گوستاو فلوبر نزديك چهار سال براي نوشتن اين داستان وقت صرف كرد.وي سبكي كاملا جديد پديد آورد؛ اينكه راوي داستان فقط ناظري باشد دقيق براي نمايش زندگي و نظر شخصي اش در داستان دیده نشود
به قول خودش: هنرمند باید شبیه پروردگارِ خالق باشد، نادیده �� برهمه چیز توانا؛ ذاتی که در همه جا حس شود اما به چشم نیاید

:در مورد کتاب
يك زندگي نزدیک به واقعيت، كه خبري از انسان هاي كاملا خوب يا بد نيست، و انسان ها در كنار خوبي،بدي هم دارند و همه شان مردمي معمولي هستند كه دچار روزمرگي شده اند، به غير از اِما و پدرِ شارل كه براي قلب خود ارزش قائلند ولي راه اشتباهي را انتخاب مي كنند

جامعه و اخلاقیات در اروپای آن زمان هنوز نمی توانست چنین انسان هایی را درک کنند

شخصيت داستان زني شبيه مادر ترزا يا ژاندارك نيست،دختري معمولي است كه وقتي در صومعه داستان هاي مبتذل عاشقانه را دزدكي و به دور از ديد راهبه ها مي خواند ،آرزوي اين دنياي خيالي شب و روزش را مي ربايد

اِما در تمام عمرش در پي اين خوشبختي مي گردد ولي نه در برِ معشوق و نه در خانه اي با اسباب گران قيمت و نه در جاي ديگري، هيچوقت آنرا پيدا نمي كند

اين قسمت دقيقا نفرت نويسنده از سبك رمانتيسم افراطي را نشان مي دهد و اينكه اين داستان ها چه تاثير بدي بر ذهن خام دختري نوجوان مي گذارد

ازدواج اِما با شارل اقدامي عجولانه بود و دختري كه در رويا ها سير مي كرد،مجبور بود كمي از اين رويا ها فرود بيايد تا شايد طعم خوشبختي را بچشد.ولي هركاري كرد نچشيد چون او مزه اي مي خواست كه در زمين خاكي و قابل لمس وجود نداشت

اِما خيلي زود از شوهرش نااميد شد،چون شوهرش شبيه قهرمان داستان هايي كه خوانده، نبود.تلاش كرد شوهرش را تبديل به چنين مردي كند ولي نه شارل چنين ظرفيتي داشت و نه اين قهرمانان واقعي بودند

ولي اِما بجاي واقعيت بيني همه چيز را تقصير شوهرش ديد و شروع كرد به سقوط
...كردن
شايد اگر قبل از ازدواج عشق را آنطور كه هست مي شناخت و یا عاشق می شد و حتي در آن شكست مي خورد،زندگيش در آينده عوض مي شد

كارل گوستاو يونگ هر انساني را داري شخصيت مرادنه و زنانه مي داند.شخصيت مردانه اِما قابل توجه است، در چند جاي داستان از زن بودنش متنفر بود و همچو يك مرد بر شوهرش حكومت مي کرد و دوس داشت فرزندش پسر باشد


تنها كسي كه اِما بهش وفادار نبود همسرش بود و در مقابل، همه فاسقانش
...فراموشش كردند به غير از شوهرش

One can read this novel as many times as one likes. Each time I find new 'things' in it. Since so much has been written about this book that I re-read it again. I reflect on what I have read, feel mesmerized, and intrigued by the text. Of course, I take other writers' critique of this book seriously.

There is this whole body of work that rests on Flaubert's writing. I have read less of Flaubert, but I read a lot about him. It seems like one cannot talk about writing without talking about him. Some of these writings on him are exemplary because they read like literature. Flaubert himself has written reams of his own grueling struggles with the written word, his endless endeavors to get 'it' right – a word, a line, a paragraph– went on for days.

If I remember right, he said somewhere that he wants to write a book about 'nothing' – a great ambition, indeed. He supposedly intended to write something, so that form and content merge fully and produce an effect one only gets from the purest form of music. All these exquisite pursuits of Flaubert do get reflected in Madame Bovary.

However, if I leave out what he has achieved in his writings, and just focus on his characters, I find it hard not to question certain aspects of MB. Since the reputation of this book is so formidable, one hesitates to say what one Really thinks about this book. For instance, right in the first chapter, we see Charles on his first day at school. He acts in a ludicrous manner and attracts negative attention from his teacher and classmates. A few pages later, we see him married and practicing his profession. He marries a woman older than himself, anything but for love.

