logo

45 pages 1 hour read

Julian Barnes

Flaubert's Parrot

Fiction | Novel | Adult | Published in 1984

A modern alternative to SparkNotes and CliffsNotes, SuperSummary offers high-quality Study Guides with detailed chapter summaries and analysis of major themes, characters, and more.

Chapters 10-12Chapter Summaries & Analyses

Chapter 10 Summary: “The Case Against”

Geoffrey wonders what it is about people that makes them “want to know the worst” (117). Geoffrey loved his wife Ellen, for instance, but still “wanted to know the worst” (117) about her. She felt quite the opposite way. Geoffrey believes people are unwilling to believe anything bad about a writer whose work they enjoy. However, it is “impossible to know too much” (118) about a writer whose work they love.

Geoffrey suggests there are many offences against Flaubert with which he could be charged. Geoffrey lists and explores the individual accusations against the writer. While is it is said Flaubert hated humanity, Geoffrey argues that Flaubert liked individual humans and—if indeed Flaubert did hate humanity—was he wrong to do so? There are charges that Flaubert hated democracy. Geoffrey dismisses these, noting that Flaubert preferred a certain obscure system of governance. Democracy, to Flaubert, was “merely a stage in the history of government” (120). Flaubert has been accused of hating progress, to which Geoffrey cites the 20th century, and of not being “interested enough in politics” (120). On the latter charge, Geoffrey notes that literature includes politics “and not vice versa” (120). He argues that being more interested in politics did not make Du Camp a better writer than Flaubert.

Next comes the charge that Flaubert was “against the Commune” (121) and that he was unpatriotic, though Geoffrey wonders what a “48-year-old epileptic syphilitic with no military experience” (121) could have done against the Prussians. When charged with shooting wildlife in the desert, Geoffrey suggests that Flaubert was indeed guilty but returns to the matter of patriotism: A writer’s job is to point out when “your country […] is behaving dishonorably, foolishly, viciously” (122), as to do so is the greatest expression of patriotism possible. Flaubert is also charged with not involving himself in life, which Geoffrey dismisses. As for the claim that Flaubert lived in an ivory tower, Geoffrey points out that he failed at this.

In response to the charge that Flaubert is a pessimist, Geoffrey questions what people want from their literature. Flaubert is accused of not teaching any positive virtues. Geoffrey argues, however, that Flaubert “teaches you to gaze upon the truth and not blink from its consequences” (124). Next, Flaubert is called a sadist, which Geoffrey describes as “rubbish” (124). Then, Flaubert is accused of being “beastly to women” (125), but Geoffrey reasons that he preferred “honesty in sexual dealings” (125). The next charges—that Flaubert “believed in Beauty” and “was obsessed with style”—are dismissed totally. The final accusation is that Flaubert did not believe that “Art had a social purpose” (126). Geoffrey agrees but takes issue with the terms of the question: “do not imagine that Art is something which is designed to give gentle uplift and self-confidence” (127).

Chapter 11 Summary:” Louise Colet’s Version”

The chapter attempts to portray events from the perspective of Louise Colet. She tells the reader to “take my arm” as she has “tales to tell” (128). Remembering how she met Flaubert, she reminds the reader that she was famous and married at the time. “I was the candle,” she claims, and Flaubert “was the moth” (128). She considered Flaubert a provincial person, happy to be accepted in artistic circles for the first time; she had been in a similar position.

While she was 35 to Flaubert’s 24, Louise is unapologetic about the difference in age. Their time together was passionate, though she believes that he may have been a little “nervous in the face of my beauty” (131). Their relationship was different to anything Flaubert had experienced before, whether with prostitutes, grisettes, or his male friends. It was more complicated.

After less than 12 months together, Louise becomes annoyed when Flaubert chooses to travel around Brittany for an extended period. He misses her and writes often. He also sends her flowers, each of which she remembers. She then recounts an incident whereby Flaubert refused to meet her at his home. He then tells her to marry Victor Cousin. In response, Louise flees to England.

