Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.57 AVERAGE
3.57 AVERAGE
I didn’t love this story, but it had an unhinged quality I appreciated. “Sentimental Education” is such a great title, and I’m not sure it quite befits the novel, but still. I just find it amusing that Victorian society was so critical of previous generations (or entire eras) and managed to come across as this perfectly clean time in history (sex wise), while debauchery clearly ran rampant according to realist writers like Flaubert. Granted, fiction isn’t a faithful portrayal of history and society, but even so, for this author to keep coming back to these same themes is telling in contrast with the general image everyone seems to have. Rambling aside, I liked this better than Madame Bovary at least.
emotional
reflective
sad
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
No
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
challenging
emotional
funny
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
This book is not at all about what it claims to be about (or what it's purported to be about). I was expecting a sort of Wuthering Heights love story between Frederic Moreau and Madame Arnoux. But really, this is a story of the French Revolution, in which women are commodities of the aristocratic world in which Frederic Moreau operates. He doesn't really love any of the four women with whom he is involved. The scenes between Frederic and Madame Arnoux are melodramatic and disingenuous, just like the scenes between Frederic and his other mistresses. Here's a good quote that sums up how women are regarded in this text: "Women's hearts were like those desks full of secret drawers that fit one inside another; you struggle with them, you break your fingernails, and at the bottom you find a withered flower, a little dust, or nothing at all!" Um, yeah, right. OK?
The treatment of women aside, this is just not a well-written book. The characters are ambiguous, the descriptions overly long and only occasionally transportive, and the narrative jumps temporally in the space of a sentence with no notice or warning. The reader is left to infer that much time has passed. So, not a favorite. I've read it, and I won't be going back for more. A disappointment from Flaubert.
The treatment of women aside, this is just not a well-written book. The characters are ambiguous, the descriptions overly long and only occasionally transportive, and the narrative jumps temporally in the space of a sentence with no notice or warning. The reader is left to infer that much time has passed. So, not a favorite. I've read it, and I won't be going back for more. A disappointment from Flaubert.
fuck you Flaubert j'ai eu 7/20 à ma colle pcq tu parlais de références que j'avais pas sur la forêt de Fontainebleau. ct bien quand même
I started this book during my Master's degree, we only read the first of three parts, so this session of 2021 was me reading the 2nd and 3rd parts of the novel. I definitely enjoyed a lot of it -- the friendship between Frédéric and Deslauriers, the longing, the hatred and eventual ousting of the monarchy. Those were great. It was just the end where there were a lot of lawsuits that I didn't understand and a series of rapid, unfortunate events that kind of made me feel "eh" at the end and eager to finish.
Every single character is comically ridiculous. A frequently humerous, but overall rather boring novel.
« Quelquefois, vos paroles me reviennent comme un écho lointain, comme le son d’une cloche apporté par le vent ; et il me semble que vous êtes là, quand je lis des passages d’amour dans les livres. » (511)
Je n’avais jamais lu de Flaubert malgré des études littéraires (lui préférant Zola, pour certaines raisons). Ce roman est une belle découverte. Romantique, de style, à souhait, les descriptions sont entêtantes et placent le lecteur dans un coussin du 19e. J’ai été également agréablement surpris•e par les apports historiques qui rendent impossible d’oublier les tumultes et les violences politiques de ce siècle. En outre, Frédéric Moreau reste un personnage que j’appellerais un antihéros, car il m’est partiellement antipathique malgré le tragique qui semble rythmer sa vie. Un roman à avoir lu.
Je n’avais jamais lu de Flaubert malgré des études littéraires (lui préférant Zola, pour certaines raisons). Ce roman est une belle découverte. Romantique, de style, à souhait, les descriptions sont entêtantes et placent le lecteur dans un coussin du 19e. J’ai été également agréablement surpris•e par les apports historiques qui rendent impossible d’oublier les tumultes et les violences politiques de ce siècle. En outre, Frédéric Moreau reste un personnage que j’appellerais un antihéros, car il m’est partiellement antipathique malgré le tragique qui semble rythmer sa vie. Un roman à avoir lu.
emotional
reflective
sad
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
No
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
The book is well written with a language that constructs images in your head. It travels you into the life of Paris in last century.
The plot is slow and smooth.
I liked best the last 50 pages of the book.
While was ok to read it did not keep me fascinated.
The plot is slow and smooth.
I liked best the last 50 pages of the book.
While was ok to read it did not keep me fascinated.