Is that the dorkiest thing you could ever imagine? It is. It just is. But the first two pages, the author's introduction Better than Kafka, better than Nabokov, better than whatever. Fucking brilliant- vivid, funny, rambunctious, wise, sarcastic, immortally satirical. I was hooked each time I picked up the book and read through it. Sometimes there's that Ok, ok Sometimes there's that first blush kind of thing going on, when a book seems amazing in the first few minutes of poking around in it in a bookstore and then it loses its shine when you take it home and read it.
Not so w. Vanity Fair I'm maybe a hundred pages in and I'm savoring it. It's deliciously wise and cyncial and knowing and filled with its own combustion engine, perpetual storytelling ie serialization, 'let's throw in a subplot so we can go out to eat for the next week' is a lost art. One thing, an objection anticipated- Story being overtold? Legitimate grounds How much story does one really need? What is a story without the very thing which comprises it?
The protein in the beef, the fiber in the bread For me as a reader, it's all about language- the way things are said, not as much what's said. How many buildungsroman 'idealistic young man from the sticks hits the big city and gets more than he bargained for" stories does one need to read The Red And the Black, On The Road, Huck Finn, Great Gatsby, Portrait, whatever View all 10 comments.
Jun 27, Loretta rated it liked it Shelves: myreading-challenge , classic. This book really wasn't for me. Don't get me wrong, some parts were very enjoyable and humorous, while others, not so much. The Rebecca, Becky character, I just couldn't stand!
She was such a snob and just so full of herself! She just wanted to be one of the rich and famous! Three stars. Vanity Fair may be brilliant, but it is extremely bloated and uneven.
For each page that features interesting characters and compelling dialogue, one must trudge through a greater measure of dull, relentless and misplaced description, aside and detail. Thackeray just goes on and on, spilling onto the page everything he can possibly think of, without any consideration for what is interesting and what is not.
The story seems not to be driving anywhere in particular, but it drives on regardless, an Vanity Fair may be brilliant, but it is extremely bloated and uneven. The story seems not to be driving anywhere in particular, but it drives on regardless, and the driver enjoys nothing more than tediously pointing out each minute element of the scenery passed along the way.
This is a novel built on comic wit and satire, which, I've come to realise, aren't really my thing, especially when coupled with Nineteenth Century concerns and sensibilities and packaged in bland realism. Give me a metaphor now and then, or something! Of the mostly unappealing and forgettable cast of characters, Becky was the one I felt least indifferent too, and she represents almost all of what I enjoyed about this novel.
I found myself frequently tuning out when she wasn't around, barely expending the effort to keep track of which Crawley was which, or who was married to whom, or in which park did each now happen to take their walks of an afternoon as compared to last week , and who enjoys a little claret with their meals now and then, and is tonight's veal to their liking?
I think to enjoy this novel you have to have some sort of affinity for its excesses, to be captivated by its time and place, its wit and voice and style, in order to follow, eagerly and attentively down each unremarkable cul-de-sac. For my part, I followed, but reluctantly, and with very little enthusiasm. If Vanity Fair were about pages shorter I might have enjoyed it, but as it stands I'm just pleased to have gotten through it. Aug 31, Helga rated it liked it Shelves: british , historical-fiction , classics.
A novel without a hero! A puppet show! The puppets are the flawed and unlikeable characters and the acts are hypocrisy, callousness, betrayal and artfulness. Narrated by Thackeray himself who is unreliable and voluble, the story is about two opposites. The manipulative, cunning, scheming and pleasure-seeking Becky Sharp and the weak, naive and kindhearted in my opinion stupid and annoying Emmy Sedley.
Vanity Fair is the portrayal of human nature at its worst. It is about the vanity of human affairs and not an easy book to like. It took me more than 3 months to read it, whereas I finished Les Miserables and War and Peace respectively in 3 and 4 weeks and devoured Charles Dickens novels like they were chocolate dipped peanut butter crackers!
Oct 13, Perry rated it really liked it. Clever, charming, attractive, as well as artful, duplicitous, hyper-ambitious, a superself-centered woman who uses sex as one of her tools to manipulate men but only to serve her needs.
She is the anti-heroine without a scruple in this subtitled "novel without a hero. Nonetheless, I was thoroughly impressed with and enjoyed reading this novel which is set in England around the time of Waterloo.
