Paul Bryant's Reviews > Sentimental Education
Sentimental Education
by
by
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.
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.
Sign into Goodreads to see if any of your friends have read
Sentimental Education.
Sign In »
Reading Progress
September 30, 2015
– Shelved
September 30, 2015
– Shelved as:
to-read-novels
January 5, 2016
–
Started Reading
January 11, 2016
–
21.74%
"this must get better - even its most rabid fans will have to admit that not a great deal happens in the first 100 pages. When Frederic was momentarily contemplating suicide I was mentally urging him to go ahead, throw himself off the bridge. Surely not the emotion M Flaubert was intending to evoke?"
page
100
January 16, 2016
– Shelved as:
abandoned
January 16, 2016
– Shelved as:
novels
January 16, 2016
–
Finished Reading
May 6, 2021
– Shelved as:
french-lit
Comments Showing 1-50 of 81 (81 new)
message 1:
by
Speranza
(new)
-
rated it 2 stars
Jan 16, 2016 03:29AM
Yet another review of yours that had me laughing, and I share your sentiment for this book completely.
reply
|
flag
I abandoned it around p 150 first time round, but discovered that it picks up considerably after that. And I don't buy the parallel with Shampoo at all. Warren Beatty is so much more decisive than Frédéric, and, like, who's Goldie Hawn supposed to be?
oh yes, there's no Goldie in Flaubert. A little bit of Goldie Hawn would have made me continue reading.
Checking her filmography on IMDB, I find that Goldie Hawn has never starred in any Flaubert adaptation! Such a missed opportunity. I think she'd have been fantastic as Emma Bovary, Salammbô, or maybe one of the lustful demons who tempts Saint Anthony.
It wouldn't have been so bad if the rats hadn't got me hooked on that terrible French crime series. Next time, I will demand a better class of rat.
This is seriously the review to end all reviews! (I mean this in the GOOD way, not in the way that you propose ASE is the novel to end all novels.) I laughed heartily. And huzzah to Henry James, saving the day once again.
thanks Jenna, and yes, HJ was actually a major fan of Madame Bovary so it took some guts to give this one a HJ-style one star review. But like me he had to tell it like he saw it. I bet in literary heaven Flaubert was gnashing his teeth wanting to rise from the grave and write a review of The Golden Bowl later on!
Whatever Paul and his buddy Henry James may say (like, what do they know about literature?) this is actually a pretty entertaining novel once you've got past the first hundred-odd pages. Sex, violence, existentialism, you name it. Honest!
Paul wrote: "Do you think readers should just simply begin at page 150 then?"
It's often the right thing to do with 19th century novels...
It's often the right thing to do with 19th century novels...
Yeah, this book was the primary inspiration for my "fmiia" shelf (i.e., "French masterworks I insufficiently appreciate").
Love this review, and glad you've so far, just about, avoided bibliocide.
Manny wrote: "Checking her filmography on IMDB, I find that Goldie Hawn has never starred in any Flaubert adaptation! Such a missed opportunity..."
Well, she's not dead yet, so you never know...
Manny wrote: "Checking her filmography on IMDB, I find that Goldie Hawn has never starred in any Flaubert adaptation! Such a missed opportunity..."
Well, she's not dead yet, so you never know...
Very convenient to try to find arguments about your bad taste in authorities which you didnt even read and you probably found in google. You have no knowledge about literature and its sad you even took the time to write these bullshits. You couldnt even manage to finish the book and you come to write a review? Pathetic. Stick to 50 shades of grey, its a book more suitable to your IQ
they're just fantasies.... I only get them sometimes... but lately, I don't know, I wake up and there's all these loose pages strewn about the room....
I haven't read this yet, but got a good laugh from your review, so thanks for that! I was a tad disappointed in both you and Henry, I must admit, at not being able to make any Star Wars connections. Surely everything in life has some sort of Star Wars connection!
you might think. I believe some scholar will fathom this out eventually. It's what dissertations were designed for.
what i take from this: even the greats such as mr HJ can get things horribly wrong. wonderful novel!
well, I remain perplexed - I must conclude that things which appear to me insufferably dull are to a great many people matters of the intensest interest. It takes all sorts to make a world, as my granny used to say.
I am at page 230, and find myself drifting off ... Frederic is creepy, a stalker, obsessive and shows definite pedophilic tendencies. Did someone say this was humorous in some sense? "A fool and his money is soon parted." And Frederic is the fool with the francs. I liked your review, Paul.
thanks Nick - I couldn't take it any more. Apparently it livens up when they have a revolution but even so.
I just briefly check the list of the book you’ve read (wow an impressive number!) but not many 19th cent novels, so maybe is not your thing. I really love French literature so well...I’ll let you know when I finish what I think about it
please do! I am a fan of Victorian lit, like Dickens and Wilkie Collins and Vanity Fair, W Heights, the usual suspects in fact. I think I have a problem when I venture into translated literature.
Turnabout being fair play, when you quote HJ "the book is in a single word a dead one," you take the chance that someone will say the same about your own review. Or HJ's review. Or this comment! Ouch!
1 star? You gave Nora Ephron 3 stars, you seriously think Nora Ephron is that much better than Flaubert?!!
oh no, of course not.... in this case the star rating (a rather crude measurement you must agree) reflects my unhappiness and bafflement with the reading experience
Phew, I almost had to post "no words," which would have been really annoying. Thank you for saving me from that.
Very glad that somebody commented on this one, so I could read through both the very amusing review and the comments section, which contains one of my favourite ever responses of yours to a troll: "You don't say if you agree with me about the Shampoo comparison."
Loved your shop girl scene description! Vivid, made me laugh. Also, "elaborately and massively dreary"! I must remember that excellent phrase, since I find that a problem of many a novel.