Wednesday, October 22, 2008
Emma's Distorted Love
It's frusterating when you come to hate the main character of a book. Emma is obnoxious not only because of how into herself she is, but also because she doesn't appreciate any of the love Charles has for her. Charles immediately falls in love with her and the reader definitely sides with him, but as the book goes on, one's heart just falls because of how Emma treats him. She expects so much from him, more than love; material things. She has grown up picturing love as this unbelievable experience, but all of her seeking love leaves her more unhappy than ever. I think if she ever stopped looking for perfection, she'd finally find it. The way she acts througout the book is aggrivating and made me want to stop reading more than anything. Her lack of appreciation towards Charles, as well as her promiscuous ways simply gave a bad name towards women. To be happy you don't have to be in love, nor do you have to sleep around. Emma's head is in the clouds though, and I don't feel that she has any real grasp of reality, no matter how much she thinks she does. It's sad because poor Charles does everything he can to satisfy Emma, from the very start. Never does he succeed. Never does she allow him to succeed. I think if she finally got what she wanted in the end, she would just start wanting something else. She's greedy, even if its for love and affection and an extravagant life.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
I agree with your statement about how hard it is to enjoy a book when you come to hate the main character.
I fully agree with your statement. Emma just seems to never be satisfied with anything or anyone. She buys lots of stuff for "secret" buddies and takes all of Charles's money. The only satisfaction she gets is when she spreads her legs to many other men.
I was pretty much indifferent about Emma until she kills herself. Not only is that one of the most selfish thing anyone could ever do, but she leaves her daughter and husband to pay back the debts she left to them from her spending while cheating on Charles.
Emma is a terrible person and it makes this book such a pain to read. You were dead on with your post and she did not deserve love. Emma sucks pretty much
I couldnt' agree more with you. I get so mad at Emma the way she treats Charles...i feel so badly for him. All he does is offer her love and she just wants more and more from him through materialistic thoughts. Flaubert's development of Emma transforms my appreciation for the novel to almost nothing. Emma doesn't deserve love because of how she treats Charles. Although, Charles did have somewhat of an affair with Emma, he deserves so much better. I don't like the perception of women that Emma creates, not all women are little premiscuous mean stupid people.
While I agree that Emma's treating of Charles is rather despicable, and not something I would enjoy in a woman at all. I do find it rather acceptable that one should expect more than "love" out of someone, for Charle's "love" is not love, it's blind devotion. He is crazy for every bit of her and shows her the utmost kindness, but he allows himself to be run over and will do anything to appease her. Though I think love is extremely important, I think Charle's blind devotion leads to a boring marriage (Unless one is into dominating one's partner) but that's another story.
Clearly you've hit a nerve here, as all those who commented on your post seemed to agree how difficult it is to enjoy a book whose main character (in fact, whose every character) has nothing redeemable. But is this really the problem? Or is it that we expect Emma to pay--or at least the author to condemn her? I think part of what makes Flaubert so difficult to read is that he gives us so few signals as to how to process the events he presents. We simply have to take them at face value (in all their tawdriness). Other authors (Bronte, for example) would be quick to 'punish' their characters (think of what Rochester has to go through before he can be redeemed and find happiness with Jane). I'm interested to hear what you think of Barnes' take on this novel (and on Flaubert in general).
Post a Comment