bring up the masses to depend entirely on spending money, and then the money gives out

longxianchen

Senior Member
chinese
Hi,
Here are some words from the novel Lady Chatterley's Lover(page 443, chapter 19) by DH Lawrence (planetebook,here):
(background: Mellors got a job on a farm.He wrote to Connie, saying that the pits were working badly, and that he objected to nationalization.…)

Anyhow, nobody knows what should be done in spite of all the talk, the young ones get mad because they’ve no money to spend. Their whole life depends on spending money, and now they’ve got none to spend. That’s our civilization and our education: bring up the masses to depend entirely on spending money, and then the money gives out.

I feel the blue sentence to be: teach(=bring up) the people(=masses) to depend entirely on spending money, and then the money runs out(=gives out).
But I don't know why Mellor not just says teach the people to depend entirely on to spend money. In other words, I feel to depend entirely on is unnecessary and makes the sentence harder to understand.

Could you please give me some help?
Thank you in advance
 
  • Keith Bradford

    Senior Member
    English (Midlands UK)
    It is possible to spend money without depending entirely on it. Mellors is talking about shopaholics, people whose enjoyment, and whose idea of their own worth, depends on spending.

    "Getting and spending, we lay waste our powers"
    (The World Is Too Much with Us, Wordsworth)
     
    Last edited:

    longxianchen

    Senior Member
    chinese
    It makes sense. Thanks. That is to say, the civilization and education taught the public to base the value of their life on spending money.

    But does the bring up mean teach/educate please?
    "Getting and spending, we lay waste our powers"
    (The World Is Too Much with Us, Wordsworth)
    I spent a very long time reading the poem, and found that it holds the similar opinion about the society to the novel I'm translating.
     
    Last edited:
    No, "bring up", while sometimes related, is not synonymous to "teach", which is far too limited.

    When you bring up a child, at the most basic level you are seeing to it that its physical needs are being taken care of just as an animal would with its young. It includes, feeding, bathing, playing, clothing it, and protecting it from danger, etc.

    Of course humans do more by passing on language and family traditions and cultural norms, etc.

    Some of that may or may not involve preliminary games that would prepare the older child for actual "education" in school.

    It's guiding an infant all the way through to adulthood so that it can survive on its own physically and culturally.
     

    longxianchen

    Senior Member
    chinese
    Thanks a lot, everyone. But in the quotation bring up the masses to depend entirely on spending money, and then the money gives out, it's the masses, not infants. And bring up the massed to depend is similar to the structure teach sb to do.
     

    Hermione Golightly

    Senior Member
    British English
    Those infants grow up aand become the masses. As already explained, 'bring up' does not mean the same as 'teach'. A better similar word is 'raise'. 'Bringing up' and 'raising' might include some formal teaching about some things, but nobody gives children classes on how to spend money.
    Lawrence is talking about society being materialistic and having no real values, much the same as every older generation says about the next. He laments the passing of the good old days when men were men, all the women were good looking, the children were well above average and of course sex was always mutually satisfying.;)
     
    < Previous | Next >
    Top