What do you think?
Rate this book
爻禺胤
賲丕乇賰賵爻 賲賷爻賳賷乇 賴賵 丕亘賳 賵丨賷丿 賱毓丕卅賱丞 賷賴賵丿賷丞 鬲毓賷卮 賮賷 賳賷賵丌乇賰 鈥� 賳賷賵 噩乇爻賷 貙 賵賴賵 卮丕亘 賱丕賲毓 賵禺賱賵賯 貙 賷丨馗賶 亘乇囟丕 賵丕賱丿賷丞 賵鬲賱賲賷匕 賲噩鬲賴丿 賵胤賲賵丨 賵乇賷丕囟賷 賳卮胤 貙 賷毓賲賱 亘噩丿 禺賱丕賱 廿噩丕夭丕鬲賴 丕賱賲丿乇爻賷丞 廿賱賶 噩丕賳亘 賵丕賱丿賴 丕賱賱丨丕賲 貙 賵賲毓 賲噩賷 丕賱丨乇亘 賵丕賱鬲噩賳賷丿 丕賱廿賱夭丕賲賷 貙 鬲噩鬲丕丨 丕賱兀亘 丨丕賱丞 亘丕乇丕賳賵賷丕 賵匕毓乇 廿賱賶 鬲囟賷賷賯 丕賱禺賳丕賯 毓賱賶 丕亘賳賴 貙 賲賲丕 賷丨丿賵 亘丕賱兀禺賷乇 廿賱賶 丕賱乇丨賷賱 亘毓賷丿丕賸 貙 丨賷孬 賷賳鬲賯賱 賱賱丿乇丕爻丞 賮賷 賰賱賷丞 亘賱丿丞 賵丕賷賳夭亘乇睾 賮賷 丕賱兀毓賲丕賯 丕賱乇賷賮賷丞 賱賵賱丕賷丞 兀賵賴丕賷賵 貙 賴賳丕賰 賷賯毓 賲丕乇賰賵爻 賮賷 睾乇丕賲 夭賲賷賱賷鬲賴 兀賵賱賷賮賷丕 貙 丕賱賮鬲丕丞 氐丕丨亘丞 丕賱賲賵丕氐賮丕鬲 賰賱賴丕 丕賱鬲賶 賲賳賴丕 鬲丨丿賷丿丕賸 賰丕賳 賵丕賱丿賴 賷禺卮賶 毓賱賷賴 貙 賵賴丕 賴賵 賷禺鬲賱賷 亘丕賱賮丕鬲賳丞 丕賱氐賴亘丕亍 丕賱卮毓乇 貙 匕丕鬲 丕賱賳丿亘丞 丕賱賲卮丐賵賲丞 賮賷 賲毓氐賲賴丕 亘毓丿 賲丨丕賵賱丞 丕賳鬲丨丕乇 賮丕卮賱丞 貙 兀賵賱賷賮賷丕 丕賱鬲賷 賰丕賳鬲 兀禺亘乇鬲賴 亘胤賱丕賯 賵丕賱丿賷賴丕 賵賱賲 鬲胤賱毓賴 毓賱賶 丿禺賵賱賴丕 丕賱賲氐丨丕鬲 毓丿丞 賲乇丕鬲 賳鬲賷噩丞 廿丿賲丕賳賴丕 丕賱賰丨賵賱 賵鬲毓乇囟賴丕 賱丕賳賴賷丕乇丕鬲 毓氐亘賷丞 貙 鬲氐毓賯 賲丕乇賰賵爻 亘丕賳賮鬲丕丨賴丕 賵禺亘乇鬲賴丕 丕賱噩爻丿賷丞 賵噩乇兀鬲賴丕 .
175 pages, Paperback
First published September 5, 2008
395 people are currently reading
11.1k people want to read
About the author
Philip Roth
298听books7,114听followersPhilip Milton Roth was an American novelist and short-story writer. Roth's fiction鈥攐ften set in his birthplace of Newark, New Jersey鈥攊s known for its intensely autobiographical character, for philosophically and formally blurring the distinction between reality and fiction, for its "sensual, ingenious style" and for its provocative explorations of American identity. He first gained attention with the 1959 short story collection Goodbye, Columbus, which won the U.S. National Book Award for Fiction. Ten years later, he published the bestseller Portnoy's Complaint. Nathan Zuckerman, Roth's literary alter ego, narrates several of his books. A fictionalized Philip Roth narrates some of his others, such as the alternate history The Plot Against America.
Roth was one of the most honored American writers of his generation. He received the National Book Critics Circle award for The Counterlife, the PEN/Faulkner Award for Operation Shylock, The Human Stain, and Everyman, a second National Book Award for Sabbath's Theater, and the Pulitzer Prize for American Pastoral. In 2005, the Library of America began publishing his complete works, making him the second author so anthologized while still living, after Eudora Welty. Harold Bloom named him one of the four greatest American novelists of his day, along with Cormac McCarthy, Thomas Pynchon, and Don DeLillo. In 2001, Roth received the inaugural Franz Kafka Prize in Prague.
Roth was one of the most honored American writers of his generation. He received the National Book Critics Circle award for The Counterlife, the PEN/Faulkner Award for Operation Shylock, The Human Stain, and Everyman, a second National Book Award for Sabbath's Theater, and the Pulitzer Prize for American Pastoral. In 2005, the Library of America began publishing his complete works, making him the second author so anthologized while still living, after Eudora Welty. Harold Bloom named him one of the four greatest American novelists of his day, along with Cormac McCarthy, Thomas Pynchon, and Don DeLillo. In 2001, Roth received the inaugural Franz Kafka Prize in Prague.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 1,857 reviews
October 13, 2022
PERCH脡 NON SONO CRISTIANO
Ritorno a Winesburg, Ohio, che per essere un'oscura cittadina sperduta dell'Ohio, 猫 diventata letterariamente celeberrima grazie all'invenzione, o creazione, di Sherwood Anderson, cui Roth paga omaggio nel suo romanzo.
Indignazione 猫 un ottimo romanzo di formazione, e deformazione, e disgregazione, visto che si conclude con la morte del protagonista, un memorabile Marcus Messner.
Ci sono momenti pi霉 che notevoli: su tutti, secondo me, il primo colloquio tra Marcus e il preside, che l'indignazione te la fa provare con i brividi sulla pelle.
Ci sono momenti meno riusciti, come l'esplosione di punti esclamativi del finale (non posso farci niente, il punto esclamativo mi rimane indigesto, mi va di traverso quando se ne abusa 鈥� e l'abuso arriva subito dopo il semplice uso).
Anche l'artificio del racconto in prima persona fatto da un personaggio gi脿 morto mi sembra gi脿 pi霉 che sfruttato da sessanta anni a questa parte (da quando Joe Gillis mise K.O. le platee di gran parte del mondo), e non mi sembra che Roth aggiunga niente di nuovo all'argomento in questione.
Per questo ho tolto la quinta stella che altrove, invece, Indignazione mi sembra meritare pienamente.
Anche nel film, il colloquio col preside 猫 uno dei momenti migliori.
Anche nel film il colloquio tra Marcus e il preside 猫 notevole, bravi entrambi, Logan Lerman e Tracy Letts, l鈥檌ndignazione cresce davvero ogni qual volta l鈥檜omo invade la privacy del giovane (sempre, a ogni domanda e a ciascuna asserzione).
Sarah Gadon 猫 un'Olivia molto azzeccata.
Il film trasmette bene la cupezza di quell鈥檈poca della storia statunitense: i bianchi dominanti, altri colori di pelle non si vedono, quindi razzismo, incluso antisemitismo strisciante, la guerra in Corea, il perbenismo, le malattie mentali diagnosticate come se fossero aspirine, elettroshock a go go, la paura del comunismo, la paura del sesso鈥�
Il dialogo abbonda, e ovviamente non manca la voce narrante, ma nessuna parola sembra sprecata, di troppo.
E anche nel film qualche passaggio 猫 venuto meno bene: direi soprattutto inizio e fine, che sono la stessa situazione, visto che il cerchio si chiude 鈥� il film 猫 costretto a mostrare, e quindi esplicitare di pi霉, e un po鈥� di magia si perde per strada.
Complessivamente un po鈥� troppo 鈥榩erfettino鈥�, certo non all鈥檃ltezza di opere pi霉 o meno recenti ambientate nello stesso periodo (le prime che mi vengono alla mente sono quelle di Todd Haynes, 鈥榣ontano dal paradiso鈥� e 鈥楥arol鈥�, film con una marcia in pi霉).
Ritorno a Winesburg, Ohio, che per essere un'oscura cittadina sperduta dell'Ohio, 猫 diventata letterariamente celeberrima grazie all'invenzione, o creazione, di Sherwood Anderson, cui Roth paga omaggio nel suo romanzo.
Indignazione 猫 un ottimo romanzo di formazione, e deformazione, e disgregazione, visto che si conclude con la morte del protagonista, un memorabile Marcus Messner.
Ci sono momenti pi霉 che notevoli: su tutti, secondo me, il primo colloquio tra Marcus e il preside, che l'indignazione te la fa provare con i brividi sulla pelle.
Ci sono momenti meno riusciti, come l'esplosione di punti esclamativi del finale (non posso farci niente, il punto esclamativo mi rimane indigesto, mi va di traverso quando se ne abusa 鈥� e l'abuso arriva subito dopo il semplice uso).
Anche l'artificio del racconto in prima persona fatto da un personaggio gi脿 morto mi sembra gi脿 pi霉 che sfruttato da sessanta anni a questa parte (da quando Joe Gillis mise K.O. le platee di gran parte del mondo), e non mi sembra che Roth aggiunga niente di nuovo all'argomento in questione.
Per questo ho tolto la quinta stella che altrove, invece, Indignazione mi sembra meritare pienamente.
Anche nel film, il colloquio col preside 猫 uno dei momenti migliori.
Anche nel film il colloquio tra Marcus e il preside 猫 notevole, bravi entrambi, Logan Lerman e Tracy Letts, l鈥檌ndignazione cresce davvero ogni qual volta l鈥檜omo invade la privacy del giovane (sempre, a ogni domanda e a ciascuna asserzione).
Sarah Gadon 猫 un'Olivia molto azzeccata.
Il film trasmette bene la cupezza di quell鈥檈poca della storia statunitense: i bianchi dominanti, altri colori di pelle non si vedono, quindi razzismo, incluso antisemitismo strisciante, la guerra in Corea, il perbenismo, le malattie mentali diagnosticate come se fossero aspirine, elettroshock a go go, la paura del comunismo, la paura del sesso鈥�
Il dialogo abbonda, e ovviamente non manca la voce narrante, ma nessuna parola sembra sprecata, di troppo.
E anche nel film qualche passaggio 猫 venuto meno bene: direi soprattutto inizio e fine, che sono la stessa situazione, visto che il cerchio si chiude 鈥� il film 猫 costretto a mostrare, e quindi esplicitare di pi霉, e un po鈥� di magia si perde per strada.
Complessivamente un po鈥� troppo 鈥榩erfettino鈥�, certo non all鈥檃ltezza di opere pi霉 o meno recenti ambientate nello stesso periodo (le prime che mi vengono alla mente sono quelle di Todd Haynes, 鈥榣ontano dal paradiso鈥� e 鈥楥arol鈥�, film con una marcia in pi霉).
February 23, 2021
Philip Roth tells an interesting story. The book is only 200 pages long, but nevertheless it is very complex, multi-faceted, fluid, tensed and it touches the reader deeply. Philip Roth has created a story where the atmosphere and feelings of this time are perfectly written. An exceptionally good book and it is consequently absolutely recommendable.
"Denn die Schw盲che anderer Menschen kann dich ebenso besiegen wie ihre St盲rke, Schwache Leute sind nicht harmlos."
S. 153
"Denn die Schw盲che anderer Menschen kann dich ebenso besiegen wie ihre St盲rke, Schwache Leute sind nicht harmlos."
S. 153
February 6, 2022
Indignation, Philip Roth
Indignation is a novel by Philip Roth, released by Houghton Mifflin on September 16, 2008. It is his twenty-ninth book.
Set in America in 1951, the second year of the Korean War, Indignation is narrated by Marcus Messner, a Jewish college student from Newark, New Jersey, who describes his sophomore year at Winesburg College in Ohio.
Marcus transfers to Winesburg from Robert Treat College in Newark to escape his father, a kosher butcher, who appears to have become consumed with fear about the dangers of adult life, the world, and the uncertainty that awaits his son.
鬲丕乇蹖禺 賳禺爻鬲蹖賳 禺賵丕賳卮: 乇賵夭 賳賴賲 賲丕賴 丿爻丕賲亘乇 爻丕賱2010賲蹖賱丕丿蹖
毓賳賵丕賳: 禺卮賲貨 賳賵蹖爻賳丿賴: 賮賱蹖倬 乇丕孬貨 賲鬲乇噩賲: 賮乇蹖丿賵賳 賲噩賱爻蹖貨 鬲賴乇丕賳貙 賳蹖賱賵賮乇貙 爻丕賱1388貙 丿乇191氐貨 卮丕亘讴9789644484209貨 賲賵囟賵毓 丿丕爻鬲丕賳賴丕蹖 賳賵蹖爻賳丿诏丕賳 丕蹖丕賱丕鬲 賲鬲丨丿賴 丌賲乇蹖讴丕 - 爻丿賴20賲
禺卮賲 (爻丕賱2008賲蹖賱丕丿蹖)貙 丌禺乇蹖賳 乇賲丕賳 芦賮蹖賱蹖倬 乇丕孬禄貙 丿乇 亘丕乇賴 蹖 爻蹖乇 鬲丕乇蹖禺 丕噩鬲賲丕毓蹖 芦丌賲乇蹖讴丕禄爻鬲貙 賳诏丕乇賳丿賴 丿乇 丕蹖賳 讴鬲丕亘貙 亘賴 卮乇丨 夭賳丿诏蹖 芦賲丕乇讴賵爻 賲爻賳乇禄 噩賵丕賳貙 賮乇夭賳丿 賯氐丕亘 芦讴丕卮乇禄貙 丕賴賱 芦賳蹖賵丌乇讴禄 丿乇 芦賳蹖賵噩乇爻蹖禄 賲蹖鈥屬矩必ж藏� 讴賴 丿乇 爻丕賱1951賲蹖賱丕丿蹖貙 丿乇 丕賵噩 噩賳诏 芦讴乇賴禄貙 诏丕賲 亘賴 讴丕賱噩 賲丨丕賮馗賴 讴丕乇 芦賵蹖賳夭亘賵乇诏禄貙 丿乇 芦丕賵賴丕蹖賵禄 賲蹖鈥屭柏ж必� 讴鬲丕亘貙 亘丕 丕賱賴丕賲 丕夭 卮賵乇卮 丿丕賳卮噩賵卅蹖 丌睾丕夭貙 賵 丿乇 蹖丕丿丿丕卮鬲蹖 賳賴丕卅蹖貙 亘丕 卮賵乇卮 丿蹖诏乇蹖貙 倬丕蹖丕賳 賲蹖鈥屰屫жㄘ� 鬲丨賱蹖賱 乇賵丕賳蹖 卮禺氐蹖鬲鈥屬囏й� 丿丕爻鬲丕賳貙 亘丕 賯賱賲 鬲賵丕賳丕蹖 芦乇丕孬禄貙 蹖讴蹖 丕夭 亘夭乇诏鬲乇蹖賳 賳賵蹖爻賳丿诏丕賳 讴賳賵賳蹖 芦丌賲乇蹖讴丕禄貙 丨蹖乇鬲 丕賳诏蹖夭 丕爻鬲貨 芦賲丕乇讴賵爻禄貙 賯賴乇賲丕賳 賳賵蹖爻賳丿賴貙 丿賵爻鬲 丿丕乇丿: 丿乇爻 亘禺賵丕賳丿貙 賵 讴丕乇 讴賳丿貨 丕賵 賲蹖禺賵丕賴丿貙 丿乇 賴蹖趩 丿丕乇 賵 丿爻鬲賴鈥� 丕蹖貙 丿丕禺賱 賳卮賵丿貨 倬丕蹖 亘賴 讴賱蹖爻丕 賳蹖夭 賳诏匕丕乇丿貨 賵 賴乇趩賴 夭賵丿鬲乇 亘丕 亘丕賱丕鬲乇蹖賳 賳賲乇賴 賴丕貙 賮丕乇睾 丕賱鬲丨氐蹖賱 卮賵丿貨 丕賵 丿乇 丿丕賳卮诏丕賴貙 亘丕 丿禺鬲乇蹖 亘賴 賳丕賲 芦丕賵賱蹖賵丕禄 丌卮賳丕 賲蹖鈥屫促堌� 賵鈥ω� 芦賮蹖賱蹖倬 乇丕孬禄貙 丿乇 倬乇丿丕禺鬲 胤賳夭丌賲蹖夭 賵 丕賳鬲賯丕丿蹖 卮禺氐蹖鬲賴丕貙 賵 賲讴丕賳賴丕 賵 乇賮鬲丕乇賴丕 蹖丕丿丌賵乇 芦诏賵诏賵賱禄貙 丿乇 讴鬲丕亘 芦賲乇丿诏丕賳 夭乇禺乇蹖丿 (乇毓丕蹖丕蹖 賲乇丿賴)禄 丕爻鬲貙 賵 丿乇 鬲丨賱蹖賱 乇賵丕賳蹖 賵 鬲賵氐蹖賮 丕丨爻丕爻丕鬲貙 賵 丿賱賴乇賴 賴丕貙 賵 亘蹖賲 賵 賴乇丕爻賴丕蹖 丕賳爻丕賳蹖貙 蹖丕丿丌賵乇 芦丿丕爻鬲丕蹖賮爻讴蹖禄 丿乇 讴鬲丕亘 芦噩賳丕蹖丕鬲 賵 賲讴丕賮丕鬲禄 丕爻鬲!貨
鬲丕乇蹖禺 亘賴賳诏丕賲 乇爻丕賳蹖 22/11/1399賴噩乇蹖 禺賵乇卮蹖丿蹖貨 16/11/1400賴噩乇蹖 禺賵乇卮蹖丿蹖貨 丕. 卮乇亘蹖丕賳蹖
Indignation is a novel by Philip Roth, released by Houghton Mifflin on September 16, 2008. It is his twenty-ninth book.
Set in America in 1951, the second year of the Korean War, Indignation is narrated by Marcus Messner, a Jewish college student from Newark, New Jersey, who describes his sophomore year at Winesburg College in Ohio.
Marcus transfers to Winesburg from Robert Treat College in Newark to escape his father, a kosher butcher, who appears to have become consumed with fear about the dangers of adult life, the world, and the uncertainty that awaits his son.
鬲丕乇蹖禺 賳禺爻鬲蹖賳 禺賵丕賳卮: 乇賵夭 賳賴賲 賲丕賴 丿爻丕賲亘乇 爻丕賱2010賲蹖賱丕丿蹖
毓賳賵丕賳: 禺卮賲貨 賳賵蹖爻賳丿賴: 賮賱蹖倬 乇丕孬貨 賲鬲乇噩賲: 賮乇蹖丿賵賳 賲噩賱爻蹖貨 鬲賴乇丕賳貙 賳蹖賱賵賮乇貙 爻丕賱1388貙 丿乇191氐貨 卮丕亘讴9789644484209貨 賲賵囟賵毓 丿丕爻鬲丕賳賴丕蹖 賳賵蹖爻賳丿诏丕賳 丕蹖丕賱丕鬲 賲鬲丨丿賴 丌賲乇蹖讴丕 - 爻丿賴20賲
禺卮賲 (爻丕賱2008賲蹖賱丕丿蹖)貙 丌禺乇蹖賳 乇賲丕賳 芦賮蹖賱蹖倬 乇丕孬禄貙 丿乇 亘丕乇賴 蹖 爻蹖乇 鬲丕乇蹖禺 丕噩鬲賲丕毓蹖 芦丌賲乇蹖讴丕禄爻鬲貙 賳诏丕乇賳丿賴 丿乇 丕蹖賳 讴鬲丕亘貙 亘賴 卮乇丨 夭賳丿诏蹖 芦賲丕乇讴賵爻 賲爻賳乇禄 噩賵丕賳貙 賮乇夭賳丿 賯氐丕亘 芦讴丕卮乇禄貙 丕賴賱 芦賳蹖賵丌乇讴禄 丿乇 芦賳蹖賵噩乇爻蹖禄 賲蹖鈥屬矩必ж藏� 讴賴 丿乇 爻丕賱1951賲蹖賱丕丿蹖貙 丿乇 丕賵噩 噩賳诏 芦讴乇賴禄貙 诏丕賲 亘賴 讴丕賱噩 賲丨丕賮馗賴 讴丕乇 芦賵蹖賳夭亘賵乇诏禄貙 丿乇 芦丕賵賴丕蹖賵禄 賲蹖鈥屭柏ж必� 讴鬲丕亘貙 亘丕 丕賱賴丕賲 丕夭 卮賵乇卮 丿丕賳卮噩賵卅蹖 丌睾丕夭貙 賵 丿乇 蹖丕丿丿丕卮鬲蹖 賳賴丕卅蹖貙 亘丕 卮賵乇卮 丿蹖诏乇蹖貙 倬丕蹖丕賳 賲蹖鈥屰屫жㄘ� 鬲丨賱蹖賱 乇賵丕賳蹖 卮禺氐蹖鬲鈥屬囏й� 丿丕爻鬲丕賳貙 亘丕 賯賱賲 鬲賵丕賳丕蹖 芦乇丕孬禄貙 蹖讴蹖 丕夭 亘夭乇诏鬲乇蹖賳 賳賵蹖爻賳丿诏丕賳 讴賳賵賳蹖 芦丌賲乇蹖讴丕禄貙 丨蹖乇鬲 丕賳诏蹖夭 丕爻鬲貨 芦賲丕乇讴賵爻禄貙 賯賴乇賲丕賳 賳賵蹖爻賳丿賴貙 丿賵爻鬲 丿丕乇丿: 丿乇爻 亘禺賵丕賳丿貙 賵 讴丕乇 讴賳丿貨 丕賵 賲蹖禺賵丕賴丿貙 丿乇 賴蹖趩 丿丕乇 賵 丿爻鬲賴鈥� 丕蹖貙 丿丕禺賱 賳卮賵丿貨 倬丕蹖 亘賴 讴賱蹖爻丕 賳蹖夭 賳诏匕丕乇丿貨 賵 賴乇趩賴 夭賵丿鬲乇 亘丕 亘丕賱丕鬲乇蹖賳 賳賲乇賴 賴丕貙 賮丕乇睾 丕賱鬲丨氐蹖賱 卮賵丿貨 丕賵 丿乇 丿丕賳卮诏丕賴貙 亘丕 丿禺鬲乇蹖 亘賴 賳丕賲 芦丕賵賱蹖賵丕禄 丌卮賳丕 賲蹖鈥屫促堌� 賵鈥ω� 芦賮蹖賱蹖倬 乇丕孬禄貙 丿乇 倬乇丿丕禺鬲 胤賳夭丌賲蹖夭 賵 丕賳鬲賯丕丿蹖 卮禺氐蹖鬲賴丕貙 賵 賲讴丕賳賴丕 賵 乇賮鬲丕乇賴丕 蹖丕丿丌賵乇 芦诏賵诏賵賱禄貙 丿乇 讴鬲丕亘 芦賲乇丿诏丕賳 夭乇禺乇蹖丿 (乇毓丕蹖丕蹖 賲乇丿賴)禄 丕爻鬲貙 賵 丿乇 鬲丨賱蹖賱 乇賵丕賳蹖 賵 鬲賵氐蹖賮 丕丨爻丕爻丕鬲貙 賵 丿賱賴乇賴 賴丕貙 賵 亘蹖賲 賵 賴乇丕爻賴丕蹖 丕賳爻丕賳蹖貙 蹖丕丿丌賵乇 芦丿丕爻鬲丕蹖賮爻讴蹖禄 丿乇 讴鬲丕亘 芦噩賳丕蹖丕鬲 賵 賲讴丕賮丕鬲禄 丕爻鬲!貨
鬲丕乇蹖禺 亘賴賳诏丕賲 乇爻丕賳蹖 22/11/1399賴噩乇蹖 禺賵乇卮蹖丿蹖貨 16/11/1400賴噩乇蹖 禺賵乇卮蹖丿蹖貨 丕. 卮乇亘蹖丕賳蹖
July 23, 2023
Philip Roth r膬m卯ne 卯ntotdeauna egal cu el 卯nsu葯i, u葯or recognoscibil, ingenios, ironic, amintindu-ne 卯ntreb膬rile mari ale vie葲ii 葯i oblig卯ndu-ne s膬 r膬spundem la ele. Iat膬 un adev膬r 葯i un 卯ndemn: Indignarea nu-i bun膬 la nimic. 脦n acest roman, un t卯n膬r moare fiindc膬 nu g膬se葯te ceva mai bun de f膬cut dec卯t s膬 se indigneze. Nu era cazul. S膬 nu uit膬m, totu葯i, c膬 St茅phane Fr茅d茅ric Hessel credea c膬 o via葲膬 nu are sens dac膬 nu te indignezi 24 de ore din 24. Nu-i 卯mp膬rt膬葯esc convingerea. Un ins care sufer膬 de aceast膬 manie devine automat hipertensiv...
