Reading Proust

[Conchis]

Hold on...you've read Proust, haven't you?




.

[jayne lee wilson]

Hold on...you've read Proust, haven't you? W&P should be a walk in the park for you....

No, I only managed Swann's Way. My mother did read all of it, in her early nineties, taking about a year.

[Conchis]

No, I only managed Swann's Way. My mother did read all of it, in her early nineties, taking about a year.

Pretty good going: it took me from May to December to read the whole opus.

A very good book to read in early middle-age, I think.

[vinteuil]

A very good book to read in early middle-age, I think.

... yes. Tho' there is also something to be said for reading Proust first when young, because you then will have more chances to re-read it later in life, when it will all make much more sense. And then later still, you can read the bits or sections that you want to without having the feeling you need to read / re-read the whole thing.

[Conchis]

... yes. Tho' there is also something to be said for reading Proust first when young, because you then will have more chances to re-read it later in life, when it will all make much more sense. And then later still, you can read the bits or sections that you want to without having the feeling you need to read / re-read the whole thing.

I was 45 when I first read it and I'm now 48. Would you advise another run-through in seven years' time?

[vinteuil]

I was 45 when I first read it and I'm now 48. Would you advise another run-through in seven years' time?

... o to be so young!

I first read it in my twenties, and several more times in my twenties and thirties. In my forties I read it in parts, missing out the more tiresome bits about Albertine. In my fifties I just loved reading my favourite parts (Combray, Balbec, the final volume). In my sixties, time for a full re-read, I think...

Just read it whenever the fancy takes you! - And since you've now read it - when re-reading don't feel guilty about skipping bits...

.

[Conchis]

... o to be so young!

I first read it in my twenties, and several more times in my twenties and thirties. In my forties I read it in parts, missing out the more tiresome bits about Albertine. In my fifties I just loved reading my favourite parts (Combray, Balbec, the final volume). In my sixties, time for a full re-read, I think...

Just read it whenever the fancy takes you! - And since you've now read it - when re-reading don't feel guilty about skipping bits...

.

... my first experience of Proust's great work is the one common to most people. I bought the first of the three volume Penguin edition, got the end of An Amour de Swann,then just didn't feel the strength or the inclination to go on. That was in my early thirties. I'm afraid I then fell into the camp of people who dismissed Proust (or, at least, Moncrieff) as so impossibly prissy and precious as to be unreadable. Some years later, after having read several other very long novels, I thought I'd better have another go and re-read the whole thing from the start. I'll admit to finding it very tough going but I finally accustomed myself to Proust's style and pace and by the end, I was left humbled, flabbergasted and changed. I don't believe the stuff people write about 'books that can change your life' - but whilst I don't think Proust's book changed my life, I think it did make me a better person! :)

.

[Nick Armstrong]

I finally accustomed myself to Proust's style and pace and by the end, I was left humbled, flabbergasted and changed.

With time for reading coming up on my horizon, this is on my agenda. I'm lucky enough to be able to read it in the original French; last time I was there, I compared the various current editions, and bought the preferable version (to my eyes) of Vol 1.

Last year, I devoured the rebroadcast on BBC 4extra of the 6 part dramatisation from a few years back with the likes of James Wilby, Harriet Walter, Imogen Stubbs and Corin Redgrave; I found it enthralling.

[Conchis]

With time for reading coming up on my horizon, this is on my agenda. I'm lucky enough to be able to read it in the original French; last time I was there, I compared the various current editions, and bought the preferable version (to my eyes) of Vol 1.

Last year, I devoured the rebroadcast on BBC 4extra of the 6 part dramatisation from a few years back with the likes of James Wilby, Harriet Walter, Imogen Stubbs and Corin Redgrave; I found it enthralling.

VERY envious of you being able to read it in the original.

I've yet to hear the radio dramatisation - I think this is a different one from the Pinter screenplay that was adapted for radio round about the turn of the century and staged at the NT in the same timeframe.

Btw: Pinter's unfilmed screenplay has been published and is available and I would certainly recommend reading it AFTER you've read the novel. I think the screenplay is a work of genius - as good, in its way, as the novel (though not comparable). I can't decide whether it's a blessing or a tragedy that it was never actually filmed.

[vinteuil]

I'm lucky enough to be able to read it in the original French; last time I was there, I compared the various current editions, and bought the preferable version (to my eyes) of Vol 1.

... and which edition do you prefer?

I'm with Tarquin Winot in my preference for "the Pléiade set ... the three-volume edition of 1954, with the silly foreword by André Maurois, rather than the portentous, over-annotated and illogically divided four-volume edition of 1987".

Tho' there is something to be said for scruffy paperback copies where it doesn't matter if stray evidence of good meals eaten and good wine drunk makes its way on to the pages...

[Nick Armstrong]

... and which edition do you prefer?

I'm with Tarquin Winot in my preference for "the Pléiade set ... the three-volume edition of 1954, with the silly foreword by André Maurois, rather than the portentous, over-annotated and illogically divided four-volume edition of 1987".

Tho' there is something to be said for scruffy paperback copies where it doesn't matter if stray evidence of good meals eaten and good wine drunk makes its way on to the pages...

I wanted something in the latter category which can travel with me. The current Pléaide edition was one of those I had a look at, but I dismissed it pretty much at once, largely on the grounds of the uninviting typeface of the text.

I do find typeface increasingly important - a bit like the acoustic of a restaurant, it can enhance the experience (or, of course, do the opposite).

On that ground, I simply went for Du côté... in the current Folio edition




.

Oooh but I do like the look of the 1954 Pléaide you mention. I love the style of those 1950s capitals on the cover.



I'd want to have a peek inside before investing though. A Google Image search is not obliging - I shall have to keep an eye out next time I'm having a bouquiniste-based rummage south of the Channel...

[vinteuil]

The current Pléaide edition was one of those I had a look at, but I dismissed it pretty much at once, largely on the grounds of the uninviting typeface of the text.

I do find typeface increasingly important .... On that ground, I simply went for Du côté... in the current Folio edition
.

... the Pléiade and the folio paperbacks both use garamond, the classic font of the maison-mère, Gallimard.

The Pléiade is at 9-point, perhaps the folio has a larger type size. The Pléiade is of course on bible-paper.

http://www.garamond.culture.fr/fr/page/le_garamond_dans_l_edition_contemporaine

https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Folio_(Gallimard)

http://paris.blog.lemonde.fr/2006/09/21/2006_09_garamond_vs_gar/

http://barneycarroll.com/garamond.htm

... and I like the comparison between various garamond typefaces and various performances of the Bach cello suites :

http://paris.blog.lemonde.fr/2007/02/23/viloloncelle-vs-violoncelle-autant-de-differences-quentre-deux-dessins-du-garamond/

[And I've learnt something today : I never knew that the French for typeface was police ... ]

[french frank]

I invested in the Pléiade edition as a student: the volume prices are still in pencil on the original slip cases. Oh, volume 1 seems to have rubbed off, but the others were £3.1.6 and £3.3.0. It's the edition with the Maurois introduction but was printed on 19 avril, 1963, 'sur bible bolloré'. Each volume has a different portrait of Proust. Nice

I'm not sure that I've ever read Tome II

[vinteuil]

I'm not sure that I've ever read Tome II

... that's all right - I promise not to give any spoilers. But it was Madeleine what dun it...

[french frank]

... that's all right - I promise not to give any spoilers. But it was Madeleine what dun it...

I don't know your Madeleine. Just about the little Albertine cakes: