Comments on: The Pringles and the Brambles http://www.bibliographing.com/2009/11/10/pringles-brambles/ Fri, 12 Mar 2010 05:04:15 -0600 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: nicole http://www.bibliographing.com/2009/11/10/pringles-brambles/comment-page-1/#comment-4584 nicole Tue, 10 Nov 2009 16:03:31 +0000 http://www.bibliographing.com/?p=2036#comment-4584 Yes, for sure, in that sense it doesn't compare. It really is just a lark, by contrast: the Pringles go to London for a singular purpose, they do not make such a circuit, as you allude, and there is no ode to the Scottish countryside mixed in. They do do a lot of what Smollett's crew does, all in miniature, but they don't do all of it by a long shot. You're right, though. You'd think, with a summary like that, it would make the characters but "pale shadows" of what we find in Smollett, and while they're not <em>as</em> good, they're not pale shadows either. And everything is still funny, though I wonder how universal it would still be. I feel like you need to know more than average about the kirk, about Calvinism, that sort of thing, to get a lot of what's going on in both Galt novels I read. I mean you can't just expect these people to be "conservative" in a typical way...it's different. Also, the stuff about George IV and his wife. I don't think you need to know the history to appreciate the humor in the way the Pringles act like fools, but certainly some of it gets a bit technical and I think a lot of contemporary readers would think it was a bit confusing. Yes, for sure, in that sense it doesn’t compare. It really is just a lark, by contrast: the Pringles go to London for a singular purpose, they do not make such a circuit, as you allude, and there is no ode to the Scottish countryside mixed in. They do do a lot of what Smollett’s crew does, all in miniature, but they don’t do all of it by a long shot.

You’re right, though. You’d think, with a summary like that, it would make the characters but “pale shadows” of what we find in Smollett, and while they’re not as good, they’re not pale shadows either.

And everything is still funny, though I wonder how universal it would still be. I feel like you need to know more than average about the kirk, about Calvinism, that sort of thing, to get a lot of what’s going on in both Galt novels I read. I mean you can’t just expect these people to be “conservative” in a typical way…it’s different. Also, the stuff about George IV and his wife. I don’t think you need to know the history to appreciate the humor in the way the Pringles act like fools, but certainly some of it gets a bit technical and I think a lot of contemporary readers would think it was a bit confusing.

]]> By: Amateur Reader http://www.bibliographing.com/2009/11/10/pringles-brambles/comment-page-1/#comment-4583 Amateur Reader Tue, 10 Nov 2009 15:52:53 +0000 http://www.bibliographing.com/?p=2036#comment-4583 I think you're getting at why I don't find <i>The Ayrshire Legatees</i> to be quite first-rank. <i>Humphrey Clinker</i> has more complex characters, or at least one, and the patterning is more complicated (the crossover with <i>Don Quixote</i>, for example. The Galt novel is a dazzling lark, but Smollett's novel is richer. You're also reminding me how funny Galt's lark really is. Shouldn't all of the gags be outdated and no longer funny? How did he do that? I think you’re getting at why I don’t find The Ayrshire Legatees to be quite first-rank. Humphrey Clinker has more complex characters, or at least one, and the patterning is more complicated (the crossover with Don Quixote, for example.

The Galt novel is a dazzling lark, but Smollett’s novel is richer.

You’re also reminding me how funny Galt’s lark really is. Shouldn’t all of the gags be outdated and no longer funny? How did he do that?

]]>