What do you think?
Rate this book
讛拽讜住诪转 诪驻讬专谞爪讛
谞讜住注 讗讬专讜驻讗讬 爪注讬专 讜爪讛讜讘志砖讬注专, 讛诪讻谞讛 讗转 注爪诪讜 "诪讜止讙讜止专 讚侄诇职讗指诪讜止专侄讛" 鈥� 诪讜旨讙讜旨诇讬 讛讗讛讘讛 鈥� 诪讙讬注 诇讞爪专讜 砖诇 讛诪讜讙讜诇讬 讛讙讚讜诇, 讗讻讘专, 讜讘驻讬讜 住讬驻讜专 砖诪转讞讬诇 诇讛砖转诇讟 注诇 讻诇 讘讬专转 讛诪诪诇讻讛. 讛谞讜讻专讬 讟讜注谉 砖讛讜讗 讘职旨谞讛 砖诇 谞住讬讻讛 诪讜讙讜诇讬转 讗讘讜讚讛, "讙讘专转 注讬谞讬讬诐 砖讞讜专讜转", 讬驻讛驻讬讬讛 诪讛诪诪转 砖注诇 驻讬 讛住讘专讛 谞讬讞谞讛 讘讻讜讞讜转 拽住诐 讜讻讬砖讜祝, 砖转讞讬诇讛 谞砖讘讬转 注诇 讬讚讬 诪爪讘讬讗 讗讜讝讘拽讬, 诇讗讞专 诪讻谉 注诇 讬讚讬 讛砖讗讛 讛驻专住讬, 讜讘住讜驻讜 砖诇 讚讘专 讛讜驻讻转 诇讗讛讜讘转讜 砖诇 讗专讙诇讬讛 鈥� 诪驻拽讚 爪讘讗讜转讬讜 砖诇 讛住讜诇讟讗谉 讛注讜转'诪讗谞讬. 讻砖讗专讙诇讬讛 讞讜讝专 讛讘讬转讛 注诐 讛驻讬诇讙砖 讛诪讜讙讜诇讬转 砖诇讜, 谞讜讻讞讜转讛 诪讛驻谞讟转 讗转 讛注讬专, 讜讛爪专讜转 诪转讞讬诇讜转. 讛拽讜住诪转 诪驻讬专谞爪讛 讛讜讗 住讬驻讜专讛 砖诇 讗讬砖讛 砖诪谞住讛 诇砖诇讜讟 讘讙讜专诇讛 讘注讜诇诐 砖诇 讙讘专讬诐. 讛讜讗 诪讗讞讚 砖转讬 注专讬诐 讝专讜转 讝讜 诇讝讜 鈥� 讛讘讬专讛 讛诪讜讙讜诇讬转 讛谞讛谞转谞讬转, 砖讘讛 谞讗讘拽 讛拽讬住专 诪讚讬 讬讜诐 讘砖讗诇讜转 砖诇 讗诪讜谞讛, 转砖讜拽讛 讜讘讙讬讚转 讘谞讬诐, 讜驻讬专谞爪讛 讛讞讜砖谞讬转 讙诐 讛讬讗, 注讜诇诐 专讘志注讜讝 砖诇 拽讜专讟讬讝谞讜转, 驻讬诇讜住讜驻讬讛 讗谞讜砖讬转 讜注讬谞讜讬讬诐 诇讗 讗谞讜砖讬讬诐, 砖诐 诇讜诪讚 讞讘专 讬诇讚讜转讜 砖诇 讗专讙诇讬讛 讘讚专讱 讛拽砖讛 注诇 讛讘专讜讟讗诇讬讜转 讛讗诪讬转讬转 砖诇 讛砖诇讟讜谉. 砖谞讬 讛注讜诇诪讜转 讛诪专讜讞拽讬诐 讛讗诇讛 讛讜诇讻讬诐 讜诪转讙诇讬诐 讻讚讜诪讬诐 讘讗讜驻谉 诪住转讜专讬, 讜拽住诪讬 谞砖讬诐 砖讜诇讟讬诐 讘砖谞讬讛诐. 讗讘诇 讛讗诐 住讬驻讜专讜 砖诇 诪讜讙讜专 谞讻讜谉? 讜讗诐 讻讱, 诪讛 拽专讛 诇谞住讬讻讛 讛讗讘讜讚讛? 讜讗诐 讛讜讗 砖拽专谉, 讛讗诐 注诇讬讜 诇诪讜转?
352 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 2008
1108 people are currently reading
15835 people want to read
About the author
Salman Rushdie
180听books12.7k听followersSir Ahmed Salman Rushdie is an Indian-born British and American novelist. His work often combines magic realism with historical fiction and primarily deals with connections, disruptions, and migrations between Eastern and Western civilizations, typically set on the Indian subcontinent. Rushdie's second novel, Midnight's Children (1981), won the Booker Prize in 1981 and was deemed to be "the best novel of all winners" on two occasions, marking the 25th and the 40th anniversary of the prize.
After his fourth novel, The Satanic Verses (1988), Rushdie became the subject of several assassination attempts and death threats, including a fatwa calling for his death issued by Ruhollah Khomeini, the supreme leader of Iran. In total, 20 countries banned the book. Numerous killings and bombings have been carried out by extremists who cite the book as motivation, sparking a debate about censorship and religiously motivated violence. In 2022, Rushdie survived a stabbing at the Chautauqua Institution in Chautauqua, New York.
In 1983, Rushdie was elected a fellow of the Royal Society of Literature. He was appointed a Commandeur de l'Ordre des Arts et des Lettres of France in 1999. Rushdie was knighted in 2007 for his services to literature. In 2008, The Times ranked him 13th on its list of the 50 greatest British writers since 1945. Since 2000, Rushdie has lived in the United States. He was named Distinguished Writer in Residence at the Arthur L. Carter Journalism Institute of New York University in 2015. Earlier, he taught at Emory University. He was elected to the American Academy of Arts and Letters. In 2012, he published Joseph Anton: A Memoir, an account of his life in the wake of the events following The Satanic Verses. Rushdie was named one of the 100 most influential people in the world by Time magazine in April 2023.
Rushdie's personal life, including his five marriages and four divorces, has attracted notable media attention and controversies, particularly during his marriage to actress Padma Lakshmi.
After his fourth novel, The Satanic Verses (1988), Rushdie became the subject of several assassination attempts and death threats, including a fatwa calling for his death issued by Ruhollah Khomeini, the supreme leader of Iran. In total, 20 countries banned the book. Numerous killings and bombings have been carried out by extremists who cite the book as motivation, sparking a debate about censorship and religiously motivated violence. In 2022, Rushdie survived a stabbing at the Chautauqua Institution in Chautauqua, New York.
In 1983, Rushdie was elected a fellow of the Royal Society of Literature. He was appointed a Commandeur de l'Ordre des Arts et des Lettres of France in 1999. Rushdie was knighted in 2007 for his services to literature. In 2008, The Times ranked him 13th on its list of the 50 greatest British writers since 1945. Since 2000, Rushdie has lived in the United States. He was named Distinguished Writer in Residence at the Arthur L. Carter Journalism Institute of New York University in 2015. Earlier, he taught at Emory University. He was elected to the American Academy of Arts and Letters. In 2012, he published Joseph Anton: A Memoir, an account of his life in the wake of the events following The Satanic Verses. Rushdie was named one of the 100 most influential people in the world by Time magazine in April 2023.
Rushdie's personal life, including his five marriages and four divorces, has attracted notable media attention and controversies, particularly during his marriage to actress Padma Lakshmi.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 2,249 reviews
November 14, 2008
On occasion a novel receives harsh treatment from critics not based on the actual work, but rather because it is not what the critics want it to be; this then is the only explanation I can find to explain the harsh, often shrill, reviews received by Rushdie's equisite "The Enchantress of Florence." Having read several of these negative assessments I find the same sub-text runs through them all, namely the complaint that "Enchantress" is neither Rushdie's masterwork "Midnight's Children" nor that lesser work for which he became broadly famous - or in other circles infamous - "The Satanic Verses." To be sure, "Enchantress" is a far different book than Rushdie's previous work, less meditative and more fantastical, yet what is the problem with a great writer branching out into new genres and worlds? While I have loved several of his earlier work, for his choice to create the extraordinary world of "Enchantress" I celebrate Rushdie's genius and thank him for giving me what I can only describe as an extraordinary read.
Other reviewers have offered excellent plot synopsis of "The Enchantress of Florence" and therefore I will offer only the briefest details of the story lines. A blond haired stranger, calling himself Mogor del'Amore (the Mughal of Love) appears in the quasi-magical city of Akbar, the Mughal King of Kings. The stranger claims to be the descendant of Akbar's grandfather's lost younger sister, carried into captivity earlier. He regales Akbar with the tale of the "lost princess" and how she journeyed across Eurasia and found herself eventually in the city of Florence. Overtime a horde of historical personages make appearances, some major, others less so, such as members of the Medici family and Machiavelli.
The story itself is so rich with detail that on occasion the reader feels as if they have been a guest at a feast. One constantly questions which details are true and which are products of Rushdie's extraordinary imagination. Interestingly, Rushdie spent years researching this work and in interviews claims that much of what one might think the most fantastical - the Shi'a monarch who uses his enemy's skull as a drinking goblet or the Ottoman Caliph who's gardeners double as his executioners - are in fact the ones that are true. On occasion on really wishes that there were a study guide to go along with the book.
Like the best fairy tales, Rushdie's "Enchantress" layers in many deep and vexing questions that transcend any age: What does it mean to be real? What is the good life? How can one be happy? All of this arrives in a story written with such incomparable talent, that one can not easily put it down. "The Enchantress of Florence" may not have been the work that the critics wanted Rushdie to write, but I have little doubt that in generations to come, readers will recognize it as among his greatest works.
Other reviewers have offered excellent plot synopsis of "The Enchantress of Florence" and therefore I will offer only the briefest details of the story lines. A blond haired stranger, calling himself Mogor del'Amore (the Mughal of Love) appears in the quasi-magical city of Akbar, the Mughal King of Kings. The stranger claims to be the descendant of Akbar's grandfather's lost younger sister, carried into captivity earlier. He regales Akbar with the tale of the "lost princess" and how she journeyed across Eurasia and found herself eventually in the city of Florence. Overtime a horde of historical personages make appearances, some major, others less so, such as members of the Medici family and Machiavelli.
The story itself is so rich with detail that on occasion the reader feels as if they have been a guest at a feast. One constantly questions which details are true and which are products of Rushdie's extraordinary imagination. Interestingly, Rushdie spent years researching this work and in interviews claims that much of what one might think the most fantastical - the Shi'a monarch who uses his enemy's skull as a drinking goblet or the Ottoman Caliph who's gardeners double as his executioners - are in fact the ones that are true. On occasion on really wishes that there were a study guide to go along with the book.
Like the best fairy tales, Rushdie's "Enchantress" layers in many deep and vexing questions that transcend any age: What does it mean to be real? What is the good life? How can one be happy? All of this arrives in a story written with such incomparable talent, that one can not easily put it down. "The Enchantress of Florence" may not have been the work that the critics wanted Rushdie to write, but I have little doubt that in generations to come, readers will recognize it as among his greatest works.
July 29, 2015
I'm a little over halfway through this and so far almost every single female character is a prostitute or a slave. Three women have committed suicide because of a man. Also there's a female character who is literally a figment of a male character's imagination and she's more dynamic than any of the (few) real women in this fucking book.
Ugh. Most likely will not finish.
Ugh. Most likely will not finish.
December 23, 2015
Welcome to realm where Story reigns, courtesy of the master of ceremony Salman Rushdie.
In a somptuous palace of red stone dwells the absolute ruler of the world, the great Mughal Emperor Akbar the Great - warrior, philosopher, despot and lover. A setting worthy of the Arabian Nights, and according to those tenets here comes a traveler / con-artist / magician calling himself the Mughal of Love, He will have to redeem his life like Scheherezade through stories : improbable stories, fantastic stories, epic stories, outright lies, stories embedded within stories. The Emperor will either heap gold on his head or throw him from the highest tower.
"If there is a knower of tongues here, fetch him;
There's a stranger in the city
And he has many things to say.
Mirza Ghalib, translated by Shamsur Rahman Faruqi"
Salman Rushdie has done his research extremely well: Both Fatehpur Sikri and Florence come alive in multicolored landscapes, vibrant with life and symbolism. Nicollo Machiavelli, Andrea Doria, the Medici and the Vespucci families, Akbar and his Nine Jewels are all historical figures. Even my local hero Vlad the Impaler has a couple of pages. I am reminded of the extraordinary movie "The Fall" and indeed some of the locations, the unreliable narrator and the fantastic coincidences of fate can be found there.
It is easy to check with Wikipedia and find out that most of the facts presented here are true. Yet the world inhabited by the characters is not the one to be found in history books. The proponents of the "magical realism" school claim that reality is subjective, it is re-created daily through our imagination. It is stated more than once in this text:
"All our certainties are being blown away and we must live in Gulbadan's universe of mystery and doubt"
"Language upon a silvered tongue affords enchantment enough"
"She had sailed away into unreality, into a world of fantasy which men were still dreaming into being"
The book is one of a breed that requires attention and patience on the part of the reader. I took my time with it, returning and reading again and again some paragraphs. The plot takes sometimes second place, but here it is taster in the words of the storyteller:
"And in the end the princess reached Italy in the company of a mighty warrior. Argalia and Angelica were their names. Argalia bore enchanted weapons, and in his retinue were four terrifying giants, and by his side rode Angelica, the princess of Cathay and India, the most beautiful woman in the world, and an enchantress beyond compare."
From Agra to Samarkhand, Istanbul to Genoa and Florence - this is a fantastic voyage that I do not regret taking.
[edit for html formatting - 2015]
In a somptuous palace of red stone dwells the absolute ruler of the world, the great Mughal Emperor Akbar the Great - warrior, philosopher, despot and lover. A setting worthy of the Arabian Nights, and according to those tenets here comes a traveler / con-artist / magician calling himself the Mughal of Love, He will have to redeem his life like Scheherezade through stories : improbable stories, fantastic stories, epic stories, outright lies, stories embedded within stories. The Emperor will either heap gold on his head or throw him from the highest tower.
"If there is a knower of tongues here, fetch him;
There's a stranger in the city
And he has many things to say.
Mirza Ghalib, translated by Shamsur Rahman Faruqi"
Salman Rushdie has done his research extremely well: Both Fatehpur Sikri and Florence come alive in multicolored landscapes, vibrant with life and symbolism. Nicollo Machiavelli, Andrea Doria, the Medici and the Vespucci families, Akbar and his Nine Jewels are all historical figures. Even my local hero Vlad the Impaler has a couple of pages. I am reminded of the extraordinary movie "The Fall" and indeed some of the locations, the unreliable narrator and the fantastic coincidences of fate can be found there.
It is easy to check with Wikipedia and find out that most of the facts presented here are true. Yet the world inhabited by the characters is not the one to be found in history books. The proponents of the "magical realism" school claim that reality is subjective, it is re-created daily through our imagination. It is stated more than once in this text:
"All our certainties are being blown away and we must live in Gulbadan's universe of mystery and doubt"
"Language upon a silvered tongue affords enchantment enough"
"She had sailed away into unreality, into a world of fantasy which men were still dreaming into being"
The book is one of a breed that requires attention and patience on the part of the reader. I took my time with it, returning and reading again and again some paragraphs. The plot takes sometimes second place, but here it is taster in the words of the storyteller:
"And in the end the princess reached Italy in the company of a mighty warrior. Argalia and Angelica were their names. Argalia bore enchanted weapons, and in his retinue were four terrifying giants, and by his side rode Angelica, the princess of Cathay and India, the most beautiful woman in the world, and an enchantress beyond compare."
From Agra to Samarkhand, Istanbul to Genoa and Florence - this is a fantastic voyage that I do not regret taking.
[edit for html formatting - 2015]
June 4, 2023
7 PILLARS OF MINDFULNESS
馃檹
Patience: to be patient is to be completely open to each moment
I savored each moment of The Enchantress of Florence, this winding tale of two cities, Sikri and Florence, and two men, an emperor and a wanderer, and three women, a phantom and an enchantress and a mirror, and three boys, friends who grow up and apart and together again. The book is a tapestry of stories upon stories, an enchantment, spacious and imposing and palatial, a memory palace. Patience is required when exploring this place, wandering through its vaulted halls and bedchambers, its thronged courtyards and haunted galleries, the overgrown gardens, the landscapes. There is much to see! So much to take in. No need to rush.
馃檹
Non-Striving: allow things to be as they are; do not become attached to a specific outcome
The journey is the destination.
馃檹
Trust: trust your own insight and wisdom; trusting yourself will allow you to have more trust in others
I trust that I know myself, well enough to know what gives me pleasure in reading, and elsewhere. History and traveling into the past; characters that may be mysteries to themselves, to others, but become relatable to me. Prose that isn't shy, that has style; writing that is nimble or sleek or ornate or all of those things at different times. I like adventures of the body and of the mind, writers who write of bodies and minds. Authors who are playful, ironic, not afraid of darkness and tragedy but not embracing either. I know that Salman Rushdie is just such an author, from my experience with . I came to this novel trusting in him completely. My trust was not broken!
馃檹
Beginner's Mind: shed preconceptions and see things as if for the first time
Shalimar the Clown was a singular experience for me, how I read it, my changing reactions, where I read it, what I felt when I had finished reading it, what I felt when I wrote its review. So much emotion in my memory of that book. It all had to be let go. Every artist brings who they are to their works, their specific and personal concerns and interests; and so every author may be seen as writing one great book, with each separate novel just an installment in their overall work. The challenge for the completist is to see each novel as an individual thing, to read it as if nothing came before or after, to resist the comparing and contrasting. Every reader brings who they are to the books they read, their experience with other perhaps similar books, their perceptions of the author, their own personal and specific perspective on how a book should read, how a narrative should unfold. Let it go... let it all go... easier said than done though.
馃檹
Non-Judgment: cultivate the ability to understand things around us without automatically assigning them labels of good or bad
The negative reviews for this novel are something else. The apparent sexism of the author, the bibliography, the feeling that the book is bland (?!), a "lush emptiness" with "wooden blasphemies"... one reviewer "surprised with the hatred I feel towards this book" and another fantasizing "If I ever came across Rushdie in person, I would like nothing more than to pelt him with eggs." LOL at the strident seething of these reviews! Must resist the urge to judge them.
馃檹
Acceptance: stay in the present - regretting the past and focusing on the future will inevitably lead to tension...
If only the characters had reflected upon this tenet, so much sorrow could have been avoided. But then we wouldn't have this book...
馃檹
Letting go: our minds seem determined to hold on to certain beliefs and thoughts - let them be, let them end, as all things must, eventually.
In the end, time marches on and things crumble, people pass, the world changes. A lake is emptied and a city fades. Three women disappear, three friends are parted. A wanderer runs away, an emperor moves on. I closed the book, sighed, and thought, what next?
馃檹
Patience: to be patient is to be completely open to each moment
I savored each moment of The Enchantress of Florence, this winding tale of two cities, Sikri and Florence, and two men, an emperor and a wanderer, and three women, a phantom and an enchantress and a mirror, and three boys, friends who grow up and apart and together again. The book is a tapestry of stories upon stories, an enchantment, spacious and imposing and palatial, a memory palace. Patience is required when exploring this place, wandering through its vaulted halls and bedchambers, its thronged courtyards and haunted galleries, the overgrown gardens, the landscapes. There is much to see! So much to take in. No need to rush.
