RELATIONS OF DOMINANCE AND EQUALITY IN D. H. LAWRENCE
RELATIONS OF DOMINANCE AND EQUALITY IN D. H. LAWRENCE RELATIONS OF DOMINANCE AND EQUALITY IN D. H. LAWRENCE
18 teaching that all women can do is to satisfy their husbands and never seek for orgasm. Lawrence's Women in Love has also presented the same idea but with the difference that Ursula could not accept the kind of love Birkin offered her. The Plumed Serpent, according to the critic, has as its strongest idea, the assertion that Kate learns from Teresa (Ramon's second wife) what she should want from love: Kate learns to "submit". However, I think that this is not true otherwise why should Kate continue to question herself about staying in Mexico or going away from it? Teresa is seen by Vivas as the 'norm' of women, i.e., the kind of woman who "may find in submission a satisfaction she could not find in any other manner" (p.130). Lawrence may have presented Teresa not as a 'norm', or as an 'exception' but as a way to contrast the two women. Ramon may have chosen the submissive woman, Teresa, because he could not bear the idea of having a wife questioning him as Kate would certainly do. The very fact of the contrast between Teresa and Kate has the purpose, I think, to show that Lawrence's conflict over domination is not resolved. Vivas, it seems to me, has misread the book. Lawrence's triumph in art includes Sons and Lovers, The Rainbow and Women in Love. I definitely agree with Vivas' classification. But this is not new. What most readers do not share with the critic (at least I do not) is the idea that the mother in Sons and Lovers is a victim of the drunkard father. Vivas says that Lawrence wants to show how Paul and his mother were forced to come together because Gertrude's husband, the uncouth, drinking, bullying miner, was no husband to her nor was he, properly speaking, a father to his children (p.180). Vivas' 'failure' in interpreting the book is chiefly due to the
19 lack of evidence to prove his point. He may defend Gertrude Morel but he must defend her by providing evidence for his defense. prejudice. His view of the Morels' marriage is full of class It seems that Walter Morel 'stinks' because of his lower class u'pbringing. This is not, in the least, a reasonable argument to defend Mrs Morel, "who rose above her miserable world by virtue of superiority of class and personal endowment, a loving mother and a wife made unhappy by an uncouth, drinking, irresponsible husband" (ibid). If Vivas presented the real reasons why Walter became an 'irresponsible' husband, I would say nothing, but he only sticks to the idea of Gertrude's class superiority. This is not fair to the text, as I will later show in some detail. Another idea which seems a little absurd, a misreading of the book, is Vivas' interpretation of the outcome of Paul and Clara's relationship. The critic says that at first their affair "appeared to be satisfactory" (p.183) because Clara has given Paul what Miriam could not — the "baptism of fire in passion". But, Vivas says, the affair ends with Paul returning Clara to her husband. and Clara?" (ibid). .And he asks: "What is wrong between Paul Vivas seems to be completely blind to the evidence in the book which shows clearly the reason why they broke off the affair. He says that "the book does not reveal the cause and therefore we cannot answer the question" (ibid). One of the reasons presented in the book is that the relation between Paul and Clara is based almost strictly on carnal love. There is nothing beyond sex and therefore Paul could not get along with Clara since what he was looking for in love was the union between soul and body. This he could never achieve with Clara nor with Miriam. In the chapter on Sons and Lovers I
- Page 1 and 2: UNIVERSIDADE FEDERAL DE SANTA CATAR
- Page 3 and 4: iii A todas as pessoas que ainda a-
- Page 5 and 6: V AGRADECIMENTO ESPECIAL Ao Profess
- Page 7 and 8: vii relationships. Yet, the partner
- Page 9 and 10: ix Lawrence mostra uma tentativa de
- Page 11 and 12: CHAPTER I STATEMENT OF PROBLEM When
- Page 13 and 14: 3 because of this, this phase is co
- Page 15 and 16: 5 The views of these above mentione
- Page 17 and 18: 7 female reader will remember herse
- Page 19 and 20: Millets' tendentious criticism stat
- Page 21 and 22: 11 Everyone who writes on Lawrence
- Page 23 and 24: 13 As for homosexuality (which Moor
- Page 25 and 26: 15 two thirds of the book [Huxley]
- Page 27: 17 in this dissertation. Vivas' vie
- Page 31 and 32: 21 text and supported by the text.
- Page 33 and 34: 23 kind of bridge for her search. H
- Page 35 and 36: 25 As for the affair between Gudrun
- Page 37 and 38: 27 a position Lawrence could not de
- Page 39 and 40: 29 the love of the powerful mother,
- Page 41 and 42: 31 can be associated with Dr Franks
- Page 43 and 44: 33 indifferent to human life. Yet h
- Page 45 and 46: 35 he says "Yet at the end, when Ci
- Page 47 and 48: 37 spiritual, or aggressive women a
- Page 49 and 50: CHAPTER II THE PATTERN OF CONFLICT
- Page 51 and 52: 41 and mind superiority. She is wha
- Page 53 and 54: 43 father was serving beer in a pub
- Page 55 and 56: 45 the control the whole family wit
- Page 57 and 58: eturning home drunken and certainly
- Page 59 and 60: to reconcile the children with the
- Page 61 and 62: more persuasive to her sons in the
- Page 63 and 64: succeed in life. This is an unconsc
- Page 65 and 66: to strengthen the relation. This me
- Page 67 and 68: eally wants. He goes from one decis
- Page 69 and 70: prefers to think of death instead o
- Page 71 and 72: 61 mutual acceptance between them.
- Page 73 and 74: 63 implies definitely the mother's
- Page 75 and 76: 65 William. He dies. Mrs Morel's li
- Page 77 and 78: 67 reserve. And on such occasions h
19<br />
lack of evidence to prove his point.<br />
He may defend Gertrude<br />
Morel but he must defend her by providing evidence for his<br />
defense.<br />
prejudice.<br />
His view of the Morels' marriage is full of class<br />
It seems that Walter Morel 'stinks' because of his<br />
lower class u'pbringing.<br />
This is not, in the least, a reasonable<br />
argument to defend Mrs Morel, "who rose above her miserable<br />
world by virtue of superiority of class and personal endowment,<br />
a loving mother and a wife made unhappy by an uncouth, drinking,<br />
irresponsible husband" (ibid).<br />
If Vivas presented the real<br />
reasons why Walter became an 'irresponsible' husband, I would<br />
say nothing, but he only sticks to the idea of Gertrude's class<br />
superiority.<br />
This is not fair to the text, as I will later show<br />
in some detail.<br />
Another idea which seems a little absurd, a misreading of<br />
the book, is Vivas' interpretation of the outcome of Paul and<br />
Clara's relationship.<br />
The critic says that at first their<br />
affair "appeared to be satisfactory" (p.183) because Clara has<br />
given Paul what Miriam could not — the "baptism of fire in<br />
passion".<br />
But, Vivas says, the affair ends with Paul returning<br />
Clara to her husband.<br />
and Clara?" (ibid).<br />
.And he asks: "What is wrong between Paul<br />
Vivas seems to be completely blind to the<br />
evidence in the book which shows clearly the reason why they<br />
broke off the affair.<br />
He says that "the book does not reveal<br />
the cause and therefore we cannot answer the question" (ibid).<br />
One of the reasons presented in the book is that the relation<br />
between Paul and Clara is based almost strictly on carnal love.<br />
There is nothing beyond sex and therefore Paul could not get<br />
along with Clara since what he was looking for in love was the<br />
union between soul and body.<br />
This he could never achieve with<br />
Clara nor with Miriam.<br />
In the chapter on Sons and Lovers I
Change language