D.H. Lawrence's Short Stories Thread

[Virgil]

Symbolically speaking, fire is seen as a sort of purification. The breaking of the lamp causes the fire, and it is the fire that breaks the "spell" the reason witches and heretics use to be burned, because it was thought the fire was the only thing that could "save their souls" so in this regard fire is almost an exorcising force.

Actually I see it differently. I don't see purification fitting into this story. Purification of what? I see the fire as a spilling over of his passion and the damage it does.

No she is not a literal witch, but you cannot ignore the fact, that Lawrence made a point of casing her in the role of a "witch" and I think the story is heavily symbolic, and it is a bit hard to talk about the story without dicussing the importance of the witchcraft allusions made, as they were put there for a reason.

Hehe, fair point. There is an attempt by Lawrence trying to get her as close to wichcraft as possible while keeping the story in the mode of realism.

[Janine]

Hi Everybody, Happy Memorial Day!
I see your lights lite up so guess you are on now. Hey, Antiquarian, you have not lost your spunk, have you? If you disagree, do post freely what you think. Actually, I agree about the witchcraft and the circle of fire idea. I will get to that when we I post that part of the story next.
I don't think we will get into anymore wrangles on here; we learned our lesson on that note; we just got restless that day.
Now to my post:

I will have to look at my Michael Black book to see if he mentions this 'tingle of tears'. I still stand by my original thought on the line but I think it advantageous to see it in context with the preceeding text and the the entire statement that contains 'tingle of tears'. This is what I posted formerly:

Text quote:

"And what of you?" he asked.
She crooned a faint, tired laugh.
"If you are jetsam, as you say you are," she answered, "I am flotsam. I shall lie stranded."
"Nay," he pleaded. "When were you wrecked?"

Ok, another interesting passage with the use of words/images of “jetsam” and “flotsam”….flotsam left lying stranded and representing Winifred, if Coutt’s marries. So she is saying he will be like the wreckage of a ship floating on the surface and she will have been the cargo that was thrown overboard, to lighten the ship's load (in hopes of saving it) before it is ultimately destroyed by storm or whatever, altogether. So he replies with the last line. “Nay, when were you wrecked?” I think that line "I shall lie stranded" plays in nicely with that 'Lady of Shallot' image.

Text quote:

She laughed quickly, with a sound like a tinkle of tears.

Two things; first, no one has discussed the top paragraph about 'jetsam' and 'flotsam' or why Lawrence would chose such images, which would conjure up the idea of a storm and a shipwreck; is this also a way of 'foreshadowning' what will come at the end between them, and another way to begin to reverse the tone of the story, before truly making the tonal shift (Coutt's gripping fingers on Winifred's arms) that leads up to the stark and rapid conclusion of the story?

Now to the 'tinkle of tears'. I still stand by my original idea that the line is very intentional and effective. My dictionary defines 'tinkle' as:
1. to make a series of small sounds as of a small bell.

At first, I was thinking the text read that Winifred shed some tears, but now I see that she actually laughed and within this sound Coutts percieved this "sound like a tinkle of tears". All along there has been reference to small sounds within Winifred's throat, which I have noticed. Now it seems, within her laugh (which is actually deeply sad), Coutts can detect this sound of sorrow or this tiny tinkle (like a small bell), which contain her unshed tears - the ones she is holding back. If I think of 'tinkle', I am reminded of a bell sound and that seems to me prominent in the fairyland, mystical, spiritual sense - but only a small tiny sound, if described as a tinkle. I wondered if this barely audible sound, would correspond/contrast to the sound mentioned not long after, of the 'click' in the lamp. Here is the line:
"minute click of a spark within the lamp."
This also is a tiny sound or vibration, like the tinkle of tears - barely there, but perceived by a very sensitive perception.

I can't imagine this being a mistake on Lawrence's part; not when he revised and rewrote all of his short stories 2 and even 3, or 4 times, before they were published; but I could be wrong.

[Janine]

Janine, I think it's "tinkle," not "tingle." I know it's just a typo, and goodness knows I make tons of them, I type so fast (almost all my posts are edited for spelling LOL), but some people might be getting confused, especially if they're just reading what we discuss and not contributing yet.

