Regunathan, Anup

Period 3
November 22, 2010
Obsession and Ruin

One of the expectations placed upon a person by his society is that he must

grow in maturity as well as age. As he ages, he is instilled with morals and values

that he must follow in order to be accepted by society. During Virginia Woolf’s

time, such morals and values held high priority and, as a result, are clearly

reflected in her writings. In her story about two politicians named John and

Charles, the lack of maturity is highly criticized. John, a parliament member with a

blooming career, gradually loses his respect among his peers as he becomes

engrossed in curiously shaped pieces of junk. However, his companion, Charles,

does not and stays focused on his career. By contrasting the two characters and

showing that John has lost his pathway in life as well as his sanity in her short

story “Solid Objects”, Virginia Woolf supports Charles, the one she believes to be

following the correct path in life.

Woolf’s criticism of John first appears at the beginning of the story as he

and Charles fling themselves down upon the sand after a heated debate on politics.

Charles stands and absentmindedly skips rocks across the water while John buries

his hand in the cool sand of the beach. While this may seem an innocent action on

John’s part, the effect it has on him is highly pejorative: “…his eyes lost their
intensity, or rather he background of thought and experience which gives an

inscrutable depth to the eyes of grown people…” (Woolf, 1). Here John’s eyes are

stated to have “lost their intensity” which implies that the passion that had been

present within himself has largely faded away. Woolf also states that the

“background of thought and experience” is lost from his eyes. By saying that, she

indicates that the maturity that he has built up over his lifetime has been lost. This

vicious criticism, masked beneath mild words, enhances Charles’ position by

comparing him with that of his companion, who is observed in a critical viewpoint.

Next to John, Charles seems to retain the correct maturity of his age that is

expected from people of his stature.

Similarly, John also seems to employ methods of regression during his time

on the beach. As he handles the emerald colored object, John begins to wonder

from where such an object may have originated. Although it is normal to ponder

such a thing, the outlandish methods that he dreams are not: “Perhaps after all it

was really a gem; something worn by a dark Princess trailing her fingers in the

water as she sat in the stern of the boat and listened to the slaves singing as they

rowed her across the Bay” (Woolf, 1). Rather than imagining plausible reasons for

why such an object may have ended up in his hands, he regresses to a childish

method of thinking. The way he believes that the object may have come from a

“dark Princess” reveals that the maturity of the adult is present no more within
him. This regression provides John with a way to escape the stressful world of

politics that controls him and, therefore, he uses his chance to do so.

On the other hand, Woolf shows Charles to be a much more down to earth

kind of person who refuses to take part in such foolishness when he dismisses the

stone as an ordinary and unexciting object later on in the passage. This contrast

between the characters once more enhances the large gap in the maturity level of

both. By doing so, Woolf yet again emphasizes her support for Charles and the

lack thereof for John.

As the story progresses, it is shown that John’s political career is also

destroyed by his obsession with the stones. After finding his first stone upon the

beach, John begins to search wildly for another such stone. In doing so, he neglects

all his political duties and is led to near ruin: “He neglected his duties, perhaps, or

discharged them absent-mindedly, or his constituents when they visited him were

unfavorably impressed by the appearance of his mantelpiece” (Woolf, 3). John is

described as “absent-mindedly” dismissing or neglecting his assigned duties. The

word “absent-mindedly” has a negative connotation to it, thus expressing Woolf’s

disapproval of John’s character. She also states that he “neglected his duties”,

which further emphasizes her displeasure with John’s actions. Instead of

attempting to justify them, Woolf says that he “neglected” them; therefore, Woolf

strongly disapproves of John’s actions by implying that he has become too

obsessed with the stones. In this way, John’s position is further demoted while his

friend’s is kept at the same level.

Woolf also addresses Charles directly. Although not often mentioned, Woolf

chooses precise positions to place Charles that indicate that he is in her favor. After

John had gone deep into his obsession with the peculiar stones, he is not elected to

Parliament. Here, Woolf’s description of Charles’ reaction emphasizes her

approval for him:

At any rate he was not elected to represent them in Parliament, and his
friend Charles, taking it much to heart and hurrying to condole with him,
found him so little cast down by the disaster that he could only suppose
that it was too serious a matter for him to realize all at once. (Woolf, 3)

Being a good friend, Charles goes to console John because he thinks that John is

devastated. By this, Woolf reveals her endorsement for Charles by implying that he

is a compassionate man who attempts to comfort those who are in trouble.

However, in this line, Woolf also stresses her condemnation for John by saying

that he does not take it seriously. She, along with Charles, believes that his failure

to be elected to Parliament is a “disaster”, but John does not care and is once more

engrossed with the stones. “Disaster”, similar to the word “tragedy”, implies that

something bad has happened to a person held in high regard by the writer. In this

case, John’s failure to acknowledge this incident as a disaster diminishes him even

more in Woolf’s opinion while Charles’ ability to sense the seriousness of the

situation increases her opinion of him. At this stage, John has nearly lost all
sensitivity and has strayed far from his original path in life while his friend has

stuck vigorously to his own.

Along with losing his job, John is also shown to have become a shadow of

his former self. With his mania for collecting the stones, he neglects all other

duties and isolates himself from society. After losing his job, John finds a black

stone in a park. Although the stone’s appearance is not attractive, he discovers an

alluring aspect within it and takes it home. The stone’s description upon the

mantel-piece is similar to the effect that it, along with the other stones, has upon

John’s sanity: “It weighed his pocket down; it weighed the mantel-piece down; it

radiated cold” (Woolf, 3). The stone “weighs” John down. It is a burden to him and

therefore it prevents him from advancing in life and improving in status. The stone

also “radiated cold” which shows that it was not an object that most people would

have upon the mantelpiece of their home. However, by placing it upon his

mantelpiece, John accepts its coldness and becomes like it.

On the other hand, Charles is very much in control of his own sanity.

Although it is not mentioned that he rises in politics, his decline is not mentioned

either. Therefore, the reader may infer that he has at least maintained a steady

career. When he visits John in his home for the last time, Charles sees through the

junk that John has accumulated and views the room as it is: “he looked round to

find some relief for his horrible depression, but the disorderly appearance of the
room depressed him still further. What was that stick, and the old carpet bag…”

(Woolf, 4). John’s room is “disorderly” and inspires “depression” from its visitors.

These critical words reflect John’s emotions and reveal that he has finally lost all

sanity. Rather than staying with such a man and losing his own, Charles wisely

flees the room. This separation of the two characters is the final indication that

Woolf has no support for John and much of it for Charles, who is allowed to leave

the “depression”. In this way, the final comparison of the two characters reveals

Woolf’s opinions of each character and separates the two men completely.

Certain expectations placed upon a person by his society must be followed

in order for him to live peacefully. John’s failure to adhere to those placed upon

him leads him to a life of depression while Charles, his counterpart and friend,

maintains his life from the beginning. Virginia Woolf’s description of both

characters in her short story “Solid Objects” clearly portrays her differing opinions

of both men and conveys her ardent support for Charles. Although not often

mentioned, Charles’ appearances are perfectly placed to provide a stark contrast to

his friend John. John’s plight in this short story reveals that one should never delve

too deeply into any action. Too much indulgence may lead to an obsession and an

ending similar to that of John’s.