D.H. Lawrence's Short Stories Thread

[Virgil]

Are these war references or what? This passage even reminds me of the trenches, such a well known symbol of WWI. This is surely a ‘wasteland’ , as Virgil pointed out. It’s a cold valley of death. The narrator (Lawence) is seeing this as a ghastly landscape and frightening image, not one of awesome winter beauty, with deep snow and peace. He is noticing instead “the trees beneath black and thin looking like wire.” This line struck me particularly and I thought immediately of barbed wire. Brilliant writing and symbolism in this section of descriptive prose; poetically beautiful and evoking a feeling of death and ghostly whiteness and cold all at the same time. The “rock-faces dark” and “sky above somber, heavy, yellowish-dark” could represent death masks themselves, fallen soldiers scattered on a battlefield, and the putrid air (sky) that lingers above a field of death. Note the stark and specific words he uses such as “shroud” and the “valley of the dead”. Also, I am sure that Lawrence’s recent close encounter with death, himself, has influenced his thinking and he is very much seeing this scene in the light of something much worse - death of the battlefield, the wasteland of war and death.

You know I thought it was a stretch at first (valley for trenches is a stretch but everything else fits) but you've convinced me Janine. Lawrence is bringing the war to the English countryside.

Note how the narrator goes on to say "I sensed I was a prisoner," in that statement last statement. Wow, that is amazing writing; so meaningful. The timing is perfect for such a statement.

Yes, I do think you're right.

And this death/war description continues. I wonder what significance there is to the line “heavily plumed with snow”. It reminds me of a plumed military helmet and also a bird, or the plumes on the peacock’s tail, when he fans it, in his showy manner, to attract a female; although in winter the males lose much of that plumage; which could also be significant in terms of lost masculinity, virility…see how nice I stated that Virgil…
Remember how the wind threw the peacocks off balance..this too could indicate the loss of their control and masculinity, because their tail is diminished...see again how gentily I stated that but I am sure you get my meaning, V. *wink*

I do think the peacock's loss of plumage is significant. Yes you make good points here.

The contrast of “white-and-black” in the valley is specifically stated here; interesting. This line especially got to me: “utterly motionless and beyond life, a hollow sarcophagus.” Additionally, this line is pretty incredible: “abstracted as a grove of death”. Even the farms are referred to has "half-buried."

Yes, it all fits.

Then the narrator thinks of Tible and the “black witch-like little Mrs. Goyte"….he directly links her witch-like aspect to death, which is rather strange; yet that makes sense somehow. I found the last line beautifully stated. Hadn’t the peacock also escaped from the pursuit of Alfred?

Not strange to me. You all think that lawrence is sympathetic to Maggie, but I don't. Lawrence blames women for the war, or at least for the state of affairs at home during and after the war. Men went off and died in the war but women stayed homed and had incredible power, power they never had before, and they used that power to reshape society. Lawrence didn't like that and thought women were to blame for the shape of modern life. I know it's hard to believe, but that's Lawrence's mindset.

What I also found interesting about the snow storm is its depth. I have never heard of England experiencing that kind of snow storm, either in literature or in the news. England for the most part has a very moderate climate for a norhtern Eurpean nation. Does anyone know how likely this kind of snow storm is in England? My thought was that it was very unnatural.

[jinjang]

And this death/war description continues. I wonder what significance there is to the line “heavily plumed with snow”. It reminds me of a plumed military helmet and also a bird, or the plumes on the peacock’s tail, when he fans it, in his showy manner, to attract a female; although in winter the males lose much of that plumage; which could also be significant in terms of lost masculinity, virility…Remember how the wind threw the peacocks off balance..this too could indicate the loss of their control and masculinity, because their tail is diminished...

This part made me smile…

I agree with Janine about the negative war-influenced feelings the narrator is having that morning. He may be feeling he got caught in a skirmish between a couple. Did the author participate in the war – was he a soldier? If the snow was giving him the gloom, what does the sentence below imply?

“And the snow seemed to lay me bare to influences I wanted to escape.”

What kind of influence he is trying to guard against? I originally thought that he was fighting the attraction he had toward her. This ambiguity appears to me that the author is intentionally leading us to several directions. I could interpret the whole paragraph this way: Seeing Maggie’s unhappiness, he meant to alleviate her gloom by hiding the truth as we sometimes do in reality. Now this heavy snow with its negative influence is forcing him to think against the female group. Far-fetched?

Not strange to me. You all think that lawrence is sympathetic to Maggie, but I don't. Lawrence blames women for the war, or at least for the state of affairs at home during and after the war. Men went off and died in the war but women stayed homed and had incredible power, power they never had before, and they used that power to reshape society. Lawrence didn't like that and thought women were to blame for the shape of modern life. I know it's hard to believe, but that's Lawrence's mindset.

