What do you think?
Rate this book
خصم
در ژانویهٔ سال ۱۹۹۳، خبری هولناک جامعهٔ فرانسه را در بهت فرو برد. ژان‌کلو� رومان، پزشکی قلابی، ظرف یک روز پدر و مادر و همسر و فرزندانش را به قتل رسانده بود. امانوئل کارر با خواندن این خبر در مطبوعات تصمیم گرفت کتابی دربارهٔ آن بنویسد. او نامه‌ا� برای قاتل نوشت و آن را به زندان فرستاد. دو سال بعد، پاسخ نامه از راه رسید و کار آغاز شد. کتابی که در دست دارید حاصل کندوکاو امانوئل کارر است در زندگی قاتلی غریب، مردی که نزدیک به بیست سال خود را پزشک جا می‌زد� حال آن‌ک� چیزی نبود جز دروغگویی کلاهبردار. این کتاب بلافاصله پس از انتشار به چندین زبان ترجمه شد و امانوئل کارر نام و آوازه‌ا� جهانی یافت.
186 pages, Paperback
First published January 31, 2000
994 people are currently reading
26.9k people want to read
About the author
Emmanuel Carrère
64books2,873followersEmmanuel Carrère is a French author, screenwriter, and director. He is the son of Louis Carrère d'Encausse and French historian .
Carrère studied at the Institut d'Études Politiques de Paris (better known as Sciences Po). Much of his writing, both fiction and nonfiction, centers around the primary themes of the interrogation of identity, the development of illusion, and the direction of reality. Several of his books have been made into films; in 2005, he personally directed the film adaptation of his novel La Moustache. He was the president of the jury of the book Inter 2003.
(Wikipedia)
Carrère studied at the Institut d'Études Politiques de Paris (better known as Sciences Po). Much of his writing, both fiction and nonfiction, centers around the primary themes of the interrogation of identity, the development of illusion, and the direction of reality. Several of his books have been made into films; in 2005, he personally directed the film adaptation of his novel La Moustache. He was the president of the jury of the book Inter 2003.
(Wikipedia)
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 3,433 reviews
December 6, 2022
A SANGUE CALDO
Jean-Claude Romand, nato l�11 febbraio del 1954.
Il riferimento al libro di Capote non è casuale, ci si muove nello stesso territorio: un romanziere s’improvvisa giornalista per scrivere un libro che racconta un fatto di cronaca nera particolarmente raccapricciante.
Ma sia il ‘mostro� che lo scrittore agiscono sull’onda di emozioni al calor bianco.
Carrère conquista la fiducia dell’assassino Jean-Claude Romand (e conquista la fiducia del lettore, sicuramente la mia) esprimendo un sentimento che lo accompagna fortissimo per tutte le pagine di questo breve testo: ‘profonda compassione�.
Jean-Claude Romand è tronato in libertà vigilata dopo 26 anni di carcere.
Tuttavia, lo scrittore-giornalista non subisce il fascino del ‘mostro� (che ne ammazza cinque, moglie e figli e i suoi genitori, andando a ‘terminarli� in altro luogo, uccide anche un cane, più tenta di strangolare una sesta persona, l’amante, più si sospetta abbia spinto dalle scale il suocero causandone la morte), Carrère non ne è attratto, non si identifica, non gioca sull’orlo del precipizio.
E� piuttosto spinto da questa compassione, nata forse dall’aver avvertito dietro l’orrore del crimine una personalità straziata.
Romand non è un killer a sangue freddo: è un pasticcione, un bugiardo matricolato, un imbroglione, ma anche marito innamorato e padre affettuoso � oltre a essere un pluriassassino.
Aurélien Recoing in L’emploi du temps di Laurent Cantet
Carrère procede nell’indagine usando molti ‘se�, molti ‘forse�, condizionali, ipotesi e congetture. Nulla è chiaro, nulla è scontato, definito, definitivo.
Il mistero risiede fra questi due momenti del libro: a seguire il processo, tra giornalisti, fotografi e cameramen di tutta la nazione c’� anche un vecchio vignettista con la barba bianca che bazzica i tribunali francesi da quarant’anni e ha l’occhio acuto, che dice:
Questo individuo è gravemente malato� si controlla, controlla ogni cosa, è l’unico modo che ha per riuscire a reggere, ma se qualcuno si mette a punzecchiarlo dove non può più controllarsi, andrà in mille pezzi� Credono di trovarsi davanti a un uomo, ma quello non è più un uomo, non lo è più da una vita. E� come un buco nero, e ci esploderà in faccia. La gente non sa cosa sia la pazzia. E� terribile. E� la cosa più terribile che ci sia al mondo.
Géraldine Pailhas e Daviel Auteuil nel film omonimo di Nicole Garcia
Più avanti, invece, è lo stesso Carrère a dire:
Il mistero è che non esistono spiegazioni, e che per quanto inverosimile possa sembrare, questo è ciò che è accaduto.
È un libro dalla parte della follia, della depressione, dalla parte del dolore.
E, per quanto è innegabile che Carrère senta una sorta di affinità con Romand, non è certo l’impulso omicida che li accomuna, ma una fase della vita in cui domina il dolore. E la depressione.
L’avversario è dentro Romand, è lui stesso, il suo doppio: la contraddizione tra l’immagine positiva che propone agli altri (che vuole e cerca di proporre) e la coscienza di essere ben altro, ma non altrettanto degno e positivo.
La paura di deludere gli altri, a cominciare da quelli che ama, lo porta a mentire: e dalla menzogna genera l’orrore.
Il male è legato strettamente alla paura e al dolore, ed è una situazione più diffusa di quanto il caso Romand, a suo modo ‘unico�, faccia presumere.
2002: Nicole Garcia ha diretto il film omonimo tratto dal libro: ottimo Auteil, buona ambientazione, ma mira bassa.
2001: Laurent Cantet, regista di altra caratura, s'è ispirato allo stesso fatto di cronaca per il bel film L’emploi du temps-A tempo pieno.
Jean-Claude Romand, nato l�11 febbraio del 1954.
Il riferimento al libro di Capote non è casuale, ci si muove nello stesso territorio: un romanziere s’improvvisa giornalista per scrivere un libro che racconta un fatto di cronaca nera particolarmente raccapricciante.
Ma sia il ‘mostro� che lo scrittore agiscono sull’onda di emozioni al calor bianco.
Carrère conquista la fiducia dell’assassino Jean-Claude Romand (e conquista la fiducia del lettore, sicuramente la mia) esprimendo un sentimento che lo accompagna fortissimo per tutte le pagine di questo breve testo: ‘profonda compassione�.
Jean-Claude Romand è tronato in libertà vigilata dopo 26 anni di carcere.
Tuttavia, lo scrittore-giornalista non subisce il fascino del ‘mostro� (che ne ammazza cinque, moglie e figli e i suoi genitori, andando a ‘terminarli� in altro luogo, uccide anche un cane, più tenta di strangolare una sesta persona, l’amante, più si sospetta abbia spinto dalle scale il suocero causandone la morte), Carrère non ne è attratto, non si identifica, non gioca sull’orlo del precipizio.
E� piuttosto spinto da questa compassione, nata forse dall’aver avvertito dietro l’orrore del crimine una personalità straziata.
Romand non è un killer a sangue freddo: è un pasticcione, un bugiardo matricolato, un imbroglione, ma anche marito innamorato e padre affettuoso � oltre a essere un pluriassassino.
Aurélien Recoing in L’emploi du temps di Laurent Cantet
Carrère procede nell’indagine usando molti ‘se�, molti ‘forse�, condizionali, ipotesi e congetture. Nulla è chiaro, nulla è scontato, definito, definitivo.
Il mistero risiede fra questi due momenti del libro: a seguire il processo, tra giornalisti, fotografi e cameramen di tutta la nazione c’� anche un vecchio vignettista con la barba bianca che bazzica i tribunali francesi da quarant’anni e ha l’occhio acuto, che dice:
Questo individuo è gravemente malato� si controlla, controlla ogni cosa, è l’unico modo che ha per riuscire a reggere, ma se qualcuno si mette a punzecchiarlo dove non può più controllarsi, andrà in mille pezzi� Credono di trovarsi davanti a un uomo, ma quello non è più un uomo, non lo è più da una vita. E� come un buco nero, e ci esploderà in faccia. La gente non sa cosa sia la pazzia. E� terribile. E� la cosa più terribile che ci sia al mondo.
Géraldine Pailhas e Daviel Auteuil nel film omonimo di Nicole Garcia
Più avanti, invece, è lo stesso Carrère a dire:
Il mistero è che non esistono spiegazioni, e che per quanto inverosimile possa sembrare, questo è ciò che è accaduto.
È un libro dalla parte della follia, della depressione, dalla parte del dolore.
E, per quanto è innegabile che Carrère senta una sorta di affinità con Romand, non è certo l’impulso omicida che li accomuna, ma una fase della vita in cui domina il dolore. E la depressione.
L’avversario è dentro Romand, è lui stesso, il suo doppio: la contraddizione tra l’immagine positiva che propone agli altri (che vuole e cerca di proporre) e la coscienza di essere ben altro, ma non altrettanto degno e positivo.
La paura di deludere gli altri, a cominciare da quelli che ama, lo porta a mentire: e dalla menzogna genera l’orrore.
Il male è legato strettamente alla paura e al dolore, ed è una situazione più diffusa di quanto il caso Romand, a suo modo ‘unico�, faccia presumere.
2002: Nicole Garcia ha diretto il film omonimo tratto dal libro: ottimo Auteil, buona ambientazione, ma mira bassa.
2001: Laurent Cantet, regista di altra caratura, s'è ispirato allo stesso fatto di cronaca per il bel film L’emploi du temps-A tempo pieno.
February 12, 2018
leggendo insieme limonov e ’a mi sono detta più volte che mi piacerebbe essere per un giorno lo psicoanalista di emmanuel carrère, o per lo meno poter sbirciare i suoi appunti. perché lasciando da parte i dettagli e la evidente diversità di cornice, spolpando fino a tenere solo i protagonisti, la prima cosa che mi resta appiccicata addosso è l’attrazione dello scrittore francese per profili psicologici che eufemisticamente definirei borderline.
l’impressione che ho ricavato da entrambe le letture è che carrère, scrivendo, visiti i propri luoghi oscuri mentre fruga dentro quelli di jean-claude romand e di eduard limonov. e che lo faccia con qualcosa di simile a quel misto di curiosità, timore e sconvolgente attrazione che si prova ogni tanto vicino alla linea gialla sulla banchina della metro.
solo così mi spiego il suo intrecciare nei racconti la finzione e la meticolosa ricostruzione, sovrappronendo sempre - e in modo esplicito - brani della propria autobiografia di scrittore al percorso di uomini che hanno dato alla menzogna e/o alla mitomania un ruolo strutturale nella propria esistenza. carrère non racconta solo vite che non sono la sua, ma vite che avrebbero potuto esserlo come potrebbero essere, oggi stesso o domani, la nostra. ecco perché, io credo, non resiste a guardare oltre quella linea gialla. nel caso di limonov quasi compiacendosi di lasciar suppurare violenza, sesso crudissimo e pensieri innominabili. e in quest’altro tirandone fuori una storia che vuole avere l’inquietudine come un basso continuo, e ci riesce benissimo.
c’� una frase in limonov che mi ha rimandato dritta a quest’altro romanzo: quando parlando di se stesso eduard dice di sapere con esattezza «cosa passa per la testa di un loser che, esasperato, prende un’arma e spara nel mucchio. ma, dal momento che è capace di scriverlo, lui non è ancora quel loser, ed è escluso che lo sia il suo doppio su carta». con ciò non voglio dire, naturalmente, che se non scrivesse romanzi carrère imbraccerebbe un fucile semiautomatico. ma che indagare certi enigmi della mente sia per lui una sorta di urgenza mi vien da pensare di sì.
l’impressione che ho ricavato da entrambe le letture è che carrère, scrivendo, visiti i propri luoghi oscuri mentre fruga dentro quelli di jean-claude romand e di eduard limonov. e che lo faccia con qualcosa di simile a quel misto di curiosità, timore e sconvolgente attrazione che si prova ogni tanto vicino alla linea gialla sulla banchina della metro.
solo così mi spiego il suo intrecciare nei racconti la finzione e la meticolosa ricostruzione, sovrappronendo sempre - e in modo esplicito - brani della propria autobiografia di scrittore al percorso di uomini che hanno dato alla menzogna e/o alla mitomania un ruolo strutturale nella propria esistenza. carrère non racconta solo vite che non sono la sua, ma vite che avrebbero potuto esserlo come potrebbero essere, oggi stesso o domani, la nostra. ecco perché, io credo, non resiste a guardare oltre quella linea gialla. nel caso di limonov quasi compiacendosi di lasciar suppurare violenza, sesso crudissimo e pensieri innominabili. e in quest’altro tirandone fuori una storia che vuole avere l’inquietudine come un basso continuo, e ci riesce benissimo.
c’� una frase in limonov che mi ha rimandato dritta a quest’altro romanzo: quando parlando di se stesso eduard dice di sapere con esattezza «cosa passa per la testa di un loser che, esasperato, prende un’arma e spara nel mucchio. ma, dal momento che è capace di scriverlo, lui non è ancora quel loser, ed è escluso che lo sia il suo doppio su carta». con ciò non voglio dire, naturalmente, che se non scrivesse romanzi carrère imbraccerebbe un fucile semiautomatico. ma che indagare certi enigmi della mente sia per lui una sorta di urgenza mi vien da pensare di sì.
