Bernard blames Winifred for having used him as her looking-glass "to see things in: to hold up to the light." He accuses her of "abnormality," of imposing on him an identity which deprives him of his manliness, his physical dimension, his very "blood" and "bone" (64). However, beneath his self-justifying reasons, lies concealed a deeper undercurrent of anger against the woman. He shows little interest in discovering her real emotions and is all too ready to characterize her as a shallow, frivolous person blissfully unaware that such accusations apply far better to himself. His refusal to approve of Winifred's independent life, is also part of a desperate defence mechanism: he seems to have an unconscious fear of her strong, intense personality and tendency to be judgmental, precisely, because she can see and reveal truths about him which he had rather not face.

The man, therefore, projects upon Winifred the inner division he experiences, his desire to reap the benefits of the social conventions and still satisfy his pride by appearing to reject them. He blames her for turning him into her "looking glass" (63) but it is actually she, who functions as his looking-glass, the distorting mirror that soothes his anxiety and rewards his clumsy efforts to construct a personally and socially acceptable self-image. He even fails to appreciate her sexual response, considering it excessive and inauthentic: "an unnatural ebb of passion" (65). The man sees her as a cruel predatory goddess, ever ready to devour even those who serve her (64), and Lawrence likens her insistently to a demonic figure, the title's "Witch à la Mode," an unacceptable modern woman, bare-armed and quick-witted, who still "looked up at him [Bernard] witch-like, from under bent brows" (62).

Winifred is simultaneously oppressed by Bernard's behaviour and oppressive towards him. This distance between what she seems to be (cold, independent, inscrutable) and what she might really be (sensitive, suffering and vulnerable) creates two distinct perspectives which interrogate and challenge each other's premises and make Winifred a character of considerable complexity. It is through the semiology of her body, her stature and movements, that Lawrence builds such a distant, unapproachable character. There are scenes involving her which move with an almost lightning speed, as they freeze action, bring the focus on her and open the possibility of diverse views and multiple explanations of her emotional world. At the same time they remain elusive in the following examples of qualities which Bernard appears to see in her: "she bowed richly to the piano" (CSS 62), "She lay perfectly still and warm in the fire-glow" (64) "He turned, saw her full, fine face tilted up to him. It showed pale, distinct, and firm, very near to him" (58) [my emphases].

Overtly, Winifred does not oppose Bernard's accusations. She is content to aim merely at wish fulfillment in order to get her object of desire and, in this sense, she can be considered egoistical. Thus, one way to perceive Winifred's

tragedy would be to explain it as a result of her egoism, her fear of emotional commitment, her inability to open up and offer her real self to a man, her tendency to oppress and her need for constant show of sympathy and affection. Winifred, however, seems to have a different experience of their relationship, an experience which she never communicates,as she is invariably shown as an inscrutable, enigmatic figure. Yet, she can convincingly illuminate what she sees as a conventional, even puritanical, reaction on Bernard's part. She sounds perfectly accurate when she reminds him that there are "many instincts" a man can choose to obey.

Moreover, her agony becomes manifest when she wonders "why that," why does Bernard sacrifice their passionate relationship for a conventional marriage, a desperate question to which he can only give an answer that is as cruel as it is unreasoned: "Because I want to!" (63). In a desperate (and unsuccessful) effort to receive some logical answers from him that will help resolve the situation even without lessening her pain, she perceptively touches upon his fear of his own freedom. Her suffering is surely unnecessary and probably avoidable if Bernard could only recognize the real motives behind his semi-conscious decision to seek her again. Instead, he prefers to present their relationship in terms of sexual rivalry in which the woman is always the traitor, the sole party responsible for its failure and since it is the man who is the focalizer in this story, she is tacitly pushed to the margin, an enigmatic distant figure only partly understood.

However, Winifred comes across vividly alive, as a woman who seeks to understand the situation she finds herself in, and tries to establish and maintain a channel of communication between herself and her partner. Even though Lawrence presents her as a typical case of the egoistical modern woman, it is hardly surprising that many elements in her depiction enable the reader to get a clearer and far more positive view of her nature, her strong feminine anxiety to be accepted as she really is, an individual human being looking for love and passion and respect. This is a clear example, I think, of what Sandra Gilbert and Suzan Gubar meant by saying that "women themselves have the power to create themselves as characters" (Gilbert& Gubar 16) and here Winifred seems to do this successfully even against the grain of her male author's intentions.

References

1. I use the word "mythicize" from the Greek word mythos: the heroines of Lawrence share qualities with the Greek mythical goddesses.
2. In the Greek pantheon, Aphrodite was the goddess of beauty and love.
3. Hera, Zeus' wife, was the patron goddess of the family and married women.
4. Artemis was the goddess of forests and hunting.

Bibliography

Gilbert, Sandra and Suzan Gubar. The Mad Woman in the Attic. Yale: Yale University Press, 2000.

Lawrence, D.H. The Letters of D.H. Lawrence, Volume I. Ed. Boulton T. James. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1979.

Lawrence, D.H . Study of Thomas Hardy. Ed. Bruce Steele. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986.

Lawrence, D.H. Collected Short Stories. London: Richard Clay (The Chaucer Press), Ltd, 1977.

Lawrence, D.H . Reflections on the Death of a Porcupine and Other Essays. Ed. Michael Herbert. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988.

Worthen, John. D.H. Lawrence: The Early Years 1885-1912. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991.

Abbreviations

CSS Collected Short Stories. London: Heinemann Ltd, 1978.
RDP Reflections on the Death of a Porcupine and Other Essays. Ed. Michael Herbert. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988.
Study Study of Thomas Hardy. Ed. Bruce Steele. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986.