Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.48 AVERAGE
3.48 AVERAGE
challenging
emotional
reflective
slow-paced
It's fiction
I honestly didn't like this book that much but it depicts a period of time that I can't relate to. It was hard for me to understand the character reactions and feelings. However, I found that the landscapes and the society of the time were very well described which creates a nice atmosphere.
This is a fascinating book. AS a mid 1800's Romance Novel it breaks most of the rules. first the hero is male, Fabrizo. Not the normal main character in Romance Novels. Second he has a slew of women who he leaves yearning for him but only consummates these relationships with one. Even though the idea in most 1800 Romances was for the love interest to consummate the relationship at some point with the heroin after a slew of romances with many other women. Stendhal blows up this idea with multiple women assisting Fabrizo at various times in his life. But, only one main female character will get any reward for these assistances. This leads to the great question this novel brings forth from Fabrizio.
How can I be Holy when I've done so much that is wrong. Wrong both to the Church, my family, and my Lord and Prince of Parma? How can I be honored with these gifts from so many women when I have no intention of allowing the giver to receive satisfaction?
Stendhal spends many pages through Fabrizio asking these two questions. All of this within the framework of Courtly Love scenarios that mid 1800 Lombardy (Northern Italy) or the rest of the Continent allows. This question never gets answered, but the rout to this no answer is worth every page. This is a wonderful read and I highly recommend it to any one who likes a fun read from the Romantic age of the mid 1800's
How can I be Holy when I've done so much that is wrong. Wrong both to the Church, my family, and my Lord and Prince of Parma? How can I be honored with these gifts from so many women when I have no intention of allowing the giver to receive satisfaction?
Stendhal spends many pages through Fabrizio asking these two questions. All of this within the framework of Courtly Love scenarios that mid 1800 Lombardy (Northern Italy) or the rest of the Continent allows. This question never gets answered, but the rout to this no answer is worth every page. This is a wonderful read and I highly recommend it to any one who likes a fun read from the Romantic age of the mid 1800's
It has been over a decade since I was underwhelmed by Stendhal’s [b:The Red and the Black|14662|The Red and the Black|Stendhal|https://images.gr-assets.com/books/1388254311s/14662.jpg|1028281], which is why it took me such a long time to read his work again. Unfortunately, Charterhouse was even more disappointing. I can’t understand why this novel is lauded as one of the great works of literature by some of the most amazing novelists (Tolstoy, Balzac, James, Gide, etc.), when it appears to be nothing more than a meandering (bordering on shaggy dog) adventure story. Stendhal supposedly gives a “realistic” depiction of the intrigues of court life, including murder, poisoning plots, prison escapes, and secret love affairs. Sounds petty exciting, right?
Not so much.
The highlight of the novel was Stendhal’s depiction of Waterloo, in which our hero, Fabrizio, gains a trial-by-fire as a young man. But even that was a bit disappointing, as Fabrizio spends most of the battle on the periphery, constantly getting his horse stolen and dodging the very soldiers whose ranks he wishes to join. Stendhal certainly takes down soldiering as a profession, painting these men as nothing more than bumbling horse thieves without much political acumen whose greatest skill is just doing what they are told.
If only the rest of the novel were so insightful. I guess we are supposed to understand that Stendhal is making the same critiques of princes, priests, and courtly ladies; perhaps my lack of knowledge of court life prevented me from understanding these critiques? But then again, I know very little of Second Empire French politics or 19th century Russian peasantry, but I didn't have the same problem reading Zola or Tolstoy. Why, then, does Stendhal continue to evade me?
Beyond the opening 70 pages, the novel really held no interest for me. The plot reminded me of a Family Circus cartoon, with Fabrizio tracing a little path across the landscape, getting into scrapes and trying to move up in the world of the clergy, all while avoiding political machinations and prison (he largely fails!). By the end of the novel, I didn’t really care how Stendhal wrapped up his various subplots and felt I was mostly reading the 19th century literary equivalent of a soap opera.
I may one day return to Stendhal to give him a third chance, but it probably won’t be for another decade or more.
Not so much.
The highlight of the novel was Stendhal’s depiction of Waterloo, in which our hero, Fabrizio, gains a trial-by-fire as a young man. But even that was a bit disappointing, as Fabrizio spends most of the battle on the periphery, constantly getting his horse stolen and dodging the very soldiers whose ranks he wishes to join. Stendhal certainly takes down soldiering as a profession, painting these men as nothing more than bumbling horse thieves without much political acumen whose greatest skill is just doing what they are told.
If only the rest of the novel were so insightful. I guess we are supposed to understand that Stendhal is making the same critiques of princes, priests, and courtly ladies; perhaps my lack of knowledge of court life prevented me from understanding these critiques? But then again, I know very little of Second Empire French politics or 19th century Russian peasantry, but I didn't have the same problem reading Zola or Tolstoy. Why, then, does Stendhal continue to evade me?
