White Peacock

by D.H. Lawrence

Lawrence's first novel The White Peacock was begun in 1906, rewritten three times, and published in 1911. The Cambridge edition uses the final manuscript as base-text, and faithfully recovers Lawrence's words and punctuation from the layers of publishers' house-styling and their errors; original passages, changed for censorship reasons, are reinstated. Andrew Robertson's introduction sets out the history of Lawrence's writing and revision, and the generally favourable reception by friends and reviewers. Lawrence incorporated much of his own experience and reading on to the novel which is set just north-east of Eastwood, and modelled characters on his friends and family. The notes identify real-life places and people, explain dialect forms, literary allusions, and historical references, and include sensitive passages deleted before publication. The textual apparatus records all the variant readings and the appendix prints the two surviving fragments from the earliest manuscripts of the novel, then entitled 'Laetitia'.

Genres: Classics, Fiction, Novels, Literature, 20th Century, British Literature, Classic Literature

368 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1911

About the author

David Herbert Richards Lawrence was an English writer of the 20th century, whose prolific and diverse output included novels, short stories, poems, plays, essays, travel books, paintings, translations, literary criticism, and personal letters. His collected works represent an extended reflection upon the dehumanizing effects of modernity and industrialisation. In them, Lawrence confronts issues relating to emotional health and vitality, spontaneity, human sexuality and instinct.

Lawrence's opinions earned him many enemies and he endured official persecution, censorship, and misrepresentation of his creative work throughout the second half of his life, much of which he spent in a voluntary exile he called his "savage pilgrimage." At the time of his death, his public reputation was that of a pornographer who had wasted his considerable talents. E. M. Forster, in an obituary notice, challenged this widely held view, describing him as "the greatest imaginative novelist of our generation." Later, the influential Cambridge critic F. R. Leavis championed both his artistic integrity and his moral seriousness, placing much of Lawrence's fiction within the canonical "great tradition" of the English novel. He is now generally valued as a visionary thinker and a significant representative of modernism in English literature.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D.H._Law...

Reviews

[°•.Melina°•. · Rating 5 out of 5]

وای عاشقششش شدم.داستان‌کوتاه‌های دهه‌ی ۱۹۰۰ شیرینی که خوندنشون تو یه شب بهاری زیر نسیم پنجره خیلی بهم چسبید. جذاب کوتاه و قابل درک...از هر لحاظ باب سلیقه‌ی من بود، از موضوع گرفته تا نوشتار. عصیان، زنانگی، روابط زناشوییِ پیچیده،جاوادنگی عشقِ اول، زندگی روستایی...
ترغیب شدم حتما همه‌ی آثار این نویسنده‌ رو بخونم🧺🫒🦋
*نشر هیرمند/ترجمه‌ی فرید قدمی/ با زیباترین جلدِ ممکن✨️

[Ellie · Rating 4 out of 5]

داستان‌هایی پر از عصیان، تنانگی، غریزه، لمس، خشونت و غریزه. آه که توصیفات لارنس چه‌قدر دل‌پذیر بود.

[Fatemeh · Rating 3 out of 5]

تو کمتر از سه ساعت تمام شد.
یه مجموعه داستان کوتاه به قلم زیبای لارنس

موقع خوندنش انگار وسط یه سالن تئاتر نشستی و محو تماشای داستانی که بازیگرا به نحو احسنت اجرا می‌کنن

داستانی از دل یه خلیج سرسبز‌ و آبی بیکران دریاش،
لارنس زندگی چندین خانواده رو تحت شعاع قرار میده و ما رو وارد ماجراهاشون می‌کنه
عشق، جدایی، جنگ، زنانگی، خشونت و...

از خوندنش لذت بردم
زیبایی این داستانا به کوتاه بودن ولی خاص بودنشون
و فضاسازی بجا و شگفت انگیزش
واقعا نمیدونم چرا تا الان هیچی از لارنس نخونده بودم

[Ali Np · Rating 5 out of 5]

