In which the author recounts his adventures in traveling through China in 1946 through to Tibet.
Exactly that. Not great literature, but a good read nonetheless. I rather like travel & adventure books, especially those that capture the period and setting. And it has me googling Lhasa and idly looking at maps of the territory, which also can't be a bad thing..
- Details
- Category: Books
"Shortlisted for the 2007 Man BOOKER PRIZE" it said on the cover, a thick book, paperback, recycled newsprint pages.
I picked it up from a friends and began reading. I don't read enough current literature, prefer the guaranteed pleasure of a weathered classic, but it's important now and then to get a glimpse of what's current in the literary scene. Not that 2007 is current, but it's about 150 years more current than my average reading choice.
It's curious. Not great, but inspiring in a sort of "I could have written this but not this, something else like this but better" sort of way. I suspect I'm missing the point, that I'm lacking the requisite body of knowledge, after all, the reviews (on the jacket) are entirely favourable, and it was Shortlisted for the 2007 Man Booker Prize. And we all say that, that it's easy enough to do better, but until one tries it, does it, it's just an easy phrase....
I'm almost done, but the finishing of it won't change my opinion of it any. Long, but not really, lots of white space and half pages, a curious but unengaging cast of characters, a slight hint of the human condition, an irrelevant detour on the way to Chesterfield...
- Details
- Category: Books
Revisiting a delightful book after a 20-odd year absence can be a tricky thing, but in no ways does this disappoint. Well, perhaps in a couple small respects, I shall never write a letter again (and why would I if I couldn't at least maintain the standards set by the esteemed Valmont and Marquise de Merteuil?).
The reason for revisiting it is to place in context "The Letters of Casanova", the original, unedited manuscripts, with other writings on courtly manners and etiquette of the same period. Sort of a "get a feel for the life and times". And it succeeds admirably. To quote André Gide of the author: "There is no doubt as to his being hand in glove with Satan...". But on the off chance you haven't read it, I won't give away any more.
Now on to Lord Chesterfield's "Letters to his Son". As well of the same period, but of a completely different tenor....
**Note the translation I reread was by Richard Aldington - I can't guarantee the veracity of others, especially should they sport a glamorous cover with Glenn Close or John Malkovich. I've read clips of the Parmee translation and recommend heartily that you skip it, or wait for something a little more resonant...
- Details
- Category: Books
Curious, 12th or 13th Century tale of the death of Siegfried and the subsequent revenge by Kriemhild upon the treacherous Hagen. Filled with a sort of cartoonish, Hollywood style of violence wherein the protagonists prevail (for a time) against seemingly insurmountable odds, introducing and slightly fleshing out characters such as Brunhild and Rudiger, it served as my introduction to the medieval German myths and legends. Now, to be truthful, while it's a classic I wasn't overwhelmed by it, the translation I read (A. T. Hatto) sought to preserve the narrative at the expense of the poetry, and not speaking medieval German I'm not in a position to comment on whether he did a good or a bad job, I suspect the former. But it was redeemed in the numerous appendices and footnotes, which clarified and interpreted certain passages and generally raised my estimitation of it.
Now the introduction is often, in my view, something to be avoided, it frequently presumes you are familiar with the plot and outcome of the story and makes free with spilling events and offering criticisms and interpretations before you've had a chance to appraise it yourself. But in this instance the introduction and notes were saved until the end, where they served the proper function of clarifying the text and comparing the outline with the various antecedent poems and stories that preceded it. Which was a good thing.
Or is it? While I don't like "spoilers", it should be noted that it's original audience was very familiar with the plot, and the telling of the story was simply a different "interpretation" or fleshing out/tying together of various of the legends surrounding Siegfried and the Burgundians. So in this sense, to have the same appreciation as it's audience, forewarned might have been forearmed....
Other observations? Curious as to the events that actually led to the creation of the myths of Siegried and Kriemhild, curious as to how the audience reconciles the 2 halves, the first in which Siegfried is the hero treacherously murdered, Kriemhild the cruelly widowed Queen, then the second half where she weds King Etzel and becomes a vengeful sort of demon who sacrifices all in her quest for revenge, Hagen's role switches from that of traitor to that of hero... But then these become questions of our culture and time, and my absence of sympathy is largely due to my lack of understanding and context.
And the treasure of the Nibelung's, Kriemhild's dowry from Siegfried sunken into the Rhine...
- Details
- Category: Books