Quote: rex said: Damn. That was longer then most of my book reviews. It does seem somewhat interesting, but not for me.
Actually, I'm planning on reading all the versions, so after I'm done reading them, maybe I'll post a review.
There is a movie version as well (which apparently had a tough time getting on the BBC due to the sex scenes). The movie is a blending of all the versions -- which to some people made it better than any single of the books.
As far as the 'male writers understanding women' comment, perhaps I should explain myself better. I am of the opinion that females cannot write men and males cannot write women. Dan Brown is a clear example of how NOT to write leading ladies. His women are all like Dr. Christmas Jones. I swear his next book will feature a Switz Oylmypic skiing champion that has a PhD in Literature and Theology and knows judo. And just about EVERY 'Romance novel' written by a women creates an equally unbelieveable male protagonist (aka SNL's 'The Lusty Woodsman').
All of Lawrence's characters (although slightly typecast) feel real. You can tell Lady Chatterley wants to find a balance between her lustful side (aka Parkin, who's name changes to something else in the later revisions and the movie) and her cultured side (Lord Chatterley enjoys reading to her in the evenings, which is a crappy substitute for sex). Lord Chatterley's nurse really does miss her departed husband and really hates her asshole of a boss.
While I do recommend the book, I can understand why some people wouldn't enjoy it. It was written in the 1920s-1930s, around the same time as books like The Great Gastby. However, the style of the book is almost completely Victoria (about 30-40 years before Gastby). In fact, Lawrence enjoys poking fun at the modern artists. Considering I only partially liked Gastby, I have no objection to that.
"You're either lying or stupid." "I'm stupid! I'm stupid!" Megatron and Starscream
