Gargantua and Pantagruel
Half a
year. This is how long it took to get through “Gargantua and Pantagruel” by Francois
Rabelais.
Part of the
explanation for the exceedingly long reading time is that this is a massive
book, just over 1000 pages. In fact, it consists of five books, but the List
seems to consider all five part of the same work and who am I to question that.
The other
and equally valid part of the explanation is that “Gargantua and Pantagruel” is
a 500 year old comedy that is not funny. It is episodic, inconsistent and with
little consideration for something as mundane as a plot. Combined with its
status as a comedy means that the episodes it does tell have to be very
interesting to keep my attention now that it is not funny and that is also,
well, rather inconsistent.
Rabelais
tells something (to call it a story is a stretch) about two giants (of variable
size), Pantagruel and his father Gargantua. Book two was about the education of
Gargantua and a mighty battle he was involved in. In Book three Pantagruel’s
sidekick Panurge considers whether or not he should be married. He is convinced
he will do just fine while his friends are convince the wife will cheat on him.
In book four and five Pantagruel, Panurge and their extensive following go on a
sea journey to find an oracle to answer the question in book three. Book one,
well, I actually forgot what took place there.
This may
sound quite exciting: battles, journeys, vital questions etc. but it is not.
The progression of the story as it is is just not really happening. Instead the
setting allows for a multitude of tableaux, discussions and descriptions. These
have two functions of which one is to entertain.
It is very
possible that in its day “Gargantua and Pantagruel” was hilariously funny, but
comedy is notoriously entrenched in its own culture and translates poorly to
other cultures, which, 500 years later, means us. The jokes are centered on
farting and pooh jokes, with intercourse related wit mixed in. That ought to
fit right into modern youth culture, but even that it fails. It is just crude
and primitive. Other jokes make fun of sentiments and people relevant 500 years
ago and yet other laughs (or attempts to) are of a scholarly colloquial kind, the
sort that would mean nothing to you if you were not in the same line of
business, meaning a monk dabbling in medicine, law and ancient Greek and Roman literature.
The second
function is as a critique and ridicule of Rabelais’ opponents. Apparently,
Rabelais belonged to the protestant side in the great religious schism dividing
Europe in the sixteenth century and Rabelais got some royal protection to heap
dung on the Catholic side in his books. Some, probably even most, of his
criticism in intelligent, as far as I understand it, and it is this part that
is interesting enough for me to actually finish this book.
It can be
(certainly is to me) difficult to understand how practicing religion in two
different ways can mean so much to people and throw Europe into a century of
war, a conflict that still echoes today. This year it is the 500 year
anniversary of Martin Luther, but the festivities seem muted, at least in
Denmark. It is just not that relevant anymore. But clearly for Rabelais who was
right there on the fault-line this was deadly serious and the viciousness of
his attacks are hardly softened by the apparent comedy. This is certainly a
window into an almost forgotten conflict that shaped Europe.
My advice
to a reader considering to go into “Gargantua and Pantagruel” would be that
this window to the past must be the primary motivation. Any other motivation is
doomed to fall short. Read the first book and consider if this was rewarding
enough. If it was not there is no point in continuing, it hardly gets better. To read it just to be a completionist starts
to feel stupid and ridiculous before the halfway point.
I have been binging on both your blogs. I love that you are doing the 1001 books too. This was the actual worst. I know comedy rarely translates but then I think of Henry Fielding and Jane Austen, who still manage to make me laugh today. Some humor is timeless...this isn't.
SvarSletYou are very welcome. I need to setup a comment tracker on this page as well, otherwise it is easy to miss comments on the old posts. Not that there are that many comments. There are not so many bloggers on the book list, I find.
SletThis book was just ridiculous. VERY long, tedious, gross and NOT funny at all. I wonder, did readers really find this funny back then? or was it just that he was kicking the butts of his political opponents? I am very happy to hear that this is as bad as it gets. I am not sure I could do this again.