Read Tundekasvatus: ühe noormehe lugu (Eesti Päevalehe romaaniklassika, #54) by Gustave Flaubert Paul Viires Online


"Tundekasvatus", mida on nimetatud ka üheks 19.sajandi mõjusamaks romaaniks, avab lugejale panoraamse vaate 1848.aasta revolutsiooni ning Teise keisririigi algusaastate aegsele Prantsusmaale. Romaani peategelane,provintsist pärit Frédéric Moreau läheb Pariisi õppima. Teel õpib ta tundma vankumatut sõprust ja rumaluse jõudu, kunsti, poliitikat ning omalaadset peataolekut üh"Tundekasvatus", mida on nimetatud ka üheks 19.sajandi mõjusamaks romaaniks, avab lugejale panoraamse vaate 1848.aasta revolutsiooni ning Teise keisririigi algusaastate aegsele Prantsusmaale. Romaani peategelane,provintsist pärit Frédéric Moreau läheb Pariisi õppima. Teel õpib ta tundma vankumatut sõprust ja rumaluse jõudu, kunsti, poliitikat ning omalaadset peataolekut ühiskonnas, mis kõhkleb monarhia, vabariikluse ja imperialismi vahel. Noormehe teele satub mitu naist, kellest ühte ta lootusetult armub. Nõnda, selle kasutu kire paistel toimubki tema "tundekasvatus", mis päädib noorusea illusioonide läbipõlemisega.Ühes kirjas on Gustave Flaubert tunnistanud, et "Tundekasvatuses" tahtis ta kujutada oma põlvkonna meeste moraalilugu. Olemuselt ongi "Tundekasvatus" autobiograafiliste sugemetega kujunemisromaan, mis ei kõnele niivõrd emotsionaalsest arengust, kuivõrd näitab, kuidas kujunes Flaubert'i põlvkonna elutunnetus, suhtumised ja arvamused.Romaani kirjutamiseks kulus viis aastat. Ajaloolise tausta dokumenteerimisel oli Flaubert täpne ja jäi siingi truuks oma loomemeetodile: olla erapooletu ja kujutada tegelikkust tõeselt. Seetõttu on kirjanik loobunud ka "kõikvõimsa", oma tegelaste mõtteid ja tulevikku teadva autori positsioonist. "Tundekasvatuse sündmused jõuavad meieni tegelaste silmade-kõrvade kaudu, tegelasi endid õpime tundma teiste kommentaaride järgi....

Title : Tundekasvatus: ühe noormehe lugu (Eesti Päevalehe romaaniklassika, #54)
Author :
Rating :
ISBN : 9788498199550
Format Type : Hardcover
Number of Pages : 348 Pages
Status : Available For Download
Last checked : 21 Minutes ago!

Tundekasvatus: ühe noormehe lugu (Eesti Päevalehe romaaniklassika, #54) Reviews

  • Paul Bryant
    2019-03-06 07:55

    This one is often described as “the novel to end all novels” and I understand why – when you are reading it you say to yourself very frequently “if this is what novels are like I am never going to read another one in my entire life”. From about page 50 until when I stopped, I was having these strong bibliocidal fantasies. I thought – maybe I will leave this accidentally on the bus to work. But I forgot to forget it, like that country song. Then I thought – maybe a column of army ants will chomp it up so that not a shred remains. But army ants are never seen in Nottingham, only the friendly variety who bid you good day as they pass by. I tried to donate my copy to Oxfam but the shop assistant, having turned very pale when she saw the title, summoned up a courage I had not thought her to possess and said they could not accept that particular title. When I asked why she referred me to the Oxfam standard operating procedures, something about health and safety, which includes of course mental health. They had accepted copies of Sentimental Education in previous years but there had been some incidents and now all shops had been explicitly warned not to. I see that many of my most respected GR friends hand out the big four and five stars to this novel and describe it as brilliantly comic. I was trembling in my boots until I found that none other than Henry James was on my side. Here is his considered opinion:Here the form and method are the same as in "Madame Bovary"; the studied skill, the science, the accumulation of material, are even more striking; but the book is in a single word a dead one. "Madame Bovary" was spontaneous and sincere; but to read its successor is, to the finer sense, like masticating ashes and sawdust. L'Education Sentimentale is elaborately and massively dreary. That a novel should have a certain charm seems to us the most rudimentary of principles, and there is no more charm in this laborious monument to a treacherous ideal than there is interest in a heap of gravel.However I did notice something what Henry James did not notice, and felt quite smug about that. It is this – that the main part of the plot of Sentimental Education is almost the same as the plot of Shampoo, the Warren Beattie movie from 1975, which I saw only last week so it was fresh in my memory. In Shampoo, hairdresser George’s former girlfriend Jackie now has a rich sugar daddy boyfriend Lester, whose wife Felicia is one of George’s best customers. Naturally George is shagging Felicia as it would seem unkind not to, and, because he keeps bumping into Jackie as they move in the same social circles, he realises he never wanted to break up with her so he starts shagging Jackie as well. Then comes the really shocking scene – Lester’s daughter who I guess is supposed to be around 16 or so comes on to George when he’s visiting Felicia. And she is played by none other than 19 year old Carrie Fisher, two years before Princess Leia. What a shock that was. So in Sentimental Education Frederic, the world’s most dreary young bachelor, wants to shag the wife of Monsieur Arnoux, a publisher. And eventually this guy introduces Frederic to his mistress Roseanne who he’s got fed up with, the idea being that Frederic will take her over, I suppose they used to do this in those days as they did not have Tinder. So Frederic is nearly shagging the guy’s wife and nearly shagging the guy’s mistress at the same time. Just like in Shampoo, except that George the hairdresser was a lot less dreary. Also in Shampoo and Sentimental Education there are these long long long boring party scenes where I think the effect is supposed to be scintillatingly socially satirical. I did not notice any specific Star Wars connections in Sentimental Education, but neither did Henry James.If I am ever taken hostage and this is the only reading material available in my rat infested dungeon then I will definitely finish this.

  • Fionnuala
    2019-03-13 03:52

    As was the case with Madame Bovary, which I read recently, this book demanded to be commented on as I read, so I posted lots of quips and quotes in the updates.While searching for illustrations for those updates, I began to notice strong parallels between Flaubert’s mid-nineteenth century story and Honoré Daumier’s cartoons for French illustrated newspapers of the same period. Finding so many amusing pairings between scenes in the book and Daumier’s illustrations made reading this book a double pleasure.And since it's a busy time of the year, I'm going to incorporate some of those updates into the review - apologies to those of you who've seen them already.L'éducation sentimentale is set in the 1840s, and the political upheavals of those years are referenced constantly - though they don't impinge as much as they might on the main character, Frédéric Moreau. Frédéric is a law student who'd like to be a writer, but he doesn't find it easy to study or write, so he leads the typical student life, sleeping, eating and drinking - and enjoying the cartoons in the Charivari newspaper: Frédéric avala un verre de rhum, puis un verre de kirsch, puis un verre de curaçao, puis différents grogs, tant froids que chauds. Il lut tout le journal, et le relut; il examina, jusque dans les grains du papier, la caricature du Charivari; à la fin, il savait par coeur les annonces.But while Frédéric spends time examining every detail of the cartoons and the advertisments in the Charivari, his friends are variously involved in preparing the revolt which will eventually depose King Louis Philippe in 1848. Frédéric is not a revolutionary himself, in fact he's not sure what he is yet. His male friends don't know either and they constantly pull him in different directions in an effort to find out. Fréderic has women friends too, and one of them sounds a lot like Madame Bovary, from the top of her dark tresses which 'lovingly framed her ovale face’ to the toe of her little boot. This Madame Bovary look-alike is called Madame Arnoux, and she gradually becomes the key love interest in Fréderic’s life, though she keeps herself in the background of the story. And although she's a very faithful spouse to M. Arnoux, she reminded me of Emma Bovary every time she swayed into a scene, especially when it was a question of her 'bottines'; Flaubert and Frédéric seem to have a thing about slim leather-clad feet peeping out from underneath the vastness of a crinoline. And since Frédéric had been studying the caricatures in the Charivari so closely, I began studying them too, especially the ones by Honoré Daumier, and that’s how I stumbled on so many parallels between Flaubert’s scenarios and Daumier's sketches. When Frédéric accompanies Madame Arnoux on her shopping trips, it’s hard not to imagine the scene like this, especially since Frédéric is such a very flexible character: (The text underneath Daumier's sketch says that since women now wear skirts made of steel, men would need to be made of rubber to give them their arm in the street!)Daumier intends to be funny of course, and you might argue that Flaubert is being serious much of the time. But even when Flaubert is describing something potentially sedate or serious, he makes me laugh. So when I came on this description of the kind of elaborate curtsies people make in polite society, I couldn't help matching the passage with another Daumier cartoon: Les invités arrivaient; en manière de salut, ils jetaient leur torse de côté, ou se courbaient en deux, ou baissaient la figure seulementSometimes, I was convinced that Flaubert himself had been studying Daumier's cartoons before writing certain scenes because they just match together so well. One of Frédéric's least bright friends tries his hand at a witty remark about a French writer called La Bruyère, known for his book 'Les Caractères', while passing a plate of grouse (coq de bruyère) to his friends at table: il tenta même un calembour, car il dit, comme on passait un coq de bruyère, "Voilà le meilleur des caractères de bruyère"! And of course, Daumier just happens to have a witty cartoon about a grouse too:At the same dinner, the Wit insults one of Frédéric's women friends, and next thing he knows, Frédéric is involved in a duel - one of the funniest scenes in the book. As the duel is about to begin, someone runs up to shout stop, and the Wit, thinking it’s the police, faints in fear and scratches his thumb whereupon the duel is abandoned because blood has been spilled.Has Daumier such a scene? But of course!The more I looked for correspondences between Flaubert's and Daumier's scenes, the more I found. Take this one for example, where Fréderic spots a crowd in front of a painting of a young woman he has become slightly involved with and discovers that the painting has his own name under it, F Moreau - as the owner, of both the painting and the lady, it is implied! And he's not even Rosanette's lover as yet! Complications seem to follow him about!Daumier just happens to have a drawing of some people in front of a painting of a young woman too - and the name ‘Moreau’ is associated with it:But it's Gustave Moreau’s Sphinx, (view spoiler)[ (hide spoiler)]about which the pair in the cartoon are having a conversation: "Un chat décolleté avec une tête de femme, ça s'appelle donc un Sphinx?" "Certainement…en grec!" ("So a bare-breasted cat with a woman's head is called a Sphinx?" asks the man with the catalogue. "Certainly," says the woman, "- in Greek!" (clearly she doesn't want to think such creatures can exist in French))Meantime, in spite of his complicated love life, Frédéric continues to sit over the dinner table discussing the state of the nation with some smug characters: Cependant, objecta M, la misère existe, avouons-le! Mais le remède ne dépend ni de la Science ni du Pouvoir. C'est une question purement individuelle. Quand les basses classes voudront se débarrasser de leurs vices, elles s'affranchiront de leurs besoins. Que le peuple soit plus moral, et il sera moins pauvre!Daumier was obviously at the same dinner! The summer of 1848 arrives, and Frédéric hasn't passed his bar exams, he hasn't written the book he planned to write, and he hasn't got involved in the Reform movement. One of his friends turns up with the news that the time has finally come to remove King Louis Philippe from power, and he strongly urges Frédéric to join the fight to topple the 'poire': Mon vieux, La poire est mûre. Selon ta promesse, nous comptons sur toi. On se réunit demain au petit jour, place du Panthéon. Entre au café Soufflot. Il faut que je te parle avant la manifestation.Daumier has some great caricatures of Louis Philippe as the 'poire', ripe for harvesting:So Paris is in uproar and people are on the barricades: But where is Frédéric? Did he answer the call?Hmm, he has his own way of addressing Reform. He decides to stop shilly-shallying and to finally sleep with Rosanette (his passion for Mme Arnoux being still unconsummated): Mille pardons ! » dit Frédéric, en lui saisissant la taille dans les deux mains. -« Comment ? que fais-tu ?» balbutia Rosanette. Il répondit : -« Je suis la mode, je me réforme. » Elle se laissa renverser sur le divan, et continuait à rire sous ses baisers.Later Frédéric's conscience wakes up and he becomes concerned for his comrades. He searches for them in the Palace which the People have invaded, and comes on a crazy scene in which a group of people try out the throne for size:ils arrivèrent dans la salle des Maréchaux. Les portraits de ces illustres, sauf celui de Bugeaud percé au ventre, étaient tous intacts..Sur le trône était assis un prolétaire à barbe noire, la chemise entrouverte, l'air hilare et stupide comme un magot. D'autres gravissaient l'estrade pour s'asseoir à sa place.Then for twenty pages, while Paris rumbles explosively, Flaubert sends Fréderic and Rosanette on a sightseeing holiday to Fontainebleau, visiting the Chateau which was the country residence of many former kings - like the most carefree of tourists (allowing Flaubert to offer us fine descriptive passages), while back in Paris, the world as they knew it is balancing on the tip of a bayonet.But of course Flaubert isn’t ignoring the troubles in Paris at all, just showing us how good he is at metaphor : des chênes rugueux, énormes, qui se convulsaient..s'étreignaient les uns les autres, et fermes sur leurs troncs, pareils à des torses, se lançaient avec leurs bras nus des appels de désespoir, des menaces furibondes..immobilisés dans leur colèreWhile reading that description of an oak wood near the Chateau, in which the enormous trees surge and sway like a seething mass of angry beings, we can’t but think immediately of the confrontations between the people and the monarchy during the uprisings, as in this sketch by Daumier of the Peasant’s Revolt:A little further on, Flaubert describes a granite quarry in terms that make it resemble a long-forgotten ruined city, a Sodom and Gomorrah:Un bruit de fer, des coups drus et nombreux sonnaient: c'était, au flanc d'une colline, une compagnie de carriers battant les roches. Elles se multipliaient de plus en plus, et finissaient par emplir tout le paysage, cubiques comme des maisons, plates comme des dalles, s'étayant, se surplombant, se confondant, telles que les ruines méconnaissables et monstrueuses de quelque cité disparueDaumier has just such a scene, which he calls Paris in Revolt or Sodom and Gomorrah:Frédéric eventually returns to the city, and the city eventually returns to a semblance of order, though no political group gets quite what they sought, and crazy compromises are made, with bankers getting into bed with socialists. Frédéric’s life is equally complicated - he's involved with four different women - and he has to make constant compromises. One compromise he's faced with is marrying a rich widow: Frédéric baissait la voix, en se penchant vers son visage..Mme D ferma les yeux, et il fut surpris par la facilité de sa victoire. Les grands arbres du jardin qui frissonnaient mollement s'arrêtè il y eut comme une suspension universelle des choses.But similarly to the political scene, where temporary allies were constantly breaking their promises and betraying one another, and betraying the spirit of Liberty at the same time, Fredéric finds himself breaking his promises and betraying all the women in his life, including Mme Arnoux: Bientôt ces mensonges le divertirent; il répétait à l'une le serment qu'il venait de faire à l'autre, leur envoyait deux bouquets semblables, leur écrivait en même temps, puis établissait entre elles des comparaisons; - il y en avait une troisième toujours présente à sa pensée…And just as you might be tempted to wonder what had become of the spirit of Liberty in the Paris of the day, you might also wonder what had become of Frédéric’s first love, Mme Arnoux. Well, like Liberty, she does turn up - when least expected:The Reform movements may not welcome the ghost of Liberty, but Frédéric is glad to see Mme Arnoux, though she's a bit of a ghost of her former self. Still, their meeting towards the end of the book provides a sweet scene in which the two finally admit their deep love for each other:elle lui dit «Quelquefois, vos paroles me reviennent comme un écho lointain, comme le son d'une cloche apporté par le vent; et il me semble que vous êtes là, quand je lis des passages d'amour dans les livres.» «Tout ce qu'on y blâme d'exagéré, vous me l'avez fait ressentir», dit Frédéric. «Je comprends Werther, que ne dégoûtent pas les tartines de Charlotte».In a scene which starts out very movingly, Frédéric somehow ends up drawing a parallel between his love for Mme Arnoux and the ridiculous quantities of bread and jam that Werther’s great love Charlotte was constantly preparing for her little brothers and sisters, which convinces me that Flaubert was always ready to see the ridiculous side of life, and that he shared Daumier’s view, as demonstrated in this cartoon, that life, love and lunacy might be more closely linked than we admit: According to Flaubert's account, it did seem as if a lot of time was spent howling at the moon during those decades! ………………………………………………I’m hoping that Flaubert’s sense of fun would have prevented him from objecting to me using illustrations in this review - though he never allowed any of his books to be illustrated in his lifetime...["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>

