What do you think?
Rate this book
Charlotte Temple
The book tells of the seduction of a British schoolgirl by a dashing soldier, John Montraville, who brings her to America and there abandons her, pregnant and ill. As such, it belongs to the seduction novel genre popular in early American literature.
139 pages, Kindle Edition
First published January 1, 1790
78 people are currently reading
937 people want to read
About the author
Susanna Rowson
44 books12 followersSusanna Rowson, née Haswell, was a British-American novelist, poet, playwright, religious writer, stage actress, and educator. She was the author of the novel Charlotte Temple--the most popular bestseller in American literature until Harriet Beecher Stowe's Uncle Tom's Cabin was published in 1852.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 301 reviews
April 14, 2019
this book is baaaaaad. it is melodramatic and sentimental and full of woe is me and what shall i do and beseeching and fainting and fits and inexplicable deaths. i want montambo to read it because of all the people herein who are faced with unpleasantness, fall into a fit, and die. i want a doctor to tell me what that is all about. and i also want to know how playing the harp with a man for a half hour can knock you up. because i don't want a baby, but i do love the harp...
come to my blog!
come to my blog!
November 17, 2011
I'm rating this book based on historical context and for entertainment value. It's a really hilarious, melodramatic book with an absurd and sensational story about a young woman who falls into vice (basically, in the words of Coach from Mean Girls, "Don't have sex. You will get pregnant. And die."). But it provides a really interesting look at the gender roles of the time period, the expectations of women and men, and the concerns of the public about morality and sexuality. So as a historical document, it's pretty valuable. And it's really fun to read.
The author led a really interesting life and likes to interject advice about not marrying bum-ish men, since her own husband was kind of a bum. The author also breaks the fourth wall and talks to the reader in some pretty amusing and sarcastic ways. I read this for school, but I had a good time reading it, and if you're looking for historical documents or literature from this time period, this is a good one to start with.
The author led a really interesting life and likes to interject advice about not marrying bum-ish men, since her own husband was kind of a bum. The author also breaks the fourth wall and talks to the reader in some pretty amusing and sarcastic ways. I read this for school, but I had a good time reading it, and if you're looking for historical documents or literature from this time period, this is a good one to start with.
May 17, 2009
I liked this book for several reasons. One, it was the first novel to become an American best-seller. Two, written by a woman who was also a writer of plays, music, textbooks. She was an actress and an educator. At one point, she was the main breadwinner in her family, which her husband approved of. We're talking in mid 1700's here.
The story of Charlotte begins in England. She's fifteen years old, the only child of two doting parents. A cute British soldier comes along and convinces her to elope with him to America. Steamy stuff! Then she comes to America, gets pregnant, gets dumped by the British soldier and dies. Why did all early heroine's die in desolation??? That's a whole other topic. What is interesting about Charlotte, from a writer's point of view, is the way she structured the novel.
It's written in third person, but along the way, the narrator/author interjects thoughts about the story, statements aimed directly at the reader. There are a few theories out there as to why Rowson did this. One, which is also very interesting, is that by doing so she was able to "preach" to her audience, which women couldn't do in Puritan society. In a way, she broke society's rules in a very sneaky way, which is another reason why I like this book.
The story of Charlotte begins in England. She's fifteen years old, the only child of two doting parents. A cute British soldier comes along and convinces her to elope with him to America. Steamy stuff! Then she comes to America, gets pregnant, gets dumped by the British soldier and dies. Why did all early heroine's die in desolation??? That's a whole other topic. What is interesting about Charlotte, from a writer's point of view, is the way she structured the novel.
It's written in third person, but along the way, the narrator/author interjects thoughts about the story, statements aimed directly at the reader. There are a few theories out there as to why Rowson did this. One, which is also very interesting, is that by doing so she was able to "preach" to her audience, which women couldn't do in Puritan society. In a way, she broke society's rules in a very sneaky way, which is another reason why I like this book.
January 5, 2014
All the morality of Jane Austen without any of the fun, Fantine without all the wonderful singing. Vanity Fair lite...triple ugh. Dear Reader, I've decided I loathe being talked to directly by the narrator.
January 11, 2013
I scanned some of the other reviews ... apparently, one is a "hater" when one has different taste in literature?
I can appreciate that this novel has historic relevance, but as to the question, "Did you like this book?" my answer is, "No." I read it because of its place in history, but I did not enjoy the flowery, fussy, manipulative style of writing, the predictable plot, the heavier-than-heavy-handed moralisms, or the assumptions the author makes about her audience. This is the 18th century version of a soap opera. It was popular, it is old, but that doesn't make it good. (And my not liking it does not make me a "hater.")