OMG - did I really spell it that way? I know how to spell it and I even was looking it up in my dictionary. Thanks, Antiq, for pointing that out to me. Going right now to correct it; otherwise it looks pretty dumb. I wrote this post twice actually; I lost it the first time around. I may have spelled the word correctly in that lost post, who knows.

I just revised it and hope I caught all those 'tinkles'!

I just thought of something - maybe years past, when someone was typing Lawrence's manuscript, they typed 'tinkle' as a typo, and it really was suppose to say a 'trickle of tears'. Probably was that darn wife of his; he complained about her typing mistakes.

[Dark Muse]

Actually I see it differently. I don't see purification fitting into this story. Purification of what? I see the fire as a spilling over of his passion and the damage it does.

In a way I see it as an act of pufication the way the fire banishes the spell between them.

[Janine]

In a way I see it as an act of pufication the way the fire banishes the spell between them.

Dark Muse, I don't know if it is true purification, because I am not sure who we could say in this story, becomes purified by it - Coutts?. Rather, I believe the flames and fire do break the spell, so they represent this idea of a spell being broken by a ritualistic action; fire being the element, which does correspond to witchcraft and pagan rituals.

When we actually get to that part of the text, which I will post next and this will complete the story, I will also point out what Michael Black had to say about this being a 'spell breaking' action.

[Dark Muse]

I was not trying to suggest that Winni or Coutts were acutally being "purified" but I think the breaking of the spell can be seen as a form of purification, it is Winnies enchaments over Coutts that has become purified by the fire, her "magic" is burned away by the fire.

[Janine]

That all sounds about right to me. Putting your heads together, you came up with how 'purification' was used in this context. I think now we all agree on the idea.

Probably, the guys will come in and disagree.

At last - the ending:

Final Section of Text:

"Good-bye," he said, looking down at her. She made a small, moaning noise in her throat, lifting her face so that it came open and near to him like a suddenly-risen flower, borne on a strong white stalk. She seemed to extend, to fill the world, to become atmosphere and all. He did not know what he was doing. He was bending forward, his mouth on hers, her arms round his neck, and his own hands, still fastened on to her wrists, almost bursting the blood under his nails with the intensity of their grip. They remained for a few moments thus, rigid. Then, weary of the strain, she relaxed. She turned her face, offered him her throat, white, hard, and rich, below the ear. Stooping still lower, so that he quivered in every fibre at the strain, he laid his mouth to the kiss. In the intense silence, he heard the deep, dull pulsing of her blood, and a minute click of a spark within the lamp.

Once again Winifred is making another throat sound, this time ‘a small, moaning noise.' I find the statement “her face…. came open” interesting, because it relates to the flower image – a flower opening to Lawrence was a wonderful thing and embodied the full knowledge of a woman, in relation to a man. Here her face is compared to a “suddenly-risen flower, borne on a strong white stalk.” Combining this imagery, with the idea of the first true kiss she ever gave him, seems to indicate that Winifred is extending herself, in order to take Coutts over, in her final effort to hold him; she has him, at this very point, very much under her spell. When the text states that “He did not know what he was doing” – he is like a man in a trance or under a spell. Again, there is mention of the 'bursting blood under his nails' from the pressure layed on her arms. The two people seem to be in a very rigid and tight clasp, with her arms about his neck, and ‘this intensity’ of his hand’s grip on her wrists. They are almost like wrestlers at this minute, holding each other securely, desperately…but then the 'stain is wearisome' and she relaxes first. The next part and image of her turning her throat to him, is nearly identical to a painting that Lawrence adored and often copied, entitled “Idyll” by Maurice Griffenhagen. This was pointed out, in my Michael Black book, and now this final pose or the one preceeding, it with the arms dropped at her side limply does seem to fit this image. I will try to post a photo of the painting or it can easily be found online. It is on the cover of my novel “The White Peacock”.

