What do you think?
Rate this book
Gargantua and Pantagruel #1
Pantagruel
François Rabelais holds a unique place in the history of world literature, and no more so than for his extraordinary satirical entertainment Gargantua and Pantagruel. Here the first of these volumes is presented in a new and lively translation. Pantagruel recounts the life a popular giant. From his portentous birth and colorful childhood, to his visit to Paris and his travels through Utopia, and not withstanding his enormous appetite, Pantagruel’s history is told with a breathtaking degree of gaiety and wit. Ingeniously coining new expressions, and with an unashamed obsession with bodily functions, Rabelais blends prose and poetry, the sacred and profound, to offer a heady satire of the religious society of his day. The result is a bawdy and brilliant celebration of life.
439 pages, Mass Market Paperback
First published January 1, 1532
About the author
François Rabelais
1,138 books426 followersFrench humanist François Rabelais wrote satirical attacks, most notably
Pantagruel
(1532) and
Gargantua
(1534), on medieval scholasticism and superstition.
People historically regarded this major Renaissance doctor of fantasy, satire, the grotesque, bawdy jokes, and songs. Considered of the great of world literature, he created modern Europe. He also published under the names Alcofribas Nasier and Séraphin Calobarsy.
François Rabelais était un des grand écrivains de la Renaissance française, médecin et humaniste. Il a toujours été considéré comme un écrivain de fantaisie, de satire, de grotesque et à la fois de blagues et de chansons de débauche. Rabelais est considéré comme l'un des grands écrivains de la littérature mondiale et parmi les créateurs de l'écriture européenne moderne. Il a également publié sous les noms Alcofribas Nasier et Séraphin Calobarsy.
People historically regarded this major Renaissance doctor of fantasy, satire, the grotesque, bawdy jokes, and songs. Considered of the great of world literature, he created modern Europe. He also published under the names Alcofribas Nasier and Séraphin Calobarsy.
François Rabelais était un des grand écrivains de la Renaissance française, médecin et humaniste. Il a toujours été considéré comme un écrivain de fantaisie, de satire, de grotesque et à la fois de blagues et de chansons de débauche. Rabelais est considéré comme l'un des grands écrivains de la littérature mondiale et parmi les créateurs de l'écriture européenne moderne. Il a également publié sous les noms Alcofribas Nasier et Séraphin Calobarsy.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 107 reviews
Read
August 15, 2023Rabelais Reviews Part II
One of the things I'm really enjoying while reading about Gargantua and Pantagruel is the amount of new and interesting words I've come across. Sometimes the words are invented to suit the context as in the verb clochidonnaminer which is used in a scene where Gargantua borrows the bells of Notre Dame Cathedral to hang on his horse’s bridle. One of the professors from the Sorbonne comes to plead for the return of the bells addressing Gargantua as Domine (master) and saying Clochidonnaminez-nous which means more or less ‘give-us-back-the-bells-which-you-dominated-us-by-taking-from-us.’ I love it. I wish I could use clochidonnaminer in some everyday situation but where could anyone ever use such a word!
At other times, the unfamiliar words Rabelais uses exist already but in another language, eg, despumer which he has borrowed from Latin (despumo, despumare) and turned into French. It means to skim off or clarify (associated with wine-making perhaps) but Rabelais uses it to satirise those who use Latin words to bemuse and confuse their listeners: nous despumons la verbocination latiale (we clarify latinate verbocinations) but of course they do the very opposite and only make everything more unclear.
Confused? Wait, I’m not finished with this subject of curious words yet.
Another interesting word I came across is emberlificoter which trips along the tongue really nicely. Try it yourself: em-ber-liff-ey-coat-ay. It’s a word I will definitely find a use for—in fact I think I’ve just found a use for it. Those of you who’ve seen some of the Rabelais updates I posted may remember that I hesitated over which of Rabelais' books to read first, Gargantua or Pantagruel, Pantagruel or Gargantua, because although in the chronology of the story, Gargantua comes first since Gargantua engendered his son Pantagruel, in the chronology of Rabelais’ life, Pantagruel comes first since it was written a couple of years before Gargantua and therefore engendered Gargantua, so to speak.
The solution I came up with was to read them both at once, a sip from one then a sip from the other, as it were. It was a good plan and allowed me to see the parallels between the narratives more clearly.
Rabelais begins each book with a detailed description of the main character’s birth. We learn for example that Gargantua was born out of his mother’s ear because the midwife had given her such a strong anti-purgative that it closed off all other exits.
Pantagruel’s birth was equally gruelling as he was an exceptionally large baby. The placenta came first and contained sixty-eight mule drivers, each with a cart-load of salt , nine dromedaries loaded with smoked ham and beef tongue, seven camel-loads of eels, and finally twenty-five cart loads of leeks, garlic, onions and chives, the smell of which nearly knocked out the midwives. I’ll refrain from mentioning what became of his poor mother after all that.
Rabelais also describes how both characters received their names, and would you be surprised to hear that both names are connected with drinking?
Rabelais elaborates on the rearing of the two heroes too, personal hygiene
and other aspects of their general education including sport, particularly riding and drinking. Eventually both characters get to adulthood and play key roles in various battles. The battles are parodies of real battles that were taking place in Europe in the 1500s.
Therefore from birth through to their military careers, Rabelais develops both stories more or less according to the same plan.
Which brings me back to my current favourite word emberlificoter. Because of the similarities in the narratives, it was easy to get tangled up in the story. I’d find myself turning to the cover of the book to double-check which book I was in, especially in the early chapters where they were most similar. At one point in Pantagruel there was mention of a student prank Pantagruel was involved in which had him stealing church bells in Orleans, and I thought, hold on, didn’t I read that already (and you're possibly saying the same thing now if you were paying attention at the beginning). However, Rabelais goes on to explain to the reader that Pantagruel’s father had stolen the bells of Notre Dame when he’d been a student in Paris and then I remembered the ‘Clochidonnaminez-nous’ story I’d already read in Gargantua.
But now you’re scratching your head, aren't you? If Rabelais wrote Pantagruel before he wrote Gargantua then he wrote that reminder to the reader before he wrote the episode the reminder reminded us of. That’s a real case of being 'emberlificoted', and totally raveled in Rabelais’ roguish ravel.
There are a few other occasions where incidents are repeated. Pantagruel recalls a story about his father’s horse pissing so much it flooded a valley, for example, and then in Gargantua we hear how the horse in fact pissed away a forest and created an entire river where none had been before.
To confuse us even further, Rabelais begins Pantagruel by referring to a book he presumes the reader has read already, Les grandes et inestimables chroniques de l'énorme giant Gargantua. This book did in fact exist though Rabelais hadn’t written it. It was published anonymously in 1532. But if the reader has already read the second book Rabelais wrote, Gargantua, he will think that it is the book referred to in the first book he wrote, if you follow me. And to emberlificote the issue completely, Pantagruel was also published in 1532, right at the beginning of the year, according to the notes in my edition. So did Rabelais read the anonymous book before it was published? It's a mystery. I can only guess that there must have been earlier versions of this tale that are now lost.
While I have underlined the parallels between Gargantua and Pantagruel, there are variations too especially when it comes to the secondary characters. A particularly loathsome but lovable rogue enters the story in the second half of Pantagruel. His name is Panurge and there isn’t really any equivalent character in Gargantua. Panurge is so entertaining that Rabelais went on to write three more books about his and Pantagruel’s exploits. I’m reading Le tiers livre at the moment and so far, it’s just as ribald and rabelaisian as the first two. Perfect.
...............................................................................
Did I say I couldn’t find a use for the phrase ‘Clochidonnaminez-nous’ or
‘give-us-back-the-bells-which-you-dominated-us-by-taking-from-us’?
It since occurred to me that in Ireland under English rule during the eighteenth/nineteenth centuries, Catholic churches, when they were finally allowed to be built again (the older ones having been taken over by the Protestant faith) were not allowed to have steeples or bell towers. ‘Clochidonnaminez-nous’, the people could have chanted, ‘give-us-back-the-bells-which-you-dominated-us-by-taking-from-us’. Or perhaps they could have called on the giant Fionn Mac Cumhaill and his son Oisin to erect bell towers for them. If Rabelais had been writing a story about Ireland instead of about France, that's how it would have worked out!
One of the things I'm really enjoying while reading about Gargantua and Pantagruel is the amount of new and interesting words I've come across. Sometimes the words are invented to suit the context as in the verb clochidonnaminer which is used in a scene where Gargantua borrows the bells of Notre Dame Cathedral to hang on his horse’s bridle. One of the professors from the Sorbonne comes to plead for the return of the bells addressing Gargantua as Domine (master) and saying Clochidonnaminez-nous which means more or less ‘give-us-back-the-bells-which-you-dominated-us-by-taking-from-us.’ I love it. I wish I could use clochidonnaminer in some everyday situation but where could anyone ever use such a word!
At other times, the unfamiliar words Rabelais uses exist already but in another language, eg, despumer which he has borrowed from Latin (despumo, despumare) and turned into French. It means to skim off or clarify (associated with wine-making perhaps) but Rabelais uses it to satirise those who use Latin words to bemuse and confuse their listeners: nous despumons la verbocination latiale (we clarify latinate verbocinations) but of course they do the very opposite and only make everything more unclear.
Confused? Wait, I’m not finished with this subject of curious words yet.
Another interesting word I came across is emberlificoter which trips along the tongue really nicely. Try it yourself: em-ber-liff-ey-coat-ay. It’s a word I will definitely find a use for—in fact I think I’ve just found a use for it. Those of you who’ve seen some of the Rabelais updates I posted may remember that I hesitated over which of Rabelais' books to read first, Gargantua or Pantagruel, Pantagruel or Gargantua, because although in the chronology of the story, Gargantua comes first since Gargantua engendered his son Pantagruel, in the chronology of Rabelais’ life, Pantagruel comes first since it was written a couple of years before Gargantua and therefore engendered Gargantua, so to speak.
The solution I came up with was to read them both at once, a sip from one then a sip from the other, as it were. It was a good plan and allowed me to see the parallels between the narratives more clearly.
Rabelais begins each book with a detailed description of the main character’s birth. We learn for example that Gargantua was born out of his mother’s ear because the midwife had given her such a strong anti-purgative that it closed off all other exits.
Pantagruel’s birth was equally gruelling as he was an exceptionally large baby. The placenta came first and contained sixty-eight mule drivers, each with a cart-load of salt , nine dromedaries loaded with smoked ham and beef tongue, seven camel-loads of eels, and finally twenty-five cart loads of leeks, garlic, onions and chives, the smell of which nearly knocked out the midwives. I’ll refrain from mentioning what became of his poor mother after all that.
Rabelais also describes how both characters received their names, and would you be surprised to hear that both names are connected with drinking?
Rabelais elaborates on the rearing of the two heroes too, personal hygiene
and other aspects of their general education including sport, particularly riding and drinking. Eventually both characters get to adulthood and play key roles in various battles. The battles are parodies of real battles that were taking place in Europe in the 1500s.
Therefore from birth through to their military careers, Rabelais develops both stories more or less according to the same plan.
Which brings me back to my current favourite word emberlificoter. Because of the similarities in the narratives, it was easy to get tangled up in the story. I’d find myself turning to the cover of the book to double-check which book I was in, especially in the early chapters where they were most similar. At one point in Pantagruel there was mention of a student prank Pantagruel was involved in which had him stealing church bells in Orleans, and I thought, hold on, didn’t I read that already (and you're possibly saying the same thing now if you were paying attention at the beginning). However, Rabelais goes on to explain to the reader that Pantagruel’s father had stolen the bells of Notre Dame when he’d been a student in Paris and then I remembered the ‘Clochidonnaminez-nous’ story I’d already read in Gargantua.
But now you’re scratching your head, aren't you? If Rabelais wrote Pantagruel before he wrote Gargantua then he wrote that reminder to the reader before he wrote the episode the reminder reminded us of. That’s a real case of being 'emberlificoted', and totally raveled in Rabelais’ roguish ravel.
There are a few other occasions where incidents are repeated. Pantagruel recalls a story about his father’s horse pissing so much it flooded a valley, for example, and then in Gargantua we hear how the horse in fact pissed away a forest and created an entire river where none had been before.
To confuse us even further, Rabelais begins Pantagruel by referring to a book he presumes the reader has read already, Les grandes et inestimables chroniques de l'énorme giant Gargantua. This book did in fact exist though Rabelais hadn’t written it. It was published anonymously in 1532. But if the reader has already read the second book Rabelais wrote, Gargantua, he will think that it is the book referred to in the first book he wrote, if you follow me. And to emberlificote the issue completely, Pantagruel was also published in 1532, right at the beginning of the year, according to the notes in my edition. So did Rabelais read the anonymous book before it was published? It's a mystery. I can only guess that there must have been earlier versions of this tale that are now lost.
While I have underlined the parallels between Gargantua and Pantagruel, there are variations too especially when it comes to the secondary characters. A particularly loathsome but lovable rogue enters the story in the second half of Pantagruel. His name is Panurge and there isn’t really any equivalent character in Gargantua. Panurge is so entertaining that Rabelais went on to write three more books about his and Pantagruel’s exploits. I’m reading Le tiers livre at the moment and so far, it’s just as ribald and rabelaisian as the first two. Perfect.
...............................................................................
Did I say I couldn’t find a use for the phrase ‘Clochidonnaminez-nous’ or
‘give-us-back-the-bells-which-you-dominated-us-by-taking-from-us’?
It since occurred to me that in Ireland under English rule during the eighteenth/nineteenth centuries, Catholic churches, when they were finally allowed to be built again (the older ones having been taken over by the Protestant faith) were not allowed to have steeples or bell towers. ‘Clochidonnaminez-nous’, the people could have chanted, ‘give-us-back-the-bells-which-you-dominated-us-by-taking-from-us’. Or perhaps they could have called on the giant Fionn Mac Cumhaill and his son Oisin to erect bell towers for them. If Rabelais had been writing a story about Ireland instead of about France, that's how it would have worked out!
April 11, 2017
Although the language of Rabelais is quite difficult in the original 16th C French, with its strange diction and spelling, this is a fantastic book full of humour and political satire. Rabelais narrowly escaped from the Inquisition with this book that was considered obscene at the time (and perhaps even now his anal and scatological obsessions would make some blush), but it is funny and bigger than life. I have not read its companion volume, Gargantua, as I was told it was more of the same but perhaps I'll get around to it one day.
Read
November 3, 2022И аз като много деца на 90-те, ги познавах като герои на анимацията, но когато трябваше да го прочета в университета приятно ме изненада сарказма, иронията и в същото време толкова истинна!
September 18, 2018
"Gargantua"dan önce yazılmasına rağmen hikaye olarak onun devamı niteliğindeki François Rebelais'nin "Pantagruel"i aynı "Gargantua" gibi alt metninde derin din ve devlet adamı eleştirisi barındıran kendina has diliyle türünde tek bir eser. "Gargantua" kadar "olgun" olmasa da en az onun kadar güçlü metaforik öğelerle kendine hayran bırakan eserin bir nevi "Gargantua"ya hazırlık niteliği taşıdığı söyleyenebilir. Rönesans'ın ilk yazarlarından biri olan Rebelais'nin Homeros'tan Virgil'e kadar tüm edebi eserlere değinerek bilgisiyle adeta şov yaptığı eserin tümünü bir taşlama olarak kabul etmek mümkün. Zaten yazarın final notu da bunu özetler nitelikte. Üzerinde düşünülmesi gereken oldukça eğlenceli ve özgün bir eser. Yukarıda da dediğim gibi "Gargantua"yla beraber türünde tek.
26.01.2015
İstanbul, Türkiye
Alp Turgut
http://www.filmdoktoru.com/kitap-labo...
26.01.2015
İstanbul, Türkiye
Alp Turgut
http://www.filmdoktoru.com/kitap-labo...
August 1, 2022
Es la segunda vez que leo "Pantagruel" y todavía la considero una tremenda obra.
Rabelais da una clase magistral sobre como desacreditar siglos de pensamiento en pocas páginas, sin artimañas retóricas rebuscadas, lo hace con la más "simple" de las comedias.
Partamos de que es un libro "oscuro", el mismo nos dificulta su acceso; en medio de todas las guarangadas que suceden hay una misión, un mensaje. Pero bendito quien entienda que significa el mundo en la boca de Pantagruel o el cambio de estilema entre los capítulos VII y VIII (yuxtaposición más que pensada) así como así. Es un gran libro, pero amerita Lecturas complementarias.
Dicho eso, no es motivo para desalentarse, el libro de por sí es graciosísimo y ligero, un ejemplo de sátira tan corrosiva que incluso fue censurado por los teólogos de su época.
Les dejo una frase que creo, engloba el mensaje general de la obra: "En todo grupo hay más locos que sabios, y la parte más grande supera siempre a la mejor"
Rabelais da una clase magistral sobre como desacreditar siglos de pensamiento en pocas páginas, sin artimañas retóricas rebuscadas, lo hace con la más "simple" de las comedias.
Partamos de que es un libro "oscuro", el mismo nos dificulta su acceso; en medio de todas las guarangadas que suceden hay una misión, un mensaje. Pero bendito quien entienda que significa el mundo en la boca de Pantagruel o el cambio de estilema entre los capítulos VII y VIII (yuxtaposición más que pensada) así como así. Es un gran libro, pero amerita Lecturas complementarias.
Dicho eso, no es motivo para desalentarse, el libro de por sí es graciosísimo y ligero, un ejemplo de sátira tan corrosiva que incluso fue censurado por los teólogos de su época.
Les dejo una frase que creo, engloba el mensaje general de la obra: "En todo grupo hay más locos que sabios, y la parte más grande supera siempre a la mejor"
June 18, 2024
puro jajajajijiji
entre mi primera lectura y esta he vivido miles de vidas y agradezco eso por hacerme apreciar este libro con la madurez que se merece
entre mi primera lectura y esta he vivido miles de vidas y agradezco eso por hacerme apreciar este libro con la madurez que se merece
October 25, 2019
Wacky, fragmentary/episodic mish-mash of fantasy/humour/nonsense involving violence/sex/farting etc - amazing, but incoherent/uneven.
June 8, 2014
This is very hard to rate, because Pantagruel is one of those classics that can't really hold its own today - if you're not very much into medieval French literature and history, and have an archaic French vocabulary to match your modern one. A modern French vocabulary isn't really sufficient here, and to actually get something out of Pantagruel, I think most people need a commented version. Unfortunately, I couldn't fine one, and I'm not really sure I can say I've actually read this book now. Some scenes are easy enough to get, but quite a lot of the material is a bit obscure when you lack the cultural context... (And like, don't really get what the funny part is supposed to be for a macabre, medieval audience.) So I'll read a book about Rabelais and his writings instead, and re-read this one day with the help of some experts.
September 27, 2015
Read in French. Very exuberant, not quite readable I'm afraid. I liked Gargantua more.
January 19, 2022
Livro da primeira metade do século XVI e dou com um procedimento do nosso dia-a-dia:
“Depois cheguei à cidade e achei-a formosa, bem fortificada e com bons ares; mas à entrada os porteiros pediram-me o certificado de saúde, o que muito me espantou e fez perguntar:
- Senhores, por aqui haverá perigo de peste?
- Ó senhor (disseram eles), tão perto de nós anda a morrer-se tanto, que a carroça percorre as ruas.”
O que me leva a dizer com o Rabelais, sobre o covid: “Pudesse eu ter à mão uma garrafa de vinho melhor do que alguma vez beberá o que vier a ler esta história tão verídica!”
“Depois cheguei à cidade e achei-a formosa, bem fortificada e com bons ares; mas à entrada os porteiros pediram-me o certificado de saúde, o que muito me espantou e fez perguntar:
- Senhores, por aqui haverá perigo de peste?
- Ó senhor (disseram eles), tão perto de nós anda a morrer-se tanto, que a carroça percorre as ruas.”
O que me leva a dizer com o Rabelais, sobre o covid: “Pudesse eu ter à mão uma garrafa de vinho melhor do que alguma vez beberá o que vier a ler esta história tão verídica!”
July 16, 2017
Même avec la traduction en français contemporain, ce bouquin reste ambiguë surtout avec les exagérations trop farfelu à mon goût.
October 23, 2023
Oğlu Pantagruel'in hihayesi de, en az Gargantua kadar eğlenceli. Önceki kitaba uzun bir ara verip devamını okuyormuş gibi.
January 16, 2020
Les livres de Rabelais permettent toujours deux lectures différentes : une lecture sérieuse et une lecture qui l’est moins. Sous l’impression de grossièreté Rabelais cache une grande sensibilité que je ne retrouve pas chez d’autres auteurs. Je le trouve d’une intelligence grandiose parce qu’il arrive à parodier extrêmement bien de nombreux ouvrages importants de la littérature et de l’histoire, entre autres les grandes gestes et les œuvres antiques. Ses écrits sont bourrés d’intertextualité, ce sont de véritables mines d’or! On peut creuser les textes chaque fois plus et toujours trouver de nouvelles références. Certains passages de Pantagruel m’ont fait rire toute seule dans le bus et le format, tout comme c’est le cas avec Gargantua, est très divertissant. L’histoire prend la forme d’épisodes divers : scènes de banquet, périple à travers les villes de France, rencontres fortuites avec des personnages excentriques, croisades et chevalerie, histoires d’amour et d’amitié, le tout ponctué de digressions sur le sens des choses et de la vie.
Rien ne manque à cet ouvrage qui s’est imposé dans l’histoire littéraire comme précurseur du roman moderne. Sous couvert d’humour et d’absurdité, Rabelais nous livre des idéaux humanistes qu’on aurait tout intérêt à sérieusement reconsidérer aujourd’hui.
