
“Post and Beam”
by Alice Munro
from Hateship, Friendship, Courtship, Loveship, Marriage
Trevor
Alice Munro has me baffled. In a good way, I think, but baffled nonetheless. I didn’t do the math, but I think this is the longest period we’ve gone without posting on one of her stories, and that’s all due to me. Betsy sent her post below a long time ago. Now, some of my delay is due to the usual things — work, kids, etc. — but not too much. Honestly, a lot of it is because I have still not been able to wrap my mind around “Post and Beam,” which I’ve read several times, and I suppose I kind of hoped I’d accomplish that before I wrote this. I suppose I better just get into it and stop putting it off by writing any more excuses!
First, I should say that I really like this story, even though I find some of it quite frustrating. I doubt Munro would feel any need to apologize, but I find the story as a whole exceedingly opaque, despite many great moments of clarity.
My main issue, I think, comes from the brief opening section that takes up a couple of inches before an abrupt section break. I have read as much analysis as I could find on this story, but I still don’t feel I fully understand this small section and how it relates to the remainder of the story. But, because it is first and because it is set apart from the remainder of the story by that section break, I assume it is important. Let me see if I can describe it without just transcribing it.
Lionel, a man in his early twenties, is talking about how his mother died. He says that his mom asked for help putting on her makeup and, while he held the mirror, said it should only take about an hour. She finishes well before the hour passes, and Lionel says that she didn’t take as long to put on her makeup as she thought. No, she says, she wasn’t talking about putting on her makeup. She was talking about how long it would take for her to die. When he offers to call his father to come, she simply asks, “What for?” He says she was only off by five minutes.
It turns out Lionel is telling this to his friends Brendan and Lorna, husband and wife, as they sit on the terrace of Brendan and Lorna’s home. Lorna is going to be our main character, through whose eyes we see and through whose thoughts we feel. The story will focus on three relationships in particular.
First, Lorna and Brendan. Brendan is a math professor in his mid-thirties. Lorna is 24 and is raising their two children. Lorna says she loves Brendan, but she admits to herself in one of the story’s most intriguing sections that she doesn’t love him enough. Honestly, he doesn’t deserve her love. He married her six years prior because it was time for him to get married, and he wanted someone young and intelligent but not particularly educated. Her job is to support him and raise his children. At this point in her life, she accepts this. Brendan represents something unknowable:
When she learned he was a teacher of mathematics she fell in love with what was inside his head also. She was excited by whatever knowledge a man might have that was utterly strange to her. A knowledge of auto mechanics would have worked as well.
Lorna, we recognize soon, is on the outside a rather frictionless person. She does what she thinks she is supposed to. But inside her mind she has created all kinds of dramatic ideas about other people. In Brendan’s case, these ideals serve to excuse him. Brendan doesn’t come off well in this story at all. He gets exasperated with Lorna whenever her family comes up. He doesn’t seem to mind Lionel, though.
So that’s the second relationship, Lorna and Lionel. Lionel is a neighbor who was once Brendan’s student, a brilliant one we understand. But one day Lionel dropped out and was hospitalized after what appears to be a nervous breakdown that left his memory, at least, impaired. Now Lionel has given up all thoughts of mathematics and, it seems, school. It was happenstance that brought him back to his professor, Brendan. One day they ran into each other at the store, and Lionel has been visiting them since. Lionel and Lorna become particularly close. When Lionel tells Lorna he is short of memories, considering what happened in the hospital, she tells him of her life. Perhaps to reciprocate, Lionel starts giving Lorna little poems, or, rather, scraps of writing she thinks of as poems. They’re really just stray, rather uninteresting observations he has. On their surface, they certainly aren’t inviting any intimacy, but they are secret. Lionel drops them off secretly and doesn’t acknowledge their existence with Lorna. I think we can agree that Lorna isn’t strange for feeling that something more intimate was going on than someone sharing simple poems, and so Lionel becomes for Lorna, without ever knowing it, a sort of secret affair of the heart.