Given Maggie’s request of reading the letter was sudden, his original intention could have been benevolent but his final feeling may have turned to sympathize with Alfred. Or he had the contradictory feelings all along as I have been having.

What I also found interesting about the snow storm is its depth. I have never heard of England experiencing that kind of snow storm, either in literature or in the news. England for the most part has a very moderate climate for a norhtern Eurpean nation. Does anyone know how likely this kind of snow storm is in England? My thought was that it was very unnatural.

It is definitely unnatural. They just had a snowstorm in February this year and the news said it hadn’t happened in two decades. The unnatural snowstorm may mean the whole situation with Maggie and Alfred is unnatural due to the war. The narrator may have felt maladroit to interfere between a couple and it has been nagging on him.

But I disagree with you where you seem to think that somehow Maggie's feelings for Joey are a justification for Alfred and that Joey is the problem in their marriage and responsible for Alfred being unfaithful and that Maggie is to blame by turning her affections to Joey.

This response is only to Dark Muse. For others, please ignore this part if it makes you uneasy. I would not like to appear dismissive to Dark Muse. I would like to respect everyone’s opinions.

I think you are twisting my opinions here: I do not think I said Joey was their marriage problem and I do not blame Joey for Alfred’s infidelity. I may have said she clings to Joey as if the bird can solve her real problem. Apparently Joey does not solve her needs of affection. Otherwise Maggie would be content with Joey’s love. Maggie’s cooing with Joey annoys Alfred and it may have been Maggie’s intention to annoy him, which is pathetic. Maggie forgets Joey as easily as she does the narrator.

I also disagreed with you on an eye-for-an eye response, but I did not argue with you on that point.

Let us refrain from our “combative” discussions for others and let us agree to disagree on some parts.

[Janine]

You know I thought it was a stretch at first (valley for trenches is a stretch but everything else fits) but you've convinced me Janine. Lawrence is bringing the war to the English countryside.

Really, that surprises me; I thought you would see it right away, Virgil. I especially was struck by the dark rocks protruding out of the white; also the mention of wire in the context of the bare trees or winter in the snow. I also thought of "Women in Love" and the ending. Everything pointed to death and if not a universal wasteland then a personal reflection of how Lawrence was viewing it all at that time. This was the period in which he and Frieda were driven out of Cornwall because the English police thought they were involved in spying for the German side; of course it was preposterous, but Lawrence had to go against the board of examiners and he was mortified at this being literally 'layed bare' and humiliated, before the medical board for the draft; of course we all know he was exempt due to his bad lungs to report to military duty; it still must have been fresh in his mind when he wrote this story. Now I am wonder what jinjang quoted in his post about being layed bare to influences I wanted to escape. That could also be applied to some degree, to the ordeal Lawrence had personally had to endure; which he later wrote about in "Kangaroo", his next novel.

I requote:

And the snow seemed to lay me bare to influences I wanted to escape.

Snow and frozen land always represented to Lawrence the negation of life and of death - think back to our discussion on 'The Man Who Loved Islands'. Also, the final scenes in WIL. Think how Lawrence gravitated towards the south and the sun and it's life giving forces - think of our discussion on 'Sun'.

Yes, I do think you're right.

If you read it over a few times you will see it clearly. I didn't see the full correlation on first reading either. I just thought the scene beautifully written and really incredibly graphic with the contrast of white and black.

I do think the peacock's loss of plumage is significant. Yes you make good points here.

Yes, in winter and in a wasteland he is diminished, as he would be in wartime. Man is diminished now by war, to Lawrence's way of thinking. Doesn't Alfred come home with a wound, a limp. Now his wife will further diminish his manhood no doubt with her witch-like manor and resentments towards him. Perhaps in this way you are right, now the narrator sees Alfred in the flesh and he being man can relate to his maleness and his his wounded manhood. I think during this story the narrator feels something for each of the characters - the female first but he is wary and then the male because of the male bondage element. I think both are temporary and as I said before this story is a sort of incident or slice of life even. Not doubt soon after this he and his wife leave England and never see Maggie and Alfred again. Even though the narrator (Lawrence) didn't go to the war front; he felt this deep hatred and humiliation in front of the authorities and the war medical board; which is carried over in the pathos and death qualities, when viewing this valley scene shrouded in deep snow. Indeed to L, it is the 'valley of death.'

Yes, it all fits.

It does and perhaps more will be revealed further along to relate to this part and these deeper meanings. Wow, Lawrence is amazing, isn't he?