馃檹
Non-Striving: allow things to be as they are; do not become attached to a specific outcome
The journey is the destination.
馃檹
Trust: trust your own insight and wisdom; trusting yourself will allow you to have more trust in others
I trust that I know myself, well enough to know what gives me pleasure in reading, and elsewhere. History and traveling into the past; characters that may be mysteries to themselves, to others, but become relatable to me. Prose that isn't shy, that has style; writing that is nimble or sleek or ornate or all of those things at different times. I like adventures of the body and of the mind, writers who write of bodies and minds. Authors who are playful, ironic, not afraid of darkness and tragedy but not embracing either. I know that Salman Rushdie is just such an author, from my experience with . I came to this novel trusting in him completely. My trust was not broken!
馃檹
Beginner's Mind: shed preconceptions and see things as if for the first time
Shalimar the Clown was a singular experience for me, how I read it, my changing reactions, where I read it, what I felt when I had finished reading it, what I felt when I wrote its review. So much emotion in my memory of that book. It all had to be let go. Every artist brings who they are to their works, their specific and personal concerns and interests; and so every author may be seen as writing one great book, with each separate novel just an installment in their overall work. The challenge for the completist is to see each novel as an individual thing, to read it as if nothing came before or after, to resist the comparing and contrasting. Every reader brings who they are to the books they read, their experience with other perhaps similar books, their perceptions of the author, their own personal and specific perspective on how a book should read, how a narrative should unfold. Let it go... let it all go... easier said than done though.
馃檹
Non-Judgment: cultivate the ability to understand things around us without automatically assigning them labels of good or bad
The negative reviews for this novel are something else. The apparent sexism of the author, the bibliography, the feeling that the book is bland (?!), a "lush emptiness" with "wooden blasphemies"... one reviewer "surprised with the hatred I feel towards this book" and another fantasizing "If I ever came across Rushdie in person, I would like nothing more than to pelt him with eggs." LOL at the strident seething of these reviews! Must resist the urge to judge them.
馃檹
Acceptance: stay in the present - regretting the past and focusing on the future will inevitably lead to tension...
If only the characters had reflected upon this tenet, so much sorrow could have been avoided. But then we wouldn't have this book...
馃檹
Letting go: our minds seem determined to hold on to certain beliefs and thoughts - let them be, let them end, as all things must, eventually.
In the end, time marches on and things crumble, people pass, the world changes. A lake is emptied and a city fades. Three women disappear, three friends are parted. A wanderer runs away, an emperor moves on. I closed the book, sighed, and thought, what next?
September 9, 2014
I'm surprised with the hatred I feel towards this book. I mean, it's Salman frickin' Rushdie, right? Isn't he some kind of literary god? I'm going to have to read his other books to see, because this one was trash.
I've read sexist books before. There are plenty of them out there, but usually I can glide over the sexist bits because overall the plot/characters/writing are good enough that I choose to ignore the fact that the women are horribly written (looking at you, Robert Jordan). But in this book I cared not a whit about any character, the plot was leaden and the writing was so stilted and musty I thought for a bit it had to be a translated book, despite the fact that I know Rushdie writes in English. Basically, every woman in this is either an insecure shrew (Machiavelli's wife, Akbar's wives) or an empty vessel that men project their sexual fantasies on to. The Enchantress herself is basically powered by hotness. Her magic is her beauty. The female servants in the book are literally their mistress' echo (Gulbadan's servant) or mirror (the enchantress' servant) thus devoiding them of the little personality that the other women get. The enchantress (whose second husband names her Angelique, a name she decides to share with her mirror/servant) decides to fulfill the fantasy that Budweiser ads promise in commercials, namely a threesome with hot, willing twins. Of course, there's never any jealousy between the enchantress and the mirror over the second husband, nor is the mirror ever shown to care that her mistress basically whores her out to the second husband. That would require them to be presented as human, when really the women in this book are ciphers for male fantasies. I mean, for goodness sake, the Mughal's favorite wife (who was an actual historical person) is a figment of her husband's imagination (who, despite this, is able to give him great sex). And don't even get me started on the part of the book when all the women in the Mughal's city became petty and quarrelsome with each other, but were cured when they were ordered to walk around naked all day and realized they were all flawed and human (uh...yeah...). The worst part of it all was that I got the feeling that Rushdie considered this book romantic. No wonder this guy has been married and divorced four times (that is probably a low blow, but the fact that he obviously does not understand women as human beings comes across in this book incredibly strongly).
Also, why the heck did he include a bibliography? This book is completely a book of magical realism and so much of it is detached from reality and obviously NOT historical, you can't really trust any of it to be historically accurate unless you're familiar with the period and can judge for yourself what is real and what is false. Is the bibliography just there to show off that he did in fact do research?
I've read sexist books before. There are plenty of them out there, but usually I can glide over the sexist bits because overall the plot/characters/writing are good enough that I choose to ignore the fact that the women are horribly written (looking at you, Robert Jordan). But in this book I cared not a whit about any character, the plot was leaden and the writing was so stilted and musty I thought for a bit it had to be a translated book, despite the fact that I know Rushdie writes in English. Basically, every woman in this is either an insecure shrew (Machiavelli's wife, Akbar's wives) or an empty vessel that men project their sexual fantasies on to. The Enchantress herself is basically powered by hotness. Her magic is her beauty. The female servants in the book are literally their mistress' echo (Gulbadan's servant) or mirror (the enchantress' servant) thus devoiding them of the little personality that the other women get. The enchantress (whose second husband names her Angelique, a name she decides to share with her mirror/servant) decides to fulfill the fantasy that Budweiser ads promise in commercials, namely a threesome with hot, willing twins. Of course, there's never any jealousy between the enchantress and the mirror over the second husband, nor is the mirror ever shown to care that her mistress basically whores her out to the second husband. That would require them to be presented as human, when really the women in this book are ciphers for male fantasies. I mean, for goodness sake, the Mughal's favorite wife (who was an actual historical person) is a figment of her husband's imagination (who, despite this, is able to give him great sex). And don't even get me started on the part of the book when all the women in the Mughal's city became petty and quarrelsome with each other, but were cured when they were ordered to walk around naked all day and realized they were all flawed and human (uh...yeah...). The worst part of it all was that I got the feeling that Rushdie considered this book romantic. No wonder this guy has been married and divorced four times (that is probably a low blow, but the fact that he obviously does not understand women as human beings comes across in this book incredibly strongly).
Also, why the heck did he include a bibliography? This book is completely a book of magical realism and so much of it is detached from reality and obviously NOT historical, you can't really trust any of it to be historically accurate unless you're familiar with the period and can judge for yourself what is real and what is false. Is the bibliography just there to show off that he did in fact do research?
November 12, 2018
This is the second time now I have abandoned a Rushdie novel, so in all likelihood I won't bother reading him again. The fact I managed to get beyond the halfway point made me feel like I deserved a nice pat on the back. He is simply not a writer I hold in high regard anyway, and this twaddle just confirms that even stronger, as it's blatantly sexist, and an insult to women. Things started out quite promising, before I drastically lost interest. and couldn't care less about any of it's characters.
If I ever came across Rushdie in person, I would like nothing more than to pelt him with eggs.
If I ever came across Rushdie in person, I would like nothing more than to pelt him with eggs.
July 21, 2008
While every review seems a need to state the basic plot of the yellow-haired stranger appearing in Akbar's court I will quickly skip over this and go straight to what I thought. I felt that the book was very uneven, there where parts that were just wonderful and deserving a full five stars, in particular the story of the illuminator who disappeared into his own artwork and the concept of Jhoda, and others that were so very boring that the average became a two.
The main problem I had was that it was a very slow read due to the fact that at times it felt like a history book (not surprising considering Rushdie's background)and had so much historical detail crammed in that I felt I really needed a who's who guide and lots of maps just to fingure out what was going on. Also the ending was a bit rushed and vague, and a bit ewwwww with the incest.
I also had the opportunity to go to his book talk and signing for this book and I have to say that he did a wonderful job actually summing things up and I feel that his talk added alot to the book, laying out more clearly what the historical situation was like during the time of Akbar, and maybe if that had been infused into the book then I wouldn't have felt quite so lost sometimes.
The main problem I had was that it was a very slow read due to the fact that at times it felt like a history book (not surprising considering Rushdie's background)and had so much historical detail crammed in that I felt I really needed a who's who guide and lots of maps just to fingure out what was going on. Also the ending was a bit rushed and vague, and a bit ewwwww with the incest.
I also had the opportunity to go to his book talk and signing for this book and I have to say that he did a wonderful job actually summing things up and I feel that his talk added alot to the book, laying out more clearly what the historical situation was like during the time of Akbar, and maybe if that had been infused into the book then I wouldn't have felt quite so lost sometimes.
September 1, 2022
(review in English below)
Gostei imenso!
Gostei da hist贸ria, dos personagens, da escrita, do humor... enfim, de tudo!
Muitos dos personagens e acontecimentos s茫o hist贸ricos, o autor fez uma intensa pesquisa e o livro inclui uma bibliografia de v谩rias p谩ginas no final.
Recomendo especialmente a quem gostar de hist贸rias do g茅nero das Mil e Uma Noites.
E fiquei com muita vontade de ler mais coisas do senhor Rushdie!
I enjoyed it immensely!
I liked the story, the characters, the writing, the humour... everything, really!
A lot of the characters and events are historical - the author did an extensive research and the book includes several pages of references in the end.
I recommend it especially to those who like the kind of stories as in One Thousand and One Nights.
And now I really want to read more by Mr. Rushdie!
Gostei imenso!
Gostei da hist贸ria, dos personagens, da escrita, do humor... enfim, de tudo!
Muitos dos personagens e acontecimentos s茫o hist贸ricos, o autor fez uma intensa pesquisa e o livro inclui uma bibliografia de v谩rias p谩ginas no final.
Recomendo especialmente a quem gostar de hist贸rias do g茅nero das Mil e Uma Noites.
E fiquei com muita vontade de ler mais coisas do senhor Rushdie!
I enjoyed it immensely!
I liked the story, the characters, the writing, the humour... everything, really!
A lot of the characters and events are historical - the author did an extensive research and the book includes several pages of references in the end.
I recommend it especially to those who like the kind of stories as in One Thousand and One Nights.
And now I really want to read more by Mr. Rushdie!
July 30, 2020
芦The Enchantress of Florence禄
Salman Rushdie
鉅赌
芦肖袥袨袪袝袧孝袉袡小鞋袣袗 效袗袪袉袙袧袠笑携禄 小邪谢屑邪薪 袪褍褕写褨
袙懈写邪胁薪懈褑褌胁芯 袞褍锌邪薪褋褜泻芯谐芯 2010
鉅赌
芦小褞褉褉械邪谢褨褋褌懈褔薪邪 褨褋褌芯褉褨褟 芯写薪芯谐芯 褏懈屑械褉薪芯谐芯 褔芯谢芯胁褨泻邪禄
鉅赌
袣邪蟹泻邪, 谢械谐械薪写邪 褔懈 褨褋褌芯褉懈褔薪邪 锌褉邪胁写邪?
鉅赌
袩邪谢泻械 泻芯褏邪薪薪褟, 褋屑械褉褌械谢褜薪褨 蟹褉邪写懈 褨 胁芯褦薪薪褨 蟹胁懈褌褟谐懈!
鉅赌
袩褉械泻褉邪褋薪褨 褔邪泻谢褍薪泻懈, 胁屑褨谢褨 泻褍褉褌懈蟹邪薪泻懈 褨 褍褟胁薪褨 泻芯褏邪薪泻懈!
鉅赌
袉褋褌芯褉褨褟 袟邪褏芯写褍 褨 小褏芯写褍 胁 褋褍屑褨褕褨 锌褉邪胁写懈 褨 胁懈谐邪写泻懈!
鉅赌
袉褋褌芯褉懈褔薪褨 锌芯褋褌邪褌褌褨, 褨屑锌械褉褨褩 泄 谐械褉芯褩 泻薪懈谐 胁 褕邪谢械薪芯屑褍 褌邪薪泻褍 褋谢褨胁!
鉅赌
笑械 屑芯褦 锌械褉褕械 蟹薪邪泄芯屑褋褌胁芯 蟹 邪胁褌芯褉芯屑. 袟邪写褍屑 褑褨泻邪胁懈泄, 邪谢械 褋泻谢邪写薪芯 锌芯胁薪褨褋褌褞 芯褑褨薪懈褌懈 泻薪懈卸泻褍 褔械褉械蟹 褟泻褨褋褌褜 锌械褉械泻谢邪写褍 褨 锌芯屑懈谢泻懈 胁 褌械泻褋褌褨.
鉅赌
笑懈褌邪褌邪:
鉅赌
芦- 校 屑芯褦屑褍 屑褨褋褌褨, - 锌褉芯屑芯胁懈胁 胁褨薪 蟹薪邪褔薪芯 锌褨蟹薪褨褕械, 褋褏懈谢懈胁褕懈褋褜 薪邪 锌芯写褍褕泻懈 褋械褉械写 屑械谢邪薪褏芯谢褨褩 卸褨薪芯泻 锌褨褋谢褟 泻芯褏邪薪薪褟, - 褋锌褉邪胁写褨 胁懈褏芯胁邪薪邪 卸褨薪泻邪 屑邪褦 斜褍褌懈 褉芯蟹胁邪卸谢懈胁芯褞 褨 褑薪芯褌谢懈胁芯褞, 褨 薪械 斜褍褌懈 芯斜鈥樠斝貉傂拘� 褔褍褌芯泻. 孝邪泻邪 卸褨薪泻邪 屑邪褦 斜褍褌懈 褋泻褉芯屑薪芯褞 褨 褋锌芯泻褨泄薪芯褞, 褖懈褉芯褞 褨 胁械谢懈泻芯写褍褕薪芯褞. 校 褌邪薪泻褍 胁芯薪邪 薪械 锌芯胁懈薪薪邪 褉芯斜懈褌懈 薪邪写褌芯 褉褨蟹泻懈褏 褉褍褏褨胁, 邪 胁 屑褍蟹懈褑褨 褩泄 谐芯写懈褌褜褋褟 褍薪懈泻邪褌懈 屑褨写薪懈褏 褋褍褉屑 褨 谐褍褔薪懈褏 斜邪褉邪斜邪薪褨胁. 袙芯薪邪 屑邪褦 斜褍褌懈 蟹谢械谐泻邪 锌褨写褎邪褉斜芯胁邪薪邪, 邪 褩褩 蟹邪褔褨褋泻邪 薪械 锌芯胁懈薪薪邪 胁懈写邪胁邪褌懈褋褟 薪邪写褌芯 锌懈褕薪芯褞.
鉅赌
袧械 蟹胁邪卸邪褞褔懈 薪邪 褌械, 褖芯 褨屑锌械褉邪褌芯褉 褍卸械 屑邪泄卸械 褋锌邪胁, 褍 薪褜芯谐芯 蟹 谐芯褉谢褟薪泻懈 胁懈褉胁邪谢芯褋褟 褖芯褋褜 褋褏芯卸械 薪邪 胁褨写褉邪蟹褍.
鉅赌
- 孝芯写褨 胁邪褕褨 写芯斜褉械 胁懈褏芯胁邪薪褨 褔芯谢芯胁褨泻懈 屑褍褋褟褌褜 锌芯屑懈褉邪褌懈 蟹 薪褍写褜谐懈, - 蟹褍屑褨胁 锌褉芯屑芯胁懈褌懈 胁褨薪.
鉅赌
- 袗谢械 卸 褦 褖械 泻褍褉褌懈蟹邪薪泻懈, - 褋泻邪蟹邪胁 袦邪覒芯褉, - 褋邪屑械 胁芯薪懈 胁褨写锌芯胁褨写邪褞褌褜 褍褋褨屑 胁邪褕懈屑 褨写械邪谢邪屑, 蟹邪 胁懈薪褟褌泻芯屑 褩褏薪褜芯谐芯 胁屑褨薪薪褟 胁懈泻谢邪写邪褌懈 锌褨写谢芯谐褍 泻芯谢褜芯褉芯胁懈屑 褋泻谢芯屑.
鉅赌
- 袧褨泻芯谢懈 薪械 泻芯褏邪泄 卸褨薪泻褍, 褟泻邪 薪械 蟹薪邪褦褌褜褋褟 薪邪 胁懈泻谢邪写邪薪薪褨 锌褨写谢芯谐懈 泻芯谢褜芯褉芯胁懈屑 褋泻谢芯屑, - 褋泻邪蟹邪胁 褨屑锌械褉邪褌芯褉 锌芯胁邪卸薪芯, 斜械蟹 卸芯写薪芯谐芯 薪邪褌褟泻褍 薪邪 卸邪褉褌. - 孝邪泻邪 卸褨薪泻邪 - 褑械 褋胁邪褉谢懈胁邪 写褍褉械锌邪.禄
鉅赌
袗薪芯褌邪褑褨褟:
鉅赌
芦肖谢芯褉械薪褌褨泄褋褜泻邪 褔邪褉褨胁薪懈褑褟禄 (2008 褉.) 鈥� 薪芯胁懈泄 褉芯屑邪薪 小邪谢屑邪薪邪 袪褍褕写褨, 写胁褨褔褨 谢邪褍褉械邪褌邪 袘褍泻械褉褨胁褋褜泻芯褩 锌褉械屑褨褩, 邪胁褌芯褉邪 褋泻邪薪写邪谢褜薪芯 胁褨写芯屑芯谐芯 褌胁芯褉褍 芦小邪褌邪薪懈薪褋褜泻褨 胁褨褉褕褨禄, 蟹写芯斜褍胁 斜谢懈褋泻邪胁懈褔薪褍 锌芯锌褍谢褟褉薪褨褋褌褜 褍 褋胁褨褌褨. 袩懈褋褜屑械薪薪懈泻 蟹屑邪谢褜芯胁褍褦 泻邪褉泻芯谢芯屑薪褨 卸懈褌褌褦胁褨 褕谢褟褏懈 褋胁芯褩褏 谐械褉芯褩胁 鈥� 卸褨薪泻懈 褨 褔芯谢芯胁褨泻邪 写芯斜懈 袙褨写褉芯写卸械薪薪褟 褍 写械褖芯 褎械褦褉懈褔薪褨泄, 泻邪蟹泻芯胁芯-锌褉懈谐芯写薪懈褑褜泻褨泄 褎芯褉屑褨, 褩褏薪褦 锌邪谢泻械 泻芯褏邪薪薪褟 薪邪 褌谢褨 褌芯谐芯褔邪褋薪懈褏 锌芯谢褨褌懈褔薪懈褏 锌芯写褨泄, 谐邪褉械屑薪懈褏 褨 写胁褨褉褑械胁懈褏 褨薪褌褉懈覒 褌邪 蟹胁懈褔邪褩胁, 褖芯 锌芯斜褍褌褍胁邪谢懈 胁 袉褌邪谢褨褩, 袉薪写褨褩 褨 孝褍褉械褔褔懈薪褨. 孝褉邪写懈褑褨泄薪芯 邪胁褌芯褉 薪械 锌褉懈锌懈薪褟褦 写懈胁褍胁邪褌懈 褔懈褌邪褔邪 薪械蟹胁懈褔薪懈屑懈 锌芯胁芯褉芯褌邪屑懈 褋褞卸械褌褍 褨 褉懈蟹懈泻芯胁邪薪褨褋褌褞 褋褌懈谢褞, 蟹褨褌泻薪械薪薪褟屑 褎褨谢芯褋芯褎褨褩 小褏芯写褍 褨 袟邪褏芯写褍.禄
鉅赌
#锌褉懈屑褏谢懈胁邪褔懈褌邪泻邪
Salman Rushdie
鉅赌
芦肖袥袨袪袝袧孝袉袡小鞋袣袗 效袗袪袉袙袧袠笑携禄 小邪谢屑邪薪 袪褍褕写褨
袙懈写邪胁薪懈褑褌胁芯 袞褍锌邪薪褋褜泻芯谐芯 2010
鉅赌
芦小褞褉褉械邪谢褨褋褌懈褔薪邪 褨褋褌芯褉褨褟 芯写薪芯谐芯 褏懈屑械褉薪芯谐芯 褔芯谢芯胁褨泻邪禄
鉅赌
袣邪蟹泻邪, 谢械谐械薪写邪 褔懈 褨褋褌芯褉懈褔薪邪 锌褉邪胁写邪?
