Diário de uma criada de quarto

by Octave Mirbeau, Adelino dos Santos Rodrigues (Translator)

"I am no saint; I have known many men, and I know, by experience, all the madness, all the vileness, of which they are capable. But a man like Monsiuer?" –– from THE DIARY OF A CHAMBERMAID

The famous anarchist and art critic Octave Mirbeau (1848–1917) inspired not one but two films (from Jean Renoir and Louis Bunuel) with his often forgotten classic THE DIARY OF A CHAMBERMAID. Telling the scandalous story of Celestine R., a fisherman's daughter with a taste for men, Mirbeau reveals that "when one tears away the veils and shows them naked, people's souls give off such a pungent smell of decay."

The Naughty French Novel Series is comprised of great poets and writers of the past who, as the French are wont to do, tried their hand at erotic fiction and in turn created classics in the genre. Series editor John Baxter, the author of WE'LL ALWAYS HAVE PARIS, will contribute an introductory essay to each book, detaiing the lives of the authors, the social mores of the times, and the publication histories of each book.

Genres: Fiction, Classics, France, French Literature, Erotica, 19th Century, Romance

325 pages, Mass Market Paperback

First published July 1, 1900

About the author

Octave Mirbeau was a French journalist, art critic, travel writer, pamphleteer, novelist, and playwright, who achieved celebrity in Europe and great success among the public, while still appealing to the literary and artistic avant-garde. His work has been translated into thirty languages.

Reviews

[Sketchbook · Rating 5 out of 5]

Mirbeau's chambermaid, Celestine R., is an extravagant creation who lodges in the imagination as you plunge into his ironic and always subversive critique of French life in 1900. A worldly tease, she's a vulnerable, manipulative, defiant and highly sexed star in his "theatre of deceit." Though somewhat of a bigot, Celestine remains likeable - an achievement in itself - while being unaware of the bitter twist that grips her final situation.

This is a dark social comedy. Mirbeau's own life, which got off to a bad start with his being raped by Jesuit priests as a teen, made him see the world as a torture garden where "passions, greed, religion, social institutions were monstrous flowers." He was an anarchist who defied conventions : his contempt for authority defined him as a journalist, novelist and playwright. (He became very rich).
With Zola, he attacked anti-semitism (the Dreyfus case), and was appalled by the behavior of human beings. An acute observer of all classes, he delivers unsparing criticism of people he saw and knew or knew about. I would call this Diary a "bloody" satire. Bloody because there's a savage murder that goes unpunished. Celestine believes she knows the killer--.

Filmmakers Renoir and Bunuel did their own versions of "Chambermaid" that only vaguely follow the book. They both found his ending unacceptable (or the censors did). But Mirbeau's finale makes the novel a "classic" of modernity. It foreshadows the ambiguity of Pinter and the transgressions of Genet.

The saucy Celestine is stationed with a cold, childless married couple in Normandy when she starts her diary and then, veering away from a chronological story, Mirbeau has her remembering past scenes (and abuses) with other households. This structure shattered the literary "realistic" formula of the day. Some memories focus on vice, like overhearing a madame describe a brothel scene where she watches two hunchbacks having sex. "You should see them! Nothing's more exciting." Some are hilarious: while traveling a grand madame refuses to open a jewel case because her dildo is there, carefully packed. Others are troubling: another madame encourages Celestine to take care of her grandson, 19, who is dying of TB. Mirbeau avoids all descriptions of sex, but soon Celestine and the sickly youth are entwined. After a session, "from his mouth...a flow of blood hit my face." Months later she wonders if she contracted the disease. How does she stop the torment of desire? Easily: "with my own caresses."

Within the Norman house is a gardener-coachman named Joseph, a dark, virile, ugly man (and raging anti-semite) who beguiles Celestine. Drawn to him, she trembles in his presence. "I will not, I cannot, love this man. No, no, it is not possible. And yet it is possible, and it is true."

I deplore Identity Politics and Identity Art. In this mostly forgotten novel, Mirbeau's first-person diary of a chambermaid seems unique; he is psychologically convincing throughout. His characters tolerate depravity "as a cherry tree bears cherries." There is not a whisper of sentiment here for anyone. Written in sedate prose, you will not find an overwrought word or soft interlude. Mirbeau destroys our illusions about people we know. Shall I mention the monsieur with a shoe fetish found dead with one of Celestine's shoes clamped in his mouth?

[anne larouche · Rating 3 out of 5]

Un roman très tranche de vie, très ancré dans son époque… il ne conviendra donc pas à ceux qui aiment l’action sans répit, mais pour ma part un livre atmosphérique, plus centré sur l’étude de personnage et des idées véhiculées par l’auteur m’intéresse toujours d’une fois à l’autre. Les mentalités de l’époque sont certainement choquantes à la lecture mais elles contribuent justement à laisser une forte impression. Mirbeau écrit magnifiquement bien! Quelques passages plus anodins auraient pu être coupés, et du point de vue « divertissement » le roman ne garde pas toujours mon attention à 100% mais du point du vue « culture » j’ai adoré ma lecture.

[Luís · Rating 4 out of 5]

Through Célestine's misfortunes, aspirations, and inner turmoil, a scathing portrait of late 19th-century France unfolds. Mirbeau denounces the hypocrisy, absurdity, and prejudices of a bourgeois society in which the wealthy indulge their desires and whims at the expense of their servants. In contrast, the servants become complicit in their masters' perversions. It's a tad outrageous, but so delightful.

[Stela · Rating 3 out of 5]

Si j’avais été plus familière avec la biographie mouvementée d’Octave Mirbeau, peut-être j’aurais été moins surprise à la lecture de son Journal d'une femme de chambre qui a contredit en tout temps (de lecture, bien sûr 😊) mon horizon d’attente suggéré par le titre. Mais, dans la bonne tradition que je me suis imposée, si je n’acquiers pas d’avance des connaissances sur un auteur ou une œuvre, je ne cueillis ces informations qu’après la lecture.

Je peux maintenant dire qu’en fin de compte je n’ai pas été si étonnée d’apprendre que l’écrivain fut un anarchiste. Il y a, dans son œuvre, une volonté de détruire toute la conception romanesque bâtie par ses prédécesseurs, et n’oublions pas que nous sommes à l’aube du XXe siècle, non à sa fin ! Et il commence si doucement, si conventionnellement, avec le motif du manuscrit, souvent utilisé pour créer l’illusion de réalisme dans l’art : l’auteur nous assure que le livre a été vraiment écrit par Mlle Célestine R. et qu’il n’a fait que l’ajuster ici et là, à contrecœur, à l’insistance de l’autrice. C’est peut-être un des motifs pour lesquels certains critiques se sont hâtés de l’inscrire parmi les réalistes avec des accents naturalistes.

Mais l’approche réaliste se révèle très rapidement un canular, une ironie à l’adresse de l’ambition des écrivains du célèbre courant d’effacer les frontières entre l’art et la vie, car Mirbeau dénonce sarcastiquement les conventions littéraires, en montrant avec volupté le caractère artificiel de l’art, aussi sur le plan de l’action que sur celui de la composition et du style, et en devenant ainsi un très intéressant précurseur du postmodernisme.

Prenons, par exemple, la voix narrative, Mlle Célestine, le narrateur héros non fiable non seulement parce qu’elle jette le doute sur certains événements qu’elle raconte en faisant des suppositions qui ne seront jamais éclaircies, mais aussi à cause de ses interprétations trop astucieuses, trop profondes pour une femme de chambre, peu importe son éducation :

…j’avertis charitablement les personnes qui me liront que mon intention en écrivant ce journal et de n’employer aucune réticence, pas plus vis-à-vis de moi-même que vis-à-vis des autres. J’entends y mettre au contraire toute la franchise qui est en moi et, quand il le faudra, toute la brutalité qui est dans la vie. Ce n’est pas de ma faute si les âmes, dont on arrache les voiles et qu’on montre à nu, exhalent une si forte odeur de pourriture.

Ainsi, la voix narrative se confond visiblement avec celle de l’auteur, sans aucun souci de la part du dernier de la camoufler par respect aux conventions littéraires en vigueur à ce moment-là.

Puis il y a une négligence voulue de la cohérence – des petits épisodes sans rapport avec l’action principale mais qui parodient quelque actualité scandaleuse du temps de Mirbeau, comme celui du triangle conjugal dans lequel le mari et l’amant se partagent la femme en invoquant leur amitié qui partage tout.

Enfin, si le titre promet une critique sévère de l’« upper class » par les yeux de ceux qui ont accès à tous ses secrets, les serviteurs, – et la remplit pleinement, cette promesse – il promet aussi, implicitement, un contraste entre ces deux classes sociales en faveur de celle plus humble, évidemment – et cela n’est pas tout à fait vrai : la corruption des maîtres est secondée par celle des domestiques dans une perpétuelle compétition du plus fourbe, du plus rusé, comme on voit du sage conseil que William donne à Célestine :

« Il ne faut jamais se plaindre de la bêtise de ses maîtres, ma petite Célestine… C’est la seule garantie de bonheur que nous ayons, nous autres… Plus les maîtres sont bêtes, plus les domestiques sont heureux… »

C’est un monde pas mal vicieux, celui imaginé par Mirbeau, un monde sans aucun espoir de rédemption, un monde où, comme remarquait génialement Noël Arnaud dans la préface, on voyage jusqu’au « bout de la nausée ». C’est pourquoi Célestine, si intelligente, si ironique et si fine observatrice des tares humaines, ne gagne pas la sympathie du lecteur et reste dans la zone grise qui sépare les héros des antihéros. Et c’est pourquoi son passage du côté de ceux qu’elle méprisait naguère n’est pas du tout surprenant dans ce monde où chacun guette son opportunité :

Nous avons trois garçons pour servir les clients, une bonne à tout faire pour la cuisine et pour le ménage, et cela marche à la baguette… Il est vrai qu’en trois mois nous avons changé quatre fois de bonne… Ce qu’elles sont exigeantes, les bonnes à Cherbourg, et chapardeuses, et dévergondées !... non c’est incroyable et c’est dégoûtant…

Et finalement c’est pourquoi la lecture est un peu aride, car son message, même si intéressant par sa nouveauté, est un peu trop évident misanthrope. Car en l’absence de l’ironie pour tempérer la laideur, les défauts dénoncés deviennent trop incommodes et leur vérité trop difficile à avaler. Qu’est-ce que vous voulez, on a malheureusement besoin de tampons pour amortir la chute du paradis, on a besoin de médicaments pour en contrecarrer la nausée.

[EslavaSabio · Rating 4 out of 5]

Епатажна французька класика у всій своїй красі😏

Тексти французьких авторів завжди відрізняються: вони більш відкриті, подекуди скандальні, відверті та емоційні. Їхній стиль також інакший, це легко зрозуміти з перших же сторінок.

«Щоденник покоївки» Окстава Мірбо абсолютно вписується у парадигму французької класичної літератури. І якщо прибрати будь-які згадки про те, коли відбуваються події, можна сказати, що цей роман у контексті сучасности. Так і не скажеш, що він був написаний у 1900 році. Тут є еротика та фемінізм.

Селестіна працює покоївкою у різних заможних французів упродовж тривалого часу. З дитинства вона спостерігає за їхнім життям, бачить всю «брудну білизну», скандали, плітки, таємниці. У «Щоденнику покоївки» ми бачимо нищівне викриття безрозсудних та лицемірних господарів очима звичайної прислуги. Звична тема класової нерівности.

Роман еротичний, сексуальний та феміністичний. Знову повертаюсь до того, що не вписується у рамки часу свого написання.

Люблю класику, яку розумію, яку можу відчути, пройнятись. І щоби було місце поміркувати над всім. І це така історія. Нечасто пишу в книгах, роблю якісь позначки, а тут хотілось це робити постійно! Коментувати, виділяти, сперечатись з автором, героїнею. Обурюватись! І цей книжковий діалог лише поглиблює відчуття залученості.

Мені подобається, що видавництво "Ще одну сторінку" відкриває невідомих нам класиків. І щиро вдячна за Октава Мірбо❤️. Сподіваюсь, що видадуть більше романів автора, хочеться й надалі знайомитись з його текстами🙏

[Lee Foust · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is a wonderful novel. It's a bit more polished, written in a less effusive prose style, and takes a more recognizable narrative form than its predecessor (and the first of Mirbeau's post-crisis works), Torture Garden. Diary... is also less sensationalist and therefore more cutting and real in its biting cultural criticism. Actually, now that I think about it, at the time that The Diary of a Chambermaid was written, the form--a diary, obviously, but more generally a straight narrative interspersed with short stories in the form of the chambermaid's recollections of previous "situations" and her upbringing--was probably rather new at the time the novel was composed (1900), even if later twentieth century novelists were more likely to trod such ground while attempting to expand the boundaries of what the long prose narrative form could do, usually in the first-person mode.

Of course I love Mirbeau's politics, his relentless contempt for all things bourgeois, hypocritical, religious, and patriotic but--beyond the author's obvious epistemology of cultural protest--two other elements are truly remarkable in this novel: 1.) the amazingly convincing female voice and 2.) the startling depiction of human perversity, which actually outstrips and even challenges the novelist's didactic political stance. It has that feeling of a narrative that manages to shake off the shackles of its author's intentions, pointed satirical barbs, and political beliefs, and to somehow go further into truth than a the puppet-mastery of a self-conscious author is capable. I'm reminded of James Hogg's The Memoirs and Confessions of a Justified Sinner, which begins as a rather simple satirical romp and then descends, almost literally, into hell, psychedelia, and a place to which only the most unrestrained fiction manages to go.

Something similar happens here in Diary... as Célestine's at first small acts of perversity lead her in and out of trouble, contradict her moral censure of her masters, complicate the plot, and leave us torn--as she herself is in the face of her servitude--between disgust and pity. In the end it's almost as if humankind deserves all of the moral degradation of capitalism--or perhaps it's capitalism's denigration of empathy and love through competition, hierarchy, and abuse that has rendered humankind all but incapable of these once applauded virtues. Also, in the end, the servants do exactly as the masters did and Celestine eventually does just about everything she's described others doing with so much disgust and superiority--and, most realistically, she seems utterly unconscious of it.

Looking forward to reading Mirbeau's next: The Twenty-One Days of a Neurasthenic.

Read this again and have now taught it in a Literature and Gender course several times. Still a remarkable work unlike any other novel I can think of. Maybe because of that it defies certain common novel structures and the whole phony character arc thing. Yet its emotions are real and its social critique beyond any other novel I can think of. Also most students are made very uncomfortable by it which, if it doesn't get me fired, is i think so good for them.

[L.S. Popovich · Rating 3 out of 5]

Diary of a chambermaid is a good novel but it does not seem to be an indispensable novel in the ouvre of octave mirbeau. Let's be honest. No one writes in their diary with such polished narration and well choreographed scenes.
For the most part mirbeau is an effective chronicler and cynical commentator of his times but the diary device is a lavish contrivance.
He does however provide a compelling female narrator who writes awfully long and intricate observations about her employers, exposing the dirty underbelly of their high class lifestyles.
For its time it might have sparked outage and shock and awe. Today it is simply amusing in its scandalous or simply exaggerated depictions.
It is a somewhat tame mirbeau novel with enough weird, unexplainable touches of macabre wit to meet with my stamp of approval.

