Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.71 AVERAGE
3.71 AVERAGE
challenging
emotional
mysterious
reflective
fast-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
This might be the best book I've ever read. I have no words. I just felt so much reading this book that I normally don't feel. The narration? The mystery? The characters? The heartbreak? Oh my LORD this is even better than Jane Eyre.
I did get into this book, the last 100 pages or so really did hold my interest but the other 472 pages took me longer than usual. The French slowed me down a bit, but near the end my high school classes were coming back to me - with no French experience, I think it would've been frustrating. I found Lucy Snowe as a character intriguing but hard for me to "get" - she seemed so harsh, opinionated and uptight on the one hand, and so loving, generous and helpful on the other. I couldn't ever figure out how she would deal with any particular situation. While I liked the relationship with Lucy and M. Paul (he was an interesting character, VERY Mr. Rochester-type guy) the ending left me feeling...blah. Like, REALLY blah. I am glad I read it because I do like Bronte's writing - I found many ideas in the book intriguing and she creates beautiful images and analogies, it was just a really long book. I liked Jane Eyre better I guess :)
dark
emotional
hopeful
mysterious
reflective
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
I'm not sure why, but I have gone my entire life and thought that Charlotte Bronte only wrote Jane Eyre. I don't know why I never sought out another book written by her. I love Jane Eyre so much. It seems like I should have checked to see if Charlotte Bronte had written another book. I finally came across this book while browsing through goodreads recommendations, and I was surprised to see that many people consider this book to be far superior to Jane Eyre. I was intrigued. Was it even possible for a book to be so much better than the Jane Eyre that I have loved for many years?
I sometimes forget just how different it is to read a Victorian novel than it is to read so many of the books published today. Today's books often seem to be taking the high speed train to our destination as we read, driving the plot through the pages of the book quickly so that as a reader we have no opportunity to get bored. How many times have I read reviews of books that are on this site, only to find the common complaint of readers that an author has the audacity to wait more than a hundred pages to get to the meat of the plot? Readers complain about too much time spent in creating the foundational background of a story. I would imagine that those same readers would have great difficulty in reading a novel such as this. While many modern stories are as fast-paced as a high speed train, reading a Victorian novel is more like taking a leisurely walk through the woods, pausing ever so often to gaze at the scenery, noticing the smaller details of the world that might otherwise escape our notice. It is definitely a slower pace of reading, but in some ways it is infinitely more rewarding at the end of the journey. It just requires a bit more patience. For that reason, although I have so many modern books that I love so much, I make sure to take time every few months to reacquaint myself with some of the Victorian literature I love. It keeps my neurons pumping, and I always find a story that sticks with me.
That led me to Vilette. Did I find it to be better than Jane Eyre? Well, it is a bit unfair to totally judge a book based on my feelings for another book, so I'll just give some general impressions I had while reading this book. First of all, the narrator, Lucy Snowe -- what can I say about her? There were times when I read this book when I thought I could totally be her best friend. She thought some of the same things I was thinking. She said some of the things that I would say. Her approach to life seemed to be so similar to mine in so many ways. In fact, there were many times when I read this book when I wanted to double check to see when it was published. So many of Lucy's actions and thoughts seemed almost modern. She seemed very independent at times, not needing the praise or support of others for the decisions that she made. There was a bravery about her as she basically left her native land on a whim once all that she had held dear was no longer there for her. She just jumped on a boat headed for France without any real plans for the future. That really was an amazing choice when you think about the times she lived in. She forms a very modern sort of friendship with Dr. John. It seems that a friendship such as theirs would have been viewed as scandalous in some of the other books of this time. And yet, as much as I related to Lucy and thought I could be her very good friend, at other times she absolutely drove me crazy. She could sometimes seem blunt in her comments, almost to the point of cruelty. Luckily those she spoke to did not seem to notice it, or maybe they were just accustomed to her mannerisms. Sometimes her melancholy, although understandable, was infuriating to read about. At those points I felt a bit like Dr. John who just wanted her to pick herself up and will herself to be happy. But Lucy was wise in her response to this: "No mockery in this world ever sounds to me so hollow as that of being told to cultivate happiness. What does such advice mean? Happiness is not a potato, to be planted in mould, and tilled with manure. Happiness is a glory shining far down upon us out of Heaven. She is a divine dew which the sould, on certain of its summer mornings, feels dropping upon it from the amaranth bloom and golden fruitage of Paradise." She could not be compelled to be happy, but as the book progresses it becomes obvious that she can make choices in her life which lead her to find the happiness she so deserves and desires.
Since I have just mentioned him, I'll next talk about Dr. John. If I had been reading a regular sort of romance book I would have been convinced that Dr. John was meant to be the love interest for Lucy. He seems to be all perfection. He is handsome, kind, intelligent, and perpetually happy. He cares for Lucy in her darkest moments and aids her to find relief to the profound lonliness she feels at the school. Dr. John and Lucy find a comfortable friendship in one another, but it is more of the kind of relationship found between a brother and sister. At times it seems that Lucy might be leaning toward deeper feelings for him, but they never quite reach that point. She never really begins to feel those feelings, and Dr. John definitely does not. She will always be his god-sister. I admit that I don't quite understand the reserve of these people at times. Why did Lucy wait so long to reveal her identity to Dr. John when she recognized him as the acquaintance from her youth? Oh well, it doesn't really end up mattering in the end. I just don't understand it. I was happy for Dr. John's happy ending. I could see that that was his destiny from the beginning chapters of the novel, so it worked out wonderfully.
And then there is M. Paul. Oh, how I love this character! Lucy's "little man" with all of his strange and humorous tendencies -- what a pleasure to read the scenes he was in. Some of the scenes were absolutely hilarious. His manner was so severe, and his comments could seem to be so harsh. He seemed to be unceasingly critical in his interactions with Lucy. His constant degrading comments about English and Protestant women were amazing to hear, maybe because of their directness, or maybe because of Lucy's excellent reactions to them. I think I might have been a blubbering mess if I had had to work with a professor such as M. Paul. Sometimes he would lead Lucy to tears, but often she would match his comments with her own well-placed barbs. His original scene with Lucy where he takes her and locks her in a blazing hot, dark, stuffy, and rat-infested room so that she can rehearse for a scene in which she has hastily been recruited to act in was boggling to read. I didn't quite know how to handle the "little man." I don't think that Lucy did either. But, it became obvious soon that M. Paul thought highly of Lucy. He showed his regard in bizarre ways -- rifling through her belongings, reading her letters from Dr. John, leaving little books behind for her, and then flying into crazy rants whenever Lucy did anything that might prove her regard for another man. I absolutely loved the scene where Lucy is the only person in the room who does not give him a birthday bouquet. I won't give the details, but it was a fun scene to read. After hearing his crazy lesson about the inherent evils of the English women, Lucy's public reaction was priceless. However, with all of his quirks, it was wonderful to see his transformation in Lucy's eyes by the end of the book. What a sweet man he turned out to be!
The secondary characters in this novel also are wonderfully created. Madame Beck, the head of the school where Lucy works is so interesting. She seems to have an ability to stand stoic in the face of any scene. She is a nosy busybody who spies on the girls in her charge as well as their teachers. She manipulates the situations around her to suit her own whims. Yet she was also a savior to Lucy when she arrived on her doorstep in the dark needing a job and a place to stay. Genevra can be described with one word: selfish. What an annoying little girl! Yet Lucy managed to handle her personality well. Polly was a good contrast to Genevra, and I appreciated that she wasn't portrayed as horribly perfect in every way. I appreciated Lucy's reaction to the newfound love between Polly and Dr. John. She loved them and wished them the best. She worked to make sure that they could find the happiness they desired, and yet she also tired of their incessant talking of their love and approaching nuptials. That reaction seemed very true to life. How many people in the world are so happy to see their friends and family happy with new love, and yet at the same time are happy to not have to hear about it constantly? There are also many characters peppered throughout the novel who make brief, yet meaningful appearances. All of them give added spice to this richly crafted story.
