Answer ONE of the following questions with 200-250 words:
1) How does the story illustrate the ways in which imperialist racism goes hand in hand with homophobia and sexism?
2) How does the story explore the possibilities and limitations of human relationships when human beings are constrained by various forms of discrimination, prejudice, and bigotry?
3) How do you interpret the ending of the story? On the surface, the story does conclude unhappily, with the murder of the seductive Cocoanut and the suicide of the transgressive Captain March. However, is it possible to offer an alternative way of interpreting the ending?
61 comments:
The conclusion could not be all tragedy. Another way to interpret the ending could be made if the death were interpreted from another side of perspective.
Because most tragedies are ended with the death of characters that were seemingly morally bad, people are taught by such cliché that the immoral will be punished eventually. If the sexual relationship between Lionel and Cocoanut is seen indecent, then their death definitely jumps into conclude with moral criticisms. On the other hand, if it were seen without prejudices or bigotry, then their death might be found with rather profound and implicit meanings.
That the movement of Cocoanut’ corpse against the prevailing current implies the disobedience and rebellion of mainstream. It was not only its pagan knowledge that was against Christian beliefs but also its unacceptable love with Lionel.
Considering Cocoanut’s responses to Lionel’s remarks and their final SM, he seemed to be foretold by the omens that there would be extermination of himself. Even so, his following frenzied action made an outburst of Lionel’s agony. After that, their relationship was known by all the people. Here the author seems to convey a message that only death can exclaim their love out of the cabin, under the sun, to the whole world.
In my opinion, Cocoanut is the king throughout the story even it was dead because Lionel’s suicide I interpret it as an action of loyalty to his lover and king.
Mia 49902028
I like the ending that even Cocoanut died, his corpse against the prevailing current, which shows his firm rebellion against mainstream. On the surface, it is sad that Cocoanut is killed by his lover- Lionel, but on the other hand, it is fortunate to be killed by your lover, not to be killed by the whole oppressive society which may force you to change. It is better to die than to live in the limited boundary and love. Death gives Cocoanut kind of freedom to be his own self. After killing Cocoanut, Lionel committed a suicide. I think it is kind of freedom for him because he bears so many stress from the society which always tells him what’s right and what’s wrong, the society which always tells him to hold his own race and class- the boundary, and the society which limits his freedom of love and spirit. Death makes him get rid of all. He can face squarely to whom he really is, not the shadow of the society. Maybe it is an only way to get freedom and to be self in this oppressed society. Even though death will be “over”, the belief will exist forever, and nothing can destroy it. Like Cocoanut’s body, moving contrary to the prevailing current.
Monica W10102006
Q2
The author begins story with a group of children playing on the deck of a boat which is from India, among those children our main characters shows up, Cocoanut and Lionel. This part tell us that there is something different between this two children. Then story begins to talk about adult Lionel has become a Captain in the British army. He has grown into a handsome young man, Lionel boarding a ship to India where he met Cocoanut. This is where author is brilliant. Their love sprouts on the boat where they can temporarily forget their class division, racial difference, people’s prejudice. The boat is their paradise, Lionel can escape from his mother’s strict constrains, not being a English gentleman but a free person in love’s world. But all these are just temporary, Lionel pissed when he found Cocoanut didn’t tell him the door is open when they were making love. This incident shows Lionel is still limited by his race and class, he cannot get over people’s homophobia and discrimination, but he just in love with Cocoanut so deeply. Finally, he chose to kill his beloved and himself right after him.They explored possibilities to let the world accept them but in the end those limitations as people’s homophobia and racial division killed them both.
Kimlake 49902004
2. This story is about Lionel and Cocoanut’s love. Forster writes about their fascinating with each other. Although the two characters belong to different racial groups and social classes and they have same sex, they still can be attracted by each other. Here, Forster deals with the possibilities of the kind of love which is considered to be a taboo and tells readers their love is not different from others’. However, their love is full of obstacles since it is composed of the most intolerable and unimaginable essence at that time: homosexual love, and love between different racial groups and social classes. Deep in Lionel’s mind, he is contradictory and is worried about their relationship. First of all, he is a successful man. If their relationship is found out by his peers, he will be doomed and lose all he has now. Second, he understands how different he and Cocoanut are. Despite that he loves him, he still mocks and degrades him when he is with his peers. He has no choice but to do these things, and they make him painful. Third, his mother is always in his mind and brings him a lot of pressures. Even though she is not by his side and knows nothing of his love with Cocoanut, she still has great impacts and influences. His mother may be the biggest impediment to him. Thus, his mind is hindered and undermined by these obstacles and he is not able to detach from them at all.
69902622 Michelle Lin chose to answer question 3.
Death is generally considered as the terminal point of live, which people feel sorrow about and are afraid of. However, it may not be for these two young men, Cocoanut and Lionel, whose love is unrevealable and unacceptable in the story because homosexual is still forbidden back to the Age. They are not only pressed by Mrs.March but also the frame of the social main stream. Water, the scene keeps coming up and flows with the two main characters in the story, represents the symbols of desire, death and love. On the surface, it is a tragedy that Lionel murders Cocoanut for the suffocating and hopeless love, and throws himself into the sea. It may look like an unhappy ending by its exterior, yet the sentence states “It moved northwards－contrary to the prevailing current－and there were clappings of hands and some smiles.” (p.2080, line 1 from the top) Underwater, the body as well as the main social moralities no longer exist. Water here symbolizes the mingling of love and death, perhaps new-born as well if we interpret the water as an interface of life and death, a passage to new life for both of them.
Question 3:
In my opinion, although both Lionel and Cocoanut died in the end, their love lasted. Being homosexual lovers, their relationship was not allowed in the conventional society. They belonged to a different race and class, and their union would be considered as perversion or degeneration. In addition, Lionel’s mother’s words kept reminding him to be pure. Because of his fear of homosexual love, degradation, and his mother’s repression, he realized that their love was a taboo, and he decided to keep his distance from Cocoanut.
In the end of story, both of their bodies were put into water. It seemed that they were finally reunited. Although they couldn’t be a couple in real life, they got together after death. What’s more, water symbolizes rebirth; the ‘‘newness’’ was added to their love. They were no longer restrained by the conventional values and prejudice which were imposed on them by the society. Like Cocoanut’s body going against the prevailing current, they would not follow the trend but fight their own way. Therefore, I think their death can be seen as the liberation of two passionate but imprisoned souls. It may appear to be woeful and tragic but is actually a form of salvation.
49902030 Angela
As my opinion, I don’t think the end is a tragedy. Because for Coconaut and March who are really falling in love with each other, the death may be the best way to set them free. As we know that people cannot accept homosexuality at that time so they couldn’t come out and maybe in the end they can only choose either hide to others about their relationship or admit the relationship but people would feel sick about them and their life would become miserable. But after both of they died, people knew their relationship and they no longer need to hide and to care about other people‘s criticism. Most important of all, they can be true self and thereby claim their love. Furthermore, Coconaut’s corpse against the flow of the river is implied that Coconaut’s spirit which didn’t follow the main stream and rebel against society. Although it is unnatural phenomenon, it did show us that nothing is impossible. Although they both died, their love would break through all obstacles. However, for other people’s perspective such as Mrs. March, it would definitely be the sad ending. Because her son transgressed her belief, she would rather forget the existence of March than mentioned him. So the ending can be interpreted many ways by people’s viewpoint.
Tavia 49902065
Question2
The story is begins with Lionel and Cocoanut’s childhood. They are play together with a group of children on the boat from India to England. Lionel is one of the five children belongs to Mrs March. There have limitations of human relationships. Mrs March don’t like Lionel play with Cocoanut because she thinks Cocoanut is “touch of the tar-brush”. He is not a totally the race of white people. He is the people of mixed race. There have prejudice that Christianity is belong to the race of white people. And their religion is different from Cocoanut. And Mrs March thinks her children playing in the bows without their topis. She thinks they are the race of white so they must wear a helmet protection from sun. It is also about discrimination about the race. When they grow up, they meet on the boat and Lionel is the captain of the British Army. They are distribution to the same room and they are fall in love. Cocoanut love him but he don’t want Lionel talk about him in the letter that Lionel write to his mother. It is because it has bigotry. Her mother thinks that Cocoanut kills her baby because of sunstroke. Cocoanut is the race of black people and they play on the boat but don’t wear any protection from the sun. Cocoanut know that Lionel’s mother has a prejudice with the race of black people so he don’t want to let she know the relationship between he and Lionel. Lionel is angry with Cocoanut when he knows that the door is not close. It is because he doesn’t want people know their relationship. So their relationship is all about discrimination, prejudice, and bigotry that Lionel kills Cocoanut in the end and Cocoanut mother don’t mention his name again because she knows her son is beyond the boundaries of the ethnicity.
Vera 49902038
Question 2:
In the beginning of the story, the boat that carries with Lionel, Cocoanut and Mrs. March is driven from India to British. Mrs. March is a conventional Christian woman. She symbolizes the value, morality and convention of British Empire. She is the authority figure of this story. Her authority represses Lionel’s nature of being a homosexual. Due to the route of the voyage in chapter one, the end of the chapter is that Mrs. March tells Cocoanut that his is “a silly idle useless unmanly little boy.”
Later in the story, Lionel and Cocoanut meet on the boat when they are men. And this time the boat is driven from British to India. This route of the voyage symbolizes that the burden of the value, morality and convention of British Empire is lightened. And Mrs. March is not on the boat this time. Her affection to Lionel is not so strong. On account of the reasons that were mentioned above, Lionel gets the chance to accept what he truly wants and who he truly is this time. He loves Cocoanut very much, and he is a homosexual.
However, even though that Lionel gets the chance to love Cocoanut, the voyage from British to India is temporary. Lionel is still constrained by his mother and the morality of British.
Rita 49902048
Q3:
From my point of view, I don’t think the end of the story is exactly a tragedy at all.
I think the murdering and committing suicide are not the proper solution for both Captain March and Cocoanut in the end of the story but may be the most meaningful and fascinating one. Because Cocoanut and Lionel’s death doesn’t mean the end of their relationship, instead, this means their soul can being together and continue their love eternally.
Moreover, since they know there is no future for being homosexual in that period, the death also can release their pain and remorse. On the other hand, Lionel dived into the sea nakedly means that he wants to get rid of the caged such as the conventional rules, the earthly perspective and the racism which the society puts on him. The water represents the rebirth; so that they can really be themselves again and no need to care what people think about their love is right or not.
Most important of all, Cocoanut’s corpse floats against the prevailing current suggests that Cocoanut’s soul still being what he like to be and don’t want to follow the principal and main stream even he is dead and his body is still fighting for freedom and drifting where he want to go.
Celia 49902066
Question 2.
In the beginning of the story, we can see the difference between Cocoanut and Lionel from their language and religion. And Mrs. March is an important character represented traditional Christian great British Empire, she does not like cocoanut played with her children. It has a line in racialism. Besides that, there has discriminate between male and female when Mrs. March was finding her children; she crossed in the Men’s quarters even though she is upper class, she still obeys the rule between men and women. There are limitations of human relationships.
When Cocoanut and Lionel grow up and encounter in the boat. Although Lionel knows Cocoanut is not honest people, he still make friend with Cocoa and then they fall in love. I think it is the possibilities between class, racial and sexual. However, Lionel cannot transgress the morality in his inner side such as he was talking his father went native, he obvious say “with a girl”.
And in the “tragedy ending”, Lionel chance to kill Cocoa and suicide, even Lionel constrain by the moral line but I think he use the way to keeps the possibilities of their love in Another World after they died. I think the most satire on Mrs. March “never mentioned his name again”; it is human beings are constrained by discrimination, prejudice, and bigotry. In the conclusion, this story explores various possibilities and limitation of human beings.
69902613 英美碩三 李怡慧
Courtney Lee
Q 2.
The relationship between Lionel and Cocoanut perfectly portrays these issues. When Lionel is a child, he is willing to play with Cocoanut who does not have entire European ancestry. The reason why Lionel is willing to play with Cocoanut is because at that time he does not have prejudice and bigotry toward the people who are not the British. However, when he meets Cocoanut at the boat, he’s already deeply affected by all the idea that the British people are superior and batter than other people. So when he knows that he has to share a room with Cocoanut, he refuses to stay in a room with him. It shows that Lionel discriminates people who are not the British. Later in the story, he has sexual relationship with Cocoanut. They become really close with one another. He discovers that Cocoanut is just like his soul mate. Nevertheless, despite the fact that Cocoanut is his perfect half, he has never think about letting other people know about his relationship with Cocoanut. He does not want to lose what he has now. He wants to maintain the integrity of his family name and his socioeconomic status. So when he notices that the door is unlocked the whole time during his lovemaking with Cocoanut. He gets very anxious about what will happen if someone discovers his relationship with Cocoanut. In the end, he kills Cocoanut and commits suicide. He kills Cocoanut because he doesn’t want anyone to know about the relationship between them. However, he can’t stand the fact that he kills his lover, so he commits suicide at last. This story shows the dilemma that Lionel faces which cause by discrimination, prejudice, and bigotry.
Despite the background of the story which is full of discrimination and prejudice, the relationship between Lionel and Cocoanut takes us to explore and challenge the limitations of the mainstream society. At the beginning of the story, we can see that although Mrs. March makes several comments about how she disapproves of Cocoanut and even refers to him as “tar-brush”, she still lets her children play with him on the deck for most of their trip. Later on, we can also see some possibilities of human relationships between two people from different class and the sparks between them. Lionel and Cocoanut have been friends since their childhood, and when they grow up they develop a love which is against the rule of the society. Although Lionel struggles between his sexuality and the voices outside, he couldn’t resist the feelings deep in his heart and finally gives in to Cocoanut’s seduction. And also, even though two of them die at the end of the story, there’s a thread of hope that Lionel’s body flows against the current which provides us a sense of rebellion and insistence. The Other Boat by E. M. Forster not only touches the issues of race and class but also the issues of gender and homosexuality, and we can see these limitation and so called “taboo” have been widely challenged throughout the story.
49902005, King, Q2
In chapter one, during the voyage from India to England, all kids are having fun at the deck. Cocoanuts draws all children’s attention through the m’m’m’. Those British children wonder what the thing exactly is. They want to define it. However Cocoa does not even care about the nature of the m’m’m. The interaction indicates the difference between the West and the East. People in the west tend to limit themselves because they cannot endure diversity. They are just afraid of the unspeakable. The thought can be summarized into the spirit of “Science”. On the contrary, people in the east can accept comparatively more possibilities than the previous ones. The theory might be the main reason why lots of well-known philosophers receive great respect. Asian prefers “Philosophy”.
After the voyage reverses the direction from England to Bombay, Lionel develops a relationship with Cocoanuts after entering the Mediterranean. They share lots of happiness and secret in the cabin. Lionel even has an idea to go against Mrs. March since the relationship actually does no harm to anyone. However, things changes after someone witness their juicy time. Lionel must choose either England or India. If he prefers England, Lionel can lead a glorious life while he is not allowed to be himself. On the other hand, if his answer is India, the price to keep his happiness is to live under stress and discrimination.
