I found myself particularly intrigued by Birkin in Lawrence's chapter, "Man to Man." The reader has seen Birkin unable to commit to Ursula in a traditional sense. He hates the concept of "love." Lawrence even writes, "But he would rather not live than accept the love she proffered. The old way of love seemed a dreadful bondage..." (199). He is entirely internally conflicted on the matter and has attempted to convince her of something beyond love (whatever that may mean).
However, when Birkin speaks to Gerald, he suddenly breaks down in a manner that it seems a man ordinarily would do with a woman (Ursula in this case). Birkin says, "But we ought to swear to love each other, you and I, implicitly and perfectly, finally, without any possibility of going back on" (206-7). This is what Ursula longs to hear Birkin say to her, and yet he's actually using the word "love" with his friend, Gerald. Is there a hint of homosexuality here? What is the difference between his "love" for Gerald and for Ursula? Birkin continues to plead with Gerald to be true to one another. He pours his heart out as he has never really done with Ursula. He more so seems to argue with Ursula on all of these concepts.
Yet as soon as Gerald responds to Birkin somewhat coldly, Birkin attempts to back out of his statement: "You must tell me what you think, later. You know what I mean? not sloppy emotionalism. An impersonal union that leaves one free" (207). This sounds more like his tone with Ursula. What's going on here? Is his love for Gerald stronger than his love for Ursula? Does it seem homosexual? What void is Birkin attempting to fill?
I'd like to point out one more thing-- at the end of "Man to Man," Birkin refers to Gerald as a "black-clothed form" (210), which is a strange contrast to the multiple other times in the novel when he, along with other characters (Gudrun), are referred to as "white forms." I can't say at the moment what exactly this implies-- just making some simple observations.
I would wager that it's more than a hint of homosexuality. Consider pp 60, in "In the Train": "He looked at Gerald, and saw how his blue eyes were lit up with a little flame of curious desire. He saw too how good looking he was. Gerald was attractive, his blood seemed fluid and electric...there was a certain beauty, a beautiful passivity in all his body, his moulding." This is certainly homoerotic not necessarily in the sense of sexual identification (which notion it is doubtful Lawrence feels strong allegiance to), but in the notion of an erotic attraction between males, plainly described.
ReplyDelete