[Sarah · Rating 4 out of 5]

À travers le discours à la première personne d'une servante, le portrait qu'Octave Mirbeau dresse des classes dominantes de la fin du XIXe siècle, de la bourgeoisie, parisienne ou de province, de la noblesse (forcément) désargentée, n'est pas tendre. Il est même sans pitié. Les domestiques ne sont pas épargnés non plus. Chez Mirbeau, l'être humain est vil. S'il lui arrive de faire preuve de bonté, il est aussitôt victime d'un coquin mal intentionné.



Quand la servante raconte son histoire, on y croit. C'est un texte qui fonctionne sur scène car la voix sonne juste. Mais certaines parenthèses sont un peu forcées. L'auteur, limité par le cadre qu'il s'est imposé (il est le simple intermédiaire qui nous fait parvenir ce texte présenté comme authentique), se retrouve parfois contraint à une gymnastique quelque peu scabreuse pour inclure certaines scènes, comme celle d'un dîner prétentieux (on imagine difficilement la femme de chambre rapporter dans son journal la conversation à laquelle elle aurait assisté, surtout que l'on nous fait part du sentiment de ridicule du maître de maison)

[Lyudmila Spasova · Rating 5 out of 5]

С публикуването си “Дневникът на една камериерка” предизвиква истинска сензация и става широко популярен. Романът е предизвикателство, направо шамар, върху лицемерния буржоазен морал, интелектуалната и духовна немощ на епохата. Аферата Драйфус е в разгара си, в Европа се завихрят мощни антисемитски настроения, Първата световна война се задава. Мирбо изживява години на слава, съратник е на Зола по време на Аферата Драйфус, но скоро умира и с началото на войната, романът му вече не представлява интерес и е почти напълно забравен. Но случва се книги да бъдат “възкресявани” и точно това се получава след като Луис Бунюел го филмира. Филмът е сензация, а романът отново е четен от милиони, издаван и преиздаван.
Интересно е също, че Димитър Димов споменава колко силно влияние му е оказал Мирбо при написването на “Осъдени души”.

Повествованието е в първо лице от името на камериерката/домашна прислужница Селестин (Божествена, небесна). Едновременно цинична и наивна, прагматична и романтична тази жена е идеалният протагонист, който чрез своите бележки в дневника си ни превежда през множество господарски домове, служба и приют за безработни, среща ни с изнежени и извратени аристократи, сноби, алчни и перверзни старчета, издигнали се бивши слуги и пълни негодници, паразитиращи върху други паразити. Галерията от гадни образи като че няма край. Слугите завиждат на господарите си, клюкарстват за тях със злорадо наслаждение, мразят ги, крадат ги, но тайно в себе си искат да станат като тях. Слугите мъже могат да подражават на господарите си и да ги мамят ловко, но жените в самотата и безизходицата си често се оставят да бъдат съблазнени от тях или от други слуги. Кражбите на дребно, алкохолизмът, мерзостта са ежедневие в безкрайно дългите работни дни на всички тези готвачи, градинари, коняри, и момичета за всичко. Женитбата е единственият възможен изход за жените. Мъжете се опитват да се сдобият с богатство обикновено като крадат господарите си. Всички мъже, пред които Селестин благоговее, са празноглави парвенюта, позьори, крадци и мошеници или направо садисти.

Понеже искат да имитират господарите си, слугите са крайно реакционни, четат ултра десните вестници, бранят разпалено религията, докато нарушават всички божи заповеди, и са заклети антисемити. Семената за появата на фашизма зреят и скоро ще покълнат.

Мирбо е причисляван към школата на натурализма, заедно със Зола, Мопасан и Алфонс Доде. В романа са загатнати или директно включени някои сцени, които сигурно силно са възмутили морализатори те, езикът на Селестин понякога е доста циничен, но не бих казала, че ставаме свидетели на краен натурализъм. Въпреки че е слабо образована, Селестин има поетична душа, което не и пречи да има за свой идеал престъпни мъже. Тя е много правдоподобен образ, изваян от голям стилист и майстор на езиковата обрисовка. В своя разказ Селестин често прескача във времето, отклонява се, сменя регистъра, което е голямо богатство за романа. В много отношения той излиза от сковаващата рамка на реализма, което го прави четивен и привлекателен за съвременния човек.

Прослойката на слугите е изчезнала или силно се е видоизменила, но слугинският манталитет е все така жив. И днес секретарки се домогват до богатия, извратен чичко или дядо паричко, благоговеят пред него заради богатството му, което за тях е мерило за интелект и мощ. И днес новобогаташи унижават подчинените си, които им отвръщат с подлост и кражби. Слугите обожават и едновременно презират силните на деня също както в началото на XX век.

“Дневникът на една камериерка” е все така актуална книга не в детайлите си, а в настроението и внушенията си. Ако на моменти ви погнуси, бих ви разбрала. Докато има слуги по душа, този роман ще звучи съвременно.

