The Readers Review: Literature from 1714 to 1910 discussion

This is the thread where you can comment and share your ideas, pertaining to chapter V. The chapter is one of the longest one in the novel, so the discussion officially lasts for two weeks. I will try to open other threads earlier for those who are ahead of the reading schedule.

Zola returns us back to the young lovers of the first chapter. The mood of the chapter changes dramatically. It starts as a happy, magical story with two young, naïve, and sweet souls discovering each other, learning about each other, overcome the obstacles and hardship to be together. The story of the well as a means of communication still fascinates me, but mechanically, I find it hard to imagine. The well with fresh water is also a symbol of their purity and chastity. They first fell in love with their images and echoed voices; only once were they granted a chance to bypass the wall that separates them. The magical description of the garden and light that was originally euphoric and ebullient turned, in the eyes of Aunt Dide, into a painful reminder of her past life.
Zola definitely underlines many times that their love was not consummated, and for everyone with the bourgeois ideas of decency, Miette and Silvere were innocent lovers, but the other, deeper intimacies are quite obvious for an attentive reader. The passionate kisses, the desire they both feel, the swimming experiences , they are all very explicit and very sensuous. Both lovers are on the verge of carnal knowledge.
I also 'enjoyed' how Zola gradually introduced the theme of darkness and death. The opening scenes of the rebellion serve as bleak and unpleasant harbingers of the upcoming carnage. The morbid scene at the cemetery only foreshadows more what is going to happen. And the culmination is the saddest scene in the novel – the death of the naïve, brave, and spirited Miette. One can only speculate how it can affect and change Silvere.
I find this chapter both slow-paced and intensive. Some parts were filled with doom, darkness, and intense emotions. Other dragged, but eventually all of them helped to create a multifaceted and personal outlook on revolution. The ideas of any revolution are always noble and justifiable, but only the ideas. The sobriety and the disillusionment usually come very quickly. The other plus of this chapter is how Zola manages to incorporate the personal perspective and the panoramic outlook. Now, I think it is safe to assume that the unsuccessful attempt to change anything will only lead to a political conservative reaction …

The garden and other locations where the young people meet are like the Garden of Eden. They are innocent though disturbed by the feelings they don't understand. In the present day, their first real kiss also frightens them, but at the end Miette's one regret is dying a virgin. Her death is so sudden and there isn't a lot of gore, which makes it hard for Silvere to believe she is really dead.

Imagine a Victorian girl, a certain Nell, having the same thoughts. The two very different worlds!

I thought in a way it was odd that they were so innocent living in a rural community and at a time when children slept in the same room or even bed as adults. But both young people were isolated, not living with parents, and not having friends near their age who might have filled them in on the facts of life. Silvere being so idealistic and theoretical about life probably ignored any jokes or comments by his coworkers that might have enlightened him.

It was lucky for Miette that Silvere was such a gentleman. She could have been either wooed and taken advantage of, or just violated, by someone of lesser scruples. I wondered if her uncle would suddenly realize she could be good for something besides field work.

Robin wrote: "It was lucky for Miette that Silvere was such a gentleman. She could have been either wooed and taken advantage of, or just violated, by someone of lesser scruples. I wondered if her uncle would suddenly realize she could be good for something besides field work. "

Wasn't that why she started escaping at night? Because I haven't read this recently, I don't recall the relationship, but there was someone she knew not to be found alone with. And I think Silvere did know the facts of life, although I can't say why I think so. I just thought he was respectful.

I think she was more or less trying to avoid notice of her uncle. She was constantly on guard against her cousin, Justin, as he tormented her at every opportunity.

This is my second reading of "The Fortune..." and I find myself even more disturbed by the disaffected relationships of everyone. Children and their guardians, spouses, friends, government entities. Everyone and everything is simply a commodity, with the very notable exceptions of the altruistic and intimate passion of Miette and Silvere and the care and respect Silvere shows toward his aunt.

Good point, Ron, Silvere is the odd character is this world, being idealistic, empathetic, caretaking, and not driven by money. If this were a Dickens novel, Silvere would have some kind of nobility in his past that caused these traits to show up. With Zola's interest in genetics, how does he explain these traits that actually aren't good for survival? Silvere was horrified by his first battle and relieved that he didn't actually kill anyone.

Robin wrote: "Good point, Ron, Silvere is the odd character is this world, being idealistic, empathetic, caretaking, and not driven by money. If this were a Dickens novel, Silvere would have some kind of nobilit..."
I think that like Balzac Zola was embittered by the way the ideals of the French Revolution had been vanquished by greed and ambition and he wanted to show that it was innocents like Silvere who were its victims.

Lisa wrote: "I think that like Balzac Zola was embittered by the way the ideals of the French Revolution had been vanquished by greed and ambition"


One can obviously see some of his frustrations. On the other hand, people like Macquart, can convert a revolutionary romantic into a conservative...

Zola is of the Naturalism movement of literature. He just tells it like it is/was without judgment.

Well, in theory he is telling it without judgment, but he is choosing what to show us and how to tell it. Similarly journalism and history are both about facts but we know that someone chooses and arranges the "facts".

He is coming from a new angle, since earlier authors often tried to use fiction to convert the readers to a view, or to make a moral point. Stendhal has a quote about how an author is just carrying a mirror along a road and the reader shouldn't complain if sometimes they see mud (or something like that)

Robin wrote: "Well, in theory he is telling it without judgment, but he is choosing what to show us and how to tell it. Similarly journalism and history are both about facts but we know that someone chooses and..."
Yes. I agree. And with this cycle of books in particular he is pushing his eugenics barrel. This 'first' one is a great story and so are the other two that I've read (Germinal and The Ladies' Paradise) but IMO they have been constructed to 'prove' Zola's (now discredited) belief that personality and behaviour are determined by heredity, because the 'good' branch of the family thrives and prospers and the 'bad' branch become thieves and prostitutes. All his material (plot and characterisation) is directed to developing this theory, and his naturalism is targeted at describing lives that are consistent with his beliefs about this. So I would argue that while this isn't a didactic work or a work to convert readers to his PoV, it is making a moral point nonetheless. As Wikipedia says
"the series traces the "environmental" influences of violence, alcohol and prostitution which became more prevalent during the second wave of the Industrial Revolution. The series examines two branches of a family: the respectable (that is, legitimate) Rougons and the disreputable (illegitimate) Macquarts for five generations".
His naturalism I think comes from describing the underbelly of French life as it was rather than sentimentalising it or ignoring it completely as earlier writers did.

Lisa wrote: "Robin wrote: "Well, in theory he is telling it without judgment, but he is choosing what to show us and how to tell it. Similarly journalism and history are both about facts but we know that someo..."

On re-reading some of these books I find I am a little more in tune to the whole "naturalism" aspect. It can be a challenge to keep that family tree in view. Keeping in mind that Silvère was clearly a considerate caring individual and, if I'm not mistaken, a Macquart, I wonder if we may find less obvious character distinctions within the two pedigrees as we continue. There may be more subtlety to Zola than I initially realized. This could be a problem for me. I stink at subtlety.

I've just finished this chapter and I have to say I was shocked by Miette's death-after so carefully constructing the characters and the intense description of the courtship and mutual affection of this young couple I had assumed they would be founding a dynasty.

Good point Zulfiya about the contrast between the charged eroticism of this chapter concerning a 13 year old girl and her 17 yo young man and the complete innocence of the older Dickens' teens such as Nell or Florence. I felt that Silvere did know the facts of life and was protecting Miette from the ridicule that would clearly come her way if she became pregnant-seen in Justin's sneering comments towards her when he sees her with the marchers. One other little point in Silvere's favour-I loved how much he admired Miette for her strength and her sturdiness-again a contrast from the Dickensian world where the admirable female is one who needs protection.

I'm not so clear on the Naturalism question-I believe that we are clearly influenced by our genetics, our upbringing and the circumstances into which we are born-and so you can certainly see family traits that follow from parent to child-something as simple as if you are raised in a loving home versus an abusive one that will colour how you raise your own children to much more complex ideas around personality and intelligence-the whole Nature vs Nurture question. However this is an incredibly complex process and one can never predict what children will be like by looking at the parents. It isn't clear to me what Zola's PoV is here for, as Ron points out, the most admirable character so far-Silvere-is a Macquart.

Frances wrote: " ... the most admirable character so far-Silvere-is a Macquart.
"

Silvere is easily the most likeable character. We want to relate to him, to see how he pursues his dreams, to live with him. Macquart, on the other hand, is the most disturbing, comic, but also surprisingly realistic. Had he been born in more favorable conditions and belonged to the upper crust, he would have turned into a perfect, strategically compliant politician whope personal gain overcomes any moral checks or qualms.

Lisa wrote @9: "...he wanted to show that it was innocents like Silvere who were its victims."

True, but I think most French readers would also associate Silvère with Saint-Juste, the youngest one of the leaders of the revolutionary terror. Now and then Zola seems to suggest that in the appropriate circumstances Silvère too would be capable of horrible deeds (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louis_An...).

Jack wrote: " Seems to me that almost everyone else focuses on nothing more than bettering themselves in the swirling political environment. "

Political and financial profiteering seems to be the core topics Zola tackled in his novel; and the outlook is quite grim ...

Jack wrote: "Good thing we've gotten beyond that in today's enlightened society. ;-(
Jack"

We have indeed evolved .... elsewhere, in a galaxy far far away ....

*sardonic chuckle of agreement*