What do you think?
Rate this book
The Holocaust
Kaddish pour l'enfant qui ne na卯tra pas
C'est pour l'enfant auquel il n'a jamais voulu donner naissance qu'Imre Kert茅sz prononce ici le kaddish - la pri猫re des morts de la religion juive. D'une densit茅 et d'une v茅h茅mence qui font songer 脿 Thomas Bernhard, ce monologue int茅rieur est aussi le r茅cit d'une existence confisqu茅e par le souvenir de la trag茅die concentrationnaire. La vie d'Imre Kert茅sz, qui connut la d茅portation 脿 Auschwitz et Buchenwald, est litt茅ralement lac茅r茅e par le sentiment de l'exil int茅rieur que renforcent les conditions de la vie intellectuelle et quotidienne de la Hongrie d'avant 1989.
Prof茅r茅e du fond de la plus extr锚me souffrance, cette magnifique oraison fun猫bre affirme l'impossibilit茅 d'assumer le don de la vie dans un monde d茅finitivement traumatis茅 par l'Holocauste. Ce que pleure le narrateur, ce n'est pas seulement " l'enfant qui ne na卯tra pas " c'est l'humanit茅 tout enti猫re.
Prof茅r茅e du fond de la plus extr锚me souffrance, cette magnifique oraison fun猫bre affirme l'impossibilit茅 d'assumer le don de la vie dans un monde d茅finitivement traumatis茅 par l'Holocauste. Ce que pleure le narrateur, ce n'est pas seulement " l'enfant qui ne na卯tra pas " c'est l'humanit茅 tout enti猫re.
157 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1990
103 people are currently reading
3,011 people want to read
About the author
Imre Kert茅sz
72听books367听followersBorn in Budapest in 1929, during World War II Imre Kert茅sz was imprisoned at Auschwitz in 1944 and later at Buchenwald. After the war and repatriation, Kert茅sz soon ended his brief career as a journalist and turned to translation, specializing in German language works. He later emigrated to Berlin. Kert茅sz was awarded the Nobel Prize for literature in 2002 for "writing that upholds the fragile experience of the individual against the barbaric arbitrariness of history".
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 209 reviews
October 2, 2016
Our unnamed writer/translator writes to his unborn child, a child he unequivocally refused to bring into this world, an astounding NO the answer he gave to his then wife when she asked for a child. A man who tries very hard to explain his thoughts, his rationality about his decision to not father a child. A man who had been imprisoned, like the author himself, in Auschwitz which left him with a great deal survivor guilt, and trying to make sense of a world that would allow something like this to happen, even exist.
This is a difficult book to read, it is a stream of consciousness novel, thoughts coming quickly and often circuitous. There is so many thoughts in this book, I reread sections again and again, and also read this with two other group friends and despite their added insights still do not feel I have a firm grasp on everything meant to be conveyed. At times I felt the words were angry, almost flung at me, his torment, his regret, his longing, filling the pages. His need to keep writing just to feel as if he exists, his trying to explain the events that were in place, people's apathy, that allowed the Holocaust to destroy so much.
I originally rated this a three, but have upped it to four because I find I can't quite get it out of my mind. It is important to realize that the author was imprisoned in both Auschwitz and then Buchenwald so this I believe is an autobiographical novel.
This is a difficult book to read, it is a stream of consciousness novel, thoughts coming quickly and often circuitous. There is so many thoughts in this book, I reread sections again and again, and also read this with two other group friends and despite their added insights still do not feel I have a firm grasp on everything meant to be conveyed. At times I felt the words were angry, almost flung at me, his torment, his regret, his longing, filling the pages. His need to keep writing just to feel as if he exists, his trying to explain the events that were in place, people's apathy, that allowed the Holocaust to destroy so much.
I originally rated this a three, but have upped it to four because I find I can't quite get it out of my mind. It is important to realize that the author was imprisoned in both Auschwitz and then Buchenwald so this I believe is an autobiographical novel.
January 11, 2023
"...mert m谩r r茅g nem t枚rekszem arra, hogy 煤gymond, 枚sszhangban 茅ljek az emberekkel, a term茅szettel, vagy ak谩r csak 枚nmagammal is, mi t枚bb, ebben egyenesen valami erk枚lcsi nyomort l谩tn茅k, valami undor铆t贸 perverzit谩st, mint egy 枚dip谩lis viszonyban vagy k茅t r煤t testv茅r k枚zti v茅rfert艖z茅sben."
Az jutott eszembe, hogy ha Kert茅sz elbesz茅l艖je t煤l is 茅lte a holokausztot, az bev茅gezte rajta a munk谩t. Ha nem is vette el az 茅let茅t, de elvette annak bizonyoss谩g谩t, hogy az 茅let lehets茅ges. Hogy van m贸d j谩rni-kelni, emberekhez kapcsol贸dni, nagy leveg艖t venni, lenni csak 煤gy, an茅lk眉l, hogy valamibe bele k茅ne temetkezn眉nk, felejt艖k茅nt. A l茅t teh谩t nem m谩s, csak evol煤ci贸s vakv谩g谩ny, a biol贸gia 茅rtelmetlen vargabet疟je, legjobb esetben is csak cigarettasz眉net a semmiben. A ritmikus "Nem", amivel az elbesz茅l艖 kimondja a maga megfellebbezhetetlen 铆t茅let茅t, ilyen 茅rtelemben a lehet艖 legradik谩lisabb szabads谩gki谩ltv谩ny, mert azt 谩ll铆tja, az embernek szabads谩g谩ban 谩ll t谩vol maradni mindent艖l - de t谩vol maradni mindent艖l azt jelenti, hogy a semmibe vetj眉k magunkat.
R茅miszt艖ek a kert茅szi konzekvenci谩k. Ugyanakkor a kert茅szi mondatok meg gy枚ny枚r疟ek: t枚rekszenek a val贸s谩g r茅smentes kit枚lt茅s茅re, arra, hogy a gondolatokat addig ismeretlen pontoss谩ggal ragadj谩k meg. Nem 煤gy t枚rleszkedik l谩b谩hoz a magyar nyelv, mint mondjuk Esterh谩zy茅hoz - a nyelv itt ink谩bb eszk枚zszer疟, amib艖l egy utol茅rhetetlen mester form谩l 茅pp valami hib谩tlan t谩rgyat. Nem tudom nem b谩mulni ezt a k枚tetet, meg egy谩ltal谩n: Kert茅szt. De 谩ldom a Magass谩gost, hogy 铆r贸 lett, nem pedig 茅letvezet茅si coach.
Az jutott eszembe, hogy ha Kert茅sz elbesz茅l艖je t煤l is 茅lte a holokausztot, az bev茅gezte rajta a munk谩t. Ha nem is vette el az 茅let茅t, de elvette annak bizonyoss谩g谩t, hogy az 茅let lehets茅ges. Hogy van m贸d j谩rni-kelni, emberekhez kapcsol贸dni, nagy leveg艖t venni, lenni csak 煤gy, an茅lk眉l, hogy valamibe bele k茅ne temetkezn眉nk, felejt艖k茅nt. A l茅t teh谩t nem m谩s, csak evol煤ci贸s vakv谩g谩ny, a biol贸gia 茅rtelmetlen vargabet疟je, legjobb esetben is csak cigarettasz眉net a semmiben. A ritmikus "Nem", amivel az elbesz茅l艖 kimondja a maga megfellebbezhetetlen 铆t茅let茅t, ilyen 茅rtelemben a lehet艖 legradik谩lisabb szabads谩gki谩ltv谩ny, mert azt 谩ll铆tja, az embernek szabads谩g谩ban 谩ll t谩vol maradni mindent艖l - de t谩vol maradni mindent艖l azt jelenti, hogy a semmibe vetj眉k magunkat.
R茅miszt艖ek a kert茅szi konzekvenci谩k. Ugyanakkor a kert茅szi mondatok meg gy枚ny枚r疟ek: t枚rekszenek a val贸s谩g r茅smentes kit枚lt茅s茅re, arra, hogy a gondolatokat addig ismeretlen pontoss谩ggal ragadj谩k meg. Nem 煤gy t枚rleszkedik l谩b谩hoz a magyar nyelv, mint mondjuk Esterh谩zy茅hoz - a nyelv itt ink谩bb eszk枚zszer疟, amib艖l egy utol茅rhetetlen mester form谩l 茅pp valami hib谩tlan t谩rgyat. Nem tudom nem b谩mulni ezt a k枚tetet, meg egy谩ltal谩n: Kert茅szt. De 谩ldom a Magass谩gost, hogy 铆r贸 lett, nem pedig 茅letvezet茅si coach.
April 7, 2017
A great, short, dense, post-Holocaust novel by Kert茅sz, who probably didn't win the Nobel Prize solely on this one's strength. I've only read his Detective Story (by a different translator) and should soon at least get to , so I'm not sure how this fits among his other novels, but it feels very real as it digresses, loops back on itself, repeats images (a bald woman in a dress in front of a mirror [what he thinks about when he thinks about his so-called Jewishness]; writing as digging a grave in the air he was meant to be buried in [alluding to gas chambers at Auschwitz, which the author/narrator survived]), not like Bernhard although Bernhard is mentioned at one point, not a single paragraph though it feels like one. Questions what his sense of Jewishness really means, contradicts or destructs sentiments like "Auschwitz cannot be explained," realizes that he must work to live and work sets him free into what's essentially a prison of melancholy and pain, an existence that denies life, the only existence possible for him, which ultimately undermines his marriage to a woman who chooses life and children. "A life lived happily is a life lived mutely, I wrote. It turned out that to write about life means to think about life, to think about life is to question it, and the only one to question the element of his life is one suffocated by it or feeling out of place for one reason or another. It turns out, I don't write to find joy; on the contrary, it turns out, I seek pain, the sharper the better, bordering on the unbearable sort, quite probably because pain is truth, and the answer to the question of what constitutes truth is quite simple, I wrote: truth is what consumes." Long, semi-colon replete sentences. An approach that follows its instinct or its anti-instinct. Repeats "so to say" a lot and every time it distracted me since it seems like people say "so to speak." Again, as with Detective Story (just re-read my review), felt like the translation was a bit wonky at times (interesting that I sensed something off at times with different translators -- maybe they're both maintaining loyalty to occasional wonkiness in the author's prose?). A few typos in my edition. Either I read the last ten pages poorly or the last ten pages when he reveals the end and the aftermath of his marriage didn't quite hold my attention as some of the previous pages had, but I read them in bed super-tired and so I probably failed them. Will try to re-read (I'm thinking about a year of re-reading starting May 1 to celebrate my 10-year anniversary of writing reviews on here). The sort of short dense real hefty novel I love.
September 24, 2023
A unique and chilling testimony of surviving Auschwitz. Ambiguously fictional or biographical, over 95 pages with no chapters or sections and only a few paragraph breaks, the first person narrator is a writer and literary translator who paints the portrait of his blighted life.
Working backward from the present while walking in the woods with a colleague, he mines his memories to open his stunted lonely life to our perusal. Hard-to-grasp mile markers or way finders at times, wending our way through the pages, we鈥檒l occasionally come to stunning images and blossoming understanding. His life is divided into parts, including his 鈥渞ental life鈥� where he owns nothing and all is tentative and temporary; his marriage, his childhood. His Jewishness pervades it all though he doesn鈥檛 feel Jewish, wasn鈥檛 raised Jewish nor even understands what it means. He has only a horrible memory of visiting an old Polish aunt that defines it for him - her sitting bald in a red robe before a mirror in a dark back bedroom, and his father laughing at him for not understanding. His work as a literary translator stands for his stunted ability to create.
In reverse chronology, we go through his marriage and the apparently brief attempt at love and intimacy, happiness, even the effort to collaborate for a new book. But his spirit resists and he is unable to let go or free himself to be vulnerable in the way intimacy requires.
Little in his life sets him up for love. His parents divorced when he was 5, when he was sent to boarding school, where rules he had to live by made no sense but affected him anyway, which rolled right into what he experienced in Auschwitz, including hunger and tyranny of the people in charge. You almost nod your head when he mentions he heard the director of the boarding school disappeared into the crematoriums.
It鈥檚 not very readable and it鈥檚 slow going, most of the 30 or so paragraph offsets are deployed with 鈥淣o!鈥� 鈥� a cry against life, but it鈥檚 elegiac and powerful and provokes deep pity, understanding and sorrow.
Working backward from the present while walking in the woods with a colleague, he mines his memories to open his stunted lonely life to our perusal. Hard-to-grasp mile markers or way finders at times, wending our way through the pages, we鈥檒l occasionally come to stunning images and blossoming understanding. His life is divided into parts, including his 鈥渞ental life鈥� where he owns nothing and all is tentative and temporary; his marriage, his childhood. His Jewishness pervades it all though he doesn鈥檛 feel Jewish, wasn鈥檛 raised Jewish nor even understands what it means. He has only a horrible memory of visiting an old Polish aunt that defines it for him - her sitting bald in a red robe before a mirror in a dark back bedroom, and his father laughing at him for not understanding. His work as a literary translator stands for his stunted ability to create.
In reverse chronology, we go through his marriage and the apparently brief attempt at love and intimacy, happiness, even the effort to collaborate for a new book. But his spirit resists and he is unable to let go or free himself to be vulnerable in the way intimacy requires.
Little in his life sets him up for love. His parents divorced when he was 5, when he was sent to boarding school, where rules he had to live by made no sense but affected him anyway, which rolled right into what he experienced in Auschwitz, including hunger and tyranny of the people in charge. You almost nod your head when he mentions he heard the director of the boarding school disappeared into the crematoriums.
