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

repositorio.ufsc.br
from repositorio.ufsc.br More from this publisher
29.12.2013 Views

341 for Tom and Lydia in The Rainbow who attain a certain balance, but even this achievement, we see, is not permanent,. since Tom dies early in the novel implying that the other couples must continue the search. Other novels show the struggle between the couples but no one can really say that they get 'there1. The couples would rather fight for dominance in the relation. This idea, I believe, proves that the author's feelings are different from his didactic intentions. Another of Lawrence's 'intentions' refers to his idea that man and woman form 'the ideal pair'. In "Morality and the Novel" he claims that The great relationship, for humanity, will always be the relation between man and woman. The relation:-between man and man, woman and woman, parent and child, will always be subsidiary. And the relation between man and woman will change for ever, and will for ever be the new central clue to human life. It is the relation itself which is the quick and the central clue to life, not man, nor the woman, nor the children that result from the relationship, as a contingency (Beal, p.113). How can it be that some of his novels try to put the relation between man and man in first plan and man and woman become secondary? One may just take a look at Women in Love which starts to present the man-to-man relationship as additional to marriage; or at The Plumed Serpent where this relation becomes the alternative to marriage. In other words, the man-to-woman relation is no longer important. Again theory and practice do not match. I do not want to claim that Lawrence is right or wrong: I say that he, like all human beings, is contradictory. We say we do what we think, but who guarantees the truth of this statement? "Never trust the artist. Trust the tale"! Lawrence probably never thought how much his statement could perfectly

342 fit his own personality. More must be said about Lawrence's 'intentions' because they reflect what he is, or what he is not. In the just quoted essay his ideas about morality contradict his authoritarian attitudes when he wrote The Plumed Serpent. Lawrence argues that Morality in the novel is the trembling instability of the balance. When the novelist puts his thumb in the scale, to pull down the balance to his own predilection, that is immorality... The novel is not, as a rule, immoral because the novelist has any dominant -idea, or purpose. The immorality lies in the novelist's helpless, unconscious predilection... If the novelist puts his thumb in the pan, for love, tenderness, sweetness, peace, then he commits an immoral act: he prevents the possibility of a pure relationship, a pure relatedness, the only thing that matters: and he makes inevitable the horrible reaction, when he lets his thumb go, towards hate and brutality, cruelty and destruction (Beal, p.1 1 0 ).2 I conclude that when Lawrence tried to 'force' the woman in Kate to fall at the feet of the man in little Cipriano, he simply imposed his own 'unconscious predilection' for the man as the master of the woman. He pressed his thumb down hard in the scale. Indeed this is 'immoral', by his own definition. Also in the predilection for a man-to-man relationship between Ramon and Cipriano, Lawrence was forcing the balance of the scale, mainly because he put into Kate's mind the sense that she as a woman was inferior to men and that they (men) form the 'ideal' pair. But Lawrence, although pressing his thumb heavily in the scale, could not help feeling ill with his own 'intentions'. That is one reason why he became so ill after completing the novel. He may have felt he was forcing a theory he could not The interesting thing about "Morality and the Novel" and The Plumed Serpent is that the essay was first published in December, 1925 and the novel in January, 1926, only a month after the publishing of the essay! Probably Lawrence wrote both the essay and the novel at the same time.

342<br />

fit his own personality.<br />

More must be said about Lawrence's 'intentions' because<br />

they reflect what he is, or what he is not. In the just quoted<br />

essay his ideas about morality contradict his authoritarian<br />

attitudes when he wrote The Plumed Serpent.<br />

Lawrence argues that<br />

Morality in the novel is the trembling instability<br />

of the balance. When the novelist puts his thumb in<br />

the scale, to pull down the balance to his own<br />

predilection, that is immorality...<br />

The novel is not, as a rule, immoral because<br />

the novelist has any dominant -idea, or purpose.<br />

The immorality lies in the novelist's helpless,<br />

unconscious predilection... If the novelist puts<br />

his thumb in the pan, for love, tenderness, sweetness,<br />

peace, then he commits an immoral act: he prevents<br />

the possibility of a pure relationship, a pure<br />

relatedness, the only thing that matters: and he<br />

makes inevitable the horrible reaction, when he<br />

lets his thumb go, towards hate and brutality,<br />

cruelty and destruction (Beal, p.1 1 0 ).2<br />

I conclude that when Lawrence tried to 'force' the woman in Kate<br />

to fall at the feet of the man in little Cipriano, he simply<br />

imposed his own 'unconscious predilection' for the man as the<br />

master of the woman.<br />

He pressed his thumb down hard in the<br />

scale. Indeed this is 'immoral', by his own definition. Also<br />

in the predilection for a man-to-man relationship between Ramon<br />

and Cipriano, Lawrence was forcing the balance of the scale,<br />

mainly because he put into Kate's mind the sense that she as a<br />

woman was inferior to men and that they (men) form the 'ideal'<br />

pair.<br />

But Lawrence, although pressing his thumb heavily in the<br />

scale, could not help feeling ill with his own 'intentions'.<br />

That is one reason why he became so ill after completing the<br />

novel.<br />

He may have felt he was forcing a theory he could not<br />

The interesting thing about "Morality and the Novel" and The<br />

Plumed Serpent is that the essay was first published in<br />

December, 1925 and the novel in January, 1926, only a month<br />

after the publishing of the essay! Probably Lawrence wrote both<br />

the essay and the novel at the same time.

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!