July 25, 2018
I promise to give my honest opinion on this book, and not tell a bag of lies.
Jean-Claude Romand turned out to be just about the biggest impostor I have ever come across. And the ultimate question is - How did this lovable family man get away with telling so many fibs about his life for so long? The people closest to him seemed of sound mind, but never aroused suspicion on all the horse pucky he was feeding them. The initial facts are extraordinary enough on what he got away with, that lead up to the murderous antics that would eventually end with his incarceration. It really is like something from a movie or a novel. It's too unbelievable to be real, but it is.
Carrère's writes of a French bourgeois implosion, where a respectable doctor (Romand) living near the Swiss border simply goes berserk, killings wife and two children, having previously shot his mother and father and attempted to strangle his mistress. He sets fire to the family home and takes an overdose, only to be rescued, revived and charged with murder, much to the consternation of the local community, which had always regarded him as a solicitous, conscientious and caring husband, father and son. He fooled them all. In spite of everything he had claimed, the killer, Jean-Claude, turns out never to have been a doctor at the World Health Organisation, nor to have any medical qualifications. The whole professional edifice of his life was an elaborate fabrication. This scandalous revelation was followed by local rumours of a romantic surrogate life in drug-running, and so on, but the truth was far more desperate. Days when Romand had said he had been teaching in Dijon, or working at the WHO's Geneva headquarters, he was actually mooching about alone, sitting around in car parks, or wandering around the woods. Romand, the ostensibly successful professional and happy family man, had in fact done nothing with his life, except make it up, and steal large quantities of cash from family and friends. He dug himself into the mother of all holes, and the deeper he went, the less likely it was he would turn back.
One could bemoan that Carrère's project, pushes the boundaries too far with taking a true story, and putting it in the blender with too many superior fictions. He also talks up his subject matter, probably making more of a mystery of Romand than is deserved. But he writes in such an addictive fashion, that it's a book to blitz through in as little time as possible rather than drag out.
Carrère became a reporter, pursuing the psychological and factual details he would need for a book. At the same time he was looking inward, trying to decipher his own motives. Why was he so preoccupied with this case?, which made him feel ashamed in front of his own children, that their father should be writing about such a monster. But what emerged from this obsession is a fascinating meditation on Jean-Claude Romand and his bizarre and imposturous life. The narrative often holds complete attention, with the most chilling parts being Carrère's description of Romand's daily routine. He would dutifully head across the border for Geneva every workday, to the headquarters of W.H.O. Some days he would put on a visitor's badge and pass the time in the library. Sometimes he would take hikes in the Mountains. When his work took him out of town, he'd settle into a hotel near the airport. It was as close to a virtual life as one could get, but how much did it differ from a real one? What is truth?
After Romand's trial, the shrinks had a field day. Romand, centre of attention at last!, flattered by the attendance of an author, and having made the apparently effortless transition from being trapped in life's equivalent to a movie script. What was so astonishing was the fact at no time did Romand ever come across as a monstrous psychopath, he was simply just your average Joe.
That in it's self is the chilling part.
Jean-Claude Romand turned out to be just about the biggest impostor I have ever come across. And the ultimate question is - How did this lovable family man get away with telling so many fibs about his life for so long? The people closest to him seemed of sound mind, but never aroused suspicion on all the horse pucky he was feeding them. The initial facts are extraordinary enough on what he got away with, that lead up to the murderous antics that would eventually end with his incarceration. It really is like something from a movie or a novel. It's too unbelievable to be real, but it is.
Carrère's writes of a French bourgeois implosion, where a respectable doctor (Romand) living near the Swiss border simply goes berserk, killings wife and two children, having previously shot his mother and father and attempted to strangle his mistress. He sets fire to the family home and takes an overdose, only to be rescued, revived and charged with murder, much to the consternation of the local community, which had always regarded him as a solicitous, conscientious and caring husband, father and son. He fooled them all. In spite of everything he had claimed, the killer, Jean-Claude, turns out never to have been a doctor at the World Health Organisation, nor to have any medical qualifications. The whole professional edifice of his life was an elaborate fabrication. This scandalous revelation was followed by local rumours of a romantic surrogate life in drug-running, and so on, but the truth was far more desperate. Days when Romand had said he had been teaching in Dijon, or working at the WHO's Geneva headquarters, he was actually mooching about alone, sitting around in car parks, or wandering around the woods. Romand, the ostensibly successful professional and happy family man, had in fact done nothing with his life, except make it up, and steal large quantities of cash from family and friends. He dug himself into the mother of all holes, and the deeper he went, the less likely it was he would turn back.
One could bemoan that Carrère's project, pushes the boundaries too far with taking a true story, and putting it in the blender with too many superior fictions. He also talks up his subject matter, probably making more of a mystery of Romand than is deserved. But he writes in such an addictive fashion, that it's a book to blitz through in as little time as possible rather than drag out.
Carrère became a reporter, pursuing the psychological and factual details he would need for a book. At the same time he was looking inward, trying to decipher his own motives. Why was he so preoccupied with this case?, which made him feel ashamed in front of his own children, that their father should be writing about such a monster. But what emerged from this obsession is a fascinating meditation on Jean-Claude Romand and his bizarre and imposturous life. The narrative often holds complete attention, with the most chilling parts being Carrère's description of Romand's daily routine. He would dutifully head across the border for Geneva every workday, to the headquarters of W.H.O. Some days he would put on a visitor's badge and pass the time in the library. Sometimes he would take hikes in the Mountains. When his work took him out of town, he'd settle into a hotel near the airport. It was as close to a virtual life as one could get, but how much did it differ from a real one? What is truth?
After Romand's trial, the shrinks had a field day. Romand, centre of attention at last!, flattered by the attendance of an author, and having made the apparently effortless transition from being trapped in life's equivalent to a movie script. What was so astonishing was the fact at no time did Romand ever come across as a monstrous psychopath, he was simply just your average Joe.
That in it's self is the chilling part.
December 1, 2021
TWO REVIEWS
FIRST : FOR PEOPLE THINKING OF READING THIS
You gotta read it. It’s a true crime classic! Total page-turner!
SECOND, FOR PEOPLE WHO KNOW THEY WON’T READ THIS BUT ARE WONDERING WHAT IT’S ALL ABOUT
The first thing is, true crime books almost never get translated into English, possibly because the English speaking world is arrogant and parochial, and possibly because it is so cram full of revolting crimes that it doesn’t need any more accounts of revolting crimes, thank you very much. So since this is a French book that was immediately translated in 2000 and then republished 17 years later, you got to figure this is quite something.
Second thing is this concerns a familicide which is as the name suggests where a guy slaughters his family. In this case it was his mother, father, wife and two children. There have been quite a number of such cases before, such as that of Ronald Gene Simmons who in 1987 murdered all 14 of his large family (including four grandchildren). That was in Arkansas. Compared to that guy, and trying not to be too crass, but five victims doesn’t sound like it warrants two books, three movies and a couple of tv episodes, which this Jean-Claude Romand case has inspired. So what’s the story here?
This Jean-Claude Romand was just an ordinary medical school student up until the point where he didn’t take his second year exams, he just stayed in bed. And lied to his parents. That was the beginning.
In year two and three he carried on being a student even though he wasn’t one.
He attended classes, used the university library…had the same textbooks and photocopied lectures as the other students…he spent as much time and energy pretending to become a doctor as he would have to become one in reality.
(Numerous judges have said similar things to prisoners in the dock before passing sentence.)
He came back home pretending to have graduated. The family lived in France but only a couple of miles from Geneva, and he then set up the next big phase in this world of lies by pretending to get a job at the HQ of the World Health Organisation in Geneva. Over the years this job became a real globe-trotting bigwig-meeting hifalutin affair but nobody ever called him at his non-existent office, for 18 years. Not his parents, not his wife. He set up an answering service and they had to call that.
He lived a nice life for 18 years. You’re going to ask well, if he didn’t have a job at all, where did the money come from. And this was the magical part of the story. By innuendo and suggestion, he spun around himself the aura of a man who has some great contacts in a very top Swiss bank � like a top WHO research consultant might - & so if you’re looking for some safe investments that’ll get you a much better return than anything mere citizens could find (how does 18% sound?) he was the guy. So his wife, his wife’s parents, his own parents and his own best friend all regularly supplied him with large amounts of francs to “invest�, and all without any bank statements or interest agreements involved. They just handed over wads of dough to their fine upstanding friendly neighbourhood man of the world.
So you can see how this thing panned out. The thin ice he was standing on came to the point where it was about to melt, so he decided to murder his family before his life of shame was exposed. For some men, fortunately a very small number, it’s better that their family all die before they find out their son/husband/father was a heartless fraud.
When everyone was dead he made a very half-hearted attempt at suicide. The firemen rescued him out of the burning house and after a couple of years they had a big trial and put him inside for life. By that time he had found religion and was a born again Christian, and everyone was so happy for him, his troubles were over and he had finally found peace in the bosom of Jesus.
I’m glad to say that our author Emmanuel Carrere doesn’t buy that sickly bullshit.
Jean-Claude Romand is still alive in his French jail. His wife and little children and his parents are still dead.
FIRST : FOR PEOPLE THINKING OF READING THIS
You gotta read it. It’s a true crime classic! Total page-turner!
SECOND, FOR PEOPLE WHO KNOW THEY WON’T READ THIS BUT ARE WONDERING WHAT IT’S ALL ABOUT
The first thing is, true crime books almost never get translated into English, possibly because the English speaking world is arrogant and parochial, and possibly because it is so cram full of revolting crimes that it doesn’t need any more accounts of revolting crimes, thank you very much. So since this is a French book that was immediately translated in 2000 and then republished 17 years later, you got to figure this is quite something.
Second thing is this concerns a familicide which is as the name suggests where a guy slaughters his family. In this case it was his mother, father, wife and two children. There have been quite a number of such cases before, such as that of Ronald Gene Simmons who in 1987 murdered all 14 of his large family (including four grandchildren). That was in Arkansas. Compared to that guy, and trying not to be too crass, but five victims doesn’t sound like it warrants two books, three movies and a couple of tv episodes, which this Jean-Claude Romand case has inspired. So what’s the story here?
This Jean-Claude Romand was just an ordinary medical school student up until the point where he didn’t take his second year exams, he just stayed in bed. And lied to his parents. That was the beginning.
In year two and three he carried on being a student even though he wasn’t one.
He attended classes, used the university library…had the same textbooks and photocopied lectures as the other students…he spent as much time and energy pretending to become a doctor as he would have to become one in reality.
(Numerous judges have said similar things to prisoners in the dock before passing sentence.)
He came back home pretending to have graduated. The family lived in France but only a couple of miles from Geneva, and he then set up the next big phase in this world of lies by pretending to get a job at the HQ of the World Health Organisation in Geneva. Over the years this job became a real globe-trotting bigwig-meeting hifalutin affair but nobody ever called him at his non-existent office, for 18 years. Not his parents, not his wife. He set up an answering service and they had to call that.
He lived a nice life for 18 years. You’re going to ask well, if he didn’t have a job at all, where did the money come from. And this was the magical part of the story. By innuendo and suggestion, he spun around himself the aura of a man who has some great contacts in a very top Swiss bank � like a top WHO research consultant might - & so if you’re looking for some safe investments that’ll get you a much better return than anything mere citizens could find (how does 18% sound?) he was the guy. So his wife, his wife’s parents, his own parents and his own best friend all regularly supplied him with large amounts of francs to “invest�, and all without any bank statements or interest agreements involved. They just handed over wads of dough to their fine upstanding friendly neighbourhood man of the world.
So you can see how this thing panned out. The thin ice he was standing on came to the point where it was about to melt, so he decided to murder his family before his life of shame was exposed. For some men, fortunately a very small number, it’s better that their family all die before they find out their son/husband/father was a heartless fraud.
When everyone was dead he made a very half-hearted attempt at suicide. The firemen rescued him out of the burning house and after a couple of years they had a big trial and put him inside for life. By that time he had found religion and was a born again Christian, and everyone was so happy for him, his troubles were over and he had finally found peace in the bosom of Jesus.
