|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
my rating |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 5.00
| 1
| 1993
| 1993
|
it was amazing
|
Das ist so unglaublich niedlich, sowohl vom Schreibstil als auch von den Illustrationen. Erwin Moser erzählt über den Kater Joschi, der sowohl Künstle
Das ist so unglaublich niedlich, sowohl vom Schreibstil als auch von den Illustrationen. Erwin Moser erzählt über den Kater Joschi, der sowohl Künstler als auch Architekt ist, und all die fabelahften Häuser, die er für seine Freunde entworfen hat. Mein Neffe wird es lieben!
...more
|
Notes are private!
|
1
|
Aug 15, 2024
|
Aug 15, 2024
|
Aug 15, 2024
|
Paperback
| |||||||||||||||||
| 0143106589
| 9780143106586
| 0143106589
| 3.43
| 522,110
| 1899
| Aug 28, 2012
|
it was amazing
|
No comment.
|
Notes are private!
|
1
|
Jul 30, 2024
|
Aug 2024
|
Jul 29, 2024
|
Paperback
| ||||||||||||||
| 3518100416
| 9783518100417
| 3518100416
| 3.65
| 6,209
| 1958
| 1963
|
it was amazing
|
"Wissend auch du, wie brennbar die Welt ist, Biedermann Gottlieb, was hast du gedacht?" Simply brilliant. Perfect for fans of Dürrenmatt's Die Physike "Wissend auch du, wie brennbar die Welt ist, Biedermann Gottlieb, was hast du gedacht?" Simply brilliant. Perfect for fans of Dürrenmatt's Die Physiker and Der Besuch der alten Dame. I really wouldn't have thought it, but Max Frisch has made it onto the list of authors I absolutely have to read more of. We read Homo Faber in 8th grade and rarely have I learned to hate a book so much. My 14-year-old self would have been perfectly happy never to have to pick up a Frisch novel again. Now, at age 28, I'm ready to declare him a genius. I willwork my way through his plays bit by bit... and maybe I'll give Faber another chance at some point. The play Biedermann und die Brandstifter is about a citizen called Biedermann who takes two arsonists into his house, even though they make it clear from the start that they are going to set it on fire. Frisch took up the Biedermann theme several times in his work. A first prose sketch was written in 1948 under the impression of the Communist takeover in Czechoslovakia. Frisch later adapted the material into a radio play and a play for the stage. Alongside Andorra, it is Max Frisch's best-known drama. Who, in order to know what is imminent, / Reads newspapers, / Daily for breakfast indignant about a distant event, / Daily supplied with interpretation, / Which spares him his own thinking, / Experiencing daily what happened yesterday, / He hardly sees through what is happening / Under his own roof*The play is a burlesque - a mixture of comic and macabre elements with a dark theme and ending. However, it is not a tragic play, because the protagonist Biedermann does not consciously and compulsively walk into a catastrophe for the sake of a sublime value, but suffers an avoidable fate out of cowardice, stupidity and blindness. Of all the various Frisch dramas, Biedermann und die Brandstifter is the most concise and consistent. The drama knows no digressions or digressions. Throughout the story, the Biedermanns are portrayed as cowardly hangers-on who have neither imagination nor steadfastness. It is only their bourgeois opportunism that makes it possible for the arsonists to carry out their work and achieve their goal without much trouble. In the radio play, the setting is a modernized Seldwyla, a fictional town in Switzerland. In the theatre play, however, there is no specific reference to time or place. The drama can therefore be interpreted against different historical backgrounds. The initially one-sided anti-communist reception of the play did not correspond to Frisch's intentions: "Although Gottlieb Biedermann exposes himself in his speeches, [...] the bourgeoisie of Zurich did not find it a laughing matter, but applauded seriously: this is what happens, yes, this is what happens when you let communists into your house! To stop this convenient misinterpretation, I wrote a sequel for the German stages: Herr Biedermann as a German bourgeois fraternizing with the Nazis." In two months of work, starting in June 1958, an epilogue to the play was created for the German premiere, which places Biedermann and his wife in hell, where they once again encounter Eisenring and Schmitz. Frisch later deleted the epilogue again, "as it relates the parable to the past and to a specific country, thus canceling out the parable as such". The multi-layered levels of interpretation nevertheless remain. Knowing how combustible the world is, Biedermann Gottlieb, what were you thinking?[Before we get serious again: Please take a look at this quote. How good is that please? I kid you not, I'm crying because it's so good. BIEDERMANN GOTTLIEB, WHAT WERE YOU THINKING???? I'm screaming. I legit have goosebumps right now. Max, you goddamn genius.] The drama is a prime example of political stupidity on the part of the citizen. Biedermann is too comfortable and too scared to take on the more powerful because he is terrified of the possible consequences. At first, Biedermann refuses to give Schmitz shelter, but he succumbs to a combination of subtle threats of violence and flattery, with which the unemployed heavyweight wrestler Schmitz skillfully uses Biedermann's egotism, mistrust and guilty conscience to his own advantage. Once he has let him into his house, he openly admits what he is up to and explains his plan precisely to Biedermann. But he pretends that all the preparations for the arson are jokes or tests of courage and tolerates them. Biedermann seems to assume that what must not be will not be, because it would never happen to him that someone he has taken in so devotedly would set fire to his house. In this sense, Biedermann can be seen as an example of the credulity, complacency, cowardice and lack of foresight of many Germans who actively or passively supported National Socialism. Frisch himself commented on his protagonist: "If you ask me, I don't find this Gottlieb a villain, even if he is dangerous as a contemporary. In order to have a clear conscience - and he needs that to have peace of mind - he simply lies to himself. [...] Gottlieb wants to appear as a good person. He even believes that he is: by not coming clean to himself.” Biedermann is an average citizen whose dilemma is that he wants to be good without changing anything. The play and its meaning have not lost their significance to this day. In view of the devastating election results of the AfD and the brutalization of our debate culture for more than 10 years now, it seems to be gaining more relevance by the hour: "Blind as blind is the fearful man, / Trembling with hope that it is not evil / Friendly he receives it, / Defenseless, oh weary of fear, / Hoping for the best... / Until it's too late." We are running into a catastrophe with our eyes wide open. And it makes me feel like Biedermann: "I'm not shouting at you, Babette, I'm shouting in general." Yes, I'm also shouting in general. [*I translated all of the quotes myself, as I don't have a copy of the English text. My translations suck. Firsch rules. Read it in the original if possible. "Wissend auch du, wie brennbar die Welt ist, Biedermann Gottlieb, was hast du gedacht?" – STILL NOT OVER IT!!!!] ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
Jun 20, 2024
|
Jun 20, 2024
|
Jun 19, 2024
|
Paperback
| ||||||||||||||
| 0241638429
| 9780241638422
| 0241638429
| 3.89
| 25,862
| 1957
| Mar 28, 2024
|
it was amazing
|
Contrary to popular belief, it was not Lolita that made Nabokov a well-known writer in the US, but rather Pnin, which was published a year earlier, in
Contrary to popular belief, it was not Lolita that made Nabokov a well-known writer in the US, but rather Pnin, which was published a year earlier, in 1957. Although it did not become a mainstream novel as Lolita did, Pnin had a relatively wide readership in literary circles, garnering favorable reviews, and getting Nabokov his first National Book Award nomination. Upon its second week of publication, Pnin had already begun its second printing, and Nabokov was referred to as "one of the subtlest, funniest and most moving writers in the United States today". I mean, I agree, but this is an understatement: To me, Nabokov is the greatest writer in the English language. Volodyen'ka was eating all of these native speakers up. Unreal. His language is just so delicious (e.g . "He would remove his glasses to beam at the past while massaging the lenses of the present."), every sentence a feast, every word carefully placed upon this banquet table we call literature. I've only read two of his novels but I won't leave this Earth before I've read all of them. Some people—and I am one of them—hate happy ends. We feel cheated. Harm is the norm. Doom should not jam. The avalanche stopping in its tracks a few feet above the cowering village behaves not only unnaturally but unethically.At the center of this book stands its titular character: Timofey Pnin, a haplessly disoriented Russian émigré precariously employed on an American college campus in the 1950s. ("It was the world that was absent minded and it was Pnin whose business it was to set it straight.") Pnin struggles to maintain his dignity through a series of comic and sad misunderstandings, all the while falling victim both to subtle academic conspiracies and to the manipulations of a deliberately unreliable narrator. Initially an almost grotesquely comic figure, Pnin gradually grows in stature by contrast with those who laugh at him. Whether taking the wrong train to deliver a lecture in a language he has not mastered or throwing a faculty party during which he learns he is losing his job, the gently preposterous hero of this enchanting novel evokes our deepest protective instinct. The story isn't told in any traditional continuous manner, instead, chapters (or rather vignettes) of varying lengths are strung together as a seemingly loose sequence of stories. Pnin is always at their center, in ever-changing contexts: Pnin on the train on his way to the lecture. Pnin as lodger. ("He was more a poltergeist than a lodger.") Pnin as party host. Pnin as lecturer struggling with the English language. Pnin as ex-husband to Liza. Pnin in the company of other exiled Russians. Initially barely connected, these descriptions eventually come full circle, as we realise that the end of the novel is also its beginning. The book, which may seem unspectacular on its surface (it's really no plot, just vibes), turns out to be interwoven with a complex web of relationships, allusions, clues, motifs and symbols. The novel is particularly enchanting because of the delicate, finely branched story that always shines through behind the figure of Pnin. In Pnin, Nabokov combines a cheerful ease reminiscent of Pushkin with the abysses of human tragedy. I honestly don't have a proper analysis for this novel. I just loved it so much. I didn't understand everything that was going on, but it was so damn funny. I was genuinely laughing at some of Nabokov's descriptions, e.g. "Nowadays, at fifty-two, he was crazy about sunbathing, wore sport shirts and slacks, and when crossing his legs would carefully, deliberately, brazenly display a tremendous stretch of bare shin." or "Both parents, in their capacity of psychotherapists, did their best to impersonate Laius and Jocasta, but the boy proved to be a very mediocre little Oedipus.", but I was also laughing at some of the ridiculousness that Nabokov made sweet ole Pnin go through, when, for instance, Pnin has his remaining teeth removed in order to make way for dentures, and then refers to the result as "his new dental glory". Or when he calls Joan John, because he can't pronounce her name correctly. It is hilarious! I also really vibed with the constant incorporation of Russian words and German phrases into the text. I also loved how they mostly went untranslated. Not gonna lie, made me feel special, since I was able to understand them perfectly, but it also really highlighted the hybridity of Pnin's being, and him having to constantly move between different languages, and not feeling at home in English. Meanwhile, Nabokov's English is more perfect than anything I've ever read, and all of us basic bitches could never. Instead of writing something basic as "Pnin started cooking", he writes: "That afternoon Pnin could hardly wait to start culinary operations." And it's just so perfect. Because it is so hilarious, but also it's so fucking true/genuine. That sentence makes me go "OMG THAT'S SO ME". And then later that day at the dinner party when Pnin finally serves his punch and his guests only talk about the value of the bowl and what kind of glass it is, Nabokov writes: "whereupon Professor Pnin remarked that, primo, he would like everybody to say if contents were as good as container, and, secundo, ...." – I MEAN WHAT A PERFECT SENTENCE??? I could stare at the entire paragraph for the rest of my life, and die content. Another brilliant quote: In order to exist rationally, Pnin had taught himself, during the last ten years, never to remember Mira Belochkin – not because, in itself, the evocation of a youthful love affair, banal and brief, threatened his peace of mind (alas, recollections of his marriage to Liza were imperious enough to crowd out any former romance), but because, if one were quite sincere with oneself, no conscience, and hence no consciousness, could be expected to subsist in a world where such things as Mira's death were possible.I mean, HOW GREAT IS THAT? "In order to exist rationally"???? I'm legit screaming right now by how awesome that is. "...no conscience, and hence no consciousness, could be expected to subsist in a world where such things as Mira's death were possible." OKAY IT'S REALLY TIME FOR US TO PACK IT UP. No one will do it like Nabokov did. Okay, last one: "...when, on a December day in 1938, Liza telephoned from Meudon, saying that she was going to Montpellier with a man who understood her 'organic ego', a Dr Eric Wind, and would never see Timofey again. An unknown French woman with red hair called for Liza's things and said, well, you cellar rat, there is no more any poor lass to taper dessus – and a month or two later there dribbled in from Dr Wind a German letter of sympathy and apology assuring lieber Herr Pnin that he, Dr Wind, was eager to marry 'the woman who has come out of your life into mine.'" I am screaming, crying, throwing up. "WELL, YOU CELLAR RAT" ????? I AM AT A LOSS FOR WORDS. I will incorporate this into my active vocabulary. How can you read a paragraph like that and not fall in love with the English language? With literature and the world itself???? I will never understand. Okay, I know I said last one, but this time really LAST ONE: "I do not think he loved anybody. In his attitude toward his mother, passionate childhood affection had long since been replaced by tender condescension, and all he permitted himself was an inward sigh of amused submission to fate when, in her fluent and flashy New York English, with brash metallic nasalities and soft lapses into furry Russianisms, she regaled strangers in his presence with stories that he had heard countless times and that were either over-embroidered or untrue." Uff. Fuck me up, why don't you???? This one sentence tells me everything I need to know about Timofey and his relationship to his mother. Nabokov, you fucking genius, you. Another thing that I loved was how much you came to care about Pnin as a character. He starts out as this oddball but throughout the text you A) realise how much in common you have with him ("Pnin had now been in that maze of forest roads for about an hour and had come to the conclusion that 'bear north', and in fact the word 'north' itself, meant nothing to him." => ME!) and B) how many people are taken advantage of him, especially his ex-wife and his colleagues, and how he doesn't really have the capacity to fight back. Why not leave their private sorrows to people? Is sorrow not, one asks, the only thing in the world people really possess?When he is fired at the end of the novel and refuses to work under our mystical narrator, I genuinely felt sad, and thought Pnin was in the right and deserved better. The entire novel is just such a feat because Nabokov perfectly captures the human condition. He knows what it's like to love and hope, suffer and despair. And he knows how to communicate it through words. It's just wonderful. I'm utterly obsessed with Nabokov, and will be rereading Pnin for many years to come. It's hilarious, it's funny. It tears at your heartstrings. It is a REVELATION! ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
Mar 27, 2024
|
Mar 30, 2024
|
Mar 26, 2024
|
Hardcover
| ||||||||||||||
| 144495279X
| 9781444952797
| 144495279X
| 4.60
| 398,107
| May 06, 2021
| May 06, 2021
|
it was amazing
|
I finally found the word to describe what I'm looking for when I'm picking up these comics. The word is fluff. I'm looking for fluff. I want it to be
