Scan barcode
thereaderintherye's review against another edition
challenging
reflective
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
2.25
jenonjupiter's review against another edition
3.0
Wollstonecraft’s writing is gorgeous as always, and I found this book to be really nice as an introduction into her work surrounding her narrative style specifically. However, this book may not be for you if you’re looking for more injected philosophy in her work. It feels that Wollstonecraft works around the idea of where happiness truly comes from for a woman and if it can be from the individual or from surroundings. However the main character in the book never truly learns to be happy just for herself and feeds her happiness from the people closest to her. This book doesn’t dive into educational reform or feministic independence as much as her other works.
rcarsonb's review against another edition
3.0
*slaps cover of Mary* this bad boy can fit so much hatred of the institution of marriage inside it
henrygravesprince's review against another edition
emotional
reflective
sad
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
3.5
Really fascinating read — I haven’t really read a lot of 1700s literature, so I’m not sure if the peculiar storytelling style Wollstonecraft used was the “norm” at the time or not, but it’s certainly an interesting one. There are parts where what seem to be major plot points are essentially summarized in a paragraph, and then the narrator moves on; that doesn’t, however, detract from the evocative prose & the emotion Wollstonecraft instilled into this.
I think the sapphic overtones to this is one of the main points of interest; of course, the comparison to Wollstonecraft’s real-life relationship with Fanny Blood is hard to ignore. But what I think is interesting is how similar this feels to the “sad sapphic period piece, usually featuring an unwanted heterosexual marriage” trend in modern-day LGBT cinema. Ultimately, though, Wollstonecraft’s philosophy and politics shine here; when she uses elegant turns of phrase to indict landlords, I can’t help but get incensed about it along with her.
I genuinely have no clue if someone who doesn’t have an interest in Wollstonecraft would enjoy this. That being said, I did enjoy it, imperfect as it is. I understand why Wollstonecraft wasn’t a big fan of this work in her later years — it’s one of her earlier forays into fiction, and it’s greatly embedded with the difficult emotions born from grieving Fanny Blood and their relationship. Personally, though, I do think this book is worthwhile.
I think the sapphic overtones to this is one of the main points of interest; of course, the comparison to Wollstonecraft’s real-life relationship with Fanny Blood is hard to ignore. But what I think is interesting is how similar this feels to the “sad sapphic period piece, usually featuring an unwanted heterosexual marriage” trend in modern-day LGBT cinema. Ultimately, though, Wollstonecraft’s philosophy and politics shine here; when she uses elegant turns of phrase to indict landlords, I can’t help but get incensed about it along with her.
I genuinely have no clue if someone who doesn’t have an interest in Wollstonecraft would enjoy this. That being said, I did enjoy it, imperfect as it is. I understand why Wollstonecraft wasn’t a big fan of this work in her later years — it’s one of her earlier forays into fiction, and it’s greatly embedded with the difficult emotions born from grieving Fanny Blood and their relationship. Personally, though, I do think this book is worthwhile.
Content Warnings
Graphic: Misogyny
Moderate: Death of parent and Terminal illness
Minor: Chronic illness
manwithanagenda's review against another edition
emotional
reflective
sad
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
2.5
Usually collected with other short works of the author, or even her 'Vindication of the Rights of Woman', 'Mary' is a short fiction with a strong autobiographical base. It is incredibly over-wrought for being so brief, but it fits in with the literary conventions of the time.
'Mary' was influenced by Wollstonecraft's own close female friendship growing up and what it meant to her. It also highlights the inequities of the treatment of women in the upper middle classes. It was a juvenile work, though much revised before publication in her lifetime.
'Mary' was influenced by Wollstonecraft's own close female friendship growing up and what it meant to her. It also highlights the inequities of the treatment of women in the upper middle classes. It was a juvenile work, though much revised before publication in her lifetime.
pixieauthoress's review against another edition
2.0
Read for EN4363: Romantic Writing and Women.
