“Lady Chatterley's Lover” is an infamous novel written by DH Lawrence, which was banned in the United States until 1959 and in England until 1960 because it was said the novel contained pornography. Lawrence does indeed use a lot of sexual words in his book and this novel uses the post-World War I era as the setting of the time, where it was rather taboo to broach the sexual subject to the public at that time. In addition to using explicit sexual words or sexual discourse that was still taboo at that time, Lawrence also rebels "Victorian norms, which did not accept sexual frankness and the emphasis on desire and sensuality of the body." Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”? Get the original essay Another Lawrence's rebellion can also be seen through the character of Clifford. As the narrator introduces Clifford's character, I can see that Clifford is also breaking the image of the upper class that turned out to be the same with another class, even the working class. However, Lawrence argues the problem with his book by saying that “[t]he words themselves are clear, as are the things to which they apply. » But the mind draws itself into a filthy association, evokes a repulsive emotion. Well, purifying the mind is the real work. limit? Also, the use of sexual speech in Lady Chatterley's Lover's narration is not an obscenity, but I think it is Lawrence's way of criticizing or simply expressing his thoughts. The narrator of Lady Chatterley's Lover (1971) by Lawrence is extradiegetic, he or she is not the character of the story or I can say that the narrator lives outside the story world, so in this novel also presents zero focus since the narrator cannot be located. Lawrence uses a third person omniscient narrator in Lady Chatterley's Lover to make the narrator speak as he knows everything in the story. Talking about the style of the narrator who likes to slip into the narration describes literature in a modernist era after the First World War. These styles used by the narrator, who has the eye of God, are called "free indirect". discourse". According to Gérard Genette "in free indirect discourse, the narrator assumes the speech of the character, or, if one prefers, the character speaks through the voice of the narrator, and the two instances then merge; in immediate discourse , the narrator is erased and the character replaces him. In the case of a18, Dujardin himself places greater emphasis on a stylistic criterion, which is the necessarily informal character, according to him, of the interior monologue: “a speech without a listener. and unspoken, by which a character expresses his most intimate, closest thoughts "to the unconscious, before any logical organization, or, simply, although in a nascent state, expresses it by means of direct sentences reduced to their syntactic minimum, so as to give the impression of a hodgepodge." The link here between the intimacy of thought and its non-logical and non-articulated character is obviously a prejudice of the time. Molly Bloom's monologue fits this description quite well, but those of Beckett's characters are, on the contrary, rather hyperlogical and reasoned. » The narrator moves in and out of the characters' consciousness. He or she seems so greedy or perhaps selfish to speak in the whole story. The characters also speak through the voice of the narrator. Sometimes the story seems so blurry that it's hard to differentiate which point of view. is presented in this line; that of the narrator or the characters. At the beginning of the story, the omniscient narrator says that "[our] life isessentially a tragic age, so we refuse to take it tragically. (Lawrence 1) Post-World War I people want to feel a certain freedom and yet, in reality, they were not having that freedom. But “we must live, no matter how many heavens have fallen.” (Lawrence 1) During this time, freedom of speech and expression was being questioned and I think this is what is being criticized by Lawrence through the narration. As can be seen in this line, the narrator seems to glorify freedom and emphasize that freedom of speech is, above all, the kind of freedom: “Free! That was the big word. In the middle of nature, in the forests of the morning, with vigorous young people with magnificent throats, free to do what they want and, above all, to say what they want. (Lawrence 4) It seems that the narrator wants freedom, as do the characters. The narrator wants to have the freedom to say whatever he likes. The unknown narrator even says that “it was the conversation that mattered most: the passionate exchange of words. Love [is] only a minor accompaniment. (Lawrence 5) Love and lust are not something that liberates the soul but the speech, in my opinion, which clearly states that what matters in Lady Chatterley's Lover is not the sexual speech but the desire to criticize the limit in expression and discourse. The narrator presents it somewhat explicitly in this line: Hilda and Constance had both had their tentative romantic relationships at the age of eighteen. The young men with whom they spoke so passionately, sang so vigorously, and camped freely under the trees wanted, of course, this romantic relationship. The girls were doubtful, but there was so much talk about it, it was supposed to be so important. And the men were so humble and greedy. Why couldn't a girl be queen and give of herself? So they had donated themselves, each to the young person with whom she had had the most subtle and intimate arguments. The arguments, the discussions were the big thing: the lovemaking and connection was just a kind of primal comeback and a bit of an anti-climax. We were subsequently less in love with the boy and a little inclined to hate him, as if he had encroached on our privacy and our inner freedom. Because, of course, as a girl, the whole dignity and meaning of life consisted in the realization of absolute, perfect, pure and noble freedom. What else did a girl's life mean? Getting rid of old and sordid connections and constraints. (Lawrence 5) I also agree with Penda Peter in his essay titled Politicized Sex and Identity in “Lady Chatterley's Lover” that “[t]he abundant sexual discourse in Lady Chatterley's Lover is linked to freedom. This is particularly the case at the beginning of the novel when sex is opposed to “a tragic time”. The novel opens with the narrator's statement that "Our time is essentially a tragic time, so we refuse to take it tragically." . Shortly thereafter, a description of Connie's premarital sexual relations equates it with free speech. Sexual intercourse is considered a liberal act of free will without subjection of the woman, “without giving in to her inner and free self”. (Lawrence 1999: 7). words instead of saying them” (Lawrence 1999: 34) and this is why “sex should be as free as speech. » (Lawrence 1999: 35) Sex is humorously seen as an aspect of faith. When asked what he believes in, Clifford's friend Tommy responds, "Me!" Oh, intellectually, I think you have to have a good heart, a happy penis, a