What do you think?
Rate this book
আইভানহো
ষোল শতকের ইংল্যান্ড।
সিংহ-হৃদয় রাজা রিচার্ড প্যালেস্টাইনে ক্রুসেড লড়ছেন, ভাই জনের ওপর দেশ পরিচালনার ভার। এদিকে চক্রান্ত চলছে, রিচার্ড ফিরলেই তাঁকে বন্দী করা হবে, পাকাপাকিভাবে সিংহাসনে বসানো হবে জনকে। রিচার্ডের প্রিয়পাত্র বীর আইভানহো। ক্রুসেড শেষে ফিরে এসেছে দেশে। গোপনে।
অ্যাশবিতে অস্ত্র-নৈপুণ্যের প্রতিযোগিতায় আইভানহো হারিয়ে দিলো জনের প্রধান তিন সহযোগী ব্রায়ান, দ্য ব্রেসি আর রিজিনাল্ডকে।
ক্ষুব্ধ তিন সহযোগী ডাকাতের ছদ্মবেশে ধরে নিয়ে গেল আইভানহোর প্রেমিকাকে।
এবার?
সিংহ-হৃদয় রাজা রিচার্ড প্যালেস্টাইনে ক্রুসেড লড়ছেন, ভাই জনের ওপর দেশ পরিচালনার ভার। এদিকে চক্রান্ত চলছে, রিচার্ড ফিরলেই তাঁকে বন্দী করা হবে, পাকাপাকিভাবে সিংহাসনে বসানো হবে জনকে। রিচার্ডের প্রিয়পাত্র বীর আইভানহো। ক্রুসেড শেষে ফিরে এসেছে দেশে। গোপনে।
অ্যাশবিতে অস্ত্র-নৈপুণ্যের প্রতিযোগিতায় আইভানহো হারিয়ে দিলো জনের প্রধান তিন সহযোগী ব্রায়ান, দ্য ব্রেসি আর রিজিনাল্ডকে।
ক্ষুব্ধ তিন সহযোগী ডাকাতের ছদ্মবেশে ধরে নিয়ে গেল আইভানহোর প্রেমিকাকে।
এবার?
262 pages, Paperback
First published December 20, 1819
About the author
Walter Scott
11.1k books1,733 followersLibrarian Note: There is more than one author in the GoodReads database with this name.
Sir Walter Scott, 1st Baronet FRSE FSAScot, was a Scottish novelist, poet and historian. Many of his works remain classics of European and Scottish literature, notably the novels Ivanhoe (1819), Rob Roy (1817), Waverley (1814), Old Mortality (1816), The Heart of Mid-Lothian (1818), and The Bride of Lammermoor (1819), along with the narrative poems Marmion (1808) and The Lady of the Lake (1810). He had a major impact on European and American literature.
As an advocate, judge, and legal administrator by profession, he combined writing and editing with his daily work as Clerk of Session and Sheriff-Depute of Selkirkshire. He was prominent in Edinburgh's Tory establishment, active in the Highland Society, long time a president of the Royal Society of Edinburgh (1820–1832), and a vice president of the Society of Antiquaries of Scotland (1827–1829). His knowledge of history and literary facility equipped him to establish the historical novel genre as an exemplar of European Romanticism. He became a baronet of Abbotsford in the County of Roxburgh.
Scott's work shows the influence of the 18th century Enlightenment. He thought of every individual as basically human, regardless of class, religion, politics, or ancestry. A major theme of his work is toleration. His novels express the need for social progress that does not reject the traditions of the past.
Sir Walter Scott, 1st Baronet FRSE FSAScot, was a Scottish novelist, poet and historian. Many of his works remain classics of European and Scottish literature, notably the novels Ivanhoe (1819), Rob Roy (1817), Waverley (1814), Old Mortality (1816), The Heart of Mid-Lothian (1818), and The Bride of Lammermoor (1819), along with the narrative poems Marmion (1808) and The Lady of the Lake (1810). He had a major impact on European and American literature.
As an advocate, judge, and legal administrator by profession, he combined writing and editing with his daily work as Clerk of Session and Sheriff-Depute of Selkirkshire. He was prominent in Edinburgh's Tory establishment, active in the Highland Society, long time a president of the Royal Society of Edinburgh (1820–1832), and a vice president of the Society of Antiquaries of Scotland (1827–1829). His knowledge of history and literary facility equipped him to establish the historical novel genre as an exemplar of European Romanticism. He became a baronet of Abbotsford in the County of Roxburgh.
Scott's work shows the influence of the 18th century Enlightenment. He thought of every individual as basically human, regardless of class, religion, politics, or ancestry. A major theme of his work is toleration. His novels express the need for social progress that does not reject the traditions of the past.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 3,192 reviews
September 16, 2019
I believe Ivanhoe just misses being a great novel for two reasons. First of all, its characters, although not without subtlety, lack depth. (The exception to the rule is the “Jewess” Rebecca). Secondly, Scott’s style—at least as demonstrated here—suffers from a wordiness that continually dissipates the novel’s power. It is nevertheless an impressive achievement, original in conception, rich in themes, formidable in architecture, and powerful in its effects.
October 9, 2021
(Book 930 from 1001 books) - Ivanhoe, Sir Walter Scott
Ivanhoe is a historical novel by Sir Walter Scott, first published in 1820 in three volumes and subtitled A Romance. It has proved to be one of the best known and most influential of Scott's novels.
At the time it was written it represented a shift by Scott away from fairly realistic novels set in Scotland in the comparatively recent past, to a somewhat fanciful depiction of medieval England.
Ivanhoe is the story of one of the remaining Saxon noble families at a time when the nobility in England was overwhelmingly Norman.
It follows the Saxon protagonist, Sir Wilfred of Ivanhoe, who is out of favour with his father for his allegiance to the Norman king Richard the Lionheart.
The story is set in 1194, after the failure of the Third Crusade, when many of the Crusaders were still returning to their homes in Europe.
King Richard, who had been captured by Leopold of Austria on his return journey to England, was believed to still be in captivity.
عنوانهای چاپ شده در ایران: «انگلیس در هشت قرن پیش با قسمتهایی از جنگهای صلیبی»؛ «آیوانهو»؛ «آیوانهوئه»؛ نویسنده سر والتر اسکات؛ (توسن) ادبیات بریتانیا؛ تاریخ نخستین خوانش روز دهم ماه ژوئن سال 2014میلادی
عنوان: انگلیس در هشت قرن پیش با قسمتهایی از جنگهای صلیبی؛ تالیف سروالتر اسکات؛ ترجمه و نگارش عبدالله انصاری؛ مشخصات نشر تهران، شرکت مطبوعات، 1320، مشخصات ظاهری 160ص؛ این کتاب تحت عنوان «آیوانهوئه» در سالهای مختلف با مترجمان و ناشران متفاوت چاپ گردیده است، موضوع: داستانهای نویسندگان بریتانیا - سده 19م، انگلستان - تاریخ - ریچارد اول، سال 1189میلادی - 1199م – داستان - سده 19م
عنوان: ایوانهو؛ تالیف: سروالتر اسکات؛ مترجم خسرو شایسته؛ تهران، سپیده، 1364، در 174ص؛ مصور، فروس: انتشارات سپیده دوازده، کتاب برای نخستین بار با عنوان «آیوانهو» با ترجمه عنایت الله شکیباپور توسط انتشارات توسن منتشر شده است
عنوان: ایوانهو (متن کوتاه شده)؛ تالیف: سروالتر اسکات؛ مترجم: تهمینه مظفری؛ تهران، نشر مرکز، 1386، در 298ص، شابک9789643059545؛
عنوان: ایوانهو؛ تالیف: سروالتر اسکات؛ مترجم عنایت الله شکیباپور؛ تهران، توسن، 1363، در 87ص؛ مصور، فروست انتشارات سپیده دوازده؛
عنوان: ایوانهو (متن کوتاه شده)؛ تالیف سروالتر اسکات؛ مترجم شکوفه اخوان؛ تهران، نهال نویدان، 1375، در159ص، شابک9649004653؛
عنوان: ایوانهو؛ تالیف سروالتر اسکات؛ مترجم محمدتقی دانیا؛ تهران، دبیر، 1386، در 208ص، شابک9789642621224؛
عنوان: ایوانهو؛ تالیف سروالتر اسکات؛ مترجم محمدتقی دانیا؛ تهران، دادجو دبیر، 1388، در174ص، شابک9789642621224؛
سِر والتر اسکات، رماننویس، شاعر، تاریخدان و زندگینامه نویس «اسکاتلندی»، که ایشان را پدر رمان تاریخی میدانند، قالبی را که ایشان برای این سبک از ادبیات داستانی، به کار بسته، تا به امروز از آن قالب پیروی شده است؛ اشعار، و رمانهای معروف به «وِیورلی» ایشان، به بازگویی رخدادهای هیجان انگیز، در باره ی تاریخ میهن اش میپردازند، و سایر رمانهای ایشان، به «بریتانیا»، و «فرانسه»ی دوران سده های میانه ی میلادی برمیگردند، که شخصیتهای آنها را «شاهان»، «ملکه ها»، «مردان سیاسی»، «مزرعه داران»، «گدایان»، و «راهزنان»، شکل میدهند
والتر اسکات ویلفرد آیوانهو، پسر «سدریک»، یکی از اشراف «ساکسون»، به «لیدی راونا»، دختری تحت قیمومت پدرش، و از اسلاف «آلفرد شاه»، دلباخته، ولی «سدریک»، که طرفدار پر و پا قرص بازگشت نژاد «ساکسون» به سلطنت «انگلستان» است، میاندیشد که با دادن «راونا» به یکی «ساکسون»ها، که خون پادشان در رگهایش جاری است، به هدف خود خواهد رسید؛ او که از عشق دو جوان، به یکدیگر، بسیار خشمگین شده است، پسرش را تبعید میکند؛ «آیونهو» به همراه «ریچارد شیردل»، به جنگهای صلیبی میرود، و دیری نمیگذرد، که احترام و محبت «ریچارد» را به خود جلب میکند
پرنس جان، در غیاب برادر، در صدد برمیآید، که بر تخت و تاج دست یابد؛ این رخداد همانند همیشه، برای «والتر اسکات»، بهانه ی خلق رخدادهای درخشانی میشود؛ مسابقه ی بزرگ «آشبی دولازوش» که در آن «آیونهو»، پیشاپیش «ریچارد»، تمام شهسواران «پرنس جان»، و از جمله «سر بریا��د دوبوا گیلبر»، شهسوار سرسخت پرستشگاه، و «سر رجینالد گاو پیشانی» را شکست میدهد، قابل توجه است؛ همچنین باید به ماجرای یورش به قلعه ی «تورکیلستون» اشاره کرد، که در آن یورش، «آیونهو» زخمی میشود؛ «سدریک»، «راونا»، «آتلستان»، «اسحاق یورکی یهودی»، و دختر با شهامتش «ربکا»، به دست اشراف «نورمان»، زندانی شده اند؛ اما پس از نبردی سخت، گروهی از راهزنها و «ساکسون»ها، که «رابین هود لاکسلی» افسانه ای، و «ریچارد شاه»، بر آنها فرمان میرانند، قلعه را بازپس میگیرند؛ «اولریش» «ساکسون» پیر، که محبوبه ی قاتل پدرش شده است، و با افشاندن بذر نفاق میان «نورمان»ها، انتقام خود را گرفته است، قلعه را آتش میزند؛ زندانیان آزاد میشوند، ولی «بواگیلبر» که دلباخته ی «ربکا» شده، او را با خود به «تمپلستو» میبرد؛ چون دختر جوان، عشق شهسوار پرستشگاه را نمیپذیرد؛ مرد نیز او را به جادوگری متهم میکند؛ خوشبختانه «آیوانهو»، که در دوئلی با «بواگیلبر» روبرو میشود، دختر جوان را آزاد میکند
آیوانهو با «لیدی راونا» ازدواج میکند، و «ربکا»، چون کاری دیگر از دستش برنمیآید، به همراه پدر خویش «انگلستان» را ترک میکند؛ در میان شخصیتهای درجه دوم، باید به «رابین هود»، «برادر تاک راهب سرباز»، «وامبای دلقک»، و «اسحاق یهودی»، که به «شیلاک» «شکسپیر» شباهت دارد، و در وجودش سودای پول، و عشق ابدی، باهم در جدال هستند، اشاره کرد؛ این رمان در «اروپا» با موفقیت روبرو شد؛ «آیونهو» همراه با «کوئنتین دوروارد» منشأ موج رمان تاریخی به شمار میرود، که نتایج تتبع تاریخی را به زنده ترین منابع تخیل پیوند میزند؛ تمام تردیدهایی که در مورد پژوهش تاریخی بتوان ابراز داشت، به پیروزی اثر آسیب نمیزند، زیرا تازگی سبک، همه جا آشکار است؛ «والتر اسکات»، چنانکه خود در تقدیم نامه ی اثر مینویسندد، تنها میخواسته، که رنگ تاریخی رمان را نگهبانی کند؛ او میخواسته چیزی جز واقعیت تاریخی، در آن راه ندهد، در گزینش جزئیات نیز مقداری آزادی برای خود برگزیده است
تاریخ بهنگام رسانی 20/10/1399هجری خورشیدی؛ 16/07/1400هجریخورشیدی؛ ا. شربیانی
Ivanhoe is a historical novel by Sir Walter Scott, first published in 1820 in three volumes and subtitled A Romance. It has proved to be one of the best known and most influential of Scott's novels.
At the time it was written it represented a shift by Scott away from fairly realistic novels set in Scotland in the comparatively recent past, to a somewhat fanciful depiction of medieval England.
Ivanhoe is the story of one of the remaining Saxon noble families at a time when the nobility in England was overwhelmingly Norman.
It follows the Saxon protagonist, Sir Wilfred of Ivanhoe, who is out of favour with his father for his allegiance to the Norman king Richard the Lionheart.
The story is set in 1194, after the failure of the Third Crusade, when many of the Crusaders were still returning to their homes in Europe.
King Richard, who had been captured by Leopold of Austria on his return journey to England, was believed to still be in captivity.
عنوانهای چاپ شده در ایران: «انگلیس در هشت قرن پیش با قسمتهایی از جنگهای صلیبی»؛ «آیوانهو»؛ «آیوانهوئه»؛ نویسنده سر والتر اسکات؛ (توسن) ادبیات بریتانیا؛ تاریخ نخستین خوانش روز دهم ماه ژوئن سال 2014میلادی
عنوان: انگلیس در هشت قرن پیش با قسمتهایی از جنگهای صلیبی؛ تالیف سروالتر اسکات؛ ترجمه و نگارش عبدالله انصاری؛ مشخصات نشر تهران، شرکت مطبوعات، 1320، مشخصات ظاهری 160ص؛ این کتاب تحت عنوان «آیوانهوئه» در سالهای مختلف با مترجمان و ناشران متفاوت چاپ گردیده است، موضوع: داستانهای نویسندگان بریتانیا - سده 19م، انگلستان - تاریخ - ریچارد اول، سال 1189میلادی - 1199م – داستان - سده 19م
عنوان: ایوانهو؛ تالیف: سروالتر اسکات؛ مترجم خسرو شایسته؛ تهران، سپیده، 1364، در 174ص؛ مصور، فروس: انتشارات سپیده دوازده، کتاب برای نخستین بار با عنوان «آیوانهو» با ترجمه عنایت الله شکیباپور توسط انتشارات توسن منتشر شده است
عنوان: ایوانهو (متن کوتاه شده)؛ تالیف: سروالتر اسکات؛ مترجم: تهمینه مظفری؛ تهران، نشر مرکز، 1386، در 298ص، شابک9789643059545؛
عنوان: ایوانهو؛ تالیف: سروالتر اسکات؛ مترجم عنایت الله شکیباپور؛ تهران، توسن، 1363، در 87ص؛ مصور، فروست انتشارات سپیده دوازده؛
عنوان: ایوانهو (متن کوتاه شده)؛ تالیف سروالتر اسکات؛ مترجم شکوفه اخوان؛ تهران، نهال نویدان، 1375، در159ص، شابک9649004653؛
عنوان: ایوانهو؛ تالیف سروالتر اسکات؛ مترجم محمدتقی دانیا؛ تهران، دبیر، 1386، در 208ص، شابک9789642621224؛
عنوان: ایوانهو؛ تالیف سروالتر اسکات؛ مترجم محمدتقی دانیا؛ تهران، دادجو دبیر، 1388، در174ص، شابک9789642621224؛
سِر والتر اسکات، رماننویس، شاعر، تاریخدان و زندگینامه نویس «اسکاتلندی»، که ایشان را پدر رمان تاریخی میدانند، قالبی را که ایشان برای این سبک از ادبیات داستانی، به کار بسته، تا به امروز از آن قالب پیروی شده است؛ اشعار، و رمانهای معروف به «وِیورلی» ایشان، به بازگویی رخدادهای هیجان انگیز، در باره ی تاریخ میهن اش میپردازند، و سایر رمانهای ایشان، به «بریتانیا»، و «فرانسه»ی دوران سده های میانه ی میلادی برمیگردند، که شخصیتهای آنها را «شاهان»، «ملکه ها»، «مردان سیاسی»، «مزرعه داران»، «گدایان»، و «راهزنان»، شکل میدهند
والتر اسکات ویلفرد آیوانهو، پسر «سدریک»، یکی از اشراف «ساکسون»، به «لیدی راونا»، دختری تحت قیمومت پدرش، و از اسلاف «آلفرد شاه»، دلباخته، ولی «سدریک»، که طرفدار پر و پا قرص بازگشت نژاد «ساکسون» به سلطنت «انگلستان» است، میاندیشد که با دادن «راونا» به یکی «ساکسون»ها، که خون پادشان در رگهایش جاری است، به هدف خود خواهد رسید؛ او که از عشق دو جوان، به یکدیگر، بسیار خشمگین شده است، پسرش را تبعید میکند؛ «آیونهو» به همراه «ریچارد شیردل»، به جنگهای صلیبی میرود، و دیری نمیگذرد، که احترام و محبت «ریچارد» را به خود جلب میکند
پرنس جان، در غیاب برادر، در صدد برمیآید، که بر تخت و تاج دست یابد؛ این رخداد همانند همیشه، برای «والتر اسکات»، بهانه ی خلق رخدادهای درخشانی میشود؛ مسابقه ی بزرگ «آشبی دولازوش» که در آن «آیونهو»، پیشاپیش «ریچارد»، تمام شهسواران «پرنس جان»، و از جمله «سر بریا��د دوبوا گیلبر»، شهسوار سرسخت پرستشگاه، و «سر رجینالد گاو پیشانی» را شکست میدهد، قابل توجه است؛ همچنین باید به ماجرای یورش به قلعه ی «تورکیلستون» اشاره کرد، که در آن یورش، «آیونهو» زخمی میشود؛ «سدریک»، «راونا»، «آتلستان»، «اسحاق یورکی یهودی»، و دختر با شهامتش «ربکا»، به دست اشراف «نورمان»، زندانی شده اند؛ اما پس از نبردی سخت، گروهی از راهزنها و «ساکسون»ها، که «رابین هود لاکسلی» افسانه ای، و «ریچارد شاه»، بر آنها فرمان میرانند، قلعه را بازپس میگیرند؛ «اولریش» «ساکسون» پیر، که محبوبه ی قاتل پدرش شده است، و با افشاندن بذر نفاق میان «نورمان»ها، انتقام خود را گرفته است، قلعه را آتش میزند؛ زندانیان آزاد میشوند، ولی «بواگیلبر» که دلباخته ی «ربکا» شده، او را با خود به «تمپلستو» میبرد؛ چون دختر جوان، عشق شهسوار پرستشگاه را نمیپذیرد؛ مرد نیز او را به جادوگری متهم میکند؛ خوشبختانه «آیوانهو»، که در دوئلی با «بواگیلبر» روبرو میشود، دختر جوان را آزاد میکند
آیوانهو با «لیدی راونا» ازدواج میکند، و «ربکا»، چون کاری دیگر از دستش برنمیآید، به همراه پدر خویش «انگلستان» را ترک میکند؛ در میان شخصیتهای درجه دوم، باید به «رابین هود»، «برادر تاک راهب سرباز»، «وامبای دلقک»، و «اسحاق یهودی»، که به «شیلاک» «شکسپیر» شباهت دارد، و در وجودش سودای پول، و عشق ابدی، باهم در جدال هستند، اشاره کرد؛ این رمان در «اروپا» با موفقیت روبرو شد؛ «آیونهو» همراه با «کوئنتین دوروارد» منشأ موج رمان تاریخی به شمار میرود، که نتایج تتبع تاریخی را به زنده ترین منابع تخیل پیوند میزند؛ تمام تردیدهایی که در مورد پژوهش تاریخی بتوان ابراز داشت، به پیروزی اثر آسیب نمیزند، زیرا تازگی سبک، همه جا آشکار است؛ «والتر اسکات»، چنانکه خود در تقدیم نامه ی اثر مینویسندد، تنها میخواسته، که رنگ تاریخی رمان را نگهبانی کند؛ او میخواسته چیزی جز واقعیت تاریخی، در آن راه ندهد، در گزینش جزئیات نیز مقداری آزادی برای خود برگزیده است
تاریخ بهنگام رسانی 20/10/1399هجری خورشیدی؛ 16/07/1400هجریخورشیدی؛ ا. شربیانی
June 7, 2023
Ivanhoe! Ivanhoe!
When these credits sounded in the 1960s, we children were eager to be in front of our black and white screens to follow his adventures where this handsome knight on his white horse came to the underprivileged aid.
I have found several heroes who rocked my childhood, Ivanhoe and Robin de Locksley, known as Robin Hood, King Richard the Lionheart, and the evil Prince John.
Ivanhoé is a great actor who has disappeared from Roger Moore (born in 1927 in England and died in 2017 in Switzerland). So I pay him a warm tribute for all these hours of true happiness, especially the adventures he made me live in my childhood, with this bit of note.
When these credits sounded in the 1960s, we children were eager to be in front of our black and white screens to follow his adventures where this handsome knight on his white horse came to the underprivileged aid.
I have found several heroes who rocked my childhood, Ivanhoe and Robin de Locksley, known as Robin Hood, King Richard the Lionheart, and the evil Prince John.
Ivanhoé is a great actor who has disappeared from Roger Moore (born in 1927 in England and died in 2017 in Switzerland). So I pay him a warm tribute for all these hours of true happiness, especially the adventures he made me live in my childhood, with this bit of note.
November 18, 2015
I love(d) this book and was torn between 4 and 5 stars. Can we call it 4.5? Heck, let's just say 5! I read it first long ago and it holds up well over the years (its and yours). A classic for a reason.
You'll find synopsis after synopsis here and elsewhere. But if you like adventure, heroism, romance, loyalty, betrayal...any or all of the above you won't go wrong here.
King Richard the Lion Heart...Robin Hood (Locksley)...Knights Templar...Saxons vs. Normans...Gentiles vs. Jews....Knights from the Crusades....Tournaments...jousts...melees...treachery...single combat...love...loss...reconciliation...heroics! This thing has more to offer than The Princess Bride! Well, no one gets murdered by pirates...and it is a "kissing book", but it's still a great read, and it's a classic so you get extra points!
Okay, so my sense of humor got the best of me for a second there.
While this book may not appeal to some, as it is definitely dated, it was written in 1819, and its syntax and construction aren't what modern readers will be used to, that won't bother most I'd think. I read this book first when I was 13 or 14. I stumbled across it in a grandparent's house one summer, and it captured my interest. The book is a historical fiction and an action adventure of it's day and while it may not move as today's action adventures do, there is so much more than that here. The depth of the prose blows away what we might call "action adventure" today. There is high adventure here that should please adventure lovers and the romantics among us. (When "Sir Desdichado" challenged the entire field at the joust I was hooked!)
Yep, on second thought no question, 5 stars. This book is highly recommended.
You'll find synopsis after synopsis here and elsewhere. But if you like adventure, heroism, romance, loyalty, betrayal...any or all of the above you won't go wrong here.
King Richard the Lion Heart...Robin Hood (Locksley)...Knights Templar...Saxons vs. Normans...Gentiles vs. Jews....Knights from the Crusades....Tournaments...jousts...melees...treachery...single combat...love...loss...reconciliation...heroics! This thing has more to offer than The Princess Bride! Well, no one gets murdered by pirates...and it is a "kissing book", but it's still a great read, and it's a classic so you get extra points!
Okay, so my sense of humor got the best of me for a second there.
While this book may not appeal to some, as it is definitely dated, it was written in 1819, and its syntax and construction aren't what modern readers will be used to, that won't bother most I'd think. I read this book first when I was 13 or 14. I stumbled across it in a grandparent's house one summer, and it captured my interest. The book is a historical fiction and an action adventure of it's day and while it may not move as today's action adventures do, there is so much more than that here. The depth of the prose blows away what we might call "action adventure" today. There is high adventure here that should please adventure lovers and the romantics among us. (When "Sir Desdichado" challenged the entire field at the joust I was hooked!)
Yep, on second thought no question, 5 stars. This book is highly recommended.
May 19, 2010
In Ivanhoe, Scott skillfully undermines the alienating characteristics of the medieval gothic while taking advantage of its familiarity to and popularity with nineteenth-century audiences. Although containing elements reminiscent of the earlier gothic, such as the corruption and intrigue of religious orders, the madness of Ulrica and the burning alive of Front-de-Beouf in his castle, it also pokes fun at some of the wilder elements of this genre: the resurrected phantom of Athelstane, for instance, turns out to be quite alive and in search of a decent meal. Scott is clear in his rejection of supernatural devices, and rather than the scenes of emotional breakdown and overwhelming passion common in earlier gothics, his characters by and large behave with the rationality and self-control that would have been regarded as admirable by the author’s contemporaries. Throughout the story, Scott attempts to have his characters behave as modernly as they could without ahistoricism. By avoiding the distasteful areas of superstition, madness, and popery, Scott made it possible for nineteenth-century readers to sympathize more fully with the actors and to imagine themselves in the characters’ places without uneasiness or mental strain.
Ivanhoe was presented, in the overtly fictional voice of the translator Templeton, as a medieval account rendered into modern language. Historical anachronisms are thus not authorial errors but deliberate attempts to make the text more accessible to contemporary readers. Scott constructed a debate between Templeton and the likewise-fictional antiquary, Dr Dryasdust, who accuses the translator of “polluting the well of history with modern inventions.” Scott replies, in the person of Templeton: “I may have confused the manners of two or three centuries… It is my comfort, that errors of this kind escape the general class of readers, and that I may share in the ill-deserved applause of those architects who, in their modern Gothic, do not hesitate to introduce, without rule or method, ornaments proper to different styles and to different periods of art.” Scott this warns his audience that Ivanhoe should not be read as an attempt to recreate, nor to modernize as Leland did (and as Scott had done when he wrote in Middle English a Continuation of the poem Sir Tristem, which was intended to be a believable imitation of the medieval text), a medieval romance. Although Scott was widely read in medieval romances and often alluded to them, he did not model Ivanhoe on a particular medieval tale and makes no attempt to imitate an authentic medieval style. Neither his language, his plotting, nor his ideology are, or were intended to be, genuinely medieval.
The plot of Ivanhoe and other of Scott’s works likewise reveals less nostalgia than is often assumed. It is commonplace to state, as Alice Chandler does in her seminal work A Dream of Order: The Medieval Ideal in Nineteenth-Century English Literature, that Scott’s medievalism “brought to an increasingly urbanized, industrialized, and atomistic society, the vision of a more stable and harmonious social order, substituting the paternal benevolence of manor and guild for the harshness of city and factory and offering the clear air and open fields of the medieval past in place of the blackening skies of England.” While this was indeed a part of the appeal of Scott’s tales, it oversimplifies Scott’s complex attitudes toward the Middle Ages and ignores the conclusion with which several of his novels end.
Scott was far from giving unreserved approval to the medieval past. Even in regards to his most sympathetic characters he offers points of criticism. In describing the heroic Richard, for example, he remarked on the “wild spirit of chivalry” which urged the king to risk unreasonable dangers. “In the lion-hearted king, the brilliant, but useless, character of a knight of romance was in a great measure realized and revived… his feats of chivalry furnishing themes for bards and minstrels, but affording none of those solid benefits to his country on which history loves to pause, and hold up as an example to posterity.” Scott goes so far as to imply that the sullen fidelity of the serf Gurth is more admirable than the reckless courage and self-pleasing and licentious chivalry of the royal Richard; freedom and honor rest for Scott on responsibility and loyalty to the social covenant, not on personal glory.
Whereas in medieval tales the focus is almost always on individual heroism expressed through valor and strength of arms, these qualities play a large but ultimately superficial role in Ivanhoe. In the final anticlimactic duel at Rebecca’s trial, for example, Ivanhoe does not defeat the tempestuous villain by skill; in fact, the other characters all agree that Bois-Guilbert would certainly have won the contest were he not so conflicted in his feelings for Rebecca that he collapses on the field without being struck by his opponent. Beneath the exciting trappings of jousts, abductions, and political intrigues, the central motivating tension of Ivanhoe rests on the disruption of familial relationships and the struggle to restore those relationships to their proper order. Even the political struggle between King Richard and Prince John is a fraternal conflict; and Richard recognizes that his royal duties include reconciling Ivanhoe with his father. This reconciliation is, in fact, his most important success: insofar as Scott suggests that Richard is a good king, it is because he unites England in loyalty to his person as he unites the disrupted families he encounters on his adventures.
The emphasis on familial order gives a different role to women than would be found in a genuinely medieval tale. In medieval chivalric romances concerning male competition the female figures occur secondarily, as lesser prizes to be won in addition to glory or honor. The nineteenth-century ideal of domestic harmony, and its association with political order, gave women a more important role than did medieval political ideology. In the jousts and duels of Ivanhoe, Rowena is the primary object of the struggle between the main character and his opponent. Rowena’s genealogical importance to legitimate Saxon claims of rule is emphasized by Cedric, but in the end she encourages Saxon assimilation rather than independence by marrying Ivanhoe, who has cast his lot with Richard. Her rejection of Athelstane signals the end of Cedric’s plan for renewed Saxon dominance, a plan which Scott marks as backward-looking and unrealistic, if understandable.
If Scott in fact advocates a medieval revival, it is not of the feudal system or of Anglo-Saxonism, but of what he understood as medieval virtues: self-sacrifice, emotion rather than sentimentality, loyalty not only to one’s leaders but also to one’s followers. These attributes were based on an integrated system of personal relationships: between members of a clan or family, between lords and vassals or serfs, between subjects and ruler. Scott depicts these relationships as essentially personal and familial, rather than abstract and national or bureaucratic, which they were rapidly becoming in his own lifetime.
Ivanhoe was presented, in the overtly fictional voice of the translator Templeton, as a medieval account rendered into modern language. Historical anachronisms are thus not authorial errors but deliberate attempts to make the text more accessible to contemporary readers. Scott constructed a debate between Templeton and the likewise-fictional antiquary, Dr Dryasdust, who accuses the translator of “polluting the well of history with modern inventions.” Scott replies, in the person of Templeton: “I may have confused the manners of two or three centuries… It is my comfort, that errors of this kind escape the general class of readers, and that I may share in the ill-deserved applause of those architects who, in their modern Gothic, do not hesitate to introduce, without rule or method, ornaments proper to different styles and to different periods of art.” Scott this warns his audience that Ivanhoe should not be read as an attempt to recreate, nor to modernize as Leland did (and as Scott had done when he wrote in Middle English a Continuation of the poem Sir Tristem, which was intended to be a believable imitation of the medieval text), a medieval romance. Although Scott was widely read in medieval romances and often alluded to them, he did not model Ivanhoe on a particular medieval tale and makes no attempt to imitate an authentic medieval style. Neither his language, his plotting, nor his ideology are, or were intended to be, genuinely medieval.
The plot of Ivanhoe and other of Scott’s works likewise reveals less nostalgia than is often assumed. It is commonplace to state, as Alice Chandler does in her seminal work A Dream of Order: The Medieval Ideal in Nineteenth-Century English Literature, that Scott’s medievalism “brought to an increasingly urbanized, industrialized, and atomistic society, the vision of a more stable and harmonious social order, substituting the paternal benevolence of manor and guild for the harshness of city and factory and offering the clear air and open fields of the medieval past in place of the blackening skies of England.” While this was indeed a part of the appeal of Scott’s tales, it oversimplifies Scott’s complex attitudes toward the Middle Ages and ignores the conclusion with which several of his novels end.
Scott was far from giving unreserved approval to the medieval past. Even in regards to his most sympathetic characters he offers points of criticism. In describing the heroic Richard, for example, he remarked on the “wild spirit of chivalry” which urged the king to risk unreasonable dangers. “In the lion-hearted king, the brilliant, but useless, character of a knight of romance was in a great measure realized and revived… his feats of chivalry furnishing themes for bards and minstrels, but affording none of those solid benefits to his country on which history loves to pause, and hold up as an example to posterity.” Scott goes so far as to imply that the sullen fidelity of the serf Gurth is more admirable than the reckless courage and self-pleasing and licentious chivalry of the royal Richard; freedom and honor rest for Scott on responsibility and loyalty to the social covenant, not on personal glory.
Whereas in medieval tales the focus is almost always on individual heroism expressed through valor and strength of arms, these qualities play a large but ultimately superficial role in Ivanhoe. In the final anticlimactic duel at Rebecca’s trial, for example, Ivanhoe does not defeat the tempestuous villain by skill; in fact, the other characters all agree that Bois-Guilbert would certainly have won the contest were he not so conflicted in his feelings for Rebecca that he collapses on the field without being struck by his opponent. Beneath the exciting trappings of jousts, abductions, and political intrigues, the central motivating tension of Ivanhoe rests on the disruption of familial relationships and the struggle to restore those relationships to their proper order. Even the political struggle between King Richard and Prince John is a fraternal conflict; and Richard recognizes that his royal duties include reconciling Ivanhoe with his father. This reconciliation is, in fact, his most important success: insofar as Scott suggests that Richard is a good king, it is because he unites England in loyalty to his person as he unites the disrupted families he encounters on his adventures.
The emphasis on familial order gives a different role to women than would be found in a genuinely medieval tale. In medieval chivalric romances concerning male competition the female figures occur secondarily, as lesser prizes to be won in addition to glory or honor. The nineteenth-century ideal of domestic harmony, and its association with political order, gave women a more important role than did medieval political ideology. In the jousts and duels of Ivanhoe, Rowena is the primary object of the struggle between the main character and his opponent. Rowena’s genealogical importance to legitimate Saxon claims of rule is emphasized by Cedric, but in the end she encourages Saxon assimilation rather than independence by marrying Ivanhoe, who has cast his lot with Richard. Her rejection of Athelstane signals the end of Cedric’s plan for renewed Saxon dominance, a plan which Scott marks as backward-looking and unrealistic, if understandable.
If Scott in fact advocates a medieval revival, it is not of the feudal system or of Anglo-Saxonism, but of what he understood as medieval virtues: self-sacrifice, emotion rather than sentimentality, loyalty not only to one’s leaders but also to one’s followers. These attributes were based on an integrated system of personal relationships: between members of a clan or family, between lords and vassals or serfs, between subjects and ruler. Scott depicts these relationships as essentially personal and familial, rather than abstract and national or bureaucratic, which they were rapidly becoming in his own lifetime.
August 23, 2022
One of my favorite novels in junior high. This began a life long affection for the work of Sir Walter Scott, even those whose language was difficult to read. I found the rewards to be worth the effort.
Here is a very good quote from the Goodreads description of the book: "The gripping narrative is structured by a series of conflicts: Saxon versus Norman, Christian versus Jew, men versus women, played out against Scott's unflinching moral realism."
Ivanhoe is one of Scott's best known and best loved works. Movies, TV programs, radio, etc have often been based on this novel of adventure and romance. There was even an anachronistic 1960's British TV series starring Roger Moore, the future Saint and James Bond. It is currently available on Amazon and free with Amazon Prime.
Here is a very good quote from the Goodreads description of the book: "The gripping narrative is structured by a series of conflicts: Saxon versus Norman, Christian versus Jew, men versus women, played out against Scott's unflinching moral realism."
Ivanhoe is one of Scott's best known and best loved works. Movies, TV programs, radio, etc have often been based on this novel of adventure and romance. There was even an anachronistic 1960's British TV series starring Roger Moore, the future Saint and James Bond. It is currently available on Amazon and free with Amazon Prime.
July 12, 2017
It is hard to know what to say about Ivanhoe. It is part Robin Hood style adventure, part history and full of thematic richness. I was surprised that Ivanhoe himself figures into this tale somewhat sporadically. There are many characters who receive more in depth development, and the Jewess Rebecca is more fully developed than the heroine, Rowena.
The attitudes toward Jews in the novel make one uncomfortable in the same way that you feel when reading The Merchant of Venice. It is obvious that Scott himself does not sanction this view of Jews, but even the characters who admire and are helped by Rebecca make comments regarding being defiled by her presence or touch. I constantly had to attempt to put myself into the time in question and remind myself that this is history and to have written it any other way would have been false.
It is easy to see why Sir Walter Scott was a popular writer in his time and has survived. The story is fun, in the same way tales of King Arthur and his Knights are. The descriptions of the lists and tournaments are vivid portrayals. There are plot surprises, there is laughter, particularly in the forms of a jester and a Thane, and there is familiarity in the characters that we have seen time and again from this era, Richard the Lion-Hearted, Robin Hood and his Merry Men, and the evil King John.
The attitudes toward Jews in the novel make one uncomfortable in the same way that you feel when reading The Merchant of Venice. It is obvious that Scott himself does not sanction this view of Jews, but even the characters who admire and are helped by Rebecca make comments regarding being defiled by her presence or touch. I constantly had to attempt to put myself into the time in question and remind myself that this is history and to have written it any other way would have been false.
It is easy to see why Sir Walter Scott was a popular writer in his time and has survived. The story is fun, in the same way tales of King Arthur and his Knights are. The descriptions of the lists and tournaments are vivid portrayals. There are plot surprises, there is laughter, particularly in the forms of a jester and a Thane, and there is familiarity in the characters that we have seen time and again from this era, Richard the Lion-Hearted, Robin Hood and his Merry Men, and the evil King John.
September 24, 2023
If you can deal with Scott’s flamboyant style and purple prose here is a story many girls and boys used to read of the days of yore 🏰 ⚔️ 🦄 🛡️ I judge it as I recall the adventure as a youth not as an adult scrutinizing its flaws.
In fact, I never return to books I read in my youth. Those were magical, uncynical, uncritical reading experiences I was wholly and wonderfully caught up in and that’s how they shall remain in my spirit. There is no need to despoil them with an adult’s wary eye ✨ ✨ ✨
In fact, I never return to books I read in my youth. Those were magical, uncynical, uncritical reading experiences I was wholly and wonderfully caught up in and that’s how they shall remain in my spirit. There is no need to despoil them with an adult’s wary eye ✨ ✨ ✨
December 9, 2021
Note, March 17, 2014: I posted this review some time ago, but just finished tweaking the language in one sentence to clarify a thought.
Obviously, this novel won't be every reader's cup of tea: the author's 19th-century diction will be too much of a hurdle for some, those who define novels of action and adventure as shallow will consider it beneath them, and those who want non- stop action will be bored by Scott's serious effort to depict the life and culture of his medieval setting. But those who appreciate adventure and romance in a well-realized setting, and aren't put off by big words and involved syntax, will find this a genuinely rewarding read.
Ivanhoe is a quintessentially Romantic novel, and that school stressed appeal to the reader's emotions rather than, or at least more so than, their intellects. But this does not mean it's devoid of a philosophical or moral point of view. Novels of action and combat appeal to emotions of fear and excitement, etc., but at their best, they often presuppose a code of conduct between humans that differentiates between good and evil, and cast the conflict in the story in those terms, with the writer on the side of good; and the various characters may model genuine virtues. This is definitely the case here. And the (small-r) romantic aspect of the plot in this book is not a simple tale of "boy falls for girl," either; the above description identifies Rowena as Ivanhoe's "true love," but in fact he comes to have very definite romantic feelings toward Rebecca as well, and the question of how how this triangle will be resolved contributes to the story's interest. Rebecca's character also brings an added depth to the novel --she's a strong, courageous lady who excels in a male-dominated profession in the midst of a sexist society (and the 19th-century culture of Scott's readers was scarcely less sexist than Rebecca's medieval world). Scott's treatment of her, as a Jewish character, also exemplifies genuine tolerance (in a much different sense than the inverted one popularized today, in which we simply proclaim ourselves as apostles of "tolerance," but then hate and anathematize anyone who disagrees with us, because their different beliefs identify them as "intolerant"); as an Anglican, he has honest differences with her religious beliefs, but he can enthusiastically affirm her as a person anyway, and, as an author, allow her to remain true to her own beliefs. So, there's a lot here for the discerning reader to appreciate!
Obviously, this novel won't be every reader's cup of tea: the author's 19th-century diction will be too much of a hurdle for some, those who define novels of action and adventure as shallow will consider it beneath them, and those who want non- stop action will be bored by Scott's serious effort to depict the life and culture of his medieval setting. But those who appreciate adventure and romance in a well-realized setting, and aren't put off by big words and involved syntax, will find this a genuinely rewarding read.
Ivanhoe is a quintessentially Romantic novel, and that school stressed appeal to the reader's emotions rather than, or at least more so than, their intellects. But this does not mean it's devoid of a philosophical or moral point of view. Novels of action and combat appeal to emotions of fear and excitement, etc., but at their best, they often presuppose a code of conduct between humans that differentiates between good and evil, and cast the conflict in the story in those terms, with the writer on the side of good; and the various characters may model genuine virtues. This is definitely the case here. And the (small-r) romantic aspect of the plot in this book is not a simple tale of "boy falls for girl," either; the above description identifies Rowena as Ivanhoe's "true love," but in fact he comes to have very definite romantic feelings toward Rebecca as well, and the question of how how this triangle will be resolved contributes to the story's interest. Rebecca's character also brings an added depth to the novel --she's a strong, courageous lady who excels in a male-dominated profession in the midst of a sexist society (and the 19th-century culture of Scott's readers was scarcely less sexist than Rebecca's medieval world). Scott's treatment of her, as a Jewish character, also exemplifies genuine tolerance (in a much different sense than the inverted one popularized today, in which we simply proclaim ourselves as apostles of "tolerance," but then hate and anathematize anyone who disagrees with us, because their different beliefs identify them as "intolerant"); as an Anglican, he has honest differences with her religious beliefs, but he can enthusiastically affirm her as a person anyway, and, as an author, allow her to remain true to her own beliefs. So, there's a lot here for the discerning reader to appreciate!
January 23, 2024
Narration by David Rintoul: 5 stars
Story by Walter Scott: 3 stars-ish
Had so many conflicting feelings while re-reading this book after more than 30 years. And even after considering this carefully, I am still confused and would really like to be able to pick Scott's mind while he was writing this.
As a modern reader, I could say that this is a mixture of The Merchant of Venice, A Game of Thrones (without the dragons, the sex and the gore, lol, but nevertheless there is the struggle for power) and the movie A Knight's Tale and Robin Hood (the Errol Flynn version).
It is also an example of (non too accurate) historical fiction: Scott presents us a pastiche of some historical facts, lots of folklore and myth. Putting it into historical context: the novel was published in 1819, depicting the long gone period of 12th century England under the rule of Richard Lionheart viewed through the pink lens of romanticism.
I guess there were certainly some ideas and messages he intended to pass on to his contemporary readers (maybe along the line of "conciliation is better than fighting") and wanted them to draw some parallels between the "then" and the "now" for sure.
My biggest problem was with the eponymous hero, (Wilfred) Ivanhoe.
He is an archetype of the knight in shining armour. Scott hung lots of literary attributes on him (courage, nobility, honesty, courtesy, etc), but nothing that would make him stand closer to the reader – he is hardly ever present in the book and when he is, he is distant and inhuman.
He is either fighting with his identity, face, thoughts/feelings utterly hidden behind his armour or lying injured.
He hardly utters any sentences and those only in the last third of the book. He has two miniscule scenes with his beloved (?) Rowena, but actually they do not exchange a single sentence between them (at least not when Ivanhoe is openly himself vs disguised as some monk), which may be the oddest thing I ever came across in a book.
The dubious honour of actually talking to Wilfred goes to the unsung, Jewess heroine of the book, the awesome Rebecca, but to what avail? In the anti-Semitic fashion of the 1200s (the question is: is it only from the 1200s or also from the 1800s?) what she gets from Ivanhoe is patronising.
For all I know WS may have come out as the preacher of religious tolerance with this novel. Very hard to decide. Making Rebecca the shining star of the whole Medieval circus stands in favour of this. Scott also does not hesitate to show the difference between bad Christians (the Templars and the Norman knights) and the good ones (King R, Ivanhoe, Cedric and the Saxons). Maybe he wanted his audience to draw parallels (in Scotland at least) between the Scottish and the English people. The Jacobite uprising was not far away when he wrote the novel.
On the other hand there is Isac of York, representing all the repulsive clichés medieval Christian society attributed to Jews, but possibly WS and his contemporaries did so as well. The sanctimonious behaviour of the “good Christians” is also there: they are feeling repulsed and behave condescendingly to Jews.
It is all assumptions on my part, but either this was the accepted norm in WS’s time and he thought he was historically accurate or he was afraid to show more support.
Another issue for me was that all the good characters were passive and it was the baddies who took action.
Secondary characters were much more interesting than the supposed main ones.
So, here I am right now. This is not a very coherent or logical review, rather a collection of my thoughts and feelings as I was reading the novel.
Story by Walter Scott: 3 stars-ish
Had so many conflicting feelings while re-reading this book after more than 30 years. And even after considering this carefully, I am still confused and would really like to be able to pick Scott's mind while he was writing this.
As a modern reader, I could say that this is a mixture of The Merchant of Venice, A Game of Thrones (without the dragons, the sex and the gore, lol, but nevertheless there is the struggle for power) and the movie A Knight's Tale and Robin Hood (the Errol Flynn version).
It is also an example of (non too accurate) historical fiction: Scott presents us a pastiche of some historical facts, lots of folklore and myth. Putting it into historical context: the novel was published in 1819, depicting the long gone period of 12th century England under the rule of Richard Lionheart viewed through the pink lens of romanticism.
I guess there were certainly some ideas and messages he intended to pass on to his contemporary readers (maybe along the line of "conciliation is better than fighting") and wanted them to draw some parallels between the "then" and the "now" for sure.
My biggest problem was with the eponymous hero, (Wilfred) Ivanhoe.
He is an archetype of the knight in shining armour. Scott hung lots of literary attributes on him (courage, nobility, honesty, courtesy, etc), but nothing that would make him stand closer to the reader – he is hardly ever present in the book and when he is, he is distant and inhuman.
He is either fighting with his identity, face, thoughts/feelings utterly hidden behind his armour or lying injured.
He hardly utters any sentences and those only in the last third of the book. He has two miniscule scenes with his beloved (?) Rowena, but actually they do not exchange a single sentence between them (at least not when Ivanhoe is openly himself vs disguised as some monk), which may be the oddest thing I ever came across in a book.
The dubious honour of actually talking to Wilfred goes to the unsung, Jewess heroine of the book, the awesome Rebecca, but to what avail? In the anti-Semitic fashion of the 1200s (the question is: is it only from the 1200s or also from the 1800s?) what she gets from Ivanhoe is patronising.
For all I know WS may have come out as the preacher of religious tolerance with this novel. Very hard to decide. Making Rebecca the shining star of the whole Medieval circus stands in favour of this. Scott also does not hesitate to show the difference between bad Christians (the Templars and the Norman knights) and the good ones (King R, Ivanhoe, Cedric and the Saxons). Maybe he wanted his audience to draw parallels (in Scotland at least) between the Scottish and the English people. The Jacobite uprising was not far away when he wrote the novel.
On the other hand there is Isac of York, representing all the repulsive clichés medieval Christian society attributed to Jews, but possibly WS and his contemporaries did so as well. The sanctimonious behaviour of the “good Christians” is also there: they are feeling repulsed and behave condescendingly to Jews.
It is all assumptions on my part, but either this was the accepted norm in WS’s time and he thought he was historically accurate or he was afraid to show more support.
Another issue for me was that all the good characters were passive and it was the baddies who took action.
Secondary characters were much more interesting than the supposed main ones.
So, here I am right now. This is not a very coherent or logical review, rather a collection of my thoughts and feelings as I was reading the novel.
February 22, 2017
I have decided to put down this book and not finish it 2/3 of the way in, the reason being that while it was interesting to read about the old times of knights, tournaments and great battles at castles, it wasn't in any way interesting enough for me to keep on reading. I feel like being this far in, I've already gotten out of the story what I possibly could, and I don't really care about how everything's going to end.
Funnily enough, I was originally under the impression that this was going to be a children' story written in a somewhat easily accessible language. Turned out I was completely wrong. It's a classic story for adults written in a rather dense 1820s-language. Maybe my disappointment is part of the reason why I don't really feel like finishing it.
Funnily enough, I was originally under the impression that this was going to be a children' story written in a somewhat easily accessible language. Turned out I was completely wrong. It's a classic story for adults written in a rather dense 1820s-language. Maybe my disappointment is part of the reason why I don't really feel like finishing it.
December 14, 2019
Put down "lame of thrones" and pick up a true epic. ok, that was a little strong this book is not for everyone and hard for modern audiences to appreciate. once Considered one of the greatest novels ever printed in English. It's influence on the culture of the English speaking world is monumental. I might be true that the influences might have surpassed the masterwork in entertainment. Lord of the rings, Robin Hood, Princess Bride I could go on. Robin Hood for one is very popular in modern entertainment. you mention Robin Hood people get excited, mention Ivanhoe most people make a face. Princess Bride is a very beloved adaptation or at least in style.
a Heroic Epic that includes Romance, Chivalry, Racism, sexism, cultural approbation, and intertwining of different cultures. I believe it has something for everyone a truly complete book. the Saxons vs. Normans dynamic might be obsolete with little genetic relatives today. but it reflect a common dynamic that has been played out by cultures all over the world. the pride of the Saxons is visceral and relatable. the fact that Walter Scott is bias to the Saxons is a bit of a turn off. he skews the historical facts a bit. the pacing is also dated and not what we have become accustom to in action adventure. but it's folly to me to call it boring. the worldbuilding is superb you really can experience medieval England. your emersion into that world is critical to enjoyment. if you have trouble with historical emersion stay clear. this is a classic which bring reading challenges but is fantastic if you approach it the right way. not sure why this book as lost it's critical shine. maybe we think we have learn all the social lesson we can from it. maybe those influenced by it surpassed it. maybe a little to historical fantastic regarded as historically accurate. maybe it's boring. all I know is Ivanhoe is the best book I read in 2019!
a Heroic Epic that includes Romance, Chivalry, Racism, sexism, cultural approbation, and intertwining of different cultures. I believe it has something for everyone a truly complete book. the Saxons vs. Normans dynamic might be obsolete with little genetic relatives today. but it reflect a common dynamic that has been played out by cultures all over the world. the pride of the Saxons is visceral and relatable. the fact that Walter Scott is bias to the Saxons is a bit of a turn off. he skews the historical facts a bit. the pacing is also dated and not what we have become accustom to in action adventure. but it's folly to me to call it boring. the worldbuilding is superb you really can experience medieval England. your emersion into that world is critical to enjoyment. if you have trouble with historical emersion stay clear. this is a classic which bring reading challenges but is fantastic if you approach it the right way. not sure why this book as lost it's critical shine. maybe we think we have learn all the social lesson we can from it. maybe those influenced by it surpassed it. maybe a little to historical fantastic regarded as historically accurate. maybe it's boring. all I know is Ivanhoe is the best book I read in 2019!
September 10, 2024
Един от най-добрите рицарски романи, който съм чел - редом ми е с "Черната стрела" на Стивънсън и "Кръстоносци" на Сенкевич!
December 11, 2020
"La venganza es una fiesta para los dioses."
Sir Walter Scott, fue el fundador de la novela histórica romántica, y es con "Ivanhoe" en donde el género se instala para siempre en la literatura. Este prolífico autor inglés posee una veintena de estas novelas y con cada una de ellas iba perfeccionándose, logrando con esto, ejercer una marcada influencia entre sus pares y los autores que quisieron seguir dicha influencia.
Con el correr de los años fueron apareciendo grandes ejemplos de novelas históricas en todos los países, tal es el caso de la monumental "La guerra y la paz" de Lev Tolstói y "La hija del capitán" de Alexandr Pushkin en Rusia, de "Nuestra señora de París" de Víctor Hugo y "Los tres mosqueteros" de Alexandre Dumas o "Salambó" de Gustave Flaubert en Francia y de una lista interminable que ocuparía varias páginas.
Al igual que Cervantes, Scott debe haber recalado en varios libros de caballería, incluidos el Orlando Furioso y el Quijote para escribir el suyo ya que, aunque publicado en 1820 se ubica en la época medieval para contar la historia de este enfrentamiento entre normandos y sajones en la Inglaterra de la época de los templarios.
Más aún, todo transcurre durante los años del reinado de Ricardo I, Corazón de León quien está cautivo en Palestina y presuntamente muerto, mientras su déspota hermano Juan sin Tierra ejerce una tiranía despreciable debido a su unión con los normandos para someter al pueblo sajón.
Los duelos entre caballeros medievales, con sus lanzas y armaduras, los salteadores de caminos, las bellas damas y los bosques presuntamente encantados y los castillos imponentes son los condimentos esenciales de esta novela y su ambientación por parte del autor es indispensable y habitual.
Los personajes que llevan a cargo las distintas aventuras son de lo más variopintos y cada uno de ellos cumple una función esencial, desde Juan sin Tierra, pasando por Brian de Bois-Guilbert (el caballero Templario normando y rival de Ivanhoe), Maurice de Bracy, Frente de buey, Cedric de Rotherdam, padre de Ivanhoe y por supuesto Ricardo I Corazón de León y muy especialmente el arquero Locksley . Gurth el porquero y Wamba el bufón, aunque al principio parecen secundarios, se transformarán en roles principales de toda la novela. Son como versiones mucho más combativas de Sancho Panza.
Como no podía ser de otra manera, sobresalen dos personajes femeninos que son el sostén de toda la lucha entre estos caballeros, me refiero a la bella Rebecca, hija de un comerciante judío, Isaac de York y hermosa Rowena, una hermosa sajona adoptada por Cedric. El contrapunto entre estas dos damas es brillantemente llevado a cabo por Scott, más puntualmente en el último capítulo.
De todas los sucesos que ocupan la novela, el mejor es la toma del castillo normando de Frente de buey llevado a cabo por los sajones en una sangrienta lucha para rescatar a la bella Rowena.
Un tema que me llamó mucho la atención es el tratamiento que Scott hace del judío Isaac de York y de los judíos en general, ya que por momento pude notar una especie de aberración a los hebreos que por momentos se torna bastante violenta por la discriminación y el desprecio que sufren Isaac y Rebeca tanto de parte de los normandos como de los sajones.
Los judíos, que a los largo de la historia y desde la época del mismísimo Jesucristo, han deambulado por el mundo, sufriendo la persecución de los romanos, de los templarios (como en esta novela), de los rusos, los daneses y los bretones, la persecución y expulsión de España a cargo de los moros y ni que hablar de las atrocidades que los nazis les hicieron durante la Segunda Guerra Mundial.
No es la primera vez que me encuentro este tipo de desprecio literario en libros de autores clásicos. En una parte de esta novela se dice de ellos:"Ten presente que hablas de un judío, de un israelita, tan incapaz de soltar el oro que una vez ha tocado, como lo son las arenas del desierto de devolver el agua que ha derramado en ellas el viajero." Esa frase me remite a otra, bastante racista de la novela Tarás Bulba de Nikolai Gógol: "Lo primero que brilló ante los ojos del judío fueron los dos mil ducados de recompensa por la cabeza del cosaco; pero se avergonzó de su codicia y pugnó por reprimir dentro suyo esa eterna fijación en el oro, que habita enroscada como un gusano en el alma de todo judío."
El tratamiento que se hace de los judíos es el punto más flojo y reprochable de la novela, y para colmo de males, es uno de los temas principales del libro.
También he de decir que en cierto modo me sentí defraudado con Ivanhoe el personaje, y más puntualmente por la manera en la que el autor hace salir al personaje de escena después de un duelo, dejándole casi muerto, ya que gran parte de la acción mal llevan adelante los otros personajes, para reaparecer recién en la acción en el capítulo 31 de los 35 que tiene el libro.
Algo similar sucede en la "Ilíada" de Homero en la que Aquiles también desaparece para volver hecho una furia cuando Héctor asesina a su amante Patroclo.
En líneas generales, "Ivanhoe" es un libro entretenido a medias, ya que por momentos se torna tedioso y es realmente extenso, pero que en ciertos tramos posee aventura, mucho humor gracias a la intervención de algunos de sus personajes, lo que le valió a Sir Walter Scott para fundar la novela romántica que aún hoy se sigue publicando y leyendo en todo el mundo.
Sir Walter Scott, fue el fundador de la novela histórica romántica, y es con "Ivanhoe" en donde el género se instala para siempre en la literatura. Este prolífico autor inglés posee una veintena de estas novelas y con cada una de ellas iba perfeccionándose, logrando con esto, ejercer una marcada influencia entre sus pares y los autores que quisieron seguir dicha influencia.
Con el correr de los años fueron apareciendo grandes ejemplos de novelas históricas en todos los países, tal es el caso de la monumental "La guerra y la paz" de Lev Tolstói y "La hija del capitán" de Alexandr Pushkin en Rusia, de "Nuestra señora de París" de Víctor Hugo y "Los tres mosqueteros" de Alexandre Dumas o "Salambó" de Gustave Flaubert en Francia y de una lista interminable que ocuparía varias páginas.
Al igual que Cervantes, Scott debe haber recalado en varios libros de caballería, incluidos el Orlando Furioso y el Quijote para escribir el suyo ya que, aunque publicado en 1820 se ubica en la época medieval para contar la historia de este enfrentamiento entre normandos y sajones en la Inglaterra de la época de los templarios.
Más aún, todo transcurre durante los años del reinado de Ricardo I, Corazón de León quien está cautivo en Palestina y presuntamente muerto, mientras su déspota hermano Juan sin Tierra ejerce una tiranía despreciable debido a su unión con los normandos para someter al pueblo sajón.
Los duelos entre caballeros medievales, con sus lanzas y armaduras, los salteadores de caminos, las bellas damas y los bosques presuntamente encantados y los castillos imponentes son los condimentos esenciales de esta novela y su ambientación por parte del autor es indispensable y habitual.
Los personajes que llevan a cargo las distintas aventuras son de lo más variopintos y cada uno de ellos cumple una función esencial, desde Juan sin Tierra, pasando por Brian de Bois-Guilbert (el caballero Templario normando y rival de Ivanhoe), Maurice de Bracy, Frente de buey, Cedric de Rotherdam, padre de Ivanhoe y por supuesto Ricardo I Corazón de León y muy especialmente el arquero Locksley . Gurth el porquero y Wamba el bufón, aunque al principio parecen secundarios, se transformarán en roles principales de toda la novela. Son como versiones mucho más combativas de Sancho Panza.
Como no podía ser de otra manera, sobresalen dos personajes femeninos que son el sostén de toda la lucha entre estos caballeros, me refiero a la bella Rebecca, hija de un comerciante judío, Isaac de York y hermosa Rowena, una hermosa sajona adoptada por Cedric. El contrapunto entre estas dos damas es brillantemente llevado a cabo por Scott, más puntualmente en el último capítulo.
De todas los sucesos que ocupan la novela, el mejor es la toma del castillo normando de Frente de buey llevado a cabo por los sajones en una sangrienta lucha para rescatar a la bella Rowena.
Un tema que me llamó mucho la atención es el tratamiento que Scott hace del judío Isaac de York y de los judíos en general, ya que por momento pude notar una especie de aberración a los hebreos que por momentos se torna bastante violenta por la discriminación y el desprecio que sufren Isaac y Rebeca tanto de parte de los normandos como de los sajones.
Los judíos, que a los largo de la historia y desde la época del mismísimo Jesucristo, han deambulado por el mundo, sufriendo la persecución de los romanos, de los templarios (como en esta novela), de los rusos, los daneses y los bretones, la persecución y expulsión de España a cargo de los moros y ni que hablar de las atrocidades que los nazis les hicieron durante la Segunda Guerra Mundial.
No es la primera vez que me encuentro este tipo de desprecio literario en libros de autores clásicos. En una parte de esta novela se dice de ellos:"Ten presente que hablas de un judío, de un israelita, tan incapaz de soltar el oro que una vez ha tocado, como lo son las arenas del desierto de devolver el agua que ha derramado en ellas el viajero." Esa frase me remite a otra, bastante racista de la novela Tarás Bulba de Nikolai Gógol: "Lo primero que brilló ante los ojos del judío fueron los dos mil ducados de recompensa por la cabeza del cosaco; pero se avergonzó de su codicia y pugnó por reprimir dentro suyo esa eterna fijación en el oro, que habita enroscada como un gusano en el alma de todo judío."
El tratamiento que se hace de los judíos es el punto más flojo y reprochable de la novela, y para colmo de males, es uno de los temas principales del libro.
También he de decir que en cierto modo me sentí defraudado con Ivanhoe el personaje, y más puntualmente por la manera en la que el autor hace salir al personaje de escena después de un duelo, dejándole casi muerto, ya que gran parte de la acción mal llevan adelante los otros personajes, para reaparecer recién en la acción en el capítulo 31 de los 35 que tiene el libro.
Algo similar sucede en la "Ilíada" de Homero en la que Aquiles también desaparece para volver hecho una furia cuando Héctor asesina a su amante Patroclo.
En líneas generales, "Ivanhoe" es un libro entretenido a medias, ya que por momentos se torna tedioso y es realmente extenso, pero que en ciertos tramos posee aventura, mucho humor gracias a la intervención de algunos de sus personajes, lo que le valió a Sir Walter Scott para fundar la novela romántica que aún hoy se sigue publicando y leyendo en todo el mundo.
January 5, 2021
Sometimes I'm in the middle of complaining to Joanne that some book, which I told Joanne before I started was probably going to be boring and stupid, is indeed boring and stupid, and I plan to complain about it being boring and stupid for the next week because it's also long, and Joanne says silly things like "Why would you even start a book that you think will be boring and stupid?" Ivanhoe is why! Sometimes I'm wrong. I thought Ivanhoe would be boring and stupid, but it's a blast.
Flesh Wounds
Here's the test for whether you'll like it: have you ever liked any story - even just one story - with a knight in it? If you're not totally immune to knights clanking about flinging gauntlets at each other, you should like Ivanhoe. It's the apotheosis of knight-bashing. There are:
- damsels in distress, and a terrific response by one of them;
- a great scheming old crone in a tower;
- a wicked prince;
- a thrilling castle siege (and note: those are usually not thrilling, it's just super hard to write large-scale battle scenes that work, but here you go!);
- mystery knights in black;
- a lusty brawling priest;
- even an outlaw bowman dressed in green. (Is his identity supposed to be a secret? Because it's not, neither is the Black Knight's.)
If none of those things sound fun to you....well, we can still read Mansfield Park together.
Apologetic Anti-Semitism
The one thing I should mention that doesn't sit perfectly with me is (sigh, here we go again) Isaac the Jew. And look, Scott's major point, which he makes again and again, is how awful bigotry towards Jews is. "Except the flying fish," he says, "there was no race existing on the earth, in the air, or the waters, who were the object of such an intermitting, general, and relentless persecution as the Jews," and you're like yeah! Good point! But then he follows that with "The obstinacy and avarice of the Jews...seemed to increase in proportion to the persecution with which they were visited," and you're like waaaaaiiiit a minute here chief. It's a sortof apologetic anti-Semitism that you run into sometimes with 1800s writers: "There was no angle left to them but to become money-lenders," they seem to say, "So of course they became greedy and wicked as well." Harriet Beecher Stowe has similar ideas about Black people in Uncle Tom's Cabin. I think they're trying, but it doesn't age well.
Walter Scott in Context
Scott is sometimes called the inventor of historical fiction. He's also sometimes called shitty; EM Forster says that "To make things happen one after another is his only serious aim." Scott can't do characters; he can't even do plots. He just presents a series of scenes. "He has the power to present the outside of a character and to work from the outside to the inside," says Pritchett. "But once inside, he discovers only what is generic." But then there's David Lodge calling Scott "the single Shakespearean talent of the English novel."
All of these things are hyperbole. It's true that characterization is not Scott's strong point - lot of archetypes here - but everyone's entertaining and memorable enough; it's okay not to be a psychologist. Scott's super fun to read, and that's great.
...and in Central Park
For some reason Central Park has a statue of him, which I went to visit as I read Ivanhoe. Here it is:
Over on the other side - in shade, so the pic I took from that side doesn't show it at all - is his dog. He looks like a nice guy, doesn't he? I like him.
Flesh Wounds
Here's the test for whether you'll like it: have you ever liked any story - even just one story - with a knight in it? If you're not totally immune to knights clanking about flinging gauntlets at each other, you should like Ivanhoe. It's the apotheosis of knight-bashing. There are:
- damsels in distress, and a terrific response by one of them;
- a great scheming old crone in a tower;
- a wicked prince;
- a thrilling castle siege (and note: those are usually not thrilling, it's just super hard to write large-scale battle scenes that work, but here you go!);
- mystery knights in black;
- a lusty brawling priest;
- even an outlaw bowman dressed in green. (Is his identity supposed to be a secret? Because it's not, neither is the Black Knight's.)
If none of those things sound fun to you....well, we can still read Mansfield Park together.
Apologetic Anti-Semitism
The one thing I should mention that doesn't sit perfectly with me is (sigh, here we go again) Isaac the Jew. And look, Scott's major point, which he makes again and again, is how awful bigotry towards Jews is. "Except the flying fish," he says, "there was no race existing on the earth, in the air, or the waters, who were the object of such an intermitting, general, and relentless persecution as the Jews," and you're like yeah! Good point! But then he follows that with "The obstinacy and avarice of the Jews...seemed to increase in proportion to the persecution with which they were visited," and you're like waaaaaiiiit a minute here chief. It's a sortof apologetic anti-Semitism that you run into sometimes with 1800s writers: "There was no angle left to them but to become money-lenders," they seem to say, "So of course they became greedy and wicked as well." Harriet Beecher Stowe has similar ideas about Black people in Uncle Tom's Cabin. I think they're trying, but it doesn't age well.
Walter Scott in Context
Scott is sometimes called the inventor of historical fiction. He's also sometimes called shitty; EM Forster says that "To make things happen one after another is his only serious aim." Scott can't do characters; he can't even do plots. He just presents a series of scenes. "He has the power to present the outside of a character and to work from the outside to the inside," says Pritchett. "But once inside, he discovers only what is generic." But then there's David Lodge calling Scott "the single Shakespearean talent of the English novel."
All of these things are hyperbole. It's true that characterization is not Scott's strong point - lot of archetypes here - but everyone's entertaining and memorable enough; it's okay not to be a psychologist. Scott's super fun to read, and that's great.
...and in Central Park
For some reason Central Park has a statue of him, which I went to visit as I read Ivanhoe. Here it is:
Over on the other side - in shade, so the pic I took from that side doesn't show it at all - is his dog. He looks like a nice guy, doesn't he? I like him.
December 29, 2017
“Hearken,” he (Brian de Bois-Guilbert) said, “Rebecca; I have hitherto spoken mildly to thee, but now my language shall be that of a conqueror. Thou art the captive of my bow and spear—subject to my will by the laws of all nations; nor will I abate an inch of my right, or abstain from taking by violence what thou refusest to entreaty or necessity.”
“Stand back,” said Rebecca—“which portion of “no” dost thou not comprehend? Kindly desist from thou crapulous Trumpery posthaste!”
Some of the above quotes hath indeed been tampered with from Sir Walter Scott’s original text. Apologies to all purists. Honestly, I cannot stand that longwinded de Bois-Guilbert. What a silly bunt (as Eric Idle would say).
Brian de Bois-Guilbert and poor Rebecca
Took me one month+19 days to read this (audio) book. I would have read it faster if it had been more compelling. but Ivanhoe is not an easy book to read, the olde English dialogue takes getting used to, and while some of it is quite entertaining it often drags, especially when that damned de Bois-Guilbert is delivering his interminable gabble.
It is hard to summarize what the novel is about as it is so fragmented. Set in the 12th century the novel (sort of) follows Wilfred Ivanhoe as he returns from the Holy Land after the Third Crusade has ended. He soon entered a jousting tournament and jousted the asses off the other competitors. Ivanhoe wins the tournament but is gravely injured after his foes ganged up on him; fortunately, a mysterious Black Knight shows up to aid him. He is then taken to Rebecca the Jewess. Ivanhoe, his Dad, Rebecca, and others are soon kidnapped by dastardly Norman Maurice de Bracy, a friend of the verbal diarrhea afflicted de Bois-Guilbert. They are taken to Torquilstone, the castle of Front-de-Boeuf (another antagonist). The Black Knight soon comes to the rescue with the help of the sharp shootin’ Robin Hood, Friar Tuck, and many other hipster outlaw types. Many more events follow and await your discovery.
The Black Knight (though he retains both arms in this book)
OK, now I am going to get medieval on this book. Actually, on reflection, I quite like Ivanhoe, though I was often frustrated when it grinds to a halt (shut up, de Bois-Guilbert!). By the end, I felt it definitely outstayed its welcome. I am surprised we don’t see that much of the eponymous hero, he does not show up until page 50 or so, after his jousting injuries he disappears from the narrative for many pages, only to become active again towards the end. His climactic battle with that damn de Bois-Guilbert is a disappointment and very WTF.
Wilfred
Sir Walter Scott's prose is a thing pf beauty and I even like the olde English once I got used to it. The story, while fragmented, is good, and not hard to follow. My only complaint is that for a “Romance” (as in “a medieval tale dealing with a hero of chivalry”, not a story of smooches and heartbreaks) it is not very thrilling. Sir Walter does write very good fight scenes but those are too few and far between to effectively liven up the narrative. There is just too much dialogue and that damn de Bois-Guilbert just goes on and on and on, repeating himself in his attempt to get into poor Rebecca’s pants. Apart from him, the characterization is generally very good, I particularly like Wamba the jester, and Robin Hood, especially when he is showing off. The humorous bits work for me but, again, there is too little of them.
I can’t really recommend Ivanhoe, personally, I will stick to Alexandre Dumas for medieval badassery.
Notes:
• The Normans and the Saxons have an acrimonious relationship but they agree on one thing, their disdain for the Jews. The most put upon characters in the book.
• Richard the Lionheart really lives up to his name, and seems to enjoy ass kicking more than ruling the land.
• Audiobook from Librivox, read by various readers, some are pretty good, some are not so good but bearable. Whatchoo want for free, eh?
Quotes:
“I pray thee, uncle,” answered the Jester, “let my folly, for once, protect my roguery. I did but make a mistake between my right hand and my left; and he might have pardoned a greater, who took a fool for his counsellor and guide.”
Wamba is the best!
“And now,” said Locksley, “I will crave your Grace’s permission to plant such a mark as is used in the North Country; and welcome every brave yeoman who shall try a shot at it to win a smile from the bonny lass he loves best.”
“Formed in the best proportions of her sex, Rowena was tall in stature, yet not so much so as to attract observation on account of superior height. Her complexion was exquisitely fair, but the noble cast of her head and features prevented the insipidity which sometimes attaches to fair beauties. Her clear blue eye, which sat enshrined beneath a graceful eyebrow of brown sufficiently marked to give expression to the forehead, seemed capable to kindle as well as melt, to command as well as to beseech.” (etc.) That is the most elaborate description of a woman I have ever seen.
“To all true English hearts, and to the confusion of foreign tyrants.”
Here is a de Bois-Guilbert special:
“No, damsel!” said the proud Templar, springing up, “thou shalt not thus impose on me—if I renounce present fame and future ambition, I renounce it for thy sake, and we will escape in company. Listen to me, Rebecca,” he said, again softening his tone; “England,—Europe,—is not the world. There are spheres in which we may act, ample enough even for my ambition. We will go to Palestine, where Conrade, Marquis of Montserrat, is my friend—a friend free as myself from the doting scruples which fetter our free-born reason—rather with Saladin will we league ourselves, than endure the scorn of the bigots whom we contemn.—I will form new paths to greatness,” he continued, again traversing the room with hasty strides—“Europe shall hear the loud step of him she has driven from her sons!—Not the millions whom her crusaders send to slaughter, can do so much to defend Palestine—not the sabres of the thousands and ten thousands of Saracens can hew their way so deep into that land for which nations are striving, as the strength and policy of me and those brethren, who, in despite of yonder old bigot, will adhere to me in good and evil. Thou shalt be a queen, Rebecca—on Mount Carmel shall we pitch the throne which my valour will gain for you, and I will exchange my long-desired batoon for a sceptre!” STFU!
“Stand back,” said Rebecca—“which portion of “no” dost thou not comprehend? Kindly desist from thou crapulous Trumpery posthaste!”
Some of the above quotes hath indeed been tampered with from Sir Walter Scott’s original text. Apologies to all purists. Honestly, I cannot stand that longwinded de Bois-Guilbert. What a silly bunt (as Eric Idle would say).
Brian de Bois-Guilbert and poor Rebecca
Took me one month+19 days to read this (audio) book. I would have read it faster if it had been more compelling. but Ivanhoe is not an easy book to read, the olde English dialogue takes getting used to, and while some of it is quite entertaining it often drags, especially when that damned de Bois-Guilbert is delivering his interminable gabble.
It is hard to summarize what the novel is about as it is so fragmented. Set in the 12th century the novel (sort of) follows Wilfred Ivanhoe as he returns from the Holy Land after the Third Crusade has ended. He soon entered a jousting tournament and jousted the asses off the other competitors. Ivanhoe wins the tournament but is gravely injured after his foes ganged up on him; fortunately, a mysterious Black Knight shows up to aid him. He is then taken to Rebecca the Jewess. Ivanhoe, his Dad, Rebecca, and others are soon kidnapped by dastardly Norman Maurice de Bracy, a friend of the verbal diarrhea afflicted de Bois-Guilbert. They are taken to Torquilstone, the castle of Front-de-Boeuf (another antagonist). The Black Knight soon comes to the rescue with the help of the sharp shootin’ Robin Hood, Friar Tuck, and many other hipster outlaw types. Many more events follow and await your discovery.
The Black Knight (though he retains both arms in this book)
OK, now I am going to get medieval on this book. Actually, on reflection, I quite like Ivanhoe, though I was often frustrated when it grinds to a halt (shut up, de Bois-Guilbert!). By the end, I felt it definitely outstayed its welcome. I am surprised we don’t see that much of the eponymous hero, he does not show up until page 50 or so, after his jousting injuries he disappears from the narrative for many pages, only to become active again towards the end. His climactic battle with that damn de Bois-Guilbert is a disappointment and very WTF.
Wilfred
Sir Walter Scott's prose is a thing pf beauty and I even like the olde English once I got used to it. The story, while fragmented, is good, and not hard to follow. My only complaint is that for a “Romance” (as in “a medieval tale dealing with a hero of chivalry”, not a story of smooches and heartbreaks) it is not very thrilling. Sir Walter does write very good fight scenes but those are too few and far between to effectively liven up the narrative. There is just too much dialogue and that damn de Bois-Guilbert just goes on and on and on, repeating himself in his attempt to get into poor Rebecca’s pants. Apart from him, the characterization is generally very good, I particularly like Wamba the jester, and Robin Hood, especially when he is showing off. The humorous bits work for me but, again, there is too little of them.
I can’t really recommend Ivanhoe, personally, I will stick to Alexandre Dumas for medieval badassery.
Notes:
• The Normans and the Saxons have an acrimonious relationship but they agree on one thing, their disdain for the Jews. The most put upon characters in the book.
• Richard the Lionheart really lives up to his name, and seems to enjoy ass kicking more than ruling the land.
• Audiobook from Librivox, read by various readers, some are pretty good, some are not so good but bearable. Whatchoo want for free, eh?
Quotes:
“I pray thee, uncle,” answered the Jester, “let my folly, for once, protect my roguery. I did but make a mistake between my right hand and my left; and he might have pardoned a greater, who took a fool for his counsellor and guide.”
Wamba is the best!
“And now,” said Locksley, “I will crave your Grace’s permission to plant such a mark as is used in the North Country; and welcome every brave yeoman who shall try a shot at it to win a smile from the bonny lass he loves best.”
“Formed in the best proportions of her sex, Rowena was tall in stature, yet not so much so as to attract observation on account of superior height. Her complexion was exquisitely fair, but the noble cast of her head and features prevented the insipidity which sometimes attaches to fair beauties. Her clear blue eye, which sat enshrined beneath a graceful eyebrow of brown sufficiently marked to give expression to the forehead, seemed capable to kindle as well as melt, to command as well as to beseech.” (etc.) That is the most elaborate description of a woman I have ever seen.
“To all true English hearts, and to the confusion of foreign tyrants.”
Here is a de Bois-Guilbert special:
“No, damsel!” said the proud Templar, springing up, “thou shalt not thus impose on me—if I renounce present fame and future ambition, I renounce it for thy sake, and we will escape in company. Listen to me, Rebecca,” he said, again softening his tone; “England,—Europe,—is not the world. There are spheres in which we may act, ample enough even for my ambition. We will go to Palestine, where Conrade, Marquis of Montserrat, is my friend—a friend free as myself from the doting scruples which fetter our free-born reason—rather with Saladin will we league ourselves, than endure the scorn of the bigots whom we contemn.—I will form new paths to greatness,” he continued, again traversing the room with hasty strides—“Europe shall hear the loud step of him she has driven from her sons!—Not the millions whom her crusaders send to slaughter, can do so much to defend Palestine—not the sabres of the thousands and ten thousands of Saracens can hew their way so deep into that land for which nations are striving, as the strength and policy of me and those brethren, who, in despite of yonder old bigot, will adhere to me in good and evil. Thou shalt be a queen, Rebecca—on Mount Carmel shall we pitch the throne which my valour will gain for you, and I will exchange my long-desired batoon for a sceptre!” STFU!
January 17, 2021
Ivanhoe by Walter Scott, is set in England during the reign of King Richard , who is away on the Crusades to the Holy Land , leaving the administration of the country to his scheming brother , John , and his corrupt court cronies like Waldemar Fitzurse , Malvoisin and Front-de-Bouef.
Meanwhile a mysterious Disinherited Knight, aided by another anonymous Knight in black amour (Le Noir Fainéant) defeats all of King John's favorite knights at the jousting tournament at Ashby.
The challenger is revealed as Wilfred of Ivanhoe, the disinherited son of the Saxon nobleman, Cedric, who is the beloved of his father's charge, the comely Rowena.
The character who was for me, the most interesting, was the beautiful `black eyed' Jewish beauty, Rebecca, the daughter of the merchant Isaac of York. Compassionate and yet fiery, humble yet proud, sensual and yet modest, it is not hard to understand the passion for her felt by the Knight Templar, Brian De-Bois Gilbert. She and her father must try to survive in a violently anti-Semitic society, in which they are rendered defenseless, as members of a humbled nation. Rebecca, faced with a horrific fate, refuses to renounce her faith, right until the end.
Rebecca thus says during her trial by the order of Knights Templars: " ` To invoke your pity' said the lovely Jewess, with a voice tremulous with emotion `would I am be aware, , be as useless as I should hold it mean...Nor will I even vindicate myself at the expense of the oppressor which seem to convert the tyrant into the victim."
So you see how timeless words of wisdom can be.
Also thrown into the book are Robin Hood and his Merry Men, and the witty Jester Wamba . A quotable quote from Wamba from Wamba is " To restrain them by their sense of humanity is the same as to stop a runaway horse with a bridle of silk thread.
The book is a pleasure to read. As Herbert Strang wrote in an early 20th century edition of Ivanhoe: "In introducing this great story to a new generation of boys and girls, I find myself wishing that I too, where about to read Ivanhoe for the first time"
After having read Ivanhoe , I can understand exactly why he wrote that.
Meanwhile a mysterious Disinherited Knight, aided by another anonymous Knight in black amour (Le Noir Fainéant) defeats all of King John's favorite knights at the jousting tournament at Ashby.
The challenger is revealed as Wilfred of Ivanhoe, the disinherited son of the Saxon nobleman, Cedric, who is the beloved of his father's charge, the comely Rowena.
The character who was for me, the most interesting, was the beautiful `black eyed' Jewish beauty, Rebecca, the daughter of the merchant Isaac of York. Compassionate and yet fiery, humble yet proud, sensual and yet modest, it is not hard to understand the passion for her felt by the Knight Templar, Brian De-Bois Gilbert. She and her father must try to survive in a violently anti-Semitic society, in which they are rendered defenseless, as members of a humbled nation. Rebecca, faced with a horrific fate, refuses to renounce her faith, right until the end.
Rebecca thus says during her trial by the order of Knights Templars: " ` To invoke your pity' said the lovely Jewess, with a voice tremulous with emotion `would I am be aware, , be as useless as I should hold it mean...Nor will I even vindicate myself at the expense of the oppressor which seem to convert the tyrant into the victim."
So you see how timeless words of wisdom can be.
Also thrown into the book are Robin Hood and his Merry Men, and the witty Jester Wamba . A quotable quote from Wamba from Wamba is " To restrain them by their sense of humanity is the same as to stop a runaway horse with a bridle of silk thread.
The book is a pleasure to read. As Herbert Strang wrote in an early 20th century edition of Ivanhoe: "In introducing this great story to a new generation of boys and girls, I find myself wishing that I too, where about to read Ivanhoe for the first time"
After having read Ivanhoe , I can understand exactly why he wrote that.
February 28, 2023
This is the original, the classic romantic adventure of chivalry, tournaments, damsels in distress, noble knights, evil villains and daring rescues. It is full of exciting action, lofty ideals and beautiful maidens, jousts and battles to the death. In fact, this is THE novel that originally put the buckle in the swash.
The tale is set during the reign of Richard the Lionheart, who is absent on a crusade, and his weak, greedy and changeable brother John rules in his stead. The ruling Normans are opposed by the oppressed Saxons, lead by Cedric, the old stubborn Saxon lord who even disowned his own son for following King Richard, a Norman. He is guardian of Rowena, the beautiful princess descended from the old Saxon kings, and wants her to marry Ethelstan, the last male Saxon heir to the throne.
We have a large cast of colorful characters, among whom the titular Ivanhoe shows up probably the least. We see way more of Cedric, his father, John and his norman courtiers, the Knight Templars, and the Jew Isaac and his beautiful and talented daughter, Rebecca. King Richard also appears, and entertainingly makes acquaintence with Friar Tuck, Robin Hood and his merry men. Scott spends quite a bit on character development, and we are treated to several humorous bits involving Friar Tuck, Robin Hood, and Ethelstan and his appetite.
Sir Walter Scott’s language is quite readable and the action and scenery are well described. However, most characters talk in long and circuituos sentences, never neglecting using fifty words where five would do… so this makes it a bit tedious. On audio, with a good narrator, this is not so much a drawback, but I probably would have skipped quite a bit if I was reading it.
With a work this old there are always problematic parts. This one drips with antisemitic characters. While Scott feels for his Jew and his beautiful daughter and laments how despite their money, they could any time be robbed, expelled or worse, he lets his characters abuse and shame the Jews in pretty much every scene. They go on and on about how dirty and infidel they are and they don’t even want to touch them. I am sure in reality the Jews were way cleaner than most Christians…
The other is the terrible misogyny. We know that damsels were supposed to be beautiful, modest and needing to be rescued, I expected that. And Scott does speak out against the terribly flimsy excuses and lies with which a female good at healing could be declared a witch whenever she became inconvenient to someone. But the scene where Cedric despises Ulrika for sharing the bed of her abductors and still being alive just really made me angry. She was raped, she had no choice in the matter! She needed sympathy, not shaming.
Overall this work stands the test of time - it is still entertaining, and if I could get over the antisemitism and the misogyny, I would give it five stars.
The tale is set during the reign of Richard the Lionheart, who is absent on a crusade, and his weak, greedy and changeable brother John rules in his stead. The ruling Normans are opposed by the oppressed Saxons, lead by Cedric, the old stubborn Saxon lord who even disowned his own son for following King Richard, a Norman. He is guardian of Rowena, the beautiful princess descended from the old Saxon kings, and wants her to marry Ethelstan, the last male Saxon heir to the throne.
We have a large cast of colorful characters, among whom the titular Ivanhoe shows up probably the least. We see way more of Cedric, his father, John and his norman courtiers, the Knight Templars, and the Jew Isaac and his beautiful and talented daughter, Rebecca. King Richard also appears, and entertainingly makes acquaintence with Friar Tuck, Robin Hood and his merry men. Scott spends quite a bit on character development, and we are treated to several humorous bits involving Friar Tuck, Robin Hood, and Ethelstan and his appetite.
Sir Walter Scott’s language is quite readable and the action and scenery are well described. However, most characters talk in long and circuituos sentences, never neglecting using fifty words where five would do… so this makes it a bit tedious. On audio, with a good narrator, this is not so much a drawback, but I probably would have skipped quite a bit if I was reading it.
With a work this old there are always problematic parts. This one drips with antisemitic characters. While Scott feels for his Jew and his beautiful daughter and laments how despite their money, they could any time be robbed, expelled or worse, he lets his characters abuse and shame the Jews in pretty much every scene. They go on and on about how dirty and infidel they are and they don’t even want to touch them. I am sure in reality the Jews were way cleaner than most Christians…
The other is the terrible misogyny. We know that damsels were supposed to be beautiful, modest and needing to be rescued, I expected that. And Scott does speak out against the terribly flimsy excuses and lies with which a female good at healing could be declared a witch whenever she became inconvenient to someone. But the scene where Cedric despises Ulrika for sharing the bed of her abductors and still being alive just really made me angry. She was raped, she had no choice in the matter! She needed sympathy, not shaming.
Overall this work stands the test of time - it is still entertaining, and if I could get over the antisemitism and the misogyny, I would give it five stars.
July 23, 2010
Ivanhoe. Seriously?! Could there be a more arbitrary title to any famous book in the English language? It would be like naming Lost "Benjamin Linus," or naming the original Dragonlance Chronicles "Caramon Majere." This isn't a book about Ivanhoe, it's a book with Ivanhoe in it.
Sir Walter Scott must have been sitting around his room with his D&D dice to come up with Ivanhoe.
Random Title List for Unnamed Book I Just Finished Writing About King Richard's Return From the Crusades and the Defeat of His Slightly Crazy Brother Prince John
Roll 1d20
1. Lady Rowena
2. Brian de Bois-Guilbert
3. Front de Boeuf
4. Friar Tuck
5. Isaac the Jew
6. The Black Knight
7. Cedric
8. Ivanhoe
9. Richard Coeur-de-Lion
10. Prince John
11. Athelstane
12. Wamba
13. Rebecca
14. Albert Malvoisin
15. Waldemar Fitzurse
16. Gurth
17. Maurice de Bracy
18. Locksley
19. Ulrica
20. Me
And by the way...I liked it. It was fun.
Sir Walter Scott must have been sitting around his room with his D&D dice to come up with Ivanhoe.
Random Title List for Unnamed Book I Just Finished Writing About King Richard's Return From the Crusades and the Defeat of His Slightly Crazy Brother Prince John
Roll 1d20
1. Lady Rowena
2. Brian de Bois-Guilbert
3. Front de Boeuf
4. Friar Tuck
5. Isaac the Jew
6. The Black Knight
7. Cedric
8. Ivanhoe
9. Richard Coeur-de-Lion
10. Prince John
11. Athelstane
12. Wamba
13. Rebecca
14. Albert Malvoisin
15. Waldemar Fitzurse
16. Gurth
17. Maurice de Bracy
18. Locksley
19. Ulrica
20. Me
And by the way...I liked it. It was fun.
March 28, 2021
That was...a painful reading experience.
February 12, 2024
2024/14
Boring, tedious, plain, confusing, are just a few adjectives that would accurately describe this novel. To put it mildly, Ivanhoe has been my most disappointing reading experience in years, as a matter of fact, I can't remember another book at the moment that was even worse than this mess.
To begin with, it is wise to recognize one's mistakes. Mine was simple: believing that I was about to read an adventure novel, such as those written by Alexander Dumas, Jules Verne, Arthur Conan Doyle—The Lost World—H. G. Wells, and of course, Homer and his Odyssey. Little did I know that Ivanhoe wouldn't be an adventure classic by any means; rather, it is a historical book with lots of 'dialogue' that might remind you of a gathering with your pals, but where almost everyone is already drunk and starts saying nonsense. Actually, the entire book—around six hundred pages—might be divided into two sections: one, unnecessary descriptions where the author goes on and on about what each character is wearing, once and again, and again, what a random room or place looks like, food—I can't recollect how many times he mentioned it in the book, but eventually it became tiring and overwhelming—and so on, instead of depicting his characters and giving them particular roles and personality, or describing important events, facts, episodes that were important during that time, and two, monotonous conversations where you have no idea who is talking—every single character has exactly the same 'voice,' so to speak—and, most importantly, what they are talking about (for instance, the editor pointed out in the footnotes that the author came up with some characters' names, 'characters' that were not a part of the story to begin with). The constant repetition of things along with the sketchy dialogue were crucial elements that made my whole experience a nightmare.
Sometimes I thought I was in a scene from Hairspray—I mean no offense to such a sweet movie—as the characters start to sing completely out of the blue! Other times I got distracted a little—I was listening to the audiobook and following along with a copy—and as soon as I was back to the story I didn't have to bother to go back a few minutes or so, since the 'story' was still understandable. As a matter of fact, you could get rid of at least three hundred pages or more and the story wouldn't change at all. That reminds me that Scott loses focus quite a few times, and starts rambling about things that have barely anything to do with the plot.
There is more, don't worry. Towards the end of the book Scott is laughing at us, his readers, as he is doing the unthinkable fiction-wise: he writes something that doesn't make any sense, just because he can, maybe he wanted to finish the novel right away, I read he wrote it just because he needed the money from its sales as soon as possible, he needed it to purchase a commission in the army for his son, and his quill and ink allowed him to do so. I was laughing too, and not because I thought it was funny, but because it was enough. I had had enough of this piece of...literature.
My rating on a scale of 1 to 5:
Quality of writing [1.5/5]
Pace [0.5/5]
Plot development [1/5]
Characters [0.5/5]
Enjoyability [0.5/5]
Insightfulness [1/5]
Easy of reading [1.5/5]
Photos/Illustrations [N/A]
Total [6.5/7] = 0.92
Boring, tedious, plain, confusing, are just a few adjectives that would accurately describe this novel. To put it mildly, Ivanhoe has been my most disappointing reading experience in years, as a matter of fact, I can't remember another book at the moment that was even worse than this mess.
To begin with, it is wise to recognize one's mistakes. Mine was simple: believing that I was about to read an adventure novel, such as those written by Alexander Dumas, Jules Verne, Arthur Conan Doyle—The Lost World—H. G. Wells, and of course, Homer and his Odyssey. Little did I know that Ivanhoe wouldn't be an adventure classic by any means; rather, it is a historical book with lots of 'dialogue' that might remind you of a gathering with your pals, but where almost everyone is already drunk and starts saying nonsense. Actually, the entire book—around six hundred pages—might be divided into two sections: one, unnecessary descriptions where the author goes on and on about what each character is wearing, once and again, and again, what a random room or place looks like, food—I can't recollect how many times he mentioned it in the book, but eventually it became tiring and overwhelming—and so on, instead of depicting his characters and giving them particular roles and personality, or describing important events, facts, episodes that were important during that time, and two, monotonous conversations where you have no idea who is talking—every single character has exactly the same 'voice,' so to speak—and, most importantly, what they are talking about (for instance, the editor pointed out in the footnotes that the author came up with some characters' names, 'characters' that were not a part of the story to begin with). The constant repetition of things along with the sketchy dialogue were crucial elements that made my whole experience a nightmare.
Sometimes I thought I was in a scene from Hairspray—I mean no offense to such a sweet movie—as the characters start to sing completely out of the blue! Other times I got distracted a little—I was listening to the audiobook and following along with a copy—and as soon as I was back to the story I didn't have to bother to go back a few minutes or so, since the 'story' was still understandable. As a matter of fact, you could get rid of at least three hundred pages or more and the story wouldn't change at all. That reminds me that Scott loses focus quite a few times, and starts rambling about things that have barely anything to do with the plot.
There is more, don't worry. Towards the end of the book Scott is laughing at us, his readers, as he is doing the unthinkable fiction-wise: he writes something that doesn't make any sense, just because he can, maybe he wanted to finish the novel right away, I read he wrote it just because he needed the money from its sales as soon as possible, he needed it to purchase a commission in the army for his son, and his quill and ink allowed him to do so. I was laughing too, and not because I thought it was funny, but because it was enough. I had had enough of this piece of...literature.
My rating on a scale of 1 to 5:
Quality of writing [1.5/5]
Pace [0.5/5]
Plot development [1/5]
Characters [0.5/5]
Enjoyability [0.5/5]
Insightfulness [1/5]
Easy of reading [1.5/5]
Photos/Illustrations [N/A]
Total [6.5/7] = 0.92
July 11, 2022
"El amor por la batalla es nuestra razón de vivir. El polvo de la melee es el aire que da sentido a nuestra vida. No vivimos ni deseamos vivir más allá de nuestras victorias y reconocimiento."
He leído por fin este súper conocido clásico de la novela histórica de Walter Scott que creo se podría resumir de forma muy somera con un "Qué malos son los templarios".
El autor nos ilustra una Inglaterra del siglo XII que aún se encuentra muy dividida por la reciente conquista de la isla por los normandos. Guillermo el Conquistador (a quien conocía por haber leído textos de historia e incluso uno sobre la Batalla de Hastings) fue el que desde Francia conquistó a la Inglaterra gobernada por los sajones. Es así que estas dos razas conviven con un gran resentimiento por parte de los sajones.
De estos su líder espiritual viene a ser Cedric quien protege al supuesto heredero de la corona inglesa el dubitativo Athelstane a quien por su linaje respeta y sueña con que reconquiste el trono de los "afrancesados" normandos. Sin embargo, respeta al rey actual que viene a ser Ricardo "Corazón de León" quien se sabe está prisionero en Austria luego de haberse teñido de gloria en las Cruzadas.
Esta situación es aprovechada por su malvado hermano, el príncipe Juan llamado "sin tierra" quien como muchas tradiciones tratan, intenta hacerse de un grupo de nobles aliados para poder gobernar en vez de su hermano. Entre ellos están Waldemar Fitzurse, Mauricio de Bracy y otros. Juan es retratado como un déspota cobarde y ambicioso que a pesar de todo "engrandece" la figura de Ricardo quien es reconocido hasta por sus enemigos como valiente y aventurero.
La introducción en sí me pareció un poco larga y creo es la parte más pesada del libro pero luego ya se cuenta la historia de forma más amena y también las acciones son más interesantes.
Hay en la historia un gran rechazo a los franceses, pues se consideran invasores en gran medida, y este rechazo está enfocado en la novela sobre todo contra los caballeros templarios. Esto podría haberme ganado la animadversión pues tengo preferencia histórica por ellos pero es una licencia que puedo aceptar sin problemas. Scott hace ver a los templarios como gente en su mayoría hipócrita y blasfema incluso. Y lo resumen en un personaje que viene a ser un gran antagonista Brian de Bois-Guilbert. Este caballero es más ateo que el peor pero ha tenido un gran desempeño en tierra santa luchando contra los sarracenos.
"¿Cuando el hálito de un templario no ha ocasionado sino crueldad a los hombres y oprobio a las mujeres?"
El grupo de buenos de la historia está liderado por Ivanhoe que viene a ser un hijo despreciado en la sociedad sajona quien luego de acompañar con entusiasmo al rey Ricardo vuelve a limpiar su honor. Tiene la misteriosa ayuda del Caballero negro cuya identidad será algo que llama mucho en la trama y me resulta muy bien manejado.
No soy de los que reclaman demasiado con "lo correcto" de nuestra época actual o algo muy evidente que quizás antes no se consideraba, pero debo decir que me sorprendió en este libro la cantidad de veces que le dan con palo a los judíos, me refiero hablando mal de ellos pero hasta por gusto.
Del lado de las mujeres destaca la hermosa y orgullosa Lady Rowena (me gusta cómo suena su nombre jaja) que pertenece a la nobleza sajona y la judía Rebecca hija del codicioso y mendaz Isaac.
Hay muchas mini historias por dentro aunque debo decir que una de las cosas que me gustó del libro fue su pequeño desarrollo. Se nos cuenta una historia simple que siempre tiene un hilo conductor y que se desarrolla en un espacio pequeño. Eso lo hace bastante llevadero y ayuda a entender la dirección. Sin embargo, hay torneos, asedios, luchas, juicios y un largo etcétera si bien es cierto estos temas no llegan a ser muy épicos porque no son tratados de manera muy profunda o grandilocuente. Encuentro artificialidad por momentos y una gran parcialidad inglesa pero como menciono la facilidad de lectura, y la historia bien llevada te hace querer y odiar a los personajes y te graba en la memoria bien los hechos lo que llegas a ver como "clásicos" o de alguna manera inolvidables.
Cada personaje cumple su función en la trama. Hasta el loco Wamba quien viene a ser un bufón del grupo de Cedric que viene a ser el contrapeso jocoso de la novela (es el primer bufón que me cae bien) y no deja de lanzar dardos a todos los personajes por más serios que sean.
Otro personaje que me sorprendió fue Robin Hood, sabía que aparecería pero no pensé que tendría un papel tan importante. No solo él sino su clásica pandilla de Sherwood entre los que está sobre todo el Ermitaño de Companhurst.
Por momentos Ivanhoe pierde terrible protagonismo y hasta podemos darle un poco más de peso al terrible Brian de Bois-Guilbert quien a pesar de todo le da el tono romántico - criminal que llega a ser más intenso que casi todos los personajes de la historia. El final no fue muy de mi gusto
"El sonido de mi voz es aterrador a mis propios oídos. Apenas sé el terreno que pisamos ni con que objeto nos han traído aquí"
He leído por fin este súper conocido clásico de la novela histórica de Walter Scott que creo se podría resumir de forma muy somera con un "Qué malos son los templarios".
El autor nos ilustra una Inglaterra del siglo XII que aún se encuentra muy dividida por la reciente conquista de la isla por los normandos. Guillermo el Conquistador (a quien conocía por haber leído textos de historia e incluso uno sobre la Batalla de Hastings) fue el que desde Francia conquistó a la Inglaterra gobernada por los sajones. Es así que estas dos razas conviven con un gran resentimiento por parte de los sajones.
De estos su líder espiritual viene a ser Cedric quien protege al supuesto heredero de la corona inglesa el dubitativo Athelstane a quien por su linaje respeta y sueña con que reconquiste el trono de los "afrancesados" normandos. Sin embargo, respeta al rey actual que viene a ser Ricardo "Corazón de León" quien se sabe está prisionero en Austria luego de haberse teñido de gloria en las Cruzadas.
Esta situación es aprovechada por su malvado hermano, el príncipe Juan llamado "sin tierra" quien como muchas tradiciones tratan, intenta hacerse de un grupo de nobles aliados para poder gobernar en vez de su hermano. Entre ellos están Waldemar Fitzurse, Mauricio de Bracy y otros. Juan es retratado como un déspota cobarde y ambicioso que a pesar de todo "engrandece" la figura de Ricardo quien es reconocido hasta por sus enemigos como valiente y aventurero.
La introducción en sí me pareció un poco larga y creo es la parte más pesada del libro pero luego ya se cuenta la historia de forma más amena y también las acciones son más interesantes.
Hay en la historia un gran rechazo a los franceses, pues se consideran invasores en gran medida, y este rechazo está enfocado en la novela sobre todo contra los caballeros templarios. Esto podría haberme ganado la animadversión pues tengo preferencia histórica por ellos pero es una licencia que puedo aceptar sin problemas. Scott hace ver a los templarios como gente en su mayoría hipócrita y blasfema incluso. Y lo resumen en un personaje que viene a ser un gran antagonista Brian de Bois-Guilbert. Este caballero es más ateo que el peor pero ha tenido un gran desempeño en tierra santa luchando contra los sarracenos.
"¿Cuando el hálito de un templario no ha ocasionado sino crueldad a los hombres y oprobio a las mujeres?"
El grupo de buenos de la historia está liderado por Ivanhoe que viene a ser un hijo despreciado en la sociedad sajona quien luego de acompañar con entusiasmo al rey Ricardo vuelve a limpiar su honor. Tiene la misteriosa ayuda del Caballero negro cuya identidad será algo que llama mucho en la trama y me resulta muy bien manejado.
No soy de los que reclaman demasiado con "lo correcto" de nuestra época actual o algo muy evidente que quizás antes no se consideraba, pero debo decir que me sorprendió en este libro la cantidad de veces que le dan con palo a los judíos, me refiero hablando mal de ellos pero hasta por gusto.
Del lado de las mujeres destaca la hermosa y orgullosa Lady Rowena (me gusta cómo suena su nombre jaja) que pertenece a la nobleza sajona y la judía Rebecca hija del codicioso y mendaz Isaac.
Hay muchas mini historias por dentro aunque debo decir que una de las cosas que me gustó del libro fue su pequeño desarrollo. Se nos cuenta una historia simple que siempre tiene un hilo conductor y que se desarrolla en un espacio pequeño. Eso lo hace bastante llevadero y ayuda a entender la dirección. Sin embargo, hay torneos, asedios, luchas, juicios y un largo etcétera si bien es cierto estos temas no llegan a ser muy épicos porque no son tratados de manera muy profunda o grandilocuente. Encuentro artificialidad por momentos y una gran parcialidad inglesa pero como menciono la facilidad de lectura, y la historia bien llevada te hace querer y odiar a los personajes y te graba en la memoria bien los hechos lo que llegas a ver como "clásicos" o de alguna manera inolvidables.
Cada personaje cumple su función en la trama. Hasta el loco Wamba quien viene a ser un bufón del grupo de Cedric que viene a ser el contrapeso jocoso de la novela (es el primer bufón que me cae bien) y no deja de lanzar dardos a todos los personajes por más serios que sean.
Otro personaje que me sorprendió fue Robin Hood, sabía que aparecería pero no pensé que tendría un papel tan importante. No solo él sino su clásica pandilla de Sherwood entre los que está sobre todo el Ermitaño de Companhurst.
Por momentos Ivanhoe pierde terrible protagonismo y hasta podemos darle un poco más de peso al terrible Brian de Bois-Guilbert quien a pesar de todo le da el tono romántico - criminal que llega a ser más intenso que casi todos los personajes de la historia. El final no fue muy de mi gusto
"El sonido de mi voz es aterrador a mis propios oídos. Apenas sé el terreno que pisamos ni con que objeto nos han traído aquí"
December 24, 2019
Set in the reign of Richard I; the Lionheart being on crusade much of the time, leaving England to the mercy (no chance!) of his brother, the odious Prince John and some rather nasty Norman barons. I found it quite a page turner. Of particular interest to me was Scott's portrayal of relations between the subjugated and resentful English and their Norman conquerors. English = liberty, Norman = tyranny.
The position of the Jews in England is fascinating too and two of them have an important part in the story. Regarded as less than animals on one level; on the other hand they were the bankers and so we couldn't do without them.
Lots of fighting here and the art of chivalry. Ivanhoe the English knight takes on a few Normans, we meet Robin Hood and his fellow bandit Friar Tuck. The latter compares favourably with the princes of the church in England. Richard puts in the odd appearance at crucial points. (Scott is balanced in his assessment of him. R's heart was in the right place but he neglected his country). Lurv figures in it too of course.
I enjoyed reading it and want to read more on this period of history.
The position of the Jews in England is fascinating too and two of them have an important part in the story. Regarded as less than animals on one level; on the other hand they were the bankers and so we couldn't do without them.
Lots of fighting here and the art of chivalry. Ivanhoe the English knight takes on a few Normans, we meet Robin Hood and his fellow bandit Friar Tuck. The latter compares favourably with the princes of the church in England. Richard puts in the odd appearance at crucial points. (Scott is balanced in his assessment of him. R's heart was in the right place but he neglected his country). Lurv figures in it too of course.
I enjoyed reading it and want to read more on this period of history.
April 30, 2011
I can see now, after having read Ivanhoe, where most of our notions of the medieval ways and of Robin Hood originated. It seemed at once both familiar and foreign jumping into this book. I could see the beginnings of certain conventions — and the glaring lack, as well. It reminded me both of the Canterbury tales and of old Hollywood movies; it was actually kind of weird.
It begins with two minor characters, for instance, and not the main character, Ivanhoe. Ivanhoe is actually introduced somewhat late, and he's mostly incognito in his first appearance, so you're kind of thrown into the story with little or no ties to anyone in particular. It's hard to care about the characters or the story that way, so I didn't have much emotion invested into the story and got easily bored. After a few chapters, I found myself watching the 1952 movie adaptation to get me jump started, the one starring Robert Taylor, which, notably, didn't start with the minor characters at all but started with Ivanhoe's back story, him coming back from the crusades, on a mission to raise enough money to free King Richard.
This is what the book lacked in the beginning. It lacked that motor, that thing that gives readers a reason to read through all the descriptive chapters in which nothing really happens just yet. As a result, the book seems a bit aimless and happenstance, and it's hard to figure out who to even care for, until you get deeper into the book and discover some of the whys and wherefores of the situations.
For instance, Ivanhoe and Rowena are childhood sweethearts, and you're supposed to root for them as a couple, but they are apart for most of the book, and you barely see them express their love for each other. There is, in fact, very little that happens in the span of the book that would lead anyone to think that Ivanhoe is better off with Rowena than with any other woman. And there IS another woman, Rebecca, in the book who through her actions seems a more deserving character than Rowena. There's another man as well, for Rowena, but the point is Rebecca is the one the reader would rather root for to win the heart of Ivanhoe. Rebecca actually, genuinely cares for Ivanhoe, not just in an emotional sense, partly out of gratitude for Ivanhoe's kind treatment of her father, but in a medical sense, when Ivanhoe gets mortally wounded in a tournament. She's the one who looks after him and with her exceptional healing skills helps him to get better. She's the one who generously funds him, too, using the jewelry she has inherited from her mother. Not only that, but when Rebecca needs saving, it's Ivanhoe alone who saves her. So Rebecca seems a more likely heroine than Rowena — at least in my eyes. The story revolves more around her than around Rowena.
But Rebecca is Jewish, and I guess that and the fact that Ivanhoe and Rowena were childhood sweethearts, make any relationship between Ivanhoe and Rebecca impossible. The way the book is written, it absolutely makes no sense to a modern reader of romance. If there was more interaction between Ivanhoe and Rowena, or if more of their back story was revealed, then I think it would have made more sense and been more gratifying to have them come together in the end; as it was, you have only the author's word that Ivanhoe and Rowena were already an item before any of the events in the book happened.
So for me, that romance story arc needed more of the usual conventions to make it work.
The action-adventure story, similarly, needed more of the usual conventions, or at least a proper back story to give it more reason to exist. I couldn't figure out, for instance, why Ivanhoe needed to enter the tournament at all. In the movie version, it was because he needed the prize money for King Richard's ransom, but the reason in the book is actually not that clear, and the tournament turns out to be a very big part of the story. The later two parts of the action-adventure makes a little more sense; there seems to be a clear mission, rescue the hostages from within the castle, and later, save Rebecca from a death sentence by being her champion and winning a fight. So I could more easily accept the plotting in those areas. The first third, though, seemed a bit senseless to me.
The language seems appropriate for the time, yet easy enough to read. The characters were nicely drawn, and some of them were actually very engaging. For a main character, though, Ivanhoe appeared only partly drawn — the other characters were better developed and more likable than he was. Also, as he was injured for much of the book, he was absent from a lot of the action and so seemed more like a prop than a main character.
Nutshell ... I can see why some people might laud this book, if it was one of the first of its kind, but at the same time it was kind of baffling and boring by the standards of today. I imagine books in this genre have come a long, long, LONG way since this first came out, and if this book were rewritten today, it would be a very, very different book indeed.
I wasn't wowed, but it wasn't TOO bad.
Finished reading March 25, 2011.
It begins with two minor characters, for instance, and not the main character, Ivanhoe. Ivanhoe is actually introduced somewhat late, and he's mostly incognito in his first appearance, so you're kind of thrown into the story with little or no ties to anyone in particular. It's hard to care about the characters or the story that way, so I didn't have much emotion invested into the story and got easily bored. After a few chapters, I found myself watching the 1952 movie adaptation to get me jump started, the one starring Robert Taylor, which, notably, didn't start with the minor characters at all but started with Ivanhoe's back story, him coming back from the crusades, on a mission to raise enough money to free King Richard.
This is what the book lacked in the beginning. It lacked that motor, that thing that gives readers a reason to read through all the descriptive chapters in which nothing really happens just yet. As a result, the book seems a bit aimless and happenstance, and it's hard to figure out who to even care for, until you get deeper into the book and discover some of the whys and wherefores of the situations.
For instance, Ivanhoe and Rowena are childhood sweethearts, and you're supposed to root for them as a couple, but they are apart for most of the book, and you barely see them express their love for each other. There is, in fact, very little that happens in the span of the book that would lead anyone to think that Ivanhoe is better off with Rowena than with any other woman. And there IS another woman, Rebecca, in the book who through her actions seems a more deserving character than Rowena. There's another man as well, for Rowena, but the point is Rebecca is the one the reader would rather root for to win the heart of Ivanhoe. Rebecca actually, genuinely cares for Ivanhoe, not just in an emotional sense, partly out of gratitude for Ivanhoe's kind treatment of her father, but in a medical sense, when Ivanhoe gets mortally wounded in a tournament. She's the one who looks after him and with her exceptional healing skills helps him to get better. She's the one who generously funds him, too, using the jewelry she has inherited from her mother. Not only that, but when Rebecca needs saving, it's Ivanhoe alone who saves her. So Rebecca seems a more likely heroine than Rowena — at least in my eyes. The story revolves more around her than around Rowena.
But Rebecca is Jewish, and I guess that and the fact that Ivanhoe and Rowena were childhood sweethearts, make any relationship between Ivanhoe and Rebecca impossible. The way the book is written, it absolutely makes no sense to a modern reader of romance. If there was more interaction between Ivanhoe and Rowena, or if more of their back story was revealed, then I think it would have made more sense and been more gratifying to have them come together in the end; as it was, you have only the author's word that Ivanhoe and Rowena were already an item before any of the events in the book happened.
So for me, that romance story arc needed more of the usual conventions to make it work.
The action-adventure story, similarly, needed more of the usual conventions, or at least a proper back story to give it more reason to exist. I couldn't figure out, for instance, why Ivanhoe needed to enter the tournament at all. In the movie version, it was because he needed the prize money for King Richard's ransom, but the reason in the book is actually not that clear, and the tournament turns out to be a very big part of the story. The later two parts of the action-adventure makes a little more sense; there seems to be a clear mission, rescue the hostages from within the castle, and later, save Rebecca from a death sentence by being her champion and winning a fight. So I could more easily accept the plotting in those areas. The first third, though, seemed a bit senseless to me.
The language seems appropriate for the time, yet easy enough to read. The characters were nicely drawn, and some of them were actually very engaging. For a main character, though, Ivanhoe appeared only partly drawn — the other characters were better developed and more likable than he was. Also, as he was injured for much of the book, he was absent from a lot of the action and so seemed more like a prop than a main character.
Nutshell ... I can see why some people might laud this book, if it was one of the first of its kind, but at the same time it was kind of baffling and boring by the standards of today. I imagine books in this genre have come a long, long, LONG way since this first came out, and if this book were rewritten today, it would be a very, very different book indeed.
I wasn't wowed, but it wasn't TOO bad.
Finished reading March 25, 2011.
August 29, 2021
3.5 stars? Give or take.
This was my DWS birthday book selection, Sir Walter Scott being an August baby. I went into it knowing that it was about knights and chivalry, but there is much more to it.
First things first: there is a TON of anti-Semitism. Scott portrays his Jewish characters very schizophrenically, alternating between sympathizing with them and depicting them stereotypically as grasping and money loving. There are scenes directly equivalent to The Merchant of Venice with Isaac of York trying to decide between his daughter and his money. Rebecca is depicted as virtuous, skilled, and possessed of wisdom, while her beauty makes her the desire of lecherous men. Still, she does not receive the affection that she desires from a particular English knight. That two centuries later we still have people who hate Jews and Muslims beggars belief.
I think the reason for this novel's longevity is Scott's incorporation of the elements of the Robin Hood tale. Once I realized that Richard the Lion Hearted and Prince John were involved, I hied me off to Wikipedia to learn more. Sure enough, it was Scott who consolidated the details of earlier legends into the storyline we all are familiar with today. The Merry Men, dressed in green, robbing from the rich and giving to the poor, Friar Tuck, Allan-a-Dale, feats of marksmanship, opposition to Prince John—he melds it all together into a unified story that seems to have grabbed our imaginations.
The part that we have let go of is the Saxon-Norman rivalry which Scott layers into the mix. I'm sure that such discords existed at some point in history, but Scott was apparently trying to make a point about such prejudices to his contemporaries. Nowadays it doesn't hurt the story, but it doesn't really help it much either.
The writing is florid by today's standards, but still very readable. There are some odd sentence constructions and word spellings, but for a book that is over 200 years old, it is still entertaining. There are bits that are predictable to the modern reader, especially those familiar with the Robin Hood story, but it would have been new and exciting when it was first published. I've been nervous of Scott's writing until now, but I have the courage to try more of his work after enjoying this one.
This was my DWS birthday book selection, Sir Walter Scott being an August baby. I went into it knowing that it was about knights and chivalry, but there is much more to it.
First things first: there is a TON of anti-Semitism. Scott portrays his Jewish characters very schizophrenically, alternating between sympathizing with them and depicting them stereotypically as grasping and money loving. There are scenes directly equivalent to The Merchant of Venice with Isaac of York trying to decide between his daughter and his money. Rebecca is depicted as virtuous, skilled, and possessed of wisdom, while her beauty makes her the desire of lecherous men. Still, she does not receive the affection that she desires from a particular English knight. That two centuries later we still have people who hate Jews and Muslims beggars belief.
I think the reason for this novel's longevity is Scott's incorporation of the elements of the Robin Hood tale. Once I realized that Richard the Lion Hearted and Prince John were involved, I hied me off to Wikipedia to learn more. Sure enough, it was Scott who consolidated the details of earlier legends into the storyline we all are familiar with today. The Merry Men, dressed in green, robbing from the rich and giving to the poor, Friar Tuck, Allan-a-Dale, feats of marksmanship, opposition to Prince John—he melds it all together into a unified story that seems to have grabbed our imaginations.
The part that we have let go of is the Saxon-Norman rivalry which Scott layers into the mix. I'm sure that such discords existed at some point in history, but Scott was apparently trying to make a point about such prejudices to his contemporaries. Nowadays it doesn't hurt the story, but it doesn't really help it much either.
The writing is florid by today's standards, but still very readable. There are some odd sentence constructions and word spellings, but for a book that is over 200 years old, it is still entertaining. There are bits that are predictable to the modern reader, especially those familiar with the Robin Hood story, but it would have been new and exciting when it was first published. I've been nervous of Scott's writing until now, but I have the courage to try more of his work after enjoying this one.
January 8, 2011
Good gravy, I've had Ivanhoe on my literary back burner for longer than I can remember. I love a romping good adventure story, but when I say that I mean things like The Count of Monte Cristo, The Scarlet Pimpernel, The Lord of the Rings and The Hobbit: Or There and Back Again, The Odyssey or The Princess Bride. I like my adventure stories to have... adventure. I expected adventure in Ivanhoe since it often falls into the same category as a lot of other swashbuckling adventures, filled with excitement.
I think my copy was broken, because I didn't get much excitement out of it.
It's not that it's a bad story by any stretch of the imagination. It's the grandpappy of historical fiction - published in 1819, the story actually takes place in the early twelfth century focusing on the whole Norman/Saxon brouhaha. Wilfred of Ivanhoe is shunned by his Saxon father for his dedication to the ENEMY: Couer de Lion, aka Richard the Lion-Heart, aka Richard I of England. And then there's a lot of stuff about politics and religion, which actually was pretty interesting, if a little unbelievable for the period in which the story was to take place. Likely that Ivanhoe would have had much opportunity to really hook up with the Jewish Rebecca? About as likely as Jack, a third-class passenger on a sinking ship, would hook up with high-class Rose in that dumb movie, Titanic. But at least the discussions of religion/class actually seemed to make a point in Ivanhoe.
But there were lots of pages of talky-talk that seemed very unrealistic. Everyone in the twelfth century, according to Walter Scott, was pretty well-educated and awful liberal-minded. But it goes beyond that! There's a scene in which there is a fire, and I swear pages went by where people are talking about the fire, but no one is actually making any movement to leave. Maybe it was my imagination but that scene dragged on forever. And there's so much greenery in the twelfth century! Maybe as a 21st-century gal it's hard to imagine so much greenery, but this went beyond the woods and the hills and the dales. Everyone wore green, there was green hanging everywhere. Green, apparently, was the new black in 1194.
Pages and pages of discussion about the size of the tables, the wood the tables were made of, what was on the tables, what the people sitting at the tables looked like, why some people weren't at the table... it never seemed to end.
But people really seem to love this story, so who am I to discourage anyone else from reading it? There were some good things about this as well, like an appearance of Robin Hood. A lot of what we believe about Robin Hood actually can be traced back to Ivanhoe, so that's pretty cool. Still I consider Pyle's The Merry Adventures of Robin Hood a much better adventure story than Ivanhoe, but that's probably beside the point.
I am glad to have read this, even though I learned in the Afterword that not only was Scott's writing sloppily anachronistic, but he also wrote the story to try to make some big bucks. For some reason that sort of rubbed me the wrong way, though certainly he's not the first nor the last writer to be in the writing game just for the Benjamins.
I'm mostly just relieved to be able to cross this off my list. WARNING: As with any work of historical fiction, take the story with a grain of salt.
I want someone to bring the Trysting tree back into popularity. There's something pretty neat-o about meeting under a tree to discuss really important things.
I think my copy was broken, because I didn't get much excitement out of it.
It's not that it's a bad story by any stretch of the imagination. It's the grandpappy of historical fiction - published in 1819, the story actually takes place in the early twelfth century focusing on the whole Norman/Saxon brouhaha. Wilfred of Ivanhoe is shunned by his Saxon father for his dedication to the ENEMY: Couer de Lion, aka Richard the Lion-Heart, aka Richard I of England. And then there's a lot of stuff about politics and religion, which actually was pretty interesting, if a little unbelievable for the period in which the story was to take place. Likely that Ivanhoe would have had much opportunity to really hook up with the Jewish Rebecca? About as likely as Jack, a third-class passenger on a sinking ship, would hook up with high-class Rose in that dumb movie, Titanic. But at least the discussions of religion/class actually seemed to make a point in Ivanhoe.
But there were lots of pages of talky-talk that seemed very unrealistic. Everyone in the twelfth century, according to Walter Scott, was pretty well-educated and awful liberal-minded. But it goes beyond that! There's a scene in which there is a fire, and I swear pages went by where people are talking about the fire, but no one is actually making any movement to leave. Maybe it was my imagination but that scene dragged on forever. And there's so much greenery in the twelfth century! Maybe as a 21st-century gal it's hard to imagine so much greenery, but this went beyond the woods and the hills and the dales. Everyone wore green, there was green hanging everywhere. Green, apparently, was the new black in 1194.
Pages and pages of discussion about the size of the tables, the wood the tables were made of, what was on the tables, what the people sitting at the tables looked like, why some people weren't at the table... it never seemed to end.
But people really seem to love this story, so who am I to discourage anyone else from reading it? There were some good things about this as well, like an appearance of Robin Hood. A lot of what we believe about Robin Hood actually can be traced back to Ivanhoe, so that's pretty cool. Still I consider Pyle's The Merry Adventures of Robin Hood a much better adventure story than Ivanhoe, but that's probably beside the point.
I am glad to have read this, even though I learned in the Afterword that not only was Scott's writing sloppily anachronistic, but he also wrote the story to try to make some big bucks. For some reason that sort of rubbed me the wrong way, though certainly he's not the first nor the last writer to be in the writing game just for the Benjamins.
I'm mostly just relieved to be able to cross this off my list. WARNING: As with any work of historical fiction, take the story with a grain of salt.
I want someone to bring the Trysting tree back into popularity. There's something pretty neat-o about meeting under a tree to discuss really important things.
May 5, 2024
Ivanhoe is a fun action-filled adventure set around 1200. Richard the Lionheart is King, his brother, John, is scheming against him, and Robin Hood is a minor character. Knights fight and damsels get rescued. Need I say more? Well, actually, I do. As a book first published in 1820, it has some major differences from a modern novel. First, ideological discussions that may take only a few paragraphs in a similar work today span multiple pages in Ivanhoe. These can be very interesting, but also set the book on a markedly slower pace than modern equivalents. Second, Ivanhoe's sensibilities and mores do not remotely reflect contemporary standards. Suffice it to say that virtually every page contains at least some antisemitism, which all the characters consider normal, albeit to varying degrees. A reader who can get past these anachronisms, will likely find this classic quite entertaining.
November 21, 2022
There is something unique about a novel written 200 years ago about a point in history that’s 600 years before that. With most modern historical fiction works, the relationship between the past and the present are at least half-way understood. But with Ivanhoe, this relationship is obscured by the years since it writing.
My interpretation is that Scott used this story to reflect upon religious irony between the two time periods. He depicts medieval religion as self-serving, power hungry, and especially antisemic. It may have been Scott’s hope that the depiction of such deplorable behavior 600 years ago would have created a place where these acts could be contemplated in isolation from Scott’s present world. The hope being that a condemnation of people in a fictional 12th Century England would carry subconsciously into judgements of similar behavior in Scott’s 19th Century world, where all of these afflictions still existed. To this end, Scott shows his cards with a single solitary line in the novel: “Will future ages believe that such stupid bigotry ever existed!” Anything more than that would risk breaking the seal between Scott’s fictional world and Scott’s reality where humanity actually lived.
The overall story is typical 19th Century writing. Long narrative passages that tend to overly stretch out the story. The writing is filled with vocabulary that is seldom in use today. Making matters worse, is the 12th Century dialog of the characters, which amplifies the antiquated English. But at moments, Scott does a good job bringing knights of the medieval England alive. He even brings the legendary Robin Hood to life, which may have been anticipated by his readers due to time period. In short, there’s entertainment and contemplation here for readers of any century provided that you have the patience to make it through to the end.
My interpretation is that Scott used this story to reflect upon religious irony between the two time periods. He depicts medieval religion as self-serving, power hungry, and especially antisemic. It may have been Scott’s hope that the depiction of such deplorable behavior 600 years ago would have created a place where these acts could be contemplated in isolation from Scott’s present world. The hope being that a condemnation of people in a fictional 12th Century England would carry subconsciously into judgements of similar behavior in Scott’s 19th Century world, where all of these afflictions still existed. To this end, Scott shows his cards with a single solitary line in the novel: “Will future ages believe that such stupid bigotry ever existed!” Anything more than that would risk breaking the seal between Scott’s fictional world and Scott’s reality where humanity actually lived.
The overall story is typical 19th Century writing. Long narrative passages that tend to overly stretch out the story. The writing is filled with vocabulary that is seldom in use today. Making matters worse, is the 12th Century dialog of the characters, which amplifies the antiquated English. But at moments, Scott does a good job bringing knights of the medieval England alive. He even brings the legendary Robin Hood to life, which may have been anticipated by his readers due to time period. In short, there’s entertainment and contemplation here for readers of any century provided that you have the patience to make it through to the end.
May 22, 2022
I really, really loved this book when I read it several years ago! I loved how this story was also connected to the story of Robin Hood. The witch was my favorite character besides Ivanhoe and so was one of the antiheroes. I forget what their name was. I remember that shortly after reading this novel, I went onto reading several other Walter Scott novels including: Rob Roy and Waverly. I read more of his books but I forget what they were because I read them so long ago.
January 23, 2010
This is a novel that, as I understand it, almost single-handedly revived the popularity of medieval chivalry and heroism in 19th century literature . . . and life. The culture of the American South profoundly admired Scott's world view. Stories like Ivanhoe were spiritual fuel to their sense of honor and privilege.
Also, with Scott, a major branch of literature was consolidated which in his time was beginning to be distinguished by the intelligentsia from "serious literature." His literary heirs are James Fenimore Cooper, Alexander Dumas pere, and Robert Louis Stevenson. Jane Austen headed up the other major branch which included George Eliot, Henry James and Joseph Conrad. This is of course a grossly simplified classification, but for some purposes a useful one which both Scott and Austen recognized. I call Scott's branch "romantic," and Austen's branch, "realistic" and/or "naturalistic."
Ivanhoe is top-notch romantic adventure. Just get past the first couple of chapters and you'll be hooked.
Also, with Scott, a major branch of literature was consolidated which in his time was beginning to be distinguished by the intelligentsia from "serious literature." His literary heirs are James Fenimore Cooper, Alexander Dumas pere, and Robert Louis Stevenson. Jane Austen headed up the other major branch which included George Eliot, Henry James and Joseph Conrad. This is of course a grossly simplified classification, but for some purposes a useful one which both Scott and Austen recognized. I call Scott's branch "romantic," and Austen's branch, "realistic" and/or "naturalistic."
Ivanhoe is top-notch romantic adventure. Just get past the first couple of chapters and you'll be hooked.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 3,192 reviews