鉅赌
袩邪谢泻械 泻芯褏邪薪薪褟, 褋屑械褉褌械谢褜薪褨 蟹褉邪写懈 褨 胁芯褦薪薪褨 蟹胁懈褌褟谐懈!
鉅赌
袩褉械泻褉邪褋薪褨 褔邪泻谢褍薪泻懈, 胁屑褨谢褨 泻褍褉褌懈蟹邪薪泻懈 褨 褍褟胁薪褨 泻芯褏邪薪泻懈!
鉅赌
袉褋褌芯褉褨褟 袟邪褏芯写褍 褨 小褏芯写褍 胁 褋褍屑褨褕褨 锌褉邪胁写懈 褨 胁懈谐邪写泻懈!
鉅赌
袉褋褌芯褉懈褔薪褨 锌芯褋褌邪褌褌褨, 褨屑锌械褉褨褩 泄 谐械褉芯褩 泻薪懈谐 胁 褕邪谢械薪芯屑褍 褌邪薪泻褍 褋谢褨胁!
鉅赌
笑械 屑芯褦 锌械褉褕械 蟹薪邪泄芯屑褋褌胁芯 蟹 邪胁褌芯褉芯屑. 袟邪写褍屑 褑褨泻邪胁懈泄, 邪谢械 褋泻谢邪写薪芯 锌芯胁薪褨褋褌褞 芯褑褨薪懈褌懈 泻薪懈卸泻褍 褔械褉械蟹 褟泻褨褋褌褜 锌械褉械泻谢邪写褍 褨 锌芯屑懈谢泻懈 胁 褌械泻褋褌褨.
鉅赌
笑懈褌邪褌邪:
鉅赌
芦- 校 屑芯褦屑褍 屑褨褋褌褨, - 锌褉芯屑芯胁懈胁 胁褨薪 蟹薪邪褔薪芯 锌褨蟹薪褨褕械, 褋褏懈谢懈胁褕懈褋褜 薪邪 锌芯写褍褕泻懈 褋械褉械写 屑械谢邪薪褏芯谢褨褩 卸褨薪芯泻 锌褨褋谢褟 泻芯褏邪薪薪褟, - 褋锌褉邪胁写褨 胁懈褏芯胁邪薪邪 卸褨薪泻邪 屑邪褦 斜褍褌懈 褉芯蟹胁邪卸谢懈胁芯褞 褨 褑薪芯褌谢懈胁芯褞, 褨 薪械 斜褍褌懈 芯斜鈥樠斝貉傂拘� 褔褍褌芯泻. 孝邪泻邪 卸褨薪泻邪 屑邪褦 斜褍褌懈 褋泻褉芯屑薪芯褞 褨 褋锌芯泻褨泄薪芯褞, 褖懈褉芯褞 褨 胁械谢懈泻芯写褍褕薪芯褞. 校 褌邪薪泻褍 胁芯薪邪 薪械 锌芯胁懈薪薪邪 褉芯斜懈褌懈 薪邪写褌芯 褉褨蟹泻懈褏 褉褍褏褨胁, 邪 胁 屑褍蟹懈褑褨 褩泄 谐芯写懈褌褜褋褟 褍薪懈泻邪褌懈 屑褨写薪懈褏 褋褍褉屑 褨 谐褍褔薪懈褏 斜邪褉邪斜邪薪褨胁. 袙芯薪邪 屑邪褦 斜褍褌懈 蟹谢械谐泻邪 锌褨写褎邪褉斜芯胁邪薪邪, 邪 褩褩 蟹邪褔褨褋泻邪 薪械 锌芯胁懈薪薪邪 胁懈写邪胁邪褌懈褋褟 薪邪写褌芯 锌懈褕薪芯褞.
鉅赌
袧械 蟹胁邪卸邪褞褔懈 薪邪 褌械, 褖芯 褨屑锌械褉邪褌芯褉 褍卸械 屑邪泄卸械 褋锌邪胁, 褍 薪褜芯谐芯 蟹 谐芯褉谢褟薪泻懈 胁懈褉胁邪谢芯褋褟 褖芯褋褜 褋褏芯卸械 薪邪 胁褨写褉邪蟹褍.
鉅赌
- 孝芯写褨 胁邪褕褨 写芯斜褉械 胁懈褏芯胁邪薪褨 褔芯谢芯胁褨泻懈 屑褍褋褟褌褜 锌芯屑懈褉邪褌懈 蟹 薪褍写褜谐懈, - 蟹褍屑褨胁 锌褉芯屑芯胁懈褌懈 胁褨薪.
鉅赌
- 袗谢械 卸 褦 褖械 泻褍褉褌懈蟹邪薪泻懈, - 褋泻邪蟹邪胁 袦邪覒芯褉, - 褋邪屑械 胁芯薪懈 胁褨写锌芯胁褨写邪褞褌褜 褍褋褨屑 胁邪褕懈屑 褨写械邪谢邪屑, 蟹邪 胁懈薪褟褌泻芯屑 褩褏薪褜芯谐芯 胁屑褨薪薪褟 胁懈泻谢邪写邪褌懈 锌褨写谢芯谐褍 泻芯谢褜芯褉芯胁懈屑 褋泻谢芯屑.
鉅赌
- 袧褨泻芯谢懈 薪械 泻芯褏邪泄 卸褨薪泻褍, 褟泻邪 薪械 蟹薪邪褦褌褜褋褟 薪邪 胁懈泻谢邪写邪薪薪褨 锌褨写谢芯谐懈 泻芯谢褜芯褉芯胁懈屑 褋泻谢芯屑, - 褋泻邪蟹邪胁 褨屑锌械褉邪褌芯褉 锌芯胁邪卸薪芯, 斜械蟹 卸芯写薪芯谐芯 薪邪褌褟泻褍 薪邪 卸邪褉褌. - 孝邪泻邪 卸褨薪泻邪 - 褑械 褋胁邪褉谢懈胁邪 写褍褉械锌邪.禄
鉅赌
袗薪芯褌邪褑褨褟:
鉅赌
芦肖谢芯褉械薪褌褨泄褋褜泻邪 褔邪褉褨胁薪懈褑褟禄 (2008 褉.) 鈥� 薪芯胁懈泄 褉芯屑邪薪 小邪谢屑邪薪邪 袪褍褕写褨, 写胁褨褔褨 谢邪褍褉械邪褌邪 袘褍泻械褉褨胁褋褜泻芯褩 锌褉械屑褨褩, 邪胁褌芯褉邪 褋泻邪薪写邪谢褜薪芯 胁褨写芯屑芯谐芯 褌胁芯褉褍 芦小邪褌邪薪懈薪褋褜泻褨 胁褨褉褕褨禄, 蟹写芯斜褍胁 斜谢懈褋泻邪胁懈褔薪褍 锌芯锌褍谢褟褉薪褨褋褌褜 褍 褋胁褨褌褨. 袩懈褋褜屑械薪薪懈泻 蟹屑邪谢褜芯胁褍褦 泻邪褉泻芯谢芯屑薪褨 卸懈褌褌褦胁褨 褕谢褟褏懈 褋胁芯褩褏 谐械褉芯褩胁 鈥� 卸褨薪泻懈 褨 褔芯谢芯胁褨泻邪 写芯斜懈 袙褨写褉芯写卸械薪薪褟 褍 写械褖芯 褎械褦褉懈褔薪褨泄, 泻邪蟹泻芯胁芯-锌褉懈谐芯写薪懈褑褜泻褨泄 褎芯褉屑褨, 褩褏薪褦 锌邪谢泻械 泻芯褏邪薪薪褟 薪邪 褌谢褨 褌芯谐芯褔邪褋薪懈褏 锌芯谢褨褌懈褔薪懈褏 锌芯写褨泄, 谐邪褉械屑薪懈褏 褨 写胁褨褉褑械胁懈褏 褨薪褌褉懈覒 褌邪 蟹胁懈褔邪褩胁, 褖芯 锌芯斜褍褌褍胁邪谢懈 胁 袉褌邪谢褨褩, 袉薪写褨褩 褨 孝褍褉械褔褔懈薪褨. 孝褉邪写懈褑褨泄薪芯 邪胁褌芯褉 薪械 锌褉懈锌懈薪褟褦 写懈胁褍胁邪褌懈 褔懈褌邪褔邪 薪械蟹胁懈褔薪懈屑懈 锌芯胁芯褉芯褌邪屑懈 褋褞卸械褌褍 褨 褉懈蟹懈泻芯胁邪薪褨褋褌褞 褋褌懈谢褞, 蟹褨褌泻薪械薪薪褟屑 褎褨谢芯褋芯褎褨褩 小褏芯写褍 褨 袟邪褏芯写褍.禄
鉅赌
#锌褉懈屑褏谢懈胁邪褔懈褌邪泻邪
July 10, 2008
Filled with lush emptiness. There is more love-at-first-sight in the Enchantress than all other stories put together. Entire cities fall in love at first sight. And the level of subtlety rarely rises above this. After a promising first 80 pages or so, it begins to resemble a cartoon (in a bad way). Even the blasphemies in this book鈥�-which seemed to be produced by Rushdie perfunctorily, like a band that always makes sure to play its most popular song鈥�-are wooden and innocuous.
It鈥檚 too bad this book comes after Shalimar the Clown, which was a great book that healed the wounds Fury caused me (and presumably other Rushdie fans). I can鈥檛 tell if Enchantress is worse than Fury; the books are so different from each other on a surface level, but they share a common awfulness (and this awfulness has its source in Rushdie鈥檚 aesthetics gone haywire).
I also read that NYTimes David Gates review that's referred to below and agreed with its gist. As the reviewer put it: 鈥淥h well, it鈥檚 his book.鈥�
It鈥檚 too bad this book comes after Shalimar the Clown, which was a great book that healed the wounds Fury caused me (and presumably other Rushdie fans). I can鈥檛 tell if Enchantress is worse than Fury; the books are so different from each other on a surface level, but they share a common awfulness (and this awfulness has its source in Rushdie鈥檚 aesthetics gone haywire).
I also read that NYTimes David Gates review that's referred to below and agreed with its gist. As the reviewer put it: 鈥淥h well, it鈥檚 his book.鈥�
December 14, 2017
Floransa B眉y眉c眉s眉 renkli, bol hik芒yeli ve masals谋 bir roman. Biri bana bir roman谋 b枚yle tarif etse 莽ok heyecanlan谋r谋m, ama okuyunca s眉rekli karars谋z kal谋yorum bu iyi bir roman m谋 diye. Bu roman谋 anlayabilmek ve de臒erlendirebilmek i莽in ona benzeyen di臒er romanlar谋 g枚z 枚n眉nde bulundurmak gerekti臒ini d眉艧眉n眉yorum; ilk akl谋ma gelenleri Y眉zy谋ll谋k Yaln谋zl谋k, Puslu K谋talar Atlas谋, Benim Ad谋m K谋rm谋z谋. Bu tarz romanlar谋n bir ad谋 var m谋 bilmiyorum ama c眉mb眉艧 roman diye tan谋mlamak istiyorum.
Bu romanlar谋n ortak 枚zelli臒i, bizim bildi臒imiz bi莽imdeki d眉nyan谋n k谋r谋lmas谋, tuhafla艧mas谋 ve daha renkli, daha karikat眉rize, daha e臒lenceli hale gelmesi. Bunu ister Benim Ad谋m K谋rm谋z谋 gibi baz谋 edebi oyunlar谋n arkas谋na saklanarak yaps谋n, ister b眉y眉l眉 ger莽ek莽ili臒i kullans谋n, sonu莽 olarak yarat谋lan d眉nyalar birbirine benziyor. B枚yle bir d眉nya yaratmak, o d眉nyay谋 onlarca hik芒ye ile birbirine ba臒lamak muhakkak bir beceri i艧i. Fakat "c眉mb眉艧 roman" ad谋n谋 verdi臒im bu romanlar谋 da ikiye ay谋rmak gerekti臒ini d眉艧眉n眉yorum: Okuru d眉nyas谋na yabanc谋la艧t谋ranlar ve okura yabanc谋 d眉nyada rehberlik edenler.
Tuhafl谋臒谋n谋 karma艧谋kl谋臒谋ndan alan diye de isimlendirebilece臒im okuru d眉nyas谋na yabanc谋la艧t谋ran romanlara Y眉zy谋ll谋k Yaln谋zl谋k ve Puslu K谋talar Atlas谋 iki m眉kemmel 枚rnek. Bu iki kitab谋 da bitirenlerle kar艧谋la艧谋nca s谋k s谋k 艧unu soruyorum: Kitaptan akl谋nda ne kald谋? Genelde bir 艧a艧k谋nl谋k, bir duraksama ve s枚ylenebilen k眉莽眉k birka莽 c眉mle haricinde bir cevap gelmiyor. 脟眉nk眉 do臒am谋z itibariyle neden sonu莽 ili艧kileriyle kavrad谋臒谋m谋z 艧eyleri daha kolay hat谋rlayabiliyoruz. E臒itim sisteminin berbatl谋臒谋 da tam olarak buradan geliyor, neden sonu莽 ili艧kilerini de臒il yaln谋zca durumlar谋 ezberleyenler, anlam zincirini olu艧turamad谋klar谋 i莽in haliyle hi莽bir 艧ey hat谋rlayam谋yorlar. Bu iki romanda da bu nedenle hi莽bir 艧ey hat谋rlanm谋yor. Neden sonu莽 ili艧kileri 莽ok zay谋f. Ama okura bunu hissettirmemek i莽in hik芒ye temposu 莽ok y眉ksek ayarlan谋yor. S眉rekli bir 艧eyler oluyor, bir 艧eyler de臒i艧iyor ve okur "dur bakal谋m" diyerek okumaya devam ediyor. Marquez ve 陌hsan Oktay Anar al谋nmazsa, bir de hile yapt谋klar谋n谋 d眉艧眉n眉yorum: 陌simlerle aldatmaca yarat谋yorlar. Marquez bir ailedeki herkese ayn谋 isimleri vererek, 陌. O. Anar ise bir karakterden her bahsetti臒inde bir paragraf soy a臒ac谋n谋 vererek bizi d眉nyaya yabanc谋la艧t谋r谋yorlar. Puslu K谋talar Atlas谋'nda kullan谋lan Osmanl谋ca'n谋n da bu i艧e yarad谋臒谋n谋 d眉艧眉n眉yorum. Hem hik芒yeler 莽ok h谋zl谋 ilerledi臒i i莽in hem de neden sonu莽 ili艧ki kurmaktan ka莽谋nd谋klar谋 i莽in 莽o臒unlukla karakterler derinle艧tirilemiyor. Ya iki boyutlu kal谋yorlar ya da onlar谋 莽ok az tan谋yabiliyoruz. Bir yazar谋n derdi ekseriyetle okuru yaratt谋臒谋 d眉nyaya yak谋nla艧t谋rmak iken, bu romanlarda okur bile isteye yabanc谋la艧t谋r谋l谋yor ve bu durumda okur, roman谋n d眉nyas谋n谋n 莽ok b眉y眉k, 莽ok karma艧谋k, kendisinin ise okyanustan bir damla su almaya 莽al谋艧an biri gibi, o karma艧谋kl谋ktan hik芒yeler koparan biri oldu臒unu d眉艧眉nmeye ba艧l谋yor.
Okura yabanc谋 d眉nyada rehberlik eden romana ise 枚rnek olarak Benim Ad谋m K谋rm谋z谋'y谋 d眉艧眉n眉yorum. Benim Ad谋m K谋rm谋z谋'da neden sonu莽 ili艧kileri gayet belirgin. Karakterler belli bir sistemle s枚z al谋yor, ba艧l谋kland谋rma okurun i艧ini kolayla艧t谋r谋yor. Olay 枚rg眉s眉 gayet belirgin, hik芒yeler ise do臒rudan bir amaca hizmet ediyor. Orhan Pamuk'u s谋k s谋k karma艧谋k yazmakla ele艧tirenleri g枚r眉nce akl谋m谋n 莽谋kmas谋 da bu y眉zden. Orhan Pamuk her kitab谋nda yaratt谋臒谋 tuhaf d眉nyada okuruna rehberlik ediyor, hi莽bir 艧eyi olmas谋 gerekenden daha karma艧谋k hale getirmiyor, buna ra臒men ortaya yukar谋da sayd谋臒谋m 枚rneklerdeki kadar tuhaf bir d眉nya 莽谋kar谋yor.
Ishiguro bu romanlara benzemeyen ama daha da tuhaf olan roman谋 Avunamayanlar i莽in konu艧urken, anlatabilece臒i en basit 艧ekilde anlatt谋臒谋n谋, ama anlatt谋臒谋 艧eyin karma艧谋k oldu臒unu s枚yl眉yordu ve bir 艧eyi gereksiz yere karma艧谋kla艧t谋rman谋n samimiyetsiz ve ho艧 olmayan bir davran谋艧 oldu臒unu s枚yl眉yordu. Ben de 枚yle d眉艧眉n眉yorum.
Floransa B眉y眉c眉s眉'ne de臒inecek olursak, bu iki tip roman谋n tam ortas谋nda oldu臒unu s枚yleyebilirim. Biraz ondan yap谋yor, biraz bundan. Kitab谋n 眉莽te biri tamamen gereksiz yere kar谋艧谋k. Hik芒yenin sonunu ba艧谋nda okuyoruz ve do臒al olarak ne karakterleri anlayabiliyoruz ne de ama莽lar谋n谋. Yazar da bize bunlar谋 a莽谋k etmiyor. Kitaba ismini veren esas karakterini neredeyse kitab谋n ortas谋na okumaya ba艧l谋yoruz. Neden b枚yle bir tercih yap谋lm谋艧? Yukar谋da s枚ylediklerimin 谋艧谋臒谋nda 莽ok da iyi niyetle oldu臒unu s枚yleyemeyece臒im. Ama kitab谋n ikinci b枚l眉m眉nden itibaren, o gereksiz yere karma艧谋kla艧an d眉nya yok oluyor ve 莽ok iyi bir hik芒ye okumaya ba艧l谋yoruz. Gereksiz oyunlara da yer verilmiyor. Kara G枚z'眉n hik芒yesini kitab谋n ortas谋ndan sonra bitirmek istemedi臒i i莽in b枚yle bir kronolojik sapmaya gitmi艧 de diyebiliriz, bunun da pay谋 vard谋r belki ama sonu莽ta biz okudu臒umuz 100 k眉sur sayfada neden b枚yle bir yabanc谋l谋k hissedelim ki? Yine 枚zel isimlerle okur yabanc谋la艧t谋r谋l谋yor. Bunu da 莽ok 莽al谋艧an yazar谋n kaynaklar谋n谋 a莽谋k etme ve verdi臒i eme臒i g枚sterme hevesi olarak yorumlamak m眉mk眉n, ama bunu yapacaksa bile iyi bir 艧ekilde yapmas谋 gerekiyor. Benim Ad谋m K谋rm谋z谋'da da onlarca eserden bahsediliyor, bilhassa nakka艧lardan uzun uzun bahsediliyor ama do臒rudan hik芒ye onlar谋n 眉zerine kurulu zaten.