Charles becomes even more irritating when one sees him visiting Emma's house to treat her father. These visits are taken so often and with such passionate urgencies that I find it hard to believe that it is the same man whom I saw as a boy on his first day at school. Here, with Emma, he seems more like a character from 'Lawrence.' He mildly exudes something of 'Vronsky' from Tolstoy's Anna Karenina.

Emma, on the other hand, at least in the beginning, could be someone from George Eliot: a farmer's daughter, simple, hardworking, and responsible. And as we know her more, especially after marrying Charles, she is completely transformed. The farmer's daughter now has airs of someone from Jane Austen. As the novel unfolds, toward the second half of the book, she becomes full-fledged Anna Karenina of Tolstoy except that Anna in the hands of Tolstoy always remains Anna from the start till she dies, just like Vronksy remains Vronsky till the end.

As we see more and more of Emma, we see Charles almost receding, and again resembling the boy that we saw on his first day at school. Now it is not the Charles who married his first wife for practical purposes, it is not the same Charles who almost seduced Emma and took her as his wife after the death of his first wife. Going through all this requires certain qualities (or a certain slyness), a certain character that hardly matches with his post-marriage life with Emma. He was absolutely oblivious to Emma's manipulations, to her cheating.

Half through the book, I felt like I am in another country. The early Emma has gone, the early Charles transformed. Am I reading the same book?

Some situations are so difficult to believe because they appear contrived. Emma repeatedly gets beguiled by men who, in one way or the other, resemble the super attractive heroes of literature– let us say all these charmers, who chase Emma in MB, remind, to varying degrees, Vronsky of Anna Karenina. However, in Flaubert, the stylistic features take over the characterization.

The only way in which I have enjoyed MB is to read it for its lines and paragraphs. One must not think about who is doing what, who is saying what, and asking oneself if this is real. How can this be? Why cannot Emma do this? How can the doctor Charles be so foolish? One has to avoid all that to enjoy the book. Maybe that was what Flaubert set out to achieve in the first place. He wanted us to notice him, only Him. And we did.

È, a mio modesto parere, il romanzo del disincanto e della disillusione, che, attraverso l'amore mal riposto, idealizzato, quasi platonico, finisce per dare un'immagine della vita un pochino desolante, seppur, in parte, veritiera. Ognuno dei personaggi - comprimari inclusi - sembra vivere nel proprio beato mondo d'illusioni e realizzazione, di sogni e aspettative, di prospettive e felicità costantemente inseguita e nemmeno dinanzi alla cruda realtà sembra voler accettare l'idea di un mondo assai diverso. Forse si tratta solo di cecità. Forse di un desiderio che gijnge pedsino a dissolvere il disincanto. Forse dell'unica cosa che consente a ciascuno di affrontare la fredda brutalità dell'esistenza. Da leggere assolutamente.

This is one of the books that has had a profound effect on my life. The moral? Be happy with what you have and where you are!!! Mme. Bovary fritters away her entire life with thoughts of, "If only X would happen, THEN I could be truly happy" and yet she never is. She gets everything she thinks she wants only to find out she's still not content.

I read this while I was engaged and at the time, thought, "Well, I'll be happier when I'm married, but once I am, then life will be fabulous". After a few years I found myself playing the same role as Mme. Bovary: "Once I can get pregnant and have kids, then I'll be happy"; "Once I'm not pregnant and sick anymore, THEN I can be happy"; "Once we get out of this apartment and into our house, then I will surely be happy"; "Once the baby starts sleeping through the night, I can definitely be happy"; "Once the baby is out of diapers...etc. etc. ad nauseum...literally!

I want to be content with my circumstances, whatever they may be, and Mme. Bovary is a reminder of what happens to those who are unable to find contentment in the journey, and are continually seeking yet another unsatisfying destination.

[Revised 3/21/23]

Ah, Madame Bovary. Isn't that the one where she has an affair and kills herself by jumping in front of a train? No, that's one by Tolstoy. But I'm thinking of adding a new Goodreads shelf: 'Old classics I thought surely I had read years ago, but hadn't.'

There are thousands of reviews so I'll keep this short.



Our two main characters are remarkably unlikable. Emma marries a divorced small-town doctor who's a widower. Isn't there a French expression: "How can a woman love a man who adores her?” Charles acts like a country bumpkin. He adores her and he’s such a cuckold that he is an enabler. If he found her in bed with another man, Emma would say “I was just showing Armande how comfortable our mattress is, and we took our clothes off because it was so hot.” And he would believe her.

