Ancient & Medieval Historical Fiction discussion
This topic is about
The Last of the Mohicans
Monthly Group Reads
>
MAY 2012: The Last of the Mohicans by James Fenimore Cooper
Terri wrote: "A wonderful passage I agree.I find his descriptions very beautiful at times. Luckily, I don't have any problems with that element of Cooper's writing. It is his dialogue, ugh, it really annoys me..."
I have to admit I haven't really found the dialouge to be particularly extra wordy
Interesting... I was surprised to learn that the theory has been around a while. We do tend to think we're the only ones to think of something.
I was interested to read what Cooper says of the 'Narraganset' (as you know, from the discussions, this was a breedof horse known as 'The Narragansett Pacer'. Cooper says As they were also sure of foot, the Narragansetts were greatly sought for by females who were obliged to travel over the roots and holes in the "new countries."
I found this interesting. There are two ways of achieving the gait we know as a 'trot' - trotting (where diagonal feet, front and rear, go forward at the same time), and pacing (where the front and back feet on each side go forward at the same time). Pacers are hard to mistake if you see one, espeially from the front or back. They're called 'sidewheelers' and they tend to swing from side to side.
The mounted services tend to ride trotters because while they are slower than pacers, they are more sure-footed. Pacers were used more by messengers since they are faster but less sure-footed. I'm surprised Cooper thought of them as mounts suitable for ladies.
I was interested to read what Cooper says of the 'Narraganset' (as you know, from the discussions, this was a breedof horse known as 'The Narragansett Pacer'. Cooper says As they were also sure of foot, the Narragansetts were greatly sought for by females who were obliged to travel over the roots and holes in the "new countries."
I found this interesting. There are two ways of achieving the gait we know as a 'trot' - trotting (where diagonal feet, front and rear, go forward at the same time), and pacing (where the front and back feet on each side go forward at the same time). Pacers are hard to mistake if you see one, espeially from the front or back. They're called 'sidewheelers' and they tend to swing from side to side.
The mounted services tend to ride trotters because while they are slower than pacers, they are more sure-footed. Pacers were used more by messengers since they are faster but less sure-footed. I'm surprised Cooper thought of them as mounts suitable for ladies.
Terri wrote: "How is everyone going with this? I am finding that I don't even want to finish it. That is pretty bad considering it is a group read. lol.
I am just finding his dialogue too wordy. In cases where..."
I agree; the dialogue is unrealistic. I'm sure that folks in colonial times didn't talk the way we do now, but I find it extremely unlikely that that they were as verbose as Mr Cooper would have us believe. And the bloody commas! It's like he threw a comma grenade at the book; little pieces of comma shrapnel are everywhere.
Other than that minor complaint, it's an engaging book; I'm not sorry to be reading it.
I'll read some more tonight and see how I go. Last night the dialogue had me rolling my eyes a lot and, exactly as you say, it was unrealistic.I want to get passed the section I am on now and see where it goes.
I made it passed halfway! :-) To page 210 of 390 to be precise. I have given up. What a disappointment. I had really looked forward to it and remembered liking it when I first read it as a teen.
In considering comments made about the verboseness of some of the dialogue in the book, and how at times it does not feel realistic, it makes me consider the way in which Shakespeare seemed to have some influence upon this work. It seems, at least thus far, that the vast majority of the chapters begin with a quote from Shakespeare. I have wondered just what the significance of Shakespeare was within this work and what Cooper is trying to convey to the reader by alluding so much to him.
I wondered myself, Silver, while I was reading these long verbal blasts whether Fenimore Cooper is expressing his love for Shakespeare through his dialogue especially.Maybe he wanted to write novels, but saw himself as a bit of a Shakespearean playwright. It felt that way plenty of times.
In my review I compared him to Alexandre Dumas. Here is an author well known for his wordiness, and yet his wordiness is all substance and without the 'waving a hanky and adjusting the powdered wig' style of dialogue that Fenimore Cooper exhibits.
I couldn't finish. The conversation was making me dizzy.
At least Shakespeare was fitting his speech into meter:
That you have wronged me doth appear in this:
You have condemned and noted Lucius Pella
For taking bribes of the Sardians
Wherein my letters, praying in his case
Were slighted off!
You wronged yourself to write in such a case!
Let me tell you, Cassius, you yourself
Are much condemn'd to have an itching palm -
To sell or mart your offices for gold
To undeservers!
I an Itching palm!
You know that you are Brutus who speaks thus
Or, by the gods, these words were else your last!
They fit the (iambic pentameter) meter, but that squabblebetween Brutus and Cassius is sharp and dramatic.
The bloated verbiage with which the estimable Mr. Fenimore Cooper - a gentleman and a scholar, it is admitted by myself - assailed our ears and eyes is like unto a bloated tick.
Bah! I was going to blab on a bit, but I think I won't. I couldn't stick it. The conversation at the beginning when Heyward tells Alice that Magua was her father's enemy but now is not, and her astonished alarm, is handled im nuch the same way I might handle someone who is trying to do the crossword puzzle.
I shall, however, always treasure the version of The Last of the Mohicans done by Masterpiece Theater in 1972. http://www.amazon.com/The-Last-Mohica...
Filmed in Scotland with blue-eyed indians speaking like Oxford dons, it nevertheless was pretty riveting.
At least Shakespeare was fitting his speech into meter:
That you have wronged me doth appear in this:
You have condemned and noted Lucius Pella
For taking bribes of the Sardians
Wherein my letters, praying in his case
Were slighted off!
You wronged yourself to write in such a case!
Let me tell you, Cassius, you yourself
Are much condemn'd to have an itching palm -
To sell or mart your offices for gold
To undeservers!
I an Itching palm!
You know that you are Brutus who speaks thus
Or, by the gods, these words were else your last!
They fit the (iambic pentameter) meter, but that squabblebetween Brutus and Cassius is sharp and dramatic.
The bloated verbiage with which the estimable Mr. Fenimore Cooper - a gentleman and a scholar, it is admitted by myself - assailed our ears and eyes is like unto a bloated tick.
Bah! I was going to blab on a bit, but I think I won't. I couldn't stick it. The conversation at the beginning when Heyward tells Alice that Magua was her father's enemy but now is not, and her astonished alarm, is handled im nuch the same way I might handle someone who is trying to do the crossword puzzle.
I shall, however, always treasure the version of The Last of the Mohicans done by Masterpiece Theater in 1972. http://www.amazon.com/The-Last-Mohica...
Filmed in Scotland with blue-eyed indians speaking like Oxford dons, it nevertheless was pretty riveting.
et tu Brute?Seems we are both weak. That's makes two of us that didn't finish and I think Ireney started it, but didn't make it as far as us and he quit too. :)
Bloated tick is probably the best description we could ever find to describe these sonorous orations his characters inflict upon us.
Bloated tick it is then!
Terri wrote: "In my review I compared him to Alexandre Dumas. Here is an author well known for his wordiness, and yet his wordiness is all substance and without the 'waving a hanky and adjusting the powdered wig' style of dialogue that Fenimore Cooper exhibits."Interesting note about Dumas, and mayhap's this is true for Cooper as well, is that Dumas was paid by the word and this was not an uncommon form of payment for many authors around this period of time. So often times writers that seem to be rather verbose, are intentionally embellishing, and adding a lot of extra filler to make their books as long as possible.
Exactly, you are very right, and yet someone such as Dumas does it well, albeit long winded, but well none the less. There are times where his characters go on and on and on. But it makes sense most of the time.I strongly believe that if a good movie hadn't been based on this book then it would have long been forgotten about.
I know I wouldn't have read it twice. Once as a teen and once now as an adult, if the movie hadn't piqued my interest.
Wordy books such as The Count of Monte Cristo will be popular forever. They seem relevant still. Smarter. Cleverer.
I felt like Fenimore Cooper, as a writer and a white man in a foreign wilderness, was trying too hard to be someone he was not.
Excited to read this. Haven't seen it since high school and that has been a number of years.
I'm pleased to read your comments - I didn't participate because I really don't like Fenimore Cooper. And it isn't the verbosity of the author - I love Dumas.
Rebecca wrote: "Excited to read this. Haven't seen it since high school and that has been a number of years."Good luck Rebecca! :-) We'll be here to talk to you as you go.
I was the same as you. It was highschool when i last read it.
My reread experience with it this time around wasn't positive, but this is one of those books, it would appear, that impresses on people differently.
While Diana and Ireney and I couldn't stick with it, Silver and Bobby and Jim have been enjoying the experience. So, I'll be keenly watching to see how you go, Rebecca. :-)
Simona wrote: "I'm pleased to read your comments - I didn't participate because I really don't like Fenimore Cooper. And it isn't the verbosity of the author - I love Dumas."I have to say, Fenimore Cooper has nothing on Dumas. :-) while there were aspects of The Count of Monte Cristo that annoyed me, sections where he went on too much, it was still superb crafted writing.
I love the character of Hawkeye. I found his constant repetition of the phrase "I am a man without a cross" to be interesting, at first I was uncertain as what was meant by this, but I believe it refers to the fact that he is a man without religion. As he attests in his argument with David that he sees God within nature, rather than in books or dogma. In some ways this seems like an almost like Pantheism which perhaps is closer to the beliefs of the Native Americans than Christianity. Also it is interesting the way in which he seems to be between two different worlds neither of which he completely belongs to. As he is frequently given to say "I am no Indian, but a man without a cross" as if to sort of reiterate or an acknowledgement of the fact that he does not truly belong with the Native Americans, he is not one of them, but at the same time, he does not seem to fit altogether in the "white" mans world either.
He is a lone wanderer with no roots, belonging to nowhere, but perhaps nature itself, no known family, no home to call his own.
I have also speculated on the intent of the phrase "man without a cross". At first I took it to mean he had no formalized religion, but it has been used so frequently in racial context I believe it to mean that he is of unmixed white blood, or not crossbred. Perhaps Cooper meant for it to be ambiguous.
Jim wrote: "I have also speculated on the intent of the phrase "man without a cross". At first I took it to mean he had no formalized religion, but it has been used so frequently in racial context I believe it..."He does frequently say things of the nature "Mind you I am no Indian, I am a man without a cross"
Though I do think the phrase can imply more than one meaning.
I took it to mean. Not 'heathen' and not of white men's religion. But a white man who has no religion. Basically what you guys are making of it too, I think.
I wonder just what the significance is of Hawkeye so often feeling the need to reiterate his position as a "man without a cross" at first I thought it was to distinguish himself from the Native American's and sort of declare his whitehood so to speak. Yet as the story progresses, it seems as if in most things he prefers the way of the Native American's over that of the white man and he adapts their own ways as his own. And in spite of his reassuring that he is a man without a cross he often tends to speak more as if he was one of the Natives rather than a white man. I found his discussion about his idea and that of the Natives regarding Heaven. So now I am not so sure that the remark is truly meant as some sort of form of racial pride and while he does not dislike his own race, at the same time he does not strike me as being ethnocentric. I wonder if in a way it is it remind himself that he is not truly one of the Natives? Or is it a way of reaffirming that he is a man without a true identity, without a place to call of his own, an acknowledgement that he is kept between two worlds.
I personally believe he means that he is an agnostic.
Terri wrote: "I personally believe he means that he is an agnostic."But I wonder what is the significance of the persistent repetition of this statement?
Sometimes I truly do feel that it is the authors attempt at reminding us that Hawkeye is a wild man. A man of the woods, living on the fringes of white society, not a white man, not a native. But an enigma.
Also, when this book was written, to say a man was of no cross, must have helped the author create a mysterious and daring character to read about. In those days...what a strange thing for a white man to not worship Christ or God. It must have added to his allure.
For this same reason, I think the author can't make his character completely turn his back on white man's religion by embracing Native religion. This may have ostracised the reader. Therefore, he was of no religion although he believed something was out there..
:) Only guessing of course.
(I wrote this before the other comments; I'm posting it anyhow)
I looked into the various interpretatios of this phrase. Someone from the State University of New York (refraining, here, from making a wisecrack comparing this university to my alma mater) says he was telling everyone he has no religion. Specifically not Christian.
There were a couple other suggetions, one of which was so convoluted, I may use it as a subject for lampoon in a future blog post.
My read:
He has no axe to grind. He is his own man, free to think however he wishes. This tends to hbe supported by his reaction to criticism. (in various lawsuits Cooper established the principle that reviewers must work within the bounds of truth when they deal with an author rather than the book.)
He uses this phrase when he's speaking of Native Americans versus European Americans, mixed blood (Cora Monro was descended from an African slave) and, finally, the burial of Cora and Uncas.
I looked into the various interpretatios of this phrase. Someone from the State University of New York (refraining, here, from making a wisecrack comparing this university to my alma mater) says he was telling everyone he has no religion. Specifically not Christian.
There were a couple other suggetions, one of which was so convoluted, I may use it as a subject for lampoon in a future blog post.
My read:
He has no axe to grind. He is his own man, free to think however he wishes. This tends to hbe supported by his reaction to criticism. (in various lawsuits Cooper established the principle that reviewers must work within the bounds of truth when they deal with an author rather than the book.)
He uses this phrase when he's speaking of Native Americans versus European Americans, mixed blood (Cora Monro was descended from an African slave) and, finally, the burial of Cora and Uncas.
Terri wrote: "For this same reason, I think the author can't make his character completely turn his back on white man's religion by embracing Native religion. This may have ostracised the reader. Therefore, he was of no religion although he believed something was out there....."
I wonder what Fenimore's reader would have thought of Duncan's comments that he believed that Native American's would go to heaven along with white Christians, particularly considering the Natives in Hawkeye's company were not Christian converts.
Diana wrote: "(I wrote this before the other comments; I'm posting it anyhow)I looked into the various interpretatios of this phrase. Someone from the State University of New York (refraining, here, from maki..."
Well that's all very interesting. Happy you posted it anyway, Diana.
I'm in! I read it a long time ago when I was younger ;)
Hey good luck, Vanessa! It has had mixed responses. For everyone of us who have already given up on it this month there are members still sticking in there with hawkeye and crew. :-)
lol! I know it's a bit wordy. I tried reading it again a few years back when I bought an old copy and couldn't get through it. I'll try again!
May the force be with you. :-) At least you'll have those that have gone before you to help you through, or console you if you give up...whichever outcome you end up with. Lol
When will you start?
I am intrigued by the character of David, as I wonder just what his significance to the story is. When he is first introduced he is described as being rather awkward looking, and he does feel like something of the odd man out, doesn't quite seem to fit in. As well it seems to me, at least thus far, that if he were to be removed from the story it really would not make much of a difference to the story. But Cooper must have created this character for a reason, there must be some purpose he is intended to serve.
I wonder if he is meant to act as a sort of contrast to Hawkeye, in both his religion as well as in his lack of skill and ability, at least in the areas of survival, warriroship, and woodsmenship.
I think tomorrow lol! I'm just finishing up another book tonight ;)
How's everyone going with the book? I see that of those A&M group members who started, we still have 4 people reading it. Deborah, Marty, Bobby and Jim.(If you click on the book on our group bookshelves, it shows which members are reading the group read still).
Terri wrote: "How's everyone going with the book? I see that of those A&M group members who started, we still have 4 people reading it. Deborah, Marty, Bobby and Jim.(If you click on the book on our group book..."
About 1/2 way and still struggling!! Don't know if I'll finish by the end of the month.
Not going to give up? :)
Silver wrote: "I am intrigued by the character of David, as I wonder just what his significance to the story is. When he is first introduced he is described as being rather awkward looking, and he does feel like ..."You're right. He really doesn't add a lot. I suspect he was meant to be comic relief, but humor has changed somewhat since Cooper put pen to paper. The character was taken out completely for the movie and didn't hurt the film at all.
Terri wrote: "How's everyone going with the book? I see that of those A&M group members who started, we still have 4 people reading it. Deborah, Marty, Bobby and Jim.(If you click on the book on our group book..."
I'll be done today, Terri.
Jim wrote: You're right. He really doesn't add a lot. I suspect he was meant to be comic relief, but humor has changed somewhat since Cooper put pen to paper. The character was taken out completely for the movie and didn't hurt the film at all. ..."
I thought about the possibility of comic relief with this character, Considering how much Cooper quotes Shakespeare the possibility of David as fool had crossed my mind.
I also wondered if his name had any particular significance, in thinking of David vs Goliath. Unlike the others, Hawkeye, and Duncan, and the Mohicans, he is no warrior. He is outmatched, and rendered as helpless as the women with little course to defend himself.
How many stars are you thinking, Jim?
Terri wrote: "How many stars are you thinking, Jim?"I'm thinking three, unless he does something magical in the last 20 pages.
lol. I think your chances of a magical ending may be slim.
Ok so I tried reading this again but just couldn't get into it. I think it was because I was too excited to read the books I got from the library ;P
No, I'd say it was because the book is hard to get into. Lol. :-)
I'm having trouble because it is hard to get into and the movie is in the back of my mind. The two are so different that it throws me. This is a case of how watching the movie first hurts reading the book.
I completely agree. I wonder.....what would I make of the book if I hadn't seen and liked the movie??? Still...no..I am certain I still wouldn't have liked it. I find it too sexist and too racist. And the dialogue wayyyyyy too waffling. In times of urgency, Hawkeye gives long, poetic sermons, instead of saying "let us hightail it out of here".
lol I agree. Talk, talk, talk. And the long sections of French. I don't read French. It seems too wordy and too descriptive. Maybe that's just me, but I like to only have what I need to have.
I hear ya! I like to only have what I need. I hate time wasting. Lol. When I feel like characters are wasting my time I lose tolerance. They need to stop talking and get on with it.
Terri wrote: "I hear ya! I like to only have what I need. I hate time wasting. Lol. When I feel like characters are wasting my time I lose tolerance. They need to stop talking and get on with it."Exactly!
Ancient & Medieval Historical Fiction
Books mentioned in this topic
The Count of Monte Cristo (other topics)The Count of Monte Cristo (other topics)
I find his descriptions very beautiful at times. Luckily, I don't have any problems with that element of Cooper's writing. It is his dialogue, ugh, it really annoys me at times.
I have a few passages to quote also. I am away from the book at the moment and will try later on today to grab the book and find the things I wanted to quote.