Floransa B眉y眉c眉s眉 yine karakterlerin zay谋f oldu臒u bir roman. Ya iki boyutlular ya da hi莽 anlayam谋yoruz. Tek iyi yarat谋lm谋艧 karakter Ekber 艦ah. Onun haricindekiler kukla gibi kal谋yor. Bu y眉zden de asl谋nda ya艧anan 艧eyleri 莽ok da 枚nemsemiyoruz.
Bu romanlar谋n ortak 枚zelli臒i, bizim bildi臒imiz bi莽imdeki d眉nyan谋n k谋r谋lmas谋, tuhafla艧mas谋 ve daha renkli, daha karikat眉rize, daha e臒lenceli hale gelmesi. Bunu ister Benim Ad谋m K谋rm谋z谋 gibi baz谋 edebi oyunlar谋n arkas谋na saklanarak yaps谋n, ister b眉y眉l眉 ger莽ek莽ili臒i kullans谋n, sonu莽 olarak yarat谋lan d眉nyalar birbirine benziyor. B枚yle bir d眉nya yaratmak, o d眉nyay谋 onlarca hik芒ye ile birbirine ba臒lamak muhakkak bir beceri i艧i. Fakat "c眉mb眉艧 roman" ad谋n谋 verdi臒im bu romanlar谋 da ikiye ay谋rmak gerekti臒ini d眉艧眉n眉yorum: Okuru d眉nyas谋na yabanc谋la艧t谋ranlar ve okura yabanc谋 d眉nyada rehberlik edenler.
Tuhafl谋臒谋n谋 karma艧谋kl谋臒谋ndan alan diye de isimlendirebilece臒im okuru d眉nyas谋na yabanc谋la艧t谋ran romanlara Y眉zy谋ll谋k Yaln谋zl谋k ve Puslu K谋talar Atlas谋 iki m眉kemmel 枚rnek. Bu iki kitab谋 da bitirenlerle kar艧谋la艧谋nca s谋k s谋k 艧unu soruyorum: Kitaptan akl谋nda ne kald谋? Genelde bir 艧a艧k谋nl谋k, bir duraksama ve s枚ylenebilen k眉莽眉k birka莽 c眉mle haricinde bir cevap gelmiyor. 脟眉nk眉 do臒am谋z itibariyle neden sonu莽 ili艧kileriyle kavrad谋臒谋m谋z 艧eyleri daha kolay hat谋rlayabiliyoruz. E臒itim sisteminin berbatl谋臒谋 da tam olarak buradan geliyor, neden sonu莽 ili艧kilerini de臒il yaln谋zca durumlar谋 ezberleyenler, anlam zincirini olu艧turamad谋klar谋 i莽in haliyle hi莽bir 艧ey hat谋rlayam谋yorlar. Bu iki romanda da bu nedenle hi莽bir 艧ey hat谋rlanm谋yor. Neden sonu莽 ili艧kileri 莽ok zay谋f. Ama okura bunu hissettirmemek i莽in hik芒ye temposu 莽ok y眉ksek ayarlan谋yor. S眉rekli bir 艧eyler oluyor, bir 艧eyler de臒i艧iyor ve okur "dur bakal谋m" diyerek okumaya devam ediyor. Marquez ve 陌hsan Oktay Anar al谋nmazsa, bir de hile yapt谋klar谋n谋 d眉艧眉n眉yorum: 陌simlerle aldatmaca yarat谋yorlar. Marquez bir ailedeki herkese ayn谋 isimleri vererek, 陌. O. Anar ise bir karakterden her bahsetti臒inde bir paragraf soy a臒ac谋n谋 vererek bizi d眉nyaya yabanc谋la艧t谋r谋yorlar. Puslu K谋talar Atlas谋'nda kullan谋lan Osmanl谋ca'n谋n da bu i艧e yarad谋臒谋n谋 d眉艧眉n眉yorum. Hem hik芒yeler 莽ok h谋zl谋 ilerledi臒i i莽in hem de neden sonu莽 ili艧ki kurmaktan ka莽谋nd谋klar谋 i莽in 莽o臒unlukla karakterler derinle艧tirilemiyor. Ya iki boyutlu kal谋yorlar ya da onlar谋 莽ok az tan谋yabiliyoruz. Bir yazar谋n derdi ekseriyetle okuru yaratt谋臒谋 d眉nyaya yak谋nla艧t谋rmak iken, bu romanlarda okur bile isteye yabanc谋la艧t谋r谋l谋yor ve bu durumda okur, roman谋n d眉nyas谋n谋n 莽ok b眉y眉k, 莽ok karma艧谋k, kendisinin ise okyanustan bir damla su almaya 莽al谋艧an biri gibi, o karma艧谋kl谋ktan hik芒yeler koparan biri oldu臒unu d眉艧眉nmeye ba艧l谋yor.
Okura yabanc谋 d眉nyada rehberlik eden romana ise 枚rnek olarak Benim Ad谋m K谋rm谋z谋'y谋 d眉艧眉n眉yorum. Benim Ad谋m K谋rm谋z谋'da neden sonu莽 ili艧kileri gayet belirgin. Karakterler belli bir sistemle s枚z al谋yor, ba艧l谋kland谋rma okurun i艧ini kolayla艧t谋r谋yor. Olay 枚rg眉s眉 gayet belirgin, hik芒yeler ise do臒rudan bir amaca hizmet ediyor. Orhan Pamuk'u s谋k s谋k karma艧谋k yazmakla ele艧tirenleri g枚r眉nce akl谋m谋n 莽谋kmas谋 da bu y眉zden. Orhan Pamuk her kitab谋nda yaratt谋臒谋 tuhaf d眉nyada okuruna rehberlik ediyor, hi莽bir 艧eyi olmas谋 gerekenden daha karma艧谋k hale getirmiyor, buna ra臒men ortaya yukar谋da sayd谋臒谋m 枚rneklerdeki kadar tuhaf bir d眉nya 莽谋kar谋yor.
Ishiguro bu romanlara benzemeyen ama daha da tuhaf olan roman谋 Avunamayanlar i莽in konu艧urken, anlatabilece臒i en basit 艧ekilde anlatt谋臒谋n谋, ama anlatt谋臒谋 艧eyin karma艧谋k oldu臒unu s枚yl眉yordu ve bir 艧eyi gereksiz yere karma艧谋kla艧t谋rman谋n samimiyetsiz ve ho艧 olmayan bir davran谋艧 oldu臒unu s枚yl眉yordu. Ben de 枚yle d眉艧眉n眉yorum.
Floransa B眉y眉c眉s眉'ne de臒inecek olursak, bu iki tip roman谋n tam ortas谋nda oldu臒unu s枚yleyebilirim. Biraz ondan yap谋yor, biraz bundan. Kitab谋n 眉莽te biri tamamen gereksiz yere kar谋艧谋k. Hik芒yenin sonunu ba艧谋nda okuyoruz ve do臒al olarak ne karakterleri anlayabiliyoruz ne de ama莽lar谋n谋. Yazar da bize bunlar谋 a莽谋k etmiyor. Kitaba ismini veren esas karakterini neredeyse kitab谋n ortas谋na okumaya ba艧l谋yoruz. Neden b枚yle bir tercih yap谋lm谋艧? Yukar谋da s枚ylediklerimin 谋艧谋臒谋nda 莽ok da iyi niyetle oldu臒unu s枚yleyemeyece臒im. Ama kitab谋n ikinci b枚l眉m眉nden itibaren, o gereksiz yere karma艧谋kla艧an d眉nya yok oluyor ve 莽ok iyi bir hik芒ye okumaya ba艧l谋yoruz. Gereksiz oyunlara da yer verilmiyor. Kara G枚z'眉n hik芒yesini kitab谋n ortas谋ndan sonra bitirmek istemedi臒i i莽in b枚yle bir kronolojik sapmaya gitmi艧 de diyebiliriz, bunun da pay谋 vard谋r belki ama sonu莽ta biz okudu臒umuz 100 k眉sur sayfada neden b枚yle bir yabanc谋l谋k hissedelim ki? Yine 枚zel isimlerle okur yabanc谋la艧t谋r谋l谋yor. Bunu da 莽ok 莽al谋艧an yazar谋n kaynaklar谋n谋 a莽谋k etme ve verdi臒i eme臒i g枚sterme hevesi olarak yorumlamak m眉mk眉n, ama bunu yapacaksa bile iyi bir 艧ekilde yapmas谋 gerekiyor. Benim Ad谋m K谋rm谋z谋'da da onlarca eserden bahsediliyor, bilhassa nakka艧lardan uzun uzun bahsediliyor ama do臒rudan hik芒ye onlar谋n 眉zerine kurulu zaten.
Floransa B眉y眉c眉s眉 yine karakterlerin zay谋f oldu臒u bir roman. Ya iki boyutlular ya da hi莽 anlayam谋yoruz. Tek iyi yarat谋lm谋艧 karakter Ekber 艦ah. Onun haricindekiler kukla gibi kal谋yor. Bu y眉zden de asl谋nda ya艧anan 艧eyleri 莽ok da 枚nemsemiyoruz.
July 13, 2008
As a neophyte of Salman Rushdie's work, I was not fully prepared for The Enchantress of Florence, although I should have been. Rushdie possesses an uncanny ability to manipulate perspective. In his stories, the flow of time is always questionable, and subject to change--if it flows at all. And his characters are larger-than-life, capricious archetypes that embody the virtues and flaws of humanity.
In this novel, Rushdie runs two stories parallel to each other: that of Emperor Akbar's court, the emperor's life and philosophy; and the story of a man's heritage, of a lost Mughal princess who travels from Asia to Florence to the New World, then beyond. The boundaries between these two stories--the latter of which takes place in the first one's past--are flimsy, permeable. If you were expecting a linear narrative that reads like a movie novelization, then you a) have not read Salman Rushdie before and b) will not get that.
I might even characterize this story as a fable, for it carries that particular brand of enchantment about it. Romance, yes, that too: the main characters all mediate on the nature of love at one point or another. Cloaked in sixteenth-century philosophical ideas, these ruminations may seem pompous or boring, but I found them intriguing. Akbar struggles with the existence of God, the divine right to rule, whether might truly is the only arbiter of power. We also see a fictionalized Machiavelli, disenchanted with his wife, and like so many men in this story, drawn into the web of enchantment that the eponymous princess weaves.
Descend deeper through these layers, and Rushdie focuses on the nature of power for women in a world dominated by men. How do women exert their influence? Is their beauty, their sexuality, the only way they can ever gain power? In this book, two female characters are essentially imaginary, constructed from the mind of Akbar. What does this say about the nature of gender, a man creating his feminine opposites because he cannot find them in life?
Rushdie uses this story as a vehicle to explore a woman's life--told largely through the perspectives of men, ironically--in this period of history. However, I wouldn't necessarily call this a work of historical fiction, in the sense that it does not concern itself too much with the details of history except when they serve a purpose. The story is not about the Mughal empire so much as it is set, for a part, in that empire.
While "epic" or "sword and sorcery" fantasy has its place, its success of late has typecasted the genre. In those stories, magic is almost a science, subjected to laws the way we have restricted gravity. We often forget that the definition of fantasy is broader. In this respect, The Enchantress of Florence reminds me of . It is truly a fantastic adventure and romance just steeped in unrestrained magic, a world in which anything is possible--but not everything is permitted.
In this novel, Rushdie runs two stories parallel to each other: that of Emperor Akbar's court, the emperor's life and philosophy; and the story of a man's heritage, of a lost Mughal princess who travels from Asia to Florence to the New World, then beyond. The boundaries between these two stories--the latter of which takes place in the first one's past--are flimsy, permeable. If you were expecting a linear narrative that reads like a movie novelization, then you a) have not read Salman Rushdie before and b) will not get that.
I might even characterize this story as a fable, for it carries that particular brand of enchantment about it. Romance, yes, that too: the main characters all mediate on the nature of love at one point or another. Cloaked in sixteenth-century philosophical ideas, these ruminations may seem pompous or boring, but I found them intriguing. Akbar struggles with the existence of God, the divine right to rule, whether might truly is the only arbiter of power. We also see a fictionalized Machiavelli, disenchanted with his wife, and like so many men in this story, drawn into the web of enchantment that the eponymous princess weaves.
Descend deeper through these layers, and Rushdie focuses on the nature of power for women in a world dominated by men. How do women exert their influence? Is their beauty, their sexuality, the only way they can ever gain power? In this book, two female characters are essentially imaginary, constructed from the mind of Akbar. What does this say about the nature of gender, a man creating his feminine opposites because he cannot find them in life?
Rushdie uses this story as a vehicle to explore a woman's life--told largely through the perspectives of men, ironically--in this period of history. However, I wouldn't necessarily call this a work of historical fiction, in the sense that it does not concern itself too much with the details of history except when they serve a purpose. The story is not about the Mughal empire so much as it is set, for a part, in that empire.
While "epic" or "sword and sorcery" fantasy has its place, its success of late has typecasted the genre. In those stories, magic is almost a science, subjected to laws the way we have restricted gravity. We often forget that the definition of fantasy is broader. In this respect, The Enchantress of Florence reminds me of . It is truly a fantastic adventure and romance just steeped in unrestrained magic, a world in which anything is possible--but not everything is permitted.
April 8, 2019
Floransa B眉y眉c眉s眉 takip edilmesi zor bir kitap. Hikaye i莽inde hikaye olan, 莽ok sesli, 莽ok katmanl谋, birden fazla merkezi olan, 15.ve 16. yy'谋 莽er莽evesinde geli艧en tarihsel olaylar谋 d枚nemlerin getirdi臒i inan莽lar,duygular ve kayg谋lar i莽erisinde ger莽eklik - ger莽ek眉st眉l眉k kavramlar谋n谋 modern roman yap谋s谋 i莽inde sunuyor.
Rushdie'nin d枚nemlerin linear olmayan anlat谋m谋 i莽inde do臒u -bat谋 kar艧谋la艧t谋rmas谋 bilindik ve kula臒a tan谋d谋k gelebilecek 枚yk眉lere kar艧谋 getirmi艧 oldu臒u dualist bak谋艧 a莽谋s谋n谋 da beraber getiriyor.
Kitap her ne kadar sadece masals谋 ya da b眉y眉sel ger莽ekli臒i kulland谋臒谋n谋 okura d眉艧眉nd眉rse de, 眉st metin a莽谋s谋ndan, ger莽ekli臒in ke艧fini arayan ve bunu masals谋 枚臒elerle son derece zekice bir araya getiren 莽ok ba艧ar谋l谋 bir kitap.
Sonu莽 olarak, bu 莽ok katmanl谋l谋k ve 莽okseslilik bazen yorabiliyor. Her 艧eye ra臒men Rushdie'nin romanc谋 olarak dili ve olaylar谋 zenginle艧tirmesine sadece hayranl谋k duyuyorsunuz.
陌yi okumalar,
5/4
Rushdie'nin d枚nemlerin linear olmayan anlat谋m谋 i莽inde do臒u -bat谋 kar艧谋la艧t谋rmas谋 bilindik ve kula臒a tan谋d谋k gelebilecek 枚yk眉lere kar艧谋 getirmi艧 oldu臒u dualist bak谋艧 a莽谋s谋n谋 da beraber getiriyor.
Kitap her ne kadar sadece masals谋 ya da b眉y眉sel ger莽ekli臒i kulland谋臒谋n谋 okura d眉艧眉nd眉rse de, 眉st metin a莽谋s谋ndan, ger莽ekli臒in ke艧fini arayan ve bunu masals谋 枚臒elerle son derece zekice bir araya getiren 莽ok ba艧ar谋l谋 bir kitap.
Sonu莽 olarak, bu 莽ok katmanl谋l谋k ve 莽okseslilik bazen yorabiliyor. Her 艧eye ra臒men Rushdie'nin romanc谋 olarak dili ve olaylar谋 zenginle艧tirmesine sadece hayranl谋k duyuyorsunuz.
陌yi okumalar,
5/4
March 22, 2012
When this book was chosen for my real life bookclub, I was a little nervous about it. I'd never read anything of Salman Rushdie's before, and I wouldn't have chosen this one to start with (if ever). I'll be honest, the premise looks kind of boring.
But then I started reading it. And I was completely surprised by not only how much I liked it, but by how funny it was. Irreverent, and witty, and whimsical and a little weird, with more than a dash of gutter-humor funny that had me giggling like a fiend. At the 45% point, I was ready to call this one a 5-star book. I was loving it.
I loved Akbar, Akbar the Great, the greatness of which must be twice specified in order to merely hint at his glorious gloriousness. Him. I loved his personality, his unpredictability, his mind. I loved how he thought about things... Honestly, it is so rare for a ruler to think about the nature of his (or her) rule in terms other than 1) how to keep it, and 2) how to get more of it. I loved that he thought in the abstract, the philosophical. I vs we. All "I"s are "we"s, not just Royal "we"s. Everyone is part of a larger entity that makes them up: family, friends, community, etc.
We enjoyed his blunt honesty too, in acknowledging that his kids, whom he loves, are royal bastards who will try to usurp his rule.
For the first half. And then it shifted.
Then that yellow-haired guy had to show up and tell his secret that is so momentous that to tell it to the wrong person would cause the listener's death. Dun dun dunnnnnnn! Except it wasn't. The secret was... mundane. A family history that leached almost all the humor and life out of the 2nd half of the book. Not all... but enough.
Suddenly we have this new cast list, and though they try to be interesting, to me they just weren't. They didn't compare to Akbar. Recognizable names, sure, but I wasn't really feeling them despite that. I wanted to get back to "the present" and spend more time with Akbar. He made the story interesting to me. Qara Koz was... not really enchanting me.
Honestly, I don't get her allure - or, to be honest, the allure of any of the other "Oh so beautiful that one look upon her face makes men ready to just keel over and die for her" women mentioned in the story. We have one that's so perfect she's literally imaginary, but doesn't even have the decency to stop existing when her imaginer is away. We have another who is so beautiful that basking in her haughty condescension is considered a luxury, and one who is so amazingly gorgeous that everyone in town's had a share except her husband. But maybe Qara Koz is actually literally enchanting them, as opposed to just being so pretty that men fall down at her feet. I'm a little iffy on that point. That's magical realism for you.
I'm not sure how I felt about this book, overall. I wanted to love it, and for the first half, I did... but then it just got tedious to me. There's the underlying question of a woman's power and influence, but I feel a bit bothered by the fact that every woman in this book either a) had none, b) had a little that was granted by a man, c) obtained it strictly based on her looks, or d) used magic.
Another reason why I loved Akbar... he didn't want a submissive doormat of a wife... he wanted a woman that would actually think for herself and act upon her own will. In fact the main men were like this and valued more than just appearance... but appearance definitely came first and was a huge factor in their relationships with women (aside from whores). They are imperfect, I know... but I do give them credit for at least being somewhat respectable.
