Tibor Fisher: Under the Frog

It is a very funny book indeed. However, this is exactly  my main problem with it. Under the Frog lacks any tragic touch that an author who actually lived through the events in the novel, would have used. I am not whining or being snob (for a change, haha); I just know, as I am from that country and I did live through half (!) of the previous regime (I am hesitating to call it "communist" regime as it was not communist). My parents and their friends saw everything Fisher is talking about, and I saw everything that those events did to them. And boy, it was not funny. Tragicomical and/or bittersweet - yes. But not funny, I swear.

Nevertheless, it is an easy read, a pageturner. What else can I wish at the end of my trimester?

Too bad I am Central-European.

A Wicked Note On Bolaño

I am reading Bolaño's new short story collection (The Return, New Directions, 2010) and at one point he writes (emphasis mine):
Rogelio came over to our table and said that the greatest writer of the centrury was, without doubt, Mikhail Bulgakov. (...) Rogelio mentioned other works by the distinguished novelist, more than ten of them...
Now, Rogelio almost had to include the short stories of B too if it came more than ten...

A New Critical Reading of “Dark They Were and Golden-Eyed”

In Ray Bradbury's short story, “Dark Were They and Golden Eyed”, a family of five arrives at Mars from the Earth to settle down and find a new life. Although they try to do everything they can to establish an environment as similar to Earth as they can, soon they notice and have to accept that they are going through irreversible changes and cannot maintain their old selves: they gradually turn into Martians.

For a close reader the most important tension of the short story becomes perfectly clear. Although Bradbury seemingly sets up the main conflict based on the differences between the “white” Earth people and the “dark” Martians, it is actually between the unimaginative and inspired, the ordinary and extraordinary, the conformist and nonconformist, the organic and technicized components that continuously fight their battle inside us and for us. Through describing a person's inner battle, and with the help of carefully but very purposefully chosen poetic devices, Bradbury shows us how much more meaningful and exciting to live a life filled with colorful fantasy and imagination – not unlike children's lives - than to insist on our safe but soul-destroying “white” existence. After all, “Maybe we're children, too”, “dark we are, and golden eyed. “

The road leading to our inner, innocent, child-like self is long and hard. Breaking all our safety-rockets does not help; the changes have to happen in us, deep in us to be final and irreversible.

Bradbury's short story can be divided into five pieces: a quasi prologue, three main parts and an epilogue. In the prologue the family arrives at Mars; the first main piece is from the devastating news about the atomic bomb on Earth to the rising of the green star; the second part ends with the father, Harry's ritual submerging into the canal; the final part is from the submerging to the total accomplishment of the transformation; the epilogue talks about the next group of Earth people coming to the planet to be supposedly lead to their “native” self.

The title of the short story, “Dark They Were, And Golden Eyed”, immediately poses some ambiguous questions causing tension. Who exactly are “they”? With the strange word order Bradbury puts a very strong emphasis on the adjectives and places them in the foreground of our perception. Dark usually refers to something bad, suspicious, unpleasant, while the color gold is a symbol of light, rich, sparkling, pleasant. How can somebody be good and evil at the same time? Or is it possible that either of these adjectives is used with an unfamiliar connotation?

In the prologue we meet the protagonist and his family. They live a “clean, decent” life on Earth; however, one day they feel the urge to leave it behind, “come over sixty million miles” to Mars. Although they are still not aware of what it is exactly that they are after, and why they feel their lives are unsatisfied and unfulfilled on Earth, the author already gives us several clues to ease this tension. They arrive with children, who are like “seeds, might at any instant be sown” (567) and eventually develop into a brand new plant. There is not too much doubt what is going to happen. Bradbury uses expressive similes with organic imagery to describe the life-changing experience the family is going to go through: “the tissues of his body draw tight as if he were standing at the center of a vacuum” (567). “The wind blew as if to flake away their identities” (567). “At any moment the Martian air might draw his soul from him, as marrow comes from a white bone” (567). Right in the beginning the author introduces several of the short story's main symbols: the wind that accompanies the hero all the way to the end is a well known and frequent public symbol of change. Something old is always “gone with the wind” and something new and exciting arrives with a new breeze (and stays until the wind changes). Through the implied meaning Bradbury suggests that these changes are going to be for the better.

Another very important element, color, also appears in the prologue. The two most prominent colors of the text are being introduced in their symbolic senses. “[T]he Martian air might draw his soul from him, as marrow comes from a white bone” (567), Bradbury writes, depicting the hero's old life as “white”. The children's hair is “yellow” - the simplified color of gold. Linking “goldness” to children foreshadows the symbolic meaning of the golden-eyed existence; after all life on Mars – according to Bradbury's description – is evidently childhood-like, innocent: “They saw the old cities, lost in their meadows, lying like children's delicate bones” (567).

