Scan barcode
emleemay's review against another edition
2.0
I'm talking about an erotic novel here, so maybe don't read my review if you tend to get offended by open and frank discussion about sexual acts. Just warning you in advance :)
Okay, firstly, this is porn. Just porn. Not a great literary achievement, not something that will sit snug in your mind with the Austen and Bronte classics... PORN. It got quite a reputation for being the first pornography to appear in novel form, and it also got a reputation because it was banned for multiple centuries and resulted in a prison sentence for the author. Being published in 1748, I can't say I'm surprised. In fact, the much more surprising thing is that books like [b:Lady Chatterley's Lover|32067|Lady Chatterley's Lover|D.H. Lawrence|http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1260489197s/32067.jpg|3249302] (1928) and [b:Delta of Venus|11041|Delta of Venus|Anaïs Nin|http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1166396277s/11041.jpg|1369571] (1977) caused such a controversy when Cleland's work had already beaten them to it two hundred years beforehand.
This is far more scandalous than [b:Lady Chatterley's Lover|32067|Lady Chatterley's Lover|D.H. Lawrence|http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1260489197s/32067.jpg|3249302] and about on a par with [b:Delta of Venus|11041|Delta of Venus|Anaïs Nin|http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1166396277s/11041.jpg|1369571]. The story is a rather disturbing (even by today's standards) tale about a fifteen year old girl who engages in sex with both men and women, participates in mutual masturbation, almost gets raped, falls into prostitution, takes part in orgies, whips a man for his sexual pleasure, and witnesses two men having anal sex only to report them to the local villagers. During this time, Fanny also manages to fall in love several times and - to give credit where it's due - does experience quite a bit of growth as a woman and as a human being.
The plot, though, is completely ridiculous, moves too fast, and ends up feeling sloppy and careless. Fanny runs from lover to lover in what feels like a bunch of short stories about sexual encounters than a full novel about a woman's sexual exploration. It must be pointed out that Cleland's portrayal of female sexuality and the ability for women to have sex for pleasure, not just to make babies or appease their husbands, seems incredibly before it's time. However, Fanny Hill is not a particularly strong character and her circumstances are often a result of where others put her, not where she takes herself.
When it comes to this kind of book, I always try and look it at from two angles and see if it delivers on either: 1) as a novel, or 2) as porn. I don't believe it delivers on the first beyond introducing the eighteenth century to the exploration of female sexuality. As for the second, well, I guess there's something for everyone stuck in here somewhere. Especially if you get hot when female genitalia is described as "clammy" and a guy's penis is described in this way: "not the play-thing of a boy, not the weapon of a man, but a maypole of so enormous a standard, that had proportions been observ’d, it must have belong’d to a young giant." Are you fanning yourself with desire? Then this is the book for you!
Okay, firstly, this is porn. Just porn. Not a great literary achievement, not something that will sit snug in your mind with the Austen and Bronte classics... PORN. It got quite a reputation for being the first pornography to appear in novel form, and it also got a reputation because it was banned for multiple centuries and resulted in a prison sentence for the author. Being published in 1748, I can't say I'm surprised. In fact, the much more surprising thing is that books like [b:Lady Chatterley's Lover|32067|Lady Chatterley's Lover|D.H. Lawrence|http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1260489197s/32067.jpg|3249302] (1928) and [b:Delta of Venus|11041|Delta of Venus|Anaïs Nin|http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1166396277s/11041.jpg|1369571] (1977) caused such a controversy when Cleland's work had already beaten them to it two hundred years beforehand.
This is far more scandalous than [b:Lady Chatterley's Lover|32067|Lady Chatterley's Lover|D.H. Lawrence|http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1260489197s/32067.jpg|3249302] and about on a par with [b:Delta of Venus|11041|Delta of Venus|Anaïs Nin|http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1166396277s/11041.jpg|1369571]. The story is a rather disturbing (even by today's standards) tale about a fifteen year old girl who engages in sex with both men and women, participates in mutual masturbation, almost gets raped, falls into prostitution, takes part in orgies, whips a man for his sexual pleasure, and witnesses two men having anal sex only to report them to the local villagers. During this time, Fanny also manages to fall in love several times and - to give credit where it's due - does experience quite a bit of growth as a woman and as a human being.
The plot, though, is completely ridiculous, moves too fast, and ends up feeling sloppy and careless. Fanny runs from lover to lover in what feels like a bunch of short stories about sexual encounters than a full novel about a woman's sexual exploration. It must be pointed out that Cleland's portrayal of female sexuality and the ability for women to have sex for pleasure, not just to make babies or appease their husbands, seems incredibly before it's time. However, Fanny Hill is not a particularly strong character and her circumstances are often a result of where others put her, not where she takes herself.
When it comes to this kind of book, I always try and look it at from two angles and see if it delivers on either: 1) as a novel, or 2) as porn. I don't believe it delivers on the first beyond introducing the eighteenth century to the exploration of female sexuality. As for the second, well, I guess there's something for everyone stuck in here somewhere. Especially if you get hot when female genitalia is described as "clammy" and a guy's penis is described in this way: "not the play-thing of a boy, not the weapon of a man, but a maypole of so enormous a standard, that had proportions been observ’d, it must have belong’d to a young giant." Are you fanning yourself with desire? Then this is the book for you!
hungerford's review against another edition
adventurous
funny
lighthearted
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
4.0
lori85's review against another edition
3.0
Well, I can see why this was banned for so long - it's explicit even by our standards. These old-timey depictions of sex can be pretty funny, though.
On the other hand, Fanny is only 15-18 during the events of the book, which can be pretty squicky for the modern reader. I'm going to include a trigger warning for 18th-century human trafficking, rape, attempted rape, and dubious consent. But I was surprised by how well it handled BDSM. There was a discussion of boundaries and concern about consent, which is way more than you can say for 50 Shades of Gray.
I found this vintage paperback edition at a thrift store. It's apparently the first legal publication of Fanny Hill in the United States.
On the other hand, Fanny is only 15-18 during the events of the book, which can be pretty squicky for the modern reader. I'm going to include a trigger warning for 18th-century human trafficking, rape, attempted rape, and dubious consent. But I was surprised by how well it handled BDSM. There was a discussion of boundaries and concern about consent, which is way more than you can say for 50 Shades of Gray.
I found this vintage paperback edition at a thrift store. It's apparently the first legal publication of Fanny Hill in the United States.
lostingothicmusic's review against another edition
challenging
funny
lighthearted
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? It's complicated
2.75
blueyorkie's review against another edition
3.0
After reading the back cover (you start where you want), you might think you will read a whole erotic story longer than those inserted in magazines placed high up in bookstores.
Close your gaping mouths, put your two hands on the table, and open your gutters wide (and your legs then, if you like, all that is none of our business).
Before getting to the heart of the matter, we have over 100 pages (out of 220) of introduction to this Fanny Hill's memories.
Yes, it gives the most extended foreplay in the history of the erotic book, without a doubt!
Close your gaping mouths, put your two hands on the table, and open your gutters wide (and your legs then, if you like, all that is none of our business).
Before getting to the heart of the matter, we have over 100 pages (out of 220) of introduction to this Fanny Hill's memories.
Yes, it gives the most extended foreplay in the history of the erotic book, without a doubt!
charlote_1347's review against another edition
3.0
Considering this was recommended to me during a lecture on Romantic eroticism, I didn't go into it expecting a swoon-at-explicit-sex-scenes novel (thank God). I liked Fanny - while she definitely wasn't a femme fatale figure, she was free with pleasure and unashamed by her natural impulses. By this point in my life I have had enough of moralistic heroines who consider themselves defiled because of a kiss, which made the women in this novel a breath of fresh air. The plot was mildly annoying despite how realistic it doubtless is. A woman of Fanny's age, station and talents would rely on being a mistress/being desired, which translates to relying on men, so understandably she does not decide she'd be better off without her biological counterparts, which was a complaint I came across when I was reading other reviews. Keeping in mind the time period in which this novel was written, it is remarkably forward thinking (whether or not it condones or endorses Fanny's lifestyle). A major drawback to this story, however, was the language. Most of the time it was passably acceptable, but during the sex scenes Cleland's scientific imagery just couldn't be overlooked. He made what should have been an erotic novel read like an instruction manual, and if you don't actively engage with the content it is so easy to grow bored. Because of issues with the language, which was a serious problem for me, I've only given Fanny Hill three stars.
sauvegypsy's review against another edition
adventurous
emotional
sad
medium-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? No
2.5
Fell a sleep listening to as well as reading.
byp's review against another edition
2.0
I think this was one of, if not the first, smut rags. It's actually pretty boring, even though there's porn on every page.
carladay83's review against another edition
2.0
I read this mostly out of curiosity. The story itself was not terribly engaging, mostly there to tie the sex scenes together as is the way with porn. The sex scenes themselves were both flowery and gross. I admittedly had a hard time following the excessively verbose and "poetic" descriptions of the scenes and when I could it was generally on the more messy, unsexy parts of the action. The moral of this story: Don't read 18th Century porn expecting it to be sexy...