View 2 comments. Maybe I've matured as a reader now but I think I haven't enjoyed any classic as much as I did this one. It was thicker and longer than many a novel, but I enjoyed it the better for it. By the end, I understood why it was so long, the ending justified it. I was so daunted by its iconic title to read it before, but it was easier to read than most classics. The experience was complete, there wasn't anything missing, it had everything and so so much more. Published in , Vanity Fair is a Victorian satire and covers the English era during and after the Napoleonic Wars.
The novel is about two women, totally opposite to each other, who after completing their education set out into the world. Thackeray talks about British Raj of those times and the Battle of Waterloo which changes the course of the lives of the protagonists.
The writing is rich with historical, Biblical, and literary allusions and references. The omniscient narration is most endearing. The title of the novel, Vanity Fair, has been iconic to this day. The author explains his title again and again in the novel bringing its significance to light. The author declares the heroine of the novel in the very beginning but subtitled his novel "A novel without a hero" which I don't agree with, by the way.
I recognized a hero in William Dobbin by the latter part of the novel. Thackeray's writing portrayed a realism unfound among the writers of his time. Thackeray discusses the human nature, explores the hypocrisy of society, and takes the curtain off the mysteries of life for a moment and lets us take a peek in. The novel is about sticking to the idols we make, ourselves, of people we think we love but which are nothing like the reality, our need to believe in our ideals no matter how false they may be, the egotism and of course the vanity of the innocent and the cunning, the rich and the poor alike, the human infidelity, the brutal reality of being poor, human greed, of closing our eyes to what is right in front of us, the truth, the frailty of relations, of friendship and opportunism.
Thackeray shows us and believes that love triumphs in the end, but so does villainy, it doesn't get retribution enough, but I had the underlying sense that depravity is a punishment in itself.
Ecclesiastes 1. Shelves: groups-of-people , happyendings. First things first: Don't get this edition! I recently attended my college reunion. Whilst ambling idly around the green lawns of that hallowed institution, I had chance to encounter my most distinguished and beloved professor of English. Exalted that I happened to be dandling Thackeray's baby on my knee instead of the glossy monthly version of Vanity Fair , as is more common with me , with sparkling eyes and an enchanting smile I thrust my copy before his erudite and discerning nose.
That said, I managed to enjoy my pictureless experience of Vanity Fair immensely! This is the best novel I've ever read on the topic of money. It's also got maybe the most wonderful and fascinating narrator in English literature, which is no small feat considering there's some virile competition.
Vanity Fair is supposed to be, as its title says, A Novel Without A Hero , and much fun is derived figuring out if this claim is true. In Vanity Fair, characters tend to be ruled either by love or money; by ruthless self-interest or slavish sacrifice to unworthy others. Thackeray's narrator slyly presents these modes and their virtues alongside society's supposed and actual values, forcing the reader to ask herself who, in this Fair, could possibly be called a true hero?
Of course, for this reader, the answer was clear: while there are some who may neither love nor delight in the antics of Becky Sharp, they're not in my social circle and would "cut" me rudely, should our open carriages happen to pass in the Park.
Despite some superficial similarities, Becky Sharp is no odious Undine Spragg, and I can't imagine not cheering for this anti-heroine.
Like the narrator, Becky's got the number of every character in Vanity Fair, and she illusionlessly proceeds based on this sound intelligence. Unlike even the noble Wm. Dobbin, Becky has no blind spots or weaknesses in judging character, and so she is that rarest of creatures: a truly charming realist who loves to have a great time.
As Thackeray takes pains to remind us, Becky's not a pure cynic: she appreciates goodness in people, and doesn't begrudge others the virtue that she lacks. She is thoroughly lovable in her wickedness, as the best of us are. What a great novel! All its considerable dramatic tension comes directly from its incredible characters -- Which will taste Success? Who shall be faced with Ruin? Will Becky triumph? Will Dobbin rally? Will Amelia ever grow a pair or will she, one wonders hopefully, please drown herself in the Thames?
As I said above, it's a novel focused on the topic of money, and is the best of these of any that I've ever read. Obviously, it's a comic novel, and is very funny; but it's also great literature, so beyond being funny, it's true. O brother-wearers of motley! Are there not moments where one grows sick of grinning and tumbling, and the jingling of cap and bells? This, dear friends and companions, is my amiable object -- to walk with you through the Fair, to examine the shops and shows there; and that we should all come home after the flare, and the noise, and the gaiety, and be perfectly miserable in private.
I cried three times while reading Vanity Fair! If you think that's pathetic, wait until you see how often the female characters in here fall to weeping. You might play a drinking game while reading Vanity Fair , and take a swig of brandy-and-water each time a character starts to cry; perhaps it might be a two-person game, in which one player drinks to the sincere and awful blubbering of dopey neurotic Amelia, while another takes a sip for each of "our little adventuress" Becky's crocodile tears.