The third relationship is the one that really destabilizes the equilibrium established between Brendan, Lorna, and Lionel, though again most of the drama is going on strictly within Lorna’s mind. Lorna’s cousin, Polly, who is a handful of years older than Lorna, arrives to visit. This arrival, and its aftermath, make up the bulk of the story. Now in her late twenties, Polly, who Lorna thinks was always more popular and beautiful, is still living in the small town where she and Lorna grew up. Lorna doesn’t want to let Brendan (or Lionel) know that Polly is coming, so she puts off telling him almost until Polly gets there. This is, for me, the most intriguing relationship, one that causes Lorna a lot of guilt and pride. It’s the one she seems to understand the most. For one thing, Lorna is happy because she feels she escaped her home town and the troubles that sit there. She knows that she feels proud of this accomplishment. She also knows she feels guilty because Polly has not left home and has not married. There’s more than a suggestion that Polly considers herself a martyr, someone who stuck around out of obligation, and that Lorna has shirked that obligation, fled her responsibilities at home for her selfish pursuits.
“If I ever went away now I think I’d just feel too guilty,” Polly said. “I couldn’t stand it. I’d feel too guilty leaving them.”
Of course some people never feel guilty. Some people never feel at all.
We clearly see that in Polly’s case, Lorna sees the issue plainly. Almost. Lorna’s guilt, which she does feel, leads her to imagine Polly as forlorn and suicidal. Indeed, Polly’s potential suicide, which seems only to be a probability in Lorna’s mind, is a threat strong enough to shoot right to one of the story’s themes: the bargains we make to get around the demons in our mind. Lorna learns to bargain by promising something vague if only Polly won’t kill herself.
That’s a fascinating theme, and when I see it in the story I see it in all of Lorna’s relationships, even the ones she is less conscious of. She bargains to get through life. If we weren’t in her head, she’d be quite the boring character. In her head, this story is exceptional.
But that leads me back to that opening section, where Lionel’s mother, who only comes up briefly later when Lorna remembers her saying she was happy to meet her son’s belle-amie, and Lorna wonders what the means in this case: beautiful friend? mistress? Then she’s gone, and I just cannot understand how her prognostication of her own death is relevant to the rest of the story.
As I mentioned above, this introduction is its own section in Hateship, Friendship, Courtship, Loveship, Marriage. In its original publication in the December 11, 2000 issue of The New Yorker, though, this opening does not end with a section break. Instead it seamlessly transitions to another paragraph where we see Lionel telling this to Brendan and Lorna out on the terrace. This leads Lorna to think back on when she met Lionel’s now deceased mom. While the story still begins with this section, without the break it doesn’t feel quite as significant. I can only assume, then, that the addition of the section break means I’m supposed to see that section in relief to the remainder of the story and, therefore, in relation to the rest of the story.
That section break! It’s haunted me! I’ve sat on this, hoping it would become clear. So, might I ask for some help? If you can explain how that fits with the clearer themes that develop in this story, I’d just love it.
If I remove that opening section from the story — and I’m hoping to figure this out still, so I’m not saying one should remove this section — I get quite a lot out of “Post and Beam.”
Betsy
“Post and Beam” is one in a series of stories about suicide. In a kind of ominous foreshadowing, the title suggests a frame for a hanging or a beating.
An unsophisticated twenty-four-year-old country girl is married to a math professor who is twelve years older. She is apparently quite beautiful and was married at eighteen. Now she has two small children. Although her children are precious to her, she does not seem interested in them or delighted by them. Her husband is a bit of a household thug. He enjoys instructing his wife and embarrassing her in front of others, but he is afraid she loves her own family more than him. He is somewhat right. She admits to herself that she does not love Brendan “enough.”
This reader suspects that she thinks that if she loved him “enough” he would treat her right. This reader also suspects that nothing she can do will be enough to make him treat her right. She is his possession. She is an employee and a serf to him. She is arm candy, an object, a possession, a servant, a thing.
In the course of the story, one of the children wants to read the Madeline story by Ludwig Bemelmans. This is the story where the head nun in charge of all the little girls famously senses that: “Something is not right!”
In “Nettles,” two young mothers discuss Simone de Beauvoir in a “rampage of talk.” One wonders what in the world the wife in “Post and Beam” would make of their “postponed ambitions” and their stab at philosophy. Lorna has no ambitions whatsoever, which is, I think, Munro’s point. This is also de Beauvoir’s point, as well as Betty Friedan’s, and that of countless others. In a series of long, philosophical, and poorly translated writings, de Beauvoir essentially argues for freedom and responsibility among both women and men.
Lorna is neither free nor responsible. She does not appear to consider herself entitled to rights, nor does she appear to consider herself responsible for her own happiness. Instead, she appears to embrace the idea that fate will happen to her and provide her with change. Choice is not something with which she is at all comfortable.
She appears to be an adult who is still a child.
De Beauvoir’s philosophy encompasses a set of stages of moral evolution from childhood to a full adulthood. A child adopts the moral universe of the parent, but to de Beauvoir an adult who accepts the moral universe of another adult is less evolved than a child. A fully evolved adult accepts freedom as a responsibility which requires active choices and goals. Viewed through such a lens, Lorna looks to be woefully unevolved, having chosen to adopt her husband as arbiter of all things in her life.
In a key event of her childhood, her older cousin Polly stashed her under a bush to keep her safe. She dutifully stayed under the bush. The pattern continues.
A crisis occurs when Polly, the country cousin, arrives almost out of the blue at Lorna’s house. The husband makes it clear that the cousin is not welcome. His rationale is that Polly wants his money (as if a professor has any money). He takes into account not at all that this cousin is more like an older sister or mother to Lorna. He makes it clear that the wife must make the cousin unwelcome. He makes it clear himself, as well. Lorna is unable to speak in the cousin’s defense or in her own defense. She has no language for the situation she is in. She is being asked to abandon her family in a cruel way, and she herself feels abandoned. As the story progresses, it is clear that her stability is compromised and that she is depressed.
Lorna imagines that her mistreatment of Polly will cause Polly to commit suicide. This is delirium; this is fantasy; this is projection. Polly is resourceful and commonsensical. Left out by Lorna and Brendan, Polly goes out exploring, and then strikes up a connection with Lionel. The person who is devoured by the lure of suicide is Lorna.
That’s the crisis. That’s what’s not right.
Well, there’s one other thing that’s not right. Brendan had said he specifically looked for an “unspoiled” woman to marry. The reader is being invited to consider the meaning of that statement. Is it that she is a virgin or sexually inexperienced? Is it that she has no ambition? Is it that she is uneducated? Is it that she has encountered no modern ideas about the situation of women? Some pastiche of all of these motivations? We don’t know, but we know we don’t like the way Brendan treats Lorna, as if she were his property.
So, will there be any resolution? Almost at story’s end, Lorna thinks:
. . . the bargain she was bound to was to go on living as she had been doing. The bargain was already in force. To accept what had happened and to be clear about what would happen. Days and years and feelings much the same . . .
This sounds like jail, jail being a repeating image in this collection of stories.
Does the reader believe that any resolution will be possible for Lorna? Any way away from her fantasies of suicide or mental breakdown or obliteration of memory?
First of all, the reader learns at story’s end that Lorna lived many years after the crisis, and that when she was twenty four, she was “new to bargaining.” So not only does she survive, she also, apparently, changes.
What hope can we have for her? She does three key things in the course of the crisis that indicate there may be hope. First of all, when Lionel sends her inscrutable poetry, she keeps it. She thinks to herself, it may mean something. She has begun looking for meaning.
Second, she breaks into Lionel’s apartment. Lionel is a former student of her husband’s, a brilliant prodigy of great promise. But he has dropped out of the math department, spent some time in a mental hospital, had his memories erased by electric shock treatment, and taken a job in the Anglican Church publishing house. This has been a trip to the underworld and a flirtation with suicide. Lionel has dropped out and started over on a path entirely his own. Lorna is fascinated with him and his story and fantasizes that he is in love with her. He is her guide, her Orpheus. When she goes to his apartment, she calls it “an investigation.” Although she has no clear idea what she is looking for, the important thing to the reader is that she has taken action, no matter how weird the action is.
Lionel is someone who has dropped out and dropped away from Brendan without dying. It’s also important that Lorna has given the activity a definition. It is “an investigation.” She is looking for something. Proof that he loves her? An explanation for why Brendan loves him? A guidebook to escaping from Brendan? She doesn’t know. We don’t know. What matters is that she has taken a step and has given that step a name: “an investigation.”
Third, at the end of the story, she takes time to carefully observe Polly, Lionel, and Brendan from the upstairs window. She considers Polly’s resilience. She considers the change in Brendan’s manner toward Polly, his new conciliation to her. She considers the change in Lionel, the change in his clothes, the change in his demeanor. She pays attention. She considers that Polly and Lionel might marry.
Then he would change and change again, maybe fall in love with some other woman, but the wife would be too busy to notice.
There it is, the resolution. It has occurred to Lorna that people might change, and it has occurred to her that a woman “might be too busy.” Lorna is so unformed that she has no idea what other than children might make her “too busy,” but the reader knows she is on her way. She is, in Munro’s words, now able to “pay attention,” and now able to conduct investigations. Of what? Of books? Of Buddhism? We don’t know. All we know is that she will die if she doesn’t.
