Lady Chatterley's Lover (Signet Classics)

SummaryWhen Constance Chatterley’s husband Clifford returns from World War I paralyzed from the legs down, the two try to make the best of a bad situation. Clifford throws himself first into a literary career and later turns an industrial eye toward the mines that pepper his land. Although Connie does her best to support her husband, she falls into a depression. Something vital is missing from her life. She meets the gamekeeper, Oliver Mellors, a man who is reclusive and insolent, but who attracts Connie in a primitive way. They begin an affair, and through it, Connie finds out what it means to be truly alive.ReviewFrom its title, Lady Chatterley’s Lover sounds like a melodrama. It’s not. This is a novel of ideas, and the story is the canvas upon which the ideas are stitched. What D. H. Lawrence really wants to do is posit a thesis as to the ailments of the modern world, namely, the disconnect mankind has toward their fellow man and the natural and the physical world, due to materialism, industrialization, and over-intellectualism. The solution, he posits, is a return to a more pagan time of “real men and real women,” which means sex.I like my novels to have ideas in them; however, these ideas come at the expense of the story. You might think that Connie cheating on her wheelchair-bound husband would cause drama. It doesn’t. And the reason is simple: no one cares. No one cares about Clifford. No one cares about morals. No one cares about what society thinks. And as such, there are no consequences, only inconveniences. I’d say that this is a comment on the disconnect of people, but I’m not sure it is. I think the problem is that D. H. Lawrence became so enamored with his ideas he forgot about the characters.I liked Clifford, initially. He came across as shy, desirous more of intimacy than sex. He had been dealt a spiritual blow and a blow to his manhood. To make up for it, he chased worldly success. I understood him; I related to him. But midway through the book, D. H. Lawrence proceeds to rip him apart, calling him a crustacean, a child. It’s not just that Clifford morphs into the villain; it’s that the author continuously tells us how we ought to feel about him.Likewise, we are told how we ought to feel about Mellors, whom Lawrence exalts as the pinnacle of manhood. But while Lawrence’s tirade against Clifford did, in fact, make me dislike the poor character, there was nothing on earth Lawrence could say to make me like Mellors. The man was odious. He was bitter, hateful, insolent, and passive. To be honest, he and Clifford had a lot more in common than D. H. Lawrence was willing to admit.The only character who made it through the whole book with my sympathy intact was Connie, and this was because she is the only one who seemed to care about other people at all. Clifford is scared of other people and wants to dominate them. Mellors is scared of other people and wants to escape them. Connie actually seems to like people and comes to their defense.I can’t in good conscience call this book a romance, because that would imply love, and honestly, I did not see it. The characters do have sex, but the scenes are not as plentiful nor as graphic as you might assume. Lady Chatterley’s Lover became notorious for being too explicit to publish in D. H. Lawrence’s native Britain until 1960, and even after publication, the book went on trial for violating obscenity laws. Lady Chatterley’s Lover includes vivid descriptions of nudity, including genitals, and uses some foul languages, including the f-word and the c-word. During the sex scenes, most of the focus is on the character’s mental states and not what is physically going on. The sex is far less graphic than your average romance novel, and I’m not sure modern audiences, unless they were very young or didn’t know what they were in for, would be at all shocked.What might be most shocking to modern audiences (what was most shocking to me) was the racist, misogynistic, and possibly fascist attitudes that reared its head in the latter half of the book. Once D. H. Lawrence defined “manhood” and “womanhood” through sex, those who did not subscribe to his narrow views (i.e., most everyone) were not “true men” or a “true women.” At this point, he began promptly dehumanizing them, heaping scorn on everyone and comparing them to animals. I was horrified when I came to this speech:“Yea, even then the tenderest thing you could do for them [those who are not true men or women], perhaps, would be to give them death. They can’t live! They only frustrate life. Their souls are awful inside them. Death ought to be sweet to them. And I ought to be allowed to shoot them.”To be honest, given the time frame and the themes, Lady Chatterley’s Lover struck me as a way of understanding the ideas and the attitudes leading to the rise of Hitler. That made it interesting to read, but not in the way I was expecting. In this sense, Lady Chatterley’s Lover is the opposite of Pride and Prejudice, a title that sounded like an exploration of big, important Ideas, but ended up being a sweet and personal love story. Lawrence’s prose is beautiful, and some of his ideas may have merit. The book has psychological insight, but not, in my mind, true wisdom. It seems to me that if you’re going to spend the whole book making sweeping judgments on humanity, you ought to have the wisdom to back it up.

I read this because it is suggested reading. I found in the book the act of sex portrayed in such beautiful, visceral terms. It seemed to reveal such an open-eyed sort of wonder about sex, and such a sweet, unvarnished, lovely thing.

Forged ahead and finished the book but was not my favorite. For me it was a bit dull and waited for it to get better but never did.

I am frustrated with the lack of real ending. So much wind up, so many words, no conclusion. Just frustrating.

