Scan barcode
A review by lesgles
Pantagruel by François Rabelais
4.0
I wasn't sure whether to start with Pantagruel or Gargantua; in the chronology of the story, Gargantua comes first and is printed first in most editions. In the end, I decided to go with my rule of reading in publication order; Gargantua will have to wait his turn.
I can understand why Rabelais has elicited such academic interest. I was glad to see that a former professor of mine, [a:Edwin M. Duval|399632|Edwin M. Duval|https://s.gr-assets.com/assets/nophoto/user/u_50x66-632230dc9882b4352d753eedf9396530.png], was cited quite often, and of course there's Bakhtin's [b:Rabelais and His World|642914|Rabelais and His World|Mikhail Bakhtin|https://d.gr-assets.com/books/1399049665s/642914.jpg|558081], which I plan to read someday. In a way, it's a crazy, rambling encyclopedia of early modern Europe. Maybe in no other author is there such a combination of high erudition and vulgarity, and we're maybe at a point in our culture where we are no longer repulsed by the latter, although there were still times, such as in the chapter "Comment Panurge enseigne une maniere bien nouvelle de bastir les murailles de Paris," when I thought, "really, Rabelais?" Look it up if you're interested, but be prepared!
As for the language, I have the impression that 16th-century French shouldn't be too hard to read, once you get used to some spelling differences, and indeed, the moments of normal dialogue and narration aren't too different from modern French. The problem with Rabelais is that his mind was so active, that it seems he couldn't help himself from constantly throwing in words from various modern and ancient languages, as well as technical terms from medicine, philosophy, etc. So it's essential to have an edition with good notes. I actually read this in the Pléiade editon of Rabelais' complete works, which was normally helpful, though surprisingly reticent when explaining the various obscenities in the book (many of the notes simply said "sens équivoque" or the like, so you have to figure out which "bad word" is meant).
I can understand why Rabelais has elicited such academic interest. I was glad to see that a former professor of mine, [a:Edwin M. Duval|399632|Edwin M. Duval|https://s.gr-assets.com/assets/nophoto/user/u_50x66-632230dc9882b4352d753eedf9396530.png], was cited quite often, and of course there's Bakhtin's [b:Rabelais and His World|642914|Rabelais and His World|Mikhail Bakhtin|https://d.gr-assets.com/books/1399049665s/642914.jpg|558081], which I plan to read someday. In a way, it's a crazy, rambling encyclopedia of early modern Europe. Maybe in no other author is there such a combination of high erudition and vulgarity, and we're maybe at a point in our culture where we are no longer repulsed by the latter, although there were still times, such as in the chapter "Comment Panurge enseigne une maniere bien nouvelle de bastir les murailles de Paris," when I thought, "really, Rabelais?" Look it up if you're interested, but be prepared!
As for the language, I have the impression that 16th-century French shouldn't be too hard to read, once you get used to some spelling differences, and indeed, the moments of normal dialogue and narration aren't too different from modern French. The problem with Rabelais is that his mind was so active, that it seems he couldn't help himself from constantly throwing in words from various modern and ancient languages, as well as technical terms from medicine, philosophy, etc. So it's essential to have an edition with good notes. I actually read this in the Pléiade editon of Rabelais' complete works, which was normally helpful, though surprisingly reticent when explaining the various obscenities in the book (many of the notes simply said "sens équivoque" or the like, so you have to figure out which "bad word" is meant).