What do you think?
Rate this book
Moll Flanders
Brilliant masterpiece of 18th-century realism, written in the form of an autobiographical memoir, recounts the dreadful facts of Moll's adventurous life — her years in prison, as a prostitute and thief, as a "transported felon" in the American colonies and her final years, lived honestly in comfort and wealth.
316 pages, Mass Market Paperback
First published January 1, 1722
About the author
Daniel Defoe
5,860 books2,085 followersDaniel Defoe was an English novelist, journalist, merchant, pamphleteer and spy. He is most famous for his novel Robinson Crusoe, published in 1719, which is claimed to be second only to the Bible in its number of translations. He has been seen as one of the earliest proponents of the English novel, and helped to popularise the form in Britain with others such as Aphra Behn and Samuel Richardson. Defoe wrote many political tracts, was often in trouble with the authorities, and spent a period in prison. Intellectuals and political leaders paid attention to his fresh ideas and sometimes consulted him.
Defoe was a prolific and versatile writer, producing more than three hundred works—books, pamphlets, and journals—on diverse topics, including politics, crime, religion, marriage, psychology and the supernatural. He was also a pioneer of business journalism and economic journalism.
Defoe was a prolific and versatile writer, producing more than three hundred works—books, pamphlets, and journals—on diverse topics, including politics, crime, religion, marriage, psychology and the supernatural. He was also a pioneer of business journalism and economic journalism.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 29 of 2,445 reviews
June 23, 2018
the person who was reading this used, 49 cent, copy of moll flanders before me stopped reading at page 26, judging by the abrupt cessation of circled words like "prattle", "would you were, sir", "brother fell", and "he would" i like to think about this person, and their busy pen. it's so arbitrary - they are not even words that might be unfamiliar to a moderately-literate reader. i tried to find a code in it: "help, i am being held hostage by a mad librarian", but to no avail. almost every page has at least six circles or underlines and then suddenly - nothing. did the pen run out of ink? did they abandon moll flanders? did they fall out of a tree? it's mysterious. another thing that is mysterious is moll flanders. she swans through this book, dripping babies from her body like a tree sheds leaves, stealing and whoring and manipulating men to keep her head above water and yet i'm not in love with her. how can this be? i mean, it's a fine book, but i can't see falling in love with it or with her character. and honestly, i don't know what to make of the realization that if she had just stayed married to her brother in the first place, she would have avoided a whole lot of trouble and had a lovely son and a fruitful plantation. let this be a lesson to you: choose wisely; incest or a life of crime. there is no in-between.
come to my blog!
come to my blog!
March 21, 2016
It is an universall and Fixed law that should a reader take up any of the works of Master De Foe she shall be obbliged to begin forthwith to write and may I say even to think in the manner of Master De Foe; for it is like a virulent infecktion; which will, it may be seen redilly, be habituated in exentrick spellings, irregular Capitilizations, alarming and unexplainable lunges into the italick; and headlong sentense construction, and the Devil take the hindmost. Mistress Moll Flanderses tale self told came off but three Yeares from the romaunce of Robinson Crusoe that was cast away on the Island in the Oroonoquoo. This Dan Foe, for such indeed was his original name, was a scribbler for the news presses and a great stirrer of pothers for the Politick Parties and so twas nothing astonishing that he got himself into Newgate a time or two and also had a spell in the Stocks; and he dabbled in Matters of Business with more gusto than wise discrimination, and of a like twas no great surprize that he finds himself Publickly Bankrupted; and so finding he can turn out tales at speed, and that the Printers are at need of a very fluid pen, he puts forth eight long tales in FIVE YEARS and him a man of SIXTY years. In those dayes of Queen Anne and King George THE FIRST this style of tale telling was new, there was hardly an one before Crusoe, and so it was called novel, meaning, a NEW THING.
So, to come now to Mistress Moll, it was no meer nothing that an entertainment should be found in the detailled moral conundrums that this woman was got into at so many times, and what she herself made of them, and how she justifyed them, and so forth. Each twist of FATE is to be chewed over mightily for page upon page until Mistress Moll’s jaws may shurely have begun twingeing. Ponder ponder ponder, so goes she. And then : ponder ponder ponder. But on occasion Moll will come forth with such a line as this
It is but here and there that a Man is to be Found who is fit for a Woman to Venture upon.
In regards to the NOVEL may we say this, I wonder. That by the time the 4th or 5th child has begun walking and talking it is not such a Phenomenon – indeed, may you look back and shake your Head at the great wonder you did make of the first that did so.
So, to come now to Mistress Moll, it was no meer nothing that an entertainment should be found in the detailled moral conundrums that this woman was got into at so many times, and what she herself made of them, and how she justifyed them, and so forth. Each twist of FATE is to be chewed over mightily for page upon page until Mistress Moll’s jaws may shurely have begun twingeing. Ponder ponder ponder, so goes she. And then : ponder ponder ponder. But on occasion Moll will come forth with such a line as this
It is but here and there that a Man is to be Found who is fit for a Woman to Venture upon.
In regards to the NOVEL may we say this, I wonder. That by the time the 4th or 5th child has begun walking and talking it is not such a Phenomenon – indeed, may you look back and shake your Head at the great wonder you did make of the first that did so.
June 3, 2026
VITA E AVVENTURE
Robin Wright è Moll Flanders nell’ultimo adattamento cinematografico, uscito nel 1996.
Daniel Defoe amava scrivere storie e situazioni che oltrepassavano le regole della morale del suo tempo.
Salvo poi fare una sorta di sfacciato mea culpa, come nel finale di Lady Roxana, dove porta Roxana al pentimento, dopo avergliene fatte attraversare di ogni (anche con soddisfazione e godimento), o come fa anche qui.
Per esempio, si sa che da sempre gli ambienti rigorosamenti maschili ispirano storie d’infrazione sessuale. Facciamo il caso delle navi e dei loro equipaggi, che all’epoca di Defoe andavano per la maggiore. Un autore anonimo del ‘700, che si firmò Capitano Charles Johnson (e che più di uno oggi identifica proprio con Daniel Defoe), raccontò la storia di Mary Read, una donna la cui madre, per nascondere una gravidanza indesiderata, sin da piccola la vestiva da maschietto e la faceva passare per il fratellino, che invece era provvidenzialmente e prematuramente deceduto. Diventò prima soldato dell’esercito di Sua Maestà, poi pirata; sempre maschio per la ciurma, femmina per i felici pochi che ne carpivano il segreto.
Nello stesso anno del film, 1996, è uscito anche un adattamento televisivo, un tv movie, dove è Alex Kingston a vestire i panni di Moll.
Non per niente il primo a condurmi per mano nel fascinoso mondo di Daniel Defoe è stato quel birichino impenitente di Alberto Arbasino.
Che, ovviamente, piuttosto che spingermi a rilettura o lettura integrale dell’opera più famosa di Defoe, il Robinson Crusoe (e sia chiaro che soli soli sull’isolotto, Robinson e Venerdì qualche trastullo dovevano pur concederselo), mi ha indirizzato ai romanzi più frizzanti e stuzzicanti, in primis proprio questo qui presente.
Moll Flanders nasce in prigione, viene partorita nel carcere di Newgate, lo stesso dove Defoe trascorse un paio d’anni, credo per bancarotta (pare si trattasse di un buco di diciassettemila sterline, cifra ragguardevole a quell’epoca: Defoe non era ancora un romanziere, ma un fabbricante e commerciante di laterizi – prima del carcere gli furono anche regalati tre giorni di pubblica gogna).
E quindi non è certo il migliore inizio per la piccola Moll, che non si chiamava affatto così, ma adottò Moll Flanders quale nome d’arte.
Il carcere di Newgate, la più temuta prigione di Londra. Rimase in attività dal 1188 al 1902.
Quale arte? Quella che la stessa Moll ci descrive nei seguenti termini:
Fui per Dodici anni puttana, cinque volte moglie (una volta di mio fratello), dodici anni ladra, otto anni criminale deportata in Virginia, per diventare alla fine ricca e onesta, e morire pentita.
E quindi forse, più che nome d’arte, nom de plume, meglio dire nome di battaglia: perché tale si delinea la vita di Moll Flanders sin dal momento che intona il primo vagito nell’infame carcere di Newgate.
Direi che è innegabile la fascinazione di Defoe per questi personaggi femminili antesignani di uno spirito d’indipendenza e di un senso di libertà che le donne di quel periodo conoscevano solo raramente. Per ottenerle, indipendenza e libertà, non era concesso loro altro strumento che il corpo: diventava quindi necessario essere dotate di bell’aspetto e usare le proprie grazie in maniera disinvolta.
Non so se questo faccia di Moll Flanders, come di Lady Roxana, proto- femministe: nel caso, comunque, sia l’una che l’altra erano inconsapevoli d’esserlo.
Morgan Freeman è accanto a Robin Wright, e le fa da tutore, personaggio inventato che non esiste nel romanzo: è lui che si fa narratore invece di Moll.
Anche questo romanzo, come il seguente Lady Roxana, è travestito da (falsa) autobiografia introdotta dal sapiente narratore che dà un colpo al cerchio e uno alla botte: da una parte sbandiera che tutto è vero e autentico, dall’altra mette le mani avanti e dice che certi passaggi sono stati taciuti, epurati, ammorbiditi per non urtare l’animo del lettore – da una parte sottolinea la (apparente) amoralità (depravazione?) della protagonista, che deogratias si salva nel finale (proprio come Lady Roxana), dall’altra ci concede assaggi gustosi di quella (presunta) amoralità.
Tutto questo in cinque pagine: poi la parola passa alla protagonista, Moll Flanders, che così esordisce:
Il mio nome è così noto negli incartamenti e nei registri di Newgate e dell’Old Bailey, e vi si ricollegano fatti di tale importanza, per quel che riguarda la mia personale condotta, che non ci si può aspettare che scriva per esteso in questo libro il mio nome o una relazione sulla mia famiglia.
Stockard Channing è Mrs Allworthy, la tenutaria del bordello. John Lynch è l’artista di cui Moll s’innamora.
Il cammino che Moll racconta al lettore è così convulso e rocambolesco che alla fine riesce difficile definirne l’età, la si farebbe molto più agée per tutto quanto ha vissuto e passato.
Se non che, Moll, proprio come Roxana, è dotata di così ricca ironia che leggere le loro (finte) autobiografie, fintamente pedagogiche, è uno spasso assicurato.
Anche Kim Novak ha indossato l’abito di Moll Flanders: in una versione del 1965 diretta da Terence Young dove recitava anche Vittorio De Sica.
Robin Wright è Moll Flanders nell’ultimo adattamento cinematografico, uscito nel 1996.
Daniel Defoe amava scrivere storie e situazioni che oltrepassavano le regole della morale del suo tempo.
Salvo poi fare una sorta di sfacciato mea culpa, come nel finale di Lady Roxana, dove porta Roxana al pentimento, dopo avergliene fatte attraversare di ogni (anche con soddisfazione e godimento), o come fa anche qui.
Per esempio, si sa che da sempre gli ambienti rigorosamenti maschili ispirano storie d’infrazione sessuale. Facciamo il caso delle navi e dei loro equipaggi, che all’epoca di Defoe andavano per la maggiore. Un autore anonimo del ‘700, che si firmò Capitano Charles Johnson (e che più di uno oggi identifica proprio con Daniel Defoe), raccontò la storia di Mary Read, una donna la cui madre, per nascondere una gravidanza indesiderata, sin da piccola la vestiva da maschietto e la faceva passare per il fratellino, che invece era provvidenzialmente e prematuramente deceduto. Diventò prima soldato dell’esercito di Sua Maestà, poi pirata; sempre maschio per la ciurma, femmina per i felici pochi che ne carpivano il segreto.
Nello stesso anno del film, 1996, è uscito anche un adattamento televisivo, un tv movie, dove è Alex Kingston a vestire i panni di Moll.
Non per niente il primo a condurmi per mano nel fascinoso mondo di Daniel Defoe è stato quel birichino impenitente di Alberto Arbasino.
Che, ovviamente, piuttosto che spingermi a rilettura o lettura integrale dell’opera più famosa di Defoe, il Robinson Crusoe (e sia chiaro che soli soli sull’isolotto, Robinson e Venerdì qualche trastullo dovevano pur concederselo), mi ha indirizzato ai romanzi più frizzanti e stuzzicanti, in primis proprio questo qui presente.
Moll Flanders nasce in prigione, viene partorita nel carcere di Newgate, lo stesso dove Defoe trascorse un paio d’anni, credo per bancarotta (pare si trattasse di un buco di diciassettemila sterline, cifra ragguardevole a quell’epoca: Defoe non era ancora un romanziere, ma un fabbricante e commerciante di laterizi – prima del carcere gli furono anche regalati tre giorni di pubblica gogna).
E quindi non è certo il migliore inizio per la piccola Moll, che non si chiamava affatto così, ma adottò Moll Flanders quale nome d’arte.
Il carcere di Newgate, la più temuta prigione di Londra. Rimase in attività dal 1188 al 1902.
Quale arte? Quella che la stessa Moll ci descrive nei seguenti termini:
Fui per Dodici anni puttana, cinque volte moglie (una volta di mio fratello), dodici anni ladra, otto anni criminale deportata in Virginia, per diventare alla fine ricca e onesta, e morire pentita.
E quindi forse, più che nome d’arte, nom de plume, meglio dire nome di battaglia: perché tale si delinea la vita di Moll Flanders sin dal momento che intona il primo vagito nell’infame carcere di Newgate.
Direi che è innegabile la fascinazione di Defoe per questi personaggi femminili antesignani di uno spirito d’indipendenza e di un senso di libertà che le donne di quel periodo conoscevano solo raramente. Per ottenerle, indipendenza e libertà, non era concesso loro altro strumento che il corpo: diventava quindi necessario essere dotate di bell’aspetto e usare le proprie grazie in maniera disinvolta.
Non so se questo faccia di Moll Flanders, come di Lady Roxana, proto- femministe: nel caso, comunque, sia l’una che l’altra erano inconsapevoli d’esserlo.
Morgan Freeman è accanto a Robin Wright, e le fa da tutore, personaggio inventato che non esiste nel romanzo: è lui che si fa narratore invece di Moll.
Anche questo romanzo, come il seguente Lady Roxana, è travestito da (falsa) autobiografia introdotta dal sapiente narratore che dà un colpo al cerchio e uno alla botte: da una parte sbandiera che tutto è vero e autentico, dall’altra mette le mani avanti e dice che certi passaggi sono stati taciuti, epurati, ammorbiditi per non urtare l’animo del lettore – da una parte sottolinea la (apparente) amoralità (depravazione?) della protagonista, che deogratias si salva nel finale (proprio come Lady Roxana), dall’altra ci concede assaggi gustosi di quella (presunta) amoralità.
Tutto questo in cinque pagine: poi la parola passa alla protagonista, Moll Flanders, che così esordisce:
Il mio nome è così noto negli incartamenti e nei registri di Newgate e dell’Old Bailey, e vi si ricollegano fatti di tale importanza, per quel che riguarda la mia personale condotta, che non ci si può aspettare che scriva per esteso in questo libro il mio nome o una relazione sulla mia famiglia.
Stockard Channing è Mrs Allworthy, la tenutaria del bordello. John Lynch è l’artista di cui Moll s’innamora.
Il cammino che Moll racconta al lettore è così convulso e rocambolesco che alla fine riesce difficile definirne l’età, la si farebbe molto più agée per tutto quanto ha vissuto e passato.
Se non che, Moll, proprio come Roxana, è dotata di così ricca ironia che leggere le loro (finte) autobiografie, fintamente pedagogiche, è uno spasso assicurato.
Anche Kim Novak ha indossato l’abito di Moll Flanders: in una versione del 1965 diretta da Terence Young dove recitava anche Vittorio De Sica.
January 26, 2012
Moll Flanders; the tale of a bawdy wench out and about being bawdy and getting up to all manner of, well, bawdiness. For those of you not up on your ye olde Englishness, bawdy is a general term for something which is lewd, obscene and lascivious. If you don't know what any of those words mean then Moll Flanders will be a nice surprise for you (and maybe you should get out more).
Moll is essentially a working girl on the make but really she's just trying to find Mr Right and settle down with a nice respectable fellow in order to get a bit of financial security. Life in the early 18th century was no picnic after all, especially if you're a lady with a bit of a reputation and not two coppers to rub together. Social services were not around to step in, help you into a small flat and give you advice about being a job seeker.
Nope, life on the banks of the Thames was very much a sink or swim affair although many people find it difficult to swim when their throats have been cut from ear to ear and they've been heaved in head first after their pockets have been emptied. London was not a pretty place to be and no one can blame Moll for trying to make the best of a bad situation. And try she does, although this mainly involves going through husbands faster than Elizabeth Taylor.
Husband One dies an early death and leaves her with small children to care for. She leaves them tucked up at home and heads out onto the street to begin a career as an artful con-woman hoping to snare another husband. Husband Two is wealthy but quickly bankrupts himself and does a runner to France leaving Moll with some fond memories and an empty bank account.
Swiftly moving on to husband number three, there is some exciting foreign travel followed by an unfortunate bought of incest (well, the world was a lot smaller in those days). Potential husband number four never comes through with the goods which brings Moll to potential husband number five. Number five is a slow mover and is put on the back-burner while Number six is sought out to fill the hole (pun intended) in the interim. Number six turns out to be an even bigger con-artist than Moll and hi-jinx ensue when they both think the other is looted.
Nine children later and six husbands down Moll is still far from living the high life and resorts to meaner crimes than seduction in order to fill her purse. You can imagine that a life like this is probably going to be less than kind on a lady's general appearance but Moll still seems to pull in the gentlemen. Perhaps bawdiness is a virtue in its own right.
A brilliant alternative classic tale with an unusual and bold heroine who is not chaste, girly or prim. A refreshing antidote to the later ladies of the Austen school of writing. Moll Flanders would kick Elizabeth Bennet's ass any day of the week.
Moll is essentially a working girl on the make but really she's just trying to find Mr Right and settle down with a nice respectable fellow in order to get a bit of financial security. Life in the early 18th century was no picnic after all, especially if you're a lady with a bit of a reputation and not two coppers to rub together. Social services were not around to step in, help you into a small flat and give you advice about being a job seeker.
Nope, life on the banks of the Thames was very much a sink or swim affair although many people find it difficult to swim when their throats have been cut from ear to ear and they've been heaved in head first after their pockets have been emptied. London was not a pretty place to be and no one can blame Moll for trying to make the best of a bad situation. And try she does, although this mainly involves going through husbands faster than Elizabeth Taylor.
Husband One dies an early death and leaves her with small children to care for. She leaves them tucked up at home and heads out onto the street to begin a career as an artful con-woman hoping to snare another husband. Husband Two is wealthy but quickly bankrupts himself and does a runner to France leaving Moll with some fond memories and an empty bank account.
Swiftly moving on to husband number three, there is some exciting foreign travel followed by an unfortunate bought of incest (well, the world was a lot smaller in those days). Potential husband number four never comes through with the goods which brings Moll to potential husband number five. Number five is a slow mover and is put on the back-burner while Number six is sought out to fill the hole (pun intended) in the interim. Number six turns out to be an even bigger con-artist than Moll and hi-jinx ensue when they both think the other is looted.
