07-09-2012, 08:07 AM
Here's what I get out of this, meaning-wise, and why I'm reasonably comfortable with the lines as they are:
(early twilight frost) hardening plangent to imperative -- the voices are always loud, with a pleading edge in the daytime ("can't we just do something nice today?") changing to more critical, demanding and commanding around tea-time ("just sit and eat you lousy bastard"). To me this indicates a husband who's never really figured out what it means to be part of a couple but goes his own way, wishing it were different but having no real motivation to make it so. Obviously as time goes on, the routine makes the wife increasingly bitter.
clear of double jeopardy -- the offences he's being accused of are never quite the same, she's creative in her criticism, not allowing him to claim that she's nagging.
shadow boxers -- there's no physical contact, thus the sting of an averted cheek is figurative only, and the stain is one of embarrassment or anger. The fall is scripted by the routine, it's expected and neither partner knows how to break out of it. The only option they seem to have is to irritate each other and go through the motions of marriage.
Personally I think the first two stanzas are important to set up the final stanza, which contextualises the action in history (I mentioned before that aspidistra and a brown sideboard are grandparent-ish things to me, compounded by the linoleum earlier on). This is poignant, because it indicates that these two have been suffering for years, perhaps remembering some dim spark of romance but having settled into a rut of contempt and mutual distaste. The woman is clearly the more active partner, the more vocally critical, whereas the man has a bit of a martyr thing -- both are tragic figures.
(early twilight frost) hardening plangent to imperative -- the voices are always loud, with a pleading edge in the daytime ("can't we just do something nice today?") changing to more critical, demanding and commanding around tea-time ("just sit and eat you lousy bastard"). To me this indicates a husband who's never really figured out what it means to be part of a couple but goes his own way, wishing it were different but having no real motivation to make it so. Obviously as time goes on, the routine makes the wife increasingly bitter.
clear of double jeopardy -- the offences he's being accused of are never quite the same, she's creative in her criticism, not allowing him to claim that she's nagging.
shadow boxers -- there's no physical contact, thus the sting of an averted cheek is figurative only, and the stain is one of embarrassment or anger. The fall is scripted by the routine, it's expected and neither partner knows how to break out of it. The only option they seem to have is to irritate each other and go through the motions of marriage.
Personally I think the first two stanzas are important to set up the final stanza, which contextualises the action in history (I mentioned before that aspidistra and a brown sideboard are grandparent-ish things to me, compounded by the linoleum earlier on). This is poignant, because it indicates that these two have been suffering for years, perhaps remembering some dim spark of romance but having settled into a rut of contempt and mutual distaste. The woman is clearly the more active partner, the more vocally critical, whereas the man has a bit of a martyr thing -- both are tragic figures.
It could be worse