Woolf's Modernism: Ambivalence of Identity in Mrs. Dalloway and "Street Haunting"

��

Woolf ’s Modern i sm

Woolf’s Modernism: Ambivalence of Identity in Mrs. Dalloway and

“Street Haunting”

megan teigen

in a may 1928diaryentrywrittenaroundthesametimeshewascomposing“StreetHaunting,”VirginiaWoolfwrites,“Londonit-selfperpetuallyattracts,stimulates,givesmeaplay&astory&apoem,withoutanytrouble,savethatofmovingmylegsthroughthestreets.”1InMrs. Dallowayand“StreetHaunting,”Woolf ’sprincipalcharactersfollowinherfootstepstoexplorethestreetsofarapidlymodernizingLondon.Astheyminglewiththecity’scrowds,theiridentitiesmergewiththoseoftheLondonerstheyencounteronthestreetsthroughsharedperceptionsandechoedthoughts. Atfirstglance,Woolf ’sLondonstreetsarehighlyaestheticandinfusedwithvitality.Woolf ’srepresentationsofthecityinbothworkscelebratethisconnectedness,temporarilyconcealinganam-bivalencetowardthecityrootedinambivalencesofmodernidentity.Thisconflictedresponsetothemoderncityultimatelyrevealsitselfinbothtexts,asitdoesinanotherofWoolf ’sdiaryentries:

HomefromteawithNessa&Angelica.Afinespringday.IwalkedalongOxfordSt.Thebusesare strungonachain.Peoplefight&struggle. Knocking each other off the pavement. Old bareheadedmen;amotorcaraccident;&c.TowalkaloneinLondonisthegreat-estrest.2

Walking among the chaotic crowds on London’s Oxford Street,Woolfiscaughtupinaviolentseriesofevents.Shereportsthem,however,withstrikingdetachment,andthecontradictionbetween

j o u r n a l o f u n d e r g r a d u a t e r e s e a r c h

��

theviolenceofthestreetsandthegreatrestWoolffeelsasshewalksthroughitisjarring.Yetbothextremesexistsimultaneouslyinthemoderncity,justasconnectednessandisolationcollideinMrs. Dal-lowayand“StreetHaunting.” ThisessaywillexaminethewaysinwhichWoolf ’s literarystyleinMrs. Dallowayand“StreetHaunting,”guidedbytheprin-cipalcharacters’streetwalking,revealsherambivalencetowardthemoderncity.WhileWoolfappearsinbothworkstopresentastrik-inglyromanticizedLondon,acloserlookatherstructureandstylerevealsafragmentationofidentitythatisadirecteffectofthecity’srapidmodernization,andwhoseonlyresolution,forWoolf,liesinhercharacters’inevitableisolation. Atfirstglance,Woolf ’srepresentationsofthestreetcrowdsarewonderfullyappealing.Hernarratorportraysthestreetasaspacethat encourages explorations and imaginations of identity, whereoneisfreetobrieflybecome“anomadwanderingthedesert,amys-ticstaringatthesky,adebaucheeintheslumsofSanFrancisco,asoldierheadingarevolution,apariahhowlingwithskepticismandsolitude.”3 This feeling of freedom guides characters’ initial reac-tionstothecity,andWoolf ’sstream-of-consciousnessnarrativestylemergescharacters’ identities intobotheachotherand thepassingLondoncrowds.TheclosebondClarissaDallowayfeelstothecityas shewalksupBondStreet is tied to theromanticizedbeautyofWoolf ’sLondoninMrs. Dallowayand“StreetHaunting”whichap-pears,onthesurface,toinspirenear-ecstasyinitsstreet-haunters.InMrs. Dalloway’sopeningpages,Clarissa,overcomebythevitalityofasummermorninginLondon,isunabletocontainheremotion:

Inpeople’seyes,intheswing,tramp,andtrudge;inthebellowandthe uproar; the carriages, motor cars, omnibuses, vans, sandwichmenshufflingandswinging;brassbands;barrelorgans; inthetri-umphandthejingleandthestrangehighsingingofsomeaeroplaneoverheadwaswhatsheloved;life;London;thismomentofJune.4

Attheoppositetimeoftheyear,Woolf ’snarratorin“StreetHaunt-ing”issimilarlycarriedawaybyLondon’sbeauty.Asshestepsout

��


ontoLondon’sstreets,herself-consciousnessdissolvesintoa“centraloysterofperceptiveness,”anidentity-lesseyethattakesinthecolorandlightofthestreets:

Butwhenthedoorshutsonus,allthatvanishes.Theshell-likecover-ingwhichoursoulshaveexcretedtohousethemselves,tomakeforthemselvesashapedistinctfromothers,isbroken,andthereisleftofallthesewrinklesandroughnessesacentraloysterofperceptiveness,anenormouseye.Howbeautifulastreetisinwinter!5

TheeyeisanimportantfigureindiscussionsofthecitybyGeorgSimmel,CharlesBaudelaire, andWalterBenjamin.6WhileBenjamin sees the eye of the city dweller as obviously “overbur-dened with protective functions,”7 the eye inWoolf ’s narrative isunencumbered;itshedsitsself-con-scious skin and “floats us smoothlydowna stream.”8Theeye,uninhib-itedbyanyidentifiablebody,enablesWoolf ’s street-walkers to rejoice inthecrowd’svitality,easilymarshalingthe ever-shifting sights and impres-sionsintoapicturesquecollectionofconcrete“trophies,”astheyarecalledin “Street Haunting,” with whichtheirindividualidentitiesmerge. In both “Street Haunting”and Mrs. Dalloway, the city’s tan-gible reality contrasts with Woolf ’sdisembodied eye, which facilitatesthe narratives’ flow from one identity to the next.Woolf ’s eye isnotattachedtoanyphysicalbodyinwhichasingularidentitycanbegrounded.Instead,theeyeassemblesforitselfanimpermanentcollectionofthemostbeautifulfragmentsofpassingidentitiesthat,liketheimaginaryhousetheeyebuildsandfurnishesfromastore-front’s offerings, can be dismantled and rebuilt “in the twinklingofaneye.”9Because theeyeprotects itselfbyremainingalwaysat

Her structure and style reveal a fragmentation of identity that is a direct effect of the city’s rapid modernization, and whose only resolution, for Woolf, lies in her characters’ inevitable isolation.


