British and Irish Literature D. H. Lawrence
by
James Moran
  • LAST MODIFIED: 31 August 2015
  • DOI: 10.1093/obo/9780199846719-0076

Introduction

D. H. Lawrence (b. 1885–d. 1930) was born, the fourth of five siblings, in the small mining town of Eastwood, near Nottingham. His father was a collier, who worked a twelve-hour day from the age of seven. Yet from this unlikely background, Lawrence went on to become one of the best-known writers in the English language. The texts that have generally been regarded as his greatest achievements are the novels Sons and Lovers (1913), The Rainbow (1915), and Women in Love (1920), which all draw on his upbringing in the English Midlands. This background also informs his last novel, Lady Chatterley’s Lover (1928), which has received much interest because of its explicit depictions of sex. An openly published, unexpurgated copy of the text was published in Britain only in 1960, and it was the subject of a celebrated trial under the country’s obscenity law, with the cultural significance of that moment being famously described by Philip Larkin in his poem “Annus Mirabilis,” which describes how sexual intercourse began “Between the end of the Chatterley ban/ And the Beatles’ first LP.” The Chatterley trial came shortly after F. R. Leavis published D. H. Lawrence: Novelist (1955), which showed how Lawrence’s writings merited serious critical attention and asserted that Lawrence could be considered a deeply moral author. Much subsequent analysis has focused on Lawrence’s novels and short stories, but publication of his complete works and letters by Cambridge University Press between 1979 and 2013 has increasingly drawn attention to Lawrence’s skilled writing in other forms, notably his poetry, plays, essays, and personal correspondence. Nonetheless, Lawrence has scarcely been without detractors. He has been a target for feminist criticism since Kate Millett published her 1970 book Sexual Politics; and the “leadership novels” that Lawrence published in the 1920s have led a number of critics to attack Lawrence as a fascist. Nonetheless, Lawrence has continued to be a subject of considerable academic and popular interest, and the reading list of primary and secondary texts can appear daunting. As Denis Donoghue states, “One of the risks incurred by a reader who takes an interest in Lawrence is that such an interest is likely to become omnivorous. It is hardly possible to place The Rainbow and Women in Love in the centre of that interest without engrossing, as one moves toward the circumference, pretty nearly everything else in the canon” (Donoghue, “‘Till the Fight Is Finished’: D. H. Lawrence in His Letters,” in Spender 1973 (p. 197, cited under Poetry).

General Overviews

Such is the amount of writing both by and about Lawrence that it can be difficult for the reader to know where exactly to begin. Indeed, the comic novel Out of Sheer Rage by Geoff Dyer (London: Little Brown, 1997) revolves around a writer who simply finds it impossible to begin his project about Lawrence because he is overwhelmed by the material. Nevertheless, a number of excellent introductions are available for the student who is new to Lawrence’s work. One of the best overviews is provided by Becket 2002, which provides not only clear biographical details, but also helpful plot summaries of Lawrence’s individual works in different forms, as well as describing the broad critical trends that have affected Lawrence’s later reception. Sagar 1982 is slightly more dated but also provides a helpful overview of Lawrence’s achievement across the range of different forms, and both Sagar 1982 and Becket 2002 provide reading lists that will aid the undergraduate. Poplawski 1996 provides excellent plot summaries of the prose fiction as well as suggested critical readings; it also includes an admirably concise biography by the leading Lawrence scholar John Worthen. Freeman 1985 provides a far less detailed, but nonetheless engaging introduction to Lawrence’s life and work. Those who are bewildered about why Lawrence has been such a well-known yet controversial writer should look at the critical essays in Draper 2013, showing how Lawrence was viewed during his own life and shortly afterward. In addition, the essays collected in Bloom 1986 reveal how Lawrence was viewed in the period when Lawrence’s reputation declined significantly (1966–1985), and Ellis and de Zordo 1992 includes a generous array of essays from 1913 to 1992. Fernihough 2001 is excellent for describing and developing a number of key debates at the start of the second century of Lawrence criticism. A comparison of Fernihough 2001 with Poplawski 1996 reveals the differing priorities of Lawrence scholars: these two books were published only five years apart, but Poplawski 1996 devotes most space to the prose fiction, giving ten times the number of pages to that topic than to the poems, whereas Fernihough 2001 devotes relatively little attention to novels such as Sons and Lovers.

  • Becket, Fiona. The Complete Critical Guide to D. H. Lawrence. London: Routledge, 2002.

    Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

    An excellent guide for the neophyte, containing accurate summaries of Lawrence’s life; descriptions of Lawrence’s work as novelist, poet, playwright, and essayist (including helpful ideas about Lawrence’s relationship with modernism); descriptions of some of the main currents in later Lawrence criticism; and helpful suggestions for further reading.

    Find this resource:

    • Bloom, Harold, ed. D. H. Lawrence. New York: Chelsea House, 1986.

      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      Includes key contributions by Frank Kermode (on Lawrence’s apocalypticism, not from Kermode’s well-known book D. H. Lawrence [New York: Viking, 1973]), Barbara Hardy (on Lawrence and women), and F. R. Leavis (on the Rainbow). Includes a deconstructive approach by Margot Norris but indicates that, by 1985, literary theorists had not found Lawrence’s work very conducive.

      Find this resource:

      • Draper, R. P., ed. D. H. Lawrence: The Critical Heritage. London: Routledge, 2013.

        Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

        This volume was first printed in 1970, then reprinted in 1997 and 2001. Draper includes reprinted reviews (including those by figures such as Ezra Pound and Virginia Woolf) that reveal how Lawrence’s work was viewed and received during his own lifetime. Also includes obituaries and retrospectives from 1930 to 1931.

        Find this resource:

        • Ellis, David, and Ornella de Zordo, eds. D. H. Lawrence: Critical Assessments. 4 vols. Mountfield, UK: Helm Information, 1992.

          Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

          Volume 1, “Contemporary Response,” details reviews and responses from 1913 to 1930; Volumes 2 and 3, “The Fiction,” include critical responses to Lawrence’s fiction from 1939 to 1990; and Volume 4, “Poetry and Nonfiction: The Modern Critical Response, 1938–1992: General Studies,” includes critical pieces on these topics.

          Find this resource:

          • Fernihough, Anne, ed. The Cambridge Companion to D. H. Lawrence. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2001.

            DOI: 10.1017/CCOL0521623391Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

            Excellent introduction to the way that leading scholars (both Lawrence specialists and those who are not usually Lawrentians) at the start of the 21st century consider Lawrence. Begins by discussing individual texts, then situates Lawrence in the context of broader issues and trends, for example, psychoanalysis.

            Find this resource:

            • Freeman, Jill, dir. Anthony Burgess Speaks: The Rage of D. H. Lawrence. VHS. Chicago: Home Vision, 1985.

              Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

              Accessible television documentary, freely available on Youtube at the time of writing, in which Burgess introduces Lawrence’s life and work with some excellent biographical material. Burgess also wrote the book Flame into Being: The Life and Work of D. H. Lawrence (London: Heinemann, 1985).

              Find this resource:

              • Poplawski, Paul. D. H. Lawrence: A Reference Companion. Westport, CT: Greenwood, 1996.

                Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                Contains a short biography of Lawrence by John Worthen, followed by a list of helpful guides to Lawrence’s work and Lawrence criticism. Devotes considerably more attention to the prose fiction than works such as poems and plays (which, in contrast to the prose fictions, have no plot summaries).

                Find this resource:

                • Sagar, Keith, ed. A D. H. Lawrence Handbook. Manchester, UK: Manchester University Press, 1982.

                  Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                  Contains a number of useful materials for the nonspecialist, including an introductory bibliography, chronological contextualizing of Lawrence’s life, social and economic details about Eastwood, and a chronology of major works. Also includes helpful details about stage and screen productions of Lawrence’s work.

                  Find this resource:

                  Biographies

                  In the decade following his death, many of those who knew Lawrence published books about him. Significant volumes were produced in the 1930s by figures including his wife Frieda his sister Ada; and his youthful girlfriend/intellectual companion Jessie Chambers (writing under the pseudonym “E. T.”). During this decade, other Lawrence volumes were written by his acquaintances Richard Aldington, Mabel Dodge Luhan, Helen Corke, Dorothy Brett, Earl Brewster and Achsah Brewster, and Knud Merrild followed by the later publication of accounts by Witter Bynner and George Neville. Such testimony casts fascinating light onto Lawrence and his circle, but can be unreliable: for example, Luhan’s account of Lawrence’s love life has been convincingly disputed in Worthen, et al. 1991–1998. Indeed, some of Lawrence’s friends who wrote books about him publicly clashed about their differences: most notably John Middleton Murry and Catherine Carswell, who, in total, produced three volumes between 1931 and 1933 in angry response to one another. Subsequently, the French writer Émile Delavenay (Delavenay 1972) and American authors Harry T. Moore (Moore 1974) and Edward Nehls (Nehls 1957–1959) were the first generation of professional Lawrence biographers, interviewing his acquaintances and casting new light on his early years in Eastwood. Today, most scholars will work closely with the three-volume Cambridge biography Worthen, et al. 1991–1998, which incorporates insights gained from Cambridge University Press’s major publication program of Lawrence’s works. Nonetheless, alternative biographies are available: Sagar 2003 includes many visual images that are not included in the Cambridge volumes (although, frustratingly, the sources of these images are not listed with precision). Squires 2008 provides a biography of Lawrence’s wife Frieda rather than focusing predominantly on D. H. Lawrence: and Squires’s volume is part of a biographical turn that includes—although Squires does not index their names—interesting studies of Frieda by Brenda Maddox, Janet Byrne, and H. T. Moore. An alternative way of studying Lawrence’s life is provided by Kaplan 2010, which places the emphasis on Lawrence’s network of acquaintances—particularly John Middleton Murry—rather than simply upon Lawrence himself. A good critical discussion of Lawrence biography, and the way that biographical reading can alter our understanding of Lawrence’s texts, is given by Paul Eggert in Fernihough 2001 (cited under General Overviews).

                  • Delavenay, Émile. D. H. Lawrence: The Man and His Work: The Formative Years, 1885–1919. Translated by Katharine M. Delavenay. Rev. ed. London: Heinemann, 1972.

                    Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                    English translation of D. H. Lawrence: L’homme et la genèse de son œuvre, a major biography first published in French in 1969 (Paris: C. Klincksieck). Relies on Lawrence’s correspondence with Jessie Chambers and focuses on Lawrence’s early development and background, taking him up to 1919.

                    Find this resource:

                    • Kaplan, Sydney Janet. Circulating Genius: John Middleton Murry, Katherine Mansfield and D. H. Lawrence. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2010.

                      DOI: 10.3366/edinburgh/9780748641482.001.0001Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                      Following earlier works by writers such as Paul Delany, this book shows how biographical study might illuminate Lawrence’s productive relationships with his acquaintances. Kaplan explores the Lawrence-Murry-Mansfield group, including a revealing intertexual relationship between Murry’s novel Still Life and Women in Love.

