Madame Bovary ~ English ~ 4/03 Export

Good morning, Joan and Robby. I am reading this book online; haven't found the French edition yet online, but will try for the sake of comparison.

I have never thought of this book as a romance. Rather, it seems like a character study to me, a perfect book for a psychologist.

Poor Charles. Flaubert describes a gangly country boy, out of place in his class. How embarrassing for this shy fellow to be singled out because of his ovoid-shaped hat and awkwardness. Ridiculus sum. I am ridiculous. How the boy must have felt to have to write this several times -- enough to put the idea in his head, certainly.

Flaubert travels very swiftly in this chapter with fine descriptions of Charles and his father and mother. He was the son of a braggart and a bully and a woman who is depicted as wine that has been left uncorked and has turned into vinegar. What lovely descriptions! What a magnificent way to start a book!

The mother spoiled Charles while his father did everything he could to toughen him up and make his son an image of himself. That included the cynical jeer.

Charles is manipulated from the beginning, and it's no wonder he sought relief and release at the cabaret with dominos. His life is directed by his parents even to the point of their choosing his field, the place in which to practice it, and a wife for him. Madame Dubuc is suitable enough with a tidy income, but older than Charles and something of a shrew.

What kind of life is this for this young man whom Flaubert doesn't really allow the reader to know? What are his thoughts? What are his feelings? This is how I'm left at the end of the first chapter. Now to read on and see if I can find out.

Mal

Just as I look for facial expressions or body behavior as well as the spoken word in the patients I see, so I examine carefully such behaviors as described by Flaubert. I am sure that Flaubert had a reason for describing such behavior.

For example, "the new boy had kept...in the corner behind the door." As the twig is bent, so grows the tree. This may tell us something of Charles when he reaches manhood. He was "horribly nervous" -- more of the same.

Aside from the clothes he wore, I am not particularly optimistic about how strong a character he will have as a man.

Robby

At this point Charles has almost no identity as a real person in his own right. He doesn't rebel; he doesn't assert himself. There's no true joy in his life. Offhand I'd say he's more than ripe for the neurotic kind of butterfly Emma appears to be.

Mal

Here we are in a tandem discussion, I think this is going to be so much fun.

Mal you have the book online in the French discussion.

Eloïse

Thank you very much, Eloise.

Mal

OK this is great, gorgeous interesting heading, Joan, I have spent much time on those links already, and great focus questions!

I see we're to DISCUSS Part I first, great!

I'm one of those a bit behind, I wish I could have read the entire book first, but have been drowning in our wonderful Caesar (over today) and our new hot fun game Last Man Standing but I'm sure I can finish Part I by tomorrow and will be thinking on the questions as I read.

Am very interested in all the beginning comments here and hello GEORGE, a special greeting to you, one of our newest members in the Books, have heard so much about you, am looking forward to hearing what you have to say here, what fun!!

Eloise I already have a phrase I need translated, is it (I know Joan G can do it but in respect for our new collaboration initiative I want to try to bridge both discussions), , is it OK to...do you want people to post in ENGLISH in your French discussion or to post here and you will pick it up? Not sure on that one!

Back tomorrow ready with Part I! Wonderful start, Joan!

ginny

Like Robby I have not been a fan of romance novels. I am finding the reading very slow going which means that my mind is wandering. The detailed portraits of architecture, landscape, and country living are superb but I am having difficulty imagining the various scenes; I think it that it was important for Flaubert to get across this sense of imagery.

Was it also important for Flaubert to be boring? I ask this seriously. After all our heroine is bored to tears.

I am not quite sure where this all takes place and I could not find the places on the map above.

I just read the previous posts and am looking forward to this discussion as I can see that the group will help me to understand the book better. I confess that I enjoy contemporary novels and history (biography) far more than the classics of literature.

In reading the novel, I am being thrust back in time to an era that I almost cannot imagine. That is a difficulty that I will have to deal with, and with your collective help, I may learn to appreciate this kind of literature.

http://members.tripod.com/~ShelLizzy/

I did a Google search of Madam Bovary and found the site shown above. As I started to read the material, I started to laugh. I make no endorsement of this site and have not read enough to really comment on it - but some of you might find it interesting in a quirky sort of way.

Hello, George. I read your posts in the Abraham discussion and liked your insight and reasonablenss. Thanks for the link.

What is the point of view of this novel? I believe it is the author's. Chapter 1: "We were in the prep.-room when the head came in . . ."

This novel is written about a Romantic time in history. Novels, poetry and art were quite lavish during that time. Perhaps this accounts for the long, almost poetic descriptions of the landscape and other things. I can easily picture these scenes. Maybe it is because I am an artist who loves art. The descriptions remind me of paintings I've seen in the Frick Museum in New York. However, despite this era of romanticism I see a sense of isolation in both Charles and Emma. Flaubert wrote about hard reality and difficult relationships in a romantic way.

While at the college in Rouen, Charles becomes "mad about" Beranger. Jean Pierre Beranger was a romantic poet in the 1800's, so I suspect that this is the Beranger to whom Flaubert refers. I'll try to come back and post one of Jean Pierre Beranger's poems.

Mal

Le Vieux Vagabond by Jean Pierre Beranger

A not very good Google translation of the above poem

I think the novel that Flaubert presents us with is not a "Romance Novel" but rather an attack on the Romance Novel of the day. In order to make his point, the author must develop characters that will be interestinng but flawed in a way that will underscore the problem that he sees.
"Was it also important for Flaubert to be boring?" Yes I think this is a way to show life as it really is. Someone once said "Life consists of hours of boredom interspersed with moments of excitement". I think the author is trying to impart that feeling so we can more readily understand his characters.

Eloïse - I have put the schedule for the French Discussion into the header there..

Theron

Good Morning Everyone!

How wonderful to see you all here ready to discuss this great novel. There are so many things we can discuss about this story, these characters , and the authors methods used to tell us this story.

Robby, I am glad you are here with your psychologist view. The book really is a psychological study. I am sure that you will get into looking at other aspects as we move along.

We have the same schedule as the French discussion. I think we will stay together very well.

Malryn, happy to see you in this discussion. With your knowledge and expertise in literature I am sure that you will have much to contribute.

I agree that this is not a romance but rather an attack on the romance novel of the time. I believe that everyone will realise as they read further that Flaubert is pointing out the errors of the Romantics by describing a situation realistically. Thanks for the link to the beautiful poem.

Eloise, I agree that this an exciting venture. I am really looking forward to it.

Ginny, I am sure you will be able to keep up with us as you read along. I look forward to your contributions to the discussion. Thanks for your encouragment and kind words about the heading.

George, how great to have you here in this discussion. I understand how you might be feel since you are not used to reading novels of this period. It certainly is different from a contemporary novel.

As for the setting of this book, it is beautiful and Flaubert describes it very well. I will try to find a map that is a little more detailed for you. However the small towns are creations of the author. They do not exist. There are little towns just like those in the novels but not the same names. When I put up the map I was just thinking about Rouen and Paris because Emma thinks and dreams about those two places so much. The area is Normandy. As far as I can tell it is between Beauvais and Rouen. Flaubert certainly does not exaggerate in his beautiful descriptions of it. As I read the book I recalled drives through the area and relived the beauty.

Thanks for the link you put in in this discussion. I see that it has links to many places that I looked at while getting the links in the heading.

I hope that by the time you have finished this book you will have developed an appreciation for classical literature.

Joan

The online version of this book which I'm reading is not divided into parts. Would someone please tell me where Part One ends?

I don't know what the scholars say, but to me it seems as if this book is an attack on romanticism and what it can do to people rather than an attack on the romantic novel.

I think Chapter 6 is a masterpiece of writing. In it Flaubert tells of Emma's life in the convent, which to her is a most romantic place. The rituals of the Catholic religion, paintings and religious texts she reads put her in a magical, heavenly place that does not exist in the outside real world. Add to that the poetry and other reading she does, and you have a girl who lives in a fantasy never-never land within the safe confines of the convent walls.

The magic is gone when she leaves the convent and returns home to her father's farm, and she can only retrieve part of it through the books she reads. Emma wants passion in all the meanings of the word, translates that to men, who surely must appear to be more free than she is. Marriage to Charles brings her the "same old stuff". She is intellectually, spiritually and physically unsatisfied and starved.

Going back for a minute to Robby's observing of behavior through Flaubert's words, I found a great deal of sensual reference when it came to Emma, especially in descriptions of her mouth and eyes. At times her eyes reveal her focusing on Charles when he is with her; then through description of her eyes she drifts away into some land of her own, escaping once again into unreality. I have the feeling that her interest would be piqued only by what she thinks exists in the convent or a place where there is an abundance of riches and displays of wealth -- fairyland.

I think I am monopolizing this discussion, so will try to refrain from posting for a while. There are numerous references to authors in these first six chapters. Perhaps later I'll come in and post some links.

Mal

Thanks Theron.

Ginny, while we were preparing for this, we agreed that for those who wanted to read in French, but could NOT write it could post in English in the French discussion. This is to encourage those who want to keep up and practice their French while discussing a book. No I don't intend to transfer posts from here to the French discussion. If someone wants an explanation about anything, they can write in English in the French discussion.

But in this English discussion only English can be used. Is that right Joan?

Eloïse

It seems clear to me from the opening chapter that "Charbovari" is going to be a "lump". Flaubert does little to fill out his character other than to give him the "idler's bench" and "ridiculus sum".

Many of the critics of the period refer to Flaubert as a "realist" however, he thinks of himself in his letters as "an old romantique enragé".

Some of you people are way ahead of me. You are speaking of someone called "Emma." I am still with Charles who is a young boy in a school. Neither he nor I ever heard of anyone named Emma so I can't comment on her.

Robby

I am up to Page 27 I have had to put the book down as my eyes are sore. My copy is really tiny with very small writing and I have mislaid my glasses. Oops no I haven't, as I type this I spy them on my PC desk.

Gosh what a boring lot of characters! The men except I think for the Farmer are a pathetic pair. Imagine being married to Charles' Father? What a wastrel, womaniser and total boor.No wonder his mother became neurotic. As for Charles I don't think he had too much intelligence but a dogged sort of patience with his book learning. I should not have liked him to be my doctor even in those days! His patients seemed to like him however which says more for his bedside manner than his skill as a doctor. So far he seems to have a more compassionate nature than his father.

Carolyn

The characters may be pathetic, or wastrel, or neurotic but I most certainly don't see them as boring! In fact, from my point of view a neurotic person is anything but boring. I may not like him/her but I do not see a neurotic person as dull.

As I am still at the start of the book, I am not able to comment on Charles as a man or anything in his adult life.

Robby

Sorry Robby but so far up to page 27 I find them boring.

Carolyn

May I join in, briefly.

It is interesting, or dare I say significant, that Flaubert begins this tale not with the title character but rather with Charles whom the reader sees growing up, and that we are introduced to Mme. Bovary senior, the mother, then Mme. Bovary, the first wife, before meeting Emma.

All the protagonists are fine character studies, and I must say I still have a soft spot for poor Charles just as I did when I read the book for the first time in my "salad" days first in German and then in English in what seems another lifetime.

It will be a double treat to post in both this and the French discussion. Thank you.

Joan Grimes ~ the photo in the heading you provided for this discussion is just lovely.

I have the book sitting here on my coffee table along with another one to read as soon as I finish the one I'm currently reading. However, I will follow along in the discussion. I always find it interesting to read other people's points of view.
Emma

Traude:--I agree with your word "significant." I see Flaubert as a student of human nature (much as Shakespeare was) and I find it hard to believe that any of his sentences were just words thrown together. Practically every one of his sentences had a meaning that might be hidden unless we unearth it.
For example, a sentence near the beginning --
"At night, in the school room, he took his cuff-protectors out of his desk, put his belongings in order, and ruled up his paper with meticulous exactitude." Farm boy notwithstanding, here was a boy (perhaps due to his upbringing) who was meticulous and exacting and who with these traits was not only finding himself being aimed toward being a physician or an engineer but who had traits that might clash later on with a woman in his life. The better we understand the boy, the better we understand the man -- long before we meet any woman.
Again -- "The brat was doted upon as if he had been a prince....His mother always kept him tied up to her apron-strings. She cut out scraps for him, told him stories, and made up countless tales full of wistful gaiety and playful prattle. She sought solace for the loneliness of her life by lavishing on her child all her own shattered and forsaken ambitions." With an upbringing like this, what kind of a husband might he end up being?
Many of you have read this book. I have never read it but I would guess that whatever problems lay ahead in his marriage, they are a result of his traits as well as his wife's traits. I prefer not to zoom on ahead and to concentrate on his future wife's traits before getting to know him.

Robby

Christian Gauss, the author of the intro of my 1930(!) French edition, says that in order to overcome his very romantic nature, Flaubert tries to keep himself out of the story and to "make the reader see rather than feel the incidents recorded. … Through analysis of these outward aspects of a situation, he seeks to penetrate to the inner psycholoogy of his characters."

I have only gotten through Ch. II, Part I, but I really feel that I understand CB and "where he is coming from," lout or not.

Robby, you were posting when I was, and I totally agree. I love the background we are given on CB.

My, this is very, very interesting. I will have to re-read both copies carefully. Robby, thank you for the analysis, I love it. And I agree, Flaubert had to portray the boy, then the young man and all his weakness and failures before he could introduce such a character as Emma. And I agree, I wouldn't have liked to be sick in his village, but you must remember that those little French towns were actually lucky to have any doctor in those days. And that the doctor, the pharmacist, the "notaire", the priest and the mayor were the most important personalities in any small town, the local bourgeois, if you will. That setup still existed not very long ago, and might still exist in many places, in spite of TV and the internet. Mme B. is not only a study in characters, but a study of their society, perhaps slightly exaggerated, perhaps not. There are quite a few "characters" in those little towns everywhere!

Using the technique of foreshadowing Flaubert identifies "la victime" almost from page one. Charles, the future victim, the cuckold, in this tale lingers in corners and behind doors when, as a child, he is the center of attention. Flaubert shows Charles to us being mildly victimized by his fellows. He doesn't show us Charles, the sports hero. He shows us Charles the humiliated. Through no fault of his own, a dropped cap, he is roasted by students and teacher. He is punished, not for a transgression but for being there.

What does all this foreshadow? It foreshadows Charles' adult role in the novel. I suppose we could remember this early scene and look back from the last chapter and say it was all foretold. We had a warning of what was to come. When discussing the last chapter this observation would be appropriate but we might miss it entirely if we don't recognize it in chapter one, page one. That's one of the benefits of having read the novel previously.

Joan, I wish to compliment you on the heading for the discussion. The photo reminds me of Givenchy. Perhaps, it is a view of Monet's garden.

Justin- The photo in the heading is the "Water Lillies" pond in Monet's Garden and it was taken by Joan when we were there in May of 2002. The "small print", top and bottom, identifies it.

Theron

The Romantic period of the nineteenth century was coming to an end at the time of this writing by Flaubert. MB, written about 1850, was among the first literary expressions of realism. George Sand who was so friendly with Flaubert, late in life, was still producing in the romantic style when MB appeared. One of Flaubert's works "Salambo" was a romantic tale of sublime scenes- a truly romantic characteristic. Yet there were elements in it of realism. So Flaubert is not pure. Like all innovators he is a mix of realism and romanticism. The full expression of realism does not come to French literature until Zola's social expose, "Germinal", appears.

Merci, Theron. I see the heading now. Giverny has something for every season. You were fortunate to be there when the garden was so beautiful. Joan's photo is outstanding.

Folks in this discussion may not have confidence in Charles as a doctor, but we know he was a concientious student, so his lack of knowledge is characteristic of the period.

Robby, how much of what we see of Charles in these early pages is the result of his parents behavior? Pop was quite a dandy. He made his spurs jingle for the ladies. The boy Charles was raised in the Spartan mode but coddled with sweetmeats by his maman. That combination and the result demands professional consultation.

I'm really struck in reading this book, by so many things, primarily the difference in the two characters, Charles and Emma, their outlooks on life, it's fascinating.

It's hard to read, dense prose, beautifully lyrically written, tiny print in my book but so worth it, it's so different and strange, it's mesmerizing.

And yes, Robby I can definitely see where your skills as psychologist will come in great use to this discussion. I look forward to hearing your perspectives when you have finished Part I.

First off I think I'd like to try one of the questions in the heading, because this is a strange book.

I think that the point of view of the book in Part I seems to change. First we have first person plural: WE, the first word in the book is we. So it's from the POV of the children in the class and Charles is an outsider. Then we have third person, I would have to say omniscient (or would you?) narrator, seeming to take Charles's point of view because we are caught up in his bewilderment but we never realize he's ....he's not smart? We're on his side, and we don't immediately grasp that he is, indeed, slow. Then we have Emma's point of view, we move from observing her to knowing what she thinks, but it's still third person....

That's a lot for 59 little pages. And the SYMBOLISM! The wedding bouquets!

Also intriguing to me is the use of the passive voice, and when and why it switches back and forth, the meticulous descriptions, which remind me in some places of Dickens, I checked his dates and he IS a contemporary,.....there are THREE Madame Bovaries, and each one shows something about Charles's character, I think there is a LOT to discuss in this book and these, for me, first 59 pages: this selection was a super choice, there is so much to talk about, thank you Mssuzy for that information on the position of doctors in small rural French towns, that's helpful to my understanding of poor Charles (that's the way I see him now) I am so glad we are trying to do this!

I felt a sympahty for Charles from the outset: he's an outsider, he does not fit in, he tries, fails and tries again, but...it's hard for me to realize, he's NOT smart. He's actually slow, but his moral character shines through the rest, witness his treatment of his first wife. Perhaps his mother accustomed him to tolerate bitter women (wasn't HER portrayal stunning) poor guy. He does deserve better than what he got, my heart bleeds for him and his kindly, (would you say he's kind?) simplicity.

Interesting also that all three Madames turned sour, but in Emma's case, it's not the husband's fault as it was the first Madame Bovary, or is it? Or actually who was to blame there? Did she have any choices?

ginny

Good Morning Everyone,

Great to see all of you posting and discussing the novel.

Mal you said that the online version that you are reading is not divided into parts and asked where Part I ends. It ends with ChapterIX.

I want to welcome those who have posted since I posted yesterday morning.

Justin! I am so glad to see you here in this discussion. I am looking forward to all your comments. Thanks for those nice comments on the photo that I took in Monet's garden.

Carolyn( KiwiLady)! wonderful to have you on board here. I am looking forward to your comments

Emma Barb! I am delighted that you will reading what is written here.

Traude! great to see you here. You will add so much to the discussio

Mme W! I am so happy you are here. I will be waiting to hear what you have to say.

mssuzy! good to have you here. I am looking forward to more of your input.

This is just a great group with wonderful comments on the first part of this book. Keep up the great analysis!

I will be back later with comments on all the comments that have been made and a few of my own.

Joan

It is because I believe Flaubert puts himself in this story that I said the point of view appears to be the author's. It's as if he was a student in the class where the first person plural "we" is used, and knowing a bit about Flaubert's background and education, I see him in Charles. I have read that he put part of himself in Emma, too. To me, Flaubert is apparent throughout this book.

Yes, Ginny, the symbolism of the wedding bouquets struck me, too. After two days of celebration after the wedding, Charles and Emma return to his home. She goes up to see the bedrooms and sees a bouquet of orange blossoms tied with white satin ribbon in a bottle. It is the wedding bouquet of Charles's first wife, Heloise. He immediately takes it up in the attic. Emma fleetingly wonders what will happen to her bouquet after she dies. Heloise's bouquet, which represents her, was essentially put in the garbage like trash. Emma seems to think about the possibility that her bouquet and she will be put there, too.

Actually, I see a resemblance between the two wives. Both are unsatisfied and deeply unfulfilled. Charles's mother is also this way, but less so, I think. She seems to accept her lot in a better way than either Heloise or Emma did. At any rate, she wouldn't dream of questioning it.

There is the element of deceit in Heloise. She lied about her dowry. I see this as a foreshadowing of deceptions on the part of Emma.

Erica Jong has written an article in which she states that Emma was a victim of her time. Women were not ever expected to do more than be dutiful wives and devoted mothers and/or ornaments for men. Emma, though full of fanciful and romantic ideas is obviously intelligent, much more so than her husband. I don't believe she knew what she really wanted besides something better than what she had. Her dreams of paradise in the Biblical sense and her longings for another sort of paradise, only achieved with wealth and riches, indicate to me that what she really wants is to be on a higher level than the one she's on.

Intellectually, Charles is no match for her, and he doesn't appreciate what she's learned from her studies of books. Of course she's bored, and of course she looks elsewhere. The age-old problem is that, like many women -- even today -- she transfers the source of the fulfillment of her needs to men.

Mal

Hello all! I'll be mainly a lurker here since I've committed to two other books at this time but I wanted to add some notes about Charles as a doctor.

My translation is by Francis Steegmuller who writes in the introduction:

"Flaubert was the son of a surgeon....and from his earliest youth Flaubert was accustomed to the sight of illness, death, operations, and dissections....[Flaubert made Charles Bovary] an officier de sante -- a licensed medical man without an M.D. degree. Such a practitioner could treat patients only in the department of France in which he had passed his examination, and could perform important surgical operations only when an M.D. was present. The category of officiers de sante...was originally created to assure medical service in French country districts. It was abolished in 1892."

There's an accent acute over the e in sante but I don't know how to add that.

Marvelle

If you read Correlli's Mandolin, you will recall that the doctor in that book had no degree. He referred to a medical book when he couldn't make a diagnosis based on experience or by using common sense. The time of Correlli's Mandolin was World War II. At least that doctor read the book. The pages in Charles Bovary's medical books were uncut.

Marvelle, if you're using a PC, pressing ALT and 0233 on the number pad at the same time will give you é.

Mal

Thanks Mal. A PC is on my wish-list and if I can get one I'll try that. Steegmuller wasn't talking about doctors in Greece or even Italy, however, but about the position of officier de sante in France. That's Charles situation in France during the 1800's in Madame Bovary.

Marvelle

I understand that, Marvelle. At the time I posted about the doctor in Correlli's Mandolin I thought the comment was apropos. Unfortunately, it's too late now to delete it.

Mal

I find it interesting that Flaubert starts the story by using terms like "new boy," "newcomer," "he," "poor fellow," and goes on for page after page without mentioning his name -- and then in a most subtle manner (which seems to be a constant method of Flaubert's) through the medium of the Master causing it to be written on the board, gives us for the very first time the name Charles Bovary. The author sneaks it in. Up to this point I had no idea that this hapless boy was to be connected in some fashion with "Madame Bovary."
Flaubert is indeed subtle and unless I pause to get behind the words, I find myself losing the thread (the message) that the author is ever so gradually beginning to weave for us.

Robby

I think one focus of Part I is to introduce us to Emma. Flaubert seems to use imagery and maybe, metaphors to introduce us to Emma. At one point, there is a description given of Emma and her father's farmhouse. On the wall, is a "pencil drawing of Minerva." Emma gave this sketch to her father as a gift.

After reading the first thirty two pages too quickly, I decided to go back and start over again. I remember Ginny writing about symbolism in the first fifty nine pages. Now, as usual, I need the help of the other posters.

Is Minerva a Grecian Goddess? Could her mythological origins have anything to do with the story? Why did Emma choose a "pencil sketch" of Minerva? I know nothing about Greek Mythology accept what I am picking up in Robby's discussion of Durant's book about Greek Civilzation.

Also, when Charles arrives at Emma and her father's home, he sees about six peacocks in the farmyard.

"among the chickens and turkeys pecking at its surface were five or six peacocks, a favorite luxury in the barnyards of the Caux region."

Should the peacocks tell me something about Emma's character? I have only seen peacocks in the zoo. I know these birds are quite beautiful. I love the royal blue and emerald colors of the peacocks. At the zoo, everyone waits for the opening of their tails. If I am not wrong, I can easily relate these fancy birds to Emma's sensual nature.

Minerva is the Ancient Roman goddess of wisdom, education and virginity. In Ancient Greece, she was called Athena. Perhaps Emma admired all of those things, who knows?

Not too long after my marriage ended, I had a job taking care of a very rich old woman who'd had a stroke. She lived in a specially equipped apartment over the carriage house, which was not far from a very large, stone castle-like structure (estate) that belonged to her, and had been brought, piece by piece, to Mt. Kisco, New York from England.

On the grounds were peacocks, peahens and guinea hens. The peacocks were for show. I guess the house residents ate guinea hen under glass once in a while. The old woman's daughter-in-law raised flax, the field tended by hired help, which she spun into linen. They raised cows and cattle, too, and played at being gentleman farmers.

The peacock displays his beautiful plumage when he is trying to attract the attention of a peahen. Such is the way of nature. The male's colorful beauty serves propagation purposes only. Once in a while, the peacocks would try to chase me away when I arrived at work. This gave me the impression that they are not very nice birds.

Peahens are a drab brownish color and far from beautiful. Both of them have ugly squawks. I can't relate the peacocks at Emma's father's farm to her.

Mal

In his youth, Flaubert was a full-blown romantic. When he finished his first version of "The Temptation of St. Anthony" in 1849, he spent four days reading it to two of his friends, fully expecting them to be blown away, but their advice was to throw it in the fire! He later said, "I was being eaten up by the cancer of lyricism and you operated on me." He took a 2-year trip to the mideast to cure himself . On his return, his friends suggested that he write something based on a local incident that would not inspire lyricism, the story of an officier de santé whose wife had committed suicide, and thus began Mme Bovary.

Justin, isn’t Zola more an example of naturalism than realism?

Joan, that is a beautiful photo. I hope to return to Giverny in May.

Robby you said "...I find it hard to believe that any of his sentences were just words thrown together".

Flaubert did choose his words carefully. He was a pioneer in using words to show the mood of his characters, As Theron mentioned. His prose plods along and is boring when he wants us to feel the boredom of ordinary life. When his characters are experiencing pleasure the prose moves faster.

Carolyn, I hope that as you read on you will not be so bored with these characters.

Traude, I agree that Flaubert has a reason for starting the novel with Charles. I also have sympathy for Charles.

Robby, I agree that Flaubert is a student of human nature. It is good to have you look at this with your view as a psychologist.

MmeW, thanks for bringing in the idea how Flaubert was trying to "over come his very romantic nature." He freely admitted that he was romanitc. That is what he meant when he utter those often quoted words, "Madame Bovary, Cést moi".

mssuzy , yes! Flaubert is giving us an indepth study of society at the time of the novel. Your comments on the French towns and their doctors at the time is much appreciated.

We have to remember as we read on and discuss this book that although Charles is called a doctor he not was trained as doctors are today. His training was about the equivalent of a level I EMT.

Justin you certainly hit it right the observation that much of what we see of Charles in the early part of this section can well be a result of his parents actions.

Ginny, excellent points on the point of view . He seems be using this method to make himself seem to be objective.

Mal, good point on the wedding bouquets.

Marvelle, Happy to see you here! Thanks for that information on a health officer in France.

Welcome Hats, glad to see you here. I believe you have hit on something rather important here with the mention of the peacocks.

What do others think about the peacocks?

Peacocks are certainly beautiful creatures who display their bright plummage to attract the female. Also it was probably ordinary to see peacocks on a farm in France at that time.

Charles gives us our first description of Emma. What do you think the significance of this is?

Joan

Charles has a romanticised view of Emma the first time he sees her. I think this is the very first mistake. He did rather rush in to marry again - as many men do- after his bereavement.

I see in my notes that Madame Bovary was first published as a serial in a magazine - Revue De Paris and a charge of having written an immoral work was brought against the author in 1857 but he was acquitted largely due to the efforts of his counsel Maitre Marie-Antoine-Jules Senard.

Emma even while in the first flush of her marriage begins to realise she may have made a mistake, not taking into account that Charles is a caring and loving husband. Was his mistake his worshipful manner towards her. She sees this every day caring as not being a passionate love. How many women have cast aside the best of men because they feel their relationship lacks excitement and passion? I have known a couple.

Carolyn

I need to catch up- but as to peacocks - they are the best snakers - all the estates in this area of the country keep them for that reason - their feathers litter the lawns and they make quite a loud sound - therefore to me Flaubert's comparison is saying more than beauty about Emma - I belive the comparison would include that she is a women who can effectively strike her enemy while displaying her beauty - using her power (beauty and sexuality) as a man would use his power, just as we all prefer the male plumage rather then the dull pea hens. Also she litters her environment with the evidence of her beauty/power -

MINERVA

100 EYES, UGLY FEET, PRIDE & IMMORTALITY

Marvelle

HATS, you have a good eye for symbols. I think both peacocks (of the ugly feet) and Minerva have various, subtle meanings.

Minerva (aka Athena) is the goddess of wisdom and the protector of culture among others. See how warlike she is? I think the pencil sketch was probably done by Emma which gives an early indication of her desire for culture and her battle against society; but pencil marks can fade and be erased so this may not bode well for our Emma. Minerva/Athena has been THE goddess for women.

The peacock also has many meanings including pride and vanity. Note in the link that the peacock saw it's ugly feet and let out a raucous squawk which is perhaps a symbol of a social protest. It is a beautiful bird but otherwise out of place in the farmyard; without utilitarian purpose except as a watch-fowl. The eye of God that is all-seeing (GINNY mentioned omniscience already) interests me as does the immortality and I wonder if that is more Flaubert than anything.

There are many ways to see the symbols here. And the oddness of Emma's eyes; will have to wait and see if this occurs again!

_____________________________________

Lines near the end of Part 1 that struck me:

Charles: "[Emma] delighted him by countless little niceties....In Rouen she saw ladies with charms dangling from their watch fobs; she bought some charms. She took a fancy to a pair of large blue glass vases for her mantelpiece, and a little later to an ivory workbox with a silver-gilt thimble. The less Charles understood these refinements, the more alluring he found them .... They were like a trickle of golden dust along the petty pathway of his life."

Emma: "She longed to travel; she longed to go back and live in the convent. She wanted to die. And she wanted to live in Paris."

____________________________________

According to Steegmuller, Tostes, the town where Charles Bovary began his practice is now called Totes (another accent, this time an inverted V over the o in Totes). MAL, I'm seriously thankful for your advice about the PC. I don't have one yet but have noted how to do accents with the ALT key which will be handy. Thanks for the welcome, JOAN. I wish I could be a full-time participant but will post when I can. This is an amazing book and an amazing group of people participating in the discussion.

Marvelle

Very good links, Marvelle. I still cannot relate the male peacocks strutting around so ridiculously in front of potential peahen mates that I once knew with super female Emma Bovary.

Mal

Hi Joan, each day I enjoy your beautiful photograph. Thank you for sharing it and thank you for the kind welcome. I also thank you, Barbara, Marvelle, Mal, Mme W and the others for helping me understand the book. It is a beautiful book. I don't want to take the descriptions lightly. Flaubert seems like a poet who gives each word very careful thought. Each chapter seems meaty. I do not want to take his words lightly.

Barbara, thank you for the links. I am reading those carefully. Marvelle, you have given me much to think about too. Wow! a pencil sketch does smudge. I never thought about the quick life of a sketch and Emma's life too. Mal, thank you for the Beranger link.

Just a note: often in French when a silent "s" dropped out, it was replaced with a circonflex (^) over the preceding vowel: île, hôpital, fête, pâte, and we can discover the meaning in English by re-inserting the "s."

Peafowl were raised for the table as well as the beautiful peacock feathers for ornamental purposes. Young peacocks were considered a delicacy. I feel there is no meaning in this in the book.

The peacock has several symbolic meanings in art. There is an ancient belief that the flesh of peacock never decayed so that the peacock became a Christian symbol of immortality, and Christ's resurrection. It is also a symbol of pride personified. It's use in MB in the barnyard may indicate Emma's pride in her beauty and in her physical powers which are frustrated in marriage. "Immortality" does not seem to be relevant in MB.

I lost my connection. Sorry. Marvelle, thank you for the links. In one link, I read that Minerva is the goddess of war. This makes me think of the power brought up by Barbara in her post. Barbara, I never knew that peacocks were snakers. It is interesting to read about the estates in your area. Again, there is power and strength. This power and beauty must in some way relate to Emma.

Marvelle's link also mentions Minerva as a patron of the arts. Emma's whole problem with her state of being is that her life is so different from what she finds in literature and the other arts.

Marvelle's links are really great!! Her link mentions the peacock as being a restless creature. I definitely see Madame Bovary as a "restless" spirit or a searching spirit.

This is from Marvelle's link. "The peacock's restless activity at the approach of a storm has caused it to become a symbol of rain."

This is an off the cuff remembrance. Flannery O'Connor, the great southern writer, kept peacocks in her yard!

MmeW: I agree with you, Zola shows characteristics of Naturalism in his writing. Naturalism and Realism often exist in the same work. They complement one another rather then oppose one another. Flaubert, for example, represents some of both movements. In naturalism one tries to portray human activity objectively, and truthfully. The "realists" try to depict life in an entirely honest manner without prejudice. Both movements grew out of advances in science in the nineteenth century. Zola also represents both movements. Willa Cather's work and John Steinbeck's work as well reflect both movements. I think, in many ways, Mark Twain exhibits elements of both movements.

The peacock's manner of strutting its beauty made it a symbol of pride and vanity. The reference is clearly to Emma but not as she appears on the farm, rather, later in life, when she is married and well dressed, with her wares on display.

How about the peacock as a symbol for Charles on the farm. He was displaying his good features to attract the female. He was not doing it very well, but that was what he was doing or trying to do. He was strutting his stuff.

The peacock figures in the Bible and in Greek and Roman myth, where it appears as the favorite bird of the goddess Hera, or Juno. Hera's watchfulness is symbolized by the peacock and the 'eyes' in its feathers. The peacock is often associated with summer and therefore this may symbolize the mature woman, the mother phase. Maybe ?

There have been a lot of posts in just a few days. I guess that I do not like to dissect a book so closely - it makes me read in a way that I do not think the author intended. Am I the only one who thinks this?

I am enjoying the book more - you may recall in my earlier posts that I was bored. But I am afraid that I may not have much to add to the discussion.

Just as Flaubert spoke of the "boy" for some time before divulging the name "Charles," so he again moved us gradually through terms like "young woman" and then said "Mademoiselle Emma did her best to sew some wads." Flaubert is a subtle artist. He does not say "Her name was Emma." We flow easily into such knowledge without realizing that we had received it.
We learn of her "brilliant and tapering nails," "polished and trimmed," "long lashes," "full lips," "hair waved about the temples," "color in her cheeks," and other descriptions letting us know that she was not an "ordinary" farm girl. Charles did not think so either as he said he would come back "the very next day."
The naive "boy" has been exposed for the first time to a girl with power. Something HAS to happen.

Robby

While a peacock can represent Charles and Emma in different ways, there is other symbolism (and I do love this shape-changing meaning of peacocks.)

I feel a peacock symbolizes the author and Madame Bovary as a work of art -- beauty, omniscience, immortality, pride, the watch-fowl that squawks at its ugly feet; love the ugly feet! The peacock is famous as a watch-fowl and the squawk of the watch-fowl, of the bird that notices it ugly feet is appropos of Flaubert's protest against bourgeois values? Emma and Charles are part of Flaubert's squawk.

The inclusion of peacocks is rather like an authorial manifesto.

Marvelle

George, I agree with you in that the book should be read for the enjoyment. If it is to be disected as a literary work, it should come with a second or third reading.
The discussion of the symbolism of the peacocks is interesting. When I read about the Peacocks, I took it to be a sign of the prosperity of the farm. The Peacock was considered a table delicacy and would be found on the more prosperous farms. That Emmas father could have 6 would be an indication of a fairly prosperous farm.

Theron

Regarding "dissection of a book" -- I don't see this book as a "romance" but as a character study. Therefore, I am not examining the book itself as a literary work but am examining carefully the personalities of the characters as presented by Flaubert.

Robby

Oh I love all the peacock information! Peacocks can squawk like any bird but they are more famous for their ungodly SHRIEKS, if you've ever heard one, you would call 911, I did the first time I heard one (we had them on campus) I truly thought somebody was being murdered. It's unholy, and terrible.Almost indescribable.

And Emma sure was attracted to a peacock like existence, wasn't she? All color and show and nothing underneath, the glitter attracted her, like it does any bird, and she wanted to flock to it, like a chicken. I've never kept peacocks, but I have chickens, and their behavior is much like that of a teenager: rush here for the latest glittery thing, rush there, but a chicken, like Emma, will turn on their weaker siblings like avengers from Hell if a drop of blood shows, Emma is very much like a chicken, to me haahahaha

I thought the image of the hurdy gurdy, the contrasts in dirty sweat pouring off the man while the bright peacock figures danced was stunning, just stunning; a mineature encapsulated world, and the repeated references to the Romantic heroes of Romantic fiction running a horse to death on every page are simply too droll. What a master writer!

ginny

Don't go away, George. We need you here. At least, I do, and I agree with your point-of-view.

There are several here who enjoy finding and interpreting symbols, and that's fine with me. Often I learn things from what they post, whether I think these interpretations apply to the author's intent or not.

These things which appear to be symbolic to some may have been written into this book by Flaubert to be symbols, or may simply have been used to describe the way something looked.

This book is a painting with words as well as a pscyhological study, in my estimation, and that is what I think Flaubert intended.

For example, if the peacocks (which, as Joan said, were common on farms in those days) are important as a symbol, what about the "big, steaming manure-heap piled up along by the wall of the buildings" at Emma's father's farm? Is that significant symbolically, too, or did Flaubert put that in because piles of manure are common sights on farms?

I am approaching this book as a character study from a more or less psychological point of view. Flaubert has been careful to tell us of the childhood, parental and other influences, and growing up environments of both Charles and Emma. To me this is important if I am to know what made them become the adults they were. It strikes me in Chapter 5 in the online version I'm reading that Flaubert writes after celebratory things have settled down and Charles goes off to work leaving Emma alone:
"And Emma tried hard to discover what, precisely, it was in life that was denoted by the words 'joy, passion, intoxication."
I find this important. Joy, passion, intoxication were what Emma found in the convent through her mystical, metaphysical interpretation of her religion and the reading she did while she was at the convent.

Robby says, "The naive 'boy' has been exposed for the first time to a girl with power." Emma is a beautiful young woman who also is educated, a rarity. Charles (and Robby is right in referring to him as a "boy") has met the kind of woman he's never known before. Emma's treatment by her father and mother as someone "special" and different combined with her innate powers as a seductress (which she may or may not be aware of) are as amazing to Charles as if she'd been a precious jewel, and he treats her like one. It's as if he's saying, "How can anybody like this be attracted to a dumb clod like me?"

Mal

Each of us reads at our own pace and in our own way. There's no right or wrong to this.

We all jump in where we feel comfortable and where our interests lie -- keeping in mind, of course, the schedule of the discussion. So please stick around George, and jump in where you feel comfortable, just as we jump where we will. Politeness and acceptance of different ways of reading and responding is key to a successful discussion.

When someone posts an idea or a link that I want to consider later I either note the post number or else print it out to read at my pace; and there's always the option of checking out the discussion after its archived. I pass by without comment posts that don't interest me, but often a post makes me see a work from a new perspective and that's exciting and one of the many joys of an SN book discussion.

Marvelle

Marvelle, I loved what you said about the peacock's feet. Nothing is perfect, and the feet and "shriek" of peacocks make one think twice about their beauty. Did Emma have big, ugly feet and a voice like a fishwife, I wonder? Flaubert tells us that Charles's first wife had feet like lumps of ice in bed. It's no wonder he fell for a hot little number like Emma.

Mal

Since I think the peacock represents Flaubert and his art, I consider the shriek and ugly feet as necessary and as important as the beauty. They complement each other.

MmeW, thanks for giving us Flaubert the 'reformed romantic' in post 44. That shows how he was able to portray so wonderfully, in all its exquisite details, the romantic dream-life of Emma.

Emma treasures the discarded cigar case and imagines it belongs to the vicomte and Emma's romance of the case begins:

"A present from his mistress, perhaps. It had been embroidered on some rosewood frame, a charming little piece of furniture kept hidden from prying eyes, over which a pensive girl had been for hours and hours, her soft curls brushing its surface. Love had breathed through the mesh of the canvas; every stroke of the needle had recorded a hope or a memory; and all these intertwined silken threads bespoke one constant, silent passion. And then one morning the vicomte had taken it away with him. What words had they exchanged....? She was in Tostes. Whereas he, now, was in Paris...."

Very early into this daydream, Emma had become the girl of the soft curls to her imaginary love, the vicomte of the 'one obligatory waltz'. Modern writing is rarely that descriptive; perhaps eclipsed by the visuals of television and movies.

Marvelle

If Flaubert uses metaphors to excess, he was well aware of it when he wrote to Louise Colet, on December 27, 1852: "I think that my 'Boavry' will be a go; but I am hindered by the metaphors which decidedly dominate too much. I am devoured by comparisons, as we are by lice and even if I spend my time crushing them, my sentences are still crawling with them".

I translated this from my French version on page 48 of the introduction. Perhaps this style of writing is passé now and today's writers seem to go straight to the action without too many metaphors. I like them in modereataion as they create an ambiance.

Eloïse

I agree with Robby it is the characters in the book which have the most interest for me. Like George also I do not look for hidden meanings or symbols. In this book I feel there is much imagery but I do not believe there is a lot of symbolism.

Joan - As the plot develops I am indeed becoming more interested in the two main characters.

Carolyn

A letter from Flaubert to Louise Colet

Flaubert and Louise Colet

About "Lui" by Louise Colet

A translation of parts of letters from Flaubert to Colet while he was writing Madame Bovary

Looked it up - wasn't sure what the maids played in summer called battledore and shuttlecock - turns out to be badmitten - behind a row of trees breaking the wind, I can see them now in their full and long dresses reaching their rackets in the soft summer afternoon -

looked up dowrey - lots of information about the eastern world's use of a dowrey - but I found one site that in French was the legal transaction between families in Canada that outlined the terms of the dowrey - another about St. Nickolas saying that if a girl did not have a dowrey she would either be a spinster or have to become a prostitute. But until 1848 in the US and 1872 in various parts of Europe a women was no different than her dowrey - simply a piece of property owned by her father and then her husband - among the working class her ability and skills that enabled her to earn money for the family was appraised and prized.

I could not find anything on the internet but having studied needlework for years, including the history of fabric decoration, and fabric making etc. there is quite a bit about the Victorian interest in simple embroderies - the middle class is being created and women were supposed to sit home and let the men not only do the work but make all the decisions - the women were to take idleness to a new level and sitting at home doing embrodery was a measure of her value - the more embrodery the more it showed her diligence, her leasure time and the more it showered on the man the fruits of his success - all to say that a proper middle class lady did not have open to her the necessary industry of the working class women nor the parties, salons, food preperation and fashions of the wealthy aristocratic class. She was caught between both worlds more subject to her husband's fantasy of how she was to represent his success.

Robby: Keep up the good work. Character analysis is essential to understanding the novel.

Symbols and metaphors are some of the tools a novel writer uses to make the message more prominent. Understanding the contribution of each should enhance one's reading of the novel.

Point of view seems to shift from author to character and back again. I see Charles looking at Emma, Emma looking at Rudolphe, etc. The author has the point of view early when he seems to slip characters in and then identify them (just as Robby pointed out so well). When Emma muses about herself and others, she seems to have the point of view.

Eloise thank you so much for that, don't you love the way he writes? I love that, crawling with them, (isn't that a metaphor itself? hahahaha) he's right, it is.

This thing is so well written, too, every image, and they're all wonderful, brings up one in the reader from his own experience. I think, especially for me, the first school room scene was uncomfortable. I saw something like that in the third grade, the new student couldn't speak and the teacher kept ...seemed like screaming at him.... to speak up she couldn't understand him, and we children tried to tell her he could not speak (something was wrong with his tongue) She actually slapped him in the face, twice, and he sputtered something out, yes I think you could say my sympathies are with Charles, that was a hard scene for me to read.

When you read, you also think of other works of literature which seem to possibly have similar themes and I keep thinking of Tennyson's The Lady of Shallott, for some reason?

Like Emma, the Lady of Shallott could not enter the world she wished to, in her case she had a spell on her (you might say Emma does too) and she sat in a castle room, and the only way she could see the world she wished to enter was in the reflection of a mirror.

One day a knight, glittering and shining in his armor, riding to Camelot, caused a flash to appear on the glass. She turned to look, despite the penalty, and to partake in the world of glamour and glitter.

Out flew the web and floated wide;
The mirror crack'd from side to side;
"The curse is come upon me," cried
The Lady of Shalott.

Things did not go well for her once she entered the world she wished to, and I have a feeling, even though I have only read the first 59 pages, that they are not going to go well for our Emma, either, but I was struck by what I see as the parallels, and it's enticing, at least to me, at this point, to consider, and I wanted to mention it here, because it reminds me of it, right now.

ginny

I read today that there are some who suggest that Flaubert based Emma on Louise Colet, who was quite a gal who had many lovers, but, if you scroll down on the page accessed by the last link I posted you will see what is posted below. Was Flaubert kidding himself about imagination, or did he really believe what he wrote was a true invention?
A Léon Laurent-Pichat. 7 décembre 1856.

"Madame Bovary n'a rien de vrai. C'est une histoire totalement inventée ; je n'y ai rien ni de mes sentiments, ni de mon existence. L'illusion (s'il y en a une) vient au contraire de l'impersonnalité de l'oeuvre. C'est un de mes principes, qu'il ne faut pas s'écrire. L'artiste doit être dans son oeuvre comme Dieu dans la création, invisible et tout puissant ; qu'on le sente partout, mais qu'on ne le voie pas."
As I understand this, Flaubert says that the story of Madame Bovary is not true; it is totally invented. He also says that the writer must be like God, always there, but invisible and omniscient. Someone who reads French better than I do without a dictionary handy will correct me if I've translated this wrong.

There's been some talk in the French discussion of this book about whether or not Flaubert understood women well enough to write about Emma as he did. I read that Flaubert loved women, was intimate with several of them, especially Colet. He also was an objective observer of human behavior and society. For that reason, I say, yes, he was very capable of portraying women in his books. It's possible that Emma Bovary was a collage of many women he had known.

Mal

I'm enjoying the book and have finished the first chapter (my other book awaits me upstairs to complete). Since I'm still taking it easy after a tooth extraction I have the time right now.
I like Flaubert's smooth poetic writing style, the way it flows between the different characters.

Yes Mal, that is what he says besides: "one of my principles is that an author must not describe himself" (but he does, he said so himself: "Madame Bovary, c'est moi")

To Louise Colet July 15, 1953 he writes:

Everything we invent is true, to be sure. Poetry is as precise as geometry. Induction is worth as much as deduction and what's more, up to a certain point, you no longer make mistakes in what concerns the soul. My poor Bovary, no doubt, suffers and cries in twenty villages of France at the same time, at this very moment

I don't think men can ever really understand women, but some men obviously make their partners happy accepting and appreciating them as they are.

Eloïse

Goodness me Eloise that thought is depressing all those maidens in distress.

Carolyn

Women as many men knew them to be, 'objects' during this time in history - the many other women in his life were ladies of the night with his one love Louise Colet who he degrades her poetry and choice of living in Paris while accepting her praising him as a genius that even his good friend and fellow traveler Du camp questions - then he lets Louise know of her rival - the Egyptian courtesan who uses sandalwood oil to hide the stench of her bed bugs, where he is infested with syphilis and he explains that her love is nothing because having a clitoridectomy she is performing as a machine - needless to say he is anything but sensitive nor does he honor her love for him - a common oaf would have more manners - He lived with his mother till he was 50 years old - she must have had quite the control over him.

In fact with all the dowery and arrangements in relationship to a marriage they sound more like shopkeepers trading than folks who believe in the romantic love we associate with the French.

Not to say that men had an impossible life as well - but I have a hard time being sympathetic - no different than any abhorrence to humanity the behavior is often committed with the excuse, everyone does it, I was trained that way, I would have been run out on a rail if I acted differently - but the example is that no author brings something in his story without it saying something and Flaubert does mention the St. Romain fair when he is describing the young Charles.

St Romain, bishop of Rouen during the first half of the 7th century, at the time of the conversion of the region to Christianity.

His role as protector (patron Saint) and liberator is illustrated in the logo through the Gargoyle legend. This monster haunted the St Gervais meadows and terrorized the population. Romain decided to fight it. No one wanted to follow him, he made a bargain with a prisoner condemned to death : if the prisoner would help him to capture the Gargoyle, he would be set free. The monster was capture, burned alive and the prisoner freed. Miracles were experienced during the 14th century mostly be prisoners.

The annual veneration of the holy bishop's relics has taken place since 1030. A popular feast combining "forgiveness" in a religious sense, festivities and business. In this "St. Romain's Fair", the word "fair" is derived from the word "feria", the feast, and it seems that coins were even made for this occasion. North of the city, is the field of "forgiveness" as a reminder.
http://catholique-rouen.cef.fr/html/diocese/a_logo.html
http://comunet.eduhi.at/bc/2/htlm/school/school.htm

This says to me that Flaubert was saying Charles was expected to slay dragons in life - be strong, fearless, and able to convince men with less to follow him, perform miracles that will benefit his family. Certainly not the image we are offered of Charles during his first days in school.

Again his reality does not match a romantic view of life shared by his mother and others in Rouen.

BARBARA, we were posting at the same time and you've given me more to think about. One of Flaubert's comments that I quoted below is his maxim about living an average life and why, which is how I think he survived Rouen and staying with his mother. Like most professional writers much was sacrificed to the work, and Flaubert had plenty of contradictions within himself about women and society. Contradictions aren't unusual for any of us, I think.

Thanks for the information on a woman's dowery and embroidery and the limits to a woman's world.

Interesting that Flaubert was so concerned with form in literature. His use of metaphor, symbolism, and description exists alongside events in his work and actually dominates the "he said, she said, they did" sort of events. Flaubert's style creates many-dimensions to the work and the characters. JUSTIN and GINNY, appreciated your takes on Flaubert's style. He certainly takes care to find, as he says, "the one precise word." Other well-known quotes from Flaubert:

"The idea exists only by virtue of its form."

"Be regular and orderly in your life like a bourgeois, so that you may be violent and original in your work."

"Books are made not like children but like pyramids...and are just as useless!"

The last quote is typical of the concerns and doubts of a long-time writer and it touches me that, even as he strives to be the immortal peacock in his work, he experiences feelings of mortality.

Marvelle

marvelle be forewarned my back is up over this story - I think Emma is given a rough deal that she uses the only power left to her and is ostracized by society for doing so - if she were a man, all would not only be forgiven but applauded - I had saved an article by the head of Harmes that for the life of me I cannot find now - but here at the turn of the twenty first century and there is still this concept that women do everything for her looks to please a man.

For the middle and upper class women in France this was the reason to give her infant to a wet nurse - the working class did hire wet nurses who were often itenirate workers earning their keep at the cost of half of the wages of the women with child so that the child's mother was able to continue to work. But the middle and upper class sent their babies to wet nurses in order to retain quickly their before birth appearance - here is Emma whose whole role in life is limited to looking sexual with no corresponding husband to fulfill her destiny - she does not even have the care of her child to fill her very able skills - look at what she accomplished on her father's farm and then look at what she is reduced to after her marriage is beyond the honeymoon stage.

I may be getting ahead of the story where as so far the concept of her romantic dreaming is so reminding me of the movie (I do not know if it was a book) (my favorite movie in fact) Ryans's Daughter She also dreams of a different life and has an affair with a British officer recouping from injuries in Ireland where she has married the best the village has to offer in Robert Mitchem. The movie can be taken straight or you can see that it is imagery in the way her lover kills himself at the same moment she is facing reality.

GINNY, I intended a while back to send an applause post on your insight into the POV's of this literary work, but only now got to it. Flaubert is everywhere isn't he? He's in one mind, then into a group consciousness, then omniscient, back to one mind....I hope I can see the pattern or purpose to this; to understand what effect it creates within me. I was fascinated too by your take on the Lady of Shallot and BARBARA's field of forgiveness. It all helps in situating the scene and tone and emotions of Madame Bovary.

Marvelle

I have been away all day and it is wonderful to come in and find so many interesting and enthusiastic posts here. You have all made many excellent points and given interesting information. The links are really great.

I really have learned alot from the information about the peacocks. I really did not know much about them. Thanks for all the information and links about them.

Those of you who really like finding symbols in literature keep up the good work. Flaubert certainly uses many of them.

Robby, keep up your careful examination of the characters. That is an important part of analysis and study of literature. We need to talk about the characters in this discussion.

George, stay with us. I can understand your reluctance to examine this book in the way that is being done here since it is your first time to read it. As you read through the posts here you will see references to things that you will remember as you read on. Some of these things will have meaning to you that you did not see as your read them.

Emma Barb, I am really glad that you are joining in the reading of this book with us.

Barbara, I think you will find that there will be sympathy for Emma as we take our discussion further.

Don't worry BARB, I know you have sympathy for Emma. I have sympathy for her and for Charles but Flaubert could not create a work sans conflict and with perfect people (whatever perfection actually means). I can't pretend that Charles and/or Emma are perfect. Flaubert has created multi-dimensional characters with both strengths and weaknesses.

Society has restricted the role and opportunities for Emma and she resorts to daydreams as escape and who knows what path she'll take? Charles is faced with limits set by his family and society and his own nature. I guess the same can be said of Emma.

Within these first few pages Emma is revealed as dissatisfied while Charles seems contented and we know from this difference that a crisis is coming.

Marvelle

At this point we have been introduced to Charles and Emma.We have learned about the education of each of them. We know that Emma is the daughter of a not too prosperous farmer. Charles is a rather dull country doctor. Country doctors in France in the 19th century were not wealthy people. When he first met Emma he was married to a woman who did not have as much money as he thought she did at the time of the marriage.

Ginny has said ,"I think that the point of view of the book in Part I seems to change. First we have first person plural: WE, the first word in the book is we. So it's from the POV of the children in the class and Charles is an outsider. Then we have third person, I would have to say omniscient (or would you?) narrator, seeming to take Charles's point of view because we are caught up in his bewilderment but we never realize he's ....he's not smart? We're on his side, and we don't immediately grasp that he is, indeed, slow. Then we have Emma's point of view, we move from observing her to knowing what she thinks, but it's still third person....

Robby has brought up the point about how Flaubert uses language. he has also started analyzing the characters.

Justin pointed that symbols and metaphors are tools of writers.

You have discussed some things that you think might be symbols.

Several of you have provided excellent links.

Barbara has brought up the plight of women in 19th century France.

Now let's think about Emma's wedding plans at the end of part III. What do you think about these plans?

Malryn has stated that Flaubert is painting a picture with his language.

Look at the passage in your book that describes the wedding. The picture is so vivid.

Joan

Coincidentally, Joan, I have written in the margin of Ch. IV of my college copy: "good description of wedding"!

I think Emma wanting to be married by torchlight at midnight would have been really romantic. But they had a regular wedding and relations from both families and townspeople of different classes attended. Imagine having a sixteen-hour feast. It's not clear to me what wedding pranks were intended but stopped because of Charles' position ?

Gustave Flaubert so superbly recalls, "the feast was so grandiose that it had to be set up in a cart-shed, the only place on the grounds large enough to hold all the food and drink."

Seton a long table were four large sirloins, six dishes of hashed chicken, some stewed veal, three legs of mutton and a variety of sausages with sorrel.

At the corners of the tables stood flasks of brandy and a large collection of cider botles from which rich foam frothed out around the corks. All of the glasses on the table had been filled to the brim with wine.

Standing to the side, in large dishes, stood delicate yellow custard with the initials of the newly married couple traced in arabesques of sugar almonds. So full were the dishes that the custard would shake at the slightest jog of the table.

Madame Bovary's wedding feast with recipes for some of the selections -

http://www.stratsplace.com/rogov/dinner_mdm_bovary.html

The reception is derived from an old French custom known as chiverie. Friends would go to the newly married couple's home after the wedding and gather under their window to sing boisterous tunes and make a lot of noise until they got invited in for refreshments.

Reception tables overflow with flowers guests bring to honor the couple's fresh beginning. Brides wear wreaths of flowers in their hair. The bride often wore a special hat for the same reason.

French Wedding Customs -

http://uptowncity.com/love/WedCus/France/France.htm

As always, it is great fun and enlightening to read a book together here. All of the posts have given me a greater understanding of Flaubert and his work, Madame Bovary.

I did find it interesting to learn that Flaubert lived with his mother until he was fifty years old. Charles' mother too had that control thing going with her son. Charles' mother picked his first wife. Then, when Charles married, his mother tried to control Emma too. At this point, I felt awfully sorry for Charles. Charles is caught in the middle. I can just imagine the unbearable tension.

"Both women uttered sugary words in a voice quavering with anger."

I also felt sorry for Emma.

"She seemed to be prejudiced against her daughter-in-law....She rearranged the linen in the closets and taught Emma to keep an eye on the butcher when he brought the meat."

For some reason, I very quickly felt sorry for Charles. Perhaps, because his character was developed first. I desperately wanted to be sympathetic towards Emma simply because she was a woman like me.

That was more difficult. I knew she was a burdened woman, but I could not see in which particular way. Barbara's posts about society's expectations of a woman during this period helped me quickly to find the reasons for my sympathy towards Emma. Also, Ginny's poem by Tennyson gave me another perspective. I love, love, love that poem.

I think Ginny wrote in her post about the many ways in which Flaubert's work reminds us of other literary works. There was a "aha" moment for me at one paragraph in Madame Bovary. These are the lines,

"The next day seemed endless to her. She went out into her little garden and WALKED UP AND DOWN the same paths over and over again,stopping in front of the flower beds...."

For some reason, probably, wrong reasons, I was reminded of the poem PATTERNS by AMY LOWELL. I could feel that same bored and restless spirit in Flaubert's writing and in Amy Lowells. In each poem, the woman is within the boundaries of her garden. All three writers, Tennyson, Flaubert and Lowell have written about women living within certain boundaries for different reasons.

Thanks for the fun links, Barbara. I mentioned early on in this discussion that Erica Jong has written an article in which she states that Emma Bovary was a victim of her time.

Bourgeois women were not expected to "work". One or more servants were hired to do the menial work which was "beneath" women in the bourgeoisie. A bourgeois wife would not ever consider nursing her child, just as an aristocratic one wouldn't. Babies were farmed out to wet nurses until they were weaned. The rich then hired a governess.

Embroidery, cultivation of the delicate, "feminine" arts, managing the home, this is what bourgeois women were expected to do. For a young woman who had persistently lived outside reality in her mind from an early age, this certainly was not enough.

The bourgeoisie imitated the aristocracy. The aristocracy, however, had money for the galas and balls and other entertainment which kept boredom away from the aristocratic wife and the wealthy husband, who dallied with his own kinds of amusements to relieve the boring expanse of time on his hands. I am much reminded of Edith Wharton's New York Society, with a capital S, here. Emma did not have this social outlet or any sort of outlet for the imagination and kind of education she had.

Charles Bovary was a dull and plodding man, just as he'd been a dull and plodding boy. I'd feel more sympathy for him if he'd fought back when he was misused by his peers and teachers, his parents, and his wives later. He allowed himself to be persecuted in a sense and received exactly what he asked for. He does not get much respect from me.

Nor does Emma Bovary, though having been a fanciful young girl myself (as many of my generation were) I can certainly understand her flights into fantasy worlds, and I can understand her pitiful attempts to satisfy her needs through men, about whom she also fantasized in a very romantic way, before and after she left the safe confines of the convent. What is it they say about idle fingers?

As I said before, Flaubert took realistic themes and wrote in a very romantic way. The idea of a woman who strays and a cuckolded man is not new. It had been written about long before Flaubert came along. To predominantly Catholic France the book must have been shocking. Last night I was thinking that if it were not for Flaubert's almost painterly descriptions this book would be extraordinarily dull.

Mal

There were peacocks in my hometown, ages ago. They were the looudest, most utterly disagreeable animals in the park, yet, because of their plumage, verybody went oh and ah. I have never seen any n French farms anywhere. They might have been used for the high society of Paris, which is relatively close to Normandy, when "plumes de paon" adorned the coquettes of the times. But I think here they are more of a symbol of Emma's and perhaps a warning that beauty, coquetterie, are very superficial, not enduring qualities Charles should have looked for in a good wife, especially the wife of a country doctor. Yes, he was lonely, felt a new independence and rushed into this new affair too soon. Nothing new about that, is there? People, as humans, have not changed that much over time, in spite of all the advances in psychology, right, Robby?

