Call number
820.9 WOO
Collection
Series
Publication
Mariner Books (1984), Edition: Annotated, 288 pages
Description
Woolf's first and most popular volume of essays. This collection has more than twenty-five selections, including such important statements as "Modern Fiction" and "The Modern Essay." Edited and with an Introduction by Andrew McNeillie; Index.
User reviews
LibraryThing member bookseller525
The Common Reader is a series of essays on, what else, reading. Beginning with the Greeks and ending with Woolf's contemporaries, the author explores the world of literature, not through the critic's eyes, but through the eyes of the common reader through the ages.
I really, really loved this book!
My absolutely favorite essay was on the Brontés. She described how the surroundings in which the Brontés grew up affected their work; and the difference between the works of Charlotte and Emily. It was such a beautiful piece of writing!
At times, this book did make me feel inadequately read. There were authors discussed whom I'd never heard of, whom I'd never read, or whom I'd not read very much of. It also made me want to go out and read some of them, or to re-read old favorites.
I highly recommend this for lovers of literature - with a caution. It will make you wnat to acquire more books!
I really, really loved this book!
Show More
Woolf is absolutely brilliant! She seems have had the ability to take an author, or a group of works, and shine a beam as strong as a laser on the essence of that body of work.My absolutely favorite essay was on the Brontés. She described how the surroundings in which the Brontés grew up affected their work; and the difference between the works of Charlotte and Emily. It was such a beautiful piece of writing!
At times, this book did make me feel inadequately read. There were authors discussed whom I'd never heard of, whom I'd never read, or whom I'd not read very much of. It also made me want to go out and read some of them, or to re-read old favorites.
I highly recommend this for lovers of literature - with a caution. It will make you wnat to acquire more books!
Show Less
LibraryThing member kdcdavis
'...a good essay must have this permanent quality about it; it must draw its curtain round us, but it must be a curtain that shuts us in, not out.' (from 'The Modern Essay')
Virginia Woolf does indeed draw a curtain round and shut us cozily in with her in each of these lovely essays. It is perhaps
Her essay on Jane Austen was a beautiful tribute, and the one on 'Jane Eyre' and 'Wuthering Heights' will be on my mind for a long time; her thoughts on Charlotte and Emily Bronte were very interesting and compelling. The essay on Addison made me want to read Addison even though, apparently, no one actually reads Addison--they only read essays about him! I'm also inspired to re-read George Eliot, Defoe, and Montaigne, and perhaps even Conrad; and maybe I'll try my hand at a few of my own essays as well.
Virginia Woolf does indeed draw a curtain round and shut us cozily in with her in each of these lovely essays. It is perhaps
Show More
the blithe assumption that all common readers are familiar with the books she discusses that is so charming, but her conversational tone is also exactly what one desires in a good essay. She has no qualms about being scathing or snarky, but is just as warm and admiring where she deems it due. She is not a critic, but a reader, a discerning and accomplished reader, who shares her thoughts about the books she loves as well as some she is not so fond of.Her essay on Jane Austen was a beautiful tribute, and the one on 'Jane Eyre' and 'Wuthering Heights' will be on my mind for a long time; her thoughts on Charlotte and Emily Bronte were very interesting and compelling. The essay on Addison made me want to read Addison even though, apparently, no one actually reads Addison--they only read essays about him! I'm also inspired to re-read George Eliot, Defoe, and Montaigne, and perhaps even Conrad; and maybe I'll try my hand at a few of my own essays as well.
Show Less
LibraryThing member thorold
The two series of The common reader (published in 1925 and 1932) are the collections of Woolf's essays on books and writers published during her lifetime (further collections were compiled by her husband after her death). As the title implies, they concentrate on the pleasures to be found in books
She is addressing English readers in English papers, of course, but still I was a bit surprised at how narrow her geographical range is here. "Literature", for the purposes of these books, seems to begin with Chaucer and the Paston Letters and end with Ulysses (still a work-in-progress when she was writing about it). Writers are, almost without exception, English - and when they are not, they are foreigners with some special claim to be recognised as English by adoption, like Swift and Joyce, Scott and RLS, or Conrad and James. There are passing references to the fact that a few Frenchmen may have written books, but this is not investigated further: it looks as though the only non-English books worth discussing are those of The Greeks and The Russians. And in both cases Woolf tells us that however much we may enjoy them, our cultural distance from them means that we will only ever appreciate them rather dimly. The famous essay "On not knowing Greek" isn't about linguistic difficulties. She assumes that we will have learnt Greek at least to the extent that we can read Homer and the Athenian dramatists, as she has. But she very sensibly warns us about the difficulty of making any assumptions about a culture where life is lived so differently from early-20th-century London, and a literature of which we read a handful of masterpieces without much knowledge of what came before or after, or indeed of contemporary works that were not preserved as masterpieces. Chaucer's England is a long way away too, but there we have so much more accessible context to help us to make sense of it. And Russia is even more of a problem, when seen from the vantage point of Bloomsbury: "Of all those who feasted upon Tolstoi, Dostoevsky, and Tchekov during the past twenty years, not more than one or two perhaps have been able to read them in Russian"(!)
Something else that came home to me about halfway through my reading is how hard it is to keep a sense of the flow of time when reading this sort of writing. Woolf talks about "The Victorians" in much the same way that we do, as representatives of a distant era, but actually she was born in Victoria's reign herself. When she talks about Tennyson, Thackeray and Trollope, they are people that her parents and grandparents knew (her father was previously married to one of Thackeray's daughters) - they're nearer to her (in time) than she would be from me. A sobering thought...
What most of us will dip into The common reader for are the wonderful essays on her real heroes, Jane Austen, George Eliot, Thomas Hardy, Joseph Conrad, Christina Rosetti, Mary Wollstonecraft and the Brontës, where Woolf expertly points us to the things we really need to know about those writers and the conditions they worked under, without obscuring in any way her own enormous (but never uncritical) enthusiasm for them. But we shouldn't neglect the backwaters. Woolf has great fun with all her subjects, and she can make Laetitia Pilkington or Geraldine Jewsbury (or Beau Brummell or Archbishop Thomson, for that matter) as interesting and extraordinary as Wollstonecraft, and make us feel - at least for the duration of the essay - that we really ought to go off and read more about those people. And occasionally, she can be delightfully brutal with some unfortunate modern writer, like the poor Miss Hill who wrote a ladylike little book about Mary Russell Mitford and her Surroundings, presumably unaware that Woolf knew all about Miss Mitford because of her research for Flush. But even faced with an undeniably bad book, Woolf admits that the simple pleasure of reading and being made to think about what the author should have said wins out "Yet, as one is setting out to speak the truth, one must own that there are certain books which can be read without the mind and without the heart, but still with considerable enjoyment."
The common reader is decidedly not a book to read without the mind and without the heart - both of those organs will be stimulated more than adequately as you read it - but the considerable enjoyment is still there all the same!
Show More
rather than the academic analysis of literary values. Woolf is happy to be eclectic, and whilst she visits most of the familiar lampposts of Eng Lit on her quasi-random walk, she doesn't mind going into rhapsodies about an obscure volume of 18th century memoirs that no-one has had out of the library in a century, or having fun exhuming the life of an almost forgotten country parson or an overlooked woman writer.She is addressing English readers in English papers, of course, but still I was a bit surprised at how narrow her geographical range is here. "Literature", for the purposes of these books, seems to begin with Chaucer and the Paston Letters and end with Ulysses (still a work-in-progress when she was writing about it). Writers are, almost without exception, English - and when they are not, they are foreigners with some special claim to be recognised as English by adoption, like Swift and Joyce, Scott and RLS, or Conrad and James. There are passing references to the fact that a few Frenchmen may have written books, but this is not investigated further: it looks as though the only non-English books worth discussing are those of The Greeks and The Russians. And in both cases Woolf tells us that however much we may enjoy them, our cultural distance from them means that we will only ever appreciate them rather dimly. The famous essay "On not knowing Greek" isn't about linguistic difficulties. She assumes that we will have learnt Greek at least to the extent that we can read Homer and the Athenian dramatists, as she has. But she very sensibly warns us about the difficulty of making any assumptions about a culture where life is lived so differently from early-20th-century London, and a literature of which we read a handful of masterpieces without much knowledge of what came before or after, or indeed of contemporary works that were not preserved as masterpieces. Chaucer's England is a long way away too, but there we have so much more accessible context to help us to make sense of it. And Russia is even more of a problem, when seen from the vantage point of Bloomsbury: "Of all those who feasted upon Tolstoi, Dostoevsky, and Tchekov during the past twenty years, not more than one or two perhaps have been able to read them in Russian"(!)
Something else that came home to me about halfway through my reading is how hard it is to keep a sense of the flow of time when reading this sort of writing. Woolf talks about "The Victorians" in much the same way that we do, as representatives of a distant era, but actually she was born in Victoria's reign herself. When she talks about Tennyson, Thackeray and Trollope, they are people that her parents and grandparents knew (her father was previously married to one of Thackeray's daughters) - they're nearer to her (in time) than she would be from me. A sobering thought...