It鈥檚 not very readable and it鈥檚 slow going, most of the 30 or so paragraph offsets are deployed with 鈥淣o!鈥� 鈥� a cry against life, but it鈥檚 elegiac and powerful and provokes deep pity, understanding and sorrow.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
November 2, 2017
"V峄� Auschwitz kh么ng c贸 l峄漣 gi岷 th铆ch鈥�
N峄梚 谩m 岷h kinh ho脿ng v峄� Auschwitz ch峄� v峄弉 v岷筺 trong m峄檛 c芒u 岷 nh瓢ng c岷� t谩c ph岷﹎ l脿 m峄檛 qu谩 tr矛nh 膽岷 tranh v峄沬 ch铆nh m矛nh c峄 t谩c gi岷�, m峄檛 ng瓢峄漣 t峄玭g s峄憂g trong nh峄痭g tr岷 t岷璸 trung kh岷痗 nghi峄噒 v脿 man r峄� c峄 ph谩t x铆t 膼峄ヽ.
N峄梚 膽au, qu谩 kh峄� 膽au th瓢啤ng 岷 m峄檛 l岷 n峄痑 r峄� m谩u khi t谩c gi岷� 膽岷穞 b煤t xu峄憂g v脿 vi岷縯 ch煤ng th脿nh c芒u ch峄�...
P.S: R岷 mu峄憂 t矛m s谩ch 膽峄� 膽峄峜 l岷 m峄檛 l岷 n峄痑.
N峄梚 谩m 岷h kinh ho脿ng v峄� Auschwitz ch峄� v峄弉 v岷筺 trong m峄檛 c芒u 岷 nh瓢ng c岷� t谩c ph岷﹎ l脿 m峄檛 qu谩 tr矛nh 膽岷 tranh v峄沬 ch铆nh m矛nh c峄 t谩c gi岷�, m峄檛 ng瓢峄漣 t峄玭g s峄憂g trong nh峄痭g tr岷 t岷璸 trung kh岷痗 nghi峄噒 v脿 man r峄� c峄 ph谩t x铆t 膼峄ヽ.
N峄梚 膽au, qu谩 kh峄� 膽au th瓢啤ng 岷 m峄檛 l岷 n峄痑 r峄� m谩u khi t谩c gi岷� 膽岷穞 b煤t xu峄憂g v脿 vi岷縯 ch煤ng th脿nh c芒u ch峄�...
P.S: R岷 mu峄憂 t矛m s谩ch 膽峄� 膽峄峜 l岷 m峄檛 l岷 n峄痑.
December 22, 2008
a great and dark autobiographical book, speaking impossible truths with brazen and an often almost obscene courage... a courage so courageous it becomes obscene.
echoing bernhard -- whom kertesz has translated -- this is a great monologue of negation and destruction, which nonetheless (hopelessly) creates. speaking about the one thing that saved him ("albeit it saved me for the sake of destruction"), i.e. his work, kertesz writes, "In those years I recognized my life for what it was: as a fact on the one hand and as a spiritual form on the other, or, more precisely, the spiritual form of the survival instinct that no longer can survive, doesn't want to survive, and probably is no longer capable of survival, but one that still and because of it all demands its own, that is to say, its own formation like a rounded glass-hard object so that it could continue to exist, no matter why, no matter for whom--for everyone and no one..." (94).
also, to mention: some reviews i read somewhere favored the wilkinson translation over the wilson's. because of this i picked up both to compare (after starting with the wilson's)... even if kertesz himself seems to prefer the wilkinson (perhaps because this more recent, post nobel-winning translation is being done by a larger house), the wilson's was to me the far better translation, much more readable, and one that seemed to capture the book's bravura and darkness and humor with much more panache. of course i don't speak hungarian so maybe i'm wrong, but a little research has at least this agreeing opinion:
from
Kert茅sz鈥檚 early novels exist in two English translations: Tim Wilkinson, a British expatriate in Budapest and translator of both fictions under review, retranslated two books for Knopf that had earlier been translated by Christopher C. Wilson and Katharina M. Wilson and published by Northwestern University Press in the days before the author鈥檚 laureate and fame. Kert茅sz himself is said to approve of Wilkinson鈥檚 translations, or at least to disapprove of the Wilsons鈥�, telling The Journal News: 鈥淚 really tried to protest against the first translations, but I found complete rejection. The publisher was not willing to do new translations. It was a really bad feeling. It was as if you had a very sane character who has a rendezvous with the reader and the person who shows up is basically a real jerk, with a stammer, bad breath and a foul mouth.鈥�
Ladies and gentlemen of the jury of those of us who care about translation 鈥� this is a case of an author having to be saved from himself, or from his enthusiasm at being retranslated, at interest being breathed anew into his work. 鈥淔ateless鈥� by the Wilsons is every word as effective as Wilkinson鈥檚 鈥淔atelessness,鈥� and 鈥淜addish鈥� I would reread in the Northwestern translation (titled 鈥淜addish for a Child Not Born鈥�), which called upon the example of Austrian writer Thomas Bernhard 鈥� an unavoidable influence, whom Kert茅sz has translated 鈥� without burying the text in received style or homage.
While the Wilsons are guilty of egregious sins of omission, they served their Muir roles with selflessness (husband and wife Edwin and Willa Muir being the first, though flawed, translators of Kafka), having Englished an uncompromising writer of inaccessible Europe relatively early and well. As for Wilkinson, one does not know what poetry Kert茅sz reads into his prose. If Wilkinson is a good translator, he鈥檚 a middling writer. He knows Hungarian, he must, but he hasn鈥檛 much art in his native English, which is paramount for a prose as spare as Kert茅sz鈥檚, in which every word, every comma, counts.
from
echoing bernhard -- whom kertesz has translated -- this is a great monologue of negation and destruction, which nonetheless (hopelessly) creates. speaking about the one thing that saved him ("albeit it saved me for the sake of destruction"), i.e. his work, kertesz writes, "In those years I recognized my life for what it was: as a fact on the one hand and as a spiritual form on the other, or, more precisely, the spiritual form of the survival instinct that no longer can survive, doesn't want to survive, and probably is no longer capable of survival, but one that still and because of it all demands its own, that is to say, its own formation like a rounded glass-hard object so that it could continue to exist, no matter why, no matter for whom--for everyone and no one..." (94).
also, to mention: some reviews i read somewhere favored the wilkinson translation over the wilson's. because of this i picked up both to compare (after starting with the wilson's)... even if kertesz himself seems to prefer the wilkinson (perhaps because this more recent, post nobel-winning translation is being done by a larger house), the wilson's was to me the far better translation, much more readable, and one that seemed to capture the book's bravura and darkness and humor with much more panache. of course i don't speak hungarian so maybe i'm wrong, but a little research has at least this agreeing opinion:
from
Kert茅sz鈥檚 early novels exist in two English translations: Tim Wilkinson, a British expatriate in Budapest and translator of both fictions under review, retranslated two books for Knopf that had earlier been translated by Christopher C. Wilson and Katharina M. Wilson and published by Northwestern University Press in the days before the author鈥檚 laureate and fame. Kert茅sz himself is said to approve of Wilkinson鈥檚 translations, or at least to disapprove of the Wilsons鈥�, telling The Journal News: 鈥淚 really tried to protest against the first translations, but I found complete rejection. The publisher was not willing to do new translations. It was a really bad feeling. It was as if you had a very sane character who has a rendezvous with the reader and the person who shows up is basically a real jerk, with a stammer, bad breath and a foul mouth.鈥�
Ladies and gentlemen of the jury of those of us who care about translation 鈥� this is a case of an author having to be saved from himself, or from his enthusiasm at being retranslated, at interest being breathed anew into his work. 鈥淔ateless鈥� by the Wilsons is every word as effective as Wilkinson鈥檚 鈥淔atelessness,鈥� and 鈥淜addish鈥� I would reread in the Northwestern translation (titled 鈥淜addish for a Child Not Born鈥�), which called upon the example of Austrian writer Thomas Bernhard 鈥� an unavoidable influence, whom Kert茅sz has translated 鈥� without burying the text in received style or homage.
While the Wilsons are guilty of egregious sins of omission, they served their Muir roles with selflessness (husband and wife Edwin and Willa Muir being the first, though flawed, translators of Kafka), having Englished an uncompromising writer of inaccessible Europe relatively early and well. As for Wilkinson, one does not know what poetry Kert茅sz reads into his prose. If Wilkinson is a good translator, he鈥檚 a middling writer. He knows Hungarian, he must, but he hasn鈥檛 much art in his native English, which is paramount for a prose as spare as Kert茅sz鈥檚, in which every word, every comma, counts.
from
September 29, 2016
September 2016
Reading this for a second time, now as a group read. The discussion is thought provoking and is enhancing my understanding of the book.
Finished for a second time- there ar a lot of layers to the book. Beautiful and moving writing, and I'll probably read it another time at some stage.
April 2016
I found this book difficult, both emotionally and because its style is complicated. I intend to re-read it at some stage, especially if I can do this as a readalong, so that I have people to discuss with on the way.
Available on Openlibrary.
Reading this for a second time, now as a group read. The discussion is thought provoking and is enhancing my understanding of the book.
Finished for a second time- there ar a lot of layers to the book. Beautiful and moving writing, and I'll probably read it another time at some stage.
April 2016
I found this book difficult, both emotionally and because its style is complicated. I intend to re-read it at some stage, especially if I can do this as a readalong, so that I have people to discuss with on the way.
Available on Openlibrary.
December 19, 2020
Nobel 枚d眉ll眉 Macar yazar Imre Kertesz鈥檛en okudu臒um 3鈥櫭糿c眉 kitap oldu 鈥楧o臒mayacak 脟ocuk 陌莽in Dua鈥�... Auschwitz y眉k眉n眉 s谋rt谋nda ta艧谋yan B.鈥檔in, do臒mayacak 莽ocu臒una monologlar谋n谋 okuyoruz kitapta. Beyin h眉crelerini canland谋ran, okumas谋 olduk莽a zor bir metindi. Bir 鈥楰adersizlik鈥� kadar vurucu olmasa da de臒indi臒i m眉him konular -枚zellikle de var olma meselesi- ve yazar谋n Thomas Bernhard gibi c眉mlelerinden f谋艧k谋ran zekas谋 m眉thi艧ti. Kertesz鈥檒e tan谋艧ma kitab谋 asla de臒il bu kitap. Ama onun neden Nobel kazand谋臒谋na dair 枚nemli bir ipucu...
August 31, 2018
Stream-of-consciousness is a beautiful literary technique... when used appropriately. When used inappropriately, it is tedious, superfluous, and (this is a very dangerous 'and') obfuscating. Enter Kert茅sz's Kaddish for an Unborn Child, guilty of all three symptoms. The story premise is interesting enough, which is why I managed to reach halfway through this novella, but there are limits to my patience. I can see no justifiable reason why this style was adopted because at no point do I have the feeling of someone suffering say: Alzheimer's, or trauma while reading the novella. Unlike say Dostoevsky's protagonist in Notes of the Underground or Hamsun's protagonist in Hunger, where stream-of-consciousness is justifiable (PTSD and starvation), Kert茅sz's protagonist here is retelling a story of why he does not want a child. A powerful and intriguing premise, and certainly being a survivor of Aushwitz most likely implies PTSD, but the setup at the start is never clear to establish this unreliable narrator. The way in which this literary technique is abused here muddles the essence of the content, and there is no underlying basis for a reader to invest the time needed to extract the information unless one reads the cover blurb first鈥攕urely not the way to go about it, right?
February 20, 2012
While I had planned to read only twenty pages today because the books so dense, I found myself so drawn into the book that I had to finish almost all of it in one burst. I realized after a few pages that a paragraph hadn't ended and so I naturally wanted to see when it would so I could put the book down and go do something else. I believe it lasted twenty pages. So I then looked for a logical stopping point but couldn't find one. And one thing led to another and I finished it as if in a dream. The intensity of the book so overwhelmed me that I couldn't stop reading.
This was one of the strangest, densest, bravest, and most brilliant and beautiful things I've ever read.
This was one of the strangest, densest, bravest, and most brilliant and beautiful things I've ever read.
August 21, 2021
El茅gg茅 leny疟g枚z艖 k枚nyv ez, nem utols贸sorban mivel kider眉l sz谩momra ebb艖l, hogy amit saj谩t priv谩t 茅letprobl茅m谩mnak nem-ismerek, vagyis amivel ismerkedem egy ideje, mondjuk: eg茅sz 茅letemben, az m谩soknak (na j贸, fikt铆v embereknek, de h谩t ki nem az ugye) is nemhogy ismer艖s terepe, de szinte kult煤r谩ja, vagy ann谩l valami t枚bb, net谩n kevesebb. 脥gy meg铆rni az 茅letnek az 艖 probl茅m谩j谩t, problematik谩j谩t, vagyis 铆gy elolvasni, azzal is j谩r, hogy ennek a k枚nyvnek nem lehet (茅s ezt m谩r az elej茅n 茅reztem) eleje, 茅s a v茅get 茅r茅s茅t sem igaz谩n lehet v茅g茅nek tekinteni, mert ez az eg茅sz ahhoz t煤lmozg谩sos 茅s am煤gy sem line谩ris szerkezet疟, hogy csak 煤gy elkezd艖dj枚n vagy v茅get 茅rjen. (Nyugalom, ez a k枚nyv茅rt茅kel茅s nem ilyen.)
A k枚nyvnek a 鈥� mondjuk 铆gy 鈥� tartalm谩r贸l nem is tudom mit 铆rjak, tal谩n hogy egy nagyon k枚zeli 茅s romantikus t枚rt茅netnek olvastam a cselekm茅nyt 茅s ahhoz k枚t艖d艖 bonyodalmat, 茅s ijeszt艖en, ugyanakkor megnyugtat贸an ismer艖s az eg茅sz 煤gy ahogy van, 谩t贸l cettig, t煤l sok minden van a hely茅n vagy ker眉lt a hely茅re (vagy nyilv谩n oda fog ker眉lni, vagy hely ker眉l majd a mindenek fennmarad贸, viszonylag mell茅kesnek hat贸 halmaz谩ra) ahhoz, hogy ne a magam茅nak tekintsem, d枚bbenetes, lehetetlen m贸don.
