Lady Chatterley's Lover by D.H. Lawrence (October 2019/November 2025)

[Judy]

Lady Chatterley's Lover by D.H. Lawrence is one of the most famous novels of the 20th century and will be a buddy read in September/October. We will also have some more general discussion of Lawrence and you are welcome to read another of his books if you prefer.

A bit of background from a Goodreads blurb...

The novel was first published privately in 1928 in Italy. An unexpurgated edition was not published openly in the United Kingdom until 1960, when it was the subject of a watershed obscenity trial against the publisher Penguin Books. Penguin won the case, and quickly sold 3 million copies.

The book soon became notorious for its story of the physical (and emotional) relationship between a working class man and an upper class woman, its explicit descriptions of sex, and its use of then-unprintable words.

[Nigeyb]

This discussion is now open. Let the discource commence....

[Roman Clodia]

It's a shame, in a way, that this is Lawrence's best known book as it's my least favourite of those I've read. It veers far too much towards polemic in places, and in working out Lawrence's philosophies (anti-industrialisation, a kind of spirituality of the body).

But it does have some lovely scenes of tenderness and intimacy.

[Ian]

Yep, I would agree with that last comment as when I read it a few years ago I was left feeling a little disappointed. All seemed a bit silly at times to me.

[Roman Clodia]

Haha, yes - all those 'quivering loins' did make me giggle!

[Elizabeth (Alaska)]

I am just over halfway. Elsewhere I have read this isn't Lawrence's best work, to sort of confirm what you've said RC.

Constance is the daughter of an R.A. What is an R.A.?

[Rosina]

Elizabeth (Alaska) wrote: "I am just over halfway. Elsewhere I have read this isn't Lawrence's best work, to sort of confirm what you've said RC.

Constance is the daughter of an R.A. What is an R.A.?"

I am not reading the books (I read it in 1960, but have forgotten most of it). But it may be a Royal Academician - a member of the Royal Academy of Arts, and very prestigious.

[Elizabeth (Alaska)]

Thank you. I suppose that is why Clifford thought that although she was beneath him in class, she was an acceptable wife.

I don't often get symbolism and maybe I'm reading more into this than Lawrence intended. It seems to me this is a story of the conflict of the classes. He posits that the upper class is impotent, while showing that members of the working class could rise to be the most potent.

[Roman Clodia]

I'd say you're definitely right about the impotence of the aristocracy (the symbolism of Clifford and his electric wheelchair is a bit heavy handed, no?) but Lawrence was no fan of the working classes: for example, he didn't believe in democracy as he thought it did too much social levelling.

Mellors is interesting as he's educated and was an army officer but his rejection of that status and deliberate embrace of a vernacular accent is more about rejecting what Lawrence sees as the emasculating condition of industrialization - (view spoiler)[his plan is that he and Connie emigrate and work the land as owner-farmers. (hide spoiler)]

I think it's very much a book about masculinity - Lawrence's gender essentialism is quite disconcerting today.

[Roman Clodia]

I liked The Rainbow and Women in Love a lot. Also Sons and Lovers but read that as a teenager and don't know how it would stand up now.

[Roman Clodia]

What do we think about the obscenity trial and this book? I can see how the rawness of the language in places could have been shocking but it didn't seem to me that Lawrence was trying to arouse his readers with the sex scenes so the 'pornography' accusation doesn't stand up for me (ooh, pun not intended!)

[Nigeyb]

Roman Clodia wrote: "What do we think about the obscenity trial and this book?"


All I know is that I wouldn't want my wife or my servants reading it

[Roman Clodia]

Nigeyb wrote: "All I know is that I wouldn't want my wife or my servants reading it"

Hahahaha :))

[Judy]

I just remembered a poem by Lawrence which seems to begin with a memory of being impotent himself, First Morning - I can only find garbled versions of the text online, so here is a link to the poem in Google Books:

https://bit.ly/2lUOWss

Not at all relevant to Clifford, but as I like the poem, just thought I would share it.

[Roman Clodia]

There's a whole 'Western tradition' of impotence poems that stretches from Catullus via Propertius, Horace and Ovid (Amores 3.7) through to Thomas Nashe's 'The Choice of Valentines' in the C16th to Aphra Behn ('The Disappointment') and Rochester ('The Imperfect Enjoyment') in the Restoration.

I didn't know the Lawrence poem, Judy, so thanks for that.

[Pages]

I haven’t reread this book recently so can’t quite join in the conversation but I did read it way back when I was 21 or so. At that time, I couldn’t get into it at all. I found the writing and style really difficult and never picked up another DH Lawerence since. I don’t remember liking any of the characters which isn’t always a must but there was nothing in it that made me want to read on.
Interesting that many of you are saying this wasn’t his best book.

Maybe I can try one you all recommend.

I have watched a few tv adaptations. I will watch the one with Richard Madden which is now on Netflix.

[Elizabeth (Alaska)]

With about 75 pages to go, I'm starting to roll my eyes.

[Judy]

I've started rereading Lady Chatterley's Lover (can't find my old Penguin so I've borrowed another edition from Scribd.) I'd forgotten some of the material at the start - the fact that both Connie and her sister have German lovers who die in WW1 surprised me, as did the fact that Clifford has been working in Germany.

I have always felt we don't glimpse much of what brought Connie and Clifford together in the first place, and this reread is bearing that out again.

[Ella]

Judy wrote: "I have always felt we don't glimpse much of what brought Connie and Clifford together in the first place, and this reread is bearing that out again."

Shared grief? I just started this myself, for the first time, so I don't know at all. That was just a guess.

[Judy]

Ella wrote: "Judy wrote: "I have always felt we don't glimpse much of what brought Connie and Clifford together in the first place, and this reread is bearing that out again."

Shared grief?I just started this myself, for the first time, so I don't know at all. That was just a guess."

I think this might be a reason in real life, but I don't see this suggested in the book - I don't think Lawrence gives much idea what attracted Connie to Clifford. I get the impression he liked her looks. Are you enjoying the book, Ella?

[Judy]

I've got a bit further into my reread and am realising I'd forgotten a fair bit - I hadn't remembered the other characters who come in early on, including Connie's previous lover. I am finding Lawrence's prose style irritating at times, especially the dialogue between Clifford's friends, where everyone sounds the same and it's just not like real conversations at all.

I do love his descriptions of the landscapes, though, which reminds me that I like his poetry.

[Judy]

Interesting article here about a biography which claims that Lawrence based the novel's central relationship on his wife, Frieda, and her relationship with an Italian soldier, when Lawrence himself could no longer have a sexual relationship because he was so ill with TB.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...

This makes it slightly puzzling that he is so unsympathetic to Clifford - I had also forgotten that Clifford is also a writer, though his short stories sound very different from Lawrence's.

[Judy]

I was a bit surprised by that article about Frieda, because I vaguely remembered hearing that Lady Ottoline Morrell's affair with an estate worker was the inspiration for Connie - I have just found articles which claim that. Possibly it's not an either/or, and the reality is that Lawrence drew on his own life and also on other people he knew?

https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2006/o...
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news...

[Judy]

Has anyone watched any of the TV/film adaptations of this book? I've seen a few over the years and remember liking the BBC version with Joely Richardson and Sean Bean, but I wasn't too impressed by the more recent version with Richard Madden and Holliday Grainger, which was so short that it had to miss an awful lot out, and also seemed rather too sweet!

[Nigeyb]

Sadly they've all passed me by Judy, as has the book.


In fact, the only way I can slightly redeem myself is by reminding you that I have read....

The Trial of Lady Chatterley's Lover by Sybille Bedford

...which we also discussed back in 2018

Here's the thread....

https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/...



The Trial of Lady Chatterley's Lover by Sybille Bedford

[Judy]

I’ve just read a bit more after being distracted by other books. I’m finding this appeals to me less than it has done in the past - all the stuff about people feeling things in their loins and their wombs doesn’t mean much to me.

And all the ranting about the “bitch-goddess” of success is so repetitive and also unclear to me. I can’t really understand Lawrence’s political views.

The writing about wildlife is lovely though.

I had forgotten that the first sexual encounter between Connie and Mellors is almost 40% into the book.

[Jill]

I gave it 3 stars as I id like the wildlife writing in it , but I thought the people were awful. Connie was never going to be satisfied with her surroundings, Mellors didn't really like anyone, and Clifford was more concerned with his position in life. I just thought I would really feel sorry for any children any of them were to have.
In my opinion, the book's popularity was purely because it had been banned.

[Nigeyb]

Welcome to our second buddy read of...


Lady Chatterley’s Lover (1928)

by

D.H. Lawrence


We're doing it all over again in November 2025

It was a controversial and scandalous novel for its time which explores a relationship that defies class boundaries and challenges social norms around love and sexuality.

Feel free to comment on this discussion any time before, during, or after November 2025



One of the most extraordinary literary works of the twentieth century, Lady Chatterley's Lover was banned in England and the United States after its initial publication in 1928.