  • Manny
    2019-03-07 06:53

    L'Education Sentimentale is well known to be one of Woody Allen's favourite books, and it explores one of Allen's favourite themes. Whether life is a tragedy or a comedy depends on hair-fine nuances. Melinda and Melinda is probably the clearest example: the perspective constantly, and rather confusingly, shifts back and forward between comedy and tragedy. A bit later, he redid the idea in a more convincing way, as the linked pair Match Point (the tragedy) and Scoop (the comedy). In the same spirit, here's a linked pair of reviews. I wrote the tragic one first, but then felt that I really needed to balance it with a comic version.________________________Tragic reviewO Hamlet, speak no more:Thou turn'st mine eyes into my very soul;And there I see such black and grained spotsAs will not leave their tinct.I'm afraid it's not exactly a fun beach read. If L'Education Sentimentale doesn't make you feel uneasy, you're either a remarkably secure person or you decided to quit before reaching the end. And Flaubert does a good job of sneaking up on you: for the first hundred pages or so, I felt it was one of those books where nothing was going to happen, and it wasn't until I was about halfway through that I really began to feel disquieted. He's good.On the surface, it's unremarkable, except for the lovely prose. Frédéric is a stupid and shallow young man in 1840s France. After a chance meeting on a boat, he conceives a passion for Mme. Arnoux, a beautiful married woman. He manages to insinuate himself into her husband's social circle, and becomes friendly with him. After a while, M. Arnoux trusts young Frédéric enough that he introduces him to his mistress, the charming and scatterbrained Roseanette. Frédéric falls for her too, and then his romantic life becomes even more complicated. I'll try to avoid dropping any more spoilers, but I thought I should convince you that it's definitely not a book where nothing happens: as in Madame Bovary and Salammbô, there's ample sex and violence. So, why's it so disquieting? One way to explain is to compare with two other novels, which were written not long after and certainly, at least in part, were inspired by it. In Proust's Le Côté de Guermantes, Marcel becomes as obsessed with the Duchesse de Guermantes as Frédéric does with Mme. Arnoux, but by the end of the novel he's got over her; we get a detailed account of how her charm gradually fades away, so that he can finally see her objectively. It's disappointing, but extremely rational. And in Maupassant's Bel-Ami, Georges Duroy cleverly exploits his series of mistresses to become rich and successful; this time, you're shocked at how cold-blooded he is, but it's also rational. I thought at several points that Frédéric was going to take one of these paths; he doesn't. The novel's extraordinary strength is to get inside his mind as he dithers between the various women he's involved with, and demonstrate how he simply isn't capable of any kind of rational thought whatsoever. He's with X, and Flaubert shows with his usual exactitude how blissfully in love he is with her. Then, a few pages later, he's with Y, and his protestations of eternal devotion don't come across as hypocritical: much worse, they're sincere! And, in the next chapter, with Z... well, you get the picture. It's horrifyingly well done.In the middle of all this, the Revolution of 1848 breaks out. (By the way: if you're as ignorant about French history as I am, I strongly recommend getting an annotated edition. Flaubert assumes you know the story already, and keeps referring to people and events I'd never heard of - I was flipping to the endnotes like I was reading Infinite Jest). I did wonder for a moment what the politics had to do with the main story; alas, that rapidly becomes clear too. Like the eponymous hero of the Rabbit series, Frédéric is constitutionally incapable of seeing past the end of his own dick. The fact that France has been given a once-in-a-century chance to establish a fairer and more democratic government completely escapes him. There is a magnificent sequence where a major event has occurred, and people are shooting at each other in the streets; all Frédéric can think about is the fact that he's missed an important date with one of his loved ones. I was strongly reminded of the scene near the beginning of Shaun of the Dead, where Shaun, who's just been dumped by his girlfriend, stumbles home in a daze while somehow managing not to notice that London is being invaded by flesh-eating zombies.You will gather that L'Education Sentimentale does not present a positive and uplifting view of human nature. If only it were ugly or hastily written, one could dismiss it. But no: as always with Flaubert, it's meticulously crafted and a delight to read. A lot of the time, it's even funny. You may occasionally want to fling it across the room; more often, you're going to react with a wry smile. He's witty and entertaining. I started with a quote from Hamlet, arguably one of the book's ancestors, and I'll conclude with one from Cat's Cradle, probably a great-grandson, and also a very funny book. Here's Kurt Vonnegut on the same subject.And I remembered The Fourteenth Book of Bokonon, which I had read in its entirety the night before. The Fourteenth Book is entitled 'What Can a Thoughtful Man Hope for Mankind on Earth, Given the Experiences of the Past Million Years?'It doesn't take long to read The Fourteenth Book. It consists of one word and a period.This is it:'Nothing.'________________________Comic review["Sex and the City" theme tune. CARRIE is lying across her bed typing industriously on her laptop]CARRIE: [voiceover] I read that over 60% of all American men cheat on their partners. That's a lot of cheating. It's happened to me. It's happened to my best friends. It may have happened to you. And, the other day, I started wondering [the title comes up as she speaks the words] When Men Cheat On Their Partners, What Are They Really Thinking?[Dissolve to a trendy Manhattan restaurant. CARRIE is sitting alone at a table set for four people, reading a paperback novel. Camera zooms in to show the title, "Sentimental Education"]CARRIE: [turns a page, and shakes her head reflectively] Jeez![CARRIE is so engrossed that she doesn't notice that CHARLOTTE, SAMANTHA and MIRANDA have arrived, and are looking at her curiously.]CHARLOTTE: Good, isn't it?CARRIE: [starts violently] Uh... yes! So you've read it too? Don't tell me how it ends...SAMANTHA: [checking to see how far CARRIE has got] Oh, you're nearly finished. You know, this reminds me of something that happened to Charlotte and me a few years ago. [She gives CHARLOTTE a teasing look] You don't mind?CHARLOTTE: Um...CARRIE: [voiceover] Charlotte did mind, but Samantha steamrollered her.SAMANTHA: [steamrollering her] Come on, babe, all ancient history now! But we need some cocktails first. [To waiter] Four Cosmopolitans!CARRIE: [voiceover] This was during Charlotte's first marriage, a period she doesn't like to talk about. Her husband Jack was a lot older than her.[Montage. CHARLOTTE'S FIRST HUSBAND evidently doesn't take her seriously.]CARRIE: [voiceover] Samantha hadn't yet discovered she had a talent for PR. She was wondering if she would make it as an actress.[Montage. SAMANTHA's movie roles don't require her to wear much.]CARRIE: [voiceover] Samantha was also a close friend of Jack.[Montage. JACK and SAMANTHA are having noisy sex. Dissolve back to restaurant.]SAMANTHA: [smiles and pats CHARLOTTE on the arm] Of course, Charlotte and I didn't know each other yet. CARRIE: [voiceover] Now Jack ran this publishing company. He had a cute intern called Fred. One day, Fred met Charlotte.[Dissolve back to the past. Montage. FRED, very young and innocent, meets CHARLOTTE. He's obviously smitten.]CARRIE: [voiceover] Fred had never seen anyone so beautiful in his life. He immediately knew he could never love another woman. But how could he meet her again? [FRED looks sad and pensive, then suddenly brightens up.]CARRIE: [voiceover] Fred needed to get friendly with Jack.[Montage. JACK is talking, FRED is hanging on his every word.]CARRIE: [voiceover] Jack liked the attention. He started inviting Fred to his dinner parties.[Montage. Dinner party at JACK and CHARLOTTE's. FRED gazes raptly at CHARLOTTE, while she ignores him.]CARRIE: [voiceover] Jack had really got to trust Fred. He started taking him to parties at Samantha's place too.[Montage. A much wilder party. FRED looks embarrassed, but is clearly eyeing up SAMANTHA]CARRIE: [voiceover] Pretty soon, Fred had fallen for Samantha as well. Oh, and somewhere around here he went back to Wisconsin for a couple of months and managed to get engaged to the girl next door.[Montage. FRED is with the adoring GIRL-NEXT-DOOR, who's even younger and more innocent-looking than he is. Dissolve back to restaurant. MIRANDA is struggling to keep up with the story.]MIRANDA: So, uh, let me see, he can only love Charlotte but he's got the hots for Samantha and he's engaged to the girl next door?[CHARLOTTE looks like she wants to sink through the floor. She takes a large sip of her cocktail. SAMANTHA is having fun.]SAMANTHA: [to MIRANDA] Don't worry, babe, it hasn't got complicated yet.CARRIE: [voiceover] Fred made progress with Charlotte. She let him hold her hand while she told him about her problems. But that's all that happened.[Montage. FRED and CHARLOTTE gaze soulfully into each other's eyes, go for walks hand-in-hand, pick flowers, etc]CARRIE: [voiceover] Obviously, Fred wanted more. He made a date with Charlotte at the New York apartment he'd just started renting. This was going to be it.[Montage. FRED, in an agony of suspense, is waiting outside the apartment block. He keeps looking at his watch.]CARRIE: [voiceover] Unfortunately, the date was September 11, 2001.[Montage. The Twin Towers erupt in flames. People screaming in the streets. FRED is still looking at his watch as they stream past.]CARRIE: [voiceover] Fred was so angry with Charlotte for not turning up. He went to see Samantha.[Montage. FRED and SAMANTHA are having sex. Dissolve back to restaurant.]SAMANTHA: [elaborate shrug] Well, I needed a fuck pretty bad.CARRIE: [voiceover] Fred liked being with Samantha. But deep down, he never forgave her for making him betray his true love. He started seeing someone else, the wife of a rich banker.[Montage. FRED is having sex with RICH BANKER WIFE. Back to restaurant.]MIRANDA: [completely lost] So, he's sleeping with you and the banker's wife because he can't be with his true love? And what's with the fiancée?SAMANTHA: [large sip of cocktail] That's it, babe. He thought it was my fault, and the banker's wife's fault. And maybe the fiancée's fault too, but I was never quite sure about that. Of course, it all ended in tears.[Montage. SEVERAL WOMEN are yelling at FRED, throwing things, etc]SAMANTHA: [back in restaurant] Your friend Stanford told Charlotte and me we should read Sentimental Education. He was right. It's just uncanny. Flaubert is a bit of an asshole, but he sure spills the beans on how men think when they cheat. It helped. [putting an arm around CHARLOTTE] And somehow, Charlotte and I ended up friends. Sorry babe. [She drains her glass. CHARLOTTE drains hers and hugs her back. There are tears in her eyes.]CARRIE: [voiceover] I swear, I'd become a lesbian if I didn't like cock so much. And I wish I'd read Flaubert earlier.[Theme music, credits]

