『아들과 연인』에 나타난 폴의 활력과 자본주의 비판
Paul’s Vitality and Critique of Capitalism in Sons and Lovers
0
조회
0
다운로드
1
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
The aim of this paper is to discuss Paul’s vitality as living individual and its critique of capitalism in D. H. Lawrence’s Sons and Lovers. Paul as a living individual feels as if his body were living empty. This being is univocal because through ‘combat-between’ he realizes his power in a life. It is this mode of individuation that overcomes the static identity and abolish work. Because univocal being must be conceived as difference that “constitutes being as a synthetic multiplicity.” This intensive life defeats the logic of identification in the modern civilization. In this novel, Paul is becoming through a dissolved self, which is no longer imprisoned within the fixed subjectivity and consists of events and singularities. As opposed to a subjectivity, Paul’s individuality is the force of non-organic life and an event, not a thing or a person. In this sense, Paul equilibrates himself with others, even nature. His creative journey can make things have fluid relationship with the circumambient universe. Deleuze says that this indefinite life attains a sort of beatitude. In this novel, Paul attains a life’s “very ecstasy of living, the highest point of bliss” in which a man reaches his fullest living and lives in immanent life. The psychoanalytic conception of desire is lack and the desire is repressed by the Oedipal law. But the Oedipus is the effect of social repression on desiring production. Desire is not a lack of something and doesn’t refer to any law which traditional psychoanalysis supports. In this regard, revolution consists of “the repetition of the future in its difference” just as positive desire functions heterogeneous in the field of immanence. For, Deleuze and Guattari, desire includes no lack: it is revolutionary because desire as productive process, desiring machine, prevents the body from being repressed by the Oedipal Law and being deprived of his labour power by capitalism. It is for this reason that Deleuze and Guattari condemn the practice of psychoanalysis, through which desire is determined to desire its own repression as “a gigantic enterprise of absorption of surplus value.” In this result, this irreducible inequality forms the condition of the world. According to Deleuze and Guattari, Lawrence is a novelist who only affirms “pantheism of flows” in his characters so as to de-oedipalize the capitalism. As Lawrence considers capitalism as “ugly relationship” between labourer and capitalist, revolution is to live as univocal being, a life that is immanent, which means Paul’s passage of a life can break the alliance between oedipal law and capitalism.
Abstract
The aim of this paper is to discuss Paul’s vitality as living individual and its critique of capitalism in D. H. Lawrence’s Sons and Lovers. Paul as a living individual feels as if his body were living empty. This being is univocal because through ‘combat-between’ he realizes his power in a life. It is this mode of individuation that overcomes the static identity and abolish work. Because univocal being must be conceived as difference that “constitutes being as a synthetic multiplicity.” This intensive life defeats the logic of identification in the modern civilization. In this novel, Paul is becoming through a dissolved self, which is no longer imprisoned within the fixed subjectivity and consists of events and singularities. As opposed to a subjectivity, Paul’s individuality is the force of non-organic life and an event, not a thing or a person. In this sense, Paul equilibrates himself with others, even nature. His creative journey can make things have fluid relationship with the circumambient universe. Deleuze says that this indefinite life attains a sort of beatitude. In this novel, Paul attains a life’s “very ecstasy of living, the highest point of bliss” in which a man reaches his fullest living and lives in immanent life. The psychoanalytic conception of desire is lack and the desire is repressed by the Oedipal law. But the Oedipus is the effect of social repression on desiring production. Desire is not a lack of something and doesn’t refer to any law which traditional psychoanalysis supports. In this regard, revolution consists of “the repetition of the future in its difference” just as positive desire functions heterogeneous in the field of immanence. For, Deleuze and Guattari, desire includes no lack: it is revolutionary because desire as productive process, desiring machine, prevents the body from being repressed by the Oedipal Law and being deprived of his labour power by capitalism. It is for this reason that Deleuze and Guattari condemn the practice of psychoanalysis, through which desire is determined to desire its own repression as “a gigantic enterprise of absorption of surplus value.” In this result, this irreducible inequality forms the condition of the world. According to Deleuze and Guattari, Lawrence is a novelist who only affirms “pantheism of flows” in his characters so as to de-oedipalize the capitalism. As Lawrence considers capitalism as “ugly relationship” between labourer and capitalist, revolution is to live as univocal being, a life that is immanent, which means Paul’s passage of a life can break the alliance between oedipal law and capitalism.
참고문헌 (32)
- 고영란, "『아들과 연인』의 서술상의 실험과 그 성패", D.H. 로렌스 연구, 19(1), pp.23~40 (2011), 한국로렌스학회
- 니콜래스 쏘번, "들뢰즈의 맑스주의: 민중이 없는 시대의 소수정치" (2005), 갈무리
- 로렌스, "아들과 연인. I. II" (2008), 민음사
- 서동욱, "들뢰즈의 철학-그 사상과 원천" (2002), 민음사
- 윤영필, "D. H. 로렌스의 소설과 타자성" (2009), 도서출판 동인
- Deleuze, Gilles, "Critical and Clinical" (1997), U of Minnesota Press
- Deleuze, Gilles, "Difference and Repetition. Trans" (1994), Columbia UP
- Deleuze, Gilles, "Negotiations" (1997), Columbia UP
- Deleuze, Gilles, "Nietzsche and Philosophy. Trans. Hugh Tomlinson" (2004), Athlone Press
- Deleuze, Gilles, "Pure Immanence. Trans. Anne Boyman" (2001), Zone Books
- Deleuze, Gilles, "Spinoza: Practical Philosophy. Trans. Robert Hurley" (1988), City Lights Books
- Deleuze, Gilles, "Desire and Pleasure,” Two Regimes of Madness, in Ames Hodges and Mike Taormina" (2006), Semiotext
- Deleuze, Gilles, "Anti-Oedipus" (1983), U of Minnesota P
- Deleuze, Gilles, "A Thousand Plateaus" (1987), U of Minnesota P
- Lawrence, D. H, "Chaos in Poetry, Introductions and Reviews" (2005), Cambridge UP
- Lawrence, D. H, "Introduction to these Paintings, in Late Essays and Articles" (2004), Cambridge UP
- Lawrence, D. H, "Phoenix: The Posthumous Papers of D. H. Lawrence" (1936), William Heinmann
- Lawrence, D. H, "Poetry of the Present, in Complete Poems" (1994), Penguin
- Lawrence, D. H, "Pornography and Obscenity, in Late Essays and Articles" (2004), Cambridge UP
- Lawrence, D. H, "Psychoanalysis and the Unconscious and Fantasia of the Unconscious" (2004), Cambridge UP
- Lawrence, D. H, "Reflections on the Death of a Porcupine and Other Essays" (1988), Cambridge UP
- Lawrence, D. H, "Selected Letters of D. H. Lawrence" (2000), Cambridge UP
- Lawrence, D. H, "Sons and Lovers" (2006), Penguin
- Lawrence, D. H, "Study of Thomas Hardy and Other Essays" (1985), Cambridge UP
- Lee, Young-Zun, "On the Artistic Significance of Paintings and Picutres in D. H. Lawrence’s Novels", D. H. 로렌스 연구, (6), pp.155~172 (1998)
- Milton, Colin, "Lawrence and Nietzsche: A Study of Influence" (1987), Aberdeen UP
- Monaco, Beatrice, "Machinic Modernism: The Deleuzian Literary Machines of Woolf, Lawrence and Joyce" (2009), Palgrave Macmillan
- Pearson, Keith Ansell, "Germinal Life: The Difference and Repetition of Deleuze" (1999), Routledge
- Stevens, Hugh, "Sex and the Nation: ‘Prussian Officer’ and Women in Love, in The Cambridge Companion to D. H. Lawrence" (2001), Cambridge UP
- Thoburn, Nichlolas, "Deleuze, Marx and Politics" (2003), Routledge
- Tynan, Aidan, "The Marx of Anti-Oedipus, in Deleuze and Marx" (2009), Edinburgh UP
- Zepke, Stephen, "Art as Abstract Machine" (2005), Routledge