The Rainbow

Rating:
Summary: unintended consequence
Review: Besides the history of a family over three generations, the key character is Ursula. In the early 1900s just before WW1, she is a "feminist" before her time. We find that she rejects marriage, engages in premarital sex, conducts a homosexual affair, and "objectifies" men. She is also non-religious and probably never has children. My point is not that she understands the human need to be a strong independent individual and does so, but that in the process of her female emancipation, she loses her ability to love a man and be loved in return. It is sad that in her search and rebellion against the traditional gender roles, she loses sight of the human need to bond.

Rating:
Summary: unintended consequence
Review: Besides the history of a family over three generations, the key character is Ursula. In the early 1900s just before WW1, she is a "feminist" before her time. We find that she rejects marriage, engages in premarital sex, conducts a homosexual affair, and "objectifies" men. She is also non-religious and probably never has children. My point is not that she understands the human need to be a strong independent individual and does so, but that in the process of her female emancipation, she loses her ability to love a man and be loved in return. It is sad that in her search and rebellion against the traditional gender roles, she loses sight of the human need to bond.

Rating:
Summary: Pot of gold
Review: Controversial in his time, D. H. Lawrence's "The Rainbow" is considered one of his masterpieces nowadays. The reasons in both cases are virtually the same. Completed in 1915, the book has a modern freshness that even now -- almost 100 years later -- is still fresh. This is a novel that aged well -- or better yet, hasn't aged and is always up to date.

Banned and considered disturbed in its time, "The Rainbow" brings a formal experiment combined with sexual awakening and candidness and the praised of individualism. The events and characters are recurrent and they happen cyclically. The novel described three generation of the Brangwen family and as their world dissolves and their lives changes.

What were most disturbing by the 1910s in this novel were the sexual passages. There weren't seen as a natural act of life, but rather were claimed as dirty. One of the most interesting moments in the narrative is a honeymoon. Beautifully --and sometimes funnily-- described the event is like an early sexual personal revolution of the couple. Needless to say that people in 1915 weren't ready for that.

The most interesting generation of the Brangwen is the third one, focused on Ursula (she and her sister will be the protagonists of "Women in Love" published in 1917). Most of the book is devoted to her, but until we reach her there is an amazing cast of characters created by Lawrence populating "The Rainbow".

Story moves in a special speed. It feels like the writer has create a world apart where one must surrender to its velocity in order to enjoy the story. It is worthwhile to let yourself be immersed in the place. Lawrence writing is like a travel in place and time with a destination that we may know --from books and movies-- but the way he presents it is so unique that this journey feels like new.

Creating characters that are very human places Lawrence's literature as universal. Since his books deal with our aspirations, fears, love among other things, one --no matter where or when-- can identify his/herself with his writings. In age when one dimensional characters and disposable thrillers tend to rule, "The Rainbow" is like the sun shining in a cloudy day. It is like finding the pot of gold in the end of the rainbow.


Rating:
Summary: A poetic novel that touches the soul
Review: D.H. Lawrence has so vividly described and analyzed in such a beautiful way everything that motivates human action. Throughout this story, I was able to recognize my own feelings and reactions to life in his words. He puts in words what most people are afraid to see themselves. It is said that Lawrence is obsessed with things sexual, but there is so much more to this novel than sexuality. It is a work of art.

Rating:
Summary: Feminism clashes with victorianism.
Review: For the time it was written The Rainbow must have been quite controversial. Themes such as sexual promiscuity and homosexuality are dealt with.

The story is of three generations of tempremental women coming to terms with their own sensuality and femminism.

Like most of the books of that generation that were written by British authors, the prose is beautiful and poetic. But unlike its predecessors, the female characters are strong and femminism is a central theme.

Personally, I prefer American writers such as Twain, London, or Steinbeck who create more beleivable and down to earth characters.

I just do not seem to enjoy the stories of Wolfe, Hardy, and Lawrence, although I do appreciate their prose.

Rating:
Summary: Subtle distinction of the sexes
Review: How unusual to find a male novelist so deeply understanding of the subtle differences in the way the sexes react to each other and society. Each generation of Brangwen came closer to the ultimate reality of freedom and self fulfillment. Of course it was finally Ursula who frees her soul totally and connects to the larger more infinite existence. This book was truly a deep and exultant experience.

