This novel is about bisexual love--men don't love only women. One of the characters learns to accept his love for another man, and the book ends with his learning that love between men is possible. In terms of plot, the rest wasn't that compelling. The author didn't seem to put as much effort into the women of the title; maybe he portrayed them more completely in The Rainbow and expected his readers to be familiar with it? What kept me stuck in the book (read it in three days) was the beauty of Lawrence's writing. As ever, he is amazing, even if his characterization is a little off here.

Despite some really well written parts of this, I was crawling to the finish line. I just couldn't stand a lot of it.
The women were so fickle and dramatic for no reason.
What happens at the end with Gerald seemed very far fetched.
I wouldn't recommend it to anyone.

Women in Love is on of Lawrence's major works and it is among his best. Gudrun and Ursula are sisters in a mining town. Ursula is a teacher and Gudrun is an artist that had been flitting around London bohemian society. The book opens with the sisters discussing marriage and then going to a wedding which sets of the main theme of the book, essentially a philosophical discourse on pairing off and the search for a better, more spiritual or physical self in others.

Lawrence has always been interested in the battle between mind and body and what the purest way to achieve that balance is and his characters talk and philosophize . . . alot. If one comes to, say, Lady Chatterley's Lover for the sex, they leave with a lot of philosophy about sex, class, etc. Women in Love is particularly debate laden. Ursula pairs off with Birkin, a sickly, dreamy young man who is looking to get beyond simple love and transcend, in a weirdly Buddhist sense. He pushes Ursula who is a bit more earthy, to think past simple matters of love and affection. Meanwhile Gudrun has a love/hate relationship with Gerald, a young man whose taking over the family coal mining business in town. Gerald believes and revels in power and control in a very manly sense, but has an insatiable curiosity. Gudren is obsessed with this power and alternately succumbs and challenges it.

Then there's Gerald and Birkin, old friends who also love and occasionally repulse each other. Birkin is annoyed by Gerald's curiosity and general bullishness, but is also looking for that pure transcendence with Gerald. It's fascinating to read now what is clearly a homoerotic relationship in a novel that barely hides it, but probably went under the radar anyway for decades. Any doubt that it is just, you know, strong male friendships in the way that our generation doesn't understand dissipates in Birkin's words in the last few pages of the book.

As I sad, there is a lot of talk. Too much in fact. It's a little top heavy and plot light. But it is Lawrence who is a brilliant, fascinating writer and there are some fantastic scenes and tableaus to be had in the book. I would not hand this out as the first Lawrence novel (I'd probably pick Sons and Lovers) anyone who loves Lawrence's other work would do well to pick this up.

what the heeeeeeeeeeell are we doing, folks ?

‘“Women and love, there is no greater tedium,” he cried.
She was slightly offended. And yet, this was her own basic feeling. Men, and love - there was no greater tedium.’

Read it a long time ago but don't recall a whole lot about it. I remember liking it well enough but not enough to read it again or to write home about it.

D. H. Lawrence's works that I have read stand alone in my experience for their at times awkward prose with with regularly clipped 4 word sentences, duplicated sentences and phrases with in a single paragraph, and use of 'hate' in response to so many simple interaction. The style at times is distracting to the point of taking one out of the book. Lawrence's focus is primarily on tension arising from human instinct for freedom and inability to experience love without sacrificing freedom. Plots and events are largely symbolic and fragmented. The focus is on the internal minds of characters and their intellectual struggles brought out through relationships with others. The 4 main characters each deeply and uniquely expressed. They are very modern for the time of writing and it's easily understood how controversial and even offensive and they would have been. Depending on your sensibilities that may still be. This is mostly an intellectual, even philosophical exploration of the way individuals compromise or for love or abandon it for freedom. Not the easiest read but rewarding and expansive.

I'm am disappointed, I wanted another Sons and Lovers, but alas. I found the characters in the love-square unlikable (with the exception of Ursula, although she was pressing her luck throughout), and I didn’t really connect with (or really understand) the Gudern-Gerald relationship. There are still enough great moments, the whole water-party scene and the great Ursula-Birkin argument that ends with Ursula walking off down the road, ostensibly to leave, only to return saying ‘see what flower I picked you’.

However, most of the societal criticism (which is mentioned in nearly every blurb of this book) comes across as superficial and angsty. Especially, because it primarily comes for the mouths of well-off people who seem to be affected by western industrialization on a visual level: ‘This building is ugly, the miners are ugly, the pit is ugly, it is ugly that man is subjected to the machine and so on’. Coupled with rants from the (obvious) author-insert character, it makes the novel feel pompous and mean spirited.