Lady Chatterley's Lover

[Janine]

I'd forgotten about my post.

I'd like to tell you Janine, that I finished and loved the book. Lawrence's descriptions blew me away, quite often I would be reading and think "Yes, that's EXACTLY how it feels!".

A thoroughly enjoyable read, it's the romance novel for the thinking woman

Hi IJustMadeThatUp! I am here now and listening. Now which one are you referring to - WIL or LC? I love all Lawrence's books and I like how you felt about his writing. I so much agree. He seemed to have a deep understanding into the thoughts and feelings of women. All L's books have blown me away in various ways! Glad to hear of another Lawrence fan; you might want to join us in the short story thread which I will get started later this week.

[Janine]

I thought this book was fantastic. I agree with Janine that life experiences are sort of necessity to understand a certain aspect of this book. Throughout some of the descriptions of emotion, I found myself wondering how in the world Lawrence could pull off certain sentiments a woman may have about her sexuality and relationships with others.

There is A LOT going on with the industrialism/pastoralism (if that's the alternative) theme. The part that struck me the most was Lady Chatterley, Mellors and Clifford and the wheelchair. There had been a previous discussion between Lady Chatterley and Clifford on masters and servants and I thought the episode of the wheelchair up the hill was a fantastic illustration.

I've read Women in Love and Sons and Lovers, and I think that this one will stick with me a bit longer than those.

Grace, I am so happy you liked the book and enjoyed it so. I think it's a fantastic novel, too. I read it twice. I am sure I will read it again someday. It has a lot to it; a lot of psychological things going on and the triangle between her husband and her and the game keeper really is evident in that wheelchair scene. Also his nurse plays into the whole dynamics. He prefers her mothering to his wife's true affections. Clifford is a strange egg and complicated. Everyone in the novel is complicated. It really makes one ponder various things and values.

I am happy you appreciate the genius of L's writing. I think he was incredible and wonderfully and intuitive and sensitive to human beings....what really mades us tick.

Virgil, I would love to read the book again and disguss it. It is short and so it's managable for the forum. Let me know when you would like to do so. I will be up for it. It's a very good book indeed.

[kelby_lake]

I thought this book was fantastic. I agree with Janine that life experiences are sort of necessity to understand a certain aspect of this book. Throughout some of the descriptions of emotion, I found myself wondering how in the world Lawrence could pull off certain sentiments a woman may have about her sexuality and relationships with others.

Isn't there a quote somewhere where Lawrence says that his greatest love was with a miner when he was 16?

[grace86]

Virgil and Janine I definitely wouldn't mind reading it again or discussing it further. Have you read it Virgil?? Even though I finished it last week I still think of the characters quite often. Actually, I'm having trouble starting Hemingway because I keep thinking of the novel.

Janine, you're right about the complicated characters. I was going to debate you on your comment about Clifford preferring the maid's (I can't remember her name right now) motherly affection or the "true" affection of Constance. I was going to say I wasn't sure how much Constance really cared for Clifford, but as I'm thinking about it - she did - and it was more complicated than I initially thought. But I'll save further comments on that in case we start a discussion of the book.

I'll definitely read it again BECAUSE there is so much to catch that's embedded within Lawrence's words.

kelby_lake I'm not sure on the quote about being in love with a miner. Janine might be more knowledgeable on that one!

Maybe I'll read the Rainbow soon....

[Janine]

Virgil and Janine I definitely wouldn't mind reading it again or discussing it further. Have you read it Virgil?? Even though I finished it last week I still think of the characters quite often. Actually, I'm having trouble starting Hemingway because I keep thinking of the novel.

So absolutely true; Lawrence's characters never really leave our minds; they make that much of an impression. I feel it is like I had a intimate window into their lives and many of the characters he did base on true people he knew. Also and probably prominently I see Lawrence's thoughts so well layed out in his characters. Virgil did read LC, I believe years ago. I know he liked it. I don't think Quark read it yet. Once we had a discussion about it late at night when we got to kidding around about yellow highlighters (inside joke).