Rating:
Summary: Maybe not quite three stars....
Review: I decided to read this because of how much I enjoyed Lawrence's "Sons and Lovers" when I read it recently a second time, after reading it many, many years ago and loathing it.

"The Rainbow" is not as good as "Sons and Lovers," in my opinion. But I did find interesting Ursula's parents and her family life -- I liked how she wanted to be different than her mother who kept popping out babies (not to put down Ursula's mother; I liked her, and thought if anybody should pop out lots of babies it should be her, she had good attitudes on child rearing and kids, especially in a time that was governed by the heinous idea of "spare the rod and spoil the child"), and was really keen to see where Lawrence was going to go with this character.

But Ursula's infautation with a female teacher, and her relationship with Anton, and also her depressing teaching experience, well, to me, some of it just did not ring true.

It was really interesting to see a female character in those times strive for a more independent life, but I guess I thought the book was most satisfactory when her struggle was with her parents. I mean, was there no other man than Anton? Was she conflicted about her sexuality? What did she want? This book did not answer the questions it should have.

The book is more bogged down in religiosity than obscenity (nothing seemed obscene to me), but that is of course from the standpoint of this modern reader. Lawrence writes brief sentences and short paragraphs, so the book does read, even though some passages were unclear, and one chapter was deadeningly boring. ('The Bitterness of Ectasy.') But because of that readability factor, and because of my fondness for "Sons and Lovers," I plan on reading Lawrence's "Women in Love" sometime soon.

This Modern Library edition is excellent; I especially liked the biographical information on Lawrence. One should take note that it mentions Lawrence suffered from mental instability.

Rating:
Summary: Been there, done that.
Review: I don't know if D.H Lawrence was just a man without breadth or depth of imagination, but why does this novel, over five-hundred pages long, only consist of throbbing, inflamed souls, and entangled sinners bonking in the haystacks?

You see, I'm a fan of D.H Lawrence, but I cannot comprehend whyever this book was (A) published and, (B), banned. The Rainbow is a book that is simply TOO stuffed with Freudian thought, and simply TOO concerned with implied incest and the kind of base themes a perverted teen could think of in under ten minutes. I completely and totally do NOT recommend this book. If you want something definitive of Lawrence's career, read Sons and Lovers. The same themes are repeated there, but not quite as stupidly.

Rating:
Summary: Lawrence's masterpiece
Review: I first read this book nearly 20 years ago, and it is always fresh whenever I come back to it. Lawrence can write gorgeous prose, and his sense of human passion and transcendence stirs the soul. I think everyone should read this book!

Rating:
Summary: Has anyone read Lawrence?
Review: I get the impression that, just as some authors remain fashionable due to their undeserved reputations, Lawrence's reputation suffers from unfounded and unjust criticism. How many people who dismiss Lawrence as a shallow, sex-obsessed writer have actually read him, or if they do read him, merely skip to the "juicy" bits in their desire to be offended? Should you dislike Lawrence, that's OK, but form your opinion after having read him objectively. It worries me too that there are still people out there who advocate the banning of books just because they don't like them - please try to remember Heine's advice. I can almost hear the autos da fe being prepared. I'm firmly of the opinion that the starting presumption should be one of tolerance rather than proscription. What of "The Rainbow"? I think that it's not the best of Lawrence's work that I have read so far - that plaudit belongs to "Sons and Lovers", but it's far better than "The White Peacock", "The Trespasser" and the awful "Lady Chatterley". There are painfully poor parts in the novel: the description of the visit to Lincoln cathedral is embarrassingly bad, and the prose is at times hackneyed, almost becoming a self-parody. Yet, there are excellent passages, such as the death of Tom Brangwen and Ursula's experiences as a school teacher. But the true value of the book is in its in-depth characterisations: the constant, unachieved desire for meaning in life (why aren't I content, now that I've reached this age, what drives me on?); the mixture of love and hate - how strong emotions often exist together rather than excluding each other (ever wondered why couples argue and "make-up"?); and (for the time) ground-breaking exploration of female sexuality. I found this refreshing - how tedious the mythology of boy meets girl, 400 pages of manoeuvering later they get married and live happily ever after. This myth does a great disservice to marriage - what institution could possibly live up to it? Oh, and if you're uncomfortable about that myth being dispelled, good, and read Hardy, Zola and especially Anne Bronte for further enlightenment.