Sons and Lovers

[Janine]

Here's a listing of L's novels. Some of these are actually short stories, not novels. Aaron's Rod was 1922. However these are published dates, not when they were actually written. Women In Love was written around 1917 but did not get published until 1920.

Virgil, I would have to check back in (like I will miss something if I don't). I need to be banned like that person begging Logos to ban them on her blog. :lol:
Anyway, thanks for posting this list. Wait, why is Kangaroo listed twice? Also was Paul Morel (original novel of S&L) published late? I wonder what that novel is like and how it differs from S&L's...hummmm. So I was right -"Aaron's Rod" came right after WIL. I am a good guesser, aren't I?



Thanks. I'm quite proud of it. You should be very proud. I am sure it took a lot of doing and hardwork and taxed your brain, too!



Nice to share some fond memories. It is - glad I could share that with all of you. It brings my friend back to me in memory. He was a very special person. We met in 9th grade, friends for life.:)



:p :lol:



College is such a great time. Free and relatively little repsonsibilities. And you're out in the world for the first time. :bawling: I hate growing old.
*creaking body, creaking bones, sore neck* yes growing old is hateful isn't it? I want to start all over again and especially from those college days - they were the best! What fun we had in art college. And most of the people I meet there were crazy like me. I felt very much in my 'element'.



:blush: ;) Why are you blushing?



Well, the didn't have someone like me (MB&D) in your class.:p

Oh yes, my friend Karl - he was quite a riot....and definitely MB&D to know! I think I told you about him before. He was born in a bombing raid in Germany, so he was all 'spite-fire', believe me! He kept me laughing! ;) Hey, Karl, if you are out there - you still have me laughing!:lol: He thought it real funny to lift me up in the air before class - I was a half-pint then and he was this big robust German guy - cute, too. I complained, but actually I did not mind.


You didn't go to college in the 60's. You're not that old. ;) Peace, sister. :p :D

uhhh eehhhh wellllll....graduated HS in 68 (spring) and started college in 1968 (fall)....but I know, I look so youthful, you are all so amazed. The Beatles were at their height and everyone was protesting the war. I was on the borderline of being a true hippie. Peace and Love!

[Virgil]

Anyway, thanks for posting this list. Wait, why is Kangaroo listed twice? Also was Paul Morel (original novel of S&L) published late? I wonder what that novel is like and how it differs from S&L's...hummmm. So I was right -"Aaron's Rod" came right after WIL. I am a good guesser, aren't I?

Don't know why Kangaroo is posted twice. Maybe a mistake. Paul Morel must be an early draft of S&L. Yes you were right about Aaron's Rod.


*creaking body, creaking bones, sore neck* yes growing old is hateful isn't it? I want to start all over again and especially from those college days - they were the best! What fun we had in art college. And most of the people I meet there were crazy like me. I felt very much in my 'element'.
Yes quite a difference between 18 years old and 50 years old. But it beats the alternative.


Why are you blushing?
Because you keep talking about porno flicks. :p :lol:


uhhh eehhhh wellllll....graduated HS in 68 (spring) and started college in 1968 (fall)....but I know, I look so youthful, you are all so amazed. The Beatles were at their height and everyone was protesting the war. I was on the borderline of being a true hippie. Peace and Love!
Oh i guess you did go to college in the sixties.

[Janine]

Don't know why Kangaroo is posted twice. Maybe a mistake. Paul Morel must be an early draft of S&L. Yes you were right about Aaron's Rod.
They must have revived Paul Morel for publication. Many people are curious these days and want to see the original drafts. L wrote so many versions of many of his novels.


Yes quite a difference between 18 years old and 50 years old. But it beats the alternative.

True, very true.


Because you keep talking about porno flicks. :p :lol:

No, I don't (!) and I think you are a riot!:lol: If you go to Italy, you will see nude statues everywhere - fountains, street corners, churches, public buildings, town squares. You are not really that naive are you? Someone had to model for all of these, you know.;)


Oh i guess you did go to college in the sixties.

...duh, yes I am afraid I did start college in the 60's. Now all our music everyone is listening to and loving it....revivals of everything!:thumbs_up rock on!

[amalia1985]

Oh, my God, so many Lawrence's novels and stories I haven't read yet!!!!!! I had an appetite now, I tell you!!I must find them all!!!!! I have read:

The White Peacock (1911)
Sons and Lovers (1912)
The Rainbow (1915)
Women in Love (1920)
Lady Chatterley's Lover (1928)
The Virgin and the Gipsy (1930)
The Man Who Died (1931)
...and that's all...I must find them!!!

[Alexei]

Sorry for not taking part in the discussion for so long, but I need a lot of time for the Russian literature. I will try to participate more from now on :)

Amalia, I feel the same way. After all I have read only two books :blush: and you have read so many!!! But I will read more if I am alive after so much Dostoevsky and Tolstoy. It will be a veeerrrrry long reading :lol:

[manolia]

I'm back :D I am having such a difficult week :( with work. Pheww!

Anyway, first i'd like to comment on the flower photos. Those were very nice Janine!



All of this is quite good and expands the idea. I know that theory has been around long before Dan Brown came out with his blockbuster/contraversial novel. It is the prior stuff I was more interested in. The novel is pretty corny and commercial. I do have better taste in literature than DB's work.:blush: But this added information really throws better light on the correlation between Mary Magdeline and Mirriam. You could probably say that Paul's mother better correlated to Mary, Christ's mother - in sacrificing her sons to the world. Just a thought....maybe way off with that one...just a thought.


You don't have to blush Janine. I have read two Dan Brown books and have enjoyed them! A fun and easy read, nothing more nothing less ;) . And of course you have better taste in literature (or else you wouldn't be called the "tour guide" for no reason ;) ).



At least Lawrence seems to think that is true and maybe it is. I don't know for fact. (....) It is strange now that in his earlier novel "Sons and Lovers" Miriam is the one with the mysterious dark eyes. It almost indicates to me that she had the potential represent the blood theory or the deep sexual mysteries and yet she is not the one to do so for Paul, instead it is Clara he finds sexual furfillment with but not entirely. I don't know if that last statement of mine makes sense. It just seems strange now that Miriam has the dark mysterious eyes but these now seem indicative of religious/mystical mysteries. Paul's eyes are described as being blue - correct? I think L often mention's Mrs. Morel's eyes as also being a clear blue.

Hmmm...i think you got that right too..Miriam seems to have that repressed sexuality, doesn't she?




I am thinking on the scene when he fixes the bicycle tire and she admires his skill and wants to run her hands down his sides. Then finally, she does, but that is as far as it goes - she pulls back away from him again. This must have been confusing and lonely for Paul; confusing for her, too. I can see why he is angry much of the time with her or annoyed with her. Am I wrong? If I am please correct me. I don't have to be the 'tour quide' or 'the leader' - just another lowly participant in this thread struggling along with my thoughts, just like all of you. I am only half way through the book, and all of you are probably done reading, correct? What a 'slow-poke' I have been on this one. But I am enjoying my second reading very much, more than the first time. I think I may have to read it a third time....well, someday.

Yes she does exactly that. Nice scene the one you mention ;)



The volume that contains "The Virgin and the Gypsy" is a 2004 Wordsworth Limited Edition, with introduction and notes by Pr. Jeff Wallace of the University of Glamorgan.

It also contains the following stories:"Love among the Haystacks", "The Lovely Lady", "Rawdon's Roof", "The Rocking- Horse Winner", "The Man Who Loved Islands", and "The Man Who Died".

:lol: Amalia we buy the same editions..i bet you have at least two shelves full of blue books :lol: .

[amalia1985]

Yes, you are right!!!!!
Hahaha!

Janine, help!!!!! My e-mails to you are returned as spams!!!! I am at a loss, I cannot communicate with you!!

[Janine]

Yes, you are right!!!!!
Hahaha!

Janine, help!!!!! My e-mails to you are returned as spams!!!! I am at a loss, I cannot communicate with you!!

Amalia, don't panic! I am still here....I am not going anywhere that I know of. I am sure we can get your email straightened out. I just sent you a PM and an email since 3 of yours did get to my regular box - see. You must have hit the wrong button before or maybe it was just a temporary gliche...it is spooky day here - Halloweeeeeeeeeennnnnnnnn. Boooooooooo....
See if you got my emails just now ok, then let me know.......must be a Halloween 'ghost in the machine'.
J

[Janine]

manolia, I will answer your answers to my post tomorrow. It got late now with Halloween and all. I got busy and then wrote a long email, too.

Wonder what happened to amalia. I hope she did not lose her computer or service. She seemed to be having trouble today with her email.

[Quark]

I'm back, briefly, to say that I'll come back later and post. Hopefully, I can get some time tomorrow. I didn't mean to make a point and then disappear.

[Janine]

Quark, no problem. I have not even finished my (second) reading of the book. I am taking my time to absorb more this time around and understand it better.
Manolia said she would continue to post past the month and so did others - there is no deadline here which is better, don't you think. No pressure at all. I will be happy to hear what you have to add to the discussion. I have about 150 more pages to read. I am up to the part when Miriam has brought Clara to Paul and they all take a long walk out in the woods. I have some comments on this part but it got too late tonight and I will have to let it go for tomorrow or the next day.

[amalia1985]

I am here, everything is fixed!!!!

[Janine]

Oh, my God, so many Lawrence's novels and stories I haven't read yet!!!!!! I had an appetite now, I tell you!!I must find them all!!!!! I have read:

The White Peacock (1911)
Sons and Lovers (1912)
The Rainbow (1915)
Women in Love (1920)
Lady Chatterley's Lover (1928)
The Virgin and the Gipsy (1930)
The Man Who Died (1931)
...and that's all...I must find them!!!

amalia, I am truly impressed with this reading list of yours - and at your age....wonderful!:thumbs_up I think you have plenty of time to catch up and read more L. or all of L's works. I still have a few left to read but I am getting there. You should read a good biography - it really enriches the experience of reading his work. I don't agree with Virgil on this point - that you can separate the author from his work. I found reading about his life made it more meaningful for me in the long-run.

I am so glad you got your email and computer straightened out. I know someone else on Lit Net had a computer problem too and now hers is fine as well. Computer sure can be frustrating sometimes.
:crash: "We can't live with them and we can't live without them!"

Alexei, good to see you back. Hey, it is never too late. I am still finishing up the book - reading this time so very slowly and absorbing it all. I hope to comment soon but my neck is bothering me so long posts have been impossible presently.

Hi manolia, I am going to come back after dinner or later and answer you comments on my comments. I was so happy to see you resurface also and address those comments I had made awhile back. Thanks!

[Virgil]

amalia, I am truly impressed with this reading list of yours - and at your age....wonderful!:thumbs_up I think you have plenty of time to catch up and read more L. or all of L's works. I still have a few left to read but I am getting there. You should read a good biography - it really enriches the experience of reading his work. I don't agree with Virgil on this point - that you can separate the author from his work. I found reading about his life made it more meaningful for me in the long-run.


Amalia, I'm impressed too. You may have read as many as I have.

These of the novels I've read:

Sons and Lovers (1912)
The Rainbow (1915)
Women in Love (1920)
Kangaroo (1923)
The Fox (1923)
Kangaroo (1923)
St. Mawr (1925)
The Plumed Serpent (1926)
Lady Chatterley's Lover (1928)
The Woman Who Rode Away (1928)
The Man Who Died (1931)
Plus I've read just about all the short stories and lots of his poems, many of his essays, and some of his travel writing.

I guess I have read quite a bit of Lawrence. ;)

[Janine]

I'm back :D I am having such a difficult week :( with work. Pheww!
Hi manolia, I am sorry you had such a difficult week at work. I guess some weeks are just like that. I hope this week is has improved in that category.
Thanks for taking time to come in here and comment.


Anyway, first i'd like to comment on the flower photos. Those were very nice Janine!

Thanks so much. I thought we could use a little color for the season. I posted some nice photos of chyrsanthemums in S&L; you might want to check them out, very autumn-like. I got them all online - not my photos. Pretty aren't they? I wish I could take the credit. Illustrations seem appropriate at slow periods and seem to perk everyone up. I am a very visual person!:)


You don't have to blush Janine. I have read two Dan Brown books and have enjoyed them! A fun and easy read, nothing more nothing less ;) . And of course you have better taste in literature (or else you wouldn't be called the "tour guide" for no reason ;) ).

Well, one just says the name and most people on here will cringe. I found the book entertaining and interesting, at times a bit corny and as I said before somewhere I kept thinking this would make a fine film. Actually I admit I did like the film, although they probably did change things. I liked the imagery and I like symbols and things like that - details in films. This is why I like Hitchcock films so much - he always used little details and objects and symbols. We sometimes do need a bit of entertaining and my friend urged me to read the book - she still loved it, and my other friend laughs at it so opinion is divided. I know, manolia, we both have way better taste in literature - real literature. Dan Brown's book is not literature to me but a novel. As someone already said - these ideas about Mary Magdaline were suggested long before Dan Brown thought to write his block-buster book; so I was only pointing out the Mary fact and the two Mary's references and connections.


Hmmm...i think you got that right too..Miriam seems to have that repressed sexuality, doesn't she?

Yes, and the more I read about her and her interaction with Paul it confuses me just what she wants or expects of him. Now I am just past the part where she brings Clara home and sets up the meeting with Clara and Paul. They all take a long walk in the fields and woodland. Why exactly is Miriam doing this? Does she really think that, if Paul goes off with Clara, he will eventually come back to her? I feel a bit confused at this point. I don't know how she would handle that, but I guess I don't recall this part of the book so well, and need to keep reading, till I see what transpires next. It just seems that she is setting up Paul, to fail with Clara, or to have this affair she can't have. Miriam does seem to be sexually repressed herself, like I said and you agreed upon.

I still have a lot of confusion about eye color with Lawrence. One time he seems to indicate one color means such and such and then later he changes it. Someone should do a whole thesis theme on "The Significance of the Color of Eyes in Lawrence's Work".....;) :lol: Just don't look to me to write it...no pun intended.... 'look'....:D


Yes she does exactly that. Nice scene the one you mention ;)

Yes, that scene seemed significant and I think I just read another similiar one where Miriam again reaches out to touch Paul. She seems to like to do so, but then she pulls back. She seems like a very confused young girl to me. I begin to wonder who is the more confused - he or her?
There are no simple explanations or answers to this novel.



:lol: Amalia we buy the same editions..i bet you have at least two shelves full of blue books :lol: .


Yes, I can see you two are twins with your pretty (sky, eye) blue copies of the 2004 Wordsworth Limited Editions! I am jealous - I only have old books bound in dull green. Were these required for your Universities?

Ok, my turn to brag. I have read all of these so far and ones that I read twice I put an * after.

NOVELS

The White Peacock (1911)
Sons and Lovers (1912) *
The Rainbow (1915)
The Lost Girl (1920)
Women in Love (1920) *
Aaron's Rod (1922)
The Fox (1923)
St. Mawr (1925)
The Plumed Serpent (1926)
Lady Chatterley's Lover (1928) *
The Virgin and the Gipsy (1930)
The Man Who Died (1931)

Also - which I thought to be a novella:
Love Among the Haystacks

Following novels, novellas I may have read, so long ago I am not sure:

The Captain's Doll (1923)
The Ladybird (1923)
The Woman Who Rode Away (1928)


I did read:
Apocalypse (1931)

3 Travel Books - D.H.Lawrence in Italy -

Twilight in Italy
Sea and Sardinia
Etruscan Places

Read in part or intend to read:

The Complete Short Stories in 3 Volumes
Not all, but many so far; hope to read them all.

Complete Poetry of D.H.Lawrence
Read the majority, but not all; will eventually.

Various commentary/critical analysis books, articles by Lawrence, in part. Most articles were from:

Selected Literary Criticism

Did read in full -

3 Biographies:

The Intelligent Heart by Harry T. Moore
The Life of D.H. Lawrence

The phoenix and the flame: D.H. Lawrence; a biography
By Trease, Geoffrey, 1909

D.H.Lawrence
The Story of a Marriage
Brenda Maddox

Presently reading and intended reading:

Cambridge editions (more recent) Biographies:

D.H.Lawrence The Early Years 1885-1912 by John Worthen

D.H.Lawrence The Life of an Outsider by John Worthen

The Selected Letters of D.H.Lawrence



Additional intended reading - anything I missed....;) !!!

I guess I did read a lot of L books and stories so far, huh....?

[Virgil]

Ok, my turn to brag. I have read all of these so far and ones that I read twice I put an * after.

NOVELS

The White Peacock (1911)
Sons and Lovers (1912) *
The Rainbow (1915)
The Lost Girl (1920)
Women in Love (1920) *
Aaron's Rod (1922)
The Fox (1923)
St. Mawr (1925)
The Plumed Serpent (1926)
Lady Chatterley's Lover (1928) *
The Virgin and the Gipsy (1930)
The Man Who Died (1931)

Also - which I thought to be a novella:
Love Among the Haystacks

Following novels, novellas I may have read, so long ago I am not sure:

The Captain's Doll (1923)
The Ladybird (1923)
The Woman Who Rode Away (1928)


I did read:
Apocalypse (1931)

3 Travel Books - D.H.Lawrence in Italy -

Twilight in Italy
Sea and Sardinia
Etruscan Places

Read in part or intend to read:

The Complete Short Stories in 3 Volumes
Not all, but many so far; hope to read them all.

Complete Poetry of D.H.Lawrence
Read the majority, but not all; will eventually.

Various commentary/critical analysis books, articles by Lawrence, in part. Most articles were from:

Selected Literary Criticism

Did read in full -

3 Biographies:

The Intelligent Heart by Harry T. Moore
The Life of D.H. Lawrence

The phoenix and the flame: D.H. Lawrence; a biography
By Trease, Geoffrey, 1909

D.H.Lawrence
The Story of a Marriage
Brenda Maddox

Presently reading and intended reading:

Cambridge editions (more recent) Biographies

D.H.Lawrence The Early Years 1885-1912 by John Worthen

D.H.Lawrence The Life of an Outsider by John Worthen

The Selected Letters of D.H.Lawrence



Additional intended reading - anything I missed....;) !!!

I guess I did read a lot of L books and stories so far, huh....?

Wow, that is very impressive Janine. You've read more than I have. I forgot to mention I have read many of the letters Lawrence wrote. Of course several biographies and a lot of critical commentary. But on the whole Janine I think you've read more of Lawrence directly than I have. :)

[Quark]

I have about 150 more pages to read. I am up to the part when Miriam has brought Clara to Paul and they all take a long walk out in the woods.

Wait, which woods scene are you at? Is it the one with Miriam and Paul or the one with Clara and Paul? Those are two radically different scenes, but I think two of the best in the book. Well, all of the second part of the novel is good.

[Janine]

Wait, which woods scene are you at? Is it the one with Miriam and Paul or the one with Clara and Paul? Those are two radically different scenes, but I think two of the best in the book. Well, all of the second part of the novel is good.

Quark :lol: You are a riot! I think there is more than two 'woods' scenes. You must be thinking like a man (you mean the two 'sexual encounters in the woods' scenes, don't you? ;) This one I am referring to seems pretty innocent - the three people (Paul, Miriam, and Clara) are just merely hanging out in woods or the glen taking a leisurely stroll.

So, Q, you liked the second half of the book best, eh? :) ;)

[Quark]

Quark :lol: You are a riot! I think there is more than two 'woods' scenes. You must be thinking like a man (you mean the two 'sexual encounters in the woods' scenes, don't you? ;)

For me, those are the only two scenes in the book, and I have the sexually suggestive words double underlined. No, really, I mean the scene where Paul and Miriam are walking to or from the chapel, and they have some intimate, yet totally platonic, moment which is very revealing of both their individual characters' and their relationship. The scene with Clara I was thinking of is what I guess would be their first date. They fall into some ravine and have a flirtatious (perhaps sexual) time trying to find their way back to the road. I thought both of them were finely written, and also, as I said, very revelatory.


This one I am referring to seems pretty innocent - the three people (Paul, Miriam, and Clara) are just merely hanging out in woods or the glen taking a leisurely stroll.

I know what scene you're talking about. Yet, there isn't any sex in it, so my memory of it is kind of hazy.


So, Q, you liked the second half of the book best, eh? :) ;)

Didn't you?

[Janine]

Wow, that is very impressive Janine. You've read more than I have. I forgot to mention I have read many of the letters Lawrence wrote. Of course several biographies and a lot of critical commentary. But on the whole Janine I think you've read more of Lawrence directly than I have. :)

Thanks Virgil,
Yes, once I started to tally it up, I was surprised myself. I don't recall if I read a few others - I mentioned that. I have a poor memory from years past. I know I was very 'taken' with L in my late 20's, early 30's.

Oh I forgot one thing - important thing, too.;)
I read:

Virgil's Thesis:
*Toward the Transfiguration: An Examination of the Use of the Transfigurative Experience in D. H. Lawrence’s Late Fiction.

*Definitely that has to be added to my reading list! A very worthwhile and helpful read!!! :thumbs_up

So, I wonder how close I am to my goal of reading everything L wrote. I don't think I will accomplish all 8, 9, or? volumes of his "Complete Letters" in my lifetime - do you, V?
...And who knows, more L manuscripts might surface, eventually. It could be an endless pursuit....like Lawrence's endless wanderings....


For me, those are the only two scenes in the book, and I have the sexually suggestive words double underlined. No, really, I mean the scene where Paul and Miriam are walking to or from the chapel, and they have some intimate, yet totally platonic, moment which is very revealing of both their individual characters' and their relationship. The scene with Clara I was thinking of is what I guess would be their first date. They fall into some ravine and have a flirtatious (perhaps sexual) time trying to find their way back to the road. I thought both of them were finely written, and also, as I said, very revelatory.

:lol: How funny, Quark, did you really underline them? haha:lol: You must have underlined a lot of stuff in "Lady Chatterly's Lover"....Which version did you read???...and if you have not yet, I can see you are heading out to the bookstore now to buy it....:lol:
So what do you think I am - a dirty old lady? Why of course, I liked the second half best. Afterall am a red-blooded American girl (or was a girl at one time)..., still 'red-blooded'! ;) :lol:



I know what scene you're talking about. Yet, there isn't any sex in it, so my memory of it is kind of hazy.

:lol: oh, I see - this scene just does not stand out to you...yes, I see...hummm...dulllll...no sex in it.....
How old were you when you first read this book, Q ???....You were probably under your bed covers, living at home with your parents, with a flashlight and yellow highligher.:lol: :lol:


Didn't you?

Of course, I loved every minute of this book equally so...hahahaha!

[Quark]

:lol: How funny, Quark, did you really underline them? haha:lol: You must have underlined a lot of stuff in "Lady Chatterly's Lover"....Which version did you read???...and if you have not yet, I can see you are heading out to the bookstore now to buy it....:lol:

I actually haven't read Lady Chatterly's lover. Is it really as lascivious as it's early twentieth century critics condemned it as being? I'm running a google seach for Lawrence+Lascivious now to see what I turn up.


So what do you think I am - a dirty old lady? Why of course, I liked the second half best. Afterall am a red-blooded American girl (or was a girl at one time)..., still 'red-blooded'! ;) :lol:

Janine, you're insulting my Victorian sensibilities. You're female not sexual. You're not supposed to think about those things.


How old were you when you first read this book, Q ???....You were probably under your bed covers, living at home, with a flashlight and yellow highligher.:lol: :lol:

I finished reading it a few days ago, and, to be honest, I didn't get as much out of the second reading as I hoped. My conclusions are pretty much the same. It's certainly a good read, but I didn't gain much by the rereading.

[Janine]

I actually haven't read Lady Chatterly's lover. Is it really as lascivious as it's early twentieth century critics condemned it as being? I'm running a google seach for Lawrence+Lascivious now to see what I turn up.

:lol: Come up with anything yet???? :lol: I really can't believe you have not read LCL - oh for goodness sake - first go out and buy a whole box of those yellow highlighters! Then be sure and buy the uncensored addition of the novel. There are several versions. I think I read the one that needed the box of highlighters!;) :lol:


Janine, you're insulting my Victorian sensibilities. You're female not sexual. You're not supposed to think about those things.

Are you a 'male chauvinist pig'? Victorian sensibilities, my eye! I went to art college in the hippie era, baby!;) I might be 'older', but as long as I am still breathing, I can still be lusting and I can still use those bright yellow highlighters in my books! I even watch R-rated films...and I fast-forward a lot.....:blush::D


I finished reading it a few days ago, and, to be honest, I didn't get as much out of the second reading as I hoped. My conclusions are pretty much the same. It's certainly a good read, but I didn't gain much by the rereading.

You know, seriously,:) I am seeing things I did not notice before. I think I am enjoying the book the same this time, if not better. I think, after reading several L bios, it makes a whole lot more sense to me and interests me more. Problem is during this read, I am definitely trying to figure out the characters and I am not wholly sure they can be figured out; just like figuring out L himself. He remains an enigma to me, in many respects, but I still love his work and admire his accomplishments. This novel is a young Lawrence work, one has to remember that, too.

[Quark]

:lol: Come up with anything yet???? :lol:

I did come up with this quote, "Lascivious! well, why not---? I can't see I do a woman any more harm by sleeping with her than by dancing with her...or even talking to her about the weather. It's just an interchange of sensations instead of ideas, so why not?". I think I can see where the novel goes from there.


I really can't believe you have not read LCL - oh for goodness sake

Prepare to be shocked: I have only read Sons and Lovers and The Rainbow. My list of Lawrence reads isn't so impressive. I'll probably read Women in Love before I read LCL.


You know, seriously,:) I am seeing things I did not notice before. I think I am enjoying the book the same this time, if not better. I think, after reading several L bios, it makes a whole lot more sense to me and interests me more. Problem is during this read, I am definitely trying to figure out the characters and I am not wholly sure they can be figured out; just like figuring out L himself. He remains an enigma to me, in many respects, but I still love his work and admire his accomplishments. This novel is a young Lawrence work, one has to remember that, too.

Yes, there are things that I did take away in the second reading. I didn't mean that it was a total waste of time. As I talked about earlier, my reading of the novel changed a lot when I considered Paul's life in the context of his older brother's downfall. Previously, I had thought that Paul was somewhat content at the end. After I finished it this time, Paul's failure to make any lasting relationships with anyone else seems much more tragic than any professional success or personal identity he might have gained at the end.

[Janine]

I did come up with this quote, "Lascivious! well, why not---? I can't see I do a woman any more harm by sleeping with her than by dancing with her...or even talking to her about the weather. It's just an interchange of sensations instead of ideas, so why not?". I think I can see where the novel goes from there.

Well, Q, I am winding down now..... . . . . . . . . . .coffee must be wearing off..... . . . . . . . . . . :sick:

Was that a direct quote from LCL or did you make it up? Either way quite creative! I like that word "Lascivious!" so expressive, isn't it? Sounds like an Lawrence type word....rolls right off the tongue nicely.....poetic....
:idea: I just got a brainstorm. You know the way you list your favorite authors, in your 'Profile' page? You now need to add...", and Lawrence for his lascivious prose".


Prepare to be shocked: I have only read Sons and Lovers and The Rainbow. My list of Lawrence reads isn't so impressive. I'll probably read Women in Love before I read LCL.

:eek: Yes, truly, I am 'shocked', with statements like the last one you made about this brilliant novel, S&L's - truly 'frivolous'....:(

But seriously, I would have to agree with you and say - first read "Women in Love". This is actually my favorite L novel. I read this one twice, as you can see I put an * next to it in my list. Hey, Quark, were you impressed with my reading list? I know...I did have a lot more years to read that much more L, than you would have yet. I am not really shocked, I was just kidding with you.... Afterall, when did you start reading - age 2? You are still a young pup; no doubt with your mind on going out til 2, drinking beer with your friends, chasing girls, --- then coming home to check to see who is on 'late night' Lit Net, and those that obviously do not have a 'real life'. ;)


Yes, there are things that I did take away in the second reading. I didn't mean that it was a total waste of time. As I talked about earlier, my reading of the novel changed a lot when I considered Paul's life in the context of his older brother's downfall. Previously, I had thought that Paul was somewhat content at the end. After I finished it this time, Paul's failure to make any lasting relationships with anyone else seems much more tragic than any professional success or personal identity he might have gained at the end.

Whewwww...well, that is good to hear....I was losing hope in you..for awhile there.....Hope restored! Yeah!

Good observations and I would have to agree....the book is really tragic.

[amalia1985]

amalia, I am truly impressed with this reading list of yours - and at your age....wonderful!:thumbs_up I think you have plenty of time to catch up and read more L. or all of L's works.


Thank you, and Virgil. My parents taught me to read from a tender age, and my constant problem is that I have no space to put the books I buy...

[Virgil]

Thank you, and Virgil. My parents taught me to read from a tender age, and my constant problem is that I have no space to put the books I buy...

Oh that is my problem too. I have a room that is considered my study and it is overflowing with books. And I still have put lots in plastic containers in the basement. I can't bare to throw any out.

[Janine]

Virgil and amalia, I third this! I have books everywhere, and now just picked up another free one at my library - it's an obsession and I love it! My room is hopeless and I keep tripping over them - sitting on the floors now. I recently tried taking some to the basement, but put them into small boxes only - about 10 at a time, and labeled the top of each, and I will probably put all these in a larger plastic one, so I can easily locate any book if I need it. I hate putting books away, because then later, I can't find them at all...like some of the L books, I am thinking I did read, but can't find presently - "Virgin and the Gypsy" for one.

Virgil, I looked at the short story online and read one page; thanks for posting that site! I know that it our other thread, but it seems quite interesting so far. I might stop S&L tonight, to squeeze in the story "Sun".

[Virgil]

Who is D.H. Lawrence?:cool:

[Janine]

Whoops! I'll change that:cool: ekkkk:goof: hxzz:rolleyes:zx#zz%@"+haha .....oh .....s..o...r...r....y....

I must have been snoozing. I had you mixed up with some cute :brow: looking movie star named that!

[Virgil]

Whoops! I'll change that:cool: ekkkk:goof: hxzz:rolleyes:zx#zz%@"+haha .....oh .....s..o...r...r....y....

I must have been snoozing. I had you mixed up with some cute :brow: looking movie star named that!

:lol: Thanks.

[Janine]

:lol: Thanks.

You are welcome - aren't you going to change yours too?????:rolleyes:

[Virgil]

You are welcome - aren't you going to change yours too?????:rolleyes:

OK. Just did. :p

[Janine]

Who is D.H. Lawrence?:cool:

:brow: I don't have the foggiest idea :confused: :p :D

[Virgil]

Oh I forgot one thing - important thing, too.;)
I read:

Virgil's Thesis:
*Toward the Transfiguration: An Examination of the Use of the Transfigurative Experience in D. H. Lawrence’s Late Fiction.

*Definitely that has to be added to my reading list! A very worthwhile and helpful read!!! :thumbs_up


Oh you are so kind Janine. Thank you.

Janine and Quark - You guys were a riot last night. :lol:

[grace86]

janine and Quark you guys have me rolling with laughter. How terrible you both are!!! ;) I only wish I was able to participate in this reading.

Man, you guys will rule the thread for Lady Chatterly in the winter!!!! :D Virgil I think we better watch out and just keep ourselves with Quixote...these two could get dangerous and ruin our poor minds :p

Quark do read Women in Love, I have to admit it isn't as umm....interesting as Sons and Lovers appears it must be, but you will like it I am sure.

[manolia]

Hehehe nice conversation you had!! You made my day :)
Janine, i'll come back to your post later.
Question to everyone: Are you interested in A "Lady Chaterley's lover" reading :brow: ? I've noticed that Quark hasn't read the book (i haven't either)..so, what say you?? Of course not now, but sometime next year.

[amalia1985]

I loved the book, and the movie adaptation of it, I would be happy to a discussion about it, manolia.

Also, I read 4 pages of the "Sun". It seems trully beautiful!

[Alexei]

Question to everyone: Are you interested in A "Lady Chaterley's lover" reading :brow: ? I've noticed that Quark hasn't read the book (i haven't either)..so, what say you?? Of course not now, but sometime next year.

Well the book is waiting for me in the shelf and after these posts by Janine and Quark I am not sure why I haven't started it yet. You definitely persuade me to take it right away :p :lol: But if we are going to read it together I will wait a little. It will be better to discuss it while reading it, it helps a lot.

[grace86]

I think that we are unofficially supposed to be reading Lady Chatterly's Lover sometime this December. I know when we were reading Women In Love, Virgil, Janine, myself and a couple others were interested. I actually think it is still a plan.

So if you guys want to read it too, the more the merrier (sp?)!!!

[Janine]

grace quote:

janine and Quark you guys have me rolling with laughter. How terrible you both are!!! I only wish I was able to participate in this reading.
manolia quote:

Hehehe nice conversation you had!! You made my day
Janine, i'll come back to your post later.
Question to everyone: Are you interested in A "Lady Chaterley's lover" reading ? I've noticed that Quark hasn't read the book (i haven't either)..so, what say you?? Of course not now, but sometime next year.

Hahah! Glad to be so entertaining! I think we both got silly from lack of sleep.:yawnb: Quark really set me off with that word of his - 'lascivious' - then his web search, and quotes. Also, his mention of 'frivolous' posts in Short S's - did you read those posts, too? It was a simultaneous 'riot session' that night - we were the only ones on here apparently. Virgil had bailed out and departed by then.
grace quote:

Man, you guys will rule the thread for Lady Chatterly in the winter!!!! Virgil I think we better watch out and just keep ourselves with Quixote...these two could get dangerous and ruin our poor minds

Nah, we won't rule it or monopolize it. I will again be the slowest reader here. I did read it twice before so maybe I can find the audiobook and not have to tire my eyes out again. I think maybe my library site has it available and I can download it onto my new MP3 player, now that I have figured out how to operate it ....well, sort of.


Quark do read Women in Love, I have to admit it isn't as umm....interesting as Sons and Lovers appears it must be, but you will like it I am sure.

Grace, what do you mean - not as interesting - why of course WIL is! I could bop you right now.:smash: I thought you loved the book? Quark, really, it is still my favorite L book, because I think it is the most complete, but I like most of what L wrote, so don't go by me. Virgil's favorite is "The Rainbow", which I just bought a new copy of and plan on a second reading of that book next year, probably, like around the springtime.
amalia

I loved the book, and the movie adaptation of it, I would be happy to a discussion about it, manolia.

Also, I read 4 pages of the "Sun". It seems trully beautiful!

Wow, amalia, which of the movie version did you see? I saw the one with Sean Bean and Jolie Richardson - it was quite good and true to the book, I thought. I own the film and want to rewatch it soon.

I can't wait to read that story "Sun" - I read one page online and I got hooked. It was written so beautifully.
grace

grace quote:

I think that we are unofficially supposed to be reading Lady Chatterly's Lover sometime this December. I know when we were reading Women In Love, Virgil, Janine, myself and a couple others were interested. I actually think it is still a plan.

