Notice this from the third paragragh:

She is in "abstraction." The roses become personified, "conversing and laughing," they created a "crowd." And then "It exhilarated her, carried her out of herself." The abstraction and the carrying her out of herself is what Lawrence calls a loss of ego, her self. The experience is intensified with the personified roses, as if she's in a drugged state. She is living in a state when she felt the most intense, when life was passionate, that past with her lover. Roses are a symbol of idealism. She has idealized the past. there isn't even a mention of the lover here, just the rose that he is symbolized by and rose that she is symbolized by. They are not real people, they are just symbols in her mind. And then we get the last paragragh:

Yeah, I think this is right. Fire, red, and crimson are all brought up in the story. I think they point to the ideal passion and romance that she wished she had. We get these words most in the garden before either of her lovers arrive. The garden is her idealized world, and those words are often linked to passionate love. I don't think it's too far-fetched to make the connection.

Although, the roses and the garden are real, the world of memory is no longer real - only in ones mind. Therefore, when the real world encrouches on the make-believe 'perfect' world, all comes tumbling down in an instant...that membrane within her is torn.

I thought of dead heros and presidents who have been assasinated, when I wrote that part about being 'idealised'. These are more extreme examples, but think of it...how suddenly any flaws they might have had in life, now seem to fall by the wayside...they become 'perfected' in our eyes and minds, by their deaths.

I think she does idealize her former lover toward the end of the story, but I think she does so by mistake. It seems like she's making him the fixed symbol of her most abstract desire for romance.

[Janine]

Well, Virgil, now you have to backtrack - you got several responses to your fine post! I am off to bed now - really tired tonight....fading fast....

[Virgil]

That's Too funny. You must think most women in 18th century fiction had big jugs. I would think that being large chested might actually make it difficult to have a "fine carriage". Their balance would be thrown off, wouldn't it?

I guess. What does it mean to have a "fine carriage?" That made me laugh Quark.

[Quark]

I guess. What does it mean to have a "fine carriage?" That made me laugh Quark.

I think Lawrence meant that she moved in a beautiful or dignified way. A person's carriage is similar to their bearing or posture. I suppose if you wanted to very subtly and indirectly talk about a woman's large breasts you could compliment her carriage, but, still, I don't think it would make much sense.

[Virgil]

I think Lawrence meant that she moved in a beautiful or dignified way. A person's carriage is similar to their bearing or posture. I suppose if you wanted to very subtly and indirectly talk about a woman's large breasts you could compliment her carriage, but, still, I don't think it would make much sense.

I guess all these years I've misunderstood when a writer referred to a woman's carriage. And why is it with woman the word is used, or have you seen it used for men? I guess I jumped to the conclusion as to what the women are carrying.

[Quark]

I guess I jumped to the conclusion as to what the women are carrying.

Ha!

I guess all these years I've misunderstood when a writer referred to a woman's carriage. And why is it with woman the word is used, or have you seen it used for men?

I'm not actually sure whether the term is applied to men. (Someone help me out here). All the examples I can think of are when the term is applied to a female figure. My inner-feminists wants to say that this is because the usage come about when women were only considered to be something pretty: they're referred to as spirits, angels, fairies--anything but human. The Russians even posed the "woman question": "are women even of the same species as men?". I suppose it follows that a woman's carriage would be more important than a man's.

I really like your discussion of the use of the transfiguration here as well as the information provided about Lawrence's use of it. I would agree that the way the idea of transfiguration is used in this story, feels very human, and does not carry any religious connotation behind it. Nice pointing that out.

Could someone say a little more about this? I understand the abstract quality of her experience in the garden, but I have a hard time filling in the actual details of what happens to her. The garden becomes this almost Keatsian bower where desire is idealized and it's gratification is intensified. But it's a little unclear how this vision changes her. What does it mean when Lawrence says she was "transfigured by pain and joy"?

[Dark Muse]

Could someone say a little more about this? I understand the abstract quality of her experience in the garden, but I have a hard time filling in the actual details of what happens to her. The garden becomes this almost Keatsian bower where desire is idealized and it's gratification is intensified. But it's a little unclear how this vision changes her. What does it mean when Lawrence says she was "transfigured by pain and joy"?

I think her entering into the garden, is symbolic, of her stepping back into her past in a way. And so it is as if for that moment in time she steps out of reality and steps into this "new world" or fantasy/dream world, as it makes references to her not being herself during her time within the garden.

I think transfigured by pain and joy refers to her memorries which are somewhat bittersweelt. For it was her frist true and real love, but it brought her pain becasue he left her, and then she leaned of what she thought was his death.

I think in someways, her discovering that her lover was still alive, be afflecited as her was, finailaized the fact that she never really could go back to the past, though she beleived he was dead, she could still invision or dream of what her life would be like with him, she still had something she could hold onto, but then when she finds him alive, but insane, it shatters the dream and she finally understands that there is no returning back to what once had been, and she must face reality.

Her vision of the past is ruined by this confrintation and her memory of her lover may now forever be tainted by the truth she discovered.

[Hira]

You guys post so fast! Wonderful posts, understanding the story more, just reading though at the moment. I am sure I am gonna come tomorrow to see two more pages filled up.

[Virgil]

I'm not actually sure whether the term is applied to men. (Someone help me out here). All the examples I can think of are when the term is applied to a female figure. My inner-feminists wants to say that this is because the usage come about when women were only considered to be something pretty: they're referred to as spirits, angels, fairies--anything but human. The Russians even posed the "woman question": "are women even of the same species as men?". I suppose it follows that a woman's carriage would be more important than a man's.

See it does refer to her chest.

