1 OF

THE PIETY AID STORIES

Dissertation Presented To The Faculty Of Irts

University of Hong Kong

In Partial Fulfilment

of the Requirements for the Degree

of

Master of Arts (English Linguistic Studies)

bF

Poon Yuk-IaBf , laita

August, 1989

Abstract

This dissertation aims at analysing the narrative discourse

of Katherine Mansfieldls THe Garden Party and Other Short

Stories. Since a discourse involves the participation of both

the speaker and the addressee, and language serves as the

mediator of their interaction, the approach of this dissertation is

a linguistic one* It attempts to answer the six questions, each

raised in a separate section, which centre round two major areas:

Mansfield's narrative techniques and analyses of some aspects of

the narrative discourse* The six questions are: (1) What kind of

narrator does Mansfield choose? (2) What perspective does

Mansfield adopt? (3) What is the structure of the narrative?

(4) What is the nature of the narrative? (5) What is the

relationship between the speaker and the addressee? (6) What are

the attitude and world view of the implied author as shown in the

discourse?

OF

SECTION 1

SECTIOI II

SECTIOi III

SECTION If

SECTIOI ¥

SECTIOI YI

SECTIOI VII

SECTIOI ¥111

FOOTIOTES

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Introduction

Mansfieldfs narrative techniques: What

Mad of narrator does Mansfield choose?

Mansfield's narrative techniques: What

perspective does Mansfield adopt?

Analyses of some aspects of the narrative

discourse: What is the structure of the

narrative?

Analyses of some aspects of the narrative

discourse: What is the nature of the

narrative

Analyses of some aspects of the narrative

discourse: What is the relationship

between the speaker and the addressee?

Analyses of some aspects of the narrative

discourse: What are the attitude and world

view of the implied author as shown in the

discourse?

Conclusion

1-3

4-12

13-31

32-40

41-48

49-61

62-68

69-70

71-72

73-74

SECTION I I1T10DUCTIOH

Very few critical works have so far been published on

Katherine Mansfield, a New Zealand writer who died prematurely at

the age of thirty-four in 1923 and who had published only three

collections of short stories before her death. Four collections

another volume of stories, a selection of poems and her

Journal and Letters were published posthumously. The very

fact that Mansfield has been neglected does not mean that she is

a lesser writer. On the contrary, despite her tiny scope, 'the

three volumes of short stories which appeared in her brief

lifetime persuade one to believe that she had already found

herself as a writer of rare individual gifts' ( Mansfield, 1922:

7 }* She has a discerning eye for the subtleties and trifles of

life and her language is poetic, full of figures of speech like

metaphors, similes, personifications, onomatopoeia, etc* What is

more, the narrative techniques manifested in her stories are

ingenious.

In this paper I am going to analyse the discourse created in

Katherine Mansfield's The Garden Party and Other Short Stories,

and I would like to focus my attention on the narrative discourse

of the book. As for the approach, I will not follow the one of

traditional literary criticism. Instead, I am trying to look at

that part of the language through which discourse is produced

with a view to analysing the significance of certain aspects of

the narrative discourse of Katherine Mansfield's work. As I have

mentioned in the previous paragraph, there is very little

literary criticism on Mansfield's works, let alone any on the

narrative discourse of her works. So this paper is aeant to be a

practical work, which draws on my observations of Mansfield's

works and my knowledge of the discourse theory.

First and foremost, let us define what discourse is. Todorov

defines discourse as f any speech-act supposing a speaker and a

listener, and in the speaker an intention to influence the

listener in some way1 ( Todorov, 1977: 25 ). Fowler holds a

similar view and treats the language of fiction as discourse —

'as active utterance and as ideological commitment" ( Fowler,

1983: 72 }. He further expounds the concept of discourse in

fiction as follows:

Discourse is the property of language which mediates the

interpersonal relationships which- must be carried by any act

of communication.

{ Fowler, 1983:52 )

Discourse is studies in all aspects of the novel to which

concepts like dialogue, point of view, attitude, world view,

tone, are relevant: the indication in language structure of the

author's beliefs, the character of his thought-processes, the

types of judgment he makes; similarly for the narrator and the

characters within the fiction; and the whole network of

interpersonal relationships between author, characters and

implied reader, as these are mediated through language.

Discourse in my sense is analogous to modality in the structure

of sentences.

{ Fowler, 1983: 45 }

So when we look at the discourse in fiction, we have to examine

the active interaction between the speaker and the addressee, and

the language that mediates their relationship. Then how about

narrative discourse? Fowler says:

Narrative discourse is created out of the interaction of the

culture's conventions, the author's deployment of these

conventions as they are coded in languaget and the reader's

activity in releasing- meaning from the text. The co-

operative process is ... inter subjective, a communicative act

calling upon shared values.

( Fowler, 1983: 81 }

Once again, the communication and interaction between the

author/narrator and the characters and readers are essential.

Since language is the means of communication and the mediator of

interaction, we have to look for the linguistic clues, for

example, in the choice of words and of syntactic constructions,

when we examine the narrative discourse*

SECTION II MANSFIELD'S NARRATIVE TECHNIQUES: WHAT KIND

OF NARRATOR DOES MANSFIELD CHOOSE?

Like most modern fiction writers, Mansfield favours the third

person 'centre of consciousness' narrator ( sometimes called the

third person reflector by Henry James ), through whom authors

filter their narratives ( Booth, 1983: 153 }. Except two stories

( The Young- Girl and The Lady's Maid ), all the stories in

this collection { The Garden Partyand Other Short Stories )

basically adopt the third person f centre of consciousness'

narrator. What kind of narration is it exactly? According to

Fowler, this narrator is a story-teller who does not tell his own

story, but someone else's story, or the event which he happens to

have witnessed ( Fowler, 1983: 83-84 }. Fowler even categorizes

this narrator as the type B narrator in his later work. The type

B narrator is not a participating character of the story, but an

outsider. However, he has access to the feelings of his

characters. So this omniscient author, who has knowledge of

everything in the story, is able to provide an internal view of

his characters, which is in some way framed by authorial ideology

( Fowler, 1986: 137-138 K

Maybe it is time to examine some stories and find out what

kind of narrator is used in them. If we look at the opening

paragraph of The Garden Party, we will find that it is an

omniscient author who speaks.

Mnd after all the weather was ideal. Hiey could not have had

a more perfect day for a garden party if they had ordered it.

Windless, warm, the sky without a cloud. Only the blue was

veiled with a haze of light gold, as it is sometimes in early

summer. The gardener had been up since dawn, mowing the

lawns and sweeping them, until the grass and the dark flat

rosettes where the daisy plants had been seemed to shine. As for

the roses, you could not help feeling they understood that roses

are the only flowers that impress people at garden parties; the

only flowers that everybody is certain of knowing. Hundreds,

yes, literally hundreds, had come out in a single night; the

green bushes bowed down as though they had been visited by

archangels.

( Mansfield, 1983: 65 }

The use of an evaluative adverbial' "after air and a conditional

in the second sentence indicates it is the narrator's opinion

rather than a mere factual report. So it must be the discourse

of the narrator, a type B narrator, who is not a participating

character of the story as he addresses the characters as * they'.

The metaphorical language in the fourth sentence and the last

sentence further enhances the effect of estrangement. A switch

of tense into present serves two purposes, the first having a

generic sense as in fas it is sometimes in early summer* and

'roses are the only flowers that impress people at garden

parties1r and the second suggesting a community of viewpoint

between the narrator and reader as in * the only flowers that

everybody is certain of Mowing". Moreover, the shifting of the

pronoun from third person to second person also conveys a generic

sense. The generic sentence is a typical device used by an

assertive story-teller to impress people while the communal

viewpoint once again draws a line between the narrator and the

characters. Nonetheless, the narrator does not have knowledge of

the external world alone. He has gained some access to the minds

of the characters. For example, in The Garden Party, the

narrator gives us glimpses of thoughts of the innocent little

girl who comes from a rich family,

(a) Laura's upbringing made her wonder for a moment whether it

was quite respectful of a workman to talk to her of

bang's slap in the eye.

( Mansfield, 1983: 67 )

(b) To Laura's astonishment her mother behaved just

Jose; it was harder to bear because she seemed amused.

She refused to take Laura seriously.

{ Mansfield, 1983: 78 )

(c) 'I don't understand,1 said Laura, and she walked quickly

out of the room into her own bedroom* There, quite by

chance, the first she saw was this charming girl in the

mirror, in her black hat trimmed with gold daisies, and a

long black velvet ribbon* Never had she imagined she

could look like that*

{ Mansfield, 1983: 79 )

(d) Laura was terribly nervous.

( Mansfield, 1983:84 }

le are thus given a chance to Lave a glimpse of Laura's feeling.

The linguistic marker verba sentieiidi, which .reans ' vords

denoting- feelings, thoughts, and p^iceptzons" f Fowler, 1986: 136

5 *, such as * astonishment", "it was harder to bear1 (b) and

'nervous" (d), signifies the subjective point of view of Laura,

But it would be wrong to say at this stage that Laura is

liberated and can feel frtt to express herself. The discourse is

basically still the narrative discourse, the discourse of the

omniscient narrator rather than that of Laura. 1 variety of

modal structures are used in the above excerpts, for instance,

verbs of evaluation like 8 wonder9 (a), 'refused*, "seemed9 Cb);

verbs of prediction like "imagined" (c); evaluative adverbials

like 'Just like', 'seriously", "terribly' (b), * quite by chance"

(c); evaluative adjectives like * charming* (c). 'Modality is the

grammar of explicit t, the by which people express

their degree of to the truth of the propositions they

utter, and their on the desirability or otherwise of the

states of affairs referred to** { Fowler, 1986: 131 )

Therefore, the feeling of Laura is in fact f railed by the view of

the omniscient author.

Is has been Mentioned previously Mansfield basically adopts

the type B narrator in all the stories in this collection except

twor is it true that she sticks to what she has achieved and

never goes beyond its threshold? It would be better perhaps to

probe into the text ia orier to get insight. The following

extracts taien Iron fbe Gardes Party are about Laura's

when she pays a visit to the lead »mafs boose:

(a) His smile was so easy, so friendly, that Laura recovered.

What nice eyes he had, small but such a dark blue And now

she looked at the others, they were smiling*, too. 'Cheer

up, we won't bite,' their smile seemed to say* How very

nice workmen were! And what a beautiful morningi She

mustn't mention the morning; she must be business-like* The

marquee*

( Mansfield, 1983: 66-67 1

(b) It's all the fault, she decided, *** of these absurd class

distinctions* Well, for her part, she didn't feel them*

Not a bit, not an atom *** And now there came the chock-

chock of wooden hammers* Someone whistled, someone sang out,

'Are you right there, matey?' 'Matey!' The friendliness of

it, the the — Just to prove how happy she was, just

to show the tall fellow how at home she felt, and how she

despised stupid conventions, Laura took a big bite of her

bread-and-butter as she stared at the little drawing* She

felt just like a work-girl*

( Mansfield, 1983: 68-69 }

(c) 0i, impossible* Fancy cream puffs so soon after breakfast*

The very idea made one shudder*

( Mansfield, 1983: 75 )

(d) Mow quiet it seemed after tJie afternoom* Mere she ras going

down the Mil to 5€t»eirJiere where a JUA Jaj cfearf, anil she

realize it* w&y cmtldM*t she?

( Mansfield, 1983: 83 }

(e) There lay a young man, fast asleep sleeping so soundly,

so deeply, that he was far, far away from them both. Oh, so

remotef so peaceful. He was dreaming. Never wake him up

again ... He was wonderful, beautiful. While they were

laughing and while the band was playing, this marvel had

come to the lane. Happy ... happy ... All is well, said

that sleeping face. This is just as it should be. I am

content*

( Mansfield, 86-87 }

The language of these excerpts provides an answer to the above

question. First of all, the use of deixis 'now1 (a) and 'here1

(d) indicates that it is no longer the narrator's discourse, but

the character's own discourse. Because the narrator would say

'And then she looked at the others' and " There she was going down

the hill' if it were really from his point of view. Besides, a

shift of tense from past to present as in (e) signals a change in

point of view, i.e. from the narrator's to the character's, as

the narrator normally uses the past tense when he reports a past

action performed by the character or describes the state of mind

of the character in a past time. The use of pronoun is another

special linguistic device in the narrative. The narrator is

describing the feelings of Laura and uses the third person

singular pronoun *sAev to refer to Laura, Hie sudden shift of

the third person proaomm fshe* to the first person singular

pronoun f Jf means the narrator has already entered the mind of

Laura and gives her m free hand to tell her ova story.

Apart from the deixis, tense and pronoun, the vocabulary and

syntax also show that it is the language of a child, i.e. the

discourse of Laura rather than that of the narrator, 'cream

[Cream] puffs' (c) are always on the mind of the child, who tends

to use a very figurative way to describe things, for example, the

use of omnomatopoeia f chock-chock' to describe the sound of

wooden hammers, or sometimes to use a somewhat exaggerated way —

- 'not an atom1 to describe * not a bit" (bK A child's

syntax tends to be simple and repetitive. Most of the sentences

in the above extracts are simple sentences, and there are only a

few complex sentences. There is a repeated use of the structure

"so ... so1 (a) and (e), * Just to ... just to1 (b). The constant

use of exclamations reveals the innocence and wonder of the

child. Moreover, a child likes to pretend to be mature, and the

last two sentences in (a) is a very good example, 'these [These]

absurd class distinctions' and 'She [she] felt just like a work-

ffirP (b) illustrate the romanticism of a young girl. Laura's

unusual response to the manfs death in (e) demonstrates a young

girlfs capacity for creativity and imagination.

At this stage we can no longer say Mansfield still uses the

type B narrator in the narrative. She has in fact shifted to a

different type of narrator — type A, which "consists of first-

person narration by a participating" character, or third-person

narration strongly coloured with personal markers of the

character's world-view or including internal Apologue1 ( Fowler,

1986: 135 }. Type A differs fro» type B in the sense that type A

narration is wholly subjective while type B narration Allows an

authorial phrasing of the character's feelings, Ihich tfpe of

narrator does Bansfield eventually choose ia the story [13?

If

B or type A? The answer is: neither type B nor type A. To be

more exact, one should say: a combinat ion of both. The

juxtaposition of these two types of narrator in the same story

helps to create a new style called free indirect style { FIS } :

1 internal perspective in which the character's subjective

feelings , given in type A narration transformed into third

person, are interwoven with and framed by the author's account

of the character's inner state type { type B )" ( Fowler , 1986:

138 ) . The greatest advantage of this type is that the author is

able to put side by side two sets of values { i.e. the

character's as well as the narrator's ) , one of which may be an

implied critique of the other, without giving any direct and

explicit judgment on his character as some traditional authors

do. The fol lowing two excerpts f r o m ' The Garden Party'

illustrate the advantage of the FIS quite well, In (a) the cook

treats the two little girls with cream puffs whereas in {b} the

mother asks Laura to send some food to the poor family.

(a) 'Have one each, my dears, * said cook in her comfortable

voice.

'Yer ma won't know. f

Ob, impossible* Fancy cream puffs so soon, after breakfast.

The very idea made one shudder. Mil the same, two minutes

later Jose and Laura were licking* their fingers with that

absorbed inward loo* that only comes from whipped

( Mansfield, 1983: 15 1

Cb) *Get me tie Jtiff Msket out of the stairs

"Art, jffriNber, *fc> jw really tMoi it's & good iifea?* said

ioir curious, she seemed to Jte Hfforeat from

11

them all. To take scraps from their party* Mould the poor

woman really like that?

{ Mansfield, 1983: 83 )

The second paragraph of (a) includes two views: the view of Jose

and Laura, and the view of the narrator. At first, Jose and

Laura refuse to eat cream puffs since they have just had their

breakfast. But, the narrator, through using the adverbial 'All

the same' puts forward his judgment and concludes that Jose and

Laura are, after all, children who cannot resist the temptation

of cream puffs. In (b), the linguistic markers 'Again*, 'bow

curious' and the verb of evaluation "seemed' reflect the

narrator's view of Laura, the following infinitive sentence and

the question show the doubt of Laura and it is the very own view

of Laura that confirms the narratorfs judgment of Laura.

Now, perhaps we can attempt to give an answer to the question

'What kind of narrator does Mansfield choose?". Mansfield is

quite consistent in the use of narrator in her stories. She

interweaves type A and type B narrations throughout almost all

the stories in this collection, and thus creates a new style

called FIS. The use and significance of FIS will be further

looked into in the following section.

12

SECTION III MMSFIELD'S MRR&TI7E TECHHIQI305S: HIT

PERSPECTIVE DOES HMSFIELB ADOPT?

M a n s f i e l d o f t e n begins her s to r ies w i t h an ex te rna l

perspective. Again, she seldom stays with where she starts* An

internal perspective is in f ac t the u l t ima te goal that she

desires to achieve, for her aim in writing is to dig deeper in

life and explore its meanings. *lt the Bay* t the longest story

in this collect ion, is a good example to i l lus t ra te the

perspective of Mansfield's stories.

Part I of the story is a description of the bay before dawn*

The second person pronoun in * Yon could not see —* and 'Perhaps

if you had waked up .. „ f indicates the narrator is talking to the

readers about the beautiful scenery at the bay. The speculative

verb and adverb "seemed' and 'perhaps*, the aodal auxiliary

'might have seeded1 and the repeated use of 'as though* and f as

if1 are words of estrangement, which help to provide an external

perspective. Such a descriptive scene would be made totally

external by other authors* But Mansfield always gives her

description a magic touch and animates everything. The sheep and

the old sheep-dog are personified. The use of onomatopoeia f Baa!

Baa!' ( Mansfield, 1983: 10 } breaks the silence of the dawn.

The repetition of the adjective 'sane* in 'For a time they* seemed

to be always on the sane piece of grvwf. Hiere alieadf was

stretched the sa®dy road with shallow puddles? the same

iusies s4ore*f 0a eitfier side mi the $m& sMdow

Baitstield, *1W3: 11 I sJk©*s the boredon of the shepherd, tlie

mi tie old dog. X* other words, tie |ws|*ectl¥e of tie

13

passage has already shifted from external to internal. The

voices of the above three described objects have already

infiltrated into the narrator's voice. The combination of the

present-tense adverb * now* and the past-tense verb { Mansfield,

1983: 11 ) shows the two deictic spheres, one referring to the

narrator and the other the characters, are placed side by side.

That means voices from different deictic spheres are interwoven,

thus creating a dialogic relationship. It is very obvious that

in the sentence ' It was marvellous how quietly the mist thinned,

sped away, dissolved from the shallow plain, rolled up from the

hush and was pone as if in a hurry to escape* { Mansfield, 1983:

11 } the internal view of the shepherd (i.e. *It was marvellous']

and the external view of the narrator { ' as if in a hurry to

escape* } are intermingled. Mansfield continues to describe the

scene at the bay using an internal perspective, i.e., from the

perspectives of the shepherd, the old sheep-dog and the sheep.

The following is a funny little scene seen from the point of view

of the old sheep-dog Wag:

Then the first inhabitant appeared; it was the Burnells' cat

Florrie,' sitting on the gatepostf far too early as usual, looting

for their milk-girl. When she saw the old sheep-dog she sprang

up quickly f arched her back, drew in her tabby head* and seemed

to give a little fastidious shiver* *ffgh! Mhat a coarse,

revolting creature!9 said Florrie* But the old sheep dog* not

looking-up, waggled past, flinging out Ms legs from side to

side. Only one of his ears twitched to prowe that be saw* md

thought Mr a silly joting female.

I Sansfieid* 1§8J: 12 )

14

The antagonism between the cat and the sheep-dog is clear. The

expressions 'far too early as usual' f 'her tabby head* f fa little

fastidious shiver'f fa silly young female9 are words of criticism

made by the old sheep-dog. Towards the end of part I, fWag- ran

out along- a ledge of rock after something- that smelledr and ran

back disgusted.' { Mansfield, 1983: 13 } The use of verba

sentiendi 'disgusted' shows that it is obviously the view of the

old sheep-dog.

Many an author adopts an internal perspective and depicts the

mind of the character yet still from the point of view of the

narrator or author. But Mansfield gradually discards her own or

the narrator's point of view in the course of narrative and sets

her characters free in order that they can narrate their own

stories. Therefore , we can have a chance to probe into the

consciousness of the characters and have a more thorough

understanding of their psyches. Free indirect style, stream of

consciousness (2) and flashbacks are the devices that Mansfield

uses to depict the psyches of her characters. While allowing her

characters to express their views freely, Mansfield does not

totally suppress the voice of the narrator, whose view is in fact

constantly infiltrated into the views of the characters. The

narrator's voice soitetiaes helps to throw light on the psyches

and minds of the characters. Let us take the examples of Linda

and Beryl and exaaine tke internal and psychological perspective

of 'Mt tire Bay1.

tJHsr picofrees stone/ the

glittered!f il tie *er*ftdtf polost In

gold flame. If only one had time to look at these flowers long

enough, time to get over the sense of novelty and strangeness,

time to know them! But as soon as one paused to part the petals,

to discover the under-side of the l e a f , along case Life and one

swept away. And, lying- in her cane chair, Linda felt so light;

she felt like a leaf. Along- cane Life like a wind and she was

seized and shaken; she had to go. Oh dear, would it always be

so? Was there no escape?

Now she sat on the veranda of their Tasmanian home, leaning-

against her father's knee. And he premised, "As soon as you and

I are old enough, linny, we'll cut off somewhere, we'll escape.

Two boys together. I have a fancy I'd like to sail up a river in

China. * Linda saw that river, very wide, covered with little

rafts and boats. She saw the yellow hats of the boatmen and she

heard their high, thin voices as they called ...

'Yes, papa. '

( Mansfield, 1983: 32 )

From the poetic language and the deixis 'Now1 we know it is Linda

who speaks. Her choice of vocabulary "wreathed1 brings out her

pessimistic view towards life. she compares one's life to a

leaf. She thinks that once you find out the real meaning of life

you will perish. From the conditional sentence 'If only one

had time to ..." r and the repeated use of the word * time" and the

parallel infinitive construction in itr we know at present she

does not have any spare time to appreciate the flowers. The use

of an exclamation mark after the conditional sentence indicates

the sense of urgency as well as her despair. The exclamatory

phrase "Oh dear' followed by two questions further reveals her

frustrations in life and her attempt to escape from the weary

life. The attempt is immediately echoed by a flashback that

16

depicts a scene between Linda and father, who are dreaming of

escaping to China, a land of mystery. Linda then recalls the

joyous rnoBient in which she announces the news of her marrying

Stanley. Yet joy is shortlived. She understands very well that

Stanley is not her type and his behaviour is sometimes a bit

ridiculous in the eyes of Linda. ' But the trouble was — here

Linda felt almost inclined to laugh, though Heaven knows it was

no laughing matter she saw her Stanley so seldom*' (

Mansfield, 1983:33 ) In this quotation, Lindafs voice is

intermingled with the narrator's. The narrator uses the present

tense verb in 'Heaven knows' to express a generic view shared by

the community. The 'her1 indicates it is Linda who

actually speaks. Her unsatisfactory relationship with Stanley is

the cause of her grudge against life. The following quotation

best illustrates her psyche:

— but all the rest of the time it was like living in a house

that couldn't be cured of the habit of catching on fire/ on a

ship that got wrecked every day. And it was always Stanley who

was in the thick of the danger* Her whole time was spent in

rescuing him, and restoring him, and calming him downf and

listening to his story. And what was left of her time was spent

in the dread of having children.

Linda frowned; she sat up quickly in her steamer chair and

clasped her ankles. Yes, that was her real grudge against life;

that was what she could not understand* That was the quotation

she as&ad and asked* and listened in vain for the answer.

{ Mansfield, 1983: 33-34 }

17

The parallel structure of gerunds { 'rescuing ... restoring ...

calming ... listening to* ) and the repeated use of the clause1 that was* heighten her feeling of frustrations. Nothing could

save Linda, not even her children, whom she does not love and is

so indifferent to.

Besides Linda, Beryl, another female character in the same

story, experiences frustrations in l i fe yet of a d i f f e ren t

nature. She is dying for a lover. Let us look at the following

extract:

You seef it's so frightfully difficult when you've nobody.

You're so at the mercy of things. You can't just be rude, And

you've always this horror of seeming inexperienced and stuffy

like the other ninnies at the Bay. And and it's fascinating

to know you've power over people. Yesf that is fascinating —

Oh whyf oh why doesn't *he* come some soon?

If I go on living here, thought Beryl, anything may happen to Me.

'But how do you know he is coming at all?' mocked a small voice

within her.