I finally found the word to describe what I'm looking for when I'm picking up these comics. The word is fluff. I'm looking for fluff. I want it to be sweet, saccharine-sweet even. No thoughts, just vibes. Just love. And fluff. And this volume delivers, at least chapter five does, chapter six is a bit more serious again, but it doesn't matter. The love confession in chapter five makes up for everything. This comic brings me so much joy, and Nick and Charlie have become some of my all-time favorite characters. I loved Charlie from the beginning but Nick has been really growing on me over the past two volumes. He's just such a sweet and lovely boy, and there's so much pressure on his shoulders, HE NEEDS TO BE PROTECTED AT ALL COST. Contrary to my other reviews for the series, I will only be going through my favorite moments in the comic in a chronological order. Otherwise, I would just repeat myself in terms of what I love (the characters, the cuteness, the art, how readable it is etc.) and what I struggle with (Oseman's at times preachy tone, the "educational" mission of the comics etc.). I think I said everything I wanted to say on that front, and now I can just accept and appreciate the comic for what it is. So, Heartstopper: Volume Four contains, like I mentioned before, two chapters instead of just one. Chapter five is probably my favorite over all chapter (alongside with chapter one <3). It opens with a shot of Nick and Charlie's shoes and I am already obsessed. It's just so iconic, and I'll never look at white converse the same way. ;) We then see Charlie practising how to say I love you to Nick in the mirror (so freaking cute) and also how Olly and Tori are watching him. I love that we see so much of Charlie's siblings in this comic because that's still quite rare in YA. Sibling dynamics are my favorite and so I was dying at Olly imitating Charlie saying "Oooooh Nick I love you soooo much" (little siblings are the worst :D) but also Olly being overexcited for Nick to "join the family" because then he would have two older brothers and that's more than anyone in his class (CAN YOU HEAR ME CRYING????). In general, I just love how Oseman modelled Charlie's family and I love that through the character of Olly we see that hate is taught, that lil' guy is so innocent and supportive of his big brother, the fact that Charlie is gay is so natural to me. It's wonderful. At the beginning of this volume, the whole squad spends a day at the bench, and whenever I see the gang my heart is immediately full to the brim. This is just the best group of people. Whenever I see the girls especially (Tara, Darcy, Elle) I just get so excited. I also love that Tao and Elle are openly dating bc they are the cutest. I also loved Nick asking Charlie for help with his sunscreen and then the both of them blushing when Charlie rubs his back. MY BABIES! Also Charlie and Elle talking and her summarising: "Yeah, I know, you’re kind of a stressed out person in general." Spot on, my girl! But the day at the beach isn't all fluff; while Charlie wants to finally confess his love to Nick (before Nick departs on summer holiday for three weeks), Nick chooses that day to confront Charlie about his eating disorder and urges him to seek help and talk to his parents. My heart literally broke when we see the Nick flashback of sitting in bed with his dog researching eating disorders ("What do we do, Nell?") because this man MUST be protected at all cost. He cares so much for Charlie and is so in tune with his feelings, and it's just too much pressure for such a young kid. I also appreciate Charlie telling Nick that he "can't" tell his parents because they wouldn't believe him. :(( Of course, that's objectively not true (as we see later when he finally talks to them and they are super supportive) but that's what it feels like to be a teenager. For Charlie, that's his subjective truth. It might be part excuse, but it's also part conviction. It's heartbreaking. I also love that through the day at the beach the problems of the other characters are explored as well. Sahar asks Nick if they can be friends at school because she will be one of the only girls in Six Form (I also love their little exchange: "I can introduce you to the rugby lads." - "The ‘rugby lads’?" bc Sahar is literally me, as a 17-year-old girl I would've also been like HELL TO THE NO, Mr Nelson). Tara also tells the group that Darcy really doesn't get along with her family; and Elle struggles with body image and doesn't want to put on a bathing suit. I also appreciate that we continue to see Charlie struggling with his eating, and that this time Nick couldn't help him. When Nick offers that the two of them can go somewhere quieter (like they did in Paris), Charlie refuses: "I can't today. I'm sorry." I feel like that was very important for Oseman to show, that having a supportive boyfriend isn't enough. Some days, heck most days, your eating disorder wins (as long as you're not in treatment/in recovery). Since Charlie wasn't able to confess his love to Nick at the beach, he chooses the last possible moment... when Nick is in the shower! You guys when I tell you how happy this entire scene made me. I would love to have it framed. Charlie confessing his love in front of the bathroom door and Nick being too stunned to speak, Charlie then quickly leaving ("So yeah... Anyway.) and Nick JUMPING OUT OF THE SHOWER TO RUN AFTER HIM... the image of Nick in his towel yelling out Charlie's name – I don't think I've ever been happier. And then when he finally catches up with him with barely any clothes on saying "Can you say what you said again?" – it was simply perfect. I will also share their whole dialogue after Nick said it back because it makes me ridiculously happy: N: So can I walk you home now?My heart, my heart. Nick then goes on summer holiday and seeing him with his nephew and niece made me so happy. It was also heartwarming to see the boys miss each other and having trouble connecting due to bad WIFI etc. One thing that felt a bit forced (to me) was Charlie's mom all of a sudden being so openly antagonistic. It came out of the blue and felt like a device to create more tension and stress in Charlie's life, so that he would sink in even deeper into his eating disorder. His conversation with Nick was just heartbreaking: "I just can't tell them stuff. My mom isn't like your mum. We don't – we don't talk about things. Emotional things. She just gets angry at me." :( And then it's contrasted with Nick's mom being an ABSOLUTE BOSS and telling David off for his snide/homophobic remarks during the summer holiday. I also LOVE that Nick tells his mom about his suspicions: "I think Charlie has an eating disorder. And I don't know what to do." It's soooo important to get your parents/a trusted adult into the boat in a situation like this, and Nick's mom is his rock. I love that Oseman showed her support her son during this trying time. On a more lighter note, I loved Tori telling Charlie: "Dad's cooked a roast so prepare for an absolutely flavourless meal." and the guys just hitting Nick with the "YOUR BOYFRIEND" because he never properly came out to them. :D Felt very appropriate and I love the lightheartedness of the moment: "Oh, so we're just putting that out there then..." Gotta love Otis! The chapter ends with two heavy moments. First, Nick's dad doesn't show up to his birthday party, and I never wanted to throw hands more with a person. This boy deserves so much better. And second, Charlie finally telling his parents about his ED with the help of Nick and a letter he wrote to them. When I tell you that I literally teared up during that scene. It means so much to me, and Charlie is so brave and I am so friggin' proud of him. One of the most important and heartfelt moments in the entire series. Chapter six has a different narrative structure as the others as it's Nick's and Charlie's diary entries recapping the past four months. I understand why Oseman chose to tell it this way: eating disorders and their treatment take time, so it would've been weird for the situation to get resolved within a week (the time span of most of these chapters). On top of that, it could be potentially dangerous to showcase Charlie's obsessive behavior for fear of it triggering readers and attracting imitators. So instead Nick just tells us that Charlie got progressively worse until he was able to go to a clinic for treatment. I also love that Nick recounts that he constantly talked to his mom about his own feelings (bc again, THIS IS SO MUCH FOR HIM AS WELL), and how relieved and happy he felt to be finally out to his friends ("now I can just be myself around them" *sobs*). Nick is the only one of the squad to visit Charlie in the clinic. "Charlie didn't want them all visiting – it would have been to overwhelming. But they still found ways to help. And they helped me too." And then it just cuts to a panel showing Nick on a walk with the whole squad. YOU GUYS I AM CRYING. I also love that the squad prepared this huge gift basket for Charlie and when Darcy is asked in the group chat whether she already got the card, she replied: "YEP I got a giant one, it's the length of my arm" – THESE KIDS NEED TO BE PROTECTED AT ALL COST. What I loved most about the journal entries is that we see Nick and Tori becoming closer. This is the relationship that I didn't expect but it makes so much sense (both of them love Charlie so much) and it made me so happy. Nick sees Tori staring out of the window after she read the card Charlie wrote to her ("Sorry for putting you through all this shit." *literally crying again*). Later in the comic, Tori is the one to call Nick after one of Charlie's relapses. Oseman really shows that the road to recovery is rocky, and so Charlie has bad days, he relapses (with his ED and the self-harm), he has fights with his mom, arguments with Nick etc. It's not sweet and easy, it's long and hard, and by the end of the comic, he's still in it. The New Year's Eve party was also wonderful. It was Charlie's first outing after the clinic and seeing Nick being super protective of him, dodging all the nosey questions (=> "We're going outside now, byeeee." ICONIC), was good to see. And the countdown to the new year was so sweet. I loved Oseman's decision to show the three different couples kissing in different locations/rooms. I just love love, you guys. We then switch to Charlie's diary and see how relieved he felt to finally have a diagnosis (anorexia and OCD). I also appreciate that Oseman showed the teachers being supportive, and Charlie getting along with his therapist. Moments that killed me where Charlie admitting that he knows that Tori feels guilty about everything, even though it's not her fault, because that big sister guilt is REAL. We end the comic with a big dinner at Nick's house where he finally wants to come out to his dad, and it goes to shit, of course, because David keeps egging him on and Nick's had finally enough – of both his brother and his dad. The absolute icon of the dinner scene was Tori because miss thang was ON IT. When David wants to out Nick to their dad, Tori literally digs her nails into his arm and warns him: "DON'T YOU FUCKING DARE." (AN ICON, A LEGEND, SHE IS THE MOMENT). Later when she overhears David talking shit to his friends at the phone, she literally KICKS THE PHONE OUT OF HIS HANDS (like YES!): "You're a pathetic little man. Talk about my brother like that again and I'll end you." *woop woop* And you guys know I hate David like the next girl but the dad saying: "You haven't turned into the man I had hoped you would, David." was tewww much. Like, gurl, you never show up to your kids??? That's not your place to say. But Mama Nelson was on his ass immediately, so I could mind my own business. The teachers bonus mini-comic at the end was the best, literally one of my favorites. Their first kiss, first morning together, first time meeting the friends (love seeing Black men supportive of their gay friends in media!), first I love you ("What did you just say?" OF COURSE IT WOULD BE MR FAROUK WHO WOULD SAY IT FIRST). It was perfect. So, finally, I just really love this volume. I love the fluff of chapter five, and I appreciate how Charlie's ED was handled in this volume. Highlights were Charlie finally talking to his parents (I'm still emotional about it ya'll) and seeing his special bond with his siblings, and also Nick relying on his mother so much. Just wonderful, wonderful stuff. <3 ...more |
Notes are private!
|
2
|
Apr 09, 2024
Jan 25, 2024
|
Apr 09, 2024
Jan 27, 2024
|
Jan 25, 2024
|
Paperback
| ||||||||||||||
| 1444951386
| 9781444951387
| 1444951386
| 4.46
| 763,777
| 2018
| Feb 07, 2019
|
it was amazing
|
I am obsessed with Heartstopper, you guys. As always, I am super late to the party but to my defence: I looked into the Netflix show when it was first
I am obsessed with Heartstopper, you guys. As always, I am super late to the party but to my defence: I looked into the Netflix show when it was first airing and decided that it was too saccharine sweet for me (an opinion I still stand by). For some weird reason, I never realised that it was based on a webcomic by Alice Oseman. I've heard of the author before, mainly through various booktubers gushing about the relatability of Radio Silence, but I didn't know that she basically created her own little universe in which every single one of her published works would connect in some way, and that Heartstopper is her most successful book. In January, I decided to read the webcomic (through Webtoon), and what can I say? It took me four days to read the whole thang. WTF. I've never felt so much joy in my entire life!!! I'm exaggerating, of course, but my serotonin supply is low these day, and Heartstopper filled it right up. It is singlehandedly the cutest comic I've ever read. It makes me incredibly happy. It didn't even take me five minutes and I was already sooooo fucking invested in Charlie's life. I want to protect this boy at all cost. The Heartstopper comic is saccharine sweet but never cringy – something that the show sometimes is, but I think that's natural. The comic is more abstract and therefore bearable, whereas the show is very realistic, and therefore sometimes over the top. It is what it is. I stand by the comic! What I really appreciate about Oseman's work is how effortlessly she weaves different forms of representation (gay and bi teenagers, trans teens, Black and Asian characters etc. etc.) as well as important topics (coming out, first relationships, depression, eating disorders, negligent parents etc. etc.) into her story. It never feels forced, it never feels out of place. It is all soo seamless. I want to push this comic into the hands of every teen I know. What would I have given to read it as a teen myself??? It is invaluable. Out of the five published comics, the first is probably my favorite. It stands for my initial surprise by how taken I was with the series. I went in with no expectations and got the greatest gift of all: a new favorite story – characters to root for, characters to root against (Ben, you will catch these hands), cute moments, silly moments, anxiety-inducing moments. Heartstopper has it all. It truly is one of the best slice of life/romance books I've ever read. I have zero complaints about this first volume in which Nick and Charlie meet, develop a crush on one another, come to terms with it, and kiss for the first time at a party (woo hoo!), so I will leave you with a compilation of my favorite moments/moments I want to discuss: ● the first thing I noticed is that Joe Locke (who plays Charlie in the Netflix show) looks exactly like him, wtf??? same goes for Tao, who was excellently cast as well; I have some issues with the castings for Ben and Nick (...they just don't look right when I picture the comic characters) but the actors play them very well, so it evens out ● the first HEARTSTOPPER moment when Nick and Charlie see each other for the first time in Mr Lange's class is the cutest, I love looking at this page so much ● Nick's fountain pen exploding and his hands being all blue - I love this man! ● Ben calling Charlie "fucking useless", Ben literally physically assaulting him (grabbing him by the collar) and then later sexually assaulting him by shoving him to the wall and forcing a kiss on him - He had my BLOOD BOILING, I was ready to fight him, like, for real. But honestly, I appreciate that Alice included this storyline because it rings true for many gay teenagers (especially boys). ● Tao being overprotective of Charlie <33 ● Charlie daydreaming about Nick confessing his love for him - LMAO HE IS ME – and then Nick hitting him with the: "So... do you wanna join the rugby team?" (no tf I don't bahahaha) ● Charlie joining the rugby team (of course) and Nick being all flustered ● in general, Alice's drawings are so cute and I especially love how she drew Charlie's expressions, especially when he's blushing looking at Nick, it is BEYOND CUTE ● the guys on the team seeming to accept Charlie and including him during practice ● Charlie confessing his fear of letting everybody down to Nick = THESE BOYS ARE SOOO GOOD AT COMMUNICATING, HELLO??? ● Tao wanting to dissuade Charlie from falling in love with Nick bc he thinks he's straight ("And don't get me started on rugby." - TAO IS SPEAKING MY LANGUAGE) ● TORI TORI TORI - that's it, I don't have more to say, if I were still into YA lit I would definitely read Solitaire, I love her more than life itself ● Charlie teaching Nick how to play the drums - BEST BUDSSS ● After seeing Nick and Charlie say goodbye to each other (hugging), Tori slides up to her brother: "I don't think he's straight." - GIRL KNOWS WHAT'S UP ● Nick running towards Charlie after the game: "WE WON." - I cannot with the cuteness ● Sai to Otis and Christian: "So... Nick has a crush on Charlie, right?" - the guys are clocking it, and then later: "I can kinda see it... Nick and Charlie." - MY HEART - I wish the boys were a bigger storyline, I especially want to see more of Otis!! ● Tara being the supportive lesbian that she is telling Nick that she's always there if he wants to talk - she needs to be protected at all cost! ● Nick finally telling Harry off for being a homophobic asshole: "Happy fucking birthday." - ICONIC SCENE - Darcy watching along with Tara: "I actually love him." LMAO GIRL SAME ● Charlie telling Ben off: "Do not fucking touch me." YES YES YES ● right before the kiss scene we get a first look at the iconic shoes: black vans and white converse ● "Would you kiss me?" - I mean, can we talk about how BRAVE Charlie actually is? I mean it's awesome that he's asking for consent, but imagine being this confident at 15/16... my ass could never ● and then Alice drawing flowers sprouting from Nick, it is so beautifully illustrated; huge probs to her for never sexualising these teenagers, it's all just cute and fluff, and very respectful, and I'm just in love I don't remember the last time I so quickly fell in love with a whole cast of characters. Maybe when first reading Six of Crows in 2018??? It's been a while, lmao. Needless to say, I reread the comic only one month later because I wanted to be back in the world. But like I said, I would go to war for these babies. I cannot wait to see how the series will wrap up in the sixth volume, I am sure we will get a happy ending, but I hope it won't be bittersweet. I want HAPPY MOMENTS. Miss Alice, are you writing this down???? ...more |
Notes are private!