کتاب‌هایی هستند که بدون برنامه‌ی قبلی و صرفاً به علت چشمک زدن‌شان در کتابفروشی خریده می‌شوند و اتفاقاً خواندنشان بسیار بیشتر از خواندن کتاب‌هایی که زمان زیادی را صرف تحقیق درباره‌شان کردی، می‌چسبد! این کتاب برایم از این دسته بود.
در میانه‌ی یک روز گرم و طاقت‌فرسا خریده شد و چه خوشحال و مفتخرم برای اولین‌بار اثری از «دی‌.اچ.لارنس» خواندم.
_______
«فرید قدمی» با ترجمه‌هایش کاری کرده که از این پس می‌توانم چشم‌بسته هر اثری که ترجمه کرده را بخرم و بخوانم. (تو بگو فَنِشم اصلاً!)
پیش‌گفتار کتاب فوق‌العاده بود و برای منی که پیش از این تنها اسم لارنس را شنیده بود و شناختی از درون‌مایهٔ آثارش نداشت، بسیار مفید بود و دوست نداشتم تمام شود! لذا قطعاً باید لارنس را بیشتر بشناسم و بیشتر بخوانمش چراکه درون‌مایهٔ آثارش یعنی: «هماهنگی رمانتیک انسان با طبیعت، رابطه‌ی انسان با انسان به واسطهٔ طبیعت و نه از طریق قانون یا قراردادهای اجتماعی» برایم شدیداً جذاب بود.
_______
«جوراب ساق‌بلند سفید» (داستان اول) نفس‌گیر بود!
چقدر سینماتیک. چقدر زنده.
چه توصیفاتی به‌به!
دارم به این فکر می‌کنم چه تئاتر نابی ازش درمیآد!
جریان داستان بسیار سیّال و سینوس‌وار بود. از همان نقطه‌ی آغاز تا پایان، یک ناآرامیِ عجیبی در فضای داستان وجود داشت. مانند همان ناآرامی و تشویشی که در رقص دو کاراکتر بود!
داستان به ویژه بخش میهمانی، منو خیلی یاد گتسبی بزرگ انداخت! شما اینطور نبودید؟
_______
در کتاب‌های مجموعه داستان کوتاه، معمولاً داستانی که هم‌نامِ کتابه، گل کتاب محسوب میشه و سایر داستان‌ها به خوبی اون نیستن اما اینجا سه‌تا داستان دیگه هم عالی بودن و من «سایه‌ای در باغچه‌ی رُز» (داستان سوم) رو میشه گفت به اندازه داستان اصلی دوست داشتم.
______
در پایان نقل قولی از محمود کیانوش دربارهٔ لارنس:
«او شاعری بود که داستان می نوشت؛ نقاشی بود که شعر می گفت و جامعه شناسی بود که می خواست آنچه را در جهان و انسان در می یافت به شکل های گوناگون بیان کند. شاید بتوانیم بگوییم که بعد از لارنس تا امروز انگلیس نویسنده ای به قدرت فکری و زبانی او نداشته است. او با کلمات نقاشی می کرد و نثرش موسیقی خاصی داشت و تصویرها را زنده نشان می داد. لارنس می کوشید که از طبیعت انسان و از انسان در طبیعت سخن بگوید و برای احساس انسان بیش از تعقل او ارزش قائل بود.»

[Jim · Rating 2 out of 5]

DHL's first novel is not worth reading if you're not a Lawrence scholar. Awkwardly constructed, cardboard characters, mundane repetitive actions... pretty much lame.

The only reason I gave it a second star is because several times, he breaks away from his leaden narrative to describe nature - these passages are poetic and vivid and worth the time to read, and they give a glance into his future short stories, which are much better than this novel.

Recommended for Lawrence completists, but otherwise, look at his later works.

[Hosein · Rating 5 out of 5]

می‌دونستم دی‌.اچ لارنس کارش خوبه، اما ذره‌ای انتظار این داستان‌ها رو نداشتم. خوندنشون شبیه نگاه کردن به نقاشی‌های امپرسیونیستیه، لحظه‌ رو با کمترین چیز ثبت کرده، توصیف‌ها کوتاه و ملموسن و مهم‌تر از همه، به حدی انسانیه که تکان‌دهنده‌ست.

پ.ن: ترجمه خیلی خوبه، مطمئنا آقای قدمی مترجم قدرتمندیه، اما میتونست بهتر هم باشه. مخصوصا توی داستان آخر. چون مجبور شدم اون رو به انگلیسی بخونم تا بفهمم.

[Kiana · Rating 4 out of 5]

وفادار تا مرگ؛

[Michael Nutt · Rating 3 out of 5]

Lawrence's first novel 'The White Peacock', published in 1911, exhibits all the charms and faults you would expect of a first novel. It was six years in the writing, undergoing three re-writes, yet despite its long gestation it would have benefitted from some prudent editing and re-structuring of the narrative.

The novel is set in an undefined time that is recognisable as late Victorian England, a world of distinct classes where the heart of the industrial revolution was still beating. It tells a slight story that follows a group of young friends over several decades, and it moves along at the pace of the changing seasons, as the friends come together and drift apart. There are three Parts to the novel: the first two Parts are mostly contained within the confines of the Nethermere valley of Nottinghamshire, while the third Part consists of a number of disconnected vignettes of life after the main characters have moved away.

