Casanova

by Andrew Miller

Giacomo Casanova arrives in England in the summer of 1763 at the age of thirty-eight, seeking a respite from his restless travels and liaisons. But the lure of company proves too hard to resist and the dazzlingly pretty face of young Marie Charpillon even harder. Casanova's pursuit of this elusive bewitcher drives him from exhilaration to despair and to attempt to reinvent himself in the roles of labourer, writer and country squire. Based on a little-known episode in Casanova's life, this is a scintillating, poignant, often comic portrait of a far more complex figure than legend suggests and of the decadent society in which he operated.

Genres: Historical Fiction, Fiction, Historical, 20th Century, Italy, Romance, British Literature

288 pages, Paperback

First published September 3, 1998

About the author

Andrew Miller was born in Bristol in 1960. He has lived in Spain, Japan, Ireland and France, and currently lives in Somerset. His first novel, INGENIOUS PAIN, was published by Sceptre in 1997 and won the James Tait Black Memorial Prize for Fiction, the International IMPAC Dublin Literary Award and the Grinzane Cavour prize in Italy. His second novel, CASANOVA, was published in 1998, followed by OXYGEN, which was shortlisted for the Whitbread Novel Award and the Booker Prize in 2001, and THE OPTIMISTS, published in 2005.

Reviews

[Katie · Rating 4 out of 5]

A fictitious account of the period Casanova spent in London when he was thirty-eight. Here he falls in love with a young beauty who is immune to his charm and lovecraft.

Without question it's the beauty of the writing that is the stand out feature. Especially the descriptive writing. Miller does a great job of bringing to life London in 1763. Unfortunately, he's less successful with his character studies. This is my third or fourth Miller novel and once again I couldn't help feeling his fabulous way with words deserved a more compelling story. There isn't much at stake in this novel. Neither does Casanova really come alive. Miller likes writing about loners. A problem with this is that it's often relationships which make compelling stories. If a novel doesn't feature at least one compelling relationship it's likely to flounder. And this is the case here. Casanova's relationship with the girl is repetitive. We see the same moment played out over and over again. Apart from the girl the only other meaningful relationship Casanova has is with his valet which veers close to cliché - the servant wiser than the master. Casanova is a very beautifully written novel but for me lacked a pivotal guiding light.

[Issicratea · Rating 3 out of 5]

Reading this novel confirmed my feeling about Andrew Miller’s strengths and weaknesses as a novelist. Strengths: chooses wonderful subjects; writes extraordinarily well at the level of word, phrase, sentence, paragraph. Weaknesses: has no idea to do with his wonderful subjects once he has found them; can’t do plot; can’t do endings.

I was tempted to mitigate this judgment after reading Miller’s first novel, Ingenious Pain, which I very much liked (previously I had read Oxygen and Pure). It was precisely the fact that I enjoyed Ingenious Pain that made me keen to search through a bit more of Miller’s early oeuvre, but Casanova just confirmed my previous, largely negative, view.

As ever, Miller chooses a good subject for Casanova, his second novel. The basic plot premise is taken from Casanova’s memoirs, though Miller uses this only as a basis for improvisation. Casanova did spend a period in London, and his unhappy infatuation with Marie Charpillon is factual, although the outcome Miller gives it is not. What excites Miller, I think, is the conjunction of two exciting worlds, eighteenth-century Venice and eighteenth-century London, both containing ferments of the present alongside the alien exotica of the terminally past—the thinking historical fiction writer’s nirvana.

I was captivated initially by this set-up, as I suspect I will always probably be captivated by the first 50 or 100 pages of Miller’s novels. He is very good at setting things up. Casanova has a fine voice; the research has been done and seamlessly incorporated; appealing minor characters turn up at the right rhythm and frequency. And the writing is just wonderful, sumptuous and nuanced–there are sentences one could happily pore over if one wasn’t still under the pleasant illusion of actually being taken somewhere.

And then, what? The plot just disintegrates about half way through and the whole novel never pulls itself back together. I found this a test-case for how little good writing can survive alone, without at least a minimum of plot backbone to hold it up. In fact, my impression reading this was that good writing can just become jarring when it’s in the service of nothing—its intrinsic stylistic quality does nothing to save it at all.

My conclusion: please, Andrew Miller, try some short stories! You are a wonderful writer, but you are not a novelist. If you want to continue writing novels, become a fully fledged post-modernist; then you will have more to hide behind. Currently your novels are too traditional to be judged by different standards, but by traditional standards, they fail.

[MAP · Rating 1 out of 5]

What...I...WHAT? This book made me feel like I was taking crazy pills. What was happening in this book? From beginning to end, what the EFF was going on?

This is what I get for pushing through. My brain told me 3 pages in that I wasn't going to like this book, but then I thought "You've been waiting for months for this book from the library so just suck it up and read it." Ugh. Big mistake.

I'm actually really irrationally angry about this book. I literally never could figure out what was going on with any "plot" -- what was up with Marie? Why did Casanova randomly go work on a bridge? Why did we have to WATCH Casanova randomly wandering off to work on a bridge in what appeared to be a complete plot cul-de-sac? WHAT WAS UP WITH MARIE?

*gnaws on book in frustration*

[Dawn (& Ron) · Rating 2 out of 5]

This one just didn't work for me. It may have been just the wrong time for me to read it. I just couldn't get invested in the characters and really can't put my finger on why. It always makes me wonder why this happened so I will try to diagnose this as I go over my old notes.

The book's description says it will show us a different Casanova, which is what drew me in. Maybe he was too different and for me too somber and lovelorn. Having some more glimpses of the Casanova we all know may have helped me in understanding his transition and efforts more. Marie Charpillon, the object of his desires just didn't pull me in. I couldn't figure out why he was willing to do so much to prove himself to her. Maybe it is simply that Marie pulls the whole narrative down, and Casanova along with her, which kept pulling me out of the story.

The writing is wonderful, there is no doubt that Miller has talent. His descriptive, elegant style wasn't able to rise above a love story of a woman who was supposed to make history's most well known womanizer want to change his ways. See it all comes back to Marie, so much hinged on her, you had to believe in her and I guess I didn't. We have wonderful writing, Casanova is well researched and flesh out which rates a 4. Marie was a paper doll, dressed in beautiful gowns and settings but not able to make this reader understand why Casanova would make himself over for her, so I could never fully get into the "different Casanova", making this rating a 1. Overall this is a 2-1/2 and it was Marie that didn't capture me and pull me in.

[W R · Rating 1 out of 5]

رواية مملة وكنت بقاوم النوم في كل مرة احاول اكملها
قرأتها بالزق لأني مابحبش ابدأ في حاجة واسيبها مهما كانت سيئة
لأول مرة المشكلة مش في الترجمة بالعكس المترجم اسلوبه كويس والهوامش فيها معلومات لطيفة
عن أماكن وبلاد وشخصيات أسطورية وفنانين ،استمتعت بها أكتر من الرواية نفسها
انا كنت متحمسة جدًا لما اشتريتها من معرض الكتاب وتخيلت إني اخيرًا بقى هقرأ عن كازانوفا الشهير
لكن اكتشفت ان مش كل شخصية تنتابك رغبة في القراءة عنها بالضرورة هتعجبك أو تبهرك
ماشدنيش اي جانب من شخصيته وهو بيحكي قصة حياته وبيتكلم عن مغامراته النسائية بأسلوب رتيب ونمطي
مافهمتش بصراحة هو بيحكي ازاي لشخصية مايعرفهاش؟ وليه؟ استنيت توضيح للموضوع دا بس ماحصلش
الجزء الخاص بشغله في الجسر وحياة العمال إلخ ،حصل فجأة وبدون اي تمهيد
علاقته بتشاربيلون كانت عادية وماتستاهلش الضجة والمحاكمة وكل المساحة اللي احتلتها في الرواية
الخلاصة يعني ماعجبتنيش على الأطلاق

[Doaa]

قرأت النسخة المترجمة منها

الترجمة سيئه للغاية والاسلوب وترابط الجمل غريب
لاأنصح بقرائتها

[Christina · Rating 3 out of 5]

With this book, I start a new shelf -- Life's Too Short: Worthwhile but Not-for-Me.