49902022 Michelle
I choose question two.
In my opinion, I think there is another way to interpret this ending. Suicide and murder are terrible. But we all are human beings, everyone will die eventually. At the end of “The Other Boat” these two main characters died with the murder of Coconut and the suicide of Lionel. And some might think that it’s a tragedy. But maybe the ending can be regard as liberation of two of them, a kind of liberation from the world where full of prejudice, sexism, imperialist racism and also homophobia. Besides, I think through the story the author actually gives us some hints and indicates the doom, we can find that the main character gazes at the sea out of the cabin hole sometimes. And the sea here may be a symbol. In literature, sea and water sometimes represent a new birth and freedom. By this way to interpret, the ending of the story can be interpreted to a symbolic meaning that people who finally find their everlasting relationship and fulfillment of their soul and have a rebirth and get freedom both physically and mentally.
Bradshaw 49902006
3. The ending of the story is not completely a tragedy to me. I would say it has a tragically beautiful ending. Forster makes the “separation” (death) like the “union”. The two lovers cannot get into the relationship under the frame of society that time; therefore, they decide to die for living together in the place where no prejudice and discrimination is. In the last few paragraphs, it says that Lionel gently covers Coconut’s eyes with his warm hand, and he kisses him tenderly, which points out that Lionel doesn’t mean to murder Coconut. This also supports the tragically beauty part of the story. In the second last paragraph, it indicates that Coconut’s corpse on the sea, which floats “contrary to the prevailing current.” It reveals Coconut’s rebellious nature. Seeing the scene, there are “clappings of the hands and some smiles,” which indicates that people support the homosexual relationship between Coconut and Lionel. In that way, the ending can be interpreted as good one. The last paragraph of the story tells the readers about the reaction when Mrs. March is informed her son’s death and “scandal.” She never mentions her son from then. This represents the attitude of main society toward homosexuality, which is the so-called tragedy.
Mario 49902064
I would like to answer question number 3. "The Other Boat" conforms to contemporaneous proscriptions against homosexuality. On the surface, Forster's story does conclude unhappily, with the murder of the seductive "wog" and the suicide of the transgressive officer. Once Cocoanut was dead, Lionel covered his eyes, and tenderly kissed them. Feeling hopeless, Lionel ran up to the deck, plunging into the ocean, ending his internal struggle. The cause of the ending are from the racism society and the environment that they had. I think it is impossible to have any alternative because at that time the society had control them and giving them pleasure. Which they have no freedom of choosing the one they love. People who has no freedom, they will end up with having illness or mental disease. In the story the character had choose to be death. Only death can give them a freedom and peace.
49902060 Joanne
(2)
In the story, there are quite a few different kinds of limitations and discriminations which depict the imperial society value at that time. First, Lionel wants to play with Cocoanut because he is "cooperative" which shows the relationship of obedience between different social classes. Second, the bow is the space for lower class. Hence, when Cocoanut mentions about the thin part of the boat, Olive says that Cocoanut is HOPELESS. In her mind, the bow is the place she is not supposed to go due to her superior social position. Then, Lionel's mother, as a woman is condemned by a male worker that she has transgressed the area of MEN'S. Although she herself consider she is ascendant to him with a higher social class, she accepts his request of the penalty. In short, Lionel's mother obeys the limit of genders. Third, Lionel's mother cannot admit that christianity is originally from the Orient. Next, Lionel has been inculcated that having carnality is a shame but sexual desire is indeed a natural and healthy part of human beings. Besides, Lionel regards heterosexuality is NORMAL and NATURAL even if he himself is homosexual. Finally, Lionel's mom receives the letter and never mentions about Lionel again. She feels ashamed that her son "goes native" and transgresses the norm he should have kept. Forster uses vivid characters to convey the ideas of human relationships, pointing out the conflicts and oppressions of races, sexes and sexual orientations.
49902014 Charles
Question 3
The ending actually reminds me the things I learned last semester from Lesbian Gay and Queer Cinemas conducted by Professor Chunchi Wang. Unlike today, homosexual is hard to survive in the old conventional era. Catholicism was originally developed in Europe. In their eyes, their doctrine, homosexuals are considered sodomy, evil, and profane. Gradually, homosexuals became a noun that linked with bad, abnormal, and something needs to be cured. Around 1950-1990, many gay and queer cinemas, just like Forster’s The Other Boat, had depicted homosexual as something unacceptable in our world. You will see the characters in the film show their bewilderment and the ending of this kind of films always ends up unpleasant. It’s like the author is conveying a message to us readers: “this is what you will get if you are a homosexual.”
One of the interpretations is that to meet with the world’s need, Forster had to kill them in the novel. That way this story would survive and wouldn’t be banned. That’s why we get to read them today. In my interpretation, I think under that circumstance, they just don’t have any choices. Lionel killed Cocoanut and then committed suicide because he knew the world would never accept them and death is their only way out. The ending is very sad but true.
I would like to choose second one to answer. As if conversion, the goddess of Sir William, they controlled over people by force and forbid those unlawful and those can make the Empire bad. They support heterosexism. To let things follow and go smooth under the rule of patriarchal society. Homosexuality is not allowed and won’t be on mainstream. In the story, Cocoanut and Lionel fell in love with each other. As far as I am concerned, Lionel was sometimes restricted by his Mater and British Empire. So he constrained himself but finally he couldn’t stop. He crossed the boundary. They complete, even though the end both of them died. Though out of appearance they were limited and could just do things in their cabin, they choose the last ecstasy. As they died Lionel didn’t follow the prevailing current but moved northwards. He beat them and won himself. Lionel was once afraid that he would forfeit their companionship and become nobody and nothing. He was so much bothered by sex. He had obligations and duties because he was the oldest son. I think what he had done is right because he didn’t follow those who forged and oppressed him. Instead he chose what he like even though lost his life but worth it.
I choose to answer question 3.
On the surface, everyone maybe think that it is a tragedy but I don’t think so. I think it is good for Lionel and Cocoanut. In that time, their affair is not accepted. For Lionel, he also feels guilty to what he does with Cocoanut. He dares his mother against them and other people discover he is a homosexual. He loves Cocoanut but he can’t endure the truth and face these obstacles. In order to save Cocoanut and himself, he chooses to kill Cocoanut and commit suicide. He loves Cocoanut very much and he hopes their love can be eternal. If their affair can exist forever, I think it is a good ending for them. Another is Cocoanut’s corpse, it doesn’t follow the current and his face with clapping hands and some smile. It represents that although he is dead, he will against the society and be himself. They died because of the mainstream of the society. It is glad that they can be released and protect their secret love eventually. So, I don’t think it is a tragedy. If they have to suffer much pain and blame, death is the best way to protect them. Life is so beautiful and wonderful and no one wants to abandon their life. But if the death is the only way to go, they have no choice but to go this way to finish their life.
Aere 49902056 Question3
I think it’s a sound ending for both Lionel and Cocoanut. As we see, The Other Boat ends up with a tragedy; with the prejudice of mainstream, Lionel, a muscular symbol, can’t persuade himself of his fond toward Cocoanut. In final, he strangles Cocoanut. But the afterward kisses give Cocoanut his commitment, and expose his secret love for his victim. After the tender and sweet farewell to Cocoanut, Lionel returns to reality, where his transgression tortures him. Holding the love on Cocoanut, he sinks into sea and everything seems gone forever.
