Scan barcode
goroshyna's review against another edition
adventurous
funny
informative
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? It's complicated
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
2.75
Очевидно, що роман було задумано як свого роду настанову молодим жінкам, але час показав, що автор — душніла. Якщо мене чогось і навчила ця книжка, то лише того, що завжди існували чоловіки, які любили вказувати жінкам, як краще поводитися, «щоб завоювати чоловіка».
З-поміж двох головних героїнь — Амелії ат Ребекки — хоч якусь розвинену особистість і автономію має лише друга, і саме вона — лиходійка історії. Звичайно, вона лицемірна та егоїстична, проте водночас вона винахідлива, харизматична, дотепна, а ще вправна в музиці та мовах. Теккерей ставить у приклад Амелію, яку прямим текстом описує як не надто розумну або цікаву, або вправну, або самостійну. Вона ніяка сама по собі, тому існує як додаток до інших персонажів, заради яких жертвує собою та які через неї переступають.
«Ярмарок суєти» неможливо сьогодні сприймати серйозно, оскільки з висоти сучасності смішно виглядають позитивні персонажі, які спокійно планують окупацію іншої країни, керують колоніями, не говорячи вже про зневагу до ірландців, євреїв і просто печерний расизм. Але я вдячна цій книжці за згадки про жінок, які на початку 19 століття були атеїстками та практикували самостійність. Вони, звичайно, усі були непорядними.
З-поміж двох головних героїнь — Амелії ат Ребекки — хоч якусь розвинену особистість і автономію має лише друга, і саме вона — лиходійка історії. Звичайно, вона лицемірна та егоїстична, проте водночас вона винахідлива, харизматична, дотепна, а ще вправна в музиці та мовах. Теккерей ставить у приклад Амелію, яку прямим текстом описує як не надто розумну або цікаву, або вправну, або самостійну. Вона ніяка сама по собі, тому існує як додаток до інших персонажів, заради яких жертвує собою та які через неї переступають.
«Ярмарок суєти» неможливо сьогодні сприймати серйозно, оскільки з висоти сучасності смішно виглядають позитивні персонажі, які спокійно планують окупацію іншої країни, керують колоніями, не говорячи вже про зневагу до ірландців, євреїв і просто печерний расизм. Але я вдячна цій книжці за згадки про жінок, які на початку 19 століття були атеїстками та практикували самостійність. Вони, звичайно, усі були непорядними.
Content Warnings
Graphic: Misogyny
Moderate: Racism
Minor: Antisemitism
ran_sophia's review against another edition
challenging
reflective
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
3.0
The book was good and the story is interesting, but the author had a great need to explain everything.
Content Warnings
Graphic: Misogyny, Racism, and Colonisation
Moderate: Fatphobia, Racial slurs, Sexism, Toxic relationship, Toxic friendship, and Sexual harassment
Minor: War
foreverinastory's review against another edition
challenging
funny
reflective
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
3.0
This was all right. Way too long tho.
Vanity Fair like other British classics is a study of the white wealthy nobility. This story follows many characters, but the main two are Becky and Amelia. These two are friends as young girls, but distance and time see the slow end of that. We also see how these two respond differently to the challenges of life.
At times this was kind of sarcastic and funny. But overall I was just not impressed. I did get a bit more interested when Becky starts getting money out of the men in her life. Unfortunately, she is villainized and sent off to exile, so I was done by that point. Amelia felt like a cardboard cut out of a woman tbh. I didn't hate this, but it wasn't particularly fun either.
Rep: Mainly all white, wealthy, cishet and abled bodied cast. Fat male side character, male side character with a lisp/speech impediment.
CWs: Misogyny, racism, racial slurs, colonisation, xenophobia. Moderate: toxic friendship, death, sexism, antisemitism, grief. Minor: war.
Vanity Fair like other British classics is a study of the white wealthy nobility. This story follows many characters, but the main two are Becky and Amelia. These two are friends as young girls, but distance and time see the slow end of that. We also see how these two respond differently to the challenges of life.
At times this was kind of sarcastic and funny. But overall I was just not impressed. I did get a bit more interested when Becky starts getting money out of the men in her life. Unfortunately, she is villainized and sent off to exile, so I was done by that point. Amelia felt like a cardboard cut out of a woman tbh. I didn't hate this, but it wasn't particularly fun either.
Rep: Mainly all white, wealthy, cishet and abled bodied cast. Fat male side character, male side character with a lisp/speech impediment.
CWs: Misogyny, racism, racial slurs, colonisation, xenophobia. Moderate: toxic friendship, death, sexism, antisemitism, grief. Minor: war.
Content Warnings
Graphic: Misogyny, Racial slurs, Racism, Xenophobia, and Colonisation
Moderate: Death, Sexism, Antisemitism, Grief, and Toxic friendship
Minor: War
xarlotte's review against another edition
adventurous
challenging
funny
informative
reflective
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
3.5
Content Warnings
Graphic: Misogyny, Racial slurs, Xenophobia, and Colonisation
Moderate: Fatphobia
Minor: Grief, Toxic friendship, and War
annemaries_shelves's review against another edition
adventurous
challenging
funny
lighthearted
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
4.0
Whew, what a journey! It took me a full month of dipping in and out and only getting ~200 pages in to finally hit my stride! I found reading at least two chapters a day kept me engaged and motivated and finishing in another 4 weeks.
Thackeray has a talent for satire and Vanity Fair truly is one of the best satires with incisive commentary that I've ever read. He explores the vices and vanities of early 19th century England without offering true condemnation or solutions to what's essentially human nature. He's also quite funny - there were a number of times he made me laugh out loud with his commentary and turns of phrase.
He uses a puppet style narrative structure with an omniscient point of view that allows for a birds-eye view of the characters and setting. Generally this worked really successfully, but I could tell when he got too focused or distracted with one storyline and would spend numerous pages/chapters on something, or drop a plot thread for too long.
Consequently, because of the serialized nature and narrative structures and choices employed, there were some meandering parts and some confusing elements where Thackeray seems to have mixed things up unintentionally. The novel overall could have benefited from a bit of tightening up; however, the sprawling nature of the story is also a highlight (so I wouldn't suggest cutting out too much!).
The length of the novel will therefore be a plus or minus for some, depending on personal preferences. Same as to the character flaws - the subtitle is A Novel Without a Hero, and truly almost no characters are redeemed or positively changed by their respective ends. Something I kind of delighted in, to be honest!
Regarding the ending, it was slightly too rushed for me (a bit contradictory, with my talk of tightening up the narrative). Much of the loose threads Thackeray attempts to tie up in the last chapter, which was slightly unsatisfactory for me (particularly as he dragged out the preceding five chapters of the Sedleys' and Dobbin's visit in Germany). Additionally,I would have preferred Amelia and Dobbin to not have married. I kind of wanted, to fit the "lack of redemption theme" for Amelia to continue pining over that bastard, George, and Dobbin to either pine over Amelia or fully move on from her. But I'll take what I got! . I also noticed that Thackeray would alternate between marking women as weak, passionless, evil, conniving etc. (depending on whether an Amelia-type or Becky-type), but then would express how much pain and suffering women live with in English, patriarchal society. It was an interesting contradiction that puzzles me as to his true thoughts.
Finally, as with pretty much every classic (and many books still today), there is racism, antisemitism, sexism/misogyny, xenophobia, fatphobia etc. Slurs and/or harmful descriptions are used throughout the text.
Overall, I really enjoyed my time with this story, these characters, and the biting social and personal commentary from the author. I can see how it's remained a classic of English canon, and if the sprawling story intrigues you (and you're willing to put up with the -isms of the text), I really recommend giving this novel a shot!
Thackeray has a talent for satire and Vanity Fair truly is one of the best satires with incisive commentary that I've ever read. He explores the vices and vanities of early 19th century England without offering true condemnation or solutions to what's essentially human nature. He's also quite funny - there were a number of times he made me laugh out loud with his commentary and turns of phrase.
He uses a puppet style narrative structure with an omniscient point of view that allows for a birds-eye view of the characters and setting. Generally this worked really successfully, but I could tell when he got too focused or distracted with one storyline and would spend numerous pages/chapters on something, or drop a plot thread for too long.
Consequently, because of the serialized nature and narrative structures and choices employed, there were some meandering parts and some confusing elements where Thackeray seems to have mixed things up unintentionally. The novel overall could have benefited from a bit of tightening up; however, the sprawling nature of the story is also a highlight (so I wouldn't suggest cutting out too much!).
The length of the novel will therefore be a plus or minus for some, depending on personal preferences. Same as to the character flaws - the subtitle is A Novel Without a Hero, and truly almost no characters are redeemed or positively changed by their respective ends. Something I kind of delighted in, to be honest!
Regarding the ending, it was slightly too rushed for me (a bit contradictory, with my talk of tightening up the narrative). Much of the loose threads Thackeray attempts to tie up in the last chapter, which was slightly unsatisfactory for me (particularly as he dragged out the preceding five chapters of the Sedleys' and Dobbin's visit in Germany). Additionally,
Finally, as with pretty much every classic (and many books still today), there is racism, antisemitism, sexism/misogyny, xenophobia, fatphobia etc. Slurs and/or harmful descriptions are used throughout the text.
Overall, I really enjoyed my time with this story, these characters, and the biting social and personal commentary from the author. I can see how it's remained a classic of English canon, and if the sprawling story intrigues you (and you're willing to put up with the -isms of the text), I really recommend giving this novel a shot!
Content Warnings
Moderate: Death, Fatphobia, Misogyny, Racial slurs, Racism, Sexism, Xenophobia, and Antisemitism