D.H. Lawrence's Short Stories Thread

[Sapphire]

@JinJang
Hi there to you too Thank you for the welcome.

Notice the change in Maggie's look! She is no longer sallow. Ignorance is a bliss! Acceptance to the lesser evil is a bliss.

Exactly what is Maggie ignorant about? Which lesser evil does she accept?

And for that part where the father is talking - it has me stumped too I am not a native English speaker either, but considering the fact that I have trouble understanding some dialects in my own language I am not sure that would really help me Thanks for writing those parts out, it really makes it easier to grasp.

@Janine
Wow, a thorough response again! And yes, it does happen to me sometimes that my whole post is deleted because I hit the wrong button More than once to be honest

This makes me think that they were not married very long or maybe he joined even prior to their marriage, at the time that he went off to the war; maybe, they never spend that much time together during the war years. I can't recall now how long WWI lasted?

WWI lasted from 1914 to (11 nov) 1918. Maggie mentions these four years in her reply to the narrator when he complains about going behind her husband's back "He's been behind my back long enough -all these four years.".
And no, I am not trying to make you blind I just so like to type in blue If it is really annoying to you I can change it in this thread of course! Just tell me

Or at least, it seemed she accepted the fact, that her husband had cheated; then resigned herself to make the most of it. That's the impression I get. But that might be only a temporary state of mind she will exist in; perhaps it's a form of survival for her. I don't think the woman will ever live a happy existence, with a husband who oviously strays.

Again, ignorance of what? Isn't this part just describing how happy Maggie is for Joey to be back? Where is the connection with her accepting a cheating husband

I think it's just a way of saying 'eyes' by referring to 'eye' as singular. I am not sure if that has special significance beyond the idea of the 'eye' being all seeing or insightful, like the inner eye and one of wisdom or knowledge. Could be that is why he is using 'eye' singularly; but I am not certain...just thinking outloud on my part.

I could go along with that Even if it is not the meant meaning, it is still a nice thought

Right, I agree... haha...I get your joke - pick your eye out!... No, this is not Hitchcock's "The Birds", Saphire.

I did not even make that connection - I guess I made a subconscious joke there

@Virgil

Joey represents the phallus and what Maggie needs is a phallus to bring her back to life, to brighten her eyes, enrich her hair, to make her flush with life.

The text says here ""he flopped out". I have a hard time ... ow wait, lets try to talk without any double meaning ... I have a difficult time () to associate this with a phallus. Or at least with a strong, erect manly one I think you are looking for something which is not really there. No doubt Maggie is "flushed" and one can/has to take this sexually, but no need to bring a phallus into this all.
It is a bit like the talk I had with a friend of mine a while ago. He objected to me (or actually girls in general) drinking beer from a bottle, telling me the bottle reminded him of a certain male part and that it was just not appropriate. When I kindly reminded him he (as a guy) was drinking from a bottle too he spread his beer all across the floor as he dropped the bottle. Such a shame... that is what can happen when you try to find a double (sexual) meaning behind everything Be warned!

No ideas on the new text yet - I'll be back BTW, I bought "England, My England" and "the White Peacock" today Always fun to find second hand books - one of them had a card from 1961 in it and an old negative (country scene picture)! A message from the past... (

[Janine]

I will get to my responses to everyone's posts as soon as I have the time, I might have to go out for awhile. But for now, I have just found this in the "Calender of His Works" a book on Lawrence at every stage of his writing - the 'where and what' he is doing at the time, well documented from letters, diary entries, etc - a very interesting source book.

JANUARY 1919

15 JAN. Lawrence send Pinker a story. It was most certainly '.Wintry Peacock'. There was deep snow in Middleton a this time. A letter of 9 Feb. to Katherine Mansfield echoes the opening paragraph of the story [Moore 578].

Virgil, In 1919, Lawrence would have been 34 yrs old. So actually, he is a bit older than the couple who are featured in this story or so I would surmise. I believe he did refer to Alfred as a young man.

I am going now to research that letter to Katherine Mansfield, in hopes of finding some facts out that will shed more light on this story. I have the Harry Moore book, so I will look in there, too.

At this same time, I know that Lawrence was attempting to write a history book -"European History for Schools", of which he was struggling and not enjoying the writing at all - I am paraphrasing an entry in this same source book. He says, if he could have a small income he would give up writing "for publication" altogether. Obviously, he is writing this book for pure income. I am sure the short story was more to his liking and for his pleasure, although he was seeking to have it published, as well.

Aha! There was a snowstorm with deep snow in England at the time Lawrence wrote this story - January 1919

I am reseaching it and found that apparently the area was populated by pheasants and other various birds, but doen't now mention peacocks. Peacock's do seem to be something Lawrence morphed the pheasants into peacocks; interesting. I wonder why. I will further research this and hope to find that exact letter to Katherine Mansfield. Apparently, from other sources, I find now that that winter (1919 in England in that region) was particularly snowy and brutal, especially to Lawrence, who hated winter. Add on the fact, that he had several severe bouts with flu and nearly died, and also a reference that he was not getting on so well with his wife, Frieda, and one can easily see the origin of this story. I will have more later with actual quotes. This is all very interesting to me.