With her soft brown hair, lithe figure and big, wondering eyes, Constance Chatterley is possessed of a certain vitality. Yet she is deeply unhappy; married to an invalid, she is almost as inwardly paralysed as her husband Clifford is paralysed below the waist. It is not until she finds refuge in the arms of Mellors the gamekeeper, a solitary man of a class apart, that she feels regenerated. Together they move from an outer world of chaos towards an inner world of fulfillment.

[Alwynne]

I think, for me, once may have been enough, but might give it a go. I found the sex scenes, John Thomas, and the fecund bodies a bit much the first time around. But maybe this time could focus more on other elements? Or perhaps I'll just lurk...

[Roman Clodia]

I'll be lurking too - I went through a Lawrence phase and really liked his The Rainbow, Women in Love and Sons and Lovers.

All of them feature quivering loins to some extent!

[Nigeyb]

Who can say no to quivering loins?

[Nigeyb]

I've gone a bit early on this as my library copy has arrived unexpectedly early and I am not sure if I will be able to renew so thought I'd better get cracking.



I posted this on the DH Lawrence Favourite Authors discussion....

Preparing for our read of Lady Chatterley I am listening to this three part series from BBC Artworks available on the BBC Sounds app...

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m002...


Here's the blurb....

D.H. Lawrence was, according to EM Forster, “the greatest imaginative novelist of our generation” and while he was undoubtedly one of the most influential writers of the twentieth century, he was also one of its most controversial.

During his lifetime, his books, including Lady Chatterley’s Lover and The Rainbow, were sometimes banned and sometimes burnt… but the incandescence of his writing and its sometimes scandalous subject matter saw him become a beacon of freedom and liberty to his millions of passionate fans. The lifting of the Lady Chatterley ban in 1960 was famously for Philip Larkin a key moment in the dawning of a sexual revolution though the puritanical monogamist Lawrence would have no doubt disliked becoming a poster-boy for free love.

Effectively cancelled following accusations of misogyny levelled by Kate Millett in her 1970 book ‘Sexual Politics’, he is now finally being brought back into the cultural conversation - principally by women. In this new three-part series Michael Symmons Roberts, who came to Lawrence via his poems and the 1969 Ken Russell adaptation of Women in Love, speaks to guests including Joan Bakewell, Robert Lindsay, Alison MacLeod, Lara Feigel, Derek Owusu and Professor Phil Davies in a bid to better understand three key aspects of Lawrence’s life and work - class, nature - and first of all, sex.

[Nigeyb]

So far I've only listened to the first episode (Sex) of the BBC Artworks series I mention in the previous post, but found it a useful primer for reading Lady Chatterley. I was particularly interested by how it is mainly contemporary female critics who are seeing value in his work after a feminist backlash in the 1970s.

One contributor said she felt Lawrence made a good attempt to understand women and femininity (despite the obvious constraints of the era in which he was alive and writing).

This seemed apparent in the rather clumsy opening section about Connie and her sister Hilda and their pre-WW1 experiences of love in Dresden where both fell in love and lost their virginity. It's pretty cringey stuff but Lawrence does seem to be making a sincere effort to imagine their perspectives.

Overall my first impressions are that this novel is well written, perceptive and readable. For some reason I thought the style might be a bit more challenging. I'm looking forward to continuing and getting properly immersed.

[Roman Clodia]

Nigeyb wrote: "One contributor said she felt Lawrence made a good attempt to understand women and femininity"

I think he does - however, his understanding might be coloured by an essentialist understanding of gender and the place he allocates to 'masculinity' and 'femininity' in his personal mythology. At least part of his understanding of the feminine is an in-built phallus worship with a desire to be mastered and overwhelmed into ecstasy that Hester mentioned.

But he is complicated and his ideas aren't static across time, and the BBC series points out.

[Alwynne]

I agree, Lawrence held some very unpalatable views at various points. Not least wanting to build a chamber in which to exterminate people he considered inferior including those with disabilities which, of course, ties into the fascination with eugenics shared by many of his contemporaries.

I'm not keen on his writing in general but liked the scenes centred on the sisters in Women in Love; and thought the story Odour of Chrysanthemums was memorably good.

[Roman Clodia]

Crikey, I didn't know about the extermination chamber!

He didn't like the idea of democracy because he thought it would level society too much and erode distinctions.