The third leading symbol of the story is also in the prologue. “The children with their yellow hair hollered at the deep dome of the Martian sky” (567). Indeed, we need to dig deep to reach our inner child-like innocence, when we were still without inhibitions and full of imagination and fantasy. The good news is, says Bradbury, that not only we possess the desire for a more imaginative and meaningful life (“a man standing on the edge of a sea, ready to wade in”), we also have all that is needed within us to realize it, to make it our reality. Although our “marrow” (fantasy, imagination) is locked up, surrounded by “white bones” it can be released and rescued; however the process to set it free may be a very long and painful process.

Interestingly enough it is only in the first part of the text's main body where we hear the family's name first time right in the first sentence. “Their name was Bittering” (567). It is a telling name: including an adjective (bitter) with an -ing ending suggests a “verb” that describes both its bearers' character and their most characteristic action. It is another clue about their not having been happy in their previous lives on Earth.

Comparing to the other main divisions of the story this section is the longest one; the lengthiness suggests that the road Harry Bittering is taking so that in the end he can arrive at a more satisfying although totally different way of life is full of inner pitfalls and uncertainties and indeed, takes a long time.

He does not see his destination still and he does not know if it is worth the struggle. Although he instinctively knows it is “time to get up” (568), he is full of fears all the time: “the fear was never gone” (567). He is “drenched in the hotness of his fear” (569). He constantly tries to convince himself of the opposite (as if testing his strength): “We do not belong here. We're Earth people. This Mars. It was meant for Martians”(568). He meticulously insists on his old-life routines: he plants a garden, gets up at seven o'clock, goes to “work”, reads the Earth paper every day. The decision of his Mars adventure seems like a certain kind of a game, a “survivor show” until a dramatic event happens: there is no way back. “Atom bomb hit New York! All the space rockets blown up. No more rockets to Mars, ever!” (569) With this event Bradbury puts his characters in a situation when they have no choice. In other words, their old, ordinary, boring, “white” life is over for ever. There is no other way than going forward. That is to say, there is no other way then just digging deeper and deeper into their “Martian world” that in the text represents a child-like, innocent, colorful, peaceful and content life. There is no other way than just being happy again just like we all used to be as children.

The road is long and hard but Bradbury does not leave his characters by themselves. From their very first breath on Mars there is a mysterious phenomenon with them, the wind that helps them through the probing times. In the prologue it cools them down and gives them (and the readers) the first clue about the changes they face. It always reminds them of the existence of their inner self, the destination of their journey. When they have doubts (“But did we find any Martians? Not a living soul!” 568), the wind immediately reacts, and does so very prominently: “A river of wind submerged the house” (568), windows “rattling”. When they learn the news about Earth (which is the actual beginning point of the main tension of the story), and they are all devastated, the wind is there at once to console them and at the same time show them a possible (the possible) way – the creative, imaginative life - out of depression: “For a long time there was only the sound of the wind in the late afternoon” (569). It is there as a manifestation of the Martian (meaningful) life, whenever the doubtful, hesitating, confused Earth people need strength and reassurance. “Are you up there? All the dead ones, you Martians? Well, here we are, alone, cut off! Come down, move us out! We're helpless!” (570) And down it comes and moves them out of their misery. It calms down only when the work is done, in the third main part of the story, and the “quiet autumn” replaces the chaotic, loud and hot summer.

Bradbury uses quite a few poetic devices to convince the reader about his truth. One of the most obvious devices is repetition. The function of the repetition of certain words and expressions is not just calling attention to an important fact, action or feature but also to make the text's central idea stronger, assuring the text's organic unity this way as well. “No way back. No way. No way” (569). The repetition plays out on the action level too. If Harry gets uncertain he keeps going to “work”: “Work, he thought, work and forget” (569). There are also lots of “lists” with the same function and role. Often the lists contain repetitions as well: “Sweat poured from his face and his hand and his body” (569). “himself working alone, himself alone even among his family, alone” (576). Whenever Harry is in an especially devastated state and almost loses his strength and sanity, he talks to himself in very short, simple, repetitive sentences that snap one after the other as if he tried to convince himself with a series of short, sharp slaps. “Think. Keep thinking. Different things. Keep your mind free of Earth...” (570), “He perspired. He glanced about. No one watching”(570). Bradbury uses the garden imaginary in a strange, defamiliarized sense: usually we connect positive phenomenon to gardens; gardening in literature very often means growing and cultivating our intellect, reconnecting with nature, with organic elements. In Bradbury's short story the garden is the symbol of the Bitterings' old, monotonous, dull, unimaginative life. It is a place where Harry keeps returning to maintain fractions of his Earth self.

