Este livro conta de um modo Hilário, divertido e delicioso a história de 3 homens, George,Harris e J. (Não se esqueçam do cachorro) que estão estressados com suas vidas diárias em Londres e decidem então partir em um passeio de barco ao longo do rio Tâmisa. Além das inúmeras trapalhadas que vão surgindo durante a viagem, junte se a isso as várias histórias contadas por eles, que abrilhanta ainda mais esse livro que durante a maior parte do tempo me fez rir muito.

O livro além do fato de ser muito engraçado, é um livro também sobre amizade verdadeira, honestidade, integridade, coragem, enfim sobre quase tudo! . Mas tem muita zoação também! É um livro para todas as idades.

Este livro originalmente era para ser uma guia de viagem pelo Tâmisa entre Kingston e Oxford, mas acabou se transformando nessa deliciosa obra-prima. Com certeza essa foi uma das novelas mais engraçadas e divertidas que já li.

Što - da - ne trojka, propraćena osmehom simpatije.
Može da se priča i zašto da i zašto ne, ali bi to bila rasprava na temu šta je za koga smešno.

https://clsiewert.wordpress.com/2014/...

I love To Say Nothing of the Dog. Adore it enough to own two copies, a paperback for reading/ lending, and a hardcover for keepsies. Love it enough, in fact, to write a ridiculous review comparing it to a Beethoven symphony (my review). Willis dedicated her book to Heinlein, who “introduced me to Jerome K. Jerome’s Three Men in a Boat.” So when I saw Project Gutenberg offered Three Men in a Boat, I snatched it up.

It is the time of year when I don’t have much time to devote to reading, particularly not long, involved plots with thirty-four funky character names, taking place in imaginary worlds I can’t pronounce (or even in this one, Mr. Jonathan Strange). Three Men seemed perfect for the kind of read I was looking for, and it turned out to be true. But I’m viewing it through the fond lens of a reader of To Say Nothing of the Dog, whose author was clearly amused by Three Men in a Boat, whose own author was riffing on other Victorian tales. So it’s all a bit meta, and I can’t really tell if I love it, or just the spiderweb of connections I feel with the authors.

Let me be honest: there’s virtually no plot. It’s an uneven narrative, flagrantly digressive, in which Bertie, I mean, Jerome, George, William Harris–to say nothing of the dog, Montmorency–are interacting in an Abbott and Costello sort of way as they plan, travel and conclude an idyllic boat ride down the Thames. Narrated by Jerome, the details of the trip are frequently interrupted with humorous asides, commentary on the sights of the Thames and musing on historical sites they are passing. Characterization is about all that holds it together– detail on historical events near the Thames, is frankly, rather yawners, as I am indifferent student of historical events (signing of the Magna what?).

And yet Three Men in a Boat amused me. It could have been the beginning, in which

“We were sitting in my room, smoking, and talking about how bad we were–bad from a medical point of view I mean, of course. … With me, it was my liver that was out of order. I knew it was my liver that was out of order, because I had just been reading a patent liver-pill circular, in which were detailed the various symptoms by which a man could tell when his liver was out of order. I had them all. It is a most extraordinary thing, but I never read a patent medical advertisement without being impelled to the conclusion that I am suffering from the particular disease therein dealt with in its most virulent form.“

Though written in 1889, it indirectly emphasized to me, a nurse, that the more things change, the more they stay the same. I think that’s why the characterization appeals so much. The three men bear a strong resemblance to people we all know; in fact, I was rather reminded of Jerry, George and Kramer, whose own self-absorbed behavior provided so many laughs. For instance, after Jerome tells a story about another man watching him work, he comments:

“Now, I’m not like that. I can’t sit still and see another man slaving and working. I want to get up and superintend, and walk round with my hands in my pockets, and tell him what to do. It is my energetic nature. I can’t help it.“

As a dog person, I couldn’t get enough of the sassy, spirited Montmorency:

“We went downstairs to breakfast. Montmorency had invited two other dogs to come and see him off, and they were whiling away the time by fighting on the doorstep. We calmed them with an umbrella, and sat down to chops and cold beef.“