I can appreciate that this novel has historic relevance, but as to the question, "Did you like this book?" my answer is, "No." I read it because of its place in history, but I did not enjoy the flowery, fussy, manipulative style of writing, the predictable plot, the heavier-than-heavy-handed moralisms, or the assumptions the author makes about her audience. This is the 18th century version of a soap opera. It was popular, it is old, but that doesn't make it good. (And my not liking it does not make me a "hater.")
July 5, 2011
Charlotte Temple is the first bestseller published in the United States, and thus an important read for anyone interested in American literature and/or print culture. This novel is very short--a novella, technically--and has a very melodramatic, over-the-top plot. It's basically an early conduct novel, showing young girls and women what consequences come from having sex outside marriage--poverty, ostracism, and death.
Charlotte is a young British girl who falls in love with a British officer and follows him to America. Basically, she becomes pregnant with his child, they don't marry, and she dies. The narrator voices her opinion constantly, although this is written in the third person, and this intrusion is actually entertaining.
While this novel is certainly offensive by today's standards, I give it four stars for its historical importance and its ability to entertain. It serves as a vehicle for understanding 18th century morals and gender codes as well as a document in the evolution of American print culture. This book is actually the first step in the development of American literature in relation to marketing, storytelling, and form. Not exactly my favorite novel, Charlotte Temple is worth reading--in the way Richardson's Pamela is worth reading. It's a valuable record of the history of the American novel.
Charlotte is a young British girl who falls in love with a British officer and follows him to America. Basically, she becomes pregnant with his child, they don't marry, and she dies. The narrator voices her opinion constantly, although this is written in the third person, and this intrusion is actually entertaining.
While this novel is certainly offensive by today's standards, I give it four stars for its historical importance and its ability to entertain. It serves as a vehicle for understanding 18th century morals and gender codes as well as a document in the evolution of American print culture. This book is actually the first step in the development of American literature in relation to marketing, storytelling, and form. Not exactly my favorite novel, Charlotte Temple is worth reading--in the way Richardson's Pamela is worth reading. It's a valuable record of the history of the American novel.
November 1, 2021
I read this for school, a class about early American literature. In that class this book does have some purpose and lends something to American literature but as a 21st century reader this book offers nothing worthwhile.
November 20, 2014
In every lit class, there comes an awkward moment when the professor has just assigned a reading he or she is unsure about. The students are already packing up, and the professor is doubting the quality of the assigned work. And so, just as the students are heading out to lunch, the professor casually tosses out a small disclaimer. These form a catalog of hilarious understatements. My Gender and Politics prof warned us that Judith Butler is 'kinda dense,' and a Shakespearean guy admitted that "The Jew of Malta" is perhaps 'a teensy bit anti-Semitic," and a total whacko allowed that assigning the entirety of "Huck Finn" in one night was 'not an easy reading load.'
I was therefore very worried when my professor, after telling us to read "Charlotte Temple" tonight, delivered an impromptu lecturer After all, even if we think the novel is an unmitigated piece of crap, we shouldn't impose the aesthetic norms of today onto a different time period. Also, these aren't novels, but works, and works exist in a transcendental sphere of language, and literary criticism is a juvenile attempt to force human sensibilities onto the god-like state of the word. When a professor resorts to semiotics and half-baked literary theory and begs you not to hate "Charlotte Temple," you should be worried.
To resort to the old cliche, I wasn't sure whether to laugh or cry.
Things that made me want to cry:
The quality of the prose
The authorial intrusions (started out gimmicky, became torturous)
The utter lack of actual, you know, characters
The over-dramatic plot progression
The unearned sentimentalism dripping from every page
Remembering that Charlotte is 15
The dialogue (because people totally talked like that, right?)
Things that made me want to laugh:
Imagining rich girls having to read "Charlotte Temple" for moral instruction
Realizing that Charlotte is just a British Fantine who can't sing
Therefore imagining 15 year old Charlotte as Anne Hathaway
The heroine getting pregnant without any actual sex (gotta protect the innocent minds of our readers!)
The heroine giving birth without any actual pregnancy symptoms
And my absolute favorite:
The author acknowledging, at various parts throughout "Charlotte Temple," that her novel sucks
I was therefore very worried when my professor, after telling us to read "Charlotte Temple" tonight, delivered an impromptu lecturer After all, even if we think the novel is an unmitigated piece of crap, we shouldn't impose the aesthetic norms of today onto a different time period. Also, these aren't novels, but works, and works exist in a transcendental sphere of language, and literary criticism is a juvenile attempt to force human sensibilities onto the god-like state of the word. When a professor resorts to semiotics and half-baked literary theory and begs you not to hate "Charlotte Temple," you should be worried.