To shift gears a little, I will say I quite enjoyed the kind of modern feel to the narration. The story is set in the 16th century, but the language was accessible and straightforward, while at the same time being somehow more. I'm not really sure how to explain it, but it was gorgeous and easy to read and descriptive, and at times really funny, as I mentioned before.
There was also an interesting duality in this story... with the Echo and the Mirror, and the imagined-made-live theme running through both story lines. I thought that this was interesting, but it wasn't enough. There was quite a bit to enjoy in this book. I just wish that the story-within-the-story interested me more. But, in fairness, this isn't one of my favorite things to begin with. I definitely think I'll try another of Rushdie's books though.
But then I started reading it. And I was completely surprised by not only how much I liked it, but by how funny it was. Irreverent, and witty, and whimsical and a little weird, with more than a dash of gutter-humor funny that had me giggling like a fiend. At the 45% point, I was ready to call this one a 5-star book. I was loving it.
I loved Akbar, Akbar the Great, the greatness of which must be twice specified in order to merely hint at his glorious gloriousness. Him. I loved his personality, his unpredictability, his mind. I loved how he thought about things... Honestly, it is so rare for a ruler to think about the nature of his (or her) rule in terms other than 1) how to keep it, and 2) how to get more of it. I loved that he thought in the abstract, the philosophical. I vs we. All "I"s are "we"s, not just Royal "we"s. Everyone is part of a larger entity that makes them up: family, friends, community, etc.
Perhaps the idea of self-as-community was what it meant to be a being in the world, any being; such a being being, after all, inevitably a being among other beings, a part of the beingness of all things."
"...[They] are all bags of selves, bursting with plurality..."I, that is to say "We", loved this. It's interesting, and uniquely worded, and it made me giggle to read it in what, before starting, I assumed would be a seriously dull book.
We enjoyed his blunt honesty too, in acknowledging that his kids, whom he loves, are royal bastards who will try to usurp his rule.
"They were little gods, the despots of the future: born, unfortunately, to rule. He loved them. They would betray him. They were the lights of his life. They would come while he slept. The little assfuckers. He was waiting for their moves."Oh, yes... We loved him. Loved.
For the first half. And then it shifted.
Then that yellow-haired guy had to show up and tell his secret that is so momentous that to tell it to the wrong person would cause the listener's death. Dun dun dunnnnnnn! Except it wasn't. The secret was... mundane. A family history that leached almost all the humor and life out of the 2nd half of the book. Not all... but enough.
Suddenly we have this new cast list, and though they try to be interesting, to me they just weren't. They didn't compare to Akbar. Recognizable names, sure, but I wasn't really feeling them despite that. I wanted to get back to "the present" and spend more time with Akbar. He made the story interesting to me. Qara Koz was... not really enchanting me.
Honestly, I don't get her allure - or, to be honest, the allure of any of the other "Oh so beautiful that one look upon her face makes men ready to just keel over and die for her" women mentioned in the story. We have one that's so perfect she's literally imaginary, but doesn't even have the decency to stop existing when her imaginer is away. We have another who is so beautiful that basking in her haughty condescension is considered a luxury, and one who is so amazingly gorgeous that everyone in town's had a share except her husband. But maybe Qara Koz is actually literally enchanting them, as opposed to just being so pretty that men fall down at her feet. I'm a little iffy on that point. That's magical realism for you.
I'm not sure how I felt about this book, overall. I wanted to love it, and for the first half, I did... but then it just got tedious to me. There's the underlying question of a woman's power and influence, but I feel a bit bothered by the fact that every woman in this book either a) had none, b) had a little that was granted by a man, c) obtained it strictly based on her looks, or d) used magic.
Another reason why I loved Akbar... he didn't want a submissive doormat of a wife... he wanted a woman that would actually think for herself and act upon her own will. In fact the main men were like this and valued more than just appearance... but appearance definitely came first and was a huge factor in their relationships with women (aside from whores). They are imperfect, I know... but I do give them credit for at least being somewhat respectable.
To shift gears a little, I will say I quite enjoyed the kind of modern feel to the narration. The story is set in the 16th century, but the language was accessible and straightforward, while at the same time being somehow more. I'm not really sure how to explain it, but it was gorgeous and easy to read and descriptive, and at times really funny, as I mentioned before.
There was also an interesting duality in this story... with the Echo and the Mirror, and the imagined-made-live theme running through both story lines. I thought that this was interesting, but it wasn't enough. There was quite a bit to enjoy in this book. I just wish that the story-within-the-story interested me more. But, in fairness, this isn't one of my favorite things to begin with. I definitely think I'll try another of Rushdie's books though.
July 21, 2018
This would have been far better served by being a Silk type novella, an incantation that weaves its charms around us for the duration of one sitting- just long enough for the magic to work, not long enough for anyone to even think of wanting to look behind the curtain. The longer it went on, and the more tied to the reality of the world it became, the less it worked. So much of this could have been left to the readers to dream and imagine afterwards. So many subplots about hookers and pages of rhapsodize about the dark power of women鈥檚 beauty could have been cut (the second part especially forced me to turn on my 鈥渟o wtf is going on THERE, then?鈥� brain). This is a story about the power of stories- I get that unraveling it a little is part of the point, but this book needed to trust that its audience got it about 100 pages sooner than it thought we did.
Gorgeous, gorgeous writing that I would like to have been top on my list to talk about and quote at length might then have taken its proper place. But by the end, even that was too much of a good thing.
What a shame, what a world.
Take it from one who reads dozens of phantasmagoric books of a magical-realism bent and actually *wants* your spell to succeed as much as you do: Less is more.
Gorgeous, gorgeous writing that I would like to have been top on my list to talk about and quote at length might then have taken its proper place. But by the end, even that was too much of a good thing.
What a shame, what a world.
Take it from one who reads dozens of phantasmagoric books of a magical-realism bent and actually *wants* your spell to succeed as much as you do: Less is more.
February 1, 2024
Floransa B眉y眉c眉s眉 莽ok ciddi, hatta bana kal谋rsa kendisine k枚t眉 bir roman dememizi hakl谋 k谋lacak sorunlar谋 olan bir roman. 脰ncelikle kitapta Ekber 艦ah d谋艧谋nda eli y眉z眉 d眉zg眉n bir karakter yok, 枚yle ki anlat谋c谋m谋z dahil olmak 眉zere b眉t眉n yan karakterler kendilerine bi莽ilen k谋s谋tl谋 roller 眉zerine yaz谋lm谋艧lar ve yazar bunun 枚tesinde derinle艧tirme 莽abas谋na dahi girmemi艧. Mogor dell鈥橝more'谋n romandaki tek i艧levi hikaye anlatmak mesela, ne bunun i莽in sahip oldu臒u motivasyon ne de kendisini bu noktaya getiren ge莽mi艧i inand谋r谋c谋 de臒il bence. Hele 枚yle kad谋n karakterler var ki kitab谋 feminist perspektiften okudu臒umuz zaman felaket oldu臒unu s枚yleyebiliriz. Romanda zaman ayr谋lan iki kad谋n karakter (asl谋nda 眉莽 ama ikisini bir sayabiliriz) var ve bunlardan biri Ekber 艦ah'谋n hayalinden hayat bulan bir "ideal kad谋n" sureti. 陌deal kad谋ndan kast谋m谋z ise 艦ah'谋n istedi臒i zaman gidip beraber oldu臒u, 艦ah yokken olanlar谋 ona yeti艧tiren ve saraydaki di臒er t眉m kad谋nlar谋n nefret etti臒i bir karakter. Ya da bize kendi hikayesini yaz谋yormu艧 gibi g枚sterilen Kara G枚z'眉n de asl谋nda kendisinden beklenenin aksine bir 艧ey yapmad谋臒谋n谋 g枚r眉yoruz hikaye ilerledik莽e. Romanda tek "devrimci" kad谋n karakter 艦ah'谋n halas谋, o da zaten romanda bir yer tutmuyor.
Bir di臒er sorun ise, ki bence daha 枚nemli bu, Floransa B眉y眉c眉s眉 莽ok a莽谋k bir 艧ekilde Bat谋l谋 okurlar i莽in yaz谋lm谋艧 Do臒u anlat谋s谋. Elif Shafak sa臒 olsun biz T眉rkiye'de al谋艧k谋n谋z buna ama Rushdie'nin de bu konuda Shafak'tan a艧a臒谋 kal谋r bir yan谋 yokmu艧. Roman boyunca Bab眉rl眉ler, 陌ran ve Osmanl谋'y谋 kapsayan ve15. y眉zy谋ldan 16. y眉zy谋la uzanan bir hikayeler toplulu臒u okuyoruz, ancak b眉t眉ne bakt谋臒谋m谋zda sanki Rushdie bu iki y眉zy谋ll谋k s眉re莽te bu topraklarda olan 枚nemli olaylar谋 枚n眉ne alm谋艧 ve aralar谋 da Bat谋l谋 okurun sevece臒i, zorlanmadan anlayaca臒谋 olaylarla ve karakterlerle doldurmu艧 gibi. Yaln谋zca iki boyutlu karakterler de臒il bunu s枚ylememin sebebi, roman boyunca hikaye bilin莽li bir 艧ekilde saraylar谋 hi莽 terk etmiyor (genelevler hari莽). Sadece 艧ahlar谋, sultanlar谋, haremi ve cariyeleri, Do臒u deyince Bat谋n谋n tahayy眉l眉nde canlanan o renkli ve b眉y眉l眉 d眉nyay谋 g枚r眉yoruz. Ekber 艦ah'谋n verdi臒i -ger莽ek tarihle de uyumlu- kararlar hep 艦ah'谋n kendi i莽 d眉nyas谋na ve sarayda ya艧ananlara dayand谋r谋l谋yor ancak Bab眉rl眉lerin o d枚nemki etnik yap谋s谋, toplumdaki ayr谋l谋klar, bu olaylar谋n daha sonra tarihe etki edebilecek yans谋malar谋 tamamem es ge莽iliyor. Suland谋r谋lm谋艧 , renklendirilmi艧 ve bolca 艧ekerlendirilmi艧 bir tarihi anlat谋 kal谋yor elimizde. Roman谋 tamamen kendi i莽inde tutarl谋, ger莽ek d眉nyadan ba臒谋ms谋z de臒erlendirsek bile kocaman krall谋klar谋n bahsedildi臒i b枚yle bir kitapta halklar谋n sadece arka plandaki fig眉ranlar olarak kalmas谋 rahats谋z ediyor bir noktadan sonra. Bunun tek istisnas谋 陌talya'da ger莽ekle艧en bir isyan hareketi san谋r谋m, o da ne tesad眉ft眉r ki Bat谋da ya艧an谋yor.
Peki bu kadar ele艧tirdi臒im bir esere neden 3 y谋ld谋z veriyorum? 脟眉nk眉 -maalesef- Floransa B眉y眉c眉s眉 b眉t眉n hatalar谋na ra臒men 莽ok e臒lenceli, h谋zl谋 okunan, okuru bir anda kendi d眉nyas谋na 莽eken ve bunu edebi anlamda tatmin eden bir dille -莽evirmene alk谋艧- yapan bir roman. Rushdie'nin betimlemeleri bir mekan谋, sahneyi okurken s谋kmadan ger莽ek k谋l谋yor. Bab眉r saray谋n谋n koridorlar谋nda dola艧mak, Ekber 艦ah ve 莽evresinin sohbetlerini dinlemek, bir saraydan di臒erine sava艧larla dolu bir hikayeyi okumak ayn谋 rengarenk bir Tarsem Singh filmi izlemek gibi keyif veriyor. Floransa B眉y眉c眉s眉's眉 irili ufakl谋 hikayelerle, mitlerle, masallarla dolu ve bunlar谋 okurken 莽ok e臒lendiriyor okuru. Puslu K谋talar Atlas谋 ve Y眉zy谋ll谋k Yaln谋zl谋k benzetmesi yapm谋艧 Biron Pa艧a, benim de akl谋ma bu kitaplar geldi okurken. B眉y眉l眉 ger莽ek莽ili臒in Hindistan'a 莽ok yak谋艧t谋臒谋n谋 biliyordum daha 枚nce okudu臒um kitaplardan, bir kez daha g枚rm眉艧 oldum b枚ylece. Hatta bu kitap "mitler nas谋l ortaya 莽谋k谋yor" sorusuna bir cevap oldu benim i莽in. Tarihte ger莽ekle艧mi艧 olaylar谋 b枚yle bir kurguya oturttu臒unuz zaman seneler, as谋rlar sonra bu olaylar谋n nas谋l efsaneye, daha b眉y眉l眉 olaylara d枚n眉艧ebilece臒ini de anl谋yoruz. Floransa B眉y眉c眉s眉 t眉m derdi hikaye anlatmak olan bir roman ve Rushdie bunu 莽ok iyi ba艧arm谋艧 bence.
T眉m bu 枚vg眉lerim i莽in bir istisna var, o da roman谋n sonu. 脟眉nk眉 bir sonu yok Floransa B眉y眉c眉s眉'n眉n. Aceleye getirilmi艧, neredeyse yazar谋 taraf谋ndan terk edilmi艧 bir 艧ekilde bitiyor kitap. Karakterlerin o ana kadar anlat谋lan zay谋f karakteristikleri dahi g枚z ard谋 ediliyor ve kitab谋n geri kalan谋na hi莽 yak谋艧mayacak anti-clicmatic, tarihe uygun ancak hikayeye ihanet eden birka莽 sayfayla olaylar ba臒lan谋yor. 陌sterdim ki tarihi anlat谋n谋n etraf谋nda gezinen, ger莽ekleri bozmayan ama onu m眉mk眉n oldu臒unca hikayenin yarar谋na b眉ken bir kitap en sonda tarihi tamamen reddetsin ve hikayeye hizmet edecek 艧a艧al谋 bir son g枚stersin okura (bknz. Inglourious Basterds). Rushdie bu cesareti g枚steremeyince roman谋n sonu, kitab谋 bitirdi臒imizde dama臒谋m谋zda kalan tat da zay谋f kalm谋艧.
Bir a莽谋dan 莽ok sevip bir ba艧kas谋ndan sevmedi臒im, beni bu kadar kesin 莽izgilerle ortada b谋rakan 莽ok kitap okumad谋m daha 枚nce. Rushdie'yle ilgili olumlu bir 枚nyarg谋m vard谋, kendisinin d眉艧眉nd眉臒眉m kadar "iyi" bir romanc谋 olmad谋臒谋n谋 g枚rmek 眉z眉c眉 ancak iyi bir dilbaz oldu臒unu inkar edemem. Nas谋l yazar bazen sadece bir hikaye anlatmak i莽in yaz谋yorsa okur da zaman zaman bu sebeple okuyaca臒谋 bir 艧eyler arayabiliyor, benim i莽in di臒er Rushdie kitaplar谋 bu vakitlerin tercihi olacak.
Bir di臒er sorun ise, ki bence daha 枚nemli bu, Floransa B眉y眉c眉s眉 莽ok a莽谋k bir 艧ekilde Bat谋l谋 okurlar i莽in yaz谋lm谋艧 Do臒u anlat谋s谋. Elif Shafak sa臒 olsun biz T眉rkiye'de al谋艧k谋n谋z buna ama Rushdie'nin de bu konuda Shafak'tan a艧a臒谋 kal谋r bir yan谋 yokmu艧. Roman boyunca Bab眉rl眉ler, 陌ran ve Osmanl谋'y谋 kapsayan ve15. y眉zy谋ldan 16. y眉zy谋la uzanan bir hikayeler toplulu臒u okuyoruz, ancak b眉t眉ne bakt谋臒谋m谋zda sanki Rushdie bu iki y眉zy谋ll谋k s眉re莽te bu topraklarda olan 枚nemli olaylar谋 枚n眉ne alm谋艧 ve aralar谋 da Bat谋l谋 okurun sevece臒i, zorlanmadan anlayaca臒谋 olaylarla ve karakterlerle doldurmu艧 gibi. Yaln谋zca iki boyutlu karakterler de臒il bunu s枚ylememin sebebi, roman boyunca hikaye bilin莽li bir 艧ekilde saraylar谋 hi莽 terk etmiyor (genelevler hari莽). Sadece 艧ahlar谋, sultanlar谋, haremi ve cariyeleri, Do臒u deyince Bat谋n谋n tahayy眉l眉nde canlanan o renkli ve b眉y眉l眉 d眉nyay谋 g枚r眉yoruz. Ekber 艦ah'谋n verdi臒i -ger莽ek tarihle de uyumlu- kararlar hep 艦ah'谋n kendi i莽 d眉nyas谋na ve sarayda ya艧ananlara dayand谋r谋l谋yor ancak Bab眉rl眉lerin o d枚nemki etnik yap谋s谋, toplumdaki ayr谋l谋klar, bu olaylar谋n daha sonra tarihe etki edebilecek yans谋malar谋 tamamem es ge莽iliyor. Suland谋r谋lm谋艧 , renklendirilmi艧 ve bolca 艧ekerlendirilmi艧 bir tarihi anlat谋 kal谋yor elimizde. Roman谋 tamamen kendi i莽inde tutarl谋, ger莽ek d眉nyadan ba臒谋ms谋z de臒erlendirsek bile kocaman krall谋klar谋n bahsedildi臒i b枚yle bir kitapta halklar谋n sadece arka plandaki fig眉ranlar olarak kalmas谋 rahats谋z ediyor bir noktadan sonra. Bunun tek istisnas谋 陌talya'da ger莽ekle艧en bir isyan hareketi san谋r谋m, o da ne tesad眉ft眉r ki Bat谋da ya艧an谋yor.
Peki bu kadar ele艧tirdi臒im bir esere neden 3 y谋ld谋z veriyorum? 脟眉nk眉 -maalesef- Floransa B眉y眉c眉s眉 b眉t眉n hatalar谋na ra臒men 莽ok e臒lenceli, h谋zl谋 okunan, okuru bir anda kendi d眉nyas谋na 莽eken ve bunu edebi anlamda tatmin eden bir dille -莽evirmene alk谋艧- yapan bir roman. Rushdie'nin betimlemeleri bir mekan谋, sahneyi okurken s谋kmadan ger莽ek k谋l谋yor. Bab眉r saray谋n谋n koridorlar谋nda dola艧mak, Ekber 艦ah ve 莽evresinin sohbetlerini dinlemek, bir saraydan di臒erine sava艧larla dolu bir hikayeyi okumak ayn谋 rengarenk bir Tarsem Singh filmi izlemek gibi keyif veriyor. Floransa B眉y眉c眉s眉's眉 irili ufakl谋 hikayelerle, mitlerle, masallarla dolu ve bunlar谋 okurken 莽ok e臒lendiriyor okuru. Puslu K谋talar Atlas谋 ve Y眉zy谋ll谋k Yaln谋zl谋k benzetmesi yapm谋艧 Biron Pa艧a, benim de akl谋ma bu kitaplar geldi okurken. B眉y眉l眉 ger莽ek莽ili臒in Hindistan'a 莽ok yak谋艧t谋臒谋n谋 biliyordum daha 枚nce okudu臒um kitaplardan, bir kez daha g枚rm眉艧 oldum b枚ylece. Hatta bu kitap "mitler nas谋l ortaya 莽谋k谋yor" sorusuna bir cevap oldu benim i莽in. Tarihte ger莽ekle艧mi艧 olaylar谋 b枚yle bir kurguya oturttu臒unuz zaman seneler, as谋rlar sonra bu olaylar谋n nas谋l efsaneye, daha b眉y眉l眉 olaylara d枚n眉艧ebilece臒ini de anl谋yoruz. Floransa B眉y眉c眉s眉 t眉m derdi hikaye anlatmak olan bir roman ve Rushdie bunu 莽ok iyi ba艧arm谋艧 bence.
T眉m bu 枚vg眉lerim i莽in bir istisna var, o da roman谋n sonu. 脟眉nk眉 bir sonu yok Floransa B眉y眉c眉s眉'n眉n. Aceleye getirilmi艧, neredeyse yazar谋 taraf谋ndan terk edilmi艧 bir 艧ekilde bitiyor kitap. Karakterlerin o ana kadar anlat谋lan zay谋f karakteristikleri dahi g枚z ard谋 ediliyor ve kitab谋n geri kalan谋na hi莽 yak谋艧mayacak anti-clicmatic, tarihe uygun ancak hikayeye ihanet eden birka莽 sayfayla olaylar ba臒lan谋yor. 陌sterdim ki tarihi anlat谋n谋n etraf谋nda gezinen, ger莽ekleri bozmayan ama onu m眉mk眉n oldu臒unca hikayenin yarar谋na b眉ken bir kitap en sonda tarihi tamamen reddetsin ve hikayeye hizmet edecek 艧a艧al谋 bir son g枚stersin okura (bknz. Inglourious Basterds). Rushdie bu cesareti g枚steremeyince roman谋n sonu, kitab谋 bitirdi臒imizde dama臒谋m谋zda kalan tat da zay谋f kalm谋艧.
Bir a莽谋dan 莽ok sevip bir ba艧kas谋ndan sevmedi臒im, beni bu kadar kesin 莽izgilerle ortada b谋rakan 莽ok kitap okumad谋m daha 枚nce. Rushdie'yle ilgili olumlu bir 枚nyarg谋m vard谋, kendisinin d眉艧眉nd眉臒眉m kadar "iyi" bir romanc谋 olmad谋臒谋n谋 g枚rmek 眉z眉c眉 ancak iyi bir dilbaz oldu臒unu inkar edemem. Nas谋l yazar bazen sadece bir hikaye anlatmak i莽in yaz谋yorsa okur da zaman zaman bu sebeple okuyaca臒谋 bir 艧eyler arayabiliyor, benim i莽in di臒er Rushdie kitaplar谋 bu vakitlerin tercihi olacak.
July 17, 2008
Reading this is like eating a bowl of creamy ice cream. Luscious words that seem to slide down and enervate but tastefully lingers to remind you it's not as light as you first thought. Reading Rushdie is like a spark of recognition with a fellow traveler and I tip my hat in greeting, to say hello! it was lovely walking with you for awhile, thank you for reminding me what it is to connect with someone, hope to bump into you again further down the road, and may you have a good journey.
January 24, 2011
I will leave plot synopsis to others. I enjoyed his lyricism and way with words. Several times I found myself re-reading or copying down a sentence just to appreciate it's beauty and wisdom. What I enjoyed far less was the very meandering nature of the book; like Russian nesting dolls, there is a story within a story and its hard to see the relevance until the end. With short stories taking the place of a longer, more constructed narrative, it's easy to get lost in the cast of characters. I also dislike his overall depiction of women, which perhaps may represent the time period, but I fear more likely is a reflection of cultural bias. The book suffers from the "Queen or whore" syndrome, which makes it less enjoyable for me. One of the other reviewers summed it up nicely when he wrote, "this is a book of marvels, but not a marvelous book."
May 11, 2018
Yahu asl谋nda hi莽 bi艧ey anlamad谋m biliyo musun?
Kitap 莽ok dolu. Benim kapasitemin 眉zerinde. O seviyeye gelememi艧im hen眉z. 脰yle hissettim.
Kitap ders kitab谋 gibi. Bir d枚nem boyunca inceleye inceleye okumak laz谋m.
Bana 枚yle geldi. 脰yle hissettim.
Seviye ya艧谋 40
Kitap 莽ok dolu. Benim kapasitemin 眉zerinde. O seviyeye gelememi艧im hen眉z. 脰yle hissettim.
Kitap ders kitab谋 gibi. Bir d枚nem boyunca inceleye inceleye okumak laz谋m.
Bana 枚yle geldi. 脰yle hissettim.
Seviye ya艧谋 40
August 22, 2016
To me, the enchantress seems like one of the most charming female characters ever. Magical, a bit scary, unforgettable. Her story is totally worth reading.
August 25, 2009
This story has all the ingredients that should make it wonderful : Akbar, one of the most intriguing of Mughal emperors and his mysterious Fatehpur Sikri, Renaissance Florence in all its colorful glory under the Medicis, Machiavelli, Jannisarries, grim Ottoman sultans, epic battles, and even a murder or two. But somehow all these elements fail to gel into a cohesive story. The exotic locales and historical figures are ably rendered in lush, sometimes breathless prose, but they lack character that make us care for them. They are little more than richly caparisoned puppets that mechanically move through the narrative, symbolic articulators of the author's ideas, but of little substance themselves. Which is a pity, since the themes explored --- the power of travel and the imagination, truth and deception, East and West, religious tolerance --- are inherently compelling.
The other thing that strikes me is the treatment of the female characters; they are either whores, concubines or wives, but virtually all of them are defined in terms of their sexual desirability to the men. Even Qara Koz, the titular Enchantress who is described as the most powerful woman in the story, derives her power and security solely from the powerful men that she has affairs with (oh, she is also a secretly a lesbian, but that hardly makes her a feminist paragon, Mr. Rushdie). That and the rather tedious smut and jarring profanities coexist uneasily with the lyrical writing and attempts at magical realism. Finishing this book is like waking up from a dream, which though wonderful in parts, leaves an odd, and slightly distasteful aftertaste.
The other thing that strikes me is the treatment of the female characters; they are either whores, concubines or wives, but virtually all of them are defined in terms of their sexual desirability to the men. Even Qara Koz, the titular Enchantress who is described as the most powerful woman in the story, derives her power and security solely from the powerful men that she has affairs with (oh, she is also a secretly a lesbian, but that hardly makes her a feminist paragon, Mr. Rushdie). That and the rather tedious smut and jarring profanities coexist uneasily with the lyrical writing and attempts at magical realism. Finishing this book is like waking up from a dream, which though wonderful in parts, leaves an odd, and slightly distasteful aftertaste.
June 21, 2023
I really enjoyed this. It was a fad some time ago for authors to try to write their own myths, and this reads just like one, but without the tired half-jog that so many authors attempting this fall into towards the end. Sad, romantic, with just enough reality to it to ground it, and enough magic in it to make it memorable.
My only downside is that Rushdie sure does like to talk about anatomy, a lot. Can you talk about boobs and boners too much? I personally vote yes. I don't have an exact ratio to give you, but this is too much.
CONTENT WARNING:
My only downside is that Rushdie sure does like to talk about anatomy, a lot. Can you talk about boobs and boners too much? I personally vote yes. I don't have an exact ratio to give you, but this is too much.
CONTENT WARNING:
September 12, 2017
The curse of the human race is not that we are so different from one another, but that we are so alike.
I have an ambivalent relationship with Salman Rushdie 鈥� admire his writing/am impatient with his books; appreciate his artistry/sense I wouldn't like him in person 鈥� and was unsurprising in both its engaging craftsmanship and its eyeroll-inducing pretentiousness. Between and , Rushdie has probably already said everything important that he needed to say, so the fault is mine for picking up a book that I knew might slightly disappoint; I'd give this one three and a half stars if I could and am rounding up because the storyline did keep me engaged.
鈥淚 am what you might call a man embarked on a quest 鈥� a secret quest, what's more 鈥� but I must warn you that my secret has a curse upon it, placed there by the most powerful enchantress of the age. Only one man may hear my secret and live, and I would not want to be responsible for your death.鈥�
Lord Hauksbank of That Ilk laughed again, not an ugly laugh this time, a laugh of dispersing clouds and revenant sunshine. 鈥淵ou amuse me, little bird,鈥� he said. 鈥淒o you imagine I fear your green-faced witch's curse? I have danced with Baron Samedi on the Day of the Dead and survived his voodoo howls. I will take it most unkindly if you do not tell me everything at once.鈥�
鈥淪o be it,鈥� began the stowaway. 鈥淭here was once an adventurer-prince named Argalia, also called Arcalia, a great warrior who possessed enchanted weapons, and in whose retinue were four terrifying giants, and he had a woman with him, Angelica...鈥�
鈥淪top,鈥� said Lord Hausbank of That Ilk, clutching at his brow. 鈥淵ou're giving me a headache.鈥� Then, after a moment, 鈥淕o on.鈥� 鈥�...Angelica, a princess of the blood royal of Genghis Khan and Tamerlane...鈥� 鈥淪top. No, go on.鈥� 鈥�...the most beautiful...鈥� 鈥淪top.鈥�
Whereupon Lord Hausbank fell unconscious to the floor.
After meeting the main character Niccolo Vespucci (or Mogor dell'Amore, if you prefer), and learning that the yellow-haired storyteller/magician/pilgrim is not above skulduggery, lies, and assault in the pursuit of some private quest, we watch as he approaches the Mughal palace at Fatehpur Sikri and tricks his way into an audience with the supreme ruler, Akbar the Great. There's a nice bit of tension as we suspect the stranger's motives, but Akbar is no fool: No matter how amused or intrigued he appears to be by the young man's tales, the emperor is wary and assessing; and although it takes several hundred pages of misdirection and tangled timelines to hear the entire story that Vespucci came to relate, Akbar is always one step ahead; ultimately intuiting the truth of Vespucci's personal history before even the young man himself does. There's a bit of Scheherezade to both the fantastical elements to some of Vespucci's stories (I particularly loved the 鈥減alace of memories鈥�) and the prolonging of his stay at the palace (despite insider intrigue) until the end of his tale is reached, and the yellow-haired stranger seems to be an avatar of Rushdie himself as the weaver of words who attempts to unite the stories of the East and the West. For that is really the essence of this book: the confluence of the Renaissance as it played out in Florence and the religious reforms and freedom of thought that the historical Akbar the Great introduced to his court in 鈥淗industan鈥�; all with a fairy-tale-for-grownups atmosphere.
鈥淚n the beginning there were three friends,鈥� he said softly. 鈥淣iccol貌 'il Machia', Agostino Vespucci, and Antonio Argalia. Their boyhood world was a magic wood.鈥�
Enchantress is populated with many historical men 鈥� Akbar the Great, Genghis Khan, Vlad the Impaler, Andrea Doria, the Medici family, Machiavelli, Amerigo Vespucci 鈥� and indeed, there is a long Bibliography included that reflects Rushdie's research for this book. And while I can understand the complaint that the women in this tale are all prostitutes/courtesans, idealised beauties (even Akbar's favourite wife is a figment of his imagination), or shrewish housewives, it would be hard to deny that it was the men in history that had their stories written down; that women were more likely to be the subjects of fantasies and fairy tales (where they were noted at all). And so it is that the Enchantress of Florence herself is a spellbinding beauty who travels with her near-twin (a servant known as 鈥渢he Mirror鈥� who is always up for a threesome with whatever powerful man her mistress is attempting to enchant; talk about male fantasies), and while the Enchantress is a princess who could be commanding multitudes, it is some magic spell she casts around her own beauty that bends the world to her will. And maybe I should have been offended by that if not for this scene that sees a Medici proving himself immune to the princess' charms, if not her political value, by proposing that she should ally herself with him after her husband's impending murder:
Music struck up. There was to be dancing now. She was to dance a pavana with the assassin of her hopes. 鈥淚 must think,鈥� she said, and he bowed. 鈥淥f course,鈥� he said, 鈥渂ut think quickly, and before you think, you will be brought to my private rooms tonight, so that you may understand what you have to think about.鈥� She stopped dancing and stood facing him. 鈥淢adam, please,鈥� he chided her, holding out his hands until she began to step in time once again. 鈥淵ou are a princess of the blood royal of the house of Tamerlane and Genghis Khan. You know how the world works.鈥�
And isn't that how the world worked? Hard to be offended by the dismissive treatment of women in a quasi-realistic historical novel (even if, after reading , I figure Rushdie doesn't like women too much). The bottom line: There were some really nice passages in this book, an intriguing overall structure (even if the ending was a bit of a let down), an enchanting fairy tale vibe, a blending of history and myth; much to like. On the other hand, there was something a bit self-satisfied about the storyteller-as-creator-of-reality that made me impatient with the author himself. I may not pick up another Rushdie until one comes along that has a general consensus of 鈥渕ust read鈥�; this isn't that.
November 8, 2011
My first read for Rushdie 鈥ell , I was confused how to rate this book . This does not mean that I hardly liked it.No ,it is just that there were parts deserved 5 starts for me while other parts simply irritated me!!! still ...I do recommend it , and I highly appreciate the work that has been done in this novel, I totally understand the declaration that it took him years to write this one .Even as reader he pushed me searching and thirsty for more about the subject!
"the enchantress of Florence " is a historical novel that jump from a place to place ; Mughal India , Safavid empire of Iran , the Ottoman Empire , Renaissance in Italy ; reaching the New World at the end (?!) - all of this in the sixteenth century , but represented by events and characters (generations) that are separated by half a century .Certainly a beautiful yarn to gather east and west together in a significant point of history , I believe that this quote from the novel : " This may be the curse of human race . Not that we are different from one anther , but we are so alike ." has very much deal of the message of this book .
Other aspects were different philosophical meditations about power , religion , home , love and "self" or as Rushdie said himself " achieve significance as human beings". That woven fabric was done in an amazing way through actual re-drawn historical figures like "Akbar the great" and "Machiavelli" (Surprising/contradicting image to the limit that I need to read the prince to get balance!) . also through fictional characters that linked all the strings together ( I liked that) , one of them is our heroin : the princess (the Mongolic enchantress of Florence) and her love story - One of my irritating issues that I wanted to love her 鈥o admire her journey , but I could not do so !(I was not attracted to any other female character except Akbar's aunt but she faded too soon besides her rebellion was Basically anti-religion ) . BTW , I noticed some reviews accusing the novel of being sexist , is that what annoyed me ? hmmm not sure; considering the time period ; when women influence came from behind curtains . yet I can not put my feelings or annoyment here into solid words !
The novel is very rich in details ; art and aurban took a prominent position in this book , now it will be a dream come true for me to visit " Fatehpur Sikri" that he cleverly drew her prosperity and transformation into city of ghosts ..
Akbar will be always a figure that I will never forget , his interest in religious and philosophical matters , the idea of "House of Worship" was quite interesting (I am still reading about the subject) . this took big part of the book , and I am not sure which of the religious thoughts in the novel were Akbar's or actually Rushdie's !
I have no more to say for the moment , but I like to quote Rushdie :" non-historians think of history as being a collection of facts, whereas actually it's not -- it's a collection of theories about the past. We revise our view of the past all the time, depending on our own present concerns " 鈥� an approach that I should always remember ..
N.B
* I enjoyed reading this interview with Rushdie about this novel in 2008 and found it very usefull in understanding the novel Salman Rushdie Spins a Yarn
"the enchantress of Florence " is a historical novel that jump from a place to place ; Mughal India , Safavid empire of Iran , the Ottoman Empire , Renaissance in Italy ; reaching the New World at the end (?!) - all of this in the sixteenth century , but represented by events and characters (generations) that are separated by half a century .Certainly a beautiful yarn to gather east and west together in a significant point of history , I believe that this quote from the novel : " This may be the curse of human race . Not that we are different from one anther , but we are so alike ." has very much deal of the message of this book .
Other aspects were different philosophical meditations about power , religion , home , love and "self" or as Rushdie said himself " achieve significance as human beings". That woven fabric was done in an amazing way through actual re-drawn historical figures like "Akbar the great" and "Machiavelli" (Surprising/contradicting image to the limit that I need to read the prince to get balance!) . also through fictional characters that linked all the strings together ( I liked that) , one of them is our heroin : the princess (the Mongolic enchantress of Florence) and her love story - One of my irritating issues that I wanted to love her 鈥o admire her journey , but I could not do so !(I was not attracted to any other female character except Akbar's aunt but she faded too soon besides her rebellion was Basically anti-religion ) . BTW , I noticed some reviews accusing the novel of being sexist , is that what annoyed me ? hmmm not sure; considering the time period ; when women influence came from behind curtains . yet I can not put my feelings or annoyment here into solid words !
The novel is very rich in details ; art and aurban took a prominent position in this book , now it will be a dream come true for me to visit " Fatehpur Sikri" that he cleverly drew her prosperity and transformation into city of ghosts ..
Akbar will be always a figure that I will never forget , his interest in religious and philosophical matters , the idea of "House of Worship" was quite interesting (I am still reading about the subject) . this took big part of the book , and I am not sure which of the religious thoughts in the novel were Akbar's or actually Rushdie's !
I have no more to say for the moment , but I like to quote Rushdie :" non-historians think of history as being a collection of facts, whereas actually it's not -- it's a collection of theories about the past. We revise our view of the past all the time, depending on our own present concerns " 鈥� an approach that I should always remember ..
N.B
* I enjoyed reading this interview with Rushdie about this novel in 2008 and found it very usefull in understanding the novel Salman Rushdie Spins a Yarn
May 13, 2023
This book had so much potential. The first 150 ish pages got me hooked, but the rest of the story became flat. This book would have been so much better if it was a novella! It got confusing at times due to the number of characters and how their names changed as well as the numerous stories within the main story (which weren鈥檛 very interesting, except for one)!
October 18, 2014
So far, this book is enjoyable, and well-written as Rushdie always is, but I can't help thinking that it's not as good as some of the others, the ones that I love (Shame, Midnight's Children, the Satanic Verses, and of course Haroun and the Sea of Stories).
I think three things are maybe the difference.
1. The title led me to expect a lot more from the female characters, or rather a lot more from how they are portrayed. There's just the tiniest whiff of women being valuable mostly for being beautiful, and it's hard to know with historical works because of course the context determines a lot of the limitations, but there is now and then a slide into agreement with those ideas on the part of the....narrator? the book? Hard to say.
In any case, quite a few women are prostitutes, sex slaves, multiple wives and spoils of war. Which, I guess, ok. But then, when we see other women (Machiavelli's wife, for example) they're not treated as interesting or valuable. How many times must we be told that she waddles? How many times that Nico doesn't want to sleep with her? That she's angry, that she's bitter? This is an issue, and I don't think it's only the historical context.
2. This book is missing some of the passionate engagement with real issues that's present in so much of Rushdie's other work. Compared with a book like Shame, or even with a book like Haroun, which furiously defends a plurality of voices and value of storytelling, this one feels a little light.
3. Finally, the history. Rushdie did a ton of research for this, there's a bibliography and everything. But I found that I actually wanted a little more magic and a little less realism in my magical realism. Some parts -- the wife who comes into being because she is imagined, the painter who disappears into his own work -- are still the very best of Rushdie. These sections are marvelous. But there are long parts that read like any other work of historical fiction, which is not a genre I typically enjoy nor what I have come to expect from this author.
All in all there was no moment where I said to myself this book is bad, and there were many moments where the writing was beautiful and funny and everything I love about Rushdie. Yet I felt myself dragging, putting the book aside, reading to finish certain parts rather than for the sheer joy of it, and I think the combination of these three things is probably why. Perhaps it's time to re-read one of his other books, to get back into the Rushdie love.
I think three things are maybe the difference.
1. The title led me to expect a lot more from the female characters, or rather a lot more from how they are portrayed. There's just the tiniest whiff of women being valuable mostly for being beautiful, and it's hard to know with historical works because of course the context determines a lot of the limitations, but there is now and then a slide into agreement with those ideas on the part of the....narrator? the book? Hard to say.
In any case, quite a few women are prostitutes, sex slaves, multiple wives and spoils of war. Which, I guess, ok. But then, when we see other women (Machiavelli's wife, for example) they're not treated as interesting or valuable. How many times must we be told that she waddles? How many times that Nico doesn't want to sleep with her? That she's angry, that she's bitter? This is an issue, and I don't think it's only the historical context.
2. This book is missing some of the passionate engagement with real issues that's present in so much of Rushdie's other work. Compared with a book like Shame, or even with a book like Haroun, which furiously defends a plurality of voices and value of storytelling, this one feels a little light.
3. Finally, the history. Rushdie did a ton of research for this, there's a bibliography and everything. But I found that I actually wanted a little more magic and a little less realism in my magical realism. Some parts -- the wife who comes into being because she is imagined, the painter who disappears into his own work -- are still the very best of Rushdie. These sections are marvelous. But there are long parts that read like any other work of historical fiction, which is not a genre I typically enjoy nor what I have come to expect from this author.
All in all there was no moment where I said to myself this book is bad, and there were many moments where the writing was beautiful and funny and everything I love about Rushdie. Yet I felt myself dragging, putting the book aside, reading to finish certain parts rather than for the sheer joy of it, and I think the combination of these three things is probably why. Perhaps it's time to re-read one of his other books, to get back into the Rushdie love.
September 22, 2016
This book is very bland. I feel like I'm supposed to be having these deep epiphanies and I'm not thinking deeply enough or something . Absolutely nothing is coming to me.
I've had a major disconnect with the author, and I'm just not sure why. I really enjoyed the storyline until the book jumped in time. Then I completely lost my equilibrium.
I've had a major disconnect with the author, and I'm just not sure why. I really enjoyed the storyline until the book jumped in time. Then I completely lost my equilibrium.
October 15, 2013
Verujem da ve膰ina nas nikada nije 膷ula za Akbara Velikog, mogulskog vladara koji je vladao u isto vreme kad i slavna engleska kraljica Elizabeta, i to podjednako velikom i mo膰nom imperijom, samo na drugoj strani globusa. Mo啪da u 拧kolskom programu za u膷enje istorije zaista nema vremena da se spomenu ba拧 svi veliki svetski vladari, ali eurocentri膷no poimanje istorijskih doga膽aja koje nam se usa膽uje u glavu dovodi do krajnje iskrivljenog shvatanja poretka u svetu i propu拧ta da sve deli膰e svetske istorije stavi u jedan 拧iri, me膽usobno isprepletan kontekst koji bi slu啪io boljem razumevanju dana拧njice i sveta oko nas. Nije d啪abe Orvel rekao: "He who controls the past controls the future. He who controls the present controls the past." Sre膰om, tu je knji啪evnost.
Ru拧di nam donosi zanimljivu interpretaciju vladavine Akbara Velikog, 鈥瀙rosve膰enog despota鈥� koji je stvorio stabilnu, prosperitetnu i ure膽enu imperiju, sa glavnim ciljem o postizanju apsolutne verske tolerancije. Jedna anegdota ka啪e da je, u 啪elji da napokon pomiri verske vo膽e u svojoj zemlji, Akbar Veliki organizovao neku vrstu 鈥瀘kruglog stola鈥�, 膷ija je tema bila da se jednom za svagda doka啪e kako su sve religije zapravo razli膷iti na膷ini ispovedanja jednog te istog Boga. Kako se rasprava rasplamsavala, Akbar je shvatao da do nekog univerzalnog pomirenja i shvatanja ne膰e do膰i, te je razo膷aran napustio raspravu. To je istorijska anegdota, a sli膷ne doga膽aje opisuje i Ru拧di u ovoj knjizi.
Zaplet je naizgleda jednostavan: mladi, plavokosi stranac iz Firence, koji sebe zaziva Mogor del Amore, dolazi na Akbarov dvor sa tvrdnjom da je ni vi拧e ni manje nego ujak Akbara Velikog, budu膰i da je sin zaboravljene mogulske princeze Karakez (Crnooke). Zaintrigiran stran膷evom pri膷om, kao i sudbinom princeze koja je izbrisana iz istorije porodi膷ne loze zbog toga 拧to je odabrala slobodu odlu膷ivanja o sopstvenom 啪ivotu, Akbar odlu膷uje da stranca ostavi u 啪ivotu i saslu拧a njegovu pri膷u, kao 拧to je nekada 艩ah D啪ahan slu拧ao 艩eherezadu.
Kroz pri膷u mladog Mogora del Amorea, selimo se iz mogulskog carstva u Firencu Medi膷ija, u kojoj stasava Nikolo Makijaveli, i pratimo sudbine njegova dva prijatelja, Aga Vespu膷ija, za koga je Firenca 膷itav svet, i ceo 啪ivot, i Nina Argalije, koji postaje turski jani膷ar i najbolji vojskovo膽a svog vremena, nagra膽en za godine verne slu啪be Otomanskoj imperiji zarobljenom princezom Karakez, i progonom iz carstva. Ve拧to prepli膰u膰i njihove pri膷e, u膷imo o dodirima istoka i zapada kroz istoriju, o politi膷kim, vojnim i 膷ak li膷nim odlukama ljudi koji su oblikovali tada拧nji svet.
Me膽utim, iako se knjiga bavi ozbiljnim temama, iako je Ru拧di obavio neverovatan istra啪iva膷ki rad na polju istorije mogulskog carstva i Firence u 16-tom veku, tok pripovedanja se na trenutke gubi, davi u digresijama opisa 拧to glavnih, 拧to sporednih junaka (i njihovih unutra拧njih monologa), a sama tema gubi na ozbiljnosti preteranim uplivom magijskog realizma na kom bi i Markes pozavideo. Stoga mislim da ova knjiga nije na nivou Ru拧dijevog prethodnog romana, 鈥濳lovn 艩alimar鈥�, koji naprosto briljantno i tragi膷no obra膽uje (na啪alost, i dalje) aktuelan problem ka拧mirskog problema u Indiji.
Indija ostaje Ru拧dijeva Muza, i nadam se da nikada ne膰e prestati da to bude, jer nam pisci poput njega pribi啪avaju svet o kome malo imamo prilike da u膷imo i slu拧amo. Zbog toga 膷astim knjigu sa 4 zvezdice, iako ima nekih manjkavosti, ali i pored toga je 拧tivo u kome se mo啪e u啪ivati na vi拧e nivoa. Neko 膰e pratiti tok pripovedanja na nivou radnje, i bi膰e mu ba拧 zanimljivi svi ti 拧areni likovi koji se inate i zaljubljuju i sva膽aju, a neko 膰e se potruditi da shvati da je istorija sveta organska celina u kojoj je sve povezano i me膽usobno poticano kroz vreme i prostor, i o kojoj nikad ne mo啪emo prestati da u膷imo.
Ru拧di nam donosi zanimljivu interpretaciju vladavine Akbara Velikog, 鈥瀙rosve膰enog despota鈥� koji je stvorio stabilnu, prosperitetnu i ure膽enu imperiju, sa glavnim ciljem o postizanju apsolutne verske tolerancije. Jedna anegdota ka啪e da je, u 啪elji da napokon pomiri verske vo膽e u svojoj zemlji, Akbar Veliki organizovao neku vrstu 鈥瀘kruglog stola鈥�, 膷ija je tema bila da se jednom za svagda doka啪e kako su sve religije zapravo razli膷iti na膷ini ispovedanja jednog te istog Boga. Kako se rasprava rasplamsavala, Akbar je shvatao da do nekog univerzalnog pomirenja i shvatanja ne膰e do膰i, te je razo膷aran napustio raspravu. To je istorijska anegdota, a sli膷ne doga膽aje opisuje i Ru拧di u ovoj knjizi.
Zaplet je naizgleda jednostavan: mladi, plavokosi stranac iz Firence, koji sebe zaziva Mogor del Amore, dolazi na Akbarov dvor sa tvrdnjom da je ni vi拧e ni manje nego ujak Akbara Velikog, budu膰i da je sin zaboravljene mogulske princeze Karakez (Crnooke). Zaintrigiran stran膷evom pri膷om, kao i sudbinom princeze koja je izbrisana iz istorije porodi膷ne loze zbog toga 拧to je odabrala slobodu odlu膷ivanja o sopstvenom 啪ivotu, Akbar odlu膷uje da stranca ostavi u 啪ivotu i saslu拧a njegovu pri膷u, kao 拧to je nekada 艩ah D啪ahan slu拧ao 艩eherezadu.
Kroz pri膷u mladog Mogora del Amorea, selimo se iz mogulskog carstva u Firencu Medi膷ija, u kojoj stasava Nikolo Makijaveli, i pratimo sudbine njegova dva prijatelja, Aga Vespu膷ija, za koga je Firenca 膷itav svet, i ceo 啪ivot, i Nina Argalije, koji postaje turski jani膷ar i najbolji vojskovo膽a svog vremena, nagra膽en za godine verne slu啪be Otomanskoj imperiji zarobljenom princezom Karakez, i progonom iz carstva. Ve拧to prepli膰u膰i njihove pri膷e, u膷imo o dodirima istoka i zapada kroz istoriju, o politi膷kim, vojnim i 膷ak li膷nim odlukama ljudi koji su oblikovali tada拧nji svet.
Me膽utim, iako se knjiga bavi ozbiljnim temama, iako je Ru拧di obavio neverovatan istra啪iva膷ki rad na polju istorije mogulskog carstva i Firence u 16-tom veku, tok pripovedanja se na trenutke gubi, davi u digresijama opisa 拧to glavnih, 拧to sporednih junaka (i njihovih unutra拧njih monologa), a sama tema gubi na ozbiljnosti preteranim uplivom magijskog realizma na kom bi i Markes pozavideo. Stoga mislim da ova knjiga nije na nivou Ru拧dijevog prethodnog romana, 鈥濳lovn 艩alimar鈥�, koji naprosto briljantno i tragi膷no obra膽uje (na啪alost, i dalje) aktuelan problem ka拧mirskog problema u Indiji.
Indija ostaje Ru拧dijeva Muza, i nadam se da nikada ne膰e prestati da to bude, jer nam pisci poput njega pribi啪avaju svet o kome malo imamo prilike da u膷imo i slu拧amo. Zbog toga 膷astim knjigu sa 4 zvezdice, iako ima nekih manjkavosti, ali i pored toga je 拧tivo u kome se mo啪e u啪ivati na vi拧e nivoa. Neko 膰e pratiti tok pripovedanja na nivou radnje, i bi膰e mu ba拧 zanimljivi svi ti 拧areni likovi koji se inate i zaljubljuju i sva膽aju, a neko 膰e se potruditi da shvati da je istorija sveta organska celina u kojoj je sve povezano i me膽usobno poticano kroz vreme i prostor, i o kojoj nikad ne mo啪emo prestati da u膷imo.
September 1, 2008
In The Enchantress of Florence, Salman Rushdie mixes history with fiction in order to create a tale of adventure, power, and romance. I enjoyed most of the book, but I found it to be a bit disjointed in places. There were so many names in the book that it was hard to keep them all straight at times. Some of the primary characters in the novel are a mysterious golden haired adventurer, an all powerful emperor, an imaginary queen, and a princess who has been erased from history. Toward the end of the book, Rushdie includes my least favorite storyline, that of incest. I would have rated the book higher if he had not woven incest into the story in a couple of different ways.
A golden haired adventurer enters the city and says that he has a message for the emperor. He is taken before the ruler, and finds favor. Over a long period of time, he tells the emperor a legend that is his own story as he knows it. The emperor, a very lonely ruler with three unworthy sons who has created for himself an imaginary wife, is entraced by the adventurer's story. The adventurer tells a tale of three friends, one of whom leaves his home in Florence as an orphan and returns as a powerful warrior with an enchantress as his consort. The enchantress is also an eastern princess, and all of Florence falls under her spell for a time. The emperor begins to feel the presence of the long dead princess and to want her for his own - however, this is forbidden as she was his great aunt. The emperor feels strongly drawn toward the adventurer and considers bestowing great honor on him, but instead, turns away from him, bringing ruin to his great city.
This is the first novel I have read by Rushdie. I found it to be interesting, and I enjoyed his style of writing. It was difficult to keep up with the characters and story in some places, but the main turnoff for me was the forbidden relationships that were in the end of the book. I had mixed feelings about this book, and I am not certain if I will read more by him.
A golden haired adventurer enters the city and says that he has a message for the emperor. He is taken before the ruler, and finds favor. Over a long period of time, he tells the emperor a legend that is his own story as he knows it. The emperor, a very lonely ruler with three unworthy sons who has created for himself an imaginary wife, is entraced by the adventurer's story. The adventurer tells a tale of three friends, one of whom leaves his home in Florence as an orphan and returns as a powerful warrior with an enchantress as his consort. The enchantress is also an eastern princess, and all of Florence falls under her spell for a time. The emperor begins to feel the presence of the long dead princess and to want her for his own - however, this is forbidden as she was his great aunt. The emperor feels strongly drawn toward the adventurer and considers bestowing great honor on him, but instead, turns away from him, bringing ruin to his great city.
This is the first novel I have read by Rushdie. I found it to be interesting, and I enjoyed his style of writing. It was difficult to keep up with the characters and story in some places, but the main turnoff for me was the forbidden relationships that were in the end of the book. I had mixed feelings about this book, and I am not certain if I will read more by him.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
November 30, 2021
He gradually, quietly, in an oriental way insidiously enters your reader's soul, first you see a pretty snobby mixture of glamour with exoticism, I had it with "The Earth under her feet", then you think: "Well, they gave him a Booker Booker for something" -, you read "Children of Midnight", you say to yourself: "Yes, it's a thing, I understand now, but not my writer, I won't read anymore." Naive, I forgot that the claw got stuck - the whole bird is lost, and the oriental tales of Salman Rushdie are already inside, and from now on the thread with a golden hook stuck in your heart will stretch from time to time, and already half a dozen of his novels have been read, a dozen, and you still won't stop. Gotcha.
"The Florentine Enchantress", in fact, is only my ninth book by Rushdie, but yes, it's as difficult to stop reading it when I'm already hooked as it is for a cruel Shahriar to stop listening to the tales of the wise Scheherazade. They contain everything that we love: cunning and love, powerful rulers and invincible warriors, beautiful maidens and cunning rascals. palaces and huts, nobility and meanness, ups and downs. The language is flowery, maybe even too much, the adventures are implausible (so it's a fairy tale).
The locations of the novel are India and Italy, more precisely, the capital of the empire of the legendary Shah Akbar Fatehpur-Sikri and Florence, then everywhere. Constantinople, which just at this time becomes Istanbul, Samarkand, where the heroine, the beautiful Princess Kara-Kez, comes from, the board of the Scottish brig and the ships of Amerigo Vespucci, sailing to the shores of the New World. The heroes are also in perfect order. In addition to Akbar and Amerigo, Niccolo Macchiavelli is also - yes, the one who wrote the treatise "The Sovereign" and enriched world politics with the term Macchiavellism.
袗泻斜邪褉, 袦邪泻泻懈邪胁械谢谢懈 懈 袗屑械褉懈谐芯 袙械褋锌褍褔褔懈 胁 锌芯懈褋泻邪褏 谢褞斜胁懈
袪械谢懈谐懈褞 屑芯卸薪芯 懈蟹屑械薪懈褌褜, 褉械褎芯褉屑懈褉芯胁邪褌褜, 斜褘褌褜 屑芯卸械褌, 写邪卸械 芯斜芯泄褌懈褋褜 斜械蟹 薪械械. 袧芯 胁械褉褍 胁 泻芯谢写芯胁褋褌胁芯 锌芯斜械写懈褌褜 薪械胁芯蟹屑芯卸薪芯.
袨薪 懈褋锌芯写胁芯谢褜, 褌懈褏芯泄 褋邪锌芯泄, 锌芯-胁芯褋褌芯褔薪芯屑褍 泻芯胁邪褉薪芯 胁褏芯写懈褌 胁 褌胁芯褞 褔懈褌邪褌械谢褜褋泻褍褞 写褍褕褍, 褋薪邪褔邪谢邪 胁懈写懈褕褜 懈蟹褉褟写薪芯 褋薪芯斜褋泻褍褞 褋屑械褋褜 谐谢邪屑褍褉邪 褋 褝泻蟹芯褌懈泻芯泄, 褍 屑械薪褟 褌邪泻 斜褘谢芯 褋 "袟械屑谢械泄 锌芯写 械械 薪芯谐邪屑懈", 锌芯褌芯屑 写褍屑邪械褕褜: "袧褍 蟹邪 褔褌芯-褌芯 卸械 写邪谢懈 械屑褍 袘褍泻械褉 袘褍泻械褉芯胁" -, 褔懈褌邪械褕褜 "袛械褌械泄 锌芯谢褍薪芯褔懈", 谐芯胁芯褉懈褕褜 褋械斜械: "协褌芯 写邪, 褝褌芯 胁械褖褜, 褌械锌械褉褜 锌芯薪懈屑邪褞, 薪芯 薪械 屑芯泄 锌懈褋邪褌械谢褜, 斜芯谢褜褕械 薪械 褋褌邪薪褍 褔懈褌邪褌褜." 袧邪懈胁薪邪褟, 蟹邪斜褘谢邪 褔褌芯 泻芯谐芯褌芯泻 褍胁褟蟹 - 胁褋械泄 锌褌懈褔泻械 锌褉芯锌邪褋褌褜, 邪 胁芯褋褌芯褔薪褘械 褋泻邪蟹泻懈 小邪谢屑邪薪邪 袪褍褕写懈 褍卸械 胁薪褍褌褉懈, 懈 芯褌薪褘薪械 薪懈褌褜 褋 蟹芯谢芯褌褘屑 泻褉褞褔泻芯屑, 胁褋邪卸械薪薪褘屑 胁 褌胁芯械 褋械褉写褑械, 褋褌邪薪械褌 胁褉械屑褟 芯褌 胁褉械屑械薪懈 薪邪褌褟谐懈胁邪褌褜褋褟, 懈 胁芯褌 褍卸械 锌芯谢写褞卸懈薪褘 械谐芯 褉芯屑邪薪芯胁 锌褉芯褔懈褌邪薪芯, 写械褋褟褌芯泻, 邪 褌褘 胁褋械 薪械 芯褋褌邪薪芯胁懈褕褜褋褟. 袩芯锌邪谢邪褋褜.
