The Translation of D. H. Lawrence’s Metaphors: the French Censored Passages in “The Rainbow” as a Case in Point

The aim of this study is to explore D. H. Lawrence’s style through the prism of his use of metaphor. As a particularly enlightening method, I shall compare some of the censored passages in “The Rainbow” (1915) against their French translations (1939, 2002). Focusing my attention on their stylistic particularities, I will examine the manner in which they were translated into French. The central argument of my paper is that Lawrence’s metaphors related to the body are a relevant tool highlighting the author’s vision of human relationships, within the context of prevalent views in the beginning of the 20th century. The British authorities banned “The Rainbow” since its first publication and accused Lawrence of pornography. Therefore, it is important to glance back in order to understand the reason behind the censorship and see that the translations of Lawrence’s oeuvre were decisive in spreading his ideas beyond the frontiers of his country of origin. My analysis mainly draws on a descriptive approach but it is at the crossroads of several paradigms, namely the interpretative approach in Translation Studies and the cognitive approach to the study of metaphors.


Introduction
This paper is part of a larger, on-going research project aiming to study the style in D. H. Lawrence's The Rainbow (1915) and its two French translations respectively published 1 Aïcha Louzir is a six-year PhD candidate in Translation Studies under the supervision of Christine Reynier and Adriana Şerban at Paul-Valéry University, in Montpellier (France). Her researches target translator's style and creativity through the prism of metaphor analysis in D. H. Lawrence's novel, The Rainbow. She has been working as a freelance translator since 2011, mainly translating into Arabic. From 2012 to 2016, she was in charge of teaching at the AFF department at Paul-Valéry University. She is also a professional trainer of French as a Foreign Language. in 1939 and2002, through the analysis of metaphors relating to the human body. The methodology adopted is at the same time a qualitative and a quantitative one, within the framework of a corpus-based approach to translation. It is important to specify that 12 long passages were censored. I shall only deal with a selection of examples from the English novel and their French translations. My interest lies in understanding the mechanism of translating metaphors and the manner in which the translator renders metaphorical images into French. I would also like to explore to what extent a translation is successful in producing new metaphorical images to bridge the gap between the source and the target culture.

The reasons behind the censorship of The Rainbow
Under the influence of The Obscene Publications Act of 1857, the novel was censored for eleven years in England after it was first published in 1915. D. H. Lawrence was charged with pornography, and copies of the book were seized and burned. Lawrence was also criticised by some other authors writing at the time, such as T. S. Eliot who was struck by "the absence of any moral or social sense" in Lawrence's characters, "who are supposed to be recognisably human beings, [but] betray no respect for, or even awareness of, moral obligations, and seem to be unfurnished with even the most commonplace kind of conscience" (Eliot 1934: 37, my addition). Eliot (1934: 65-66) also qualified Lawrence's vision as "spiritually sick", a vision that "may appeal to the sick and debile and confused". Thus, pornography and lack of morality were the main accusations that Lawrence faced at the time. As a matter of fact, a number of scenes, in particular female same-sex relationship in The Rainbow, were at the origin of the relentless accusation that Lawrence experienced. In Lesbian Scandal and the Culture of Modernism, Jodie Medd explains that eroticized female friendships -specifically romances between schoolgirls and their seductive teachers -are coded by their narrators as distinctly alluring but also perverse and dangerous, and are regarded by legal authorities as worthy censorship <...>. Furthermore, in Lawrence's case, highly eroticized female same-sex passions were provocatively represented within a modernist novel that aimed to disrupt all established conventions, from conventional morality to conventional plot and readerly expectations. The bathing scene between Ursula and her schoolmistress in the chapter "Shame" was singled out in reviews and the obscenity trial of the novel, but it was only part of the novel's blasphemous, overtly sexual, and implicitly anti-war stance that resulted in its suppression (Medd 2012: 17, emphasis in the original).
Thus, D. H. Lawrence challenged the standards of English society insofar as social conventions and norms were concerned. On the one hand, Lawrence openly expressed anti-war position in his novel, as highlighted by Jansohn and Mehl (2014: 3): "No wonder some English critics considered Lawrence's vision of England as an offence to national pride". Secondly, even if heterosexuality was the dominant accepted stance, it was not totally accepted to explicit sexual scenes in literary works. In addition to those two aspects, the author dared to portray homosexuality openly. Lawrence's own attitude after the censorship of The Rainbow hurt his reputation. According to Jansohn and Mehl (2014: 3), "the controversial and aggressively committed nature of Lawrence's writings has, from the first, generally proved more divisive than was beneficial for his literary reputation". It seems worth noticing that not only the content of his oeuvre was offensive but also his general attitude towards the readers. In fact, Lawrence was embittered and sarcastic because of the criticism that he had experienced. The tension is palpable for instance when he advises his readers not to get involved in exploring his essay Fantasia of the Unconscious: "I warn the generality of readers, that this present book will seem to them only a rather more revolting mass of wordy nonsense than the last. I would warn the generality of critics to throw it in the waste paper basket without more ado" (Lawrence 1922: 7). It is also relevant to highlight Lawrence's attempt to rise them against him: "And I wish I could mix a few more metaphors, like pops and legs and boots, just to annoy you" (Lawrence 1922: 117).

