Greer on Chatterley

[polynices]

Here's Germaine Greer's polemic against Lawrence's Lady Chatterley's Lover, in today's Guardian:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2010/nov/14/germaine-greer-d-h-lawrence

 

[voluptuary_manque]

In what way is Germaine Greer's opinion pertinent to anything?

 

[AllardChardon]

I thought the article was perfectly wonderful and I want to thank you for posting it. I happen to be a historical erotica novelist and find all these kind of things from the past so fascinating.

 

[Pure]

thanks

it was a fun read. nice invective. it's fun because the alleged 'liberal' or 'emancipatory' views of Lawrence or his characters are fair game indeed.



as to the exact 'charges', i'd quibble, but that's hardly the point: 1) a person, esp. a woman, reading it won't learn to fuck. (which work of literature teaches that?) and 2) Mellors is a retro, woman-hating asshole:

greer Mellors agrees [women are forced to have sex]]: "The mass of women are like this: most of them want a man, but don't want the sex." Connie is afflicted with a restless modern woman's brain, in so far as she is possessed of a brain at all. For all her education, dimly wondering is what she does best. The sex she has with the gamekeeper is what blues singers call "dry shaving". Wham, bam and no thank you ma'am. "He hated mouth-kisses."

One thing the innocent reader will not learn from Lady Chatterley's Lover is how to fuck. If you are a woman, you learn that you do "wild little cries", the same wild little cries that you will hear porn stars faking on every video. It seems to Mellors that women are "nearly all Lesbian" and when he's with a woman who's really lesbian, he fairly howls in his soul, "wanting to kill her". The evidence that women are lesbian is that they move during sex.

---
this last 'charge' is peculiar [esp. Mellors thinks most women are lesbian, because they move during sex]. whatever the character's views, they shouldn't be assumed to be Lawrence's.

a fine read, ms greer. thanks!!

 

[elfin_odalisque]

You miss the Lawrence point. His comment about Mellors thinking all women were lesbian was an attack on male prejudices at the time. Read 'Women in Love' or 'The Virgin and the Gypsy' . He was attacking male preconceptions and, in his way, trying to change mindsets.

 

[3113]

In what way is Germaine Greer's opinion pertinent to anything?

In what way is anyone's opinion of anything pertinent unless it's a plumber telling you that you need a new toilet?

It's okay, Bear. People have opinions and some of them make good reads, and some don't. This one, I think, has merit so far as it goes. Like Pure, I agree that it questions what I think should be questioned, which is whether Lady Chatterley is all that. It's a good thing to take what people praise, sometimes blindly, and ask if the Emperor really has any clothes.

I think that Greer's main point is that the sensationalism of the erotica may have blinded people to the fact that the man in the book is an asshole and the woman poorly written. In agreement with Pure, this doesn't mean that Lawrence was his character (an asshole). However, it does mean that the character might have long been praised for being what he's not, an emblem of erotic freedom. The sex trumps the characterization.

Greer argues that what was freeing was that people could read the book, not the book's message about sex. I think she rightly points out that the book doesn't present as positive a view of sex or women as people seem to think given its exalted reputation.

 

[Stella_Omega]

In what way is anyone's opinion of anything pertinent unless it's a plumber telling you that you need a new toilet?

It's okay, Bear. People have opinions and some of them make good reads, and some don't. This one, I think, has merit so far as it goes. Like Pure, I agree that it questions what I think should be questioned, which is whether Lady Chatterley is all that. It's a good thing to take what people praise, sometimes blindly, and ask if the Emperor really has any clothes.

I think that Greer's main point is that the sensationalism of the erotica may have blinded people to the fact that the man in the book is an asshole and the woman poorly written. In agreement with Pure, this doesn't mean that Lawrence was his character (an asshole). However, it does mean that the character might have long been praised for being what he's not, an emblem of erotic freedom. The sex trumps the characterization.

Greer argues that what was freeing was that people could read the book, not the book's message about sex. I think she rightly points out that the book doesn't present as positive a view of sex or women as people seem to think given its exalted reputation.

To all of this, yes.

 

[oggbashan]

It wasn't Lawrence's best book and except for the obscenity trial would have been of minor interest.

Og

 

[3113]

It wasn't Lawrence's best book and except for the obscenity trial would have been of minor interest.