Not strange to me. You all think that lawrence is sympathetic to Maggie, but I don't. Lawrence blames women for the war, or at least for the state of affairs at home during and after the war. Men went off and died in the war but women stayed homed and had incredible power, power they never had before, and they used that power to reshape society. Lawrence didn't like that and thought women were to blame for the shape of modern life. I know it's hard to believe, but that's Lawrence's mindset.

No, you have me wrong. I don't think he is totally sympathetic to anyone really, not for any duration of time. I think he is temporarily sympathetic to each at different junctures in the story. I think basically, the narrator remains neutral at the end. I don't believe Lawrence blames women for the war. Where are you getting that from, Virgil? If you look at WIL and realise that's also a war novel, war themes throughout and in the background (subtext), tell me how women in general are responsible for the war? Boy, I am confused on this one. In England, women stayed home and helped the war effort. Did you ever hear of the Land Girls program? They didn't have it so easy. The worked the farms, while the men were off in the war. I sort of take offense to the idea that the woman started the war. I think your information on all this is a bit off. I don't agree; women were not responsible at this time for modern life. I don't believe Lawrence believed that. I read too many biographies of the author to flatly dispute that. Women were just coming into their own. If you watch old WWI and WWII films on Britian; the woman served their country at home very admirably, just as they did in America, and they cared for their homes and their children.

What I also found interesting about the snow storm is its depth. I have never heard of England experiencing that kind of snow storm, either in literature or in the news. England for the most part has a very moderate climate for a norhtern Eurpean nation. Does anyone know how likely this kind of snow storm is in England? My thought was that it was very unnatural.

Yes, and that would be interesting to research. I think you may have hit on something there or maybe while Lawrence and Frieda occuppied a homestead in that part of England it was a particularly harsh storm or winter. But maybe the unnatural aspect lent itself to this story perfectly. Of course, it does.

This part made me smile…

I agree with Janine about the negative war-influenced feelings the narrator is having that morning. He may be feeling he got caught in a skirmish between a couple. Did the author participate in the war – was he a soldier? If the snow was giving him the gloom, what does the sentence below imply?

“And the snow seemed to lay me bare to influences I wanted to escape.”

jinjang, I basically addressed your question in Virgil's post, when I brought up the place the author had experienced in his life personally and what his thought process might be in relation to the war. I like this statement of yours, jinjang, "He may be feeling he got caught in a skirmish between a couple." I really believe that is the case. He got dragged into this whole affair with the neighboring couple.

No, Lawrence did not participate in the war, however he was humiliated before the medical board for his physical appearance, by now he was very thin and weakened; he had nearly died of a severe bout with pnemonia right before writing this story; he had had it before and more than a few near brushes with death. He had bad lungs all his life, which he referred to as his broncials. In reality, it was most likely a predisposition to full-fledged TB, which he was finally diagnosed with in Mexico several years later. Lawrence died in his early 40's. You can read a short biography on his life on this site.

What kind of influence he is trying to guard against? I originally thought that he was fighting the attraction he had toward her. This ambiguity appears to me that the author is intentionally leading us to several directions. I could interpret the whole paragraph this way: Seeing Maggie’s unhappiness, he meant to alleviate her gloom by hiding the truth as we sometimes do in reality. Now this heavy snow with its negative influence is forcing him to think against the female group. Far-fetched?

No, not far-fetched at all. I am wondering about this statement and coming up with a several different explanations or interpretations. I think I aired most of them in Virgil's post and in here in the beginning. I don't think it inaccurate to say that the narrator wavers throughout the story with sympathies for all the characters; perhaps the only one he stays consistent with is poor Joey, although he remarks at one point that he is somewhat afraid of him.

Given Maggie’s request of reading the letter was sudden, his original intention could have been benevolent but his final feeling may have turned to sympathize with Alfred. Or he had the contradictory feelings all along as I have been having.

Yes, I agree; I think his sympathising wavers; at the end I think he is neutral observer of what has transpired. He leaves the scene and what more can it all mean to him?

It is definitely unnatural. They just had a snowstorm in February this year and the news said it hadn’t happened in two decades. The unnatural snowstorm may mean the whole situation with Maggie and Alfred is unnatural due to the war. The narrator may have felt maladroit to interfere between a couple and it has been nagging on him.

Good point you are both making. The description is seemingly very unworldly and unnatural as well. It's not your typical cozy pretty snow scene, is it?

Left that last part for Dark Muse to answer.