The story's narrator, Cyril Beardsall, lives in Woodside cottage with his mother and his sister Lettie. The essence of the story is the relationship of the inhabitants of Woodside to those of two neighbouring properties: the tenant farmers of Strelley Mill and the mine-owners of Highclose. Cyril is a close friend of a young farmer, George Saxton, and his sister Emily, who live at Strelley Mill with their parents and siblings. And then there are the Tempests of Highclose, where young Leslie Tempest is a suitor to Lettie Beardsall.

There are clear autobiographic elements to the novel. Beardsall was the maiden name of Lawrence's mother, and the nearby town of Eberwich stands in for Lawrence's home town of Eastwood. The death of Cyril's father, Frank Beardsall, early in the story can be seen as Lawrence's act of disowning his father.

Some of the elements of the story appear irrelevant to the central drama playing out between its five main protagonists: Cyril and Emily, Lettie and Leslie, and George. Characters are introduced, gain our interest and curiosity, only to fade into the background, to be left behind as figures of the past as our protagonists depart from Nethermere into exile, and the place they have known so long becomes a strange distant memory: "Nethermere was no longer a complete, wonderful little world that held us charmed inhabitants. It was a small, insignificant valley lost in the spaces of the earth."

There are other weaknesses. It seems as though Lawrence wants to withhold important information from the reader, to feed it through a bit at a time during the course of the novel. Often key information is never revealed. We do not know what Cyril does for a living, apart from some casual farm work during his "vacation" and the occasional paintings that he does. For a long time we are left guessing about the inhabitants of Highclose, and it is only at the beginning of Part 2 that we learn that the Tempests are mine-owners. Elsewhere family characters appear suddenly, (e.g. the child David in Pt 1 Chapter 8) only to have no relevance to the story. There are some clumsy shifts between scenes in places, and bits of exposition are dropped into the story when deemed necessary to explain something or other. Important plot developments are despatched in a few cursory lines, while long paragraphs are spent describing in florid prose poems the seasonal changes to the local flora. The novel's fragmented narrative does, however, serve to reflect the fractured relationships between its main characters.

This is a writer still learning his art. Lawrence is at his best in 'The White Peacock' when creating dramatic episodes within the story (e.g. the hunt for the sheep-killing dog, and its aftermath, in Pt 1 - Chapter 6). These passages are almost self-contained stories, hinting at Lawrence's latent talent as one of English literature's greatest short-story writers.

'The White Peacock' is a light read compared to Lawrence's more celebrated and accomplished novels, but one that I could enjoy for the pure pleasure of his descriptive writing alone. Lawrence's writing style is painterly as he builds up a sense of the rural Northern landscape through poetic description and imagery. The novel was inspired by a painting - 'An Idyll' by Maurice Griffinhagen - to which Lawrence refers directly in Part 1 - Chapter 3 in a scene in which Lettie is showing George a book of pictures (and again, briefly, in Part 1 - Chapter 5 when Lettie meets George scything the oats). It brings us a world described in all its colours, as Lawrence creates images of colour and shape through words ("The yellow corn was dipping and flowing in the fields, like a cloth of gold pegged down at the corners under which the wind was heaving. Sometimes we passed cottages where the scarlet lilies rose like bonfires, and the tall larkspur like bright blue leaping smoke"). The novel is full of the purple prose and poetic descriptions of landscape and place that are so characteristic of Lawrence's writings - I particularly liked the remarkable prose poem on the vibrancy of the natural world that follows the funeral of the gamekeeper Annable ("The day had already forgotten") - and only occasionally does Lawrence indulge in the intellectual and aesthetic debate that was to clog some of his later, greater novels.

Lawrence gives free rein to some of his most beautiful descriptive writing here, as though he was striving to pack all his creativity into this one work, and there are numerous examples of passages that are almost blank-verse poems within the story. Pt 2 Chapter 8 is titled 'A Poem of Friendship' and is a diversion from the main story, a self-contained prose poem to male friendship, the beauty of work and play, and the passage of time through a day and through the seasons.

Lawrence describes in detail the women's fashions, the decor of the homes at that time, and in today's reader this evokes a world of late Victorian or Edwardian style and period. It may seem to today's reader that this is a period piece, but for the author this was his contemporary world and what he was writing about was not historical fiction or nostalgia, but the concerns and issues of his day. Lawrence was creating a picture of a section of English society prior to the cataclysm of World War 1.