Then the fateful moment of the kiss and the 'minute click of a spark within the lamp'. I love the line “quivered in every fibre at the strain, he laid his mouth to the kiss.” It sounds so poetic or musical. Then I like this part “In the intense silence, he heard the deep, dull pulsing of her blood…again musical, trance-like and poetically beautiful. Then when you add on this part….. “and a minute click of a spark within the lamp”…that seems to wake us up to reality, brings the reader back from this trace. That one little click seems to me so important as a signal of what will happen ultimately. It is reminisent of the scene we studied in "The Prussian Officer"; Virgil will recall that scene, but everyone else was not here during that discussion. Michael Black points this out and it made sense to me, but will mean nothing to most of you, so I did not quote it.

Then he drew her from the chair up to him. She came, arms always round his neck, till at last she lay along his breast as he stood, feet planted wide, clasping her tight, his mouth on her neck. She turned suddenly to meet his full, red mouth in a kiss. He felt his moustache prick back into his lips. It was the first kiss she had genuinely given.

Here is the mention of the “first kiss genuinely given”….short lived, I may add…

Dazed, he was conscious of the throb of one great pulse, as if his whole body were a heart that contracted in throbs. He felt, with an intolerable ache, as if he, the heart, were setting the pulse in her, in the very night, so that everything beat from the throb of his overstrained, bursting body.

That is marvelous; just the way that is written, I find it so expressive and so brilliant. Coutts is quite overtaken by that last kiss. The scene is very passionate at this point and yet the pain of it is so evident and this fact brings Coutts “out of the reeling stage to distinct consciousness”….revealed in the next line of text to follow:

The hurt became so great it brought him out of the reeling stage to distinct consciousness. She clipped her lips, drew them away, leaving him her throat. Already she had had enough. He opened his eyes as he bent with his mouth on her neck, and was startled; there stood the objects of the room, stark; there, close below his eyes, were the half-sunk lashes of the woman, swooning on her unnatural ebb of passion. He saw her thus, knew that she wanted no more of him than that kiss. And the heavy form of this woman hung upon him. His whole body ached like a swollen vein, with heavy intensity, while his heart grew dead with misery and despair. This woman gave him anguish and a cutting-short like death; to the other woman he was false. As he shivered with suffering, he opened his eyes again, and caught sight of the pure ivory of the lamp. His heart flashed with rage.

“Already she had had enough” – such a key line and the absolute ending of the seduction. Reality is coming back to Coutts. He is returning – words like ‘stark’ to describe his perception of objects in the room. Before this the objects had a certain mystical charm for Coutts, a certain familiarity, now they are merely 'stark' objects of no importance to him. Suddenly he sees Winifred in a whole new light as well, as soon as she stops the seduction at the point of that kiss…the only real thing she desired of him and that he now realizes completely - that kiss. Suddenly her form has become as a burden, ‘heavy’ and he feels her hanging upon him. The rest is his own suffering and final flash of ‘rage’. The pure ivory lamp signals the end. I wonder if the fact, that it is pure and ivory, also relates to the idea of the moon image or the white marble statues? Now both of these images would be negative to Coutts and not as he had earlier perceived them.

A sudden involuntary blow of his foot, and he sent the lamp-stand spinning. The lamp leaped off, fell with a smash on the fair, polished floor. Instantly a bluish hedge of flame quivered, leaped up before them. She had lightened her hold round his neck, and buried her face against his throat. The flame veered at her, blue, with a yellow tongue that licked her dress and her arm. Convulsive, she clutched him, almost strangled him, though she made no sound.

So once again, encountering the involuntary blow of his foot and the upset lamp-stand with the fire as the result of his inner anger. I don’t think this was intentional but it may have been subconscious. I still am not completely sure which I believe to be the total true. Rationally I don’t think Coutts would ever mean to harm Winifred or burn down her house. I feel consciously his anger did cause the accident but it was not intentional.

He gathered her up and bore her heavily out of the room. Slipping from her clasp, he brought his arms down her form, crushing the starting blaze of her dress. His face was singed. Staring at her, he could scarcely see her.

Does this mean he did sustain pretty severe injuries not only to his hands, but to his face and his eyes? This last line combined with the last line of the story seem to indicate he has lost his sight, probably temporarily, but either way he runs blindly from the house.

"I am not hurt," she cried. "But you?"

The housekeeper was coming; the flames were sinking and waving up in the drawing-room. He broke away from Winifred, threw one of the great woollen rugs on to the flame, then stood a moment looking at the darkness.
Is he looking at the actual darkness or can he no longer really see?