А сега да чуем Селестин:
“Слугата не е нормално обществено създание. Той е нещо разнородно, сглобено от части и парчета, които не пасват заедно, които не можеш да наложиш едно върху друго... И по-лошо дори: той е чудовищен човешки хибрид. Не е вече към народа, от който произлиза, не е и към буржоазията, макар да живее с нея и да се стреми към нея. Отказвайки се от народа, той е загубил неговата щедра кръв и наивната му сила... А буржоазията го е заразила със срамните си пороци, без да му остави средства да ги задоволи, предала му е долните си страсти, подлите си страхове, престъпните нагони, ала без обстановката, тоест без оправданието на богатството. С омърсена душа той прекосява този благоприличен буржоазен свят и достатъчно е да вдъхне зловонието на тези гниещи помийни ями, за да загуби увереността на духа си, да загуби дори формата на собственото си “аз”... И под всички тези спомени, сред тълпата фигуранти, из които броди като призрак, той разравя само мръсотии, сиреч страдания...Смее се често, ала смехът му е пресилен. Това не е смях от изпитана радост, от осъществена надежда - той крие горчивата гримаса на негодуванието, суровата напрегната гънка на сарказма... Няма нищо по-болезнено и по-грозно от този смях; той изгаря, изпепелява... По-добре да бях плакала може би! Не, всъщност не зная... Всъщност майната му!...Да става каквото ще...”

[Яна · Rating 5 out of 5]

переклад шикарнючий, фінал своєрідний

[Eadweard · Rating 4 out of 5]

I usually read the source first and then watch the movie adaptation(s), this time I couldn't help myself. It's easy to see why Luis Buñuel adapted this (already having directed The Exterminating Angel and later making The Discreet Charm of the Bourgeoisie). I found the most recent adaptation (2015) to be okay, and I have yet to watch Renoir's.

Through Celestine, Mirbeau makes it clear to us how he viewed the people and society of turn of the century France. He relentlessly attacks the bourgeoisie, the conservative / monarchist reactionaries, the glorification of the military (long live the Army! exclaims Joseph, the book's ignorant everyday man), the antisemitism of the times (Dreyfus Affair) and in general, the -hypocrisy- of the people.
----



"No one has any idea of all the worries that servants have to put up with, nor of the monstrous way in which they are continually exploited. If it’s not the employers, it’s the registry offices or some charitable institution—not to mention your fellow servants, for some of them are pretty foul. No one has the slightest concern for anyone else. Everybody lives, grows fat, amuses himself at the expense of someone more miserable and hard-up than himself. However much the scene may change or the background be transformed, however different or hostile the social setting, men’s passions and appetites remain the same. Whether it is in a cramped, middle-class flat, or some banker’s luxurious town house, you find the same beastliness, the same inexorable fate. When all’s said and done, the truth is that a girl like me is defeated even before she starts, wherever she may go and whatever she may do … poor human dung, nourishing the harvest of life and happiness for the rich to gather and use against us …"






"How they infuriate me, these ‘respectable’ people, with their…savage contempt for any girl who happens to ‘go wrong’, and their everlasting nagging about our moral behavior…of course, none of this prevents the master, despite all his morality, pulling you on to a sofa or bed as soon as he gets a chance, and as often as not…leaving you with a child on your hands.  Then, of course, it’s up to you to do what you can if you can…and if you can’t, then you and the child can just starve, for all they care.  It’s no concern of theirs.”

[Dima Katerusha · Rating 5 out of 5]

Я у захваті. Ні, серйозно, мене дуже легко підкупити — це має бути атмосферно, цікаво, з нотками гумору, з цікавою героїнею і цікавим сюжетом-спогадом.

1️⃣ - атмосферність вражає тим що це Франція. Ну хто не хотів побувати у Франції? А тут її предостатньо. Прям Париж, прикордонні містечка, побут паризьких вельмож. Ну вау.
2️⃣ - головна героїня Селестіна - slay. Весь її характер робить її собою — вона емоційна, з гарним почуттям гумору, впевнена в собі, розуміє психологію людей, інколи робить необдуманні вчинки — і без неї книга не була б такою чудовою.
З одного боку, ти її не розумієш зовсім, а з іншого боку, ти підтримуєш її в усьому. Як ж автор зумів закохати в Селестіну!
3️⃣ - тут є та ниточка сюжету, якої тобі вдосталь вистачить. Я боявся, що це буде класика-класика, тим паче французька, і тут не буде нічого цікавого, але ні. Тут є сюжетна лінія до кінця книги, яка супроводжується спогадами героїні про минуле, яке відіграє роль в її світогляді і за яким цікаво спостерігати.

Я у захваті! Це однозначно та книга, яка увійде в топ10 книг цього року. Вона це заслуговує. Ти не покладаєш на неї надій, а потім ти її згадуєш і хочеш перечитати!

[Chequers · Rating 1 out of 5]

Immagino che sara' stato scandaloso e sicuramente innovativo nel 1900, ma oggi, sinceramente, io l'ho trovato alquanto noioso ed arrivata ad un terzo del libro mi sono chiesta se valeva andare avanti: la risposta e' stata "no".
Mi aspettavo un resoconto frizzante della vita della domestica, ma invece mi e' sembrato tutto alquanto piatto, almeno per gli standard di oggi.
Meglio impiegare il poco tempo che ho per leggere in un libro che mi "dia" qualche emozione, positiva o negativa che sia.