Metaphors as a powerful device in Lawrence's literary style
D. H. Lawrence uses metaphors very often in order to conceptualise a new ethics of the relationships between human beings based on different representations of their bodies in various situations, such as birth, death, miscarriage and sex. Lawrence's metaphors act like an experimental laboratory where the Self should find its own way as an individual, not as part of the group. Lawrence rejects the industrialised mainstream and believes that human bodies should escape the influence of the machine. Otherwise, human beings will be condemned to live in mere "carcasses". According to Lawrence, the process of individualisation can only happen when a person frees his/her blood from all the particles that 'pollute' it. Consequently, my own interest in the analysis of metaphors relating to the body and their translations springs from the observation that metaphors constitute an important stylistic device in his writing that should be carefully considered. It goes without saying that a successful translation should take into account aspects of, to put it in Fowler's words, the writer's "linguistic fingerprints " (1996: 186).
It is important to bear in mind that the translation of a metaphor cannot be reduced to the mere sum of the words that compose it. It is, rather, about determining its purpose, in order to preserve the metaphorical image and its effect. Indeed, translating metaphors can only be envisaged through a communicative strategy based on three pillars; that is to say, the author, the translator and the reader. According to Hatim and Mason (2013: 3-4), translation is <…> a process, involving the negotiation of meaning between producers and receivers of texts. In other words, the resulting translated text is to be seen as evidence of a transaction, a means of retracing the pathways of the translator's decision-making procedures. In the same way, the ST itself is an end-product and again should be treated as evidence of a writer's intended meaning rather than as the embodiment of the meaning itself.
In the text that makes the object of this study, metaphors are an integral part of the backdrop of the narrative. Due to the cultural anchoring of metaphors, the translator must endeavour to find a comparable cognitive representation in the host culture that allows the reader to access the meaning of a metaphor in order to fully appreciate a literary work. Moreover, it is worth noticing that translating metaphors is a difficult task insofar as [t]here is no simplistic general rule for translation of metaphor, but the translatability of any given SL metaphor depends on (1) the particular cultural experiences and semantic associations exploited by it, and (2) the extent to which these can, or not, be reproduced non-anomalously in TL, depending on the degree of overlap in each particular case (Dagut 1976: 32).
There is a persistent double constraint regarding the translation of metaphors. In fact, Andersen (2000: 59) wonders if the translator should find "the underlying metaphorical concepts in the source-text" and "translate these into equivalent metaphorical concepts in the target-text". Otherwise, should the translator "start by finding the metaphorical linguistic items" in order to "translate these into similar linguistic items?" It is obvious that a metaphor conveys a mental image but it is also shaped according to a linguistic pattern; for instance, thanks to the repetition of a same image throughout a literary work. In that case, both the cognitive and linguistic aspect should be taken into consideration. It seems also plausible to suggest that one of the difficulties lies in the process of interpretation, which is highly subjective: "How do we ensure when translating that the reader of our translation also experiences a change in mental state, and that those changes, too, have at least something in common with those we have ourselves experienced?" (Boase-Beier 2006: 74).