                      Find this resource:

                      • Moore, Harry T. The Priest of Love: A Life of D. H. Lawrence. Rev. ed. London: Heinemann, 1974.

                        Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                        Moore interviewed people, including Lawrence’s brother George, although the fact that Moore had never met Lawrence himself meant that the biography achieved a more impartial feel than many earlier biographies. Originally published in 1954 as The Intelligent Heart, and later made into a film with Ian McKellen as Lawrence.

                        Find this resource:

                        • Nehls, Edward. D. H. Lawrence: A Composite Biography. 3 vols. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1957–1959.

                          Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                          Slightly confusing but valuable publication. Nehls does not include an overarching narrative; rather he simply gives a broadly chronological sequence of accounts of Lawrence, drawing on Lawrence’s own writings as well as published memoirs and original accounts by people who had known Lawrence but had not published their memories (including Frieda’s children).

                          Find this resource:

                          • Sagar, Keith. The Life of D. H. Lawrence: An Illustrated Biography. Rev. ed. London: Chaucer, 2003.

                            Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                            Does not attempt to replicate the detail of the Cambridge biography but is by far the best of Lawrence’s biographies in terms of visual imagery. For example, the image of Esther Andrews is revealing about the effect she may have had on Lawrence in 1916–1917.

                            Find this resource:

                            • Squires, Michael. D. H. Lawrence and Frieda: A Portrait of Love and Loyalty. London: André Deutsch, 2008.

                              Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                              Squires relies on his extensive knowledge of Frieda’s unpublished letters to construct this biography that gives the nuanced view that her marriage to Lawrence saw “a sharp crosscut of temperaments that formed layers of mutual antagonism, affection, stimulation and peace” (p. 3).

                              Find this resource:

                              • Worthen, John. D. H. Lawrence: The Life of an Outsider. London: Penguin, 2005.

                                Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                This is the best one-volume introduction to Lawrence, with Worthen relying on the research of the earlier three-volume edition. Although the title is rather awkwardly appended to the piece (Worthen wanted: “D. H. Lawrence: The Life of a Writer,” but Penguin insisted otherwise), the scholarship on show here is first rate.

                                Find this resource:

                                • Worthen, John, David Ellis, and Mark Kinkead-Weekes. D. H. Lawrence. 3 vols. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1991–1998.

                                  Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                  This three-volume biography is now the essential starting point for any serious study of Lawrence’s life. The authors rely upon a great deal of new information that appeared with the publication of the Cambridge Letters (Lawrence 1979–2000, cited under Editions) and many of the Works (Lawrence 1980–2013, cited under Editions), and which was therefore unavailable to previous biographers.

                                  Find this resource:

                                  Bibliographies and Reference Guides

                                  Lawrence expressed some ambiguous feelings about being included in bibliographies. In 1924 he was approached by Edward McDonald, a professor in Philadelphia, who was preparing a bibliography of Lawrence’s writings, and Lawrence responded, “I don’t really care a snap about first editions, or whether e’s are upside-down or not. So I have nothing really to say, in that line” (Lawrence 1979–2000, Vol. 5, pp. 63–64, cited under Editions). Nonetheless, Lawrence subsequently took pains to answer the questions that McDonald sent him, contributed an introduction to the book, and when the finished volume arrived he said, “I really am pleased with the bibliography. Almost it makes me feel important” (Lawrence 1979–2000, Vol. 5, p. 271, cited under Editions). Compiling the bibliography also allowed Lawrence’s publisher to see a gap in Lawrence’s oeuvre that led to the publication of Reflections on the Death of a Porcupine and Other Essays (1925). Scholars today will find that Roberts and Poplawski 2001 is similarly valuable, providing publication information about Lawrence’s works in exquisite detail. In addition, the concluding section of Roberts and Poplawski 2001 lists more than 700 secondary works published on Lawrence between 1922 and 1999, and scholars interested in this critical reception will find both Cowan 1982 and Cowan 1985 even more detailed, listing altogether more than 4,500 publications about Lawrence. Pilditch 2001 also focuses on Lawrence criticism, presenting a helpful compendium that can be read productively alongside the earlier critical selection of Ellis and de Zordo 1992 (cited under General Overviews). Pilditch 2001 is not as comprehensive as Ellis and de Zordo 1992 but it does include some pieces, e.g., a mid-1950s article by Middleton Murry in the TLS, that are absent from the earlier volume and which are also missing from Draper 2013 and Bloom 1986 (both cited under General Overviews). Jansohn and Mehl 2007 extends this critical focus to examine Lawrence’s reception outside the Anglophone world. The reader who simply needs easily accessible, chronologically ordered facts about Lawrence’s life should consult Preston 1994. Those undergraduate students who require accessible, alphabetized detail about Lawrence’s many fictional characters should see Holderness 1976.

                                  • Cowan, James C. D. H. Lawrence: An Annotated Bibliography of Writings about Him. Vol. 1. De Kalb: Northern Illinois University Press, 1982.

                                    Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                    Contains 2,061 entries of internationally published writings on Lawrence, which date between 1909 and 1960. The great strength of this volume is that it provides abstracts for the publications listed.

                                    Find this resource:

                                    • Cowan, James C. D. H. Lawrence: An Annotated Bibliography of Writings about Him. Vol. 2. De Kalb: Northern Illinois University Press, 1985.

                                      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                      Contains 2,566 entries of published writings on Lawrence, which date between 1961 and 1975. As with Volume 1, scholars will find great assistance here in the fact that Cowan provides abstracts for the publications listed.

                                      Find this resource:

                                      • Holderness, Graham. Who’s Who in D. H. Lawrence. New York: Taplinger, 1976.

                                        Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                        Alphabetical list of all the fictional men, women, children, and animals who appear in Lawrence’s novels and short stories, giving key points about their attributes and actions.

                                        Find this resource:

                                        • Jansohn, Christa, and Dieter Mehl, eds. The Reception of D. H. Lawrence in Europe. London: Continuum, 2007.

                                          Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                          Surveys Lawrence’s reception beyond Anglo-Saxon criticism. Includes chapters analyzing the varying understandings of Lawrence in German-speaking countries. Might usefully be read in conjunction with Iida 1999 (cited under Space and Place).

                                          Find this resource:

                                          • Pilditch, Jan. The Critical Response to D. H. Lawrence. Westport, CT: Greenwood, 2001.

                                            Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                            Selected criticism of Lawrence’s work from across the 20th century. Includes separate sections for six Lawrence novels, followed by sections on the plays, short fiction, poetry, and “letters and prose,”

                                            Find this resource:

                                            • Preston, Peter. A D. H. Lawrence Chronology. Basingstoke, UK: Macmillan, 1994.

                                              Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                              Synthesizes essential biographical facts from the Cambridge letters and elsewhere to help clarify the overall trajectory of Lawrence’s life and writing career. From 1908, gives a month-by-month breakdown of what Lawrence was doing and where he was living.

                                              Find this resource:

                                              • Roberts, Warren, and Paul Poplawski. A Bibliography of D. H. Lawrence. 3d ed. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2001.

                                                Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                An essential scholarly volume. Has five main sections that list: (1) all Lawrence first edition books and pamphlets, (2) all first editions of his previously unpublished work, (3) all his periodical writings, (4) all his translations, and (5) all known manuscripts.

                                                Find this resource:

                                                Databases

                                                A number of online resources for the study of Lawrence are available. For undergraduate students, the D. H. Lawrence Research Centre at the University of Nottingham provides excellent introductory materials. For those planning to visit Eastwood, the D. H. Lawrence Heritage website provides up-to-date guidance about what to see. For serious scholarship, the other online resources detail some of the key collections of archival materials related to Lawrence. Researchers will find that the Nottingham University: Manuscripts and Special Collections Online Catalogue website lists a number of significant Lawrence manuscripts, as well as an impressive array of secondary criticism held at the university. The important Lawrence manuscripts at the New York Public Library: D. H. Lawrence Collection of Papers and the University of Texas at Austin: D. H. Lawrence can be consulted alongside a treasure trove of original manuscript materials held by those libraries and written by other key modernist writers. Postgraduate and academic researchers might also note that the University of Texas at Austin and Yale University Library: Beinecke Rare Book and Manuscript Library frequently offer a range of fellowships to enable visiting scholars to consult the material in person.

                                                Journals

                                                A number of journals have published special issues on Lawrence. See, for example, Library Chronicle of the University of Texas at Austin. Of the dedicated Lawrence journals, the D. H. Lawrence Review has the longest scholarly standing. But the more recently inaugurated The Journal of D. H. Lawrence Studies is also a well-edited and scholarly publication (effectively replacing the earlier Journal of the D. H. Lawrence Society). The remaining journals (Rananim: The Journal of the D. H. Lawrence Society of Australia, Études lawrenciennes, Japan D. H. Lawrence Studies) have also published some fine research and reveal Lawrence’s continuing purchase in locations far beyond his homeland.

                                                Editions

                                                Between 1980 and 2013 Cambridge University Press published a full set of scholarly editions of Lawrence’s works (Lawrence 1980–2013), at the same time as, between 1979 and 2000, the publisher printed an eight-volume set of Lawrence’s unexpurgated letters (Lawrence 1979–2000). These volumes are now extremely important for Lawrentian analysis, and they provide readers with a more comprehensive scholarly resource than is available for practically any of Lawrence’s contemporaries. However, the publications have not been without controversy, particularly as they have been priced beyond the reach of most readers (Penguin later published the texts more cheaply without some of the scholarly apparatus), and they first emerged at a time when feminist writers had launched a severe critique of Lawrence. A question also lingers about the completeness of these editions: Cambridge has printed only two out of what was clearly intended by its editor as a three-volume edition of the Poems. Without a third volume, some of Lawrence’s draft/variant poems are therefore found not in the Cambridge works but in the earlier Penguin volume (Lawrence 1993). Also not included in the Cambridge volumes are Lawrence’s paintings; for these see Lawrence 2003. Furthermore, some scholars have questioned whether the entire editorial enterprise of the Cambridge volumes ran counter to Lawrence’s own writing method and philosophy. See, for example, Peter Howarth, “Holy Apple Pie,” London Review of Books (22 May 2014), p. 27. Indeed, in Ross and Jackson 1995 and Boulton 1996 some of the key editors of the Cambridge project question the aims and achievements of the enterprise.

                                                • Boulton, James T. “Editing D. H. Lawrence’s Letters: The Editor’s Creative Role.” Prose Studies 19.2 (1996): 211–220.

                                                  DOI: 10.1080/01440359608586588Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                  The general editor of the Cambridge letters (Lawrence 1979–2000) describes how the texture of the prose of Lawrence’s letters means that the editor must take a creative role, and he gives examples to show how the editor might “create” Lawrence and his correspondents.