It is not all grim up North. The nearby mining town of Selsby remains for much of the story a faint glow in the night sky, a presence on the far horizon, a dark shadow in the corner of the protagonists' lives. Lawrence offers detailed descriptions of the natural landscape, which is seen as a constant source of life and renewal, although it can also appear cruel and unfeeling. The characters sometimes display a callous disregard for natural life, and there are many references to death in the story. This brutality is often exemplified in the male characters - e.g. the rabbit hunt, after which we get the following dialogue: "Men are all brutes", said Lettie hotly ... "You can tame us", said Leslie, in mighty good humour (Chapter 5).

The novel is full of contrasts. The rural landscapes and unspoilt countryside (the Nethermere valley, safe and hidden away) oppose the encroaching mines and mining villages ("the ugly village standing blank and naked on the brow of the hill"). An enlightened generation of educated, intellectual men of the higher classes rules over the labouring, physical workers of the farms and pits. This allows Lawrence to explore his recurrent themes of the dichotomy between intellect and physicality, between intelligence and the senses, between thought and emotion. The delicacy and refinement of the Tempests and Beardsalls is contrasted with the roughness and coarseness of the Saxtons; and later, in political terms, between Leslie's Conservatism and George' Socialism. For Lawrence, both points of view stem from restrictions and limitation, from a failure to embrace the breadth of life - a narrowing of the eyes till they see one thing only.

Lawrence often uses symbolism to add portent to the narrative, for example the storm and the solitary raven in Part 1 - Chapter 7, when Leslie and Lettie agree to marry. The weather and seasons often match and reflect the mood of the drama. The title of the novel is itself symbolic. A peacock appears in the disused churchyard in Part 2 - Chapter 2, "the very soul of a lady ... all vanity and screech and defilement" according to Annable, and the titular white peacock refers to the gamekeeper's deceased wife, a Lady who "would choose to view me in an aesthetic light. I was Greek statues for her ...". For Lawrence, it stands for women who view men objectively, stifling their spirit and soul.

Modern analysts of Lawrence may talk of his misogyny and anti-feminism but invariably this is the inappropriate application of 21st century attitudes to his time. Within his own period, Lawrence was a radical and often controversial thinker whose views would often clash with those of later eras. They were his intellectual reaction to seismic shifts in the social order in England in the early years of the 20th century: a country grappling with the legacy of vast industrialisation, the burgeoning movements for organised labour and social justice, for women's suffrage, and a declining aristocracy and old order.

Lawrence's views on the sexes could be scornful of both men and women, although he saw convention and the social restrictions of the times as the main obstacles to true unity between the sexes. Invariably his men do not match the expectations of women, who tend to look outward, catching the new spirit of women's emancipation. The men are often trapped in social convention, like George - a victim of his parochialism, his timidity in the face of change: "He was afraid of the town. He was afraid to venture into the foreign places of life, and all was foreign save the valley of Nethermere". For the characters in 'The White Peacock', personal development is crushed by unsuitable marriages, which is society's way of containing the individual's spirit and potential. For the men, brief moments of male bonding, almost homoerotic in description, offer the only respite.

Lawrence described how gender and class differences made relationships and mutual understanding difficult. There are many conversations where one party fails to understand the other, or is unable to get across what it is they really want to say. Lawrence strives to capture the natural style of conversation, with its unfinished sentences, broken phrases and half-uttered statements. He also tries to replicate the local dialects, accents and idioms of the uneducated, common people, as distinct from the more well-spoken protagonists of this tale.

Lawrence uses the novel to indulges the breadth of his own artistic tastes, filling it with erudite references to a wide range of the arts, both classical and contemporary. His characters are conversant with the fine arts and literature and bring these into the most casual of conversations. Cryptic references to the arts abound throughout the novel, as in Pt 1 Chapter 8 when Lawrence references Maeterlinck and his 1893 Symbolist play 'Pelleas and Melisande' and the central character Golaud (or is it Debussy's opera, based on the play, that is the source of Lawrence's reference here?). This is quickly followed in Chapter 9 with references to Millais, Maxim Gorky, and Thomas Hardy, before moving onto mythology. Later we get a reference to Aubrey Beardsley's sketches for 'Salome' (and their effect on George), a random quote from Walt Whitman here, a casual mention of Samuel Butler's 'Erewhon' there.

The result is a mixed pudding, somewhat rich in parts, unfulfilling in others. I doubt if 'The White Peacock' will convert many new readers to Lawrence's writing, but for those already convinced of his immense talent and appreciative of his beautiful style, it will offer sufficient rewards.

*****

NB: errors in typography in producing a Kindle version (as part of complete works of D H Lawrence) confused me on occasions, especially when they did not make it clear who was speaking in some of the dialogue exchanges.