What most of us will dip into The common reader for are the wonderful essays on her real heroes, Jane Austen, George Eliot, Thomas Hardy, Joseph Conrad, Christina Rosetti, Mary Wollstonecraft and the Brontës, where Woolf expertly points us to the things we really need to know about those writers and the conditions they worked under, without obscuring in any way her own enormous (but never uncritical) enthusiasm for them. But we shouldn't neglect the backwaters. Woolf has great fun with all her subjects, and she can make Laetitia Pilkington or Geraldine Jewsbury (or Beau Brummell or Archbishop Thomson, for that matter) as interesting and extraordinary as Wollstonecraft, and make us feel - at least for the duration of the essay - that we really ought to go off and read more about those people. And occasionally, she can be delightfully brutal with some unfortunate modern writer, like the poor Miss Hill who wrote a ladylike little book about Mary Russell Mitford and her Surroundings, presumably unaware that Woolf knew all about Miss Mitford because of her research for Flush. But even faced with an undeniably bad book, Woolf admits that the simple pleasure of reading and being made to think about what the author should have said wins out "Yet, as one is setting out to speak the truth, one must own that there are certain books which can be read without the mind and without the heart, but still with considerable enjoyment."
The common reader is decidedly not a book to read without the mind and without the heart - both of those organs will be stimulated more than adequately as you read it - but the considerable enjoyment is still there all the same!
Show Less
LibraryThing member Chris_V
The first volume of Virginia Woolf's in-depth essays into literature both contemporary and classic. Her analysis is so thorough and engagingly conversational that even if the writer is unknown to one she still makes it interesting.
LibraryThing member LyzzyBee
(2 September 2016)
I bought these two volumes especially for Woolfalong, although I did also need them for my Iris Murdoch research, mining them first to pull out information on what exactly Woolf said about the common reader and about critics. I was a bit disappointed to find that my lovely new
I loved re (surely re) reading this famous book of essays, so readable, even though they demonstrate formidable scholarship and strong opinions, and thus could feel a little intimidating. I went start to finish as my “downstairs” (dinner table and sofa reading) book, often sitting a little longer for “just one more”.
Yes, it does help if you know who the people are she’s writing about, and I did enjoy least the pieces where she speaks of very minor figures, but I so enjoyed the famous ones on “Modern Fiction” and “How it Strikes a Contemporary) and loved her pieces on Austen, the Brontes and particularly George Eliot, having forgotten these from my original reading, back in the day.
I don’t agree with Woolf on Bennett et al (although as Ali has mentioned in her review of the Writer’s Diary, she was sad at his death) even though she does concur that he’s a good workman, but the modernists had to have people to rail against, didn’t they, and she does back up her arguments! Her comments about the tyrannical conventions that make the modern novelist feel they have to provide plot, comedy, tragedy, love interest and an air of probability make you see why she and others like her felt their way of working to be important. A good read, and another one I’ve been glad to pick up for #Woolfalong.
I bought these two volumes especially for Woolfalong, although I did also need them for my Iris Murdoch research, mining them first to pull out information on what exactly Woolf said about the common reader and about critics. I was a bit disappointed to find that my lovely new
Show More
paperbacks were reprints, and rather smudgy ones at that, of an earlier edition, as I do like the clear type you get in modern books. But I managed.I loved re (surely re) reading this famous book of essays, so readable, even though they demonstrate formidable scholarship and strong opinions, and thus could feel a little intimidating. I went start to finish as my “downstairs” (dinner table and sofa reading) book, often sitting a little longer for “just one more”.
Yes, it does help if you know who the people are she’s writing about, and I did enjoy least the pieces where she speaks of very minor figures, but I so enjoyed the famous ones on “Modern Fiction” and “How it Strikes a Contemporary) and loved her pieces on Austen, the Brontes and particularly George Eliot, having forgotten these from my original reading, back in the day.
I don’t agree with Woolf on Bennett et al (although as Ali has mentioned in her review of the Writer’s Diary, she was sad at his death) even though she does concur that he’s a good workman, but the modernists had to have people to rail against, didn’t they, and she does back up her arguments! Her comments about the tyrannical conventions that make the modern novelist feel they have to provide plot, comedy, tragedy, love interest and an air of probability make you see why she and others like her felt their way of working to be important. A good read, and another one I’ve been glad to pick up for #Woolfalong.
Show Less
LibraryThing member Ghost_Boy
This is the first of two collections of essays by Virginia Woolf about various writers, their books, and style for the common man. Unlike her novels, these are fairly easy to read...if you know the material. Some essays I found easy to understand like the ones about the Greeks, the Russians, George
Show More
Eliot, Joseph Conrad and others I had no idea who she was talking about, thus making it hard for me to get what she was talking about. One thing I will say I got from this collection was Woolf got picky when it came to translation. It seemed she rather learn and read the original language than English translations. Seems like she thought translators often distorted the way in which the author was speaking, especially when she talks abut Russian and Greek writers. Show Less
Pages
288
ISBN
0156198061 / 9780156198066