As for Cocoanut, despite of death, he still shows his rebellion against the mainstream with his dead body floating contrary to the prevailing current. As if he feels Lionel’s commitment of the kisses, he bravely leads his way. Besides, he is never lonely when the claps and smiles are raised from the deck. Those crew seems to support and cheer for him owing to his determination touching everyone.
When Mrs. March hears the news, her reaction shows her turndown on his son. Maybe she guards for her faith and reputation, but I think in another aspect, she accepts Lionel’s letter, so she still accept the son. But she wants to protect him, she hopes he can live his life in another world without interference; he can freely chase his secret love there.
Qiana 49902068
My answer is question one.
First, on the boat, black people and lower-class people are forbidden to enter the area where is front part of the boat that is the place for middle-class and upper-class people to held activities there. The English sailor catches Olive because she oversteps to the upper-class area. Therefrom we can see that obviously under the imperialist society, the concept of class and the racial discrimination arose. Moreover, the English sailor as an example of imperialist, when he is impliedly to ask for some tip to Lionel’s mother, he thinks that is taken for granted because he thinks that is a respectful for those Ladies and gentlemen, who cost much more money on their boat tickets. This obvious concept of class and racism are what imperialist’s attitude and mind. Besides, he does not believe that Lionel’s mother has enough money to pay for him because she is only a woman and with several little children. From this reveal he is kind of sexism.
Second for Lionel’s mother, she could not accept that there are some oriental things and thoughts exist in Christianity and she also think that no good thing can come out of the eastern Mediterranean. Thus reveal she is imperialist racism that she has kind of racial prejudice. Meanwhile when she discovered the intimate relationship between her son and Coconut, she never mentioned her son’s name again; it is because she thinks that her son is already transgressed the boundary of herself religious belief, also she thinks that homosexual love is kind of dirty that stain the sanctity of religion. Therefore she is homophobia. Herself belief brings her kind of imperialist racism and kind of homophobia, what she belief was formed by the imperialist country.
To sum up, from two examples above, imperialist racism goes hand in hand with homophobia and sexism.
Question 3:
The story concludes the incident of Lionel killed Cocoanut and the suicide of Lionel with just one paragraph, providing the readers with a tremendous shock of how things turned down. It all seemed like a tragedy because the main characters were dead and the story ended with the disappointment and disapproving tone of Lionel’s mother. For me, if it’s in a tragic way, Lionel’s death can be seen as an escape, a runaway for him to not to face the reality; not to deal with his own betrayal of his body and his mind; not to face the condemn and disappointment of his mother; and not to cope with the value and the public voice of the society then. His death was merely his getaway and was never the solution of all problems. However, in the other way, it is possible that the end was not so tragic. We can see that Lionel kissed Cocoanut tenderly and covered him with a scarf. With gentleness, it seemed like Lionel had this expectation to meet him in the world of death. Maybe it was a relief for both of them because the death world doesn't contain restraint that trapped them. And the word ‘naked’ symbolizes that Lionel was already fearless, open-minded to face the world and himself about his sexual orientation. And he didn't hesitate to face his death because he believed that it was the only redemption for his soul. Death provides them the freedom and power to love.
Amy 410002003
I choose Question NO.3 to answer.
I think it can divide into two parts to explain. First is Lionel and Cocoanut’s relationship. Lionel is a young and strong man with blond hair and blue eyes. And Cocoanut is an Indian, who is attractive to Lionel. Their destiny starts in the deck of the boat; the place was their first meet. Ten years later, they meet again and fell in love with each other; they forgot their identity to love. Although they both died in the end, I think story wants to tell us things discrepant mainstream of the age will be discriminated and then to be a sorrowful end.
Another example is Mrs. March, she symbolizes untainted impression of British, and they usually feel good of themselves and treat other races like they are nothing. Mrs. March, in the story, she says to Cocoanut: You’re a silly idle useless unmanly little boy. And Mrs. March’s prejudice to homosexuality that reflects to his son, “－and she never mentioned his name again.” This fulfills discrimination of sexual transgression, and reveals British society which is unfriendly to them.
By the way, I want to mention Mrs. March is drawn a circle round her by a sailor, an Englishman. I also this is a symbol that expresses if British don’t change, then they will limit their mind development by discrimination, prejudice, and bigotry.
Sorry. I leave a word," I also 'think' this is a symbol that..."
The end of the story seems a tragedy, but I did not think it is a complete tragedy. Cocoanut and Lionel died in the end. Death was the important symbol in the story. It may consider the end of life. It was the process that people need to endure. But death has a different meaning to Cocoanut and Lionel. Being homosexual loves, the relationship between Cocoanut and Lionel are not accepted in the society. And their race and society status are different. Mrs. March asked Lionel keeps his pure bloods. Mrs. March repressed their relationship. In the story, Mrs. March also symbol the main stream in the society. In the end of the story, Cocoanut and Lionel‘s body were put in the water. They could not be a couple in the life. After their death, they finally can release the constraint. It is a new start of their relationship and life. They putted in water, and water not symbols their death. Water can symbol rebirth. Cocoanut and Lionel’s death let them had another chance to have a new life.
49902042 Pansy
Q3
In my interpretation, death is the best ending for the homosexual relationship between Cocoanut and Lionel. How do they break the rules of the society such as racism and homosexual love? They are in different race and class. It was forbidden by the society that black people and white people to be good friends, needless to say, they are in homosexual relationship. Although it seems a tragedy in the ending of this story, it’s the only way to continue their love, to be the eternal love.
In the story, Cocoanut didn’t feel guilty and stressful about this relationship, but Lionel did. He felt great shame on their love and he was afraid that other people will find this truth. Therefore, in my opinion, Lionel loved Cocoanut indeed, but he killed Coconut because of the stress from the society. He committed suicide because that he wanted to escape from those limitations and rules. It’s the way he saved his spirit.
After Coconut died, his corpse moved contrary to the prevailing current and there were some smiles on his face, these things reveals that Cocoanut didn’t follow the trend even after he died. He didn’t feel guilty and he insisted that homosexual love is nothing wrong. Coconut’s smile reveals his pleasure because no one can take them apart. This tragedy is the other kind of happiness.
Ben 49902049 question 3
I think that tragedies are the most powerful thing that can force others to think more. Whenever stories had happy endings, people would not think more about the meaning underneath, because they enjoy the happiness that stories gave them, and believe that world is as good as the stories tell them. Coconut’s death and Lionel’s suicide let people think about why story must end like this. Until nowadays, homosexual are still not being accept by most of the people in society. People treat others cruel by the power they think they had, mostly we call it mainstream. So it makes homosexual weak and difficult to open, because if others know their relationship, they’ll be treated differently and may affect their perceptions. This is a story full of love, it cross the boundary of gender, race and class, telling others that “Love” is something magical and powerful. Coconut’s body float against the current flow was a very strong symbol in the story. Though he had been killed by Lionel, I think it was the love that is the power for him to fight against the mainstream. He’s no longer trapped in this world; their love had already exceeded everything. I think as a imply, Foster was trying to gave us a message that no matter what kind of difficulties they will encounter, even if the power were as strong as the ocean current, that everybody consider it irreversible, the spirit of love will always fight against to it.