One thought that comes to me about the wedding is that both families look at the other as being well to do. Since Charles is a country Doctor, Emma's father assumes "well placed" in society. Charles looks at the farm and sees a prosperous farmer. In reality, both are wrong. Emmas father tends to "drink the best of the cider" instead of selling it and Charles has very little skill in the Business side of being a Doctor. I think this sets the tone for what comes later and is a forewarning of problems.

Theron

I believe it is Charles's father who drinks the cider and eats the fattest hen. (Chapter 1) Flaubert says about Emma's father's farm in Chapter 2 that "it looked prosperous".

Mal

Mal, In Flaubert's words about Old Rouault "Far from having made a fortune, the old man was losing every year; ...he was the poorst of growers or farm managers, ... and did not spare expense for his own comforts, liking to eat and sleep well, and never suffer frrom the cold. He liked old cider, underdone legs of mutton, brandied coffee well beaten up. ..."
It sounds to me like the fathers were two of a kind, basicly trying to get the children married off so to be done with them. Charles mother was looking for, and found, a rich wife for her son. When this wife died, Charles wanted a replacement. Emmas father was happy to have her gone as she did nothing to help the farm.

Theron

Thank you, Theron.

Mal

"Realism is just one of the arbitrary views man takes of man. It sees us all as little ant-like creatures toiling against the odds of circumstance. . . . I think the inherent flaw in Madame Bovary is that individuals like Emma and Charles Bovary are too insignificant to carry the full weight of Gustave Flaubert’s profound sense of tragedy . . . Emma and Charles Bovary are two ordinary persons, chosen because they are ordinary. But Flaubert is by no means an ordinary person. Yet he insists on pouring his own deep and bitter tragic consciousness into the little skins of the country doctor and his dissatisfied wife. . . .

"the human soul has supreme joy in true, vivid consciousness. And Flaubert’s soul has this joy. But Emma Bovary’s soul does not, poor thing, because she was deliberately chosen because her soul was ordinary. . . .

"[Yet] Even Emma Bovary has a certain extraordinary female energy of restlessness and unsatisfied desire. So that both Flaubert and Verga allow their heroes something of the hero, after all. The one thing they deny them is the consciousness of heroic effort."

People do rush into new relationships today also but I think mostly because they are not at peace with themselves. Liking oneself and having peace with oneself enables one to take time over decisions. That is what I have found.

Carolyn

Yes, Carolyn, but how many choices do people who live in small villages, as Charles and Emma did, have?

At the time my father and his brothers and sisters were growing up in a small Maine farming town, there were few choices and not much chance to move anywhere else. This situation often caused intermarriage. I was very surprised to find out that my former husband, whose grandfather had a dairy farm in a little town about 20 miles from the town where my grandfather was a potato farmer, and I had a relative in common, for example.

Mal

Hi Everyone,

It is good to see those of you who have posted today. I appreciate the contributions of your thoughts and links on the wedding of Charles and Emma.

MmeW, I am not surprised that you marked the wedding scene as a good description.

Flaubert's language is wonderful as he describes the wedding scene. I keep thinking about his words,"The procession, first united like one long coloured scarf that undulated across the fields, along the narrow path winding amid the green wheat, soon lengthened out, and broke up into different groups that liotered to talk."

EmmaBarb, yes that was a very romantic idea of Emma's about a midnight wedding with torches. However not an idea that her father couldn't understand.

Barbara, thanks for the information on The Chiverie , and the links to the Wedding feast recipes and to the French wedding customs. That was all so very interesting.

Hats, like you I feel sympathy for both Charles and Emma. The lack of communication between them is tragic. He is so happy to have such a young, attractive wife. He notices the things she does but does not communicate his thoughts to her. She expects things to be like they were in the books she reads. She continues to look for romance and does not find it in her life with Charles.

Mal, yes you did mention that Erica Jong has written that article. I think that many people look at Emma as a victim of the time in which she lived. Thanks for the your insight on the life of a woman of the middle class. All of that information is very helpful.

mssuzy, you are right when you say that people have not changed much over time.

Good thoughts, Theron.

Mal thanks for the selection by DH Lawrence on 19th century realism.

Joan

After examining the wedding scene, let's look at the ball attended by Emma and Charles. How would you contrast this party given by a Marquis to the wedding of a farmer's daughter.

Flaubert was preoccupied with the topic of adultery as early as 1837 when he wrote Passion et vertu = Passion and Virtue, whose heroine, Mazza, resembled the Emma Bovary yet to be created.

Of course, society - and not only French society - was considerably harder on women than on men found to have been adulterous (among them indeed our dear Flaubert himself). Women were held to a "higher standard", or a "different standard", which was hardly logical and certainly unfair.

While Flaubert was working on EB, he wrote, "My poor Bovary suffers and cries in more than a score of villages in France at this very moment."

Re the POV : what is admirable in this novel, IMHO, is Flaubert's telling of it, his objectivity, the dispassionate recording of every trait and incident that serves to illuminate the psychology of the characters and their role in the logical development of the story ... and its inevitable tragic ending.

Poor Charles is indeed slow and dull, but - as has been well said in the French discussion - he is basically a gentle, good-natured, affectionate soul, no doubt profoundly relieved to be free of his mother's domination for the first time in his life, clumsily devoted to his pretty wife and proud of her artistic endeavors.

Emma, on the other hand, appears (to me) vague from the first; her head is in the clouds and filled with insufficiently digested notions. Whether she was more 'intelligent' than Charles could be a matter of debate - neither was an intellectual, to be sure. But in the realm of feelings I find her hopelessly wanting : she had none except for hereself.

In many ways the ball was disastrous for Emma and Charles IMO.

We know that Charles is rather slow, it was hard for him to keep up in school, and his appreciation of Emma is on a rather simple level. He doesn't acknowledge her embroidery or art or her reading but he feels a basic sensory pleasure in the added household refinements like the trimmed sconces, his new wife Emma, and the large blue glass vases on the mantelpiece.

Emma reads George Sand and Balzac "seeking in their pages vicarious satisfactions for her own desires" and she brings the books to the table but there's every indication from Flaubert that Charles doesn't notice the books or is even curious about them. She sings to Charles and recites all the amorous verses she has memorized but they don't affect him. He loves her and he's good and kind but she can't make herself love him.

No, Emma definitely has a more active intelligence than Flaubert gives to Charles but she is romantic, impressionable and inexperienced.

Emma and Charles go to the aristocrat's ball and at the dinner she "was surprised to notice that several of the [aristocratic] ladies had failed to put their gloves in their wine glasses." This is one of the lessons Emma learns; 'worldly society' ladies have certain freedoms like a man, such as the freedom to drink.

At the ball itself she notices how a lady asks a passing gentleman to retrieve her dropped fan and then the lady tosses a folded note into his hat. All so romantically clandestine yet casual. This is another lesson Emma learns: 'worldly society' ladies choose their lovers.

The vicomte waltzes with Emma and no matter that it was only one dance after which he selected another partner (and the lady had three men asking to be her partner). Emma takes the vicomte's image away from the ball and imagines a romance with him which is gradually replaced by the idea of romantic Paris itself. But this is another lesson that Emma learns: for 'worldly society' women there are other men besides Charles.

Emma is still inexperienced, impressionable and romantic. Charles dresses for the ball but hangs around in the background and doesn't dance and doesn't converse with anyone. He's tired by the end of the night, tolerant of his wife's entertainment, and doesn't have a clue. Except for her feelings of dissatisfaction, I don't believe Emma has a clue either as to their future.

Society's double standard -- the stuffiness of bourgeois values, the restrictions placed on women within that sphere -- is what Flaubert so brilliantly exposes and what may cause harm to the Bovarys.

Marvelle

Emma ..."was surprised to notice that several of the [aristocratic] ladies had failed to put their gloves in their wine glasses." actually that is "over" their wine glass - a gloved hand over the glass to indicate they do not want to be served - during this time in history it was considered bad manners or behavior for a peasant, for a women to drink wine in public - the aristocratic ladies were usually served during salon or dinner held in their great homes which is not public -

All this talk of wool gathering Emma wanting romance in her life - I look at our lives today - how many of us try to take our reality to another level by decorating our homes or creating parties or collecting antiques to recreate a romantic slice of life - even our desire to decorate for the holidays is our trying to create an image that is not part of a life that is just caring for our needs with all its difficulties as well as successes.

I remember dressing my children for certain events, like attending church and family gathering, in clothes not in keeping with their active bodies, before they held food well on their spoon or drank without knocking things over - and yet, they in their lovely clothes made the romantic picture that I imagined -

We often say that most men left alone live like hermits with just what is needed to sustain themselves - some are clean and others do not seem to develop that skill at all - they live as they will say, without putting on airs -

A women will gussy up the house - seems to me the gussying up that we do is romanticizing our lives by making our homes the picture that we can bury ourselves within, more than just rooms that satisfy the needs for basic living - we make our home into an oasis of charm or elegance according to our taste. We achieve this look by seeking pictures in magazines to guide us or look at the show rooms or builder homes or even out friends homes for ideas - no different then Emma picking up tips at the ball.

In fact it would be interesting to just list the ways we try to romanticize our lives - the way we wrap gifts, the notepaper we choose - some of us dress in very practical cloths and others of us create a look which is saying we are romaticizing our appearance -

Some of us continue to wax and polish fine Victorian or Colonial wood furniture and silver trays that we seldom use just to surround ourselves with the look of bygone days that we have even romanticized the era we are copying - We wax poetic over old music and Opera written over 100 years ago - we call all this being cultured when we are really romanticizing our lives.

How many of us want to be swept off our feet by husbands with flowers and thoughtful words or special evenings that take us away from the ordinary of our lives - we all day dream - we all like to be more than the mundane reality of our lives -

Yes, many people are romantic today with gift wrapping presents or gussying up a house, and I'm sure some devote their lives to daydreaming. But we all know that more will come in this novel than daydreaming or gussying up a house or else it wouldn't be a novel which needs conflict, climax, suspense. (Thank goodness, woman today have more options in life than Emma did/does!)

IMO Emma is a romantic so we may have to agree to disagree about that. I think we can agree that Flaubert is actually criticizing the bourgeois and not Emma?

I'm reading the Steegmuller translation and she has the gloves "in" the glass.

BARB, I enjoyed your insights on the wedding and the links were superb (as they always are). How do you see the section about the ball? Any impressions? I personally would be dazzled at such an affair as that ball.

Marvelle

I think it is not surprising that Emma falls in love with all the riches and glitter. My "romantic" side would come alive too. After all, she has lived on a farm. At her wedding, there was only one fiddler. Here, at the ball, there is an orchestra. At her wedding, brandy was served. Here, iced champagne is served with fruits she has never tasted. "She had never seen pomegranates or eaten pineapple." All of this is overwhelming to Emma. Poor Charles, his senses are not awakened. I am not sure what, if anything, excites him. Charles is simply blind to the beauties of life. If I were married to a man like Charles, I would cry my eyes out. He's lost in his own boring world.

THAT was a fabulous post, Hats, we were posting together, do you think if she tried to tell him ONE thing he might have tried to understand??

He's a good, simple soul, is he capable of understanding? In today's world he'd be the hero, right? Good, steady, and caring?

Wonderful juxtapositioning of the two feasts or scenes of celebration: the wedding and the ball, Joan G!! When you look at it that way all sorts of things pop out, great direction!!

I wanted to note also that the wedding description (me, too, Joan on the winding brightly colored scarf of people what a picture)! I was so struck by "Since the town hall was only a little more than a mile from the farm the entire party went there on foot and returned the same way after the church ceremony." I was just struck by that! Can you imagine a modern bride doing that?

These people are not accustomed to the life of luxury and that makes the ball scene even more of a flash for Emma, especially since she becomes disillusioned almost immediately in the marriage because she expected HIM to provide everything she wanted.

Unfortunately he can have no clue as to what she wants. Wonder why she does not tell him?

"But shouldn't a man know everything, excel in all sorts of activities, initiate you into the turbulence of passion, the refinements and mysteries of life?"

The ball will, I'm afraid, forever dazzle Emma beyond hope.

Even IF she tried to tell Charles, would he have ever understood, I wonder?

Hats, loved the poem parallel!!

The first question in the heading is about Point of View and there's another one I don't see anybody mentioning in the wedding scenes which were masterpieces of realistic detail: indirect discourse, in which the character's words sound like the narrator, it's confusing and it's all over this book, here's an example in the wedding scene,

It was all so long ago! Their son would now be thirty if he were still alive! He looked back again and saw nothing on the road.

In that small excerpt you can see we're at once in his thoughts, it was so long ago, his thoughts of his son and BLAMMO we're back in third person: HE looked back and saw nothing on the road, difference in narrator, fabulously done, the book is full of it, it's a switch in POV there, very adroit.

I keep thinking about the question in the heading on the point of view, it's beginning to appear that it changes with every twist in the plot, it becomes Emma's at the beginning of Chapter VI.

What did this mean in the ball scene: "Madame Bovary noticed that several ladies had not put their gloves in their wine glasses?"

And what is the "two wheeled charabancs" which brought guests to the wedding? And what is a game of cork penny the wedding guests were playing?

The writing in the ball scenes is so good, I feel like a peasant myself, what is meant by "the quail still had their feathers?" Ickers.

I really like this approach: loking at two different feasts, with Emma in both. I find myself comparing them and how they are presented, super direction!!

It looks like the mirror is broken:

Her trip to La Vaubyessard had made a gap in her life, like those great crevasses which a storm will sometimes hollow out on a mountainside in a single night!.....Her heart was like them: contact with wealth had left something on it which would not wear away.

Is this a case, literally, of "How you gonna keep them down on the farm, after they've seen Pareee?"

ginny

Barbara, Marvelle, you say it so well.

Is romanticizing dressing up, decorating our homes, reading romantice novels, putting on make up or do we do all that because we are women and that is what women do? I think that Charles is romantic but he wouldn't even think of trying to understand his wife from her point of view. He just basked in Emma's presence and beauty but in the nineteenth century, men didn't need to understand women because a wife was there to serve his needs without her ever needing anything in exchange.

Eloïse

I am finding some of the recent posts most interesting; as I read the novel I try to see how it relates to contemporary society in the United States. The role of the woman today is so different mainly because women often have to be wage earners and they can no longer stay at home. Yet the advertising world constantly assaults us (and it seems to me particularly women) with romanticized images, the need to be more beautiful, the need to have possessions to be loved. We are asked to spend, spend, spend. It would seem that our reality has not really changed that much.

Hats, you are so correct. What would you do if you were married to such a boring person? I started to saying "unfeeling" but I do think that Charles feels for Emma but unfortunately cannot fathom her personality. She is really a foreign person to him.

And this brings up an interesting topic for me and I may tread on dangerous ground. What do marriage vows mean? When and how were marriage vows first begun? Are marriage vows a part of religious ceremonies only? Emma is a most unhappy woman caught in a marriage that does not suit her. How many women (and men) today are caught in similar circumstances?

I raise these questions because I think that Flaubert has as much to say about contemporary life as about life in his time. You may recall that I was not enamored of the romance novel - but this is more than a romance novel - it is a commentary upon morals, values, passion, etc. Unfortunately I think (and I have not completed the book) that Emma is doomed to never finding what she wants or what she thinks she wants.

I am continually amazed at the descriptive detail in the book. Flaubert is a literary painter. He also seems to have an uncanny ability to capture the mental and emotional views of his characters -both male and female.

There are some really good posts since I was last in here.

I think there are some women to whom having a pretty house and pretty things are not the be all and end all in life - perhaps not in Emma's day but certainly today. I visit my sons' beautiful homes and will love the one Graham has just started building with all its expensive fittings and Karens interior decorating but its not important to me personally. I don't have to have the latest and the best. I have always been like that. Give me a good book and a good view from the window a garden to potter in and I feel content. I don't care what people have as long as they welcome me and we have stimulating conversation if they gave me a marmite sandwich for lunch that would be OK too. However I do think its human nature that some of us will always hanker after what we don't have or can't afford. The same with men - the most handsome the most passionate of men don't always make good husbands or fathers.

As for Emma- I don't have much patience with her. She does not appreciate what she has. She sees the world around her through rose tinted glasses and does not comprehend the falsety of much of it. She does not realise that much of real life is mundane. To my way of thinking for the time that she lived in she had a pretty good husband.

Carolyn

I see nothing to criticize if someone decorates a house in a way that reflects her or him. It is pleasant to be surrounded by things one likes or considers beautiful, and does not seem like an escape into romanticism to me at all. It is when I go into a house where an interior designer has been hired to bring in furnishings and decorate the place in the popular style of the day and not the personality and taste of the owner that I am bothered.

Emma was taken by Charles to a house where there had been another mistress. There were signs of that woman there, like the wedding bouquet. What she was doing by having new wallpaper installed and bringing in pretty knickknacks and bibelots, and decorating the lawn with birdbaths, was erasing Heloise and making her mark. That seems pretty normal to me. I've done the same thing when I've moved from one house to another.

Comparing the wedding celebration with the Marquis' gala is like comparing apples picked sun-warm from the tree with imported mandarin oranges. What struck me was Flaubert's clever mention of the faces of peasants peering in the window at the lavish party. This reminds Emma of "her father in his blouse out in the orchard" and herself "in the dairy skimming cream off the milk pans with her finger." For a fleeting second in all the glitter which surrounds her, Emma remembers what seems to me a wholesome, ungilded life, dull as it might be. She does not realize or know that aristocratic life is dull in a different way.

Flaubert here is satirizing the extravagances of the wealthy and the type of foolish freedom (liaisons dangereuses) they allow themselves within their bounds of society in much the same way as he criticized the restrictions of the bourgeoisie in his description of Emma's and Charles's wedding.

The dinner and dancing and all Emma saw at the party were like the music she had to sing in the convent which told lyrically about "angels with golden pinions, madonnas, lagoons and gondoliers" and the pictures under tissue paper like the "innocent damsel, with a tear on her cheek giving food to a dove between the bars of a Gothic cage." That unreal magical paradise and what she saw at the party were what she thought life should be. How could she possibly tell Charles this? He is as satisfied with his life as much as Emma is not. And how could he, as a country doctor, possibly provide for her the glitter and glamour she thinks she wants?

There is a method of applying plucked feathers to partridges and quails after these birds have been cooked. I couldn't find a recipe which told me how, but I have a feeling that the birds are put in a crust after they are partially roasted, then roasted again to bake the crust and the feathers are applied to that, possibly with an egg wash "glue". When the dish is served, the crust and feathers are discarded.

Mal

Well said, I agree with you. But I believe this to be Flaubert's exageration of her character; it seems to me that a woman of her kind, in the spotlight of a small French town in those days, even bored, self-centered, unrealistic, etc., might have had some kind of feeling for her little daughter, don't you? What is the real role of the pharmacien and his large family and his slovenly, affectionate wife? This one is certainly the opposite of Emma, but is she supposed to be the epitomy of what a woman was supposed to be there and then? There are many secondary characters, every one of them so true to form, I know Flaubert knew real people like them in real life.

Origins of Wedding Traditions

It is because of George's question about marriage vows that I posted a link to a page about origins of wedding traditions.

I have been writing a farcical novel recently as a reaction to the one I wrote before it. The previous book is a serious story of how a divorced woman in her forties adjusts to being alone after a more than twenty year marriage. It poses this question: Can an untrained woman make it financially in today's world, having worked at a paying job only briefly in her life? Or will she give in to a tendency to hide behind a bottle of booze, relationships with men, or something equally as damaging? This book is loosely based on some experiences of my own and those of other women I've known.

In my current story the 26 year old woman who is the protagonist falls in love and is married by an old New England curmudgeon who happens to be a justice of the peace. During the ceremony he says, "Do you promise to love, honor and obey for the rest of your life? You'd dang well better because divorce is a dirty word where I come from."

This is how I was raised. After you took marriage vows, you loved, honored and obeyed for the rest of your life because divorce was a terrible thing and "a dirty word". It didn't matter whether husbands and wives intensely disliked each other, there was hell to pay if they strayed, and they stayed married whether they had anything in common besides kids they disagreed about or whether they spoke to each other or not.

Emma Bovary didn't fall in love with Charles; she didn't love him or show much indication that she even liked him. She was bound to him by only vows and their religion. If she had left him, what would she have done? She didn't have any money or any developed skills. If she had been able to do more than embroidery, pencil sketches and read, where would she have found a job in a society where respectable women didn't work outside the home?

Today a woman in this situation is able to find some help as far as job training goes with some effort on her part, and might possibly be able to earn a very modest living, always hoping to find a better job and a more comfortable life. In Emma's time the only hope a woman had for a decent existence was through a man, even a man who, as relatively stable as Charles was, bored her to death. Emma Bovary's plight is hopeless -- and not that different from too many women I've known -- unless she accepts a life which seems to make her sick.

Mal

HATS, your comparison of the wedding and the ball was great. GINNY and All, thanks for the points and further food for thought.

It's still a tradition in some countries -- countryside of course -- for the wedding procession to wind through the community. The procession is a celebration for the married couple which invites everyone in the community to note the marital change in groom and bride and to rejoice in their new life together. It sets the status of the newly marrieds in the minds of their neighbors and in their own minds, It's also an affirmation of the community bond. This is something we miss in larger cities but there is also a type of safety in not being so visibly in front of a community.

Marvelle

I looked at Francis Steegmuller's introduction to my copy of Madame Bovary and here's what I found about gloves:

"[Emma's] surprise, at the chateau of La Vaubyessard, at seeing that 'several of the ladies had failed to put their gloves in their wineglasses,' points up a difference between social classes. Provincial bourgeoises of that time, brought up in a spit of genteel puritantism, considered it ladylike to eschew wine at dinner parties; they proclaimed their intention by fillng their wineglasses with their flimsy evening gloves or with a lace handkerchief. Ladies of the old aristocracy were freer in their behavior."

The emphasis on the last quoted sentence is mine. Emma has undergone culture shock at the ball! I see danger ahead if she tries to emulate the aristocratic ladies within her own society -- the bourgeois society that Flaubert constantly berates in this novel.

Marvelle

A charabanc is a tourist bus. The Bovarys arrived in a bus! Being two-wheeled it's small like a trap or gig, and not on the grander scale of carriages. See below link for comparison of the photos of 4-wheeled and 2-wheeled vehicles:

HAUGHTY CARRIAGES ETC

Marvelle

GINNY, I assumed it was the Bovarys who used the charabanc service? But now I see it was the Bovarys wedding guests? So the contrast is still between two classes but not between the Bovary couple and aristocrats but rather between the bourgeois wedding guests and the aristocratic guests at the ball.

About the cork penny game -- what chapter in Part 1 is that mentioned and what are the surrounding words or sentence(s)? If I know that I can find it in my book. So far I've only seen one actual game in Part 1 and don't know if that's your reference or not. Thanks.

Marvelle

It would probably be wise to let Ginny explain but I think the 'cork Penny game' is an expression to say that if you have gone a penny over, using a very tight budget, you put a cork in to stop spending but the emotion, within the bottle that you are corking, builds, especially if shaken up, and the cork pops so that it is not only an explosion but a like champagne, a celebration so that you end up spending even more each cork popping time.

I am still fascinated by all the ways I romanticize my life - I realize to knock out the sounds around me I often play my choice of music on my CD player - this reminds me as a kid we did not have a radio till I was 6 - I spent a month or more in bed with Scarlet Fever and ear surgery - I received a radio as a gift and listened to the baseball games hehehe and soap operas - remember the Guiding Light - I think some of those shows are on TV today - talk about taking time from the drudgery of housework to romanticize - Back in those years our windows were opened and the sounds of the day and night were part of our life - today those sounds are not joyful - through closed windows the neighbor mowing - a vehicle going by - the garbage truck - the low rumble of a refrigerator and the AC coming on or the heat coming on - interrupted by birds singing and sometimes dogs barking - we are not the quite world of my youth and so I block it out with sounds not available to me in my youth.

Interesting when you think about all the reality shows as compared to the overly romanticized sets for the Bachelorette or Bachelor in their evening dresses - did any of you watch Joe Millionaire? - I saw the last night and then we learned the truth in the later talk shows that they were acting and were not in love at all - ah so the dream popped.

I am trying to remember a time that I was so overwhelmed with wonder as Emma is at the ball - seems to me I remember a particular wonderful version of Swan Lake when Oddette and all her swans danced in on a stage with snow falling that took my breath and if I never saw the end of the Ballet or another Ballet again I would have felt transported in my mind to this remembered vision of wonder. I drifted along for days with the vision of that scene in my mind making every drugery disappear -

I must say though I was never one to leave things as they are - I was always trying to decorate the breakfast table to surprise the family for all the holidays - of course my deal was, to create and make with eyes for the possible greater then the time or energy I had to produce - I still have cloth not sewn along with needlework projects and a list of other wonders that I never got around to completing.

Leaves were brought in and apples piled in bowls and I still like going to what I call a "nice" restaurants - where the atmosphere is conducive to conversation with coffee rather than just a place to eat like a cafeteria. But then as a kid I loved a good romantic yarn about sea captains and explorers, especially mountain men, and gazing out the school room window imagining myself as Joan of Arc with banners flying in the wind.

And Charles - well he is just too close for comfort - I've known a Charles...trouble with the Charles' of the world is, they make no room for the Emma's to soar, they do not support making more of the world they live in, they only see anyone with the urge to be more as leaving themselves open to competion that they know they cannot win so they either do not try at all or they become oblivious. And then the biggie, they measure others by their view of how we should live, making no room much less support for the difference.

It reminds me of a saying that I do not have down pat - something about it take two kinds and the picture is of two caterpillars each on a stem - there is the kind that pays attention to climbing and tradition (that caterpillar is straight on his stem) and there is the kind who must dream and experiment (that caterpillar is half on the stem reaching out with its upper body into thin air) -

When neither feels their needs are being met they either rebel or go into their shell.

They say it takes a village to bring up a child - I've always thought it takes a village to either allow a child to soar or to hold a child down to expected behavior that feels safe - Emma and Charles are simple grown up children and Charles' childhood was all about achieving the expectations of others - being held in place.

Marvelle, that is very interesting about the gloves. I wondered why the gloves were on top or in the wine glasses. I read the phrase more than once thinking that I had misread it.

Just like language changes over time, etiquette has certainly changed from one century to the next, not to mention from country to country. I remember reading one time that in some country or countries it is proper to burp after a meal. It shows your enjoyment or satisfaction with the meal and drink. Such an action here would be thought of as totally rude.

I think back to "fancy" parties I have attended (not too many!) and I remember the woman placing her "gloved hand" over the glass to indicate that she did not want any.

Robby

There is a game described but not named at the wedding party in my copy of the book (translator: Steegmuller) and perhaps that's the cork penny game GINNY asked about? It's in Chapter IV of Part I where corks popped and the cider flowed freely during the dinner. Finally dessert came (see BARB's link on French Weddings) and --

"The banquet went on till nightfall. Those who grew tired of sitting took a stroll in the yard or played a kind of shuffleboard in the barn; then they returned to table. A few, toward the end, fell asleep and snored. But everything came to life again with the coffee: there were songs, displays of strength. The men lifted weights, played the game of passing their heads under their arms while holding one thumb on the table, tried to raise carts to their shoulders. Dirty jokes were in order; the ladies were kissed."

I think the game (my emphasis in the quoted passage) of passing heads under arms could be the cork penny game, perhaps a betting game undertaken after a few drinks? My second guess would be the 'type' of shuffleboard. GINNY, can you tell this is driving me crazy? Let me know if this is the passage and if not where the passage is located in the book?

Marvelle

Marvelle, in my book, "corkpenny" is at the top of page twenty five in Part I.

Thanks HATS but different editions won't have the identical parts of the novel on the same pages. That's why my confusion. Page 25 in my hardcover book doesn't call anything a corkpenny game and my page 25 is before there's any courtship much less a wedding party.

That's why I noted the Chapter number and quoted the passage so you or GINNY would be able to tell if that's the correct scene. Is it HATS? If it isn't, what does the passage you've mentioned say?

Confused in New Mexico, Marvelle

Victorian Table Manners
http://www.currensnet.com/ladies/tablemanners.HTM

Again the romantic idea of eating - I doubt many ate this way at home or that the farmer ate using these manners - and today how much of this romantic notion of eating do we train our children saying we are feeding our souls when seated at the table - when the reality is, we are in-taking the source of energy for our bodies.

Edwardian countryhouse (what we would consider a great house, a castle or a chateau) dining -
http://www.channel4.com/history/microsites/C/countryhouse/edwardianlife/food.html

Did you read how an Edwardian meal used about 50 pieces of china, crystal and silver for each person served - even with a dishwasher that is 1,000 pieces to wash and dry - at the Girl Scout camp I managed the kitchen one year and that would be enough to to wash and dry for 180 girls which was quite a production of steam in a commerical dishwasher -

Gloves are mentioned several times in this story - remember when we did not go up-town or to church or even on an interview without our short white gloves with the little slit or button on the inside wrist - and evening ware had long gloves with buttons at the wrist - I went to a High School where the uniform required we wear gloves -

According to my book of tradition symbols, gloves symbolize; good faith, a gage of honor, purity of heart, clean gloves and clean hands and a pure heart, freedom from bribery. Taking off gloves signifies respect, sincerity, since the glove can conceal the hand which is considered the most expressive part of our bodies.

With our hand we demand, promise, summon, dismiss, threaten, supplicate, express aversion or fear, question or deny. We use them to indicate joy, sorrow, hesitation, confession, penitence, measure, quantity, number, and time. Hands have the power to excite and prohibit, express approval, wonder, shame - they can be folded, clasped, on the breast, crossed at the wrist, cover the eyes, be outstretched, placed on another palms outward or palm upward, raised to the head, are used in a pledge, to bless, shake, pray, etc.

Some of the places in Bovary that speak of hands and gloves -

"...the whiteness of her nails. They were shiny, delicate at the tips, more polished than the ivory of Dieppe, and almond-shaped. Yet her hand was not beautiful, perhaps not white enough, and a little hard at the knuckles; besides, it was too long, with no soft inflections in the outlines."
"...these visits to the farm so pleasant an interlude in the dull monotony of his daily life? On those days he would get up betimes, start off at the gallop and ride hard all the way, dismounting to wipe his boots on the grass and to put on his black gloves before going into the house."
"Emma from time to time cooled her cheeks with the palms of her hands, and cooled these again on the knobs of the huge fire-dogs"
"Old Rouault ...on the other hand, agriculture properly so called, and the internal management of the farm, suited him less than most people. He did not willingly take his hands out of his pockets, and did not spare expense in all that concerned himself, liking to eat well, to have good fires, and to sleep well."
"discussion of money matters was put off; moreover...some big girls of fourteen or sixteen, cousins or elder sisters no doubt, rubicund, bewildered, their hair greasy with rose pomade, and very much afraid of dirtying their gloves."
"He was happy then, and without a care in the world. A meal together, a walk in the evening on the highroad, a gesture of her hands over her hair,"
"For six months, then, Emma, at fifteen years of age, made her hands dirty with books from old lending libraries."
"...Emma's dress, too long, trailed a little on the ground; from time to time she stopped to pull it up, and then delicately, with her gloved hands,"
"Along the line of seated women painted fans were fluttering, bouquets half hid smiling faces, and gold stoppered scent-bottles were turned in partly-closed hands, whose white gloves outlined the nails and tightened on the flesh at the wrists."
"The young beaux were strutting about in the pit, showing in the opening of their waistcoats their pink or applegreen cravats, and Madame Bovary from above admired them leaning on their canes with golden knobs in the open palm of their yellow gloves."
"Emma sometimes tucked the red edge of his sweater up under his vest, or straightened his tie, or threw away a pair of faded old gloves he was about to put on; and it was never, as he believed, for his sake that she did it, but for her own, out of exasperated vanity."
"It was thus the druggist ...spent long hours there alone, labelling, decanting, and doing up again; and he looked upon it not as a simple store, but as a veritable sanctuary, whence there afterwards issued, elaborated by his hands, all sorts of pills, boluses, infusions, lotions, and potions, that would bear far and wide his celebrity."
"So that in all the towns about they were found wearing his long wadded merino overcoat and black frock-coat, whose buttoned cuffs slightly covered his brawny hands--very beautiful hands, and that never knew gloves, as though to be more ready to plunge into suffering "

Flaubert tells his story in so many little ways - the progress of gloved hands or not gloved tell so much - it starts with Emma's ungloved hands not white enough and too long for Charles with her hard knuckles, hands that at age 15 touching the beautiful binding of the books that opened her eyes to more than the farm and basic physical needs of her family, and ends with the reality of of her suffering that the ungloved brawny beautiful hands of the doctor could not keep her alive.

From BARB's link on Victorian Table Manners:

#27 When finger glasses are passed around at the end of the dinner, merely wet your fingertips and your mouth. Do not rinse your mouth.

#32 ...macaroni may be eaten with the fingers.

I'll try to remember those dining tips -- I won't rinse (or gargle) at the table and I'll forego the fork and use my fingers instead with the macaroni. The links, as always, BARBARA were fun and informative and I enjoyed how you strung together the 'hands' passages which shows Flaubert's attention to the smallest of details to build the mood, tone, and meaning throughout the novel.

A little bluebird told me that the cork penny game is the one some of the wedding guests played when they went out to the barn. Steegmuller translated that section as: "Those who grew tired of sitting took a stroll in the yard or played a kind of shuffleboard in the barn, then they returned to the table."

The mystery is solved! Corkpenny is a kind of shuffleboard. Someone said perhaps you hit the cork, trying to move the penny with it, or vice versa. Like shuffleboard with its squares.

Marvelle

Well, Ginny sent you off on a merry chase today, didn't she? Thank you all for this background information.

Flaubert wrote at the time impressionist painters were doing their artwork in France. As I think of his descriptions, in my mind Flaubert is an impressionist writer. Impressionist artists were rebelling against the accepted type of tight, paint-by-the-rules realism which had come before. Below are links to some paintings which I think reveal some of what Flaubert was trying to say with words.

The Gleaners by Millet

Dance in the Country by Renoir

Dance in the City by Renoir

Thank you Barbara and Mal for the links. Barbara, I really enjoyed reading how often "hands" and "gloves" were written about in just Part I.

Barbara, thank you for your last post regarding hands as it made me look at the detail of this book in a new and more intelligent way.

Mal, as a former art gallery owner, your impressionistic images were a wonderful addition and supported my view of Flaubert as a painterly novelist. But I will have to think about whether Flaubert is an impressionist. The impressionist painters did not follow the rules and blurred detail in their paintings; they painted impressions of what they saw. Flaubert, on the other hand, is a stickler for detail. The Impressionists introduced feeling into their paintings in a way that had not been done before. Flaubert does do this. So I am in a quandry.

George, I almost changed what I said about Flaubert because of what I know about him, but let it pass. In a way, he was a rule breaker, too. Details or not, Flaubert makes me think of paintings, even Brueghel (Pieter the Elder), and Brueghel certainly was not of Flaubert's time.

Mal

I am most happy to see all the posts in the English discussion.

You are all most welcome to visit and post in English in the French discussion too and please click on the links in the heading that shows images of museums, monuments, 19th century famous authors, the sound track of a concerto by Chopin's, a popular song and more.

Eloïse

Notice the evenness of Flaubert's painterly strokes in his descriptions, as over and over he strings them together (often in 3's) with no conjunctions to interrupt the flow. You can see examples in the passages quoted by Marvelle and Barbara.

Thanks, Marvelle, for the Steegmuller clarification on the gloves, since in French it says clearly gloves in their glasses. And the game after lifting weights is "they passed under their thumbs," which the translation clears up for me.

With my high school French I read some of the posts in the French discussion - interesting - one poster explained how the look of food, the presentation is as important to the kitchen as the taste - that the look is what wets the appitite and would be why the expressive dishes - foods shaped to look like columns in a garden were served during the wedding feast.

Thanks for the tip Mme - need to look for threes - there is a poetic sound to his writing isn't there.

The links in Joan's heading open pages that have numerous links on them. Much information can be gleaned by exploring the links. Museums, Art and historic essays that can paint you a very good picture of life in that era.

Theron

The comparisons of the wedding reception and the ball made me think of the Renoir paintings: Dance in the Country and Dance in the City, except that I think the country couple is supposed to be having a lot of lively fun and the ciry couple rather buttoned down (note the gloves on the City couple).

MmeW buttoned up but beautiful - I can see how Emma's head was spinning during the ball. I do not get the impression Charles was ever loose enough to dance as in the painting of the couple in the country. Both women, city and country girls wore gloves...

Mme W, check out Post #132.

Theron, I've had a very good time going through the links Joan posted, and her photograph of Monet's garden at Giverny is wonderful.

Mal

I found a very interesting link on the web but was unable to make it clickable. PAT came to my rescue and made it clickable for me in the French discussion group.

It is an article written by Geoffrey Wall on Who Was the Real Madame Bovary ? I daresay you'll get a kick out of what Mr. Wall has to say about Flaubert (and how he says it)... He also posits, quite persuasively, that Delphine Delamare and Louise Pradier were the (real) models for Emma Bovary.

Wonderful links all, BARBARA and MAL, thank you.

I was glad when short white gloves went out of fashion. I always had trouble wearing rings and sometimes I wore them on the outside. I still have some lovely long white kid gloves. I can't seem to part with even though I doubt very much if I shall ever wear them again.

Madame Bovary online....for those who may be interested.

"Who Was the Real Madame Bovary ?" by Geoffrey Wall.

Oops, Mal—great minds and all that! Don't know how I missed it!

I thought it was funny, Madame!

Mal

I have really enjoyed coming in here and reading all the excellent posts that have been made since I posted last night. The discussion has been just wonderful.

Traude thanks for your excellent comment " Re the POV : what is admirable in this novel, IMHO, is Flaubert's telling of it, his objectivity, the dispassionate recording of every trait and incident that serves to illuminate the psychology of the characters and their role in the logical development of the story ... and its inevitable tragic ending. "

Marvelle, I agree that the ball was disastrous for Emma.

Yes , Barbara we do, or many of us anyway, try to improve our surroundings in a way that is pleasing to us. We all do things that are like things that Madame Bovary did. I love to travel and I look back at that photo in the heading here and dream about Monet's garden in May. This gives me pleasure as it gave me pleasure when I was there. I am sure that many of us love special evenings and romantic settings but know that these things do not happen every day. I think most of us can accept this. Emma Bovary could not accept the reality that she could not be in the places and situations of her dreams.

Excellent comment Hats.

Ginny, I wonder too if Charles would have tried to understand if she had told him how she felt. I continue to wonder why she expected him to know and provide everything.

Eloise, very good point, "... but in the nineteenth century, men didn't need to understand women because a wife was there to serve his needs without her ever needing anything in exchange. I don't think that ended with the 19th century. Maybe by the last of the 20th century it was not longer true but it certainly was true through alot of the 20th century in many instances.

Excellent comment George!

Mal, excellent comment, " Flaubert here is satirizing the extravagances of the wealthy and the type of foolish freedom (liaisons dangereuses) they allow themselves within their bounds of society in much the same way as he criticized the restrictions of the bourgeoisie in his description of Emma's and Charles's wedding."

Barbara, you did a very good job of summing up what Charles childhood was like with your comment, " Charles' childhood was all about achieving the expectations of others..."

I really enjoyed all the discussion about gloves.

MmeW, I very much enjoyed your comment about "the evenness of Flaubert's painterly strokes in his descriptions, as over and over he strings them together (often in 3's) with no conjunctions to interrupt the flow."

Emma Barb, I love beautiful gloves just like I love beautiful hats.

Pat W., thanks for making Traude's link clickable.

Mal, I ejoyed looking at Millet's Gleaners. It is one of my favorite paintings. When I am in Paris I often go to the D'Orsay just to look at it.

All the links are excellent! Thanks so much for them everyone.

Joan

As you read Part I did you notice windows being mentioned? Could they be a symbol?If so, of what?

Flaubert says, "She thought sometimes , that , afterall, this was the happiest timeof her life: the honeymoon, as people called it.,To taste the full sweetness of it, it would no doubt, have been necessary to fly to those lands with sonorous names where the days after marriage are full of the most suave laziness!" Here are some links to sites that give the origin of honeymoon.

http://www.idiomsite.com/honeymoon.htm

http://friendlyjoker.com/friendlyjoker/mis-2.html

http://www.erieweddingplanner.com/honeymoon_history_101.html

Let's discuss the meaning of the following quotation from the novel:

"But it was above all the meal-times that were unbearable to her, in this small room on the ground-floor, wit its smoking stove, its creaking door, the walls that sweated, the damp pavement; all the bitterness of life seemed served up on her plate, and with the smoke of the boiled beef there rose from her secret soul waves of nauseous disgust. Charles waas slow eater; she played with a few nuts, or, leaning on her elbow, amused herself drawing lines along the oilcloth table-cover with the point of her knife."

Hi Joan, thank you for the above links. Mme. W I really enjoyed the Renoir paintings. Those paintings bring Flaubert's writing alive. Looking at the paintings, I feel as though Emma jumped from the pages of my book and into a frame at the museum. Thanks Traude for your link.

Joan, I did not notice the use of windows in Part 1 and will go back and look. However, windows are a transparent separation between the viewer and the scene through the window. In the case of Emma, her view of her village is the same, day after day. Monotony! She looks for the new, the exciting, the different - but what she sees is the dull routine of village life.

BUT in her mind, her window provides a far different perspective. She imagines that she sees the life she should have been living. She feeds off of this image; she lives off of this image. She denies the reality of her life. And by denying reality, she sinks into depression.

I shared this thought in the French group discussing Madame Bovary but would like to do the same here.
I was referring specifically to the spot at the dance where Charles indicates that he might get out on the dance floor and Emma answers: "You must be off your head! People would laugh at you. Sit still and watch the others. It looks better for a doctor."
This, to me, illustrates the innate selfishness in Emma. This was extremely rude. She had come to the dance with her husband and (to translate from the French I wrote in the other discussion) she was now "throwing him in the garbage." For her he no longer existed. He was still living in the present while she was already living in the future. Their lives were no longer connected. She saw herself as the Grand Dame and he was nothing. And so she lied to him telling him how "grand" he was being a doctor and that it would be below him to be out on the floor.
It was a sign of what was to come.

Robby

Hi. I looked at all those carriages and noticed they were English. The "charaban" Flaubert is writing about was probably an ordinary horse carriage, or "char" with a bench or "banc" on either side. Those existed in the French countryside. They were definitely not as elegant or dernier cri as Emma would have liked or as the aristocrats possessed. But a bus? I don't think so. This, of course, emphasizes the social difference between the Bovarys and their wealthy hosts. Emma may have wanted to fit in, but she would never have been accepted, being a farmer's daughter. These differences still existed in the 20th c. and probably still do.

Thank you for those interesting links, Joan.

I read somewhere that Flaubert said his portrayal of Emma Bovary would affect every woman who read about her; that they'd find part of themselves in this character he created. I thought, What ego; there's nothing of Emma Bovary in me.

Joan has brought up the use of windows in the book, and George has responded in a way that makes a liar out of me. I grew up in a countrified area of a small New England city. My view was of fields and trees and a pond across the dirt road in front of the house. Because of my handicap, it was not easy to change that view, which, though rustic and lovely, because of its familiarity it had a tendency to be a bore.

I have lived in the country a good part of my adult life, much of which has been spent alone. The restrictions caused by often idyllic country living seemed claustrophobic at times. I yearned to escape to the city (New York in one case) and the excitement of music, art and food it offered, but rarely had the chance, since I couldn't do it on my own.

Now I am pretty much housebound, once again in the country. If I did not have a computer and the monitor window to the world it provides, I'm sure I'd be depressed, or at least very bored.

Imagination has provided a real window for me most of my life. Emma Bovary was full of imagination, too, and dreamed of paradisiacal places where she deluded herself into thinking she should be. Though her life was not physically painful in the way mine often has been, in her mind her life was painful in every possible way.

Sweetmeat and sugar plums, satin and lace, jewels and adoration were what Emma desired. It is a sense of isolation I share with her, not a dream of fairyland. Flaubert was right.

Mal

I am glad George brought up the word "depression." Robby, I wondered whether Emma might be what we would today call clinically depressed or manic-depressive. Emma loses her appetite, does not care about how she dresses,etc. At the end of part I, I noticed the words "nervous malady." What were the psychological terms used for women who faced "mental illness" during the time of Flaubert or Madame Bovary? My mind thought of Sigmund Freud. Did he live and work during the time of Flaubert?

Interesting comments, Hats. Sigmund Freud was born in 1856. Flaubert was born in 1821.

Mal

Wonderful comment George!

Very good points Robby!

mssuzy, you are right about the fact that Madame Bovary would not have fit in with the aristocratic society and probably still would not.

Hats , I am sure that Madame Bovary was depressed. Maybe Robby will comment more on this.

Here is a link to Sigmund Freud that gives you a quick chronology.

http://www.freud.org.uk/chronology.htm

Joan

I haven't yet gotten as far in the story as you folks so I want to wait a bit to comment on "clinical depression." I am reading it in French and that takes me a bit longer. At the moment it would seem to me that it was more a matter of the environment in which she was raised rather than any mental disorder or genetic predisposition toward it.

Robby

Whew how different we see that scene Robby - we do see these scenes from our own experiences don't we - but to me she was floored that he would not see the wonderment that she was trying to take in and her insecurity of properly adding to that wonderment - I can easily understand her reluctance to join the dancers, especially since Charles seemed to see the evening, in what to me seemed such selfish terms by ogling her, wanting her attention for his satisfaction, being friendly in order to change her focus to their relationship rather than to support her as she is entranced with this wonderment she was privileged to observe - like looking at a wonderful piece of art and have your partner more interested in how enchanting you look enjoying the art -

We know through our relationship with our creative self, we experience our personal power - and a partnership is based on sharing your hopes and dreams with someone who is accepting, which is the ingredient toward intimacy -

Charles' thought for intimacy is to take Emma's attention away from her creative self as she is absorbing like a sponge her surroundings that are so perfect she cannot imagine inflicting their country ways in this setting. Emma would hope that he would see how inappropriate their current skills were while having her similar resolve to learn how to be a part of this new scene - almost like slurping soup - this was not the atmosphere to slurp soup just because the soup was there.

Robby what kind of depression would it be labled if the environment is inhibiting her ability to develop further and use the talents she has acquired. Emma is isolated (which we know is a crazy making experience) because of the proper 'form' middle class households are expected to follow. With less need for her labor because of their class status, Emma now has fewer avenues for challenging work - embroidery and reading is not exactly challenging -

I would feel angry as I imagine Emma feels angry - Anger that is illusive and without an apparent cause - Anger that feels confusing since she is doing all that is expected of a middle class wife with little satisfaction and with no challenge - women are not supposed to feel anger therefore, as so many agree, most women turn anger on themselves in the form of depression.

It seems to me that being boxed in, having the responsibility, devised by neglect from Charles, to learn and grow, Emma has no avenue for the expression of her learning and growing and is and example of what so many women experienced until the later part of the twentieth century. There are so many books now about the depression experienced by women after WW2 when their only outlet was home and family - that cultural time in history is reminding me so much of what Emma is experiencing.

I thought the image of Charles enjoying his wife with her hands up over her hair was so telling - a sign of surrender - surrender to Charles - he did not see beauty in her long hands - which to me is a sign that her far reaching hands was not something Charles saw as an advantage or as beautiful -

As I read, the sadness to me is, Charles wanted a capable wife who made him feel great in the warmth of family - he did not think about his wife's needs - with her energy if married to another she could have been a Madame Curie - Charles needed a wife that did not have the mind and energy of Emma.

Charles' independent mind was not nurtured as a child and he was closed off from that part of himself. He was so busy satisfying other's demands of him that he lost his sense of curiosity which is the main ingredient to learning and growth. Seems to me Charles wanted a women that would provide him the comfort and love he did not receive as a child. Where as Emma wanted a husband who was going to admire growth and learning and partake in their together increasing their learning and growth which her childhood farm life with a father keeping his hands in his pocket was not offering as opportunity.

Yes, I am harder on Charles - he had the power to make a difference, to understand Emma, talk to her and listen to her dreams. His indifference trivialized Emma's vitality.

I don't read that much depth in Flaubert's portrayal of Emma. In my opinion, she is a selfish, immature woman, who was so involved in her own needs and herself that she couldn't give much of anything to her husband or her child or anyone else.

It seems to me that Charles gave her as much as he could -- time, space, servants, love. He was not equipped to share much with her intellectually, but Emma's intellectual pursuits appear shallow to me anyway, more like a pose rather than a means to grow and find satisfaction for herself.

As I read somewhere or other, Flaubert drew these two characters too weak really to expound the lofty things he was trying to say. Scratch the surface of Charles, and you find a dull, plodding, ordinary man. Scratch the surface of Emma, and a vain, neurotic, egocentric woman is revealed.

Mal

Wow everybody, what deep thoughts and I went to agree with almost everybody on almost everything.

Joan its wonderful that you could catch the purple flowers with the scene at Giverny. You do such wonders with a camera. I love to pause on it when I come here.

Eloïse

Mal, I agree with your post 160.

I am sorry if I made a liar out of you and in looking back to what I said, I am not sure what you mean. At any rate, no slight or hurt was intended.

I envy those of you who can wear hats and they look good. Ever since I was little and made to wear hats when I went to church and at special occasions, I felt like it was a punishment. I used to wish I was taller (like my aunt who often took care of me) and could wear those lovely wide-brim garden hats. My aunt always looked so striking in those (she was 6'2" and I was always so short). I have a lovely pair of black lace gloves that go just over the elbow and the fingers are out (you know the kind)....but where does one wear those these days. The last formal thing I attended was The Governor's Ball and I was in a long gown and felt out of place.

A lot of artists use windows in their paintings, especially the Old Masters like Vermeer. I personally like the refelections from them....it gives the painting dimension. Perhaps the windows in Flabert's book were a reflection into his soul.

I believe Emma Bovary was a vegetarian (I don't eat red meat). I was sort of nauseous when I read about the smoke of the boiled beef and the smoking burning of the stove. And oilcloth on a table .... no thank you.

I thought Emma Bovary was being selfish also telling Charles he should not dance because he would be laughed at. I was assuming though that Charles was not a very good dancer and maybe never danced a step in his life and she didn't want to be embarrased by him.

"I was assuming though that Charles was not a very good dancer and maybe never danced a step in his life and she didn't want to be embarrased by him."
I can see where Charles might feel embarrassed if he was not that good a dancer but why would his ineptness embarrass her? Was she identifying herself with him by virtue of being his wife? No identity of her own?
And if she had her own itentity separate from his, what was the point of her rudely (in my opinion) laughing at him and "ordering" him not to dance? Could she not be in charge of her own behavior without believing that his behavior reflected upon her? Was she not strong enough within her own self to let her own behaviors speak for themselves?
Was she trying to "put herself up" by "putting him down?" Was she, to use the parlance of our day, a "control freak?"

Robby

Emma didn't see Charles fitting into her fantasy life at the ball and that's why she kept him out of it, IMO. She wasn't a good dancer herself, in reality. The vicomte cut short their dance when she got all tangled up with the door and stepping wrong.

Marvelle

Mal I entirely agree with your post above. Emma had it good compared to most women of her class and time. If she was my daughter and moaned to me I would tell her so. No other human being can provide 100% for anothers emotional needs its up to us as individuals to find peace and happiness within ourselves. If this sounds harsh I am sorry!

Carolyn

Marvelle, thank you so much for the wonderful explanations, of the gloves in the wine glass, I've enjoyed EVERYBODY'S input here, loved the city dance and country dance, the cork penny and of the carriages, and all the points you have added here. At Vaux le Vicomte, which preceeded Versailles in France, they have an entire stable full of carriages, apparently they kept every carriage since it was built and all the harness, too. It's a spectacular exhibit with photos, when applicable, of the real people in the coaches and sounds of hoof beats, here's one of the coach and four: Coach and Four at Vaux le Vicomte. My text translation of Madame Bovary is full of the words Postillion and Post, and I've enjoyed looking up those terms, apparently the postillion is the rider on the near horse to the driver, you have seen them in Queen Elizabeth's coaches when she goes out, I love the sport of driving, it's been super to read that exciting URL.

It's an interesting thing to contemplate the windows in this book: there seem to be a lot of them, the hurdy girdy guy is seen thru the windows, too, are the windows some kind of symbol of being outside the life desired (from all standpoints?) They're all over the place when you start looking for them: I think it's all the windows that made me think of the Lady of Shallott and her looking glass.

Then there are the broken windows when Emma was inside the ball and looking out at the peasants looking in, (she's inside, they are not) but then she leans out the window of her room for a long time after they went to bed, looking at all the other windows of the chateau, trying to guess behind which window which noble was inhabiting and "She longed to know all about their lives, to enter into them and become part of them," (she's outside even tho physically staying in the chateau, actually a very nice touch? She's there but she's really not a part of it)....

I am not sure what all the windows represent in this, didn't they have some kind of elaborate signal, the father and Charles with a window shutter if she accepted him? Windows again!

Emma's wanting to be part of society is ironic because she has just told her husband before the ball "Stay in your place. Besides....doctors shouldn't dance anyway."

I am wondering if his being the doctor is the reason she is there, in the first place. I did not understand the marquis's reasoning,

When he saw Emma he noticed that she had a shapely figure and that she did not bow to him like a peasant, so at the chateau it was decided that the young couple could be invited without going beyond the limits of gracious condescension or causing anyone any embarrassment.

I am not sure what that means?

At which moment in her new married life did Emma became so disenchanted with her husband and new life that she essentially stopped trying, does anybody know when that was or what caused it, because she did try for a while, to make things nice, little creative things which he appreciated, then she stopped.

I had thought that she had kept her former home spotless and everything in super order but in looking back I see dirty glasses, etc., and so need to read those parts again, my first impression of the household had been all spic and span and well managed, but in Chapter III we have flies crawling up the sides of dirty glasses (glass again!!) and so I am not sure.

The windows could symbolize a barrier I guess, a physical manifestation of the actual social barriers in the piece? OR maybe they could symbolize a physical difference between reality and Emma's dreams because she surely does not have much of a hold on what's real: one example is the way she distorts and magnifies Charles's faults almost as IF through a glass, however darkly. And then we have the gloves in the wine glasses. We've got a lot of glass images and window images repeating, why, I don't know but they're very vivid!

ginny

Oh dear do not want to argue that is why I said we all see this from our own experience - Since being a 'control freak' is abusive behavior I immediately refreshed myself with The Verbally Abusive Relationship by Patricia Evans a sort of Bible to the understanding of abuse - that and also, what I usually do, which is to change a character's role -

First of all these folks lived in the mid eighteen hundreds - and so there was no equal power between men and women also, the middle class was just struggling to find itself -

But let's look at this as if a man today had the wonderful good fortune to be invited to the Belgian Grand Prix. He and some others had the opportunity to be on the track to admire Enrique Bernoldi's Orange Arrow formula One - the man's fairly new wife is there with him as he is standing in awe of this machine - she suggests they be one of the couple that take the car around the track - First I think the guy is busy admiring and looking at how this vehicle is put together but then, I think he would feel better with someone else behind the wheel especially for a first time spin.

Now if Enrique himself or one of the pit crew offer to take him - fine - but the fact that he and his wife drives a sports car, not even a Lamborghini, makes him feel a little inhibited about going on the track with his wife in this rarified machine and he is probably interested in first seeing how the Formula One opporates all the while admiring its look.

Now using a child is a bit harder since children seldom have the power to get what they want by just disagreeing - if a child is watching a parade, say the Rose Bowl Parade and is wrapped up in this wonder and her family says lets go walk in the Parade, the child misses seeing the remaining parade plus feels uncomfortable - where as if a clown comes along and asks the child to join the parade there is a difference. The Clown is part of the parade and allows the child to feel, although she isn't ready for the performance, it is OK.

And then to Patricia Evans who points out that one of typically 15 characteristics of verbal abuse is to 'Trivialize' - in essence she says, Trivializing is often done in a frank and sincere tone of voice, therefore difficult to detect. A person should feel a sense of her mate's pleasure in and approval of her work, dreams, skills etc. She will feel frustrated if the mate does not understand how important this is to her.

"Trivializing is confusing to the partner because, if she doesn't recognize it for what it is, she believes she somehow hasn't been able to explain to her mate just how important certain things are to her...Good will in a relationship is a warmth and honesty which comes from one's deepest sense of truth...Don't ever delude yourself into thinking that you should have the ability to stay serene no matter how you are treated. Your serenity comes from the knowledge that you have a fundamental right to a nurturing environment and a fundamental right to affirm your boundaries...Trivializing is abusive behavior which makes light of your work, your efforts, your interests, or your concerns. It is often done with feigned innocence. The abuser invades your boundaries and moves into your psyche by telling or showing you that what is meaningful to you has little meaning - what is valuable to you has little value."

I think Emma was short with Charles and back to the old story women are not supposed to be angry - Also, we must look at the time in history - Emma had no legal rights to even own property - she was in affect the legal property of her husband - therefore the behavior we expect today for a women to share and expect accord is based on a more equal partnership - During this time in history women were more like captives with all the behavior of those in unequal positions. She could make the best of it which is what most women did but Emma had a brain that was being slowly squashed. She could only live through her husband - this time in history did not allow her to live for herself. Even Anandine Aurore Lucie Dupin had a pseudo nam that made her work accepted as if written by a man.

George, oh no, you didn't hurt me! You opened my eyes when you said "her village is the same, day after day. Monotony." I had said Flaubert was wrong when he stated that reading about Emma Bovary would touch some part of every woman who read the novel. Thanks to you, I realized that isolation was what I had in common with her, and, at least for this woman, Flaubert was right.

To me, windows as described by Flaubert signify someone inside who wants to get out. They emphasize a feeling of being trapped, which is how Emma Bovary felt. She doesn't appear to understand that her sense of freedom depends on her, whether she's married or not.

Interesting, isn't it, that the windows that were broken at the dance, which Ginny mentions, were too high for the peasants to use to come in or anyone inside to get out?

Mal

This is what I posted in the French discussion this morning in response to Robby's post about Emma's urging Charles not to dance.
"I had the impression that Emma didn't want Charles to dance because she was afraid he'd embarrass her. By urging him not to dance, she put a wall of separation between them, something she desired. Charles wasn't good enough for her and her grand ideas. Dancing together would join them and thus lower her in the eyes of the aristocratic crowd that was there. She seems to be constantly aware of his gaucheness, as opposed to the polish she deluded herself into thinking she had."
Mal

I know that Willa Cather was influenced in the structure of her novel The Professor's House by an exhibition of Dutch Interior paintings. In those paintings there is the confined space of a domestic interior and an unlimited outdoor expanse beyond a window.

Paintings by Johannes Vermeer:

GIRL READING A LETTER AT AN OPEN WINDOW

LADY STANDING AT A VIRGINAL

Painting by Pieter de Hooch (1629-1684):

WOMAN PEELING APPLES

More...

Marvelle

Windows are frequently used as symbols in writing. Here are some meanings:

1 -- a window is separation and isolation, a division between the interior/exterior

2 -- looking out a window you are an observer of life

3 -- a window at night is a dim mirror that reflects your image back onto yourself; a time of introspection

4 -- a dirty window means the person is not seeing/understanding clearly; a period of illusion

5 -- a closed window is a barrier, it shuts you off from life and prevents you from reaching your dreams/goals

6 -- an open window is access; a sense that you can achieve your dreams/goals

7 -- a broken window if deliberately broken is escape from one world to another (whether in/out or out/in)

8 -- a face at a window is fear of criticism, fear of being judged

9 -- climbing out a window is escaping your feelings

10 -- climbing into a window -- facing yourself or seeing what makes someone tick

11 -- no windows is not seeing what's going on around you

These are general symbolic meanings of windows and of course there are shadings to the meanings used by different authors in different settings. Edgar Allan Poe used windows in his story "The House of Usher" where the entire house symbolized the state of the main character (not the narrator) and the windows of the house were the eyes into his soul.

