Mrs. Ramsay and Lily Briscoe
Mrs. Ramsay and Lily Briscoe
Only Lily Briscoe, she was glad to fin; and that did not matter. But the sight of the
girl standing on the edge of the lawn painting reminded her; she was supposed to
be keeping her head as much in the same position as possible for Lily’s picture.
Lily’s picture! Mrs. Ramsay smiled. With her little Chinese eyes and her puckered-up
face, she would never marry; once could not take her painting seriously; she was
an independent little creature, and Mrs. Ramsay liked her for it; so, remembering
her promise, she bent her head. (21)
Mrs. Ramsay’s descriptive language about Lily is very derogatory, despite the fact that she
supposedly likes Lily. Lily is “othered” by the descriptions of he facial features; men will not
want to marry someone that looks Chinese. She is described as a “creature,” almost like a
pet, a person that Mrs. Ramsay is supposed to humor but not take seriously. Why does Mrs.
Ramsay present the reader with such scorn and ambivalence towards a woman she likes?
Mrs. Ramsay does, indeed, like Lily and is, more than likely, jealous of her friend’s freedom.
Lily does not need to play roles; she is one of the truest characters in this novel. Men do not
rely on her for anything, at least not while Mrs. Ramsay is alive, and she is thus afforded
the time to paint her silly pictures that no one takes seriously. Mrs. Ramsay secretly yearns
for the freedom that Lily has, but refuses to recognize this desire. She would rather make
Lily appear less important and frivolous, thus making herself appear better.
Alex Zwerdling claims that Lily is the only woman in the novel who tries to reconcile the
domestic world with the public, or career world. At times, she wants to bend to Mrs.
Ramsay’s will, but eventually chooses to “work over domesticity in a moment of vocational
commitment associated with the solution to the design of the painting she is working on”
(191-92). The difficulty of her choice is highlighted by her relationship with Mrs. Ramsay.
Lily Briscoe is a confusing character in and of herself because she has an ambiguous
relationship with the family. She struggles with her thoughts, whether she loves Mrs.
Ramsay or the children or both: “—but what could one say to her? ‘I’m in love with you?’
No, that was not true. ‘I’m in love with this all,’ waving her hand at the hedge, at the house,
at the children” (TtL 23). Lily is alone in the world and it appears that she longs for
conventions of life, a home of her own, a family. However, long after Mrs. Ramsay has died,
Lily is still haunted by the ghost from her past. She seems to rebel against Mrs. Ramsay’s
adherence to marriage:
Mrs. Ramsay has faded and gone, she thought. We can over-ride her wishes,
improve away her limited old-fashioned ideas. She recedes further and further from
us. Mockingly she seemed to see her there at the end of the corridor of years
saying, of all incongruous things, “Marry, marry!” (178)
Ironically, Lily knows that Mrs. Ramsay has not gone nor has she faded. She is the ghost
lingering behind while the others finally make their trip to the lighthouse. She is the one
who watches as Lily completes her painting. At times the ghost is silent, other times
memories float freely through Lily’s mind as she tries to remember the specific shape of
images in her painting. Despite Lily’s need to “stand up to Mrs. Ramsay—a tribute to the
astonishing power that Mrs. Ramsay had over one,” she recognizes the little miracles of life
that Mrs. Ramsay gave to her family.
One of the main questions addressed in Mrs. Dalloway is reiterated in this novel: “What is
the meaning of life? That was all—a simple question; one that tended to close in on one
with years. The great revelation had never come” (164). Despite Lily being disappointed
that there was no great revelation, she highlights some of the important things Mrs.
Ramsay brought to the family:
Instead there were little daily miracles, illuminations, matches struck unexpectedly
in the dark; here was one. This, that, and the other; herself and Charles Tansley
and the breaking wave; Mrs. Ramsay brining them together; Mrs. Ramsay saying,
“Life stand still here”; Mrs. Ramsay making of the moment something permanent…
this was of the nature of a revelation. In the midst of chaos there was shape; this
eternal passing and flowing…Life stand still here, Mrs. Ramsay said. “Mrs. Ramsay!
