Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.56 AVERAGE
3.56 AVERAGE
reflective
slow-paced
L’Éducation sentimentale : un naturalisme encore voilé de romantisme. Flaubert y déroule, sans illusion, la trajectoire de Frédéric Moreau — jeune homme trop plein d’ambitions, trop pauvre en talent, exemplaire d’une époque plus portée à rêver qu’à agir. Tout le roman repose sur une obsession : l’amour impossible, fixé une fois pour toutes sur la figure de Madame Arnoux. Mais derrière cette quête amoureuse, Flaubert démonte le concept de l’apprentissage affectif, qui, à ses yeux, n’a pas lieu. Pas plus qu’il n’existe de réussite pour ces vies tenues en laisse par leurs idées fixes. Le vrai sujet, c’est l’échec : celui d’une jeunesse aisée, cultivée, mais impuissante, qui vieillit sans jamais s’être démentie.
Et tout cela converge vers l’ultime scène. Une conversation calme et résignée où tout se dit :
« Ils résumèrent leur vie, ils l’avaient manquée tous les deux (…) ils accusèrent le hasard, les circonstances, l’époque où ils étaient nés. »
Le naufrage sans drame, le regret sans pathos.
Sur une note plus légère : Flaubert walked so Zola could fly.
Et tout cela converge vers l’ultime scène. Une conversation calme et résignée où tout se dit :
« Ils résumèrent leur vie, ils l’avaient manquée tous les deux (…) ils accusèrent le hasard, les circonstances, l’époque où ils étaient nés. »
Le naufrage sans drame, le regret sans pathos.
Sur une note plus légère : Flaubert walked so Zola could fly.
I think I have a love/hate relationship with this book. There are many things to like about this book. And other things that I absolutely loathed.
For starters, there is the protagonist - Frederic. He is one of the most spineless people there ever were! The character is very real and so is my hatred for him. I did want my own sense of justice to prevail and I wanted horrible things to happen to him. But Flaubert does it much better and there is something very life-like about the whole narrative. Almost none of the characters are ideal. Everyone is hateful and spiteful in a way. Deslauriers was another despicable character that I felt strongly about. Perhaps making the reader feel so strongly about these people is in itself laudable. It felt very appropriate that the story ended with these two reminiscing about their youth and their ideals.
There is a love story hidden amidst all the political turmoil and the moral dialogues that go on. It felt like a fresh take on love. You know how sometimes the love in your head for a person is much better and purer than the love you actually engage in? This story is almost a homage to that. Frederic and the married woman he falls for never come together in a way lovers do. But through everything they do hold something for each other. I loved that this was left unconsumed in the end. The way the characters react to each other is also wonderful. Frederic often frustrated by his pining decides to break away and start with another woman, a woman who he gives up without a thought for his central love again. This kind of love has not been often portrayed - flawed, imperfect and very human nevertheless. There was a little of idealizing this which was not, well, ideal. But other than that this sense of morality about this was very refreshing. It was not portrayed as something wrong, in fact judgement was mostly left out of it.
There is a lot of reference to the political scenario in France at the time this book is set in. I must say that ignored footnotes notwithstanding, this went over my head a bit. There are ways in which this plays into the narrative but it did not feel very important to the central play of characters. I do think having the context would help enjoy this work further but I was not invested enough in French History to engage. Perhaps a different reader might enjoy these things more.
Like any good book should, this book leaves you with questions - about love and morality for the most part but also about ambition and life. And for that I give it four stars!
For starters, there is the protagonist - Frederic. He is one of the most spineless people there ever were! The character is very real and so is my hatred for him. I did want my own sense of justice to prevail and I wanted horrible things to happen to him. But Flaubert does it much better and there is something very life-like about the whole narrative. Almost none of the characters are ideal. Everyone is hateful and spiteful in a way. Deslauriers was another despicable character that I felt strongly about. Perhaps making the reader feel so strongly about these people is in itself laudable. It felt very appropriate that the story ended with these two reminiscing about their youth and their ideals.