The colors in Bradbury's short story also have enormous importance and expressive strength as they carry very heavy symbolism.

The old, left behind world is white. It is the color of oversimplified boredom, transparency (as in: not complicated with shades), everything that is ordinary, empty, mundane. That is the life the Earth people come from. This is the color they try to establish around themselves: “They built a small white cottage” (567). The wind of change sweeps out the colorlessness and fills the “center of a vacuum” (567) with colors. Lots of colors. When the transformation really gains ground, everything and everyone is being saturated with bright colors, similar to a free drawing of a child bursting with happiness and light-heartedness. “...changing through the old peach tree [peach as a color, not just the fruit], the violet grass, shaking out green rose petals” (571).
The second most important color in the list is definitely gold (or its frequent representation, yellow). In the beginning of Bradbury's text golden-yellow is undoubtedly and purposefully connected mainly to children. The Bittering children arrive at Mars “with their yellow hair” (567) strengthening the short story's main idea: the creative, imaginative, fantastic features that give meaning to our life are carried by the children in a “white” world until they lose them and they, themselves become “white” adults. The children are not just the only ones who possess the seed of being “yellow” or “golden-eyed”, but they are the first ones who sense and notice and know the changes both in the environment and in people too. They are the first ones who bring up the possibility of some kind of Martian existence: “Maybe there're Martians around we don't see. Sometimes nights I think I hear 'em” (568). And they are the first ones who adapt to the new situation by demanding new, “Martian” names for themselves.

But the golden color is not restricted to children only. The first thing that goes through a transformation in people is their eye. The eye is the mirror of the soul – as the saying goes. And if it is so, there is a part in everyone's soul that – according to Bradbury – still possesses our inner, playful child. We just have to find our Martian wind that brings it out from the deep. Golden-yellow is the color of the sun, the huge, hot, bright star that gives us light, warmth, the source of all existence. In Bradbury's story golden-yellow is the symbol of being different, being exciting, being extraordinary. At this point we are again at the center idea of the text: this extraordinariness, this excitement that manifests itself as imagination and fantasy, is not less than the essence of our life. “Mr. Bittering felt his bones shifted, shaped, melted like gold” (573), Bradbury writes. It is an intriguing simile indeed: the very intensive, aggressive physical transformation, that suggests some kind of pain, suffering, is connected to the color gold. However, it has been quite clearly established that in this text gold has positive, pleasant connotations. What nature is, after all, such a huge change and transformation? Bradbury makes sure the feelings, impressions and descriptions of the ongoing change leave a very positive aftertaste in the reader. Changing (back) to a world filled with imagination is good. It is desirable. Even if it does not seem so at first: when he speaks about the Martian new world, Bradbury uses a seemingly cruel metaphor in which the beast of change devours its victim: “What would happen to him, the others? This was the moment Mars had waited for. Now it would eat them” (569). But this metaphor is embedded in sensually pleasant context, making it very ambiguous: “Earth people left to the strangeness of Mars, the cinnamon dusts and wine airs, to be baked like gingerbread shapes in Martian summers, put into harvested storage by Martian winters” (569). Gingerbread cookies smelling like cinnamon, accompanied by wine in harvest time...What is all this if not a reminder of memories of our sweet-smelling, fragrant childhood? Should we stay away from a change like that? Bradbury does not think so. It is not bad, it is not cruel, only different and maybe surprising, says Harry himself: “Onions but not onions, carrots but not carrots. Taste: the same but different. Smell: not like it used to be.” (571) Cora, Harry's wife agrees: “Look all right to me” (570). It is not just right, it is “native”, it is natural, it is evident: “You make a little ghost in your mind, a memory. It's quite natural. Imagination” (568).

The change saturates the Earth people's senses: the colors change, tastes are different, voices die out and quietness takes over, smells are “not like it used to be”, digging “fingers in the earth” does not feel the same as it was before. Bradbury uses synaesthesia to express the chaotic (but exciting) mixture of senses: cinnamon dust, wine airs, green silence dance around the people entering their old-new lives.

This section of the story ends with an allusion: “A green star rose in the east” (574). It refers to Jesus' birth in the New Testament. The pivotal placement of such a well known and strong reference-image suggests that the chain of the events has gotten to a turning point. The birth of Jesus, the Savior means the transformation, the rescue (“saving”) is getting rooted deeply in Harry at last, probably for ever and irreversibly. Indeed, this is the moment when “a strange word emerged from Mr. Bittering's lips” (574). This is the very first linguistic element in a long line of Martian naming words that occurs in the story. And a very important one. We learn that Iorrt, the word that Harry utters after the portentous star appears is “the old Martian word for our planet Earth” (574). The pioneer of the upcoming names “emerged” from the depth of Harry Bittering. The verb “emerge” definitely has an image of upward movement. Apart from the depth of Harry's inner self the direction refers both to the act of redeeming (through the allusion of Christ's birth) and concretely, to the height of the surrounding mountains where the remnants of the ancient, buried Martian life can be found. This is the event that starts the ceremony of naming and renaming things and people in Bradbury's short story, although we have already learned earlier the importance of names. “He thought of the proud old Martian names that had once been on those peaks...Once Martians had built cities, named cities; climbed mountains, named mountains; sailed seas, named seas…In spite of this, the Earth Men had felt a silent guilt at putting new names to these ancient hills and valleys” (570). Growing up, we leave our childhood behind together with its language. Our language “grows up” too, as we feel we need to find rational sense in the universe including its signs, the words. The act of naming is a very symbolic step: it gives things and people identity. By taking away the Martian (“childhood”) names and replacing them with the Earth Men's (“grown up”) words, Martian life has lost its essence, its child-like quality in the name of “rationality”, “seriousness” and “adulthood”. With the transformation getting close to its completion, the elements of the environment return to their original, “native” states by reclaiming their old names. These new-old names do not make “sense” linguistically to the adult Earth Men (and Women), just like a newborn's cooing cannot be identified with any traditionally formed “adult” words. With this choice of linguistic elements Bradbury's reminds the readers again of the meaning of his Mars metaphor that is surrounding the central idea of the text.

The next main part ends in another very strong biblical allusion. Harry Bittering submerges in river (canal) water so that he can emerge as a newly born, changed, transformed man. The image can easily be traced back to the Christening scene of Jesus. By baptism the protagonist becomes, is converted to a new, innocent person. He frees himself from his previous life and sins. The paragraph that describes the scene in Bradbury's story is one of the most important parts of the whole text. It is full of figures of speeches with definitely positive connotations suggesting something wonderful, desirable and peaceful has happened. Bradbury uses synaesthesia (“green silence”) to express the complexity of the almost overwhelming experience; brings back a previously established color symbol in a simile: “let himself sink down and down to the bottom like a golden statue” (575); takes a metaphor (as a contracted simile) to picture the tranquility that fills Harry (“water-quiet” as opposed to the wind's constant howling in the previous parts). When Bradbury writes about the process of the change he tends to use very strong and aggressive nouns and verbs of action (the rocket's “lid gave a bulging pop”, the wind is rattling, Laura, one of Harry's children, is dashing onto the porch with bad news, the children are running out “in time to see their father hurrying about the garden”, the situation is called a “crisis”). In this paragraph he does the opposite: everything slows down, taking time: “A few tremblings shook him, but were carried off in waves of pleasant heat” (575). It is not dark under the water, on the contrary, he sees the light, he is enlightened, he is enchanted – he is transformed. An oxymoron (“He saw the sky submerged above him” 575, - submerge/above) emphasizes two features of the experience: it is indeed an overall and overwhelming surrounding and at the same time it is elevating. The event takes place in the deep, where “all was peace”, where all our buried dreams exist. Although it happens underwater, it is not suffocating like the “other” world. When he emerges from the water he gets his new (“Christian”) name (utha) as a manifestation of his new identity. It is given to him by his son – a child figure, hinting at a new, innocent, promising, exciting era of his life in which he needs to build himself again, cell by cell, but this time with lively, thrilling colors from his deeply buried self: “If I lie here long enough, he thought, the water can build on that skeleton – green things, deep water things, red things, yellow things” (575).

In the epilogue, that takes place five years later, the old, Earth life appears again on Mars, in the form of a rocket that “fell out of the sky” (579). Together with it returns the characterization of the “white” life. The newcomers speak in the usual short, concise sentences of the Earth Men (“Dark people. Yellow eyes. Martians. Very friendly” 579), nothing unnecessary albeit nice and amusing pleasantries and extras. The main value of them is constant, monotonous, rational and effective work: “Lots to be done, Lieutenant…The work, all the work” (580). Their viewpoint is definitely “adult”; they see only “ruins” instead of villas with marble floors and refreshing swimming pools in the Martian settlement. Bradbury uses irony to describe and characterize the absolute unimaginativeness of the rocket men. When they are engaging themselves in naming the environment on Mars (and by naming they think they can take possession of it), the captain claims that it “calls for a little imagination” (580). But the given names are the same as always, there is no innovation, or fantasy, or playfulness present at all (Lincoln Mountains, Washington Canal, Einstein Valley).

Everything starts again, and we can just hope we know what will happen with “the blue mountains rising beyond, the canals moving in the light, and… the soft wind in the air”... (580)

Dark they were, and golden-eyed, indeed.