Note: Something is not right. Several of the stories in this collection are directly about suicide — “Comfort,” “Floating Bridge,” and “Post and Beam.” I wonder if what happened to Marcelle in the title story is that she committed suicide after her operation in London for “feminine problems.”
These stories in this collection are also indirectly about wasted time and a wasted life. The writer in “Nettles,” for instance, is wasting her new, free life on easy hookups. Jinny, in “Floating Bridge,” is wasting “the time given.” All of these stories are about the self-imposed jail of aimlessness. Lorna, in “Post and Beam,” is looking for a way to break out. Later, Fiona, in “The Bear Came Over the Mountain,” will also look for a way to break out of a self-imposed jail.
Second note: Simone de Beauvoir also emphasizes the way we can get lost in the past or can get paralyzed by the past and not take action in the present. De Beauvoir’s writings are dense and demanding, but they appear to be playing a part in Munro’s thinking. More “investigation” is necessary.
Third note: Munro is not in love with authority. In her book, education is actually the student’s own responsibility. Education is “investigation.” Education is paying attention to experience. Lionel has a lot to learn that Brendan, his professor, could not teach him. As does Lorna.
Fourth note: Ultimately, Munro is so fascinating because her writing is so filled with gaps and lack of interpretation. We make of it our own story.
Wow, Trevor. Suicide. Assisted suicide. I think Lionel was talking about assisted suicide. I missed that completely. Your catch of that troubling introduction is so important. Given that the rest of the story is also about suicide.
Oh my, you’re right I think! That’s the only explanation for the prognostication and not calling the dad. That never occurred to me!
I will say that as much as suicide is explicit in the story, I have not looked at it as a story about suicide, though I think it must be one of the “bargains” that Lorna is learning about.
But still, wow. I had not looked at Lionel as helping his mom end her life.
” In 1997, Oregon enacted the Death With Dignity Act, allowing terminally ill Oregonians to end their lives through the voluntary self-administration of a lethal dose of medication, expressly prescribed by a physician for that purpose.” Google
Munro published “Post and Beam” in the December 11, 2000 issue of the New Yorker.
I think one reason that suicide didn’t strike as one of the main ideas in the story, though again I acknowledge it is an explicit presence, is because it seems to be something in Lorna’s head alone, and not even something she is thinking of for herself but rather as something she fears Polly will do, both as an escape from her circumstances as well as punishment against Lorna. It never seemed Polly was really considering such an act, and I don’t see that Lorna is either. It seemed a way to allow Lorna to explore the idea of bargaining. But since it seems to be introduced right in the first section I need to now reread this and see what’s going on.
Scribbling my preliminary “Post and Beam” thoughts in August after Betsy had thanked for the “Nettles” conversation, I came across an interview with Alice Munro before or after her new book “Hateship” appeared at the beginning of this century. What she said helped me to understand better the stories of the collection, including this story.
Five months later, the text is there but the reference not. In spite of that, this is what A.M. said:
“I think we all tell stories of our lives to ourselves, as well as to other people….What interests me is how these stories are made – what is left out at different times, and how you use the stories to see yourself, or sometimes just to make life bearable to yourself.”
In “Post and Beam” Munro (to me) seems to have a conversation with her former self.
Lorna has a young wife´s dilemma: still bound to her family, where everything was so precious; in the new family she has children but a man she really does not love. Lorna resents her husbands patronizing attitudes. Betsy´s description of Brendan is ample. Lorna wants something new in her life, but a substantial change would mean there´d be much to lose and she decides she has to endure, so far…
It is easier to live thinking it was not her last hope.
Lorna is not alone among Munro´s protagonists wanting a(nother) man, at least in theory. The story is full of psychology, the plot once again plays a minor role. Important is what happens between Lorna´s ears.
Like Jill on the field in “Floating Bridge”, Lorna plays with the idea of being free from all connections in Lionel´s room.
Other themes in “Post and Beam”: the metaphysical Berkeley 1710 theme, what happens if anything if you are not there.
How family affects peoples current lives.
Not a real theme, but there is also a class aspect, as in most of her stories. We see how swift is the change from an uneducated girl to a wife who is sure that her cousin, once her substitute mother, does not know how to behave amongst better people.
And of course suicide. If you read “Hateship” reviews, “Post and Beam” isolates itself from the other stories, no one really understands what the beginning of the story is about – until Betsy explains it.