                                                  Find this resource:

                                                  • Lawrence, D. H. The Cambridge Edition of the Letters of D. H. Lawrence. Edited by James T. Boulton, Keith Sagar, Warren Roberts, et al. 8 vols. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1979–2000

                                                    Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                    Makes the letters of Lawrence available alongside explanatory notes and chronological apparatus. A shorter version was also produced, The Selected Letters of D. H. Lawrence, edited by James T. Boulton (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1997). Subsequent discoveries of Lawrence correspondence have appeared in the Journal of D. H. Lawrence Studies. (cited under Journals).

                                                    Find this resource:

                                                    • Lawrence, D. H. The Cambridge Edition of the Works of D. H. Lawrence. Edited by James T. Boulton, Warren Roberts, Albert Glover, et al. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1980–2013.

                                                      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                      The best edited and most complete editions of Lawrence’s work that are available, including insightful scholarly notes and introductions that elucidate the editorial process.

                                                      Find this resource:

                                                      • Lawrence, D. H. The Complete Poems. Edited by Vivian de Sola Pinto and F. Warren Roberts. New York: Penguin, 1993.

                                                        Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                        First published in 1964, with revised versions in 1967 and 1972, this one-volume edition includes draft poetry such as “O! Americans” that has not subsequently appeared in the Cambridge edition.

                                                        Find this resource:

                                                        • Lawrence, D. H. D. H. Lawrence’s Paintings. Introduction by Keith Sagar. London: Chaucer, 2003.

                                                          Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                          Included are forty well-printed color reproductions of his paintings (thirty-four originals and six copies). Also includes three of Lawrence’s essays on his paintings and a perceptive introduction by Keith Sagar, placing the paintings in context.

                                                          Find this resource:

                                                          • Ross, Charles R., and Denis Jackson, eds. Editing D. H. Lawrence: New Versions of a Modern Author. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1995.

                                                            Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                            Contains contributions from those who edited the Cambridge works, including Worthen, Eggert, and Baron, who reflect upon, and theorize, the process. They consider what has been learned about Lawrence and about critical editing. Particularly revealing is L. D. Clark’s frank article about editing The Plumed Serpent.

                                                            Find this resource:

                                                            Criticism

                                                            Lawrence was a prolific writer who produced work in a wide variety of forms. Of all Lawrence’s texts, his Novels have generated the most comment, and students who want a guide to the sheer range of criticism that has appeared on the novels would be advised to look carefully at Cowan 1982 and Cowan 1985 (both cited under Bibliographies and Reference Guides). Lawrence’s Short Stories are also well known, as their length has made them suitable for teaching in school and university classrooms. Although published commentary on the short stories has been less than on the novels, a powerful critical argument put forward in Cushman 1978 (see Short Stories) makes the case that the short stories nonetheless have a pivotal place in Lawrence’s evolution as a writer. Lawrence’s Poetry has also generated a set of increasingly sophisticated critical readings, and, as discussed in Space and Place, his poetic appreciation for the natural world has the potential to make his writing freshly relevant in the 21st century. Lawrence’s Plays have tended to be less well known, although Peter Gill worked hard to bring them to public attention by staging them at the Royal Court in the 1960s, and in 2000 the Royal National Theatre gave a reading from The Widowing of Mrs Holroyd as one of its “100 plays of the century,” before commissioning Ben Power to adapt Lawrence’s three Eastwood plays for production in 2015–2016. Lawrence also produced a diverse body of other work, including paintings, travel writings, and literary criticism, and some indication of this range is given in the studies cited under Nonfiction Writings and Painting.

                                                            Novels

                                                            Lawrence’s individual novels have attracted widely varying amounts of critical attention. His best-known novels remain Sons and Lovers, The Rainbow, Women in Love, and Lady Chatterley’s Lover, and for undergraduates and postgraduates who are beginning to study Lawrence, the contextualizing approach of Harrison 2007 (on Sons and Lovers) and Roberts 2007 (on Women in Love) is excellent. Marsh 2000 focuses on those two novels as well as The Rainbow, in an unfussy way, for those who may not already be familiar with the contexts and construction of the works. Harrison 2007 is particularly good at introducing publication history and textual variants. More experienced Lawrentians will value Squires 1983, which analyses Lady Chatterley’s Lover by means of genetic criticism, an approach that has proven valuable in assessing Lawrence’s development as a writer (see particularly Cushman 1978, cited under Short Stories). Eggert and Worthen 1996 shows how a thematic organization of Lawrence’s work might disturb the traditional prioritization of Lawrence’s novels. One of the most influential ways of analyzing Lawrence’s novels has been through the critical frameworks of psychoanalytic theory, including highly influential volumes by Weiss, Ruderman, and Schapiro. Cowan 2002 gives a short and useful history of the application of psychoanalytical thinking to Lawrence, before exploring alternatives to Freud’s Oedipus complex that might explicate Lawrence’s novels. Michelucci 2002 is also included here because this study highlights an important critical turn in Lawrence studies since the start of the 21st century (detailed more fully under Space and Place), namely, that critics have increasingly used cultural geography and Lawrence’s engagement with specific locations to analyze the way in which his work was formed and received. Finally, Arai 2014 shows scholarship looking beyond the best-known novels and appreciating the experimental qualities of the late Lawrence, also revealing how, particularly since the 1990s, the application of critical theory to Lawrence’s writing has generated valuable readings (see more under Critical Theory).

                                                            • Arai, Hidenaga. Literature along the Lines of Flight: D. H. Lawrence’s Later Novels and Critical Theory. Amsterdam: Rodopi, 2014.

                                                              Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                              Argues for the values of the late novels, and applies critical theory to this part of Lawrence’s oeuvre—most notably ideas from René Girard, Deleuze and Guattari, postcolonial theory, and Michel Foucault.

                                                              Find this resource:

                                                              • Cowan, James C. D. H. Lawrence: Self and Sexuality. Columbus: Ohio State University Press, 2002.

                                                                Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                Cowan uses the “self-psychological” approach of Heinz Kohut: Lawrence is seen as failing to idealize his father at the pre-oedipal stage, leading him to search for a later set of father substitutes in Sons and Lovers, Women in Love, the “leadership novels,” and Lady Chatterley’s Lover.

                                                                Find this resource:

                                                                • Eggert, Paul, and John Worthen, eds. Lawrence and Comedy. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1996.

                                                                  DOI: 10.1017/CBO9780511665745Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                  This volume, in its thematic focus, includes a fine analysis of Women in Love but also brings to the fore Lawrence’s unfinished novel Mr. Noon, as well as traditionally unfashionable novels Kangaroo, The Boy in the Bush, and Aaron’s Rod. Convincingly shows how Lawrence used humor to undermine authority.

                                                                  Find this resource:

                                                                  • Harrison, Andrew. D. H. Lawrence: Sons and Lovers. Tirril, UK: Humanities-Ebooks, 2007.

                                                                    Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                    The best place for students to begin studying Lawrence’s novel. Harrison explains the novel’s key ideas and themes, its reception, and the biographical contexts that helped create it. Makes adept comparisons between that finished work and earlier drafts and draws particular attention to the pivotal editorial contribution of Edward Garnett.

                                                                    Find this resource:

                                                                    • Marsh, Nicholas. D. H. Lawrence: The Novels. Basingstoke, UK: Macmillan, 2000.

                                                                      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                      Focusing on Sons and Lovers, The Rainbow, and Women in Love, this study is aimed at initiating those who may have little previous knowledge of Lawrence’s work. Eschews theory for an approach that focuses on literary form and close readings.

                                                                      Find this resource:

                                                                      • Michelucci, Stefania. Space and Place in the Works of D. H. Lawrence. Translated by Jill Franks. Jefferson, NC: McFarland, 2002.

                                                                        Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                        Focuses on the “geography” of Lawrence’s novels, from the early books The White Peacock and The Trespasser to his 1926 text The Plumed Serpent, to show how place provides a system of functional relationships in Lawrence’s works.

                                                                        Find this resource:

                                                                        • Roberts, Neil. D. H. Lawrence: Women in Love. Tirril, UK: Humanities-Ebooks, 2007.

                                                                          Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                          Gives a clear discussion of the contexts of the book (relying on the Cambridge biography) and then moves on to discuss the ways in which the novel is Lawrence’s most experimental work. The brief discussion of the work’s critical reputation and the select bibliography are also useful for student readers.

                                                                          Find this resource:

                                                                          • Squires, Michael. The Creation of Lady Chatterley’s Lover. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1983.

                                                                            Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                            A fine study that examines Lawrence’s three versions of Lady Chatterley’s Lover (as well as fictions that Squires views as precursors) to make the case that Lawrence’s process of composition was central to his art: as Connie breaks from the past, so the novelist wrote entirely new drafts rather than revising them.

                                                                            Find this resource:

                                                                            Short Stories

                                                                            In contrast to the critical interest in the novels, studies of his short stories are far fewer in number. Leavis 1955 (cited under Moral and Religious Reputation) does offer a positive critique of the shorter works in a chapter on “The Tales,” but the first book-length study did not arrive until Widmer 1962, and few full-length studies have appeared since then. Cushman 1978 is scarcely for the beginner (many references here will be confusing for those unfamiliar with Lawrence’s life and work), but the author does use genetic criticism to show how the revision of The Prussian Officer stories was central to Lawrence’s development as a writer. Those interested in using this approach to Lawrence’s stories will find the Odour of Chrysanthemums, a Text in Process website useful. Harris 1984 is probably the best place for the undergraduate to start, as the volume discusses the short stories in a clear chronological way and gives a number of sensible close readings. Kearney 1998 and Thornton 1993 are also helpful introductory guides, although both focus on a far narrower range of primary texts than Harris 1984. In contrast to Cushman 1978, Reeve 2003 emphasizes the significance of Lawrence’s late rather than his early development as a short story writer. Grmelová 2001 reveals something of the international status accorded to Lawrence in describing the reception in, first, Czechoslovakia and, then, the Czech Republic.

                                                                            • Cushman, Keith. D. H. Lawrence at Work: The Emergence of the “Prussian Officer” Stories. Charlottesville: University of Virginia Press, 1978.

                                                                              Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                              Key study that describes how Lawrence extensively altered and revised The Prussian Officer stories in 1908–1914. Reveals the extent of compositional changes and argues that they show the emergence of the mature Lawrence.

                                                                              Find this resource:

                                                                              • Grmelová, Anna. The Worlds of D. H. Lawrence’s Short Fiction, 1907–1923. Prague: Univerzita Karlova, 2001.

                                                                                Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                                Shows how Lawrence’s short fiction replays ideas through varying viewpoints, and includes an appendix detailing the reception of D. H. Lawrence in Czechoslovakia and the Czech Republic between 1927 and 2000.

                                                                                Find this resource:

                                                                                • Harris, Janice Hubbard. The Short Fiction of D. H. Lawrence. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 1984.

                                                                                  Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                                  Gives a chronological analysis of all Lawrence’s short stories by examining their theme and form. She relates his stories to broader currents in the English short story (particularly with regard to realism, the use of ritual, fable, and stylization) to show Lawrence’s originality.

                                                                                  Find this resource:

                                                                                  • Kearney, Martin F. Major Short Stories of D. H. Lawrence: A Handbook. New York: Garland, 1998.

                                                                                    Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                                    Focuses on just six of the stories, in each case giving details about publication history, circumstances of composition, relationship to other Lawrence works, details of critical reception, and a bibliography of sources.

                                                                                    Find this resource:

                                                                                    • Reeve, N. H. Reading Late Lawrence. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan, 2003.

                                                                                      DOI: 10.1057/9780230599888Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                                      Focuses particularly on the late short stories, including relatively unknown pieces such as Lawrence’s final story, “The Blue Moccasins.” Also focuses on Lawrence’s manuscript revisions to the novel Lady Chatterley’s Lover. Finds common tropes in the work of this period, including a desire for the maternal body.

                                                                                      Find this resource:

                                                                                      • Thornton, Weldon. D. H. Lawrence: A Study of the Short Fiction. New York: Twayne, 1993.

                                                                                        Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                                        Thornton selects nine of Lawrence’s short stories for analysis in order to show how Lawrence’s stories avoid the epiphanies of modernist writers, such as Joyce, and instead focuses on the more complicated nature of the human psyche. Eschews biographical readings for a focus on textual effect.

                                                                                        Find this resource:

                                                                                        • University of Nottingham. “Odour of Chrysanthemums, a Text in Process.” Nottingham, UK: University of Nottingham.

                                                                                          Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                                          Website allows readers to study four different versions of D. H. Lawrence’s Odour of Chrysanthemums: the original proof with Lawrence’s corrections on it, the corrected proof, the version published in the English Review in 1911, and the version in The Prussian Officer and Other Stories of 1914.

                                                                                          Find this resource:

                                                                                          • Widmer, Kingsley. The Art of Perversity: D. H. Lawrence’s Shorter Fictions. Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1962.

                                                                                            Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                                            First full-length study to draw attention to Lawrence’s more than sixty short stories and novellas. Identifies “perversity”—a kind of rebelliousness—as particularly praiseworthy (unconsciously using a term first developed in Lawrence criticism by John Heywood Thomas in the Criterion in 1930).

                                                                                            Find this resource:

                                                                                            Poetry

                                                                                            Although Lawrence’s poetry is sometimes considered to have been critically neglected, Sagar 2007 points out that, although less numerous than publications on the fiction, the long list of publications on the poetry “hardly constitutes neglect” (p. 150). In particular, Spender 1973 reveals how Lawrence’s poetry has been highly rated by practicing poets, including Spender himself, Clive James, Alan Sillitoe, Al Alvarez, and Edward Lucie-Smith (the latter two agreeing that Lawrence was the only significant English/English modernist poet to survive the Great War (see p. 210 and p. 224)). Gilbert 1990 and Sagar 2007 provide the best student introductions to the breadth of Lawrence’s poetry. For more advanced readers, Jones 2010 and Hagen 1995 confirm the general critical turn toward an appreciation of Lawrence’s late poetic works, with Laird 1988, by contrast, devoting considerable attention to the early poetry written before 1912. Dillon 2007 shows how Lawrence’s poetry may also be amenable to theoretically informed discussion, as does perhaps the best book on Lawrence’s poetry, Chaudhuri 2003, a densely packed volume that offers convincing close readings as well as a theoretically sophisticated approach that reveals Lawrence’s potential affinities with post-structuralist thought.

                                                                                            • Chaudhuri, Amit. D. H. Lawrence and “Difference.” Oxford: Clarendon, 2003.

                                                                                              DOI: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199260522.001.0001Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                                              In this book based on a PhD thesis completed a decade earlier, Chaudhuri uses Derrida’s ideas of language to show how Lawrence might be considered a postmodernist before his time, whose sense of the provisional leads to affinities with avant-garde artists, such as Brecht, as well as links to postcolonial thinking.

                                                                                              Find this resource:

                                                                                              • Dillon, Sarah. The Palimpsest: Literature, Criticism, Theory. London: Continuum, 2007.

                                                                                                Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                                                As part of a broader study, Dillon gives an excellent reading of Lawrence’s early poem “Evening of a Week-Day” (from about 1907), examining how it was revised to become “Palimpsest of Twilight” in New Poems (1918) and later republished as “Twilight” in the 1928 Collected Poems.

                                                                                                Find this resource:

                                                                                                • Gilbert, Sandra. Acts of Attention: The Poems of D. H. Lawrence. 2d ed. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press, 1990.

                                                                                                  Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                                                  Reprint, with a new introduction, of groundbreaking 1972 volume that emphasized that, although New Criticism had generally dismissed Lawrence’s poetry, the poetic works are remarkable for the way that they attend to the flux of experience and the fluidity of language.

                                                                                                  Find this resource:

                                                                                                  • Hagen, Patricia L. Metaphor’s Way of Knowing: The Poetry of D. H. Lawrence and the Church of Mechanism. New York: Peter Lang, 1995.

                                                                                                    Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                                                    Like Becket 1997 (cited under Nonfiction Writings and Painting), this work describes the centrality of a metaphorical idiom for Lawrence, but unlike Becket, Hagen applies this insight to the poetry. Argues that, although Lawrence’s poetry is not modernist and was dismissed by Eliot, Lawrence’s poetry anticipates features of a postmodern sensibility.

                                                                                                    Find this resource:

                                                                                                    • Jones, Bethan. The Last Poems of D. H. Lawrence: Shaping a Late Style. Farnham, UK: Ashgate, 2010.

                                                                                                      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                                                      Lawrence’s Collected Poems appeared in 1928, but Jones argues for the significance of his subsequent poetic development, focusing on two notebooks of poetry drafts that were unpublished when Lawrence died. Uses Edward Said and Theodor Adorno, and emphasizes that Lawrence’s late poems scarcely show a peaceful acceptance of death.

                                                                                                      Find this resource:

                                                                                                      • Laird, Holly A. Self and Sequence: The Poetry of D. H. Lawrence. Charlottesville: University of Virginia Press, 1988.

                                                                                                        Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                                                        Argues that, although Lawrence called his poems “bits,” he was, in fact, consciously constructing them as clusters, something that connects to his broader desire for narrative. Presenting the chronological structure of writing and revision allows Laird to read the poems against Lawrence’s biography and his broader development as a writer.

                                                                                                        Find this resource:

                                                                                                        • Sagar, Keith. D. H. Lawrence: Poet. Tirril, UK: Humanities-Ebooks, 2007.

                                                                                                          Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                                                          Perhaps the best place for a new reader to begin with Lawrence’s poems: Sagar works to reveal the key biographical and literary contexts, analyze textual effects, and set out the argument that Lawrence became a great poet only after 1920. The reading list is also excellent.

                                                                                                          Find this resource:

                                                                                                          • Spender, Stephen. D. H. Lawrence: Novelist, Poet, Prophet. New York: Harper & Row, 1973.

                                                                                                            Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                                                            Valuable compendium of fifteen essays, some by those who had known Lawrence and some by well-known literary figures. Edited by (and with a chapter by) Stephen Spender, it shows a determination that the poetry should be given due consideration in an overall assessment of Lawrence’s life and work.

                                                                                                            Find this resource:

                                                                                                            Plays

                                                                                                            Lawrence studies had to wait until 1965–1968 for theater director Peter Gill to draw sustained critical attention to the theater work by staging acclaimed productions of three Eastwood plays at the Royal Court in London. In 1965, Heinemann published all of Lawrence’s plays for the first time, and in 1969 Penguin printed a paperback edition of the three plays that Gill had staged, along with an introduction by Raymond Williams (who strangely neglected to mention the work of Peter Gill, whose selection and staging of the three plays at the Royal Court quite clearly was influenced the Penguin volume). However, despite this interest in Lawrence’s plays during the 1960s, Becket 2002 (cited under General Overviews) observes that “Critical interest in Lawrence’s plays has been relatively slight” (p. 37), and Clarke 2001 notes that “No other generic body of Lawrence’s work has suffered such extensive obscurity” (p. 39). The best overall introduction to the plays remains Sklar 1975, whose reading of the experimentalist and proto-Brechtian aspects of Lawrence’s dramaturgy is rejected in Pittock 2014, which views Lawrence’s plays as straightforward realism. Worthen 1999 and Clarke 2001 attend to the language of the plays, and ask why Lawrence’s drama was long neglected by the professional stage. Worthen 2001 is an excellently detailed analysis of the plays and their stage history by an expert Lawrentian, whereas Trussler 2001 is a similar analysis by a writer with a background in theater studies. Also instructive is the contrast between these generally positive verdicts on the plays and the negative verdict of Waterman 1959. The fact that some of Waterman’s arguments are recycled by Malcolm Pittock in Pittock 2014 perhaps indicates that the status of Lawrence’s drama remains uncertain. Worthen 2003 draws attention to Lawrence’s unfamiliar late theatrical work, which remains very different from the Nottinghamshire dramas for which Lawrence is best known.

                                                                                                            • Clarke, Ian. “Dialogue and Dialect in Lawrence’s Colliery Plays.” Journal of the D. H. Lawrence Society (2001): 39–61.

                                                                                                              Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                                                              Argues that Lawrence’s plays have been neglected on the stage because of the difficulty that literary critics have in valuing the language of realist drama, and particularly the language of working-class speech. Shows the ways in which Lawrence’s drama contradicted middle-class conventions.

                                                                                                              Find this resource:

                                                                                                              • Pittock, Malcolm. “D. H. Lawrence: Dramatist?” The Cambridge Quarterly 43.3 (2014): 256–272.

                                                                                                                DOI: 10.1093/camqtly/bfu021Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                                                                Speculates about whether Lawrence could have become a great playwright, and concludes that he could not, although A Collier’s Friday Night is great because of the subtlety of its stagecraft. This particular play came about because of a unique set of biographical circumstances and when Lawrence had become a successful writer his plays (David and Touch and Go) became wordy and unsuccessful.

                                                                                                                Find this resource:

                                                                                                                • Sklar, Sylvia. The Plays of D. H. Lawrence: A Biographical and Critical Study. London: Vision, 1975.

                                                                                                                  Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                                                                  Apart from a poorly produced volume by Hiran Malani (D. H. Lawrence: A Study of His Plays [Atlantic Highlands, NJ: Humanities Press, 1982]), this volume was for many years the only full-length analysis of Lawrence’s plays. Sklar devotes space to each of Lawrence’s plays and reaches a positive verdict about them. She also perceptively points to the proto-Brechtian elements of Lawrence’s late drama.

                                                                                                                  Find this resource:

                                                                                                                  • Trussler, Simon. “Introduction.” In D. H. Lawrence: The Widowing of Mrs. Holroyd and Other Plays. Edited by Simon Trussler, vii–xxxviii. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001.

                                                                                                                    Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                                                                    Useful introduction by a theatrical rather than a Lawrentian scholar, paying attention to the contemporary background that informed Lawrence’s drama. Also valuably highlights the way in which the plays were recovered in the 1960s.

                                                                                                                    Find this resource:

                                                                                                                    • Waterman, Arthur. “The Plays of D. H. Lawrence.” Modern Drama 2.4 (1959): 349–357.

                                                                                                                      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                                                                      Waterman is harshly critical of Lawrence’s plays, although he does acknowledge Lawrence’s skill at handling dialect. This article became influential after being anthologized in Mark Spilka’s edited book, D. H. Lawrence: A Collection of Critical Essays (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1963).

                                                                                                                      Find this resource:

                                                                                                                      • Worthen, John. “Towards a New Version of D. H. Lawrence’s The Daughter-in-Law: Scholarly Edition or Play Text?” Yearbook of English Studies 29 (1999): 231–246.

                                                                                                                        DOI: 10.2307/3508944Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                                                                        Fine article revealing the way that one of Lawrence’s best plays, The Daughter-in-Law, remained unpublished until 1965, and then appeared in a corrupt edition. Highlights many of the corrections made in the Cambridge edition.

                                                                                                                        Find this resource:

                                                                                                                        • Worthen, John. “Lawrence as Dramatist.” In The Cambridge Companion to D. H. Lawrence. Edited by Anne Fernihough, 137–153. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2001.

                                                                                                                          DOI: 10.1017/CCOL0521623391Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                                                                          Contextualizes the plays, including the production history, and argues that Lawrence’s theatrical skill affected his novels: concludes that Lawrence’s finest dramatic work might be found in his prose fiction and letters.

                                                                                                                          Find this resource:

                                                                                                                          • Worthen, John. “Lawrence’s Theatre of the Southwest.” In D. H. Lawrence: New Worlds. Edited by Keith Cushman and Earl G. Ingersoll, 243–257. Madison, NJ: Fairleigh Dickinson University Press, 2003.

                                                                                                                            Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                                                                            Draws attention to the fact that, although Lawrence is known for writing plays about Nottinghamshire’s mining district, three of Lawrence’s ten theater works had nothing to do with miners but were conceived or written in Taos, New Mexico. Worthen contextualizes these pieces in terms of the personalities and politics that shaped them.

                                                                                                                            Find this resource:

                                                                                                                            Nonfiction Writings and Painting

                                                                                                                            Lawrence’s paintings and essays allowed him to develop some of the ideas that he explored in his writing, with the essays using a highly metaphorical language. Volume 4 of Ellis and de Zordo 1992 (cited under General Overviews) gives an excellent overview of how such work was perceived (in this volume, for example, Evelyn J. Hinz discusses Psychoanalysis and Fantasia, P. I. Crumpton discusses Movements in European History, and Armin Arnold examines Lawrence’s translations). One of the best-known biographical moments of the final period of Lawrence’s life is the censoring of his paintings. In 1929 an exhibition of his paintings in Mayfair attracted the attention of the police, who took away thirteen of the twenty-five paintings on show (which were then banned from being shown again in Britain). Police also confiscated four copies of the Mandrake Press edition of the reproductions, which were later destroyed on court orders. Millett 1983 focuses on the suppressed images of the Mandrake book and compares Lawrence’s paintings with his prose works. The other writers in this section do not analyze the paintings; rather, they examine different aspects of Lawrence’s nonfictional writing: Gordon 1966 was one of the first to take the nonfiction as a serious subject for critical discussion, looking primarily at Lawrence’s literary criticism, as does Delavenay 1987. Becket 1997 looks at Lawrence’s studies of the unconscious; Roberts 2004 analyzes the late travel writings; while Black 1992 examines the nonfictional prose of 1913–1917.

                                                                                                                            • Becket, Fiona. D. H. Lawrence: The Thinker as Poet. Basingstoke, UK: Macmillan, 1997.

                                                                                                                              DOI: 10.1057/9780230378995Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                                                                              Focuses on Lawrence’s use of a metaphorical idiom, mainly in his nonfictional prose (although Becket resists a straightforward distinction between Lawrence’s fiction and nonfiction). She places Lawrence’s studies of the unconscious at the center of her study, showing how they resist Freud.

                                                                                                                              Find this resource:

                                                                                                                              • Black, Michael H. D. H. Lawrence: The Early Philosophical Works: A Commentary. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1992.

                                                                                                                                Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                                                                                Analyzes, in broadly chronological order, the philosophical works that Lawrence wrote from 1913 to 1917. Black subjects these works to a close reading, informed by his intimate knowledge of Lawrence’s process of writing and revision, to reveal Lawrence’s recurring interests.

                                                                                                                                Find this resource:

                                                                                                                                • Delavenay, Émile. “Otto Weininger and ‘Rather Raw Philosophy.’” In D. H. Lawrence: New Studies. Edited by Christopher Heywood, 137–157. Basingstoke, UK: Macmillan, 1987.

                                                                                                                                  Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                                                                                  Points to the influence of Otto Weininger’s Sex and Character upon Lawrence’s Study of Thomas Hardy. Follows an earlier essay in the volume by Christopher Heywood, which also examines Lawrence’s psycho-physiological writings with reference to Marie-François Xavier Bichat and Marshall Hall.

                                                                                                                                  Find this resource:

                                                                                                                                  • Gordon, David J. D. H. Lawrence as a Literary Critic. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1966.

                                                                                                                                    Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                                                                                    Apart from reviews and incidental praise, no one had seriously analyzed Lawrence’s literary criticism until this volume. Says Lawrence’s lit-crit is scarcely balanced or reasonable but is complex and less reductive than had been supposed.

                                                                                                                                    Find this resource:

                                                                                                                                    • Millett, Robert W. The Vultures and the Phoenix: A Study of the Mandrake Press Edition of the Paintings of D. H. Lawrence. Philadelphia: Art Alliance, 1983.

                                                                                                                                      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                                                                                      Discusses Lawrence’s “Mandrake” images in the context of Lawrence’s writings. Other discussions of the paintings include Mervyn Levy’s edited volume of 1964, John Russell’s essay in Spender 1973 (cited under Poetry), and Jack Stewart’s book, The Vital Art of D. H. Lawrence (Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press, 1999).

                                                                                                                                      Find this resource:

                                                                                                                                      • Roberts, Neil. D. H. Lawrence, Travel and Cultural Difference. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan, 2004.

                                                                                                                                        DOI: 10.1057/9780230505087Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                                                                                        Concentrates on Lawrence’s writings from 1922 to 1925, when the author wrote a number of controversial works of prose fiction. Relies upon postcolonial theory and argues that the journeying Lawrence describes is a sophisticated attempt to “imagine beyond the terms of Western culture” (p. 41).

                                                                                                                                        Find this resource:

                                                                                                                                        Moral and Religious Reputation

                                                                                                                                        In 1951, Martin Jarrett-Kerr, a member of a monastic community, argued that Lawrence articulated Christian ideas about the relationship of body and soul. Jarrett-Kerr 1961 is therefore offered as “a slight token of the gratitude that Christians should owe” to Lawrence (pp. 22–23). Similarly, Spilka 1955 argues that Lawrence was a religious writer, for whom “the resurrection or destruction of the human soul, within the living body, was central to his work” (p. 112). That same year also saw the publication of Leavis 1955, the highly influential volume that, by relying on ideas that Leavis had explored in the quarterly periodical Scrutiny, helped to gain for Lawrence the reputation as a deeply moral writer. Leavis’s criticism heavily influenced the next generation of Lawrence’s critics, establishing a moralistic, New Critical approach as normative: the direct effect can been seen in Freeman 1955, which relies on Leavis’s ideas from Scrutiny, although not all critics were ready to swallow the Leavis ideas whole. Where Leavis had concentrated on the prose fiction, Graham Hough published a 1956 volume focusing on Lawrence’s poetry as well as his fiction, and Eliseo Vivas published a 1960 book that was notably more willing to acknowledge Lawrence’s failures. Since the start of the 21st century, a notable critical turn is evident back toward viewing Lawrence as a religious writer, albeit a writer who had little time for conventional Judeo-Christian notions of God. Beckson 2006 argues that Lawrence’s entire conception of his artistic vocation was strongly akin to the artistic vocation of a religious priest. Iida 2012 argues that Lawrence was operating in a tradition of both Christian mysticism and European polytheism. Iida 2012 focuses mainly on European and Japanese comparisons, but Ferretter 2013 gives particular attention to Lawrence’s experiences of indigenous religion in North America. Meanwhile, Burack 2005 argues that Lawrence’s major novels seek to initiate the reader into sacred experience.

                                                                                                                                        • Beckson, Karl. The Religion of Art: A Modernist Theme in British Literature, 1885–1925. New York: AMS, 2006.

                                                                                                                                          Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                                                                                          A good introduction to tracing religious ideas in Lawrence’s writing. Argues that, from 1913, Lawrence viewed himself and his work in relation to the “religion of art,” the idea that sacred imagery could be used for aesthetic purposes, making the artist a priest/saint/visionary.

                                                                                                                                          Find this resource:

                                                                                                                                          • Burack, Charles Michael. D. H. Lawrence’s Language of Sacred Experience: The Transfiguration of the Reader. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2005.

                                                                                                                                            DOI: 10.1057/9781403978240Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                                                                                            Makes the reader, rather than Lawrence, the focus, and uses Wolfgang Iser’s ideas to reveal how Lawrence makes (the somewhat passive) reader feel sacred feelings when encountering the artwork.

                                                                                                                                            Find this resource:

                                                                                                                                            • Ferretter, Luke. The Glyph and the Gramophone: D. H. Lawrence’s Religion. London: Bloomsbury, 2013.

                                                                                                                                              Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                                                                                              A clear survey of Lawrence’s developing religious thinking from 1915 to 1930. Draws on thinkers, including William James and Mircea Eliade, and explains how Lawrence avoided religious doctrine but found religion in emotions that transcend an individual’s known experience.

                                                                                                                                              Find this resource:

                                                                                                                                              • Freeman, Mary. D. H. Lawrence: A Basic Study of His Ideas. New York: Grosset & Dunlop, 1955.

                                                                                                                                                Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                                                                                                Freeman had been reading Leavis’s articles about Lawrence in Scrutiny, and presents a Lawrence who is a social ethicist with “significant insights into the problems characteristic of our time” (p. v). Interestingly (but wrongly) asserts that Sons and Lovers is “most factual” (p. 9).

                                                                                                                                                Find this resource:

                                                                                                                                                • Iida, Takeo. D. H. Lawrence as Anti-rationalist: Mysticism, Animism and Cosmic Life in His Works. Tokyo: AoyamaLife, 2012.

                                                                                                                                                  Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                                                                                                  Argues that Lawrence was a mystic, whose animistic writings and paintings articulate the view that rationalism kills an intuitive understanding of life. Fascinatingly compares Lawrence with Japanese writers, including Sei Ito, and painters Hiroshige and Hokusai.