[Harir Heidary · Rating 5 out of 5]

با شروع کتاب، هرچند مقدمه رو خونده بودم و اونجا کمی آمادگی پیدا کرده بودم که قراره با چه چیزی روبه‌رو بشم، جا خوردم. برام حتی تا حد زیادی زننده بود.
ولی بعد که ادامه دادم، یک چیز واقعا جالب رو فهمیدم. لارنس توی این کتاب و در مجموع این چهار داستان کار خیلی متفاوت و جذابی رو انجام داده، و یک روایت تازه از عشق رو به خواننده ارائه داده. یک تصویر دیگه، از سوی دیگۀ عشق. از تمام انواع دیگر روایت‌های عاشقانه. ما همیشه در داستان‌ها ماجرای افراد رو می‌شنویم که دیوانه‌وار عاشق همند، و یا به هم می‌رسند و یا نمی‌رسند. درحالی که به جز این دو سناریو، سناریوهای بی‌شمار دیگه‌ای هم هستند. سناریوهایی که چون زننده‌اند، غلطند، اشتباهند و خارج از عرفند، ترجیح می‌دیم بهشون فکر نکنیم و حذفشون کنیم.
درحالی که یک چیزی می‌تونه غلط باشه و همچنان ارز بیان شدن رو داشته باشه. هرچند، می‌دونم که این لزوما نظر خود نویسنده نبوده. این برداشت منه. من خیانت رو زشت و زننده می‌دونم، اون هم در هر شرایطی. درحالی که لارنس به چشم یک بخشی از طبیعت انسانی به اون نگاه می‌کنه.
ولی حس می‌کنم دیدگاه من هم ارزش فکر کردن رو داره. کتاب خوبی بود.

[Natalie Richards · Rating 4 out of 5]

I really enjoyed Lawrence's first novel and it hints at the great writer he would become.

[Lucy · Rating 4 out of 5]

I see that Lawrence reworked this novel 3 times. If only one of those times he had realised that the first person narration didn't work - at times it feels that the narrator is just a voyeur, and too often I found myself thinking, well how does he know that? And why, in his revisions, didn't he write an ending?
That said, it has to be given 4 stars for the quality of the writing and the depth of characterisation. His detaile dobservation is a wonder: here is Meg, obsessed with her baby to the exclusion of her husband:

"Before carrying him to bed, Meg took him to feed him. His mouth was stretched round the nipple as he sucked, his face was pressed closer and closer to the breast, his fingers wandered over the fine white globe, blue veined and heavy, trying to hold it. Meg looked down upon him with a consuming passion of tenderness."

He has some very sharp observations on women: resents Emily's ecstasy over the babies, and this comment on Lettie trying to please her husband is a real ouch moment:
"This peculiar abnegation of self is the resource of a woman for the escaping of the responsibilities of her own development."

And also, we find in this book the prose version of that wonderful poem 'Piano' - remember the line about pressing the small poised feet, of a mother who smiles as she sings? Well, here is Lettie playing and singing, while
"Lucy, the little mouse [her 6 year old daughter] sat on her mother's skirts, pressing Lettie's silk slippers in turn upon the pedals."

There is a wonderful book in here struggling to get out. If you can overlook the flaws arising from the inappropriate use of first person, then it is well worth reading. Oh, and you mustn't object too much to dead animals, either.

[Bahman Bahman · Rating 3 out of 5]

« دي. اچ. لارنس نويسنده‌ ناممكن‌هاست؛ يا به عبارت بهتر، نويسنده‌اي‌ست ناممكن؛ همچون همين پيشگفتار كه پس از پايان ترجمه‌ داستان‌هايي از او قرار گرفته اما پيش از آن‌ ظاهر شده، گويي كه «آينده» را جاي «گذشته» جا زده است. اگر براي هر شاعر يا نويسنده‌اي قائل به خانواده‌اي باشيم كه او را در بر مي‌گيرد، بي‌گمان بايد لارنس را نيز در خانواده‌اي از ديگر شاعران و نويسندگان ناممكني قرار دهيم كه بيش از حد معاصرند، بدان معنا كه هماره خود را از گذشته به آينده‌اي مي‌افكنند كه هميشه پيش روي ماست، نه در پسِ ما، كه هيچ‌گاه نمي‌توانيم آنان را در زمانه‌ خود جا دهيم؛ شاعران و نويسندگاني چون: والت ويتمن، فردريش نيچه و ژرژ باتاي.»

[Jane Cathleen · Rating 3 out of 5]

There is beautiful prose and great characterization but the plot was somewhat confusing. Some chapters I had to listen to again . Not such an interesting story as The Rainbow .

[Margarita · Rating 3 out of 5]

This is a re-read. As Lawrence's first novel, this one acts really as a foreshadow of brilliance to come in his later works. To me, his ability to capture the beauty and simplicity of nature is unparalleled. He often juxtaposes nature with the complexities (words, actions, spirit) of his characters. His strength definitely lies in his characters – Their relationships with one another and their individual construction, often complicated though relatable. What doesn't work in this novel is the choice of first person narration. The narrator (Cyril) doesn't add much insight to the relationship situations nor does he make sense logistically in several of the scenes. The phrasing then becomes awkward as it ebbs back and forth awkwardly between a first person to third person style. There is though much promise in this first novel of better writing to come.

[Paul Christensen · Rating 1 out of 5]

Awash with nihilism, narrator is a gimp;
Instead of phallic potency, the prose style is limp.

It was Lawrence's first book, though, so give the man a break.
He later made amends for this abortive mistake.

But in case you think I was completely unmoved,
'White Peacock' had one passage I really approved:

"People who are worth much talk with their eyes. That's why you are forced to respect many quite uneducated people. Their eyes are so eloquent, and full of knowledge…"

[molly ☆ · Rating 2 out of 5]

pretty writing, nothing happened. pure vibes.

[George · Rating 3 out of 5]

3.5 stars. A well written, descriptive novel about four main characters, George, Meg, Lettie and Leslie. There are vivid descriptions of rural landscapes and nature. George loves Lettie and Lettie loves George, but Leslie is rich and exerts influence over the fun loving Lettie. George as a young man, is ambitious and fun loving, but as he ages, he changes. Meg is a supportive young woman who is in love with George.

This book was first published in 1911 and is D. H. Lawrence’s first novel. I enjoyed this novel, but then I am a D. H. Lawrence fan! Readers new to Lawrence should begin with ‘Sons and Lovers’ or ‘Lady Chatterley’s Lover’.

[Bahareh · Rating 3 out of 5]

⭐ 3.5

[Yas · Rating 3 out of 5]

کارکترهای زن‌های داستان‌ها رو درک نمیکردم:/ ولی چه قشنگ نوشته بود و توصیف کرده بود.

[Jeremy Neal · Rating 4 out of 5]

Slowly closing in on the complete works of DHL, so I feel like I’m visiting an old friend by now, and this was an interesting read because it was his first novel. If you have read Sons and Lovers then you will immediately recognise this as his early years therein referenced in that admittedly greater work. So it feels rather nostalgic to read this, and I really loved it for that, but also because of those moments of sublime beauty that are scattered almost carelessly throughout his works. There is a powerful yearning quality in this, it is truly a story of innocence lost, like a retrospective of Eden! Magical, as ever, but sad too.

[مروان عثمان · Rating 2 out of 5]

قصة حب كعادة معظم كتابات لورانس لكنها خانقة ومملة. وصف مبالغ لأجواء الريف الإنجليزي كعادة كل الروايات الكلاسيكية التي تعتبر الوصف مكمل جمالي لا غنى عنه في النصوص. لم أستمتع سوى بالحوار بين الشخصيات.

[Kezia · Rating 4 out of 5]

Lawrence's first novel and clearly a biographical snapshot of his young manhood is flawed and unfulfilling, but shows the sketched outline of the genius to come. "The White Peacock" is full of landscapes that change with the seasons and the moods of its characters. While the natural world gets described in thrillingly glorious detail, his treatment of animals is strangely callous and gruesome. I can't recall another book with such a high animal death toll. The book's main weakness is its central narrative voice, the ineffectual Cyril, or Lawrence himself. Aside from moving the plot along and providing necessary description and exposition, Cyril has very little to do, even when it concerns his own romance. Otherwise, Cyril's only real contribution is being a foil for the surly gamekeeper Annable, a progenitor of Mellors, in a chapter that would almost stand alone as a short story considering its lack of relation to the rest of the book. Similarly, Cyril and Lettie's mother disappears without a trace when she becomes irrelevant towards the end, an unfortunate choice since she is a welcome figure in the early chapters.

[Tormund · Rating 3 out of 5]

Kitabin dili güzel , temiz ve akıcı. Hele doğa tasvirleri mükemmeldi. Yalnız, zaman geçişlerinde bir sıkıntı söz konusu.