��

thesurface,itcreatesalimitationnotimmediatelyapparent:“Thethingitcannotdo…istocomposethesetrophiesinsuchawayastobringoutthemoreobscureanglesandrelationships.”10Theeyeisincapableofconstructingapermanentidentityfromthefragmentedimpressionsitcollectsfrompassingencountersonthestreet,andthetrophiestheeyecollects,liketheimaginaryroomsitfurnishes,areneverenoughtoformawholehouse. In the same way, the identitiesWoolf ’s characters assumeareunsustainable.Atfirst sight, themoderncity streetsappear toofferafreedomforWoolf ’scharacters,whocanlosethemselvesinthe crowds. The narrator in “Street Haunting” finds herself ask-ing, “What, then, is it like tobe adwarf?”;11ElizabethDallowayridesaimlesslyonLondon’somnibusesandimaginesherfutureasaprofessionalamongthe“uproar”onFleetStreet.12Lookingdeeper,however, this lossof self is the sourceofWoolf ’s ambiguous atti-tudetowardthecity.Thenarrator’sencounterwiththedwarf“hadchangedthemood;shehadcalledintobeinganatmospherewhich,aswefollowedheroutintothestreet,seemedactuallytocreatethehumped, the twisted, the deformed”;13 as Elizabeth Dalloway re-callsthetime,shebecomesawareofthecity’sperpetualinstability.Cloudsfalloverthecity,andshenotes:

Fixedthoughtheyseemedattheirposts,atrestinperfectunanim-ity…tochange,togo,todismantlethesolemnassemblagewasim-mediatelypossible;andinspiteofthegravefixity,theaccumulatedrobustnessandsolidity,nowtheystrucklighttotheearth,nowdark-ness.14

Inthisrepeatingpatternofcomposingandfracturingiden-tities,WoolfsubtlyrevealstheambivalencetowardthecitythatismoreovertlyexpressedbyothermodernwriterssuchasT.S.EliotorD.H.Lawrence.ThesamerepeatingpatternexistsinMrs. Dalloway,inwhichthevariouselementsofmodernity,mechanicalorhuman,which composemodernLondon, contribute to theunstable rela-tionsbetweencharacters.PeterChildsdefinesmodernityasaseriesofbinaryoppositions—“disintegrationandreformation,fragmenta-

��


tionandrapidchange,ephemeralityandinsecurity”—whichareatthecenterof“certainnewunderstandingsoftimeandspace,speed,mobility, communication, travel, dynamism, chaos and culturalrevolution.”15WoolfisclearlyawareofthedualitiesChildsidenti-fies and, experimenting with new representations of his elementsoftime,space,speed,mobilityandtravel,Woolfconstructsseveraldichotomies—between Clarissa and Septimus in Mrs. Dalloway;betweenindoorsandoutdoors,andbetweensummerbalconyandwinter pavement in “Street Haunting”—which, aided byWoolf ’snarrativestructure,createuncertaintiesofidentityforthecharactersinvolved. Throughout“StreetHaunting,”Woolfemphasizesthissenseofambiguousidentitybyreferringtoherselfas“we”:“Weshallneverknow”thecontextofoverheardconversations;theypasstooquicklyto“letusasksuchquestions.”Fromthemomentthenarratorstepsoutherdoorandintothestreet,shemakesclear,“wearenolongerquiteourselves.”16AsRachelBowlbynotes,thismoveintothecityisaccompaniedbyalossofidentity,anda“removalofindividualityforanonymity.”17InMrs. Dalloway,adifferentstrategyconveysthesamedislocatingsenseofsimultaneousabsorptioninmultipleidentities,whichendsinisolation.Thenovel’snarratormovesfluidlyfromonecharacter’sthoughtstoanother’s,tyingtogetherdistinctanddiver-gentconsciousnessesbya“thinthread”reminiscentofSimmel’sin-tertwiningrelationships.18UnlikeSimmel,however,whoseestheserelationshipsintertwine“intoamany-memberedorganism,”identi-tiesinMrs. Dallowaybecomeentangledonlyimpermanentlybeforefinallysplittingapartagainandreturningtoinaccessibleanonymity.Forexample,HughWhitbreadandRichardDallowayformatenu-ousandtemporarybondatLadyBruton’sshort lunch,thenleavehertonapastheypartcompanyonthestreet:

Andtheywentfurtherandfurtherfromher,beingattachedtoherbyathinthread(sincetheyhadlunchedwithher)whichwouldstretchandstretch,getthinnerandthinnerastheywalkedacrossLondon;asifone’sfriendswereattachedtoone’sbody,afterlunchingwiththem,


��

byathinthread,which(asshedozedthere)becamehazywiththesoundofbells,strikingthehourorringingtoservice,asasinglespi-der’sthreadisblottedwithrain-drops,and,burdened,sagsdown…AndRichardDallowayandHughWhitbreadhesitatedatthecornerofConduitStreetattheverymomentthatMillicentBruton,lyingonthesofa,letthethreadsnap;snored.19

Theoverlyingnarration,orthread,inMrs. Dalloway,likeClarissa’sinitialreactionstoLondon,facilitatesanillusionofunifiedidentityinthemoderncity.Thethreadcreatesadirectpathfromonechar-actertothenext:afterpartingwayswithHughWhitbread,“Rich-

ard turned at the corner ofConduitStreeteager,yes,veryeager, totravelthatspider’sthreadofattachmentbe-tweenhimselfandClarissa;hewouldgostraight toher, inWestminster.”19Italsoallowsmultipleperspectivesonthesamescene,whichareconnectedandgroundedinacollectionofphysi-calrepresentationsofmodernization:

amotorcar’sbackfirestartlesClarissaDallowayandcaptivatesSep-timusSmith;anairplanelinksthemacrossthecityasbothspelloutitssky-writtenmessage;PeterWalshandSeptimusandReziaSmithconvergeoutsideRegent’sParkTubeStation.Andtime,whichforSimmelisessentialforholdingtheseurbanrelationshipstogether,20constantlyservesasaunitingforce:BigBenchimessimultaneouslyeachhourwithclocksacrossLondontounitedivergingnarratives,asitdoesherebetweenClarissaandPeterWalsh.AsClarissawalksupBondStreet,sheisphysicallyawareofBigBen’schime:

ForhavinglivedinWestminster—howmanyyearsnow?overtwen-ty,—onefeelseveninthemidstofthetraffic,orwakingatnight,Cla-rissawaspositive,aparticularhush,orsolemnity;anindescribablepause;asuspense…beforeBigBenstrikes.There!Outitboomed.Firstawarning,musical;thenthehour,irrevocable.Theleadencir-

Big Ben chimes simultaneously each hour with clocks across London to unite diverging narratives.

��


clesdissolvedintheair.21

Andlater,leavingClarissa’shouse,PeterWalshalsophysicallyreactstobells’rhythmashereplaystheechoofBigBentohimself:

“Remembermyparty, remembermyparty, saidPeterWalshashesteppeddownthestreet,speakingtohimselfrhythmically, intimewiththeflowofthesound,thedirectdownrightsoundofBigBenstrikingthehalf-hour.(Theleadencirclesdissolvedintheair.)”22

Inthenovel’sfinalsceneBigBenunitesClarissaandSepti-mus,whoaremorecloselylinkedthroughoutMrs. Dallowaythananyotherpair.Woolf ’suseofthemotorcaratthenovel’sbeginningisthefirstmomentofmanywhichlinksthetwocharacters.Althoughthetwonevermeet,Clarissa’sconnectiontoSeptimus—who,Woolfwroteinher1928introductiontoMrs. Dalloway,ismeanttobeherdouble23—isstronglyfeltthroughoutthenarrative.FromSeptimus’connectiontoClarissathroughtheirobservationsofthemotorcartohis“appearance”atherparty,“[h]eislinkedtoClarissathroughhisanxietiesaboutsexualityandmarriage;hisanguishaboutmortal-ityandimmortality;andhisacutesensitivitiestohissurroundings,whichhavegoneoverthelineintomadness.”24Septimus’worldisatragicillustrationofanextremefragmentationofpersonalityinthefaceofmodernity.Freshfromthetraumaofmodernwarandrecent-lyre-immersedintourbanlife,Septimuslacksthedefensesagainstover-stimulationtowhichClarissaclings.Asaresult,hisobservationofthesamemotorcarwhichmerelystartlesClarissacompletelydis-ablesSeptimus.Thevastlydifferentnaturesoftheirawarenesscreatethedichotomybetweenthem:thevitalityClarissacelebratesisfeltequally intenselybySeptimus,buthismadnesscreatesa terror indirectoppositiontoherjoy:

Everyonelookedatthemotorcar.Septimuslooked.Boysonbicyclessprangoff.Trafficaccumulated…andthisgradualdrawingtogetherof everything toone centrebeforehis eyes, as if somehorrorhadcomealmosttothesurfaceandwasabouttoburstintoflames,ter-


��

rifiedhim.Theworldwaveredandquiveredandthreatenedtoburstintoflames.25

Clarissa and Septimus share a heightened awareness of London’smotionandenergywhichisunmatchedinintensitybyanyofthenovel’sothercharacters.Asthenovelprogresses,WoolfcontinuallylinksClarissaandSeptimusthroughsceneslikethisonethatrevealtheintensityofurbansensation,sothatClarissaeasilyvisualizesSep-timus’deathandreadilyempathizeswithhisdecisioninthenovel’sfinalpages.Thelinkbetweenthemmakesherreflectionsseemper-fectlynaturaleventhoughthetwonevertrulymet. ThiscloseconnectionbetweenClarissaandSeptimusservestoundermineClarissa’sexpressionsofdelightinthecity.Themo-torcarenginethatbothhear,which“soundedlikeapulseirregularlydrummingthroughanentirebody,”26actsasaphysicalconnectionbetweenthetwothatalsolinkstheirreactionstothecity.Septimus’horrorbecomes linked toClarissa’s joy in thisway,and thefluid,rapidlyshiftingnarrativestructureofMrs, Dallowayfurtherempha-sizesthecontinuitiesofidentity.Instabilityisexpressednotinim-mediaterepresentationsofthecitybutinafracturingandmergingofperceptionandpersonalityatthisindividuallevel:asthethreadinterweavestheiridentities,Septimus’desperationhauntsClarissa’sliveliness;hissuicideunderminesherloveofLondonlife. Ultimately,though,justasthethreadconnectingLadyBru-tontoRichardDallowayandHughWhitbreadeventuallybreaks,thethreadbetweenClarissaandSeptimusalsosnaps,andtheun-derlying isolationcharacteristicof themoderncity is revealed.Atthenovel’sclose,BigBen,whichthroughoutthenovelfacilitatedthefusionofdivergentconsciousnesses,severstheconnectionbetweenClarissaandSeptimus:

Theclockbeganstriking.Theyoungmanhadkilledhimself;butshedidnotpityhim;withtheclockstrikingthehour,one,two,three,shedidnotpityhim,withallthisgoingon…Butwhatanextraor-dinarynight!Shefeltsomehowverylikehim—theyoungmanwhohadkilledhimself.Shefeltgladthathehaddoneit;thrownitaway

��


whiletheywentonliving.Theclockwasstriking.Theleadencirclesdissolvedintheair.Butshemustgoback.Shemustassemble.ShemustfindSallyandPeter.Andshecameinfromthelittleroom.27

BigBen groundsClarissa anduntangles herwandering thoughts,whichhadbeguntoconsciouslymergewithSeptimus’.Assheturnstogoinside,sheforcesherselftodismissthisintimateconnection,createdby thecity, toa stranger.ToClarissaandherguests,Sep-timus must remain the anonymous young man whose story onlybrieflyintrudesontheparty’sgaiety. Similarcharactershaunttheedgesofperceptionin“StreetHaunting”tointrudeonthebrightnessofthenarrator’swalk.Thebeautyofthestreets,overwhichtheeyeglidessmoothly,isabruptlydisturbedwhen

suddenly, turning the corner,we comeupon abearded Jew,wild,hunger–bitten,glaringoutofhismisery;orpassthehumpedbodyofanoldwomanflungabandonedonthestepofapublicbuildingwithacloakoverherlikethehastycoveringthrownoveradeadhorseordonkey.Atsuchsightsthenervesofthespineseemtostanderect;asuddenflareisbrandishedinoureyes;aquestionisaskedwhichisneveranswered.28

Thewoman’shuddledbodyevokesanimageofdeaththatcontrastsstarklywiththeswirlof“sequinedcloaksandbrightlegsofdinersanddancers”29aroundher.Thenarratorisnearlycaughtupinthespectacleofthecrowdsemergingfromthetheatres,butatthelastmomentisshockedbacktoherself.30 Thenarrator’sunansweredquestion,askedinresponsetotheghastly—andghostly—imageoftheoldwoman,isaskedaswellbyClarissainMrs. Dalloway.Evenwhileshereflectsonherloveofthecity,of“thismomentinJune,”herthoughtsarehauntedbyunderly-inguncertaintiesaboutheridentityinbothlifeanddeath:

Buteveryoneremembered;whatshelovedwasthis,here,now,infrontofher;thefatladyinthecab.Diditmatterthen,sheasked


�0

herself, walking towards Bond Street, did it matter that she mustinevitablyceasecompletely;allthismustgoonwithouther;didsheresentit;ordiditnotbecomeconsolingtobelievethatdeathendedabsolutely?butthatsomehowinthestreetsofLondon,ontheebbandflowofthings,here,there,shesurvived,Petersurvived,livedineachother,shebeingpart,shewaspositive,ofthetreesathome;ofthehousethere,ugly,ramblingalltobitsandpiecesasitwas;partofpeopleshehadnevermet;beinglaidoutlikeamistbetweenthepeoplesheknewbest…butitspreadeversofar,herlife,herself.ButwhatwasshedreamingasshelookedintoHatchards’shopwindow?Whatwasshetryingtorecover?31

ForBaudelaireandlater,Benjamin,theghostorspecterisanim-portant figure of the modern city.32 As bodies like those of thebearded Jew or the huddled woman begin to invade the streets,itbecomesclearthat“StreetHaunting”isamorefittingtitlethanitoriginallyappears.Whenbothtextsareexaminedmoreclosely,beyond the initial emphasison life, anunderlyingpreoccupationwithdeathandhauntingbecomesvisible.Intheabovepassage,Cla-rissaconsiderswhetherdeathisanabsoluteend,buthere,laterinthenovel,sheexpresseshopethat“theunseenmightsurvive”inaghostlyform:

Oddaffinities shehadwithpeople shehadnever spokento,somewomaninthestreet,somemanbehindacounter—eventrees,orbarns.Itendedinatranscendentaltheorywhich,withherhorrorofdeath,allowedhertobelieve,orsaythatshebelieved(forallherskepticism),thatsinceourapparitions,thepartofuswhichappears,aresomomentarycomparedwiththeother,theunseenpartofus,whichspreadswide,theunseenmightsurvive,berecoveredsome-howattachedtothispersonorthat,orevenhauntingcertainplaces,afterdeath.Perhaps—perhaps.33

Thetwotypesof“StreetHaunting”Woolfpresents,oneacelebra-tionoflifeandtheother,here,afterdeath,areintimatelyconnected.Intheabovepassage,livingbodiesareconstructedas“apparitions,”whichuniteonlymomentarilywiththeunseenaspectthatextends

��


beyondthebodytobecomepartof“thispersonorthat.”Thefigureoftheapparitionintegratesthehopeinanenduringconnectednesstootheridentitieswiththeindividualisolationofthecrowd,whichmustultimatelyprevailinthemoderncity. Modernity’s rapidly increasing technological advances,whilegivingrisetonewconceptionsoftime,space,speed,mobil-ityandcommunication,expandthemoderncitybeyondthe lim-itsofcoherentperception.Thecityisnolongercomprehensibleinits entirety; ithasbecome simply too large andcomplex. InMrs. Dalloway,Woolfrecognizeshowthesenewconceptstransformper-ceptionsofnarrative and subjectivity.Clarissa,ridingontopofanomnibus,feels herself “everywhere; not ‘here,here,here’;andshetappedthebackoftheseat;buteverywhere…Sothattoknowher,oranyone,onemust seekout thepeoplewhocompleted them;eventheplaces.”34Clarissadeeplyfeelstheinterconnectednessofidentitiesinthecity,buttoseekoutthepeopleandplacesthatcompleteeveryidentitysheencountersisimpossible,andmodern identities thereforemustremain incomplete.At thesametime,then,thatthosemodernidentitiesbecomeintermingledandinmanywaysindistinguishablefromoneanother,theyalsoremainstrikinglyisolated. Theanonymousvastnessofthemoderncityislamentedaswellin“StreetHaunting.”Pausinginasecond-handbookshop,thenarratorexpressesregretthat“thenumberofbooksintheworldisinfinite,andoneisforcedtoglimpseandnodandmoveonafteramomentoftalk,aflashofunderstanding,as,inthestreetoutside,onecatchesawordinpassingandfromachancephrasefabricatesalifetime.”35 Just as the infinitenumberofbooks regrettably limits thenarrator’s insightto“aflashofunderstanding,”thevastnessofthecrowd outside this small bookshop limits communication among

The two types of “Street Haunting” Woolf presents, one a celebration of life, and the other, here, after death, are intimately connected.


