One story, two interpretations

Kiana 2022-12-16 20:40:57

One of the more interesting things about this movie is that my personal interpretation is a little off. Assuming I haven't read the original.

Or I understand it in a more labelled way, this is a cheating story. The scene where Charles met Sarah on the embankment, looking back at each other, was too straightforward. I thought at the time: shit, this guy just proposed and turned his head and fell in love with someone else.

"Dog blood" is because there is no emotional logic, and without external pressure on the characters, a few words are used as a foreshadowing (- she is too dangerous to stand there - people call her the woman of the French lieutenant, she is a lunatic), a Look at each other to complete the emotional transition.

Love at first sight in two cases can be understood by me: 1. The appearance is crushed. 2. Gene controls expression. People's preferences, big or small, may originate from specific reactions to certain chemical substances. Just like a person likes sugar, it is because the process and results of some biochemical reactions in his body exceed the average level. . The intense stimulation of one person's smell, color, and sound just happens to hit another person's transcription switch, which can be "love at first sight", just like ferrous ions are oxidized, plants photosynthesize, and sound waves can wash glasses. Love at first sight is a bunch of quantifiable equations, and even case 1 is a genetic advantage.

Is love at first sight an animal, is a human being human because of animal nature, or is human being human because of human nature?

So Charles meets Sarah, and animality instantly triumphs over self-restraint. It may be said that there will be a second and third encounter later, and the encounters have helped Charles to break through the constraints. But the shooting method of the embankment meeting has already been knocked out.

It was almost doomed that he wanted to miss her again and meet her again, and the subsequent contact was not a boost, but no doubt.

Even if Charles' repentance words fall into the scumbag routine, he didn't say "I fell in love with Sarah", he said "I'm not worthy of you", "I love your father's money", "We have known each other for many years, I I found that I still love her", and even "I'm afraid of hurting you". Why didn't he show his sincerity, why didn't he dare to say her name? Is it for your own business? Or do you really have some feelings left, for fear of hurting your fiancée's heart? After all, the object of his empathy is a little embarrassing.

In fact, he is a cowardly person, even a Kochi scientist?

He used a lot of results to prompt and profile the fundamental reason, so he could not be directly accused of being wrong, because he was not wrong. His fiancée may be tacky but she's not an idiot, so she rips him off.

On the importance of refining character archetypes, "I'm not worthy of you", "I love your father's money", "We have known each other for many years, but I found that I still love her", "I'm afraid of hurting you". It is timeless to travel through the decades.

By the time they rolled the sheets, Sarah said, "Do what you do or what you should do, and now I know you love me, I can endure it, you've given me the strength to live." Her voice It's a little soft, I think, she's almost finished, if she really endures everything for him, then she's completely finished.

So she went.

Perhaps for the sake of Sarah's sincerity and integrity, Sarah is a virgin. What if she wasn't a virgin? Combined with the background of the times, can it further inspire Charles to complete his personality transformation?

Until Charles gritted his teeth and said "I will sign". Be a person.

The growth of the characters is completed, and the story slides to the end.

Another modern plot that is synchronously interspersed may have more interpretations, but I only use it as a set of comparisons, the same variables, the results produced in different environments, the former is the butterfly change from animal to human, the latter Humanity kills animality.

After reading it, I turned to an analysis, which is another way of interpretation.

In the original timeline, the feelings of Sarah and Charles are combined with the soul and the flesh. In the modern timeline, the feelings of Anna and Mike are separated from the soul and the flesh. It is because of this separation and the swaying of the characters in their choices that they finally go to pain. .

Their first meeting was not an animal overcoming self-restraint, but a kind of "psychic". At the seaside, Sarah looked back and saw Charles, Charles saw Sarah, and Sarah fell in love because of "perception" Charles, because Sarah is an eccentric woman, she often overlooks the sea, but the people in the town don't care about her except whispering, only Charles falls from the sky like a thorn.

Maybe love is Schrödinger's cat, "seeing" means "existing". At the moment when it can be observed, Sarah's coordinates are determined.

Of course, the scene is also very romantic. The strong wind and huge waves are all images, in order to set off only Charles knows how to appreciate Sarah's loneliness.

In the modern plot, the proliferation and availability of sex in modern life, so the spirit and the flesh can be easily separated, but when people have a relationship, they cannot be completely separated from love. Anna looked in the mirror twice, the first time she entered the play, the second time she appeared in the play, but she did not confirm herself, and maybe Mike did not bring her to confirm herself.

There is no right or wrong interpretation. The thickness of the classic lies in the fact that it is very interpretable. Because of its refinement, it is possible to see the big from the small.

When the original is made up, there should be more opinions.

View more about The French Lieutenant's Woman reviews

Extended Reading

The French Lieutenant's Woman quotes

  • Sarah: He was handsome. No man had ever paid me the kind of attentions he did as he was - recovering. He told me I was beautiful - and that he could not understand why I was not married. Such things. He would mock me - lightly. I took *pleasure* in it.

  • Dr. Grogan: I am a young woman of superior intelligence and some education. I am not in full command of my emotions. What is worse, I have fallen in love with being a victim of fate. Enter a young god. Intelligent, good-looking. Kind. My one weapon is the pity I inspire in him.