What do you think?
Rate this book
A Disorder Peculiar to the Country
A National Book Award Finalist "The best novel yet about 9/11.... A brilliant new comedy of manners, A Disorder Peculiar to the Country is about the way a conflict takes on a logic and momentum of its own." —Salon “Savagely hilarious.� � Elle Joyce and Marshall each think the other is killed on September 11—and must swallow their disappointment when the other arrives home. As their bitter divorce is further complicated by anthrax scares, suicide bombs, and foreign wars, they suffer, in ways unexpectedly personal and increasingly ludicrous, the many strange ravages of our time. In this astonishing black comedy, Kalfus suggests how our nation’s public calamities have encroached upon our most private illusions.
256 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 2006
51 people are currently reading
1,011 people want to read
About the author
Ken Kalfus
24books68followersHe was born in the Bronx, NY and grew up in Plainview, Long Island.
Kalfus started college at Sarah Lawrence College, Bronxville, NY, but dropped out after the first year. He attended various other universities including the New School for Social Research in Manhattan and Trinity College in Dublin, Ireland. Kalfus started writing at an early age.
Kalfus started college at Sarah Lawrence College, Bronxville, NY, but dropped out after the first year. He attended various other universities including the New School for Social Research in Manhattan and Trinity College in Dublin, Ireland. Kalfus started writing at an early age.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 225 reviews
August 5, 2009
Sometimes you think “This will be a good book�, and you get quite excited. And then you read it, and it turns out it is not a good book after all. And such is life.
“Disorder Peculiar to the Country� has all the ingredients � 9/11, New York setting and a couple going through a bitter divorce. Somehow, however, these ingredients don’t seem to blend at all. It seems like Kalfus has thrown all the popular subjects at the time � 9/11 World Trade Center, anthrax, Afghanistan, Osama bin Laden here and there without thinking much. So we have a story that really doesn’t go anywhere about two people who hate each other and then we have random bits of modern history every few paragraphs. It goes like this:
Joyce came home and took a shower. Then she read a newspaper. In the newspaper it said that the US sent their troops to Afghanistan [here insert more details about the invasion:]. And then the book goes back to the “story�. I really don’t know what Kalfus was trying to do here apart from including some hot topics that might help sell the book. I understand he somehow wanted to show parallels between the state of the country and the state of its people but they just seemed extremely forced and artificial.
Towards the end you can feel Kalfus is getting tired with his own novel (or maybe his deadline was approaching?) and he just writes whatever nonsense to wrap it up.
I will top off this review with a quote from "A Disorder Peculiar to the Country". (first class narration, I swear).
“Pimples spilled across his chin, neck and forehead, little red and white spots in secret designs that told the story of what he was thinking if only you knew how to read them�. Seriously, wtf?
I give it 2 stars because my one star rating is reserved for books that are so appalling I am actually amazed. They are as hard to find as the 5 star ones.
“Disorder Peculiar to the Country� has all the ingredients � 9/11, New York setting and a couple going through a bitter divorce. Somehow, however, these ingredients don’t seem to blend at all. It seems like Kalfus has thrown all the popular subjects at the time � 9/11 World Trade Center, anthrax, Afghanistan, Osama bin Laden here and there without thinking much. So we have a story that really doesn’t go anywhere about two people who hate each other and then we have random bits of modern history every few paragraphs. It goes like this:
Joyce came home and took a shower. Then she read a newspaper. In the newspaper it said that the US sent their troops to Afghanistan [here insert more details about the invasion:]. And then the book goes back to the “story�. I really don’t know what Kalfus was trying to do here apart from including some hot topics that might help sell the book. I understand he somehow wanted to show parallels between the state of the country and the state of its people but they just seemed extremely forced and artificial.
Towards the end you can feel Kalfus is getting tired with his own novel (or maybe his deadline was approaching?) and he just writes whatever nonsense to wrap it up.
I will top off this review with a quote from "A Disorder Peculiar to the Country". (first class narration, I swear).
“Pimples spilled across his chin, neck and forehead, little red and white spots in secret designs that told the story of what he was thinking if only you knew how to read them�. Seriously, wtf?
I give it 2 stars because my one star rating is reserved for books that are so appalling I am actually amazed. They are as hard to find as the 5 star ones.
June 17, 2012
Marriages will always fail unless one sex agrees to be slightly less dominant. Otherwise:
Where did you leave the car keys? ON THE TABLE WHERE THEY ALWAYS ARE. Where did I put my hat? IT’S ON THE HAT-HOOK WHERE IT USUALLY IS. What should I wear tonight? DON’T BE STUPID JUST WEAR BLACK TROUSERS AND DON’T PUT ON THAT CARTOON TIE YOU’RE NOT A CLOWN. Do I have time for a quick pee? NO WE HAVE TO GO NOW, YOU SAID YOU’D BE READY AT FIVE EXACTLY. I forgot to pick up the potatoes. OH THAT’S GREAT NOW WE CAN’T MAKE THE CASSEROLE. Can you stay in tonight with the kids? I’VE BEEN PLANNING THIS NIGHT WITH THE BOYS FOR MONTHS. I need more bedclothes. YOU’RE ALWAYS HOGGING THE DUVET FOR GOD’S SAKE SHOW SOME CONSIDERATION. I stopped for a drink. YOU SAID YOU WOULDN’T DRINK AGAIN OH GOD YOU’RE ALWAYS LYING TO ME. Could you move those things out the hall now? I’VE ONLY BEEN IN FIVE MINUTES AND ALREADY YOU’RE NAGGING AT ME. We haven’t had sex in five months. OH GOD I JUST DON’T FIND YOU ATTRACTIVE IN THAT WAY ANYMORE WILL YOU JUST LEAVE IT? Do you think we should split up? SHUT UP MY PROGRAMME’S ON.
My tip? Be the slightly less dominant sex. Take one for the team. Accept that love fades away after five years. And be happy.
Where did you leave the car keys? ON THE TABLE WHERE THEY ALWAYS ARE. Where did I put my hat? IT’S ON THE HAT-HOOK WHERE IT USUALLY IS. What should I wear tonight? DON’T BE STUPID JUST WEAR BLACK TROUSERS AND DON’T PUT ON THAT CARTOON TIE YOU’RE NOT A CLOWN. Do I have time for a quick pee? NO WE HAVE TO GO NOW, YOU SAID YOU’D BE READY AT FIVE EXACTLY. I forgot to pick up the potatoes. OH THAT’S GREAT NOW WE CAN’T MAKE THE CASSEROLE. Can you stay in tonight with the kids? I’VE BEEN PLANNING THIS NIGHT WITH THE BOYS FOR MONTHS. I need more bedclothes. YOU’RE ALWAYS HOGGING THE DUVET FOR GOD’S SAKE SHOW SOME CONSIDERATION. I stopped for a drink. YOU SAID YOU WOULDN’T DRINK AGAIN OH GOD YOU’RE ALWAYS LYING TO ME. Could you move those things out the hall now? I’VE ONLY BEEN IN FIVE MINUTES AND ALREADY YOU’RE NAGGING AT ME. We haven’t had sex in five months. OH GOD I JUST DON’T FIND YOU ATTRACTIVE IN THAT WAY ANYMORE WILL YOU JUST LEAVE IT? Do you think we should split up? SHUT UP MY PROGRAMME’S ON.
My tip? Be the slightly less dominant sex. Take one for the team. Accept that love fades away after five years. And be happy.
Read
January 25, 2023Esta novela es un ácido y amargo relato de en qué nos podemos convertir cuando pasamos de amar a odiar a alguien. Cuenta la historia de un matrimonio en pleno proceso de divorcio y se recrea en todas las maldades que se hacen ambos miembros del matrimonio: aunque sepan que es perjudicial para ambos, aunque sepan que se están haciendo un daño fácilmente evitable. Esta situación, ya dificilísima de por sí, se encrudece cuando ambos, de forma más o menos directa, se ven afectados por el atentado de las Torres Gemelas... y es a partir de ahí cuando la ruptura íntima se entrelaza con la hecatombe mundial que sacude a la sociedad de la época.
Me ha gustado mucho cómo el autor expone la crueldad que a veces nos nace hacia quienes quisimos. También me ha gustado cómo es capaz de contar un evento histórico desde la perspectiva de dos personajes que, a su forma, son mezquinos y vengativos.
Me ha gustado mucho cómo el autor expone la crueldad que a veces nos nace hacia quienes quisimos. También me ha gustado cómo es capaz de contar un evento histórico desde la perspectiva de dos personajes que, a su forma, son mezquinos y vengativos.
May 3, 2013
Moments of absolute hilarity interspersed with the horrific are the hallmark of this tidy little novel which explores a divorcing couple's first year post-9/11.
Yes, it could have been a wee bit better. Kalfus could have extended his narrative frame up to the present in which he was writing. He could have explored (instead of barely suggesting) the levels of intrigue underlying the hijacking of the planes, the general stupidity of making Saddam a scapegoat and . But the book works.
I really liked how the book was divided into chapters by month, even though Kalfus fudges this a little at the end with some flash-backing. (This is the second of his books I've read; the first, , showed much promise but lacked unity. I've actually not finished all the stories in Thirst, some of the language of some of the stories got too abstract for me—that was not an issue with this book, which is very easy to breeze right through)
One of the stronger chapters was the one which was focused on the couple's eldest daughter (a toddler just gradually gaining awareness) as the epistemological games she plays, trying to figure out why Mommy and Daddy fight all the time sorta mirrors the unknowingness of the American public vis-à-vis international relations. In general the book does a good job balancing between the two spouse's perspectives. At one point the .
Kalfus seemed intent on portraying them as being wholly recriminatory and vindictive against each other. Which is fine, because the prose here is really on point. There are a few brief meanderings into political/economic wonkery which may put some readers off, but if there are other, simpler books about .
Quotes that resonated with me:
"She had narrowly escaped destruction and had seen the towers come down, but so far terror Cherry Garcia." (page 23)
"He stared at the bedroom ceiling in the dim evening light, looking to read something in the faint patterns that had been left by the paint rollers years ago: elegant spirals and coils, labyrinths of kinks and vortices, the entire ceiling in a . He thought something within these convolutions. He thought he might learn from them, as he had nearly learned when the buildings fell, the exact lines and patterns that connected him to every stranger in the world." (page 38)
"But there's too much chatter in the system, so we report only on the volume of the chatter, rather than its content. Then ." (page 138)
No lie, if you read this book you will Laugh Out Loud.
Yes, it could have been a wee bit better. Kalfus could have extended his narrative frame up to the present in which he was writing. He could have explored (instead of barely suggesting) the levels of intrigue underlying the hijacking of the planes, the general stupidity of making Saddam a scapegoat and . But the book works.
I really liked how the book was divided into chapters by month, even though Kalfus fudges this a little at the end with some flash-backing. (This is the second of his books I've read; the first, , showed much promise but lacked unity. I've actually not finished all the stories in Thirst, some of the language of some of the stories got too abstract for me—that was not an issue with this book, which is very easy to breeze right through)
One of the stronger chapters was the one which was focused on the couple's eldest daughter (a toddler just gradually gaining awareness) as the epistemological games she plays, trying to figure out why Mommy and Daddy fight all the time sorta mirrors the unknowingness of the American public vis-à-vis international relations. In general the book does a good job balancing between the two spouse's perspectives. At one point the .
Kalfus seemed intent on portraying them as being wholly recriminatory and vindictive against each other. Which is fine, because the prose here is really on point. There are a few brief meanderings into political/economic wonkery which may put some readers off, but if there are other, simpler books about .
Quotes that resonated with me:
"She had narrowly escaped destruction and had seen the towers come down, but so far terror Cherry Garcia." (page 23)
"He stared at the bedroom ceiling in the dim evening light, looking to read something in the faint patterns that had been left by the paint rollers years ago: elegant spirals and coils, labyrinths of kinks and vortices, the entire ceiling in a . He thought something within these convolutions. He thought he might learn from them, as he had nearly learned when the buildings fell, the exact lines and patterns that connected him to every stranger in the world." (page 38)
"But there's too much chatter in the system, so we report only on the volume of the chatter, rather than its content. Then ." (page 138)
No lie, if you read this book you will Laugh Out Loud.
June 27, 2010
This book was supposedly a black comedy, and I must admit that I did not find it to be amusing at all. I also don't feel why anyone would have found it amusing. The book begins with a divorcing couple on September 11th. One works in the trade center, and one is supposed to be on the plane that crashes in PA. I guess the humor starts that both the man and the woman hoped that the other had perished. I'm not sure I see why anyone would find that humorous. The book continues to present two extremely petty, vengeful people who seem to have very little good in them. Occasionally we get the perspective of the children. And even the children come across as spiteful.
May 12, 2014
Empezó bien. Una pareja está en proceso de divorcio y el odio mutuo es tan fuerte que se pasan toda la novela llevando a cabo pequeñas venganzas. El escenario: Nueva York durante y unos meses después del 9/11. Me reí mucho al principio y Kalfus escribe muy bien. Pero más o menos a la mitad del libro, me empecé a aburrir. A partir de entonces, seguí leyendo pero sólo por disciplina, para no dejar el libro a medias.
Creo que le pasó como a muchos escritores: no supo cuándo detenerse. Pudo haber parado a la mitad y darle un final más interesante, pero en lugar de eso, siguió escribiendo y narrando situaciones históricas que ya conocemos.
Creo que le pasó como a muchos escritores: no supo cuándo detenerse. Pudo haber parado a la mitad y darle un final más interesante, pero en lugar de eso, siguió escribiendo y narrando situaciones históricas que ya conocemos.
October 18, 2021
A husband and wife rancorously cohabitating after the decision to divorce, neither party wanting to relinquish the apartment, when the Twin Towers (where he works) are destroyed on 9/11. Hoping there will be some inkling of thoughts of mortality and what is important, but so far seems to be opening up into more viciousness between them. But giving it the benefit of the doubt-- I love Ken Kalfus' books--his PU-239 and other Russian Fantasies is one of my favorites. And it had been nominated for a National Book Award, I'm going to keep going.
>>>>>>>>Tried. It was very War of the Roses, each side as nasty as could be-- I could see how some see this as deliciously dark humor, but it struck me very similarly to Franzen's The Corrections, which I also couldn't finish. Each of the dual 'protagonists' trying to get a power-hold on the other one, kown in Games People Play as "I've Got You Now, you Son of A Bitch" involving friends and working colleagues in the dirty games. For those who like this kind of thing, you're going to really like it. But not for me.
>>>>>>>>Tried. It was very War of the Roses, each side as nasty as could be-- I could see how some see this as deliciously dark humor, but it struck me very similarly to Franzen's The Corrections, which I also couldn't finish. Each of the dual 'protagonists' trying to get a power-hold on the other one, kown in Games People Play as "I've Got You Now, you Son of A Bitch" involving friends and working colleagues in the dirty games. For those who like this kind of thing, you're going to really like it. But not for me.
May 14, 2010
I alternately loved this book and was slightly bored by it. Strange combination. It is stuffed with fantastic scenes, brilliantly executed, starting with 9/11, the protagonist being caught up in it in the WTC, his wife secretly pleased he might be dead. There is great satire too about the state of marriage and the state of the country: the pettiness of divorce (the coffe maker), these people are ruled by lawyers about what they can and cannot say, having to stay together but ignoring each other, the wrangling of concessions; after the tension of 9/11 and anthrax scares (another beautifully done, funny section) the relief of war is felt by all - much of the country it is implied, certainly many of the cast. In the marriage too action would be welcome, stifled as they are, and there is a wonderful scene in the kitchen of their apartment with all the family where finally some action is taken, a line crossed. I don't want to give away too much about why but it dovetails beautifully with the war/terrorist theme. An utterly fantastic scene, so full of ironies and different levels of feeling and humour and terror, funny and profound and heartstopping, it truly gives the book a deep resonance and almost makes the book 5 stars on its own. There are other great scenes too but sometimes they feel gratuitous - they don't seem to add (to me) to the core of the book, rather take away - the wedding/chuppah farce for instance didn't do much for me (although it was good to hear an alternative take on the Middle East question at the 'stag' do), neither did the sequence in what seems an addendum where the husband goes into a bar and ends up at a druggy party. Handled very well again, full of tension, sexual power-play but I didn't get its point, how it integrated into the narrative as a whole (probably me). The characters seem there sometimes just to make points, eg the financial stuff (the husband tries to lose his wife's money by investing in crap but of course it performs very well and he makes her richer). I suppose that’s because it’s satire and the characters function that way.
One thing puzzled me � it seemed to be following the course of real events, 9/11, the invasion of Iraq etc, but then it veers off into fictional ‘history� (again I don’t want to give the game away) � quite OK I suppose but for me it cast a strange light back on the preceding events in the novel.
So, um, great but not great. Certainly glad I read it, I think there’s a brilliant five star 100 page novella buried within.
One thing puzzled me � it seemed to be following the course of real events, 9/11, the invasion of Iraq etc, but then it veers off into fictional ‘history� (again I don’t want to give the game away) � quite OK I suppose but for me it cast a strange light back on the preceding events in the novel.
So, um, great but not great. Certainly glad I read it, I think there’s a brilliant five star 100 page novella buried within.
February 4, 2021
One of the better-known novels written in the aftermath of 9/11. A New York novel, a novel of death and disaster and divorce, a novel of economic collapse. A novel of severe trauma - that is to say, a totally contemporary American novel.
Yet it felt inadequate, thin in spite of trying.. its plain-Jane language matched by its too facile insights matched by its wretched principals Marshall and Joyce. I tried to like it all better but never quite got there. The voyeurism of the black people sex party was weird - but far weirder was the undiluted fantasy (one can only consider it extreme satire) of the final pages. Hey pal, Assad is still there 14 years later.
PS also the chapter in the kid’s voice was un-believable. The wedding chapter is probably the one I enjoyed the most.
Yet it felt inadequate, thin in spite of trying.. its plain-Jane language matched by its too facile insights matched by its wretched principals Marshall and Joyce. I tried to like it all better but never quite got there. The voyeurism of the black people sex party was weird - but far weirder was the undiluted fantasy (one can only consider it extreme satire) of the final pages. Hey pal, Assad is still there 14 years later.
PS also the chapter in the kid’s voice was un-believable. The wedding chapter is probably the one I enjoyed the most.
April 6, 2016
I wasn't going to review this book, but after reading some of these I think I might have had a very alternate impression of it. As soon as I started reading it, I interpreted this book as an allegory- as if the "war" between Joyce and Marshall was a metaphore for that specific historical moment, as opposed to having 9/11 as a background for their story. The fact that Joyce so readily identifies with Afghan culture and considers going to an anti-war demonstration, the fact that the Harrimans both think a given piece of land belongs to only one of them...
"A tale about how two self-absorbed are affected by 9/11". Yes, that's true. But weren't we supposed to be making 9/11 about them? Wasn't Kalfus, by showing us how primal and wrongly motivated their disputes were, trying to say all disputes were somehow brutal and irrational? Maybe not. Because I'm not from the United States, I can't really completely understand a person's motives for writing such a book. It might be simply a satire about divorce, the absurdity of it being a greater tragedy and how two people make it all about them. Perhaps I was wrong to just assume, from the beggining, that this was a work of allegoric fiction.
But then again, why would Kalfus even bother making it all about them, if not to actually make it all about them? Action, reaction. Attack is the best defense. Isn't this basically what was happening during that time? The friend of my enemy is my enemy, Joyce thinks, while the readers get a look at Afghan tribal life. She decides to act the same way. Attack is the best defense.
Sure, if this is an allegory, it is an unconventional one- both the characters are constantly shifting in their metaphorical positions. Joyce can represent Afghanistan and the US in different parts of the book, for instance. Mostly, both characters either think they are being terrorized or act like terrorists. No one actually wonders why this war is happening in the first place.
The other war, of course, is happening because of 9/11- not for one second does one question this. 9/11 changed everything. While Joyce and Marshall's was an ongoing war, and the attack to the World Trade Center didn't change that. It didn't make them less cold, or have a realization of any kind. If anything, 9/11 worsened their already broken situation.
Speaking of broken things, there's a particular moment- the moment where a vase is broken- in which, through Viola's point of view, we watch her worry about her parents' divorce defining her. That was perhaps the greatest moment of the book for me, because it was understandable in both a microscopic and macroscopic level. As a child of divorce- who was a child of Viola's age on 2001, and watched Dexter and the Powerfuff girls too-, I though Kalfus managed to portray a child's point of view in a perfect manner, specially when talking about that moment in history; so much that I remembered how it was to be Viola and even felt nostalgic for that nineties lingering.
Moreover, on a macroscopic point of view, Viola was also the image of an Afghanistan ruined by the Cold War, left to pieces. In that scenario, Marshall and Joyce were the USA and the Soviet Union, mindlessly fighting, using their kids as weapons; turning them into weapons. In fact, every aspect of their interraction can be seen as an image of a "Cold War"- they neither acknowledge nor talk to each other without their lawyers. All the while fighting over a minuscule apartment in Brooklyn.
"I'm not Saddam", Marshall says to Joyce. But their situation, much like the relationship between Iraq and the USA, has gone from amicable to tense in a short period of time.
The fact that "A Disorder Peculiar to the Country" doesn't specify the actual reason why this couple is fighting in the first place was purely intentional, I think. By doing that, it manages to insinuate that 9/11 wasn't the reason why that war was happening either. And that 9/11 wasn't as much of a beggining, but an aggravating factor of an already stiffened scenario.
You know, when the Soviet Union disappeared, some very important historian declared that "World History was over". He was, of course, bashed for it and never respected again. History is a neverending tale of actions and reactions. It's just that the Western World never considered the fact that history also visits faraway places. Nothing is lost, nothing is won, everything is transformed. To say that radical Islamic terrorism just "appeared" out of nowhere is a very simplistic view. They were simply given room to grow. Basic Chemistry. Of course, though, we would feel as though thngs were disconnected.
That's also why some parts of this book felt disconnected too, I think. The whole wedding thing, for instance, was a little too lenghty, and I didn't think blaming 9/11 on Israeli attacks was funny (not that I think the Seven Day War was funny), it was borderline offensive and useless.
I wouldn't, however, say that the things that happened were 'gratutious'. It is true that the party thing was not funny in any way, but it was symbolic. Here's what we need to observe:
1-Miss Naomi, the person who is supposed to teach children basic concepts and values to grow up with, is compleyely full of shit.
2- At first, the party is a total damper, but as soon as the white people have a minority to go against, they come together
3-The underage escort is blindfolded
4- It was only when the underage escort was blinfolded that he was able to ejaculate
5-Miss Naomi extracted his sperm against his will, even if theoretically its release is seen as something to look forward to.
6- Everybody was completely OK with what was happening
Anyway, this is getting too long already. The reason I decided to give this book three stars is because I see it as an allegory, sort of Orwellian-ish. It was superbly well written, to a point where I was brought back to my childhood- much like Victor and Viola, my siblings and I had a game envolving Bin Laden and Saddam etc. We had this really ugly stuffed squirrel and we called him Bin Laden, and we had to run away from him otherwise he'd explode us. I'm not sure we even knew who the real Bin Laden was, or whether we'd just heard something about it in the news.
In addition, however, the ending of the book was a little weird, given that the author took a poetic license and wrote about the future. Was the point? Was he trying to say that would never happen, and that it was all a farse? It sort of reminded me of that Green Day song, "Jesus of Suburbia"- which is on an album called "21st Century Breakdown", so I can't be too far off on this.
Anyway, perhaps I didn't get the end of "A disorder peculiar to the Country" because I never understood patriotism. It might be because I think it is a forged concept created in the nineteenth century, or it might be because I'm Brazilian, and Brazilians by principle hate their country and would like it to be any other country in the world. A famous writer here called it a "Stray Dog Complex", a complex set off by not sticking word for word to the strict pattern of Evolution set by countries wiser than our own. We are known improvisers and short-cutters, and have our own specific disorders.
PS:
I actually made a "Disorder Peculiar to the Country" Playlist:
For the beggining: A Day in The Life, by The Beatles
For the Anthrax scare: Kick me when I'm high, by SUM 41
For the Bomb in the Kitchen scene: Knocking on Heaven's Door, by Guns and Roses
For when Marshall is leaving the party/ the war debate is happening: Wake me Up when September Ends, by Green Day
For the actual divorce/ Marshall leaving the apartment: Don't Look back in Anger, by Oasis
For the ending scene: Jesus of Suburbia, by Green Day
"A tale about how two self-absorbed are affected by 9/11". Yes, that's true. But weren't we supposed to be making 9/11 about them? Wasn't Kalfus, by showing us how primal and wrongly motivated their disputes were, trying to say all disputes were somehow brutal and irrational? Maybe not. Because I'm not from the United States, I can't really completely understand a person's motives for writing such a book. It might be simply a satire about divorce, the absurdity of it being a greater tragedy and how two people make it all about them. Perhaps I was wrong to just assume, from the beggining, that this was a work of allegoric fiction.
But then again, why would Kalfus even bother making it all about them, if not to actually make it all about them? Action, reaction. Attack is the best defense. Isn't this basically what was happening during that time? The friend of my enemy is my enemy, Joyce thinks, while the readers get a look at Afghan tribal life. She decides to act the same way. Attack is the best defense.
Sure, if this is an allegory, it is an unconventional one- both the characters are constantly shifting in their metaphorical positions. Joyce can represent Afghanistan and the US in different parts of the book, for instance. Mostly, both characters either think they are being terrorized or act like terrorists. No one actually wonders why this war is happening in the first place.
The other war, of course, is happening because of 9/11- not for one second does one question this. 9/11 changed everything. While Joyce and Marshall's was an ongoing war, and the attack to the World Trade Center didn't change that. It didn't make them less cold, or have a realization of any kind. If anything, 9/11 worsened their already broken situation.
Speaking of broken things, there's a particular moment- the moment where a vase is broken- in which, through Viola's point of view, we watch her worry about her parents' divorce defining her. That was perhaps the greatest moment of the book for me, because it was understandable in both a microscopic and macroscopic level. As a child of divorce- who was a child of Viola's age on 2001, and watched Dexter and the Powerfuff girls too-, I though Kalfus managed to portray a child's point of view in a perfect manner, specially when talking about that moment in history; so much that I remembered how it was to be Viola and even felt nostalgic for that nineties lingering.
Moreover, on a macroscopic point of view, Viola was also the image of an Afghanistan ruined by the Cold War, left to pieces. In that scenario, Marshall and Joyce were the USA and the Soviet Union, mindlessly fighting, using their kids as weapons; turning them into weapons. In fact, every aspect of their interraction can be seen as an image of a "Cold War"- they neither acknowledge nor talk to each other without their lawyers. All the while fighting over a minuscule apartment in Brooklyn.
"I'm not Saddam", Marshall says to Joyce. But their situation, much like the relationship between Iraq and the USA, has gone from amicable to tense in a short period of time.
The fact that "A Disorder Peculiar to the Country" doesn't specify the actual reason why this couple is fighting in the first place was purely intentional, I think. By doing that, it manages to insinuate that 9/11 wasn't the reason why that war was happening either. And that 9/11 wasn't as much of a beggining, but an aggravating factor of an already stiffened scenario.
You know, when the Soviet Union disappeared, some very important historian declared that "World History was over". He was, of course, bashed for it and never respected again. History is a neverending tale of actions and reactions. It's just that the Western World never considered the fact that history also visits faraway places. Nothing is lost, nothing is won, everything is transformed. To say that radical Islamic terrorism just "appeared" out of nowhere is a very simplistic view. They were simply given room to grow. Basic Chemistry. Of course, though, we would feel as though thngs were disconnected.
That's also why some parts of this book felt disconnected too, I think. The whole wedding thing, for instance, was a little too lenghty, and I didn't think blaming 9/11 on Israeli attacks was funny (not that I think the Seven Day War was funny), it was borderline offensive and useless.
I wouldn't, however, say that the things that happened were 'gratutious'. It is true that the party thing was not funny in any way, but it was symbolic. Here's what we need to observe:
1-Miss Naomi, the person who is supposed to teach children basic concepts and values to grow up with, is compleyely full of shit.
2- At first, the party is a total damper, but as soon as the white people have a minority to go against, they come together
3-The underage escort is blindfolded
4- It was only when the underage escort was blinfolded that he was able to ejaculate
5-Miss Naomi extracted his sperm against his will, even if theoretically its release is seen as something to look forward to.
6- Everybody was completely OK with what was happening
Anyway, this is getting too long already. The reason I decided to give this book three stars is because I see it as an allegory, sort of Orwellian-ish. It was superbly well written, to a point where I was brought back to my childhood- much like Victor and Viola, my siblings and I had a game envolving Bin Laden and Saddam etc. We had this really ugly stuffed squirrel and we called him Bin Laden, and we had to run away from him otherwise he'd explode us. I'm not sure we even knew who the real Bin Laden was, or whether we'd just heard something about it in the news.
In addition, however, the ending of the book was a little weird, given that the author took a poetic license and wrote about the future. Was the point? Was he trying to say that would never happen, and that it was all a farse? It sort of reminded me of that Green Day song, "Jesus of Suburbia"- which is on an album called "21st Century Breakdown", so I can't be too far off on this.
Anyway, perhaps I didn't get the end of "A disorder peculiar to the Country" because I never understood patriotism. It might be because I think it is a forged concept created in the nineteenth century, or it might be because I'm Brazilian, and Brazilians by principle hate their country and would like it to be any other country in the world. A famous writer here called it a "Stray Dog Complex", a complex set off by not sticking word for word to the strict pattern of Evolution set by countries wiser than our own. We are known improvisers and short-cutters, and have our own specific disorders.
PS:
I actually made a "Disorder Peculiar to the Country" Playlist:
For the beggining: A Day in The Life, by The Beatles
For the Anthrax scare: Kick me when I'm high, by SUM 41
For the Bomb in the Kitchen scene: Knocking on Heaven's Door, by Guns and Roses
For when Marshall is leaving the party/ the war debate is happening: Wake me Up when September Ends, by Green Day
For the actual divorce/ Marshall leaving the apartment: Don't Look back in Anger, by Oasis
For the ending scene: Jesus of Suburbia, by Green Day
August 4, 2021
Ένα από τα ωραιότερα βιβλία που έχω διαβάσει (φέτος; γενικά;). Διάβασα την περίληψη στο οπισθόφυλλο και προετοιμάστηκα για ένα βιβλίο της Κατερίνας Μανανεδάκη ή έστω της Λένας Μαντά. Ε, καμία σχέση. Ένα ζευγάρι είναι στα πρόθυρα του διαζυγίου. Οι Δίδυμοι Πύργοι δέχονται επίθεση. Η κατηφόρα της ανθρώπινης αξιοπρέπειας και το κατρακύλισμα της κάποτε αγάπης που ένιωθαν αυτοί οι δύο ο ένας για τον άλλον αναπτύσσονται και εξιστορούνται παράλληλα με την κατηφόρα της αξιοπρέπειας του μέσου αμερικανού πολίτη που πλέον πλήττεται από παντού (τρομοκράτες, εβραίους, φακέλους με άνθρακα) και το κατρακύλισμα της εμπιστοσύνης του μέσου Αμερικανού στους γείτονες λαούς, στο Ισραήλ και στους ηγέτες του που τον προασπίζονται με βίαιο τρόπο.
Ο συγγραφέας δεν ηθικολογεί, δεν μεμψιμοιρεί, δεν ηρωοποιεί. Περιγράφει, καταγράφει, γράφει. Τι να πρωτοαναφέρω; Την καθημερινότητα του Αμερικανού, που πλήττεται από ένα σωρό ειδήσεις και παραπληροφόρηση (πρέπει λέει να είσαι πολύ γρήγορος για να προλαβαίνεις να διαβάζεις στην τηλεόραση και την κυλιόμενη μπάρα με τις ειδήσεις και τα νέα στην οθόνη ή τον παρουσιαστή), που πάει τα παιδιά του για ένα πρόχειρο γεύμα στα Μακ, που δουλεύει σε γραφεία με συναδέλφους που ζουν στον ίδιο χώρο και δεν γνωρίζουν κάτι περισσότερο για την προσωπικότητα και τα ενδιαφέροντά του; Περπατάμε στη Νέα Υόρκη, ζούμε την αγωνία των κατοίκων μετά την επίθεση στο Παγκόσμιο Κέντρο Εμπορίου, νιώθουμε την αλλαγή στο αίμα μας. Φοβερό το επεισόδιο που ο οδηγός του φορτηγού έκελισε με δύναμη την πόρτα του κι όλη η εικόνα πάγωσε για ένα δευτερόλεπτο γιατί όλοι οι περαστικοί κάνανε την ίδια σκέψη: δέχονται επίθεση αυτοκτονίας! Κι οι επισκέψεις στους ψυχιάτρους αυξήθηκαν, το ρίσκο αυξήθηκε, ζήσε το σήμερα για το σήμερα γιατί αύριο κάποιος θα μπει στην πιτσαρία που έχεις πάει τα παιδιά σου και φωνάζοντας «Ο Θεός είναι μεγάλος» θα τινάξει τα πάντα στον αέρα! (ανατρίχιασα).
Ως προς το ζευγάρι υπήρχαν κάποια πραγματικά αστεία περιστατικά για το πού θα φτάσουν ένας άντρας και μια γυναίκα που αγαπιούνταν μέχρι πρότινος. Όπως λέει και η σύζυγος, δεν θυμάται πια γιατί φτάσανε στο σημείο να μισιούντια τόσο πολύ, δεν έχει πια σημασία. Είναι πραγματικά πολύ άσχημο να φτάνεις στο σημείο να συγκατοικείς με τον πρώην σύζυγό σου ώσπου να βγει το διαζύγιο με τη διατροφή και την έξωσή του από το κάποτε δικό σας διαμέρισμα. Τα παιδιά για άλλη μια φορά αιχμάλωτα των γονικών αποφάσεων και εξουσιών κι όταν παθαίνουν κάτι, οι γονείς ανησυχούν μην το χρησιμοποιήσει σαν όπλο εναντίον τους ο άλλος γονιός (καλά, δεν πρόσεχες το παιδί; Τώρα θα δεις τι θα πάθεις) (κιι οι δικηγόροι να συνεχίζουν να πληρώνονται). Πραγαμτικά στενοχωρέθηκα, σε ένα σημείο μάλιστα ο μπαμπάς τσακώνεται με τη μαμά και τα παιδιά φωνάζουν με μια φωνή «είστε μπροστά στην τηλεόραση και δεν βλέπουμε». Ειλικρινά, όταν μεγαλώσουν αυτά τα παιδιά, τι οικογένεις θα δημιουργήσουν, τι ενδιαφέροντα θα αποκτήσουν;
Αστεία και τραγική ταυτόχρονα η σκηνή όπου ο σύζυγος δένεται με εκρηκτικά και επιτίθεται στη γυναίκα του για να τελειώνουν πια με αυτό το αστείο αλλά η ύλη δεν πυροδοτείται και μαζί οι δυο σύζυγοι φτιάχνουν και ξαναφτιάχνουν τα εκρηκτικά ώσπου ο σύζυγος τα παρατάει και φεύγει! Χωρίς ίχνος αστεϊσμού ή διακωμώδησης, ξανασκέφτομαι μέχρι πόσο μπορεί κάποιος να αδιαφορ��σει για την οικογένειά του ή πόσο απελπισμένος μπορεί να νιώσει ώστε να εξοντώσει τον εαυτό του και την οικογένειά του με αυτόν τον τρόπο.
Μέσα από το βιβλίο διαβάζουμε πάρα πολλά πράγματα για την καθημερινότητα του Αμερικανού πριν και μετά την τρομοκρατική επίθεση, τις απόψεις του για τον εβραϊσμό και την περιοχή του Ισραήλ, ακόμη και για την εβραϊκή τελετουργία ενός γάμου (παντρεύτηκε ο αδερφός της συζύγου, καλά αυτό το σημείο έκανε μια τεράστια κοιλιά ως προς το σύνολο του περιεχομένου, όταν στο τέλος ανακαλύπτουμε ότι ο σύζυγος σαμπόταρε τον γάμο για εκδίκηση).
Εδώ ο συγγραφέας μας χαστουκίζει ως προς τον μικρόκοσμο και την ατομική μας καθημερινότητα και κατά συνέπεια την αδυναμία που δείχνουμε σε περιπτώσεις μεγάλου κακού: «Η κίνηση των αυτοκινήτων, τα υπόγεια τρένα, το τηλέφωνο, το e-mail, τα γεμάτα κάυσιμα αεροπλάνα που πετάνε πάνω από τα κεφάλια μας, το Αμερικανικό Ταχυδρομείο, όλα αυτά μας κρατάνε σε έναν εύθραστο, αραχνοΰφαντο ιστό νοήματος. Μία και μοναδική πράξη κακού μπορεί να τον ξεσκίσει. Στα χέρια μας κρατάμε ο ένας τη σπουδαιότητα του άλλου».
Σε ένα άλλο σημείο διαβάζουμε μια σοβαρή απορία για όλον αυτόν τον γιγαντισμό των ΗΠΑ: «Έχουμε αρκετά στρατεύματα για να καταλάβουμε μια χώρα 25.000.000 ανθρώπων σε μια περιοχή του κόσμου που διάκειται εχθρικά απέναντί μας βάσει ιστορικών, θρησκευτικών και πολιτιστικών λόγων. Αυτά τα κράτη δε θα γίνονταν ακόμη πιο εχθρικά απέναντι στην Αμερική;». Κια πολλά πολλά ακόμη. Σπάνια ένα βιβλίο με έχει κάνει να σταματήσω για να σκεφτώ, χωρίς αυτό να είναι ο σκοπός του (ένα μυθιστόρημα διαβάζεις στο κάτω κάτω, όχι δοκίμιο). Πραγματικά το συνιστώ ανεπιφύλακτα γιατί κάθε σελίδα είναι και μια έκπληξη και για τη σχέση των δυο πρώην συζύγων και για την πορεία των ΗΠΑ μετά την 11η Σεπτεμβρίου.
Ένα μεγάλο μειονέκτημα είναι ότι ο μεταφραστής κλείνει όλα τα ξενόγλωσσα ονόματα (του Βίκτωρα, της Βαϊόλας κλπ.) και τις λεωφόρους τις άφησε αμετάφραστες (Τουέντι θέρντ Άβενιου, μα είναι δυνατόν, Εικοστή Τρίτη Λεωφόρος ηχεί άσχημα;).
Ένα εξαιρετικό μυθιστόρημα.
Στα ελληνικά από τον Κέδρο το 2009 (Σύζυγοι σε θέση μάχης).
Ο συγγραφέας δεν ηθικολογεί, δεν μεμψιμοιρεί, δεν ηρωοποιεί. Περιγράφει, καταγράφει, γράφει. Τι να πρωτοαναφέρω; Την καθημερινότητα του Αμερικανού, που πλήττεται από ένα σωρό ειδήσεις και παραπληροφόρηση (πρέπει λέει να είσαι πολύ γρήγορος για να προλαβαίνεις να διαβάζεις στην τηλεόραση και την κυλιόμενη μπάρα με τις ειδήσεις και τα νέα στην οθόνη ή τον παρουσιαστή), που πάει τα παιδιά του για ένα πρόχειρο γεύμα στα Μακ, που δουλεύει σε γραφεία με συναδέλφους που ζουν στον ίδιο χώρο και δεν γνωρίζουν κάτι περισσότερο για την προσωπικότητα και τα ενδιαφέροντά του; Περπατάμε στη Νέα Υόρκη, ζούμε την αγωνία των κατοίκων μετά την επίθεση στο Παγκόσμιο Κέντρο Εμπορίου, νιώθουμε την αλλαγή στο αίμα μας. Φοβερό το επεισόδιο που ο οδηγός του φορτηγού έκελισε με δύναμη την πόρτα του κι όλη η εικόνα πάγωσε για ένα δευτερόλεπτο γιατί όλοι οι περαστικοί κάνανε την ίδια σκέψη: δέχονται επίθεση αυτοκτονίας! Κι οι επισκέψεις στους ψυχιάτρους αυξήθηκαν, το ρίσκο αυξήθηκε, ζήσε το σήμερα για το σήμερα γιατί αύριο κάποιος θα μπει στην πιτσαρία που έχεις πάει τα παιδιά σου και φωνάζοντας «Ο Θεός είναι μεγάλος» θα τινάξει τα πάντα στον αέρα! (ανατρίχιασα).
Ως προς το ζευγάρι υπήρχαν κάποια πραγματικά αστεία περιστατικά για το πού θα φτάσουν ένας άντρας και μια γυναίκα που αγαπιούνταν μέχρι πρότινος. Όπως λέει και η σύζυγος, δεν θυμάται πια γιατί φτάσανε στο σημείο να μισιούντια τόσο πολύ, δεν έχει πια σημασία. Είναι πραγματικά πολύ άσχημο να φτάνεις στο σημείο να συγκατοικείς με τον πρώην σύζυγό σου ώσπου να βγει το διαζύγιο με τη διατροφή και την έξωσή του από το κάποτε δικό σας διαμέρισμα. Τα παιδιά για άλλη μια φορά αιχμάλωτα των γονικών αποφάσεων και εξουσιών κι όταν παθαίνουν κάτι, οι γονείς ανησυχούν μην το χρησιμοποιήσει σαν όπλο εναντίον τους ο άλλος γονιός (καλά, δεν πρόσεχες το παιδί; Τώρα θα δεις τι θα πάθεις) (κιι οι δικηγόροι να συνεχίζουν να πληρώνονται). Πραγαμτικά στενοχωρέθηκα, σε ένα σημείο μάλιστα ο μπαμπάς τσακώνεται με τη μαμά και τα παιδιά φωνάζουν με μια φωνή «είστε μπροστά στην τηλεόραση και δεν βλέπουμε». Ειλικρινά, όταν μεγαλώσουν αυτά τα παιδιά, τι οικογένεις θα δημιουργήσουν, τι ενδιαφέροντα θα αποκτήσουν;
Αστεία και τραγική ταυτόχρονα η σκηνή όπου ο σύζυγος δένεται με εκρηκτικά και επιτίθεται στη γυναίκα του για να τελειώνουν πια με αυτό το αστείο αλλά η ύλη δεν πυροδοτείται και μαζί οι δυο σύζυγοι φτιάχνουν και ξαναφτιάχνουν τα εκρηκτικά ώσπου ο σύζυγος τα παρατάει και φεύγει! Χωρίς ίχνος αστεϊσμού ή διακωμώδησης, ξανασκέφτομαι μέχρι πόσο μπορεί κάποιος να αδιαφορ��σει για την οικογένειά του ή πόσο απελπισμένος μπορεί να νιώσει ώστε να εξοντώσει τον εαυτό του και την οικογένειά του με αυτόν τον τρόπο.
Μέσα από το βιβλίο διαβάζουμε πάρα πολλά πράγματα για την καθημερινότητα του Αμερικανού πριν και μετά την τρομοκρατική επίθεση, τις απόψεις του για τον εβραϊσμό και την περιοχή του Ισραήλ, ακόμη και για την εβραϊκή τελετουργία ενός γάμου (παντρεύτηκε ο αδερφός της συζύγου, καλά αυτό το σημείο έκανε μια τεράστια κοιλιά ως προς το σύνολο του περιεχομένου, όταν στο τέλος ανακαλύπτουμε ότι ο σύζυγος σαμπόταρε τον γάμο για εκδίκηση).
Εδώ ο συγγραφέας μας χαστουκίζει ως προς τον μικρόκοσμο και την ατομική μας καθημερινότητα και κατά συνέπεια την αδυναμία που δείχνουμε σε περιπτώσεις μεγάλου κακού: «Η κίνηση των αυτοκινήτων, τα υπόγεια τρένα, το τηλέφωνο, το e-mail, τα γεμάτα κάυσιμα αεροπλάνα που πετάνε πάνω από τα κεφάλια μας, το Αμερικανικό Ταχυδρομείο, όλα αυτά μας κρατάνε σε έναν εύθραστο, αραχνοΰφαντο ιστό νοήματος. Μία και μοναδική πράξη κακού μπορεί να τον ξεσκίσει. Στα χέρια μας κρατάμε ο ένας τη σπουδαιότητα του άλλου».
Σε ένα άλλο σημείο διαβάζουμε μια σοβαρή απορία για όλον αυτόν τον γιγαντισμό των ΗΠΑ: «Έχουμε αρκετά στρατεύματα για να καταλάβουμε μια χώρα 25.000.000 ανθρώπων σε μια περιοχή του κόσμου που διάκειται εχθρικά απέναντί μας βάσει ιστορικών, θρησκευτικών και πολιτιστικών λόγων. Αυτά τα κράτη δε θα γίνονταν ακόμη πιο εχθρικά απέναντι στην Αμερική;». Κια πολλά πολλά ακόμη. Σπάνια ένα βιβλίο με έχει κάνει να σταματήσω για να σκεφτώ, χωρίς αυτό να είναι ο σκοπός του (ένα μυθιστόρημα διαβάζεις στο κάτω κάτω, όχι δοκίμιο). Πραγματικά το συνιστώ ανεπιφύλακτα γιατί κάθε σελίδα είναι και μια έκπληξη και για τη σχέση των δυο πρώην συζύγων και για την πορεία των ΗΠΑ μετά την 11η Σεπτεμβρίου.
Ένα μεγάλο μειονέκτημα είναι ότι ο μεταφραστής κλείνει όλα τα ξενόγλωσσα ονόματα (του Βίκτωρα, της Βαϊόλας κλπ.) και τις λεωφόρους τις άφησε αμετάφραστες (Τουέντι θέρντ Άβενιου, μα είναι δυνατόν, Εικοστή Τρίτη Λεωφόρος ηχεί άσχημα;).
Ένα εξαιρετικό μυθιστόρημα.
Στα ελληνικά από τον Κέδρο το 2009 (Σύζυγοι σε θέση μάχης).
June 16, 2017
A good read, about a divorcing couple in New York during the aftermath of 9/11. A touch of black comedy at times, and felt a little like Bonfire of the Vanities.
July 4, 2015
This is the first book I've read that's set against the backdrop of 9/11. The analogies to a failed marriage and an ugly divorce - the twin towers falling, the war on terror - are a little trite and seem insignificant, but it's okay, because they're not the focus of the book. The real focus is the sadly honest portrayal of a former happy couple with ordinary, selfish desires, which mostly involve screwing each other over. It's a great depiction of self-absorption and the frustration of being so consumed by your own interests, but being unable to fulfill them. The historical context was, by my recollection, fairly accurate. While the war on terror was all any channel was showing on TV around that time, which led to everyone being well-informed of all the details, it eventually blended into the background, taking a backseat to people's individual lives, and Ken Kalfus captured that aspect of the time period very well.
October 30, 2009
This book was supposed to be a dark comedy, but mostly it was depressing. I guess I am not ready for dark humor about 9-11, vicious divorces, or children in sexual situations. There was one funny moment that I can recall. The husband in the middle of a divorce walked in on his soon-to-be-ex-wife with a bomb strapped to his chest, yelled out, "God is Great", and pulled a string. When nothing happened, the wife tried to help him with it, criticizing his bomb-making skills all the while. The conversation sounded like she was trying to help him zip his jacket. It was weird.
January 17, 2008
This book sounded really promising from the back cover. A divorcing couple stuck together in a tiny apartment who both think the other has died in the World Trade Tower collapse and are disappointed when this isn't the case. The characters were very hollow and I couldn't get a sense of why they hated each other so much. If the author had been able to create more believable characters this would have been a decent book.
August 21, 2017
Odeonky jsou pro mě vždycky zárukou zajímavého čtení a nebylo tomu jinak ani u Amerického problému Kena Kalfuse. Knížka, kterou jsem za pár korun koupila v mém oblíbeném antikvariátu na Národní v úplně nádherným stavu, pojednává o rozpadu manželství v období největšího teroristického útoku na dvojčata v New Yorku. Událost, která navždy změnila tvář Ameriky jako takové, ale není úplně hlavním dějovým prvkem tohoto románu, spíš kulisou. A to mi přišlo na této knížce zajímavé. Tady šlo hlavně o rozpad manželství a vytvoření obrázku toho, jak dva lidi, kteří se někdy strašně moc milovali, jsou po určité době, dětech a konfliktech schopní se nenávidět a dělat všechno proto, aby tomu druhému, co nejvíc znepříjemnili život. I když se tam vyskytlo pár vtipných situací, ve skutečnosti je to velmi smutná knížka. Takový ten smích přes slzy se tam občas vyskytne.
Do děje vstupujeme 11. září, kdy Marshall je na cestě do práce (pracuje ve WTC) a Joyce by měla sedět v inkriminovaném letadle, ale nějakou náhodou, nebo řízením osudu, ani jeden v ten den není tam, kde by měl být. To oni ale v tu chvíli, kdy se útok odehrává neví a potěší se, že se toho druhého zbavili a nebudou se už muset dál dohadovat, protože oba jsou už vyčerpaní neustálými vzájemnými konflikty. Jaké je jejich veliké zklamání, když zjistí, že tomu druhému se nic nestalo.
I když první polovice knihy mě bavila víc, v té druhé knížka ztratila svůj spád, ale jako celek to působilo dobře a líbilo se mi to. Obraz Ameriky, změn, které nastali po teroristických útocích, změny na pracovním trhu, v bezpečnosti, v pocitech lidí, to všechno opisované a odehrávající se na pozadí dvou lidí, kteří se tak strašně moc nenávidí (anebo až tak moc zas ne?).
Skvěle, reálně napsané. Určitě doporučuji. Není to dlouhé čtení, ale zaujme a zapůsobí.
Do děje vstupujeme 11. září, kdy Marshall je na cestě do práce (pracuje ve WTC) a Joyce by měla sedět v inkriminovaném letadle, ale nějakou náhodou, nebo řízením osudu, ani jeden v ten den není tam, kde by měl být. To oni ale v tu chvíli, kdy se útok odehrává neví a potěší se, že se toho druhého zbavili a nebudou se už muset dál dohadovat, protože oba jsou už vyčerpaní neustálými vzájemnými konflikty. Jaké je jejich veliké zklamání, když zjistí, že tomu druhému se nic nestalo.
I když první polovice knihy mě bavila víc, v té druhé knížka ztratila svůj spád, ale jako celek to působilo dobře a líbilo se mi to. Obraz Ameriky, změn, které nastali po teroristických útocích, změny na pracovním trhu, v bezpečnosti, v pocitech lidí, to všechno opisované a odehrávající se na pozadí dvou lidí, kteří se tak strašně moc nenávidí (anebo až tak moc zas ne?).
Skvěle, reálně napsané. Určitě doporučuji. Není to dlouhé čtení, ale zaujme a zapůsobí.
March 20, 2018
Horrível. Que Livro Mau, que Perda de Tempo com esta Leitura. Detestei.
November 24, 2010
This is such an interesting premise for a novel, and something that I admit I wondered to myself. What about the people who, on 9/11, were disappointed that their spouses survived the attacks or missed their flight? As ugly a thought as it is, there must have been people here and there who were stuck in miserable relationships, or in the midst of ugly divorces, who would have viewed this monstrous day as a stroke of good luck.
That's not a pretty concept, but given the sheer scope of the calamity, it is a plausible one, and it is the leaping-off point for A Disorder Peculiar to the Country. Joyce and Marshall are in the process of divorcing, and they loathe one another. He works on the 86th Floor of the World Trade Center, and she's due to catch Flight 93 to San Francisco. Her flight is canceled, and he escapes the Towers. Neither of them is pleased to see the other come home. (I'm not giving anything away here; this happens in the first ten pages and is told in the jacket blurb.)
How their survival, their obvious PTSD and how it affects the divorce battle provides the crux of the story. As ridiculously as they behaved prior to 9/11, some of their actions afterwards are positively inexplicable. As is usual, they don't notice that their kids are far more aware of what's going on, and are far more astute about the consequences. These are self-involved, selfish, and generally unpleasant people, and it's difficult to find any sympathy for them. As I looked in at them from the outside, however, somewhat as if I was looking at a zoological exhibit, I found them fascinating.
This novel was thought-provoking and largely well-written. The reason for four stars rather than five is that there were some scenes that had no bearing on the story that I could see, and were just wasted space. One, where Marshall attends a rather strange party, was particularly extraneous. Overall, however, the story gave me some uncomfortable things to think about, and that's not necessarily a bad thing.
That's not a pretty concept, but given the sheer scope of the calamity, it is a plausible one, and it is the leaping-off point for A Disorder Peculiar to the Country. Joyce and Marshall are in the process of divorcing, and they loathe one another. He works on the 86th Floor of the World Trade Center, and she's due to catch Flight 93 to San Francisco. Her flight is canceled, and he escapes the Towers. Neither of them is pleased to see the other come home. (I'm not giving anything away here; this happens in the first ten pages and is told in the jacket blurb.)
How their survival, their obvious PTSD and how it affects the divorce battle provides the crux of the story. As ridiculously as they behaved prior to 9/11, some of their actions afterwards are positively inexplicable. As is usual, they don't notice that their kids are far more aware of what's going on, and are far more astute about the consequences. These are self-involved, selfish, and generally unpleasant people, and it's difficult to find any sympathy for them. As I looked in at them from the outside, however, somewhat as if I was looking at a zoological exhibit, I found them fascinating.
This novel was thought-provoking and largely well-written. The reason for four stars rather than five is that there were some scenes that had no bearing on the story that I could see, and were just wasted space. One, where Marshall attends a rather strange party, was particularly extraneous. Overall, however, the story gave me some uncomfortable things to think about, and that's not necessarily a bad thing.
October 19, 2007
The only other fiction about 9/11 that I've read is Jonathan Safran Foer's "Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close," which is heartbreaking. And yet it is somehow easier to read than Kalfus' sardonic look at 9/11. It is uncomfortable reading an account of 9/11 that isn't meant to make us sad. It is uncomfortable reading about characters who grieve not for what they lost but for what they wish was lost. It is uncomfortable reading about unsympathetic characters when we want to read about heroes. But if you can get past that, Kalfus writes an excellent study of human nature--- especially our ability to make even the grandest tragedy about ourselves. The two main characters, Joyce and Marshall, are a couple going through a hateful divorce which consumes their lives far more than the terrorist attacks. They think about happier times and how they dissolved into such a bitter marriage and wonder: how did we come to this? In fact, every event in the book, every argument, every relationship, every missed warning about the attacks, every mistaken piece of evidence about WMD forces us to ask, how did we come to this?
June 2, 2014
I’m mixed about this book, I liked the very dark humor that sometimes pops up in the narrative, and I liked some of the topics that the author explored, like cultural and religious differences, the horror of war, how war plays out on TV in our modern society, our brain dead capacity to watch TV 24 hours a day and an exploitive drug and sex party. However, I didn’t fully connect fully with Joyce and Marshall. I don’t know if it’s because I have never been through a divorce, either parent or myself, or because the author didn’t fully flush out why they were so hateful of each other. And with such hatred, how could they possibly live in the same apartment? The book seems to lack depth or true connections between the characters. But the part that really missed the mark, to me anyway, the thing that I would have done in a heartbeat (under these circumstances), the thing Marshall is still kicking himself over; simply transfer the money out of the Joyce’s account and get the hell out of Dodge.
Recommendation: it’s a unique topic, based on a unique backdrop, with some very dark humor interspersed. If these topics interest you, go ahead a read it, otherwise, skip this one.
Recommendation: it’s a unique topic, based on a unique backdrop, with some very dark humor interspersed. If these topics interest you, go ahead a read it, otherwise, skip this one.
April 17, 2020
I was so excited to start this book. It seemed to have a really quirky (in a good way!) premise: a couple who is getting a divorce each thinks the other person died in the 9/11 attacks, but neither did. And boy did I wish they had because I've never hated two main characters as much as I hated the two in this book. I desperately wanted to side with one of them, but no two people deserved each other more than these two. So the characters stunk, but at least the plot was interesting, right? Ha. What plot? The divorcing couple just continually manipulated each other in order to make life miserable for everyone until, anti-climactically, the divorce was final. How about that surprise ending, you ask? More like WTF were the last 50 pages about?!? It suddenly turned into some weird rah rah Saddam and bin Laden are dead along with the most uncomfortable, unnecessary, bizarre sex (sexual assault? I don't even know what was happening) scene thrown in. It was like the author didn't know where the book was going either, so he just decided to drop the most disturbing scenes he could think at the end of the book just to see if you were paying attention. I'm sorry I was.
April 14, 2012
This book was so close to 5 stars; very, very close. It was so good, for around 170 pages. Then it just got far to depressing for 5 stars. It may be sadistic of me, but I loved both of these neurotic depressed main characters. I was rooting for Joyce and Marshall! I wanted them and their kids to be happpy; that isn't an emotion I normally feel towards fictional characters. In fact, I don't even really like happy endings. But the depression exhibited by these two is just so great, I felt almost callous not wanting them to be happy.
A great quick read, it probably took me about 4 hours, and it was definetly a page turner, and had extremely funny sections. The Judeo/Christian wedding battle had me laughing hysterically. The novel is very entertaing, and anyone will be able to get through it quickly. However, if your prone to being depressed about the State of humanity, this may not be a good one to pick up.
A great quick read, it probably took me about 4 hours, and it was definetly a page turner, and had extremely funny sections. The Judeo/Christian wedding battle had me laughing hysterically. The novel is very entertaing, and anyone will be able to get through it quickly. However, if your prone to being depressed about the State of humanity, this may not be a good one to pick up.
January 29, 2013
Such a gripping opening and natural symbolic parallel between the fall of the Twin Towers and the not-so-amiable end of a hyperfunctional dysfunctional couple in their mid-thirties. Flowing and very readable language that sometimes reminded me of TC Boyle -- both also use recent history to inform the action (and vice versa). Lots of great little descriptions, like the "oily, gamey" taste of a NYC hot dog that's been soaking all day in near boiling water. Not the most likeable characters but (sadly) representative of an era that seems to have thankfully passed with the actual end of Osama (not fictional capture) and the rise of Obama.
Disclosure of potential conflict of interest: I've played multiple games of doubles tennis with the author and, on more than one occasion, we've both contributed to the above-average Philadelphia Quizzo team known as "Volcanus!"
Disclosure of potential conflict of interest: I've played multiple games of doubles tennis with the author and, on more than one occasion, we've both contributed to the above-average Philadelphia Quizzo team known as "Volcanus!"
February 6, 2014
I had written a review of this book and then accidentally closed the tab. The first few chapters of this book showed great promise. I was overjoyed to have found another example of somewhat inappropriately themed black humor writing. But where something like Hope: A Tragedy occasionally pushed the premise and individual jokes too far (usually with what I imagine was the intended effect -- "If I could stop laughing for just one second, I would ponder and be horrified by the terrible things it says about me that I can't stop laughing at this.") , A Disorder Peculiar to the Country seemed unable or unwilling, after the Anthrax part, to push much at all.
September 20, 2017
Ik had weinig verwachtingen van dit boek, maar de cover sprak me aan, en boeken uitgegeven door Meulenhoff vind ik meestal wel voltreffers, dus ging ik er voor 😉
En ja, het is een boek dat boeit. In het New York tussen 11 september en de dood van Bin Laden, volg je het koppel Marshall en Joyce in de weg naar hun scheiding. Rooskleurig is het verhaal niet. De politiek-economische context is uiteraard niet positief, maar het boek toont ook de grauwe realiteit van een (vecht)scheiding, waarbij je je meermaals afvraagt of mensen hier nu echt beter uitkomen.
Geen aanrader voor mensen in een relatiecrisis, maar wel voor anderen die een vlotte realistische pageturner willen lezen
En ja, het is een boek dat boeit. In het New York tussen 11 september en de dood van Bin Laden, volg je het koppel Marshall en Joyce in de weg naar hun scheiding. Rooskleurig is het verhaal niet. De politiek-economische context is uiteraard niet positief, maar het boek toont ook de grauwe realiteit van een (vecht)scheiding, waarbij je je meermaals afvraagt of mensen hier nu echt beter uitkomen.
Geen aanrader voor mensen in een relatiecrisis, maar wel voor anderen die een vlotte realistische pageturner willen lezen
February 18, 2010
This book is trying to be darkly funny throughout and almost never succeeds. More importantly, way too much of the book takes place in the heads of its two main characters rather than in dialogue or in them living life. I'm sure that was sort of the point, and the one positive of this book is how well Kalfus paints a portrait of modern self-obsession, but he does it at the expense of everything else. There's a real lack of story. The reviews of this book are all glowing, though, so maybe fiction truly is wasted on me.
July 26, 2009
9/11 and the Iraq war serve as the setting for a black comedy about a divorce. 2 solipsistic New Yorkers are calling it quits, and parallels are drawn with the state of the country. Initially, this works very well, but - No spoilers - it ends with a bizarre scene that cheapens the whole. While there were very funny moments - overall, it was a whimper. I don't need to find characters sympathetic, but it is hard to stay engaged when they are so very pathetic.
33/52/2009
33/52/2009
July 5, 2007
The protagonists were so horribly vile I could barely bring myself to finish this book.
Obviously it's possible to write well about obnoxious people, but don't look for good writing here. And aspects of the plot were frankly ludicrous.
A dreadful book about dreadful people. Save your money and your time.
Obviously it's possible to write well about obnoxious people, but don't look for good writing here. And aspects of the plot were frankly ludicrous.
A dreadful book about dreadful people. Save your money and your time.
October 13, 2008
It's hard for me to give this book only three stars because I would have given the first half five. Somewhere in the middle I lost interest and by the end I was discouraged. It's about the best three star book you'll ever read and I would recommend it to most people, but not if you want something full of hope and cheer. Dark, dark and funny. Very funny. Until it isn't funny.
January 27, 2009
Pretty dreadful, although it starts from a good premise - a husband and wife who hate each other believe that each has been killed in the 9/11 attacks. It's all downhill from there.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 225 reviews
Can't find what you're looking for?
Get help and learn more about the design.