Fiindc膬 am b膬nuiala c膬 nu e nevoie de 卯nc膬 un rezumat al romanului, m膬 voi opri, 卯n aceast膬 not膬, la un pasaj care m-a pus pe g卯nduri. Poate c膬 episodul a mai fost povestit de cineva, c卯ndva, mi se pare cunoscut. Dac膬 e s膬-l credem pe Jorge Luis Borges, nimic nu e nou 卯n literatur膬, totul a fost spus deja. Num膬rul temelor, subiectelor 葯i metaforelor e limitat.
葮i acum exemplul. Marcus Messner s-a 卯ndr膬gostit de Olivia Hutton, colega lui cu p膬rul ar膬miu de la colegiul Winesburg. S-au 卯nt卯lnit o dat膬, au mers la un restaurant, au stat de vorb膬, au f膬cut sex (卯ntr-un fel), apoi fata i-a 卯ntors brusc spatele. Nu mai vrea s膬 discute cu el 葯i 卯l evit膬 sistematic. Marcus nu poate 卯n葲elege motivele Oliviei. E 葯i foarte t卯n膬r. E 葯i foarte naiv. Subtilit膬葲ile erotice 卯l dep膬葯esc. Va afla mult mai t卯rziu c膬 fata are un psihic fragil. 脦i scrie, a葯adar, un mesaj intrigat: vrea s膬 afle de ce 卯l ocole葯te. Olivia 卯i r膬spunde 卯ntr-un t卯rziu. C卯nd prime葯te mesajul, 卯ndr膬gostitul e cuprins de o euforie care se manifest膬 cam a葯a:
鈥濵i-am ap膬sat gura pe foaie 葯i am s膬rutat acel 鈥濷鈥� [din numele Olivia, n. m.]. L-am s膬rutat de nenum膬rate ori. Apoi, dintr-un impuls, m-am apucat s膬 ling cu v卯rful limbii cerneala din semn膬tur膬鈥� I-am b膬ut scrisul. I-am m卯ncat numele. M-am str膬duit din r膬sputeri s膬 nu m膬n卯nc 卯ntreaga ei epistol膬鈥� (p.90). Ce spune葲i? Exist膬 o semnifica葲ie 卯n acest pasaj? Sau e doar gestul unui 卯ndr膬gostit exaltat? Repet, cred c膬 am mai citit c卯ndva, undeva aceast膬 scen膬 teribil膬 de bibliofagie.
脦n opinia mea, Indignare ilustreaz膬 un principiu cunoscut sub numele de Efectul fluturelui. Un gest aproape insignifiant, minor, anodin poate avea un efect devastator: 鈥濪eciziile cele mai banale, cele mai accidentale 葯i chiar comice pot duce la rezultate din cele mai dispropor葲ionate鈥� (p.268).
P. S. F膬r膬 mare leg膬tur膬 cu cele scrise deasupra. C卯nd 卯nghite praful de arsenic, Emma Bovary simte 卯n gur膬 鈥瀠n gust acru, ca de cerneal膬鈥�. 脦n Numele trandafirului, c膬lug膬rul Jorge din Burgos m膬n卯nc膬 la propriu partea a doua (partea care investiga problema comediei, cea pierdut膬 ast膬zi) a Poeticii lui Aristotel.
Romanul merit膬 mai mult de 3 stelu葲e 葯i mai pu葲in de 4. Ar trebui s膬 avem posibilitatea de a lucra 葯i cu frac葲iuni...
Fiindc膬 am b膬nuiala c膬 nu e nevoie de 卯nc膬 un rezumat al romanului, m膬 voi opri, 卯n aceast膬 not膬, la un pasaj care m-a pus pe g卯nduri. Poate c膬 episodul a mai fost povestit de cineva, c卯ndva, mi se pare cunoscut. Dac膬 e s膬-l credem pe Jorge Luis Borges, nimic nu e nou 卯n literatur膬, totul a fost spus deja. Num膬rul temelor, subiectelor 葯i metaforelor e limitat.
葮i acum exemplul. Marcus Messner s-a 卯ndr膬gostit de Olivia Hutton, colega lui cu p膬rul ar膬miu de la colegiul Winesburg. S-au 卯nt卯lnit o dat膬, au mers la un restaurant, au stat de vorb膬, au f膬cut sex (卯ntr-un fel), apoi fata i-a 卯ntors brusc spatele. Nu mai vrea s膬 discute cu el 葯i 卯l evit膬 sistematic. Marcus nu poate 卯n葲elege motivele Oliviei. E 葯i foarte t卯n膬r. E 葯i foarte naiv. Subtilit膬葲ile erotice 卯l dep膬葯esc. Va afla mult mai t卯rziu c膬 fata are un psihic fragil. 脦i scrie, a葯adar, un mesaj intrigat: vrea s膬 afle de ce 卯l ocole葯te. Olivia 卯i r膬spunde 卯ntr-un t卯rziu. C卯nd prime葯te mesajul, 卯ndr膬gostitul e cuprins de o euforie care se manifest膬 cam a葯a:
鈥濵i-am ap膬sat gura pe foaie 葯i am s膬rutat acel 鈥濷鈥� [din numele Olivia, n. m.]. L-am s膬rutat de nenum膬rate ori. Apoi, dintr-un impuls, m-am apucat s膬 ling cu v卯rful limbii cerneala din semn膬tur膬鈥� I-am b膬ut scrisul. I-am m卯ncat numele. M-am str膬duit din r膬sputeri s膬 nu m膬n卯nc 卯ntreaga ei epistol膬鈥� (p.90). Ce spune葲i? Exist膬 o semnifica葲ie 卯n acest pasaj? Sau e doar gestul unui 卯ndr膬gostit exaltat? Repet, cred c膬 am mai citit c卯ndva, undeva aceast膬 scen膬 teribil膬 de bibliofagie.
脦n opinia mea, Indignare ilustreaz膬 un principiu cunoscut sub numele de Efectul fluturelui. Un gest aproape insignifiant, minor, anodin poate avea un efect devastator: 鈥濪eciziile cele mai banale, cele mai accidentale 葯i chiar comice pot duce la rezultate din cele mai dispropor葲ionate鈥� (p.268).
P. S. F膬r膬 mare leg膬tur膬 cu cele scrise deasupra. C卯nd 卯nghite praful de arsenic, Emma Bovary simte 卯n gur膬 鈥瀠n gust acru, ca de cerneal膬鈥�. 脦n Numele trandafirului, c膬lug膬rul Jorge din Burgos m膬n卯nc膬 la propriu partea a doua (partea care investiga problema comediei, cea pierdut膬 ast膬zi) a Poeticii lui Aristotel.
Romanul merit膬 mai mult de 3 stelu葲e 葯i mai pu葲in de 4. Ar trebui s膬 avem posibilitatea de a lucra 葯i cu frac葲iuni...
January 27, 2014
INDIGNATION,the novel, and an opinion regarding literary criticism
Philip Roth's twenty-ninth book "Indignation" is one of those novels about which some critics are a bit, well, indignant. They're indignant that Roth didn't produce another masterpiece of the same degree as "American Pastoral," "The Human Stain," or "The Plot Against America," to name a few.
They also are a bit indignant that Roth once again addresses the same issues he has repeatedly addressed in previous works, that is, overcoming the dominance of family, growing up Jewish, rebelling against family tradition to gain autonomy, the eternal quest for sexual initiation, love, loss, and inevitably death. Of course, Roth is dealing more frequently with death as he contemplates his own mortality. That's not unnatural considering the man is now seventy-nine, born March 19, 1933. You might check my math. I'm not getting any younger either.
Marcus Messner has a lot about which to be indignant. He is nineteen. Indignation is as prevalent for him as adolescent angst. He is the perfect student. He works part time in his father's Kosher butcher shop in New Jersey. But he yearns to break free from his family's restrictive life style. Doesn't every adolescent?
Marcus's father's love for him is boundless. But in his effort to protect Marcus from the rest of the world, his love is oppressive. Like Garp, who worries about the worst case scenario in every scenario, he frets that Marcus will unwittingly end up in a situation beyond his control. "You are a boy with a magnificent future before you," his father tells him. 'How do I know you're not going to places where you can get yourself killed?'
And, oh, God, Marcus is still a virgin. He doesn't want to be. Who does at that age anymore?
Marcus escapes the family ties that bind by enrolling in Winesburg College far from home in the Midwest. Roth's allusion to Sherwood Anderson's "Winesburg, Ohio," is fitting, because there is much of the grotesque to which Marcus is exposed. It is a bit of irony that flows through Roth's dark humor in this little book.
Having slipped loose those familial bonds, Marcus seeks his independence and to lose his virginity. He does so, much to his surprise, to the lips of lovely Olivia, a troubled young woman with the scars of a failed suicide on her wrists and some time spent in a mental health institution. She tells Marcus, "I did that because I like you so much." Olivia has her own poignant reasons for pleasing Marcus, leading to a very complicated and moving relationship.
Having kicked over the family traces, Marcus becomes a rebel on a very conservative campus. He can't win. It is not a good time to be expelled. It is 1951, the second year of the Korean War when the most intense fighting was occurring around the 38th parallel.
Historically, this was a period of escalating Chinese involvement. Mao had called upon Stalin's aid for equipment and materiel, to which Stalin agreed. McArthur was considering using nuclear weapons against Chinese and North Korean troops prior to his being recalled by President Truman.
Marcus had included ROTC in his schedule. He is nobody's fool. It would be safer to go to war as an officer. However, Marcus is foolish enough to push his campus issues to the point he is expelled.
Marcus is drafted. The next stop is the 38th Parallel.
I leave it to the reader to find what happens to Marcus Messner.
However, as noted in Roth's subsequent short novel, "Nemesis," it is the last of four short novels beginning with "Everyman in 2006, followed by "The Humbling," and "Indignation." Those four short novels complement one another on the unifying theme of mortality. "Indignation" clearly belongs in this quartet that constitutes a remarkable literary dirge.
Roth's detractors bash the old man for rehashing the same themes throughout his works. Some refer to it as cannibalizing from his previous works.
The simple fact of the matter is life is a process much the same for every individual. You are born. You have a relationship with your family, sometimes with two parents, sometimes with one. Sometimes even none.
Depending on what part of the world you live in you go to school. You interact with your fellow students or village mates. You are socialized. As a child becomes an adolescent, he pulls away from his family.
During the process of gaining autonomy there is conflict with your family.
You may or may not have spiritual values. If you do, you most likely will lose your religion should you be fortunate enough to attend an institute of higher education.
You will become politicized. Per Paul Simon,"You will be Lou Adlered, Barry Sadlered, and Beatled till you're blind."
At some point you will become initiated into the mysterious realm of the great secret of sex. It will be pleasant or it will be unpleasant.
You will feel guilt or not. You will pursue the sexual union for its intense gratification or not.
You will fall into lust, once or more. If you're lucky, you'll find something that you identify as love. It will last or it won't. It may be marriage or not.
You may choose to have children or not. You will bear children or abort them. If you have children you will subject them to the same pressures you felt from your own family as an adolescent or not.
Your children will love you, hate you, or become indifferent to you.
If you are fortunate, you will never go to war. If you are not, oh, fortunate son, you will go to war because you are no Senator's son. You will kill or be killed. You will live or you will die. You have some degree of control over this depending on your skill at killing others or saving yourself through cowardice.
If you go to war and you live, you will come home a different person. It is unlikely you will ever be the same. If you are the same and you are unaffected you are amoral. You have a choice to be moral or amoral.
You may live to a ripe old age or you may die in the next moment through events completely out of your control.
The only universal truth is you will never get out of this life alive.
Through each phase of life there will be conflict. You will have good days. You will have bad days. Some days you will be the windshield. Other days,you will be the bug.
How many variations are there on what it is to live as a human being, no matter your culture, your parents,your community, your values?
I may have missed a few sub-issues here and there. But have I missed that much?
For those critics who accuse writers of rehashing the same themes, I ask how many different themes are there from the dawn of time. Their belief that an author has developed a formulaic work is a futile effort on their part to say they are different, that they are unique, that their lives be different from that described above. They are wrong. One day they will be dead wrong.
Ernest Hemingway may have said it best in A Farewell to Arms.
The question is does a book stand completely on its own, separate and apart from every other book. I think not. I think what James Baldwin said is true. 鈥淵ou think your pain and your heartbreak are unprecedented in the history of the world, but then you read. It was books that taught me that the things that tormented me most were the very things that connected me with all the people who were alive, or who had ever been alive.鈥�
People read books. They are influenced by them. Writers write from their lives and the books they have read. Books breed books. In short, there are only so many variations on a theme.
So, not only is this a review of Roth's "Indignation, it's a review of reviewers and critics. I'll express a little of my own indignation over the ethics of critics and critiques, or rather the lack of simple ethics in tanking a work by a major writer while wearing a gleeful smile.
Michiko Kakutani is a primary example of the critic who will shred an author's work--the greater the author the more brutal the shredding.
In the words of George Bernard Shaw, which might be considered a bit mean spirited, too: "He who can, does. He who cannot, teaches. You may find this in "Man and Superman: Maxims for Revolutionists," written in 1903. Not to say that literary criticism isn't writing, those who do not write literature, critique or criticize it.
I will be among the first to say Kakutani earned her chops as a literary critic for the New York Times. She got her B.A. in English Lit at Yale in 1976, mentored by author John Hersey. Subsequently she began her career as a reporter, first for the Washington Post and then for Time Magazine. She began reviewing books for the NYTimes in 1983. She won the Pulitzer Prize for literary criticism in 1998. None of these things are small accomplishments.
However, at Wikipedia, we find the following, all precisely documented and referenced:
What I find particularly refreshing here on goodreads is the recommended practice of posting a spoiler alert,to hide spoilers, thus allowing the reader of the review to determine whether or not they want the key plot points revealed or not. To me that's the way to write a review.
Here is the link to Ms. Kakutani's review of "Indignation."
I leave it to the reader of this review to determine whether they would like to have the punchline of "Indignation" destroyed by the very title of the review, and hammering the nail down on the coffin with a one sentence paragraph lead in to the remainder of the review. The line begins, "The narrator of Philip Roth鈥檚 new novel is a..."
Norman Mailer was never at a loss for words in response to an unfavorable review. He was no knight in shining armor. Some of his opinions regarding Ms. Kakutani are past demeaning. However, he stooped to her level and engaged in a tit for tat. The bottom line is Ms. Kakutani on more than one occasion spoiled a novel for the prospective reader by unveiling the turns and twists of an author's work. Yes, she was the divine wind in her treatment of "Indignation."
It is a simple question to ask at this point. Would you buy a mystery if the reviewer had already told you who done it? Well, if it were an author I regularly read, the answer is probably, yes. For many readers, though, the answer is "What's the point?"
While Ms. Kakutani may have her Pulitzer, is it ethical to torpedo a novel using a technique to discourage the work finding a readership. I say it is not.
In Disney's "Bambi," the little rabbit Thumper was constantly reminded by his mother, "If you can't say anything nice, don't say anything at all." That is NOT my theory regarding literary criticism. But the only point to spilling all the beans by a reviewer is hitting below the belt. It is a nasty form of preemptive censorship committed for reasons lacking honesty or honor.
Reviewers and critics have joyfully taken pot shots at every author of any merit with relish. Hemingway, Steinbeck, Faulkner, O'Connor. However, I am always amazed that critics of that sort may critique, but have not written a literary work. In the present case, the score is Roth:
1960 National Book Award for Goodbye, Columbus
1975 National Book Award - finalist for My Life As A Man
1978 National Book Critics Circle Award - finalist for The Professor Of Desire
1980 Pulitzer Prize for Fiction - finalist for The Ghost Writer
1980 National Book Award - finalist for The Ghost Writer
1980 National Book Critics Circle Award - finalist for The Ghost Writer
1984 National Book Award - finalist for The Anatomy Lesson
1984 National Book Critics Circle Award - finalist for The Anatomy Lesson
1986 National Book Critics Circle Award for The Counterlife
1986 National Book Award - finalist for The Counterlife
1991 National Book Critics Circle Award for Patrimony
1994 PEN/Faulkner Award for Operation Shylock
1994 Pulitzer Prize for Fiction - finalist for Operation Shylock
1995 National Book Award for Sabbath's Theater
1994 Pulitzer Prize for Fiction - finalist for Sabbath's Theater
1998 Pulitzer Prize for Fiction for American Pastoral
1998 National Book Critics Circle Award - finalist for American Pastoral
1998 Ambassador Book Award of the English-Speaking Union for I Married a Communist
1998 National Medal of Arts
2000 Prix du Meilleur Livre 脡tranger (France) for American Pastoral
2001 Franz Kafka Prize
2001 PEN/Faulkner Award for The Human Stain
2001 Gold Medal In Fiction from The American Academy of Arts and Letters
2001 WH Smith Literary Award for The Human Stain
2002 National Book Foundation's Award for Distinguished Contribution to American Letters
2002 Prix M茅dicis 脡tranger (France) for The Human Stain
2003 Honorary Doctor of Letters degree from Harvard University
2005 National Book Critics Circle Award - finalist for The Plot Against America
2005 Sidewise Award for Alternate History for The Plot Against America
2005 James Fenimore Cooper Prize for Best Historical Fiction for The Plot Against America
2006 PEN/Nabokov Award for lifetime achievement
2007 PEN/Faulkner Award for Everyman
2007 PEN/Saul Bellow Award for Achievement in American Fiction
2010 Paris Review's Hadada Prize
2011 Man Booker International Prize
Kakutani:
1998 Pulitzer Prize for Literary Criticism
Novels--0
Game. Set. Match.
When Roth was awarded the 2011 Man Booker International Prize, the following is noted in the Wikipedia entry- regarding the award:
Good question.
Philip Roth's twenty-ninth book "Indignation" is one of those novels about which some critics are a bit, well, indignant. They're indignant that Roth didn't produce another masterpiece of the same degree as "American Pastoral," "The Human Stain," or "The Plot Against America," to name a few.
They also are a bit indignant that Roth once again addresses the same issues he has repeatedly addressed in previous works, that is, overcoming the dominance of family, growing up Jewish, rebelling against family tradition to gain autonomy, the eternal quest for sexual initiation, love, loss, and inevitably death. Of course, Roth is dealing more frequently with death as he contemplates his own mortality. That's not unnatural considering the man is now seventy-nine, born March 19, 1933. You might check my math. I'm not getting any younger either.
Marcus Messner has a lot about which to be indignant. He is nineteen. Indignation is as prevalent for him as adolescent angst. He is the perfect student. He works part time in his father's Kosher butcher shop in New Jersey. But he yearns to break free from his family's restrictive life style. Doesn't every adolescent?
Marcus's father's love for him is boundless. But in his effort to protect Marcus from the rest of the world, his love is oppressive. Like Garp, who worries about the worst case scenario in every scenario, he frets that Marcus will unwittingly end up in a situation beyond his control. "You are a boy with a magnificent future before you," his father tells him. 'How do I know you're not going to places where you can get yourself killed?'
And, oh, God, Marcus is still a virgin. He doesn't want to be. Who does at that age anymore?
Marcus escapes the family ties that bind by enrolling in Winesburg College far from home in the Midwest. Roth's allusion to Sherwood Anderson's "Winesburg, Ohio," is fitting, because there is much of the grotesque to which Marcus is exposed. It is a bit of irony that flows through Roth's dark humor in this little book.