There is a web-available dissertation by Ulrica Skagert (Stockholm University 2008) in which she finally argues that Alice Munro´s fiction recognizes life as possibility in a moment when it shows itself in its remarkable sameness, using “Post and Beam” as a final concluding example.
The name of the dissertation:
Possibility-Space and Its Imaginative Variations in Alice Munro´s Short stories
This is wordier post — you can skip to paragraphs 4,5 and 7 (the last one) if you want to just get the gist of it. As always, THANKS Trevor, Betsy, Harri T for your insights and inspiration!
Lorna was 18 and working class when she married a university professor, a man more mature, more educated and –significantly– much “less troubled” than her own family was. At the time of the story, Lorna is an adult who gets the chance — is actually forced — to examine her life. She has understood that her marriage had been a bargain, and she is also reminded that her family back home is paying some of the price in this bargain. She leads a sanitized suburban life, while the people who raised her are desperately struggling.
There is a stark contrast between Lorna and Brendan, with their “model family”, and all the other characters, whose situations past and present are trouble, uncertainty, turmoil. These people struggle with tangles of emotions, blunt and not so blunt traumas, are entrapped in unfulfilling lives. While Lorna and Brendan’s family needs not worry about the future, and is practically spared the emotional life too.
Polly confronts Lorna with her responsabilities. We see that Lorna, who is starting to feel that her life with Brendan is incomplete, doesn’t have much deeper feelings of attachment for Polly or for her folks back home. Certainly not enough feeling to be involved in Polly’s plea for help more than superficially. She does not want any more responsibility for them than the relatively small responsibility she has already assumed. But she knows this is wrong — her guilt makes her imagine Polly’s suicide — in her house! She looks for a bargain — not to save Polly, but to save herself from having to face her guilt.
At the end of the story, the bargain is clear. She is delivered of facing _this guilt_ and she sees what the price is. The “messed-up” people who can feel genuine emotion, can also transform themselves, can lead independent, imprevisible lives. These lives are full of pain, but in these lives sometimes one human being can save another — the way Polly saves Lionel. Not facing her conscience, Lorna will have to put up with the emotion-less mapped-out life she now has. Lorna is given this moment when she sees it all clearly, and she feels “she should pay attention”. She is not the 18 year old naive girl any more, she is an adult woman, now having the option of making a choice she fully understands. The last line tells us what she chose: a life of bargaining. In the future, she will move from the post and beam house to other houses, but not to a different life.
Betsy says that the moment in “Post and Beam” is the moment Lorna starts changing herself and chaning her life; I think it is the moment when a window opens when she sees she can do this, but in the end she abdicates taking responsibility for her life, goes back down to essentially the same life, her empowerment being only as better at bargaining.
Two notes on suicide. I am stil far from understanding Lionel’s importance in the story; he appears at the beginning, middle, and end, so there must be more about him than I see now. I had not wondered previously why Lionel’s mother suicide opens this story — as many other readers, I had found a lot in the story even without paying attention to this section. Thanks, Trevor! And yes, “Post and Beam” makes one think of a hanging. But it also symbolizes “suburban conventinal” as a way of life, and the bargain Lorna is in, as a “property” of her husband.
Now that Betsy suggests that the story is about suicide, may I also suggest that it is about loosing one’s soul? At the beginning, the wife of a clergy man commits suicide, damning her immortal soul. At the end, a young woman who has had the good luck to be spared serious troubles, renounces her soul quite lightly, essentially by not “paying attention”.
More notes, as the previous comment was already long enough. These are mainly questions. I am coming to this discussion some 7 months too late, but since you are not yet finished with AM’s stories, I still have a slim hope that someone will reply.
It’s tempting but I don’t want to go on to suggest a bargain with the devil. I don’t think there is a “Devil” in this story. I think there is no big evil, quite the contrary, it’s easy to lose your soul by doing or not doing very small things, or not doing anything at all.
Another parenthesis: Are we supposed to understand Lionel’s mother kills herself because of the husband? I had assumed she was sick and was escaping the disease. That would make sense, a woman who renounces her soul after a long life, in which she had attachments — to Lionel. I should reread these parts carefully. “Belle-amie” — is Lionel’s mother passing on the responsibility for Lionel to Lorna? As she plans to kill herself soon? If yes, Lorna fails in this too, while Polly succeeds.
I have now reread the parts on Lionel and his mother (and the rest of the story too; who can stop in the middle of an Alice Munro story just because they have read it before?) There is the episode with the mummies. Just after Lionel and his mother wonder why the minister is not speaking to them. This seems to be all about communication. Mummies are trapped in their coffins; but Lionel’s mother makes up a story that they are not dead, they have this job of staying there, but they can get out after all the visitors have left. Lionel says couldn’t this be a good job for his father? But the mother mishears “mummy” for “mommy” (another job where in which you are trapped? in which you have to stay mum whenever people are present?). And we are told that Lionel is daunted by the difficulty of communication. Communication, being trapped, being mum/mother/embalmed, in one single paragraph. There sure are a lot of questions left about Lionel’s mother.
There is also the theme of “saving”. Polly restores Lionel, gives him new life, something neither Brendan nor Lorna were able to do. When he married her, Brendan “saved” Lorna from the life with her family, picked her up from a messed-up, impredictible life like Polly’s, full of those “gnarled [emotional] roots”, and brings her to his modern life. So many parallels to “The progress of love”. Only the focus here is on the life after escape. Was the bargain worth it?
Why it is important that Lorna has no mother but surrogate mother. The duty towards a mother is more explicit and more subject to social norm. Brendan, for example, could not have been so disrespectful to a mother-in-law as he is to Polly. By replacing the mother with Polly, the obligation is more in the moral realm and less of a social contract. This works the other way too; a mother is expected to make sacrifices for a daughter, but Polly is not Lorna’s mother, so her un-repaid sacrifice heightens Lorna’s moral dilemma.
Welcome, Marina – I will answer your long and welcome thoughts sometime within the week! My own take on Alice Munro is that while there are general fixed points in the stories, there are usually also areas where people have justifiably different responses. Am looking forward to sitting down with your deeply considered thoughts.
Betsy — Hi. can’t wait to read your replies! But let this be no chore… if some of my long list of questions and “investigations” aren’t inspiring you right now, they can wait. Looking forward to your next AM posts and comments!
Another late comment. My take on the short opening was quite different. I view the anecdote about Lionel’s mother dying not as an implied suicide but as a precis of Lorna’s married life with Brendan. Lionel’s mother has a son with whom she is close, and he is with her as she dies, helping her by holding a mirror, giving what comfort he can. Lionel’s mother also has a man who is both her husband and her minister, thus a man who both emotionally and spiritually should be her comforter as she dies. To say there is no need to bother calling him as she dies (and she is so much in tune with herself that she predicts her time of death within five minutes) is to imply a marital desert, a complete breakdown of love and understanding and comfort. There is no point in calling a man to whom she does not matter and for whom she feels no love.
This story, especially given its separation from the rest of the text, is a foreshadowing and precis of Lorna’s life with Brendan. Lorna made a social bargain by marrying Brendan to get away from her motherless home and a poor, rural life full of obligation but no emotional fulfillment; she made a second bargain with God to ask that Polly not commit suicide in her house, later realizing the second bargain was really the first one over again and continuing forever because she had already bargained without actually understanding the cost of what she was bargaining away–namely herself and the possibility of a man who might really give her emotional fulfillment, a chance for actual happiness rather than a post and beam house.
Regarding Lionel’s importance to the story. He is partly orphaned at the beginning – his mother leaves him (with his help), and his father is gone, useless. His life of promise was taken away – by a nervous breakdown, and electroshock therapy which removes most of his memories. He hopes to be as the mummy encountered in his youth – dead but not quite, and then resurrected.
Lorna finds Lionel’s tabula rasa enticing , such that she goes to his apartment, not to snoop, but to experience his emptiness, or more accurately his wiped slate, his plain kitchen floor. This is pre-history, not a dream of a specific future, but the erasing of old complications and a white absence of clutter.
And of course at story’s end Lionel is indeed seemingly resurrected, through the attentions of Polly, who Lorna imagines to be a practical fit for him, just as she had been for Brendan. Lorna supposes that through Polly’s resuscitative efforts, Lionel will be free to grow and develop, perhaps finding true love with some other woman. Meanwhile, Polly will be stuck, as Lorna is, too “busy” to liberate herself.
But one senses that maybe Polly and Lionel have a richer future. Who knows if this casual connection will flower into a relationship, or bring separate but richer lives. Or perhaps they’ll just go back. They have not made the bargain which Lorna has made, to be content with her choice. But we all must contend with our past bargains, in how we allow them to constrain our next one.