|
2
|
Feb 19, 2024
Jan 24, 2024
|
Feb 19, 2024
Jan 24, 2024
|
Jan 25, 2024
|
Paperback
| ||||||||||||||
| 3716011355
| 9783716011355
| 3716011355
| 3.67
| 31,343
| Jan 29, 1956
| 1956
|
it was amazing
|
Meine erste Lektüre 2024. Und gleich ein 5-Sterne-Buch. Das war wirklich nicht vorgesehen. Vor allem da das Buch auf recht unverhoffte Weise Einzug in
Meine erste Lektüre 2024. Und gleich ein 5-Sterne-Buch. Das war wirklich nicht vorgesehen. Vor allem da das Buch auf recht unverhoffte Weise Einzug in mein Bücherregal erhielt. Ich habe diese etwas weirde gebundene Ausgabe von 1956 (Erstausgabe, woo hoo!) im Bücherschrank meines Sportvereins gefunden. Eigentlich wollte ich das Stück gerne in der Diogenes-Taschenbuchausgabe lesen, da diese zu meiner Ausgabe von Die Physiker passt, aber immer wenn ich ein WuLi-Buch irgendwo kostenlos finde, nehme ich es immer mit, egal in welcher Ausgabe. Anyways, Dürrenmatt ist einer jener Dramatiker, um die ich in der Schulzeit "herumgekommen" bin, irgendwie stand er bei uns nie auf dem Lehrplan. Im Nachhinein ist das vielleicht auch ganz gut so, da ich es wirklich geschafft habe, jede einzelne meiner Schullektüren abgrundtief zu hassen, und Dürrenmatt gefällt mir jetzt als freie, unabhängige Erwachsene ganz gut. ;) Ich fand schon Die Physiker urkomisch, muss aber sagen, dass Dürrenmatt mit Der Besuch der alten Dame den Vogel abgeschossen hat. Ich finde dieses Stück nochmal um einiges besser. Dürrenmatts Dialoge sind einfach zum Schreien komisch. Gleichzeitig schafft er es jedoch auch wichtige Themen anzusprechen, in diesem Stück bspw. Scheinheiligkeit, Macht und Gerechtigkeit. DER BÜRGERMEISTER: Meine Herren, die Milliardärin ist unsere einzige Hoffnung.In dem Stück geht es um die Milliardärin Claire Zachanassian, die ihrer Heimat, der verarmten Kleinstadt Güllen, einen Besuch abstattet. Während die Einwohner auf finanzielle Zuwendungen und Investitionen hoffen, will Claire vor allem Rache für ein altes Unrecht: Als sie im Alter von 17 Jahren von dem 19-jährigen Güllener Alfred Ill ein Kind erwartete, leugnete dieser die Vaterschaft und gewann mit Hilfe bestochener Zeugen den von Klara gegen ihn angestrengten Prozess. Entehrt, wehrlos und arm musste Klara Wäscher ihre Heimat verlassen, verlor ihr Kind, wurde zur Prostituierten, gelangte jedoch später durch die Heirat mit einem Ölquellenbesitzer (der noch acht weitere Ehen folgten) an ein riesiges Vermögen. Die inzwischen hochangesehene "alte Dame" hat insgeheim, als Vorbereitung für ihren Besuch, in der Vergangenheit alle Güllener Fabriken und Grundstücke aufgekauft, um die Stadt allmählich zu ruinieren. Nun, 45 Jahre nach ihrer Vertreibung, unterbreitet sie den auf diese Weise für Korruption und finanzielle Strohhalme besonders empfänglich gewordenen Güllenern ein ebenso verlockendes wie unmoralisches Angebot und verspricht: "Eine Milliarde für Güllen, wenn jemand Alfred Ill tötet." Diese Forderung lehnen die Bewohner zunächst zwar entrüstet ab, beginnen jedoch gleichzeitig, über ihre Verhältnisse zu leben, sich Geld zu borgen und auszugeben, und die Kaufleute gewähren Kredite, so als ob alle mit einem baldigen Vermögenszuwachs rechnen könnten. Der Bürgermeister gibt den Bau eines neuen Stadthauses in Auftrag, der Pfarrer hat bereits eine neue Glocke für die Kirche gekauft. Insbesondere bei dem Gespräch zwischen Ill und dem vermeintlich vertrauenswürdigen Pfarrer wird deutlich, dass niemand hinter Ill steht. Selbst Ills eigene Frau sich einen teuren Pelzmantel, der Sohn ein schnelles Auto und die Tochter nimmt Tennisunterricht. Ill, von Schuld und Angst zermürbt, will nach Australien fliehen, wird jedoch von den Güllenern "zum Abschied" am Bahnsteig umringt und wagt es nicht den Zug zu besteigen. Wenig später bringt ihm der Bürgermeister ein geladenes Gewehr und lässt es, zum Selbstmord einladend, in Ills Laden zurück. Der jedoch zögert, wächst über sich selbst hinaus und besinnt sich anders. Aus seiner Resignation wird Einsicht und er beschließt sich seinen Mitbürgern auszuliefern. Stolz lässt der Bürgermeister in der Presse verkünden, Frau Zachanassian habe durch Vermittlung ihres Jugendfreundes Ill der Stadt eine Milliardenstiftung geschenkt. Vor laufenden Kameras stimmen die Bürger über Annahme oder Ablehnung der Stiftung ab, also eigentlich über die Tötung Ills. Unter Ausschluss der Öffentlichkeit bilden dann die Bürger eine Gasse für Ill, die sich immer enger um ihn schließt. Als sie sich wieder öffnet, liegt Ill tot am Boden. "Herzschlag" und "Tod aus Freude" sind die Kommentare von Amtsarzt und Bürgermeister; die Presse übernimmt diese Meinung. Claire lässt den Toten in einen mitgebrachten Sarg legen, händigt dem Bürgermeister den Milliardenscheck aus und reist ab nach Capri, wo bereits ein Mausoleum auf Ills Leichnam wartet. Der Besuch der alten Dame ist ein Theaterstück, das von der Korrumpierbarkeit der Menschen und der Schuld eines einzelnen handelt. Es zeigt, wie schnell Menschen in Versuchung geraten, wie schnell sich menschliche Gier ausbreiten kann, und welche Konsequenzen diese hat. Es zeigt ebenfalls die menschliche Bereitschaft sich auch mit dem "Unmenschlichen" abzufinden. Ich finde es persönlich wirklich nicht weit hergeholt, dass sich eine Dorfgemeinschaft so gegen einen Einzelnen verschwören würde, wenn danach wirklich gesichert so viel Geld für alle anderen herausspringen würde. Menschen haben definitiv schon für weniger getötet und für weniger weggeschaut. ILL: Ich lebe in einer Hölle, seit du von mir gegangen bist.Was ich an dem Stück besonders interessant finde, ist, dass man natürlich mit Ill mitfühlt, aber trotzdem weiß, dass er kein Unschuldslamm ist. Claires Rachegelüste sind, wenn auch nicht in dieser Intensität, nachvollziehbar. Und sie ist als Figur einfach ICONIC ("Nicht nötig. Seit meinem Unfall bewege ich mich nur per Sänfte. Roby und Toby, her damit."). Und immerhin musste sie 45 Jahre auf ihre Rache warten. Dürrenmatt selbst hat sie ihrer Unerbittlichkeit wegen mit Medea verglichen. Als "reichste Frau der Welt" verfügt sie über finanzielle Druckmittel, die es ihr erlauben, die Bürger der Stadt für ihre Zwecke zu instrumentalisieren. Ihr Vermögen versetzt sie in die Lage, "wie eine Heldin der griechischen Tragödie zu handeln, absolut, grausam". Claire braucht auf nichts und niemanden Rücksicht zu nehmen – nicht mal auf ihr eigenes Gewissen. Und das macht sie zu einem so spannenden und auch untypischen Frauenfigur. Zudem hat Dürrenmatt sie mit einer Pseudo-Unsterblichkeit ausgestattet: Als einzige Überlebende eines Flugzeugabsturzes umgibt sie die Aura des Wunderbaren und Übermächtigen – auch wenn ein Blick hinter die grotesken Kulissen zeigt, dass ihr einst makelloser Körper inzwischen nur noch von zahlreichen Prothesen zusammengehalten wird. Alfred Ill ist die einzige Figur, die den kathartischen Prozess der Läuterung durchläuft. Auf sich alleine gestellt und unausweichlich mit seinem Schicksal konfrontiert, gewinnt er nach anfänglicher Feigheit durch seine Haltung und Einsicht an Größe, entwickelt ein moralisches Bewusstsein und wird so letztlich zum tragischen Helden. In Der Besuch der alten Dame findet sich also Dürrenmatts typische zynische Kritik an der westlichen Wohlstandsgesellschaft, in der Geld Macht ist und die Welt regiert. Doch das Stück ist keine typische Tragödie, es ist mindestens genauso eine Komödie, und das ist Dürrenmatts herrlichem Stil und der Handlung geschuldet. Das Stück ist mit seinem Thema der Käuflichkeit einer ganzen Stadt eine lächerliche Groteske. Die Bürger werden zunächst als ehrliche Bürger gezeigt, dann jedoch bald als lächerliche Figuren vorgeführt, indem sie der Verführung des Geldes unterliegen. Lügner, geldgierige Betrüger und hohle Phrasendrescher gehören zum klassischen Personal einer Komödie, und Dürrenmatt lässt sie alle auflaufen. Nicht zufällig heißt die Stadt "Güllen" (vgl. Gülle), denn sie erweist sich als ein Sumpf der Unmenschlichkeit und Morast der Unmoral. Ich kann das Stück wirklich jedem ans Herz legen. Es liest sich unglaublich schnell, ist urkomisch und regt auch noch zum Nachdenken an. Wirklich, wirklich klasse. ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
Jan 03, 2024
|
Jan 04, 2024
|
Jan 02, 2024
|
Hardcover
| ||||||||||||||
| 9783949164019
| 4.34
| 164,513
| Sep 12, 2006
| 2006
|
it was amazing
|
I really held it together... until that last sentence. It destroyed me. In a good way. I may or may not have broken down sobbing. It is the most power
I really held it together... until that last sentence. It destroyed me. In a good way. I may or may not have broken down sobbing. It is the most powerful last sentence to a book I ever read. What?? Read this book, fall in love with its characters, be destroyed by what happens to them, learn about Nigeria & Biafra, and earn that last sentence. Like Ugwu did. Like Odenigbo did. They are the heart of this story. But so are Olanna & Kainene... besties, I promise I will write a full review for this some day. It's an excellent book! ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
Feb 20, 2024
|
Feb 25, 2024
|
Oct 08, 2023
|
Hardcover
| ||||||||||||||||
| 0593243226
| 9780593243220
| 0593243226
| 4.14
| 1,032
| May 25, 2021
| May 25, 2021
|
it was amazing
|
Languages of Truth by Salman Rushdie is one of my favorite books of the year, heck, one of my favorite books of all time. It is my first Rushdie, and
Languages of Truth by Salman Rushdie is one of my favorite books of the year, heck, one of my favorite books of all time. It is my first Rushdie, and reading this essay collection made me fall utterly in love with this man. Afterwards, I watched so many of his lectures, speeches, and documentaries. I knew that he was a fascinating figure, and still relevant today, but reading his essays made me see the loving man behind the word, the literature enthusiast, the book nerd, the smartypants, the comedian. I kid you not: I love this guy! He is hilarious, he is oh so very smart, and yet is able to convey his clever thoughts in precise and clear language that most will understand. Reading his book reviews, his musings on literature, film and art, made me utterly obsessed with the works he was discussing. Rushdie has that magic. He's a true artist, and a true critic. Oscar Wilde would be jealous. In Languages of Truth, he dissects various forms of art: the novels of Tolstoy, Roth, Cervantes, Shakespeare and Vonnegut. But there are also some essays on painters like Amrita Sher-Gil and Bhupen Khakhar, as well as some mentions of directors like Federico Fellini and Danny Boyle. He muses on his friendships with Harold Pinter, Christopher Hitchens and Carrie Fisher. But he also engages with the broader subjects of storytelling and literature in general, of culture, myths, migration, language and censorships. The plethora of subjects that he opens up is wonderful. You will leave the book feeling smarter. I cannot stress enough how pleasurable this reading experience was. I devoured it. Rushdie's words invigorated me. And even though I have accepted that I'm probably more at home on the reviewing end of the spectrum, Rushdie made me want to go out there and create, tell my own stories. Rushdie begins the collection with a sentence, "Before there were books, there were stories", and reflects on the art of storytelling and on his individual search for a narrative. A journey that took him beyond the realm of realism in order to create magical universes of alternative realities. I found his approach to storytelling refreshing, in the first essay, "Wonder Tales", he writes: "Write what you don't know. Either leave home and go find a good story somewhere else, or remember that diction is fictional and try to make things up. We are all dreaming creatures." For Rushdie, it is essential that we use our imagination, and that we realise that fiction is made up. And that that's a good thing. In "Proteus", he elaborates on these thoughts: "The act of reading or viewing is also a creative act, a participation in fiction, clap hands if you believe in fairies, and without it the magic doesn't work, and Tinker Bell dies." Later he says: "I understand the contract of fiction, so I can agree to suspend disbelief in what I know is not to be believed in the hope of finding, by doing so, some truth on which I can rely, in which I can have faith." And I couldn't agree more with that sentiment. As a reader, it is so important to uphold that contract. Without us, there would be no stories. The magic wouldn't work. But it is in that magic that is fiction that we can learn, find the truths about ourselves and our lives. That's at least how I feel about fictional stories. These are the stories that teach me the most, that make feel seen and unseen, that make me reflect. In "Another Writer's Beginnings", he talks of his upbringing and the importance of stories for him as a child. His father told him various stories and thereby taught him his two most important life lessons: "First, that stories were not true, but by being untrue they could make him feel and know truths that the truth could not tell him, and second, that they all belonged to him." How powerful is that! Let these messages sink in, appropriate them for your own lives and reading journeys. They are the key to understanding literature. Rushdie is also very firm in his believe that the art should be separated from its artist. "Nowadays," he claims, "there is a prevalent assumption that all novels are really autobiographies in disguise." He partly blames Dickens for this, because it was Dickens who popularised the "cult of the writer" and made people interested in the person behind the words. Rushdie argues that "a life lived in language is quite other than a life spent breathing air", and thus "The magic of the character lies not in its point of origin but in the precise language in which it is captured." And I have to say I agree with him: I think art can be seen and enjoyed seperate from its artist. I think nowadays the conversation is less about the art itself (whether it's good or bad) but more about if you want to support a person (an artist) with whose morals you align. It has nothing to do with literary critic, it's more about not wanting to put money into the pockets of people you deem offensive/problematic/hurtful. And whilst I loved Rushdie's more broader/general essays, I also marvelled at the ones in which he dissected one artist's work. I was pleasantly surprised that I was familiar with some of the artists' works that Rushdie was discussing. One of my absolute favorite essays, "Gabo and I", engages with the work of Gabriel García Márquez. And where I always have trouble explaining Gabo's magic to people, especially those who read his books and didn't enjoy them, Rushdie finds the right words: "And the singularity of García Márquez lies, I believe, in the precise note he strikes, a note somewhere on the scale between sweetness and bitterness, between gentle acceptance of one's fate and an anger about it; "the wrath of his imagination" from which note proceeds the music of solitude, of human beings locked, alone, in destinies they cannot escape, moving toward deaths foretold." He also explains the difference between fantasy and magical realism exceptionally well: "In Macondo, imagination is used to enrich reality, not to escape from it; the wonderful has deep roots in the real and for that reason is able to use the surreal to create metaphors and images of the real that come to feel more real than reality, more truthful than the truth." The important part of "magical realism" is not the first word, but the second: "realism". Writers of that literary tradition are revealing truths. There were also many moments in which I literally yelled "RUSHDIE GETS IT. In "Adaptation", he writes: "The Harry Potter films, determined to remain utterly faithful to the books, suffer cinematically from that loyalty, apart, perhaps, from Alfonso Cuarón's Prisoner of Azkaban." Yes, yes, yes. The movies, especially 5-8, are almost unwatchable, Cuarón is the only one who created a worthwhile film. In "Hans Christian Andersen", he gives Hector the flowers he deserves: "Heroes are flawed, and their adversaries not necessarily villainous but possessed of heroic virtues as well. Homer knew this too. Hector, the Trojan who falls in single combat to the Greek Achilles, is the lesser warrior but in many ways the better man." I would go so far as to say that he is the BEST MAN. But then again, I'm a Hector stan. ;) In the second half of the collection, Rushdie steers away from the more open discussions on literature and art, and connects them more to politics and what's happening in the world. These essays were powerful, and Rushdie, more often than not, hit the nail in the head. In "Courage", he writes: "Liberty is the air we breathe, and we live in a part of the world where, imperfect as the supply is, it is, nevertheless, freely available, at least to those of us who aren’t black youngsters wearing hoodies in Miami, and broadly breathable, unless, of course, we’re women in red states trying to make free choices about our own bodies. Imperfectly free, imperfectly breathable, but when it is breathable and free we don’t need to make a song and dance about it. We take it for granted and get on with our day. And at night, as we fall asleep, we assume we will be free tomorrow, because we were free today." Yes, yes, yes! There are a thousand more quotes I could share with you, but I think I'll leave you with the last quote of the book, from the essay in which he answers Vanity Fair's "Prout Questionnaire": "How would you prefer to die? I would prefer not to. " Amen to that. May we be blessed with many more Rushdie years, many more of his insights, and much more of his brilliance. I got away from Languages of Truth as a smarter, much happier girl. And maybe a better person than I was before. I now also have a list of 20 authors/books/art works that I desperately need to check out (because Rushdie told me to, and so, of course, I will oblige), so I will be busy for the next couple of years. Naturally, I also ordered his two former essay collections, Imaginary Homelands and Step Across This Line. Can't wait to be further illuminated by big daddy Rushdie! ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