A little time now and then I have to depart again - I did find the exact letter to Katherine Mansfield in my Collected Letters. It's quite interesting.

This is to Saphire, I can read the blue type but usually when I do to quote your passages they blue gets all mixed up with the quote/unquoted text. I have to manually remove it. It's very pretty but maybe if you would restain yourself to some parts it might be easier. It's up to you. I can continue to take out your formating when I quote you. Now the green type I cannot make out at all on my computer. It just blends into the tan background. Maybe a darker shade might work.

No ideas on the new text yet - I'll be back BTW, I bought "England, My England" and "the White Peacock" today Always fun to find second hand books - one of them had a card from 1961 in it and an old negative (country scene picture)! A message from the past... (

Saphire, that is great that you found "The White Peacock" second hand. Mine I bought off Amazon was second hand, too at pretty good price. I liked the book very much although there are some flaws in it as far as development of plot. It was, afterall, young Lawrence's first published work. I found some of the passages so incredibly beautiful though that it makes the book totally worthwhile. You will see distinct parallels to "Sons and Lovers" which followed this book by a two, I think. First came "The Trespasser", which I just read and enjoyed very much.

I also own "England, My England" - that is a nice little collection. I have had that book for ages - one of my first Lawrence books actually. The first story is incredible; and "Wintry Peacock" is in that book, as well.

[jinjang]

Janine, thank you very much for your research result in #2927. I read the posting thoroughly.

Based on your research, we can now say the narrator was actually Lawrence himself. Could it mean then that we can say the narrator had a good intention towards both Maggie and Alfred and that he hid the real content of the letter in order to put them out of their misery?

Exactly what is Maggie ignorant about? Which lesser evil does she accept?

We are talking about the real content of the letter that the narrator decided to hide from Maggie. Before the letter was incorrectly read to Maggie, she had a strong suspicion of her husband's infidelity and the narrator observed Maggie had sallow and gloomy face with red nose.

She was flushed and handsome, her eyes bright, her hair slack, thick, but more witch-like than ever.

Now Maggie accepted the fact that her suspicion may have been wrong with tint of doubt, she is less unhappy and looks "flushed and handsome."

The son looked at me. He had a devil-may-care bearing, his cap on one side, his hands stuck in the front pockets of his breeches. But he said nothing.

The trouble between Maggie and Alfred is still lingering on. Maggie did not reveal to Alfred what was read to her. Alfred knows he is guilty but does not know whether Maggie discovered the whole thing or not.

'Tha'lt rouse thysen up a bit again, now, Maggie,' the father-in-law said--and then to me: ''ers not bin very bright sin' Alfred came whoam, an' the bod flyed awee. 'E come whoam a Wednesday night, Alfred did. But ay, you knowed, didna yer. Ay, 'e comed 'a Wednesday--an' I reckon there wor a bit of a to-do between 'em, worn't there, Maggie?'

I know I am the wrong person to translate the father-in-law, but there is always Janine to check my mistakes and so here is my try again:

"That will rouse yourself up a bit again, now, Maggie," the father-in-law said--and then to me: "She has not been very bright since Alfred came home and the bird flew away. He come home Wednesday -- and I reckon there was a bit of a to-do between them, wasn't there, Maggie?"

"A to-do between them" means Maggie and Alfred fought big or small not in front of the parents. English reserved manners may have prevented the couple from frighting in front of elders.

''Ers got 'er colour back this mornin',' continued the father-in-law slowly. 'It's bin heavy weather wi' 'er this last two days. Ay--'er's bin northeast sin 'er seed you a Wednesday.'

"She got her color back this morning," continued the father-in-law slowly. "It has been heavy weather with her this last two days. Ay-- she has been northeast since she's seen you on Wednesday."

Now this part indicated that the narrator's hiding the true content of the letter has done Maggie good. The narrator could clearly observe the good deed he think he did as long as it last in their fragile relationship.

But Alfred turned and disappeared.

''E's got th' monkey on 'is back ower this letter job,' said the father secretly to me. 'Mother, 'er knows nowt about it. Lot o' tom-foolery, isn't it?
Ay! What's good o' makkin' a peck o' trouble over what's far enough off, an' ned niver come no nigher. No--not a smite o' use. That's what I tell 'er. 'Er should ta'e no notice on't. Ty, what can y' expect.'

"He has got the monkey on his back over this letter job, " said the father secretly to me. "Mother, she knows nothing about it. Lot of tom-foolery, isn't it? Ay! What's good of making a peck of trouble over what is far enough off and need never come no near. No--not a smite of use. That is what I tell her. She should take no notice on it. Ty(?), what can you expect."