It's also worth remembering about Mellors, if I recall this properly, that (view spoiler)[he's not quite the raw working class gamekeeper he's often portrayed as: he's had a grammar school education, joined the army where he continued his education and became an officer, and chooses to speak in dialect even though he's perfectly cognisant with standard English. His conversations with Constance demonstrate his intellectual credentials and he brings together a power of mind and body. This is definitely more complex than it is sometimes portrayed in terms of class and ideology. (hide spoiler)]

[Nigeyb]

One thing that came out of the Artworks series was his contradictory nature. He was prone to rants and would later recant on things he had said. I'm not excusing any comments or opinions but just highlighting that his positions were often not fixed or thought through.

[Kathleen]

Nigeyb wrote: "One thing that came out of the Artworks series was his contradictory nature. He was prone to rants and would later recant on things he had said. I'm not excusing any of comments or opinions but jus..."

This seems very much in keeping with the emotional way he writes. I think based on all of this, I'm not interested in delving too deeply into his biography. I'm glad to hear your description of the novel so far, Nigeyb--readable and perceptive are encouraging!

I very much enjoyed Sons and Lovers, fell in love with his style in The Rainbow, and while I found it often ridiculous, still appreciated Women in Love. So I'm really curious to see where I land on Lady Chatterley. I won't be able to start until next month, but I'm looking forward to it.

[Nigeyb]

Thanks Kathleen - that's great


Lady Chatterley appears to be less well regarded than Sons and Lovers and The Rainbow just to manage your expectations

[Kathleen]

Nigeyb wrote: "Thanks Kathleen - that's great


Lady Chatterley appears to be less well regarded than Sons and Lovers and The Rainbow just to manage your expectations"

I appreciate that, Nigeyb!

[Nigeyb]

I had no idea about Michaelis - a character who doesn't seem to get much mention when people discuss the book yet has the potential to play quite a significant role given what happens

[Nigeyb]

Interesting to hear Clifford's thoughts on having a son in Chapter 5, which on one level are pretty enlightened for the era despite the offputtingly dispassionate way he delivers them

(view spoiler)[He suggests to Connie that she get pregnant by another man so they can have the son he desires. Implicit in what he is saying is that sex is inconsequential and that the ties of marriage are much more important than an occasional dalliance (hide spoiler)]

[Roman Clodia]

Nigeyb wrote: "Interesting to hear Clifford's thoughts on having a son in Chapter 5, which on one level are pretty enlightened for the era despite the offputtingly dispassionate way he delivers them


(view spoiler)[An alternative and less positive response might be that he sees Connie as a walking womb, and conception as a kind of mechanized process that is impersonal - like the industrialization that Lawrence loathed. Isn't Clifford a mine owner? There's the possible implication that someone else does the work and he takes the benefit - a bit like the capitalist system behind mining. (hide spoiler)]

[Nigeyb]

Very good point RC. I suspect that’s spot on. Thanks for sharing


Interestingly immediately prior to their discussion the klaxon for the mine goes off signaling the end of a shift, or a break. Connie hears it but Clifford is oblivious having become so used to it

[Nigeyb]

I’ve had the first sighting of Mellors and an unexpected wedding proposal

Overall I’m still finding more to enjoy than anything else

[Roman Clodia]

Oh absolutely do enjoy this and it's fun to share your reaction.

[Nigeyb]

I am interested by how Connie’s body manifests her inner unhappiness. Also, Clifford’s anger is reflected by yellow: in his eyes and in his body.

Some of the after dinner conversations seem to reflect the same kind of utopian and dystopian ideas that come up in a lot of books of this era

[Nigeyb]

You’ve got to be amused


All seem to be agreed Connie needs stimulation

[Nigeyb]

What are we to make of Ivy Bolton’s changing role within Sir Clifford’s household

And how Sir Clifford mutates into a crab. The hard shell and soft, pulpy interior.

So much of this is about Lawrence's belief that modern industrial society has alienated people from their bodies and natural instincts, leading to a life that is "all mind." Connie and Clifford's marriage is initially based on an intellectual, "cerebral" connection, which Lawrence seems to suggest is ultimately sterile.

Overall I am still enjoying it but also wondering whether it has to be quite so long. I’m not even halfway and already feel a lot of it could have been streamlined

[Roman Clodia]

But have Connie's loins quivered yet?

But yes, I agree - I feel this book is more polemic than novel. It's interesting and you've put your finger on Lawrence's theory but it doesn't have the same character life as some of the Lawrence books I prefer.

I'm always a little sad that this is often a first read for Lawrence newbies because of the court case and consequent reputation when some of his other books are more emotionally exciting and satisfying.