What do you think?
Rate this book
The Guy de Maupassant MEGAPACK ®: 144 Novels and Short Stories
A protege of Flaubert, Maupassant's stories are characterized by their economy of style and efficient, effortless denouements. Many of the stories are set during the Franco-Prussian War of the 1870s and several describe the futility of war and the innocent civilians who, caught in the conflict, emerge changed. He authored some 300 short stories, six novels, three travel books, and one volume of verse. The story "Boule de Suif" ("Ball of Fat," 1880) is often accounted his masterpiece. His most unsettling horror story, "Le Horla" (1887), was about madness and suicide.
Kindle Edition
First published January 1, 1980
35 people are currently reading
28 people want to read
About the author
Guy de Maupassant
7,488 books3,047 followersHenri René Albert Guy de Maupassant was a popular 19th-century French writer. He is one of the fathers of the modern short story. A protege of Flaubert, Maupassant's short stories are characterized by their economy of style and their efficient effortless dénouement. He also wrote six short novels. A number of his stories often denote the futility of war and the innocent civilians who get crushed in it - many are set during the Franco-Prussian War of the 1870s.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews
February 24, 2022
Do we each have a secret belief that X is the greatest short story writer of all time? I might have thought Katherine Mansfield at one point, and there are damned good reasons to nominate Salinger.
Both are terrific, but both are tied to a time and a place.
What about Maupassant?
The roughly 180 stories in this monumental collection (I haven't tried the novels yet) spring from a universal well of experience. Not just human or societal experience, but an author's singular internal experience.
When I was in high school, "The Diamond Necklace" was probably in every English lit text, mostly because of its pre-O. Henry O. Henry ending. It's a hell of a story on all levels, but far from typical of Maupassant. In a sense, for him, it's a kind of well-manufactured throwaway.
He didn't produce a "typical Maupassant" story, except in one sense: At a time (mid to latish 19th century) of florid yet precious writing, with convoluted sentence structure where adverbs nipped at the unberbellies of objective phrases, he wrote short-short stories composed almost entirely of simple declarative sentences. There's no waste in his descriptions, no sense of teasing the reader's time with style. If he anticipated anyone in unstylized style, it was Hemingway.
He arose form a well-to-do background in Normandy, and he uses the local towns and their types often – but just as often, riffs on the epicene dilettantes of his later days in Paris.
He has an almost unique ability to paint a character completely in a dozen or two words, so that we not only know who he or she (more often he) is, but how his life is ordered, how he will react in almost any circumstance. ("Having married the daughter of a neighboring squire, he had lived a good and peaceful life in the indolence of a man who has nothing to do.") These quick pictures slap you directly into the scene.
Many stories are formed as a tale within a narrative: He sets a group scene (often an especially memorable scene) in which a character veers off from the discussion to present a personal reminiscence that becomes the true focus of the story. As often as not, the reminiscence ends and the original scene is abandoned, nothing about it reconciled or elaborated.
Which leads to a broader point: The reason so many of these stories are only a few pages long is that they just ... stop, with no denouement. You turn the page to see what happens next – and nothing does. Are these just character studies? Ideas that he twiddles through the mind's fingers? Passing ideas given flesh then tossed to the dog? But – just as often, a tale will end with a poleaxing emotional slam. I seldom read more than four stories at a sitting, despite their short length, because something had forced the breath out of me.
A paired example, two juxtaposed stories presumably written in the same period (late 1880s):
"Miss Harriet" is one of the reminiscences-within-a-gathering pieces and a love story (in a sense), as are so many others. Here, an aging artist recalls his negligent youth and the horrifying consequence of a single thoughtless act secretly observed, leading to an ending with no redemption.
"Little Louise Roque," the following story, could hardly have been typical of its time, for it highlights the murder of a young girl, left naked and defiled in the woods. This soul-stripping mix of grief, maddened desire, hypocrisy and social blindness is also a deeply affecting look at human weakness and perverted remorse.
Several stories end in suicide or death by disease, perhaps either a concession to the expectations of the time or a reflection of that time's reality (place this against the escalating suicide rate today).
How did Maupassant look at the world? There's a great deal of obvious anger and exasperation with humanity, yet alleviated by a huge dose of compassion. He paints his peasants as stupid and mentally deformed, yet as beset by the world and the victims of circumstance. Men describe women as vile, incomplete and worthless, yet they become the centers of dignity and decency. His bourgeois can be pitiable outcastes or gray cyphers. I sense that, within himself, he was seldom concerned with the opinions of his readers, or anyone else. He simply presented.