I’m glad to say that our author Emmanuel Carrere doesn’t buy that sickly bullshit.
Jean-Claude Romand is still alive in his French jail. His wife and little children and his parents are still dead.
August 29, 2020
Crème de la Crime
Jean-Claude Romand killed his wife, two children and his mother and father in a French village not far from Geneva in 1993. Six years later Emmanuel Carrère finished a book about the murders. This is all we know for sure: the dead bodies, the book and the chronology of two sets of events. And therein lies the mystery posed by Carrère.
Is the book fact or fiction? Carrère makes it purposely ambiguous by telling the reader that his ambitions to write a psychological assessment of Romand were thwarted early on by Romand’s unreponsiveness. So he wrote the present book instead. As with Truman Capote’s non-fiction novel, In Cold Blood, actual events are supplemented by conjectures and conjunctions. The boundaries aren’t clear so that all but the general outlines of the story are in that Borgesian territory in which fictions pose with factual passports and vice versa. The reader is never certain of the literary nationality of any statement. Alien spies could be lurking anywhere.
The implications of Carrère’s technique are clear: Any attempt to understand, to explain, to analyse the behaviour of Jean-Claude Romand inevitably involves fiction. The newspaper accounts of the killings, the forensic medical reports, the psychiatric diagnoses, and even the first person statements of Romand are all fiction in their own way. Carrere‘s book is a sort of meta-fiction which brings all the details together. If he adds a few details here and there, it’s only to make things flow more smoothly. The rest is incomprehensible without the touch of an accomplished story teller. N'est-ce pas?
And besides, isn’t such meta-fiction precisely what constituted the life of Jean-Claude Romand. He lived an apparently conventional life, the facts of which - wife, children, house, social involvement - were visible and verifiable to his family, neighbours, and friends. These existential truths were supplemented with other hearsay reports by Romand - about career, travel, qualifications, responsibilities - which were further transmitted by mutual acquaintances until they were part of a shared communal reality. Romand had only to supply some minor narrative connections in the form of tactical name-dropping and the occasional trinket from some foreign place (obtained in cosmopolitan Geneva) to complete his entirely bogus biography.
Meaning requires narrative, which demands a point of view, which cannot by definition be factual. Ergo, meaning is an imposition of fiction on the world of pure existence. It’s that simple and that complicated. Meaning can’t be found in events - educational background, family history, economic class, emotional profile or childhood behaviour - or in other minds, or for that matter in one’s own mind since it doesn’t exist as a thing until it is communicated, at which point it is in nobody’s mind and everyone’s simultaneously. Refusal to recognise this mystery causes a great deal of trouble. Whatever Romand did only has meaning after the fact, which really doesn’t help to explain why he did it except as a fiction that makes everyone involved, including Romand, feel safer.
Carrère recognises the paradox of his undertaking. He is whistling in the dark for the rest of us. Whatever insights he or the others who have been appalled by Romand’s actions come up with are actually sterile. They are not about the facts of the case, much less truth. The point of his book, as well as all the underlying material which he uses to construct it, is to promote the idea that the world is an orderly place, that it can be trusted even if there are the occasional dangers. Part of this trust is the feeling that we can learn things - like how to spot potential homicidal maniacs - which might expand the realm of order in our lives.
In short, Romand’s was a haute bourgeois crime, a sort of crème de la crime. And it demanded therefore a suitably haute bourgeois exposition. Carrère both does and does not supply it. Teflon was never so slippery.
Jean-Claude Romand killed his wife, two children and his mother and father in a French village not far from Geneva in 1993. Six years later Emmanuel Carrère finished a book about the murders. This is all we know for sure: the dead bodies, the book and the chronology of two sets of events. And therein lies the mystery posed by Carrère.
Is the book fact or fiction? Carrère makes it purposely ambiguous by telling the reader that his ambitions to write a psychological assessment of Romand were thwarted early on by Romand’s unreponsiveness. So he wrote the present book instead. As with Truman Capote’s non-fiction novel, In Cold Blood, actual events are supplemented by conjectures and conjunctions. The boundaries aren’t clear so that all but the general outlines of the story are in that Borgesian territory in which fictions pose with factual passports and vice versa. The reader is never certain of the literary nationality of any statement. Alien spies could be lurking anywhere.
The implications of Carrère’s technique are clear: Any attempt to understand, to explain, to analyse the behaviour of Jean-Claude Romand inevitably involves fiction. The newspaper accounts of the killings, the forensic medical reports, the psychiatric diagnoses, and even the first person statements of Romand are all fiction in their own way. Carrere‘s book is a sort of meta-fiction which brings all the details together. If he adds a few details here and there, it’s only to make things flow more smoothly. The rest is incomprehensible without the touch of an accomplished story teller. N'est-ce pas?
And besides, isn’t such meta-fiction precisely what constituted the life of Jean-Claude Romand. He lived an apparently conventional life, the facts of which - wife, children, house, social involvement - were visible and verifiable to his family, neighbours, and friends. These existential truths were supplemented with other hearsay reports by Romand - about career, travel, qualifications, responsibilities - which were further transmitted by mutual acquaintances until they were part of a shared communal reality. Romand had only to supply some minor narrative connections in the form of tactical name-dropping and the occasional trinket from some foreign place (obtained in cosmopolitan Geneva) to complete his entirely bogus biography.
Meaning requires narrative, which demands a point of view, which cannot by definition be factual. Ergo, meaning is an imposition of fiction on the world of pure existence. It’s that simple and that complicated. Meaning can’t be found in events - educational background, family history, economic class, emotional profile or childhood behaviour - or in other minds, or for that matter in one’s own mind since it doesn’t exist as a thing until it is communicated, at which point it is in nobody’s mind and everyone’s simultaneously. Refusal to recognise this mystery causes a great deal of trouble. Whatever Romand did only has meaning after the fact, which really doesn’t help to explain why he did it except as a fiction that makes everyone involved, including Romand, feel safer.
Carrère recognises the paradox of his undertaking. He is whistling in the dark for the rest of us. Whatever insights he or the others who have been appalled by Romand’s actions come up with are actually sterile. They are not about the facts of the case, much less truth. The point of his book, as well as all the underlying material which he uses to construct it, is to promote the idea that the world is an orderly place, that it can be trusted even if there are the occasional dangers. Part of this trust is the feeling that we can learn things - like how to spot potential homicidal maniacs - which might expand the realm of order in our lives.
In short, Romand’s was a haute bourgeois crime, a sort of crème de la crime. And it demanded therefore a suitably haute bourgeois exposition. Carrère both does and does not supply it. Teflon was never so slippery.
August 31, 2021
3/5 Estrellas
El libro empieza de forma poderosísima. Un padre de familia aparentemente normal y acomodado, buena persona y sin antecedentes de ningún tipo, asesina a su mujer, a sus hijos y a sus padres. También intenta acabar con su vida, pero en esto no tiene tanto "éxito", sobrevive.
Todo se viene abajo, su familia (la que le queda) y sus amigos comienzan a conocer con estupor detalles de la vida de este personaje, padre de familia, esposo, médico famoso, detalles que ponen de manifiesto un entramado de mentiras, que había ido sustentando durante casi 20 años, porque todo, todo, salvo su vida familiar, era FALSO. ¿Cómo ha podido mantenerse este edificio de mentiras tantos años y nadie se dio cuenta? Su trabajo, sus ingresos, sus viajes, sus compañeros........
A modo de ensayo novelado, a la manera de sus compatriotas Eric Vuillard o Laurent Binet, Carrere intenta poner luz a estos interrogantes, que se corresponden a acontecimientos REALES, por si alguien se piensa que se trata de una invención. ¿Cómo este personaje llegó a desarrollar esta doble vida? ¿Cómo la pudo sostener? ¿Cómo desembocó todo en la monstruosidad del asesinato de toda su familia? ¿Cómo no se desmontó todo, si con una simple llamada se podía comprobar que su trabajo era ficticio?.
Como he dicho empieza muy fuerte, vemos los acontecimientos desde el punto de vista de los amigos y del propio Carrere, pero poco a poco se va disolviendo como un azucarillo, navegando hacia el final en aburridas disquisiciones acerca de la deriva religiosa del monstruo (de hecho ingresó en un convento a su salida de la cárcel en 2019), su compleja personalidad narcisista que se alimenta de mentiras y le permite vivir en un mundo paralelo que le hace insensible a la realidad de su vida y de sus actos, su capacidad de embaucar a la gente con su personalidad suave y educada que le hacen incluso objeto de compasión, pobrecito por lo que ha tenido que pasar, después de matar a TODA su familia.
En definitiva, que me esperaba más. Te deja a medias con el análisis psicológico del pobrecito, tampoco explica bien y convincentemente sus motivaciones para escribir sobre este tema, cuando está contribuyendo al narcisismo patológico del asesino con esta publicidad gratuita, la deriva religiosa de unos y otros me la suda, así que se queda en 3 estrellas.
PD.: Es cortito y se lee rápido, por si os interesa el tema.
El libro empieza de forma poderosísima. Un padre de familia aparentemente normal y acomodado, buena persona y sin antecedentes de ningún tipo, asesina a su mujer, a sus hijos y a sus padres. También intenta acabar con su vida, pero en esto no tiene tanto "éxito", sobrevive.
Todo se viene abajo, su familia (la que le queda) y sus amigos comienzan a conocer con estupor detalles de la vida de este personaje, padre de familia, esposo, médico famoso, detalles que ponen de manifiesto un entramado de mentiras, que había ido sustentando durante casi 20 años, porque todo, todo, salvo su vida familiar, era FALSO. ¿Cómo ha podido mantenerse este edificio de mentiras tantos años y nadie se dio cuenta? Su trabajo, sus ingresos, sus viajes, sus compañeros........
A modo de ensayo novelado, a la manera de sus compatriotas Eric Vuillard o Laurent Binet, Carrere intenta poner luz a estos interrogantes, que se corresponden a acontecimientos REALES, por si alguien se piensa que se trata de una invención. ¿Cómo este personaje llegó a desarrollar esta doble vida? ¿Cómo la pudo sostener? ¿Cómo desembocó todo en la monstruosidad del asesinato de toda su familia? ¿Cómo no se desmontó todo, si con una simple llamada se podía comprobar que su trabajo era ficticio?.
Como he dicho empieza muy fuerte, vemos los acontecimientos desde el punto de vista de los amigos y del propio Carrere, pero poco a poco se va disolviendo como un azucarillo, navegando hacia el final en aburridas disquisiciones acerca de la deriva religiosa del monstruo (de hecho ingresó en un convento a su salida de la cárcel en 2019), su compleja personalidad narcisista que se alimenta de mentiras y le permite vivir en un mundo paralelo que le hace insensible a la realidad de su vida y de sus actos, su capacidad de embaucar a la gente con su personalidad suave y educada que le hacen incluso objeto de compasión, pobrecito por lo que ha tenido que pasar, después de matar a TODA su familia.
En definitiva, que me esperaba más. Te deja a medias con el análisis psicológico del pobrecito, tampoco explica bien y convincentemente sus motivaciones para escribir sobre este tema, cuando está contribuyendo al narcisismo patológico del asesino con esta publicidad gratuita, la deriva religiosa de unos y otros me la suda, así que se queda en 3 estrellas.
PD.: Es cortito y se lee rápido, por si os interesa el tema.
August 21, 2018
Este libro me impresionó muchísimo. Se trata de un tipo que lleva una doble vida con una naturalidad que asusta, un auténtico mitómano que construyó un perfil y una vida imaginaria durante toda su existencia. Su trabajo, su vida amorosa, su salud, todo una gran mentira. Y lo mejor de todo es que está basado en un caso real. El desenlace de este suceso es igual o más espeluznante. Un librazo, me encantó.
September 25, 2022
True crime. A caballo entre la novela, el ensayo o el relato periodístico.
No esperes encontrar un thriller.
El relato de Carrére tiene algo de hipnótico, no puedes soltar el libro a pesar de las sensaciones que te provoca. Me quedo con las de horror y repugnancia ante los hechos acontecidos y este personaje espeluznante, me quedo con una sensación extraña cuando pienso en la forma en que lo aborda el autor. Lo siento, yo no puedo ser neutral.
Los hechos:
En 1993 Jean-Claude Romand asesina a sus padres, su mujer y sus dos hijos. ¿Qué pudo provocar que alguien mate a su entorno más cercano?
Emmanuel Carrère aborda esta cuestión desde una reconstrucción de los hechos fruto de la investigación del juicio, las conversaciones con un amigo de su entorno y la correspondencia que mantiene con el autor de los crímenes mientras está preso. Es el autor quien se dirige a Jean-Claude Romand, indicando en su primera carta, que a su entender sus actos no son la obra de un criminal ordinario, ni la de un loco, sino la de un hombre empujado hasta el fondo por fuerzas que le superan. Pero ¿realmente existe alguna justificación para estos actos?
