What are you currently reading?

[karlhenning]

Revisited this with much, much delight:

How I Edited an Agricultural Paper

[toledobass]

Started Shantaram by Gregory David Roberts last night.


Allan

[Renfield]

He's often lively and a fine writer of e.g. village scenes and witty folks, but as soon as it comes to Great Ideas, he gets wholly confused and cannot decide between Buddha, Christ, Tolstoy, Lenin and anyone else ever making an impression on him. Imo, he's no orginal thinker himself, sorry to say. But you may correct me!

Oh no, you are absolutely correct in that. His was more of an amalgam of ideologies and beliefs, as you suggest, than original thought. However, what makes his writing special is its "individual voice" quality I noted in an early comment on him, in the Listening thread.

That is to say, he has a way of presenting this jumble of ideas in the form of a very personal enquiry, seeming more concerned about the enquiry as such, that there is an enquiry to be made, than the answers. Soul-searching is a perpetual topic of his, after all.

Also, his writing (and his life) is strongly connected to Greece's own soul-searching as a country and of Greeks as a people, which is important in establishing the context of all his literary musings (including the travel pieces).


So all in all, you should not attempt to look for a doctrine in Kazantzakis, beyond soul-searching itself. And that is where all the village scenes and quaint descriptions of childhood, the self-consciously bizarre pseudo-religious texts, The Odyssey, come together.

(As an addendum, further evidence for his almost Nietzschean reluctance to commit on principle - emphasis on that - is obviously to be found on his tomb: "I fear nothing, I believe in nothing, I am free." But as I said, I am nigh-certain he is very difficult to decode out of context. )

[ezodisy]

So helpful. What did you read and what did you think about it?

[J.Z. Herrenberg]

So helpful. What did you read and what did you think about it?

Well, it would help too if you could tell us why you are interested, what you already know about him, in what language you intend to read him...

I for my part can offer this - Thomas Bernhard is a very dark and very funny (if you weren't the butt of his invective, that is) writer. His theme is Austria, but he takes it on so thoroughly and inventively, that you don't have to be an Austrian to appreciate his satirical castigation of narrow-mindedness, stupidity, blindness et cetera. In my possesion is a Thomas Bernhard Lesebuch, a selection in German, where I dip into from time to time. Bernhard is so unremittingly bleak and rants so exhaustingly, I can only enjoy him in small doses. He has written fiction and plays, but there is no real difference in subject matter.

I don't know what has been translated into English. But he is a very even writer. And once you like him, you'll want to read everything. He can be quite addictive (though I haven't fallen under his spell myself).

[ezodisy]

Well, it would help too if you could tell us why you are interested, what you already know about him, in what language you intend to read him...

I don't see the connection but will answer nonetheless. Tarr was asked if Krasznahorkai's writing belonged to any particular tradition and he replied Bernhard and Kafka. Thanks for the info.

[J.Z. Herrenberg]

I don't see the connection but will answer nonetheless. Tarr was asked if Krasznahorkai's writing belonged to any particular tradition and he replied Bernhard and Kafka. Thanks for the info.

Thanks for your answer. Now I have learned something, too.

[Kullervo]

I've finished all the originally published chapters of The Man Without Qualities and am continuing on with the Posthumous Papers. It would be impossible for me to make a general statement about what I've read so far, as Musil's miraculous novel was written in a way that makes summing up in so many words untenable. College freshman classroom material it is not. Even so, I feel I have to say something.

In some places (specifically the conversations between Ulrich and Agathe) it seems to me that here Musil was on the very edge of that which it is even possible to write about.

It is not very uplifting — in my case it has only compounded my preexisting feeling of the futility of having convictions and ideals and the impossibility of applying them in everyday living. In this way I relate to Ulrich, who sees everything that is "true" at one moment able to be totally negated in the next. Living life as an experiment. Though, my own irresoluteness probably has as much to do with my own mercurial character as it does my surroundings.

