Take a photo of a barcode or cover
2.85 AVERAGE
2.85 AVERAGE
The three portraits—of Billy Budd the good-natured peacemaker, of Starry Vere the discerning captain, and of Claggart the dastardly master-at-arms—are vivid and (impressive in so brief a book) sufficiently detailed as to elevate the characters beyond mere types. Much as in a longer maritime work of his, Melville is generous with his erudition, and patient readers of Billy Budd will walk away better informed about Horatio Nelson, the layout of a man-of-war ship from the late 18th century, not to mention topics ranging from Calvinistic predestination to phrenology.
I appreciated the narrator’s drawing our attention to something like the military-industrial complex; lantern oil aboard the Bellipotent is supplied by “the war contractors (whose gains, honest or otherwise, are in every land an anticipated portion of the harvest of death).” I likewise enjoyed his Pavlovian description of the crew’s obedience: “True martial discipline long continued superinduces in average man a sort of impulse whose operation at the official word of command much resembles in its promptitude the effect of an instinct.”
I was occasionally bogged down in the effort to parse Melville’s double and even triple negatives. What, for example, are we talking about when a sentence begins, “Unlike no few of England’s renowned sailors…”? I took “no few” together, reading it to mean the same thing as “Unlike quite a few…” but it’s hard to say, and there are more negatives waiting in the following clause. By and large, though, I cannot not not not love the baroque extremes of his language, as at the moment Claggart’s eyes, “those lights of human intelligence, losing human expression, were gelidly protruding like the alien eyes of certain uncatalogued creatures of the deep.”
And on the grander scale, Billy Budd is excellent tragedy. The “natural depravity” of Claggart is Iago-like. Starry Vere and the lieutenants are constrained by law, duty, and the political climate to make decisions that offend their own senses of justice and compassion. Billy Budd, for his part, is the Handsome Sailor who does right by all yet is not loved by all, since these haters, you know, they can't stand to see a good man winning.
I appreciated the narrator’s drawing our attention to something like the military-industrial complex; lantern oil aboard the Bellipotent is supplied by “the war contractors (whose gains, honest or otherwise, are in every land an anticipated portion of the harvest of death).” I likewise enjoyed his Pavlovian description of the crew’s obedience: “True martial discipline long continued superinduces in average man a sort of impulse whose operation at the official word of command much resembles in its promptitude the effect of an instinct.”
I was occasionally bogged down in the effort to parse Melville’s double and even triple negatives. What, for example, are we talking about when a sentence begins, “Unlike no few of England’s renowned sailors…”? I took “no few” together, reading it to mean the same thing as “Unlike quite a few…” but it’s hard to say, and there are more negatives waiting in the following clause. By and large, though, I cannot not not not love the baroque extremes of his language, as at the moment Claggart’s eyes, “those lights of human intelligence, losing human expression, were gelidly protruding like the alien eyes of certain uncatalogued creatures of the deep.”
And on the grander scale, Billy Budd is excellent tragedy. The “natural depravity” of Claggart is Iago-like. Starry Vere and the lieutenants are constrained by law, duty, and the political climate to make decisions that offend their own senses of justice and compassion. Billy Budd, for his part, is the Handsome Sailor who does right by all yet is not loved by all, since these haters, you know, they can't stand to see a good man winning.
3.5. The digressions are reminiscent of TRISTRAM SHANDY in their assumed (yet unironic) profundity and of THE CRUCIBLE in their attempt to understand a historic episode. It does have its tedious passages, but there is no doubt that Melville's tale is poignant and excellently written.
I do enjoy the Melville. And sadly I feel like I've known lesser Claggarts.
adventurous
challenging
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
Complicated
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
Had to go back to the library and I wasn’t enjoying the dense writing style enough to get it again to finish.
Part of me wants to give it the full 5 stars, but I have to admit that the first half of the story bogs it down a bit. Still, the second half sees Melville thinking through moral and social questions even more inscrutable than what he ponders in Moby Dick.
not to my taste sorry :( really flopping at this last month of my reading stats oops
Rating 2.5/5
For the July Challenge for the [info:]50bookchallenge community, I decided to re-read Billy Budd. I was forced to read this during my senior English class and truly hated it. For the required "Opinion Paper" dealing with each book we read (we could choose our own topics as long as they had well thought out arguments and proof) I actually wrote a paper about why this book should not be required reading in high schools.