Or maybe, following the book's milieu, it wouldn't be based around drinking but instead a highly risky and addictive game of chance. There was an unholy amount of gambling in Vanity Fair, and indeed this vice seems to have been to moneyed Regency? England what crack cocaine was to impoverished s American urban centers.
Anyway, this book was great and I definitely do recommend it. I know I said that going forward I was going to make a greater effort to start quoting from the source, but I've got things to do, and anyway, it's all so choice that I hardly know where to start. Just go read it yourself -- but remember!
Get the one with the pictures! Nov 23, BAM Endlessly Booked rated it really liked it Shelves: own , guardian-list , library , catching-up-on-classics , gilmore , e-book , wc-democratic , classic-literature , before-death.
Quite unstimulating I obviously missed something. I chose audio book format because the book is so long, but I felt like it was just one long ramble, the narrator droning on and on about nothing. I also own the paperback, so maybe down the road I'll give it another try. This is a classic for a reason. So i dont know why I had such a hard time finishing this book in the past. It was an accurate depiction of the 19th century.
Thackeray's opus is a wonder. Long, yes, but so very good in so many ways. Since the story is so long and sprawling, I only jotted down a few notes on my impressions.
Other times he does it with delicacy, sliding back the wall and making you feel like it's just him and you in t Thackeray's opus is a wonder. Other times he does it with delicacy, sliding back the wall and making you feel like it's just him and you in the same room, both of you enjoying the wit and banter of this story, you his equal and friend. He wrote it in installments, and got paid by the pound. Okay, maybe not by the pound, but it was in his best interest to keep the story going.
And so it goes on for a long time. However, I was never bored, never wanting to skip this chapter and get it over.
Wicked, resourceful, likable and detestable. All too human, which is why I liked her, and deplored her. Brilliant dance of vagueness and ambiguity about how rotten she was, fantastic ending of her partial rise and questions of her motives. She is an archetype, some times playing the saint, other times playing Clytemnestra. It's from "Pilgrim's Progress" by John Bunyan. Vanity Fair sits out side the town Vanity on the path to heaven.
Thackeray uses this motif to expose humanity's frailties and foibles. Just a touch. There is so much more to say, but I would never be able to do this book justice. I strongly recommend this book. Yes, it's long, but you might just find a wonderful adventure among humanity in Vanity Fair.
View all 3 comments. Jan 27, Sara rated it liked it Shelves: classics , victorian , the-author-cards-list , catching-up-classics. This book might be unique in that it not only claims to have no hero, but in fact has no hero. What it does have is a cast of duplicitous, weak or inane characters, none of whom stir much in the way of either pity, empathy, or affinity.
It also has the bad girl to end all bad girls, Miss Rebecca Sharp. I doubt anyone would argue that Becky is not the most interesting character in the book, and while some might admire the good little Amelia, few could actually like her. Vanity Fair is quite a bit This book might be unique in that it not only claims to have no hero, but in fact has no hero.
Vanity Fair is quite a bit longer than it needs to be and some chapters meander aimlessly, but this, I believe, can be attributed to the method in which it was released.
When a book is being presented to its audience in a serial form, it must go on for a prearranged period of time and acquire a certain length. Were it being edited for release as a novel today, I feel sure it would be shortened considerably. Thackeray breaks the fourth wall constantly, talking to the reader and urging him to see the point he has just made, in a way that can become irritating at times.
But, even this conceit works for me for the most part. Up to this point, I had accepted the narrator as an all-seeing sort of presence, not a literal acquaintance of the characters, so it was discombobulating to say the least.
Vanity Fair is a moral tale, or more correctly a tale about lack of morals. One wonders if this society actually had any or if everything that passed for morals was pretense. At one point, Thackery compares the behavior of these persons to a mermaid and her tail: Those who may peep down under waves that are pretty transparent and see it writhing and twirling, diabolically hideous and slimy, flapping amongst bones, or curling around corpses; but above the waterline, I ask, has not everything been proper, agreeable, and decorous, and has even the most squeamish immoralist in Vanity Fair a right to cry fie.
I believe he is trying to impress upon his reader that this is a world of pretense, a world that cares more for appearance than it ever could for virtue. Indeed, we watch Becky Sharp navigate this society in the most unscrupulous way possible, and we cannot help feeling that her flaws and shortcomings are more about survival than evil.