��

the identities itcontains.OnherwaytotheStrandtobuya leadpencil,Woolf ’snarratorcatchesonlyfragmentsofconversationastheyfloatby:

It is about awomancalledKate that they are talking…butwhoKateis,andtowhatcrisisintheirfriendshipthatpennystamprefers,weshallneverknow…andhere,atthestreetcorner,anotherpageofthevolumeoflifeislaidopenbythesightoftwomencon-sulting under the lamp-post. They are spelling out the latest wirefromNewmarketinthestoppressnews.Dotheythink,then,thatfortunewilleverconverttheirragsintofurandbroadcloth…?Butthemainstreamofwalkersatthishoursweepspasttoofasttoletusasksuchquestions.36

Fromthisfleetingexchange,thenarratorisabletoidentifyKateasthesubjectofthewomen’sconversation,butisunabletoconstructheridentity.Theconversationisintimate,butthenarrativemustcutoffabruptlyasitpassesbyandanothercomesintoview;noinvestiga-tiveeffortcanbemadetoassembleKate’sidentity,totrulyknowher.Anelementofreserveor“conventionaldistance”37preventsadeeperconnectionwiththewomenspeakingaboutKate—and,byexten-sion,Kateherself.Simmelwoulddefinethisreserveassymptomaticofanunderlyingaversion,orrepulsion.38ForWoolf,though,thisisnotatallthecase.Thenarratorisdrawntotheconversation,butthecrowd’sspeed–amodernconvention–checksthedevelopmentofasolididentityforKate;she“sinksunderthewarmthoftheirvolu-bility”39 as thewomendisappear into the crowd.Despite the factthatKatehasbeennamed,sheremainsinaccessible;theencounterischaracterizednotbyanytrueidentificationwithKatebutbytheanonymityofalltheconversation’sparticipants. This ambivalence of identity reflects ambivalence towardthecity;aninabilitytounitethecityintoacoherentwholecreatesthe same difficulties when turned inward to individual personali-ties.DespiteherelationduringheropeningwalkupBondStreet,ClarissaisacutelyawarethroughoutMrs. Dallowayoftheinevitableisolation thatpermeates relationships in thecityand she longs to

��


repairthefractures:

Buttogodeeper,beneathwhatpeoplesaid(andthesejudge-ments,howsuperficial,howfragmentarytheyare!)inherownmindnow,whatdiditmeantoher,thisthingshecalledlife?...HerewasSo-and-so in South Kensington; some one up in Bayswater; andsomebody else, say, in Mayfair. And she felt quite continuously asenseoftheirexistence;andshefeltwhatawaste;andshefeltwhatapity;andshefeltifonlytheycouldbebroughttogether;soshedidit.Anditwasanoffering;tocombine,tocreate;buttowhom?40

DespitethenecessaryanonymityofthosewithwhomClarissafeelsaconnection,thesefleetingencountersarestrikinglypersonal.Cla-rissa’s parties, which unite her guests indoors, are her attempt tocounteractthefracturingofrelationshipsinthecitybybringingthedisparateanddissipatingelementstogether,ifonlyforanevening.LikeWoolf ’snarrator in“StreetHaunting,”whorealizes that it isnotpracticaltochangeidentitieswiththechanginglandscapeofthecity,Clarissarecognizesthatdespiteheracutesenseofconnected-nesstothecity,shecanneithercreateasolididentityonthestreetsnorsolidifyherfleetingencounters:“So-and-soinSouthKensing-ton;someoneupinBayswater;andsomebodyelse,say,inMayfair”remainanonymous,identity-less.Inthecity,consciousnessiscon-tinuallyinflux,dissipatingthroughthepassingcrowdandrestingonlybrieflyonanysingleindividual. As Woolf guides her reader through an ever-shifting se-quenceofcharacters’thoughts,mergingthepathsandperceptionsof each, thenarratormakesclear thatwhile eachconsciousness isinterwovenwiththeothers,aseamlessnarrativeisimpossiblewithinthecity.Backontheomnibus,Clarissamournfullyacknowledges,“Howcouldtheyknoweachother?Youmeteveryday,thennotforsixmonths,or years.”41AswithClarissa andSeptimus;Peter andtheSmiths;HughWhitbread,RichardDallowayandLadyBruton,paths cross—intentionally or unconsciously—for a moment, andthendivergeagainforanunforeseeableamountoftime,sothatre-lationships,likecharacters’personalidentitiesandtheidentitiesof


��

thosetheyencounter,canneverbefullydeveloped. DespitetheconnectednessClarissafeelsandtheconnectionsofconsciousnessWoolfcreatesinMrs. Dalloway,hercharacters’im-mersioninthemoderncrowdisalwayssuperficial.Woolfdrawsto-getherdivergingnarrativesthroughcharacters’parallelreactionstothecity’smodernelements,fromthemotorcartoBigBen.Buttheconnectionscannotextendbeyondthesesharedperceptions;thecityistoovast,andthecrowdmovestooquickly. Thenarratorcanonlyspeculateaboutdetailsofthelivessheencountersonherwalk,but theflowofWoolf ’snarrative reflectstheirfragmentingeffectonherconsciousness.Assheleaveshome,sheshedsthesolididentityprovidedbytheobjectsthat“perpetu-allyexpress theoddityofourowntemperamentsandenforce thememoriesofourownexperience.”42Withoutthem,heridentityun-ravelsintoa“thinthread”asinMrs. Dalloway,whichthenbecomesentangledwiththeidentitiesofeachpersonsheencountersonherwalk:

“Andwhatgreaterdelightandwondercantherebethantoleavethestraightlinesofpersonalityanddeviateintothosefootpathsthatleadbeneathbramblesandthicktreetrunksintotheheartoftheforestwherelivethosewildbeasts,ourfellowmen?”43

LikeBaudelaire’sflâneur,forwhom“itbecomesanimmensesourceofenjoymenttoestablishhisdwellinginthethrong,intheebbandflow,thebustle,thefleetingandtheinfinite,”44thenarra-toratfirstrevelsinmergingheridentitywiththemasses.Despitethenarrator’sapparentconfidenceinheragencywithinthecrowd,however,thenarrativehintsthatitmaybedangeroustowalktoofardownthosefootpaths.Benjamin’sanalysisofBaudelaireseesthismergingwiththecrowdsasamovetowardanonymityina“defen-sivereactiontotheirattractionandallure.”45ButforWoolf,defenseagainstthecrowdliesincontinuallysteppingbackfromanonymity.The crowd’s composition evolves so rapidly that the fragments ofidentitywhichmergewiththecrowdaresoondispersedwidely.Any

��


mergingofidentitiesinonelocationwilldivergeandmergeagainthroughout the city until the connections become untraceable orlostaltogether, and identities returntoisolationwithin“thatvastrepub-lican army of anonymous tramp-ers”46 that trudges through Londonin“StreetHaunting.”Thustheonlywaythenarratorcanstepbackfromanonymity inthemoderncity isbysteppingindoorsandawayfromthecrowdedstreetswhoseconstantstim-ulationshesoloves. Yetdespiteitsapparentsolid-ifyingeffectonidentity,thisstepindoorsisalsoastepintoisolation.AsClarissadoesontheomnibus,thenarratorin“StreetHaunting”regrets the impracticality of collecting identities from these dailymeetings.Clarissa’sbeliefintheunifyingpowerofherpartiesandthe narrator’s interactions inside the street’s shops provide a briefrespitefromanonymity.Thenarratorin“StreetHaunting”mustre-peatedlypauseand“makesomelittleexcuse,whichhasnothingtodowiththerealreason,forfoldingupthebrightparaphernaliaofthestreetsandwithdrawingtosomeduskierchamber,”47whichof-fersareprievefromthestreets’constantflux:

Herewefindanchorageinthesethwartingcurrentsofbeing;herewebalanceourselves after the splendours andmiseriesof thestreets.Theverysightofthebookseller’swifewithherfootonthefender,sittingbesideagoodcoalfire,screenedfromthedoor,isso-bering and cheerful. She is never reading, or only thenewspaper;hertalk,whenitleavesbookselling,whichitdoessogladly,isabouthats;shelikesahattobepractical,shesays,aswellaspretty.Ono,theydon’tliveattheshop;theyliveinBrixton;shemusthaveabitofgreentolookat.48

Likethebootshopandthestationer’sstorethatthenarratorenters,these withdrawals introduce the narrator to solid characters who

“Here we find anchorage in these thwarting currents of being; here we balance ourselves after the splendours and miseries of the streets.”


��

pullherbackfromthecity’s labyrinthofdivergent identities.Thebookseller’swife,thedwarfinthebootshopandthehusbandandwifeatthestationer’sshopallowamomentofrestfortheself,whichoutsideonthestreet“hasbeenblownaboutatsomanystreetcor-ners,[…]batteredlikeamothattheflameofsomanyinaccessiblelanterns.”49Theyprovideaconnectingthreadtoguidethenarratorasshenavigatesthestreetcornersanddeadends. Thenarrator,however,eventuallyallowsthethreadtosnap,disconnectingfromherurbanacquaintancesasshestepsindoorstoendherjourney:

Circumstancescompelunity;forconveniencesakeamanmustbewhole.Thegoodcitizenwhenheopenshisdoorintheeveningmustbebanker,golfer,husband,father;notanomadwanderingthedes-ert,amysticstaringatthesky…Whenheopenshisdoor,hemustrunhisfingers throughhishairandputhisumbrella inthestandliketherest.50

Isolationwithinthemoderncityisunavoidable.Atdifferenttimes,Woolf ’scharactersalternatelyfeeldeeplyconnectedtoandisolatedfromthecity’scrowdsofindividuals.Connectednessandisolation,like the threads that linkLondon’s inhabitants, areentangledandcannotbeseparated.Thedifferencebetweenthetwoisasambiguousasthenarrator’sidentityasshewalkstotheStrand:

Butwhatcouldbemoreabsurd?Itis,infact,onthestrokeofsix;itisawinter’sevening;wearewalkingtotheStrandtobuyapencil.How,then,arewealsoonabalcony,wearingpearlsinJune?[…]IsthetrueselfthiswhichstandsonthepavementinJanuary,orthatwhichbendsoverthebalconyinJune?AmIhere,oramIthere?oristhetrueselfneitherthisnorthat,neitherherenorthere,butsomethingsovariedandwanderingthatitisonlywhenwegivethereintoitswishesandletittakeitswayunimpededthatweareindeedourselves?51

AsshewalksthroughLondon,thenarratorishauntedbyaformerselfwhostands,attheoppositetimeoftheyear,onabalconyoutsideaMayfairparty.Hertwoselvesareindistinguishable,anddestined