                                                                                                                                                  Find this resource:

                                                                                                                                                  • Jarrett-Kerr, Martin [Father Tiverton]. D. H. Lawrence and Human Existence. London: SCM, 1961.

                                                                                                                                                    Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                                                                                                    Includes a forward by Eliot stating that Lawrence “without being a Christian, was primarily and always religious” (p. 10). Jarrett-Kerr then argues that Christians owe a debt to Lawrence for reminding them of the bodily nature of existence and for articulating a vision of religion that is central to Christianity. First published under pseudonym in 1951.

                                                                                                                                                    Find this resource:

                                                                                                                                                    • Leavis, F. R. D. H. Lawrence: Novelist. London: Chatto & Windus, 1955.

                                                                                                                                                      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                                                                                                      Leavis’s best-known publication on Lawrence and perhaps the single most influential volume ever published on the novelist. Leavis viewed Lawrence as a radical innovator whose experiments revolved around an urgent interest in life.

                                                                                                                                                      Find this resource:

                                                                                                                                                      • Spilka, Mark. The Love Ethic of D. H. Lawrence. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1955.

                                                                                                                                                        Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                                                                                                        With an opening endorsement from Frieda Lawrence, Spilka uses New Critical techniques to develop his idea that “the art of the novel was the religious art for Lawrence” (p. 4). Lawrence emerges as a moral writer who teaches discernment and who strove to revitalize Christian doctrine.

                                                                                                                                                        Find this resource:

                                                                                                                                                        Lady Chatterley Trial and the Sexual Revolution

                                                                                                                                                        In 1932 René Guyon wrote his book La liberté sexuelle, which was later translated into English as Sexual Freedom. Here he declared that “Genuine sexual reform advances with giant strides. If we are not mistaken, D. H. Lawrence’s book Lady Chatterley’s Lover marks enormous progress [. . .] we cannot fail to regard its having been printed in England and unexpurgated in France (1932) as the Sexual Revolution’s Declaration of Rights” (Sexual Freedom, translated by Eden and Cedar Paul [London: Bodley Head, 1950], p. 125). In the United States, the frankness and sensuality of Lawrence’s writing inspired admiration and emulation from writers ranging from Tennessee Williams to Allen Ginsberg. Although the import of Lady Chatterley’s Lover was banned after publication, in 1959 Grove Press published an unexpurgated version of the book in the United States. When the postmaster general deemed the Grove edition obscene and refused to transport copies, the publisher brought a suit to restrain him and, on 21 July 1959, a New York judge agreed that the book was not obscene. A British trial ensued shortly afterward in 1960, whose proceedings are detailed in Rolph 1961. Rolph’s publication confirmed Lawrence as part of the counter-culture, and in the popular mind—as shown in Davies 2007—the publication of the novel and the British court case reflected, and perhaps helped to trigger, wider societal changes. However, recent cultural critics have increasingly dissented from this narrative. Matthews 2008 and Matthews 2009 argue that the trial was deeply significant, but not necessarily because of what it indicated about attitudes toward sex. Rather, the trial was a key moment in terms of the development of cultural studies and because of how it summarized literary discussions since the 1940s. Leavis 1967 (a review of Rolph 1961 originally published in The Spectator that year) and Ellis 2008 agree that too much attention has been paid to Lady Chatterley’s Lover, which is viewed as a substandard work with a notoriety that damages Lawrence’s overall reputation. Ford 1965 and Glicksberg 1973 similarly tend to downplay the racier aspects of Lawrence’s writing in order to emphasize that he remained a writer who said something fundamentally moral about love and human relationships.

                                                                                                                                                        • Davies, Andrew. The Chatterley Affair. DVD. Silver Spring, MD: Acorn Media, 2007.

                                                                                                                                                          Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                                                                                                          Fictional re-creation of the British trial, including potrayals of some real-life figures such as Richard Hoggart (played by David Tennant). Features two fictional jurors who are taking part in the trial and who become lovers, with their relationship echoing that described in the novel. Originally released as a motion picture in 2006.

                                                                                                                                                          Find this resource:

                                                                                                                                                          • Ellis, David. Death and the Author: How D. H. Lawrence Died, and Was Remembered. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008.

                                                                                                                                                            DOI: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199546657.001.0001Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                                                                                                            This brilliantly written volume argues that, with Lady Chatterley’s Lover, a great deal of fuss was made over a work that was not Lawrence’s best. Includes fascinating detail about Lawrence’s illness, death, and posthumous reputation.

                                                                                                                                                            Find this resource:

                                                                                                                                                            • Ford, George H. Double Measure: A Study of the Novels and Stories of D. H. Lawrence. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 1965.

                                                                                                                                                              Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                                                                                                              Important New Critical reading of Lawrence that contradicts some of Lawrence’s post-1960 reputation. Avoids Lady Chatterley’s Lover, but praises Lawrence for creating fictional men and women who are searching for a transforming relationship that will rouse them into life.

                                                                                                                                                              Find this resource:

                                                                                                                                                              • Glicksberg, Charles. The Sexual Revolution in Modern English Literature. Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 1973.

                                                                                                                                                                Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                                                                                                                Emphasizes that, although sex was central to Lawrence, he thought it should be treated as sacred and moral. Sex is not simply about a physical act; rather, he though if it as “uniting the chthonic instincts and the consciousness of modern man” (p. 91).

                                                                                                                                                                Find this resource:

                                                                                                                                                                • Leavis, F. R. “The Orthodoxy of Enlightenment.” In “Anna Karenina” and Other Essays. By F. R. Leavis, 235–242. London: Chatto & Windus, 1967.

                                                                                                                                                                  Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                                                                                                                  Leavis is dismayed by the emerging orthodoxy that sees Lawrence simply as the author of Lady Chatterley’s Lover, and states that Lady Chatterley is a “bad novel” and not “normal” Lawrence (p. 236). Feels that the British court misunderstood the class dynamics of the novel: emphasizes that Mellors is not a member of the working class.

                                                                                                                                                                  Find this resource:

                                                                                                                                                                  • Matthews, Seán. “The Uses of D. H. Lawrence.” In Re-reading Richard Hoggart: Life, Literature, Language, Education. Edited by Sue Owen, 85–101. Newcastle, UK: Cambridge Scholars, 2008.

                                                                                                                                                                    DOI: 10.1057/9780230583313Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                                                                                                                    Analyzes Richard Hoggart’s contribution to the 1960 Chatterley trial, and his later reflections on it, to reveal Lawrence’s contribution to Hoggart’s own work (particularly Hoggart’s key idea of “democratization” of culture) and to the development of cultural studies in academia.

                                                                                                                                                                    Find this resource:

                                                                                                                                                                    • Matthews, Seán. “The Trial of Lady Chatterley’s Lover: ‘The Most Thorough and Expensive Seminar on Lawrence’s Work Ever Given.’” In New D. H. Lawrence. Edited by Howard Booth, 169–192. Manchester, UK: Manchester University Press, 2009.

                                                                                                                                                                      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                                                                                                                      Argues the 1960 trial was shaped by, and developed, many literary-critical ideas about Lawrence that had already been articulated, most notably by F. R. Leavis (who refused to testify). The trial was not, therefore, the start of the permissive 1960s so much as the culmination of discussions that began in the 1940s.

                                                                                                                                                                      Find this resource:

                                                                                                                                                                      • Rolph, C. H., ed. The Trial of Lady Chatterley: Regina v. Penguin Books Limited: The Transcript of the Trial. Harmondsworth, UK: Penguin, 1961.

                                                                                                                                                                        Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                                                                                                                        Includes the testimony of key witnesses. Also includes, at times, the reactions of those in the court (including, for example, laughter among the jury at the words “cunt” and “fuck”). Another trial transcript was edited by H. Montgomery Hyde and published by Bodley Head in 1990.

                                                                                                                                                                        Find this resource:

                                                                                                                                                                        Feminist Critique

                                                                                                                                                                        Anaïs Nin in D. H. Lawrence: An Unprofessional Study (Paris: Edward W. Titus, 1932) wrote that Lawrence “had a complete realization of the feelings of women. In fact, very often he wrote as a woman would write” (p. 67). However, the opposite argument was first put by John Middleton Murry in Son of Woman (London: Cape, 1931). Murry asserted that Lawrence desired “To annihilate the female insatiably demanding physical satisfaction from the man who cannot give it to her” (p. 118). Murry’s view was developed by Simone de Beauvoir in the chapter “D. H. Lawrence or Phallic Pride” in The Second Sex (London: Cape, 1953 [French edition 1947]). However, it was Kate Millett who made this case most forcefully and brilliantly in 1970: Millett asserted that Lawrence’s religion was a mystical one that revolved around male supremacy (Millett 1970). Holbrook 1992 shows how even Leavisites could be convinced of this argument. Those who dissented from Millett’s analysis responded with hostility, most notably Norman Mailer, who asserted that Lawrence actually understood women very well (Mailer 1971); and Peter Balbert (Balbert 1989), who praised Mailer. Nonetheless, Millett’s viewpoint became such an orthodoxy that Sheila MacLeod wrote “I have scarcely been able to find a woman in the 1980s who has a good word to say for him” (MacLeod 1985, p. 11). By 1991 Lawrence’s connection with anti-feminist excess seemed confirmed when the actor Oliver Reed (star of Ken Russell’s celebrated Women in Love) molested Kate Millett live on the Channel Four TV show After Dark, and called her “big tits.” However, it would be wrong to think that feminist critics have held universally negative views of Lawrence. Nixon 1986 follows the earlier example of Hilary Simpson in asserting that the young Lawrence existed within a matrix of suffragist influences in Nottinghamshire, and that Lawrence began supporting a fixed and essentialist sexual hierarchy only during the war years. Smith 1978 equally showed a lively debate among female critics in the late 1970s. Importantly, Siegel 1991 emphasizes that Lawrence may have fulfilled a particular rhetorical need within the developing discourses of feminism, while Bowlby 1992 argues that feminist criticism may be judging Lawrence’s work by the same criteria as those who praise Lawrence.

                                                                                                                                                                        • Balbert, Peter. D. H. Lawrence and the Phallic Imagination: Essays on Sexual Identity and Feminist Misreading. Basingstoke, UK: Macmillan, 1989.

                                                                                                                                                                          Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                                                                                                                          Concerned to contradict Kate Millett. Feminist critics (somewhat problematically lumped together) are condemned for reading Lawrence in a reductive way that fails to account for the full conservatism and radicalism of his sexual vision.

                                                                                                                                                                          Find this resource:

                                                                                                                                                                          • Bowlby, Rachel. “‘But She Would Learn Something from Lady Chatterley’: The Obscene Side of the Canon.” In Decolonizing Tradition: New Views of Twentieth-Century “British” Literary Canons. Edited by Karen R. Lawrence, 113–135. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1992.

