The French Lieutenant’s Woman by John Fowles
Release date/ Length: 1969 / 467 pages
Synopsis (from the front cover): In a feat of seductive storytelling, John Fowles immereses us in the emotionally charged world of a Victorian love triangle and, through a startling act of literary invention, reveals the image of modern man reflected in the past.
First line: An easterly is the most disagreeable wind in Lyme Bay — Lyme Bay being that largest bite from the underside of England’s outstretched leg — and a person of curiosity could at once have deduced several strong probabilities about the pair who began to walk down the quay at Lyme Regis, the small but ancient eponym of the inbith, one incisively sharp and blustery morning in the late March of 1867.
Review: This was the second novel in a row that I appreciated, but didn’t truly enjoy. However, I was reminded anew of the power of discussion. My book club choice this and while I did not necessarily enjoy reading this, I certainly appreciated it much more after a good conversation with great friends.
So, why will this review not glow? As with Boyle’s The Women, I did not like a single character in this novel — at all. Unlike in The Women, only the protagonist was fully developed in this novel — and I do not think Fowles expected his readers to sympathize with him. Also in contrast to The Women, I found this novel a slow and ponderous read — to the point that I actually checked out the audio and paperback versions and used both to get through it. I listened to an hour a day during my commute to and from the barn and then read a few pages at night before bed, eventually finishing it the weekend before my book club met. In addition, I renewed both copies TWICE!
Now, it IS 467 pages long — and true to the Victorian setting in its prose — so it was not meant to be a quick read by any means. But I truly found it tedious much of the time. This surprised me since I love Dickens and Jane Austen and do not shy away from complex syntax. But I felt as if I was wading through words much of the time with little reward. The ending was interesting, and my favorite part, but at that point I was just so relieved to be finished I didn’t care as much as I should have.
So, what did I appreciate about this novel? Fowles’ voice is unique — his tone is well-crafted (mostly snarky — he, too, did not sympathize with the characters) — and he reveals the dichotomies and hypocrisies of the Victorian age well. In addition, Sarah is a complex and memorable heroine. I can see why Meryl Streep wanted that role! I have not yet seen the movie version, but may check it out at some point!
