Book review - "The White Peacock"
“The White Peacock”, published in 1911, is the first novel of D.H. Lawrence. ‘The usual way of constructing a novel,’ the young Lawrence remarked at the time, ‘is to take two couples and to work out their relationship.’ Lawrence certainly achieves this in his novel, through deft description and piercing characterisation.
The novel follows a group of young friends living in the English midlands. The narrator is middle-class Cyril Beardsall, who lives with his mother and sister Lettie in Woodside cottage. Cyril’s best friend is working-class George Saxton, who lives on the neighbouring farm with his sister Emily. Then there is Leslie Tempest, son of the local mine owner, who is courting Lettie.
“The White Peacock” is divided into three parts. The first two parts take place over several months, and follow the growing attraction between George and Lettie. The third part describes, in a series of episodes, how the characters change and suffer over the next decade or so, after they marry. It is not giving too much away to say that Lettie settles for a comfortable life with Leslie, and George - lost and miserable - marries barmaid Meg, who proves to be a wholly unsuitable spouse for him. Marriage and disillusionment are major themes in this novel, as is class difference.
In this sense, I found Lawrence’s novel to be almost a prototype of “The Great Gatsby”. The peripheral, detached narrator. His flawed best friend from humble origins, who falls in love with the narrator’s flighty female relative. The wealthy husband/suitor, whom the female protagonist eventually chooses. And the tragic ending which befalls the lover.
However, unlike Fitzgerald’s brazen tale of the Jazz Age, “The White Peacock” is a quiet novel. And Lawrence’s George Saxton is more akin to Frank Wheeler from “Revolutionary Road” than Jay Gatsby. Lawrence paints a fine word portrait of a young man who is both ambitious and timid; brash and cautious.
Both the main strength of “The White Peacock” is the description of the countryside and changing seasons. Here is one example:
“Against the wall the globed crimson plums hung close together, and dropped occasionally with a satisfied plunge into the rhubarb leaves. The crop of oats was very heavy. The stalks of corn were like strong reeds of bamboo; the heads of gold swept heavily over like tresses weighted with drops of gold.”
Alas, these descriptions are also a weakness, due to their sheer volume. The young Lawrence over-eggs the pudding, resulting in all the constant descriptions of nature - while lovely - becoming tedious.
But the novel’s main weakness is that, quite simply, the device of first person narrator doesn’t work. There are many scenes detailing intimate conversations between Lettie and George, or Lettie and Leslie, where Cyril is not actually in the vicinity. This makes the reader wonder how Cyril could possibly have overheard them. As Cyril has little to do in the story, a better option might have been to scrap his character altogether and write the story in third person. Or - as Nick Carraway does a few times in “The Great Gatsby” - have Cyril imagine the conversations that might have taken place.
While “The White Peacock” might seem slow to a modern reader, there are plenty of biting observations that some might say hold true today. Here is Lawrence, describing the older Lettie’s interest in her children to the exclusion of all else:
“This peculiar abnegation of self is the resource of a woman for the escaping of the responsibilities of her own development… Service is light and easy. To be responsible for the good progress of one’s life is terrifying. It is the most insufferable form of loneliness and, and the heaviest of responsibilities.”
Ouch. And further on the subject of motherhood and marriage:
“Meg was quite indifferent. She listened occasionally, but her position as a mother made her impregnable. She sat eating calmly, looking down now and again at her baby, holding us in slight scorn, babblers that we were. She was secure in her high maternity; she was mistress and sole authority. George, as father, was first servant; as an indifferent father, she humiliated him and was hostile to his wishes.”
Yet Lawrence also has a sense of humour. Here are the young friends, having tea at the Saxtons’. Leslie asks George:
“’Do you play tennis, Mr Saxton? - I know Miss Saxton does not.’
‘No,’ said George, working the piece of cheese into his cheek. ‘I never learned any ladies’ accomplishments.’”
“The White Peacock” is in parts brilliant and flawed. Recommended, if you enjoy a slow, insightful read.
The novel follows a group of young friends living in the English midlands. The narrator is middle-class Cyril Beardsall, who lives with his mother and sister Lettie in Woodside cottage. Cyril’s best friend is working-class George Saxton, who lives on the neighbouring farm with his sister Emily. Then there is Leslie Tempest, son of the local mine owner, who is courting Lettie.
“The White Peacock” is divided into three parts. The first two parts take place over several months, and follow the growing attraction between George and Lettie. The third part describes, in a series of episodes, how the characters change and suffer over the next decade or so, after they marry. It is not giving too much away to say that Lettie settles for a comfortable life with Leslie, and George - lost and miserable - marries barmaid Meg, who proves to be a wholly unsuitable spouse for him. Marriage and disillusionment are major themes in this novel, as is class difference.
In this sense, I found Lawrence’s novel to be almost a prototype of “The Great Gatsby”. The peripheral, detached narrator. His flawed best friend from humble origins, who falls in love with the narrator’s flighty female relative. The wealthy husband/suitor, whom the female protagonist eventually chooses. And the tragic ending which befalls the lover.
However, unlike Fitzgerald’s brazen tale of the Jazz Age, “The White Peacock” is a quiet novel. And Lawrence’s George Saxton is more akin to Frank Wheeler from “Revolutionary Road” than Jay Gatsby. Lawrence paints a fine word portrait of a young man who is both ambitious and timid; brash and cautious.
Both the main strength of “The White Peacock” is the description of the countryside and changing seasons. Here is one example:
“Against the wall the globed crimson plums hung close together, and dropped occasionally with a satisfied plunge into the rhubarb leaves. The crop of oats was very heavy. The stalks of corn were like strong reeds of bamboo; the heads of gold swept heavily over like tresses weighted with drops of gold.”
Alas, these descriptions are also a weakness, due to their sheer volume. The young Lawrence over-eggs the pudding, resulting in all the constant descriptions of nature - while lovely - becoming tedious.
But the novel’s main weakness is that, quite simply, the device of first person narrator doesn’t work. There are many scenes detailing intimate conversations between Lettie and George, or Lettie and Leslie, where Cyril is not actually in the vicinity. This makes the reader wonder how Cyril could possibly have overheard them. As Cyril has little to do in the story, a better option might have been to scrap his character altogether and write the story in third person. Or - as Nick Carraway does a few times in “The Great Gatsby” - have Cyril imagine the conversations that might have taken place.
While “The White Peacock” might seem slow to a modern reader, there are plenty of biting observations that some might say hold true today. Here is Lawrence, describing the older Lettie’s interest in her children to the exclusion of all else:
“This peculiar abnegation of self is the resource of a woman for the escaping of the responsibilities of her own development… Service is light and easy. To be responsible for the good progress of one’s life is terrifying. It is the most insufferable form of loneliness and, and the heaviest of responsibilities.”
Ouch. And further on the subject of motherhood and marriage:
“Meg was quite indifferent. She listened occasionally, but her position as a mother made her impregnable. She sat eating calmly, looking down now and again at her baby, holding us in slight scorn, babblers that we were. She was secure in her high maternity; she was mistress and sole authority. George, as father, was first servant; as an indifferent father, she humiliated him and was hostile to his wishes.”
Yet Lawrence also has a sense of humour. Here are the young friends, having tea at the Saxtons’. Leslie asks George:
“’Do you play tennis, Mr Saxton? - I know Miss Saxton does not.’
‘No,’ said George, working the piece of cheese into his cheek. ‘I never learned any ladies’ accomplishments.’”
“The White Peacock” is in parts brilliant and flawed. Recommended, if you enjoy a slow, insightful read.