Dones enamorades (1920)

The edition I read had some critical commentary in the frontmatter. In one case, someone or other was quoted as having said this book should have been called "Everyone In Hate". That's only the beginning of the story: everyone is completely, irrationally hateful, spiteful, and petty at times, especially the women -- including the painfully incomprehensible act of attempted murder with a paperweight over a shockingly mild disagreement about the meaning of a probably meaningless painting of a duck, compounded by the victim's later conclusion that he deserved the unprovoked attack, which in a better writer's work might have been attributed to the severe concussion he received. Meanwhile, the attention on the manly physiques of the heroic male characters was absurd in its poorly suppressed and utterly gratuitous lasciviousness, while the fatuous, excrutiating attention to irrelevant details (such as the comically out of place page and a half devoted to the yellow dress worn by one of the key female characters in the midst of what could have been a tragic incident involving a boy's untimely demise) boggled the mind.

One could easily be forgiven for coming away from this book with the idea that its author was a misogynistic, cowardly, loathesomely passive-aggressive man who lashed out at everyone who did not regard him with stars in their eyes through the pathetic mechanism of turning them into comically vile people in his writing, his view of the world twisted by his inability to reconcile his latent (but obviously emerging) homesexuality with his cultural indoctrination. In fact, if one was to then go on to read about Lawrence's life at the time he wrote the book, one's ideas to that effect would be fully justified. The asinine double-helping of teenage angst behind Lawrence's piss-poor writing might be forgivable if he was not about twice the age normal for that kind of self-pitying pathos. I'm convinced the only reason this overwrought, overvalued, overlong bundle of kindling is regarded as a "classic" is its controversy at the time it was published and the fact it is a relatively early indicator of the way repressed sexual deviations from the norms of the time found outlet in what we might call "the arts" for lack of a better, less flattering term for this novel. ( )

A big sigh. I just can't get into this book. It doesn't get (or keep) my attention and it doesn't interest me at all to learn about the musings and 'adventures' of these people. I gave tried, both reading it and listening to it, but the result is the same as I described above.

Women in Love was written as a possible sequel to Lawrence's novel, the Rainbow. The novel follows the lives of two of the Brangwen sisters, Ursula and Gundren, who were introduced in the previous novel. It isn't necessary to read The Rainbow to enjoy and Women in Love, although it is interesting to see the characters develop from the previous novel.

The two sisters pursue "free love" which was very controversial for the time, that being the reason it was not published immediately. It is considered one of the greatest novels of all time, appearing as on the list of the Greatest books (https://thegreatestbooks.org/items/173), 49th on the Modern Library's List of the Greatest Novels, and 75th on Radcliffe's Rival 100 Greatest Novels.

The book explores the connection (erotic, spiritual and intellectual) between men and women , men and men, as well as women and women. It also discusses the author's beliefs about the changing times- as society became more mechanized, Rupert, the main character, feels that humans need to throw off the old ideas and conventions to emerge as humans that are free and able to truly enjoy life. The author speaks through Rupert, who encourages Ursula and Gundrun to flout the conventional morals and traditions of the times.

Some of the philosophizing can be tiresome to read, but at other times the observations made by some of the characters still ring true.
In reference to the "decay" of traditional ways of thinking:
"Hermione had decided long ago that where there was no mind, it was useless to appeal for reason- one had to ignore the ignorant."

"The old great truths had been true. And she was a leaf of the old great tree of knowledge that was withering now. To the old and last truth then she must be faithful even though cynicism and mockery took place at the bottom of her soul."

"Why must you always praise the past at the expense of the present? Really."

(Hmm.. does that sound familiar?)

When confronted with a discussion about ideals and motives of some of his acquaintances, Rupert concludes,
"they follow a few great laws, and intrinsically there was no difference. They reacted involuntarily according to a few great laws, and once the laws, the great principles were known, people were no longer mystically interesting."

Boy oh boy, that could describe the current political climate in America today!

My favorite quote:
"The only hopeless thing is a fool."
That says it all!! ( )

"Instead of chopping yourself down to fit the world, chop the world to fit yourself."

Women in Love is the sequel to The Rainbow and follows sisters Ursula and Gudrun Brangwen struggle to balance independence, love, and marriage at the beginning of the twentieth century but I don't believe that it is absolutely necessary to read it's predecessor before tackling this book. I didn't.

Ursula and Gudren are in their late twenties and have established independent and comfortable lives with their fairly liberal parents in an anonymous mining town in the Midlands. Ursula is a schoolteacher whilst Gudrun is a sculptor who has recently returned from London. Gudren does a little teaching at the school but finds her home-town dull and claustrophobic until Gerald Crich, a handsome mining heir, catches her eye. Meanwhile Ursula finds herself captivated by Gerald's best friend Rupert Birkin.

Rupert loves Gerald but neither men can envisage an enduring relationship between two men. The two of them have a naked wrestling match but whilst each man admires the other physical attributes it goes nowhere.

In many respects the title of this book is a bit of a misnomer as it is soon becomes apparent that neither woman are in love rather this is a novel that explores psychological drama between the sexes looking at feelings and thought processes through sensual language. Lawrence is however, also making a social commentary with this novel; the meaning of love in particular how the two differing sexes view it, intellectualism and nature, the need for social reform in regards to societal expectations versus individual sentiments and the desire/ aversion for marriage.

This is certainly not an easy read. Firstly I don't agree with the author's views on marriage (I have been married to the same woman for over thirty years which may colour my views) whilst some of the long philosophical sections of the text were tedious at best. Yet every time I decided to read one more chapter before throwing in the towel I would find myself being drawn into the plot again and the conclusion was both unexpected and dramatic. I am glad that I have finally gotten around to reading it but it is not a book that I am likely to revisit. ( )

This was a great novel by Lawrence. He managed to convey so much with his words and some passages are elegant, graceful, and wonderful in their bearing. The characters are complex, multifaceted, and intriguing and the plot is never stale or boring. This is one to read if you enjoy classics, by all means. It's totally worth it.

4 stars! ( )