A szerkezete a c铆mhez m茅rhet艖en nem is olvas贸i mint ink谩bb haszn谩lati sz枚vegnek hat, k枚rk枚r枚s, refr茅nekkel 茅s halmoz谩sokkal, ism茅tl艖d艖 茅s vari谩l贸d贸, mint az invok谩lt Kaddis vagy b谩rmilyen hasonl贸 ritu谩lis sz枚veg, ami spir谩lisan ny铆lik kifel茅, minduntalan visszat茅r a m谩r elhangzottakhoz 茅s minduntalan 谩trendezi mag谩t az ism茅tl艖d茅s茅ben annyira, hogy valami m谩st, valami v谩ltoz谩st, valami kiboml贸t sejtessen fel. Kompon谩lt egy szerkezet, 茅s egy谩ltal谩n nem 煤gy m疟k枚dik, ahogyan mondjuk egy j贸l meg铆rt sztorit贸l v谩rhatn谩nk. Ez egy m谩sik 谩llatfajta. Rokonok vagyunk, azt hiszem.
脷jra lesz olvasva (vagyis m谩r most olyan, mintha m谩r 煤jra lett volna olvasva, vagyis f枚l枚sleges ilyen 茅rtelemben 煤jraolvasni, de ez nem kiz谩r贸 ok, csak el茅gg茅 k眉l枚n枚s.) Gondolta volna a fene, hogy a Kert茅sz Imre ennyire 茅rdekes lesz nekem, azt hittem a Sorstalans谩g ok茅 az a mesterm疟ve 茅s akkor t茅ma letudva, k枚zben nem dehogy, s艖t.
V茅gezet眉l de ezt t茅nyleg csak 煤gy mondom : milyen bizarr lenne, ha ezt a k枚nyvet mindenki elolvasn谩 茅s azt k茅pzeln茅, hogy 茅rti, vagy legal谩bbis t枚bbnyire 茅rti, ahogy 茅n is ezt k茅pzelem 鈥� azt hiszem teljesen m谩s lenne a vil谩g amiben 茅lek; mondhatn谩nk ezt b谩rmilyen nagy benyom谩st tett k枚nyvr艖l, de itt t茅nyleg egy谩ltal谩ban nem ezt mondom.
2021, 煤jraolvas谩s.
Id茅n 茅pp az utols贸 Knausgaard k枚tet, a Harcok el艖tt olvastam el 煤jra a Kaddist. Nem kev茅sb茅 mesteri sz枚veg茅lm茅ny, 茅s v谩ratlanul (?) 煤jra茅lette velem, legal谩b helyenk茅nt, az els艖 olvas谩skori 茅lethelyzetem. Ezen k铆v眉l, vagyis ezzel egy眉tt, pedig perspekt铆v谩ba ker眉lt, szinte 茅reztette, vagyis 茅n magammal az olvas谩som 谩ltal, hogy mennyire - hogy valamennyire - t煤l vagyok azon. Klasszikusokat musz谩j 煤jraolvasni, n茅ha.
A k枚nyvnek a 鈥� mondjuk 铆gy 鈥� tartalm谩r贸l nem is tudom mit 铆rjak, tal谩n hogy egy nagyon k枚zeli 茅s romantikus t枚rt茅netnek olvastam a cselekm茅nyt 茅s ahhoz k枚t艖d艖 bonyodalmat, 茅s ijeszt艖en, ugyanakkor megnyugtat贸an ismer艖s az eg茅sz 煤gy ahogy van, 谩t贸l cettig, t煤l sok minden van a hely茅n vagy ker眉lt a hely茅re (vagy nyilv谩n oda fog ker眉lni, vagy hely ker眉l majd a mindenek fennmarad贸, viszonylag mell茅kesnek hat贸 halmaz谩ra) ahhoz, hogy ne a magam茅nak tekintsem, d枚bbenetes, lehetetlen m贸don.
A szerkezete a c铆mhez m茅rhet艖en nem is olvas贸i mint ink谩bb haszn谩lati sz枚vegnek hat, k枚rk枚r枚s, refr茅nekkel 茅s halmoz谩sokkal, ism茅tl艖d艖 茅s vari谩l贸d贸, mint az invok谩lt Kaddis vagy b谩rmilyen hasonl贸 ritu谩lis sz枚veg, ami spir谩lisan ny铆lik kifel茅, minduntalan visszat茅r a m谩r elhangzottakhoz 茅s minduntalan 谩trendezi mag谩t az ism茅tl艖d茅s茅ben annyira, hogy valami m谩st, valami v谩ltoz谩st, valami kiboml贸t sejtessen fel. Kompon谩lt egy szerkezet, 茅s egy谩ltal谩n nem 煤gy m疟k枚dik, ahogyan mondjuk egy j贸l meg铆rt sztorit贸l v谩rhatn谩nk. Ez egy m谩sik 谩llatfajta. Rokonok vagyunk, azt hiszem.
脷jra lesz olvasva (vagyis m谩r most olyan, mintha m谩r 煤jra lett volna olvasva, vagyis f枚l枚sleges ilyen 茅rtelemben 煤jraolvasni, de ez nem kiz谩r贸 ok, csak el茅gg茅 k眉l枚n枚s.) Gondolta volna a fene, hogy a Kert茅sz Imre ennyire 茅rdekes lesz nekem, azt hittem a Sorstalans谩g ok茅 az a mesterm疟ve 茅s akkor t茅ma letudva, k枚zben nem dehogy, s艖t.
V茅gezet眉l de ezt t茅nyleg csak 煤gy mondom : milyen bizarr lenne, ha ezt a k枚nyvet mindenki elolvasn谩 茅s azt k茅pzeln茅, hogy 茅rti, vagy legal谩bbis t枚bbnyire 茅rti, ahogy 茅n is ezt k茅pzelem 鈥� azt hiszem teljesen m谩s lenne a vil谩g amiben 茅lek; mondhatn谩nk ezt b谩rmilyen nagy benyom谩st tett k枚nyvr艖l, de itt t茅nyleg egy谩ltal谩ban nem ezt mondom.
2021, 煤jraolvas谩s.
Id茅n 茅pp az utols贸 Knausgaard k枚tet, a Harcok el艖tt olvastam el 煤jra a Kaddist. Nem kev茅sb茅 mesteri sz枚veg茅lm茅ny, 茅s v谩ratlanul (?) 煤jra茅lette velem, legal谩b helyenk茅nt, az els艖 olvas谩skori 茅lethelyzetem. Ezen k铆v眉l, vagyis ezzel egy眉tt, pedig perspekt铆v谩ba ker眉lt, szinte 茅reztette, vagyis 茅n magammal az olvas谩som 谩ltal, hogy mennyire - hogy valamennyire - t煤l vagyok azon. Klasszikusokat musz谩j 煤jraolvasni, n茅ha.
April 10, 2021
Cartea poate intra 葯i la categoria eseu 葯i la cea de roman. Poate fi citit膬 dintr-un singur foc, cum se spune, pentru c膬 este scris膬 astfel: un bloc unic, f膬r膬 alineat, pu葲in peste o sut膬 de pagini. Volumul este 卯n mare parte autobiografic, scris la persoana 卯nt芒i.
Protagonistul, evreu, fost prizonier la Auschwitz, 卯葯i poveste葯te via葲a, care i se deruleaz膬 卯n fa葲a ochilor 卯ntr-o singur膬 noapte, provocat fiind de o discu葲ie cu un prieten intelectual, filosof, o discu葲ie, deci, filosofic膬.
Totu葯i, acel pretext de la care pleac膬 卯ntreaga confesiune nu este unul de ordin filosofic (de葯i mai apoi va fi dezb膬tut, 卯n paginile c膬r葲ii, ca o problem膬 de natur膬 folosofico-social膬), ci o 卯ntrebare inocent膬 pe care prietenul intelectual i-o adreseaz膬 protagonistului din pur膬 curiozitate, anume dac膬 acesta are copii.
La aceast膬 卯ntrebare vocea narativ膬, personaj principal, r膬spunde tran葯ant: Nu! 脦ntreaga carte va fi construit膬 卯n jurul acestui NU categoric. Singurele d膬葲i 卯n care alineatul va fi folosit, va 卯ncepe cu acest nu, eviden葲iindu-l, repet芒ndu-l 葯i, p芒n膬 la final, clarific芒ndu-l 卯n 卯ntregime.
Protagonistul, evreu, fost prizonier la Auschwitz, 卯葯i poveste葯te via葲a, care i se deruleaz膬 卯n fa葲a ochilor 卯ntr-o singur膬 noapte, provocat fiind de o discu葲ie cu un prieten intelectual, filosof, o discu葲ie, deci, filosofic膬.
Totu葯i, acel pretext de la care pleac膬 卯ntreaga confesiune nu este unul de ordin filosofic (de葯i mai apoi va fi dezb膬tut, 卯n paginile c膬r葲ii, ca o problem膬 de natur膬 folosofico-social膬), ci o 卯ntrebare inocent膬 pe care prietenul intelectual i-o adreseaz膬 protagonistului din pur膬 curiozitate, anume dac膬 acesta are copii.
La aceast膬 卯ntrebare vocea narativ膬, personaj principal, r膬spunde tran葯ant: Nu! 脦ntreaga carte va fi construit膬 卯n jurul acestui NU categoric. Singurele d膬葲i 卯n care alineatul va fi folosit, va 卯ncepe cu acest nu, eviden葲iindu-l, repet芒ndu-l 葯i, p芒n膬 la final, clarific芒ndu-l 卯n 卯ntregime.
October 20, 2016
螚 慰渭慰蟻蠁喂维 蟿慰蠀 苇纬魏蔚喂蟿伪喂 伪魏蟻喂尾蠋蟼 蟽蟿喂蟼 蠀蟺蔚蟻尾慰位喂魏维 渭伪魏蟻慰蟽魏蔚位蔚委蟼 蟺蟻慰蟿维蟽蔚喂蟼, 蟽蟿畏谓 苇位位蔚喂蠄畏 魏蔚蠁伪位伪委蠅谓 魏伪喂 蟺伪蟻伪纬蟻维蠁蠅谓. 螘委谓伪喂 苇谓伪蟼 蟿蟻蠈蟺慰蟼 纬蟻伪蠁萎蟼 蟺慰蠀 蟽蔚 蟽蠀谓蔚蟺伪委蟻谓蔚喂. 螠蔚蟿伪尾伪委谓蔚喂 伪蟺蠈 蟿慰谓 苇谓伪谓 蟽蠀谓蔚喂蟻渭蠈 蟽蟿慰谓 维位位慰谓 伪蟽蟿蟻伪蟺喂伪委伪 魏伪喂 蟽蠀蠂谓维 "蟿慰 蠂维谓蔚喂蟼" 魏伪喂 蔚蟺喂蟽蟿蟻苇蠁蔚喂蟼 蟽蟿畏谓 伪蟻蠂萎 蟿畏蟼 蟺蟻蠈蟿伪蟽畏蟼.
螣 蟽蠀纬纬蟻伪蠁苇伪蟼 渭伪蟼 蟺伪蟻慰蠀蟽喂维味蔚喂 蟿伪 蔚蟽蠋蠄蠀蠂维 蟿慰蠀 魏伪喂 蟿慰 魏蔚谓蟿蟻喂魏蠈 胃苇渭伪 蟿慰蠀 尾喂尾位委慰蠀 蔚委谓伪喂 畏 维蟻谓畏蟽萎 蟿慰蠀 谓伪 伪蟺慰魏蟿萎蟽蔚喂 伪蟺慰纬蠈谓慰蠀蟼. 螚 维蟻谓畏蟽萎 蟿慰蠀, 纬蔚谓喂魏蠈蟿蔚蟻伪, 蟺蟻慰蟼 苇谓伪谓 蟿蠀蟺喂魏蠈 蟿蟻蠈蟺慰 味蠅萎蟼 (未慰蠀位蔚蠉蠅, 尾纬维味蠅 蠂蟻萎渭伪蟿伪, 蔚蟺喂蟿蠀纬蠂维谓蠅 蔚蟺伪纬纬蔚位渭伪蟿喂魏维, 蟺伪谓蟿蟻蔚蠉慰渭伪喂, 魏维谓蠅 蟺伪喂未喂维) 魏喂 伪蠀蟿蠈 蔚蟺蔚喂未萎 蟿伪 蟺伪喂未喂魏维 蟿慰蠀 尾喂蠋渭伪蟿伪, 伪位位维 魏蠀蟻委蠅蟼 蟿慰 螁慰蠀蟽尾喂蟿蟼 魏伪喂 蟿慰 螠蟺慰蠉蠂蔚谓尾伪位谓蟿 蟿慰谓 蟽畏渭维未蔚蠄伪谓.
螣 蟽蠀纬纬蟻伪蠁苇伪蟼 渭伪蟼 蟺伪蟻慰蠀蟽喂维味蔚喂 蟿伪 蔚蟽蠋蠄蠀蠂维 蟿慰蠀 魏伪喂 蟿慰 魏蔚谓蟿蟻喂魏蠈 胃苇渭伪 蟿慰蠀 尾喂尾位委慰蠀 蔚委谓伪喂 畏 维蟻谓畏蟽萎 蟿慰蠀 谓伪 伪蟺慰魏蟿萎蟽蔚喂 伪蟺慰纬蠈谓慰蠀蟼. 螚 维蟻谓畏蟽萎 蟿慰蠀, 纬蔚谓喂魏蠈蟿蔚蟻伪, 蟺蟻慰蟼 苇谓伪谓 蟿蠀蟺喂魏蠈 蟿蟻蠈蟺慰 味蠅萎蟼 (未慰蠀位蔚蠉蠅, 尾纬维味蠅 蠂蟻萎渭伪蟿伪, 蔚蟺喂蟿蠀纬蠂维谓蠅 蔚蟺伪纬纬蔚位渭伪蟿喂魏维, 蟺伪谓蟿蟻蔚蠉慰渭伪喂, 魏维谓蠅 蟺伪喂未喂维) 魏喂 伪蠀蟿蠈 蔚蟺蔚喂未萎 蟿伪 蟺伪喂未喂魏维 蟿慰蠀 尾喂蠋渭伪蟿伪, 伪位位维 魏蠀蟻委蠅蟼 蟿慰 螁慰蠀蟽尾喂蟿蟼 魏伪喂 蟿慰 螠蟺慰蠉蠂蔚谓尾伪位谓蟿 蟿慰谓 蟽畏渭维未蔚蠄伪谓.