Having slipped loose those familial bonds, Marcus seeks his independence and to lose his virginity. He does so, much to his surprise, to the lips of lovely Olivia, a troubled young woman with the scars of a failed suicide on her wrists and some time spent in a mental health institution. She tells Marcus, "I did that because I like you so much." Olivia has her own poignant reasons for pleasing Marcus, leading to a very complicated and moving relationship.
Having kicked over the family traces, Marcus becomes a rebel on a very conservative campus. He can't win. It is not a good time to be expelled. It is 1951, the second year of the Korean War when the most intense fighting was occurring around the 38th parallel.
Historically, this was a period of escalating Chinese involvement. Mao had called upon Stalin's aid for equipment and materiel, to which Stalin agreed. McArthur was considering using nuclear weapons against Chinese and North Korean troops prior to his being recalled by President Truman.
Marcus had included ROTC in his schedule. He is nobody's fool. It would be safer to go to war as an officer. However, Marcus is foolish enough to push his campus issues to the point he is expelled.
Marcus is drafted. The next stop is the 38th Parallel.
I leave it to the reader to find what happens to Marcus Messner.
However, as noted in Roth's subsequent short novel, "Nemesis," it is the last of four short novels beginning with "Everyman in 2006, followed by "The Humbling," and "Indignation." Those four short novels complement one another on the unifying theme of mortality. "Indignation" clearly belongs in this quartet that constitutes a remarkable literary dirge.
Roth's detractors bash the old man for rehashing the same themes throughout his works. Some refer to it as cannibalizing from his previous works.
The simple fact of the matter is life is a process much the same for every individual. You are born. You have a relationship with your family, sometimes with two parents, sometimes with one. Sometimes even none.
Depending on what part of the world you live in you go to school. You interact with your fellow students or village mates. You are socialized. As a child becomes an adolescent, he pulls away from his family.
During the process of gaining autonomy there is conflict with your family.
You may or may not have spiritual values. If you do, you most likely will lose your religion should you be fortunate enough to attend an institute of higher education.
You will become politicized. Per Paul Simon,"You will be Lou Adlered, Barry Sadlered, and Beatled till you're blind."
At some point you will become initiated into the mysterious realm of the great secret of sex. It will be pleasant or it will be unpleasant.
You will feel guilt or not. You will pursue the sexual union for its intense gratification or not.
You will fall into lust, once or more. If you're lucky, you'll find something that you identify as love. It will last or it won't. It may be marriage or not.
You may choose to have children or not. You will bear children or abort them. If you have children you will subject them to the same pressures you felt from your own family as an adolescent or not.
Your children will love you, hate you, or become indifferent to you.
If you are fortunate, you will never go to war. If you are not, oh, fortunate son, you will go to war because you are no Senator's son. You will kill or be killed. You will live or you will die. You have some degree of control over this depending on your skill at killing others or saving yourself through cowardice.
If you go to war and you live, you will come home a different person. It is unlikely you will ever be the same. If you are the same and you are unaffected you are amoral. You have a choice to be moral or amoral.
You may live to a ripe old age or you may die in the next moment through events completely out of your control.
The only universal truth is you will never get out of this life alive.
Through each phase of life there will be conflict. You will have good days. You will have bad days. Some days you will be the windshield. Other days,you will be the bug.
How many variations are there on what it is to live as a human being, no matter your culture, your parents,your community, your values?
I may have missed a few sub-issues here and there. But have I missed that much?
For those critics who accuse writers of rehashing the same themes, I ask how many different themes are there from the dawn of time. Their belief that an author has developed a formulaic work is a futile effort on their part to say they are different, that they are unique, that their lives be different from that described above. They are wrong. One day they will be dead wrong.
Ernest Hemingway may have said it best in A Farewell to Arms.
鈥淚f people bring so much courage to this world the world has to kill them to break them, so of course it kills them. The world breaks every one and afterward many are strong at the broken places. But those that will not break it kills. It kills the very good and the very gentle and the very brave impartially. If you are none of these you can be sure it will kill you too but there will be no special hurry.鈥�
The question is does a book stand completely on its own, separate and apart from every other book. I think not. I think what James Baldwin said is true. 鈥淵ou think your pain and your heartbreak are unprecedented in the history of the world, but then you read. It was books that taught me that the things that tormented me most were the very things that connected me with all the people who were alive, or who had ever been alive.鈥�
People read books. They are influenced by them. Writers write from their lives and the books they have read. Books breed books. In short, there are only so many variations on a theme.
So, not only is this a review of Roth's "Indignation, it's a review of reviewers and critics. I'll express a little of my own indignation over the ethics of critics and critiques, or rather the lack of simple ethics in tanking a work by a major writer while wearing a gleeful smile.
Michiko Kakutani is a primary example of the critic who will shred an author's work--the greater the author the more brutal the shredding.
In the words of George Bernard Shaw, which might be considered a bit mean spirited, too: "He who can, does. He who cannot, teaches. You may find this in "Man and Superman: Maxims for Revolutionists," written in 1903. Not to say that literary criticism isn't writing, those who do not write literature, critique or criticize it.
I will be among the first to say Kakutani earned her chops as a literary critic for the New York Times. She got her B.A. in English Lit at Yale in 1976, mentored by author John Hersey. Subsequently she began her career as a reporter, first for the Washington Post and then for Time Magazine. She began reviewing books for the NYTimes in 1983. She won the Pulitzer Prize for literary criticism in 1998. None of these things are small accomplishments.
However, at Wikipedia, we find the following, all precisely documented and referenced:
"Salman Rushdie has called her 'a weird woman who seems to feel the need to alternately praise and spank.'[9] In a June 2005 interview with Rolling Stone magazine, author Norman Mailer criticized Kakutani as a 'one-woman kamikaze' who 'disdains white male authors' and deliberately 'bring[s] out your review two weeks in advance of publication. She trashes it just to hurt sales and embarrass the author.' Mailer also said that New York Times editors were 'terrified' of Kakutani, and 'can't fire her' because she's 'a token,' 'an Asiatic, a feminist.'[10] Jonathan Franzen called her 'the stupidest person in New York.' [11] Franzen has also called her an 'international embarrassment.' [12] Moreover, in recent years, Kakutani's particularly harsh reviews of books by famous authors (for example, John Updike's The Widows of Eastwick[13]) are followed by usually milder or openly positive reviews of the same titles by other Times reviewers.[14]See references cited therein.
On July 19, 2007, The New York Times published a pre-release story written by Kakutani about Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows. An account of the ensuing controversy, including the critical comments of some Harry Potter fans, can be found on the Times Public Editor's blog.[15]"
What I find particularly refreshing here on goodreads is the recommended practice of posting a spoiler alert,to hide spoilers, thus allowing the reader of the review to determine whether or not they want the key plot points revealed or not. To me that's the way to write a review.
Here is the link to Ms. Kakutani's review of "Indignation."
I leave it to the reader of this review to determine whether they would like to have the punchline of "Indignation" destroyed by the very title of the review, and hammering the nail down on the coffin with a one sentence paragraph lead in to the remainder of the review. The line begins, "The narrator of Philip Roth鈥檚 new novel is a..."
Norman Mailer was never at a loss for words in response to an unfavorable review. He was no knight in shining armor. Some of his opinions regarding Ms. Kakutani are past demeaning. However, he stooped to her level and engaged in a tit for tat. The bottom line is Ms. Kakutani on more than one occasion spoiled a novel for the prospective reader by unveiling the turns and twists of an author's work. Yes, she was the divine wind in her treatment of "Indignation."
It is a simple question to ask at this point. Would you buy a mystery if the reviewer had already told you who done it? Well, if it were an author I regularly read, the answer is probably, yes. For many readers, though, the answer is "What's the point?"
While Ms. Kakutani may have her Pulitzer, is it ethical to torpedo a novel using a technique to discourage the work finding a readership. I say it is not.
In Disney's "Bambi," the little rabbit Thumper was constantly reminded by his mother, "If you can't say anything nice, don't say anything at all." That is NOT my theory regarding literary criticism. But the only point to spilling all the beans by a reviewer is hitting below the belt. It is a nasty form of preemptive censorship committed for reasons lacking honesty or honor.
Reviewers and critics have joyfully taken pot shots at every author of any merit with relish. Hemingway, Steinbeck, Faulkner, O'Connor. However, I am always amazed that critics of that sort may critique, but have not written a literary work. In the present case, the score is Roth:
1960 National Book Award for Goodbye, Columbus
1975 National Book Award - finalist for My Life As A Man
1978 National Book Critics Circle Award - finalist for The Professor Of Desire
1980 Pulitzer Prize for Fiction - finalist for The Ghost Writer
1980 National Book Award - finalist for The Ghost Writer
1980 National Book Critics Circle Award - finalist for The Ghost Writer
1984 National Book Award - finalist for The Anatomy Lesson
1984 National Book Critics Circle Award - finalist for The Anatomy Lesson
1986 National Book Critics Circle Award for The Counterlife
1986 National Book Award - finalist for The Counterlife
1991 National Book Critics Circle Award for Patrimony
1994 PEN/Faulkner Award for Operation Shylock
1994 Pulitzer Prize for Fiction - finalist for Operation Shylock
1995 National Book Award for Sabbath's Theater
1994 Pulitzer Prize for Fiction - finalist for Sabbath's Theater
1998 Pulitzer Prize for Fiction for American Pastoral
1998 National Book Critics Circle Award - finalist for American Pastoral
1998 Ambassador Book Award of the English-Speaking Union for I Married a Communist
1998 National Medal of Arts
2000 Prix du Meilleur Livre 脡tranger (France) for American Pastoral
2001 Franz Kafka Prize
2001 PEN/Faulkner Award for The Human Stain
2001 Gold Medal In Fiction from The American Academy of Arts and Letters
2001 WH Smith Literary Award for The Human Stain
2002 National Book Foundation's Award for Distinguished Contribution to American Letters
2002 Prix M茅dicis 脡tranger (France) for The Human Stain
2003 Honorary Doctor of Letters degree from Harvard University
2005 National Book Critics Circle Award - finalist for The Plot Against America
2005 Sidewise Award for Alternate History for The Plot Against America
2005 James Fenimore Cooper Prize for Best Historical Fiction for The Plot Against America
2006 PEN/Nabokov Award for lifetime achievement
2007 PEN/Faulkner Award for Everyman
2007 PEN/Saul Bellow Award for Achievement in American Fiction
2010 Paris Review's Hadada Prize
2011 Man Booker International Prize
Kakutani:
1998 Pulitzer Prize for Literary Criticism
Novels--0
Game. Set. Match.
When Roth was awarded the 2011 Man Booker International Prize, the following is noted in the Wikipedia entry- regarding the award:
"...Roth was awarded the Man Booker International Prize for achievement in fiction on the world stage, the fourth winner of the biennial prize. One of the judges, Carmen Callil, a publisher of the feminist Virago house, withdrew in protest, referring to Roth's work as 'Emperor's clothes.' She said 'he goes on and on and on about the same subject in almost every single book. It's as though he's sitting on your face and you can't breathe... I don鈥檛 rate him as a writer at all ...' Observers quickly noted that Callil had a conflict of interest, having published a book by Claire Bloom which had criticized Roth. In response, one of the two other Booker judges, Rick Gekoski, remarked: 'In 1959 he writes Goodbye, Columbus and it's a masterpiece, magnificent. Fifty-one years later he's 78 years old and he writes Nemesis and it is so wonderful, such a terrific novel ... Tell me one other writer who 50 years apart writes masterpieces ... If you look at the trajectory of the average novel writer, there is a learning period, then a period of high achievement, then the talent runs out and in middle age they start slowly to decline. People say why aren't Martin [Amis] and Julian [Barnes] getting on the Booker prize shortlist, but that's what happens in middle age. Philip Roth, though, gets better and better in middle age. In the 1990s he was almost incapable of not writing a masterpiece 鈥� The Human Stain, The Plot Against America, I Married a Communist. He was 65-70 years old, what the hell's he doing writing that well?'"
Good question.
March 19, 2023
鈥淚t鈥檚 about life, where the tiniest misstep can have tragic consequences.鈥�
Philip Roth, one of the great American novelists, died in May 2018, so I decided to read Sabbath鈥檚 Theater, his final National Book award winner, and then his uncharacteristically shorter final four novels (some say novellas) grouped under the descriptor 鈥淣emeses,鈥� which would seem to be linked by the author鈥檚 concerns arising out of (his own) decline and death. His last say, shall we say. I had wanted to read them in order of publication, but I had this one nearby and read it. It surprised me in not being about the sad observations of an aging (i.e., decaying) man (which most of the narrators or main characters of his last books are, though mortality for Roth has been a consideration for decades), but is narrated by a nineteen-year-old young man, whom we learn about 1/3 of the way in (possibly deserving of spoiler-alert status?)鈥攋ust mentioned casually and that鈥檚 it鈥攊s actually dead. Yes, the story is narrated by a ghost.
The novel begins innocently and nostalgically enough, as Marcus Messner tells of family life and baseball and school work and working in his father鈥檚 butcher shop:
鈥淚t was my job not just to pluck the chickens but to eviscerate them. I hated that part. Nauseating and disgusting, but it had to be done. That's what I learned from my father and what I loved learning from him: that you do what you have to do.鈥�
One motif is early fifties-style American determination in the close-knit context of a Jewish-American family; another is blood: Chicken blood, human blood, but also familial blood (I鈥檓 also listening to Kerouac now; there are no beatniks in this book nor anywhere near it, though they both grew up in the northeastern U.S.). This book as many other Roth books reveres craft; in this one butchering.
It is 1951 in America, the second year of the Korean War. Marcus can鈥檛 stand his father鈥檚 obsessive over-protection of him and needs to go far away to school. He ends up at Ohio鈥檚 Winesburg College (Yes, this is a reference to Sherwood Anderson鈥檚 short story collection Winesburg, Ohio, the small town gentile haven of Midwestern conservatism so contrasted with Marcus鈥檚 and Roth's own East coast Jewish Newark upbringing). Sweet Marcus, such a good, reliable boy, becomes resentful of his father, and yes, indignant, and indignant, too, at the Dean who wonders why Marcus switches roommates (indignantly) twice in his first term. Marcus, as a Jew, is indignant about Winesburg鈥檚 chapel attendance policy, and rather than quietly accepting the Dean鈥檚 mild chiding, explodes into argument with him, as he had done with his father. He is ready to leave Winesburg, the provincial place, and Marcus needing to leave is something the Dean correctly sees as Marcus鈥檚 basic m.o..
As with all Roth, one feature of the book is eloquent oratory, incisive argument, and bombast, but in this book, to what end? Indignation is about a young man鈥檚 resistance-for-resistance鈥檚 sake and the mistakes this sets in motion. It is not about old age (since he never makes it there, we know that early on), but it is a story about arrogant pushback (something Roth seems to have done with his own parents) and death(s).
The story takes place against the backdrop of the Korean War, which is always a specter of potential doom for the Messner family, who lost some of their own in WWII. You have to study hard, Marcus, and stay in school, or you may have to go to Korea and then maybe die. (This was part of my motivation, too, for going to college during the Vietnam War; you could avoid the draft if you went to college, though when that was taken away as an option, you could avoid the draft by going to Seminary--one way to a religious exemption--which I couldn't do). That is Marcus鈥檚 central purpose in life, to excel in school, and a second purpose, admittedly more frivolous but still pretty darned important to him, is 鈥渢o have intercourse before I die[d]鈥� (because this is Roth, and every Roth male main character no matter the age has sex on his brain, though in this tale the obsession is relatively innocent鈥攅specially compared to the old horn-dog Mickey Sabbath!), a goal which he pursues with a young woman, Olivia Hutton, who is herself sexually active (compared to the virginal Marcus) but also has in the past year attempted suicide.
We don鈥檛 exactly know why, but we know fairly early on that Olivia has a 鈥渞eputation鈥� at the college, and is thus 鈥渓iked鈥� (popular, in a way) but not deeply admired. The tone of the novel is largely comic (isolationist) until we begin to deal in a serious way with some of the realities of Olivia鈥檚 life, of American (and international, re: the Korean war) life and of Marcus鈥檚 life. Then things get serious and we have to re-evaluate everything we thought we knew.
If the author鈥檚 big trilogy (American Pastoral, I Married a Communist and The Human Stain) is about postwar American history, this one is a short (but good!) contribution to that group, focused on American involvement in the Korean War. It doesn鈥檛 have the scope or ambition or heft of those three books; it isn鈥檛 as complexly layered as those three books are, but I still loved it as an older author鈥檚鈥攈e鈥檚 75 when he writes this, writing as well as anyone alive you can name--cautionary coming-of-age story, for its tragi-comic simplicity. And in Roth鈥檚 capable hands, he shows us a time in American history that depicts a campus panty raid under the threat of expulsion to the military, at approximately the same time Olivia 鈥渧isits鈥� Marcus in the hospital (yes, and I mean to have sex with him) where he is recovering from hernia surgery. Soon, there is trouble for Marcus, and he is forced to learn first-hand:
鈥�. . . what his uneducated father had been trying so hard to teach him all along: of the terrible, the incomprehensible way one鈥檚 most banal, incidental, even comical choices achieve the most disproportionate result.鈥�
Crazy Dad turns out to have been right, alas! It happens sometimes, huh! Ah, but Roth is such an amazing writer. I鈥檓 really more of a minimalist guy, historically, into guys (okay, there are more guys than women historically on this list, but I am rectifying that!) such as Hemingway and Carver, but I have enjoyed my deep dive into (non-minimalist) Roth the last couple years. I hadn鈥檛 expected to like this late book as much as I did. Who would expect it?! The dude was 75! But now, as each year approach that age, I think, why not?
Oh, and two things about the charge of misogyny leveled against Roth all his career? Marcus鈥檚 mother is one strong and independent woman here (as most Roth mothers are); also, the sad story of Olivia Hutton鈥檚 proudly joyful sexuality and where it leads to in 1951 Winesburg makes for one of the most poignant portraits of a bright and engaging woman I can recall in Roth. The quiet meeting between Marcus鈥檚 mother and Marcus鈥檚 girl friend and what results is heart-breaking.
Philip Roth, one of the great American novelists, died in May 2018, so I decided to read Sabbath鈥檚 Theater, his final National Book award winner, and then his uncharacteristically shorter final four novels (some say novellas) grouped under the descriptor 鈥淣emeses,鈥� which would seem to be linked by the author鈥檚 concerns arising out of (his own) decline and death. His last say, shall we say. I had wanted to read them in order of publication, but I had this one nearby and read it. It surprised me in not being about the sad observations of an aging (i.e., decaying) man (which most of the narrators or main characters of his last books are, though mortality for Roth has been a consideration for decades), but is narrated by a nineteen-year-old young man, whom we learn about 1/3 of the way in (possibly deserving of spoiler-alert status?)鈥攋ust mentioned casually and that鈥檚 it鈥攊s actually dead. Yes, the story is narrated by a ghost.
The novel begins innocently and nostalgically enough, as Marcus Messner tells of family life and baseball and school work and working in his father鈥檚 butcher shop:
鈥淚t was my job not just to pluck the chickens but to eviscerate them. I hated that part. Nauseating and disgusting, but it had to be done. That's what I learned from my father and what I loved learning from him: that you do what you have to do.鈥�
One motif is early fifties-style American determination in the close-knit context of a Jewish-American family; another is blood: Chicken blood, human blood, but also familial blood (I鈥檓 also listening to Kerouac now; there are no beatniks in this book nor anywhere near it, though they both grew up in the northeastern U.S.). This book as many other Roth books reveres craft; in this one butchering.
It is 1951 in America, the second year of the Korean War. Marcus can鈥檛 stand his father鈥檚 obsessive over-protection of him and needs to go far away to school. He ends up at Ohio鈥檚 Winesburg College (Yes, this is a reference to Sherwood Anderson鈥檚 short story collection Winesburg, Ohio, the small town gentile haven of Midwestern conservatism so contrasted with Marcus鈥檚 and Roth's own East coast Jewish Newark upbringing). Sweet Marcus, such a good, reliable boy, becomes resentful of his father, and yes, indignant, and indignant, too, at the Dean who wonders why Marcus switches roommates (indignantly) twice in his first term. Marcus, as a Jew, is indignant about Winesburg鈥檚 chapel attendance policy, and rather than quietly accepting the Dean鈥檚 mild chiding, explodes into argument with him, as he had done with his father. He is ready to leave Winesburg, the provincial place, and Marcus needing to leave is something the Dean correctly sees as Marcus鈥檚 basic m.o..
As with all Roth, one feature of the book is eloquent oratory, incisive argument, and bombast, but in this book, to what end? Indignation is about a young man鈥檚 resistance-for-resistance鈥檚 sake and the mistakes this sets in motion. It is not about old age (since he never makes it there, we know that early on), but it is a story about arrogant pushback (something Roth seems to have done with his own parents) and death(s).
The story takes place against the backdrop of the Korean War, which is always a specter of potential doom for the Messner family, who lost some of their own in WWII. You have to study hard, Marcus, and stay in school, or you may have to go to Korea and then maybe die. (This was part of my motivation, too, for going to college during the Vietnam War; you could avoid the draft if you went to college, though when that was taken away as an option, you could avoid the draft by going to Seminary--one way to a religious exemption--which I couldn't do). That is Marcus鈥檚 central purpose in life, to excel in school, and a second purpose, admittedly more frivolous but still pretty darned important to him, is 鈥渢o have intercourse before I die[d]鈥� (because this is Roth, and every Roth male main character no matter the age has sex on his brain, though in this tale the obsession is relatively innocent鈥攅specially compared to the old horn-dog Mickey Sabbath!), a goal which he pursues with a young woman, Olivia Hutton, who is herself sexually active (compared to the virginal Marcus) but also has in the past year attempted suicide.
We don鈥檛 exactly know why, but we know fairly early on that Olivia has a 鈥渞eputation鈥� at the college, and is thus 鈥渓iked鈥� (popular, in a way) but not deeply admired. The tone of the novel is largely comic (isolationist) until we begin to deal in a serious way with some of the realities of Olivia鈥檚 life, of American (and international, re: the Korean war) life and of Marcus鈥檚 life. Then things get serious and we have to re-evaluate everything we thought we knew.