But it wasn’t all irony and laughter, there were moments of quite lyrical, perhaps even indulgent writing (to take a line from Willis: “a tendency to maudlin sentimentality, like… a Victorian poet cold-sober”):

“In the sunlight–in the daytime, when Nature is alive and busy all around us, we like the open hillsides and the deep woods well enough: but in the night, when our Mother Earth has gone to sleep, and left us waking, oh! the world seems so lonesome, and we get frightened, like children in a silent house.The we sit and sob, and long for the gas-lit streets, and the sound of human voices, and the answering throb of human life. We feel so helpless and so little in the great stillness, when the dark trees rustle in the night-wind.“

Without doubt, it kept me entertained. Read in small doses before bedtime, it perhaps started to feel a little like the three men experiencing the Thames: interesting, humorous, thoughtful, and perhaps just a day or two too long. Hopefully, the above quotes give enough of a flavor to see if it will appeal. For me, I’m looking forward to my next read of To Say Nothing of the Dog; with the insight I’ve gotten from Three Men, I expect it to be even more amusing.

What a brilliant book! If you are looking to the perfect follow up to The Pickwick Papers this is your genre. See what J (the narrator), George (the man with the orange red blazer), Harris and not to be forgotten Montmorency (the dog) experience on their picnic, camping and boat trip on the River Thames through the English countryside. If you know some places of the area described (like me) you see every step in full detail before your mental eye. Those episodes are so funny that you have a broad grin upon your face in every chapter: The episode with the cheese, the anglers' lore with the trout, the failed opening of the can, bad weather and so on (there are also some fine illustrations in the edition I read). Every mishap possible seems to occur to our Pickwickian heroes here. Splendid humour. Or the episode when they came back to London... you simply have to read that episodic book and have one of the best laughs ever. Absolutely recommended!

What a huge moron I was for not giving this book a chance. And now, I just can’t stop praising it. So here it goes…

‘Three Men in a Boat’ is an amusing account of three friends-Jerome(whom I’m in love with),Harris and George and of course their dog Montmorency; while on a little boating expedition. The three of them concur of being overworked and tired of the daily humdrum, are in a dire need of a vacation. After weighing options of a country trip and a sea voyage they settle down on a boat ride to a secluded and peaceful place. So, on a quiet Saturday they rent a boat from Kingston and while picking up George from his workplace they head out on a boating trip up to the River Thames. Right from hiring the boat to scheduling itinerary the story further propels into a comical sketch of various boating and camping mishaps. This is undoubtedly the wittiest and most entertaining book I have ever read. Jerome has a knack for creating even the utter sentimental pieces into this jubilation of jollity and intellect. Not a word passes by without giving a chortle or plastering a wide grin on the face. Every chapter brings with it a plethora of joyous moments and at times a series of wild laughter. The writing is sarcastic with a hint of sharp smartness to the core of my extreme liking.

The comic flavors can be tasted from the beginning, especially when the author introduces the three central characters:-
1. Jerome(the narrator):-Thinks of himself to be a ‘walking hospital’. Jerome a pharmalogical wreck has somehow concluded that he has been inflicted with all sorts of diseases that ever existed by reading various medical pamphlets and imagining their symptoms. What is even hilarious is the mere fact of Jerome being heartbroken for not contracting the Housemaid’s Knee and goes to an extent of calling his doctor a quack for not being able to give it to him.

2.George:- a banker and of whom Jerome says, “George goes to sleep at a bank from ten to four each day, except Saturdays, when they wake him up and put him outside at two”

3.Harris :- “You can never rouse Harris. There is no poetry about Harris - no wild yearning for the unattainable. Harris never "weeps, he knows not why." If Harris's eyes fill with tears, you can bet it is because Harris has been eating raw onions, or has put too much Worcester over his chops.”

In addition, episodes where the author recalls how his Aunt Podger used to take a week long refuge at her mother’s place when Uncle Podger donned the role of a handyman trying to fix “little” things in the house or how the making of Irish Stew from all the leftovers compelled Montmorency to add his bit by bringing a dead-water rat, brims with utmost hilarity.