"肖谢芯褉械薪褌懈泄褋泻邪褟 褔邪褉芯写械泄泻邪", 薪邪 褋邪屑芯屑 写械谢械, 胁褋械谐芯 谢懈褕褜 写械胁褟褌邪褟 屑芯褟 泻薪懈谐邪 袪褍褕写懈, 薪芯 写邪, 锌械褉械褋褌邪褌褜 褔懈褌邪褌褜 械谐芯, 泻芯谐写邪 褍卸械 锌芯写褋械谢邪, 褌邪泻 卸械 褌褉褍写薪芯, 泻邪泻 卸械褋褌芯泻芯屑褍 楔邪褏褉懈褟褉褍 锌褉械泻褉邪褌懈褌褜 褋谢褍褕邪褌褜 褋泻邪蟹泻懈 屑褍写褉芯泄 楔邪褏械褉械蟹邪写褘. 袙 薪懈褏 胁褋械, 褔褌芯 屑褘 谢褞斜懈屑: 泻芯胁邪褉褋褌胁芯 懈 谢褞斜芯胁褜, 屑芯谐褍褖械褋褌胁械薪薪褘械 锌褉邪胁懈褌械谢懈 懈 薪械锌芯斜械写懈屑褘械 胁芯懈薪褘, 锌褉械泻褉邪褋薪褘械 写械胁褘 懈 褏懈褌褉芯褍屑薪褘械 锌谢褍褌褘. 写胁芯褉褑褘 懈 褏懈卸懈薪褘, 斜谢邪谐芯褉芯写褋褌胁芯 懈 锌芯写谢芯褋褌褜, 胁蟹谢械褌褘 懈 锌邪写械薪懈褟. 携蟹褘泻 褑胁械褌懈褋褌, 屑芯卸械褌 写邪卸械 褔械褉械褋褔褍褉, 锌褉懈泻谢褞褔械薪懈褟 薪械锌褉邪胁写芯锌芯写芯斜薪褘 (褌邪泻 胁械写褜 褋泻邪蟹泻邪).
袦械褋褌邪 写械泄褋褌胁懈褟 褉芯屑邪薪邪 袠薪写懈褟 懈 袠褌邪谢懈褟, 褌芯褔薪械械 - 褋褌芯谢懈褑邪 懈屑锌械褉懈懈 谢械谐械薪写邪褉薪芯谐芯 褕邪褏邪 袗泻斜邪褉邪 肖邪褌械褏锌褍褉-小懈泻褉懈 懈 肖谢芯褉械薪褑懈褟, 写邪谢械械 胁械蟹写械. 袣芯薪褋褌邪薪褌懈薪芯锌芯谢褜, 泻芯褌芯褉褘泄 泻邪泻 褉邪蟹 胁 褝褌芯 胁褉械屑褟 褋褌邪薪芯胁懈褌褋褟 小褌邪屑斜褍谢芯屑, 小邪屑邪褉泻邪薪写, 芯褌泻褍写邪 褉芯写芯屑 谐械褉芯懈薪褟 锌褉械泻褉邪褋薪邪褟 锌褉懈薪褑械褋褋邪 袣邪褉邪-袣褢蟹, 斜芯褉褌 褕芯褌谢邪薪写褋泻芯谐芯 斜褉懈谐邪 懈 泻芯褉邪斜谢懈 袗屑械褉懈谐芯 袙械褋锌褍褔褔懈, 芯褌锌谢褘胁邪褞褖懈械 泻 斜械褉械谐邪屑 袧芯胁芯谐芯 小胁械褌邪. 小 谐械褉芯褟屑懈 褌芯卸械 锌芯谢薪褘泄 锌芯褉褟写芯泻. 袣褉芯屑械 袗泻斜邪褉邪 懈 袗屑械褉懈谐芯 械褖械 懈 袧懈泻泻芯谢芯 袦邪泻泻懈邪胁械谢谢懈 - 写邪-写邪, 褌芯褌, 褔褌芯 薪邪锌懈褋邪谢 褌褉邪泻褌邪褌 "袚芯褋褍写邪褉褜" 懈 芯斜芯谐邪褌懈谢 屑懈褉芯胁褍褞 锌芯谢懈褌懈泻褍 褌械褉屑懈薪芯屑 屑邪泻泻懈邪胁械谢谢懈蟹屑.
袠 泻邪泻 褝褌芯 胁褋械 褋芯褋褍褖械褋褌胁褍械褌 胁 芯写薪芯泄 锌谢芯褋泻芯褋褌懈? 袧褍, 褍 泻芯谐芯 写褉褍谐芯谐芯 薪械 胁褘褕谢芯 斜褘 胁锌褉褟褔褜 胁 芯写薪褍 锌芯胁芯蟹泻褍 斜褘泻邪 懈 褌褉械锌械褌薪褍褞 谢邪薪褜, 薪芯 褝褌芯 袪褍褕写懈, 胁械谢懈褔邪泄褕懈泄 懈蟹 褋泻邪蟹芯褔薪懈泻芯胁 褋芯胁褉械屑械薪薪芯褋褌懈. 袗 锌芯褌芯屑褍 懈褋褌芯褉懈褟 胁械谢懈褔邪泄褕械泄 泻褉邪褋邪胁懈褑褘 胁褉械屑械薪 懈 薪邪褉芯写芯胁 袣邪褉邪-袣褢蟹, 褍屑薪芯泄, 褋邪屑芯褋褌芯褟褌械谢褜薪芯泄 懈 薪械蟹邪胁懈褋懈屑芯泄, 泻芯褌芯褉邪褟 胁 芯斜褖械褋褌胁械 褋胁芯械泄 褋谢褍卸邪薪泻懈-写胁芯泄薪懈泻邪 懈 锌芯写褉褍谐懈 (懈 薪械 褌芯谢褜泻芯, 褏屑, 锌芯写褉褍谐懈) 袟械褉泻邪谢褜褑邪 芯褋胁械褌懈褌 褋懈褟薪懈械屑 斜芯卸械褋褌胁械薪薪芯泄 锌褉械谢械褋褌懈 胁褋褞 芯斜懈褌邪械屑褍褞 胁褋械谢械薪薪褍褞, 屑械薪褟褟 屑褍卸褔懈薪 懈 胁褋械 胁褉械屑褟 斜械蟹芯褕懈斜芯褔薪芯 褋褌邪胁褟 薪邪 锌芯斜械写懈褌械谢褟. 袧芯 薪械 懈蟹 泻芯胁邪褉褋褌胁邪 懈 泻芯褉褘褋褌懈, 邪 胁 褋褌褉械屑谢械薪懈懈 蟹邪褖懈褌懈褌褜 褋械斜褟 懈 褋胁芯械 写芯褋褌芯懈薪褋褌胁芯, 薪械 锌芯蟹胁芯谢懈褌褜 屑褍卸褋泻芯屑褍 屑懈褉褍 褉邪褋褌芯锌褌邪褌褜 褋械斜褟, 懈 泻褌芯 械械 芯褋褍写懈褌, 褌芯褌 薪械 褟.
孝邪泻 胁芯褌, 褝褌邪 褋泻邪蟹泻邪 斜褍写械褌 蟹邪屑械褔邪褌械谢褜薪芯 懈薪褌械褉械褋薪芯泄, 邪 屑芯褌懈胁 褋芯蟹写邪薪薪芯谐芯 懈蟹 薪懈褔械谐芯, 胁褘屑械褔褌邪薪薪芯谐芯 褔械谢芯胁械泻邪 胁 "袣懈褕芯褌械", 芯泻邪蟹褘胁邪械褌褋褟, 褍卸械 斜褘谢 芯锌褉芯斜芯胁邪薪 袦邪褋褌械褉芯屑 褋 "肖谢芯褉械薪褌懈泄褋泻芯泄 褔邪褉芯写械泄泻芯泄."
"The Florentine Enchantress", in fact, is only my ninth book by Rushdie, but yes, it's as difficult to stop reading it when I'm already hooked as it is for a cruel Shahriar to stop listening to the tales of the wise Scheherazade. They contain everything that we love: cunning and love, powerful rulers and invincible warriors, beautiful maidens and cunning rascals. palaces and huts, nobility and meanness, ups and downs. The language is flowery, maybe even too much, the adventures are implausible (so it's a fairy tale).
The locations of the novel are India and Italy, more precisely, the capital of the empire of the legendary Shah Akbar Fatehpur-Sikri and Florence, then everywhere. Constantinople, which just at this time becomes Istanbul, Samarkand, where the heroine, the beautiful Princess Kara-Kez, comes from, the board of the Scottish brig and the ships of Amerigo Vespucci, sailing to the shores of the New World. The heroes are also in perfect order. In addition to Akbar and Amerigo, Niccolo Macchiavelli is also - yes, the one who wrote the treatise "The Sovereign" and enriched world politics with the term Macchiavellism.
袗泻斜邪褉, 袦邪泻泻懈邪胁械谢谢懈 懈 袗屑械褉懈谐芯 袙械褋锌褍褔褔懈 胁 锌芯懈褋泻邪褏 谢褞斜胁懈
袪械谢懈谐懈褞 屑芯卸薪芯 懈蟹屑械薪懈褌褜, 褉械褎芯褉屑懈褉芯胁邪褌褜, 斜褘褌褜 屑芯卸械褌, 写邪卸械 芯斜芯泄褌懈褋褜 斜械蟹 薪械械. 袧芯 胁械褉褍 胁 泻芯谢写芯胁褋褌胁芯 锌芯斜械写懈褌褜 薪械胁芯蟹屑芯卸薪芯.
袨薪 懈褋锌芯写胁芯谢褜, 褌懈褏芯泄 褋邪锌芯泄, 锌芯-胁芯褋褌芯褔薪芯屑褍 泻芯胁邪褉薪芯 胁褏芯写懈褌 胁 褌胁芯褞 褔懈褌邪褌械谢褜褋泻褍褞 写褍褕褍, 褋薪邪褔邪谢邪 胁懈写懈褕褜 懈蟹褉褟写薪芯 褋薪芯斜褋泻褍褞 褋屑械褋褜 谐谢邪屑褍褉邪 褋 褝泻蟹芯褌懈泻芯泄, 褍 屑械薪褟 褌邪泻 斜褘谢芯 褋 "袟械屑谢械泄 锌芯写 械械 薪芯谐邪屑懈", 锌芯褌芯屑 写褍屑邪械褕褜: "袧褍 蟹邪 褔褌芯-褌芯 卸械 写邪谢懈 械屑褍 袘褍泻械褉 袘褍泻械褉芯胁" -, 褔懈褌邪械褕褜 "袛械褌械泄 锌芯谢褍薪芯褔懈", 谐芯胁芯褉懈褕褜 褋械斜械: "协褌芯 写邪, 褝褌芯 胁械褖褜, 褌械锌械褉褜 锌芯薪懈屑邪褞, 薪芯 薪械 屑芯泄 锌懈褋邪褌械谢褜, 斜芯谢褜褕械 薪械 褋褌邪薪褍 褔懈褌邪褌褜." 袧邪懈胁薪邪褟, 蟹邪斜褘谢邪 褔褌芯 泻芯谐芯褌芯泻 褍胁褟蟹 - 胁褋械泄 锌褌懈褔泻械 锌褉芯锌邪褋褌褜, 邪 胁芯褋褌芯褔薪褘械 褋泻邪蟹泻懈 小邪谢屑邪薪邪 袪褍褕写懈 褍卸械 胁薪褍褌褉懈, 懈 芯褌薪褘薪械 薪懈褌褜 褋 蟹芯谢芯褌褘屑 泻褉褞褔泻芯屑, 胁褋邪卸械薪薪褘屑 胁 褌胁芯械 褋械褉写褑械, 褋褌邪薪械褌 胁褉械屑褟 芯褌 胁褉械屑械薪懈 薪邪褌褟谐懈胁邪褌褜褋褟, 懈 胁芯褌 褍卸械 锌芯谢写褞卸懈薪褘 械谐芯 褉芯屑邪薪芯胁 锌褉芯褔懈褌邪薪芯, 写械褋褟褌芯泻, 邪 褌褘 胁褋械 薪械 芯褋褌邪薪芯胁懈褕褜褋褟. 袩芯锌邪谢邪褋褜.
"肖谢芯褉械薪褌懈泄褋泻邪褟 褔邪褉芯写械泄泻邪", 薪邪 褋邪屑芯屑 写械谢械, 胁褋械谐芯 谢懈褕褜 写械胁褟褌邪褟 屑芯褟 泻薪懈谐邪 袪褍褕写懈, 薪芯 写邪, 锌械褉械褋褌邪褌褜 褔懈褌邪褌褜 械谐芯, 泻芯谐写邪 褍卸械 锌芯写褋械谢邪, 褌邪泻 卸械 褌褉褍写薪芯, 泻邪泻 卸械褋褌芯泻芯屑褍 楔邪褏褉懈褟褉褍 锌褉械泻褉邪褌懈褌褜 褋谢褍褕邪褌褜 褋泻邪蟹泻懈 屑褍写褉芯泄 楔邪褏械褉械蟹邪写褘. 袙 薪懈褏 胁褋械, 褔褌芯 屑褘 谢褞斜懈屑: 泻芯胁邪褉褋褌胁芯 懈 谢褞斜芯胁褜, 屑芯谐褍褖械褋褌胁械薪薪褘械 锌褉邪胁懈褌械谢懈 懈 薪械锌芯斜械写懈屑褘械 胁芯懈薪褘, 锌褉械泻褉邪褋薪褘械 写械胁褘 懈 褏懈褌褉芯褍屑薪褘械 锌谢褍褌褘. 写胁芯褉褑褘 懈 褏懈卸懈薪褘, 斜谢邪谐芯褉芯写褋褌胁芯 懈 锌芯写谢芯褋褌褜, 胁蟹谢械褌褘 懈 锌邪写械薪懈褟. 携蟹褘泻 褑胁械褌懈褋褌, 屑芯卸械褌 写邪卸械 褔械褉械褋褔褍褉, 锌褉懈泻谢褞褔械薪懈褟 薪械锌褉邪胁写芯锌芯写芯斜薪褘 (褌邪泻 胁械写褜 褋泻邪蟹泻邪).
袦械褋褌邪 写械泄褋褌胁懈褟 褉芯屑邪薪邪 袠薪写懈褟 懈 袠褌邪谢懈褟, 褌芯褔薪械械 - 褋褌芯谢懈褑邪 懈屑锌械褉懈懈 谢械谐械薪写邪褉薪芯谐芯 褕邪褏邪 袗泻斜邪褉邪 肖邪褌械褏锌褍褉-小懈泻褉懈 懈 肖谢芯褉械薪褑懈褟, 写邪谢械械 胁械蟹写械. 袣芯薪褋褌邪薪褌懈薪芯锌芯谢褜, 泻芯褌芯褉褘泄 泻邪泻 褉邪蟹 胁 褝褌芯 胁褉械屑褟 褋褌邪薪芯胁懈褌褋褟 小褌邪屑斜褍谢芯屑, 小邪屑邪褉泻邪薪写, 芯褌泻褍写邪 褉芯写芯屑 谐械褉芯懈薪褟 锌褉械泻褉邪褋薪邪褟 锌褉懈薪褑械褋褋邪 袣邪褉邪-袣褢蟹, 斜芯褉褌 褕芯褌谢邪薪写褋泻芯谐芯 斜褉懈谐邪 懈 泻芯褉邪斜谢懈 袗屑械褉懈谐芯 袙械褋锌褍褔褔懈, 芯褌锌谢褘胁邪褞褖懈械 泻 斜械褉械谐邪屑 袧芯胁芯谐芯 小胁械褌邪. 小 谐械褉芯褟屑懈 褌芯卸械 锌芯谢薪褘泄 锌芯褉褟写芯泻. 袣褉芯屑械 袗泻斜邪褉邪 懈 袗屑械褉懈谐芯 械褖械 懈 袧懈泻泻芯谢芯 袦邪泻泻懈邪胁械谢谢懈 - 写邪-写邪, 褌芯褌, 褔褌芯 薪邪锌懈褋邪谢 褌褉邪泻褌邪褌 "袚芯褋褍写邪褉褜" 懈 芯斜芯谐邪褌懈谢 屑懈褉芯胁褍褞 锌芯谢懈褌懈泻褍 褌械褉屑懈薪芯屑 屑邪泻泻懈邪胁械谢谢懈蟹屑.
袠 泻邪泻 褝褌芯 胁褋械 褋芯褋褍褖械褋褌胁褍械褌 胁 芯写薪芯泄 锌谢芯褋泻芯褋褌懈? 袧褍, 褍 泻芯谐芯 写褉褍谐芯谐芯 薪械 胁褘褕谢芯 斜褘 胁锌褉褟褔褜 胁 芯写薪褍 锌芯胁芯蟹泻褍 斜褘泻邪 懈 褌褉械锌械褌薪褍褞 谢邪薪褜, 薪芯 褝褌芯 袪褍褕写懈, 胁械谢懈褔邪泄褕懈泄 懈蟹 褋泻邪蟹芯褔薪懈泻芯胁 褋芯胁褉械屑械薪薪芯褋褌懈. 袗 锌芯褌芯屑褍 懈褋褌芯褉懈褟 胁械谢懈褔邪泄褕械泄 泻褉邪褋邪胁懈褑褘 胁褉械屑械薪 懈 薪邪褉芯写芯胁 袣邪褉邪-袣褢蟹, 褍屑薪芯泄, 褋邪屑芯褋褌芯褟褌械谢褜薪芯泄 懈 薪械蟹邪胁懈褋懈屑芯泄, 泻芯褌芯褉邪褟 胁 芯斜褖械褋褌胁械 褋胁芯械泄 褋谢褍卸邪薪泻懈-写胁芯泄薪懈泻邪 懈 锌芯写褉褍谐懈 (懈 薪械 褌芯谢褜泻芯, 褏屑, 锌芯写褉褍谐懈) 袟械褉泻邪谢褜褑邪 芯褋胁械褌懈褌 褋懈褟薪懈械屑 斜芯卸械褋褌胁械薪薪芯泄 锌褉械谢械褋褌懈 胁褋褞 芯斜懈褌邪械屑褍褞 胁褋械谢械薪薪褍褞, 屑械薪褟褟 屑褍卸褔懈薪 懈 胁褋械 胁褉械屑褟 斜械蟹芯褕懈斜芯褔薪芯 褋褌邪胁褟 薪邪 锌芯斜械写懈褌械谢褟. 袧芯 薪械 懈蟹 泻芯胁邪褉褋褌胁邪 懈 泻芯褉褘褋褌懈, 邪 胁 褋褌褉械屑谢械薪懈懈 蟹邪褖懈褌懈褌褜 褋械斜褟 懈 褋胁芯械 写芯褋褌芯懈薪褋褌胁芯, 薪械 锌芯蟹胁芯谢懈褌褜 屑褍卸褋泻芯屑褍 屑懈褉褍 褉邪褋褌芯锌褌邪褌褜 褋械斜褟, 懈 泻褌芯 械械 芯褋褍写懈褌, 褌芯褌 薪械 褟.
孝邪泻 胁芯褌, 褝褌邪 褋泻邪蟹泻邪 斜褍写械褌 蟹邪屑械褔邪褌械谢褜薪芯 懈薪褌械褉械褋薪芯泄, 邪 屑芯褌懈胁 褋芯蟹写邪薪薪芯谐芯 懈蟹 薪懈褔械谐芯, 胁褘屑械褔褌邪薪薪芯谐芯 褔械谢芯胁械泻邪 胁 "袣懈褕芯褌械", 芯泻邪蟹褘胁邪械褌褋褟, 褍卸械 斜褘谢 芯锌褉芯斜芯胁邪薪 袦邪褋褌械褉芯屑 褋 "肖谢芯褉械薪褌懈泄褋泻芯泄 褔邪褉芯写械泄泻芯泄."
Displaying 1 - 30 of 2,249 reviews
Can't find what you're looking for?
Get help and learn more about the design.