If the author鈥檚 big trilogy (American Pastoral, I Married a Communist and The Human Stain) is about postwar American history, this one is a short (but good!) contribution to that group, focused on American involvement in the Korean War. It doesn鈥檛 have the scope or ambition or heft of those three books; it isn鈥檛 as complexly layered as those three books are, but I still loved it as an older author鈥檚鈥攈e鈥檚 75 when he writes this, writing as well as anyone alive you can name--cautionary coming-of-age story, for its tragi-comic simplicity. And in Roth鈥檚 capable hands, he shows us a time in American history that depicts a campus panty raid under the threat of expulsion to the military, at approximately the same time Olivia 鈥渧isits鈥� Marcus in the hospital (yes, and I mean to have sex with him) where he is recovering from hernia surgery. Soon, there is trouble for Marcus, and he is forced to learn first-hand:
鈥�. . . what his uneducated father had been trying so hard to teach him all along: of the terrible, the incomprehensible way one鈥檚 most banal, incidental, even comical choices achieve the most disproportionate result.鈥�
Crazy Dad turns out to have been right, alas! It happens sometimes, huh! Ah, but Roth is such an amazing writer. I鈥檓 really more of a minimalist guy, historically, into guys (okay, there are more guys than women historically on this list, but I am rectifying that!) such as Hemingway and Carver, but I have enjoyed my deep dive into (non-minimalist) Roth the last couple years. I hadn鈥檛 expected to like this late book as much as I did. Who would expect it?! The dude was 75! But now, as each year approach that age, I think, why not?
Oh, and two things about the charge of misogyny leveled against Roth all his career? Marcus鈥檚 mother is one strong and independent woman here (as most Roth mothers are); also, the sad story of Olivia Hutton鈥檚 proudly joyful sexuality and where it leads to in 1951 Winesburg makes for one of the most poignant portraits of a bright and engaging woman I can recall in Roth. The quiet meeting between Marcus鈥檚 mother and Marcus鈥檚 girl friend and what results is heart-breaking.
April 17, 2021
鈥淟a palabra m谩s hermosa de la lengua inglesa: 芦 隆In鈥攄ig鈥攏a鈥攖ion!禄鈥�Un sentimiento que deber铆a estar en todos los corazones adolescentes, que quiz谩 se va atemperando en exceso con los a帽os, que no le sienta bien a todo el mundo (hay mucho indignadito suelto), que es del todo in煤til si no invita a la acci贸n y que con excesiva frecuencia invita a acciones in煤tiles.
鈥淓so es lo que aprend铆 de mi padre y lo que me gust贸 aprender de 茅l: que haces lo que tienes que hacer鈥�El problema es que no siempre es f谩cil saber qu茅 es lo que se tiene que hacer y si vale la pena hacerlo. 鈥淚ndignaci贸n鈥�, de Philip Roth, es la historia de un chico rebelde que no supo ni dominar ni dirigir bien su indignaci贸n y que pag贸 muy caro su error, y no fue el 煤nico. Tampoco se le puede reprochar demasiado, como apunta Cummings en la cita que antecede al texto, hay niveles de mierda que uno ya no est谩 dispuesto a aguantar.
Despu茅s est谩 la indignaci贸n que el lector deber谩 sentir hacia una 茅poca no tan lejana, y cuyos principios se siguen reivindicando con no poco 茅xito en los 煤ltimos tiempos, en la que se santifican las tradiciones, se imponen los conceptos religiosos con mayor o menor diplomacia y apariencia de ecuanimidad, se estigmatiza al distinto, y se sigue viendo pernicioso todo aquello relacionado con un sexo que no se mueva por los cauces 鈥渁ceptables鈥�.
鈥淓n una noche de fin de semana en Winesburg, el dolor de huevos constitu铆a la norma, y afectaba a decenas de chicos m谩s o menos entre las diez y las doce de la noche, mientras que la eyaculaci贸n, el m谩s agradable y natural de los remedios, era un acontecimiento siempre huidizo, sin precedentes en el historial er贸tico de un estudiante cuya libido se hallaba en la cima de su rendimiento.鈥�Haz de tu vida algo interesante, te va la muerte en ello. Algo as铆 viene a decir Roth desde un m谩s all谩 inquietante a todos ustedes, adolescentes que, como el protagonista, tienen con mucha frecuencia la sensaci贸n de no comprender nada ni a nadie, que no terminan de descubrir c贸mo funcionan las cosas, que experimentan con el mundo como nunca antes, inmersos en la b煤squeda de una identidad m谩s all谩 del mundo protector y, a veces, asfixiante de los padres, a ustedes est谩 especialmente dirigida la novela.
Y como siempre, amigos, no olviden vitaminizarse y supermineralizarse y que鈥�
鈥溾€� en la vida, el m铆nimo paso en falso puede tener tr谩gicas consecuencias.鈥�
P.S. Redondeando desde el 3,5.
June 8, 2020
鈥滻 put my mouth to the page and kissed the 鈥極.鈥� Kissed it and kissed it. Then, impulsively, with the tip of my tongue I began to lick the ink of the signature, patiently as a cat at his milk bowl I licked away until there no longer the 鈥極,鈥� the 鈥榣,鈥� the 鈥榠,鈥� the 鈥榲,鈥� the second 鈥榠,鈥� the 鈥榓鈥�--licked until the upswept tail was completely gone. I had drunk her writing. I had eaten her name. I had all I could do not to eat the whole thing.鈥�
After reaching the threshold of his frustration with his father, Marcus Messner heads west to attend the very conservative Winesburg College in Ohio. Given his obsession with the writings of Bertrand Russell and his own personal disregard for organized religion, he probably should have found a college that better fits his temperament. Desperation tends to lead to rash decisions, and Marcus would have done anything to get away from New Jersey, his father鈥檚 cloying obsession over every moment of his day, and the family kosher butcher shop.
He is a young man of grand passions and explosive opinions. He soon finds himself at odds with the requirements of the school, specifically the 40 times he has to attend chapel a year, but he also keeps moving from roommate to roommate, unable to get along with anyone, and finally moves into an attic room that no one wants so he can live by himself. Is he intolerable of differences of opinions, or is everyone else too intolerable to live with? His father has become angry at everyone and finds the world to be a very unsafe place, and though he would deny it vigorously, Marcus is exactly like his father. The difference is that his father took several decades longer to become that angry.
There is a girl. There is always a girl, or at least there always should be. Olivia Hutton is the odd, but pretty, girl in history class. A doe, a fragile beauty, who remarkably seems to like him. He is a virgin, and he soon discovers that she is not. When they park on their first date, he is expecting or hoping for some heavy petting, but he gets more than he could ever hope for or is even ready for.
She has a scar, a long, white scar across her wrist. 鈥漎ou would have thought the whole of Olivia lay in her laughter, when in fact it lay in her scar.鈥� Olivia finds him to be odd, serious, and mysterious. When Marcus鈥檚 mother meets her, she insists that he needs to stop seeing Olivia because... 鈥漈his is a girl full of tears.鈥�
This astute observation made me sad. I thought to myself, here is a girl where the tragedy of her life is splashed across her face for all to see. Why is it no one can help her?
Marcus fucks everything up with Olivia. Is this the classic boy-wins-girl, boy-loses-girl, and boy-wins-girl-back plot? Hmmm, if only his life would prove to be that simple.
As she avoids him, his obsession with her grows. They exchange letters, jockeying for understanding. He realizes that he must get her back. He is working, trying to become valedictorian of his class, and trying to find the right words that will win back Olivia. He has no time for the rules and regulations of this very conservative school and soon finds himself in conflict with the dean.
Why can鈥檛 everyone just leave him alone? Why can鈥檛 Olivia see that his love/lust for her is real? Isn鈥檛 he doing enough?
This is 1951, and the Korean War is raging. Young men are dying in the snow and mud, trying to keep the Chinese from overrunning South Korea. The fear of being drafted is a looming dread hanging over him. As long as he can stay in school, he will be deferred, but can he make the compromises that will keep him out of conflict with the dean and also keep him out of the conflict overseas?
Marcus has a lot of can鈥檛s in his vocabulary. Indignation surrounds him in a cloud of dissent.
The big decisions we make that we think will unalterably change the course of our lives are sometimes sabotaged by a series of small decisions that lead us down the most unexpected paths. It is 鈥漣ncomprehensible the way one's most banal, incidental, even comical choices achieve the most disproportionate result.鈥�
This is a slender volume that is exploring themes that go deeper than what the overarching plot would indicate. The writing flows quickly, like a rain swollen stream, and sometimes I found myself being pushed along too fast. I had to occasionally reach out and grab a passing branch so I could let the water flow past me for a while to ponder the subconscious rumblings of the machinery beneath the stage.
There is a movie from 2016, directed by James Schamus, that I fully intend to watch as well. Will Schamus capture the nuances? We shall see.
If you wish to see more of my most recent book and movie reviews, visit
I also have a Facebook blogger page at: and an Instagram account
After reaching the threshold of his frustration with his father, Marcus Messner heads west to attend the very conservative Winesburg College in Ohio. Given his obsession with the writings of Bertrand Russell and his own personal disregard for organized religion, he probably should have found a college that better fits his temperament. Desperation tends to lead to rash decisions, and Marcus would have done anything to get away from New Jersey, his father鈥檚 cloying obsession over every moment of his day, and the family kosher butcher shop.
He is a young man of grand passions and explosive opinions. He soon finds himself at odds with the requirements of the school, specifically the 40 times he has to attend chapel a year, but he also keeps moving from roommate to roommate, unable to get along with anyone, and finally moves into an attic room that no one wants so he can live by himself. Is he intolerable of differences of opinions, or is everyone else too intolerable to live with? His father has become angry at everyone and finds the world to be a very unsafe place, and though he would deny it vigorously, Marcus is exactly like his father. The difference is that his father took several decades longer to become that angry.
There is a girl. There is always a girl, or at least there always should be. Olivia Hutton is the odd, but pretty, girl in history class. A doe, a fragile beauty, who remarkably seems to like him. He is a virgin, and he soon discovers that she is not. When they park on their first date, he is expecting or hoping for some heavy petting, but he gets more than he could ever hope for or is even ready for.
She has a scar, a long, white scar across her wrist. 鈥漎ou would have thought the whole of Olivia lay in her laughter, when in fact it lay in her scar.鈥� Olivia finds him to be odd, serious, and mysterious. When Marcus鈥檚 mother meets her, she insists that he needs to stop seeing Olivia because... 鈥漈his is a girl full of tears.鈥�
This astute observation made me sad. I thought to myself, here is a girl where the tragedy of her life is splashed across her face for all to see. Why is it no one can help her?
Marcus fucks everything up with Olivia. Is this the classic boy-wins-girl, boy-loses-girl, and boy-wins-girl-back plot? Hmmm, if only his life would prove to be that simple.
As she avoids him, his obsession with her grows. They exchange letters, jockeying for understanding. He realizes that he must get her back. He is working, trying to become valedictorian of his class, and trying to find the right words that will win back Olivia. He has no time for the rules and regulations of this very conservative school and soon finds himself in conflict with the dean.
Why can鈥檛 everyone just leave him alone? Why can鈥檛 Olivia see that his love/lust for her is real? Isn鈥檛 he doing enough?
This is 1951, and the Korean War is raging. Young men are dying in the snow and mud, trying to keep the Chinese from overrunning South Korea. The fear of being drafted is a looming dread hanging over him. As long as he can stay in school, he will be deferred, but can he make the compromises that will keep him out of conflict with the dean and also keep him out of the conflict overseas?
Marcus has a lot of can鈥檛s in his vocabulary. Indignation surrounds him in a cloud of dissent.
The big decisions we make that we think will unalterably change the course of our lives are sometimes sabotaged by a series of small decisions that lead us down the most unexpected paths. It is 鈥漣ncomprehensible the way one's most banal, incidental, even comical choices achieve the most disproportionate result.鈥�
This is a slender volume that is exploring themes that go deeper than what the overarching plot would indicate. The writing flows quickly, like a rain swollen stream, and sometimes I found myself being pushed along too fast. I had to occasionally reach out and grab a passing branch so I could let the water flow past me for a while to ponder the subconscious rumblings of the machinery beneath the stage.
There is a movie from 2016, directed by James Schamus, that I fully intend to watch as well. Will Schamus capture the nuances? We shall see.
If you wish to see more of my most recent book and movie reviews, visit
I also have a Facebook blogger page at: and an Instagram account
July 30, 2018
Reading Indignation
There is some anger in each young generation - an urgent need to break free from parental values, and from a dominant society that doesn't match the visions adolescents have of a better future.
When Philip Roth takes on adolescent rage in his old age, it is of course going to be about overprotective fathers, oppressive religious rituals versus atheism, male sexuality in detail, difficulties with authorities in general, an American dream gone wrong.
Yet, despite the particular circumstances of the novel, set during the Korean War, it tells a story as universal and as timeless as human coming-of-age. Try to force the next generation to satisfy parental dreams, and disaster is going to strike. It is as inevitable as a Greek myth. Because they try to prevent the oracle's words from coming true, the Greek heroes set up the conditions that make the oracle come true. Because parents try to shield their children from evil, they cause a lot of problems for them.
There is some truth in that still, and Roth was a master of irony, so the topic suits him.
Recommended to those who see their children set sails for new horizons...
There is some anger in each young generation - an urgent need to break free from parental values, and from a dominant society that doesn't match the visions adolescents have of a better future.
When Philip Roth takes on adolescent rage in his old age, it is of course going to be about overprotective fathers, oppressive religious rituals versus atheism, male sexuality in detail, difficulties with authorities in general, an American dream gone wrong.
Yet, despite the particular circumstances of the novel, set during the Korean War, it tells a story as universal and as timeless as human coming-of-age. Try to force the next generation to satisfy parental dreams, and disaster is going to strike. It is as inevitable as a Greek myth. Because they try to prevent the oracle's words from coming true, the Greek heroes set up the conditions that make the oracle come true. Because parents try to shield their children from evil, they cause a lot of problems for them.
There is some truth in that still, and Roth was a master of irony, so the topic suits him.
Recommended to those who see their children set sails for new horizons...
May 25, 2018
As always Roth delivers fantastic story built of just human frailty and indignation. Marc Messner is indignant about things ranging from his father's obsessive over-protection to the Winesburg College requirement for chapel attendance 40 times. His own failure to compromise (Dean Coulter for all his faults was right about that) was his undoing. The Olivia Hutton incident is so heart-rending as well. Only a master writer like Roth could pack so much into such a short powerful book. Yes another seemingly benign but superb masterpiece from Roth.
RIP (1933-2018). One of America's literary giants has left us.
RIP (1933-2018). One of America's literary giants has left us.
August 16, 2016
鈥淥f a terrible, the incomprehensible way one's most banal, incidental, even comical choices archive the most disproportionate result.鈥�
鈥� Philip Roth, Indignation
There was a period when I hated Roth's small books. I loved his big, strong, hefty books. I thought DeLillo and Roth's novella periods were horrible indulgences; vanity projects meant to expel some small idea, some festering detail yet unexplored in their earlier masterpieces. A prose zit popping. I still think they are a bit indulgent and not as good as Roth and DeLillo's great works, but I guess as I get a bit older, I become less indignant of things that matter little, really.
Anyway, this novella moved up my list because several Roth books have recently been made into movies and this looked like one my wife and I would go to together. So, I brought home my small, beautiful, yet unread, autographed copy of Roth's 'Indignation'.
My wife read it first, and finished it. That was a good sign. She has a very low toleration for crap and where I MUST finish something, she has no problem abandoning a novel if it doesn't measure up to her minute-by-minute standards (this creates a bit of uncertainty in our marriage and keeps me on my toes). She felt it was a bit darker than she typically likes. Once, early in our marriage, my wife summarized my literary taste as "older white men with sexual issues". Obviously, reading Roth is bound to solidify that stereotype.
When I started reading the novel, I was tickled to find a bunch of not-so-subtle allusions to Sherwood Anderson's . Anderson's book of related short stories seems to have been an inspiration, or at least a harbinger of, of this later Roth novella. While I don't love this book as much as Anderson's book, I still enjoyed it (as much as one can enjoy a book about death, loneliness, isolation, rigidity, and indignation). It was tight, beautiful, and also strange and sad. IT was a Philip Roth novella.
鈥� Philip Roth, Indignation
There was a period when I hated Roth's small books. I loved his big, strong, hefty books. I thought DeLillo and Roth's novella periods were horrible indulgences; vanity projects meant to expel some small idea, some festering detail yet unexplored in their earlier masterpieces. A prose zit popping. I still think they are a bit indulgent and not as good as Roth and DeLillo's great works, but I guess as I get a bit older, I become less indignant of things that matter little, really.
Anyway, this novella moved up my list because several Roth books have recently been made into movies and this looked like one my wife and I would go to together. So, I brought home my small, beautiful, yet unread, autographed copy of Roth's 'Indignation'.
My wife read it first, and finished it. That was a good sign. She has a very low toleration for crap and where I MUST finish something, she has no problem abandoning a novel if it doesn't measure up to her minute-by-minute standards (this creates a bit of uncertainty in our marriage and keeps me on my toes). She felt it was a bit darker than she typically likes. Once, early in our marriage, my wife summarized my literary taste as "older white men with sexual issues". Obviously, reading Roth is bound to solidify that stereotype.
When I started reading the novel, I was tickled to find a bunch of not-so-subtle allusions to Sherwood Anderson's . Anderson's book of related short stories seems to have been an inspiration, or at least a harbinger of, of this later Roth novella. While I don't love this book as much as Anderson's book, I still enjoyed it (as much as one can enjoy a book about death, loneliness, isolation, rigidity, and indignation). It was tight, beautiful, and also strange and sad. IT was a Philip Roth novella.
January 1, 2018
丕賱乇丕賵賷 丨丕囟乇 亘賳氐賴 賵乇賵丨賴 / 睾丕卅亘 亘噩爻丿賴.. 賴匕丕 賴賵 亘胤賱賳丕貙 噩孬丞 賲賷鬲. 鬲匕賰乇賳賷 亘乇賵丕賷丞 (賲丕乇賰賵爻 夭賵爻丕賰 : 爻丕乇賯 丕賱賰鬲丕亘) 丨賷孬 賰丕賳 丕賱乇丕賵賷 (丕賱賲賵鬲) 亘賳賮爻賴.. 賮賷 丨亘賰丞 亘爻賷胤丞 賵賱賷爻鬲 賲毓賯丿丞 賵賱賷爻 匕丕鬲 禺賷丕賱 禺氐亘 賷噩亘乇賰 乇賵孬 毓賱賶 丨亘 胤亘賷毓丞 賴匕丕 丕賱毓賲賱 丕賱賮賵囟賵賷 賮賷 丿丕禺賱 丕賱廿賳爻丕賳... 賰毓丕丿丞 爻賵丕丿賵丕賷鬲賴 賷睾乇賯賳丕 賮賷 爻禺胤賴貙 乇賵孬 亘乇賵丕賷鬲賴 爻禺胤. 乇睾賲 乇賵丨賴 丕賱賲乇丨丞 丕賱鬲賷 賯乇兀鬲賴丕 賮賷 (丕賱賵氐賲丞 丕賱亘卮乇賷丞) 賵賴賷 毓賳丿賷 兀毓馗賲 賲賳 爻禺胤貙 賵賱賰賳 賰匕賱賰 爻禺胤 噩賲賷賱丞 賮賯胤 賮賷 丕賱氐賮毓丞 丕賱鬲賷 鬲賵噩賴賴丕 賱賰 賮賷 賳賴丕鬲賷賴丕.
賷賳賯賱 賱賳丕 乇賵孬 鬲噩乇亘丞 "賲丕乇賰賵爻 賲爻賳乇" 丕賱丿乇丕爻賷丞 - 丕賱噩丕賲毓丞 - 賮賷 兀賲乇賷賰丕 賮賷 丕賱禺賲爻賷賳賷丕鬲 丕賱賲賷賱丕丿賷丞. 丕賱鬲賷 鬲夭丕賲賳鬲 賲毓 丨乇亘 兀賲乇賷賰丕 : 丕賱賰賵乇賷丞. 賮亘毓丿 賲睾丕丿乇丞 亘胤賱賳丕 賲丿賷賳鬲賴 賳賷賵 丕乇賰 賵賷鬲乇賰 賵丕賱丿賴 賱兀噩賱 丕賱丿乇丕爻丞 賵匕賱賰 禺卮賷丞 丕賱丨乇亘 賰匕賱賰 賵丕賱廿賱鬲丨丕賯 亘賴丕貙 賵丿賵賳 睾賮賱丕賳 丿賵乇 賵丕賱丿賴 丕賱鬲禺賵賷賮賷 丕賱匕賷 兀氐丕亘賴 賲賳 丕賱丨乇亘 賵賴匕丕 丕賱禺賵賮 賵丕賱鬲囟賷賷賯 賴賵 賲賳 賰丕賳 丕亘賳 賴匕賴 丕賱毓丕卅賱丞 丕賱賷賴賵丿賷丞 丕賱賵丨賷丿 賱賱爻賮乇 丨賷孬 賲賳胤賯丞 乇賷賮賷丞 賮賷 兀賵賴丕賷賵貨 賵賷賳夭亘乇睾貙 賵賮賷 兀孬賳丕亍 丕賱丿乇丕爻丞 賷賯毓 賮賷 睾乇丕賲 兀賵賱賷賮賷賴. 賮鬲丕丞 賰丕賳 賵丕賱丿賴 丿賵賳 卮賰 賱賷乇賮囟 賱賵 賰丕賳 毓賱賷 賲賯乇亘丞 賲賳賴 賱賳賮賵乇賴 賲賳 毓丕丿丕鬲賴丕 賵鬲賯丕賱賷丿賴丕 賵賰賱 丕賱氐賮丕鬲 丕賱鬲賷 丨賲賱鬲賴丕.
