What do you think?
Rate this book
Manon Lescaut - Bac 2026
Des Grieux et Manon sont jeunes et beaux, et ils s'aiment. Mais il vient d'une famille noble, alors qu'elle est une fille du peuple. Surtout, elle se montre vaniteuse et prête à toutes les infidélités pour assouvir son goût du luxe... Dans ce roman de l'amour fou, le plaisir de lecture naît du spectacle de passions en marge des conventions sociales et morales. TOUT POUR COMPRENDRE - Notes lexicales - Biographie et contexte - Genèse et genre de l'oeuvre - Chronologie et carte mentale PERSONNAGES EN MARGE, PLAISIRS DU ROMANESQUE - Analyse du parcours - Groupements de textes - Histoire des arts VERS LE BAC - Explications linéaires guidées - Sujets de dissertation et de commentaire guidés - Méthodologie CAHIER ICONOGRAPHIQUE.
288 pages, Pocket Book
First published January 1, 1731
615 people are currently reading
9133 people want to read
About the author
Antoine François Prévost d'Exiles
1,077 books66 followersAntoine François Prévost d'Exiles (April 1, 1697 – December 23, 1763), usually known simply as the Abbé Prévost, was a French author and novelist.
He was born at Hesdin, Artois, and first appears with the full name of Prévost d'Exiles, in a letter to the booksellers of Amsterdam in 1731. His father, Lievin Prévost, was a lawyer, and several members of the family had embraced the ecclesiastical estate. Prévost was educated at the Jesuit school of Hesdin, and in 1713 became a novice of the order in Paris, pursuing his studies at the same time at the college in La Flèche.
At the end of 1716 he left the Jesuits to join the army, but soon tired of military life, and returned to Paris in 1719, apparently with the idea of resuming his novitiate. He is said to have travelled in the Netherlands about this time; in any case he returned to the army, this time with a commission. Some biographers have assumed that he suffered some of the misfortunes assigned to his hero Des Grieux. Whatever the truth, he joined the learned community of the Benedictines of St Maur, with whom he found refuge, he himself says, after the unlucky termination of a love affair. He took his vows at Jumièges in 1721 after a year's novitiate, and in 1726 took priest's orders at St Germer de Flaix. He spent seven years in various houses of the order, teaching, preaching and studying. In 1728 he was at the Abbey of Saint-Germain-des-Prés, Paris, where he was engaged on the Gallia Christiana, the learned work undertaken by the monks in continuation of the works of Denys de Sainte-Marthe, who had been a member of their order. His restless spirit made him seek from the Pope a transfer to the easier rule of Cluny; but he left the abbey without leave (1728), and, learning that his superiors had obtained a lettre de cachet against him, fled to England.
In London he acquired a wide knowledge of English history and literature, as can be seen in his writings. Before leaving the Benedictines Prévost had begun perhaps his most famous novel, Mémoires et aventures d’un homme de qualité qui s’est retiré du monde, the first four volumes of which were published in Paris in 1728, and two years later at Amsterdam. In 1729 he left England for the Netherlands, where he began to publish (Utrecht, 1731) a novel, the material of which, at least, had been gathered in London Le Philosophe anglais, ou Histoire de Monsieur Cleveland, fils naturel de Cromwell, écrite par lui-même, et traduite de l'anglais (Paris 1731-1739, 8 vols., but most of the existing sets are partly Paris and partly Utrecht). A spurious fifth volume (Utrecht, 1734) contained attacks on the Jesuits, and an English translation of the whole appeared in 1734.
Meanwhile, during his residence at the Hague, he engaged on a translation of De Thou's Historia, and, relying on the popularity of his first book, published at Amsterdam a Suite in three volumes, forming volumes v, vi, and vii of the original Mémoires et aventures d’un homme de qualité. The seventh volume contained the famous Manon Lescaut, separately published in Paris in 1731 as Histoire du Chevalier des Grieux et de Manon Lescaut. The book was eagerly read, chiefly in pirated copies, being forbidden in France. In 1733 he left the Hague for London in company with a lady whose character, according to Prévost's enemies, was doubtful. In London he edited a weekly gazette on the model of Joseph Addison's Spectator, Le Pour et contre, which he continued to produce, with short intervals, until 1740.
In the autumn of 1734 Prévost was reconciled with the Benedictines, and, returning to France, was received in the Benedictine monastery of La Croix-Saint-Leufroy in the diocese of Évreux to pass through a new, though brief, novitiate. In 1735 he was dispensed from residence in a monastery by becoming almoner to the Prince de Conti, and in 1754 obtained the priory of St Georges de Gesnes. He continued to prod
He was born at Hesdin, Artois, and first appears with the full name of Prévost d'Exiles, in a letter to the booksellers of Amsterdam in 1731. His father, Lievin Prévost, was a lawyer, and several members of the family had embraced the ecclesiastical estate. Prévost was educated at the Jesuit school of Hesdin, and in 1713 became a novice of the order in Paris, pursuing his studies at the same time at the college in La Flèche.
At the end of 1716 he left the Jesuits to join the army, but soon tired of military life, and returned to Paris in 1719, apparently with the idea of resuming his novitiate. He is said to have travelled in the Netherlands about this time; in any case he returned to the army, this time with a commission. Some biographers have assumed that he suffered some of the misfortunes assigned to his hero Des Grieux. Whatever the truth, he joined the learned community of the Benedictines of St Maur, with whom he found refuge, he himself says, after the unlucky termination of a love affair. He took his vows at Jumièges in 1721 after a year's novitiate, and in 1726 took priest's orders at St Germer de Flaix. He spent seven years in various houses of the order, teaching, preaching and studying. In 1728 he was at the Abbey of Saint-Germain-des-Prés, Paris, where he was engaged on the Gallia Christiana, the learned work undertaken by the monks in continuation of the works of Denys de Sainte-Marthe, who had been a member of their order. His restless spirit made him seek from the Pope a transfer to the easier rule of Cluny; but he left the abbey without leave (1728), and, learning that his superiors had obtained a lettre de cachet against him, fled to England.
In London he acquired a wide knowledge of English history and literature, as can be seen in his writings. Before leaving the Benedictines Prévost had begun perhaps his most famous novel, Mémoires et aventures d’un homme de qualité qui s’est retiré du monde, the first four volumes of which were published in Paris in 1728, and two years later at Amsterdam. In 1729 he left England for the Netherlands, where he began to publish (Utrecht, 1731) a novel, the material of which, at least, had been gathered in London Le Philosophe anglais, ou Histoire de Monsieur Cleveland, fils naturel de Cromwell, écrite par lui-même, et traduite de l'anglais (Paris 1731-1739, 8 vols., but most of the existing sets are partly Paris and partly Utrecht). A spurious fifth volume (Utrecht, 1734) contained attacks on the Jesuits, and an English translation of the whole appeared in 1734.
Meanwhile, during his residence at the Hague, he engaged on a translation of De Thou's Historia, and, relying on the popularity of his first book, published at Amsterdam a Suite in three volumes, forming volumes v, vi, and vii of the original Mémoires et aventures d’un homme de qualité. The seventh volume contained the famous Manon Lescaut, separately published in Paris in 1731 as Histoire du Chevalier des Grieux et de Manon Lescaut. The book was eagerly read, chiefly in pirated copies, being forbidden in France. In 1733 he left the Hague for London in company with a lady whose character, according to Prévost's enemies, was doubtful. In London he edited a weekly gazette on the model of Joseph Addison's Spectator, Le Pour et contre, which he continued to produce, with short intervals, until 1740.
In the autumn of 1734 Prévost was reconciled with the Benedictines, and, returning to France, was received in the Benedictine monastery of La Croix-Saint-Leufroy in the diocese of Évreux to pass through a new, though brief, novitiate. In 1735 he was dispensed from residence in a monastery by becoming almoner to the Prince de Conti, and in 1754 obtained the priory of St Georges de Gesnes. He continued to prod
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 1,146 reviews
April 26, 2023
Update 26/04/2023:
I finally managed to attend the Opera by Massenet in El Gran Teatre del Liceu in Barcelona and was utterly transported back to the tragic story of Manon. The production was provocative, ground-breaking and performed flawlessly, setting the scenes in the sordid and commonplace brothels where dancers and Manon herself appear in state of complete nudity. Quite a musical triumph that elevates Manon to the status of literary myth such as Cleopatra or Carmen.
Manon Lescaut is a deceptive novel in multiple ways.
It could be easily labeled as a classic, picturesque short tale of a doomed love affair between a noble young man, Chevalier des Grieux, and a beautiful maiden from a lower breed, set in the Paris of The Régence, a convulsive era where class structures and ancient regime ruled the world.
Told from the male lover point of view in a fast-paced, flowing narrative, the reader is presented with the irrevocable passion, almost obsession des Grieux is consumed with when he first sets his eyes on Manon, a fatal moment which will make his inner peace crumble down and bring him to perform all sort of dubious acts, even to commit murder, to keep his beloved with him.
Des Grieux constructs his own story in retrospection, using a nameless narrator who crosses paths with him almost at the end of his misadventures, giving this way a foreboding tone to the story.
"Love has made me too soft, too passionate, too faithful and perhaps over-indulgent of the desires of a most charming woman; and that is the sum of my crimes" says des Grieux, talking about his beloved Manon, the temptress, and the one to blame for his forthcoming misdeeds.
The fact that we only get to hear Manon’s voice throughout des Grieux’s account leaves the reader completely blind about her character, devoid of her motivations or her true feelings. Des Grieux describes her as a fickle, capricious creature prone to take other lovers in order to live lavishly. So Manon appears as a cold, calculating character, becoming a sort of desirable object to possess, an object des Grieux rightfully believes to belong to him. But still, in the rare passages where Manon can voice her quiescent values, we can envisage a strong spirit who keeps defying des Grieux’s views with her struggles to remain her own mistress. Couldn’t it be that in challenging him to broaden his conservative views about relationships, Manon would also be challenging the imposed gender politics of the time?
In any case, the driven plot of the story takes sweet revenge separating the lovers again and again in myriad forms: family, legal authority and the gulf between social classes keep preventing them from being together until they receive the ultimate punishment in being exiled to the colonies in New Orleans, where against all odds and once set free of the French, rotten social pressures, the idea of a simple, bare existence in a new world impregnates them with a wish to live at peace with rekindled values of virtue and morality, flirting even with an improbable happy ending, which makes the final twist in the story even more brusque and cruel than expected.
As I stated at the beginning of this rambling review, this self-righteous account, this seemingly lineal plot and simple, direct style can be misleading.
My first instinctive reaction to the story was to doubt the veracity of des Grieux’s biased tale for he is a flawed hero and unreliable narrator. His constant search for self-excuse, his vain urge in blaming others for his own acts, his theatrical, almost parodic explosion of emotive outbursts and his unremorseful confession of using them to take advantage of others made it very difficult to empathize with him.
