Commentaires client les plus utiles
|
|
4.0étoiles sur 5
The ultimate coming-of-age novel, Oct. 24 2003
Scott can be a ragged storyteller, by our contemporary standards (which are unfair to apply, since he showed the way to all future English novelists). Patches of WAVERLEY are ragged and rambling. Such humor as there is is not very funny, and sometimes when the action is meant to be sweeping, it is more nearly absurd.None of this is without compensations. The English novel was still young and unformed, and Scott is alive to all its possibilities, with a freshness and boldness not available to later writers. He thinks nothing, for instance, of having his hero (here as in IVANHOE) sick or asleep while the action is conducted elsewhere by more vidid, nominally secondary characters. But WAVERLEY is not just of historical interest. It accomplishes something unique in the Bildungsroman genre. In its time, and even now, it is thought of as a nonpareil romantic adventure, but the reputation is misleading, since it is mostly about the unraveling of Waverley's romantic notions. For a time we share them: how merry and noble the highlanders seem, how manly and swashbuckling their leader, Fergus; how accomplished and womanly his sister, the beautiful Flora. By the the end of the book, however, Waverley's cause has turned to ashes, the man he idolized is revealed as an unfeeling monomaniac, and the woman he thought he loved seems just a sour harpy. The cold slap of reality is an experience common enough in life, the painful accompaniment of growing up, but you'll have to look far and wide to find it so cannily presented in fiction as here.
Aidez d'autres clients à trouver les commentaires les plus utiles
Ce commentaire vous a-t-il été utile ?
 
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.0étoiles sur 5
Interesting critique of romantic tendencies, Fév 25 2003
Waverley, Walter Scott's first successful novel, concerns Edward Waverley, the scion of a noble, landed family in England. He's a Romantic young man, in the formal sense of belonging to the Romantic movement and in temperament--the relative ease of his life and his passionate dilettantishness land him, eventually, in the service of the Jacobites during the rebellion of 1745. He discovers the wild landscapes of the Scottish Highlands, the curious manners of the Highland folk, and learns that life and war are not exactly like all those romantic books about adventure and glory he loves to read.Scott's book can be interpreted as a critique of the Romantic temperament, and I think the book succeeds best when it contrasts reality with the puffed-up imaginings of Edward Waverley's literature-addled perception. He is not quite Don Quixote, according to Scott, but he suffers from a milder version of the same disease; the most amusing parts of the book center around Waverley's naivete toward battle, ceremony, and love. He is feckless, to be sure, and abysmally undisciplined--but he is a decent fellow in the end, and learns from his mistakes. The people that populate Scott's novel are generally civilized, noble, and upright people, even the fierce rebels; while Scott doesn't approve of rebellion, the rebels are portrayed as misguided at worst, and of equal nobility to the English at best. Scott's purpose was to peer into the world "sixty years since" his own time, and helped give birth to the historical novel. It has confusing and near-unreadable parts (especially when the pedantic Baron shows up), but as a historical novel, it certainly sets the template for all other books of its type to come.
Aidez d'autres clients à trouver les commentaires les plus utiles
Ce commentaire vous a-t-il été utile ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.0étoiles sur 5
In this time, a curiousity., Nov. 2 2002
Just about every work of historical fiction ever written owes its existence to Walter Scott and to Waverley, his first novel. At the time, it was a new way to write novels - indeed, combining historical fact with entertainment was a brilliant idea. By creating a fictional character and inserting him into the middle of the 1745 Jacobite Rebellion, Walter Scott was able to bring the culture and traditions of Scotland to life in the most staid bourgeois imagination. As a result, he achieved unprecedented popularity for his time, singlehandedly started a tourist industry in Scotland, and kicked off a new genre of fiction, which was then studiously adopted by countless authors, of whom Dumas and Fenimore Cooper are canonical examples.Sometime in the middle of the nineteenth century, however, Scott's popularity took a nosedive, and has never recovered since. Unfortunately, after all the years and all the imitators, and after this kind of novel turned into an established genre, much of Waverley's charm has been lost, and the book no longer seems particularly impressive. Its length is sure to turn off many, especially given that for all the historical romance, there's relatively little action here. However, what still makes it worth your time is Scott's delightful and quintessentially British humour, which he applies through odd digressions and liberal use of comic anticlimax to alleviate tension. One also can't help but be impressed by his vocabulary; there are many passages in Waverley that are more or less devoid of content, but which are so elaborately constructed as to be a pleasure to read. The story itself is no less worth one's attention than before, as far as its "educational value" goes, but the modern reader will not enjoy wading through the obfuscatory prose. I confess that I had a hard time getting through the first few chapters; after that, though, I got used to it and actually enjoyed the rest of the book. I can't however, claim that it was a particularly mindblowing read. I'm not alone; Scott has often been criticized for being a daft romantic entertainer and not a serious artist. This isn't quite true since he was rather conservative (not romantic); he writes about romantic things, but with a rather tongue-in-cheek approach that isn't visible in the works of, say, Dumas. What is true, however, is that this is primarily a tale of manners, and thus by necessity somewhat stuck in its time. Dumas's colourful, loyal, wine-loving Musketeers can thrill the mind even to this day; Scott's characters seem rather bland in comparison, and it looks like he is doomed to fall even further into disfavour as time passes and readers' frames of reference change even further. I do recommend Waverley, but more for the author than the book - unable to extract any great effect from the latter, I found myself more and more captivated by the former, who lets the reader in on his jokes and invites him to regard the events of the book with the same attitude of respect and fascination lightened by bemused wit. That doesn't make for any life-altering enlightenment, but it is enjoyable.
Aidez d'autres clients à trouver les commentaires les plus utiles
Ce commentaire vous a-t-il été utile ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commentaires client les plus récents
|
de James Hogg
de Sir Scott
de Neal Ascherson
de John L Roberts
de Andrew Jefford
