Scan barcode
sofiacanread's review against another edition
adventurous
funny
tense
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? It's complicated
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
3.0
grubstlodger's review against another edition
3.0
It could be said that The Dunciad is the third in the Scriblerus Trilogy; which also include the Memoirs of Martinus Scriblerus and Peri Bathous - but then, a lot could be said about The Dunciad.
For a start, how do you know when you’ve read it? There’s the original anonymous Dunciad, the Dunciad Variorum and the later four volume Dunciad in which the King of the Dunces is no longer Tibbald but Colley Cibber. I expect the confusion is part of the point. Pope was very calculating in what he released to the public and how. In this case, he released the first Dunciad so he could gather attacks and responses in which to include in the Dunciad Variorum.
Pope also uses the chance to kick the people he doesn’t like - and to just keep sticking that boot in. It’s vicious.
If anyone took a jackhammer to crack a nut, it was Alexander Pope.
The Dunciad is obviously unfair to it’s targets. Included for ridicule are people like Daniel Defoe and Eliza Haywood who developed the novel, people like Ned Ward who captured the voice of the age, even critics like Dennis and poor Tibbald (or Lewis Theobald to give him his real name) , who pioneered modern techniques of criticism and close reading. In many ways, Pope is on the wrong side of history. What he calls Dulness, we call modernity and what he calls Chaos, we call relativism, and a more nuanced way of analysing. Despite this, Pope manages argue from that wrong side with more savage brio and panache than many have ever been able to on the right side. What would he say of today…
See Dan Brown hide clues that shine bright as day
And EL James dissolve in Shades of Grey
Spawn of dark world where vampires glitter
Celebrity bards dive in the shitter.
For a start, how do you know when you’ve read it? There’s the original anonymous Dunciad, the Dunciad Variorum and the later four volume Dunciad in which the King of the Dunces is no longer Tibbald but Colley Cibber. I expect the confusion is part of the point. Pope was very calculating in what he released to the public and how. In this case, he released the first Dunciad so he could gather attacks and responses in which to include in the Dunciad Variorum.
Pope also uses the chance to kick the people he doesn’t like - and to just keep sticking that boot in. It’s vicious.
If anyone took a jackhammer to crack a nut, it was Alexander Pope.
The Dunciad is obviously unfair to it’s targets. Included for ridicule are people like Daniel Defoe and Eliza Haywood who developed the novel, people like Ned Ward who captured the voice of the age, even critics like Dennis and poor Tibbald (or Lewis Theobald to give him his real name) , who pioneered modern techniques of criticism and close reading. In many ways, Pope is on the wrong side of history. What he calls Dulness, we call modernity and what he calls Chaos, we call relativism, and a more nuanced way of analysing. Despite this, Pope manages argue from that wrong side with more savage brio and panache than many have ever been able to on the right side. What would he say of today…
See Dan Brown hide clues that shine bright as day
And EL James dissolve in Shades of Grey
Spawn of dark world where vampires glitter
Celebrity bards dive in the shitter.
tsundoku281's review against another edition
3.0
so imaginative and scholarly but damned hard to read without a contemporary knowledge of everyone he’s talking about 🤣
megmerante's review against another edition
1.0
Extraordinarily dense: First because of the way it is written, secondly because there are tons of footnotes to get through in order to understand the writing. And after all of that, Pope only comes off as a pretentious jerk who hates the world. It seems his purpose may have been to extort what he found bad in society so much so that the absurdity should have been comical, but the humor was lost on me.
lizpatanders's review against another edition
3.0
On the whole, I did enjoy reading this poem, although I found it very difficult to read. I've heard before that it's very hard to comprehend the first time around, and I would have to agree. Although I did find it humorous, I'm not sure that I pciked up on all of the jokes and satire, even with the footnotes. I think a better knowledge and understanding of British cultural history would have helped me.
I think I only really managed to read the surface of the poem, but anythign which I didn't pick up on was not because of Pope but because of my understanding of it.
I think I only really managed to read the surface of the poem, but anythign which I didn't pick up on was not because of Pope but because of my understanding of it.
alicejwhite17's review
challenging
funny
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? N/A
- Loveable characters? N/A
- Diverse cast of characters? N/A
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
3.5
More...