She stays in a “fine round tower covered in ivy” (134) and meets with famous people from around Europe. She picks a flower for Flaubert and remarks on his ignorance of the symbolism of flowers, which is a language unto itself. Louise believes that Flaubert never understood women, though admits to feeling jealous occasionally. She compares herself to the women from Flaubert’s diaries.

Flaubert frequently tried to humiliate Louise. He forbade her from visiting his home or meeting his mother or writing to him directly. He lied and “spoke ill” (136) of Louise to his friends. He ridiculed her work. Louise believes that Flaubert humiliated her because the qualities he initially found so charming in her began to irritate him. Perhaps, she reasons, he feared her, terrified that he might “love me completely” (137). Perhaps it “flattered his vanity” (138) to constantly desire Louise and then deny himself the pleasure of being with her.

They send one another literature samples. Flaubert chastises Louise for making the wrong comments on his writing. He calls her poetry “soft, slack and banal” (140). She does not believe that Flaubert cared at all for poetry and decided that all writing should echo his personal style. He also felt that everyone should live in the same manner as he did. Flaubert considered himself a wild animal—a polar bear or a buffalo on the prairie—but Louise suggests he “was really just a parrot” (142). She then lists his hypocrisies, including that he nearly went broke buying gloves. Louise knows that “people will take Gustave’s side” (142) after they are dead. She does not mind, admitting that “I am resigned” (142).

Chapter 12 Summary: “Braithwaite’s Dictionary of Accepted Ideas”

This chapter presents an alphabetized list of commonly known facts about the life and work of Flaubert, with a short discussion on each entry. It is modeled after Flaubert’s own dictionary.

Selected entries include:

  • Louise Colet: a “tedious, importunate, promiscuous woman […] who tried to trap Gustave into marriage” (144)—and, simultaneously, a “brave, passionate, deeply misunderstood woman […] who committed the sin of wanting to make someone else happy” (144).
  • Maxine Du Camp: one who “wrote with steel nibs whereas Gustave always used a quill pen” (144); Flaubert’s social alter ego.
  • Epilepsy: a strategy allowing Flaubert to “sidestep a conventional career” (145).
  • Irony: “either the devil’s mark or the snorkel of sanity” (145).
  • Jean-Paul Sartre: a “highbrow Louise Colet” (146).
  • Mme. Flaubert: the writer’s mother, as well as his “gaoler, confidante, nurse, patient, banker and critic” (146).
  • Prussians: “vandals in white gloves, clock-thieves who know Sanskrit” (146).
  • George Sand: “Gustave’s second mother” (147).
  • Whores: “necessary in the nineteenth century for the contraction of syphilis” (148). 

Chapters 10-12 Analysis

Geoffrey shows himself to be a keen defender of Flaubert throughout the novel. He believes it is “impossible to know too much” (118) about the flaws of those who he loves and admires. While explaining that he wants to know the worst about Flaubert, Geoffrey places Ellen in the same regard. This positioning of the two characters suggests that they share something in common, leaving the audience to theorize as to what crime Ellen is guilty of. This subtle shaping of the narrative around Ellen will soon come to a head.

Further clues arrive in the next chapter, when Geoffrey takes the position of Louise Colet. Though Louise provides interesting insight into the character of Flaubert, it is her identity (and Geoffrey’s imagining of her identity) which is the most foreboding. Louise is an adulterer who cheats on her husband with a man whom Geoffrey admires. Geoffrey spends the chapter sympathizing with Louise to the extent that he writes from her perspective, including her in this biography of Flaubert. Like Geoffrey, the audience is encouraged to view the world through the eyes of someone who has cheated on their husband. Without even mentioning Ellen, the inclusion of Louise’s perspective provides a hint of what crime Ellen might have committed.

blurred text
blurred text
blurred text
blurred text