Don't get me wrong - I understand why they wanted us to read it. The moral dilemma posed in the book is quite intreguing. And related to a lot of the "real world" things we hear about today with soldiers doing things "because they were ordered to" or they were "enforcing the law" even though they don't believe in it, because that's their job. The book is pretty thought provoking - that is, if you can find the plot and message.
This was my major complaint at the time. Melville's writing style is ... ok, I know there's a word for what I'm trying to say, but I can't think of it. Basically, I find it incredibly difficult to wade through his ridiculous wording and outrageously long descriptions and diversions into historical background of things and figure out what the hell was going on. The plot was completely lost to me. Something would happen on one page. Then 5 pages later, something else finally happened but by that time I'd forgotten what had happened before. Reading the book for the first time, without knowing anything at all about the plot ... it just took me forever to figure out what was going on.
I'll admit, it was somewhat easier this time, since I knew the progression of the story and what would be coming next. But this time in reading it, I got incredibly impatient. Something happened on one page, and I knew what would happen next. And then I went pages and pages and pages wondering when he was going to get to the point and make it happen already! It drove me crazy. I do think I enjoyed the book a lot more this read-through, but there were still a lot of parts where, had I not been -forcing- myself to read everything for the sake of this chapter, I would have skipped a few pages. And since the books is pretty short to begin with, skipping pages leads to approximately 10 pages worth keeping. I really, really think this would have made a GREAT short story.
And when I came to chapter 26, which was titled "A Digression", I literally burst out laughing in the middle of the library and got a few evil glares. The whole damn book is a digression if you ask me.
Anyway, the story is good and the moral dilemma is interesting, but I'd still suggest the Cliff's Notes version.
For the July Challenge for the [info:]50bookchallenge community, I decided to re-read Billy Budd. I was forced to read this during my senior English class and truly hated it. For the required "Opinion Paper" dealing with each book we read (we could choose our own topics as long as they had well thought out arguments and proof) I actually wrote a paper about why this book should not be required reading in high schools.
Don't get me wrong - I understand why they wanted us to read it. The moral dilemma posed in the book is quite intreguing. And related to a lot of the "real world" things we hear about today with soldiers doing things "because they were ordered to" or they were "enforcing the law" even though they don't believe in it, because that's their job. The book is pretty thought provoking - that is, if you can find the plot and message.
This was my major complaint at the time. Melville's writing style is ... ok, I know there's a word for what I'm trying to say, but I can't think of it. Basically, I find it incredibly difficult to wade through his ridiculous wording and outrageously long descriptions and diversions into historical background of things and figure out what the hell was going on. The plot was completely lost to me. Something would happen on one page. Then 5 pages later, something else finally happened but by that time I'd forgotten what had happened before. Reading the book for the first time, without knowing anything at all about the plot ... it just took me forever to figure out what was going on.
I'll admit, it was somewhat easier this time, since I knew the progression of the story and what would be coming next. But this time in reading it, I got incredibly impatient. Something happened on one page, and I knew what would happen next. And then I went pages and pages and pages wondering when he was going to get to the point and make it happen already! It drove me crazy. I do think I enjoyed the book a lot more this read-through, but there were still a lot of parts where, had I not been -forcing- myself to read everything for the sake of this chapter, I would have skipped a few pages. And since the books is pretty short to begin with, skipping pages leads to approximately 10 pages worth keeping. I really, really think this would have made a GREAT short story.
And when I came to chapter 26, which was titled "A Digression", I literally burst out laughing in the middle of the library and got a few evil glares. The whole damn book is a digression if you ask me.
Anyway, the story is good and the moral dilemma is interesting, but I'd still suggest the Cliff's Notes version.
I love Melville’s contortions of language. The trial is played out in much less opulent vocabulary and much more standard grammar.
He loves calling sources he references “long-forgotten” and “a writer whom few know.” Very funny habit.
He loves calling sources he references “long-forgotten” and “a writer whom few know.” Very funny habit.