This book was like a bad marriage. I was in love by the end of the first sentence -- and out of love by the end of the first chapter. But I hung on, because, dammit, there was still so much to love here. Such voice! Such pitch-perfect tone! Good research, too. So I kept on. Yet, what little plot there is was so feeble and trite as to be soporific, and the characters, even Casanova, are outright boring. I couldn't bring myself to care, one way or another, about any of them. Still, the more time and effort I invested, the more determined I was to see it through to the end. I kept hoping it would get better. After 130 pgs or so, I suddenly remembered my recent Big, Scary Milestone Birthday and concluded, "You know what? Life's just too short. Next!" Maybe someone else will find more joy in this one.

[Kate · Rating 5 out of 5]

An absolutely fabulous read. Miller writes with great precision and evokes a wonderful picture of 18th century London. He does not shy away from describing the debauched and eccentric lives of his characters whilst allowing his reader to immerse themselves in their inter relationships and the wider events surrounding the story (including reference to historical characters and events). Casanova is presented in an unsentimental manner with all his flaws, "demons" and black thoughts/ deeds clearly described. i read the book in one sitting and felt I had read a book with depth and integrity.

[Tuck · Rating 2 out of 5]

i liked his new novel of 1700's france, Pure but this casanova imagining, in london mostly, but as he reminisces while in bohemia at end of his life, while a bit funny and titillating, is not funny or sexy enough for my tastes. a bit toooo lugubrious. something casanova never should be. for hot hot 5 star librarian/casanova sex and tales see Casanova in Bohemia: A Novel

[Ayatollah ahmed · Rating 2 out of 5]

اول شئ سئ في الرواية دي طبعتها الغريبة و حجم الكتاب غير المريح بالمرة في القراءة

في حاجات كتير غير مبررة بالنسبة لي في الرواية
منها مين الشخصية اللي كازانوفا بيحكيلها
وليه بيحكيلها قصة حياته و هو اصلا مايعرفهاش

الجزء التاني من الكتاب الخاص بالجسر و شغل كازانوفا فيه
مفيش اي تمهيد قبله ولا تعريف ليه هو اصلا عمل كده
ومن بعده الجزء التالت و قراره بانه يكون كاتب

وكل معاناته مع تشاربيلون مش مستاهلة يعني قصاد رفضها ليه
والجزء الخاص ب المحاكمة اللي ف آخر الرواية غير مفهوم بالمرة
الخلاصة انها تعب قلب طول الرواية ع الفاضي

[Sara · Rating 3 out of 5]

رواية بطيئة مملة لم أتحمس للأحداث حتى وصلت لثلثها الأخير تقريبًا
يبدو أن العيب ليس في المترجم كما قرأت في مراجعات من قرؤها بلغتها الأصلية الإنجليزية.
الكثير من "اللخبطة" بين أجزاء الرواية الأربعة..لم أفهم ماذا يريد كازانوفا من عمله في الجسر ثم رغبته أن يصبح كاتبـًا؟
لا أعلم هل تعاطفت مع كازانوفا في نهايتها أم لا ولكن كان عليّ أن أكره ماري تشاربيلون..امرأة داهية وغير مريحة على الإطلاق.
إنجلترا في القرن الثامن عشر..فقر مدقع وثراء فاحش ودعارة وجنس و تشييء للمرأة بشكل سافر ومستفز جعلني أشكر الحركة النسوية لظهورها.

لم أتحمس لقراءة عمل آخر لأندرو ميللر ..تكفيني هذه التجربة الغريبة.

[Ahmed Diaa · Rating 3 out of 5]

كازانوفا زير النساء الشهير ... ذلك الرجل الذي قلما وقفت امرأة في طريق متعته , ولكن عندما يقع في الحب يصير منهزما , فاشلا في استغلال اسلحته للإيقاع بمحبوبته , بل وعلى الرغم من انه يعلم انها عاهرة تخدم رجال الطبقة المتوسطة , لم يستطع ان يشتريها بماله ... قصة مستوحاة من ذكريات كازانوفا , قصة حب عجيبة لشخص أكثر عجبا !

[Ashya Al Mouniem · Rating 1 out of 5]

انا مش عارفة هي الرواية وحشة ولا المشكلة في الترجمة.. بس هي وحشة جدا جدا

[Moshira · Rating 1 out of 5]

الترجمة سيئة والأسلوب غير مترابط.
يحكى كازانوفا لشخصية لا نعلمها عن ذكريات قديمة يحكى منها جزء ولا يخبرك من هذه الشخصيات التى يذكرها. ويقفز لأحداث دون أى تمهيد مناسب لها

[Geertje · Rating 3 out of 5]

The language is beautiful yet for quite a long time, I could put thr book away without any strong desire to pick it up again

[Mohamed Hamdy · Rating 4 out of 5]

إنك مدمن يا سيدي لتعاستك بقدر إدمانك لمتعك ومسراتك.

[Izzie Flynn · Rating 5 out of 5]

Amazing. Seriously incredible book.

[Gihan Ali · Rating 1 out of 5]

لأخر سطر حاولت أفهم السبب لحصول هذه الرواية على جائزة ووجودها بسلسلة الجوائز .ولا حياة لمن تنادي!!

[د. راقية الدويك]

الرواية ممتعة لكنها تحتاج لقدر كبير من التركيز .. والصبر

[Jill · Rating 3 out of 5]

This was a difficult one to review. My previous read by this same author Oxygen was excellent, and I've been on the lookout for more Andrew Miller novels since then. This novel is set in 1763 and tells part of the story of that sexual conquest rogue, Casanova, who has exiled himself to In-ge-lan (as he pronounces it, for he speaks no English - why he has chosen London where the locals eschew strangers speaking strange tongues on a good day, and do far worse to them on a bad day, we never quite learn). We follow Casanova in his renamed guise as the Chevalier de Seingalt. Presumably the name change is to allow him some freedoms from his notorious reputation.

This book is bathed in a fog, clothed in cheesecloth, and is placed inside a labyrinth. For much of the time, I wasn't sure what was going on, at least where the core part of the story - our protagonist's pursuit of the elusive mysterious Marie Charpillon (who is referred to as The Charpillon. Why, I do not know) - was headed, it was all so twisted and tortured. Many things I still do not know.

The novel is in four parts, each segmenting a slice of Casanova's experiences over the course of something like six months, possibly a year. The second part, where he and his valet Jarba, take jobs building the London Story Bridge, is very strange. We are given no reason why they do this, and are left to wonder if it is some kind of strange psychological penance Casanova is remitting to himself for what happened at the end of part 1 (an ignoble attempt at seduction of The Charpillon, which ends in frustration, due to the inexplicable behaviour of not only the girl in question but her colluding mother, aunts and grandmother - who seem to be setting Casanova up for ridicule. But none of this is clear).

Apart from the obtuse nature of the plot, there were some very amusing parts to this story. Andrew Miller has a wonderful turn of phrase, and I found myself smiling out loud at quite a few of his more charming turns of phrase. There was also quite a selection of terms I had never heard before, and which often weren't contextualised so you weren't sure if a flowerpot, a chamber pot or a chimney pot were being described. A random flick through the book, before it goes off to the charity store to be enjoyed by someone else, has me pointing out examples: fustian, zendale, epee, pikestaff.

This was quite an intriguing read, and deserves more a 3.5 star review, if just for the lyrical way the story flows along. It's snake-like turns make for a charming read at times, and a frustrating read at others - I would have liked to have been clearer on some things which were shrouded in mist, including key turns of plot, intentions of some characters, and decisions by main characters which just seemed odd and inexplicable.

So a somewhat strange and strangely enjoyable read.

[Justin · Rating 4 out of 5]

People who hate this book seem to be most bothered by the lack of a strong plot. They seem to want Miller to be something he's not. Plot-oriented books often tend to be a hallmark of genre fiction. Literary fiction, on the other hand, deals more with in-depth character development. Although, Miller writes historical fiction, he does so from the vantage of a literary fiction writer. It's not fair to judge an author by a standard he does not aspire to emulate. That said, I agree with critics who allege that Miller seems to have difficulty figuring out how--and where--to end his books. But for those who want a strong plot, read genre fiction and stop complaining that literary fiction lacks enough action or forward momentum to satisfy, because it would be just as silly for someone like me to complain about a comic book because it did not feature strong character development or use enough metaphor.

