Friday, May 17, 2019
How does Flaubert use the Agricultural fair at Rouen to further his satire of 19th century French society?
Gustave Flaubert wrote his young Madame Bovary in the mid-nineteenth century as a satirical comment on the upper middle hu earthly concern body, those who were just rich enough to pretend to be rich. Flaubert loathed them and wrote his novel to top them appear as the fools that he thought them to be. His loathing for the upper middle class of 1850s France stemmed from the ideals which they held. Flaubert saw his fellows as a generation lost to the meritless and frivolous dreams of the French amorous cause.French Romanticism was a questionment through in all the creative arts towards idealising the world which artists constructed. Although every bit present in music and visual art, Flaubert focused both his hatred and his satire on the literature of the time, this ultraconservative nature earned him the title of a naturalist. This was however something that Flaubert hated the Naturalistic movement was one that focused on specifics and on realism in a work, whereas Flaubert s ought to grant his horizontal surface one that was applicable to any scope. Though his attention to detail in places mirrors that of a realist or naturalist writer, this is not his essential purpose.Flaubert defies any attempt to fit his work to a particular movement or style in French literature, though there is little doubt that his work Madame Bovary is a reactionary satire of French love story and of the bourgeois society that regurgitated the clichs of the movement. Each word of honor in the novel is c arefully chosen, so the book becomes a painstakingly constructed trap which ensnares the thoughts of the reader and guides them to the conclusions that Flaubert wants us to make. Although every word in the novel is vital to Flauberts purpose, there are certain key passages that are particularly opposite to the book. Among these is his description of the agricultural fair at Rouen in Part II Chapter 8. One section of this describes a conversation that occurs between Rodolphe and Emma in the provincial fair that surrounds it.The passage begins with a monologue from Rodolphe what he expresses in the passage is a fairly clich set of ideals from the romantic movement. He talks of Striving souls and beating police wagon . Particularly typical is the idea of two souls matched by fate that put upnot be drawn apart. However disrespect the words of the text the tone is not one of romance. Flaubert intentionally marrs Rodolphes words by introducing them with the sentenceRodolphe had locomote in closer to Emma, he was talking in a low voice, speaking rapidlyThis has the rear that Rodolphe appears to be making a clumsy attempt to seduce Emma, quite an than simply expressing noble sentiments. other tool that Flaubert uses to make the entire situation still more comedic, is by consistently secernate the routine provinciality of the agricultural fair with the frivolous fantasies in which the two star crossed lovers engage. This is used consistently throughou t the passage, save it makes its first appearance in door to this section Flaubert talks of bleating lambs and cattle, wherefore suddenly Rodolphe saysDont you mention this social conspiracy revolting? Is there one sacred feeling that they do not fate?.This adds to the readers feeling that Rodolphe and Emma are completely in a world of their own with little or no connection to the reality of the bovine conspirators. The reader should note the over-punctuation which creates a disjointed toneOh Come what may, kind of or later, in six months, ten years, they will be together, will be lovers, because Fate ordains it, because they were innate(p) for one another.Flaubert runs the entire monologue into a single paragraph. This has the effect that we are left with the impression of a clumsy attempt at seduction muttered quickly under the breath.In the near paragraph Flaubert describes the sensations that Emma feels. He writes of Emmas observations of Rodolphe. Ironically much of the passage is devoted to describing the smell of Rodolphes pomade and to the fresh scent of the ivy come up a nearby house, but one can only imagine the onslaught of odours that would campaign against ones nostrils in a rural agricultural fair. Flauberts writing here mimics that of French Romanticism, his style is an mimicry of the literary music genre that he seeks to mock. This is perhaps also a reflection of the feelings that Emma wants to have as much as the feelings that she does have.The next paragraph contains the concluding section of the Councillors speech. One should note the immediate change Emma has been lost to the scent of Rodolphes hair, and then suddenly the councillor shouts out Endurance Perseverance, ideals which are in stark contrast to Emmas thoughts of desire. This serves to make Emma appear petty, concerned only with those matters that are emotive and frivolous.Flaubert makes another sly stab here, this time at the church.Endurance Perseverance vigilance neith er the voice of habit, nor the over-hasty teachings of rash empiricism Dedicate yourselves above all to the improvement of the soil, to good manure, to the development of the various breeds, equine, bovine, ovine and porcine.If one reads the opening sentences from the Councillors speech it becomes clear that his path of oration is based on the stereotype of a hellfire and damnation p payer the resemblance can perhaps be most clearly seen in the way he cries out virtues, and in Heed neither the voice of habit, nor the over-hasty teachings of rash empiricism a sentence that is quite biblical in its formula if not in its subjects. This is certainly a caricature of an evangelical preacher. This impression is aided by the Councillors introductionshe could hear the voice of the councillor psalming out his phrasesMimicking the style of a over-zealous padre serves to mock the church by imitation. Applying this same manner of speech to such a mundane topic as agriculture rather than religi on serves to demystify it, making it appear comical. Lieuvain then dismounts his pulpit and is replaced by another speaker.Flaubert takes the opportunity of introducing the hot orator to contrast the trivial nature of Rodolphe and Emmas discourse with the profound speech of Monsieur Derozerays. This is done by contrasting pairs of sentences throughout the paragraph, alternating between describing the lovers conversation, and describing the speech. This technique begins thusAccordingly, praise of the government played a lesser role religion and agriculture were rather more in evidence Rodolphe, with Madame Bovary, was talking dreams, premonitions, magnetism.We now move a little lower on the page and find a similar contrastCincinnatus at his plough, Diocletian planting his cabbages and the emperors of China bringing in the New Year by planting seeds, the young man was explaining to the young woman that these irresistible attractions had their origin in some previous existenceFlaubert clearly wants to make a mockery of the whole situation. He is trivialising these matters of the heart by comparing them to the hardworking people of the fields, where the labourers are planting seeds for the New Year. Flaubert continues to alternate between describing the speech and describing the seduction. The contrasts between the two begin subtly but as we continue down the page they grow less and less so. By the time we reach the bottom of the page Flaubert has begun to intermingle the words of Rodolphe, speaking of love and destiny and of all the ideals of French romanticism and Derozerays, who talks of money of work and of that which is concrete and substantive Did you know that I would be escorting you? Seventy francs3 A hundred times I wanted to leave, and I followed you, I blockageed. Manures As I shall stay this evening, tomorrow and the day after, all my life.Flauberts purpose in this entire extract is to satirise the seduction. More importantly, it is to memorialise that the ideals that are shared by the Bourgeoisie and the Church concern matters that are emotive and are and then trivial compared to those things concrete such as land, money and food. Flaubert trivialises the entire Romantic genre by setting a clichd romantic conversation, that proliferates with the language and metaphors that permeate the literature that he is satirising. He then places this exaggeration of the Romantic movement into a situation that is overwhelmingly provincial and agricultural. This serves his purpose of mocking the petty middle class and the Romantic movement.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.