In another Poe story "The System of Doctor Tarr and Professor Fether" the windows separated the sane society outside from the insane kept in an asylum. (This story was modernized and revised by Ken Kesey into One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest. I prefer the Poe story.)

In "The System of Doctor Tarr and Professor Fether" the insane people actually run the asylum and it's the sane who are locked up. The sane people break out and then break back into the asylum through the windows to take over. And you end up wondering who was really who. Somehow this reminds me of Emma and the bourgeois society.

Marvelle

Possibly G. Flaubert was not a very good dancer himself as he wrote Charles into that role, but thru Emma Bovary he was able to romanticize what it would be like to be twirled around on the dance floor by some handsome young man. Afterall most women are better dancers than men anyway, especially country doctors. (Now I'll duck in case someone wants to throw something at me.)

Again I agree with Mal! Spot on Mal! I have exactly the same thoughts. Emma is driving me to distraction.

Carolyn

Well as long as we can all agree to disagree we have it made in the shade - I do not think we need a consensus to appreciate the story. Again, we all come from different experiences - just like seeing an accident when the various on-lookers are interviewed, sometimes you wonder if they were all at the same accident - just as long as we do not insist that others agree with us or allow ourselves to get carried away labeling behavior to be more than it is, I think we are in good shape don't you.

I loved your thoughts Marvelle - using the example of Poe's "The System of Doctor Tarr and Professor Fether" - again for me the boxed in feeling and turning to a man was the movie 'Ryan's Daughter' - I saw it as a dream sequence from the time the British officer entered the bar till he kills himself but others see it all as a piece of reality. Again another example of a beautifully told story of society boxing in behavior.

hehehe not a good dancer himself huh...I love it. Was the waltz in yet at this time in history - hmmm I wonder what kind of dancing they did - there had to have been a live orchesra - I need to look in my costume book and see if I figure out the kind of dresses the women were wearing - this would be before our Civil War but after the Empire look that we know from books like Pride and Prejudice.

BARB, we posted at the same time. Poe's story "The System of Doctor Tarr and Professor Fether" is dear to my heart. It's a lot about labeling and how difficult if not impossible it is for a person, once labeled, to free themselves from society's box.

EmmaBarb, now that's an interesting thought about Flaubert and dancing as Emma. It would agree with Flaubert's statement that he is Mme Bovary but I think authors do put bits of themselves into certain of their characters. Emma was a dreamer and a rebel. She had to contend with a restrictive society. I see Flaubert in Emma and the entire novel of Madame Bovary.

So far Emma has managed (mostly) to handle that woman-hating-woman, the senior Madame Bovary, but the force of bourgeois society that puts women into boxes is strong. Emma is dissatisfied with her life, she has a right to feel that way, she dreams of a way out but the only 'out' she's ever been taught is one of romance. A man in Flaubert's time also had to fulfill a gender role but he had greater opportunities since he is in the wide expanse of the world while Emma is in the narrow Dutch interior realm of domestic limits. If the good and kid Charles were less slow and dull to the senses he'd notice Emma's real unhappiness in her restrictive world and perhaps he too would see a need to change or break out of gender expectations. And as BARB said in Flaubert's time equal power didn't exist between men and woman.

This novel is Flaubert=Emma's protest against inequality and restrictions. Emma's dissatisfaction is the symptom of an illness while the bourgeois social restraints on women are the cause.

There was an English play written in the 1970s with traditional male and female roles. What made the play gripping was that men played the female roles and vice versa. The audience was faced with the ridiculousness of those traditional gender views and we howled at the lines of female submission, docility, and helplessness that were spoken in a deep basso voice by a man.

Marvelle

I am not certain le père Rouault wanted to be "rid" of Emma. What was he to do with a bright teenager too pretty to work in the fields ? Wasn't it better (hemay have reasoned) to send her to the nuns who would teach her the "finer things" and make her more attractive to a future husband ?

Emma still strikes me now, on the third reading, as essentially self-centered, unable to consider anyone's feelings or needs but her own. Her romantic notions were nourished by the tracts the old seamstress smuggled into the convent and lent to the older girls on the sly. But Emma knew nothing of real life. And what she found out with Charles disappointed her.

Yet, dull and ordinary as Charles was, he adored her, he worshipped her (which did not escape Madame Bovary senior), and he had a respectable profession. She was invited by the Marquis and Marquise because of who her husband was, and as his wife.

Charles admired everything she did and was proud of her. What more could he have done ? Where could he have been exposed to, or learned the art of brilliant conversation ? Why didn't she speak to him about happiness or unhappiness in general terms ? After all, the man was no brute. It seems to me she wanted life and marriage on her own terms, like a child stomping his feet demanding whateverhe covets and pouts (or worse) when he doesn't get it.

Emma's is tactless, even cutting in her remarks to Charles as they dress for the ball. And he takes it without saying a word. When he kisses her on the shoulder, she waves him off. So much for give and take in that marriage !

Much as I'd like to, because injustice directed toward women has been one of my causes, I can't fit Emma Bovary into what Barbara and Marvelle describe. It would be great to become furious with Charles for neglecting and demeaning his wife and to see her as a representative of the way 19th century male society thought of and treated women, but I am unable to see where Charles even trivializes her. Nor do I see in Emma much of any independent thinking or feminist ideas. It‘s my opinion that Flaubert used the character of Emma as a depiction of the romanticism he so much despised.

Flaubert based this character, Emma Bovary, on women he had known very well. For example, there was Louise Colet, a feminist who had many lovers, and there was Louise Pradier, wife of a sculptor much older than she. Both of these women were married and spent money they didn't have on their lovers, including Flaubert. This, too, was the story of Delphine Delamare, also used by Flaubert in the creation of Emma Bovary.

Women fascinated Flaubert, especially those who sought passion which was beyond reality. I found this, and think it's interesting:
"Through all of his affairs with women, Flaubert began to make 'a series of maxims about women' in general (Bart 258). He even tried to explain these ideas to Louise [ Colet ]. Flaubert believed all women 'were never frank with themselves, because they would never admit the purely physical aspect of attraction and must always deny the existence of evil or vice in their loved ones' (Bart 258). 'In reality [women] longed in everything for the eternal spouse and always dreamed of the great love of a lifetime' (Bart 258). Eventually, Flaubert would make this 'Emma's confusion' (Bart 258).

“Emma imagined a man: A phantom composed of her most ardent memories, her strongest desires and the most beautiful things she had read. He finally became so real, so accessible, that she was thrilled and amazed, even though she was never able to imagine him clearly , for his form, like that of a god, was lost in the abundance of his attributes. He lived in that nebulous realm where silk ladders swing from balconies bathed in moonlight and the fragrance of flowers. She felt him near her; he was about to come and sweep her away entirely in a kiss. Then she would fall back to earth, shattered.” (Flaubert 251)
For more, click here.

Mal

MAL, that link PAT made clickable for me in the French discussion yesterday contains further details(relevant IMHO) about Delphine Delamare and Louise Pradier and is well worth reading in this connection. For example, how different the lives of Delphine and Louise were. Louise HAD all the things EB so desperately wanted and a husband, the famous sculptor James Pradier, who gave her every luxury imaginable. Nothing satisfied her. In the end her husband cast her out, and she was ostracized by society. But Flaubert kept her company, was even her lover for a time. There are more interesting details about Flaubert himself (his favorite reading was the Marquis de Sade !!).

Thank you for the link to the article by Stephanie Hopkins, which I read. I don't see, however, how she can classify Madame Bovary as an AUTObiography.

Windows are again referred to in chapter IX too, and the references recur in other chapters. Thank you, MARVELLE, for giving us the helpful list of the symbolic meanings.

Is there a way, I wonder, to find out who the translator is of the English version on the net ? I have been comparing it with the French original on a few occasions when certain passages were quoted.

The introductory paragraphs in the web translation, which summarize what each chapter describes, must be additions made by the translator : they are NOT found in the original French text which Eloïse was kind enough to send me.

Historic Dances in France

Traude's link: Who was the real Madame Bovary

Who was the real Madame Bovary. I truly enjoyed reading it and Thank You so Much.

Now to see if I can find the Lady that the town Baudette, Minnesota was name afer as my relation discribed her as much the same as Mme Bovary.

To all I am enjoying reading each and Every post in here and have read the book so Please keep your posts up as Your inteligent Thoughts and clickables Bring so much to the book than I could ever Hope for just reading the book alone with out You. Thank You so Much. You Know who I am but (a new observer, maybe even new to computers and it is some times hard to remember who the poster is) may not and so my name is Ginger

Hi Ginger! I wondered where you'd been. Please keep posting here, you add so much to a discussion.

Goodness, Mal, you've just created a whole new bunch of labels for Charles and Emma. Well, we'll have to agree to disagree about them.

I'd like to go back a ways and address Joan's call for responses to the following quote:

"But it was above all at mealtimes that she could bear it no longer, in that little room on the ground floor, with the smoking stove, the creaking door, the oozing walls, the damp floor tiles; all the bitterness of life seemed to be served to her on her plate, and, with the steam from the boiled beef, there rose from the depths of her soul other exhaltations as if it were of disgust. Charles was a slow-eater; she would nibble a few hazel-nuts, or else, leaning on her elbow, would amuse herself making marks on the oilcloth with the point of her table-cloth."

I first experienced the sensory details of sight, smell, sound, even touch if one counts the knife on oilcloth, and taste since I can't get rid of the awful anticipation of boiled beef in my mouth. The details are quite realistic but filtered through Emma's emotions so we have a dual vision -- realism and emotions.

Emma has an emotional, negative reaction to her real-world surroundings and she can't escape from it. She's trapped in the real world of things and escape in her imagination -- such as making marks on the oilcloth -- is impossible under the weight of details that Flaubert gives us and her.

And I feel along with Emma, as if I'm also trapped in a small space, like an elevator stalled between floors where the narrow walls creep in, getting narrower and narrower with every second. There's disgust and a kind of hopelessness in Emma's situation.

Flaubert triggers our own emotions with his descriptions -- oozing walls, smoking stove, damp floor-tiled, creaking door, steam from the boiled beef and the little room that encloses Emma, Charles the details, and the reader, all together.

Here we are forced by Flaubert to face Emma's physical world and her emotional response to that world and there's a sense of foreshadowing for what may come out of all of this.

Marvelle

Please Notice this in Marvelle's Post (Well, we'll have to agree to disagree) but in a friendly kind of way so please know what kind of people that You are Observing and Feel Free to post Your thoughts as We the Posters would like to hear from You.

Hi Marvelle! Thank You so much.

TRAUDE, the Madame Bovary link -- if you're referring to the one listed by EmmaBarb in post #144 -- was translated in 1928 by James Lewis May (1873-1961).

Marvelle

I have not read all of the posts. Reading Ginny's and Marvelle's posts makes me very excited to learn all of the symbolic meanings for "windows." Thank you Marvelle for Vermeer paintings too.

I do feel that Emma is living behind a window. I feel that she is, if possible, scratching to get out. There is no one to save her. Her husband is completely satisfied with his career as a doctor. Charles is loved and respected by the community. What does Emma have?

Emma is trapped behind unbreakable glass. She is screaming, but no one can hear her. I don't know who to blame. Is it society's fault? Emma's fault? I don't know. I think Flaubert's message must be one that is deeper than a woman's selfish behavior. If it is just about a woman's selfishness, I think women should revolt against the writings of Flaubert.

No. There is something about Emma's life that Flaubert is trying to tell us. The answer, I think, lies with the windows.

HATS, you always see straight into the heart of things and express yourself so clearly. Yes, do look at the windows. I think there's something there. More art links of women and windows, the first painter is Esaias Boursee (1631-1672):

INTERIOR WITH A WOMAN AT A SPINNING WHEEL

Then from Pieter Janssens Elinga, around 1630?:

ROOM IN A DUTCH HOUSE

READING WOMAN

Certainly the painters in this period were sophisticated in the use of symbolism. In many of the paintings of interiors with women by a window, the outside shows a wider world than the inside world. This limited inside life was typical for women and the activities of women was also narrow. One of the paintings in my earlier post shows a woman reading a letter and the window is open -- symbolic of showing her expanding world and opportunity contained in what she reads.

Now to see what Flaubert does with windows!

Marvelle

Marvelle, these links to arts and artists just gives the book, Madame Bovary, an extra zing! Thank you for sharing these links.

The contrast between 'eating' dinner on an oil cloth table top versus 'dining' at either the wedding feast or the ball - oh my Or even the setting for the meal at the farm, "Knives and forks and silver goblets were laid for two on a little table at the foot of a huge bed that had a canopy of printed cotton with figures representing Turks."

Hats perfect - her screaming to get out and no one hearing -

Ginger you will tell us won't you who Baudette was, when did she live, was she also French?

Marvelle the women alone reading is so poignant - there she is inside her box filled with reflected light while reading about the greater world of ideas - almost like Ginny bringing our attention to "The Lady of Shallot" who dies when she leaves her turret with her mirror on the world.

Had a re-look at the first chapter - it appears Charles had his rebellion against the expectations for his life while attending school. There is no explaining what Charles' dreams for himself were except he wanted freedom and his way of attaining freedom was to play domino, learn some popular songs to sing to his new mates, learns the secret of making punch and is aquainted with the mysteries of love. (interesting turn of phrase - never understood why the word mystery was used)

"He became a habitue of the cabaret, and a domino enthusiast. To go and shut himself up, night after night, in a dingy public room and rattle about little black-spotted bone cubes on a marble-topped table, seemed to him a precious symbol of freedom and raised him in his own esteem.

It was something like an initiation into the social world, a taste of forbidden fruit. And as he put his hand on the door-knob to go in, he experienced an almost voluptuous pleasure. And thus many things which had been repressed within him began to expand and blossom forth. He learnt by heart some popular songs, with which he would greet his boon companions, went mad over Beranger, acquired the secret of making punch, and at length became acquainted with the mysteries of Love.

As a result of these preparatory activities, he failed completely in his examination."

Interesting how his mother makes excuses for him and blames his failure on the examiners who had treated him unfairly...he is not taught to take responsibility for his actions is he. And 'freedom' to do what pleases him means 'failure in the responsiblities' of life - hmmmm.

Looks like Charles wants 'freedom' as much as Emma wants 'more' - he agrees to his first marriage thinking "matrimony as a means of bettering his lot; he thought it would give him a free hand to do as he liked, and spend his money as he thought fit." -

aha he loves Emma in the same way he secretly arranged for his freedom by rebelling and playing domino in the cabaret, after promising his first wife he will not go back to les Bertaux, "...with a sort of childish hypocrisy, he persuaded himself that because he was forbidden to see her, it was lawful for him to love her."

Also Heloise, is jealous of Emma's education which must mean it was not usual for women to have as much education as Emma.

And interesting bit, Heloise dies as Charles is "drawing the window curtain" - those windows of freedom again.

You would think he would have stayed a bachelor with his acknowledging "The unaccustomed sweets of independence soon made his solitude more bearable. He was free now to have his meals when he liked, he could go out and come in without having to give explanations, and when he was very tired he could stretch out his arms and legs in bed as far as he liked."

But after the drink with Emma, the window again "He got up, took a drink from the water-jug and opened his window. The sky was filled with stars, a warm breeze was blowing, and a long way off, some dogs were barking. He turned his head towards les Bertaux." Again the prospect of marriage for Charles represents freedom as symbolized with open windows.

I wonder if this is his dullness at work, because Emma does lay out to him on that visit, her accomplishments - her interests, her active and restless mind.

"She showed him her old music-books, the little volumes she had been given her as prizes...the oak-leaf crowns... she went on to speak of her mother, of the cemetery, and even pointed out the bed in the garden where she gathered flowers the first Friday in every month, to lay on her mother's grave. But the gardener they had now didn't know his work; servants were so unsatisfactory. She would have liked to live in town, at all events during the winter months, although perhaps the long days made the country still more boring in the summer;

We are not told what Emma thought marriage meant to her - her father made the arrangements and Emma fell into her place - she had flirted a bit with the Doctor but other than that, we have no idea what her feelings are, if marriage represented freedom or love or what, we do not know.

Windows again - "The neighbors hastened to their windows to take a look at the doctor's new wife." It appears the community is behind windows as much as Emma; and Charles has his 'freedom' being married to Emma.

Flaubert to George Sand 1866

"At the present time I am disheartened by the populace which rushes by under my windows in pursuit of the fatted calf. And they say that intelligence is to be found in the street!"

"Of the two portraits, I like that of Couture's the better. As for Marchal's he saw in you only 'the good woman,' but I who am an old Romantic, find in the other, 'the head of the author' who made me dream so much in my youth.

Emma Bovary

"What exasperated her was that Charles did not seem to notice her anguish. His conviction that he was making her happy seemed to her an imbecile insult, and his sureness on this point ingratitude. For whose sake, then was she virtuous? Was it not for him, the obstacle to all felicity, the cause of all misery, and, as it were, the sharp clasp of that complex strap that bucked her in on all sides."

Flaubert to Turgenev

"The thought that I shall see you this winter quite at leisure delights me like the promise of an oasis. The comparison is the right one, if only you knew how isolated I am! Who is there to talk to now? Who is there in our wretched country who still 'cares about literature'? Perhaps one single man? Me! The wreckage of a lost world, an old fossil of romanticism! You will revive me, you'll do me good."

About Flaubert by Arnold Hauser in The Social History of Art

"Flaubert, on the other hand, is full of contradictions and his antithetical relationship to romanticism corresponds to an equally conflicting relationship to the middle class. His hatred of the bourgeois is, as has often been said, the source of his inspiration and the origin of his naturalism. In his persecution mania, he allows the bourgeois principle to expand into a metaphysical substance, into a kind of 'thing-in-itself', something unfathomable and inexhaustible."

If I use adjectives when I talk about Emma and Charles Bovary it is not labelling or calling them names; it is description of what I see from what Flaubert is telling me.

"Nevertheless, in accordance with theories she considered sound, she tried to physic herself with love. By moonlight, in the garden, she recited all the love poetry she knew and sighed and sang of love's sweet melancholy. But afterwards she found herself not a whit less calm, and Charles not a whit more amorous or emotional.

"When she had thus struck the flint upon her heart without producing a single spark, unable either to understand what she did not experience or to believe in anything that did not show itself in the customary forms, it dawned on her that Charles's love had passed through the passionate stage. His emotional expansions had become regular; he embraced her at certain fixed periods. It was just another habit added to the rest, like a humdrum dessert rounding off a humdrum dinner.

"Sometimes Emma would have to push back the red border of his vest to keep it from showing, or put his tie straight, or throw aside a pair of soiled gloves he was just going to put on. And all this wasn't, as he thought it was, for him; it was for herself, the effect of ultra-selfishness and nervous irritation. Sometimes she would talk to him about things she had read in a book, a passage in a novel, a new play or some bit of news about the fashionable world which she had picked up from the newspaper. For, at all events, Charles was somebody, somebody willing to listen and to approve what he heard." (Why did she need approval from anyone besides herself?) "She told a lot of things to her greyhound. She would have done as much to the logs in the fireplace, or the pendulum of the clock.

"Deep down in her heart, she was waiting and waiting for something to happen."
She was waiting for something to happen. Why didn't she make something happen? Why didn't she stop looking out the window and go outside and talk to the townsfolk? She thought she was too good for them?

I remember that after my marriage ended I had trouble adjusting to being with the "ordinary people" whom I met because of my circumstances. I had been married to a brilliant, successful man who was a snob, not just intellectually, and some of that rubbed off on me. At first I was alone and miserable away from the kind of fairly well-to-do, rarified world I'd lived in before. It took time for me to realize that the uneducated old man I knew, whose best job had been as a maintenance man in a factory, was a fine spinner and weaver -- crafts he'd learned as a peasant boy in Czechoslovakia -- and that he had stories to tell and was a most interesting person. When I got off my high horse, I was able to see that I could learn from this type of person and his or her experiences; people who often had far more wisdom than I had.

Emma never lived a high horse existence. Her snobbism was based on romantic illusions and delusions.

I call boiled beef "pot roast", and to me a pot roast dinner is a very good meal, even when compared to the Foie Gras, Vichyssoise, Coquilles St. Jacques, Chateaubriand, Crêpes Suzettes meals I've had in the past.

Emma had food on the table and a husband who provided that food for her. If it was served on an oilcloth-covered table, it was her choice at the time. She'd shown before that she was perfectly capable of setting a better table than that. Her misery also was her choice, a choice for which she did not take responsibility, in my opinion. Even if there was inequality between men and women which showed on her life, Emma Bovary did not take and make the best of what she had for herself. What's the old saw? "Life is what you make it"?

Mal

Below is a link to a newer painting of a woman and windows by American artist, Frank Benson. There is a wonderful realistic painting of a young woman standing in front of a window which overlooks sea marshes by Salvador Dali, but I can't find my file of the image. If I do, I'll put it on a web page and post the link here.

Painting by Frank Benson

Mal, that is a good painting. I am not familiar with Frank Benson. Thanks for the link.

This seems to be a fairly common theme, doesn't it?

Woman at the Window by Salvador Dali

MAL, thank you for the link to Frank Benson.

HATS, Benson (1862-1951) was a native of Salem, Massachusetts, and, until I came to live in this - his - state, I had never heard of him before.

Eventually, a member of our afternoon live book group, an artist herself, told the group of Benson's importance as an American impressionist, and of the influence painters like Vermeer had on him (i.e. not only regarding subject, i.e. girl(s) at window(s), but technique and use of light).

Visual experiences are essential for our appreciation of practically anything. Thank you again, MAL.

MARVELLE, thank you for providing the info re the translator of the English web-available version and when he made it.

This time around I was determined to read only the original text to "get at" every detail of what the author intended to convey. Then I was drawn to compare a specific translated word or phrase mentioned here with the French original ... which produced an automatic professional, technical reaction, one I decided to now supress, since we are not involved in linguistic technicalities here.

Incidentally, the carriage that took Emma and Charles to the chateau is mentioned in italics as boc , a term NOT included even in my all-encompassing, all-French Nouveau Petit Larousse. Even so, the type of carriage/conveyance is surely clear in our eyes.

Lastly, on EB I am in full agreement with MAL, emphatically so with the last paragraph of her post. And I have a personal comment :

Whether we are women or men - it is incumbent upon us to be ready to MOVE, to ACT, especially if our partner is (cowardly) not so inclined and, later, actually blames us when our decision did not produce the anticipated result. We have a stake in and a responsibility for our own lives and realize that the world will not come to us.

Traude, if it's any consolation, I have an old Gasc French Dictionary, copyright 1876, and it doesn't have boc either, in its 1187 tiny print pages, I thought we were talking about the charabanc bringing the guests to the wedding, but in any event, no boc is found in Gasc!

ginny

To answer your question the answer is yes the name Baudette is French. I am doing some research on the name so will get back to you later on it.

I am just getting in here because of storms yesterday afternoon, last night and this morning. It is so nice to see all these posts filled with so much insight into this novel.

The links that have been posted are just great. I love the art. I am sure most of you know that Theron and I are docents at the Birmingham Museum of Art. Art is a big thing in our lives.

Robby , I agree with comments on Emma's treatment of Charles at the dance.

Mal and Carolyn, good comments on Emma's lot in life.

EmmaBarb, good input.

Ginny, you made really good points. Thanks for bringing up irony. Flaubert's use of irony in this novel is something that we really need to consider. You were right on the mark with Emma being invited to the ball of because of Charles. He had treated the Marquis when he was ill and then had given him some shoots from his cherry trees later.

Marvelle, thanks for the list of "general symbolic meanings of windows" in Literature .

Barbara, this would be a dull discussion if everyone agreed on everything. It is really good to hear all views. Your contributions are very interesting. I especially interested in your comment about looking up what kind of clothes were worn. There are frequent mention of Emma's clothes throughout the book. These references worth looking examining. " Traude , excellent insight to Emma's character.

Mal, that link to Historic Dances in France was very interesting.

Welcome Ginger! I am so glad to see you here. I knew that you had read the book. I have been looking for you everyday since we began the discussion. Please tell us about Baudette.

Marvelle, excellent comment on

"But it was above all at mealtimes that she could bear it no longer, in that little room on the ground floor, with the smoking stove, the creaking door, the oozing walls, the damp floor tiles; all the bitterness of life seemed to be served to her on her plate, and, with the steam from the boiled beef, there rose from the depths of her soul other exhaltations as if it were of disgust. Charles was a slow-eater; she would nibble a few hazel-nuts, or else, leaning on her elbow, would amuse herself making marks on the oilcloth with the point of her table-cloth."

Barbara, really found that interesting where you went back to the first chapter and looked at Charles again.

Hats, really good insight to the situation.

This novel is so full of things to discuss. It seems with almost every sentence there is something worth mentioning. I think I am looking at it much closer than ever before.

Oh Mal, I love the painting by Frank Benson!

Again let me say how much I am enjoying all these intelligent comments that you are making.

Joan

As we continue our discussion let's continue to look at the use of windows as we read.

How about some more comments on

"But it was above all at mealtimes that she could bear it no longer, in that little room on the ground floor, with the smoking stove, the creaking door, the oozing walls, the damp floor tiles; all the bitterness of life seemed to be served to her on her plate, and, with the steam from the boiled beef, there rose from the depths of her soul other exhaltations as if it were of disgust. Charles was a slow-eater; she would nibble a few hazel-nuts, or else, leaning on her elbow, would amuse herself making marks on the oilcloth with the point of her table-cloth."

Notice Flaubert's use of irony.

Notice Flauber's use of liquid images.

Comment on Emma's illness.

What is the symbolism in the two dried wedding bouquets?

What does the cigar case symbolize?

Why do you think Charles is willing to move to a new town when things are going so well for him in the present place?

Mal ~ the painting by Frank Benson is lovely. Thanks for that link as well as the Dali painting...I've not seen that one before...unlike his usual paintings. There appears to be another signature on the painting, is it a copy ? Anyway I really do like it.

Many paintings of old show women reading or doing needlepoint in front of windows ....it was the only source of light.

EmmaBarb, the painting of the girl at the window is attributed to Dali. I enlarged it and could not find what you asked about. Justin is an art historian who knows a great deal more than I do. George is a former art gallery owner. Perhaps they'll be able to answer your question. I do know that Dali painted many realistic paintings before he went into surrealism. It has always interested me that Dali's paintings look thick and lush when actually the coating of the paint on the canvas was quite thin. Why do I think of tempera when I write that?

I posted about the wedding bouquets, and, if I remember correctly, I said they represent Charles's two wives, Heloise and Emma. Emma thinks about what will happen to her bouquet when she's dead. Will it have the same attic fate as Heloise's, i.e., will she be thrown out in the trash, too?

Marvelle posted what I consider a fine explanation of the use of the cigar case by Flaubert. Unfortunately, I cannot find her post to tell you the number.

Mal

I believe GINNY mentioned before how Flaubert uses realistic detail viewed through shifting POV in order to establish the inner emotions of a character. The boiled beef dinner is Emma's POV.

BARB, here are some other windows where Flaubert, so far, uses opened or closed windows as symbols along with the shifting POV.

Ch 1 CHARLES: When Charles was a student he rented a 4th floor room at a dyer's house overlooking the stream called Eau-de-Robec. "On fine summer evenings....he would open his window and lean out." He notices the stream, stained yellow from the dyers' rinsing of yarn, the attic poles dangling with skeins of drying cotton. "And beyond the roof-tops stretched the sky, vast and pure, with the red sun setting. How good it must be in the country! How cool in the beech grove! And he opened his nostrils wide, longing for a whiff of the fresh and fragrant air, but none was ever wafted to where he was."

Right after this he starts going to the cafes and neglecting his studies. He failed and felt guilt and he went back and studied and later passed his exam. But it appears that being an officier de sante is not a calling for him; he yearns for the countryside.

Ch 2 EMMA: "When Charles came back downstairs after going up to take leave of Monsieur Roualt, he found [Emma] standing with her forehead pressed against the windowpane looking out at the garden, where the beanpoles had been thrown down by the wind."

Ch 3 EMMA: Visiting Les Bertaux after his wife's death, Charles sees Emma in the kitchen "The shutters were closed; the sun streaming in between the slats with long thin stripes that broke off at the corners of the furniture and quivered on the ceiling."

Ch 3 CHARLES: He thinks about remarrying. "That night he didn't sleep, his throat was tight, he was thirsty; he got up to drink from the water jug and opened the window; the sky was covered with stars, a hot wind was blowing, dogs were barking in the distance. He stared out in the direction of Les Bertaux. After all, he thought, nothing would be lost by trying; and he resolved to ask his question...."

Ch 3 MONSIEU ROUALT TO CHARLES: He'd talk to Emma about marriage and if the answer is yes "I'll slam a shutter against the wall."

Ch 5 EMMA: As a newlywed "...She would go to the window and watch him leave for his rounds; she would lean out between two post of geraniums, her elbows on the sill...She would continue to talk to him from above, blowing down to him some bit of flower or leaf she had bitten off in her teeth. Charles would send her a kiss; she would respond with a wave; then she would close the window; and he was off."

Ch 6 EMMA: Emma remembers her previous life at the convent and how she 'besmirched her hands with books' and the illustrations of "English beauties... dreaming on sofas, an opened letter laying beside them, gazed at the moon through a window that was half open, half draped with a black curtain...."

Ch 9 EMMA: "How depressed she was on Sundays, when the churchbell tolled for vespers. With a dull awareness she listened to the cracked sound as it rang out again and again. Sometimes a cat walking slowly along one of the roofs outside her window arched its back against the pale rays of the sun."

Ch 9 EMMA: "The winter was a cold one. Every morning the windowpanes were frosted over, and the whitish light that came through -- as though filtered through ground glass -- sometimes didn't vary all day. By four o'clock it was time to light the lamps."

Other glass and window scenes have been mentioned: watching the hurdy-gurdy man watching her through the window as he cranks miniature dancers into a waltz; the cider glasses with flies (during the shuttered window scene); Charles drawing the curtain, looking the other way as his wife Heloise dies. "She was dead! Who would have believed it?"; the neighbors looking out their windows at the newlywed Emma and Charles; Emma looking in the windows of her neighbors; faces of servants looking at the ball through broken windowpanes; Emma looking at the chateau from her room "opened a window and leaned out" imagining life behind the other windows.

Marvelle

While Charles was controlled by his mother he still expected 'freedom' as BARB mentioned when he married his first wife Heloise but she was the one who ruled. He does criticize Heloise's and Emma's looks, so the critical view is not that of the women alone.

At the end of Chapter 5 we get two different POVs following the first rush of the newlywed life.

CHARLES: He thinks he'd never been happy before "but now he possessed, and for always, this pretty wife whom he loved...He couldn't keep from constantly touching her comb, her rings, everything she wore...." but under a shower of his kisses, Emma, half amused, half annoyed, would push him away.

EMMA: "Before her marriage she had thought that she had love within her grasp, but since the happiness which she had expected this love to bring her hadn't come, she supposed she must have been mistaken. And Emma tried to imagine just what was meant, in life, by the words 'bliss,' 'passion, and 'rapture' -- words that had seemed so beautiful to her in books."

Charles is in love, he feels he possesses Emma and everything about her; and Emma, who was unhappy before Charles and had an upswing in mood when first married, now wonders what's wrong, where is the happiness.

Marvelle

Marvelle, I think you mentioned that Emma's eyes might be important. I kept your thoughts about Emma's eyes in the back of my mind. I remembered an old cliche "eyes are the "windows" to our souls.

"Seen from so close, her eyes seemed larger than usual, especially when she opened and shut them several times on awakening;

Traude, thank you for sharing more about Frank Benson.

I mentioned Emma's eyes in Post 16. I'm busy right now with my publishing, so someone else will do the delving, I'm sure.

Mal

HATS, yes, "the eyes are the mirror of the soul", said my mother, who also had a "thing" for hands (as, apparently, did Flaubert). I have not always heeded my mother's multiple warnings and dismissed quite a few of them because I perceived them to be snobbish, but I have always, always paid attention to a person's eyes and hands. Emma's eyes changed with her moods, we see, and her hands were not all that 'great', we read.

In the scene where Charles and Emma are getting ready for the dance in their room at the château, when Charles has innocuously mentioned the hindrance of boot straps while dancing and Emma has so sharply (and gracelessly) rebuked him, he remains silent; he is ready before she is and, at some point, he views her from behind, in the mirror flanked by two sconces, when her dark eyes seemed (even) darker. "noir" is the adjective in the French text.

JOAN, the paragraph you quoted reflects Emma's doom-and-gloom POV, as MARVELLE already said. But we know, in fact we've read, that Emma was perfectly capable of setting a beautiful table and had in fact done so when she was first married, and prettified the house in other ways. This neglect, this passivity, was the first manifestation of the depression-to-come.

Nowadays we know all about the mind-body connection and understand that an emotional problem, especially when prolonged, can make a person physically sick. Incidentally, Flaubert himself suffered from an unexplained, unspecified "condition nerveuse".

GINNY, I agree, we need to get into irony here; so far we have been too "bloody" serious, as the Brits call it, about Emma.

Lest our understanding be one-sided, let me answer one of JOAN's quetions : Poor ordinary, clumsy, gauche, romantically unresponsive, conversationally inexperienced Charles, woefully ignorant of etiquette and unambitious to boot, LOVED and cherished his wife. And it showed.

He was concerned.

He took her to his old professor.

He thought a change of place would restore her to good health. He thought only of her well-being.

What he gave up simply to please his wife were four arduous, no doubt stressful, years and a successful practice.

Let's wait till the end to see who was whose victim.

Thank you Mal. I had a great time searching for it.
The Dali painting is also titled "Person At the Window"...apparently one of his earlier works of art. Such a lovely painting. I was never fond of his weird dreamlike paintings.

Painters models were never the Twiggy types we have today! That is a lovely painting of Dali's.

Carolyn

While Emma had, in my opinion, many selfish traits, there were other actions on her part which I believe are duplicated by numerous women of today, never mind the women in those times and which I do not find as being selfish.
I explained my reasoning in detail in "Madame Bovary -- French."

Robby

Well I spent an enchanting day finding examples of all that Emma bathed her soul in, while at the convent school - ohh the wonder of it - we know that Flaubert himself saw just about all that he puts on the pages as Emma's dreams...no wonder he could never marry - nothing could measure up to the wonders he experienced which is this magical world that Emma would like to know first hand...

On weekdays it would generally be some manual of Sacred History, or the Lectures of the Abbe Frayssinous; and on Sundays, as a treat, extracts from the Genie du Christianisme This is the best I could do translating from a French web site - - -

There is no more célebre romantic writer, in 1768 than Saint-Malo. With a promising military career, he leaves the service and leaves for Americas (1791) then joined the armeedes Princes before being exiled for 7 years in England (1793 - 1800) His books published include: the Test on the revolutions, returning to France, Atala (1801) Genie of Christianity (1802) are all published. He makes a voyage in the East (1806 -1807) out of which comes his book Martys (1811).

After the fall of Napoleon of which he was one of most savage opponents, his career marries the history of the legitimatism; for France in 1815, ambasador to London in 1822 then Rome in 1828, Minister for the Businesses étrangeres of 1822 has 1824. He withdraws from political life in 1829, and writes his autobiographical 'Memoires' counterpoint of this immense work, published is; Natchez (1826), Voyages in America (1827), historical studies (1831), Congers of verone (1838) and life of Rancé (1844).

The richness of his imagination, his harmony and style, is always monumental and divertifié, sometimes dynamic and irritated. He had put a great influence on the French literature. Chateaubriant renovated the Gothic cathedrale, it opened the door closed of nature, it found the modern melancholy.

What is also significant, is that it helped his contemporaries to include/understand the literature of other countries and it was essential to help express the beauty. All the XIX century old writers really admired it. His Genie of Christianity was to be used as illustration with the concept of vagueness of passions. It is only in 1805 that it will become a fully autonomous novel and will be published with Atala, another romantic illustration of Genie.
She had read Paul and Virginia...-...Mademoiselle de la Valliere

If her childhood had been spent in a shop parlour in some busy street, she might have been susceptible to the poetic charms of nature, which, generally speaking, only reach us through the medium of books. But she knew only too much about the country; she was familiar with the lowing of cattle, she knew all about milking and ploughing. With eyes accustomed to look on the tranquil aspects of nature, she turned for contrast to the wild and precipitous. She only cared for the sea when it was lashed to fury by the storm, and for verdure when it served as a background to a ruin....(aha is this the foreshadowing of her own ruin)

Must include the next paragraph is is so filled with the wonder of youthful reading...

She always carried a novel of some sort or another in her pocket...It would be all about love, lovers, fair maidens, persecuted ladies swooning in lonely bowers, postilions murdered at every stage, horses ridden till they dropped dead, gloomy forests, sombre forebodings, vows, sobs, tears and kisses, skiffs gliding on moonlit waters, nightingales in bosky dells, noble gentlemen as brave as lions and as gentle as lambs, incredibly virtuous, always dressed in fine raiment and ready to weep like urns...

Oh my, "ready to weep like urns..." - "nightingales in bosky dells" I think I need to pick up an Arthur or Charliemagne to read. Had to look up bosky it means, covered with bushes, shrubs, trees; wooded Shaded by trees or bushes. And dells are small secluded wooded valleys. Ohhh - we just do not have dells in these parts and I do not think our Chapperal could be called bosky either - I will just have to dream...

This reminds me so of the advertisment that was on PBS for awhile - a young teenager in long white nightie flounces on her four poster as her brother comes in to announce someone on the phone for her. She proceeds to wax poetic if the caller was like some fourteen century knight. Of course the brother thinks she has gone off her noggin and makes a face saying, 'Whatever'. I got such a kick out of that add and had to smile everytime it came on.

Ok more in the next post...

Emma Bovery would have been in her element with a pile of Mills and Boon novels!

I still think Emma was a pretty selfish person and not only that a very immature person emotionally.

Carolyn

Walter Scott (remember studying Ivanho in 8th grade) and got enthusiastic about historical things, forever dreaming of coffers, guardrooms and minstrels.

She would have loved to dwell in some old manor, like those chatelaines with the long bodices who, beneath the trefoil window with its Gothic arch, spent their days with their elbow on the parapet and their chin in their hand, gazing far away into the distance for the coming of a cavalier with a white plume in his hat, galloping on a black charger.

At that time she adored Mary Queen of Scots and evinced an enthusiastic veneration for illustrious or ill-fated women. Joan of Arc, Eloise, Agnes Sorel,...-... la belle Ferronniere and Clemence Isaure...-...in French painting of Clemence Isaure...-...statue of Clemence Isaure shone out, in her eyes, like comets on the dark immensity of history

- Saint Louis and his oak, (He had, as we have said, a passion for justice, and changed the "King's court" of his ancestors into a popular court, where, seated in his palace or under a spreading oak in the forest of Vincennes, he listened to any of his subjects who came with grievances and gave what seemed to them wise and impartial judgments.) Paintings of St. Louis

- (Could not find whot the dying Bayard is - could be a horse in the Charlemagne story or a new thinker in the 1800s or someone that I have no clue to) the dying Bayard,

- certain cruelties perpetrated by Louis XI, some fragmentary notions about Saint Bartholomew (one of the 12 apostles)...(thought this was an interesting bit of French History) St. Bartholomew Massacre

- the plumed hat of Henri IV, and, still as distinct as ever, the recollection of that pictorial dinner service on which the glorious days of King Louis XIV were held up to admiration...

She saw behind the rail of a balcony a young man in a short cloak clasping in his arms a maiden in a white dress wearing an alms-bag in her girdle; (An over-gown that reached to the ground was then placed on top of everything and clinched at the waist with a belt, to which a small bag, known as a money or alms bag, was often attached.)

- portraits of anonymous English ladies with golden curls, who gazed at you with big bright eyes beneath their round straw hats...lolling in carriages, gliding through stately parks, with a greyhound bounding on before a team of trotting horses guided by a pair of diminutive postilions in white breeches.

...gazing at the moon through a half-open window partly veiled by a dark curtain. An innocent damsel, with a tear on her cheek, was seen giving food to a dove between the bars of a Gothic cage, or smiling, head on one side, as, with tapering fingers, she pulled off, one by one, the petals of a marguerite.

And ye too were there, ye sultans with your long pipes, stretched drowsily in the shade of an arbour in the arms of Bayaderes, and Giaours, ('infidels', Christians)

- Turkish scimitars, Greek caps, above all, pale landscapes of dithyrambic regions, (see below) which so often indulge us with a simultaneous display of palms and fir-trees, tigers on this side and lions on that, images Tartar minarets on the horizon, ancient Minaret at Aghdam Roman ruins in the foreground and kneeling camels (plus imgaes of Tartars- you have to click on photos since this will only link to her main page- worth it/ great photos) in the middle distance -

the whole within a framework of virgin forest very neatly trimmed, a great perpendicular ray of sunlight trembling on the water, whereon, in patches of white on a steel-grey surface, swans are depicted proudly oaring their way far and near.

giaours - 'infidels', Christians. "A thousand heads of infidel Giaours cannot wash away this hatred."

dithyrambic poetry. Performed at festivals honoring the god Dionysus, (Bacchos), dithyrambic poetry incorporated choral song and dance

The origin of the word is probably bound with the word Thiriambos, which means triumph: the cortège of poets, musicians, dancers, Maenads, (female devotees of Dionysus) They roamed mountains and forests, adorned with ivy and skins of animals, waving the thyrsus. When they danced, they often worked themselves into an ecstatic frenzy, during which they were capable of tearing wild animals to pieces with their bare hands. The maenads were also called (for Bacchus) bacchantes or bacchae.)

- Satyrs and various supporters holding torches, thyrs, phallic symbols, amphorae and so on, all celebrating the deeds of the God in his campaigns abroad like, per example, the return from India, characterised by a conspicuous booty.

The beginning of the cult of Dionysos in Greece is dated around 1500 b.C., and the place where it starts seems to be the Island of Crete, as is testified by a recent archaeological discovery (1991) that many scholars and several old fonts indicate an elder cult, coming from the Orient, maybe from India and passing through Egypt (Osiris) and Arabia.

http://www.hinduonnet.com/folio/fo9812/98120420.htm

Bharata defines dance as "that which reflects the pains and pleasures of the people in society". There are other treatises which define dance as the art of imitation.

Aristotle uses the same term to define art when he says "Epic poetry and tragedy, as also comedy Dithyrambic poetry, and most flute playing and lyre playing, are all, viewed as a whole, modes of 'imitation'.

Art whether it is occidental or oriental is considered basically as imitation of nature. Aristotle considers the art of imitation as creative art. Dance thus plays a predominant role in world culture.

Twice a year at the Dionysian Festivals in Athens writers of comedy were invited to compete for the three drama prizes. At the City Dionysia of 414 B.C., a tense year in the apparently endless war with Sparta, Aristophanes entered his brilliant fantasy, THE BIRDS. For some reason it took only the second prize: the first went to Ameipsias for his Komastai, a comedy that has not survived; but it is clear that the audience received The Birds with favor, and even now, more than two millennia later, we can sense much of the delight and some of the fun that Athens found in it. ...its vivacity, its other-worldliness, and the ironic twist of its resolution make it one of the most engaging, as it is certainly the most beautiful, of the eleven plays of Aristophanes that have come down to us.

The shade of the argand lamp fixed in the wall above Emma's head illumined with its rays all these pictures of a romantic world.

Another Argand Lamp

Ya know this is not the political discussion - I am not asking any of you to agree with my assessment of Emma - you do not have to repeat that you disagree with me - If you are so uncomfortable with my views then simply ask me to leave this discussion - I am offering y'all not only my insight but also what links I can find to better understand what we are reading - so please come on - a bit of manners - I am not thowing down your throats my views - I am stating them as I would hope y'all would feel comfortable stating your own - I thought we agreed that we all view things differently and we could agree to disagree - Every so often even I blow...Please respond what you want me to do...

As I said Mal the post was not a put down - I saw that you removed it and I adjusted my explosion since you know I had a sentence in my post saying that your last post was not one I was reacting to.

Well it looks like you removed another post - so be it...

This is not something I do in these discussions but this book seems to have brought out a lot of differences in how we view Emma - fine - but we can go forth and simply speak to our own views without constently commenting on the other views as something not in keeping with your own judgement of Emma - or suggesting that someone's judgement or thinking is something not acceptable.

This sounds like a perfect time to remember the Alligator River game by Sid Simon - 5 characters all who have flaws and if played in a group, when someone in the group chooses the character you think is the most awful as their choice for the best of the lot usually you are shocked - how could they - Inevitably it turns out they see the character from a whole different perspective then you could ever imagine since you have never experienced in your life what that person has experienced. I also have learned we look at these 5 character in the game differently as our live goes forth and we change our circumstances of living.

All to say that everyone has a valid viewpoint, and if you are not being abusive, needs to be honored regardless that you cannot support it. We are not making choices here that are life and death situations. Please, can we at times simply agree to disagree and then go on without laboring over it and trying to make someone feel bad because you think differently.

I will continue to find wonderment and beauty in various aspects of Emma - I am not asking any of you to do the same - I will not repeat that I think she is this or that - I will say it once and if you do not agree - fine - my nose is not out of joint and you do not even have to prove to me why you think as you do - I bless you - I may not agree but hay it is OK.

Dear Barbara:

I have sent you an email because I am so sorry I upset you. You see, I understand all you're saying about inequality and being trivialized because I lived it -- hard. That's probably something you do not know because I don't talk about it much any more. I just don't happen to see Emma Bovary in my shoes and the shoes of so many women I know.

Enough. I don't belong here.

Mal

Your posts are fab BARB. You've really shown us, have us experience, the influencing background to Emma's romanticism. It's been a romp reading your posts and the links and "weeping like urns."

Emma and Charles have been fleshed out by Flaubert into fully dimensional characters; and I expect we'll continue to see the good/bad of both characters in this novel. Charles has what he wants. He's living in the country with a wife he adores; he "possessed" her totally, he thought, down to her comb and rings. He's too happy and doesn't notice her discontent. Emma is too unhappy and doesn't tell him. Emma: "Wasn't it a man's role to know everything?"

This whole of Part I is foreshadowing the rest of the novel; showing the differences in Emma and Charles which may result in disaster.

____________________________________

HATS, excuse the pun, but good "eyes" for notice Emma's eyes on awakening. I've noticed that her eye color changes.

Ch 2 CHARLES POV: "The finest thing about her was her eyes. They were brown, but seemed black under her long eyelashes; and she had an open gaze that met yours with fearless candor."

Ch 5 CHARLES POV: the scene HATS mentioned on Emma's awakening where Emma's eyes were "black when looked at in shadow, dark blue in bright light, they seemed to contain layer upon layer of color, thicker and cloudier beneath, lighter and more transparent toward the lustrous surface." Charles sees himself mirrored in her eyes.

Ch 8 CHARLES POV: Dressing for the ball "her dark eyes seemed darker than ever."

Ch2 and Ch 9: Emma's eyes widen when interested; close when not and then she imagines; (Ch 9) at home she poured over a map of Paris until "closing her tired eyes, she would have a shadowy vision of gas lamps flickering in the wind and carriage steps clattering in front of theatres."

Emma's eyes are black are brown are blue? A mistake on Flaubert's part are an indication of her changing emotions?

Marvelle

Barbara,

I found your links fascinating. I looked at all of them. I think it is great that you are so enthusiastic and letting us share in what you find.

All opinions are acceptable here. There are many opinions and interpretations of everything involving this book. There are no right or wrong opinions. Everything is open to a personal interpretation. This is a discussion. One can look at something and make an observation. Then someone else can add to that observation or make a different observation about the same material.

Marvelle we were posting at the same time. The discussion about the eyes is great. The reference to keep appearing throughout the book.

Joan

I took so long in posting that I missed the deleted posts, but I've had similar experiences and I understand BARB's response. I agree with BARB and JOAN that all viewpoints are acceptable so long as not abusive of others. The following points that BARB made are necessary to a friendly, enriching discussion:

-- Everyone has a valid viewpoint and, if you are not being abusive, each viewpoint needs to be honored regardless that you can't support it.

-- We can agree to disagree and then go on, without laboring over it and trying to make someone feel bad because you think differently.

-- We can speak our views without saying or suggesting different views are not acceptable.

I'm enjoying this discussion because it's FUN and ENRICHING and I love BOOKS and SN; and I hope everyone feels the same and, in that spirit, you all will remain.

Marvelle

JOAN, thanks for the heads up about the references to Emma's eyes continuing throughout the book. It'll be interesting to see what else Flaubert continues to say about her eyes.

Marvelle

Marvelle, it will be interesting to learn and look for more examples of the "eyes." Traude gave me a deeper insight into the "eyes."

I love BARBARA's posts. BARBARA'S links are thoughtful and always so helpful. BARBARA takes the time to do extra research for the discussions. Without BARBARA'S posts, it would be an empty discussion.

I like BOOKS because of the different opinions. I read every opinion because someone else might see an aspect of the novel in a different way. That different way might help me see the characters in a whole new light.

I come to the discussions with an open mind. I want to learn. I come as a student. This helps me not to lock up when someone else thinks differently.

I am having a memory lapse. What is POV?

HATS, I love your reasons for coming to BOOKS and your insightful and receptive responses in each discussion is a joy.

POV is point of view. Sometimes we see the world from the eyes, heart, and mind (POV) of Charles, or Emma, or "We" such as the schoolboys, and so on. I don't think I've ever read a book with a continually changing POV -- from one person to the next -- that is as subtle and unobtrusive as in Flaubert's Madame Bovary.

Marvelle

I have been quiet but am reading the posts and the book; I am almost at Part 3. In less than a week we have posted 222 times which I find a little daunting and at times hard to follow. I do not want to interfere with the flow of what has been going on in our discussion, but I would find it helpful to focus at least once a week on some facet of the novel. Character study, symbolism, irony. For instance, I found the use of windows particularly interesting.

Part of my problem may be due to the fact that we are posting on the web and not meeting face to face as a group. And I am new to this.

I think that there are only two males in this discussion. Interesting - is this a "female book"? How did Flaubert, a man, so eloquently write about the feelings of a woman? How does a writer get into the characters of his/her novels? Does the writer's reality become that of his book?

Irony. To me it’s a great irony that Emma Roualt married Charles Bovary. I see a woman, who desires a world of passion that doesn’t exist in reality and wants a Prince Charming to sweep her away, marry a gauche, country doctor who couldn’t possibly fulfill her dreams. This to me is irony.

There also exists a woman who since childhood has had a physical handicap, which as a little girl she thought made her ugly and unacceptable, when she longed to be accepted, and who at this time longs for companionship, since she sees one other person besides herself for only one hour a day. This woman with few outlets -- myself -- manages somehow to alienate people in book discussions in ways she doesn’t understand. To me this is extremely ironic.

When I post a view or opinion it is my own, never an attack on someone else and his or her views and scholarship and knowledge, which I respect. I have torn myself apart trying to figure out how what I say and have said could possibly appear abusive to anyone else. I have examined the way I feel when I think someone online has hurt me or said something that makes me angry, trying to determine whether that feeling is justified or simply an interpretation and conclusion I’ve come to because I hurt all over that day, to see if I can understand how some feel about me and what I post. I can’t find any answers.

I have read that Flaubert based the character, Charles Bovary, on his father, and that he used numerous women he knew, many intimately, as basis for Emma. It’s said he used his mother as a model for Charles’s mother and created other characters from acquaintances and friends he had. Whether he did this or not, it seems to me that he did what all good fiction writers do; he got inside all of his characters, knew how they thought and felt and how they’d react to situations he built. This is perhaps why there are different points of view. I also think Flaubert had an amazing visual memory.

Flaubert was Charles when he wrote about him. He was Emma when he wrote about her. My interpretation of his statement that he was Madame Bovary is that he was the book. Right now I‘m not sure I dare to post this message for fear that what I say will be misunderstood.

Mal

Mal, I appreciate your posts and have never found them abusive. You should read some of the posts in the religious folders. Now there is abuse with a capital A. As I said in a post in another discussion, each of us brings a personal history as baggage into any discussion. This history affects how we view and interpret the novel and the world. It is nothing to apologize for. Unfortunately since we do not know one another in any real sense, we cannot fully comprehend where each of us is coming from.

One of the hardest things to do in life is to listen. My wife reminds me of this all the time. On line we do not see facial expressions or hear tonal inflections that help in interpretation.

I personally find it fascinating that I come back to the question of what is reality - a topic we found very interesting in the Life of Pi discussion. Reality for Emma is totally different from reality for Charles. Their lives were lived independently; their marriage was in name only. And it gets worse (not the novel) -their marriage.

I am not a scholar. I read a book and the important part of the book to me personally is the characters: descriptive language, cleverness of style etc is secondary to me.

Dare I say Flaubert understood women because he was a ladies man. He spent much time talking with women and women confided in him. I have certainly met men to whom one could have conversation we most often would describe as woman to woman conversation. I think Flaubert may have been fascinated by women - the way they think etc.

I agree with Mal regarding Emma. I don't see her as a victim - maybe she is her own victim?

Carolyn

There is not a single person in this world who is "black" or "white". We are unique combinations of many different shades of color in between those absolutes.

Because she was hungry in a way, Emma Bovary felt as if she were a victim, and she thought her husband was at fault. Like other husbands, when the honeymoon was over and initial passion and special attention to his wife subsided, Charles went about his business just as he had before he was married, thus the feeling that she was neglected on the part of his wife. I see this as benign neglect, not any sort of intentional punishment or deprivation on Charles's part. Emma didn't realize there were some things she had to provide for herself.

Charles loved her, but for Emma it wasn't enough, nor were the small opportunities offered by the village where they lived. Her hopes and dreams were much higher than that. I can easily see why she became depressed.

As George said, Charles's reality was quite different from Emma's. He was content with country life and his role as doctor. Since what Charles thought and did directly affected her, Emma was not content with his reality, and he was incapable of understanding why.

Traude pointed out that Charles left his established practice and moved to another town because he thought it would help his wife because he was concerned about her. Setting up a home for her and their child and working so he could provide for them was all he thought he could do. Truly, in his position, how could he do more?

Who is responsible for the nurturing of one's soul? Surely the only person who can do that is oneself. I find it terribly sad that poor Emma didn't realize this; that she looked for peace for herself in other people where it would never be found.

Mal

Again Mal I agree wholeheartedly with your opinion. When I first became widowed I found it difficult to function as one person, it did take me a while to realise I now was the author of my own destiny in a very real sense. I had to find the peace within myself and move on. I lead a very simple life yet I am content. Its not because I am very elderly either because I am one of the babies on SN. It is possible to find contentment in very mundane circumstances.

Carolyn

George, it seems that fiction draws a lot of women. Go figure!

Abuse has existed in Books unfortunately but it's rarely, if ever, been directed at a man. I myself have been the target of abuse many times in Books and no longer tolerate such behavior. I expect no less than its complete banishment since all of us face challenges in life and shouldn't be abused in, of all places, Books.

Challenges are an everyday part of Life. I don't come to Books to air my issues; there are more suitable places for that. We all have concerns but they shouldn't dominate a book discussion. I think Chat Rooms, for instance, are a good place for that so long as one is considerate of others.

George, trust me, abusive behavior has occurred, but people delete such posts when called out on it, yet the harm is done and its unacceptable.

Excuses wear thin when the abuse continues. After this post I wont be drawn into this off-topic subject. If people can stop such behavior then I applaud them. It will be exquisite to have a friendly discussion about exciting books.

Welcome to Friends in SN Books!

Back to the book. If I make a statement about something or someone in Madame Bovary I also try to provide examples from the book to show how I got to that response. This isn't just for fellow posters but for my own benefit in thinking out what's occurred in a book and why and how and what I really truly feel about it. I'm infamous, I think, for changing my mind. That's one of the pluses of being in a book discussion and listening to other well-thought out responses and re-considering my own. We're still in Part I and Part II begins tomorrow. More about the book....

Marvelle

What I see in Books is a bit of intellectual oneupmanship. In my opinion books are like paintings and music. There is no right there is no wrong interpretation. Each person sees the work of art differently and that's OK. Sometimes two or more people see the same thing and sometimes only one person sees a particular slant on the work. That is OK too. So lets be more tolerant and get on with it. I am not trying to be offensive its just what I being no scholar sees in the postings here.

Carolyn

Here are some questions that refer to Barbara's posts linking Emma to the actual romance literature or her time:

What are the implications of the literary inspirations of Emma's desires and dreams? Is Flaubert condeming literature or is he hinting at deeper issues? How does Emma compare to characters like Don Quijote de la Mancha whose desires and actions are also affected by the literary works he reads?

Marvelle

I think Flaubert is hinting at deeper issues although there is no getting away from the influence today of say the movies. I guess in Emma's day books took the place of the movies as a main form of entertainment. Not everyone would try to live their lives according to a fantasy obtained from reading a novel or watching a film but certainly there are certain people with personality disorders who may well be influenced by outside stimulae such as books or movies.

Don Quixote - Never read it.

Carolyn

TIMELINE

.
1789 French Revolution

popular uprising against the monarchy of Louis XVI, ideals of liberty, equality and brotherhood; storming of the Bastille (July 14(; "Declaration of the Rights of Man and the Citizen" (August 27)

Revolution: Short Version

Revolution: Long Version

Women in the Revolution

Marie Antoinette & Charlotte Corday

1799 - 1804 Consulate of Napoleon Bonaparte

Popular and egalitarian character of 1789 French Revolution betrayed in Napoleon Bonaparte's Consulate. Napoleon was characteristic of the bourgeoisie adoption of aristocratic values and attitudes; return to monarchic, dictatorial mode; denial of the values of freedom and equality embodied in the Revolution of 1789; Napoleonic Codes

1804-1815 Napoleon Bonaparte crowned Emperor of France

1830 The July Revolution

revolt of students and workers who wanted a Republic against the monarchists

1830-1848 Constitutional monarchy

Louis-Philippe, king of France, House of Orleans, favoring of upper bourgeoisie at the expense of the popular class

1848-1852 Revolution

beginning of Second Republic; President Louis-Napoleon Bonaparte (nephew of Napoleon Bonaparte)

1852-1872 Second Empire in France

Louis-Napoleon Bonaparte crowned as Emperor Napoleon III

Background of Bonaparte

1857 Madame Bovary by Gustave Flaubert

.
These are some of the social and political influences for Flaubert's Madame Bovary

Marvelle

Thank you for that time line, marvelle, it's very helpful, (the Napoleon link is gorgeous, I may have to steal those colors sometime for html pages) and you for your kind remarks some time back, Hats, I'm having a lot of trouble staying on due to storms. But I've got the next section read and ready for tomorrow and it's a whopper, boy! I'm so glad we're reading this and I would NEVER have read it had Joan G and Eloise not suggested it!

I'm beginning to think that a word we don't usually associate with good connotations, bourgeois, had a different meaning to Emma and her society, (LOVED the Abbey, Barb!!) I hope to read those links a bit more closely and see if I can understand what was meant by the bourgeoisie, it's certainly no compliment to use it today!

George, what an interesting viewpoint (there are THREE of you men here!) ahahahah but I think that may be unusual in such a book, why I don't know, that's an interesting question, is this a "female book," what do you consider a female book? One with a female heroine?

It's true that women in all book clubs outnumber the men, but I have found some of the most profound thoughts actually come from the men, so they are more than welcome! Hahahah We here in the Books have ALWAYS had a large number of men involved in our effort, and still do.

George, you said, "I personally find it fascinating that I come back to the question of what is reality..."

It does seem that Charles and Emma have a different perception of .....reality. Which one would you say is the correct perception, Emma's or Charles's?

I have read into the next section and the difference in their perceptions of the same thing is really clear there, I thought.

I don't know, you tell me: what's wrong with a good man who loves his wife, there is no evidence that I can see that she tried to tell him how she felt or what she wanted, and the one time she did get what she wanted she acted like a hellion (at the ball) She is not a person over concerned with the feelings of others, she is quite self centered and involved. Charles, on the other hand, rubs down his own horse, when he comes in late at night, taking care of the dumb animal first, which endeared me to him forever, even if he IS slow, he's steady. Emma is not quite so charitable to those who can't do her any good: supposedly the measure of character? Over and over again Emma displays lack of concern for any person other than herself, even her own father.

