Klik op een omslag om naar Google Boeken te gaan.
Bezig met laden... Arrival and Departure (1943)door Arthur Koestler
Translingualism (40) Bezig met laden...
Meld je aan bij LibraryThing om erachter te komen of je dit boek goed zult vinden. Op dit moment geen Discussie gesprekken over dit boek. This is the last book in a trilogy (of which Darkness at Noon is the second) whose theme is the conflict between morality and expediency. The story is about a young disillusioned former revolutionary who has escaped to a neutral country (unimaginatively named Neutralia). Back in his homeland, he was from an elite intellectual class who has joined the ranks of workers and revolutionaries. He is caught one day and goes through a series of interrogation. He does not confess even at the point of death, and for this he is considered a hero in his country. Once in Neutralia, he suffers a nervous breakdown and undergoes psychonanalysis. The gist of the story is that in the course of this process, it is revealed that his revolutionary zeal was not founded on a conviction of its historical necessity or social justification, but out of a guilt complex from his childhood and imaginary "moral" obligations. While there are thought-provoking parts of the story, especially where he is in a discussion with a Party member who is trying to win him to their side, i found the story much weaker than Darkness at Noon. The main character does not convince. Throughout the novel, one senses his identity crisis, weakness, hesitation and confusion. Even as he decides what he eventually decided to do (at which the novel ends), I wasn't sure if it was even what he wanted. But it did make me ask whether to be effective at something, only "pure" motives suffice. Now i'm interested to read the first of the trilogy, called The Gladiators, to round out Koestler's take on this theme. An interesting novel written and set during the second world war, focusing on the character Peter Slavek who is a Communist rebel who has been tortured by the Nazi-supporting authorities in a nameless East European country and is now in a nameless neutral country. There is in fact no naming of countries and political movements in the novel; it is all done through allusion and the focus is not on political events but on the moral dilemmas faced by Peter as he grapples about whether to flee to safety in America or join the British army and how he tries to come to terms with the physical and mental tortures he has suffered. A bit harrowing in the middle section, but a good read by a gifted writer. geen besprekingen | voeg een bespreking toe
Onderdeel van de reeks(en)Onderdeel van de uitgeversreeks(en)Is opgenomen in
This was the third novel of Arthur Koestler's trilogy on ends and means - the other two are THE GLADIATORS and DARKNESS AT NOON - and the first he wrote in English. The central theme is the conflict between morality and expediency, and in this novel Koestler worked it out in terms of individual psychology. Peter Slavek starts out as a brave young revolutionary, but suffers a breakdown. On the analyst's couch he is made to discover, in Koestler's own words, 'that his crusading zeal was derived from unconscious guilt'. Geen bibliotheekbeschrijvingen gevonden. |
Actuele discussiesGeenPopulaire omslagen
Google Books — Bezig met laden... GenresDewey Decimale Classificatie (DDC)823.912Literature English & Old English literatures English fiction Modern Period 1901-1999 1901-1945LC-classificatieWaarderingGemiddelde:
Ben jij dit?Word een LibraryThing Auteur. |
Az tutifix, hogy Koestler korai regénye nem olyan hatásos, mint mondjuk Remarque hasonló témájú könyvei – ahhoz túl mechanikusan akar okos lenni. És hát azt is gyanítom, hogy ez a pszichoanalízis-betét sem feltétlenül állná meg a szakmaiság próbáját – olyan „ahogy Móricka elképzeli a terápiát”-jellege van. Ugyanakkor mégis helyet követel magának a jelentős emigránstörténetek között, és nem csak azért, mert megelőlegezi Koestler morális és filozófiai témák iránti vonzalmát, ami aztán később a Sötétség délben-ben borul virágba**. Hanem azért, mert olyan markáns elszánással, olyan lobogó tűzzel megy bele az ún. „kemény kérdésekbe”, hogy már önmagában a szándék is gyönyörködtet. És bár ma már a direktben felvállalt tanító-szerep nem annyira kompatibilis az írói léttel (hála Istennek! soha többé szocreál!), de most valahogy jólesett ez a szent-naiv hevület.
* Nota bene: meg is erőszakolja. Ami nem válik attól elfogadhatóbbá, hogy az áldozat látszólag nálam sokkal empatikusabban fogadja ezt. (Kábé így: „Jaj, de édes fiú, csak hát nem tudja magát kifejezni rendesen szegény…”)
** Sőt, Raditsch, a regényben szereplő rendőrtiszt előtanulmánynak tekinthető a Sötétség délben kihallgatójához. ( )