                                                                                                                                                                            Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                                                                                                                            Examines the Chatterley trial of 1960 and its associated discourse by showing that the aesthetic views of the courtroom depended on a relatively conservative, and heteronormative, set of criteria. Also argues that the subsequent feminist critique of Millett has depended on such criteria.

                                                                                                                                                                            Find this resource:

                                                                                                                                                                            • Holbrook, David. Where D. H. Lawrence Was Wrong about Women. Lewisburg, PA: Bucknell University Press, 1992.

                                                                                                                                                                              Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                                                                                                                              Argues that Leavis was deeply wrong in praising Lawrence’s work and claims that the repeated enthusiasm for sodomizing women in Lawrence’s fiction is a form of control, related to Lawrence’s unresolved feelings about his dead mother.

                                                                                                                                                                              Find this resource:

                                                                                                                                                                              • MacLeod, Sheila. Lawrence’s Men and Women. London: Heinemann, 1985.

                                                                                                                                                                                Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                                                                                                                                Aims to counter the view set out in Millett 1970 with a psychological understanding. Reads the fictions as attempts to experiment with various masculine roles and sees Lawrence as determinedly, but not securely, male.

                                                                                                                                                                                Find this resource:

                                                                                                                                                                                • Mailer, Norman. The Prisoner of Sex. London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson, 1971.

                                                                                                                                                                                  Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                                                                                                                                  An extended reply to Millett 1970 that condemns her work as “reminiscent of a PhD tract, its roads a narrow argument, and its horizon low” (p. 93). Pp. 134–161 provide a defense of Lawrence, arguing the Millett is misrepresentative in the way that she selects and orders quotations from Lawrence’s work.

                                                                                                                                                                                  Find this resource:

                                                                                                                                                                                  • Millett, Kate. Sexual Politics. Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1970.

                                                                                                                                                                                    Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                                                                                                                                    Alongside Leavis 1955 (see Moral and Religious Reputation) this is perhaps the most influential book to have shaped Lawrence studies. Millett focuses on a number of Lawrence’s fictions, but most memorably upon Lawrence’s short story “The Woman Who Rode Away” to argue that Lawrence enjoys the spectacle of men’s power over women.

                                                                                                                                                                                    Find this resource:

                                                                                                                                                                                    • Nixon, Cornelia. Lawrence’s Leadership Politics and the Turn against Women. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1986.

                                                                                                                                                                                      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                                                                                                                                      Uses manuscript materials, particularly of The Rainbow and Women in Love to show how, during World War I, Lawrence’s work shifted dramatically in moving from ideas of creative expression and sexual fulfilment toward antidemocratic elements and the dominance of men over women.

                                                                                                                                                                                      Find this resource:

                                                                                                                                                                                      • Siegel, Carol. Lawrence among the Women: Wavering Boundaries in Women’s Literary Traditions. Charlottesville: University of Virginia Press, 1991.

                                                                                                                                                                                        Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                                                                                                                                        Looks both at what Lawrence wrote about women and what women have written about Lawrence, showing that he was not a straightforward misogynist. Instead, she argues that Lawrence’s essentialist view of women has provided a convenient masculine Other against which feminism could be defined.

                                                                                                                                                                                        Find this resource:

                                                                                                                                                                                        • Smith, Anne, ed. Lawrence and Women. London: Vision, 1978.

                                                                                                                                                                                          Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                                                                                                                                          Provides an interesting compendium of contrasting opinions at a key point during the 20th-century debate about Lawrence and women. Faith Pullin, for example, sees Lawrence as “a ruthless user of women” (p. 49), whereas T. E. Apter claims that Lawrence’s approach “involves a sanity and depth which those of the women’s movements often lack” (p. 156).

                                                                                                                                                                                          Find this resource:

                                                                                                                                                                                          Fascism

                                                                                                                                                                                          In 1915 Lawrence told Bertrand Russell that “The whole [of society] must culminate in an absolute Dictator” (Lawrence 1979–2000, Vol. 2, p. 365, cited under Editions). In 1953 Bertrand Russell asserted that Lawrence’s views about “blood-being and blood-consciousness” were views that “led straight to Auschwitz” (reprinted in Ellis and de Zordo 1992, Vol. 1, pp. 140–141, cited under General Overviews). Even a writer who defended Lawrence, Norman Mailer, declared feeling uneasy that Lawrence “could have been literary adviser to Oswald Mosley about the time Hitler came in” (Mailer 1971, p. 137, cited under Feminist Critique). Yet Lawrence has also been defended on this count. Casey 2003, for example, argues that Lawrence’s politics were not fascist, and that the authoritarian elements in Lawrence’s writing need to be weighed against his libertarian ideas. Similarly, Mohanty 1993 examines the “leadership novels” and some late short stories to show that Lawrence’s fictional texts use irony and ambiguity to undermine the author’s apparent attraction to fascism. However, Al-Dabbagh 2011 comes to precisely the opposite view, condemning Lawrence as straightforwardly fascist and extending the critique to the critics whom Al-Dabbagh feels have conspired to hide this fascism. Raskin 2009 (first published in 1971) is sympathetic to Lawrence, but the author does agree with Al-Dabbagh in giving an anti-imperial critique of the literary critics themselves, while Ruderman 2014 emphasizes the dominant discourses of race that existed at the time when Lawrence wrote his work. Adelman 2002 provides a response to the assaults on Lawrence’s reputation in academia, with Adelman contacting 110 leading poets and novelists and discussing their (overwhelmingly positive) opinion of Lawrence.

                                                                                                                                                                                          • Adelman, Gary. Reclaiming D. H. Lawrence: Contemporary Writers Speak Out. Lewisburg, PA: Bucknell University Press, 2002.

                                                                                                                                                                                            Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                                                                                                                                            Contrasts Lawrence’s poor reputation in the academy with his high reputation among creative writers. One of those included among these writers, A. S. Byatt, continued this approach in a 2002 piece in the New Statesman, contrasting Lawrence’s declining academic reputation with the high esteem of readers.

                                                                                                                                                                                            Find this resource:

                                                                                                                                                                                            • Al-Dabbagh, Abdulla. D. H. Lawrence: A Study of Literary Fascism. New York: Peter Lang, 2011.

                                                                                                                                                                                              Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                                                                                                                                              Places Lawrence in the context of British imperialism and argues that, during the First World War, Lawrence developed a fascist outlook. Sees Kangaroo and The Plumed Serpent as openly advocating fascism. Argues that critics have worked to hide Lawrence’s fascism and to keep his work in the canon.

                                                                                                                                                                                              Find this resource:

                                                                                                                                                                                              • Casey, Simon. Naked Liberty and the World of Desire: Elements of Anarchism in the Work of D. H. Lawrence. New York: Routledge, 2003.

                                                                                                                                                                                                Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                                                                                                                                                Asserts that Lawrence actually had a profound sympathy for philosophical anarchism. In particular, chapter 5 makes the case that Lawrence’s idea of the “aristocrat” was not opposed to anarchism but was close to the anarchist idea of “the nobility of free men.”

                                                                                                                                                                                                Find this resource:

                                                                                                                                                                                                • Mohanty, Sachidananda. Lawrence’s Leadership Politics and the Defeat of Fascism. Delhi: Academic Foundation, 1993.

                                                                                                                                                                                                  Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                                                                                                                                                  Expresses some frustration that other readers tend to read Lawrence’s fictional characters as straightforward representations of his own views and feelings. Feels that, although these fictions are not his best, they are not artistic failures and cannot simply be read as fascist works.

                                                                                                                                                                                                  Find this resource:

                                                                                                                                                                                                  • Raskin, Jonah. The Mythology of Imperialism: A Revolutionary Critique of British Literature and Society in the Modern Age. New York: Monthly Review Press, 2009.

                                                                                                                                                                                                    Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                                                                                                                                                    Attacks Leavis for containment criticism and constructing a literary canon that ignores imperialism. However, Raskin nonetheless praises Women in Love for exposing the kinds of chaos in society and culture that hegemonic powers usually attempt to disguise. Views Lawrence’s personal politics as having little connection with the politics of the fictions. Originally published in 1971.

                                                                                                                                                                                                    Find this resource:

                                                                                                                                                                                                    • Ruderman, Judith. Race and Identity in D. H. Lawrence: Indians, Gypsies, and Jews. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan, 2014.

                                                                                                                                                                                                      DOI: 10.1057/9781137398833Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                                                                                                                                                      Places Lawrence’s writings in sociocultural contexts and emphasizes that some of his more extreme statements were not necessarily idiosyncratic in an era of race theory. Asserts that Lawrence did think he could know and define the Other, thus disagreeing with Chaudhuri 2003 (see Poetry) and Roberts (see Nonfiction Writings and Painting).

                                                                                                                                                                                                      Find this resource:

                                                                                                                                                                                                      Critical Theory

                                                                                                                                                                                                      Ingersoll 2001 asserts that biographical criticism had “taken its toll” on Lawrence studies (p. 3), and that, as a result, Lawrence was increasingly being left outside the critical mainstream. Instead, Ingersoll uses a Lacanian critical framework to analyze Lawrence’s texts. Since 2000, other scholars have increasingly used critical theory to open up new questions about Lawrence’s work. Booth 2009 includes analysis informed by Deleuze and Guattari. Burden 2000 gives a more sustained focus to applying Derridean ideas to Lawrence’s novels (particularly the later works) and argues that, although biographical criticism has often dominated Lawrence studies, Lawrence’s complex textual effects take the works a long way from autobiography. Poplawski 2001 takes its cue from a 1985 essay by Lydia Blanchard (“Lawrence, Foucault, and the Language of Sexuality”), which discusses the brief comments on Lawrence in Foucault’s The History of Sexuality. Meanwhile, Williams 1993 applies psychoanalytic feminist film theory to Lawrence to look at the female gaze in his work, arguing that he presents multiple positions, and reveals that Lawrentian identity is not “fixed or divisible” (p. 138). Also, recent years have witnessed an increased tendency to examine the underlying philosophical complexities with which Lawrence himself engaged. A groundbreaking reading, Fernihough 1993 argues that, although Lawrence’s political outlook was sometimes brutally authoritarian, his aesthetic views were pluralistic and had much in common with both the art theories of Bloomsbury and the aesthetics of Heidegger. Bell 1992 provides similarly impressive analysis, and although Bell focuses on the novels rather than the nonfiction, he reaches a similar conclusion to Fernihough in seeing Lawrence as having much in common with the thinking of Heidegger. Wright 2000 shows how Lawrence’s biblical views were influenced not only by nonconformist traditions and theosophical reworkings, but also by the philosophical ideas of Nietzsche and Frazer.

                                                                                                                                                                                                      • Bell, Michael. D. H. Lawrence: Language and Being. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1992.