French translators of The Rainbow
D. H. Lawrence's The Rainbow has so far been translated twice into French. The first translation, by Albine Loisy, was based on the censored edition of the novel and was published by Gallimard as early as 1939. The second translation, by Jacqueline Gouirand-Rousselon, was published by Autrement in 2002. Interestingly enough, the back cover of Loisy's translation briefly mentions that the novel was banned in England, but this edition does not give further information. Thus, the reader is not informed about the fact that the translation corresponds to the expurgated English language edition of the novel. It is worth noticing that the retranslation appeared 63 years after Loisy's translation. This temporal gap suggests that some differences have been implemented in the use of the French language. Reader's knowledge of Lawrence's literary work has also evolved. In fact, according to Jansohn and Mehl (2014: 3), "for some later generations" of readers, the "disregard of conventional inhibitions" was "in tune with modern sensibilities, indeed, liberating <…>". Yet, regrettably, neither of the translations carries a preface, which would have been an invaluable source of information for future translators and translation scholars alike.

Analysis of the censored passages in The Rainbow and their French translations
In this section, I propose to carry out fine-gained analyses of eight passages out of twelve from The Rainbow and their French translations. Because of space constraints in this article, I will not be able to explore the entire censored excerpts. For each example, I will first give the complete passage before expurgation, followed by its translation and a back translation into English. The censored part in the source text (ST) and its translation in the target text (ST) will be highlighted in bold. From Example 2 to Example 8, the whole passages are absent in the censored edition. I shall use the abbreviations below: ST1: represents selected excerpts from Oxford World's Classics' complete edition of 1997; ST2: represents selected excerpts from A Penguin Book's censored edition of 1915 and 1976; TT1: represents French excerpts from the first translation by Loisy in 1939; TT2: represents French excerpts from the second translation by Gouirand-Rousselon in 2002. The first example from first chapter "How Tom Brangwen Married a Polish Lady", highlights Tom's desire to spend the night with an unknown woman he met. His desire progressively grows, and he finds himself experiencing a real sexual turmoil. Yet, Tom is a timid man who is not able to approach women openly.

ST1
Afterwards he glowed with pleasure. By Jove, but that was something like! He stayed the afternoon with the girl, and wanted to stay the night (Lawrence 1997: 28).

Gloss
After that, he was beaming with joy. Good Lord! That, it was something! He spent the afternoon with the girl and wanted to stay for the night.

ST2
Afterwards he glowed with pleasure. That was a different experience. He wanted to see more of the girl (Lawrence 1976: 18).

