Picture of author.
27+ Works 2,248 Members 118 Reviews 3 Favorited

About the Author

Pierre Bayard is a psychoanalyst and professor of French literature in Paris

Includes the names: Baiiar P., Pierre Bayard

Image credit: Allen and Unwin Media Centre

Works by Pierre Bayard

Who Killed Roger Ackroyd? (1998) 225 copies
Le plagiat par anticipation (2009) 23 copies
Il existe d'autres mondes (2014) 11 copies
Oedipe n'est pas coupable (2021) 10 copies
Demain est écrit (2005) 9 copies

Associated Works

Lectures de Romain Gary (2011) — Contributor — 7 copies

Tagged

Common Knowledge

Birthdate
1954
Gender
male
Nationality
France
Occupations
professor of French literature
author
psychoanalyst
Organizations
University of Paris VIII
Short biography
Professor Bayard has written several books that present revisionist readings of famous fictional mysteries.

Members

Reviews

Gosh, this book is an absurd flight-of-fancy, irritatingly smug, and sits at the opposite end of the literary theory spectrum to myself. It is also, incidentally, well-written and coherent within its own framework.

Bayard adopts the viewpoint of the 19th century school of literary theory (somewhat back in vogue) that characters can have a life beyond the page. He argues forcefully for the fact that we all play some role in bringing characters to life, interpreting the gaps and lacunae in the author's descriptions and bringing our own biases with us. He takes this theory further, arguing that it is dull to accept what the author tells us, and we must instead fashion our own work out of that on the page. An intriguing theory that doesn't sit well with my New-Criticism-cum-New-Historicism viewpoints, but I'm willing to let other opinions stand.

Without spoiling anything, Bayard's ultimate conclusion about what really happened in [b:The Hound of the Baskervilles|8921|The Hound of the Baskervilles (Sherlock Holmes, #5)|Arthur Conan Doyle|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1355929358l/8921._SY75_.jpg|3311984] is quite clever, really. He makes a convincing case that Holmes' faulty reasoning and preconceived notions led to an incorrect conclusion, and he argues forcefully that readers' love of Holmes since his conception goes beyond that of fans and a character. That, in a sense, Conan Doyle created a character who outgrew him, who outgrew the world of fiction.

Undeniably this work (in translation) would have been better as a long essay than an entire volume. The first 53 pages are a retelling of Conan Doyle's novel, which seems excessive. The section on Conan Doyle's relationship with his character is entirely filler, if interesting historically. Nevertheless, this is the book that we have, and thus it's the book I'm reviewing.

Much of your feeling on this book will depend on how you take Bayard's own attitude. Is he being wryly self-aware or does he truly believe his own argument? Evidently a lot of Goodreads reviewers are frustrated by the theorist arguing that characters experience lives we are not a part of. I suspect Bayard knows exactly what he's doing, and is having fun with his own conceit. He knows, as well as we do, that this is not possible, and that if Conan Doyle had intended for Holmes to get the case wrong, he would have made that clear. Thus, we must approach the whole work within Bayard's own framework or there is no point reading it at all.

From this point of view, the book is rather good. On reflection, even the seemingly excessive chapters (such as a deep analysis of the eponymous hound's mindset) are relevant to the central argument. This is a book that can inspire great literary debates - as indeed it has in my friendship circle - and for that we should be grateful. (Although the fact that Bayard has written three such books as this - another on Hamlet and one on Agatha Christie's Roger Ackroyd - may annoy literary elitists like myself, who would rather theorists devote themselves to exploring the texts themselves rather than making a career out of the spaces in between!)

What am I saying? If the work is one long con, it's a damn good one. If it's completely serious, it's trash. If it's somewhere in between, I suspect it's a cunning little argument that helped earn a writer some royalties, and it needn't be any more than that.
… (more)
 
Flagged
therebelprince | 15 other reviews | Oct 24, 2023 |
Okay, this is actually kinda great. Bayard's other book on this subject - [b:Sherlock Holmes Was Wrong: Reopening the Case of The Hound of the Baskervilles|3476806|Sherlock Holmes Was Wrong Reopening the Case of The Hound of the Baskervilles|Pierre Bayard|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1312050651l/3476806._SY75_.jpg|3518135] - rubbed me the wrong way because I simply don't believe that characters have lives outside the page, or that any useful literary theory can come from that. Here, he's much more analytical. From Oedipus to Agatha Christie, Bayard is clearly using these texts as discussion points for his broader thoughts on textual authority, and his mastery of the subject shines through.

The first section is a detailed recap of the plot of Christie's famous The Murder of Roger Ackroyd. The second is an examination of Christie's oeuvre from the point of view of both rational investigation and literary criticism. The third section is a broader discussion of truth and authorial voice. The final section returns to Ackroyd to put forward arguments why Hercule Poirot may have got it wrong - and finally an allegation against a different character entirely.

This is not heady academic stuff. Bayard is a populist critic at best, although he is pretty darn good at translating dense subjects for a general audience. It's worth noting that the book contains spoilers for roughly every single Christie novel without warning, so you'd better be either indifferent or well-read in the subject.

This book will interest people with a broader enthusiasm for literary theory but especially crime fiction fans. While his solution for the Ackroyd murder was rather obvious (it was my assumption from page one), his broader points about how we interpret texts, and the purposes of crime fiction, are salient. Occasionally borderline absurd, but salient!
… (more)
1 vote
Flagged
therebelprince | 10 other reviews | Oct 24, 2023 |
This book is very well written (and translated), is witty, elegant and honest especially if we consider that the one who's admitting he doesn't completely read all books is a literature professor. Nonetheless, the title was promising probably more than a collection of examples taken from literature on from authors' biographies. The best thing about the book is definitely its peculiar list of abbreviations: https://p.twimg.com/AwoK-gcCQAA3ohU.png:large… (more)
 
Flagged
d.v. | 84 other reviews | May 16, 2023 |
This was fun, and I liked Bayard's arguments. I'll never read mysteries the same way again!
 
Flagged
JudyGibson | 15 other reviews | Jan 26, 2023 |

Lists

Awards

You May Also Like

Associated Authors

Statistics

Works
27
Also by
1
Members
2,248
Popularity
#11,404
Rating
½ 3.5
Reviews
118
ISBNs
125
Languages
19
Favorited
3

Charts & Graphs