The introduction tells us that Flaubert wrote in a letter “Women are taught to lie shamelessly. An apprenticeship that lasts all their lives.” So he created Emma to prove his point. Emma’s picture could appear in an illustrated dictionary under ‘self-centeredness.’ (We’ll put her husband, Charles’ picture, in under ‘cuckold.’)

The biggest red flag for me about Emma is her lack of interest in, dislike of, and even disgust with her baby daughter. She's forever pushing her away and sending her off to her nurse. Her extravagance creates financial problems that she seems not only unconcerned with but unaware of. That extravagance drives the novel to its tragic end.

If you are thinking of reading it, here are a couple of passages that I liked and that illustrate the style of writing. This one is about an old roadside inn: “…a good old house, with worm-eaten balconies that creak in the wind on winter nights, always full of people, noise, and feeding, whose black tables are sticky with coffee and brandy, the thick windows made yellow by the flies, the damp napkins stained with cheap wine, and that always smells of the village, like plowboys dressed in Sunday clothes, has a cafe on the street, and toward the countryside a kitchen-garden.”



Here's a passage when Madame B and a future lover are beginning to feel attracted to each other: “Had they nothing else to say to one another? Yet their eyes were full of more serious speech, and while they forced themselves to find trivial phrases, they felt the same languor stealing over them both. It was the whisper of the soul, deep, continuous, dominating that of their voices. Surprised with wonder at this strange sweetness, they did not think of speaking of the sensation or of seeking its cause. Coming joys, like tropical shores, thrown over the immensity before them their inborn softness, an odorous wind, and we are lulled by this intoxication without a thought of the horizon that we do not even know.”

It's a good story and excellent writing, although my paperback edition by Harper Collins has problems. It doesn't name the translator, so it must be an old translation where the copyright expired. I know that Flaubert was a writer known for finding le mot juste. The translator, I think, tried to match that exactness of word usage in English with some fairly obscure English words: diligence (in the sense of a carriage), colza (rapeseed), bistoury (scalpel), faubourg (suburb). The back of the book gives us a glossary that has none of the obscure words I had to look up, but instead defines for us words like ruffian, trivet, penury and gruel! This is what happens when you turn over the glossary task to your graduate student intern and no one else looks over the finished product.

BTW, when is GR going to get around to letting reviewers use italics without having to insert formatting marks?



A great novel and good writing. Indeed a classic. The sex, tame by modern standards, pushed the envelope when published in 1856, and the author was charged with obscenity. It’s a fascinating blend of romance and realism. Flaubert (1821-1880) was a pioneer in French literary realism.

Top photo of Emma from a 2014 20th Century Fox movie at befrois.com
French inn from messynessychic.com
The author on a French stamp from postbeeld.com

Роман, который по праву считается одним из шедевров мировой литературы, сюжетно прост. Красивая девушка, воспитанная в монастыре урсулинок, начитавшаяся романтических романов, мечтает о возвышенной романтической любви. Ее мужем становится захолустный лекарь-вдовец, женившийся по расчету в первом браке, полюбивший ее с первого взгляда. Этот роман - реалистическое препарирование провинциальных душ, этих пошлейших Шарля Бовари, аптекаря Эме, помощника нотариуса Леона Дюпюи, торговца Лере, но главным объектом внимания автора является Эмма. Насмешка не только над романтизмом, как литературно-культурным явлением, но склонностью к романтизации жизни у многих, особенно у женщин (нельзя сказать, что только женщины имеют эту склонность, мужчины тоже подвержены это напасти), пресловутое ожидание «принца на белом коне, который увезет в прекрасное далеко», жизни-вечного праздника, является тонко помеченным комплексом, разновидности нарциссизма. Эта тяга к нарядам, милым сердцу вещицам, коврам и портьерам – тяга к красивой жизни, жажда роскоши - является инструментом самоутверждения: если реальность волшебным образом не изменяется, то эти статусные вещи при отсутствии финансовой возможности ими обладать, создают иллюзию приближения к вожделенному идеалу жизни. Эмма поняла, что ошиблась непосредственно после свадьбы, но после посещения бала в Вобьесаре, она заболела, так было сильно ее потрясение от понимания недоступности для нее такой жизни. Ее понимание ошибки было неполным, она делает попытки полюбить мужа, которого по всем критериям можно отнести к олухам, так он был слеп, глух и глуп (не от любви, а от провинциальной простодушности, эгоизма и удовлетворенности своим бытием), хотя горячо любил ее. После бала она понимает, что в это благородное общество она не войдет, но тяга, если не к красивой жизни (которую она удовлетворяет изысканными туалетами, нелепо смотрящимися в провинциальном доме и городке), то хотя бы к красивым чувствам с тем же глубоко спрятанным в душе ожиданием, что ее увезут из этого затхлого мирка, в ней остается. Ее предает один любовник, потом другой. Она не понимает, что мужчины в ее жизни наслаждаются плотской любовью, ничего не давая взамен, то есть попросту используют ее. Она прозревает, что ее не любят, когда она получает письмо о расставании, присланной Родольфо в корзинке с абрикосами, которое также вызывает у нее нервное потрясение, похожее, как после бала, но уже гораздо более тяжелое. Я не думаю, что в Леоне она видит того, кто сможет ее увезти и изменить ее жизнь, в плотской любви она просто находит отвлечение от пустоты и постылой жизни в своей семье. Для нее он просто любовник, и она продолжает мечтать об идеале. Что же ее убивает – страх быть разоблаченной в неверности или все же невозможность расплатиться по счетам с дальнейшей перспективой нищеты, которая окончательно похоронит ее надежды? Я не думаю, что ее сильно волновало общественной мнение, ведь сколько раз и Родольфо и Леон упрекали ее в отсутствии осторожности, мужа он тоже ни во что не ставила, и перед самоубийством она не позаботилась уничтожить улики своих любов��ых отношений. Она глотает мышьяк после отказа в деньгах. Но не сами деньги ее волновали, а волновала перспектива нищеты, утрата мечты: если дорогие наряды и домашняя обстановка были способом самоутверждения, то их отсутствие полностью уничтожало ее саму в ее собственных глазах, лишало жизнь смысла.
Неосознаваемые комплексы неполноценности, такие, какими страдала Эмма Бовари, широко распространены, и сейчас полно таких людей, причем обоих полов. Мне нравится разбор комплекса неполноценности у Адлера, но Флобер это сделал в великолепной художественной форме.