Jean-Claude Romand es un mentiroso, manipulador, narcisista y egocéntrico.
La frase:
"Deberían haber visto a Dios y en su lugar habían visto, adoptando los rasgos de su hijo bienamado, a aquel a quien la Biblia llama Satán, el adversario".
La reconstrucción de la vida de Jean-Claude Romand me ha gustado, desde como ha ido forjando una nueva vida de éxito a partir de una primera mentira, hasta como ha conseguido "sobrevivir" durante todos esos años. La frialdad, el egoísmo y la falta de escrúpulos de sus actos se entremezcla primeramente con esa sensación de soledad en su mentira, de tener que llenar un hueco vacío, de tiempo a rellenar como precio a pagar por su ego en su status social y laboral y posteriormente con la ilusión de otra mentira, una aventura que llenará su ego sentimental basada en una manipulación y un engaño que precipitará el desenlace de ese fatídico fin de semana -no me ha parecido creíble el silencio de Corinne-.
La reacción de su amigo Luc sí que me ha parecido creíble, como vas pasando de una confianza en mi amigo Jean-Claude al horror de pensar que lo considerabas tu amigo, que creías que lo conocías, de lo que le podría haber ocurrido a tu propia familia. Incluso la forma de superar los hechos, no querer mantener la relación y la sensación de desconfianza ante cualquiera.
El perfil psicológico de Jean-Claude está bien construido, se mantiene en la mentira y la distancia incluso cuando en el juicio no reconoce las evidencias y pone distancia a los hechos y su familia -no se refiere a ella por sus nombres hasta casi el final del libro, cuando menciona un perfume que le recordaba a su mujer-, mantiene ese don embaucador hasta en la cárcel. Increíble que se libre del trato vejatorio que suelen darle a este tipo de criminales por esa casualidad de un encuentro fortuito previo con un cabecilla que le reconocerá y le allanará el camino, que despierte la simpatía de visitadores carcelarios y que mantenga un cierto estatus en la misma. Ese casi ¡Pobrecito lo han trasladado y tiene que hacer nuevos amigos!, puede conmigo. ¿¡Dónde han quedado las víctimas!?
"Él hubiese preferido sufrir de veras un cáncer que la mentira -pues la mentira era una enfermedad, con su etiología, sus riesgos de metástasis, su pronóstico reservado-, pero el destino había querido que contrajese la enfermedad de la mentira, y no era culpa suya haberla contraído".
Lo siento, pero no puedo compartir esa premisa.
No creo que haya sido un libro fácil de escribir para el autor. Yo no podría mantener una relación, aunque fuese profesional y epistolar, con un criminal de este calibre y menos visitarlo. El monstruo perturbaría mis sueños.
Valoración: 8/10
Lectura: septiembre 2022
No esperes encontrar un thriller.
El relato de Carrére tiene algo de hipnótico, no puedes soltar el libro a pesar de las sensaciones que te provoca. Me quedo con las de horror y repugnancia ante los hechos acontecidos y este personaje espeluznante, me quedo con una sensación extraña cuando pienso en la forma en que lo aborda el autor. Lo siento, yo no puedo ser neutral.
Los hechos:
En 1993 Jean-Claude Romand asesina a sus padres, su mujer y sus dos hijos. ¿Qué pudo provocar que alguien mate a su entorno más cercano?
Emmanuel Carrère aborda esta cuestión desde una reconstrucción de los hechos fruto de la investigación del juicio, las conversaciones con un amigo de su entorno y la correspondencia que mantiene con el autor de los crímenes mientras está preso. Es el autor quien se dirige a Jean-Claude Romand, indicando en su primera carta, que a su entender sus actos no son la obra de un criminal ordinario, ni la de un loco, sino la de un hombre empujado hasta el fondo por fuerzas que le superan. Pero ¿realmente existe alguna justificación para estos actos?
Jean-Claude Romand es un mentiroso, manipulador, narcisista y egocéntrico.
La frase:
"Deberían haber visto a Dios y en su lugar habían visto, adoptando los rasgos de su hijo bienamado, a aquel a quien la Biblia llama Satán, el adversario".
La reconstrucción de la vida de Jean-Claude Romand me ha gustado, desde como ha ido forjando una nueva vida de éxito a partir de una primera mentira, hasta como ha conseguido "sobrevivir" durante todos esos años. La frialdad, el egoísmo y la falta de escrúpulos de sus actos se entremezcla primeramente con esa sensación de soledad en su mentira, de tener que llenar un hueco vacío, de tiempo a rellenar como precio a pagar por su ego en su status social y laboral y posteriormente con la ilusión de otra mentira, una aventura que llenará su ego sentimental basada en una manipulación y un engaño que precipitará el desenlace de ese fatídico fin de semana -no me ha parecido creíble el silencio de Corinne-.
La reacción de su amigo Luc sí que me ha parecido creíble, como vas pasando de una confianza en mi amigo Jean-Claude al horror de pensar que lo considerabas tu amigo, que creías que lo conocías, de lo que le podría haber ocurrido a tu propia familia. Incluso la forma de superar los hechos, no querer mantener la relación y la sensación de desconfianza ante cualquiera.
El perfil psicológico de Jean-Claude está bien construido, se mantiene en la mentira y la distancia incluso cuando en el juicio no reconoce las evidencias y pone distancia a los hechos y su familia -no se refiere a ella por sus nombres hasta casi el final del libro, cuando menciona un perfume que le recordaba a su mujer-, mantiene ese don embaucador hasta en la cárcel. Increíble que se libre del trato vejatorio que suelen darle a este tipo de criminales por esa casualidad de un encuentro fortuito previo con un cabecilla que le reconocerá y le allanará el camino, que despierte la simpatía de visitadores carcelarios y que mantenga un cierto estatus en la misma. Ese casi ¡Pobrecito lo han trasladado y tiene que hacer nuevos amigos!, puede conmigo. ¿¡Dónde han quedado las víctimas!?
"Él hubiese preferido sufrir de veras un cáncer que la mentira -pues la mentira era una enfermedad, con su etiología, sus riesgos de metástasis, su pronóstico reservado-, pero el destino había querido que contrajese la enfermedad de la mentira, y no era culpa suya haberla contraído".
Lo siento, pero no puedo compartir esa premisa.
No creo que haya sido un libro fácil de escribir para el autor. Yo no podría mantener una relación, aunque fuese profesional y epistolar, con un criminal de este calibre y menos visitarlo. El monstruo perturbaría mis sueños.
Valoración: 8/10
Lectura: septiembre 2022
December 27, 2022
"Una mentira normalmente, sirve para encubrir una verdad, algo vergonzoso, quizá, pero real. La suya no encubria nada. Bajo el falso doctor Romand no había un auténtico Jean-Claude Romand."
November 6, 2023
موقعی که سبیل رو خوندم،خیلی از داستانش خوشم آومد.و بیشتر از همه سبک نوشتاری این نویسنده رو خیلی دوست داشتم که خواننده را تاآخر همراهی می‌کن�.
برای همین تصمیم گرفتم کتاب خصم که توسط نشر مد منتشرشده رو بخونم.
امانوئل کارر در این کتاب به پرونده� جنایی که در ژانویه سال ۱۹۹۳ در فرانسه رخ داده می‌پرداز�.این نویسنده کنجکاو میشه و تصمیم می‌گیر� کتابی بصورت گزارش وار درباره‌ا� بنویسد.
پرونده ی جنایی درباره� مردی که چه عرض کنم؟🤦♀�
ژان کلود رومان ۱۸سال هست که به همه� دوستاش و خانواده‌ا� دروغ گفته،فریب داده و خیانت کرده ودر آخر که نزدیک بود تمام حقایق و رازهاش برملا شود.نقشه میکشه که همه رو سربه نیست کند.
آخر چرا؟
بااینکه نویسنده تمام زندگی ژان کلود از کودکی تا بزرگسالی رو نوشته.
ولی راستش من متقاعد نشدم که اینقدر خودخواه باشه و بی رحمانه خانواده‌ا� رو بکشد.
ودر آخر کتاب خیلی ناراحت شدم که ژان کلود درسن ۶۴ سالگی آزاد شد.
حس میکنم هنوز عدالت در حق قربانیان اجرا نشده.
ژان کلود اینقدر بزدل بود که هیچوقت نتونست با حقیقت زندگیش کنار بیاد و ترجیح داد باکشتن خانواده‌ا� حقیقت رو هم از بین ببرد.
من کتاب رو خیلی دوست داشتم� و اصلا برای من خسته کننده نبود از اون‌ج� که من هم شیفته پرونده‌ها� جنایی هستم. خیلی لذت بردم.
ودر آخر ترجمه و جل�� کتاب عالی بودن.
برای همین تصمیم گرفتم کتاب خصم که توسط نشر مد منتشرشده رو بخونم.
امانوئل کارر در این کتاب به پرونده� جنایی که در ژانویه سال ۱۹۹۳ در فرانسه رخ داده می‌پرداز�.این نویسنده کنجکاو میشه و تصمیم می‌گیر� کتابی بصورت گزارش وار درباره‌ا� بنویسد.
پرونده ی جنایی درباره� مردی که چه عرض کنم؟🤦♀�
ژان کلود رومان ۱۸سال هست که به همه� دوستاش و خانواده‌ا� دروغ گفته،فریب داده و خیانت کرده ودر آخر که نزدیک بود تمام حقایق و رازهاش برملا شود.نقشه میکشه که همه رو سربه نیست کند.
آخر چرا؟
بااینکه نویسنده تمام زندگی ژان کلود از کودکی تا بزرگسالی رو نوشته.
ولی راستش من متقاعد نشدم که اینقدر خودخواه باشه و بی رحمانه خانواده‌ا� رو بکشد.
ودر آخر کتاب خیلی ناراحت شدم که ژان کلود درسن ۶۴ سالگی آزاد شد.
حس میکنم هنوز عدالت در حق قربانیان اجرا نشده.
ژان کلود اینقدر بزدل بود که هیچوقت نتونست با حقیقت زندگیش کنار بیاد و ترجیح داد باکشتن خانواده‌ا� حقیقت رو هم از بین ببرد.
من کتاب رو خیلی دوست داشتم� و اصلا برای من خسته کننده نبود از اون‌ج� که من هم شیفته پرونده‌ها� جنایی هستم. خیلی لذت بردم.
ودر آخر ترجمه و جل�� کتاب عالی بودن.
February 19, 2024
این ترسناک‌تری� جای روایت بود🥲
...دیگر همه� بچه‌ه� می‌دانستن� که پدر آنتوان � کارولین ان‌ه� و مادرشان را کُشته و بعد خانه‌شا� را به آتش کشیده است. خیلی‌هایشا� شب خواب می‌دیدن� که خانه‌شا� دارد می‌سوز� و پدرشان همان کاری را می‌کن� که پدر آنتوان و کارولین کرده بود.
در ژانویه سال ۱۹۹۳ خبری هولناک جامعه� فرانسه را در بهت فرو برد. ژان کلود، رومان پزشکی، قلابی ظرف یک روز پدر و مادر و همسر و فرزندانش را به قتل رسانده بود
امانوئل کارر با خواندن این خبر در مطبوعات تصمیم گرفت کتابی درباره آن بنویسد. او نامه‌های� برای قاتل نوشت و آن را به زندان فرستاد. دو سال بعد پاسخ نامه از راه رسید و کار آغاز شد.
...دیگر همه� بچه‌ه� می‌دانستن� که پدر آنتوان � کارولین ان‌ه� و مادرشان را کُشته و بعد خانه‌شا� را به آتش کشیده است. خیلی‌هایشا� شب خواب می‌دیدن� که خانه‌شا� دارد می‌سوز� و پدرشان همان کاری را می‌کن� که پدر آنتوان و کارولین کرده بود.
در ژانویه سال ۱۹۹۳ خبری هولناک جامعه� فرانسه را در بهت فرو برد. ژان کلود، رومان پزشکی، قلابی ظرف یک روز پدر و مادر و همسر و فرزندانش را به قتل رسانده بود
امانوئل کارر با خواندن این خبر در مطبوعات تصمیم گرفت کتابی درباره آن بنویسد. او نامه‌های� برای قاتل نوشت و آن را به زندان فرستاد. دو سال بعد پاسخ نامه از راه رسید و کار آغاز شد.
September 10, 2022
Hace mucho tiempo que quería leer este libro. Cuando lo terminé, me quedé meditando un rato. Tiene un mérito que hace rato ningún libro consigue obtener en mí: no podía parar de leer. Aunque se me cansaba la vista, aunque era tarde, no pude parar de leer y lo terminé ayer a la noche.
Antes de leerlo, sabía el contexto en el que había sido escrito, de modo que no haré ninguna mención de los crímenes cometidos por Romand y daré por asumido que todos los lectores de esta reseña los conocen.
Aunque muchos lo comparan con "A sangre fría", de Capote, creo que la comparación es equivocada. No solo por la diferencia de extensión de páginas, sino porque Capote cubrió la investigación y el juicio, cosas que Carrera hace muy pormenorizadamente. Carrera se propone reconstruir lo que pasó antes, toda la red de mentiras que Romand cultivó por décadas para llegar a un desenlace monstruoso que él mismo construyó y ejecutó.
Cuando empecé a leer este libro, sentí una duda, que podemos calificar de ética supongo, que el mismo Carrere experimentó: al centrar el libro en torno a Romand, ¿No se le está dando una atención inmerecida a un individuo monstruoso? Todos sabemos que las víctimas siempre son las grandes olvidadas de todos los delitos, mientras que el perpetrador recibe más atención por parte de los medios y el público. Por eso me preocupaba que el libro explorara el morbo o realizara una apología de este hombre. Felizmente, ninguna de esas dos cosas ocurre.
Carrere orientó el libro a responder las dudas que muchos se hacen-yo mismo-cuando sucede algo tan espantoso: ¿Qué hay en la mente de este individuo? Si pudiéramos abrir su cabeza y leer sus pensamientos, ¿Qué veríamos? ¿Locura? ¿Maldad? ¿Psicopatía? ¿Un oscuro vacío?
Lo sé porque yo mismo he experimentado esa-voy a llamarla horrible curiosidad-por un caso mucho más reciente: el de Chris Watts en Estados Unidos, un padre de familia que mató a su esposa embarazada y a sus dos hijas para estar con su amante.
Es probable que esa respuesta sea imposible de encontrar, porque no podemos sondear el interior de la mente de individuos así. Pero allí radica el intento del autor.
Y también busca responder otra duda: ¿Cómo pudo ser que Romand mantuviera en pie su mentira durante casi veinte años? ¿Una tan endeble, que con apenas unas llamadas o comprobaciones de rutina se hubiera venido abajo?
No hay ninguna apología de Romand en el libro. Después de leerlo, me quedó en claro que es un egocéntrico narcisista, un mentiroso patológico y muy posiblemente un psicópata. Toda la compasión, si es que la tiene, se la reserva para sí mismo. Ni siquiera habla de sus delitos como "delitos": se refiere a "la tragedia". Y no habla de sus víctimas por sus nombres. De esta manera, las deshumaniza, se coloca en un plano externo y evita asumir su responsabilidad. Creo que Romand encarna muy bien el concepto acuñado por Arendt: el de la "banalidad del mal". Nunca aceptó de entrada su responsabilidad, hubo que interrogarlo y desmontar todas y cada una de sus mentiras: porque nunca dejó de mentir, incluso después de descubierto.
Si hubiera puesto la mitad del empeño que puso en mentir, en estudiar y graduarse, hubiera sido un excelente médico.
Sé que Romand salió en libertad en 2019, lo leí en las noticias mucho antes de leer el libro. A riesgo de emitir una opinión personal, debería haber permanecido en la cárcel. No porque tuviera posibilidades de reinsertarse en la sociedad o no. Al matar a cinco personas, les robó permanentemente su libertad. Todos los sueños y deseos que tenían fueron destruidos en aras de su delirio narcisista. Si le quitó la libertad de forma perpetua a cinco personas, él jamás debería haber recuperado la suya.
Antes de leerlo, sabía el contexto en el que había sido escrito, de modo que no haré ninguna mención de los crímenes cometidos por Romand y daré por asumido que todos los lectores de esta reseña los conocen.
Aunque muchos lo comparan con "A sangre fría", de Capote, creo que la comparación es equivocada. No solo por la diferencia de extensión de páginas, sino porque Capote cubrió la investigación y el juicio, cosas que Carrera hace muy pormenorizadamente. Carrera se propone reconstruir lo que pasó antes, toda la red de mentiras que Romand cultivó por décadas para llegar a un desenlace monstruoso que él mismo construyó y ejecutó.
Cuando empecé a leer este libro, sentí una duda, que podemos calificar de ética supongo, que el mismo Carrere experimentó: al centrar el libro en torno a Romand, ¿No se le está dando una atención inmerecida a un individuo monstruoso? Todos sabemos que las víctimas siempre son las grandes olvidadas de todos los delitos, mientras que el perpetrador recibe más atención por parte de los medios y el público. Por eso me preocupaba que el libro explorara el morbo o realizara una apología de este hombre. Felizmente, ninguna de esas dos cosas ocurre.
Carrere orientó el libro a responder las dudas que muchos se hacen-yo mismo-cuando sucede algo tan espantoso: ¿Qué hay en la mente de este individuo? Si pudiéramos abrir su cabeza y leer sus pensamientos, ¿Qué veríamos? ¿Locura? ¿Maldad? ¿Psicopatía? ¿Un oscuro vacío?
Lo sé porque yo mismo he experimentado esa-voy a llamarla horrible curiosidad-por un caso mucho más reciente: el de Chris Watts en Estados Unidos, un padre de familia que mató a su esposa embarazada y a sus dos hijas para estar con su amante.
Es probable que esa respuesta sea imposible de encontrar, porque no podemos sondear el interior de la mente de individuos así. Pero allí radica el intento del autor.
Y también busca responder otra duda: ¿Cómo pudo ser que Romand mantuviera en pie su mentira durante casi veinte años? ¿Una tan endeble, que con apenas unas llamadas o comprobaciones de rutina se hubiera venido abajo?
No hay ninguna apología de Romand en el libro. Después de leerlo, me quedó en claro que es un egocéntrico narcisista, un mentiroso patológico y muy posiblemente un psicópata. Toda la compasión, si es que la tiene, se la reserva para sí mismo. Ni siquiera habla de sus delitos como "delitos": se refiere a "la tragedia". Y no habla de sus víctimas por sus nombres. De esta manera, las deshumaniza, se coloca en un plano externo y evita asumir su responsabilidad. Creo que Romand encarna muy bien el concepto acuñado por Arendt: el de la "banalidad del mal". Nunca aceptó de entrada su responsabilidad, hubo que interrogarlo y desmontar todas y cada una de sus mentiras: porque nunca dejó de mentir, incluso después de descubierto.
Si hubiera puesto la mitad del empeño que puso en mentir, en estudiar y graduarse, hubiera sido un excelente médico.
Sé que Romand salió en libertad en 2019, lo leí en las noticias mucho antes de leer el libro. A riesgo de emitir una opinión personal, debería haber permanecido en la cárcel. No porque tuviera posibilidades de reinsertarse en la sociedad o no. Al matar a cinco personas, les robó permanentemente su libertad. Todos los sueños y deseos que tenían fueron destruidos en aras de su delirio narcisista. Si le quitó la libertad de forma perpetua a cinco personas, él jamás debería haber recuperado la suya.
September 4, 2024
خصم کتابی ایست از امانوئل کارر، نویسنده� فرانسوی ، که بر اساس داستان واقعی ژان کلود رومان و زندگی عجیب او نوشته شده . خصم رمانی است فراتر از یک داستان جنایی ساده. این کتاب با کاوش در عمق روان یک قاتل، به پرسش‌ها� بنیادینی درباره ماهیت انسان، دروغ، هویت و عدالت می‌پرداز� . خصم را می توان روایتی هولناک از دروغ و جنایت دانست .وو
زندگی بر پایه دروغ
در خصم ، دروغ نقش محوری در شکل‌گیر� شخصیت ژان کلود و در نهایت سرنوشت او ایفا می‌کن�. زندگی دوگانه رومان از آغاز بر اساس دروغ شکل گرفته و این دروغ‌ه� به مرور زمان به یک ساختار عظیم تبدیل شده و رومان برای حفظ این ساختار، دروغ‌ها� جدیدی را به دروغ‌ها� قبلی اضافه می کند . گویی که او در تاریکی دروغ‌ها� خود غرق شده و دیگر راهی برای بازگشت به زندگی واقعی ندارد. کارر این گونه نشان میده� که دروغ می‌توان� به یک بیماری مهلک و غیرقابل درمان تبدیل شده و زندگی فرد و اطرافیانش را به طور کامل نابود کند.
یک زندگی دوگانه
ضد قهرمان مخوف داستان ، یعنی رومان را باید قهرمان یک زندگی دوگانه دانست ، فردی که با خونسردی بسیار و با استعدادی بی نظیر در جلد شخصیت هایی که ساخته فرو می رود . او چنان زندگی رویایی و مرفه ای برای خود فراهم آورده که زندگی او مورد رشک و حسد دیگران است . اما فقط خود رومان می داند که زندگیش را بر روی بستری از دروغ ساخته ، خانه ای روی آب
سرانجام ، دروغ که بخشی از هویت رومان شده ، او را به جایی می رساند که گویی دیگر راه برگشتی ندارد ، کمبود اعتماد به نفس ، ترس از شکست و شاید هم اختلالات روانی ، فاجعه می آفریند .
در کتاب خصم ، کارر ضمن روایت داستان زندگی و جنایات فجیع ژان‌کلو� رومان، به موازات آن، به شرح حال شخصی خود و فرایند خلق این اثر از طریق مکاتبات با رومان پرداخته و بدین ترتیب، تلاش کرده تا ارتباطی عمیق میان این دو روایت ایجاد می‌کن�.
اگرچه کتاب با موضوعی جذاب و قلم توانمند امانوئل کارر، مخاطب را به خود جذب می‌کند� اما در بخش پایانی، به خصوص در توصیف جزئیات قتل، حال و هوایی شبیه به یک گزارش هیجان‌انگی� روزنامه‌ا� پیدا کرده . این تغییر لحن، در تضاد با عمق روانشناختی بخش های ابتدایی کتاب و تحلیل‌ها� پیشین نویسنده است و کمی از جذابیت آن کاسته. با این حال، مطالعه کتاب همچنان برای علاقه‌مندا� به ادبیات داستانی ، روان شناختی و جنایی می تواند جذاب باشد .
زندگی بر پایه دروغ
در خصم ، دروغ نقش محوری در شکل‌گیر� شخصیت ژان کلود و در نهایت سرنوشت او ایفا می‌کن�. زندگی دوگانه رومان از آغاز بر اساس دروغ شکل گرفته و این دروغ‌ه� به مرور زمان به یک ساختار عظیم تبدیل شده و رومان برای حفظ این ساختار، دروغ‌ها� جدیدی را به دروغ‌ها� قبلی اضافه می کند . گویی که او در تاریکی دروغ‌ها� خود غرق شده و دیگر راهی برای بازگشت به زندگی واقعی ندارد. کارر این گونه نشان میده� که دروغ می‌توان� به یک بیماری مهلک و غیرقابل درمان تبدیل شده و زندگی فرد و اطرافیانش را به طور کامل نابود کند.
یک زندگی دوگانه
ضد قهرمان مخوف داستان ، یعنی رومان را باید قهرمان یک زندگی دوگانه دانست ، فردی که با خونسردی بسیار و با استعدادی بی نظیر در جلد شخصیت هایی که ساخته فرو می رود . او چنان زندگی رویایی و مرفه ای برای خود فراهم آورده که زندگی او مورد رشک و حسد دیگران است . اما فقط خود رومان می داند که زندگیش را بر روی بستری از دروغ ساخته ، خانه ای روی آب
سرانجام ، دروغ که بخشی از هویت رومان شده ، او را به جایی می رساند که گویی دیگر راه برگشتی ندارد ، کمبود اعتماد به نفس ، ترس از شکست و شاید هم اختلالات روانی ، فاجعه می آفریند .
در کتاب خصم ، کارر ضمن روایت داستان زندگی و جنایات فجیع ژان‌کلو� رومان، به موازات آن، به شرح حال شخصی خود و فرایند خلق این اثر از طریق مکاتبات با رومان پرداخته و بدین ترتیب، تلاش کرده تا ارتباطی عمیق میان این دو روایت ایجاد می‌کن�.
اگرچه کتاب با موضوعی جذاب و قلم توانمند امانوئل کارر، مخاطب را به خود جذب می‌کند� اما در بخش پایانی، به خصوص در توصیف جزئیات قتل، حال و هوایی شبیه به یک گزارش هیجان‌انگی� روزنامه‌ا� پیدا کرده . این تغییر لحن، در تضاد با عمق روانشناختی بخش های ابتدایی کتاب و تحلیل‌ها� پیشین نویسنده است و کمی از جذابیت آن کاسته. با این حال، مطالعه کتاب همچنان برای علاقه‌مندا� به ادبیات داستانی ، روان شناختی و جنایی می تواند جذاب باشد .
