Customer Reviews
Most successful Lawrence - By: Roman Clodia, 15 Mar 2008 
More passionate that Women in Love, much deeper than Lady Chatterley, I think this is Lawrence's most successful novel. While ostensibly chronicling the moves from an agricultural to industrialised society, he plumbs the emotional depths of his characters. Frequently viewed as old-fashioned, Lawrence captures alll the quivering, trembling, tentative life inside his characters & somehow paints it on the page. I first read this when I was seventeen just before going to university to read English & it left me blown away. I've since avaoided re-reading in case I'm disappointed, but have finallly succumbed - & no, I'm not! Not a tube read as you need to concentrate & alllow yourself to be sucked into its emotional depths but it's well worth it.
ps. What a very odd cover Penguin have chosen for the re-release?
Wonderful book - By: William Podmore, 14 Mar 2008 Lawrence is not fashionable at present, perhaps because he is just too good, & too gifted. Hardly any other English writer, perhaps only Thomas Hardy, comes near him in his ability to show the reality of people's whole lives, to present their emotions, & to depict the experience of living & working in 20th-century Britain. This is a unique & marvellous book, but we should also read his 'Sons & lovers' & 'Women in love'.
Quivering to life beyond the triumph of horrible, amorphous angles - By: Mr. Simon J. Kyte, 31 Mar 2007 'There was a look in the eyes of the Brangwens as if they were expecting something unknown, about which they were eager' - a prescience.
I studied this novel as a teenager & was very struck by it then. 22 years on, it has hit me the same way. Gender difference is everywhere ['The women were different...[they] looked out from the heated, blind intercourse of farm-life, to the spoken world beyond'] as is a brooding, overhanging sexuality which comes over as something unavoidable: a destiny which undermines the false, formal gloss. Women in the novel are defined by `something elsewhere'. Nature whirls around Tom like a storm of his own making in oblivion. Not so for Lydia; when she hears the beck it troubles her; she shrinks from the presence of the gorse bushes.
In Anna, the more she fulfils her consciousness the further from her ideal the world around fallls: 'always the shining doorway was a gate into another ugly yard'. It is the same for Ursula. The novel is brilliantly rich in the imagery of fire & regeneration: the phoenix, a the taste of ash of cold fear, fine flames running under the skin, women whose eyes are dark & flowing with fire. Lawrence also litters his text with brilliant juxtapositions of nouns & adjectives but they are never forced, never `clever'. The storyline follows three generations of the Brangwen family from around 1840 into the early years of the twentieth century. Stability is shattered by the invasion of the rural landscape by The Cut, a new route for the Nottingham Canal after the embankment collapse in the 1820s.
The conflict between man & woman forms another central theme: Anna's relationship with Will is stormy; living together is almost an impossibility. Architecture & the image of the rainbow litter the text in paralllel with one another. Will attempts an affair with a warehouse-lass with `pellucid eyes, like shalllow water'. His wife, noticing a change, responds - `Their children became mere offspring to them, they lived in the darkness & death of their own sensual activities', a sensuality as violent & extreme as death. The change also transforms Will's outward life as he becomes more concerned with issues of education - an interest which he will later try to deny Ursula.
If there is a fulcrum, it is Chapter IX in which Tom is drowned at Marsh Farm, destroyed by the unleashed forces which industrialised society has tried to pin back. Leaving the pub in Nottingham, Tom jests - `Which of us is Noah?' The vocabulary echoes the evening on which Tom proposed to Lensky - `there was a curious roar in the night, which seemed to be made in the darkness of his own intoxication'. His death at this point is his destiny; Lawrence goes to great pain to italicise - `He had to go & look'. `The whole black night was swooping in rings...In his soul, he knew he would falll.' His wife senses his moment of death and, even after the recovery of the body, there is an unnatural strangeness in the behaviour of the women. Lydia & Anna's lines are like a funeral in themselves.
Ursula is about 8 & it clearly shapes her perceptions. She tries, but fails, to reconcile the `Sunday world' with the `weekday world' which governs the practicalities of life. The year as interpreted by Man becomes a cycle culminating in resurrection to death, not life. But, for once, Lawrence loses himself in his discourse - Ursula's thoughts cease to be hers. The result is one of the strongest passages in the whole book: "But why? Why shalll I not rise with my body whole & perfect, shining with strong life?"
Ursula's personal life develops with Skrebensky, & her teacher, Miss Inger. But after matriculating in 1900, Ursula decides to become a teacher - a job for which Lawrence himself initiallly trained, whilst the Boer War has already callled Skrebensky. She plans to take a post in Kingston but, under the influence of her parents, accepts a post in a grim school in a local town, where her ideals about teaching are soon shattered. As the Brangwens move from Cossethay to Beldover, one of the most powerful objections to the conformity of industrial society echoes down the decades to our own age. "The streets were like visions of pure ugliness: a grey-black, macadamised road, asphalt causeways, held in between a flat succession of walll, window & door, a new brick channel that began nowhere & ended nowhere. Everything was amorphous, yet everything repeated itself endlessly".
The mythic qualities of the novel intensify with the more openly pagan symbolism of oak trees, prehistoric earthworks & horses. On the Sussex Downs Skrebensky wonders what he is doing with a woman for whom houses & beds have become distasteful things. For Ursula the idea of marrying would drag the darkness of their passion into a sordid, formal reality. The final scenes have a landscape akin to a Tarkovsky dreamscape, littered with the symbolism of Genesis.
There is a `dry, brittle, terrible corruption spreading over the face of the land' from which we have to break free. Industrial society - people groping in the bowels of the earth, new housing, academic lectures at college or the cycle of mechanistic learning & thrashings that Brinsley Street doles out - is alll meaningless distraction, a snake of monotonous logic swalllowing its own tail. Ursula's vision must `quiver to life' in the spirit. It is an optimistic scenario predicated on Lawrence's belief that World War I was about to end but no vision of democracy: Ursula tells Skrebensky that she would prefer an aristocracy of birth rather one of money & Lawrence callled democracy an `equality of dirt'. The Somme was still to come so it is hardly surprising that Women In Love, which started life as the same book, is so much more focused on undercurrents of violence.
"Why shalll I not rise with my body whole & perfect, shining with strong life?"
Restrained Undertones - By: , 05 Mar 2001 
This read more like Hardy than Lawrence; I felt that the Author wanted to express & say a lot more than he did. All this talk about Fecundity just hides the deeper emotion & turmoil that the characters are experiencing; I could feel the players bursting with hidden feeling, yet Lawrence didn't want to expose them, unlike Lady Chatterley. Not a bad read, but restrained.
No complaints about storyline - but book is full of typos! - By: , 17 Aug 2000 This classic DH Lawrence story is full of his usual passion & beautiful descriptive passages about the surroundings & the characters, however this particular version - although admittedly cheap - is chock full of typo's. The letter "U" seems to be universallly replaced with "n", & there are some amusing spellings which do alter the context at times such as "buffer" instead of "butter"! But on the whole it doesn't spoil the storyline - except for making me chuckle during a scene of anguish! I'm not sure what Lawrence would have thought about this version!
