It is hard to know what to say about Ivanhoe. It is part Robin Hood style adventure, part history and full of thematic richness. I was surprised that Ivanhoe himself figures into this tale somewhat sporadically. There are many characters who receive more in depth development, and the Jewess Rebecca is more fully developed than the heroine, Rowena.

The attitudes toward Jews in the novel make one uncomfortable in the same way that you feel when reading The Merchant of Venice. It is obvious that Scott himself does not sanction this view of Jews, but even the characters who admire and are helped by Rebecca make comments regarding being defiled by her presence or touch. I constantly had to attempt to put myself into the time in question and remind myself that this is history and to have written it any other way would have been false.

It is easy to see why Sir Walter Scott was a popular writer in his time and has survived. The story is fun, in the same way tales of King Arthur and his Knights are. The descriptions of the lists and tournaments are vivid portrayals. There are plot surprises, there is laughter, particularly in the forms of a jester and a Thane, and there is familiarity in the characters that we have seen time and again from this era, Richard the Lion-Hearted, Robin Hood and his Merry Men, and the evil King John.

I really, really loved this book when I read it several years ago! I loved how this story was also connected to the story of Robin Hood. The witch was my favorite character besides Ivanhoe and so was one of the antiheroes. I forget what their name was. I remember that shortly after reading this novel, I went onto reading several other Walter Scott novels including: Rob Roy and Waverly. I read more of his books but I forget what they were because I read them so long ago.

In Ivanhoe, Scott skillfully undermines the alienating characteristics of the medieval gothic while taking advantage of its familiarity to and popularity with nineteenth-century audiences. Although containing elements reminiscent of the earlier gothic, such as the corruption and intrigue of religious orders, the madness of Ulrica and the burning alive of Front-de-Beouf in his castle, it also pokes fun at some of the wilder elements of this genre: the resurrected phantom of Athelstane, for instance, turns out to be quite alive and in search of a decent meal. Scott is clear in his rejection of supernatural devices, and rather than the scenes of emotional breakdown and overwhelming passion common in earlier gothics, his characters by and large behave with the rationality and self-control that would have been regarded as admirable by the author’s contemporaries. Throughout the story, Scott attempts to have his characters behave as modernly as they could without ahistoricism. By avoiding the distasteful areas of superstition, madness, and popery, Scott made it possible for nineteenth-century readers to sympathize more fully with the actors and to imagine themselves in the characters’ places without uneasiness or mental strain.

Ivanhoe was presented, in the overtly fictional voice of the translator Templeton, as a medieval account rendered into modern language. Historical anachronisms are thus not authorial errors but deliberate attempts to make the text more accessible to contemporary readers. Scott constructed a debate between Templeton and the likewise-fictional antiquary, Dr Dryasdust, who accuses the translator of “polluting the well of history with modern inventions.” Scott replies, in the person of Templeton: “I may have confused the manners of two or three centuries… It is my comfort, that errors of this kind escape the general class of readers, and that I may share in the ill-deserved applause of those architects who, in their modern Gothic, do not hesitate to introduce, without rule or method, ornaments proper to different styles and to different periods of art.” Scott this warns his audience that Ivanhoe should not be read as an attempt to recreate, nor to modernize as Leland did (and as Scott had done when he wrote in Middle English a Continuation of the poem Sir Tristem, which was intended to be a believable imitation of the medieval text), a medieval romance. Although Scott was widely read in medieval romances and often alluded to them, he did not model Ivanhoe on a particular medieval tale and makes no attempt to imitate an authentic medieval style. Neither his language, his plotting, nor his ideology are, or were intended to be, genuinely medieval.

The plot of Ivanhoe and other of Scott’s works likewise reveals less nostalgia than is often assumed. It is commonplace to state, as Alice Chandler does in her seminal work A Dream of Order: The Medieval Ideal in Nineteenth-Century English Literature, that Scott’s medievalism “brought to an increasingly urbanized, industrialized, and atomistic society, the vision of a more stable and harmonious social order, substituting the paternal benevolence of manor and guild for the harshness of city and factory and offering the clear air and open fields of the medieval past in place of the blackening skies of England.” While this was indeed a part of the appeal of Scott’s tales, it oversimplifies Scott’s complex attitudes toward the Middle Ages and ignores the conclusion with which several of his novels end.
Scott was far from giving unreserved approval to the medieval past. Even in regards to his most sympathetic characters he offers points of criticism. In describing the heroic Richard, for example, he remarked on the “wild spirit of chivalry” which urged the king to risk unreasonable dangers. “In the lion-hearted king, the brilliant, but useless, character of a knight of romance was in a great measure realized and revived… his feats of chivalry furnishing themes for bards and minstrels, but affording none of those solid benefits to his country on which history loves to pause, and hold up as an example to posterity.” Scott goes so far as to imply that the sullen fidelity of the serf Gurth is more admirable than the reckless courage and self-pleasing and licentious chivalry of the royal Richard; freedom and honor rest for Scott on responsibility and loyalty to the social covenant, not on personal glory.

Whereas in medieval tales the focus is almost always on individual heroism expressed through valor and strength of arms, these qualities play a large but ultimately superficial role in Ivanhoe. In the final anticlimactic duel at Rebecca’s trial, for example, Ivanhoe does not defeat the tempestuous villain by skill; in fact, the other characters all agree that Bois-Guilbert would certainly have won the contest were he not so conflicted in his feelings for Rebecca that he collapses on the field without being struck by his opponent. Beneath the exciting trappings of jousts, abductions, and political intrigues, the central motivating tension of Ivanhoe rests on the disruption of familial relationships and the struggle to restore those relationships to their proper order. Even the political struggle between King Richard and Prince John is a fraternal conflict; and Richard recognizes that his royal duties include reconciling Ivanhoe with his father. This reconciliation is, in fact, his most important success: insofar as Scott suggests that Richard is a good king, it is because he unites England in loyalty to his person as he unites the disrupted families he encounters on his adventures.

The emphasis on familial order gives a different role to women than would be found in a genuinely medieval tale. In medieval chivalric romances concerning male competition the female figures occur secondarily, as lesser prizes to be won in addition to glory or honor. The nineteenth-century ideal of domestic harmony, and its association with political order, gave women a more important role than did medieval political ideology. In the jousts and duels of Ivanhoe, Rowena is the primary object of the struggle between the main character and his opponent. Rowena’s genealogical importance to legitimate Saxon claims of rule is emphasized by Cedric, but in the end she encourages Saxon assimilation rather than independence by marrying Ivanhoe, who has cast his lot with Richard. Her rejection of Athelstane signals the end of Cedric’s plan for renewed Saxon dominance, a plan which Scott marks as backward-looking and unrealistic, if understandable.

If Scott in fact advocates a medieval revival, it is not of the feudal system or of Anglo-Saxonism, but of what he understood as medieval virtues: self-sacrifice, emotion rather than sentimentality, loyalty not only to one’s leaders but also to one’s followers. These attributes were based on an integrated system of personal relationships: between members of a clan or family, between lords and vassals or serfs, between subjects and ruler. Scott depicts these relationships as essentially personal and familial, rather than abstract and national or bureaucratic, which they were rapidly becoming in his own lifetime.

That was...a painful reading experience.

I can't believe I really finished this. The impetus was Febregency 2022, which is a new readathon hosted by some of my favorite Booktubers. I felt strangely compelled to pick this up while at the same time feeling very intimidated. I've never been one for knights and chivalry and Robin Hood and the Middle Ages, etc. I'm chuckling as I write that. It sounds odd to say I didn't care much about chivalry or such a well known character as Robin Hood, but there it is. Perhaps it says something about my education or about America's own history or the milieu in which I was raised.