=================================
Work Cited
Bradbury, Ray. “The Stories of Ray Bradbury.” Alfred A. Knopf, 2010. 567-80. Print.

Disobedience by Naomi Alderman

I am almost done with Disobedience by Naomi Alderman. And I think I know why it doesn't work. It is impossible to identify with the heroine (Ronit). She is superficial, pathetic, insensible, very-very selfish and I could go on and on and on. It is not that there aren't (main) literary characters that are similarly negative but in this case Alderman seems to make tons of effort to make us like Ronit or at least understand her. I am not saying that this really strict and ortodox Jewish world with its patriarchs and silent manipulators is attractive in any sense, however the only character I managed to like up to a certain point is the husband, Dovid. I absolutely despise Esti, consider Ronit a monster, so comparing to them, Dovid is quite likeable. I am wondering whether the last 50-so pages will change anything.


The Good Apprentice by Iris Murdoch

OK, this is gonna be short, for now: I find Murdoch's writing almost unbearably pretentious. I am not the one who refuses "artsy" things, but this seems to be too much, even for me.

We'll see. I am still in the beginning.


Laura Rider's Masterpiece by Jane Hamilton

Sooooo.... I am at half of the novel and there are three things I want to mention.

I almost did not pick up the book as it has this terrible, distasteful and hideous jacket design - I understand that it is supposedly funny hinting at some 50s (?) romance novel covers but there is nothing in it that suggests irony; the designer thought that putting together 50s style graphics automatically gives an ironic impression. Well, let me tell you: no, it does not.

Even when I read the blurb on the cover I thought it would be a kind of How to Talk to a Widower- type book – a very easy, very entertaining guilty pleasure. I did not read anything from the author, Jane Hamilton (whose name, by the way, sounds exactly like a name of a heroine in a typical romance novel, and this fact did not help me pick up the book either).

And finally the mea culpa, the pleasant surprise: Laura Rider's Masterpiece is extremely intelligently written, almost too intelligently (meaning: too artificially, too perfectly, too smoothly), and the story itself is growing onto me slowly but surely. It is a pretty delicate situation and of course the big question is whether Ms. Hamilton is talented enough to grab its delicacy and uneasiness. There is something creepy about the whole set-up, something absolutely not funny about the wife writing flirting letters to the radio star in the name and with the consent of her husband.

We'll see.

The Angel's Game by Carlos Ruiz Zafón, Part 8.

Okay, okay, okay. Calm down.

I am almost in the end, hardly 30 pages are left, and it is a total chaos. The last sentence of the inspector twisted the story again. The hundredth time. I do not know anything, I do not understand anything.

I still have patience and excitement to go on and on and on. But I am more and more convinced this novel cannot be finished in the "right" way (from the writing technique's point of view or something). I do not want to finish this book and I want to finish it so badly.

The Angel's Game by Carlos Ruiz Zafón, Part 7.

Well, I am not familiar with the genre, this genre, if this is the genre the novel seems to belong to (why the hell I keep thinking that nothing is really what it seems to be?!), but now that I have read about 2/3 of the book certain events start to pile up and they seem to be too many for CRZ to be able to "explain" in the end one by one. Unless of course there is going to be (1) a huge deus ex machina or (2) a generous, mysterious, leave-everthing-in-the -dark type ending. I am not sure I would be happy with either of them though. (However, everything seems to point to number 2, so I'd better get used to the idea.) And as fabulous and overwhelmingly rich as this book has been so far, I am terrified that CRZ won't have enough munition left for the whatever ending…

The Angel's Game by Carlos Ruiz Zafón, Part 6.

I am slowly but surely realizing that one of the protagonists of the novel (quite easily the real one) is Barcelona itself. It is unbelievable how atmospheric CRZ's text. Beautiful. I've been waking up, living with and going to bed with Barcelona for a while now, a gothic, sinister Barcelona, always wet, always under stormy skies, always at daybreak, neither day nor night. Haunting me anywhere I go.

The Angel's Game by Carlos Ruiz Zafón, Part 5.

Ah, now I feel some inauthentic voice in the text – a dialog-chunk where CRZ let the temptation for an oh-so-easy score take over. But I needed to get to the 320th page to experience this slight slip for the very first time in the novel – and that is, my friends, not a too bad report card over all, whatever the future might bring.


The Angel's Game by Carlos Ruiz Zafón, Part 4.

…of course, now the question is not that what will happen - if it stays like this (and this is a huge 'if'), we can figure that out quite easily I guess, but rather: is it going to be final main story or will the main story be Daniel's fight against the Evil? And if yes, will he succeed? Is he going to survive this fight?


