I've got a slight pain in one of my shoulders. I suppose that's what I get for falling asleep on a fire escape in the middle of a fire. I think it's a muscular pain, rather than a gunshot wound or an acid burn. It's not really going to impact on my ability to write, but I thought you should know about it.
I don't want us keeping any secrets from each other.
Except for... well, you know... the BIG one.
But I won't mention that. We don't want to give that can of worms the oxygen of publicity (if the seal is broken, the worms will go bad).
I'm working on a tight schedule here. The Liverpool-Man Utd match starts soon and even with my aforementioned multitasking skills, I'd still rather devote my attention to the football.
So I'm going to have to cram a lot of insight into a short space of time. Luckily, most of my insights are collapsible, and could probably fit inside a full matchbox with room to spare for my self-confidence, my self-respect, and an ant's sofa bed.
Let's get cracking (as the egg said to the other egg, before they both realised they were sentient eggs, tried to sob, then realised they didn't have eyes).
***
An Idiot Flaps Odyssey - Part 12
Yeah, I'm burning through the books! Not literally - that would be immoral. And costly. And would contravene our tenancy agreement.
Man, I love being glib.
Intro
Part 1
Part 2
Part 3
Part 4
Part 5
Part 6
Part 7
Part 8
Part 9
Part 10
Part 11
***
Ivan Turgenev - Fathers and Sons
[I wonder if that picture was a mistake. I look like I've seen a rapist's ghost.]
Turgenev! One of the masters of the Russian novel, along with Tolstoy, Dostoyevsky and Boris Yelstin's imaginary friend.
This is a superb novel about family, nature, the cross-generational divide, politics and lots of other things. It's really beautifully written, the characters are engaging, the morality is ambiguous. You should read it. Well, not you. You.
I can't really explain the plot (I'm sure a certain pedia can help you out there), but I have noted down some of my favourite bits. I made a list of six things in a Notepad document called 'turgnotes'. I'm clever.
1) Bazarov, the fiery, rationalistic, nihilistic, slightly-dickish antihero of the book for the first time expresses doubt about the ridiculousness of his circumstances:
He is frustrated that he has normal human desires when he should be above such concerns.
2) This description of Bazarov's mother is a great bit of writing.
(Google books is great! I don't have to do no typing or nothin'!)
3) Another character, in my edition, is described as: "a small shrivelled woman with a clenched fist of a face".
4) One of the central themes of the book is about the division between generations - the old-fashioned, romantic aristocratic old people, and the ruthless, determined, revolutionaries of the young.
This book was published in 1861, but I like to relate these things to the modern day. It seems each generation must war with the next. And every time, they think it's new and unique, when it's just a continuing cycle. It's a Hegelian dialectic, I suppose. (Those years at university weren't entirely wasted!)
It's summed up nicely by Nikolai Petrovich, the father of one of the other main characters, Arkady:
I think even now, people find that pill difficult to swallow.
5) I nice bit of anti-Russian humour:
6) One of the reasons I like the book so much is that the characters are so well drawn, you're never told who is right and who is wrong. Each viewpoint is explored thoroughly and reasonably - there are no heroes and villains really. It's a mark of great sensitivity that Turgenev can sympathetically present different points of view.
Apparently, this open-mindedness attracted a lot of criticism from both the Left and the Right, for failing to pick a side. There's a good introduction in my Penguin edition from Isaiah Berlin, where he talks about this in depth.
He identifies Turgenev with the left-leaning liberal: opposed to exploitation and the old order, but unwilling to overlook the harsh extremism of the Left, and so unable to commit to revolution.
Berlin refers to Turgenev's ability to put himself in the shoes of people he doesn't necessarily believe in as 'negative capability' (a term coined by Keats apparently). I'm always impressed by this in art. It's easy to present your own views with elegance and conviction, but to do the same for your opponents is a sign of a really good writer.
It reminded me (to continue the high-brow discussion) of The Simpsons. Remember the episode where Marge tries to get the Itchy and Scratchy Shows banned because they're too violent? What an episode...
Anyway, the writers manage to present both sides of the argument, and even create an idyllic childhood wonderland without cartoons. The writers weren't supporting the anti-cartoon perspective, of course, but were able to present it with dignity. You can make more effective political points by addressing the views of your opponents, than you can by just putting your own views forward.
So there. Turgenev and The Simpsons.
Humanity has created a lot of beautiful things.
***
Once again, I hope these book posts aren't too annoying for anyone. I suppose they're just prompts to get me to read, and to remind me of what I have read.
I know I should probably either do a proper review (including historical context, plot summary etc), or just do something short and funny. But I don't really know how to do either of those, so I'm an unhappy medium.
But at least they're clearly signposted, so you can skip them!
I didn't get it finished in time for the match, so I'm writing this bit at half time. It's going well so far, but I'm not going to count my weeping, cracking eggs before they hatch.
I'd like to end on a song.
No comments:
Post a Comment