Melincourt

by Thomas Love Peacock

This second (1817) novel by the English satirist takes on the electoral system of the time, in a plot about a civilized yet silent orangutan elected Member of Parliament for the "rotten-borough" Onevote. The novel also serves as a scathing treatise on romanticism, primitivism, and the idea of the "noble savage."

206 pages, ebook

First published January 1, 1817

About the author

Thomas Love Peacock (1785-1866) was an English novelist and poet. For most of his life, Peacock worked for the East India Co. He was a close friend of Percy Bysshe Shelley, who greatly inspired his writing. His best verse is interspersed in his novels, which are dominated by the conversations of their characters and satirize the intellectual currents of the day. His best-known work, Nightmare Abbey (1818), satirizes romantic melancholy and includes characters based on Shelley, Samuel Taylor Coleridge, and Lord Byron.

Reviews

[Adam · Rating 4 out of 5]

An orang-utan as a member of parliament, sitting around a dinner table. This absurdity was Thomas Love Peacock's attempt to ridicule the so-called Rotten Boroughs. These were electoral districts in the UK which had once been populated, but had become depopulated. Anyone representing a Rotten Borough obtained a seat in Parliament, but needed to do little or no work to justify it. Many of those who represented the Rotten Boroughs in the House of Commons were gifted or sold their elevated positions by the aristocrats who owned the Rotten Borough and were themselves Members of the House of Lords.

In Melincourt, the Rotten Borough of Onevote is represented by Sir Oran Haut-Ton, a speechless orang-utan, a parody of a certain type of human behaviour.

I read this book many years ago, along with a number of Peacock's equally enjoyable novels.

[Anna · Rating 3 out of 5]

I remember studying this novel (or parts of it?) at university and really enjoying it, so I came to this re-reading with high expectations. At first it seems that my expectations were met. I am fairly familiar with novels of the early nineteenth century so I think I got the majority of the jokes which ranged from slapstick to comments on contemporary (1817) politics and art. However, the novel seems to be predicated on a few comic concepts which were not sufficient to hold my attention to the end of the final volume.

I read this book as part of a reading group in which we are reading six books published in 1817 in 2017 (we are following an official group but doing the sessions ourselves as a group of friends). If it weren't for the upcoming meeting, I probably wouldn't have bothered with the final volume. My e-copy was also corrupted which didn't help (bits missing, footnotes spliced into the text etc).

In our reading group we debated whether the reader is supposed to mock the hero and heroine, or if they (the hero and heroine) are supposed to beyond the scope of the satire. I think most readers today would find them unlikeable, but we couldn't figure out if that's what Peacock intended. If you're reading this review, please feel free to reply with your opinion on this matter!

[Brian · Rating 5 out of 5]

A most entertaining book that introduces through its characters many of the conflicting lines of thought about society prevalent in the first couple of decades of the 19th century. F. H. Townsend's line illustrations for this edition are superb, by the way. The introduction by George Saintsbury is rather subdued, but includes a short list of those whom the characters were supposed to caricature, many of whom are forgotten. However, Saintsbury talks of "ludicrous inaccuracy" in the indirect portraits of Coleridge (Mr. Mystic), Southey (Mr Feathernest), Wordsworth (Mr. Paperstamp) and others, and this certainly distracted readers in 1817. No reason to let that bother us today. I found most of the characters hilarious, not least the dear Sir Oran Haut-Ton. Not many novels feature a tamed and civilized orangoutang. Thoroughly recommended.

[Tom Griffin · Rating 3 out of 5]

I enjoyed this but it felt like bit of a sophomore effort, falling into pitfalls that Headlong Hall avoided. The philosophical dialogue was more long-winded and the satire a bit peevish in places. The premise was interesting. On the face of it, not much was done with it but I suppose Sir Oran was the exemplar of natural justice. I'm hoping Nightmare Abbey will be a return to form.

[Micah Whale]

anthelia didn't bang the orangutan. shattered.

read this if you care about drawn out philosophical musings such as "it's better to be considerate of others even if there is no immediate benefit", or you want someone to kind of take the piss out of a bunch of very rich and very dead british politicians/nobility that you've never needed to hear of.

[Matthew · Rating 2 out of 5]

A classic of the orangutan gets to live with the girl genre. NEED whatever Peacock was on.

[Nancy · Rating 1 out of 5]

Humor was dated and topical and didn't translate too well to 21st century taste.