2000s?: second review. this 2nd time after reading some critical work on it, i was more aware of the flow and power dynamics between the competing aristocrats in their manipulation and seduction of other players, i was aware of how sharing the truth emotional or programmatic is leaving yourself vulnerable to the other. i am told by a friend: i can like reading about cruel, bad people, bad manipulative characters- but I do not like stupidity (characters are not people). well maybe it is more fascinating to watch, to examine, to follow, complex and intelligent manipulation. to read the wrong. this is relevant here, as the characters are morally terrible but continue to be admirable in some sense of intelligence. maybe i will learn to read french...
.??? 80s: first review. there are reasons this book has survived and indeed flourished since its publication before the french revolution. compelling, involving, beautifully written epistolary novel- with short letters that keep the story going, great characters, plot, read twice but also read on, more than any other work this has made me think of learning to read french. probably won’t happen but just a thought... and anyway Proust would be the one to then read...