Wednesday, November 5, 2008
Barnes's Criticism
This book is extremely critical. A few chapters have been lists of complaints about Flaubert and either explanations of them or proofs of them. At first I thought that Barnes was a Flaubert fanatic, just in love with him. But the more I read, the more it appears that he likes to pick out Flaubert's flaws. Along with those flaws, he describes his ingenious works of art (books). But his flawed lifestyle is explained in depth in addition to the deaths around him and the nonexistence of his marriage. He goes on and on about how women were attracted to him and how he had flings but no, Flaubert would never want to marry one of them. This again is another flaw he is quick to point out while mentioning his wife and their love. Furthermore, we as the reader seem to know very well by this point that Flaubert hated trains. Even though before trains were established, the trip to see his mistress was long and miserable, he still seemed to greatly dislike them.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
Kenz i agree with you, the whole book is just about his flaws and honestly its a pretty horrible book. why would anyone want to read a whole book about someone elses flaws?
With all due respect to Natalie's comments, I wonder what you guys mean by "critical". Is it an entirely negative term? Can a critic also be one who (positively and productively) breaks down an issue (be it a book or a biography) into its constituent parts, and then tries to show the connections between them by reassembling the puzzle in a more meaningful way (sorry to mix metaphors there). Defining 'critic' might be a useful exercise (and maybe even a good essay topic). Good post.
Ooops. I guess "Colors" is Madison, not Natalie. My bad.
Post a Comment