So if you guys want to read it too, the more the merrier (sp?)!!!

Anything you all decide, will be fine with me. I usually am super busy at Christmastime though but I know you all have off from school then and it is more workable for you. I can probably swing it since I did read the book several times before so I know it pretty well, like I said.

and last but not least ~
alexei quote:

Well the book is waiting for me in the shelf and after these posts by Janine and Quark I am not sure why I haven't started it yet. You definitely persuade me to take it right away But if we are going to read it together I will wait a little. It will be better to discuss it while reading it, it helps a lot.
hahaha - hey guys, where did our laughing emoticon go? I can't find it today or last night either. Did they take it out from excessive use?
Alexei - you will enjoy this book emensely. Do read it and don't listen to our inane comments. It is a truly well-written and thoughfully constructed story and book. It is wonderfully written and beautiful in descriptions and sensual and not that bad compared to the novels read today really. Just banned in L's time. They were stuffy Victorians back then and only just changing their perspectives.

[amalia1985]

Yes, it was the Sean Bean version. I love him!!!

[Alexei]

hahaha - hey guys, where did our laughing emoticon go? I can't find it today or last night either. Did they take it out from excessive use?
Alexei - you will enjoy this book emensely. Do read it and don't listen to our inane comments. It is a truly well-written and thoughfully constructed story and book. It is wonderfully written and beautiful in descriptions and sensual and not that bad compared to the novels read today really. Just banned in L's time. They were stuffy Victorians back then and only just changing their perspectives.

I have decided to keep for the end of my l's reading or at least to pick it after I finish with "The Rainbow", because i have a very good feeling about it. I think i will like it very much. This isn't really a surprise after it is a L's book, but I think it is special :p I am afraid I won't be able to do it, I am too impatient for this, it is most likely that "The Rainbow" will have to wait. On the other hand, if we decide to read "Lady Chatterly's Lover" in December may be I will menage to squeeze "The Rainbow" somewhere in my reading list (always optimistic :lol:).

[Virgil]

I thought we were going to do Lady Chatterly in the late spring, around a year after Women In Love. I've already got plans for December: Finish Don Quixote and start The Aeneid.

[Alexei]

I thought we were going to do Lady Chatterly in the late spring, around a year after Women In Love. I've already got plans for December: Finish Don Quixote and start The Aeneid.

In this case I am not going to make. May be I will reread it, but I don't think I can wait so long for reading it :lol:

That remind me I have to reread Don Quixote or at least read the few works on it I have. i am going to start with Méditations sur Don Quichotte by Ortega y Gasset. I have to read it last year when I was actually studying Don Quixote, but I didn't get to it :p

And I have heard you are planning to start a thread for The Aeneid. I would be glad to join in. I wanted to read it for a long time and I have even started it once, but i didn't menage to finish it. So it will be a perfect opportunity :D

Why there are so many books and so little time to read them. I have no idea how I am going to menage with all this reading when I have to read "War and Peace" :D

[Janine]

Yes, it was the Sean Bean version. I love him!!!

amalia, ....Yeah, you know I did not realise how great Sean Bean was until I saw that film and I liked the scene when he goes to the house and he sees the husband - that scene somehow really touched me - there was a lot of hurt emotion in his eyes and he was really convincing. I did like his role in "Lord of the Rings" - he got killed off pretty early on, didn't he? It has been such awhile, since I first saw that. I saw this preview the other day - or it was sort of compiling of all clips from his films and it really made me want to see more. I had not realised just how much he had done. We must talk about him and you can tell me which are his best roles.


Virgil quote

I thought we were going to do Lady Chatterly in the late spring, around a year after Women In Love. I've already got plans for December: Finish Don Quixote and start The Aeneid.

Well, Virgil, this would be my preference, too, because I forsee being really busy during this holiday season; I am usually the one to do all the decorating and stuff so it makes it hard to spend countless hours on here, too. You all know that I just found out recently that I am going to be a grandmother? My only son's baby is due in the early spring (May 11th - Mother's Day!). Of course, the spring also will be busy for me (no doubt), but if we could do it late in the spring/summer months, that might work out well for me, with less pressure. V, I recall now that you did say that you and Grace would resume DQ and I recall, too, that you planned on doing the Aeneid, as well. SO - that is only fair - we definitely want and need you in the LCL discussions.

alexei quote

I have decided to keep for the end of my l's reading or at least to pick it after I finish with "The Rainbow", because i have a very good feeling about it. I think i will like it very much. This isn't really a surprise after it is a L's book, but I think it is special I am afraid I won't be able to do it, I am too impatient for this, it is most likely that "The Rainbow" will have to wait. On the other hand, if we decide to read "Lady Chatterly's Lover" in December may be I will menage to squeeze "The Rainbow" somewhere in my reading list (always optimistic ).

Therefore, if I were you, alexei, I would try to read or continue to read, and finish "The Rainbow" first. You did read "Women in Love" - right? If not, would suggest that next. Really LCL is a later work of L's - one of his last - so we are chronologically and 'logically' ;) working up to it. Does that make sense? By the time all our discussion are through I expect you all do be Lawrence scholars! LOL:D

Hey,I am still missing my 'laughing' emoticon - where did he run off to? He must have been overworked in Quark and my posts that night...haha!


manolia, you might want to read it now after this discussion - it is not a long book and will not take nearly the time that WIL or S&L's took to read. You can always read it over again in the spring. I can discuss things with you until then privately. I say this because I see you are anxious to get to it. I read it twice and it went along quickly.

[Alexei]

amalia, ....Yeah, you know I did not realise how great Sean Bean was until I saw that film and I liked the scene when he goes to the house and he sees the husband - that scene somehow really touched me - there was a lot of hurt emotion in his eyes and he was really convincing. I did like his role in "Lord of the Rings" - he got killed off pretty early on, didn't he? It has been such awhile, since I first saw that. I saw this preview the other day - or it was sort of compiling of all clips from his films and it really made me want to see more. I had not realised just how much he had done. We must talk about him and you can tell me which are his best roles.

I haven't watched the film (I will change this though :lol:), but I like him from LOTR. He was very goo there. I am big fan of the book and I was a bit pessimist about the whole thing and especially the characters but I am very satisfied with the way he play. He really present the character and his personality although there are a lot of changes that move Boromir in the background.



alexei quote


Therefore, if I were you, alexei, I would try to read or continue to read, and finish "The Rainbow" first. You did read "Women in Love" - right? If not, would suggest that next. Really LCL is a later work of L's - one of his last - so we are chronologically and 'logically' ;) working up to it. Does that make sense? By the time all our discussion are through I expect you all do be Lawrence scholars! LOL:D

Hey,I am still missing my 'laughing' emoticon - where did he run off to? He must have been overworked in Quark and my posts that night...haha!


Thanks, there is perfect sense in this. And that's going to be another reason to read "The Rainbow" first, but I am so curious about LCL that I don't know whether I will menage to stick to my first decision.

I don't know about becoming scholars, but there will be a lot of additional knoledge. There are already 20 pages and it wasn't much more than a month. It has become quite a discussion :lol:

About the emoticon, I am not sure why exactly, but it isn't on the main page anymore. Just click on "[more]" (it is under the other emoticons) it is in the list with the additional one.

[Janine]

I haven't watched the film (I will change this though :lol:), but I like him from LOTR. He was very goo there. I am big fan of the book and I was a bit pessimist about the whole thing and especially the characters but I am very satisfied with the way he play. He really present the character and his personality although there are a lot of changes that move Boromir in the background.

Alexei, do see the film - it is a BBC film - miniseries. I think it runs very close to the actual plot of the book - a rather true rendition...faithful to the text. I bought it awhile back and have enjoyed watching it several times now. It is a nice thing to keep. I have several L books in adaptation form on film. I collect them. I am still trying to acquire some obscure ones like "Boy in the Bush" and "Lady and the Gypsy", but I keep them in a wishlist hoping to find a good used or cheaper copy.



Thanks, there is perfect sense in this. And that's going to be another reason to read "The Rainbow" first, but I am so curious about LCL that I don't know whether I will menage to stick to my first decision.

If your curiosity gets the better of you then read it; not a long book. Knowing you, Alexei, you can finish it in a day's time! :lol: finally found my guy! LOL



About the emoticon, I am not sure why exactly, but it isn't on the main page anymore. Just click on "[more]" (it is under the other emoticons) it is in the list with the additional one.

He went a hidin' in the MORE section - how strange! :brow:

[Alexei]

Alexei, do see the film - it is a BBC film - miniseries. I think it runs very close to the actual plot of the book - a rather true rendition...faithful to the text. I bought it awhile back and have enjoyed watching it several times now. It is a nice thing to keep. I have several L books in adaptation form on film. I collect them. I am still trying to acquire some obscure ones like "Boy in the Bush" and "Lady and the Gypsy", but I keep them in a wishlist hoping to find a good used or cheaper copy.

If your curiosity gets the better of you then read it; not a long book. Knowing you, Alexei, you can finish it in a day's time! :lol: finally found my guy! LOL

He went a hidin' in the MORE section - how strange! :brow:

Thanks, Janine. I will try to find it. And if the emoticons are listed by frequency of use we have the chance the drove it back to the main page. We smile a lot here :lol::lol::lol:

[Janine]

Thanks, Janine. I will try to find it. And if the emoticons are listed by frequency of use we have the chance the drove it back to the main page. We smile a lot here :lol::lol::lol:

Hey, Alexei, you posted fast. I went to check emails and you posted right after me.:D Yes, we sure do smile and laugh a lot here - would you have it any other way - we should have fun learning this stuff!
Now don't cheat and watch the film first - haha....unless this won't spoil the book for you. I can do so either way and still enjoy it all. I was in the middle of reading Hardy's "Mayor of Casterbridge" and the BBC film came on the TV and I had to see it. I figured I could finish it right after and I did and I still loved it so. SO do enjoy the film if you find it. Good luck to you! By the way, A, it is good to see you back here in S&L thread. I missed you!

Yes, hope the 'little laugher' emoticon does not take off for good. I am rather fond of him and use him often. I would :bawling: if he left us altogether! LOL Yes, you are right - so by 'popular demand' we need him back on the main menu!

Well, talking of movies - that is just where I am headed - for the TV and DVD player. I have some great films out this weekend from my library. I might even watch two tonight. I took 4 out on Friday and they are all due back on Monday. Yikes! I may be back later tonight but no promises. If not tomorrow is soon enough. Night all!

[Alexei]

Hey, Alexei, you posted fast. I went to check emails and you posted right after me.:D Yes, we sure do smile and laugh a lot here - would you have it any other way - we should have fun learning this stuff!
Now don't cheat and watch the film first - haha....unless this won't spoil the book for you. I can do so either way and still enjoy it all. I was in the middle of reading Hardy's "Mayor of Casterbridge" and the BBC film came on the TV and I had to see it. I figured I could finish it right after and I did and I still loved it so. SO do enjoy the film if you find it. Good luck to you! By the way, A, it is good to see you back here in S&L thread. I missed you!

Yes, hope the 'little laugher' emoticon does not take off for good. I am rather fond of him and use him often. I would :bawling: if he left us altogether! LOL Yes, you are right - so by 'popular demand' we need him back on the main menu!

Well, talking of movies - that is just where I am headed - for the TV and DVD player. I have some great films out this weekend from my library. I might even watch two tonight. I took 4 out on Friday and they are all due back on Monday. Yikes! I may be back later tonight but no promises. If not tomorrow is soon enough. Night all!

Seeing the film first doesn't spoil the reading for me too. But I like the feeling of impatience while i am finishing the book and I am planning to see the film right after it. I constantly woinder what is it like and how much different from the book it is, how the director and the writer have seen the book and to compare it with my ideas on it. It's always fun :lol:

I can't find it yet, but I find this instead. I think you will like it too :lol:
http://us.imdb.com/title/tt0459880/

As you see i am using :lol: this guy a lot, I am really hopeful about his return :lol: *crossing her fingers*

And have a nice watching or whatever the correct phrase on English is. It isn't my first language after all I am too sleepy to think about the right thing, it's round 3 am here. Who doesn't have life of his own now? :lol::lol::lol:

[Virgil]

In this case I am not going to make. May be I will reread it, but I don't think I can wait so long for reading it :lol:

That remind me I have to reread Don Quixote or at least read the few works on it I have. i am going to start with Méditations sur Don Quichotte by Ortega y Gasset. I have to read it last year when I was actually studying Don Quixote, but I didn't get to it :p

And I have heard you are planning to start a thread for The Aeneid. I would be glad to join in. I wanted to read it for a long time and I have even started it once, but i didn't menage to finish it. So it will be a perfect opportunity :D

Why there are so many books and so little time to read them. I have no idea how I am going to menage with all this reading when I have to read "War and Peace" :D

You are an incredibly prolific reader Alexei. I'm truely impressed. Sorry about LCL. But I do hope you are enjoying The Rainbow. It is my favorite lawrence novel. How far have you read?

Yes I hope to read and start a thread on The Aeneid as soon as i finish Don Quixote, probably around Christmas. It would be great if you could join too.

[Quark]

I could read another Lawrence story after this; but, really, have we finished with this one? I'd hate to run off and start another story before Janine even finishes the first one. I kind of wanted to talk about the ending, too.

[Janine]

I could read another Lawrence story after this; but, really, have we finished with this one? I'd hate to run off and start another story before Janine even finishes the first one. I kind of wanted to talk about the ending, too.

Hello Quark, yikes don't dessert me! You or anyone else!:rolleyes: Since everyone has called me 'the leader' here in this thread - I am still keeping it 'open-ended' for any more discussions. I am sorry I have been so naughty and not kept up a faster pace on my reading. I have a few good questions and some parts to quote and talk about.

For one, I am interested in the part, when Paul takes his mother into the town, like a date would, and he treats her to dinner and they wander the town and he is alternately happy and then annoyed - mostly with his strange 'feelings' that he cannot seem to deal with, about her aging and slowing up. I thought the part, about him buying her the violets, and tucking them into her collar, particularly 'touching' and 'sweet' and wondered what everyone thought of the day and of the church scene, their interaction - mother and son. Also curious to know what all thought about the scene when his mother seems to look into the church with a presentiment of her coming death and eternal life, but Paul seems, in stark contrast to be the opposite - uncomfortable in the church and feeling totally out of place in this 'sacred holy' environment.

And Quark, I definitely do want to discuss the ending with you (and others, too, hopefully) in greater detail. Be patient - I just want to get there in the book, so that my memory of it is fresh. I will push my reading this week and try to get done, but I have been reading more concentratedly and absorbing much more, than I did the first time around.

I don't think we shall go onto another L book, presently. If you read back to the posts, you will see we have pretty much decided (by the majority) that we should wait till spring to discuss 'Lady Chatterly's Lover'.

Now, Quark, I know you have probably run out today to buy the book and that economy box of yellow highlighters (I suggested), --- but be patient and we will get to it sooner than you can wink. You might not be able to wait to read it, so read it now, if you care to - it is a faster read - and just review-read it in the spring. This way you will be way ahead of me ;)and everyone else. Haha :lol:

[Virgil]

Quark, I saw your photo you posted in the photoalbum. You look pretty much how I pictured you. Kind of like me when I was your age. ;)


Janine, have you seen Quark's picture in the photoalbum?

[Quark]

For one, I am interested in the part, when Paul takes his mother into the town, like a date would, and he treats her to dinner and they wander the town and he is alternately happy and then annoyed - mostly with his strange 'feelings' that he cannot seem to deal with, about her aging and slowing up. I thought the part, about him buying her the violets, and tucking them into her collar, particularly 'touching' and 'sweet' and wondered what everyone thought of the day and of the church scene, their interaction - mother and son. Also curious to know what all thought about the scene when his mother seems to look into the church with a presentiment of her coming death and eternal life, but Paul seems, in stark contrast to be the opposite - uncomfortable in the church and feeling totally out of place in this 'sacred holy' environment.

Yeah, Paul and his mother have a date night in town that is only sort of Oedipal. It is kind of cute the way they play back and forth, but what is most striking about this part is dependency that Paul shows for his mother. Mrs. Morel enjoys the evening as a nice social night out, but Paul places a strange importance on everything; and, as you pointed out, becomes enraged when things go wrong. More than anything else, his mother's frailty sets him off. He knows that his mother will die, and he has probably imagining a world without her. Also, he might be upset because his mother's age makes it impossible for them to be the close friends he wants them to be.

I don't remember the church scene so well, but I do know that Paul has a rather dubious relationship with Christianity. He probably would not feel comfortable standing in the presence of something he has so fervently rejected. It might also be that the church is reminding him of spirituality or immortality or something like that. These sort of thoughts might unnerve Paul as well--considering that he's ceded control of his soul over to his mother.



I will push my reading this week and try to get done,

Good, I thought I was going to have to call you up on the phone and read it to you.


This way you will be way ahead of me ;)and everyone else. Haha :lol:

I don't think I'll ever be ahead of you guys in Lawrence reading.


Quark, I saw your photo you posted in the photoalbum. You look pretty much how I pictured you. Kind of like me when I was your age. ;)


Janine, have you seen Quark's picture in the photoalbum?

Yes, I know I come off as tall and handsome in prose, too.

[Virgil]

Yes, I know I come off as tall and handsome in prose, too.

:lol: I'm sure you are.