  • MJ Nicholls
    2019-03-22 06:59

    An exhausting thrill-ride through the zany world of womanising socialite Frédéric, or—for the first 300 pages, at least—wannabe womanising socialite Frédéric. Because Frédéric can’t make it happen with his mate Arnoux’s missus, nor his mate Arnoux’s mistress, this frustration is the bane of his existence as he falls in and out of money, society and love. Against the backdrop of the 1848 Paris uprising this novel heaves with ornate descriptive grandeur, political commentary and violence, a frenetic comic energy, and more love triangles than the HMS Hefner in Bermuda. A classic that delights, frustrates, amuses and teases in equal measure—what more could you ask for? Sex? Well, there’s no sex. You have sex on the brain, you do. Take a cold shower.

  • ZaRi
    2019-02-24 05:55

    فلوبر در یک نامه در 1852 به لوییز کوله می نویسد:"دوست دارم کتابي بنويسم درباره هيچ، کتابي که بر هيچ چيز بيروني که خارج از خود باشد دلالت نکند، کتابي که بتواند به نيروي دروني سبکش، روي پاي خودش بايستد، درست بدان گونه که کره زمين بي هيچ تکيه گاهي خود را در فضا نگاه دارد... کتابی بی‌هیچ وابستگی به دنیای بیرون، کتابی که به یمن نیروی درونی سبکش، قائم به ذات باشد، همچنان که زمین خود را در خلاء فضا نگه می‌دارد و از هر پایه‌ای بی‌نیاز است، کتابی که کم‌وبیش هیچ موضوعی ندارد، یا دست‌کم موضوع آن نادیدنی است، البته اگر چنین چیزی ممکن باشد...هم از اين رو است که مي گوييم نه موضوع خوب وجود دارد و نه موضوع بد.» «ديگري» يا همان «تکيه گاه» مساله اخلاق است. «اخلاقي» زندگي کردن يعني زندگي مطابق معياري که «ديگري» تعيين مي کند. اين «ديگري» مي تواند ايده ها، اسطوره ها، باورها، جامعه يا حتي منافع معين يک طبقه و... باشد. علاوه بر آن در اخلاق «خوب» يا «بد» يا به عبارت دقيق تر خير و شر وجود دارد و نه برحسب آنچه فرد را خوش آيد يا خوش نيايد. ولي من مي خواهم کتابي بنويسم درباره هيچ که بدون هيچ گونه تکيه گاهي خود را در فضا نگاه دارد، يعني به خود و باورهاي خود و نيروي دروني اش(و نه ديگري) متکي باشد. بنابراين من پيشاپيش قصد نوشتن کتابي را کرده ام که مطابق تعريف گفته شده نمي تواند اخلاقي باشد زيرا به «خود» متکي است و هم از اين رو است که خود نيز بر اين مساله صحه مي گذارم که نه موضوع خوبي وجود دارد و نه موضوع بدي. کل ادبياتي که حاوي درس اخلاقي است، ذاتاً و اساساً کاذب است، از همان لحظه يي که اثبات مي کني، دروغ مي گويي. اول و آخر را خدا مي داند، انسان از وسط خبر دارد هنر مثل خدا بايد در بيکران معلق باشد، در خود کامل باشد، مستقل از خالقش باشد."هر چند هنگام نوشتن این نامه،فلوبر سرگرم نگارش مادام بوواری بوده ، اما به نظر می‌رسد که در نهایت در "تربیت احساسات" است که تا اندازه به این خواسته‌ خود می رسد و یک رمان مینویسد که می توان گفت موضوع ندارد، یا البته درست تر است که بگویم یک رمان نوشته که موضوع آن نادیدنیست. در مادام بوواری آنچنان که یوسا در عیش مدام می نویسد موضوع کتاب بسیار روشناست. اما فلوبر در تربیت احساسات موفق می‌شود تا در نهایت یک موضوع را بهانه‌ چیزی بکند که در واقع می‌خواهد درباره‌ آن حرف بزند. در مادام بوواری، "اما بوواری" کاراکتر اصلی داستان است و تمام اتفاقها و حادثه ها و حتا تفسیرها ، ارتباط با او می‌شود و به او باز می گردد، اما در تربیت احساسات اینچنین نیست، چرا که "فردریک مورو" هراندازه هم که کاراکتر اصلی داستان باشد، به هیچ وجه آن جایگاه را ندارد که "اما " در مادام بوواری دارد. درواقع "فردریک مورو" بیشتر یک بهانه‌ است برای مشاهده‌ اتفاقها و جریانهایی که در حاشیه‌ زندگی فردریک در جریان هست در حالی که در مادام بوواری هر آنچه که اتفاق می‌افتد پیرامون کاراکتر اصلی هست و به او باز می‌گردد. بنابراین می توان گفت در تربیت احساسات هست که فلوبر موفق می‌شود برای اولین دفعه موضوع اصلی خود را به شیوه جدید روایت کند، آن را در میان کاراکتر فردریک مورو پنهان کند و در نهایت آنچنان که خود می گوید،یک رمان بنویسد که "قائم به ذات" باشد. "تربیت احساساتی" یا آنچنان که "مهدی سحابی" آنرا "تربیت احساسات" به فارسی برگردان کرده ، داستان "تربیت سانتی‌مانتال" یا "تربیت احساساتی" نسل و جامعه‌ از فرانسه را نشان می‌دهد که خواسته‌ها و اهداف راستین خود را فراموش کرده و درگیر احساسات خود شده و چشمان خود را بر واقعیت کشور خود بسته است. تربیت احساسات داستان زندگی "فردریک مورو" یک جوان احساساتی ‌هست که به طور اتفاق با خانواده‌ آقای "ژاک آرنو" آشنا می‌شود و دلباخته خانم آرنو می شود. "فردریک" که در ابتدای رمان یک جوان بامصمم، با اراده و با آرزوهای بزرگ تصویر شده است، کم‌کم از خواسته‌های خود دست می‌کشد و درگیر ماجراها و احساست که با خانم آرنو دارد، تمام آن‌ها را فراموش می‌کند. در نهایت،‌ فردریک که پیش از این به تحصیلات دانشگاهی‌ خود در رشته‌ حقوق و همچنین نویسندگی علاقه‌ی زیادی داشته است و حتا همیشه می‌خواسته وزیر بشود، به هیچ‌کدام از آرزوها و خواسته‌های گذشته‌ خود نمی‌رسد و زندگی‌ او تمام در راه احساسات می رود. در همان حال، یعنی در همان‌ سال‌هایی که فردریک درگیر احساسات با ا خانم آرنو است، فرانسه تحولات و تغییرات سیاسی و اجتماعی مهمی را پشت سر می‌گذارد اما فردریک که به‌ دلیل درگیری احساسی‌ خود از تمام این جریانها به‌دور است، تنها مشاهده کننده آن‌ها هست و هیچ دخالت در سونوشت سیاسی و اجتماعی کشور خود ندارد. فرانسه در سال‌هایی که بخش بیشتری از تربیت احساسات در آن سال‌ها روایت می‌شود، در گیر جنبش‌ها و شورش‌های انقلابی هست. انقلاب ۱۸۴۸ فرانسه در همین موقع اتفاق می شود و در این میان شورش‌های زیاد در پاریس در جریان است و در نهایت پادشاهی لویی فیلیپ پایان می‌شود و "جمهوری دوم" فرانسه برقرار می‌شود."امیل زولا" در باره این رمان گفته است :" تمامی آثار قبل و بعد از این رمان دربرابر واقعیت گرایی آن ، بیش از یک اپرای تراژیک نیست !"