Here is my guess at the moment: he'll try to fight it but won't survive the battle. I just cannot see anyone being able to stand up to such an evil power, the Evil itself.


But that leads me to something else too: if I am right, and it is a Mephistopheles (Faust) story than how come the omnipotent Mr C. cannot see Daniel's every step and move? Or can he? Is this just a trick of his – to make D. think he can have thoughts and intentions of his own while in reality he cannot…? And who is in and who is just an innocent bystander in Daniel's life? Like: what is the role of Isabella?


Questions, question, questions. Still. Still no answers. (I love it.)


Sunday Salon: no milk today

...uhm, books. No books today. The whole family is sick with the flu. Our weekly feature is returning next week. Until then enjoy these interesting book-related links.

Monday Movies - October 12, 2009

Over at The Bumbles there is a weekly meme that is very close to my heart as it is about movies, good movies.

This week is about the best romantic movie I have ever seen.

Of course there is not one "best of", and so I could list a lot of "best" romantic movies as well as "best this" and "best that". However I am mentioning the one that I have seen (and will be watching) the most as I love it so much (but who doesn't).

Yes, it is of course Casablanca, directed by one of my fellow countrymen, Kertész Mihály, a.k.a. Michael Curtiz.

Ah, what could I write about this movie that hasn't already been written? Anyhow, it is comforting to know that the studio came to its senses and casted the Bergman & Bogart couple as the leads instead of Ronnie (the Reagan) and Ann Sheridan (as the original plan was). Brrrrr....

Oh, and one more thing: Bogart wrote a big chunk of the screenplay and so supposedly we should thank him for one of my all-time favourite quotes (that I use an average once a week, or more, haha): "Here's looking at you, kid..."

(You can read about more favourite romantic movies here.)

Sunday Salon: Mysteries of Winterthurn by Joyce Carol Oates

Mysteries of Wintherthurn by Joyce Carol Oates
Published by Persea Books in 2008

(NOTE: Well. The thing is, Oates' name was all around in the past week in connection with the nominees for Nobel Prize for Lit – and honestly I hoped it was a mistake, mainly if you compare her to the other nominated authors. But just in case I have written a few words about an old novel of Oates to prove my point. Here it is – I don't want to throw it out just because she hasn't won. As for Herta Müller, the winner… well. She has to wait.)

Everyone read Bellefleur or them or Blonde. Everyone loved them. Me too. But this is an author who should write approximately tenth of the amount she is actually writing and stop and think first instead. 75% of her oeuvre is – although very popular in Reading Clubs I guess - totally mediocre (and I am very generous now). Mysteries of Winterthurn is not an exception either.


Success traps you much more easily than failure. While failure might discourage you success often makes you stuck-up and over-confident. That's what happens to Oates sometimes in her career and that is definitely the case with Winterthurn. It was written not much after Bellefleur and she evidently wanted to ride the success waves of that great family novel.


First of all, it is important to keep in mind that Oates' novel is supposed to be a classical mystery / detective story because this fact determines the critical approaches.


The story takes place in a small fictional American town in the East Coast – or better to say: stories as there are 3 ones (seemingly loosely) linked together by the same place and the same characters – a detective and his love. The question is: apart from this, is there any more, a bit deeper connection among the three stories?


We follow the protagonist, Xavier Kilgarvan's detective career from the beginning up to his 40s. In the first story there are several strange unnatural deaths in his own family and he manages to find out who stands behind all this. The second one is about some sadistic murders of factory workers (women) and in the third one a respected priest is murdered while in the middle of (seemingly) dubious acts. (You can read the book as a detective story, a whodunnit, so I am not telling you more.)


Well. I know, it is the umpteenth time I am writing this but again, Mysteries of Winterthurn seems to be an excellent example for the fact that a story itself is really not that important (=not enough) for a good novel. (In other words: the story is way over-estimated nowadays.) The literary value of a book lies mostly in the way an author handles (writes) a story. It is mainly true with mysteries. And that's where Oates slips: she evidently doesn't want to present an ordinary whodunnit, she feels she has to be "deeper", more "artistic". So she researches a whole bunch of cheap (American) pulp fiction from the beginning of the last century, decides to follow their formula but, as she is a "serious" novelist after all, she wants to write a persiflage, a kind of (not-too-funny) parody of these instead. So she uses a lot of archaisms, strange sentence-structures, fills her text with exalted fake-emotions, etc, etc. But there is a problem here: if you do decide on this genre you just cannot do things by halves. In a persiflage (parody) you either mock at somebody or not mock at them at all. You either need to take it totally seriously (and then drop the genre) or make fun of the characters, situations, etc. without any ("artistic") restrictions. That's what makes this genre work. Any other solution just confuses the receivers (=readers). Just like Oates confuses us in the Mysteries of Winterthurn: she evidently takes her almost-horror stories dead (haha) seriously but at the same time the way she tells us these stories (i.e. her writing style) is one of a parody. We tend to believe the seriousness of the stories but the archaic, mocking, sometimes pompous style that goes with it makes them sound discordant.


