A good old book, like the ones written by Trollope, set in the countryside, etc.etc.etc. A pleasure and a bore at the same time, but it was a good boring book if you can catch my drift.

Uno di quei bei libri, tipo quelli che scriveva Trollope, ambientato in campagna, etc.etc. Un piacere ed una noia allo stesso tempo, ma una noia di quelle buone se capite cosa intendo.

My theory is that Goldsmith started this out as a satire but (1) fell in love with Primrose’s moral vigour and (2) wanted it to be marketable by imitating the success of the religious novels. The fact that he editted this multiple times post-publication allowed these contraditions to mess the novel up a tad. Sir Thornhill is my evidence for this claim, as he is set up to be the future of Primrose.

Still a sucker for a feel-good story, though.

I actually listened to this on CD in the car. Luckily, it was a well-done version. The story was really frustrating, though. I mean, this is mostly a family of idiots! I realize it's meant to be satire or entertainment but I wanted to shake them.

This is the supposed memoir of Dr Charles Primrose, a benevolent idiot who considers himself quite wise, as he recounts the downfall and salvation of his family of benevolent idiots as their belief in the goodness of their fellow man has them taken advantage of time and again. It's a classic that Victorians loved and the humour and melodrama stand up over 200 years later. It is a quick read that shews what life was like in the British countryside of 1788, with great oeconomy. I recommend it to anyone that enjoys Dickens and Austen. They both liked it and referenced it in their books. I read the Project Gutenberg edition.

got bogged down...

It was... perfectly readable. I was expecting, based on the description of the book, something like the Barsetshire novels, but this was nothing like that. The writing style was quite dry. I think the narrator was meant to seem dignified, constantly and wisely doing the best by his family (and God, being a Vicar). Probably, at the time of writing, he did seem like that, but now in the 21st century, it's hard to see him like that. Instead, he seems stern and self righteous. Certain aspects of the plot seemed odd and contrived, like the fire, which just happens for no explained reason, and has nothing to do with the rest of the plot, which is all related no matter how astonishing the coincidence tying it all together.

One of those books that changes over the decades. It was especially interesting to read now given how many mentions of it show up in novels over the past two hundred years, and how many well-respected writers talk fondly about its light-heartedness, its mildness, its being the quintessential English domestic novel.

On this (very spoilery!) reading, I picked up how very tongue in cheek Goldsmith wrote, satirizing class and social climbing and the real meaning of posh manners as well as town/country, women and fashion, the haphazard (and greed-driven) state of schools and ecclesiastical learning at upper levels. Son George's interview for becoming a schoolmaster will make every teacher laugh and wince.

And yet it wasn't all that light-hearted. The riff about prison reform could be published today, with regrettably few emendations. The auctioning off of daughters is a grim reminder of the fact that marriage between a man and a woman not so long ago was anything but holy. This is especially true at the end, when everyone is celebrating a thorough-going scoundrel and possibly serial rapist finding out his marriage is real, yay, the money is safe! The idea that this book was given to youngsters to read for a couple of centuries would raise eyebrows now, notwithstanding all the hardcore stuff seen on tv and film to which kids are exposed.

It's also a fascinating look at how the novel was developing. Goldsmith was riffing off Sterne's recent runaway bestseller, Tristram Shandy, and also taking a leaf from Tom Jones in his rambunctiously coincidence-driven plotting. The excursions into manners, the poetry and fantasy storytelling, the sermonizing and satire all reflect popular tropes of the time. Completely unexamined--indeed reinforced--was the idea that women were not expected to have any agency because they needed male guidance in all things. Willful women invariably came to no good.

It's short, and quick read, and full of eighteenth century views, but a cozy domestic novel? With the sons almost burning to death, a daughter believed to be dead after her betrayal, the thievery and so forth? Not my idea of cozy at all, in spite of everybody on stage grinning at their happy endings. Interesting, yes, cozy, no.