A Place of Greater Safetly

[trf-chan.livejournal.com]

(In Spanish, Un Lugar de la Seguridad Grande - I have no idea why that amuses me, but somehow it does)

Well, I've finally gotten around to finishing Hilary Mantel's A Place of Greater Safety this weekend. Overall, I thought it was quite wonderful, especially compared what is usually offered up in the catagory of French Revolution books - fiction and nonfiction. At least Mantel doesn't think Robespierre was green. ;)

The only thing that irked me was her unecessarily harsh (IMO) treatment of the Duplay family and Philippe Lebas. The whole Babette thing was just completely...O.o;. Saint-Just wasn't too nicely handled either, but that at least had a more understandable basis than with the poor Duplays and Lebas.

That's what irks me about what is written on the FR, honestly. No author seems content to evaluate all personages involved honestly - someone's always got to be The Source of All Evil or That Idiot Who Got in the Way of Everything.

Other than that, though, I thought it was an excellent book. Mantel has stated that she came into it loving Camille and came out of it loving Maxime. I had almost the opposite experience, oddly enough. XD; I still love Maxime, of course, but I'm definitely more interested in Camille now than I was before.

What are everyone else's opinions on the book?

P.S. - For my Speech class (not the team - I decided against doing that the moment I stepped foot in the class), we have to write a speech describing a certain setting. I've decided on revolutionary Paris. We need to hit up at least ten locations. I've already got The Jacobins, the National Convention, Place de la Revolution, Palais Royal, Tuileries, and the Bastille. Does anyone have any other suggestions of places that I should use? Please note that I'd like places that you can find pictures of as they looked at the time (or a description) or that have remained mostly unchanged. Thanks. :)

Comments

[cachecache.livejournal.com]

I started reading A Place of Greater Safety at the beginning of the summer and got about 100 pages into it when I had to put it down because I decided to take summer classes and that totally took away all of my reading time. I haven't picked it back up because, truthfully, it hasn't been able to really keep my attention. Mantel's writing style bothers me (the dialogue's often way too modern) but I do want to finish it some day just because good books about the Revolution are rare.

As for locations, here are some suggestions: Les Invalides, Hotel de Ville, Champs de Mars (where they had the Festival of Federation, among other things), the Pantheon.

[vulpea-rea.livejournal.com]

the Conciergerie? i can't believe this hasn't been mentioned yet. XD

[estellacat.livejournal.com]

I could rant on this book for a long time, but the short version of my opinion on it has five points:

1. "Camille-ist", which is the same thing as Dantoniste really, but it must make Saint-Just the evil corrupting influence in Robespierre's life who makes him "turn against the poor innocent Camille" *sighs*

2. Extremely well-written

3. Was it really necessary to make the Duplays, Le Bas, and Saint-Just so evil? There is absolutely NO historical evidence for this whatsoever. >__<

4. Too much credulity as far as blantantly counterrevolutionary sources that are not at all based on fact go...but then again, you tend to get that from just about any English-speaking person (particularly British) who writes about the Revolution

5. This was my favorite book for a long time and I believed a lot of what it it said....until I actually read credible historical sources (particularly the French ones), at which point I realized that a lot of what it presents in what looks like a pretty credible fashion is extremely exaggerated at best or just made up...........and sadly we're not talking minor things here, but important things like the way major events really unfolded and the overarching opinions and character of several of the most important characters

[jonahmama.livejournal.com]

See comments below - but I just wanted to reiterate that I personally would be VERY interested to read/hear more about your opinions/research on this. Particularly if you would care to elaborate on #5, I would love to learn more from your research.

[jonahmama.livejournal.com]

I have to say this is one of my favorite novels of all time on any subject. I absolutely adore Mantel's style of writing, especially the wicked humor. I find myself quoting her all the time - just bits and pieces that fit my own life. ("I should prefer not to be an object of general odium, but I wouldn't go so far as to let my preference alter my conduct.")

I would tend to agree that there are certain incidents / ideas in the book with which I would radically disagree. I can't remember any specific mistreatment of LeBas (who is not someone I am overly interested in anyway), but I agree that the way the Duplays are treated, and specifically the incidents with Elisabeth, are totally false. I think Mantel decided the story needed more sexual drama, which is a valid point, so she decided to give it some - including the story with Annette, which I also don't like much (and haven't actually located evidence for). I also think people underestimate the issue of a bisexual main character, even in this day and age. Mantel must have been under tremendous pressure to bring in female characters, even vixens, to grab the female audience. She is a woman who has had a long personal battle with her femininity, so I am not surprised that she has difficulty capturing female characters in a positive way.

I think that you have to take this book for what it is: not a historical text, but a novel - a piece of fiction. As such, I also feel it benefits greatly from the modern dialogue, which is never outright anachronistic (someone in another text referred to the Marquis de Sade as a "prominent sadist" - groan), but extremely readable. In order to appeal to a mass audience, not just to fans of the revolution, this is a very valuable tool to bring the characters to life and make them relatable.

In reply to Estellacat:
1. Obviously since this is a fictional biography of Camille, it is by definition Camille-ist. I actually didn't see it as so Dantonist (more Robespierrist actually) and anti-Saint-Just, but maybe that's because I am such a huge Saint-Just fan, I can take a little off the top. :) I actually think it offers some tantalizing hints about the nature of their relationship - or rather animosity. I have never, NEVER found a satisfactory explanation for what happened between the two of them to take them from friends to enemies. I think it's one of the most interesting enigmas of the Revolution. One of my favorite lines in the book is when Robespierre says something to him along the lines of "you are a professional revolutionary, you had no life before the revolution" and he replies "a little." Wow - ya think?! Prison, anyone? Camille knew Saint-Just long before Robespierre - he knew the background. There IS a story here. (I am currently at work on a FIC on this subject.)
2. Agreed. :)
3. See above. Again, I am not so sure Saint-Just is so "evil" per se. He is a lot less evil than in a lot of other books, where he is just portrayed as Satan himself.
4/5. Wow, I really didn't see the book as counter-revolutionary. Can you give specific examples of where it is wrong and how? I would really love to discuss this even outside of LJ. I love the book but know it is wrong in some ways - this would be really important for my research to take it apart and see what is good and what isn't. Separate the wheat from the chaff, as it were. Perhaps we can e-mail further?

[estellacat.livejournal.com]

1. This the first time I've heard it out-right described as a "fictional biography of Camille" although, upon reflection, that would seem to be what it is. (The emphasis placed on Robespierre and Danton can throw one off until one realizes that they were the two major influences on his life for at least the later stages of the Revolution.)
2. What you said about quoting her--I do that too. The knowledge that I'll never be able to write like that is positively maddening;)
3. It's funny you should say that, because I've found this to be one of the most unlikeable portrayals of Saint-Just in any novel I've read (barring Marjorie Coryn's The Incorruptible, the alternate title of which--Ridiculous Dictator--should give some idea of its view; and The Gods Are Thirsty by Tanith Lee--although I tend to discount anything said about Saint-Just from what is actively and explicitly Camille's point of view....When Robespierre starts to dislike him, though, as he does in A Place of Greater Safety I begin to get suspicious). As far as plays go, Pauvre Bitos isn't exactly sympathetic to Saint-Just, but then again, one gets the impression that Anouilh doesn't know anything about the personage from reading it. Movies, admittedly are another story, but I find them to be more extremist than books in their portrayals of the Revolutionaries generally; in what book would one find Robespierre hiding a torture chamber under a bakery as he does in The Black Book?
4/5. I should mention, before I go into detailed analysis of any kind that if Mantel is counterrevolutionary I would say it's pretty near to impossible that it was intentional on her part. It's the fault of her sources; just about any source you can find in English will measure the Revolution against the Anglo-American model(s) of governments, ethics, and culture. This is a given. However, I'm convinced that this is a tenuous way to look at the Revolution, at best. It's worse, of course, then it might be otherwise because despite England and America's history and literature (and who raised in the English-speaking world doesn't have A Tale of Two Cities indelibly etched into his brain?), the authors and historians of these countries claim the objectivity of those not directly involved. This assumption makes even the best of the English historians inferior to the French, who realize their involvement and use it to aid their understanding. Many people in the English-speaking world can thus devote their lives to collecting facts on the French Revolution and still never truly understand it. Thus, I find it imperative to take what any British or American historian says with a grain of salt; if some people have not come to this conclusion and choose to believe supposedly "objective" English sources, they are not counterrevolutionary in the same way someone like Taine (who obviously realized his status in this group) was, but their writings can sound remarkably like those of the French counterrevolutionary historians nonetheless.

I would be glad to discuss this further; I was actually considering a detailed analysis of the book, to do just as you described. I don't know too much of the accuracy of the scenes involving Camille and Danton, since they are not my area of expertise (I do know that a scene in regards to Camille's marriage was pulled practically word for word from a translation my sister has of Claretie's biography of Camille). I know this is the bulk of the book, but there is plenty concerning Robespierre as well. This is where the errors and overly negative (without evidence) characterizations come in to play. From my research (for a novel I'm planning on writing) I think I can safely say I know as much about the Duplays as someone who doesn't have access to archives can, as well as a great deal of information concerning Robespierre, Saint-Just, Le Bas, Couthon (who is conspicuously absent from A Place of Greater Safety), general facts about life in the era of the Revolution, what historians of all stripes have said about it, and what I have been able to learn of the art and music of the time period.
....So, by now I can pretty much tell if a scene concerning any of those is accurate.

[jonahmama.livejournal.com]

Looking forward to more analysis.

I never do this...really... would you mind if I friended you? Seems like you have some interesting entries. I don't (by way of warning), unless you like to read rants about TV. Did I read that you're in California as well?

"The knowledge that I'll never be able to write like that is positively maddening;)" - Oh yeah - every time I work on my FIC for the "other" community. I wonder what you'd think. Might not be something you like though. And technically, I am not even a writer. Just dabbling to try my hand at something different.

[estellacat.livejournal.com]

would you mind if I friended you?
Not at all. And yes, I'm also in California, but further north.

Well, I might like it; I generally like writing about the Revolution as long as it's not full (whether intentionally or accidentally) of counterrevolutionary propaganda....At any rate, I don't judge writing I haven't read.

[sibylla-oo.livejournal.com]

I have seen a Spanish translation of PoGS under the title "La sombra de la guillotina", or "The Shadow of the Guillotine". How original....