Rating: 
Summary: A Steep Hill But Worth Climbing
Review: At first perusal "Waverley" appears to be quite peculiar. The initial opinion, however primitive, is probably caused by one's continuous comparison of it, in the course of the reading, with the well-known Sir Scott's masterpiece, "Ivenhoe". Indeed, the opening chapters of the novel are too descriptive, and those in the middle, though packed with events, are generally lacklustre. The end stands out as written in a rather precipitate manner, which Sir Scott understands himself - "but when the story draws near its close, we hurry over the circumstances, however important ... and leave you to suppose those things..." and ultimately gives an original and amusing justification for that. The narrative is often intermittent with long digressions, not bearing a direct relationship to the main line of the story. The principal hero, young Edward Waverley, is depicted as a timid boy, with education "of a nature somewhat desultory" making it highly surprising to find other heroes rapturous over his personality. Sir Scott portrays the former as bright individuals, perhaps, sometimes too bright, which imparts to them some artificiality: the uncharacteristic puerility of the Baron, the inconceivable honour and pride of Colonel Talbot, the shyness and simplicity of Rose, who scarcely opens her mouth in the novel. English, with which it is written, is tainted with Scotch and Latin, over-abusively, in several scenes.
All this forms a direct contrast to "Ivanhoe", which is yet more noticeable by the complete absence in "Waverley" of that good and witty humour of Wamba and Friar Tuck which "Ivenhoe" is strewn with.
Why, then, did I endow "Waverley" with four stars? Trudging through the novel, the careful reader will get the feeling that the author has really some other purpose than simply to entertain the audience with a well fabricated story. Instead, he tries to do his best to combine the story with traditions and history of Scotland, often painting the picture with local dialects, so that the reader could get the "double share". We clearly see the author's intention in the Postscript: "... and now, for the purpose of preserving some idea of the ancient manners, of which I have witnessed the almost total extinction, I have embodied in imaginary scenes, and ascribed to fictitious characters, a part of the incidents which I received from those who were actors in them". On the whole, "Waverley" is a great and profound historical novel, written by a real master.
So, if you value art and history, if you are not one who can be easily intimidated by obstacles in a journey, this is the book for you.
Rating:
Summary: In this time, a curiousity.
Review: Just about every work of historical fiction ever written owes its existence to Walter Scott and to Waverley, his first novel. At the time, it was a new way to write novels - indeed, combining historical fact with entertainment was a brilliant idea. By creating a fictional character and inserting him into the middle of the 1745 Jacobite Rebellion, Walter Scott was able to bring the culture and traditions of Scotland to life in the most staid bourgeois imagination. As a result, he achieved unprecedented popularity for his time, singlehandedly started a tourist industry in Scotland, and kicked off a new genre of fiction, which was then studiously adopted by countless authors, of whom Dumas and Fenimore Cooper are canonical examples.Sometime in the middle of the nineteenth century, however, Scott's popularity took a nosedive, and has never recovered since. Unfortunately, after all the years and all the imitators, and after this kind of novel turned into an established genre, much of Waverley's charm has been lost, and the book no longer seems particularly impressive. Its length is sure to turn off many, especially given that for all the historical romance, there's relatively little action here. However, what still makes it worth your time is Scott's delightful and quintessentially British humour, which he applies through odd digressions and liberal use of comic anticlimax to alleviate tension. One also can't help but be impressed by his vocabulary; there are many passages in Waverley that are more or less devoid of content, but which are so elaborately constructed as to be a pleasure to read. The story itself is no less worth one's attention than before, as far as its "educational value" goes, but the modern reader will not enjoy wading through the obfuscatory prose. I confess that I had a hard time getting through the first few chapters; after that, though, I got used to it and actually enjoyed the rest of the book. I can't however, claim that it was a particularly mindblowing read. I'm not alone; Scott has often been criticized for being a daft romantic entertainer and not a serious artist. This isn't quite true since he was rather conservative (not romantic); he writes about romantic things, but with a rather tongue-in-cheek approach that isn't visible in the works of, say, Dumas. What is true, however, is that this is primarily a tale of manners, and thus by necessity somewhat stuck in its time. Dumas's colourful, loyal, wine-loving Musketeers can thrill the mind even to this day; Scott's characters seem rather bland in comparison, and it looks like he is doomed to fall even further into disfavour as time passes and readers' frames of reference change even further. I do recommend Waverley, but more for the author than the book - unable to extract any great effect from the latter, I found myself more and more captivated by the former, who lets the reader in on his jokes and invites him to regard the events of the book with the same attitude of respect and fascination lightened by bemused wit. That doesn't make for any life-altering enlightenment, but it is enjoyable.
Rating: 
Summary: Dreams of love & lady's charms give place to honor & to arms
Review: Like most readers, I was introduced to Scott through "Ivanhoe," which remains one of my favorite novels to this day. I was surprised to find however, that critics then and now do not regard it as the best of his many novels. Rather, his Waverley novels take that pride of place. After reading "Waverley," I have to agree with them. "Ivanhoe" is exciting, full of passion, gallantry and derring-do. So is "Waverley," but in a different sort of way. The protagonist, Edward Waverley, is not a knight in shining armor, but a fickle boy who learns to be a man through many hardships and dangers. It is a much more satisfying novel in this respect, and the characters are much more subtly drawn than in "Ivanhoe." I haven't read this book in a few years, but I am inclined to do so again as I believe it deserves a second read. One of my favorite lines in this book is from the poem that Waverley writes at the start:"So on the idle dreams of youth breaks the loud trumpet call of truth; forever gone to beauty's eye is each bright day that flitted by; while dreams of love and lady's charms give place to honor and to arms!"
Rating:
Summary: A Geste of Waverly
Review: Mark Twain stated that Scott's writings had a "debilitating influence;" in fact drove the antebellum South "mad" with medieval notions of chivalry into the War Between the States. It's true, the popularity of Sir Walter at the time was unparalleled. Waverley, published in 1814, has the distinction of being the first historical novel; that is, where a heroic fictional character is set within an actual event in history. Waverley also stands out as a splendid example of the romantic trend in literature, where imagination is considered primary to understanding. Waverley is the first in a series of popular "historical romances" by Scott. The key event to Waverley is the colorful Jacobite rebellion of 1745, where Bonnie Prince Charlie, the last of the Stuarts, landed on Scottish shores to reclaim the English throne from King George II. 75,000 ex-Jacobites later immigrated to South Carolina following Prince Charlie's failure, no doubt giving King George III much to contend with, during the American Revolution. Over a hundred years later, South Carolina was the first state to secede from the Union, by the Scott "crazed" generation. So, Twain's witty observation could have a basis in fact.
Scott published Waverley anonymously, giving the novel a thrilling mystique of historical authenticity; a romantic strategy ? for imaginative distancing or "negative capability" discussed by contemporary poet, John Keats. The hero, Edward Waverley, is born into a house of divided loyalties, between the treasonable Stuart cause and loyal ties to the Hanoverian crown. Although himself a Captain in the King's forces, Edward begins an adventure of self-discovery at the Scottish manor of Bradwardine; learns the ways of the Highlanders from Fergus McIvor and his sister, Flora; joins forces with "the Chief," and fights the battle of Preston. We are treated to riveting characterizations of famous historical persons and events, told in evocative poetic prose, with haunting images, dramatic set pieces, and convincingly real dialogue. I agree with A.N. Wilson, who more recently described Sir Walter Scott as "a genius of extraordinary range, depth and intelligence."
So, in reply to the ever gallant and wry wit of Mr. Twain, it's my belief that the creative genius, as evidenced by Waverley, promotes rather than detracts from cultural growth. The self-defeating principles which destroyed the Old South are endemic to all societies (including our own), as Toynbee could have said, and these causes lay deep within the collective unconscious (Jung).
Rating:
Summary: Stick With It....
Review: Oh, is this a difficult read! If you're fluent in Old Scotts, French and Latin, and familiar with hundreds of historical/literary allusions (some of which Scott purposefully distorts in the mouths of his characters), then you should be OK. Otherwise, I see only two ways for the reader to make it through "Waverly" -- Sir Walter Scott's first historical novel and progenitor of an entire literary genre. Either keep a thumb on the page you're reading and leave the other digits free to mark the glossary, appendices and notes. Or, may I suggest you plow through the text fortified with your favorite beverage and merely pretend to understand what is being said? Here's an example from the pedantic and quarrelsome, Baron Bradwardine, who has just dismounted his war-horse: "I seldom ban, sir, but if you play any of your hound's-foot tricks, and leave puir Berwick before he's sorted, to rin after spuilzie, deil be wi' me if I do not give your craig a thraw." You'll forgive my very loose, vulgar translation, but here goes: "I seldom swear, sir, but if I catch you running around, leaving my poor horse, Berwick, unattended (all hot and lathered) so you can whore after the spoils of war, it will be the devil with me if I don't wring your bloody neck with my own hands." Mercifully, the narration is written in modern English. The trick is to get through the first 125 pages, which is all narrative, no dialogue, and not a modicum of action. Something is not quite right here. Either Scott's erudition is too much for a Post- World War II baby boomer weaned on television; or, he was still cutting his literary teeth on "Waverly" and had not yet mastered a narrative technique that served him so well later on. My problem is I'm not quite sure which it is? Ultimately, the text and narration may be easier to deal with than the young hero protagonist, Edward Waverly -- the last remaining branch of a venerable, ancient English family, whose only familial blemish is empathy for Scottish independence. By no means is Edward Waverly a bad fellow -- I don't think he has a mean bone in his body. He is, indeed, a gentleman at a time when that term actually stood for something. He also possesses a certain adventuresome spirit, and to use a modern day expression he has wonderful survival skills. The problem with Edward Waverly is that Scott has rendered a central character that inspires something like indifference in the reader, and at the risk of sounding too harsh I'm not sure I really care what happens to him. It's hard to. This is how he describes himself: "I am the very child of caprice." And here is the brave, ambitious Highland Chieftain, Fergus Mac-Ivor, telling Edward, "...you are not celebrated for knowing your own mind very pointedly." That's putting it mildly! At times his behavior is overly mannered, wooden and seemingly imbecilic. At other times, he appears to aimlessly drift from one allegiance to another. Perhaps this is the way Scott wanted to portray an overly romantic young man, struggling to find his place in the world and trying rather desperately to answer the age-old question: "Who am I?" Or, maybe, it was Sir Walter Scott struggling with himself? After all, he was blazing a new literary genre with "Waverly," and his primary goal was to recapture a bygone era (which he does so magnificently.) My sense is Scott created Edward Waverly to transport his reader back in time, and along the way Scott may have lost touch with his own young protagonist. Half a century later, Robert Louis Stevenson recreated Edward Waverly as David Balfour in "Kidnapped", who is also a young man coming of age in war-torn Scotland. The difference is that David Balfour does not have the advantages of wealth and education, nor is he overly romantic and foolish enough -- as is Edward Waverly -- to willingly stick his head into the jaws of a real historic event, the 1745 Jacobite Rebellion. Perhaps the best that can be said for Edward Waverly is that many of the novel's heroic figures love him and want to protect him....mostly from himself. And to his credit, by the end of this long tale, Edward Waverly manfully handles the loss of so many dear friends. So, why have I given "Waverly" four stars? Well, on the authority of others, it did create an entirely new literary genre -- the historical novel. But I loved this book because Sir Walter Scott created a precious time-bank of 18th Century Scottish culture. This is a treasure trove of language and customs, and the reader is treated to a national ethos of Scotland, including marshal ardor, hospitality, thrift and a certain fondness for overly intricate legal matters. And, if you can make it through, say, four-fifths of the book, Scott delivers a heartfelt, masterful ending that blends pathos with celebration and renewal.
Rating: 
Summary: Read the instuction manual for your can opener first!
Review: Scott apologizes numerous times for rambling on and on in both his introduction and conclusion. If you can control yourself and continue reading (even though this part is really really boring) you will actually find a story. I am a bit biased for this book as I have toured Scotland and even seen Scott's Abbotsford home, but it isn't a bad book. It is interesting for its portrayal of Scotland and the people there in the 18th century. The characters seem a bit mysterious and far-off, because of this I never connected to them. There is an attempt at a sort of Braveheart story, but it is neither touching nor inspiring. If you are locked in a damp Scottish castle or if you have a STRONG interest in Scottish history then this book is worth a read. Other than that, read something else.
Rating:
Summary: The ultimate coming-of-age novel
Review: Scott can be a ragged storyteller, by our contemporary standards (which are unfair to apply, since he showed the way to all future English novelists). Patches of WAVERLEY are ragged and rambling. Such humor as there is is not very funny, and sometimes when the action is meant to be sweeping, it is more nearly absurd. None of this is without compensations. The English novel was still young and unformed, and Scott is alive to all its possibilities, with a freshness and boldness not available to later writers. He thinks nothing, for instance, of having his hero (here as in IVANHOE) sick or asleep while the action is conducted elsewhere by more vidid, nominally secondary characters. But WAVERLEY is not just of historical interest. It accomplishes something unique in the Bildungsroman genre. In its time, and even now, it is thought of as a nonpareil romantic adventure, but the reputation is misleading, since it is mostly about the unraveling of Waverley's romantic notions. For a time we share them: how merry and noble the highlanders seem, how manly and swashbuckling their leader, Fergus; how accomplished and womanly his sister, the beautiful Flora. By the the end of the book, however, Waverley's cause has turned to ashes, the man he idolized is revealed as an unfeeling monomaniac, and the woman he thought he loved seems just a sour harpy. The cold slap of reality is an experience common enough in life, the painful accompaniment of growing up, but you'll have to look far and wide to find it so cannily presented in fiction as here.
Rating:
Summary: The ultimate coming-of-age novel
Review: Scott can be a ragged storyteller, by our contemporary standards (which are unfair to apply, since he showed the way to all future English novelists). Patches of WAVERLEY are ragged and rambling. Such humor as there is is not very funny, and sometimes when the action is meant to be sweeping, it is more nearly absurd. None of this is without compensations. The English novel was still young and unformed, and Scott is alive to all its possibilities, with a freshness and boldness not available to later writers. He thinks nothing, for instance, of having his hero (here as in IVANHOE) sick or asleep while the action is conducted elsewhere by more vidid, nominally secondary characters. But WAVERLEY is not just of historical interest. It accomplishes something unique in the Bildungsroman genre. In its time, and even now, it is thought of as a nonpareil romantic adventure, but the reputation is misleading, since it is mostly about the unraveling of Waverley's romantic notions. For a time we share them: how merry and noble the highlanders seem, how manly and swashbuckling their leader, Fergus; how accomplished and womanly his sister, the beautiful Flora. By the the end of the book, however, Waverley's cause has turned to ashes, the man he idolized is revealed as an unfeeling monomaniac, and the woman he thought he loved seems just a sour harpy. The cold slap of reality is an experience common enough in life, the painful accompaniment of growing up, but you'll have to look far and wide to find it so cannily presented in fiction as here.
Rating:
Summary: Sir Walter Scott's redemption--if he needed one.
Review: Sir Walter Scott, I think, needs to be redeemed only in the eyes of people who don't know him. He has a bad rep in most English Departments--because most people (including English professors) haven't read him. Typically, the process goes like this: a professor will tell you that Cooper got the "historical novel format" from Scott, and then you read "The Last of the Mohicans," and you're cured forever. But really, Scott himself is the antidote to this hasty conclusion. "Waverley" is a great novel. It takes some work though: you'll have to get over the sometimes convoluted language, the artificial dialogue, the idealized descriptions of character and setting. But once you do that, this novel is a blast. The hero may look like a sissy for most of the book, but after the Jacobites' retreat back to Scotland, Scott will show you that Waverley is a "real" character after all. The happy ending, after adventuring incognito through England back to London, may seem too romantic for a student in an English Department, but Scott never loses sight of the pain and bloodshed that are the inevitable result of civil war. Romantically speaking, it's up to you. Rose or Flora? I always think it's sad that Scott has Waverley marry Rose instead of providing us with a super-happy ending, but perhaps this goes to show you--Scott is not that romantic after all. Romantically speaking, you got to love the couleur locale of the Highlands, the dirks and claymores, the unwavering loyalty of Evan Dhu, Flora's waterfall... Don't forget, all you professors and Ph.D.'s and M.A.'s, we also read to enjoy, and I enjoy the heck out of this novel! This particular edition, like all the others by OUP, is very competent. The introduction by Clare Lemont could have done with a healthy dose of Marxist criticism (see the OUP edition of "Rob Roy"--in my opinion, by the way, a much less exciting novel), but the apparatus, which includes extensive notes by the editor and Scott's introductions and notes to the Magnum Opus-edition, is great. So there you have it: this is a very good edition of a wonderful novel by a wonderful storyteller. Go get you a copy and read it with glasses colored by whatever critical theory you subscribe to--but read it first, and read it for enjoyment also.
Rating:
Summary: a pleasure to read
Review: The first several chapters were a bit slow. But once Edward Waverley goes to Scotland, the story picks up. I enjoyed Scott's romantic portrayal of Scotland and, as someone who's not much of a student of history, I also liked learning a little about the Jacobite Rebellion of 1745. But most enjoyable was watching the maturation of Edward Waverley. He begins his adventures as a young dreamer whose passivity and romantic notions allow him to be swept into the Jacobite uprising on the side of the rebels. But adversity teaches Edward a sense of responsibility and the value of a realistic outlook. The ending of the novel is almost too neat and satisfying, but through it Scott reconciles the novel's divisions - romanticism and realism, Scotsman and Englishman and the old world, so attractive to Scott but which was speedily disappearing, with the new world and the stability and order it represents.
|