Nine children later and six husbands down Moll is still far from living the high life and resorts to meaner crimes than seduction in order to fill her purse. You can imagine that a life like this is probably going to be less than kind on a lady's general appearance but Moll still seems to pull in the gentlemen. Perhaps bawdiness is a virtue in its own right.
A brilliant alternative classic tale with an unusual and bold heroine who is not chaste, girly or prim. A refreshing antidote to the later ladies of the Austen school of writing. Moll Flanders would kick Elizabeth Bennet's ass any day of the week.
July 16, 2014
Did I enjoy this novel? No. In some ways, its story and writing technique are far too rudimentary for a 21st century reader. It certainly didn't grab me the way other books have. But I think if you want to see how the novel got from there to here, you can't pass this by.
Because reading Moll Flanders is like watching the grainy footage of a home video of your lover at five years old. You can see the gestures and traits that make up the person today, but only sketched out in infant form. You have to love it because you love the fully formed adult person now, and it's so squee-fascinating to see that some bits have been there since the very beginning.
I'm a bit of lit-geek and I loved seeing how you could see the beginnings of the character/realist novel in Moll Flanders. The whole thing is more plot than character. Certainly Moll has far less internal substance and texture than Madame Bovary or Anna Karenina. However, Moll is also the progenitor or one of the progenitors of later heroines like Scarlett O'Hara (Gone with the Wind / Margaret Mitchell) or Emma Harte (A Woman of Substance / Barbara Taylor Bradford): survivalist bad girl who triumphs over everything the author throws at her.
And boy does he throw everything at her: "husband" #1 is a seducing cad who marries her off to his brother; husband #2 dies after a few years of marriage; husband #3 turns out to be her brother; husband #4 is a highway man who tricks her into marrying him but eventually lets her go; husband #5 is a decent man who dies after five years of marriage. And in between husbands 3 and 4 is an extended love affair. And so, Moll is also the daughter of the Wife of Bath.
Was this a good read? Not in the fun sense of the term, nor in the value-judgement sense either. But I think it certainly belongs in the canon and if that's something that matters to you (and there's zero reason why it should), then it certainly was a good read.
Because reading Moll Flanders is like watching the grainy footage of a home video of your lover at five years old. You can see the gestures and traits that make up the person today, but only sketched out in infant form. You have to love it because you love the fully formed adult person now, and it's so squee-fascinating to see that some bits have been there since the very beginning.
I'm a bit of lit-geek and I loved seeing how you could see the beginnings of the character/realist novel in Moll Flanders. The whole thing is more plot than character. Certainly Moll has far less internal substance and texture than Madame Bovary or Anna Karenina. However, Moll is also the progenitor or one of the progenitors of later heroines like Scarlett O'Hara (Gone with the Wind / Margaret Mitchell) or Emma Harte (A Woman of Substance / Barbara Taylor Bradford): survivalist bad girl who triumphs over everything the author throws at her.
And boy does he throw everything at her: "husband" #1 is a seducing cad who marries her off to his brother; husband #2 dies after a few years of marriage; husband #3 turns out to be her brother; husband #4 is a highway man who tricks her into marrying him but eventually lets her go; husband #5 is a decent man who dies after five years of marriage. And in between husbands 3 and 4 is an extended love affair. And so, Moll is also the daughter of the Wife of Bath.
Was this a good read? Not in the fun sense of the term, nor in the value-judgement sense either. But I think it certainly belongs in the canon and if that's something that matters to you (and there's zero reason why it should), then it certainly was a good read.
Read
January 4, 20093 things I liked about this book:
1. Moll's distinctive character and voice
2. Her ability to turn almost any situation into a positive, eventually (Moll Flanders wobbles, but she never falls down!)
3. How the book highlighted the difficult positions a woman could be left in during this period as a result of, for example, becoming widowed with children, not having a husband/family to support her, having illegitimate children, or being married and thus all personal property legally belonging to the husband, who might fritter it away
3 things I did not like about this book:
1. The disregard for Moll's children. OK, I can understand her doing her best to forget them when she's in a very difficult situation. The second time round in Virginia, for example, she doesn't ask after the other child she had left there. She overdoes the "loving mother" bit a touch right at the end when she re-meets her son in Virginia, and you'd think in this mood she would be minded to say something about that son's brother or sister she left behind. Similarly, at one point she comments on going back to the place she left her two children by Robin, and finds out about (and reports back on) the fate of his parents, brother, and sister - but not a word about the two children.
2. It was skillfully written so that the reader retained more sympathy for Moll than might have been the case, but she was still a pretty nasty piece of work, however much she justified her actions to herself.
3. The ending seemed rushed, forced, and as if it was trying to make up for a prurient emphasis on "wickedness" throughout most of the rest of the book.
3 things I learnt from this book:
1. Fabric could be really, really expensive (yet apparently not subject to particularly tight security). We are told that a typical servant-girl would earn about £3 a year, £5 will pay for a baby to be fostered for a year, and Moll estimates that she could live on £6 a year. She routinely, however, steals pieces of cloth worth upwards of 20 guineas.
2. London had an area called "The Mint" in which debtors were safe from prosecution for their debts.
3. You could get hung for all sorts of crimes in the past. "At its height the criminal law included some 220 different crimes punishable by death. These crimes included such offences as "being in the company of Gypsies for one month", "strong evidence of malice in a child aged 7–14 years of age" and "blacking the face or using a disguise whilst committing a crime"." (Wikipedia)
3 words used excessively in this book:
1. satisfaction
2. perplexity
3. convenience
1. Moll's distinctive character and voice
2. Her ability to turn almost any situation into a positive, eventually (Moll Flanders wobbles, but she never falls down!)
3. How the book highlighted the difficult positions a woman could be left in during this period as a result of, for example, becoming widowed with children, not having a husband/family to support her, having illegitimate children, or being married and thus all personal property legally belonging to the husband, who might fritter it away
3 things I did not like about this book:
1. The disregard for Moll's children. OK, I can understand her doing her best to forget them when she's in a very difficult situation. The second time round in Virginia, for example, she doesn't ask after the other child she had left there. She overdoes the "loving mother" bit a touch right at the end when she re-meets her son in Virginia, and you'd think in this mood she would be minded to say something about that son's brother or sister she left behind. Similarly, at one point she comments on going back to the place she left her two children by Robin, and finds out about (and reports back on) the fate of his parents, brother, and sister - but not a word about the two children.
2. It was skillfully written so that the reader retained more sympathy for Moll than might have been the case, but she was still a pretty nasty piece of work, however much she justified her actions to herself.
3. The ending seemed rushed, forced, and as if it was trying to make up for a prurient emphasis on "wickedness" throughout most of the rest of the book.
3 things I learnt from this book:
1. Fabric could be really, really expensive (yet apparently not subject to particularly tight security). We are told that a typical servant-girl would earn about £3 a year, £5 will pay for a baby to be fostered for a year, and Moll estimates that she could live on £6 a year. She routinely, however, steals pieces of cloth worth upwards of 20 guineas.
2. London had an area called "The Mint" in which debtors were safe from prosecution for their debts.
3. You could get hung for all sorts of crimes in the past. "At its height the criminal law included some 220 different crimes punishable by death. These crimes included such offences as "being in the company of Gypsies for one month", "strong evidence of malice in a child aged 7–14 years of age" and "blacking the face or using a disguise whilst committing a crime"." (Wikipedia)
3 words used excessively in this book:
1. satisfaction
2. perplexity
3. convenience
June 3, 2021
I loved Moll Flanders, the character and the book. They are bawdy, but in that eighteenth century way, that lays everything between the sheets between the lines, and lets you use your own imagination, if you will. Defoe makes this sometimes tragic tale a kind of frolic. There is humor, and you cannot help rooting for the woman who is breaking the law, engaging in indiscriminate sex and sexual manipulations, and robbing people blind, while protesting how sorry she is she had to do it. I confess to not feeling the least sorry for anyone Moll might have harmed, except her children, who were so briefly dealt with that we forget them almost as cavalierly as Moll does.
I suppose Moll is a hardened criminal. She might have had an honest life several times during the course of the novel and she failed to secure it. She gets more opportunities than most women in her situation would have gotten, but she seems destined to find herself in a boiling pot time and again. Marriage being one of the few ways a woman might improve her status, Moll never fails to take advantage of a marriage vow. However, even if you only consider her marriage debacles, which I will not discuss here as that would be a major spoiler, you have to admit fate is very unkind. So, she is a criminal, but she is also a survivor, and it is the survivor in her that wins out for me.
She is a precursor for every strong woman who refuses to accept her fate and makes the most of her talents to survive the unsurvivable. She is Amber St. Clare, Scarlett O’Hara, and Dickens’ Nancy, with a different outcome. She’s a roll in the hay, but with purpose. I totally enjoyed her story.
I suppose Moll is a hardened criminal. She might have had an honest life several times during the course of the novel and she failed to secure it. She gets more opportunities than most women in her situation would have gotten, but she seems destined to find herself in a boiling pot time and again. Marriage being one of the few ways a woman might improve her status, Moll never fails to take advantage of a marriage vow. However, even if you only consider her marriage debacles, which I will not discuss here as that would be a major spoiler, you have to admit fate is very unkind. So, she is a criminal, but she is also a survivor, and it is the survivor in her that wins out for me.
She is a precursor for every strong woman who refuses to accept her fate and makes the most of her talents to survive the unsurvivable. She is Amber St. Clare, Scarlett O’Hara, and Dickens’ Nancy, with a different outcome. She’s a roll in the hay, but with purpose. I totally enjoyed her story.