There is a love story hidden amidst all the political turmoil and the moral dialogues that go on. It felt like a fresh take on love. You know how sometimes the love in your head for a person is much better and purer than the love you actually engage in? This story is almost a homage to that. Frederic and the married woman he falls for never come together in a way lovers do. But through everything they do hold something for each other. I loved that this was left unconsumed in the end. The way the characters react to each other is also wonderful. Frederic often frustrated by his pining decides to break away and start with another woman, a woman who he gives up without a thought for his central love again. This kind of love has not been often portrayed - flawed, imperfect and very human nevertheless. There was a little of idealizing this which was not, well, ideal. But other than that this sense of morality about this was very refreshing. It was not portrayed as something wrong, in fact judgement was mostly left out of it.
There is a lot of reference to the political scenario in France at the time this book is set in. I must say that ignored footnotes notwithstanding, this went over my head a bit. There are ways in which this plays into the narrative but it did not feel very important to the central play of characters. I do think having the context would help enjoy this work further but I was not invested enough in French History to engage. Perhaps a different reader might enjoy these things more.
Like any good book should, this book leaves you with questions - about love and morality for the most part but also about ambition and life. And for that I give it four stars!
This was an interesting book. I thought it would be a romantic wasting away type of a thing but instead I got a 19th century womanizer and a lot of politics. It was funny, ridiculous, sentimental, poignant, lovely, and absurd all wrapped into one package. I enjoyed this almost as much as Madame Bovary and I look forward to reading more of Flaubert's work.
My audio and print editions were unfortunately by different translators. The print book was the superior translation but I was in a hurry and mostly listened to the audio, which was pretty good, but the translation was lighter somehow.
My audio and print editions were unfortunately by different translators. The print book was the superior translation but I was in a hurry and mostly listened to the audio, which was pretty good, but the translation was lighter somehow.
challenging
emotional
informative
reflective
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
No
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Complicated
funny
reflective
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Complicated
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
challenging
slow-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
Ooh Frédéric, you are a sad sack, aren’t you? Reading through I couldn’t help to compare to Stoner, in both novels the protagonist poor choices living mundane lives and never achieving anything. Neither develop meaningful relationships or careers, both realize they are on a path to nowhere yet sabotage any other way. At first, I felt sorry for him being a lost soul, country bumpkin making his way in the big city. No sense of direction, cannot even figure out what to read or hobbies. Has the one friend, who takes advantage of him. Well, then Frédéric gets older embracing his womanizing ways and being a jerk.
In between, as Frédéric ages, we are exposed to high society salons listening in on social and political changes as money dominates. Lots of discussion about art for aesthetic sake. No one in the novel was grounded, everyone was putting on airs coming off rather shallow. Flaubert couldn’t give everyone a distinct name, seemed by intent to demonstrate they are inconsequential. Infidelities galore.
2* character names
3* for the story
4* for learning about Paris society in the timeframe
5* for Flaubert’s writing despite Frédéric being a dolt
In between, as Frédéric ages, we are exposed to high society salons listening in on social and political changes as money dominates. Lots of discussion about art for aesthetic sake. No one in the novel was grounded, everyone was putting on airs coming off rather shallow. Flaubert couldn’t give everyone a distinct name, seemed by intent to demonstrate they are inconsequential. Infidelities galore.