Gloss
Later, he beamed with pleasure. Because it had been a new experience. He would have wanted to see the girl again. The scene depicted in the complete edition of The Rainbow is more explicit than the edition of 1976. "By Jove" is an old English expression, which was often used in the farming sphere. It refers to the King of the Gods, Jupiter. It also represents an alternative to the swearword "by God", which was considered blasphemy until the 19th century. The interjection "parbleu" in the second French translation conveys the same effect as the English expression "by Jove". In the English novel before the editorial revision required by the publishing house before any censorship, Lawrence uses the metaphor "he wanted to see more of the girl" associated with a wish to spend the night with her, which allows the reader to imagine the impatience of the character and his haste to discover the body of the unknown lady whose description suggests that she is a girl of easy virtue.
Loisy's translation, "revoir la jeune fille" (to see the girl again), establishes a different angle of view, which is slightly more innocent. The metaphor "he stayed the afternoon with the girl, and wanted to stay the night" emphasises the intensity of desire and an implicit need to uncover the body. There is a certain repressed effervescence in Tom, as desire takes over his body. Yet, the English passage becomes more descriptive in the French translations: respectively, "He would have liked to see the girl again", and "he wanted to stay for the night". It is interesting to note that Gouirand-Rousselon translates "he glowed with pleasure" by "il rayonnait de joie" (he was beaming with joy). In fact, the English metaphor offers a brief experience through the use of simple past, while the French reader is exposed to a longer scene, because of the use of 'imparfait' verb tense, which highlights description and long actions par excellence. The rhythm is different: explosion of pleasure in English and radiance of joy in French. Unfortunately, there are very few footnotes in both translations and, as a result, the French readership might be unaware of the editorial revision of this passage and its censorship later. Unfortunately, as Jean-Yves Masson (2017: 639) suggests, it is rather common, in France, not to 'pollute' texts with additional information. Moreover, Masson asserts that "some exceptions can be spotted the translations of religious texts". Yet, generally speaking, "some [French] translators think that they should not use footnotes". According to Masson, a translator's constraint is to "provide the clearest and the most 'consumable' text" 2 .
My second example comes from chapter 8 of The Rainbow, entitled "The Child". Lawrence uses almost the same metaphor as in Example 1 to highlight another character's intense desire. Will Brangwen is struggling not to give in and have an extramarital relationship.

Example 2 ST1
He wished he had a hundred men's energies, with which to enjoy her. He wished he were a cat to lick her with a rough, grating, lascivious tongue. He wanted to wallow in her, bury himself in her flesh, cover himself over with her flesh (Lawrence 1997: 234).

Gloss
He would have wanted to possess the energy of a hundred men to enjoy her. He would have wanted to be a cat to lick her with his rough, rugged, and lascivious tongue. He wanted to wallow in her, to make her flesh his shroud.
The initial image in the manuscript before the editorial revision is different. Lawrence writes a scene where the character is compared to a "tiger, which lapses Anna's blood and wrests her flesh" 3 (Cuny 2008: 70). The violence of a bestial desire is attenuated and replaced by a less explicit image after the revision required by the publishing house. Notwithstanding the revision, this passage was later on censored.
Gouirand-Rousselon's translation does not weaken the English scene; in other words, a series of brief images that depict the beginning of an intense desire. The metaphor of the cat associated with the verb "to lick" and the three adjectives were probably censored because they suggest a rather explicit oral sex performance. There is certain slowness in the representation of the scene, in the French translation. Moreover, the metaphor "he wanted to wallow in her, bury himself in her flesh, cover himself over with her flesh" corresponds to a key scene in the novel: once the character's desire is fulfilled at the end of the book, he will be metaphorically compared to a corpse: satisfying one's desire results in a metaphorically death sentence in the novel. This example perfectly illustrates Lawrence's repetitive style at the level of syntax as well as semantics. The author's tendency to use repetition complicates the task of the translator. Gouirand-Rousselon opts for the metaphor "il désirait se vautrer en elle, faire de sa chair son linceul" (he wanted to wallow in her, to make her flesh his shroud). The first part of the French metaphor is a literal translation of the original, but the translator then uses a different image (make her flesh his shroud or blanket) that still conveys the same effect; in other words, hiding the body. Her intention is probably to avoid the redundancy resulting from the juxtaposition of "wallowing in her", "burying himself in her" and "covering himself with her flesh". Gouirand-Rousselon's translation is doubly interesting insofar as she uses the noun "linceul" (shroud), which makes it possible to create a metaphor that preserves the image that the verb "bury" connotes in English; that is to say, to hide, to engross oneself in something and to put something under the earth, while maintaining the idea of a flesh-like canvas covering the body. Even if this metaphor is completely absent from the first French translation of the novel, it seems necessary to underline that Loisy translates "energy" by "force" (strength) and employs a French verb "jouir" that makes explicit the idea of having an orgasm. Lawrence's use of repetition is constant throughout the novel. In Example 3 from chapter 11, "First Love", he weaves a complex relationship between Tom's granddaughter, Ursula, and Skrebensky. The sentence in bold is missing from the first French translation.