Mrs. Ramsay!” she repeated. She owed it all to her. (165)
Lily owes Mrs. Ramsay credit for helping her reach this revelation about life. Lily and Mrs.
Ramsay seemed to share a love/hate relationship. They didn’t hate each other in the
traditional sense of the word. Mrs. Ramsay disliked how Lily was too free-thinking and
revolutionary in her ideas. Lily disliked how Mrs. Ramsay constantly conformed to society’s
expectations of her. In the end, the two women created a type of balance, a harmony in
which they were able to see the significant high points of life through the other’s eyes. Their
colorful points of view made life meaningful. They found the beauty, through each other,
that other people in their life constantly seek.
By the end of the novel, Lily finally realizes how much Mrs. Ramsay meant to her as she
begins to cry. She doesn’t even understand why she is crying: “Was she crying then for Mrs.
Ramsay, without being aware of any unhappiness?” (183). Lily cannot have her final vision
of life, her final epiphany, without Mrs. Ramsay. No matter how much she cries, she will not
bring Mrs. Ramsay back to life:
For one moment she felt that if they both got up, here, now on the lawn, and
demanded an explanation, why was it so short, why was it so inexplicable, said it
with violence, as two fully equipped human beings from whom nothing should be
hid might speak, then, beauty would form into shape; if they shouted loud enough
Mrs. Ramsay would return. “Mrs. Ramsay!” she said aloud, “Mrs. Ramsay!” The
tears ran down her face. (183)
Lily can bring Mrs. Ramsay to life, but only if she finishes her painting. Lisa Ruddick explains
that Lily’s painting, and her trouble with reconciling Mrs. Ramsay’s death, becomes the final
climax of the novel: “She must bring Mrs. Ramsay back to the realm of the living, draw the
distant, visionary picture she has of her into the near world of fact” (49). In fact, Thomas A.
Vogler, in the introduction of Twentieth Century Interpretations of To the Lighthouse,
explains how Lily’s “painting echoes Mrs. Ramsay’s sense of ‘being oneself’…the goal is to
achieve a sense of felt form in which the means—the particular formal elements—are
arbitrary because the inner essence captured by the form is invisible” (31). Though Mrs.
Ramsay’s person will never grace Lily’s presence again, her spirit, her ghost, will continue to
haunt Lily for the rest of her waking days, both through memories and through the new life
Lily gave her within the canvas of her painting.
Stream of Consciousness
in Virginia Woolf's "To the
Lighthouse"
Virginia Woolf’s novel To the Lighthouse delves into the minds of its characters in a stream of
consciousness approach. The characters’ thoughts and feelings blend into one another, and the
outward actions and dialogue come second to the inward emotions and ruminations. In the dinner
party sequence, for instance, Woolf changes the point of view frequently, with transitions often
marked by the sparse dialogue. While shifting the point of view from person to person, Woolf
develops her characters through their thoughts, memories, and reactions to each other.
Raising her eyebrows at the discrepancy—that was what she was thinking, this was what she was
doing—ladling out soup—she felt, more and more strongly, outside that eddy. (83)
Being outside of the eddy is her sense of “being past everything, through everything, out of
everything” (83). Completely out of touch with Mr. Ramsay and everyone else at the table, she
instead focuses on how shabby the room is, how sterile the men are, and how she pities William
Bankes. Finding meaning and strength again in her pity, she gets past her mental weariness enough
to ask him an innocuous question about his letters.
To The Lighthouse
The point of view shifts abruptly to Lily Briscoe, who is watching Mrs. Ramsay intently and imagining
her thoughts. Lily is able to read Mrs. Ramsay pretty clearly: “How old she looks, how worn she
looks, and how remote” (84). She wonders why Mrs. Ramsay pities William Bankes, and she
realizes that “the life in her, her resolve to live again, had been stirred by pity” (84). Lily does not find
Bankes pitiable, but she recognizes that Mrs. Ramsay is fulfilling some need of her own. Lily thinks
about how Bankes has his work, then her thoughts switch to her own work, and she starts imagining
her painting and the adjustments she will make. As if to remind the readers of the setting, Woolf has
Lily take up “the salt cellar and put it down again on a flower in pattern in the table-cloth, so as to
remind herself to move the tree” (84-85). After all of Lily Briscoe’s thoughts, Mr. Bankes finally
responds to Mrs. Ramsay’s inquiry as to whether he has found his letters.
