Although there are already a lot of posts dealing with the relationship of Gerald and Birkin, I would like to point out a few other things on the matter. The two men share definitely more than just friendship. At many points throughout the novel we see their mutual affectionj and attraction towards each other and the chapter Gladiatorial obviously features homosexual eroticism. A crucial point for their relationship is the chapter Man to Man, where Birkin asks Gerald to swear the Blutsbrüderschaft: "We will swear to each other, one day, shall we?" [...] "We will swear to stand by each other - be true to each other - ultimately - infallibly - given to each other, organically - without possibility of taking back." Birkin is willing to admit to their love and offers Gerald the possibility of a relationship with him. Gerald however, although he seems somehow pleased with the idea, avoids an affirmative answer and thus rejects Birkin. We have a similar, but even more obvious situation in the chapter Marriage or Not. Birkin again offers Gerald the possibility of a "perfect relationship between man and man" as an alternative to marriage, which Gerald again refuses because of two reasons. Firstly, he is afraid to stand by this "alternative" relationship because it is against the "established world" and the "established order". So he seems to be afraid to act against the norms of society. Secondly, he rejects the offer because it would involve his commitment. In my opinion Gerald could thus be called a coward, because he chooses the easy way of marrying Gudrun and denying his feelings for Birkin to match the social conventions of the time and to avoid being commited.
Living with this "lie" might also to be an explanation for Gerald's state of mind towards the end of the novel (I don't want to spoil the novel for those who haven't read it so far, but consider that if you read the end).
Something that bothers me also is the question, why Lawrence chose the title Women in Love. The feelings of women being displayed in a novel seems rather common. In this novel, however, we learn much more about the feelings of men as usually in a novel, as somebody has pointed out before in this blog. So why the title?
PS: I apologize for my English. Hopefully it is not totally incomprehensible ;)
It is totally comprehensible!
ReplyDeleteYeah, your English is wonderful. And your ideas. I feel somewhat thwarted by the title, and want it to be more about Ursula and Gudrun. Gerald is certainly a coward, I think, or in some way compelled by fate. Another metaphor the book uses for this is the mechanical. Gerald, like a machine, really has no choice in how he proceeds. His essential emptiness, his lack of a center, makes him unable to fight his compulsion to simply proceed with his social role and his death-sex catastrophe with Gudrun.
ReplyDelete