French Lieutenants Woman

What Our Readers Are Saying

Share your thoughts on this title!

Average customer rating 4.5 (4 comments)

---

`

"But I live in the age of Alain Robbe-Gillet and Roland Barthes; if this is a novel, it cannot be a novel in the modern sense of the word." English writer re-imagines the Victorian novel for the modern era. While remaining faithful to the form and themes of 19th century novels, he also inserts what could not be part of those novels, namely sex and characters discussing controversial subjects like Darwin, the fossil record, socialism, and evolution. Marx and Tennyson provide many of the chapter's epigraphs. Fowles, like a good post-modernist, addresses the reader, which astute readers will know is actually an old device that goes back to the roots of the English novel (Fielding, Smollett). Unlike many post-modernists, this works both as a conventional novel and as a play on a novel. If you've seen the film (Harold Pinter did the screenplay), which added a present-set storyline, the book is far more creative, provocative, and absorbing. Also check out "The Collector" by the same author.

`

It’s the 1860s. An English couple, Ernestina and Charles, walk together along a beach. He is a member of the aristocracy; she is spoiled and rich. They see from afar a mysterious woman standing still, staring out to sea. Ernestina tells Charles that the woman is variously called “the French lieutenant’s whore” and “Tragedy”; she had an affair with a French lieutenant who went home and was never heard from again. Charles becomes curious. The mysterious woman, Sarah, will keep you guessing throughout, right to the very end. You’ll think she’s pitiful, then you’ll wonder if she’s crazy, then you think she may be mean, and round and round. THE FRENCH LIEUTENANT’S WOMAN by John Fowles, written in 1969, is a Victorian-sounding novel. Fowles mimics the style of, maybe, Jane Austen or maybe Charles Dickens. At the same time, he interjects his own voice and compares the Victorian age with modern (1969) times. This book is, although long, not long enough. When you read it, get very comfortable; you won’t want to put it down. And you’ll hate to see it end.

`

John Fowles' book is more than just a beautifully written Victorian love triangle. When I first read this book in my twenties, I was disappointed that the writer didn't stick to the formula, and kept "interrupting" with a modern view of the era's social mores. Now that I'm rereading the book, I am fascinated with the author's balancing act. If you read this -- perhaps as a school assignment --and dismissed it like I did, give it another try!

`

The first half of this novel struck me as a more forward version of "The End of the Affair." A man in a strict society is engaged to the perfect woman produced by aforesaid society but his heart is stolen by a fallen woman who stands for everything society disdains but who appeals to us as readers because of her beauty and independence. Same reason she appeals to him. But anyway. This book does proceed very much like "Affair" except that it does it in a much more critical manner. It seems as if all through the novel, Fowles is taking a scientific look at just what made the Victorian Era click and what was wrong with it. Or what was right with it in some cases. Sometimes the scientific aspect got to be just a little much for me. I couldn't tell what was Charles talking and what was the author and what was Dr. Grogan. Fowles makes no bones about how hard it is to control characters if you want them to be truly realistic and often complains about how much trouble he has writing about Charles and Sarah. He even goes so far as to insert himself as a character in the book so he can examine his characters "in person." This brings him to the conclusion that he cannot tell what would really happen with his characters, so he provides three separate endings for the novel. And if you ever read this book, I'd be interested in hearing your opinion on which would be most likely to be the truest ending.