I started to read it in December last year, but eventually I found it too cumbersome and hefty to absorb since my mind was still saturated with personI started to read it in December last year, but eventually I found it too cumbersome and hefty to absorb since my mind was still saturated with personal concerns at that time, so it wound up unfinished on my study table , collecting dust , biding its time to be read until its leaves are turning crispy. Then , I realized that it is about time I cleared out my currently-reading shelf to work up more appetite for the other to-read books. It is a burden on my part to put a heap of unfinished books aside, or it looks like as though I had a Mahabharata list of currently-reading books.
History has proven that living in a suppressing nation where you have no absolute freedom , where its atmosphere restrains your desires from expressing your thoughts and feelings, where you are not valued, where you are degraded and debased as if you were the disgusting "invisible” dregs of humanity, brings about revolution in any manners. Some well-known leaders have stood up by means of the iconic Mahatma Gandhi ‘s principles of civil disobedience or “by any necessary means” immortalized by the late black activist Malcolm X. In a subliminal or passive way, some have channeled their pent-up grievances through writing books such as novels which could in effect change a particular cause , and this is at what Ralph Ellison must have aimed .
Ralph Ellison is not far different from Richard Wright, the author of the Native Son that astounded me to the bone. Both of them have in common with their ulterior motive why they wrote a novel about African life: to revolt. The only thing they have big difference is the instrumental style they used in putting their suppressed feelings into a novel. Richard Wright , on the one hand, wrote a suspense novel which you could feel the psychology of racism. Conseqently, the novel is heart-breaking, appalling, and sympathatizing. You could feel the psychologically adverse effects of slavery, discrimination, prejudice, and bigotry. On the other hand, although Ralph Ellison used the style of R. Wright, he attached more importance to allegories or literary devices; he used some situations and materials in elaborating his suppressed grievances, as appeals to reasons, appeals to emotion, and appeals to authority. Thus, reading it was like as though you get into two dimensions of semantics , and yet you could get at the real climax of the story: You read the literal passages ; at the same time, they have figurative meanings. That is why I was impressed by this book- it is steeped in awakening passages; every page is worth reading, indeed.
Since R. Ellison grew out of a culture of bigotry and availed of his talent in writing to produce this , which he believed could have changed the incorruptible stereotypes of white Americans about blacks as well as awakened his fellow blacks to the reality about divisive dilemma coming into existence among them. In this book, he simply attached to the very simple dialogues and passages with what the “ real” problems he insisted on are the crucial to the desired equality. Ellison wanted to imply figuratively that there are two groups of blacks that prevail: one is that believe in the principle of practicality and gentle and gradual process of raising awareness whereas the second one is consist of the people who believe in the urgent revolution in a manner of public demonstration .
While reading it, the character, Brother Jack reminded me of Martin Luther King Jr. while in the half persona of the main protagonist and Ras the Exhorter , of Malcolm X. As far as I remember from the book THE AUTOBIOGRAPHY OF MALCOLM X, King and Malcolm had unresolved misunderstanding then, for they had different opinions of means of revolution against racism. For King’s, he could get rid of the ulcer of society by means of religion using his immortal slogan I HAVE A DREAM; Malcolm X’s “ BY Necessary Means.” In the other case, I could interpret that the main protagonist could be the persona of Richard Wright. Why not? Ralph Ellison was then close to him. Besides, I learned that Richard Wright once became a spokesperson of a Communist party based on his autobiographical novel BLACK ( 5 stars ) . Gee, having read a great deal of books about blacks is now causing me to have mental bubbles of analyses.
It is understood that this book was written as a revolutionary book against freedom and equality just the likes of what I have read : UNCLE TOM’S CABIN by Harriet Beecher ( 5 stars ), A PASSAGE TO INDIA by E. L. Forrester ( 5 stars ), THE FIXER by Bernard Malamud, A NATIVE SON by Richard Wright, and our very own NOLI ME TANGERE ( TOUCH ME NOT ) by Jose Rizal.( I hope you give it a try. )
This is included on the list of the The Guardian's 1001 Best Novels of All Time as well as on TIME’s BEST NOVELS OF ALL TIME since 1923 to 2005. I should not give it any sheer shadow of doubt because it is absolutely deserving- deserving of any special literary awards, of your time to read it, of being part in American studies, and of your 5 stars. ^^
Along with her The Blind Assassin, this is one of the most convoluted and elaborate novels I have ever read. The story is too cloudy to understand thaAlong with her The Blind Assassin, this is one of the most convoluted and elaborate novels I have ever read. The story is too cloudy to understand that it requires your powers of concentration, especially if you are not analytical enough to grasp its complexity, the style I have proven Atwood bears the hallmark of.