Janine, you're right about the complicated characters. I was going to debate you on your comment about Clifford preferring the maid's (I can't remember her name right now) motherly affection or the "true" affection of Constance. I was going to say I wasn't sure how much Constance really cared for Clifford, but as I'm thinking about it - she did - and it was more complicated than I initially thought. But I'll save further comments on that in case we start a discussion of the book.

From what I recall, when Clifford first came back from the war injuried Connie attempted to be a wife to him. It was as if he was more than damaged physically. He probably brought away with him all the ravages of war and his internal memories of them and this could have changed him and made him more detached. I am just surmissing this. The nurse might represent nurses he had in the hospital, and she would be no threat to him emotionally. We can discuss this part in more detail later. I have read some analysis on the relationships. There is actually several triangles here dealing with relationships.

I'll definitely read it again BECAUSE there is so much to catch that's embedded within Lawrence's words.

Grace, I think anyone reading L and taking to his writing should definitely read the works twice. I know I get more out of the second reading. Good way of putting it - "embedded within Lawrence's words" - how very true that is. There is a lot there.

kelby_lake I'm not sure on the quote about being in love with a miner. Janine might be more knowledgeable on that one!

Maybe I'll read the Rainbow soon....

Kelby, I think you might be referring to a love he had for one of Jesse's brothers. He was a farmer and lived with his farming family. Lawrence was first close friends with him (forget his name now, think it was George) and later he got intimate with Jesse. His love for the young man was most likely platonic and innocent (they were quite young then), but very close and intimate and made a great impact on him. I also know that later on he loved a man in Cornwall...another farmer. There are rumors about that, also; but most likely it was not a homosexual encounter; although, it could have been. However, people like to talk and gossip and make more about something than really exists. Afterall a man can love another man without it being a homosexual thing.

[Virgil]

Virgil, I would love to read the book again and disguss it. It is short and so it's managable for the forum. Let me know when you would like to do so. I will be up for it. It's a very good book indeed.

Virgil and Janine I definitely wouldn't mind reading it again or discussing it further. Have you read it Virgil?? Even though I finished it last week I still think of the characters quite often. Actually, I'm having trouble starting Hemingway because I keep thinking of the novel.

Yes I've read it. I would put it behind The Rainbow, Women In Love, and Sons and Lovers as to the greatness of the novel, but that's not to say it's not a good novel. It is.

Well, it's a little tough this month. I'm already involved in the Book club March read of Hesse's Steppenwolf. I could read it in April but there is the possibility that I may have to break the discussion and go off to Siberia.

As to the theme of the novel, I bet most of the feminists would be shocked as to what Lawrence is saying about male/female relationships in this novel. This is a late Lawrence work and he's moved passed the equal forces theme of Women In Love.

[grace86]

I'll discuss it whenever...simply because I enjoyed it!

As to the theme of the novel, I bet most of the feminists would be shocked as to what Lawrence is saying about male/female relationships in this novel. This is a late Lawrence work and he's moved passed the equal forces theme of Women In Love.

Personally glad I'm not a feminist! For me, there's more to enjoy then.

[Quark]

I would love to have a group read of Lady Chatterly.

I'm listening.

I don't think Quark read it yet.

No, I haven't read it, but at the bookstore this morning I looked at the first chapter--a whirlwind of characterization. It reminded me of Jane Austen novel, honestly. We get the genealogy of our protagonists, their class, occupation, marriage status. Lawrence mixes in some post-war resonances and risque sexual observations, but, without that, it could have been opening of a new Austen novel: Sex and Sexuality? Wragby Park? I'm interested to see where Lawrence goes from here. It seems like the story is in stasis after chapter one. Everyone is settled into a comfortable (although not entirely happy) position, and there isn't a conflict in sight. Usually, at least in the short stories, Lawrence starts out in some disequilibrium: a wife discovers evidence that her husband is having an affair, a man leaves to settle mysterious islands, etc. Here, though, everyone's in a fixed position. There isn't yet a pronounced direction to the story. I'm interested to see where Lawrence takes this.

[Janine]

I'm listening.