keen intelligence and the courage to say stupid things! in front of a lady. » (Lawrence 1999: 37) By linking sexto freedom of speech and knowledge, Lawrence poses the question of general freedom, which is again a political question. “True knowledge comes from the entire corpus of consciousness, from your belly and your penis as much as from your brain and your mind. » (Lawrence 1999: 37) Lawrence implies that if the theme of sexual relations in art is obscene, immoral and therefore censored, then our freedom is questionable. The war may be over and people think that they have freedom but the truth is that they were not totally free because they have the limit to express their thoughts. Lawrence presents this situation through this story: “The two sisters had lived their love experience when the war broke out and they were rushed home. Neither was ever in love with a young man unless they were verbally very close: that is, unless they were deeply interested and speak. The amazing, deep, incredible thrill of talking passionately to a really intelligent young man hour after hour, repeating day after day for months... something they never realized until it happened. 'arrived ! The heavenly promise: You will have men to talk to! — had never been pronounced. It came true before they knew what a promise it was. And if after the lively intimacy of these lively, soul-lit discussions, the question of sex becomes more or less inevitable, then leave it. This marked the end of a chapter. There was also a thrill of its own: a strange thrill vibrating inside the body, a final spasm of self-affirmation, like the last word, exciting, and very much like the row of asterisks we can put to indicate the end of a paragraph. , and a break in the theme. When the girls returned home for the summer vacation of 1913, when Hilda was twenty and Connie eighteen, their father saw clearly that they had experienced love. Love had been there, as someone said. But he was a man of experience himself and let life take its course. As for the mother, a nervous invalid in the last months of her life, she wanted her daughters to be “free” and “to flourish”. She herself had never been able to be completely herself: that had been refused to her. God knows why, for she was a woman who had her own income and her own way. She blamed her husband. But in fact it was an old sense of authority in her mind or soul that she couldn't shake. It had nothing to do with Sir Malcolm, who had let his high-spirited, high-spirited wife rule her own roost, while he went his own way. The girls were therefore "free" and returned to Dresden, with their music, the university and the young men. They loved their respective young men, and their respective young men loved them with all the passion of a mental attraction. All the wonderful things that young men thought and expressed and wrote, they thought, expressed and wrote for young girls. Connie's young man was musical, Hilda's was technical. But they lived simply for their young wives. In their minds and their mental excitements, of course. Elsewhere, they were pushed back a bit, even if they didn't know it. With them too, it was obvious that love had passed through them: that is to say, physical experience. It is curious what subtle but unmistakable transmutation this operates, both in the body of the man and in that of the woman: the woman more fulfilled, more subtly rounded, her young angles softened, and her expression either anxious or triumphant: l a much calmer, more interior man. , THEThe very shapes of her shoulders and her buttocks are less assertive, more hesitant. (Lawrence 6-8) Through these lines the characters seem to have freedom but instead of feeling free to do what they want, the characters seem imprisoned by the environment they live in, even the Chatterleys who seem having everything are not. than free: The Chatterleys, two brothers and a sister, had lived curiously isolated, locked together in Wragby, despite all their connections. A feeling of isolation intensified the family bond, a feeling of weakness in their position, a feeling of helplessness, despite or because of title and land. They were cut off from the industrial Midlands in which they spent their lives. And they were cut off from their own class by the sullen, stubborn, and withdrawn nature of Sir Geoffrey, their father, whom they ridiculed, but for whom they were so fond. We can also see the narrator describing Connie's situation as if she doesn't feel free with Clifford: "He and Connie were attached to each other, in a modern, distant way. He was far too wounded within himself, by the great shock of his mutilation, to be easy and casual. It was a hurt thing. And as such, Connie remained passionately loyal to him. » (19) Underline with these lines: “Yet he was absolutely dependent on her, he needed her at every moment. As big and strong as he was, he was powerless. He could get around in a wheelchair and he had a sort of bath chair with a motor in which he could move slowly around the park. But alone he was like a lost thing. He needed Connie there, to assure him that he existed. " (19-20) "Only this life with Clifford, this endless weaving of webs of thread, of minutiae of consciousness, these stories of which Sir Malcolm said there was nothing in them, and they would not last. Why should they contain anything, why should they last? Each day has its own evil. The APPEARANCE of reality is enough for the moment. » (24) “So the men, especially those who were no longer young, were really very nice to her. But, knowing the torture poor Clifford would feel at the slightest sign of flirtation on his part, she did not encourage them at all. She was quiet and vague, she had no contact with them and planned to have none. Clifford was extraordinarily proud of himself. “Her loved ones treated her with great kindness. She knew that kindness indicated a lack of fear and that these people had no respect for you unless you could scare them a little. But again, she had no contact. She let them be kind and dismissive, she let them feel like they didn't need to draw their steel in anticipation. She had no real connection with them. " (24-25) "His bedroom was the only gay and modern one in the house, the only place in Wragby where his personality was revealed. Clifford had never seen her and she invited very few people to come. Now she and Michaelis are sitting on the other side talking. She asked him about himself, about his mother and father, about his brothers... other people always amazed him, and when his sympathy aroused, she was totally devoid of class feeling. Michaelis spoke frankly about himself, very frankly, without affectation, simply revealing his bitter and indifferent stray dog ​​soul, then showing a glimmer of revanchist pride in his success. “But why are you such a lonely bird? Connie asked him; and again he looked at her, with his full, inquisitive hazel gaze. “Some birds ARE that way,” he replied. Then, with a touch of familiar irony: “but look, what about you? Aren't you..