  • peiman-mir5 rezakhani
    2019-03-08 03:03

    ‎دوستانِ گرانقدر، من این کتاب را با نامِ "آموزهٔ سهش ها" یا "آموزش عاطفی" میشناسم.. ولی آنچه برجسته است این است که هدفِ اصلی <گوستاو فلوبر> از نوشتنِ این کتاب، بیانِ احساساتِ بسیار زیادِ فرانسوی ها و همچنین برآیند ها و پی آمدهایِ شکستِ عشقی میباشد.... فلوبر چیزی در حدودِ هفت سال از عمرِ خویش را پایِ نوشتنِ این رمان نهاد-------------------------------------------‎شخصیتِ اصلی داستان، جوانی به نامِ <فردریک مُورو> میباشد.. فردریک در سالِ 1840 میلادی همراه با مادرِ خود به شهرِ "نوژان سور سن" سفر کرده و در آنجا با زنی زیبارو به نامِ <خانم آرنو> آشنا میشود.. در همان نگاه نخست، یک دل نه صد دل، عاشق و دلباختهٔ این زن میشود.. ولی مشکل آنجاست که او شوهر کرده است‎فردریک با داغی که بر دل دارد به پاریس باز میگردد، ولی نمیتواند عشقِ به <خانمِ آرنو> را فراموش کند... ناامیدی و سبُک سری در زندگیِ او موج میزند... تمامِ وقتش را بر گشت و گذار و رفت و آمد با دانشجویان و بازاریان و هنرمندان میگذراند... او در زندگیِ خویش معشوقه هایی دارد که از نظر سنی از او بزرگتر هستند.. <خانم دامبروز> که زنی ثروتمند است و <خانم رزانت> که تمام وقتش را در آتلیه و نمایشگاه ها سپری میکند... جالب است بدانید که از برخی جهات شخصیتِ فردریک شبیه به شخصیتِ نویسندهٔ کتاب است... <گوستاو فلوبر> نیز در جوانی سه معشوقه داشت که همگی از نظر سنی از او بزرگتر بودند‎فردریک با شوهرِ خانمِ آرنو آشنا میشود... او مردی خوش گذران و خیانتکار و هوس ران است و شغلش خرید و فروشِ تابلوهایِ نقاشی میباشد و با زنهای زیادی در نمایشگاه ها آشنا شده است... رزانت نیز معشوقهٔ او بوده است و سپس با فردریک آشنا میشود... فردریک افسوس میخورد که چرا مردی با خانم آرنو است که سپاسدارِ این زن نمیباشد و چرا نباید او به جایِ آن مردِ هوس باز، با خانمِ آرنو زندگی کند‎فردریک پس از مدتی از همه چیز و همه کس دلزده میشود و رابطه اش را با زن ها نیز قطع کرده و حتی با <لوئیز> که او را میپرستد و با او قصدِ ازدواج دارد نیز قطع رابطه میکند‎در سالِ 1848 میلادی، شورش و انقلاب سراسر فرانسه را زیر و رو کرده است.. دوستانِ فردریک همچون <سرنال> در این شورش ها شرکت میکنند. ولی فردریک هیچگونه علاقه ای به این کارها نشان نمیدهد و خود را از دوستانِ انقلابیِ خویش جدا میکند.... در همان روزها به طور اتفاقی با خانمِ آرنو، برخورد میکند... ولی هرکاری میکند نمیتواند به او بگوید که تا چه اندازه دیوانه وار دلباختهٔ او میباشد... او به جایی رسیده است که دیگر برایِ رسیدنِ به آرزوهایش هیچ تلاشی نمیکند‎سرانجامِ آن انقلاب و شورش ها، پایانِ حکومتِ <لویی فلیپ> و آغازِ جمهوری دومِ فرانسه است... فردریک نسبت به سرنوشتِ سرزمینش و هیجاناتِ انقلاب بی تفاوت است‎بیست و هفت سال از نخستین دیدارِ او با خانمِ آرنو میگذرد... فردریک به همان شهری که دلدادگی اش از آنجا آغاز شده، باز میگردد و داستانِ زندگی اش و آن عشقِ نافرجام و غم انگیز را برایِ دوستش <دلوریه> بازگو میکند--------------------------------------------‎امیدوارم این ریویو در جهتِ شناختِ این کتاب، کافی و مفید بوده باشه‎<پیروزباشید و ایرانی>

  • notgettingenough
    2019-02-26 05:51

    Finished. What an achievement. Writing it, not reading it. I marvel that he has written a book with no character for which one could have a shred of sympathy and yet somehow we sit there caring what happens. I mean, really caring, reading through breakfast caring.I kept thinking of The Great Gatsby when Nick says to Jay "They're a rotten crowd...You're worth the whole damn bunch put together." and isn't that what makes the book work, that there is somebody worthy of our caring. But here there isn't one character to redeem the story and yet, even so, even though they are rotten without exception, still Flaubert gets you to care. Amazing.And then again, I marvel that the book is a complete shambles -The rest is here.....http://alittleteaalittlechat.wordpres...

  • Geoff
    2019-03-08 02:47

    *this book deserves anywhere between 4.2 and 4.7 stars“Funny, how the things you have the hardest time parting with are the things you need the least.” (Bob Dylan)With every work I read or reread by Flaubert, I am all the more convinced that he was the master craftsman, that he was master of attention to the tiny stuff, the small details that are layered brick by brick (word by word), the master of attention to even the mortar between the bricks, and master of raising the whole damn superstructure. The buildings he makes out of words hold the world, and I want to call him King of the Paragraph, because his seem so measured, so precise, so carefully wrought. I’ve heard complaints that his detailing of minutiae can become tedious, but to me that is evidence of the eye fully open, the mind ticking at a heightened rate, the physicality of the world irresistibly impressing itself on his realism. His emotional sketches are just as profound and rich as his inventories of space; his sketches of those characters void of human emotion are equally as profound. Flaubert is almost that Joycean image of the author pairing his nails, detached, his handiwork submerged in refinement. Almost. Because above all Flaubert is a satirist. So his presence is felt, as a ripple on the surface of the water is evidence of a rampart crumbling on the ocean floor. I stole that from Frank O’Hara. But kind of like the experience of reading Nabokov, Flaubert the artist is what is on full display here, and in Sentimental Education, as I said when I was writing about Bouvard and Pecuchet, he is perched behind his curtain like Oz or comfortably atop Mount Olympus like the prankster gods of old. He animates his characters to illustrate human folly above all else- who are we to sympathize with in Madame Bovary? who do we not find ridiculous in B & P? who deserves our alliance in Sentimental Education? - but the almost indefinable thing about Flaubert is that amid his mockery he comes off as touching. Because you get the impression that this cranky god really loves his little pets, and wishes them the best- although he knows with all his prescience what the grim best is for us hopeless little mortals playing our dangerous games.It’s a pretty grim book. Those two eternal opiates- sex and power- are pretty much the sole motivation behind everyone in Frédéric and Deslauriers’ circle. Allegiances and philosophies are as mutable as clothing or the shifting light in Paris- everything is exhausted in the pursuit of one of those two endless ends. Flaubert claimed his intent was to write “the moral history of the men of my generation” and if so it’s a bleak assessment. The great upheavals that define 19th century France take place as the background of this narrative (the Revolution of 1848 acting as a center point) but Frédéric is too busy trying to get a piece of ass to really notice. The offstage massacres and thunder of guns in far off arrondisements are purposefully distanced- the “moral history” Flaubert is trying to paint is apparently mass solipsism. The revolutionaries become oppressors when it suits them, the super-rich elite are suddenly populists and social advocates when the unrest in the streets threatens the order of things, the artists sell out, brave men are proven cowards, and all seem to worship some vague form of authority, whether it be social, political, or psychological. Frédéric’s obsessive, life-long pursuit of the phantom-like image of Madame Arnoux can be extrapolated into a rather ripe comment on all of those masses surging about in the streets of mid-19th century Paris- they too were chasing ghosts- the ghosts of the Revolution, Royalism, Socialism, Democracy- all those specters that never seem content to lie in their graves; all those straw men people are constantly trying to revive in the name of some sort of never-achieved utopia. See the Dylan quote above.But the potential bad taste in the mouth that this kind of judgement on humanity could leave, the awfulness, duplicity, shallowness, stupidity, manipulation, and gold-digging of the people in Sentimental Education, is offset by Flaubert’s lovely, lovely prose, his impressionistic drawing of scenes, his adoration of Paris as an entity of indifferent light and beauty; his Paris, the place where history unfolds under the stoicism of stone arcades, where passions are conceived and destroyed, where markets are set up in the mornings and dismantled in the evenings and alluring smells emanate from restaurants, where gossip flows through the gutters like sewage, and alleys are sunk in aqueous light and the sky is always pale or a vaulted blue or gray and about to rain and the amber evening is refracted through clouds, making all of our selfish human endeavors all the more charming, all the more timeless and endearing; and the Seine is reflecting the gaslights in wavering strands as a tortured lover pines on the Pont Neuf at midnight, and hooves percuss and echo from the cobblestones, and Montmarte is filthy and eternal, and the cafes are greasy and alive with chatter and opaque with purple smoke and the men are in their cravats and top-hats and the women are rouged and bosomy and flush and comely. Flaubert cannot help but adore Paris, despite himself. That mythical stage, that constant setting for so much of the great art that the Western world has produced. Sentimental Education succeeds in coming off like an epic of place, of space and lifetimes, a panoptic portrait of interesting times told in often banal scenes and acts; and the technique, skill, or what have you, of the sardonic, darkly hilarious master Flaubert elevates the book beyond some severe excoriation of the human condition- it makes it a vital work of art, resonant now and probably for all time.

  • Nora Barnacle
    2019-02-23 05:06

    Floberovo "Sentimentalno vaspitanje" je knjiga koja počinje u ranoj mladosti, a završava se u ranoj starosti jednog pametnog, ali previše osećajnog Francuza sa umetničkim senzibilitetom, Frederika Moroa, na čijem primeru se pokazuje i kako ne tako surove životne okolnosti (izuzimajući Revoluciju koja je na nivou epizodnog lika u očima Frederika) vrlo lako mogu da ubuđave mladalačke snove i ambicije. Istina, Frederik nije baš nevina žrtva: nije da se ne angažuje u cilju te propasti, sve i da je taj angažman nekakava samopovodljivost ni za čim, gotovo strastvena ambivalentnost (da, sve paradoksi), on lebdi iznad i izvan života, menjajući stvarnost za iluzije a iluzije za život. Na kraju nema lekcije, a mi nemamo osećaj kruženja po istoj putanji.Frederik je od onih likova koji, naizgled, sve rade pogrešno, ali za čije postupke ne nalazite alternativu (u tom smislu, roman je hermetički zatvoren). Svakako među najzanimljivijim književnim likovima za koje znam.Iako je glavni motiv (momenat iz Floberove biografije takođe) celoživotna ljubav prema jednoj ženi, u roman su uklopljene još 3, koje Ingrid Šafanek poredi sa 4 elementa koja bi mogla da čine nekakvu celinu Frederikovih potreba. Pogrešno bi bilo sklapati od njih idealnu jednu, to nije namera. Ovo nije ljubavni roman, makar ne u mom shvatanju. Pre bih ga svrstala u grupu onih što postavljaju pitanje "šta bismo menjali kad bismo živeli u svetu najboljem od svih?".Kažu da je Flober hteo da prikaže izgubljenost svoje generacije, ali se namestilo da su i potonje izgubljene u sličnoj meri i na sličan način, pa mu je vanvremenost došla gratis. Doduše, sa zakašnjenjem, budući da ni kritiku ni publiku Sentimentalno vaspitanje nije fasciniralo. Ali jeste Džojsa, Hamsuna, Prusta, Kafku (koji se nije odvajao od francuskog izdanja ove knjige).Struktura romana, jezik i stil su nešto o čemu ne treba govoriti: sumnjam da išta može biti toliko sivo i gorko u toj količini sjaja i slatkoće.Velika preporuka!

  • Perry
    2019-03-25 08:39

    While Crimes of Passion are All the Fashion, A Gentleman's Picturesque Ideations of Adulterous Procreation Frederic Moreau comes of age in 1840s Paris. Given to flowery fancies of romance, he falls "in love" with Madame Arnoux, a lady at least a decade his senior, and becomes frustrated with the failed revolution of 1848, a Parisian fiasco. Flaubert said he set out to write a "moral history of the men of [his] generation...the history of their feelings... a book about love, about passion... inactive."I enjoyed the book not so much for the love on verge of coital, a story line that lost its steam about halfway through the novel, but for its lampooning of a decadent, egocentric French society filled with superficial characters given to whimsy, such as the banker Dambreuse, "a man so habituated to corruption that he would happily pay for the pleasure of selling himself." C. Hitchens, “The Rat That Roared,” Wall Street Journal, 2/06/03.I found Madame Bovary's abbreviated life much more compelling and revelatory than Monsieur Moreau's romantic adventures in pursuit of Madame Arnoux.

  • David Lentz
    2019-02-23 00:56

    The French word for sentiment is "sentiment" (san-tee-mon). So Flaubert is concerned essentially about what a young French man, presumably him, has learned about love and lust, affection and disaffection, friendship and betrayal, loyalty and disloyalty, admiration and disdain, and other sentiments. He writes precisely within the complex pixilist history of a turbulent political era for France as new liberal rights emerge versus the power of kings and their conservative bedfellows. There is blood in the streets of Paris and against this chaotic backdrop we find a macro-view of the turbulent Paris embedded with Flaubert's micro-view of his protagonist, Frederic Moreau. He is an intellectual who has made a complete hash of his love life as he falls into virtually every emotional trap available to a member of his gender. He seeks love affairs with beautiful, married women who admire but are unavailable to him. He seeks wealth through dangerous liaisons with influential, politically connected women who play him. He seeks the company of a woman of the streets who must be with other men in order to make her living. He is a negligent and unwilling father to a child. Despite his affluence and intellect, in matters of love Moreau is completely inept. He repeatedly surrenders to his emotions and loses control of his life. He conducts his personal life so idiotically that I found it difficult to respect Moreau: he is very nearly a complete idiot, in the literal sense of Dostoevsky, who suffers for the failures of his personal life and should. I sense that Flaubert wanted us to like Moreau and perhaps even view him heroically. Neither happened for me in my reading of this great literary masterwork. I do understand that Flaubert wants Moreau to seem all-too-human and find it credible that any man could be susceptible to the sentiments of Moreau. I also find credible that men make mistakes by giving all to the heart as do women. Certainly, as Flaubert reminds us in the title of his literary novel, the lessons of love are instructive despite their pain and etch upon our souls the scars of their teaching. We love and learn, don't we, when feeling drives us excessively to act without regard, foresight or respect for unintended consequences. Flaubert immerses this tale in the politics of his day and if you understand them, all the better. If you don't, then Flaubert wants to school you in them. On a grander scale the common sentiments of one man can be seen to be reflected in the evolution of a nation and its political life for better or worse. How to navigate as only one human within the mass of humanity of one's own civilization also leads Moreau into grand dilemmas that he can't win and traps from which he cannot entirely extricate himself. Again, this is the human condition and there is no better place to experience and observe it than in Paris in the mid-19th century. His view is epic in scope much like Balzac's "Human Comedy" another true literary masterpiece that I can't recommend highly enough. I respect Flaubert and have no doubt that he personally experienced the full range of human sentiment leading to the education reported so eloquently in this literary novel. I just didn't like Moreau although I understand him well. Perhaps, Moreau is like us in so many ways that some of us are incapable of admitting to admiring him. Perhaps, he is simply an anti-hero as Moreau is the penultimate Adam-afer-the-Fall. He is well schooled in the dangerous risks of sentiment but he just can't help himself and he creates so much total chaos in his life every time he succumbs to sentiment. Flaubert in the tone of the French seems so blase about his many colossal moral lapses. I understand Moreau only too well. I see much of myself in him and perhaps so will you. But if you think you can spare yourself by educating yourself in the painful lessons of sentiment of Frederic Moreau, you will be seriously challenged, if you lead a full life, to avoid sentiment as a ruling passion that guides you. If you can see something of yourself from your past in him, so much the better. At a minimum consider yourself well warned by Flaubert: our sentiments drive us to the brink of madness and may well push us over it. You may misunderstand your own sentiment to believe you can fully control it as, despite your best efforts to learn from it, sentiment defines both your character and your destiny. Read this great book.

  • Dolors
    2019-03-04 01:50

    An educational reading indeed, either spiritually or rationally speaking.The novel talks about the life of a young man, Frederic, during the French Revolution and the founding of the French Empire in 1848. It is said that Frederic is in fact Flaubert himself telling about some real events in his life and of course about his platonic love for an older woman, in the book, called Mme Arnoux. We are able to follow, with a somehow ironic and pessimistic tone, a different set of characters who live the important changes of the era, from the Republican idealist Sénecal to the well off banker Mr. Dambruese, passing several courtesans and artists on the way. The book combines highly advanced politics with almost philosophical wanderings such as existence and death , passion and love, morality and justice... Each character represents an icon, Mme Arnoux, unattainable perfection; Rosannette, troubled and used courtesan; Deslauries, ambitious and envious middle class lawyer; all of them combine into a well constructed scenery which engulfs you into the story, even if you don't want to.The book left me wondering if a man is to be judged by the result of his actions or by his good intentions. The answer might not be as easy as it seems after you've read Frederic's story. A book that shouldn't be missed by those who appreciate a smart and eloquent reading. I think this work outperforms Flaubert's "Madame Bovary".

  • Maria Thomarey
    2019-03-23 03:52

    Όταν είσαι 18 χρόνων και διαβάζεις αυτό το βιβλίο , σε σημαδεύει για όλη σου τη ζωή .

  • Nelson Zagalo
    2019-03-22 01:07

    Tinha ficado algo apreensivo aquando da minha resenha de “Madame Bovary” (1856), mas aceitei que o problema fosse meu. Assumi que a obra tinha surgido numa fase embrionária do realismo na literatura, que tinha obrigado Flaubert a inovar e a abrir caminhos sem pauta para se orientar, e que por isso teria de ser condescendente por estar a quase dois séculos de distância. Mas ao chegar ao final de “A Educação Sentimental”, esta minha abordagem já não serve, porque passados 15 anos, Flaubert não alterou em nada os problemas que eu tinha sentido face a "Madame Bovary".Só em parte consigo entender que Proust e Kafka se tenham deliciado com Flaubert. Sim a escrita tem momentos muito bons, existe uma organização frásica muito boa, capaz de gerar bom ritmo, de adocicar a leitura, a ponto de fazer toda a experiência fluir muito naturalmente. Por outro lado, e agora no final destes dois livros, percebo que Flaubert terá sido um indivíduo com problemas obsessivos, centrado sobre si e sobre a sua arte, incapaz de lidar com o social. E é por isso que apesar de eu não ver proximidade temática, entre Proust e Kafka com Flaubert, eles por sentirem problemas ao nível dos de Flaubert, terão lido nas entrelinhas. Mas fosse apenas este o meu problema com a obra, e aceitaria Flaubert sem problemas, o problema é que ao contrário deles, Flaubert não foi capaz de criar uma obra autónoma.Ou seja, “Madame Bovary” e “Educação Sentimental”, seguem ambos a mesma formula, com uma variação apenas, num temos uma mulher, no outro um homem. Isto parece ridículo, mas foi exatamente isto que senti no final dos dois livros. **** SPOILER **** Temos dois personagens, Emma e Frederic, ambos apenas centrados sobre si, nos seus amores, totalmente insensíveis à restante sociedade, desde a própria família, aos amigos, até mesmo aos próprios filhos. E se já me tinha chocado com o desenho da relação entre Emma e a sua filha Berthe, Frederic vai muito mais longe, roçando o desumano. Ter um filho e não querer saber, podemos até aceitar que se trata de alguém apenas focado em si, mas ver o filho morrer nos braços, e estar apenas preocupado com o facto da amada ir partir para outra cidade, é tão aberrante que não tenho palavras para descrever **** FIM ***.Acabei por ter de ir confirmar que Flaubert nunca casou, nem nunca teve filhos, e para além disso, afirmava ser "antinatalista", já que considerava não querer "transmitir a ninguém os agravos e as desgraças da existência”. Lido assim, parece profundo, apesar de ser aquilo que quase todas as pessoas que conheço, e que não querem ter filhos, dizem. O problema, é que para alguém supostamente tão reflexivo sobre a existência humana, escreveu dois livros, os que li, de uma superficialidade atroz. Tanto Emma como Fréderic vivem as suas vidas sem pensar em absolutamente mais nada nem ninguém, a não ser nos seus amores, nos seus desejos, na sua própria felicidade. Como se para viver bastasse apenas amar alguém, isto claro desde que caísse na conta uma renda mensal para não ter que trabalhar e poder viver apenas a pensar no tal amor.Flaubert criticou "Os Miseráveis" de Victor Hugo por ser um romance condescendente para com todas as classes da sociedade, pois fez bem, já que acabou a fazer o oposto. Aliás, quem tinha razão era mesmo Henry James, a quem Flaubert não conseguiu enganar:"Aqui, a forma e o método são os mesmos que em "Madame Bovary"; a competência estudada, a ciência, e a acumulação de material, são ainda mais impressionantes; mas o livro, esse numa única palavra, está morto." (Henry James)Como se isto não bastasse, o livro apresenta vários problemas de organização da ação e dos personagens, que fazem com que não poucas vezes as cenas não apresentem ligação entre si, ou não seja possível compreender totalmente o que o autor pretende ao colocar os personagens a dizerem certas coisas. Isto é mais um problema de edição, mas acredito que Flaubert com todas as suas idiossincrasias, tenha impedido que esse trabalho fosse feito sem o seu total controlo, e por isso o livro que temos é o que ele terá permitido que tivéssemos.Dito tudo isto. Não dou por perdido o tempo que gastei a ler “Madame Bovary”, já “A Educação Sentimental” dispensava.Publicado no VI em:

  • Kelly
    2019-03-13 04:46

    Look, its Flaubert. I don't have any fault to find with this writing. But I've still got 100 pages to go and its been weeks and I have no intention of finishing this. I get these characters- way waaay too much. I want to claw my eyes out rather than spend any more time with them though.So probably too good a job, M. Flaubert. But I'd prefer to spend time with Emma so many times over. Even at her most whiny.Review to come.

