英国硕士论文 The Fine Line Between Love And Hate

在毛里斯,我们看到爱和恨是相似的,在他的嫉妒,在他的痴迷。而在莎拉那里是信仰的飞跃是伴随着和平和翻译她爱德里克斯作为对神的爱。这两个对立的爱情在小说中的讽刺和真理背后是什么使它现实。甚至是在关系中的一些神秘的感觉,即使是在小说中的实际奇迹的存在。关系持有这种变革的质量,因为这种情绪是永远不会完全在一个背景下定义的。

在这两套信仰,信徒的人犹犹豫豫的结论有一个神,看起来对他仇恨使他感到无助。这种仇恨然而共鸣与恐惧感是因为他害怕不确定性的亵渎的飞跃。在这篇文章中,他提到“一个不能爱什么也不做。”这是在肉体上,毛里斯对莎拉的爱的花朵,没有它的形体是他留下的不确定性。他留下了一些他怀疑的东西。小说中的爱情都被看作是亵渎神圣的但不一定在同一时间。

这带来了没有仇恨的爱的可能性的问题。如果不是相反的,甚至是与恨相结合,爱仍然是爱吗?希望没有绝望?看来,一个人选择希望因为BOT似乎每个人都能够做到。什么使它更有趣的是,这两个观点来自一个单一的关系。在莎拉的案例中,有一种感觉,Marcel的“我相信你”。在爱的毛里斯中,她从这份爱中找到了希望。毛里斯在另一方面发现了相反的是真的,他是抢劫的莎拉作为一个现实,所以没有希望。然而,在最后这个意义上是毛里斯选择相信,以保持她与他。这感觉

很容易只是说仇恨关闭我们与神隔绝,但在小说中什么是爱与恨不断互换。毛里斯希望莎拉将他留下的失望,因为他的期望和条件是肉体是她必须离开亨利。Marcel指出,这种希望不是真的希望。最后在他绝望而失去莎拉死刑德里克斯勉强相信上帝的不完全而失去莎拉。正如爱是可以互换的,什么都不恨,都需要彼此的存在。毛里斯对莎拉的希望依赖于她离开他时所经历的绝望,她承认她对他并不是最棒的。

在众多的插件和他们的关系是作为一种手段去见上帝是否愿意或不情愿地在其他。在这些实现了不公开展示。在Hick的神正论是通过媒介,我们最熟悉的展示,人与人之间的关系。在小说中,如果没有毛里斯或莎拉,如果他们没有彼此的话,上帝会缺席的。在其他人中,我们找到了绝望和希望的原因。爱,最终上帝是通过恨和爱,损失和痛苦,绝望和希望找到的。

In Maurice we see love and hate as similar; in his jealousy, in his obsession. While in Sarah there is that leap of faith which is accompanied by peace and a translation of her love for Bendrix as a love for God. The irony and truth behind these two opposite realizations of love within the novel is what makes it realistic. Even the sense of something mystical within relationships, even the presence of actual miracles as displayed in the novel. Relationships hold this transformative quality and because of this emotions are never solely defined under one context.

Within these two sets of belief, that of a believer and someone who hesitatingly concludes there is a God and looks upon Him with hatred making him feel helpless. This hatred however resonates with a sense of fear because he is afraid to take a leap without certainty of the profane. In this passage he mentions that “one cannot love and do nothing.” It is in physicality that Maurice’s love for Sarah blossoms and without the physicality of it he is left without certainty. He is left with something he doubts. In the novel love is seen as both a profane and sacred but not necessarily at the same time.

This brings forth the question of the possibility of love without hate. Would love still be love if it were not opposite or even combined with hate? Hope without despair? It seems that one chooses to hope because bot everyone seems able to do it. What makes it more interesting is that these two perspectives come from a singular relationship. In Sarah’s case there is a sense of Marcel’s “I believe in Thee for us”. In loving Maurice she found hope from this love. Maurice on the other hand finds the opposite to be true, he is robbed of Sarah as a reality and so there is no hope. However in the end this sense is something Maurice chooses to believe in order to keep her with him. This sense

It would be easy to simply say that hatred closes us off from God but in the novel what love is constantly interchanged with hate. In Maurice’s hope that Sarah would be his he is left disappointed because of the physicality of his expectations and the condition that to be is she must leave Henry. As Marcel points out this kind of hope is not truly hope. In the end however in his despair of losing Sarah to death Bendrix begrudgingly believes in God for the sake of not losing Sarah totally. Just as love is interchangeable with hate nothing and both need each other to exist. Sarah’s hope for Maurice is dependent on the despair she experiences in leaving him, in acknowledging that she is not the best for him.

In the numerous ins and out of their relationship love is used as a means to see God whether willingly or begrudgingly in the other. In a way these realizations are learned instead of overtly shown. In a way Hick’s theodicy is shown here through a medium most familiar to us, human relationships. In the novel God would be absent for either Maurice or Sarah if they did not have each other. In other people we find reason to despair and to hope. Love and ultimately God is found through hate and love, loss and suffering, despair and hope.