��


toendlesslyalternateunlessthenarratordismissesbothtoassumeanidentitythatis“neitherthisnorthat,neitherherenorthere.” InhisdiscussionofBenjaminandWoolf,JohnJerviswrites,“Themoderncityreturnsendlessly, repeats itselfendlessly […] inthecity,theghostsarethereinadvance;thefutureexistsinthepast,gives it momentary meaning, through making it present.”52 Themoderncityiseternallyhauntedbytheconnectionsanddisconnec-tionsofidentitywhichhauntthenarratorinthepassageabove. As the narrator is haunted by a phantom self, Clarissa isalsohauntedinMrs. Dalloway’sfinalscenebythephantomofher“double,”Septimus.Theabovepassagefrom“StreetHaunting”ee-rily shadows that final scene in Mrs. Dalloway, in which Clarissaactuallystands,wearingpearls,lookingoutonanightinJuneandcontemplatingSeptimus’death:

She felt somehowvery likehim– theyoungmanwhohadkilledhimself.Shefeltgladthathehaddoneit;thrownitawaywhiletheywentonliving.Theclockwasstriking.Theleadencirclesdissolvedintheair.Butshemustgoback.Shemustassemble.ShemustfindSallyandPeter.Andshecameinfromthelittleroom.53

Death,whichClarissahasbeenconsciousof since thenovel’sbe-ginning,comesbacktohauntherassheidentifieswithSeptimus’decisiontocommitsuicide.Itisnotablethatmodernity,intheformofBigBen’sever-recurringchime,joltsClarissafromhercontempla-tionofSeptimus’suicidebacktothepresent,toreality.Butwhethertheinterruptionisawelcomeoneremainsambiguous.ItinterfereswithClarissa’s identificationwith“theyoungmanwhohadkilledhimself,”severingtheconnectionbetweentheiridentitiesandsend-ingherbackindoorsandintoisolation.Yetevenhadsheremainedonthebalcony,theiridentitiescouldneverhavemerged. As the following passage from “Street Haunting” makesclear,identificationwiththeseghostsofidentityisalluring:

Theusualconflictcomesabout.Spreadoutbehindtherodofdutywe see the whole breadth of the river Thames – wide, mournful,


��

peaceful.AndweseeitthroughtheeyesofsomebodywhoisleaningovertheEmbankmentonasummerevening,withoutacareintheworld.Letusputoffbuyingthepencil; letusgoinsearchofthisperson–andsoonitbecomesapparentthatthispersonisourselves.Forifwecouldstandtherewherewestoodsixmonthsago,shouldwenotbeagainaswewerethen–calm,aloof,content?Letustrythen.54

Thenarratoristemptedtogoinsearchofthisperson,thisghostofourselves,totrytoregainthatmomentsixmonthsago.Butitisnotpossible:

Theriverisrougherandgreyerthanweremembered.Thetideisrun-ningouttosea…Thesightsweseeandsoundswehearnowhavenoneofthequalityofthepast;norhaveweanyshareintheserenityofthepersonwho,sixmonthsago,stoodpreciselywherewestandnow.Hisisthehappinessofdeath;ourstheinsecurityoflife.55

Inthemoderncity,isolationinevitablyprevails.Here,justasClarissaturnedawayfromSeptimusandbackindoorstoherparty,Woolf ’snarratorturnsawayfromherghostlyalternateidentityandintotheindoorsanctuaryofthestationer’sshop.“Aghosthasbeensoughtfor,”56butthenarratorhaschosennottoseekafurthercon-nection.Instead,assheleavesthestationer’sshoptoreverseherpathbacktowardhome,sherecallstheindividualsshehasencounteredonherwalk,tellingherself“thestoryofthedwarf,oftheblindmen,ofthepartyintheMayfairmansion,ofthequarrelinthestationer’sshop.”57Butthemergingofheridentitywiththeirs,likeherencoun-terswiththem,isbriefandimpermanent.“Toescapeisthegreatestofpleasures,”58Woolf ’snarrator says,but she realizes that it is anescapeonly:

“Intoeachoftheselivesonecouldpenetratealittleway,farenoughtogiveoneselftheillusionthatoneisnottetheredtoasinglemind,butcanputonbrieflyfora fewminutes thebodiesandmindsofothers…”59

��


Thenarratormusteventuallyshedthese illusory identitiesandre-composehersolididentity. Throughout“StreetHaunting”andMrs. Dalloway,Woolf ’scharactersaretornbetweenthesetwoopposingconstructionsofiden-tity:thesuperficial,fragmentedinterconnectednessthatWoolfseemsatfirsttocelebrateandtheinevitableisolationoftheselfwithinacitythatallowsonlyfleetingidentificationswiththoseindividualspassinginitscrowds.Thisambivalenceisconclusivelyrevealedasthenarra-torin“StreetHaunting”mournsanunidentifiedghostlymalealongtheThamesandClarissareflectsonSeptimus’suicide.Intherecogni-tionoftheambiguityofmodernidentityliestheinevitableconclu-sion,“Hisisthehappinessofdeath;ourstheinsecurityoflife.”60

Endnotes

1 Virginia Woolf, The Diary of Virginia Woolf, vol. three, 1925-1930, ed. Anne Olivier Bell (New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1980), 186.2 Woolf, Diary, 298.3 Virginia Woolf, “Street Haunting: A London Adventure,” in The Virginia Woolf Reader, ed. Mitchell A. Leaska (San Diego: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1984), 6.4 Woolf, Mrs Dalloway (London: Penguin Books, 1992), 4.5 Woolf, “Street Haunting,” 248.6 Simmel blames modernity for the increased emphasis on the eye’s function: “Here is something… characteristic of the big city. The interpersonal relationships of people in big cities are characterized by a markedly greater emphasis on the use of the eyes than on the ears… Before buses, railroads, and streetcars became fully established during the nineteenth century, people were never put in a position of having to stare at one another for minutes or even hours on end.” Quoted in Walter Benjamin, “On Some Motifs in Baudelaire,” in Illuminations, ed. Hannah Arendt (New York: Schocken Books, 1968), 191. Sight is also essential to Benjamin’s concept of “aura,” which is dependent on the returnable gaze (See Benjamin, “The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction,” 217-52, also in Illuminations, ed. Hannah Arendt.).7 Benjamin, 191.8 Woolf, “Street Haunting,” 248.9 Woolf, “Street Haunting,” 252.10 Woolf, “Street Haunting,” 249.11 Ibid.12 Woolf, Mrs. Dalloway, 149-51.