  • ·Karen·
    2019-03-16 02:40

    Angry Young Men of the July MonarchyThere's Louis-Philippe, King of the French rather than of France, trying hard to look safely bourgeois rather than pompously regal. Wikipedia informs me to my delighted astonishment that he survived no less than SEVEN assassination attempts (you'd think he'd have got the message) including one that slithers into the realm of absurdity: Giuseppe Mario Fieschi built a device that consisted of 25 gun barrels fixed to a wooden frame, all of which could be fired at once. A machine infernale indeed, and deadly too. When Fieschi fired a volley during the king's review of the National Guard on July 28th 1835, eighteen people were killed and a further twenty two injured, Fieschi himself suffering severe injury when several of the gun barrels exploded. One bullet slightly grazed Louis-Philippe's forehead. Come to think of it, maybe that's the message that Louis-Philippe took away from failed attempts: that here was some kind of providential power protecting him. He was certainly let us say a little complacent. In face of mounting opposition in January and February 1848 by those groups of society that were disappointed in his intransigence on the questions of economic reform and a more extensive suffrage, Louis-Philippe claimed that Parisians would never start a revolution in the winter.Flaubert's novel opens in 1840 and takes us through to the unrest and upheaval that culminated in the February Revolution of 1848 and beyond, ending with a coda in 1867. Frédéric, the hero of this tale, is suitably placed in Paris, surrounded by men of action, enjoys a small private income due to the generosity of a childless uncle which would allow him to strive for public office without the necessity of compromise in order to earn a living, seems to have some sympathy for the concerns of those outside of his small social circle, is young and hot-blooded and thus all in all seems perfectly placed to be right in the thick of things. That's what you might expect but for the title of course, for this is not his political education, this is the education of the heart. Frédéric longs for the Unattainable Madame Arnoux. At the very moment when he begins to believe that his impossible dream might be fulfilled those high hopes are dashed. He descends into a kind of moral turpitude that sees him torn between a loveless marriage to a young naive ingénue, a relationship with a courtesan on whom he fathers a child, and an equally loveless marriage to a somewhat older but vastly rich widow. (view spoiler)[Turns out she's not quite as rich as either of them believed. (hide spoiler)] He ends up losing them all from his life, comfortably complacent in front of the fire with his excellent friend Deslauriers, accepting that their time has passed, their ambitions frustrated, their dreams of the future bankrupted.That cycle of hope and strong desire turning into bankrupt moral turpitude: maybe it is political too.["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>

  • F.R.
    2019-02-24 02:46

    Long time friends will know I have a great love of the English novel of the nineteenth century, but, heavens, it’s a ponderous beast when compared to this work by Flaubert. Written in 1869 this feels a far more modern novel , with a rapid pace which covers events in two chapters that it takes most contemporaneous novels a volume to deal with. Indeed it would be hard to imagine such a swift style ever use in 1800s Britain, if anything it feels more appropriate to a novel about 1960’s Carnaby Street. The morality too is much different to straight-laced Victoriana, with the lead character spending most of the book in love with a married woman and even scheming on how best to get her into bed. This is before he actually moves in with the woman of easy virtue.Frederic Moreau is the young antihero: a lazy, feckless, amoral and envious sort, who we follow through this tumultuous period of French history. (Flaubert is superb at weaving his characters into real events, although if – like me – you don’t have expert knowledge of this era then an edition with good notes is essential). Thinking of the 1960s may actually be a good window for the modern reader to start reading this book, there is the social mobility, the tumultuous times, the ambitious young men and the sex (if not the drugs and rock’n’roll). Covering a number of years Flaubert follows his character as he succeeds and then fails many times over until the reader, whilst still probably not liking him, does understand him and the world he lives in.

  • سوشی
    2019-02-28 04:58

    خیال می‌کنم هنوز نمی‌توانم رمان نو را درک کنم. مثل «جادهٔ فلاندر» که با هزار امید و آرزو شروع به خواندنش کردم و بعد با شلم‌شوربایی بی‌سروته مواجه شدم، تربیت احساسات هم ناامیدم کرد. در این رمان با یک جوان بی‌اراده، خجالتی و احساساتی مواجهیم که از اول تا آخر کتاب بین زن‌های مختلف سرگردان است. هیچ کاری نمی‌کند، هیچ اتفاقی نمی‌افتد، و خواننده در نهایت به هیچ نتیجه‌ای نمی‌رسد. خود فلوبر گفته بود «می‌خواهم کتابی دربارهٔ هیچ بنویسم. کتابی که خودبه‌خود در هوا معلق بماند» و همین کار را کرد. کتاب از ابتدا تا انتها شرح جزئیاتی بی‌اهمیت بود از توهمات جوانی به نام فردریک که لابه‌لای آن ماجرای انقلاب ۱۸۴۸ فرانسه نیز گنجانده شده بود که بسیار خسته‌کننده بود.مارسل پروست در شاهکارش «در جست‌وجوی زمان از دست رفته» می‌نویسد: ادیبی که با او از یک «کتاب خوب» تازه حرف می‌زنی پیشاپیش از بیحوصلگی خمیازه می‌کشد، چون میانگین گونه‌ای از همهٔ کتابهای خوبی را در نظر می‌آورد که خوانده است، حال آن‌که یک کتاب خوب چیزی خاص و پیش‌بینی نکردنی است، و نه از مجموع همهٔ شاهکارهای پیش از خود بلکه از چیزی ساخته شده است که برای یافتنش جذب کامل آن مجموع هیچ بس نیست، چون درست در بیرون از آن است. ادیبی که تا اندکی پیش دلزده بود، همین‌که با این اثر تازه آشنا شد به واقعیتی که اثر توصیف می‌کند علاقه‌مند می‌شود.من هم با به یاد سپردن این نکته و بدون هیچ‌گونه پیش‌زمینهٔ ذهنی سراغ «تربیت احساسات» رفتم اما نتیجه دلچسب نبود. به داستان علاقه‌مند نشدم و این بی‌میلی تا انتها ادامه داشت.

  • Bastet
    2019-03-05 08:47

    El adulterio no está tan mal visto si lo comete un hombre que si la instigadora es una mujer, en el siglo XIX y en el XXI. Por eso Madame Bovary (1857) escandalizó tanto a la sociedad parisina decimonónica. En La educación sentimental (1869) el adulterio es un mero trámite que tiene que cumplir cualquier burgués que se precie, y si además de una amante casada tenía una querida (o varias) soltera, más envidiado era el joven aspirante a brillar en sociedad. Así, Frédéric Moreau se sirve de su poder de atracción entre las féminas para medrar socialmente, y no le cuesta trabajo llevar una doble vida basada en engaños y subterfugios con tal de alcanzar su objetivo. Pero su desmesurada ambición le impide culminar felizmente su relación con Marie Arnoux, la única mujer a la que ha amado. Esta es la venganza que se reserva Gustave Flaubert, cuyo amor platónico, Elisa Schlesinger, «devastó su vida», como él mismo reconoció.Considerada una de las grandes obras maestras del XIX junto con Guerra y paz, La educación sentimental es una novela de formación, en gran parte autobiográfica —Frédéric es el trasunto de Gustave y la señora Arnoux el de Elisa—, técnicamente perfecta. El primer y el último capítulo son impecables. En el primero, Gustave Flaubert relata el encuentro, en un navío, que unirá inexorablemente los destinos del bachiller Frédéric Moreau y del matrimonio Arnoux. La relación amorosa entre Frédéric y la señora Arnoux está abocada al fracaso desde el principio: «Mientras más la contemplaba, mayor era el abismo que sentía abrirse entre ambos». En el último capítulo, Flaubert reúne a los dos íntimos amigos de juventud, Frédéric Moreau y Charles Deslauriers, en un pasaje nostálgico que borra de un plumazo las antiguas desavenencias que los habían distanciado: «Ambos la habían malogrado [su vida], tanto el que había soñado con el amor como el que había soñado con el poder». Flaubert dedica un capítulo completo, el primero de la tercera y última parte, a las revueltas populares que asolaron París en febrero de 1848, en las que obreros y burgueses precipitaron la abdicación del rey Luis Felipe y la instauración de la Segunda República. Flaubert no simpatizaba con los socialistas, a los que tacha de «calientes de cascos», y despreciaba a la burguesía, clase social a la que pertenecía.La edición de Alianza tiene un gran aliciente: el Prólogo que firma el traductor de la obra, Miguel Salabert, es un interesantísimo estudio pormenorizado de la obra de Gustave Flaubert en el que queda patente su dominio de la literatura francesa decimonónica. En él explica, entre otras cosas, por qué esta novela fue tan mal recibida por la crítica, que aducía que en ella no pasaba nada más que la vida, y eso el público lo consideraba poco menos que una estafa. En palabras del traductor, «La obra era forzosamente mediocre, puesto que sus personajes lo eran. Negaban, al hablar así, la posibilidad de escribir una novela genial con personajes mediocres, que era precisamente lo que tenían en sus manos». Coincido con Salabert en que La educación... es superior, desde el punto de vista estilístico, a Madame Bovary.En general, las notas son imprescindibles para contextualizar la obra. Miguel Salabert es uno de los traductores de francés más solventes. Sin embargo, confunde «deber» con «deber de» e incurre en imprecisiones tales como «calles vacías», «la jornada del día siguiente», «la curva del río», «grandes estatuillas», «obtener la confianza», además de afrancesar los patronímicos rusos (príncipe Tzernukoff, en lugar de Tzernukov) y de nombrar las calles a la manera francesa, es decir, primero el número y después la calle. El libro está bien editado, pero corregido con descuido: he encontrado algunas letras en negra, un «de arriba a abajo» y un «en fin de cuentas», amén de otros muchos errores tipográficos.

  • Lucas Sierra
    2019-03-14 04:04

    Cuando terminé el quinto capítulo de la tercera parte tuve que cerrar el libro, pararme de la mesa, y caminar por toda la casa blandiendo en alto el puño, maldiciendo a Flaubert por haber hecho lo que hizo, por la injusticia tan aberrante que no es suya sino del mundo. La situación, si alguien quiere imaginarla con mayor claridad, incluye un apartamento con cuatro gatos en el que yo vocifero en contra del autor francés mientras mis padres duermen en la alcoba principal.Sólo esa escena (la última del capítulo cinco de la tercera parte) basta para hacer de este libro uno que se gana su puesto entre las mejores cosas que he leído. El resto de elementos vendrán a confirmar esa observación. La pericia narrativa es la de un maestro en el oficio, uno que supo que escribir es un proceso de larga artesanía en el que poco importan las geniales intuiciones si no se domina a la perfección la herramienta del lenguaje y la paciente observación del alma humana. La educación sentimental es una de esas composiciones que parecen pertenecer, en exclusiva, al siglo XIX: novelas que abarcan todo, que no se echan atrás al momento de poner en escena discusiones estéticas o políticas, y que mantienen, por encima de cualquier cosa, una amarga conciencia crítica que hace vitales los cuadros más cotidianos.Aborrecí al personaje principal a lo largo de toda la novela. Esta confesión no dice nada, pero cuando debo admitir que en las dos páginas finales dejé de odiarle, que en veinte párrafos consiguió Gustave Flaubert que me reconciliara con Frédérik Moreau, bueno, entonces estoy confesando una de dos cosas: la primera mi absurda volubilidad; la segunda, una inmensa capacidad de síntesis en el autor que consigue poner en perspectiva toda una personalidad a la luz de una conclusión encantadora. La sencilla belleza del final de la novela no deja de recordarme el demoledor final de Don Quijote.¿Para qué irme a más? Quien lea La educación sentimental encontrará una novela lenta para nuestras costumbres actuales, demorada en los detalles, amplia al momento de describir particularidades del vestido y del paisaje. Encontrará situaciones patéticas por su ausencia de tragedia, narradas con un dramatismo esencial a partir de las declaraciones de sus personajes; y situaciones febrilmente dramáticas, narradas con demoledora falta de adornos...Es el primer libro que leo de Gustave Flaubert. He encontrado pasajes enteros de una candidez repleta de ternura que de golpe se interrumpen para dejar paso a metáforas que jamás se me habrían pasado por la imaginación. ¿Si ese no es el oficio del poeta, dónde hemos de encontrarlo? Insisto, es el primer libro que leo del clásico francés, y lo buscaré de ahora en adelante con entusiasmo.Encontré en la lectura algo parecido a la esperanza, en nuestra contradictoria condición humana, en nuestra tierna soberbia, en nuestras mejores aventuras. De toda la obra, sé que el personaje de Dussardier me acompañará siempre.

