You need to sign in or sign up before continuing.
Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.45 AVERAGE
3.45 AVERAGE
This book is like an Expressionist painting: you look at it once, and return and see something different. The writing is lush, and almost poetic at times. Lawrence uses the idea of the two sisters, Gudrun and Ursula, as his canvas to explore ideas about men and women, marriage and fidelity, and whatever else runs through his mind and on to the page.
In this high-speed, instant world, we are losing the art of leisurely contemplation. D.H. Lawrence needs to be taken up, and put down, and taken up again. Forget about the criticisms of misogyny/adoration of women, eroticism/not erotic enough, too frou-frou /too manly. Just let the language wash over you and enjoy the experience.
In this high-speed, instant world, we are losing the art of leisurely contemplation. D.H. Lawrence needs to be taken up, and put down, and taken up again. Forget about the criticisms of misogyny/adoration of women, eroticism/not erotic enough, too frou-frou /too manly. Just let the language wash over you and enjoy the experience.
Poetic and descriptive prose, but a an extremely slow plot broken up with lengthy romanticized philosophizing. More interesting than the Women in Love were the men in love (with each other). Jane Austen but with sex scenes.
‘’You think we ought to break up this life, just start and fly by?’’
“Humanity is a huge aggregate lie, and a huge lie is less than a small truth. Humanity is less, far less than the individual because the individual may sometimes be capable of truth, and humanity is a tree of lies. And they say that love is greatest thing, they persist in saying this, the foul liars, and just look at what they do (...It's a lie to say that love is greatest, what people want is hate - hate, and nothing but hate. And in the name of righteousness and love they get it...If we want hate, let us have it - death, murder, torture, violent destruction- let us have it: but not in the name of love.”
A masterpiece, arguably containing the most hideous female character in the history of English Literature. Gudrun has always made me want to gauge her eyes out...Sorry, not sorry!
“Humanity is a huge aggregate lie, and a huge lie is less than a small truth. Humanity is less, far less than the individual because the individual may sometimes be capable of truth, and humanity is a tree of lies. And they say that love is greatest thing, they persist in saying this, the foul liars, and just look at what they do (...It's a lie to say that love is greatest, what people want is hate - hate, and nothing but hate. And in the name of righteousness and love they get it...If we want hate, let us have it - death, murder, torture, violent destruction- let us have it: but not in the name of love.”
A masterpiece, arguably containing the most hideous female character in the history of English Literature. Gudrun has always made me want to gauge her eyes out...Sorry, not sorry!
So far, I LOVE this book. I think Hermione and Gudrun are two of my favorite literary characters ever-- let's see if I still feel that way in 300 pages.
Update: I do, though I switched my allegiances to Ursula and Winifred. Great book!
Update: I do, though I switched my allegiances to Ursula and Winifred. Great book!
Reading 'Women In Love' was a struggle. I feel like I've understood none of the things the four main characters say or feel. Initially I thought that the fault lies with my not being sophisticated enough to understand any of it (I'm reading this for university). I think I've changed my mind, though. These characters are horrible, terrifyingly cynical, twisted misanthropes- or Lawrence hopes that's what his readers are. I am so honestly glad not to understand any of their disturbing interactions.
Maybe after all it's just a sign that I'm a happy person.
And yes, I am aware that choosing to dislike a book because I don't like the characters sounds childish. Still, I am appalled, perplexed and disturbed by the entire content of the book, not just the personalities of the characters (I have completely failed to understand them, so I don't even know how to respond to them). 'Women In Love' has unsettled me and confused me, while holding no allure whatsoever. It was terrifying. A glimpse into a horrible world that didn't even make sense to me.
Shudder. Every time I opened this book I felt like I was borrowing someone else's illness.
PS. On a totally irrelevant and superficial note, I admire the sheer unintended ridiculousness of this sentence:
"To touch, mindlessly in darkness, to come in pure touching upon the living reality of him, his suave, perfect loins and thighs of darkness, this was her sustaining anticipation"
'Thighs of Darkness' should be the name of a movie.
Maybe after all it's just a sign that I'm a happy person.
And yes, I am aware that choosing to dislike a book because I don't like the characters sounds childish. Still, I am appalled, perplexed and disturbed by the entire content of the book, not just the personalities of the characters (I have completely failed to understand them, so I don't even know how to respond to them). 'Women In Love' has unsettled me and confused me, while holding no allure whatsoever. It was terrifying. A glimpse into a horrible world that didn't even make sense to me.
Shudder. Every time I opened this book I felt like I was borrowing someone else's illness.