March 14, 2017
Compulsive book - I read it like I would a particularly good internet article, staying up late to get to the (somewhat abrupt) end. Carrere's style is understated and good here, and though his occasional digressions into religion disrupt the flow of the action, he knows enough to get out of the way and let the story tell itself. The opening:
"On the Saturday morning of January 9, 1993, while Jean-Claude Romand was killing his wife and children, I was with mine in a parent-teacher meeting at the school attended by Gabriel, our eldest son. He was 5 years old, the same age as Antoine Romand. Then we went to have lunch with my parents, as Jean-Claude Romand did with his, whom he killed after their meal."
is an all-timer, and the narrative itself is irresistible. Romand's life before the murders is given equal focus, which is good because it's so interesting. How could a man spin a fifteen-year lie, a lie that reached into the farthest corners of his life - employment, family, friends, an affair? The smallest details of that lie are worth hearing about, and in giving them, Carrere grants us the space to imagine what Remond was thinking. There's an odd, notable reliability, consciously created by the murderer, here. This is what good true crime should feel like - not just the thrill of scoptophilia, but an illumination of the unwilling accomplices that surround us.
"On the Saturday morning of January 9, 1993, while Jean-Claude Romand was killing his wife and children, I was with mine in a parent-teacher meeting at the school attended by Gabriel, our eldest son. He was 5 years old, the same age as Antoine Romand. Then we went to have lunch with my parents, as Jean-Claude Romand did with his, whom he killed after their meal."
is an all-timer, and the narrative itself is irresistible. Romand's life before the murders is given equal focus, which is good because it's so interesting. How could a man spin a fifteen-year lie, a lie that reached into the farthest corners of his life - employment, family, friends, an affair? The smallest details of that lie are worth hearing about, and in giving them, Carrere grants us the space to imagine what Remond was thinking. There's an odd, notable reliability, consciously created by the murderer, here. This is what good true crime should feel like - not just the thrill of scoptophilia, but an illumination of the unwilling accomplices that surround us.
February 5, 2023
Los reyes me trajeron El adversario, de Emmanuel Carrère. «¿Todavía no lo habías leído?», me dijo alguien. Pues no, no lo había leído, ¿qué prisa había? La historia de Jean Claude Rommand es tan increíble que hay que contarla muy mal para que no atrape al lector. Lo sucedido es extraordinario porque es llevar el engaño y la mentira a una cumbre que para los que mentimos de una manera vulgar y chapucera resulta casi una obra de arte. La mentira es excelsa y el personaje incomprensible. Cuando se descubre que tras su fachada está hueco, ¿lo que se descubre es la verdad u otra capa de maldad? Veo una línea clara entre A sangre fría, El adversario y La ciudad de los vivos (éste último ya estáis tardando en leerlo y doy por hecho que cualquiera que pasa por aquí leyó A sangre fría hace tiempo). Tres historias de crímenes narradas por autores competentes que pretenden contarlas sin tocarlas, desde una atalaya de objetividad imposible de mantener. Todos sabemos que Capote terminó enamorado de Perry y deseando que le ajusticiaran para poder terminar su novela y, en mi opinión y por otras lecturas que he hecho de él, Carrère no se enamora de Rommand porque está demasiado enamorado de sí mismo. Es una autor, y ya lo he dicho más veces, que siempre entra en sus novelas a codazos, como el que en una discoteca empieza a bailar en los límites de la pista de baile pero poco a poco va empujando y presionando hasta llegar al centro porque necesita ser el foco de atención: así es Carrère.
Por si acaso queda alguien, como yo, que llega «tarde» a El adversario, me gustaría decir que es una novela que hay que leer, con una historia que no voy a destripar, que te deja boquiabierto y que al terminar solo deja una pregunta: ¿cómo fue posible?
Por si acaso queda alguien, como yo, que llega «tarde» a El adversario, me gustaría decir que es una novela que hay que leer, con una historia que no voy a destripar, que te deja boquiabierto y que al terminar solo deja una pregunta: ¿cómo fue posible?
December 7, 2017
Fue una lectura compulsiva, desesperada, abrumadora, escalofriante, una historia verídica brutal que me deja reflexionando sobre la mente y naturaleza humana.
February 21, 2022
Un racconto agghiacciante, una storia vera che ci immerge nello stupore, un viaggio nel cuore dell'orrore.
Il 9 gennaio 1993, Jean-Claude Romand uccise sua moglie, i suoi figli, i suoi genitori e tentò senza successo il suicidio. L'indagine ha poi rivelato che non era un medico come sosteneva e, cosa ancora più difficile da credere, non era nient'altro, non era nessuno. Aveva mentito da quando aveva diciotto anni. Sul punto di essere scoperto, ha preferito uccidere tutta la sua famiglia per non sopportare il loro sguardo. E' stato poi condannato all'ergastolo.
Emmanuel Carrère fa auto-fiction in questo bellissimo e forte romanzo misto a reportage giornalistico, narra i fatti dal suo punto di vista con uno stile unico, conquista la fiducia dell’assassino e si fa raccontare la sua storia senza subire il fascino del "mostro": "Ho cercato di raccontare accuratamente, giorno dopo giorno, questa vita di solitudine, impostura e assenza. Immaginare cosa gli ribolliva nella mente durante le ore vuote, senza progetti o testimoni, quando doveva essere al lavoro ma in realtà era nei parcheggi autostradali o nelle foreste della Giura. Capire cos'è un'esperienza umana così estrema mi ha toccato così da vicino e che colpisce, credo, ognuno di noi".
Carrère cerca sempre di esporre i fatti nel modo più oggettivo possibile, ma allo stesso tempo riflette profondamente sul caso e, senza poterlo evitare, sulla natura umana.
La fatidica notte della strage viene raccontata da Carrère in maniera sobria, magari un altro scrittore avrebbe riempito le pagine di sangue e grida di supplizio, i movimenti dell'assassino sono veramente "a sangue freddo" (in riferimento al romanzo di Truman Capote che si può considerare genitore di questo), ma il fatto di far capire la natura umana senza mostrare esplicitamente la carne umana macerata, rende l'opera molto più potente.
Il 9 gennaio 1993, Jean-Claude Romand uccise sua moglie, i suoi figli, i suoi genitori e tentò senza successo il suicidio. L'indagine ha poi rivelato che non era un medico come sosteneva e, cosa ancora più difficile da credere, non era nient'altro, non era nessuno. Aveva mentito da quando aveva diciotto anni. Sul punto di essere scoperto, ha preferito uccidere tutta la sua famiglia per non sopportare il loro sguardo. E' stato poi condannato all'ergastolo.
Di norma una bugia serve a nascondere una verità, magari qualcosa di vergognoso, ma reale. La sua non nascondeva nulla. Sotto il falso dottor Romand non c’era un vero Jean-Claude Romand.
Emmanuel Carrère fa auto-fiction in questo bellissimo e forte romanzo misto a reportage giornalistico, narra i fatti dal suo punto di vista con uno stile unico, conquista la fiducia dell’assassino e si fa raccontare la sua storia senza subire il fascino del "mostro": "Ho cercato di raccontare accuratamente, giorno dopo giorno, questa vita di solitudine, impostura e assenza. Immaginare cosa gli ribolliva nella mente durante le ore vuote, senza progetti o testimoni, quando doveva essere al lavoro ma in realtà era nei parcheggi autostradali o nelle foreste della Giura. Capire cos'è un'esperienza umana così estrema mi ha toccato così da vicino e che colpisce, credo, ognuno di noi".
Carrère cerca sempre di esporre i fatti nel modo più oggettivo possibile, ma allo stesso tempo riflette profondamente sul caso e, senza poterlo evitare, sulla natura umana.
La fatidica notte della strage viene raccontata da Carrère in maniera sobria, magari un altro scrittore avrebbe riempito le pagine di sangue e grida di supplizio, i movimenti dell'assassino sono veramente "a sangue freddo" (in riferimento al romanzo di Truman Capote che si può considerare genitore di questo), ma il fatto di far capire la natura umana senza mostrare esplicitamente la carne umana macerata, rende l'opera molto più potente.
"mi sembra anche di cominciare a percepire quella voce interiore carica di senso che finora si è manifestata soltanto attraverso sintomi o azioni. Intuisco fino a che punto sia essenziale sentire dentro di me una parola che trovi conferma nell’ascolto di un altro e di ciò che produce un’eco in lui. Il fatto che lei non riesca a parlare della mia storia in prima persona mi sembra in parte legato alla difficoltà che ho io a parlare di me stesso in prima persona. (...) ed è terribile pensare che se a suo tempo avessi avuto accesso a quell’“io� e di conseguenza al “tu� e al “noi�, avrei potuto dire loro tutto quello che avevo da dire senza che la violenza rendesse impossibile ogni dialogo."
Jean-Claude Romand, in una lettera a Carrère. 1996
--
March 6, 2025
عهد کردیم درباره «خصم» اثر «امانوئل کارر» صحبت کنیم. یک گزارش با فرم درست رمان از جنایتی واقعی که مطلقا بی نظیر و بر اساس تکنیک رمان نوشته شده.
«خصم» داستان جنایت و بیوگرافی و در عین حال جلسه دادگاه محاکمه «ژانکلود روومان» مردی که همسر ، فرزندان و والدین خودش رو می کشه.
در صفحه اول ما میخونیم که شخصیت اصلی مرتکب قتل همین افراد شده. چقدر این حرکت درسته که از لحظه اول این رو به ما میگه و تلاشی در شوک کردن ما نمیکنه. و بجاش با خوندن خط اول داستان ، در ما تعلیق ایجاد میشه که با چه هدفی این قتل ها صورت گرفته؟ چجوری این قتل ها اتفاق افتادن؟ قاتل کی هست؟ از کجا اومده؟ و... این نشون میده که نویسنده فرم رو میفهمه و تلاشی نداره که بر اساس این ماجرا در اتاق فکر خودش مثل خیلی از نویسنده های دیگه داستانی بنویسه که شاید به این ماجرا ربطی داشته باشه. نه، داستان تماما با نظارت و بر اساس مصاحبه هایی که با «روومان» داشته نوشته و بررسی شده.نویسنده در عین حقیقت نوشتن ، لحن گزارش گونه نمینویسه و این علتیه که اثر رو برای ما خوندنی میکنه.خوانش اثر رو به دانشجوها و متخصصین روانشناسی توصیه میکنم چرا که در عین رمان بودن ، گزارشی‌س� از زخم یک روح.
کتاب داستان داره(داستان خیلی خوبی هم داره)
شخصیت داره که خیلی خوب و بر اساس اون چیزی که بودن بنا میشن نه چیزی که نویسنده میخواد.
فضا داره و باعث میشه ما به فکر فرو بریم.
در عین حال دو نقد هم داره. دو نقد خیلی خیلی خیلی مهم که میشه گفت در اکثریت آثار جنایی - تریلر نمیبینیم :
1.نقد به «دروغ» و «دروغگویی»
2.نقد «خشونت»
بر عکس تقریبا آثار ادبیات امروزی ، این اثر به حدی خوبه که خشونت رو به زبانی درست و سر حال ، نقد میکنه.
نویسنده میخواد که زندگی هایی که برپایه «دروغ» خلق میشن رو هم نقد کنه. و این کار رو خیلیی خوب انجام میده.
«خصم» رو بخونید و ازش لذت ببرید.
سپاس بی کران از دو نفر
یکی «ابوالفضل الله دادی» که ترجمه بی نظیری برای این اثر ارائه کرده و یکی مدیریت نشر «مَد» که با چاپ آثار خوب داره خودش رو در بین ده نشر برتر ایران ، برای من جای میده.
«خصم» داستان جنایت و بیوگرافی و در عین حال جلسه دادگاه محاکمه «ژانکلود روومان» مردی که همسر ، فرزندان و والدین خودش رو می کشه.
در صفحه اول ما میخونیم که شخصیت اصلی مرتکب قتل همین افراد شده. چقدر این حرکت درسته که از لحظه اول این رو به ما میگه و تلاشی در شوک کردن ما نمیکنه. و بجاش با خوندن خط اول داستان ، در ما تعلیق ایجاد میشه که با چه هدفی این قتل ها صورت گرفته؟ چجوری این قتل ها اتفاق افتادن؟ قاتل کی هست؟ از کجا اومده؟ و... این نشون میده که نویسنده فرم رو میفهمه و تلاشی نداره که بر اساس این ماجرا در اتاق فکر خودش مثل خیلی از نویسنده های دیگه داستانی بنویسه که شاید به این ماجرا ربطی داشته باشه. نه، داستان تماما با نظارت و بر اساس مصاحبه هایی که با «روومان» داشته نوشته و بررسی شده.نویسنده در عین حقیقت نوشتن ، لحن گزارش گونه نمینویسه و این علتیه که اثر رو برای ما خوندنی میکنه.خوانش اثر رو به دانشجوها و متخصصین روانشناسی توصیه میکنم چرا که در عین رمان بودن ، گزارشی‌س� از زخم یک روح.