What does "he has got the monkey on his back over this letter job" mean? Father may have chided Alfred over his misbehavior but advised both to put aside the whole thing.

[Janine]

Janine, thank you very much for your research result in #2927. I read the posting thoroughly.

Glad, that I could find something at long last. I found more, but it will take a bit of time to quote from the book directly; I am too tired out tonight. Typing from a paperback is not easy. The main things are the distinct mention of the harsh condition and deep snow, the pheasants that Lawrence observed on his hikes around the countryside and the fact, that he and his wife were not getting along very well; that is putting it mildly. He even says he can't take anymore of her 'bullying' and he hopes she just goes off to Germany to live and that be an end of it. In the meantime, his sister seemed to have arrived to nurse Lawrence back to health; I believe I read that his wife does take off for a holiday in Germany to visit her relatives at or near this time; but I can't swear to that. At anyrate, Lawrence seemed to be disgruntled at this time with the weather, his commerical writing, and his wife. It therefore, could have been his sister he referred to included in the "we". This all now leads me to wonder, if the narrator (if he be Lawrence) would be out of sorts with both the man and the woman in this story, probably more toward the woman. Apparently, he did happen to see a woman come out of her home and this inspired his story further, on the same day he saw the pheasants in the wild. I will have to read that part of the biography again and hopefully type it up for all to read and speculate upon. It's really interesting, at least to me.

Based on your research, we can now say the narrator was actually Lawrence himself. Could it mean then that we can say the narrator had a good intention towards both Maggie and Alfred and that he hid the real content of the letter in order to put them out of their misery?

This I don't know. I would think by his general attitude at this time he would not favor either, however he would very much have on his mind the strife and struggle between man and woman in a relationship of marriage. Like I said, he seems a bit disgruntled at this concerning married life.

We are talking about the real content of the letter that the narrator decided to hide from Maggie. Before the letter was incorrectly read to Maggie, she had a strong suspicion of her husband's infidelity and the narrator observed Maggie had sallow and gloomy face with red nose.

Now Maggie accepted the fact that her suspicion may have been wrong with tint of doubt, she is less unhappy and looks "flushed and handsome."

That's how I read it too; but obviously our sick-minded Virgil thinks otherwise. I guess he thinks that Alfred and Maggie had a roll in the hay the night before....or wait a minute, I might be thinking of Lawrence's long short story "Love Among the Haystakes." By the way, it's a great story.

The trouble between Maggie and Alfred is still lingering on. Maggie did not reveal to Alfred what was read to her. Alfred knows he is guilty but does not know whether Maggie discovered the whole thing or not.

I know I am the wrong person to translate the father-in-law, but there is always Janine to check my mistakes and so here is my try again:

You kidding, you did such a good job now that we are going to appoint you official Lawrence translator. I think all your wrote below is quite accurate - thanks so much. It does make it clearer. I don't know how you accomplish it with English not being your native language. Good for you!

"That will rouse yourself up a bit again, now, Maggie," the father-in-law said--and then to me: "She has not been very bright since Alfred came home and the bird flew away. He come home Wednesday -- and I reckon there was a bit of a to-do between them, wasn't there, Maggie?"

"A to-do between them" means Maggie and Alfred fought big or small not in front of the parents. English reserved manners may have prevented the couple from frighting in front of elders.

"She got her color back this morning," continued the father-in-law slowly. "It has been heavy weather with her this last two days. Ay-- she has been northeast since she's seen you on Wednesday."

Yep, that is how I would interpret it, also.

Now this part indicated that the narrator's hiding the true content of the letter has done Maggie good. The narrator could clearly observe the good deed he think he did as long as it last in their fragile relationship.

Not sure what that I understand exactly what you mean here. Do you mean he might think his actions justified if the married couple remain together?

"He has got the monkey on his back over this letter job, " said the father secretly to me. "Mother, she knows nothing about it. Lot of tom-foolery, isn't it? Ay! What's good of making a peck of trouble over what is far enough off and need never come no near. No--not a smite of use. That is what I tell her. She should take no notice on it. Ty(?), what can you expect."

What does "he has got the monkey on his back over this letter job" mean? Father may have chided Alfred over his misbehavior but advised both to put aside the whole thing.

Humm, how can I explain that expression? It's like having this bad thing thrust on you and your can't get rid of it...or like having your 'neck in a noose', but that's explaining it with another expression. Monkey is like an emotional weight, I believe.

And Jinjang, thanks for refraining from using 'green' type.

[Sapphire]

I'll leave the blue then Maybe it is easier for me to read because I have the forum background on "test" style - this light grey might be a better contrast to the blue than the yellowish from the standard style.

Janine, I totally side with JinJang: thank you so much for the research and sharing all that with us Really appreciated! Imagine that they really had a strong snowstorm in those days Like the weather wanted Lawrence to write that story .
And I get almost all my books second hand. I honestly enjoy it when I find a book I want to read for a nice price 3 Bucks for a D.H. Lawrence is a bargain in my eyes

And JinJang, thank you again for translating Really a good job.

"He has got the monkey on his back over this letter job, " said the father secretly to me. "Mother, she knows nothing about it. Lot of tom-foolery, isn't it? Ay! What's good of making a peck of trouble over what is far enough off and need never come no near. No--not a smite of use. That is what I tell her. She should take no notice on it. Ty(?), what can you expect."

I guess Ty is not "thank you" as I immediately thought, but just some sort of exclamation or way of addressing. I read the part about the monkey like Alfred is concerned about the letter, a bit paranoid maybe - it is on his mind and worries him. The line "mother, she knows nothing about it" is either that
1) the mother knows nothing about it
2) mother is just an exclamation again and "she" means Maggie
-a) Maggie knows nothing about how worried Alfred is
-b) Maggie knows nothing about the real story with Eliza. This would imply the Father does...
I think it is 2b, as the Father talks about it being far enough off (not sure myself how far away off a grandson is ). All this does imply that the Father knows quite well what is going on. Could he have read the letter? Or would Alfred have confined in him? The Father seems over all quite good informed, knowing why Joey got away and everything...

@the part about Maggie not being shallow anymore

We are talking about the real content of the letter that the narrator decided to hide from Maggie. Before the letter was incorrectly read to Maggie, she had a strong suspicion of her husband's infidelity and the narrator observed Maggie had sallow and gloomy face with red nose.

If you put it that way, with the previous description, I see how you got there. I really just read that part in the immediate context and thought the girl was happy as could be because Joey came back. After all, the sentence is right after she knows the bird is OK - before that the girl's looks are not described...
Maybe her look has several reasons (there is not always just one reason )
- She's so happy Joey is back. After all, Joey is just one letter away from Joy
- Ignorance IS bliss, though the second to last alinea in the last text (do you still follow? ) indicates she has her reservations. Or maybe it is the feeling that she is on the "controlling side" of the relation now - she knows what is in the letter but her husband does not. She has something over him now, instead of him having something over her. She has the secret.
- Her husband is back and she had a good "night" She's sexually active again. After all, 'Ers got 'er colour back this mornin'

I know I said I would go into the other part of the story myself, but I think most have already been said . One thing did strike me though, which is not yet mentioned:

In spite of his grey moustache and thin grey hair, the elderly man had a face young and almost delicate, like a young man's. His blue eyes twinkled with some inscrutable source of pleasure, his skin was fine and tender, his nose delicately arched. His grey hair being slightly ruffled, he had a debonair look, as of a youth who is in love.

The Father is really affectionately portrayed. He seemed in love. Either with life itself, or with his woman, or ... ?

And then there is the last part

She sat on a low stool by the fire, near her father-in-law. Her head was dropped, she seemed in a state of abstraction. From time to time she would suddenly recover, and look up at us, laughing and chatting. Then she would forget again. Yet in her hulked black forgetting she seemed very near to us.

Real laughter, finally?! I personally do not think this really counts, it seems rather the laughter of a casual conversation - fun, but not that much from the heart. I wonder why Lawrence made Maggie "near in her forgetting"?! Why is Maggie so near when she seems to have forgotten (like the peacocks in the beginning) about the men she's with?

[Janine]

Saphire, thanks from refraining from the blue type. It's not the reading that is so difficult on the tan but the quoting that gets all jumbled which takes me longer to reformat. That would explain why your page looks better if is on gray and not on tan, also. But it's the fact half the quotes turn out colored and half black that drives me crazy.

You wrote a lot and so did others. Today is a bad day for me. I am anticipating being super busy. I have to fly off to the bank in time and the PO and then to get wrappings for my grand-daughter's first birthday party which is tomorrow; tomorrow I won't be around at all. I have to do some laundry tonight and get to bed in good time. Virgil said he needed a little time off, too...a short break. Don't dispair I will be back on Sunday I hope; unless I am too worn out from the huge kid party! Hhaah...I think it will be great fun. Can't wait really.

Let me just say this, concerning the story background. I read up some more on this period in Lawrence's life in two books last night. Wow, he went through a lot of 'ups and downs', mostly 'downs', I must say. He was super depressed after nearly dying of the flu, that had invaded England and Europe at the time, which killed many people. He was lucky to have survived, but he had many after-effects emotionally, from the two bouts with this flu. They said that his apparent remarks about Frieda and he splitting up were born out of that depression. Not long after she did go off to Germany and he went in the spring to Italy to await her. He kept writing to others, that he was waiting patiently, for Mrs. Lawrence to return home to him. He was apparently still very much in love with her, although during his illness, he said she was a devil to him and he was tired of her nagging him and her bossy way. Then the biographer added that Lawrence was not so easy to deal with when he was ill either, so it went both ways. I imagine that to be totally true, from all I have read about the man, biographically. Lawrence, at this time, was fed-up with his publisher and England and anxious to flee to other countries, which he did, trying each one and settling nowhere for very long.

That's just a little tidbit more, to consider in the background of this story.

You are welcome, Saphire, and hope this little tidbit helps you and others even further to understand the author's views. I am always fascinated with Lawrence's interesting and curious life.

Wowy, yes $3 for a L book is amazing! I have found some books, other than Lawrence, that cheap and my friend just found one, a L book free for me at her local library....his travels through Italy.

[Virgil]

You know what I am referring to. I suppose you are going to say anatomical is just fine. You still crack me up!

I'm afraid it's in the text Janine. It really can't be helped. Have you read Lady Chatterly and what he actually says in there?

He appeared to me in the form of a ghost last night and told me himself - believe it - whispered to me "I am the narrator!" You know me, I think all the first person narrations are Lawrence. But truly, the reason I think it, just because of what I read and posted on the background of the story. Shall I post that again for you, Mr. ADD?

No, but it's not in the text and it's an assumption that the narrator satnds for Lawrence. But ok, I'll accept it.

Younger than you!

Sticks and stones...

I do, but just maybe she is lying, too. It could be someone else's kid. Obviously, Alfred is going to abandon her for good; we wouldn't have a story without that factor. Maybe she send this letter out to several eligible males.

She could be. I guess we'll never know.

Or lost in translation...just kidding...lies yes, whether blantant or little white lies....still deceit, cover-up.

The whole story revolves around lies.

I still think that it's a philosphical and complicated thing to aspect of Lawrence to define absolutely. Some might say the idea of the 'primative instincts' is actually a progression in modern thinking, not a regression. That's a whole new debate. Lawrence was no way conventional in the usual sense of the word.

Yes, I understand what you mean. It's modern to be primitive.

You know what else echoes in the story? It came to me today. The fact, that Joey is aligned with Alfred, in that they both would have been rescued from death; then they would both have been nursed back to health by a human being who was compassionate.

That is a good point. And they are both loved by Maggie.

Aha, you now admit this story is well crafted. I think it's very well thought out and very well written.

I never said otherwise.

[Janine]

I'm afraid it's in the text Janine. It really can't be helped. Have you read Lady Chatterly and what he actually says in there?

What? That word wasn't mentioned in my text. Hey, what version are you reading? Yes, I read LCL, twice to be precise and I own the film version. Hummm.....I should watch that again real soon....I like the scene - naked in the rain and the woods ....It's by Ken Russell, what more can I say?

No, but it's not in the text and it's an assumption that the narrator satnds for Lawrence. But ok, I'll accept it.

Ok, good...then we can agree...right? It feels very much like Lawrence to me.

Sticks and stones...

She could be. I guess we'll never know.

True; just another spin-off theory of mine really....a 'what if'.

The whole story revolves around lies.

Perhaps, but I don't think that's the full focus or theme.

Yes, I understand what you mean. It's modern to be primitive.

Oh, good, you see my point then.

That is a good point. And they are both loved by Maggie.

Exactly! You took that one step further than me. I hadn't thought of that, quite in that way.

I never said otherwise.

That's true, sorry I said that; one for you! I think all of Lawrence's stories are very well crafted. I am trying now to reach my goal - to have read all of them. I finished one more last night - 'A Lovely Lady'. It would be a good candidate for another discussion, I think. It was interesting; although now that I think of it it involves another lie...so maybe not...we'll see.

[Virgil]

I will get to my responses to everyone's posts as soon as I have the time, I might have to go out for awhile. But for now, I have just found this in the "Calender of His Works" a book on Lawrence at every stage of his writing - the 'where and what' he is doing at the time, well documented from letters, diary entries, etc - a very interesting source book.



Virgil, In 1919, Lawrence would have been 34 yrs old. So actually, he is a bit older than the couple who are featured in this story or so I would surmise. I believe he did refer to Alfred as a young man.

I am going now to research that letter to Katherine Mansfield, in hopes of finding some facts out that will shed more light on this story. I have the Harry Moore book, so I will look in there, too.

At this same time, I know that Lawrence was attempting to write a history book -"European History for Schools", of which he was struggling and not enjoying the writing at all - I am paraphrasing an entry in this same source book. He says, if he could have a small income he would give up writing "for publication" altogether. Obviously, he is writing this book for pure income. I am sure the short story was more to his liking and for his pleasure, although he was seeking to have it published, as well.

Aha! There was a snowstorm with deep snow in England at the time Lawrence wrote this story - January 1919

I am reseaching it and found that apparently the area was populated by pheasants and other various birds, but doen't now mention peacocks. Peacock's do seem to be something Lawrence morphed the pheasants into peacocks; interesting. I wonder why. I will further research this and hope to find that exact letter to Katherine Mansfield. Apparently, from other sources, I find now that that winter (1919 in England in that region) was particularly snowy and brutal, especially to Lawrence, who hated winter. Add on the fact, that he had several severe bouts with flu and nearly died, and also a reference that he was not getting on so well with his wife, Frieda, and one can easily see the origin of this story. I will have more later with actual quotes. This is all very interesting to me.

A little time now and then I have to depart again - I did find the exact letter to Katherine Mansfield in my Collected Letters. It's quite interesting.

That's good research Janine. Thanks for that. I'm trying to catch up and I know I will never be able to respond to all the comments. I want to see if there is anything in the latest text I should comment on.

[Virgil]

I may be duplicating some of your comments on the latest bit of text but here are my thoughts.

First let me say, I have a tough time understanding the father's words. Lawrence writes in such an accent that it took me a while to get some of it, and I still may be wrong.

'Ah,' went on the grey man. 'It wor our Alfred scared him off, back your life. He must'a flyed ower t'valley. Tha ma' thank thy stars as 'e wor fun, Maggie. 'E'd a bin froze.

Now the whole Alfred/Joey rivalry is interesting. I'm not sure we are given a rationale for it, but one can assume there is some sort of psychic drama being played. Some sort of unconscious hatred in Alfred that is being expressed. Otherwise why?

They a bit nesh, you know,' he concluded to me.

"Nesh?" What is that supposed to say? I can't understand it.

'No, it isna,' replied Mr. Goyte. He spoke very slowly and deliberately, quietly, as if the soft pedal were always down in his voice. He looked at his daughter-in-law as she crouched, flushed and dark, before the peacock, which would lay its long blue neck for a moment along her lap. In spite of his grey moustache and thin grey hair, the elderly man had a face young and almost delicate, like a young man's. His blue eyes twinkled with some inscrutable source of pleasure, his skin was fine and tender, his nose delicately arched. His grey hair being slightly ruffled, he had a debonair look, as of a youth who is in love.

That is a typical Lawrece hero who is comfortable with the world and sexuality. There are sexually loaded words throughout that passage: Maggie being "flushed and dark, before the peacock," and old man looking young and vital at the lady.

'We mun tell 'im it's come,' he said slowly, and turning he called: 'Alfred--Alfred! Wheer's ter gotten to?'

Then he turned again to the group.

'Get up then, Maggie, lass, get up wi' thee. Tha ma'es too much o' th'bod.'

Very strange passage. "We mun tell 'im it's come"? What's he referring to? What's come? And he tells Maggie she makes too much of the bird. There's a lot being suggested there.

A young man approached, wearing rough khaki and kneebreeches. He was Danish looking, broad at the loins.

Alfred's loins are constantly being highlighted.

The son looked at me. He had a devil-may-care bearing, his cap on one side, his hands stuck in the front pockets of his breeches. But he said nothing.

Lots of Lawrentian characters are "devil-may-care." And again, emphasis on his crotch.

'Tha'lt rouse thysen up a bit again, now, Maggie,' the father-in-law said--and then to me: ''ers not bin very bright sin' Alfred came whoam, an' the bod flyed awee. 'E come whoam a Wednesday night, Alfred did. But ay, you knowed, didna yer. Ay, 'e comed 'a Wednesday--an' I reckon there wor a bit of a to-do between 'em, worn't there, Maggie?'

He twinkled maliciously to his daughter-in-law, who was flushed, brilliant and handsome. 'Oh, be quiet, father. You're wound up, by the sound of you,' she said to him, as if crossly. But she could never be cross with him.

"A bit of to-do," another reference to sex, and maggie is flushed again. That's at least three times already lawrence has used that word in referring to her.

''Ers got 'er colour back this mornin',' continued the father-in-law slowly. 'It's bin heavy weather wi' 'er this last two days. Ay--'er's bin northeast sin 'er seed you a Wednesday.'

Can someone translate that for me? I can't understand it.

''E's got th' monkey on 'is back ower this letter job,' said the father secretly to me. 'Mother, 'er knows nowt about it. Lot o' tom-foolery, isn't it?
Ay! What's good o' makkin' a peck o' trouble over what's far enough off, an' ned niver come no nigher. No--not a smite o' use. That's what I tell 'er. 'Er should ta'e no notice on't. Ty, what can y' expect.'

Whatever it is he's saying, it's supposed to show the old man's wisdom.

The mother came in again, and the talk became general. Maggie flashed her eyes at me from time to time, complacent and satisfied, moving among the men. I paid her little compliments, which she did not seem to hear. She attended to me with a kind of sinister, witch-like graciousness, her dark head ducked between her shoulders, at once humble and powerful. She was happy as a child attending to her father-in-law and to me. But there was something ominous between her eyebrows, as if a dark moth were settled there--and something ominous in her bent, hulking bearing.