丕賱丨乇亘 丕賱鬲賷 賰毓丕丿鬲賴丕 鬲丿禺賱 兀賲乇賷賰丕 賳賮爻賴丕 賮賷賴丕 禺賵賮賸丕 賲賳 廿賳鬲卮丕乇 丕賱卮賷賵毓賷丞 丕賱鬲賷 丨丕乇亘鬲 乇賵爻賷丕 亘賴丕 兀賲乇賷賰丕 亘毓丿 丕賱丨乇亘 丕賱毓丕賱賲賷丞 丕賱孬丕賳賷丞 賮爻丕賳丿鬲 賰賵乇賷丕 丕賱噩賳賵亘賷丞 毓賱賶 丨爻丕亘 賰賵乇賷丕 丕賱卮賲丕賱賷丞 丕賱鬲賷 丌夭乇鬲賴丕 乇賵爻賷丕 賵丕賱氐賷賳. 賵賰丕賳鬲 賲賳 賯亘賱 匕賰乇賶 兀亘賳丕亍 毓賲賵賲鬲賴 丕賱賱匕丕賳 廿賱鬲賴賲鬲丕 丕賱丨乇亘 丕賱毓丕賱賲賷丞 丕賱孬丕賳賷丞 鬲禺賷賮 賵丕賱丿賴 丕賱賱丨丕賲 丕賱賷賴賵丿賷 丕賱賲鬲賲爻賰 亘賷賴賵丿賷鬲賴 賵胤乇賷賯鬲賴 匕亘丨賴丕 丕賱鬲賷 賱丕 賷睾賮賱賴丕 毓賳賴丕 丕賱乇賵丕卅賷 賮賷 鬲賮丕氐賷賱 丕賱乇賵丕賷丞 - 兀毓卮賯 丕賱鬲賮丕氐賷賱 - 賷禺卮賶 兀賳 鬲賱鬲賴賲 丕亘賳賴 丕賱丨乇亘 賳丕賴賷賰 毓賳 廿賷賲丕賳賴 亘兀賳 賴匕丕 丕賱丨乇亘 賱丕 鬲毓賳賷 賱賴賲 卮賷亍 - 賰毓丕丿丞 賰賱 丨乇賵亘 兀賲乇賷賰丕 賱賲 鬲毓賳賷 卮毓賵亘賴丕 卮賷卅 賵賱賲 鬲乇囟賷賴賲 - 賮賷禺卮賶 賮賯丿賴 賲毓 禺亘乇鬲賴 丕賱賯賱賷賱丞 賮賵賯 禺卮賷鬲賴 丕賱丿丕卅賲丞 毓賱賷賴 丨鬲賶 賲賳 賮鬲賷丕鬲 亘氐賮丕鬲 賲毓賷賳丞!!.. 賰丕賳 賰賱 賴匕丕 禺賳丕賯 賵鬲囟賷賯 毓賱賶 賲丕乇賰賵爻. 丨鬲賶 噩丕賲毓鬲賴 丕賱鬲賷 賰丕賳 亘賴丕 賲賳 賯亘賱 亘丕賱賯乇亘 賲賳 兀爻乇鬲賴 賮賯丿 鬲乇賰賴丕 賴賷 丕賱兀禺乇賷 賱賷禺賱賾賮 賵丕賱丿賴 賵噩賳賵賳 廿乇鬲賷丕亘賴.
賲毓 兀賵賱賷賮賷丕 / 兀賵賱賷賮賷賴 賷馗賴乇 毓賱賷 丕賱爻胤丨 孬賷賲丞 丕賱乇賵丕賷丞 兀賰孬乇 賵兀賰孬乇 (丕賱鬲賲乇丿) 賷亘賱睾 鬲賲乇丿 賲丕乇賰賵爻 匕乇賵鬲賴 賱賷爻 賲賳 噩賴鬲賴 亘賯丿乇 賲丕賴賵 亘賮丕毓賱賷丞 賲賳 胤乇賮 兀賵賱賷賮賷丕 賮賲賷賳 氐賮丨丕鬲 賴匕賴 丕賱乇賵丕賷丞 丕賱氐睾賷乇丞 鬲噩丿 (賮賵囟賶: 毓亘孬賷丞) 丕賱兀丨丿丕孬 賲賳 丨賵賱 賲丕乇賰賵爻 禺乇賵噩賴 賲賳 亘賱丿鬲賴 賵噩丕賲毓鬲賴 賵毓賱丕賯鬲賴 亘兀賵賱賷賮賷丕 賵賳賯丕卮丕鬲賴 賲毓 賲卮乇賮賴 賮賷 丕賱賲亘賳賶 賵丕賱兀禺亘丕乇 丕賱鬲賷 毓乇賮賴丕 毓賳 賳賷賴 兀賲賴 賮賷 丕賱廿賳賮氐丕賱 毓賳 賵丕賱丿賴貙 賵乇睾亘丞 丕賱兀禺賷乇丞 賮賷 兀賳 賷鬲乇賰 氐丿賷賯賷鬲賴 賵丕賱鬲賷 亘丿賵乇賴丕 賷夭毓噩賴丕 丕賱兀賲乇 丨丿 丕賱廿賳賴賷丕乇 賵鬲乇賰賴 賱賱噩丕賲毓丞 孬賲 丨丿孬賴 丕賱兀禺賷乇 丨賷孬 丕賱丨乇亘 / 丕賱賲賵鬲.
賮賷 丕賱爻賰賳 丨賷孬 噩丕賲毓丞 賲丕乇賰賵爻 鬲禺鬲賱賮 丨賷丕鬲賴 賵賷噩丿 兀賳賲丕胤 亘卮乇賷丞 賲睾丕賷乇丞 毓賳 丕賱鬲賷 毓乇賮賴丕 賲賳 賯亘賱 賵賷噩丿 鬲噩丕賵夭丕鬲 賵鬲丨賵賱丕鬲 賷氐毓亘 毓賱賷賴 鬲兀賵賷賱賴丕. 鬲乇亘賰 卮禺氐賴 賵鬲乇亘賰 賮賴賲賴 賱賴匕丕 丕賱鬲丨賵賱 賵丕賱鬲丨乇乇 丕賱匕賷 賰丕賳 賷毓丕乇賰賴 賲賳 丕賱丿丕禺賱 乇睾賲 鬲賯亘賱 亘毓囟賴 亘鬲丨賮馗. 賲卮賰賱丞 賲丕乇賰賵爻 賱賲 賷賮賴賲 賲噩鬲賲毓賴 丕賱噩丿賷丿 賱爻丿丕噩鬲賴 賮賱賲 鬲爻丕毓丿賴 丨鬲賶 亘匕乇丞 (丕賱鬲賲乇丿) 丕賱鬲賷 賮賷 丿丕禺賱賴 賵丕賱鬲賷 兀禺乇噩鬲賴 賲賳 亘賱丿鬲賴.
賲賯胤毓 賲賳 丕賱乇賵丕賷丞 :
賷氐賮 賲丕乇賰賵爻 賴匕賴 丕賱丨丕賱丞 賮賷賯賵賱 賮賷 丕賱乇賵丕賷丞 : "賯丕賱 賱賷 兀亘賷 : "亘丿兀鬲 兀毓賲賱 賱賰爻亘 丕賱賲丕賱 賲賳匕 兀賳 賰賳鬲 賮賷 丕賱毓丕卮乇丞 賲賳 毓賲乇賷 " 賰丕賳 兀亘賷 噩夭丕乇 丕賱丨賷 賵賰賳鬲 兀賯賵賲 亘丕賷氐丕賱 丕賱胤賱亘丕鬲 丕賱賶 丕賱夭亘丕卅賳 毓賱賶 丿乇丕噩鬲賷 毓賳丿賲丕 賰賳鬲 胤丕賱亘丕 賮賷 丕賱賲丿乇爻丞 丕賱孬丕賳賵賷丞 亘丕爻鬲孬賳丕亍 賮鬲乇丞 賲賵爻賲 賲亘丕乇賷丕鬲 丕賱亘賷爻亘賵賱 賵賮賷 賮鬲乇丕鬲 賲丕 亘毓丿 丕賱馗賴乇 毓賳丿賲丕 賰賳鬲 兀丨囟乇 賲亘丕乇賷丕鬲 丕賱賲賳丕賯卮丕鬲 丕賱鬲賷 鬲賯丕賲 亘賷賳 丕賱賲丿丕乇爻 丕賱孬丕賳賵賷丞貙 賱賰賵賳賷 毓囟賵丕 賮賷 賮乇賷賯 丕賱賲賳丕賯卮丞 賮賷 賲丿乇爻鬲賷. 賵賲賳匕 丕賱賷賵賲 丕賱匕賷 鬲乇賰鬲 賮賷賴 丕賱毓賲賱 賮賷 丿賰丕賳 兀亘賷 賵丕賱匕賷 賰賳鬲 兀毓賲賱 賮賷賴 爻鬲賷賳 爻丕毓丞 兀爻亘賵毓賷丕 丕賱賶 兀賳 鬲禺乇噩鬲 賲賳 丕賱賲丿乇爻丞 丕賱孬丕賳賵賷丞 賮賷 賰丕賳賵賳 丕賱孬丕賳賷 賵亘丿兀鬲 兀丿乇爻 賮賷 丕賱噩丕賲毓丞 賮賷 卮賴乇 兀賷賱賵賱 鈥� 鬲賯乇賷亘賸丕 賲賳匕 丕賱賷賵賲 丕賱匕賷 亘丿兀鬲 賮賷賴 丕賱丿乇丕爻丞 賮賷 噩丕賲毓丞 乇賵亘乇鬲 鬲乇賷鬲貙 亘丿兀 賷賳鬲丕亘 兀亘賷 卮毓賵乇 亘丕賱禺賵賮 賲賳 兀賳賳賷 爻兀賲賵鬲貙 乇亘賲丕 賰丕賳鬲 賱賲禺丕賵賮賴 鬲賱賰 毓賱丕賯丞 亘丕賱丨乇亘 丕賱鬲賷 丿禺賱鬲 賮賷賴丕 丕賱賯賵丕鬲 丕賱賲爻賱丨丞 丕賱兀賲乇賷賰賷丞 毓賱賶 丕賱賮賵乇 亘乇毓丕賷丞 丕賱兀賲賲 丕賱賲鬲丨丿丞 賱丿毓賲 噩賴賵丿 噩賷卮 賰賵乇賷丕 丕賱噩賳賵亘賷丞 丕賱匕賷 賱賲 賷賰賳 賲丿乇亘丕 賵賲噩賴夭丕 亘卮賰賱 噩賷丿貙 賵乇亘賲丕 賰丕賳鬲 賱賲禺丕賵賮賴 毓賱丕賯丞 亘丕賱禺爻丕卅乇 丕賱賰亘賷乇丞 丕賱鬲賷 鬲賰亘丿鬲賴丕 賯賵丕鬲賳丕 丕賱賲爻賱丨丞 賳鬲賷噩丞 賰孬丕賮丞 賳賷乇丕賳 丕賱卮賷賵毓賷賷賳 賵禺卮賷鬲賴 賲賳 兀賳 兀爻鬲丿毓賶 丕賱賶 丕賱噩賳丿賷丞 丕賳 胤丕賱 兀賲丿 丕賱賳夭丕毓 賰賲丕 丨丿孬 賮賷 丕賱丨乇亘 丕賱毓丕賱賲賷丞 丕賱孬丕賳賷丞貙 賵兀賯丕鬲賱 賵兀賲賵鬲 賮賷 爻丕丨丞 丕賱賲毓乇賰丞 丕賱賰賵乇賷丞 賰賲丕 賱賯賷 丕亘賳丕 毓賲賷 丌亘賷 賵丿賷賮 賲氐乇毓賴賲丕 賮賷 丕賱丨乇亘 丕賱毓丕賱賲賷丞 丕賱孬丕賳賷丞貙 兀賵 賱毓賱 賲禺丕賵賮賴 賰丕賳鬲 鬲賳亘毓 賲賳 賴賲賵賲賴 丕賱賲丕賱賷丞貙 賮賮賷 丕賱爻賳丞 丕賱賲丕囟賷丞 賮鬲丨 兀賵賱 爻賵亘乇 賲丕乇賰鬲 賮賷 賲賰丕賳 賯乇賷亘 賲賳 丿賰丕賳 亘賷毓 丕賱賱丨賲 丕賱賰賵卮乇 ( 丕賱丨賱丕賱) 丕賱匕賷 鬲賲賱賰賴 兀爻乇鬲賳丕 賵亘丿兀鬲 丕賱賲亘賷毓丕鬲 賮賷 丿賰丕賳 兀亘賷 鬲鬲丿賳賶 亘丕囟胤乇丕丿 賵匕賱賰 賱兀賳 丕賱爻賵亘乇 賲丕乇賰鬲 亘丿兀 賷亘賷毓 丕賱賱丨賵賲 賵丕賱丿賵丕噩賳 亘兀爻毓丕乇 兀丿賳賶 賲賳 丕賱兀爻毓丕乇 丕賱鬲賷 賷亘賷毓賴丕 兀亘賷鈥�.. 氐 5 - 6
爻禺胤 : 賮賷賱賷亘 乇賵孬
鬲乇噩賲丞 禺丕賱丿 丕賱噩亘賷賱賷 (2010)賲
丕賱噩賲賱 (176) 氐
賷賳賯賱 賱賳丕 乇賵孬 鬲噩乇亘丞 "賲丕乇賰賵爻 賲爻賳乇" 丕賱丿乇丕爻賷丞 - 丕賱噩丕賲毓丞 - 賮賷 兀賲乇賷賰丕 賮賷 丕賱禺賲爻賷賳賷丕鬲 丕賱賲賷賱丕丿賷丞. 丕賱鬲賷 鬲夭丕賲賳鬲 賲毓 丨乇亘 兀賲乇賷賰丕 : 丕賱賰賵乇賷丞. 賮亘毓丿 賲睾丕丿乇丞 亘胤賱賳丕 賲丿賷賳鬲賴 賳賷賵 丕乇賰 賵賷鬲乇賰 賵丕賱丿賴 賱兀噩賱 丕賱丿乇丕爻丞 賵匕賱賰 禺卮賷丞 丕賱丨乇亘 賰匕賱賰 賵丕賱廿賱鬲丨丕賯 亘賴丕貙 賵丿賵賳 睾賮賱丕賳 丿賵乇 賵丕賱丿賴 丕賱鬲禺賵賷賮賷 丕賱匕賷 兀氐丕亘賴 賲賳 丕賱丨乇亘 賵賴匕丕 丕賱禺賵賮 賵丕賱鬲囟賷賷賯 賴賵 賲賳 賰丕賳 丕亘賳 賴匕賴 丕賱毓丕卅賱丞 丕賱賷賴賵丿賷丞 丕賱賵丨賷丿 賱賱爻賮乇 丨賷孬 賲賳胤賯丞 乇賷賮賷丞 賮賷 兀賵賴丕賷賵貨 賵賷賳夭亘乇睾貙 賵賮賷 兀孬賳丕亍 丕賱丿乇丕爻丞 賷賯毓 賮賷 睾乇丕賲 兀賵賱賷賮賷賴. 賮鬲丕丞 賰丕賳 賵丕賱丿賴 丿賵賳 卮賰 賱賷乇賮囟 賱賵 賰丕賳 毓賱賷 賲賯乇亘丞 賲賳賴 賱賳賮賵乇賴 賲賳 毓丕丿丕鬲賴丕 賵鬲賯丕賱賷丿賴丕 賵賰賱 丕賱氐賮丕鬲 丕賱鬲賷 丨賲賱鬲賴丕.
丕賱丨乇亘 丕賱鬲賷 賰毓丕丿鬲賴丕 鬲丿禺賱 兀賲乇賷賰丕 賳賮爻賴丕 賮賷賴丕 禺賵賮賸丕 賲賳 廿賳鬲卮丕乇 丕賱卮賷賵毓賷丞 丕賱鬲賷 丨丕乇亘鬲 乇賵爻賷丕 亘賴丕 兀賲乇賷賰丕 亘毓丿 丕賱丨乇亘 丕賱毓丕賱賲賷丞 丕賱孬丕賳賷丞 賮爻丕賳丿鬲 賰賵乇賷丕 丕賱噩賳賵亘賷丞 毓賱賶 丨爻丕亘 賰賵乇賷丕 丕賱卮賲丕賱賷丞 丕賱鬲賷 丌夭乇鬲賴丕 乇賵爻賷丕 賵丕賱氐賷賳. 賵賰丕賳鬲 賲賳 賯亘賱 匕賰乇賶 兀亘賳丕亍 毓賲賵賲鬲賴 丕賱賱匕丕賳 廿賱鬲賴賲鬲丕 丕賱丨乇亘 丕賱毓丕賱賲賷丞 丕賱孬丕賳賷丞 鬲禺賷賮 賵丕賱丿賴 丕賱賱丨丕賲 丕賱賷賴賵丿賷 丕賱賲鬲賲爻賰 亘賷賴賵丿賷鬲賴 賵胤乇賷賯鬲賴 匕亘丨賴丕 丕賱鬲賷 賱丕 賷睾賮賱賴丕 毓賳賴丕 丕賱乇賵丕卅賷 賮賷 鬲賮丕氐賷賱 丕賱乇賵丕賷丞 - 兀毓卮賯 丕賱鬲賮丕氐賷賱 - 賷禺卮賶 兀賳 鬲賱鬲賴賲 丕亘賳賴 丕賱丨乇亘 賳丕賴賷賰 毓賳 廿賷賲丕賳賴 亘兀賳 賴匕丕 丕賱丨乇亘 賱丕 鬲毓賳賷 賱賴賲 卮賷亍 - 賰毓丕丿丞 賰賱 丨乇賵亘 兀賲乇賷賰丕 賱賲 鬲毓賳賷 卮毓賵亘賴丕 卮賷卅 賵賱賲 鬲乇囟賷賴賲 - 賮賷禺卮賶 賮賯丿賴 賲毓 禺亘乇鬲賴 丕賱賯賱賷賱丞 賮賵賯 禺卮賷鬲賴 丕賱丿丕卅賲丞 毓賱賷賴 丨鬲賶 賲賳 賮鬲賷丕鬲 亘氐賮丕鬲 賲毓賷賳丞!!.. 賰丕賳 賰賱 賴匕丕 禺賳丕賯 賵鬲囟賷賯 毓賱賶 賲丕乇賰賵爻. 丨鬲賶 噩丕賲毓鬲賴 丕賱鬲賷 賰丕賳 亘賴丕 賲賳 賯亘賱 亘丕賱賯乇亘 賲賳 兀爻乇鬲賴 賮賯丿 鬲乇賰賴丕 賴賷 丕賱兀禺乇賷 賱賷禺賱賾賮 賵丕賱丿賴 賵噩賳賵賳 廿乇鬲賷丕亘賴.
賲毓 兀賵賱賷賮賷丕 / 兀賵賱賷賮賷賴 賷馗賴乇 毓賱賷 丕賱爻胤丨 孬賷賲丞 丕賱乇賵丕賷丞 兀賰孬乇 賵兀賰孬乇 (丕賱鬲賲乇丿) 賷亘賱睾 鬲賲乇丿 賲丕乇賰賵爻 匕乇賵鬲賴 賱賷爻 賲賳 噩賴鬲賴 亘賯丿乇 賲丕賴賵 亘賮丕毓賱賷丞 賲賳 胤乇賮 兀賵賱賷賮賷丕 賮賲賷賳 氐賮丨丕鬲 賴匕賴 丕賱乇賵丕賷丞 丕賱氐睾賷乇丞 鬲噩丿 (賮賵囟賶: 毓亘孬賷丞) 丕賱兀丨丿丕孬 賲賳 丨賵賱 賲丕乇賰賵爻 禺乇賵噩賴 賲賳 亘賱丿鬲賴 賵噩丕賲毓鬲賴 賵毓賱丕賯鬲賴 亘兀賵賱賷賮賷丕 賵賳賯丕卮丕鬲賴 賲毓 賲卮乇賮賴 賮賷 丕賱賲亘賳賶 賵丕賱兀禺亘丕乇 丕賱鬲賷 毓乇賮賴丕 毓賳 賳賷賴 兀賲賴 賮賷 丕賱廿賳賮氐丕賱 毓賳 賵丕賱丿賴貙 賵乇睾亘丞 丕賱兀禺賷乇丞 賮賷 兀賳 賷鬲乇賰 氐丿賷賯賷鬲賴 賵丕賱鬲賷 亘丿賵乇賴丕 賷夭毓噩賴丕 丕賱兀賲乇 丨丿 丕賱廿賳賴賷丕乇 賵鬲乇賰賴 賱賱噩丕賲毓丞 孬賲 丨丿孬賴 丕賱兀禺賷乇 丨賷孬 丕賱丨乇亘 / 丕賱賲賵鬲.
賮賷 丕賱爻賰賳 丨賷孬 噩丕賲毓丞 賲丕乇賰賵爻 鬲禺鬲賱賮 丨賷丕鬲賴 賵賷噩丿 兀賳賲丕胤 亘卮乇賷丞 賲睾丕賷乇丞 毓賳 丕賱鬲賷 毓乇賮賴丕 賲賳 賯亘賱 賵賷噩丿 鬲噩丕賵夭丕鬲 賵鬲丨賵賱丕鬲 賷氐毓亘 毓賱賷賴 鬲兀賵賷賱賴丕. 鬲乇亘賰 卮禺氐賴 賵鬲乇亘賰 賮賴賲賴 賱賴匕丕 丕賱鬲丨賵賱 賵丕賱鬲丨乇乇 丕賱匕賷 賰丕賳 賷毓丕乇賰賴 賲賳 丕賱丿丕禺賱 乇睾賲 鬲賯亘賱 亘毓囟賴 亘鬲丨賮馗. 賲卮賰賱丞 賲丕乇賰賵爻 賱賲 賷賮賴賲 賲噩鬲賲毓賴 丕賱噩丿賷丿 賱爻丿丕噩鬲賴 賮賱賲 鬲爻丕毓丿賴 丨鬲賶 亘匕乇丞 (丕賱鬲賲乇丿) 丕賱鬲賷 賮賷 丿丕禺賱賴 賵丕賱鬲賷 兀禺乇噩鬲賴 賲賳 亘賱丿鬲賴.
