Comments for The Mookse and the Gripes

Comment on 2013 Independent Foreign Fiction Prize Winner by Tony

Tony — Tue, 21 May 2013 10:31:08 +0000

A surprising winner, but one that deserves it :) I’ve just posted my recap on the whole IFFP business if you’re interested:
http://tonysreadinglist.blogspot.com.au/2013/05/the-official-iffp-2013-winner-and-some.html

Comment on Roberto Bolaño: “Mexican Manifesto” by Ken

Ken — Tue, 21 May 2013 08:00:45 +0000

I read 2666 a few years ago and enjoyed it very much and, yes, it is not satisfying in the traditional way but so rich. This story was so amazing on a stylistic level that I should probably read it again and think more about “meaning.” I was so transifxed by the surreal, sensuous ambience here and by the beauty of the prose (even in translation) that I have very little analytical to add this time.

Comment on Ben Marcus: “The Dark Arts” by Roger

Roger — Tue, 21 May 2013 02:46:58 +0000

The story shows off Marcus’s virtuosity with language. Nonetheless, for me the story failed, because despite (maybe because) of how hard it strives for emotional impact, I found myself utterly not interested in Julian. He is a terribly ill man who feels terribly sorry for himself. He whines. He whines about cuddling. I didn’t want to hear or read that. He makes a sad plan to have a liaison with a random man in the hostel where he’s staying, once the place is dark. I really didn’t want to read that. Sure, he slings some good quips, like when he offers to show the German doctor how to refund his money. But overall, he is so solipsistic that I stopped feeling sorry for him. And I feel so bad about that. I should probably go do a good deed to compensate. Then again, maybe I’ll just ask my wife for extra cuddling tonight….

Comment on Kingsley Amis: The Green Man by jb

jb — Tue, 21 May 2013 02:09:02 +0000

I just finished this last night, and quite enjoyed it. But I must admit to what might be a personal failing: I’m so used to stories where the protagonist believes something & turns out to be deluded that it always takes me a while to allow that maybe this IS actually happening, that in the world of ‘The Green Man’ there ARE indeed ghosts, and Maurice is seeing them. I know such stories have always started with the assumption of readerly skepticism, but I guess I’m so used to reading unreliable/deluded/insane narrators that that’s now my default assumption. (I had the same issue lately with the first book in Vladimir Sorokin’s ‘Ice Trilogy’ – how seriously do I take this? Are these characters feeling & seeing what the narrator says they are, and if so, are they insane or are the things that seem to be happening actually happening?)

Anyway, one of the bits in ‘The Green Man’ I enjoyed the most was Maurice’s relationship with his daughter-in-law. Without spoiling, I thought that added a nice extra dimension to the story. I’ve got ‘The Alteration’ nearby too – must start it soon…

Comment on 2013 Independent Foreign Fiction Prize Winner by queenofthepark

queenofthepark — Mon, 20 May 2013 21:52:29 +0000

Loved this novel. Bought The Twin on a whim in airport bookstore in Amsterdam Easy to remember since My hometown is Sydney Australia And my visits to Amsterdam, only once. Couldnt wait to read The Detour and found it an even better experience. Quite haunting and affecting

Comment on Andrei Tarkovsky: Solaris by birne

birne — Mon, 20 May 2013 14:22:00 +0000

One should add that the part on earth in the beginning of the movie cannot be found in the book at all (the ending is also different). The beginning gives the movie a very nice touch by introducing the personal history of the protagonist in much more detail than in the novel. Also the nature aspects etc are not there in the novel at all. This is where the movie really dramatically enriches the material.

Comment on Andrei Tarkovsky: Solaris by birne

birne — Mon, 20 May 2013 14:11:22 +0000

I would like to make a few additional comments, as I saw the movie again a couple of days ago (the Criterion Blu-Ray indeed, which has very nice quality, in particular the nature shots in the beginning look fantastic).

“[...] as Lem himself had focused on the inability of humans to communicate with or comprehend things that aren’t human; Tarkovsky said, heck, humans can’t communicate with or comprehend themselves [...]”

I would formulate it like this. Tarkovsky chose to focus on the human part and to neglect many of the scientific aspects of Lem’s novel. Lem on the other hand covered both these aspects in detail (as well as other things): the impossibility to comprehend alien life/intelligence as well as the problems to understand the human mind in the first place. As you might know, Lem studied psychology and medicine, so he was also always very interested in the human mind and consciousness. Lem’s novel is richer in this sense. Tarkovsky on the other hand was not interested in the science fiction or scientific aspects of the novel at all, as he made clear in interviews, and even considered it some kind of failure of his film that he relied at all on a science fiction setup. Thus, he thought Stalker to be an improvement over Solaris in this respect as he was able to get rid of basically all of the clear SF aspects of the underlying novel of the Strugatsky brothers. This attitude of the director is in complete opposition to the mindset of a Stanley Kubrick, for example.

“There is beauty — they float together, and it’s one of the most beautiful scenes I’ve ever seen.”

It is a pity that this scene features a blatant conceptual mistake, i.e. that most of the objects in the room do not float at all but stay where they are. The fact that the book is shown floating in the foreground makes it even more annoying. Either this is a big mistake or Tarkovsky just did not care. But I am pretty sure that such things annoyed Lem, even though this example is certainly only of minor importance.

Comment on January 4, 2010 — Uwem Akpan: “Baptizing the Gun” by Trevor

Trevor — Mon, 20 May 2013 05:08:57 +0000

Ah, thanks akumbu! After over three years, the title of this post is — I hope — correct :-).

Comment on Ruth Prawer Jhabvala: “The Judge’s Will” by Betsy

Betsy — Sun, 19 May 2013 16:21:45 +0000

Hi Jon – But your original point regarding the reviewer’s tone is well taken. As you must have noticed, Trevor’s tone is ever steady, reserved, even-handed, respectful, and modest! As for me, when snatching a hot iron from the fire, a little caution (as in a nod in Trevor’s direction) would be in order.

Comment on January 4, 2010 — Uwem Akpan: “Baptizing the Gun” by akumbu

akumbu — Sun, 19 May 2013 15:55:59 +0000

Hi, the author’s surname is Akpan not Ukpan. He’s a Jesuit priest as well. Check out his collection of stories, ‘Say You’re One of Them’