Miller's historical novels tell stories, but the stories are secondary to the scene. He does something that few people expect from books anymore: he creates mood, atmosphere, worlds. Most people turn to movies, TV, and other media for that, but most of what those other media offer is gruel by comparison to the stews that Miller serves up. "Mood" does not do Miller's work justice. Every word and every detail are crafted to bring a long-dead world back to life. Miller excels at providing visceral realities to life in a way that simultaneously accentuates the exotic, yet also makes the exotic mundane and relatable. And nobody can put together metaphors like Miller, particularly where retired generals are being compared to other objects. He also has a sense of humor so dry it could be used to dehumidify my home in winter.

But as I said, people do not really turn to books for that kind of experience anymore, so it doesn't surprise me that his work fails to receive the kind of misplaced fawning and gilded hype that a simpleton like Cormac McCarthy gets.

Miller's style is organic. Sometimes a clear, well-defined story emerges from the flow of human life and society. At other times, events happen and people interact, and some of the elements of a complete, unified story are lacking, but rather than an oversight, it may be that Miller wishes the flow of his works to more closely resemble that of real life. In this aspect, Miller's fictitious Casanova seems more plausible--and more human--than the one bequeathed to us by history.

[Adam Stevenson · Rating 2 out of 5]

I know this is a novel and not biography or history, but I find Casanova to be really out of character in this book. He did mark the end of his youth by his less then successful trip to London but in his own retelling of his life, the older Casanova seems to view his younger self with such affection and amusement that the full tired-of-life element of this book doesn’t really ring true.

Casanova is so dour in this. Viewing London in the eighteenth century as little more then a purgatory in which he is condemned to live out the whole of his life following the same dull patterns. Actually, it’s more like Tartarus, where Tantalus is finds all his pleasures pulling away from him at the last minute.

The story is about Casanova’s disastrous seduction of Marie Charpillon, in which she gives as good as she gets and drives Casanova half-mad, buying lead shot to drown himself in the Thames and being had up by the law for assault when he furiously caught her with the hairdresser and beat him out the house. The best part of the true story is when Casanova gets revenge by training a parrot to repeat accusations and then sells it for fifty pounds - that’s watered down here into a love token he sends her that says ‘je t’aime’.

Other added water includes turning what was a massive storm into a flood that engulfs London up to the roofs, turning it into Venice and causing people to row around it, tying their boats to the steeples of churches. It’s a lovely image but to fairytale for an often very grounded book and so it feels daft.

Other added bits I didn’t really understand were an elongated stay in the country and a number of chapters where Casanova and his manservant pretend to be labourers and work on a bridge, for no reason I can really fathom. it feels like a point is being made, but I’m not sure what it is. A feeling that sums the book up.

[Mark White · Rating 3 out of 5]

Three stars but only just. The story is a fictionalised and dramatised account of Casanova's time in London and his unsuccessful pursuit of Marie Ann du Charpillon. It is framed by the elderly Casanova, a librarian in Bohemia, recounting the tale to an unknown female visitor.

The written language is lovely and littered with the oddest, yet strangely apt similes throughout. Unfortunately the plot doesn't seem to go anywhere. It talks about Casanova's obsession with Charpillon but this aspect is rather coldly and distantly described. It lacks the passion of Casanova's own account of his life. Another lost opportunity is the mysterious female visitor to the elderly Casanova. There is no hint in the novel of who this visitor might be. I was guessing it might be the older Charpillon, unrecognised by the ailing Casanova, but not so much as a clue.

Where the novel does excel is in its picture of life in 18th century England. London is beautifully described in all its dirt, grime, muddy roads and smells and it all rings true. Casanova's excursion to the country (a bad AirBnB experience) is fascinating even apart from the ongoing relationship (as such) between Casanova and Charpillon. On the other hand the flood described in the last few chapters is very false. Apparently there was a big storm at the time described but London is steep enough that it won't stay flooded for long. So, great background for the most part but it is a bit aside from the main story and what we want from the novel.

