Scan barcode
smcleish's review
3.0
Originally published on my blog here in January 2000.
Like his contemporary Jeffrey Farnol, Sabatini was an immensely popular author of historical thrillers. Sabatini, however, seems today to be less dated, possibly because his novels are more literary and better researched, giving a greater sense that they are anchored in the periods in which they are set than Farnol's. His dialogue in particular is not so artificial.
Scaramouche is probably Sabatini's best known novel (though a couple of others were made into films which themselves are much more famous - [b:Captain Blood|158446|Captain Blood|Rafael Sabatini|http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1298454925s/158446.jpg|2125579] and [b:The Sea-Hawk|236888|The Sea-Hawk|Rafael Sabatini|http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1300380410s/236888.jpg|2200551]). Set in revolutionary France, it tells the story of the transformation of cynical Breton lawyer André-Louis Moreau into radical orator, fugitive, play actor and fencing tutor as he is swept into the turbulence following the murder of his friend Villemorin.
Unusually for popular fiction depicting the Revolution, no attempt is made to romanticise the aristocracy. They are frequently portrayed as a cultured contrast to a bestial peasantry. (This is what Baroness Orczy tends to do in the Scarlet Pimpernel novels, for example.) Instead, in keeping with Moreau's cynical outlook, neither side is drawn in a very positive light; mankind in general is bestial.
The troupe of actors joined by Moreau is a travelling group of improvisers, a traditional commedia dell'arte company. This section is the most interesting part of the novel, and the quality of Sabatini's research is shown by the way that he gives an excellent (one of the best short accounts I have read) summary of the traditional characters which make up such a troupe and some of the scenarios they used as the basis for their performances. He also, being a good writer, brings alive these pages with a sense of the atmosphere that these performances must have produced. Moreau eventually ends up playing the part of Scaramouche, the cynical plotter, both in the company and in his own life, hence the title of the novel.
Like his contemporary Jeffrey Farnol, Sabatini was an immensely popular author of historical thrillers. Sabatini, however, seems today to be less dated, possibly because his novels are more literary and better researched, giving a greater sense that they are anchored in the periods in which they are set than Farnol's. His dialogue in particular is not so artificial.
Scaramouche is probably Sabatini's best known novel (though a couple of others were made into films which themselves are much more famous - [b:Captain Blood|158446|Captain Blood|Rafael Sabatini|http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1298454925s/158446.jpg|2125579] and [b:The Sea-Hawk|236888|The Sea-Hawk|Rafael Sabatini|http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1300380410s/236888.jpg|2200551]). Set in revolutionary France, it tells the story of the transformation of cynical Breton lawyer André-Louis Moreau into radical orator, fugitive, play actor and fencing tutor as he is swept into the turbulence following the murder of his friend Villemorin.
Unusually for popular fiction depicting the Revolution, no attempt is made to romanticise the aristocracy. They are frequently portrayed as a cultured contrast to a bestial peasantry. (This is what Baroness Orczy tends to do in the Scarlet Pimpernel novels, for example.) Instead, in keeping with Moreau's cynical outlook, neither side is drawn in a very positive light; mankind in general is bestial.
The troupe of actors joined by Moreau is a travelling group of improvisers, a traditional commedia dell'arte company. This section is the most interesting part of the novel, and the quality of Sabatini's research is shown by the way that he gives an excellent (one of the best short accounts I have read) summary of the traditional characters which make up such a troupe and some of the scenarios they used as the basis for their performances. He also, being a good writer, brings alive these pages with a sense of the atmosphere that these performances must have produced. Moreau eventually ends up playing the part of Scaramouche, the cynical plotter, both in the company and in his own life, hence the title of the novel.
melerihaf's review
5.0
Although I've seen the movie many times, I had never read the book. When it popped up as a new eaudiobook arrival at my library, I decided it was time. It was very different from the movie, of course, but it was still so fun. Drama upon drama in a very melodramatic fashion. I was surprised that it was written in the 1920s. I read all of the Three Musketeers series not too long ago, and stylistically, it felt very much like one of those books. Anyway, tons of fun and adventure. And it doesn't take itself too seriously, which is always a plus for me.