It's hard, because Emma is obviously, (I await Robby's diagnosis here) in the throes of some kind of severe depression, and it would be easy to say "snap out of it," but she has nothing but negative derisive remarks for her loving husband, even as he kisses her with tears in his eyes when he thinks she has defended him. "What a pitiful specimen," she thinks.

That's not good.

I dunno here, she's certainly being made into a very unsympathetic character, or so it seems to me? She seems in some ways to have some things in common with the first two Mrs. Bovarys, Charles mother was disappointed in her husband and became withdrawn and bitter and controlling of her son, trying to live vicariously thru him, Emma tries to live vicariously, too. His first wife tried to be very controlling like his mother and died...I guess of disappointment in her own life? The jury is still out on Emma there. But he stuck with her, even to the point of preserving her wedding bouquet, because she had loved him.

But the last Mrs. Bovary can't accept the world as it is but she lacks whatever it takes to make it what she'd like, she's different from the first two: it's possible that some of her intense frustration and dislike is for herself. Hers is a very unsympathetic character, to me: not in her dreams, or wanting to be better but in the way she goes about her dreams and in the way she treats those she deems no better than herself.

ginny

GINNY, very thoughtful post. So far in my reading I see Flaubert as both criticizing Emma for her bourgeois attitudes and admiring her for dreams. At least she had dreams even if she couldn't or wouldn't find realistic steps to achieve them.

I keep remembering dear Charles who was happy now, he was in the country, and "he possessed, and for always, this pretty wife whom he so loved...He couldn't keep from constantly touching her comb, her rings, everything she wore...." Charles' adoration and possession is a dual sword. He was as good or better than his society allowed him to be; women were legal possessions of men. Still....

Oh, I forgot to add a caveat to the Marie Antoinette and Charlotte Corday link in post 233; the subtitle is off-putting but that's all, the text itself is fine.

I think there are a variety of themes in Madame Bovary. Perhaps we should start making a list. George's idea of "what is reality and what is art" is one theme.

A Flaubert quote I just found: "The author, in his book, must be like God in the universe, present everywhere and visible nowhere."

Marvelle

marvelle, what an interesting thought, "At least she had dreams even if she couldn't or wouldn't find realistic steps to achieve her dreams."

Well, when you say at least....wouldn't she have been happier if she had not had those dreams? Did the dreams actually help her in life, I mean did they enhance her life in any way? That's an interesting thought you had there. "At least she had dreams," what would she have been if she had not? .... she is almost the antithesis of "be content with enough." Gotta think on that one a bit, thanks for that!

ginny

GINNY, everyone says "dreams" with Emma but what about goals? Would she have had the opportunity to reach any sort of goals in her society and times? Or would that lack of opportunity be the spur to frustration and dreams and depression? Those are questions that I'll have to think about myself. It's clear to me that Charles had the dream/goal to live in the country.

Marvelle

You don't get inner peace hankering after impossible dreams. If we did not have ancestors who put up with the mundane, harsh, unromantic life of our pioneer forefathers, many of us would not be here in this discussion today. Survival depends on getting on with life not living in a dream world. Emma Bovery appears to be the unhappiest of women. Her dreams in her time and her world I would rate as impossible. There was a stringent class system which was a big obstacle to fulfilling her dreams or should I say daydreams.

Carolyn

Ginny, the interesting thing about reality is that it differs for different people. You cannot say that one view is correct and another incorrect. The factual material may be the same but have different meanings to different people. Charles' sees Emma in a totally different way from the way Emma views herself. Which one is correct? Both.

I read a book only for entertainment. If it's not, then I don't want to do it anymore.

Now Ginny you have my interest as I can very Much understand Madame Bovary. She started in France, I started in Niles and we were Both farm girls, She married a doctor, I married my families choice. I had many others that I could have had, (would have had) chosen. I could Relate to this book as to my life. Remember I am Old. Smile.

I must look in the book to see where we are at but can and do relate to the book Madame Bovary, more than I will ever tell as I was searching also, were Not we all?

I have enjoyed every post so far, as to the windows Oh yes we had them in in a past read book (Remains of the Day. I do understand about the windows also as they are my windows to the World as was Madame Bovars. Now we are on the book to me as a story told.

GINGER, lovely post. We're just finishing Part I today which has 9 chapters. Tomorrow it's Part II but, of course, if anything in Part I interests you then please talk about it.

GEORGE, yes I think it's a dual vision with Emma and Charles and that Flaubert, expert that he was, planned there to be shadings and doubts. Truth is elusive, isn't it?

The bourgeoisie are the middle class. There is upper/haute middle class (professionals) and lower/petite middle class (artisans and craftsman) and then there's the lower class. At least that's my understanding of it. Where would Emma fit in this as daughter of a farmer and wife to a doctor?

There are three estates: nobility, clergy, and the bourgeoisie. Cartoons from the revolution:

AWAKENING OF THE THIRD ESTATE

ACTIVE CITIZEN / PASSIVE CITIZEN

Some links on the Revolution of 1830 which began the reign of the July Monarchy of Louis-Philippe, aka the Bourgeois King:

THE SPRINGTIME OF THE PEOPLES

WAVES OF REVOLUTION

REVOLT: CLASS STRUGGLES

The last link is clear, easy to read and is from Marx.

GINNY, you're making me learn a lot with your questioning!

Marvelle

Thank you for the links, Marvelle. The Active-Passive cartoon reminds me of Ancient Athens where the same thing was true.

To set the record straight, I want to tell you what was in the two messages I deleted last night. The first was a comment about the fine links Barbara posted and a humorous message about how young women are fed romantic stories. When I returned, Barbara appeared angry, and I thought I had offended her with my try at humor, so deleted the post. In the second I told her I was very sorry I had upset her, especially since I consider her a very bright woman and a friend. After posting it, I decided that was better said in an email, so I deleted it. Barbara later posted that it was another of my messages which upset her. I have no idea which one because I haven't deleted any others.

Now I will thank you for a very interesting week. I made what I thought was a decent effort, but apparently it wasn't a good enough try and hasn't worked out.

So long, folks. I'm headed for my word processor where I won't be seen or bother anyone.

Mal

I've tried everything to make my last link open and now am out of the allowed time so I'll post again here. This is the long version:

CLASS STRUGGLES: LONG VERSION

I wish I could have made the short version work!

Marvelle

Thanks for all the intelligent and informative posts today. All the links have been filled with lots of interesting information. I have enjoyed all of them.

Before we start our discussion of Part II of this novel I would like to just mention a few things we have talked about so far.

WE have mentioned Flaubert's use of symbolism with his using closed windows as a symbol of the frustration, restriction, and boredom of married life and the open window as a symbol of the freedom.

Also there has been mention of the the symbolism in the two wedding bouquets that represent the quickly passing romance of marriage and the death of love and beauty.

Also the symbolism of the cigar case was mentioned as representing the life of the upper classes that Emma seeks in her imagination.

WE have begun looking at the characters of Charles and of Emma. WE see what their lives were like before they met.WE have seen the tragic lack of communication in their early married life.

We talked about how Flaubert's use of language sets the mood of his characters.

Flaubert's use of irony has been pointed out.

We have discussed the changing point of view of the novel and its importance.

These are just a few of the things that we have talked about.

Now let's go on into Part II of the novel continuing our discussion of all these things . We will add a few things and broaden our discussion of others.

I have added some questions for discussion in the heading and there will be more as we move on in Part II.

Joan

Hi Joan, thanks for adding the questions to the heading. I have not read Part II yet. I will today or this evening. I am very anxious to get to Part II.

At the end of Part I, Emma burns her bridal bouquet. This is a symbol of totally giving up. She hates her marriage. She wants no memories of it. When she burnt the bridal bouquet, I thought, for whatever her reasons, this woman is out of here.

At first, I think Emma went through phases in her life. First, she liked to fantasize about beauty, the arts, etc. She seemed no different from other young women who look for a prince charming. Unfortunately, fantasies don't come true. This, I think, is what turned her into a bitter woman.

There might be a slim difference between fantasies and dreams. To live totally in a world of fantasy can lead to serious illness. Living in a land of fantasy means there is a non acceptance of reality. We must accept and live in reality. The "real" world exists. Our fantasies don't exist.

I think Emma moved into the world of unreality. Today we would say she had become, in some way, seriously depressed. Her moods are up and down,

"There were days when she chattered feverishly for hours on end; and this overexcitement whould be abruptly followed by a period of torpor during which she neither spoke nor moved."

She is extremely angry. Remember how she screams at the maid? Then, Emma does not eat. She drifts away to never never land at the table.

I think Charles is in the book to give us a heavy dose of what is valuable in life. He loves his work. Being a doctor, he has the chance to give back to society. He has friends. The community loves him. He gives and what he gives is given back to him.

Emma does not give. She wants to receive. Sure, this was a very difficult time for a woman to live. There were age old restrictions. The upper class women were told to stay by the hearth fires. Some women fought against these restrictions. They gave themselves to charity or wrote books. From this era came many great women writers.

I do feel sorry for Emma. She misses days and days of her life searching for the next day, hoping the next day will be her fantasy come true. Fantasies don't come true. Goals come true.

"Meanwhile, in the depths of her soul, she was waiting for something to happen. Like a sailor in distress, she kept scanning the solitude of her life with anxious eyes, straining to sight some far-off white sail in the mists of the horizon."

Those lines are so sad. At first, I thought Charles was sleepwalking through life. It is really Emma.

Marvelle, thank you for the links. The links are always helpful.

George, are you saying there IS no reality other than as it's perceived by each individual? If the tree falls and nobody is there to hear it, DOES it make a sound? I think it does. I don't think the world revolvs around me, whether or not I'm there it makes a sound, if I'm looking thru the window (windows again!!) and there's a dog in the yard, if a tree falls the dog will whirl around, whether or not I heard it.

I doubt Emma would agree with that line of philosophy. I don't think Charles would care. Love this line of thought, tho, see below, then, how are we to know what IS real in this book?

Joan G, wonderful summing up of the super points made here so far! And great focus questions for Part II, I'm still struggling with the WHY of WHY are there so many points of view, why did Flaubert take so long to introduce us to the title character, why did he DO that?

What is Flaubert really saying about women?

Flaubert's descriptions of Yonville (which for some reason I find a funny name, as in "hither and "YON?") hahahahaha at any rate his own descriptions, when compared with Emma's sour view are particularly striking, what is he saying??? I wonder? Is Emma actually here a victim of Flaubert?

I will say I have never seen so many green capes or articles of clothing thrown around in one book in my life, All the metaphors describing the beautiful countryside really compare to Emma's view, to her it looks like dreck.

I am not sure what Flaubert is doing here, in this obvious contrast between Emma's point of view and what Flaubert seems to present AS the reality? REALITY again. If WE were there, how would WE see Yonville? Would it depend on our own social status at the time? Who can you trust, that is, whose view of this situation is the REAL one? The points of view are so different, you have to pick one? Who do you trust, to quote Jack Nicholson as the Joker, who do you trust?

There's a lot of social contrast in this thing, and thank you Marvelle for the bourgeois explanations, it's clear from Emma and the wet nurse Emma is in some social position above her. I think Marvelle asked what social status the wife of a doctor might have: note how "compassionately" she treats the wet nurse, but again she's not dancing at the palace all night long, either, nor is she cooking for guests at the inn, so that appears to be at least 4 different levels of society represented there all at once, and Emma's situation apparently could be a lot worse?

I just thought of a song which might apply here: "Don't fall in love with a dreamer, 'cause he'll only break your heart." That one fits, so far I have no sympathy for Emma at this point, but I think her own self centeredness is going to bring her down in the hands of more manipulative people, I feel it, because even tho she's obviously intelligent, she is too self centered to see the whole picture, she's ripe for being taken advantage of: when that happens, depending on how she has or has not treated others less fortunate than she is, will we be sorry or glad?

ginny

Very quickly for Ginny as I want to go hit golf balls (sorry). There is a difference between what we PERCEIVE as reality and BELIEVE to be reality and TRUTH or FACT. IMO The reality for a deaf person does not include any sound but we know that sound exists - but it does not exist for the deaf person. Will return later. Joan, I like the questions posed and have gone back to reread the novel. A novel idea for me. Pun intended.

What better place in which to engage 'reality' than on the golf links. Greatest mind game in the world! And out of all those takes on reality comes art, I suppose. Even the 'novel' kind?

Just having fun listening to your great discussion and can't resist the impulse to say hello.

Jonathan

Jonathan I love it - golf - I can see that is so true though about many sports where winning is defined with a series of actions done successfully - in fact some employment is structured along those lines aren't they - alas not so easy measuring success in life - without dreamers there would be so many wonders missing in our lives like the movies and various pieces of architecture and for some our homes, even our constitution was as a result of dreamers like Paine and Franklin, Adams and crew - but it is fun and so satisfying to think of golf in Spring with new green grass, trees and the knowledge that it is only a ball and it should go where I send it - hehehe

Seems to me Emma and Charles were doomed from the beginning. Emma is educated as very few women in Victorian society except those aristocratic women who lived in chateau with large libraries. Emma has moved beyond society’s definition of who she is. Charles is also part of the new middle class that as a class has one leg in the world of an aristocratic Victorian gentleman and the other leg as someone living near the land in the provinces.

Through their character Flaubert, also a middle class member of the Victorian society is attempting to show the futility of the middle class dictated by what the Victorian Age thought was true about the essential nature of men and women, how they relate to one another, their family and societies influences.

As I read I am seeing the novel’s antagonist is the Victorian society, which spurns women like Emma who do not conform to society’s strict definitions of what women should be, how they should act, what little education and reading material should be available to her. Emma’s dreams may be so far beyond reality that she would continue always to be frustrated in life - alas, we will never know. I think as we grow older we do less dreaming or we do not expect our dreams to be practical - remember how it is the young with fervor so strong they peruse a dream and our Emma is young.

Flaubert is writing about the shattering of romantic illusions and her only avenue to realize these dreams in Victorian society is through Charles who is wanting his freedom from the responsibilities that Victorian society says are de rigueur for men. He wants to be shut in and allowed to play - he does not have a calling for any great adventure or to be the best in his profession.

To complicate matters further, we see the women within their dissatisfaction grow increasingly demanding, developing sour dispositions, twisting men, We see men trying to better the situation by, what to them seems, in good faith offering changes without being able to satisfy the real needs of these women.

Flaubert was brilliant giving Charles the profession of a Doctor. For the times being a doctor so perfectly depicting the limited ability to create health and comfort. At this time in history except to bleed a patient, offer some herb mixtures and set bones there was not much a doctor could offer his patients. He is alienated from even his families life and death and does not realize the strength within him that was dormant from the time he was a child. He never does take on the world where as Emma is made separate from the world till she separates herself from the world.

As readers we constantly want to interrupt and make assumptions and associations based in our twentieth century perspective. Charles finds the prospect of living a life as a studious successful Doctor and raconteur unappealing. Emma wants to have a more meaningful life, unrestricted by the reality of their circumstances.

Fowles, a twentieth century author of the French Lieutenants Women, wrote in his novel about women and the working-class as the two groups oppressed both economically and socially in Victorian society that inhibits mobility for anyone who is not middle or upper-class and male. These are the social issues that Fowles explores within the traditional romance. Fowles writes about the amount of prostitution in an ironically realistic manner.

The Victorian Age is thought of as a Golden Age based in Reason and Rationality. Yet Fowles message is that Victorian’s in their unquestioned religious faith, imposed a great deal of repressive conventions and norms on its people, especially women and the working class. Victorian women were socially conditioned to believe that their rightful place was at home with their husbands and children. A Victorian woman was expected to accept the patriarchal norm unhesitatingly. Her duty was to her husband and children. Only if she toed this social line would she be deemed a proper young lady.

Sorry - I do get carried away so this is long - this author sure knows how to attract us to his characters - I spent time last night reading a book given to me when I was teaching Needlework called The Subservient Stitch.

The book goes into the history of women through the eyes of how stitchery was either used or a reason for abuse - Women were not employed as stitches till after glass windows - prior to that time it was a man’s industry. Essentially the industry was either a haven or a force to further abuse to women and this book offers background information to further explain the circumstances of women through out history that leads to their stitchery use or abuse. In a nut shell between reviewing The French Louitentant’s Women and rereading The Subservient Stitch the lives of the women during the historical time of Madame Bovary come closer to reality of me.

The institution of marriage was often a contract agreement aligning money, thereby reinforcing the dominant society’s power. The Legal system was quite adept at stripping the nineteenth century widow of any inherited wealth although there was increasing rights for women to own property. The book said that a women was lucky to come away with one fourth of the value of the property inherited. The old traditional customs prevailed among families where the women stayed at home - the family property usually is inherited by the eldest son, who she hopes will care for her or take her in. A daughter would have to convince her husband to take on the burden of her mother. It was the working class women who were more successful in securing any inheritance and the family business.

Where ever she is accepted she would work to ease the burdens of the family if only knitting the families sox and sweaters. Having seen the PBS 1900 House we know the work is hard and grueling even in that late date. If a son or daughter does take her in and they are not wealthy, more than likely the mother would sleep with the grandchildren.

If a housewife is widowed with unmarried children, hopefully she is one of the few who has a sought after skill and connections to a wealthy family who would swap food and board in exchange for sharing the skill with the family. Other wise the children would be sent to an orphanage so that she could seek employment, often becoming a prostitute. The children would visit their mother over Christmas. If there is an unmarried daughter of at least 12 year of age, she would be too old for the orphanage therefore she would become either a prostitute or a lace maker. A lace maker worked 16 hour days in a dark room where a candle was placed next to a glass filled with water. Each girl would place her chair where a beam of the fractured light would shine on her work. Lace makers usually went blind after 9 or 10 years of work or they experienced a life with severe disablity to their eyes.

Easy to see why women were frustrated - their place in society was not only limited but dependent on having a living husband - some of Marvelle's links help illuminate the box women were in during the publication of this book as compared to our lives now or during the last half of the twentieth century.

And women birthing children at this time, although there is a new era in surgical practice began in 1846 with the medical application of anesthesia which rapidly spread from America to Europe, in obstetrics, there was opposition to its use based on the biblical injunction that "women should in sorrow bring forth children in atonement for Eve's sin." This argument held firm until Queen Victoria, had chloroform during the births of two of her children, Leopold in 1853 and Beatrice in 1857. Only then was anesthesia used in childbirth among the wealthy and in cases of cesarean section. Although cesarean surgery was an accepted practice, until the 1830s it meant the death of the mother. The first successful cesarean was in 1828. Emma's birthing is a bump in her life - hmmmm.

Class structure during Victorian Europe was changing with a burgeoning middle class and it was based more on money than breeding which affected the changing social scene. Successful members of the trade and commerce industry were in positions held formally by the aristocrats although there was resistance to their being accepted into most social circles. Easy now to understand why the women all seem to have an issue with the success of the men - their place in society is now measured by their wealth.

A Victorian gentleman was expected to have a sense of duty and propriety. He was expected to stick to his commitments, both legal or marital. They were expected to act the proper gentleman. But very often the norm was mocked to the advantage of men. It is these proper Victorian men who patronize the prostitution dens. There were one set of social rules for men and one for women.

The upper classes and the lower classes had no hang-ups about pre-marital sex or about changing partners yet the middle classes treated this as a taboo subject. Emma entering an adulterous relationship is an issue because she is a middle class married lady. One more example of her trying to fulfill her desire for a fashionable life-style described in the books she has read as a young women.

Flaubert in Madame Bovary does not judge in either exaltation or derision his characters, he merely depicts the reality of their lives.

I'm caught up in a whirlwind of questions from Joan and the fab posts. I'm still re-reading Part 2 so will post later about that.

Going back to Part 1 when the noble thought that Emma's not bowing to him meant she wouldn't be too out of place or gauche at the ball. I think GINNY was right that it was Charles' position (haute bourgeois) as a doctor that drew the invitation. Emma married up when she married Charles so she's in a tenuous position and she would be well aware of that. Class and gender and romanticism may be a lethal combination for her.

HATS, I think Emma yelled at her maid and fired her because she'd just been evicted, so to speak, from the fairyland ball and had to return to her everyday life (like kissing a prince and opening your eyes to find he's really a frog). It was a shock to her that her dream had evaporated. Will she ever learn in this novel?

Farmers would be considered working class I believe, or at best, petite bourgeois. I remember how Charles assumed Emma's father had to be rich because he was a farmer, and Homais thinks the same of the farmers of Yonville -- incorrect assumptions by both men. Yet doesn't Homais call them peasants?

We know some of Emma's weaknesses but Charles is beginning to disturb me with his male assumptions and his "possession" of his wife and all her effects. He's good and kind, but there's something there that's nagging at me. Will have to wait and see how Flaubert continues with him. One thing we know already is that Flaubert doesn't create just White Hats and Black Hats people; there are shadings of good/bad. As BARB said "Flaubert in Madame Bovary does not judge in either exhaltation or derision of his characters, he merely depicts the reality of their lives." I think Flaubert deals in realism but am not sure that all his characters do so.

From what I've read again of Part II, its dynamite. Enjoyed all the thoughts. Will be back later after I've considered Joan's questions more.

Marvelle

Barbara, thank you for your posts. You have given me a clearer understanding of how women in the Victorian Age lived and how society treated them.

On reading Part II, I see that Emma was fully aware of her place in that society. When Emma learns that her baby will be a girl, she becomes very upset. Her thoughts are,

"a man, at least, is free; he can explore the whole range of the passions....But a woman is constantly thwarted. Inert and pliable, she is restrictd by her physical weakness and her legal subjection."

If these are Emma's thoughts and not Flaubert's, Emma is totally aware of her reality. She just can not bare living with it.

I think in every era in history, whether French History or American History there are men and / or women who are oppressed. There seems to be a healthy and an unhealthy way of dealing with these restrictions. I am not sure that Emma chose the healthy way to deal with it.

Hats that is a very sound assumption. I agree with you. I still see Emma as a victim of her own making.

Carolyn

HATS, good thoughts. Given Emma's class and gender, what would be a healthy way to deal with her -- as you say -- oppression? If she surrenders, is that healthy? Would there have been something she could've done specifically (remembering of course the restrictions imposed in the time and place she lived.) I have no answers here, just questions; wondering what options were available. Maybe we'll find answers as we proceed in the book.

Another thought: Why is this novel called Madame Bovary and not Emma or Emma Bovary?

_____________________________________

The more I think about class, the more I see it as one of the central concerns in the novel. If Emma left Charles, she'd lose her social position gained from marriage and also gained from Charles' social position. Would she cease being a lady and become like the wet-nurse or work in non-respectable positions? How would she survive in her time and place?

Emma's father had bought into the class system and his way of saying 'I'm not a peasant like these other farmers' was by not lifting a finger to work the farm if he could help it. He had certain pretensions or desires; and we'll see more people in the novel scrambling for social position, not Emma alone.

Emma didn't receive a proposal of marriage from Charles. It was an agreement between Charles and Monsieur Rouault, with Rouault going alone to speak with Emma. Charles the doctor was one of the haute bourgeois which would add distinction to Rouault's social position as well as Emma's.

Class is definitely a big part of Madame Bovary.

Marvelle

GINGER, this week's reading (April 9-15) begins Ch 1, where Charles and Emma are resettling to another town. My translation begins:

"Yonville-l'Abbaye (even the ruins of the ancient Capuchin abbey from which it derives its name are no longer there) is a market town twenty miles from Rouen, between the hightways to Abbeville and Beauvais in the valley of the Rieule."

This week's discussion ends with Part II Ch 7 and -- in the first lines of the ending paragraph -- the clerk Leon thinks about the Bovarys and especially Emma:

"We'll get to be friends. I'll call on them occasionally and send them presents -- game and chickens."

And the concluding two sentences of that paragraph:

"We'll get started. The approach direct: that's the best."

Hope this helps.

Marvelle

How pathetic is it to put all ones hopes on romantic attachments. I ask you! I would say to Emma I don't see any freedom in her aspirations. She will still be a slave to a man. Why didn't she just enjoy her child, she could have seriously studied all sorts of literature and perhaps even gone for long walks or rides to cool off her overactive ardour. She knew the class divisions and she must have known her attempts at climbing the social ladder would most likely never be successful on a permanent basis.

Women cried for freedom to pursue their careers and now many of them have realised rearing children while being still responsible for the majority of the running of the household has made them another sort of slave. I know quite a few women who have chosen to stay home until their preschoolers begin full time schooling rather than have the stress of trying to manage preschoolers and a responsible job. I know what slavery- trying to do two jobs at once is like. Not much fun! Many young women are beginning to have the courage to admit they are struggling to juggle everything. They may have to drop their standard of living for five years but those who decided to do this in the main have not regretted their decision.

What I am saying is that Emma while desperately trying to attain the freedom she wants is going to end up a slave to a man anyway. Shall I put on my tin hat after these controversial comments?

Carolyn

Carolyn the problem Emma experiences is, she had to give her child to be wet nursed - the idea of the day was that a women should get her figure back quickly and be sexually attractive without a leaky breast interfering with a man’s pleasure - and so Emma did not have opened to her the role of being a cozy mother - it was expected that she become attractive to her husband -

Now the lower class wet nursed because like day care today they could then make the needed money allowing the family to function. Often the wet nurse came to the lower class mother who then had her baby with her evenings and Sundays where as the middle class mother sent their babies often to a village or farmer's wife for the duration only visiting the baby when weather and roads and transportation was availible. The upper class and aristocrats all wet nursed the children often with a maid that lived in the same location. In those years a child was wet nursed until the age of 2 and most often till they were 3 years old.

Having had a different relationship with my babies it would be hard for me to imagine but then I did not live in a society where it was expected for me to separate from my new born babies.

I also wish that Emma made other choices but then we would not have this novel would we - Flaubert is bringing us this tale that he worked on for 5 years in order to tell us something - we cannot rewrite the story.

I guess I am trying to figure out what he is telling us rather than deciding if the characters acted in their own best interests. I do know in the book A Grammar of Motives it says when an author includes sex in a book it is a symbol or analogy for power. Could this be Flaubert’s way of showing us that boxed in as she was Emma sought power so she could make her dreams come true...? I do not know...I am just wondering aloud and trying to find the key to what Flaubert is telling us.

Carolyn, you say that Emma is a victim of her own making and then say that she is a slave to men. You also point out that Emma is trying to attain freedom. But do you really think that if one of her love affairs works out, that she will be happy that she will stop looking to be free. I am afraid that for Emma, happiness is an illusion that she will never attain. She will never be free of her own fantasies.

In part 2 note the early mention of "thick bulging windows" - aha her view is even going to be more obscured.

Why is the notary's the finest house in town? I do not think of a notary as a particularly wealthy or important person.

What about the statue of the Virgin with bright red cheeks. That is a new image of Mary for me. Irony and foreshadowing???

What is Dietetic Chocolate? I have a feeling that it is not fat free.

The town is certainly painted as a backwater dump - a step down for Dr and MME Bovary.

Flaubert takes a real swipe at the Catholic Church in the scene where the priest refuses a drink and the pharmacist (Homais) goes after the priesthood and the church. His speech is wonderful - unfortunately no one is listening. I think that this message about the church is one that Flaubert subtely (spelling?) introduces. He seems to be quite critical.

As am aside - while looking for a book on Amazon, I came up with a DVD on Impressionism (from a TV series) that looked interesting.

CAROLYN don't worry, your comments aren't in the least controversial.

Thanks BARB for the enlightening information on Victorian women. I too am at the point where I'm trying to figure out what Flaubert is telling us rather than 'deciding if the characters are acting in their own best interest.' Since we know that women in 1800s France had many, many more restrictions than today, I cannot equate the two time periods as being identical since women today have greater opportunities (imperfect as today's society is in regards women). I also cannot put my eggs in one basket and say it's totally a gender issue. I'll be looking at many themes in this novel.

Oops, I made a mistake in post #258 to GINGER, the speaker in the last paragraph of Part II Ch 7 isn't Leon, but someone else.

Marvelle

Thank You for your correction. Know that I caught it.

No Emma will never be happy in my opinion. Always chasing "My elusive dream"

Carolyn

I'm not really sure I like this man Gustave Flaubert or his beliefs. One thing, from what I've read about him, he was a womanizer....something I cannot stand in a man. It appears he was also dominated by his mother and she put up barriers in any of his relationships with women. He went from one woman to another, many of them married and never could find the right woman to marry. I don't think Flaubert knew how to love. He apparently died a lonely old hermit. Serves him right (IMO).

Hats, Your posts are so very insightful. I enjoy reading them.

Ginny, you ask why Flaubert took so long to introduce us to the title character. He is presenting her from a distant view. We hear about her from other viewpoints first.He is using a technique known as "delayed emergence". This technique is used to "arouse the reader's interest in the main character".

You also ask what Flaubert is saying with his descriptions of Yonville. In my opinion he is saying that Yonville is really just like Tostes. Yonville is just as boring and monotonous as Tostes was. This makes us realize that Emma is going to be just as depressed here as she was in Tostes.

George, hope you enjoyed your golf. I am glad you are going back and having another look at the novel.

WElcome Jonathan, hope you will join us here. You and George could really have a good time with your play on words.<smile> I like that. It lightens things up some.

Barbara, that is an excellent post with many good points. The Subservient Stitch sounds like a very interesting book.

Marvelle, enjoyed your comments.

Carolyn, It does seem that Emma should have known that she would not be able to climb in society.

I can't imagine missing the first 2 or 3 years of my child's life. To me it is so sad that women did this.

George you ask, "Why is the notary's the nicest house in town?" A French notary's duties and powers should not be confused with the limited powers of an American notary.

The French notary ("le notaire") has a legal monopoly to effect the transfers of French real property and to probate estates in France. They are trained in the law in such areas and also know the French tax law relating to such fields of specialization.
from http://www.paris-law.com/

He was an important person.

I think you are right when you say that Flaubert is quite critical of the Church.

EmmaBarb, I am not sure if Flaubert could not find the right woman to marry of if he wanted to devote himself to writing rather than marriage. Guess I need to do more research on that.

Enjoyed all the posts today Folks.

Are any of you ready to analyze the character of Homais?

Joan

When Emma went to the priest for help, I felt very sorry for her. The priest did not hear a word she said. Emma finally gave up and did not share her concerns.

I find it impossible to look at this novel without looking at the motivations of the characters. I think novels are written around what moves the characters to act. I also believe Barbara and Marvelle are correct in saying that the history and gender issues will have to be discussed too.

Emma's character is so strong. It is almost impossible to see or hear the other characters. Her faults are very evident. She hits her baby and almost causes the baby to suffer a terrible accident. She calls her child ugly, etc. It is hard not to think about what is causing this woman to act in the way she is acting.

I don't know the correct way in which she should handle her problems. I do know that living in a world of fantasy is not the answer. While we are looking up the problems in this time in history, should we not also look at the solutions used by women? Some women did make it through this era in history with all of their dignity. How did they do it? Can we compare and contrast them with Emma?

Joan, I think Yonville is boring too. The town lives up to its name. Like Ginny, I found myself laughing at the name of this town. This town is just going to send Emma deeper into her fantasy world.

Of course, living in this town does not bother Charles. He does not have the humph to even get jealous of his wife's behavior. Now that would bother me. If I were flirting, I would want my husband to sit up and take notice.

Here I am again. I did have one more post. Reading the back of my Madame Bovary book, I have found an interesting quote.

"A brilliant psychological portrait, MADAME BOVARY searingly depicts the human mind in search of transcendence. Who is Madame Bovary? Flaubert's answer to this question was superb: "Madame Bovary, c'est moi."

So, along with the history, I think we do have to look at the motivation of the character. Also, when we look at the history, I would think we would have to look at the male in French History too.

After all, Flaubert says he is writing about himself while writing about Madame Bovary. What would make a male, during that time in history, relate so closely to Madame Bovary? Did the male experience as many restrictions as the woman? What? I don't know.

This subject is getting pretty deep for me. I need help understanding it all from Joan, Ginny, Marvelle, Barbara, Mal and especially Robby and everyone else.

At least we know it's not just a "woman's book." I think George brought up that issue.

Hats,

What Flaubert probably meant when he said "Madame Bovary, c'est moi" was that he saw in himself many of the same desires and conflicts that he had created in this character. We see Madame Bovary's obsession with a desire for an idealized romantic love. Flaubert , at a young age , had this fantasy about a romantic relationship with a much older woman, Elisa Schlessinger. He kept up this fantasy for many years. Flaubert was not a healthy man, there is speculation that he might of had epilepsy. In first part of the book we see Emma suffering from a mysterious illness that seemed to involve a nervous condition. Flaubert suffered from bouts of depression just as Emma does when she realizes she cannot have what she wants.

Flaubert has deep dislike for middle-class values. We see this in the book.

Looking at events in France during Flaubert's time, we see that it was a time of tremendous social conflict. The Revolution of 1789 overthrowing the aristocracy and Napoleon's reign as Emperor of France were still remembered vividly. The middle class -bourgeoisie-was made up of merchants and capitalists who had made fortunes from commerce. This was in contrast to the inherited fortunes of the aristocracy. This middle class was morally conservative, lacked polished manners, and were unsophistocated in their tastes. Flaubert was dismayed by these things.

I hope this helps in answering some of your thoughts. It is just a summation of some of the things we have all talked about.

Joan

Joan, your thoughts are very helpful.

I think Flaubert identified with the book Madame Bovary with all its philosophy and social criticism, rather than just the individual we know as Emma. That's also why I think the book wasn't called Emma or Emma Bovary. Its about a society, hence the Madame Bovary which indicates an entire boureois society embedded in that title of "Madame".

Marvelle

JOAN, thank you for distilling the thoughts that have been expressed so well so far.

As you said, Flaubert was not a well man; he too had an unspecified "condition nerveuse" like Emma. He had epilectic seizures, and furthermore, like Charles Baudelaire and Guy de Maupassant among others, he contracted syphilis.

For Flaubert, the "mise en scène" was very important. He went to some lengths to prepare the reader for Emma in Part I; and he does the same in Part II. It is readily apparent that Emma will be even more bored and unhappy in the new environment than she was at Tostes.

Just saw your post, MARVELLE.

But even in this country in the 20th century -- before Betty Friedan and Gloria Steinem came up with 'Ms.' -- women were referred to and went by their husband's name.Long-time, beloved friends from my years in Virginia still write to me as Mrs. with my late husband's name.

I might add that this custom was not known to me when I arrived here as an adult. I was naïve in many ways.

Homais is such an extreme representative of the haute bourgeoisie that he seems almost a caricature. He says he believes in the principles of '89 but apparently that doesn't include liberty, equality and fraternity except for a select few.

He criticizes whenever he can get away with it,

calls farmers "peasants" and the priest a hypocrite, tells the hotel proprietress how to run her hotel. He assumes the right to judge unilaterally, because he's in a supposedly superior occupation as a pharmacist. His title defines his identity.

Homais is a snob with the conservative and restrictive views of his class.

He passes judgment on people according to their class: against Binet the tax collector, and for Leon the notary's clerk and law student, a haute bourgeois. Homais: "There's a great difference ... between someone who's been properly brought up [Leon Dupuis] and a tax collector [Monsieur Binet] who got his only schooling in the army."

Homais needs to justify his bourgeois superiority (i.e. having material comforts) by negating the conditions of the working class

He calls farmers peasants while, at the same time, he says they are wealthy. Homais also says: "You'll have to fight many a prejudice, Monsieur Bovary; every day your scientific efforts will be thwarted by the peasant's stubborn adherence to his old ways. Plenty of our people still have recourse to novenas and relics and the priest, instead of doing the natural thing and coming to the doctor or the pharmacist." (A slam by Homais against the Church, and the working class who're 'ignorant' according to him.)

Homais presents himself as an important self-made man and a progressive scientist

but he spouts pseudo scientic jargon with a wavering bluster. Homais on the climate's effect on health in the valley: "{The} warmth, which because of the dampness given off by the river and the number of cattle in the pastures, which themselves exhale, as you know, a great deal of ammonia, that is nitrogen, hydrogen, and oxygen (no, just nitrogen and hydrogen), and which, sucking up the humus from the soil, mixing all these different emanations together ... and combining also with the electricity in the atmosphere when there is any, could in the long run result in noxious miasmas, as in tropical countries...."

Homais is insecure; always afraid of sliding down the social ladder; he still retains the fear of the wealthy and the powerful.

Part of his scientific bluster and his fear stems from the fact that he's never been licensed, yet he needs the status of consulting patients. He shakes in front of a royal prosecutor who reprimands him for this practice. I'm left with the impression that Homais can't qualify, doesn't have the knowledge, to acquire a license. In any case, he courts Charles Bovary the doctor as a solution to the reprimand. Homais is frightened of losing his status and that fear could be dangerous.

Homais, like Emma Bovary, has bought into the conventional ideas of the bourgeoisie. His library is filled with romance novels. He's sociable, sentimental, and can be kind. He and his wife are indifferent parents but he calls the neglect and sloppy housekeeping 'being progressive' and in the interest of the children. Homais' opinions parrot the opinions of his class and he doesn't consider, reason, or think things out -- opinions are facts to Homais. He's egoistic yet also insecure. He's desperate to believe the myth that in his society the cream rises to the top (haute bourgeoisie that is) and he is the cream.

I consider Leon to be the male counterpart to Emma, and they both don't feel established in their society. And Emma, as a woman, is a reflection of another and has severe limits placed on her. Leon will have opportunities as a man and an individual. Perhaps Flaubert thought Homais was necessary as a caricature of the extreme side of greed, false pride, and insecurity that could exist in the supposedly established bourgeoisie.

I don't know if I'm too harsh with Homais. I can't quite see him as real and I'm considering him now only within the context of Part II Ch 1-7. Who knows what the future pages will bring?

Marvelle

TRAUDE, I just saw your post #274. I wasn't talking about an everyday personal address but about the title of a book. I think I was unclear about that. Flaubert was one of those authors who carefully chose titles for their implications as to theme or intent of the novel. Just as Hemingway did with For Whom the Bells Toll and A Farewell to Arms.

I believe that Flaubert chose Madame Bovary with a purpose in mind, as seen in some of his other titles and -- from his criticisms of the bourgeoisie within the novel -- I feel that the "Madame" represents that particular class.

What custom was unknown to you, Traude?

Marvelle

Never mind, TRAUDE, I figured it out! After the post on Homais my brain has turned to mush and it took a while to understand you meant the custom of using "Ms." for Miss or Mrs.

That brings up a good example as to the book's title. Imagine an author of the 1970's writing about Sylvia Sneed, a married woman from New York. If the title of this novel is "Ms. Sneed" then we'd understand not to tunnel our energy on just Sylvia Sneed but to widen our focus to the society that stood in back of the woman's married title. What was this society like? Why call both single and married women "Ms."? What was the status of married women? How did the society view women? What were its values? Etc etc.

All of that from a book's title -- not Emma, or Emma Bovary (as individuals) but Madame Bovary, representative of a certain society.

Marvelle

Marvelle, that gives me a good understanding about the title. Thank you for breaking down Homais' character. Talking about the title, proves Barbara's point that there is a need to look at this society and how it viewed women.

Marvelle to be at peace one has to find a way to fit into the society we live in. There will always be those who want to change society to fit their dreams but if this becomes the focus of ones life I don't think it will bring happiness. I think Emma had totally unrealistic hopes and she was doomed to dissatisfaction because of this.

Carolyn

MARVELLE,

what I meant was that in the fifties, sixties and up into the seventies married women went by their husband's first name on invitations, or place cards and on envelopes : i.e. Mrs. DAVID Keller, not Mrs. GLORIA Keller.

That was the way members' names were listed also in the directories of the woman's organization to which I belong; it changed after the advent of "Ms." - but not right away !

Then began the rush to eliminate the -man from words like "chairman". The State President pronounced herself unhappy with "chairwoman" and protested against the compromise of "chair", saying somewhat angrily, "I am not a piece of furniture !". She later relented. The year was 1974.

As for the book title, I believe "Madame" Bovary sounds more formal, more polished, than "Emma Bovary".

Hats, I meant to mention in my earlier post that in the 19th century many people use Laudanum for depression. It is a derivative of opium. In the United States in the 19th century many women used Lydia Pinkham's compound for what ever ailed them. It had a high alcohol content. Many patent medicines had a high alcoholic content. I suppose we find more recorded about the people who did not cope well than we do about those who did. Many woman did devote themselves to bringing up their children and taking care of their home. After all that was an important job. It was not easy at that time to run a household. It was really work. Many woman followed the idea that their husbands earned the living therefore it was the woman's job to provide a well run home. This idea was prevalent well into the 20th century. Carolyn mentioned that today many young women are choosing to stay home with their children because they see the importance of bringing up their children.

Traude, yes well into the 20th century most women were referred to and went by their husband's name. More woman began to use their own names as they began to have careers.

Marvelle, interesting concept about the title. That was an excellent character study of Homais.

Here is something that I came across in my research in preparation for this discussion - the suggestion that the name Bovary as related to "bovine, herd animals meant for slaughter and exploitation, indifferent to ideals" is an issue for discussion. Do you have any ideas on that?

How did Emma feel about her pregnancy?

Joan

Thank you, Joan. Your post gives me a deeper understanding of mental depression and also, a woman's life in this period.

Wow, lots of super stuff here today, THANK you Jaon for that delayed emergence thing, when you consider the title of the story as Marvelle has here (you drove me CRAZY with that Marvelle, hahaha I thought and thought and thought and have very much enjoyed your and Traude's takes on it!) then you have to wonder if he's making some point in some way, thank you!!

And GEORGE George George, whee? Let me tell you you're a commercial for playing golf, better than Tiger Woods, LOOKIT you go, wow! (Obviously golf if good for the mind?) hahaah I never found it so, ahahahaha I also noticed the windows of Yonville, didn't it say something about the center bulge? I can see those old windows now, and you're right, very distorted. So moving to a new place might not solve their problems, I wonder why Charles ever thought it would?

Also our first view of Homais the Pharmacist is likewise through a window and in his case we see only his shadow thru the shield of bottles of colored glass, literally through a glass, darkly.

I really am ambivalent on the character of Homais? I can sense (why?) that Flaubert wants us to like him? Or does he? He's BORRRING? He's boring and talks all the time about nothing, he's THE authority in town, what was THAT about Charles would not have any paying patients? I don't understand what's going on? A cover up of some kind?

And Yonville almost steams there in 'the houses all had their shutters closed, and the slate roofs, gleaming under the harsh light of the blue sky, seemed to be giving off sparks beneath their ridges."

So the town seems closed, the windows a re closed but it seems there are sparks where we would not expect them, interesting.

JONATHAN!!!!!! There you are, look, George, 4 men, that may be a record for a book about a bored housewife, Jonathan don't go anywhere, this one had much beneath the surface, I think. Like the slate roofs and their sparks.

EmmaBarb, thank you for that bit about Flaubert himself, so he came to the knowledge of a stifling mother first hand, that's how he could write that well, and he kept seeking, apparently? What? Worth in other affairs?

What DO psychologists say people seek who have many affairs?

In one way, (now you'll all gasp I said this) you have to feel a bit sorry for Emma, I see Carolyn and I feel the same about her, but I wonder, too, if we shouldn't have a bit of compassion, because she's a motherless child, brought up by nuns whose teaching she rejected like adolescents will, but whose only idea OF reality WAS in romance novels, much like our American television is denounced for the Mom wears a dress and Dad only wore suits sitcoms of the 50s and 60s? She had only fake fiction to guide her on what to expect FROM life, but as Carolyn says, if she can't adjust what will happen to her?

How OLD is Madame Bovary when we meet her? Shouldn't she be giving up her childish romantic dreams of the white knight? Too bad she didn't have things to read on women who succeeded all by themselves? She wouldn't, would she? Based on what you've said, those were in a bit of short supply except for Joan of Arc. And she burned.

But now, again, and who mentioned, I'm sorry, your ideas have become one giant composite in my brain of understanding, about the Bovary being like Bovine?

What does, if anything Homais mean? Doesn't this new character L'heureux also have a symbolic name, something about happiness? But he's anything BUT happy, he's slimy and seems to want to lend her money? If she had a mother her mother would have warned her about such things, but she didn't. And since she rejected the aestheticism of the religious vocation and life, she has nothing to go on.

Also George is right on the scathing denunciation of the Church, found in Emma's seeking help from the parish priest, who is more concerned with...what? More concerned with...she says "I'm suffering,," he thinks she's...cold? or sick or?

So is this a lesson Flaubert wishes us to learn? Who can you trust? Who can you turn to?

Is Flaubert saying not the church? Not your husband? Not society, so make your own way?

Joan G asks about the pregnancy, how Emma felt about it? Wasn't THAT ironic?

She hopes for a son'; he would be strong and dark; she would call him George; and this idea of having a male child was like an expected revenge for all her impotence in the past.

SHE, the third Mrs. Bovary, would do exactly as his own mother did, she would live vicariously thru her son who would be her revenge, but it didn't turn out that way, and poor Berthe, that scene is extremely hard to read.

Berthe, pushed away, falls and hurts herself. Emma immediately lies to Charles about it. That's bad enough. This is the worst, the poor baby is lying there, tear on her little cheeks, quiet and what does the mother think?

"It's amazing how ugly that child is!" thought Emma.

This, again, is not good. To me it's evidence of serious distortion in viewpoint, to put it mildly. Would it be nicer to say she's mentally ill? Some sort of post partum depression? That one line is chilling, I'm not sure what we have here to deal with, but it's not going to turn out well, her values are totally screwed up.

Joan G asked about Homais, I think we're supposed to like him for his hospitality. I don't. I think he's a fraud and I have a sneaking suspicion he's standing for something, he himself is a indication of something bigger, in the book. Thank you Hats for your wonderful questions, the answers so generously provided here have added a lot to my understanding, too, even to the point I felt sympathy for her for the first time.

Until the Berthe episode, I'm now having a hard time seeing something good here?

And THIS? THIS is totally inexplicable, to me, what about you?

Her carnal desires, her longing for money and the melancholy of her unfulfilled passion merged into one vast anguish, and instead of trying to distract herself from it she concentrated her attention on it, stirring up her pain and always looking for a chance to suffer. [ I know people who are always looking for a "chance to suffer" ....do you? ]She complained bitterly about a badly served dish or a door left ajar, she lamented the velvet she did not own, the happiness that eluded her, her too lofty dreams, her too narrow house."

Jeepers talk about an attitude of "somebody owes me a living!" In spades, here, in spades.

WHAT too lofty dreams? To live in a palace? Do you know what this woman reminds me of? Do you remember a child's story called The Fisherman and his Wife?

The Fisherman caught a talking fish, this is an old old story. It would grant him any wish. He told his wife and she sent him back to wish for a bigger house, then a bigger this, then a bigger THIS and that, and her wishes, as they came true every time, never ceased. She was never satisfied. (Kind of like that rock song, " Maybe you're just like my mother, she's never satisfied.")

. Every time the fisherman went back the sea became more angry, the fish more impatient. She wanted to be KING, that was granted. She wanted to be Pope, I can't recall what her final wish was, but I remember the fish saying in a storm so bad the Fisherman could not even SEE the fish, "What does she want NOW?" Whatever it was, to be the Popo (which WAS one of the wishes) or to be God, the fish told him to go home and when he did everything was as it was. She had lost everything following her greedy shallow insubstantial dreams.

It's an old story, and I think it's about to be retold here, but WHAT longing for money does Emma suddenly have? Are they without money? Is this the first time we've seen the MONEY enter in to it?

Her DREAMS are what's at fault, not only are they unattainable, they in themselves are unworthy and shallow, poor woman (until she pushed the child, lied about it, and said that chilling remark about her own baby's ugliness). Poor Charles, then?

I'm wondering if we're seeing a tragedy in the making here. Tragic heroes generally need some redeeming features, I keep thinking about George's Madonna statue with the blushing cheeks, and why she might be blushing....for whose fault?

ginny

My golf game seems to have caught everyone's attention - what a frustrating sport for me. I am never good enough. Oh to be like Tiger Woods - young, strong and supple. What an illusion. And believe me golf is definitely a 'mind' game.

But back to the book. I found the commentary on the church fascinating. I did not see a blushing Madonna. Red cheeks mean painted cheeks to me and I thought of a 'woman of the night' - a virgin to attract men. I thought of this, I think, because the book is about illicit love and romance, at least in part. I do not want to step on any one's religious beliefs and I mean that seriously. I am just reporting how my thought process ran when I read the discription and I do wonder what Flaubert meant.

I am well into Part 3 and decided to read some of the commentary that is appended to my edition of the book. I did not want to read this material until I had my own sense of what the book was about. But having read a few commets, I was struck by Emile Zola's first hand observation, that Flaubert worked and worked and worked to get his words just right. His choice of word, his placement of the word, the sound of the word meant a great deal to him. He was a perfectionist in his early writing. "He did not write for the eye" rather he wanted his words spoken and spoken loudly. He did not want words or sylables repeated; he wanted there to be a flow of words much like a musical score.

But evidently Flaubert's desire for perfection in his published work gradually inhibited his artistic ability. His desire for perfection of form and vocabulary limited his attention to the "humanity of his characters". If you have access to Zola's critique, I recommend reading it as, at least for me, the comments have made the reading of Madam Bovary even more interesting.

As we go into the last two weeks of discussion, I wonder if we could deal with some of the commentary that is probably included with all editions of this work. Perhaps one or more of us could report on various commentaries. If the group does not find this an interesting idea - forget it.

GINNY, I don't think we're supposed to like Homais. He's pompous, bigoted, and sneaky. Homais is practicing without a license, he's been warned officially, but he continues to practice behind the glass door of his back room with his name lettered in black and gold on the glass. Homais is taking Charles' business away and he even tells Charles not to expect paying clients. Perhaps now we can see why the Polish doctor left so quickly. Considering all of this, Flaubert was lampooning the newly haute bourgeoisie in Homais.

I'm sure GINNY has the answer to her question about the meaning of Homais. For me it sounds similar to homeopathy. We know Homais has a fondness for recipes and his name might suggest that he is dispensing his own drugs.

Please remember too to save a little judgment for Homais with his lifelong child neglect and the harm he's done to the entire community with his quack medicine and his blustering ignorance.

Marvelle

GINNY, another thought on the name Homais is that it's similar to representative Man. Representative of the bourgeoisie that Flaubert so disliked? I hope you'll let us know what his name means or what you think it means. Whatever his name implies, Homais is an opportunist and exploiter and I have a sickening feeling that he'll continue to do well in his society.

Marvelle

Actually women don't have a choice of last names unless they legally change it to something they prefer. We either have our father's name or our husband's name. I wonder if there are any societies that when they marry the husband takes the last name of his wife ?

Finally finished the other book I was reading and can now concentrate on this one.

Marvelle I don't think we can say homeopathy is quackery. Many MD's here have studied homeopathy and dispense both conventional and homeopathic remedies. The Queen mother and the Queen have had homeopathic doctors as well as conventional medicine all their lives. Look at the long life the Queen Mother has had. I think our medical profession here is more open to alternative medicine than in the USA in the main.

This does not mean the Pharmacist in Madam Bovery was an ethical man- he was not and was acting against the laws of the day.

Carolyn

I think Homais had a huge ego. His name is plastered all over the pharmacy. Marvelle did say Homais was "insecure." I guess huge egos go hand in hand with insecurity.

"And his name is written on a sign which runs across the entire width of the shop, behind the big scales fastened to the counter, the word "Laboratory" is spread out above a glazed door in the middle of which "Homais" appears again, in gold letters on a black background."

Carolyn, your thoughts about "alternative medicine" are very interesting.

I think G. Flaubert based the character Homais on one of his friends. He also had an affair with his wife (I think I read that somewhere).

Homais seems to despise the priests and the church. He is very outspoken about his feelings. Homais is outspoken about everyone and everything. I think it would be impossible to live in Yonville without knowing Homais, whether you wanted to know him or not.

I don't understand his hatred for the church.

For fun I looked up some of the names in my Montreal telephone book. We have 2 columns of Boulangers, the same for L'Heureux, a page and a half of Dupuis, but interestingly, no Bovary or Homais. Never heard those names. What about Monsieur Tuvache? meaning 'youcow'. It sounds awful in French, worse than 'youcow'.

Eloïse

You cow - what a name Eloise- I did have a giggle.

Carolyn

AND if you're looking at the French discussion you will see Bovary, or rather le bouvart, which is a young bull, and a bouverie is a stall for an ox, Interesting, huh?

Did you know Bouvier as in Jacqueline Bouvier Kennedy meant Cow herd? Puts a different light on that elegant sounding name, huh? Hahaha

ginny

CAROLYN, Homais practices quack medicine because he isn't a licensed doctor and hasn't the training. Yet he charges people for his services as a 'doctor' -- for medical consultations, prescribing drugs, and mixing/selling those prescriptions. Goodness knows what else he does as a pseudo-doctor.

Marvelle

Bonjour! I had a good laugh with the names discussion. "Bovary" has the same etymology as bovin apparently, which has a connotation of heavy, placid, not very intelligent, which is the reputation cows have in France. "Homais", on the other hand, if you really want to "chercher midi a 14 heures", could have something to do with "oh-mais", as in a discussion where this character always has something to interject and debate "yes, but..." And we know he is forever giving his opinions to whoever will listen and about everything on earth. I had not thought about it, but his anti-church position reminds me of some old antagonism in France between scientists, people with some sort of education, and religious others. Homais is the ubiquitous, indispensable, yet horribly annoying know-it-all. His anti-clergy attitude may have to do with the all-powerful position of the Catholic Church way back when, in the Middle Ages and later; let's not forget that the Clergy was one of the three "Estates" King Louis XVI convened in Versailles before the Revolution. The Clergy did not pay taxes while the bourgeois paid for them (and the nobles). The Revolution of 1789 changed that, the "citizen" of th lower class came into power but kept some ancient animosity against the Clergy in general. This Homais is representing the citizens, the ordinary people who won the battle of the classes and are therefore the "liberals" as opposed to the other two clases, the conservative nobility and the rigid Clergy. Does that make any sense to anyone else? Notice how the poor cure, the priest, is portrayed as little more than a peasant, useful, needed, one of the pillars of society, but not as important as medecin or pharmacien.

MSSUZY, love the "yes, but..." interject & debate explanation! Homais is definitely a know-it-all and who knows what harm he's caused as a pseudo-doctor and with his opinions. We discussed earlier the animosity to the Church and your background on it has helped explain Homais' attitude.

Homais now thinks himself above "peasants" so he hasn't left behind the prejudices of pre-'89 but adopted them and twisted them to pamper his ego. He considers himself superior to others, like M. Binet the tax collector and the working class and peasants, so his "liberality" seems to pertain only to himself.

Marvelle

Homais' kindnesses are not real. He is insincere. He is kind to Charles Bovary for a reason. He does not want Charles to report him to the authorities.

Mssuzy - that is an absolutely plausible explanation for the name of Homais. Indeed the man is a know-it-all. He simply drones on. And in his anticlerical stance he is the priest's adversary. You have provided the historical background and explanation.

Monsieur le curé is extremely well described too - with his stained cassock thinning at the elbows. He fails to see that Emma is troubled, and Charles is not up to the task, as the reader knows. He cannot see what is happening until it is too late.

Given the evocative description of the countryside, the general surroundings, the houses and some of the people in Yonville, the reader can hardly be optimistic that this move will make Emma happy.

Charles is loving and excited about the pregnancy, his usual clumsily affectionate self. Emma is indifferent and, later, inconvenienced. When Charles announces "it's a girl", she feints.

A few months later, Emma is in one of her reveries and pushes little Berthe away twice, causing her to fall, but does not say so to the returning Charles, who is immediately concerned. Emma is not. That is one of her first acts of deception.

Léon may have some youthful charm but he is immature. He and Emma are kindred souls; he is as dissatisfied as she is, they both long to be elsewhere, preferably in Paris, both are bored to tears. He too becomes depressed out of boredom - and eventually leaves.

Traude, Mssuzy helped me understand why Homais hated the church. Mssuzy, I read your explanation twice. Now, I understand. It's an age old power struggle.

mssuzy, your post 296 seems right on. I too looked back at the history of France and the three divisions. I keep coming back to the question - What does Flaubert want the reader to think about the church? After all we know that he was extremely careful in his choice of topics and words. I see him as a liberal and quite critical of the conservative church. I suspect that this is one of the underlying reasons for the attacks on the book after its publication.

Bonjour! Well, I am delighted to have enlightened a few readers about some peculiarities of the French. We are known to have quite a few, usually not easily distinguished by Americans. Being French born and raised AND a techer of Social Studies helps. France in the mid-XIXth century was undergoing a lot of changes; from the post-Napoleonic era to the present Republic, society re-made itself. In Art, the Impressionists rebelled against the Classiques; in literature, same thing. It's not Voltaire and Rousseau anymore; it's Balzac, Flaubert, Zola, etc.Perhaps the dis-ease (malaise) of Emma and Leon in their own place in that society reflects the dis-ease of many others. Flaubert does not portray the rich, except at the ball, but the ordinary people who now have a window of opportunituy, the possibility to rise above the place of their birth. After ll, Emma is a farmer's daughter; earlier, that's all she could ever have been, pretty or not. Now she has become a bourgeoise. Leon, a petit clerc de notaire, which is not very high in society, but is above the peasant condition he also came from very likely. Charles is not really a doctor, but an "officier de sante"; Homais, a pseudo-pharmacist. All of them are where they are because society is in transition. The main theme of adultery also shows how society has changed. In a rigidly Catholic country, the infidelities of kings, queens and nobles were always well-known and accepted; now, even the petits bourgeois allow themselves this sort of behavior. And it becomes the subject of one of the most famous novels of the century? Then again, aren't we forever in transition?

Transition, change for the better, time and space -- aren't those some of the illusions in Madame Bovary? TIME: Emma dreams of a better future, but the future soon enough becomes the present and it disappoints. SPACE/TRAVEL/CHANGE: Emma imagines that things will be better with a change of scene, with movement to another place, but the change to Yonville eventually disappoints too.

Emma doesn't see her life improving, after the first exhilaration of change has come and gone.

Marvelle

What does Emma's indiscretion in asking Leon to join her in the visit to see the baby foreshadow?

Emma is a country girl of the 1800s and knew that in a small town walking out with a man, other than her husband, would cause gossip. "By evening the news of this had spread throughout Yonville, and Madame Tuvache, the wife of the mayor, said in her maid's presence that Madame Bovary was risking her reputation." (Part 2 Ch 3) I believe this indiscretion foreshadows Emma's disdain for public opinion and that in the future she'll do as she pleases no matter what others might say of her.

What does Emma's encounter with the nurse foreshadow?

Emma suddenly wanted to see her child and she goes with Leon to the cottage of the wet-nurse which turns out to be a run-down shack. The wet-nurse greets her holding a baby in one arm and with the other towing "a frail, unhappy-looking little boy, his face covered with scrofulous sores." Emma walks into the 'squalor' of the cottage. She picks up her baby daughter and sings to her but Berthe throws up on the collar of Emma's nankeen gown so she puts Berthe back into the cradle. Emma leaves the cottage -- and this is the part that stuck with me -- "she left the house, wiping her feet on the doorsill." She wipes her feet leaving the house.

Emma wipes out/rejects the reality of country dirt, of babies making messes, of squalid shacks, of things 'less than perfect' or her idea of perfect. She dreamed of an elegant, idyllic meeting with her daughter with Emma in her nankeen gown, she tried to create that idyllic meeting, but it ended in spit and dirt.

I think this foreshadows what will happen as Emma -- frustrated and anxious to have the Ideal -- tries to force her vague dreams onto reality. It will end badly for her and those around her. It foreshadows Emma wiping her feet of reality in her last, ultimate flight.