And, there seems to be a particular emphasis on women and their relationships to one another: I am tempted to think that to be despised by her sex is a very great compliment to a woman. It does indeed seem that it is the fairer sex, who are proposed to have the gentler hearts, the nurturing instincts and the sweeter dispositions, who wield the knife most cruelly.
The men, while equally dissipated, seem somehow more gullible and unaware than hateful or manipulative. I had a hard time deciding what rating to give this tome. I did enjoy it and found myself caught up in the story at times. There were also moments when I might have laid it aside and never picked it up again without the slightest hesitation.
It is not the best of Victorian literature to me In short, it cannot be ranked with the best of its time, but it cannot be dismissed either. I could not help feeling sorry for Thackeray, knowing that he suffered in comparison to Dickens in his lifetime and will continue to do so throughout literary history. I am happy to have read Vanity Fair at last. There are surely some important ideas addressed and some things of value that can be taken away from it, but it is not the kind of book that pleads well to be read again.
I feel I've reached a milestone, having finally read this. I'd spent years avoiding it — partly its length and negative comments from people unable to finish it. I found it very readable and hugely entertaining. I now feel quite bereft as I had got to know Thackeray's characters pretty well and came to regard some of them as old friends, others as familiar foes. I'd expected to be bored but it is difficult to be bored by Vanity Fair, just over indulged perhaps.
It is a satire on Life and Society, I feel I've reached a milestone, having finally read this. It is a satire on Life and Society, the names chosen by Thackeray for many of his characters makes this very clear.
This was my first Thackeray, so not sure how representative V. Set c. It is timeless in its appeal, in its depiction of human nature, the fickleness of fashion and morality. It is long and at times taxingly wordy but it is a gem of a book and I can see why it entices readers back to it again and again. One to read at least once before you die! View all 5 comments. I was delighted by the book and laughed out loud several times. I think it is a terrifically fun and interesting novel, but there are a couple of negatives for modern readers.
The one BIG negative of the book is it is about 1, pages long, depending on the print edition. A small negative, to me, is the archaic florid overwriting style, but after all, it was written several centuries ago.
My recommendation is read it anyway, even it you have to buy a bigger dictionary or use Google and use a ruler to read the dense sentences. When I was a young child, I read books like this with rulers as well as writing out the sentences on lined notepaper. Several generations are followed, determined by their relationship and proximity to two young girls: poor but clever amoral Becky Sharp, and innocent pious middle-class Amelia Sedley. After several decades, their lives intersect again in an amusing scene when Becky and Amelia are middle-aged widows.
Basically, for one minute, they are simple human beings without the encrusted veneer of class and social discriminations. It changes everything, and nothing. Everybody is a victim of the personality and talents and beauty they were born with and of the social class and gender they were born into. Basically, no one wants to be poor and everybody wants to be richer than they are. One of the characters with little interest in money is shown to be a fool because she is overly dependent on conventional piety and good-looking surface beauty and class.
Another is a failure because she cannot resist making fools of everyone she meets, throwing personal safety and honor to the vagaries of the four winds, despite her useful knowledge a sucker is born every minute. I could go on, because every single character, of which there are at least 50 or so of interest, are idiots and foolish, true to real life. I am positive some characters will strike readers as recognizably much like real people they know, and other characters will cause readers to recognize their own brand of ridiculous idiocy.
Of course, some readers are oblivious to their own faults, or simply have not lived long enough, and they will not recognize themselves at all. Amelia is the character who I was most like until I was about 44 years old except very poor , I am sad to reveal. Hopefully, I will not disappoint too many people who never knew this about me, but at the same time, it is what it was. Currently, I am a bitter bitch.
It is what it is. But persons who think otherwise, and are of a lazy, or a benevolent, or a sarcastic mood, may perhaps like to step in for half an hour, and look at the performances. There are scenes of all sorts; some dreadful combats, some grand and lofty horse-riding, some scenes of high life, and some of very middling indeed; some love-making for the sentimental, and some light comic business; the whole accompanied by appropriate scenery and brilliantly illuminated with the Author's own candles.
Halcyon Press Ltd.. Kindle Edition. But why speak about her? It is probable that we shall not hear of her again from this moment to the end of time, and that when the great filigree iron gates are once closed on her, she and her awful sister will never issue therefrom into this little world of history.
Sedley burst out laughing he was a coarse man, from the Stock Exchange, where they love all sorts of practical jokes. The ladies only smiled a little. They thought poor Rebecca suffered too much. She would have liked to choke old Sedley, but she swallowed her mortification as well as she had the abominable curry before it, and as soon as she could speak, said, with a comical, good-humoured air, "I ought to have remembered the pepper which the Princess of Persia puts in the cream-tarts in the Arabian Nights.