But Beryl dismissed it. She couldn't be left. Other people,

perhaps,but not she. It wasn't possible to think that Beryl

Fairfield newer married, that lovely fascinating girl.

( Mansfield, 1983; 60-61 ]

18

But now — it's suddenly dear to you. It's a darling little

funny room. It's yours. Oh, what a joy it is to own things!

Nine — my own!

(Mansfield, 1983:59)

The use of an imaginary dialogue between Beryl and an unknown

lover reveals the desire of Beryl, The repeated use of 'Let us1

intensifies her desire to get a lover. Beryl then directly

addresses the readers and appeals to their sympathy. The

colloquial expressions 'you sea1, 'tie other ninnies" show it is

Beryl who speaks, and the shift of tense from past to present

shows Beryl's problem is imminent and she wants to solve it

immediately. The shift of pronoun from "she* to 'I1 [3] and the

use of the deixis 'here' suggest the narrator has completely

entered the mind of Beryl and even gives her a free hand to tell

her own story. However, only after a short while, the narrator's

own voice emerges again. The shift back to past tense and fsAef

once again re-establishes the narrator's position as a story-

teller in the narrative. The dialogic relationship of the

narrator and Beryl's voices adds some depth to the psychological

perspective of the narrative. So far we have seen that the

perspective Mansfield adopts in the stories is basically an

internal one, though apparently external at the start, and a

psychological one. She does not allow only one voice to speak*

Neither does she examine the psyche of merely one character. Her

stories consist of a polyphony of voices and thus a multitude of

perspectives.

19

Just take the example of 'At the Bay1, we have male voices

and female voices, who are at times antagonistic. For example,

after Stanley leaves home, the whole family, old Mrs. Fairfield,

Linda, Beryl, the servant girl, the children ... are relieved.

'Gone?'

'Gone?'

Oh, the relief, the difference it made to have the man out of the

house. Their very voices were changed as they called to one

another; they sounded warm and loving- and as if they shared a

secret.

( Mansfield, 1983: 20 )

Even between males, there is a difference between a serious manrs

voice ( e.g. Stanley ) and a carefree man's voice (e.g. Jonathan).

And between females, there are conventional women and

unconventional women. For example, the women at the Bay find

Mrs. Kember bizarre because she is the only woman at the Bay who

smokes incessantly and her husband is at least ten years younger

than her. Besides, age also divides people. Beryl as a young

girl definitely has a different voice from the older people like

her mother. No wonder she says: 'Poor old mother, she smiled, as

she skimmed over the stones. Poor old motherl Old! Oh, what

joy, what bliss it was to b® young ... *

{ Mansfield, 1983; 26 1

20

We have also adults1 voices and children's voices, who sometimes

fail to understand each other. The scene about Kesia and her

grandma is a good example. nevertheless, children, though

innocent, create different opposing voices. The Trouts, the

Josephs and the Burnells are constantly in battle with each

other. The Burnells once criticize the Josephs: fThey were too

awful.' ( Mansfield, 1983; 23 } We have also the baby's voice.

Besides the characters1 voices, we have the narratorfs voice, the

implied authorfs voice. And apart from human voices, we also

have the voices of the sheep, the old sheep-dog, the sleepy sea,

the little streams, the cat's voice, the birds1 singing ... The

story is indeed animated by voices of various sorts, thus

creating a multi-perspective.

Apart from internal, psychological and multiple perspectives,

a word should be said about the 'spatio-temporal perspective of

the book* First, about the spatial dimension, which refers to

the viewing position that the reader occupies when looking at the

objects in the book with the help of the organization of the

language. Let us examine the highly pictorial passage setting the

opening scene of * At the Bay':

Very early morning* The sun was not yet risen, and the whole of

Crescent Bay was hidden under a white sea-mist* The biff hush-

covered hills at the hack were smothered. You could not see

where they ended and the paddocks and bungalows began. The sandy

road was gone and the paddocks and bungalows the other side of

it; there were no white dunes cowered with reddish grass beyond

them; there was nothing to mark which was beach and where was the

sea. A heavy dew had fallen. T»e grass was blue. Big drops

21

hung on the bushes and just did not fall; the silveryo, fluffy

toi-toi was limp on its long- stalks, and all the mangolds and

the pinks in the bungalow gardens were bowed to the earth with

wetness. Drenched were the cold fuchsias, round pearls of dew

lay on the flat nasturtium leaves. It looked as though the sea

had beaten up softly in the darkness, as though one immense wave

had come rippling, rippling- how far? Perhaps if you had waked

up in the middle of the night you might have seen a big fish

flicking in at the window and gone again ...

(Mansfield, 1983:9}

From the quotation above we can see how the language

contributes to the building of spatial perspective. The scene

starts with a flong shot1, presenting a general view of fthe

whole of Crescent Bay1. The prepositional phrases help to single

out the feature of the Bay, which is 'bidden under a white sea-

mist1, at that moment and paint its backdrop, i.e. there are some

'big bush-covered hills at the back1. The use of oxymorons, a

pair of contrasting words put side by side to create a certain

effect, 'ended1 and 'began1 in 'You could not see where they

ended and the paddocks and bungalows began, and the parallel

structure in 'there were no white dunes ... there was nothing to

mark ... r reinforce the image of a misty and blurring scene.

Gradually the visual perspective shifts to a fclose-up1 of some

components of the landscape, which are held together by

prepositional phrases indicating directions and relationships.

For instance, fBig drops hung on the bushes ... the silvery,

fluffy toi-toi was limp on its long stalks, and all the marigolds

and the pinks in the bungalow gardens were bowed to the earth ...

22

round pearls of dew lay on the flat nasturtium leaves.1 Such

locative phrases are frequently employed in this passage as well

as in the subsequent descriptive scenes for two purposes: first,

'they insist on the spatial content of the prose, the foreground

the theme of the representation of a place and its component

parts1; second, 'they also relate them1 in order that the reader

can view the scene 'from place to place in a definite order, with

a starting-point and a subsequent development which suggest an

initial viewing position and a chain of perceptions moving from

that position1 ( Fowler, 1986: 129 ). notice also the past

participle 'covered* is used twice in 'The big bush-covered

hills1 and 'no white dunes covered with reddish grass1, and it

implies vision from above because only when an observer views an

object from above can he see whether the surface of it is covered

with something. If we continue to' read the rest of the scene, we

will find the spatial point of view shifting all the time. For

example, from a general view of the Bay to a close-up view of a

corner of the Bay as illustrated by the locative phrases in

fRound the corner of Crescent Bay, between the piled-up masses of

broken rock, a flock of sheep came pattering,1 ( Mansfield,1983:

10 }; then back to the general view of the Bay again through the

use of a demonstrative pronoun 'there1 as in 'There ahead was

stretched the sandy road with shallow puddles1 { Mansfield, 1983:

11 }; and then some close-ups of the shepherd, the sheep-dog, the

cat. So there is a constant wave-like alternation of visual

perspectives even within a scene.

The above analysis of the opening scene of fit the Bay1

provides a micro view of the spatial dimension of spatio-temporal

perspective. Perhaps we can have a look at the spatial dimension

23

from a more macro view. Mansfield moves her viewing angles not

only within the same location, for instance, the Bay. As a

matter of fact, she often shifts her vision from one location to

another when narrating a story. For example, in 'The Daughters

of the late Colonel1, Josephine and Constantia stay in their

house all the time. However, the spatial perspective does not

remain always static. On the contrary, it moves rather rapidly

from one location to another with the help of flashbacks and

stream of consciousness. At the beginning of the story,

Josephine and Constantia are talking in their bedroom. Then a

flahback brings them to the dining-room having breakfast with

Nurse Andrews. Another flahback shifts them beside the bed of

their dying father. After a few moments, they are found outside

and then inside their dead father's study-room. Besides their

house, the vision can also be seen from a cemetery where their

father fs funeral is held, and it shifts even farther away from

home to a foreign country — Ceylon. Mansfield is able to shift

the spatial point of view of her stories so easily and quickly

mainly because her focus is often on the consciousness of her

characters, and one's consciousness flows to and fro freely.

Thus, the viewing position follows the stream of consciousness

and changes its course of direction.

In fact, spatial dimension is sometimes affected by temporal

dimension. The change in spatial dimension is simply a result of

the change in temporal dimension. What is temporal point of view

then? It 'refers to the impression which a reader gains of events

moving rapidly or slowly, in a continuous chain or isolated

segments; it includes also disruptions of the "natural** flow of

time, by for example flashbacks, previsions or the interweaving

24

of stories which concern different ti-c-sh*rcs.' { Fcwler, 1986;

127 } Since the stream of consciousness is Mansfield's favourite

device, the temporal perspective of her stories does not often

follow a natural flow. Thus, there is a mixture of different

time spheres: the past, the present and even the future,

Sometimes there are obvious linguistic clues that aark the change

in time spheres, but sometimes there are none. In the latter

case, the reader has to be exceptionally alert and should pay

heed to the context in order to differentiate the time spheres.

Maybe we can examine the temporal dimension of a scene in !The

Singing Lesson1, in which a school teacher, while having a

singing lesson, is contemplating the letter by her boy-friend

saying that he has to break off their relationship.

Hiss Meadows lifted her arms in the wide gown and began

conducting' with hath hands. ' J feel more and more strongly

that our marriage would be a mistake —' sie beat. And the

voice cries: Fleetly! Ah, Fleetly* What could have possessed

him to write such a letter I What could have led up to it! It

came out of nothing* His last letter had been all about a fumed-

oak book-case he had bought for *ourr books, and a "natty little

hall-stand' he had seen, 'a very neat affair with a carved owl on

a bracket* holding three hat-brushes in its claws9. How she had

smiled at that! 5o like a man to think one needed three hat-

brushes! From the Listening Ear, sang the voices.

'Once again, * said Miss Meadows* 'But this tiae in parts. Still

without expression.9 Fast! Ah, too Fast, Vitb the gloom of the

contraltos added, one could scarcely help shuddering. Fade the

Roses of Pleasure. Last time he bad come to see her* Basil had

25

worn a rose in his buttonhole. ffow handsojsa he had looked in

that bright blue suit, with that dark red rose!

{ Mansfield, 1983: 206-207 }

Apparently this passage is a bit confusing in the time sphere.

The direct style sometimes reports words spoken in the present

time sphere, yet sometimes in the past time sphere. On a closer

look, though, we can discriminate the different time spheres with

the help of some linguistic markers and what is more important

is, in fact, the contextual clues. The first sentence refers to

the present time sphere, i.e. Miss Meadows conducting the singing

lesson. The second Sentence mostly written in a direct style is

a quotation taken from her boy-friend's letter and belongs to

another time sphere. The short clause 'she beat* immediately

after the quotation and the lyric of the song written in italics

refer to the present once again. The following two exclamations

that begin with the interrogative 'what1 are the queries and

present feelings of Miss Meadows. The quotations in the next

sentence are definitely words spoken by Hiss Meadows* boy-friend

in the past because the pronoun *ourf and the colloquial

expression 'natty little hall-stand'are obviously words of her

boy-friend. The following exclamation is Miss Meadows1 present

comment of her past response to her boy-friend's words spoken in

the past. The lyric written in italics once again brings us out

of Miss Meadows1 consciousness and back to the present time

sphere: the singing lesson. Unlike the one at the beginning of

the passage, the direct style used in the next paragraph belongs

to the present time sphere, which continues to stretch until the

adverbial phrase of tiae 'Last* appears. Igaia, the exclamation

26

with the interrogative 'How' , Hiss Meadows1 present comment on a

past incident, brings us back to the present time sphere. The

disruption of the temporal order is one of the characteristics of

Mansfield's stories. Apart from a blend of the past and present,

she sometimes even blends the past , present and f u t u r e as

illustrated in the following passage:

'But, my darling, if you love me, ' thought Hiss Meadows, 'I don't

mind how much it is. Love me as little as you like. f But she

knew he didn't love her. Not to have cared enough to scratch out

that 'disgust*, so that she couldn't read it! Soon Autumn yields

unto Winter Drear. She would have to leave the school, too. She

could never face the Science Mistress or the girls after it got

known. She would have to disappear so&ewhere. Passes away. The

voices began to die, to fade, to whisper — to vanish — '

( Mansfield, 1983; 208-209 }

The use of modal verbs 'would1, 'could* suggests the possibility

of certain things that Miss Meadows may do in future, which is

interwoven with the present time sphere { i.e. the singing ) and

the past time sphere { i.e. the fact that her boy-friend writes

the word 'disgust1 and does not care to scratch it out }.