Reading this book is such bliss that I am already onto its sequel –“Three Men on the Bummel”.

Written in 1899, this book could easily be contemporary, just change the scenery a bit and give these guys another mode of transportation. The three men in question, J, George and Harris, along with Montmorency the dog, decide to take a camping trip down the Thames (and when I include the dog in the decision making, it is not a stretch). The dynamics between the men is just what I would expect today of three young men on a camping excursion, particularly three men who are not overly adept at living an outdoor life. The humor is subtle and sometimes hilarious, and while there is little in the way of a plot, the book is sheer fun.

I can’t sit still and see another man slaving and working. I want to get up and superintend, and walk around with my hands in my pockets, and tell him what to do. It is my energetic nature. I can’t help it.

Seriously, I know this man! I might be related to him. Hell, I might be married to him.

The book is replete with this kind of sarcasm and anecdotes that show how little human nature has changed in 120 years. There is a maze experience that had me rolling, a struggle with a tin can of pineapple, and a fish tale that keeps growing. The boys fix a stew to which ”Montmorency, who had evinced great interest in the proceedings throughout, strolled away with an earnest and thoughtful air, reappearing, a few minutes afterwards, with a dead water-rat in his mouth, which he evidently wished to present as his contribution to the dinner…”

I’m not always good with comedy, but that got a laugh, even as my skin crawled thinking of the dead rat being put into the stew pot. Takes a certain kind of humor to really capture me. This did. Once again, I think I might have been born too late. I suspect I would have been at home in a previous century.

It takes three girls to tow always; two hold the rope, and the other one runs round and round, and giggles.

Maybe I would have been the giggler.

A curious tale that requires the reader to enjoy Old English vocabulary due to the time frame of the story. While I normally enjoy British humor such as Wodehouse or other contemporary authors, I struggled with this one. It's a quick read with lots of vintage illustrations which in my opinion could have been left out. Another one bites the dust!

It has a nice cover illustration,and it is pretty much the only thing I like about this book.

A chapter from this book was part of my college English course,otherwise I would probably not have been familiar with it.

Mercifully,it was a short chapter.Three friends
all hypochondriacs,take a boat trip along the Thames river.They talk about their illnesses.

Though this is a supposedly a humour classic,I didn't find it funny.Despite trying hard,I couldn't finish it.

Abandoned.

That I read this novel is due to serendipity. Wanting something on the light side to read while spending a few days at the beach, I decided to check out some Scandinavian crime fiction. (Why did I think this would constitute "light reading"?!). A search for a suitable novel led me to read an article about Scandinavian crime fiction in the The Guardian. Nothing jumped out at me, other than a link to another article in the same newspaper: crime writer Val McDermid's Top 10 Oxford Novels. Included in McDermid's list was a novel I'd never heard of before, Connie Willis' To Say Nothing of the Dog, which I immediately decided to read. However, A GR friend's review of that novel referred to this book, which I'd also never heard of before. (I have, it seems, been living under a rock, because if the GR reviews are anything to go by, it's a classic.) Reading this before reading To Say Nothing of the Dog seemed like a good idea. So here I am, less than a week later, having finished reading this book and started on the novel it inspired.

First published in 1889, the work is part novel, part travelogue and part memoir. Three friends - the narrator J, his friends Harris and George and Montmorency the dog, embark on a boat trip on the Thames. The narrative alternates laugh-out-loud silliness, bits of purple prose (which I think were meant to be tongue-in-cheek, but may just be examples of high Victorian descriptive language), information about the not always interesting localities through which the friends pass and discursive anecdotes of varying degrees of inherent interest. It's a short work and there's enough humour in it to make the duller bits easy to get through.

Reading this gave me plenty of laugh-out-loud moments on various forms of public transport. It's lots of fun.

Yet again I tried to struggle through this classic. I first tried years ago because it was Mr. Russell's (Cliff's father) favorite book in Have Space Suit—Will Travel. (Yes, I've gotten a lot of my suggested reading from fiction authors. Heinlein, Louis L'Amour, & Roger Zelazny were all very well read & their recommendations should be taken seriously.) I keep running into references from or about this book, so I really want to read it to put them in proper context & made myself read it.