Marvelle

I have to say Marvelle I still feel like shaking Emma. Would any of us have survived if we had been as air headed as her? I guess there will always be air heads. There was one in our family who sat about wishing her life away, ignoring her kids needs, sunk in depression until she could resume her life of one big round of overseas trips, shopping, 4 nights a week out and so on and so on. Life has never been one long summer of halcyon days. I want to get Emma, shake her til her teeth rattle and say - GET REAL GIRL! Count your blessings and enjoy your daughter! This is the first book I have ever read where I have been so irritated with the main character!

Carolyn

CAROLYN, at times I want to shake Emma too. I also have sympathy for her because she had such limits compared to the opportunities and freedoms of today's women; and she's living in a vulgar society the values of which she's been raised to accept.

Homais is a danger to the entire community, he's a neligent father whose vision is limited to his own Social Standing. The priest -- to whom Emma turns as a last ditch effort -- is there to minister to souls but he only sees physical needs. Charles is kind but dull and insensible. Emma is the one who's asking questions of life "how am I to be? is that all there is?" but she's asking in a society that's smug and common; and she has as her guidebook to life the all-pervasive Romantic influence.

I guess what I'm saying is that at this point I'd like to shake them all!

Marvelle

It is great to come in here and see all the interesting posts here.I am sorry for not getting in here yesterday or earlier today. My daughter-in-law had sinus surgery and I was with her helping her.

All of you have brought out many interesting points.

Ginny and Eloise, thanks so much for the discussion of names. I have looked in all my dictionaries and all that I have found is bovin which can mean lacking in intellingence. I have a Petit Robert and I could not find bovart in it. I have not come across it before. I am glad to learn that word. Of course the Tuvache was easy enough for me to translate.

mssuzy, thanks for your comments on the names and all the other things that you explained so well.

All the comments on Homais are excellent.

Flaubert's characters are all exaggerated. He presents these people as caricatures of society to show us the faults that he is criticizing. I think that is probably why we all are ready to shake them to wake them up to what is happening.

As for Flaubert's criticism of the church - this was a time when country parish priests were very poorly educated. They were not trained counsel people with the kind of problems that Emma had.

Keep up the great discussion. I will be back tomorrow with more things to think about.

Joan

We contemporary readers do not know what response or reaction Flaubert wanted to elicit from the readers of his time. As I see it, EB is a social commentary, social criticism - of the complacent, self-satisfied bourgoisie and tbe privileged clergy. Flaubert found both wanting. Through Homais, an inadequate mouthpiece though he was, Flaubert voiced his own anticlerical stance.

Now, a century and a half after this book was published, even more urgent, more crucial questions are asked of the clergy and the Catholic Church, and few answers have been forthcoming.

As for the bourgoisie, if we apply this term and use it as a definition for the middle class, I'd say it is in decline and mostly gone, leaving a perhaps unbridegable abys beween the rich and the poor - to the detriment of society.

How far has society progressed since Flaubert's time in the most important aspects and endeavors ?

Flaubert is wonderful in presenting the characters, warts and all, while leaving the reader to form his/her own opinion. If this book is an expression of Flaubert's personal literary crusade againt mediocrity and hipocrisy, I say he has succeeded.

Whew - did I have an infections - then it turned out I was allergic to the mycin the Doctor gave me - so that took a 36 more hours of being even sicker to figure out - shesh - I am on old fashioned erythromycin and starting to feel human again - been reading and can't wait to put my thoughts together and share them - probably not till tomorrow afternoon though - need to catch up with so much -

Little tidbits of information - when in, was it chapter 10 or 11, they spoke of the big Hirondelle arriving I assumed it ment some sort of large carriage or wagon - in fact I could see almost a truck pulled by horses - I do not remember what they were called but I remember seeing them as a child - heck our milkman dilevered in a horse drawn wagon - well when I looked it up thinking I was going to find a picture of this large wagon this amazingly is what came up. Hirondelle

And of the various philosophers mentioned I did not know Beranger - seems he was a poet of the times - the sites I could find were not translated into English so I still do not have a handle on him but here is one of his poems Jean-Pierre de Beranger (1780-1857) Poet - "The Old Vagrant" Kinda falls in line with the old count or what was his title that dribbled his soup but had been at court (rummer had it in the bed of) with Antoinette.

Also curious before they leave there is this bit about the cure which must mean something but I do not know what - or why would it even be included

Under the firs, near the hedge, the 'cure' in his three-cornered hat, buried in his breviary, had lost his right foot, and the plaster, scaling off with the frost, had left white patches on his face.

I do think it is significant that there is an issue being made about the submissive role of the priests and the church because all that goes through my head as I read is the song "looking for love in all the wrong places" also Emma is reminding me of a movie that I do not have the name correct something Goodbar Girl or Mrs Goodbar - I think she was a school teacher that plys the bars for sex partners - together with Emma having no respect for the church

Once when Madame offered the opinion that a mistress ought to look after her servant's religious ideas, Emma answered her with such an angry glint in her eye and such a chilling smile on her lips,

she has all the earmarks of someone today who we would call a sex addict and needs a 12 step program called Sexaholics. A 12 step program is built around having a belief in a God - Emma's belief I do not think is in question but her respect for God, the Church and even her books that she renouced is lost to her. She is adrift with no anchor.

Barbara, we posted within a minute of each other. You were missed here. I am glad you are on the road to recovery.

We all need an infusion of spring to make things right.

Wishing you well.

No one has commented on my suggestion that we read and share some of the criticisms that accompany most editions of the book.

georgehd, The book that I read is a Norton Critical Edition and has essays in criticism and sources in the back that contain more pages than the book itself. Personaly, I will pass on your suggestion.
I think the characters are well thought out and presented excellently. To make the reader see the flaws in society, the author must give the characters some facet that is generally not acceptable. I find the presentation by Flaubert to emphasize the ills of, not only Society at the time, but of people in general at any time.

Theron

I don't think Flaubert is pointing out flaws in society in general. To me he has shown he has sympathy for his main character Emma - the book is about how he sees Emmas life. If he is pointing our flaws in society it is that he would have liked the society to be much looser. He is not making a great statement about the time in which he lived except for the fact that perhaps he feels the church has too much influence on the populace of the day. I don't think Flauberts agenda was like Charles Dickens agenda. I think Flaubert was what we would call a Bohemian last century and his writings reflect this.

Carolyn

Carolyn

Georgehd, sorry to be late answering your question.

I am reading the English text available on line, and it ends with the last chapter of the novel.

The French paperback contains an appendix of Flaubert's trial but no critical essays.

In my French version the Introduction is quite interesting and I will try and translate a couple of paragraphs on what prompted Flaubert to write Madame Bovary.

One day at the end of September 1849, Flaubert meets two true friends Louis Bouilhet and Maxime DuCamp and they told him: “Since you have an invincible penchant toward lyrisim, you must choose for your next book a subject that would be so ridiculous that you will be forced not to give it up. Take a down-to-earth subject, one of those incidents where the bourgeois life is full of something like “La cousine Bette” by Balzac, and keep treating it on a natural tone, almost casual, leaving out those digressions, those ramblings, beautiful in themselves but are but useless hors-d’oeuvres to the development of the conception, and are fastidious to the reader.

We were sad, said Du Camp thinking of the disappointment of Flaubert and of the truths that we had not spared him with. All of a sudden, Bouilhet said: “Why don’t you write the Delaunay story” Flaubert raised his head and said happily: “What an idea”

Eloïse

I had a good laugh with all of you who want to shake all these people! That's a whole society to shake up! I felt like shaking them up too, at Emma's age. So she takes a walk with the clerc. So what? Why are the evil tongues wagging? She has nothing to do at home, is bored out of her wits, has a servant and a nourrice for the baby. What is she suposed to be doing all day? Flaubert has not opened that window. What would she be doing now? Going to the big city? Getting a job? Then what? Is that a release? Many have thought so, but found it was only a different chain. Let her enjoy her afternoon!

Of course, the danger and the risk they are both taking is that they will want more and more. Oh well. Doesn't everybody? What's her option? Divorce was not accepted in that small-town Catholic society. Flaubert gives us one answer because he is a novelist, but before bashing poor Emma and the rest, let's think. They didn't have marriage counselors and all the other psychosomethings then. That small-town society had very petty minds, always ready to gossip and destroy. Did she have any friend? No club or association or other support group for her. She had no one and belonged nowhere. Do you know how difficult that is? How strong you have to be - or become - to overcome the loneliness? She didn't even have a family, her mother was dead and she was the only girl. Alors? Taking up crochet is not too fulfilling for some. Flaubert is right; there were probably hundreds of Emmas crying their eyes out in all those small towns. And maybe there still are.

George,

If you or anyone else wants to bring in the commentaries after we reach the end of the book that will be fine. However if there are points in those commentaries that are about things that we are talking about now why not just tell us about them as we discuss various points. It would not have to be a formal report on someone's commentary. You or anyone else could just state that Zola said, or Henry James said this about this point. That is always allowed.

Joan

I'm under the impression it was G. Flaubert who did not respect the church and it was he who believed he was a sex goddess thru the Emma character in his book. I even read a comment in one of his biographies where he said he was God. Flaubert possessed strong opinions on political and social matters in society.

georgehd - the reprint version of the book I'm reading does not have any criticisms listed anywhere, only lots of references.

I wonder if Flaubert's trial and why the book was banned had more to do with him criticizing the church than it did with society?

I have enjoyed all the excellent comments that have been made.

Here are a two more points for discussion:

How does Flaubert satirize the idea of romantic love?

Describe Emma's feelings after Leon's departure.

I have put them in the heading also.

Joan

Since in our country State and Church are seperate it is hard to understand but in France the Church is very much a part of politics. And it looks like the french middle class (which would include Flaubert) were in a delimma - to aligne yourself with the Church is to aligne yourself with the farmer/peasent and against Democracy - rather than reaching above to this higher class which was not Conservative as the peasent farmer prefered.

This is a run down of what I found about the health of the Church in France just before and during the nineteenth century.

The French had been divided into bitterly opposing camps: clericals and anticlericals.

The former, or pro-church elements, were hostile to the Revolution of 1789. Many were royalists and favored extreme Rightist policies.

The anti-clericals were generally liberal in religion, republican in politics, and strongly opposed to church influence in education and government.

The church vigorously opposed the Revolution and condemned its principles. During the French Revolution a great crisis faced the church. Looked upon as a pillar of the 'Old Regime' the Revolution tried to break the church’s power by confiscating its property, disrupting its organization, and outlawing its ministers. Crowds looting the Churches was similar to our pictures of Baghdad today.

1789-1791 – The National Assembly reorganizes the nation into 83 departments, eliminates the nobility as a legally defined class, makes the Catholic Church an agency of the state, appropriates Church property and sells it to pay off the monarchy's debt, and extends full citizenship to Jews and other religious minorities.

Napoleon restores the Church to a place in the national life as the official or “established” faith of France,

July 1830 – The monarchy is re-instituted till 1848. France is more liberal than under the Restoration but not democratic although, the theory of the divine right (A Kings power is subject to Rome) of kings was eliminated.

1848 Revolution - The monarchy is again overthrown by the Paris crowds and a republic is again declared. Elections are held in April 1848 by truly universal male suffrage. The church throughout the nineteenth century sides with the forces of conservatism and reaction against those of liberalism and democracy.

Peasants, overwhelmingly conservative, vote for a conservative government, ending the experiment with democracy. Parisian workers revolt and the government sends in troops to bloodily suppress the revolt known as the June Days of 1848.

Boy does this book need anotation - here are another few tidbits that I had to look up to better get a grip as to what I was reading -

They would open the proceedings with a round or two of - 'Trente-et-un'

ECARTE (Fr. for “separated,” “discarded “), a game at cards... played in the Paris salons in the first quarter of the 19th century...Ecarté is generally played by two persons, but a pool of three may be formed, the player who is out taking the place of the loser, and the winner of two consecutive games winning the pool. At French écarté (but not at English) bystanders who are betting may advise the players, but only by pointing to the cards they desire them to play, and the loser of the game goes out, one of the rentrants taking his place, unless the loser is playing la chouette, i. e. playing single-handed against two, and taking all bets.

"Emma listened, mechanically twisting round the lampshade, with its pictures of pierrots in carriages and tight-rope dancers holding their balancing poles." Sounds like some sort of viewing devise where light comes through a series of pictures or maybe only one picture. Cannot find anything on the net that explains what she is twisting.

Photo of a Phrenological Bust

This I thought was brilliant on Flaubert's part - on their walk home Leon and Emma come upon a swarm of Midges

Says it all - seems female midges don't bite; males have large, bushy antennae. I would think the large bushy antennae would not only pick up on the female but attract her as well. But alas the female does not bite.

Hi Barbara, thank you for all of the links and historical information. It is all very helpful.

I am really enjoying each person's comments here and what you each bring to the discussion, from George and MsSuzy I believe I CAN see why the book might have been viewed unfavorably and I have enjoyed Joan G's presentation of background material, and BARB with the bird when we thought it was a carriage, and all the other GREAT background stuff from ALL of you, and Marvelle and Hats and Eloise and and Carolyn and Emma Barb, and Theron, and Traude, I hope I have not left anybody out but you ALL have added so many different perspectives.

Leon is interesting, to me, doesn't "Leon" mean lion? He's hardly that, but he has the best line in the book, so far, to me:

"I'm the same way, ' said Leon. "What could be better than to sit beside the fire at night with a book and a glowing lamp while the wind beats against the windows."

(you got that right, Leon) hahahaha

"You're quite right," she said, staring at him with her big dark eyes wide open.

"Your mind is free then, " he went on. "The hours pass and, without leaving your chair, you wander through countries that a re clearly visible to you. Your imagination is caught up in the story and you see all the details, experience all the adventures; it seizes the characters and you have the feeling that you are living in their costumes."

Boy I don't see how anybody could have said that better, that's marvelous writing. Speaking of art, one of my favorite contemporary artists, Deborah DeWit Marchant (her reader's note cards are aviailable at Barnes & Noble and Bas Blue Booksellers) has a new one out, just a fireplace and roaring fire, two feet on a hassock and a book opened in each hand, you can't see the readers. LOVE it.

And I felt for Emma, as well, a true reader, meeting another, like an oasis in the desert, but didn't she STOP reading? Didn't she say she had read everything there was to read? Was she just leading him on here, then or was it two kindred longing souls? I'm not sure.

And then Reading or communication also plays a part as we see Homais apparently is in charge of bringing the news? I was not sure what went on there, Charles let his subscription expire or something and Homais delivers the news?

Now Joan asks a difficult question here: How does Flaubert satirize the idea of romantic love? Now what is the definition of satire? Making fun of something?

I was struck in Chapter IV with the description beginning

"Love she thought must some suddenly, with great thunderclaps and flashes of lightning; it was like a storm bursting upon life from the sky, uprooting it, overwhelming the will and wseeping the heart into the abyss.

I LOVED this:

It did not occur to her that rain forms puddles on a flat roof when the drainpipes are clogged, and she would have continued to feel secure if she had not suddenly discovered a crack in the wall.

WHEW! That's powerful stuff. Clogged drainpipes? Hsahaahah Is Flaubert saying her reasoning is clogged? What's clogged? And so she suddenly discovers a crack in the wall, and she no longer feels secure? So her entire being is focused on the....er....romantic never never?

I can see how Flaubert might have said Emma, c'est moi, if he were a seeker, for something out of the mundane, who doesn't seek? But to what extent, I feel sorry for her again!!!

You won't believe this, but the brand new only months old All is Vanity by Christina Schwarz (which I recommend to any person on earth who ever had a friend and ambition) says:

In fact, it occurred to me that it might even a be very good novel. The story that was emerging from Letty's e-mails was a parable of American consumerism. Like Madame Bovary, Lexie was attempting to conjure for herself the elusive life she thought she glimpsed through other people's French doors by copying their furnishings down to the doors themselves. It was a simple notion really, but had it not led, at least once before, to a masterpiece?

I was excited to be reading Madame Bovary, while finishing Vanity because I would not have understood the reference, but I'm not sure I see Emma, now, copying furniture or a way of life? I seem to see her actually kind of falling by the wayside in some kind of depressed reverie?

And again with the windows in Chapter IV we have Emma and Leon looking at each other tend their gardens "out of their respective windows." And then we have Binet, behind a window almost always filled, (at the end of Chapter IV) working on his lathe, making "napkin rings which he piled up all over his house with the jealousy of an artist and the egotism of a bourgeois." (Chapter 1) What in the world does that mean? Why would you pile up napkin rings all over your house? I'm lost with Binet here,

And Marvelle mentioned scrofula, what is that? I looked it up and can't seem to find a satisfactory definition, does it exist today? You often see it in books, what IS it?

Have you ever seen a privet hedge bloom? And if so what does it look like?

Inquiring minds are full of unanswered questions, but enjoying every minute of it!

ginny

Privet is classed as a noxious weed here. The flowers are profuse they are like miniature bottle brushes but the petals are wider apart on the flower stem and much wider. The privet has a strong smell, not nice really and the flowers are white. They drop petals everywhere like little bits of torn paper. They are tiny petals. Privet is very bad for asthmatics when in bloom. You would not drive past and say 'Oh the privet is in bloom how marvellous". Its a boring sort of flower really.

Carolyn

Some of the people in Yonville think that Emma's behavior would be better or more respectable if she did not read novels.

"It was therefore decided to keep Emma from reading novels.....The good lady agreed to take care of it herself: she would go to see the owner of the lending library when she passed through Rouen and tell him Emma was canceling her subscription. And wouldn't they have a right to go to the police if he refused to stop spreading his poison?"

Is this a form of satire? It seems pretty far out to relate writing novels to spreading a form of poison. It does seem almost funny that they would think of taking such a matter to the police. What were respectable ladies supposed to read at that period in history?

Ginny,

Here is a photo of Privet . I am sure you must have seen it.

http://newtontxnetwork.com/tour/flowers/enlarge/3privethedge.jpg

Here is a link to Scrofula

http://www.bartleby.com/61/24/S0172400.html

Carolyn, it is a pest here too. I am very allergic to it.

Hats from what I have read elsewhere women were expected not to read - period.

ewwwaahhh thanks for the Links Joan - we call privet - Lugustrum - an awful bush once it gets a foothold with yes those little white smelly flowers in spring.

I have so many thoughts pushing me here and there I do not know where to start - I am not sure either what chapters we are reading this week - they have all melted together since I do not have the benefit of knowing where part one ends -

I know I spoke too soon about our Emma being a Mrs. Goodbar - she really isn't is she - she met her soul mate but I doubt if a marriage could have ever worked out - she had been trained to be a lady and Leon although interested in the arts with an active mind would not have the income to allow Emma to be the lady he so admired.

With just a bit more wealth and Emma would be wonderful running a Salon with Leon a steady welcomed guest - she attracts those that would be a welcomed addition to a Salon.

I thought it strange that Homais just waltzes into their home every evening at supper time - he does listen to Charles offering him a willing ear which must have made Charles feel good - everyone likes to be listened to - but Emma, nope - just her and her servents are offered advise - Emma has no one, until Leon to whom she can share her thoughts and feeling - ah yes, her dog -

Homais reminded me of the local version of 'Peter Jennings' bringing all the news and the windows that are mentioned as lookouts to the village beyond are like the nineteenth century TV screen.

"There's nothing of the Jew about us." Ouch - so blatanly was the put-down association and yet we know the Jews were made citizens after the Revolution. "I don't bother my head about the money. I would lend you a bit, if you wanted it any time." Is this the beginnings of the avalanche of mailed unrequested credit card mentality - hehehe

I loved the imagery that Flaubert creates with - "At the far end of the church, a lamp was burning, or, more precisely, the wick of a night-light in a hanging glass. Seen from afar, it looked like a whitish stain quivering on the oil. A long beam of sunlight shone right across the nave and deepened the shadows in the aisles and recesses."

Light; the source of goodness, life, truth, Christ the light of the World as a night light, a beacon in the darkness
Darkness; chaos, dualism, not evil but light unmanifested, spiritual darkness, captivity, rebirth, madness, disintegration, the mother of the Gods

the wick of night-light seen from afar - but in this case just a quivering stain on the oil

oil; mercy, consecration, bestowing the grace of God, conferring wisdom

and then the long beams of sunlight -

Sunlight; Christ the sun of righteousness, the abode of Archangel Michael, God the Father ruler and sustainer of the universe radiating light, life, love

- across the nave deepening the shadows -

Shadows;the negative representing the soul, witchcraft, spells

Wow I love it - what a contrast to the ensuing dialoge between Emma and the cure who cannot see past his waifs and those whose afflictions are observable and of the world rather than a crisis of the soul.

Up until now all we have had is Emma's remarks and disparaging discription of her husband - but now the author has another voice agreeing that Emma's discription of Charles is right on target - but oily - oh my - again I won't make the mistake of coming to a conclusion till I have read the entire bit related to Monsieur Rodolphe Boulanger.

His remarks catalogueing the two - "He looks a dull dog to me. She's no doubt sick of him. He's got dirty nails and three days' beard. While he's out on his rounds, she sits at home darning socks. And she's sick to death of it, wants to live in town and go to a dance every night. Poor little woman! She's simply gasping for love, like a carp on a kitchen table gasping for water. A word or two about love and she'd be at your feet..."

My head is spinning with other thoughts that I must put together and go back to review and see if they fit.

Thank you, Joan, Ginny and Carolyn for the information about the Privet.

Barbara, I had a feeling that women were not expected to read any sort of book. Here is another statement about Emma's reading.

"Reading novels and other bad books that are against religion and make fun of priests with quotations from Voltaire! It can lead to all kinds of things..." Did we have a link about Voltaire? I might have missed it. I know nothing about him.

There is another statement about women in the book that made me angry. I think the statement is made by Homais, but I am not sure. Here it is,

"You know how women are: the slightest little thing gets them all stirred up, especially my wife! There''s no use complaining about it, though, because their nervous system is much more delicate than ours."

Women, it seems, during those times were cardboard figures or paper dolls. They were not supposed to think, and of course, they were highly emotional. Unfortunately, some of those stereotypes are still alive and well today. Is that why we have not seen a woman president yet? Women are too emotional. We might jump into a war too fast. I have heard people speak such thoughts!

Ginny and Joan, the link about Scrofula is really interesting. I kept thinking of Scurvy. Scrofula is totally different. Tuberculosis, small children and unpasteurized milk. I had no idea.

I am beginning to change my opinion. I am sure this novel is about more than human motivations. I think Flaubert wanted us to look at the historical and gender side of things during that time.

Emma Bovary, like any woman, can not be seen apart from the historical events in which she lived. Just like environment makes us who we are, history makes us who we are too.

Ah Hats Voltaire - the Durant’s tomes The Story of Civilization that Robby has been gradually studying has one whole volume devoted to The Age of Voltaire He died in Paris an old man - having studied in England, lived in Germany for a time and then settled in Eastern France - wrote plays and novels, (Candide being one of his masterpieces) A philosopher, the greatest man of letters France produced in the eighteenth century, always at odds with the local aristocracy. and a loud opponent of the Catholic Church. In his younger years held for 11 months in the Bastile - considered by many to have brought the ‘light’ of ‘Enlightenment’ to the eighteenth century - VOLTAIRE

Yes - good point about history which reminds me of the question still being waged as to how much enviornment affects behavior and character.

Also found some other information that could pinpoint when Flaubert wrote sections of his book - I became curious of this Ventose Civil Code - it seems the first code of French civil law was known as the Code civil des Fran Qais, and was promulgated in its entirety by a law of the 3oth Ventose in the year XII. (March 31, 1804). then September 1807 it received the official name of Code Napoleon A law in 1818 restored to it its former name, but a decree in March 1852 re-established the title of Code Napoleon. Since September 1870 the laws in simply named the Code Civil.

France sure did not become a Democratic country is one sweep as this nation - back and forth for nearly a 100 years.

While we are building our understandings when Emma's baby is christened there were gifts from Homais - I always thought Jujubes were candy - ha...

Jujubes - a Hardy Tree Yields ‘Chinese Dates’
Jujubes Photo

Racahout n. [F. racahout, probably fr. Ar. raqaut.] A preparation from acorns used by the Arabs as a substitute for chocolate, and also as a beverage for invalids.

Words to the lullaby and other verses of = Le Dieu des bonnes gens interesting, you must scroll horizontaly to read all the words.

Barbara, thanks. I am very glad you are back. I hope you are feeling much better.

Barbara, I'm glad you're better. I had to stop for a couple days to catch up with "stuff" and then spent this morning catching up on all the posts. I enjoyed all the links with various bits of information, opening each link was like opening a special gift.

Joan asked about how Emma felt after Leon's departure. They were attracted to each other, they both felt guilty, and they both withdrew from one another. Emma mourns Leon's departure in Ch 7, but I feel she's actually relieved: "The next day was a funereal one for Emma. Everything appeared to her as though shrouded in vague, hovering blackness; and grief swirled into her soul, moaning softly like the winter wind in a deserted castle." All very romantic with castles, shrouds and blackness. In her imagination Emma quickly transforms Leon into someone "taller, handsomer, more charming and less distinct" and she keeps the romance going in absentia and in the clouds.

There is safety for Emma (and Leon) in the imagination. This isn't what the shrewd and brutal Rodolphe Boulanger would tolerate from Emma. At the end of Ch 7 he meets Emma and Charles and plots, in cold imagery, how to seduce her: "She's gasping for love like a carp on a kitchen table gasping for water. A compliment or two and she'd adore me, I'm positive. She'd be sweet! But -- how would I get rid of her later?"

Going from Leon to Rodolphe is quite a leap, but Leon, and Emma's feelings for Leon, have paved the way for Rodolphe.

I had to laugh at Leon who couldn't decide on his own to leave Yonville. He wrote his mother justifying the move; he had to get his mother's consent!

_________________________________________

For those posting who don't have the text separated by parts and chapters...

Tomorrow begins Part 2, Ch 8-15. Ch 8 starts with the Agricultural Show: "The great day arrived at last. The morning of the Agricultural Show all the Yonvillians were standing on their doorsteps discussing the preparations." Ch 15 ends with Charles taking Emma to the opera at Rouen where they stumble into Leon; "[Charles to Leon] 'Now that you're back in our part of the world, I hope you'll drop in now and then and let us give you dinner?' The clerk said that he certainly would, especially since he'd soon be going to Yonville anyway on a business matter. They said good night at the corner of the Passage Sait-Herbland as the cathedral clock was striking half past eleven."

Marvelle

Great because even my chapters do not mesh with the numbers you are suggesting Marvelle.

The earlier question that Joan proposed about Romantic love gave me pause as I thought through Romance - this is a novel considered to be of the Romantique genre - what did that mean - well had a good search and with a bird's eye view, like in the book Atonement where the author, McEwan actually includes in his novel the facts of writing (bringing the reader's attention to the fact that the story is a Novel, a made-up story fitting certain criteria) it was easy to see how the story and character of Madame Bovary had to take the turns she took in order to fit the earmarks or criteria of a Romantique Novel.

Romanticism is the rebellion against the imposed order and structure from the Age of Reason. (like Voltaire an author during the Age of reason or the Age of Enlightenment)

Here are the aspects or criteria included in Romanticism. You can see the story fit this list, all except the one aspect of mystical creatures and supernatural elements.

Romantic authors placed importance on memory and personal experiences.
Rather than writing about outside situations, romantics often reflect upon their own internal conflicts.

The loss of innocence and the existence of melancholy often were tied to such experiences.
Nature and childhood were popular themes, since Romantics saw children as being close to nature and God.
Society, among other reasons, was blamed for the melancholy and sadness that seemed to appear the further away people moved from innocence and nature

Romantic writers valued creativity, and active minds. Through this they used their imagination to create characters using their creativity and minds to fight objectivity, the concrete ideas of the realities of the society before them.
Romanticism involved nature and the wild cycles within it to also fight the concrete ideas of reality and social conformity.
(And so Emma's active mind as well as her bouts of depression are a means to fight objectivity, the concrete ideas of society, the realities of society)

The French Revolution made the authors feel that they could change the world. Actually, not only did the authors feel they could change things, but everybody did. It was a time in history when people believed they could use their imaginations to better the world and themselves.

Adventure and a quest were part of the romantic movement.
(And what is Emma's quest? We know her adventure is with becoming less the farmer's daughter and more the lady but what is this adventure into beauty, interest in men, literature and "things" satisfying...?)

The Romantics had a fascination of foreign lands.
(And here we have the reason for Emma's fascination with Minarets and Turkish swords.)

Ironically the authors chose to talk about nature so much, when "their" nature was deteriorating from the impact of industry. The authors were creating a nature that was beautiful, simple, and most importantly, free from impurities.
(Sounds like the agricultural show with all the medals for the good farmers.)

Women were people of love and sentiment while men wanted reason. Where as, Women did not want the ideals of themselves to be characterized by that of passiveness and total dependency.
(aha - and we have a male author showing women in the eyes of the male characters with sentiment. Where as, among themselves - Emma and Charles' mother or Homais' wife - they are characterized as less passive)

Mystical creatures and places, supernatural elements, and myths contributed a major part to the Romantic era.

Authors used the idea of "imagination" to show that humans can transcend reality - and what just "appears to be" - so that readers can grasp the larger view and then, in a way. return to life with a new perception of an idea.

Poets and Novelists often draw stark comparisons between; innocence and child-likeness versus the "experience" that we often grow into.

It was the Poet and Novelists job to remain child-minded and bring to the people what they had long since abandoned- faith, reason, love, mercy, etc.: Rather than writing about outside situations, romantics often reflect upon their own internal conflicts.

The loss of innocence and the existence of melancholy often were tied to such experiences.
Nature and childhood were popular themes, since Romantics saw children as being close to nature and God.
Society, among other reasons, was blamed for the melancholy and sadness that seemed to appear the further away people moved from innocence and nature

Romantic writers valued creativity, and active minds. Through this they used their imagination to create characters using their creativity and minds to fight objectivity, the concrete ideas of the realities of the society before them.
Romanticism involved nature and the wild cycles within it to also fight the concrete ideas of reality and social conformity.
(And so Emma's active mind as well as her bouts of depression are a means to fight objectivity, the concrete ideas of society, the realities of society)

The French Revolution made the authors feel that they could change the world. Actually, not only did the authors feel they could change things, but everybody did. It was a time in history when people believed they could use their imaginations to better the world and themselves.

Adventure and a quest were part of the romantic movement.
(And what is Emma's quest? We know her adventure is with becoming less the farmer's daughter and more the lady but what is this adventure into beauty, interest in men, literature and "things" satisfying...?)

The Romantics had a fascination of foreign lands.
(And here we have the reason for Emma's fascination with Minarets and Turkish swords.)

Ironically the authors chose to talk about nature so much, when "their" nature was deteriorating from the impact of industry. The authors were creating a nature that was beautiful, simple, and most importantly, free from impurities.
(Sounds like the agricultural show with all the medals for the good farmers.)

Women were people of love and sentiment while men wanted reason. Where as, Women did not want the ideals of themselves to be characterized by that of passiveness and total dependency.
(aha - and we have a male author showing women in the eyes of the male characters with sentiment. Where as, among themselves - Emma and Charles' mother or Homais' wife - they are characterized as less passive)

Mystical creatures and places, supernatural elements, and myths contributed a major part to the Romantic era.

Authors used the idea of "imagination" to show that humans can transcend reality - and what just "appears to be" - so that readers can grasp the larger view and then, in a way. return to life with a new perception of an idea.

Poets and Novelists often draw stark comparisons between; innocence and child-likeness versus the "experience" that we often grow into.

It was the Poet and Novelists job to remain child-minded and bring to the people what they had long since abandoned- faith, reason, love, mercy, etc.
The loss of innocence and the existence of melancholy often were tied to such experiences.
Nature and childhood were popular themes, since Romantics saw children as being close to nature and God.
Society, among other reasons, was blamed for the melancholy and sadness that seemed to appear the further away people moved from innocence and nature

Romantic writers valued creativity, and active minds. Through this they used their imagination to create characters using their creativity and minds to fight objectivity, the concrete ideas of the realities of the society before them.
Romanticism involved nature and the wild cycles within it to also fight the concrete ideas of reality and social conformity.
(And so Emma's active mind as well as her bouts of depression are a means to fight objectivity, the concrete ideas of society, the realities of society)

The French Revolution made the authors feel that they could change the world. Actually, not only did the authors feel they could change things, but everybody did. It was a time in history when people believed they could use their imaginations to better the world and themselves.

Adventure and a quest were part of the romantic movement.
(And what is Emma's quest? We know her adventure is with becoming less the farmer's daughter and more the lady but what is this adventure into beauty, interest in men, literature and "things" satisfying...?)

The Romantics had a fascination of foreign lands.
(And here we have the reason for Emma's fascination with Minarets and Turkish swords.)

Ironically the authors chose to talk about nature so much, when "their" nature was deteriorating from the impact of industry. The authors were creating a nature that was beautiful, simple, and most importantly, free from impurities.
(Sounds like the agricultural show with all the medals for the good farmers.)

Women were people of love and sentiment while men wanted reason. Where as, Women did not want the ideals of themselves to be characterized by that of passiveness and total dependency.
(aha - and we have a male author showing women in the eyes of the male characters with sentiment. Where as, among themselves - Emma and Charles' mother or Homais' wife - they are characterized as less passive)

Mystical creatures and places, supernatural elements, and myths contributed a major part to the Romantic era.

Authors used the idea of "imagination" to show that humans can transcend reality - and what just "appears to be" - so that readers can grasp the larger view and then, in a way. return to life with a new perception of an idea.

Poets and Novelists often draw stark comparisons between; innocence and child-likeness versus the "experience" that we often grow into.

It was the Poet and Novelists job to remain child-minded and bring to the people what they had long since abandoned- faith, reason, love, mercy, etc.: Nature and childhood were popular themes, since Romantics saw children as being close to nature and God.
Society, among other reasons, was blamed for the melancholy and sadness that seemed to appear the further away people moved from innocence and nature

Romantic writers valued creativity, and active minds. Through this they used their imagination to create characters using their creativity and minds to fight objectivity, the concrete ideas of the realities of the society before them.
Romanticism involved nature and the wild cycles within it to also fight the concrete ideas of reality and social conformity.
(And so Emma's active mind as well as her bouts of depression are a means to fight objectivity, the concrete ideas of society, the realities of society)

The French Revolution made the authors feel that they could change the world. Actually, not only did the authors feel they could change things, but everybody did. It was a time in history when people believed they could use their imaginations to better the world and themselves.

Adventure and a quest were part of the romantic movement.
(And what is Emma's quest? We know her adventure is with becoming less the farmer's daughter and more the lady but what is this adventure into beauty, interest in men, literature and "things" satisfying...?)

The Romantics had a fascination of foreign lands.
(And here we have the reason for Emma's fascination with Minarets and Turkish swords.)

Ironically the authors chose to talk about nature so much, when "their" nature was deteriorating from the impact of industry. The authors were creating a nature that was beautiful, simple, and most importantly, free from impurities.
(Sounds like the agricultural show with all the medals for the good farmers.)

Women were people of love and sentiment while men wanted reason. Where as, Women did not want the ideals of themselves to be characterized by that of passiveness and total dependency.
(aha - and we have a male author showing women in the eyes of the male characters with sentiment. Where as, among themselves - Emma and Charles' mother or Homais' wife - they are characterized as less passive)

Mystical creatures and places, supernatural elements, and myths contributed a major part to the Romantic era.

Authors used the idea of "imagination" to show that humans can transcend reality - and what just "appears to be" - so that readers can grasp the larger view and then, in a way. return to life with a new perception of an idea.

Poets and Novelists often draw stark comparisons between; innocence and child-likeness versus the "experience" that we often grow into.

It was the Poet and Novelists job to remain child-minded and bring to the people what they had long since abandoned- faith, reason, love, mercy, etc.; Society, among other reasons, was blamed for the melancholy and sadness that seemed to appear the further away people moved from innocence and nature

Romantic writers valued creativity, and active minds. Through this they used their imagination to create characters using their creativity and minds to fight objectivity, the concrete ideas of the realities of the society before them.
Romanticism involved nature and the wild cycles within it to also fight the concrete ideas of reality and social conformity.
(And so Emma's active mind as well as her bouts of depression are a means to fight objectivity, the concrete ideas of society, the realities of society)

The French Revolution made the authors feel that they could change the world. Actually, not only did the authors feel they could change things, but everybody did. It was a time in history when people believed they could use their imaginations to better the world and themselves.

Adventure and a quest were part of the romantic movement.
(And what is Emma's quest? We know her adventure is with becoming less the farmer's daughter and more the lady but what is this adventure into beauty, interest in men, literature and "things" satisfying...?)

The Romantics had a fascination of foreign lands.
(And here we have the reason for Emma's fascination with Minarets and Turkish swords.)

Ironically the authors chose to talk about nature so much, when "their" nature was deteriorating from the impact of industry. The authors were creating a nature that was beautiful, simple, and most importantly, free from impurities.
(Sounds like the agricultural show with all the medals for the good farmers.)

Women were people of love and sentiment while men wanted reason. Where as, Women did not want the ideals of themselves to be characterized by that of passiveness and total dependency.
(aha - and we have a male author showing women in the eyes of the male characters with sentiment. Where as, among themselves - Emma and Charles' mother or Homais' wife - they are characterized as less passive)

Mystical creatures and places, supernatural elements, and myths contributed a major part to the Romantic era.

Authors used the idea of "imagination" to show that humans can transcend reality - and what just "appears to be" - so that readers can grasp the larger view and then, in a way. return to life with a new perception of an idea.

Poets and Novelists often draw stark comparisons between; innocence and child-likeness versus the "experience" that we often grow into.

It was the Poet and Novelists job to remain child-minded and bring to the people what they had long since abandoned- faith, reason, love, mercy, etc.
Romantic writers valued creativity, and active minds. Through this they used their imagination to create characters using their creativity and minds to fight objectivity, the concrete ideas of the realities of the society before them.
Romanticism involved nature and the wild cycles within it to also fight the concrete ideas of reality and social conformity.
(And so Emma's active mind as well as her bouts of depression are a means to fight objectivity, the concrete ideas of society, the realities of society)

The French Revolution made the authors feel that they could change the world. Actually, not only did the authors feel they could change things, but everybody did. It was a time in history when people believed they could use their imaginations to better the world and themselves.

Adventure and a quest were part of the romantic movement.
(And what is Emma's quest? We know her adventure is with becoming less the farmer's daughter and more the lady but what is this adventure into beauty, interest in men, literature and "things" satisfying...?)

The Romantics had a fascination of foreign lands.
(And here we have the reason for Emma's fascination with Minarets and Turkish swords.)

Ironically the authors chose to talk about nature so much, when "their" nature was deteriorating from the impact of industry. The authors were creating a nature that was beautiful, simple, and most importantly, free from impurities.
(Sounds like the agricultural show with all the medals for the good farmers.)

Women were people of love and sentiment while men wanted reason. Where as, Women did not want the ideals of themselves to be characterized by that of passiveness and total dependency.
(aha - and we have a male author showing women in the eyes of the male characters with sentiment. Where as, among themselves - Emma and Charles' mother or Homais' wife - they are characterized as less passive)

Mystical creatures and places, supernatural elements, and myths contributed a major part to the Romantic era.

Authors used the idea of "imagination" to show that humans can transcend reality - and what just "appears to be" - so that readers can grasp the larger view and then, in a way. return to life with a new perception of an idea.

Poets and Novelists often draw stark comparisons between; innocence and child-likeness versus the "experience" that we often grow into.

It was the Poet and Novelists job to remain child-minded and bring to the people what they had long since abandoned- faith, reason, love, mercy, etc.: Romanticism involved nature and the wild cycles within it to also fight the concrete ideas of reality and social conformity.
(And so Emma's active mind as well as her bouts of depression are a means to fight objectivity, the concrete ideas of society, the realities of society)

The French Revolution made the authors feel that they could change the world. Actually, not only did the authors feel they could change things, but everybody did. It was a time in history when people believed they could use their imaginations to better the world and themselves.

Adventure and a quest were part of the romantic movement.
(And what is Emma's quest? We know her adventure is with becoming less the farmer's daughter and more the lady but what is this adventure into beauty, interest in men, literature and "things" satisfying...?)

The Romantics had a fascination of foreign lands.
(And here we have the reason for Emma's fascination with Minarets and Turkish swords.)

Ironically the authors chose to talk about nature so much, when "their" nature was deteriorating from the impact of industry. The authors were creating a nature that was beautiful, simple, and most importantly, free from impurities.
(Sounds like the agricultural show with all the medals for the good farmers.)

Women were people of love and sentiment while men wanted reason. Where as, Women did not want the ideals of themselves to be characterized by that of passiveness and total dependency.
(aha - and we have a male author showing women in the eyes of the male characters with sentiment. Where as, among themselves - Emma and Charles' mother or Homais' wife - they are characterized as less passive)

Mystical creatures and places, supernatural elements, and myths contributed a major part to the Romantic era.

Authors used the idea of "imagination" to show that humans can transcend reality - and what just "appears to be" - so that readers can grasp the larger view and then, in a way. return to life with a new perception of an idea.

Poets and Novelists often draw stark comparisons between; innocence and child-likeness versus the "experience" that we often grow into.

It was the Poet and Novelists job to remain child-minded and bring to the people what they had long since abandoned- faith, reason, love, mercy, etc.; (And so Emma's active mind as well as her bouts of depression are a means to fight objectivity, the concrete ideas of society, the realities of society)
The French Revolution made the authors feel that they could change the world. Actually, not only did the authors feel they could change things, but everybody did. It was a time in history when people believed they could use their imaginations to better the world and themselves.

Adventure and a quest were part of the romantic movement.
(And what is Emma's quest? We know her adventure is with becoming less the farmer's daughter and more the lady but what is this adventure into beauty, interest in men, literature and "things" satisfying...?)

The Romantics had a fascination of foreign lands.
(And here we have the reason for Emma's fascination with Minarets and Turkish swords.)

Ironically the authors chose to talk about nature so much, when "their" nature was deteriorating from the impact of industry. The authors were creating a nature that was beautiful, simple, and most importantly, free from impurities.
(Sounds like the agricultural show with all the medals for the good farmers.)

Women were people of love and sentiment while men wanted reason. Where as, Women did not want the ideals of themselves to be characterized by that of passiveness and total dependency.
(aha - and we have a male author showing women in the eyes of the male characters with sentiment. Where as, among themselves - Emma and Charles' mother or Homais' wife - they are characterized as less passive)

Mystical creatures and places, supernatural elements, and myths contributed a major part to the Romantic era.

Authors used the idea of "imagination" to show that humans can transcend reality - and what just "appears to be" - so that readers can grasp the larger view and then, in a way. return to life with a new perception of an idea.

Poets and Novelists often draw stark comparisons between; innocence and child-likeness versus the "experience" that we often grow into.

It was the Poet and Novelists job to remain child-minded and bring to the people what they had long since abandoned- faith, reason, love, mercy, etc.: (And what is Emma's quest? We know her adventure is with becoming less the farmer's daughter and more the lady but what is this adventure into beauty, interest in men, literature and "things" satisfying...?)
The Romantics had a fascination of foreign lands. (And here we have the reason for Emma's fascination with Minarets and Turkish swords.) Ironically the authors chose to talk about nature so much, when "their" nature was deteriorating from the impact of industry. The authors were creating a nature that was beautiful, simple, and most importantly, free from impurities. (Sounds like the agricultural show with all the medals for the good farmers.) Women were people of love and sentiment while men wanted reason. Where as, Women did not want the ideals of themselves to be characterized by that of passiveness and total dependency. (aha - and we have a male author showing women in the eyes of the male characters with sentiment. Where as, among themselves - Emma and Charles' mother or Homais' wife - they are characterized as less passive) Mystical creatures and places, supernatural elements, and myths contributed a major part to the Romantic era. Authors used the idea of "imagination" to show that humans can transcend reality - and what just "appears to be" - so that readers can grasp the larger view and then, in a way. return to life with a new perception of an idea. Poets and Novelists often draw stark comparisons between; innocence and child-likeness versus the "experience" that we often grow into. It was the Poet and Novelists job to remain child-minded and bring to the people what they had long since abandoned- faith, reason, love, mercy, etc.: (And here we have the reason for Emma's fascination with Minarets and Turkish swords.)
Ironically the authors chose to talk about nature so much, when "their" nature was deteriorating from the impact of industry. The authors were creating a nature that was beautiful, simple, and most importantly, free from impurities. (Sounds like the agricultural show with all the medals for the good farmers.) Women were people of love and sentiment while men wanted reason. Where as, Women did not want the ideals of themselves to be characterized by that of passiveness and total dependency. (aha - and we have a male author showing women in the eyes of the male characters with sentiment. Where as, among themselves - Emma and Charles' mother or Homais' wife - they are characterized as less passive) Mystical creatures and places, supernatural elements, and myths contributed a major part to the Romantic era. Authors used the idea of "imagination" to show that humans can transcend reality - and what just "appears to be" - so that readers can grasp the larger view and then, in a way. return to life with a new perception of an idea. Poets and Novelists often draw stark comparisons between; innocence and child-likeness versus the "experience" that we often grow into. It was the Poet and Novelists job to remain child-minded and bring to the people what they had long since abandoned- faith, reason, love, mercy, etc.: (Sounds like the agricultural show with all the medals for the good farmers.)
Women were people of love and sentiment while men wanted reason. Where as, Women did not want the ideals of themselves to be characterized by that of passiveness and total dependency. (aha - and we have a male author showing women in the eyes of the male characters with sentiment. Where as, among themselves - Emma and Charles' mother or Homais' wife - they are characterized as less passive) Mystical creatures and places, supernatural elements, and myths contributed a major part to the Romantic era. Authors used the idea of "imagination" to show that humans can transcend reality - and what just "appears to be" - so that readers can grasp the larger view and then, in a way. return to life with a new perception of an idea. Poets and Novelists often draw stark comparisons between; innocence and child-likeness versus the "experience" that we often grow into. It was the Poet and Novelists job to remain child-minded and bring to the people what they had long since abandoned- faith, reason, love, mercy, etc.: (aha - and we have a male author showing women in the eyes of the male characters with sentiment. Where as, among themselves - Emma and Charles' mother or Homais' wife - they are characterized as less passive)
Mystical creatures and places, supernatural elements, and myths contributed a major part to the Romantic era. Authors used the idea of "imagination" to show that humans can transcend reality - and what just "appears to be" - so that readers can grasp the larger view and then, in a way. return to life with a new perception of an idea. Poets and Novelists often draw stark comparisons between; innocence and child-likeness versus the "experience" that we often grow into. It was the Poet and Novelists job to remain child-minded and bring to the people what they had long since abandoned- faith, reason, love, mercy, etc.

In Edit: Barb, we are posting together! Oh I'm really looking forward to the Agricultural Fair, I need to speed ahead now and catch up, I think you all have done a wonderful job with all the background materials, thank you, Carolyn for that description of privet, as I read it I kept thinking sounds like Ligustrum as Barb said but then when Joan did the photo I am not sure!?! We have had lots of ligustrum hedges and I know they often use privet hedges in Europe, but good HEAVENS on the flowers, I am not sure that's what we had, actually!

And Hats, me too on the scrofula, thanks Joan G, I had thought it had...I don't know what I thought it was, obviously you don't see people with TB conditions today, or do you?

This is apparently some manifestation of TB on the neck and glands, why not call it TB?

It looks like you all ahve wonderfully covered the great questions in the heading except this one, did somebody address it and I missed it? What does Emma's encounter with the nurse foreshadow?

Good heavens, what did that foreshadow?....I don't know. She's a distant mother? Once she pushed Berthe she could not pretend to be a model of rectitude, who was she pretending FOR? Herself? She's the only one who knows she pushed the baby. Awful scene, woman is quite detached from her own child, she's a model of self interest, if she were in Dante's Inferno she'd be condemned to look in a mirror in which she developed carbuncles on the face all day long. I have no idea what the answer to that one is, do any of you?

Thank you Hats for the reading thing, I had missed that, (how??) and satire? It does seem there that Flaubert might have been satirizing the....what? The bourgeoisie and their attitude toward women as Barbara said and reading? Boy how constricting, take away MY books, you have a tiger by the tail, yes indeed. And Eloise and MsSuzy, thank you for your always refreshing input here, it's like a breath of French air! hahahaah

Windows again: Chapter IV: "Sitting in the armchair beside the window she watched the people of the village go by on the sidewalk."

Does it seem to you that she spends a lot of time wishing and watching others and longing, but never being a part of when in fact she HAD a family, a child, a husband of good occupation and plenty of what seem like friendly neighbors (except the woman who cancelled her subscription to the library) but she is always outside looking in?

And the window was OPEN when she heard the Angelus ringing and then set out for the church TO SEEK help. The one time she tries, she is repulsed, I wonder whose fault that was, really? Hers or his? I mean he's not a mind reader?

And then Leon thought HE saw a shadow behind the window at the end of chapter VI, behind the curtain, there are enough images of windows in this thing, it should have been called Windows.

Did you like the simile of the hair in Chapter V, "thin grass swayed with the current , like disheveled green hair growing in its limpid depths." haahaha I LOVE that and I know exactly what he means, when we moved here to the farm there was so much overgrowth that where other people saw fields and forests all I saw was something that reminded me of a girl whose hair needed cutting. hahaahahah I KNOW what he means with that disheveled green hair. hahahaha

OK have any of you talked about the glorious apotheosis at the end of Chapter VI?

For him, she was now divested of those bodily attributes from which he could obtain nothing, and n his heart she rose higher and higher, soaring away from him in a glorious apotheosis. It was one of those pure feelings, which do not interfere with everyday life and are cultivated because they are rare; the pain of losing them would be greater than the happiness s of possessing them.

Is this saying that pure feelings are the product of fantasy only and that it's better to dream because there's more glory in the dream than in the reality? Sort of a ...who was it that the poet wrote about who was OK until he noticed the hair on the arm of his beloved? My mind is gone. Is that in Prufrock? In other words he has put her on a pedestal of pure....this reminds me of the guy who build Neuschwanstein? Mad King...er....Ludwig? He was of such a purity of mind that he had gold sleighs and even when he went forth at night in the snow in the gold sleigh (he was like the boy in the bubble but he had to be surrounded by purity) everything had to be perfect. Would you say Leon here is an aesthete?

And then this is really bad stuff here? I think this is important here?

She was exasperated by Charles's apparent unawareness of her ordeal. His conviction that he as making her happy seemed to her an idiotic insult, and his placid confidence about it struck her as ingratitude. (!?!) For whom was she being virtuous? Was he not the obstacle to any kind of happiness, the cause of al her misery, the sharp pointed tongue in the buckle of the strap that wound around her, binging her on all sides.

She therefore made him the sole object of the complex hatred engendered by her frustrations, and all her efforts to lessen is served only to increase it, for their failure gave her one more reason to despair and made her feel still more alienated from him.

How could she perceive his thinking he made her happy as ingratitude? I don't understand this? And here it seems that we see her transfer all her frustrations on to Charles, let me tell you , wouldn't YOU hate to be married to anybody who acted like that? Gosh, there's no way he can win? What could he possibly do to win? Really.

Leave her? What is in Charles's power to do for this woman and here's another man she can't seem to make understand her, I guess they are all supposed to have osmosis. I am learning quite a bit about communication from this book, she seems to think people should be able to see her distress and read her mind as to the cause, she needs a psychologist, did they have them then?

ginny

"What does the visit to the nurse foreshadow?" Ginny, I tried to answer that in post 304 but not too successfully. (She didn't push Berthe down in this scene with the wet-nurse. That came later at her own home.) What still sticks in my mind is this act of Emma's upon leaving the home of the wet-nurse:

"And she left the house, wiping her feet on the doorsill."

What does the visit foreshadow? I'm anxious to hear other thoughts.

I agree about the danger of taking books. I'd turn into a Winged Lion to protect my books. Even the Devil himself wouldn't be safe if he tried to destroy them or steal them away!

About Emma and the priest and who was at fault for the miscommunication -- the duty of a priest is the protection and healing of Souls, yet he's blind to that aspect of humanity. The priest thinks only of the body, rather than the soul which is all backwards IMO. Wouldn't a priest normally think of the Soul first if a troubled or unhappy person came to him?

Marvelle

Sorry I misread that marvelle, yes you explained it very well. No she was definitely alone when she pushed the child, that was in her perfect mother phase, admired by all, how does Flaubert put it, she was a model whatever, in public, but in private she was something else again, both mentally and physically.

Still reading the next assignment, that wiping of the feet, wow, missed that, she's wiping what off her feet as she exits!! Wiping off the child and the responsibility? Or the dirt? Or the appeals for help? Ironic then that she herself should be not helped by the priest.

And in this next section I see a lot of miscommunication, actually, but I LOVED the Agricultural Fair description, reminds me for some reason of some of the paintings I've seen of them, a rare combination of Barney Fife giving speeches (did you notice again she and Rodolph (sp) looking at the Fair speeches thru a window? Windows windows everywhere, back anon...

About the priest? You say wouldn't he be thinking of the soul first? I would think so, but if the person can't communicate herself to him at all, they are not in a confessional either, she's not made an appointment, she's talking to him while he's trying to herd kids, (ironically in learning Catechisms?!?) and his mind is distracted, I bet he does not view this as a cry for help at all, and why would he?

ginny

Ginny even when I was a kid that was the approach to a priest - that is part of why they were called Fathers - like any father to the poor they were to be available - again we have Emma acting in her peasant background where as you are so right, just as the upper class child makes an appointment to see their father so would an upper class parishioner seek help by arranging an appointment.

That bit to me is Emma seeking comfort from the priest, cure or father as she received comfort when her own father came for her in her melencholy after her mother died. Her father came rushing to her aid after receiving her letter. Here the priest is a spiritual father who she expected if she was a worthy child of God he would drop everything and rush to her aid. To a Catholic the cure or priest is more than an envoy but a representative of Christ - therefore how the priest acts toward you is how you measure your acceptence to God. Therefore to a parishioner if the priest is distracted that is confirmation that God would be distracted and you are on your own.

I can understand that, Barb, everything you said, but don't the souls of the children count for something, too? I mean here he is trying to instruct them, I guess for their First Communion and I guess he wants to impress on them the seriousness of it, I dunno I tend here not to blame him, but I could be wrong, why could she not have said, can I come and speak to you when you're not busy? I would like to tell you a problem I have?

ginny

I think Ginny the difference is you came to the priest as a child - the concept of being a child of God is pounded in since babyhood - and so like most children you want and expect immediate attention that is going to be made easy since this man is larger than life. A priest, cure or father after all represents God and you are taught that they and the nuns are closer to God and more educated than your parents.

The fact that the children are written about as misbehaving urchins that he does not have much patience with them, is the other clue that this guy is out of it - which is helping to show how as a middle class person you are against the church as Homais and others in the story sprinkle their put-downs to the church.

Also, He uses the corporal needs of the community as examples to her of real problems which is opposite the teachings of the church where the peasant in need was and still is considered more holy and valuable to God -

Of course politics today has many Catholics caught-up to the French. We see how being a needy peasant keeps the rich landlords, especially in South America, in their place of power. The church receives greater income and prestige from that association. Lots of foot stomping from Rome on those religious communities, like the Jesuits, who really attempt to minister to the souls of the faithful, mostly through education and the kind of missionary work that empowers the laity.

P.S> I am remembering so many scenes from my own childhood where grown women and even some men would happen on the priest at the same time all clamouring for his attention like a group of 3 year old children - and like the shepherd of his flock he would make them all feel wonderful giving them immediate attention and asking this one or that one to come see him at the rectory to talk further about whatever the issue presented or he would wait till the others leave holding the hand of the one he needed to give more attention and then they would walk along the grass or be brought into the vestibule of the church to talk further.

Barbara, you expressed so beautifully what Catholics expect and receive from priests as representatives of Christ. This Catholic priest of Emma's was entirely out of it, just a wrong, twisted caricature of what a Catholic priest should be concerned with and how he should act. He keeps her on the steps and acts as if she's intruding (on a priest at church)!

Marvelle

The discussion of the priest is interesting in that it concentrates on a point that Flaubert wants the reader to underestand. Priests are not all that they are cracked up to be. This particular priest represents a view of the priesthood held by the author. Not very attractive.

georgehd I think it has to do with the sweeping changes and looting of the Church in France during the French Revolution. To be for the Revolution is to be against the monarchy who were in positions of power because of 'Divine Rights of Kings' and crowned by the church.

The monarchy was re-established with Louis XVIII (1814-24) Regardless a great spiritual revival took place, the voice for freedom had been liberated. Although France at this time makes the 'Divine Rights' illegal, the association of church and monarchy was bound together, the conservative view shared by the peasants and not the views of the educated, the workers of Paris, or the bourgeois.

This see-saw continues - the aim of Charles X (1824-30) was to make the Church the servant of the Crown. In 1848- a revolution is carried out by the Socialists, mostly the workers of Paris. A law of 1850 restored secondary education to religious control, as a law of 1833 had done with primary education. In 1851 along comes Napoleon again who wants the support of the Church.

The way a cure/priest/father is revered is similar to the same theory as the 'Divine Right of Kings,' that certain kings ruled because they were chosen by God to do so and that these kings were accountable to no person except God.

Saint Augustine wrote in The City of God his concept of the Two Cities, - the City of God is as the body of believers, and the City of Man is as the secular world. Although these two cities are in spiritual conflict, the City of Man was instituted by God, according to Augustine, in order to secure the safety and security of the members of the City of God. Therefore, monarchs are placed on their thrones by God for a specific purpose. Although they may be ungodly, to question their authority is in essence to question God's purpose for both the City of Man and the City of God.

Since Medieval times kings ruled by virtue of God's authority; were crowned by a representative of God from Rome; therefore the king was to be obeyed in all things. No group, whether they be nobles, or a parliament, or the people in the street, had a right to participate in this rule; to question or oppose the monarch was to rebel against God's purpose. To be for France as a Republic is to be against the Catholic Church and the Monarchy.

There is the same concept that a priest is divinely chosen—his vocation is a sign or gift from God and so to, he may be ungodly, as many were and are, to question their authority is in essence to question God’s purpose.

France had only abandoned in the 1830 the concept of a ‘The Divine Right of Kings.’ The secular views held sway since the French Revolution were stripping the Church of hundreds of years of power.

By Flaubert showing the cure to be inept he is supporting the middle class values that Emma is trying to adapt but she is lonely in that pursuit.

It is annoying to be off line because of computer problems. I am sorry not to have been able to post earlier.

The French Revolution was a cataclysmic event; the social and political upheaval lasted until 1799. There were historical reasons for the revolution.

For more than a century before Louis XVI ascended the throne, France had experienced periodic financial crises due to mismanagement, the cost of wars, and massive resulting indebtedness. The advocates for fiscal, economic and social reform became ever more vocal. The three estates were aware that the status quo needed to be changed, but there were class antagonisms, no estate was willing to give up its privileges, and no unity for action was attained - until the powder keg exploded.

Insurrection and rioting began in Paris on July 12, 1789, and the Bastille, the royal prison, which symbolized the despotism of the Bourbons, was stormed and captured on July 14. Bastille Day continues to be celebrated on July 14.

As we know, the constitutional monarchy was not retained as had been originally contemplated. Louis XVI died under the guillotine, as did the unpopular Queen Marie Antoinette. She was the daughter of Empress Maria Theresa of Austria and contemptuously referred to as l'autrichienne (the Austrian).

After the overthrow of the Bourbon dynasty came the First Republic. Enormous changes ensued; among many others : the provinces were abolished and the country divided into departments; hereditary titles were abolished, and the Gregorian calendar was replaced by the French Republican calendar, an inventive, fascinating (even rhyming !) creation. Calculated from September 22, 1792 it was in use from 1793 through 1805. The Gregorian calendar was re-instituted under Napoléon Bonaparte on January 1, 1806.

I did not mean to digress, but the details of the Republican calendar have long fascinated me.

Will try to answer questions tomorrow.

Super background material, thank you all so much, I agree, Barb, , that Emma approached as a child, in fact I see her quite childish in many aspects, of course you'd have to consider what puerile behavior is!

Our Joan G is not well at the moment, we hope she will be feeling better soon, we look forward to her return: we've got plenty of questions in the heading here to go on and a new section, how about help us out here by plowing ahead so she won't be disappointed when she gets back?