Jul 08, 2023
|
Sep 2023
|
Jun 18, 2023
|
Paperback
| ||||||||||||||
| 9783959392129
| 4.25
| 312
| 2016
| Jun 02, 2022
|
it was amazing
|
Ich könnte vor Freude weinen. Dieses Buch ist einfach zuckersüß, herzerwärmend und wunderschön gestaltet. Ein wahres Fest für die Augen und das eigene
Ich könnte vor Freude weinen. Dieses Buch ist einfach zuckersüß, herzerwärmend und wunderschön gestaltet. Ein wahres Fest für die Augen und das eigene innere Kind. Mir fiel das Buch das erste Mal in die Hände, als ich Ende September zur Hochzeit meines Cousins nach Münster fuhr. Seit dem Tod meiner Oma verschlägt mich nicht mehr vieles in diese Stadt, aber immer, wenn ich da bin, mache ich einen Abstecher zu Poertgen Herder, meinem absoluten Lieblingsbuchladen in Münster. Da ich dieses Mal noch einige Stunden Zeit hatte, bevor mein Zug nach Berlin abfuhr, nahm ich mir besonders viel Zeit, die Regale abzuschlendern und durch alle Etagen des Ladens zu stöbern. In der Kinderbuchabteilung, die ich ausgiebig durchforstete, auf der Suche nach interessanten Büchern für meinen Neffen, stieß ich dann auf Morstad's Und heute?. Das Buch sprach mich von Anfang an an. Die Illustration auf dem Cover war verheißungsvoll, ein ungewöhnlicher Stil, aber einer, der mir sehr zusagte. Und als ich dann die ersten Seiten aufblätterte, war es bereits um mich geschehen. Was ein Zeichenstil! Was für Farben! Was für ein tolles Konzept! Ich hätte dieses Buch als kleines Mädchen so geliebt. Es ist ja selbst jetzt zu einem meiner all-time favorites geworden, obwohl ich nichts Nostalgisches mit dem Buch verbinden kann. :> Es ist einfach nur wundervoll! Mitgenommen habe ich es bei Poertgen Herder dann übrigens nicht. Mein innerer miser war zu stark und ich wollte keine 19,00€ für ein Kinderbuch ausgeben, obwohl der Preis für diese wunderschönen 50 Seiten durchaus gerechtfertigt wäre. Also sagte ich dem Buch Lebewohl, konnte dann aber in Berlin nicht ganz mit ihm abschließen. Als ich es dann für 9,00€ auf reBuy fand (und sowieso schon dabei war, meinen Warenkorb zu füllen ... ihr werdet nicht glauben, was für einen Schnapper ich da gemacht habe, aber das erzähle ich euch ein andermal), war die Sache geritzt. Zack. Bestellt. Jetzt am Nikolaustag in meinen Händen und ich könnte glücklicher nicht sein. Ich hätt' Kunst studieren müssen, um euch Morstad's Zeichenstil lebhaft zu beschreiben, daher verlinke ich euch einfach ihre Webseite, auf der ihr mal selber stöbern könnt. Ich liebe diesen etwas rougheren "Buntstift-Look", der auch der Ästhetik eines Erwachsenen entspricht. Jede Seite ist ein Fest, auch wenn mir die Seiten, die in Grautönen gehalten sind, nicht so zusagen. Ich hätte es präferiert, wären alle Seiten voll koloriert gewesen. Mich würde interessieren, was Morstad dazu bewegte, diese zwei unterschiedlichen Farbkonzepte für diese Geschichte zu verwenden. Wie auch immer, Und heute? ist ein "Aussuchbuch" (mir fällt gerade kein besseres Wort ein). Eines, bei dem Leser*innen dazu aufgefordert werden, sich unterschiedliche Dinge aus verschiedenen Themenbereichen auszusuchen. Wir begleiten verschiedene Kinder durch ihren Tag, vom Aufstehen bis zum Schlafengehen. Da so ein Tag ja auch lang ist, gibt es eben auch viele Entscheidungen zu treffen, viele Dinge, die man sich aussuchen kann: Welche Kleidung wird angezogen? Welche Frisur gewählt? Was wird zum Frühstück gegessen? Welche Blumen möchte man pflücke und wem schenken? Was ist das coolste Spielzeug? So on and so forth. Die Themen sind gut gewählt, da sie die Lebensrealität vieler Kinder abbilden. Das Buch kann auch bezüglich Diversity punkten. Morstad gibt auch Schwarzen, indigenen, asiatischen und Kindern of Color einen Raum in ihrem Buch, ich würde fast sagen, dass diese Gesichter dominieren, was einfach klasse ist! Insgesamt würde ich sagen, dass das Buch eher auf Mädchen als auf Jungen zugeschnitten ist, da deutlich mehr weibliche Figuren vorkommen und bei den Kleidungsseiten auch mehr traditionelle Kleidung für Mädchen, sprich Kleider und Tütüs etc., vorkommen – was nicht heißen soll, dass sich Jungs nicht für Kleider und Tütüs entscheiden sollen oder können. Ich bin sehr gespannt, wie mein Neffe später auf das Buch reagieren wird. Bestimmt unterschätze ich die kleinen Racker total und sie scheißen noch mehr auf Gendernormen als wir. Das Buch hätte definitiv inklusiver sein können, so kommen bspw. keine mehrgewichtigen oder behinderten Kinder vor. Trotzdem hat es bei mir ein ganz wohliges Gefühl hinterlassen. Die gezeigte Diversität wäre bei Kinderbüchern meines Jahrgangs absolut utopisch gewesen. Bücher wie diese waren damals nicht zu finden – jedenfalls nicht in meinem Bücherregal oder in meiner lokalen Buchhandlung. Ich finde, dass besonders im Bereich der illustrierten Geschichten (Kinderbücher, Comics, Graphic Novels etc.) der Wandel hin zu mehr Diversität deutlich spürbar ist. Und das macht mich einfach nur glücklich. We have a long way to go, aber Bücher wie Und heute? scheinen heute der Standard zu sein, nicht mehr die Ausnahme. Dieses Buch regt die eigene Fantasie ein und lädt ein, mit Kindern ins Gespräch zu kommen. Ich kann mir gut vorstellen, dass viele Kinder ihre Freude an einem Buch wie diesem finden werden. Viele spannende Konversationen und Erkenntnisse können sich aus der Lektüre ergeben. Ganz nebenbei können sich Kinder auch neuen Wortschatz erschließen. Für mich ein absolutes Jahreshighlight! ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
Dec 06, 2022
|
Dec 06, 2022
|
Nov 25, 2022
|
Hardcover
| ||||||||||||||||
| 1844087638
| 9781844087631
| 1844087638
| 4.00
| 61,316
| 1951
| Aug 04, 2011
|
it was amazing
|
Did she? Didn't she? Who's to blame? These are questions that seem to circle Daphne du Maurier's Gothic novel My Cousin Rachel. However, instead of fo
Did she? Didn't she? Who's to blame? These are questions that seem to circle Daphne du Maurier's Gothic novel My Cousin Rachel. However, instead of focusing on the mystery of our enigmatic heroine, it seems to me that the novel rather reveals how dangerous rejected men can be. Rachel, consistently struggling to accommodate her demanding, petulant cousin Philip, and continually struck, horrified, by his resemblance to her dead, abusive husband, is ultimately nothing more frightening than a woman fighting to carve out independence in a world designed to deny her it. For a Victorian audience, this quest for self-hood would have indeed rendered Rachel frightening, threatening – even mad. Yet through the eyes of a twenty-first century audience it is Philip's entitlement that provides this discomfort. Philip is young but his sense of ownership over Rachel is disconcerting to the point of upsetting, and his misguided attempts to woo her become increasingly obsessive, suffocating, and even violent. I'm not sure how an audience could see Philip choking Rachel on the stairs and be convinced of his innocence as a poor lamb driven to distraction by her womanly wiles. The very notion that Philip's behaviour is even slightly justified by Rachel's sensuality and complexity is part of a toxic narrative whereby men are incapable of controlling their "animalistic desires". It's the same societal drive that forces girls to cover their shoulders so as not to "distract" their male peers. It is the same rhetoric that blames victims for existing, and for being too tempting, too undressed. Philip comes to the conclusion that Rachel is guilty within minutes of discovering his uncle's death, without a shred of evidence, seemingly motivated by a hatred of or total unfamiliarity with women. To Philip women are strange, alien creatures — the only women allowed in his house growing up were the dogs. Philip is perplexed by the idea that his uncle would ever want to marry, convinced that his own companionship is more than satisfactory. It is not just women that Philip is ignorant to, but the idea that a man would ever be attracted to one, let alone need one. It is within this context that Rachel is portrayed as alien – while her gender is strange and mysterious to Philip, she is also foreign, from a foreign land, speaking a foreign tongue, drinking foreign tea, with foreign friends. It is this very "difference" that fuels Philip's suspicion. It is the unfounded concern that Rachel is somehow sending money abroad that leads Philip to question her motives (how unpatriotic! How frivolous! A woman spending her own income!). Indeed, Rachel is seen by Philip as a victim – frail, mourning, constantly on the verge of tears – until he gifts her with economic independence, and it is only then that she becomes a "dangerous" creature. Philip is a rampant misogynist, a spoilt child, and emblematic of entitled manbabies everywhere who think they have a right to a woman's body. The sort of man who, in the twenty-first century, would start a sentence with "but not all men…" without a trace of irony. Philip is incapable of even beginning to process the idea that Rachel may not want him – may not want any man, may just wish to live her life the way she wishes to live it. As a reader it is hard, if not impossible, to not lose your patience with Philip. Gradually "bewitched" by Rachel, he makes a series of decisions that threaten to capsize the reader's sympathies. He recklessly handles the family's heirlooms, he doesn't listen to his godfather, shuns the attentions of his caring would-be soulmate – and all this before legally entrusting his whole fortune into Rachel's name, with little to go on but puppy love. Philip's vehement belief that he is saving Rachel, and that she, in turn, should give herself over to him, is enough to drive any reader mad. Even the term "manbaby", while an accurate representation of Philip's immaturity, seems to express too softly the determination with which he pursues Rachel, his hatred of her species, his desire to demonise her, villainise her, and ultimately fatally endanger her life, rather than accept that he cannot have her. It's the same reason why women are murdered by the men they reject. It's this sense of entitlement to and ownership of the objectified female body that renders the woman an archetype – angel, whore – rather than a three-dimensional human being. Rachel is an angel when she allows Philip in her bed and a demoness when she denies him. The question is not "Did she? Didn't she?" because that question is redundant. It is not Daphne du Maurier's or the reader's decision as to whether Rachel is guilty, it is Philip's perspective of her, fluid and unstable and shifting, and entirely dependent upon how obediently she conforms to his desires and whims. We are trapped by his male gaze. Du Maurier doesn't allow her readers to look beyond it, to see the true Rachel. All we can see are distortions. A distorted narrative because it is written solely from the perspective of a shunned man. This book is not about whether Rachel killed Ambrose or didn't – it's about whether she agrees to marry Philip, hand herself over to him, his whims and desires. To answer the question of "Who’s to blame?", the answer seems explicitly obvious – Philip, his puppy face, and the culture of toxic masculinity he represents. My Cousin Rachel is an underrated feminist classic of the 20th century. Its message and narrative technique were ahead of its time; the novel's complexity and true meaning are things that can only be caught from a modern feminist view point. Chapeau, Daphne, you really outdid yourself! ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
Aug 21, 2022
|
Sep 21, 2022
|
Aug 05, 2022
|
Hardcover
| ||||||||||||||
| 0060531045
| 9780060531041
| 0060531045
| 4.12
| 996,559
| 1967
| Nov 2019
|
it was amazing
|
Es gibt viele gute Gründe, Hundert Jahre Einsamkeit zu lesen. Es ist eines der wichtigsten Bücher des 20. Jahrhunderts, der Autor, Gabriel García Márq
Es gibt viele gute Gründe, Hundert Jahre Einsamkeit zu lesen. Es ist eines der wichtigsten Bücher des 20. Jahrhunderts, der Autor, Gabriel García Márquez, erhielt den Nobelpreis für Literatur, das Buch ist eines der Hauptwerke des Magischen Realismus, welcher durch südamerikanische Autor*innen geprägt wurde... und doch waren es nicht meine Gründe, das Buch endlich zur Hand zu nehmen. Mir reichte ein einfacher Satz: Viele Jahre später, vor dem Erschießungskommando, sollte Oberst Aureliano Buendía sich an jenen fernen Nachmittag erinnern, als sein Vater ihn mitnahm, das Eis kennenzulernen.Mit diesem Satz beginnt Hundert Jahre Einsamkeit. Mit diesem Satz weckte Márquez eine Neugier in mir, die ich sofort stillen musste. Erschießungskommando, Eis kennenlernen, Oberst Aureliano Buendía – ich musste einfach wissen, was es damit auf sich hat. Und so begab ich mich auf eine Reise, tauchte in die Welt Macondos ab und war sechs Lesetage vollkommen gefesselt von einer Geschichte, die mich einfach nicht loslassen wollte. Hundert Jahre Einsamkeit ist nicht nur immens gut geschrieben, als Leser*in merkt man sofort, dass Márquez wirklich etwas zu erzählen hatte. (S)eine Familiengeschichte, die Geschichte Kolumbiens, die Geschichte Südamerikas. Viele seiner Romane wurden später millionenfach verkauft, doch keiner hat die literarische Landkarte derart verändert wie diese Familiensaga der Buendías in Hundert Jahre Einsamkeit, dieser Allegorie der Geschichte Kolumbiens. Gleich zu Anfang des Buches schildert Márquez die Absonderlichkeiten des Dorfes Macondo und seiner Bewohner*innen: Seit den Tagen der Gründung baute José Arcadio Buendía Fallen und Käfige. In kurzer Zeit füllte er nicht nur sein eigenes Haus, sondern auch alle anderen des Dorfes mit Turpialen, Kanarienvögeln, Meisen und Rotkehlchen. Das Konzert so vieler verschiedener Vögel wurde jedoch so betäubend, daß Úrsula sich die Ohren mit Bienenwachs zustopfen mußte, um nicht den Sinn für die Wirklichkeit zu verlieren.Ich zitiere diese Stelle, weil sie mir emblematisch für den ganzen Roman erscheint. Als Lesende*r, die*der zum ersten Mal in Márquez' schräge Welt abtaucht, fühlt mich sich genauso wie Úrsula in ihren ersten Tagen in Macondo: so als würde einem jeglicher Realitätssinn entzogen. Es ist ein schwindelerregendes Gefühl. Der Text ist so mit der südamerikanischen Kultur und Landschaft verwoben, dass man sich als westliche*r Lesende*r auf diesen einlassen muss; der Text erklärt sich nicht von selbst, vieles sollte man zwar hinnehmen, anderes hingegen sollte man nochmal ordentlich (nach-)recherchieren. Wovon ich abraten würde, ist, eigene Standards und Moralvorstellungen auf den Text anwenden zu wollen. Das kann nur schief gehen. Márquez präsentiert viel Fremdes, Ungewöhnliches, teils sogar Abartiges... es entsteht ein einzigartiges Tableau interessanter Charaktere und unerklärlicher Ereignisse, ein Meisterwerk, welches einen in schwindelerregende Höhen reißt, wenn man es lässt. Doch worum geht es genau? "Am Ufer eines Flusses mit kristallklarem Wasser, das dahineilt durch ein Bett aus geschliffenen Steinen, weiß und riesig wie prähistorische Eier", befindet sich das imaginäre Dorf Macondo. Es wird gegründet und beherrscht von der Familie Buendía. Márquez erzählt die Geschichte dieser Familie über sieben Generationen im Familienkontext und Kontext der Einzelschicksale hinweg – über einen Zeitraum von hundert Jahren. Dabei geht es um Höhepunkte und Katastrophen, um Aberglauben und Liberalismus, um Liebschaften und Missgunst, um goldene Fische und Emigrationsträume in Brüssel und schließlich auch um brutal ermordete Arbeiter im Streik und Nationallegenden. Beeindruckend ist, wie es Márquez gelingt, ganze Epochen charakteristisch durch das Buendía-Kaleidoskop in einem imaginären Raum zu betrachten und zu verdichten, der Raum und Zeit erhellt, indem er sie verengt. Dadurch lässt sich der Roman wie eine Geschichte en miniature zur Geschichte Lateinamerikas lesen. Die Literaturtheoretikerin Mechthild Strausfeld teilt die Romanstruktur in ein paralleles geschichtliches Stufenverhältnis ein: (1) Entdeckung, Eroberung, Kolonialzeit (1492–1830)Die Parallelverweise zum Roman: (1) Gründung Macondos durch die Familie Buendía(1) Der Stammvater der Buendías, José Arcadio Buendía, zieht, da er einen Mord begangen hat und vor dem Geist des von ihm Ermordeten flüchtet, mit seiner Frau Úrsula Iguarán sowie einigen anderen Familien durch den Dschungel, auf der Suche nach einem geeigneten Ort zur Gründung eines Dorfes. Nach der Gründung Macondos taucht eine Gruppe Sinti*zze und Rom*nja auf, zu denen auch Melquíades gehört, die den Dorfbewohner immer wieder neue wissenschaftliche Entdeckungen, wie Magnete und Teleskope, näher bringen. Melquíades pflegt eine enge Freundschaft mit José Arcadio, der sich immer mehr zurückzieht und davon besessen ist, die Geheimnisse des Universums zu erforschen, die ihm präsentiert werden. Schließlich wird er wahnsinnig, spricht nur noch Latein und wird von seiner Familie viele Jahre lang bis zu seinem Tod an einen Kastanienbaum gefesselt. (2) Jahre später besiegelt das Auftauchen eines Landrichters die Eingliederung Macondos ins System staatlicher