Patrick White’s “A Fringe of Leaves” Essay Essay
Social interactions and relationships are frequently used in novels to set up and develop thematic concerns within the text. Within A Fringe of Leaves. Patrick White constructs characters and their relationships to expose the restraints of societal outlooks and at the same time exemplify the metaphysical journey to self-fulfillment that the supporter. Ellen undergoes. It is through Ellen’s complex and frequently confusing relationships with other characters that her journey may be traced and the extent of alteration at each degree may be realised. The text remains. throughout such a journey. concerned with the contrast between visual aspects and world. revealed though all degrees of interaction. but affectingly exemplified in the upper category. Such contrasts are juxtaposed to the comparatively natural. nevertheless none the less complex. relationships looking deep within the Australian shrub. Social relationships are critical in set uping subjects. nevertheless Ellen’s interior battle remains the focal point of the novel. Relationships are therefor presented as complex and confounding in order to determine a deeper apprehension of both the trials and personal struggles Ellen must confront and the complex merchandise of her journey.
Ellen Gluyas is of working category beginnings and it is merely through her relationship with Austin that she comes to be the ‘Mrs. Roxburg’ of category and societal stature. This transcending of category. although provides her with Stoic and expediency. valuable in her journey. is the cause of much confusion for Ellen and she is invariably reevaluating her state of affairss in able to presume her appropriate function. White clearly expresses that Ellen and Austin’s matrimony is for grounds other so romantic love. Austin’s choice of Ellen as his married woman enables him to carry through his Pygmalion phantasies. nevertheless the chance of get marrieding would non hold come about at all without the direction of his female parent. The matrimony may therefore be seen every bit. as every bit carry throughing for ‘old’ Mrs. Roxburg as it is for Austin. Ellen. in following with the Pygmalion construct. marries as it is her merely means by which to accomplish societal mobility. Her credence of Austin’s ‘extraordinary’ proposal is prompted by her father’s decease ( a composite relationship in itself ) as her ensuing societal place leaves her with small alternate pick. Their relationship is therefore grounded on a unstable combination of unequal power. gratitude. strangeness. responsibility and ‘a bungling effort to turn out their love’ .
It is in the initial phase of the novel that the impacts of such a relationship are introduced. Ellen invariably struggles to camouflage her working category roots and beneath that. her religious and instinctual ego. This creates struggle and confusion in her apprehension of her ego and her relationships with other characters. Ellen plays a ‘many faceted role’ . which is made possible through the beds of societal patterns imposed during her induction into the upper category. Although Austin provides her with the chance. it is her relationship with ‘old’ Mrs. Roxburg that begins the building of the new immature Mrs. Roxburg. Ellen becomes Austin and his mother’s molded and manipulated ‘work of art’ and it is during this clip that she realises the importance of visual aspects within the upper category. Ellen besides becomes cognizant of the artlessness and ignorance of her working category ego. and therefore White foregrounds the impression of the category system as divided by a thin veneer of reputability. This impression of a superficial ‘fringe’ as the determiner of place within society is further criticised through the building of Austin’s brother Garnet.
White’s portraiture of Garnet and the penetrations Ellen additions from her relationship with him. uncover the potency for corruptness and immorality within the upper category. Garnet. although banished from respectable society in Britain. is able to restart his autocratic function. permuting his familiar being of privilege and power to an Australian society. White’s dry portraiture of Garnet as a stereotype of the upper category is critical in its exposure of the dual criterions apparent in a graded societal construction. Garnet is expected to continue societal ideals by puting moral illustrations for those ‘lesser’ than him. yet he. in every regard. defies the construct of ‘Christian morality’ through his advantageous and corrupt nature. White’s word picture of Garnet’s relationship with the servant miss Holly reveals how a adult male of his place is able to pull strings the lives of those around him. with small concern for the effects. The character of Holly is marginalised within the text nevertheless this may be read as fostering White’s dry portraiture of the upper category. as the minimum description of the girl’s destiny is representative of merely how small Garnet’s actions consequence his life.
Although the portraiture of Holly besides criticises dominant political orientations on gender. the extent of dual criterions towards male and female gender is to the full exposed in the building of the relationship between Ellen and Garnet. Their relationship is strongly contrasted to the sterile and inhibitory nature of Ellen and Austin’s relationship. Within her matrimony Ellen is unable to research her gender as when she ‘had…once responded with a natural ardour…discovered on her husband’s face an look of holding tasted something bitter’ . Her relationship with Garnet therefore proves to be complex in its significance. It first represents Ellen and Garnet as parallel characters in their sensualist desires that must be censured in visible radiation of societal morality. Whilst at the same time juxtaposing the perceptual experience of gender in males and females within phallocentrically informed societies.
Garnet’s gender is defined as a beginning of virile power. It is condoned and slightly celebrated within the text. In strong contrast. Ellen’s gender is represented as unsafe and immoral. She suffers guilt after the experience. and in restarting her dealingss with Austin. continues to ‘refrain…from tearing…off…the mask which obviously she was expected to have on. ” In the Roxburg’s confounding relationship of supposed love and stifled interactions. Ellen must quash her animal desires in order to conform to societal outlooks of a ‘lady’ . and thoughtful married woman. Thus Garnet is the ‘tool which she used to mensurate the deepnesss she was tempted to explore’ . Their brush unleashes Ellen’s repressed animal nature and sexual desire. which prompts and foreshadows her journey to self-fulfillment.
