Wow. What a tragic book. I found I didn't really like any of the selfish, dramatic characters. Everything seemed so big and life-altering to them, and they couldn't ever seem to settle down or accept anything that would make them happy into their lives. How frustrating to read! I felt like I wanted to slap some sense into most of the women in the book - I wonder how I'll feel when I read Women In Love. I just couldn't identify (for the most part), and I certainly couldn't sympathize. The girls of each generation just kept flailing at something they couldn't even identify, instead of trying to make peace with what they had and where they were. I did like the feminist aspects of the book, though, and I truly enjoyed how liberal-minded Lawrence seemed to be, his progressive take on women in many ways. But at the same time I felt like he was very misogynistic, that he believed that women were fickle, flighty creatures prone to dramatic scenes at every turn, and unable to find their place in life. Perhaps it was a commentary on the changing world that they found themselves in, with the collieries gradually eating up more and more of the traditional farmland landscape. I suppose I can understand the metaphors which Lawrence was trying to paint, and the frustration he and his characters might have felt. And I can't decide if I feel as if Lawrence was a feminist or just a jerk. He seems to leave Ursula with a new-found hope, where she believes she can get through on her own terms. But I find Lawrence's intentions in writing this book difficult to discern. Hrm.

Oh, and I found myself extremely frustrated with the difficulty of getting through some of the passages where one character or another just devolves into a mess of very repetitive stream-of-consciousness type thought. I would drag my feet through these, hence the month it took me to read the book. It reminded me of when Henry Miller would digress in Tropic of Cancer into this long-winded, unnecessary passage which I just couldn't even get myself to focus on, and would have to read 8 times before I could grasp the point. I enjoyed the story of both books, and even most of the philosophy they were trying to feed the reader, but I just couldn't abide those parts where things just spiraled down into a mess of unnecessary self-indulgence.

I know you find dh lawrence offensive. We all do. but if you're feeling indulgent this one is an experience worth having.

I have many thoughts about this book.

It has a lot of words in it. It luxuriates, sometimes languishes in words. I'd never heard the word 'lambent' before but now I wonder how I've ever got along without it. It's expansive and highly impressionistic. One could happily skip whole paragraphs without fear of missing any plot developments.

This book only really came alive for me with Ursula. Everything leading up to her was insignificant in comparison to her story, and I actually struggle (having just now finished it) to recall any of the details of the previous two generations. Certainly Lawrence felt the same. He dwells on her more than any other. I wonder if he was just writing a genealogy until he hit upon a character he liked. This book would have had more impact if it had started with Ursula.

But then I'm glad it didn't. Lawrence's genius is in building and easing tension through his characters over sustained periods, so that the reader almost comes to partake in the characters' emotions herself. The early generations of Brangwens warm up the reader, immersing him in the narrative's rhythm.

I experienced moments of frustration (at the uncommunicativeness of any number of lovers whose fierce quarrels would have been settled with a word), suspense (especially in the final two chapters), pathos and boredom (at various points). I was fully conscious of feeling these things as I was reading and criticised Lawrence accordingly. But looking back I think he has ever so subtly evoked emotions in his readers that his characters are currently feeling. I think this is pretty special.

Amidst and through the book's lyrical and often circuitous prose, Lawrence does a fantastic job of portraying the complexities of human beings, their emotions, yes, but also the parts of themselves they have no name for, and that they themselves are scarcely conscious of. He somehow evokes in words the ineffable. There's an awful lot of 'suddenly's and 'blind rage's, but again I don't think this betrays a naive style but a highly impressionistic one. In the interpersonal passages the complexities are of course multiplied and the description of these approaches sheer silliness. No wonder the scenes with more than two people involved are few and relatively clinically narrated. There'd just too much going on.

Interesting to see how industrialisation and 'the man's world' vs. the natural (overwhelmingly feminine) world is used as a theme, compared to in, say, Dickens or Joyce. As expected, simply beautiful descriptions of the beauty and marvel of nature, and also art/architecture to be fair. He also does nostalgia very well.

This took a great deal of effort to read but I'm super pleased I did. I look forward to returning to it in my twilight years, where I can hopefully (?) relate to more of this from personal experience.

I enjoyed this book up until I went back and read the introduction. Why does every story with female characters have to be some sweeping statement about women and changing gender roles / society? I really didn’t get that at all from this book, but purportedly if one were to listen to the introduction, that’s what it is about.

You see, I thought this book had much more to say on how women and men can relate to one another within a romantic relationship, both treacherously, devotedly, dotingly - and not to mention Ursula’s lesbian affair with Winifred which very well gobsmacked me and put a huge grin on my face (because we love representing, particularly in such an old novel). I thought this book was just as much about men as women, so that’s why the intro has me all confused - because I wish I hadn’t read it. I quite think that the way individuals relate to one another within a relationship is important enough. So I just don’t really see how Lawrence could be writing only about the women here… I mean perhaps it was reductive on the part of the introduction’s writer to assume that anything with female characters and period romance has to do with women’s lib. I mean it does, but to solely focus on that seems to miss the point.

I enjoyed this book up until I went back and read the introduction. Why does every story with female characters have to be some sweeping statement about women and changing gender roles / society? I really didn’t get that at all from this book, but purportedly if one were to listen to the introduction, that’s what it is about.

You see, I thought this book had much more to say on how women and men can relate to one another within a romantic relationship, both treacherously, devotedly, dotingly - and not to mention Ursula’s lesbian affair with Winifred which very well gobsmacked me and put a huge grin on my face (because we love representing, particularly in such an old novel). I thought this book was just as much about men as women, so that’s why the intro has me all confused - because I wish I hadn’t read it. I quite think that the way individuals relate to one another within a relationship is important enough. So I just don’t really see how Lawrence could be writing only about the women here… I mean perhaps it was reductive on the part of the introduction’s writer to assume that anything with female characters and period romance has to do with women’s lib. I mean it does, but to solely focus on that seems to miss the point.

This is a book in three parts. In each part, we follow a new generation of the Brangwen family.
It is a family saga, but the three parts hardly build on each others. The main characters from the previous part, whose innermost thoughts we have just seen, are now strangers.

Except for one or two chapters in the third part, I was not really interested or invested in what was going on. There was very little to no conflict, and the page count was kept up with inner monologue and descriptions of nature and the feelings of the characters.

A lot of the time I did not know what the writing was supposed to mean and would have a hard time focusing.

The chapters that I did like were the ones where something actually happened. There was a conflict between a teacher, her boss and her students and a lesbian love story. However, these were only a small part of the book and overall, I was disappointed.

I liked this one, too, although I am unclear as to whether I actually finished it.