賲賯胤毓 賲賳 丕賱乇賵丕賷丞 :
賷氐賮 賲丕乇賰賵爻 賴匕賴 丕賱丨丕賱丞 賮賷賯賵賱 賮賷 丕賱乇賵丕賷丞 : "賯丕賱 賱賷 兀亘賷 : "亘丿兀鬲 兀毓賲賱 賱賰爻亘 丕賱賲丕賱 賲賳匕 兀賳 賰賳鬲 賮賷 丕賱毓丕卮乇丞 賲賳 毓賲乇賷 " 賰丕賳 兀亘賷 噩夭丕乇 丕賱丨賷 賵賰賳鬲 兀賯賵賲 亘丕賷氐丕賱 丕賱胤賱亘丕鬲 丕賱賶 丕賱夭亘丕卅賳 毓賱賶 丿乇丕噩鬲賷 毓賳丿賲丕 賰賳鬲 胤丕賱亘丕 賮賷 丕賱賲丿乇爻丞 丕賱孬丕賳賵賷丞 亘丕爻鬲孬賳丕亍 賮鬲乇丞 賲賵爻賲 賲亘丕乇賷丕鬲 丕賱亘賷爻亘賵賱 賵賮賷 賮鬲乇丕鬲 賲丕 亘毓丿 丕賱馗賴乇 毓賳丿賲丕 賰賳鬲 兀丨囟乇 賲亘丕乇賷丕鬲 丕賱賲賳丕賯卮丕鬲 丕賱鬲賷 鬲賯丕賲 亘賷賳 丕賱賲丿丕乇爻 丕賱孬丕賳賵賷丞貙 賱賰賵賳賷 毓囟賵丕 賮賷 賮乇賷賯 丕賱賲賳丕賯卮丞 賮賷 賲丿乇爻鬲賷. 賵賲賳匕 丕賱賷賵賲 丕賱匕賷 鬲乇賰鬲 賮賷賴 丕賱毓賲賱 賮賷 丿賰丕賳 兀亘賷 賵丕賱匕賷 賰賳鬲 兀毓賲賱 賮賷賴 爻鬲賷賳 爻丕毓丞 兀爻亘賵毓賷丕 丕賱賶 兀賳 鬲禺乇噩鬲 賲賳 丕賱賲丿乇爻丞 丕賱孬丕賳賵賷丞 賮賷 賰丕賳賵賳 丕賱孬丕賳賷 賵亘丿兀鬲 兀丿乇爻 賮賷 丕賱噩丕賲毓丞 賮賷 卮賴乇 兀賷賱賵賱 鈥� 鬲賯乇賷亘賸丕 賲賳匕 丕賱賷賵賲 丕賱匕賷 亘丿兀鬲 賮賷賴 丕賱丿乇丕爻丞 賮賷 噩丕賲毓丞 乇賵亘乇鬲 鬲乇賷鬲貙 亘丿兀 賷賳鬲丕亘 兀亘賷 卮毓賵乇 亘丕賱禺賵賮 賲賳 兀賳賳賷 爻兀賲賵鬲貙 乇亘賲丕 賰丕賳鬲 賱賲禺丕賵賮賴 鬲賱賰 毓賱丕賯丞 亘丕賱丨乇亘 丕賱鬲賷 丿禺賱鬲 賮賷賴丕 丕賱賯賵丕鬲 丕賱賲爻賱丨丞 丕賱兀賲乇賷賰賷丞 毓賱賶 丕賱賮賵乇 亘乇毓丕賷丞 丕賱兀賲賲 丕賱賲鬲丨丿丞 賱丿毓賲 噩賴賵丿 噩賷卮 賰賵乇賷丕 丕賱噩賳賵亘賷丞 丕賱匕賷 賱賲 賷賰賳 賲丿乇亘丕 賵賲噩賴夭丕 亘卮賰賱 噩賷丿貙 賵乇亘賲丕 賰丕賳鬲 賱賲禺丕賵賮賴 毓賱丕賯丞 亘丕賱禺爻丕卅乇 丕賱賰亘賷乇丞 丕賱鬲賷 鬲賰亘丿鬲賴丕 賯賵丕鬲賳丕 丕賱賲爻賱丨丞 賳鬲賷噩丞 賰孬丕賮丞 賳賷乇丕賳 丕賱卮賷賵毓賷賷賳 賵禺卮賷鬲賴 賲賳 兀賳 兀爻鬲丿毓賶 丕賱賶 丕賱噩賳丿賷丞 丕賳 胤丕賱 兀賲丿 丕賱賳夭丕毓 賰賲丕 丨丿孬 賮賷 丕賱丨乇亘 丕賱毓丕賱賲賷丞 丕賱孬丕賳賷丞貙 賵兀賯丕鬲賱 賵兀賲賵鬲 賮賷 爻丕丨丞 丕賱賲毓乇賰丞 丕賱賰賵乇賷丞 賰賲丕 賱賯賷 丕亘賳丕 毓賲賷 丌亘賷 賵丿賷賮 賲氐乇毓賴賲丕 賮賷 丕賱丨乇亘 丕賱毓丕賱賲賷丞 丕賱孬丕賳賷丞貙 兀賵 賱毓賱 賲禺丕賵賮賴 賰丕賳鬲 鬲賳亘毓 賲賳 賴賲賵賲賴 丕賱賲丕賱賷丞貙 賮賮賷 丕賱爻賳丞 丕賱賲丕囟賷丞 賮鬲丨 兀賵賱 爻賵亘乇 賲丕乇賰鬲 賮賷 賲賰丕賳 賯乇賷亘 賲賳 丿賰丕賳 亘賷毓 丕賱賱丨賲 丕賱賰賵卮乇 ( 丕賱丨賱丕賱) 丕賱匕賷 鬲賲賱賰賴 兀爻乇鬲賳丕 賵亘丿兀鬲 丕賱賲亘賷毓丕鬲 賮賷 丿賰丕賳 兀亘賷 鬲鬲丿賳賶 亘丕囟胤乇丕丿 賵匕賱賰 賱兀賳 丕賱爻賵亘乇 賲丕乇賰鬲 亘丿兀 賷亘賷毓 丕賱賱丨賵賲 賵丕賱丿賵丕噩賳 亘兀爻毓丕乇 兀丿賳賶 賲賳 丕賱兀爻毓丕乇 丕賱鬲賷 賷亘賷毓賴丕 兀亘賷鈥�.. 氐 5 - 6
爻禺胤 : 賮賷賱賷亘 乇賵孬
鬲乇噩賲丞 禺丕賱丿 丕賱噩亘賷賱賷 (2010)賲
丕賱噩賲賱 (176) 氐
July 24, 2024
賯賴乇賲丕賳 讴鬲丕亘 倬爻乇 賯氐丕亘 蹖賴賵丿蹖 丕爻鬲 讴賴 丿乇 賳蹖賲賴 賯乇賳 亘蹖爻鬲賲 賲蹖鈥屫堌з囏� 丿乇爻蹖 亘禺賵丕賳丿 讴賴 鬲丨賯蹖乇 亘趩賴 賯氐丕亘 亘賵丿賳卮貙讴賲 爻賵丕丿蹖 禺丕賳賵丕丿賴鈥屫ж簇屫蹿┴з� 賳爻賱鈥屬囏ж屫关帝屫з� 亘賱賵睾 賵 蹖賴賵丿蹖 亘賵丿賳卮 乇丕 丿乇 噩丕賲毓賴鈥屰� 亘乇禺賱丕賮 丕丿毓丕 賳跇丕丿倬乇爻鬲丕賳賴 賵 鬲亘毓蹖囟鈥屭� 亘賴 賳賵毓蹖 噩亘乇丕賳 讴賳丿 賵 賳卮丕賳 丿賴丿 讴賴 丕禺賱丕賯鈥屬呚ж臂� 賲丨丕賮馗賴鈥屭┴ж必з嗁団€屰� 丕賲乇蹖讴丕 丿乇 丌爻鬲丕賳賴鈥屰� 賮丕卮蹖爻賲 丿賵乇丕賳 賲丨丕讴賲丕鬲 賲讴鈥屭┴ж必屫屭┴з呝勜� 倬賵趩 丕爻鬲.丿乇 倬丕蹖丕賳 賲鬲賵噩賴 賲蹖鈥屫促堐屬� 讴賴 讴鬲丕亘 禺丕胤乇賴鈥屫й� 丕夭 爻乇亘丕夭 賲爻賳乇 蹖丕 賴賲丕賳 倬爻乇 賯氐丕亘 蹖賴賵丿蹖 丕爻鬲 丕夭 夭賲丕賳蹖鈥屭┵� 禺丕賳賵丕丿賴鈥屫ж� 乇丕 乇賴丕 賲蹖鈥屭┵嗀� 鬲丕 丿乇 丌睾丕夭 噩賳诏 讴購乇賴 亘乇丕蹖 鬲丨氐蹖賱 亘賴 讴丕賱噩 賲丨丕賮馗賴鈥屭┴ж� 賵蹖賳夭亘賵乇诏 丿乇 丕賵賴丕蹖賵 賲蹖鈥屫辟堌�.賲丕乇讴賵爻 丿賵爻鬲 丿丕乇丿 讴賴 賮賯胤 丿乇爻 亘禺賵丕賳丿 賵 丿丕禺賱 賴蹖趩 丨夭亘 賵 诏乇賵賴蹖 賳卮賵丿 賵賱蹖 夭賳丿诏蹖 爻乇賳賵卮鬲蹖 丿蹖诏乇 乇丕 亘乇丕蹖 丕賵 乇賯賲 賲蹖鈥屫操嗀�.禺丕胤乇丕鬲 夭賲丕賳蹖 亘蹖丕賳 賲蹖鈥屫促堌� 讴賴 丕賵 夭蹖乇 鬲夭乇蹖賯 賲賵乇賮蹖賳 蹖讴蹖 倬爻 丕夭 丿蹖诏乇蹖 丕爻鬲 賵賱蹖 賮乇丕蹖賳丿賴丕蹖 毓賯賱丕賳蹖鈥屫ж� 賲鬲賵賯賮 賳賲蹖鈥屫促堌�.賮囟丕蹖 丿丕賳卮诏丕賴卮貙賯賵丕賳蹖賳 賵 賲賯乇乇丕鬲 賵 丿賳蹖丕蹖 毓丕卮賯蹖 丕賵 亘丕 丕賵賱蹖賵丕 賵 賮囟丕蹖 噩賳诏 賵 賳賯丿 爻蹖乇 鬲丕乇蹖禺蹖 丕噩鬲賲丕毓蹖 丕賲乇蹖讴丕 丌賳賯丿乇 禺賵亘 亘蹖丕賳 卮丿賴 讴賴 丕蹖賳 讴鬲丕亘 讴賲鈥屫� 乇丕 賲蹖 卮賵丿 蹖讴 賳賮爻 禺賵丕賳丿.
June 5, 2021
鈥溫敦官� 丕賱丌禺乇賷賳 賯丿 賷丨胤賾賲賰 亘丕賱賯丿乇 丕賱匕賷 鬲爻鬲胤賷毓 賯賵鬲賴賲 兀賳 鬲賮毓賱 匕賱賰. 廿賳 丕賱賳丕爻 丕賱囟毓賮丕亍 賱賷爻賵丕 睾賷乇 賲丐匕賷賳. 賮賯丿 賷賰賵賳 囟毓賮賴賲 賴賵 賯賵鬲賴賲. 賯丿 賷賰賵賳 丕賱卮禺氐 睾賷乇 丕賱賲爻鬲賯乇 禺胤乇賸丕 毓賱賷賰貙 賵賮禺賾丕賸.鈥�
鈥溬傌� 鬲賰賵賳 丕賱賲卮丕毓乇 兀賰亘乇 賲卮賰賱丞 賮賷 丕賱丨賷丕丞. 賷賲賰賳 兀賳 鬲賱毓亘 丕賱賲卮丕毓乇 兀賰孬乇 丕賱禺丿毓 賮馗丕毓丞".
鈥溬娯簇辟懾� 丕賱鬲丕乇賷禺 兀亘賵丕亘賴 賰賱 賷賵賲 賭 丕賱丨乇亘貙 丕賱鬲賮噩賷乇丕鬲貙 丕賱賲匕丕亘丨 丕賱噩賲丕毓賷丞貙 賵兀賳鬲賲 睾丕賮賱賵賳 毓賳 賰賱賾 賴匕丕. 丨爻賳賸丕貙 賱丕 兀馗賳 兀賳賰賲 爻鬲賰賵賳賵賳 睾丕賮賱賷賳 胤賵賷賱賸丕! 賷賲賰賳賰賲 兀賳 鬲賰賵賳賵丕 兀睾亘賷丕亍 賰賲丕 鬲卮丕丐賵賳貙 亘賱 賵賷賲賰賳賰賲 兀賳 鬲馗賴乇賵丕貙 乇睾亘鬲賰賲 丕賱卮丿賷丿丞 賮賷 兀賳 鬲賰賵賳賵丕 兀睾亘賷丕亍貙 賱賰賳 丕賱鬲丕乇賷禺 爻賷賲爻賰賰賲 亘賯亘囟鬲賴 賮賷 丕賱賳賴丕賷丞. 賱兀賳 丕賱鬲丕乇賷禺 賱賷爻 丕賱禺賱賮賷丞 賭 丕賱鬲丕乇賷禺 賴賵 禺卮亘丞 丕賱賲爻乇丨! 賵兀賳鬲賲 毓賱賶 禺卮亘丞 丕賱賲爻乇丨! 賰賲 賴賵 賲賯夭夭 噩賴賱賰賲 丕賱賲乇賵賾毓 亘丕賱賵賯鬲 丕賱匕賷 鬲毓賷卮賵賳 賮賷賴!鈥�.
鈥溬傌� 鬲賰賵賳 丕賱賲卮丕毓乇 兀賰亘乇 賲卮賰賱丞 賮賷 丕賱丨賷丕丞. 賷賲賰賳 兀賳 鬲賱毓亘 丕賱賲卮丕毓乇 兀賰孬乇 丕賱禺丿毓 賮馗丕毓丞".
鈥溬娯簇辟懾� 丕賱鬲丕乇賷禺 兀亘賵丕亘賴 賰賱 賷賵賲 賭 丕賱丨乇亘貙 丕賱鬲賮噩賷乇丕鬲貙 丕賱賲匕丕亘丨 丕賱噩賲丕毓賷丞貙 賵兀賳鬲賲 睾丕賮賱賵賳 毓賳 賰賱賾 賴匕丕. 丨爻賳賸丕貙 賱丕 兀馗賳 兀賳賰賲 爻鬲賰賵賳賵賳 睾丕賮賱賷賳 胤賵賷賱賸丕! 賷賲賰賳賰賲 兀賳 鬲賰賵賳賵丕 兀睾亘賷丕亍 賰賲丕 鬲卮丕丐賵賳貙 亘賱 賵賷賲賰賳賰賲 兀賳 鬲馗賴乇賵丕貙 乇睾亘鬲賰賲 丕賱卮丿賷丿丞 賮賷 兀賳 鬲賰賵賳賵丕 兀睾亘賷丕亍貙 賱賰賳 丕賱鬲丕乇賷禺 爻賷賲爻賰賰賲 亘賯亘囟鬲賴 賮賷 丕賱賳賴丕賷丞. 賱兀賳 丕賱鬲丕乇賷禺 賱賷爻 丕賱禺賱賮賷丞 賭 丕賱鬲丕乇賷禺 賴賵 禺卮亘丞 丕賱賲爻乇丨! 賵兀賳鬲賲 毓賱賶 禺卮亘丞 丕賱賲爻乇丨! 賰賲 賴賵 賲賯夭夭 噩賴賱賰賲 丕賱賲乇賵賾毓 亘丕賱賵賯鬲 丕賱匕賷 鬲毓賷卮賵賳 賮賷賴!鈥�.
April 7, 2017
3.5 stars
Even when Philip Roth is not at his best, he's still plenty readable. Indignation is
definitely not Roth bringing his A-game chops but, still, quite riveting trying to fathom what's making 1951 college student Marcus Messner so damn indignant. The son of a kosher butcher, Marcus is a Jewish (by birth only) non-believer whose sole raison d'etre seems to be to do well at college at Wineburg, Ohio, so that he can avoid bring drafted into the Korean War as anything less than a lieutenant (and more probably, to escape having to work alongside his overbearing father in his failing Newark New Jersey butcher's business). Everyone is distracting Marcus from straight-A's: from fraternity members (of both the Jewish frat and non-denominational frat of Wineburg College) trying to get him to rush their frats, dormitory bunkmates that drive him crazy with their insolent behavior, a mystery "blow job queen" of a female classmate Olivia trying to inveigle herself into his life. Even the Dean of Students keeps calling Marcus to his office to sort out what's getting his goat.
As I've found in the past, when Roth reins in the length of his novels, the quality of his prose generally seems to jump upward. That's pretty much the case here. Solid,breezy storytelling, just enough heft to keep you thinking about what you've just read without bashing your skull in with needless exposition. This is not the best Roth I've read, but I was still plenty satisfied.
Even when Philip Roth is not at his best, he's still plenty readable. Indignation is
definitely not Roth bringing his A-game chops but, still, quite riveting trying to fathom what's making 1951 college student Marcus Messner so damn indignant. The son of a kosher butcher, Marcus is a Jewish (by birth only) non-believer whose sole raison d'etre seems to be to do well at college at Wineburg, Ohio, so that he can avoid bring drafted into the Korean War as anything less than a lieutenant (and more probably, to escape having to work alongside his overbearing father in his failing Newark New Jersey butcher's business). Everyone is distracting Marcus from straight-A's: from fraternity members (of both the Jewish frat and non-denominational frat of Wineburg College) trying to get him to rush their frats, dormitory bunkmates that drive him crazy with their insolent behavior, a mystery "blow job queen" of a female classmate Olivia trying to inveigle herself into his life. Even the Dean of Students keeps calling Marcus to his office to sort out what's getting his goat.
As I've found in the past, when Roth reins in the length of his novels, the quality of his prose generally seems to jump upward. That's pretty much the case here. Solid,breezy storytelling, just enough heft to keep you thinking about what you've just read without bashing your skull in with needless exposition. This is not the best Roth I've read, but I was still plenty satisfied.
May 27, 2018
芦Non scherzare, Markie. Non scherzare su tuo padre. Questa cosa ha tutte le caratteristiche di una tragedia.禄
Nella serie degli ultimi libri 鈥� la fase tarda di Roth 鈥� che ha portato all鈥檃ttuale silenzio, questo 猫 uno di quelli buoni. Probabilmente non all鈥檃ltezza del periodo d鈥檕ro ma pur sempre una lettura coinvolgente, dal ritmo incalzante e con alcuni momenti straordinari (su tutti, il primo colloquio con il decano della sezione maschile e le descrizioni del lavoro nella macelleria kosher del padre).
Seriet脿, rigore, responsabilit脿, veemenza, e quindi indignazione segnano Marcus Messner, un bravo ragazzo ebreo di Newark (芦Ecco cosa imparavo da mio padre e cosa mi piaceva imparare da lui: si fa quel che va fatto禄), che passa dal piccolo college locale ad uno pi霉 grande, nel cuore del mondo gentile, a Winesburg nell鈥橭hio (chiaro omaggio a Sherwood Anderson), per liberarsi dalla sorveglianza dell'amato padre, diventato insopportabilmente ossessivo negli anni della guerra di Corea, che incombe con il suo orrore.
L'ossessione del padre rimanda anche all'ossessione della vecchiaia di Philip Roth per l鈥檕ssessione americana anni Cinquanta.
Il titolo viene dall鈥檌nno cinese, imparato da bambino, quando i ragazzi imparavano gli inni delle forze armate e anche quelli degli alleati nella seconda guerra mondiale, come appunto i cinesi, diventati ora i nemici in Corea. Inno che Marcus canta dentro di s茅 come una barriera durante le funzioni religiose (alle quali 猫 costretto ad assistere e che rifiuta totalmente, da 芦fervente ateo禄 seguace di Bertrand Russell) e dal quale estrae in particolare la parola indignazione: 芦la pi霉 bella parola della nostra lingua禄.
Abbastanza presto, senza accenni precedenti, si assiste alla .
E alla fine
Sono proprio la seriet脿 e l'intensit脿 e la responsabilit脿 che portano inevitabilmente alla tragedia.
E - al di l脿 dei brani da antologia citati prima - segno della grandezza di Roth direi che rimane la capacit脿 di farci provare contemporaneamente ilarit脿 e ansia; e di farci partecipi - di nuovo, nello stesso tempo - sia della ricerca di rigore di Marcus sia dell'esplosione del suo desiderio, dello sfrenamento della sessualit脿 e dell'individualit脿.
Nella serie degli ultimi libri 鈥� la fase tarda di Roth 鈥� che ha portato all鈥檃ttuale silenzio, questo 猫 uno di quelli buoni. Probabilmente non all鈥檃ltezza del periodo d鈥檕ro ma pur sempre una lettura coinvolgente, dal ritmo incalzante e con alcuni momenti straordinari (su tutti, il primo colloquio con il decano della sezione maschile e le descrizioni del lavoro nella macelleria kosher del padre).
Seriet脿, rigore, responsabilit脿, veemenza, e quindi indignazione segnano Marcus Messner, un bravo ragazzo ebreo di Newark (芦Ecco cosa imparavo da mio padre e cosa mi piaceva imparare da lui: si fa quel che va fatto禄), che passa dal piccolo college locale ad uno pi霉 grande, nel cuore del mondo gentile, a Winesburg nell鈥橭hio (chiaro omaggio a Sherwood Anderson), per liberarsi dalla sorveglianza dell'amato padre, diventato insopportabilmente ossessivo negli anni della guerra di Corea, che incombe con il suo orrore.
L'ossessione del padre rimanda anche all'ossessione della vecchiaia di Philip Roth per l鈥檕ssessione americana anni Cinquanta.
Il titolo viene dall鈥檌nno cinese, imparato da bambino, quando i ragazzi imparavano gli inni delle forze armate e anche quelli degli alleati nella seconda guerra mondiale, come appunto i cinesi, diventati ora i nemici in Corea. Inno che Marcus canta dentro di s茅 come una barriera durante le funzioni religiose (alle quali 猫 costretto ad assistere e che rifiuta totalmente, da 芦fervente ateo禄 seguace di Bertrand Russell) e dal quale estrae in particolare la parola indignazione: 芦la pi霉 bella parola della nostra lingua禄.
Abbastanza presto, senza accenni precedenti, si assiste alla .
E alla fine
Sono proprio la seriet脿 e l'intensit脿 e la responsabilit脿 che portano inevitabilmente alla tragedia.
E - al di l脿 dei brani da antologia citati prima - segno della grandezza di Roth direi che rimane la capacit脿 di farci provare contemporaneamente ilarit脿 e ansia; e di farci partecipi - di nuovo, nello stesso tempo - sia della ricerca di rigore di Marcus sia dell'esplosione del suo desiderio, dello sfrenamento della sessualit脿 e dell'individualit脿.
January 31, 2021
Splendido, splendido, splendido. Con una prosa che si legge tutta d'un fianto e una maestria narrativa che rammenta la prova de "La macchia umana", attraverso le vicissitudini di Marcus Messner, il protagonista, Roth sa elevare un intenso grido di libert脿 e porre l'accento sulla costante guerra e ribellione che, prima o poi, cos矛 come travolge le istituzioni marcatamente repressive, non pu貌 non rjversar la propria furia anche sulle moralistiche s ipocrite convenzioni sociali. Qualunque ne sia il prezzo. Stupendo.
