I found the most interesting aspect of Flaubert’s novel his sheer bitterness towards romanticism. There are times when he seems to really put his heart into it, like Emma’s longings for story-book-true-love or Charles’ attempt at burring her in a truly royal fashion, but by the end of the book it’s a failed (albeit intentional failure) endeavor. In fact, it’s rather funny. How perfectly Flaubert sets up Emma’s hopeful dreams and puerile desires only to have them come crashing down around her. It’s actually quite comical that in an attempt to pass away peacefully in her sleep, she dies violently and hideously (what with the black bile). Even Charles, who in a last attempt at completing Emma’s romantic desires, buries her in three coffins with a green velvet shroud. Yet, once again, Flaubert’s realism seems to spit upon romanticism in Charles’ comical death when his daughter pushes over his stiff cadaver in the arbor.
After reading Madame Bovary, I find myself almost disgusted with the extravagant tailing of romanticism and proud of the pessimistic styles of realism. I’m still fond of Romanticism, but Realism might be slightly more entertaining.
2 comments:
I agree entirely, it does seem throughout the book as if Flaubert is just so sick of reading romanticism he's decided to attack it in every shape or form.
Spitting on romanticism...Ha!
I think you may be on to something, however. It does seem that Flaubert believed his realism--his particular "style"--was an antidote to the excesses of Romanticism. Indeed, it may be Bronte's novel is not the best example of what he was writing against (given that, as a novel--romantic or not--it holds up pretty well). It seems as if each new movement (and Flaubert seems to have been more aware of himself as a member of a movement than most) specifically works to correct the excesses and faults of the previous generation of writers (we'll see this again when we read Woolf's "Modern Fiction").
Good post.
Post a Comment