  • Sandra
    2019-02-25 08:38

    Ho letto l’ultima riga, ho chiuso il libro e sono stata colta da un’improvvisa tristezza, profonda come poche altre volte. Al contempo, però, sono soddisfatta perché ho letto un libro che non può non essere letto, imperdibile. E da ora in poi ne consiglierò a tutti la lettura. E’ “IL ” romanzo, per me. Perfetto, stupendo in ogni sua pagina, in ogni riga. Un mondo racchiuso in poco più di 500 pagine. C’è il mondo di Frédéric Moreau, uno studente diciottenne che, intorno al 1840, lascia Parigi per tornare nel suo paese nativo, Nogent sur Seine, e nel battello lungo la Senna incontra colei che diverrà in un attimo il "grande amore" della sua vita, Madame Arnoux, la donna che dalla prima pagina del romanzo fino all’ultima, occupa i pensieri del protagonista, il quale, alla fine del romanzo, divenuto adulto “Viaggiò. Conobbe la malinconia dei piroscafi, i freddi risvegli sotto la tenda, la vertigine dei paesaggi e delle rovine, l’amarezza delle simpatie troncate. Ritornò. Frequentò la società, ed ebbe altri amori ancora. Ma il ricordo incessante del primo glieli rendeva insulsi: e poi la veemenza del desiderio, la freschezza stessa delle sensazioni era perduta. Anche le sue ambizioni intellettuali erano appassite. Passarono anni; e lui sopportava l’inoperosità dell’intelligenza e l’inerzia del cuore.” Con queste parole Flaubert sintetizza una vita: un’esistenza fatta di desideri, di speranze, che riempiono la giovinezza e che si perdono per strada, nel corso delle variegate esperienze che la vita sottopone, appassiscono e muoiono rivelandosi illusioni e alla fine il ricordo tutto sopisce e spegne. Così è Frédéric: un irresoluto, volubile ed inetto, con tante belle idee per la testa e tante belle parole che rimangono tali, senza tradursi in azioni nè in sentimenti.Così come i suoi amici, giovani della sua generazione, idealisti e irresoluti, che insieme con il protagonista attraversano gli anni dei moti rivoluzionari adeguandosi al vento che tira; così come i ricchi borghesi parigini, che si sono arricchiti con la monarchia ma che, al primo anelito di idee rivoluzionarie, si buttano a capofitto nella nuova repubblica da fondare, cambiando le loro idee e i loro pensieri come bandiere al vento; così come le giovani mantenute che vivono in eleganti case pagate dagli amanti, che ogni giorno dichiarano il loro “amore”a un uomo diverso, a seconda dell’ampiezza o meno del portafogli. C’è il genere umano nel suo aspetto più meschino, mediocre e codardo destinato a fallire, esaminato da Flaubert con occhio critico mai esente da ironia, che non solo si alterna a momenti di grandi liricità ma addirittura si inserisce nei toni romantici, con effetti ridicolizzanti, per evidenziare ancora di più come il sentimento amoroso, cui tutti aneliamo, non sia altro che una mera illusione. E dunque, l’educazione sentimentale del protagonista non può che avere termine laddove è iniziata, in un bordello frequentato goliardicamente in età adolescenziale dal protagonista e dal suo amico Deslauriers: “è la cosa migliore che abbiamo avuto!”.

  • David
    2019-03-12 09:07

    Pretty much the best thing ever. Not really Maybe. Yeah, it's 500 pages long and about a guy who wastes his life and is incredibly selfish and everyone else he knows is even worse ). And yeah, not much happens, especially in the first 200 pages or so. YET the book manages to be fucking intoxicating. The writing is precise, trenchant, etc, as expected, and perhaps because of this it is insanely simple to just get immersed in this world of 1840s Paris. (I know this is selling it on a pretty base level, but if you're nostalgic at all for the Paris of narrow alleys by candlelight, when Montmarte was mines and farmland, I can't imagine a better read.) And there's the politics of the thing, which somehow seem relevant to me as a 21-year-old in America in 2011. One might draw parallels between the characters of the book who want to radicalize shit like their parents did before in the Revolution and the children of baby boomers, but the youthful striving for change only to be met with later disenchantment is archetypical, though here portrayed so closely that it never feels "archetypical" or "thematic," just like the shit that actually happened.The Intro to my Penguin mentions that this was Kafka's favorite, and I've been wrapping my head around why he, of all people, loved the thing and what he might have aped from it (besides perhaps when Frederic is referred to as "K."). One idea: the immersiveness, again, the sense that there are things about this world we don't know, that are mysterious and beautiful, managing to make the mysterious and beautiful out of material that is, in essence, banal and hopeless. And I was being a little harsh on Frederic before; he's not a complete shit (just mostly a shit). In dealing with the Frederic/Arnoux relationship, I think Flaubert actually painted the characters with just a touch of sympathy. Like 10% sympathy for 90% satire and suspicion. Which is about what most humans deserve.

  • Rick Slane
    2019-02-23 08:06

    This was one of Franz Kafka's favorite books. A young upper class adult learns about love in turbulent 1840's Paris. Like Warren Zevon sang after reading this "I need some sentimental hygiene."

  • Sketchbook
    2019-02-25 07:44

    Dithering Heights.

  • Mb
    2019-03-20 06:42

    خطر لو رفتن داستانگوستاو فلوبر نويسنده فرانسوي،تربيت احساسات را پس از هفت سال كار بر روي ان در سال ١٨٦٩منتشر كرد.گوستاو فلوبر را اغازگر و پايه گذار رمان مدرن مي دانند.تربيت احساسات هميشه زير سايه ي مادام بواري به عنوان دومين كتاب بزرگ فلوبر شناخته شده ولي منتقدان بزرگي تربيت را بهترين رمان او ميدانند.تربيت احساسات داستان زندگي فردريك مورو است كه در ابتداي داستان به صورت اتفاقي در يك كشتي با اقاي ژاك ارنو اشنا ميشود و همان دم دل در گرو همسر او(خانم ارنو) ميبندد.فردريك كه خورده بورژوايي شهرستانيست با بلندپروازي زيادي به پاريس مي ايد.او در ابتدا مصمم و با اراده است ولي هر چه زمان پيش ميرود بيشتر در منجلاب زندگي بورژوازي غرق ميشود.او كه هميشه روياي نويسنده شدن يا پيدا كردن شغلي در دولت يا وزارت دارد نه تنها به روياهايش نميرسد بلكه تمام ميراثي كه از پدر و عمويش هم به او رسيده را در راه احساسات خام دستانه اش فدا ميكند..فردريك كه در ابتداي داستان جواني با شرم و حيا و خجالتي معرفي ميشود"دور و بري هايش دانشجوياني مثل خودش بردند.از استادان و از معشوقه هايشان براي هم تعريف ميكردند.او از هيچ استادي ككش هم نميگزيد!معشوقه اش كجا بود!براي انكه شاهد خوشي هايشان نباشد هر چه ديرتر به انجا ميرفت".فردريك در طول زندگي اش وابسته ٤ زن ميشود و دائماً بين انها در حركت و جابجايي ست:١-اولين زن همسر ارنو و اولين معشوقه او است كه به نظر ميرسد تنها زني هم هست كه او واقعا دوستش دارد.٢-دومين رزانت است كه او هم معشوقه ارنوست و انگيزه فردريك از خواستن او زيبايي و شهرت او بين مردان جامعه بورژوا و گاهي انتقام گرفتن از خانم ارنو.٣-سومين لوييز"دختر بچه اي بود كه دچار يكي از ان عشقهاي كودكانه اي شد كه هم به پاكي يك دين و هم به تندي يك نيازند" كه انگيزه فردريك از او بي اعتنايي زنان بورژوا به او و ثروت پدر اوست.٤-چهارمين زن خانم دامبروز همسر بانكدار ثروتمند است و باز هم انگيزه فردريك تحكيم كردن مقامش بين اشراف و ثروت اوست.فردريك به هر ٤ زن قول ازدواج ميدهد و در اخر به هيچ كدام وفا نميكند و به هيچ يك از هدف هايش نميرسد.او در رابطه با اين زنها چنان اصول اخلاقي را زير پا ميگذارد كه فلوبر در توصيفش ميگويد:ديگر براي هميشه به دنياي برتر زناهاي اشرافي و دسيسه هاي مهم پا گذاشته بود.در حين كش و قوسهاي فردريك بين زنان،فرانسه دستخوش انقلاب ميشود.سلطنت واژگون ميشود و جمهوري برقرار ميگردد،جمهوري شكست ميخورد و متعاقب ان شورش ميشود و كشتار.فردريك كه درابتدا جوانيست مسئول كه سياست و جامعه و حكومت برايش مهم هستند،در حين انقلاب براي اينكه با معشوقه اش تنها باشد از پاريس خارج ميشود و به جاي بي خطري ميرود.از نظر من مادام بواري كتاب بهتري از تربيت احساسات است.تربيت كتابيست با توصيفات بيشمار اشيا و فضا.ولي كار فلوبر انجا كه سراغ توصيف كاراكترها ميرود و تمام ابعاد شخصيتي انها از جمله ضعف و قدرت،بخل و حسد و نيرنگ،حماقت و ساده زيستي و البته فساد انها را به تصوير ميكشد بينظير است.توصيفات فلوبر از انقلاب ١٨٤٨ فرانسه عاليست.او در حين نشان دادن زندگي پوچ و بي معني فردريك به سادگي انقلاب و درگيريهاي بورژواها و طبقه كارگر را وارد داستان ميكند.با اينحال تربيت رمان مورد علاقه من نيست.بسياري جاها كتاب كند پيش ميرفت و توضيحات زياده از حد بود.ضمن اينكه كتاب تعليق زيادي ندارد و صرفاً رفت و امدهاي متوالي يك جوان در ميان معشوقه هايش است.قسمتهايي از كتاب:در نتيجه حرمت مالكيت تا حد مذهب بالا رفته بود و انگار ان را با خود پروردگار يكي ميدانستند.حمله هايي كه به ان ميشد انگار از كفرگويي و حتي ادم خواري بدتر بود.تسغ گيوتين در تك تك هجاهاي جمهوري طنين مي انداخت،فرانسه ديگر خودش را سرور حس نميكرد،از ترس به داد و فرياد افتاده بود،چون كوري كه عصايش را از او گرفته باشنديا بچه اي كه لله اش را گم كرده باشد.ص٤٢٧-براي دلبري از زنها بايد يا بيقيدي دلقك وار نشان داد يا خشم يك قهرمان تراژدي را.اگر ساده و بي پيرايه به زن بگويي كه دوستش داري مسخره ات ميكند.ص٦٩-چيزي كه از زنها شما را فريب ميدهد،دقيقا همان چيزيست كه از نظر فكري مايه تنزل اوست،يعني پستان و گيسوانشص١٦٣-دولت دارد ما را مي بلعد،روي همه چيز دست گذاشته:فلسفه،حقوق،هنر،هوا..فرانسه دارد به صدا در مي ايد:زير چكمه ژاندارم و رداي كشيش به تنگ امده.ص٤٣٦-هدف به چيزها حقانيت ميدهد.ديكتاتوري بعضي وقتها لازم است.زنده باد استبداد،به شرطي كه مستبد كار خوب بكند!سپس براي انكه با ان چيزِ گنگ غير قابل تعريفِ چون اينه بازتاباننده اي اشنا شود كه محافل ناميده ميشوند.