March 19, 2016
It wouldn't be a Philip Roth book without some raining semen.
This time the splooj comes not from a chronic masturbator, but a lil goodie two-shoes named Markie Boy. Him, and a couple of frat dooshbegs that raid the girls' dorms at a small college in a display of human atrocity similar to the Apache ambush in Blood Meridian. Marcus is like the Anti-Portnoy, repressed instead of indulgent. Both of them come from strict Jewish households and both have parents that have inculcated them with extreme neuroses. DOESN'T IT SOUND FUN, KIDDIES?!
God knows why Roth wrote this book. He wrote a page a day (how many words is a page?) for about sixty years and then he quit. What an art铆ste. I vascillated between hating this book, liking it, thinking the writing was good, thinking the writing sucked. Roth writing as Marky boy wasn't quite believable (I mean who calls their own cock a penis? What a tool.) Then it ended and I still don't quite know what to make of it. Can't tell if it was just Roth going through the motions or if it just flat out sucked. Roth is a good enough technical writer in any event to make the book a quick read.
I bet if you turned this in for a college project you'd get an A-.
This time the splooj comes not from a chronic masturbator, but a lil goodie two-shoes named Markie Boy. Him, and a couple of frat dooshbegs that raid the girls' dorms at a small college in a display of human atrocity similar to the Apache ambush in Blood Meridian. Marcus is like the Anti-Portnoy, repressed instead of indulgent. Both of them come from strict Jewish households and both have parents that have inculcated them with extreme neuroses. DOESN'T IT SOUND FUN, KIDDIES?!
God knows why Roth wrote this book. He wrote a page a day (how many words is a page?) for about sixty years and then he quit. What an art铆ste. I vascillated between hating this book, liking it, thinking the writing was good, thinking the writing sucked. Roth writing as Marky boy wasn't quite believable (I mean who calls their own cock a penis? What a tool.) Then it ended and I still don't quite know what to make of it. Can't tell if it was just Roth going through the motions or if it just flat out sucked. Roth is a good enough technical writer in any event to make the book a quick read.
I bet if you turned this in for a college project you'd get an A-.
January 14, 2018
Fa veramente star male pensare al " terribile, incomprensibile modo in cui le scelte pi霉 accidentali, pi霉 banali, addirittura pi霉 comiche, producono gli esiti pi霉 sproporzionati".
Questo romanzo 猫 un invito a vivere fuori dalle convenzioni e dalle scelte bigotte. Un invito a vivere la vita nella sua pienezza, perch猫 la vita 猫 un attimo.
Ma com'猫 che in giovent霉 si 猫 cos矛 intransigenti tanto da non capire che le cose non sono o nere o bianche ma esistono infiniti toni di grigi?
Perch猫 si sposano i principi a volte in maniera miope e questo impedisce di essere felici?
Una lettura amara amara.
Questo romanzo 猫 un invito a vivere fuori dalle convenzioni e dalle scelte bigotte. Un invito a vivere la vita nella sua pienezza, perch猫 la vita 猫 un attimo.
Ma com'猫 che in giovent霉 si 猫 cos矛 intransigenti tanto da non capire che le cose non sono o nere o bianche ma esistono infiniti toni di grigi?
Perch猫 si sposano i principi a volte in maniera miope e questo impedisce di essere felici?
Una lettura amara amara.
August 26, 2016
A diverting but hollow novel about Marcus, a butcher鈥檚 son encountering various problems in his first term at college. The strongest moments in the book are the touching father/son scenes in the first section, followed closely by the comedic bouts of hauteur exchanged between Marcus and the Dean of the college in the latter part. But please excuse, humble reader, the clanging Kosher butcher/Korean war metaphor, the unconvincing 鈥渄isturbed鈥� love interest, the shamblingly overwritten and ludicrous climax, and the awkward lapses in narrative POV as the narrator becomes Roth chatting to himself. Also excuse the pages of blatant dialogue padding, the parodic Jewish mother, Marcus鈥檚 perpetual dullness, and those many scenes stating the bleeding obvious. And 鈥淧art Two鈥� (eight pages long) contains some of worst writing I have read since Sorrentino did it on purpose. I am indignant.
November 20, 2019
"I did that because I like you so much."
鈥� Or, if you will, Fellatial Fiction, Fine and Furious
(One of Roth's so-called "short, devastating, sex-and-mortality novels鈥�)
Marcus Messner, a Jewish kid from Newark, son of a kosher butcher man, says he used to be "the nicest boy in the world," until he goes to Winesburg College (a fictional nod to Sherwood Anderson's short story collection), a small Lutheran college in Ohio (maybe south Ohio in hillbilly country). He has fled his overprotective father and intends to focus on his studies. His goals at 19 in 1951 are to be valedictorian and "to have intercourse before I died."
He becomes infatuated with Olivia Hutton, a gorgeous Christian girl, daughter of a doctor. He asks her on a date and is surprised she accepts. After a nice dinner, he is surprised when she fellates him. Roth, at 74, hit the nail on the head (pardon the pun) of college males' duplicity between what they want from co-eds and when they get it. The novel covers pages and pages on Marcus' "mind-blowing" memories of the fellatio. He wonders if Olivia's actions were caused by "abnormality," or her parents' divorce. Concluding that "I, who should have been the most satisfied man in all of Winesburg, was instead the most bewildered. How could such bliss befallen me be such a burden?" Olivia, who he finds out was a survivor of a suicide attempt, tells Marcus some time later that, "I did that because I like you so much."
After suffering an illness for which he must be hospitalized, Marcus decides to take a stand against being forced to attend chapel with Christian hymns and sermons, not because he was Jewish but because he was an "ardent atheist." He thinks back to grade school on a song he and his classmates were taught as the national anthem of China, a WWII ally but an enemy during the ongoing Korean War: "Arise, ye who refuse to be bondslaves!... Indignation fills the hearts of all of our countrymen. Arise! Arise! Arise!"
He risks being expelled from school which will mean a certain conscription into service in the Korean War. Disclosing any more would risk spoiling the plot.
An intriguing, thoughtful short novel.
鈥� Or, if you will, Fellatial Fiction, Fine and Furious
(One of Roth's so-called "short, devastating, sex-and-mortality novels鈥�)
Marcus Messner, a Jewish kid from Newark, son of a kosher butcher man, says he used to be "the nicest boy in the world," until he goes to Winesburg College (a fictional nod to Sherwood Anderson's short story collection), a small Lutheran college in Ohio (maybe south Ohio in hillbilly country). He has fled his overprotective father and intends to focus on his studies. His goals at 19 in 1951 are to be valedictorian and "to have intercourse before I died."
He becomes infatuated with Olivia Hutton, a gorgeous Christian girl, daughter of a doctor. He asks her on a date and is surprised she accepts. After a nice dinner, he is surprised when she fellates him. Roth, at 74, hit the nail on the head (pardon the pun) of college males' duplicity between what they want from co-eds and when they get it. The novel covers pages and pages on Marcus' "mind-blowing" memories of the fellatio. He wonders if Olivia's actions were caused by "abnormality," or her parents' divorce. Concluding that "I, who should have been the most satisfied man in all of Winesburg, was instead the most bewildered. How could such bliss befallen me be such a burden?" Olivia, who he finds out was a survivor of a suicide attempt, tells Marcus some time later that, "I did that because I like you so much."
After suffering an illness for which he must be hospitalized, Marcus decides to take a stand against being forced to attend chapel with Christian hymns and sermons, not because he was Jewish but because he was an "ardent atheist." He thinks back to grade school on a song he and his classmates were taught as the national anthem of China, a WWII ally but an enemy during the ongoing Korean War: "Arise, ye who refuse to be bondslaves!... Indignation fills the hearts of all of our countrymen. Arise! Arise! Arise!"
He risks being expelled from school which will mean a certain conscription into service in the Korean War. Disclosing any more would risk spoiling the plot.
An intriguing, thoughtful short novel.
January 26, 2023
鈥淚s that what eternity is for, to muck over a lifetime's minutiae? Who could have imagined that one would have forever to remember each moment of life down to its tiniest component?鈥� ~Philip Roth, Indignation
You can be a good person, a respectful citizen, an obedient child, a straight-A student, a faithful lover, and still sometimes your life goes to complete shit. 19 year old Marcus Messner's short but eventful odyssey, layed out in exquisite detail, does just that.
Written in first person, I couldn't help but hear Marcus in my head voiced by a young Jerry Lewis or a pre-pedo Woody Allen. Some of it (a lot of it) is hysterically funny. Is it a tragic comedy, or a comic tragedy? I'm undecided. What I'm sure of is that Philip Roth is a national treasure, and that Indignation will, from this day forward, be listed among my all-time favorite novels.
鈥淗e had learned the worst lesson that life can teach 鈥� that it makes no sense.鈥� ~Philip Roth, American Pastoral
You can be a good person, a respectful citizen, an obedient child, a straight-A student, a faithful lover, and still sometimes your life goes to complete shit. 19 year old Marcus Messner's short but eventful odyssey, layed out in exquisite detail, does just that.
Written in first person, I couldn't help but hear Marcus in my head voiced by a young Jerry Lewis or a pre-pedo Woody Allen. Some of it (a lot of it) is hysterically funny. Is it a tragic comedy, or a comic tragedy? I'm undecided. What I'm sure of is that Philip Roth is a national treasure, and that Indignation will, from this day forward, be listed among my all-time favorite novels.
鈥淗e had learned the worst lesson that life can teach 鈥� that it makes no sense.鈥� ~Philip Roth, American Pastoral
June 2, 2013
小谢械写 泻邪褌芯 芯褋褌邪薪邪褏 褌芯谢泻芯胁邪 薪械锌褉懈褟褌薪芯 懈蟹褍屑械薪邪 芯褌 ''袚褗褉写邪褌邪'', 褋械 褔褍写褟 泻邪泻 懈蟹芯斜褖芯 褏胁邪薪邪褏 写褉褍谐 褉芯屑邪薪 薪邪 肖懈谢懈锌 袪芯褌 写芯斜褉芯胁芯谢薪芯. 袟邪 屑芯械 褖邪褋褌懈械 褌邪蟹懈 褋谢褍褔邪泄薪芯褋褌 褋械 芯泻邪蟹邪 褖邪褋褌谢懈胁邪.
''袙褗蟹屑褍褖械薪懈械'' 屑械 薪邪泻邪褉邪 写邪 褔械褌邪 锌褉懈锌褉褟薪芯 懈 谢邪泻芯屑芯. 袠 屑懈 锌褉懈锌芯屑薪懈 ''袣褗写械 褋懈, 袗谢褟褋泻邪'' 锌芯 屑薪芯谐芯 褋褌褉邪薪械薪 薪邪褔懈薪, 锌芯泻邪蟹胁邪泄泻懈 屑薪芯谐芯 褟褋薪芯 褉邪蟹谢懈泻邪褌邪 屑械卸写褍 锌懈褋邪褌械谢褟 懈 袩懈褋邪褌械谢褟. 袠 写胁械褌械 懈褋褌芯褉懈懈 褉邪蟹谐谢械卸写邪褌 锌褗褉胁邪褌邪 泻芯谢械卸邪薪褋泻邪 谐芯写懈薪邪 薪邪 褋褉邪胁薪懈褌械谢薪芯 蟹邪褌胁芯褉械薪芯 懈 写芯斜褉械 胁褗蟹锌懈褌邪薪芯 屑芯屑褔械, 泻芯械褌芯 械 械写懈薪褋褌胁械薪芯 写械褌械 胁 褋械屑械泄褋褌胁芯 芯褌 褋褉械写薪邪褌邪 泻谢邪褋邪. 袠 写胁邪屑邪褌邪 褌邪泻邪 懈 薪械 褋械 胁锌懈褋胁邪褌 写芯斜褉械 胁 薪芯胁邪褌邪 褋褉械写邪 懈谢懈 薪械 懈褋泻邪褌 写邪 谐芯 薪邪锌褉邪胁褟褌. 袠 写胁邪屑邪褌邪 褋械 胁谢褞斜胁邪褌 胁 褋褌褉邪薪薪懈 芯褋芯斜薪褟褔泻懈 褋 泻芯褎褌懈 褋械屑械泄褋褌胁邪 懈 械屑芯褑懈芯薪邪谢薪懈 锌褉芯斜谢械屑懈. 肖懈谢懈锌 袪芯褌 芯斜邪褔械 褍屑械械 写邪 锌褉邪胁懈 芯薪芯胁邪, 薪邪 泻芯械褌芯 袛卸芯薪 袚褉懈泄薪 胁褋械 芯褖械 薪械 褋械 械 薪邪褍褔懈谢 - 写邪 褉邪蟹胁懈胁邪 屑薪芯谐芯锌谢邪褋褌芯胁懈 谐械褉芯懈. 袙褟褉薪芯 械, 褔械 褌邪褉谐械褌-褔懈褌邪褌械谢懈褌械 薪邪 写胁邪屑邪褌邪 械 褋褗胁褋械屑 褉邪蟹谢懈褔薪邪, 薪芯 懈 斜械蟹 褌芯胁邪 薪械 褋屑褟褌邪屑 写邪 锌褉邪胁褟 褋褉邪胁薪械薪懈械 屑械卸写褍 写胁邪褌邪 褉芯屑邪薪邪.
袦邪褉泻褗褋, 谐谢邪胁薪懈褟褌 锌械褉褋芯薪邪卸 胁 褉芯屑邪薪邪 薪邪 袪芯褌, 械 19-谐芯写懈褕械薪 械胁褉械懈薪, 褋懈谢薪芯 锌芯褌懈褋泻邪薪 芯褌 斜邪褖邪 褋懈, 泻芯泄褌芯 锌褗泻 蟹邪锌芯褔胁邪 写邪 褉邪蟹胁懈胁邪 锌邪褉邪薪芯褟 胁 褌懈泄薪械泄写卸褗褉褋泻懈褌械 谐芯写懈薪懈 薪邪 褋懈薪邪 褋懈, 褋胁褗褉蟹邪薪邪 芯褋薪芯胁薪芯 褋 斜褗写械褖械褌芯 屑褍. 袛芯褉懈 褋谢械写 泻邪褌芯 袦邪褉泻褗褋 蟹邪屑懈薪邪胁邪 写邪 褍褔懈 胁 泻芯谢械卸, 褌芯泄 锌褉芯写褗谢卸邪胁邪 写邪 褔褍胁褋褌胁邪 屑芯褖薪邪褌邪 谢邪锌邪 薪邪 斜邪褖邪 褋懈 胁褗褉褏褍 褋胁芯械褌芯 褉邪屑芯. 袟邪褌芯胁邪 褉械褕邪胁邪 写邪 褋械 锌褉械屑械褋褌懈 胁 锌芯-写邪谢械褔械薪 泻芯谢械卸. 袣芯械褌芯 锌邪泻 薪械 褋械 芯泻邪蟹胁邪 写芯褋褌邪褌褗褔薪芯 (懈谢懈 锌褗泻 薪械芯斜褏芯写懈屑芯), 蟹邪褖芯褌芯 薪懈褖芯 薪械 褋械 褉械褕邪胁邪 褌芯谢泻芯胁邪 谢械褋薪芯 褋邪屑芯 褋 械写薪芯 斜褟谐褋褌胁芯. 小褌褉邪褏芯胁械褌械 懈 泻芯屑锌谢械泻褋懈褌械 褋邪 褋懈 褋褌褉邪褏芯胁械 懈 泻芯屑锌谢械泻褋懈, 泻褗写械褌芯 懈 写邪 懈写械褕.
袠褋褌芯褉懈褟褌邪 械 褉邪蟹泻邪蟹邪薪邪 锌褉械蟹 芯褔懈褌械 薪邪 褋懈薪邪 懈 薪械谐芯胁邪褌邪 谐谢械写薪邪 褌芯褔泻邪 械 褟褋薪邪, 邪 锌芯蟹懈褑懈褟褌邪 屑褍 锌芯 褉邪蟹谢懈褔薪懈 胁褗锌褉芯褋懈 械 写芯斜褉械 芯斜芯褋薪芯胁邪薪邪. 袣邪褌芯 褑褟谢芯 袦邪褉泻褗褋 械 锌械褉褎械泻褌薪芯 懈蟹锌谢械褌械薪 谐械褉芯泄. 袧懈褖芯 褔褍写薪芯 薪褟泻褗写械 懈蟹 斜褞褉芯褌芯 薪邪 袪芯褌 写邪 懈屑邪 芯谐褉芯屑薪邪 锌邪锌泻邪-写芯褋懈械 蟹邪 卸懈胁芯褌邪 薪邪 谐械褉芯褟 屑褍, 胁 泻芯褟褌芯 械 芯锌懈褋邪薪邪 胁褋褟泻邪 褋械泻褍薪写邪 卸懈胁芯褌, 胁褋械泻懈 写械褌邪泄谢 芯褌 褋褗褖械褋褌胁褍胁邪薪械褌芯 屑褍, 褌邪泻邪 褔械 胁 褉芯屑邪薪邪 写邪 薪褟屑邪 锌褉邪蟹薪邪 写褍锌泻邪. 袠 褌邪泻邪 薪邪懈褋褌懈薪邪 薪褟屑邪.
"袙褗蟹屑褍褖械薪懈械'' e 懈蟹泻谢褞褔懈褌械谢薪芯 锌褉械屑械褉械薪 懈 懈薪褌械谢懈谐械薪褌械薪 褉芯屑邪薪, 卸懈胁 懈 锌谢褗褌械薪.
小谢械写 薪械谐芯 懈蟹锌懈褌胁邪屑 卸械谢邪薪懈械 蟹邪 褔械褌械薪械 薪邪 袩芯谢 袨褋褌褗褉, 袛卸芯薪 肖邪褍谢蟹 懈谢懈 锌褗泻 芯褌薪芯胁芯 肖懈谢懈锌 袪芯褌.
袞械谢邪薪懈械 蟹邪 褔械褌械薪械 懈蟹芯斜褖芯.
''袙褗蟹屑褍褖械薪懈械'' 屑械 薪邪泻邪褉邪 写邪 褔械褌邪 锌褉懈锌褉褟薪芯 懈 谢邪泻芯屑芯. 袠 屑懈 锌褉懈锌芯屑薪懈 ''袣褗写械 褋懈, 袗谢褟褋泻邪'' 锌芯 屑薪芯谐芯 褋褌褉邪薪械薪 薪邪褔懈薪, 锌芯泻邪蟹胁邪泄泻懈 屑薪芯谐芯 褟褋薪芯 褉邪蟹谢懈泻邪褌邪 屑械卸写褍 锌懈褋邪褌械谢褟 懈 袩懈褋邪褌械谢褟. 袠 写胁械褌械 懈褋褌芯褉懈懈 褉邪蟹谐谢械卸写邪褌 锌褗褉胁邪褌邪 泻芯谢械卸邪薪褋泻邪 谐芯写懈薪邪 薪邪 褋褉邪胁薪懈褌械谢薪芯 蟹邪褌胁芯褉械薪芯 懈 写芯斜褉械 胁褗蟹锌懈褌邪薪芯 屑芯屑褔械, 泻芯械褌芯 械 械写懈薪褋褌胁械薪芯 写械褌械 胁 褋械屑械泄褋褌胁芯 芯褌 褋褉械写薪邪褌邪 泻谢邪褋邪. 袠 写胁邪屑邪褌邪 褌邪泻邪 懈 薪械 褋械 胁锌懈褋胁邪褌 写芯斜褉械 胁 薪芯胁邪褌邪 褋褉械写邪 懈谢懈 薪械 懈褋泻邪褌 写邪 谐芯 薪邪锌褉邪胁褟褌. 袠 写胁邪屑邪褌邪 褋械 胁谢褞斜胁邪褌 胁 褋褌褉邪薪薪懈 芯褋芯斜薪褟褔泻懈 褋 泻芯褎褌懈 褋械屑械泄褋褌胁邪 懈 械屑芯褑懈芯薪邪谢薪懈 锌褉芯斜谢械屑懈. 肖懈谢懈锌 袪芯褌 芯斜邪褔械 褍屑械械 写邪 锌褉邪胁懈 芯薪芯胁邪, 薪邪 泻芯械褌芯 袛卸芯薪 袚褉懈泄薪 胁褋械 芯褖械 薪械 褋械 械 薪邪褍褔懈谢 - 写邪 褉邪蟹胁懈胁邪 屑薪芯谐芯锌谢邪褋褌芯胁懈 谐械褉芯懈. 袙褟褉薪芯 械, 褔械 褌邪褉谐械褌-褔懈褌邪褌械谢懈褌械 薪邪 写胁邪屑邪褌邪 械 褋褗胁褋械屑 褉邪蟹谢懈褔薪邪, 薪芯 懈 斜械蟹 褌芯胁邪 薪械 褋屑褟褌邪屑 写邪 锌褉邪胁褟 褋褉邪胁薪械薪懈械 屑械卸写褍 写胁邪褌邪 褉芯屑邪薪邪.
袦邪褉泻褗褋, 谐谢邪胁薪懈褟褌 锌械褉褋芯薪邪卸 胁 褉芯屑邪薪邪 薪邪 袪芯褌, 械 19-谐芯写懈褕械薪 械胁褉械懈薪, 褋懈谢薪芯 锌芯褌懈褋泻邪薪 芯褌 斜邪褖邪 褋懈, 泻芯泄褌芯 锌褗泻 蟹邪锌芯褔胁邪 写邪 褉邪蟹胁懈胁邪 锌邪褉邪薪芯褟 胁 褌懈泄薪械泄写卸褗褉褋泻懈褌械 谐芯写懈薪懈 薪邪 褋懈薪邪 褋懈, 褋胁褗褉蟹邪薪邪 芯褋薪芯胁薪芯 褋 斜褗写械褖械褌芯 屑褍. 袛芯褉懈 褋谢械写 泻邪褌芯 袦邪褉泻褗褋 蟹邪屑懈薪邪胁邪 写邪 褍褔懈 胁 泻芯谢械卸, 褌芯泄 锌褉芯写褗谢卸邪胁邪 写邪 褔褍胁褋褌胁邪 屑芯褖薪邪褌邪 谢邪锌邪 薪邪 斜邪褖邪 褋懈 胁褗褉褏褍 褋胁芯械褌芯 褉邪屑芯. 袟邪褌芯胁邪 褉械褕邪胁邪 写邪 褋械 锌褉械屑械褋褌懈 胁 锌芯-写邪谢械褔械薪 泻芯谢械卸. 袣芯械褌芯 锌邪泻 薪械 褋械 芯泻邪蟹胁邪 写芯褋褌邪褌褗褔薪芯 (懈谢懈 锌褗泻 薪械芯斜褏芯写懈屑芯), 蟹邪褖芯褌芯 薪懈褖芯 薪械 褋械 褉械褕邪胁邪 褌芯谢泻芯胁邪 谢械褋薪芯 褋邪屑芯 褋 械写薪芯 斜褟谐褋褌胁芯. 小褌褉邪褏芯胁械褌械 懈 泻芯屑锌谢械泻褋懈褌械 褋邪 褋懈 褋褌褉邪褏芯胁械 懈 泻芯屑锌谢械泻褋懈, 泻褗写械褌芯 懈 写邪 懈写械褕.
