What do you think about D.H. Lawrence? Have you read any of his novels/ poetry?
>>>/pol/We don't read fascists here.
>>25179048really weird
>>25179048I read 'Kangaroo'. It wasn't a good novel, but it was beautifully written and extremely perceptive about the Australian spirit. I don't know if anyone has captured it as objectively...
>>25179048I think his work has aged really well and I wonder why it's not read anymore. But maybe that's just because millennials and zoomers pretty much don't read anything pre-war.
>>25179048A visionary on heterosexual relationships
>>25179352He foresaw the casting out of the low tier men into the wastes of inceldom?
>>25179357A portion of men have always been filtered outbefore it was wars now it's through a brutal globalized mating market. Don't make a big deal out of it, if people like you were allowed to breed this world would be even more of a cesspool
>>25179084also really enjoyed Kangaroo. apparently he wrote it very fast and didn't revise it. i liked the bit where the DH Lawrence-stand-in character absolutely refuses to tell the poor dying guy on his deathbed that he loves him. everything mattered so much more back then. and yeah, the description of Australia as a place where you sink into the ferny primordial darkness and lapse into a semi-conscious life of cricket and lounging - very evocative, though i'm not the one to judge if it's accurate. Plumed Serpent is another good example of his late-period cryptofash fantasising - a minor work i guess, but interesting.
>>25179048interesting writer, interesting guy, his best work vibrates and flames with vitalist charge, his worst work is execrable. protofaggot, hats off to him. the short stories, essays, and poems are underread. shoutout to his poem The Ship of Death
>>25179048>> Lawrence, D. H. Second-rate, ephemeral, puffed-up. Mediocre. Fakes realism with easy platitudes. Execrable.
>>25179445Lolitafag really was a catty old queen wasnt he?
>>25179445that list is one of the worst things that could happen for a board of second-hand-opinion havers
>>25179511Sorry Nabakov bodied your favorite hack bruh
>>25179518>Nabakovyeah, this is what I expect from anons who parrot the list
>>25179518>>25179525lmao
>>25179048read some short atories from the collection england, my england. writing was beautiful, albeit each story got a little repetitive at times. like anything from the ww1 era it was very sad--somehow I find that period more devastating and sadder than ww2
>>25179445The only parts of Lawrence that could be called realism are used as contrast and are supposed to be hohum, it is what allows him to reach the peaks he does.
>>25179048Greatest writer in the English languague since Milton. Start with Sons and Lovers and read chronologically.
>>25179378It's 100% accurate. No one has understood Australians as well as Lawrence, and very little has changed since then.
>>25179048I have a book that compiled all his poems and I rather liked them. "Immorality" was one of my faves.
>>25179048This guy wrote nookie like no one else. He was undoubtedly the Robert Kincaid of his era.
>>25180213>The fear was like bliss in his heart. He looked down. Her face was shining, her eyeswere full of light, she was awful. He suffered from the compulsion to her. She was the awful unknown. He bent down to her, suffering, unable to let go, unable to let himself go, yet drawn, driven. She was now the transfigured, she was wonderful, beyond him. He wanted to go. But he could not as yet kiss her. He was himself apart. Easiest he could kiss her feet. But he was too ashamed for the actual deed, which were like an affront. She waited for him to meet her, not to bow before her and serve her. She wanted his active participation, not his submission. She put her fingers on him. And it was torture to him, that he must give himself to her actively, participate in her, that he must meet and embrace and know her, who was other than himself. There was that in him which shrank from yielding to her, resisted the relaxing towards her, opposed the mingling with her, even while he most desired it. He was afraid, he wanted to save himself.>There were a few moments of stillness. Then gradually, the tension, the withholding relaxed in him, and he began to flow towards her. She was beyond him, the unattainable. But he let go his hold on himself, he relinquished himself, and knew the subterranean force of his desire to come to her, to be with her, to mingle with her, losing himself to find her, to find himself in her. He began to approach her, to draw near.>His blood beat up in waves of desire. He wanted to come to her, to meet her. She was there, if he could reach her. The reality of her who was just beyond him absorbed him. Blind and destroyed, he pressed forward, nearer, nearer, to receive the consummation of himself, he received within the darkness which should swallow him and yield him up to himself. If he could come really within the blazing kernel of darkness, if really he could be destroyed, burnt away till he lit with her in one consummation, that were supreme, supreme.>Their coming together now, after two years of married life, was much more wonderful to them than it had been before. It was the entry into another circle of existence, it was the baptism to another life, it was the complete confirmation. Their feet trod strange ground of knowledge, their footsteps were lit-up with discovery. Wherever they walked, it was well, the world re-echoed round them in discovery. They went gladly and forgetful. Everything was lost, and everything was found. The new world was discovered, it remained only to be explored.
>>25180254beautiful stuff. i cant imagine why a moron like nabokov would call it platitudes. other than attention-seeking.