To resort to the old cliche, I wasn't sure whether to laugh or cry.
Things that made me want to cry:
The quality of the prose
The authorial intrusions (started out gimmicky, became torturous)
The utter lack of actual, you know, characters
The over-dramatic plot progression
The unearned sentimentalism dripping from every page
Remembering that Charlotte is 15
The dialogue (because people totally talked like that, right?)
Things that made me want to laugh:
Imagining rich girls having to read "Charlotte Temple" for moral instruction
Realizing that Charlotte is just a British Fantine who can't sing
Therefore imagining 15 year old Charlotte as Anne Hathaway
The heroine getting pregnant without any actual sex (gotta protect the innocent minds of our readers!)
The heroine giving birth without any actual pregnancy symptoms
And my absolute favorite:
The author acknowledging, at various parts throughout "Charlotte Temple," that her novel sucks
May 28, 2019
After the first American novel I went straight to the first American best seller. This is an ordinary sentimental novel of the era in which the author narrates in excessively dramatic tones a story of seduction intended - as she claims - to warn girls and their parents about this threat. It is a book that had everything needed at that time to have a great impact, especially on the female readership. Of course, in today's reader this sentimentality and the moral suggestions may seem ridiculous but anyone who has the patience to see this book with the eyes of a reader of that time will find that without being great is something beautifully written, full with intense emotional moments that will touch the sensitive strings of anyone that can let himself free enough. As for the didactic part, the author makes more an emotional appeal than a strict sermon, which makes it less annoying.
Μετά το πρώτο αμερικανικό μυθιστόρημα προχώρησα αμέσως στο πρώτο αμερικανικό best seller. Πρόκειται για ένα συνηθισμένο συναισθηματικό μυθιστόρημα της εποχής στο οποίο η συγγραφέας αφηγείται σε υπερβολικά δραματικούς τόνους μία ιστορία αποπλάνησης με σκοπό - όπως ισχυρίζεται - να προειδοποιήσει τα κορίτσια και τους γονείς τους για αυτήν την απειλή. Είναι δηλαδή ένα βιβλίο που είχε όλα αυτά που χρειάζονταν εκείνη την εποχή για να έχει μεγάλη απήχηση, ειδικά στο γυναικείο αναγνωστικό κοινό. Φυσικά στον σημερινό αναγνώστη αυτός ο συναισθηματισμός και οι ηθικολογικές υποδείξεις μπορεί να φαίνονται γελοία αλλά όποιος έχει την υπομονή για να δει αυτό το βιβλίο με τα μάτια ενός αναγνώστη εκείνης της εποχής θα διαπιστώσει ότι χωρίς να είναι κάτι σπουδαίο είναι κάτι όμορφα γραμμένο, γεμάτο με έντονες συναισθηματικές στιγμές που θα αγγίξουν τις ευαίσθητες χορδές οποίου καταφέρει να αφεθεί αρκετά. Όσο για το διδακτικό κομμάτι, η συγγραφέας περισσότερο κάνει μία συναισθηματική έκκληση παρά κάποιο αυστηρό κήρυγμα, κάτι που το κάνει λιγότερο ενοχλητικό.
Μετά το πρώτο αμερικανικό μυθιστόρημα προχώρησα αμέσως στο πρώτο αμερικανικό best seller. Πρόκειται για ένα συνηθισμένο συναισθηματικό μυθιστόρημα της εποχής στο οποίο η συγγραφέας αφηγείται σε υπερβολικά δραματικούς τόνους μία ιστορία αποπλάνησης με σκοπό - όπως ισχυρίζεται - να προειδοποιήσει τα κορίτσια και τους γονείς τους για αυτήν την απειλή. Είναι δηλαδή ένα βιβλίο που είχε όλα αυτά που χρειάζονταν εκείνη την εποχή για να έχει μεγάλη απήχηση, ειδικά στο γυναικείο αναγνωστικό κοινό. Φυσικά στον σημερινό αναγνώστη αυτός ο συναισθηματισμός και οι ηθικολογικές υποδείξεις μπορεί να φαίνονται γελοία αλλά όποιος έχει την υπομονή για να δει αυτό το βιβλίο με τα μάτια ενός αναγνώστη εκείνης της εποχής θα διαπιστώσει ότι χωρίς να είναι κάτι σπουδαίο είναι κάτι όμορφα γραμμένο, γεμάτο με έντονες συναισθηματικές στιγμές που θα αγγίξουν τις ευαίσθητες χορδές οποίου καταφέρει να αφεθεί αρκετά. Όσο για το διδακτικό κομμάτι, η συγγραφέας περισσότερο κάνει μία συναισθηματική έκκληση παρά κάποιο αυστηρό κήρυγμα, κάτι που το κάνει λιγότερο ενοχλητικό.
did-not-finish
May 28, 2018I know it was a bestseller at the turn of the XVIII and XIX. But to me, today, it sounded too moralizing and I couldn't force myself to listen to more than circa one-third of the book (I was listening from LibriVox). Perhaps some other time...
