The Rainbow by DH Lawrence

[Nienna]

I decided to join up and ask the opinion of the lovely people here on the forum on this book because my own opinion on it is very confused!

 

This is my first DH Lawrence book and when I began it I didn't really know much about him or his style of writing, so perhaps it's my expectations that threw me off. Although I sort of want to like this book it has me constantly mentally chastising both the characters and Lawrence - it seems to me that he doesn't seem to have very tight control over his writing, which, for such an acclaimed writer, was surprising to me. The characters seem self-absorbed and unable to control their ever-bubbling emotions to the detriment of their relationships and the opinion of others. Then again, perhaps this is what Lawrence stands for. Perhaps he endeavoured, in an early 20th century tight-lipped society, to indulge in effusiveness and emotional freedom. A sort of counter-culture free spirit, maybe?

 

I'm currently 200 pages into the book and struggling, so I was wondering if anyone could explain to me the appeal that Lawrence has to so many people? What is it that I seem to be missing?

 

Also, hello BCF!

[chesilbeach]

Hello Nienna, and welcome to BCF!

 

I only read Lady Chatterley's Lover from his fiction books (and that was because I wanted to find out more about the book after watching the television drama, The Chatterley Affair, set around the trial for the publication of the book), and I was distinctly underwhelmed by the quality of the writing in general.

 

However, I also read one of his non-fiction books, Sea and Sardinia, and although I didn't have chance to finish it before it had to go back to the library, I thought was much better, and a generally more appealing read. I intend to go back and finish it as some point, just haven't got round to it yet.

[BookJumper]

Hello .

 

Afraid I can't be of much use - I didn't even get to the end of Lady Chatterley's lover (it was one of those books I didn't so much as cast aside but rather threw across the room with great force), and my A-Level English textbook has on the pages devoted to his biography all the un-printable things I think about his opinion of women. His writing is alright, definitely underwhelming as Chesil says for such an acclaimed author, but it was his ideas that put me off his works altogether.

[Jay Landsman]

I haven't got to reading any of the novels yet, but his literary criticism is top notch.

[Nienna]

BookJumper: Yes! Oh thank you for letting me know that other people recognised all the talk of "conquering" and "owning" - I felt objectified just reading it. He even talks a lot in this book about the man and wife being "strangers" to each other, and the waves of hatred that they have for each other that seem to only be overcome by sexual attractions. Then again, he does seem to contradict it by worshipping women for both their sexuality and their emotional affect on the man. I think he called them "anchors" at one point, or something similar. It's all very confusing! I still don't know what to think of him but my natural instincts seem to tell me he's just... well, not that good, despite what the critics say. Still wondering what I'm missing!

[BookJumper]

I felt objectified just reading it.

My feeling exactly, and it's hardly a nice feeling.

 

The way I understand it is that he worships women as the key to a man's happiness (so far so good, except he equates happiness with sexual fulfilment)... but nothing more than that - individuals with a mind and aspirations? Nah. His attempts to make this sound better by claiming that no job in the world is more important than making a man happy just make things worse, IMHO.

 

Seriously, Nathaniel Hawthorne died 19 years before Lawrence was even born and had a better understanding of women !