octanexit's review against another edition
sad
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
1.5
_marco_'s review against another edition
3.5
I picked up this book because so often I have seen it mentioned in French literature (Stendhal, Dumas Fils) and heard it in opera (Puccini, Massenet) that I just had to read it for myself.
This is also my first ‘rococo’ era read, and while I’m heavily drawn to the apparent, almost hedonistic sensuality of the period’s culture, I found Manon Lescaut to lack that charm, that feathery decadence that sweetens the music and visual art of Prévost’s France.
It could have been the strangeness of the romance that disinterested me - I am already not a big fan of the romantic genre - that led me to dislike most of the novel; The incessant back and forth and frivolity of Des Grieux and Manon was more tiresome than exciting. (In my opinion, of course!)
Something that all my favourite stories have in common is their emotional depth and rawness, and the rich prose that shapes the scenery around the characters. There was neither of these in Manon Lescaut, or at least they remained undetectable to my understanding. Every action was described in strictly sequential terms, emotions were placidly listed, and most of the story was carried out with such taciturnity and single-dimensionality that it was very hard — impossible — to identify in any way with either Des Grieux or Manon. At the same time, the lack of any external descriptors forced me, the reader, to focus only on the chronology of events, most of which have left me with my face in my palm.
Perhaps, however, this was the point of the book. Could it be satire? A commentary on foolishness? A treatise, almost, on the folly of love? The insuperability of desire? Or maybe it's meant to be a character study on Des Grieux? The nebulous image of Manon? How well can we trust his story, told and acted by an idiot prostrate before the opaque idol of a woman, who tells us nothing of her except her infidelity, her beauty (without describing it), and the fact that he is so completely obsessed with her? Personally I like the idea of Des Grieux and Manon as the embodiments of worldly lust and transcendent love can represent the other. Of course, I haven’t done any research on Prévost nor on this book, and perhaps there is something written between the lines that I could not grasp, at least not in translation. What is clear, however, is that the book is rapt with ambiguity on all fronts, which can be exciting to think about and discuss in a book club setting.
I did enjoy it as a foray into early 18th century Paris and contemporary attitudes, and it was fun imagining everyone and everything as if painted in the pastels of Fragonard or Boucher. There were some scenes, particularly closer to and at the end of the book, that offer a certain beauty in their sensuous, almost sweet portrayal of grief.
This is also my first ‘rococo’ era read, and while I’m heavily drawn to the apparent, almost hedonistic sensuality of the period’s culture, I found Manon Lescaut to lack that charm, that feathery decadence that sweetens the music and visual art of Prévost’s France.
It could have been the strangeness of the romance that disinterested me - I am already not a big fan of the romantic genre - that led me to dislike most of the novel; The incessant back and forth and frivolity of Des Grieux and Manon was more tiresome than exciting. (In my opinion, of course!)
Something that all my favourite stories have in common is their emotional depth and rawness, and the rich prose that shapes the scenery around the characters. There was neither of these in Manon Lescaut, or at least they remained undetectable to my understanding. Every action was described in strictly sequential terms, emotions were placidly listed, and most of the story was carried out with such taciturnity and single-dimensionality that it was very hard — impossible — to identify in any way with either Des Grieux or Manon. At the same time, the lack of any external descriptors forced me, the reader, to focus only on the chronology of events, most of which have left me with my face in my palm.
Perhaps, however, this was the point of the book. Could it be satire? A commentary on foolishness? A treatise, almost, on the folly of love? The insuperability of desire? Or maybe it's meant to be a character study on Des Grieux? The nebulous image of Manon? How well can we trust his story, told and acted by an idiot prostrate before the opaque idol of a woman, who tells us nothing of her except her infidelity, her beauty (without describing it), and the fact that he is so completely obsessed with her? Personally I like the idea of Des Grieux and Manon as the embodiments of worldly lust and transcendent love can represent the other. Of course, I haven’t done any research on Prévost nor on this book, and perhaps there is something written between the lines that I could not grasp, at least not in translation. What is clear, however, is that the book is rapt with ambiguity on all fronts, which can be exciting to think about and discuss in a book club setting.
I did enjoy it as a foray into early 18th century Paris and contemporary attitudes, and it was fun imagining everyone and everything as if painted in the pastels of Fragonard or Boucher. There were some scenes, particularly closer to and at the end of the book, that offer a certain beauty in their sensuous, almost sweet portrayal of grief.
“I laid forever in the bosom of the Earth the most perfect and lovely thing she ever bore“
Content Warnings
Graphic: Infidelity
Minor: Colonisation and Racism
peter_fischer's review against another edition
3.0
I read this book mainly because it forms the basis of the eponymous opera by Giacomo Puccini.
Young Chevalier des Grieux, from a good provincial French family, falls in with Manon Lescault, a young woman of loose morals, focussed completely on the easy life and entertainment. Although professing to be in love with des Grieux, she takes on wealthy men, while des Grieux turns his hand to cheating at cards in gambling dens. Anyway it all goes horribly wrong and Manon is eventually sent as a convict to Louisiana for prostitution, and the story, which takes a tragic end, continues in the new world.
It turns out this is a pretty racy story, considering it was written in the early 18th century. At some point Manon’s brother actually pimps her to rich Parisians! No wonder the book was originally banned in France. The author, Abbé (!) Prévost, then put in some homilies about virtue over debauchery, to make the book more palatable to the authorities. The homilies take the form of harangues to des Grieux by his friend Tiberge, and are actually rather tedious.
Young Chevalier des Grieux, from a good provincial French family, falls in with Manon Lescault, a young woman of loose morals, focussed completely on the easy life and entertainment. Although professing to be in love with des Grieux, she takes on wealthy men, while des Grieux turns his hand to cheating at cards in gambling dens. Anyway it all goes horribly wrong and Manon is eventually sent as a convict to Louisiana for prostitution, and the story, which takes a tragic end, continues in the new world.
It turns out this is a pretty racy story, considering it was written in the early 18th century. At some point Manon’s brother actually pimps her to rich Parisians! No wonder the book was originally banned in France. The author, Abbé (!) Prévost, then put in some homilies about virtue over debauchery, to make the book more palatable to the authorities. The homilies take the form of harangues to des Grieux by his friend Tiberge, and are actually rather tedious.
bookishwendy's review against another edition
4.0
A number of possible interpretations ran through my mind as I read Manon Lescaut. On its surface, the novel is sort of a Bonnie & Clyde romp through 18th century Paris. However, because our narrator "Clyde", the Chevalier des Grieux, relates his story with the intent of securing the money and pity of a wealthy bystander, I'm not certain just how trustworthy he is.
On the face of it, our Chevalier is a naive, lovelorn idiot. He cries a lot, falls unconscious at least three times, which is two times more than any other character in the book, to include the leading lady. If he's fishing for sympathy, he'll have a tough time with modern readers, though maybe his contemporaries took the bait. Born into a noble family, he makes the fatal mistake of falling for young Manon, a woman of a lower class. Association with her is enough for his father to cut all ties, including financial ones, from his son. Our Chevalier refuses to be fazed, and perhaps the sheer amount of crap he is willing to put up with is proof of a deeper, more touching connection between he and Manon than was at first evident.
Manon, on the other hand, is a cipher. This is where a reader's interpretation may alter the reading experience. From the outset, our Chevalier seems to lay a lot of the blame for their misfortunes on her shoulders--she's inconstant, her attention wavers, he must ply her with luxuries continuously or risk losing her. On the other hand, it's clear Manon is a practical woman of the world. She understands money as a necessity to life, a concept clearly foreign to her lover. When the young man finds himself cut off from his allowance he is clearly at a loss about how to go about making a living. Manon, however, has no compunction about wrenching the reins from her man and driving their little financial cart for a while, even if the subsequent petty crime and prostitution offends our Chevalier. At the surface, Manon might come across as an untrustworthy slut, but we never hear her side of things. An odd thought struck me, as I neared the end of the novel, that maybe the Chevalier was a stalker who relentlessly pursued Manon to the ends of the earth, while she struggled in vain to be rid of him. It's an unlikely interpretation but...as likely as all the rest, I guess.
On the face of it, our Chevalier is a naive, lovelorn idiot. He cries a lot, falls unconscious at least three times, which is two times more than any other character in the book, to include the leading lady. If he's fishing for sympathy, he'll have a tough time with modern readers, though maybe his contemporaries took the bait. Born into a noble family, he makes the fatal mistake of falling for young Manon, a woman of a lower class. Association with her is enough for his father to cut all ties, including financial ones, from his son. Our Chevalier refuses to be fazed, and perhaps the sheer amount of crap he is willing to put up with is proof of a deeper, more touching connection between he and Manon than was at first evident.
Manon, on the other hand, is a cipher. This is where a reader's interpretation may alter the reading experience. From the outset, our Chevalier seems to lay a lot of the blame for their misfortunes on her shoulders--she's inconstant, her attention wavers, he must ply her with luxuries continuously or risk losing her. On the other hand, it's clear Manon is a practical woman of the world. She understands money as a necessity to life, a concept clearly foreign to her lover. When the young man finds himself cut off from his allowance he is clearly at a loss about how to go about making a living. Manon, however, has no compunction about wrenching the reins from her man and driving their little financial cart for a while, even if the subsequent petty crime and prostitution offends our Chevalier. At the surface, Manon might come across as an untrustworthy slut, but we never hear her side of things. An odd thought struck me, as I neared the end of the novel, that maybe the Chevalier was a stalker who relentlessly pursued Manon to the ends of the earth, while she struggled in vain to be rid of him. It's an unlikely interpretation but...as likely as all the rest, I guess.
abnormalreader's review against another edition
emotional
sad
medium-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
evasurlafalaise's review against another edition
emotional
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? N/A
- Strong character development? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
2.0
Les personnages sans personnalités et chiants à mourir, un plot répétitif et sans grand intérêt, un rythme hyper irrégulier selon moi (un paragraphe peut aussi bien correspondre à 10 secondes ou 2ans)
Mais bref juste un jour normal à essayer d’aimer les livres qu’on fait lire en cours de français. J’attends de l’étudier pour peut être l’aimer ?
Mais bref juste un jour normal à essayer d’aimer les livres qu’on fait lire en cours de français. J’attends de l’étudier pour peut être l’aimer ?
gourdonne's review against another edition
challenging
reflective
sad
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? N/A
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated
2.5
viri's review against another edition
adventurous
dark
lighthearted
tense
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? N/A
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
3.0
it was a very entertaining and fun read.
charliemandar's review against another edition
emotional
reflective
tense
fast-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
3.5