Verwaltung und Gewalt des neuen unabhängigen Kolumbiens, vor dem seine abgelegene Topographie die Bewohner*innen ja gerade bewahren sollte. In der Stadt wird eine manipulierte Wahl zwischen der konservativen und der liberalen Partei abgehalten, was Aureliano Buendía dazu veranlasst, in einen Bürgerkrieg gegen die konservative Regierung einzutreten. Er wird zu einer Ikone unter den Revolutionsführern, kämpft viele Jahre lang und überlebt mehrere Attentate, wird aber schließlich des Krieges überdrüssig und unterzeichnet einen Friedensvertrag mit den Konservativen. Desillusioniert kehrt er nach Macondo zurück und verbringt den Rest seines Lebens damit, in seiner Werkstatt kleine Goldfische herzustellen. (3) Die Eisenbahn kommt nach Macondo und bringt neue Technologien und viele ausländische Siedler mit sich. Ein amerikanisches Obstunternehmen gründet außerhalb der Stadt eine Bananenplantage und errichtet auf der anderen Seite des Flusses ein eigenes, getrenntes Dorf. Dies läutet eine Zeit des Wohlstands ein, die in einer Tragödie endet, als die kolumbianische Armee Tausende von streikenden Plantagenarbeitern massakriert - ein Vorfall, der auf dem Bananenmassaker von 1928 basiert. José Arcadio Segundo, der einzige Überlebende des Massakers, findet keine Beweise für das Massaker, und die überlebenden Stadtbewohner leugnen oder weigern sich zu glauben, dass es geschehen ist. (4) Am Ende des Romans ist Macondo heruntergekommen und fast verlassen. Die einzigen verbliebenen Buendías sind Amaranta Úrsula und ihr Neffe Aureliano, dessen Herkunft von seiner Großmutter Fernanda verheimlicht wird. Aureliano und Amaranta Úrsula beginnen unwissentlich eine inzestuöse Beziehung. Sie bekommen ein Kind, das den Schwanz eines Schweins trägt, womit sich die lebenslange Angst der längst verstorbenen Matriarchin Úrsula erfüllt. Amaranta Úrsula stirbt bei der Geburt, das Kind wird von Ameisen aufgefressen und hinterlässt Aureliano Babilonia als letztes Mitglied der Familie. Dieser entziffert die verschlüsselten Schriften des Melquíades, die sich als eine Chronik und Prophezeiung der Geschichte Macondos herausstellen; sie endet mit der Zerstörung des Dorfes, bei der auch Aureliano Babilonia zu Tode kommt – just in dem Moment, als er davon in Melquíades' Prophezeiung liest. Before reaching the final line, however, he had already understood that he would never leave that room, for it was foreseen that the city of mirrors (or mirages) would be wiped out by the wind and exiled from the memory of men at the precise moment when Aureliano Babilonia would finish deciphering the parchments, and that everything written on them was unrepeatable since time immemorial and forever more, because races condemned to one hundred years of solitude did not have a second opportunity on earth.Ein beherrschendes Thema in Hundert Jahre Einsamkeit ist die unausweichliche Wiederholung von Geschichte. Die Protagonisten werden von ihrer Vergangenheit und der Komplexität der Zeit beherrscht. Da sie ihre Vergangenheit verdrängen und vergessen, werden sie schließlich bestraft. Márquez zeigt auf, welche Kraft in der Erinnerung steckt, wieviel wir von der Vergangenheit lernen könnten, wenn wir nur gewillt wären. Er zeigt auch den Verfall, der unausweichlich wird, wenn sich Geschichte stets im Kreis dreht. "What did you expect," murmured José Arcadio Segundo. "Time passes."Es wurde oft konstatiert, dass dieser Roman einer der Texte ist, den die "lateinamerikanische Kultur geschaffen hat, um sich selbst zu verstehen." Márquez nutzt das Fantastische, um der Realität Ausdruck zu verleihen. Mythos und Geschichte überlappen sich in seinem Werk. Vielen kolumbianischen Nationalmythen wird durch die Geschichte der Buendías Leben einverleibt. Wichtige historische Ereignisse, die Márquez in seine Geschichte webt, sind bspw. die Eingliederung der Sinti*zze und Rom*nja, die liberale politische Reform einer kolonialen Lebensweise, die Errichtung einer Eisenbahn in einem gebirgigen Land, der Tausend-Tage-Krieg (Guerra de los Mil Días, 1899-1902), die unternehmerische Hegemonie der United Fruit Company und das militärische Massaker an streikenden Arbeitern. Realität und Mythos/Magie verschwimmen. Dies mag westlichen Leser*innen kurios erscheinen. Für Márquez war es das Normalste der Welt. Er sagte einst: "Tatsächlich ist diese magische Welt, von der so viel gesprochen und über die von den Kritikern so viel geschrieben wird, unser Alltagsleben, das Leben, an das wir uns gewöhnt haben. Ich bin in einem Haus von Großmüttern und Tanten aufgewachsen, in einem Haus von Frauen, wo man inmitten dieser zweiten Natur lebte, dieser zweiten Wirklichkeit hinter der Wirklichkeit, hinter der es möglicherweise noch weitere unbekannte Wirklichkeiten gibt. Ich betrachte mich als einen reinen Realisten, der alltägliche Ereignisse katalogisiert, die später fantastisch erscheinen." Lost in the solitude of his immense power, he began to lose direction.Das vielleicht wichtigste Thema des Buches ist das der Einsamkeit. Macondo wurde in einem abgelegenen Teil des kolumbianischen Regenwaldes gegründet. Die Einsamkeit des Dorfes steht stellvertretend für die Kolonialzeit in der lateinamerikanischen Geschichte, in der Außenposten und Kolonien im Grunde genommen nicht miteinander verbunden waren. Vom Rest der Welt isoliert, werden die Buendías immer einsamer und egoistischer. Da jedes Familienmitglied nur für sich selbst lebt, werden die Buendías zu Repräsentanten der aristokratischen, landbesitzenden Elite, die Lateinamerika beherrschte. Irgendjemand hat einmal gesagt, mit dem Kolumbianer Gabriel García Márquez sei Lateinamerika neu entdeckt worden. Das ist natürlich übertrieben und gilt höchstens für die nicht Spanisch sprechende Welt. Aber es ist dann auch nicht ganz falsch. Die Nobelpreis-Jury hat den lateinamerikanischen Kontinent nicht mit Ehren überschüttet. Gabriel García Márquez bekam den Preis 1982, Pablo Neruda 1981. Ein Gigant wie Jorge Luis Borges konnte lange auf den Nobelpreis warten. Márquez überwand die Grenzen, die literarische Kontinente trennen. Mit Hundert Jahre Einsamkeit habe auch ich mich endlich auf eine literarische Reise nach Südamerika begeben. Natürlich las ich zuvor von südamerikanischen Autor*innen, Machado de Assis und Allende fallen mir als Erstes ein, doch keine*r fesselte und beeindruckte mich so wie Márquez. Dieser eröffnete mir eine neue, faszinierende Welt, in die ich von nun an öfters abtauchen werde. Und natürlich werde ich auch Hundert Jahre Einsamkeit noch mehr als einmal in meinem Leben lesen. Das Buch hält noch so viele Rätsel, unverstandene Momente und Freuden bereit, to quote literary icon Cassandra Howard: "I have never ever been happier." ;) ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
Jul 18, 2022
|
Jul 23, 2022
|
Jul 12, 2022
|
Hardcover
| ||||||||||||||
| 3982432308
| 9783982432304
| 3982432308
| 4.70
| 27
| 2022
| 2022
|
it was amazing
|
Was für ein großartiges Buch. Einfach nur WOW. Definitiv eines meiner liebsten für dieses Jahr, wenn nicht of all time! Sharon und Heinrich haben sich
Was für ein großartiges Buch. Einfach nur WOW. Definitiv eines meiner liebsten für dieses Jahr, wenn nicht of all time! Sharon und Heinrich haben sich hier in mein Herz geschrieben. Jede Seite war ein Genuss, eine Offenbarung und so voller Liebe für Sprache, Literatur, Gemeinwohl und so vieles mehr, was ich selbst auch schätze. Bei der Danksagung, in der der Verlag René Böll für die Rechte an der Kurzgeschichte seines Vaters dankte, musste ich tatsächlich ein paar Tränchen verdrücken. Ich habe bisher nur sehr wenige deutsche Schriftsteller*innen lieben lernen können. Deutsche Klassiker stehen bei mir nicht weit oben auf der Prioritätenliste. Zum einen hat mir die Schulzeit die Freude an deutscher Literatur versaut, zum anderen haben Stimmen alter weißer Männer bei mir nur selten Vorrang. Bisher fand ich es schwer, wenn nicht unmöglich, einen persönlichen Zugang zum deutschen Literaturkanon zu finden. Durch das Lesen von Autor*innen, dessen Zweitsprache Deutsch ist, hat sich für mich ein neues, interessantes Feld aufgetan. Autor*innen wie Sharon Dodua Otoo, Abbas Khider und Semra Ertan öffneten mir die Tür zur deutschen Literatur. Gesammeltes Schweigen, 2022 bei Edition Zweifel erschienen, öffnete mir nun die Tür in die Welt Heinrich Bölls. Und wow, ich weiß gar nicht, was ich sagen soll, but i am quite possibly OBSESSED! Ich bin mir ziemlich sicher, dass diese Sammlung Ausgangspunkt meiner neuen Böll-Obsession sein wird. Ich habe mich im Anschluss an die Lektüre mit dem Gesamtwerk des Autors befasst und will fast alles von ihm lesen. Böll wird mich wohl bis zum Ende meines Lebens begleiten. How crazy is that? Ich weiß, ich will nicht immer so dramatisch klingen, aber Gesammeltes Schweigen quite possibly changed my life. Es hat sich in meinem eigenen Literaturkanon als absolute Pflichtlektüre zementiert. Doch fangen wir von vorne an! Zweifel ist ein Büro für kritisches Gestalten, eine Edition für Printformate mit Haltung. Ich war zunächst verwirrt, da es sich hier nicht um einen klassischen Verlag handelt, und Gesammeltes Schweigen ist tatsächlich ihre erste fiktionale Publikation. In der Edition Zweifel erscheinen Bücher, die zwar klassisch gebunden, aber unkonventionell gedacht und gemacht sind. Und ungebundene Medien wie Plakate, die auf die Straße gehen können und sich als öffentliche Räume verstehen. Gesammeltes Schweigen verbindet Heinrich Bölls Kurzgeschichte "Doktor Murkes gesammeltes Schweigen" (1955) mit Sharon Dodua Otoos "Schnipsel der Stille" (2022). Bölls legendäre Kurzgeschichte wird in dem Sammelband graphisch interessant dargeboten, währen Sharon Dodua Otoo eine Haltung zu Bölls Text sucht. Sie recherchiert, schreibt Briefe, tippt Nachrichten, zitiert, experimentiert – und verfasst nicht nur einen Text, sondern viele. Die Sammlung versteht sich als Gespräch, das immer wieder aufgenommen wird und das das Schweigen nicht fürchtet. In diesem Buch treten nicht nur die Autor*innen, sondern auch Form und Inhalt in Dialog – sie wurden von Anfang an zusammengedacht. Entstanden ist eine Gestaltung, die digitale Kommunikation aus Papier bringt und Schweigen sichtbar macht. “Schweigen”, sagte Murke, “ich sammle Schweigen.”Ich bin selbst verwundert darüber, aber vor dieser Sammlung hatte ich noch nie von Bölls Kurzgeschichte "Doktor Murkes gesammeltes Schweigen" gehört. Generell wusste ich nicht viel über Böll. Er war nie Teil meines Deutschunterrichts (...wofür ich im Nachhinein dankbar bin, denn meine Lehrer*innen hätten es wahrscheinlich sogar geschafft, mir diesen brillanten Autor zu versauen). In der Kurzgeschichte, die auch als Satire gelesen werden kann, geht es um die intellektuelle Kontinuität zwischen NS-Ideologie und der Kultur der Nachkriegszeit in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland. Die Geschichte spielt Anfang der 50er-Jahre und fokussiert zwei Charaktere: den jungen Dr. Murke, Redakteur in der Abteilung "Kulturwort" beim Rundfunk, und Bur-Malottke, eine einflussreiche Geistesgröße. Bur-Malottke, "der in der religiösen Begeisterung des Jahres 1945 konvertiert hatte" (um seinen Sinneswandel weg von der Nazi-Ideologie zu erklären), verlangt vom Intendanten seines Haussenders, dass aus seinem Vortrag zum Wesen der Kunst, in dem er häufig auf Gott Bezug nimmt, das Wort "Gott" durch die Wendung "jenes höhere Wesen, das wir verehren" ersetzt wird, da dies "mehr der Mentalität entsprach, zu der er sich vor 1945 bekannt hatte". Er weigert sich jedoch, den Vortrag komplett neu einzusprechen, stattdessen soll das Wort aus den Bändern herausgeschnitten und mit der neuen Wendung ersetzt werden. Dr. Murke wird diese irrwitzige Aufgabe zuteil. Bei der nun folgenden Arbeit – mehrfaches Anhören der Rede, Herausschneiden von "Gott" und Vorbereitung der Neueinspielung – lernt Murke den von ihm ohnehin nicht sehr geschätzten Bur-Malottke zu hassen. Als jener zum Einsprechen des Satzes "jenes höhere Wesen, das wir verehren" erscheint, macht ihn Murke darauf aufmerksam, dass er besagte Wendung für 27 Textstellen benötige, unterschieden nach Nominativ/Akkusativ, Genitiv, Dativ und Vokativ („O Gott!“) und dass die Rede durch die Umschnitte um eine Minute verlängert würde, was man durch Kürzungen an anderer Stelle wieder werde ausgleichen müssen. Bur-Malottke, der diese Komplikationen nicht bedacht hatte, erbittet beim Intendanten eine zusätzliche Sendeminute. Zudem äußert er den Wunsch, dass alle seine Tonaufzeichnungen im Rundfunkarchiv – wohl über 120 Stunden – gleichermaßen überarbeitet werden sollen. Die Geschichte ist nicht nur brilliant geschrieben, witzig ("Früher hatte sie sich Wilfriede-Ulla gennant, dann aber den Namen der Einfachheit halber zu Wulf zusammengezogen.") und pointiert, sie offenbart auch Bölls klare Haltung zum Umgang mit ehemaligen Nationalsozialisten (bzw. deren Mitläufern und Nutznießern) in der Nachkriegszeit in der Bundesrepublik, vor allem aber auch im Kulturbetrieb, als dessen Teil sich Böll verstand. Bur-Malottke, wie seine Vorbilder aus dem realen Leben, war zum christlichen Glauben konvertiert, um seinen plötzlichen, antinationalsozialistischen "Sinneswandel" zu rechtfertigen. Nun, zur Mitte der 1950er-Jahre, glaubt er, die Kehrtwende von der Kehrtwende einläuten zu können, und möchte die Gottesbekundungen aus einem Vortrag gestrichen wissen. Auf einer anderen Ebene macht Böll interessante Aussagen über das Schweigen, und welchen Wert es hat, in einer Gesellschaft, die viel zu laut ist und sich selbst zu gerne reden hört, bzw. den "falschen" Leuten Gehör schenkt. Und so sammelt Murke Schweigen, indem er die Stellen aus Tonbändern herausschneidet, in denen die Sprecher schweigen. Auch seine Freundin hält er dazu an, ihm Tonbänder zu "beschweigen". Er braucht die Aufnahmen, um sie sich abends zur Erholung von der Hohlheit und Geschwätzigkeit des Mediums, also zur Seelenhygiene, vorspielen zu können. Und ja, es stimmt, dass Böll ein “alter weißer Mann” ist, dennoch (oder vielleicht deswegen?) sehe ich ihn ganz klar als Vorbild. […] Ich lese Böll als eine Person, die sich zu ihrer Zeit deutlich positioniert hat. Er verstand, dass Satire nicht nach unten, sondern nach oben zielt.Diese Bedeutung von Schweigen, nicht Stille (die Intentionalität macht den Unterschied), ist, was Sharon Dodua Otoo so an Bölls Geschichte fasziniert: "Warum genau sammelt Murke Schweigen und nicht Stille?" Im Schwarzen Feminismus wird dem Schweigen meist eine andere Bedeutung zuteil. Schweigen im Sinne von "zum Schweigen gebracht werden" (to be silenced) ist etwas, was überwunden werden muss. So zitiert Sharon bspw. Audre Lordes ikonischen Satz "Your silence will not protect you" und merkt an, dass für Schwarze Menschen Sprechen (das genaue Gegenteil von Schweigen) ein Akt der Rebellion und des Widerstandes ist, dass es wichtig ist, dass wir sprechen. In ihren "Schnipseln der Stille" zitiert sie aber auch die afrodeutsche Schriftstellerin Olivia Wenzel: "Schweigen ist machtvoll, Stille hat Kraft.", die dem Schweigen ebenfalls eine besondere Macht zumisst. Sharon merkt ebenfalls an, dass es beim Sprechakt wichtig ist, welche Worte wir benutzen, "dann handelt derjenige sozusagen unfassbar verantwortungslos, der nur irgendwas in den Raum wirft. Dann wird nämlich die Kunstfreiheit zur Narrenfreiheit. Nicht ein Ort des Experiments, im Ringen mit dem Gewissen, sondern ein Freifahrtschein." In diesem Zusammenhang zitiert sie May Ayims Gedicht "künstlerische freiheit": alle worte in den mund nehmenEines meiner Lieblingsgedichte, gerade weil es so mehrdeutig ist. Auf der einen Seite könnte man das Gedicht als eine Kritik an der Kunstfreiheit, wenn diese als Narrenfreiheit ausgelegt wird, verstehen. In dieser Interpretation würde May bemängeln, dass es Leute gibt, denen es egal ist, welche Worte sie benutzen und wen sie damit womöglich verletzen. Dies ist wohl die gängigste Interpretation des Gedichts. Auf der anderen Seite könnte man das Gedicht aber auch als Lobeshymne auf die Kunstfreiheit lesen, vor allem wenn diese von marginalisierten Menschen wahrgenommen wird, und Marginalisierte bspw. nicht mehr ständig darauf achten, ob ihr Aufmerksammachen auf Missstände den Mainstream verletzt und nicht passt. Passend hierzu fand Sharon auch ein Zitat Bölls: "was den einen trösten mag, kann den anderen zu Tode verletzen." In ihrer Recherche ist Sharon über mehrere Reden (und somit Zitate) Bölls gestolpert, die sie haben aufhorchen lassen. Sie zitiert Böll: "Der Mensch als gesellschaftliches Wesen existiert ja nur durch Sprache. Da sehe ich für einen Schriftsteller schon eine sehr große Verantwortung, diese Sprache zu hüten und sie auch zu reinigen." und schreibt ihrem Freund: "Was meint Böll mit “reinigen”? Das klingt so Nazi." Ihr Freund antwortet ihr: "Ich denke, es könnte vielleicht im Verständnis von “heilen” zu lesen sein. Heinrich Böll findet nach dem Zweiten Weltkrieg nicht nur ein zerstörtes Land vor, sondern auch eine von den Nazis vergiftete Sprache." Sharon reflektiert – "Böll hatte erlebt, wie die deutsche Sprache dazu benutzt wurde, aus Mitmenschen erst Fremde und schließlich Gegenstände zu machen." – und kommt zu dem Schluss, dass Böll sich sehr bewusst darüber war, welche Macht Sprache hat. Und dass vor allem Schriftsteller*innen, deren Werkzeug die Sprache ist, sich darüber im Klaren sein müssen, welche Begrifflichkeiten sie verwenden, und welche Auswirkungen dies hat. Haltung und Positionierung sind hier die Stichwörter. Für Sharon ist es unglaublich wichtig, immer abstecken zu können, aus welcher Haltung heraus sie Texte schreibt – diese Frage stellt sie sich auch bezogen auf ihre "Schnipsel der Stille": "Aus welcher Haltung schreibe ich also? Vielleicht als Kollegin?" Sie überlegt lange, ob ihr Beitrag ein Vorwort oder Nachwort oder gar Antwort auf Bölls Kurzgeschichte sein soll, oder vielleicht ein Kommentar, ein Aufsatz oder ein Essay. Schließlich kommt sie zu dem Schluss, dass es einfach eine Sammlung ist: "Morgen reiche ich meine Sammlung ein. So, wie sie ist." ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