[Janine]

Be forewarned: the following post has an over-abundance of emoticons!:D


Yeah, Paul and his mother have a date night in town that is only sort of Oedipal. It is kind of cute the way they play back and forth, but what is most striking about this part is dependency that Paul shows for his mother. Mrs. Morel enjoys the evening as a nice social night out, but Paul places a strange importance on everything; and, as you pointed out, becomes enraged when things go wrong. More than anything else, his mother's frailty sets him off. He knows that his mother will die, and he has probably imagining a world without her. Also, he might be upset because his mother's age makes it impossible for them to be the close friends he wants them to be.

I don't remember the church scene so well, but I do know that Paul has a rather dubious relationship with Christianity. He probably would not feel comfortable standing in the presence of something he has so fervently rejected. It might also be that the church is reminding him of spirituality or immortality or something like that. These sort of thoughts might unnerve Paul as well--considering that he's ceded control of his soul over to his mother.

Quark, oh yikes, it is almost 12:00 AM and I am back here again - just can't leave this place alone....and I am sure you noticed I was on here this afternoon as well. Do I ever sleep - Not much!:eek:

Thanks so much for your post answer - it is a good one. I like all the thought behind it. I think you covered much even thinking further on the church scene and how Paul would be reacting. I felt everything you said is about par with what I was thinking so I suppose this just supports my own ideas on it. Yes, I can see what you mean when you said that Paul places great significance on every little detail of the day, perhaps as a young man would having a first date....interesting. I will think more on the passages in this section but I have other sections I am interested in discussing so let me sleep/rest on these thoughts and I will think clearer tomorrow.



Good, I thought I was going to have to call you up on the phone and read it to you.
Now that is a thought - do you have a British accent, by any chance? I have a weakness for British accents.;) and.....I heard this through the grapevine......that you "come off as tall and handsome in prose". :lol:

Virgil, I am off now to go check out that photo of our beloved Quark. Does he look like a movie star???:cool: :lol: ;) Be right back with an assessment.:brow:

Back already!
Hey Quark, you are a real honey! Is that a driver's liscense picture ID? I was trying to read the writing on it. Anyway, seriously, great photo and I love your pretty eyes - brown or blue? They look blue with those sultry lush 'lascivious' lashes! :brow: (how do you like that alliteration and my prose on that last line?) :D
Hey, you remind me of Mellors in LCL - if you were to grow a beard, you would look like his twin (but not the BBC rendition, Sean Bean is blondish; more like L's description and another version, I once saw). Anyway, truly it is a very handsome photo and definitely you come off as 'tall and handsome in prose'.


I don't think I'll ever be ahead of you guys in Lawrence reading.

Well, Quark, if I keep reading these books twice or thrice to keep up with these threads, you just might catch up!:D :rolleyes:

[grace86]

Oh you guys post too fast!!! Well I don't know...I guess we are reading LCL in Spring then? Grrrr...you guys!!!! That book has been sitting on my shelves for about a year and a half now. But maybe in that time I can read Sons and Lovers myself.

Janine I did not mean that S&L was better than WIL, I haven't even read it for crying out loud....I was just saying that S&L might have been a little more "laviscious" :p than WIL and might suit Quark's interest better...with all those highlighters and all. :D

Seriously I am almost finished with Quixote, but I guess I will wait to read LCL with you guys. I had planned on finishing Quixote so I then could move on to LCL since I have such a busy schedule and go at a slow pace...so if we did read it in December I would be caught up, but spring time will have to do :bawling: :p

Hey...Janine you told me to read S&L in the summer anyway grrrrr...

[Janine]

grrrr....to you, Grace, too! Stop grinding your teeth! If you read "Sons and Lovers" first, that would be better; as I said work up to LCL....since it is a later work. You do want to be well-versed in Lawrence works, don't you? And you and I can still discuss it, and you can also go back and read the posts. There is more in here than a lot of craziness, you know. Some of the posts are truly insightful and helpful for a better understanding. Plus, I have lots of commentary on the book and I can steer you to that, if you request some more to read on the subject of S&L. I know you will like the book.
It is just that, if we all wait till spring to read LCL, we all can participate and that will make for a better discussion. If you don't all come back, you know I will pursue you and drag you all into the LCL's thread! haha :lol:

Time to kill the computer and head for bed! night all.....

[amalia1985]

I think I might have seen "Lady and the Gypsy", Janine. Is this the one with Ian McShane as the Gypsy? If it is that, indeed, you must watch it. I love Ian McShane, he is a wonderful actor. Have you seen "Wuthering Heights" with him as Heathcliff? Materpiece!!!
I have seen him on stage too, in London, and he was great...

[manolia]

Wow Janine you have read all these books on L!! You are ready for a thesis :lol: :thumbs_up

I saw the chrysanthemums you posted. Beautiful!



Yes, and the more I read about her and her interaction with Paul it confuses me just what she wants or expects of him. Now I am just past the part where she brings Clara home and sets up the meeting with Clara and Paul. They all take a long walk in the fields and woodland. Why exactly is Miriam doing this? Does she really think that, if Paul goes off with Clara, he will eventually come back to her? I feel a bit confused at this point. I don't know how she would handle that, but I guess I don't recall this part of the book so well, and need to keep reading, till I see what transpires next. It just seems that she is setting up Paul, to fail with Clara, or to have this affair she can't have. Miriam does seem to be sexually repressed herself, like I said and you agreed upon.



You make a good point here. It really feels like it (Miriam setting up a meeting between Paul and Clara is like her trying to establish a "connection" between them so that Clara, who is an experienced woman in matters of sex may give Paul what she - Miriam- can't???).


I thought we were going to do Lady Chatterly in the late spring, around a year after Women In Love. I've already got plans for December: Finish Don Quixote and start The Aeneid.

Virgil, i thought the same thing..that we were going to read LCL sometime in spring..that is more convenient for me too since i have already decided which books to read till then (and i also want to participate in the December reading of the forum if "Master and Margarita" is selected).


In this case I am not going to make. May be I will reread it, but I don't think I can wait so long for reading it :lol:

Even if you can't wait, you can still participare in the conversation once the thread is started :)



Why there are so many books and so little time to read them. I have no idea how I am going to menage with all this reading when I have to read "War and Peace" :D

I am convinced that at least you Alexei will be able to read all the books you have in mind ;) :) :thumbs_up (you read A LOT and you are soooo fast)

[Janine]

amalia quote

I think I might have seen "Lady and the Gypsy", Janine. Is this the one with Ian McShane as the Gypsy? If it is that, indeed, you must watch it. I love Ian McShane, he is a wonderful actor. Have you seen "Wuthering Heights" with him as Heathcliff? Materpiece!!!
I have seen him on stage too, in London, and he was great...

amalia, I don't know if that was the actor. I must go back to Amazon and check. I have the film in my 'wish list' but I think I can only acquire a used copy of a VHS tape of it, otherwise it is Region 2 and my DVD is Region 1. I hate that they have these distinctions because I love to buy the British films and often they are only offered in Region 2 format.
How fortune to have seen the film and to have seen this actor live on a London Stage. I am truly jealous of you, amaila, being able to travel to London, how wonderful! I will have to check out that verion of "Wuthering Heights". Did you ever see the version of WH with a young (very young) Timothy Dalton! It is so good! He was also amazing in the BBC production of "Jane Eyre" - Lady Wentworth and I had a discussion on this and she saw his JE and said it was the best so far. It was pleasantly surprising just how good and intense that production is.
Well, anyway, I am going now to check out Ian McShane on Amazon. Thanks for the tip!
PS: I am trying to get to your email reply, but got busy last few days...sorry. So be patient and I will get to it soon. Gee, and if I keep posting posts like this long one I will never get to my poor emails - grrrr - that is Grace's grrr - works good! :lol:

manolia quote

Wow Janine you have read all these books on L!! You are ready for a thesis :lol: :thumbs_up

Yes, well, all the ones I designated as reading and the ones with the * I read twice now. I tend to get obsessed with authors and actors I really like. I don't know what it is with L, but something there really spoke to me first time I read his work. Now the pursuit has taken off and it becomes a lifetime venture perhaps since there is a still much I wish to read about him and the works I did not read of his yet. If I had to write a thesis, truly, I could think of about a dozen aspects of L's work to use for a theme. However, manolia, even though I love your flattery (thanks so much), I am too tired out, at this juncture of my life, to take on another major project. Instead and in substitute, I am quite satisfied impressing all of your with my reading list.;) :lol: and seriously helping you all with your own pursuits of knowledge on Lawrence and his works; this last gives me great satisfaction and I think we all have fun in here too, don't you? Believe it or not, I read as many Thomas Hardy books as L, if not more, but only one small biography.

I should make a list of all the books I have read in my life. I tried that with movies, but I got behind in the list now; it takes precious time to make lists, too. Movies were in the thousands....I could not believe it. In 57 yrs one does tend to accumulate a lot of memorable stuff in the gray matter of one's brain. It is a wonder I remember what I have read actually, and I am finding, as I get older, I don't recall what I read. Like with S&L; from the beginning of the book, by the time I get to the end, or even between additional readings....grrrr (using Grace's famous 'grrrr...':lol: ) I forget so much.
Like presently, I feel like I never read S&L's before, but I know I did a few years ago. I feel these passages are so 'fresh' to me. Does anyone else feel this way who is re-reading it?

Let me comment directly on the book here. I think some of the descriptive passages are so beautifully written - really exquisite. I just read about the cherry tree and harvesting the cherries and the way Paul climbed the tree and viewed the sunset all aglow. I was mesmerized with this poetic prose descriptions. I felt like I could visualise this scene perfectly. It was magnificent. Then there is the scene when Paul goes out into the garden at night and the lilies are blooming and filling the air with strong intoxicating odour - this scene is amazing. For among the white madonna lilies, he sees suddenly dark iris blooming, and then he picks a flower to take with him as he returns to the house and his discussion with his mother - I think it is pink. It all seems to be so significant. He is bursting inside with his manly feelings and desperately needing and wanting the freedom of something, of his sexual fulfillment and completeness. I have had this same feeling he is feeling, restlessly looking on my garden and seeing Stargazer lily blooms in the evening of summer, among other lilies and the scent absolutely fills the night and makes one feel drunk and overflowing with life and the 'life blood' and desire for something one cannot always grasp. So when I read this last passage I nearly wanted to weep, because I knew exactly how Paul felt here, with his keen artist's sensitivity to the natural world and it's absolute beauty. Sensitivity such as this is painful and yet elating, at the same time.

The more I read of this wonderful book, the more I feel it is like no other book I have ever read. It is so complex and intricate in feelings and innerworking of the various character's minds and souls and these are intertwined with the natural world. In this way this book can always be a fascination for me. I think I easily could read it, or passages from it, over again and again.

Now, I do agree with you whole-heartedly, Quark, in that the second half, of the book, is the most interesting and the best part. This tug of war and wills between Miriam and Paul, with all the little nuances and expressions and actions/reactions from each character is so well expressed and keeps one's interest every second of the book. And it is all so believable, as well...so realistic to me.



I saw the chrysanthemums you posted. Beautiful!

manolia, thank you, I thought everyone would enjoy a little splash of fall color there! It breaks up our academic look, don't you think?


You make a good point here. It really feels like it (Miriam setting up a meeting between Paul and Clara is like her trying to establish a "connection" between them so that Clara, who is an experienced woman in matters of sex may give Paul what she - Miriam- can't???).


Yes, I do see it this way, sort of taking pressure off of her, but I don't think it really makes her happy in the long-run, do you? I think she feels that he will get help/relief with his sexual tension and anxiety through Clara, but I don't know if Miriam really expected that they would actually have sexual relations. This is now unclear to me as I have progressed with the story. Miriam may have felt it was a possibility and then would accept it, but this too, would be part of her 'supreme sacrifice' to and for Paul; her goal, ulitmately, was to win Paul back to her. I believe she thought 'let him be worldly and then he will see it as frivolous and shallow and then he will value what I to offer him, which is the soul and the spiritual communion and relationship and closeness and compatibility. She feels this (their type relationship) is the only meaningful one. She is a very old-fashioned girl in that her mother has told her, referring even to married life and relations, in the following statement she makes, which Miriam now communicates to Paul:


"But all my life.' Mother said to me: 'There is one thing in marriage that is always dreadful, but you have to bear it.' And I believed it."
Then Paul says:
"And still believe it," he said.
"No!" she cried hastily. "I believe, as you do, that loving, even in thatway, is the high-water mark of living."

However, just after this Miriam abruptly brings up the idea of having Paul's children (procreation as the main goal of sex idea) so she never really acknowledges the value, even within a marriage, of sex as the expression and fulfillment of love between husband and wife. One can see where the difficulty lies. How confusing this must seem to a young man of 24!

Also, present in my mind when reading these passages between Paul and Miriam is the prominent thought that both he and she have been greatly altered or patterned by their mother's opinions and their advice on life. Now Miriam's mother seems to be the happier of the two women but if one reads between the lines it becomes believable that she would have said something like this to her daughter. She has 7 children but she this hardly means she enjoyed her sexual union with her husband. She seems to have given herself as a sort of sacrifice, as a woman, to her husband in order to bear him children. Her is where Lawrence crossed over and blantantly brought out all these thoughts to his public in this book and he says - hey this is not the way life should be but it is how people have been expected to think. In an earlier passage Paul surmisses that young men who are nice young men, as himself at his age, all went through this time of feeling sexually frustrated and hemmed in and struggling with celibacy:


He looked around. A good many of the nicest men he knew were like himself, bound in by their own virginity, which they could not break out of. They were so sensitive to their women that they would go without them forever rather than do them a hurt, an injustice. Being the sons of mothers whose husbands had blundered rather brutally through their feminine sanctities, they were themeselves too diffident and shy. They could easier deny themselves than incur any reproach from a woman; for a woman was like their mother, they were full of the sense of their mother. They preferred themselves to suffer the misery of celibacy, rather than risk the other person.


This passage speaks volumes! It seems to sum up the real problem between Miriam and Paul. Both are greatly influenced by their mothers. Thus, when he is making love to Miriam, it is like making love to his mother and deviling her in a psychological sense because Miriam takes on this role as if she were a sacrifice. I think in this way, one could site some shred of the Oedipus Complex in play, but more of the total logic of the fact that from an early age both the woman and the man, were taught values they can not break though, break away from....even though they may know them to be false in their innate natures.

manolia quote

Virgil, i thought the same thing..that we were going to read LCL sometime in spring..that is more convenient for me too since i have already decided which books to read till then (and i also want to participate in the December reading of the forum if "Master and Margarita" is selected).

manolia, Interesting - who wrote "Master and Margarita" - I have never heard of it. Also, glad you have such a list to accomplish before tackling another complex L book. Enjoy your new reading. Maybe you can participate in the short story thread, in the meantime, and that way keep your mind somewhat on L's works. I can just imagine your long reading list and you are half my age I think. ;) :lol:
manolia quote

Even if you can't wait, you can still participare in the conversation once the thread is started :)

This is true.

manolia quote

I am convinced that at least you Alexei will be able to read all the books you have in mind ;) :) :thumbs_up (you read A LOT and you are soooo fast)

I agree with manolia on this one. alexei, you are amazing. When did you start reading - age 1? She must have read her alphabet soup or ABC cereal. When my son was small, he broke off pretzels and made letters out of them. I thought that was pretty clever. :D

[amalia1985]

Yes, Janine, I think that Timothy Dalton was very good in "Wuthering Heights", and in "Jane Eyre". "Master and Margarita" was written by Mikhail Bulgakov, it is an excellent book, extremely interesting, you must definitely read it, I ahve read it three times already since the day I bought it, and I am still surprised by the power of its messages and themes.

Also, I agree with you on the previous point you made about Miriam and Paul. We see it every day, and it is actually getting worse, because young people miss youth's point, and try to keep up with the roles that others have persuaded them to have. Thank God I've escaped that so far! Both young women and young men are equally oppressed, since they "have" to show that they are "true men" and "true women". If the hearing of those words is abominable, what does "True" mean, anyway? I think that societies, including all institutions, have a lot to answer about this.It's like those immature beings that start smoking to show off, smoking has, unfortunately, become a "value", and we all know it is deadly wrong, but young smokers are constantly increased, that's why I fully agree with your stating of the couple's problem.

PS:Do not worry about the e-mail, we have no pressure of time.

[Janine]

Yes, Janine, I think that Timothy Dalton was very good in "Wuthering Heights", and in "Jane Eyre". "Master and Margarita" was written by Mikhail Bulgakov, it is an excellent book, extremely interesting, you must definitely read it, I ahve read it three times already since the day I bought it, and I am still surprised by the power of its messages and themes.

amalia, thanks for answering my post so quickly. Wow, so you have seen the Timothy Dalton films as well. Funny story on first one. I found it quite by accident at a thriftstore - used tape - cheap. I did not even realise it was Dalton in the role...how funny. Then my sister and I watched it and the old tape would not stop having this annoying line pass over the screen - we kept watching hoping it would straighten out and it never did. Needless to say we watched because we both were mesmerized with Dalton's eyes (we still did not realise it was he, duh) and ofcourse got a headache from the annoying line flipping the screen. Ok, now I have found the film on DVD and had to have it. I think I threw the tape away.
I will put M &M on my 'to read eventually list' - that list is getting impossibly long. It must be great if you read it now 3 times! Thanks for the tips.