3. It seems that the end of the story is sad and a tragedy. In the end of the story, there is murder and suicide and both of Lionel and Cocoanut die. And Lionel’s mother still does not accept Lionel as a homosexuality and never mentions his name. Generally, this kind of ending is thought of as a bad outcome of someone who does not follow the rules of the society. But I think this end of story is not totally a tragedy and there is another way to interpret it. I think that death does not mean the end of love of Lionel and Cocoanut. Contrarily, it’s a way to preserve their love to eternity and a way to break the constraint of the society. Although their bodies die, their will and soul live. This is the rebellion against main stream society. At page 2080, it says that ‘’it moved northwards─contrary to the prevailing current─and there were clappings of hands and some smiles.’’ It shows that still some people accept it and I think that clappings of hands and smiles also indicates that there are people from class to class yearning to change the stale rules and state of society and not only for this kind of issue but also all kinds of.
49804003 Doris
Q3:
Outwardly, the ending seems grief-stricken; nevertheless, it may turn out to be the most finest and suitable way to show Captain March and Cocoanut’s love. Living in a society with racial, class, gender, and sexual transgressions, they have no choice but to conceal their relationship. In the story, Forster unstintingly reveals his doubt – How to demolish the hegemonic boundaries? Obviously, he makes use of supernatural phenomenon, which Cocoanut’s corpse moves northward, to take against the main stream; on the other hand, he also makes a dig at the middle-class England/ the Empire who institute invisible limitations. Due to these torturous limitations, human beings can’t lead free and peaceful lives; they even lose rights to follow their own bents. In other words, it is impossible for two “different” people to be in love with each other under the society full of plenty bans. That’s why Lionel chooses to murder his secret lover Cocoanut and then commit suicide. Although the final result expresses Lionel’s inability to face the outcome of being contrast to the prevailing currents, it won’t change his love to Cocoanut, a brave man who ignores prejudices. In short, it’s the only way to bring happiness and freedom of their souls.
410002019 Linda
Question 3:
The ending was a tragedy, and I think the death of Cocoanut and Captain March was a pity. To me, they do have love in each other and they were attracted to each other. The result of their love was to be murdered and suicide, when the story gets to this point, I can’t help but felt sorry for them. There are two ways of my interpretation and thoughts: we all know that homosexuality was unacceptable at that time, but why don’t they fight against it? Yes, this may seem to be too idealistic, but aren’t we still fighting for homo rights until today? Either you stand up and fight for it or hind yourself for ever. Captain March killed Cocoanut and himself because he was afraid, he was terrified by been discovered that the relationship between Cocoanut and him. If love can surpass all these things, why Captain March still committed suicide? He was still bound by the mainstream, and he cannot release himself from them. Another point is that, their death might have slightly changed people’s opinions towards their relationship. Just like today’s society, not until someone had lost their life can the mainstream take it seriously and directly. Of course, their love can last forever after their death, and they can always be together. But what I see is what their death had contributed or teaches us and to the mainstream back then.
3.In my point of view, the ending of story isn’t tragic at all for me. In that time, the love between Cocoanut and Captain March should be concealed as a secret. They can’t be open their relationship to other people and interact as normal couple in public places because their love can’t be accepted by the mass. The society isn’t exoteric for the appearance of homosexual in that time, so they have to face a lot of dispute and opposed by plenty of people. Thus, I think the ending of story is the most appropriate for them. Although both of them are died in the end, they can comfortably stay with each other and don’t have to care that other people focus on their relationship. Besides, in Lionel’s mind, he is still fear that their relationship is discovered by others. Maybe they will have a quarrel with each other because their attitude toward love is different though they really love each other. But they can keep their pleasured memory in the ending. Hence, I don’t think it’s a tragedy. They don’t die because they are betrayed by one of them. On the contrary, they just die because of the stress of society.
1) Speak of imperialist racism, Mrs. March’s attitude toward Coconut shows that she can be racist. The story shows that Coconut speaks in a different accent and he has darker skin than others. In Mrs. March mind, it is very important to keep the blood ‘clean’. That is, a darker skin means a lower race to them. Racism can be compare with homophobia in the Christian world. For them, homosexual is against their belief. So, to keep their society ‘clean’, homosexual must not exist. Just like how the British society makes their people taught to be racist. They belong to the highest level of race so they have the responsibility to teach others ‘civil’. Homophobia somehow has already taught for years in their religion that even a homosexual can be one of them naturally. We think everyone love whatever the gender or person they love. It is all by nature. Lionel says “….with a girl, naturally…” when he is talking about his father with Coconut. Even thought Lionel has already cross the line of what he was taught, he still has the thought deep down in his mind that can be hard to erase. Because of the education he and everyone have, he will never ended up to face his relationship with Coconut or even talk with anyone.
Helen 49902002
Q2:
The story is about a forbidden love between Lionel and Cocoanut in a conservative society. In fact, they really love each other however their relationship is considered as a scandal on the ship. Lionel is an impressive captain who is afraid of their love will be revealed. In contrast with Lionel, Cocoanut doesn’t care about his status and the class difference he merely cares about his beloved. After Gibraltar, they become so intimate, Lionel temporally forgets his identity and race and he accepts Cocoanut’s love. Unfortunately, after he knows Cocoa knew the door unbolted all the time, he fears someone may see their lovemaking and he thinks he may get fired from the Army. I think this event is a turning point of their relationship and the unbolted door is going to unveil their secret love. Finally, he decides to stop their relationship because of Isabel and his reputation. He is isolated and he can not resist the restrictions of the society so he has to be obedient to people who discriminate homosexual. He has no choice but kills Cocoa because he knows this is the best way to free from his racist mother and prejudiced peers. In the end, Mrs. March feels shameful to her Lionel so she deems not to have this son. In this story, I sympathize with them because racism and the conservative break their love and take away their life and I start to wonder how many people are victims of other people’s prejudice and racism.
49802032 Karen 陳蓁
Lionel’s conflicting attitude toward his relationship between Cocoanut is the proof that he is under great pressure because of the social conventions. He is a conservative an stiff gentleman. He who serves as a perfect idle has to be alert with others’ attention all the time. He shows no discrimination when he stays along with Cocoanut. However, when he is in a public place or talking to his mother, he calls Cocoanut “touch of the tar brush”, “dagoes”, or “the wog” just like others do. Although he hates himself to do so, in order to follow the trend, he has to degrades Cocoanut. When he considers about the future of himself and Cocoanut, he cannot help but think that it will be a catastrophe and he has to end this. In the same time, he indulges himself in this dangerous relationship. On the contrary, Cocoanut is an active, flexible, feminine and cunning figure, who shows his emotion directly and overwhelming. In the story, he seems to be more optimistic and wild than Lionel. He does not worry others may find out their unseemly relationship and cherish the time with Lionel. Their quarrel becomes a blasting fuse of the end of their lives. It is that Lionel cannot take the worry and his psycho burden anymore. Eventually, they are devoured by his impulsion and violent love. If it was without the discrimination and all kinds of restraints from the society, their love would not become a tragedy.
Through out the story, we can tell there's love between Lionel and Cocoanut. For Forster had also illustrated that 'Lionel sighed, with a happiness he couldn't understand. ..., he did not even know that he was falling in love.' Also, Cocoanut did want Lionel since first meeting him. All these descriptions are saying they were in love and felt good about having each other.
In my opinion, if the relationship goes on like both Lionel and Cocoanut were not dead, then this affair would also be ended soon in unpleasant ways. Either Lionel would abandon Cocoanut on the boat, or when they arrived at India due to Lionel’s soldiering duties, his obligations as eldest son, the social constraint and so on…. . That would be what I call real tragedy.
The ending keeps reminding me a Chinese folktale ‘The Butterfly Lovers.’ In ‘The Butterfly Lovers’, the lovers finally died and became butterflies. The story ended as the two butterflies flying away together. So the death is somehow lifted to another level. As I read through the ending of ‘The Other Boat,’ I wish the illustration could be like ‘The Butterfly Lovers;’ Lionel and Cocoanut did die, but they were still being together as other formations.