Rien ne manque à cet ouvrage qui s’est imposé dans l’histoire littéraire comme précurseur du roman moderne. Sous couvert d’humour et d’absurdité, Rabelais nous livre des idéaux humanistes qu’on aurait tout intérêt à sérieusement reconsidérer aujourd’hui.
May 15, 2018
1.5
Yes, I'm a prude and I do not like sex related books. But I can stand them if there's something beyond that. This book makes disagreeable jokes (misogynist, vulgar, incoherent, excrement related) and I don't get why is that necessary. I mean, it's okay to break taboos, you do can tell me about your excrement once, maybe twice, but not the fucking entire book. I really don't need to know about your shit (literally), or how you annoy women who don't want to sleep with you, or how you literally live to make the others miserable.
I don't get it.
And I don't get why the author would think this is funny. It's not. It's gross.
The only chapters I did enjoy were 8 and 32, and I admit 30 was interesting and kinda funny.
Yes, I'm a prude and I do not like sex related books. But I can stand them if there's something beyond that. This book makes disagreeable jokes (misogynist, vulgar, incoherent, excrement related) and I don't get why is that necessary. I mean, it's okay to break taboos, you do can tell me about your excrement once, maybe twice, but not the fucking entire book. I really don't need to know about your shit (literally), or how you annoy women who don't want to sleep with you, or how you literally live to make the others miserable.
I don't get it.
And I don't get why the author would think this is funny. It's not. It's gross.
The only chapters I did enjoy were 8 and 32, and I admit 30 was interesting and kinda funny.
August 24, 2021
2.50 🌠 ➡ 3.50 🌠
Como se puede ver por las estrellas que le puse, puedo afirmar que esta segunda vez lo disfruté y aprecié mucho más.
La primera vez que lo leí era un ingenuo estudiante de Letras que esperaba "más" de la literatura francesa. Cuando lo leí me pareció ridículo , vago, tonto y digno de ser olvidado. Pero repito, era ingenuo.
Esta relectura (y acordándome las benditas clases de Campora 🛐) me llevó a la conclusión de que este libro es una genialidad. Si siento que hay episodios más dignos de recordar que otros, como por ejemplo la carta de Gargantua a Pantagruel, la importancia cultural del debate entre el filósofo Inglés y Panurgo, etc. Pero, como dije, hay capítulos que me dan sensación de relleno (la mayoría, tbh) y por eso no le puse una puntuación tan alta.
Como se puede ver por las estrellas que le puse, puedo afirmar que esta segunda vez lo disfruté y aprecié mucho más.
La primera vez que lo leí era un ingenuo estudiante de Letras que esperaba "más" de la literatura francesa. Cuando lo leí me pareció ridículo , vago, tonto y digno de ser olvidado. Pero repito, era ingenuo.
Esta relectura (y acordándome las benditas clases de Campora 🛐) me llevó a la conclusión de que este libro es una genialidad. Si siento que hay episodios más dignos de recordar que otros, como por ejemplo la carta de Gargantua a Pantagruel, la importancia cultural del debate entre el filósofo Inglés y Panurgo, etc. Pero, como dije, hay capítulos que me dan sensación de relleno (la mayoría, tbh) y por eso no le puse una puntuación tan alta.
Read
June 28, 2020I did not read this edition, so I'm not giving this a rating. I read the Great Works series version as well as listened to part of the audio recording.
This one is about the giant Gargantua's giant son Pantagruel. It's just as full of hyperbole and ridiculousness as the tale about Gargantua. It's often outrageous, sometimes disgusting, and frequently crude. It's supposed to be funny. I guess it's a drinking tale. I have to admit I did chuckle a few times because it's so over the top. It reminds me of a cross between Monty Python, Paul Bunyan, and weird fantasy. Crazy. I had a dictionary on hand and learned a few new words, but many of the words are either manufactured or in a different language. I suppose it has value because of the interesting words. I'm glad we got through it and can move onto mellower works.
This one is about the giant Gargantua's giant son Pantagruel. It's just as full of hyperbole and ridiculousness as the tale about Gargantua. It's often outrageous, sometimes disgusting, and frequently crude. It's supposed to be funny. I guess it's a drinking tale. I have to admit I did chuckle a few times because it's so over the top. It reminds me of a cross between Monty Python, Paul Bunyan, and weird fantasy. Crazy. I had a dictionary on hand and learned a few new words, but many of the words are either manufactured or in a different language. I suppose it has value because of the interesting words. I'm glad we got through it and can move onto mellower works.
January 28, 2022
Hahahahaha this has got to be one of the best, and funnets books I’ve ever read, hilarious stuff! And all the notes to the text help explain the linguistical puns and word-play of Rabelais. Highly recommended. Great satire! So many strange episodes and descriptions, was very surprised that so much body-related stuff was accepted back in the 1500s, but I’m glad it was hhahahahaha, need to read the rest of the books now because holy moly
Thank you Gentle Giant for pointing me this way!
Thank you Gentle Giant for pointing me this way!
January 20, 2020
2.5/3
Well, I read it in old French so that didn’t help, and I definitely lacked a lot of references. I’ll take a good old fart joke any day but the ones in here barely made me smile.
Well, I read it in old French so that didn’t help, and I definitely lacked a lot of references. I’ll take a good old fart joke any day but the ones in here barely made me smile.
January 9, 2023
La lecture fut beaucoup moins fluide pour moi sur Pantagruel que Gargantua, probablement parce qu'il est souvent présenté comme le galop d'essai de Rabelais avant les aventures du père de Pantagruel.
Ca reste tout aussi irrévérencieux évidemment, parodique du style épique et très inventif : mes chapitres préférés sont ceux aux Enfers, le dispute sans parole et celui de la visite de la gorge très peuplée de Pantagruel. La violence misogyne de Panurge frise toutefois l'insoutenable, ce qui m'a presque coupé de la lecture en cours d'ouvrage.
L'introduction et les notes permettent de mieux comprendre l'organisation du récit, sa réception ambigüe, ses influences (tant la farce médiévale, que les maîtres antiques révérés par les humanistes, que l'Evangile et la Kabbale) et surtout l'interchangeabilité Pantagruel et Panurge. Je recommande de lire l'introduction après le récit, c'est plus intéressant ainsi pour ce livre.
Ca reste tout aussi irrévérencieux évidemment, parodique du style épique et très inventif : mes chapitres préférés sont ceux aux Enfers, le dispute sans parole et celui de la visite de la gorge très peuplée de Pantagruel. La violence misogyne de Panurge frise toutefois l'insoutenable, ce qui m'a presque coupé de la lecture en cours d'ouvrage.
L'introduction et les notes permettent de mieux comprendre l'organisation du récit, sa réception ambigüe, ses influences (tant la farce médiévale, que les maîtres antiques révérés par les humanistes, que l'Evangile et la Kabbale) et surtout l'interchangeabilité Pantagruel et Panurge. Je recommande de lire l'introduction après le récit, c'est plus intéressant ainsi pour ce livre.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
Read
February 17, 2024Sérieux, un livre qui me fait rire, et me fait rendre compte que je ris devant un livre, donc je me trouve con, donc je ris.
May 30, 2021
Weirdly filthy for its time. Shit, piss, dicks, and good ol' mysogony 👍 This is Renaissance stand-up.
July 7, 2013
I don't think I've ever read anything quite as... unique as Francois Rabelais' Pantagruel. If it had been produced for television, I might describe it as a combination between Ren and Stimpy and Monty Python's Flying Circus. In the story, Pantagruel is a giant of mythic proportions and he takes part in a series of adventures both lewd and surreal. In one chapter, he is described as giving off a fart that spawns the race of pygmies, while in another he drowns an entire legion of troops with his urine.
Unfortunately, the prose was a bit awkward for my taste. The problem with word-based humor is that it tends not to translate very well to other languages. Actually, to call Rabelais' humor "word-based" would be a dramatic understatement, as his inventive prose is credited with introducing hundreds of words to the French language, many borrowed or adapted from Latin, Greek, and Italian. Sir Thomas Urquhart's English translation had an undeniable charm of its own, but I highly doubt that it can compare to the original French text.
Gargantua and Pantagruel is a curiosity for English speakers and should probably be approached as such. Its true beauty is otherwise encoded.
Unfortunately, the prose was a bit awkward for my taste. The problem with word-based humor is that it tends not to translate very well to other languages. Actually, to call Rabelais' humor "word-based" would be a dramatic understatement, as his inventive prose is credited with introducing hundreds of words to the French language, many borrowed or adapted from Latin, Greek, and Italian. Sir Thomas Urquhart's English translation had an undeniable charm of its own, but I highly doubt that it can compare to the original French text.
Gargantua and Pantagruel is a curiosity for English speakers and should probably be approached as such. Its true beauty is otherwise encoded.
January 3, 2015
História absolutamente escandalosa na linguagem e cenas escatológicas, blasfemas, alcoolizadas e sexualizadas, que nos apresenta a vida do gigante Pantagruel na França do séc XVI, numa crítica feroz de todos os estratos sociais, mas sobretudo de clérigos, nobres, estudantes e professores das universidades. Pantagruel é filho de Gargantua e Rabelais parodia um sem número de obras e factos do seu tempo, confessando alguma predileção por humanistas em relação aos que a estes se opunham. Conta a infância de Pantagruel, a sua vida de estudante (pouco aplicado, exceto em matéria de tabernas e bebedeiras) mas também muito dos factos e façanhas em tascas mas também na salas e espaços de erudição, também do seu criado Panúrgio, que até é mais protagonista que seu amo.
Livro alegre e divertido, em que tem um prólogo fenomenal, mas também um epílogo em que se anuncia as não menos admiráveis futuras aventuras de Pantagruel e Panúrgio nas prometidas sequelas que Rabelais acabou por escrever porque este é só o começo da horrífica história do senhor Pantagruel.
Livro alegre e divertido, em que tem um prólogo fenomenal, mas também um epílogo em que se anuncia as não menos admiráveis futuras aventuras de Pantagruel e Panúrgio nas prometidas sequelas que Rabelais acabou por escrever porque este é só o começo da horrífica história do senhor Pantagruel.
May 26, 2019
Obscene yet brilliant, though a lot of the humor gets really juvenile with a third read, some moments still shine.
October 25, 2016
Beuvez toujours ne mourrez jamais
December 7, 2016
I came to Rabelais, on this reading, working backwards from the satirical visions of Sterne and Swift. These 18th century descendants evince traces of Rabelais' satire, but little of his raucous, borderline apocalyptic laughter.
Pantagruel is like a taunting parody of an Enlghtenment hero, the man of reason as productive monster. While Panurge, his master's Figaro, his Passepartout, is a cross between a warrior monk and a filthy uncle. "Pantagruel" is closer to Alfred Jarry or Bulgakov than to nearer early modern satirists. A laughter that speaks not merely of genteel criticism, but of the threat of popular justice. One imagines Swift commenting, in distaste colored with private admiration, "before us, the savage God."
No wonder Joyce was enamored of Rabelais.
As to this edition, I was glad to find Hesperus' offering of at least two of Rabelais' "cinq livres" published in more intimate novella-length packages (the other is "Gargantua"). This is a more pleasurable way to read, closer to how the works were first experienced, and a refreshing corrective to the modern tendency to present canonical literature in big value-pacs-- all the works of a given author, or some huge selection of works on a theme.
In the case of Rabelais, there is the Penguin edition for example, which presents all five "livres" in chronological disorder. So Gargantua (published in 1534) precedes Pantagruel (published in 1532), then come books 3 and 4 (published 12 and 14 years later) and book 5, whose authorship remains disputed. And so most readers will plow through this corpus as if it were a major novel, rather than an artificially linear assemblage never contemplated (or perhaps even written, in the case of book 5) by Rabelais.
In contrast, Pantagruel read separately as Rabelais' first work is bold and abrupt. After being introduced as the "sequel" to oral folk traditions, it promptly trashes the stage and then leaves before the audience quite has its bearings. And with the air still thick with dust, Rabelais steps out to admonish the reader that his characters are as saints compared to the kind of crap that's actually going on in the world.
Pantagruel is like a taunting parody of an Enlghtenment hero, the man of reason as productive monster. While Panurge, his master's Figaro, his Passepartout, is a cross between a warrior monk and a filthy uncle. "Pantagruel" is closer to Alfred Jarry or Bulgakov than to nearer early modern satirists. A laughter that speaks not merely of genteel criticism, but of the threat of popular justice. One imagines Swift commenting, in distaste colored with private admiration, "before us, the savage God."
No wonder Joyce was enamored of Rabelais.
As to this edition, I was glad to find Hesperus' offering of at least two of Rabelais' "cinq livres" published in more intimate novella-length packages (the other is "Gargantua"). This is a more pleasurable way to read, closer to how the works were first experienced, and a refreshing corrective to the modern tendency to present canonical literature in big value-pacs-- all the works of a given author, or some huge selection of works on a theme.
In the case of Rabelais, there is the Penguin edition for example, which presents all five "livres" in chronological disorder. So Gargantua (published in 1534) precedes Pantagruel (published in 1532), then come books 3 and 4 (published 12 and 14 years later) and book 5, whose authorship remains disputed. And so most readers will plow through this corpus as if it were a major novel, rather than an artificially linear assemblage never contemplated (or perhaps even written, in the case of book 5) by Rabelais.
In contrast, Pantagruel read separately as Rabelais' first work is bold and abrupt. After being introduced as the "sequel" to oral folk traditions, it promptly trashes the stage and then leaves before the audience quite has its bearings. And with the air still thick with dust, Rabelais steps out to admonish the reader that his characters are as saints compared to the kind of crap that's actually going on in the world.
Read
December 22, 2023J'ai passé une part importante de mon adolescence à lire de la littérature du Moyen-Âge. Un des trucs qui me fascinaient, c'est qu'en lisant le vieux français avec l'accent québécois, j'arrivais à comprendre presque tout.
Mais bon, je ne m'étais jamais donné la peine de lire Rabelais. La Renaissance, c'était moins mon truc. Je me serais d'ailleurs attendu à ce que le moyen français soit plus accessible que le vieux, mais en fait non, j'ai dû m'aider de la version translatée pendant toute la lecture. J'imagine que c'est parce que Rabelais venait plutôt du sud de la France, à une époque où les influences culturelles venaient surtout d'Italie.
Alors voilà, j'ai lu Pantagruel. J'ai été surpris d'y trouver une parodie des romans de chevalerie, quoique beaucoup plus superficielle que, disons, Don Quichotte. J'ai bien aimé le style, qui se permet beaucoup de libertés avec la langue, les jeux de mots, les néologismes, les emprunts à d'autres langues.
L'humour est omniprésent et joue sur plusieurs niveaux. On passe rapidement de l'humour absurde aux blagues de flatulences puis à des blagues sur les œuvres de Platon, Cicéron et autres classiques.
On plonge aussi dans la vulgarité. Parfois très drôle, comme Panurge qui propose de fortifier Paris en bâtissant un mur en vagins. Puis qui entre dans les détails de l'entretien et de l'architecture de l'édifice.
Parfois moins. Comme cette scène ou Panurge, fâché qu'une femme mariée refuse de coucher avec lui, s'arrange pour la faire violer par un millier de chiens. Devant toute la ville qui observe, hilare.
Aussi, une bonne part de Pantagruel est, paraît-il, une satire sociale, plutôt critique de l'Église en plein schisme. Je ne connais visiblement pas assez la période pour avoir repéré ces passages.
Bref, cette lecture est une expérience intéressante, qui part dans toutes les directions mais qui, ultimement, n'arrive à aucune destination. J'ai ri quelques fois. Mais au final, je lui préférerais mille fois quelques vieux textes médiévaux poussiéreux.
Mais bon, je ne m'étais jamais donné la peine de lire Rabelais. La Renaissance, c'était moins mon truc. Je me serais d'ailleurs attendu à ce que le moyen français soit plus accessible que le vieux, mais en fait non, j'ai dû m'aider de la version translatée pendant toute la lecture. J'imagine que c'est parce que Rabelais venait plutôt du sud de la France, à une époque où les influences culturelles venaient surtout d'Italie.
Alors voilà, j'ai lu Pantagruel. J'ai été surpris d'y trouver une parodie des romans de chevalerie, quoique beaucoup plus superficielle que, disons, Don Quichotte. J'ai bien aimé le style, qui se permet beaucoup de libertés avec la langue, les jeux de mots, les néologismes, les emprunts à d'autres langues.