[Cathy Q de V · Rating 3 out of 5]

I'm not quite sure what to make of this book. It was interesting (and appalling) to be thrust into the tumultuous and disgusting 1760s. It was just risque enough to make me uncomfortable without becoming graphic. The prose was beautiful but at times the flowery language seemed forced. Some of the plot seems not to make much sense, although I'm not sure if that is a criticism of the author or the ineptitude of the reader. For example, how exactly did the grandma die? Was it merely due to fright? And what exactly did Casanova do to Marie during the flood? I didn't quite understand.

And of course there's the strange relationship that begins with multiple attempted rapes, then apparently she loves him madly and just leaves me confused and baffled. It was a good portrayal of a raw, unromanticized historical setting but leaves me feeling uneasy. 3/5

[Godfrey · Rating 3 out of 5]

Casanova outwitted while decaying, outplayed as metaphor for his decline, and his sexual virility's diminution affirmed, even caused by his unconsumated obsession with the Charpillon. Clumsy historical references, embodied in the vague bulk of Johnson, redeemed by the alluring synthesis of sexual depravity and aristocratic idealism offered by the 18th century. Moment of climax as London becomes Venice, reconciling narrator and narrative times. Casanova's internal struggles delightfully purged then distracted through theatrical seductions and purgatories, sometimes imposed. Shapeless where Schnitzler is direct. Casanova in love, with the chase - as over Schnitzler's Marcolina as ideal woman - where Charpillon comes to represent something he cannot have, through her own cunning autonomy (an immoral justice), a female answer to his troubling impotence.

[Veronica · Rating 2 out of 5]

This is a love story in the way Lolita is a love story (which is to say, it isn't, though it has all the language of one). It is richly written, and yet there is not a single redeeming character or compelling plot point. It meanders through the borderline-depressive ennui of an aging Casanova as he becomes infatuated and swindled by a barely-legal beauty who is essentially pimped by her mother and aunts. The imagery of 18th-century London is phenomenal but the characters acting within it are thoroughly unappealing.

[Lisa Willems · Rating 4 out of 5]

Sometimes the story dragged on too much about the life of Casanova. It was a very interesting concept to read about a retired man that still owned his share lust for women.

The idea is pretty, but the book could've done more for the protagonist's story. Yet the ending had been a very shocking event that I wouldn't have seen coming. I like the author's writing in a way that we immersed ourselves into the world of someone that pines and has a very particular taste.

Overall, I enjoyed reading it in 1 night.

[Fatma Adel · Rating 3 out of 5]

رواية لطيفة لم اجدها مملة كما وصفها البعض
بها أخطاء إملائية بسيطة
وبعض الاجزاء المبهمة! -اللتى كانت تحتاج الى استفاضة اكثر من وصف الشكليات المتعلقة بالريف والاماكن
فهناك الكثير من النقاط الغامضة ابسطها هو كيف انتهى الحال بكزانوفا منفيا
هوية السيدة التى يقص عليها حكايته
ماذا حل بابنته صوفى ومارى وجاربا

[Motaz tarek soliman · Rating 1 out of 5]

جربت في يوم تكون بتقرأ رواية عمال تمر في سطورها.. و ف نفس الوقت بتطلع عليك كل الاسئلة الوجودية الي ملهاش دعوة بالرواية اللي في ايدك يعني ليه الحيطة اللي قدامي لونها " كذا " مش لونها " كذا " .. ليه رجلي كبيرة عن ايدي .. اي حاجه ملهاش دعوة .. و بس بتقلب صفحاتها ( و دا حرفيا اللي حصل معايا فيها) 😄😐
مملة.. جداا

[Lysda Smythe · Rating 2 out of 5]

Un espèce de spin off aux mémoires de Casanova, qui raconte son séjour à Londres et sa rencontre avec une demoiselle qui va jouer avec lui et lui mettre des râteaux à répétition.
C'est plutôt bien écrit, mais c'est ennuyeux. On a beaucoup mieux fait en terme de roman historique, surtout que certains faits sont exagérés.
Pas envie de le recommander à qui que ce soit.