[Dark Muse]

I think you are twisting my opinions here: I do not think I said Joey was their marriage problem and I do not blame Joey for Alfred’s infidelity. I may have said she clings to Joey as if the bird can solve her real problem. Apparently Joey does not solve her needs of affection. Otherwise Maggie would be content with Joey’s love. Maggie’s cooing with Joey annoys Alfred and it may have been Maggie’s intention to annoy him, which is pathetic. Maggie forgets Joey as easily as she does the narrator.

I also disagreed with you on an eye-for-an eye response, but I did not argue with you on that point.

Let us refrain from our “combative” discussions for others and let us agree to disagree on some parts.

Some of the things you said in your earlier posts alluded to the fact that you seemed to view Joey as being an interfernce within thier marraige. You seemed to place more responsiblity on Maggie's affection for the bird over Alfred's actions.

I have nothing more to say upon the issue as we shall eternally disagree.

[BienvenuJDC]

Some of the things you said in your earlier posts alluded to the fact that you seemed to view Joey as being an interfernce within thier marraige. You seemed to place more responsiblity on Maggie's affection for the bird over Alfred's actions.

I have nothing more to say upon the issue as we shall eternally disagree.

I'm not up on reading everyone's comments, but I would have to say that concerning problems in every relationship, there are two sides to every coin. And in the words of the immortal Forrest Gump, "That's all I gots to say 'bout that!"

[Dark Muse]

And I do not belive anything excuces infidelity.

[Janine]

And I do not belive anything excuces infidelity.

As jingang said "I have nothing more to say upon the issue as we shall eternally disagree."...so why can't all of this cease? I don't think any one of us are here to pass moral judgement on anyone and as far as our own personal beliefs are concerned, that is up to the individual who is posting; his private affair. As the bible says "Let those without sin cast the first stone". I would rather refrain from casting any stones myself. I just want to proceed with actually discussing this story and the text.

[Dark Muse]

Fictional characters are there to be judged

[Janine]

Fictional characters are there to be judged

But, is that the main objective of discussing this story? It's odd because in "The Awakening" discussion, if I read you correctly, you were not opposed to Edna and her moral code, but here you are so against the characters. I am rather miffed myself at this point. We have been discussing some important characteristics of the story today and yesterday as well, but you haven't commented on one of those aspects, just the morality of Alfred. There are many immoral characters in literature. Look at Anna in Anna Karenina; look at many a husband in novels who strayed. I am not sure what point you are trying to make in continuing to disagree with others, who said they would rather refrain from further discussing it; and striking out at the moral fiber of any of the characters in this story just seems pointless to me and tiresome at this time. Also, I have been told by others, simply reading along with this thread that it's distracting to the main focus of discussing this story.

[Dark Muse]

I am not one to keep my opinons restrained, after my initail purge toward the beginning I had let the issue drop, it is others who have continued to bring it up again and I have simply responded to thier own comments.

Not strange to me. You all think that lawrence is sympathetic to Maggie, but I don't. Lawrence blames women for the war, or at least for the state of affairs at home during and after the war. Men went off and died in the war but women stayed homed and had incredible power, power they never had before, and they used that power to reshape society. Lawrence didn't like that and thought women were to blame for the shape of modern life. I know it's hard to believe, but that's Lawrence's mindset.

While I naturally personally like Maggie I agree that for Lawrence she was likely not intended to be a sympathetic character. As well he rarely does portray his women in a very positive light within his stories, and much of the imagery surrounding Maggie in the descriptions of her can be seen as having a negative connotation to them.

More than once throughout the text she is referred to being "wtichy" or "witch-like"

There is also the fact that at the beginning when she first wishes to have the letter read to her, she does come off as being flirtatious in her efforts to try and cajole the narrator to read the letter to her. And her demeanor during the reading of the letter seems to be scornful and mocking.

She does not appear outwardly broken up about the news. Even though she strongly suspects Alfred, she takes it in a more callous way, laughing at points during the reading, which I imagine was in a bitter and malicious way.

[jinjang]

Cheers to Dark Muse for her tenacious spirit!
Please Janine, you have been a great pilot of this discussion. I am sure you will land us safely to the runway. I would like to reach our destination even if it has been a little a bumpy ride.

I am still quite puzzled on the narrator's intention. When a man knows he is being cajoled, does he feel flattered or does he feel alert against the person cajoling him? The answer to this question may prove or disprove Virgil's claim below.

Not strange to me. You all think that lawrence is sympathetic to Maggie, but I don't. Lawrence blames women for the war, or at least for the state of affairs at home during and after the war. Men went off and died in the war but women stayed homed and had incredible power, power they never had before, and they used that power to reshape society. Lawrence didn't like that and thought women were to blame for the shape of modern life. I know it's hard to believe, but that's Lawrence's mindset.