As it has been said before, the spatial and temporal

dimensions are sometimes interlinked. If we look into the

specially designed spatio-temporal perspective of Mansfield's

stories in depth, we will find something revealing. The

disruption in time order and the subsequent shift in location and

2?

vision help to bring two otherwise totally different spheres

together, for example: actions and thoughts, fantasy and reality.

In 'Life of Ma Parker1, Ma Parker, a part-time domestic helper of

a literary gentleman, is doing the cleaning-up in the gentleman's

house, and occasionally talking to the gentleman, ¥hile she is

working and performing her duty on the one hand, she is

recollecting her past and reflecting on life on the other hand.

For example, Ma Parker traces her intimate relationship with her

grandson Lennie and recalls how she rears him and eventually

sends him to the cemetery. Despite the fact that it is a tragic

thing to recall, she still has to suppress her feeling and face

the day-to-day tough work.

(a) And for five years Ha Parker had another baby such a one

for crying! — to look after. Then young Maudie went wrong

and took her sister Alice with her; the two boys

ewigrimated, and young Jim went to India with the army, and

Ethel, the youngest, married a good-for-nothing little

waiter who died of ulcers the year little Lennie was born.

And now little Lennie my grandson ...

fie piles of dirty cups* dirty dishes, were washed and

dried. The ink-black kniwes were cleaned with a piece of

potato and finished off with a piece of corM» The table was

scrubbed, and the dresser and the slul that had sardine

tails swijminff in it ,.«

Se'd never been a stromff child —- nerar from the first.

Me 'id me of those fair imMi.es that ererj^^fj tool for a

5iJrerj fair carls Jre Jhttfr e^&s* anil a Jit fie

iJbe a cp me ^ M* J*M** Jfc*

she and Ethel had had to rear that child!

( Mansfield, 1983:148-149 5

(b) But the last ... Ma Parker threw the counterpane over the

bed. No, she simply couldn't think about it. It was too

much — she'd had too much in her life to bear. Sh^'d

borne it up till now, she'd kept herself to herself, and

never once had she been seen to cry. Never by a living

soul. Not even her own children had seen Xa break down*

She'd kept a proud face always. But now! Lennie gone -

— what had she? She had nothing. He was all she'd got

from life, and now he was took too. Why must it all

iavd happened to me? she wondered.

'What have I done?9 said old Ha Parker. 'What have I done?9

As she said those words shd suddenly let fall her brush.

Sie found herself in the kitchen. Her misery was so

terrible that she pinned on her bat, put on her jacket and

walked out of the flat like a person in a dream. She did

not know what she was doing:.

( Mansfield,1983: 151 }

From the above passages, we know what Ma Parker is doing and what

she is thinking belong to two separate spheres, the former in the

real* of the preseat ( temporal ) and in the gentleman's house

I spatial J while the latter in the realm of the past { temporal I

and in her owa house or somewhere elsefs { spatial ) . Vhile

ble&ding separate spatio-temporal perspectives together,

pm^fiftli itiUB&aes to niai actions ami thoughts, tke j

i of t» o» tW life of

19

as well as her admirable strong character. Besides actions and

thoughts, fantasy and reality are another pair of realms that are

interwoven as a result of the blend of two different spatio-

temporal perspectives as in 'An Ideal Family1, which is about a

middle-aged man who all of a sudden realizes he is growing old.

He imagines himself watching an ancient old creature climbing up

and down:

But all his drowsing brain could think of was — too rich for

him. And somewhere at the back of everything1 he was watching a

little withered ancient man climbing up endless flights of

stairs. Who was he?

'I shan't dress tonight,' he muttered.

'What do you say, father?'

'Eh, what, what?' Old Mr. Neave woke with a start and stared

across at them. 'I shan't dress tonight, * he repeated.

'But, father, we've got Lucile coming, and Henry Davenport, and

Mrs. Teddie Walker. '

'Very well I Very well!' Old Mr. Neave got up and went to join

that little old climbing fellow just as far as bis dressing-room

Old Mr. Neave sigbed, got up, and putting one band under bis

beard, be toot the comb from young Charles, and carefully combed

tbe white beard over, Charles gave him a folded bamd&ercbieff bis

watch and seals, and spectacle case.

'That will do, my lad. ' Tbe door shut, be sant back* be was

alone —

Amd nor that little ancient fellow was climbing dom endless

flights tbat led to a glittering* gay dimimg-room. Mbat legs be

were UMe a spider's — ttiu*f mtbered*

30

'You're an ideal family, sir, an ideal family. *

But if that were true, why didn't Charlotte or the girls stop

him? Why was he all alone, climbing up and down? Where was

Harold? Ah, it was no good expecting anything from Sarold.

Down, down went the little old spider, and then, to his horror,

old Mr. Neave saw him slip past the dining-room and maMe for the

porch, the dark drive, the carriage gates, the office* Stop him,

stop him, somebody!

Old Mr. Neave started up. It was dfari in his dressing-room; the

window shone pale. How long had he been asleep?

{ Mansfield, 1983; 244-246 )

The passage is blended with Mr. Heave's imagination { an old

creature climbing sometime somewhere } and the reality ( he is

neglected by his family who are enjoying themselves and actively

involved in their own affai rs K The blend of fantasy and

reality as a result of the mixture of two d i f fe ren t spatio-

temporal perspectives again helps to throw light on Mr. Heave's

self-awakening.

Above all, what perspective does Mansfield adopt in this book?

From the analyses above, we can see she adopts an internal,

psychological, multiple and spatio-temporal perspective i& the

stories.

31

SECTION I? ANALYSES OF SOHE ASPECTS OF THE

NARRATIVE DISCOURSE; WHAT IS THE

STRUCTURE OF THE HARRATI7E?

From the previous section, we know the infiltration of voices

and the shifting of spatial and temporal orders are Mansfield's

favour i te narrat ive techniques, which however , may m a k e the

stories appear rather incoherent. Is it true that Hansficld 's

stories lack organization? Is there any structure in her

narrative? Under the apparently confusing narrative discourse,

there are embedded indeed some structures that are brought about

by certain salient linguistic f e a t u r e s , and these discourse

structures are significant in revealing the meaning of the text.

Foregrounding is the first discourse structure that we are

going to d iscuss in M a n s f i e l d ' s n a r r a t i v e . ¥hat is

foregrounding, then? Foregrounding is: 'whenever some item or

construction appears in a text vith unusual or noticeable

frequency and apparently for some valid reason, then cumulatively

a distinctive effect emerges' { Fowler, 1986; 71 ), for example,

the use of r epe t i t i ons of some p h r a s e s , pa r a l l e l i sm and

equiva lence , e tc , f A s fo r the mo t ives and f u n c t i o n s o f

foregrounding, the perceptual salience it produces is not ,

despite our authorities, physical prominence of the expressive

medium for its own sake, but extra discourse structure iairitiag

interpretation.* C Fowler, 1986: 73 } Let as take tie example of

flarriage a la lode* and discuss its discourse structure of

foregrounding* Hie qualitative adjective *ae«* is tine ami

repeated throughout tie stoty* sonetiies with the noun as ia

fthe new Isabel *, otier fines wilh different as in *tlw» mm

32

way', 'the new house', 'new people', 'new music*. This salient

linguistic feature helps to bring out an important aspect of the

story. Isabel, after knowing sone avant-garde artist friends,

has completely changed her life-style, and Williair is totally out

of hand when dealing with this fnewf wife and her fnewf friends.

From a repeated use of the quantifiers fso ...' used by Isabel

and her friends, we can see how exaggerating these people are

when they talk and how they tend to dramatize things. For

instance, fso dreadfully sentimental1 and fso apallingly bad for

the babies' sense of form' { Mansfield, 1983; 154 ), fso

dreadfully stuffy and tragic1, 'am frightfully keen onff

'It's so awfully absurd' ( Mansfield, 1983: 158 }. ¥hen they

talk, they like to use exclamations. For example, Bill is

disappointed when he finds out there is no letter for him: 'But,

heartless postman 0 malignant world!* { Mansfield, 1983: 167

) The use of parallelism and equivalence by Denis *^hen he

describes what his friends are doing is another example to show

their language is out of the ordinary: 'A Lady in Love with a

Pine-apple1 ( Mansfield, 1983: 162 ), 'A Lady with a Box of

Sardines' ( Mansfield, 1983: 164 }, 'A Lady reading a Letter1 (

Mansfield, 1983: 167 }. Code-mixing is another characteristic of

their language, for instance, the use of Italian 'Hvanti!* and

French 'mes amis*. That is why William can hardly Jmow how to

cope with them. The parallelism and equivalence used in 'the

familiar dull gnawing in his breast quietened down* ( Mansfieldr

1983: 156 }, 'The dull, persistent gnawing in Ms breast started

again* { lansfield, 1983: 157 1 and fle folded Ms arsts against

the dull, persistent gnawing* C Hansfield, 1583: 166 } feigblight

William's uneasy feeling vis-a-vis these fnewf people, and his> 4fnewf wife in particular. VilUna is in fact not fcl© only

33

who disapproves of their 'new' style. The author's opinion is

implied in the discourse structure of foregrounding. If We

examine carefully the language used by Isabel's friends, we will

find the word 'divine1 having a religious connotation repeated

three times { Mansfield,1983: 62, 164,163 ), and the religious

image of anointing somebody with ointment is found in the speech

of one of them: "¥w shall have to anoint ourselves with the

butter/ said Denis. "Hay thy head, William, lack not ointment.1

( Mansfield, 1983:161 } To the author (or the implied author),

these people pursue fashion in such a manner as those who are

over-zealous to religion. In the end they exclude those who are

not their in-groups, like William. What is more ironic is that

these people are so sure of what they are doing that they never

doubt their course. Therefore, the significance of the discourse

structure is 'additional to the prepositional meaning, and often

at odds with the latter1 ( Fowler, 198C: 73 }.

Apart from foregrounding, there is another discourse

structure that gives you more insight about the minds and

consciousness of the characters, and this kind of discourse

structure is called structure of consciousness. 'By assigning a

consistent type of semantic structure to a character, or managing

some particularly significant transformations in a distinctive

way, the novelist is able to convey not only the sequence of a

character's thoughts but also the implicit structure and

quality of his outlook on the world1, { Fowler, 1983: 104 } The

language used to describe the little girl Fenella in 'The

Voyage1, who has to undertake a voyage and stay in her

grandmotherf $ home for some time since her mother has lied aai

her father is unable to take care of her, &est illustrates tMs

34

structure. In the following scene, Fenella's father bids them

farewell at the pier.

He sounded stern, but Fenella, eagerly watching him, saw that he

looked tired and sad. Hia-oo-oo-O-Oi The second whisle blared

just above their heads, and a voice like a cry shouted, 'Any more

for the gangway?'

'You'll give my love to father,' Fenella saw her father's lips

say. And her grandma, very agitated, answered, 'Of course I will,

dear. Go now. You'll be left. Go now, Frank. Go now. '

'It's all right, mother. I've got another three minutes.' To her

surprise Fenella saw her father take off his hat. He clasped

grandma in his arms and pressed her to him. 'God bless you,

mother!' she heard him say.

And grandma put her hand, with the black thread glove that was

worn through on her ring finger, against his check, and she

sobbed, 'God bless you, my own brave son!'

This was so awful that Fenella quickly turned her back on them,

swallowed once, twice, and frowned terribly at a little green

star on a mast head. But she had to turn round again; her father

was going.

'Goodbye, Fenella. Be a good girl. ' His cold, wet moustache

brushed her check. But Fenella caught hold of the lapels of his

coat.

( Mansfield, 1983; 173 )

The verbs of sensation ( e*g. see, watch, hear, listen } are a

dominant linguistic structure in this extract. Everything is

35

filtered through the eyes of Fenella: 'eagerly watching him, saw

that he looked tired and sad' , 'saw her father 's lips say1, 'saw

her father take off his hat ' , 'she heard him say1. She is an

observer rather than a participant. She witnesses the parting

scene between her father and her grandmother, but without being

able to understand why they are so upset* In 'His cold, wet

moustache brushed her cheek1, it is the inanimate 'moustache1

that is the agent of the action, and Fenella is a recipient. In

the end, she is trying to play a more active role by catching

hold of the lapels of her fa ther ' s coat. This syntactic

patterning of having an inanimate subject in a sentence is

recurrent throughout the whole story. The following passage

further illustrates this discourse structure;

The sailors put their shoulders to the gangway. A huge coil of

dark rope went flying through the air and fell thump on the

wharf. A bell rang; a whistle shrilled. Silently the dark wharf

began to slip, to slide, to edge away from them. Now there was a

rush of water between. Fenella strained to see with all her

might. 'Was that father turning round?' or waving? — or

standing alone? or walking off by himself? The strip of

water grew broader, darker. Now the Picton boat began to swing

round steady, pointing out to sea. It was no good looking any

longer. There was nothing to be seen but a few lights, the face

of the town clock hanging in the airf and more lights, little

patches of them, on the dark hills.

The freshening wind tugged at Fenella *$ skirts; she went back to

her ffrandma. To her relief grandma seemed no longer sad.

( Mansfield, 1983: 174 )

36

A series of action verbs 'went flying through ... and fell'.

'rang1, 'shrilled' are governed by inanimate objects 'A hugh coil

of dark rope', 'A bell', 'a whistle1 respectively rather than

animate beings. It is the dark wharf that slips, slides and

edges away from the people, not the people that slip, slide and

edge away from the dark wharf. Faced with the great forces of

the unknown world, Fenella, a little girl, is powerless. She can

only be a recipient of an action as in 'The freshening wind

tugged at Fenella's skirts1. As a matter of fact, she has tried

very hard to exert her influence on the environment — 'Fenella

strained to see with all her might1 but in vain. She cannot even

answer the question whether her father is turning round, or

waving, or standing alone, or walking off by himself. She cannot

change the fact that she has to part with her father. She does

not know when she can go home. She does not even have a say in

making the decision. The simple fact is that everything has been

decided for her. It is not her who goes to welcome the future,

but the future that comes to meet her, as illustrated in the

following sentences in which the inanimate agents actively catch

the attention of the animate recipient: "An immense basket of ham

sandwiches caught her eye.1 ( Mansfield, 1983: 176 ) 'The dark

round eye above the washstand gleamed at them dully. Fenella

felt shy*1 ( Mansfield, 1983: 177 ) As a result, she is not sure

of anything. Every now and then she can only make a guessr so

the verbs of prediction fseemf and 'guess1 are often employed,

for example, 'To her great relief grandma seemed no longer sad

she was praying.1 ( Mansfield, 1983: 174 ), 'She seemed to know

grandma well1 ( Mansfield, 1983: 176 ). As she finds life full

of mystery and the outside world so uncertain, subconsciously she

often clasps everything tightly, for example/ ... and Fenella

37

clutched the clammy brass rail and forgot all aboout the swan-

necked umbrella' ( Mansfield, 1983: 175 )f 'She stood against the

door, still clasping her luggage and the umbrella* ( Hansfield,

1983: 177 }.

Lastly, some discourse structure is not idiosyncratic,

but conventional.'Structural patterns in a language by convention

encode various interpersonal and cognitive experiences and

relationships,' ( Fowler, 1983: 113 } We call this type of

discourse structure fsociolinguistic structure1 , which is

normally found in the speech and dialogue of characters in the

stories. Let us look at the speech of Ha Parkerr the main

character in 'Life of Ha Parker1:

'Beer parding, sir?'

( Mansfield, 1983: 143 )

fBe off with you; Gran ain't got no pennies. '

( Mansfield, 1D83: 144 }

' ... sitting in the fire-place of a evening you could see the

stars through the chimley, r and 'Itether always 'ad *er side of

bacon 'anging from the ceiling. '

( Hansfield, 1983: 146 }

Ha Parker certainly speaks a dialect, in which the fricative [h]

is not pronounced as in tf 'ad 'er ... 'aaging ...", and there is

the use of a double negative as in fain't got no pennies*. She

also speaks with some accent* Her aoB-staalaira pronunciation is

represented by a variant spelling such as Asking* C asking )r

3S

'arding' ( pardon ), Ditching-Mid' { kitchcn-aaid )f

'chimley' ( chimney ), 'beedles' ( beetles ), • emigrated' {

emigrated K Her English is also ungrajanatical. For example,

sho uses an indefinite article 'a1 in front of a word that begins

with a vowel sound: 'a evening1; she does not LSC the past

participle of 'take1 in the passive fen:; fand now hd was took

too1. The speech of a person offers us some information and it

shows 'an affinity between the user and some identifiable group1

{ Page, 1988: 5C ) Ha Parker's speech shows she coc*s froa a

lower socio-economic group, who do not speak standard English and

who are not well educated. Becaase of the poor background, Ha

Parker is a constant victim of the environment. In contrast with

Ma Parker, the literary gentleman, the person who comes from an

upper socio-economic class and whom Ma Parker works for, usc-s a

more elaborated code when he speaks. For instance, he says to Ha

Parker, 'I hope the funeral went off all right*1 ( Mansfield,

1983: 143 ) But Ma Parker fails to understand the phrasal verb

'went off1. So the discourse structure can differentiate people

socio-econoiaicallly. People of a certain in-group can also be

distinguished from the language they use in speech. For

instance, Isabel and her friends use a very special code when

they talk to each other. Their language is full of metaphors and

hyperboles, and they code-mix different languages. They are

supposed to be avant-garde, leading the latest trend in art, So

any one outside their group will find it hard to comprehend their

dialogues.

Therefore, despite the seemingly incoherent surface

structure, some structures are embedded ia Mansfield's aarratiire

discourse and they are: foregrounding, structure of consciousness

39

and sociolinguistic structure. Todorov's words can best conclude

this section: 'The organization of the narrative is therefore

produced on the level of the interpretation and not on thai of

the events-to-be-interpreted. The combination of these events

arc sometimes singular, incoherent, but this docs not .ucan that

the narrative lacks organization; simply this organization is

situated on the level of ideas, not on that of events.1 {

Todorov, 1984: 130 ) So the reader has to reconstruct everything

in the process of reading. The reader is an active participant

rather than a aere passive recipient. There is a constant

interaction between the reader and characters, the narrator and

the implied author. Discourse is thus created out of the

interaction.

40

SECTION V ANALYSES OF SOME ASPECTS OF THE HJLRRiTIVE

DISCOURSE: ¥HAT IS THE MATURE OF THE

NARRATIVE?

In every talc the narrator tells a jtory cither of his own or

of someone dsc's. Sonic stories are narrated in a very dramatic

way while others are less so. How about the narratives of

Mansfield's stories? Ifhat is the nature of her narrative? Out

of the fifteen stories in this collection, nearly all the stories

are narrated in an undraaatie and unexciting manner. The events

choscu ;u-c not of *uiict interest. They arc in fact the trifles of

life. For example, "It the Bay* talks about the daily lives

of different people at the bay, 'The Garden Party1 is about a

rich family making preparation for a garden party. 'The Daughter

of the Late colonel* is about two sisters discussing how to

arrange the things left behind by their dead father. fMr. and

Mrs. Dove1 is about a young man bidding a girl with whom he

secretly falls in love farewell. 'The Young Girl1 talks about

how a man takes care of a little boy and meanwhile entertains his

elder sister while their mother is away gambling at a casino.

'Life of Ha Parker* is Ha Parker's reflections on her hard life.

'Marriage a la Mode' is a story about a husband going home and

spending his weekend with his family. 'The ¥oyagef talks about a

little girl who has to follow her grandmother hoaa after her

mother dies, 'Miss Brill1 is about how aa old lady speads ber

weekend in a park. *Her First Ball1 talks about a young girl's

experience in her first ball, 'The Singing Lessoa* is about a

qu$ic t aclpr's feeling during a lesson. 'The Stranger1 is about

a w lcoaimi Ms wife feacl after her lom§ wacmfioa abroad.

'Bank Holiday* do lip lag & holiday.

41

'An Ideal Family• describes the feeling of a middle-aged man at

home. 'The Lady's Maid' is a monologue of a maid who tells her

neighbour about her life and her lady.

Not only does Mansfield like to talk about minute things in

life, but she also likes to present her narrative in a

deliberately undramatic manner, In fact, some stories could have

been made very dramatic* For example, in 'The Garden Party1, the

death of a man in the neighbourhood could have been treated in

such a way that would add more excitement to the whole story.

Nevertheless, Mansfield's focus is never on the drama of an

event. The language that she uses is highly poetic, i.e. a lot

of figures of speech like metaphors, similes, personifications,

using onomatopoeias, etc { please refer to the excerpts quoted

above especially the opening scene of 'At the Bay1 in SECTION

III ), and the poetic language helps to create a static effect as

poetic language is normally used to depict scenery or the psyche

of a character rather than the action of the story, which

requires more direct and literal language. So on the whole

Mansfield's narrative is basically of a static nature yet

psychologically dynamic if we look deeper into it* There is a

very exciting and dynamic description of Mr. Hammond's psyche in

'The Stranger'. While he is waiting for the arrival of his wife,

he cannot help feeling ecstatic:

His hands were shaking, but he'd got bold of himself again. Be

was able to face Janej. There she was ... how small she looted

on that huge ship. Sis heart was wrung with such a spasm that he

could have cried out. How little she Joolecf to hawe come all

42

that long way and back by herself! Just like her, though. Just

like Janey.

( Mansfield, 983: 217 }

The repeated use of exclamations 'how small1 and 'How little1,

and the adverbial phrase 'Just like1 highlights Mr. Hammond's

excitement on seeing his wife, and the metaphor f with such a

spasm1 fur ther enhances this feel ing of excitement. In the

following passage, Mrs, Hammond goes to say good-bye to the

ship's doctor and Mr. Hammond is again waiting for her:

Would she really not be long? What was the time now? Out came

the watch; he stared at nothing* That was rather queer of Janey,

wasn't it? Why couldn't she have told the stewardess to say

goodbye for her? Why did she have to go chasing after the ship's

doctor? She could have sent a note from the hotel even if the

affair had been urgent. Urgent? Did it — could it mean that

she had been ill on the voyage she was keeping something from

him? That was it!

( Mansfield, 1983: 221 )

The series of questions bring Mr, Hammond from a state of ecstasy

to a state of doubts and worries. The simple declarative

sentence 'That was it!* confirms his doubts. And then they are

alone in a hotel:

43

(a) He groaned for love and caught her close again. And

as always, he had the feeling he was holding something that

never was quite his — his. Something too delicate, too

precious, that would fly away once he let go.

( Mansfield, 1983: 222 }

(b) But just as when he embraced her he felt she would fly away,

so Hammond never knew — never knew for dead certain that

she was as glad as he was. How could he know? Would he

ever know? Would he always have this craving — this pang

like hunger, somehow, to make Janey so much part of him that

there wasn't any of her to escape? Be wanted to blot out

everybody, everything.

( Mansfield, 1983; 226 }

In (a) the verb 'groaned1 depicts Mr. Hammond's strong feeling

for his wife and the action verb 'caught1 shows his desperate

attempt to keep his wife. The repetition of the adverb 'again1,

the pronoun 'something1, the possessive pronoun "his1, the

modifier 'too1, and the series of questions and the repetition of

the negative sentence fnever knew1 in (b} intensify this sense of

uncertainty* The universal quantifiers 'everybody* and

'everything* indicates Mr. Hammond has already fallen into a

state of extreme despair. Then, his wife discloses the fact to

him that a young man has died in her arms on board the ship.

The blow was so sudden that Hammond thought he would faist* Be

couldn't move; he couldn't breathe. He felt all his strength

44

flowing flowing into the big dark chair, and the big dark

chair held him fast, gripped him, forced him to bear it.

( Mansfield, 1983: 228 )

The two parallel sentences containing the action verbs 'move1 and

'breathe' are short yet very effective in describing Mr.

Hammond's response to the sudden blow. The repetition of the

present participle 'flowing1 and the noun phrase 'the big dark

chair' is emphatic* There is a reversal of the positions of the

agent and the recipient, Mr, Hammond, being the agent of the

action in the first two-thirds of the passager has gradually lost

his power, and the inanimate object fthe big dark chair1 has, on

the contrary, gathered enough momentum and become the agent. So

it is 'the big dark chair1 that 'held him fast, gripped him*

forced him to bear itf, not the reverse. Mr. Hammond is now in a

state of immense shock. Then,

Janey was silent. But her words, so light, so soft, so chill,

seemed to hover in the air, to rain into his beast lite snow*

The fire had gone red. Now it fell in with a sharp sound and the

room was colder. Cold crept up his arms. The room was huge,

immense, glittering. It filled his whole world. ...

No; he mustn't think of it. Madness lay in thinking of it. Mof

he wouldn't face it. He couldn't stand it. It was too much to

bear!

( Mansfield, 1983: 230 }

45

The repeated use of the modifier 'so1 to describe the words of

Mrs. Hammond draws our attention to the effect of the words oa

Mr. Hammond. The simile 'snow* is further echoed in the

following paragraph by the images of the huge room, the cold that

fills the room as well as the cold that fills his whole world.

The repeated use of the negative 'No1 and the negative

construction fmustnft think1, fwouldn lt face1 and 'couldn't

stand1, and the modal verbs 'mustn't1, 'wouldn't1 and 'couldn't1

all indicate Mr, Hammond's determination to get rid of the whole

thing* However, deep down his heart he knows very well that

'They would never be alone together again1. { Mansfield, 1983:

230 } This uneasy psychological state will persist forever in

the heart of Mr. Hammond. Looking back, we can see the sorts of

psychological states Mr. Hammond has gone through: ecstasy,

doubts, despair, shock, uneasiness. So the narrative is indeed

dynamic though static on the surface, Mansfield's narrative is

also psychic as the focus of the story is always on the ebb and

flow of the character's psyche rather than the development of the

event,

Another factor to consider about the nature of the narrative

is the relationship between the events and the instances of

discourse in the narrative. Do they happen simultaneously or

not? If the events and discourse match each other temporallyw

the story is then said to follow a narrative logic, if the events

happen before the discourse, the story is then said to follow a

ritual logic. Todorov sums up the concepts of narrative logic

and ritual logic in the following words:

Jferratire Jogi<? Implies, ideally, a teoporalitr we miffht call tie

46

'perpetual present'. ... There is a perfect parallelism between

the series of events one speaks of and the series of the

instances of discourse. Discourse is never behind and never

ahead of what it evokes. The characters, too, live in the

present alone; the succession of events is governed by a logic

proper to it, and is influenced by no external factor.

On the other hand, ritual logic is based on a conception of

time, which is that of the 'external return'. Here no event

happens for the first time or the last time. Everything- has

already been foretold, and now one foretells what will follow.

The origin of the rite is lost in the origin of time ... '

( Todorov, 1977: 132 )

Most of the stories in this collection follow a narrative logic,

for instance, fThe Garden Party1,, 'Mr. and Mrs. Dove1, fThe

Young Girl1, 'Marriage a la Mode1, 'The Voyage1, §Miss Brill1,

'Her First Ball1, 'The Stranger1, 'Bank Holiday1, 'An Ideal

Family'. A few stories have a mixture of narrative logic and

ritual logic. For example, 'At the Bay1, 'The Daughters of the

Late Colonel', 'Life of Ma Parker1 and 'The Singing Lesson1,

These four stories basically follow the narrative logic, except

that in the course of the narrative there are soae scenes of

flashbacks, the events in whicii have actually taken place when

they are told by the narrator or the character concerned, so a

ritual logic is included. 'The Lady's Maid1 is the only story in

the collection which uses a ritual logic because the whole story

is in fact a maid's recollection of her past, her childhood

experience with her grandfather aad her aunt, her relationship

with the ladies whom she has served and is serving, her broken

47

love affair and so on. All the events happened long before the

maid's discourse that takes place at present. As a matter of

fact, 'The Lady's Maid* is rather different from other stories in

this book in its narrative techniques as well as its narrative

nature.

In a nutshell, Mansfield's narrative is of a psychic and

dynamic nature, and basically follows the narrative logic.

SECTION VI ANALYSES OF SOME ASPECTS OF TIE MARR1TIYE

DISCOURSE: ¥HAT IS THE RELATIOISHIP BETWEEH

THE SPEAKER AMD THE ADDRESSEE?

In a discourse there must be a speaker and an addressee, and

during their interaction we can see what sort of relationship

they have. To begin with, maybe we can talk about the

relationship between the narrator and the characters,

Mansfield's narrator is basically an omniscient narrator, so he

is supposed to know a lot about his characters. The most basic

duty that he performs is of course to present the situation as

well as the characters. In 'In the Bay1, the narrator presents

the characters one by one: Jonathan, Stanley, Beryl, Mrs.

Kember, Linda, Mrs. Stubbs, etc. Besides giving a physical

account of his characters, the narrator also describes the

feelings of the characters, for example, a description of the

shopkeeper Mrs. Stubbs1 feeling: 'There was a look of mild

astonishment on her large face.1 ( Mansfield, 1983: 43 }* He also

describes the relationship between the characters. For instance,

on presenting Linda and Jonathan, he says, 'They knew each other

well.' { Mansfield, 1983: 52 } The narrator sometines even gives

his own comment on the characters. Let us look at the following

extract from 'Mr. and Mrs. Dove1, in which Anne suddenly laughs

while Reginald is talking to her:

'I really must conquer it,f it's too absurd, ' sai$ she.

'Good heavens, Anne, ' cried Re&ffie, *I love to hear yon lanffbin®!

I can't imagine anythinff more -—*

But the truth as, and they both tuer it* ske wasn't always

49

laughing; it wasn't really a habit. Only ev^r since the Jay

they'd iwt, c7*r since that ;ery first M^htf for sc^ string*

reason that Reggie wished to Scd he uzderstood, A^c bad lauyh*d

at hit*. Why? It didn't matter vb*rc tb*y ^iv or whit tb*y w*re

talking about. They &igbt b^gin by beib? as serious as possible,

dead s^rioas --- at any rate as far as he was concerned — but

then suddenly, Li tie ^iddlv of a sentence, ina* would glance at

bix, aud a little quid: quiver passed over her face- Her lips

parted, her £y&s daj^ced, and sic begaL laughing.

( Mansfield, 1933: 12S )

The narrator seems to be superior and points out the truth.

Sometimes he even criticizes his characters' judgment* For

example, in *In the Bay*, Beryl guesses that the said Alice has

had an affair with a man:

'She supposed Alice had picked up some horrihle common larrikin

and they'd go off into the bush together. *.- But nof Beryl

was unfair. 'I Mansfield, 1983; 41 }

On the other hand, the narrator ma^ sometimes show his sympathy

to the characters, just like the sympathy giwen to the little

girl Lottie in fln the Bay1: *fhere as poor little Lottie, left

behind again.* ( Hansfieli, 1983: 21 ) lo aatter what; duties lie

performs, presenting the physical or the minds ami

feelings of his characters^ or iepictiaf the relationships

between climracters, or criticizing his characters, or showing

syapathy to Ms characters, laiisfi iafs mmrratw a

role and a Ms

50

characters. But , this is not the whole story. At times

Mansf ie ld ' s narrator talks to the characters direct ly by

addressing them as 'you*. Look at the following excerpt from 'In

the Bay1:

Why does one feel so different at night? Why is it so exciting

to be awake when everybody else is asleep? Late — it is very

late! And yet every moment you feel more and more wakeful, as

though you were slowly almost with every breath, waking* up into a

new wonderful, far more thrilling and exciting- world than the

daylight one* And what is this queer sensation that you're a

conspirator? Lightly, stealthily you move about your room, you

take something off the dressing-table and put it down again

without a sound. And everything, "even the bed-posts, knows you,

responds, shares your secret ..»

You're not very fond of your room by day. ... But now *— it's

suddenly dear to you. It's a darling little funny room. It's

yours. Oh, what a joy it is to own things! Mine — my own!

'My very own for ever?1

'Yes, ' Their lips met.

'No, of course, that had nothing to do with it. That was all

nonsense and rubbish* But, in spite of herself, Beryl saw so

plainly two people standing in the middle of her room. Ser arms

were round his neck; he held her.

It is true when you are by yourself md you think about life, it

is always sad. All that excitement and so on has a way of

suddenly leaving you, %nd it's as though, in the silence,

somebody called yonr name,, md you heard your name for the first

time. "Beryl i f

51

'Yes, I'm here. I'm Beryl. Who wants me?1

'Beryl I '

'Let me come. '

It is lonely living by oneself, of course there are relations,

friends, heaps of them; but that's not what she means. She wants

someone who will find the Beryl they none of them know, who will

expect her to be that Beryl always. She wants a lower.

( Mansfield, 1983; 58-60 }

Past tense is used prior to this passage. The sudden shift of

tense from past to present implies that the author wants to adopt

a more intimate discourse here. Present tense conveys a sense of

immediacy. The narrator no longer keeps his character at a

distance. He even uses a second' person pronoun 'you* when he

addresses Beryl. The contractions 'you're1 and 'It 's* and the

vocabulary !all nonsense and rubbish1 suggest an infernal style

and hence indicates the close relationship between the narrator

and the character. However, there is another shift of tense and

pronoun in the f i f th paragraph. The narrator distances hiaself

from his character once again by referring to Beryl as 'she1 and

reporting the case in past tense. After this, the author shifts

the tense back to present and the pronoun back to the second

person. Finally, in the last paragraph, the tense remains

present, but the pronoun has once again shifted to the third

person 'she1, so the discourse in this paragraph is not the sane

as that in the previous paragraphs. The alternating shifting of

discourse implies that the relationship betweea the narrator and

the character is not constant. Sometimes the narrator is close

to the character and sometimes he keeps his character at a

52

distance.

Nevertheless, in both cases, i.e. the narrator directly

addressing the character as 'you' and the narrator referring to

the character as 'she', there still remains a gap between them.

As we have discussed in SECTION I, FIS is a narrative technique

that Mansfield adopts and the infiltration of voices is a result

of such a technique. In other words, the character is liberated

and able to express his view freely. The character thus holds a

similar status as the narrator and they both stand side by side

speaking their own minds and infiltrating into each other's

voices. For example, in the second paragraph of the previous

quotation, we hear the voice of the narrator talking to Beryl,

but all of a sudden towards the end of the paragraph, Beryl's

voice has already infiltrated into'the narrator's as indicated by

the change of pronoun into 'mine1 as in fOh, what a joy it is to

own things I! Mine my owni' The vocabulary "nonsense1 and

'rubbish1 is also Beryl's. The imaginary couple embracing each

other in the room is surely the imagination of Beryl's, not the

narrator's. So in the end we cannot distinguish who speaks in

the narrative. The narrator or the character? The relationship

has become so close that we cannot say who is more superior.

Some authors seldom consider the readers when they write and

they take for ganted that readers are always there receiving

their messages* Mansfield, OE the contrary, cares about the

existence of her readers. So her narrator often draws the

attention of the readers while narrating the story. For example,

the narrator of fThe Stranger* describes a crowd of people

waiting on tie wfcarf for the arrival of tie ship.*:

53

It seemed to the little crowd on the wharf that she was never

going to move again. There she lay, imense, motionless on the

grey crinkled water, a loop of smoke above her, an immense flock

of gulls screaming and diving after the galley droppings at the

stern. You could just see little couples parading ™ little

flies walking up and down the dish on the grey wrinkled

tablecloth. Other flies clustered and swarmed at the edge. Now

there was a gleam of white on the lower deck the cook's apron

or the stewardess perhaps. Now a tiny black spider raced up the

ladder on to the bridge.

( Mansfield,1983: 212 }

From the speculative verb 'seemed1 and the modal adverb

'perhaps1, which emphasizes interpretation rather than factual

report, we can see the narrator serves as an observer at this

point of the narrative. The metaphors 'little flies1 and 'a tiny

black spider* further enhance the effect of speculation.

Everybody on the wharf is in fact wondering why the ship lies

motionless on the sea. The narrator directly addresses the

readers as 'you1 with a view to inviting the readers to join hia

as observers of the narative, So the readers are not excluded in

the discourse. Sometimes the narrator even asks the readers to

verify a certain thing as in 'Miss Brill', 'Miss Brill as glad

that she had decided on her fur* The air was motionless, but

when you opened your mouth there was just a faint chill, like a

chill from a glass of iced water before you sip, and now and

again a leaf came drifting — fro® nowhere, from the sky. Miss

Brill put up her hand and touched her fur. Bear little thing!

It was nice to feel it again.1 { Mansfield, 983: 184 )

54

readers 'you* are invited to play the role of judge to certify

that the weather is really freezing in order to show that Hiss

Brill's dicision of wearing the fur is correct. It 'The Singing

Lesson1, the narrator, whose voice is infiltrated into by a

character Miss Meadows, invites the readers 'you* to support his

criticism of another character, i.e. the Science Mistress in this

story:

Miss Meadows, hugging the knife, stared in hatred at the Science

Mistress. Everything about her as sweet, pale, like honey. You

would not have been surprised to see a bee caught in the tangles

of that yellow hair.

( Mansfield, 198: 203 }

From the above examples, we can see the readers are often invited

to play a role in one way or another in the narrative discourse.

Thus, the relationship between the narrator and the readers is

quite close.

Besides the narrator's relationship with characters and

readers, the relationships between characters can also be

revealed through dialogues* In actual daily communication,

sometimes we cannot take the face value of an utterance into

account because it may appear to be incongruous with the rest of

the conversation. Instead, we have to consider the context both

linguistically and sociologically in which an utterance is

produced in order to grasp its real aeaning* iccordiag to I.P.

Grice, people have to follow certain rules whea they hold a

55

conversation and Gnce calls those rules .uaxias. There are

altogether five maxims: the co-operative principle, the aaxis of

quality, the maxim of quantity, the uaxia of relevance, the maxim

of manner. [4] But soiTietimes these maxims are not observed and

deliberately violated, thus producing an implicature, which is an

inference generated 'beyond the semantic content of the

sentences1 by the maxim ( Levinson, 1983:103 }, i.e. the real

meaning of the utterance. So the addressee has to be alert in

decoding the real meaning of the speech without being confused by

the apparently incongruous utterance. Moreover, for the sake of

politeness sometimes people employ certain strategies when they

speaker so as to give face to the addressee. By 'face1 here we

luccji 'basic wantsf, 'which every member knows every other member

dosir^s, and which in general it is in the interests of every

member to partially satisfy,1 ( Brown £ Levinson, 1987: 62 }.

There arc two kinds of face wants; positive face [5] and negative

face [6]. There are five face-saving strategies: ( i ) to do the

face threatening act bald on record [7] ( ii } to do the face

threatening act with redressive action oriented toward positive

politeness [8] ( iii } to do the face threatening act with

redressive action oriented towards negative politeness ( iv ) to

do the face threatening act off record [9] ( v ) do not do the

face threatening act ( Brown & Levinson, 1987: 69 }

Let us now apply the above theories of pragmatics to the

dialogues in some stories with a view to examining the

relationships of the characters. First, look at tie following

dialogue between Reginald and Anne in fHr. and Mrs, Dove1:

For tLe ^oj:c?;;t h* *7as COLSCIC^S ozly of tLc :L

too* to t^ar Us s^c^t cut cf LL^^lf a::J offer it to A±M.

'Znna, do you think you co^ld er^r Jure for »c?'

'No, never 212 thzt vzy. '

Anne faced Regi^ld. 'It isL*t that I'-j not awfully foxd of

you,' she saiJ. 'I ^. 3*t' — - he; ey*.s xid*s*d — *^ci zr>

the vay' — - a qaiver passed over h<=r f z c e ~ 'c+*e c+ght to la

fond of -— f Hcr lips parted, and she couldn't stop herself,

She began laaghiLg. 'There, you see, you see,1 she cried, 'it's

your check t-tie. E7en at this ^G*2e®t, when one would think oze

really would be solemn, your tie reminds me fearfully of the bow-

tie that cats wear in pictures! Oh, plc-as^ forgive ^c for being

so horrid, please 1 f

Reggie caught hold of h^r little war^ hand. 'There's no question

of forgiving you, ' he said quic&ly. 'How could there be? And I

do believe I knoz why I ^aiv you laugh. It's because you're so

far aLovc EG in every ;/ay tiat I a% somehow ridiculous. I see

that, AnLe. But if I were to --- '

*Nof no. ' Anne squeezed his land hard. 'It's not that. That's

all wrong. I'm not far above you at all. You're much better

than I an. You're marvellously unselfish and ... and kind and

simple'.

'The nan I ^arry --- f

"So you?' said Anne. fOhf I do hope you do ---- Isn't it fumy? I

aj5 say a£ytfai&g to y&i. I always Ji«irc been aile to from the

He tried to smile, to say *Ifia flad. ' She vent on. *I*ve newer

known anyone I like as much as J like you. ..* But I*M sure It's

nat what people and what J&oois mean when they talk aiout lore.

Do you iincferstaM? Oil,, if you only iney Jbov horrid J feel. But

57

we'd be like ... like Sr. and A'rs. Sore. ' ...

'Don't drive it i^, ' h= said and Le t^d ^ay frc_ A^e *zd

looked across the Ju »/;„....

7/o, don't. You «*'fr go yc?t, ' si* suid i^plori^Iy. T_ Jaii't

possibly go away £*eli^ 2i*c tiat. ' i.jf ^ stsr*J up at hi±

frowning, biting her lip,

'Oh, that's all riyht,' said 3*;jie, giving LUsalf a shake.

'I'll . . . I'll • z^d Le ^;^J Lis Land as ^ch as to say 'get

over i t * „

{ • * , f - > - c ^ n - " ' 4 •* / " * , O T . 1^0 1 01 *\ i*a**Si-.Ca.*0i, ,*. J 0. * i.«O""J.J«. >

Ii;ne turi.3 Rcgir.ild dowr. in & sirc^igliforKi.-d tLoagL ^ bit

abrupt },^. Why docsr.'t stc cLcosc a higher number strategy,

which, would giv^ Reginald more fac«f for example, strategy 3 or

4? The situation is so imminent that she Las to put 'face1 aside

and choose a bald-on-record because she does net want to give

Reginald any false hope. And then, she laughs and offers a

reason 'it's your check t-tic1. Here the maxi^ of quality is

broken just because Anne is trying tc cover up her attitude

towards Reginald in order to give hiii face. However, Riginald

ignores the; Batter of face and continues to go bald-on-reccrd by

pointing out why Anne laughs at hi-i all the ti^e. Face is nc

longer important to him at this stage since he has already lost

it at the very beginning of the conversation. What he wants is

to verify whether his analysis is right. So he pushes lane to

ad^it it. But Amic still wants to give him face by breaking the

maxim of quality and answers, 'Ho, llo.f She than continues to

explain how much they understand each other. Reginald is

therefore forced to smile because he, too, wants to sate his face

58

at this stage, nevertheless, it is now Anne's turn to adept the

bald-oii-record strategy by comparing their relationship to that

of her doves. Maybe she misjudges Reginald's response and thinks

that he has really overcome the embarrassment and does act care

about fac<=. This tine it is Reginald who asks Anne not to be so

straightforward as he really wants to save his negative face.

Even towards the end, Reginald has to break the uaxi« of quality

in order to save his own face. Frc- this example, Ws= know

strategies of various sorts have to be employed in a dialogue if

tho characters want to naintain a cordial relationship.

Likewise, so^e characters who have an intimate relationship

50L*w-tijicS have to adopt so^e strategy if they do not want to

spoil their relationship. In 'The Stranger', the jealous llr.

HaLLaond questions his wife why she should be the one who helps

to save the life of the young man on beard the ship.

'But — why you, why you?' moaned Ha^ond*

At that Jarjey turned quickly, quickly saarchzd his face.

'You don't mind, John, do you?' she asked. 'You don't ™ It's

nothing- to do vith you and me. '

Somehow or oth^r he managed to jhakct som^ sort of smil£ at her.

Somehow or other he stammered: 'No— go on, go on! I want

you to toll me. r

fBut, Join darling f

'Tell mef Janay* *

'There's ootbinff to tell,* she said, wondering.

( Maasfiald, 1983; 229 )

59

ic^d, i.. jct^r;., by his w i f i , he his .ic chcic*.-

but to break the ...a:ci... cf ^lit hcca.Sc L*

manipula t ing cer ta in s t ra tegies in a d ia log .e . Loci: at th

following extract fro:: 'The Young Girl1 :

Tou doi^'t -ixiJ tzZi^j Hcn&ic?' s^id Hrs Saddle!:. f5urc you

don't? Tare's thc car, azd you'll have tea a;i«f ,YC 'JJ ia iacJ;

i^^^ oj] tiis .st^p right here — iij an hour. Yoa see, I want

her to go in. She's not &&*n before, and it's i/orth Scei&g. I

f&el it wouldn't Le fair to her. '

*CLt shut up, mother, ' said she ^^arily. "Co^ aJo*2^. Sc^'t

tall: so jjuji, :J yoar Jbaj's ope:«; yzj'll be losing all

The m o t h e r s^eiis to t a k e t h e d a u g h t e r ' s s i t u a t i o n i n t o

consideration uhcreas the daughter is very rude and goes bald on

record.Froja the daugter's strategy, we can see how much she hates

her aother, so she has not thought of giving faca to .her aether

even in front of a stranger.

Tha conversation iatwean lazia and her grandma in "At the

Bay* demonstrates another kind of relationship.

"You 're not to die. ' Kezia was very decided.

'Ah, Kezia' her grandma looked up and sailed and shoos her

head 'don't let's talk about it. *

'But you're not to . You couldn't leave ae. You couida'r not 3e

there.' This was awful. 'Promise se you won't ever do it,

grandma, ' pleaded Kezia.

The old woman went on knitting.

'Promise me! Say never!f

But still her grandma was silent.

( Mansfield, 1983: 39 }

Grandma deliberately breaks the maxim of irrelevance when Kezia

brings up the topic of death because grandma knows very well that

Kezia is too young to understand death. Kezia insists, and

grandma is forced to break the maxim of quantity by remaining

silent. From their dialogue and grandma's strategies, we know

age divides people no matter how intimate their relationship is.

The gap between two generations is not easily bridged.

From the strategies and in the above dialogues, relationships

of different nature, i.e. cordial, intimate, antagonistic,

between speakers and addressees are revealed.

61

SECTION VII ANALYSES OF SOME ASPECTS OF THE NARRATIVE

DISCOURSE; WHAT ARE THE ATTITUDE MJ)

WORLD VIE! OF THE IMPLIED AUTHOR IS

SHOiH IN THE DISCOURSE?

Out of fifteen stories, the main characters of ten stories

are female characters, and from the implied author's treatment of

the characters and the narrator*s comments we can see her

tendency to sympathize with female characters more than male

characters. For example, in 'Life of Ma Parker', Ma Parker says

in her own words: 'I've had a hard life.1 ( Mansfield, 1983: 146

) The narrator says that even the neighbours sympathise with her

by saying among themselves: 'She's had a hard life, has Ha

Parker.1 The narrator even gives his own comment on Ma Parker*s

attitude towards her life: 'And it was so true she wasn't in the

least proud of it. It was just as if you were to say she lived

in the basement-back at Number 27. A hard life!1 ( Mansfield,

1983: 146 } Towards the end of the story the narrator cannot

help showing his sympathy: 'Her misery was so terrible that she

pinned on her hat, put on her haciet and walked out of the flat

like a person in a dream- She did not know what she was doing.

She was like a person so dazed by the horror of what has happened

that he walks away — anywhere, as though by walking away he

could escape ..,' { Mansfield, 1983: 151-152 ) Perhaps we can

look at the implied author's treatment of characters in 'In the

Bay1, in which most of the characters who speak are females* The

implied author depicts the ainds and psyches of Linda and Beryl

in an exceptionally thorough and deep way. The techniques of

stream of consciousness and FIS are used. The narrator even

addresses Linda and Beryl directly by addressing them in second

62

person pronoun 'you1 as illustrated in the previous serticn. All

these show the narrator as veil as the implied author's concern

for the characters*

On the contrary, in a few stories the sain characters are

male characters, for example, Mr. Heave in 1An Ideal Family %

Reginald in 'Mr. and Mrs. Dove', Mr. Hammond in 'The Stranger1

and William in 'Marriage a* la Mode', there are no traces of the

narrator's or the implied author's sympathy for these male

characters although the narrator does enter their minds and

attempt to give an internal view of their psyches* Sometimes the

narrator even criticizes his male characters as shown in the

following comment on Jonathan in 'In the Bay1:

At these times he exaggerated his absurd manner of speaking f and

he sang in church — he was the leader of the choir — with

such fearful dramatic intensity that the meanest hymn put on an

unholy splendour*

( Mansfield, 1983: 53 )

From the implied authorfs treatment of the male and female

characters, we can see her view on women's role in society.

Linda is perhaps a good example to illustrate this point.

