Scan barcode
maryehavens's review against another edition
3.0
I'm glad I revisited this book. It does require quite a bit of attention because there's tons of characters and Welty uses the same names again and again (Battle, Uncle Battle, Little Battle, e.g.). Someone said this is a "jumbled mess" and yes, it is messy/chaotic. But you have so many people gathered together for a wedding that it can't help but be chaotic! The family structure and the "servant" (read: former slaves) structure also makes it chaotic. I found it difficult to remember why this kid was here and was this kid really Ellen and Battle's child and how many children did they have anyway and how old is this aunt??
I find it interesting that the Goodreads description says it was set in 1923 because I had a very difficult time pinning down the time period. Denis and George served in the war and I initially thought that was WWI but other family members kept referring to the Civil War. The other stumbling block was the amount of servants on the properties. I don't know much about the transition of African-Americans from Civil War to Reconstruction to, like, the 1890s. I imagine that there was a slow turnover from slaves to former slaves to servants. And someone else also mentioned something about Reconstruction so it seemed fresh-ish in their mind. It was difficult for me to figure out.
In terms of Southern, LORDY, this was SOUTH-ERN!!
I did enjoy reading this book, if only to really dig into Southern literature, but it requires a lot of attention. Kind of like the Fairchilds themselves, TBH. :)
-------------------------------------------
I'm going to need to come back to this one. It just couldn't hold my attention. I started over twice. Willing to try again but not now.
I find it interesting that the Goodreads description says it was set in 1923 because I had a very difficult time pinning down the time period. Denis and George served in the war and I initially thought that was WWI but other family members kept referring to the Civil War. The other stumbling block was the amount of servants on the properties. I don't know much about the transition of African-Americans from Civil War to Reconstruction to, like, the 1890s. I imagine that there was a slow turnover from slaves to former slaves to servants. And someone else also mentioned something about Reconstruction so it seemed fresh-ish in their mind. It was difficult for me to figure out.
In terms of Southern, LORDY, this was SOUTH-ERN!!
I did enjoy reading this book, if only to really dig into Southern literature, but it requires a lot of attention. Kind of like the Fairchilds themselves, TBH. :)
-------------------------------------------
I'm going to need to come back to this one. It just couldn't hold my attention. I started over twice. Willing to try again but not now.
ewg109's review against another edition
3.0
More and more I feel like the American South is its own culture, wholly incomprehensible to me. I have more understanding of rural England, than I do of Welty's Delta. As a result, I suspect I missed a lot of this novel.
What does the garnet pin mean? What about the wandering girl? Is the Yellow Dog just a big old symbol of time? What about the cake? Why do Dabney and George marry "beneath them"? Is George a good guy or a bad guy? Is he the rejection of the masculine archetype? Is his refusal to find Robbie a method to cast him as anti-hero? Or is her return meant to portray him as inevitable? Is this all just about change and constancy? Is this novel reflective of the female narrative?
Can someone please explain this whole novel to me, because its not just about the wedding.
What does the garnet pin mean? What about the wandering girl? Is the Yellow Dog just a big old symbol of time? What about the cake? Why do Dabney and George marry "beneath them"? Is George a good guy or a bad guy? Is he the rejection of the masculine archetype? Is his refusal to find Robbie a method to cast him as anti-hero? Or is her return meant to portray him as inevitable? Is this all just about change and constancy? Is this novel reflective of the female narrative?
Can someone please explain this whole novel to me, because its not just about the wedding.
kcdarmody's review against another edition
5.0
Atmospheric and evocative. A joy to savor - no need to rush through because not a lot happens, but every page has something to ponder.
pbrohan's review against another edition
reflective
relaxing
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
3.5
elena_monti's review against another edition
2.0
Nozze sul Delta è un libro dalle atmosfere cotonate e suggestive, non a caso Eudora Welty è considerata una delle maggiori esponenti della Southern Literature Class. Siamo di fronte ad una scrittura molto geografica e territoriale, in cui il Mississippi oltre a rappresentare un immaginario antropologico, separa una parte del territorio dall’altra divenendo centrale ai fini narrativi.
Vero protagonista del romanzo è il profondo e autentico Sud che l’autrice descrive nella sua staticità ovattata, in un affresco fuori dal tempo ma non per questo non fedele alla transitorietà storica.
Tutta la narrazione ruota attorno ai preparativi per il matrimonio tra la giovane Dabney e Troy, il soprintendente della piantagione di cotone, un uomo rude, di classe inferiore, che a malapena conosce.
Nozze sul Delta oltre a restituirci una fotografia d’altri tempi del Mississippi, basa la propria narrazione sulla costruzione dei dialoghi, che sono ritmici e civettuoli, molto fedeli all’animo southern dei suoi personaggi.
Inizialmente ero parecchio affascinata dalle atmosfere di Eudora Welty, continuando nella lettura però mi è venuto a mancare il mordente narrativo. Nozze sul Delta è un libro che ti accarezza, ma non ti graffia e quindi mi ha lasciato in parte insoddisfatta.
Io ve lo consiglio se amate i libri di atmosfera, le situazioni corali e personaggi da scoprire oltre l’apparenza sociale. Se cercate qualcosa di più forte e se ritenete che la violenza lascia un segno inevitabile, forse non è il libro giusto per voi.
Ho comunque intenzione di leggere altro di Eudora Welty e sono incuriosita dai suoi racconti.
Vero protagonista del romanzo è il profondo e autentico Sud che l’autrice descrive nella sua staticità ovattata, in un affresco fuori dal tempo ma non per questo non fedele alla transitorietà storica.
Tutta la narrazione ruota attorno ai preparativi per il matrimonio tra la giovane Dabney e Troy, il soprintendente della piantagione di cotone, un uomo rude, di classe inferiore, che a malapena conosce.
Nozze sul Delta oltre a restituirci una fotografia d’altri tempi del Mississippi, basa la propria narrazione sulla costruzione dei dialoghi, che sono ritmici e civettuoli, molto fedeli all’animo southern dei suoi personaggi.
Inizialmente ero parecchio affascinata dalle atmosfere di Eudora Welty, continuando nella lettura però mi è venuto a mancare il mordente narrativo. Nozze sul Delta è un libro che ti accarezza, ma non ti graffia e quindi mi ha lasciato in parte insoddisfatta.
Io ve lo consiglio se amate i libri di atmosfera, le situazioni corali e personaggi da scoprire oltre l’apparenza sociale. Se cercate qualcosa di più forte e se ritenete che la violenza lascia un segno inevitabile, forse non è il libro giusto per voi.
Ho comunque intenzione di leggere altro di Eudora Welty e sono incuriosita dai suoi racconti.
emilyusuallyreading's review against another edition
2.0
What I Liked
Eudora Welty brings depth and characterization to her African-American characters, while many other authors of this time period used their black characters as a way to reflect something about their white characters.
I appreciated the realistic family structure in Delta Wedding and the significance of each member of the family, blood relative or not.
What I Didn't Like
It is a struggle to find a plot structure within Delta Wedding. It's slow-paced and light-hearted. While Eudora Welty can write beautiful words, I was never able to get into the story and could barely make it through to the end.
Eudora Welty brings depth and characterization to her African-American characters, while many other authors of this time period used their black characters as a way to reflect something about their white characters.
I appreciated the realistic family structure in Delta Wedding and the significance of each member of the family, blood relative or not.
What I Didn't Like
It is a struggle to find a plot structure within Delta Wedding. It's slow-paced and light-hearted. While Eudora Welty can write beautiful words, I was never able to get into the story and could barely make it through to the end.
tombomp's review against another edition
3.0
Had a dreamy quality that I enjoyed. The atmosphere was kind of beautiful and the descriptions were great and the scenes felt real. I liked it.
Weird/bad points: there was pretty much no conflict involved in the book even though quite a bit was set up, which was bizarre. For example, there are constant references to Troy's seeming unsuitability as a husband but nothing comes of it - and there's not really much explanation of WHY people talk about him as unsuitable. There are a couple other similar scenes, which presumably have deeper implications or ones which aren't the obvious but aren't referenced again and don't seem to have an impact - There are several times the author seems to be describing some sort of romantic tension between George and other people but maybe I'm reading too much into it. Every character is prone to going into deep reflection at every opportunity, which is pretty ridiculous but adds to the dream like quality of the book and really wasn't bad. There are a lot of named characters that it's impossible to keep track of and don't really have a point.
Bigger things: I note an event re: violence above - violence is treated as tainting someone in this one case. Yet Battle beating children happens often and is treated incredibly casually. He also threatens extreme violence casually and the one reference to this plays it off as a "oh haha our Battle!!" thing.
None of the Fairchilds are ever shown engaging in any work. Yet at the end of the book several describe how "draining" and "tiring" the wedding has been. The disconnect between words and experience is noticeable. The only reason I can see Troy being unsuitable, in fact, is in his job as an overseer - in doing their work, the work of the plantation owner running their lands, he's somehow "unclean". His presence impinges on the "paradise" of the Fairchilds' life - they have no experience of the reality of where their (obviously absolutely massive) income comes from. The thing is, this theme is hardly developed and shows mostly in omission, making me curious how the author felt about this.
The black workers have very little presence, even though they should be a constant presence around the house as domestic servants. The scenes that feature them show them as personality-less - they just obey orders happily - with 2 exceptions. Right at the end of the book, one says they don't like roses. This upsets Ellen, although we're not given much more than that. One character is visited at her house to ask about something lost and the Fairchilds who visited treat her vaguely dramatic searching as malicious - the one example of personality is shunned and considered bad.
In fact, I could think of only two other instances of things being treated as malicious or wrong in the book - the first is the mentally disabled preteen Maureen (who is referred to in rude terms) and the other is George's wife Robbie, who is again considered "unsuitable" but especially for leaving him when she feels hurt. Their real crime seems to be that they disturbed in some way the Fairchilds' untroubled existence.
I don't know if my view of the Fairchilds as horrible people who live an incredibly happy life merely by ignoring or shunning things that disturb it is an unreasonable one, but to me it was the only one that made sense and still let me enjoy the book.
Weird/bad points: there was pretty much no conflict involved in the book even though quite a bit was set up, which was bizarre. For example, there are constant references to Troy's seeming unsuitability as a husband but nothing comes of it - and there's not really much explanation of WHY people talk about him as unsuitable.
Spoiler
Near the end, Shelley witnesses him apparently shooting a black worker who's threatening him with a knife. The scene lasts maybe a page and she says it shows some sort of extreme unsuitability, but the event is never referenced again and Shelley makes no further comments about Troy, in thought or otherwise. The event itself is incredibly confusing and I have no idea what went on. Weird.Spoiler
George talking about "sleeping with" the vagrant girl Ellen finds in the woods - Ellen seems shocked but again nothing else happens, it doesn't affect their relationship and the girl is referenced once again in an ambiguous context.Bigger things: I note an event re: violence above - violence is treated as tainting someone in this one case. Yet Battle beating children happens often and is treated incredibly casually. He also threatens extreme violence casually and the one reference to this plays it off as a "oh haha our Battle!!" thing.
None of the Fairchilds are ever shown engaging in any work. Yet at the end of the book several describe how "draining" and "tiring" the wedding has been. The disconnect between words and experience is noticeable. The only reason I can see Troy being unsuitable, in fact, is in his job as an overseer - in doing their work, the work of the plantation owner running their lands, he's somehow "unclean". His presence impinges on the "paradise" of the Fairchilds' life - they have no experience of the reality of where their (obviously absolutely massive) income comes from. The thing is, this theme is hardly developed and shows mostly in omission, making me curious how the author felt about this.
The black workers have very little presence, even though they should be a constant presence around the house as domestic servants. The scenes that feature them show them as personality-less - they just obey orders happily - with 2 exceptions. Right at the end of the book, one says they don't like roses. This upsets Ellen, although we're not given much more than that. One character is visited at her house to ask about something lost and the Fairchilds who visited treat her vaguely dramatic searching as malicious - the one example of personality is shunned and considered bad.
In fact, I could think of only two other instances of things being treated as malicious or wrong in the book - the first is the mentally disabled preteen Maureen (who is referred to in rude terms) and the other is George's wife Robbie, who is again considered "unsuitable" but especially for leaving him when she feels hurt. Their real crime seems to be that they disturbed in some way the Fairchilds' untroubled existence.
I don't know if my view of the Fairchilds as horrible people who live an incredibly happy life merely by ignoring or shunning things that disturb it is an unreasonable one, but to me it was the only one that made sense and still let me enjoy the book.