Do men or the author really felt that the men have to get the control back as they want the remote control?

Maybe we should move on to the next part of the text... to learn more.

[Dark Muse]

In trying to discover the narrators intention I think that it is telling than when he finished reading the letter his first thought is to pass a judgement on Maggie rather than Alfred, he never expresses any thoughts of disapproval about Alfred but he interrogates Maggie on how she happened to come by the letter and scolds her for her going behind her husband's back, while seeming to be apathetic to Alfred's betrayal.

"Where did you get this letter?" I said.

"Postman gave it me last week."

"And is your husband at home?"

"Won't you read that letter?" she said. "Read it, so that I know what
it says."

"It's rather behind his back," I said.

[Janine]

In trying to discover the narrators intention I think that it is telling than when he finished reading the letter his first thought is to pass a judgement on Maggie rather than Alfred, he never expresses any thoughts of disapproval about Alfred but he interrogates Maggie on how she happened to come by the letter and scolds her for her going behind her husband's back, while seeming to be apathetic to Alfred's betrayal.

Dark Muse, I still think you are being very harsh on the narrator. He is defending something, a human privacy and basic right, that nowdays is actually a federal offense and punishable by law; referring to reading mail addressed to another person, be it her husband or anyone, for that matter. In the parts you quoted he asked who the letter was addressed to and I would do the same before consenting to reading any letter. Second, he says "it is rather behind his back". He used 'rather' and it shows he is ambivalent about proceeding to read this letter. He is a little wishy-washy here using that word, because at this point, he is not yet made up his mind to read the letter to Maggie. He could have kept what he read to himself, once he has read it silently. He also is not aware at that point that Maggie will tell him she knows the opposite and that the child is her husbands, nor does he know she will scoff at it or even laugh. The narrator in the beginning is quite in the dark. I think this is why Lawrence chose to present this story in 3rd person narration. We encounter the various impressions and feelings as he would, as he went along, in a sense 'playing it by ear', as the expression goes.

jinjang, I like this part of your statement, "a great pilot of this discussion. I am sure you will land us safely to the runway." I will do my best to get us safely to the runway....I somehow have managed it before. Thanks for the compliment.......hhaha...then I may be the hero, not Joey..haha...Are we having fun yet?

Yes, I wish to post more text to discuss; hopefully I can do that tonight. My home situation is problematic at this time, plus I have to go out to a meeting, be there at 6. I will be home after 10 EST. I stay up late so I will post more text then. I'd do it now but I don't have the time.

[Dark Muse]

That parts I quoted happend after he read the letter and knew the contents. He readily read it without a thought and knew from her that it was too her husband.

This was before he read that letter:

"Would you mind reading a letter for me, in French?" she said, her face
immediately black and bitter-looking. She glanced at me, frowning.

"Not at all," I said.

"It's a letter to my husband," she said, still scrutinising.

He then reads the letter after she told hin that it was a letter to her husband.

And once he finnished already reading it, he than began to question her on it. He had no problem reading someones priavte words for himself, he only questioned it when she than wanted to know what it said.

When he first started reading the letter he said:

Therefore I read with a callous heart the effusions of the Belgian
damsel.

By saying he read it with a callous heart seems to suggest while reading it he was not mortally conflicted in the invasation of privacy.

[jinjang]

In trying to discover the narrators intention I think that it is telling than when he finished reading the letter his first thought is to pass a judgement on Maggie rather than Alfred, he never expresses any thoughts of disapproval about Alfred but he interrogates Maggie on how she happened to come by the letter and scolds her for her going behind her husband's back, while seeming to be apathetic to Alfred's betrayal.

This proves how different our perceptions and interpretations are. The narrator later on interrogates Alfred just as much. I may be risking going ahead of the discussion. The exact same quotes you listed made me think that the narrator is hesitant and uncomfortable of intruding, even though he is being asked, in their privacy. Since the whole story is of 15 pages, I reread it. My impression on the good intention of the narrator has not changed.

A respectable author is a sagacious and indifferent observer of human lives. The narrator is in place of the author in this story, I believe, who happens to be entangled in the story involuntarily.

"Nothing more trite and vulgar in the world, than such a love letter - no newspaper more obvious.
Therefore, I read with a callous heart the effusions of the Belgian damsel. But then I gathered my attention."

I think his "callous" heart is toward to the letter and Elise, not to Maggie. But, he softens, as he "gathers his attention," to the letter writer since Elise is also an unhappy girl as he figures out in the letter.

The only difference I observed this time is that the narrator can understand Alfred quickly as of the same gender, while Maggie remains mysterious and impossible for him to comprehend.