[The Babadook · Rating 4 out of 5]

I was happy to have read the debut novel of one of my favorite authors this year, The White Peacock by D.H. Lawrence. Like most of his later work, I found the story involving and upsetting per usual. He focuses on a kind of small hamlet of characters and how they connect and live among the animal characters of their environment. I’m sure Lawrence had a deeper poetic meaning to weaving the two so closely together and here, I think it is at once meaningful and.... let’s be honest, macabre. There is a lot of animal pain and death here. I found it so interesting that in between these scenes were such clear snapshots of human indifference or even, callousness. To balance, he does have characters who push through the pain of life and find affirmation and even empathy. Not only to the worlds around them but to one another. I also really loved how he explored past interests and how someone who'd abandoned them were never as whole again. Once they'd pick a former interest back up, whether walking or piano, they seemed to recapture something lost. In this way, they seem to mirror the natural world around them in terms of a seasonal purpose and consequence (of living?). Just as the weather warms and the cats are out and about the humans equally seem to find "traps" to be caught in or rivers to drown in. He’s best when writing about two things that coexist beautifully in his novels - our (humans) natural instinct and nature itself. There’s no one quite like Lawrence who can write about the two both so cutting and comedic or sensually. Despite this, the story itself was probably not one of his strongest but who cares really when the language and form is this beautiful? While it's not my favorite (probably Sons and Lovers) I really enjoyed it.

[Michael Percy · Rating 4 out of 5]

It is always interesting to read a major author's last works first, and then delve into their first novel. I found myself spiralling down from a Love Among the Haystacks quaintness, to a period Enid Blyton curiosity, and finally to a period piece of young adult (YA) fiction. That is, until towards the end when the major characters are approaching middle age. This is where the back cover's "strange genius" is evident. The tone moves with the age of the characters. It is always difficult to limit the affect of introductions and other readings in how one interprets a novel, but I think here the back cover's "strange genius" is right. The botanical and ornithological details provided by the first-person narrator irritatingly reminded me of Jean M. Auel's endless treatise on herbalism in the Clan of the Cave Bear series, rather than being the fine poetry promised by the back cover. Nevertheless, if my view that Lawrence begins the novel with a teenage knowledge of the world and ends with an educated, middle age view of the world is correct, the flora and fauna provide the one constant theme, in the form of the knowledge of a hobbyist that is untouched by formal or social training or experience, that otherwise comes to bear as the characters age. The conclusion left me with a physical shudder. I think it is the ordinariness of the story that makes it so powerful. This is not a fanciful tale but a story that any one of us could, and in fact do, live out, and this is clearly the novel's great strength.

[Zachary Ngow · Rating 3 out of 5]

A first-person narrative where Cyril Beardsall, a Lawrence stand-in, mostly stands around and observes everyone else's much more interesting lives. The first part of the book is about their childhood in Nethermere (a terrible name). Cyril's visits to the Saxton's mirror Lawrence's to the Chambers'. His 'sweetheart' Emily (based on Jessie Chambers but to me disappointingly portrayed) is someone he rarely seems to pay attention; most of his focus is on her brother George. Their relationship is balanced by Cyril's supposed intellectual superiority and George's physical superiority. This obsession with the male form and 'blood brotherhood' carries on through his career (it's pretty obvious he had an attraction to men but he wouldn't say that). Cyril's sister Lettie has a playful relationship with George, frequently teasing him,

"You never grow up, like bulbs which spend all summer getting fat and fleshy, but never wakening the germ of a flower. As for me, the flower is born in me, but it wants bringing forth. Things don’t flower if they’re overfed. You have to suffer before you blossom in this life. When death is just touching a plant, it forces it into a passion of flowering."

but goes with a rich man with frequent tantrums named Leslie instead. Hanging over this is the destruction of farmland, and the Saxton's livelihood, by rabbits pouring from the Nethermere estate.

"An evil fortune discovered to him that he could sell each of his rabbits, those bits of furry vermin, for a shilling or thereabouts in Nottingham; since which time the noble family subsisted by rabbits. Farms were gnawed away; corn and sweet grass departed from the face of the hills; cattle grew lean, unable to eat the defiled herbage."

This book is filled with descriptions of nature. The opening of the book in particular is excellent.

"I stood watching the shadowy fish slide through the gloom of the mill-pond. They were grey, descendants of the silvery things that had darted away from the monks, in the young days when the valley was lusty. The whole place was gathered in the musing of old age. The thick-piled trees on the far shore were too dark and sober to dally with the sun; the weeds stood crowded and motionless. Not even a little wind flickered the willows of the islets. The water lay softly, intensely still. Only the thin stream falling through the mill-race murmured to itself of the tumult of life which had once quickened the valley."

Along with the beauty of nature is death and decay. Cyril's absent father appears after many years and goes again. Seasons pass. There are only hints of Lawrence's spirituality, which would become dark and prophetic in later works; this is in the gamekeeper, a manifestation of Pan (a character that re-occurs in a few of his short stories such as 'The Last Laugh'). For now his spirituality is in the plants and animals of Nethermere.

As a fellow autumn child (though on the other side of the Earth and calendar), I liked this passage:

"I was born in September, and love it best of all the months. There is no heat, no hurry, no thirst and weariness in corn harvest as there is in the hay. If the season is late, as is usual with us, then mid-September sees the corn still standing in stook. The mornings come slowly. The earth is like a woman married and fading; she does not leap up with a laugh for the first fresh kiss of dawn, but slowly, quietly, unexpectantly lies watching the waking of each new day. The blue mist, like memory in the eyes of a neglected wife, never goes from the wooded hill, and only at noon creeps from the near hedges. There is no bird to put a song in the throat of morning; only the crow’s voice speaks during the day. Perhaps there is the regular breathing hush of the scythe—even the fretful jar of the mowing machine. But next day, in the morning, all is still again. The lying corn is wet, and when you have bound it, and lift the heavy sheaf to make the stook, the tresses of oats wreathe round each other and droop mournfully."

I like how observant Lawrence is of his surroundings. For him, corn is oats, for me, it was withered stalks of maize with the tops of dried cobs peeking through.

Despite her engagement, Lettie still feels for George, and there is some back and forth before she eventually commits to Leslie. Poor George suffers and ends up marrying his barmaid cousin Meg. She turns out to be quite delightful and George is at first enraptured. Cyril goes with them to their wedding and takes them on a day out in Nottingham.

The last part of this book is told through letters and visits to Nethermere. Cyril now is in London. This part tells of how the marriages go, how children affect the marriages and what the men make of themselves. Leslie becomes a conservative (not surprising) but George cycles through identities, for a while becoming a socialist leader, then property speculator, before crumbling under his alcoholism, all the while treating his wife poorly. Cyril misses his chance with Emily.

I thought the choice to make this first-person and give the reins to Cyril, who Lawrence himself describes as "a young fool at the best of times, and a frightful bore at the worst", caused the book to suffer. Half of the time you don't know or care what Cyril is doing. It's quite vague what he does all day (how can he survive on just occasionally helping with farm work). When he is down in London, presumable to teach in Croydon, no explanation is given. I'm not sure that giving more information about Cyril would actually help though.

The women of this book are not as strong as in later works. I think he needed to meet Frieda for that.

This book was at parts great, and it did, despite Cyril, provide a beautiful description of an East Midlands village. I am yet to read any of his later novels (only Aaron's Rod and half of Lady Chatterley so far), but I am sure his later works set in this place, especially 'Sons and Lovers' and 'The Rainbow', will be much better.

[Jonathan · Rating 3 out of 5]

This is an early effort, with flashes of his later magic, but not quite there. A very personal, touching story, but for some reason, he puts himself into it. It's not about him, he's mostly an observer, but a battle plays out in the novel - he's starting to form his writer-voice as a narrator that gets inside the emotional life of each character, and this is struggling against the fact that as the brother of the main character, there are intimate moments in his sister's life that he really should not be present for or have awareness of. Sometimes Lawrence realizes this and the scene becomes awkward; sometimes he does not, and the writing becomes disjointed. Still, very much worth a read.

[Simon · Rating 3 out of 5]

As Lawrence's first novel it is worth 4 or 5 stars. It gives revealing insights into his outlook as a man and as a novelist and into his sexuality. As a novel, in its own right, it is something of a quagmire to get through. His choice to write in first person means putting his narrator into all sorts of situations where he must play the gooseberry. It doesn't work.
The student of literary landscapes has much to go on. Wander around the Notts/Derbys border and you'll be wandering the fields, woods, farms and churches of The White Peacock.
Not the easiest or the best of his books but one that deserves to be read.

[A.L. · Rating 3 out of 5]

A few chapters in, and although you can see the glimmerings of the D. H. Lawrence of later books, he's not quite there yet. The story is stilted and tedious. The first person narrator is largely redundant and could be dispensed with entirely. The descriptions of nature and country life are charming, but sit uneasily in the jerky narrative. The characters are without distinction or personality.

The book improves as you move into the second and third volumes, although the narrator still feels largely redundant. I'm glad I read it, but it's not the best.

[Abbasriahi · Rating 5 out of 5]

دی. اچ. لارنس و زنانی که بهتر از همه می‌شناسد. داستان «جوراب ساق‌بلند سفید» صحنه‌ی مهمانی‌ای دارد که بین زن و شوهر جوان و معشوق زن، میزانسنی گیرا طراحی شده. اثرات این مهمانی و اتفاقاتی که در گذشته رخ‌داده، تا زمان حال ادامه پیدا می‌کند...