You need to sign in or sign up before continuing.
Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.51 AVERAGE
3.51 AVERAGE
Mi-a plăcut tare mult, a fost ceva ce eu nu am mai întâlnit în puțina literatură clasică pe care am citit-o (puțină pentru că mereu m-a ținut departe stilul greoi și impersonal + descrierile interminabile).
Am apreciat că Emma nu a fost portretizată vreodată ca vreo persoană bună sau chiar angelică. A fost prezentată încă de la început cu defectele ei, cu dorința aprigă de a atinge idealul. Nu pot să o condamn vreodată, dar cumva îmi pare rău de Charles. Deși n-a fost ce-i trebuia ei, a fost mereu acolo, gata să ii ofere tot ce ii stătea in puteri pentru a smulge măcar un zâmbet.
Am fost șocată de cât de îndetaliată a fost prezentată toată scena cu orbul, dar și moartea Emmei (mă așteptam la ceva mult mai finuț, maxim la o menționare lungită pe o pagină jumătate, dar nu m-au deranjat deloc!). Aceste secvențe au reușit să adâncească toată povestea și să o ducă într-o întunecime foarte foarte interesantă.
In the end, cartea chiar mi-a ajuns la inimă și mă bucur că am ajuns, în sfârșit, să o citesc!!!
Am apreciat că Emma nu a fost portretizată vreodată ca vreo persoană bună sau chiar angelică. A fost prezentată încă de la început cu defectele ei, cu dorința aprigă de a atinge idealul. Nu pot să o condamn vreodată, dar cumva îmi pare rău de Charles. Deși n-a fost ce-i trebuia ei, a fost mereu acolo, gata să ii ofere tot ce ii stătea in puteri pentru a smulge măcar un zâmbet.
Am fost șocată de cât de îndetaliată a fost prezentată toată scena cu orbul, dar și moartea Emmei (mă așteptam la ceva mult mai finuț, maxim la o menționare lungită pe o pagină jumătate, dar nu m-au deranjat deloc!). Aceste secvențe au reușit să adâncească toată povestea și să o ducă într-o întunecime foarte foarte interesantă.
In the end, cartea chiar mi-a ajuns la inimă și mă bucur că am ajuns, în sfârșit, să o citesc!!!
dark
emotional
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Complicated
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
Complicated
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
challenging
tense
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
No
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
Saw this recommended a lot after reading Anna Karenina. I think the comparison doesn’t extend beyond surface level but you’d probably enjoy one if you liked the other. Not a fault, but Madame Bovary has all around less sympathetic characters. Emma’s blazing path to self destruction is sad to watch but not in the same way as Anna’s.
Also some pretty memorable, grotesque scenes like the blind man, the gangrene incident, and Emma’s gruesome battle with arsenic. She was not rewarded an easy way out that’s for sure…
Also some pretty memorable, grotesque scenes like the blind man, the gangrene incident, and Emma’s gruesome battle with arsenic. She was not rewarded an easy way out that’s for sure…
3,5/5
eindelijk uit moehaha - dit boek was zoveel beter geweest als ik het niet tijdens de examens had gelezen!!!!!! de laatste 150 pagina’s waren
eindelijk uit moehaha - dit boek was zoveel beter geweest als ik het niet tijdens de examens had gelezen!!!!!! de laatste 150 pagina’s waren
medium-paced
This book...ugh. Not a single character in this story is sympathetic. I’m glad I never had to read it back in school. I wanted to like it so much, but I found myself wondering how this was Flaubert’s masterpiece. Emma I found sniveling and weak, even in moments where she seemed to be asserting herself. (SPOILER ALERT: In choosing to engage in extramarital affairs, and eventually in taking her own life, the inherent power of her choice didn’t even give her character strength; rather, it made her seem even more pathetic to me as the world around her unfolded.) And Charles — really, could not a single character in this story warrant a little sympathy? I just couldn’t muster it up.
In the myth of Sisyphus, a man is condemned by the gods to roll a stone up to the top of a hill, only for the stone to immediately roll back down, be pushed to the top again, and roll down once more, unceasingly and endlessly, forever. For those who encounter the tale, the myth of Sisyphus engenders the same impenetrable question – why does he do it? The tragic fate of Sisyphus has often been said to resemble the fate of the human condition, but if that is true, then another question emerges – why do we do it? For many, particularly Emma Bovary in Gustave Flaubert’s Madame Bovary, the question can be answered in one word – desire.
Most humans are ensnared in a web of constant desire, yet, most live their lives unaware of its root. For humanity, desire is a reason to exist; if an endeavor has some further purpose, then the endeavor is worth pursuing. Inevitably, to desire is to lack; desiring an object stems from the deprivation or absence of that object. If Sisyphus pushes the rock to the top of the hill because he is thirsty and believes there is water at the top, he does not have any drinking water, to begin with. If desire stems from lacking and breeds suffering, human existence must ineluctably flow between states of desire and suffering. Emma Bovary embodies this flow, for she, like Sisyphus, is fated to suffer because of her desires and desires because of her suffering. Emma Bovary, Sisyphus, and Gustave Flaubert appear to have nothing in common, yet, all three are consigned to the same endless struggle between purpose, desire, and suffering. The fate of Emma, Sisyphus, and Flaubert is our fate; it is the fate of the human condition. For Flaubert, “Madame Bovary, c'est moi,” and as for everyone else, “Emma, c’est nous.
The fate of Madame Bovary is tragic, and yet, it is the same fate that we all must accept one way or another. Flaubert expresses that to lack, to desire, and thus to suffer, is the fate of the human condition. Through ambiguity, subjectivity, and the realistic, tragic portrayal of one woman’s struggle with desire and fulfillment, Flaubert illustrates a picture of fate that portrays Madame Bovary as a symbol of the human condition. Madame Bovary is Sisyphus, just like Flaubert is Madame Bovary, and humans are all of the above, for we are all ultimately unified through our universal longing and lack of purpose. Emma pushes her rock – her desire for a life filled with luxury and romantic love – up a hill repeatedly, but the second she reaches the top, the rock – the reality that her life is filled with dissatisfaction and melancholia – plunders back down into the ground. Like Sisyphus, she does this until she cannot take it anymore until she finally sees the top of the hill – her desire – as unattainable. Without desire, without some illusion that her life has meaning, Emma no longer sees a reason to continue living. At the end of the novel, forced to finally face reality, she refuses to push the rock up the hill, accepts her fate, and ceases to exist. Everyone has their rock in some way or another, and everyone pushes the rock up the hill to fulfill some desire. Without desire, we will suffer the same tragic fate as Madame Bovary. Without desire, humans encounter the same realization that Emma seemed to come to – there may be nothing up the hill, no reason to keep pushing, no reason to live a moment longer; yet, somehow, humans continuously create their own reason.
Thus, we are Flaubert when he says, “Madame Bovary, c’est moi,” we are Sisyphus when he pushes the rock up the hill, and we are Madame Bovary when she suffers from ineluctable longing and discontent. We are forever condemned to write about the human condi tion, push a rock up a hill, and use romantic love as an escape. We are slaves to our desire, for our desire is our purpose, and without a purpose, we cease to exist, just like Emma. Thus, the human will to live “flutters in every breeze; always there is the desire urging, always the convention restraining,” for Emma, c’est nous (14).
“But that happiness, no doubt, was a lie invented for the despair of desire.”
(Gustave Flaubert, Madame Bovary, 28)
Most humans are ensnared in a web of constant desire, yet, most live their lives unaware of its root. For humanity, desire is a reason to exist; if an endeavor has some further purpose, then the endeavor is worth pursuing. Inevitably, to desire is to lack; desiring an object stems from the deprivation or absence of that object. If Sisyphus pushes the rock to the top of the hill because he is thirsty and believes there is water at the top, he does not have any drinking water, to begin with. If desire stems from lacking and breeds suffering, human existence must ineluctably flow between states of desire and suffering. Emma Bovary embodies this flow, for she, like Sisyphus, is fated to suffer because of her desires and desires because of her suffering. Emma Bovary, Sisyphus, and Gustave Flaubert appear to have nothing in common, yet, all three are consigned to the same endless struggle between purpose, desire, and suffering. The fate of Emma, Sisyphus, and Flaubert is our fate; it is the fate of the human condition. For Flaubert, “Madame Bovary, c'est moi,” and as for everyone else, “Emma, c’est nous.
The fate of Madame Bovary is tragic, and yet, it is the same fate that we all must accept one way or another. Flaubert expresses that to lack, to desire, and thus to suffer, is the fate of the human condition. Through ambiguity, subjectivity, and the realistic, tragic portrayal of one woman’s struggle with desire and fulfillment, Flaubert illustrates a picture of fate that portrays Madame Bovary as a symbol of the human condition. Madame Bovary is Sisyphus, just like Flaubert is Madame Bovary, and humans are all of the above, for we are all ultimately unified through our universal longing and lack of purpose. Emma pushes her rock – her desire for a life filled with luxury and romantic love – up a hill repeatedly, but the second she reaches the top, the rock – the reality that her life is filled with dissatisfaction and melancholia – plunders back down into the ground. Like Sisyphus, she does this until she cannot take it anymore until she finally sees the top of the hill – her desire – as unattainable. Without desire, without some illusion that her life has meaning, Emma no longer sees a reason to continue living. At the end of the novel, forced to finally face reality, she refuses to push the rock up the hill, accepts her fate, and ceases to exist. Everyone has their rock in some way or another, and everyone pushes the rock up the hill to fulfill some desire. Without desire, we will suffer the same tragic fate as Madame Bovary. Without desire, humans encounter the same realization that Emma seemed to come to – there may be nothing up the hill, no reason to keep pushing, no reason to live a moment longer; yet, somehow, humans continuously create their own reason.
Thus, we are Flaubert when he says, “Madame Bovary, c’est moi,” we are Sisyphus when he pushes the rock up the hill, and we are Madame Bovary when she suffers from ineluctable longing and discontent. We are forever condemned to write about the human condi tion, push a rock up a hill, and use romantic love as an escape. We are slaves to our desire, for our desire is our purpose, and without a purpose, we cease to exist, just like Emma. Thus, the human will to live “flutters in every breeze; always there is the desire urging, always the convention restraining,” for Emma, c’est nous (14).
“But that happiness, no doubt, was a lie invented for the despair of desire.”
(Gustave Flaubert, Madame Bovary, 28)
Most despicable character of all time
Let me introduce
Madame Emma Bovary
Let me introduce
Madame Emma Bovary
idk jeśli mam być szczera, te ich charaktery są dla mnie mdłe…