Jul 15, 2022
|
Jul 15, 2022
|
Jul 10, 2022
|
Hardcover
| ||||||||||||||
| 1406353434
| 9781406353433
| 1406353434
| 4.22
| 24,772
| Oct 09, 2012
| Jun 16, 2014
|
it was amazing
|
A MILLION STARS. This picture book is HILARIOUS and a new favorite. I am actually shook by how much I adore this tale. I picked it up in an English bo
A MILLION STARS. This picture book is HILARIOUS and a new favorite. I am actually shook by how much I adore this tale. I picked it up in an English bookshop in Amsterdam whilst I was looking for cute children's books for my nephew... no one's surprised that I also ended up with a book for myself, right? I mean, I don't usually read picture books anymore (lmao) but even whilst flipping through this one in the store I knew that I had to make it mine. The art is beautiful, albeit a bit of an acquired taste. It's not the usual bright and colorful tones that you see in most picture books, the colors in this one are subdued. Jon Klassen chose very similar frames for his illustrations—they often mirror each other with only one small detail being different (e.g. the big fish's eyes being closed and then open in the next picture), which means that kids need to be very attentive while reading and looking in order to understand the humor in this story. All in all, I am not even sure if that humor will be comprehensible for smaller children. It's not as on the nose as you might expect. As an adult, I found it hilarious though. The text (basically the confident taunts of a little fish who stole the big fish's tiny hat) was such a striking juxtaposition to the images, it was hilarious to see the plan of the little fish go south real quick. The ending (did he or did he not? muahahaha) will probably provide interesting discussion when reading it to children, I'd be very curious to see how small kids would interpret it. Personally, I am just delighted that I found this little gem in the oddest of all places, and that I can now call it mine. I read through the other two books in the series online (yes, I've read the shitty PDF versions just to see if they're worth the buy) but I have to say that I didn't find them nearly as funny and they didn't do much for me... so I'll just stick to my fish, no need for bears of turtles in this house! ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
May 25, 2022
|
May 25, 2022
|
May 27, 2022
|
Paperback
| ||||||||||||||
| 0140275363
| 9780140275360
| B00A2KEJ5A
| 3.91
| 466,207
| -800
| Apr 29, 1999
|
it was amazing
|
The Iliad; "a poem about Ilium (Troy)" is one of two major ancient Greek epic poems attributed to Homer. As with the Odyssey, the poem is divided into
The Iliad; "a poem about Ilium (Troy)" is one of two major ancient Greek epic poems attributed to Homer. As with the Odyssey, the poem is divided into 24 books and was written in dactylic hexameter. It contains 15,693 lines in its most widely accepted version. Set towards the end of the Trojan War, a ten-year siege of the city of Troy by a coalition of Mycenaean Greek states, the poem depicts significant events in the siege's final weeks. In particular, the fierce quarrel between King Agamemnon and the celebrated warrior, Achilles. There are two human beings in the poem who are godlike, Achilles and Helen. Helen, the "cause" of the war, is a sort of human Aphrodite. She is irresistible. Every king in Greece was ready to fight for her hand in marriage, but she chose Menelaus, King of Sparta. When Paris, the Prince of Troy, came to visit, she ran off with him [or was abducted by him, depending on how one interprets the story], leaving husband and daughter, without a thought of the consequences for others. When she left with Paris she acted like a god, with no thought of anything but the fulfilment of her own desire. However, at the beginning of the Iliad, she has already recognised her flaws. She feels responsible for the human misery she sees all around her, something the gods never do. The gods feel no responsibility for the human victims of their private wars. At the beginning of the Iliad Helen has already broken out of the prison of self-absorption, but this is the point at which Achilles enters it. The Iliad shows the origin, course and consequences of his rage, his imprisonment in a godlike, lonely, heroic fury from which all the rest of the world is excluded, and also his return to human stature. The road to this final release is long and grim, strewn with the corpses of many a Greek and Trojan, and it leads finally to his own death. Achilles plays no part in the events described in Books 2 through 8; he sits by his ships on the shore, waiting for the fulfilment of his mother's promise. And by the end of Book 8, the supplication of Thetis and the will of Zeus have begun to produce results. The Greeks are in retreat, penned up in their hastily fortified camp at nightfall, awaiting the Trojan assault, which will come with daybreak. And Agamemnon yields to Nestor's advice to send an embassy to Achilles, urging him to return to the battle line. It is a magnificent offer, but there is one thing missing: Agamemnon offers no apology, no admission that he was in the wrong. Therefore, Achilles rejects this embassy and any other that may be sent. He vows to sail home the next day, with all his men. Due to a string of events [mainly the death of his beloved fellow warrior Patroclus at the hands of Hector, Prince of Troy], Achilles decides to join the war after all. When he does go into battle, the Trojans turn and run for the gates; only Hector remains outside. And the two champions come face-to-face at last. The contrast between the raw, self-absorbed fury of Achilles and the civilised responsibility and restraint of Hector is maintained to the end. It is of his people, the Trojans, that Hector is thinking as he throws his spear at Achilles: “How much lighter the war would be for Trojans then / if you, their greatest scourge, were dead and gone!” But it is Hector who dies, and as Achilles exults over his fallen enemy, his words bring home again the fact that he is fighting for himself alone; this is the satisfaction of a personal hatred. He taunts Hector with the fate of his body. And in answer to Hector's plea and offer of ransom for his corpse, he reveals the extreme inhuman hatred and fury he has reached: “Beg no more, you fawning dog – begging me by my parents! / Would to god my rage, my fury would drive me now / to hack your flesh away and eat you raw –” This is how the gods hate. His words recall those of Zeus to Hera in Book 4: “Only if you could breach / their gates and their long walls and devour Priam”. Achilles lashes Hector's body to his chariot, and, in full view of the Trojans on the walls, drags it to his tent, where he organises a magnificent funeral for Patroclus. All through the funeral games he acts with a tact, diplomacy and generosity that seem to signal the end of his desperate isolation, his godlike self-absorption; we almost forget that Hector's corpse is still lying in the dust, tied to his chariot, and that Achilles refuses the will of Zeus, refuses to surrender Hector's body to his father Priam. Only when Priam himself visits Achilles in his tent and kisses his hand does Achilles break out at last from the prison of self-absorbed, godlike passion. Achilles takes Priam's hands and begins to weep. But not for Priam but for his own aged father, to whose memory Priam had appealed and who will soon, like Priam, lose a son. Achilles goes to collect the ransom, and when he orders Hector's body to be washed and anointed, he gives orders to have it done out of Priam's sight: “He feared that, overwhelmed by the sight of Hector, / wild with grief, Priam might let his anger flare / and Achilles might fly into fresh rage himself, / cut the old man down …” He knows himself. This is a new Achilles, who can feel pity for others. For the first time he shows self-knowledge and acts to prevent the calamity his violent temper might bring about. It is as near to self-criticism as he ever gets, but it marks the point at which he ceases to be godlike Achilles and becomes a human being in the full sense of the word. The tragic course of Achilles' rage, his final recognition of human values – this is the guiding theme of the poem, and it is developed against a background of violence and death. But the grim progress of the war is interrupted by scenes which remind us that the brutality of war is not the whole of it. Except for Achilles, whose worship of violence falters only in the final moment of pity for Priam, the yearning for peace and its creative possibilities is never far below the surface of the warriors' minds. This is most poignantly expressed by the scenes that take place in Troy, especially the farewell scene between Hector and Andromache. (<3) But it is not enough. The Iliad remains a terrifying poem. Achilles, just before his death, is redeemed as a human being, but there is no consolation for the death of Hector. We are left with a sense of waste, which is not adequately balanced even by the greatness of the heroic figures and the action; the scale descends towards loss. The Iliad remains not only the greatest epic poem in literature but also the most tragic. The death of Hector seals the fate of Troy; it will fall to the Achaeans, to become the pattern for all time of the death of a city. The images of that night assault – the blazing palaces, the blood running in the streets, old Priam butchered at the altar, Cassandra raped in the temple, Hector's baby son thrown from the battlements, his wife Andromache dragged off to slavery – all this, foreshadowed in the Iliad, will be stamped indelibly on the consciousness of the Greeks throughout their history, immortalised in lyric poetry, in tragedy, on temple pediments and painted vases, to reinforce the stern lesson of Homer's presentation of war: that no civilisation, no matter how rich, no matter how refined, can long survive once it loses the power to meet force with equal or superior force. ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
Jan 04, 2023
|
Jan 21, 2023
|
Feb 26, 2022
|
Library Binding
| ||||||||||||||
| 1472214811
| 9781472214812
| 1472214811
| 4.30
| 230,384
| Jun 1979
| Mar 27, 2014
|
it was amazing
|
Kindred, oh my fuck, where do I even start? Definitely one of my favorite reads from this year and definitely one of the most fucked up things I've ev
Kindred, oh my fuck, where do I even start? Definitely one of my favorite reads from this year and definitely one of the most fucked up things I've ever read in my entire life. This book is not for the faint of heart. It is literally every Black person's literal nightmare. It will make you sick, it will make you think, it won't leave you. It will stay with you. "There’s worse things than being dead."Written in 1979, Kindred remains Octavia E. Butler's most popular work until date. It is a common choice for high school and college courses as well as book clubs and reading programs. And I sure see why. This novel begs to be discussed in a group, preferably in a safe space (which schools and colleges can't always provide, unfortunately), but this books opens up so many important topics, interesting questions, moral dilemmas ... I'm actually saddened that my reading experience was a solitary one. When I reread it (and I sure will in the future), I'll definitely pick a reading buddy! Kindred is the first-person account of a young African-American woman writer, Dana, who finds herself being shunted in time between her Los Angeles, California home in 1976 and a pre-Civil War Maryland plantation, where she meets her ancestors: a proud Black freewoman and a white planter who has forced her into slavery and concubinage. As Dana's stays in the past become longer, she becomes intimately entangled with the plantation community and has to make many hard choices to survive – and to ensure her return to her present home! Butler's debut novel explores the dynamics and dilemmas of antebellum slavery from the sensibility of a late 20th-century Black woman, who is aware of its legacy in contemporary American society. Through the two interracial couples who form the emotional core of the story, the novel also explores the intersection of power, gender, and race issues, and speculates on the prospects of future egalitarianism. "I don’t have a name for the thing that happened to me, but I don’t feel safe anymore."Butler explores how a modern Black woman would experience the time of slavery. During an interview, Butler admitted that while reading slave narratives for background, she realized that if she wanted people to read her book, she would have to present a less violent version of slavery. Still, Kindred is not for the faint of heart, and Butler's depictions of slavery and the violence (especially sexual violence towards Black women) that goes along with it are hard to stomach. Her descriptions are vivid and feel authentic. As a reader, you are transported alongside Dana to life on an Eastern Shore plantation pre-Civil War. Butler portrays individual inhabitants of the plantation as distinctive people, giving each his or her own story. Robert Crossley argues that Butler treats the Blackness of her characters as "a matter of course", to resist the tendency of white writers to incorporate African Americans into their narratives just to illustrate a problem or to divorce themselves from charges of racism. Thus, in Kindred the enslaved community is depicted as a "rich human society": the proud yet victimized free-turned-enslaved Alice; Sam who has to work on the fields and hopes Dana will teach his brother how to read and write; the traitorous sewing woman Liza, who frustrates Dana's escape; the bright and resourceful Nigel, Rufus's childhood friend who learns to read from a stolen primer; most importantly, Sarah the cook, who Butler transforms from an image of the submissive, happy "mammie" of white fiction to a deeply angry yet caring woman subdued only by the threat of losing her last child, the mute Carrie. But Butler doesn't just excel at writing Black characters, her white characters are just as well-written and interesting. The enslaver Rufus and his father Tom Weylin are easy to loathe and hate, yet Butler hammers home that they are human, they're not monsters: "He wasn't a monster at all. Just an ordinary man who sometimes did the monstrous things his society said were legal and proper." One of the most interesting (and heartbreaking) relationships in the book is between Rufus and Alice. While Rufus seems to hold all the power in his relationship with Alice, she never wholly surrenders to him. Alice's suicide at the end can be read as her way of ending her struggle with Rufus with a final upsetting of their power balance, an escape through death, as something that he can't take away from her. It's a bleak interpretation but a fitting one, taking into consideration that an enslaved woman like Alice held no power except for the one over her own death. "I can’t advise you. It’s your body."Kindred portrays the exploitation of Black female sexuality as a main site of the historic struggle between master and slave. Diana Paulin describes Rufus's attempts to control Alice's sexuality as a means to recapture power he lost when she chose Isaac as her sexual partner. Compelled to submit her body to Rufus, Alice divorces her desire from her sexuality to preserve a sense of self. Similarly, Dana's time traveling reconstructs her sexuality to fit the times. While in the present, Dana chooses her husband and enjoys sex with him; in the past, her status as a Black female forced her to subordinate her body to the desires of the master for pleasure, breeding, and as sexual property. Thus, as Rufus grows into adulthood, he attempts to control Dana's sexuality, ending with his attempt at rape to turn her into a replacement of Alice. Since Dana sees sexual domination as the ultimate form of subordination, her killing of Rufus is the way she rejects the role of female slave, distinguishing herself from those who did not have the power to say "no." Keeping Butler's other work in mind, it's also interesting that he bond between Dana and Rufus can be interpreted as a symbiotic relationship between enslaver and enslaved: they are continually forced to collaborate in order to survive. In a fucked up way, they are dependent on each other. A fact that is seen in Dana's feelings towards her enslaver-ancestor: in addition to fear and contempt, there is affection from familiarity and the occasional kindnesses. The novel often made me uncomfortable because I felt like Dana had to much empathy for/with Rufus. Not gonna lie, I hated the guy from the first time we meet him to the last. But Dana has patience with him, even forgives him many times when he hurts her... the only thing she cannot forgive is when he hurts other people. In several interviews, Butler has mentioned that she wrote Kindred to counteract stereotypical conceptions of the submissiveness of enslaved people. While studying at Pasadena City College, Butler heard a young man from the Black Power Movement express his contempt for older generations of African-Americans for what he considered their shameful submission to white power. Butler realized the young man did not have enough context to understand the necessity to accept abuse just to keep oneself and one's family alive and well. "I'm not property, Kevin. I'm not a horse or a sack of wheat. If I have to seem to be property, if I have to accept limits on my freedom for Rufus's sake, then he also has to accept limits - on his behavior toward me. He has to leave me enough control of my own life to make living look better to me than killing and dying.”Thus, Butler resolved to create a modern African-American character, who would go back in time to see how well he (Butler's protagonist was originally male) could withstand the abuses his ancestors had suffered. Therefore, Dana's memories of her enslavement, as Ashraf A. Rushdy explains, become a record of the "unwritten history" of African-Americans, a "recovery of a coherent story explaining Dana's various losses." By living these memories, Dana is enabled to make the connections between slavery and current social situations, including the exploitation of blue-collar workers, police violence, rape, domestic abuse, and segregation. Kindred reveals the repressed trauma slavery caused in America's collective memory of history. In an interview on 1985, Butler suggested that this trauma partly comes from attempts to forget America's dark past: "I think most people don’t know or don’t realize that at least 10 million blacks were killed just on the way to this country, just during the middle passage....They don’t really want to hear it partly because it makes whites feel guilty." In a later interview with Randall Kenan, Butler explained how debilitating this trauma has been for Americans, especially for African Americans, as symbolized by the loss of her protagonist's left arm: "I couldn’t really let [Dana] come all the way back. I couldn’t let her return to what she was, I couldn’t let her come back whole and [losing her arm], I think, really symbolizes her not coming back whole. Antebellum slavery didn’t leave people quite whole." Many academics have extended Dana's loss as a metaphor for the "lasting damage of slavery on the African American psyche". ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
