Before I forget completely, I want to address the panel presentations from Monday and Tuesday. The two talks that interested me were the “Septimus as Christ” presentation and the “Different ways to read the novel” one. They, for me, led to the most interesting discussion and I wish we had had at least an entire period for each.
First, the Septimus talk. This was very engrossing for me, especially after my talk. My first thought was, “Wow, wouldn’t it be incredible if Woolf planned all of this! Any author who can include characters based off of Greek goddesses and other characters based off of Christ must be incredible talented!” As I said in class, I now think that the Septimus tie is coincidence, while the Demeter connection was actually planned. For an atheist, referencing Christ seems unlikely, even if it is used to make a point. Virginia Woolf strikes me as a woman who would not compromise her views to say something; she would simply use her talent to find a different medium with which to say that England needed change.
Staying with the same discussion, I definitely do see some sort of connection, even if it does seem to be coincidence. It could be that she unconsciously thought of Christ, or that such a religious idea was ingrained in her head so that it appeared in Septimus even without the conscious acknowledgment of what she had done. No matter what reason, if any, the Septimus character was introduced for, he is certainly important. Since all the reasons presented for his analogousness to Christ were legitimate, it was hard for me to decide which of the ideas (Demeter or Jesus) to side with as intentional. In the end, I went with the Demeter idea, probably because I knew the most about it (having presented it, and having loved Greek mythology when I was in elementary school—the abridged Iliad and Odyssey were two of my first books). It just seems like the most probable thing for Woolf to write about, since she was a feminist, was widely read in Greek myths, and was often mentioned writing in a “Homeric” style.
Now, on to the other presentation. The main part of this that interested me was the “Richard or Peter” question posed at the very end. Of course, I have to share my personal view. It is a very hard question to answer, since I know the characters so well inside and out that I feel as if I am condemning a friend if I choose poorly. Either way, I am hurting Peter or Richard, both of whom I like a lot. In fact, I feel as if I were a character, I would be a blend of them, and can see sides of me through them as the book progresses. In Peter’s defense, he was her first love, and certainly affected her greatly. She clearly still cares for him, and he for her. He represents things she doesn’t admire in life (lack of ambition, disdain for her lifestyle, etc) but the fact that she is so overwhelmed when he shows up seems to show that she really does love him, deep down. That she feels so ashamed at the party when he is looking at her with judgment speaks for itself—he means a LOT to her. However, Richard also has a grip on Clarissa’s heart. He is clearly a person to be admired: not cocky, doesn’t feel entitled, kind and sincere, the list goes on and on. However, I question whether he and Clarissa are right for each other. I got the feeling that Clarissa chose him strictly because she felt that was what society required of her. Her goal was always to be a popular member of the upper class, and Richard must have seemed to be the perfect way to achieve this. This sounds mean to Clarissa, but I also think she truly loves him. What I believe, however, is that she forced this love upon herself. After all, who wouldn’t want to love Richard? Their marriage appears, to me, to be less of a love connection for her, and more of a business connection, with the bonus of having a husband she loves. I mean, it’s clear she does love him. She feels as if she has let him down with the smallest blunder (even if he notices nothing wrong), she strives to please him constantly. However, I can’t quite bring myself to say that they belong together. They can’t even talk about what’s important—their feelings and goals—and if communication can fail so easily, I don’t want to call their love “deep”.
Therefore, my opinion is that in a perfect world, Clarissa would not have married at all. I don’t know what the social norms were at the time, so it is possible that this would have damned her in society or something… I don’t know. However, In A Perfect World, she would be able to attain her goals sans her connection to Richard. Since she clearly cares strongly for both men in her life, I think that she should have maintained a strong friendship with each of them, but not married either. I can’t predict what an alternate life would have been like for her had she married Peter, but I am fairly certain that he would have led her away from Richard. The combination of Peter and Richard shows Clarissa’s tangled feelings of what she wants, and who she is. I feel that she truly needs both of them in her life to be happy. They both complete different parts of her, and the times when all three were friends were some of the best moments of her life. It may seem like the easy way out of an answer, but I really don’t see any better alternative. For the sake of imagery, I will divide Clarissa into two: “Clareter” and “Clarichard.” Assuming she must choose one of the men to marry, she will essentially be killing half of her soul. That may seem drastic, but it represents my view that she needs both of them to stabilize her. Another way to look at it would be to place the three of them on a scale. If you were to remove one of the guys (the one she doesn’t marry” the scale will tilt toward her husband’s views and life, until they fall off. This fall marks the point of no return”—when she is too set in that lifestyle to recover and be complete once again. I think that is what has happened to Clarissa in Mrs. Dalloway. She is fully centered in Clarichard mode, so life throws her a curveball with Peter’s reappearance. She is too far gone to hope for a return to when Peter was a part of her as well, she can only think back fondly of times when she was more content. His appearance is sad to me, since it is just too late to change anything. Clareter is shriveled up in the attic of her soul, so all that remains is regret that things had to turn out as they did.
A situation that has Clarissa staying with both men is beneficial to them as well, although in different ways. For Peter, Clarissa is life. With her, he is emotional, active, excited. He is living. When she chooses Richard, his life is changed forever. Richard’s adoration of Clarissa is not necessarily any less that Peter’s, but it is definitely shown in a different way. He had trouble portraying his love to her, the husband who just does what he assumes his role requires of him. Getting flowers for her is a nice action, but as we know, the flowers represented something he couldn’t say in words. I think that Clarissa is a stabilizing factor in Peter and Richard’s live, just as they are to her. Richard is definitely less reliant on her than she on him, but she obviously matters a great deal to him, so she should be in his life. If the three of them were to maintain a strong friendship throughout their lives, Clarissa would be truly content. Peter would help her stay carefree and fun-loving, not neglecting some things to achieve others. Richard would keep her realistic, not getting strung along by Peter’s wild plans for the future. I see this situation as a rubber band with Peter and Richard on the ends, and Clarissa in the middle, every time one of the men pulls her too far in one direction, the other end counteracts this effect so that Clarissa remains in tune with both sides of her, even if she doesn’t consciously recognize why she needs both of them. The only problem with this rubber band representation is that is has Peter and Richard competing to pull Clarissa towards themselves. In reality, I think that each tug of the rubber band would pull her in a positive direction, so that she is constantly moving forward with the help of Peter and Richard.
(Sorry for the randomness, I didn’t plan all this out when I started writing)
