Most Helpful Customer Reviews
|
|
6 of 9 people found the following review helpful:
If I could rate this novel at threeandahalf, I would., 3 May 2003
I was initially attracted to this book since it is so inextricably linked to Andre Gide's writing, in that it was contemporary to it, and is of the same genre. Praise was given the book for being the catalyst of modern french literature, ahead of either Proust or Gide. But, although I enjoyed the book, I do not rate it as highly.
Perhaps it is because the subject matter is so backwards, so off-beat, that I cannot relate to it. Andre Gide wrote fantastic novels, to inspire people to new heights, and to reveal hypocrisy. Henri Barbusse, on the other hand, merely became enveloped in human activities, and saw no virtue in them. In Hell, there are no heros, and there is no moral standard. What was so fantastic and pivotal in Gide and Proust's writing was their sense of revolution; they saw a new, liberal future, where people could live as they like. As opposed to Barbusse, whose novel Hell speaks such decrepidity that it would induce no noble action of anyone.
Although, as I have said already, it could merely be the subject matter. After all, it is hard to relate to voyeurism.
|
|
|
3 of 5 people found the following review helpful:
Lyrical genius rages against the machine on soul's behalf, 8 Sep 2000
By A Customer
The previous reviewer is so very wise and absolutely correct: this is indeed a masterpiece. Barbusse's little aperture on the soul beckons the reader in to a work which is part myth of creation, part chronicle of creation's fall. Here is an invitation to a game of spiritual voyeurism where the stakes are higher than the simple life and the easy death: this is a battle for the primacy of the soul of man. The struggle is enjoined in lyrical p | |
(3 customer reviews)
See all 3 customer reviews...
(
