It was kind of touching, but I kept wondering why, if she was in such poor shape and he was so determined to take care of her, he trundled off to dangerous Africa and left her alone! Clearly, he felt he needed the money, but how destitute were they? He talked about how she could go stay with her brother, etc., but were they really that extremely poor that they'd have to separate to survive? Right after he muses over his drunken infidelities, he says it isn't fair that "just when you were old and needed each other most, you lost your money and couldn't keep together."
I guess I just didn't grasp why circumstances would become so dire that they'd have to part ways! A lot of terribly poor people are married and live together.
It made me wonder whether it was more about his manly pride and social position. Like a throwback to British notions about money and class, the idea that if you can't do something in the right style, then don't bother — like how in Jane Austen people "can't" get married because they don't have a proper income or social position, and meanwhile people of the "lower orders" are marrying and procreating left and right because they're not hung up on the proper "forms."
KC, I agree it seemed more like a social thing -- telling her not to cut back on expenses, giving her anything to worry about. Still kind of touching despite the infidelities. Like the trip sounded like pure hell and was a karmic payback for his earlier ways.
My first reaction when I saw the infidelities mentioned was "well, so what?" But then I started thinking about the way it all was framed, and it made me reconsider somewhat my sympathy for Mr. Lever. The cheating is described as something he usually did while drunk and being "egged" on by his friends. The "skirts" meant nothing more than sex to him, and he never considered marrying any of those women because he was "devoted" to his wife. Why did the author include this? It sounded to me like maybe there was a fair amount of guilt in the background that Lever tried to minimize in his own mind by saying he was really only going along with what the fellows wanted and wasn't doing anything for his own personal gratification, you know. Of course, if a married female character were portrayed as periodically getting drunk and having multiple sexual affairs at the urging of her friends, I doubt we'd view the matter in the same offhand way! And Mr. Lever damn sure wouldn't excuse such behavior in his wife, even if the affairs "meant nothing" to her. Probably if she had behaved how he had behaved in the marriage he wouldn't now give a rat's bum about taking care of her in old age!
So, any thoughts on why the narrator told us about the infidelities?
I forgot all about the infidelities! Obviously my reaction was also "well, so what?" Call me cynical, but people having sexual flings outside marriage is no longer particularly scandalous or interesting to me.
Perhaps the author included it to imply that Mr. Lever did feel guilty for not appreciating his wife as he should have in his youth and that his willingness to risk his life to provide for her in her ill health was part of atoning for those earlier transgressions.
It was kind of touching, but I kept wondering why, if she was in such poor shape and he was so determined to take care of her, he trundled off to dangerous Africa and left her alone! Clearly, he felt he needed the money, but how destitute were they? He talked about how she could go stay with her brother, etc., but were they really that extremely poor that they'd have to separate to survive? Right after he muses over his drunken infidelities, he says it isn't fair that "just when you were old and needed each other most, you lost your money and couldn't keep together."
ReplyDeleteI guess I just didn't grasp why circumstances would become so dire that they'd have to part ways! A lot of terribly poor people are married and live together.
It made me wonder whether it was more about his manly pride and social position. Like a throwback to British notions about money and class, the idea that if you can't do something in the right style, then don't bother — like how in Jane Austen people "can't" get married because they don't have a proper income or social position, and meanwhile people of the "lower orders" are marrying and procreating left and right because they're not hung up on the proper "forms."
KC, I agree it seemed more like a social thing -- telling her not to cut back on expenses, giving her anything to worry about. Still kind of touching despite the infidelities. Like the trip sounded like pure hell and was a karmic payback for his earlier ways.
ReplyDeleteMy first reaction when I saw the infidelities mentioned was "well, so what?" But then I started thinking about the way it all was framed, and it made me reconsider somewhat my sympathy for Mr. Lever. The cheating is described as something he usually did while drunk and being "egged" on by his friends. The "skirts" meant nothing more than sex to him, and he never considered marrying any of those women because he was "devoted" to his wife. Why did the author include this? It sounded to me like maybe there was a fair amount of guilt in the background that Lever tried to minimize in his own mind by saying he was really only going along with what the fellows wanted and wasn't doing anything for his own personal gratification, you know. Of course, if a married female character were portrayed as periodically getting drunk and having multiple sexual affairs at the urging of her friends, I doubt we'd view the matter in the same offhand way! And Mr. Lever damn sure wouldn't excuse such behavior in his wife, even if the affairs "meant nothing" to her. Probably if she had behaved how he had behaved in the marriage he wouldn't now give a rat's bum about taking care of her in old age!
ReplyDeleteSo, any thoughts on why the narrator told us about the infidelities?
I forgot all about the infidelities! Obviously my reaction was also "well, so what?" Call me cynical, but people having sexual flings outside marriage is no longer particularly scandalous or interesting to me.
ReplyDeletePerhaps the author included it to imply that Mr. Lever did feel guilty for not appreciating his wife as he should have in his youth and that his willingness to risk his life to provide for her in her ill health was part of atoning for those earlier transgressions.