Winifred caught at him as he passed her.
"No, no," he answered, as he fumbled for the latch. "I'm not hurt. Clumsy fool I am--clumsy fool!"

Any thoughts on what Coutts blurts out in this line; it is that he knows he was clumsy, even going foolishly to her house to begin with, or is it just momentarily an admission of his own action (guilt?) in starting the fire accidently? I still find this line sort of curious.

In another instant he was gone, running with burning-red hands held out blindly, down the street.

Again this word “blind”. I keep wondering if he truly is blinded. Maybe I am being too literal with this.

[Janine]

The throat, the neck, the pulsing still remind me of vampire images, though this isn't a story about vampires.

Actually, it does not sound too crazy to me; afterall the whole story involves references to witchcraft and the supernatural, so why not vampires, too? It is night and the scene is set in an isolated house with a lot of neck kissing. Actually, I thought I did read a reference in the Michael Black commentary where he does mention the idea of a vampire in the kissing scenes and now I cannot find that to quote. I wish I marked these things or took notes, because I am curious now, to see what he did say about it. I will try and find it later tonight.

I don't think he was truly blind, I think it's metaphorical.

Yes, I believe you are right about that. I was taking it too literal noticing all the blind references. Geez, maybe Coutts becomes Maurice in "The Blind Man" story....just kidding.

I think, when he refers to himself as a "clumsy fool" he means all of it. Stopping in the village, going to Winifred's house, getting involved, all of it.

Yes, I think I was tending to think that way too. I felt this line embodied the whole folly, not just the final action and minutes of the story. It is just now he has come to the full realisation of just what a 'clumsy fool' he has been.

[Dark Muse]

So once again, encountering the involuntary blow of his foot and the upset lamp-stand with the fire as the result of his inner anger. I don’t think this was intentional but it may have been subconscious. I still am not completely sure which I believe to be the total true. Rationally I don’t think Coutts would ever mean to harm Winifred or burn down her house. I feel consciously his anger did cause the accident but it was not intentional.

I think he did, at the very least, on a sub-conscious level, intentionally kick over the lamp, I do not think that was a complete and total innocent accident, but a direct result of his anger, but I do not think he had actually intended to start a fire in his doing so. I think the lamp was just the nearest object to unleash his frustration upon, and the first thing he laid eyes on when he did grow angry.

Does this mean he did sustain pretty severe injuries not only to his hands, but to his face and his eyes? This last line combined with the last line of the story seem to indicate he has lost his sight, probably temporarily, but either way he runs blindly from the house.

"I am not hurt," she cried. "But you?"

The housekeeper was coming; the flames were sinking and waving up in the drawing-room. He broke away from Winifred, threw one of the great woollen rugs on to the flame, then stood a moment looking at the darkness.
Is he looking at the actual darkness or can he no longer really see?

When I read it, I took it that he truly was made blind by the fire, though it might be symbolic as well, I think he really was injured by the accident, at the least perhaps he is just temporally blinded by the sudden bright light of the fire.

Any thoughts on what Coutts blurts out in this line; it is that he knows he was clumsy, even going foolishly to her house to begin with, or is it just momentarily an admission of his own action (guilt?) in starting the fire accidently? I still find this line sort of curious.

When I first read the story, I felt that he had said it in a sort of disingenuous way, that he had blurted it out just as an excuse because he knew it was his anger that caused him to strike the lamp but I think it also just refers to the fact that he was a fool to think that Winnie would actually want from him everything that he wanted from her, and maybe he feels it was "clumsy" in his attempts and love and passion toward Winnie

[Virgil]

Two things; first, no one has discussed the top paragraph about 'jetsam' and 'flotsam' or why Lawrence would chose such images, which would conjure up the idea of a storm and a shipwreck; is this also a way of 'foreshadowning' what will come at the end between them, and another way to begin to reverse the tone of the story, before truly making the tonal shift (Coutt's gripping fingers on Winifred's arms) that leads up to the stark and rapid conclusion of the story?

Yes, I can agree with that.

Now to the 'tinkle of tears'. I still stand by my original idea that the line is very intentional and effective. My dictionary defines 'tinkle' as:
1. to make a series of small sounds as of a small bell.