October 14, 2019
Heavens. What a depressing story. Even more than Tess of the d'Urbervilles. I don't know what to make of it. How was this the bestselling novel until the 1900s?
March 26, 2020
I cried at the end.
February 2, 2023
solid 3 stars. similar to Pamela but less bad lol
May 11, 2019
My mission to read women above and beyond the call of duty has increasingly drawn me further afield over the years, and these days I find myself wandering realms and centuries far outside of the areas of my usual perusal in search of the famous, the infamous, and the more than not horrendously underread. I don't expect to love or even like everything, especially when considering how warped popular representation of women's writing must be by patriarchal ivory towers even today, so the fact that I seemingly go along with the popular evaluation of this work in particular only makes me more determined to unbury less previously rabidly popular works. It's easy to scoff at Rowson's moralizing, but her entreatment of the reader hails straight from the pages of Shandy and co., and the fact that she made nothing off her work and had to negotiate very literary publication through her blunderbuss of a husband goes to show how easily works by women are sunken and drowned if we let such occur. I can't see this book surviving beyond the status of a historical reliquary, but it does deserve to be remembered, as it tells as much about the state of white Anglo literature in that land and in that time as it does about how (white) man liked his (white) women to write, and how little he was willing to pay for it.
This is an extraordinarily short book, and between the moralizing and the fact that it takes the author a fifth of the work to get to the titular character, audiences have plenty of ammunition for justifying the abysmally low rating. Unlike The Coquette, a comparably early US women written work, the characters' speeches are all too sensationalist to merit much analysis of true human passion. As a result, what similarities lie between the rape culture of the tail end of the 18th century and the one of today are borderline too occluded with dramatics to pore over, beyond the structure of narrative. The author's career as actor likely had a hand in the choice in prose, and while it proved popular for a rather long time, it does not survive today in accordance to the whims of the market beyond the times it is assigned as required reading in various university classes. Still, it's worth noting as a canonical text, for Temple's story still occurs today at all levels of society, and the country of mine still hates those with wombs enough to force them to abide by rape and incest simply to bring forth another often maligned and swiftly forgotten foster child into the world. A melodramatic work, to be sure, but the subject has only changed in terms of what the 21st century has provided it in terms of laws and technology, a situation which, if you have any compassion whatsover, should make you bloody sick.
All in all, not my least favorite book read so far this year, but I'm sure it'd have a good chance of being so if it had been any longer. It's a relic of the past, but the fact that humanity still enables such situations as Temple's on a huge scale means those in power, and those who vote said those into power, still forsake compassion for rapacious gains. Until this story's tale ceases its occurrences at in any sort of frequency, a human's right to their body is continually violated to the tune of myriad misogynistic moral panics, and so perhaps it's a shame this book has fallen so far out of favor. The style and syntax don't fit today's tastes, but the moralizing is still needed, and if that doesn't work, we shall have to simply wait and see what the inevitable breaking point brings us. It should never be normal that at 15 year old dies soon after giving birth. More than 200 years have passed, and either you're on the side of those with bodies, or you'd rather those with wombs have less autonomy than that of a corpse which didn't get a pink dot on its driver's license while it was still kicking.
This is an extraordinarily short book, and between the moralizing and the fact that it takes the author a fifth of the work to get to the titular character, audiences have plenty of ammunition for justifying the abysmally low rating. Unlike The Coquette, a comparably early US women written work, the characters' speeches are all too sensationalist to merit much analysis of true human passion. As a result, what similarities lie between the rape culture of the tail end of the 18th century and the one of today are borderline too occluded with dramatics to pore over, beyond the structure of narrative. The author's career as actor likely had a hand in the choice in prose, and while it proved popular for a rather long time, it does not survive today in accordance to the whims of the market beyond the times it is assigned as required reading in various university classes. Still, it's worth noting as a canonical text, for Temple's story still occurs today at all levels of society, and the country of mine still hates those with wombs enough to force them to abide by rape and incest simply to bring forth another often maligned and swiftly forgotten foster child into the world. A melodramatic work, to be sure, but the subject has only changed in terms of what the 21st century has provided it in terms of laws and technology, a situation which, if you have any compassion whatsover, should make you bloody sick.