But what most struck me when trying to add perspective into the story was the shameful realization that my dislike for des Grieux came from recognition, as his futile attempts at trying to hold on to Manon revealed the universal impossibility of a mutual understanding, the hopelessness of a complete possession of the other.
No simple tale then, but a novel which oozes with the complexity of human relationships and the tragic consequences of trying to cross the barrier of subjectivity in appealing to raw emotions, as one can’t disengage from individual consciousness , however much we try.
"What fatal power had dragged me down to crime? How came it that love, an innocent passion, had turned for me into the source of all misery and vice" wonders a despairing des Grieux.
Exalted existential questions about the tragic consequences of being in love, as being infected by an incurable disease, which robs us of our former selves, blinding us with passion, making it difficult to find our place in a material world where authority and order prevail over emotions.
And in this sense, I’d say that Manon Lescaut is a disruptive novel because in giving free expression to des Grieux’s feelings, even if charged with subjectivity, Prévost is encouraging us to reach our own truths through language, although he also whispers a warning, reminding us that our own reached reality might be easily misunderstood by those we love the most and by the world we live in.
I finally managed to attend the Opera by Massenet in El Gran Teatre del Liceu in Barcelona and was utterly transported back to the tragic story of Manon. The production was provocative, ground-breaking and performed flawlessly, setting the scenes in the sordid and commonplace brothels where dancers and Manon herself appear in state of complete nudity. Quite a musical triumph that elevates Manon to the status of literary myth such as Cleopatra or Carmen.
Manon Lescaut is a deceptive novel in multiple ways.
It could be easily labeled as a classic, picturesque short tale of a doomed love affair between a noble young man, Chevalier des Grieux, and a beautiful maiden from a lower breed, set in the Paris of The Régence, a convulsive era where class structures and ancient regime ruled the world.
Told from the male lover point of view in a fast-paced, flowing narrative, the reader is presented with the irrevocable passion, almost obsession des Grieux is consumed with when he first sets his eyes on Manon, a fatal moment which will make his inner peace crumble down and bring him to perform all sort of dubious acts, even to commit murder, to keep his beloved with him.
Des Grieux constructs his own story in retrospection, using a nameless narrator who crosses paths with him almost at the end of his misadventures, giving this way a foreboding tone to the story.
"Love has made me too soft, too passionate, too faithful and perhaps over-indulgent of the desires of a most charming woman; and that is the sum of my crimes" says des Grieux, talking about his beloved Manon, the temptress, and the one to blame for his forthcoming misdeeds.
The fact that we only get to hear Manon’s voice throughout des Grieux’s account leaves the reader completely blind about her character, devoid of her motivations or her true feelings. Des Grieux describes her as a fickle, capricious creature prone to take other lovers in order to live lavishly. So Manon appears as a cold, calculating character, becoming a sort of desirable object to possess, an object des Grieux rightfully believes to belong to him. But still, in the rare passages where Manon can voice her quiescent values, we can envisage a strong spirit who keeps defying des Grieux’s views with her struggles to remain her own mistress. Couldn’t it be that in challenging him to broaden his conservative views about relationships, Manon would also be challenging the imposed gender politics of the time?
In any case, the driven plot of the story takes sweet revenge separating the lovers again and again in myriad forms: family, legal authority and the gulf between social classes keep preventing them from being together until they receive the ultimate punishment in being exiled to the colonies in New Orleans, where against all odds and once set free of the French, rotten social pressures, the idea of a simple, bare existence in a new world impregnates them with a wish to live at peace with rekindled values of virtue and morality, flirting even with an improbable happy ending, which makes the final twist in the story even more brusque and cruel than expected.
As I stated at the beginning of this rambling review, this self-righteous account, this seemingly lineal plot and simple, direct style can be misleading.
My first instinctive reaction to the story was to doubt the veracity of des Grieux’s biased tale for he is a flawed hero and unreliable narrator. His constant search for self-excuse, his vain urge in blaming others for his own acts, his theatrical, almost parodic explosion of emotive outbursts and his unremorseful confession of using them to take advantage of others made it very difficult to empathize with him.
But what most struck me when trying to add perspective into the story was the shameful realization that my dislike for des Grieux came from recognition, as his futile attempts at trying to hold on to Manon revealed the universal impossibility of a mutual understanding, the hopelessness of a complete possession of the other.
No simple tale then, but a novel which oozes with the complexity of human relationships and the tragic consequences of trying to cross the barrier of subjectivity in appealing to raw emotions, as one can’t disengage from individual consciousness , however much we try.
"What fatal power had dragged me down to crime? How came it that love, an innocent passion, had turned for me into the source of all misery and vice" wonders a despairing des Grieux.
Exalted existential questions about the tragic consequences of being in love, as being infected by an incurable disease, which robs us of our former selves, blinding us with passion, making it difficult to find our place in a material world where authority and order prevail over emotions.
And in this sense, I’d say that Manon Lescaut is a disruptive novel because in giving free expression to des Grieux’s feelings, even if charged with subjectivity, Prévost is encouraging us to reach our own truths through language, although he also whispers a warning, reminding us that our own reached reality might be easily misunderstood by those we love the most and by the world we live in.
May 29, 2013
This is a novel that puts me in the not completely unfamiliar position of attempting to balance my extreme distaste for the narrator - and even for his story - against my admiration for the way the story is told. Let's get the aggravations out of the way: objections so strong, they caused me to put this relatively short novel down twice before I finally finished it.
The Chevalier de Grieux is nothing short of an idiot. A young man from a wealthy family, he falls in rapturous love with a lower class waif, Manon, and proceeds to squander his fortune, his education, his career, and his principles for her. Which is bad enough, but the net result is that he squanders HER, too - his inept actions put her in greater and greater jeopardy, until he has no choice but to follow her to the penal colony of New Orleans,
And Manon is bringing little or nothing to the table. Aside from her apparently ravishing looks and ability to cry on command, it's difficult to understand why anyone would devote himself to her. She's easily distracted by other lovers, only seems genuinely interested in the Chevalier when he has large quantities of money to spend on her, and at several points seems completely ready to throw him over for a wealthier suitor, until he bumbles in with another disastrous rescue attempt and she has no choice but to throw her lot in with him again.
The part that brought my irritation to a full boil was the very end.
I almost believe Abbe Prevost wrote the story as an endurance read, to see if anyone would care to stick with these two repulsive people until the end, though from what I understand, the novel received quite a different response in 1731 - it was found to be salacious, ribald, and titillating enough to be banned, likely because the two leads never get married, and Manon engages in a number of sexual liaisons to raise funds over the course of this steeplechase.
So why bother, then? Why see this novel through? Because there is a quality in the narration that makes it difficult to believe this writing dates to the eighteenth century. There is an almost relentless immediacy in the way it is told, even though the entire story is a long flashback. We are shackled to the Chevalier's side, almost in real time, and he drags us through his desperate story, daring us to question his obviously questionable judgment. In short, it is because of the richness of the Chevalier's monologue that I can hate him as rabidly as I do. It is because of the relentlessness of his self-inflicted misadventures that I can be so provoked by them.
Even though the modern romance novel is in many ways the mirror opposite of Manon Lescaut, it is a direct descendant of this novel - in which romantic love no longer inspires noble gestures, but pratfalls and reversals of fortune, and in which passion translates not into gallantry but impetuousness and self-sabotage. The Chevalier is the anti-hero, the Don Quixote, and if only Manon were his unseen, unharmed Dulcinea - instead she bears the full brunt of all his windmill-tilting.
There is a reason to read Manon Lescaut - it is a key link between Cervantes and later writers like Alexandre Dumas. It is with that perspective that I would recommend approaching this text.
The Chevalier de Grieux is nothing short of an idiot. A young man from a wealthy family, he falls in rapturous love with a lower class waif, Manon, and proceeds to squander his fortune, his education, his career, and his principles for her. Which is bad enough, but the net result is that he squanders HER, too - his inept actions put her in greater and greater jeopardy, until he has no choice but to follow her to the penal colony of New Orleans,
And Manon is bringing little or nothing to the table. Aside from her apparently ravishing looks and ability to cry on command, it's difficult to understand why anyone would devote himself to her. She's easily distracted by other lovers, only seems genuinely interested in the Chevalier when he has large quantities of money to spend on her, and at several points seems completely ready to throw him over for a wealthier suitor, until he bumbles in with another disastrous rescue attempt and she has no choice but to throw her lot in with him again.
The part that brought my irritation to a full boil was the very end.
I almost believe Abbe Prevost wrote the story as an endurance read, to see if anyone would care to stick with these two repulsive people until the end, though from what I understand, the novel received quite a different response in 1731 - it was found to be salacious, ribald, and titillating enough to be banned, likely because the two leads never get married, and Manon engages in a number of sexual liaisons to raise funds over the course of this steeplechase.
So why bother, then? Why see this novel through? Because there is a quality in the narration that makes it difficult to believe this writing dates to the eighteenth century. There is an almost relentless immediacy in the way it is told, even though the entire story is a long flashback. We are shackled to the Chevalier's side, almost in real time, and he drags us through his desperate story, daring us to question his obviously questionable judgment. In short, it is because of the richness of the Chevalier's monologue that I can hate him as rabidly as I do. It is because of the relentlessness of his self-inflicted misadventures that I can be so provoked by them.
Even though the modern romance novel is in many ways the mirror opposite of Manon Lescaut, it is a direct descendant of this novel - in which romantic love no longer inspires noble gestures, but pratfalls and reversals of fortune, and in which passion translates not into gallantry but impetuousness and self-sabotage. The Chevalier is the anti-hero, the Don Quixote, and if only Manon were his unseen, unharmed Dulcinea - instead she bears the full brunt of all his windmill-tilting.
There is a reason to read Manon Lescaut - it is a key link between Cervantes and later writers like Alexandre Dumas. It is with that perspective that I would recommend approaching this text.
January 8, 2023
je pensais jamais arriver au bout, pas vraiment mon style de littérature à la base si je devrais résumer en une phrase ce serait « tout ça pour ça »
quand tu te mets à donner des secondes chances à des secondes chances faut commencer à s’inquiéter
ps : pensée pour Tiberge qui a prêté bcp trop d’argent à un mec qui se fait avoir par la même fille pendant 195 pages
quand tu te mets à donner des secondes chances à des secondes chances faut commencer à s’inquiéter
ps : pensée pour Tiberge qui a prêté bcp trop d’argent à un mec qui se fait avoir par la même fille pendant 195 pages
January 15, 2024
Роман о страстной любви знатного аристократа кавалера де Грийе к принадлежащей более низкому сословию Манон, которую больше всего на свете прельщают деньги и богатство, воспринимается сегодня, как исключительно нравоучительный. Вместе с тем, этот роман был запрещен во Франции, как безнравственный. Сейчас этот факт вызывает удивление – что же в нем безнравственного?
Герои романа не исключительно положительные или исключительно отрицательные. Манон, да, жаждет богатства и удовольствий, которые можно купить за деньги, и готова продать себя, чтобы получить желаемое, но парадоксальным образом, равнодушна к деньгам, как таковым. Изменяя, она при этом одновременно «верна в своем сердце» де Грийе, если можно так выразиться. Образ Манон сложен и противоречив, что нехарактерно для литературы XVII века. Но самое главное, что покоряет читателя - это любовь, которая при всех парадоксальных обстоятельствах, тем не менее воспринимается, как искренней.
Герои романа не исключительно положительные или исключительно отрицательные. Манон, да, жаждет богатства и удовольствий, которые можно купить за деньги, и готова продать себя, чтобы получить желаемое, но парадоксальным образом, равнодушна к деньгам, как таковым. Изменяя, она при этом одновременно «верна в своем сердце» де Грийе, если можно так выразиться. Образ Манон сложен и противоречив, что нехарактерно для литературы XVII века. Но самое главное, что покоряет читателя - это любовь, которая при всех парадоксальных обстоятельствах, тем не менее воспринимается, как искренней.
October 16, 2022
des grieux certifié l'homme le plus frustrant de la littérature française.
December 12, 2021
Montaigne said the more things change the more things stay the same and this short novel published in 1731 proves that the madness that comes along with first love/infatuation is common to teenagers of whatever era.
Chevalier des Grieux is the 18 year old son of a wealthy influential father sees 15 year old Manon for the first time at the inn they are both staying in overnight as they travel to their destinations – she is on her way to a convent a place she is does not want to go to but acquiesces to stating that God has offered her no alternative. God might not have intervened directly but she is saved from this fate by Chevalier who elopes with her that night on a journey to Paris that would have made Paul Revere seem tardy.
This is no Romeo and Juliet story though. Love here is one sided – Manon will, like Judas, betray Chevalier three times for money and the men who can provide her with the lifestyle she desires. Love for this pair does not edify but demean – Chevalier lies, cheats (literally becoming a card sharp), murders and is imprisoned during the course of his entanglement. He discards lifelong friends and his family to be with the vain and mercenary Manon and while we read it, perhaps at a distance of some years from our own teens, and question the realism of his actions I am reminded of a friend who told me once that she and her first boyfriend (in their mid-teens at the time) used to bitch and bad-mouth her mother in ways that she finds incomprehensible now and said if her husband even looked at her mother the wrong way he’d be out. This is the intensity of that first foray into love.
The structure of the book is one of my favourite things – the narrator who retells the story he has been told by a stranger. Our narrator meets Chevalier 9 months after the madness has ended, so while the events are still fresh and not completely devoid of emotion he at least has some perspective on his actions. That distance means that he recognises the folly of his actions and he can be honest enough to see that even at the time he knew he was being a fool but that he was helpless to extricate himself from her. Her third betrayal leads to him calling her out for what she is,
Now I can see more clearly than ever that you are nothing but a liar and a whore. Now I know your mean little character.
Yet he doesn’t get as far as the door before her tears has him apologising.
A relationship this dysfunctional can only have one inevitable conclusion and so it is that the death of Manon frees Chevalier from his spell (or curse) and allows him to tell his tale before returning home to his family and resuming the life he should have been living. Perhaps this is the bleakest note – that the wealthy can have a period of indiscretion and return to their lives unscathed but the poor are punished for trying to better themselves. In this respect Montaigne is again apt.
Chevalier des Grieux is the 18 year old son of a wealthy influential father sees 15 year old Manon for the first time at the inn they are both staying in overnight as they travel to their destinations – she is on her way to a convent a place she is does not want to go to but acquiesces to stating that God has offered her no alternative. God might not have intervened directly but she is saved from this fate by Chevalier who elopes with her that night on a journey to Paris that would have made Paul Revere seem tardy.
This is no Romeo and Juliet story though. Love here is one sided – Manon will, like Judas, betray Chevalier three times for money and the men who can provide her with the lifestyle she desires. Love for this pair does not edify but demean – Chevalier lies, cheats (literally becoming a card sharp), murders and is imprisoned during the course of his entanglement. He discards lifelong friends and his family to be with the vain and mercenary Manon and while we read it, perhaps at a distance of some years from our own teens, and question the realism of his actions I am reminded of a friend who told me once that she and her first boyfriend (in their mid-teens at the time) used to bitch and bad-mouth her mother in ways that she finds incomprehensible now and said if her husband even looked at her mother the wrong way he’d be out. This is the intensity of that first foray into love.
The structure of the book is one of my favourite things – the narrator who retells the story he has been told by a stranger. Our narrator meets Chevalier 9 months after the madness has ended, so while the events are still fresh and not completely devoid of emotion he at least has some perspective on his actions. That distance means that he recognises the folly of his actions and he can be honest enough to see that even at the time he knew he was being a fool but that he was helpless to extricate himself from her. Her third betrayal leads to him calling her out for what she is,
Now I can see more clearly than ever that you are nothing but a liar and a whore. Now I know your mean little character.
Yet he doesn’t get as far as the door before her tears has him apologising.
A relationship this dysfunctional can only have one inevitable conclusion and so it is that the death of Manon frees Chevalier from his spell (or curse) and allows him to tell his tale before returning home to his family and resuming the life he should have been living. Perhaps this is the bleakest note – that the wealthy can have a period of indiscretion and return to their lives unscathed but the poor are punished for trying to better themselves. In this respect Montaigne is again apt.
December 14, 2023
I read this book mainly because it forms the basis of the eponymous opera by Giacomo Puccini.
Young Chevalier des Grieux, from a good provincial French family, falls in with Manon Lescault, a young woman of loose morals, focussed completely on the easy life and entertainment. Although professing to be in love with des Grieux, she ‘takes on’ wealthy men, while des Grieux turns his hand to cheating at cards in gambling dens. Anyway, it all goes horribly wrong and Manon is eventually sent as a convict to Louisiana for prostitution, and the story, which takes a tragic end, continues in the New World.
It turns out this is a pretty racy story, considering it was written in the early 18th century. At some point Manon’s brother actually pimps her to rich Parisians! No wonder the book was originally banned in France. The author, Abbé (!) Prévost, then put in some homilies about virtue over debauchery, to make the book more palatable to the authorities. The homilies take the form of harangues to des Grieux by his friend Tiberge, and are actually rather tedious.
Verdict: Unlike many books from the early 18th century, this one perhaps hasn’t stood the test of time, except of course as an opera libretto, which can never be too absurd and preposterous!
Young Chevalier des Grieux, from a good provincial French family, falls in with Manon Lescault, a young woman of loose morals, focussed completely on the easy life and entertainment. Although professing to be in love with des Grieux, she ‘takes on’ wealthy men, while des Grieux turns his hand to cheating at cards in gambling dens. Anyway, it all goes horribly wrong and Manon is eventually sent as a convict to Louisiana for prostitution, and the story, which takes a tragic end, continues in the New World.
It turns out this is a pretty racy story, considering it was written in the early 18th century. At some point Manon’s brother actually pimps her to rich Parisians! No wonder the book was originally banned in France. The author, Abbé (!) Prévost, then put in some homilies about virtue over debauchery, to make the book more palatable to the authorities. The homilies take the form of harangues to des Grieux by his friend Tiberge, and are actually rather tedious.
Verdict: Unlike many books from the early 18th century, this one perhaps hasn’t stood the test of time, except of course as an opera libretto, which can never be too absurd and preposterous!
July 2, 2013
Manon Lescaut is a slut. A priestess of the highest order: and, made to order. Its hard to know if she is real, or the uber male fantasy wet dream, she juxtastruts about so: think John Cage 4.33.
Its the Chevalier whose lament we witness. Not in the ordinary-esque tableau. Which latter didacts a scene like this:
[image error]
And this:
Notice the lamented: stone inarticulate. Dodo-ed out. Now, where is the fun in that? Prevost, see, anticipated Indecent Proposal
in 1731 and had the decency to be indecent, which If you have a handsome, monied, upper class but not uppity, suave but not swine-y, witty not wily, besotted but not beguiled, generous but not geriatric, brainy but not bovine, in short a beau who does not blight, and he offers you ‘the whole wide world in your hand’, are you (Manon) going to say no, or spread your legs and think of England? Especially if it means keeping your true love (Chevalier) on the side, and in the style YOU are accustomed to? Which is what Manon doeth. Does. Repeatedly. What does the Chevalier do? Well, whine like a little bitch. (the usual: his heart is broken, the infidelity is killing him. Oh, OK lets do it one more time then. Three times over, in fact. )
Why three times? Because the cock crows three times silly. You can’t read 18c without some Bible under your belt. Heck, you can’t read this if you ARE in the Bible Belt. God will smite you. But rest assured: sluttery gets slated. Now I don’t think I’m letting slip any spoilers here: we all know that all women who have sex outside the marriage bed die a horrible death just before the mid 20c. Madame Bovary: dead. Therese Raquine: dead. Anna Karenina: even deader. Catherine Linton: dead as the dodo (mind, she only thought about sex: off with her head). La boile suife: ok maybe not dead, but bet she wished she was. Or might as well be. (in fact, maybe she DID die by end of journey). A lot of dead-i-ness going about, see?
What then is the Chevalier doing, whilst Manon is putting about for his 401K and edging towards decided deadness? Well, he is...pontificating. And credit to him: he is trying to put paid all kinds of classical rhetorical oratorical methods, Ciceronian and others, in justifying an ideal (ised) love which ‘bends not with the remover to remove’ (and who wants to remove a plethora of ducats), and failing miserably, and pre-empting scores of texture-laden sound bytes from all kindsof bildungrommen (not) and maybe my favourite Nathaniel West
And surviving the debauchery, because, he is....a man.
And, well, men. You just have to let men play with their toys, right?
Ummm.
Jean Rhys? Please. Can you Saragossa this one? Any way you can? Posthumously is OK.
Its the Chevalier whose lament we witness. Not in the ordinary-esque tableau. Which latter didacts a scene like this:
[image error]
And this:
Notice the lamented: stone inarticulate. Dodo-ed out. Now, where is the fun in that? Prevost, see, anticipated Indecent Proposal
in 1731 and had the decency to be indecent, which If you have a handsome, monied, upper class but not uppity, suave but not swine-y, witty not wily, besotted but not beguiled, generous but not geriatric, brainy but not bovine, in short a beau who does not blight, and he offers you ‘the whole wide world in your hand’, are you (Manon) going to say no, or spread your legs and think of England? Especially if it means keeping your true love (Chevalier) on the side, and in the style YOU are accustomed to? Which is what Manon doeth. Does. Repeatedly. What does the Chevalier do? Well, whine like a little bitch. (the usual: his heart is broken, the infidelity is killing him. Oh, OK lets do it one more time then. Three times over, in fact. )
Why three times? Because the cock crows three times silly. You can’t read 18c without some Bible under your belt. Heck, you can’t read this if you ARE in the Bible Belt. God will smite you. But rest assured: sluttery gets slated. Now I don’t think I’m letting slip any spoilers here: we all know that all women who have sex outside the marriage bed die a horrible death just before the mid 20c. Madame Bovary: dead. Therese Raquine: dead. Anna Karenina: even deader. Catherine Linton: dead as the dodo (mind, she only thought about sex: off with her head). La boile suife: ok maybe not dead, but bet she wished she was. Or might as well be. (in fact, maybe she DID die by end of journey). A lot of dead-i-ness going about, see?
What then is the Chevalier doing, whilst Manon is putting about for his 401K and edging towards decided deadness? Well, he is...pontificating. And credit to him: he is trying to put paid all kinds of classical rhetorical oratorical methods, Ciceronian and others, in justifying an ideal (ised) love which ‘bends not with the remover to remove’ (and who wants to remove a plethora of ducats), and failing miserably, and pre-empting scores of texture-laden sound bytes from all kindsof bildungrommen (not) and maybe my favourite Nathaniel West
And surviving the debauchery, because, he is....a man.
And, well, men. You just have to let men play with their toys, right?
Ummm.
Jean Rhys? Please. Can you Saragossa this one? Any way you can? Posthumously is OK.
January 9, 2017
Introduction
Note on the Text
Note on the Illustrations
Select Bibliography
A Chronology of the Abbé Prévost
--Manon Lescaut
Explanatory Notes
Note on the Text
Note on the Illustrations
Select Bibliography
A Chronology of the Abbé Prévost
--Manon Lescaut
Explanatory Notes
February 20, 2023
le personnage principal est VRMT insupportable,
l’histoire elle est aléatoire ptn jsuis désolé, 300 pages d’évènements random qui font pas avancer l’histoire (tout ça pr que au final le type retourne en france comme si de rien n’était??) bref tiberge force
l’histoire elle est aléatoire ptn jsuis désolé, 300 pages d’évènements random qui font pas avancer l’histoire (tout ça pr que au final le type retourne en france comme si de rien n’était??) bref tiberge force
Read
June 8, 2019My love is as a fever longing still,
For that which longer nurseth the disease;
Feeding on that which doth preserve the ill,
The uncertain sickly appetite to please.
My reason, the physician to my love,
Angry that his prescriptions are not kept,
Hath left me, and I desperate now approve
Desire is death, which physic did except.
Past cure I am, now Reason is past care,
And frantic-mad with evermore unrest;
My thoughts and my discourse as madmen's are,
At random from the truth vainly expressed;
For I have sworn thee fair, and thought thee bright,
Who art as black as hell, as dark as night.
William Shakespeare: Sonnet 147
Shakespeare's notorious Dark Lady, black as hell, dark as night; she was no more faithful to the poet than Manon is to her lover, des Grieux. Two men complaining of women who feel they have every right to bestow their favours where they please - both men see themselves as past reason, but for Shakespeare that is sickness, madness, a disease that needs curing. Des Grieux, curiously, does not. This is love, unconditional, irrational, inexplicable, a force of nature that comes over you, that overcomes you, that turns everything upside down. He knows in his mind that it is unreasonable, and he cannot be sure if his Manon really loves him best, and cannot be sure if she would have loved him and him alone if only he'd had enough money to keep her in the manner to which she'd like to become accustomed. But he doesn't want the cure, he doesn't even see this as sickness. He gives up everything for her, follows her even to the New World, to a world that they can make new, according to their rules. It nearly works, until the machinery of French Ancien Régime government, transposed to this brave new world with such goodly creatures in it, once again cranks into action. The Governor of New Orleans discovers that Manon and des Grieux are not married at all, as they have been claiming. In which case, as in the Old World, she is disposable goods, once more. Poor Manon.
What surprised me most about this is how French of close to 300 years ago doesn't feel terribly different to French nowadays. Once or twice I checked on a phrase in the online English version and found sweetly archaic sounding sentences: "Alas!' replied I, after a moment's silence, 'it is but too true that I am the unhappy victim of the vilest perfidy." Oh woe is me, alack and alas, but strangely, the rest doesn't sound nearly as stuffy in French. Maybe that explains why des Grieux didn't make me fume with frustration, an effect that he seems to have on a lot of reviewers hereabouts. "Idiotic" is one of the more polite epithets.
A lot of people seem to think he's blind. Hasn't a clue about love, as this is obviously nothing but lust. But love is sparked by desire - what you make out of it, to go along with the desire, is up to each individual. Des Grieux stays with her through thick and thin, follows her all the way to America - surely that must count as real love? (Sorry, that came out wrong. It's a long way, is all.) And he is blind it's true, but only to the fact that he and Manon are operating on different codes. She is sweet, and compliant, and fond of pretty things and going to the theatre, which is precisely what he loves about her. But it means, in her pragmatic way, that she can be sweet and compliant with rich men too, which is a useful way of getting her the pretty things and the visits to the theatre. But that is separate. Her heart belongs to her Chevalier, not her body. Get over it Chevalier.
For that which longer nurseth the disease;
Feeding on that which doth preserve the ill,
The uncertain sickly appetite to please.
My reason, the physician to my love,
Angry that his prescriptions are not kept,
Hath left me, and I desperate now approve
Desire is death, which physic did except.
Past cure I am, now Reason is past care,
And frantic-mad with evermore unrest;
My thoughts and my discourse as madmen's are,
At random from the truth vainly expressed;
For I have sworn thee fair, and thought thee bright,
Who art as black as hell, as dark as night.
William Shakespeare: Sonnet 147
Shakespeare's notorious Dark Lady, black as hell, dark as night; she was no more faithful to the poet than Manon is to her lover, des Grieux. Two men complaining of women who feel they have every right to bestow their favours where they please - both men see themselves as past reason, but for Shakespeare that is sickness, madness, a disease that needs curing. Des Grieux, curiously, does not. This is love, unconditional, irrational, inexplicable, a force of nature that comes over you, that overcomes you, that turns everything upside down. He knows in his mind that it is unreasonable, and he cannot be sure if his Manon really loves him best, and cannot be sure if she would have loved him and him alone if only he'd had enough money to keep her in the manner to which she'd like to become accustomed. But he doesn't want the cure, he doesn't even see this as sickness. He gives up everything for her, follows her even to the New World, to a world that they can make new, according to their rules. It nearly works, until the machinery of French Ancien Régime government, transposed to this brave new world with such goodly creatures in it, once again cranks into action. The Governor of New Orleans discovers that Manon and des Grieux are not married at all, as they have been claiming. In which case, as in the Old World, she is disposable goods, once more. Poor Manon.
What surprised me most about this is how French of close to 300 years ago doesn't feel terribly different to French nowadays. Once or twice I checked on a phrase in the online English version and found sweetly archaic sounding sentences: "Alas!' replied I, after a moment's silence, 'it is but too true that I am the unhappy victim of the vilest perfidy." Oh woe is me, alack and alas, but strangely, the rest doesn't sound nearly as stuffy in French. Maybe that explains why des Grieux didn't make me fume with frustration, an effect that he seems to have on a lot of reviewers hereabouts. "Idiotic" is one of the more polite epithets.
A lot of people seem to think he's blind. Hasn't a clue about love, as this is obviously nothing but lust. But love is sparked by desire - what you make out of it, to go along with the desire, is up to each individual. Des Grieux stays with her through thick and thin, follows her all the way to America - surely that must count as real love? (Sorry, that came out wrong. It's a long way, is all.) And he is blind it's true, but only to the fact that he and Manon are operating on different codes. She is sweet, and compliant, and fond of pretty things and going to the theatre, which is precisely what he loves about her. But it means, in her pragmatic way, that she can be sweet and compliant with rich men too, which is a useful way of getting her the pretty things and the visits to the theatre. But that is separate. Her heart belongs to her Chevalier, not her body. Get over it Chevalier.
February 11, 2019
We were just going to get into bed when he opened the door. 'Oh God!' I said to Manon, 'it's old G.M!' I leaped for my sword but, as ill-luck would have it, it was tangled with my belt.
The introduction to my Penguin edition discusses this in terms of tragic grandeur - well, call me a Philistine but I found myself smirking and giggling throughout this tale of femme fatale Manon and her unbelievably naive-to-the-point-of-silliness lover, des Grieux.
Mere teenagers when they meet, he picks her up at an inn as she's being sent to a convent and whisks her off to a love-nest, abandoning his plans to study for the priesthood and ignoring the advice of his best friend and father. Then when the money runs out, Manon abandons him for a rich lover...
One of the reasons I struggled is that that scenario plays out three times: des Grieux loses all his money (and he does seem to be the unluckiest man alive: if his house can burn down, it will!), Manon goes off with a rich lover, they meet again, she makes her excuses, he takes her in his arms, they live happily... till the money runs out... Oh yes, and they go to prison, repeatedly, until Manon is sent as a convict to New Orleans...
Despite some distinct hamminess, there are more interesting things going on: the story is des Grieux's confession to a framed narrator and so the narrative is a slippery one shaped by his self-interest. We only learn about Manon through his story and there are narrative gaps that allow us to interpret her differently from the way des Grieux portrays her. One big question is why, if he is so madly, truly, deeply in love, doesn't he marry her? If anyone could charm his father it's Manon - but no, right to the end he keeps her as his mistress.
So I couldn't see this as a tragic love story of sexual obsession but enjoyed the ambiguity allowed by the 1st person confessional narrative - is the anti-romance in the book or merely in my interpretation? Hard to tell.
September 21, 2018
"Afirmen que las delicias del amor son pasajeras, que están prohibidas, que serán seguidas de penas eternas y que, cuanto más dulces y sabrosas sean, mayor será la magnanimidad del Cielo al recompensar tan gran sacrificio; pero confiesen que con corazones como los nuestros aquí abajo constituyen la suprema felicidad"
"Manon Lescaut" u originalmente "Historia del caballero Des Grieux y Manon Lescaut" es un segmento de la monumental obra del ábate Prévost titulada "Memorias y Aventuras de un hombre de calidad retirado del mundo" y obviamente es la que alcanzó mayor fama y gloria. Clásico de clásicos para los franceses. Lectura obligada quizás hasta nuestros días fue conocido por generaciones enteras.
Nuevamente por Stendhal en su "Rojo y Negro" llegué a ella, cuando Julián pensaba que la ópera de igual nombre no era superior a la novela. La influencia que ha tenido en la obra mencionada de Stendhal, "Carmen" de Mérimée e incluso "La dama de las camelias" de Dumas es palpable y evidente.
Sin embargo para su época fue una total novedad el tema que trataba y la manera de contarlo, en el siglo XVIII, allá por el año 1732, pues contaba de una relación amorosa obsesiva y hasta un cierto punto libertina e inmoral. En efecto el personaje masculino el caballero Des Grieux, joven de apenas 20 años, tímido como él mismo se decía, conocerá a Manon Lescaut quien lo cautivará de por vida y por ella entrará en un círculo de contradicciones y situaciones terriblemente enojosas de las cuales tratará de salir.
Las actitudes contradictorias hasta cierto punto de su bella y joven amante sacará de quicio no solamente a él sino seguro al lector que tenga la oportunidad de leer esta historia. En general las acciones siempre están presentes y eso es algo que me encantó, la manera de contarlo es sencilla y no demasiado profunda. Se hablan de muchas cosas como la infidelidad, la amistad, la religiosidad, la obsesión, la virtud, la traición, la corrupción y un largo etcétera. Muchos temas importantes y frases a mi parecer muy buenas.
Sin embargo considero que la novela es relativamente sencilla, los personajes manejan lenguajes similares como en Alejandro Dumas, no hay una riqueza de diálogos ni pensamientos, tampoco encuentro grandes reflexiones aunque los temas se plantean y con relativo éxito. El tema sin duda fue vanguardista e inauguró prácticamente un nuevo género en las novelas francesas de esa época. Contradijo la idea que la virtud es el único camino del hombre de aquella época para darle una importancia mayor al amor e incluso al placer, por ello fue muchas veces censurada. La historia en general vale y mucho.
Espero leer algún día el libreto de la ópera de Puccini homónima y ver qué tan buena es. Un clásico muy recomendable.
"Manon Lescaut" u originalmente "Historia del caballero Des Grieux y Manon Lescaut" es un segmento de la monumental obra del ábate Prévost titulada "Memorias y Aventuras de un hombre de calidad retirado del mundo" y obviamente es la que alcanzó mayor fama y gloria. Clásico de clásicos para los franceses. Lectura obligada quizás hasta nuestros días fue conocido por generaciones enteras.
Nuevamente por Stendhal en su "Rojo y Negro" llegué a ella, cuando Julián pensaba que la ópera de igual nombre no era superior a la novela. La influencia que ha tenido en la obra mencionada de Stendhal, "Carmen" de Mérimée e incluso "La dama de las camelias" de Dumas es palpable y evidente.
Sin embargo para su época fue una total novedad el tema que trataba y la manera de contarlo, en el siglo XVIII, allá por el año 1732, pues contaba de una relación amorosa obsesiva y hasta un cierto punto libertina e inmoral. En efecto el personaje masculino el caballero Des Grieux, joven de apenas 20 años, tímido como él mismo se decía, conocerá a Manon Lescaut quien lo cautivará de por vida y por ella entrará en un círculo de contradicciones y situaciones terriblemente enojosas de las cuales tratará de salir.
Las actitudes contradictorias hasta cierto punto de su bella y joven amante sacará de quicio no solamente a él sino seguro al lector que tenga la oportunidad de leer esta historia. En general las acciones siempre están presentes y eso es algo que me encantó, la manera de contarlo es sencilla y no demasiado profunda. Se hablan de muchas cosas como la infidelidad, la amistad, la religiosidad, la obsesión, la virtud, la traición, la corrupción y un largo etcétera. Muchos temas importantes y frases a mi parecer muy buenas.
Sin embargo considero que la novela es relativamente sencilla, los personajes manejan lenguajes similares como en Alejandro Dumas, no hay una riqueza de diálogos ni pensamientos, tampoco encuentro grandes reflexiones aunque los temas se plantean y con relativo éxito. El tema sin duda fue vanguardista e inauguró prácticamente un nuevo género en las novelas francesas de esa época. Contradijo la idea que la virtud es el único camino del hombre de aquella época para darle una importancia mayor al amor e incluso al placer, por ello fue muchas veces censurada. La historia en general vale y mucho.
Espero leer algún día el libreto de la ópera de Puccini homónima y ver qué tan buena es. Un clásico muy recomendable.
March 28, 2025
بر خلاف رمان های عشقی ، این رمان جذاب بود. چون ببشتر به هوس و رابطه ای پر از اشتیاق و هوس و لذت اشاره داشت تا خود عشق. جذاب بود چون بالاخره کتابی میخونی که شاید بر خلاف اون داستان های عشقی کلاسیک بود و بیشتر به لذت بردن از خود رابطه پرداخته شده تا عشق همین کتاب رو خوندنی تر، شیرین تر، جذاب تر و واقع بینانه تر کرده بود. لذت بردم از خوندنش
February 27, 2013
Des Grieux is a nobleman who falls in love with the irresistible Manon Lescaut, a woman from the lower classes. They run away together and during the course of their relationship, Manon betrays des Grieux three times. He takes her back every time after experiencing some angsty thoughts, such as “But in my heart I was so overjoyed at seeing her again that I could scarcely bring myself to say a hard word to her, despite all the grounds I had for being angry. Yet my heart was bleeding at the cruel outrage she had done me. I quickly called all this to mind in an attempt to fan the flames of my indignation, and I tried to make my eyes blaze with other fires than those of love.”
The blurb on the back of the book describes Manon Lescaut as a femme fatale so I was expecting her to be really evil, akin to Mildred in Somerset Maugham's Of Human Bondage. Well, she really wasn’t as bad as I thought she was, just silly and childish, as was her lover, Chevalier des Grieux.
I really enjoyed reading the book, although des Grieux quite annoyed me. Some may say that it was romantic that he left his inheritance for love but I found him more and more irritating as the story went on.
The language was quite poetic and it was obvious that the author had some religious training or knowledge. De Grieux was the narrator for the majority of the book, and he told his story in a very engaging way.
Definitely a book I’d read again.
The blurb on the back of the book describes Manon Lescaut as a femme fatale so I was expecting her to be really evil, akin to Mildred in Somerset Maugham's Of Human Bondage. Well, she really wasn’t as bad as I thought she was, just silly and childish, as was her lover, Chevalier des Grieux.
I really enjoyed reading the book, although des Grieux quite annoyed me. Some may say that it was romantic that he left his inheritance for love but I found him more and more irritating as the story went on.
The language was quite poetic and it was obvious that the author had some religious training or knowledge. De Grieux was the narrator for the majority of the book, and he told his story in a very engaging way.
Definitely a book I’d read again.
July 16, 2024
-ای عشق،ای عشق!سر آشتی با عقل نداری؟
.
عناصری که توی داستان بود شباهت زیادی با همان عناصر حاضر در تراژدیهای شکسپیری داشت؛خیانت،عشق،انتقام،مرگ و..
دو شخصیت جذاب و تقریبا عجیب این داستان یعنی مانون لسکو و دگریو افرادی هستند که برای اسایش مالی(مخصوصا مانون)چه کارها که نمیکنند...
مانون دائما از دیدگاه دگریو روایت میشود،شخصی که فقط با معیار های زیبایی و تحت تاثیر عشق دگریو معرفی میشود اما فقط در یک جا وقتی مانون از اندیشه هایش حرف میزند میفهمیم که زکاوت و پیچیدگی این شخصیت نادیده گرفته شده است و نشان از این است که دگریو احتمالا واقعا او را نمیشناسد و درک نمیکند.
شاید مانون زنیست معتقد به روابط ازاد و جدایی عشق از رابطه اما در نهایت همیشه برچسپ خیانتکار را به دوش میکشد و سخت ترین مجازات ها برای این زن است این در حالی است که دگریو با تمام تصمیم های نا به جا و اعمال هولناک خود صرفا مردی فریب خورده معرفی میشود و به راحتی مشمول عفو میشود.
زوج جالبی هستند در یک داستان قرن ۱۸،با عشقی تقریبا نامتعارف و تصمیمات اشتباه در موقعیت های اشتباه...
.
عناصری که توی داستان بود شباهت زیادی با همان عناصر حاضر در تراژدیهای شکسپیری داشت؛خیانت،عشق،انتقام،مرگ و..
دو شخصیت جذاب و تقریبا عجیب این داستان یعنی مانون لسکو و دگریو افرادی هستند که برای اسایش مالی(مخصوصا مانون)چه کارها که نمیکنند...
مانون دائما از دیدگاه دگریو روایت میشود،شخصی که فقط با معیار های زیبایی و تحت تاثیر عشق دگریو معرفی میشود اما فقط در یک جا وقتی مانون از اندیشه هایش حرف میزند میفهمیم که زکاوت و پیچیدگی این شخصیت نادیده گرفته شده است و نشان از این است که دگریو احتمالا واقعا او را نمیشناسد و درک نمیکند.
شاید مانون زنیست معتقد به روابط ازاد و جدایی عشق از رابطه اما در نهایت همیشه برچسپ خیانتکار را به دوش میکشد و سخت ترین مجازات ها برای این زن است این در حالی است که دگریو با تمام تصمیم های نا به جا و اعمال هولناک خود صرفا مردی فریب خورده معرفی میشود و به راحتی مشمول عفو میشود.
زوج جالبی هستند در یک داستان قرن ۱۸،با عشقی تقریبا نامتعارف و تصمیمات اشتباه در موقعیت های اشتباه...
December 12, 2021
I wrongly thought this was a classic gay romance due to not being specific on the blurb I read for it on the book app I'm using. It wasn't. But still a good story, not a favorite though.
December 25, 2019
<< Όμως οι άνθρωποι με χαρακτήρα μπορούν να συγκλονίζονται με χίλιους διαφορετικούς τρόπους. Είναι σα να διαθέτουν πάνω από πέντε αισθήσεις και να μπορούν να συλλαμβάνουν ιδέες και ερεθίσματα που ξεπερνούν τα κανονικά όρια της φύσης. Και επειδή έχουν συναίσθηση του μεγαλείου που τους ανυψώνει πάνω απ’ το χυδαίο, δεν υπάρχει τίποτα που να τους είναι πιο πολύτιμο απ’ αυτό. Γι’ αυτό και δε μπορούν να υποφέρουν την περιφρόνηση και τον εμπαιγμό, γι’ αυτό η ντροπή είναι ένα από τα πιο βίαια πάθη τους >>
Όποιος διαβάσει αυτό το βιβλίο και το χαρακτηρίσει αφελές, είναι μεγαλόστομος βλαξ.
Η ηθογραφία συνήθως μέσω του σχήματος της μυθιστορίας προωθεί τους ηθικούς σχηματισμούς ή μετασχηματισμούς ( ενίοτε, και, μεταλλάξεις ) κάποιων δεδομένων προσώπων, σε μοντέλα γεγονότων. Οι ηθικές σπουδές από την άλλη, είναι, ασκήσεις, ηθικής αλληλεπίδρασης μεταξύ συγγραφέα και αναγνώστη. Αυτό που έχουμε εδώ.
<< Γιατί να μη γεννηθούμε κι οι δυο με χαρακτήρες που ταιριάζουν στη δυστυχισμένη μας ζωή; Μας προίκισες με πνεύμα, με αγάπη για το ωραίο και με αισθήματα. Αλίμονο >>!
Οι επιδράσεις του πάνω στο Σαντ, το Γκαίτε, το Μαζόχ εμφανείς. Φιλοσοφικά, φυσικά. Την άγρα διαστροφών για αφορισμούς, την αφήνω σε άλλους. Ένα όμοιο πνεύμα, πειραχτήρι με το Βολταίρο.
Το 1731, εκδόθηκε για πρώτη φορά η σκληρότερη σπουδή πάνω στο ίσο δικαίωμα να λέγεται άνθρωπος, η γυναίκα και να αποκτήσει θέση – ατομική θέση, πέρα απ’ τα δεσμά και τη σκέπη οποιουδήποτε άντρα, η Μανόν Λεσκώ.
Υπάρχουν άνθρωποι ατυχέστεροι από άλλους ή άνθρωποι που έλκουν περισσότερο τα δεινά; Τα επιφαινόμενα, φυσικά, το επιβεβαιώνουν. Όμως, είναι εξ’ ίσου βέβαιο πως η βούληση παρελαύνει ερήμην των αποφάσεων, για την ακρίβεια είναι η μητέρα τους, που τους κρύβει ότι είναι μητέρα τους. Κι ίσως αυτό εξηγεί ακόμη περισσότερο την καθολική ισχύ αυτού του φαινομενικά απλού ρομάντζου, πάνω σε ιερά τέρατα της λογοτεχνίας και της διανόησης.
Τι γεννάει άραγε το ιδεώδες αυτοθυσίας; Λένε πως μόνο αυτός που φοβάται γίνεται ήρωας. Ίσως μόνος αυτός ατρόμητος, να μπορεί να σβήσει τον εαυτό του, για τον άλλο. Υπάρχουν κάποια βαθύτατα συναισθήματα – δίνες – υπερβάσεις για τους άλλους, τέτοια που καταπατούν το δικαίωμα μας στο φόβο και σε κάθε προσωπική κύλιση. Ή αν θέλουμε να είμαστε πιο κυνικοί, κάτω απ’ την αιτιολόγηση του λόγου της αυτοθυσίας να βρίσκεται πάντα η βούληση που υποκινεί να συνεχίζουμε, για όσο χρειάζεται να κάνουμε κάτι, να κάνουμε το οτιδήποτε αρκεί να διαιωνίζουμε την ύπαρξη μας.
Το βιβλίο αυτό με την επιμονή του στο ωραίο μέσα στη λογική και την τρέλα στο συναίσθημα, στάθηκε ικανό λάσο για να με τραβήξει από τις τρύπες που πήγα και χώθηκα, με το ζευγάρι αρχέτυπο για τους Μπόνι και Κλάϋντ, με τη σοβαρή, τίμια επιμονή του πάνω στη συνύπαρξη του μυαλού και της ψυχής μας, στην εκζήτηση με την οποία απαιτεί να είμαστε ελαστικοί σε ό,τι απαιτεί να είμαστε εκεί, ολόκληροι, χωρίς να δυσανασχετούμε για ό,τι μοιάζει πολύ μικρό, για τον κυνισμό μας.
<< Έρωτα! Έρωτα! Δε θα μπορέσεις λοιπόν ποτέ να συμβαδίσεις με τη φρόνηση >>;
Το δικαίωμα να είναι αιρετικός το έχει ο οποιοσδήποτε δεν έχει έτοιμο το Ναι το σωστό και το βέβαιο. Όποιος αναζητά αυτό που λειτουργεί, κόντρα στο οτιδήποτε, συχνά αντίθετο στις γενικές πεποιθήσεις, ακόμα κι αν είναι ασταθές πέρα απ’ το ειδικό. Ό,τι δουλεύει, πρεσβεύει κι ας είναι ο αρνηθείς που πάλι Όχι θα ξανάλεγε, όσο κι αν τον καταβάλλει, γιατί δε μπορεί να τον καθυποτάξει. Γιατί δεν πλέει μαζί με το συρφετό. Σκέφτεται, αισθάνεται, κάνει λάθη, πέφτει πάλι και πάλι.
Όποιος διαβάσει αυτό το βιβλίο και το χαρακτηρίσει αφελές, είναι μεγαλόστομος βλαξ.
Η ηθογραφία συνήθως μέσω του σχήματος της μυθιστορίας προωθεί τους ηθικούς σχηματισμούς ή μετασχηματισμούς ( ενίοτε, και, μεταλλάξεις ) κάποιων δεδομένων προσώπων, σε μοντέλα γεγονότων. Οι ηθικές σπουδές από την άλλη, είναι, ασκήσεις, ηθικής αλληλεπίδρασης μεταξύ συγγραφέα και αναγνώστη. Αυτό που έχουμε εδώ.
<< Γιατί να μη γεννηθούμε κι οι δυο με χαρακτήρες που ταιριάζουν στη δυστυχισμένη μας ζωή; Μας προίκισες με πνεύμα, με αγάπη για το ωραίο και με αισθήματα. Αλίμονο >>!
Οι επιδράσεις του πάνω στο Σαντ, το Γκαίτε, το Μαζόχ εμφανείς. Φιλοσοφικά, φυσικά. Την άγρα διαστροφών για αφορισμούς, την αφήνω σε άλλους. Ένα όμοιο πνεύμα, πειραχτήρι με το Βολταίρο.
Το 1731, εκδόθηκε για πρώτη φορά η σκληρότερη σπουδή πάνω στο ίσο δικαίωμα να λέγεται άνθρωπος, η γυναίκα και να αποκτήσει θέση – ατομική θέση, πέρα απ’ τα δεσμά και τη σκέπη οποιουδήποτε άντρα, η Μανόν Λεσκώ.
Υπάρχουν άνθρωποι ατυχέστεροι από άλλους ή άνθρωποι που έλκουν περισσότερο τα δεινά; Τα επιφαινόμενα, φυσικά, το επιβεβαιώνουν. Όμως, είναι εξ’ ίσου βέβαιο πως η βούληση παρελαύνει ερήμην των αποφάσεων, για την ακρίβεια είναι η μητέρα τους, που τους κρύβει ότι είναι μητέρα τους. Κι ίσως αυτό εξηγεί ακόμη περισσότερο την καθολική ισχύ αυτού του φαινομενικά απλού ρομάντζου, πάνω σε ιερά τέρατα της λογοτεχνίας και της διανόησης.
Τι γεννάει άραγε το ιδεώδες αυτοθυσίας; Λένε πως μόνο αυτός που φοβάται γίνεται ήρωας. Ίσως μόνος αυτός ατρόμητος, να μπορεί να σβήσει τον εαυτό του, για τον άλλο. Υπάρχουν κάποια βαθύτατα συναισθήματα – δίνες – υπερβάσεις για τους άλλους, τέτοια που καταπατούν το δικαίωμα μας στο φόβο και σε κάθε προσωπική κύλιση. Ή αν θέλουμε να είμαστε πιο κυνικοί, κάτω απ’ την αιτιολόγηση του λόγου της αυτοθυσίας να βρίσκεται πάντα η βούληση που υποκινεί να συνεχίζουμε, για όσο χρειάζεται να κάνουμε κάτι, να κάνουμε το οτιδήποτε αρκεί να διαιωνίζουμε την ύπαρξη μας.
Το βιβλίο αυτό με την επιμονή του στο ωραίο μέσα στη λογική και την τρέλα στο συναίσθημα, στάθηκε ικανό λάσο για να με τραβήξει από τις τρύπες που πήγα και χώθηκα, με το ζευγάρι αρχέτυπο για τους Μπόνι και Κλάϋντ, με τη σοβαρή, τίμια επιμονή του πάνω στη συνύπαρξη του μυαλού και της ψυχής μας, στην εκζήτηση με την οποία απαιτεί να είμαστε ελαστικοί σε ό,τι απαιτεί να είμαστε εκεί, ολόκληροι, χωρίς να δυσανασχετούμε για ό,τι μοιάζει πολύ μικρό, για τον κυνισμό μας.
<< Έρωτα! Έρωτα! Δε θα μπορέσεις λοιπόν ποτέ να συμβαδίσεις με τη φρόνηση >>;
Το δικαίωμα να είναι αιρετικός το έχει ο οποιοσδήποτε δεν έχει έτοιμο το Ναι το σωστό και το βέβαιο. Όποιος αναζητά αυτό που λειτουργεί, κόντρα στο οτιδήποτε, συχνά αντίθετο στις γενικές πεποιθήσεις, ακόμα κι αν είναι ασταθές πέρα απ’ το ειδικό. Ό,τι δουλεύει, πρεσβεύει κι ας είναι ο αρνηθείς που πάλι Όχι θα ξανάλεγε, όσο κι αν τον καταβάλλει, γιατί δε μπορεί να τον καθυποτάξει. Γιατί δεν πλέει μαζί με το συρφετό. Σκέφτεται, αισθάνεται, κάνει λάθη, πέφτει πάλι και πάλι.
August 15, 2022
This is a fast-paced, flowing read, though I can see that some will become annoyed with the Chevalier's constant protestations, especially of nothing being his fault. I'm sure the story was quite scandalous for its time.
The fact that the Chevalier's story is actually being told by another narrator might be easily forgotten. The unnamed narrator says near the beginning that he is quoting the Chevalier's words with no interference, thus as verbatim as possible, which to my 21st-century mind immediately brings up the idea of an unreliable narrator, and whether that might be the narrator himself or the Chevalier. While the motivations for deceptive narrating are very easy to see in the case of the Chevalier, and are undoubtedly within the text, thus adding to the complexity of the Chevalier's character, what would be the motivation for the narrator? To avoid looking like one of the Chevalier's dupes? In that case, the veracity of the whole story would come into question, though I don't think that should be the case. Then there is the character of Manon. We only know what the Chevalier says and thinks about her, and there is a case to be made that she is very different from his depiction.
I'm sure the Abbe intended this to be a tragedy, but it read as a comedy to me with its over-the-top adventures, even through to the climax, which at first seemed tragic but only for a moment as the next thing we learn becomes another event in a sort of 'comedy of errors.' The Chevalier calls all of this his "fate."
In the unhistorical depiction of colonial New Orleans, I found humor as well, perhaps unintentional (and perhaps because I am from N.O.), especially in a passage where the Chevalier is rapturous about the colony, sounding almost like a tourist brochure. I do think it very significant, though, that the lovers end up in a land where their class differences no longer matters, though religion and the law do.
I have no doubt that I am imposing my 21st-century sensibilities onto this 18th-c novel. The theme of trying to make sense of an irrational emotion such as love, however, seems universal.
The fact that the Chevalier's story is actually being told by another narrator might be easily forgotten. The unnamed narrator says near the beginning that he is quoting the Chevalier's words with no interference, thus as verbatim as possible, which to my 21st-century mind immediately brings up the idea of an unreliable narrator, and whether that might be the narrator himself or the Chevalier. While the motivations for deceptive narrating are very easy to see in the case of the Chevalier, and are undoubtedly within the text, thus adding to the complexity of the Chevalier's character, what would be the motivation for the narrator? To avoid looking like one of the Chevalier's dupes? In that case, the veracity of the whole story would come into question, though I don't think that should be the case. Then there is the character of Manon. We only know what the Chevalier says and thinks about her, and there is a case to be made that she is very different from his depiction.
I'm sure the Abbe intended this to be a tragedy, but it read as a comedy to me with its over-the-top adventures, even through to the climax, which at first seemed tragic but only for a moment as the next thing we learn becomes another event in a sort of 'comedy of errors.' The Chevalier calls all of this his "fate."
In the unhistorical depiction of colonial New Orleans, I found humor as well, perhaps unintentional (and perhaps because I am from N.O.), especially in a passage where the Chevalier is rapturous about the colony, sounding almost like a tourist brochure. I do think it very significant, though, that the lovers end up in a land where their class differences no longer matters, though religion and the law do.
I have no doubt that I am imposing my 21st-century sensibilities onto this 18th-c novel. The theme of trying to make sense of an irrational emotion such as love, however, seems universal.
September 3, 2024
قطعاً من در جایگاهی نیستم که بخوام اثری به این مهمی رو نقد کنم و هرچیزی که میخوام بگم صرفاً از دیدِ یک خوانندهست و بس.
اما با بخش هایی از این داستان مشکل داشتم. شاید یکی از دلایلش این باشه که تعداد تراژدیهایی که خوندم به تعدادِ انگشتای دست هم نمیرسه و یک مقدار فضای داستانهای این چنینی، برام غریبه.
اما اول از همه با پایانبندیِ داستان مشکل داشتم. حس میکنم یه مقدار برای اون حجم از شور و اشتیاق و هیجان، ساده و سرسری بود.
بعد از اون اما مشکلم با شخصیت ها بود. در طولِ روایتِ شوالیه دگریو، اتفاقات جوری پیش میرن که انگار دگریو جوانِ ساده و دست و پاچلفتی ای هست که تنها گناهش عشق بی حد و حصرش به مانونِ خیانتکار و جفاکاره.
در حالیکه به نظرم شوالیه دگریو شخصیتِ به شدت خودشیفته ای داره که هر سختی ای رو به جون میخره که فقط عشق و احساسش به مانون رو داشته باشه حتی اگه به قیمتِ بدبختی و از دست رفتن جونِ مانون باشه.
و اما مانون! نتونستم از درست و راست بودنِ احساساتش به شوالیه دگریو مطمئن شم. یه جاهایی باورناپذیر بود و یه جاهایی برعکس.
و خب به نظرم این ها همه نشون دهندهی پیچیدگیِ شخصیتهاست و در نهایت رسیدن به این نکته که اشخاص تماماً سیاه یا سفید نیستن.
———————————————————————————-
کتاب رو در قشنگ ترین و آروم ترین جایی که تو این چند وقتِ اخیر دیدم، تموم کردم. کافه ای که فکر کنم پاتوقم شده و با پلیلیستِ خفنش،خوندن این کتاب رو برام خیلی لذت بخش کرد.😭
اما با بخش هایی از این داستان مشکل داشتم. شاید یکی از دلایلش این باشه که تعداد تراژدیهایی که خوندم به تعدادِ انگشتای دست هم نمیرسه و یک مقدار فضای داستانهای این چنینی، برام غریبه.
اما اول از همه با پایانبندیِ داستان مشکل داشتم. حس میکنم یه مقدار برای اون حجم از شور و اشتیاق و هیجان، ساده و سرسری بود.
بعد از اون اما مشکلم با شخصیت ها بود. در طولِ روایتِ شوالیه دگریو، اتفاقات جوری پیش میرن که انگار دگریو جوانِ ساده و دست و پاچلفتی ای هست که تنها گناهش عشق بی حد و حصرش به مانونِ خیانتکار و جفاکاره.
در حالیکه به نظرم شوالیه دگریو شخصیتِ به شدت خودشیفته ای داره که هر سختی ای رو به جون میخره که فقط عشق و احساسش به مانون رو داشته باشه حتی اگه به قیمتِ بدبختی و از دست رفتن جونِ مانون باشه.
و اما مانون! نتونستم از درست و راست بودنِ احساساتش به شوالیه دگریو مطمئن شم. یه جاهایی باورناپذیر بود و یه جاهایی برعکس.
و خب به نظرم این ها همه نشون دهندهی پیچیدگیِ شخصیتهاست و در نهایت رسیدن به این نکته که اشخاص تماماً سیاه یا سفید نیستن.
———————————————————————————-
کتاب رو در قشنگ ترین و آروم ترین جایی که تو این چند وقتِ اخیر دیدم، تموم کردم. کافه ای که فکر کنم پاتوقم شده و با پلیلیستِ خفنش،خوندن این کتاب رو برام خیلی لذت بخش کرد.😭
June 17, 2024
Si DG avait pris des rendez-vous chez la psy, on aurait pu éviter un tel ouvrage
July 23, 2013
Wow, how do I start this? Because trying to collect my thoughts about this book is a bit like trying to collect body parts of a pedestrian smeared all over the road by a car. This is one train wreck of a book, because it doesn't work on any level - it fails to be a compelling story, it blows as a cautionary tale and it is most certainly is not a believable psychological portrait. But, as spectacular accidents do, it is weirdly fascinating to watch all the gruesome details while being repulsed by them at the same time. I'll look at some of them now to examine the true catastrophe that is "Manon Lescaut".
At first, this books seems to be an innocent novel in the spirit of a morality tale. We have Chevalier des Grieux, a boy, who is desperately in love with a woman who does not deserve his noble feelings. Not the most original of plots, but there are masterpieces that use this plot device (vide "The Great Gatsby") so I won't hold this against the novel. Later on we see how the poor lad is torn between virtue, represented by his friend Tiberge who wants to become a priest, and passion/love for a young woman called Manon Lescaut.
It doesn't take long to see the emerging problems. First off, all the characters are mechanical - they seem programmed to do everything, because they they react the same way to everything that happens and it looks as if they learn nothing from that. Really, take a shot each time Des Grieux does something stupid out of love, Tiberge gives Des Grieux money and/or a lecture or Manon acts as if she loves the protagonist but betrays him instead, and see how long you will stay sober. This, repetitiveness makes it impossible to invest emotionally in the story because it makes these characters seem completely retarded, because they NEVER learn from the consequences of their actions. That is particularly true for the protagonist whose "love" (I'll explain later why I've put this word in quotation marks) makes him completely abandon self-preservation of any kind, what makes him completely unrelatable to (and he is SO STUPID that I just want to SCREAM with frustration; seriously, at one point in the story he tries to dig a grave with an epee. A goddamned epee!!!). Ultimately that's what makes this book's population of characters mere symbols (des Grieux as the best possible person, young age could muster, Manon as the emptiest of women etc.) who are presented to us to teach us a moral lesson.
I admit, that's a lot of hard feelings that I have, so I'll show an act of kindness and pretend this book depicts real people, not symbols. What happens now? Well, it turns out it gets worse still. First off, in a work of fiction, that is supposedly about love, I see no love whatsoever. I'll even go on a limb and say that there is not one character that truly loves another (and here I assume my definition of love, which is to WISELY care about and SELFLESSLY act on the behalf of the OTHER person). This is obvious in the case of Manon, who prefers comfort and wealth to love and Tiberge whose friendship with des Grieux – is limited to giving the latter money without thinking if it's the right thing to do and uses every opportunity to lecture him (what I see as a need to boast about his assumed moral superiority).
"Well, but what about the poor, love-sick des Grieux?” some of you might ask. Well, my dear readers, this character is the worst of all of them. He thinks he loves Manon, but the truth is, he does not - he just needs an object of worship, which is supposed to give HIM purpose to live. Also, he does not act selflessly - he just does what might minimize the chance that Manon leaves him without caring if his actions will make her a better person (and I DO believe that the materialistic urges of hers that he mindlessly satisfies achieve the contrarian effect). It is worth adding that not only does this feeling serve mainly him, but it is brutally superficial too – at one point in the book des Grieux admits that he mainly admires Manon for her looks. Finally, because of this „love”, the idealistic des Grieux commits the following:
-gambling
-lying
-cheating
-murdering.
This guy is a psychopath... And a selfish idiot.
On a final note, I might add that this book contains some of the most skimmed over details that I have ever seen (and I like it when Haruki Murakami or F. Scott Fitzgerald does it, but Jesus Christ, it needs to be done skillfully!). The most laughable part was when .
Well, that is all. To sum up I'll say that this is one of the WORST books I've ever read and certainly the most annoying next to the feminist utopia „Herland” by Charlotte Perkins Gilman. „Manon Lescaut” is to be avoided at all cost (especially if you highly value equality in a relationship!) unless you can approach it with a sense of humour. Because if you can you'll have a riot. To those of you I say: ”Have more fun than I did.”.
October 26, 2025
I remember Manon Lescaut as pretty much of a sad, tragic tale, which I read during my own descent into romantic love. (I say 'descent' since 'falling' in love historically implies that you become less of who you have been and share a large portion of yourself with another person, of course increasing your worth as a human being.) I had just arrived in Athens and a girl I met was reading Manon Lescaut for her course at Pierce College in Athens, a private women's college located in the Kolonaki area of the city.
I have already written a review of The Painted Bird, which I was reading when I met this young lady, and I had advised her that Painted Bird was not a very good novel. She in turn handed me her text of Manon Lescaut that she was reporting on for her professor.
It is a classic tale of love written in the French style of a "recit". I quote literary critic Roger Shattuck's explanation of what a recit is: "During a récit, we are conscious of being at one remove from the action; the very act of narration interferes and calls attention to itself." In addition, he cites a few writers of this genre such as Andre Gide.
Also, Manon winds up in the deep part of Louisiana with which I am familiar and have many relatives living there now. At least for me I felt a kinship with the Chevalier des Grieux and Manon Lescaut, and this in some way may have brought me closer to the 'objet' of my desires. A long time ago. but the ember is still bright in my memory and has been for more than 5 decades.
I have already written a review of The Painted Bird, which I was reading when I met this young lady, and I had advised her that Painted Bird was not a very good novel. She in turn handed me her text of Manon Lescaut that she was reporting on for her professor.
It is a classic tale of love written in the French style of a "recit". I quote literary critic Roger Shattuck's explanation of what a recit is: "During a récit, we are conscious of being at one remove from the action; the very act of narration interferes and calls attention to itself." In addition, he cites a few writers of this genre such as Andre Gide.
Also, Manon winds up in the deep part of Louisiana with which I am familiar and have many relatives living there now. At least for me I felt a kinship with the Chevalier des Grieux and Manon Lescaut, and this in some way may have brought me closer to the 'objet' of my desires. A long time ago. but the ember is still bright in my memory and has been for more than 5 decades.
September 26, 2022
V-ați întrebat vreodată cât de multe compromisuri poate face cineva în numele iubirii?
Cartea aceasta, cumva exagerată în opinia mea, prezintă povestea cavalerului des Grieux, un tânăr pregătit pentru tagma ecleziastică, pentru o viață cinstită și cuminte, până când se îndrăgostește de Manon Lescaut, unul dintre cele mai superficiale personaje feminine pe care le-am întâlnit eu, cel puțin în literatura clasică.
Manon se va dovedi o femeie de moravuri ușoare, ispitită de viața luxoasă pe care tânărul ei cavaler nu i-o poate oferi, cel puțin nu pe cale cinstită.
Multă tradare, multă gelozie, dar și înflăcărată pasiune care atrage după sine înșelăciuni și omoruri.
Cu toate acestea, acțiunea este ciclică, deci repetitivă, iar personajele nu m-au atras. Am notat-o cu 3 stele, nu pot să-mi justific nota, însă, deci mă declar puțin dezamăgită de lectură.
"La urma urmei, amorul e un dascăl bun; soarta nu ne-ar putea pricinui atâtea suferințe câte plăceri ne face el să gustăm."
"Nouă, numai dragostea și tinerețea ne pricinuiseră toate nenorocirile."
Cartea aceasta, cumva exagerată în opinia mea, prezintă povestea cavalerului des Grieux, un tânăr pregătit pentru tagma ecleziastică, pentru o viață cinstită și cuminte, până când se îndrăgostește de Manon Lescaut, unul dintre cele mai superficiale personaje feminine pe care le-am întâlnit eu, cel puțin în literatura clasică.
Manon se va dovedi o femeie de moravuri ușoare, ispitită de viața luxoasă pe care tânărul ei cavaler nu i-o poate oferi, cel puțin nu pe cale cinstită.
Multă tradare, multă gelozie, dar și înflăcărată pasiune care atrage după sine înșelăciuni și omoruri.
Cu toate acestea, acțiunea este ciclică, deci repetitivă, iar personajele nu m-au atras. Am notat-o cu 3 stele, nu pot să-mi justific nota, însă, deci mă declar puțin dezamăgită de lectură.
"La urma urmei, amorul e un dascăl bun; soarta nu ne-ar putea pricinui atâtea suferințe câte plăceri ne face el să gustăm."
"Nouă, numai dragostea și tinerețea ne pricinuiseră toate nenorocirile."
February 5, 2020
Thầy dòng Prévost viết đã hay, mà bản dịch của Nguyễn Văn Vĩnh tiên-sinh tài-tình cũng lắm, quả là một cuộc đọc sung-sướng cho kẻ hậu-sinh.
Read
August 16, 2025she lied
he believed
he believed
November 20, 2020
"Girl from Wrong Side of Town Jinxes Silver Spooner"
Many years ago I read the classic Chinese novel "Chin Ping Mei" in which overindulgence in sex, wine, and food occurs so regularly that by the end of the hundreds of pages, the reader is glutted and uninterested in more. This, people say, was the Buddhist message of the novel-that the sensual, material world is meaningless. MANON LESCAUT reminded me of that novel because the single moralizing theme-how a talented young aristocrat who falls madly in love with a girl of dubious character wastes his life-dominates so completely that nothing else really matters. The various characters, while potentially interesting, are never built up much, due to subordination to the moral lesson. No matter how many times the beautiful Manon betrays her impetuous lover, he forgives her and indulges in his passion more than ever. His father and friends despair. Jail, murder, betrayal, gambling, prostitution, and eventual exile are only some of the results this passion delivers. The denouement of the novel occurs in far-off New Orleans, about which, it seemed to me, the author had absolutely no idea. An opera was later written based on this minor classic of French literature. I could not say that it is a wonderful piece of writing, nor that many readers will thrill to its ups and downs. You can read it in a short while; it will hold your attention and you will have the satisfaction of being able to say you read it. But, at the end of the day, French literature offers a lot more than MANON LESCAUT.
Many years ago I read the classic Chinese novel "Chin Ping Mei" in which overindulgence in sex, wine, and food occurs so regularly that by the end of the hundreds of pages, the reader is glutted and uninterested in more. This, people say, was the Buddhist message of the novel-that the sensual, material world is meaningless. MANON LESCAUT reminded me of that novel because the single moralizing theme-how a talented young aristocrat who falls madly in love with a girl of dubious character wastes his life-dominates so completely that nothing else really matters. The various characters, while potentially interesting, are never built up much, due to subordination to the moral lesson. No matter how many times the beautiful Manon betrays her impetuous lover, he forgives her and indulges in his passion more than ever. His father and friends despair. Jail, murder, betrayal, gambling, prostitution, and eventual exile are only some of the results this passion delivers. The denouement of the novel occurs in far-off New Orleans, about which, it seemed to me, the author had absolutely no idea. An opera was later written based on this minor classic of French literature. I could not say that it is a wonderful piece of writing, nor that many readers will thrill to its ups and downs. You can read it in a short while; it will hold your attention and you will have the satisfaction of being able to say you read it. But, at the end of the day, French literature offers a lot more than MANON LESCAUT.
October 29, 2021
This is quite honestly one of my favorite works of the 18th century, and one of my favorite French novels. Heavily challenged and censored, it is a story that presents the concept of “love” as the twisted, tyrannical, and deleterious thing it really is, especially for the time and context it was written in. Also, the action eventually arrived at Louisiana. What else could you want?!
March 19, 2025
عشق احمقانه-
June 15, 2013
Deeply misogynist, self-centered and completely idiotic singular narration, Manon Lescaut are possibly one of the worst novel I had ever encounter in French literature. Considering, I have read a lot of Marquis de Sade book that is an accomplishment. I think this is possibly a worst definition of romanticism in history of time.
What Stephenie Meyer's Twilight and Prevost's Manon Lescaut had in common was a complete joke of a first narrator and the confused definition of love between the two POV character. Its not love when you became enslaved to the person where you obsess every second in life and are blind to their faults and accepting the bullshit they do to you in the name of 'love'. On contrary, this book completely alienate a woman sorely because she's a woman with flaws while totally ignoring the rest of the judgmental and hypocrite characters.
Since I read this for the Brown's Fiction of Relationship syllabus, I get the whole relationship aspect and the feelings that Prevost induce in the readers. But I can't help feeling like a feminist bitch while reading this novel because every pages of this novel is about a whiny boy worshiping a girl and is filled with constant sex metaphors and female demonization than I can't help but wanting to burn the book. (I have ebook, it got lucky). I usually tolerated explicit sexual narration and a degree of female submission but all of these high handed and moralistic value and the continued subjugation of a teenage girl is nausea inducing.
I can't accept the excuse for this atrocious novel to be as it is because it was written 300 years ago in some backward 1700s when even in 21st century, women are continuously being objectified as sexual product brought to bring a man's utter misery for being a woman. Have you even open your TV or read stupid shared messages on how a woman was made to please men and how a woman have to be submissive and not shining above men and snubbed because of her gender that are non-religiously sanctioned. The issues with this novel on a woman is real and in front of us.
The more we give a gentle slap on the hand about how misogynist this novel is and how I have to find the values in the mess of a monologue of a guy having a hard time trying to understand his animalistic attraction with a girl while conveniently ruin her life and his completely that he constantly blames her while being so incoherent with his feelings with her. This is ridiculous!
This novel is plain perverted teenage angst except with every single page filled with sex metaphors that it became overwhelming enough that it basically clouded any plot in it. Yeah, there's murder, infidelity, "diamonds are a girl best friend" mentality and etc. Unless you can read French and want to suffer through the "woman as the fruit of evil in men" subtext, skip this book before you suffer from PTSD.
What Stephenie Meyer's Twilight and Prevost's Manon Lescaut had in common was a complete joke of a first narrator and the confused definition of love between the two POV character. Its not love when you became enslaved to the person where you obsess every second in life and are blind to their faults and accepting the bullshit they do to you in the name of 'love'. On contrary, this book completely alienate a woman sorely because she's a woman with flaws while totally ignoring the rest of the judgmental and hypocrite characters.
Since I read this for the Brown's Fiction of Relationship syllabus, I get the whole relationship aspect and the feelings that Prevost induce in the readers. But I can't help feeling like a feminist bitch while reading this novel because every pages of this novel is about a whiny boy worshiping a girl and is filled with constant sex metaphors and female demonization than I can't help but wanting to burn the book. (I have ebook, it got lucky). I usually tolerated explicit sexual narration and a degree of female submission but all of these high handed and moralistic value and the continued subjugation of a teenage girl is nausea inducing.
I can't accept the excuse for this atrocious novel to be as it is because it was written 300 years ago in some backward 1700s when even in 21st century, women are continuously being objectified as sexual product brought to bring a man's utter misery for being a woman. Have you even open your TV or read stupid shared messages on how a woman was made to please men and how a woman have to be submissive and not shining above men and snubbed because of her gender that are non-religiously sanctioned. The issues with this novel on a woman is real and in front of us.
The more we give a gentle slap on the hand about how misogynist this novel is and how I have to find the values in the mess of a monologue of a guy having a hard time trying to understand his animalistic attraction with a girl while conveniently ruin her life and his completely that he constantly blames her while being so incoherent with his feelings with her. This is ridiculous!
This novel is plain perverted teenage angst except with every single page filled with sex metaphors that it became overwhelming enough that it basically clouded any plot in it. Yeah, there's murder, infidelity, "diamonds are a girl best friend" mentality and etc. Unless you can read French and want to suffer through the "woman as the fruit of evil in men" subtext, skip this book before you suffer from PTSD.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 1,146 reviews