readerbug2's review
2.0
This books was incredibly frustrating as the protagonist, Andre-Louis Moreau, is the definition of a Marty Stu. He's good at everything. He's super charming, so when he makes a bunch of very wrong assumptions, he's immediately forgiven. Everyone loves him, and every woman fell in love with him. On top of this, he refuses to help his friends save their friends from getting massacred in duels until he personally benefits from these encounters, even though he's the best fencer in the city. He is the definition of male privilege! Sabatini's novels are typically like this, but he usually offsets his perfect characters with descriptive prose regarding battles and genuinely clever plots to cheat the enemy that it becomes more amusing. Also, usually his male characters have at least one fault. AL's only fault was revealed at the end, and it was that he was a coward (which he is): he runs away from everything, but he's still celebrated as some sort of hero.
AL gets his cake and eats it too. He goes around as a republican, touting how people born into privilege shouldn't run the country or be considered great just because of their birth. While we agree with these sentiments now, that wasn't the case back then. Back then, these republicans were stealing the aristocrats of their land, homes, and their way of life. Not only that but what followed was the French Revolution, and we know how much of a mess that was. To the old-timers, the republicans had brought hellfire down on everyone. YET, at the end of the novel, AL gets the girl of his dreams and lives with his RICH AF family, completely forgiven! Seriously?!
Not only that, but the aristocrats were more likable in general. Yes, they were overpowered, but they had more heart. They looked out for each other. Granted, their friends and family have more resources than servants, but they seem to genuinely care about each other, even when they've hurt each other. AL always assumed he was right and would break his own principles for personal gain and never had an existential crisis about it. In contrast, Azyr was a terrible person, but he tried to atone for his mistakes, and he fought for what was his, while AL let himself get chased out of multiple towns. Azyr's behavior makes sense based on the ideologies he grew up with while AL is just an entitled jerk. The former is sympathetic while the latter is not.
In the end, AL changed society enough that he always ended on top, even though everyone else lost their homes, friends, and everything they owned. He might've lost some things in the process, but his mentality and heartlessness prevented him from caring. As a result, I didn't care about him or for this book.
AL gets his cake and eats it too. He goes around as a republican, touting how people born into privilege shouldn't run the country or be considered great just because of their birth. While we agree with these sentiments now, that wasn't the case back then. Back then, these republicans were stealing the aristocrats of their land, homes, and their way of life. Not only that but what followed was the French Revolution, and we know how much of a mess that was. To the old-timers, the republicans had brought hellfire down on everyone. YET, at the end of the novel, AL gets the girl of his dreams and lives with his RICH AF family, completely forgiven! Seriously?!
Not only that, but the aristocrats were more likable in general. Yes, they were overpowered, but they had more heart. They looked out for each other. Granted, their friends and family have more resources than servants, but they seem to genuinely care about each other, even when they've hurt each other. AL always assumed he was right and would break his own principles for personal gain and never had an existential crisis about it. In contrast, Azyr was a terrible person, but he tried to atone for his mistakes, and he fought for what was his, while AL let himself get chased out of multiple towns. Azyr's behavior makes sense based on the ideologies he grew up with while AL is just an entitled jerk. The former is sympathetic while the latter is not.
In the end, AL changed society enough that he always ended on top, even though everyone else lost their homes, friends, and everything they owned. He might've lost some things in the process, but his mentality and heartlessness prevented him from caring. As a result, I didn't care about him or for this book.
lnatal's review
4.0
First line: "He was born with a gift of laughter and a sense that the world was mad."
According to Wiki, "Scaramouche" also called Scaramuccia, means a roguish buffoon character in the commedia dell'arte.
A great novel, it reminds me Dumas pere books, with a lot of twisting plots, duels and plenty of historical figures, like Marat, Danton , Marie Antoinette and so on.