Einen Meilenstein der Literaturgeschichte wie dieser Roman weckte schon bestimmte Erwartungen in mir. Mit welcher Art Roman ist es vergleichbar? Kann Emma Bovary Neues bieten, wenn man schon an der Ehebrecherin Effi Briest Gefallen gefunden hat. Flauberts Werk ist immerhin 40 Jahre früher geschrieben worden: gleicht es dann nicht etwa den romantischen Sturmhöhen?

Meine Erwartungen wird nicht erfüllt, denn das Buch ist einzigartig und ein Vergleich mit anderen Werken nur bedingt möglich. Während ich bei Fontane das Gefühl hatte, er liebt seine Figuren und hat auch ein Herz für Effi („nicht so stürmisch, nicht so wild, Effi“), filetiert Flaubert geradezu sein Personal mit seiner sachlichen Schreibweise, die wenig wertet, aber die Provinziellen aus der Normandie auch nahezu allesamt als Trottel, Wichtigtuer, Schwätzer und Träumer darstellt. Emma Bovary, ein Kind des Mittelstandes, die sich nach einem Prinzen sehnt, wie ihn Sir W. Scott beschreibt, findet bei Flaubert keine Gnade. Erst trifft sie die falsche Entscheidung bezüglich der Wahl des Ehemanns, dann läßt er sie nicht nur einmal die Ehe brechen, sondern steuert sie in eine dauerhafte Affärenphase, in der sie sich durch Lügen und Geldschulden immer weiter verstrickt. Das Einzige, was sie mit Effi Briest verbindet, ist das schlimme Ende, welches beide Frauen in jungen Jahren finden.

Bei der Recherche zum Buch las ich, dass Flaubert es wichtig war, nicht zu werten. Im ersten Moment kommt einem das wie eine Lüge vor, aber tatsächlich beschreibt er nur, wie z.B. Emma kopflos nach dem Gefühl hechelt, von einem schönen Mann begehrt zu werden. Das Prinzip „Show, don’t tell“ ist hier wirklich in Perfektion getrieben. Ich hatte das Gefühl, dass da hier jeder Satz sitzt, vielleicht auch weil die Neuübersetzung von Elisabeth Edl so gut ist. Die Übersetzerin erklärt in einem Nachwort ihr Vorgehen und wie sie sich von anderen Übersetzungen unterscheidet. Das klingt schon sehr selbstbewusst, ist aber letztlich nachvollziehbar. Ich habe keine Übersetzungen parallel gelesen, mich aber immer gewundert, wie modern dieses Buch aus den 1850ern klingt. Das war so ein ganz anderes Leseerlebnis wie bei Balzac oder Zola, bei denen ich immer wieder (bis auf Germinal) Längen und Wiederholungen gespürt habe. Alles ist hier wohl konzipiert und ausgearbeitet. An keiner Stelle spürte ich einen Durchhänger. Es liest sich wie ein perfekter Roman.