2* character names
3* for the story
4* for learning about Paris society in the timeframe
5* for Flaubert’s writing despite Frédéric being a dolt
funny
informative
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Complicated
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
adventurous
emotional
inspiring
reflective
sad
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
N/A
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
La historia de “La educación sentimental” se desarrolla de 1840 a 1867 durante este turbulento período del siglo XIX con el abandono en 1848 de la monarquía de julio para la segunda república y luego en 1852 el advenimiento del imperio de Napoleón III. Cuando a bordo de Ville de Montereau, el 15 de septiembre de 1840, el joven Frédéric Moreau, recién graduado de bachiller sueña con su vida futura en la capital y con los éxitos que le esperan. Mientras el Ville de Montereau se deslizaba por el Sena, una ráfaga femenina se le interpuso, apareciéndole la hermosa mujer de Arnoux, Marie Arnoux, quien en gran medida tiene cierta conexión autobiográfica con Élisa Schlésinger, a quien el escritor dedicó un amor apasionado .
Si bien el joven Frédéric Moreau que solo aspira al amor, la riqueza y la gloria, en una época de profundos trastornos cuyo apogeo es la revolución de 1848, resultará incapaz de comprometerse por una causa, es incapaz de llegar hasta el final, para nada arriesgado en el plano del enamoramiento, falto de audacia. A través del viaje de este héroe, Flaubert presupone una preocupación constante por la perfección formal, por una reflexión sutil sobre la política y la naturaleza humana.
Una excelente novela que enlaza un viaje entre un romántico y el final del romanticismo, que al momento de ser publicada esta novela no tuvo buena aceptación, mas allá de las consideraciones de la crítica que la consideran la obra maestra del escritor por su calidad y sus descripciones. Donde los sueños e ilusiones de un joven de provincia, al igual que un Lucien de Rubempré de la novela “Las ilusiones perdidas” de Honore de Balzac, buscan la gloria en la gran ciudad, o un Julien Sorel, personaje de “Rojo y negro” del escritor Stendhal o un Eugène de Rastignac, personaje de Papa Goriot de Honore Balzac que penetra en la alta sociedad para abrirse paso. Un texto plagado de experiencias urbanas que irán carcomiendo la inocencia de este enamorado, que en momento se hace incapaz de centrarse en su éxito. Si es de mencionar que el final deja mucho que decir. Mientras “Madame Bovary” nos describe la historia de una mujer animada por el romanticismo, a quien la realidad ahoga. Sueña con la vida pero, sin embargo, termina suicidándose; en cambio, “La educación sentimental”, por el contrario, cuenta la historia de un joven soñador, que vive en un mundo lleno de ilusiones.
Si bien el joven Frédéric Moreau que solo aspira al amor, la riqueza y la gloria, en una época de profundos trastornos cuyo apogeo es la revolución de 1848, resultará incapaz de comprometerse por una causa, es incapaz de llegar hasta el final, para nada arriesgado en el plano del enamoramiento, falto de audacia. A través del viaje de este héroe, Flaubert presupone una preocupación constante por la perfección formal, por una reflexión sutil sobre la política y la naturaleza humana.
Una excelente novela que enlaza un viaje entre un romántico y el final del romanticismo, que al momento de ser publicada esta novela no tuvo buena aceptación, mas allá de las consideraciones de la crítica que la consideran la obra maestra del escritor por su calidad y sus descripciones. Donde los sueños e ilusiones de un joven de provincia, al igual que un Lucien de Rubempré de la novela “Las ilusiones perdidas” de Honore de Balzac, buscan la gloria en la gran ciudad, o un Julien Sorel, personaje de “Rojo y negro” del escritor Stendhal o un Eugène de Rastignac, personaje de Papa Goriot de Honore Balzac que penetra en la alta sociedad para abrirse paso. Un texto plagado de experiencias urbanas que irán carcomiendo la inocencia de este enamorado, que en momento se hace incapaz de centrarse en su éxito. Si es de mencionar que el final deja mucho que decir. Mientras “Madame Bovary” nos describe la historia de una mujer animada por el romanticismo, a quien la realidad ahoga. Sueña con la vida pero, sin embargo, termina suicidándose; en cambio, “La educación sentimental”, por el contrario, cuenta la historia de un joven soñador, que vive en un mundo lleno de ilusiones.
informative
reflective
slow-paced