Name: Imre Kertész
Year Won: 2002
Read: Dossier K
Original Language: Hungarian
Reason: "for writing that upholds the fragile experience of the individual against the barbaric arbitrariness of history"
About: Dossier K is Imre's autobiography, told as a dialogue between himself and...himself. It's pretty strange.
What I liked: It's a very interesting idea to write an autobiography as a dialogue. Just saying. Also Imre's life is fascinating. He's a Holocaust survivor who lived under Hungary's totalitarian communist regime. So he's got quite a bit to say.
What I Disliked: The dialogue format, IMO, works better as a high concept idea than in practice. It makes the writting really jumbled and jump about in a way that, IMO, robs the story of much of its power. Which feels all the more a shame as Imre's life truly is fascinating.
Should it have won a Nobel: I don't think he won it for this, so sure. FWIW, despite that I really hated the format of this story, when the story wasn't jumping around, it was incredibly riveting. Even details like his parents' divorce (normally not that exciting of a topic) was pretty cool in this as Imre Kertesz is a natural storyteller. So yeah, he probably deserved the prize. And if I can find an autobiography of his that's less scattered, I'd definitely be happy to read it.
Next Up: "The Pole" by John Maxwell Coetzee
Thursday, October 26, 2023
Monday, October 16, 2023
A Bend in the River by V.S. Naipaul
Name: V.S. Naipaul
Year Won: 2001
Read: A Bend in the River
Original Language: English
Reason: "for having united perceptive narrative and incorruptible scrutiny in works that compel us to see the presence of suppressed histories"
About: A Bend in the River is the story of an Indian man in an African nation. He travels inland from the more urbanized coast and moves into a former European ghost town populated by both the locals, Europeans who've refused to leave, and other sorts.
What I liked: The descriptions of Africa are incredibly evocative, as are the histories that Naipaul seems to breathe into almost every interaction with them. I also like some of the colorfully and weirdly described characters.
What I Disliked: Are all the women whores or Madonnas? Yes! Is this perhaps a critique of colonialism, but also one that is very, very racist? Also yes! While maybe - maybe - some of this is appropriate to an Indian in Africa (the protagonist spends an awful lot of time trying to convince a guy to abandon his common law wife and kids because they're "just African"), it also feels ickily like this might be sorta, kinda what the author himself believes. Which made reading this a bit grotesque.
Should it have won a Nobel: I mean, Naipaul is considered a great. He's also not without controversy due to his sexism. And...both are really apparent in this work. IDK. It feels a bit like Kipling, although I have to say that I enjoyed Kipling a bit more. Also, this was like...nearly a hundred years later. So...
With that said, the man can write. I just wish he could write in a less dehumanizing way.
Next Up: "Dossier K" by Imre Kertész
Year Won: 2001
Read: A Bend in the River
Original Language: English
Reason: "for having united perceptive narrative and incorruptible scrutiny in works that compel us to see the presence of suppressed histories"
About: A Bend in the River is the story of an Indian man in an African nation. He travels inland from the more urbanized coast and moves into a former European ghost town populated by both the locals, Europeans who've refused to leave, and other sorts.
What I liked: The descriptions of Africa are incredibly evocative, as are the histories that Naipaul seems to breathe into almost every interaction with them. I also like some of the colorfully and weirdly described characters.
What I Disliked: Are all the women whores or Madonnas? Yes! Is this perhaps a critique of colonialism, but also one that is very, very racist? Also yes! While maybe - maybe - some of this is appropriate to an Indian in Africa (the protagonist spends an awful lot of time trying to convince a guy to abandon his common law wife and kids because they're "just African"), it also feels ickily like this might be sorta, kinda what the author himself believes. Which made reading this a bit grotesque.
Should it have won a Nobel: I mean, Naipaul is considered a great. He's also not without controversy due to his sexism. And...both are really apparent in this work. IDK. It feels a bit like Kipling, although I have to say that I enjoyed Kipling a bit more. Also, this was like...nearly a hundred years later. So...
With that said, the man can write. I just wish he could write in a less dehumanizing way.
Next Up: "Dossier K" by Imre Kertész
Wednesday, October 4, 2023
Soul Mountain by Gao Xingjian
Name: Gao Xingjian
Year Won: 2000
Read: Soul Mountain
Original Language: Chinese
Reason: "for an oeuvre of universal validity, bitter insights and linguistic ingenuity, which has opened new paths for the Chinese novel and drama"
About: Soul Mountain follows a young man in China as he lives live. He seduces women. He wanders around the countryside. He interacts with people. Mostly women. Most of whom he has very unsatisfying seeming sex with.
What I liked: The descriptions of rural China were wonderful, as is the intermingling of the commonplace and divine. The writing was remarkably vivid and evocative of a world that is mostly lost now.
What I Disliked: True to Nobel form, there is no plot. Also, the guy seemed like a bit of an asshole to women, but eh. Also true to Nobel form.
Should it have won a Nobel: I'd love it if the Nobel committee, just once, went for a novel with a plot. But like that's going to happen, LOL.
At the very least, Soul Mountain is interesting and evocative and brilliantly calls to mind a specific time and place. So sure. Why not?
Next Up: "A Bend in the River" by V.S. Naipaul
Year Won: 2000
Read: Soul Mountain
Original Language: Chinese
Reason: "for an oeuvre of universal validity, bitter insights and linguistic ingenuity, which has opened new paths for the Chinese novel and drama"
About: Soul Mountain follows a young man in China as he lives live. He seduces women. He wanders around the countryside. He interacts with people. Mostly women. Most of whom he has very unsatisfying seeming sex with.
What I liked: The descriptions of rural China were wonderful, as is the intermingling of the commonplace and divine. The writing was remarkably vivid and evocative of a world that is mostly lost now.
What I Disliked: True to Nobel form, there is no plot. Also, the guy seemed like a bit of an asshole to women, but eh. Also true to Nobel form.
Should it have won a Nobel: I'd love it if the Nobel committee, just once, went for a novel with a plot. But like that's going to happen, LOL.
At the very least, Soul Mountain is interesting and evocative and brilliantly calls to mind a specific time and place. So sure. Why not?
Next Up: "A Bend in the River" by V.S. Naipaul
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)