Instead of analyzing it in a broader literary context with intellectual bravado since everyone can turn to Wikipedia, I’d rather review it in a manner of what I found out in her writing styles: I’m envious of her skilled mastery for turning into beautiful prose her train of thoughts or whatsoever plays in the figment of her imagination. Furthermore, she is an unfathomable female writer who can be as genius as any writers mostly celebrated in world literature.
This novel from the first pages to the last is strewn with vivid, beautiful, elegant, graceful, sumptuous sentences which I enjoyed reading rather than gripping its main idea. The sentences are so lyrical that I chanted them again and again. They melt in my tongue like sweet, dark chocolate, or smell good like a garden, full of a variety of colorful flowers hovered above by a swarm of butterflies.
Under an unlikely scenario, if there were still such a world that men were superior to women over skills in writing stories or any literacy pieces, and Atwood were into such a literary show-off ,surrounded by supercilious writers looking down on her feminism, I bet my life that Atwood could dominate or catch up with them at any cost of literary bouts. Don’t dare her write one because this her The Handmaid’s Tale has proved me wrong that there is something Atwood could make her rather genius. Her novels may appear complex, much more if she writes a simpler or more intricate one. In other words, there is nothing to find fault with her more; it’s crystal clear that she is an extraordinary writer. Roll down the red carpet and pay homage to Her Majesty.
Now, I freely acknowledge that reading another Atwood’s books could be challenging since I have now the clearest idea of her writing style. Sometime in the future, if I have a great deal of time, perhaps when I reach my mid-life , no longer preoccupied with how to embellish my life with youthful experiences, hers would be one of those books I want to read again and again.As American musician and filmmaker, Frank Zappa put it , so many books, so little time to read.There are still thousands of books in the world I haven't read yet.
Also, the best course of technique I should use when I happen to read Atwood's other books and others books which have little resemblance to her style would be a matter of full concentration ( regardless of how poor my reading comprehension skill is .) Then, I will seat myself at a coffee table with a voluminous dictionary and colorful highlighters scattered around , par for the course in my reading repose. Ho-ho!
P.S . It is now being adapted for a TV series broadcast live on Hulu....more
I learned this novel from one of Thomas Merton’s biographies. Then, I became curious why this novel had an impact upon his religious and spiritual jouI learned this novel from one of Thomas Merton’s biographies. Then, I became curious why this novel had an impact upon his religious and spiritual journey.
Since Evelyn Waugh is said to have converted to Catholicism, I got confused about his real intention why he wrote such novel. There are some parts of the dialogues which appear to be inconsistent. Did he intend to channel his religious devotion in order to convert readers to Catholicism? Did he intend to differentiate between “believers” and “nonbelievers”? (Sighs!)
If an avowed atheist or agnostic like me reads it, without bias, there are some parts of the dialogues she /he will take an exception to:
(a) Sebastian Flyte’s and Charles Ryder’s characters. In the novel, Charles Ryder, the openly agnostic protagonist, is emotionally empty despite being financially comfortable, unsure of what he wants to do in his life. Did E. Waugh intent to symbolize him that life is “hollow” without religion? How sure E. Waugh of that (all) agnostics and atheists in general have these kinds of feelings? On the other hand, Sebastian Flyte is an alcoholic who gets astray since he ignores his deeply religious mother’s advice that he, if I’m not mistaken, enter an institution to rehabilitate himself. Eventually, he will abscond somewhere in Africa and become an object of charity under the auspices of a monastery. But he will still struggle for his alcoholism. What did E. Waugh intend to drive at?
(b) The ambiguous ending. Its ending is a little “lack of substance in plot”. In other words, it is not convincing for me that Charles Ryder converted himself in the end on account of Lord Marchmain’s concession to his (Lord Marchmain) daughter, Lady Cordelia’s suggestion that he he ask forgiveness for all the sins he has committed through the blessing and prayer of a priest. In fact, Charles Ryder insisted that Lord Marchmain could die or live to the other life, if there is one, without the blessing and prayer of a priest. Charles Ryder has more logical reasons, doesn’t he? Would E. Waugh reason that it could be the “Divine Grace”? Hmmm…it is another atomic collision between Religion and Science.
(c)The frustrating attitude of the religious characters. There is a scene that one of the characters made for the confession room, but was ignored. Another one is the Marchioness of Marchmain and her son, Bridey ‘s prejudice against Sebastian’s alcoholism as well as Lady Julia’s love affair with Charles Ryder; let alone Rex Mortamm’s insincere conversion. These plots are befuddling me. Should E. Waugh have characterized them positively? If she had done it, the story could be of use? Well, they must be the archetypes of religious upbringing. E. Waugh may have wanted to disclose the holier-than-thou in church.
Whatever Waugh‘s real intentions were, well, kudos to him! This novel is the product of his religious devotion- its content is creative, deep, and meaningful. I guess the panelists who included it in the list of the TIME’s 100 Best Novels of All Time could have been subjective.