Could someone say a little more about this? I understand the abstract quality of her experience in the garden, but I have a hard time filling in the actual details of what happens to her. The garden becomes this almost Keatsian bower where desire is idealized and it's gratification is intensified. But it's a little unclear how this vision changes her. What does it mean when Lawrence says she was "transfigured by pain and joy"?

I think D-M does a good job below:

I think her entering into the garden, is symbolic, of her stepping back into her past in a way. And so it is as if for that moment in time she steps out of reality and steps into this "new world" or fantasy/dream world, as it makes references to her not being herself during her time within the garden.

I think transfigured by pain and joy refers to her memorries which are somewhat bittersweelt. For it was her frist true and real love, but it brought her pain becasue he left her, and then she leaned of what she thought was his death.

Lawrence would later go on to use the word in a religious sense. Christ is transfigured. Here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transfiguration_of_Jesus. But so does Moses and St. Francis, and even from other religions. Spiritual figures go through an experience so intense that they physically change, or at least we're told. I did my master's thesis on how Lawrence uses this type of transfiguration in some of his work. I do not believe that the woman in this story is having a religious experience. You can see that the word is on lawrence's mind, though. He doesn't start using the word in its religious connotation until his later fiction.

[Janine]

Originally Posted by Quark

I'm not actually sure whether the term is applied to men. (Someone help me out here). All the examples I can think of are when the term is applied to a female figure. My inner-feminists wants to say that this is because the usage come about when women were only considered to be something pretty: they're referred to as spirits, angels, fairies--anything but human. The Russians even posed the "woman question": "are women even of the same species as men?". I suppose it follows that a woman's carriage would be more important than a man's.

Now there is a post that will win points with women!


Quote by Virgil

See it does refer to her chest.

You guys are hilarious!

[Virgil]

Janine, you were asking me why Lawrence sets the rose scene in a church. I can't find your post. I can't answer that. Perhaps Lawrence does want a religious connotation to come through. But if he did, I think it was unsuccessful. Like I said I don't pick up a religious connotation in the story.

[Janine]

Janine, you were asking me why Lawrence sets the rose scene in a church. I can't find your post. I can't answer that. Perhaps Lawrence does want a religious connotation to come through. But if he did, I think it was unsuccessful. Like I said I don't pick up a religious connotation in the story.

Virgil, I can't find it either. Is it a church or a parsonage (residence) near the church? I was unclear on that and why a rector's son to have been the lover, do you think? To make it appear to be a more correct or innocent relationship?

Virgil, what do you think of these last lines of the story?

He stood and looked at her. At last he had learned the width of the breach between them. She still squatted on the bed. He could not go near her. It would be violation to each of them to be brought into contact with the other. The thing must work itself out. They were both shocked so much, they were impersonal, and no longer hated each other. After some minutes he left her and went out.

I had posted this and some of my own comments, opinions on this passage, earlier in post #943.

[Virgil]

Virgil, I can't find it either. Is it a church or a parsonage (residence) near the church? I was unclear on that and why a rector's son to have been the lover, do you think? To make it appear to be a more correct or innocent relationship?

Oh I had not realized he was the rector's son. Quite interesting. I don't still know what to make of it. It seems very Hardyesk. It seems like every British novel from the 19th century has a rector or minister in it. Perhaps Lawrence was emulating.

Virgil, what do you think of these last lines of the story?



I had posted this and some of my own comments, opinions on this passage, earlier in post #943.

I'll check that post out. As to those lines, I was going to get to it. I think that was critical scene number 3 as I listed above. Tomorrow I'll get to scene number two and in another day or so we can discuss that scene. You know I hate to jump around. It makes for confusing discussion. Do you think we're done with the scene with the roses?

[Virgil]

In the Thomas Hardy story, "Tess of the D'Urbervilles", this double standard is quite evident. The man has a past and so does the woman, but when she confesses her past to him, he condemns her, even though he has admitted to his past. This story reminds me of that. Who is to say this man doesn't have a secret past of his own he has never told his wife? Who is to say he is being totally honest with her? 'Let those without guilt cast the first stone' - doesn't the Biblical quote go something like that?

Yes, it does have the same situation as Tess. I agree, only thing here Lawrence gives the woman the power instead of the man. You can see how he likes to tweak the feminists. He kind of repudiates their idea that it's always men who control and manipulate woman. He can be so anti-feminism.

[Janine]

Yes, it does have the same situation as Tess. I agree, only thing here Lawrence gives the woman the power instead of the man. You can see how he likes to tweak the feminists. He kind of repudiates their idea that it's always men who control and manipulate woman. He can be so anti-feminism.

Virgil, come to think of it Lawrence wrote a few essays on Hardy. I will have to read it. I think I have it here...yeah, I did recently buy that book of commentary from Amazon. I will have to see his take on Tess. I know he was quite unhappy that Sue in "Jude the Obscure" went back to her legal husband, whom she had never comsumated the marriage with. Lawrence was emphatically put out about that. Yes, he could be quite feminist-tweaker, couldn't he? Perhaps he was influenced by Hardy here and thought he would write this story giving a new bend to the double standard - as you say, in favor of the woman, giving her the power. There is definitely a lot going on in this story about 'will' and I noted much said about this whole 'will' thing in the book I am now reading "Kangaroo". Not only is the book about political tension and matching of 'wills' but, also marital tensions and matching of the male and female 'wills'. Interesting, since I have been reading them at the same time.

Anyway, Virg, thanks for going back to that post and reading it. If I find the other one I will let you know which number post it is. Helpful that they are numbered. Yes, definitely, we are done discussing you designated key scene 1 of the story; so please do proceed to scene 2; I will be anxious to hear what you have to say about the next part.