Chez D. H. Lawrence, le non-humain correspond à la fois à une forme de vitalité primordiale et aux créatures végétales et animales que cette vitalité anime bien davantage que les hommes, étouffés par une civilisation moderne qui les rend inertes. Le non-humain apparaît comme le dépositaire d‘une présence pure, existant avant ou hors de la culture. Lawrence est donc confronté à la difficulté de représenter cette présence pure par un moyen intrinsèquement « humain », le langage poétique. Il ne se pose alors pas simplement en anti-humaniste : son écriture poétique du non-humain procède d‘un conflit permanent entre la volonté de se libérer du carcan humain et la nécessité de demeurer dans la sphère humaine, voire de réinstaurer la limite entre humain et non-humain. Ce conflit s‘exprime déjà dans le non-humain comme simple matière vivante, sous la forme d‘une tension entre une conception de la matière comme pure présence extérieure à tout discours humain et une vision de la matière comme objet scientifique par excellence. Dans l‘évocation des créatures, le conflit incite Lawrence à réinventer spécifiquement pour elles des rapports au monde (émotions, perception, agentivité) qui leur permettent de préserver leur présence. Dans le rapport de Lawrence aux créatures non-humaines, le conflit demeure car Lawrence remet en question la limite qui le sépare du non-humain mais la réaffirme également. Enfin, la dialectique entre la volonté de saisir la présence du non-humain et la crainte de l‘abstraire complètement en l‘incluant dans le langage semble particulièrement présente dans ce que nous tentons de définir comme un langage poétique propre au non-humain, au-delà de sa simple utilisation chez Lawrence. / In D. H. Lawrence‘s poetry, the non-human is both a form of primordial vitality and the living world of non-human creatures. Non-human creatures are seen as more able to embody this vitality than modern men, stifled by their civilization. The non-human stands outside the sphere of culture, and its mode of existence is consequently an untouched, pure form of presence. Therefore, Lawrence faces the difficulty of representing this pure presence through an inherently ―human‖ means, poetic language. However, his stance is not entirely anti-humanist: his poetic writing of the non-human is founded on an unceasing conflict between the will to break free from the constraints of humanity and the necessity to remain within a human sphere, and even to reinstate the limit between human and non-human. In the representation of the non-human as mere living matter, this conflict is already manifest, taking the shape of a tension between matter as existing completely outside human discourse, and matter as a scientific object par excellence. When Lawrence evokes the creatures, this conflict brings about a reconfiguration of specific non-human modes of being in the world (emotions, perception, agency), which allow the creatures to interact with each other without diminishing or abstracting their presence. In the poet‘s own relationship with the non-human creatures, the conflict appears again as Lawrence questions the limit between human and non-human while reinstating it. At last, the dialectic between a will to capture non-human presence and the fear of abstracting it when including it within the sphere of language seems particularly present in what we have attempted to establish as a poetic language specific to the representation of the non-human, in Lawrence and other poets.

Using Gillian Beer's suggestion that literature and science 'share the moment's discourse' (Open Fields, 1996), this thesis explores the ideas associated with Albert Einstein's three revolutionary 1905 papers, examining the ways in which similar concepts appeared across disciplines during the early part of the twentieth century, and focusing in particular on their manifestation within the literary works of Virginia Woolf and D. H. Lawrence. The study seeks to distinguish between instances of direct influence and a shared contemporary discourse, arguing that the analysis of both is essential to studies within the field of literature and science. Part I focuses on concepts of duality and complementarity, considering Max Planck's introduction of the quantum, Einstein's development of light quanta, Louis de Broglie's wave-particle duality and Niels Bohr's principle of complementarity. It analyses other contemporary discussions of duality and complementarity, and explores Virginia Woolf's attempts to simultaneously express both sides of dualistic models, suggesting that Woolf is a complementary writer. Part II focuses on Einstein's theories of relativity, exploring D. H. Lawrence's adoption thereof in Fantasia of the Unconscious (1922), in particular his claim that 'we are in sad need of a theory of human relativity'. It argues that this proposed theory is directly relevant to Lawrence's fictional works, both those that precede Fantasia and those that follow it. It also analyses the impact on Lawrence of contemporary ideas of relativism, especially those of William James as expressed in Pragmatism (1907). Part III explores the ways in which both Woolf and Lawrence write about individuals within crowds. It considers the possible links between such scenes and Einstein's paper on Brownian motion as well as contemporary studies of crowd psychology. It suggests that individual characters within modernist works can be considered as similar to the individual particles suspended in a mass which exhibit Brownian motion.

by Chung Ka Man Amy. / Thesis (M.Phil.)--Chinese University of Hong Kong, 2000. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 108-113). / Abstracts in English and Chinese. / Abstract --- p.i / Acknowledgment --- p.iii / Abbreviations --- p.iv / Chapter Chapter I --- Introduction --- p.1 / Chapter Chapter II --- Sons and Lovers (1913): The Release --- p.20 / Chapter Chapter III --- The Rainbow (1915): Experiencing the State of Balance --- p.41 / Chapter Chapter IV --- Women in Love (1920): Articulating the Idea of Balance --- p.60 / Chapter Chapter V --- Lady Chatterley´ةs Lover (1929): Towards the Balance --- p.77 / Chapter Chapter VI --- Conclusion --- p.91 / End Notes --- p.102 / Bibliography --- p.108 / Appendix I --- p.114

No description available.

No description available.

How is Bakhtin's conception of novelistic openness distinct from modernist-dialectical irresolution or open-endedness? Is Women in Love a Bakhtinian "open totality"? How is dialogic openness (as opposed to modernist indeterminacy) a "form-shaping ideology" of comic interrogation? / This study tests whether dialogism illuminates the shape of openness in Lawrence. As philosophers of potentiality, both Bakhtin and Lawrence explore the dialogic "between" as a state of being and a condition of meaningful fiction. Dialogism informs Women in Love. It achieves a polyphonic openness which Lawrence in his later fictions cannot sustain. Subsequently, univocal, simplifying organizations supervene. Dialogic process collapses into a stenographic report upon a completed dialogue, over which the travel writer, the poet or the messianic martyr preside. / Nevertheless, the old openness can be discerned in the ambivalent laughter of The Captain's Doll, St. Mawr or "The Man Who Loved Islands." In these retrospective variations on earlier themes, laughing openness of vision takes new, "unfinalizable" shapes.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--Tufts University, 2002. / Adviser: Modhumita Roy. Submitted to the Dept. of English. Includes bibliographical references. Access restricted to members of the Tufts University community. Also available via the World Wide Web;

Thesis (Ph. D.)--UCLA, 2007. / Vita. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 265-284).

Critics continue to debate Lawrence's attitude toward women: Some say Lawrence is a misogynist, some say he is an egalitarian, and others say he is ambivalent toward women. If Lawrence's works are divided into two chronological periods, before and after 1918, these differences of opinions begin to dissolve. Lawrence is fair in his treatment of women in the earlier works; however, in his later works Lawrence restricts women to what he calls the sensual realm, the realm of feelings and emotions. In addition, Lawrence denounces all women who assert individuality and self-responsibility. In the later works, Lawrence's ideology restricts the role of women and presents male supremacy as the natural and necessary order for human existence.

No description available.