Also, I agree with you on the previous point you made about Miriam and Paul. We see it every day, and it is actually getting worse, because young people miss youth's point, and try to keep up with the roles that others have persuaded them to have. Thank God I've escaped that so far! Both young women and young men are equally oppressed, since they "have" to show that they are "true men" and "true women". If the hearing of those words is abominable, what does "True" mean, anyway? I think that societies, including all institutions, have a lot to answer about this.It's like those immature beings that start smoking to show off, smoking has, unfortunately, become a "value", and we all know it is deadly wrong, but young smokers are constantly increased, that's why I fully agree with your stating of the couple's problem.

Himm....this is quite interesting - what you say here. I had not thought of this carrying over into today's society exactly and into other themes of represssion or being applied to the idea of feeling pressured to go along with the crowd or what appears to be the norm. This may be why I love Lawrence's work so very much. It is timeless. It askes a lot of questions about 'what is normal' and 'what is natural' to man's existence. I think many of the feelings do occur still in our societies with young people and even people unsatisfied with their lives who are older now. People still marry poorly and feel trapped, some divorce and still feel financially trapped, others avoid marriage all together out of fear, parents still exert too much control over children and attempt to control their adult lives, as well as their childhood ones; what is ingrained still casts a shadow over some. Some are lucky and they have been given right and good information and fair well, others don't. I have seen this first hand and experienced it in my own family. Domestic violence or tension still exists, not knowing how to cope/learning how to cope are basic themes of mankind. Finding ones true self is still such a vital part of life and takes concentration and work, and so many just don't attempt it and drift along with the crowd, not really having any true direction or goals or purpose in life.
So these themes are not just post- or Victorian themes. They still do exist! You are quite right. I don't advocate totally 'free love' or 'free sex', but some people, no doubt, still think in the old way and many a woman suffers from thinking a man will save them someday, when her 'knight in shining armour charges in on his white horse for the rescue' - from heaven knows what - poverty, self awareness, honor...I don't know. Hollywood only glorifies these notions and romance novels. I am not knocking Jane Austen, but doesn't nearly everyone of her books end with a wedding? A friend pointed this out to me recently. No wonder there is a great revival of her works. I am not knocking weddings either, but some girls marry because they are 'in love' with the whole 'wedding/marriage' idea and not the real thing - the important element -the sincere mature love ideal with a real person. In one part of S&L, Paul pointed out that his relationship was so fine with Miriam and elevated and yet he could not envision the everyday things in life with her and sharing, in this way. I have said this countless times to young people - you can't keep living in a fairy-tale world. You are thinking too romantically. We all are guilty of this and we all like that wonderful happy ending, like in movies; but life is beyond that 'simplistic' concept and it is 'real' and when we choose a mate it is work. Ask Virgil; he speaks of this from time to time, that it takes 'work'; he always supports this idea and advocates marriage. So I think that Paul realised that, even though he was so sensitively close to Miriam and in many ways, so compatible and 'similiar' they could not effectively or practically share their life together. It just would never have worked. They would have burned each other out emotionally and eventually, since one cannot live on that exalted plane and maintain it for a lifetime. It is a place like heaven or like in the fantasy of a cloud and clouds are made of moisture and their support is a false one - all vapour and water suspended. So to use that analogy, I would say that by breaking with Miriam, Paul was ultimately doing the right thing. It was the thing he knew to be right for his own life and probably for hers, as well. It takes great courage on Paul's part to break with her. It may seem unfair and mean to Miriam, but in the long-run it had to be and was fated to be this way, and probably was the best course for her, as well.

Yes, and quite right about cigarettes - and they do kill - thousands every year, or is it millions? Someone, was it you(?), recently said to me in email they should shoot the manufacturers; but quite right - kids still feel peer pressure to be 'cool' and to smoke, in spite of all the warnings. Sad.


PS:Do not worry about the e-mail, we have no pressure of time.

Oh good, thanks A, for being so understanding and patient; but I am dying to get to it, of course. I have spend all my computer time and brain energy up in posts today.

PS: I looked up the 'Virgin and the Gypsy' and the one I saw in Amazon - the only one I can find - screenplay by Alan Platter; from 1970. I went then to the Movie Data Base site and read a very fine review on it. It is available on DVD - all region - on Amazon, so when it gets cheaper, I may spring for it. It looks like a good adaptation. I can't seem to find the one you speak of, but next I will search under the actor's name and maybe something will surface.

[Quark]

You make a good point here. It really feels like it (Miriam setting up a meeting between Paul and Clara is like her trying to establish a "connection" between them so that Clara, who is an experienced woman in matters of sex may give Paul what she - Miriam- can't???).


Yes, I do see it this way, sort of taking pressure off of her, but I don't think it really makes her happy in the long-run, do you? I think she feels that he will get help/relief with his sexual tension and anxiety through Clara, but I don't know if Miriam really expected that they would actually have sexual relations. This is now unclear to me as I have progressed with the story. Miriam may have felt it was a possibility and then would accept it, but this too, would be part of her 'supreme sacrifice' to and for Paul; her goal, ulitmately, was to win Paul back to her. I believe she thought 'let him be worldly and then he will see it as frivolous and shallow and then he will value what I to offer him, which is the soul and the spiritual communion and relationship and closeness and compatibility.

Yes, Miriam does think that Paul will return to her after he has wild sex with Clara. And, to an extent, she's right. Paul rapidly losses interest in Clara, and he passes her off to her original husband. When Paul returns to Miriam it is with a somewhat diminished sexual urge. Underneath, though, remains all the problems that plagued their relationship in the first place. A list in which sexual frustration rated fairly low.


Let me comment directly on the book here. I think some of the descriptive passages are so beautifully written - really exquisite. I just read about the cherry tree and harvesting the cherries and the way Paul climbed the tree and viewed the sunset all aglow. I was mesmerized with this poetic prose descriptions. I felt like I could visualise this scene perfectly. It was magnificent. Then there is the scene when Paul goes out into the garden at night and the lilies are blooming and filling the air with strong intoxicating odour - this scene is amazing. For among the white madonna lilies, he sees suddenly dark iris blooming, and then he picks a flower to take with him as he returns to the house and his discussion with his mother - I think it is pink. It all seems to be so significant. He is bursting inside with his manly feelings and desperately needing and wanting the freedom of something, of his sexual fulfillment and completeness. I have had this same feeling he is feeling, restlessly looking on my garden and seeing Stargazer lily blooms in the evening of summer, among other lilies and the scent absolutely fills the night and makes one feel drunk and overflowing with life and the 'life blood' and desire for something one cannot always grasp. So when I read this last passage I nearly wanted to weep, because I knew exactly how Paul felt here, with his keen artist's sensitivity to the natural world and it's absolute beauty. Sensitivity such as this is painful and yet elating, at the same time.

The more I read of this wonderful book, the more I feel it is like no other book I have ever read. It is so complex and intricate in feelings and innerworking of the various character's minds and souls and these are intertwined with the natural world. In this way this book can always be a fascination for me. I think I easily could read it, or passages from it, over again and again.

Now, I do agree with you whole-heartedly, Quark, in that the second half, of the book, is the most interesting and the best part. This tug of war and wills between Miriam and Paul, with all the little nuances and expressions and actions/reactions from each character is so well expressed and keeps one's interest every second of the book. And it is all so believable, as well...so realistic to me.

The second half is by far my favorite part. The first half is charming in its own way. I like the part where Mr. Morel storms out of the house but doesn't even make it to mailbox before he turns around. The problem with the first part has something to do with it's style. It reads like a work of dry realism, and Lawrence meets realism with only moderate success. He's far better with the more emotionally charged language he uses in the second half of the novel. The scene that Janine refers to is a perfect example. Now, being male, some people have a hard time believing that I, rugged manly figure that I am, would like emotional renderings of landscapes; but, actually, I do--that is, if they are well done. And, it's not just that the writing is moving or beautiful. It has more to do with the fact that it fits and improves the story. The writing isn't just meant to be sentimental; it's meant to express the characterization, conflict, and themes that guide the story. The second half does this far better than the first. Also, the characters are better. The portrait of Miriam in this story is very good.



She feels this (their type relationship) is the only meaningful one. She is a very old-fashioned girl in that her mother has told her, referring even to married life and relations, in the following statement she makes, which Miriam now communicates to Paul:

However, just after this Miriam abruptly brings up the idea of having Paul's children (procreation as the main goal of sex idea) so she never really acknowledges the value, even within a marriage, of sex as the expression and fulfillment of love between husband and wife. One can see where the difficulty lies. How confusing this must seem to a young man of 24!

Also, present in my mind when reading these passages between Paul and Miriam is the prominent thought that both he and she have been greatly altered or patterned by their mother's opinions and their advice on life. Now Miriam's mother seems to be the happier of the two women but if one reads between the lines it becomes believable that she would have said something like this to her daughter. She has 7 children but she this hardly means she enjoyed her sexual union with her husband. She seems to have given herself as a sort of sacrifice, as a woman, to her husband in order to bear him children. Her is where Lawrence crossed over and blantantly brought out all these thoughts to his public in this book and he says - hey this is not the way life should be but it is how people have been expected to think. In an earlier passage Paul surmisses that young men who are nice young men, as himself at his age, all went through this time of feeling sexually frustrated and hemmed in and struggling with celibacy:

This passage speaks volumes! It seems to sum up the real problem between Miriam and Paul. Both are greatly influenced by their mothers. Thus, when he is making love to Miriam, it is like making love to his mother and deviling her in a psychological sense because Miriam takes on this role as if she were a sacrifice. I think in this way, one could site some shred of the Oedipus Complex in play, but more of the total logic of the fact that from an early age both the woman and the man, were taught values they can not break though, break away from....even though they may know them to be false in their innate natures.

This is pretty good Janine. I hadn't thought about Miriam's mother's role in the Paul-Miriam relationship. I think your quotes are quite revealing. I had always thought that Miriam's prudishness was a result of her pretentiousness. I thought that she scorned sex as something low, and Miriam hates everything low because of her defensiveness about her social situation: a rural woman who is picked on by some of her family. I had never thought of the mother as such an influence, but it would make sense. If this is true, then you're right Paul and Miriam's sexual frustrations can be pinned on the older generation and possibly the greater society. Good thought, Janine

[Janine]

Yes, Miriam does think that Paul will return to her after he has wild sex with Clara. And, to an extent, she's right. Paul rapidly losses interest in Clara, and he passes her off to her original husband. When Paul returns to Miriam it is with a somewhat diminished sexual urge. Underneath, though, remains all the problems that plagued their relationship in the first place. A list in which sexual frustration rated fairly low.

Hi Quark, I read your post a day or so ago. Been trying to get back to it. So here I am at last!

I just got to your favorite scene in the woods with Clara and Paul. It seems more in implied when they go to tea as to what took place there in that ravine or whatever that odd space was - all muddy and some sort of a ledge in the tree trucks. This part I was a bit foggy about, but it is interesting to note, that one surmises what took place (now I am being very serious about this) from the way Paul's mood is so different afterwards - he is all aglow and playful with Clara, as he cleans her boots off - so that one knows his sexual anxiety has now been relieved. Writers today should take the que and not have to be so explicit in their descriptions - sometimes they really get annoying and crude. Of course, I don't know what is to follow this scene (?) and also I know that in "Lady Chatterly's Lover" Lawrence is much more explicitly expressive of this sexual union between woman and man. Of course, Quark, I realise you have not read it yet....ordering it online right now, are you? haha;)

So what you wrote above does make perfect sense to me. He has his little romps with Clara, that don't ultimately satisfy his greater self, and he is drawn back to Miriam. I had forgotten that part. I am just past the part, when he had broken off with her - I have to tell you that at the end of that chapter and that scene between them - I felt sad and even shed a small tear when the last line read in that chapter about Miriam remaining so alone and waiting. Of course, now I have gone beyond in the text and I am to the lighter/casual affair between Paul and Clara - those 'lascivious' parts. :brow: I can't wait to resume my reading tonight.:lol:

I have a few questions about the breakup passages, and interaction/conversation between Miriam and Paul, and their reactions to each other. Do you think that Miriam is truly telling the truth to Paul, when she says they never had a good day or a truly loving day; not her exact words but something like that? Then it totally devasts Paul to think that what he thought to be never actually existed between them.
I could see this two ways. The woman is feeling totally betrayed and therefore, turns the whole thing around, as a kind of 'emotional protection' for herself; also a way of being 'one up' on Paul. We woman tend to lash out or fight back at these times. I can see this breakup from another perspective, as well. Perhaps it is true and she is finally being totally honest with herself and with Paul. I don't doubt she does love him in a special way, and he her, as well, but I find this as confusing as a real life breakup and I feel like I can relate to this sort of thing, having lived through one that seemed similar in the dymanics of the conversation; one aspect being that it might be something that one knows is coming and cannot control and when the 'axe does finally fall' it seems 'shocking' and sudden, inspite of prior premonitions or feelings. This I think is what Miriam is experiencing at that point; she did know and believe deep, deep down, but failed to realise fully or 'consciously'; therefore, it all comes as a huge hurtful shock to her, when it does come. Even Paul questions later, when he has just told his mother, if he has seriously done the right thing.
This interaction between Miriam and Paul is much more fascinating to me, than it was on my first reading. I can see so much more in these few pages, that goes on between them. It seems so utterly true and real.

In that last quote of yours I agree with your last statement entirely - it was not just sexual incompatibility that caused the ultimate breakup of Miriam and Paul. They had a whole string of problems, that could not be worked out, if you think about it. They truly wanted different things in their future lives.



The second half is by far my favorite part. The first half is charming in its own way. I like the part where Mr. Morel storms out of the house but doesn't even make it to mailbox before he turns around. The problem with the first part has something to do with it's style. It reads like a work of dry realism, and Lawrence meets realism with only moderate success. He's far better with the more emotionally charged language he uses in the second half of the novel. The scene that Janine refers to is a perfect example. Now, being male, some people have a hard time believing that I, rugged manly figure that I am, would like emotional renderings of landscapes; but, actually, I do--that is, if they are well done. And, it's not just that the writing is moving or beautiful. It has more to do with the fact that it fits and improves the story. The writing isn't just meant to be sentimental; it's meant to express the characterization, conflict, and themes that guide the story. The second half does this far better than the first. Also, the characters are better. The portrait of Miriam in this story is very good.

I agree with all of this, Q, and I am especially pleased that the rugged manly figure that you are, you can still tap into your sensitive side and see how very beautiful and meaningful these passages are. And yes, not intended for sentimentality but for deeper meaning and reflections of the conflicts, themes, etc in the novel. It is all there for a purpose - Lawrence would not think in any other vain I am sure. Even that muddy decent into the woods by the river - I felt that red mud took on significance, didn't you. And the smashing of the vermillion red flowers certainly were suggestive and significant and representative of deeper meanings - perhaps Lawrence's 'blood philosophy'; I would certainly think it.



This is pretty good Janine. I hadn't thought about Miriam's mother's role in the Paul-Miriam relationship. I think your quotes are quite revealing. I had always thought that Miriam's prudishness was a result of her pretentiousness. I thought that she scorned sex as something low, and Miriam hates everything low because of her defensiveness about her social situation: a rural woman who is picked on by some of her family. I had never thought of the mother as such an influence, but it would make sense. If this is true, then you're right Paul and Miriam's sexual frustrations can be pinned on the older generation and possibly the greater society. Good thought, Janine

Q, Glad you liked it and consider it a possibility. I just got thinking of how influence woman can be by their mothers advice just as much as men, maybe even more so. Also sexual morality issues are at play here - nice girl verses bad girl. It would have been greatly frowned on for a young girl to say alone in the house with her boyfriend as Miriam and Paul did that night, or weekend, whatever. So I can't blame Miriam for being prudish. I don't think truly the woman is - she is just totally unexperienced and shy as well and she does not have the faintest idea of how to break out of this and her ingrained standards nor does she know if it is truly right to do so. She was definitely confused about her love to Paul and her place within that love.

Q, And yes - definitely the second half is the best half of the book but the first half also has some fine moments - like when the older brother dies.

[Quark]

I have a few questions about the breakup passages, and interaction/conversation between Miriam and Paul, and their reactions to each other. Do you think that Miriam is truly telling the truth to Paul, when she says they never had a good day or a truly loving day; not her exact words but something like that? Then it totally devasts Paul to think that what he thought to be never actually existed between them.

I remember Miriam saying something like that, and I was similarly confused because I thought they had numerable "good" days. I think we would have to look more closely at the motivation and context for this charge.


I could see this two ways. The woman is feeling totally betrayed and therefore, turns the whole thing around, as a kind of 'emotional protection' for herself; also a way of being 'one up' on Paul. We woman tend to lash out or fight back at these times. I can see this breakup from another perspective, as well. Perhaps it is true and she is finally being totally honest with herself and with Paul. I don't doubt she does love him in a special way, and he her, as well, but I find this as confusing as a real life breakup and I feel like I can relate to this sort of thing, having lived through one that seemed similar in the dymanics of the conversation; one aspect being that it might be something that one knows is coming and cannot control and when the 'axe does finally fall' it seems 'shocking' and sudden, inspite of prior premonitions or feelings. This I think is what Miriam is experiencing at that point; she did know and believe deep, deep down, but failed to realise fully or 'consciously'; therefore, it all comes as a huge hurtful shock to her, when it does come. Even Paul questions later, when he has just told his mother, if he has seriously done the right thing.

It does seem plausible, even probable, that Miriam would be defensive during break-up, and her claim is a pretty good emotional shield. And, characters in this story will often say something motivated by their own emotional needs. Yet, equally often, those things they say have some truth which lingers in the person they're aimed at. For example, Mrs. Morel casts all these oblique aspersions on her sons' girlfriends; and, while, yes the mother does say them selfishly, they do have some amount of truth in them. I wonder if Miriam's lament over their fruitless relationship has something genuine behind it. I think I need to go back and reread.


I agree with all of this, Q, and I am especially pleased that the rugged manly figure that you are, you can still tap into your sensitive side and see how very beautiful and meaningful these passages are. And yes, not intended for sentimentality but for deeper meaning and reflections of the conflicts, themes, etc in the novel. It is all there for a purpose - Lawrence would not think in any other vain I am sure. Even that muddy decent into the woods by the river - I felt that red mud took on significance, didn't you. And the smashing of the vermillion red flowers certainly were suggestive and significant and representative of deeper meanings - perhaps Lawrence's 'blood philosophy'; I would certainly think it.

Okay, now I'm really in the dark as to where you are in the book. I thought you were just after The Test of Miriam, but now it sounds like you're well into the Paul-Clara love affair. We desperately need to start using chapter names instead of mere saying, "You know that part in the second half where". I know where the Paul and Clara date scene is, but I'm having problems finding the Miriam quote we were talking about above.


Q, Glad you liked it and consider it a possibility. I just got thinking of how influence woman can be by their mothers advice just as much as men, maybe even more so. Also sexual morality issues are at play here - nice girl verses bad girl. It would have been greatly frowned on for a young girl to say alone in the house with her boyfriend as Miriam and Paul did that night, or weekend, whatever. So I can't blame Miriam for being prudish. I don't think truly the woman is - she is just totally unexperienced and shy as well and she does not have the faintest idea of how to break out of this and her ingrained standards nor does she know if it is truly right to do so. She was definitely confused about her love to Paul and her place within that love.

You think her prudishness was just nervousness and apprehension? I don't know. I think she was genuinely prudish since she remains so throughout the entire story--even after they break the sexual ice.


Q, And yes - definitely the second half is the best half of the book but the first half also has some fine moments - like when the older brother dies.

Yeah, that is probably the most moving part of the first half. William's failed marriage is also very well done. It's like a condensed version of the second half.

[Janine]

I remember Miriam saying something like that, and I was similarly confused because I thought they had numerable "good" days. I think we would have to look more closely at the motivation and context for this charge.

Hey, Quark, I am sorry leaving you hanging like this. I was trying to get back here for days now, since I appreciated that you had answered my post so well; I got tied up in "Sons and Lovers" thread debating a few things.


It does seem plausible, even probable, that Miriam would be defensive during break-up, and her claim is a pretty good emotional shield. And, characters in this story will often say something motivated by their own emotional needs. Yet, equally often, those things they say have some truth which lingers in the person they're aimed at. For example, Mrs. Morel casts all these oblique aspersions on her sons' girlfriends; and, while, yes the mother does say them selfishly, they do have some amount of truth in them. I wonder if Miriam's lament over their fruitless relationship has something genuine behind it. I think I need to go back and reread.

Quark, I think this assessment of yours in so well stated and accurate. I like both parts - about Miriam's reaction and about how oblique (good word!) Mrs. Moral's opinions about Paul's girlfriends actually are. And in both cases, both woman do sometimes say bits of truth. Like wasn't Paul acting immature and Miriam called him a 4 yr old? Also, somethings Mrs. Morel says I might have said myself as a mother concerned about her son. Some are normal mothering and advice/opinion, and some go past the limit.


Okay, now I'm really in the dark as to where you are in the book. I thought you were just after The Test of Miriam, but now it sounds like you're well into the Paul-Clara love affair. We desperately need to start using chapter names instead of mere saying, "You know that part in the second half where". I know where the Paul and Clara date scene is, but I'm having problems finding the Miriam quote we were talking about above.

I am beyond the 'Test of Miriam' chapter now...quite beyond it. The quote I think was just at the end of that chapter - 'Test of Miriam'. It was in the last couple of pages.

In the other scene, I was referring to Clara's and Paul's first encounter, in a sexual sense, in the woods, by the stream; then afterwards Paul cleans off mud from her boots; then they go somewhere for tea and a lady loves how gay they seem and gives Clara some flowers. This chapter follows the other mentioned and is called 'Passion'.

Hey, Q, I would think you could locate these easily or at least the 'Passion' one - it must be solid double lined passages in your book!;) :lol:





You think her prudishness was just nervousness and apprehension? I don't know. I think she was genuinely prudish since she remains so throughout the entire story--even after they break the sexual ice.

I guess from a woman's perspective, I differ, in my point of view, on that idea of her being prudish. You see, I think it was due to her upbringing that she appears to be 'prudish'. Why do men always use that catch phrase, anyway? The girl believed and had scrupples and 'values' that were different than Paul's. Perhaps, as Lawrence pointed out, either in another story or in real life (I forget which I read now) he could have brought her through it to the other side, freed her, had they stayed together. Either he was talking about Jessie or the character in another story we read - maybe 'The Shades of Spring' - I will check my books on that. I may have read it in a letter Lawrence wrote concerning the model for Miriam, Jessie. All this, of course, is just conjucture for now, so don't quote me on it. Just a thought - that is all.


Yeah, that is probably the most moving part of the first half. William's failed marriage is also very well done. It's like a condensed version of the second half.

Yes, truly a moving moment, but there were other values to the first half. It built up to the romance part of the story, so that I feel the entire book was well structured, and the first part paced differently on purpose. Perhaps, the second half reflects the fury or a young man's passions, so the pace of the book moves along more rapidly and is more interesting in the second half.
;) I am sure you have more double underlined words in that half.:lol:

[Janine]

Hi everybody, anybody, I am back! Seems this thread is fading into the mist. I am nearly done reading the book and soon would like to discuss the ending and some of the prior chapters with anyone....hello...anyone out there still interested in S&L's???......where is Quark? He must be busy with his applications for his Masters, was it? I forget what he told me now.

Well, maybe someone else will jump in, when I post some remarks on the last couple of chapters.

Too busy for comments now but hoped to revive this thread a bit just by saying I am still interested in some bit of discussion. Let me finish up the book, I am close.

[manolia]

Ready to discuss the ending Janine, when you are ready too :)

[Janine]

Ready to discuss the ending Janine, when you are ready too :)

manolia, great! Good to see you here again. Gee, I put out a cry for help and you responded - how nice.:)

I only have a dozen more pages to go till the ending. Give me a few days and I will be back to discuss it, today I am not feeling really well; I think I am just overly tired out. Not on Thursday, either - that is our Thanksgiving Day and we are all going to my son's in-laws for a turkey dinner. Probably around Friday would be good. See you then, hopefully.

Thanks for responding, so that this thread did not fade into infamy! haha:lol:

[Quark]

Hi everybody, anybody, I am back! Seems this thread is fading into the mist. I am nearly done reading the book and soon would like to discuss the ending and some of the prior chapters with anyone....hello...anyone out there still interested in S&L's???......

We never really talked about the end very much. I would like to hear what people think about it. Is Paul in a better place at the end? What do we learn about Paul after his mother's death? Are Clara and Baxter a good couple? Or, is it a marriage of convenience (it's embarrassing how many attempts it took me to spell that word correctly)?


where is Quark? He must be busy with his applications for his Masters, was it? I forget what he told me now.

It's probably going to be another week or so until I can start posting regularly. Right now, I'm trying to come up with a writing sample that will live up to the expectations of an admissions committee. Most people simply give them a paper they wrote for an undergraduate class, but my university didn't just fail to teach us how to do research--they actively discouraged it. So, rather than have these schools think I'm woefully unprepared for academic work, I'm writing a new paper. It will be done soon, though, and I hope to come back to LitNet eventually.

[Janine]

Hey Quark, don't worry about it. I am still reading the book! Now tonight I should actually complete it.
Did it really take you a long time to spell 'convenience'?....hahaaha:lol: ...join the club; neither I, nor Virgil can spell worth a darn. I think I get the 'prize' this time for the slowest reader on here. I have been so very slowly reading this book and I can't recall it taking this long, the first time around. After this is done I think I need a break. I am getting really tired and burned out again....it may be a case of brain freeze coming on.:cold:

manolia is wanting also to discuss the ending. You bring up some good questions and I will think about them tonight, promise. Of course, with L's characters, which are so multi-layered these are not easy to answer. Maybe manolia has some ideas to start with, until I finish up my reading. I only have a couple of pages now, but my eyes would not remain open last night, to complete the book,:( so I had to give in to sleep.:as-sleep:

Good luck with your paper. I know what you mean, so many colleges do fall short of helping students after they graduate - like in the real world. It is quite distressing. I think you will do just fine. :thumbs_up You always express yourself so well on here and you write very lucidly and you articulate well.... and sometimes you can actually spell.:lol:

[Janine]

Hi everyone, I have a huge apology to make to everyone, since I have been quite vacant from this thread for too long now. I did finish the book about a week ago. Wow - what a book, eh? I think this is one of the very finest books I have ever read. I started to listen to an audiobook of "Women in Love" and I got quite mesmerized by it. I feel like it is a whole different book and I am noticing things I had not prior picked up in my own reading - strange. I will post in that thread soon to comment on a few things I noticed in Chapter 3 that I felt of great interest.
I would like now to discuss the ending with everyone of this novel - "Sons and Lovers'. If anyone would like to jump in and say anything I would be interested in these points towards the ending:

First off, I did not know before, exactly what critics meant when they said that 'Paul's mother simply gave up and then she died. I now realise that she ignored her tumor for months and did not reveal how ill she was; in a sense 'giving up' on life. Was this just denial or a actual 'death wish'? Now, I'm curious to know of your opinions on this aspect of the story.

I also wondered about Clara - she claimed she did not love here husband, but then she returns to him - is this because she feels she can have the 'whole' of him and not 'part', as with Paul and is it also, out of the fact, that her husband truly 'needs' her? I felt at the end, that roles were somewhat exchanged with Miriam, in that Clara gave herself up as a 'sacrifice' to her husband, and therefore abandoned her own independence from him and her free will, in terms of relationships. I found her to be a sad character.

Lastly, I wondered how everyone felt about the fact, that Paul took it on himself, after convering with his sister, to administer the overdose of morphia to his mother. Do you think his mother knew when she drank the bitter milk or suspected? I personally believe he did the right thing, but oddly enough the mother took sometime to pass away, which was a very sad and devastating scene and very realistic, as well. I can see how one would love another so much to aid in putting them to rest and out of their misery; but of course, this raises all kinds of 'moral' issues, too. I don't know if we can realistically go into much about this aspect of the book in this forum. I would think at the time this book was written it would have caused quite a stir with the public, this one issue. I think Lawrence was brave to include this in his book and so close to completing the book, knowing in his heart it was indeed a masterpiece of writing, and this could censor it with publishers.

[manolia]

Janine i agree with what you say about Clara. While i was reading this part, where she returns to her husband i kept thinking that she returns to a safer harbor ;) . After all security is very important in a relationship and for some people it is more important than..let's say..passion or even love.
I'll have to think about the other two points you made ;)

[Janine]

Janine i agree with what you say about Clara. While i was reading this part, where she returns to her husband i kept thinking that she returns to a safer harbor ;) . After all security is very important in a relationship and for some people it is more important than..let's say..passion or even love.
I'll have to think about the other two points you made ;)

:wave: Himanolia, I do so agree but still it seems strange. Another thing is that so often I noticed that Paul kept questioning Clara about if she made the husband the way he was. Considering Paul's own family dynamics this struck me as curious - did Paul's mother make his father the way he was?

Anyway, glad you saw my posts and addressed them today. I revised a few things in my last paragraph so that it would read clearer and be more understandable, as to what I was trying to express.

I also just thought of another thing. I would like very much to discuss the befriending of Paul to Clara's husband. I felt that they two shared a sort of misery at the time they really got friendly - Paul with his mother and the husband seeming to give up on life. I hope all of you have good comments on these two and why you think that Paul turned the tables to seek out the man and become as a friend. Not sure I have explained all this correctly but I think you all know what I mean and the passages I refer to.

[Virgil]

You know I always loved the last paragraphs of Sons and Lovers. Here they are:

He shook hands and left her at the door of her cousin's house.
When he turned away he felt the last hold for him had gone. The town,
as he sat upon the car, stretched away over the bay of railway, a
level fume of lights. Beyond the town the country, little smouldering
spots for more towns--the sea--the night--on and on! And he had no
place in it! Whatever spot he stood on, there he stood alone.
From his breast, from his mouth, sprang the endless space, and it
was there behind him, everywhere. The people hurrying along the
streets offered no obstruction to the void in which he found himself.
They were small shadows whose footsteps and voices could be heard,
but in each of them the same night, the same silence. He got off
the car. In the country all was dead still. Little stars shone high up;
little stars spread far away in the flood-waters, a firmament below.
Everywhere the vastness and terror of the immense night which is
roused and stirred for a brief while by the day, but which returns,
and will remain at last eternal, holding everything in its silence
and its living gloom. There was no Time, only Space. Who could say
his mother had lived and did not live? She had been in one place,
and was in another; that was all. And his soul could not leave her,
wherever she was. Now she was gone abroad into the night, and he
was with her still. They were together. But yet there was his body,
his chest, that leaned against the stile, his hands on the wooden bar.
They seemed something. Where was he?--one tiny upright speck of flesh,
less than an ear of wheat lost in the field. He could not bear it.
On every side the immense dark silence seemed pressing him, so tiny
a spark, into extinction, and yet, almost nothing, he could not
be extinct. Night, in which everything was lost, went reaching out,
beyond stars and sun. Stars and sun, a few bright grains, went spinning
round for terror, and holding each other in embrace, there in a
darkness that outpassed them all, and left them tiny and daunted.
So much, and himself, infinitesimal, at the core a nothingness,
and yet not nothing.

"Mother!" he whispered--"mother!"

She was the only thing that held him up, himself, amid all this.
And she was gone, intermingled herself. He wanted her to touch him,
have him alongside with her.

But no, he would not give in. Turning sharply, he walked
towards the city's gold phosphorescence. His fists were shut,
his mouth set fast. He would not take that direction, to the
darkness, to follow her. He walked towards the faintly humming,
glowing town, quickly.


THE END

The way Lawrence uses the image of the town as the place to rebell against and escape, while still bound as a bond to civilization has always seemed like the ideal ending of a novel about a young person. So much angst and anger and frustration is expressed beautifully here. The whole experience has fractured his mental state. The women, his mother's death, he has entered the world of adulthood, and it's not an easy transition. So much of his upbringing, his family and culture comes from there, yet "his fists are shut and his mouth set fast." Wow! I love those paragraphs.

[jlb4tlb]

You know I always loved the last paragraphs of Sons and Lovers. Here they are:


The way Lawrence uses the image of the town as the place to rebell against and escape, while still bound as a bond to civilization has always seemed like the ideal ending of a novel about a young person. So much angst and anger and frustration is expressed beautifully here. The whole experience has fractured his mental state. The women, his mother's death, he has entered the world of adulthood, and it's not an easy transition. So much of his upbringing, his family and culture comes from there, yet "his fists are shut and his mouth set fast." Wow! I love those paragraphs.

When I first read "Sons And Lovers" I had to reread the ending a few times to have it sink in. Then the most interesting idea :idea: came to be. Paul at this point is only a few steps away from Alan Bates land.:lol:

Jeff

[Janine]

When I first read "Sons And Lovers" I had to reread the ending a few times to have it sink in. Then the most interesting idea :idea: came to be. Paul at this point is only a few steps away from Alan Bates land.:lol:

Jeff

:brow: Wasn't Alan Bates the mama's boy/son/slasher in the Hitchcock film 'Pyscho'? You know I have never actually seen that film and I love Hitchcock. Jeff, I don't think sooooo......come now.....but you did make me laugh:eek: :lol:

Are we having fun yet???;)


You know I always loved the last paragraphs of Sons and Lovers. Here they are:


The way Lawrence uses the image of the town as the place to rebell against and escape, while still bound as a bond to civilization has always seemed like the ideal ending of a novel about a young person. So much angst and anger and frustration is expressed beautifully here. The whole experience has fractured his mental state. The women, his mother's death, he has entered the world of adulthood, and it's not an easy transition. So much of his upbringing, his family and culture comes from there, yet "his fists are shut and his mouth set fast." Wow! I love those paragraphs.

Virgil,I thought that last part of the novel was beautifully and expressively written, as well; so full of deep meaning. This last part was completely true to life and how a youth would feel at that point. The last lines are amazing and they just tell all, with the 'shut fists' and the 'mouth set fast' - one can picture so much going on inside a person with those expressions just at that significant moment of letting go of ones past and youth. I just recall after reading this last part, closing the book slowly and saying - wow, this was a truly great book I experienced. It wasn't just a story, it was more of an 'experience' that I will never forget. It's intimacy truly touched me in a way no other novels have before. It seemed so truthful and honest.

[amalia1985]

I agree with Manolia regarding Clara, safety is something precious these days, and I am in favor of this attitude in certain occassions.

Regarding Paul's mother, I agree with Janine. I would do the same for my mother, although there are certain moral reservations which I respect. I admit I would think twice, but I would probably end up doing what Paul did. I am not sure whether his mother knew, she was a clever woman, perhaps she realised it, but as Janine said it was a frightful ending. I remember having the desire to skip these pages, I felt so disturbed and sorry for the woman at that point.

Now, regarding the mother's wish to die? I don't know, honestly, I wouldn't agree. Perhpas the fact that she ignored the tumor was a denial to admit that there was something wrong.