Apr 19, 2022
|
Apr 20, 2022
|
Feb 14, 2022
|
Paperback
| ||||||||||||||
| 037571457X
| 9780375714573
| 037571457X
| 4.26
| 213,567
| Apr 29, 2003
| Jun 01, 2004
|
it was amazing
|
One of the best comic books I've ever read. Third time reading it, still loved it more than life itself! Marjane is charming, witty, funny ... her mem
One of the best comic books I've ever read. Third time reading it, still loved it more than life itself! Marjane is charming, witty, funny ... her memoir is educational and emotional at the same time. A true feat of graphic storytelling! *** Persepolis 1 begins by introducing Marji, the ten-year-old protagonist. Set in 1980, the novel focuses on her experiences of growing up during the Islamic Revolution in Iran. Her story details the impact of war and religious extremism on Iranians, especially women. Belonging to an upper-middle class family, Marji has access to various educational materials, such as books and a radio, which expose her to Western political thought at a very young age. By discovering the ideas of numerous philosophers, Marji reflects on her class privilege and is eager to learn about her family's political background. This inquiry inspires her to participate in popular demonstrations against the Shah's regime in which people are asking for his exile as a way to safeguard their rights. Unfortunately, after the Shah's departure, Marji notices the rise of religious extremism in her society and is unhappy about it. Her uncle Anoosh's visit deepens her interest in politics when he tells her stories of being imprisoned as a communist revolutionary. His stories cause her to value ideas of equality and resistance. The new government then begins to reform Iranian society, especially having women cover themselves while out in public and putting restrictions on social freedoms. Marji's family begins to fear for their lives since many of their friends and thousands of Iranians had fled the new regime to Europe or the USA, but they resolve to stay. Anoosh is arrested again and accused of being a spy. He is executed for his political beliefs. Marji is upset that God didn't do anything to help her uncle and rejects her faith. After an abrupt family vacation to Europe, Marji returns to Iran where she learns from her grandmother that the government has declared war against Iraq. As her hometown of Tehran comes under attack, she finds safety in her basement, which doubles as a bomb shelter. One night, the family hears the Iranian National Anthem play on the TV, moving them to tears. It is later revealed that the government released the soldiers and air pilots from prison who were in jail for protesting. The soldiers agreed to fight on the condition that the country's National Anthem be played on the public broadcasting. Amidst the chaos of an ongoing war, her family secretly revolts against the new regime by having parties and consuming alcohol, which is prohibited in the country. Two years of war force Marji to explore her rebellious side by skipping classes, obsessing over boys, and visiting the black market that has grown as a result of the shortages caused by war and repression. As the war intensifies, Marji rushes home one day to find that a long-range ballistic missile has hit her street. Her family escapes the missile as it hit the neighboring building, which housed their (very rare) Jewish neighbors the Baba Levy's. Traumatized by the sight of her friend's dead body, she expresses her anger against the Iranian political system. Her family begins to worry about her safety and decides to send her off to Austria for further study and to escape the war. The novel ends with her departure to Europe. ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
Feb 11, 2022
|
Feb 12, 2022
|
Feb 12, 2022
|
Paperback
| ||||||||||||||
| 0425288994
| 9780425288993
| 0425288994
| 4.31
| 1,009,078
| Jan 01, 1908
| Jun 06, 2017
|
it was amazing
|
Anne of Green Gables is everything. I got interested in reading this book after hearing Ariel gush about it for years. And I initially wanted to save
Anne of Green Gables is everything. I got interested in reading this book after hearing Ariel gush about it for years. And I initially wanted to save it for October (“I'm so glad I live in a world where there are Octobers.” – duh) but I'm so glad that I didn't. I fell sick in February and was in the mood to read a cute children's book, which is why I picked up this book. Anne of Green Gables recounts the adventures of Anne Shirley, an 11-year-old orphan girl, who is mistakenly sent to two middle-aged siblings, Matthew and Marilla Cuthbert, who had originally intended to adopt a boy to help them on their farm, Green Gables, in the fictional town of Avonlea in Prince Edward Island, Canada. The novel recounts how Anne makes her way through life with the Cuthberts, in school, and within the town. And yes, it's a story suitable for children but I feel like it hits closer to home as an adult. Much of its humor (and believe me, this book is HILARIOUS) would have been lost on me as a child. Also the intricate character dynamic of Anne and her new foster parents. I am really happy that I read it as an adult. But really, Marilla, one can’t stay sad very long in such an interesting world, can one?I feel like this book can be truly hit or miss for people, and it all hinges on whether or not you will take to Anne as a character. She's a child, 11 at the beginning of the book, 16 when it ends, so she is definitely annoying af at times, self-centered, oblivious to the problems of other people, she literally won't shut up and I'm positive that her dialogue makes up at least 60% of this novel. ;) So, she's not a character that just everyone will love. But if you do, you will fall head over heels in love with this book. Anne of Green Gables is charming, hilarious, heart-warming, and gut-wrenching at the same time. I didn't expect to laugh out loud (for real, no hyperbole!) every other page. Every single joke landed with me. Montgomery's witty writing style, the banter, Anne's hilarious monologues and Marilla's unsympathetic responses, the little adventures and mishaps that Anne gets herself into on a daily basis – it's all so wonderful. This book feels like a spring morning, with the first sun in months on your skin, it tastes like your favorite apple pie, it smells like the ocean. I know I'm repeating myself but it is simply wonderful. I didn't expect to fall in love with Green Gables and its inhabitants as much as I did – Anne, Matthew and Marilla will always have a place in my heart. As well as the other inhabitants of Avonlea, most notably Diana (who is a queen), Gilbert (who is everything), Mrs. Rachel Lynde (who is an icon!), and Miss Stacy (who is doing the Lord's work out here). I love all of them more than life itself. Anne of Green Gables did not only make me laugh in ways I haven't laughed in a long time (at a book), it also made me cry, more like historically sob over the pages, so much so that they're wavy right now. Since I had read through the chapter titles before jumping into the story, I was pretty certain that something would happen at the end of the book that would completely wreck me. And yes, I was right. It happened. And it wrecked me. [I'm really happy that the show, "Anne with an E", took a different approach and didn't include that event in any of their three seasons. I would not have been able to handle it again.] The only minor criticism I have of this novel is that it could've been 50-70 pages shorter. The first half was AMAZING AMAZING AMAZING – like I said before, literally laughing out loud on every page – but when Anne grew up, I felt like Montgomery could've told her story a little more tighter, as some of Anne's adventures and mishaps just started to feel repetitive and I wanted to see her character growth a bit earlier. Nonetheless, I still flew through this 400+ pages children's classic in four days – whilst nursing a headache – so it was still a true page-turner for me. I cannot wait to return to the world of Avonlea some day – ya'll have convinced me to give the second and third book in the series a shot. I need to see more of my baby Gilbert! Favorite/ notable moments: (spoilers ahead!) – ‘If Marilla had said that Matthew had gone to Bright River to meet a kangaroo from Australia Mrs Rachel could not have been more astonished.’ – from the first chapter on I knew I was going to be in for a fun ride; Montgomery's wit and humor is unmatched and EXACTLY my cup of tea – ‘She was sitting there waiting for something or somebody and, since sitting and waiting was the only thing to do just then, she sat and waited with all her might and main.’ – and from her first appearance, I fell in love with Anne Shirley – Anne telling Matthew: ‘I’ve never belonged to anybody – not really.’ – ‘Will you please call me Cordelia?’ she said eagerly. ‘Call you Cordelia! Is that your name?’ – Marilla was like WHAT THE FUCK IS GOING ON UP IN HERE??? – ‘I can’t. I’m in the depths of despair.’ – half of the humor is that Anne is so fucking extra, she's the most dramatic of children and her vocabulary is UNMATCHED – ‘And when people mean to be good to you, you don’t mind very much when they’re not quite – always.’ – I found it really interesting how differently Anne’s past abuse are portrayed in the book vs the show ("Anne with an E"), it's much more explicit in the show due to all the horrifying flashback scenes where we see Anne getting whipped by her former foster parents and bossed around, bullied and assaulted at the orphanage, the book is much less overt – however, similarly to Harry Potter, it's pretty unrealistic that Anne got out of these horrifying situations without any mental issues or problems, just like Harry, she's basically the purest, most naive and even confident and self-assured child, and whilst I love that for her, it's not a realistic portrayal of how children who are abused/neglected FOR YEARS during their early childhood and teenage years feel and act – Marilla telling Anne: “I haven’t any use at all for little girls who aren’t neat.” was such a fucking low point, I love Marilla but especially in the beginning of the book she is highly manipulative and emotionally abusive towards Anne (by dangling the threat of not keeping her over her head constantly), it was hard to read – However, it is worth of note that Marilla is the one shouldering most of the responsibility of Green Gables, therefore, she has to be the practical (harsher) one, whereas Matthew – who comes across as more sympathetic – can allow himself to keep his head in the clouds and indulge Anne's every whim (but only BECAUSE Marilla manages everything) – ‘I never say any prayers.’ […] Marilla decided that Anne’s religious training must be begun at once. Plainly there was no time to be lost. – Marilla really was like WE BROUGHT A HEATHEN TO THIS HOUSE – ‘I’d love to call you Aunt Marilla,’ said Anne wistfully. – WHY IS SHE SO PURE? – After Mrs Rachel calls her ugly: ‘You have hurt mine worse than they were ever hurt before even by Mrs Thomas intoxicated husband. And I’ll never forgive your for it, never, never!’ – first of all, Rachel was an ass for that, but more notably, again, we get some hints at Anne's past abuse but nothing specific ... due to the fact that it's left to the imagination, one imagines the worst, but if Rachel calling her ugly is worse than anything Mr Thomas did, then it couldn't have been as bad as I first imagined (= sexual assault) – ‘Puffed sleeves are so fashionable now. It would give me such a thrill, Marilla, just to wear a dress with puffed sleeves.’ – I love her more than life itself! – When Anne and Marilla went to pay the Barrys a visit, so that Anne could be introduced to Diana, Mrs Barry asked: ’How are you?’ And Anne replied: ‘I am well in body although considerably rumpled in spirit, thank you, ma’am,’ said Anne gravely. – ‘I don’t feel that I could endure the disappointment if anything happened to prevent me from getting to the picnic. I suppose I’d live through it, but I’m certain it would be a lifelong sorrow.’ – ANNE HAS ZERO CHILL – ‘I believe this child is crazy.’ – same, Marilla, SAME – After Marilla forbids her to attend the picnic: ‘My heart is broken. You’ll feel remorse of conscience some day, I expect, for breaking it, Marilla, but I forgive you.’ – Anne wishing she’d been the one who nearly drowned during the class trip instead of Jane Andrews – LOL – Mr Phillips can suck my ass => whipping his students, humiliating them in front of the class, and let's not talk about the Prissy situation (PUKE) ... I love how they showed his true colors in the show! – Once, when nobody was looking, Gilbert took from his desk a little pink candy heart with a gold motto on it, ‘You are sweet’, and slipped it under the curve of Anne’s arm. (HOW SWEET) Whereupon Anne arose, took the pink heart gingerly between the tips of her fingers, dropped it on the floor, ground it to powder beneath her heel, and resumed her position without deigning to bestow a glance on Gilbert. (CAN SHE CHILL? NO? OH, OKAY.) – After Diana’s mother forbids her to associate with Anne (due to the wine debacle) and the girls have to say their farewell: ‘Ten minutes isn’t very long to say an eternal farewell. Oh, Diana, will you promise faithfully never to forget me, the friend of your youth, no matter what dearer friends may caress thee?’ – ‘Diana gave me a lock of her hair and I’m going to sew it up in a little bag and wear it around my neck all my life. Please see that it is buried with me, for I don’t believe I’ll live very long. Perhaps when she sees me lying cold and dead before her Mrs Barry may feel remorse for what she has done and will let Diana come to my funeral.’ – I AM TELLING YOU SHE HAS NO CHILL – ‘Marilla, isn’t it nice to think that tomorrow is a new day with no mistakes in it yet?’ – Marilla literally being xenophobic, she literally hates all foreigners and only trust Canadians ??? (‘How often have I told you never to let one of those Italians in the house! I don’t believe in encouraging them to come around at all.’ OKAY KAREN) – In the sudden stab of fear that pierced to her very heart she realized what Anne had come to mean to her. => I really love Marilla's arc (in regards to Anne) though, she started out as this tough "unfeeling" woman and came to love her like her own daughter, BEAUTIFUL! – ‘I don’t believe I’d really want to be a sensible person, because they are so unromantic. Mrs Lynde says there is no danger of my ever being one…’ – Rachel telling it straight as it is – AUNT JOSEPHINE ... I loved her in the books already (her asking the girls to sent her more story? HOW PURE) but her take on the show (literally being a lesbian icon) was also refreshing – Matthew telling Anne: ‘Don’t give up all your romance…’ I AM SOBBING – ‘That’s the worst of growing up, and I’m beginning to realize it. The things you wanted so much when you were a child don’t seem half so wonderful to you when you get them.’ – I didn't remember asking for a therapy session, hello? – Gilbert had ambitions, she knew, and Ruby Gillis did not seem the sort of person with whom such could be profitably discussed. => Anne, honey, I know you’re jealous but please stop shaming this girl – ‘Well now, I’d rather have you than a dozen boys, Anne,’ said Matthew patting her hand. ‘Just mind you that – rather than a dozen boys. Well now, I guess it wasn’t a boy that took the Avery scholarship, was it? It was a girl – my girl – my girl that I’m proud of.’ – THESE ARE LITERALLY MATTHEW’S LAST WORDS TO ANNE, I AM NOT OKAY – “The Reaper whose Name is Death” => As soon as I saw that chapter title I knew I wouldn’t be ready for what’s to come … this was the most painful chapter, I literally SOBBED so much, I can’t remember the last time I cried this hard during a book (…probably when I read a memoir about the Rwandan genocide … yeah, that’s how bad I cried) – For the first time shy, quiet Matthew Cuthbert was a person of central importance; the white majesty of death had fallen on him and set him apart as one crowned. – STOP STOP STOP, the tears are flowing again!!! – Anne deciding to stay with Marilla and help her with the farm instead of going away to study at Redmond – I AM SOBBING – “When I left Queen’s my future seemed to stretch out before me like a straight road. I thought I could see along it for many a milestone. Now there is a bend in it. I don’t know what lies around the bend, but I’m going to believe that the best does. It has a fascination of its own, that bend.” – STOP STOP STOP – Gilbert giving up his teaching position for Anne, + the two of them reconciling at the end of the book – I AM SOFT ... I am only reading the next two books for their relationship tbh, I NEED to see them together! *** Update 1: For the first time in my life, I got myself a Netflix subscription. Yes, it was for Anne with an E. Just watched the first episode (literally sobbed the whole time). I HAVE ZERO REGRETS. Can't wait to see where this show takes me! Update 2: It has only taken in a week to watch the entirety of all THREE SEASONS of "Anne with an E" (...and oh boy I HAVE SO MANY THOUGHTS, not all pleasant, especially when it comes to how trauma-ridden and separated and unresolved the storylines of the Black and indigenous characters were...) and I need more of this world. I can't believe that season 3 basically ends where book 1 ends ... with Anne wanting to go to college. GAAAAAAH. I wanted so desperately to see her in college and SEE her relationship with Gilbert ... guess I'll have to read book 2 and 3 after all. Will place my order shortly lmao. ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