“What damned rot they talk,” thinks Charles Tansley, as the point of view shifts to him very briefly
(85). Lily observes how he lays down his spoon “precisely in the middle of his plate, which he had
swept clean, as if, Lily thought…he were determined to make sure of his meals” (85). As if she can
read people’s thoughts, Lily’s attention turns to Charles Tansley, as she makes observations about
him. She notes that his appearance is meager and unlovely, but she is still drawn to his blue, deep
set eyes. Mrs. Ramsay pities him as well, as she also asks him about his letters.
Tansley’s response is incorporated into the text, not as a direct quotation, as if he does not wish to
join in the banal conversation but instead wallow in his thoughts. “For he was not going to talk the
sort of rot these people wanted him to talk. He was not going to be condescended to by these silly
women” (85). Tansley holds the women and their ways in disdain; he finds them silly and superficial.
Why do they get dressed up for such occasions? He is wearing his ordinary clothes. Women “did
nothing but talk, talk, talk, eat, eat, eat…Women made civilization impossible with all their ‘charm,’ all
their silliness” (85). By portraying his inner frustrations, Woolf lets the reader know exactly how
Charles Tansley feels about dinner parties, women, and civilization as a whole.
By shifting the point of view from character to character, Woolf shares each character’s thoughts and
feelings, opinions and reactions to one another. The dynamics between the characters are
expressed more fully by their thoughts than by their words. The light dialogue serves to break up the
transitions in perspective. By blending people’s inward feelings and keeping dialogue to a minimum,
Woolf develops her many-dimensioned characters in a unique and memorable way.
Just as with the contrast between Mrs. Ramsey and Lily Briscoe, there is a distinct
contrast between Cam and James. These are the two youngest of the Ramsey
children. Cam is described as “wild.” She is not shown much in the novel, but the
reader knows some parts of her personality. For example, as a child she refuses to
give William Bankes a flower for his lapel, she runs wildly past people without
much regard for them, and the boar’s skull scares her. James on the other hand,
as a child, is described by Mrs. Ramsey as the most sensitive of her children. They
are able to share many moments because they are so much alike. He however,
likes the boar’s head.
I noticed the contrast most when Mrs. Ramsey puts them to sleep by addressing
them each in a distinctive manner. She tells Cam to ignore the skull and think of
mountains, valleys, stars, antelopes, parrots, and gardens. This set of things really
doesn’t match logically. Mrs. Ramsey pacifies Cam by freeing her imagination. Her
speech here is described as “nonsensical.” She wants Cam to think of impossible
combinations: parrots and antelopes, antelopes and bird nests, and maybe bird
nests and women, women and art, etc. and she wants Cam to ignore the skull,
which may be read as frighten patriarchy.
However, Mrs. Ramsey addresses her very sensitive son, James, in a very logical
manner, much in the same way that Mr. Ramsey and Tansley address him. She
says that the boar’s head is still there under the shawl even though it looks
different. Then when he asks if they can go to the lighthouse the next day, she
does exactly what she criticizes Ramsey and Tansley of doing: She gives James a
dose of reality and kills his hope. Mrs. Ramsey gives into the dominance of
patriarchy, thus going against her intuition and perpetuating the patriarchical
institution.
So with patriarchy as the dominant theme, how does James’s Oedipal complex
support or undermine patriarchy? I think that it supports it in that James thinks he
owns his mother just as much as Mr. Ramsey does. It indicates that no matter how
sensitive the son is, he is selfishly interested in continuing the patriarchy at a very
early age. His way of perpetuating the patriarchy is to overthrow his father and to
seduce his mother. So just like his father “James…stood stiff between her knees,
felt her rise in a rosy-flowered fruit tree laid with leaves and dancing boughs into
which the beak of brass, the arid scimitar of his father, the egotistical man,
plunged and smote, demanding sympathy.”