TS1
She yielded to him, and he pressed himself upon her in extremity, his soul groaning over and over: 'Let me come -let me come. ' She took him in the kiss, hard her kiss seized upon him, hard and fierce and burning corrosive as the moonlight (Lawrence 1997: 320).

Gloss
She gave in to him, unable to contain herself, he pressed himself against her, his soul constantly moaning: -Let me kiss you, do not stop me. She took him in this kiss, but hers was cold, hard, violent and corrosive as the moonlight, seized Skrebensky.
The translator renders the repetition of the phrasal verb "let me come -let me come" in a different way since she avoids repetition. In back translation, the text reads, "let me kiss you, "do not stop me", let me do it", "let me take care of this", or even "submit to my will". Her translation foregrounds the idea of letting man's desire takes its course. According to Paul Bensimon (1999: 89), when repetition "plays a crucial function, and generates a certain rhythmicity, it acquires the status of figure and creates an interior space of language" 4 . Thus, Gouirand-Rousselon's translation weakens the metaphor even if it does not change the meaning, since French readers are still able to picture Skrebensky's entreaty. However, the metaphorical image is somehow different. In fact, Lawrence's immoderate use of repetition is never random: on the one hand, in Example 3, it highlights the words and actions of a man who is impatient to conquer the woman. In a way, Example 3 suggests the same metaphorical image as Example 1, that is to say, the man's desire is chained and about to blow up. The movement of his body is at the mercy of Ursula's approval. On the other hand, the slang use of the verb "to come" refers to having an orgasm.

Example 4 TS1
Ah, the wonderful firm limbs. If she could but hold them, hug them, press them between her own small breasts! Ah, if she did not so despise her own thin, dusky fragment of a body, if only she too were fearless and capable (Lawrence 1997: 336).
Gloss Ah! These strong and wonderful legs! If only she could hold them, hug them, press them against her small breasts! Ah! If only she did not despise so much her own body, barely sketched, thin and dark, if only she was fearless and expert too.
Example 4 from chapter 12 entitled "Shame" was one of the passages that were fraught with controversy during the novel's trial. Ursula describes her teacher's body she saw during a swimming session. She is experiencing a sense of physical and psychological discomfort, a sort of embarrassment that reflects her desire to look like Miss Inger. The lesbian nature of the scene is provocative, insofar as Lawrence challenges the limits of what could be addressed in literature at that time. Water scenes are interesting spaces in the narrative, as they allow the characters to have an alternative space to evolve differently. Michelucci (2001: 28) explains that, "in Lawrence's works, shame of the body and the rejection of its living impulses often issue in the characters' attempts to dominate and suppress the bodily spontaneity of others".
Firstly, Gouirand-Rousselon translates "limbs" by "jambes" (legs). Thus, she slightly modifies the metaphoric image by moving from the general to the precise. In English, 'limb' designates both legs and arms. The French word 'membre', which could have been an alternative, belongs rather to the anatomical lexical field. The translator's choice therefore can be said to have a more poetic dimension. Secondly, it is clear that Lawrence's metaphor "dusky fragment of a body" is not easy to decipher, because of the unusual use of "dusky". The British National Corpus lists a single example where this adjective co-occurs with the word 'body' in the fiction category. The image of a dark body is difficult to decipher and visualise. The word "fragment" implies a particular representation of the scene: that of a small body, a body smashed to pieces. In the translation, one finds the description of "un corps à peine ébauché, mince et sombre" (her own body, barely sketched, thin and dark). The translation thus diverges from the source text, even though the French metaphor does reveal an important aspect. In fact, in mechanics, the verb "ébaucher" is closely linked with using machining in order to be able to manufacture items. The use of "fragment" is deliberate in Lawrence's passage since he condemns the fact that bodies act like machines. The bodies of the characters in The Rainbow are reduced to carrying out mechanical tasks. It is important to bear in mind that the fragmented bodily representation in Lawrence's writing is a result of the influence of Marinetti's futuristic movement: "Lawrence's prose style significantly echoes the literary and pictorial styles promoted by the Italian futurist writers and artists whom he had consulted in his reading of two futurist volumes in the summer of 1914" (Harrison 2001: 45-46). Fragments are decisive pieces necessary for the functioning of the whole, that is to say, the body, which, according to Cuny (2008: 35), remains "evolutionary and unstable" in "the era of industry, psychology, anthropology and Darwinism". Given all these elements, the translator's choice perfectly corresponds to the marrow of Lawrencian writing.
Example 5 is also an excerpt from the chapter entitled "Shame". In the passage reproduced below, Lawrence compares to emerald the reflections of the pale green water in the swimming pool.