Perhaps needless to say, I recommend — but it's not for everyone (though, the only ones that are interested in reading what little I have to say would be definitely be well-served by diving in ).

[Wanderer]

Thanks! And great that you react! Because of my stay in Crete, I tried to read as much Kazantzakis as I could (in Dutch translations as I'm writing an article on him and have to be able to quote them in those versions). I managed to read completely: Captain Michalis/Freedom or Death, Christ Recrucified, The Last Temptation, and also parts of Report to El Greco (hope these are the correct English titles, the Dutch translations use others).

Well, I found them disappointing, so far, even his final testament (Report to El Greco) - but okay, I'll first have to finish that one too, to be able to offer a final verdict. He's often lively and a fine writer of e.g. village scenes and witty folks, but as soon as it comes to Great Ideas, he gets wholly confused and cannot decide between Buddha, Christ, Tolstoy, Lenin and anyone else ever making an impression on him. Imo, he's no orginal thinker himself, sorry to say.

Johan, I'm sorry to hear you felt somehow obliged to read Kazantzakis just because you spent some (good, I hope:-) time in Crete. Your perseverance is admirable.  0:)
Personally, I don't like him and I've read almost everything he wrote more than once. The main thing, common more or less to all his works, that I find distasteful about him is that he forcefully pours too much of his ego (not his soul) into his writing, at times obscuring the narrative and one is forced to see his characters through the author's all encompassing yet severely distorting lens. When the author does have something significant to say that's a good thing that may reveal new insights, but in this case I don't feel it works very well.

[Christo]

Johan, I'm sorry to hear you felt somehow obliged to read Kazantzakis just because you spent some (good, I hope:-) time in Crete. Your perseverance is admirable.  0:)
Personally, I don't like him and I've read almost everything he wrote more than once. The main thing, common more or less to all his works, that I find distasteful about him is that he forcefully pours too much of his ego (not his soul) into his writing, at times obscuring the narrative and one is forced to see his characters through the author's all encompassing yet severely distorting lens. When the author does have something significant to say that's a good thing that may reveal new insights, but in this case I don't feel it works very well.

I hadn't foreseen that the complete Greek GMG Forum intelligentsia would respond! Otherwise, I would have been much more careful with my casual remarks. Anyhow: thanks so much for you clear views! Yes, I enjoyed my first stay in the blessed island of Crete (eastern parts) tremendously. And no: I didn't feel "obliged" to read Kazantzakis, but I always plan to write one or two larger newspapers articles during a holiday, with the addition of some extra couleur locale.

Kazantzakis did enjoy real popularity in the Netherlands in the past (1950s and 1960s mostly). E.g. his Christ Recrucified alone sold some 200.000 copies, in those years, and other novels were popular too. My article will be a kind of Kazantzakis revisited, concentrating on two novels: The Last Temptation and Christ Recrucified and ending with a visit to his grave, in the southern ramparts of Heraklion. BTW the end (but it takes 500 pages to get as far ..) of The Last Temptation isn't that bad. In part, it recalls Bulgakov's Master and Margharita and is shows soms visionary insight, but in general I'm afraid your verdict holds. Many thanks!

[Novi]

I don't know what has been translated into English. But he is a very even writer. And once you like him, you'll want to read everything. He can be quite addictive (though I haven't fallen under his spell myself).

It's his prose style that did it for me. I read a couple of his novels (in translation, unfortunately, as I don't know a word of German *shame, shame*), wow, must be close to 10 years ago. My memory is shocking so I couldn't for the world tell you what they were about, but I do remember being perversely mesmerised by the merciless pounding of the prose. You end up being stuck between this inexorably propulsive drive on the one hand and the relentless repetitions on the other. Completely exhausting but absolutely fascinating.

I've been meaning to go back to Bernhard (yeah right, for the past ten years ) - thanks for the reminder.