This really is an existential novel written before existentialism was really discussed. Lucy is a woman who is trying to find her place in this world. She has the advantage of no ties to hold her to any particular paths in life. The world is open to her. But, while that gives her freedom of choice, it also creates great confusion for her as well. What is it that she desires? How can she find the happiness she wants in this life? Is happiness even something that she can achieve here, or does she have to wait for the hereafter? But at one point in the book Lucy declares: "I am a rising character: once an old lady's companion, then a nursery-governess, now a school-teacher." Lucy has dreams, and she desires to better her situation. She is not willing to sit and wait for life to come at her. Even with a relatively good situation as an English teacher at the school, Lucy wants to do more. She desires to start her own school. She puts her mind to it and teaches herself French and German. She works to be more than she is. There are constant thoughts she holds throughout the book that touch on a variety of social themes. It was fascinating to see the struggle that occured between Lucy and M. Paul over religion. He was a staunch Catholic who was concerned for the welfare of Lucy's soul. She was a Protestant who did not hold good feelings about Catholicism. He tried to teach her and inspire her to convert. She found the pomp and decoration of the Catholic church to be pulling away from God and toward the power of the church. Eventually they come to an understanding -- an understanding that may have been revolutionary in a time when there was such violent opposition between Catholics and Protestants. Their compromise seems to be not so shocking in an age when countless couples make the same choice.
Was this better than Jane Eyre? I believe that the themes found within this book may be richer and deeper than those found in Jane Eyre. Some of the writing seemed deeply personal and heartfelt. M. Paul is no Mr. Rochester. Perhaps in Jane Eyre the romance takes a greater stage than is found in this book. I am a sucker for romances, so I am immediately drawn to that beautiful romance in Jane Eyre. Jane Eyre is also more familiar to me, so I have a solid place in my heart for it, and I haven't made as big of a space there for this book. However, I loved this story. I will read this book again in the future, I know. There is much in the words of this story, and I am convinced that there are elements to this story that I have not yet discovered. The characters are wonderful in many ways. I could picture the scenes perfectly. Is there a wonderful BBC version of this story out there? If not, why not? It would be funny, sweet, daring, maybe a bit haunting, and romantic. This is a longer book, but it was worth every minute of my time spent reading it. I highly recommend it!!!
I sometimes forget just how different it is to read a Victorian novel than it is to read so many of the books published today. Today's books often seem to be taking the high speed train to our destination as we read, driving the plot through the pages of the book quickly so that as a reader we have no opportunity to get bored. How many times have I read reviews of books that are on this site, only to find the common complaint of readers that an author has the audacity to wait more than a hundred pages to get to the meat of the plot? Readers complain about too much time spent in creating the foundational background of a story. I would imagine that those same readers would have great difficulty in reading a novel such as this. While many modern stories are as fast-paced as a high speed train, reading a Victorian novel is more like taking a leisurely walk through the woods, pausing ever so often to gaze at the scenery, noticing the smaller details of the world that might otherwise escape our notice. It is definitely a slower pace of reading, but in some ways it is infinitely more rewarding at the end of the journey. It just requires a bit more patience. For that reason, although I have so many modern books that I love so much, I make sure to take time every few months to reacquaint myself with some of the Victorian literature I love. It keeps my neurons pumping, and I always find a story that sticks with me.