[manolia]

Hmmmm..i agree with Amalia. I don't think that Mrs Morel wanted to die..
As for Paul giving the fatal dose to his mother...i was very troubled reading that part too. I don't think i could ever do such a thing to my mother. I'd sit and wait till the end hoping for a miracle, i guess ;)

Janine, regarding the friendship between the two men..this is the part of the book that i couldn't get ;) . I could understand Baxter's attitude, being a broken man, sick, poor, abandoned by his wife, without a job e.t.c. He could "receive" charity even from his "enemy" Paul (or should i say adversary?). We can give him credit for being reluctant at first, though (he shunned Paul, at first, didn't he?). But i can't account for Paul's behaviour..

[Janine]

I agree with Manolia regarding Clara, safety is something precious these days, and I am in favor of this attitude in certain occassions.

Hi manolia and amalia,
Well, let's face it - what choice did a woman really have back then? With Paul, she had a shaky relationship for certain. He seemed to be floundering all the time, not knowing what he wanted in life, so there was no 'stability' in staying with him. Clara was a 'separated' woman and not even divorced, so who could she hope to get as a partner for life? I think she also felt bound to the husband, by the fact that she was technically still married to him. I think going back to him was her only secure option, so I agree with you two on this idea of security. I don't think she had nearly the passion she had with Paul, but she did have some regard for her husband and realised she could have the 'whole of him' and be secure. Also, it seemed that the husband had gone through some bit of 'tranformation' by the end of the novel. His 'need' for her, at that point, also would have been appealing to a woman in her position.



Regarding Paul's mother, I agree with Janine. I would do the same for my mother, although there are certain moral reservations which I respect. I admit I would think twice, but I would probably end up doing what Paul did. I am not sure whether his mother knew, she was a clever woman, perhaps she realised it, but as Janine said it was a frightful ending. I remember having the desire to skip these pages, I felt so disturbed and sorry for the woman at that point.

Yes, this is such a hard question to answer, isnt' it. I actually knew a woman who died much like this - she too had ignored her cancer and it spread and she took no real modern treatment but morphine. It was such a sad and drawnout affair. I think had any one of her daughters administered the lethal dose of morphine that Paul did to her mother I would have looked on them as saints, because they adored their mother and say her suffer so.
The ending was frightful and hard to keep reading, I agree. It made one feel very uncomfortable. From an artistic sense this part of the book was written brilliantly and it is so like life and shows us a true window into dying in this manor. Sad to say, but I think we see how difficult the whole thing was through these passages - from the decision to her last breath and that it is no simple answer to this age old question from a moral standpoint. I hope that all made sense.

Now, regarding the mother's wish to die? I don't know, honestly, I wouldn't agree. Perhpas the fact that she ignored the tumor was a denial to admit that there was something wrong.

Well, keep wondering about that, too. Some say she felt she lost her sons, even Paul, or the control over him, and so she gave up on her own living. If she did do this and was in denial about her cancer, I think it was 'subconscious' and not a deliberate thing. It is hard to say. This woman I know, who died of cancer, had just lost her husband and I think, like Paul's mother, she gave up on her own life. She had had it and wanted out. A very sad thing, since my feelings are she might have been saved to live many more years, but then who really knows? Perhaps, had Paul's mother told that she had a small tumor before it got out of hand, she may have had surgery and survived, but back then, it all was doubtful; there were no miracle treatments, like today for cancers.


Hmmmm..i agree with Amalia. I don't think that Mrs Morel wanted to die..
As for Paul giving the fatal dose to his mother...i was very troubled reading that part too. I don't think i could ever do such a thing to my mother. I'd sit and wait till the end hoping for a miracle, i guess ;)

I am sure I would be like you, too, M, and just wait till the end....although I would probably wish it could be otherwise. I guess I believe more in natural death and not aided but if a person truly wants to be aided I would not oppose it; however I am sure I could not be the instrument of the carrying out of the request. I just saw a very good film on this. I should talk about it in the film thread. I forget the name of it presently but it was based on a true story and the man had been paralysised for years and wanted out finally. Something about the 'sea' in the title and I think it was a Spanish-speaking film.



Janine, regarding the friendship between the two men..this is the part of the book that i couldn't get ;) . I could understand Baxter's attitude, being a broken man, sick, poor, abandoned by his wife, without a job e.t.c. He could "receive" charity even from his "enemy" Paul (or should i say adversary?). We can give him credit for being reluctant at first, though (he shunned Paul, at first, didn't he?). But i can't account for Paul's behaviour..

I agree - I was a little confused and keep wondering why Paul's behavior was like this. It seemed so unreal to me at first. The one thing I keep coming up with is this - sometimes when people are under extreme dirgess, they do strange and even seemingly illogical things. I also, had the thought in reading these passages, that Paul saw Baxter as a 'broken' man and he felt this certain affinity with him, because inside Paul also was broken and fractured. In the company of the man he felt he had someone to exist with, even if they did not communicate, so well. They say 'like seeks like' or 'misery likes company'; so this is what I have come up with, to satisfy my own pondering on these facts. I thought the strangest scene was when Paul invited Clara along to spend a day with Baxter and he at a cottage, wasn't it... by the sea? How quickly I have forgotten - it seems I moved onto other books and now I can't recall clearly that part of 'S&L' - help! refresh my memory, if you can.

[Virgil]

As for Paul giving the fatal dose to his mother...i was very troubled reading that part too. I don't think i could ever do such a thing to my mother. I'd sit and wait till the end hoping for a miracle, i guess ;)


I'm with you Manolia. I could never do such a thing. Perhaps they didn't have the pain killers then that they have now, so Paul may not have had a choice. And that part of the book troubled me too. I thought it was somewhat unprepared as an climax.

[manolia]

I guess I believe more in natural death and not aided but if a person truly wants to be aided I would not oppose it; however I am sure I could not be the instrument of the carrying out of the request. I just saw a very good film on this. I should talk about it in the film thread. I forget the name of it presently but it was based on a true story and the man had been paralysised for years and wanted out finally. Something about the 'sea' in the title and I think it was a Spanish-speaking film.

I couldn't oppose it either but i certainly wouldn't do it myself (like you say). This is a tough one though (whether euthanasia must be legal or not..).
I know the film. It is spanish ("The sea inside" must be the english title). I haven't seen it, but i will. I like Havier Bardem. Great actor.



The one thing I keep coming up with is this - sometimes when people are under extreme dirgess, they do strange and even seemingly illogical things. I also, had the thought in reading these passages, that Paul saw Baxter as a 'broken' man and he felt this certain affinity with him, because inside Paul also was broken and fractured. In the company of the man he felt he had someone to exist with, even if they did not communicate, so well. They say 'like seeks like' or 'misery likes company'; so this is what I have come up with, to satisfy my own pondering on these facts. I thought the strangest scene was when Paul invited Clara along to spend a day with Baxter and he at a cottage, wasn't it... by the sea? How quickly I have forgotten - it seems I moved onto other books and now I can't recall clearly that part of 'S&L' - help! refresh my memory, if you can.

Hmmmm..that definately makes sense. This might be the answer ;)


I'm with you Manolia. I could never do such a thing. Perhaps they didn't have the pain killers then that they have now, so Paul may not have had a choice. And that part of the book troubled me too. I thought it was somewhat unprepared as an ending.

Yes, i thought that too...and he loved her too much and couldn't bare to watch her suffer. That's why i find an excuse with his behaviour and didn't dislike him as a character. What an ending, eh?

[grace86]

Yay!!!! I bought S&L...can't read it now...but at least now I will be able to catch up at some time!!

But uhhh flipping through the pages of this thread might take forever....you guys really have had a good go at it!

[Janine]

Yay!!!! I bought S&L...can't read it now...but at least now I will be able to catch up at some time!!

But uhhh flipping through the pages of this thread might take forever....you guys really have had a good go at it!

Hi grace, glad to see you here. We all missed you so.
Yes, do read the book, when you find the time. I think you will discover it quite interesting. We certainly did get ambitious posting, didn't we? I had not realised just how many pages there were....and they are still growing. Thing is way back this same thread was started before the others read the book; at that time I think it was basically just Pensive and myself and maybe Virgil, then I re-read the book with everyone else and this thread again took off. No doubt it will never truly end so when you are ready to discuss the book I will probably do so and the others as well. There is so much here to condemplate and discuss - a very complex book indeed!


I'm with you Manolia. I could never do such a thing. Perhaps they didn't have the pain killers then that they have now, so Paul may not have had a choice. And that part of the book troubled me too. I thought it was somewhat unprepared as an climax.

Virgil, how did you feel it was unprepared or Lawrence presented it unprepared at the end or climax? I am curious for you to expound on this thought. First time I read the novel, it certainly did have a shocking aspect.


I couldn't oppose it either but i certainly wouldn't do it myself (like you say). This is a tough one though (whether euthanasia must be legal or not..).
I know the film. It is spanish ("The sea inside" must be the english title). I haven't seen it, but i will. I like Havier Bardem. Great actor.

manolia, that is the film! It was quite good, although slow-going at times. I like Havier Bardem, also. Did you ever see him in the film "The Dancer Upstairs"? I thought it was interesting. I thought his name was Javier, not Havier....maybe different in translation to Greek. Anyway, I think my friend, Amalia also likes him - she mentioned his name recently. He is a fine actor. It is interesting to watch the special features on the DVD of "The Sea Inside", since it shows much footage of the real man and what he had to say.


Hmmmm..that definately makes sense. This might be the answer
Glad you consider it to make sense. Also, I was thinking to add this - they, both men, had Clara (physically) yet they, neither of them, truly had her. Neither had had her mentally, emotionally, physically, spiritually; all at the same time. They both lacked this. They both were needy and confused as well. Does that make sense?


Yes, i thought that too...and he loved her too much and couldn't bare to watch her suffer. That's why i find an excuse with his behaviour and didn't dislike him as a character. What an ending, eh?
Yep - what an ending! ...and like no other book I have ever read....really thought-provoking, wasn't it?

[grace86]

Hi grace, glad to see you here. We all missed you so.
Yes, do read the book, when you find the time. I think you will discover it quite interesting. We certainly did get ambitious posting, didn't we? I had not realised just how many pages there were....and they are still growing. Thing is way back this same thread was started before the others read the book; at that time I think it was basically just Pensive and myself and maybe Virgil, then I re-read the book with everyone else and this thread again took off. No doubt it will never truly end so when you are ready to discuss the book I will probably do so and the others as well. There is so much here to condemplate and discuss - a very complex book indeed!

I shall definitely try reading it when things die down here in a couple of weeks, you convinced me last night when we were talking about the intricacies of relationships ;) both for the novel and otherwise! I am looking forward to it very much.

I'll see if I can push Quixote through the last pages and get started on that so I have the whole break to read S&L.

[Janine]

I shall definitely try reading it when things die down here in a couple of weeks, you convinced me last night when we were talking about the intricacies of relationships ;) both for the novel and otherwise! I am looking forward to it very much.

I'll see if I can push Quixote through the last pages and get started on that so I have the whole break to read S&L.

Hi Grace, great!... But don't rush yourself....make it a 'no stress' reading. You have school to think about, too...ugh right? No, seriously, your classes do sound interesting to me, actually....not as interesting as our Lit Net discussions, but interesting. Can I go to school, too? .:lol:

I don't say that Lawrence is the 'model', by far, for 'good' or 'ideal' relationships, but he shows what goes on behind the veneer of a person and deep within them. He seems to see into the very core of human beings and their relationships - which are so intricate, complex and sometimes like a fine web of confusion. Conversations between characters are filled with so much to condemplate and often one sees just how we all tend to react to things, both rationally and irrationally. I think you will be able to relate quite well to certain aspects of this book, because when we are growing up/older, going through a sort of indedpence from our families and parents; striking out on our own - it is a very confusing time. We all know that, only too well.

I hope this helps and you understand what I have written here. Glad our little talk also helped. Stay in-touch...I am always here....trying to do real life work...but not far from my trusty little computer. Today laundry is calling to me this moment.:lol:

[protagonist]

can all of us explain the themes in sons and lovers?
For example
Oedipus complex...
It is a kind of relation which the son addict to his mother a lot.

[Janine]

can all of us explain the themes in sons and lovers?
For example
Oedipus complex...
It is a kind of relation which the son addict to his mother a lot.

Hi protagonist, you can if you want to, but for now this thread is no longer very active; for one thing most of us have gone onto other books and some of us are just too busy now with the holidays. I know that Grace plans to read the book soon and I told her I could then disguss some things with her in this thread. I always say that these threads never truly close, which is a good thought I think. Hope this does not discourage you from posting; please do and I will be sure to read it and comment if I have the time to.
The 'Oedipus complex' you mention has been disgussed on this thread in several posts, awhile back, but should you want to add to it - your own thoughts and ideas it would certainly be interesting to read them. I would however, review what had already been discussed about that consideration in the story. Lawrence was well aware of Freud and his theories on this idea, but he did not agree completely with F's philosophies. I think that Virgil posted thoughts on this and Lawrence changing attitudes, and others, including myself added our thoughts or references, too.
I highly recommend you read this thread, if you can find the time; there is a lot of good L information here and on the story of S&L. By the way, how do you like the book? I read it twice and liked it very much both times, even more so the second time around. :thumbs_up

[protagonist]

Hi protagonist, you can if you want to, but for now this thread is no longer very active; for one thing most of us have gone onto other books and some of us are just too busy now with the holidays. I know that Grace plans to read the book soon and I told her I could then disguss some things with her in this thread. I always say that these threads never truly close, which is a good thought I think. Hope this does not discourage you from posting; please do and I will be sure to read it and comment if I have the time to.
The 'Oedipus complex' you mention has been disgussed on this thread in several posts, awhile back, but should you want to add to it - your own thoughts and ideas it would certainly be interesting to read them. I would however, review what had already been discussed about that consideration in the story. Lawrence was well aware of Freud and his theories on this idea, but he did not agree completely with F's philosophies. I think that Virgil posted thoughts on this and Lawrence changing attitudes, and others, including myself added our thoughts or references, too.
I highly recommend you read this thread, if you can find the time; there is a lot of good L information here and on the story of S&L. By the way, how do you like the book? I read it twice and liked it very much both times, even more so the second time around. :thumbs_up

Thanks a lot Janine.I read the book both the translated versin and english version.It is very different and tells about the people who are under the influence of natural and industrial world.

[Janine]

You're welcome, Protagonist. Sorry it took me so long to answer your post above. I saw it awhile back but just could not find the time.
Wow, so you read two Lawrence versions - interesting. Yes, the novel very much does contrast the natural world with the industrial world - the advent of the machine and it's effect and changes it had on our way of living and environment. This is a 'timeless' theme, don't you think? Lawrence saw it all coming; he was quite prophetic in his novels. Now we all know the ecological problems in the world, we can see that he made a lot of sense, so far back in the beginning of the last century. Yes, Lawrence's writing is quite 'different'. I really love the way he describes people and places; one feels like one has been there first-hand.
If you are inclined to short stories - we are currently reading one a month in the Lawrence Short Story thread. It is a good discussion group we have going. You are welcome to join in. 'The more the merrier', as they say! We have not picked the next story yet, but will soon for February.

[ci_ci]

Hi everyone,I am a Chinese student who take the book Sons and Lovers as my graduating paper.My concern is the reason of the tragic love between Paul and Miriam.In my opinion, it is the defective pesonality of the two protagonists that leads the tragedy,not is the so-called Oedipus complex which does play as the stimulus to the tragedy. It is appreciated that anyone gives his advices and opinions to my topic:)
Can I join in your dicussion?
P.S.:There is a limitation of my English level,but I will try my best to improve it to express myself and communicate with everyone:)

[Virgil]

Hi everyone,I am a Chinese student who take the book Sons and Lovers as my graduating paper.My concern is the reason of the tragic love between Paul and Miriam.In my opinion, it is the defective pesonality of the two protagonists that leads the tragedy,not is the so-called Oedipus complex which does play as the stimulus to the tragedy. It is appreciated that anyone gives his advices and opinions to my topic:)
Can I join in your dicussion?
P.S.:There is a limitation of my English level,but I will try my best to improve it to express myself and communicate with everyone:)

Welcome Ci Ci. Yes, I think that might be a good approach to understanding the Paul/Miriam relationship. Let us know what you write in your paper.

