题目 | 中文 | |||
英文 | Anti-womanism in D.H.Lawrence’s Tickets, please | |||
学生姓名 | 学号 | 07101791 | ||
班 级 | 英语0703 | 专业 | 英语系 | |
指导老师 | ||||
Purpose and Significance of study： David Herbert Richards Lawrence (11 September 1885 – 2 March 1930) was an English novelist born in a working-class family. With this background, Lawrence could profoundly realize the whole trends and thus confronts issues relating to emotional health and vitality, spontaneity, and instinct in his collected works, which represent an extended reflection on the dehumanizing effects of modernity and industrialization. Considering these above, Lawrence, from nearly the very beginning, has made his mind to fighting against the industrial world by using his pen, as well as calling upon naturalism and free emotional development. This theme can be seen from almost every brilliant piece of his works, such as sons and lovers, Lady Chatterley’s Lover and so on. As for his writing skills, Lawrence used to describe the bisexual relationship and human instinct, which resulted in a strong desire for utopian rural life and social attention paid to the destiny and the world of women’s. Concretely in his Tickets, please, there is a viewpoint deeply rooted in many people’s heart that it is a master piece to display a place-promoted image of women in that era and Annie’s succeed was just the beginning of the destruction of a patriarchal society and the establish of a feminism world. Going deep into the whole story, however, I start to doubt whether this is what Lawrence really intended to express in that novel, since there can be found many evidence to refute this opinion. Lawrence seems not to highlight the feminism, but to perform an anti-feminism attitude through all his superficial expressions. This short story was created in 1919, which is set during the war, WWI. D. H. Lawrence, to some extent, is the ultimate anti-womanist. He hated the war for what it did to society, kill good men. He hated the fact that the war inverted positions of power. He found it unnatural that women were running society and what is left of men are cripples and dandies. So this is a story with an element of satire, of inversions of power, and ultimately sterility of society and of male/female relationships. And from this time background we know that D. H. Lawrence would be an anti-womanist, which strongly against the foregoing standpoints that he is a feminism-favor. In another word, the popular notion is that D.H. Lawrence is one of zealot for feminism; however, after read some of his works, I have some other points of view. Not only in the ticket please, Lawrence’s other works also manifest his tendency to anti-womanism. In his Aaron’s Rod, (mostly completed during the war), Lawrence’s anti-feminist ideology had already began to take shape. The patogonist believed that “we must either love, or rule. Once the model of love to change --- it must be changed……Men must have clear control of the direction; women have appeal to the powerful men who yield to the power of the soul, for their own survival. It is clear that the view that Lawrence’s male chauvinism thinking gradually increased to a clear expression at the post-war. In another novel, Women in Love (completed in 1916), the female image shape than its companion, Rainbow, is much more in the shadow. In independent Rainbow, Ursula, a wan who is radical brave, aggressively pursue equal rights with men but it disappeared in Women in Love, has become the tame and ignorant Futile. Anti-womanism arises to against the development of women’s liberation movement in the 20th century. During that time, perhaps we can say its representatives are D. H. Lawrence, Norman Mailer, Henry Miller, and Jean Genet. Their works offered a powerful challenge to traditional values of capitalism, crude sexuality, and demands of female power in general. These anti-feminists distort female characters by associating them with deviance. As Millett ob-served, the “interior colonization “of women by men is“sturdier than any form of segregation, and more rigorous than class stratification, more uniform, certainly more enduring”. Unlike the other approaches we have examined, anti-feminist literary criticism is often a political attack upon other modes of criticism and theory, and its social orientation moves beyond traditional literary criticism. It is somewhat unrealistic fluff. Millett wrote in Sexual Politics that “the essence of politics is power”. D. H.Lawrence’s literature is a record of the collective consciousness of patriarchy. It delineates women speaking men’s language and supplants the men英语专业论文题目’s career, but as fact, if women continue to speak as men do when they enter discourse, whatever they say will be alienated, just as John Thomas neglects the girls ‘indignation. Anti-womanism, as a marginal discourse appeared, did not get the academic community generally-recognized, whereas so many feminism works launched shock to be born. At least for this academic discourse, there are many concerns. For example, in some very formal academic discussion, as long as related to this topic, we missed to hear this argument: It is now a woman’s right to whether too much or too little; women’s nature and their social roles, as well as they want to get the relationship between the rights that may be fundamentally irreconcilable. It is to keep the discussion of which should and will be the leader between feminism and anti-womanism. | ||||
Situation of study and findings： There are rare materials about Tickets, please, and most of the relative studies are still considering it as a success of women against men in the whole society since the content and plot the writer planed was Miss Annie defeated John Thomas. And seen from the plots, Annie really takes an upper hand. That’s why most of the followers of this theory are unalterable. But many young writers have noticed the phenomenon that despite so many clearly evidence about Annie’s success, there are many implies are included, for example, the end. Why these women would perform a “hurriedly, with mute, stupefied face”? This is so strange! They dig from here and therefore dig a roadway. The theory of Lawrence’s anti-womanism thus being built. By an deeper analysis of this novel, I expect a concrete knowledge of D.H.Lawrence and his anti-womanism. | ||||
Detailed Outline： 1. Introduction 1.1 The background of the age 1.2 D.H.Lawrence’s own life experience 1.3 The effects resulted to Lawrence’s writing of this novel 2. D.H.Lawrence’s main thoughts in his master pieces 2.1 D.H.Lawrence’s social criticism 2.2 D.H.Lawrence’s psychological exploration about human sexuality and Oedipus Complex 3. An analysis of Tickets, please 3.1 An abstract of the short story 3.2 Specific analysis to the images the writer sets up and the reflection of anti-womanism 3.3 Various artistic features Lawrence use in this novel 4. Conclusion | ||||
References： [1]Millet, Kate. Sexual Politics .London: Rupert Hart Davis,1970 [2] Wilfred L. Guerin, A Handbook of Critical Approaches to Literature [M]. Oxford University Press, Inc, 1994 [3]麻友世.女性主义第三浪潮的男性视角[J]. 北京师范大学学刊, 2006,(2). [4]陈凤珍.女性艺术中反女性主义的文化症候[J]. 邢台学院报刊, 2005,(4). [5]从《查太莱夫人的情人》看劳伦斯的生态女性主义观[J].牡丹江教育学院学报,2009,(4). [6]蒋家国．重建人类的伊甸园——劳伦斯长篇小说研究[M]．长沙：湖南大学出版社，2003． [7]赵红英.论劳伦斯的女性观叨.武汉大学学报，2001，(7)． [8]谢鹏.生态女性主义文学批评述论阴.重庆邮电学院学报，2006，(2)． [9]何颖.论劳伦斯作品的自我、社会观[J].广东社会科学，2000(4)：146-151． [10]李汝成.路玉坤.物我交流的载体——D．H．劳伦斯小说的象征艺术研究之--[J]．山东社会科学， 1 998(2)76.78. | ||||
发布评论