Scan barcode
haileyswhimsicalpages's review against another edition
2.0
Read for school. This wasnt too horrible to get through, especially with the audiobook.
yeahtobi's review against another edition
2.0
Too sentimental for me, though there seems to be some debate whether this is satire or not. I would say that there are parts that are very comical, but on the whole it's not satire and the eponymous vicar seems to be sincere but able to lightly talk about his misfortunes because of his sincerity.
So - parts I enjoyed, but altogether too many digressions and too little plot or theme.
So - parts I enjoyed, but altogether too many digressions and too little plot or theme.
notafraidofvirginiawoolf's review against another edition
4.0
Delightful little book, I think. The Vicar is so pompous, yet with such a good heart, one can't help but love him. Not perhaps the most thrilling, but a cozy read, and one I enjoy.
artemismatchalatte's review against another edition
2.0
This book was one of the big staples of British Literature that all of our favorite Regency and Victorian writers probably would have read it in their lifetimes (But I'm especially looking at you, Percy Bysshe Shelley, as Zastrozzi somewhat had a similar feel, in regards to how all over the place it was). I can see how it influenced many of them as this piece had elements of stage drama as well. Goldsmith wrote plays as well as this novella. So in a way it's not surprising that this story feels more like a play than a novel. At least, in my head, I pictured this as a comedy play while I was reading it.
I'm pretty sure that the author is making fun of the vicar the whole time because too many ridiculous and weird things happen in the play for it to be taken too seriously. The first half of the story is about a vicar and his humble family being good upstanding people in the face of losing their fortunes due to trusting in the wrong banker to look after their money. The vicar is very nonchalant about going from an upper middle class man to a near pauper overnight. In fact, he generally underreacts to everything that happens, even to unbelievable levels. Though I think this was the author making fun of the vicar by doing this. Many of his reactions didn't make any sense at all.
For example, later in the story, both his daughters are kidnapped by sketchy guys, at different points. His wife is so ready to disown their first daughter, Olivia, as she clearly must have done something to have been kidnapped. Since she was kidnapped by a guy and it's the 18th century, they assume that Olivia's honor is compromised or will be forever in question at the very least. The vicar's wife actually says that it would be better if their daughter were dead, rather than be restored to their family alive. This moment is what sticks out the most to me as a 21st century reader, since that sentiment is deeply disturbing and telling of the values of the time. A woman's virtue is valued higher than her actual life.
To the Vicar's credit, he does attempt to find his first daughter but is unable to find her on his attempt to do so. His second daughter, Sophia, is kidnapped when her father is in debtor's prison later in the story. But as this is a comedy, both the daughters are returned to their parents, relatively unharmed by the end of the play. The second daughter even marries the guy she wanted to, a relatively happy ending for an old story that is so harsh towards women. The poor first daughter's love interest turned out to be the creepy kidnapper so, she doesn't get the same happy ending as her younger sister.
I gave this play two and a half stars. Though it was a relatively quick read, the pacing for a lot of it didn't make any sense. I enjoyed the later stories and novels that were inspired by this novella (many works of 19th century English lit) better than I did this. Also I just didn't find what happened to the daughters as funny. Maybe 18th century literature just isn't my thing?
I'm pretty sure that the author is making fun of the vicar the whole time because too many ridiculous and weird things happen in the play for it to be taken too seriously. The first half of the story is about a vicar and his humble family being good upstanding people in the face of losing their fortunes due to trusting in the wrong banker to look after their money. The vicar is very nonchalant about going from an upper middle class man to a near pauper overnight. In fact, he generally underreacts to everything that happens, even to unbelievable levels. Though I think this was the author making fun of the vicar by doing this. Many of his reactions didn't make any sense at all.
For example, later in the story, both his daughters are kidnapped by sketchy guys, at different points. His wife is so ready to disown their first daughter, Olivia, as she clearly must have done something to have been kidnapped. Since she was kidnapped by a guy and it's the 18th century, they assume that Olivia's honor is compromised or will be forever in question at the very least. The vicar's wife actually says that it would be better if their daughter were dead, rather than be restored to their family alive. This moment is what sticks out the most to me as a 21st century reader, since that sentiment is deeply disturbing and telling of the values of the time. A woman's virtue is valued higher than her actual life.
To the Vicar's credit, he does attempt to find his first daughter but is unable to find her on his attempt to do so. His second daughter, Sophia, is kidnapped when her father is in debtor's prison later in the story. But as this is a comedy, both the daughters are returned to their parents, relatively unharmed by the end of the play. The second daughter even marries the guy she wanted to, a relatively happy ending for an old story that is so harsh towards women. The poor first daughter's love interest turned out to be the creepy kidnapper so, she doesn't get the same happy ending as her younger sister.
I gave this play two and a half stars. Though it was a relatively quick read, the pacing for a lot of it didn't make any sense. I enjoyed the later stories and novels that were inspired by this novella (many works of 19th century English lit) better than I did this. Also I just didn't find what happened to the daughters as funny. Maybe 18th century literature just isn't my thing?
lovegriefandgender's review against another edition
1.0
I have a great passion for literature, which motivates me to despise this book. It is dull, it is patronising, and our narrator is irritating beyond compare. Goldsmith, you have murdered literature.
kailey_luminouslibro's review against another edition
4.0
Amusing, funny characters, interesting, quotable, fantastical in plot... I love it!
msand3's review against another edition
4.0
The first half is comic, the second half is absurd. My opinion of the novel shifted with every page as Goldsmith piled on the ridiculous twists of plot and then attempted to justify the unbelievable coincidences. The novel ended like a bad sitcom: all the characters just happen to turn up at the same time in a jail cell and the multiple subplots were neatly tied into a bow. As a parody of 18th century novels, it's brilliant. But IS it a parody? This is the great debate. In any case, the novel is quite memorable.