English Assingment 11/10

By Michael Juul Hagerup

Social security or social insecurity, inequality and a system that does not function properly are some of the subjects a reader finds himself confronted with after reading Doris Lessing s short story D.H.S.S. . Doris Lessing is a dominant figure in English literature and through her stories she scrutinizes our immoral civilization whilst she depicts powerful and truthful personalities like no other. This analysis deals with D.H.S.S. , a short story from 1991.

The setting is a conservative Britain in the 1980 s and the Department of Health and Social Security is on strike. The story evolves in the centre of London (we know that it is an area near Kentish Town by p. 70 l. 29) and it takes place over a very short period of time: It could be somewhere in between an hour and two hours. The story starts in medias res with the sentence: The young woman on the pavement s edge was facing in, not out to the street, and she moved about there indecisively, but with a stubborn look (p. 1 l. 1). The cloudy situation is quickly revealed in the next lines and sentences: The woman wandering indecisively is in big trouble now that the health care that usually provides her money is on strike. She is forced to beg for money to provide for her children. We can conclude through the lady s behaviour and on the first line of the story that she is not at all comfortable with her humiliating situation. She is facing in and not out to the street and it is very hard for her to ask people to give her money. The way she tries to hide her face and tries to be anonymous is of course an indication of the fact that she feels embarrassed and humiliated. The later conversation between her and the second main character also shows signs of a proud woman that wants to take care of herself all by herself. She is a woman full of so much hate and remorse that she is actually not joking when talking about killing people from the D.H.S.S. She is angry because of the non-functional system that has made her lose her job and made her unable to feed her kids. The second character seems to be the narrator at some points of the story. Sometimes we are given insight in his thoughts as for example in p. 69 l. 18-22: While she was gone

he allowed his face to show what he was feeling: anger, but it was different from hers, and he did not seem able to believe what he was remembering, what he was thinking. Pity, but it was a reminiscent pity, and he was full of frustration . But mostly thorough the story it does seems as if the story is instead being narrated from an external point of view by an implicit narrator: His quick glance back showed he was afraid she would be off. (p. 66 l. 8). What confuses us in defining the narrator is the fact that he is subjectively describing the scenery and the situations of the story. He is an observer just like the reader, which blurs his credibility we do not actually know whether the information he gives us is valid or not. The fact that the begging woman looks stubborn is given from his point of view and his conclusion on her looks. We don t actually know if it really is stubbornness that affects the woman s face. The narrator of the story is therefor a 3rd person implicit narrator. The second character of the story is a former D.H.S.S. worker. He wanted to help people but felt depressed because of the distance that was established between the workers and the people they ought to help. The cuts in the social spending caused a bad atmosphere and aggravated the social workers possibilities to help other people. This might be the reason for his insist on helping the poor woman: he might want to compensate past situations where he felt that he could have done more. He wants to help people like he did 15 years ago and not in the disappointing, inadequate way he did after the cuts. He also wants to explain the circumstances of the strikes that also went on back at the time when he worked there and he wants to justify himself from her accusations on the D.H.S.S. This is all of no importance to the lady because it does not help her situation. The man does not understand that the woman is not angry with him because of his involvement in the D.H.S.S., which he tries to achieve her forgiveness for. She is angry with him because of his charity towards her charity that she did not even ask for and charity that seems provoking because of his confident attitude. But the man is not confident. He needs her appreciation and he is clearly trying very hard to achieve it, giving her sandwiches, paying for her groceries and just persistently keeps on occupying her. It is as if he does not understand her emotions: It must feel incredibly humiliating and uncomfortable to be stared at while eating sandwiches one just bought for you and

being told to stock up in the supermarket for money that is not yours. He really just ends up pushing her away and he keeps on expecting some kind reaction from her (a gentle look, a smile, a wave at the end of the story) and has clearly not been able to read the signs that her body language and her attitude gives him. It is quite strange keeping in mind that he has worked as a social worker for 15 years. He should be able to read such behaviour with better precision after so many years in that industry. The story is a criticism of Britain s ultra-liberal society in the 1980 s. It speaks of a system that does not work and a system where the wrong are claimed guilty. The girl in the story blames D.H.S.S. for her condition because of their strike whilst she should really be blaming the government for not preventing an of it from happening. The people working at D.H.S.S. seem selfish and are the ones accused. The story raises the important question of whether or not you should provide charity for people in need of it and which is the right or proper way to help them. The girl in the story does not ask for the man s charity and just wants to be left to herself. She seems more of a liberalist than the man does. Ultimately, D.H.S.S. is a bitterly ironic commentary on how the social services create resentment and dependence in those they are supposed to serve.