Take a photo of a barcode or cover
rose_pawws 's review for:
Lady Chatterley's Lover
by D. H. Lawrence
The only reason I can see that this book is so recommended as a classic and a must-read is the fact it was banned for so long. Maybe it did change literature but my goodness we must have been prudes to take offence at such banal sex!
The first chapter or two setting the scene were quite interesting but after that Lady Chatterley just got more and more insipid and selfish, yes she was depressed but apparently the only reason being was that she needed a good seeing to. Which was so thoughtfully pointed out by her father. Yes, seriously! After that it was Connie moping, boring chat and inanities from her husband and his friends, on sex and class and industrialisation. Snooze. But maybe it will get better, I thought, once she gets a lover, surely it will get more interesting. I couldn't have been more wrong! The sex was boring, when it wasn't just cringe (John Thomas? Seriously?!), and the lover was a perfectly acceptable, intellectual, man who for some reason spent most of his time trying to be as common and rude and oafish as he could be. Even if you like the strong, silent type, Mellors is hardly a man you would fall straight into bed with!
I don't even see how this book is supposed to be pro-feminist, apart from the fact that Connie enjoys sex, which women weren't supposed to do back then. Lawrence spends most of the start of the book half-apologising for her affair - her husband is impotent, so it's ok for her to have a lover! Even her father and her husband (both highly unlikely!) tell her she should, they really honestly don't mind! Then the middle part, she does as she's told, and has a 'scandalous' affair, but only because she wants a baby (how very feminist!). Mellors only likes her enjoying sex if 1. She lies there and comes at the same time as him, 2. He gets to do whatever he wants, whenever he wants, and 3. She better not try and enjoy herself too much otherwise she's a lesbian. And then the conclusion, well of course the only way to deal with such an affair is that everyone gets divorced so Connie and Mellors can get married and bring up a child together because that's what everyone should do if they possibly can. Fancying a man because you'd really like a baby and he has a big penis is not, and never has been, feminism!
Overall a book that has been killed off by the changing times, it's own hype and it's unlikable, one-dimensional characters.
Merged review:
The only reason I can see that this book is so recommended as a classic and a must-read is the fact it was banned for so long. Maybe it did change literature but my goodness we must have been prudes to take offence at such banal sex!
The first chapter or two setting the scene were quite interesting but after that Lady Chatterley just got more and more insipid and selfish, yes she was depressed but apparently the only reason being was that she needed a good seeing to. Which was so thoughtfully pointed out by her father. Yes, seriously! After that it was Connie moping, boring chat and inanities from her husband and his friends, on sex and class and industrialisation. Snooze. But maybe it will get better, I thought, once she gets a lover, surely it will get more interesting. I couldn't have been more wrong! The sex was boring, when it wasn't just cringe (John Thomas? Seriously?!), and the lover was a perfectly acceptable, intellectual, man who for some reason spent most of his time trying to be as common and rude and oafish as he could be. Even if you like the strong, silent type, Mellors is hardly a man you would fall straight into bed with!
I don't even see how this book is supposed to be pro-feminist, apart from the fact that Connie enjoys sex, which women weren't supposed to do back then. Lawrence spends most of the start of the book half-apologising for her affair - her husband is impotent, so it's ok for her to have a lover! Even her father and her husband (both highly unlikely!) tell her she should, they really honestly don't mind! Then the middle part, she does as she's told, and has a 'scandalous' affair, but only because she wants a baby (how very feminist!). Mellors only likes her enjoying sex if 1. She lies there and comes at the same time as him, 2. He gets to do whatever he wants, whenever he wants, and 3. She better not try and enjoy herself too much otherwise she's a lesbian. And then the conclusion, well of course the only way to deal with such an affair is that everyone gets divorced so Connie and Mellors can get married and bring up a child together because that's what everyone should do if they possibly can. Fancying a man because you'd really like a baby and he has a big penis is not, and never has been, feminism!
Overall a book that has been killed off by the changing times, it's own hype and it's unlikable, one-dimensional characters.
Merged review:
The only reason I can see that this book is so recommended as a classic and a must-read is the fact it was banned for so long. Maybe it did change literature but my goodness we must have been prudes to take offence at such banal sex!
The first chapter or two setting the scene were quite interesting but after that Lady Chatterley just got more and more insipid and selfish, yes she was depressed but apparently the only reason being was that she needed a good seeing to. Which was so thoughtfully pointed out by her father. Yes, seriously! After that it was Connie moping, boring chat and inanities from her husband and his friends, on sex and class and industrialisation. Snooze. But maybe it will get better, I thought, once she gets a lover, surely it will get more interesting. I couldn't have been more wrong! The sex was boring, when it wasn't just cringe (John Thomas? Seriously?!), and the lover was a perfectly acceptable, intellectual, man who for some reason spent most of his time trying to be as common and rude and oafish as he could be. Even if you like the strong, silent type, Mellors is hardly a man you would fall straight into bed with!
I don't even see how this book is supposed to be pro-feminist, apart from the fact that Connie enjoys sex, which women weren't supposed to do back then. Lawrence spends most of the start of the book half-apologising for her affair - her husband is impotent, so it's ok for her to have a lover! Even her father and her husband (both highly unlikely!) tell her she should, they really honestly don't mind! Then the middle part, she does as she's told, and has a 'scandalous' affair, but only because she wants a baby (how very feminist!). Mellors only likes her enjoying sex if 1. She lies there and comes at the same time as him, 2. He gets to do whatever he wants, whenever he wants, and 3. She better not try and enjoy herself too much otherwise she's a lesbian. And then the conclusion, well of course the only way to deal with such an affair is that everyone gets divorced so Connie and Mellors can get married and bring up a child together because that's what everyone should do if they possibly can. Fancying a man because you'd really like a baby and he has a big penis is not, and never has been, feminism!