Beyond the opening 70 pages, the novel really held no interest for me. The plot reminded me of a Family Circus cartoon, with Fabrizio tracing a little path across the landscape, getting into scrapes and trying to move up in the world of the clergy, all while avoiding political machinations and prison (he largely fails!). By the end of the novel, I didn’t really care how Stendhal wrapped up his various subplots and felt I was mostly reading the 19th century literary equivalent of a soap opera.
I may one day return to Stendhal to give him a third chance, but it probably won’t be for another decade or more.
This book started with a bang for the first 100 pages. Right up to his return from joining Napoleon's army, it is very enthralling. After that, it slows to a crawl and I quickly lost interest in the characters.
We are ostensibly on the side of Fabrice, the Duchess, Count Mosca and Clélia, but except for Clélia, I found the other characters unsympathetic. Stendahl seems to exchange "attractive" for any other characteristics that would make these characters compelling. Fabrice's adventures after Waterloo are those of a bored aristocrat, and the trouble he gets into are completely avoidable. This is a long book to deal with a relatively unimportant figure. Fabrice has everything handed to him on a silver platter and squanders it. He is more of a spoiled brat than anything, and all the machinations that take place on his behalf are efforts wasted.
It is amazing when you step back and look at all the court intrigues that take place when the stakes are so small. The plotting and conniving, conspiracies and murders, all take place because a pretty woman falls in love with her nephew and wants to rescue him, and a Prince wants to spite the pretty woman. The last 400 odd pages just dragged by. What a disappointment!
We are ostensibly on the side of Fabrice, the Duchess, Count Mosca and Clélia, but except for Clélia, I found the other characters unsympathetic. Stendahl seems to exchange "attractive" for any other characteristics that would make these characters compelling. Fabrice's adventures after Waterloo are those of a bored aristocrat, and the trouble he gets into are completely avoidable. This is a long book to deal with a relatively unimportant figure. Fabrice has everything handed to him on a silver platter and squanders it. He is more of a spoiled brat than anything, and all the machinations that take place on his behalf are efforts wasted.
It is amazing when you step back and look at all the court intrigues that take place when the stakes are so small. The plotting and conniving, conspiracies and murders, all take place because a pretty woman falls in love with her nephew and wants to rescue him, and a Prince wants to spite the pretty woman. The last 400 odd pages just dragged by. What a disappointment!
It felt like this book went on and on forever! I preferred The Red and the Black more to Charterhouse of Parma.
Initially, the story starts with a lot of promise. It seems like it is going to be an entertaining romp with a clueless young hero. The scenes at the Battle of Waterloo were great - a very different comedic perspective than most novels.
However, instead of focusing solely on Fabrizio, it moves to his aunt Gina and Count Mosca, and their desire to climb the social ladder. The middle meanders. The plot is very loose.
The ending redeems the story somewhat, but it is all too much soap-opera and dramatic to really have serious underpinnings. Certainly important historical events are mentioned, but there are so many other classic novels that do it so much better!
There is a decent story overall, yet I think execution was weak. The court intrigues were actually rather simple, but the manner in which they were explained were convoluted.
If the story was a bit more lowbrow and ridiculous, it would have been much better. What should have been fun turned out boring at times.
My translation seemed a bit awkward with its phrasing, and I got the sense it was attempting to make the writing more high-brow than it really was written. Possibly this affected my reaction to the novel.
Charterhouse of Parma is fun, but I can't say it's a light read considering its length.
Initially, the story starts with a lot of promise. It seems like it is going to be an entertaining romp with a clueless young hero. The scenes at the Battle of Waterloo were great - a very different comedic perspective than most novels.
However, instead of focusing solely on Fabrizio, it moves to his aunt Gina and Count Mosca, and their desire to climb the social ladder. The middle meanders. The plot is very loose.
The ending redeems the story somewhat, but it is all too much soap-opera and dramatic to really have serious underpinnings. Certainly important historical events are mentioned, but there are so many other classic novels that do it so much better!
There is a decent story overall, yet I think execution was weak. The court intrigues were actually rather simple, but the manner in which they were explained were convoluted.
If the story was a bit more lowbrow and ridiculous, it would have been much better. What should have been fun turned out boring at times.
My translation seemed a bit awkward with its phrasing, and I got the sense it was attempting to make the writing more high-brow than it really was written. Possibly this affected my reaction to the novel.
Charterhouse of Parma is fun, but I can't say it's a light read considering its length.
adventurous
challenging
reflective
tense
slow-paced
Pulp fiction. Intrigues only. Too mechanical.
A big disappointment. Never ended. Proud of that.
A big disappointment. Never ended. Proud of that.
informative
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Plot
Strong character development:
No
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
Nebylo to úplně jednoduché čtení (hodně postav, plno intrik a pletichaření), ale za svoje úsilí jsem byla víc než dostatečně odměněna.