Very interesting. I don't know what Lawrence is suggesting. Maggie has grown powerful here among the men

[jinjang]

"He has got the monkey on his back over this letter job,” said the father secretly to me. "Mother, she knows nothing about it. Lot of tom-foolery, isn't it?

We could consider the possibility that the father fooled around just like his son when he was younger. Mother, the mother of Alfred, does not know anything about Alfred’s tom-foolery. Who knows the father-in-law is showing excessive kindness towards to Maggie and hence causing gloomy-look on the mother-in-law? That is a pure speculation and there is not enough evidence from the story. If it is the case, Virgil's point on the dominance between men and women comes stronger.

From the story:

"She got her color back this morning," continued the father-in-law slowly. "It has been heavy weather with her this last two days. Ay-- she has been northeast since she's seen you on Wednesday."

Sapphire’s response:

mother is just an exclamation again and "she" means Maggie and Maggie knows nothing about the real story with Eliza.

I have never seen “Mother” as an exclamation in his story and so I do not think it is an exclamation. "Mother, Alfred's mother, does not know anything about it." seems more natural to me.

I really just read that part in the immediate context and thought the girl was happy as could be because Joey came back. After all, the sentence is right after she knows the bird is OK - before that the girl's looks are not described...

She had sallow and gloomy face when Joey was with her on the day when she asked the narrator to read the letter. Joey is a minor comfort to Maggie.

Since she got the color back the morning after the letter was read to her, I interpreted this part as follows: the narrator's hiding the true content of the letter has done Maggie good. The narrator is observing the good deed he thinks he did by looking at the flushed and handsome face of Maggie, although the marriage of Maggie and Alfred may still be fragile and unhappy.

"It has been heavy weather with her this last two days. Ay-- she has been northeast since she's seen you on Wednesday.” – My interpretation of this part: Maggie has been brooding over the letter for the last two days, but she got her color back after the letter was read to her.

How else would you interpret “she has been northeast since she’s seen you (the narrator) on Wednesday?” I think that “she has been northeast” means she has changed for the better temperament.

Do you mean he might think his actions justified if the married couple remain together?

The narrator may well think it was good to hide the true content of the letter to Maggie for her and her husband’s sake. The story seems to try to demonstrate how subtle men and women behave and how well we, men and women, know it but hard to express in words but we live with just suspicions.

Humm, how can I explain that expression? It's like having this bad thing thrust on you and your can't get rid of it...or like having your 'neck in a noose', but that's explaining it with another expression. Monkey is like an emotional weight, I believe.

I guess the meaning, but your explanation is a lot clearer. Thank you.

[Sapphire]

Monday Morning - let's start the day of with some Lawrence

@Virgil

"Nesh?" What is that supposed to say?

My first thought was that he meant the bird was sensitive (to changes). Maybe even fragile, but rather "nervous". I googled the word and despite "cold weather" it also means "soft, delicate" or "sensitive to cold". In short, Joey isn't that strong - Albert is stronger

We mun tell 'im it's come

Strange indeed - I guess it means "We must tell him (Albert) it (Joey) is come". If I had not read it in this context though, I would have translated "mun" to "MUst Not"

For further translation of what the father says, see JinJang's post #2928. I really like how you state "Whatever it is he's saying, it's supposed to show the old man's wisdom." That's one way to show wisdom: by letting a person talk in a strange language .

@JinJang
Interesting to suggest that the Father fooled around in his days (and maybe still does by liking Maggie a bit too much). Could very well be. I think you're indeed spot on when you say that "mother" implies here that the Mother knows nothing about Alfred's tom-foolery. - I'll go for explanation 1 with you

She had sallow and gloomy face when Joey was with her on the day when she asked the narrator to read the letter. Joey is a minor comfort to Maggie.

Interesting... Thus Joey is not as important and Albert really has nothing to worry about?! I mean, if she's not overly happy with Joey being back but rather with knowing the true meaning of the letter... I totally see why you implement it like that, but I myself will go with the explanation that it is both: she's happy after the narrator read her the letter and even more now Joey is back

How else would you interpret “she has been northeast since she’s seen you (the narrator) on Wednesday?” I think that “she has been northeast” means she has changed for the better temperament.

It does not really fit though: the narrator read the letter to her on Wednesday, found Joey Thursday morning and brings him back on Friday. It has been heavy weather with her the last 2 days. This would rather mean that the letter reading made her more fierce full - it made her like a storm. Which kind of fits maybe, as since the letter was read to her she might believe there is no secret anymore and she has some sort of power over Albert as he did not read the letter and does not knows what she knows...
It is also funny how the Father fits all these changes in Maggie to the Narrator, instead of to the arrival of Albert on Wednesday evening. He really knows that girl well...

