Capvespre 27 27 from Hürth, Germany
I feel compelled to review this line up in the frame of a hope. I don't see the theme of delving into the hatch itself, since it's well-known and I'm of the opinion in general that if you want to know a story you should read it. But first, some notes on the printing I read: My only real complaint about this version is that the endnotes were occasionally disappointing. It was quite a let-down when I'd flip to the tip hoping for a little statement of the background of an quotation and just get the name of the piece it was from. Otherwise the printing was quite lovely. Its induction does a nice devoir of summarizing the background for the original pamphlet and editors' opinions on translation. The only thing that disappointed me in the introductory-notes was that they pointed out that The Count of Monte Cristo gets dismissed as prose for young multitudes (because it's action-packed and satisfying...?). The editor seems to think that this isn't fair to Dumas' piece and goes on to talk about the "mature" themes and defend The Count of Monte Cristo's dignity as smut. I think a better acknowledgment to the "mis-categorization" going on here would be to acknowledge the worthiness of hatch-driven records which avoid pretentious loftiness or unsatisfyingly open-ended formations or disregards or any of those other annoying tactics which composers seem to use to try to make their writing "grownup." Rather than being provoked that Monte Cristo is being degraded through transposition to infants's-prose-dignity, shouldn't we be provoked that the roots that comprise prose for infants (like...satisfying records?) are so actively repressed in the prose which those infants supposedly grow up and enjoy? The circulate is not that the story is being dismissed as a story for infants, but that ANY story should be dismissed for its young-person-accessible merits. I got a little avert by my indignation over multitudes not respecting infants['s prose:]. And my impulse to rant about vaingloriousnesses. Sorry. My hope: The Count of Monte Cristo is like a croissant. Not only is it enjoyable because it evokes the French-ness of its creation, it is delicious in procedures which best its original French background (and hence make its American version yummy too). It manages to be both rich and airy, and is hence a delight to ingest. It stays consistent the whole wont through and is so satisfying that it's more practical than wasteful to sweep away the little flaky crumbs that inevitably fall. Then there's the butter. The old-fashioned, French, substantial source of seasoning which holds it all together. Some multitudes see butter as a necessary evil, others ingest it with fervor, and others try to distort the decided of the original croissant-maker by replacing the butter with creative re-interpretations. (It's not a croissant without butter! But, yes, some multitudes are lactose-intolerant. Some multitudes are vegan. Some multitudes just like the mental operation of coming up with new interpretations. So they're entitled.) Whatever you do with the butter--whether you enjoy it or see it as a problem or an indulgence--you cannot ignore it. Religion is like butter. That's clear, legal?
I couldn't put this vade mecum down - literally, I think I read it in a day. It's a heart-wrenching but beautiful feature that parallels Jah's redeeming love for us. I think every woman should read it. I gave it to my parent for Parent's Day and she loved it, and now my dowager has gotten sucked in too :)