I loved the Agricultural Fair section, just loved it. So vivid and picturesque, and down to earth and so different from Emma. I laughed out loud at what Flaubert did when ol Rodolphe was declaring himself, and the announcer was giving the prizes! hahaahah MANURE! The announcer intervened, boy that was just what I was thinking hahaahahah What a contrast, hahahaah And did you notice how the writing changed there, and how the sentences become shorter and shorter, and tenser and terser as the excitement heightens: (will; she? Won't she?) That's SUPER writing.

And o boy talk about irony, poor Charles, here he is with the horseback riding as much as saying I give my wife to you? Is that what your book has? I was stunned, is he just naive or trusting or what?

I think Emma is naive too, and I can't really see what's so fabulous about this new affair, can you?

I think ol Rodolphe or however you spell his name has been around the barn a few times and thinks nothing of Emma, but she seems to think this is Love's True Kiss, just like in the fairy tales. I think she's kissing a frog here thinking he's a prince.

What IS it that this Rodolphe seems to represent to her?

The contrasts in the section on the Agricultural Fair which everyone seems to be enjoying tremendously, could not be stronger, here's a medal to Mmr. Leroux for 54 years in service on the farm! Now think on that one a moment, jeepers. The very opposite of Emma, constancy. And what does the winner decide to do with the medal? Give it to the priest, " he'll say Masses for me." To which Flaubert has the pharmacist say, "What fanaticism."

It's apparent that Flaubert does not regard the church well, and I don't think any of his clerical figures are going to be men to idolize. Nor, however, do I think Emma is a very deep person religiously or otherwise. Note that what decided her on the horseback morning rides was the prospect of a new riding habit. She's more like a teenager than a teenager, shallow and naive herself, jeepers.

How do you all see Emma at this point, tho? Do you agree she's shallow? Do you see her as having choices at all or swept away by fate or what?

What IS it about this new experience that seems to make her think she's found True Love at last? Do we feel sympathy for her or for Charles?

I need to catch up here as I've only come up to Chapter IX, what did you all see you'd like to comment on in this section??

ginny

Ginny I've thought long and hard about our Emma - she is not a character that many can have any compassion for - thinking of compassion as sympathy or pity - Is she just a nineteenth century lolita I wondered... While reading, some try to identify with her and are uncomfortable with her behavior therefore, they want her to step-up and make other choices -

I also think since most folks have respect if not love for their church they are looking at the characterizations of the church as troubling without being able to burrow into the church as a part of the political repression since we have a separation of church and state - I think that the Islamic world is still enmeshed in a system where in a few nations of the middle east their church has great political power - so much so that the church is not only a political force but it is impossible to separate what is mans or the secular and what is Gods. Many of us would prefer to see an Islamic nation run with a secular government rather than by or even sanctioned by the religion. We would have no tolorance for say our Supreme Court to be all memeber of the Catholic Church or our President having to be sancitioned by the Pope. And only in that light can I see us understanding Flaubert depicting the clergy as he does in this book.

Charles is another who depicts so much of the "typical" behavior for so many men with whom most of our generations is familiar - so that he is seen through many reader's eyes as understandable - a note of reality and that it does not make any difference to day dream thinking that reality can be avoided.

I have to agree that if I only read certain pieces describing the behavior of several characters - they are then not admirable and I agree the concept you mention of Emma being child like seems right on. But I could not leave it there - if Emma is child like, appearing to throw inner temper tantrums - then what is going on - what is Flaubert saying - this could not be a classic just to display the characteristics of a child like women. Other information about Flaubert may indicate he did not respect or like the bourgeois and he had his own string of women etc. etc. etc. but to put all that noxious thinking into a book would not alone make it a book we are still reading 150 years later.

Then is when I decided I needed to read this book with new questions - I notice also, most professional critics of this book are men - and the old saw of 'until you have walked in my shoes...' cropped up - also the quote that I love from Flaubert's Parrot "If all your responses to a book have already been duplicated and expanded upon by a professional critic, then what point is there to your reading?...Julian Barnes author.

And so, if nothing else but to justify my reading this book I wanted to better understand or maybe in my mind justify 'why Madame Bovary?' - other than a justification for a women's ruinous behavior and to celebrate the well accepted insensitivity’s of a "good" husband.

I was beginning to see a pattern and only after taking Jaon’s question about Romance to the level of looking into the Romantic Genre did I start a new set of questions.

Included in Romantic novel are among other points these three -

The loss of innocence and the existence of melancholy often were tied to an experience.
Nature and childhood were popular themes, since Romantics saw children as being close to nature and God.
Society, among other reasons, was blamed for the melancholy and sadness that seemed to appear the further away people moved from innocence and nature

Is this saying Flaubert had to have Emma stay childlike so as not to blame Society and that her childlike behavior brings her closer to nature and God? But the real killer question for me was, where is Emma's loss of innocense or rather, when in the story did her loss of innocense take place?

After all this is a story of a women - we read about her marriage that must have taken place when she was in her late teens - we get a glimpse of her childhood and as readers, we can follow her life quite well from the time of her meeting Charles forward - where is or what event or series of events represent her loss of innocense?? What makes Emma who she is...

Well Emma finally got the lover she'd been dreaming about. Shame shame....now how or when will Rodolphe get tired of her and dump her (just like the Soap Operas on tv). What was Charles thinking to encourage Emma to go horseback riding with Rodolphe? Did Flaubert want us to think Charles was a idiot or what?
The Agricultural Fair reminds me of the Fairs we have today.
Oh and where is Emma's father in all of this? Did he die and I missed reading about it in an earlier chapter?

Been busy with babysitting so have only just got to do some more thinking on this book.

The priesthood until probably the nineteen eighties was not really a vocation as we think of it- in many cases it was a career choice. This was the same in the mainstream Protestant churches. Therefore I don't really think we could expect too much pastoral care -not like we know it today. In my country the open orders have very good pastoral care for parishioners. I encountered a nun in the hospice. I found her care invaluable when dealing with my husbands dying process. She was wonderful and everyone loved her. I am not a Roman Catholic. Open orders no longer wear habits and they are so much more approachable and much more worldly (in the nicest possible way) In Emma's day the priest could possibly have been pushed into the priesthood by his family - every family felt reflected glory if they had a priest in the family - he may not have had any skills or even any interest in pastoral care. He may have just been doing a job! In any case I doubt whether a priest would be terribly sympathetic to a bored neurotic middle class woman - who did not have enough to occupy her and therefore was totally self absorbed for that is how I see Emma. Self absorbed -shallow and selfish.

Carolyn

I hope Joan feels better soon.

Barbara, the task you've given yourself I consider an excellent suggestion for myself and all readers: step away from our common judgements and assumptions of novel and characters and reconsider what is happening within Madame Bovary. I intend to read this section of the novel again.

I loved how Rodolphe walks with Emma through the Agricultural Show, telling her to admire his fine clothes, as he steps unconcernedly through manure with his shiny shoes! There's manure everywhere Rodolphe goes. He brings up fate a lot (but I think the other characters do too?) Fate is what Rodolphe blames or lays responsibility to, rather than onto himself.

Just noticed this in Ch 9, when Rodolphe next visits Emma following the Agricultural Show six weeks have gone by and Rodolphe says

"...I was right not to want to come here again. Your name -- my heart's full of it -- I spoke it wihtout meaning to, and you stopped me. 'Madame Bovary'! Everyone calls you that, and it's not your name at all. It's somebody else's. Somebody else's...."

I don't know if this means anything in connection with the title of the novel but will see if this thought continues and if it is explored in any way.

Ginny, loved you post. Lots of new material and new questions to consider. I wouldn't call Rodolphe a frog though -- they jump to escape him -- maybe just a garden variety worm that thrives in the manure pile.

________________________________________

Here's something that tickles me and I include it just for fun: as the Agricultural Show and banquet end, Emma and Rodolphe have found each other, all the politicans have done their duty to their satisfaction, and "[M. Binet] was homeward bound. He was looking forward to rejoining his lathe."

Marvelle

Oh Barbara, look! Your yellow swallow has returned! If I had your link addresses I'd post them here again but, according to your links, the swallow was a harbringer of spring and with him came rain and good news.

Now in Ch 8 we see the speeches just beginning, Rodolphe and Emma go to the second floor of the town hall and observe the proceedings through a window. Rodolphe, so near, brings memories of the vicomte to Emma while she notices outside "...in the distance, on the farthest horizon, the old stagecoach, the Hirondelle, slowly descending the hill of Les Leux, trailing a long plume of dust behind it." How like the swallowtail! but it trails dust rather than rain. Ominous sign? Then:

"It was in this yellow carriage that Leon had so often returned to her; and that was the road he had taken when he had left forever." A yellow stagecoach! And then Emma sees Leon and the vicomte and Rodolphe in one confused moment brought on by the arrival of the yellow Hirondelle that travels the road to connecting cities in the spring. Lovely imagery on Flaubert's part and from this I gather that the Hirondelle stagecoach is like a brand name as we'd call a car a Mustang or Cougar.

Will be back later....

Marvelle

EmmaBarb it is getting a bit like a soap opera isn't it - the descriptions of the village and the rooms are so well done it is almost like a Masterpiece Theater production in my head - I think this was made into a movie - did you ever see this book made into a movie?

Carolyn how brilliant - hehehe talk about an eagle eye - I never picked up on the association - I love it that here the cure possibly was pushed into being a priest with little interest in pastoral care and we know Emma did not want to be pregnant and the last thing she wanted was a girl and they both are less then "pastoral" in their frustrations that they both impose on their charges. Great association I love it - Here is the cure's treatment of his charges...

'Little ragamuffins!' muttered the 'cure': 'always the same!' And, picking up a torn and battered catechism which he had knocked against with his foot, wow with his foot - that would be like kicking the Bible with your foot he exclaimed: 'Irreverent little brats!'... Now then, Riboudet, just you wait a minute!' shouted the cure angrily. 'I'll give you one over the ears, you limb of Satan, you!'... I call him Riboudet (like the hill you go up when you go to Maromme); and I say, "Mon Riboudet". D'you get me- "Mont Riboudet"? Ha! ha! I told that little joke to the Bishop the other day. And he laughed. He was so nice! Yes, he laughed outright! nothing like being verbal abusive to a child and then sharing the abuse which appears to have been welcomed by the Bishop, oh my ... But before you could say 'knife', I wonder why 'knife' the cure was upon them, distributing cuffs right and left. Taking hold of them by the coat collar, he held them aloft, and then deposited them on their two knees on the stone floor of the choir, ramming them well down as if he wanted to plant them there ouch whew... I must look after these brats of mine.

The episode with the cure immediately precedes this one with Bertha falling -

Leave me alone,' said Emma, pushing her away...'Leave me alone,' said her mother, who had quite lost her temper. Looks like both Emma like the cure have lost their temper Her look made the child frightened, and it began to cry. The boys don’t cry but then they are a bit older and probably used to this rough treatment 'Leave me alone, will you?' she repeated, and she gave her a push with her elbow... Berthe fell down by the chest of drawers, striking her head against one of the brass handles. She cut her cheek, and blood began to flow. ohhh Madame Bovary rushed over to pick her up, broke the bell-pull, shouted with all her might for the servant to come, and was beginning to curse herself for a wicked woman, well the best you can say here is she felt guilty and had to unload - seems servents always get the brunt of their "master's" dispositions when Charles appeared on the scene... Oh, look, dear,' said Emma, quite calmly. 'The little one was playing about and has just fallen down and hurt herself!' more guilt -

As you say Carolyn, folks who do not want to care for others are really not very good at it are they...the difference seems to be a women is expected to be good at it but a priest can be abusive without our giving it too much thought...ah so

Marvelle you have me curious now about the yellow swallow - I never noticed till you said something but yellow and swallow are mentioned in the same paragraph with that haunting description of the light in the church. I wonder if a swallow has some symbolic meaning to the French - isn't is swallows that come back to Capistrano...

still cannot find the large carriage that looks like a truck that was pulled by horses but here is a 1875 restored Landau carriage

And then we have the Queen Mother and Princess Diana riding in a royal landau while attending the Royal Ascot horse races.

Barbara, I loved looking at those stately carriages. Thank you for the links. I am reading Part II. In these chapters, I seem to see a dramatic change in Emma. She looks at her baby with new eyes and sees Charles differently too. Flaubert makes Emma's change like a RELIGIOUS one.

"It was then that Emma REPENTED!"

"She even wondered why she detested Charles, and whether it might not be better if she could love him. But there was so little about him to which she could attach this REVIVAL of feeling..."

When I read this paragraph, I began to think there might be hope for their marriage.

"They spent a delightful evening, full of intimate talk and shared dreams. They spoke of their future fortune, of the improvements they would make in their house....then her eyes turned back to Charles and she noticed with surprise that his teeth were not at all bad-looking."

At the Agricultural Fair, "rapeseed" is mentioned. What is rapeseed? It is mentioned along with flax.

Hats, rapeseed is an oil producing seed. The oil is used much like corn oil. It is grown in much of France and is most easily identified when it produces great fields of brilliant yellow flowers. The plant looks similar to the wild mustard that is common in most of the USA.

Theron

Here you go Hats - first a photo and then an article with photo - seems to me during WW2 when we could not get butter and margerine first hit the market it came as white square quarters - not the long quarters of today - included were these little packages of yellow die to mash into the margerine so that it looked the same color as butter - well if I remember correctly that coloring was from the flower heads of rape - and if you read any of the Bodice Busters the hero is always on a swift stead taking the heroine off past the gorse hedge into the rape fields...

http://images.webshots.com/ProThumbs/65/1165_wallpaper280.jpg

http://interactive.usask.ca/ski/agriculture/crops/oilseeds/canola.html

OH what REAMS of fabulous stuff, Joan will be so proud!

I agree with EmmaBarb on the Agricultural Fairs of today, I wouldn't miss a State Fair, and I saw a wonderful PBS program on one in England, it was magic, they gave TROPHIES for the best radish and the competition was keen and everybody gathered round in this huge hall JUST to applaud, it was so similar and fun. Love it.

Barbara, thank you for that wonderful point of view on Emma, I'm closing on on Chapter 15 and I am feeling a bit of sympathy for her as anybody who has ever been jilted would have to , really? Now whether or not she's causing this I need to wait and see.

Carolyn, thank you for that wonderful background on the priesthood, that clears things up as well, many thanks!!

MARVELLE!!!!!!!!!!

telling her to admire his fine clothes, as he steps unconcernedly through manure with his shiny shoes! There's manure everywhere Rodolphe goes.

hahaha AHAHHAHA Missed that one, well done, well said, I agree totally!

Hahahaha

AND THIS ONE!! ", and you stopped me. 'Madame Bovary'! Everyone calls you that, and it's not your name at all. It's somebody else's. Somebody else's...." I don't know if this means anything in connection with the title of the novel but will see if this thought continues and if it is explored in any way." Oh well said also, that's been driving me kind of nuts as well even tho we have explained it here, it nags at me. THANK you for that, I missed it, reading too fast to try to keep up!

HO HATS!!!!!!!!! Flaubert makes Emma's change like a RELIGIOUS one. "It was then that Emma REPENTED!"

HO!~ Well done, well done, I LOVE that one! And I missed it, too, well done! Religion and Emma, what a combination to contemplate. And thank you for asking about rape and....

Theron, what a beautiful description and so right on. I will never forget my first view of rape in a field, the entire field is the most glorious golden yellow you can imagine, drove an entire train crazy trying to find out what it is, very beneficial plant, made my husband plant some, (does not do well here) but the FIELDS are full of the most glorious color! THANK you for asking and responding!!

I had some stuff in this too that I did not understand, but let me move to the next post, Mr. Rodolphe fans, buckle your seat belts! Hahahahaha

ginny

OK I'm gaining ground here but I'm still not where the rest of you are chapter wise, but am now in XIV and closing fast.

So Mr. Rodolphe never intended to run away with her and his Dear John letter is the pits, Do you see what he blames? The excuses he gives? And then he says, well there's nothing we can do about it anyway:

Why did we ever meet? Why were you so beautiful? Was it my fault? Oh no, dear God, no! Only fate is to blame.

"There's a word that always makes an impression, " he said to himself.

Yes it sure does you cynical rat, MERDE is a good accompaniment for you. It did in Juilius Caesar which some of us just finished, "The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars, but in ourselves..." and it does here too.

Nor is this the first time FATE has been mentioned, and I have a feeling it won't be the last. I'm going to watch for it.

So she, even then, believed him. She believed that he had left till she saw the blue tilbury "crossing the square at a fast trot," and collapsed when the evidence was before her: he cheated, he lied, he said that he loved her, but he did not.

So she then went into a 43 day funk. Now you have to remember, there used to be an "I died for love" attitude at a certain time in history? Even Flaubert says women are known to faint at the smell of bread (he must have associated with some very strange women) Of course, again, if this is the age of corsets, we have to know that if you squeeze a body into an 18 inch waist, a whole LOT of fainting is going to go on.

Remember Sweet Barbara Allen? Oh mother oh mother go dig my grave, make it both long and narrow, Sweet William died for love of me and I will die of sorrow." Very common at that time.

T he writing here is fabulous. Just wonderful. The contrasts, Binet keeps working at his spindle turning out napkin rings, I can't figure that out.

And we see here a new dimension in Mr. L'Heureux or however you spell his name, no sooner is shc sick then here he comes with the GREEN cape and the suitcaseS and wants money and poor Charles borrows from him, and I have a feeling this is going to bring about ruin. THIS money thing, Emma...has Emma caused Charles needing money? Something changed there, for this little family, something has snapped?

Here's a BIG THING, I thought, this whole paragraph, on communication or miscommunication:

Chapter XII:

He, this man of great experience, could not distinguish dissimilarities of feeling beneath similarities of expression. Because lascivious or venal lips had murmured the same words to him, he now had little belief in their sincerity when he heard them from Emma; they should be taken with a grain of salt, he thought, because the most exaggerated speeches usually hid the weakest feelings-as though the fullness of the soul did not sometimes overflow into the emptiest [phrases, since no one can ever express the exact measure of his needs, his conceptions or his sorrows ,and human speech is like a cracked pot on which we beat out rhythms for bears to dance to when we are striving to make music that will wring tears from the stars."

Notice Flaubert says stars here , Brutus, and not God or heaven or angels?

This seems to me to be important but I don't understand the pot you bang on for bears? And is he saying that….WHAT is he saying here?

What do your translations do with the pot for bears? I have to get off, storms, will somebody ask in the French discussion what the pot for bears is?

I think this passage on communication is important but I don't know why?

ginny

How different translations can be! Ginny, who is your translator? Mine is Francis Steegmuller. Here is his translation of Ch 12 in the 'bear' section (authorial Point of View?) about Rodolphe's jaundiced view of Emma's passionate declarations of feelings:

"He had no perceptions -- this man of such vast experience -- of the dissimilarity of feeling that might underlie similarities of expression. Since he had heard those same words uttered by loose women or prostitutes, he had little belief in their sincerity when he heard them now; the more flowery a person's speech, he thought, the more suspect the feelings, or lack of feelings, it concealed. Whereas the truth is that fullness of soul can sometimes overflow in utter vapidity of language, for none of us can ever express the exact measure of his needs or his thoughts or his sorrows; and human speech is like a cracked kettle on which we tap crude rhythms for bears to dance to, while we long to make music that will melt the stars."

Having trained bears dance was a common entertainment. Twenty years ago I lived in Ankara (the capitol city of Turkey) & many times at home we'd hear men calling and music in the street. From our balconies we'd see the leashed and muzzled bear dancing while his trainer beat heavily on a drum. Poor bear! how wrong it all was. The music was simple, more noise than anything, and the bear would shuffle in the street. Often there was an assistant who'd play the flute. With enough tossed coins from the neighborhood, the entourage would walk away, to perform again in other parts of the city. It sounds like Steegmuller had seen a similar bear dance; at least he understood it.

I think Steegmuller's translation is clearly expressed. Trying to communicate deep feelings through speech is a crude and inadequate process. He uses the contrast of the rough and primitive music of a bear dance (a pot used to communicate to the bear to dance) = to human desire for heavenly music to "melt the stars" (words to express our strongest feelings to another). Hard to explain the comparison because I feel Steegmuller's translation says it all.

Marvelle

Hi Ginny, Barbara and Marvelle, I have not read all of the posts. I wanted to skip over and just say how beautiful and brightly yellow the fields of rapeseed look. Thanks again Theron for describing them so well.

Get Well Soon, Joan!!

Well if I'd read on a bit more I'd have seen Emma's letter addressed "Dear Children". I can't help but wonder why Emma wasn't closer to her father and why they didn't visit one another. He'd not even seen his grandchildren.

Barbara St.Aubrey, it's my understand this was made into a movie, I'm trying to find the DVD version in fact.

So Emma's lover (Rodolphe) left her and she had a nervous breakdown. What happened to the letter? Did Charles find it? Emma is making herself ill over this. Charles (the doctor) wasn't the only doctor back in those days that could have been sued for medical malpractice. I wonder if G. Flaubert had written this part from the experience of someone in his family of doctors ?

DANCING BEAR

Marvelle

One thing to remember is that Charles was an officier de sante, a licensed medical man without an M.D. degree. He could only perform surgical operations when an M.D. was present.

Charles never mentions that restriction when Homais and then Emma urge him to perform the operation. Charles wasn't qualified as a surgeon and knew it. He knew he couldn't operate without an M.D. present; but still he operated. Why didn't he think?

Marvelle

Ginny, thanks for sharing your experience on the train. It must have been a pretty field of rapeseed.

Marvelle, a "real" dancing bear? I did not realize you had lived in Turkey. Thanks for sharing your travel memory. I enjoyed reading it.

I am behind in my reading. I have not read about the "bear" yet. I might have missed it. I am in the middle of chapter ten in my translation.

Marvelle, I wanted to reread the part about the clubfoot. I thought that part was interesting.

AHA...YES!...I wouldn’t share this till I had more to support it and had this cockeyed idea I had to hurry and read the entire book before I breathed my thoughts aloud or at least heheheh in a post (this may take many POSTS) I am only in the chapter after the Agricultural Fair but, with Hats saying Emma and Charles have turned over a new leaf, I said to my self... ahuh...and then the posts speak of the break up between old oily Rudolphio and then the startling one from Ginny talking about 'Fate' - now I am sure - this may not hold up through out the entire book but my gut says it will ...

This is a story about loss - we all know in the end Emma takes her life - I see this as all the losses of feelings, along the way - there seems to be a pattern she follows after each loss till she renews herself with another "fix" only to have the “fix” represent loss -

Frankly, my memory of the story goes back to a reading in High School when her sex life was being shown to be the cause of all her woes and I am shocked now during this re-read how innocently she gets herself into these messes - yes, innocence - and this is why -

Going back to the early chapters we have two very telling experiences that I think is the set-up for Madame Bovary who never becomes a Madame as she continues, over and over to attempt to attain her childhood preconceived images of herself. The information Flaubert gives us is not in this order but in reality this seems to be the order in which Emma became who she is...

Emma leaves her home for the convent at the impressionable age of 13 - - "When she was thirteen, her father came up himself with her to Rouen to settle her in at the convent."

She replaces the warmth of home in family that she still needs - aha her first developing behavior to loss that seems to be a system that Emma uses for every loss -

So far from finding the convent dull in the early days, she loved being with the kind sisters, who, to keep her amused, took her into the chapel...

reached through a long passage leading from the refectory. long passage symbolic of a long journey from the refectory or kitchen

She went in but little for games,

acquired a good knowledge of the catechism, and she it was who always answered the curate when any knotty question was propounded to the class.

Living perpetually in the warm atmosphere of the classrooms, among these pale-faced women with their beads and crosses, and how often as an 'adult' are we reminded how pale is Emma’s complexion

she insensibly NO rational, wisdom, logic or intelligence

yielded to the mystic languor that exhales from the perfumes of the altar, the shadowy coolness of the holy-water stoups, and the soft radiance of the tapers. How often we read of Emma placing candles on her mantle or the small candle wick in the church - I am seeing that scene again with the cure as symbolic of her loss of the sustenance of the church

By way of mortifying the flesh she would try to go all day without food. And she ransacked her brains to think of some disciplinary obligation she could lay upon herself. a "good" girl proves just how good she is by going without food and mortifying herself as the martyrs and the Holy Saints.

Remember back in the 70s and 80s there were all these books about little girls being the ‘princes’ - the Jewish Princess and Daddy’s Princess on and on - girls that were typical Sorority girls - the reason we got all in a dither about Jan Bonnoit Ramsey or what ever the name of poor unfortunate little girl.

Well our Emma is a PRINCESS. Not only does she receive her little crown but she wins prizes - the 'good' little girl with the curl in the middle of her forehead only in Emma’s case it is hair in neat plaits wearing white, the color of perfection, innocence, purity, redemption - within the church the color of suffering saints, virgin saints, Easter, Christmas, Epiphany and the Ascension.
When she looked like such a nice little girl she won prizes, mounted the platform to receive her little crowns. - "with her hair in plaits, white frock and kid shoes..."
Then her mark on earth absorbed from childhood is to get compliments from men - all the while doing the proper thing, taking her seat like a "good" girl after having received her crown.
...as she made her way back to her seat, the gentlemen would lean over and pay her pretty compliments.

She is alone - no parents - no secular roll model - everyone is sweet to her and she is as if on center stage waved to by the thrungs - she is left to her own devices to figure out who she is on this earth - what her earthly image with be. She reads and attends the ceremony of daily mass, lectures and we know she remembers the line of girls in their white vails but she has no calling to become a nun - only to be 'GOOD' -

The courtyard would be thronged with carriages, and people would smilingly wave her good-bye from the carriage windows.

Her love of music that probably makes real her other fantasies all steeped in the arts is set because she receives attention from the music-master, another man - not the janitor or the gardener but the music-master.

The music-master, carrying his violin case, would give her a nod as he passed.

Borrowing more warmth not a part of her daily life she stays longer in the confessional, in its dim light, and in order to receive that warmth she is in a kneeling position - hardly the position of a girl learning to be self-empowering around a man. And in this pseudo warm, intimate situation where she should be learning about a marriage that promotes growth and well-being of one’s self and the other person she is instead, putting together an impression as the result of convent experiences and from her experiences within the confessional box.

she invented little sins The first of her small lies in order to get what she desperately needs - the warmth of someone who cares about her in order to linger in the dim light, kneeling down with her hands clasped before her face, listening to the murmuring tones of the priest above her. Similes bringing in such words as 'betrothed', 'spouse', 'heavenly bridegroom', and 'eternal marriage', which occur again and again in sermons, awoke unsuspected sensations of pleasure in the hidden depths of her soul.

For six months, Emma, when she was fifteen, battened on the garbage of these out-of-date 'Libraries of Choice Fiction'...when

her mother died,
she wept bitterly. tho only other loss that she weep about is the loss of her dog that she inbued with herself when she talked to it. A suggestion that these two events are the centeral axis of Emma's journey in life.
She had a memorial card made containing the hair of the deceased, The proper thing to do like a “good” daughter - this is the first time in history that there is time to celebrate death and embroidery with hair is most popular.
wrote a letter home to les Bertaux later she purchases a desk set - Writing appears to be part of the pattern that sinks her into a lonely girl/women who all her life she is seeking warmth, love, the prize, the crown, the attention of men that represents acceptance.
full of melancholy here is the pattern of melancholy or depression that seems to follow each loss in her life reflections on life, she begged that when her time came she herself might be laid in her mother’s grave. (Tomb; the womb of the earth Mother imprisoning the soul) Emma's life long search for her soul that she looks for in the union of mother and daughter
Her father thought she must be ill, and came post-haste to see her. from here on we see her seeking the rescue - from the cure - Leon - Charles when she pushed Bertha - Rudolphe when she is had washed her hands of boring Charles.
Emma was inwardly gratified at the thought that she had risen at a bound to those ethereal heights which the more commonplace beings of the earth are never permitted to attain. How many times we read the word ethereal - beyond her need for food the sustenance of life - beyond being a slattern wife and mother as Homais’ wife - beyond the daily chit chat of the ordinary
And so she suffered herself to glide along in these Lamartinian meanderings. aha and the circle continues with her suffering that leads to her depressed state till there is another solution that is going to fix her - make her feel better - seek someone, a man’s attention, who will make her feel good about herself
And then it began to cloy: she wanted no more of it;
but nevertheless went on from force ofhabit and so refraining from food becomes a habit as does other morifications that like receiving a crown ear-marks Emma as a "good" girl worthy of a mother who has died and left her alone.
and afterwards from vanity, Vanity is an expression of ego, not being egotistical but the normal ego needed if we are a live human on earth - Emma's self-esteem - this is who Emma is - her earthly image of herself
(She) was surprised in the end to find herself quite calm, with no more trace of sadness in her heart than of wrinkles on her brow. She has successfully numbed her pain
Upon leaving the convent school Emma is described as - Her mind, so material amidst its enthusiasm... had been lacking in reverence towards the Community Nope - she is not going to be a nun. We know that part of the system in order to feel as Emma and to feel a 'good' girl is to receive compliments from men.
Emma found some distraction in managing the household, part of the pattern seems to be -'get organized and do what a worthy good women does on this earth.'
but she soon grew tired of the country and wished herself back in her convent....But her longing for a change... the unrest caused by a masculine presence Here we go again - the 'fix' is the attention of a man or men.
she believed that she would at last be possessed by wonderful passion... trying to fill the hole of a missing feeling of warmth, the love of a mother dead and the warmth of family life and her parents love lost at age 13 when she is cloistered with pale faced women.

What does she share with Charles as their only time together before they plan to marry...She is letting him in...letting him see who she is...

She began to talk about her convent,
She showed him her old music-books,
the little volumes she had been given to her as prizes,
the oak-leaf crowns
she went on to speak of her mother, of the cemetery,
pointed out the bed in the garden where she gathered flowers the first Friday in every month, to lay on her mother's grave.

And now she lists all of a peice of rheteric, how she imagines she would feel warmth, alive, not emotionally dead after the liteny leading to her mother's death.

servants were so unsatisfactory.
She would have liked to live in town,
attend all events during the winter months,

The summation of her reactions to most of her losses I think are in these words - "according to the kind of thing she was saying, her voice would be

clear... now joyfully, with wide-open, innocent eyes,
shrill,
suddenly sinking into languor, linger in modulations which ended almost in a whisper, as if she were speaking to herself...now with lids half-closed, and a look of boredom, as her thoughts wandered aimlessly.
"Charles recalled, one by one, the various things she had said, trying to remember them exactly, to discover their implications, so as to give himself an idea of the sort of existence that had been hers in the times before he knew her."

Try the pattern and see what you come up with - I've got a different interpretation of Bertha's birth and the scraping of Emma's feet leaving the wet nurse which I see fitting the system of loss - but enough is enough - y'all must be full with all that posting I did - I just did not know how to say what I was getting at (Emma's system in life or Flaubert's system of events expressing Emma's life) by using less words - what was the movie where the complaint was 'too many words' - ah so...

Your post are much like I feel about Madame Bovary, but so much better than a post from me would have been. Thank You for your posts.

Barbara, I can't see as clearly as Ginger does about your latest posts and I really want to understand. You say the novel is about "loss" -- Emma loses her mother, then convent, then father, then ... what? ... marital love, then mother love, then ideal love, then passion, then...

Is what you're saying Barbara is that the story is about loss and replacement and loss again until Emma is worn out?

Or is it the ideal (one aspect of bourgeois society), then disillusionment/loss, then adjustment (to another aspect), then disillusionment/loss...etc?

I think the book is more than Emma. I still cannot place all my eggs in one basket with Emma-Emma-Emma. I think there are more characters to consider in the themes and meaning of Madame Bovary but I'm interested in Barbara's concept of 'loss'.

____________________________________

Charles for one doesn't receive or accept human communication -- Ginny's dancing bear? Is that Charles too as well as Emma? Is Flaubert saying that Charles has intense feelings but doesn't express them? So far I see Emma as the person with a soul who's struggling with dreams and reality in ways that none of the other characters seem to be doing.

Marvelle

Men rarely express their deepest feelings often not even to their closest buddies. Women however unburden themselves whether it be in their own journals or to their best friend. Women are normally better at "dumping". It would be a certainty that a man of Charles's time in general would have extreme difficulty in expressing his innermost feelings to another person.

Carolyn

Marvelle - I came to a point that I shared the other day where I was beginning to see a pattern. Prompted by Joan's question about Romance I looked at the points within the Romantic Genre. The points I found most intriguing that I wanted to identify in this story, especially since I found them a bit harder to see was, If Emma experienced a loss of innocence - She is the character who commits suicide and we see her tumbling into melancholy after various experiences. Some of her behavior seems child like - another popular theme among the Romantics is to blame society for the melancholy and sadness that appears as people move further away from innocence and nature.

For me the question was - where is Emma's loss of innocence or rather, when in the story did her loss of innocence take place? - where is or what event or series of events represent her loss of innocence?? What makes Emma who she is...

I see a pattern emerging - she wants to feel loved not necessarily have a marriage or an affair - she wants the warmth of love -

She is isolated from women with only the pale faced nuns and heroines from books like, Mary Queen of Scots or Joan of Arc as role models - Charles' mother feels bereft that she is no longer the center of his existence, she does not make friends but rather only tells Emma what to do and trys to control Emma even to her reading matter. Emma trying to attain the image of the Bourgeois she cannot stoop to the behavior of the likes of Homais' wife, much less the wet nurse and so they are out as friends.

Here sense of herself is to be "good" (which is important to her) she needs to win prizes. As an adult that translates into being the best. We read over and over how super she was with the accounts, letter writing, homemaking, making Charles’ life comfortable, entertains his friends and family, dressing well, looking like a lady, she studies her music, Italian, history, philosophy, changes the furniture, her hairdo, a regular Martha Stewart, Betty Crocker, Diana Vreeland all rolled into one. But she does not receive complements for this effort from Charles, his mother, her father, the neighbors, who all either gossip or tell her and her servants what else they should do, nor does she gain the freedom to live among those with like interests and expectations for excellance.

After each effort she rebels and is true to her experience, that in order to be worthy she needs compliments from men - and not any man but, those who are successful, dress well, ride in carriages etc. - she easily is captivated by anyone who she believes will give her that attention.

I see a pattern of loss - each time a goal or part of her self-esteem is lost, it prompts this system to go in place that will cover the pain of the loss - do the correct thing - look good since this is a habitual part of her self-esteem - gain attention - put her mind and actions into anything that is not of the commonplace - none of these efforts bring her the satisfaction she is needing, wanting, which is to fix her inner void - the inner pain numbed that desires the warmth of her family lost at 13 and the loss of her mother at 15.

All her losses along the way are simply other aspects of how she defines herself, advances herself, is visible, extends herself only to be shot down - she not only does not have that aspect of her self satisfied but the advance was an expectation that if satisfied was supposed to cover this inner pain.

After each loss or failure she attempts to be very, very "good" followed by a time of melancholy - she is bereft and most often goes into some ethereal state above the commonplace with her books or other baubles of beauty or embraces an assault on life - of martyrdom to homemaking or study that is supposed to bring happiness until, the newest pain in numbed. And then she is off again on another round of seeking the crown that says she is very, very "good" all the while looking for the attention from cultured men, never really feeling pleasure or freedom or love.

No one can make her a Madame - within herself she must feel a Madame - and I see her as a lost girl/women spending her life trying to plug the hole left by her early teen experiences - in that respect I see her character as limited - we never get to know the depth of Emma - only her yearning, her failures, her ability and continued study for a life never allowed.

I also see an author who does not give her anything but a box with a window, a very patriarchal view of womanhood. This is not a self-sufficient Hester Prynne, nor does she have the passionate affair of Anna Karenina, she is not the small minded Rosamond Vincy of Middlemarch. Madame Bovary is defiantly not written as a Marianne, bare breasted, holding the tricolors, wearing a three cornered hat, Delacroix's symbol of French liberty.

Insomnia for me, and I had to come in and give you my take on this book. To me Emma shows every indication and symptom of an addiction problem. She's not addicted to drugs or alcohol, but she is addicted to Romance. I think Flaubert created this character in this way so he could show his great dislike for Romance and all it implies. Funny, too, because in my opinion he's written this book in a very romantic way.

Lheureux plays the part of enabler. So did Charles in the beginning, but not enough to suit Emma. Lheureux makes sure Emma has all the fixes she needs and wants, always with an eye on his pocket. She was perfect for his business because she was unable to refuse what he offered her in her pursuit and craving for the trappings and dreams of Romance, and he knew it. It was this addiction to Romance which led to her death.

At a distance now from reading this book, I see how Flaubert managed to satirize nearly everything about which he wrote. He satirizes marriage, not just with Charles and Emma, but with the Homais. He satirizes motherhood, not just with Emma, but with Madame Homais, Madame Bovary Senior and the wet nurse and Charles's mother. He satirizes fatherhood. He satirizes religion. You've all made points about that. He satirizes education. He satirizes the aristocracy through the description of the party and dance where Emma did not want Charles to dance. He satirizes the landed gentry with Rodolphe. He satirizes practitioners of medicine with Charles and the other doctor whose name I can't remember at this hour. He satirizes science with Homais.

He satirizes virtues like honesty with Homais, Charles, Emma, Leon and Rodolphe and a few others. He satirizes women, and he satirizes men. He satirizes peasants in the form of the woman who'd worked the same job for fifty-four years and the farmers, including Father Bovary and Emma's father. He satirizes children like the ones at the church to learn their catechism, Homais' children, Berthe and the children of the wet nurse. He satirizes politicians and government at the agricultural fair. He satirizes the bourgeoisie. He satirizes the poor, the lame, the halt, and those who suffer other physical problems. He satirizes students and earnest young men with Leon. He satirizes stupidity. There's more. I noticed all this one night when I began to laugh at his cleverness and his distaste for nearly everyone and everything. Was there anyone or anything Flaubert really liked and respected who missed the point of his pen, I wonder?

He has exaggerated every character in the book. The one he seems to dislike less than others in my mind is Homais, who is often his mouthpiece, the one who comes out quite a winner eventually. Virtue, honesty and goodness don't win in Flaubert's eyes.

Flaubert didn't care about Emma or anyone represented in the book. They were vehicles for what he was trying to do. In my opinion, Flaubert has successfully torn down every institution I can think of. And that, I believe, was his aim.

Mal

Mal, you are right on the mark, if you believe the article in the link I posted in the French discussion and I translated this quote from it by popular French author.

As Jean d’Ormesson notices : "Two fundamental traits appear from childhood in Flaubert : “A certain fascination of evil, of suffering, of the horrible, and the taste for information that is a little sinister, on daily events that will lead to a rather impressive document”"

Flaubert writes what he thinks society really is behind the front it presents to the world. The story is not about Emma, he said "Madame Bovary, c'est moi".

Eloïse

Barbara, thanks for explaining where you're at with Emma. A loss of innocence that falls away in a series of incidents engendered by society (?) or herself (?)

______________________________________________

FATE AND THE DANCING BEAR

Rodolphe says/thinks again and again 'its fate, its fate; it isn't me, its fate.' Does he believe it? While Cassius in Julius Caesar was honest and told Brutus 'it isn't fate (the stars) but you and I. We choose to act as we do.'

In Ch 12 Rodolphe won't be moved by words of love from Emma as his heart is hardened. The author ironically calls Rodolphe's hardened heart 'fate': "...fullness of soul can sometimes overflow in utter vapidity of language, for none of us can ever express the exact measure of his needs or his thoughts or his sorrows, and human speech is like a cracked kettle on which we tap crude rhythms for bears to dance to, while we long to make music that will melt the stars." The stars then are fate, but Flaubert is pointing to Rodolphe's unaccepting, unresponsive heart as the star, the true cause and not fate. And we read a number of times in Madame Bovary how people call their actions 'fate.'

Rodolphe plotted a way to get Emma's love but when talking to her, he calls it fate; when ridding himself of her, he calls it fate.

At the Agricultural Show Ch 8, Rodolphe courts Emma with the words "if two poor souls do find one another, everything is organized to keep them apart...(but) never fear! Sooner of later ... they'll come together and love one another, because they can't go against fate and because they were born for each other."

Rodolphe drops out of Emma's life for six weeks following the Agricultural Show in order to increase her desire for him. In Ch 9 when he comes back to her he says "I don't know what power it was that made me come. We can't fight against fate. There's no resisting when an angel smiles."

In Ch 11 Charles Bovary botches an operation that he wasn't qualified to perform on Hippolyte who gets worse instead of better and amputation is necessary. This time the surgery is performed by an M.D. Chalres blames fate for the botched operation he performed: "What a misfortune! he was thinking. What a disappointment! Certainly he had taken all conceivable precautions. Fate had played a hand in it." He wonders if he could have made a mistake but then, no, all precautions had been taken. Here we see that Charles wavers in accepting responsibility, but eventually decides 'it's fate.'

I'll continue to look into fate as we read to see when it is mentioned in Madame Bovary.

Marvelle

Malryn yes, every aspect of this story seems to be an exercise in satire - each incident is like a TV news event - almost predictable as the reader can see the handwriting on the wall - the books saving grace is the beautiful language and metaphors that Flaubert chooses.

Marvelle I have had to distance myself from these characters - I have become too angry with the box and limited resources allowed Emma - Fate indeed - just, in my opinion, Flaubert's excuse for keeping Emma so boxed in, limited and dependent - she reminds me of the runt of the litter who grows up with this deformity and there is no one around to help her learn how to live a more fulfilling life within the box and with her deformity.

The bit about becoming a mother broke my heart many years ago and still breaks my heart today - alone with no mother or mother-in-law to help her learn how to be a mother - this is not a time in history where Emma could get books on raising or caring for a baby - her stations in life demands certain socially responsible practices to manage herself and her baby after birth that do not engender the maternal aspects of motherhood.

The kicker for me was - the socially correct practice of having to send her infant to a wet nurse - the result is Emma never bonds with her baby - and then acting on the little maternal instinct left she eagerly, before the 6 weeks (the time that was typical for a women to virtually stay in bed after birth and not be in public without the special blessings administered by the church) she goes to see her baby

Once there, she is faced with such slovenly conditions and this is where she must leave her child! - This farm isn't even on the caliber of her father's farmhouse which was the peasantry she had married out of -

I too could see her wanting to distance herself since there was no choice, she had to leave her daughter in these conditions which were so far beyond Emma's ability to create order and beauty. How do you cope with that sinking feeling knowing your baby must nurse in order to survive but in conditions that you could never imagine being so bad.

I also think that Emma was looking for a picture perfect baby who would be on her side - just as many young mothers today think they will be happy when they have their very own baby -

Emma had already reacted to her baby as a daughter, a girl, as she her mother, 'a women' would be "checkmated at every turn. Flexible yet powerless to move, she has at once her physical disabilities and her economic dependence in the scales against her. Her will, like the veil of her bonnet, is tied to a string and flutters in every wind. Whenever a desire impels, there is always a convention that restrains."

Emma manner of operating within this dependency was to use all her energy into being a perfect, well-groomed lady who continues her search for knowledge and skills beyond the commonplace place - she is alone in her pursuit - no other women to help her adapt to motherhood within this box -

I think she imagined a baby who would be her secret partner and be as fastidious as Emma is - having the baby, who is not loved because of a mother infant bond but rather as an extension of herself, for this baby to do something so commonplace as to be sick on her beautiful lace collar, I think Emma saw that as a loss - her idea of this bond between mother and girl/child with limited freedom dependent on men, she perceived this bond was gone - her idea of this bond included a baby that was perfect and beautiful in looks and manner.

Had Emma naturally bonded with her baby and, if she had some guidance as to how to be a mother and, if she had a wet nurse in her home or at least one that lived in some manner of order, if not beauty, I think then Emma would have eagerly visited her daughter often with joy in her heart -

We may see that Emma was not realistic in what she expected from her baby - but then her baby was not an individual separate from Emma's self-esteem - Emma never wanted a child and was devastated to learn she had a girl - again, she had no resources to learn how to be a mother nor, opportunity for bonding with the baby and then the low blow of the baby being placed in an environment not even equal Emma's childhood home much less if the marquise had had a baby.

I think Emma had to distance herself from that slovenly environment and as the old saying "she threw the baby out with the bathwater" until the child was old enough when she no longer needed to nurse and could be brought home.

Emma left the cottage reacting in her typical system of taking herself, her mind to another realm beyond the commonplace to observe nature in its glory and to put her head into heady thoughts that would transport her to 'ethereal heights' with Leon as a complementing gentleman at her side.

Frankly, given her box her only other choice would be to get angry - venting rage would not help her, she would end up with less power like Charles' first wife, nor would venting rage allow her to be the ‘Princess’ the crowned cultured lady of the bourgeois.

Thanks to all of you for carrying on this discussion in such a super way while I was not here! I hope that I will be here for the remainder of the discussion.

I have a few new points for you to discuss.

Compare and contrast the characters of Charles and Rodolphe.

What do you think of Emma's reaction to Rodolphe's betrayal?

Is it possible that Emma really loved Rodolphe?

Let's hear your thoughts on these things.

Joan

Was "Madame Bovary" ever made into an opera ? I finished reading the book and that last chapter and the death scene certainly reminded me of an opera (perhaps several) that I've seen. I had trouble falling asleep after I put the book down. I also felt sorry for Madame Homais for being married to such an evil man. I must say, the only thing that kept me reading was G. Flaubert's painterly poetic words. Which reminds me, if anyone is interested "The Painted House" will be on CBS-TV on Sunday, April 27th.

Found this book very difficult to keep reading. I prefer the English style of writing for that period. Guess I just don't understand Flaubert!

Carolyn

I am very anxious to reply to several posts but find myself hampered by the fact that I have only ONE telephone line and must keep it open for news from my California daughter whose husband, totally unexpectely, was hospitalized and scheduled to undergo cardiac catherization today to determine the extent of whatever damage.

So far I have not heard, am anxious, and will keep my telephone line open for calls.

I will post when I can. Thank you all.

Glad you are back and feeling OK Joan

Truade your daughter is in my prayers -

EmmaBarb, a big gold star to you - yes, I agree the writing and the pictures he paints in words are glorious but Opera - Soap Opera - oh my talk about making all the world fit into a shoe-box-stage -

My thought is that like the aristocrats, middle class women may have been frustrated decorations when there was a Kingdom rather than a Republic when women had a role to play. I kept thinking of the great difference between Marrianne, the symbol of French Liberty and Marie Antonette having the use of money to build her rustic village to play house in, another version of a frustrated women with no role except to look pretty, shop, and attract the attention of men.

I'm still plugging away reading...

I was off line most of the afternoon, waiting for news from California daughter. Son-in-law's problem was discovered in the nick of time and, it is hoped, can be controlled with medication. If all goes as expected, the patient will be released tomorrow.

All the while, thoughts about MB kept percolating. And here are some of them.

Emma is the focal point of the story and, if we could imagine this as a play, we'd see Emma center stage with two satellites : Leon and Rodolphe. This is not a play, but Flaubert has carefully, meticulously sketched every character in this novel just the same. The writing is superb : the landscapes are beautifully described. And when brevity is called for, there it is : "Mayor Tuvache bent like a bow". Can one get more descriptive in so few words ?

So here I am thinking that, in the end, there were ultimately only two actors left on the stage : Emma and LHeureux. And the reader can feel that LHeureux's presnce is evil.

BARBARA, all your points about Emma are well taken and I thank you for outlining them here. As for me, I have grave doubts about Emma's state of mind. What are we, the readers, to think about her wild mood swings, the extremes - indeed the dramatic - changes she underwent when Leon left ?

She displayed all the symptoms of acute neurosis (and more besides !!), jubilant one day, deep down the next day, always blaming others for her sacrifices and problems), and very little concern for anyone but herself.P>

Please forgive me, it has been a long day for me, so I'll leave you now ...

Joan G, glad to see you back!!

Traude, am glad to see you here, glad the condition was caught in time!

Well have finally caught up to Chapter 15 and this is the last DAY for it ahahahah so will have to talk fast!

Marvelle way back there I thought what you said about the cracked pot and the bear thing (I did not know you had lived in TURKEY, my goodness!!) but the connection you made to human communication was brilliant, I thought, took my breath away!

I am using the Bantam text with the Bair translation and I need to go into the French discussion and see what some of these things are!

Am so enjoying everybody's posts here and all the various points of view.

Barb, I thought of you the other night when reading about Emma and Leon at the opera and how they treated Charles. First they were bored and had to leave, Charles was really enjoying himself. Then o the guy was at his PEAK in the last scenes, it would be a shame to miss it (in other words Emma to stay).

Am I the only reader who was furious at that point? Charles, who had loved it and not wanted to leave, says of his love for Emma, I can't stay but you must. It never occurs to him to say but you deprived me of it, his only thought is for her.

THAT is love, putting the other person first.

Emma? Miss Emma? Well I am not sure which religion she is espousing, but it's one without guilt. She does not feel the least bit sorry for what she just did to Charles, but I do. Charles deserves better than Emma.

EMMABarb! I just caught that! What do you think of your namesake??

The operation? What a horror. Here we have the irony of goodness and simplicity even more than Charles's, destroyed by vain ambition, Emma's and Homais's, What a horror. Have you ever seen a club foot? I have, you don't see them much any more but he had managed very well with it. Homais is quite a strange personality, isn't he?

I notice also, is this the first time or have I not been paying attention? In the case of Hippolyte (what does that mean?) Flaubert actually makes a moral judgment:

Chapter XI:

Through long use it had taken on what might almost be called moral qualities of patience and determination…."

So here we have a direct contrast with moral qualities versus the forces of …what? Ignorance? Immoral qualities ? Would you say Emma is behaving in a moral fashion in this part?

I found it interesting that the lady who had the drink spilled down her back "screamed like a peacock as though she were being murdered." As I noted in the beginning of the discussion, there's nothing like the sound of a peacock, you'd call 911 in a heartbeat if you ever heard one.

I thought this also was interesting, in Chapter IV, "The theater," he said, "was useful because it ridiculed prejudice, and under the guise of entertainment it taught virtue."

Now that's interesting to me, is that the definition OF Satire? How are satire and irony different? I see a LOT of irony in this part.

EF Benson's Mapp and Lucia do that very thing, he satirizes pretension and teaches virtue by it but it's gentle and kind, so is Hyacinth Bucket (Bouquet) of the Keeping Up Appearances series, that's, possibly satire?

I'm seeing contempt here in this part, and irony, it's hard for me to know where the one stops and the other starts.

Here's another interesting quote, "It was for him that she had made all those sacrifices, for that creature, that man who understood nothing, felt nothing." (Chapter XI after the operation where she ponders the loss of her reputation because of the botched mess.)

WHAT sacrifices? What do you all see she has sacrificed here?

Was it EmmaBarb who asked about her father? (How can you have finished? It's all I can do …I'm with Carolyn here,) some of the passages go wonderfully quickly and some of them drag, have you noticed? I wonder why? It's the same author) Anyway, there was the letter, and she read it and then…..? She thought of her own life, she repented, nothing more about the father? He's not doing well? He has not seen his granddaughter? nothing? Nothing but I was happy then? Me me me, but she repents, I can't figure this out? Does she realize she is well off after all?

I may have missed something in hurrying to finish?

When Emma reads her father's letter she is transported beck to that happy ?!? rustic life with lots of farm images:

(Chapter X)

she followed the gentle thoughts that cackled through them like ahen half hidden in a thorn hedge….

There had been a beehive beneath her window, and sometimes the bees, buzzing around in the sunlight, would strike against the panes like bouncing golden balls.

What happiness there had been in those days! What freedom! What hope! What an abundance of illusions! She had none left now….and then the passage of her leaving stuff by the side of the road like a traveler (very fine writing) as she progressed thru life.

Wonderful word pictures, the simile of the golden balls, marvelous, just wonderful. Did you know a honey bee, which will die if it stings you, tries first to avoid that by hitting you in the back? They'll throw themselves at your back, wham, wham, in an effort to drive you away first, if they can. We have bee hives here and a bee keeper, I sure as heck won't go near them. He says other than approaching the hives, the most dangerous thing you can do is get between them and where they're going early in the day, get in their path, they don't appreciate that. You can be sure our paths don't cross hahaahaha.

I guess I want to say her illusions are what is wrong with her now? What more freedom could she have then than she does now? I would say she's overwhelmed with illusions, myself?

ginny

Ginny there are people even today who will never be happy no matter how fortunate they seem to others. I know some of these people and no doubt you do too! Emma is one of these people and Flaubert in my opinion in this book has made a great to do about nothing! Maybe this book was written like a modern day pot boiler. A bit of sensation (the book was sensational for its time) lots of sales and recognition in a big way for the author. I think the book is a bit too flowery!

Carolyn

Orgeat (OHR-zhat) is an old English word related to the Italian "orzata" which means almond. The original version of this sweet syrup was made with a barley-almond blend. Today its made with almonds, sugar and rose water or orange flavored water. Has a pronounced almond taste and is used to flavor beverages. The classic recipe of orgeat cappucino is 1/2 oz orgeat, 4 oz milk, and 1-2 shots espresso.

For more recipes CLICK HERE

Click on the icon 'Recipe Gallery' and scroll down to type of drinks and flavoring. Open the flavoring button and scroll to Orgeat/Almond and click to get various recipes, from hot beverages to cold sodas.

Marvelle

Here's the picture of the Dancing Bear in case Ginny missed it. It agrees with my memory of the dancing bears of Turkey with the cooking pot used as a drum and the muzzled and leashed bear. Gives a very tight and constrained feeling and shows the limits of both music and dance. I think Francis Steegmuller had seen this entertainment because he translated its sense so well.

Ginny asked some questions regarding different translations. Here's Francis Steegmuller's translation of Emma reading her father's letter:

"She sat for a few minutes with the sheet of coarse paper in her hand. The letter was thick with spelling mistakes, and Emma brooded on the affectionate thought that crackled through them like a hen half hidden in a thorn hedge. Her father had dried his writing with ash from the fireplace, for a bit of gray dust drifted out of the letter onto her dress, and she could almost see the old man bending down toward the hearth to take up the tongs. How long it was since she had sat there beside him, on the fireseat, burning the end of a stick in the flame of the crackling furze! She remembered summer evenings, full of sunshine. The foals would whinny when anyone came near, and gallop and gallop to their hearts' content. There had been a beehive under her window, and sometimes the bees, wheeling in the light, would strike against the panes like bouncing golden balls. How happy she had been in those days! How free! How full of hope! How rich in illusions! There were no illusions left now! She had had to part with some each time she had ventured on a new path, in each of her successive conditions -- as virgin, as wife, as mistress; all along the course of her life she had been losing them like a traveler leaving a bit of his fortune in every inn along the road."

___________________________________

The other bits of the novel that Ginny mentioned are short and I'll list her Bair translation next to my Steegmuller translation:

Bair, Part 2 Ch 12: "But, with the shrewdness of those who hold themselves aloof in any relationship, Rodolphe saw other pleasures to be developed in his affair with Emma."

Steegmuller, Part 2 Ch 12: "But, with the superior acumen of those who keep aloof in any relationship, Rodolphe discovered that the affair offered still further possibilities of sensual gratifications."

__________________________________

Part 2 Ch 15 where Charles encourages Emma to stay over in Rouen to see the opera with Leon --

Bair: "Come on, make up your mind to stay! You'd be wrong not to if you feel there's any chance it would do you good."

Steegmuller: "You can come home Sunday. Yes, make up your mind to do it. You'd be wrong not to, if you think there's the slightest chance it might do you some good."

____________________________________

Ginny, when you can compare the French to Baird and Steegmuller, can you tell me how close they are to the emotions, sense, and feeling of Flaubert?

Marvelle

Sure, and I did see the bear photo, thanks so much, I have seen them before in person somewhere, but I can't remember where, miserable type of thing, isn't it?

I've put a lot of things in the French discussion and I also put a link to here and your orgeat post, (thank you for that, too) and when we see what the actual French is we can know who's closer!

That's quite a difference there you cite on the Part II Chapter 15!!!

I'm still not happy with the Come on...what do the rest of you have? Do you all have Bair and Steegmuller?

Traude, how is that muller pronounced? What does the umlaut do to a word like muller? I've always wondered?

Carolyn, I thought about what you said all afternoon, yes I do know people who are not happy, it's not true that money brings happiness, and who live in the clouds half of the time but the CRUELTY the deliberate meanness, to me, that's something else. She's just mean.

I think there's a lot of wisdom in what else you say also, about the "pot boiler" hahaha was that a deliberate reference to the cracked pot? Love it, I can see why it was sensational I think, it ridicules the church, that alone would send a good churchman in orbit and she seems pretty feckless about these affairs, actually.

Has it struck any of you that Leon now is also a boulevardier and she ...who loves the most there?

I need to read on!

ginny

AS I asked in the questions do think she actually loved Rodolphe. I wonder ...is she really capable of love?

When I read and studied this book years ago I felt very sorry for her. With this reading I seem to have seen it a bit differently. Being older seems to have made me look at all in a different way.

Joan

The French version has: "Tu reviendras dimanche. Voyons, décide-toi! tu as tort, si tu sens le moins du monde que cela te fait du bien..

I translate that as meaning: "You can come back Sunday. Come, come, make up your mind, you are wrong if it makes you feel good the least little bit." (preceding this, Emma pretends to prefer to go home, but down deep she wants to stay in Rouen with Leon)

Steegmuller: "You can come home Sunday. Yes, make up your mind to do it. You'd be wrong not to, if you think there's the slightest chance it might do you some good."

Bair: "Come on, make up your mind to stay! You'd be wrong not to if you feel there's any chance it would do you good."

Steegmuller is a better translator, in my opinion.

Eloïse

Ginny,

The scene in the theatre struck me in precisely the same way. Actually, Emma herself initially enjoyed the opera; she even saw herself in Lucia! But when Leon entered the box, he and their unconsummated love became more important than what was going on on the stage, and poor Charles let himself be dragged away.

I agree with Carolyn that Emma would never have been satisfied anywhere with anyone. She wasn't capable of love, she knew the word but had no idea what it meant. She was shallow, self-involved, self-pitying and cruel to her husband and child. The pot boiler analogy is a good one, Carolyn.

Don't you just hate it when you write out a whole post and loose the whole thing with a stroke of a key - and then trying to reconstruct the post is never that easy - the words just do not flow - ah so

Yes, I think she not only loved Rodolphe but saw in him her chance to be free. The concept of moving away from your troubles still is a solution many people consider but I think Emma's past would soon catch up with her - as I have shared she seems to be looking to fill the hole left with her after the death of her mother and being left alone in the convent - because her self-esteem is wrapped up in winning, being crowned a winner and attracting the admiration of men - she did not see through Rodolphe because she saw what she wanted to see -

After that bitter loss I think she just doesn't care anymore - she even says something to Leon indicating she does not trust that men would keep their word - I think she feels betrayed and is just satisfying herself.

At this point Charles could be a 'dancing bear' and he would not impress - she lost respect for him a long way back there and he keeps trying to be nice by doing things for her - which is not the stuff of creating intimacy - as we have all seen in recent years the number of men who are about the business of success and money, giving all the things money can buy to the family rather than time to be interested in his wife and then wonders why the children aren't his friends and his wife divorces him.

Earning success and money is not the cornerstone for Charles but he is wrapped up in himself looking at Emma as someone who brings him pleasure rather than listening to her and really finding out about her and her interests - there is never a conversation between Emma and Charles similar to the ones between Emma and Leon or a passion explored between Emma and Charles as there is between Emma and Rodolphe -

And so my comment about Charles and his taking Emma to the Opera - He is bored and childlike he wants her attention to explain the story to him that he finds difficult to understand - neither have seen the Opera and she wants to enjoy it - then after Leon comes and suggests they leave only then, toward the end, did Charles finally becoming interested in the story and music and wants to stay to enjoy the Opera - it's simply too little too late. He is not mean or a wife beater - he does not abuse her - he is simply more interested in his pleasures with little interest in uncovering the real Emma or learning of her interests and desires.

Not exactly the stuff of a young marriage - he makes a great kind husband for someone in their 50s or 60s after they have run through 25 years of their passion and they know each other backwards and forwards. Charles is the perfect husband for a Patriarchal society where women have a limited role and are not supposed to think, or be smart, or are not to be the center of interest except, they should look the center of interest, take care of a man's emotional needs and therefore, they do not need interested conversation to be happy?!?

From here-on-in it appears to be downhill for Emma - evidently where we (maybe it is just me) have an issue with her having a lover, it is 'THE THING' for a French women to do and even that did not bringing her completeness - she gave up on Charles being a successful scintillating or passionate man a long time ago - she has let her ability to manage her home and the finances go by the boards - she does not see the affair with Leon going further - all to say she is looking for more - and her reason for marrying, to me is the key - every incident since is more of the same - looking for the "wonderful passion...places which naturally brought forth happiness."

When Charles came to les Bertaux for the first time, she regarded herself as vastly disillusioned, one for whom life had nothing new to offer, either in knowledge or experience.

But her longing for a change; possibly, too, the unrest caused by a masculine presence, had sufficed to make her believe that she was at last possessed of that wonderful passion which, till then, had hovered like a great bird with roseate wings, floating in the splendour of poetic skies; and now she could not believe that her present unemotional state was the bliss whereof she had dreamed.

It seemed to her that there were certain places on the earth which naturally brought forth happiness, as though it were a plant native to the soil, which could not thrive elsewhere.

Emma says many times she wants freedom - instead she is walled-in behind convent walls - the loss of her mother is like being abandoned and she is walled inside herself to handle alone her emotional growth into womanhood - she is walled into a marriage where her wish for passion does not materialize and all she represents to her husband is her excellent skills and duties as a wife and homemaker - she is walled into a lack of renown because her husband is not ambitious and she has no avenue for her own ambition - walled-in by having a child she did not want - walled in as the cure is not open to her needs - walled-in to further loneliness by not having a mother-in-law who is a confidante - walled-in from escape when Rodolphe abandons her - from here on all I see is her decorating her walled-in-box with Leon and anything else that pleases her.

I do not see Madame Bovary as a sex hungry female. Is it possible that are thoughts and feelings are not shallow but so deep that we can not understand her? I am thinking she missed her calling. In some way, she became a person she never wanted to become. I am reminded of "Back When We Were Grownups."

Is it possible that Madame Bovary's calling is not one of motherhood or marriage? I see her as a religious person. Look at these quotes,

"Instead of following the Mass, she looked at the blue-boarded religious pictures in her book: she loved at the sick sheep, the Sacred Heart pierced by sharp arrows, and poor Jesus stumbling and falling beneath his cross. She tried to fast, for a whole day, to mortify herself. She tried to think of some vow she could fulfill."

Every evening before prayers a passage from some religious work was read aloud in the study hall...How intently she listened."

"She was overcome with celestial bliss when she advanced her lips to receive the body of the Saviour...She now saw that there was a bliss greater than worldly happiness, and a different kind of love transcending all others, a constant, endless love that would grow through all eternity!...She resolved to become a saint. She bought rosaries and wore holy medals; she wished she could have an emerald-studded reliquary at the head of her bed so that she could kiss it every night."

I think Charles is the culprit. To live without emotion is to be a dead person. He did not FEEL. He did not hear the cries of Hippolyte. One track, he kept thinking about what he could have done better. He never related, personally, to his gruesome mistake.

"Charles looked at her with the clouded eyes of a drunken man as he listened to the amputee's last screams; they came in a succession of long, varied tones interspersed with short, fitful shrieks, like the howling of some animal being slaughtered far away."

On a different note, I do not think Emma loved Rudolphe or any of those men, including Charles. She was in search of her true self. With Barbara, I think it is a book about loss.

I posted a few days ago that to me Emma shows every symptom of having an addiction problem, and that I think she's addicted to Romance. I'd like to expand on that a bit.

My computer dictionary has this as one definition of romance: "A mysterious or fascinating quality or appeal, as of something adventurous, heroic, or strangely beautiful."

It is this elusive, hard-to-describe thing that Emma seeks. The feelings she had in the convent and romantic novels and poetry she read gave her a taste of it. Falling in love gave her the same mystical feelings she had in the convent and those she had when she read books about knights and princesses and romantic love. She was looking for a kind of rapture that doesn't exist, and she was compelled to seek it. She was, in fact, obsessed by this search.

Have you ever known an alcoholic? People who are addicted to alcohol are looking for the same kind of rapturous "high" that Emma so desperately sought. Between binges of drinking, the alcoholic can be sweet, kind, neat, orderly, a lovely person with whom to be. In fact, they act the same way Emma does when the craving she has is not on her, and her mind is in another place besides the one compelled by addiction.

When the craving returns the alcoholic will do anything for a drink, and he or she will be ruthless in the search for one. It is revealed in this book that Emma will do anything to be with the lover who, temporarily at least, brings her the rapture she desires and physically and emotionally needs.

When alcohol is taken away from a person addicted to alcohol, he or she goes into a state of withdrawal which makes that person terribly depressed and often very sick. When Rodolphe left her, Emma became sick in this way.

In the online version of Madame Bovary, Flaubert says in Chapter 19:

"LITTLE by little Rodolphe's apprehensions began to take hold of her. Her passion had intoxicated her at first, and she had no thoughts beyond it. But now, when love had become indispensable to her life, she was afraid of losing even a piece of it, or of having it interfered with in any way."

This is exactly how a person addicted to alcohol feels when the threat of removal of alcohol arises.

If my supposition is correct and Flaubert drew Emma as a person addicted to Romance, I'll say that she could not help herself. Her need for a kind of rapture was beyond her control. This need had nothing to do with loss or love or a religious calling. It had to do with a craving that would never be fulfilled, a hunger that would never be satisfied because the means of fulfillment and satisfaction do not exist in the real world.

Poor Emma. Poor Charles. Most of all, I pity their poor child.

Mal

Yes, Hats I still see this as a book about loss - and the idea of the religious is interesting but let me take a twist on it - I think it is her spirit - her inner connection to something beyond herself that today we call spirituality but for many is wrapped up in a particular religion - in Emma's case the quotes you have shown us is saying Emma has used the devotions of a particular religion but, I think like you say, she is looking for those "Ethereal Heights" - I see her looking everywhere for them - not just in religion - I think she wants the healing of her spirit and again I see her spirit as being the lonely abandoned little girl whose why of feeling accepted was to be very very good - get the crown - receive the complements of men - the applause of those enjoying a high income status and the high arts especially music.

I can see where Marlyn sees Emma as having an addiction but as I learned, an addiction, although trying to cover a hole with activities other than having a relationship with God and living from your own truth looks much like the behavior of the Mystics and other religious who sought God in a way that would appear to many as an obsession. Hehehe no one was more obsessively intoxicated with God than St. John of the Cross.

On a dark night, Kindled in love with yearnings -
oh, happy chance!-
I went forth without being observed, My house being
now at rest
In darkness and secure, By the secret ladder, disguised...

In the present we have many doctrines of salvation around, none appeal more to the American mind than the Pelagian view. We hear this phrase echoed again and again - "God helps those who help themselves" or "You got to pull yourself up by your own bootstraps." Pelagius, a monk, was on this road of total dependence on self to arrive at salvation. In response St. Augustine states there are three principal errors in the Pelagian Heresy - one being - "the grace of God whereby we are justified is not given freely, but according to our merit" versus; "The soul naturally cleaves to Divine Unity."

Flaubert's association with the Church would include the theology of St. Augustine, the Father of Western Christianity. St. Augustine wrote, the way to God is the way of the intellect, not just a rational or conceptual mind but the higher, contemplative mind. The light in which the intellect knows spiritual realities, or ‘ideas,’ is God. Instead of a union with God in the darkness, Augustine envisions a participation in God through the knowledge.

Augustine says God is found not simply by turning inward to the center of the soul but, further, by turning upward. Augustine “invents” the private, inner space of the soul, where this upward movement takes place. This is the beginnings of the separation between God and the human person therefore, God must be sought outside of ourselves through outward devotion and knowledge.

This would justify Emma’s reading, studying, started in the convent and her desire for "Ethereal Heights" - What I see is, as a young girl Emma was not guided toward understanding her value but rather was taught the love and peace of God was found in study and devotion to God. Having determined not to become a religious nun she adapted the means to find the love and peace that her soul craved in others, who all disappointed and took advantage of her - and in her practice of being and looking the perfect lady that would attract men's compliments.

Charles loved Emma because of how she made him feel, because of how she took care of him - The cure was too busy with the corporal needs of his parishioners to guide Emma with her with her spiritual work - Rodolphe took advantage of her passion without any intention of taking her away or even the vaguest notion of returning a like passion, he being simply a practiced man of the boudoir - Leon came closest but society pulled on him to leave her for his own future success - According to several links, Rouault was not a true loving father since he did not put much time or haggle over her Dowry showing he just wanted her to be taken care of so he could have his own comforts (do not know the practice of negotiating a Dowry to make the judgement myself) but I did notice Roualt liked his comfort that was more important to him then seeing Bertha at the time of Emma’s funeral - and then Lheureaux, Oh My he was able to swindle and weasel his swindling with Guillaumins in it for the kill.

The bit in the book that impressed me was when Rouault is leaving to go back to Les Bertaux after the funeral - when he reaches the summit of the hill and turns back seeing the village lit by the rays of the sun he shields his eyes and "looked in the distance, where he saw a walled enclosure in which the treetops showed black between white stones." That for me sums up Emma's life - walled-in and black betwen white.

Following minor eye surgery this morning my vision is still blurred, so I will be brief.

My impression is very much like MAL's and CAROLYN's evaluations of Emma. I believe the words "mystical", "rapture" and "ruthless" are especially appropriate.

If Emma was forever marked by the loss of her mother, wouldn't, in fact SHOULDN't she have tried harder, given more attention, more time to her child (only a girl!) and more strength, to prepare her for life as a woman ?! Am I alone to see her as a vastly detached, indifferent mother ?

What sacrifices did she make, exactly ? Giving up her dreams ? Don't we all have to do that to some extent when we grow up ? What did she have to complain about, to Rodolphe, to Leon ? She had Félicité, the maid, later a silent conspirator, clean up after her literally and figuratively, and mind the child when she was away. Charles may have been obtuse, a poor lover, but he was not unloving; he cared for her and his daughter, he had feelings !

Emma had only illusions, unrealizables ones, at that.

Since we are not seeking consensus here, I will not belabor my view of Emma any longer.

Truade my take on that is she one, had no clue as to how since Bertha only represented the loss of freedom that she knew would be her girl child's legacy as a women - since she did not know how to shield Bertha from that legacy she distanced herself from Bertha and also Emma could not receive a crown of excellence for something beyond her ability to solve.

I remember when during the early 70s women were first trying to prepare themselves to compete head to head with men and many of us had no idea how to prepare our girls for what lie ahead so we involved our menfolk in activities like Girl Scouting etc. just to teach our girls how to function and succeed - in affect we abandoned our tradition roles as role-model mothers and caretakers.

I believe I remember that Emma fainted when she learned she'd given birth to a girl. I see no sign that she even liked her child, much less loved her, but that is my view of this book and not necessarily that of anyone else.

From what I read about Flaubert elsewhere, Homais' views about religion were Flaubert's own. Do you think this is a proper assessment?

As far as I'm concerned, the only way to know how an addict feels about addiction is either to ask one or be one. We all have opinions, which are at least partially based on our own experiences. I have not asked, and do not ask, anyone to agree with mine. All of the thoughtful views expressed here are of great interest to me.

Mal

Traude, at first, I felt that Emma distanced herself from her child. Now, I think that she loved Berthe, but she could not see how to save Berthe from the same miserable existence she was living.

Charles? It is just impossible that he can be without fault. Sometime, men are the perfect providers, but they miss taking care of the emotional needs of their family. It takes more than bringing home the bacon. I think Charles used Emma as a trophy wife. She is beautiful, and he willingly lived in the shadow of her glory.

How can we overlook the way he botched Hippolyte's leg? It seems so easy to find fault with Emma and not Charles. I think Emma lived in a loveless marriage. Devoirce was not an option. I think she looked to men and religion to save her. She found help in neither place because it was a patriarchial society. When she went to the priest for help, he did not see or hear Emma. To him, she was invisible. She was just another woman with a nervous malady. Her problem was not important.

I had been reading the book using several sites on the Internet and finally last week purchased a paper back copy - does your texts include the translated Trial of Madam Bovary? Talk about nineteenth century Patriarchal views - OH My - on both sides - the arguments for the Prosecution AND the arguments for the Defense -

The charge was Outrage against morality and religion - the Counsel for the Defense is Monsieur Marie-Antonine -Jules Sénard who spoke glowingly of Flaubert’s father’s 30 years as chief surgeon at the Rouen Hospital and about his older brother who succeeded his father and how Gustave, the younger one, is a man of obligation to the large fortune and great name of his father, who left his two boys courageous and useful men. No mention of the daughter other than there was a sister - I guess she isn’t courageous -

This goes on as an introduction that his life is of study and letters with this being his first work which “excites the passions and is the result of long study and long meditation... Monsieur Flaubert is a serious and grave man who embraced not only all the branches of literature but also of law and who is not content with the observations of his own sphere; he has studied other spheres: Qui mores multorun videt et urbes.”

He explains Flaubert belongs less to the romantic school, as the school of realism but to the psychological school, not the materialistic side of things, but the human feelings and unfolding of the passions within their given sphere...."The second title of this work is The Story of the Adulteries of a Provincial Wife I emphatically protest this title."

Now get this - and this is the Defense! -

"If you must absolutely have a second title, the story of the education too often given in the provinces; the story of the dangers to which it can lead, the story of degradation, of villainy, of a suicide seen as the consequence of an early transgression, and of a transgression that was itself induced by the first misstep into which a young women is often led; it is a story an education; the deplorable life to which this sort of education is too often the preface. This is what Monsieur Flaubert has wanted to paint, and not the adulteries of a provincial wife; you will recognize this at once on reading the accused work.

Now what is it that Monsieur Gustave Flaubert has wanted to paint? In the first lace, the education given a woman that was above the station to which she was born (as happens with us, it must be said, all too often) and the resulting mixture of incongruous elements this produces in the woman’s understanding; and then, when her marriage comes, as the marriage is suitable not to her education but to the station into which she was born, the author has described all the events that take place in the position that has been made for her.

What else does it show? He shows a woman turning to vice from an unsuitable marriage, and from vice to the last stages of degradation and misery. Presently, after reading various passages...I will ask the court for liberty to state the questions in these terms: if this book were placed in the hands of a young woman, could it have the effect of drawing her toward dissipation and toward adultery, or the contrary, would it show her the danger from the start and cause her to shudder with horror? ...

...Monsieur Flaubert has wanted to paint the woman who instead of trying to be contented with her given station, with her situation and her birth, instead of trying to live the life that belongs to her, is troubled by a thousand alien aspirations derived from an education that has been to elevated for her; who instead of adapting to the duties of her position, instead of being the contented wife of the country doctor with whom she spends her days, instead of seeking happiness in her home and her marriage, seeks it in interminable daydreams and who then, very soon, when she encounters a young man who flirts with her, plays the same game (God knows they are inexperienced, the two of them!)...on resorting to the religion of her early years, she does not find sufficient strength in it -...she becomes acquainted with a man like so many others, of whom there are all too many in the world, a man who takes hold of her, poor spoiled woman, and seduces her..."

Hehehehe - now get this - again this is the DEFENSE! Easy to see where some of the views for women’s behavior came and how they still unfortunately hang around...

The man to whom she had entrusted and given herself had taken her only to play with for an instant, like a toy; remorse consumes her, it rends her. What has shocked you has been to hear this called the "disillusionments" of adultery; you would have preferred the writer to have said the "defilements" for this woman who, not having understood marriage, had felt herself defiled by her husband’s touch, and who after having sought elsewhere for her ideal and found instead the disillusionments of adultery.

I would say to her: "Poor woman! If you thing your husband’s kisses are something boring and monotonous, if you find in them - it is the world that has been pointed out - only the platitudes of marriage, if you seem to find defilement into his union over which love has not presided, beware; your dreams are in illusion and on day you will be cruelly disenchanted."

...I prefer a man who does speak out strongly, who does not employ the word "defilement," but who warns the woman of disappointment and disillusionment, who says to her: "There where you think to find love you will find only libertinage; there where you think to find happiness you will find only bitterness. A husband who goes quietly about his affairs, who puts on his nightcap and eats his supper with you, is a prosaic husband who disgusts you. You dream of a man who loves you, who idolizes you, poor child!

...Oh! God knows, those of our young women who do not find enough in honest and elevated principles or in a strict religion to hold them to the performance of their duties as mothers, who do not find it above all in that resignation, that practical understanding of life that tells us that we must make the best of what we have, but who turn their dreams outside, those most honorable and pure young women who, in the banality of their household, are sometimes tormented by what goes on around them, they will be made to reflect by a book like this one, you maybe be sure of it."

Of course this is all said in a time in history when there are more women prostitutes in all of history before or since - ahum and who is satisfied or who is making the marriage bedroom a place of splendor for both husband and wife - golly but the women is the poor benighted creature for wanting love -

I got the biggest kick out of the uses of the words "prosaic husband." Hehehe Prosaic, OK - acting like he is on 'Prosac'

Looks like a women should not be educated beyond her station - I remember that one when women in order to marry 'up' went to College for their MRS and others, there just wasn’t the funds unless you were a boy who were the real wage earners.

At least he admits to the banality of their households.

And now we know where this idea came that women should not expect love or passion - she should expect boredom and be glad she has a good husband who eats with her and goes to bed in his nightcap - that she is all about 'Making The Best of Things,' being 'Responsible- and 'Disenchantment' is the order of the day for a women in her marriage... that her dreams are an illusion...looks like it is easy for some of us to still buy into that view of what a women should expect and how she should react within a marriage...They trained us well...

Of course the prosecution argues that Flaubert describes Madame Bovary as a picture of Lascivious, voluptuous whose beauty is enticement and the bit that he uses to prove this statement is - Get this - not exactly what I would consider "The" sentence that shows Emma as lascivious or voluptuous -

Every night he would come home to a glowing fire, the table set, the furniture arranged comfortably, and charming woman, neatly dressed, smelling so fresh you wondered where the fragrance came from and whether it wasn’t her skin lending the scent to her petticoat.

So Suzy homemaker is voluptuous and lascivious with enticing beauty. shesh - again take care of the man and you are voluptuous...

Then in the argument is this hilarious banter as the prosecution goes after the bad reputation the Revue de Paris gave Rouen because of the cab scene that mentions all the streets etc. This fantastic ride shows a wanton use of what the Defense says is imagination since there is no word as to what happened during that long cab ride. Since the author only satisfies the reader revealing only "a bare hand reaching under the little homespun curtains..."

Why would we expect anything else in that day and age?

But . . . . Who was on trial here? Gustave Flaubert or Madame Bovary?

Madame Bovary was published in 1857.
"1852 - 1870: The Second Empire of Napoleon III

"Following his coup d'état in 1851, Louis Napoleon declares himself Emperor Napoleon III. This period sees the Haussmanization of Paris, colonial expansion, the growth of department stores and of major financial institutions. The régime favoured industrial development and the bulk of the French railway system was built in this period."

Have you ever met woman who is always after dangerous love? This woman is addicted to it. She casts aside the steady loving suitor for the dangerous one who cares nothing for her in the long run? I have certainly met them and none of them are happy for any length of time. They have an obsession with a man and before too long it all turns to custard because there was no foundation of mutual respect or committment on the part of the "dangerous lover" I think Emma is one of these women the more I have read.

Carolyn

BARBARA, Flaubert was extremely devoted to his sister. She died young and he took it very hard, had a death mask made of her and displayed it -- it's mentioned in his letters.

Yes, my French original contains the trial, the Steegmuller translation does not.

Indeed, what do we expect from that day and age ? What about the Victorians ?

On the other hand, we should not forget that there was at least ONE notable exception : the writer George Sand, a contemporary and correspondent of Gustave Flaubert.

Born Amantine Lucile Aurore Dupin, she left her husband, Baron Dudevant, when she was 27 and established herself as a writer in Paris. She was famous for her love affairs, e.g. with Chopin and with Alfred de Musset.

Even if the exceptions are said to confirm the rule, she was certainly not compliant, not subservient and her own woman, using a man's name.

Madame Bovary is not a romantic novel, IMHO, rather it is Emma who is the hopeless hapless romantic.

Let's see : Léon had composed a letter in which he said (and I paraphrase) that they had no future together. Then they met in the church (that scene could understandably be seen as disturbing, shall we say, when the novel was written), and then came the ride in the carriage that took hours and hours to the despair of the coachman. And at the end Emma's white hand threw out the torn pieces of that letter.

It's not hard to imagine what happened in the carriage, but of course Flaubert couldn't delineate THAT at the time! Who seduced whom BTW, I wonder ?

In the French discussion, Eloïse has raised pertinent questions well worth asking about the other characters in the novel,and how women in the 21st century on the North American continent compare with EB and her era. I am going to attempt an answer as soon as I can.

I enjoyed reading all of the ideas that all of you have expressed in your posts.

Traude,

You are right this not a romantic novel. It is a reaction to romanticism. It is a "masterpiece of realism" as is stated in the heading here. Emma Bovary is an exaggerated character as are all these characters.

Joan

There are many things that we have not discussed yet in this novel. We have a week left for this discussion of Part III and to try to reach our conclusions about the book.

Look again at the point of view of this novel. Flaubert is not reaponsible for Emma's situation. Flaubert merely reported on her as a young , 19th century , middle class housewife life who is a victim of the boredom and frustration of everyday life. He does this in a masterful way.

Both Emma and Charles are victims of 19th century society. Is their lot so different from that of people in the late 2Oth and early 21st centuries? Can you find similarities and differences?

Flaubert chooses every incident in this novel for a purpose.Thinking about this what do you think is the purpose of the blind beggar?

I have put these questions in the heading along with a few others that I left there.

Joan, welcome back! I think the fact that Emma was been so soundly blamed over the years, and including the present age, is one indication that women still are expected to be Madonnas on a Pedestal while 'boys will be boys' is the attitude for men. I believe, although I don't like it, we live in a bourgeois society. Today there are women who are censured for unconventional behavior and there are women who "settle" but we have greater freedom and opportunities than in Flaubert's time.

I see a lot of the characters in this novel being dishonorable or acting without conscience but Emma is the one blamed -- yet there is Rodolphe with his lifetime of brutal behavior towards women; L'heureaux being dishonest & having joy in deceit and dishonor; Leon making love with a married woman & sneaking away when Emma needed him; the Priest without a Soul; Homais playing doctor without a license and abandoning Charles; Charles unqualified but operating without a surgeon present & refusing to acknowledge anything around him.

It's Emma who's blamed and I find that very telling and perhaps one of the points of the novel. I don't think Flaubert swallowed the values of the bourgeois society or he wouldn't have included so many characters with extraordinary weaknesses in this one novel. He once said that he lived like a bourgeois so he could write violently and unconventionally. Writers do what they must to have the freedom to write. Flaubert had choices that Emma did not, he could avoid public censure, and he was intelligent enough to know that.

Emma is blamed and suffers and Charles suffers and the rest thrive. Barbara and Hats, appreciated your comments. I don't know about you but I felt like Emma by this last section, a Dancing Bear muzzled and leashed and nowhere to escape. Yet what a stiffling, soul-numbing life for the entire society!

Marvelle

To try and understand Emma Bovary by observing and drawing conclusions from her behavior and the influences on her life is not to blame and judge her and find her guilty.

To say that Charles Bovary was a good husband who loved his wife and provided for her and his child, while at the same time acknowledging that here was a dull, plodding country health practitioner who made many mistakes as an unlicensed doctor and a terrible mistake when he operated on Hippolyte, is not to make a saint out of him.

Charles couldn't read Emma's mind or anyone else's. How was he to understand her illusions and dreams and the needs they created? How can any man today do the same thing unless he is specifically told? Could Emma ever have told Charles what was bothering her? I don't think so, because I don't think she really knew.

As I said in another post, these characters were a vehicle for what Flaubert was trying to say. Every character in this book is boxed in by the rules and limits of bourgeois society, just as Barbara suggested that Emma was. Every character is as human and flawed as she is.

Rodolphe is a smalltime playboy who uses women as playthings. As such his behavior is typical -- even today. In contrast, Leon is weak and gullible. How could such a man resist the power of Emma's needs and her charm?

Lheureux was out to get as much money as he could from what he sold and services he provided. What use is it to have a business if it doesn't make a profit? Lheureux didn't care where the money he received came from, and he didn't care what he loaned out was used for as long as the transaction lined his pocket. The fact that he was feeding and nurturing Emma's obsessions didn't matter to him. Does a liquor store owner today refuse to sell whiskey to a person he suspects is an alcoholic? No. A sale is a sale.

Homais was in business, too. It didn't matter to him whether what he was doing was illegal or how he got the Legion of Honor as long as he got it.

Every person was out for himself or herself. That's how the world is, and that's how Flaubert saw the world of his time. He wrote about it realistically rather than glossing it over with Romantic decorations.

Like the priest who was more concerned with the boys messing up the church than he was with Emma's unspoken problems, many of these men were unqualified and ill-equipped to do what they did. I doubt very much if the priest had a religious "calling". He probably became a priest because his family expected it of him. Look at priests today. I've known many men who became priests because their parents were determined that at least one of their sons would take up that vocation, not because these men had any particular religious fervor.

Joan asks about the blind beggar. It seemed to me that Emma felt as if he represented everything that was ugly in the world. When she lies dying, the beggar sings love songs under her window. To me those songs were a reminder of the sensual woman she's been almost all of her life. Being sensual is not a fault.

Offhand I'd say that most of us here in this discussion are bourgeois (middle class), and that many in this class today have what are called bourgeois thoughts and opinions. Not much has changed in that respect.

Emma reminds me of Hester Prynne who was forced to wear the scarlet letter. Hester was chastised and shunned. There have been Hesters throughout history. Emma Bovary is only one.

Mal

I agree with Malryn on the "blame" business in the case of Emma and Charles, we ask why Emma why not blame Charles or Rodolphe, but the fact is Emma is the protagonist and we have spent more time in her head than in anybody else's: it's natural if the author focuses on a character, to look more closely at that character, and as Joan G so wisely points out, Flaubert did all this for a reason.

Did he ever SAY what he was attempting to accomplish in this novel, Joan G? IS this novel some sort of French genre of novel? My knowledge of French literature is quite faint.

THANK you Eloise for those translations and all of you for your insights, it's natural to look at the protagonist of a book, Joan G points out people are trapped today, too, in the 20th century. Does being trapped necessarily mean that you treat others meanly?

Charles, as Malryn points out, was slow, dull and stupid. We forget he is almost unable to understand what he reads. Anything he reads. I see no "sin" in Charles whatsoever. Surely it is not a "sin" to be stupid or dull. Even tho he cannot understand his wife, (and she doesn't waste her flowery words on HIM trying to explain) he moves his practice for her, he buys her a horse he insists she stay at the opera, it seems to me in his admittedly limited way he's trying. I see no sin. SHE and Homais talked him into the operation, they know he's slow but both Homais and she wanted glory, and her only thought after was not for the suffering, but what was her status. I see no "sin" in Charles, but enough in Emma to sink a battleship and as Joan G mentions, I think NONE of this is by accident. These are characters placed here acting in a certain way for a reason. But what IS it? We're getting a super discussion out of it, I'm so glad we see Emma differently; what will we conclude, I wonder?

Point of View, is very clearly illustrated in another REPEATING ELEMENT in the cracked pot thing. We're in Rodolphe's mind then suddenly Flaubert himself is talking to the reader about the impossibilities of communication: it's, at best, a cracked pot fit for a bear to dance.

What is Flaubert himself trying to communicate in this book, I keep asking myself? Maybe when I get to the end I will know.

I don't now!

ginny

Ginny, just read your comment that you haven't fnished the book. I've never been so saddened by a book's ending. After I was emotionally numbed around the episodes with the bouncing golden balls and the dancing bear, the ending for the two lead characters suddenly devastated me. Please let me know your response when you get there. I can imagine this soap-operaish story might not get an emotional reaction; I can see that.

Dear Ginny, there is sin in Charles for he is the officier de sante.

Homais, who was in trouble with playing doctor and prescribing drugs without a license, certainly knows from his own experience the limits placed on Charles. Flaubert never showed Emma to be aware of the officier de sante's legal limits but he did show her to be woefully ignorant of legal issues as well as uninterested in Charles practice and patients until approached by Homais who had the idea for the surgery.

Charles was licensed as an officier de sante and knew what he was allowed to do and not allowed to do when he received that license. He did not, anywhere related to the surgery or anywhere in the book, tell Emma he was under legal restraints as an officier de sante. He never said "no, I can't do this operation because...." No Ginny he did sin but can't we forgive Charles and Emma? They didn't know how to work within the system like the others -- Homais, Rodolph, Leon, L'heureaux etc. Charles and Emma hadn't developed scepticism and a practical denial of Ideals (not even Emma at the end who tried to be a sceptic but couldn't). Their failure led to their doom. I do blame the others and don't know if forgiveness is in me for any except Emma and Charles.

Most novels have a main protagonist and authors, through their writing details of the others, encourage readers to look at all the characters. Emma isn't the only person in Flaubert's novel. Flaubert skillfully developed many characters (they aren't just walk-on parts), making important points about morality with people like Homais the fraud and L'heureaux the deceiver and ursurer.

I feel at this point that we're beating a dead horse by writing/reading posts about the issue of blame and sin. Let's agree to disagree.

I'll re-read the passages with the blind man and come back later to post my thoughts about him.

Marvelle

Lets just say that I do disagree that everyone is selfish in life. Some people are selfish and then there are others who are selfless.I know people of both natures.

I am with Ginny - Emma's life was in her control in the main. She need not have had all these affairs. Flaubert is blaming everyone else but Emma for her immorality. I think she was immoral. So were the men who had affairs with her. I still think adultery is immoral and so do my children however modern their outlook is.

I think Flaubert who was by all accounts a ladies man is maybe writing about someone he once had an affair with and perhaps betrayed.

I keep thinking - there was more profound troubles in France in Flauberts time than writing about one womans sorrow. Maybe I am just too much of a realist to appreciate this book!

Carolyn

What a stew of character defects - who is to blame? We all have our own ideas it seems - I know I cannot imagine being as walled-in with the few options 'for life,' a life sentence, as Emma - to bury herself in books and her music period and to pretend her need, as anyone's need, for someone to be interested in her and not just what she can do for them is beyond reasonable - she could deaden her feelings and carry on like a 'good' women but then, we have an Emma as a character without passions - not just sexual passion but passion for life - it takes a passion for life to continue to take care of yourself - she would simply be another Mrs. Homais without her passions - she has no outlet for those passions since again as someone so wisely labeled her - she is a trophy wife!

Charles even if he is a dull man with little smarts still could have paid attention by listening to and conversing with his wife - I do not think it is only the prerogative of the smart or the intelligent to care enough about someone that you want to converse with them rather than just have your own dreams and comforts seen to - I also saw what he did when he ran scared that Emma was so sick - when he knew she was beyond his capability to make her well - he called in two Doctors - well why did he not do that when the surgery went badly or when gangrene set in -

I thought L'heureaux was below contempt! Where he may have at first appealed to Emma's desire for beautiful things, his manipulating the loans and to benefit his own unseemly profit was to me beyond the pale. He leaned on both Charles’ and Emma’s guilt over their being irresponsible in their spending and hit their shame that they did not understand the consequences of the loans till they were so far in debt even they could not figure out how to extricate themselves - that final bit of manipulations to bring the Bovary's down, and with outside financial help, I thought was too calcualted for any solution - Emma's choice may have been the only way to save the house for Charles and Bertha to have their home - Emma's final sacrifice for her family making the picture of the Holy Family she admired in the church become in affect a reality - although after Emma’s death Charles proved he was no more able to control his shopping and spending then Emma.

The other that I have big issues with is Roagat, Emma's father - to be so selfish not to take the child in after Charles’ death just because he was old and had a bad leg - knowing Bertha’s situation - that one I just cannot accept -

Rodolphe may have been a rogue of the first order but he had some great words during the Fair to Emma that sound to me like Flaubert moralizing with Rodolphe as his puppet -

Duty... And what is duty, when all's said and done, but to appreciate what is great, to cherish what is beautiful and not to bow down to every little social convention, with all the humiliations they involve

No! Why inveigh against the passions? Are they not the one beautiful thing there is on earth, the source of all heroism, enthusiasm, poetry, music, art, everything?'

'Yes, but one must observe the laws of society more or less, and obey its moral code.'

As we wonder about the Blind man - who to me, looking on this story from the twenty-first century, I do not know if that was Flauberts intent - he appeared to be like Emma and I guess similar to most of the characters who are limited in their behavior by the mores of society - walled-in by his blindness - full of scabs which are symbolic of the sins - taking advantage of all of those he can by placing himself on the crossroads to beg from every carriage of people that go by - and doing it all with artistic beauty like the artist the writer or poet still revered in France at this time in history and as Flaubert himself - another meaning could be the blind man represented Flaubert who tells his story as a poet blind to judging the right or wrong but only writing as if in the moment.

The other I wondered about is why the wedding dress - why did Charles want Emma buried in the wedding dress - she did not see her wedding as the high point of her life although Charles did - at least the dress is white and like the very very ‘good’ girl who received her crowns she was dressed in death in white.

Interesting that this book starts and ends with Charles although named Madame Bovary.

Marvelle, I'm not sure I was clear, GREAT points Marvelle, Barbara, and Carolyn, by the way!!

I'm not the one who spoke of BLAME in the first place here? and I was trying to say that we're not BLAMING Emma but noting stuff about her, (how can you miss it) and noting that not EVERY character is doing bad stuff, to remove the BLAME word entirely, either. I personally think Flaubert is making moral comparisions, he's already alluded to it once, but I could be wrong and I'm about to find out haahahahha

You said, No Ginny he did sin but can't we forgive Charles and Emma?

I should not have used the word "sin," (got Dante on the brain, I guess). I don't blame, condemn or anything else Emma, but she's full of it no matter what I say, it's got nothing to do with me, I didn't write it: sure, she's forgiven, as are we all, I hope? hahahaa

Charles was licensed as an officier de sante and knew what he was allowed to do and not allowed to do when he received that license. He did not, anywhere related to the surgery or anywhere in the book, tell Emma he was under legal restraints as an officier de sante. He never said "no, I can't do this operation because...."

Oh no here I'm going to disagree and say since he has not undestood one other paper on his position presented to him in his entire career, no text, nothing whatsoever about anything nothing about the Homais arrangement, no I don't really or truly think he understood his limitations at all; what makes you think he did? Perhaps I have missed something important (wouldn't be the first time!) haahahah No in order to.....well I hate to use the word sin. I don't think Charles is culpable, I don't think he makes deliberate decisions to hurt or to do wrong. I think Emma, Homais, and Rodolphe do. THAT to me is a comparison?

Barbara, again I disagree with your extremely wonderful post. You said I also saw what he did when he ran scared that Emma was so sick beyond his capability to make her well - he called in two Doctors - well why did he not do that when the surgery went bad -

I thought he did? I must have missed something, I thought he did consult with other doctors, I thought the doctor did not hide his contempt either, I could have misread that.

As far as intelligence in soclal intercourse, "shoulda" does not always apply. Some people have it and some don't. I know academics who are so socially inept they truly never noticed a mentally suffering spouse, their minds were elsewhere, and so is Charles's, he just doesn't have enough of one, but he DOES try. Emma's is deliberately elsewhere, she not only does not try she is deliberate in her cruelty unlike Charles, she chooses indifference. That's bad, to me.

The entire book is a ship of fools, very few likeable or moral characters (so far) and those who are or who try to do good, do not end up well (so far) Wonder why?

Do you all disagree that Emma is the protagonist? I, like Barb, find it strange that the book begins and ends with somebody other than her.

ginny

Whoops I was amending my post Ginny when you posted - I am trying to find a redeeming angle and that was what I added - it dawned on me that Emma's death was the only way that Charles and Bertha would have a home and so her death was her sacrifice in effect to their future - although Charles does prove he had no more ability to maintain that Future as his ability at money handling was as bad as Emma's and their daughter paid the ultimate sacrifice.

I had Emma finally having achieved one of her "Ethereal Heights" as she admired the painting of the Holy Family hanging in the church with two candles on either side - her death was giving her family a home that would have been taken because of the debts that had to be forgiven once she was dead and of course her being buried in white as the very good girl who was receiving her crown with the men attending the funeral much like the acknowledgment of those men in her childhood school audience as well as those waving good-by from their carriages.

Seems to me Charles only called the surgeons after he realized the leg had to be amputated - not earlier when the first troubles where noted. And to is lack of smarts - he knew he was not a Doctor Ginny and he Knew he skipped out on study as a child - it was his choice not to be more knowledgeable - as I recall he was rebelling against his mother and that was why he did not study - as a younger boy he was not the brightest - but he played domino rather than study - later after marriage, he fell asleep after dinner after rather than read the medical journals that Emma had ordered a subscription for him. - it was not so much not smart as just not wanting to do the difficult studying...

Yes, society has changed a lot. But is it any better to have the divorce rate we experience now? The "reconstructed" families? Women commuting and fighting in the workforce? Children bearing the brunt of it all? What do 21st century Am. Emmas do? Aren't there any "affairs" anymore? Any "Rodolphe"? I don't think so.

Well I guess we all see it differently but to me women communting and fighting in the workplace?!? is healthier than fighting in the neighborhoods during coffee klatches and wasting time sitting in the afternoons watching or listening to soap operas -

Yes, it would be great if moms could have a year after the birth of the babies and it is only those who have the education and good jobs that can afford a home nanny. But if we compare I think it is healthier for children to be raised from infancy with their moms even if in day care than have them sent away for a year or two with moms only visiting, so that the children are fed and the women can look as society wants them to look and men can have a sex partner that looks like a lady and not a nursing mom.

I guess there is no perfect solution but as long as society has expectations that are not in keeping with the best for a mother, then a child will never learn to put out and expect the best from themsleves.

I do think that since women are in the workforce it is healthier to be a girl child - when I was a kid children had to earn money to bring home since dads were the only ones working with few to no jobs for women and they were expected to stay home - girl children had little chance for college because again of funds. The idea if you remember, girls were not needing the education that boys needed since they would not always be working -

I like the mind shift that has come with women in the work force and I think it is according to how the family handles themselves as to if the children suffer - my daughter-in-law is a full time school teacher and I notice her boys are on all the soccor, tennis and gymnastic teams they can fit in their schedule which means Saturday's and a couple of nights a week are either games or practice - Dad pick up the slack by taking kids to games and running a vacuum or doing the laundry - good examples for the children - my daugher-in-law and son made good friends with the neighbors who keep an eye on the boys when the arrive home about an hour before their mom - the boys are focused - are doing well - and have a college fund that assures their going on with their educaiton -

I do not think my daughter-in-law is unusual - I have worked with many families who all seem to share a similar story - I think we do not read and hear about those families on the evening news, families who are able to create good family homes - they are not the news makers - if there were so few of them then they would be the unusual and therefore they would be the news makers.

The first thing I thought of when I read about the blind man was Lazarus in the Bible. I think it's so interesting that he sang under Emma's window when she was dying.

"The blind man!" she cried, and broke out into a laugh -- a ghastly, frantic, despairing laugh -- thinking she saw the hideous features of the wretched being, arising up to strike terror in her soul, on the very threshold of eternal night."

That certainly didn't go along with Emma's romantic ideas about everything.

Emma gave the crucifix the most passionate kiss she had ever given in her life. That struck me, too. Of course, this could be interpreted at least two different ways. To me it was as if the sensuality and emotion which she allowed to rule her life were one of the last things to leave.

The end of the book is far too melodramatic for me. Was it Hats who asked if this story had been made into an opera? That's how it felt.

I find it very difficult to sympathize with every woman and every woman's plight that come along, just because I am a woman. True, Emma didn't stand a chance in the social stratum and time in which she lived. (This is like a lot of women I know who manage to do something besides ruin their lives and those of their husband and children.) But Emma didn't show me that she was truly interested in anything else but herself. I kept wanting her to stop her whining and do something, for heaven's sake! Like save herself so perhaps she could save her child?

Yes, there are Rodolphes around today, and there are affairs. I know of some which first began on the internet.

What's wrong with women in the workforce? Isn't that what we fought for all those years -- the right to stand side by side with men and the right to earn our own living if we wanted to?

My attitude about women in the workforce may be different from some because the aunt who raised me worked all of her adult life, and I never knew the traditional mother-stay-at-home-and-take-care-of-the-kids kind of life when I was growing up. For me it was normal that the mother figure worked at an outside job and earned a week's pay.

My daughter has worked since she was a teenager. After marriage she worked so she could help support her family. She still does, and her 18 year old son shows absolutely no damage because of this. There was always someone in the family there when he came home from school, including me. Hil is a bright, well-adjusted young man whose parents divorced three years ago. I'm very proud of him, too, because he's been awarded a very fine four year scholarship to an excellent university, which he'll enter next Fall.

( That was a bragging grandmother's aside! )

Mal

I sent the following comment to Joan:

Just wanted you to know that I did finish the book some weeks ago and found it far more interesting than I had expected. I guess I found the writing more interesting than the subject which is why I more or less dropped out of the group. I have been reading the posts but have had nothing to add

to me she was a farm girl who had seen sex pertaining to the animals on the farm but read about romance and thought that there was more to marriage than sex so she expected much more than she got and so went in search of romance to no avail and so while searching for romance ended up thinking that the men in her life might be able to supply but found the thrill of satisfaction in sex which was not at the time thought to be important to women as they were just there to satisfiy there husbands and serve them in every way so with every man that caught her eye she kept searching and finally found it and he diserted her and so the book goes on.

Ginger, what a wonderful summation of this book! I wish I could do that instead of rambling on and on and on and on.

Mal

your posts are very special to me and I do read Many posts from each of you as I love books and the discussions Here bring out so much more about the books.

But on with Madame Bovary so she has found what she has searched for but alas he is gone so she cannot stand life as it is for her thus she leaves it to search No more as the Priest could not have understood her desires and the blind man in the end said more or less I know all and You will not find God Now.

I feel that Emma was caught in a loveless marriage. I think she wanted and tried to love Charles, but the feelings were not there. Of course, not loving Charles did not make it right for her to have affairs.

Instead of having affairs, she should have focused on Berthe. When one door shuts, another opens. Berthe could have been her savior, but she missed seeing Berthe. I think in the end she realized her mistake.

This is why I felt sad for Emma. She was running and running and running looking for happiness. Really, it could have been found in her own backyard. When we are totally lost, a baby, a child can give so much to us.

Over and over I saw a religious overtone to the novel. I felt that Flaubert, in the end, wanted the reader to see that chasing after romantic dreams and materialism never works. There must be something deeper in life. Not that physical pleasures are wrong. It is just that at the base of our life must be some type of spirituality.

In some way, I feel that Emma knew this. She kept returning to the convent or the cathedral or some religious ritual. It is like she had her finger on the tip of the answer, but she could not grasp it. The total answer alluded her, or she was too weak to accept the answer.

I am trying to say that in order for us to get through life, no matter how much passionate love we experience or how many riches we have, there must be an underlying source of spirituality. If there is no higher goal than pleasing ourselves, we will die daily simply by being miserable and maybe, literally taking our lives.

Well said my friend. Thanks.

Ginger, your words spoke to me too. It's good to have a kind friend like you.

Thank You so much as I thought maybe I was out of place with my thoughts on the book Madame Bovary.

As I indicated I have been reading the posts and found the last exchange interesting. Hats, why was it not right for Emma to have an affair? Men had affairs all the time. I do not see her child as a substitute for a man in her life. She desperately wanted a romantic man and her search was doomed to failure because what she sought was unattainable. I think you are trying to imbue her with higher feelings, higher goals, even a higher morality than we have a right to expect. I see Emma as frustrated by her position in life -a woman who wanted more in her life than she could ever attain. She wanted love, romance, beauty, money, things and being a woman she could not simply go out and get those things for herself. Think of Emma as a man - in the same society he could have gotten love, romance, beauty, money and things by simply having the gumption to go out into the world and get them. Emma, the woman, could not. The realization of this fact was crushing to her and ultimately leads to her downfall. IMO

I do see one problem with my thinking as I reread what I wrote and that is that men and women of that era were locked into a social system or caste that was more or less inescapable. I am still going to leave my comment above to see what people think.

georgehd - yes, and yes again - as you are aware I am down on these guys for that very reason - I sound like Emma - they had the freedom to make something happen - to change or better their lives - I think even though Ginny has done wonders to make Charles look OK, but for me I get so annoyed with him for that very reason - he had opportunity and he frittered it away -

I didn't get the impression she was going after affairs until the second time around with Leon - I thought the first time with Leon and Rodolphe were simply her attempt to get the the love, attention, romance, beauty, she needed and would have forgone money and things but after Rodolphe, after his betrayal, she wanted money and things as well.

Betrayal blows apart trust. It blows it apart into a million pieces. Betrayal happens when we put our faith and trust in a person, place, or thing (including an idea). We are taught to do this, which is really the ultimate betrayal because it does not work. Betrayal is the collapse of what we have relied upon as true and supportive. It is a shattering experience.

But, if we put our trust in people, places, or things, indeed in any form including religion, philosophy, etc. betrayal is inevitable.

Betrayal is so shattering, something that devastates us as long as we continue to believe that we cannot trust. We mentioned that trust gets shattered, but really, what gets shattered is the illusion that we can put our trust in people, places or things.

When betrayal is experienced there is often the decision to close down, to run, or to do both. There can even be a decision to get even. Choosing any of these "solutions", is where the real pain of betrayal continues to live. A decision is made never to be betrayed again.

At any hint of possible betrayal, solutions are made of closing off, running, and revenge. These decisions are what betrays the most; these are what hurt the most. In effect, the betrayed are not shattered from the outside; they are shattered from within. It hurts to close off. It hurts to run. It hurts to choose revenge, because none of these mechanisms allows a real solution; none of these reactions allows the betrayed to be present with themselves.

Those who betray are not coming from a place of integrity.

I see Emma not closing down completely after Rodolphe, which is brave and to her credit although, she did tell Leon she thought all man betrayed - I do not remember her exact words - regardless - If we think Charles betrayed her or not, she did, - since he showed no interest in her as a person or in her dreams or continued to be the passionate lover she imagined a husband would be or better himself - and again I think Emma thought Bertha betrayed her by not being the perfect baby and by being born a girl.

Emma's mother betrayed her by dying. The church and her education betrayed her. Of course the ultimate betrayal was all about the debt - I do not think she ever showed any revenge or hate - She ran and closed down after Rodolphe betrayed her - she was sick all that winter - but it was the debt and no one helping her with the debt - that was the ultimate betrayal and so she ran and closed down in the ultimate way.

Not to say she didn't betray others but again, they can only feel betrayed if they had put all their trust in her - Bertha may have been betrayed - certainly as a baby and child she wanted all of her mother even though she had a father - Charles I do not think he put all his trust in Emma - he did have his practice that she was not a part of and he passed himself off as more capable than he really was, which says he was not trusting her with every aspect of his life. He didn't trust her with his dreams or lack of dreams.

Where as Emma seemed willing to share every aspect of her life if anyone would only pick up the baton - but then that is the way girls have been and are still trained - trust those who you love in order to be intimate and be candide in order to create intimacy.

Hmmm the mother daughter link - I remember looking this up when the names of Homais' children were shared - the one that was mentioned again as being a famous stage production or something was Athalie - let me find it...

"Athalie was a tribute to the most deathless masterpiece of the French stage... In 'Athalie', for instance, he condemned the ideas but admired the style, he denounced the conception but applauded the workmanship, fell foul of the characters but belauded their speeches. When he read out the purple passages, he was carried away, but when he reflected that the shavelings made use of it to reinforce their stock-in-trade, he was terribly cast down. He would have liked to crown Racine with both hands, and at the same time give him a good piece of his mind."
Athalie (- Tragedy in five acts of Jean Root (1691) - Madam de Maintenon, who married secretly the king Louis XIV in 1683, asked the tragic actor Jean Racine (1639-1699) to compose for the girls of the school of Saint-Cyr military school. His work was Esther (in 1689) and Athalie (in 1691). Athalie is a Jewish queen. Like her Jézabel mother, she committed many crimes.

Looks like Athalie was a foreshadowing of Bertha...and Homais describing Racine is almost like describing Flaubert or maybe even Emma.

George and Barbara, I understand what you are saying. I just had to come to the conclusion that, to me, Emma would have never been satisfied. There are people who look and look and never find that magic thing called "happiness."

I think there is a difference between happiness and contentment. Emma wanted happiness and not contentment. She did not want the daily routine of life. She could not face it. This is not blaming her. It is just the truth.

During one point in our life there is that "thing" called romance or puppy love. It feels sooo good. Yet, it is not enough to sustain us through the rest of our lives. Then, we move pass "puppy love," and we begin to know how to love for a longer time. Emma never made it pass the stage of "falling in love." Once, it got pass the wine and roses, she felt deeply unsatisfied or empty.

I believe to fill those empty places we need a higher goal. We do not have to use the word spirituality. Why don't we try the word "giving." We have to give happiness in order to receive happiness. We need something bigger than ourselves.

I say Emma could have focused on little Berthe because there is something about sharing time with a child where, I believe, we can experience all those heady feelings in a different way. With a child, we can be innocent again, play again, experience wonder again.

Anyway, I feel Emma became stuck in one stage of her life. She did not move onto the next stage and the next stage. I did feel very sorry for Emma. I did not dislike her. It was just painful, to me, that she never did go onto another stage in life.

I think my thoughts changed after reading Part III. Anyway, it is not just a gender problem. Whether a man or woman is involved in an affair or affairs, these affairs never bring happiness. These affairs complicate our lives especially when we run into "bad boys" or "playboys" like Rudolphe.

Rudolphe, Leon and the others who were involved with Emma were not happy either. They were out to "get" to "receive" only for themselves too. Could you point to one of them as being happy? They were searching and never found whatever they needed or wanted. Just like Emma, they were stuck.

At one point, after all the bills are coming due, Emma does go back to the convent and sit down. She remembers the peace within those walls. I am saying, maybe, that is what she was looking for and never found, a higher type of love.

Emma had been betrayed so many times. She began to almost hate men. When you get so dissatisfied, in order to go on living, you have to either accept your state of being, or you have to look for some wonderful cause to live for.

I am only thinking of some way in which Emma could have gone on living without destroying her life. Suicide is never a good or worthy option.

I do think the book is about loss. I think Barbara mentioned the word "loss" first. To me, the book is about loss because Emma lost herself. When everyone and everything began to crumble around her, she did not have enough inner spirit to survive. She had spent so much time searching and searching, but she never sat down to think and just reach within to find her identity.

She spent so much time hunting and gathering. She never took time to enjoy the beauties she owned. She was on a merry go round. Her ride on the carousel never ended. She kept spinning and spinning until she spun completely out of control.

With all that comes up against us, whether the lack of romantic love, a boxed in life due to discriminations because we are women, there is an inner strength within all of us. We have to reach in and get it.

The explication on Athalie was much appreciated, Barbara. Many people consider Racine to be THE great French writer, with the most beautiful prose, so if Flaubert compared himself to Racine that was some ego.

George, please post more often; I always look forward to what you have to say. Sometimes a discussion can go in directions a poster is not interested in and one way I cope is to respond to whatever pricks my interest in the slightest, as well as introduce what I find interesting in a particular book whether it be theme or character or plot etc. People may continue with those thoughts or they may not, but SN discussions encourage different interests and viewpoints.

Hats, just saw your message. Now how do we define happy? Perhaps the absence of visible unhappiness in this book? I'd say the opportunists are happy for they use the system to get what they want -- Homais is happy (with himself and his advancement in the end), Rodolphe (who cynically plays at romanticism as the way to 'get' Emma), L'heureaux, probably others -- yes, these are happy people, these opportunists. I don't consider them moral but they are happy.

Marvelle

Emma was placed in the convent at the age of 13. At that age she thought:

"Everything must needs minister to her personal longings, as it were, and she thrust aside as of no account everything that did not immediately contribute to stir the emotions of her heart, for her temperament was sentimental rather than artistic, seeking, not pictures, but emotions."

When her mother died not much later, Emma was:

"surprised at the end of Lamartinian meanderings to find herself calm, with no more trace of sadness in her heart than of wrinkles in her brow."

Perhaps it might be more interesting, as far as Madame Bovary is concerned, to read some of Lamartine's poetry rather than Racine.

At the age of 12 I had no thought of being betrayed by my mother when she very suddenly died. No, I thought God had betrayed me. I had harbored the hope that if I prayed hard enough I'd completely recover from my illness and be returned to my mother who, because she was poor and couldn't afford the illness I contracted, had to give me away five years before she died. At the age of 12 I knew that no amount of praying would bring my mother back and no amount of praying would make me recover from the illness I had. Barbara is right about betrayal and trust. From that time on I no longer trusted any god, and I have never recovered from the sadness I had at the time of my mother's death, nor have my younger brother and two younger sisters.

Affairs are fine if you can handle them. Even if women are satisfied with a lover, most of them want more. They have a tendency to want to build a nest with that man (or woman, as the case may be), and live happily ever after. Men don't think this way.

Emma Bovary shows enormous immaturity to me. On the day she died, she still thought "everything must needs minister to her personal longings", and she was still "thrusting aside as of no account everything that did not immediately contribute to stir the emotions of her heart, for her temperament was sentimental rather than artistic, seeking, not pictures, but emotions."

Mal

Good Post Mal. You hit the nail on the head as they say in my opinion!

Carolyn

What was Flaubert doing by writing Madame Bovary? He was tearing down romantic ideas about everything he could think of which had been covered by the misleading, pretty obfuscation Romanticism can bring. Homais says about religion:

"I've no use for a god that goes stalking about his garden with a switch in his hand, shuts up his friends in a whale's belly, makes a song about dying, and comes to life again three days after, which is not only intrinsically absurd, but completely opposed to scientific teaching, while, incidentally, it just shows that your priests have always wallowed in bestial ignorance and tried to bring the masses down to their level."

This sounds like heresy, but there’s truth in what Homais says, and Flaubert expressed these ideas deliberately.

Emma’s ideas of religion were not so different from those of some others at that time:
". . . . she (Emma) insensibly yielded to the mystic languor that exhales from the perfumes of the altar, the shadowy coolness of the holy-water stoups, and the soft radiance of the tapers. Instead of following the Mass, she pored upon the religious pictures in azure borders that adorned her prayer-book and she loved the sick lamb, the Sacred Heart pierced with spears, or poor Jesus falling by the wayside upon His cross. By way of mortifying the flesh she would try to go all day without food. And she ransacked her brains to think of some disciplinary obligation she could lay upon herself.

"When she went to confession, she invented little sins in order to linger in the dim light, kneeling down with her hands clasped before her face, listening to the murmuring tones of the priest above her. Similes bringing in such words as 'betrothed', 'spouse', 'heavenly bridegroom', and 'eternal marriage', which occur again and again in sermons, awoke unsuspected sensations of pleasure in the hidden depths of her soul."

Romantic love and marriage:
"When, until now, had he (Charles) had a taste of life's good things? Was it in his schooldays, shut up behind high walls, lonely and friendless, among boys who were richer or cleverer than he, who mocked his country speech, who jeered at his clothes and whose mothers came with their muffs crammed full of pastries and good things? Or later when he was studying medicine and never had the wherewithal to stand treat to some little work-girl or other who might have become his mistress. After that he had had fourteen months of married life with the widow, whose feet, in bed, were like lumps of ice. But now this pretty little woman whom he worshipped, was his for life. For him the whole universe was contained within the silken circumference of her skirt. He reproached himself for not making enough fuss of her; he was always longing for the sight of her; he hurried back home, and mounted the stairs with a beating heart.

And Emma?
"Before she married, she thought she was in love; but the happiness that should have resulted from that love, somehow had not come. It seemed to her that she must have made a mistake, have misunderstood in some way or another. And Emma tried hard to discover what, precisely, it was in life that was denoted by the words 'joy, passion, intoxication', which had always looked so fine to her in books."

"But wasn't it a man's business to know about things, to shine in all sorts of activities, to display the energy of the passionate lover, to acquaint you with the amenities of life, and to initiate you into all its mysteries? But he couldn't teach anybody anything, that man. He knew nothing, and he wanted nothing. He thought she was happy; and his immovable placidity, his ponderous serenity, the very contentment of which she herself was the cause, got on her nerves."

" ‘Ah, yes,' Felicite went on, 'you're just like old Guerin's daughter, the fisherman at Pollet. I used to know her at Dieppe before I came to you. She was that sad, she was, that when you saw her standing in the door of her house, she somehow looked like a funeral pall hung up at the threshold. She'd got a sort of fog that settled in her head, so the folks said, and the doctors couldn't do nothing with her, nor the 'cure' neither. When she got it bad, she went out all by herself along by the side of the sea, and often enough the coastguard officer, going his rounds, would come across her lying flat on the pebbles crying her eyes out. Then she got married, and after that it all went off, so they say.'

" 'But in my case,' said Emma, 'it didn't come on till I was married.' "
There’s much, much more. There’s scarcely a page in any chapter of this book in which Flaubert is not tearing down one idol or another of Romanticism.

Mal

post 434 - Mal I agree with Carolyn, good post. (Good posts are those that I agree with) Said in jest.

Betrayal, there have been a number of posts about Emma's being betrayed. Is there a kind of personality for whom betrayal is the norm? Betrayal implies placing blame somewhere else, not in oneself. I agree that Emma did not behave very maturely and I guess I think that this immaturity led to the kinds of betrayal she may have felt.

I am going to add some other comments which I hope are taken in the spirit that I make them. I am rather new to Senior Net and I sense that most members of this group have been posting with each other for some time. As I said earlier, I grew to like this book and found the writing to be unusually fine. And for that reason, I did not keep to the group's schedule but forged ahead and finished the book. This was a good approach for me. I thought the detailed dissection of the novel in our discussion was not helpful to me. In no way do I mean to detract or downplay the discussion - I just needed to stay with the novel. And I hope that you understand that. I have been in book discussion groups before and we would meet once a month, once or twice a week, but never every day.

One aspect of Senior Net and the wealth of experience and knowledge of its membership, is the links that various people post in the discussion groups. I find these absolutely wonderful!!

Great you joined us Georgehd and we definitely do not look for either consensus or a 'present arms' approach to reading a book - we do though only discuss various parts of the book at different times over the course of the discussion - not the manner of critiquing that is favored by some but the result is we do get deeper into each area of the book - glad you are posting and yes, we all can smile at our shared desire to have others agree with our conclusions. But I think what many of us find is, by hearing other conclusions we sometimes make slight shifts in our own thinking - not huge giant shifts but slight shifts.

As I understand Betrayal it has not so much to do with blame as it has to do with putting your own trust in someone, place, idea etc. that does not live up to what your conceived expectation or understanding of how things should work. That is what a shared culture is all about - the culture is built around a shared expectation of how things or people will carry-on or work-out.

We are taught these expectations as rules of behavior, as a pre-ordained pattern - when they are broken and they create chaos, pain, confusion there is betrayal - now some are saying we should not put that much trust into anything, person etc. I saw that as being the opposite way or life-style for Emma -

Passion (not just sexual passion but a passion for anything) is dependent on trust - almost like someone who has a passion for antiques and finds that a well respected dealer sold him an antique that he holds in his valuable collection and the antique is a fake - the betrayal may not be as catastrophic as the feelings of a child when loosing a parent or, a family member learns that a close family member has a secret criminal life, as the retired police inspector recently learned that his father was the murderer of a notorious crime in California - but our trust in others is the cornerstone.

The step that includes blame to me is how you handle the betrayal - if you do not own the pain and would prefer not to detach (which is a process you must learn, it is not natural to most) than you blame the people, places, things, religion, or philosophy that caused the pain.

This story has touched something within most of us and changing Emma or the other characters is something we have suggested - this says to me that we have problems with folks that act as these characters and problems with Emma's solution to solving her various problems - my thought is that our uncomfort with Emma is all a prelude to the ultimate solution Emma takes. Her suicide is difficult to accept and then to see the outcome for Bertha is very troubling. It is as if we could get into the story and change the course of it so we could have a different outcome.

I hear you Hats about Emma becoming a nurturing mother to Bertha - what I see in that thought though is, than Emma would not be the passionate figure saying to us 'live with passion even if means being reckless' - we may not agree when we see the damage but than if that scares us, what are we saying about passion - because passion is not an organized contained emotion - it borders on chaos.

We are only now becoming comfortable with the concept of chaos and where we in the past bought into the idea of cooling passions, passion is verging on being irresponsible, we are only now being able to quantify and formalize chaos. Therefore, we are becoming more comfortable with the realization that every approach to life leaves its marks - and I never realized how much our lives are as a result of chaos rather than the organized rules of society -

Example from nature - two leaves fall from a tree into a stream or creek bed - one floats on to the sea the other gets caught on something - other things pile up behind the caught leaf and in time there is an Island created where in even later time people build homes - the stream is diverted in the process and a whole eco-system was established because of one leaf. This holds true for land masses that are created because of volcanoes etc. etc.

They even say that weather is affected on the North American continent because of a the wind made by a mosquito flying or not in Indonesia - and so our lives are affected as they say by how someone does or not greet us with a good morning and that is passed along all day to many others - therefore all the characters in this book pass along something that true to the times was changed and today for instance we have usury laws and child labor laws and women finally even have the kind of freedom that Emma dreamed -

If we all continued to "put up with it" - "make the best of it" we would not have the freedoms of opportunity we enjoy now.

Emma's passions may not have accomplished what say Thomas Paine's passion accomplished but she is an example of how the passionate among us live. And to most of us the passionate seem to create a chaos that as some have so aptly said in this discussion, is like an Opera or at least a soap opera.

George, I prefer to read a book straight through to stay within the spirit of its writing. Then when the discussion begins I focus on the particular book section being discussed, and try to forget future events in the book. I personally enjoy this second reading during the discussion.

Many posters read one section at a time so that the book is fresh in their minds.

No need for consensus which is why we sometimes have to 'agree to disagree'. Some people state generalized opinions, others base opinions on quotes, others consider overall social factors, others ... etc. etc. If you like to critique (?) a work then feel free. We each approach a book uniquely which enriches us all.

________________________________________

I think its a hoot that Homais triumphs in the end. He used Charles until Charles was disgraced -- and Homais carefully hid his participation in the disgraceful surgery. Then Homais distances himself from Charles because suddenly they're in a different social status -- Homais, through duplicity, denial of responsibility and opportunism, is now in a superior position over Charles instead of a lower standing. It says a lot about the spiritually bankrupt bourgeois society.

Marvelle

George, what a wonderful thing to say about our discussions, I agree with you, they are super. I thought Marvelle expressed herself also very well.

At any rate, your idea of is there a type of personality who is often betrayed is a provocative one, it implies either a person with an unlucky curse or behavior patterns which then tend to cause such problems, I think Emma's betrayals seemed to be caused, to me, by her own behavior and aspirations.

Having finished the book I now see the blind beggar you all are talking about, he's a lot more than blind, isn't he? Great bleeding sores, oozing pus, literally rotting away, he reminds me of the picture of Dorian Grey in the attic slowly rotting away, he's the reality behind the false appearances that some of the characters seek to put forth in the world, or seek to be part of, which Flaubert seems to relentlessly....not mock....I don't know the word....drag in front of us.

Even at the horrific end we're always reminded of reality, we're hearing about various details of nature and furnishings, etc. sort of like "life goes on," type of thing while all these awful things are happening. The blind beggar, definitely an embodiment of reality, follows the coach, and when he sees Emma he sings about women falling under the sway of passion and petticoats in the breeze, (altho Flaubert notes he does have other songs and poems) he's everybody's nightmare come to life, he's the embodiment of everybody's mistakes, as if the appearances we all wear were suddely stripped off like a sci fi movie and our real selves displayed: as in the old saying goes, be sure your sins will find you out, type of thing. And he's harping on her mistakes. He seems to haunt her. Ironic that Homais wants change from this man, TB is contagious which of course the pharmacist would know.

Poor Emma, caught in a nightmare she can't get out of, of her own making (that always makes it worse) she appeals to...she seems to feel nobody can save her but these different men, we even see her with Binet and his lathe again, always turning that lathe. I have no idea what that's supposed to mean either?

Did you notice the women watch Emma and Binet's exchange thru TWO WINDOWS? Windows again? The women watch her try to get help from a man, she's desperate, I wonder what would have happened if she had simply let them seize the house and they all moved away somewhere else? As the old saying goes we don't have much but each other: but then she never prized Charles or Berthe. He could have started over, he did once.

I don't have the trial in my translation, wonder why not?

And then when she dies, horribly, I guess I've read too many mysteries, could you actually EAT arsenic? I thought not? And does it turn your face blue, is that why Chalres started so when he looked later on at the body? I'm not sure on the length of the suffering either, I just don't know enough about arsenic poisoning, seems like she ate a handfull, and it was extremely prolonged and painful.

Charles wants her buried in her wedding dress with these instructions, "Cover her with a big piece of green velvet."

Green mantles, green clothing, images of green cloaks have been in this book since the first chapter, when Charles wore green on the first page. I wish I knew what it means, but it does mean something, I'm sure of it.

Another repeated thing in the book is FATE. People are always saying in critical moments, that it's FATE!! On the last page Charles, uttering "the only [lofty philosophical remark] he had ever made in his life, " said, "

Only fate is to blame.

Flaubert really set that one off, he wants the reader to see it. Why?

This has been said by the characters throughout the book, however Flaubert gives us a hint, here at the last, as to what HE thinks of that notion, separating himself from the characters, by saying,

Rodolphe, who had directed that fate judged him to be extremely meek for a man in his position—comical, even, and a little contemptible

So it appears that Flaubert thinks man's destiny is not the result of "Fate," and is not preordained but instead is in the hands of each person. And if that is the case, then, the reader has to wonder which of the characters in this book Flaubert admires? Homais? The guy who made the press work for him? The embodiment of pretension? The happy family man whose happy children Charles in his misery spies again thru a window?

That doesn't seem fair, to me. Charles has been true, Homais has not. Homais seems to have all the rewards, Charles does not. Why?

I think that this judgment of Rodolphe's, which would be hard for any compassionate person to accept, is Flaubert's, and I think it's of the entire cast of characters in this book: they are all comical, and contemptible. Except for Charles who dies of a broken heart. And Berthe, of course, who never had a chance.

I'm still trying to figure out Flaubert's message. By condemning Emma who longed for something "better," to a miserable life and savage end, and worse, the ruination of her husband and child, he seems to be saying All is Vanity. However in elevating that old fraud Homais to the Legion of Honor, he seems to be saying this IS the way of the world, I can't decide what the lesson is here??

ginny

Hmmm I wonder if the message is simply - what happens, happens - ?!?

Saying "Only fate is to blame" is called passing the buck in some circles. I just found out that passing the buck is a poker term. Did you know that? A buck was a marker which was passed around the poker table to whoever had the next deal, or passing responsibility from one person to another.

I really laughed when I found out Homais was awarded the Legion of Honor. What a beautiful twist! I haven't seen as good a one as that in a story or novel for quite a long time. With Flaubert in control, the white-necktie-do-gooders didn't stand a chance.

Must this book have a lesson? I certainly wouldn't want the convoluted delusions and illusions that Emma had, or her life either.

Okay, I'm off to figure out if "green" refers to raw, green grass, or mould.

Mal

Fate seems to be used in this book when a character avoids responsibility for personal actions. Rodolphe is an experienced cynic who uses 'fate' quite freely while Charles is new to it and wavers in blaming fate over the surgery. By the ending of the novel when he called on fate seemed like he'd got the hang of it or else he'd gotten tired to trying to figure out the 'why' of things. It is easier, after all, to blame fate. I noticed that Emma never could do that.

I loved hearing about the Trial documents but caution against accepting the defense argument at face value. In court, if a prosecutor says 'A' in his arguments; then the defense must say 'B' to try to win the case; especially in days of extreme censorship. 'B' isn't necessarily reliable as to the artist's intention; most often it has nothing to do with intention and everything to do with winning the case whatever the means. The Trial was fascinating, however, in seeing the emotional mood and outlook of Flaubert's day and what had to be defended in court and I enjoyed reading about it.

Marvelle

"The evolution of the symbolism of green in Western culture: In Celtic myths the Green man was the God of fertility.

"Later in the millennium, Early Christians banned green because it had been used in pagan ceremonies.

"Nevertheless, as evidenced by this 15th Century wedding portrait ( Giovanni Arnolfini and His Bride by Jan Van Eyck ), the color green was the best choice for the bride's gown because of its earliest symbolism.

"Of note is the continued symbolism attached to the color in the latter part of this century. Anyone who chooses a green m & m (an American candy which contains an assortment of different colored chocolate sweets) is sending a somewhat similar message. Green has been reinterpreted by late 20th century American culture to signify a state of heightened sexuality in this specific situation."

From HERE

Thanks Ginny and Mal for the information about the color green. I did not realize that it was mentioned so often in the book. Ginny, I really liked how you explained the meaning of the blind man.

I really need to reread Part III. Emma did choose a horrible way to kill herself. She took a handful of Arsenic and swallowed it. Then, died slowly and painfully. I do not think she knew anything about Arsenic. She does not strike me as a person who would have chosen a painful death for penance or some other reason. I also think she would not have wanted to look like a distressed, dying person.

In the back of my book, I think there is a whole section about "windows." I have not read it yet.

Barbara, I understand your meaning of betrayal too. You gave me a lot to think about it.

Mal, I have seen Van Eyck's painting many times. I never focused on the fact that the bride was wearing green. I always looked at her pregnancy, but it was not a "real" pregnancy. How interesting. You have to look at a painting more than once. In the same way, it helps to read a thought provoking book more than once.

We do learn a lot in these book discussions. Learning is fun, and it helps to do it with others and not alone.

Emma wouldn't have taken arsenic if she'd known it'd be such a dreadful way to die. That's a good point, Hats. Emma didn't know anything about medicine; she wasn't interested in Charles' profession, but Flaubert the doctor's son obviously knew (of surgery etc) about arsenic.

Hats, if you have time can you share what your book says about windows?

Marvelle

Marvelle, you read my mind. I have so many questions. I know you and the others can help me.

Do you think Emma thought about her suicide for a long period of time? At first, I thought the deed was impulsive. Then, I reread these lines.

"The most pitiful fate of all," she sighed at length, "is to go on dragging out a futile life, the way I do." There is that word fate.

Both she and Leon discussed dying.

"Emma shrugged slightly and interrupted him to complain of the illness that had nearly killed her. What a pity it hadn't! Her suffering would now be over. Leon immediately expressed his longing for "the peace of the grave"; one night he had even written his will, asking to be buried in the beautiful velvet-striped bedspread he had received from her."

It surprised me to read about Leon thinking about suicide. Somehow, I relate suicides to women. Do more women commit suicide than men? It also surprised me that Leon would even think of the cover he wanted to be buried in. These thoughts do fit Leon's character. To me,he did seem like a romantic.

Marvelle, here are the thoughts from the book about WINDOWS. I think we might have covered them already.

"Emma's characteristic pose is at, or near, a window. This is indeed one of the first impressions Charles has of her:...il la trouva debout, le front contre la fenetre. Windows which are "ajar" are part of her literary reveries in the convent. The image, from the very outset, suggests some manner of imprisonment as well as a longing for a liberation. After her marriage, her daily routine brings her to the window every morning. When she goes through one of her nervous crises, she locks herself up in her room, but then, "stifling," throws open the windows. Exasperated by a sense of shame and contempt for her husband, she again resorts to the typical gesture: "She went to open the window...and breathed in the fresh air to calm herself."

These remarks are from an essay called PATTERNS OF IMAGERY: HER DREAMS TOO HIGH, HER HOUSE TOO NARROW BY VICTOR BROMBERT.

It goes on and on about windows. So fascinating. There is so much in this book. We could go on for another month and have more to say.

This is my other question. Leon and Emma spoke of high ideals. Were they just mouthing off? Were they sincere?

This is Emma. "I'd love to be a nun in a hospital," she said. "Alas," he replied, "there aren't any sacred missions like that for men, and I can't think of any kind of work...unless it's the medical profession..."

I just keep having this thought that Emma would have lived a happier life in a different position. I feel she missed her calling or her true identity.

"A common interpretation of the novel maintains that Emma Bovary's downfall is due to the fact that she is both foolish and romantically inclined. Emma comes to a tragic end because she has been self-dramatizing and impulsive and, above all, because she has believed in the ideals of the Romantic literature of which she has been an avid consumer since adolescence. This is the view adopted by many critics who have viewed Emma as mediocre and trite, her dreams shoddy, second-hand and second-rate. The literary critic Allen Tate, for example, described Emma as a `silly, sad and hysterical woman' (quoted in Brombert: 1966, p.84). For further discussion of this reading click on http://www.sunderland.ac.uk/~os0tmc/chemin/bovrom.htm.

"Another view holds that Emma is an essentially tragic figure, a figure of epic proportions whose ideals are thwarted by a petty and money-grabbing society. The poet and critic Charles Baudelaire, however, saw Emma as a heroic creation and described her as `très sublime dans son espèce, dans son petit milieu et en face de son petit horizon' (Baudelaire: 1976, p.83). She is a truly epic heroine in thrall to an excessive but splendid passion. She has heroic potential - Baudelaire was a writer keen to discover and celebrate what he called `l'héroïsme de la vie moderne' - but who has the misfortune of inhabiting a mediocre environment far too small for her considerable energies. In this particular interpretation Emma stands out as a figure representing a challenge to the sterility and materialism of the new `bourgeois century'. Emma is almost an artist, almost a rebel in her challenge to the priorities and ideals of her age. As such, she is ultimately an awe-inspiring and tragic figure. For further discussion of this reading click on http://www.sunderland.ac.uk/~os0tmc/chemin/bovbourg.htm.

"Another possible interpretation of Emma's downfall is that it is primarily due to her being a woman and not to her being foolish. In this essentially feminist reading, Emma is a victim of patriarchy, destroyed by a society that can conceive of no other role for women than that of wife and mother. Emma is essentially in revolt against the patriarchal order, although, of course, she lacks the insight and the vocabulary to conceive it in those terms. For further discussion of this reading click on http://www.sunderland.ac.uk/~os0tmc/chemin/bovpatr.htm"

Color Imagery in Madame Bovary

Dust Imagery in Madame Bovary
Structure of Madame Bovary

Eloise has said something interesting in the French discussion:

'Quelque part dans la discussion en anglais, je pense, il a été question d'une comparaison entre Flaubert et Lamartine. Deux auteurs d'une grande finesse, Lamartine qui nous élèvent, l'autre qui nous rabaissent. Pour ce qui est de l'écriture, Flaubert à du génie il ne faut pas en douter, mais contrairement à Lamartine, Flaubert se sert de sa plume pour exprimer ses sentiments négatifs envers la société, alors que Lamartine les expriment positivement."

As I read this, Eloise says, "There has been a comparison between Flaubert and Lamartine in the English discussion. Both authors have great finesse, Lamartine who elevates us, and the other who brings us down. In writing this book, Flaubert has genius, there is no doubt, but unlike Lamartine, Flaubert takes up his pen to express negative feelings about society, while Lamartine writes positively about it."

Eloise, please correct me here if my interpretation is wrong.

Lamartine was a French romantic poet who served briefly as minister of foreign affairs (1848).

Mal

That French discussion has also been a joy to read, look how beautifully and lyrically Eloise writes, it gives us all the flavor and a small appreciation of what we're dealing with, I feel that we've really had the best experience we could have with this!

BLUE???!!!? Malryn?? hahahah They do a whole article on BLUE? hahahaahah HAHAHA Thank you Malryn I had no idea, love all those critics's possibilities, too, BLUE? With all that GREEN? hahaahahah Wouldn't you KILL to read this one: Symbolic Green and Satanic Presence in Madame Bovary' Satanic? Jeepers.

Good points on the nature of death by arsenic, Hats and marvelle, I kept thinking as I read that that Flaubert himself had seen a lingering death by arsenic poisoning, but again, to swallow a handful might be a bit quicker, I have no idea, ironic that she'd die that way, when you think about it, married to a doctor and the pharmacist playing such a big part. I know people poison others with small batches over years of time and that it would not take a handful to kill somebody, will lok it up, am curious now, I'm sure it's as gruesome as reported.

Thank you also Hats for the windows stuff, that scene with the women watching another woman try to make her way through a man seems to me that it might be saying something.

Barbara, "whatever happens, happens," seems to imply FATE has a hand in all our lives? Or would that be a random sort of thing? It can't be God's will in Flaubert's case or was he, although anti church, religious, not sure here.

Marvelle, good point about when FATE is brought up, excuses being made, Emma certainly bewailed her fate but I'm in agreement I'm not sure who she blamed. I think she blamed Charles, actually, rather than FATE or God, I'm not sure Charlres deserved that.. Why do I keep thinking of Scarlett O'Hara for some reason in this thing, tomorrow, I'll think about that tomorrow? But even she made a dress out of the curtains and, at the end, continued on. .

GREEN M&Ms, Malryn? I am not sure I've ever seen one? Are they in every bag? Hahaahahah

Green to me is symbolic of renewal and life, in spring things "green up," GREEN is a good color, am going to have to look up that article, WHERE heaven knows.

Hats, I think maybe Flaubert is also making a point about the levels of society here, in what capacity do you think Emma WOULD have been happy? As a nun? She lacks the discipline. Married to the Marquis or whatever he was? Maybe. (And why does he appear at the end driving a prancing horse?)

Finally, did you see what I said about the blind beggar? Hahahah I said whenever he sees her he sings about passion and such but he can't SEE. And did a scene have him clinging to the coaches as they ran till the coachman beat him off? Tricky business for a sighted man, much less a blind man: to leap on a moving coach or did I mistake that? Those coaches of the 19th century were hard to get in much less jump up on the door and hang on. No mistaking what he sings to HER?

Hats what a beautiful quote about learning, to me everything, including this discussion, is a learning experience, that's beautiful and I've gotten a LOT of perspective from the posts of the other here, just as George said.

But there are Emma's today, in many forms, aren't there? 250+ years later, I don't think Emma had the perseverance to do anything, at all, she showed no fortitude, to me.

I thought Leon was lying about the suicide, wasn't he?

Neither Leon nor Rodolphe dropped a tear for Emma, but Justin and Charles and Berthe did, so she was not entirely unloved.

It's fascinating the different takes on this novel, t isn't it? I don't feel any differently about it now that I've read it all than I did in the first chapter, but I am not sure, still, what of the various positions cited here, on what's being said, to take. You might say it's a vicious satire of class and trying to be above yourself but then Homais does just that, by self promotion. I dunno but it's fun to contemplate!!!

In the heading we have a question on "human insensitivity" and I'm wondering if we gave a prize for the most insensitive who we think would win it? The answers might surprise us?

ginny

THE LAKE

Time pushes towards new shores
Into the eternal night no return
We weren't given to throw in the ocean of ages
An anchor for a single day?

Oh lake, the year has hardly finished its course
When here, every wave expected her
Look, I'm coming alone to sit on the shore
Where you saw her sit.

You were murmuring under these deep rocks
You were breaking against the sides
And the wind would throw up the waves
Against her adored feet.

One evening, you remember? We were sailing in silence;
All we could hear in the distance under the waves and under the sky
Are the oars striking in rhythm
Your harmonious waves.

Suddenly in sounds unknown to earth
From the charming shoreline the echo came
The wave was attentive, and a voice dear to me
Spoke these words:

"Oh time, stop your flight! And your propitious hours
Stop your course!
Let us savor these fleeting pleasures
Of the most beautiful of our days!

Enough of the sad here implore you
Flow, flow for them
Take with their days the cares that devour them;
Forget, us, the happy.

But I ask in vain for a few more moments,
Time escapes me and flees;
I say to this night, "slow down;" and dawn
will dispel the night.

"Let us love! Let us love in this fugitive hour
Let us hasten, enjoy
Man has no port, time has no shore
It flows, and we pass!"

Jealous time, can it be that these moments of drunken delight
Where love pours out on us, happiness
Flies away from us with the same speed
As unhappy days?

What? Is it gone forever? What? Is it completely lost?
What? Can we never fix our step?
Time which gives them, erases them
Will not give them back?

Eternity, nothingness, past, dark abysses
What do you do with the days you devour?
Talk to us: Will you never give back to us
What you've taken?

Oh lake! Oh silent rocks! Caves! Obscure forest!
All that time spares or gives birth to again
Save this night, save nature
At least the memory!

May it be in your rest and in your storms
Beautiful lake, and in your coastline
And in the black trees and in the rocks
Which hang over your waters!

May it be in the water and wind that passes
In the sounds of your shorelines that
In the star with its silver forehead
Which to surface with its soft clear light!

May the wind which groans and the reed which sighs
May the wind sense of your embalmed air
May all that one hears, that one sees, that one smells,
Say, "They loved!"

I was in the middle of a post when AOL abruptly threw me off line. The reconstruction will have to wait until the afternoon. Sorry.

"Symbolic Green and Satanic Presence in Madame Bovary. Well, I suppose in a way some people might consider Emma possessed.

Mal

I knew a young girl once who was described by Psychologists as being an imaginary princess without the castle she desired. This young girl was put in several wealthy foster homes with loving parents who really wanted a daughter - she wanted more. She had been the same while living with her birth mother ( the mother died when she was 12) I had this girl a lot to stay with us before she got permanent guardians but she always wanted to be the centre of attention. It did not work when she was placed firstly as the only girl in the family or as the only child. She wanted far more than any other human being could give her. She became an actress and is a member of a theatre company now in Australia. I think of Emma now as being like the girl I knew. She too wanted more than any one could give her. You have no idea how draining a person like this can be on the ones closest to them and how destructive they can be to any other person they consider to be competing with them for affection or attention.The psychologist said the behaviour of the girl I knew was an illness.

Carolyn

Fabulous links Malryn - I was especially taken with the one on structure - how did you originally get in - looks like it is a site for students and faculty - I window asking me to sign in kept popping up...

I also liked the essay on the use of birds in the book and until I read the essay on food it never struck me how much food plays a role in the book from wedding feast to suppers at all junctures of the story till finally Emma puts poison in her mouth - not exactly food but she eats the poison.

And the other essay I thought interesting where the blind man is like a decaying cupid since cupids are blindfolded and the use of cupid statues from the top of a wedding cake forward during her liaisons with both Rodolphe and Leon.

Emma: "The most pitiful fate of all ... is to go on dragging out a futile life, the way I do." This isn't Emma constantly bewailing her fate; she never got the knack of blaming fate as others had; Rodolphe pratlled on and on about fate. But Emma says she's the one responsible for dragging out a futile life.

Hats, thanks for including the information on the windows. So great.

Emma is unhappy that Leon left the village (and her) for Rouen and thinks:

"...now he was gone, the one bright spot in her life, the one possible hope of happiness! Why hadn't she grasped that good fortune when it had offered itself? And when it had first threatened to slip away -- why hadn't she seized it with both hands, implored it on her knees? She cursed herself for not having surrendered to her love for Leon." (Part 2 Ch 7) Emma is saying that opportunity knocked but she failed to take it. It was her non-action that's at fault in her mind.

Later when Rodolphe first cynically romances her above the dignitaries platform at the Agriculture Show, he talks on and on about fate and how he's in torment, driven by dreams and passions and "no wonder we fling ourselves into all kinds of fantasies and follies!" Emma replies "We poor women ... don't even have that escape." (Part 2 Ch

Eventually, Emma acts and begins an affair with Rodolphe. She plans their running off together (another action rather than leaving her future to fate) but when he leaves her, through the coward's way of a letter, she thinks of suicide. She reads his letter in the attic where she throws open the shuttered dormer window. Below her the countryside stretched out 'as far as the eye could see', the village square was empty, the pavement glittered, the weathervanes were motionless, and "from the lower floor of a house at the corner came a whirring noise with strident changes of tone. Binet was at his lathe."

"Leaning against the window frame she read the letter through, now and then giving an angry sneer. But the more she tried to concentrate, the more confused her thoughts became. She saw Rodolphe, heard his voice, clasped him in her arms, and a series of irregular palpitations, thudding in her breast like great blows from a battering ram, came faster and faster. She cast her eyes about her, longing for the earth to open up. Why not end it all? What was holding her back? She was free to act. And she moved forward. 'Do it! Do it!' she ordered herself, peering down at the pavement.

"The rays of bright light reflected directly up to her from below, were pulling the weight of her body toward the abyss. The surface of the vilage square seemed to be sliding directly up the wall of her house, the floor she was standing on seemed to be tipped up on end, like a pitching ship. Now she was at the very edge, almost hanging out, a great emptiness all around her. The blue of the sky was flooding her; her head felt hollow and filled with the rushing of the wind; all she had to do now was to surrender, yield to the onrush. And the lathe kept whirring, like an angry voice calling her. But then she heard another voice. 'Where are you?' It was Charles." (Part 2 Ch 13)

Binet's lathe is constantly whirring in the hobby of making napkin rings just to accumulate them. It is an empty, grinding pursuit and the lathe is symbolic of life in bourgeois society.

Emma can hardly bear it but yet when Charles calls out to her she doesn't jump after all. That will come later after more actions and disillusionment and finally the arsenic. Charles, Berthe and Justin grieve. Homais, the Representative of Bourgeois Society -- someone said "white-tier" which certainly fits the untra-conventional opportunist 'I'll do whatever it takes to climb the bourgeois ladder' Homais, it is the white-tier Homais who triumphs over Emma and the Blind Man.

One wonderful aspect of a well written novel is that there are multiple meanings. Flaubert had that fluid quality which seemed to be emphasized by the reality of official disapproval by the bourgeois rulers. He had to be a little tricky in his writing to squeeze past the censors, and he almost didn't get that book past them. While Flaubert criticizes Emma in so many ways, he criticizes even more the white-tiers, such as Homais -- the conventional cattle of a dull society who succeed in their futile existence. In the end there's a fineness to Emma that is highlighted against the stark contrast of the relentlessly dull opportunist Homais.

Marvelle

What fabulous posts, you are so right, Carolyn, people like that are an ubelievable drain on others, they say there's no greater burden than the unfulfilled hopes of another, good thing Charles WAS slow, maybe?

Barbara, me too on that site, but it let me read it, I enjoyed it, Malryn, EATING, I also had not realized that there was so much on it, and as for the arsenic Emma ate, I found this fascinating thing on Napoleon, Arsenic and the Color Green!!! A fascinating website better than a detective story WHO killed Napoleon, really?

Amazing!

Still looking for toxicology and arsenic, oh good post, Marvelle, good points on the windows and the lathe and Charles's voice, that WAS stunning and very good writing. And I was thinking today, yes, this IS a great book, there's still enough in it even after all this time for a lively debate, I've enjoyed it, still looking for arsenic poisoning and to see if it's possible to EAT it like that.

ginny

Here are two more on arsenic and it does appear from the first one here that death would have occurred in an hour or so if you ate a handful of it. I'm surprised to learn it's tasteless and odorless, here's the first bit, from Arsenic Symptoms

Arsenic, White Arsenic, Black Arsenic, Metallic Arsenic, Arsenic Trioxide, arsenous oxide, arsenic trihydride.

Form, In its pure state a grey metal. Most often found as arsenic trioxide - a white powder. I Murder cases it is usually swallowed. Can also be inhaled as dust or gas.

Effects, Not completely agreed upon in the scientific community, but, it is believed that arsenic interferes with certain enzymes and chemicals in the body. Side effects can include jaundice type skin. After long periods of ingestion victims can display flaky skin. Arsenic is believes to be a carcinogenic, thus possibly causing skin cancer.

The most common effect of arsenic poisoning is extreme stomach pain and cramp, in fact in Victorian England doctors would often diagnose arsenic poisoning as gastric fever, normally it was to late for the victim by the time they established the true cause. Other symptoms include throat burning and pain, vomiting and diarrhea with blood. Skin can become cold and clammy and the victims blood pressure falls dramatically, causing the person to become dizzy and weak. Convulsions and coma usually follow, death finally resulting from circulatory problems.

In cases of slow poisoning the signs are jaundiced skin, weakness and restlessness, headache and dizzy spells, with occasional spells of paralysis. Because of the structure of arsenic as an element, traces can be found in the hair, fingernails and urine, red blood cells are destroyed, thus causing the jaundiced look.

In extreme & Chronic arsenic poisoning the victim can experience burring in the hands and feet, a numbing sensation through the whole body, hair loss, skin irritation nausea, vomiting cramps, weight loss, visual disturbance and finally cardiac failure.

Reaction time, Normally within half an hour of the ingestion, death will occur in as little as a few hours, or, in the case of slow poisoning over a prolonged period, can take several weeks.

Treatment, The first course of action, if the doctor knows that it is arsenic poisoning, is to pump the stomach. The victim will then be given medication to bind the arsenic, and probably penicillin to clear any infections. The doctor will also need to treat the side effects of the arsenic, such as any shock, cardiac and blood related problems., as well as any kidney damage, which could result in kidney dialysis. Milk is often given to penitents as it acts a a binder in the stomach for arsenic and other metal derivatives.

Famous cases, Although more easily detected these days, many murderers still use arsenic as a poison. Forensic tests on samples from the hair of Napoleon have shown traces of arsenic.

And here's the second site saying that tolerance is different with each person (but they're not talking about eating a handfull). Poisonings

ginny

LE LAC DE LAMARTINE

This poem is not just a melody, it is a symphony. Not just by listening to the sound of the words but their meaning makes your heart soar.

That was an excellent translation of my post Mal. Thank you for taking the time to do it.

Eloïse

I've been trying to figure out what a hand-operated lathe would sound like. Does anybody know? Surely Binet didn't have electricity to power his, did he? Below is a link to an image of the only old hand-operated lathe I could find.
Hand-operated lathe
Marvelle, in Post #442 I mentioned "white-necktie-do-gooders". In New England where I come from a person who was called a "white necktie" was someone holier than thou who went around trying to convert people to his or her beliefs, and attempted to save souls.

Edit:

My wood-working sculptor daughter just told me the sound of the lathe would be the sound of the chisel held against the wood as it turns. She describes it as a "grindy, whoosh whoosh noise". She also mentioned that perhaps the crank of the lathe might have creaked because it needed to be oiled.

Mal

Wonderful links and thoughts have been given and expressed --and so well that there is no need for repetition.

The following are a few random remarks.

In response to an earlier post, Léon, a young man, and Emma were soul mates. Both had romantic ideas of far-away, more desirable places (Scotland, a chalet in Switzerland e.g.), both - bored out of their wits - were dissatisfied with the surrounding flat Norman landscape in which they found themselves, both dreamed endlessly of Paris as the ultimate paradise. I do not believe they seriously thought of doing away with themselves, nor was Emma's suicide premediated, IMHO. She had the existence and the precise location of the arsenic filed in her memory, but that's all, IMHO.

It seems one aspect needs to be addressed : Emma's state of mind. How stable was she ? In fact, WAS she stable ? Even as an adolescent she had her head in the clouds and, sfterwards, seemed to operate in a fog of irreality. Her awareness of reality became ever more clouded.

Rodolphe is annoyed at her rantings and ravings, and even adoring Léon wonders about her ever-changing moods : when the power of attorney is thrown into the fire, Emma burst out laughing and didn't stop. Her laughter was loud and strident - it was an attack of hysterics. Léon certainly noticed her ever-changing moods and demands and, later, was afraid of Emma's sudden extreme mood changes.

The writing is superb --just look at the juxtaposition of Emma's seduction by Rodolphe throughout the proceedings of the Agricultural Fair and its award-winning process. As I see it, there was abolutely no irony, cynicism or parody in the description of the woman who won an award for 54 years of domestic service -- I felt infinite sadness.

As countless critiques have shown, we could analyze Emma and this novel for quite some time; there are opinions and speculations galore - about the shifting point of view, the narrative technique and, naturally, speculations about Flaubert's view of women and their (lost? virtue at his time.

I have more thoughts and will post tomorrow late afternoon after I return from the annual state convention of my organization.

"Il vient de recevoir la croix d'honneur." He just received the "croix d'honneur".

The "croix d'honneur" must not be confused with "La croix de la Légion d'Honneur" which is the highest decoration in France.

I thought that this last phrase sounded strange and I asked Google: The "croix d'honneur" is a decoration destined for a table tennis champion. I laughed out loud when I read this.

Eloïse

Eloise, the online English translation says "Legion of Honor". What do the other translations say?

Mal

This translated site has a picture of Lamartine

http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=fr&u=http

/www.anthologie.free.fr/anthologie/lamartine/lamartine.htm&prev=/search%3Fq%3DAlphonse%2Bde%2BLamartine%250D%26start%3D10%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26ie%3DUTF-8%26sa%3DN

Wow you cannot just click on the link showing - you must copy the entire URL and past it on the location window in order to get to the page which is a translated page...

Dear Friends, the net is wonderful and the sources immense. Not all of the sources are accurate, however. I checked some translations and found them (a) wrong and (b) almost unintelligible.

Some references have it that Léon is a 'lawyer', but he is not.

When Emma meets him, he is a clerk in the office of a notary, and eventually becomes a notary himself. The marriage announcement reaches Charles after Emma's death but before he finds the love letters.

As for the medal awarded to Homais, one would have to know exactly what la croix d'honneur means. As I said, sometimes the accuracy of translations cannot be trusted and leaves something to be desired. And by God, there are dreadful spelling errors even (!) in the English texts of whatever, which I find, frankly, inexcusable -- speaking of course from the viewpoint of a translator.

La Croix d'Honneur du Policier Européen

I am not sure how that fits Homais - a police officer of civil or militery public service decorated for honor, honesty, integrity and courage. Homais was not a police officer that I remembe but maybe then all you had to do was offer outstanding civilian public service -

Has anyone else had the thought that just about every piece of Literature from Europe during the nighteenth century including some Operas had to do with money - having or not having it - the Jane Austin stuff - Dickens - the Bronte's were usually about characteres that had or did not have - La Boheme - on and on -

I am trying to figure out what the change was because I would not say the twentieth century Literature is based on having or not having money. The European authors of the 19th century do not write about the injustice of it, just the facts and how it governed lives.

By and large, except for Henry James and Whorton who both wrote as much about Europeans as Americans, most American writers of the period had different themes and if they did speak of social differences because of money it was to show the injustice of it. I'm thinking here of Sister Carrie.

What wonderful posts!! Each of them is just full of interesting thoughts and information.

I am sorry that I have not been able to be here the last few days. We have had heavy thunderstorms here in Alabama. Since I did not want my want my computer destroyed by lightening I could not be online. Also my daughter's father-in-law died. This required some time also.

Ginny, you asked me why Flaubert wrote this book. Mal gave an excellent answer to this question when she posted this comment. " What was Flaubert doing by writing Madame Bovary? He was tearing down romantic ideas about everything he could think of which had been covered by the misleading, pretty obfuscation Romanticism can bring." That is what Flaubert was doing.

Flaubert was a perfectionist and wanted to write a novel that was perfect in form and completely objective. It took him five years, working seven hours a day, to write this novel. He visited the places where this novel was set. He even drew maps of the area. He chose every word carefully. He tried to use the words and clichés that real people would use in the situations he presented in his novel. He cast no blame on any of his characters. He just described what happened.

George, I like to read a book through before discussing it just as Marvelle does. I think on the second reading that I am better able to examine the details.

Ginger, great comment.

Hats, you are certainly right that we could continue discussing this book for another month. I think we might discuss this book for many months. There are so many things that would be possible to point out an discuss. However we will end our discussion on the planned date. There are many books that we all need to read and discuss that I am sure that we will all want to move on to those. I do hope though that we take with us the knowledge that through his skill as a writer Flaubert showed us that is possible for everyday life to be a source of art.

I have more comments to make but my mouse is not working right tonight and I am having a hard time composing this post. It is very late. So I will be back in the morning with more comments.

Keep up the excellent comments and discussion.

Joan

I agree, Joan, everybody has submitted SUCH great points, thank you for that background information, so Flaubert labored long on this thing, that's wonderful background information, thank you.

Barbara, I agree, too, I do think that this novel is of a genre, he may have broken the "Romantic" mold but in places it seems he just couldn't help himself and laid on the pathos with a trowel, yet even now, many years later, it's still moving and his writing is superb!

Malryn, thanks for the lathe, now we can picture him there, endlessly through every toil and trouble, working on nothing, producing nothing of use that will ever BE used, just to...why? Is he somehow a symbol of a class of people or the indifference ...I 'm beginning to see indifference in this thing.

Eloise! Table Tennis prize? Hahahaah Now THAT is funny and changes entirely for me the point of the book. MY book says Legion of Honor. Table Tennis is much more in Homais's league and shows the futility of bourgeois striving, as do they all. Is the message "be content with enough?"

Hypolite (sp) was content and the machinations of the bourgeois Homais and Emma almost destroyed him, Caused him great pain anyway. Charles was content with enough, but married Emma, who was not.

Traude remarked on the woman at the fair who got an award for 54 years, I think, of farm service. She is presented as a symbol of "Be content with your lot, with enough, that's praiseworthy and noteworthy in itself and has more honor than a table tennis prize you have to work and falsify and finagle to win, which, in the end, means nothing."

I suppose you'd have to ask yourself what does matter? Didn't this take place at a time of great class shifts in France? Was Flaubert simply saying be content with your social status, your lot, the grass is not greener, it's shallow, false and will kill you in the end?

All is Vanity, in fact?

ginny

"All is Vanity." Ginny, are you plugging the All is Vanity book by Christina Schwarz that is slated for discussion in September? ; ) It must be a very good read.

It has been my experience that people are not so much indifferent as "I couldn't care less." I can remember making what seemed like a terrible public faux pas and cringing, only to realize that people are so wrapped up in their own "stuff" and issues that they had no time or inclination to notice mine. "Like so you spilled your coffee, so what? I've got bigger problems of my own on my mind than worry about what happens to you." If that's vanity, then that's what people have.

Perhaps Flaubert is saying that people should be practical and aim for realistic, attainable goals instead of what's in romantic fairy tales. Reaching for beautiful iridescent bubbles bobbing in the sky and pink elephants wearing diamond tiaras can only lead to thwarted hopes and frustration.

Mal

hahaah Malryn OF COURSE I'm pushing Vanity , it's another Remains, in my book, and I do hope people will turn out, it's a stunner. But also I wonder IF in fact, as you say, Flaubert is saying something about all of life not just a station in life.

In the process of mailing out a book for our Book Exchange, I was thinking about Marvelle asking can't we forgive her and that reminded me of a book I have to give away on the Exchange: Trollops' Can You Forgive Her?

Written in 1830, the reviewer says "English fiction from about 1830 corresponded very closely in theme and treatment with the political and social changes of the nineteenth century and is apparently based on "the predicament of women." Apparently "Alice has half-consciously, become deeply infected with the nineteenth-century idea that there was something important to do with her life." Apparently she is an early woman's lib person and gives something horrifying away?1? we can only guess, (I've not read it). I had to laugh at the introduction which quotes Henry James, exasperated with Trollope's repeated question, who answered, "Of course we can, and forget her, too, for that matter." Ahhaahahah

It would seem a type of novel or theme was prevalent at the time, much as Barbara said. I'm not sure what Trollope would have made of Madame Bovary, however, because he advises his female readers there is much you can learn in literature:

...you will find taught in them good lessons: Honour and honesty, modesty and self-denial.

Without being judgmental on Emma Bovary, or the whys of her situation or the wherefores, it really can't be denied that she did not practice any of those traits? It may be that we don't see them as virtues in 2003, but I can't think of one instance where she ever did any of them? I'm not going to forget her, nor Flaubert, nor this excellent pairing of French and English discussions, I've enjoyed this tremendously, it's a succes fou!

ginny

The Narrator in Madame Bovary

Hmm, honesty, modesty, self-denial? Gee, WHO in the novel doesn't follow that? How about Homais, L'heureux, Rodolphe etc etc.....But let's center on the 'white-tier' bourgeois Homais since the book ends with him.

-- Homais had done something so bad that in the beginning of the book, he'd been hauled in by the Royal Prosecutor. How much harm/deaths had Homais already caused?

-- Homais practices medicine & prescribes drugs behind the gold-black lettered glass door of his inner office

-- Homais keeps playing doctor despite Charles' move into the village

-- Homais runs over to see Charles treat his patients and thinks he'll use Charles

-- Homas says that other peoples' blood doesn't bother him, only his own. This indicates selfishness & callous indifference towards others; and also that Homais has already done unlicensed medical practice involving blood.

-- Homais tells Emma to help him persuade Charles to perform surgery

-- Homais runs away when the results of the surgery turn bad; pretends noninvolvement; helps blame Charles

-- Homais shuns the disgraced Charles

-- Homais near the end is so self-important that he leaves orders for Emma to see him then keeps her standing around the dinner table while he spouts off to his family about their behavior

-- Homais hypocritically wants to publically judge Emma by erecting a symbolic "ruin" over her grave

-- Homais banishes the Blind Man (also reminiscent of Emma) because the Blind Man threatens his newly-acquired dignity & status.

"The blind man, whom his salve had not cured, had resumed his beat on the hill at Bois-Guillaume, where he told everyone about the pharmacists's failure -- to such a point that Homais (hid to avoid a face-to-face meeting). He hated him. He must get rid of him at all costs, he decided, for the sake of his own reputation; and he launched an underhand campaign against him in which he revealed his deep cunning and his criminal vanity.... [Homais wrote about him in his newsletter; invented stories about him.] It was a fight to the finish. Homais was victorious; his enemy was committed to an asylum for the rest of his days."

________________________________

I'll let people argue about the medal that Homais worked so assiduously to get. Steegmuller translates it as the "cross of the Legion of Honor", but I'd be happy if the authorities palmed off onto Homais a medal for a minor sport. Whatever the medal, I think it was awarded for his political favors, for being a pest and also for being a volunteer fireman!

In the last two pages of the book we see how Homais pursued the medal. He ticks off his qualifications as

"First, during the cholera epidemic was conspicuous for devotion above and beyond the call of professional duty

[ahhh, this is why the Royal Prosecutor called him on the carpet! I remember reading about cholera in the book before this. Homais did go beyond his training; did cause deaths I bet and now he wants to say what he did was honorable and necessary!]

"Second, have published at my own expense various works of public usefulness..." [he cites his treatsie on Cider, his pharmacist's thesis, etc] " 'Not to mention that I am a member of several learned societies.' (He belonged to only one.)"

"And even suppose," he said with a caper, "that the only thing I had to my credit was my perfect record as a volunteer fireman!"

"Homais proceeded to ingratiate himself with the powers that be, he secretly rendered great services to Monsieur le Prefet during an electoral campaign. In short, he sold himself; he prostituted himself. He went so far as to address a petition to the sovereign in which he begged him to 'do him justice', he called him 'our good king' and compared him to Henry IV."

________________________________

The next to last paragraph is an authorial warning and summing up of Homais, the busybody 'clown' that we thought we'd seen in the pages. Homais is a con man and malicious in intent and harmful in his actions to an entire community:

"Since Bovary's death, three doctors have succeeded one another in Yonville, and not one of them has gained a foothold, so rapidly and so utterly has Homais routed them. The devil himself doesn't have a greater following than the pharmacist; the authorities treat him considerately, and public opinion is on his side."

Homais, it turns out, is not a clown but the devil and his goal all along was to rout Charles (and because of Charles, to also rout Emma).

Is Homais honest, modest, self-denying? Absolutely not. He far exceeds Emma in those failures of character and actions. Flaubert has Homais, Representative of the Bourgeois Man, end the novel in his amoral triumph while Flaubert authorially disapproves of him as the devil; and therein lies an important moral.

Marvelle

Steegmuller's translation has Leon as a notary's clerk and law student. And that Leon left Yonville for Rouen & continued as a clerk while studying law.

Marvelle

Mal - Your last post reflects my feelings.

Carolyn

"Il fait une clientèle d'enfer; l'autorité le ménage et l'opinion publique le protège." The ( Homais' ) practice makes ( grows, is, like the fire of ) an inferno; ( the ) authority saves ( shields ) him and public opinion protects him." Enfer means hell, inferno. Clientèle means practice like medical practice. There is no mention of the devil in this paragraph of the French text.

I think Flaubert neither approved or disapproved of the behavior of any of his characters. His aim was to be an objective reporter, as Joan has said, and objective reporting leaves no room for comment, authorial or editorial. I'm sure this is why Flaubert used the narration technique that he did.

I'm also sure that there's not one of us here who likes Homais. However, I don't believe it was Flaubert's intent to make his reader like or dislike any of the characters in this book. As I see it, his aim was much broader and greater than just winning sympathy or antipathy for any character, female or male.

It does interest me, though, that this masterful writer has been able for 146 years to stir up the various different reactions he did, some of which we see here.

Mal

Ah, but Flaubert did get in his authorial two-bits at the novel's ending. Mal recently wrote "Perhaps Flaubert is saying that people should be practical and aim for realistic, attainable goals instead of what's in romantic fairy tales." etc etc etc etc. However, there is no perhaps with the novel's ending which is in the authorial voice and not in Homais' head.

Flaubert is a careful wordsmith. I feel Steegmuller diluted the 'enfant' translation although he wasn't aiming to do so; Steegmuller: " 'Il fait une clientele d'enfer' " -- which appears in various English versions as 'His practise grows like wildfire,' or 'He is doing extremely well,' or 'He has a terrific practise.'...And yet, surely, the word "enfer" (hell) isn't present in the original for nothing. The mere use of the term suggests at once that Homais, prince of the bourgeois, is an earthly counterpart of the prince of darkness."

Flaubert wrapped up the story around the conventional white-tier Homais and used his authorial voice. Lovely writing.

Madame Bovary at times was a slow and depressing read; other times quite funny; Flaubert speeded up the action at the end as Emma and Charles became beseiged. Mal talked (I'm relating to Emma's troubled feelings) about people not listening to her problems because they have their own burdens and I agree with that especial during the ending.

Emma didn't have anyone to confide in although the Catholic priest should have listened; she didn't have friends or family to talk with in private -- Charles wouldn't/couldn/t and her father seemed too fragile in his letter which is why I think she didn't burden him.

Marvelle

History of Flaubert's Accepted Ideas

More Accepted Ideas

On the second link, scroll down to the essay which includes the use of the ideas as a source.

Marvelle

As I said before, ha ha, isn't it interesting that "this masterful writer has been able for 146 years to stir up the various different reactions he did, some of which we see here"?

There is no argument about Emma Bovary as far as I'm concerned. There's something about her which applies to her life and why she was the way she was in every single post that mentions her -- whether we believe she is the product of a society that was repressive to women; whether we believe her actions and reactions are based on a gender issue, or whether we think she had a psychological problem, or that something else was responsible for her behavior and what happened to her. We're all seeing the same woman in different ways, and it's possible that Flaubert wanted Emma to be everything we see.

Remembering what Traude said recently about translations -- something as a linguist she's spoken of before -- I don't agree with Steegmuller's idea that Flaubert painted Homais as the "prince of the bourgeois, an earthly counterpart with the prince of darkness", or that Flaubert was making authorial comments at the end. What we, who are not French, do is make an interpretation of the original language of the book which is particularly our own. I'd like to know what someone who is French and lives in France and understands the history of that country and its literature says about this book.

Mal

Perhaps it might be a good idea right now to look again at this article posted by Eloise in the French discussion.

"Comme le remarque Jean d'Ormesson : 'Dès l'enfance apparaissent deux traits fondamentaux de Flaubert : une certaine fascination du mal, de la souffrance, de l'horrible, et le souci d'une information un peu sinistre , sur les événements et la vie qui entraînera un goût du document assez impressionnant.' "

Gustave Flaubert

Mal, from the article you mention, the following quote is interesting because it sheds a light on his personality.

Le jeune Gustave a une éducation assez monotone. Il grandit dans un pavillon annexé à l'hôpital, où son père dissèque des cadavres. Il est délaissé par sa famille qui a placé tous ses espoirs dans la réussite de son frère aîné, Achille. Ce dernier sera chirurgien.

The young Gustave has a rather monotonous education. He is raised in the hospital annex where his father dissects cadavres. He is abandoned by his family who has put all hopes on the success of his older brother Achille. This last one will become a surgeon.

Eloïse

And while Flaubert questions the romantic view of life in favor or realism - as many of us here believe a realistic approch is best to live with the difficulties of life - Emily Dickenson (1830-1886) seems to have a bit of Emma within her heart - she wrote:

I Dwell in Possibility
I dwell in Possibility -
A fairer House than Prose -
More numerous of Windows -
Suprerior - for Doors -
Of Chambers as the Cedars -
Impregnable of Eye -
And for an Everlasting Roof
The Gambrels of the Sky -
Of Visitors - the fairest -
For occupations - This -
The spreading wide my narrow Hands
To gather Paradise -

I wonder if that is saying something - that in this nation - continent during the nineteenth century there is much opportunity - therefore, a women can dream of possibilites - where as, in Europe where tradition is the basis of life there is less room for dreaming and possiblities - or maybe among the new emerging middle-class, developing and clinging to a tradition of behavior was more valuable than dreaming of freedom?!?

As to Homais - there is a modern twist on an old saying that says - Rats Win...

Thanks for the information on Flaubert, Eloise. It sounds like he had a difficult beginning with his own family. It helps in understanding his attitudes (bitterness, anger even) in the "Dictionary of Accepted Ideas" against the conventional bourgeois life & values.

Barbara, Dickinson is a wonderful poet. Possibilities in the 19th century in different continents? That's an intriguing thought. Emily Dickinson saw what she wanted -- to write -- and she devised a life that helped her reach that goal. Quite like Flaubert managed his life rather than limting himself to the bourgeois box. Emma didn't have those options as she found out.

The best part of possibilities: finding your special aim or purpose in life and taking steps to achieve.

I don't think Homais actually wins because Flaubert gets the last laugh on him. Homais is forever more the limited clown on Flaubert's pages.

Marvelle

Critique by George Sand"

"He (Flaubert) wanted that the woman shunning reality should be crazy and despicable, that the husband devoted to reality, deplorably foolish, that the ambient reality, house, town, countryside, neighbors, friends, everything be of sickening stupidity, ugliness and sadness around those two unfortunate characters.

The thing is masterfully executed and such a stroke of essay (or trial) is worthy of admiration. There is in this book a painful bias that never denies itself, proof of a great strength of spirit or of character, sure proof of a great sharpness of talent."

The original by George Sand is so much better than my translation.

Eloïse

While not directly related to Emma Bovary, I am reminded of the movie, The Hours, adapted from the book by Michael Cunningham and based on Virginia Woolf's book Mrs. Dalloway. If you have not seen The Hours, I highly recommend it. One of the best movies I have seen in a long time. Another interesting portrait of women. I note that a discussion of these books has already taken place.

I now want to read the criticisms (at the back of the book) that I mentioned some time ago which I felt would be interesting to examine.

Today is the last day of this most interesting and stimulating discussion. I'd like to thank Joan Grimes for all the work she's done. I'm so sorry you've been ill, and hope you're feeling better, Joan.

I'd also like to thank Barbara and Marvelle for their scholarship and research, which opened up so many ideas.

Thanks, too, to Carolyn and Hats and Theron and George and Robby and everyone else who has participated, especially Eloise and MsSuzy who gave us a different and more French point-of-view.

Ginny, you've been a peach to take the time to point out things and ask such good questions. You're a bulwark in Books and Lit, and I do appreciate you and all you do.

See you all again soon in another discussion, I hope.

Mal

Before we officially end this discussion tomorrow I would like to comment on a couple of things.

One of them is Flaubert's purpose in including the the blind beggar. It seems to me that Flaubert is pointing out how blind everyone in this novel is. Charles is blind to the things that Emma wants in life and to her affairs. Emma is blind to her own self-deception about what life is like as well as being unable to see through the the deceitful ideas of Homais and the scheming and shady ways of Lheureux.

I also wanted to mention this term-- bovarism or bovarysm. I tried to put in a clickable but it did not work. so here it is:

Bovarism:

bovarism. Also bovarysm(e. [ad. F. bovarysme, f. the name of the principal character in Flaubert's novel Madame Bovary (1857) + -ism.] (Domination by) a romantic or unreal conception of oneself. Hence bovaric, bovaristic adjs.; bovarize, bovaryze v. trans. and intr. [1902 J. de Gaultier (title) Le Bovarysme.]
1929 A. Huxley Do what you Will 273, By a process of what Jules de Gaultier has called 'Bovarysm' .. we impose upon ourselves a more or less fictitious personality. Ibid. Our earnest efforts to bovaryze ourselves into imaginary unity. Ibid. The bovaric personage .. is firmly established.
1934 T. S. Eliot Eliz. Essays iii. 40, I do not believe that any writer has ever exposed this bovarysme, the human will to see things as they are not, more clearly than Shakespeare.
1936 A. Huxley Olive Tree, 30 The French philosopher, Jules de Gaultier, has said that one of the essential faculties of the human being is 'the power granted to man to conceive himself as other than he is'. He calls this power 'bovarism' after the heroine of Flaubert's novel Madame Bovary. Ibid. 31 People have bovarized themselves into the likeness of every kind of real or imaginary being. Ibid. 32 Realizing, if only in words, his bovaristic dreams. 1952 H. Levin in Ess. in Crit. II. 3 If to Bovarize is simply to daydream. Ibid. 16 An all-pervasive state of mind: Bovarism.
Oxford English Dictionary

Joan

Malryn,

Thanks for your kind words. I have enjoyed the discussion very much.It has been wonderful to have all of the wonderful dedicated participants who have put so much into this discussion.

Joan

I too would like to thank the leaders of the discussion and all the participants. It's been a great discussion- just like all the others I have participated in on SN.

Carolyn

Thank you to the DLs for their time and energy and for fearlessly leading us through this discussion. Thanks also to each participant who, together, brought this novel to life.

Just a few of the many instances -- Barbara's Hirondelle as the yellow bird, Hats perfection as a commentator on the Comedy of life, Eloise's graceful eloquence, and Ginny's cracked kettle. (No, Ginny, not a personal crack!)

I hope to see you all again over a virtual cuppa on the Net.

Marvelle

I enjoyed the discussion. I also would like to thank the discussion leaders and the posters.

HO, Joan, LOOKIT you here at the last with the blind beggar and the derivative of Bovary!! Well done, they WERE blind, well done, there are none so blind as those who will not see: that's fabulous, and I've trememdously enjoyed this discussion of this French classic, and I do think the company, to a man, distinguished themselves, it's been great fun and I enjoyed it, our first French/ English discussion, a succes fou!

Well done, Joan G, and Everybody!!

ginny

Joan,

I too believe Flaubert introduced the blind beggar for a symbolic reason, as you said.

For emotional, high-strung Emma he was frighteningly real when he came up to the coach after her Thursday trysts, once sticking his grimacing face in the window. He always hummed a little innocent-sounding ditty.

Is it possible that she loathed his presence not only because of his horrifying physical appearance but as a silent accuser, representing possible retribution? Or as a menetekel ?

On her deathbed Emma is suddenly galvanized when she hears the first words of he tune and the beggar's approach, sits straight up and cries,"The blind man!".

This time he sings all the words-- the song was far from 'innocent'.

In MB Flaubert has expressed cynicism about people, whether high-born or not, governmental bodies, bureaucracy, the role of the church, and all kinds of human behavior. The message is not a hopeful one.

The plot, the shifting points of view, the narrative flow, all are admirable. Chapter 8 of part 2 is especially remarkable : It's the day of the Agricultural Fair, how the people wait for the Prefect to do the honors, but then a second-tier Prefectural Councilor comes in his stead; the long speeches, and finally the awarding of prizes.

The award procedure is skillfully woven into the slow verbal seduction of Emma by Rodolphe, and the alternating dialogues are by turns funny, poignant, and, yes, sad in the case of the work-worn woman who was honored for 54 years of domestic service. Too dazed to come forward at first and uncomprehending, she understood later and said she'd give the money to the church. Satire? I'm not so sure in this case.

This was a marvelous discussion and I am very grateful to have been a part of it, even though not as regularly as I had intended. Many thanks, Joan, for guiding us, to Theron for the beautiful setup, and to all who contributed their voices and the splendid links. With gratitude.

Just to set the record straight, I did NO work on the setup for this discussion. I did the Heading HTML for Eloïse in the French Discussion. Joan G. deserves all the credit for this setup and heading. She took the photo, made the mask and did all the HTML. Great job Joan G. !!!!

Theron

Whoops - yes Theron, you got in here while I was spell checking my post - yes, Joan's heading is a wonder.

Wow yes! super discussion - great thoughts from everyone!!! YES - super give and take as we wound ourselves round so many issues, many of which were uncomfortable.

The Bovarism info was another spot of understanding Flaubert's intentions - thanks Joan. And the graphic that greeted our opening of this discussion was a joy to gaze upon each day - wonderful and appreciated...

I do need to add that I am wondering if any of us had an appreciation for how hard it was to maintain a home during this time in history and the isolation or lack of intimacy folks experienced because in order to make things work successfully it took all your waking hours in work even with servants -

I have been watching Manor House on PBS and the program is showing the strict social rules that deprived those upstairs as well as those downstairs with time for themselves and time to be with each other - the man is definitely the head of the house much like the captain of a ship and he seems to be the only one enjoying the experience as they are trying to recreate an Edwardian Manor House.

I remember last year watching the 1900 House and there also, WITH the aid of one servant, the wife and eldest daughter were exhausted all the time and became more estranged from the family as each had their own box so to speak that was their expected role and station in life.

This is all taking place about 50 years AFTER Madam Bovary and to realize that Emma ran a smooth and very successful life with the extra emanates and kept herself trim, proper and turned out really steeps more accolades on her head -

The Manor House is showing the lack of intimacy and boxed social expectations for nearly every move made by every member of society and how easy it was because of the seperatness of lives and the all-consuming work for all except the head of the house - and so for the men to have a mistresses was considered ordinary -

Even the servants feel this lack of intimacy and are speaking about it when the Hall Boy and the Scullery Maid against the rules are a couple who if this happened in 1903 she, the maid, not the Hall Boy, would have been sacked with no references and therefore her only employment would have to be one of becoming a prostitute.

The sister of the wife in the Manor House actually becomes ill because of the loneliness and her life now reduced to being powerless - women had no voice except if you were the mistress of the house and had a good intimate life with the head of the Manor. Even that relationship became strained - The older boy is amazed to see his career mom now spending hours, at least 5 hours a day over her clothes, dressing, re-dressing and choosing which pins to wear - he has to write her a note to ask for some weekly time so they can chat as a son and mother - the youngest boy is rebelling, spending most of his time among the servants just for the hustle and bustle of people.

In the Manor House production there is an older women brought in to meet those who are attempting the servant positions - this women was a servent in that very house when she was young - and even among the servants there was a lot of advantage taken of the lessor staff members by the men - she also foundly looked at the Park from the rooftop where she slept many a summer night just to be cool. The work was so demanding that getting out of the house was often only on Sunday walking back from Church. This is before servants were given any time off except for special emergencies arranged by the Butler and the Head of the Manor - The only one that is truely enjoying the experience and as his wife says has taken to his role is her husband as head of the Manor.

All this put for me a light on the reality of what many of us were saying about Emma - She was looking for more than an affair - this TV special sheds light on the lack of intimacy experienced by women and Emma was trying to fill that void -

We know Charles was gone most all day and when at home he enjoyed receiving Emma's attention - but Emma did not receive similar attention from him or others who visited. It was probably that feeling isolated, similar to those in the Manor House, more than if Charles talked with her about her interests - Emma really had no meaningful decisions to make - only if she should be a good wife - and what she should or not buy - and if she did buy than she had a choice -

What I did not appreciate was the Herculean nature she displayed when these perfectly run households that she managed were described. Both her and Charles' home and her father's home that she had in such perfect order. That perfect order she created appears to be the rue of her existence since perfect order ment isolation and a lack of intimacy.