[Sapphire]

I just found THIS on youtube (no sound). I know we are reading the Wintry and not the White Peacock, but just look at that bird! Wonderful

[Janine]

I just found THIS on youtube (no sound). I know we are reading the Wintry and not the White Peacock, but just look at that bird! Wonderful

Thanks, Saphire, that was marvelous! I loved it. No wonder Lawrence named his first book "The White Peacock"....just amazing! Guess what? I was looking on Amazon last night and now the book is listed at $39.00, for a mere paperback. Do you know how lucky you are to have found that book for $3? I had to pay about $15 - 20 for a used one ages ago.

Oh, Saphire, I laughed so hard when I saw this line of yours and appropriately in blue type:

Monday Morning - let's start the day of with some Lawrence

hahah...that's great. I hope we have made a Lawrence enthusiast out of you and jinjang, our enthusiastic newbies! Love having you both here; you are both so consistent with posting.

Unfortunately, I woke up with my left arm hurting. I am not sure what I did to it. It may have been from carrying my grandchild around on Saturday at her party. She sure got heavy. I'm not used to carting 20lbs around with me; getting old I guess. I don't know how much posting I will do today, but I am reading all of your posts and so much makes sense to me. Thanks everyone, for writing such great posts. They all are wonderful and insighful. When you want to move on with the text, let me know. I will be ready anytime to progress, but only when you are.

I have one comment about the interpretation or definition of 'nesh'. I think you are right, Saphire, and I would go for the weaker - the "soft, delicate" or "sensitive to cold". Now that I think of it, that would align the narrator (assuming it is Lawrence himself) with the bird. He had nearly died of flu and flu is usually prevalent in the winter/cold months and this had been a unusually harsh winter for him; leaving him in a very weak state. I think this would then align him to Alfred in some respect, in that he also was saved by a doting woman or women - his wife Frieda, who he referred to has being harsh in her treatment as a nursemaid, and his sister, Ada, who he preferred. Now Frieda might be aligned with Maggie, in that, at this time, Lawrence was veiwing his own mate/wife as a sort of witch and Frieda was very strong willed; he could not seem to tame Frieda. The Belgium woman, if she did nurse, Alfred, may have been kinder and gentler to him, than Maggie would have been, and attended to his every whim; therefore, I can see her character aligned with Lawrence's sister, Ada. In fact, biographically speaking, Frieda once actually accused the two of being 'too close', since they were blood/sister and brother; Frieda could be very jealous at times. See the connections or parallels. I find all of this fascinating. I had not picked up on it, until we began discussing all these aspects of the story and I found the additional biographical background. In some sense I believe Ada took the place of Lawrence's mother at this time and we all know the connotations there, that they had an unusually 'close' relationship.

Here are some more peacock videos I found on Youtube. Wow, their call is really strange - sort of sounds like a cat.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iCJkh...eature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eWTAB...eature=related

[jinjang]

hahah...that's great. I hope we have made a Lawrence enthusiast out of you and jinjang, our enthusiastic newbies! Love having you both here; you are both so consistent with posting.

I am one of those who like to finish things once started, though slowly and nonchalantly sometimes.

Janine and Virgil, this part of the story is possibly the most important one and, if we could decipher it together, it will tell a lot about the story. This is, I think, where the real dissection happens.

It does not really fit though: the narrator read the letter to her on Wednesday, found Joey Thursday morning and brings him back on Friday. It has been heavy weather with her the last 2 days. This would rather mean that the letter reading made her more fierce full - it made her like a storm. Which kind of fits maybe, as since the letter was read to her she might believe there is no secret anymore and she has some sort of power over Albert as he did not read the letter and does not knows what she knows...

I admit it is confusing. I think we need to re-examine the three sentences in the context of the story:

Ay--'er's bin northeast sin 'er seed you a Wednesday.'

I am still puzzled over this part in the context.

We mun tell 'im it's come.

I still think it says, "We must tell him it's come," because the father calls Alfred right after he says the sentence.

They a bit nesh, you know,' he concluded to me.

Sapphire cleared the third one: nesh = sensitive to cold and nervous
Sapphire, this is my opinion: Joey is a minor comfort to Maggie. One participant strongly disagreed with me at the beginning of the discussion.

And...

"A bit of to-do," another reference to sex, and maggie is flushed again. That's at least three times already lawrence has used that word in referring to her.

I thought "a bit of to-do" means there was a big fight between Maggie and Alfred, especially after "''ers not bin very bright sin' Alfred came whoam" (She has not been very bright since Alfred came home.)

Alfred's loins are constantly being highlighted.

This shows simply that men - not referring to you though, should I?-lose their heads too much to think straight over sex, ruining their marriages and their lives sometimes like Alfred on the expense of happiness of others.