A decade later after Scaramouche publication, Sabatini wrote a sequel, Scaramouche the Kingmaker text , which was not as well received. I wonder why.
Available at Gutenberg project
Available at LibriVox as an audio book.
The movie based on this book is available at You Tube
Stars: Stewart Granger, Janet Leigh, Eleanor Parker, Mel Ferrer and Nina Foch.
According to Wiki, "Scaramouche" also called Scaramuccia, means a roguish buffoon character in the commedia dell'arte.
A great novel, it reminds me Dumas pere books, with a lot of twisting plots, duels and plenty of historical figures, like Marat, Danton , Marie Antoinette and so on.
A decade later after Scaramouche publication, Sabatini wrote a sequel, Scaramouche the Kingmaker text , which was not as well received. I wonder why.
Available at Gutenberg project
Available at LibriVox as an audio book.
The movie based on this book is available at You Tube
Stars: Stewart Granger, Janet Leigh, Eleanor Parker, Mel Ferrer and Nina Foch.
silverstarswept's review
4.0
Scaramouche is full of surprises, not only in terms of its plot - although it certainly does have plenty there - but also in terms of its content and style.
Sabatini writes with a sharp wit which is all the more striking for the book's 1921 publication date, which certainly makes itself known in many passages (I'm very glad I read a digital version from Project Gutenberg which let me look up words without leaving the app!), and he also delivers an absolutely scathing critique of class, privilege, and the nature of revolution and government, with Andre-Louis often serving as his mouthpiece.
The character of Andre-Louis - otherwise known as Scaramouche - is just... ridiculously enjoyable. Were the novel told strictly from his perspective, he'd probably have been insufferable: he succeeds in pretty much everything he turns his hand to, from law to acting to fencing to politics, he's confident and composed, and he's nearly always able to turn a situation to his favour. However, the omniscient narration works to reveal his flaws. He has a cruel streak, he misinterprets the actions of his childhood friend Aline, and although he likes to consider himself a Stoic, he isn't always as unaffected as his actions and words might suggest.
The whole book is just a lot of fun (or, it is after the very upsetting inciting incident), combining a lot of the most interesting possible career paths in revolutionary France with an antagonist whom I just really wanted to get stabbed the whole time, all with a good serving of grey morality on the side.
Sabatini writes with a sharp wit which is all the more striking for the book's 1921 publication date, which certainly makes itself known in many passages (I'm very glad I read a digital version from Project Gutenberg which let me look up words without leaving the app!), and he also delivers an absolutely scathing critique of class, privilege, and the nature of revolution and government, with Andre-Louis often serving as his mouthpiece.
The character of Andre-Louis - otherwise known as Scaramouche - is just... ridiculously enjoyable. Were the novel told strictly from his perspective, he'd probably have been insufferable: he succeeds in pretty much everything he turns his hand to, from law to acting to fencing to politics, he's confident and composed, and he's nearly always able to turn a situation to his favour. However, the omniscient narration works to reveal his flaws. He has a cruel streak, he misinterprets the actions of his childhood friend Aline, and although he likes to consider himself a Stoic, he isn't always as unaffected as his actions and words might suggest.
The whole book is just a lot of fun (or, it is after the very upsetting inciting incident), combining a lot of the most interesting possible career paths in revolutionary France with an antagonist whom I just really wanted to get stabbed the whole time, all with a good serving of grey morality on the side.
houxli's review
adventurous
emotional
medium-paced
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
4.0
The thesis given at the beginning is woven throughout the story. It's delightful.
eri_md's review
adventurous
funny
fast-paced
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
4.0
mdemanatee's review
4.0
I predicted some of the plot, but it was so worth it I didn't care. This book was a lot of fun. I enjoyed the banter quite a lot.
borisd's review
4.0
Découverte de Sabatini et de son Scaramouche ! Roman de cape et d’épée parfait pour s’évader le temps d’une lecture en pleine Révolution même si l’on est loin de Dumas pour maintenir le suspens et l’intrigue loin des soupçons du lecteur qui aura tôt fait de deviner la fin !