April 25, 2016
Ese "隆No!" Con el que empieza el libro es un "No", que atraviesa todo el libro. Una negaci贸n a muchas cosas, a un hijo, empecemos por ah铆. Pero tambi茅n a poder soltar el pasado, un pasado duro y terrible, un pasado que hace a IK, porque de entrada este libro no tiene nada de ficci贸n, o no lo parece. Kert茅sz vivi贸 cosas terribles, y sobrevivi贸 a Auschwitz, pero sus heridas llegan m谩s profundamente, ya que llega a decir que para el estar en el campo de concentraci贸n es una extensi贸n de la educaci贸n que recibi贸 con su padre, y al haber estado en un internado cuando era ni帽o. Al final es una negaci贸n de el Yo. Es un libro dif铆cil, hasta en la manera en c贸mo est谩 escrito, sin pausa, sin p谩rrafos, sin historia. La 煤nica historia es la negaci贸n al hijo, a la ex mujer, que intenta acompa帽arlo, intenta estar, y al final lo deja, por no poder soportar la negaci贸n en la que el vive, a estar mejor.
Porque ella es un elemento importante, as铆 como el escribir. Su trabajo, es un escape, y a la vez donde vive sus neurosis, y desde donde tambi茅n la aleja a ella. Ella llega a mencionarle la posibilidad de ser un escritor "exitoso" y eso lo hace cuestionarse las razones por las que escribe, que no llegan ni de lejos a el tener "茅xito" y ah铆 siente que ella est谩 metiendo la mano en algo en donde no puede, supongo que se siente invadido, por ese instinto de poseer esa libertad en lo que hace, aunque eso es algo que supongo, porque el reacciona mucho a ese comentario que ella le llega a hacer.
Es duro, tiene algo de terrible todo lo que cuenta, es como un libro-mon贸logo contado casi para s铆 mismo, o para el hijo que se neg贸 a tener, porque tiene esa relaci贸n compleja con su propio padre, y porque no quiere imponer a nadie el ser su padre, o el ser jud铆o.
Se siente mucho odio a s铆 mismo, es un libro lleno de tristeza profunda, de horror, de incluso un poco de autodestrucci贸n, pero a la vez s铆, me conmueve, me met铆 en su viaje, y sufr铆 con el.
Porque ella es un elemento importante, as铆 como el escribir. Su trabajo, es un escape, y a la vez donde vive sus neurosis, y desde donde tambi茅n la aleja a ella. Ella llega a mencionarle la posibilidad de ser un escritor "exitoso" y eso lo hace cuestionarse las razones por las que escribe, que no llegan ni de lejos a el tener "茅xito" y ah铆 siente que ella est谩 metiendo la mano en algo en donde no puede, supongo que se siente invadido, por ese instinto de poseer esa libertad en lo que hace, aunque eso es algo que supongo, porque el reacciona mucho a ese comentario que ella le llega a hacer.
Es duro, tiene algo de terrible todo lo que cuenta, es como un libro-mon贸logo contado casi para s铆 mismo, o para el hijo que se neg贸 a tener, porque tiene esa relaci贸n compleja con su propio padre, y porque no quiere imponer a nadie el ser su padre, o el ser jud铆o.
Se siente mucho odio a s铆 mismo, es un libro lleno de tristeza profunda, de horror, de incluso un poco de autodestrucci贸n, pero a la vez s铆, me conmueve, me met铆 en su viaje, y sufr铆 con el.
April 15, 2020
3 Stars
Dear Mr Kertesz,
This text only passed my eyes because of my uni subject, where it is apart of the curriculum, it probably would've made my TBR otherwise. Your novel maybe a whopping 160 pages or so, it packs so much into those pages.
My three stars are not because I found this average, but more so there is so much in this text, that I would need to re-read this over and over to gain further understanding and meaning, it is a text that requires to be slowly read in small doses to able to decipher your intentions.
For my first read through, I struggled to connect to your narrator because of this overload of messaging and meaning. I wasn't able to do it that kind of justice and I feel even if I didn't have the time constraints I am just not that style of reader. The format was a steady stream of consciousness thoughts, which were hard to engage at times and I think add in the fact that the text has been translated from Hungarian to English at times there wasn't this easy sense or reason.
While it was hard work and I was overly disconnected from the narrator, I could feel the disconnect he felt from the world, the disorientation of his place in the world, a world where he was intended to cease to exist (not by his choice) and the insights that had garnered him throughout his life.
Maybe one day I'll give it another read and see how it goes? See if I find it easier? See if I gain some new insights? or See if I can be that reader who can take it slow and steady?...
Today, Tomorrow or Next Week I won't be that reader, so until I am...
Natty
Dear Mr Kertesz,
This text only passed my eyes because of my uni subject, where it is apart of the curriculum, it probably would've made my TBR otherwise. Your novel maybe a whopping 160 pages or so, it packs so much into those pages.
My three stars are not because I found this average, but more so there is so much in this text, that I would need to re-read this over and over to gain further understanding and meaning, it is a text that requires to be slowly read in small doses to able to decipher your intentions.
For my first read through, I struggled to connect to your narrator because of this overload of messaging and meaning. I wasn't able to do it that kind of justice and I feel even if I didn't have the time constraints I am just not that style of reader. The format was a steady stream of consciousness thoughts, which were hard to engage at times and I think add in the fact that the text has been translated from Hungarian to English at times there wasn't this easy sense or reason.
While it was hard work and I was overly disconnected from the narrator, I could feel the disconnect he felt from the world, the disorientation of his place in the world, a world where he was intended to cease to exist (not by his choice) and the insights that had garnered him throughout his life.
Maybe one day I'll give it another read and see how it goes? See if I find it easier? See if I gain some new insights? or See if I can be that reader who can take it slow and steady?...
Today, Tomorrow or Next Week I won't be that reader, so until I am...
Natty
July 11, 2011
Kaddish for a Child Not Born by Imre Kert茅sz is one of a series of four novels which examine the life of a man who survives the Nazi concentration camps of World War II.
If Fatelessness offered a relatively conventional narrative approach, Kaddish for an Unborn Child, written fifteen years later, is anything but. It is a difficult novel of repetition and ambiguity, the narrator acknowledging all his uncertainty, and constantly reminding the reader of the difficulty of exact expression. In many respects, it鈥檚 an artist鈥檚 attempt at public self-flagellation.
Broadly, the novel is a meditation on the narrator's failed marriage, and in particular, his refusal to have children. Identity is fixed firmly to the present perspective, with the narrator constantly reminiscing yet always acknowledging what was to happen: history is fixed, even if, at the points he returns to, anything seemed possible. So he writes repeatedly of the woman he was to marry: "my wife (who at that time was not yet and is now no longer my wife)".
It鈥檚 an interesting text, a (self-) analysis of a state of being that is, in turn, deliberate and emotional, troubled by the inadequacy of the written word (and of human reaction). The author cannot rise above his inadequacies, but can only try to give them expression. As such, it is a jarring read. This is not a fluid narrative, but there is purpose to the careful locutions and the doubling back and emphasis on the contradictory.
It鈥檚 not easy going, and one best reserved when your strength of concentration is high!
If Fatelessness offered a relatively conventional narrative approach, Kaddish for an Unborn Child, written fifteen years later, is anything but. It is a difficult novel of repetition and ambiguity, the narrator acknowledging all his uncertainty, and constantly reminding the reader of the difficulty of exact expression. In many respects, it鈥檚 an artist鈥檚 attempt at public self-flagellation.
Broadly, the novel is a meditation on the narrator's failed marriage, and in particular, his refusal to have children. Identity is fixed firmly to the present perspective, with the narrator constantly reminiscing yet always acknowledging what was to happen: history is fixed, even if, at the points he returns to, anything seemed possible. So he writes repeatedly of the woman he was to marry: "my wife (who at that time was not yet and is now no longer my wife)".
It鈥檚 an interesting text, a (self-) analysis of a state of being that is, in turn, deliberate and emotional, troubled by the inadequacy of the written word (and of human reaction). The author cannot rise above his inadequacies, but can only try to give them expression. As such, it is a jarring read. This is not a fluid narrative, but there is purpose to the careful locutions and the doubling back and emphasis on the contradictory.
It鈥檚 not easy going, and one best reserved when your strength of concentration is high!
April 28, 2013
There were parts, formally and tonally, that reminded me of Ponge's Soap and Dostoevsky's Notes from the Underground. However, the prose in Kaddish feels far less intentional or purposeful than either of those texts it is resembling. While I understand and appreciate what this book is trying to accomplish -- a painfully honest psychological portrait of its author through unmediated stream of consciousness -- for me it falls short aesthetically. The formal structure it seems to be following in the beginning pages -- a constant repetition of a story that builds itself more with each iteration -- is very interesting, but falls apart half way through the text upon which the narrative becomes dense psychobabble, to put it bluntly. This books requires a bit of patience and an enjoyment of unceasing rambling prose, neither of which I possess in great quantity.
January 25, 2013
This piercing unbroken paragraph novella ups the emotional and philosophical ante concerning the Shoah and leaves only scorched earth and tattered memories in its wake. Throughout the work there a number of nods to Bernhard, whereas Kertesz further gilds the homage to the Austrian with trademark recurrences and stilted rhythms. These circumstances extend beyond, of course. The decision reached is also an imperative, one which still bears considerable weight.
August 4, 2016
Kert茅sz is inspired by Thomas Bernhard, but surpasses him. Rarely have the contradictions and unity between domination and freedom been so powerfully realized in a work of fiction. A definitive work of critical holocaust literature, Kaddish draws attention to the tenuous threshold that connects the horrors of Auschwitz to the banal assimilations of everyday life. Absolutely brilliant. One of the greatest books I have ever read.
May 20, 2017
S峄– M岷燦H C峄 R峄狽G C脗U D脌I MI脢N MAN
H峄搃 nh峄�, n岷縰 b岷 ch峄 膽瓢峄 nghe nh峄痭g con chi锚n c峄 Ch煤a 膽峄峜 kinh, m峄檛 n峄梚 s峄� h茫i kh么ng t锚n c峄� ch岷 kh岷痯 ng瓢峄漣 l脿m tui l岷h t贸c g谩y, nh瓢 th峄� v峄玜 b峄� m峄檛 s峄ヽ m岷h v么 h矛nh b峄 v芒y. V矛 h峄� ph谩t ra nh峄痭g 芒m thanh tui th岷痗 m岷痗 li峄噓 n贸 c贸 ph岷 ti岷縩g m岷� 膽岷� - tui 膽茫 ngh末 Ch煤a d岷 h峄� ng么n ng峄� ri锚ng c峄 Ng瓢峄漣. V矛 h峄� 膽峄峜 li峄乶 t霉 t矛 tui kh么ng bi岷縯 n锚n ngh峄� ch峄� n脿o 膽峄� nghe ti岷縫 hay th岷璵 ch铆 膽峄� h峄� h铆t th峄�. V矛, quan tr峄峮g h啤n c岷�, h峄� t岷 n锚n b岷 kh么ng kh铆 d芒ng tr脿n s峄� thi锚ng li锚ng v脿 膽峄ヽ tin.
蚕耻测峄僴 Kinh n脿y khi岷縩 tui c农ng s峄� v岷瓂, s峄� 膽岷縩 ph谩t m峄噒, m峄噒 膽岷縩 ph谩t n岷, n岷 膽岷縩 ph谩t ch峄璱 r峄 b岷 th芒n khi th峄漣 gian g岷 膽芒y to脿n 膽峄峜 ph岷 nh峄痭g quy峄僴 s谩ch ch岷� l么i cu峄憂 g矛 m岷 峄� nh峄痭g l岷 gi峄� trang 膽岷 ti锚n.
膼岷縩 con s峄� 69 r峄搃 nh瓢ng tui kh么ng ch岷痗 (th岷璽 ra l脿 ho脿n to脿n kh么ng) hi峄僽 膽瓢峄 nh峄痭g g矛 膽茫 膽峄峜, ch岷硁g bi岷縯 ph岷 膽岷縩 con s峄� bao nhi锚u m峄沬 g岷穚 膽瓢峄 d岷 ch岷 k岷縯 c芒u ti岷縫 theo, v脿 h啤n h岷縯, ch岷� r玫 t矛nh tr岷g n脿y s岷� c貌n k茅o d脿i 膽岷縩 bao nhi锚u ph岷 c峄 quy峄僴 s谩ch, hay c贸 l岷� 膽岷縩 t岷璶 con s峄� cu峄慽 c农ng n锚n.
Imre tr峄搉g m峄檛 r峄玭g c芒u d脿i mi锚n man trong quy峄僴 Kinh.