White depicts Ellen as a complex character whose complexness is enhanced by her experiences within the upper category of society. By concentrating on Ellen’s societal relationships. White is able to build her character to the point where her descent may be as interesting and many leveled as her acclivity. As a working category miss. Ellen existed with a few beds of constructed ego. As she is initiated into the upper category she is constructed by external forces ( ‘old’ Mrs Roxburg and Austin ) and internal forces ( her new ‘knowledgable’ ego. exemplified within her diary ) . This building of ego. imposes beds upon beds of ‘culture’ and false or rendered individuality. In ellen’s journey to self realization she is stripped of her constructed or societal ego. The initial phases of the fresh develop these beds so that the 2nd portion may take them. Social relationships are therefore used to develop and mensurate both her acclivity and her descent.
Analogues are therefore drawn between the Roxbourg’s and the Aborigines. as they are characters whose relationships with Ellen denote periods of pronounced and rapid alteration. This impression of allining the two experiences is introduced when Ellen is ‘dragged to her feet’ by the group of Aboriginal adult females. Omniscient narrative allows the analogue to be drawn through the line. ‘Ellen Gluyas had non encountered a more improbable state of affairs since forced as a bride to confront the drawing suites at Cheltenham. ’ This line is important besides in the usage of calling. It is the first of an interchanging of individuality. which represents both the confusion Ellen undergoes and besides the sloughing of her ‘cultivated’ beds. Within the Aboriginal society Ellen is pushed and pulled to accommodate those around her.
This may be read as representative of her intervention by civilized society. on a more basic and crude degree. symbolizing use through societal relationships. Ellen’s relationship with the natives mark the beginning of her descent. as she is returned to the most basic and subsistence degree of humanity. However to be within the community she still must presume certain functions. such as slave and nurturer. barbarian and ‘work of art’ . Ellen becomes the Aborigines ‘work of art’ . merely the manner she did for Austin. And the ordeal she suffers exemplifies physically. the psychological effects of her ‘work of art’ rolein her matrimony. Her function as nurturer and barbarian. uncover her instinctual and crude ego. Ellen is allowed to research this side of her nature as she is freed from the restraints of civilized society.
White constructs relationships between Ellen and the Aboriginal kids. through Ellen’s function as nurturer. These relationships are of import in uncovering the contrasts of good and bad within human nature. and White explores the impression that good and bad exist jointly within people. and that nil is genuinely good or genuinely bad. This is foremost introduced through the portraiture of Garnet who. despite being vilified within the text. encompasses critical features in the development of Ellen’s journey. The first relationship Ellen has with an Aboriginal kid. blatantly exposes her evil side. whilst nurses the sallow kid. There is blunt contrast of good and bad in Ellen’s ideas and address. She first refers to it as gross outing an so wishes it to ‘sleep. sleep…sleep-my darling’ . Later she wishes the kid dead. Her relationship with other Aboriginal kids. within the text are every bit confounding. There are minutes of idyllic contentment with the kids. and so they become grave and determined or even violent. They become for Ellen a agency by which she may be comforted. nevertheless there there is ne’er any developed illustration of love. In the context of Ellen’s journey. the kids are besides ‘tool’s. by which she may research her nurturer side. denied through her bootless matrimony with Austin.
White’s building of the character Jack Chance. Ellen’s inmate hero. provides a heightened illustration of good shrouded in immorality. Jack is a liquidator. and a condemnable. whilst he is Ellen’s defender. In contrast to Garnet. Jack is unable to get away the effects of his actions. and has suffered the ferociousnesss of the upper classes’ corruptness. His character therefore evokes sympathy despite his immoral yesteryear. The brotherhood of Ellen and Jack is complex as it reveals the contradiction and multiplicity within the individuals’ true ego. Jack is presented as both a liquidator and defender. whilst Ellen’s heightened consciousness of ego. is merely made possible through the darker and more crude side of her nature. The positive portraiture of their Eden-like being valorises the multiplicity and contradictions within themselves and their relationship.
It is both a religious and sexual brotherhood in which Ellen appears her most natural ego. It is with Jack that she makes the concluding passage to full enlightenment and self-fulfillment. symbolized by the sheding of her periphery of foliages. Their relationship remains confounding though. Ellen replaces the periphery of foliages to distance herself from Jack. Although ‘she loved him’ . societal relationships remain complex for Ellen. and Jack is of class another tool in Ellen’s journey. Through him she may rekindle her sensualness and widen her ego cognition. He is her agencies to return to civilisation. and therefore their idyllic relationship is impermanent. White implies that their brotherhood is non possible within civilized society. Their natural being of unrepressed desires and sensualness may non be transposed onto a universe of visual aspects and constructed societal foreparts. such that Ellen returns to civilization entirely.
Throughout the fresh Ellen’s societal relationships hint and reflect the phases of her journey. On returning to civilisation there surfaces a new confusion as Ellen realizes that ‘self-knowledge might stay a beginning of embarrassment even danger. ’ She is forced to quash all of her new cognition to suit back into a society of shallowness and undue stratification. White constructs Ellen’s journey to knock the nature of society and to expose the trials of those ‘less’ than the upper category white male. Through the building of confounding and complex relationships. White is able to dig deeper into the battalion of perceptual experiences and apprehensions of his characters. Few characters reflect a 1 sided and strictly good or bad individual. therefore White reveals that morality and ‘goodness’ is frequently blurred.
In the context of category. by using all-knowing narrative. societal relationships are constructed to uncover the shallownesss and uneven power distributions within society. Through his critical word picture of category White enforces that such divisions are but thin veneers. and criticizes them as a false footing to construct societal relationships. Through Ellen’s journey. more heightened experiences take precedency over her slightly boring societal being. Juxtaposed to her interior ideas and religious consciousness. her societal forepart is preponderantly a hapless contemplation of her true ego. White explores such contrasts in order to raise a critical contemplation of society in all contexts.