Overall a book that has been killed off by the changing times, it's own hype and it's unlikable, one-dimensional characters.
The first chapter or two setting the scene were quite interesting but after that Lady Chatterley just got more and more insipid and selfish, yes she was depressed but apparently the only reason being was that she needed a good seeing to. Which was so thoughtfully pointed out by her father. Yes, seriously! After that it was Connie moping, boring chat and inanities from her husband and his friends, on sex and class and industrialisation. Snooze. But maybe it will get better, I thought, once she gets a lover, surely it will get more interesting. I couldn't have been more wrong! The sex was boring, when it wasn't just cringe (John Thomas? Seriously?!), and the lover was a perfectly acceptable, intellectual, man who for some reason spent most of his time trying to be as common and rude and oafish as he could be. Even if you like the strong, silent type, Mellors is hardly a man you would fall straight into bed with!
I don't even see how this book is supposed to be pro-feminist, apart from the fact that Connie enjoys sex, which women weren't supposed to do back then. Lawrence spends most of the start of the book half-apologising for her affair - her husband is impotent, so it's ok for her to have a lover! Even her father and her husband (both highly unlikely!) tell her she should, they really honestly don't mind! Then the middle part, she does as she's told, and has a 'scandalous' affair, but only because she wants a baby (how very feminist!). Mellors only likes her enjoying sex if 1. She lies there and comes at the same time as him, 2. He gets to do whatever he wants, whenever he wants, and 3. She better not try and enjoy herself too much otherwise she's a lesbian. And then the conclusion, well of course the only way to deal with such an affair is that everyone gets divorced so Connie and Mellors can get married and bring up a child together because that's what everyone should do if they possibly can. Fancying a man because you'd really like a baby and he has a big penis is not, and never has been, feminism!
Overall a book that has been killed off by the changing times, it's own hype and it's unlikable, one-dimensional characters.
Merged review:
The only reason I can see that this book is so recommended as a classic and a must-read is the fact it was banned for so long. Maybe it did change literature but my goodness we must have been prudes to take offence at such banal sex!
The first chapter or two setting the scene were quite interesting but after that Lady Chatterley just got more and more insipid and selfish, yes she was depressed but apparently the only reason being was that she needed a good seeing to. Which was so thoughtfully pointed out by her father. Yes, seriously! After that it was Connie moping, boring chat and inanities from her husband and his friends, on sex and class and industrialisation. Snooze. But maybe it will get better, I thought, once she gets a lover, surely it will get more interesting. I couldn't have been more wrong! The sex was boring, when it wasn't just cringe (John Thomas? Seriously?!), and the lover was a perfectly acceptable, intellectual, man who for some reason spent most of his time trying to be as common and rude and oafish as he could be. Even if you like the strong, silent type, Mellors is hardly a man you would fall straight into bed with!
I don't even see how this book is supposed to be pro-feminist, apart from the fact that Connie enjoys sex, which women weren't supposed to do back then. Lawrence spends most of the start of the book half-apologising for her affair - her husband is impotent, so it's ok for her to have a lover! Even her father and her husband (both highly unlikely!) tell her she should, they really honestly don't mind! Then the middle part, she does as she's told, and has a 'scandalous' affair, but only because she wants a baby (how very feminist!). Mellors only likes her enjoying sex if 1. She lies there and comes at the same time as him, 2. He gets to do whatever he wants, whenever he wants, and 3. She better not try and enjoy herself too much otherwise she's a lesbian. And then the conclusion, well of course the only way to deal with such an affair is that everyone gets divorced so Connie and Mellors can get married and bring up a child together because that's what everyone should do if they possibly can. Fancying a man because you'd really like a baby and he has a big penis is not, and never has been, feminism!
Overall a book that has been killed off by the changing times, it's own hype and it's unlikable, one-dimensional characters.
Merged review:
The only reason I can see that this book is so recommended as a classic and a must-read is the fact it was banned for so long. Maybe it did change literature but my goodness we must have been prudes to take offence at such banal sex!
The first chapter or two setting the scene were quite interesting but after that Lady Chatterley just got more and more insipid and selfish, yes she was depressed but apparently the only reason being was that she needed a good seeing to. Which was so thoughtfully pointed out by her father. Yes, seriously! After that it was Connie moping, boring chat and inanities from her husband and his friends, on sex and class and industrialisation. Snooze. But maybe it will get better, I thought, once she gets a lover, surely it will get more interesting. I couldn't have been more wrong! The sex was boring, when it wasn't just cringe (John Thomas? Seriously?!), and the lover was a perfectly acceptable, intellectual, man who for some reason spent most of his time trying to be as common and rude and oafish as he could be. Even if you like the strong, silent type, Mellors is hardly a man you would fall straight into bed with!
I don't even see how this book is supposed to be pro-feminist, apart from the fact that Connie enjoys sex, which women weren't supposed to do back then. Lawrence spends most of the start of the book half-apologising for her affair - her husband is impotent, so it's ok for her to have a lover! Even her father and her husband (both highly unlikely!) tell her she should, they really honestly don't mind! Then the middle part, she does as she's told, and has a 'scandalous' affair, but only because she wants a baby (how very feminist!). Mellors only likes her enjoying sex if 1. She lies there and comes at the same time as him, 2. He gets to do whatever he wants, whenever he wants, and 3. She better not try and enjoy herself too much otherwise she's a lesbian. And then the conclusion, well of course the only way to deal with such an affair is that everyone gets divorced so Connie and Mellors can get married and bring up a child together because that's what everyone should do if they possibly can. Fancying a man because you'd really like a baby and he has a big penis is not, and never has been, feminism!
Overall a book that has been killed off by the changing times, it's own hype and it's unlikable, one-dimensional characters.