Evening star., 1936-05-16

this. And paradoxically. none makes
him half 30 wretched . fgure.
For he appears in Z. T.s work
(she was the Miriam" Of Sons and
Lovers"J as so much less than
man that for the reader to have any
feeling except an embarrassed con.
tempt toward him will be impossi.
BILE. The sum Of his relation with the
author seems to have been simply
that he needed . human being to
torture. that he was not able to ind
any one weaker than himself and
so had to seek some one 50 strong
that, out Of pity, belief in his genius
and plain and human charity, she
permitted his spiritual sadisms. 1t
makes . revolving picture.
In the beginning Of course 1t was
not clear to her that their acquain.
tance would take such Q course. Law.
renee was older, better educated and
generally freer. She accepted him as
q sort Of mentor. But before the end
of the relation. she had come to see
clearly what she represented to him
and to what amazing levels Of shab-
biness he would sink In order to keep
her in the role In which he needed
her. When finally he crystallized that
role by putting in Sons and Lovers"
q distorted and, to her, an outrageous
construction on her tolerance-when
he no longer limited his mental de-
formity to her in the privacy Of
friendship but seemed driven to pub
lish what he hoped were its implica-
tions for her and so convince him.
self. by writing them down, that they
were true-she did cross him OF.
She says, He held over me a doom Of
negation and futility. dreaded
lest should come to fulfill it as he
seemed convinced that I must"
Yet with so ugly story to tell,
E. T. shows great kindliness and de-
tachment. She was genuinely this
mans friend. even after she knew
what obsession allied him. That cam
not be doubted. She saw his betrayal
his frenzied betrayal-of her friend.
ship as part Of his obsession. She
came to regard him as a creature
jerked about on strings, strings which
he pretended to hate, but without
which he would have beer unwilling
to live. And she does not forgive
him because she never hated him.
Yet, with all her charity. one has to
wonder at her tolerance in staying
by him so long as one reads the book,
and more particularly as one reads
her quotations from his conversat ton.
That he was an appalling bore is
cryingly evident She must have
longed many times to wiring his self
pitying neck. AS she records herself
aS thinking ut one state his life
would be rich indeed If it gave him
second time what she had to give.
The efforts Of weak natures to free
themselves can be admirable, but
there is . great dearth Of any ad-
mirable quality in Lawrence as this
Unconditional book sets him down.
For his efforts were not really to free
himself; it Is impossible to think,
from this work, that he wanted to be
free: that he did not dread freedom.
Instead, with all the egoism of q
strong being, he felt Q need to as
Sert himself and so he turned on the
creature whom, he was sure, would
never strike back. It Is Q picture, in
other words, Of q spiritual bully. tor
menting and worrying . nature so
large that it felt no need to retail
late. As said, it Is not pretty. Yet,
in its plain, matter of fact honesty,
it Is more worthy than many Of the
ID. H. Lawrence Series" to date.
PIGEONS AND SPIDERS. BY Maui
rice Maeterlinck. Translated by
Bernard Mall. New York: w. w.
Norton & Co.
THE famous poet here adds two
more nature studies to his 'Life
of the Bee" choosing as his subject
the little water spider and the common
pigeon. His delicate charm of style
combines with precise and reasoned
observation. making Of this small book
one Of those minor but precious lit
erary pleasures that come to readers
all too seldom. He admires the spider
the pigeon he finds sadly in need Of
debunking. The spider is ingenious,
dainty, courageous. The pigeon is by
no means gentle and faithful, as pop
ularly imagined, nor even considerate
of its young. The one supposedly the
most rapacious Of insects, the other
the symbol Of peace and serenity-they