At first, I was thinking the text read that Winifred shed some tears, but now I see that she actually laughed and within this sound Coutts percieved this "sound like a tinkle of tears". All along there has been reference to small sounds within Winifred's throat, which I have noticed. Now it seems, within her laugh (which is actually deeply sad), Coutts can detect this sound of sorrow or this tiny tinkle (like a small bell), which contain her unshed tears - the ones she is holding back. If I think of 'tinkle', I am reminded of a bell sound and that seems to me prominent in the fairyland, mystical, spiritual sense - but only a small tiny sound, if described as a tinkle. I wondered if this barely audible sound, would correspond/contrast to the sound mentioned not long after, of the 'click' in the lamp. Here is the line:
"minute click of a spark within the lamp."
This also is a tiny sound or vibration, like the tinkle of tears - barely there, but perceived by a very sensitive perception.

But tears don't make any sound, not even a tinkle. I can't be convinced on this one. I think Lawrence just stretched too far this time.

I was not trying to suggest that Winni or Coutts were acutally being "purified" but I think the breaking of the spell can be seen as a form of purification, it is Winnies enchaments over Coutts that has become purified by the fire, her "magic" is burned away by the fire.

I guess i see what you mean, but i associate purify with the relieving of sin or guilt. Here i think you're referring to disenchant or break a spell or change a mood or something to that effect.

I'll comment on that last section tomorrow probably.

[Janine]

Yes, I can agree with that.

Oh good, Virgil and good to see you again! So you can see the significance of the terms, too?

But tears don't make any sound, not even a tinkle. I can't be convinced on this one. I think Lawrence just stretched too far this time.

But you are taking it too literally. I think that is what he perceived and not what was actually heard. It is more of a metaphor. I think putting the words together is unique and I do feel that rain has a tinkling sound, but like I said it can also be like a bell or even the piano. If rain or tears are falling onto something metallic they can be percieved as tinkling. I don't know. I just did not find it that strange.

tinkle (from my larger College dictionary): 1 to give forth or make a succession of short, light, ringing sounds, as a small bell. 2. to run one's fingers lightly over a keyboard instrument.

Maybe this applies more to the second definition; reminiscent of a keyboard sound, not quite music. Maybe he percieves tears as having a sound, like sorrowful music; this being metaphorical, not literal.

Maybe, I am the 'odd one' in thinking this way. It is not that important really, if we agree or disagree on this point, but it still does interest me.

I guess i see what you mean, but i associate purify with the relieving of sin or guilt. Here i think you're referring to disenchant or break a spell or change a mood or something to that effect.

I'll comment on that last section tomorrow probably.

Oh good. I posted that last part of text - look for it; it might get bumped a page back by tomorrow. I want to move onto the new story soon; maybe take a short break until. I really need to clean my house!

Oddly enough I came back in here, Virgil, to show you this poem in which I found Lawrence uses this imagery of the piano tinkling and also talks of sadness and tears or weeping. I know you will recognise this poem. It is one of his most noted ones:

Piano

Softly, in the dusk, a woman is singing to me;
Taking me back down the vista of years, till I see
A child sitting under the piano, in the boom of the tingling strings
And pressing the small, poised feet of a mother who smiles as she sings.


In spite of myself, the insidious mastery of song
Betrays me back, till the heart of me weeps to belong
To the old Sunday evenings at home, with winter outside
And hymns in the cosy parlour, the tinkling piano our guide.


So now it is vain for the singer to burst into clamour
With the great black piano appassionato. The glamour
Of childish days is upon me, my manhood is cast
Down in the flood of remembrance, I weep like a child for the past.

D. H. Lawrence

Lawrence must have had 'tinkle and weeping (tears) on the brain!

Also note: hearts can't weep, so maybe tears can't really tinkle, as we know it.
Also note: I highlighted 'tingling' strings also because the sound is similiar although the meaning is slightly different. This time it is spelled right, Antiquarian. I copied from online and also looked it up in my book.

[Quark]

Oh good. I posted that last part of text - look for it; it might get bumped a page back by tomorrow. I want to move onto the new story soon; maybe take a short break until. I really need to clean my house!