C贸 l煤c, tui mu峄憂 qu岷硁g n贸 sang b锚n, ph岷 b峄檌 l貌ng tin d岷玼 c贸 d峄� 膽岷縩 膽芒u quy峄僴 s谩ch c农ng s岷� c贸 膽i峄僲 s谩ng tr瓢峄沜 gi峄� c峄 m矛nh. Nh瓢ng 么ng l脿 t谩c gi岷� 膽o岷 gi岷 Nobel V膬n Ch瓢啤ng. H茫y 膽峄峜 膽i, h茫y c峄� 膽峄峜 膽i! N岷縰 m脿y kh么ng ph霉 h峄 v峄沬 m峄峣 c谩i g岷痭 v峄沬 t铆nh t峄� h脿n l芒m th矛 h茫y v矛 t锚n c峄 quy峄僴 Kinh m脿 膽峄峜. H茫y t矛m ki岷縨 膽i峄乽 m脿y kh么ng th岷 峄� Th瓢 g峄璱 膽峄゛ tr岷� ch瓢a t峄玭g sinh ra c峄 Oriana Fallaci.
Khi ch瓢a 膽岷縩 膽瓢峄 kh煤c cua ti岷縫 theo c峄 r峄玭g c芒u n脿y, tui l岷 膽峄檔g vi锚n m矛nh.
Nh瓢 gi峄� 膽芒y ng峄� ra, 膽峄峜 kinh l脿 nh岷痗 l岷 nh峄痭g l峄漣 r膬n c峄 Ch煤a v峄沬 t峄慶 膽峄� nhanh h啤n b矛nh th瓢峄漬g v脿 l岷穚 l岷 v峄沬 s峄� l岷 c岷 thi岷縯 trong t芒m tr铆 h貌a nh岷璸 v脿 d芒ng hi岷縩, th矛 tui c岷 膽峄峜 nhanh 膽峄� ch贸ng hi峄僽 媒 ngh末a c峄 xu岷 ph谩t 膽i峄僲 么ng mu峄憂 n贸i, hay c贸 khi l脿 c谩i 么ng mu峄憂 n贸i nh瓢ng l岷 kh么ng n岷眒 峄� r峄玭g ch峄� hi峄僴 hi峄噉 tr瓢峄沜 m岷痶, ch峄� kh么ng n锚n ho岷穋 ch瓢a ph岷 l煤c d峄玭g l岷 ph芒n t铆ch t峄玭g c芒u t峄� - th贸i quen 膽峄峜 s谩ch tr瓢峄沜 膽芒y, nguy锚n nh芒n khi岷縩 tui (t岷 nh岷璶) l脿 con m峄峵 mang h峄� r霉a - 膽峄� r峄搃 膽岷縩 cu峄慽 c芒u c农ng qu锚n lu么n 么ng 岷 m峄� 膽岷 膽o岷 v膬n (tui c谩 n贸 kh么ng ph岷 c芒u v膬n, c贸 l岷� 么ng t谩c gi岷� 膽茫 ng峄� g岷璽 gi峄痑 ch峄玭g v脿 ng峄� r岷眓g m矛nh 膽茫 膽岷穞 d岷 ch岷 tr瓢峄沜 膽贸 n锚n m峄沬 vi岷縯 ti岷縫) v峄沬 m峄 膽铆ch g矛; nh瓢ng 膽峄搉g th峄漣 c农ng ph岷 膽峄峜 膽i 膽峄峜 l岷 nhi峄乽 膽o岷 (kh么ng d谩m n贸i l脿 c岷� c芒u, v矛 n脿o bi岷縯 ph岷 l霉i l岷 m岷 trang 膽峄� b岷痶 g岷穚, 啤n tr峄漣, d岷 k岷縯 c芒u tr瓢峄沜 膽贸) 膽峄� nh岷痗 nh峄� b岷 th芒n h茫y n岷痬 b岷痶 膽i峄乽 Imre g峄璱 g岷痬 膽芒u 膽贸 trong 膽o岷 m脿 tui 膽茫 l瓢峄泃 qua theo tri岷縯 l媒 r峄焟 膽峄峜 nhanh ch贸ng hi峄僽 v矛 b岷 l峄眂 v峄沬 c谩i t脿i m煤a b煤t v岷� c芒u c峄 么ng.
Kh峄� gi贸 th岷璽, ai n贸i d脿i n贸i dai n贸i d岷 ch峄� tui th岷 么ng t脿i l岷痬! Tui m峄噒 mu峄憂 膽峄﹖ h啤i khi c农ng b脿y 膽岷穞 m煤a b煤t v岷� c芒u nh瓢 么ng.
Kh么ng th峄� tin 膽瓢峄 l脿 r峄玭g c芒u n脿y m峄峜 t峄� trang 15 膽岷縩 t岷璶 143 trong 膽峄� d脿i (ho岷穋 d脿y) 193 trang m峄沬 (ho岷穋 l岷) 膽瓢a tui quay v峄� v峄沬 膽o岷 m峄� 膽岷 峄� trang th峄� m瓢峄漣 l膬m: ... nh峄痭g b岷 n膬ng c峄 ch煤ng ta ho岷 膽峄檔g ch峄憂g l岷 nh峄痭g b岷 n膬ng c峄 ch煤ng ta, c贸 th峄� n贸i nh峄痭g ph岷 b岷 n膬ng c峄 ch煤ng ta ho岷 膽峄檔g thay cho nh峄痭g b岷 n膬ng c峄 ch煤ng ta... 膼贸 l脿 r峄玭g c芒u d脿i nh岷 v脿 kia l脿 c芒u (th岷璽 ra ch峄� l脿 m峄檛 媒) 膽瓢峄 l岷穚 l岷 nhi峄乽 nh岷, n岷縰 tr铆 nh峄� tui c贸 th峄� t岷 s峄� d峄g 膽瓢峄 (v峄憂 n贸 r岷 t峄�, m脿 khi 膽峄峜 quy峄僴 n脿y th矛 tui nh岷璶 ra n贸 c貌n t峄� h啤n tui t瓢峄焠g) th矛 膽贸 l脿 b峄憂 l岷.
B峄憂 l岷 膽茫 l脿 g矛!
V峄�, v峄� t么i, v峄� c农 t么i, 膽茫 t峄� l芒u kh么ng c貌n l脿 v峄� t么i, gi峄� 膽茫 l脿 v峄� c农, khi 膽贸 c貌n ch瓢a l脿 v峄� t么i... c霉ng v峄沬 nh峄痭g d岷 ngo岷穋 膽啤n 膽贸ng - m峄� r啤i r峄泃 tr锚n trang gi岷 nh瓢 l谩 r峄g v脿o m霉a. Sang 膽么ng, t瓢峄焠g b瓢峄沜 ch芒n 膽i kh么ng c貌n ng岷璸 ng峄 trong l谩 c芒y (hay c芒u) n峄痑 th矛 l岷 v岷 ph岷 nh峄痭g h貌n 膽谩 (hay d岷 ph岷﹜ th芒n thi岷縯 c峄 Imre - 膽么i b岷 qu岷 qu媒t nhau v峄沬 t岷 su岷 cao b岷 th瓢峄漬g 膽岷縩 l脿m d岷 ch岷 k岷縯 c芒u ph岷 ph谩t h峄漬), m脿 sau n贸 l脿 nh峄痭g c啤n m瓢a nh瓢 tr煤t n瓢峄沜 t么i n贸i, t么i vi岷縯, t么i n贸i v峄沬 v峄� t么i, v峄� t么i n贸i...
B峄憂 l岷 膽茫 l脿 g矛! Kh么ng 膽岷縨 膽瓢峄 m峄沬 th岷璽 s峄� nhi峄乽. N脿o ai 膽岷縨 膽瓢峄 l谩 r峄g, n脿o ai 膽岷縨 膽瓢峄 h岷 m瓢a?
Ch峄 nh峄� 膽岷縩 c芒u n贸i 膽峄� 膽峄漣 c峄 c峄� c峄� H峄搉g trong S峄� 膽峄�, tui nh峄痭g mu峄憂 h茅t l锚n: Bi岷縯 r峄搃, kh峄� l岷痬, n贸i m茫i! Tui bi岷縯 么ng 峄� hi峄噉 t岷 膽ang n贸i v峄� v峄� c农 c峄 么ng r峄搃, hay 么ng 峄� qu谩 kh峄� 膽ang n贸i v峄� v峄� t瓢啤ng lai c峄 么ng r峄搃. Tui bi岷縯 么ng 膽ang n贸i hay 膽ang vi岷縯 m脿, v矛 tui 膽ang nghe v脿 膽ang 膽峄峜 膽芒y m脿. Tui bi岷縯 v峄� 么ng 膽ang n贸i m脿, v矛 ngo脿i 么ng v脿 b脿 ra th矛 c貌n ai v脿o 膽芒y n峄痑 膽芒u m脿.
Kh峄� gi贸 th岷璽, tui bi岷縯 m脿, 膽峄玭g nh岷痗 m茫i nh瓢 th岷�!
Kh峄� gi贸 th岷璽, r峄憈 cu峄檆, 么ng c农ng d峄玭g m煤a b煤t v岷� c芒u!
Kh峄� gi贸 th岷璽, ng瓢峄漣 ta 膽峄峜 kinh nh瓢 th岷� n脿o th矛 么ng vi岷縯 Kinh y chang th岷� 膽贸 v脿 tui 膽峄峜 Kinh y chang th岷� 膽贸!
N贸i c谩ch kh谩c, tinh th岷 quy峄僴 Kinh c峄 Imre 膽茫 ph岷 谩nh 膽煤ng t锚n c峄 n贸 (hay ph岷 n贸i c谩i t锚n r岷 ph霉 h峄 v峄沬 t谩c ph岷﹎) v脿 ph岷 n脿o 膽贸 c谩c bu峄昳 膽峄峜 kinh c霉ng Ch煤a - d脿i kh么ng 膽i峄僲 d峄玭g, nhanh kh么ng k峄媝 th峄�, l岷穚 l岷 nhi峄乽 膽岷縩 thu峄檆 theo qu谩n t铆nh. V脿 膽瓢啤ng nhi锚n, c贸 thi锚ng li锚ng. V脿 膽瓢啤ng nhi锚n, c贸 膽峄ヽ tin. C峄 m峄檛 ng瓢峄漣 l脿m ch峄搉g. C峄 m峄檛 ng瓢峄漣 kh么ng l脿m cha.
Tui n贸i m脿, quy峄僴 s谩ch d岷玼 c贸 d峄� 膽岷縩 膽芒u c农ng c贸 膽i峄僲 s谩ng. Ho岷穋 n贸i l脿 tui c贸 t峄慽 d岷� 膽岷縩 膽芒u th矛 cu峄慽 c霉ng c农ng 膽瓢峄 khai s谩ng.
Th矛 ra l脿 nh瓢 v岷瓂.
Do Th谩i!
Ch峄慽 b峄� ngu峄搉 g峄慶 Do Th谩i!
Ch峄慽 b峄� b岷 t铆nh Do Th谩i!
Ch峄慽 b峄� h峄� l峄 Do Th谩i!
Ch峄慽 b峄� 膽峄゛ con Do Th谩i!
Tui hi峄僽 r峄搃, th岷璽 ra 么ng c农ng b峄� m峄檛 s峄ヽ m岷h b峄 v芒y.
N峄梚 s峄� Do Th谩i!
Con kh么ng mu峄憂 l脿m m峄檛 ng瓢峄漣 Do Th谩i!
H峄搃 nh峄�, n岷縰 b岷 ch峄 膽瓢峄 nghe nh峄痭g con chi锚n c峄 Ch煤a 膽峄峜 kinh, m峄檛 n峄梚 s峄� h茫i kh么ng t锚n c峄� ch岷 kh岷痯 ng瓢峄漣 l脿m tui l岷h t贸c g谩y, nh瓢 th峄� v峄玜 b峄� m峄檛 s峄ヽ m岷h v么 h矛nh b峄 v芒y. V矛 h峄� ph谩t ra nh峄痭g 芒m thanh tui th岷痗 m岷痗 li峄噓 n贸 c贸 ph岷 ti岷縩g m岷� 膽岷� - tui 膽茫 ngh末 Ch煤a d岷 h峄� ng么n ng峄� ri锚ng c峄 Ng瓢峄漣. V矛 h峄� 膽峄峜 li峄乶 t霉 t矛 tui kh么ng bi岷縯 n锚n ngh峄� ch峄� n脿o 膽峄� nghe ti岷縫 hay th岷璵 ch铆 膽峄� h峄� h铆t th峄�. V矛, quan tr峄峮g h啤n c岷�, h峄� t岷 n锚n b岷 kh么ng kh铆 d芒ng tr脿n s峄� thi锚ng li锚ng v脿 膽峄ヽ tin.
蚕耻测峄僴 Kinh n脿y khi岷縩 tui c农ng s峄� v岷瓂, s峄� 膽岷縩 ph谩t m峄噒, m峄噒 膽岷縩 ph谩t n岷, n岷 膽岷縩 ph谩t ch峄璱 r峄 b岷 th芒n khi th峄漣 gian g岷 膽芒y to脿n 膽峄峜 ph岷 nh峄痭g quy峄僴 s谩ch ch岷� l么i cu峄憂 g矛 m岷 峄� nh峄痭g l岷 gi峄� trang 膽岷 ti锚n.
膼岷縩 con s峄� 69 r峄搃 nh瓢ng tui kh么ng ch岷痗 (th岷璽 ra l脿 ho脿n to脿n kh么ng) hi峄僽 膽瓢峄 nh峄痭g g矛 膽茫 膽峄峜, ch岷硁g bi岷縯 ph岷 膽岷縩 con s峄� bao nhi锚u m峄沬 g岷穚 膽瓢峄 d岷 ch岷 k岷縯 c芒u ti岷縫 theo, v脿 h啤n h岷縯, ch岷� r玫 t矛nh tr岷g n脿y s岷� c貌n k茅o d脿i 膽岷縩 bao nhi锚u ph岷 c峄 quy峄僴 s谩ch, hay c贸 l岷� 膽岷縩 t岷璶 con s峄� cu峄慽 c农ng n锚n.
Imre tr峄搉g m峄檛 r峄玭g c芒u d脿i mi锚n man trong quy峄僴 Kinh.