Does that mean you would be interested or you heard us all say it before? Someday it will come to be. Just be patient.

No, I haven't read it, but at the bookstore this morning I looked at the first chapter--a whirlwind of characterization. It reminded me of Jane Austen novel, honestly. We get the genealogy of our protagonists, their class, occupation, marriage status. Lawrence mixes in some post-war resonances and risque sexual observations, but, without that, it could have been opening of a new Austen novel: Sex and Sexuality? Wragby Park? I'm interested to see where Lawrence goes from here. It seems like the story is in stasis after chapter one. Everyone is settled into a comfortable (although not entirely happy) position, and there isn't a conflict in sight. Usually, at least in the short stories, Lawrence starts out in some disequilibrium: a wife discovers evidence that her husband is having an affair, a man leaves to settle mysterious islands, etc. Here, though, everyone's in a fixed position. There isn't yet a pronounced direction to the story. I'm interested to see where Lawrence takes this.

Now that was an interesting analogy, Quark. I have never thought of Lawrence as remotely anything like Austen; but apparently, you have seen the similarities. At anyrate, I think you can remedy seeing where Lawrence takes this novel by actually reading it. It's about time you read LCL. You have talked about it enough....and don't skim. If you need yellow highlighters, I will gladly send you box!

[grace86]

If you need yellow highlighters, I will gladly send you box!

Here here!! I wrote down page numbers to dozens of passages I'd like to look into more!

[Janine]

Here here!! I wrote down page numbers to dozens of passages I'd like to look into more!

....that comment was meant for Quark; we had a funny conversation on the Lawrence short story thread late one night. He said he highlighted passages in Sons and Lovers and I asked if he had read LCL; of which he said "Not yet" and I told him he would need a whole box of highlighters for that one. We got a good many laughs out of that one! Grace, shall I send you box, too?

[grace86]

....that comment was meant for Quark; we had a funny conversation on the Lawrence short story thread late one night. He said he highlighted passages in Sons and Lovers and I asked if he had read LCL; of which he said "Not yet" and I told him he would need a whole box of highlighters for that one. We got a good many laughs out of that one! Grace, shall I send you box, too?

Oh I know it was meant for Quark...thought I'd join in too. Yes I should like a box!

[Janine]

Oh I know it was meant for Quark...thought I'd join in too. Yes I should like a box!

Oh it's way!

[Quark]

Does that mean you would be interested or you heard us all say it before?

Both. I'd be interested in an LCL discussion, but, at the same time, I think I'd be willing to do any Lawrence discussion at this point. It's been months since we've done a story.

Now that was an interesting analogy, Quark.

Just trying to mix things up by looking at the oddities of the first chapter. I think we can all see the usual Lawrence touches there, and they probably don't need to be pointed out: an overly civilized, enervated couple with a troubled sex life; an ironic, detached narrator; etc.

I think I mentioned in my previous post, though, that I wasn't sure where Lawrence might be going with this. Well, that was a little bit of a lie. Lawrence tips his hand quite a lot in the first chapter. While it's difficult to make out exactly what the plot is going to look like, you can certainly make out what will be at stake in the coming pages. Sentences like these two give it away (not in a bad way):

For, of course, being a girl, one's whole dignity and meaning in life consisted in the achievement of an absolute, a perfect, a pure, and noble freedom. What else did a girl's life mean?

Notions like these probably won't stand the test of time in the novel.

I think you can remedy seeing where Lawrence takes this novel by actually reading it. It's about time you read LCL.

Well, I'll actually read whichever story you all choose is the best for discussion.

[grace86]

Well, I'll actually read whichever story you all choose is the best for discussion.

Read it Quark!!! I usually don't pull into reading for much more than the story, but Lawrence's thoughts are really not just easy to get to, but quite interesting to think about. But of course, I also probably read the novel at a most appropriate time though - being a single and yet educated young woman having her doubts about relationships and the human condition - so I got a lot out of it.

There are just some scenes in the novel that have stuck with me more than in other Lawrence novels that happened to be very thought provoking. You'll like the reading if you like Lawrence - which seems apparent