My reading has tended much more towards the modern era with Jane Austen being my earliest literary love after a childhood love of books which tended to be filled with things like The Boxcar Children, The Babysitters' Club, and a sprinkling of classics like Narnia, Mrs. Piggle-Wiggle, Pippi Longstocking, The Borrowers, etc. Even as my reading has evolved in the 15 years of my adult life, I've tended towards the modern and have settled firmly into a deep and profound love of the British novel post 1840, but most especially in the years around the world wars when authors were grappling with intense suffering and social/class change. I'm sure it would pain some people to read that 'Plantagenet' first reminds of Trollope's Plantagenet Palliser and not the Kings of England bearing that name.

All that to say, dipping a toe in the world of Sir Walter Scott was a new venture for me, and I'm happy to say one that paid off. I enjoyed the novel so much more than I thought I would and was truly fascinated to read about England a generation or two after the Norman Conquest. I was constantly on Wikipedia looking up places and names and customs: Robin Hood, Friar Tuck, Richard the Lionheart, Prince John, tournaments, York, Jews in the Middle Ages, Normans, Saxons, even the history of the development of the English language. This book is an education in itself for a novice like me. I had never thought of what the Norman conquest was actually like for those living in England who did not want to be conquered.

While there were parts of the book that felt long to me, especially in the middle, I found the first 300 pages and the last 100 to be incredibly exciting stuff. Several times my mouth was open in surprise and shock. Sir Walter Scott knows how to spin a good tale and how to evoke a period of history with remarkable liveliness. Scott's main characters are vivid and took shape in my mind as whole persons. I enjoyed knowing nothing about the plot because the shocking events really were just that. A big part of the plot is that certain characters' true selves are concealed and it was my favorite part of the novel. It added so much to the tension and excitement of the plot. My other favorite part of the novel is the character Rebecca who is a Jew. She is remarkable: brave, skilled, devout, wise, loyal. Scott seems to have a great affection for her because she's much more of an active character than Rowena. Oh, and I love the jester Wamba and his wise foolishness.

I'm not sure if this is a criticism or not, but Ivanhoe spends most of his time off the page, especially after the initial exciting event. It did feel odd to me, though I can see why Scott may have done that to make his few appearances all the more climactic.

All in all, a cracking good read, and I feel like it's opened up a new era of English history to me. Kudos Sir Walter!

This. Was. Amazing.

I can't tell you how much I enjoyed this book. Wamba is hysterical, Rebecca a true heroine, the writing style magnificent, and all the other characters admirable or detestable by turns. I really love this book. :)

This book, for me, is like the 19th century version of a Marvel movie—simple, exciting, fun, and ultimately forgettable. Though the descriptions are long-winded, a a great chunk of the book is immensely and effortlessly enjoyable. There is very little in the way of character development, and not much in the way of social commentary or philosophic reflection, either. Scott’s portrayal of his Jewish characters—at times sympathetic, and yet employing the crassest Anti-Semitic stereotypes—will likely make the modern reader squirm (they can hardly go a sentence without exclaiming “Great God of Abraham!”). Other than that, however, there is very little to trouble the conscience or even tickle the brain in this thrilling tale of high chivalry. Just mount your steed, grasp your spear, and charge.

Dopo aver letto Rob Roy in inglese, disperavo di riuscire a farmi andare giù un altro libro di Walter Scott, ma un amico di GR mi ha convinto a leggere questo, stavolta in italiano perché il linguaggio di Scott è difficile pure per me. E per fortuna che gli ho dato retta, è un libro bellissimo!

Certo, non è esente da passaggi lenti (è pur sempre un libro dell'Ottocento), ma in realtà anche quelli sono bellissimi, per esempio quando descrive minuziosamente i vari personaggi o il castello di Coningsburgh... meraviglia! Sembra di averli davanti. E nonostante questi brani più lenti, è un libro avvincente e pieno di azione. Vogliamo parlare del torneo di Ashby o della liberazione di Rebecca?

Qualche recensore ha criticato l'antisemitismo, che è obiettivamente estremo. Ecco, questi recensori fanno due errori: il primo è che non riescono a inserire il libro nel contesto in cui è stato scritto, il secondo è che non riescono a capire che l'antisemitismo non è di Scott, ma del periodo in cui il romanzo è ambientato. Certo, non è mica facile leggere certe espressioni d'odio, ma bisogna contestualizzare sempre e non mi sembra difficile.

Insomma, questo romanzo mi ha incantata come I tre moschettieri! Gli do "solo" 4 stelline e mezzo arrotondate a 5 perché non entra nell'Olimpo dei miei libri preferiti e io sono tirchia :D

This is an incredibly difficult novel to review. It was published in 1819, so rating it in the context of the modern books that I usually read is incredibly unfair. But I'll start with this, just in case you're wondering what to expect: I listened to the audiobook. About halfway through, I realized I had no idea what was going on and had to read the spark notes to catch myself up (maybe I'm just an idiot). It may be a romantic adventure novel, but it's not like a modern novel, so if that's what you're expecting, you'll be disappointed.

To be honest, if this very book had been sent to agents or editors today, I guarantee it would've been rejected. It's wordy, the characters are extremely superficial, the plot is fairly random, and the narrator 'breaks the fourth wall' on a regular basis. If it had been published this year, I likely would've given it 1 star. But it was written in a completely different context than books today are. So I had to push aside my expectations for the elements that foster my engagement and emotional attachment and try to appreciate the book for what it is and where it came from.

In the end, I had a very positive reading experience with this book. Now, I'm no literary expert, so my impressions may be totally off base. But from a lay reader's point of view, I think this book must've been quite progressive for its time - and I find myself a huge fan of Sir Walter Scott now. It was written by a man and published in 1819, but it is very pro-women and pro-Jew. Scott fights stereotypes and divisiveness, and he makes the reader feel empathy for his Jewish and female characters. And his female characters are strong. They are brave, confident, and articulate. One is even elderly - and she's still given a boss moment.

Ivanhoe may be the title character, but let's be real. Rebecca ("the Jewess") is the real star of this book, and her plight is still relevant today. Rebecca has power - she is beautiful, wealthy, intelligent, and has great medical skills. And when she spurns one man's inappropriate advances, he turns the situation around and frames himself as the victim. This inappropriate treatment of women - the measures taken to protect predators and keep women powerless - has happened throughout history, and things like it still happen today. And our boy Walter had this figured out back in 1819 and illustrated it for the world in this book.

In my opinion, one of the best parts of the novel is the conversation that occurs between Rowena and Rebecca at that end that perfectly illustrates the novel's main theme. The women talk about the power that they have, demolish stereotypes, and condemn division between people. And yes, this key conversation happens between TWO WOMEN (and there our boy Walter goes, passing the Bechdel test well over a century before it even existed). Maybe I'm clueless about literature and history (that's definitely true), but I can't get over the fact that a man in 1819 made female characters the stars of his adventure novel when so many male authors today reduce their female characters to a pretty face and a pair of boobs.

Overall - I'm glad I read this book, but I don't necessarily recommend it to everyone. You've got to be in the mood for an adventure novel that's less accessible, less engaging, and less emotional than most modern novels. Really, you've got to be in the mood to read an adventure novel while considering the historical context that it was published in.

Yes, I know I just listened to this book. But I figure if Harriet Beecher Stowe could read Ivanhoe seven times in one month, then I can reread it right away. Am enjoying it immensely - again!

=========

I'm reading this for my book club (the adult equivalent of a high school reading assignment when it is for a book you've managed to avoid for years).

Consequently I listened to B.J. Harrison's excellent narration to help me get into the book. And it worked. I initially enjoyed it it on the level of adventure novel, a la Treasure Island (the adventure novel I listened to just before this).

I was surprised at the inventive plot twists, the laugh-out-loud humor, and most of all at Rebecca. Here is someone who is female, from a despised group, and who is only valued by most for her beauty. Yet, she is articulate, quick witted, and will not allow herself to be used as a pawn or allow others to get away with facile explanations for their own evil actions. What a role model!

Overall, Ivanhoe was a reminder not to avoid a classic just because the first chapter seems a little difficult or because one thinks the plot is hackneyed. Highly recommended.