All in all, not my least favorite book read so far this year, but I'm sure it'd have a good chance of being so if it had been any longer. It's a relic of the past, but the fact that humanity still enables such situations as Temple's on a huge scale means those in power, and those who vote said those into power, still forsake compassion for rapacious gains. Until this story's tale ceases its occurrences at in any sort of frequency, a human's right to their body is continually violated to the tune of myriad misogynistic moral panics, and so perhaps it's a shame this book has fallen so far out of favor. The style and syntax don't fit today's tastes, but the moralizing is still needed, and if that doesn't work, we shall have to simply wait and see what the inevitable breaking point brings us. It should never be normal that at 15 year old dies soon after giving birth. More than 200 years have passed, and either you're on the side of those with bodies, or you'd rather those with wombs have less autonomy than that of a corpse which didn't get a pink dot on its driver's license while it was still kicking.
December 5, 2014
Well, I'm back to reading books for a college class. And this is the first thing I had to read this term? Ugh. Sometimes the life of an English major isn't quite so glamorous.
I will say that while I didn't love this book (written in the late 1700s), I didn't hate it either. Once you get past the old writing style and accept that the author will direct certain passages directly to her reader, it has a pretty good story line. Of course, you also have to bear in mind that the story is built around the ideals of the 1700s where girls of certain classes were expected to have their parents' permission to marry and eloping leads to the ruin of girls.
Charlotte is a good girl. She's being educated by a well known and trustworthy lady. However, the French teacher, Mademoiselle La Rue, is not a good girl and really shouldn't be friends with Charlotte. La Rue encourages Charlotte to do things that are inappropriate for a girl of her station, which leads to Charlotte meeting a soldier by the name of Montraville. Between La Rue and Montraville, they convince Charlotte to elope with him to New York, where his company is ordered to be.
She hates betraying her family, and eventually, Montraville forgets about her for a girl of significant wealthy. Poor Charlotte is left pregnant and rather delusional. Her reputation is completely ruined and she quickly spirals.
It's kind of a sad story about a sweet girl who was lead astray by people who should have been protecting her. In the end, I felt bad for Charlotte, hated La Rue, and actually kind of pitied Montraville. While this story isn't very relevant for today's society, I can see how it was so popular in the time it was written.
But, I did get a little weary of the author talking to her reader about things other than Charlotte's story. I also thought certain points were a little preachy, but then I'm a 21st century girl reading a story about an 18th century girl. It can be expected that I'd find it preachy.
See my other reviews at: http://bookwormingitup.blogspot.com/
I will say that while I didn't love this book (written in the late 1700s), I didn't hate it either. Once you get past the old writing style and accept that the author will direct certain passages directly to her reader, it has a pretty good story line. Of course, you also have to bear in mind that the story is built around the ideals of the 1700s where girls of certain classes were expected to have their parents' permission to marry and eloping leads to the ruin of girls.
Charlotte is a good girl. She's being educated by a well known and trustworthy lady. However, the French teacher, Mademoiselle La Rue, is not a good girl and really shouldn't be friends with Charlotte. La Rue encourages Charlotte to do things that are inappropriate for a girl of her station, which leads to Charlotte meeting a soldier by the name of Montraville. Between La Rue and Montraville, they convince Charlotte to elope with him to New York, where his company is ordered to be.
She hates betraying her family, and eventually, Montraville forgets about her for a girl of significant wealthy. Poor Charlotte is left pregnant and rather delusional. Her reputation is completely ruined and she quickly spirals.
It's kind of a sad story about a sweet girl who was lead astray by people who should have been protecting her. In the end, I felt bad for Charlotte, hated La Rue, and actually kind of pitied Montraville. While this story isn't very relevant for today's society, I can see how it was so popular in the time it was written.
But, I did get a little weary of the author talking to her reader about things other than Charlotte's story. I also thought certain points were a little preachy, but then I'm a 21st century girl reading a story about an 18th century girl. It can be expected that I'd find it preachy.
See my other reviews at: http://bookwormingitup.blogspot.com/
February 12, 2018
Charlotte Temple, oh you poor, unfortunate, naive soul. Why oh why didn't you listen to your parents?
Lol. So, my opinion on this piece? I adored the omniscient narrator. I loved the way she would degress from the story, jump around between the perspectives and comment on the characters' behavior throughout. Sometimes it was so hilarious. She would address the readers directly and it was so fun at times.
When looking at this book from today's perspective (and a feminist one), I found it quite interesting how the narrator, our moral compass and teacher, judges them. Charlotte is blamed for giving into passion and love and lust perhaps as well, whilst her father Mr Temple is complemented on acting on love and therefore going against his parents
double standards??
But yeah, Charlotte was just naive and stupid. Not once did she use her brains. Quite disappointing for a female lead. The same is true for her mother... She isn't even strong enough to go look for her daughter in the States. Weak women, of course. Perfect for the time.