Women in Love is better, but maybe that's only because it led to that great nude wrestling scene between Oliver Reed and Alan Bates in the film. Woof!

 

[amicus]

From the article:

Pornography is the literature of prostitution. Prostitution and art have always lived together.

The women who posed for Titian with armfuls of flowers and a nipple exposed were courtesans. Courtesans were the only presentable females young English gentlemen met on the Grand Tour; they reigned over the salons, they played the songs of the day and showed off the best and most precious works of the most distinguished artisans. The fact that they were cultivated and eloquent didn't make their virtue any less easy. If they hadn't been so accomplished, they would have been less seductive. In 17th- and 18th-century Europe art encouraged lust. Unfortunately the English seem to have been left short of both. They kept no glorious courtesans. They relieved themselves with women of the streets, who would do the deed for a mutton chop or a dish of coals. Gentlemen read their obscene poems in Latin, less often Greek, because that was the best way of keeping sexual excitement out of the reach of women and servants. The stories of the common folk were equally obscene, but they seldom reached the ears of educated folk. In the 19th century the two realms were converging; the great unwashed were increasingly able to read, and the educated classes were increasingly unable to read any language but English. By the time Lawrence began planning a tale of rude goings-on between a lady and a servant, a new mass readership was ripe for introduction to the joys of literary sex.

~~~

It should come as no surprise when one states that one reads what one wants to in any offering.

That first line that I bolded,

Pornography is the literature of prostitution. Prostitution and art have always lived together.

The innate curse of the intellectual is that they find the affairs of the common man mundane and boring. Telling, I think, "Pornography is the literature of prostitution." Think on that and muse. "Prostitution and art, with a small 'a', have always lived together."

Being 'smart', intellectual, is something we are born with; you either have it or you do not. What you do with it, is perhaps, to qualify that, a matter of environment, encouragement and opportunity.

Real Art, with a large 'A', reflects the human condition, not of the elite, the prostitutes and courtesans, but of the common man and the mainstream of human existence.

There is the, perhaps redeeming value, of the pornographer, the prostitute and the artiste, that expands the envelope of human experience in a beneficial manner, but that is subject to disagreement as the benefits are possibly overshadowed by the unintended consequences of fringe behavior.

When you savor your petite filet mignon & truffles, I doubt you think of the slaughter of the cattle or the rooting of the pig that discovered your truffle...and...perhaps you should?



as always...

amicus

 

[AllardChardon]

To truly understand a work of ART, one must consider the times and places in which the piece was created, whichever form. I do recall women were writing erotica under men's pen names to be published back then, unlike now where men are writing under women's pen names for the same purpose. I originally was going to use a male pen name for my writings, yes Allard Chardon, but reconsidered once my children grew up. LOL

 

[bronzeage]

When hurricane season comes to Louisiana, I find a book I always meant to read and set it aside for when the power fails. In the past few years, I waded through Absalom, Absalom!, As I Lay Dying and Lady Chatterly's Lover.

I kept looking for the "really dirty parts" and was disappointed. I concluded the obscenity trial was either for the publicity or for Lady Chatterly's decision to fuck beneath her station. No one had ever brought Bullfinch's Mythology to court for it's story of Leda and the Swan. Premarital bestiality ought to be a shock in any time and culture.


Greer's critique is not far off base until the very end when she confuses Lawrence with the character he created. Why assume Lawrence is hiding in the Gamekeepers cottage. He could just as easily be Lord Chatterly, impotent and confined to his motor powered wheelchair.

Greer has set her career on the idea all exchanges between men and women result in a winner and a loser. She sees prostitution in all its forms (her definition is very broad) as always a loss for the woman. "Pornography is the literature of prostitution." This poses a question. When I sit at my keyboard, typing out dirty stories for friends to enjoy, who is the whore in this instance?

 

[Verdad]

The pornography sentence alludes to the literal meaning of the word, but I’m not entirely certain where else Greer was aiming with it. That’s cool, though, because it makes me think.

I liked her critique because it basically makes this point: Controversial doesn’t necessarily equal good or great. A pretty obvious point to make, but often forgotten in the world of polarized, knee jerk opinions, and regurgitated political arguments. She may have been a tad too harsh on Lawrence, but I think she found a fine way to say something of contemporary relevance.

 

