Madame Bovary


Victor Pross

Recommended Posts

good-bye, time to move on. just wanted to chat about a book.

(Note from MSK:

Article removed by author on April 22, 2007 for accusation of plagiary of the Madame Bovary website's homepage. See here. As many other disclosures of plagiary by Pross followed, there is no reason to think of this one any differently.

OL extends its deepest apologies to the owner of the Madame Bovary website and the unknown author of the original text.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Victor: Funny how you posted this in CHEWING! I have this irrational sensitivity to certain words (see my thread on Leonard Peikoff chewing his Alfabits creeal!)

I have had for a long time an irrational aversion to ever seeing or reading Madame Bovary. The name sounds too much like a contraction for BOVINE OVARY. It also brings to mind images of this Victorian woman who looks like a cow, chewing her cud in a grassy field.

Because of this, I am psychologically repulsed from ever experiencing Madame Bovary.

Do you guys think I need a shrink to address this "chewing phobia" of mine? =)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you almost literally copy text from a website you should give the reference and not pretend that it is your own text. Compare the following passages:

It is also considered socially relevant because it inadvertently served to inspire, if not signal the dawn of feminism, (but feminism more consonant with individual rights, allowing women the right to vote that had previously been denied them). Flaubert's adulterous heroine was happy in her contraventions, her actions seemingly warranted by her dreary and lifeless marriage and the over all banalities and emptiness of provincial life.
Madame Bovary is one of the most important French novels of the 19th century. It is vastly regarded as Flaubert's most important work, and is also considered socially relevant because it inadvertently served to inspire, if not signal the dawn of feminism. Flaubert's adulterous heroine, the author's alter-ego of sorts, was happy in her transgressions, her actions seemingly justified by her dull and lifeless marriage.
Madame Bovary is the story of Emma Bovary, an unhappily married woman who seeks escape through “forbidden relationships” (sexual!) with other men. The book could be seen as an expose of the situation of women in the 19th century: women who had not yet been emancipated and were expected to obey their husbands, to stay in their homes while the men went to work, or left for months to fight in wars, and were seen as “secondary citizens.” Ultimately, Madame Bovary's indiscretions and her desire and need for love and romance lead to her downfall, which not only appeases the guardians of “conventional morality”, but shows us Flaubert's view of the world wasn't one of what he would probably describe as “naive optimism”.
Madame Bovary is the story of Emma Bovary, an unhappily married woman who seeks escape through forbidden relationships with other men. The book could be viewed as an expose of the situation of women in the 19th century; women who had not yet been emancipated and were expected to obey their husbands, to stay in their homes while the men went to work, or left for months on end to fight in wars. Emma Bovary also serves as a voice for Flaubert, who patterned the character's personality after his own. Emma Bovary's "rebellious" attitude against the accepted ideas of the day, reflects Flaubert's views of the bourgeoisie. Ultimately, Madame Bovary's indiscretions and her obsession with Romance lead to her downfall, which not only appeases the guardians of morality, but shows us Flaubert's view of the world wasn't one of naive optimism.

In my book this is called plagiarism.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dragonfly, yes, you are right; I just wanted to give a generic break down of the book and background for a conversation. I was reading about it's back ground here and there, actually, all stating the same things--and I don't want to take credit for what is readly available--info wise. I want to talk about the story. Sorry to offend you.

-Victor

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't want to take credit for what is readly available--info wise.

But you did take credit for it, until you were caught.

How many times are you going to do this sort of thing? It's disgraceful. Have you not noticed that this site is called Objectivist Living?

Barbara

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't want to take credit for what is readly available--info wise.

But you did take credit for it, until you were caught.

How many times are you going to do this sort of thing? It's disgraceful. Have you not noticed that this site is called Objectivist Living?

Barbara

Barbara, No. No credit; wanted to provide general genric background to the story, that's it, and then talk about. This not an essay, just a topic generator for convo. That is it. Saw the movie tonight and it was a let down. Sorry you are bothered by this--Victor

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Victor: you post so much maybe you run over what would otherwise be your sensibilities. I sort of recall that you've done this before. Please stop.

*****

I met Jennifer Jones in 1967 when she visited my A-Team in the Mekong Delta. She was nice but really not there to entertain the troops. I got the impression she was doing her patriotic, maybe PR, duty.

John Wayne came through four or five months before I got there. Sean Flynn, too, who I thought was a fellow Special Forces Aidman. He disappeared in Cambodia about three years later, literally only a few miles from where he and I had been, just south of the "Parrot's Beak." He and his companion were captured by the Kilmer Rouge, held for a year and executed in 1971.

--Brant

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Victor: you post so much maybe you run over what would otherwise be your sensibilities. I sort of recall that you've done this before. Please stop.

*****

I met Jennifer Jones in 1967 when she visited my A-Team in the Mekong Delta. She was nice but really not there to entertain the troops. I got the impression she was doing her patriotic, maybe PR, duty.

John Wayne came through four or five months before I got there. Sean Flynn, too, who I thought was a fellow Special Forces Aidman. He disappeared in Cambodia about three years later, literally only a few miles from where he and I had been, just south of the "Parrot's Beak." He and his companion were captured by the Kilmer Rouge, held for a year and executed in 1971.