Yes, we're close to exhausting "The Witch A La Mode." There's already been 40 pages of posts on this one! Have you decided on the next story, yet?

The only question I'm still unsure about in this story is what the flames represent. They're destructive, so they might be tied to Coutts anger at the end. The flames could be, as you said, burning away Winifred's spell over Coutts. The only problem with this interpretation is that the flames and the lamp seem to correspond with Winifred as much as they do with Coutts. Maybe the flames show the destructiveness of their relationship? I'm not sure.

[Janine]

Yes, we're close to exhausting "The Witch A La Mode." There's already been 40 pages of posts on this one! Have you decided on the next story, yet?

Maybe we should recite an incantation and hope this story goes away or set a nice bonfire! ...break the spell.....

The only question I'm still unsure about in this story is what the flames represent. They're destructive, so they might be tied to Coutts anger at the end. The flames could be, as you said, burning away Winifred's spell over Coutts. The only problem with this interpretation is that the flames and the lamp seem to correspond with Winifred as much as they do with Coutts. Maybe the flames show the destructiveness of their relationship? I'm not sure.

Glad to see you stopped in at last, Quark. Nice to see you again and I just read your new post in the Chekhov and wanted to respond but I may be too tired out now. Is it really 200 degrees in your upstairs rooms? I am upstairs too with a flat roof and it has been very warm but not 200 degrees - oh come on. You would be soup by now!

Well, everyone keeps pointing out the 40 some odd pages we have filled up in here on this one story. #1 - we have more participants #2 if you remove all our chit-chat, our little insignificant tiffs/disagreements, and whatever else we found to amuse ourselves with, between my posting of the actual text, then we probably could cut those 40 pages in half, for actual discussion time. Hey, Quark, we are a friendly group in here and who is counting? However, no one has noted, that we once again went past another 1000 posts - we are at 2000 something. Remember when you made that other congratulatory announcement when we hit 1000? That was just great!

Ok, if you read back, a few pages, you will get a better sense of the meaning or our interpretation of the fire and the flames and just what it signifies. I think it definitely does several things - it breaks the spell and it breaks off the whole connection between Winifred and Coutts, for good. Only through the flames, can they be set free from any attachment, they formerly had, or thought was still possible for them. Perhaps, the flames do show the destructiveness of their relationship and now the end of that. I think one can interpret the flames in various ways. In terms of the 'witch' theme, of this story, the flames/fire fit the idea of the pagan ritual of breaking the spell and the breaking forever the attachment between these two people; the device ends the story dramatically and very effectively. All along flame and light have lead up to this story. This story was very well crafted and written; no wonder it is considered one of his finest short stories.

I have picked out the next story, but will not announce it, until we are done discussing this one entirely. So, we fill up another page of two. I need a small break between to clean my house; even though I am sweltering, too. I can tell you the next story is not quite as complex and symbolic as this story. I liked it though and you can acquire the audio MP3 file, from Amazon for a download of only $1.98. I hope to do so. Also, the story is available online. It is in the first volume of Lawrence's collected short stories. I promise to announce it soon. It is not a long story; 14 pages in my small paperback. They read quickly.

[Virgil]

Maybe, I am the 'odd one' in thinking this way. It is not that important really, if we agree or disagree on this point, but it still does interest me.

Oh of course it doesn't matter. We can move on.

Oddly enough I came back in here, Virgil, to show you this poem in which I found Lawrence uses this imagery of the piano tinkling and also talks of sadness and tears or weeping. I know you will recognise this poem. It is one of his most noted ones:


Lawrence must have had 'tinkle and weeping (tears) on the brain!

Also note: hearts can't weep, so maybe tears can't really tinkle, as we know it.
Also note: I highlighted 'tingling' strings also because the sound is similiar although the meaning is slightly different. This time it is spelled right, Antiquarian. I copied from online and also looked it up in my book.

I guess the only saving grace for the phrase is that it connects to the music motif. But I find it awkward.

[Janine]

So, what is the general vote here; shall we move onto the next story? Or does anyone want to make any closing remarks on this current one?

I don't think we will ever forget 'The Witch A La Mode' discussion, do you?

Give me the word, Everyone, when you are ready and I will post the next story, ASAP.