C贸 l煤c, tui mu峄憂 qu岷硁g n贸 sang b锚n, ph岷 b峄檌 l貌ng tin d岷玼 c贸 d峄� 膽岷縩 膽芒u quy峄僴 s谩ch c农ng s岷� c贸 膽i峄僲 s谩ng tr瓢峄沜 gi峄� c峄 m矛nh. Nh瓢ng 么ng l脿 t谩c gi岷� 膽o岷 gi岷 Nobel V膬n Ch瓢啤ng. H茫y 膽峄峜 膽i, h茫y c峄� 膽峄峜 膽i! N岷縰 m脿y kh么ng ph霉 h峄 v峄沬 m峄峣 c谩i g岷痭 v峄沬 t铆nh t峄� h脿n l芒m th矛 h茫y v矛 t锚n c峄 quy峄僴 Kinh m脿 膽峄峜. H茫y t矛m ki岷縨 膽i峄乽 m脿y kh么ng th岷 峄� Th瓢 g峄璱 膽峄゛ tr岷� ch瓢a t峄玭g sinh ra c峄 Oriana Fallaci.
Khi ch瓢a 膽岷縩 膽瓢峄 kh煤c cua ti岷縫 theo c峄 r峄玭g c芒u n脿y, tui l岷 膽峄檔g vi锚n m矛nh.
Nh瓢 gi峄� 膽芒y ng峄� ra, 膽峄峜 kinh l脿 nh岷痗 l岷 nh峄痭g l峄漣 r膬n c峄 Ch煤a v峄沬 t峄慶 膽峄� nhanh h啤n b矛nh th瓢峄漬g v脿 l岷穚 l岷 v峄沬 s峄� l岷 c岷 thi岷縯 trong t芒m tr铆 h貌a nh岷璸 v脿 d芒ng hi岷縩, th矛 tui c岷 膽峄峜 nhanh 膽峄� ch贸ng hi峄僽 媒 ngh末a c峄 xu岷 ph谩t 膽i峄僲 么ng mu峄憂 n贸i, hay c贸 khi l脿 c谩i 么ng mu峄憂 n贸i nh瓢ng l岷 kh么ng n岷眒 峄� r峄玭g ch峄� hi峄僴 hi峄噉 tr瓢峄沜 m岷痶, ch峄� kh么ng n锚n ho岷穋 ch瓢a ph岷 l煤c d峄玭g l岷 ph芒n t铆ch t峄玭g c芒u t峄� - th贸i quen 膽峄峜 s谩ch tr瓢峄沜 膽芒y, nguy锚n nh芒n khi岷縩 tui (t岷 nh岷璶) l脿 con m峄峵 mang h峄� r霉a - 膽峄� r峄搃 膽岷縩 cu峄慽 c芒u c农ng qu锚n lu么n 么ng 岷 m峄� 膽岷 膽o岷 v膬n (tui c谩 n贸 kh么ng ph岷 c芒u v膬n, c贸 l岷� 么ng t谩c gi岷� 膽茫 ng峄� g岷璽 gi峄痑 ch峄玭g v脿 ng峄� r岷眓g m矛nh 膽茫 膽岷穞 d岷 ch岷 tr瓢峄沜 膽贸 n锚n m峄沬 vi岷縯 ti岷縫) v峄沬 m峄 膽铆ch g矛; nh瓢ng 膽峄搉g th峄漣 c农ng ph岷 膽峄峜 膽i 膽峄峜 l岷 nhi峄乽 膽o岷 (kh么ng d谩m n贸i l脿 c岷� c芒u, v矛 n脿o bi岷縯 ph岷 l霉i l岷 m岷 trang 膽峄� b岷痶 g岷穚, 啤n tr峄漣, d岷 k岷縯 c芒u tr瓢峄沜 膽贸) 膽峄� nh岷痗 nh峄� b岷 th芒n h茫y n岷痬 b岷痶 膽i峄乽 Imre g峄璱 g岷痬 膽芒u 膽贸 trong 膽o岷 m脿 tui 膽茫 l瓢峄泃 qua theo tri岷縯 l媒 r峄焟 膽峄峜 nhanh ch贸ng hi峄僽 v矛 b岷 l峄眂 v峄沬 c谩i t脿i m煤a b煤t v岷� c芒u c峄 么ng.
Kh峄� gi贸 th岷璽, ai n贸i d脿i n贸i dai n贸i d岷 ch峄� tui th岷 么ng t脿i l岷痬! Tui m峄噒 mu峄憂 膽峄﹖ h啤i khi c农ng b脿y 膽岷穞 m煤a b煤t v岷� c芒u nh瓢 么ng.
Kh么ng th峄� tin 膽瓢峄 l脿 r峄玭g c芒u n脿y m峄峜 t峄� trang 15 膽岷縩 t岷璶 143 trong 膽峄� d脿i (ho岷穋 d脿y) 193 trang m峄沬 (ho岷穋 l岷) 膽瓢a tui quay v峄� v峄沬 膽o岷 m峄� 膽岷 峄� trang th峄� m瓢峄漣 l膬m: ... nh峄痭g b岷 n膬ng c峄 ch煤ng ta ho岷 膽峄檔g ch峄憂g l岷 nh峄痭g b岷 n膬ng c峄 ch煤ng ta, c贸 th峄� n贸i nh峄痭g ph岷 b岷 n膬ng c峄 ch煤ng ta ho岷 膽峄檔g thay cho nh峄痭g b岷 n膬ng c峄 ch煤ng ta... 膼贸 l脿 r峄玭g c芒u d脿i nh岷 v脿 kia l脿 c芒u (th岷璽 ra ch峄� l脿 m峄檛 媒) 膽瓢峄 l岷穚 l岷 nhi峄乽 nh岷, n岷縰 tr铆 nh峄� tui c贸 th峄� t岷 s峄� d峄g 膽瓢峄 (v峄憂 n贸 r岷 t峄�, m脿 khi 膽峄峜 quy峄僴 n脿y th矛 tui nh岷璶 ra n贸 c貌n t峄� h啤n tui t瓢峄焠g) th矛 膽贸 l脿 b峄憂 l岷.
B峄憂 l岷 膽茫 l脿 g矛!
V峄�, v峄� t么i, v峄� c农 t么i, 膽茫 t峄� l芒u kh么ng c貌n l脿 v峄� t么i, gi峄� 膽茫 l脿 v峄� c农, khi 膽贸 c貌n ch瓢a l脿 v峄� t么i... c霉ng v峄沬 nh峄痭g d岷 ngo岷穋 膽啤n 膽贸ng - m峄� r啤i r峄泃 tr锚n trang gi岷 nh瓢 l谩 r峄g v脿o m霉a. Sang 膽么ng, t瓢峄焠g b瓢峄沜 ch芒n 膽i kh么ng c貌n ng岷璸 ng峄 trong l谩 c芒y (hay c芒u) n峄痑 th矛 l岷 v岷 ph岷 nh峄痭g h貌n 膽谩 (hay d岷 ph岷﹜ th芒n thi岷縯 c峄 Imre - 膽么i b岷 qu岷 qu媒t nhau v峄沬 t岷 su岷 cao b岷 th瓢峄漬g 膽岷縩 l脿m d岷 ch岷 k岷縯 c芒u ph岷 ph谩t h峄漬), m脿 sau n贸 l脿 nh峄痭g c啤n m瓢a nh瓢 tr煤t n瓢峄沜 t么i n贸i, t么i vi岷縯, t么i n贸i v峄沬 v峄� t么i, v峄� t么i n贸i...
B峄憂 l岷 膽茫 l脿 g矛! Kh么ng 膽岷縨 膽瓢峄 m峄沬 th岷璽 s峄� nhi峄乽. N脿o ai 膽岷縨 膽瓢峄 l谩 r峄g, n脿o ai 膽岷縨 膽瓢峄 h岷 m瓢a?
Ch峄 nh峄� 膽岷縩 c芒u n贸i 膽峄� 膽峄漣 c峄 c峄� c峄� H峄搉g trong S峄� 膽峄�, tui nh峄痭g mu峄憂 h茅t l锚n: Bi岷縯 r峄搃, kh峄� l岷痬, n贸i m茫i! Tui bi岷縯 么ng 峄� hi峄噉 t岷 膽ang n贸i v峄� v峄� c农 c峄 么ng r峄搃, hay 么ng 峄� qu谩 kh峄� 膽ang n贸i v峄� v峄� t瓢啤ng lai c峄 么ng r峄搃. Tui bi岷縯 么ng 膽ang n贸i hay 膽ang vi岷縯 m脿, v矛 tui 膽ang nghe v脿 膽ang 膽峄峜 膽芒y m脿. Tui bi岷縯 v峄� 么ng 膽ang n贸i m脿, v矛 ngo脿i 么ng v脿 b脿 ra th矛 c貌n ai v脿o 膽芒y n峄痑 膽芒u m脿.
Kh峄� gi贸 th岷璽, tui bi岷縯 m脿, 膽峄玭g nh岷痗 m茫i nh瓢 th岷�!
Kh峄� gi贸 th岷璽, r峄憈 cu峄檆, 么ng c农ng d峄玭g m煤a b煤t v岷� c芒u!
Kh峄� gi贸 th岷璽, ng瓢峄漣 ta 膽峄峜 kinh nh瓢 th岷� n脿o th矛 么ng vi岷縯 Kinh y chang th岷� 膽贸 v脿 tui 膽峄峜 Kinh y chang th岷� 膽贸!
N贸i c谩ch kh谩c, tinh th岷 quy峄僴 Kinh c峄 Imre 膽茫 ph岷 谩nh 膽煤ng t锚n c峄 n贸 (hay ph岷 n贸i c谩i t锚n r岷 ph霉 h峄 v峄沬 t谩c ph岷﹎) v脿 ph岷 n脿o 膽贸 c谩c bu峄昳 膽峄峜 kinh c霉ng Ch煤a - d脿i kh么ng 膽i峄僲 d峄玭g, nhanh kh么ng k峄媝 th峄�, l岷穚 l岷 nhi峄乽 膽岷縩 thu峄檆 theo qu谩n t铆nh. V脿 膽瓢啤ng nhi锚n, c贸 thi锚ng li锚ng. V脿 膽瓢啤ng nhi锚n, c贸 膽峄ヽ tin. C峄 m峄檛 ng瓢峄漣 l脿m ch峄搉g. C峄 m峄檛 ng瓢峄漣 kh么ng l脿m cha.
Tui n贸i m脿, quy峄僴 s谩ch d岷玼 c贸 d峄� 膽岷縩 膽芒u c农ng c贸 膽i峄僲 s谩ng. Ho岷穋 n贸i l脿 tui c贸 t峄慽 d岷� 膽岷縩 膽芒u th矛 cu峄慽 c霉ng c农ng 膽瓢峄 khai s谩ng.
Th矛 ra l脿 nh瓢 v岷瓂.
Do Th谩i!
Ch峄慽 b峄� ngu峄搉 g峄慶 Do Th谩i!
Ch峄慽 b峄� b岷 t铆nh Do Th谩i!
Ch峄慽 b峄� h峄� l峄 Do Th谩i!
Ch峄慽 b峄� 膽峄゛ con Do Th谩i!
Tui hi峄僽 r峄搃, th岷璽 ra 么ng c农ng b峄� m峄檛 s峄ヽ m岷h b峄 v芒y.
N峄梚 s峄� Do Th谩i!
Con kh么ng mu峄憂 l脿m m峄檛 ng瓢峄漣 Do Th谩i!
January 19, 2024
鈥濱 no longer remember exactly how we were related, but then why would I remember, they long ago dug their graves in the sky, into which they were sent up in smoke.鈥�
鈥濿hy must we live with our face perpetually turned towards some scene of shame?鈥�
鈥濨eneath my feet the sewers bubble, as if the polluted flood of my memories were seeking to burst out of its hidden channel and sweep me away.鈥�
鈥濿hy must we live with our face perpetually turned towards some scene of shame?鈥�
鈥濨eneath my feet the sewers bubble, as if the polluted flood of my memories were seeking to burst out of its hidden channel and sweep me away.鈥�
September 6, 2014
Kaddis: 艖sr茅gi ima, mely "egy茅rtelm疟en Isten dics艖铆t茅s茅r艖l sz贸l", "a gy谩sszal s煤jtott hozz谩tartoz贸k ezzel (...) azt szeretn茅k kifejez茅sre juttatni, hogy s煤lyos f谩jdalmuk ellen茅re sem vesz铆tett茅k el hit眉ket."
Mi is ez a k枚nyv? Szerintem egyetlen m茅ly l茅legzetv茅telre kiadott vallom谩s, 枚nmarcangol谩s, egy t枚nkretett 茅let mag谩b贸l kiok谩dott kr茅d贸ja. K枚nyv arr贸l, amir艖l sem besz茅lni, sem 铆rni nem lehet, m茅gis besz茅lni 茅s 铆rni kell. K枚nyv arr贸l, ami feldolgozhatatlan, s amelynek feldogoz谩sa m茅gis egy teljes 铆r贸i p谩lya motorja lehet. K枚nyv arr贸l, mik茅nt nem lehet t煤l茅lni azt, amit t煤l lehetett 茅lni. K枚nyv arr贸l, amit ma is ki kellene mondani, s amit ma sem mond ki hangosan senki, vagy csak kevesen, s azok hangja se hallatszik messzire. K枚nyv a feladott 茅s a kij贸zan铆t贸 apas谩gr贸l.
Kert茅sz Imre nehezen befogadhat贸 铆r谩sa. Zaklatott, csapong贸, 枚nmag谩val megb茅k茅lni k茅ptelen. Soha v茅get nem 茅r艖 mondatok, vissza- visszat茅r艖 fr谩zisok staccatoja, egy falat 铆rom-mintha-mondan谩m. Felzaklat? Felzaklat. Nem 茅rted? 艕 sem mindig. 脰nmag谩t sem. Befogadhat贸? Aligha. Csod谩lod? Ne csod谩ld!
