Paris Peasant - A novel that is not a novel? How novel!

Louis Aragon's Paris Peasant was certainly an easier read for me than Proust's Swann's Way was. I imagine it is to do with the translation, though of course the writing style of the original author. In fact, I found myself thinking about translation a lot while reading this book. There were parts that had very interesting metaphors and jokes that I would love to see in the original language. I especially noticed this in the F.M.R. section where even the translator made a note that the original pun worked so much better. I suppose this is one of the weaknesses of translation; you can never conserve all the layers of meaning within a word or a phrase because you always have to choose one. If you can find a way to make it work with more than one meaning then you're lucky.

Before starting the book, I knew that Aragon was part of the surrealist, avant-garde movement and you can tell. Paris Peasant has been described as a "novel-that-[is]-not-a-novel" and I agree with that description because there isn't really a story that I could pick up on. Truthfully, it felt more like Aragon's personal musings than a novel, but it was interesting nonetheless. 

That said, some of his musings aren't particularly savoury, especially those about women. The way he describes women struck me as being a bit... weird... to say the least. Numerous paragraphs on women's hair, their bodies, how much he likes blondes... let's just say that he wouldn't pass the 2022 vibe check. But we kind of knew that already, and I think he did too. After all, he did say that it "matters very little to me whether or not I have reason on my side. I do not seek to be right. I seek the concrete." 

So I don't think he'd be particularly bothered about our opinions. Or anyone's opinions. Because he said some things about religion that would be controversial today, let alone the 1920s. As a communist, you can see the threads of Karl Marx's ideas in his writing, especially in the parts about religion. He comments that religion is a sign of "mental laziness" and notices that religion is becoming replaced with a sense of human morality. Certainly, we can see that religiosity has declined over the past century or so, so his prediction wasn't completely inaccurate.

In fact, some of his predictions were funnily accurate. One of the first quotes that really caught my attention was about how young people will eschew work, marriage, and children (or something along those lines, unfortunately I can't find the exact quote anymore, try as I might). I thought it was a very interesting observation, especially since nowadays the "Child-free by choice" and "I don't dream of labour" movements are increasing in popularity, especially among young adults.

In all, I'm not entirely sure that I managed to glean every message from the book and I think I'd have to read it a second time to better understand it, but what I did pick up was definitely thought-provoking. The question I'd like to present is; What makes a novel a novel, if this is a "novel-that-is-not-a-novel"?