Realism was seen as an avant-garde challenge to the artificial artistic modes of expression that preceded it, for instance Romanticism and 18th century Classicism. It became prominent in French Literature in the late 19th century and Faubert was one of the artists art the forefront of the movement. Realist novels are based on the simple and mundane every day routines. Realist writers did not believe in writing about the extraordinary, instead they look to portray life in a truthful way, mainly by using an objective narrative point of view and by amassing accurate details. ‘Un Coeur Simple’ is a realistic piece of writing, that’s for sure, but many people argue that it has elements of the romantic in it. Although it is said that Flaubert took inspiration from characters in his own life, there are certain aspects of the novel that hints at it being somewhat romantic. In particular, the protagonists view on nature and her compassion have been interpreted as somewhat romantic.

Flaubert’s most prestigious book, Madame Bovary, caused quite a stir due to its moral content. ‘Un Cœur Simple’ did not cause quite as much controversy. But the debate surrounding Madame Bovary had a lot to do with Flaubert's realistic writing style; he did not believe in inspiration and muses—he believed in working hard and simply reporting exactly what he saw. He believed in inspection and accurate imitation. Hence the reason the life that was reproduced in ‘Madame Bovary’ shocked the people of the time so much, because of Flaubert’s realism, he wrote it exactly as he saw it. Madame Bovary has been described as the highest stage of French realist writing. The realist authors and the novels themselves were all condemned as immoral due to their content and Flaubert was even taken to court over the subject matter in ‘Madame Bovary’. Realism was highly contentious because compared with its predecessor movement, romanticism; it was almost a rebellion by the authors at the time. They authors in scrupulous observation and when events are relayed they are told exactly as they happened. Flaubert in particular was a strong believer that the novelist shouldn’t impose his own attitudes on the readers through his literature and that he should only tell the story. For instance, in ‘Un Cœur Simple’, the narrator tells Félicité's life story without observations or criticisms, and in turn the readers must draw their own conclusions.

The main reason that we can tell this novel is a realistic piece of work is because, as per usual, Faubert took inspiration from characters in real life and based people in the novel on these characters. René Dumesnil is quoted as saying that Félicité has certain qualities similar to a fille-mère called Léonie who served in Trouville and also from ‘mademoiselle Julie,’ a member of staff who worked for the Flaubert family for many years. Dumesnil also claims it’s a possibility that the two children Paul and Virginie were based on Flaubert himself as a child and his sister Caroline. Like Virginie in ‘Un Coeur Simple,’ Caroline died quite young.

It is clear just by looking at the protagonist in this book that it is a realist text. Throughout, Félicité is described and treated by other characters as simple, almost stupid. It would be rare to find the main protagonist to be anything other than perfect in another genre of writing, but Flaubert clearly makes his protagonist quite normal and with certain flaws, again to give the book the sense of realism that he desires. The level of description in certain points is another clear sign that this is a realist text. Especially when it comes to illness and death, we as the reader receive quite heavy details of all the ailments and symptoms, which any realist writer would include, for example, at Virginie’s deathbed, Madame Aubain says ‘poussait des hoquets d'agonie’. Also Faubert is particularly graphic with the description of Virginie when she is dead: ‘elle remarqua que la figure avait jauni, les lèvres bleuirent, le nez se pinçait, les yeux s'enfoncaient’. Faubert even goes far enough to describe the particular illness’ that the parrot has ‘Il devint malade, ne pouvait plus parler ni manger. C'était sous sa langue une épaisseur, comme en ont les poules quelquefois. Elle le guérit, en arrachant cette pellicule avec ses ongles’.
The lack of sentimentality throughout all the tragedy in the book is quite astounding. When describing the deaths, although he is at times almost overly descriptive he is very factual and there is no emotion involved whatsoever. The most touching part of the play to me was when Félicité is knocked down by the coach and whipped by the driver, she breaks down moments later and she realizes all the injustices or her life and all of the things that have gone wrong, the passage of thought ‘Alors une faiblesse l'arrêta; et la misère de son enfance, la déception du premier amour, le départ de son neveu, la mort de Virginie, comme les flots d'une marée, revinrent à la fois, et, lui montant à la gorge, l'étouffaient’ reminds the reader of all the terrible times. Having read this, I immediately thought that all of these instances of misfortune that happened through her life almost made it unrealistic. The amount of bad luck and deaths she had to deal with seemed slightly unrealistic to me. But the way in which they are all described by Faubert, straight to the point and simply stating the facts lead me to believe that Félicité just lived an incredibly unfortunate life and that Faubert describes them all without a trace of sentimentality.

Faubert starts off with the realism right from the very beginning, even the name of the book already prepares the readers for the mundane. ‘Un Coeur Simple’ which is of course referring to Félicité’s simple heart and life. Within the first page Faubert is listing the chores that Félicité has to do, “elle faisait la cuisine et le ménage, cousait, lavait, repassait…et resta fidele a sa maitress”, these menial tasks listed so early on sets the tone for the rest of the book and prepares the reader for a truly realist novel. We know early on that Félicité is going to be a simple character and she is also described as ‘functionant dans un manière automatique’ which gives off the impression she almost doesn’t think about her actions and that she lives her life by way of instinct and automaticity.

It has been said and is quite obvious from this novel that on the whole, novels written by realist authors are quite monotonous and straightforward without much excitement. The scene with the most excitement in it is clearly that with the bull, although in any other novel it would be a relatively exciting part but nothing special, in this Faubert makes it into something really out of the ordinary, Félicité becomes a town legend and it really is something special in the book. Even the tempo of the passage is upped and the overall detail combined with the exclamations makes it the most intense extract from the book. I think this scene emphasises the unexciting life that the characters live as well as how simple Félicité is as she doesn’t understand why everyone has made a big deal out of her saving the others.

To conclude, I think it is obvious that this is a realist novel. Despite many critics arguing that the references to nature included in it and Félicité’s emotional attachment to certain people and objects throughout make it somewhat romantic, I don’t agree. I feel that it is highly influenced by the realist movement and the mundane routines that are described meticulously throughout clearly show that. The attention to detail that is included in all of the descriptions and the constant depiction of the places and surroundings of the characters is so typical of the realism style of writing that there is no doubt in my mind this is a realistic novel. Of course there are hints of romanticism throughout, romanticism as a genre focuses on man and his emotions and as the two genres were so close on the timescale it’s impossible not to have a few influences from the Romantic Movement but it is almost exclusively, definitely predominantly a realist text.