--Brant

Brant, and sorry to you, too. I do post a lot; that's ended. Tired. Beat. Wanna go back and paint, and live a life with Angie where existence exists; not cyber-borg reality. ;] Met Jen Jones? You have (and maybe are) lived an interesting life? What else?--Victor

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I may be out of place, but would it not be wise to consult Victor on your issues with him privately, instead of derailing his post?

Dodger, it's his post that is plagiarized, and so it should be derailed. If let stand, we would be abetting the plagiarism. Further, this is not a personal issue that some of us have with Victor, such that it should be discussed privately; he is and has been using Objectivist Living as an outlet for his plagiarisms, and this has to be stopped. Since his plagiarisms are presented publicly, he has to expect to be called on them publicly. I, for one, have kept silent about it for too long, out of a misguided kindness.

I believe that Michael did speak to Victor privately when he first became aware of what he was doing. But Victor has again and again ignored the private warnings.

Barbara

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I, for one, have kept silent about it for too long, out of a misguided kindness.

I, too, have kept my mouth shut about it -- on the list; I've exchanged some choice words about it with elist friends in private. But my motive for not making a stink on the list hasn't been "misguided kindness"; it's been respect for this being Michael's list and thus up to him to call the shots. I will say, however, that I've felt disappointed in Michael for his letting things go on so long -- and for covering up by quickly deleting the thread the last major time this happened. (Yes, Michael, several of us saw, before you took it down, the material Victor borrowed from Nicholas Dykes re Popper.)

What amazes me in regard to Victor's borrowings is that he seems to show no sense of wrongdoing about his cavalier picking up of material from others. Instead, his attitude is: oh, pesk, why are people bugging me about this? No harm done/intended.

I've been thinking a fair amount lately about the bases on which I really do judge other people's character -- in connection with Daniel Barnes' posts about ethics on other threads. One thing which for me is a total turn-off is intellectual dishonesty. I can't think well of anyone who would engage in various forms of intellectual dishonesty -- among them plagiarizing. (There are of course multiple other forms of such dishonesty, among them ones I despise even more. For instance, I've lost all respect for certain scientists I know of who are currently "selling their souls" on the global-warming issue.)

I'm sure Victor has many other characteristics which are appealing to other people here. He's obviously popular with a number of the posters. I suppose I could even see his charm myself, if it weren't for the intellectual shenanigans. Those are types of behavior I personally can't abide.

Ellen

___

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I will say, however, that I've felt disappointed in Michael for his letting things go on so long -- and for covering up by quickly deleting the thread the last major time this happened. (Yes, Michael, several of us saw, before you took it down, the material Victor borrowed from Nicholas Dykes re Popper.)

Ellen,

The overwhelming reason for deleting that thread was because it was wrong to leave plagiary up. But I admit that I also wanted to avoid public controversy, so I dealt with the issue backstage. I have my reasons. The present thread was left up because it got sourced. But even with my reasons, I cannot tolerate new occurrences.

My apologies to all for the inconvenience.

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dragonfly-

Wow. Thanks. Wow.

One thing I've learned in being a helpmate to my wife and her professorial duties is that Google is a real bitch for those who plagiarize.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

True confession time folks! I've never read Madame Bovary. There are a whole bunch of the classics I've never read. I've seen some of the movie versions. I know a little about some of these classics because I've read about them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dragonfly: My apologies -- I did not realise this was some regularly recurring thing. Now that I do, let me humbly make amends for saying you were playing the "gotcha" game. Given the full context, I now see you were just looking out for the integrity of the boards. Robert.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is now some 20 years ago I read the complete works by Flaubert, so my memory is a bit vague, but I recall that I found Madame Bovary one of his best works. One of the contributing factors to its success was probably the fact that Flaubert's friend the poet Louis Bouilhet acted more or less as an editor when Flaubert wrote his novel. Flaubert was a perfectionist in his writing, endlessly changing his text to improve it, but in my opinion the perfection in the details was counteracted by neglecting the total structure, the flow of the story. With Madame Bovary however Bouilhet could convince Flaubert to remove many superfluous passages, for example Flaubert's friend Maxime du Camp tells about some complicated toy that Flaubert wanted to describe in the book, the description would take about a dozen pages! After a long struggle Bouilhet could persuade Flaubert to delete the whole toy from the book (a pity there was no Bouilhet when Rand wrote The Speech). Thanks to those constant criticisms the book has not become like the endless and boring La tentation de St. Antoine (of which there exist several different versions), which was read by Flaubert to Bouilhet and du Camp, who were embarrassed by Flaubert's enthusiasm, but didn't mince their words when Flaubert asked for their opinion. There are some interesting passages in La tentation de St. Antoine, but these don't save the book (in any of the different versions). Somewhat better but still with the rather poor overall construction are the two different versions of L'Éducation sentimentale and Salambbô. As far as I remember his shorter stories Trois Contes were quite good, perhaps I'll reread them one of these days (now I think of it I might also reread Madame Bovary, as far as I can remember it wasn't bad at all). Interesting are also the unfinished and somewhat comical Bouvard et Pécuchet and his satirical Le dictionnaire des idées reçues.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.