After attempting suicide by cutting his throat, he died in an asylum, where he wrote his own epitaph: "I have coveted everything and taken pleasure in nothing."
What can I say after that? Only that Guy de Maupassant was the greatest short story writer ever, hands down.
Both are terrific, but both are tied to a time and a place.
What about Maupassant?
The roughly 180 stories in this monumental collection (I haven't tried the novels yet) spring from a universal well of experience. Not just human or societal experience, but an author's singular internal experience.
When I was in high school, "The Diamond Necklace" was probably in every English lit text, mostly because of its pre-O. Henry O. Henry ending. It's a hell of a story on all levels, but far from typical of Maupassant. In a sense, for him, it's a kind of well-manufactured throwaway.
He didn't produce a "typical Maupassant" story, except in one sense: At a time (mid to latish 19th century) of florid yet precious writing, with convoluted sentence structure where adverbs nipped at the unberbellies of objective phrases, he wrote short-short stories composed almost entirely of simple declarative sentences. There's no waste in his descriptions, no sense of teasing the reader's time with style. If he anticipated anyone in unstylized style, it was Hemingway.
He arose form a well-to-do background in Normandy, and he uses the local towns and their types often – but just as often, riffs on the epicene dilettantes of his later days in Paris.
He has an almost unique ability to paint a character completely in a dozen or two words, so that we not only know who he or she (more often he) is, but how his life is ordered, how he will react in almost any circumstance. ("Having married the daughter of a neighboring squire, he had lived a good and peaceful life in the indolence of a man who has nothing to do.") These quick pictures slap you directly into the scene.
Many stories are formed as a tale within a narrative: He sets a group scene (often an especially memorable scene) in which a character veers off from the discussion to present a personal reminiscence that becomes the true focus of the story. As often as not, the reminiscence ends and the original scene is abandoned, nothing about it reconciled or elaborated.
Which leads to a broader point: The reason so many of these stories are only a few pages long is that they just ... stop, with no denouement. You turn the page to see what happens next – and nothing does. Are these just character studies? Ideas that he twiddles through the mind's fingers? Passing ideas given flesh then tossed to the dog? But – just as often, a tale will end with a poleaxing emotional slam. I seldom read more than four stories at a sitting, despite their short length, because something had forced the breath out of me.
A paired example, two juxtaposed stories presumably written in the same period (late 1880s):
"Miss Harriet" is one of the reminiscences-within-a-gathering pieces and a love story (in a sense), as are so many others. Here, an aging artist recalls his negligent youth and the horrifying consequence of a single thoughtless act secretly observed, leading to an ending with no redemption.
"Little Louise Roque," the following story, could hardly have been typical of its time, for it highlights the murder of a young girl, left naked and defiled in the woods. This soul-stripping mix of grief, maddened desire, hypocrisy and social blindness is also a deeply affecting look at human weakness and perverted remorse.
Several stories end in suicide or death by disease, perhaps either a concession to the expectations of the time or a reflection of that time's reality (place this against the escalating suicide rate today).
How did Maupassant look at the world? There's a great deal of obvious anger and exasperation with humanity, yet alleviated by a huge dose of compassion. He paints his peasants as stupid and mentally deformed, yet as beset by the world and the victims of circumstance. Men describe women as vile, incomplete and worthless, yet they become the centers of dignity and decency. His bourgeois can be pitiable outcastes or gray cyphers. I sense that, within himself, he was seldom concerned with the opinions of his readers, or anyone else. He simply presented.
After attempting suicide by cutting his throat, he died in an asylum, where he wrote his own epitaph: "I have coveted everything and taken pleasure in nothing."
What can I say after that? Only that Guy de Maupassant was the greatest short story writer ever, hands down.
May 27, 2022
“The Hand” is a story by de Maupassant where he writes about the supernatural. In this story, Sir John Rowell is found dead in a shroud of mystery. The judge narrates his story to a group of mostly women into a scary rendition with a questionable ending. In this story, the judge conveys this story as a man who believes in the rational with natural causes. The story introduces a man who is hunting and voyaging by sea. Rowell has the judge visit him in his home where he sees a withered, shriveled hand chained in a corner of his room. There are also 3 loaded revolvers in the room. The story is haunting and will stay with you when the hand is mysteriously reclaimed, and a finger is present on the body of Sir John Rowell.
In this excellent story and other short stories, the authors talents as a writer are incomparable. He crafts his stories with perfection, in minute detail and graphic images. Many of his stories will remain with you for a long time.
In this excellent story and other short stories, the authors talents as a writer are incomparable. He crafts his stories with perfection, in minute detail and graphic images. Many of his stories will remain with you for a long time.
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews