really terrible historical fiction

[camille-love.livejournal.com]

...so, in lieu of reading for my exams (what's WRONG with me?!), I've been trying to clear my head by skimming through a historical novel published about a year ago, simply titled Revolution, by Jennifer Donnelly. First of all, it's technically for "young adults" (the protagonist is a high school senior). Second of all, its perspective on the Revolution is (surprise) very naive and, well, high school. I started reading it last night and I'm almost done now. But, for all its flaws and blatant royalist sympathies, I can't deny that part of me kind of enjoys it. It's kind of like, The Da Vinci Code only with the French Revolution. So, even while I'm groaning over the history and politics, I can't stop reading because it's a page-turner and I'm hooked on the silly plot! Below is the description from Amazon.com:

BROOKLYN: Andi Alpers is on the edge. She’s angry at her father for leaving, angry at her mother for not being able to cope, and heartbroken by the loss of her younger brother, Truman. Rage and grief are destroying her. And she’s about to be expelled from Brooklyn Heights’ most prestigious private school when her father intervenes. Now Andi must accompany him to Paris for winter break.
 
PARIS: Alexandrine Paradis lived over two centuries ago. She dreamed of making her mark on the Paris stage, but a fateful encounter with a doomed prince of France cast her in a tragic role she didn’t want—and couldn’t escape.
 
Two girls, two centuries apart. One never knowing the other. But when Andi finds Alexandrine’s diary, she recognizes something in her words and is moved to the point of obsession. There’s comfort and distraction for Andi in the journal’s antique pages—until, on a midnight journey through the catacombs of Paris, Alexandrine’s words transcend paper and time, and the past becomes suddenly, terrifyingly present.

If you have some time to waste (not likely, given that you all seem like intelligent, productive people) and are in the mood for some very lightweight, very not-to-be-taken-seriously fiction, then go for it.

EDIT:  Please forget that I ever suggested reading this book (unless you're reading it in order to write a vehement, public rebuttal of its contents).

Comments

[estellacat.livejournal.com]

Oh, that's right, I ought to have remembered that you study mainly Victorian literature, since I already responded to your post on the subject. The portrayal of the Revolution in literature is definitely a fascinating subject. I did - actually, I should say "I'm doing", since I never finished it - a series on the representation of Éléonore Duplay in literature (and a few entries on Saint-Just as well, for the books he shows up in but where he's not a major character, to keep things short). I would have liked to do the same for Robespierre, but it's impossible to be exhaustive in the same way: I wouldn't have been able to include every place in a book that Robespierre appears, so then I would have had to justify which excerpts I chose and it would have ended up practically being a disseration by the time I was through.

Was Ann Radcliffe really sympathetic to the Revolution? If so, I might have to look into reading her (in my copious spare time).

I've heard of Zanoni, but I've never read it. I can't decide whether it sounds like it would be painful or (perhaps unintentionally) entertaining to read, but I'm sure it would say a good deal about Victorian sensibilities. Mixing the French Revolution and the occult seems to have become a trend recently too, though. maelicia found a French comic including Robespierre and succubi, or something like that. There's also a webcomic and, apparently a YA novel about vampires and the Revolution (I saw the latter in a bookstore last summer, but I found the concept so unappealing I'm afraid I didn't take a closer look).

I think part of Camille Desmoulins's appeal for the Victorians, aside from this idea of his having had a "perfect" family life destroyed by the Revolution, is that it's very easy for people who don't like the Revolution to recuperate him by ignoring his entire pre-Vieux Cordelier career. According to the preferred reading, Camille and Lucile's executions just prove what a heartless monster Robespierre supposedly was, which, if that's what you want to believe, can make Camille attractive to you without anything else. Add in the love story and the orphaned child and you can hardly go wrong. Well, as long as you don't actually read Les Révolutions de France et de Brabant, for example. Ironically, the romantic Camille of the Victorians is precisely the one I don't care for. I have much more sympathy for the author of the Révolutions de France et de Brabant (I mention that journal in particular because I've read a lot of it for my research).

[hanriotfran.livejournal.com]

I've read your essais you published here about Eléonore in littérature and I find them fascinating. I wish you'll write more about this issue. What literature does to historical subjects is sometimes amazing.Movies and plays are very similar to literature in it. The same person could be portrayed in very different ways! And yet, it's the very same person. :D A monster or an angel...That depends on which political ideas you'll have. Interesting!

I've real "Zanoni" and it's delirious. Jacobins are all mosnters there. But REAL monsters. Hanriot is portrayed as an OLD, FAT - yes, old and fat despite the fact he was young and VERY thin - untidy drunkard who would cut people intentionally with his sword in the streets. Robspierre -yes, you see this coming- is very similar to a cat , was "cadaverous" and always had his oranges at hand...But a Marquise was close to him rady to peel them off and offer the fruit segment one by one to him...Almost a "Neron" type in "Quo Vadis?". He is the essense of evil.Of ccourse if you wants a big laugh, you must read it.

I actually like Camille's love for his wife...but I can sepparate it of his work in political arena. I'm intersted in his personal drama, as I'm interested in Hanriot's private life, since I'm interested in them for the men they were...however, I can't appprove the Camille of the last times and all good husband he was , he was not acting as a good patriot. Of course, he was not the candid dove that some historians wanted to show us he was. I think he must be more similar to the Camille of "A Place of Greater Safety" than to the angel you could see in Victorian tales or recent TV movies as "The French Revolution", by Enrico-Heffron. He was far of being an innocent little guy.

[estellacat.livejournal.com]

I probably will write more about representations of various figures in literature at some point when I'm not so busy. It's definitely a subject of great interest to me.

"Zanoni" sounds rather predictable, but looked at from the right angle I can see how it would be funny. I've never understood why people think they're insulting Robespierre by claiming that he was catlike though. I like cats!

It's not so much Camille's relationship with Lucile that I object to as the way that he's turned into some kind of sainted martyr to freedom of the press, when really all people want is one more excuse to depict Robespierre as evil. It's the same kind of hypocrisy that makes counterrevolutionaries claim they object to the violence of the Revolution when they really object to popular participation in government. But it's harder to sell people on the latter objection.

[hanriotfran.livejournal.com]

Well, I like cats too...But the historians who compared Robespierre to a cat, didn't seems to like cats so awfully much. The way in which they said he was similar to one of those animals is ver disdainful. People who didn't like cats (not my case, since I LOVE them) claims they are traitors and couldn't be faithful to their owner (which is false...One of my cats was 1000 times more faithful than any of the dogs I had). Some of these historians, depicts Robespierre's behavior toward his ennemies as a cat playing with the innocent mouse he's certain to kill. So, it's not Robespierre's supposed similarity to cats that bothers me, but the negative intention that underlines over the whole thing. They didn't like cats-They didn't like Robespierre. So, they identifies Robespierre with cats.

Of course, the problem with Lucile and Camille's love is not their true relationship , but the use the historians made of it to turn Camille into a Saint...

[estellacat.livejournal.com]

I figured that they probably did not like cats if they viewed it as such an awful thing to be like one. I just find it ironic, given how much I like cats.