  • Bob Koelle
    2019-03-03 02:05

    I read this based on Woody Allen's recommendation [] in "Manhattan" when I was 17. Frederic, the protagonist, goes through the tumultuous years of early 19th century France in love with an older woman, Madame Arnoux, but never having more than a close friendship with her, while yearning for much more, and watching her go through one personal and financial disaster after another. Anyway, after years of separation, she visits him at the end of the book, and he goes down on one knee to avoid seeing her white hair and finally expresses his love for her. This passage on page 414 stopped me cold, and brought me to tears:"Your person, your slightest movements seemed to me to possess a superhuman importance in the world. My heart used to raise like the dust in your footsteps. The effect you had on me was that of a moonlit night in summer, when all is perfume, soft shadows, pale light, and infinite horizons. For me your name contained all the delights of flesh and spirit, and I repeated it again and again, trying to kiss it with my lips."It's a superb description of how a woman invades my thoughts and dreams, then and now. I felt destined to deliver that speech, or one like it, to someone close to me, and the idea of having to wait to declare love to someone years after the bloom has fallen broke my heart. At the time, being the nerdy loner, I had no idea that I would not always be so alone. Thankfully, it has not turned out so.I bookmarked that page, and 21 years later, that book is sitting right behind me in my office, still bookmarked. And it moves me today, because I still have the heart of a 17 year old.

  • Jim Coughenour
    2019-03-13 04:01

    Flaubert was Kafka's favorite author, and A Sentimental Education his favorite novel. After rereading this book, I think I can understand why. Flaubert's "story of a young man" is the story of a rather witless protagonist and his almost indistinguishable set of friends and lovers, each immersed in her or his illusions, each almost equally stupid (in the phenomenological sense). There is indeed a "sentimental" romance at its heart, which is more or less a disappointment stretching from the first page to the last. There's no redemption; no meaning.I had to fight myself to finish this book. It wasn't until almost the last sentence of Part II that it captured me. By the end I was delighted with this tale in which nothing really happens, in which no one accomplishes anything – all captured in Flaubert's perfect prose. Here we are at the very end (spoiler alert):They'd both been failures, the one who'd dreamed of Love and the one who'd dreamed of Power. How had it come about?"Perhaps it was lack of perseverance?" said Frédéric."For you maybe. For me it was the other way round, I was too rigid, I didn't take into account a hundred and one smaller things that are more crucial than all the rest. I was too logical and you were too sentimental."Then they blamed it on their bad luck, the circumstances, the times in which they'd been born.The future of such hapless characters is not, as I'd imagined, in Proust (for example) but in Kafka and Beckett.

  • Shahin
    2019-03-03 03:53

    ایمان بیاورید به فلوبر ...

  • ZaRi
    2019-03-01 08:07

    فلوبر در یک نامه در 1852 به لوییز کوله می نویسد:"دوست دارم کتابي بنويسم درباره هيچ، کتابي که بر هيچ چيز بيروني که خارج از خود باشد دلالت نکند، کتابي که بتواند به نيروي دروني سبکش، روي پاي خودش بايستد، درست بدان گونه که کره زمين بي هيچ تکيه گاهي خود را در فضا نگاه دارد... کتابی بی‌هیچ وابستگی به دنیای بیرون، کتابی که به یمن نیروی درونی سبکش، قائم به ذات باشد، همچنان که زمین خود را در خلاء فضا نگه می‌دارد و از هر پایه‌ای بی‌نیاز است، کتابی که کم‌وبیش هیچ موضوعی ندارد، یا دست‌کم موضوع آن نادیدنی است، البته اگر چنین چیزی ممکن باشد...هم از اين رو است که مي گوييم نه موضوع خوب وجود دارد و نه موضوع بد.» «ديگري» يا همان «تکيه گاه» مساله اخلاق است. «اخلاقي» زندگي کردن يعني زندگي مطابق معياري که «ديگري» تعيين مي کند. اين «ديگري» مي تواند ايده ها، اسطوره ها، باورها، جامعه يا حتي منافع معين يک طبقه و... باشد. علاوه بر آن در اخلاق «خوب» يا «بد» يا به عبارت دقيق تر خير و شر وجود دارد و نه برحسب آنچه فرد را خوش آيد يا خوش نيايد. ولي من مي خواهم کتابي بنويسم درباره هيچ که بدون هيچ گونه تکيه گاهي خود را در فضا نگاه دارد، يعني به خود و باورهاي خود و نيروي دروني اش(و نه ديگري) متکي باشد. بنابراين من پيشاپيش قصد نوشتن کتابي را کرده ام که مطابق تعريف گفته شده نمي تواند اخلاقي باشد زيرا به «خود» متکي است و هم از اين رو است که خود نيز بر اين مساله صحه مي گذارم که نه موضوع خوبي وجود دارد و نه موضوع بدي. کل ادبياتي که حاوي درس اخلاقي است، ذاتاً و اساساً کاذب است، از همان لحظه يي که اثبات مي کني، دروغ مي گويي. اول و آخر را خدا مي داند، انسان از وسط خبر دارد هنر مثل خدا بايد در بيکران معلق باشد، در خود کامل باشد، مستقل از خالقش باشد."هر چند هنگام نوشتن این نامه،فلوبر سرگرم نگارش مادام بوواری بوده ، اما به نظر می‌رسد که در نهایت در "تربیت احساسات" است که تا اندازه به این خواسته‌ خود می رسد و یک رمان مینویسد که می توان گفت موضوع ندارد، یا البته درست تر است که بگویم یک رمان نوشته که موضوع آن نادیدنیست. در مادام بوواری آنچنان که یوسا در عیش مدام می نویسد موضوع کتاب بسیار روشناست. اما فلوبر در تربیت احساسات موفق می‌شود تا در نهایت یک موضوع را بهانه‌ چیزی بکند که در واقع می‌خواهد درباره‌ آن حرف بزند. در مادام بوواری، "اما بوواری" کاراکتر اصلی داستان است و تمام اتفاقها و حادثه ها و حتا تفسیرها ، ارتباط با او می‌شود و به او باز می گردد، اما در تربیت احساسات اینچنین نیست، چرا که "فردریک مورو" هراندازه هم که کاراکتر اصلی داستان باشد، به هیچ وجه آن جایگاه را ندارد که "اما " در مادام بوواری دارد. درواقع "فردریک مورو" بیشتر یک بهانه‌ است برای مشاهده‌ اتفاقها و جریانهایی که در حاشیه‌ زندگی فردریک در جریان هست در حالی که در مادام بوواری هر آنچه که اتفاق می‌افتد پیرامون کاراکتر اصلی هست و به او باز می‌گردد. بنابراین می توان گفت در تربیت احساسات هست که فلوبر موفق می‌شود برای اولین دفعه موضوع اصلی خود را به شیوه جدید روایت کند، آن را در میان کاراکتر فردریک مورو پنهان کند و در نهایت آنچنان که خود می گوید،یک رمان بنویسد که "قائم به ذات" باشد. "تربیت احساساتی" یا آنچنان که "مهدی سحابی" آنرا "تربیت احساسات" به فارسی برگردان کرده ، داستان "تربیت سانتی‌مانتال" یا "تربیت احساساتی" نسل و جامعه‌ از فرانسه را نشان می‌دهد که خواسته‌ها و اهداف راستین خود را فراموش کرده و درگیر احساسات خود شده و چشمان خود را بر واقعیت کشور خود بسته است. تربیت احساسات داستان زندگی "فردریک مورو" یک جوان احساساتی ‌هست که به طور اتفاق با خانواده‌ آقای "ژاک آرنو" آشنا می‌شود و دلباخته خانم آرنو می شود. "فردریک" که در ابتدای رمان یک جوان بامصمم، با اراده و با آرزوهای بزرگ تصویر شده است، کم‌کم از خواسته‌های خود دست می‌کشد و درگیر ماجراها و احساست که با خانم آرنو دارد، تمام آن‌ها را فراموش می‌کند. در نهایت،‌ فردریک که پیش از این به تحصیلات دانشگاهی‌ خود در رشته‌ حقوق و همچنین نویسندگی علاقه‌ی زیادی داشته است و حتا همیشه می‌خواسته وزیر بشود، به هیچ‌کدام از آرزوها و خواسته‌های گذشته‌ خود نمی‌رسد و زندگی‌ او تمام در راه احساسات می رود. در همان حال، یعنی در همان‌ سال‌هایی که فردریک درگیر احساسات با ا خانم آرنو است، فرانسه تحولات و تغییرات سیاسی و اجتماعی مهمی را پشت سر می‌گذارد اما فردریک که به‌ دلیل درگیری احساسی‌ خود از تمام این جریانها به‌دور است، تنها مشاهده کننده آن‌ها هست و هیچ دخالت در سونوشت سیاسی و اجتماعی کشور خود ندارد. فرانسه در سال‌هایی که بخش بیشتری از تربیت احساسات در آن سال‌ها روایت می‌شود، در گیر جنبش‌ها و شورش‌های انقلابی هست. انقلاب ۱۸۴۸ فرانسه در همین موقع اتفاق می شود و در این میان شورش‌های زیاد در پاریس در جریان است و در نهایت پادشاهی لویی فیلیپ پایان می‌شود و "جمهوری دوم" فرانسه برقرار می‌شود."امیل زولا" در باره این رمان گفته است :" تمامی آثار قبل و بعد از این رمان دربرابر واقعیت گرایی آن ، بیش از یک اپرای تراژیک نیست !"

  • Mohammad Mahdi Fallah
    2019-03-22 02:49

    این دومین کتاب بلندی بود که از فلوبر خوندم و هر دو عمیقا ملال آور بودند. کتاب سرشار از توصیفات و اتفاق هایی ست که هرچند ممکنه ذکرشون خالی از لطف نباشند و در نهایت منجر به ترسیم بهتر شخصیت در ذهن شود ولی آن چیزی که مسلم است، به واسطه اینکه کارکردهای مشخصی براشون قابل تصور نیست، غالب صحنه ها و رفت و آمدها شدیداً کسالت بارند؛ انگار که ما بخوایم رشد یافتن یک کودک رو گام به گام و لحطه به لحظه ببینیم.سه جهارم انتهایی کتاب ولی ریتم داستان به نسبت مطلوب تر می شود و شاهد اتفاق هایی هستیم که با ترسیم گری فلوبر، قطعا قوت بیشتری دارد؛ دوگانگی های شخصیتی که فردریک مورو دچارش می شود و در آنان، ما به همراه نویسنده متعجب می شویم. کسی که در یک روز به دو نفر می گوید که: «تا ابد دوستت خواه داشت»داستان به طور کلی در کنار التهابات شدید سیاسی و اجتماعی نزدیک انقلاب فرانسه اتفاق می افتد و مناسبات اشخاص آنان از یک زاویه بیرونی قابل تامل است که به نظر می رسه در سبک نویسندگی فرانسوی خیلی جدید نیست. همچنین اقدام های چندگانه فردریک برای ورود به سیاست و سرخوردگی دائمی او به دلیل طبع حساس و دل آشوبی همیشگیش مانع از او میشد و در دیالوگ های نهایی تصویری به نسبت جامعی را بدست می آورد.در نهایت می توان گفت در عین حالی که نمی توان از تصویرپردازی کم نظیر فلوبر چشم پوشی کرد، متن برای بنده ملال انگیز بود.