Point of View

This last chapter is told from the point of view of Louise Colet. I find this very interesting because i have never encountered a book in which the author tells an entire chapter using a different narrator. I really enjoyed seeing her perception of Flaubert. I am still wandering what color the convolvulus was, i guessed blue because Colet was trying to say that she would be patient with Flaubert and simply wait out his insensitivities towards her. I also found it interesting when Colet was speaking of Flaubert's Egyptian romance, and how she need not be jealous because she did not feel anything. (Page 145). This brings us back to the question about mistakes in literature. If a work of literature is flawed, is the meaning lost, does it matter any more? At the end of this same paragraph i liked the metaphor with the coin. That each person has an obverse.... i wonder who my obverse - other side of the coin - is??? On page 147 Colet refers to Flaubert as has having a bearish fashion, then on page 151 she says Flaubert is a "white bear in white gloves? No, no: the parrot, the parrot in gloves." I found this weird because it reffered back to the chapter about animals, and actually compared Flaubert himself to a parrot - which his writing style seems to support. In the last few pages of this chapter Colet quotes Flaubert a number of times, and it appears each quote is a metaphor or a similie about his or her life. Is this saying that Flaubert will be romantic in matters of life, but not in those of literature? At the end of page 150 Colet describes Flaubert's technique for nursing genius also as a way to suffocate talent. Maybe Flaubert writes realist novels simply because he is a mere genius with no actual talent for writing..... probably not, but maybe. This was an intrigueing chapter because it revealed another side of Flaubert.