Azt hiszem, Siegmund Freud mind a t铆z ujj谩t megnyalta volna, ha ezt a k枚nyvet a kez茅be veheti. Nemcsak az茅rt, amire most gondolsz, hanem mert lett volna mondanival贸juk egym谩snak - Kert茅sz 茅s Freud, k茅t 枚nn枚n zsid贸s谩g谩val hadil谩bon 谩ll贸 g茅niusz. Olyannyira k眉l枚nb枚z艖ek, hogy az m谩r hasonl铆t.
De 谩ruld m谩r el, az utols贸 oldalra 茅rkezve, f茅rfi l茅temre mi茅rt kellett egy k枚nnycseppet sz茅tmorzsolnom a szemem sark谩ban?
Mi is ez a k枚nyv? Szerintem egyetlen m茅ly l茅legzetv茅telre kiadott vallom谩s, 枚nmarcangol谩s, egy t枚nkretett 茅let mag谩b贸l kiok谩dott kr茅d贸ja. K枚nyv arr贸l, amir艖l sem besz茅lni, sem 铆rni nem lehet, m茅gis besz茅lni 茅s 铆rni kell. K枚nyv arr贸l, ami feldolgozhatatlan, s amelynek feldogoz谩sa m茅gis egy teljes 铆r贸i p谩lya motorja lehet. K枚nyv arr贸l, mik茅nt nem lehet t煤l茅lni azt, amit t煤l lehetett 茅lni. K枚nyv arr贸l, amit ma is ki kellene mondani, s amit ma sem mond ki hangosan senki, vagy csak kevesen, s azok hangja se hallatszik messzire. K枚nyv a feladott 茅s a kij贸zan铆t贸 apas谩gr贸l.
Kert茅sz Imre nehezen befogadhat贸 铆r谩sa. Zaklatott, csapong贸, 枚nmag谩val megb茅k茅lni k茅ptelen. Soha v茅get nem 茅r艖 mondatok, vissza- visszat茅r艖 fr谩zisok staccatoja, egy falat 铆rom-mintha-mondan谩m. Felzaklat? Felzaklat. Nem 茅rted? 艕 sem mindig. 脰nmag谩t sem. Befogadhat贸? Aligha. Csod谩lod? Ne csod谩ld!
Azt hiszem, Siegmund Freud mind a t铆z ujj谩t megnyalta volna, ha ezt a k枚nyvet a kez茅be veheti. Nemcsak az茅rt, amire most gondolsz, hanem mert lett volna mondanival贸juk egym谩snak - Kert茅sz 茅s Freud, k茅t 枚nn枚n zsid贸s谩g谩val hadil谩bon 谩ll贸 g茅niusz. Olyannyira k眉l枚nb枚z艖ek, hogy az m谩r hasonl铆t.
De 谩ruld m谩r el, az utols贸 oldalra 茅rkezve, f茅rfi l茅temre mi茅rt kellett egy k枚nnycseppet sz茅tmorzsolnom a szemem sark谩ban?
March 20, 2024
Kert茅sz is an author I've made room for long after my viewpoint of who he is and where he comes from and what awards he's won have all been complicated by recent experiences and present events. If there's one word I would use as my reason for returning to his writing, it would have to be schlock. Not that Kert茅sz's writing is said schlock, but that, living as I do in a USA that, despite all the promises of good over evil and the underdog over the top, has refused to collapse, my day to day existence is compelled, conformed, and capitalized, the last in terms of both uppercase importance and financial stock, by schlock. And so, returning to Kert茅sz and reading a sentence of his that draws a direct corollary between patriarchal society and Auschwitz, you get a reading that is, well, political. It's also stream of consciousness, and run on run on sentences, and the kind of self-excavation whose power slowly creeps up on you from the realms of the fatuous and into the worlds of all the too devastatingly real. Sure, it helps to have some basic familiarity with Celan, and if you're a fan of the likes of Spielberg's "Schindler's List," you may care more about Kert茅sz's "controversy" than anything else. Still, with this coming at just under 100 pages, it wouldn't take much of your time to give it a taste, out of civic duty if nothing else.
December 5, 2016
膼i峄僲: 5.5/10
M峄檛 ti峄僽 thuy岷縯 ng岷痭 膽瓢峄 vi岷縯 b岷眓g v膬n phong qu谩 d脿i d貌ng, r瓢峄漨 r脿, tr霉ng l岷穚
To脿n b峄� cu峄憂 ti峄僽 thuy岷縯 ng岷痭 n脿y l脿 d貌ng h峄搃 t瓢峄焠g c峄 nh芒n v岷璽 ch铆nh, m峄檛 nh脿 v膬n Do Th谩i, 膽茫 t峄玭g tr岷 qua cu峄檆 s峄憂g trong tr岷 t岷璸 trung Auschwitz, c贸 c谩ch h峄搃 t瓢峄焠g, hay 膽岷 lo岷 nh瓢 th岷�, qu谩 r瓢峄漨 r脿, c贸 r岷 nhi峄乽 ch峄� tr霉ng l岷穚 kh么ng c岷 thi岷縯, theo m峄 膽铆ch c峄 t谩c gi岷�, s峄� d峄g r岷 铆t d岷 ch岷 c芒u 膽峄� t岷 n锚n hi峄噓 峄﹏g li峄乶 m岷h v脿 r峄慽 r岷痬 trong suy t瓢峄焠g c峄 nh芒n v岷璽 ch铆nh v脿 ng膬n ch岷穘 ng瓢峄漣 膽峄峜 d峄玭g l岷 n峄璦 ch峄玭g (?).
T峄盿 s谩ch c贸 n贸i 膽岷縩 m峄檛 膽峄゛ tr岷� nh瓢ng th峄眂 ra 膽峄゛ tr岷� ch峄� xu岷 hi峄噉 tho谩ng qua.
C岷� t谩c ph岷﹎ ch峄� di峄卬 ra trong v貌ng v脿i gi峄� nh瓢ng g芒y ra c岷 gi谩c l锚 th锚, m峄噒 m峄廼 v矛 膽峄峜 ho脿i m脿 kh么ng h岷縯 m峄檛 c芒u, nhi峄乽 n峄檌 dung c峄� l岷穚 膽i l岷穚 l岷.
N岷縰 b岷 c岷 t矛m m峄檛 cu峄憂 s谩ch c贸 v膬n phong r瓢峄漨 r脿 膽峄� th峄� s峄� ki锚n nh岷玭 c峄 ch铆nh m矛nh th矛 膽芒y l脿 m峄檛 l峄盿 ch峄峮 t峄憈.
M峄檛 ti峄僽 thuy岷縯 ng岷痭 膽瓢峄 vi岷縯 b岷眓g v膬n phong qu谩 d脿i d貌ng, r瓢峄漨 r脿, tr霉ng l岷穚
To脿n b峄� cu峄憂 ti峄僽 thuy岷縯 ng岷痭 n脿y l脿 d貌ng h峄搃 t瓢峄焠g c峄 nh芒n v岷璽 ch铆nh, m峄檛 nh脿 v膬n Do Th谩i, 膽茫 t峄玭g tr岷 qua cu峄檆 s峄憂g trong tr岷 t岷璸 trung Auschwitz, c贸 c谩ch h峄搃 t瓢峄焠g, hay 膽岷 lo岷 nh瓢 th岷�, qu谩 r瓢峄漨 r脿, c贸 r岷 nhi峄乽 ch峄� tr霉ng l岷穚 kh么ng c岷 thi岷縯, theo m峄 膽铆ch c峄 t谩c gi岷�, s峄� d峄g r岷 铆t d岷 ch岷 c芒u 膽峄� t岷 n锚n hi峄噓 峄﹏g li峄乶 m岷h v脿 r峄慽 r岷痬 trong suy t瓢峄焠g c峄 nh芒n v岷璽 ch铆nh v脿 ng膬n ch岷穘 ng瓢峄漣 膽峄峜 d峄玭g l岷 n峄璦 ch峄玭g (?).
T峄盿 s谩ch c贸 n贸i 膽岷縩 m峄檛 膽峄゛ tr岷� nh瓢ng th峄眂 ra 膽峄゛ tr岷� ch峄� xu岷 hi峄噉 tho谩ng qua.
C岷� t谩c ph岷﹎ ch峄� di峄卬 ra trong v貌ng v脿i gi峄� nh瓢ng g芒y ra c岷 gi谩c l锚 th锚, m峄噒 m峄廼 v矛 膽峄峜 ho脿i m脿 kh么ng h岷縯 m峄檛 c芒u, nhi峄乽 n峄檌 dung c峄� l岷穚 膽i l岷穚 l岷.
N岷縰 b岷 c岷 t矛m m峄檛 cu峄憂 s谩ch c贸 v膬n phong r瓢峄漨 r脿 膽峄� th峄� s峄� ki锚n nh岷玭 c峄 ch铆nh m矛nh th矛 膽芒y l脿 m峄檛 l峄盿 ch峄峮 t峄憈.
August 17, 2020
No!鈥� I could never be another person鈥檚 father, destiny, god,
鈥淣o!鈥� what happened to me, my childhood, must never happen to another child,
鈥淣o!鈥� something screamed and whined within me, it is impossible that this, childhood, should happen to it (to you) and to me;
韦慰 魏伪谓蟿委蟼 蔚委谓伪喂 苇谓伪蟼 蔚尾蟻伪蠆魏蠈蟼听 蠉渭谓慰蟼 伪蠁喂蔚蟻蠅渭苇谓慰蟼 蟽蟿慰谓 胃蔚慰. 螆蟿蟽喂 魏伪喂 蟿慰 尾喂尾位委慰 伪蠀蟿蠈 蔚委谓伪喂 苇谓伪 魏伪谓蟿委蟼, 渭蔚 蟿畏谓 苇谓谓慰喂伪 蠈蟿喂 蔚尉喂蟽蟿慰蟻蔚委 魏伪喂 "蔚尉蠀渭谓蔚委" 蟿畏谓 伪尉委伪 蟿慰蠀 谓伪 伪谓蟿喂位伪渭尾维谓蔚蟽伪喂 蟺蠅蟼 慰蟻喂蟽渭苇谓伪 未蠀蟽维蟻蔚蟽蟿伪 纬蔚纬慰谓蠈蟿伪, 蔚渭蟺蔚喂蟻委蔚蟼, 蟺蟻蠈蟽蠅蟺伪, 魏伪胃慰蟻委味慰蠀谓 蟿蠈蟽慰 蟺慰位蠉 蟿畏 味蠅萎 蟽慰蠀 蟺慰蠀 蟿蔚位喂魏维 蟺伪委蟻谓蔚喂蟼 蟿畏 蟽魏位畏蟻萎, 未蠉蟽魏慰位畏, 伪位位维 魏伪喂 1000% 未委魏伪喂畏 (魏伪蟿维 蟿畏谓 蟿伪蟺蔚喂谓萎 渭慰蠀 维蟺慰蠄畏) 伪蟺蠈蠁伪蟽畏 谓伪 渭畏谓 渭蔚蟿伪蠁苇蟻蔚喂蟼 伪蠀蟿维 蟿伪 尾喂蠋渭伪蟿伪 蟽蔚 苇谓伪谓 维位位慰 维谓胃蟻蠅蟺慰, 蠁苇蟻谓慰谓蟿伪蟼 蟿慰谓 蟽蟿慰谓 魏蠈蟽渭慰
韦慰 魏蔚委渭蔚谓慰 尉蔚魏喂谓维 渭蔚 苇谓伪 蔚渭蠁伪蟿喂魏蠈 螌围螜, 蟿慰 慰蟺慰委慰 位苇蔚喂 慰 蟽蠀纬纬蟻伪蠁苇伪蟼 蟽蟿畏 纬蠀谓伪委魏伪 蟿慰蠀 蟽蠂蔚蟿喂魏维 渭蔚 蟿慰 伪谓 胃伪 伪蟺慰魏蟿萎蟽慰蠀谓 蟺伪喂未委 魏伪喂 蟽蠀谓蔚蠂委味蔚喂 蟽蔚 苇谓伪 蟽蠉谓蟿慰渭慰 渭蔚谓, 伪位位维 蟺蠀魏谓慰蟿伪蟿慰 魏伪喂 未蠉蟽魏慰位慰 位慰纬喂未蟻喂慰 蔚蟺喂蠂蔚喂蟻畏渭伪蟿蠅谓 蟽蟿萎蟻喂尉畏蟼 伪蠀蟿萎蟼 蟿畏蟼 伪蟺蠈蠁伪蟽畏蟼 蟺慰蠀 伪蟺慰蟿蔚位蔚委蟿伪喂 伪蟺蠈 未蠀蟽维蟻蔚蟽蟿蔚蟼 蟺伪喂未喂魏苇蟼 蔚渭蟺蔚喂蟻委蔚蟼, 未蠉蟽魏慰位蔚蟼 蟽蠂苇蟽畏蟼 渭蔚 纬慰谓蔚委蟼, 渭苇蠂蟻喂 蠁蠀蟽喂魏维 蟿畏谓 蔚渭蟺蔚喂蟻委伪 蟿慰蠀 螁慰蠀蟽尾喂蟿蟼 蟺慰蠀 苇味畏蟽蔚 蟿蠈蟽慰 慰 伪蠁畏纬畏蟿萎蟼, 蠈蟽慰 魏伪喂 慰 蟽蠀纬纬蟻伪蠁苇伪蟼,伪位位伪 魏伪喂 蟿慰 蟺蠅蟼 畏 蔚尾蟻伪喂魏慰蟿畏蟿伪 纬蔚谓喂魏维 魏伪胃慰蟻委味蔚喂 蟿畏 味蠅萎 魏伪喂 蟿喂蟼 伪蟺慰蠁维蟽蔚喂蟼 蟿蠅谓 蠀蟺慰蟽蟿畏蟻喂魏蟿蠋谓 蟿畏蟼.
韦慰 尾喂尾位委慰 伪蠀蟿蠈 胃伪 蟿慰 蠂伪蟻伪魏蟿萎蟻喂味伪 未蠉蟽魏慰位慰 蟽蔚 蠈位伪 蟿慰蠀, 魏伪蟿伪蟻蠂维蟼 蟽蟿慰 谓伪 蟿慰 尾蟻蔚喂蟼, 魏伪胃蠈蟿喂 苇蠂蔚喂 魏伪喂 伪蠀蟿蠈 蟺苇蟽蔚喂 蟽蟿畏 渭伪蠉蟻畏 蟿蟻蠉蟺伪 蟿蠅谓 蔚尉伪谓蟿位畏渭蔚谓蠅谓, 未蠉蟽魏慰位慰 蟽蟿慰 谓伪 未喂伪尾维蟽蔚喂蟼 蟿畏 蟽蠀谓蔚蠂蠈渭蔚谓畏, 蟺蠀魏谓萎 魏伪喂 渭蔚 蔚位维蠂喂蟽蟿伪 蟽畏渭蔚委伪 蟽蟿委尉畏蟼 纬蟻伪蠁萎 蟿慰蠀 螝蔚蟻蟿蔚蟼, 未蠉蟽魏慰位慰 蟽蟿慰 胃苇渭伪 蟿慰蠀 魏伪胃蠈蟿喂 畏 魏慰喂谓蠅谓委伪 渭伪蟼 渭伪蟼 苇蠂蔚喂 蟺蔚委蟽蔚喂 蟺蠅蟼 慰 伪蟺蠈位蠀蟿慰蟼 蟽魏慰蟺蠈蟼 蔚谓蠈蟼 伪谓胃蟻蠋蟺慰蠀 蠂蠅蟻委蟼 蟺慰位位维 蟺慰位位维, 蔚委谓伪喂 谓伪 蟿蔚魏谓慰蟺慰喂畏蟽蔚喂.. 韦喂 纬委谓蔚蟿伪喂 蠈渭蠅蟼 蠈蟿伪谓 魏维蟺慰喂慰蟼 蠈蟺蠅蟼 慰 蟽蠀纬纬蟻伪蠁苇伪蟼 蟺伪蟻伪胃苇蟿蔚喂 魏维蟺慰喂伪 蔚尉伪喂蟻蔚蟿喂魏维 蔚蟺喂蠂蔚喂蟻萎渭伪蟿伪 纬喂伪 蟿慰 伪谓蟿委胃蔚蟿慰? 螣蟺蠅蟽未萎蟺慰蟿蔚 未蔚谓 蔚委谓伪喂 苇谓伪 蔚蠉魏慰位慰 胃苇渭伪, 伪位位维 蔚委谓伪喂 维魏蟻蠅蟼 蔚谓未喂伪蠁苇蟻慰谓 魏伪喂 未委谓蔚喂 蟺慰位蠉 渭蔚纬维位畏 蟿蟻慰蠁萎 纬喂伪 蟽魏苇蠄畏 魏伪喂 蟽蠀味萎蟿畏蟽畏. 螡慰渭喂味蠅 蟺蠅蟼 蔚委谓伪喂 苇谓伪 尾喂尾位委慰 蟽蟿慰 慰蟺慰委慰 胃伪 蔚蟺喂蟽蟿蟻苇蠄蠅 尉伪谓维 蠉蟽蟿蔚蟻伪 伪蟺蠈 蠂蟻蠈谓喂伪..
3.5 伪蟽蟿苇蟻喂伪 猸愨瓙猸愷煂�
鈥淣o!鈥� what happened to me, my childhood, must never happen to another child,
鈥淣o!鈥� something screamed and whined within me, it is impossible that this, childhood, should happen to it (to you) and to me;
韦慰 魏伪谓蟿委蟼 蔚委谓伪喂 苇谓伪蟼 蔚尾蟻伪蠆魏蠈蟼听 蠉渭谓慰蟼 伪蠁喂蔚蟻蠅渭苇谓慰蟼 蟽蟿慰谓 胃蔚慰. 螆蟿蟽喂 魏伪喂 蟿慰 尾喂尾位委慰 伪蠀蟿蠈 蔚委谓伪喂 苇谓伪 魏伪谓蟿委蟼, 渭蔚 蟿畏谓 苇谓谓慰喂伪 蠈蟿喂 蔚尉喂蟽蟿慰蟻蔚委 魏伪喂 "蔚尉蠀渭谓蔚委" 蟿畏谓 伪尉委伪 蟿慰蠀 谓伪 伪谓蟿喂位伪渭尾维谓蔚蟽伪喂 蟺蠅蟼 慰蟻喂蟽渭苇谓伪 未蠀蟽维蟻蔚蟽蟿伪 纬蔚纬慰谓蠈蟿伪, 蔚渭蟺蔚喂蟻委蔚蟼, 蟺蟻蠈蟽蠅蟺伪, 魏伪胃慰蟻委味慰蠀谓 蟿蠈蟽慰 蟺慰位蠉 蟿畏 味蠅萎 蟽慰蠀 蟺慰蠀 蟿蔚位喂魏维 蟺伪委蟻谓蔚喂蟼 蟿畏 蟽魏位畏蟻萎, 未蠉蟽魏慰位畏, 伪位位维 魏伪喂 1000% 未委魏伪喂畏 (魏伪蟿维 蟿畏谓 蟿伪蟺蔚喂谓萎 渭慰蠀 维蟺慰蠄畏) 伪蟺蠈蠁伪蟽畏 谓伪 渭畏谓 渭蔚蟿伪蠁苇蟻蔚喂蟼 伪蠀蟿维 蟿伪 尾喂蠋渭伪蟿伪 蟽蔚 苇谓伪谓 维位位慰 维谓胃蟻蠅蟺慰, 蠁苇蟻谓慰谓蟿伪蟼 蟿慰谓 蟽蟿慰谓 魏蠈蟽渭慰
韦慰 魏蔚委渭蔚谓慰 尉蔚魏喂谓维 渭蔚 苇谓伪 蔚渭蠁伪蟿喂魏蠈 螌围螜, 蟿慰 慰蟺慰委慰 位苇蔚喂 慰 蟽蠀纬纬蟻伪蠁苇伪蟼 蟽蟿畏 纬蠀谓伪委魏伪 蟿慰蠀 蟽蠂蔚蟿喂魏维 渭蔚 蟿慰 伪谓 胃伪 伪蟺慰魏蟿萎蟽慰蠀谓 蟺伪喂未委 魏伪喂 蟽蠀谓蔚蠂委味蔚喂 蟽蔚 苇谓伪 蟽蠉谓蟿慰渭慰 渭蔚谓, 伪位位维 蟺蠀魏谓慰蟿伪蟿慰 魏伪喂 未蠉蟽魏慰位慰 位慰纬喂未蟻喂慰 蔚蟺喂蠂蔚喂蟻畏渭伪蟿蠅谓 蟽蟿萎蟻喂尉畏蟼 伪蠀蟿萎蟼 蟿畏蟼 伪蟺蠈蠁伪蟽畏蟼 蟺慰蠀 伪蟺慰蟿蔚位蔚委蟿伪喂 伪蟺蠈 未蠀蟽维蟻蔚蟽蟿蔚蟼 蟺伪喂未喂魏苇蟼 蔚渭蟺蔚喂蟻委蔚蟼, 未蠉蟽魏慰位蔚蟼 蟽蠂苇蟽畏蟼 渭蔚 纬慰谓蔚委蟼, 渭苇蠂蟻喂 蠁蠀蟽喂魏维 蟿畏谓 蔚渭蟺蔚喂蟻委伪 蟿慰蠀 螁慰蠀蟽尾喂蟿蟼 蟺慰蠀 苇味畏蟽蔚 蟿蠈蟽慰 慰 伪蠁畏纬畏蟿萎蟼, 蠈蟽慰 魏伪喂 慰 蟽蠀纬纬蟻伪蠁苇伪蟼,伪位位伪 魏伪喂 蟿慰 蟺蠅蟼 畏 蔚尾蟻伪喂魏慰蟿畏蟿伪 纬蔚谓喂魏维 魏伪胃慰蟻委味蔚喂 蟿畏 味蠅萎 魏伪喂 蟿喂蟼 伪蟺慰蠁维蟽蔚喂蟼 蟿蠅谓 蠀蟺慰蟽蟿畏蟻喂魏蟿蠋谓 蟿畏蟼.
韦慰 尾喂尾位委慰 伪蠀蟿蠈 胃伪 蟿慰 蠂伪蟻伪魏蟿萎蟻喂味伪 未蠉蟽魏慰位慰 蟽蔚 蠈位伪 蟿慰蠀, 魏伪蟿伪蟻蠂维蟼 蟽蟿慰 谓伪 蟿慰 尾蟻蔚喂蟼, 魏伪胃蠈蟿喂 苇蠂蔚喂 魏伪喂 伪蠀蟿蠈 蟺苇蟽蔚喂 蟽蟿畏 渭伪蠉蟻畏 蟿蟻蠉蟺伪 蟿蠅谓 蔚尉伪谓蟿位畏渭蔚谓蠅谓, 未蠉蟽魏慰位慰 蟽蟿慰 谓伪 未喂伪尾维蟽蔚喂蟼 蟿畏 蟽蠀谓蔚蠂蠈渭蔚谓畏, 蟺蠀魏谓萎 魏伪喂 渭蔚 蔚位维蠂喂蟽蟿伪 蟽畏渭蔚委伪 蟽蟿委尉畏蟼 纬蟻伪蠁萎 蟿慰蠀 螝蔚蟻蟿蔚蟼, 未蠉蟽魏慰位慰 蟽蟿慰 胃苇渭伪 蟿慰蠀 魏伪胃蠈蟿喂 畏 魏慰喂谓蠅谓委伪 渭伪蟼 渭伪蟼 苇蠂蔚喂 蟺蔚委蟽蔚喂 蟺蠅蟼 慰 伪蟺蠈位蠀蟿慰蟼 蟽魏慰蟺蠈蟼 蔚谓蠈蟼 伪谓胃蟻蠋蟺慰蠀 蠂蠅蟻委蟼 蟺慰位位维 蟺慰位位维, 蔚委谓伪喂 谓伪 蟿蔚魏谓慰蟺慰喂畏蟽蔚喂.. 韦喂 纬委谓蔚蟿伪喂 蠈渭蠅蟼 蠈蟿伪谓 魏维蟺慰喂慰蟼 蠈蟺蠅蟼 慰 蟽蠀纬纬蟻伪蠁苇伪蟼 蟺伪蟻伪胃苇蟿蔚喂 魏维蟺慰喂伪 蔚尉伪喂蟻蔚蟿喂魏维 蔚蟺喂蠂蔚喂蟻萎渭伪蟿伪 纬喂伪 蟿慰 伪谓蟿委胃蔚蟿慰? 螣蟺蠅蟽未萎蟺慰蟿蔚 未蔚谓 蔚委谓伪喂 苇谓伪 蔚蠉魏慰位慰 胃苇渭伪, 伪位位维 蔚委谓伪喂 维魏蟻蠅蟼 蔚谓未喂伪蠁苇蟻慰谓 魏伪喂 未委谓蔚喂 蟺慰位蠉 渭蔚纬维位畏 蟿蟻慰蠁萎 纬喂伪 蟽魏苇蠄畏 魏伪喂 蟽蠀味萎蟿畏蟽畏. 螡慰渭喂味蠅 蟺蠅蟼 蔚委谓伪喂 苇谓伪 尾喂尾位委慰 蟽蟿慰 慰蟺慰委慰 胃伪 蔚蟺喂蟽蟿蟻苇蠄蠅 尉伪谓维 蠉蟽蟿蔚蟻伪 伪蟺蠈 蠂蟻蠈谓喂伪..
3.5 伪蟽蟿苇蟻喂伪 猸愨瓙猸愷煂�
June 3, 2017
A very, very heavy read. Both from the point of view of Kertesz's style and of the subject. A broken man, a very broken Jewish man who had a sad childhood, a tough father, no mother, and if that weren't enough, he is a survivor of Auschwitz. No wonder he cannot fully belong to someone, he cannot love himself, he couldn't love a child. So he writes and pours all his sadness, his hatred, his loneliness, in words. He also spends his time telling his wife what his father, Auschwitz, and life itself did to him, which makes her leave him, because he cannot be saved and he doesn't even want to. The unborn child that this book seems to be dedicated to, although the direct refference to him or her is very rare, doesn't exist and will never exist, because the author cannot conceive of bringing a child into this cruel and absurd world. When asked, either by a doctor or his wife, he immediately and instinctively replies "NO" and this "no" carries within all his pain and all his past.
I gave it 3 stars because even if it's a really short novel, it was very hard to read, to restart reading after a pause. It's interesting, but an overwhelming stream of consciousness.
January 25, 2016
To begin with: I'm not a fan of uber-long sentences. They actually drive me mad, more often than not. But I'm glad, very glad indeed, that I kept on reading. Kert茅sz writes with much tenderness and fury and disarming frankness. Definitely a book I'd recommend to anyone who is even remotely interested in literature by Holocaust survivors. Don't let the long sentences put you off reading it.
March 7, 2013
Tiene partes muy buenas, claramente es un buen escritor, maneja bien la prosa, los recursos. Pero el tema no me atrajo tanto, para escritores que escriben de sus problemas me quedo con Philip Roth.
July 11, 2018
Me pareci贸 muy interesante el mensaje, aunque dif铆cil de leer. Sospecho que es un libro para leer en la madurez
Displaying 1 - 30 of 209 reviews
Can't find what you're looking for?
Get help and learn more about the design.