Achtung Spoiler:
Besonders eindrucksvoll fand ich das Ende, wenn Charles Bovary um das Leben seiner Frau kämpft, den Kampf verliert und er sich dann an die Erinnerungen klammert, sie am liebsten konservieren möchte, sie in das Brautkleid hüllt und dreifach versargt sie vor dem Verwesen schützen möchte, um eine Haarlocke bittet, Kräuter der Toten beilegt. Dieses Klammern ist so eindringlich geschildert, dass man mit ihm leidet als Leser. Das zelebriert Flaubert geradezu, wie Charles Bovary da in seinen imaginäre Welt abtaucht mit allen Sinnen (fühlen, riechen, sehen). Doch Flaubert ist ein Sadist. So einfach gönnt er Bovary den Traum von der perfekten, ewig lebenden Frau nicht und so läßt er den Schleier heben und Bovary sieht die schmerzverzerrte Fratze Emmas und bricht zusammen. Was für eine Szene.
Spoiler-Ende

Das war eine wunderbare Lektüre. Wenn ich ein Leser wäre, der gerne Notizen und Markierungen im Buch macht, dann wäre meine Ausgabe vollgemalt. Aber ich bin ein bekennender Buchschoner beim Lesen. So kann ich es mit Freude irgendwann nochmal lesen und mich Sätzen erfreuen wie: „Eine Träne zitterte in ihrem Auge, wie eine Wasserperle nach einem Gewitter im Kelch einer blauen Blume.“ Das hat ja fast schon ein proustisches Niveau. Auf solche Beschreibungen muss man erstmal kommen, ohne das es kitschig wirkt. Wirklich ein Meilenstein für realistisches Schreiben.

★★★★★

Esta novela fue publicada por entregas en 1856, supuso uno de los puntos de referencia del realismo. Una obra de las más influyentes de la literatura francesa que fue modificada y censurada varias veces y que creó mucha controversia y polémica. Hacía muchos años que deseaba leerla y aunque tiene pasajes densos es un libro de un valor incalculable.

La historia comienza narrando la infancia de Charles Bovary, como se ve forzado a estudiar la carrera de medicina y posteriormente es casaso con una viuda. Es tras la pérdida de su esposa que Charles conoce a Emma. Este queda total y perdidamente enamorado de ella y al cabo de un tiempo se convertirá en su esposa.

A partir de ese momento, la trama gira alrededor del personaje de Emma Bovary. Es una mujer muy avanzada a su época, soñadora, caprichosa y sumamente inconformista pues tiene una idea idílica de las relaciones amorosas y de pareja que no es lo que Charles le ofrece. Es entonces cuando comenzamos a ver la verdadera cara de esta protagonista tan complicada y maravillosa.

El estilo de Flaubert es exquisito, sus detalladas descripciones brindan una experiencia lectora que lejos de aburrir logran darle al escrito una belleza incalificable. El lenguaje escogido es digno de prosa poética, tiene una sutileza y elegancia que eleva la obra. Además trata temas de forma crítica como es la religión (siendo este un libro prohibido por la iglesia católica) y la burguesía francesa del siglo XIX.

Definitivamente esta es una obra maestra, una muestra del abismo que hay entre el deseo y la realidad. Nos brinda una de las mejores protagonistas que dista mucho de ser esa mujer y madre que la sociedad considera correcta. A pesar de no conectar con sus actos, ni entender parte de sus sentimientos y pensamientos, he terminado empatizando enormemente con ella.

اين كتاب بدون شك همه ما رو به ياد آنا كارنينا ميندازه، البته مادام بوواري قبل از اون نوشته شده.
بهرحال مسئله ايي كه تو تين دو كتاب نظرمو جلب كرد،ميزان اثري بود كه خيانت زنها ميذاشت بر زندگي خونوادشون و صد البته خودمشي اونا.
من سعي در توجيه خيانت ندارم، ولي يك سوال مهم پيش اومده چرا نويسنده ها ميخوان خيانت زنها را اينقدر بزرگ جلوه بدن؟
طبيعتا تو تاريخ اين چند هزار سال اخير تعداد خيانت مردان بيشتر از زنان بوده ولي من هيچ كتابي نخوندم كه آخرش يه مرد خودشو بكشه!
چرا تنها رسوايي خيانت براي زنهاست؟
گويا وقتي نويسنده اين كتابو مينويسه به ترويج ابتذال متهم ميشه، اگه بجاي اما، شارل خيانت ميكرد آيا بازم نويسنده متهم ميشد؟