کتاب داستان داره(داستان خیلی خوبی هم داره)
شخصیت داره که خیلی خوب و بر اساس اون چیزی که بودن بنا میشن نه چیزی که نویسنده میخواد.
فضا داره و باعث میشه ما به فکر فرو بریم.
در عین حال دو نقد هم داره. دو نقد خیلی خیلی خیلی مهم که میشه گفت در اکثریت آثار جنایی - تریلر نمیبینیم :
1.نقد به «دروغ» و «دروغگویی»
2.نقد «خشونت»
بر عکس تقریبا آثار ادبیات امروزی ، این اثر به حدی خوبه که خشونت رو به زبانی درست و سر حال ، نقد میکنه.
نویسنده میخواد که زندگی هایی که برپایه «دروغ» خلق میشن رو هم نقد کنه. و این کار رو خیلیی خوب انجام میده.
«خصم» رو بخونید و ازش لذت ببرید.
سپاس بی کران از دو نفر
یکی «ابوالفضل الله دادی» که ترجمه بی نظیری برای این اثر ارائه کرده و یکی مدیریت نشر «مَد» که با چاپ آثار خوب داره خودش رو در بین ده نشر برتر ایران ، برای من جای میده.
September 20, 2021
Un libro que va de más a menos. El autor nos ofrece una versión muy personal y literaria del caso real de Jean-Claude Romand, quien sostuvo una vida ficticia durante 18 años a través de mentiras y estafas a sus familiares, amigos y conocidos, hasta que finalmente en 1993 asesinó a su esposa, sus hijos y sus padres.
Precisamente el estilo de la primera parte del libro es el que atrapa y estremece, primero narrando desde la perspectiva de su más íntimo amigo (quien por supuesto también era víctima del engaño) y luego recorriendo la vida de Romand desde su infancia hasta los trágicos hechos de enero del �93. Lo anterior está muy bien construido, ya que el autor complementó su investigación manteniendo correspondencia con Romand cuando estaba en la cárcel, permitiéndole plantear el complejo perfil con el que enfrentaba las diferentes situaciones.
Lo que no me gustó tanto fue la última parte, abocada al juicio y a la vida en la cárcel después de la condena: cansadora, sobre todo porque aquí Carrère se dedica a exponer el devenir de su proceso como autor del libro, lo que realmente no despertó mi interés. Además, me chocó el hecho de que en la cárcel, Romand fuera considerado un preso modelo por sus compañeros y los funcionarios de la prisión, situación a la que el autor dedica unos cuantos capítulos en un tono casi de redención.
Precisamente el estilo de la primera parte del libro es el que atrapa y estremece, primero narrando desde la perspectiva de su más íntimo amigo (quien por supuesto también era víctima del engaño) y luego recorriendo la vida de Romand desde su infancia hasta los trágicos hechos de enero del �93. Lo anterior está muy bien construido, ya que el autor complementó su investigación manteniendo correspondencia con Romand cuando estaba en la cárcel, permitiéndole plantear el complejo perfil con el que enfrentaba las diferentes situaciones.
Lo que no me gustó tanto fue la última parte, abocada al juicio y a la vida en la cárcel después de la condena: cansadora, sobre todo porque aquí Carrère se dedica a exponer el devenir de su proceso como autor del libro, lo que realmente no despertó mi interés. Además, me chocó el hecho de que en la cárcel, Romand fuera considerado un preso modelo por sus compañeros y los funcionarios de la prisión, situación a la que el autor dedica unos cuantos capítulos en un tono casi de redención.
January 31, 2023
Although this slim little book tells you what happened and who did it, its main purpose seems to be, does Jean Claude Romand really know himself? This is a true crime story with a psychopathic killer. He fooled everyone for years about who he was, when the truth threatened to be revealed, he killed his whole family in a brutal fashion.
The author was able to meet and interview him. Jean Claude Romand is a dumpy loser who was able to pretend that he was a big shot. He lied, cheated and stole from his own family and friends. He killed five people, his wife, two children and his parents. He may have killed his father-in-law too, earlier, but that was never proven.
In prison and on trial, he continued to get good, decent people to believe his outrageous lies and the author believes he lives in a fantasy world and believes them himself. Romand is a physical and mental coward who would rather kill his own family, rather than let them learn the truth about him.
The author was able to meet and interview him. Jean Claude Romand is a dumpy loser who was able to pretend that he was a big shot. He lied, cheated and stole from his own family and friends. He killed five people, his wife, two children and his parents. He may have killed his father-in-law too, earlier, but that was never proven.
In prison and on trial, he continued to get good, decent people to believe his outrageous lies and the author believes he lives in a fantasy world and believes them himself. Romand is a physical and mental coward who would rather kill his own family, rather than let them learn the truth about him.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
May 5, 2024
Bueno, esta novela es una joya. La leí en una tarde, prácticamente sin referencias previas. No supe que se trataba de una obra de no ficción hasta que terminé de leerla y me puse a investigar. Una bestialidad lo que hace Carriere. El que sepa de su obra dígame por donde sigo, por favor!
April 6, 2024
او دروغ میگوید ، راه و رسم زندگی اش همین است و توان انجام هیچ کار دیگری را ندارد.به نظر من او بیشتر به قصد فریب خودش دروغ میگوید تا دیگران.
تا قبل از این اگر یه نفر بهم میگفت دروغ گویی و غرق شدن بیمارگونه در دروغ هایی که خودت میبافی میتونه باعث این بشه که توی سر بچه ت تیر خلاص شلیک کنی نمیتونستم قبول کنم چون هیچ پل ارتباطی ای بین دروغ گفتن و کشتن بچه پیدا نمیکردم! ولی الان میتونم!
تا قبل از این اگر یه نفر بهم میگفت دروغ گویی و غرق شدن بیمارگونه در دروغ هایی که خودت میبافی میتونه باعث این بشه که توی سر بچه ت تیر خلاص شلیک کنی نمیتونستم قبول کنم چون هیچ پل ارتباطی ای بین دروغ گفتن و کشتن بچه پیدا نمیکردم! ولی الان میتونم!
February 1, 2016
Essenzialmente il racconto di una solitudine.
Bugie impossibili come mosse nervose a shangai.
Pomeriggi inquieti a vagare nel vuoto.
Una storia che è stata un lavoro ostico e complesso per chi l’ha scritta (qualche anno con pause di riflessione nel mezzo) ma che è diventata un resoconto abbastanza fluido per chi legge.
Alla base c’� la ricerca di uno stile credibile, lontano dai sensazionalismi facili.
Carrère se la cava con la sua solita eleganza, con bracciate farfalla tra udienze e vita vissuta.
Per i suoi standard si tiene abbastanza in disparte, meno protagonista del solito.
La sintesi di un monolite. [76/100]
Bugie impossibili come mosse nervose a shangai.
Pomeriggi inquieti a vagare nel vuoto.
Una storia che è stata un lavoro ostico e complesso per chi l’ha scritta (qualche anno con pause di riflessione nel mezzo) ma che è diventata un resoconto abbastanza fluido per chi legge.
Alla base c’� la ricerca di uno stile credibile, lontano dai sensazionalismi facili.
Carrère se la cava con la sua solita eleganza, con bracciate farfalla tra udienze e vita vissuta.
Per i suoi standard si tiene abbastanza in disparte, meno protagonista del solito.
La sintesi di un monolite. [76/100]
November 9, 2024
Aunque soy una persona muy feliz y totalmente equilibrada, los dramas y el true crime me fascinan, y no es morbo, es la desconocida mente humana y sus capacidades las que me atraen. Son estas historias las que me llegan, las que me remueven, las que me dejan la mente trabajando para buscar explicaciones a los actos que son capaces de hacer algunas mentes retorcidas e inhumanas.
Y llegó a mis manos esta crónica novelada de la vida de Jean Claude Romand, en la que la realidad supera la ficción, en la que un hombre tras iniciarse con una pequeña mentira, se inventa una vida como el que elige el menú en un restaurante, en donde todo, salvo su familia, es mentira. Una vida falsa, pero real a ojos de todos, que creció como una gran bola de nieve durante 18 años sin que ninguna de las personas que vivían a su alrededor y con las que se relacionaba a diario, se dieran cuenta. Cómo es posible? Es la confianza ciega de su familia y amigos la que hizo que nadie sospechara? Aún así la bola de nieve empezó a hacer aguas y como un castillo de naipes Jean Claude vio como toda su vida se iba a desmoronar, entonces, pudo el egoísmo y su narcisismo exaltado frente a los pensamientos suicidas y cometió de forma fría y calculadora los crímenes más atroces inimaginables, su familia�
Una mente narcisista, calculadora y muy inteligente capaz de mantener una mentira global sin cometer errores, sin tener un desliz que lo delatara, que acabó convirtiéndose en un criminal sin dudar, sin arrepentirse, sin piedad�
Estuvo 20 años en la cárcel, desde 2019 está libre. Es justo?
Y llegó a mis manos esta crónica novelada de la vida de Jean Claude Romand, en la que la realidad supera la ficción, en la que un hombre tras iniciarse con una pequeña mentira, se inventa una vida como el que elige el menú en un restaurante, en donde todo, salvo su familia, es mentira. Una vida falsa, pero real a ojos de todos, que creció como una gran bola de nieve durante 18 años sin que ninguna de las personas que vivían a su alrededor y con las que se relacionaba a diario, se dieran cuenta. Cómo es posible? Es la confianza ciega de su familia y amigos la que hizo que nadie sospechara? Aún así la bola de nieve empezó a hacer aguas y como un castillo de naipes Jean Claude vio como toda su vida se iba a desmoronar, entonces, pudo el egoísmo y su narcisismo exaltado frente a los pensamientos suicidas y cometió de forma fría y calculadora los crímenes más atroces inimaginables, su familia�
Una mente narcisista, calculadora y muy inteligente capaz de mantener una mentira global sin cometer errores, sin tener un desliz que lo delatara, que acabó convirtiéndose en un criminal sin dudar, sin arrepentirse, sin piedad�
Estuvo 20 años en la cárcel, desde 2019 está libre. Es justo?
June 25, 2018
Cosa spinge un uomo a mentire per 18 lunghissimi anni ?? Jean Claude Romand un folle , un depresso un uomo senza personalità, è riuscito ad ingannare chiunque, persino i suoi genitori. Un uomo ammirato da tutti , perché nonostante la sua incredibile carriera , ovviamente inesistente, è rimasto una persona semplice .. un mostro . Chi l’avrebbe mai immaginato che avrebbe sparato senza pietà alle spalle del padre e al petto sua madre , colei che l’ha messo a questo mondo, lo stesso mondo che l’ha ignorato . E poi sua moglie Florence vittima della sua incredibile follia insieme ai figli , innocenti , Caroline e Antoine. Un falso medico , un truffatore di poveri pensionati . Una bestia . Chi l’avrebbe mai Amato per quello che realmente è, un uomo che si vergogna di se stesso . Una richiesta sbagliata di amore , un essere malato senza via d’uscita..”per poi crogiolarsi nel suo letto umido ,bagnato di sudore , nel suo cattivo odore � . I soldi rubati ai suoi genitori, allo zio , alla famiglia di Florence ed infine anche alla sua ipotetica amante , che non l’avrebbe mai amato . Un uomo contorto , alla ricerca di compassione non di amore . Lo stesso amore che ha dichiarato di avere , l’unica cosa autentica , forse , verso la sua famiglia. È amore quello che spinge ad uccidere ???
October 3, 2024
دروغ؛ و تو چه دانی دروغ چیست؟!
August 5, 2017
Videorecensione:
December 18, 2020
Cosa succede quando ci si addentra nei meandri della psiche di un pluriomicida?
Lo racconta Emmanuel Carrère ne L’Avversario: un libro che mi ha scossa e commossa.
La luce che Carrère getta sulla vita di Romand non giudica: espone i fatti, è come un raggio luminoso che incide su un prisma ottico per decomporlo in più colori.
“La mattina del sabato 9 gennaio 1993, mentre Jean-Claude Romand uccideva sua moglie e i suoi figli, io ero a una riunione all’asilo di Gabriel, il mio figlio maggiore, insieme a tutta la famiglia. Gabriel aveva cinque anni, la stessa età di Antoine Romand. Più tardi siamo andati a pranzo dai miei genitori, e Romand dai suoi. Dopo mangiato ha ucciso anche loro. Ho trascorso da solo, nel mio studio, il pomeriggio del sabato e l’intera domenica, in genere dedicati alla vita familiare, perché stavo finendo un libro al quale lavoravo da un anno: la biografia dello scrittore di fantascienza Philip K. Dick. L’ultimo capitolo raccontava i giorni che lo scrittore aveva passato in coma prima di morire. Ho finito il martedì sera, e il mercoledì mattina ho letto il primo articolo di «Libération» sul caso Romand.�
Un romanzo crudo e profondamente umano, che spinge il lettore alla compassione.