But even the stories themselves are not authentic in a literary sense. Yes, you can write unsolved mysteries very successfully (watch out: there is a good reason why I wrote "unsolved"; it is not necessarily referring to the actual story line, but again, I am not going to tell you more…), but you need to be an excellent writer to make it work (think of Edgar Allan Poe for instance). Or: you can create a surrealistic/enigmatic situation (chain of events) but in this case you need to give an explanation for the surrealism/enigma in a classic detective story. Unfortunately, Oates mixes up things again: she presents a mystery story in a pretty realistic way but leaves important elements of the same story enigmatically unsolved, causing uncertainty, unbalanced feelings in the reader (and not the good kind of literary uncertainty, believe me).


But let me to collect the positive features of the novel as well – and try to answer my beginning question at the same time: is there any more, a bit deeper connection among the three stories? After all, it says "A novel" and not "3 Novels" on the cover.


I have a feeling that if we can get over this mystery-persiflage thingie we might even discover what Oates' real purpose would be with her book. Somewhere deep (very, very deep, almost invisibly deep) she seems to talk about one thing in all 3 stories: she is outraged by the unscrupulous American Rich, who, with the help of their money, can overcome social morals, laws and anything or/and anybody who might stand in their way to live and do as they please. And after all this can be a suitable message for a reader to keep their motivation to finish the book.


Suitable – yes; literarily valuable – unfortunately: no.



The Angel's Game by Carlos Ruiz Zafón, Part 3.

I have never understood totally what it meant when somebody said 'It was the kind of book I read as slowly as I was able to so that it could last longer..."


Now I know.

As in literature or any other act of communication, what confers effectiveness on it is the form and not the content. (...) Everything is a story, a narrative, a sequence of events with characters communicating an emotional content. We only accept as true what can be narrated.

I think it rhymes to Wittgenstein but I still need to think it over. Not to speak of the fact how much it rhymes to what I've kept saying: the "story" being totally secondary after the form of a text. Yeah, baby.

(Part 1.
Part 2.)


And the Nobel goes to…

Well, now we know where the award goes this year.


But there might be something we don't know. A quote:


One lesson to be taken from this: the Swedish Academy has a big leak, and someone made a mint placing money on Müller at 50/1. That's two years in a row now (though since Le Clézio's odds started out much better not quite as much was won off his victory) -- and you can be sure everyone is going to follow the Ladbrokes odds very, very closely next year.

First read this


…and then this


Interesting, to say the least. (And the LS is fantastic, as usual.)


Monday Movies - Dad characters

Over at The Bumbles there is a weekly meme that is very close to my heart as it is about movies, good movies. I thought it is time to introduce this topic here as I am also planning to write about movies in the future.

This week is about movies with great Dad characters.

The greatest movie about a Dad is definitely Father directed in 1966 by István Szabó (he is the one who got an Academy Award back in 1981 for his 'Mephisto'). It is out here as well with English subtitles so all the English speaking community can enjoy it too.

More fantastic Dad characters in movies...? Let me see just on top of my head.
  • Les Nichols (played by Charles Durning) in Tootsie. (One of the best movies ever made about gender issues as well.)
As I mentioned a Dustin Hoffman movie, here is something everyone will mention as it is a really great one...
  • Ted Kramer in Kramer vs. Kramer.
But there are lots of others (don't forget, great means greatly written or greatly played too, not just "good" or "positive")...
  • Moses Pray (played by Ryan O'Neal) in Paper Moon.
  • Guido (played by Roberto Begnini) in Life is Beautiful.
  • Frantisek (played by Zdenek Sverák) in Kolya.
  • Helge (played by Henning Moritzen) in Festen.
  • Vito Corleone in Godfather (played by Marlon Brando).
  • Will (played by Hugh Grant) in About a Boy.
  • Bishop Edvard Vergerus (played by Jan Malsmjö) in Fanny and Alexander
  • Norman Thayer (played by Henry Fonda) in On Golden Pond.

(You can read more about Daddy movies here.)

The Angel's Game by Carlos Ruiz Zafón, Part 2.

In a bookstore I have just read a bit about the novel in Bookmarks. Well, it seems to me that the NYT mentions Faust so I am right about that. (Phew. I felt stupid... no, not stupid but rather over-educated.)