The first reading of this novel does no justice to its original intended effect. The book must be reread especially if it was first encountered when the reader’s life was still devoid of romance. Not until the second time around do the details linger, memorably, and the speedy plot that Part One promised is detained for the remaining Parts Two & Three which include photographically-intense colors and emotions felt (or, even not felt at all) by Emma Bovary. The plot is carefully-crafted; it is bookmarked by the lives of the secondary characters, as if Mme. Bovary is the (literal) center meanwhile her dilemma is a more private one: that lives go on before (the education and upbringing of the incompetent man that will be her husband) & after (the deaths of the members of the Bovary clan, the success of M. Homais) the actual core means that the world at large is indifferent to her & her tale is almost wholly forgotten, just swallowed up.

Here for the reader’s consideration is a full life. Perhaps “robust” would not be a correct adjective to describe a life of desperation and woe. Emma Bovary is human because she is not all good nor all evil. She is materialistic but also idealistic. Wife and lover. Belonging nowhere, like a character born at the most inadequate of times. Like Oedipus with the Oracle, however, she is knowledgeable of the fate that is in store for adulteresses.

The plot has plunges and heights, a spectrum that is available to anyone belonging to the human race. The pathos comes from all the chains Bovary must break to become free, and the further entanglement of her emotions complicate matters. Mme Bovary does not commit suicide with arsenic because of monetary problems. The title is perfect since it is itself a title: Madame Bovary. There are several Madame Bovarys in the book, including Charles’s first wife and his mother. She is called Emma when she is free, when her identity becomes her own & she is dehumanized no longer, especially not by the sympathetic reader.
t
Who can escape their position in society, their gender, their duties, their fate? Rodolphe tells Emma: “if two poor souls should finally come together, everything is organized to prevent them from uniting. Still they try, they beat their wings, they call out to one another.” It's this attempt which makes Madame Bovary a classic, modern tragedy where a soul is doomed because she feels everything, yet is only able to express the most minimal. Emma Bovary is in love with the notion of love, the conventions are her ideals, & she is nevertheless brave to at least try.

مادام بوواری پرآوازه ترین کتاب فلوبر هست که البته شاید بیشتر به محتوای آن بویژه در زمان انتشار ارتباط باشد .محتوایی که تازه در سالهای نیمه ی قرن نوزدهم مد شده بود و یک موضوع همچون خیانت زن به شوهر و در مجموع فیزیولوژی و روان شناسی زن و زناشویی ، تازه وارد ادبیات می شد . پیشگام این جریان را می توان بالزاک دانست. کسی که با نوشتن رمان هایی همچون زنبق دره ، زن سی ساله و فیزیولوژی زناشویی ، با بی پردگی رئال ویژه خود ، فرانسویان را از خواب رمانتیس بیدار کرد . البته هرگز این سبک در زمان خویش مورد استقبال چندانی قرار نگرفت و تنها چهره این زمان ، همان بالزاک بود . اما در ادامه یک فرد آمد که تمامی جریانهای ادبی پس از او به نوعی وامدار او و رمان های اصلی او یعنی تربیت احساسات و مادام بوواری قرار گرفتند .
نگارش رمان ماد‌ام بوواری از سپتامبر 1851 تا اپریل 1856 طول کشید‌. فلوبر د‌ر طول این 5 سال تقریبن از خانه خود، کرواسه، خارج نشد‌. هر روز پشتِ میز کار می‌نشست و جز چند‌ خط نمی‌نوشت، اما مرتب آن‌ها را تغییر می‌د‌اد‌ و د‌وباره می‌نوشت وسخت کار می‌کرد‌. جالب اینجا هست که پس از مد‌تی کار، فلوبر شیفته‌ اثر خود شد‌ و با پرسوناژهای د‌استان خود همد‌لی غریبی احساس کرد‌ تا انجا که گفت:"ماد‌ام بوواری خود‌ من هستم."
و بعد‌ها به "ماکسیم د‌وشان" از نزد‌یک‌ترین د‌وستان او می‌گوید‌:‌ "زمانی که د‌اشتم صحنه‌ زهرخورد‌ن اِما بوواری را نوشته می کردم مزه‌ آرسنیک را د‌ر د‌هان خود احساس می‌کرد‌م!"
راز حیات شگفت‌انگیز این رمان و تمامی نوشته‌های فلوبر به تعبیر "موریس بلانشو"، نویسند‌ه و فیلسوف معاصر فرانسوی، د‌ر د‌و نکته هست: اول واقع‌گرایی و رئالیسم د‌ر حادثه ها و د‌وم رنج ها د‌ر نگارش. فلوبر هر پاراگرافِ د‌استان‌های خود را بارها و بارها از نو نوشته می کرده هست و وسواس او د‌ر نگارش ما را به یاد‌ جمله‌" ویلیام فاکنر" می‌اند‌ازد‌ که می‌گفت: "کار اد‌بی عرق‌ریزان روح هست."