September 5, 2022
Style-wise, this classic novel isn’t the easiest book for the 21st century reader. In period fashion Defoe goes in for many long, long sentences, full of commas and semi-colons. Some of them stretch to an entire page. In terms of vocabulary though, it’s remarkable how little English has changed in 300 years.
The book is supposed to have been written by the central character, who goes by the name “Moll Flanders”, though we’re not told what her real name is. Moll looks back on her life as she approaches the age of 70, and the book ends with the words “written in 1683”. I’d always thought of Moll Flanders as a character in an 18th century world, but had she been a real person she would have lived through the English Civil War, Cromwell, and the Restoration. Although none of those events feature in the book, that is the world we should think of when we picture the setting.
One feature of the 17th century was the lack of bureaucracy. For example, Moll’s second husband is a gambler and wastrel who flees to France to escape his creditors. Moll then moves house, assumes a new name and marries again – as simple as that. A lack of bureaucracy has pros and cons though. If you ran out of money in 17th century England there was no government to send you a social security cheque. Throughout the novel, Moll’s actions are motivated by one fear.
“I had the terrible prospect of poverty and starving, which lay on me as a frightful spectre…”
She continually calculates how much money she has. Conventionally the story is one of moral decline and redemption. I think it’s possible to interpret the ending another way, but will avoid saying more for fear of spoilers. The book is also a commentary on the position of women in early modern England, and the lack of opportunities open to them. As an innocent teenager Moll is seduced by the flattery and false promises of a wealthy young man. At this stage she is sinned against rather than sinner, but as her life progresses she gradually becomes hard hearted and calculating, deliberately using her looks to manipulate men. When the man who becomes her fifth husband starts to court her, she comments how:
“I played with this lover as an angler does with a trout.”
Moll uses what she has to get men to transfer their wealth to her. On one occasion she is picked up by a wealthy gent:
“Would such gentlemen but consider the contemptible thoughts which the very women they are concerned with, in such cases as these, have of them…when he is, as it were, drunk in the ecstasies of his wicked pleasure, her hands are in his pockets searching for what she can find there…”
As Moll gets older she can no longer rely on her looks, and turns to a life of crime. By this point she has almost entirely lost her sense of right and wrong. To most modern readers, her life of borderline prostitution is not as shocking as it might have been in Defoe’s time, but other aspects of her behaviour are more so. She has several children by her various husbands but with one exception they disappear from the text almost as soon as they are mentioned. As far as I could tell Moll simply abandons them.
Worth a read if you are interested in the classics.
The book is supposed to have been written by the central character, who goes by the name “Moll Flanders”, though we’re not told what her real name is. Moll looks back on her life as she approaches the age of 70, and the book ends with the words “written in 1683”. I’d always thought of Moll Flanders as a character in an 18th century world, but had she been a real person she would have lived through the English Civil War, Cromwell, and the Restoration. Although none of those events feature in the book, that is the world we should think of when we picture the setting.
One feature of the 17th century was the lack of bureaucracy. For example, Moll’s second husband is a gambler and wastrel who flees to France to escape his creditors. Moll then moves house, assumes a new name and marries again – as simple as that. A lack of bureaucracy has pros and cons though. If you ran out of money in 17th century England there was no government to send you a social security cheque. Throughout the novel, Moll’s actions are motivated by one fear.
“I had the terrible prospect of poverty and starving, which lay on me as a frightful spectre…”
She continually calculates how much money she has. Conventionally the story is one of moral decline and redemption. I think it’s possible to interpret the ending another way, but will avoid saying more for fear of spoilers. The book is also a commentary on the position of women in early modern England, and the lack of opportunities open to them. As an innocent teenager Moll is seduced by the flattery and false promises of a wealthy young man. At this stage she is sinned against rather than sinner, but as her life progresses she gradually becomes hard hearted and calculating, deliberately using her looks to manipulate men. When the man who becomes her fifth husband starts to court her, she comments how:
“I played with this lover as an angler does with a trout.”
Moll uses what she has to get men to transfer their wealth to her. On one occasion she is picked up by a wealthy gent:
“Would such gentlemen but consider the contemptible thoughts which the very women they are concerned with, in such cases as these, have of them…when he is, as it were, drunk in the ecstasies of his wicked pleasure, her hands are in his pockets searching for what she can find there…”
As Moll gets older she can no longer rely on her looks, and turns to a life of crime. By this point she has almost entirely lost her sense of right and wrong. To most modern readers, her life of borderline prostitution is not as shocking as it might have been in Defoe’s time, but other aspects of her behaviour are more so. She has several children by her various husbands but with one exception they disappear from the text almost as soon as they are mentioned. As far as I could tell Moll simply abandons them.
Worth a read if you are interested in the classics.
May 7, 2017
1.5 points
A very difficult and boring book to read. Imagine old style English and long sentences plus details about things that didn't matter. I didn't like Defoe's style of writing. The characters weren't referred to by name, so i was confused most of the time. Sometimes i felt i was reading a very badly written and boring fairy tale!
A very difficult and boring book to read. Imagine old style English and long sentences plus details about things that didn't matter. I didn't like Defoe's style of writing. The characters weren't referred to by name, so i was confused most of the time. Sometimes i felt i was reading a very badly written and boring fairy tale!
August 6, 2008
Largely confusing, frenetic action interspersed with long, prosy, preachy morality lessons, and then plunged right back into constant action again. Defoe's storytelling appears almost entirely random, especially towards the end, picking out one tale to tell of her wicked ways and days, and suppressing others that sound much more interesting. There's hardly any reflection on character here, if any at all. I'm not counting the times when Defoe pauses to lecture his audience on God's mercy while having Moll pretend to be stricken by conscience by things that seem highly improbable, with outcomes afterwards which seem positively incredulous.
He never really makes Moll a character at all, but rather a conduit for his opinions of the time and place. His constant message is that a girl like Moll could have led a moral life, if only she had enough money to do so. She falls in and out of good circumstances, and is a good person so long as she has the money to be. He does emphasize what a problem it was especially for a woman with no resources, and her very limited options for getting by in the world, especially if she is no longer young or beautiful. I do give him credit for that. But he makes her so unappealing... I mean, all her thoughts are either preachy and moral and obviously from Defoe himself, or justifying what she does, or glorying in her successes. She seems to forget that she has children half the time. She cares about what becomes of only one of them, and seems to disregard the other, oh.. eight of them? She doesn't seem to care for clothes, her appearance is only mentioned in connection with morality or disguising herself, she hardly has any female friends, nor do they ever talk about what women would have talked about at the time. There's no convincing woman in there.
He never really makes Moll a character at all, but rather a conduit for his opinions of the time and place. His constant message is that a girl like Moll could have led a moral life, if only she had enough money to do so. She falls in and out of good circumstances, and is a good person so long as she has the money to be. He does emphasize what a problem it was especially for a woman with no resources, and her very limited options for getting by in the world, especially if she is no longer young or beautiful. I do give him credit for that. But he makes her so unappealing... I mean, all her thoughts are either preachy and moral and obviously from Defoe himself, or justifying what she does, or glorying in her successes. She seems to forget that she has children half the time. She cares about what becomes of only one of them, and seems to disregard the other, oh.. eight of them? She doesn't seem to care for clothes, her appearance is only mentioned in connection with morality or disguising herself, she hardly has any female friends, nor do they ever talk about what women would have talked about at the time. There's no convincing woman in there.
July 15, 2016
When I was younger, I was a smart girl but not smart enough to get a full scholarship to college. My parents were poor, so any help from them was out of the question. I knew I had to make it on my own. So, I worked three jobs during my freshman year. I worked at White Castle, I typed stuff for attorneys, and I did another job that I have never told anyone about until now. I was Mrs. Claus.
I worked for a company that had dozens of Mrs. Clauses who would call children during the holiday season. I got an email telling me who to call and when, and I called those little stinky spoiled children and talked to them about Santa's reindeer. I hated every minute of it, but it paid the bills, so I called those little fuckers like it was nobody's business.
Making a living isn't easy, and Moll Flanders knew that. This woman did some stuff to make ends meet that took some guts. She was a prostitute and a pick pocket. She dated men and married men and slept with men who she thought could help her. She was tough, and she was dedicated. Moll was not going to starve. Hell no, she was going to be the best prostitute/pick pocket in the world. I admire that in a perverse way.
On the one hand, it is hard to believe that a novel about an independent woman trying to survive was written in 1722. It is one of the first novels ever written, actually. On the other hand, the structure of the novel is a complete mess, making it obvious that it was written in 1722. I am willing to overlook that.
Because Moll Flanders is one of my very favorite literary characters. She is the Scarlet O'Hara of the 1700s; she has backbone. She's racy and edgy. She might have also slept with her brother on accident. I mean, haven't we all? (NO, No, and absolutely not, but we can live vicariously through Moll and her other escapades, which is way better than accidental incest, in my opinion).
I worked for a company that had dozens of Mrs. Clauses who would call children during the holiday season. I got an email telling me who to call and when, and I called those little stinky spoiled children and talked to them about Santa's reindeer. I hated every minute of it, but it paid the bills, so I called those little fuckers like it was nobody's business.
Making a living isn't easy, and Moll Flanders knew that. This woman did some stuff to make ends meet that took some guts. She was a prostitute and a pick pocket. She dated men and married men and slept with men who she thought could help her. She was tough, and she was dedicated. Moll was not going to starve. Hell no, she was going to be the best prostitute/pick pocket in the world. I admire that in a perverse way.
On the one hand, it is hard to believe that a novel about an independent woman trying to survive was written in 1722. It is one of the first novels ever written, actually. On the other hand, the structure of the novel is a complete mess, making it obvious that it was written in 1722. I am willing to overlook that.