Technically, the edition I own is a Penguin 3-in-1, but I realised that I'd rather have my reviews of Mary, Maria and Matilda separate, and that using that edition on GoodReads would skew my reading statistics for the year.
I'm unsure as to whether Mary is a novella or a short-story. It only takes up 53 pages in my edition, but it's an incredibly small font. And given how tedious this book felt after a while, it might as well have been a full-length novel!
Honestly, I really appreciate Wollstonecraft's A Vindication of the Rights of Woman, but I think that's definitely her best display of her writing skills. Although there are a few insightful moments in Mary, the only other compliments I can bestow this novel is that Wollstonecraft occasionally inserts some interesting descriptions of scenery and probably did a good job of depicting how difficult it was to be an independent women towards the end of the 18th century. Other than that, it seems to be a melodramatic novel about a woman who experienced far too much illness, death and heartbreak. Mary seemed to be a good product of her time, but this contradicted Wollstonecraft's comments in the Advertisement at the start of the novel, which explained that Mary was an unusual woman of "thinking powers". There were a few throwaway comments about Mary's reading and powers of reason, but honestly? The emotions and irrationality that she displayed seemed far more fitting with the women Wollstonecraft describes in A Vindication of the Rights of Woman. It almost feels like Wollstonecraft didn't entirely know what she set out to write about in this much earlier work.
All in all, I'm sure this will make for some interesting conversations in class, but I can't say I can recommend this book--whether you're looking for an early classic novel or a feminist tract. If you are interested in Wollstonecraft, look to her non-fiction instead. 2*
Technically, the edition I own is a Penguin 3-in-1, but I realised that I'd rather have my reviews of Mary, Maria and Matilda separate, and that using that edition on GoodReads would skew my reading statistics for the year.
I'm unsure as to whether Mary is a novella or a short-story. It only takes up 53 pages in my edition, but it's an incredibly small font. And given how tedious this book felt after a while, it might as well have been a full-length novel!
Honestly, I really appreciate Wollstonecraft's A Vindication of the Rights of Woman, but I think that's definitely her best display of her writing skills. Although there are a few insightful moments in Mary, the only other compliments I can bestow this novel is that Wollstonecraft occasionally inserts some interesting descriptions of scenery and probably did a good job of depicting how difficult it was to be an independent women towards the end of the 18th century. Other than that, it seems to be a melodramatic novel about a woman who experienced far too much illness, death and heartbreak. Mary seemed to be a good product of her time, but this contradicted Wollstonecraft's comments in the Advertisement at the start of the novel, which explained that Mary was an unusual woman of "thinking powers". There were a few throwaway comments about Mary's reading and powers of reason, but honestly? The emotions and irrationality that she displayed seemed far more fitting with the women Wollstonecraft describes in A Vindication of the Rights of Woman. It almost feels like Wollstonecraft didn't entirely know what she set out to write about in this much earlier work.
All in all, I'm sure this will make for some interesting conversations in class, but I can't say I can recommend this book--whether you're looking for an early classic novel or a feminist tract. If you are interested in Wollstonecraft, look to her non-fiction instead. 2*
izzydvies's review against another edition
4.0
I notice a lot of the negative reviews of this novel focus on Mary as a character, her self-absorption and 'obsession with herself' - I can't help but disagree. Mary is a fundamentally selfless character, consistently (naively) hopeful that others will behave as well to her as she does to them. That Mary Wollstonecraft has constructed the character around herself is not inherently negative. How many men, particularly in the 18th Century, write characters where they obsessively consider their own virtues, and those of other men around them. If the author and protagonist were not women I think this book would be held in much higher regard. The novel is, in essence, a deep character study, and simply because the character in question is a woman confident of her own intellect, reason, passion and goodness, does not negate the successes of the narrative. Mary's story is one of profound tragedy, heightened by the circumstances her gender relegates her into, which only adds to the irony of so much reader dismissal on account of her personality. A male character, becoming romantically interested in Mary, is surprised by her: 'In Mary's company he doubted whether heaven was peopled with spirits masculine, and almost forgot that he had called the sex "the pretty play things that render life intolerable". This quote alone indicates the importance of Mary's self-insertion of her own experiences; many men at the time simply did not consider women to be anything more than sexual objects, incapable of rational thought or intellect. 'Mary: A Fiction' is a celebration of the rich internal life of an intelligent, unfortunate young woman of the time.
emilyclairem's review against another edition
2.0
I have to agree with Wollstonecraft's later opinion that this is not a strong work. It's absolutely worth reading to see the beginnings of her later political ideas, but as a work of fiction it's just not great. It's quite muddled and ambivalent, despite being an incredibly tragic narrative. This term is often misused and I don't think it could be properly applied to this text, but the only thing I kept thinking of over and over while reading this is that Mary is a, well, Mary Sue. It unfortunately really read like Wollstonecraft's personal fantasy, which is interesting in order to learn more about Wollstonecraft, but is pretty lame as a fiction.
bloodhoney's review against another edition
2.0
"Mary, A Fiction" is often supposed to be one of the world's first truly feminist novels. However, Wollstonecraft instead creates an insipid character named Mary (after the authoress, by any chance?) who very rarely speaks up in her own defense or acts with the revolutionary fervor Mary Wollstonecraft was famous for. The character Mary is born of dreadful beginnings and it is not until she unexpectedly becomes an heiress that her parents take note of her. Her parents, however, die shortly after Mary becomes an heiress, and their last act is to marry her to a man who we meet twice in the novel.
Mary's husband goes to the Continent, and Mary spends a lot of time actively avoiding him, travelling all the way to Lisbon with a sick friend to achieve this end. Whilst in Lisbon, Mary falls in love with another invalid named Henry. However, their romance is interrupted by the death of her friend, and Mary must return to England to put her friend's affairs in order. Henry, meanwhile, has a lapse of his sickness, and he returns to England only to die in Mary's arms.
Now the novel has become almost gothic, in that everyone Mary cares about are dead, were it not for the frequent speeches Mary makes about the value of sensibility. Mary spends the rest of the novel bemoaning her fate, and faints when her husband returns home. She spends the rest of her life avoiding her husband whilst living in the same house as him and working with the poor. The novel ends with Mary's desire to die and go to heaven, where nobody gets married.
There are a few moments where Mary's feminism comes out--she refuses to ask her husband permission to travel to Lisbon in a letter, and only informs him of her intentions--and she is obviously a very poor housewife, but Mary changes nothing for the better and, once she dies, will leave no mind changed about the status of women, or even Mary's right to choose who she marries for herself. The entire novel is a sermon on the beauty of religion and both a praise and mockery of sensibility. I fail to see how this is considered a feminist novel, and I really hope that Wollstonecraft's other books are better than this one was.
Mary's husband goes to the Continent, and Mary spends a lot of time actively avoiding him, travelling all the way to Lisbon with a sick friend to achieve this end. Whilst in Lisbon, Mary falls in love with another invalid named Henry. However, their romance is interrupted by the death of her friend, and Mary must return to England to put her friend's affairs in order. Henry, meanwhile, has a lapse of his sickness, and he returns to England only to die in Mary's arms.
Now the novel has become almost gothic, in that everyone Mary cares about are dead, were it not for the frequent speeches Mary makes about the value of sensibility. Mary spends the rest of the novel bemoaning her fate, and faints when her husband returns home. She spends the rest of her life avoiding her husband whilst living in the same house as him and working with the poor. The novel ends with Mary's desire to die and go to heaven, where nobody gets married.
There are a few moments where Mary's feminism comes out--she refuses to ask her husband permission to travel to Lisbon in a letter, and only informs him of her intentions--and she is obviously a very poor housewife, but Mary changes nothing for the better and, once she dies, will leave no mind changed about the status of women, or even Mary's right to choose who she marries for herself. The entire novel is a sermon on the beauty of religion and both a praise and mockery of sensibility. I fail to see how this is considered a feminist novel, and I really hope that Wollstonecraft's other books are better than this one was.
More...