Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.65 AVERAGE
3.65 AVERAGE
It’s always interesting to read the debut work of well-known classic writers. Virginia Woolf’s first novel, The Voyage Out, was published in 1915, while her last novel, [book:Between the Acts|46105], was published in 1941, the same year Woolf committed suicide. I’ve now read both ends of her work, as well as some from the middle; yet I still don’t feel I have a grasp on her.
[author:Virginia Woolf|6765] is known for her innovation in narrative style and use of stream of consciousness to delve into the emotions and psyches of her characters, and that’s definitely present in this novel, although to a less noticeable extent than her later works. There is very little plot here; few major events take place, although there are turning points in the characters’ consciousness. And while The Voyage Out purports to be a satire of the wealthy English travelers at the beginning of the twentieth century, interpretations of this necessarily vary.
For my part, I was much more interested in the coming-of-age story that follows Rachel Vincrace, a 24-year-old young woman. Raised by her matronly aunts in the countryside, Rachel is quite obviously inexperienced at the beginning of the novel. While she’s an accomplished pianist, Rachel isn’t very well educated, and her views of the world are obviously sheltered. She alternates between finding the older adults boring and wanting to ask them dozens of questions about their life experiences. Ultimately, through the influence of the various characters she meets, Rachel “grows up” at least as much as a young woman can be expected to grow up.
Perhaps this is my age speaking, but I found Rachel a very sympathetic character. I related to her feelings of isolation and loneliness; a lot of the story revolves around her deep desire to have intimate conversations with people, but her inability to achieve that due to societal conventions. The multi-focused third person narration reveals that characters are often thinking one thing (often the same thing as other characters) but say something totally different.
Additionally (and this might just be my personal interpretation) there’s a definite hint at depression under the surface of things, the sense that “I’m happy, but is this all that happiness is?” There were so many lines I highlighted because they practically jump off the page. Despite the century that’s passed since the book’s publication, I relate to Rachel’s feeling of disconnect and isolation; even with the internet, connecting with other human beings can be fraught with complications.
While I did find things I liked in this novel, it wasn’t a totally enjoyable read. Classic literature is always a little more involved reading, and Woolf’s jumping back and forth through characters’ heads has always grated on me. I also felt that the actual social commentary left something to be desired—either because I’m too removed from the time period to understand, or because Woolf had to edit herself carefully in order to publish the book. While she talks about women’s suffrage and various characters talk about women’s psyche, there are definitely a lot of antifeminist statements made by characters as well. Additionally, I thought there was going to be a lot more critique of colonialism, as the book takes place in South America. Aside from some description of the surroundings, I often forgot that these characters were on a resort at all. It wasn’t really about the physical journey, but the psychological one.
Ultimately, I had some issues with this. It took me a good 40% of the book to even care what was happening, and the parts not in Rachel’s voice were tedious. While I can appreciate Woolf’s genius, I much prefer her later work (namely [book:Orlando|18839]) to this first novel.
[author:Virginia Woolf|6765] is known for her innovation in narrative style and use of stream of consciousness to delve into the emotions and psyches of her characters, and that’s definitely present in this novel, although to a less noticeable extent than her later works. There is very little plot here; few major events take place, although there are turning points in the characters’ consciousness. And while The Voyage Out purports to be a satire of the wealthy English travelers at the beginning of the twentieth century, interpretations of this necessarily vary.
For my part, I was much more interested in the coming-of-age story that follows Rachel Vincrace, a 24-year-old young woman. Raised by her matronly aunts in the countryside, Rachel is quite obviously inexperienced at the beginning of the novel. While she’s an accomplished pianist, Rachel isn’t very well educated, and her views of the world are obviously sheltered. She alternates between finding the older adults boring and wanting to ask them dozens of questions about their life experiences. Ultimately, through the influence of the various characters she meets, Rachel “grows up” at least as much as a young woman can be expected to grow up.
Perhaps this is my age speaking, but I found Rachel a very sympathetic character. I related to her feelings of isolation and loneliness; a lot of the story revolves around her deep desire to have intimate conversations with people, but her inability to achieve that due to societal conventions. The multi-focused third person narration reveals that characters are often thinking one thing (often the same thing as other characters) but say something totally different.
Additionally (and this might just be my personal interpretation) there’s a definite hint at depression under the surface of things, the sense that “I’m happy, but is this all that happiness is?” There were so many lines I highlighted because they practically jump off the page. Despite the century that’s passed since the book’s publication, I relate to Rachel’s feeling of disconnect and isolation; even with the internet, connecting with other human beings can be fraught with complications.
Spoiler
And ultimately, it’s this sense of disconnect that seems to manifest as the physical illness that ultimately kills her, which opens up some interesting questions about women’s psychological and physical health.While I did find things I liked in this novel, it wasn’t a totally enjoyable read. Classic literature is always a little more involved reading, and Woolf’s jumping back and forth through characters’ heads has always grated on me. I also felt that the actual social commentary left something to be desired—either because I’m too removed from the time period to understand, or because Woolf had to edit herself carefully in order to publish the book. While she talks about women’s suffrage and various characters talk about women’s psyche, there are definitely a lot of antifeminist statements made by characters as well. Additionally, I thought there was going to be a lot more critique of colonialism, as the book takes place in South America. Aside from some description of the surroundings, I often forgot that these characters were on a resort at all. It wasn’t really about the physical journey, but the psychological one.
Ultimately, I had some issues with this. It took me a good 40% of the book to even care what was happening, and the parts not in Rachel’s voice were tedious. While I can appreciate Woolf’s genius, I much prefer her later work (namely [book:Orlando|18839]) to this first novel.
As with most classics, I had a rough time getting into it. The writing was very foreign to me, and the first half of the book was very slow. Then as time went on, there were just too many characters for me to keep track of, so they some of them tended to blend together. I did appreciate some of the insights the characters, and by extension Woolf herself, had on the nature of life. I especially loved the recurring symbolism of water being something that isolates the main characters from civilization, making them act differently than they would back in rigid England.
The ending felt so bland. While I understood what Woolf was trying to say about how human beings tend to quickly go back to the cheerful ways of life if something tragic doesn't specifically happen to them, I felt as if Terence and Rachel's family were just left with a loose end. The fact that we don't know any of what happens to them afterward is just completely unsatisfying to me.
The ending felt so bland. While I understood what Woolf was trying to say about how human beings tend to quickly go back to the cheerful ways of life if something tragic doesn't specifically happen to them, I felt as if Terence and Rachel's family were just left with a loose end. The fact that we don't know any of what happens to them afterward is just completely unsatisfying to me.
emotional
reflective
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Complicated
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
4.5ish stars. I love Virginia Woolf; she's one of the few authors whose work I hope to read all of. It was a pleasure to read her first novel, her most traditional and yet of course with fantastic leaps in point of view and razor sharp similes like this one:"Their silence, he said, reminded him of the silence in the lion-house when each beast holds a lump of raw meat in its paws." I thought the last quarter dragged on a bit; the points Woolf made via Rachel, the protagonist, seemed to be expounded up a bit too much. I had the same feeling about Doris Lessing's The Golden Notebook. But! I always feel good reading Woolf. Reading her makes me a better writer.
reflective
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Loveable characters:
Yes
This book was a nice home I stumbled upon, one that opened its doors and made me feel like a welcome guest (stay as long as you'd like).
The beginning was incredibly gripping. The chapters were episodic. One moment you're eavesdropping, examining people in a hotel and the next you're in the hotel, living the lives of the very people you were inspecting so closely just the page before. (Woolf gives you opportunity to view a storm right before she puts you in its torrential downpour.)
The beginning was incredibly gripping. The chapters were episodic. One moment you're eavesdropping, examining people in a hotel and the next you're in the hotel, living the lives of the very people you were inspecting so closely just the page before. (Woolf gives you opportunity to view a storm right before she puts you in its torrential downpour.)
The Voyage Out is a sweeping, layered story. The reader acquainted with Woolf's previous works will see little pins of them scattered in this first novel. From the humor, ever present in Orlando, to the encapsulation + separation of atmosphere/story accomplished by descriptions of the natural world, done in The Waves. Though this novel doesn't show case Woolf's archetypal writing style and has a more present plot than her other novels, it still holds a strong place in her line up. A substantive story with developed & interesting characters.
My only gripe is that some parts seem a tad rushed or came out of nowhere, but even these seemed to work with the novel's message and structure.
I did suppose this to be set to go in a particular direction, but it went completely far from that. (light spoiler)
I've heard that this edition of text is the result of multiple cuts. Woolf removed much of the social/political commentary, homosexuality, discussion on colonialism and feminism, that was in the initial manuscript due to fear of critiquing British society too much (a concern heightened as this was her debut). The text published under the title <a href="https://app.thestorygraph.com/books/3fc9fb0b-0b7c-4cfa-8d84-ec6483de1004"> Melymbrosia </a> is the uncut version of this novel. I would love to see how it fares against this one.
To note: Chapter 9 is one the most hilarious chapters I have ever read in literature.
To note: Chapter 9 is one the most hilarious chapters I have ever read in literature.
Read this as an introduction to Woolf, read this if you already love Woolf.
Content Warnings
Moderate: Terminal illness
Minor: Infidelity
How flimsy are the accroutrements of civilisation in the face of nature.
It’s like it took Virginia a third of this novel to get out of her Victorian stays, chemises, petticoats and corsets. Once she shakes off all the Victorian trappings though she moves with beautiful poise and clarity of purpose. So, it’s quite heavy footed to begin with, not as modern in tone and treatment as Forster who had already written a couple of his novels when she wrote this. It’s as if Woolf has to free herself of tradition by first embracing it. She does this by creating a background cast of Victorian characters, elderly spinsters and erudite emotionally retarded elderly men and embarking on what seems a comedy of manners. Not perhaps Woolf’s forte – though, that said, it does have some fabulous comic moments and made me laugh out loud at least three times.