Do you put cayenne into your cream-tarts in India, sir? Joseph simply said, "Cream-tarts, Miss? Our cream is very bad in Bengal. We generally use goats' milk; and, 'gad, do you know, I've got to prefer it!
Early drafts of the book, which had the working title "a novel without a hero" lacked the all-important figure of William Dobbin, a thoroughly good and likable character who owes much to Thackeray himself.
Unlike Bunyan, Thackeray was hardly a die-hard Christian, but rather a man who relished a life of pleasure and luxury, and who, on the evidence of his letters, found much of the Bible either ludicrous or distasteful. As a title, however, "Vanity Fair" set the tone of the novel in its depiction of a society, rather as "The Bonfire of the Vanities" did for Tom Wolfe who also illustrated his own work in Thackeray's intention was satirical and realistic.
Writing mid-century, he set his masterpiece in Regency England during the Napoleonic wars, intending the lessons of his tale to be applied equally to his own times. In contemporary terms that would be like a modern literary novelist setting their scene during the second world war, or the blitz. The climax of the novel comes with the battle of Waterloo.
Unlike Tolstoy, whose War and Peace was influenced by Vanity Fair , Thackeray was squeamish about military matters, and chose to leave most of the fighting off-stage.
This makes the irruptions of violence all the more shocking, as in the death of George Osborne, "lying on his face, dead, with a bullet through his heart" on the field of Waterloo, which occurs almost exactly halfway through the narrative. Thackeray was highly conscious of his audience and repeatedly breaks off from his story to buttonhole and tease his readers "the present chapter 8 , is very mild. Used - Softcover Condition: Bien.
From Spain to U. Quantity: 1. Condition: Bien. Published by Service and Paton, Used - Hardcover Condition: Good. From United Kingdom to U. Condition: Good. GC plus. Service and Paton, Red hardback gilt illustration on the front cover, gilt lettering and illustration on the spine in GC plus, no Dj cover as issued. Nice and clean pages with small ink marks and slightly tainted on the outer edges, small foxing marks,creases and nicks on the edges of the pages, small foxing marks inside the half-title and title pages.
The book is in GC for its age with some shelf wear. A collectable book. Published by Oxford University press, Oxford, Contact seller. First Edition Signed. Used - Hardcover Condition: Very Good. Within U. Condition: Very Good. No Jacket. John Austin illustrator. John Johnson printer to the University of Oxford, the illustrations have been made by John Austin and each book has been signed by the artist of the copies this is number Decorative and maroon over boards with gilt lettering on the spine starting to fade.
Illustrated throughout by John Austin and signed by him on the limited page. For edge and bottom page edges are deckled, no dust jackets. Signed by Illustrator s.
Published by Bradbury and Evans, First Edition. Well Preserved Copy. Published by Baudry's European Library; A. Galignani and Co, Paris, First publication in France. Collection of Ancient and Modern British Authors.
Two volumes. Bound in contemporary quarter leather and textured paper over boards, gilt spines. Sunning to both spines, wear to the edges and leather tips, the front and back joints of volume one are partially split, a very good set.
Wyeth Illustrator ibid W. Used - Hardcover Condition: Very Good binding. Hard Cover. Condition: Very Good binding. Five books awarded by St. Paul's School to Cord Meyer Jr.
Cord served for decades in the CIA, eventually becoming second in command of worldwide clandestine services there, and subject to a number of controversies; these include accusations of communist sympathies by the FBI, association while at the CIA with unnamed "dirty tricks" which the New York Times obituary says 'are prohibited today', and the unsolved murder of his recently divorced wife.
Angleton attempted to steal after her death, an affair between her and President John F. Vanity Fair is bound in three quarters red leather over red cloth, the two James Fenimore Cooper works are dark cloth with pictorial pastedowns on the front board, and the three others are in standard blue cloth bindings.
Generally in Very Good condition. Christopher Marquis "Cord Meyer Jr. Dies at 80" The New York Times. Very Good binding. Condition: FAIR. Circa Published by Grosset and Dunlap. New York , Used - Hardcover. Dust Jacket Included. First Photoplay Edition, illustrated with scene from the film and color illustration of Miriam Hopkins at front dustjacket panel.
Despite having no stills from the movie, a still desireable larger format photoplay edition with nearly eight-hundred pages. Near Fine in Very Good plus dustjacket, scattering of small edge chips.
Becky Sharp Edition.
0コメント