Question 1:
First, we can tell that Mrs. March is a racist. From what Mrs. March do and say to Coconut, we can know that she hate people who are having non-European ancestry. That is people who do not have white skin. There are so many insulting words which are spoken to Coconut. She could not admit that Christianity have ever been “oriental.” She also thought that there is no good things come out of the Levant, and the apostles never had a touch of the tar-brush. And I think the English sailor is a racist, too. He asked Mrs. March to pay for her footing and he took it for granted. It is true that imperialist racism goes hand in hand with homophobia and sexism. Under his mother’s education, Lionel is racist because in the letter to his mother, he said something disparaging of Coconut. His Christianity made he have a sense of homophobia although he just crossed the line with Coconut. When Lionel talked about his father’s past and say that his father went with a native, Coconut asked “, With a girl or with a boy?” Lionel replied “, I mean to say, with a girl, naturally.” Lionel cared about Coconut’s race and status when he had a conversation with Colonel Arbuthnot on the deck. In addition, Mrs. March is a women with homophobia because in the end of the story, she received Lionel’s letter but she never mentioned his name again.
Irene 49902034
Question 1
Before thinking about the connection with imperialist racism, homophobia and sexism, I search the detailed definition of imperialist. I understand that imperialist racism is an “unequal human relationship, based on ideas of superiority and practices of dominance, and involving the extension of authority and control of one state or people over another."
In the story, Mrs. March was asked to pay for her footing because she entered in “men’s quarters” by an English sailor. And she replied ”The money shall be sent to you.” It shows that she obey this rule even though the rule doesn’t make sense at all. In my point of view, this situation obviously represents unequal human relationship.
The state between men and women is different. Men were always superior than women at that time. I think it is one of examples illustrate that imperialist racism goes hand in hand with sexism.
When Lionel told Cocoanut the story about his father, Cocoanut asked “for whom did the Major desert the Master?” “With a girl or with a boy?” Lionel answered ”A boy? Good God! Well, I mean to say, with a girl, naturally…” From this dialogue, I can aware that Lionel as a homosexual who loves Cocoanut but he still can’t dismantle the boundaries of hegemonic heterosexuality. Lionel somehow represents people with homophobia that regard heterosexual love is “natural”. In other words, heterosexual love stand in a state of dominance. On the contrary, homosexual love is inferior and unnatural. In conclusion, I think it shows the connection between imperialist racism and homophobia.
Wesleigh Liao 69804001
Q3:
"The Other Boat" tells of a homosexual liaison between an English officer, Captain March and his manipulative Indian lover, Cocoanut who have different cultures and ends with the death of both when Captain March kills Cocoanut and then jumps into the sea.
Literature is the grand repository of our dreams and desires and fears, of our longing for meaning and justice and redemption. “The Other Boat” ends as a tragedy that both Captain March and Cocoanut are dead in the sea. A sea is a place where water comes from. The image of water plays such a distinguished and recurrent role as a metaphor in literature that is given the essential place of water in life itself. Water is mutable, sublime and destructive, and throughout literature water serves as a representation not only of death but also of birth. Also water holds the promise both of freedom and of enslavement. Therefore; the story seems to ends sadly with Captain March feels shame to accept his homosexual love with Cocoanut for it’s against the mainstream value or we may interpret the ending in another point of view that Captain Mach and Cocoanut have, in the end, faced their true feelings, gained their freedom and rebirth from the water.
I am going to answer question three.
To the common people, everyone is almost afraid of death. We would like to prolong our life-span, which is why we do our best to find the new source, new invention for extending our life; because we are so fearful of the knocking sound of Death’s. For this cause and effect, once we meet someone’s death we will stir the sense of pitying; when we heard someone committing suicide we will feel sorry and want to ask them: “Why do you want to get over your life? Don’t you think this is a harmful act to you, your family and your friends? ” I think those questions which come from the empathy: we think it is a wrong way.
Compare to On the Other Boat, the relationship between Coconut and Lionel, they are loved but they have to love each other secretly. Their love is hiding in the dark ocean, sealing in the confidential box. Love force to be constrained by the pressure of the society, religion and their own. The untold relation compels them to face the death, so Lionel kills Coconut, and then he also dives into the sea. When Coconut’s flesh flows in the ocean, he moves to the contrary side from the prevailing current; it is also a metaphor to speak: even his flesh dies, but his soul does not. And the death also brings the new born to both of them; they help themselves to choose their fate, not be chosen by Gods.
Last I would like to talk which is the location which they finish their life, the ocean. In the beginning, they meet each other in the youth voyage, and they fall in love in their adult voyage. Coconut said” we shan’t be meeting again after disembarkation.” before Lionel kills him. Once they leave the sea, they can’t hold their love together; the ocean seems a containing place including taboos. So they also choose to give their life in the ocean, and the ocean will give them a new born to be what they want to be. They have no rules or taboos anymore; they become one part of the sea.
49902046 Vicky
The end of their sweet time is due to the unlocked door. Lion is still afraid that others know the relationship between Cocoanut and him. Thus, it can be seen that he’s not so recognize this thing that he doesn’t want its exposure. It’s easy to think that why Lion uses this kind of way to face the scandal according to his mother’s final response. Everyone can only need family’s support, even though the whole world doesn’t support him. And although he has submitted to the reality by committing suicide, his body still shows his discontent with backflow after he died. I think that the setting is refined.
Tragedy is almost more classical than comedy. I think that the ending is great to impress people, but it’s still possible to have another ending. Every enormous social change needs drastic revolutions. In this version, Lion finally faces up to the sensibility to Cocoanut. And they end up striving for the rights of homosexual people and bisexual people for their remaining lives. His mother may not be tolerant to him. For him, it’s so sorrowful, but he can bring benefits to our posterity. I think it’s worth.
49902016 Ryan
Question 2
Was Lionel truly in love with Cocoanut? Yes, but (not “and”) no, since System 2 is the one truly in control (explained later). As with most modernist literary works, the exploration of the conscious and unconscious can be seen within “The Other Boat”, albeit more subtle since the readers were not shown Lionel March’s transition to accept Cocoanut but how the captain transitions backs to a homophobic, possibly power grubbing, man. There are two things to consider to better understand the depth of understanding E.M. Forster had for the human mind. “System 1 operates automatically and quickly, with little to no effort and no sense of voluntary control. System 2 allocates attention to the effortful mental activities that demand it… System 2 is often associated with the subjective experience of agency, choice, and concentration.” (Kahneman, pp.20-21) Also noted was that System 2 is lazy, and endorses any intuitive answer System 1 provides that seems to be valid. (Kahneman, pp.44-46) As mentioned before, it is important to keep in mind that System 2 is the ultimate decision maker. Secondly, in Forster’s time, it was considered by society at large better to not be homosexual, be homophobic and for men to pursue fervently a high rank in whatever they endeavor in. Therefore, what happened was that Lionel felt a strong passion for Cocoanut (System 1), which made Lionel forget what it was that he originally wanted (System 2). With the incident of the unbolted door, Lionel’s System 2 was jumpstarted to action, and the reevaluation of the situation while he was on the deck smoking finally brought him back to senses (of discriminating against homosexuals and furthering his position in the army.) In the end, the story shows that humans are controlled by the social norm in how we act and react to people or things.
410002037 Chou
I would like to take the third one question. In the ending, both Lionel and Cocoanut were died. On the surface, it seemed like a tragedy. However, I consider that they were died for their own freedom. The freedom of pursue their transgressive love. In Lionel’s life times, his mother made a big influence on him. His mom, this figure, represented the social expectation, imperialist racism and patriarchal follower. She restricted Lionel’s possibilities and let him to suit in his own sex even forced him to obey the current stream. Until he met Cocoanut, he started to realize the truth of himself. Quite the end of the story, the previous of him and the real of him conflicted to each other. Finally, he chose to die to against the mainstream. That was the way to keep away from those disgusting limits and let him to be as happy as the time when he been with Cocoanut. Looking on Cocoanut’s death, it was somehow the happiness for him to be killed by his lover instead of killing by the dark society. His body dropped to the sea and flowed against the ocean current. It indicated that he did not want to follow the current stream of heterosexuality.
4100002025 Sunny
(3)In the end of the story, although it seems to be a tragedy that both men die, it is also a release of their souls. If your true self cannot be accepted by the society and that you cannot comfortably be yourself, why not find an exit and leave the choking world? It might be better to die than live if the harsh situation is steady and cannot easily be changed. Lionel who is regarded as a masculine man has power and bright future. But that is not what he likes. He loves man and he is anxious about the future which is waiting for him. He struggles in his heart a lot because he cannot let others know about his secret and he cannot decrease his desire toward his lover, either. He sometimes tries to go back to where he should be but his heart keeps on leading him to his true feeling. Coconut who is totally in love with Lionel doesn’t care about others thoughts. He is like a little girl who is having her first love. He cares about the romantic things and ignores the reality. I think that is why Lionel kills him without a word. He cannot explain to Coconut why they have to die because Coconut will never understand. They both die but their love can last in another world happily and without obstacles. They do not have to follow the mainstream anymore.
410002052 Cindy
Q1
First, the English sailor ask Mrs. March to pay for her footing in a "men's" quarters. It can show the imperialist racism goes hand in hand with sexism. Although Mrs. March kind of is not willing to pay for the stupid custom, she still said yes. When she said that she cannot pay for the money EXAMPLEimmediately, but it will be sent to him, the sailor did not believe her. We can see the inferior position of women under the imperial value. Women like a possession of men. Women had a big restriction, and could not break the gender boundary.
Also, when Mrs. March faced Cocoanut, she became an woman with strong imperialist racism. She didn't like him maybe because her education tell her the mainstream ideas that the western people is better than him. She thought Cocoanut was a unmanly boy, so she always taught her children to behave as English men. Therefore, when Lionel talked about his father's scandal, and Cocoanut asked ''With a girl or a boy?" he said ''A boy? Well, I mean to say , with a girl, naturally." Lionel was taught by his mother who under the imperial racism, and he needed to become an traditional English man. Under his mother's education, he assimilate with these mainstream ideas which the homosexuality did not admit. Moreover, Lionel and Cocoanut had a quarrel about the unbolted door. Lionel didn't want the other one knew their relationship. It also show the imperialist racism goes with homophobia.
410002052 Cindy
Q1
First, the English sailor ask Mrs. March to pay for her footing in a "men's" quarters. It can show the imperialist racism goes hand in hand with sexism. Although Mrs. March kind of is not willing to pay for the stupid custom, she still said yes. When she said that she cannot pay for the money immediately, but it will be sent to him, the sailor did not believe her. We can see the inferior position of women under the imperial value. Women like a possession of men. Women had a big restriction, and could not break the gender boundary.
Also, when Mrs. March faced Cocoanut, she became an woman with strong imperialist racism. She didn't like him maybe because her education tell her the mainstream ideas that the western people is better than him. She thought Cocoanut was a unmanly boy, so she always taught her children to behave as English men. Therefore, when Lionel talked about his father's scandal, and Cocoanut asked ''With a girl or a boy?" he said ''A boy? Well, I mean to say , with a girl, naturally." Lionel was taught by his mother who under the imperial racism, and he needed to become an traditional English man. Under his mother's education, he assimilate with these mainstream ideas which the homosexuality did not admit. Moreover, Lionel and Cocoanut had a quarrel about the unbolted door. Lionel didn't want the other one knew their relationship. It also show the imperialist racism goes with homophobia.
I would like to answer question two.
The only part in the story I found illustrates sexism is on page 2062 when the Mater went into the men's quarter's and was told to pay up. Another part similar to this is on page 2077 when Lionel mentions in passing that the sleeping quarters are separated by sex-"...there lay Colonel Arbuthnot...Mrs. Arbuthnot lay parted from her lord in the ladies' section...". Here Lionel uses the word "lord" to describe the relationship between them. Lord, not husband. This is an example of sexism that men are in the higher position.
Examples of homophobia are found easier and more in numbers. Throughout the story, Lionel keeps saying that what he and Cocoanut are doing is unacceptable-"we're not supposed to do this sort of thing...if we got caught there'd be hell to pay..." (p.2065) and a sin -"a voice condemning him for sin"(p. 2078). This is a concept influenced by the imperialism and Christian teachings. Homosexuals are not allowed to exist. Also, on page 2066 Lionel showed disgust when Cocoanut made a move on him. When Cocoanut asked him if his father ran off with a boy or girl, Lionel was surprised that Cocoanut would mention a boy. He was taught that a boy and a girl together is the "norm", and he would never have thought about the possibilities of a man with another man.
“The Other Boat” contains many of Forster’s personal humanistic moral perspectives on many issues including class conflict, colonization, racism, and adultery. "The Other Boat" explores with profound insight the psychological effects of racism and homophobia. Forster wrote so passionately and violently about Lionel and Cocoanut’s doomed homosexual relationship. Lionel's search for wholeness is complicated by his confused identity and made especially difficult by the conflict between his secret love for Cocoa and his self-definition as a member of a racist society. The story's violent conclusion, in which Lionel murders Cocoa and then commits suicide, expresses the young officer's inability to face either a life led contrary to prevailing currents or one without tribal identity. Unlike Cocoa, he lacks the heroism to achieve wholeness. The harshest judgment came from the person of Mrs March who, after she receives the letter that allows her to divine the nature of her son’s death, “never mentioned his [Lionel’s] name again". This show a strong way in which imperialist racism goes hand in hand with homophobia and sexism. This also showed the hatred in Mrs March heart. In my opinion, this story is a tragedy. In their world, no one understand them.
Generally speaking, no matter in the film or literature it always ends up in tragedy like killing others, committing suicide, rational or separating by parents. In my opinion, I think it will make people relate homosexual to commit crime, so I prefer this story ends up in a happy ending. In this story, Cocoanut is a very smart person that can handle lots of things and also understand the stars. If I was E.M. Forster, I would like to make Cocoanut and Lionel run a company which help people deal with some problems just like the tour agent and also gives people some advices like fortuneteller. However, as the general parents, Lionel's mom disagrees their relationship. Lionel's mom disagrees their relationship at first, as the time went by, Lionel's mom saw their effort and gradually release the concern to them. According to above, I think the optimistic ending can lead people to think an optimistic way and then gradually influence other's thought to homosexual.
410002044 Leo
I want to answer the question3. I think that the ending of the other boat is the best ending for the kind of story in the age. The love between Lionel and Cocoanut was doomed to failure in the conservative time. Even in the 21centries, homosexual are still spurned by some “moralists”. I think that Lionel and Cocoanut used their death to protest the prejudice world and the author’s challenge as well. The ending also reminds me of a book I read before. It called Paradise Lost, but it isn’t written by Milton. It is written by Japanese---Junichi Watanabe. The book is talking about a unacceptable love between two married people--- Kuko and Rinko like the love between Lionel and Cocoanut. They loved each other but their relationship couldn’t expose under the sun. Therefore, they can only date in the hotels or other cities secretly. The scenes are always in the bed, and they always have a chat after their sexual climax. They talk about their unacceptable love and the shortage life of human beings. And In the end, they want to love each other forever, so they commit suicide in the moment which they both achieve the sexual climax by taking poison. In conclusion, I think the ending of Paradise Lost is similar to the ending of the other boat and I think the ending about the two stories are not sorrow. On the contrary, they achieve the immortal.