[Ангеліна Іванченко · Rating 4 out of 5]

На початку мені дуже сподобався переклад, проте, коли я дізналася, що там є вирізані та цензуровані моменти, стало дуже сумно( Воно й відчувалося на етапі читання, насправді: занадто вже пристойно все було як для французької літератури.

Щодо самої історії, то я з нею відпочила. Не скажу, що вона мене полонила, але на полицях точно лишаю, аби повертатися до деяких частинок.

[Perihan · Rating 4 out of 5]

"Ah ah ! Gariban bir hizmetçi ne kadar da acınacak durumdadır. Ne kadar da yalnızdır. Neşeli gürültülü evlerde yaşamış da olsa, o hep yalnızdır.
Yalnız olmak ,yalnız yaşamak değildir, ötekilerin evinde yaşamaktır yalnızlık..."

"Her sözcük, o evde sizi aşağılar, her hareket sizi hayvanlardan daha da değersiz kılar..."

1900 yılında yayınlanan ve bir "YerAltı Klasiği" olarak nitelendirilen bu romanda, bir oda hizmetçisinin gözüyle, sosyete hayatı , onun "üstün ahlakı", gizli sırları ortaya dökülüyor.
Kurgu olmayan , gerçek bir kişi olan Celestine, sefil ve acılı bir çocukluktan sonra, geçimini sağlamak üzere oda hizmetçisi olarak ev ev dolaşmaya başlıyor. O evlerde tuttuğu günlükler de böylece bir yazarın elinde kitaba dönüşüyor.

Not: Kitabın 2016 yapımı bir de "The Diary of a Chambermaid " adında film uyarlaması var.

[Siv30 · Rating 3 out of 5]

לסקירה מפורטת בעברית, קישור לבלוג שלי -

https://sivi-the-avid-reader.com/יומנ...

[Andrew]

Despite the supposed naughtiness, this is hardly an "erotic" novel or anything of the sort. Instead, it's a very, very French satire of the bourgeois mores of the time, the moronic militarism, the self-flagellating Catholicism, the obsessive anti-Semitism, the callous attitudes of the wealthy, and so forth. If Zola wrote in the spirit of social change, and Balzac wrote in the spirit of unflinching honesty, Mirbeau wrote with medical-grade venom, and even when he was sympathetic, he still spit at his characters.

[Electra · Rating 5 out of 5]

Je ne regrette pas mon choix d’être allée vers un classique ! Une très belle découverte qui fait écho à une précédente lecture sur cette période particulière de l’histoire française.
Hâte de rédiger mon billet.

[Louise · Rating 5 out of 5]

Ça commence comme un journal de bord un poil graveleux, enchaînant les récits anecdotiques sur le quotidien d'une domestique dans des familles bourgeoises où les apparences cachent beaucoup d'immondices... Je l'ai commencé avec entrain car il se lit facilement et la langue est déliée, truculente mais élégante à la fois, tout en me disant qu'on restait dans le regard qu'un homme bourgeois portait sur la condition d'une femme de chambre. On ressent à de multiples reprise le male gaze (et le bourgeois gaze, ça se dit ça ?!) de Mirbeau qui se plaît à décrire à travers la plume de Célestine, les cochonneries qu'une femme élégante ou du peuple pourrait s'adonner sans trop d'état d'âme.
Mais au fur et à mesure de la lecture, j'ai trouvé que la satire prenait des accents pamphlétaires beaucoup plus intéressants car Mirbeau se mouille : Célestine écrit des diatribes sur la conditions de sa classe économique, elle raconte son histoire et les raisons pour lesquelles elle se retrouve placée très régulièrement dans des demeures qui ne la gardent pas ou d'où elle s'enfuit.

Est-ce vraiment de ma faute, ce qui m'arrive ?... Peut-être!... Et pourtant, il me semble qu'une fatalité, dont je n'ai jamais été la maîtresse, a pesé sur toute mon existence, et qu'elle a voulu que je ne demeurasse jamais, plus de six mois, dans la même place... Quand on ne me renvoyait pas, c'est moi qui partais, à bout de dégoût. C'est drôle et c'est triste... j'ai toujours eu la hâte d'être "ailleurs", une folie d'espérance dans "ces chimériques ailleurs", que je parais de la poésie vaine, du mirage illusoire des lointains...

Difficile de ne pas penser aux femmes de ménage et autres personnels au service des nantis, qui vivent, à peu de choses près, les mêmes vicissitudes et humiliations en boîte d'intérim ou en société de placement...
La classe bourgeoise en prend donc pour son grade : mœurs dissolues cherchent domestique irréprochable, prête à accepter un droit de cuissage (= viol, intégré comme désagréable mais normal par Célestine), gages extrêmement bas, nourriture avariée et suspicion généralisée sur tout ce qu'elle entreprend. Extrême servitude du personnel, en particulier des femmes : harcelée sexuellement si elles sont jolies, humiliées à l'extrême si elles sont laides. Prostitution fréquemment suggérée et perçue comme une voie vers la liberté (ça me rappelle une autre époque). Cette lecture se termine donc en un formidable témoignage de la condition domestique et du délitement des classes nobles et bourgeoises, sensées dans l'imaginaire populaire, être des exemples de probité.