On the other hand it seems The Angel's Game hasn't gotten too good reviews (hasn't gotten too bad ones either), it has been judged as a mediocre effort, and everybody compares it to his previous novel of course. (See one of my posts about this - this comparison game is the stupidest thing ever.)

Again, it is absolutely possible that this novel goes downhills (has to drop quite a lot as it is now at a very very high point), but it has to be a totally different reason from what these idiot reviews are talking about. I haven't read even one authentic (=literary critical) reason so far for these face-makings.

Nevertheless, in spite of my common sense and knowledge, these things can put me off quite well.

(Part 1.)

Sunday Salon: Giovanni’s Room by James Baldwin

Giovanni's Room by James Baldwin
Published by Delta, 2000.

Last week I wrote about a James Baldwin novel and promised I would go on this week with another one, a more famous one, Giovanni's Room.


Well, it almost did not happen.


Not because this novel is worse – as a matter of fact, just the opposite. Although it was written much earlier then If Beale Street Could Talk, Giovanni's Room is more completed, more absolute – artistically speaking. Its world is as dark as the world of Beale Street but in a different way. It is a love story as well but even more beautiful. Race is not mentioned here and its subject is not a "blacks vs. whites" conflict but rather the nature of love. And as such, Giovanni's Room is one of the most beautiful love stories ever written. However, our question seems evident: is it possible to write another "traditional" love story when everything has already been said and told about this topic? And the answer is: yes and no.


Baldwin's story is a love story between two young men. A great, tragic love. The text is not banal, not sentimental at all: it presents all the painful aspects of the agony a relationship can cause (adding homosexuality to all this), including a very thorough social context as well (see the exploitation manner of the old pimps). Baldwin pictures the situation with a real insider's view, thoroughly and in an extremely complex way. The novel is an unforgettable, inspiring and sometimes disturbing reading about the beauty and the anguish, the clashes, the social aspects and the overwhelming power of Love itself.


Other than it should be a compulsory reading for every bigoted person who ever questioned the rights of homosexual love, it is hard to say anything more.


As a matter of fact hard to utter a word after closing the book.


The Angel's Game by Carlos Ruiz Zafón, Part 1.

(NOTE: In my Hungarian book blog I have been doing this for a long, long time - a diary of my ongoing reading experiences; thoughts, ideas while I am reading a certain book, thoughts, ideas about that particular book. I wanted to do so in this blog as well, when all of a sudden... Well. It will be sufficient to say now that I do not care about that certain "all of a sudden" thingie any more.)

I am at about the 120th or so page and... I am sure it has been one of the best novels I have read in this year so far. Or in the last 2 years. Or ever. The problem: it is 530+ pages so I should keep up my very high opinion on it for another 410 pages... We'll see (and I definitely hope so).

I kinda read some of the reviews (the reliable ones I mean) - "kinda", as I really did not want to know any important story line in advance (other than the cover tells us of course, but I practically cannot avoid that), so I just skimmed through these reviews very superficially and quickly. The Angel's Game was published in Hungary too, so I even pulled up some Hungarian reviews as well.

But.

After just 120 pages the parallel with the Faust-story is sooooo evident to me. I cannot tell if it will be staying so (so please do not tell me if yes or no!), but if yes, why the heck nobody mentions this? Am I the only one who read the Master and Margarita by Bulgakov (another aspect of the parallel)? Or am I the only one who has noticed this? OK, I am smart, but that smart...? So I am assuming, the character named Andreas Corelli, won't turn out to be a Lucifer figure and that's why nobody mentions this... Although so far everything, I repeat, everything shows so: the outlook, his "family background", his being totally omniscient, even the title of the book, etc, etc. Or, of course, I haven't read the reviews very thoroughly or I haven't read the right reviews, etc.

The text itself is so disturbing that I cannot read more than a few pages (1 or 2 chapters) at a time and then I need to put it down for a short while, but I cannot wait to get back to it again. I know, I know, it is weird but that's how it is, that's how I am. Believe me, there are not too many books that have done this to me. Very intense, very disturbing, very complex, very thick text. Layers and layers and layers. Incredible. So far at least.

And the characters. Not even the protagonist (Daniel - who is, or has been so far, the least interesting out of the 3), but take the woman (Cristina) or the (seemingly? really?) altruist Pedro Vidal. So complex, so complicated characters that I could write essays on them. And again: I have only read less then the quarter of the whole book (roughly)! But in this first part so many things are happening (both on the levels of reality and symbolism), so many emotions and thoughts are crammed in that all this would be more than enough already for a separate novel.

I should read (=catch up) with my Les Miserables but I cannot think about anything else but The Angel's Game.

Came the right time, right place...? Yes. Definitely.


About Me

My Photo
I am a Hungarian artist having been living in the US since 1995.