Talk:Lady Chatterley's Lover
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Novels, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to narrative novels, novellas, novelettes and short stories on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit one of the articles mentioned below, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to the general Project discussion to talk over new ideas and suggestions. | ||
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-Class. | ||
| Top | This article has been rated as Top-importance on the importance scale. | ||
 |
This article has an infobox template in need of a 1st Edition Cover! | ||
|
Assessment comments
|
|||
[edit] Discussion
there should be a reference to Kate Millet's discussion of this book in her 'sexual politics'. --Bailamor 17:45, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
It would be nice to have some information on literary reviews of the book. Do critics think the book has any merit beyond the sexuality? Unjedai 04:50, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
The Lady Chattery Lover's TRIAL had issues raised on the whether or not the book was an obscene book within the meaning of the law. Questions posed whether this books should be tolerated in the sense that it may tend to deprave, corrupt or induce promiscuity within a conservative contemporary society.
The paragraph immediately following the "Controversy" heading seems like it has been cut from the following paragraph. There are references to the outcome of the trial before mention of the trial itself is made. It is rather confusing, and needs to be reworded. I am not going to fix this problem, since I don't know much about the subject material, but someone should fix it.
I have heard a story that when a defense lawyer in the obscenity trial was asked if Lady Chatterley's lover was a book he would want his wife or servants to read, he responded "I would not object to my wife reading it, but I would have some concerns about my gamekeeper." Does anyone know if this is a real quote or if it is apocryphal? Is it worth mentioning as an apocryphal story if it cannot be confirmed? 205.172.21.142 18:30, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
Lady Chatterly bourgeois? Is she not a member of the aristocracy, being a "Lady"? I can't remember what her hubby's rank was. Will someone fix it, or do I need to read the book again? (Ick.) Trxi 09:43, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
MRB 02:26, 17 February 2007 (UTC)Trxi-Sir Clifford was a baronet...not sure if that was aristocracy or not.
Sorry to post so many times-I'm new to this, so it is sort of confusing...I just checked-baronet IS aristocracy. I shall change it. MRB 02:30, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
Here's the significant passage: "Clifford Chatterley was more upper-class than Connie. Connie was well-to-do intelligentsia, but he was aristocracy. Not the big sort, but still it. His father was a baronet, and his mother had been a viscount's daughter." 141.243.60.12 07:10, 10 May 2007 (UTC)Adam
I'm definitely going to try and do something with this page. I'm new to all this, but it seems to me that this article needs more on characters, settings, themes- especially industrialisation which (if I remember my Alevels correctly!) Lawrence had a lot to say about- as well as more about the controversy surrounding the novel as there has been so much written about it. It's a bit of an undertaking- so any suggestions will be helpful! considerable~powers 11:46, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
[edit] What kind(s) of sex?
Given that the sexual passages of the book are given such importance, shouldn't there be a mention in our article of what actually goes on? Personally, I haven't read and have no particular interest in reading the book, but my mother recalls that they did "everything". I suspect her definition of "everything" of being rather more narrow than yours or mine, but I can't be sure without any clarification of what was involved in these contentious passages. Anyone? - Vague | Rant 10:54, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