It was all very well to say it was the common lot of women to

hear children. It wasn't true. She, for one, could prove that

wrong. She was broken, made real, her courage was gone, through

63

ild-be-zinj. .'.iJ yist de it do^ly izrd tc iear v&s, sL* did

t Jo.v Ji.-r jiiJJr*... rt ,-.j -^JL^ ^retciJJ-j. rra if ji«?

tragedy is that she cs.r*nc.i go Leycr*d herself ^s traditional

vo-ic.il. If ;;e st^dy the Letters of Eithcri^c. :: sfidd critter, tc

J. II. Kun-y, we will find Mansfield herself also loathes her role

oiS Cwi* * ell <L JLS^AA M.^. 1i 1, «. c - r c> L. 1. 11 1 « .u. IS 3. — f ** a, y S Ol* •« «^r **. I. I*u. »

Besides f^^^lcs, childr*... or^ uLoth^r g-ro^ of ^i-opl^ th^t

IlaLsfidd car^s «io^t. That is why they appear all the tisie in

her stories, for example, 'At the Bay1, 'The Garden Party1, 'The

Young Girl1, fThe Voyage1 and fThe First BA11'. Except 'At the

Bay1, the uain characters of these stories are childr^r* and the

stories arc told from the points of vie^ of children* For

example, as discussed before, 'The Voyage1 is a story filtered

through tha ayes of tha little girl Feaalla with the help cf soae

linguistic devices like verbs of sensation, so she is not touched

Ly the sadness of separation, which is a sentiment shared mainly

by adults. Even the rude girl in "The Young Girl"1 is treated in

a synpathctic light by the narrator and implied author. Towards

the end of the story, the narrator tells us the girl has

undergone so^e change and she speaks 'in a warn* aag«er voica1.

The description in the concluding paragaph shovs the narrator's

appraciaticn of the girl's change;

S-J

Her dark coat fell open, and her %iire throat — all her soft

young body in the blue dress •— was lile a flower that is j

emerging* from its dark bud.

{ Mansfield, 1983: 142 )

The colours 'dark', 'white1 and 'blue', and the simile 'a flower

... emerging from its dark bud1 tell us the girl's change is

surely an encouraging one.

After studying all the stories in this collection, we will

find that there is always a human touch in Mansfield's works.

Human relationship is a problem that puzzles Mansfield all the

time. Communication is never an easy task. Mansfield's

characters always have difficulties in communicating with each

other, for example, Linda and Stanley in 'At the Bay* Reginald

and Anne in 'Mr. and Mrs, Dove*, the rude girl and her mother in

'The Young Girl1, Isabel and William in 'Marriage a la Mode1,

Fenella and her grandmother in 'The Voyage1, Miss Meadows and her

boy-friend in 'The Singing Lesson', Mr. and Mrs. Hammond in 'The*

Stranger1, Mr. Heave and his family in 'An Ideal Family1* Let us

examine the implied author's tret&ent of the discourse in

'Marriage a la Mode1. The first two-thirds of the story is

written from William's point of view. Then the point of view

gradually shifts to Isabel's in the remaining one-third of the

story. The readers are presented with the points of view of this

couple, which, however, never have a chance to interningle. It

implies that despite their status as husband and wife, filliaa

and Isabel scarcely have a chance to communicate and understand

each other's view. The story ends on a pessimistic note that

65

Isabel continues to pursue her new way, which means that she will

continue to use her discourse, which can in no way be intervoven

with Williamfs discourse. Communication is thus blocked.

Finally, from the discourse of certain characters, we can see

the implied author's philosophic view of life and death. Linda's

view of life is revealed in the following passage:

Dazzling- white the picotees shone; the golden-eyed marigold

glittered; the nasturtiums wreathed the veranda poles ingreen and

gold flame. If only one had time to look at these flowers long

enoughf time to get over the sense of novelty and strangeness,

time to know them! But as soon as one paused to part the petals,

to discover the under-side of the leaf, along came Life and one

was swept away. And, lying in her cane chair, Linda felt so

light; she felt like a leaf. Along came Life like a wind and she

was seized and shaken; she had to go. Oh dear, would it always

be so? Was there no escape?

( Mansfield, 1983: 32 }

From the figurative language of the passage we can see Linda

should find life beautiful. Life is ever new and one has to take

time to discover its novelty. Yet there is always a dark side —

'the under-side of the leaf1 — in life as well* The paradox of

life is something that one may not be able to bear. The

vocabulary 'wreathed* and the questions at the end of the passage

indicate Linda's pessimistic view towards life* The generic use

of the pronoun 'one1 three times implies the narrator or the

implied author wants to generalize the situation, whicb is not

confined to Linda alone but shared by many people* Like Linda,

66

Jonathan finds life unbearable.

'Tell me, mat is the difference between ^y life and that of

an ordinary prisoner? The only difference I can see is zhaz I

put myself in jail and nobody's ever going to let ze out. That's

a more intolerable situation than the other. ... I1^ like an

insect that's flown into a room of its ora accord, 1 dash

against the walls, dash against the windows, flop against the

ceiling, do everything on God's earth, in fact, except f l y our

again. And all the while I'j thinking, like that sotb, or that

butterfly, or whatever it is,"The shortness of life! The

shortness of life!" I've only one night or one day, and there's

this vast dangerous garden, waiting out there, undiscovered,

unexplored* '

{ Mansfield, 1983: 53-54 }

The use of parallelism and equivalence 'dash against ... flop

against', 'undiscovered .., unexploredf reinforces Jonathan * s

fee l ing of being t r apped in l i f e . In c o n t r a s t r K e z i a ' s

grandmother, an old woman facing death, accepts life as it is.

In the FIS of grandmother when she is asked about her son's

death, we can clearly see her view of life and death:

'Does it make you sad to think about him, grandma?' She hated

her grandma to he sad.

It was the old woman's turn to consider. Did it make her sad?

To loot back, Jtecjr. Fo stare down the jears, as Kezzia had seen

67

her doing. To look after thex as a vosan does, long after they

were out of sight. Did ir zake her sad? So, life ¥as like that.

7/o, Kezia. '

( Mansfield, 1933:38 }

Therefore, from the narrator's discourse as well as the

characters' discourse, we can infer that the implied author is

more sympathetic to the females and children, and there are

traces of feminism in her ideas. Human relationships and the

philosophic question of life and death are her major concerns in

writing stories.

SECTION VIII CONCLUSION

From the above analyses, we can derive certain

characteristics of the narrative discourse in Katherine

Mansfield's The Garden Party and Other Short Stories. First, it

is not simple but highly complex. Mansfield does not adopt a

single type of narrator, but two types, or to be more exact, a

combination of two types of narrator. Her perspective is not

one-dimensional. She explores the possibility of using various

perspectives: internal, psychological, multiple and spatio-

temporal. There is also a complexity of discourse structures;

foregrounding, structure of consciousness and sociolinguistic

structure.

Second, her narrative discourse is not static, but dynamic.

The narrator always shifts from one type to another. Owing to

the use of flashbacks and stream of consciousness, the spatial

order as well as the temporal order shift all the time. Besides,

because of the use of FIS and infiltration of voices, the point

of view shifts from one character to another. Thus, the reader

has to be vigilant if he wants to capture the dynamism of the

discourse.

Third, Mansfield's narrative discourse is not explicit, but

subtle. Because of the psychological perspective and psychic

nature of the discourse, it is deemed to be subtle because human

psychology is never transparent, and human relationship is the

most subtle area in human behaviour.

Lastly, llan^fidd's narrative discourse is not incoherent,

but highly structured. The surface structure cf her discourse

indeed laclis organization, but there exist so*.*e embedded

patterns in the deep structure of the discourse., i.e. the

discourse structure. Three discourse structures are found in

Mansfield's narrative discourse: foregrounding, structure of

consciousness and sociolinguistic structure,

To conclude, in *-iew of the complex, dynamic, subtle and

highly structured characteristics of }:aLsfi^ldls narrative

discourse, the reader has to play an extremely active part in

decoding the discourse. Therefore, the participation of the

reader is essential. As a Batter of fact, the reader is

constantly invited by the narrator to talie part in his narrative

discourse.

70

FOOTNOTES

[1] By 'eventually* we do not mean in the course of Hansfield's

whole writing career, but we confine it to the development

within a story.

[2] Li isa Dahl d e f i n e s it as: f $tream~-of-consciousness

literature is identified by its subject-matier rather than

by its forms. The subject-matter is the "atmosphere of the

mind", the uninterrupted and endless flow of consciousness

of a character in a literary work* By consciousness is

meant the total range of awareness and emotive-mental

response of an individual, from the lowest pre-speech level

to the highest fully articulated level of rational thought.9

[3] Some people may argue that the shift from 'she* to 'I* in

the second paragraph does not indicate it is an FIS since

the ii-clause is followed by 'thought Beryl* , which means it

is a direct style. But the second passage contains two

choices: the narrator addressing Beryl at the beginning and

Beryl saying f Mine — my ownT towards the end. Here is a

typical example of FIS*

[4] Levinson: P.1011 The co-operative principle

make your contribution such as is required, at the stage at

which it occursf by the accepted purpose or direction of the

tall: exchange in which you are engaged,

The maxim of Quality

try to make your contribution one that is true, specially:

(i) do not say what you believe to be false

(ii) do not say that for which you lack adequate evidence

The maxim of Quantity

71

(i) make your contribution 35 izror^aczve as is required

for the purposes of the exchange

(ii) do not make your contribution xore informative than is

required

The maxim of Relevance

make your contributions relevant

The maxim of Manner

be perspicuous, and specifically:

(i) avoid obscurity

(ii) avoid ambiguity

(Hi) be brief

(iv) be orderly'

[5] Brown & Levinson: P.62

"negative face: the want of every "competent adult member"

that his actions be unimpeded9by others.'

[6] Brown & Levinson: P.62

'positive face; the want of every member that his wants be

desirable to at least some others.*

[7] Brown & Levinson; P.68

1 An actor goes on record in doing an act A if it is clear to

participants what communicative intention led the actor to

do &*

[8] Brown & Levinson: P.69

'By redressive action we mean action that "gives face" to

tie addressee1

[9] Brown £ Levinson: P.69

'if an actor goes off record in doing Af then there is more

than one unambiguously attributable intention so that the

actor cannot be held to have committed himself to one

particular intent*f

72

BIBLIOGRAPHY

A. Text

Mansfield, Katherine. The Garden Party and Other Short Stories. 1983.

England, Penguin.

B. On Katharine Mansfield

1, Caffin, Elizabeth. Introducing- Katherine Mansfield. 1982.

Auckland, Longman Paul.

2. Hanson, Clare, ed. The Critical Writings of Katherine Mansfield.

1986, London, Macmillan,

3* Murry, J. Middle ton, ed. Journal of Katherine Mansfield. 1954.

London, Constable & Co. Ltd.

4. Hurry, J. Middleton, ed. The Letters of Katherine Mansfield. 1929.

New York, Alfred A. Knopf.

C. On Stylistics

1. Booth, Wayne. The Rhetoric of Fiction. 1961. U. of Chicago Press.

2. Crystal, D . , & Davy, D, Investigating English Style. 1969.

Longman,

3. Dahl, Liisa. Linguistic Features of the Stream-of'-Consciousness

Techniques of James Joyce, Virginia Woolf and Eugene O'Neill. 1970.

Turun Yliopisto.

4. Fowler, Roger, ed. Essays on Style and Language. 1966, Routledge

and Kegan Paul.

5* Fowler, Roger. Linguistics and the Novel. 1311. Methuea.

6, Fowler, Roger, Linguistic Criticism* 1986, Oxford 0. Press,

7, Fowler, Roger, Literature as Social Discourse. 1981, London,

Guilford and Worcester,

8, Leech, G.N., £ Short, H*H, Style in Fiction. 1981. Longman.

73

9. Page, Norman. Speech in the English Hovel. 19S3. 2nd Edition.

Hong Kong, Hacmillan.

10. Pratt, Mary Louise. Toward a Speech Act Theory of Literary

Discourse. 1977. Blooiaington, Indiana U. Press.

11. Todorov, Tzvetan. The Poetics of Prose. 1977, Blackwell.

D, On Sociolinguistics

1. Brown, P., & Levinson, 5.C. Politeness. 1987. England, Cambridge

U. Press.

2. Goffman, Erving. Forms of Talk. 1981. England, Basil Blackwell.

3. Levinson, S. Pragmatics. 1983. England, Cambridge U. Press.

4. Trudgill, P. Sociolingnistics: An Introduction to Language and

Society. 1983. England, Penguin.

74