Despite the fact that it was written in the 1920's this book carried the same scandalous notoriety that Fifty Shades of Gray carries today--but in a much milder form. Growing up during that time period in the Appalachian Mountains, I couldn't quite understand why a largely undereducated group of women like my mother and my aunt laughed and whispered while they were discussing this book that they were all reading. Today, this behavior seems almost laughable. Our children and grandchildren are exposed or bombarded with a constant deluge of much more risque material on the internet and television on on a daily basis. But remember, this was the 1950's in the Bible Belt. This was pre-Playboy. This was pre-cable TV. This was pre-adult bookstores. Women stayed in a bad marriage because a divorcé was somehow labeled as undesirable company. Girls who became pregnant out of wedlock went "to stay with Aunt Shirley" before coming back to school a year later.Besides appealing to the prurient interests of the naive reader, Lady Chatterley's Lover is a damned good read. The characters are so well developed that the reader cannot help but empathize with the untenable situation Lady Chatterly finds herself. She has a controlling crippled husband who is incapable of meeting either her mental or physical needs. She lives in a large unmanageable estate that she hates. She has no friends or close relatives in whom she can confide. The dusty dirty polluted coal mining community in which she finds herself does not lend itself to outdoor diversions. It seems inevitable that she would find refuge in an extramarital affair. The world would consider the lowly gamekeeper to be beneath Lady Chatterley's station in life, but Mellors is a true enigma. He is Sir Clifford's minion of the lowest sort. He speaks with the local vernacular that is almost indecipherable. He lives in in a sparsely furnished hut that offers only the most basic creature comforts. But Lady Chatterly falls in love with and into the bed of the Mellors who was well-read, who had travelled the world as a lieutenant in the King's army, who spoke impeccable English, and who could provide Lady Chatterley's psychological and physical needs.The author has the rare ability to combine the language of both well-bred and the slum dweller. He provide a rare insight into the lives of the inhabitants of both ends of the social and economic spectrum. Lady Chatterley's Lover satisfies the reader as well as the main characters in the book. However, it leaves open a question that may be taboo even in our less inhibited modern open society--should a full-time caregiver living in an inescapable situation be given a free pass to go outside the bonds of marriage to find the physical and mental relief that is essential to the caregivers ultimate survival. At this time I guess that we will have to wait for the next author to answer that question.

Lord Chatterley, seriously wounded in the war, is confined to a wheelchair. He’s mostly concerned about his social standing and seeks to find solace in his writing. As he looks to find meaning and purpose to his life in increasingly superficial ways, he fails to notice the difficulties his disability and his emotional detachment forces upon his young, intelligent wife. This especially so when he suggests Connie takes a carefully chosen lover with a view to becoming pregnant – simply to provide him with a son and heir. Lady Chatterley comes to know the estate gamekeeper, and before too long Connie is faced with confronting the differences between the upper and lower classes, forced to make a choice between a future in poorer circumstances with Mellors, or a life of comfortable luxury with her distant, physically challenged husband.A shocking book in its day, it was banned for being considered pornographic, and understandable too when one considers this was written at a time when sex and adultery in literature was taboo. So, D.H.Lawrence was a bit rude and racy with his pen although by today’s standards his sex scenes are positively tame – and perhaps, slightly surreal given the historical differences – although some of the language he uses is quite coarse and explicit. Outside of this element there are a lot of intellectual, albeit honest conversations about the differences between men and women, and the politics of the day. Sadly, I didn’t care for any of the characters and the storyline felt slow and lacking in substance; ultimately the book felt more about bringing attention to the tide of change shifting across the social strata of England, including the oppression of women – especially sexually – and I think its strength lies in highlighting several social messages, rather than a work of pure fiction. Questions are raised as to why it should be so wrong to cross social boundaries and above all, what price wealth against love.

Read this for the first time. I Felt some of the prose was beautiful, but a lot was not what I expected and in some cases the repetitive use of the f word seemed unnecessary. The story, however, was very engaging and I really connected to Lady Chatterley and I really wanted to know how it was all going to pan out so I was disappointed with the ending (without giving anything away). Did also feel at times Lawrence was focused on pushing his political leanings and not really adding much. May read more DHL, but not immediately, may try “Lolita” for comparison of writing style

Perhaps when it was first written it caused quite a lot of controversy and ended up in the courts. But I have to say, apart from the sexual contents, which by today’s standard amounts to nothing, I was not impressed by the way in which the supposed heroine was portrayed. When I read any book I have to be able to home in on someone, be they good or bad, to empathise with. I found no such character in this book worthy of empathy, and consequently the book remains unfinished. Maybe one day ….

This book was awful. Mostly incomprehensible with Nottinghamshire dialect, even the bits in English were badly written, some sentences about as comprehensive as a tv subtitle.At first sight purporting to support the rights and freedom of women it quickly turned into half baked misogynistic rubbish, blaming all the ills on women who didn't want to perpetuate male supremacy. The characters are thin and underdeveloped with no continuity. The sex episodes and dialogue were risible. Only the second DH Lawrence I've read over my lifetime but will definitely be the last

This is not the best of Lawrence, nor the worst. It was overpraised in the sixties at the time of the notorious trial. But the author has now dropped out of the twentieth century canon - wrongly. The descriptions of nature in the novel are remarkably good; the English Midlands which were already in industrial decline are diligently analysed; class is surgically disected. And there is the sexual side. Carnality is good, not a necessary evil. The erotic prose is adorned with Biblical quotations, although the exegesis is unconventional! Passion, yes - but often there are descents to the risible. An imperfect book, but strengths are not lacking!