Warning: I feel the urge to shock, because it's been a long time since I saw so much nonsense so concentrated together! This was the first time I readWarning: I feel the urge to shock, because it's been a long time since I saw so much nonsense so concentrated together! This was the first time I read the German-Korean philosopher and cultural scientist Byung-Chul Han (掳1959). It is a collection of essays, in which Han reveals himself as a mercilessly sharp critic of our society. Nothing against that, on the contrary. But this clearly went on deaf ears with me.
It starts with the pushy tone of his argument: Han launches proposition after proposition, without nuance, declaiming to the point of being pushy, and almost without exception in very negative terms. So much assertive negativity always arouses my suspicion, and almost automatically provokes resistance in me. In one of the chapters, Han laments the disappearance of the playful and the festive; well: his bone-dry text lacks any form of humor and playfulness. And the mantra that always returns: it is capitalism in its neoliberal phase that is to blame for everything that is going wrong in our society today. On almost every page, neoliberalism figures as a demon that has ruined our idyllic life of the past. Such simplistic thinking makes me angry. Be careful, the concept of neoliberalism is a useful instrument to explain certain (ideological) aspects of our political-economic system, but it is no more than an instrument, a tool, not an acting being in itself, as Han seems to suggest.
And while we are at it: what Han lists as the ills of the time is of course recognizable (production and authenticity compulsion, hyper-individualism, disenchantment of the world, etc.), but it is a particularly one-sided, exclusively negative reading of the time.
The biggest annoyance when reading this book is its a-historical nature. Han is clearly irritated by the disenchantment of the world, and acts as if this phenomenon only became active with globalization and neoliberalism, which is of course not the case. Many of his examples seem to be recent phenomena (attributed to neoliberal capitalism), while most of them are the result of centuries of evolution (see Charles Taylor). And then there is his ambiguous reference to the good things of the past: the Japanese tea ritual, life in a Hungarian rural village, fashion in the 19th century (the era of industrial modernity par excellence?). And what do you think of this statement: 鈥淚n a society determined by rituals, depression does not occur. There, the soul is completely absorbed, indeed emptied, by ritual forms.鈥� The author apparently has an idealistic view of rituals, which can of course be valuable, but which according to him are (should be) 鈥榚mpty鈥�, mere form, no meaning. And that is strange, because in my opinion rituals can certainly also have a dominant and dehumanizing effect.
No, Han seems to me 鈥� based on this booklet 鈥� to be yet another representative of a romantic cultural pessimist, who is only able to mourn the decline of what once was, and is unable to sketch a sound alternative. Such analyses are usually so one-sided that the ultimate consequence of their thinking can only be a return to reactionary times. What a waste....more
Klaus Mann (1906-1949), the eldest son of Thomas Mann, with this short novella proves that 鈥� like his father - he could write succinct stories. Here, Klaus Mann (1906-1949), the eldest son of Thomas Mann, with this short novella proves that 鈥� like his father - he could write succinct stories. Here, he evokes the last days of the mentally ill King Ludwig of Bavaria, imprisoned by his entourage in a castle with barred windows. At first, I thought this story had an allegorical meaning, with a veiled criticism of the Nazis (Ludwig blames his imprisonment on a conspiracy by the State and science). But Mann broaches other themes, such as Ludwig's struggle with his homosexuality (Richard Wagner makes a striking appearance here). And after the dramatic denouement, the focus suddenly shifts to Elisabeth, the Empress of Austria (known as 'Sissi'), to whom the author addresses a rather pathetic appeal. Stylistically, this novella is certainly worth it, but as a story it limps too much on different legs....more
Plastic Surgery in the Seventeenth Century? Where does the Phoebus Foundation keeps getting it from? This booklet discusses a painting by an unknown maPlastic Surgery in the Seventeenth Century? Where does the Phoebus Foundation keeps getting it from? This booklet discusses a painting by an unknown master from the 17th century, with a very macabre content. It depicts a studio where people of standing are beheaded, given a temporary head in the shape of a cabbage, while their real head is being reworked and then baked in an oven, subsequently to be placed back on the torso of the rightful owner. This was apparently a fairly popular genre in the 17th century. In a rather dry, enumerative text, Wendy Wauters provides explanation and context. Compared to other Phoebus Focus publications, I found this to be a lesser edition; this could have been worked out better. But the theme itself is definitely interesting and surprising! It gives an idea of how people (let's say elites) in the 17th century already were focussed on enhancing themselves physically, a quite modern affliction. Here's the full painting: [image]...more