>>25180270As an anon said in the Nabokov thread, the reviews were not serious and making fun of his public image and reviewers who take themselves too seriously. Are we supposed to believe that Nabokov thought this was realism? Regardless of what one may think of him, it is safe to assume he knew what realism was.
>>25180254He definitely wrote this with trembling fingers.
>>25180288i think realism is a nebulous label but if someone wants to call his depiction of collier life or his unmasked depiction of sexuality realism, sure why not
>>25180254Shit like this makes me get why people like Lawrence. I've never read any of his novels, but I've read some of his nonfiction. NYRB has a great selection of his essays. I might pick a novel/story collection/whatever up, where should I start
>>25180348The Prussian Officer and Other Storiesthen read Sons and Lovers and the rest of his novels chronologically
>click on get captcha>get popup asking "Which African kingdom is Alberto Barbosa from?">wtf?>no results from any search engines or AI about an Alberto Barbosa from AfricaDid 4chan get hacked again? Clicking cancel and getting the captcha again returned things to normal. Then capthcha expired and when I got it again I got "Who is this character" and a ridiculous picture, dismiss and captcha returns to normal. >>25180291Realism is not remotely nebulous, it is one of the major periods of thought with a very well developed school of criticism and theory. When it comes to the novel it is the least ambiguous period by a long shot and the only time in history that critic, theorist and writer were all on the same page. Even realism after the realist period works well within realist theory and criticism, you can apply their school of theory and criticism to the mid 20th century American realists and end up with pretty much the same understanding as the people who understand that the mid 20th century American realists adopted the use of subtext of the minimalist and some of the prose techniques of the early post modernists, you will just miss much of the nuance. What you think has no bearing on reality.>>25180348I would start with The Rainbow. He mostly has things figured out by that point and what he doesn't have worked out mostly works in his favor and his uncertainty as a writer tends to manifest as the uncertainty of the character, as it does in that I excerpt I posted above; he is aware of his not quite understanding what he wants but knows what he wants, he wants to kiss her feet but knows it is not the right thing to do so doesn't and goes for it. Everything aligns perfectly in The Rainbow, later works are good to great but lack, are too refined, in earlier works his weakness as a writer don't work so much in his favor and they give me a fair number of eye rolls and groans, still like them but their failings are harder to ignore.
>>25180471it's april 1st, genius
>>25180475lol. Nice.
>>25180471>"Realism is not remotely nebulous"said as it's debated whether lawrence was a realist
>>25180254this is good, but i think people emphasise 'warm Lawrence' to the expense of the more interesting Cold Lawrence:>And he! He did not want her to watch any more, to see any more, to understand any more. He wanted to veil her woman's spirit, as Orientals veil the woman's face. He wanted her to commit herself to him, and to put her independent spirit to sleep. He wanted to take away from her all her effort, all that seemed her very raison d'être. He wanted to make her submit, yield, blindly pass away out of all her strenuous consciousness. He wanted to take away her consciousness, and make her just his woman. Just his woman.>And she was so tired, so tired, like a child that wants to go to sleep, but which fights against sleep as if sleep were death. She seemed to stretch her eyes wider in the obstinate effort and tension of keeping awake. She would keep awake. She would know. She would consider and judge and decide. She would have the reins of her own life between her own hands. She would be an independent woman to the last. But she was so tired, so tired of everything. And sleep seemed near. And there was such rest in the boy.>Yet there, sitting in a niche of the high, wild, cliffs of West Cornwall, looking over the westward sea, she stretched her eyes wider and wider. Away to the West, Canada, America. She would know and she would see what was ahead. And the boy, sitting beside her, staring down at the gulls, had a cloud between his brows and the strain of discontent in his eyes. He wanted her asleep, at peace in him. He wanted her at peace asleep in him. And there she was, dying with the strain of her own wakefulness. Yet she would not sleep: no, never. Sometimes he thought bitterly that he ought to have left her. He ought never to have killed Banford. He should have left Banford and March to kill one another.>But that was only impatience: and he knew it. He was waiting, waiting to go West. He was aching almost in torment to leave England, to go West, to take March away. To leave this shore! He believed that as they crossed the seas, as they left this England which he so hated, because in some way it seemed to have stung him with poison, she would go to sleep. She would close her eyes at last and give in to him.>And then he would have her, and he would have his own life at last. He chafed, feeling he hadn't got his own life. He would never have it till she yielded and slept in him. Then he would have all his own life as a young man and a male, and she would have all her own life as a woman and a female. There would be no more of this awful straining. She would not be a man any more, an independent woman with a man's responsibility. Nay, even the responsibility for her own soul she would have to commit to him. He knew it was so, and obstinately held out against her, waiting for the surrender.
>>25179048i have his collected poems and he has a poem called like “paradise reclaimed” or maybe rediscovered that i really enjoyed.