I could be as subjective as the said panelists may have been, it is nevertheless compelling because of the intimate relationship between Sebastian and Charles Ryder. I wish E. Waugh meant to picture that homosexuality was repugnant at that time. Or I wish he were not that since their said relationship has been unsure and debatable among the readers whether both had a secret love affair. In my opinion, they had. ^^
To be enlightened, I read Evelyn Waugh’s biography in Wikipedia, and I was not disappointed. In fact, I am more intrigued by his religious viewpoints. I hope to read his other works....more
This is an Americanized novel; it has something to do with the American society during the Jazz Age in 1920’s when there was atmospheric aristocracy iThis is an Americanized novel; it has something to do with the American society during the Jazz Age in 1920’s when there was atmospheric aristocracy in society. The rich were ostentatiously glamorous by throwing luxurious parties, so the people in the lower class were pigeonholed; they strove to meet the standard norms. In addition, bootlegging became prevalent, so the social situations, along with their psychological effects, at the time are illustrated in the novel. However, subjectively speaking, I did not enjoy it much. Its plot boggled my mind. I did not have the slightest ideas of what the characters are talking about; I did not know where they are going. (I should have concentrated well. (laughs)). In addition, the narrator is too quick to narrate the story as if he was making some shortcuts. I wish he went easy on each situation; I wanted to get to the deeper part. ( I guess it may be another form or style of writing a novel. ) I felt F. S. Fitzgerald may have written it slapdash or quickie. In other words, it was awfully written; I feel that the plot seems to lack of literary elements as if there are something in the story I wanted to know more. ) Nevertheless, I only felt its climax when the last two chapters cast the lights on the real characters of Jay Gatsby. He pulled the string of my heart. I could somehow feel his loneliness, overshadowed by his bereavement; his idiosyncrasies, and his idealism. ^^
Flummoxed by the fact why it is so popular among the literati, I made an effort to get through its essence in the Internet. I learned that the novel was not yet popular at that time. In fact, it distressed F. S. Fitzgerald a lot knowing that his books were completely forgotten. It only drew the attention of the Americans when it was one of the books distributed to the American soldiers during the WWII. ( I guess the purpose was to entertain the soldiers.) Consequently, among the books they read, The Great Gatsby caught their attention, and it became more famous. In other words, the novel developed an American psyche until it becomes nostalgic by including it in American curriculum. No doubt TIME and Modern Library both voted it as one of the best novels of all time. Naturally, the panelists may have been American, for they take pride in it. ^^
Now I have understood why my best friend likes it a whole lot. She may have deeper reasons .She must relate herself to the story. But pardon me Han Han for giving it 2 stars. Not bad. It is ok. Had F. S. Fitzgerald put it into another way, I would have loved it likewise. If I have seen its movie adaptations, I may like it , for Lionardo di Caprio was too handsome to play the role of Jay Gatsby; Tobey Maguire ,for Nick Carraway. I3 I3 I3 ...more
I was always intrigued by this book. It is on the list of the The Guardian’s 1001 Best Novels of All Time, TIME’s 100 Best Novels, The Modern Library’I was always intrigued by this book. It is on the list of the The Guardian’s 1001 Best Novels of All Time, TIME’s 100 Best Novels, The Modern Library’s Voting List. This is even part of my students’ literary studies. I could not even avert my gaze from its literary fame on bookshelves at bookstores. In the end, I tried to borrow it from my co-teacher-although it is my number one rule that I should never, never borrow from anyone's, over my dead body. The book, after all, may be about Stalin-ism. Besides, it is easy to read, for George Orwell used simple standard form of language. However, if Orwell intended to write a satirical fable -although the preface insisted it is not- I did not feel the connection between the animals involved and the people.
George Orwell’s intention to express his political viewpoints in writing a story involving animals- anthropomorphism in literature- is an astounding idea. I guess writing was his means of freedom of expression and speech. I guess his time , since he is a British writer , may have been restricted by the atmosphere of imperialism. In the light of writing this, isn't it amazing to praise that it had a clashing impact upon his ( Orwell) targets? It was like as if I were the target being alluded to or insulted. No doubt this book is well received by readers and considered as a literary classic. Like reading Aesop’s fables or fantasies , his sentences are so light but very dashing though.
On the other hand, although I enjoyed the story , I cannot deny the fact that I had a hard time connecting the unimaginable with the imaginable- animals living apart from humans, granted that the Animal Farm may be a symbol of dystopiac Stalin era whereas humans are the universal standard of government (democracy ). Well, my reactions could be another puny, minor impact of this book.
Politically speaking, I believe there is no such a perfect form of government. But if a form of government just what the like of Communism manifested in the history , this is one of the revolutionary books which could open the eyes of the peoples. ...more
Loading...
