What do you think?
Rate this book
کوتوله ها و چهار نمایشنامه دیگر
کتاب کوتوله ها و چهار نمایشنامه دیگر، اثری نوشته ی نمایشنامه نویس بزرگ انگلیسی و برنده ی جایزه ی نوبل ادبیات هارولد پینتر است. داستان کوتوله ها در بریتانیای پس از جنگ اتفاق می افتد و به ماجرای زندگی و دغدغه های چهار جوان لندنی می پردازد: لِن که در ایستگاه قطار کار می کند ولی عاشق مفاهیم انتزاعی ریاضی است، مارک که گاهی اوقات به بازیگری می پردازد و زوجی جوان با نام های ویرجینیا و پیت که در حال تلاش برای تعریف چارچوب های رابطه ی خود هستند. هارولد پینتر در فرآیند تکامل این دوستیِ چهارجانبه و مسائلی که از آن ناشی می شود، به این موضوع می پردازد که چگونه زندگی افراد به واسطه ی محدودیت ها و چارچوب های جنسیت، صمیمیت و مرگ شکل می گیرد. اینجا، دنیایی پر از کوتوله هاست—افراد� جوان که برای رهایی از پوچی حاضرند از همه چیز خود بگذرند.
156 pages
First published January 1, 1990
19 people are currently reading
398 people want to read
About the author
Harold Pinter
346books763followersHarold Pinter was a British playwright, screenwriter, director and actor. A Nobel Prize winner, Pinter was one of the most influential modern British dramatists with a writing career that spanned more than 50 years. His best-known plays include The Birthday Party (1957), The Homecoming (1964) and Betrayal (1978), each of which he adapted for the screen. His screenplay adaptations of others' works include The Servant (1963), The Go-Between (1971), The French Lieutenant's Woman (1981), The Trial (1993) and Sleuth (2007). He also directed or acted in radio, stage, television and film productions of his own and others' works.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 69 reviews
January 27, 2014
If you ever want to read a book that you definitely do not want to read, read this book.
November 3, 2015
have NO idea what is going on in this book???
February 28, 2012
A well-established member of the Absurdist Theatre tradition, Pinter pulls no literary punches in this, his only novel. For those who know of his plays' stark ambiguity and pointed pointlessness, this novel will be nothing too new. Pinter is a man of thematic contradictions, someone who elucidates the morals and meanings of senseless with the tools of obsfucation and slyly crafted symbolism. He has a point -- he always does -- but those points are always disguised, usually as themselves, and so his work is never what it seems to be.
You either have patience for Pinter, or you don't, and part of what most lovers of Pinter go for is the translation of his work onto the stage by living actors with some measure of skill. Pinter's work is of life, despite how surreal it always may seem, and it finds its greatest expression in the medium of flesh and blood.
Therefore, this novel falls short in some ways, most notably in that it is only alive as much as the reader's own imagination is, and given the smoke screens and philosophical fogginess that permeates the text, it is likely that readers will run high on impatience before they do on understanding.
However, for those careful and delicate literature lovers with the time and focus necessary for the task, Dwarfs is a densely layered and methodically crafted tale of common lust and betrayal mixed with some rather heavy-handed but finely wielded philosophy. Sometimes the writing delves into repetitious, monochromatic, self-aggrandizement, but this is usually just the knee-jerk aspect of Pinter's play-work marring the novelistic medium. In general though, he gains a lot of ground with this book, even if, by the time you're done reading, you're not sure where you've ended up.
You either have patience for Pinter, or you don't, and part of what most lovers of Pinter go for is the translation of his work onto the stage by living actors with some measure of skill. Pinter's work is of life, despite how surreal it always may seem, and it finds its greatest expression in the medium of flesh and blood.
Therefore, this novel falls short in some ways, most notably in that it is only alive as much as the reader's own imagination is, and given the smoke screens and philosophical fogginess that permeates the text, it is likely that readers will run high on impatience before they do on understanding.