L'humour est omniprésent et joue sur plusieurs niveaux. On passe rapidement de l'humour absurde aux blagues de flatulences puis à des blagues sur les œuvres de Platon, Cicéron et autres classiques.
On plonge aussi dans la vulgarité. Parfois très drôle, comme Panurge qui propose de fortifier Paris en bâtissant un mur en vagins. Puis qui entre dans les détails de l'entretien et de l'architecture de l'édifice.
Parfois moins. Comme cette scène ou Panurge, fâché qu'une femme mariée refuse de coucher avec lui, s'arrange pour la faire violer par un millier de chiens. Devant toute la ville qui observe, hilare.
Aussi, une bonne part de Pantagruel est, paraît-il, une satire sociale, plutôt critique de l'Église en plein schisme. Je ne connais visiblement pas assez la période pour avoir repéré ces passages.
Bref, cette lecture est une expérience intéressante, qui part dans toutes les directions mais qui, ultimement, n'arrive à aucune destination. J'ai ri quelques fois. Mais au final, je lui préférerais mille fois quelques vieux textes médiévaux poussiéreux.
July 8, 2019
Rönesans’ın ilk dönem eserlerinden olan Pantagruel, Gargantua’dan önce yazılmasına rağmen Gargantua’nın devamı olarak sayılıyor. Baba Gargantua ve oğlu Pantagruel’in maceralarının anlatıldığı eserler toplamda beş kitaptan oluşuyor. Yalnız bu eserler özellikle Gargantua ve Pantagruel kendi içinde okunabilir seri olarak okunmasına gerek yok. Ben yazılma sırasına göre ilk olarak Pantagruel okuyarak başladım.
Kitaplarda baba oğul dev olan Gargantua ve Pantagruel’in maceraları anlatılıyor. Tabi ki sadece macera kitabı değil aslında anlattıklarıyla din, devlet, sistem eleştirisi yapan bir kitap. Yazar oldukça sivri dilli ve lafını hiç esirgemeden yazmış, zaten her yazdığı kitap zamanında sansürlenmiş. Okurken çeşitli konularda bilgi sahibi değilseniz konuya yabancı kalabiliyorsunuz. Ben yazarın bilgisine, zekasına hayran kaldım. Özellikle Panurge ile tanışması ve Fransa’daki yerleşim yerlerinin neden birbirine yakın olduğunu açıkladığı kısımlar da çok güzeldi. Oldukça bilgilendirici, gülümseten, yaptığı eleştirilerle şapka çıkarttıran bir kitaptı. Ben yazarın kendine ait bir türü olduğunu ve bu türde oldukça başarılı olduğunu düşünüyorum. Daha önce böyle bir kitap okumamıştım, çok beğendim.
Kitaplarda baba oğul dev olan Gargantua ve Pantagruel’in maceraları anlatılıyor. Tabi ki sadece macera kitabı değil aslında anlattıklarıyla din, devlet, sistem eleştirisi yapan bir kitap. Yazar oldukça sivri dilli ve lafını hiç esirgemeden yazmış, zaten her yazdığı kitap zamanında sansürlenmiş. Okurken çeşitli konularda bilgi sahibi değilseniz konuya yabancı kalabiliyorsunuz. Ben yazarın bilgisine, zekasına hayran kaldım. Özellikle Panurge ile tanışması ve Fransa’daki yerleşim yerlerinin neden birbirine yakın olduğunu açıkladığı kısımlar da çok güzeldi. Oldukça bilgilendirici, gülümseten, yaptığı eleştirilerle şapka çıkarttıran bir kitaptı. Ben yazarın kendine ait bir türü olduğunu ve bu türde oldukça başarılı olduğunu düşünüyorum. Daha önce böyle bir kitap okumamıştım, çok beğendim.
January 5, 2018
Je ne savais pas vraiment à quoi m'attendre, ne connaissant de l'oeuvre de Gargantua que cette image d'un ogre dans un texte en vieux français et j'ai été très agréablement surpris, une fois l'amusante phase de décryptage passée, de découvrir un texte foisonnant de vulgarités énooooormes et de traits d'esprit, de sexe, de gore, d'irrévérences religieuses et de propos philosophiques. C'est généreux, intelligent, réellement drôle, imaginatif, humaniste... C'est un Charlie Hebdo de 500 pages écrit par une des Lumières de la Renaissance.
Quelques extraits:
"Noe le sainct homme, à qui nous sommes tant obligez et tenuz, de ce quil nous planta la vigne."
"Les aultres enfloient en longitude par le membre, qu’on appelles le laboureur de nature : en sorte quils le avoyent merveilleusement long, grand, gras et gros, si bien quils sen servoient de ceincture le redoublant a cinq ou six foys par le corps."
"Et vint en Avignon ou il ne fut pas troys iours quil ne devint amoureux, car les femmes y iouent voulentiers du serrecropyere."
"Bonsoir messieurs, pardonnate my, et ne pensez pas tant à mes faultes que vous ne pensez bien es vostres."
Quelques extraits:
"Noe le sainct homme, à qui nous sommes tant obligez et tenuz, de ce quil nous planta la vigne."
"Les aultres enfloient en longitude par le membre, qu’on appelles le laboureur de nature : en sorte quils le avoyent merveilleusement long, grand, gras et gros, si bien quils sen servoient de ceincture le redoublant a cinq ou six foys par le corps."
"Et vint en Avignon ou il ne fut pas troys iours quil ne devint amoureux, car les femmes y iouent voulentiers du serrecropyere."
"Bonsoir messieurs, pardonnate my, et ne pensez pas tant à mes faultes que vous ne pensez bien es vostres."
Displaying 1 - 30 of 107 reviews