TS1
Miss Inger touched the pipe, swung herself around, and caught Ursula round the waist in the water, and held her for a moment against herself. The bodies of the two women touched, heaved against each other for a moment, then were separate (Lawrence 1997: 336).

Gloss
Miss Inger touched the edge, turned and wrapped her arms around Ursula's waist in the water, holding the girl against her. The bodies of the two women touched each other, heaved against each other for an instant then were separated again.
The verbs used by Lawrence suggest that the two bodies are constantly moving along a brief but renewable trajectory, in a kind of jerky movement. The metaphor, read in the whole chapter, evokes an assembly of pieces in a factory due to the use of the verb "to heave", which can be translated as "amarrer" in French (to moor or tie something down). Gouirand-Rousselon's translation preserves this metaphorical representation since she grasps the importance of keeping the lexical unit "the bodies" as the subject of the sequence of events. It would have been possible to translate "les corps des deux femmes se touchèrent" (the bodies of the two women touched each other) by "les deux femmes se touchèrent" (the two women touched each other); however, this would have created an understatement, and would have somewhat modified the scene. In other words, the self in Lawrence's vision is dependent on the body and evolves according to specific machinery. In this scene, when the bodies act, the self is at their mercy. Thus, even if both bodies remain active under the translator's pen, the metaphor of the mechanical body takes rather a more sensual turn.

TS1
'I shall carry you into the water'. Ursula lay still in her mistress's arms, her forehead against the beloved, maddening breast.
'I shall put you in', said Winifred.

But Ursula twined her body about her mistress.
After a while the rain came down on their flushed, hot limbs, startling, delicious (Lawrence 1997: 338).

Gloss
-I will carry you into the water. Ursula remained inert in the arms of her teacher, her forehead resting against the breast of her beloved, intoxicating.
-I will drop you in the water, Winifred said. But Ursula hugged her mistress with her whole body. After a while, the rain fell on their burning limbs, surprising them with delight.
The French translation "le front appuyé contre la poitrine de sa bien-aimée, enivrante" (her forehead resting against the chest of her beloved, intoxicating) makes the scene more explicit through the use of "resting against". The translator gives details about the environment by adding the word "water" in her translation: "Je vais vous porter jusque dans l'eau" (I will carry you in the water). In my opinion, her choice is plausible insofar as water often plays an important role in the Lawrencian narrative and is compared to the representation of the body: water as a bodily space. This idea is supported by, for instance, Michelucci (2001: 22), according to whom the "landscape for Lawrence" is "an environment which partakes [the] vital impulse [of bodies], and becomes itself a living body, pulsating matter". It also seems relevant to refer at this point to the concept of "water psychology" outlined by Gaston Bachelard (1942). In fact, water is the ideal environment for representing corporeal flow. Unlike earth, water is neither solid nor stable; it is a reflection of a desired reality. Transparent, clear water resonates with feminine nudity. Furthermore, in Bachelard's view, rivers have a sexual function. However, the water in Example 6 is that of a swimming pool, and consequently it does not connote its idealised function. Consequently, containing water in a pool can be read as a metaphor of a chained desire and the impossibility of its fulfilment: "it seems to be a closed object" (Cuny 2008: 135). Considering all the aspects mentioned above, it is possible to argue that the translator's choices correspond to the rhythm of the narrative in chapter "Shame": bodies become lighter, clothes are removed so that the flesh becomes more reactive, more sensitive to the other body it tries to approach. Even if the order of visualising the scenes in the French translation is different from that of the uncensored English version, the elements that make up the scene remain the same. Still, the sentence "but Ursula twined her body about her mistress" undergoes a slight modification. Gouirand-Rousselon translated it as "mais Ursula enlaça sa maîtresse de tout son corps" (but Ursula hugged her mistress with her whole body). The grammatical function of the word 'body' changes from a direct object complement in English to an adverb in French. Nonetheless, the intensity of the embrace is the same, even if the presentation of the relationship to the body is different in the English novel and its translation.
Moreover, the translation of the adjective "maddening" might be quite problematic in that the common English meaning does not correspond to the way Lawrence uses it. In fact, the adjective "maddening" commonly means "annoying", "exasperating" or "mad" (angry). In the British National Corpus, "maddening" is listed in the fiction category 37 times only and the given examples do not provide any significant help in contextualising Lawrence's choice. "Maddening" can be defined as 'tending to crave'. Consequently, the choice of the adjective "enivrante" (intoxicating, exhilarating or thrilling) is relevant; however, juxtaposing the French adjective with the nominal group "la poitrine de sa bienaimée" (the breast of her beloved) can create some confusion. Does the adjective refer to the beloved, or to the breast? A possible solution might be to place it before, even if such a choice weakens the syntax of the French sentence. This strategy can foreground the breast and avoid any form of ambiguity in the French translation.
Censorship in Example 7, also from the chapter "Shame" of The Rainbow, is somewhat unexpected. The scene portrays Winifred in Ursula's room, asking her whether she should marry her uncle. Winifred's question reflects a crisis of identity. Indeed, reading the whole passage can convey a feeling that marriage is to be considered as a choice to comply with society's expectations.

TS1
'But he's not like you, my dear -ha, he's not as good as you. There is something even objectionable in him -his thick thighs -' (Lawrence 1997: 350).

Gloss
But he does not look like you, my dear; Oh no! he is not worthy of you. There is even something unpleasant in him, his strong thighs.
It is surprising to notice that the phrase "his thick thighs" was deleted in the censored edition. Bearing in mind the main accusations related to the trial of the novel, this phrase is neither blasphemy nor pornography. Yet, it may not correspond to the "masculine ideal" of that time insofar as it conveys a reductive representation of masculinity. Within the framework of the whole passage in the chapter, "thick" does not refer to 'strong' thighs, but rather to a fat part of the man's body. The character's fat thighs can suggest the man's incapacity to satisfy women's desire. This phrase can be interpreted as a metaphor of the man's body as a burden. In other words, her marriage will not allow her to accept her true self. In "D. H. Lawrence's Representation of the Body and the Visual Arts", Michelucci (2001: 23) explains that "Lawrence's visual representation of the body in general is characterized by an emphasis on volume rather than on line, on effects of plumpness, fleshiness, physicality, and weight".
As far as the translation of this phrase is concerned, Gouirand-Rousselon chooses "ses fortes cuisses" (his strong thighs). Yet, "fortes" in French also reads as a polite way to describe fat persons. The image is the same but French punctuation creates a shift. While in the original the phrase is fragmented, both visually and syntactically, through the use of dashes, in the French translation it is juxtaposed with the previous sentence. Lawrence's writing style corresponds to a well-known technique in paintings. Thus, according to Michelucci (2001: 25), [a] symptomatic emphasis on single parts of the body is also often witnessed in the works of the visual and literary avant-garde. Such emphasis suggests a rupture between part and whole, and can be seen to represent the fragmentation of the modern world and the loss of vital unity between man and nature. Therefore, accentuating the volume of a body part indicates a lack of homogeneity and emphasises fragmentation. Lawrence employs punctuation in a specific manner to create visual effects related to the use of metaphors. This is also the case in Example 8 from Chapter 15, "The Bitterness of Ecstasy", in which Ursula offers her body to Anton. During the Easter vacation, they decided to spend some time together. They went to an hotel in Piccadilly.

