Lady Chatterley's Lover is a book I was first introduced to by my dad (suprise suprise). He told me about how scandalous it was considered and how it had been banned for more than 40 years before it was allowed to be published, because of the way it portrayed sex. Ever since that day , listening to this little piece of history in the literature section of Landmark( the biggest bookstore in town) , I have been intrigued. And now , after five years , I have finally read it. And all I can say is "Wow...."
Since it was written in 1928, I tried to picture my grandmom and co. read something like this and I could see exactly why it was banned.
The Sex part, now in the 21st century with the way people write, is'nt really a big deal. I cannot say it shocked me. It did'nt. It's what the author was trying to portray , allowing crude language to slip in to emphasize his point, that shocks. Well , I won't go into the story 'cos i want to reproduce an excerpt from the book.
The principal character (Lady Chatterley)lives with her crippled husband and therefore has no sexual life to speak of. And by and by , with her husband's consent she has intercourse with one or two of her husbands guests. (he does'nt mind so long as he does'nt know...and the man is not the sort of man he would despise personally...he tells her)But she is barely satified with the 'depth-less' relationship and even the sex. She finds none of them satisfactory as a lover .But one day she falls in love with his gamekeeper(a servant responsible for the grounds and game). And what happens after that is what the story is about. Now , the story in itself is again alright.Rich married woman , poor servant lover and all that.
What's strikingly different is that the woman yearns for sexual love as much as intellectual compatibility. She is tired of people only appreciating her mind and not wanting her body despite the fact that she is extremely attractive. That's what hit me as strange. She feels that men want to have sex with the idea of her as a intellectual , cultivated woman and not just because they are physically attracted to her.
Lawrence, I guess, wants his audience to appreciate that a woman is a sexual being too and has needs and that it is alright for her to want sex as one of the primary things in her relationship not just an emotional and intellectual companionship. The same way men have every right to feel that way. But, I think, he takes it too far. He makes it seem that a woman should want that first and foremost.
Reading , a book such as this ,with a perspective in a day and age where women complain about being treated solely as sexual objects and not taken seriously as intellectual equals , makes it so ironic. In fact at several points in the book...I wanted lawrence to have lived to see 2005. He might have been much pleased.
Anyway, here's an excerpt from the book:
" That's why I don't like to start thinking about you actually.It only tortures me, and it does you no good.I don't want you to be away from me.But if i start fretting it wastes something.Patience, always patience. This is my fortieth winter. And I can't help all the winters that have been.But this winter I'll stick to my little pentecost flame, and have some peace. And I won't let the breath of people blow it out.I believe in a higher mystery,that does'nt let even the crocus be blown out. And if you are in scotland and I'm in the midlands, and I can't put my arms around you , and wrap my legs around you , yet I've got something of you.My soul softly flaps in the little pentecost flame with you , like the peace of fucking.We fucked a flame into being.Even the flowers are fucked into being between the sun and the earth.But it's a delicate thing, and takes patience and the long pause.
So I love chastity now , because it is the peace that comes of fucking. I love being chaste now. I love it as snowdrops love the snow.I love this chastity, which is the pause of peace of fucking,between us now like a snowdrop of forked white fire.And when the real spring comes,when the drawing comes together comes , then we can fuck the little flame brilliant and yellow , brilliant.But not now, not yet.Now is the time to be chaste , it is so good to be chaste , like a river of cool water in my soul. I love the chastity now that it flows between us.It is like fresh water and rain.How can men want wearisomely to philander. What a misery to be like Don Juan , and impotent ever to fuck oneself into peace,and the little flame alight , impotent and unable to be chaste between whiles , as by a river.
Well, so many words, because I can't touch you.If I could sleep with my arms around you, the ink could stay in the bottle.We could be chaste together just as we can fuck together.But we have to be separate for a while , and I suppose it is really the wiser way.If only one were sure.
Never mind , Never mind , we won't get worked up.We really trust in the little flame , and in the unnamed god that shields it from being blown out. There's so much of you here with me , really , that it's a pity you are'nt all here."
This is from the last page of the book ,a letter the gamekeeper writes to Lady chatterley. Well all said and done...If you are an avid reader with an open mind, It is a must read. If not for anything else, just to see what shocked people so much in the 1930's.
Friday, January 14, 2005
Lady Chatterley's Lover
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
Where are these women!, oh, tell me please, Where are these women...
vishnu...must you publish the fact that you are a desperate dope??? ...lol..
Aaah! It's good enough that people are bron to wedded parents around here. I guess a century later, marraige would be a laughable concept, just as the concept of family would be!
LCL was great not just because of its portrayal of sex, but for its ability to break through the mindsets of people, and project into the future.
Go ahead and write a novel that thinks 100 years down the line... might as well be quoted as a great novelist a century down the line. :)
- Heretic
Absolutely...right you are... But I don't think even lawrence guessed it would be as bad (or not?) as it is today...I think he just wanted to get people to change how they thought about women and sex.
In fact in an author's note he says as much. Defending his right as an artist and as a social observer, to write about those aspects of society that (in his opinion) ought to change.
As it so happens...mindsets have changed.So much so, that there is no sanctity left in almost anything .Or atleast it seems to be heading that way...
Post a Comment