[Keemun]

Revisited this with much, much delight:

How I Edited an Agricultural Paper

Karl, thanks for posting that, it was great fun to read. 

~~~~~

I am presently reading C. S. Lewis: The Screwtape Letters from this:

[J.Z. Herrenberg]

It's his prose style that did it for me. I read a couple of his novels (in translation, unfortunately, as I don't know a word of German *shame, shame*), wow, must be close to 10 years ago. My memory is shocking so I couldn't for the world tell you what they were about, but I do remember being perversely mesmerised by the merciless pounding of the prose. You end up being stuck between this inexorably propulsive drive on the one hand and the relentless repetitions on the other. Completely exhausting but absolutely fascinating.

I've been meaning to go back to Bernhard (yeah right, for the past ten years ) - thanks for the reminder.

I have that 'Bernhard Lesebuch' I mentioned lying on the table today, reading in it at random and yes - his prose is mesmerising, that narrative voice can't keep talking, with an observation here, an attack there, or throwing a (shocking) memory at you... Thomas Bernhard is good, no doubt about it. One of the best ranters in literature.

[DavidRoss]

Revisited this with much, much delight:

How I Edited an Agricultural Paper

Aye, thanks, mate!  It's good to know some human institutions are as constant as the tides, and I'm particularly grateful for the answer to my question about virtually every piece of political reportage I meet.

[Lethevich]

Currently: a totally obscure book on Winchester Cathedral.

If it were recent it wouldn't be worth mentioning, but - while it doesn't give the year of publication inside - I estimate it to have been written in the 50s, and the writing style is consequently different and in some cases interesting. The author's constant use of "race" to describe people of different countries (the British, the Normans, etc) is quite strange to read from a modern POV, as is the slightly florid style of writing (at one point "lovely" was used in two consecutive sentences). But overall it's very readable, the person has an affection for the history of the building which extends beyond academia, and it also doesn't focus excessively on the religious use of the building - maintaining a decent balance between social history, and describing the actual fabric of the place.

[karlhenning]

Excellent, Sara!

[Lethevich]

I also forgot to mention - it had many excellent black and white photographs too. It's a sad sign of the current state of English cathedrals that modern colour photographs are generally less pleasing than ones from the 1970s and before. Currently the buildings are being used as elaborate tourist traps, full of modern fittings and all kinds of stuff obscuring detail and function (Salisbury for example had a large ramp installed in one transept for wheelchair access, rather uningratiatingly covering up several graves). Post-war B&W photographs can be extremely clear; and better still often depic the buildings free of endless donation boxes, electric light fixtures, and with original pews intact as well :>

[M forever]

The author's constant use of "race" to describe people of different countries (the British, the Normans, etc) is quite strange to read from a modern POV

I would say that is a little strange from a 1950s point of view, too, after all the catastrophies caused by racism in the first half of the century. Plus in the meantime, not only do people perceive "race" in a very different way, it has also been shown by genetic testing that most people who inhabit the British islands are directly descended from people who have lived there for millenia, and that the "genetical contributions" from groups groups who invaded and ruled the region at some point, such as the Anglos, Saxons, or Normans is much smaller than it had been believed to be for a long time.

[Lethevich]

I would say that is a little strange from a 1950s point of view, too, after all the catastrophies caused by racism in the first half of the century. Plus in the meantime, not only do people perceive "race" in a very different way, it has also been shown by genetic testing that most people who inhabit the British islands are directly descended from people who have lived there for millenia, and that the "genetical contributions" from groups groups who invaded and ruled the region at some point, such as the Anglos, Saxons, or Normans is much smaller than it had been believed to be for a long time.

Indeedie. In the context implied he seems to mean culture, I wonder whether that word wasn't chosen due to it having a slightly different emphasis back them (perhaps it being synonymous with "high culture" or something). He seems harmless in his use of the term, and there may have been a reason for it.

[M forever]

What reason?