That led me to Vilette. Did I find it to be better than Jane Eyre? Well, it is a bit unfair to totally judge a book based on my feelings for another book, so I'll just give some general impressions I had while reading this book. First of all, the narrator, Lucy Snowe -- what can I say about her? There were times when I read this book when I thought I could totally be her best friend. She thought some of the same things I was thinking. She said some of the things that I would say. Her approach to life seemed to be so similar to mine in so many ways. In fact, there were many times when I read this book when I wanted to double check to see when it was published. So many of Lucy's actions and thoughts seemed almost modern. She seemed very independent at times, not needing the praise or support of others for the decisions that she made. There was a bravery about her as she basically left her native land on a whim once all that she had held dear was no longer there for her. She just jumped on a boat headed for France without any real plans for the future. That really was an amazing choice when you think about the times she lived in. She forms a very modern sort of friendship with Dr. John. It seems that a friendship such as theirs would have been viewed as scandalous in some of the other books of this time. And yet, as much as I related to Lucy and thought I could be her very good friend, at other times she absolutely drove me crazy. She could sometimes seem blunt in her comments, almost to the point of cruelty. Luckily those she spoke to did not seem to notice it, or maybe they were just accustomed to her mannerisms. Sometimes her melancholy, although understandable, was infuriating to read about. At those points I felt a bit like Dr. John who just wanted her to pick herself up and will herself to be happy. But Lucy was wise in her response to this: "No mockery in this world ever sounds to me so hollow as that of being told to cultivate happiness. What does such advice mean? Happiness is not a potato, to be planted in mould, and tilled with manure. Happiness is a glory shining far down upon us out of Heaven. She is a divine dew which the sould, on certain of its summer mornings, feels dropping upon it from the amaranth bloom and golden fruitage of Paradise." She could not be compelled to be happy, but as the book progresses it becomes obvious that she can make choices in her life which lead her to find the happiness she so deserves and desires.
Since I have just mentioned him, I'll next talk about Dr. John. If I had been reading a regular sort of romance book I would have been convinced that Dr. John was meant to be the love interest for Lucy. He seems to be all perfection. He is handsome, kind, intelligent, and perpetually happy. He cares for Lucy in her darkest moments and aids her to find relief to the profound lonliness she feels at the school. Dr. John and Lucy find a comfortable friendship in one another, but it is more of the kind of relationship found between a brother and sister. At times it seems that Lucy might be leaning toward deeper feelings for him, but they never quite reach that point. She never really begins to feel those feelings, and Dr. John definitely does not. She will always be his god-sister. I admit that I don't quite understand the reserve of these people at times. Why did Lucy wait so long to reveal her identity to Dr. John when she recognized him as the acquaintance from her youth? Oh well, it doesn't really end up mattering in the end. I just don't understand it. I was happy for Dr. John's happy ending. I could see that that was his destiny from the beginning chapters of the novel, so it worked out wonderfully.
And then there is M. Paul. Oh, how I love this character! Lucy's "little man" with all of his strange and humorous tendencies -- what a pleasure to read the scenes he was in. Some of the scenes were absolutely hilarious. His manner was so severe, and his comments could seem to be so harsh. He seemed to be unceasingly critical in his interactions with Lucy. His constant degrading comments about English and Protestant women were amazing to hear, maybe because of their directness, or maybe because of Lucy's excellent reactions to them. I think I might have been a blubbering mess if I had had to work with a professor such as M. Paul. Sometimes he would lead Lucy to tears, but often she would match his comments with her own well-placed barbs. His original scene with Lucy where he takes her and locks her in a blazing hot, dark, stuffy, and rat-infested room so that she can rehearse for a scene in which she has hastily been recruited to act in was boggling to read. I didn't quite know how to handle the "little man." I don't think that Lucy did either. But, it became obvious soon that M. Paul thought highly of Lucy. He showed his regard in bizarre ways -- rifling through her belongings, reading her letters from Dr. John, leaving little books behind for her, and then flying into crazy rants whenever Lucy did anything that might prove her regard for another man. I absolutely loved the scene where Lucy is the only person in the room who does not give him a birthday bouquet. I won't give the details, but it was a fun scene to read. After hearing his crazy lesson about the inherent evils of the English women, Lucy's public reaction was priceless. However, with all of his quirks, it was wonderful to see his transformation in Lucy's eyes by the end of the book. What a sweet man he turned out to be!
The secondary characters in this novel also are wonderfully created. Madame Beck, the head of the school where Lucy works is so interesting. She seems to have an ability to stand stoic in the face of any scene. She is a nosy busybody who spies on the girls in her charge as well as their teachers. She manipulates the situations around her to suit her own whims. Yet she was also a savior to Lucy when she arrived on her doorstep in the dark needing a job and a place to stay. Genevra can be described with one word: selfish. What an annoying little girl! Yet Lucy managed to handle her personality well. Polly was a good contrast to Genevra, and I appreciated that she wasn't portrayed as horribly perfect in every way. I appreciated Lucy's reaction to the newfound love between Polly and Dr. John. She loved them and wished them the best. She worked to make sure that they could find the happiness they desired, and yet she also tired of their incessant talking of their love and approaching nuptials. That reaction seemed very true to life. How many people in the world are so happy to see their friends and family happy with new love, and yet at the same time are happy to not have to hear about it constantly? There are also many characters peppered throughout the novel who make brief, yet meaningful appearances. All of them give added spice to this richly crafted story.
This really is an existential novel written before existentialism was really discussed. Lucy is a woman who is trying to find her place in this world. She has the advantage of no ties to hold her to any particular paths in life. The world is open to her. But, while that gives her freedom of choice, it also creates great confusion for her as well. What is it that she desires? How can she find the happiness she wants in this life? Is happiness even something that she can achieve here, or does she have to wait for the hereafter? But at one point in the book Lucy declares: "I am a rising character: once an old lady's companion, then a nursery-governess, now a school-teacher." Lucy has dreams, and she desires to better her situation. She is not willing to sit and wait for life to come at her. Even with a relatively good situation as an English teacher at the school, Lucy wants to do more. She desires to start her own school. She puts her mind to it and teaches herself French and German. She works to be more than she is. There are constant thoughts she holds throughout the book that touch on a variety of social themes. It was fascinating to see the struggle that occured between Lucy and M. Paul over religion. He was a staunch Catholic who was concerned for the welfare of Lucy's soul. She was a Protestant who did not hold good feelings about Catholicism. He tried to teach her and inspire her to convert. She found the pomp and decoration of the Catholic church to be pulling away from God and toward the power of the church. Eventually they come to an understanding -- an understanding that may have been revolutionary in a time when there was such violent opposition between Catholics and Protestants. Their compromise seems to be not so shocking in an age when countless couples make the same choice.
Was this better than Jane Eyre? I believe that the themes found within this book may be richer and deeper than those found in Jane Eyre. Some of the writing seemed deeply personal and heartfelt. M. Paul is no Mr. Rochester. Perhaps in Jane Eyre the romance takes a greater stage than is found in this book. I am a sucker for romances, so I am immediately drawn to that beautiful romance in Jane Eyre. Jane Eyre is also more familiar to me, so I have a solid place in my heart for it, and I haven't made as big of a space there for this book. However, I loved this story. I will read this book again in the future, I know. There is much in the words of this story, and I am convinced that there are elements to this story that I have not yet discovered. The characters are wonderful in many ways. I could picture the scenes perfectly. Is there a wonderful BBC version of this story out there? If not, why not? It would be funny, sweet, daring, maybe a bit haunting, and romantic. This is a longer book, but it was worth every minute of my time spent reading it. I highly recommend it!!!
Rereading this one was a joy. The book is based on Charlotte's time in Brussels (Villette in Labassecour) and when you know the places she describes, it's lovely to follow her journey through our capital.
Again I loved her observations and her philosophical musings on love and life. Again I love how she hates us Flamands with an adorable passion.
Again I loved her observations and her philosophical musings on love and life. Again I love how she hates us Flamands with an adorable passion.
mysterious
reflective
sad
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
dark
emotional
mysterious
reflective
relaxing
sad
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
Very fine, but I bloody well hakee M. Paul. Why would you even look at a man who talks to you like that. Don’t care that it’s 18XX.
I loved Jane Eyre. That was the only reason I read this book. It was not Jane Eyre. I was still able to enjoy reading something written by Charlotte Bronte, and was able to finish it with the same belief that she is amazing, but I have to admit it really wasn't that good. I read it over 8 years ago, though and don't remember much about it other than this feeling.
emotional
reflective
sad
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
No
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
challenging
emotional
reflective
tense
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes