Falling off the perch

     "Isn't the most reliable form of pleasure...the pleasure of anticipation? Who needs to burst into fulfilment's desolate attic?"

I should have heeded that line, which appears on page 4, and put this book back on the shelf. I risk being blackballed by the Serious Readers' Club for my views here, but as far as I am concerned Flaubert's Parrot is an ex-parrot, a late parrot, a dead parrot, it has ceased to be, it is bereft of life ! (and the Monty Python sketch is a lot funnier than this book is).

      My introduction to Julian Barnes was the marvellous Arthur and George so I was expecting similarly great things here. Yes, it is undoubtedly very clever and there are flashes of brilliance and passages which are beautifully done, and some exquisitely quotable lines, and ...and ....and...., but even so I found myself eagerly awaiting the last page so that I could put it down. Why did I continue if I was disappointed? I hoped that with all the conjuring tricks Barnes performs in this book he'd be pulling a rabbit out of the hat at the end; the few mangy feathers he produces weren't really worth waiting for.

      As an extended idea, a piece of literary flamboyance, a "train-spotter's guide to Flaubert" - as one chapter is called - it is great, but it's not a great novel. It's a book of layers, of coincidence, of irony and the nature of biography; it's technically very showy but its 'artificial colouring and flavouring' seem to devalue what might have been a nourishingly 'all natural ingredients' kind of story. I found myself irritated by its mannerisms, cheated by its unfulfilled promise, and even with the parallels and overlaps between the narrator Braithwaite's life and those of Flaubert and his characters, I couldn't have cared less about any of them.

     Despite my reservations I am open to persuasion on this, so if you loved it, please tell me what it is I have missed.

Comments

[Harriet]

Love this post -- love the picture of the parrot -- but like you, I was not particularly taken with the book, which I read a while ago. I haven't read Arthur and George but maybe I should.

[Claire]

Thank you for that review. I so enjoyed Arthur and George that I might have been tempted by Flaubert and his Parrot. It won't be joining my tbr pile.

[sherry]

I simply could not get on with this book, and guiltily tossed it aside. Your comments make me feel better!

[Maureen]

'Flaubert's Parrot' is such a good title, isn't it? I read the book some time ago and was so disappointed that I almost missed reading the excellent 'Arthur and George'.

[Peter the Flautist]

If you didn't love it then you missed nothing in my opinion! I don't think anyone should feel the slightest guilt in stopping reading a book that is not rewarding (unles they are reviewing it or revising for an exam or teaching students from it). Can I recommend to Claire that she finds out for herself whether it has the same effect on her as it did on you (and that is not to reject your response in anyway). I read a number of books that you collectively recommend which I didn't like and vice versa. I wasn't put off reading "The Lying Tongue" by some of the negative reviews from people whose opinions I rate very highly. I didn't like it much either. I didn't think "All Passion Spent" was much good, but I hope that my expression of that didn't put other people off from reading it.

A bit rambling, but I feel it quite important that books don't induce guilty feelings if you stop reading them or you don't like one that people have raved over. Of course you will trust Cornflower's judgement more than mine if you find yourself in agreement with the majority of her reviews; that is right and proper.

[Equiano]

Oh hurrah! Glad I'm not the only one who didn't like this. It was one of the first books I ever forgave myself for not finishing - just didn't agree with me at all. Love the upside down parrot!

[Barbara]

I did enjoy reading it but I rsther disapprove of it and of its influence. It is so much about cleverness and technique that it's more a book for critics and other writers than for the common reader.
Have you read Metroland? It's more of a story.

[Margaret Powling]

I never feel guilty about not finishing a book (and this is one that I'd not bother to start, sorry Julian Barnes!) Life's too short to finish books we aren't enjoying. I think this idea (we must finish a book) perhaps started at school when we couldn't go onto the 'next' book unless we'd finished the current one.

[Nan]

Brilliantly written! Do you find that sometimes it is easier to write about a book you didn't like? I think it may be for me. The ones I love I just seem to go on and on (boringly) saying oh, this is wonderful. But the ones I don't like seem to bring the words out better. Anyhow, I'll never read this one, thanks anyway. We own the Arthur & George and I'll get to it sometime.

[rosie]

I loved the book, but I had to tear it apart (techincal term) to write an essay, so I had a lot of fun analysing those "conjuring tricks" that you mention. But this is also the book which changed my life, when I saw those two different accounts of Flaubert's life: one highlighting failures (the way I'd been thinking about my life for 10 years or so) and the other account highlighting his achievements. Suddenly I was a lot kinder to myself.

[Claire]

I appreciate Peter's comment. I SHOULD read the book myself but my tbr pile is so large that I'm just glad of an excuse not to add to it. Whilst we are in Barnes mode might I recommend his book of essays "Something to Declare". Perhaps, and especially, number nine, "Flaubert's Death-Masks"!

[adele geras]

I am in the strange position of knowing I loved the book when I read it first and now not remembering much about it at all. But I do know that the overwhelming feeling I had while reading was: how clever this is! Not: what's going to happen next? Nor: I really care about this person or that. Also, I started as a Flaubert lover, so maybe that helped. BUT no guilt about unfinished books. Nor about unstarted ones! NOT EVER!

[Mark Thwaite]

Loved it when I read it years and years back ... but don't remember a thing about it now -- just like Adele said above.

But Flaubert's own writing ... oooh yesh!

[lindsay]

I'm disappointed you didn't like this - I did, but can't remember anything about it except that. But other commentators are right, Metroland and also History of World in 10 and a half chapters are well worth reading.

Normally I would say that guilt is good, but on not finishing books, I'll make an exception, unless I recommended them to you!

[Sheila]

That quote! I was brought up on that very sentiment and still see some truth there. As for the book, I read it about two dozen years ago and recall enjoying it and being inspired to dive into Flaubert. Now Arthur and George: After two half-hearted attempts, I'm still not "in." Will try again, wholeheartedly, soon.

Julian Barnes is quite a dreamy man. I met him at a reading and was swept away. Just for the moment!

[Peter the flautist]

Dear Sheila, some say Dark Puss resembles Mr Barnes (dream on ...)