The Readers Review: Literature from 1714 to 1910 discussion

The next two chapters are very distinct in style and tone, but they mostly focus more on people around Saccard, Madame Caroline, Maxime, and the speculation clique.

Zola exposes poverty on a surgical level. On the one hand, he is very level-headed in his descriptions; on the other hand, he is precise as a surgeon because his statements lacerate and cut the surface of comfort with the precision of a scalpel.

At the same time, he does not turn the poor into the noble poor as Dickens often does. Saccard's illegitimate child is a child who easily succumbs to the same vices the rich people do in Zola's novels.

I have changed my opinion of Madam Caroline. She seemed to be an efficient but self-seeking manager. In this chapter, she is mostly driven by her unfulfilled motherly instinct and a desire to help. Right now, she is the only moral compass for me in the novel, if it is possible to talk about a moral compass in the Zola's novels due to his naturalistic vision of literature and the world in general.

Chapter VI is a very interesting insight into the world of big money and politics. We always talk about how business occasionally benefits from politics, and this chapter is a perfect example how it is important for big money speculators to have an access to the corridors of power even if it is just a cursory look.

Conversely, we know there is something negative brewing that might undermine this venture: not all shares were sold and due to different smoke screen tactics, no one knows about this failure. So far, it has not complicated anyone's life, and Saccard is only reaping good pecuniary harvest, but for how long?

I'm still working on this section, but I wanted to say that when we got to the slum scene with its deprivation and degradation, I thought "THIS is how I remember Zola!" This is the sort of thing that made people want to ban his books or refuse to translate them literally.

The last few books have been largely about bourgeois and nouveau riche characters with many descriptions of luxurious settings. All the Zola I had read before was from the proletariat side, whether farmers, miners, or laborers, so i was surprised by that.

Dickens either had his impoverished children be sweet and clever like Oliver Twist, or sweet and slow like Smike or Jo. Even his fallen women aren't totally corrupted. Zola is undoubtedly more correct in depicting how a child would turn out in such a milieu.