But hey we also have some more active women in there. Mademoiselle La Rue for instance, a woman of loose morals and the female villain cause she is so improper, the narrator can hardly bear it. Once in the book, it is mentioned that females are supposed to be meek, good natured and should they be deceived and acted upon cruelly, good and honour bound women break while those of loose morals seek revenge. Ha. Alright then.
Concerning filial duty, I cannot but laugh and find that hilarious. I mean, can we just say that women and men have brains they can make use of and hence not be deceived by villains? I don't think adhering to rules blindly (as the narrator suggests it) is the way to go.
Anyways, from a historical perspective, it's quite interesting how gender roles are portrayed, how women are viewed, what men are supposed to achieve etc.
Lol. So, my opinion on this piece? I adored the omniscient narrator. I loved the way she would degress from the story, jump around between the perspectives and comment on the characters' behavior throughout. Sometimes it was so hilarious. She would address the readers directly and it was so fun at times.
When looking at this book from today's perspective (and a feminist one), I found it quite interesting how the narrator, our moral compass and teacher, judges them. Charlotte is blamed for giving into passion and love and lust perhaps as well, whilst her father Mr Temple is complemented on acting on love and therefore going against his parents
double standards??
But yeah, Charlotte was just naive and stupid. Not once did she use her brains. Quite disappointing for a female lead. The same is true for her mother... She isn't even strong enough to go look for her daughter in the States. Weak women, of course. Perfect for the time.
But hey we also have some more active women in there. Mademoiselle La Rue for instance, a woman of loose morals and the female villain cause she is so improper, the narrator can hardly bear it. Once in the book, it is mentioned that females are supposed to be meek, good natured and should they be deceived and acted upon cruelly, good and honour bound women break while those of loose morals seek revenge. Ha. Alright then.
Concerning filial duty, I cannot but laugh and find that hilarious. I mean, can we just say that women and men have brains they can make use of and hence not be deceived by villains? I don't think adhering to rules blindly (as the narrator suggests it) is the way to go.
Anyways, from a historical perspective, it's quite interesting how gender roles are portrayed, how women are viewed, what men are supposed to achieve etc.
September 2, 2017
RATING: 3.5 STARS
This was the first book I read for college, and the first school-assigned book that I finished on time since the 9th grade. Therefore, I feel justly proud. I kept up with a reading schedule! For a book published in 1795 that would normally take me 5 months to read despite its short length! I finished it in a week!
Charlotte Temple was fascinating because of the context that I read it in. When you learn about sentimentalism and its role in American literature and society, Charlotte's tale of woe takes on an entirely new context. Yes, there's a lot of crying and blushing, and it does get tiresome--but that's kind of the point! Charlotte Temple functioned as both a scintillating story and a cautionary tale back in the day, a way for young girls to learn about the social expectations that were awaiting them. By modern feminist standards, does it set a bad example? Sure, but it shouldn't be read that way. This was Rowson's way of protecting girls from the dangers of romance and manipulation. A tale of truth, as she calls it. Both fact and fiction. In a way, it's still relevant today. These expectations of obedience, femininity, and the consequences that befall unruly women still haunt us. Rowson's text is far less subversive than, say, Kate Chopin or Jane Austen, but it's worth reading nonetheless. Truly a pioneer of both the Sentimental movement and in using the novel as a serious literary work.
This was the first book I read for college, and the first school-assigned book that I finished on time since the 9th grade. Therefore, I feel justly proud. I kept up with a reading schedule! For a book published in 1795 that would normally take me 5 months to read despite its short length! I finished it in a week!
Charlotte Temple was fascinating because of the context that I read it in. When you learn about sentimentalism and its role in American literature and society, Charlotte's tale of woe takes on an entirely new context. Yes, there's a lot of crying and blushing, and it does get tiresome--but that's kind of the point! Charlotte Temple functioned as both a scintillating story and a cautionary tale back in the day, a way for young girls to learn about the social expectations that were awaiting them. By modern feminist standards, does it set a bad example? Sure, but it shouldn't be read that way. This was Rowson's way of protecting girls from the dangers of romance and manipulation. A tale of truth, as she calls it. Both fact and fiction. In a way, it's still relevant today. These expectations of obedience, femininity, and the consequences that befall unruly women still haunt us. Rowson's text is far less subversive than, say, Kate Chopin or Jane Austen, but it's worth reading nonetheless. Truly a pioneer of both the Sentimental movement and in using the novel as a serious literary work.
May 6, 2020
I'd only pick this up if you were wondering what the first best-seller "novel" was in America. At the time, this book was bequeathed as a birthday present to young girls and boys. What message, pray tell, was it meant to send to these dear children?
Charlotte Temple is short, far from subtle, and dramatic to the nth degree, but this is perhaps what you would expect for a conduct book in the late 18th century. America, having just separated from its mother country, was a young nation reflected by very young leaders. What can I say...young and malleable moral fiber was at risk.
To the girls: don't run away with a young man. Stay with your loving, pious parents, or your moral integrity will be irreparably compromised. Should you stray from the path of righteousness, you will die.
To the boys: don't ruin a young girl with false promises of romance. You'll become an old man riddled with regret for your foolish and selfish actions. You do get to live though...
Charlotte Temple is short, far from subtle, and dramatic to the nth degree, but this is perhaps what you would expect for a conduct book in the late 18th century. America, having just separated from its mother country, was a young nation reflected by very young leaders. What can I say...young and malleable moral fiber was at risk.
October 21, 2010
In Susanna Rowsons day, this was a book of literary genius. Her target audience was young girls & she wrote this to teach a lesson about cherishing virtue & morals. I loved the simpleness of her characters... None were too complicated. I also loved how the morals of her story are still a much talked about issue in our present day. Charlotte was young, naive, & easily persuaded. The only image she had of the world was that of her little community & girls boarding school. Though she had been warned by her mother to never let a man seduce her, she let Montraville in; let her guard down with him & she wound up pregnant, abandoned, and alone.
Though her writing style was simple, I still loved this book & the lessons it taught. Life's not always a fairytale & when we lose sight of the lessons our parents taught, we often wind up in places in our lives that we would have never imagined; places we hate.
Absolutely, one of my favorite books!
Though her writing style was simple, I still loved this book & the lessons it taught. Life's not always a fairytale & when we lose sight of the lessons our parents taught, we often wind up in places in our lives that we would have never imagined; places we hate.
Absolutely, one of my favorite books!
October 26, 2013
Alas and alack! I have been a writer too long. I read a work like this, and instead of seeing it as a period piece all I can see is how it should have been written, better. Move the heroine's problems to the fore. Do not lade the beginning with flashbacks -- her grandparents, her parents, her French teacher, argh! Avoid having people tell us their story; far better to have us right there, watching the old grandfather hauled away for debt. And great day in the morning, must all the characters be either black or white, either utterly villainous or incredibly upright? Gray, a perfectly nice color!
The introduction by Cathy Davidson is most enlightening, recounting this novel's history and popularity. I do not wonder any more how Nathaniel Hawthorne copped the title of American's first novelist. This work may have preceded it but is far less focused, subtle and gripping than, say, HOUSE OF THE SEVEN GABLES or THE SCARLET LETTER. And I never thought I would say that!
The introduction by Cathy Davidson is most enlightening, recounting this novel's history and popularity. I do not wonder any more how Nathaniel Hawthorne copped the title of American's first novelist. This work may have preceded it but is far less focused, subtle and gripping than, say, HOUSE OF THE SEVEN GABLES or THE SCARLET LETTER. And I never thought I would say that!
March 12, 2016
Think 18th century after school special.
A tragedy from start to finish. Miss Charlotte Temple is set out as an example as to what the outcome can be when one is imprudent, listening to those that do not have your best interest at heart and allow yourself to be ruined. It is beautifully written and an incredibly quick read. The author uses these asides that I actually liked (I imagined the characters froze in the seen fade out and the narrator steps out with a spotlight as they address the reader), perhaps not so much in spite of it seeming a bit corny as much as because of it.
The story is very Puritan 18th century and also seems to glorify the English. Also, very black and white / good and evil / virtuosic and immoral.
Morals of the story: listen to your parents, don't be impetuous.
A tragedy from start to finish. Miss Charlotte Temple is set out as an example as to what the outcome can be when one is imprudent, listening to those that do not have your best interest at heart and allow yourself to be ruined. It is beautifully written and an incredibly quick read. The author uses these asides that I actually liked (I imagined the characters froze in the seen fade out and the narrator steps out with a spotlight as they address the reader), perhaps not so much in spite of it seeming a bit corny as much as because of it.
The story is very Puritan 18th century and also seems to glorify the English. Also, very black and white / good and evil / virtuosic and immoral.
Morals of the story: listen to your parents, don't be impetuous.
January 9, 2012
This book was everything I thought it would be, and more! Interspersed at seemingly random intervals throughout the overly moralistic tale, the author earnestly lectures the reader directly, constantly re-emphasizing all of the already obvious moral shortcomings of the characters as the story progresses. The lessons on filial devotion should be required reading for all children. With such chapter titles as "French teachers not always the best women in the world," "Which people void of feeling need not read," and "Subject continued," it would be hard to disappoint.
March 11, 2019
I love reading classics that no one has really heard of. I am surprised, though, that despite studying American Literature that the name of Susanna Rowson never came up. Charlotte is one of the saddest heroines I have ever read - woe follows her everywhere and Susanna shows no mercy on her.
It was also interesting to see the authorial intrusions. Susanna reminds me a bit of Jane Austen. I can understand why this was the best-selling American book until ‘Uncle Tom’s Cabin.’ This one goes straight into my ‘offbeat’ reads.
It was also interesting to see the authorial intrusions. Susanna reminds me a bit of Jane Austen. I can understand why this was the best-selling American book until ‘Uncle Tom’s Cabin.’ This one goes straight into my ‘offbeat’ reads.
June 18, 2016
This book is an extremely interesting look into the sentimental novel. Rowson's narrative reminds me of a story a mother would tell her daughter in order to help her find the "right" husband and live the "right" way. Not progressive in terms of women's literature at all, but definitely worth exploring.
It's also extremely melodramatic, so it's a bit like reading a soap opera where the narrator keeps telling you how to interpret the different scenes.
It's also extremely melodramatic, so it's a bit like reading a soap opera where the narrator keeps telling you how to interpret the different scenes.
February 1, 2013
A cautionary tale on what happens if we raise our daughters to be "delicate flowers"...they will become easy prey. :-( Also think about the mother/daughter relationships and how they parallel Britain and America. Loved this novel, first American best seller but she made no money on it in America due to lack of copyrights there.
April 17, 2012
If I could have I would've given it negative stars! That's how bad this book is. Heroine is walked over like a carpet and lives miserably til she dies. Yes, I just painted broad strokes here, but I'm saving you hours of your life that you would never get back if you read this book.
October 10, 2019
I found this to be a beautiful story about forgiveness and compassion and repentance but then, like, every ten pages Rowson would show up to warn us all that sin is shameful (which was, like, the opposite of the point of the book). It made me cry a lot.
February 7, 2017
This book is more dramatic than any soap opera. Very entertaining, if also quite preachy.
March 19, 2025
Charlotte Temple is a 1791 English novel, that in 1794 became America's first bestseller, then titled Charlotte. A Tale of Truth., a seduction tale in which the characters travel from England to North America at the time of the American Revolution. As such there are soldiers and Charlotte reminds the reader of Kitty and Lydia from the still-to-come Pride and Prejudice in their infatuation with officers. "In affairs of love, a young heart is never in more danger than when attempted by a handsome young soldier." The story hearkens back to Charlotte's grandfather to give the proper background, and she is just 15 when she enters the story catching the eye of two soldiers: the weak and corrupt Montraville and the evil Belcour ("dissipated, thoughtless, and capricious"). The two ally with Charlotte's French teacher, Mlle. La Rue ("designing, artful and selfish"), to lure the young girl to her fate. Miss La Rue "had lived with several different men in open defiance of all moral and religious duties." Those French! Although written more simply and clearly than some books of the time, the narrator frequently addresses the reader directly and didactically: "Oh my dear girls -- for to such only am I writing -- listen not to the voice of love, unless sanctioned by paternal approbation." The narrator's moral purpose is clear: "If the following tale should save one hapless fair one from the errors which ruined poor Charlotte ... ." At times the narrator excuses her writing: "I confess I have rambled strangely from my story: but what of that?" and later rails against those readers who "love to cavil at every trifling omission." Just when Charlotte's tale of woe begins to overwhelm, the narrator acknowledges that there is "so much fainting, tears, and distress" that the reader must be "sick to death of the subject." This reader was growing so. But the narrator temporizes, saying she "must request your patience: I am writing a tale of truth." The monologue directly to the reader begins to seem like a conversation. The biography of Susanna Haswell Rowson is novel-worthy itself. She was born in England in 1762, brought to the New World at four, then returning to England at 16 as a dispossessed and unwanted Loyalist. Fifteen years later, after publishing Charlotte Temple, she returned to the nascent United States for the rest of her life, being at various times an actor, playwright, novelist, songwriter, and magazine editor. She opened the prestigious Young Ladies' Academy in Boston, heading it for a quarter century and writing several of the school books herself. Rowson also wrote a sequel to Charlotte Temple (about Charlotte's daughter), which was published posthumously. For those interested in the theme or period, Charlotte Temple pairs well with The Coquette (1797) by American Hannah Webster Foster. Though I find the latter the better-written book, both are valuable as early reflections of women's concerns at the time and full of melodrama and "fainting, tears, and distress." [3★]
Displaying 1 - 30 of 301 reviews