However, for those careful and delicate literature lovers with the time and focus necessary for the task, Dwarfs is a densely layered and methodically crafted tale of common lust and betrayal mixed with some rather heavy-handed but finely wielded philosophy. Sometimes the writing delves into repetitious, monochromatic, self-aggrandizement, but this is usually just the knee-jerk aspect of Pinter's play-work marring the novelistic medium. In general though, he gains a lot of ground with this book, even if, by the time you're done reading, you're not sure where you've ended up.
July 9, 2020
"When one is in a position to judge by what discourse a man can persuade, and when one can see and penetrate him and say to himself: "Behold, man, this is the character which I taught; is here before me, and it is necessary to give him speeches of this kind to persuade him of such a thing. When all these means mastered, when it is known, besides, to discern the occasions to speak or to be silent, to be concise, moving, intense, and if it is the case or not to resort to a certain kind of discourse learned at school, the perfection of art will attaining; not before."
Plato, in Fedro
From some reason or another, I thought that something was missing from this work by Pinter.
Plato, in Fedro
From some reason or another, I thought that something was missing from this work by Pinter.
February 17, 2017
Το πρώτο μου ένα αστέρι. Διάβασα περίπου 40 σελίδες και δεν έβγαλα κανένα νόημα. Δεν ξέρω τον λόγο που γράφτηκε αυτό το βιβλίο... Και δεν κατάλαβα επίσης τον λόγο που οι υπεύθυνοι της σειράς βάλανε αυτό το βιβλίο που είναι και το μοναδικό μυθιστόρημα του Πϊντερ, αντί να βάλουν ένα βιβλίο κάποιου άλλου συγγραφέα που τιμήθηκε με Νόμπελ.
Ίσως να μην είμαι έτοιμος ακόμα για το συγκεκριμένο βιβλίο αλλά στην δική μου οπτική η λογοτεχνία δεν είναι έτσι..
Ίσως να μην είμαι έτοιμος ακόμα για το συγκεκριμένο βιβλίο αλλά στην δική μου οπτική η λογοτεχνία δεν είναι έτσι..
May 4, 2019
O primeiro e único romance de Haroldo Pinter é desinteressante, chato e confuso.
May 9, 2012
O livro que seria um gigante e afinal é quase um "anão"
Na minha opinião este livro começa de forma positiva e com o desenvolvimento da leitura parece que vamos sentindo que a história pode e está em evolução. Porém, o auge deste livro fica-se nos seus meados e não consegue dar continuidade e acompanhar todo o enredo que se havia formado. Personagens nodais como o Len e a Virgínia facilmente parecem ser esquecidas e, no final, surgem como marionetas de uma narrativa da qual faziam literalmente parte. Como se todo o livro fosse resumido à personagem de Pete e Mark.
A meu ver, dar continuação ao livro seria uma necessidade para enriquecê-lo e dar-lhe mais sentido, pois se a sua centralidade é na "amizade tumultuosa e destrutiva" fica-se pela rama.
Este livro é apresentado como sendo "divertido, vivo e perturbante". Todavia, de diversão não me pareceu ter grandes elementos, excepto alguns pequenos e raros excertos; vivacidade penso que é perdida na forma como personagens centrais são esquecidas, que diga-se novamente que influenciavam em muito a diversidade e interesse da narrativa, e nos vários discursos por vezes desnecessários e confusos que adormecem quem o está a ler; e perturbante não compreendo o porquê, pois não me parece que este livro seja envolto de acontecimentos que perturbem e marquem a diferença em relação ao que já se escrevia na época em que foi escrito e posteriormente revisto, não é surpreendente.
Mas nem tudo é mau. Gosto particularmente da consistência que o autor consegue dar às personagens. Ao Pete que do início ao fim foi pouco ou nada afectuoso mas sim racional, descrente do futuro mas crente nas suas potencialidades; ao Len que sempre foi o mesmo rapaz questionador, indeciso e perturbado sem sentido de vida, a não ser descodificar o sentido da sua existência; ao Mark que sempre foi conhecido pelo grupo de amigos como consciente mas racionalmente supérfluo e estagnado, até ao momento final que demonstra pensar sobre as relações, as experiências, a fim ao cabo sobre a vida, deitando-se aí abaixo o pano que cobria a sua pessoa; e Virgínia que primeiro é aquela que está em crescimento por influência de Pete mas que a dada altura decide ser ela mesma e encontrar o seu próprio caminho sempre com a demonstração de afecto e naturalidade.
Penso também que este livro consegue levantar algumas questões filosóficas interessantes como a moralidade, a existência humana, entre outras, sendo sobretudo a exploração destas questões que me leva a "classificar" este livro como algo minimamente positivo. Algumas dessas questões filosóficas por vezes pareciam descontextualizadas e forçadas ao longo da narrativa, mas por outro lado alimentavam as personagens e o conteúdo da narrativa, permitindo que surgissem momentos de reflexão não só relacionados com o livro em si mas com situações concretas de vida.
Na minha opinião este livro começa de forma positiva e com o desenvolvimento da leitura parece que vamos sentindo que a história pode e está em evolução. Porém, o auge deste livro fica-se nos seus meados e não consegue dar continuidade e acompanhar todo o enredo que se havia formado. Personagens nodais como o Len e a Virgínia facilmente parecem ser esquecidas e, no final, surgem como marionetas de uma narrativa da qual faziam literalmente parte. Como se todo o livro fosse resumido à personagem de Pete e Mark.
A meu ver, dar continuação ao livro seria uma necessidade para enriquecê-lo e dar-lhe mais sentido, pois se a sua centralidade é na "amizade tumultuosa e destrutiva" fica-se pela rama.
Este livro é apresentado como sendo "divertido, vivo e perturbante". Todavia, de diversão não me pareceu ter grandes elementos, excepto alguns pequenos e raros excertos; vivacidade penso que é perdida na forma como personagens centrais são esquecidas, que diga-se novamente que influenciavam em muito a diversidade e interesse da narrativa, e nos vários discursos por vezes desnecessários e confusos que adormecem quem o está a ler; e perturbante não compreendo o porquê, pois não me parece que este livro seja envolto de acontecimentos que perturbem e marquem a diferença em relação ao que já se escrevia na época em que foi escrito e posteriormente revisto, não é surpreendente.
Mas nem tudo é mau. Gosto particularmente da consistência que o autor consegue dar às personagens. Ao Pete que do início ao fim foi pouco ou nada afectuoso mas sim racional, descrente do futuro mas crente nas suas potencialidades; ao Len que sempre foi o mesmo rapaz questionador, indeciso e perturbado sem sentido de vida, a não ser descodificar o sentido da sua existência; ao Mark que sempre foi conhecido pelo grupo de amigos como consciente mas racionalmente supérfluo e estagnado, até ao momento final que demonstra pensar sobre as relações, as experiências, a fim ao cabo sobre a vida, deitando-se aí abaixo o pano que cobria a sua pessoa; e Virgínia que primeiro é aquela que está em crescimento por influência de Pete mas que a dada altura decide ser ela mesma e encontrar o seu próprio caminho sempre com a demonstração de afecto e naturalidade.
Penso também que este livro consegue levantar algumas questões filosóficas interessantes como a moralidade, a existência humana, entre outras, sendo sobretudo a exploração destas questões que me leva a "classificar" este livro como algo minimamente positivo. Algumas dessas questões filosóficas por vezes pareciam descontextualizadas e forçadas ao longo da narrativa, mas por outro lado alimentavam as personagens e o conteúdo da narrativa, permitindo que surgissem momentos de reflexão não só relacionados com o livro em si mas com situações concretas de vida.
July 25, 2016
مبدئيا لو عندك أمل تفهم العمل ده بنسبه كبيرة من أول مره ف إنسى ..الغموض يخيم على الكتاب من حيث الحوارات ومغذاها ،معرفش كان قصده الخلاصه هتبقى نابعه من خيال القاريء ولا ايه .. بس عموما انا بيستهويني كل ماهو غريب ويثير التساؤلات ...
October 12, 2016
Normaal gesproken stop ik niet halverwege met een boek, maar Pinter krijgt het voor elkaar. The Dwarfs is buitengewoon saai en ongeïnspireerd in zijn dialogen of karakters. Doe jezelf een plezier en houd het bij de toneelstukken.
1,5*
1,5*
May 16, 2022
My only previous experience with Pinter, watching a recorded version of No Man's Land, didn't go well. So, of course, I then decided it was a great idea to review an adaptation of his only novel being performed at the White Bear in London. The adaptation and performance were, in a pleasant surprise, wonderful. Unfortunately, this book is less so. There's a reason Pinter didn't publish it for thirty years after writing it, and a reason the adaptation is superior - it takes out the extremities of Pinter's writing and makes everything better. Perhaps some Pinter aficionados would say that his writing just go above my head, and that may be true. I feel like there's more to his writing than I'm giving him credit for, and I didn't hate all of this - there was plenty to enjoy in the humour, relationships and philosophical discussions. It's enough to make me think it's worth persisting with Pinter given how strongly some enjoy his work, but not enough for me to be able to recommend him.
My review of The Dwarfs at the White Bear here:
My review of The Dwarfs at the White Bear here:
March 22, 2024
In hindsight, reading Pinter shortly after a root canal, maybe not the best idea.
I have read around forty pages of what I can attest were English words, some of them beautiful, some of them in beautiful sentences, but that is about all I can say, and my desire to deepen my understanding is limited.
I have read around forty pages of what I can attest were English words, some of them beautiful, some of them in beautiful sentences, but that is about all I can say, and my desire to deepen my understanding is limited.
February 14, 2013
Ο Χάρολντ Πίντερ είναι ένας από τους σπουδαιότερους Άγγλους θεατρικούς συγγραφείς. Οι Νάνοι είναι η μοναδική νουβέλα που έγραψε. Τέσσερις φίλοι, ο Λεν, ο Πητ, ο Μάρκ και η Βιρτζίνια ζουν μια ζωή (κοινή;) στο μουντό Λονδίνο. Άλλοτε βαρετή, άλλοτε έντονη, μερικές φορές φαιδρή. Και τελικά καταστροφική. Μια καταστροφή που αναδύεται λυτρωτική. Οι νάνοι (κανείς δεν ξέρει τι είναι αυτά τα πλάσματα) εμφανίζονται πού και πού, χωρίς να παίρνουν μέρος στη δράση.
Η υπόθεση ξεδιπλώνεται περισσότερο σαν σε μια σκηνή, ένα θεατρικό δράμα. Οι αλλοπρόσαλλοι διάλογοι, με αρκετή δόση σουρεαλισμού, σοκάρουν με τη δύναμη της ευφυίας τους.
Η μετάφραση του Παύλου Μάτεσι είναι αριστοτεχνική. Ένα ιδιαίτερα δύσκολο εγχείρημα σε ένα τόσο στρυφνό κείμενο.
Η υπόθεση ξεδιπλώνεται περισσότερο σαν σε μια σκηνή, ένα θεατρικό δράμα. Οι αλλοπρόσαλλοι διάλογοι, με αρκετή δόση σουρεαλισμού, σοκάρουν με τη δύναμη της ευφυίας τους.
Η μετάφραση του Παύλου Μάτεσι είναι αριστοτεχνική. Ένα ιδιαίτερα δύσκολο εγχείρημα σε ένα τόσο στρυφνό κείμενο.
April 12, 2020
من ترجمه فارسی کتاب رو خوندم که نمایشنامه بود که در ابتدا نوشته بود ریشه در رمان منتشر نشده ی پینتر داره.
و چیزی حدود ۵۰ یا ۶۰ صفحه بود.
و من مطلقا نفهمیدم که چی شده، البته بعضی از مونولوگ های لن منو ترسوند و نمیدونم چرا!
و همونطور که از جلد کتاب و نظر بقیه کاربران مشخصه، اینه که کتاب ۴ کاراکتر داشت و توی نسخه ای که من خوندم فقط ۳ کاراکتر مرد بودن!
اول فکر کردم مترجم بد ترجمه کرده که من نفهمیدم وابستگی میان دیالوگ ها رو و اینکه چرا شخصیت ها راجع به خودشون از دیگری میپرسن یا در چه مدت زمانی رخ داد و در چه مکان هایی!؟
ولی متوجه شدم که خیر ایراد از ترجمه نیست و فضای نیمه ترسیمی پیچیده ای داره گویا.
و چیزی حدود ۵۰ یا ۶۰ صفحه بود.
و من مطلقا نفهمیدم که چی شده، البته بعضی از مونولوگ های لن منو ترسوند و نمیدونم چرا!
و همونطور که از جلد کتاب و نظر بقیه کاربران مشخصه، اینه که کتاب ۴ کاراکتر داشت و توی نسخه ای که من خوندم فقط ۳ کاراکتر مرد بودن!
اول فکر کردم مترجم بد ترجمه کرده که من نفهمیدم وابستگی میان دیالوگ ها رو و اینکه چرا شخصیت ها راجع به خودشون از دیگری میپرسن یا در چه مدت زمانی رخ داد و در چه مکان هایی!؟
ولی متوجه شدم که خیر ایراد از ترجمه نیست و فضای نیمه ترسیمی پیچیده ای داره گویا.
April 9, 2015
Not for me - I realize Pinter went on to receive the Nobel Prize - but The Dwarfs read more
like a radio script than a novel. There weren't any scene settings, nor tactile sensations,
like smells or descriptions of rooms. It read more, as I said, like an early draft of a play.
Pinter did turn this, his only novel, into a play - and I know literature all boils down
to personal taste, but I simply don't like any of his work.
September 18, 2017
The Dwarfs is an early work. It is made up of some friends talking. It is an absurdist drama. I didn’t like it.
See my other reviews here!
See my other reviews here!
June 2, 2018
Some stories are not read for plots but for the words they are composed of and the ideas that the words lead to, the Dwarfs is one of those story, the only problem is that The Dwarfs is not a story but a Novel: a rather refined and complex version of story. The readers usually know that they are going to read an abstract novel yet they are not told that they might have to turn pages of pages in the search of the story that is the backbone of any novel. I was very much on my guard when I started reading this novel. I knew when language is denied its power to rule the narrative, it is often hard to find a story that flows smoothly from start to end;so I concentrated on sentences no matter who utter them and under which circumstances as the a single search for circumstance might lead me to futile search for story ans, as I told you, story was not there, even if it was there ,it has been hidden behind a really clumsy plot.
The Dwarfs is the story of three friends living in London and spending an apparently tumultuous life which is quite uneventful in reality. Peter and Mark appear as rivals and this rivalry gets more apparent when someone mentions Virginia : Peter's beloved. Peter and Virginia, despite having physical intimacy, do not seem to enjoy a love relationship and their encounter remains tensed because of the expectation that one has from other and that remain unaddressed. Mark is presented as a womanizer but her behavior towards Virginia is way more considerate than that of Peter. Len is a dreamer and what he dreams about it not really clear. He is much into music and shows his concern about people' s indifference to works of literature. In the novel , there are few small parts in which a narrator speaks about the activities of Dwarfs. This narrator can be found in Len's character because of his thoughtful dialogues.
Novel is full of characters' discussion about human nature, possibility of being moral, religion and character of Jesus . The characters of Mark and Pete discuss about human nature in terms of Shakespeare character and shed light on human flaws by relating them to unavoidable circumstances and not as a result of innate human weakness. Their reference to religion shows that they are unconsciously aware of the waywardness of the life yet the institutionalized religion does not conform with the nature of these Londoners.
I would suggest reader that once you will start reading this novel, kindly look for small pieces of wisdom shrouded within characters ' haphazard talk and note it down to quote later on. The Dwarfs cannot stand tall as a novel among literary plethora but it has maintains its existence because of some strong dialogues dealing with the philosophy common man's life.
The Dwarfs is the story of three friends living in London and spending an apparently tumultuous life which is quite uneventful in reality. Peter and Mark appear as rivals and this rivalry gets more apparent when someone mentions Virginia : Peter's beloved. Peter and Virginia, despite having physical intimacy, do not seem to enjoy a love relationship and their encounter remains tensed because of the expectation that one has from other and that remain unaddressed. Mark is presented as a womanizer but her behavior towards Virginia is way more considerate than that of Peter. Len is a dreamer and what he dreams about it not really clear. He is much into music and shows his concern about people' s indifference to works of literature. In the novel , there are few small parts in which a narrator speaks about the activities of Dwarfs. This narrator can be found in Len's character because of his thoughtful dialogues.
Novel is full of characters' discussion about human nature, possibility of being moral, religion and character of Jesus . The characters of Mark and Pete discuss about human nature in terms of Shakespeare character and shed light on human flaws by relating them to unavoidable circumstances and not as a result of innate human weakness. Their reference to religion shows that they are unconsciously aware of the waywardness of the life yet the institutionalized religion does not conform with the nature of these Londoners.
I would suggest reader that once you will start reading this novel, kindly look for small pieces of wisdom shrouded within characters ' haphazard talk and note it down to quote later on. The Dwarfs cannot stand tall as a novel among literary plethora but it has maintains its existence because of some strong dialogues dealing with the philosophy common man's life.
December 28, 2022
Citaat : Ze gingen het huis uit en liepen naar de eendenvijver. Op een bank bij het houten bruggetje spreidden ze een krant uit en gingen zitten. De wind tipte de neerhangende regen van de bladeren.
Review : Bij de bekendmaking van de Nobelprijs voor de literatuur 2005 werd Harold Pinter de belangrijkste toneelschrijver van de tweede helft genoemd, die in zijn toneelstukken de afgrond onder het alledaagse gezwets blootlegt en de gesloten deur waarachter onderdrukking heerst, loswrikt." Ziedaar de enige zin waarmee het comité motiveerde waarom de Britse toneelschrijver de Nobelprijs voor de Literatuur waardig was.
Pinter schreef de eerste versie van De dwergen in de jaren vijftig en voltooide het boek in 1989, waarna het aan een zegetocht over de wereld begon. De dwergen is zijn enige roman. Maar ook in deze roman blijft hij een echte toneelschrijver, want aan uiterlijke beschrijvingen waagt hij zich niet en dialogen voeren de boventoon. Het opgevoerde Londense vriendengroepje bestaat uit rasechte praters. Leidersfiguur Pete Cox, schizofreen Len Weinstein en uitvreter Mark Gilbert doen weinig anders dan spreken. Als het moet langs elkaar heen. Daarbij drinken ze thee of halve liters bier in de pub en steken ze sigaret na sigaret op.
De dialogen wisselen van pseudo-academische prietpraat, triviale intermezzo’s tot lange theoretische uiteenzettingen. Het intellect van het drietal is het enige dat telt, maar ook datgene dat faalt. Hun gesprekken zijn grotendeels onnavolgbaar en zitten vaak tegen de grens van gekte aan, om er zo nu en dan over heen te gaan. Het fysieke is niet belangrijk in het intellectuele dodenrijk waarin het drietal zich bevindt. In de bittere wereld van Pinters absurde realisme is geen verlossing voor handen.
Een uiterst sterke roman die nog altijd geen sprankje van zijn kwaliteit en actualiteit verloren heeft.
Review : Bij de bekendmaking van de Nobelprijs voor de literatuur 2005 werd Harold Pinter de belangrijkste toneelschrijver van de tweede helft genoemd, die in zijn toneelstukken de afgrond onder het alledaagse gezwets blootlegt en de gesloten deur waarachter onderdrukking heerst, loswrikt." Ziedaar de enige zin waarmee het comité motiveerde waarom de Britse toneelschrijver de Nobelprijs voor de Literatuur waardig was.
Pinter schreef de eerste versie van De dwergen in de jaren vijftig en voltooide het boek in 1989, waarna het aan een zegetocht over de wereld begon. De dwergen is zijn enige roman. Maar ook in deze roman blijft hij een echte toneelschrijver, want aan uiterlijke beschrijvingen waagt hij zich niet en dialogen voeren de boventoon. Het opgevoerde Londense vriendengroepje bestaat uit rasechte praters. Leidersfiguur Pete Cox, schizofreen Len Weinstein en uitvreter Mark Gilbert doen weinig anders dan spreken. Als het moet langs elkaar heen. Daarbij drinken ze thee of halve liters bier in de pub en steken ze sigaret na sigaret op.
De dialogen wisselen van pseudo-academische prietpraat, triviale intermezzo’s tot lange theoretische uiteenzettingen. Het intellect van het drietal is het enige dat telt, maar ook datgene dat faalt. Hun gesprekken zijn grotendeels onnavolgbaar en zitten vaak tegen de grens van gekte aan, om er zo nu en dan over heen te gaan. Het fysieke is niet belangrijk in het intellectuele dodenrijk waarin het drietal zich bevindt. In de bittere wereld van Pinters absurde realisme is geen verlossing voor handen.
Een uiterst sterke roman die nog altijd geen sprankje van zijn kwaliteit en actualiteit verloren heeft.
October 8, 2022
I don't give 1* ratings lightly. But this is probably the most pointless and absurd book I've ever read in my entire life.
The characters: Virginia, Pete, Len and Mark; also known as, one woman, one man, another man and another man.
The plot: One woman, one man, another man and another man, talk about the first piece of crap that pops to their head, resembling four Alzheimer patients who can barely connect two sentences.
Literary style/Narrative: disconnected random chatter; or rather, a desynchronized concert of mouth farts and butt burps; an Alice in what-the-actual-f**k-land.
I could only read it up to page 161, where I gave up wrestling with my penchant for finishing every book that I decide to read. I could simply not endure wasting my time any further.
I am personally offended that the author of a book such as this was awarded a Nobel.
EDIT 1 - 08/10/2022 :
After my initial ranting, I ended up finishing the book and I feel obligated to recognize that there are some interesting aspects to this book. Although they're still not interesting enough for me to spend time debating them.
2 stars.
The characters: Virginia, Pete, Len and Mark; also known as, one woman, one man, another man and another man.
The plot: One woman, one man, another man and another man, talk about the first piece of crap that pops to their head, resembling four Alzheimer patients who can barely connect two sentences.
Literary style/Narrative: disconnected random chatter; or rather, a desynchronized concert of mouth farts and butt burps; an Alice in what-the-actual-f**k-land.
I could only read it up to page 161, where I gave up wrestling with my penchant for finishing every book that I decide to read. I could simply not endure wasting my time any further.
I am personally offended that the author of a book such as this was awarded a Nobel.
EDIT 1 - 08/10/2022 :
After my initial ranting, I ended up finishing the book and I feel obligated to recognize that there are some interesting aspects to this book. Although they're still not interesting enough for me to spend time debating them.
2 stars.
July 23, 2020
This book was too much for me. I could appreciate some - admittedly short - parts of it, but in general I failed to see what it is all about. The characters, the dialogs, the plot, everything seemed out of order. At some point, in the middle of the book, I thought that it might start to pick up the pace and start looking like an actual, coherent novel, but more nonsense was soon to follow. One of my main principles as a reader is to finish the books I begin, no matter how much I like them. Here was one of the extremely few cases - it could very well be the first - that I seriously considered giving up. Eventually I pretty much forced myself through it, but this isn't a book I would recommend. Overall, (maybe too generous) 2/5.
January 25, 2022
Instead of Estragon and Vladimir we have Len and Pete. And Mark and Pete. And Len and Mark, who sit around in bedsitting rooms talking about cups of tea, Bach, tables, Len’s cat, Shakespeare, trousers, bus routes, what a room is, girls (one specific girl, Virginia, comes between Pete and Mark, because, even though she’s written as a fairly rounded character rather than a tawdry temptress, women, in this misogynistic milieu, are always going to come between the pure platonic friendship of men, rather than that she’s driven away because Pete is obnoxious, controlling and emotionally abusive) whilst waiting for what? Something to happen? Dead air?
They live in Hackney. They do not move.
They live in Hackney. They do not move.