袠褋褌芯褉懈褟褌邪 械 褉邪蟹泻邪蟹邪薪邪 锌褉械蟹 芯褔懈褌械 薪邪 褋懈薪邪 懈 薪械谐芯胁邪褌邪 谐谢械写薪邪 褌芯褔泻邪 械 褟褋薪邪, 邪 锌芯蟹懈褑懈褟褌邪 屑褍 锌芯 褉邪蟹谢懈褔薪懈 胁褗锌褉芯褋懈 械 写芯斜褉械 芯斜芯褋薪芯胁邪薪邪. 袣邪褌芯 褑褟谢芯 袦邪褉泻褗褋 械 锌械褉褎械泻褌薪芯 懈蟹锌谢械褌械薪 谐械褉芯泄. 袧懈褖芯 褔褍写薪芯 薪褟泻褗写械 懈蟹 斜褞褉芯褌芯 薪邪 袪芯褌 写邪 懈屑邪 芯谐褉芯屑薪邪 锌邪锌泻邪-写芯褋懈械 蟹邪 卸懈胁芯褌邪 薪邪 谐械褉芯褟 屑褍, 胁 泻芯褟褌芯 械 芯锌懈褋邪薪邪 胁褋褟泻邪 褋械泻褍薪写邪 卸懈胁芯褌, 胁褋械泻懈 写械褌邪泄谢 芯褌 褋褗褖械褋褌胁褍胁邪薪械褌芯 屑褍, 褌邪泻邪 褔械 胁 褉芯屑邪薪邪 写邪 薪褟屑邪 锌褉邪蟹薪邪 写褍锌泻邪. 袠 褌邪泻邪 薪邪懈褋褌懈薪邪 薪褟屑邪.
"袙褗蟹屑褍褖械薪懈械'' e 懈蟹泻谢褞褔懈褌械谢薪芯 锌褉械屑械褉械薪 懈 懈薪褌械谢懈谐械薪褌械薪 褉芯屑邪薪, 卸懈胁 懈 锌谢褗褌械薪.
小谢械写 薪械谐芯 懈蟹锌懈褌胁邪屑 卸械谢邪薪懈械 蟹邪 褔械褌械薪械 薪邪 袩芯谢 袨褋褌褗褉, 袛卸芯薪 肖邪褍谢蟹 懈谢懈 锌褗泻 芯褌薪芯胁芯 肖懈谢懈锌 袪芯褌.
袞械谢邪薪懈械 蟹邪 褔械褌械薪械 懈蟹芯斜褖芯.
August 7, 2019
A brilliantly written story, very funny in parts although ultimately it's a pretty grim tale. Marcus Messneer goes off to an American provincial college to escape his domineering father and to plot a course to avoid being drafted to fight on the front line via Korean War draft. Whilst at college he falls in love for the first time and has bitter rows with just about everyone he comes into contact with. He 's doomed from the start and it's no surprise when Marcus meets and untimely end. What saves this book is the fantastic writing of Roth. A gem of a book.
June 5, 2018
芦诏賮鬲賲: 芦賳賲蹖鈥屫з嗁� 趩胤賵乇 乇丕丨鬲 亘丕卮賲.禄 賲賳 賴賲蹖卮賴 乇賵蹖 禺賵丿賲 讴丕乇 賲蹖鈥屭┴必�. 賴賲蹖卮賴 丿賳亘丕賱 賴丿賮蹖 亘賵丿賲. 賵 丕讴賳賵賳 賴丿賮 丕賵賱蹖賵蹖丕 賴丕鬲賳 亘賵丿.禄
卮賵乇卮 亘乇丕蹖 丕爻鬲賯賱丕賱貙 賵 賲賯丕亘賱賴 亘丕 爻賳鬲鈥屬囏й� 賲匕賴亘蹖 賵 賲賯乇乇丕鬲 禺卮讴 丿丕賳卮诏丕賴蹖. 丕賳噩賲賳 卮丕毓乇丕賳 賲乇丿賴鈥屰� 丿賵.
卮賵乇卮 亘乇丕蹖 丕爻鬲賯賱丕賱貙 賵 賲賯丕亘賱賴 亘丕 爻賳鬲鈥屬囏й� 賲匕賴亘蹖 賵 賲賯乇乇丕鬲 禺卮讴 丿丕賳卮诏丕賴蹖. 丕賳噩賲賳 卮丕毓乇丕賳 賲乇丿賴鈥屰� 丿賵.
November 23, 2016
Great book, it's one of those books that leaves you wondering of all the "what if's". Things could have turned out different.
September 21, 2024
丕賱賰孬賷乇 賲賳 丕賱兀卮賷丕亍 鬲丐丿賷 丕賱賶 睾囟亘 丕賱廿賳爻丕賳 賮賷 賴匕賴 丕賱丨賷丕丞貙 賱賰賳 丕賱爻禺胤 卮賷亍 賲禺鬲賱賮貙 卮賷亍 賱丕 賷丨鬲賵賷 毓賱賶 丕賱睾囟亘貙 亘賱 賴賵 賲噩賲賵毓丞 鬲乇丕賰賲丕鬲 賮噩丞 鬲鬲夭丕賷丿 賷賵賲丕賸 亘毓丿 賷賵賲 貙 賷賲賰賳 兀賳 賷賯鬲賱賰 賴匕丕 兀賵 兀賳 賷噩毓賱 賲賳賰 孬丕卅乇丕賸 賲鬲賲乇丿丕賸 賳夭賯丕賸 廿賱賶 兀亘毓丿 丨丿貙 丕賱爻禺胤 賷兀賰賱 丕賱廿賳爻丕賳貙 毓賰爻 丕賱睾囟亘 丕賱匕賷 賷噩毓賱賰 鬲賮賰乇 賮賷賲丕 亘毓丿 賮賷 兀賮毓丕賱賰貙 丕賳賴 卮賷亍 賲丐賯鬲 ..
賷孬賷乇 乇賵孬 賮賷 賴匕賴 丕賱乇賵丕賷丞 毓丿丞 鬲爻丕丐賱丕鬲 乇亘賲丕 賲賳 兀亘乇夭賴丕貙 賲丕 賯賷賲丞 兀賳 賳丨賰賲 毓賱賶 鬲氐乇賮丕鬲 丕賱賳丕爻貙 廿匕丕 賰丕賳 賯丿 丨丿孬 賰賴匕丕 賮廿賳賴 賱賲 鬲丨氐賱 丕賱賲氐賷亘丞 丕賱賮賱丕賳賷丞 賲孬賱丕貙 賴匕丕 丕賱爻丐丕賱 丕賱匕賷 賷爻鬲亘賷丨 丕賮毓丕賱 丕賱丕賳爻丕賳 賵賷丨胤賲賴丕 賮賷 賳賮爻 丕賱賵賯鬲貙 丕匕丕 賲丕 賯賷賲丞 丕賳 鬲賱賵賲 卮禺氐丕 毓賱賶 賮毓賱 亘爻賷胤 賮賷 爻賱爻賱丞 兀丨丿丕孬 賰亘賷乇丞 賯丿 鬲丐丿賷 兀賵 賱丕 鬲丐丿賷 賮賷 丕賱賳賴丕賷丞 廿賱賶 賳賮爻 丕賱賲氐賷乇貙 賱毓亘丞 丕賱賯丿乇貙 丕賱爻禺胤 丕賱匕賷 賷賳賲賵 賲毓 賲乇賵乇 丕賱賵賯鬲貙 賴匕丕 丕賱賰亘鬲 丕賱匕賷 賷噩乇賷 賮賷 賳賮賵爻 丕賱賳丕爻貙 賷噩毓賱賴賲 丕賰孬乇 丨爻丕爻賷丞貙 賵賲賯鬲丕賸 賵賲乇丕賵睾丞 賱賰賱 丕賱兀卮賷丕亍貙 賷噩毓賱賴賲 賱丕 賷鬲賯亘賱賵賳 丕賱丌禺乇賷賳 亘丕賱乇睾賲 賲賳 丕丿毓丕亍賴賲 匕賱賰貙 賲賳睾賱賯賷賳 賲鬲賴丕賵賷賳 賮賷 丿丕禺賱賴賲貙 賷囟噩乇賴賲 丕賱丌禺乇賵賳貙 賷爻鬲賮夭賴賲 丕賱兀賮毓丕賱 賵丕賱丕禺鬲賱丕賮丕鬲 貙 丕賱卮禺氐 丕賱爻丕禺胤 賴賵 兀賰孬乇 卮禺氐 賲丿毓丕丞 賱兀賳 賱丕 賷乇丨亘 亘兀賷 卮禺氐 賮賷 丨賷丕鬲賴貙 賷賰鬲亘 乇賵孬 賴賳丕 毓賳 賲氐賷乇 丕賱丕賳爻丕賳貙 毓賳 丕賱兀亘賵丞 丕賱禺丕胤卅丞貙 毓賳 丕賱賰亘鬲 賵丕賱賲卮丕毓乇 丕賱乇丿賷卅丞 丕賱鬲賷 鬲禺乇噩 賮賷 丕賱賵賯鬲 丕賱禺胤兀貙 賷賰鬲亘 毓賳 丕賱毓氐亘賷丞 丕賱賮賰乇賷丞 亘賰賱 丕鬲噩丕賴丕鬲賴丕貙 毓賳 丕賱噩賳爻 賵丕賱丨乇賷丞 賵丕賲賰丕賳賷丞 丕賳 賷丨氐賱 丕賱丕賳爻丕賳 毓賱賶 丕賱賲賱匕丕鬲 賰賵賳賴丕 賲賱匕丕鬲 賮丨爻亘 賵丕賱鬲賷 鬲丐丿賷 賮賷 賳毓丕賷丞 丕賱賲胤丕賮 丕賱賶 丕賱卮賰 賵丕賱賰乇丕賴賷丞 賵丕賱囟賷丕毓 賮賷 賲鬲丕賴丞 賳賮爻賷丞 賵毓賯賱賷丞貙 賰賱 賲丕 賷丨鬲賵賷賴 賴賳丕 爻禺胤 賵兀賲丕賰賳 賲丿賮賵賳丞 賲賳 卮禺氐賷丞 兀賷 丕賳爻丕賳 賲賲賰賳 兀賳 鬲賳亘毓孬 毓賱賶 卮賰賱 丨胤丕賲 兀賵 乇匕賷賱丞 賵乇亘賲丕 賲賵鬲 兀賵 賮卮賱 賷丨賵賱 胤丕賯丕鬲 丕賱廿賳爻丕賳 廿賱賶 孬賯亘 兀爻賵丿 賷亘鬲賱毓 賮賷賴 賰賱 卮賷亍 ..
賷孬賷乇 乇賵孬 賮賷 賴匕賴 丕賱乇賵丕賷丞 毓丿丞 鬲爻丕丐賱丕鬲 乇亘賲丕 賲賳 兀亘乇夭賴丕貙 賲丕 賯賷賲丞 兀賳 賳丨賰賲 毓賱賶 鬲氐乇賮丕鬲 丕賱賳丕爻貙 廿匕丕 賰丕賳 賯丿 丨丿孬 賰賴匕丕 賮廿賳賴 賱賲 鬲丨氐賱 丕賱賲氐賷亘丞 丕賱賮賱丕賳賷丞 賲孬賱丕貙 賴匕丕 丕賱爻丐丕賱 丕賱匕賷 賷爻鬲亘賷丨 丕賮毓丕賱 丕賱丕賳爻丕賳 賵賷丨胤賲賴丕 賮賷 賳賮爻 丕賱賵賯鬲貙 丕匕丕 賲丕 賯賷賲丞 丕賳 鬲賱賵賲 卮禺氐丕 毓賱賶 賮毓賱 亘爻賷胤 賮賷 爻賱爻賱丞 兀丨丿丕孬 賰亘賷乇丞 賯丿 鬲丐丿賷 兀賵 賱丕 鬲丐丿賷 賮賷 丕賱賳賴丕賷丞 廿賱賶 賳賮爻 丕賱賲氐賷乇貙 賱毓亘丞 丕賱賯丿乇貙 丕賱爻禺胤 丕賱匕賷 賷賳賲賵 賲毓 賲乇賵乇 丕賱賵賯鬲貙 賴匕丕 丕賱賰亘鬲 丕賱匕賷 賷噩乇賷 賮賷 賳賮賵爻 丕賱賳丕爻貙 賷噩毓賱賴賲 丕賰孬乇 丨爻丕爻賷丞貙 賵賲賯鬲丕賸 賵賲乇丕賵睾丞 賱賰賱 丕賱兀卮賷丕亍貙 賷噩毓賱賴賲 賱丕 賷鬲賯亘賱賵賳 丕賱丌禺乇賷賳 亘丕賱乇睾賲 賲賳 丕丿毓丕亍賴賲 匕賱賰貙 賲賳睾賱賯賷賳 賲鬲賴丕賵賷賳 賮賷 丿丕禺賱賴賲貙 賷囟噩乇賴賲 丕賱丌禺乇賵賳貙 賷爻鬲賮夭賴賲 丕賱兀賮毓丕賱 賵丕賱丕禺鬲賱丕賮丕鬲 貙 丕賱卮禺氐 丕賱爻丕禺胤 賴賵 兀賰孬乇 卮禺氐 賲丿毓丕丞 賱兀賳 賱丕 賷乇丨亘 亘兀賷 卮禺氐 賮賷 丨賷丕鬲賴貙 賷賰鬲亘 乇賵孬 賴賳丕 毓賳 賲氐賷乇 丕賱丕賳爻丕賳貙 毓賳 丕賱兀亘賵丞 丕賱禺丕胤卅丞貙 毓賳 丕賱賰亘鬲 賵丕賱賲卮丕毓乇 丕賱乇丿賷卅丞 丕賱鬲賷 鬲禺乇噩 賮賷 丕賱賵賯鬲 丕賱禺胤兀貙 賷賰鬲亘 毓賳 丕賱毓氐亘賷丞 丕賱賮賰乇賷丞 亘賰賱 丕鬲噩丕賴丕鬲賴丕貙 毓賳 丕賱噩賳爻 賵丕賱丨乇賷丞 賵丕賲賰丕賳賷丞 丕賳 賷丨氐賱 丕賱丕賳爻丕賳 毓賱賶 丕賱賲賱匕丕鬲 賰賵賳賴丕 賲賱匕丕鬲 賮丨爻亘 賵丕賱鬲賷 鬲丐丿賷 賮賷 賳毓丕賷丞 丕賱賲胤丕賮 丕賱賶 丕賱卮賰 賵丕賱賰乇丕賴賷丞 賵丕賱囟賷丕毓 賮賷 賲鬲丕賴丞 賳賮爻賷丞 賵毓賯賱賷丞貙 賰賱 賲丕 賷丨鬲賵賷賴 賴賳丕 爻禺胤 賵兀賲丕賰賳 賲丿賮賵賳丞 賲賳 卮禺氐賷丞 兀賷 丕賳爻丕賳 賲賲賰賳 兀賳 鬲賳亘毓孬 毓賱賶 卮賰賱 丨胤丕賲 兀賵 乇匕賷賱丞 賵乇亘賲丕 賲賵鬲 兀賵 賮卮賱 賷丨賵賱 胤丕賯丕鬲 丕賱廿賳爻丕賳 廿賱賶 孬賯亘 兀爻賵丿 賷亘鬲賱毓 賮賷賴 賰賱 卮賷亍 ..
June 24, 2024
Because other people鈥檚 weakness can destroy you just as much as their strength can. Weak people are not harmless. Their weakness can be their strength.
*
Yes, the good old defiant American 鈥淔uck you,鈥� and that was it for the butchers son, dead three months short of his twentieth birthday鈥擬arcus Messner, 1932-1952, the only one of his classmates unfortunate enough to be killed in the Korean War, which ended with the signing of an armistice agreement on July 27, 1953, eleven full months before Marcus, had he been able to stomach chapel and keep his mouth shut, would have received his undergraduate degree from Winesburg College鈥攎ore than likely as class valedictorian and thus have postponed learning what his uneducated father had been trying so hard to teach him all along: of the terrible, the incomprehensible way ones most banal, incidental, even comical choices achieve the most disproportionate result.
*
Yes, the good old defiant American 鈥淔uck you,鈥� and that was it for the butchers son, dead three months short of his twentieth birthday鈥擬arcus Messner, 1932-1952, the only one of his classmates unfortunate enough to be killed in the Korean War, which ended with the signing of an armistice agreement on July 27, 1953, eleven full months before Marcus, had he been able to stomach chapel and keep his mouth shut, would have received his undergraduate degree from Winesburg College鈥攎ore than likely as class valedictorian and thus have postponed learning what his uneducated father had been trying so hard to teach him all along: of the terrible, the incomprehensible way ones most banal, incidental, even comical choices achieve the most disproportionate result.
April 1, 2015
Ho letto in qualche commento che Markus Messner, il protagonista di Indignazione, sia in un certo senso avvicinabile a Holden Caufield: anche lui un鈥檃nima pura, un idealista 鈥渋ndignato鈥� che si scaglia contro il mondo bigotto degli adulti americani. Markus 猫 uno studente modello, sempre primo nei voti, figlio devoto di un padre ebreo macellaio kosher che lo adora, tanto da esasperarlo con i suoi soffocanti controlli fino a spingerlo ad allontanarsi dal college che frequenta a Newark, dove 猫 nato e vissuto, per trasferirsi a Winesburg, nel cuore dell鈥橝merica pi霉 provinciale e tradizionalista. Da l矛 inizieranno i problemi per lui che ha le idee chiare su cosa vuol fare e chi vuole diventare, desidera soltanto studiare e laurearsi in giurisprudenza, non si inserisce nell鈥檃mbiente delle confraternite del college, non vuole partecipare alla squadra di baseball, non riesce a condividere la stanza con chi lo importuna o gli impedisce di studiare e soprattutto inizia una relazione con Olivia, una studentessa che per la sua famiglia 猫 agli antipodi della donna ideale, 猫 figlia di divorziati, ha problemi psichiatrici ed ha tentato il suicidio. Olivia non ha remore sessuali come la maggior parte delle ragazze del college nell鈥檃nno 1951, e tutto ci貌 provoca in Markus una reazione forte di rifiuto verso la bigotteria del college, del suo corpo dirigente e degli studenti, una 鈥渋ndignazione鈥� che lo lascer脿 tragicamente in solitudine e che, per circostanze beffardamente banali, lo consegner脿 in balia dell鈥檈vento terribile in corso in quegli anni, la guerra di Corea, che tante morti ha causato all鈥橝merica.
Ebbene, pi霉 che ad Holden Caufield Markus mi ha fatto pensare alla tragica figura di un eroe mitologico, al grande Achille figlio di Peleo, eroe puro e indistruttibile che muore per una banale ferita al tallone, ed 鈥渁ll鈥檌ncomprensibile modo in cui le scelte pi霉 accidentali, pi霉 banali, addirittura pi霉 comiche, producono gli esiti pi霉 sproporzionati鈥�: un argomento su cui riflettere, un esempio di vita da cui trarre mille spunti , uno dei tanti romanzi di Philip Roth che lasciano il segno.
Ebbene, pi霉 che ad Holden Caufield Markus mi ha fatto pensare alla tragica figura di un eroe mitologico, al grande Achille figlio di Peleo, eroe puro e indistruttibile che muore per una banale ferita al tallone, ed 鈥渁ll鈥檌ncomprensibile modo in cui le scelte pi霉 accidentali, pi霉 banali, addirittura pi霉 comiche, producono gli esiti pi霉 sproporzionati鈥�: un argomento su cui riflettere, un esempio di vita da cui trarre mille spunti , uno dei tanti romanzi di Philip Roth che lasciano il segno.
January 13, 2018
Un amico me l'aveva detto
... 猫 terribilmente vivo
desolante in alcuni brani,spietato in altri e malinconico, anche.
In Indignazione 肠'猫 l' inesperienza ,la stoltezza,la resistenza intellettuale,la scoperta sessuale il coraggio e i passi falsi di un ragazzo .
C'猫 il terribile e incomprensibile modo in cui le scelte pi霉 accidentali e banali ,possono produrre conseguenze tragiche, gli esiti pi霉 sproporzionati.
Un passaggio che mi 猫 piaciuto molto:
Cerca di essere piu' grande dei tuoi sentimenti.Non sono io che te lo chiedo,ma la vita.Altrimenti finirai spazzato via dai tuoi sentimenti.Spazzato via senza poter piu' tornare indietro.
I sentimenti possono essere il piu' grande dei problemi.
I sentimenti possono giocare gli scherzi piu' crudeli.
驳颈脿.
... 猫 terribilmente vivo
desolante in alcuni brani,spietato in altri e malinconico, anche.
In Indignazione 肠'猫 l' inesperienza ,la stoltezza,la resistenza intellettuale,la scoperta sessuale il coraggio e i passi falsi di un ragazzo .
C'猫 il terribile e incomprensibile modo in cui le scelte pi霉 accidentali e banali ,possono produrre conseguenze tragiche, gli esiti pi霉 sproporzionati.
Un passaggio che mi 猫 piaciuto molto:
Cerca di essere piu' grande dei tuoi sentimenti.Non sono io che te lo chiedo,ma la vita.Altrimenti finirai spazzato via dai tuoi sentimenti.Spazzato via senza poter piu' tornare indietro.
I sentimenti possono essere il piu' grande dei problemi.
I sentimenti possono giocare gli scherzi piu' crudeli.
驳颈脿.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 1,857 reviews
Can't find what you're looking for?
Get help and learn more about the design.