It’s clear Woolf couldn’t help thinking of the older generation as enemies and her foremost inclination is to ridicule them. This inclination muddies the early part of the novel a bit. Forster was better at characterising elderly interfering women, mainly because he sympathised with them and was able to write about them with tenderness as well as mockery whereas Woolf seems to find it difficult to overcome a snobbishly scornful point of view. Also, in the name of realism – we’re in a busy hotel - she duplicates characters which means it’s hard to differentiate some of the women. There are probably too many. Woolf is much more engaging in this novel when she’s writing about people of her own generation. In fact the novel becomes infinitely more compelling every time Rachel is its prevailing voice. There’s nothing of the comedy of manners genre about Rachel. Woolf is on the hunt for what’s fugitive about Rachel. Already there are signs of her ambition to write a new kind of biography which she was to achieve in such a brilliant and ground-breaking manner in The Waves.
The tone of the novel becomes kinder, warmer, when love arrives, the spinsters and middle aged married women are treated with more tenderness, and the novel improves massively as a result. If the first half was a three star read, the second half is a five star read.
It’s poignant that the young lover uses the exact same words to describe a relationship as Woolf herself was to use in her suicide note to Leonard. It also provides an insight into what Woolf herself went through as a young woman. I suspect the descriptions of Rachel’s illness were inspired by her own breakdowns. Thanks to Michael’s comment below I’ve been thinking about what Woolf says about love in this novel. Rachel offers lots of insights into Woolf herself, a woman who seemed to live without sexual passion. For Rachel love is like a river that takes her deeper inside herself; it doesn’t, as it does to most, bring her out of herself. It heralds a deeper silence rather than a louder singing. It’s closer to death than it is to life. It’s probably worth remembering Woolf had already attempted suicide before writing this. This might mean she had a greater need than most to believe in the transformative powers of love but at the same time less faith in those powers. I thought the last two chapters were incredibly powerful and haunting – and perhaps a little depressing - as an attempt to examine the testament of love. Brings me back again to her suicide note to Leonard – “I don’t think two people could have been happier than we have been.” And yet these were two people who had never made love. All Woolf’s romantic conflicts are encapsulated in that one line.
It’s been a long time since I read this. I was surprised by how good it is. Especially the second half, the depiction of young love and illness, which is inspired. Lovely to renew my twenty-year-old love affair with Virginia Woolf.
It’s like it took Virginia a third of this novel to get out of her Victorian stays, chemises, petticoats and corsets. Once she shakes off all the Victorian trappings though she moves with beautiful poise and clarity of purpose. So, it’s quite heavy footed to begin with, not as modern in tone and treatment as Forster who had already written a couple of his novels when she wrote this. It’s as if Woolf has to free herself of tradition by first embracing it. She does this by creating a background cast of Victorian characters, elderly spinsters and erudite emotionally retarded elderly men and embarking on what seems a comedy of manners. Not perhaps Woolf’s forte – though, that said, it does have some fabulous comic moments and made me laugh out loud at least three times.
It’s clear Woolf couldn’t help thinking of the older generation as enemies and her foremost inclination is to ridicule them. This inclination muddies the early part of the novel a bit. Forster was better at characterising elderly interfering women, mainly because he sympathised with them and was able to write about them with tenderness as well as mockery whereas Woolf seems to find it difficult to overcome a snobbishly scornful point of view. Also, in the name of realism – we’re in a busy hotel - she duplicates characters which means it’s hard to differentiate some of the women. There are probably too many. Woolf is much more engaging in this novel when she’s writing about people of her own generation. In fact the novel becomes infinitely more compelling every time Rachel is its prevailing voice. There’s nothing of the comedy of manners genre about Rachel. Woolf is on the hunt for what’s fugitive about Rachel. Already there are signs of her ambition to write a new kind of biography which she was to achieve in such a brilliant and ground-breaking manner in The Waves.
The tone of the novel becomes kinder, warmer, when love arrives, the spinsters and middle aged married women are treated with more tenderness, and the novel improves massively as a result. If the first half was a three star read, the second half is a five star read.
It’s poignant that the young lover uses the exact same words to describe a relationship as Woolf herself was to use in her suicide note to Leonard. It also provides an insight into what Woolf herself went through as a young woman. I suspect the descriptions of Rachel’s illness were inspired by her own breakdowns. Thanks to Michael’s comment below I’ve been thinking about what Woolf says about love in this novel. Rachel offers lots of insights into Woolf herself, a woman who seemed to live without sexual passion. For Rachel love is like a river that takes her deeper inside herself; it doesn’t, as it does to most, bring her out of herself. It heralds a deeper silence rather than a louder singing. It’s closer to death than it is to life. It’s probably worth remembering Woolf had already attempted suicide before writing this. This might mean she had a greater need than most to believe in the transformative powers of love but at the same time less faith in those powers. I thought the last two chapters were incredibly powerful and haunting – and perhaps a little depressing - as an attempt to examine the testament of love. Brings me back again to her suicide note to Leonard – “I don’t think two people could have been happier than we have been.” And yet these were two people who had never made love. All Woolf’s romantic conflicts are encapsulated in that one line.
It’s been a long time since I read this. I was surprised by how good it is. Especially the second half, the depiction of young love and illness, which is inspired. Lovely to renew my twenty-year-old love affair with Virginia Woolf.
emotional
reflective
slow-paced