Muriel Barberry: The Elegance Of The Hedgehog

[nnyhav]

NYT: Muriel Barbery, The Elegance of the Hedgehog (trans Alison Anderson) [off the main NYT books page but on the NYTSBR one]

[Eric]

Thanks, Nnyhav, for drawing our attention to Muriel Barbery and her The Elegance of the Hedgehog. I had never heard of the author, nor even of the publisher:

Europaeditions - Home

And something about the translator of this book, who is also an author in her own right:

Europaeditions - Authors - Alison Anderson

I see that a second Barbery novel will be appearing next year in English translation, this one called Une Gourmandise in French.

The French Wiki article about the author is here:

Muriel Barbery - Wikip?dia

The hedgehog novel has sold around 600,000 copies in French. It'll be interesting to see whether the English translation sells as many.

[Stewart]

Thanks, Nnyhav, for drawing our attention to Muriel Barbery and her The Elegance of the Hedgehog. I had never heard of the author, nor even of the publisher:

Europaeditions - Home

In the UK it's out from Gallic Books.

[Eric]

Thanks, Stewart, I hadn't spotted that. Judging by all the hype, this book should sell a few hundred thousand copies in Britain too.

Gallic Books is new to me. Nice to see another specialist publishing house. The hedgehog book's been reviewed in the New Statesman. Let's hope it gets more British reviews. That NS review actually says something concrete about the translation:

Sadly, but not fatally, Alison Anderson's English translation mislays much of the poetry of the original. Literal rather than instinctive, it is uneven, inelegant and at times painfully infantilising: "saucisson" and "h?tel particulier" stay, but "coquilles Saint-Jacques" turn into "scallops in champagne sauce". When, as a favour for Ren?e, Manuela offers to bake an absolute abundance of pastries, her lovely answer to her friend's protests ("Me donner du mal? r?pond-elle. Mais Ren?e, c'est vous qui me donnez du bien depuis toutes ces ann?es!") becomes a sloppy "So much bother? But Ren?e, you are the one who has been going to a lot of bother for my sake all these years."
Perhaps one cannot re-create the play on donner du mal and faire du bien, but the sense of the original phrase should have been made clear: "Put myself out?".

So reviewer Heather Thompson is in my good books - she tackled the translation issue:

New Statesman - Charm and cleverness

[Stewart]

So reviewer Heather Thompson is in my good books - she tackled the translation issue:

Indeed. I've just seen a review of this in Metro, the national free paper, which has its fiction roundup every Thursday:

In a Parisian apartment block, a middle-aged, self-educated concierge mulls over phenomenology, while an over-achieving 12-year-old decides suicide is the only way to rebel against her bourgeois existence.

Ren?e and Paloma, the two characters at the heart of Muriel Barberry's touching second novel are kindred spirits. But both go to such great lengths to hide their intellect and philosophising, for fear they will become misunderstood, they only become friends by the books end. Through alternate chapters, the pair separately discuss their profound thoughts and suffering in the face of an uncultured and prejudiced society, before a newly arrived Japanese tenant senses a potential empathy and brings them together.

Many of these lofty passages are laborious to read (in part down to a French to English translation), yet amid the impenetrable sections is a sense of the literary beauty that made this novel a best-seller in France last year. A book of great charm and grace.

Zena Alkayat

I suppose when you've only got space enough for three paragraphs you try to get the flavour across, but I found the last paragraph a bit off, as if blaming the book for simply being a translation as the issue. At least Heather Thompson's review (above) gives a taste of where the translation errs.

[fausto]

I wonder what she means by impenetrable. The translator would really have to botch its job to make sections of this very simple book "impenetrable".

[saliotthomas]

So i came to it with a bad a-priori,to much fuss,to smart an idea,but really liked it.
The story of Ren?e,the caretaker of expensive appartements in Paris(400 m squarre flats).Caretaker is an old Parisian tradition,the usualy live in the ground floor,are vindictive,spy on every one,watch soap opera all day,and own a french poodle(about as agressif as them).And to be honest i have knowed many who stick perfectly the description.But Ren?e is different,she loves Anna karenina,Tolstoy,read phylosophie and watch arty japanese movies.She also want to be left alone so she play the part expected from her.Leave the TV on while reading in the back room.Cook heavy stuff in gravy or with cabage for the cover smell, when she love delicate dishes and jasmine tea.
The other charactere is Paloma,a 12 years old little genius who decided to die a 13 before being caugh in the "fish bowl" as she sees the predictable lives of poeple suronding her.She also play down her role of a good little girls,hidding her mental abilities,while gathering sleeping pills for her suicide and writing a journal of "Deep thought" and "world movement".
I specialy like the "world movement" she writes.Classic body move of sports men or the move of a rose bulbe rolling on a table to fall silently on a towel.Since reading it,i actuly gather "mouvement du monde" myself.

The book is very well written and original without the gadget style certain too good ideas can bring along.The fact that often people act what is expected of them and not what they are, is interesting and common.And by playing it too long they kill the intimate part of themselves.Also some nice part because the intellectualisme of Ren?e is not stiff,she like Osu and Ridley scott,critic phenomenology,and is a specialist of dutch still lives of the 18 th century.
It's a quick read,full of good things,and not that artificial.

Here is maybe a better more understandable review.Review: The Elegance of the Hedgehog by Muriel Barbery | Books | The Observer

[Sybarite]

I nearly threw it at a wall.

If I want to read philosophiocal diversions, I'll read philosophy.

I don't mind a novel having a philosophical aspect to it, but here there seemed to be sections where the philosophising isn't a part of the plot, but is just incidental – it's dumped in there, two or three pages at a time, with Ren?e effectively talking to herself.

And as for Paloma – the character's rambling about the decorative nature of cats began to grate quickly too.

Perhaps the translation didn't help, but I started it in a state of great optimism and was really cheesed off after about 50 pages. So much of it seemed to me to be about the author showing how clever she is (she's a philosophy lecturer).

[saliotthomas]

It's more social the philosophiocal,there is few pages but only to show a certain aspect of Ren?e.

So much of it seemed to me to be about the author showing how clever she is (she's a philosophy lecturer)

Not really,i was also dubious for a while but there is more to it that just Smartness.

[titania7]

So i came to it (The Elegance of the Hedgehog)
with a bad a-priori,to much fuss,to smart an idea,but really liked it.

Thomas,
I'm delighted to finally see this review. I was afraid you had decided to
forsake it! But here it is. Thanks for posting it. More thoughts follow.

The story of Ren?e,the caretaker of expensive appartements in Paris(400 m squarre flats).Caretaker is an old Parisian tradition,the usualy live in the ground floor,are vindictive,spy on every one,watch soap opera all day,and own a french poodle(about as agressif as them).And to be honest i have knowed many who stick perfectly the description.But Ren?e is different,she loves Anna karenina,Tolstoy,read phylosophie and watch arty japanese movies.

In some respects, it sounds as if Renee and I are similar. I am reading Hannah Arendt now, a brilliant philosopher that a friend in Belgium introduced me to. I love Japanese movies, also, as well as Japanese literature. And Tolstoy, of course...though you might have guessed that already.

She also want to be left alone so she play the part expected from her.Leave the TV on while reading in the back room.Cook heavy stuff in gravy or with cabage for the cover smell, when she love delicate dishes and jasmine tea. The other charactere is Paloma,a 12 years old little genius who decided to die a 13 before being caugh in the "fish bowl" as she sees the predictable lives of poeple suronding her.She also play down her role of a good little girls,hidding her mental abilities,while gathering sleeping pills for her suicide and writing a journal of "Deep thought" and "world movement".

Precocious children with gifted intelligence often have a rough time of it. People are envious of them, at the same time expecting them to live up to a certain set of expectations that they place upon them. It's interesting how a kid who, to the outside world, seems to "have it all" (in many respects) can, in reality, feels that he/she has no real purpose. It sounds like this book fully conveys what I am speaking of--the tortured life of a child who is almost too smart for the world around her. People are so unwilling to spend time trying to understand things--and other people--that they don't immediately comprehend. I hope I am making some sense. This is actually an issue I feel strongly about, this inability to "conform" and desperate struggle to exist in spite of being viewed as something quite outside "the norm" ("norm" being a completely relative term, of course).

The book is very well written and original without the gadget style certain too good ideas can bring along.The fact that often people act what is expected of them and not what they are, is interesting and common.And by playing it too long they kill the intimate part of themselves.

And yet....to a certain extent, don't we all find ourselves acting in ways that are expected of us? You're right about it being common, Thomas. What happens, of course, is that when our true self emerges--if, that is, we have been pretending to be someone else--people say to us, "That is so unlike you!" In reality, of course, they never understood who we were in the first place. Yet, we must at some point remove "the mask" and reveal who we are, whether people accept us or not. If we don't, we will, as you say, "kill the intimate part" of ourselves.

It's a quick read,full of good things,and not that artificial.

An excellent review, Thomas. I appreciate the personal insights you gave. It is wonderful when a person has such deep thoughts about the books he or she reads.

Here is maybe a better more understandable review.Review: The Elegance of the Hedgehog by Muriel Barbery | Books | The Observer

I had no difficulty understanding your review, Thomas . But I'll check out the link, too.

Best,
Titania

[titania7]

I nearly threw it at a wall.

Wow, you've stolen my Dorothy Parker quote and turned it around!! Damn! I do hope you would've thrown the book with "great force," Sybarite--Dorothy-style, naturally .

If I want to read philosophiocal diversions, I'll read philosophy.

Yet don't you think a little philosophy in literature can be thought-provoking? I'm actually amazed at how closely linked philosophy and literature really are. You might enjoy reading Hannah Arendt's Responsibility and Judgement, a book that has several references to
philosophical concepts in literature. From Dostovesky to Melville to Shakespeare, Arendt appears to think that philosophy plays a significant role in many of the greatest works of literature.

I don't mind a novel having a philosophical aspect to it, but here there seemed to be sections where the philosophising isn't a part of the plot, but is just incidental – it's dumped in there, two or three pages at a time, with Ren?e effectively talking to herself.

Well, I haven't read the book. So, I reserve judgement. I respect your opinions about literature, Sybarite, but I respect Thomas's opinions, too.
I'll have to decide for myself on this one.

And as for Paloma – the character's rambling about the decorative nature of cats began to grate quickly too.

Hmmm....not a remark I would expect to hear from someone who owns a cat!

Perhaps the translation didn't help, but I started it in a state of great optimism and was really cheesed off after about 50 pages. So much of it seemed to me to be about the author showing how clever she is (she's a philosophy lecturer).

Well, it's possible that you simply don't like Barbery's style. It's admirable that you didn't give up until page 50 or so. When I dislike a book that much, I'm ready to throw it at the wall much sooner.

Cheers,
Titania

[Sevigne]

I've lent my copy of this novel to my daughter. She has asked me a question about a quote but since I haven't the book to see the quote in context, I can't answer her question.

In this sentence:

"We went on to discuss the definition of intelligence and he asked me if he could write down my formula in his moleskin notebook: 'It is not a sacred gift, it is a primate?s only weapon.'?

does the word "formula" have a special meaning? a meaning other than that usually attached to it?

[saliotthomas]

I got the film adaptation today with Josiane balasko, a first film by Mona Achache.
I'll let you know how it is but i don't have much hopes.
Wander if hollywood is working on one with Kathy Bates !

[lenz]

From what I've read here, this book sounds a lot like Sophie's World by Jostein Gaarder, which I didn't like for reasons I can't quite remember - that it was too simplistic, and cute maybe.
Does anyone else see a similarity?

[Daniel del Real]

I've had the temptation to read this book for months, but I have the feeling that at the end I'm not going to like it. Don't know why.

[Kobayashi]

It's worth reading. It isn't quite as precious as one might be led to believe, and is actually rather subtle at times. Quite interesting to read the points about the translation from French to English.

[miercuri]

This book is selling really well here and I am curious about it, but I was quite surprised to read such conflicting opinions on this thread. Thomas made it sound lovely and then I scrolled down and read Sybarite's post. I don't know what to think of it anymore. A few years ago I read Alain de Botton's On Love and I would describe that in the exact same terms Sybarite used for Barbery's novel. I would have thrown de Botton's book at a wall if it wasn't a library copy.

[saliotthomas]

The probleme Sybarite had with the book was because she thought herself a mighty philosoper or at least an expert, she was then very upset with the light pisstaking Barberry makes of certain aspect of the discipline.

It is not a life changing story or a great novel but a nice read and a good time, it has some very interesting ideas.
Nothing pompous or arogant about it.
I'm quite sure you would like it very much Mercurie.
I'd take a bet.
And it could very well pull you out of your reading block.

[Bjorn]

Cleaned a few posts up. For the 14th time, if you feel the need to go schoolyard on each other, please keep it to PM.

[lenz]

I've never read the book myself, but based on what Alexis and Thomas have said, I might check it out eventually (it's been on the bestsellers list at Amazon forever).

Have you read the review at the Complete Review? I suspect it's on the best sellers list
because it's like the famous works of Paulo Coehlo that were so craftily reviewed here recently.