On ne s'imagine pas combien il y a de femmes avec des bouches d'anges, des yeux d'étoiles, et des robes de trois mille francs, qui, chez elles, sont grossières de langage, ordurières de gestes, et dégoutantes à force de vulgarité de vraies pierreuses !

[Lewis Woolston · Rating 4 out of 5]

I went through an intense Octave Mirbeau phase in 2012. I read nearly every of his that i could get my hands on. I have a vivid memory of being in my little flat in Black Forest (a lovely leafy green suburb of Adelaide) reading his books with a cup of tea and the rain just hammering down outside.
Anyway...this is probably my favourite of his novels. If you can imagine Orwell's poverty books, "Road to Wigan Pier" and "Down and Out in Paris and London" but make them French, feminine, comical and sexual then that's the basic gist of this book.
Our main character is Celestine, a young woman living the dreary and financially insecure life of a chambermaid to the wealthy and unworthy upper classes. She observes their degenerate antics, their miserly, spiteful natures and has various goings-on with the other servants.
All in all a winning novel, i believe a rather saucy French movie was made of this book but i haven't seen it although i would like to. Saucy French movies being a particular favourite of mine.

[Rachel · Rating 2 out of 5]

Yeah, I'm really not sure what to say about this book. I was excited to read a "naughty" French classic. But this was screwed up on so many different levels that it went from casually dirty (no real sex scenes) to casual thriller featuring a really messed up lead character. I use the term casual because the way (this edition, at least) is translated is extremely awkward and distant. The awkwardness comes from the novel being written in 1900 but having late-80s to early 90s slang: "When I say I love you, I mean it for keeps!"

FOR KEEPS???

There was also a lot of derogatory comments about other people's bodies that were liberally sprinkled with more 90s slang and I can't quite remember the exact quotes but it just led to a really disjointed read.

Then we have the main character.

She's a self-destructive train wreck. She can't allow herself to feel comfortable in any living situation and sabotages any happy/easy working situations for herself. At first, this habit is very subtle. But by the end she's marrying a man who kills animals in horrible ways, presumably murdered and raped a little girl in a horribly violent way, and who wants to profit off of her body. But it's okay because he loves her "for keeps."

It was bizarre and unpleasant and dragged on due to the many flashbacks to old job situations that weren't relevant to anything, really. I wasn't a fan.

[Olena · Rating 3 out of 5]

Чи ж винна я, що, коли з людських душ скинути серпанок і показати їх у справдешньому вигляді, — чути такий страшенний сморід гниття?

Відвертий щоденник Селестіни, покоївки, яка викриває лицемірство та збочення буржуазного суспільства, перш ніж сама стає «однією з них». По суті, це Мірбо, який показує великий літературний середній палець буржуазії свого часу.

Книга вже від початку химерна і дивна (чого варті лише черевики в зубах господаря). Покоївка сильна душею та вперта, пащекувата навіть, і я ніколи б не подумала, що головна героїня буде такою. Я сперечалась з Селестіною на полях, задавала їй питання, писала емоційні вигуки і багато інших коментарів, загалом моє ставлення до неї було досить суперечливим, але вона мені сподобалася, бо була одночасно дуже недосконалою та гідною захоплення.

Протягом книги Селестіна розвішує перед нами брудну білизну усіх своїх попередніх роботодавців і колег – спогади про попередню роботу. І ці замальовки минулого, це те, що я читала із найбільшим захопленням, я усміхалась, обурювалась і сумувала. Автор порушив теми жалоби, кохання, смерті, ненависті. Цікаві паралелі між бажанням та огидою, коханням та ненавистю.

Не буду спойлерити вагому частину сюжету, яка додає трохи саспенсу цій книзі. Через неї хотілося б, щоб у розповіді був моральний урок і позитивний результат, досягнутий через чесноту, а не через порок. Але ця історія радше показує неминуче псування душі через обставини, на які приречені персонажі.

[Bettie · Rating 3 out of 5]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MoHgW...

Description: "I am no saint; I have known many men, and I know, by experience, all the madness, all the vileness, of which they are capable. But a man like Monsiuer?" -- from THE DIARY OF A CHAMBERMAID

The famous anarchist and art critic Octave Mirbeau (1848-1917) inspired not one but two films (from Jean Renoir and Luis Bunuel) with his often forgotten classic THE DIARY OF A CHAMBERMAID. Telling the scandalous story of Celestine R., a fisherman's daughter with a taste for men, Mirbeau reveals that "when one tears away the veils and shows them naked, people's souls give off such a pungent smell of decay."


There is a hiccough half way through this youtube version where you have to fast forward through the duplicate piece

[yana shkrebtii ౨ৎ · Rating 2 out of 5]

не знаю як описати свої думки з приводу цієї книги. наче і цікаво було, а наче вона мене взагалі і не вразила.

[Aline · Rating 3 out of 5]

Quelques longueurs parfois mais dans l'ensemble une lecture agréable.

[Orçun Güzer · Rating 5 out of 5]

20. yüzylın hemen başında yazılmış bu yergi klasiği, bir hizmetçinin ağzından tüm toplumu topa tutuyor. Adına bakıp da sadece bir hizmetçi kızın gönül maceralarının anlatıldığını sanmayın; romanda cinsellikle politika başa baş ilerliyor. Meslekte olmaya zorlandığı karakterin tersine, hizmetçi kızımızın günlüğünde pervasız, bol argolu, açık saçık bir dili var; özellikle efendilerinin rezilliklerini ve aptallıklarını teşhir ettiği bölümleri eğlenerek okudum. Romanın temel meselesi aslında burjuvaların, aristokratların ve tüm muhafazakârların iki yüzlülüğünü deşifre etmek: Mirbeau, bir anarşist öfkesiyle, kibar dünyaların önündeki perdeyi yırtıyor; üst sınıftan insanların gündelik hayattaki vahşiliğini ortaya çıkarıyor; ahlak diye bağıranların nasıl cimri, düzenbaz ve şehvet düşkünü olduklarını acımasızca yüzlerine vuruyor. Fakat sadece üst sınıftan insanlar değil, taşradaki kurnazlık, ırkçılık ve dedikoduculuk da bu eleştiriden payına düşeni alıyor.

Bir hizmetçi kızın ağzından yazılması nedeniyle, hem sınıf farkına hem de erkek egemen dünyaya bir başkaldırı olarak okunabilir. Célestine bir kahraman veya ahlakçı değil; kendi zayıflıklarını kabul etmekle birlikte, kahramanlığa ve ahlakçılığa soyunanların da kendisinden farklı olmadıklarını bize anlatıyor. Dehşet verici ve trajik birkaç bölümde görüyoruz ki, çok daha beterler…

[LaBioVaincra · Rating 5 out of 5]

J'ai ADORÉ ce livre.

Je l'ai trouvé subtil malgré l'impression que l'héroïne rentre dans le tas (comme quoi... c'est subtil). Intéressant historiquement et socialement, ce n'est pas très subjectif et j'ai bien aimé ça. Célestine a bien sûr ses propres opinions, mais on n'a pas l'impression que l'auteur veut nous faire penser ce qu'elle dit. Par exemple, elle affirme que ses maîtres sont des pourris et que c'est le cas de tous les riches, mais l'auteur n'hésite pas à nous parler de certains riches sympathiques pour lesquels elle a travaillé.

Je ne vais pas spoiler le petit suspense du livre, mais il est traité de façon mélancolique. Célestine pense à ce problème au milieu de ses activités et de ses souvenirs, et malgré le fait que ça n'avance pas comme un livre "normal" on ne peut pas arrêter de lire. La chronologie est un peu déroutante puisque Célestine digresse facilement, mais c'est tellement agréable. On oublie la petite intrigue du livre et elle finit par revenir, mais on ne s'est pas ennuyé et on n'a pas attendu avec impatience que ça avance.

C'est pas clair ? Je sais pas moi, lisez-le !

[Sally68 · Rating 3 out of 5]

Tre stelline e mezza...
Siamo in Francia, nel 1900 e questo libro è uno spaccato dell'epoca..Dove Celestine
racconta,anche in modo divertente, attraverso pagine deliziose e spudoratamente sincere
quello che era il suo rapporto con i suoi datori di lavoro,
dove spesso queste povere cameriere venivano scelte come
merce in vendita, subivano angherie e dovevano sottomettersi al volere
dei loro padroni. Tra malizie, misfatti , perversioni quella era la società di allora...
Celestine, protagonista memorabile...

[Eleni Zissi-Kaila · Rating 5 out of 5]

An absolute must-read. So funny and interesting. I have read it several times.

[Candice · Rating 3 out of 5]

3.5

J’ai apprécié que Mirbeau donne à son roman la forme d’un journal intime, où l’auteur se présente comme le simple éditeur de ce récit. En effet, il s’agit d’un récit daté, entrecoupé de souvenirs, qui dresse un tableau social de la bourgeoisie à la fin du XVIIIe siècle, un siècle après la révolution française qui a propulsé cette classe sociale à la direction politique du pays.

Il y met en lumière la condition des domestiques, y compris l’asservissement sexuel +/- consenti des femmes de chambre à leurs patrons, et évoque l’existence des avortements clandestins qui en découlent.

En toile de fond on retrouve l’affaire Dreyfus : je n’avais pas pris conscience l’importance de cette affaire, ni à quel point elle avait divisé la France. Je suis scotchée de l’antisémitisme assumé et ambiant de l’époque.

Cependant, j’ai été très gênée par l’apologie de la virilité animale (poils sur le torse, brutalité, caractéristiques vues comme étant excitantes et irrésistibles pour une femme : on voit bien là la plume d’un homme) et par la rivalité entre femmes (notre héroïne est jolie et bien faite évidemment, et cela attise toutes les jalousies de ses maîtresses et camarades femmes domestiques).

Cette misogynie est sans doute le reflet de la société patriarcale de l’époque, mais également les mots d’un auteur homme qui, bien qu’engagé politiquement (anarchiste si j’ai bien compris), n’a tout de même pas été jusqu’à remettre en question la place des femmes en general dans la société (dans ce roman en tout cas).