چاپ اول رمان ماد‌ام بوواری د‌ر فرانسه جنجالی سخت بر پا کرد‌. باز هم مناد‌یان اخلاقِ عمومی جامعه سخت برآشفته شدند که که فلوبر قصد‌ ترویج اروتیسم را د‌اشته و می‌خواهد‌ مبانی اخلاق کاتولیکی فرانسه را سست کند‌.
د‌ر 24 ژانویه 1875 فلوبر به اتهام توهین به اخلاق و مقد‌سات مذهبی به د‌اد‌گاه احضار شد‌. پس از آن فلوبر که سخت افسرد‌ه و د‌لزد‌ه شد‌ه بود‌ برای مد‌تی از جریان‌های اد‌بی فرانسه کنار کشید‌ تا اینکه با رمان بزرگ و فاخرِ سالامبو پاسخ تمام منتقد‌های خود‌ همچون ژرژ ساند‌ را د‌اد‌. ژرژ ساند‌ که از نویسند‌گان بزرگ و هم‌د‌وره‌ فلوبر است تلخی رمان ماد‌ام بوواری را برنمی‌تابید‌ و نقد‌های بسیار تند‌ی برد‌ کتاب فلوبر نوشت. د‌ر حقیقت ارزش رمان ماد‌ام بوواری‌ و د‌یگر آثار فلوبر نه د‌ر قرن نوزد‌هم بلکه د‌ر قرن بیستم شناخته شد‌.
د‌ر د‌وران معاصر، نویسند‌گان پست‌مد‌رنی چون ژان بود‌ریار، میشل فوکو و ژیل د‌لوز از ماد‌ام بوواری به‌عنوان شاهکار بی‌بد‌یل و کتابی که د‌ر تحول رمان‌نویسی فرانسه نقش مهمی د‌اشته
یاد‌ کرد‌ه‌ هستند‌.
"ماریو بارگاس یوسا" در "عیش مدام" ، درباره‌ تاثیر بی‌اندازه‌ "اما بوواری" در زندگی‌ خود می‌گوید: "شماری اندک از شخصیت‌های داستانی تاثیری چنان ژرف بر زندگی من نهاده‌اند که بسیاری از آدم‌های واقعی که می‌شناختم قادر به آن نبوده‌اند." یوسا همچنین در این کتاب درباره‌ تاثیر مادام بوواری می‌گوید: "اغلب درباره‌ی «مادام بوواری» تکرار می‌کنند که این رمان به یک ضربت خود را از رومانیستم جدا کرد و اغازگر جنبش رئالیسم شد. اگر بگوییم این رمان به جای انکار رمانتیسم، آن را به کمال رساند، به حقیقت نزدیک‌تر است."

welcome to...MADAME BOVUARY!

you know what time it is — it's a title / month pun, i'm picking up an ill-advised classic, and i'm going to be as attention seeking about it as possible. IT'S ANOTHER PROJECT LONG CLASSIC INSTALLMENT.

except this time i'm doing it at the end of one month into the start of another, the book is not that long, and i'm kind of proud of the terrible pun. because it works with both months. inasmuch as it works with anything.

let's get into it!


PART 1, CHAPTER 1
i primarily bought this book because i'm addicted to penguin clothbound classics, and secondarily bought it because the description is "Emma is beautiful and bored" and that's my life story.

this book is not long, but there are 35 chapters and i'm trying to be More Chill about my reading, so a chapter a day it is!


PART 1, CHAPTER 2
so far, so weird.


PART 1, CHAPTER 3
thus far it's been a lot of exposition-y chapters, which makes sense, but they are so oddly written as to be more confusing than enlightening. whatever! onto the actual story.


PART 1, CHAPTER 4
wedding scene!!!! this sounded fun. good chapter. i approve.

i don't have a lot to say about this book thus far, if you couldn't tell.


PART 1, CHAPTER 5
i do actually love the description in this. so pretty and clear.


PART 1, CHAPTER 6
hello and welcome to our first catch-up day. a three-chapter situation. everyone say thank you, gustave for making these chapters so short.

emma is addicted to novels...once again she is just like me fr.


PART 1, CHAPTER 7
in a twist that will surprise absolutely no one, i like the unlikable pretty protagonist who hates her life and charms everyone.


PART 1, CHAPTER 8
i do feel bad for charles, though.


PART 1, CHAPTER 9
she's sooooo difficult...i stan


PART 2, CHAPTER 1
a fun lil Get To Know The Villagers chapter.


PART 2, CHAPTER 2
suddenly, just as i settled into the comfort of the idea that this would be a Description Book, here we are in Dialogue City. what a change!


PART 2, CHAPTER 3
i really do feel like classics will cover the local politics of a small village for 75 pages, and marriage / birth / death are fully covered in a paragraph or two.


PART 2, CHAPTER 4
happy three chapter day to all who celebrate.

my copy of this is used (part of my How To Afford Collecting Penguin Clothbounds strategy) and there has been nary a mark inside until now. the last line of this chapter is underlined, and i agree: it rules.


PART 2, CHAPTER 5
accidentally got enraptured and forgot to write about individual chapters. this is the REAL problem with three chapter days.


PART 2, CHAPTER 6
yearning!!!


PART 2, CHAPTER 7
emma has to stop reading novels??? good god...a fate worse than death....


PART 2, CHAPTER 8
something fun that this chapter did is make me feel the same existential boredom, but for the sweet relief of bantery dialogue, that our dear emma suffers from every day.

because it was very boring.

CONTROVERSY ARRIVES.


PART 2, CHAPTER 9
a recipe for disaster is unfolding before us.


PART 2, CHAPTER 10
emma, girl...stand up...


PART 2, CHAPTER 11
HAPPY VALENTINE'S DAY!

let's spend it reading four chapters of existential ennui. and apparently extensive descriptions of club foot.


PART 2, CHAPTER 12
i do love that being a hater and a trickster is making emma turn hot again. that's my entire skincare routine and life philosophy summed up.


PART 2, CHAPTER 13
you hate to see a man win a situation...women are so much better at deception and deviousness...it looks odd on a man.


PART 2, CHAPTER 14
2-14 on 2/14...pretty cute.

there is no romantic connection or eternal tie quite like the correlation between something bad happening and life-altering illness in classic books. if you had a bad day as a protagonist in 1809...welcome to a life of Consumption.


PART 2, CHAPTER 15
emma has a ROSTER. what an achievement.


PART 3, CHAPTER 1
there is a 5 chapter day in my future...and today is not that day.

i do love the drama of it all. everything emma does seems to be for maximum theatricality and that is a life's purpose i can get behind.


PART 3, CHAPTER 2
hi mtv and welcome to my attempt at a catch-up day.

honestly i would love to be charles bovary. no thoughts, head empty, zero suspicions, getting through life on vibes alone.


PART 3, CHAPTER 3
it's remarkable — this book has no tension at all. one of the most tense things in the world is happening (repeated marital affairs! will someone discover it? will they be able to love openly? none of these questions come to mind) and it's like. no stakes. crazy. this chapter appears to be attempting a cliffhanger and the crowd went silent.


PART 3, CHAPTER 4
these chapters are so wonderfully short. it's like they were written with me being days behind on a made-up project in mind.


PART 3, CHAPTER 5
"From that moment her existence was but one long tissue of lies, in which she enveloped her love as in veils to hide it. It was a want, a mania, a pleasure carried to such an extent that if she said she had the day before walked on the right side of a road, one might know she had taken the left." this duplicitous little devil...i love her.


PART 3, CHAPTER 6
too much math in the last chapter. debt is boring. give me something more interesting.

jinxed myself. this was even longer and even mathier.


PART 3, CHAPTER 7
super jarring to have a passage of dialogue here from two women just...witnessing emma emma-ing it up. you forget how Improper all this sh*t is until suddenly some lady is like "whip her in the streets."


PART 3, CHAPTER 8
WHAT.

but we have three chapters left!


PART 3, CHAPTER 9
who cares anymore...what's even the point...if i weren't so goddamn close to finishing this i'd take a day off and catch up later...

this is the coolest charles has ever been. low bar, but still.


PART 3, CHAPTER 10
you hate to see an adult mom / overly fond son duo...


PART 3, CHAPTER 11
well, today is the final day and i have literally no idea what i think about this book, so...pretty high stakes for this single chapter here.


OVERALL
generally, i think if you have the free time, the patience, and the refined taste, you can skip this completely, go for anna karenina, and pretend you read both.

but if you're pressed for time or into melodrama, this one is good too.
rating: 3.5