49902032 Hazel
At the beginning I was sad, because Cocoanut and Lionel do not have a good end. They both died and no longer can live with each other. But after thinking about what’s really going on with Lionel’s decision to kill Cocoanut and himself, then I realize there is something we cannot describe in an old way. Lionel killed Cocoanut could be based on the love that beyond them. And this is just the different kind of sexual intercourse on the contrary to the majority. Or maybe Lionel killed Cocoanut on purpose, because he confronts lots of pressure from both of the society and his mother, he had no courage to show that he is homosexual, not even to tell the guy he love is a black. The choice Lionel made could be interpreted differently, killed Cocoanut and then drowned himself could be a relief to both of them, and by this they could show others about their determination to be with each other forever. Lionel’s corpse did not follow the same flow with the boat, and it means that Lionel did not follow the main stream. Although Lionel was dead, his resolution to fight against the whole society could be seen. At the end of this story it pushes the boundary, and allows the readers to have an open-ended interpretation.
410002016 Kenny
I would like to answer the third question.
Although the ending of the story is a tragedy, I think it’s still a good ending. In the end, Lionel still could not face the reality that he was in love with Cocoanut. He was restrained by the society that still thinks homosexual was unnatural and sick. Also he was always under the pressure from his mother’s highly expectation to Lionel. His mother symbolized the conservative power. Mrs. March’s thought always kept remind him also he was haunted by her. The death of both Lionel and Cocoanut in the end, I think it is a proper ending. To Cocoanut, it was a very lucky thing that died in his lover’s hand. If his identity of homosexual is discovered by other people, he might be tortured and discriminated by them. And to Lionel, death was the way he could get rid of this society also his mother’s control. His corpse floated against the prevailing current means he didn’t want to follow the idea of mainstream. Death or tragedy sometimes is more attractive than a happy ending. It can stimulate readers to think about the issue that author wants to reveal.
410002008
From my perspective, the story is not completely a tragedy. Homophobia is not accepted at that time and there is no doubt that this phenomenon is oppression to people who are homosexual. Actually, I like the ending of the story because I think both of Lionel and Cocoanut get the freedom of their soul eventually. They don’t have to suffer from the mainstream oppression anymore.
When Lionel talks about his father abandon them and run away with his mistress, Cocoanut asks a question, “With a girl or with a boy.” From the question Cocoanut asks, it is obvious that he is not bounded by the traditional thoughts of gender and he has no sexual discrimination. Unfortunately, this is unacceptable for the society at that time.
As for Lionel, he suicides at the end of the story, which I think it is the best choice for him. He is struggling between the mainstream thoughts and the inner voice of his heart. He still keeps the idea that homosexuality is abnormal, against nature, but at the same time, he realizes that he is a homosexual. From the ending of the story, the author says that Lionel’s body drifted the opposite direction to the current. This represents that Lionel is different from the mainstream thoughts. After Lionel’s death, his mother has never mentioned his name again which indicates that she would rather forget everything about Lionel than admit Lionel is a homosexual. For this reason, I think it is best for Lionel to die because he will never be accepted by his mother in the rest of his life.
3.In my opinion, the ending of the story is great. The death solved Cocoanut and Lionel’s problem. Their death let them free from people’s scolds and criticism on their homosexual behavior. Their death was an exit to get away from the mainstream of the society in that time. They used their death to tell people their love and make a complaint against the society in that time. Their death forced the society to face homosexual issues and deal with them. Their death told people that mainstream was not always right. Furthermore, Cocoanut’s body moved contrary to the prevailing current. This situation showed that he was against the mainstream of the society in that time. If the ending of the story was that Lionel and Cocoanut got married and lived a happy life, I thought the other boat would be banned. Forster wrote this ending of the story to show rules and laws can kill people.
3.
I think it can be a sad ending and a happy ending at the same time depends on how the readers interpret. It can be a sad ending because handsome Captain March dies out of my surprise. And I want to know more about Lionel and Cocoanut, and know about how Cocoanut might do to keep Lionel’s heart latter. Moreover, I also think that Lionel has been under the pressure that he does not want to admit he is actually a bisexual. He has to pretend “normal” when he is getting alone with his colleagues. Only when he is with Cocoanut, he can show his other side. It might be tired and stressful. On the other hand, it can be a happy ending that Lionel finally let himself free. He is finally free from the society by diving into the sea after he kills Cocoanut accidentally. Here I think Lionel really loves Cocoanut in a way that he chooses commit suicide for the frustrated love of Cocoanut and himself. It is really dramatic and touching. The love is beyond the sex. As a result, I think after the death, their souls or spirits can finally be together forever without caring other people’s judgments.
69902623 李姵瑩
Sorry I didn't notice the message on FB, so I missed the deadline of HW.:(
Q1.
The other boat shows the long-standing legacy of Victorian vigilance over sexual normalization, namely that of middle-class is heterosexuality. In the story, Lionel follows his father's step as repeating a form of sexual liberty that has fallen into disfavor. Being a Captain of British army, however Lionel cannot tell his desire to Cocoanut till the boat approaches to Suez, meaning the moral inhibitions of British Empire are gradually melted away and the fluid sea water beneath the boat presents the arising lusts and love. While Lionel expresses his homosexuality, he only does it secretly below deck in a locked cabin, but when he found out the door is unlocked, he is astonished and realizes that he has transgressed the rules of race and sexism. Consequently, within the internalization of homophobia, he reformed masculinity that holds his sexual restraint and cleanness. His sexual awakening is a symbolic assertion in racial, cultural and ideological terms of his individuality over his own tribal belief system. In the end of the story, Lionel murders Cocoanut for this desperate relationship, and commits suicide by jumping into the sea. The mother is ashamed for having such son who breaks the morality of the empire; however, the body still floating "contrary to the prevailing currernt" because he does not want to submit to the main stream imperialist culture even when he died.
410002012 Phillip Ting-Yu Huang
3.
Superficially, the ending of the story is a tragedy. Captain March, who killed his lover Cocoanut and Commit suicide in the end. However, to trace back to their life, both of them are suffering, they are such a different person when their lives begin, their race, color, and their position are destined to be in an tragedy contrast. Unfortunately, they fall in love with each other, which suffused them in an ecstasy of joy however tortured them in the feeling of ashes, shame simultaneously.
To me, Captain March’s destiny is poorer than Cocoanut, his identity is in danger, his family and the environment surrounded him limit he from being himself, he resist the thought of loving Cocoanut and being a homosexual, which is quite a sad sorrow.
“It moved northwards contrary to the prevailing current-and there were clapping of hands and some smiles.” In the end of the story, both of them die, however it can be regarded as the salvation to their soul as well. They don’t have to suffer anymore, instead, the felling of shame vanished; they can be honest to their desire, they can be unrestrained; they can free their identity. That’s what makes them smile; finally there is no more torture and suffering, instead, hope coms, the refresh of felling, the real identity release them to create a new soul. They no longer have to worry about the race and the problems of being a homosexual; they can make love freely, gaily, crazily without caring about the unbolted door.
Post a Comment