Reader discussion: Sons and Lovers

Public reader discussion about Sons and Lovers in the WeRead Catalog by D. H. Lawrence.

Sons and Lovers

By Reader_Hill

Just wrapped up this modernist Lawrence novel, and it honestly felt pretty close to what I remember from “Lady Chatterley’s Lover.” A lot of the same stuff comes up—like he’s really pushing this idea that the body and the “higher” side of you can’t be separated. The mind/soul don’t feel complete without the body, and a relationship isn’t fully there unless it includes both the physical part and some kind of deeper sharing. It also seems like he’s going after the whole Western split between mind and body. A lot of that feels tied to religion—like the body is temporary and you’re supposed to treat physical desire as kind of bad, while the soul is the real, eternal thing. Lawrence flips that and basically argues you only get real fulfillment when you’re letting a lover in on both levels. For him, sex without that deeper giving of the soul is kind of just a momentary thrill. And I get why people would’ve freaked out about sex in his books back then. The whole ban thing and the way “Lady Chatterley” took forever to come out says a lot. In both novels, sex isn’t treated like something dirty or trivial—it’s shown as meaningful, tied to how lovers connect and how they bond, almost like the “soul talk” happens through the physical too. Also, I was a little surprised by how unjudgmental he is when his women end up having affairs outside marriage—he doesn’t really frame it as a failure, more like something that’s emotionally necessary. Anyway, has anyone else read this one recently? I’m sure I missed plenty, because there’s a lot going on in it.

88/100 Sons and Lovers

By tide_scragger

This was my first Lawrence book, and I also picked up that Centaur one from the 100 greatest list. From what I’ve heard, it’s his most autobiographical novel, and it honestly feels like Paul is so lived-in that you can tell even before you dig into what Lawrence’s life was like. It really paints working-class family life in the early 1900s—way before cars, electricity everywhere, and all the modern heating/AC/refrigeration stuff. It makes you realize how much those changes affected everyday life and even the way books get written. I felt like I could see some Austen and Hardy in there at times, but it still ends up finding its own voice. Also, you don’t forget how narrow the options were for working-class women, and how intense the rules were around sex and what was expected before marriage. Overall it kind of lands as a semi-tragedy with a love story that stumbles along in two directions. Really well written, too—apparently he rewrote it four times. I’m definitely going to try another Lawrence later. The female characters and Paul are going to stick with me for a while.

Favorite D. H. Lawrence Film Adaptation?

By luckywindow1990

I’ve watched three movie versions of Lawrence novels: *Sons and Lovers* (1960), *Women in Love* (1969), and *Lady Chatterley’s Lover* (1981). Out of the three, I think *Women in Love* is my favorite, and *Lady Chatterley’s Lover* is probably the one I liked least. What’s your favorite adaptation?

D. H. Lawrence’s characters

By silent_hammer

I’m reading Sons and Lovers right now, and I do think the story is good, but I can’t really connect with the characters. Like with Miriam and Paul’s whole relationship—I just don’t understand what they’re doing or why it feels the way it does. A lot of it honestly annoyed me, and it brought back the same vibe I got when I read Lady Chatterley’s Lover. It feels like Lawrence’s characters’ feelings don’t line up in a way that makes it hard for me to fully get into the book. Is anyone else like that?