August 31, 2022
Harold Pinter, Os Anões ⭐️⭐️
“Estive a ouvir Grosse Fuge. Nunca ouvi uma coisa assim. Não é musical. É físico. Não é música. É alguém a serrar ossos dentro de um caixão.�
“E então tudo muda. A toda a minha volta a mudança. O pátio tal como o conheço está juncado de restos de comida de gato, colhões de porco, latas vazias, miolos de pássaros, partes desmembradas de todo o género de pequenos animais, um tapete viscoso e a guinchar, com todos os sobejos dos anões, cuspidos para o meio do esterco, vermes apanhados nos poios de merda envenenada, as ruelas um turbilhão de mijo, lido, sangue e sumo de fruta.�
“Estive a ouvir Grosse Fuge. Nunca ouvi uma coisa assim. Não é musical. É físico. Não é música. É alguém a serrar ossos dentro de um caixão.�
“E então tudo muda. A toda a minha volta a mudança. O pátio tal como o conheço está juncado de restos de comida de gato, colhões de porco, latas vazias, miolos de pássaros, partes desmembradas de todo o género de pequenos animais, um tapete viscoso e a guinchar, com todos os sobejos dos anões, cuspidos para o meio do esterco, vermes apanhados nos poios de merda envenenada, as ruelas um turbilhão de mijo, lido, sangue e sumo de fruta.�
Read
February 15, 2025I thought I was stronger than the 2.6 average rating for maybe 50 whole pages...and then.
beautiful on a sentence level and interesting to see Pinter's true talent for playwriting bursting out of prose, but largely unrewarding as a cohesive story. the dialogue (which this book largely is) is classic Pinter and if you can summon his rhythm in mind when reading and essentially direct the book in your head, there is enjoyment to be had in 'acting out' the lines and finding the nuances of performance needed to bring them to life. but I have seen The Homecoming about 40 times so this might be a skill issue of mine.
also Goncharov mentioned????
beautiful on a sentence level and interesting to see Pinter's true talent for playwriting bursting out of prose, but largely unrewarding as a cohesive story. the dialogue (which this book largely is) is classic Pinter and if you can summon his rhythm in mind when reading and essentially direct the book in your head, there is enjoyment to be had in 'acting out' the lines and finding the nuances of performance needed to bring them to life. but I have seen The Homecoming about 40 times so this might be a skill issue of mine.
also Goncharov mentioned????
November 7, 2024
Tendo Harold Pinter sido um consagrado dramaturgo e sendo "Os Anões" o seu único romance, sinto-me tentada a dizer que foi uma pena não se ter dedicado em exclusivo à área que lhe valeu o Prémio Nobel.
Admito que a falha pode ser minha mas, tanto quanto me recordo, nunca um livro me custou tanto a terminar. Foi com muito esforço, sempre à espera de que tudo me fizesse algum sentido. Tal não aconteceu.
Até tentei ler como se fosse uma peça de teatro. Também não resultou.
Admito que a falha pode ser minha mas, tanto quanto me recordo, nunca um livro me custou tanto a terminar. Foi com muito esforço, sempre à espera de que tudo me fizesse algum sentido. Tal não aconteceu.
Até tentei ler como se fosse uma peça de teatro. Também não resultou.
July 3, 2024
Pinter's ability to move seamlessly between disparate conversations rife with jealousy, bravado, vulnerability, arrogance, and pseudo-philosophizing is noteworthy, though the novel's elliptical structure can be a bit unwieldy at times. Overall, a fascinating snapshot of male toxicity and insecurity circa 1950s London.
April 14, 2022
Escrito em longos, imensamente longos, diálogos este que é o único romance de um dramaturgo, parece efetivamente uma obra de teatro. Ligeiramente cansativa a leitura de uma história com um inusitado nexo. Ainda assim, valeu a leitura em tempos de confinamento.
March 2, 2025
This is my second Pinter play and it turns out I just don’t like his style. Nothing makes sense. It’s just 3 male characters (again) rambling about nonsense. Can’t make heads or tails of it. A bore overall.
September 10, 2018
I really believed till that in the end, something would change my view on this novel. I was wrong.
November 5, 2019
Disappointing!
February 22, 2020
I will read this again, because there's something there...like a painting
Read
May 4, 2020Pesado, lento y aburrido. No merece perder el tiempo.
Sí me preguntan la trama del libro , no sabría que decir... Pq cuando uno lo acaba no tiene ni idea de qué va.
Diálogos sin sentido
Sí me preguntan la trama del libro , no sabría que decir... Pq cuando uno lo acaba no tiene ni idea de qué va.
Diálogos sin sentido
Displaying 1 - 30 of 69 reviews
Can't find what you're looking for?
Get help and learn more about the design.