[Janine]

Hi everyone,I am a Chinese student who take the book Sons and Lovers as my graduating paper.My concern is the reason of the tragic love between Paul and Miriam.In my opinion, it is the defective pesonality of the two protagonists that leads the tragedy,not is the so-called Oedipus complex which does play as the stimulus to the tragedy. It is appreciated that anyone gives his advices and opinions to my topic:)
Can I join in your dicussion?
P.S.:There is a limitation of my English level,but I will try my best to improve it to express myself and communicate with everyone:)

ci_ci, I am sorry to tell you that the discussion for "Sons and Lovers" is not active currently, although these threads never truly end; so feel free to post and ask questions. I hope I can be of some help to you. I love this book and I know it well - I have read it twice and discussed it often, so we might discuss it, also. I am an avid reader of Lawrence and biographies about the author.
Your particular question is a complicated one, that has puzzled readers and scholars alike ever since the book was published. There are so many answers to this question and so many reasons that Paul and Miriam could not last as a couple. I think for one it was the time in which they lived and the social attitudes of each. Paul longed for freedom and sexual freedom, but Miriam was still harnessed to the old ways and therefore Paul and Miriam could not be as Paul envisioned. Although they were very close friends and tried to become lovers it truly did not work for either of them. Very much Paul wanted to come together physically and mentally with Miriam, but in a different way of being and thinking. This could not be achieved by Miriam, nor by Paul with Miriam. Instead, Paul saw Miriam as a 'sacrifice' for him in her physical loving of him. Also, Mrs Morel was a great factor. She kept Paul from Miriam by exerting her 'will' over Paul and using their unusual 'closeness' to keep Paul from Miriam. Miriam knew this and she Knew she was no match for Paul's mother. There was a continual tug of war between them - of their wills. Paul's mother felt Miriam wanted Paul body and soul and therefore would rob Mrs. Moral of her son, whom she now saw almost as a lover after the death of Paul's older brother. If you read a Lawrence biography or a short rendition, you will see that this story is very autobiographical and Jesse (Miriam) indeed was hurt deeply by Lawrence when he broke-up with her. Miriam did actually think Paul would come back to her eventually, but it was impossible for Paul emotionally at that point in his life. I really think Paul loved Jessie deeply, but it was not destined to happen or last as a love partnership or marriage. If you read Lawrence's short story 'The Shades of Spring', you may get some insight into Lawrence and how he felt about Jesse, in looking back to the past. I feel the story relates, but in an round-about way. I am not saying these characters are the actual people, but the two main characters seem to be reminescent of Lawrence and Jesse, at least to me they do. The new lover in the woman's life at the end of this story is fictional. In "Son's and Lovers", most of the characters are based on real life and actual people in Lawrence's young life. The character of Clara, is a combination of several woman and basically 'fictional'.
I hope this helped some in understanding the relationship, but much has been written in this thread about this complicated situation with Paul, Miriam, his mother and even the element of Clara. I would hope you could review some of this to get more information.

[River]

I have to read this within the next three days if I want time to write a decent report. I'm not looking forward to it, to be honest.

[Janine]

Why? It is a great novel, River....give it a chance. It is a tight deadline reading it in only 3 days time. I do hate deadlines and pressure. Good luck with your paper. We have discused this novel recently, on this forum, believe it is this thread; so you should read the back posts to get a better idea of what the book is all about. Of course, you have a ton of reading for the next 3 days, so I can sympathise. Good luck!

[symphony]

I have to read this within the next three days if I want time to write a decent report. I'm not looking forward to it, to be honest.
Thats too bad. I could never read anything with interest with the awareness of it being anything related to a textbook ever! Here's a great bengali novel which i've been wanting to read since i was a kid, but now that it's become included in my high school syllabi i began avoiding it (i didnt even know why first!). The very fact that it's a textbook made me repel it and drift off to sleep whenever i set my eyes on it. :sick:


Anyway, i finished reading S & L last night. Loved it. Though the ending was troubling (and the last few pages took me more time than i needed to finish the whole book), i enjoyed reading it. I particularly admired the artist in Paul and enjoyed watching where he goes.
This was my first Lawrence novel. It sure will make me read more now. :)

[Janine]

Thats too bad. I could never read anything with interest with the awareness of it being anything related to a textbook ever! Here's a great bengali novel which i've been wanting to read since i was a kid, but now that it's become included in my high school syllabi i began avoiding it (i didnt even know why first!). The very fact that it's a textbook made me repel it and drift off to sleep whenever i set my eyes on it. :sick:


Anyway, i finished reading S & L last night. Loved it. Though the ending was troubling (and the last few pages took me more time than i needed to finish the whole book), i enjoyed reading it. I particularly admired the artist in Paul and enjoyed watching where he goes.
This was my first Lawrence novel. It sure will make me read more now. :)

Hi symphony, I am so glad you appreciated and liked "Son and Lovers" - one of my favorite Lawrence novels. I am a huge fan of L's work! I don't know if you have noticed, but we have a monthly short story thread, devoted just to Lawrence's short stories. We also, discussed "Women in Love" (last year) and "Son's and Lovers" later in the same year, or beginning of ths year (now I forget which), on this forum site. Both discussions were great. I don't know if you are aware just how closely autobiographical "Sons and Lovers" is, to Lawrence actual life story. In fact, he would correspond to the character of Paul; Lawrence also loved art and to paint throughout his life and the people closest to him, were based on his family; Miriam was based on Jesse Chambers, who lived on a nearby farm.
Soon we hope to read and discuss "The Rainbow", which would actually be the novel next in-line for you; it follows S&L. Later or prior to this, we will discuss "Lady Chatterly's Lover" which is a much later work for L. I hope any, or all of these, will interest you, and hope to see you in one of the threads.

I agree with you, when you said:"I could never read anything with interest with the awareness of it being anything related to a textbook ever!" I had this same thought when I was in HS - it really was a serious mental block I think. Years and years later, when I viewed the excellent miniseries of "A Tale of Two Cities", of which I know the novel was required reading in HS, I said to myself, "did I ever really read this story? This is just great read and a terrific love story; how did I miss that part of the book?" Well, I must have skimmed it, just to get by on a test. So, I dusted off my old book, and read it cover to cover, in a week's time and loved every word of it. I was so amazed; I had actually thought I had read this before....which now I doubt seriously.

[symphony]

Hi symphony,I don't know if you are aware just how closely autobiographical "Sons and Lovers" is, to Lawrence actual life story. In fact, he would correspond to the character of Paul; Lawrence also loved art and to paint throughout his life and the people closest to him, were based on his family; Miriam was based on Jesse Chambers, who lived on a nearby farm.
Yes I read that in the introduction. I'm not sure if Clara stands for Louie Burrows or Frieda Weekley. Could easily be none of the two though.


Soon we hope to read and discuss "The Rainbow", which would actually be the novel next in-line for you; it follows S&L. Later or prior to this, we will discuss "Lady Chatterly's Lover" which is a much later work for L. I hope any, or all of these, will interest you, and hope to see you in one of the threads.
I so want to join the discussions. But right now i'm in the neck of some very important exams and tied up till July. So i'm not sure i'll make it for The Rainbow but may be i'll catch up with you on another. I'll sure try to. :)

[Janine]

Yes I read that in the introduction. I'm not sure if Clara stands for Louie Burrows or Frieda Weekley. Could easily be none of the two though.

Actually, we came up with this while discussing the book on this forum: apparently, from my research, Clara is actually based on a combination of women Lawrence knew; one may be Louie Burrows, but the other definitely was not Frieda Weekly, since he had not yet met her, I believe. Frieda was closer to being the model for Ursula in the "Rainbow" and "Women in Love". Interesting, isn't it? So Clara is actually a fictional character that Lawrence conjured up in his own mind.


I so want to join the discussions. But right now i'm in the neck of some very important exams and tied up till July. So i'm not sure i'll make it for The Rainbow but may be i'll catch up with you on another. I'll sure try to. :)
Oh, that would be great. Don't worry, discussions will continue through the summer months, so you might be able to catch some short stories or one of the novels. We may not start "The Rainbow" till late anyway, since I am expecting my first grandchild, this month or early next. I know I will be too busy, then to begin the book discussion. They are all waiting patiently on me but they'll wait, so actually - the discussion of TR, may not take place till your summer vacation time. Hope you can join us then. It should be quite interesting. Virgil will be there and he knows a lot about TR since it is his favorite Lawrence novel. My favorite is "Women in Love", but I am sure a second reading of TR, will greatly help me to understand and appreciate that work, as well. Hope to see you in the summer in one of the discussion groups.

Your avatar is elegant and lovely. I recall you had another I really loved, too. You user name goes so well with that image, symphony.

[Virgil]

Anyway, i finished reading S & L last night. Loved it. Though the ending was troubling (and the last few pages took me more time than i needed to finish the whole book), i enjoyed reading it. I particularly admired the artist in Paul and enjoyed watching where he goes.
This was my first Lawrence novel. It sure will make me read more now. :)

Oh I'm so glad you enjoyed that Symph. I actually loved the ending. It seems like the perfect ending of a young man in turmoil. Lawrence is such a brilliant writer. Anytime you wish to join our Lawrence short story discussion, feel free.

[symphony]

Oh, that would be great. Don't worry, discussions will continue through the summer months, so you might be able to catch some short stories or one of the novels. We may not start "The Rainbow" till late anyway, since I am expecting my first grandchild, this month or early next. I know I will be too busy, then to begin the book discussion. They are all waiting patiently on me but they'll wait, so actually - the discussion of TR, may not take place till your summer vacation time. Hope you can join us then. It should be quite interesting. Virgil will be there and he knows a lot about TR since it is his favorite Lawrence novel. My favorite is "Women in Love", but I am sure a second reading of TR, will greatly help me to understand and appreciate that work, as well. Hope to see you in the summer in one of the discussion groups.

I look forward to that, then. :)


Your avatar is elegant and lovely. I recall you had another I really loved, too. You user name goes so well with that image, symphony.Why thank you! :)
Yours is a lovely one as well, Janine. :thumbs_up


Oh I'm so glad you enjoyed that Symph. I actually loved the ending. It seems like the perfect ending of a young man in turmoil. Lawrence is such a brilliant writer. Anytime you wish to join our Lawrence short story discussion, feel free.

Yes. I like endings that dont give off too much of the future, or too many obvious plans. I thought he ended it as much derelict as he promised by the title of that last section.
And oh, I also wanted to say that I really loved the verbal imageries, esp. the natural sceneries. First I thought he was dragging things a bit like all classics, but then I thought he didnt actually give off more than what it was, perfect in his way to let you feel the sunshine, the flowerbeds, the evenings. Not more, not less.



Anytime you wish to join our Lawrence short story discussion, feel free. Will. :nod:

[country doctor]

i've read sons and lovers, the rainbow and women in love. though all very good, none moved me like sons and lovers. i found it to be one of the best books i ever read.

[Janine]

i've read sons and lovers, the rainbow and women in love. though all very good, none moved me like sons and lovers. i found it to be one of the best books i ever read.

Hi country doctor, I love them all, but I do adore "Sons and Lovers" - it is an exquisite book and he wrote that at such a youthful time in his life - it shows great maturity and insight. Probably that and "Women in Love" are my two favorites! Glad that you appreciate Lawrence.

[Janine]

I look forward to that, then. :)

Why thank you! :)
Yours is a lovely one as well, Janine. :thumbs_up

Hi symphony, Thank you, but recently I have been toying with the idea of changing it. I have had that same Dali painting, which I love, since I joined up here.

I did not mean to ignore your post; my old computer went to the graveyard recently and so the transition to a new one was pretty rough, but now I have a beautiful new machine and am loving it, thanks to some very kind and generous friends.


Yes. I like endings that dont give off too much of the future, or too many obvious plans. I thought he ended it as much derelict as he promised by the title of that last section.

And oh, I also wanted to say that I really loved the verbal imageries, esp. the natural sceneries. First I thought he was dragging things a bit like all classics, but then I thought he didnt actually give off more than what it was, perfect in his way to let you feel the sunshine, the flowerbeds, the evenings. Not more, not less.

So do I, I like them to be open-ended or suggested. That drives some people crazy but to me that seems more like realism. I though "Sons and Lovers" ended absolutely appropriately - how else could it end? I adore the verbal imageries in Lawrence's work. I read his first novel, "The White Peacock" and I was entralled with his nature/floral descriptions. He describes snowdrops in the wood like no one else - the way he does it is so sensual and meaningful. Exactly as you say - he lets you actually feel the sunshine, smell the flowers and the breeze or the fragrant air in the evenings. It is always a pleasure to read these pastoral passages of Lawrence's. His poems are lovely also. If you have not read them, you should read some. They are so perceptive and beautiful and many are about animals or nature but always related to some deeper ideas, some deeper well in his being and blood. They are marvelous.


Will. :nod:

symphony, I hope that 'will' was to check out the short story thread. If so I just announced that we will be starting a new story in Sept. I hope you can participate. It is a great group we have and your are always welcome. That goes for you also, country doctor.

[kelby_lake]

Loved 'Sons and Lovers'. It had a great intense claustophia to it that never slipped into parody, like Chatterley tended to do.

[kelby_lake]

Has anybody picked up on the fact that Mrs Morel's first name is Gertrude- also the name of Hamlet's mother? Is Lawrence drawing the Oedipal parallel there?

[aliengirl]

Has anybody picked up on the fact that Mrs Morel's first name is Gertrude- also the name of Hamlet's mother? Is Lawrence drawing the Oedipal parallel there?

Great idea! I've read Hamlet and going to read S & L soon. Will keep it in mind.

[Snowqueen]

I read Women in Love a few years ago and quite halfheartedly as it was the part of our syllabus. I didn’t really enjoy it and Lawrence’s writing style was also new to me. But I liked Sons and Lovers the picturesque quality of its prose.

He sat down against his will, resting his back against the hard
wall of hay. They faced the amphitheatre of round hills that glowed
with sunset, tiny white farms standing out, the meadows golden,
the woods dark and yet luminous, tree-tops folded over tree-tops,
distinct in the distance. The evening had cleared, and the east
was tender with a magenta flush under which the land lay still
and rich.

It’s nice to see that some of my friends have discussed this book with religious fervour in this thread.

Special thanks to Virgil for this translation. I really wanted to know what Miriam has written in her diary.


"This morning the birds wakened me," he read. "It was still dawn light. But the little window of my room was pale, and then yellow, and all the birds in the woods burst in a lively and resounding song. The whole dawn shivered. I had been dreaming of you. Do you also see the dawn? The birds wake me nearly every morning, and there is always a sound of terror in the song of the thrushes. It is so clear..."

[cacian]

Has anybody picked up on the fact that Mrs Morel's first name is Gertrude- also the name of Hamlet's mother? Is Lawrence drawing the Oedipal parallel there?

I think so. I am wondering why so much of it in literature? It is one think to think and another to write about it. Insisting on both is rather over the top.
The book we had to study but it was not my cup of tea. We were studying Englidh literature and I felt it did not reflect anything about England. Infact this book reminds me of Wives and Daughters By Elizabeth Gaskell.

[kelby_lake]

I think so. I am wondering why so much of it in literature? It is one think to think and another to write about it. Insisting on both is rather over the top.
The book we had to study but it was not my cup of tea. We were studying Englidh literature and I felt it did not reflect anything about England. Infact this book reminds me of Wives and Daughters By Elizabeth Gaskell.

I think that Lady Chatterley's Lover says more about England but I prefer Sons and Lovers. The main highlight of Women in Love is the wrestling scene, which Lawrence was clearly having a blast writing.

[kelby_lake]

Here is the scene from Women in Love. Beats anything in Lady Chatterley's Lover:
http://www.online-literature.com/dh_lawrence/women_in_love/20/

[Amona555]

Hello I'm new here and i've been having some trouble with Sons and Lovers. Although i like the book, i was asked a question by one of my professors, that is to interpret what a passage means, or what is the symbolism in the passage... I have been reading a lot, trying to find out what it is but so far i haven't had much luck, so I was wondering if maybe one of you could help me.


"Stop a minute," he said, and, digging his heels sideways into the steep bank of red clay, he began nimbly to mount. He looked across at every tree-foot. At last he found what he wanted. Two beech-trees side by side on the hill held a little level on the upper face between their roots. It was littered with damp leaves, but it would do. The fishermen were perhaps sufficiently out of sight. He threw down his rainproof and waved to her to come.
She toiled to his side. Arriving there, she looked at him heavily, dumbly, and laid her head on his shoulder. He held her fast as he looked round. They were safe enough from all but the small, lonely cows over the river. He sunk his mouth on her throat, where he felt her heavy pulse beat under his lips. Everything was perfectly still. There was nothing in the afternoon but themselves.
When she arose, he, looking on the ground all the time, saw suddenly sprinkled on the black wet beech-roots many scarlet carnation petals, like splashed drops of blood; and red, small splashes fell from her bosom, streaming down her dress to her feet.
"Your flowers are smashed," he said.
She looked at him heavily as she put back her hair. Suddenly he put his finger-tips on her cheek.
"Why dost look so heavy?" he reproached her.
She smiled sadly, as if she felt alone in herself. He caressed her cheek with his fingers, and kissed her.
"Nay!" he said. "Never thee bother!"
She gripped his fingers tight, and laughed shakily. Then she dropped her hand. He put the hair back from her brows, stroking her temples, kissing them lightly.
"But tha shouldna worrit!" he said softly, pleading.
"No, I don't worry!" she laughed tenderly and resigned.
"Yea, tha does! Dunna thee worrit," he implored, caressing.
"No!" she consoled him, kissing him.
They had a stiff climb to get to the top again. It took them a quarter of an hour. When he got on to the level grass, he threw off his cap, wiped the sweat from his forehead, and sighed.
"Now we're back at the ordinary level," he said.
She sat down, panting, on the tussocky grass. Her cheeks were flushed pink. He kissed her, and she gave way to joy.
"And now I'll clean thy boots and make thee fit for respectable folk," he said.
He kneeled at her feet, worked away with a stick and tufts of grass. She put her fingers in his hair, drew his head to her, and kissed it.
"What am I supposed to be doing," he said, looking at her laughing; "cleaning shoes or dibbling with love? Answer me that!"
"Just whichever I please," she replied.
"I'm your boot-boy for the time being, and nothing else!" But they remained looking into each other's eyes and laughing. Then they kissed with little nibbling kisses.


So although i understand that the flowers indicate passion, lust, and in a way that it indicates his physical relationship with her, but what is the symbolism when he smashes the flowers, and if there is something else which can be regarded as symbolic??? :)
I would be very grateful if anyone of you could answer me :)
PS: I almost forgot this is a passage from Chapter 12 Passion, when he is walking with Clara.

[kelby_lake]

I think the flowers are to do with effeminacy and the female control. Also doesn't he do something with Miriam that involves flowers?