Because Moll Flanders is one of my very favorite literary characters. She is the Scarlet O'Hara of the 1700s; she has backbone. She's racy and edgy. She might have also slept with her brother on accident. I mean, haven't we all? (NO, No, and absolutely not, but we can live vicariously through Moll and her other escapades, which is way better than accidental incest, in my opinion).
January 15, 2020
The original and complete title of Moll Flanders by Daniel Defoe is this:
"The Fortunes and Misfortunes of the Famous Moll Flanders, Etc. Who was born in Newgate, and during a life of continu'd Variety for Threescore Years, besides her Childhood, was Twelve Year a Whore, five times a Wife (whereof once to her own brother), Twelve Year a Thief, Eight Year a Transported Felon in Virginia, at last grew Rich, liv'd Honest and died a Penitent. Written from her own Memorandums."
There is the story in a nutshell. Supposedly, it was written by Moll herself. Daniel Defoe’s name never appeared as author on the books until after his death. The tale is said to be based the life of Moll King, whom the author met on visiting Newgate Prison.
On closing the book, I knew I had enjoyed it. The question was why.
Well first of all, I like Moll, despite her faults! She is strong and resourceful. She is clear thinking and doesn’t give up. She talks straight. She doesn’t shy away from stating what she has done, at least as she tells the story to us here. Moll’s voice, her personality, comes through loud and clear.
Secondly, I was curious to see how what is stated in the title came to be. How is it possible one marries a brother? Moll’s story is in fact believable, but convoluted.
Thirdly, I felt like I was seeing life, experiencing life, in the 1600s, the life of a woman not of the elite. Moll, seventy years old in 1683, tells us the story of her life. We see life in England and America. Comparisons may be drawn.
Surprisedly enough, written so long ago, Defoe’s prose is not hard to follow. The book was first published in 1722.
This is quite simply a fun story. I believe Defoe wanted us to enjoy ourselves and laugh. People enjoy reading more about those who misbehave than those who are strait-laced and law abiding. Clearly, Defoe knew this.
Why not more stars? Sometimes it is hard to keep track of who is who.
Davina Porter narrates the audiobook extremely well. Her narration increased my enjoyment of the book. She perfectly intones all the characters. Five stars for the narration.
"The Fortunes and Misfortunes of the Famous Moll Flanders, Etc. Who was born in Newgate, and during a life of continu'd Variety for Threescore Years, besides her Childhood, was Twelve Year a Whore, five times a Wife (whereof once to her own brother), Twelve Year a Thief, Eight Year a Transported Felon in Virginia, at last grew Rich, liv'd Honest and died a Penitent. Written from her own Memorandums."
There is the story in a nutshell. Supposedly, it was written by Moll herself. Daniel Defoe’s name never appeared as author on the books until after his death. The tale is said to be based the life of Moll King, whom the author met on visiting Newgate Prison.
On closing the book, I knew I had enjoyed it. The question was why.
Well first of all, I like Moll, despite her faults! She is strong and resourceful. She is clear thinking and doesn’t give up. She talks straight. She doesn’t shy away from stating what she has done, at least as she tells the story to us here. Moll’s voice, her personality, comes through loud and clear.
Secondly, I was curious to see how what is stated in the title came to be. How is it possible one marries a brother? Moll’s story is in fact believable, but convoluted.
Thirdly, I felt like I was seeing life, experiencing life, in the 1600s, the life of a woman not of the elite. Moll, seventy years old in 1683, tells us the story of her life. We see life in England and America. Comparisons may be drawn.
Surprisedly enough, written so long ago, Defoe’s prose is not hard to follow. The book was first published in 1722.
This is quite simply a fun story. I believe Defoe wanted us to enjoy ourselves and laugh. People enjoy reading more about those who misbehave than those who are strait-laced and law abiding. Clearly, Defoe knew this.
Why not more stars? Sometimes it is hard to keep track of who is who.
Davina Porter narrates the audiobook extremely well. Her narration increased my enjoyment of the book. She perfectly intones all the characters. Five stars for the narration.
June 3, 2021
I'm so glad that I had not read the book blurb before reading this. It gives everything away! Goodreads warns of spoiler reviews, why not spoiler book blurbs? I found this was such a pleasant surprise after having disliked the only other Defoe I've read which was Robinson Crusoe. I can't say that I necessarily loved his prose here and it's not as structured as I'd normally prefer but the story was so fast-paced, addicting, and shocking (since I hadn't read the blurb!) that I couldn't put it down. It reminded me of a Greek tragedy in some ways and even a little bit of Dickens the way it exposed the plight of women and orphans in Georgian England as he did later with the Victorian era.
Moll Flanders starts out her life as Betty but changes her name to avoid being discovered. She's orphaned when her mother goes to prison just before her birth. Her extraordinary beauty gives her more opportunities than many orphans as she's taken on by a wealthy family pretty early. It's hard to talk about the book without giving things away but her life yo-yos up and down so fast that you become breathless just reading about it.
There is a lot to judge Miss Flanders about if you didn't know her whole story, especially one aspect regarding children that bothered me even knowing her circumstances, but everything she does she does in order to survive in a world that gives little value to women who aren't born into wealth.
So much happens to Betty/Moll and the coincidences are a bit much, but they didn't bother me. I came to admire Ms. Flanders for her tenacity. She pushed on despite devastating setbacks and always tried to make her own way without being an undue burden on anyone. There is an aspect of repentance and forgiveness here that I liked, but I forgave her well before she repented. She is a wonderful character that will stick in my mind.
Moll Flanders starts out her life as Betty but changes her name to avoid being discovered. She's orphaned when her mother goes to prison just before her birth. Her extraordinary beauty gives her more opportunities than many orphans as she's taken on by a wealthy family pretty early. It's hard to talk about the book without giving things away but her life yo-yos up and down so fast that you become breathless just reading about it.
There is a lot to judge Miss Flanders about if you didn't know her whole story, especially one aspect regarding children that bothered me even knowing her circumstances, but everything she does she does in order to survive in a world that gives little value to women who aren't born into wealth.
So much happens to Betty/Moll and the coincidences are a bit much, but they didn't bother me. I came to admire Ms. Flanders for her tenacity. She pushed on despite devastating setbacks and always tried to make her own way without being an undue burden on anyone. There is an aspect of repentance and forgiveness here that I liked, but I forgave her well before she repented. She is a wonderful character that will stick in my mind.
June 25, 2021
Moll Flanders has a story of survival to tell. In Daniel Defoe’s early novel of 1722, he presents a woman of low class, born to a thief and left an orphan who when she is young wants more out of life than to be sent to servitude. She wants to be a gentlewoman which to her means an independent woman. Brazenly, Moll meets each plight of her life with grit and does anything she can to survive and occasionally flourish. 17th century women like Moll knew the importance of attaching themselves to a man. She realizes how to use her beauty to get what she wants from men. She never marries for love and sadly leaves behind all of her children. So many times she is “undone” or “ruined” by the simple fact that her current husband or lover has died or disappeared leaving her with nothing. Moll is not ashamed at any length she chooses to go in order to survive. Even when it means she must scheme and deceive using her feminine wiles in order to snag a man with wealth. She is a woman with wit and smarts that help her escape trouble many, many times. I definitely believe that Moll was one lucky woman. Every instance of trouble or ruin she encounters, Moll never takes time to mourn her losses or the loss of those she robbed but is already looking to the next possibility that would bring her back up in the world. Moll knows her vices but also understands her necessities. Does she meet with some pretty unbelievable circumstances? Yes! She certainly does. Does she make some choices in her life that are questionable? Of course. Do her actions demonstrate her as a criminal like her mother or as a woman doing what is necessary to live in a society that diminished her worth and gave her no other choice? That’s for the reader to determine.
I was not without secret reproaches of my own conscience for the life I led…yet I had the terrible prospect of poverty and starving.
I was not without secret reproaches of my own conscience for the life I led…yet I had the terrible prospect of poverty and starving.
February 17, 2010
The Fortunes & Misfortunes of the Famous Moll Flanders &c.
Who was Born in Newgate, and during a Life of continu'd Variety for Threescore Years, besides her Childhood, was Twelve Year a Whore, five times a Wife (whereof once to her own Brother), Twelve Year a Thief, Eight Year a Transported Felon in Virginia, at last grew Rich, liv'd Honest, and dies a Penitent. Written from her own Memorandums . . .
Original title page for Moll Flanders
The character of Moll Flanders has traditionally baffled critics.
Is she an ironic character? Is she truly penitent? How may her inconsistencies be justified? Critics have asserted there is irony in Moll Flanders but it is not in the book; that is, we--as readers--may appreciate irony in Moll's character but Defoe does not provide it. What may be easier to demonstrate, then, is that "Defoe's attitude toward Moll is consistent, even if Moll herself, ironically or otherwise, is not" (James 203). Whatever the critics propose, for readers, Moll emerges as irascible, vibrant, and wonderfully complex. Moll also shows the limited choices for a woman of her time.
Moll Flanders, as the description from Defoe's original title page suggests, is a novel written in the confessional mode. As readers of this type of work, our role is akin to that of a priest: we listen to the confessions and tacitly provide understanding or forgiveness. To elicit our sympathy, Defoe places Moll in an environment not only hostile but enticing, a world, he would have us believe, that tempts and lures an otherwise virtuous individual into a life of crime.
Moll’s world, ostensibly mimetic, is really portrayed with great selectivity. Many characters—even those as important as her first lover—are not even named; settings are often depicted as just “a house” or “the street.” What does loom large on Moll’s horizon is money. Again and again, Moll focuses on money and the material; early on, she defines herself in terms of her net worth.
Moll’s indoctrination into a materialistic world starts in childhood. Orphaned, Moll is raised by an elderly woman who feels amused pity for Moll’s desires to become a “gentlewoman” and let Molls live with her rather than go into service. The ladies of the town, curious about the “little gentlewoman,” visit her and soon begin to give Moll gifts of money and fine clothes. When Moll’s elderly guardian dies, one of the families that had shown an interest in Moll takes her into their home. Though poor, Moll describes how she receives an education equivalent to that of a gentlewoman. By a twist in circumstances, Moll gets an early “taste of genteel living” (9) far above her actual station.
Although Moll describes herself initially as “very sober, modest, and virtuous” (12), she is led into a liaison with the eldest brother in the household. His dominance soon takes hold, and Moll describes his tactics in terms of lures: “he began with that unhappy snare to all women, viz. taking notice upon all occasions how pretty I was” or “After he had thus baited his hook” (13). Though Moll admits her strong passion for the elder brother, her stronger passion soon becomes clear. After an initial episode of kissing, the brother gives Moll money. Moll’s reaction is telling: “I was more confused with the money than I was before with the love, and began to be so elevated that I scarce knew the ground I stood on” (17). On a subsequent occasion, he gives Moll a “handful of gold” (18), and its glittering reality becomes the dominant image in Moll’s landscape: “As for the gold, I spent whole hours in looking upon it; I told [and yes, this is the right word:] the guineas over and over a thousand times a day” (19).
To gain Moll’s complete surrender, the brother offers her a silk purse with a hundred guineas in it and the promise of one hundred guineas annually until he marries her. With irony intended or unintended, Moll’s passion and greed gain equal footing: “My colour came and went, at the sight of the purse and with the fire of the proposal together” (22), and Moll succumbs to his advances.
Significantly, money and attendant material possessions are foregrounded while the rest of Moll’s setting recedes into the background. The elder brother—as we could predict—does not marry Moll and her reluctant marriage to the younger brother, done only out of financial necessity, receives a rapid narration. Molls tells us there is little worth describing, “…I lived with this husband, only to observe that I had two children by him, and that at the end of five years he died” (51). Typically, Moll assesses her present situation in terms of money, a description more graphic and several lines longer, than that of her five years of marriage.
Moll’s early adventures set up her pattern of behavior. Despite her professed good intentions, when push comes to shove, Moll consistently acts out of self-interest. Moll’s hostile world tempts her with material gain, she succumbs, eventually has some type of downfall, and then defines her outcome in terms of her current net worth. Moll’s patterned conduct puts the reader in an interesting situation. Moll may momentarily hesitate and try to rationalize a forthcoming seduction or theft, but we never doubt the outcome.
However, in a society that would otherwise provide little choice for an unattached woman, Moll’s ability to silence any internal qualms greatly increases her freedom of movement. While we might find her attempts at rationalization or short fits of morality funny, Moll Flanders is a complex character. Ultimately, she is not simply funny nor simply tragic, but fully realized and equipped with powers of resourcefulness and self-preservation that might have been admired in a man.
April 30, 2021
Difficile definire il personaggio di Moll Flanders in maniera univoca, così come le presunte ragioni che possono aver indotto Defoe a scriverne. Si tratta di un romanzo picaresco fine a se stesso? Di una storia che parla di redenzione. Di un'atto di accusa verso la società e la giustizia inglesi? Di un attacco al moralismo anglosassone che condanna condotte moralmente "discutibili" senza considerar le ragioni e le necessità che possono condurre chijnque ad abbracciarle? Di un elogio all'astuzia e all'industriosità umane, che possono innalzare alla ricchezza anche cho è nato povero, ma volenteroso? Non saprei. Forse tutto o il contrario di tutto. Ai (lettori) postero l'ardua sentenza...
July 1, 2010
Women! You need to read this book. Armchair Historians! You need to read this book. Forensic Sociologists! You need to read this book.
Moll Flanders is, I think, a rare look at the treatment and disposition of lower class women in Britain in the early 1700s--what they thought, how they comported, and their daily interactions, no matter how insignificant. What makes it a rare exposition? Fiction ofttimes captures the mood and milieu of a people and their condition far more accurately--and with much more meaning--than sterile government reporting and historian interpretations thereof. And this book is a snapshot of the then-current state of low income conditions instead of a retroactive screed or a future prediction.
Daniel Defoe is regarded (by those crazy Wikipedians) as one of the most prolific of all British writers, and he is certainly one of the best at cataloging daily life. His fiction portrayed Everyman (or Everywoman in this case). It's a welcome relief to fiction of the Royal Court--its seneschals, courtiers, gallery, entourage, baggage, its rarefied air--that was so common among his literary peers. Defoe's main character, Moll, is a woman with little money and few prospects. Throughout the book we witness the vagaries of her life in astonishingly candid details. She willfully, gladly and repeatedly partakes in whoring, infidelity, incest, child abandonment, rampant thievery, collusion, obstruction, misrepresentation. Despite what would normally be intriguing yet deplorable behavior, Defoe manages to make Moll, if not a likable character, at least one under which the pressures of her demographic makes her a believable, credible, and forgivable protagonist.
I understand Moll's behavior to be a faithful representation of her class. Unschooled, abused, almost no legal rights, victimized by any able man, no great hopes to improve her condition, destitute, routinely sick, routinely pregnant--this is the daily grind for women in 1722 Britain. Moll Flanders is a good, though unintentional, primary source that could easily be used as a historiography of the era.
I recommend women read this book, not for my star rating, but because a man has written what I believe is a true, unabashed representation of a woman's condition in the 1700s. I'd like to know what women think of this book. I believe the abuse, sexual mores, and survival tactics of women in a brutish man's world at the lowest income levels is an unexpected reveal, and though the story drags at first, you may find yourself rooting for Moll. And despite her licentiousness, she ultimately finds modest wealth and success. She outwits the legal system, prevails to find a man of some substance, and escapes her demographic. Interestingly, she makes no excuse for how she lived; there's reflection, but no real penitence.
What do women today think of Moll? Is she diamond or quartz? Is this image of woman ready for high school English--a discussion for sophomores? Now, Robinson Crusoe is close to my heart as one of my rare 5 star ratings, and the only book I've read both as a child and an adult, with equal curiosity and gusto, producing equal coolness. But I'm a man, and that was a man-story (and a boy's story too). So, if this story is about a women, does it work in the same regard as RC does for men?
The writing, by common translation, has all the mile markers of early 18th century prose. The pervasive capitalization of random nouns, the apostrophe-heavy argot, no break for chapters, and the fastidiousness of complete thoughts for every sentence. All the hallmarks of what was then 'proper writing.' In the handwritten manuscript, I picture the letter 's' written like so many 'f's. 3.5 stars.
Moll Flanders is, I think, a rare look at the treatment and disposition of lower class women in Britain in the early 1700s--what they thought, how they comported, and their daily interactions, no matter how insignificant. What makes it a rare exposition? Fiction ofttimes captures the mood and milieu of a people and their condition far more accurately--and with much more meaning--than sterile government reporting and historian interpretations thereof. And this book is a snapshot of the then-current state of low income conditions instead of a retroactive screed or a future prediction.
Daniel Defoe is regarded (by those crazy Wikipedians) as one of the most prolific of all British writers, and he is certainly one of the best at cataloging daily life. His fiction portrayed Everyman (or Everywoman in this case). It's a welcome relief to fiction of the Royal Court--its seneschals, courtiers, gallery, entourage, baggage, its rarefied air--that was so common among his literary peers. Defoe's main character, Moll, is a woman with little money and few prospects. Throughout the book we witness the vagaries of her life in astonishingly candid details. She willfully, gladly and repeatedly partakes in whoring, infidelity, incest, child abandonment, rampant thievery, collusion, obstruction, misrepresentation. Despite what would normally be intriguing yet deplorable behavior, Defoe manages to make Moll, if not a likable character, at least one under which the pressures of her demographic makes her a believable, credible, and forgivable protagonist.
I understand Moll's behavior to be a faithful representation of her class. Unschooled, abused, almost no legal rights, victimized by any able man, no great hopes to improve her condition, destitute, routinely sick, routinely pregnant--this is the daily grind for women in 1722 Britain. Moll Flanders is a good, though unintentional, primary source that could easily be used as a historiography of the era.
I recommend women read this book, not for my star rating, but because a man has written what I believe is a true, unabashed representation of a woman's condition in the 1700s. I'd like to know what women think of this book. I believe the abuse, sexual mores, and survival tactics of women in a brutish man's world at the lowest income levels is an unexpected reveal, and though the story drags at first, you may find yourself rooting for Moll. And despite her licentiousness, she ultimately finds modest wealth and success. She outwits the legal system, prevails to find a man of some substance, and escapes her demographic. Interestingly, she makes no excuse for how she lived; there's reflection, but no real penitence.
What do women today think of Moll? Is she diamond or quartz? Is this image of woman ready for high school English--a discussion for sophomores? Now, Robinson Crusoe is close to my heart as one of my rare 5 star ratings, and the only book I've read both as a child and an adult, with equal curiosity and gusto, producing equal coolness. But I'm a man, and that was a man-story (and a boy's story too). So, if this story is about a women, does it work in the same regard as RC does for men?
The writing, by common translation, has all the mile markers of early 18th century prose. The pervasive capitalization of random nouns, the apostrophe-heavy argot, no break for chapters, and the fastidiousness of complete thoughts for every sentence. All the hallmarks of what was then 'proper writing.' In the handwritten manuscript, I picture the letter 's' written like so many 'f's. 3.5 stars.
December 18, 2022
There are a couple of odd things about this book I want to note. Written as a memoir, it was published anonymously in 1722 with no real names given throughout, sort of an early version of the “protect the innocent” card. Somewhat scandalous at the time and many years afterwards, it would frequently be sold tied up in string, a sure sign that titillating content was inside. Sometimes it was banned. For many years it was republished, again and again still anonymously. Then in 1776, a somewhat disreputable publisher came out with an edition he attributed to Daniel DeFoe (of Robinson Crusoe fame). Dead more than 50 years, his descendants gone as well, no one seemed able to prove or disprove DeFoe penned it. Slowly and steadily, it transitioned from a mildly salacious memoir by a woman to a work of fiction by a man, and worked its way into the “great, white male canon.” Now it’s no longer porn, but a great English novel. Go figure.
As memoir or fiction, even historical fiction, it’s entertaining. Moll (not her real name) is making her way through life as best she can after having been born in prison around 1620 to a felon mother and immediately taken by the Crown and fostered off. Dishonorably used by the elder son in her foster family as a teenager, after him she moved from man to man, 10 or 12 in all, over 50 years. (Oh, the scandal!) She falls into thievery and does well for herself and her pawnbroker/fence landlady and close friend. Her crimes finally catch up to her and she lands in Newgate Prison, back where she was born. I won’t give away the ending, but lots of people find Jesus in prison, and transport to the colonies was a good option for starting anew.
Another thing to note about the book is there are no chapters or breaks in the text. This was very strange, and you have to figure out when a section ends to take a break.
As memoir or fiction, even historical fiction, it’s entertaining. Moll (not her real name) is making her way through life as best she can after having been born in prison around 1620 to a felon mother and immediately taken by the Crown and fostered off. Dishonorably used by the elder son in her foster family as a teenager, after him she moved from man to man, 10 or 12 in all, over 50 years. (Oh, the scandal!) She falls into thievery and does well for herself and her pawnbroker/fence landlady and close friend. Her crimes finally catch up to her and she lands in Newgate Prison, back where she was born. I won’t give away the ending, but lots of people find Jesus in prison, and transport to the colonies was a good option for starting anew.
Another thing to note about the book is there are no chapters or breaks in the text. This was very strange, and you have to figure out when a section ends to take a break.
February 18, 2019
Hmmm, I gave this only 4 stars just a couple months ago, when I read it on my Kindle. Either I changed my mind, and it's really a 5-star, or perhaps the 'x' factor is the narration by Virginia Leishman.
She's very good! I enjoyed very much my 're-read' via listening to this audiobook CD.
There was also a male narrator at the end, but I don't see his name on the packaging for the CD book. Interestingly, they included the Author's Preface at the end. The male narrator read that, and also the summary Defoe gives, at the very end of the book. The rest was narrated by Ms. Leishman.
I had also checked out some physical books from the library to 'read along' with the Audio, but I didn't read along. I did read the extras in each of the three volumes after. They were good. I'll put in a separate review for those later, probably.
(Edit - they were:
- a Heritage Press hardback edition (favorite),
- a Signet Classics paperback edition,
- and a Penguin Classics paperback edition.)
Edit: Included on the cover is a 'blurb excerpt' by Virgina Woolf:
... among the few English novels which we can call indisputably great..
Hmmmmmm, she may be right. It kinda is indisputably great. Such a fascinating character, particularly for the time, that Defoe created. Defoe is a very interesting person, himself.
She's very good! I enjoyed very much my 're-read' via listening to this audiobook CD.
There was also a male narrator at the end, but I don't see his name on the packaging for the CD book. Interestingly, they included the Author's Preface at the end. The male narrator read that, and also the summary Defoe gives, at the very end of the book. The rest was narrated by Ms. Leishman.
I had also checked out some physical books from the library to 'read along' with the Audio, but I didn't read along. I did read the extras in each of the three volumes after. They were good. I'll put in a separate review for those later, probably.
(Edit - they were:
- a Heritage Press hardback edition (favorite),
- a Signet Classics paperback edition,
- and a Penguin Classics paperback edition.)
Edit: Included on the cover is a 'blurb excerpt' by Virgina Woolf:
... among the few English novels which we can call indisputably great..
Hmmmmmm, she may be right. It kinda is indisputably great. Such a fascinating character, particularly for the time, that Defoe created. Defoe is a very interesting person, himself.
October 27, 2015
Words cannot express how happy I am I'm finally able to throw this book aside to never pick it up again. Nothing of this novel worked for me, starting with the odd writing style. It was painful and more often than not I had to put it down because it was giving me headaches. The narrator, Moll, didn't work to help the story either. Moll Flanders was a torture and I don't care why it is still studied today. My feelings won't change.
October 31, 2021
Mi sono annoiata per tutta la lettura. Moll Flanders ne ha passate nella sua vita più di Carlo in Francia: adultera, prostituta, ladra, carcerata, deportata…
eppure una noia leggere il resoconto delle sue disavventure con un tono lamentoso di pentimento (finto) per il male fatto e per la vita peccaminosa.
Defoe aveva uno scopo nello scrivere questo romanzo, il primo romanzo moderno dicono, ma io non l’ho capito.
eppure una noia leggere il resoconto delle sue disavventure con un tono lamentoso di pentimento (finto) per il male fatto e per la vita peccaminosa.
Defoe aveva uno scopo nello scrivere questo romanzo, il primo romanzo moderno dicono, ma io non l’ho capito.
November 7, 2012
I finally finished reading Moll Flanders, and I loved it.
I have heard such negative reviews about this book. I have heard it said that the heroine is not likeable. She is painted as a whore and a thief. I came away with an entirely different view.
Her character hooked me from the start. A beautiful and skillful woman, she is intelligent but unworldly. She meets with great success in the beginning of the book due to her own personal accomplishments, aspirations, and personality. She takes what little she has and uses it as best she can. She keeps running into bad luck which she works hard to overcome. I just adored her.
I love everything about the book. This isn't pulp fiction. I was recently inspired listening to a cambridge professor on the radio commenting on the idea of reading for fun. He criticised the idea that we read pulp fiction for fun, and suggested that we should read good novels for fun, he suggested Anna Karenina etc. The idea struck home with me, these are well written and highly enjoyable pieces of literature, why are they often considered too hard. I read Anne Karenina recently and found it fabulous, it blew me away.
I have heard such negative reviews about this book. I have heard it said that the heroine is not likeable. She is painted as a whore and a thief. I came away with an entirely different view.
Her character hooked me from the start. A beautiful and skillful woman, she is intelligent but unworldly. She meets with great success in the beginning of the book due to her own personal accomplishments, aspirations, and personality. She takes what little she has and uses it as best she can. She keeps running into bad luck which she works hard to overcome. I just adored her.
I love everything about the book. This isn't pulp fiction. I was recently inspired listening to a cambridge professor on the radio commenting on the idea of reading for fun. He criticised the idea that we read pulp fiction for fun, and suggested that we should read good novels for fun, he suggested Anna Karenina etc. The idea struck home with me, these are well written and highly enjoyable pieces of literature, why are they often considered too hard. I read Anne Karenina recently and found it fabulous, it blew me away.
July 5, 2007
This, of course, was called an actual memoir when it was published. Today's novelists should take note: The first novels definitely were meant to deceive the public into thinking they were true stories.
The Norton Critical Edition I read in college was one soild paragraph. This means Defoe didn't get an effect out of the LOOK of his prose, unless an effect of incredible suffocation was intentional. The fact that it was one paragraph drove me insane, as it did my elder brother, who, upon hearing I had read it, said, "Oh, my God. It was one paragraph!"
It is a great story about a woman who uses her body to free herself. It's frightening, funny and tragic. The character of Moll Flanders clearly influenced James Joyce in his characterization of Molly Bloom. (No need to ignore the fact that both characters share the first four letters of their names.) MOLL FLANDERS is told in the first person, as is Molly Bloom's soliloquy in ULYSSES.
Defoe gave us ROBINSON CRUSOE (which was marketed as an actual account) and A JOURNAL OF THE PLAGUE YEAR, which, although it was a work of fiction, is still used by historians.
Moll Flanders is not a very likeable woman, but she is a survivor and her escapades are well worth taking in. Take her home.
The Norton Critical Edition I read in college was one soild paragraph. This means Defoe didn't get an effect out of the LOOK of his prose, unless an effect of incredible suffocation was intentional. The fact that it was one paragraph drove me insane, as it did my elder brother, who, upon hearing I had read it, said, "Oh, my God. It was one paragraph!"
It is a great story about a woman who uses her body to free herself. It's frightening, funny and tragic. The character of Moll Flanders clearly influenced James Joyce in his characterization of Molly Bloom. (No need to ignore the fact that both characters share the first four letters of their names.) MOLL FLANDERS is told in the first person, as is Molly Bloom's soliloquy in ULYSSES.
Defoe gave us ROBINSON CRUSOE (which was marketed as an actual account) and A JOURNAL OF THE PLAGUE YEAR, which, although it was a work of fiction, is still used by historians.
Moll Flanders is not a very likeable woman, but she is a survivor and her escapades are well worth taking in. Take her home.
July 24, 2022
I read this in college. The one pithy line I remember from it is Moll's prayer, "Lord give me not poverty, lest I steal".
January 9, 2025
I've had this classic on my bookshelf forever and finally got around to reading it. For some reason I always had the idea that it was an exciting story about a woman who was a criminal mastermind - maybe she dressed up as a man and led a merry gang that robbed stagecoaches or something. I sure wish I had read that book, because this one was SO boring.
Petty theft is just not that interesting. How fun is it to read about a woman stealing a bolt of cloth, a piece of lace, or whatever from a shop; or pinching someone’s watch? Not much, really. I guess it is possible that 300 years ago, people found this to be fascinating, because the scenario is described with little variation over and over and over again.
A few other things happened to Moll. She was involved with many different men, and frequently married them without worrying about divorcing the previous husband. There was that whole thing about accidentally marrying her brother and having kids with him. But even that was not as interesting as it sounds.
I resent every minute that I wasted on this book. I really wonder why it is considered a classic and I recommend it to no one.
Petty theft is just not that interesting. How fun is it to read about a woman stealing a bolt of cloth, a piece of lace, or whatever from a shop; or pinching someone’s watch? Not much, really. I guess it is possible that 300 years ago, people found this to be fascinating, because the scenario is described with little variation over and over and over again.
A few other things happened to Moll. She was involved with many different men, and frequently married them without worrying about divorcing the previous husband. There was that whole thing about accidentally marrying her brother and having kids with him. But even that was not as interesting as it sounds.
I resent every minute that I wasted on this book. I really wonder why it is considered a classic and I recommend it to no one.
May 22, 2026
Moll Flanders (not her real name) wants you to believe she regrets every shilling she ever stole. But the reader will shortly realize that her "confession" is being made for appearance's sake. Moll accumulates husbands, abandons children with barely a thought, and recounts her best pickpocketing scores with relish. She understands that a woman without money in late seventeenth-century England is a woman without a self, and she sets about acquiring both with a methodical shrewdness. She exhibits the patience of someone working a long con. The moralizing passages feel pasted on, which I suspect they were.
Defoe doesn't seem to have decided whether he was writing a cautionary tale or a how-to guide, and the friction between the two is what gives the book its strange power. Moll's repentance does not feel authentic, and I don't think it's supposed to. Defoe was a Dissenter who knew exactly what real spiritual rebirth looked like, and what he gives us is the counterfeit version, possibly on purpose. For a book published in 1722, it surprised me how modern the book feels (quaint prose aside), and it is a propulsive read. It’s arguably an early feminist novel, which I quite enjoyed.
Defoe doesn't seem to have decided whether he was writing a cautionary tale or a how-to guide, and the friction between the two is what gives the book its strange power. Moll's repentance does not feel authentic, and I don't think it's supposed to. Defoe was a Dissenter who knew exactly what real spiritual rebirth looked like, and what he gives us is the counterfeit version, possibly on purpose. For a book published in 1722, it surprised me how modern the book feels (quaint prose aside), and it is a propulsive read. It’s arguably an early feminist novel, which I quite enjoyed.
September 12, 2007
Ever wondered what the significance of Ned Flander's wife's name on the Simpons?
Moll Flanders is about a woman that not only fell on hard times, but is a strong, self asserted woman that uses any possible wiles to survive in a time when women were still nothing more than trinkets. She goes from reputable, to the London street slum, to accidentally marrying her brother, to living a long life with one that she loves.
Far beyond its time, Moll Flanders is a classic. Hard to read at times, as is most of the books that came from the 1700s-1800s, just meerly because of the style of writing can get long in the tooth. This isn't a book for someone to pick up that isn't willing to read.
Moll Flanders is about a woman that not only fell on hard times, but is a strong, self asserted woman that uses any possible wiles to survive in a time when women were still nothing more than trinkets. She goes from reputable, to the London street slum, to accidentally marrying her brother, to living a long life with one that she loves.
Far beyond its time, Moll Flanders is a classic. Hard to read at times, as is most of the books that came from the 1700s-1800s, just meerly because of the style of writing can get long in the tooth. This isn't a book for someone to pick up that isn't willing to read.
February 28, 2022
Daniel Defoe’s 18th century novel dealing with the ups and downs in the life of Moll Flanders, both lady and prostitute. I have been meaning to read this since forever, feeling as I did that while it might be an important literary piece, it was going to be a slow and painful read. In the end, I was surprised how modern it felt, how witty, and how perceptive. Surprisingly good! I may have to procure a copy of Robinson Crusoe next.
February 14, 2021
Non tanto il racconto in sé che un po’ ripete le peripezie di questa donna e, a tratti è un po’ noioso, ma il suo significato complessivo, questo è quello che ho apprezzato di “Moll Flanders”.
Questa figura femminile così anacronistica che quasi si fatica a ricollocarla tra le pagine del secolo XVIII°.
Ma partiamo dall’inizio.
Pubblicato nel 1722 con un titolo chilometrico () in un’epoca in cui non esisteva nessun riguardo per il lettore e non si pensava minimamente di rovinare la lettura, fu scritto mentre Daniel Defoe si trovava nel carcere di Newgate con un’accusa di diffamazione.
Ed è proprio il carcere ad essere il primo protagonista dato che Moll Flanders nasce a Newgate.
Figlia di una detenuta, la cui condanna a morte è rimandata prima perché gravida di lei poi, una volta nata, nuovamente incinta (!!) e sarà quindi deportata in America (e da qui si evince “la stoffa “dei pionieri che hanno dato inizio alle comunità statunitensi) lasciando la piccola Moll al suo destino.
Il romanzo è una continua rinascita di Moll che poi non è neppure il suo vero nome – ce lo dice subito- ma quello con cui è conosciuta nei numerosi atti giudiziari e anche se, poi, nella prima parte, la chiamano Beth ma rimarrà per tutti Moll Flanders.
A proposito di nomi: a parte il suo, il romanzo non ne ha nessuno!
Cinque mariti, tre amanti e nessun nome. Le persone sono indicate in modo vago (per parentela, la professione o la il ceto).
Mi sono chiesta (ma non ho ancora trovato risposta) se Defoe l’avesse fatto per dare più identità al suo personaggio che, effettivamente, ha un carattere peculiare.
A circa sei anni si trova affidata ad una buona donna e quando, all’età di otto anni, si prospetta il progetto di mandarla a servizio, Moll scoppia in lacrime: tutto, ma la serva no!
Moll vuole essere una signora e con questa idea intende lavorare per essere indipendente.
Questo è il suo obiettivo che con una scaltrezza che accresce con l’età rimane un punto fermo di questa vita travagliata.
Penso a questa bambina nata dietro alle sbarre che ancora ingenua è ingannata da un uomo e si rialza.
Da oggetto manipolabile si trasforma in soggetto che usa ogni mezzo per raggiungere il suo scopo in una società dove avere denaro equivale ad avere potere.
“...se una giovane possiede bellezza, nascita, educazione, intelligenza, gusto, garbo, modestia, sia pure nella massima misura, ma non ha denaro, allora non è nessuno, è come se le mancasse tutto, perché soltanto il denaro è una buona raccomandazione per le donne; il gioco degli uomini è il pigliatutto”
Una vita turbolenta e una redenzione all’orizzonte, questa la storia di Moll Flanders.
Sono piacevolmente sorpresa.
” l’itinerario della mia vita per quarant’anni era stato uno spaventevole miscuglio di delinquenza, puttaneria, adulterio, incesto, menzogna, furto; e, in poche parole, meno l’assassinio e il tradimento, tutto era stato mestiere mio”
Questa figura femminile così anacronistica che quasi si fatica a ricollocarla tra le pagine del secolo XVIII°.
Ma partiamo dall’inizio.
Pubblicato nel 1722 con un titolo chilometrico () in un’epoca in cui non esisteva nessun riguardo per il lettore e non si pensava minimamente di rovinare la lettura, fu scritto mentre Daniel Defoe si trovava nel carcere di Newgate con un’accusa di diffamazione.
Ed è proprio il carcere ad essere il primo protagonista dato che Moll Flanders nasce a Newgate.
Figlia di una detenuta, la cui condanna a morte è rimandata prima perché gravida di lei poi, una volta nata, nuovamente incinta (!!) e sarà quindi deportata in America (e da qui si evince “la stoffa “dei pionieri che hanno dato inizio alle comunità statunitensi) lasciando la piccola Moll al suo destino.
Il romanzo è una continua rinascita di Moll che poi non è neppure il suo vero nome – ce lo dice subito- ma quello con cui è conosciuta nei numerosi atti giudiziari e anche se, poi, nella prima parte, la chiamano Beth ma rimarrà per tutti Moll Flanders.
A proposito di nomi: a parte il suo, il romanzo non ne ha nessuno!
Cinque mariti, tre amanti e nessun nome. Le persone sono indicate in modo vago (per parentela, la professione o la il ceto).
Mi sono chiesta (ma non ho ancora trovato risposta) se Defoe l’avesse fatto per dare più identità al suo personaggio che, effettivamente, ha un carattere peculiare.
A circa sei anni si trova affidata ad una buona donna e quando, all’età di otto anni, si prospetta il progetto di mandarla a servizio, Moll scoppia in lacrime: tutto, ma la serva no!
Moll vuole essere una signora e con questa idea intende lavorare per essere indipendente.
Questo è il suo obiettivo che con una scaltrezza che accresce con l’età rimane un punto fermo di questa vita travagliata.
Penso a questa bambina nata dietro alle sbarre che ancora ingenua è ingannata da un uomo e si rialza.
Da oggetto manipolabile si trasforma in soggetto che usa ogni mezzo per raggiungere il suo scopo in una società dove avere denaro equivale ad avere potere.
“...se una giovane possiede bellezza, nascita, educazione, intelligenza, gusto, garbo, modestia, sia pure nella massima misura, ma non ha denaro, allora non è nessuno, è come se le mancasse tutto, perché soltanto il denaro è una buona raccomandazione per le donne; il gioco degli uomini è il pigliatutto”
Una vita turbolenta e una redenzione all’orizzonte, questa la storia di Moll Flanders.
Sono piacevolmente sorpresa.
” l’itinerario della mia vita per quarant’anni era stato uno spaventevole miscuglio di delinquenza, puttaneria, adulterio, incesto, menzogna, furto; e, in poche parole, meno l’assassinio e il tradimento, tutto era stato mestiere mio”
Displaying 1 - 29 of 2,445 reviews