TS1
Neither did any of the old obligations. They came home from the theatre, had supper, undressed, then flitted about in their dressing-gowns (Lawrence 1997: 452).

Gloss
The old obligations neither. When they returned from the theatre, they supped and then came and went in a dressing-gown. It is worth noticing that the verb "undressed" is juxtaposed with three verbs that create a series of successive actions. Again, Gouirand-Rousselon opts for the imparfait verb tense, which foregrounds description and highlights a certain habit in the past. This French tense can often be rendered through "used to" to explicit an idea of repeating an action over time. The translation is purely descriptive in this example. Under the translator's pen, the verb "undressed" is not mentioned. It is not possible to say exactly if the omission of the English verb is voluntary. Nevertheless, it is important to preserve it in the passage. Indeed, Lawrence progressively strips his characters, to free their bodies. Bodily nudity is the culmination of a deliberate technique in Lawrence's writing as well as in his paintings.

Conclusion and indications for further research
In this article, I have examined eight censored passages from the novel The Rainbow by D.H. Lawrence and its French translation by Jacqueline Gouirand-Rousselon. The analysis reveals that the translator has often managed to maintain the metaphorical representation in the English novel. However, the author's writing style and his tendency to use repetition have, on occasion, been softened. This tendency in translation goes hand in hand with a common stylistic French characteristic of avoiding repetition through the intensive use of synonyms. Such a strategy allows the translator to avoid a certain redundancy. In this regard, Bensimon (1990: 89, italics in the original) highlights translators' desire to improve the text: "Animated by the desire to embellish or to beautify, to poeticize the original text, the translator adds supplementary flourishes onto the source text". Yet, generally speaking, French translators shall balance the systematic use of synonyms in a rather excessive manner. It is also important to mention that the order in which the scenes are revealed differs sometimes between the original text and its translation. Consequently, body imageries are shaped differently. According to Didier Bottineau (2004: 116), "English tends to state the perceived elements in the actual order of their identification by the real or simulated observer" 5 . Then, adjusting the order of the metaphorical images in the translation is a technique that impoverishes Lawrence's writing on the body. Repetition in Lawrence's style is a deliberate choice that echoes the weight of social conventions, which enchains the characters. It also allows him to progressively construct his personal metaphorical tapestry. It is worth noticing that D. H. Lawrence warned his readers and literary critics that his use of metaphors is intentional. However, the translator's stylistic and semantic amendments do not mean that Gouirand-Rousselon's translation is doomed to fail, insofar as she counterbalances her translating choices by weighing various strategies that enable French-speaking readers to experience a similar effect as the one produced in the original novel. Thus, the translator's challenge lies in her ability to make a translational decision, which is respectful of both the standards of French stylistics and of Lawrence's style, particularly when it comes to body-related metaphors.
In order to enlarge the scope of my research, I would like to explore the representation of body metaphors in the Arabic translations of D. H. Lawrence's oeuvre in order to analyse the mental representations that metaphors in Arabic render. Another aspect that interests me is the question of reception. There have already been different studies on the reception of Lawrence in Europe, in countries such as Italy, Germany and France. To the best of my knowledge, the reception of his literary work in Arabic has not made so far the object of deep academic research, and it would be extremely interesting to see how the Arabic literary tradition has hosted the translation of an English novel censored in England decades ago. Granting importance to different translations of a literary work in different languages is a relevant approach to enrich the researches related to the study of metaphors and their translations as a key device to build one's vision of his/her own reality.