�0

13 Woolf, “Street Haunting,” 251.14 Woolf, Mrs. Dalloway, 152.15 Peter Childs, Modernism (London: Routledge, 2000), 14-15.16 Woolf, “Street Haunting,” 247.17 Rachel Bowlby, “Walking, Women and Writing,” in Feminist Destinations and Further Essays on Virginia Woolf, 191-219 (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 1997), 210.18 See Georg Simmel, “The Metropolis and Mental Life,” in Georg Simmel: On Individuality and Social Forms, Selected Writings, ed. Donald Levine (Chicago, University of Chicago Press, 1971), 328: “The relationships and concerns of the typical metropolitan resident are so manifold and complex that, especially as a result of the agglomeration of so many persons with such differentiated interests, their relationships and activities intertwine with one another into a many-membered organism.”19 Woolf, Mrs. Dalloway, 123.20 Woolf, Mrs. Dalloway, 125-6.21 “In view of this fact, the lack of the most exact punctuality in promises and performances would cause the whole to break down into an inextricable chaos.” Simmel, 328.22 Woolf, Mrs. Dalloway, 4.22 Woolf, Mrs. Dalloway, 52.23SusanDick,“LiteraryRealisminMrs. Dalloway,To the Lighthouse,OrlandoandThe Waves,”inThe Cambridge Companion to Virginia Woolf,ed.SueRoeandSusanSellers(Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress,2000),53.24 Woolf, Mrs. Dalloway, xxxvi.25 Woolf, Mrs. Dalloway, 16.26 Woolf, Mrs. Dalloway, 15-16.27 Woolf, Mrs. Dalloway, 204.28 Woolf, “Street Haunting,” 251-2.29 Woolf, “Street Haunting,” 252.30 It is worth noting that Benjamin identifies these shocks as essential to Baudelaire’s conception of the isolation of the modern crowd (See Benjamin, 198.). 31 Woolf, Mrs. Dalloway, 9-10.32 “Ant-seething city, city full of dreams,/ Where ghosts by daylight tug the passer’s sleeve.” From Charles Baudelaire, Les Fleurs du mal, quoted in Jean-Michel Rabate, The Ghosts of Modernity (Gainesville, FL: University Press of Florida, 1996), 10.33Woolf,Mrs. Dalloway,167.34 Ibid.35 Woolf, “Street Haunting,” 255.36 Woolf, “Street Haunting,” 255-56.37 Bowlby, 218.

��


38 “Indeed, if I am not mistaken, the inner side of this external reserve is not only indifference but more frequently than we believe, it is a slight aversion, a mutual strangeness and repulsion which, in a close contact which has arisen any way whatever, can break out into hatred and conflict.” Simmel, 331.39 Woolf, “Street Haunting,” 256.40 Woolf, Mrs. Dalloway, 133-4.41 Woolf, Mrs. Dalloway, 167.42 Woolf, “Street Haunting,” 247.43 Woolf, “Street Haunting,” 258.44 Baudelaire, 399. Baudelaire’s man of the crowd, like Woolf ’s woman of the crowd, willingly merges with the streets’ anonymous crowds: “The crowd is his domain, just as the air is the birds’, and water that of the fish. His passion and his profession is to merge with the crowd. For the perfect idler, for the passionate observer it becomes an immense source of enjoyment to establish his dwelling in the throng, in the ebb and flow, the bustle, the fleeting and the infinite. To be away from home and yet to feel at home anywhere; to see the world, to be at the very centre of the world, and yet to be unseen of the world, such are some of the minor pleasures of those independent, intense and impartial spirits, who do not lend themselves easily to linguistic definitions.”45 Benjamin, 167. See also p. 169: “As regards Baudelaire, the masses were anything but external to him; indeed, it is easy to trace in his works his defensive reaction to their attraction and allure.” Benjamin cites his sonnet ‘A une passante’ as an illustration: “What this sonnet communicates is simply this: Far from experiencing the crowd as an opposed, antagonistic element, this very crowd brings to the city dweller the figure that fascinates. The delight of the urban poet is love – not at first sight, but at last sight. It is a farewell forever which coincides in the poem with the moment of enchantment. Thus the sonnet supplies the figure of shock, indeed of enchantment.” 46 Woolf, “Street Haunting,” 247. 47 Woolf, “Street Haunting,” 249.48Woolf,“StreetHaunting,”254.49 Woolf, “Street Haunting,” 258.50 Woolf, “Street Haunting,” 253.51Ibid.52 John Jervis, Exploring the Modern (Malden, MA: Blackwell, 1998), 85.53 Woolf, Mrs Dalloway, 204.54 Woolf, “Street Haunting,” 256-57.55Woolf,“StreetHaunting,”257.56 Woolf, “Street Haunting,” 258.57 Ibid.58 Woolf, “Street Haunting,” 259.59 Woolf, “Street Haunting,” 258.60 Woolf, “Street Haunting,” 257.

Documents

Woolf's Modernism: Ambivalence of Identity in Mrs. Dalloway and "Street Haunting"