[squarejohn]

Lady Chatterley's Lover may have been shocking porn in its time, but nowadays it's pretty mild, on the order of modern romance novels.

 

[AllardChardon]

bronzeage, I have often wondered the same kind of thing about my dirty little mind exposed on paper for all to see. The only losing aspect I can see from reading erotica is maybe some bodily fluids that desperately desire release. hehehe

 

[bronzeage]

bronzeage, I have often wondered the same kind of thing about my dirty little mind exposed on paper for all to see. The only losing aspect I can see from reading erotica is maybe some bodily fluids that desperately desire release. hehehe

From what I have read of Greer's work over the past 40 years or so, it seems she would remove all sexual exchange between men and women, because it is the only way to achieve true equality. She sees sex as a woman's insurmountable weakness. Many men see it as their own weakness.

The internet has given us a great equalizing tool. You and I can exchange dirty stories with others, which is a form of sex, with little risk to ourselves. The internet may have exposed us to a new kind of danger, but it allows us to do so much more with relative safety.

 

[AllardChardon]

I cannot understand how sex can weaken anyone unless not properly matched. With the right chemistry, sexual intercourse is empowering to both partners.

 

[3113]

I cannot understand how sex can weaken anyone unless not properly matched.

Um, apparently you do understand. Sex can weaken anyone and everyone if not properly matched, and how likely, frequent or common is a proper match? I'd say that it's more common for sex to weaken one or both because of that then for it to empower because two lucky people have found their perfect match.

 

[AllardChardon]

I suppose the problem here for me is the word "weaken". The only times I have felt weakened by the sexual experience is when I was with a very selfish lover, one who took all and gave little except jism. Even when I masturbate, I do not feel weakened, just relieved. Often energized. Certainly far more relaxed and happy. And I do not have a regular partner, by the way.

Am I alone in this?

 

[bronzeage]

I cannot understand how sex can weaken anyone unless not properly matched. With the right chemistry, sexual intercourse is empowering to both partners.

I suppose the problem here for me is the word "weaken". The only times I have felt weakened by the sexual experience is when I was with a very selfish lover, one who took all and gave little except jism. Even when I masturbate, I do not feel weakened, just relieved. Often energized. Certainly far more relaxed and happy. And I do not have a regular partner, by the way.

Am I alone in this?

You would have to read more of Greer's work in order to understand her point of view. In The Female Eunuch, she argued a woman has to give up he sexuality in order to work with and compete with men in the real world.

To me, she seems to be saying a woman's sexuality always puts her in an inferior position to a man, in any exchange, in order to break even or win, she has to abandon or hide her feminine nature. The book was written decades before anyone ever heard of Meg Whitman or Carly Fiorina.

 

[3113]

I suppose the problem here for me is the word "weaken". The only times I have felt weakened by the sexual experience is when I was with a very selfish lover, one who took all and gave little except jism. Even when I masturbate, I do not feel weakened, just relieved. Often energized. Certainly far more relaxed and happy. And I do not have a regular partner, by the way.

Am I alone in this?

On this site? Of course you're not alone. But you can't use yourself or even us here as a model for all people or even all women or even all women in Western Culture. Not when our culture still treats sex as something mysterious, dirty, demonized, powerful (rather empowering), scandalous, shocking, secretive, and private. All of which leads it to be something that people tend, in their personal sexual lives, to tangled up with a lot of other emotions like guilt, resentment, depression, hurt and fear and rage.

Twenty years ago we had a Surgeon General who wanted to teach masturbation as normal and healthy. She was ousted and sex ed in schools still can't teach it. The message is that this is something no one is allowed to teach kids, hence, it must be dirty, bad, taboo. Given that sort of feeling surrounding it in our culture, why assume your empowerment from it the norm? It may be right, but that doesn't make it common.

 

[Huckleman2000]

I think Greer has made some interesting points, as bronzeage pointed out. But I wonder if the times have changed enough since The Female Eunuch to reassess her observations.

I think she's absolutely right that there are aggressive sexual overtones in the workplace, but I'm not certain that it's all against women. I mean, the exertion of authority by sexual objectification didn't just begin when women entered the ranks of management. There has always been a stifling degree of homophobia as well. In the high-testosterone world of Wall St., the language of homoerotic dominance is rampant, as it is in most Conservative power echelons. "Bend over and grab the ankles" is a Rush Limbaugh catch-phrase, for example.

Moreover, as women have risen through the ranks of management and into positions of power and influence, my experience has been that they can be every bit as willing to play power games with their sexuality and aggressiveness as ambitious men have been.

What I'm trying to say is that I don't believe it's the nature of men to exert authority through sexual objectification - rather, sexual objectification is a means of exerting authority, regardless of gender.

I've grown to understand sexuality as having two axes: Male-attraction/Female-attraction; and Dominance/Submission. What I understand Greer to be saying is that workplace discrimination is primarily an abuse along the Male/Female axis, and from her point-of-view as a woman in the '60s, she made some insightful points. But, with the benefit of more experience, I think the abuse is really on the Dominance/Submission axis. I see many powerful women happily oppressing from their hard-won seats in "the patriarchy."

 

[JackLuis]

I recently read LCL and referred to it in my story, Spreading Seeds.

What struck me is the sex is not erotic at all, Mellors just fucked her and pulled up his pants.
The odd thing is Lady C went back for more. I wondered if Laurence intended Mellor's "method" to be "normal" for the lower class and Lady C was so grateful for some dick, even if it didn't get her off?

All in all, I found it depressing and very unsatisfying.

 

[AllardChardon]

Thanks Huckleman, for the insightful response. I have always been interested in the dominance/submission aspect of sex, especially as I have gotten older. For some men, they NEED me to be a Dom to get the action going and for others they NEED for me to be submissive. Luckily for me, I am comfortable with both roles, to a rather vanilla point, I must admit.

 

[amicus]

There was a 20 second audio/video clip on a news outlet today, the tallest man and woman to every marry, according to the Guiness book of records; he was 6'10', she was 6'5".

I have been a part of that Metropolitan, big City life, where upwardly mobile singles engage in the pursuit of sexual release in a variety of ways, none conventional or traditional.

Although a full half of all Americans live in an urban environment, the percentage on the fast track is exceedingly small, on the order of "The Devil Wears Prada", where a very few set the trends for many.

There is also the college scene, where the intellectual sexual pecking order is established and solidified, especially the Ivy League schools that set the Beltway/DC government complex, that also functions to set nationwide trends in current behavior all across the nation, except San Francisco, which sips a different wine.

Trust you enjoyed the prelude, now the soliloquy: sex, as seen through a prostitute's eyes, differs from that of the merely promiscuous male or female seeking excitement and perhaps adventure. If it were not for sexually trasmitted diseases, some of them fatal, others most inconvenient and messy, and for the not so occasional pregnancy, then sex could be viewed as a sport of sorts, with no winners and no losers and a good time had by all.

Dominant/Submissive, are LGBT terminologies, those to whom sex is that game, that sport, that some choose to engage in.

In the animal world, sex is for procreation, with a perverted exception to the rule in a tiny minority.

In the human world, the sentient world, the world of focused minds and controlled emotions, the vast majority of humans insist on a moral factor when it comes to sexual exploitations, something the world of progressive hedonists have completely ignored. Well, not entirely, they disdain religious influence and the 'missionary' position and reject the bans on sodomy and oral sex....yes, those poor limited deluded Christians who stick to their guns and religion.

There are those who know far more about the history of human sexuality than I, but where they see enlightenment and emancipation, I see perversion an degradation.

I mean, hey, I have a right to my opinion, do I not?

Many say this is a porn site so what should I expect? To me this is an open forum with many excellent minds and writers and a site where, if I type the word, fuck, which I seldom do, the 'bots' won't change the word to 'baby', or some other innocuous word to protect the innocent.

No one can foretell the future, not even me, although I sense an ability to conceptualize where we are and extrapolate where we might be going.

With a population giving birth to less than two per woman, less than replacement rate, a society where a full half of the children born will never know their biological fathers, I perceive that society, as we know it, will not survive another generation.

Don't read that as an inevitable doomsday scenario, merely as a conclusion that the current trends are unsustainable and will either change or fail and society will degenerate to a lower level of civility.

Them's my thoughts...at this late hour...

Amicus