>>25180481>doesn't address anything saidIf you can't see that those reviews of Nabokov's are a mockery of the reviews by people who use writing reviews to validate their own opinions, you are beyond help. He strips that sort of review from all its pretense and reduces it to pure ego and he could not possibly be more blunt about it. >>25180487I wan't emphasizing either, that was just the only excerpt I had saved, some anon posted it years ago and I saved it to remind myself to read Lawrence. In your excerpt he is doing the same thing, mimicking those times when the emotion of the moment cause everything else to fall away and all your have is the emotion of the moment, generally a shared moment between two people.
>>25180504your point is Nabokov can't be serious because he identified Lawrence's work as realism when he's not the first or last to call it that. Ok...
>>25180505Who else called him a realist? That wasn't my point at all.
>>25180509>That wasn't my point at all.> Are we supposed to believe that Nabokov thought this was realism?my answer to your question is, yes, why not?
>>25180512>desperate back pedaling
>>25180515yes I see that's what you're doing
>>25180517Not ignoring your demoting your own appeal to authority?
>>25180519are you asking me again who else called him a realist? I graciously ignored that question for how stupid it was. you can easily find several monographs about Lawrence analyzing his realism"From Realism to Fable Modes of Fiction in D.H. Lawrence's Tales""The Movement from Realism to Myth in Selected Short Stories of D.H. Lawrence""Women in Love:'A Novel of Mythic Realism."etc.> I saved it to remind myself to read LawrenceIt sounds like you're not even well acquainted with Lawrence but still arguing asininely about this. very strange.
>>25180524>ignores what was said>back pedals again>bunch of literal whos>can't read>asks ChatGPTlol. Do you not know how adjectives work? What about "The Movement From Realism" or "From Realism," what do you think those phrases mean? do you know what "from" means? Some of his early work is somewhat realism but only in context of late realism when it was essentially modernism. But you said realism is ambiguous so I can just do like you did, right? Its not realism just because realism is ambiguous and I can move these goalposts forever!
>>25180546>>asks ChatGPTif you're too retarded to use google, don't project that on me>>can't readyou're the one arguing about an author you've only read 4chan excerpts of>Its not realism just because realism is ambiguousmy goodness you're retarded. I have no strong opinion on whether Lawrence is realist or not. my point is that the view that he's a realist is common.picrel: DH lawrence describing his own novel as rooted in realismlmaoretard
>>25180546also: you concede that his early works are realist. how does his modernism negate his realism? it doesn't! an author can exist in two categories.retardo
>>25180556That is one of his early novels and he does not say it is realism, work on that comprehension, rooted in realism is not the same as being realism; a tree is rooted in the earth but is not earth. Google has been AI for a good while now and what you dug up out of ignorance are not calling him a realist. You are admitting to having no clue what you are talking about but still trying to be right. >>25180558I said somewhat but only in a certain context. Reading is hard for you, isn't it?
>>25180561> That is one of his early novelsto use one of your reddit-isms, "moving the goal posts." lawrence wrote realism, lawrence scholars frequently analyzed his works as realist, and nabokov was being earnest in critiquing his realism. no one said every thing he published was realist.> Reading is hard for you, isn't it?im the only one here who has actually a read a lawrence book in full so...
>>25180567>redditYou really are getting desperate now, falling back to the weakest of adhoms. If you have read a Lawrence novel in full and know what realism is, then you should be able to explain what makes him realist, but how can you do that if you think realism is ambiguous? but you are trying to prove he is a realist? You picked up on his seed metaphor when you said rooted in realism, but you ignored my extrapolating on the metaphor despite my extrapolation being exactly what you picked up on; the tree is not earth, it is a tree. Maybe tomorrow I will pick this back up with you but probably not, tomorrow I will be sober.
>>25180575>If you have read a Lawrence novel in full and know what realism is, then you should be able to explain what makes him realistI dunno bud, it's probably the way he meticulously describes the material conditions of coal miners and their families across hundreds of pages!
I find it interesting that he wrote beautifully despite very much not reading like "beautiful", polished prose, such as Nabokov's. Reminds me of Dostoevsky in this sense.
How are his italian travelogues?
>>25180596Shit, i read something about a trip to Sicily and was bored to tears, but then again I’m severely depressed and reading is just going through the motions of turning pages and seeing words.I remember him taking the train and meeting people in small villages - the book didn’t leave a big impression on me.
I picked up a collection of Lawrence's poems and short stories yesterday from the library. 'Odour of Crysanthemums' is a short story - about 20 pages or so. Much of the writing was mediocre but his description of the wife's interior as she comes to terms with her husband's death, and reflects on the years they spent together, is fascinating.Some of his poetry is great. In a poem I read last night, he reflects on his experiences as a schoolteacher:>When will the bell ring, and end this weariness?>How long have they tugged the leash, and strained apart>My pack of unruly hounds: I cannot start>Them again on a quarry of knowledge they hate to hunt,Other poems are terribly simple and make you wonder if he was trolling.
