In their well-known controversy, T. S. Eliot and F. R. Leavis, while being opposed as to the evaluation of the Nonconformist tradition and its influence on Lawrence, agreed on one thing: that Lawrence owed much to his Nonconformist upbringing. Succeeding debates among other critics, however, have not been conclusive, largely because they did not base their arguments on historical evidence and therefore could not decide on the exact nature of his inheritance. This paper attempts to demonstrate what Lawrence's inheritance was by examining Nonconformism at the turn of the century. Special attention will be paid to R. J. Campbell, the proponent of the immanentistic “New Theology, ”and Robert Reid, the minister of the Eastwood Congregational Church. Campbell will be shown to have played a significant role in Lawrence's departure from Nonconformism. Reid's attitude to modern ideas, such as the New Theology and evolutionism, will reveal the difficulty Congregationalists had in maintaining orthodoxy in the face of widespread immanentism and scientific discoveries.
The aim of this paper is to throw a new light on Gerald's destructiveness in Women in Love. Most critics insist that Gerald is the most obvious manifestation of the destructive power of civilization, and that his death is the sign of the inevitable death of civilization itself. But I should argue that Gerald's destruction is not, in essence, a negative one. Lawrence explains in his essays that“dissolution, ” “destruction, ” “corruption, ” or“death”has two forms: the one leading to creation and the other leading to nullity. Therefore we must consider in which form Gerald's destruction is really represented by the author. I discuss in detail Gerald's attempted murder of Gudrun and his own death, comparing them (1) with Clifford's and Skrebensky's reduction to childhood, (2) with Hermione's murderous assault on Birkin, and (3) with Ursula's transformation through death-and-rebirth process in the last chapter in The Rainbow. My discussions show that Gerald's destruction is to release him into creative life, not to reduce him into nullity.
This paper is an attempt to identify the narrative structure of D.H. Lawrence's Sea and Sardinia and place the work in the context of the Lawrence oeuvre and also that of Modernist literature. The narrative of Sea and Sardinia is characterized by its rapid shifts of tone and its fragmentariness, the most speedy and least unified of Lawrence's prose works. This feature enables the vivid representation of the multilayered realities of travelling. In its speedy, fragmented representation through a person on the move, Lawrence's Sea and Sardinia shares a common structure with some representative works of Modernism: particularly with James Joyce's Ulysses. Lawrence is, more often than not, considered as opposed to the mainstream of Modernism, and the narrative of Sea and Sardinia is the closest he ever came to that of Modernism. Interestingly, he was closest to the modernistic style, when he wrote a work of a minor genre (a travel book) most extemporaneously (the book was written with amazing speed, over 200 pages in six weeks). It was probably because he was unconsciously freer while writing at his most spontaneous, and because travel was an important literary feature of the time.
This paper aims to make clear the differences between Lawrence and Thomas in their usage of the dichotomy image-light and darkness. Here we will deal with Lawrence's “The Ship of Death” and some of Thomas' early works, which are written at almost the same time. In Chapter 1, we survey how the image has been accepted in the conventional European thought, referring to the very beginning of Genesis. In Chapter 2, we re-read the text of “The Ship of Death” with special attention to the transition of the color images used there, and then point out that Lawrence the poet is distorted by his own written text. He comes to be caught in a snare of the self contradiction. Even Lawrence cannot escape from the strong flow from darkness to light. In Chapter 3, we will examine some of Thomas's poems and point out that the dichotomy of light and death itself is completely broken in his poetic world. This seems to be caused by the fact that his language always tries to flee from the stabilized meanings. In the last chapter, we summarize our discussion and conclude by showing the possibility that their differences may be derived from those of their fields of creation, that is, prose and verse.