This blog post will focus on the letter from the Narrator to Louise on page 105. Specifically, the following lines, “You are safe in my home but not my arms. If I stay it, will be you who goes, in pain, without help. Our love was not meant to cost you your life. I can’t bear that. If it could be my life, I would gladly give it.” (Winterson, 105). The opening line of the section demonstrates the powerlessness and impotence the Narrator feels in their current situation. The line implies the only way they are valuable is as a provider of housing but not as a partner or source of comfort. This feeling is perpetuated in the second line with the opening and close words, “If I stay” and “without help.” The Narrator works under the assumption that the only way one can be helpful to someone afflicted with cancer is by providing medical treatment. They ignore the possibility that their emotional support is just as valuable as anything Western Medicine can provide.
In the final three sentences the Narrator creates their excuse for leaving. They perpetuate the idea that they must abandon Louise for her to survive. This is exemplified in the third sentence with the use of the words, “Our love” and “your life.” This sentence could be written as “We should not cost you.” That the separation of the two, and destruction of “we” is necessary for the survival of Louise.
The last two lines are a confession of the Narrator’s feelings, “I can’t bear that.” (105). Rather than handle the messy aspects of a relationship they would rather leave. Even after Louise had already states she will under no circumstances go back to Elgin, the Narrator feels it is necessary for her to do exactly that because they “can’t bear” to be the person Louise relies on. These lines attempt to make a selfish decision seem selfless. They suggest that the Narrator chooses to leave out of fear rather than sacrifice.
I like how you focused on the pairing of words in the section you chose. I hadn’t noticed the destruction of the we in the “our love” and “your life” part. This post made me think of all the other times in the book when the narrator justified their actions. They do it a lot with their little anecdotes about friends and exes. Like this ex did x, which is why I don’t do y. Even though they seem confident on the outside, I think this constant justification sort of prepares us for their decision at the end; it wasn’t surprising they left Lousie, because they make a lot of decisions based on their past.
This is a really important thought that is definitely a recurring paradox in this novel. The narrator supposedly feels love for a person, but they are unwilling to commit, and constantly find “reasons” to abandon their loves. I wrote about neglect, and how the narrator has fallen into the trope of the neglectful partner by abandoning Louise, and I think the idea of selfishness is a big part of this behavior too. If the narrator loves Louise so much, how could they bear to leave her in her time of need? That’s just not something you do to someone you love. I personally don’t believe that any amount of reasoning can justify abandoning someone “you love.” Given that, the narrator’s love for Louise must be called into question. Are they capable of benevolent love? (Which I might call redundant, because I think truthfully proclaimed love should be inherently selfless.)
In my post I wrote about the narrator’s admiration of the minutiae of Louise: her hair, her scent. I was struck with the thought that it is true love to notice these things. Now, reading about the narrator’s selfishness, I’m inclined to see this as more of an obsession with the idea of Louise than real love. The narrator ran away from Louise in her hour of need, trying to sell it as a selfless act. Cancer is a relentless disease that changes the body in unbelievable, physical ways. To know and love Louise is to love her in all her forms, emotionally and physically.
I agree with your statement that the narrator sees themselves as unable to provide partnership to Louise because of the situation they are in. This assessment is somewhat incorrect, because Louise still wants to be with the narrator until they leave her. I see the narrator as wanting to act like a sort of martyr even though that is not what Louise wants. I appreciate that you highlighted the line “If it could be my life, I would gladly give it”, as I feel that this line perfectly encapsulates the martyr mentality. The narrator is willing to sacrifice their happiness for Louise’s life, even though that is not what Louise wishes for them, and it should be her decision.