Sons and Lovers - D.H.Lawrence

DH Lawrence Sons and Lovers, first published 1913.

How can you write about a novel such as Sons and Lovers without the weight of a hundred years of critical evaluation and response bearing down oppressively on you? Where do you start - with one's own immediate personal reaction, or with some consideration of the novel in the context of its place in 20th century literature?

Lawrence famously was the first novelist to write openly and honestly about sexual relationships between men and women. This is a relatively early work however, and there is still much hesitation in his approach. While people have sexual urges, and subsequently sex, it is described largely through suggestion or inference, the literary equivalent of trains going into tunnels. People are deeply moved, feel their hot blood rising, and objects often stand in as representations of their erotic feelings. For example there is an extraordinary scene where Miriam, one of the lovers of the title, turns her attention to some daffodils thus: "To her (Miriam) flowers appealed with such strength she felt she must make them a part of herself. When she bent and breathed a flower it was as if she and the flower were loving one another. Paul hated her for it." (Page 155). Not too much room for ambiguity to my jaded 21st century eyes there.

"Miriam went on her knees before one cluster, took a wild looking daffodil between her hands, turned up its face of gold to her, and bowed down, caressing it with her mouth and cheeks and brow. He stood aside with his hands in his pockets, watching her…..fondling them lavishly all the while" (page 198). Which I am sure was nice. Her approach to flowers, which decorate the book like a church in August, is summarised earlier:


People constantly behave in an extremely sexual way while continuing to avoid sex itself eg: 
"She (Miriam again) took her finger from her mouth with a little pop, and looked up at him almost challenging. But still her soul was naked in her great dark eyes, and there was the same yearning appeal upon her." (page 169).
Or later 
"He (Paul) picked up a stick and began to stab the earth with it….He thrust, thrust, thrust at the ground with the pointed stick, digging up little clods of earth as if he were in a fever of irritation." (page 200). One last example, when Paul is reading the bible to Miriam:
"She sat back on the sofa away from him, and yet feeling herself the very instrument his hand grasped. It gave her great pleasure."
When the sex does finally arrive, which I can understand to a pre-Great War audience must surely have been shocking, not to mention titillating, it is usually presenting as the exercise of male lust against passive female acceptance. He conjures an extraordinary phrase to describe "married love" on this basis: "Being the sons of mothers whose husbands had blundered rather brutally through their feminine sanctities".

If I were to do a word count I am guessing one of the words that would crop up most frequently in this novel is "hate". An example is cited above, where Paul, the principal son of the title, hates his girlfriend for liking flowers just a bit too much. But people hate others and things at the drop of a hat, and for apparently little or no reason. We can thus conclude that these are people who are moved to deep emotions signified by their quivering breasts and moody silences. Stella Gibbons parodies this all wonderfully in Cold Comfort farm of course, especially through the character of Cousin Judith, and Seth and his mollocking. And delightfully there is also a Miriam in CCF who bears the fruit of too much blundering through her feminine sanctities.
The handling of the Oedipal relationship between Paul and his mother, Gertrude to remind us of Hamlet's problems with women no doubt, reminded me of Seth's comments to Flora that he won't let women eat him:
"She wants to absorb him. She wants to draw him out and absorb him till there is nothing left of him, even for himself. He will never be a man on his own feet - she will suck him up". (As Larkin almost said, they suck you up, your mum and dad). (Page 173)

So what is missing from the novel? Well a plot would have been nice, or incidents that appeared connected to the lives of the characters. An ending would have rounded it off. I would have been interested in a description of the mines where Paul's father works, with perhaps with a bit less about the surgical appliance factory. A believable female character that didn't swoon over Paul, give in to his sexual desires without any of her own, and then walk away. Oh, and some indication that the world as described was going to come to an abrupt end 12 months later. (To be fair there is a very fleeting reference to the German attitude to war, and Paul's younger brother, Arthur does join the army, but these hardly give you a feel for a country on the brink of war, and massive social change).

Would I read more Lawrence - I think I have to don't I?

At Home - Bill Bryson

Bill Bryson is a wonderfully entertaining writer. His short book about Shakespeare was superbly written and erudite, and despite covering ground so well trodden he managed to bring new perspectives, as well as demolishing the “Shakespeare didn’t write Shakespeare” position devastatingly. I also enjoyed “Notes from a Small Island” and his book on Australia, unimaginatively titled “Down Under”. “A Short History of Everything” was however almost certainly over-reaching himself. So my expectations on approaching "At Home" were high. 

Bryson’s starting point is a history of his Norfolk home. Sadly, despite extensive research, he is unable to find anything particularly interesting to say about it. From this point he wanders through his home and uses each location as the starting point for a long digression on loosely themed ideas and thoughts prompted by the room. Sometimes there is some coherence to these, but often not. I was left with the impression of someone struggling to find a framework on which to drape a lot of quite interesting facts, and ultimately failing.

That’s not to say there is not much to divert one on the way through (goodness me) 700 pages. Every page bursts with detail and ideas, and even his asides are noteworthy – so much so that returning to the book today to refresh my memory led me to a re-reading of several sections. I was looking for, and found, the comments on infant mortality, and the attitudes of people in earlier times to children. The argument that because so many people died in childhood parents could not afford the emotional commitment to their children that we give ours today is neatly countered by Bryson.

Imagine an episode of QI without most of the jokes, extended over many days. You have undoubtedly been educated and entertained, and they have done their best to make things coherent, but ultimately it is all fairly superficial. I had a sneaking suspicion that like the QI “elves” Mr Bryson would have had a team of research assistants working with him on this book – pity it didn’t include an editor or two.

When Money Dies - Adam Fergusson

When Money Dies – the Nightmare of the Weimar Hyper-inflation

(First published in the 1970’s, although I read the 2010 version pictured here.)

First off, what a great title for a book. But the obvious question I need to address in the first instance is once again, “Why?” Although I studied Economics at A level in the (early) 1980’s my interest in the topic, faint though it was even at the time, has not been maintained.  I could pretend that I found the debate around how to control inflation in the face of spiralling public expenditure and falling revenue a particularly pertinent one given the financial times we find ourselves in in 2012. And I suppose that would be true, although with hindsight the behaviour of the German political establishment seems baffling – if we just print enough money it – all our economic woes - will all go away.  George Osborne doesn’t strike me as much of a reader, but he would love this book with its messages of controlling expenditure, maximising revenue, sacking lots of unnecessary public sector workers, etc.  However the parallels between Weimar Germany and 21^st century UK can be overplayed – we aren’t being occupied by the French army for instance.  

I could also argue that the rise of Hitler is inextricably linked with the series of crises in the German economy, and that would be closer to the truth, because in reality I read this book because I wanted to stay one step of my sons who was studying the rise of the Nazis in GCSE History. But as he will never read this far my secret is safe!

Incidentally, the QI theory of history – that everything we were ever taught in school is wrong – doesn’t really apply here. People really did have money worth less than the paper it was printed on, although whether the wheelbarrow stories are true is another matter. What I found interesting was how Germans managed to survive this period – for example rural Germans were much less affected than those in the cities, having access to their own food sources.

I can’t hand on heart recommend this (unless you are Danny Alexander or Ed Balls I suppose) because there are histories of the Weimar that tell the story with more “economy” (see what I did there?) and more context. I’ll write about one of these, by Richard J Evans, when I finally finish it!

(PS After I wrote this I saw this book recommended by an economist writing in the weekend newspapers!)

The Greatest Day in History - Nicholas Best

The Greatest Day in History – the 11^th Hour of the 11^th day of the 11^th Month – How the Great War Really Ended by Nicholas Best (Phoenix 2008)

I am probably being pedantic here, but I see a bit of a contradiction between this book’s title and its sub-title: either the book is about the 11^th November 1918 – the day – or the 11^th hour of that day, or about how the war really ended, which is infinitely more complex than just the analysis of one hour or day.

Pedantry aside, what the author has done here is actually very interesting – he has gathered together a series or memoirs and recollection of the end of the First World War, and woven them together. Sensibly he hasn’t been dogmatic about the time span, and where the narrative requires it he has gone outside the 24 hour constraints.

The book is a curious mixture of these memoirs with some genuine historical analysis, charting hour by hour how the Germans came to sign the Armistice. Armistice not of course surrender, a detail which matter significantly for the later course of European history. The Nazi version of events, whereby the undefeated German army was betrayed by the politicians, is comprehensively demolished through this detail. The last hours of the Kaiser before the abdication is also minutely described. Other scenes are more impressionistic – what various famous or to be famous people were doing at the time of the Armistice.

Many scenes from this book stayed with me, including the account of how, when the news that an armistice and ceasefire was imminent, some troops rushed to the front so they could claim they had “seen action”, not wanting to miss the last chance to have a go at the "Boche". Some men died minutes before 11, and of course some fighting went on after 11.

I was a little surprised that this approach worked – that a deep dive into one day could tell so much about broader European historical themes such as the end of the second Reich and the Austro-Hungarian empire, instead of a traditional, broad narrative sweep across the years. The use of so much raw material, especially the diaries and letters, gives the account an immediacy and urgency – you can share the elation, the relief, and the bitterness as the war ends.

For anyone who wants to read about the Great War but doesn’t want to lose the personal stories of those involved, this is highly recommended.

Westwood - Stella Gibbons

"If Cold Comfort Farm is Stella Gibbon's Pride and Prejudice, then Westwood is her Persuasion," says Lynne Truss, in her introduction. The observation is acute. It is intended as a positive comment, but I am not sure it does Gibbons or Westwood any favours - Persuasion is a book it is hard to love, the characters being largely unengaging and unsympathetic, all the more so when contrasted with the earlier work which inspires such devotion. Once the first bright flare of Cold Comfort farm had faded away, what was Gibbons to do -  keep silent like Harper Lee, or earn a modest living churning out uninspired and uninspiring stories that have dated horribly and never hint at the heights of achievement CCF achieved. There is some amusement in spotting traces of the DNA of Mr Mybug in the characterisation of Gerard Challis, the pompous and horny playwright gleefully exposed to his family as a "cad", but the principal character, Margaret Steggles, is just the kind of self absorbed young woman whom Flora would have kindly said "yes dear" to and then got away from as quickly as possible. Her dilemma - of being a young, clever, but plain young women in a world where men are in short supply, and likely to continue thus, is one women of the time would be identified with, but today makes us just sigh with relief. Some reviewers have claimed that the description of a post blitz London provides some interest - Westwood was published in 1946, and the story takes place in London just after the Blitz; - but this is not enough to support the interest of a 21st century reader.

I quite understand the idea of mining the Gibbons back-catalogue - Vintage must have done quite well out of it, and have done the job respectfully, assembling some nicely designed editions with thoughtful introductions. But I can't resist the thought that once the flurry of interest has died away these books will fade back out of print until the next rediscovery.

First Among Sequels - Jasper Fforde

First Among Sequels is (I think, but I may have lost count) the fifth in the Thursday Next series. Halfway through this novel it would be fair to say I was disappointed. Not a lot had happened, and most of the text was a reiteration of the ideas of the earlier books in the series. While several years have elapsed since Something Rotten, Thursday has acquired several children, and is no longer a literary policewoman, despite all this ostensible change, everything felt very familiar.

Then about halfway the book seemed to wake up, sit upright, and give itself a good shake. In fact Fforde seems to have spotted what was happening himself, because he introduces a couple of very clever ways of stopping lazy reading - that is where the reader doesn't really engage with the text, pays only partial attention, and doesn't mind too much about the detail - like when taking a train ride you have been on many times before you don't look out of the window. Spoiler alert - don't read further if you don't want to know how he does this. The first of these techniques is that one of Thursday's children doesn't exist - she is a mindworm implanted by Aeornis Hades, a mind controlling villain from an earlier book. Thursday is convinced she exists, and when told she doesn't has only moments of lucidity before relapsing into the illusion again. It explains why the child is so under-written, and the reader realises with a jolt that they had not been paying enough attention to realise what had been happening. Later on this lesson is reinforced with a subtle, unflagged and very clever change of narrational point of view. I don't mind admitting it had me tracking back a chapter or so to spot what I had missed at first.

This is confident playful writing by a writer at the top of his game. Fforde creates a deliciously dark villain in Thursday Next 1-4, and although she is killed off "textually" at the end of the novel, as we always knew she must be, I would not be at all surprised to see her return. In reading First Among Sequels I was reminded of some of the better episodes of Doctor Who, where time travelling allows just about anything to happen, including dead characters to reappear. There's a wealth of other really funny and interesting ideas, plus an appearance of one of my favourite characters in literature, to make this a really worthwhile and valueable addition to the series. Fforde is in complete control of his material, despite sometimes juggling with concepts which in lesser hands would be simply silly (e.g. the recipe for unscrambled eggs), but definitely pulls it off.

Feed - Mira Grant

By this week's guest blogger, SRJ:

It is clear this book was written for a purpose, a message of some sort, because it is a zombie book - yet I feel zombies were not the focus. For a 550 page book there are surprisingly few zombie encounters; in fact I was relieved when the Eakly attack happened, since I was starting to wonder whether the zombies would actually feature again.

So if the focus isn't zombies, what is? Is it the relationship between Shaun and Georgia? Is it the journey they make from beta journalists to alpha to national plot uncoverers? Or is it about the "truth" Georgia so vehemently pursues? If so then I feel the book did not mirror this enough; after all, we never find out who is really behind the big plan, nor their true reasons for it. We only find out about one man involved, who confesses practically nothing. We never even see or find out about the attackers.

I feel that the book spent too much time with background zombie-related things such as the blood tests rather than actual zombies to be one of those books that focus on action and excitement like most zombie books. So it must make a point somewhere, but it wasn't clear enough. I might do a separate piece because I have some thoughts on the blood tests (watch this space!).

Nevertheless, it was a good book; I enjoyed the zombie attacks where they happened, and the story itself was enthralling. Maybe we find out more details of the plot in the sequel, but somehow it won't be the same with the book ending the way it did.