According to the Wikipedia article, Esquire voted this the second funniest novel of all time in 2009. Incredible. My funny bone doesn't seem to be located in the same world as theirs. I don't find most British humor or old humor particularly funny & this is old British humor so it's just a slog. The narrator is pitiful as are his companions. The Uncle Podger story was just asinine. The world would be better off without the 3 men, but the dog, Montmorency, showed some promise. There wasn't nearly enough about him, though.

I could take about 15 minutes of this & then I zone out or find myself grinding my teeth, so I switched to a Matt Helm audio book. Even though I've read them all several times in paperback & listened to them once before, I find them far preferable.

I thought an audio book might make it bearable. Librivox has 3 versions available for free. I don't care for the narrator of the first version which is here:
https://librivox.org/three-men-in-a-b...
I'm listening to the second version which has multiple readers, some female. I thought mixing up the voices might help. You can find it here:
https://librivox.org/three-men-in-a-b...
The third version is read by Nick Bulka who is pretty good. You can find it here:
https://librivox.org/three-men-in-a-b...

So, I finally managed to get through it & did find quite a few references that other authors have used, but my masochistic tendencies have been used up. It wasn't worth it.

I know i don't take to plotless books with lackluster characters but Since this is a comedy i decided to give it a go. Somewhere between pointless frivolity and introspective human incite. classified as a comedic travelogue. man, Victorians loved travelogues!

As i said not much of a plot, In fact the title will suffice to tell you all you need to know so i'll keep this synopsis brief. Three men George, Harris and J. our narrator travel down the Thames river with J's dog Montmorency. Telling you what they saw and experienced with many amusing anecdotes along the way!

personal taste in Comedy can be very different. i found three men in a boat amusing sometimes and over-the-top slapstickish at others. kind of like watching Charlie Chaplin you think so this really made them LOL back in the day. More so then the humor i liked the historical tidbits interspersed throughout. since this is a travelogue. I can imagine how a knowledge of the area would improve your enjoyment. This seemed like a good snapshot of Victorian life!

I enjoyed this the more i listened to it. Narration you choose is important i did the one read by Frederick Davidson free on audible+ and was greatly disappointed. May spring for another version on audible later there're several to choose from! can see this being like Monty Python's the holy grail where at first i was not that impressed. Only to find myself quoting it and having watched it many more times years later!

E adesso ho bisogno di ridere!
(Scrivevo qualche giorno fa)
--------------------------------

***1/2
Ho riso, ma non quanto avevo sperato: avrei dovuto aspettarmelo da un inglese, difficilmente si rischia di slogarsi la mandibola.
Ho anche sbadigliato, a volte, soprattutto quando il nostro J. diventa un po' troppo storico-bucolico: sono troppi i riferimenti all'Inghilterra dei tempi che furono e ad una Storia che non conosco come le mie tasche. (per non parlare della navigazione sul Tamigi, delle alzaie e dei canapi: ne so quanto del Mib del Nasdaq e del Dow Jones!)
Però mi è piaciuto moltissimo il tono del racconto, questo aplomb, tipicamente inglese, con il quale ironizza sui comportamenti dei tre uomini in barca (per non parlare del cane, che è veramente una lenza :-)) e contemporaneamente sugli usi e i costumi dei suoi connazionali.
Ecco, cercare di leggerlo con la stessa intonazione di un inglese che parla un italiano molto distinto, se come me non potete leggerlo in originale, ma irrimediabilmente snob (mi immagino un David Niven d'annata!), è sicuramente un'arma in più per riuscire ad apprezzarne maggiormente l'ironia sottile che lo contraddistingue.
Ma forse il maggior difetto di questo romanzo, anche se più che altro penso possa definirsi un'insieme di sketch, è l'incostanza: il tono non è mai omogeneo, si passa da capitoli come ho detto noiosi, a capitoli molto divertenti, ad altri dove il sorriso è tirato tirato.
L'introduzione dell'autore e l'episodio in cui racconta le operazioni familiari necessarie ad appendere un quadro - purtroppo già in uno dei primissimi capitoli - sono tra le parti migliori.