Audible.com 18 hours 59 min. Narrated by Simon Prebble

I award 4.5 stars to the book by Walter Scott and 5 stars to Simon Prebble for his masterful performance which brought the book to life for me. My only previous knowledge of Ivanhoe was the classic movie made in 1953 starring Robert Taylor as the knight and Elizabeth Taylor as Rebecca. To say the movie was based on the book is an overstatement.
In 73 years I have never desired to read the book because I thought it would be too ponderous. When I read the historical fiction books about King Richard by Sharon Kay Penman Lionheart and The King's ransom, I decided I wanted to finish Richard's story with a book written by an English writer who lived 200 years closer to Richard to get another perspective.

This was the right time for me to listen to Ivanhoe. Both of Penman's books about Richard were captivating but filled with so much depressing hardship and death. Scott's novel is lightweight in comparison. I loved that his first chapter gives his readers background information on the changes in the English language due to Normans conquering the Saxons. Even 200 years ago our laguage was misunderstood. Having grown up reading the King James translation of the Bible, I had no difficulty understanding the grammar patterns. Simon Prebble read this lyrical prose as if were the culmination of a lifetime of practice. So much for being "ponderous."

The characters of Ivanhoe brought such delight!
The Black Night, or Richard the Lionheart. Both Penman and Scott viewed Richard through the same lens. They showed his quick wit, love of a good story or ballad, his wreckless courage, his fidelity to the knights who served under him, and his ability to overlook the betrayal by his brother John but his relentless wrath that fell upon countrymen who were a part of the same acts of betrayal.
The characters fall into groups including the Saxons, the Jews, Robinhood and the men of Sherwood Forest, the Normans following traitorous John, the Templars, and the obligatory priests. My personal favorite was Wamba, Cedric the Saxon's jester or fool. Wamba is quick-witted not half-witted. He is clever, courageous and truly devoted to his master and exchanges places with Cedric when it seems that life is in jeopardy. Wamba plays a key role through most of the book and was one the more memorable characters evoking smiles, chuckles and laughs. And then there were the Jews. Throughout history they have been hated, slandered, abused and killed. Scott made their story central to the plot. Issac of York is the elderly "penniless" merchant who is the sterotype of a Jewish money-loving money lender always alert to lend if a profit can be made. He doesn't care if you're Saxon or Norman and is willing to lend to both sides. Rebecca is Issac's beautiful daughter who has studied healing and has powerful herbs and ointments that she uses freely and generosly to help the sick and injured.
What about Ivanhoe? He is Cedric's disinherited son who returns home from Richard's Crusade at beginning of the story hoping to regain good standing with his father. Cedric spurns him. So Ivanhoe whose chief aim is to be the picture of chivalry determines to win favor with beautiful Rowena and to get revenge on a Templars knight by winning a joust. He succeeded only to be seriously injured. Rebecca came to his aid, saves his life and sadly falls in love with him. Ivanhoe's opinion of Jews is no higher than that of others. While Ivanhoe is healing, the story goes on without him! At the climax, Ivanhoe returns to health and rides in on old, nearly dead horse just in time to save Rebecca from being burned at the stake as a witch. Then through the stroke of Scott's pen and a big surprise ending, Rowena is free to marry Ivanhoe.
I am so glad this novel is the conclusion to my reading about this period. It left me smiling!

Audible.com 17 hours 42 min. Narrated by David McCallion

I enjoyed Ivanhoe so much that I listened to it again read by a different narrator. Of course this time there were no surprises, but the story still worked. Since Audible is now owned by Amazon, why can't the audio books be included in Goodreads? I also listened to Black Gold by Teresa Edwards, both the youngest and oldest member of US women's Olympic basketball team. Another short book (4 hours) I can't include.

Sempre suggestiva l'ambientazione medioevale inglese, si ritrova in questo romanzo uno tra i personaggi più sfruttati dal cinema, Robin Hood...la verbosità di Walter Scott tende ad annacquare l'azione, ma rimane comunque una lettura avvincente ed ha aperto la strada al romanzo storico.