PS. On a totally irrelevant and superficial note, I admire the sheer unintended ridiculousness of this sentence:
"To touch, mindlessly in darkness, to come in pure touching upon the living reality of him, his suave, perfect loins and thighs of darkness, this was her sustaining anticipation"
'Thighs of Darkness' should be the name of a movie.
I forgot how good this book is. I am amazed at the narrator's ability to move in and out of each of the main character's thoughts without confusing the reader.
I only got about halfway through this book and had to return it to the library so I will have to check it out again. So sad. So my review will have to wait....
challenging
emotional
reflective
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Yes
This novel is the sequel to a previous work by the author, entitled "The Rainbow". It revolves around the Brangwen sisters, Ursula and Gudrun, and their love interests, Gerald and Rupert, who are also bound by an intense friendship with strong homoerotic shades.
I've given several shots to D.H.Lawrence, but he and I just ain't happening. I want to like his novels filled with spiritual and philosophical enquiries about the nature of love, but truth be told, I find them terribly tedious. There isn't a single character in Women in Love who I liked, identified with, or was simply not annoyed by. I found them all unbearable. As regards Lawrence's prose, I can heap nothing but praise: it is magnificent. But his themes are completely alien to me. Maybe in another life, D.H...
I've given several shots to D.H.Lawrence, but he and I just ain't happening. I want to like his novels filled with spiritual and philosophical enquiries about the nature of love, but truth be told, I find them terribly tedious. There isn't a single character in Women in Love who I liked, identified with, or was simply not annoyed by. I found them all unbearable. As regards Lawrence's prose, I can heap nothing but praise: it is magnificent. But his themes are completely alien to me. Maybe in another life, D.H...
Apparently Women in Love is a sequel to D. H. Lawrence's The Rainbow, but judging by the descriptions of the latter I don't think I have to worry about spoilers. It's probably been a decade since I last read a Lawrence work, but I remember loving Sons & Lovers and Lady Chatterley's Lover. I was looking forward to revisiting a favorite classic author, but for some reason Women in Love didn't strike the same chord.
Ursula and Gudrun are two sisters who fall in love with two friends, Rupert and Gerald, who may or may not be in love with each other. What unfolds is nothing short of a load of foolishness. All of the main characters are in their mid-twenties which you would think, for the early 1900s, would mean they are somewhat mature. That is not the case. No one seems to know what they want, or they know what they want and it's not attainable. They're in love one minute and hate each other the next.
Some of the nonsense is relatable. Your 20s can be a confusing time. Falling in love can be confusing. I appreciated the power and agency Lawrence gives the female characters. They don't wait for marriage to have sex. They're capable of making up their own minds about men, work, and ideas. However, they're still guilty of stereotypical behavior like playing hard to get or falling prey to their emotions.
Lawrence explores different types of power structures in relationships, especially romantic ones. The relationship that is more balanced works while the one where the man and woman are constantly battling to be on top does not. Characters battle each other physically for power and battle spiritually for power with each other and within their selves. There are also undercurrents of social power between the working and upper classes or between those who work in industry vs. the arts.
I think this might have been a case of reading this book at the wrong time. I had to take lots of breaks because of all the hecticness of the holidays, and now that I'm 30, I just don't have the patience for all the drama of relationships in your 20s. I have a copy of The Rainbow, so I'll be reading it eventually, just not around Christmas.
Ursula and Gudrun are two sisters who fall in love with two friends, Rupert and Gerald, who may or may not be in love with each other. What unfolds is nothing short of a load of foolishness. All of the main characters are in their mid-twenties which you would think, for the early 1900s, would mean they are somewhat mature. That is not the case. No one seems to know what they want, or they know what they want and it's not attainable. They're in love one minute and hate each other the next.
Some of the nonsense is relatable. Your 20s can be a confusing time. Falling in love can be confusing. I appreciated the power and agency Lawrence gives the female characters. They don't wait for marriage to have sex. They're capable of making up their own minds about men, work, and ideas. However, they're still guilty of stereotypical behavior like playing hard to get or falling prey to their emotions.
Lawrence explores different types of power structures in relationships, especially romantic ones. The relationship that is more balanced works while the one where the man and woman are constantly battling to be on top does not. Characters battle each other physically for power and battle spiritually for power with each other and within their selves. There are also undercurrents of social power between the working and upper classes or between those who work in industry vs. the arts.
I think this might have been a case of reading this book at the wrong time. I had to take lots of breaks because of all the hecticness of the holidays, and now that I'm 30, I just don't have the patience for all the drama of relationships in your 20s. I have a copy of The Rainbow, so I'll be reading it eventually, just not around Christmas.