“«Scoprendo che la Grazia non consiste nella realizzazione dei miei desideri, per quanto generosi e altruisti, ma nella forza di accettare tutto con gioia, dal fondo di questa cella il mio De profundis si trasforma in un Magnificat, e tutto diventa Luce». Mentre tornavo a Parigi per rimettermi al lavoro, non vedevo più ombra di mistero nella sua lunga impostura, ma solo una misera commistione di cecità, disperazione e vigliaccheria. Ormai sapevo che cosa accadeva nella sua testa durante le lunghe ore vuote trascorse nelle aree di servizio o nei parcheggi dei bar, era una cosa che in qualche modo avevo vissuto anch’io, e che mi ero lasciato alle spalle. Ma mi chiedevo: che cosa accade, adesso, nel suo cuore durante le ore notturne di veglia e di preghiera? Ho svuotato il bagagliaio e, mentre sistemavo per i prossimi diciassette anni gli scatoloni dell’istruttoria in un armadio del mio studio, ho capito che non li avrei più aperti. Aperta sulla mia scrivania rimaneva, invece, la testimonianza che Bernard gli aveva chiesto di scrivere. Questa sì, con la sua retorica cattolica, mi sembrava davvero misteriosa. Indecidibile, nell’accezione matematica del termine. Sono sicuro che non stia recitando per ingannare gli altri, mi chiedo però se il bugiardo che c’� in lui non lo stia ingannando. Quando Cristo entra nel suo cuore, quando la certezza di essere amato nonostante tutto gli fa scorrere sulle guance lacrime di gioia, non sarà caduto ancora una volta nella rete dell’Avversario? Ho pensato che scrivere questa storia non poteva essere altro che un crimine o una preghiera.
Parigi, gennaio 1999�
Amo Carrère, la sua capacità narrativa.
Di nuovo, però, la voce del lettore dell’audiolibro, ha smorzato il piacere della lettura.
[Gli audiolibri mentre si pulisce sono una benedizione. Recupero così romanzi che non ho ancora letto e avrei voluto leggere.]
Lo racconta Emmanuel Carrère ne L’Avversario: un libro che mi ha scossa e commossa.
La luce che Carrère getta sulla vita di Romand non giudica: espone i fatti, è come un raggio luminoso che incide su un prisma ottico per decomporlo in più colori.
“La mattina del sabato 9 gennaio 1993, mentre Jean-Claude Romand uccideva sua moglie e i suoi figli, io ero a una riunione all’asilo di Gabriel, il mio figlio maggiore, insieme a tutta la famiglia. Gabriel aveva cinque anni, la stessa età di Antoine Romand. Più tardi siamo andati a pranzo dai miei genitori, e Romand dai suoi. Dopo mangiato ha ucciso anche loro. Ho trascorso da solo, nel mio studio, il pomeriggio del sabato e l’intera domenica, in genere dedicati alla vita familiare, perché stavo finendo un libro al quale lavoravo da un anno: la biografia dello scrittore di fantascienza Philip K. Dick. L’ultimo capitolo raccontava i giorni che lo scrittore aveva passato in coma prima di morire. Ho finito il martedì sera, e il mercoledì mattina ho letto il primo articolo di «Libération» sul caso Romand.�
Un romanzo crudo e profondamente umano, che spinge il lettore alla compassione.
“«Scoprendo che la Grazia non consiste nella realizzazione dei miei desideri, per quanto generosi e altruisti, ma nella forza di accettare tutto con gioia, dal fondo di questa cella il mio De profundis si trasforma in un Magnificat, e tutto diventa Luce». Mentre tornavo a Parigi per rimettermi al lavoro, non vedevo più ombra di mistero nella sua lunga impostura, ma solo una misera commistione di cecità, disperazione e vigliaccheria. Ormai sapevo che cosa accadeva nella sua testa durante le lunghe ore vuote trascorse nelle aree di servizio o nei parcheggi dei bar, era una cosa che in qualche modo avevo vissuto anch’io, e che mi ero lasciato alle spalle. Ma mi chiedevo: che cosa accade, adesso, nel suo cuore durante le ore notturne di veglia e di preghiera? Ho svuotato il bagagliaio e, mentre sistemavo per i prossimi diciassette anni gli scatoloni dell’istruttoria in un armadio del mio studio, ho capito che non li avrei più aperti. Aperta sulla mia scrivania rimaneva, invece, la testimonianza che Bernard gli aveva chiesto di scrivere. Questa sì, con la sua retorica cattolica, mi sembrava davvero misteriosa. Indecidibile, nell’accezione matematica del termine. Sono sicuro che non stia recitando per ingannare gli altri, mi chiedo però se il bugiardo che c’� in lui non lo stia ingannando. Quando Cristo entra nel suo cuore, quando la certezza di essere amato nonostante tutto gli fa scorrere sulle guance lacrime di gioia, non sarà caduto ancora una volta nella rete dell’Avversario? Ho pensato che scrivere questa storia non poteva essere altro che un crimine o una preghiera.
Parigi, gennaio 1999�
Amo Carrère, la sua capacità narrativa.
Di nuovo, però, la voce del lettore dell’audiolibro, ha smorzato il piacere della lettura.
[Gli audiolibri mentre si pulisce sono una benedizione. Recupero così romanzi che non ho ancora letto e avrei voluto leggere.]
February 23, 2020
Este libro es incómodo. Primero, por el crimen horroroso que se relata; segundo, por la confidencialidad establecida entre el autor de los asesinatos y el autor del texto. Mientras leía, me surgían muchas dudas con respecto a esta última cuestión. No lograba entender, por ejemplo, la motivación de Carrère para contar una historia como esta, o me descolocaba un poco al tratar de comprender la relación de mutuo respeto entre este y Romand, el criminal. El gran 'pero...' es que, a pesar de esta base de incomodidad con la que está construido el texto, hay algo en la pluma de Carrère que amortigua esa perturbación inicial y la transforma en un sentir más ameno e, incluso, en un sentimiento de curiosidad. Mentiría si dijera que no podía leer la historia por el horror que se narraba; por el contrario, necesitaba saber detalladamente lo ocurrido. Y creo que es ahí donde se halla el talento de su autor, en hacer que el lugar del horror sea un sitio al que podamos acceder como lectores sin mucha dificultad.
Con esta lectura confirmo que la realidad puede ser aun más ficcional que la misma literatura.
Con esta lectura confirmo que la realidad puede ser aun más ficcional que la misma literatura.
July 9, 2017
What a psychological inquiry! OMG.
This was read in a two sit down frenzy. I slowed down at certain points. Not only because it was so mesmerizing but because it was an ILL book that someone had underlined and star highlighted with incredible precision. ABSOLUTELY sure it was a Psychology Major or someone that was using this for a paper or case study.
It is. Incredible history for this man and what he pulled off for a period of 18 years would not be considered possible in nearly any other scenario I can envision. And believe me, I thought about this for an entire hour. For instance he was known as a successful physician working for the World Health Organization and had a wide and numerous number of associated groups of "fine fellow well met" in church, neighborhood, wider country community etc.
The only other cases I have heard that approach this ability to lie and attract association for trust and good intent have been within the class of phony job record gigs or confederate job copiers or confidence men or spies. None that have this eventual outcome either. And I can't think of even one who did it in one place for such a long time.
The trial is fascinating for several points of French and Swiss laws and other emotive slants toward the defendant that I find nearly appalling. To me, the voice of the victims is nearly nil or completely nil. Take your pick.
But what truly got me to read this straight away (WHAT!) the author admits it-(that the original idea and proposition rather made his stomach turn and yet he did this book) was not only the sequence of the murderer's acts themselves but how his best friend and another comply to "TAKE HIS PART" so artfully for the $$$ they could get out of it in the afterwards (not that long afterwards on top of it)of writing this book for the "eyes" that they had held. As they literally stood by the front door- HOW COULD THEY! The same ones (both writer and door) where they carried out the small grey body bags. And where Luc saw the blackened face behind the thrown coat. Incredible what people will do for money. Luc has this guy as GODFATHER to one of the kids! Kids who played at his house weekly, at the least.
Madness truly has some thick layers of masking and mannerisms of grand eloquence and affinity which can and do display erudite, knowledgeable, current, trustful kindness "know better" concern and can carry it all off for decades. Nary a slip. Nothing offensive and perfect congeniality- never called crass or bombastic in his words or manner. And then it is not even called the madness that it is.
But then it becomes all too much for Jean-Claude. On this one bad day.
What I can't get over is that he can remember all his dogs, their illnesses, their demise- their essential memories in core to full emotion when the humans are little more but names to him now.
Or so he says?
I find the fact that this much can be done and this quality of life can be lived in these places and with this level of the material without paying an income tax. EVER. That's despicable. What a total unit of users.
And someone needs to impart to the Swiss and the French in their schooling structures that you cannot fail to investigate a "student" who has registered as active for his 2nd or 3rd medical year for 12 consecutive years. That medical school in Lyons??? HORRIBLE admins.
And his wife, Florence? And all the people who signed their accounts to him for investment with his name only on them in end stage. But essentially his wife, Florence. Did she EVER look at a banking statement or not think that the phone system they used was unusual? There is not one woman I have ever met that would fall for that buzzer and I call you back thing. And she was a pharmacist??? OMG!
1993 in France Jean-Claude Romand had a very bad day. Prevessin, France which is just across the border from Geneva Switzerland. If it was fiction you would find this hard to believe- the plot too contrived. The nature of all the friends, family and closest humans to this man- naive beyond any era's possibility to pull off with so little questioning.
This was read in a two sit down frenzy. I slowed down at certain points. Not only because it was so mesmerizing but because it was an ILL book that someone had underlined and star highlighted with incredible precision. ABSOLUTELY sure it was a Psychology Major or someone that was using this for a paper or case study.
It is. Incredible history for this man and what he pulled off for a period of 18 years would not be considered possible in nearly any other scenario I can envision. And believe me, I thought about this for an entire hour. For instance he was known as a successful physician working for the World Health Organization and had a wide and numerous number of associated groups of "fine fellow well met" in church, neighborhood, wider country community etc.
The only other cases I have heard that approach this ability to lie and attract association for trust and good intent have been within the class of phony job record gigs or confederate job copiers or confidence men or spies. None that have this eventual outcome either. And I can't think of even one who did it in one place for such a long time.
The trial is fascinating for several points of French and Swiss laws and other emotive slants toward the defendant that I find nearly appalling. To me, the voice of the victims is nearly nil or completely nil. Take your pick.
But what truly got me to read this straight away (WHAT!) the author admits it-(that the original idea and proposition rather made his stomach turn and yet he did this book) was not only the sequence of the murderer's acts themselves but how his best friend and another comply to "TAKE HIS PART" so artfully for the $$$ they could get out of it in the afterwards (not that long afterwards on top of it)of writing this book for the "eyes" that they had held. As they literally stood by the front door- HOW COULD THEY! The same ones (both writer and door) where they carried out the small grey body bags. And where Luc saw the blackened face behind the thrown coat. Incredible what people will do for money. Luc has this guy as GODFATHER to one of the kids! Kids who played at his house weekly, at the least.
Madness truly has some thick layers of masking and mannerisms of grand eloquence and affinity which can and do display erudite, knowledgeable, current, trustful kindness "know better" concern and can carry it all off for decades. Nary a slip. Nothing offensive and perfect congeniality- never called crass or bombastic in his words or manner. And then it is not even called the madness that it is.
But then it becomes all too much for Jean-Claude. On this one bad day.
What I can't get over is that he can remember all his dogs, their illnesses, their demise- their essential memories in core to full emotion when the humans are little more but names to him now.
Or so he says?
I find the fact that this much can be done and this quality of life can be lived in these places and with this level of the material without paying an income tax. EVER. That's despicable. What a total unit of users.
And someone needs to impart to the Swiss and the French in their schooling structures that you cannot fail to investigate a "student" who has registered as active for his 2nd or 3rd medical year for 12 consecutive years. That medical school in Lyons??? HORRIBLE admins.
And his wife, Florence? And all the people who signed their accounts to him for investment with his name only on them in end stage. But essentially his wife, Florence. Did she EVER look at a banking statement or not think that the phone system they used was unusual? There is not one woman I have ever met that would fall for that buzzer and I call you back thing. And she was a pharmacist??? OMG!
1993 in France Jean-Claude Romand had a very bad day. Prevessin, France which is just across the border from Geneva Switzerland. If it was fiction you would find this hard to believe- the plot too contrived. The nature of all the friends, family and closest humans to this man- naive beyond any era's possibility to pull off with so little questioning.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 3,433 reviews
Can't find what you're looking for?
Get help and learn more about the design.