Community Reviews

Rating(3.9 / 5.0, 100 votes)
5 stars
30(30%)
4 stars
34(34%)
3 stars
36(36%)
2 stars
0(0%)
1 stars
0(0%)
100 reviews
April 16,2025
... Show More
4.5 zapravo ali dobre sam volje.

Nemam zivaca za recenzije - pa samo preporuka, i za one koji nisu pro level Flober.
Odlicno stivo.
April 16,2025
... Show More
در مقدمه‌ی کتاب آمده است که حتا اگر کتاب‌های فلوبر را نخوانده‌ای می‌توانی طوطی فلوبر را بخوانی اما بگذار چیزی بگویم: اگر کتاب‌هایش را خوانده‌ای و حالا می‌خواهی در یک بازی فلوبری خودت را محک بزنی، وقت آن است که طوطی فلوبر را در دستانت بگیری!
_
کتاب را دوست داشتم، ذره ذره از همه کتاب‌هایی که از او خوانده بودم در طوطی فلوبر پیدا می‌شد، بارنز با زبان کنایه‌دارش به زیر و بم زندگی او نفوذ کرده بود، گاه کنایه می‌زد و گاه می‌ستودش. در این کتاب هم مادام بوواری بود، هم بووار و پکوشه، هم سالامبو و هم کتاب‌های دیگرش که نخوانده‌ام؛ اگر آواز‌های کوچکی برای ماه را هم خوانده باشی می‌فهمی که بارنز چه موشکافانه آن نامه‌ها و گفت‌وگو‌ها را در کتاب گنجانده است.
یکی از چیز‌هایی که درباره‌ی این کتاب مایه‌ی آزارم می‌شد این بود که گاهی نمی‌توانستم واقعیت را از آن‌چه نویسنده خود در زندگی فلوبر گنجانده تشخیص دهم، این از ضعف خواندن من بود یا نه نمی‌دانم اما این‌ موضوع هم به حیرت‌ام می‌انداخت و هم دلم می‌خواست کتاب را ببندم و نخوانم. اما مگر یکی از هدف‌هایم از خواندن این نیست که بخوانم و لذت ببرم، هرچه بود فارغ از راست و دروغ‌ها من به غایت لذت بردم.
April 16,2025
... Show More
Bloody hell. No sooner have you started liking an author, imagining that you'll dip into their stuff quite regularly, than you discover this sort of thing. Perhaps if I had read Madame Bovary, or anything else by Flaubert, it would have made a difference. But I had to stop reading this because it just seemed like self-indulgent crap. I’m sure a story would have, somewhere, emerged from behind Barnes’ meanderings of Flaubert’s life and works, but just over a third of the way through and there was no sign of it. Maybe I would have been rewarded for persevering, but somehow I doubt it.

'Rubbish' as Brian Clough once shouted on the training ground. 'For missing the target from there you want bloody shooting'.
April 16,2025
... Show More
J. Barnes spune despre Gustave Flaubert că ura trenurile, dar nu pentru ceea ce erau, ci tocmai pentru că progresul științific nu-ți folosește la nimic dacă nu este însoțit de unul moral.

"Transportul feroviar nu avea alt rol decât să pună în mișcare și mai mulți indivizi, care să se întâlnească pentru a-și reuni prostia." pag. 103
April 16,2025
... Show More
Verdict: A really wonderful textbook for a course entitled ‘Gustave Flaubert & Assorted Literary Musings’. Not terribly useful beyond this context.

Written by a man whose last name begins with ‘B’ and classed (rather dishonestly) under the first Guardian 1000 books category of comedy, ‘Flaubert’s Parrot’ made it onto the first page of my list of essential novels. From there it managed to worm its way into my subconscious so that, without making any deliberate note of it, I recognized the title as one I must eventually read as I cast my eye about the glorious wreckage of SKOOB, the best used bookstore in London.

The blurb on the back describes the main character, Geoffrey Braithwaite as ‘a retired doctor haunted by a private secret,’ and declares ‘In ‘Flaubert’s Parrot’ Julian Barnes spins out a multiple mystery of obsession and betrayal, both scholarly and romantic.’ Having now finished ‘Flaubert’s Parrot’ I can state with some authority that these are bald-faced lies. There is no haunting, no secret, and no mysteries; multiple, spun or otherwise. In fact, the whole summary is so ridiculous I would very much like to meet this blurb writer and demand to know if he really read the book. Or maybe just do him a small amount of physical harm. I hate blurbs. Never trust them.

That said, I’m not exactly disappointed to have missed out on the spinning multiple mystery betrayals, just appalled at the incompetence of the description. In fact, I thought this book began quite well. It is well written and knowledgeable. Witty too, at times even enough to deserve its ‘comedy’ label on the list. I laughed out loud when the narrator describes an implied outburst of ‘fuck Grosse!’ as ‘a comment that was deeply unfair to Mr Grosse, both as an author and a sexual human being.’ Also, early on someone finds previously unknown correspondence uncovering a deep and lasting relationship between Flaubert and some English nanny. In the final note there is a plea to return all the letters and destroy them. The modern discoverer of these game-changing documents promptly does so. As someone who loathed ‘Possession’, I heartily admired his moral code.

So yes, I warmed to this book initially and read merely along about Geoff’s trips to Normandy, about Flaubert’s statues and museums, about the heroic letter burning acquaintance, about what Flaubert thinks about animals, about buying cheese in Normandy, about Loulou the parrot, about Flaubert’s family, about how critics feel about the writers they study, about many many things. Eventually, and with creeping irritation it dawned on me that this novel was no slow starter, it was a no-starter. There was no story.

I suppose, under the circumstances, perhaps I can understand (but never forgive) the blurber’s impulse to emblazon the rear of this text with barefaced lies when faced with a book with no plot. It is a collection of personal musings and tales of Flaubert; his life and legacy. At times it was quite interesting, certainly very informative. I quite liked some of the digressions, like where Geoff makes up rules for new literature ‘There shall be no more novels about incest. No, not even those in very bad taste.’ Some are a bit tiring, like his defence of Flaubert to an imaginary disdainer. Instead of an ending, there is an exam complete with essay questions.

What can I say, this book is novel, but it is not a novel. (lol) I liked the writing. I’ve come away with some interesting insights into the nature of literature and considerable affection for Flaubert. Previously the most concrete fact I could offer on the subject was that Miss Piggy had an anteater named Flaubert in Muppet Treasure Island. I had a vague notion that he was a writer or maybe a poet, but now I’m actually looking forward to reading Madame Bovary. If I were ever teaching a course on Flaubert, this would be a brilliant addition to the reading list, but it’s not a novel.

Witty writing can only keep you going for so long and this book quickly turned into a slog without any sort of plot to drive it. It felt aimless and pointless and that is why I cannot recommend it and it gets a 2. Read it if you’re interested in Flaubert. Otherwise, there are better uses of spare time.



#24
TitletFlaubert’s Parrot by Julian Barnes
WhentJanuary/February 2012
WhytRemembered the title from the 1000 books list, saw it at SKOOB
Ratingt2
April 16,2025
... Show More
if you like this review, i now have website: www.michaelkamakana.com

270119: ??? 90s? 000s? i have not read this in some time, but enjoyed it immensely first 2 times. as a meditation, an investigation, of the artistic mind and creative process, this book is brief, dense, playful, and an excellent intro to postmodernism. of all of barnes, i like this best. what is important and necessary, what is irrelevant and contingent, there is more to write- but this succeeds as short and provocative work. this makes you think. not everybody’s sort of novel, as it dispenses with the usual furniture of plot, character, incident, but here in a good way...
April 16,2025
... Show More
Kitap alışılagelmiş bir anlatım şekli ile ilerlemiyor. Kronolojik sıralamaların, tanımsal sınıflandırmaların, mektup alıntılarının yapıldığı bölümlerin yanı sıra Flaubert’e dair anektotların anlatıldığı, yazarın fanatikçe Flauber’i savunduğu ve “acaba o bu hikayeyi anlatsaydı nasıl olurdu?” yu sorgulayan dinamik bir anlatıma sahipti.
Yer yer kategorik ilerleyen bir kitabı ben zihin kütüphanemde hangi kategoriye koyup, kimlerin yanına istifleyeceğim diye düşünürken, “neden tanıdık geliyor ki” nin cevabı netleşince Nietzsche Ağladığında’nın yanına iliştirdim...
İçimde bir yerlere dokunan bölümler Louise Colet’in Yorumu ve Saf Öykü kısımları oldu.

"Kitaplar olup bitenin bize açıklandığı yerlerdir; yaşamsa olup bitenin açıklanmadığı yer. Bazı insanların kitapları yeğlemesine şaşırmıyorum. Kitaplar yaşama bir anlam verirler. Tek sorun, anlam verdikleri yaşamların asla sizin kendi yaşamınız değil, başkalarının yaşamları olmasıdır."
"Yeterince mutlu olmak ne kadar mutlu olmaktır? Bir dilbilgisi yanlışına benziyor bu -oldukça benzersiz gibi yeterince mutlu- ama bir şeyler söyleme ihtiyacına yanıt veriyor."
Ultima
April 16,2025
... Show More
Un viaggio intorno a Flaubert: l’assassino del romanticismo e il precursore del romanzo moderno: di Proust, di Joyce e di tutto il ‘900, non a caso uno scrittore prediletto dagli scrittori .
Un romanzo strano, elegante e raffinato, molto singolare, apparentemente complesso. Discontinuo, digressivo, costruito per difformi tasselli. Una specie di inchiesta sul celebre autore della “Bovary” condotta da un medico (una sorta di alter ego di Barnes, che si nasconde dietro questa figura da lui creata come autore del libro stesso) ossessionato da questo scrittore, ma anche nella fase di elaborare il lutto di una moglie defunta da non molto, probabilmente anch’essa adultera, che lo ha lasciato profondamente solo.
Un libro singolare, fatto di scatole cinesi. Ma che alla fine indaga non solo sulla vita (poco in fondo se ne sa: il celebre romanziere teneva molto alla sua privacy e non amava comparire in pubblico) e sulle opere di Flaubert, o sui segreti di una moglie fedifraga, ma su tanti temi oggi come allora perennemente aperti: la felicità, la solitudine, l’isolamento, il dolore, la letteratura, la poesia e la prosa, l’amore e il sesso, la ragione e il sentimento, l’arte, la storia, i viaggi, il progresso … Sulla maggiore importanza della vita propria o di quella degli altri, veri o falsi, in carne e ossa o puramente romanzeschi.
Sul senso di scrivere , di leggere, o di vivere.
Vi basta?
April 16,2025
... Show More
iz nekog razloga nije mi sjela. imam dojam da je julian barnes pokušao učiniti lik i djelo gustavea flauberta intrigantnim i privlačnim -na svojevrstan način- ali zasupnuo me tolikim mnoštvom informacija da je tekst izgubio čar. do sada sam imala samo dobrih iskustava s barnesom i ovo mi je na neki način razočarenje... ipak, svjesna sam da govorim iz subjektivne perspektive, u kojoj flaubert ne zauzima neku značajniju poziciju; s druge strane, ukoliko si obožavatelj madame bovary, flauberta općenito, francuske literature i miljea XIX. stoljeća, možda pronađeš ljepotu u ovom djelu.
April 16,2025
... Show More
Flaubert’s Parrot is a witty essay on Flaubert, thinly battered in fiction. The fictional story, of retired physician and Flaubert amateur Geoffrey Braithwaite alone with memories of his adulterous suicide wife (her name is Ellen, not Emma), I found weak and boring. But I kept with it because Braithwaite approximates my favorite kind of first-person narrator: the speculative dreamer, the casual critic; the isolated ideal mind—a phrase I’ve heard—at home in all history. There’s Ishmael, Humbert, Hadrian, and the narrators of Reader’s Block and Wittgenstein’s Mistress, anticipation of whom makes me drool—though the perfection of the voice may not be fictional at all, it may be Flaubert’s letters, especially those addressed to his mistress Louise Colet. Flaubert’s side of the correspondence is a fascinating compound of fantasy, reminiscence, obscenity and criticism; and for me, Carmen lost priority after I recently read what Henry James said about Mérimée’s letters to his mistress:

We owe our knowledge of these letters to the lady herself, who has published them with a frankness more common in France than among ourselves. She has, however, taken every pain to draw the veil about her identity, and it may be said on her behalf that it is none of our business who she was or what she was. But only a very unimaginative reader will spare his conjectures. There is something extremely provoking to curiosity in the image, however shadowy, of a woman clever enough to have all this cleverness addressed to her. The author tells her early in the book that she has “a nature so raffinée”—something more than our “refined”—“as to be for him the summing up of a civilization.” She had a head worth favoring. Constantly busy himself with philological studies, he recommends her to learn Greek as a pastime, and tells her how to set to work. It soon appears that she has taken his advice, and in the course of time we find her enjoying Homer and the tragedians. Later, when, with the privilege of a twenty years' friendship, he utters all the crudities that come into his head, he scolds her at being alarmed at what she finds in Aristophanes...Gradually, however, sentiment of the tenderer sort disappears—but by absorption, as one may say, and not by evanescence. After a correspondence of ten years the writer’s devotion may be taken for granted. His letters become an irremissible habit, an intellectual need, a receptacle for his running commentary on life. The second volume of the Lettres à une Inconnue contain less that is personal to the lady, and more allusions to other people and things, more anecdotes and promiscuous reflections. Mérimée became more and more a man of the world. He was member of two Academies, inspector and conservator of national monuments (a very active post, apparently), a senator of the Empire and an intimate friend of sovereigns. He travels constantly from Moscow to Madrid, makes regular archaeological surveys through the length and breadth of France, and pays frequent visits to England. He meets every one and knows most people—most great people, at least. In the midst of these things he dispatches constant notes to his correspondent, flashing his lantern fitfully over his momentary associates and over the events of the hours. There is a multitude of entertaining opinions, characterizations and anecdotes; but we lack space for quotations. Everything he says is admirably said; his phrase, in its mingled brevity and laxity, is an excellent fit for his thought. He tells anecdotes as vividly as Madame de Sévigné and in much fewer words. His judgments are rarely flattering and his impressions rarely genial; and, as proper names have been retained without, with unprecedented audacity, many of his opinions must have aroused a sufficiently inharmonious echo.


That sounds wonderful. Unlike Mérimée’s mistress, Louise Colet is anything but an unknown, having been a litterateur in her own right, and this fact compels Barnes to write one of his closing chapters in the voice of Colet, to give her side. I’m sure it was all deeply researched—it may be a pastiche of Colet’s statements about Flaubert, I have no idea—but as historical ventriloquism it is mawkish and tired. The novel ends in such a jumble of gimmicks that, despite the wit of previous parts, I can say I don’t understand its lasting reputation for cleverness. And a blurb on my copy compares it to Pale Fire!


April 16,2025
... Show More
Existen tantas formas de escribir una (auto)biografía como loros disecados en un museo de una ciudad de provincia. Tantas y ninguna: en forma de diccionario, con doble cronología, que incluya un bestiario, contestando acusaciones, mediante examen (para desarrollar, opción múltiple sería muy Zambra o Fresán), guía ferroviaria, epistolar o "relato puro". Pero siempre con mucho humor, con mucho amor y erudición.

En La vaca, cuenta Augusto Monterroso que le preguntaron una vez cuáles eran los mejores libros que había leído en el año: entre los elegidos estaba este de Julian Barnes. Suficiente recomendación para mí. Ese tipo de cosas son las que producen el amor o fanatismo por un autor: seguir sus sugerencias y, por supuesto, viajar en barco, buscar animales disecados, aguantar conversaciones inútiles, arruinar el propio matrimonio etc.

Un par de frases:

"por mucho que seguramente pudiésemos preferirlos si lo fuesen, los libros no son la vida"

"Los libros dicen: ella hizo esto porque. La vida dice: ella hizo esto. En los libros las cosas quedan explicadas; en la vida, no. No me extraña que la gente prefiera los libros. Los libros le dan sentido a la vida. El único problema radica en que las vidas a las que dan sentido son las de otros, jamás a la del lector".

Quizás debería ponerme a escribir la biografía de Monterroso.

PD: Cuando leí a Barnes por primera vez (El sentido de un final) no lo coloqué entre las mejores lecturas de ese año. Un pata se extrañó por esa decisión y le dije que sospechaba que el autor tenía un libro mucho mejor. No me equivoqué. Era este.
April 16,2025
... Show More
A novel about an amateur literary enthusiast who is obsessed with novelist Gustave Flaubert's life and work. I found this narrative approach engaging and unique. It is written with style and wit and takes some surprisingly dramatic turns. I would suggest that familiarity with some of Flaubert's work would add to a reader's enjoyment of this book. I have only read "Madame Bovary" and "Salammbo" prior to this and still really enjoyed it. Cheers!
Leave a Review
You must be logged in to rate and post a review. Register an account to get started.