Feb 07, 2022
|
Feb 10, 2022
|
Jan 31, 2022
|
Paperback
| ||||||||||||||
| 315019704X
| 9783150197042
| 315019704X
| 3.72
| 59,955
| 1984
| 2006
|
it was amazing
|
Despite its title, The Lover is not a love story. Like Nabokov's Lolita, older men take advantage of underage girls, pretending as though these "sexua
Despite its title, The Lover is not a love story. Like Nabokov's Lolita, older men take advantage of underage girls, pretending as though these "sexual arrangements" (i.e. rape in Lolita and statutory rape in The Lover) are born out of pure affection and mutual respect. But whereas Lolita is told from the perspective of Humbert Humbert, Nabokov's confessional protagonist, who tries to win over his audience from his jail cell, painting himself as the image of a "hopeless romantic" with an incurable illness, Marguerite Duras chooses to tell the narrative from the point of view of the young protagonist, a 15-year-old girl with a dysfunctional family and lower-class background. In Lolita, the voice of Dolores Haze is effectively strangled by Humbert's narration. We don't get to hear her side of the story. We don't even get to know her as a real person. Lolita is the name that Humbert bestows upon her, it is a manifestation of Humbert's fantasy in which Dolores becomes the sole object of his desire, she is no longer a subject. Dolores becomes Lolita, the "nymph", whose sole purpose it is to satisfy Humbert's twisted fantasy of her. Who this 12-year-old girl really is? The readers will never know. And whilst Duras refuses to giver her 15-year-old protagonist a name, we nonetheless get her side of the story, and only hers. We learn of her dysfunctional family, of her 27-year-old "lover", the son of prominent Chinese businessman. The "lover" mimics Humbert’s obsessive attachment to his nameless paramour. However, Duras strips their relationship of any romantic pretense, a means that is achieved by having the narrative be told in retrospect, the language the older protagonist uses when looking back on her youth is stripped from false romance and is often tainted with regret. The story of my life doesn’t exist. Does not exist. There’s never any center to it. No path, no line. There are great spaces where you pretend there used to be someone, but it’s not true, there was no one.Throughout the narrative, which refuses to acknowledge traditional chronology and instead goes back and forth between the protagonist's present as a famous French writer and her childhood and youth in French Indochina, we catch glimpses at the young girl's harsh realities. The sudden death of her father impacted her family not only emotionally but financially, as they had to survive without him in Indochina. Consequently, the girl's mother – "she was desperate with despair" – owes numerous debts and often loses herself in the blackout despair of her manic depression. The girl also lives in constant fear of her brothers. Her older brother is violent, aggressive, selfish and vagrant and terrorises the whole family; her younger brother is his prime victim, a fact that distresses the girl greatly: "I tell him my elder brother's cold, insulting violence is there whatever happens to us, whatever comes our way. His first impulse is always to kill, to wipe out, to hold sway over life, to scorn, to hunt, to make suffer." It is out of this complicated and harrowing family situation that the girl seeks and stays in the unconventional relationship to her rich and older "lover". Out of financial necessity and fear, she seeks stability through him. But when her "lover" takes her family out to dinner at fancy restaurants, it's nothing more but a painful and shame-inducing transaction. Her family will barely speak, let alone look at her lover, resenting the fact that they have to depend on a Chinese man for food, but not proud enough to refuse. The narrator reflects: "When it concerns my lover I’m powerless against myself. Thinking about it now brings back the hypocrisy to my face, the absent-minded expressions of someone who stares into space." Critics have often labeled The Lover as an erotic novel, but to me, the erotic or romantic "relationship" serves only as the backdrop to a larger, overarching theme: the loss of childhood for the disillusion of rushed adulthood. The girl is constantly on the defense with her unpredictable mother, who has no faith in her. The girl confesses to her lover, "Today I tell him it's a comfort, this sadness, a comfort to have fallen at last into a misfortune my mother has always predicted for me when she shrieks in the desert of her life." Dolores and Charlotte, the bickering mother and daughter in Lolita, share a similarly broken relationship. However, Nabokov denies Dolores the chance to ever grow up. Dolores death in childbirth at age seventeen, always defined by the possession of a man. Duras discards the male gaze in her narrative. Her unnamed protagonist gets to grow up. She is not victimized or infantilized. It's no surprise that the girl hopes to be a writer when she grows up. o write is to make sense of the world, to carve a place for oneself, to affirm the importance and relevance of one's existence. Unlike Dolores Haze, this nameless girl gets the opportunity to fight for autonomy. There's still an obvious power imbalance between the girl and her lover, but she is less a tricked hostage, whisked away for an endless road trip that would be every girl's worst nightmare. Romantic love is not the end goal, even though the girl seeks relief from her isolation and loneliness in her "relationship", her end goal is emancipation through the pursuit of physical connection. In the introduction of the English translation, Maxine Hong Kingston writes: "The girl and her mother and brothers are barbarians, sans culture. How to enroot oneself but to make primitive, sexual connection with another?" Tired of being rootless, the girl finds a temporary home in a stranger who is just as lost, barely afloat. Even though the events Duras describes revolve around highly sensitive topics (such as emotional and physical abuse, racism in the French colonies, and issues of consent in relationships involving teenagers and adults), she is not afraid to be honest with her readers. There is no romanticizing of her colonial childhood nor of the trauma that she carried until her death. Nonetheless, The Lover is highly poetic and Duras a lyrical writer. Through her words, she manages to transport her readers to a world that no longer exists, a world of Indochinese landscapes and people she saw abound. If you let it, The Lover will take a hold of you, and it won't let go. ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
Jul 30, 2022
|
Jul 31, 2022
|
Jan 15, 2022
|
Paperback
| ||||||||||||||
| 0140447369
| 9780140447361
| 0140447369
| 3.28
| 254
| Feb 28, 1975
| May 01, 2000
|
it was amazing
|
Probably the most fascinating book I’ve read in 2022, and the one with the best introduction and notes. Gordon Innes, Bakari Sidibe, Lucy Durán and Gr
Probably the most fascinating book I’ve read in 2022, and the one with the best introduction and notes. Gordon Innes, Bakari Sidibe, Lucy Durán and Graham Furniss did an amazing job with making this culturally complex and specific story accessible to Western readers. Highly recommend getting this Penguin black classics edition! I slightly prefer Bamba Suso’s version of the tale but both are excellent, thrilling stories, that, from a modern perspective, have almost an epic fantasy feel to them. *** During the years between the Norman conquest of England and the reign of Henry VIII (c. 1066-1547), the world saw many empires rise and fall. Europe’s high Middle Ages saw the rise and decline of the Holy Roman Empire, the establishment of the Spanish Christian kingdoms of Castile, Leon, Aragorn and Navarre, the Crusades, and the rise across Europe of a nascent bourgeoisie alongside the feudal nobility and the peasants. In West Africa meanwhile, three great empires rose and fell, the empires of Ghana, Mali and Songhai. The story of Sunjata is about the beginnings of the empire of Mali in the early 13th century. It concerns the struggle by Mande-speaking people for independence from rule by a Susu king. At its peak, Mali was the largest empire in West Africa, profoundly and widely influencing the culture of the region through the spread of its language, laws and customs. The Susu/Sosso people had been subjects of the Ghana empire until, in alliance with other groups, they were able to assert their independence. Early in the 13th century, the greatest king of the Susu, Sumanguru Kante, found himself confronted by a revolt of the Mande-speaking peoples under his control led by Sunjata. The victory of Sunjata over Sumanguru put an end to the Susu kingdom and began the establishment of the great Mali empire over a large part of the West African savanna. All right,The story of Sunjata Keita has become one of the world’s greatest living epic oral traditions. The figure of Sunjata is an important cultural symbol for Mande peoples (comparable in some ways to Richard the Lionheart for the English). But the Sunjata story is not some quaint relic of a bygone era: it forms part of an extensive and vibrant oral tradition of Mande epic stirs and praise songs that are constantly being regenerated through new performance. This tradition has been kept alive by highly skilled professional musicians who are known by the Mandinka term ‘jali’, often translated as griot, bard or ‘master of the word’. The texts in this volume were recited by Bamba Suso and Banna Kanute, two master jalis in the Mandinka cultural tradition of the Gambia, for Gordon Innes, a British researcher with a focus on Mande languages and oral literatures, in the 1970s. The subtlety of Bamba Suso’s version stands in contrast with the directness of that of Banna Kanute. The contrast between the two versions highlights the way in which oral traditions contain with them not only the potential for infinite variety in rendering character and plot, but also the potential to accommodate the differing interests of the reciters, reflecting their own personalities and predilections. In Bamba Suso we see the hinting at subtleties in human interaction expressed through dialogue, and in Banna Kanute we see a fascination with the supernatural, the excitement of action, and the accumulation of power in all its form, natural and supernatural. Traditionally, the jalis accompany their songs on instruments in which they specialise: the balafon, and the kora. The accompaniment plays a vital role in several ways. First, it acts as a reference point for the narration. The jail paces his or her singing or spoken recitation to fit into a certain point in the tune. Second, each tune in the Mande repertoire is associated with a particular episode or character. As they are played over and over again, most Mande listeners are familiar with these tunes, which have strong historical associations. For example, janjungo is considered a serious, almost dangerous song in praise of the greatest warriors. The jalis believe that only elder musicians have the right to play this piece. In Kita and other centres of the Maninka tradition, senior male jalis – of 50 years or older – are no longer supposed to sing. The spoken voice is considered the most prestigious and effective ‘mode’ of performance. When Bamba Suso spoke out his version of Sunjata for Gordon Innes, it was not because he could not sing, it was because he was obeying the Maninka dictates of how a jail of his status – a ngara, or ‘master musician’ – should perform. The story goes as follows: Sunjata was the son of Naré Maghann Konaté and Sogolon Condé (the daughter of the “buffalo woman”, so-called because of her ugliness and hunchback). Sunjata was crippled from childhood and his mother was the subject of ridicule among her co-wives. She was constantly teased and ridiculed openly for her son’s disability. This significantly affected Sunjata and he was determined to do everything he possibly could in order to walk like his peers. Through this determination, he one day miraculously got up and walked. Among his peers, he became a leader. His paternal half-brother, Dankaran Touman, and Dankaran's mother were cruel and resentful of Sunjata and his mother. Their cruelty escalated after the death of Sunjata’s father. To escape persecution and threats on her son’s life, Sogolon took her children, Sunjata and his sisters, into exile. This exile lasted for many years and took them to different countries within the Ghana Empire and eventually to Mema, where the king of Mema granted them asylum. Sunjata was admired by the King of Mema for his courage and tenacity. As such, he was given a senior position within the kingdom. When King Sumanguru Kante of Suso/Sosso conquered the Mandinka people, messengers were sent to go and look for Sogolon and her children, as Sunjata was destined to be a great leader according to prophecy. Upon finding him in Mema, they persuaded him to come back in order to liberate the Mandinkas and their homeland, which Sunjata did successfully, defeating Sumanguru in an epic battle full of witchcraft. Now, white man, the account of Sunjata's career as far as I know it,The story of Sunjata is an integral part of a Mande world view. It serves to remind Mande peoples why they are who they are, and what behaviour is expected of them. On the broadest level, the name of Sunjata is a symbol of Mande cultural identity, and the name alone conjures up images of a glorious past, heroic behaviour, and moral values, that serve as a cultural matrix for Mande peoples. This is why, still today, every jali first learns to sing Sunjata's praise names, evoking his special relationship with his griots: “Cat on the shoulder / The hunter and the lion are at Naarena.” ...more |
Notes are private!
|
1
|
Jan 25, 2022
|
Jan 28, 2022
|
Jan 14, 2022
|
Paperback
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
my rating |
|
|
||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| 5.00
|
it was amazing
|
Aug 15, 2024
|
Aug 15, 2024
|
|||||
|
| 3.43
|
it was amazing
|
Aug 2024
|
Jul 29, 2024
|
|||||
|
| 3.65
|
it was amazing
|
Jun 20, 2024
|
Jun 19, 2024
|
|||||
|
| 3.89
|
it was amazing
|
Mar 30, 2024
|
Mar 26, 2024
|
|||||
|
| 4.60
|
it was amazing
|
Apr 09, 2024
Jan 27, 2024
|
Jan 25, 2024
|
|||||
|
| 4.46
|
it was amazing
|
Feb 19, 2024
Jan 24, 2024
|
Jan 25, 2024
|
|||||
|
| 3.67
|
it was amazing
|
Jan 04, 2024
|
Jan 02, 2024
|
|||||
|
| 4.34
|
it was amazing
|
Feb 25, 2024
|
Oct 08, 2023
|
|||||
|
| 4.14
|
it was amazing
|
Sep 2023
|
Jun 18, 2023
|
|||||
|
| 4.25
|
it was amazing
|
Dec 06, 2022
|
Nov 25, 2022
|
|||||
|
| 4.00
|
it was amazing
|
Sep 21, 2022
|
Aug 05, 2022
|
|||||
|
| 4.12
|
it was amazing
|
Jul 23, 2022
|
Jul 12, 2022
|
|||||
|
| 4.70
|
it was amazing
|
Jul 15, 2022
|
Jul 10, 2022
|
|||||
|
| 4.22
|
it was amazing
|
May 25, 2022
|
May 27, 2022
|
|||||
|
| 3.91
|
it was amazing
|
Jan 21, 2023
|
Feb 26, 2022
|
|||||
|
| 4.30
|
it was amazing
|
Apr 20, 2022
|
Feb 14, 2022
|
|||||
|
| 4.26
|
it was amazing
|
Feb 12, 2022
|
Feb 12, 2022
|
|||||
|
| 4.31
|
it was amazing
|
Feb 10, 2022
|
Jan 31, 2022
|
|||||
|
| 3.72
|
it was amazing
|
Jul 31, 2022
|
Jan 15, 2022
|
|||||
|
| 3.28
|
it was amazing
|
Jan 28, 2022
|
Jan 14, 2022
|
Loading...