                                                                                                                                                                                                        DOI: 10.1017/CBO9780511983429Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                                                                                                                                                        Describes how Lawrence shared similar ideas to Heidegger but expressed those with a language of genuine simplicity. The major novels attest to this struggle, which, Bell asserts, means that “Lawrence is at once the culmination of the English novel and the writer in whom it most completely fragments” (p. 12).

                                                                                                                                                                                                        Find this resource:

                                                                                                                                                                                                        • Booth, Howard J., ed. New D. H. Lawrence. Manchester, UK: Manchester University Press, 2009.

                                                                                                                                                                                                          Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                                                                                                                                                          Includes theoretically informed readings by Jeff Wallace (using Deleuze and Guattari) and Fiona Becket (eco-critism). Readers may also be interested in Wallace’s study D. H. Lawrence: Science and the Posthuman (Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan, 2005), which also draws strongly on theory.

                                                                                                                                                                                                          Find this resource:

                                                                                                                                                                                                          • Burden, Robert. Radicalizing Lawrence: Critical Interventions in the Reading and Reception of D. H. Lawrence’s Narrative Fiction. Amsterdam: Rodopi, 2000.

                                                                                                                                                                                                            Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                                                                                                                                                            The “radicalizing” being done here is to apply post-structuralist theory to Lawrence’s major novels (particularly the later works). Argues that Lawrence, like Derrida, is a deconstructor and destabilizer of received notions of linguistic and generic unity.

                                                                                                                                                                                                            Find this resource:

                                                                                                                                                                                                            • Fernihough, Anne. D. H. Lawrence: Aesthetics and Ideology. Oxford: Clarendon, 1993.

                                                                                                                                                                                                              DOI: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198112358.001.0001Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                                                                                                                                                              Focuses on Lawrence’s nonfiction works to show how Lawrence’s aesthetic views emerged from a cultural context in which he drew heavily on the same German cultural contexts that affected Heidegger, explaining Lawrence’s opposition to Freudian thinking.

                                                                                                                                                                                                              Find this resource:

                                                                                                                                                                                                              • Ingersoll, Earl. D. H. Lawrence, Desire, and Narrative. Gainesville: University Press of Florida, 2001.

                                                                                                                                                                                                                Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                                                                                                                                                                Reads Lawrence’s novels through a Lacanian theory. Particularly valuable is the analysis of the inadequacies of Lawrence’s first novel The White Peacock, a work that is often overlooked by theorists and other critics.

                                                                                                                                                                                                                Find this resource:

                                                                                                                                                                                                                • Poplawski, Paul, ed. Writing the Body in D. H. Lawrence: Essays on Language, Representation, and Sexuality. Westport, CT: Greenwood, 2001.

                                                                                                                                                                                                                  Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                                                                                                                                                                  Collection of essays uses an array of critical theory to analyze the central notion of the body and bodily experience, with contributors mainly focusing on his novels and short stories (although the first essay focuses on Lawrence’s 1929 essay “Introduction to These Paintings”).

                                                                                                                                                                                                                  Find this resource:

                                                                                                                                                                                                                  • Williams, Linda Ruth. Sex in the Head: Visions of Femininity and Film in D. H. Lawrence. Detroit: Wayne State University Press, 1993.

                                                                                                                                                                                                                    Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                                                                                                                                                                    Sophisticated study arguing that, although Lawrence was by turns indifferent and hostile to cinema, he actually enjoyed the visual and experimented with narrative that was informed by cinematic technique. Lawrence’s worries about cinema are revealed here as a worry about gender relationships.

                                                                                                                                                                                                                    Find this resource:

                                                                                                                                                                                                                    • Wright, T. R. D. H. Lawrence and the Bible. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2000.

                                                                                                                                                                                                                      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                                                                                                                                                                      This chronological study describes Lawrence’s extensive use of biblical material as a postmodern bricolage that has affinities with work by postmodern theorists such as Derrida.

                                                                                                                                                                                                                      Find this resource:

                                                                                                                                                                                                                      Space and Place

                                                                                                                                                                                                                      Since 1999, an academic turn labeled the “new modernism” has set about refiguring the time-space frontiers of modernism, reconceiving the Eurocentrism of previous scholarship and finding a modernist impulse in locations and at times that earlier researchers had overlooked. As Susan Friedman put it in 2006s, scholars should “Always spatialize!” And Lawrence’s writing has been particularly apt for reexamination by scholars who follow Friedman’s exhortation. A number of recent books about Lawrence have highlighted his interaction with particular subnational parts of the United Kingdom, including Cornwall, Bloomsbury, and Eastwood. In such volumes, Lawrence’s writing reveals a profound awareness of the particularity of lived experience in specific locations, with Bailey and Nottingham 2013 providing a valuable examination of Lawrence’s relationship with Eastwood. At the same time, scholars have become increasingly aware that such regional engagement might also have a significant interconnection with Lawrence’s interest in the international: Harrison 2013, therefore, situates Lawrence’s regional concerns within a broader comparative framework that highlights Joycean affinities, while Hyde and Ingersoll 2010 reveals how changing notions of geographical scale and perspective might be central to understanding Lawrence’s work. After all, as Roberts 2004 (cited under Nonfiction Writings and Painting) and Hyde 1981 show, Lawrence’s travel writing and translation attest to an outlook that, while paying close attention to regional affiliations, determinedly transcends the parochial. A number of recent studies push toward a similar conclusion by focusing on Lawrence’s productive relationship with locations and cultures from far beyond the country of his birth, and such studies include the notable interventions of Bachrach 2006, Krockel 2007, and Jenkins 2015. A related, and very fertile, strand of scholarship has worked to chart Lawrence’s developing reputation in countries that the writer himself never actually visited but where his work is read. Such research is exemplified by Iida 1999, which draws attention to a wide range of national contexts for the reception of Lawrence, and which includes a particularly novel chapter describing the post-1980s “Lawrence rush” in China (p. 272). Iida 1999 has since inspired a spin-off volume about Lawrence in South Africa, and surely more work needs to be done in this vein. Furthermore, Lawrence’s concern with specific features of the natural environment make his writing feel particularly timely in our own environmentally aware era. Thus Norris 2011 provides a highly suggestive eco-critical approach that examines Lawrence’s relationship to a particular place (looking at the description of Lincoln Cathedral in The Rainbow) in order to illustrate Lawrence’s broader concern with connecting the spiritual and the environmental.

                                                                                                                                                                                                                      • Bachrach, Arthur J. D. H. Lawrence in New Mexico: “The Time Is Different There.” Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press, 2006.

                                                                                                                                                                                                                        Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                                                                                                                                                                        Account of Lawrence’s time in New Mexico, which the author divides into three discrete periods. Includes a clear guide to the work Lawrence wrote here and also uses knowledge of the specific geographical terrain, and the archival material of Mabel Dodge Luhan, to illuminate Lawrence’s relationship with Taos.

                                                                                                                                                                                                                        Find this resource:

                                                                                                                                                                                                                        • Bailey, Stephen, and Chris Nottingham. Heartlands: A Guide to D. H. Lawrence’s Midland Roots. Kibworth Beauchamp, UK: Matador, 2013.

                                                                                                                                                                                                                          Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                                                                                                                                                                          Builds on earlier work by Bridget Pugh, Roy Spencer, and Claude Sinzelle to show how the distinctive geographies of Nottinghamshire and Derbyshire affected Lawrence’s literary works, including specific sites such as the Eastwood Mechanics Institute. Shows the lamentable state in which some of the key Lawrence sites now exist.

                                                                                                                                                                                                                          Find this resource:

                                                                                                                                                                                                                          • Harrison, Andrew. “The Regional Modernism of D. H. Lawrence and James Joyce.” In Regional Modernisms. Edited by Neal Alexander and James Moran, 44–64. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2013.

                                                                                                                                                                                                                            Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                                                                                                                                                                            Harrison gives a fine parallel reading of how regional landscape inspired both Joyce and Lawrence. Suggests that, despite Lawrence and Joyce’s apparent mutual hostility, they both reacted toward environment in comparable ways. Harrison’s earlier publications include a book-length examination of the Italian Futurist influence on Lawrence’s writing.

                                                                                                                                                                                                                            Find this resource:

                                                                                                                                                                                                                            • Hyde, G. M. D. H. Lawrence and the Art of Translation. Basingstoke, UK: Macmillan, 1981.

                                                                                                                                                                                                                              Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                                                                                                                                                                              Analyzes Lawrence’s three volumes of translations from Giovanni Verga, arguing that Lawrence was battling public taste in selecting Verga’s work. Also focuses on Lawrence’s attempts at Russian translation, describing Lawrence’s difficulty with a language he did not know and which necessitated translation as a collaborative effort.

                                                                                                                                                                                                                              Find this resource:

                                                                                                                                                                                                                              • Hyde, Virginia Crosswhite, and Earl G. Ingersoll. “Terra Incognita”: D. H. Lawrence at the Frontiers. Madison, NJ: Fairleigh Dickinson University Press, 2010.

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                Foregrounds and examines the terms “frontier,” “boundary,” and “place” to show how Lawrence engaged in a spatial quest for a new land that might also be a shift in consciousness. There is a particular focus on Lawrence’s engagement with the peoples, places, and customs of New Mexico.

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                Find this resource:

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                • Iida, Takeo. The Reception of D. H. Lawrence Around the World. Fukuoka, Japan: Kyushu University Press, 1999.

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  Excellent volume begins with Peter Preston exploring Lawrence’s local reception in the English East Midlands, including particularly insightful comments about Lawrence’s posthumous reputation in Eastwood and at Nottingham University. Iida then broadens out to examine Lawrence’s reception in five other European countries, the Americas, Australia, and Asia.

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  Find this resource:

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  • Jenkins, Lee M. The American Lawrence. Gainesville, FL: University Press of Florida, 2015.

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    Argues that Lawrence, from 1922 to 1925, was a “non-American who, in one period of his career at least, wrote American literature” (p. 1). Lee details Lawrence’s profound engagement with American critical debates and artistic impulses.

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    Find this resource:

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    • Krockel, Carl. D. H. Lawrence and Germany: The Politics of Influence. Amsterdam: Rodopi, 2007.

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      Focuses on Lawrence’s relationship with Germany, particularly as manifested in literary, philosophical, musical, and personal connections. Argues that some of the contradictory impulses in Lawrence’s work—not least those between romanticism and objective reality—can be traced to similarly unresolved conflicts in German culture.

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      Find this resource:

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      • Norris, Trevor. “Martin Heidegger, D. H. Lawrence, and Poetic Attention to Being.” In Ecocritical Theory: New European Approaches. Edited by Axel Goodbody and Kate Rigby, 113–125. Charlottesville: University of Virginia Press, 2011.

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        Compares Lawrence with Heidegger to emphasize that both writers express a set of concerns that are best examined through the lens of eco-criticism, with both writers worrying about the environmental, aesthetic, and spiritual changes that have been necessitated by an age of industrial and technological modernity.

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        Find this resource:

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        back to top

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        Article

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        Up

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        Down