My far too long 鈥渢o read鈥� list has long included 鈥渂ooks on American pragmatism鈥�. So, I didn鈥檛 hesitate when I saw this beautifully published book in mMy far too long 鈥渢o read鈥� list has long included 鈥渂ooks on American pragmatism鈥�. So, I didn鈥檛 hesitate when I saw this beautifully published book in my bookstore. William James (1842-1910) is nothing less than the father of that philosophical movement, and so I hoped to score a nice introduction here. Unfortunately, John Kaag may have intended this as an introduction, in practice it has become more of a self-help book. Of course, I could have suspected that, based on the subtitle. Kaag, himself a specialist in pragmatic philosophy, zooms in on James鈥� personal life, especially the man鈥檚 many existential struggles, and he also connects them with his own struggles, including suicidal thoughts. You may find this courageous or repellent, but it distracted me from my question of what James and pragmatism stand for. 鈥淭ruth is what works鈥�, is the classic summary of that philosophy. And, of course, I already knew that this is a rather simplistic summary. Kaag only gets around to providing some explanation on this towards the end of his book. But what about everything that precedes it? I don't know. Perhaps it is commendable to present the winding path of a genius (James, that is, Kaag does his best to attribute a more average level to himself) to demonstrate that you can indeed cut through fundamental existential knots by thinking calmly and especially by reasoning hands-on, and thus reach the light from the darkness. Again, I don't know. I - who am rather optimistic by nature - had little use for this. So, I will have to take another look at the rest of my "to read" list....more
This Dutch language novel, written by the Flemish writer Jan Toortelboom (掳 1975), offers a series of confessions and reflections by a man by on his dThis Dutch language novel, written by the Flemish writer Jan Toortelboom (掳 1975), offers a series of confessions and reflections by a man by on his deathbed. It is a rather complicated composition that shows how someone who suffered a severe trauma in his youth, has to constantly fight his demons. This book won a literature prize (Boekenbon Literatuurprijs 2023), but isn't translated in English (yet). Rating 2.5 stars. Dutch review below.
Bekentenissen op een sterfbed, het is een genre op zichzelf, met een evident problematisch karakter, want de verteller is bij uitstek onbetrouwbaar. In dit geval voert Jan Vantoortelboom Mauk op, een samentrekking van Maurice K. (een verwijzing naar Kafka, of naar de 茅chte vader van Maurice?). De auteur doet 鈥� via verteller Mauk - zijn uiterste best om voortdurend mist te spuien over allerlei situaties in het verleden, en over de ware toestand van de verteller. Mysterieuze verwijzingen naar schimmige figuren (zowel oom Konrad als broer Henri), naar Wilde Westen-toestanden, en vooral naar niet nader beschreven 鈥榲reselijke misdaden鈥�, volgen elkaar op. Pas naar het einde toe vallen de puzzelstukken op zijn plaats. Vantoortelboom is ingenieus te werk gegaan, absoluut. Maar tegelijk iets te opzichtig, en vooral: waar wou hij heen? Wat is de baseline van deze roman? Dat de impact van een jeugdtrauma centraal staat, is duidelijk. Stilistisch bevat dit boekje zowel knappe passages (zoals de beschrijving van zijn slapende moeder) als wat mindere. Gemengde gevoelens dus. Rating 2.5 sterren....more
For three months I read intensively about the earliest history of the area of Israel/Palestine, and how Jewish culture came into being there in the fiFor three months I read intensively about the earliest history of the area of Israel/Palestine, and how Jewish culture came into being there in the first millennium BCE. I know that libraries have been filled with books about this, so it was no more than a first introduction. What immediately struck me is how fierce the debates about this early period are, both inside and outside the academic world. This obviously has to do with the political implications for today's world (the legitimacy of the state of Israel and the rights of the Palestinian people), with the fundamental tension between a (agnostic) scientific and a religiously inspired approach, but also with a number of methodological questions of historical research. The latter mainly concerns the question to what extent the stories of the Hebrew Bible can be used as a historical source. Opinions on this range from 鈥渁bsolutely not鈥�, biblical history largely is a fictional story with minimal historical references and only archaeology can provide us with anything reliable (radically minimalist), to 鈥渕ostly true鈥�, biblical stories are based on hard historical events that have been passed down for centuries and eventually recorded fairly faithfully in writing (radically maximalist). Within these extreme positions, there is of course a whole range of opinions that lean more in one direction or more in the other. And this diversity is logical, because 鈥� as with much of antiquity 鈥� we are dealing here with a striking lack of written and material sources, and reasoned speculation is the only way to present a sound historical story. The ten or so books that I read on this subject made it clear to me that the last word on this has not yet been written, and perhaps never will be.
The book by Jacob L. Wright (Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia) is in its own way a daring attempt to shed more light on this thorny issue. Wright focuses on the redaction history of the Hebrew Bible, and attempts to explain why the biblical stories were written, especially since they are so atypical of the rest of the writings we know from the ancient Near East. His angle is political: the conquest and dismantling of the 鈥淛ewish states鈥� (Jewish is of course an anachronism here) by Assyria in the late 8th century and early 6th century BCE caused a shock, and that trauma was transformed into the view that a nation is defined not so much by kings and courts, but by culture (language, customs, religion, etc.). That view was transformed into numerous stories, sometimes long-standing, sometimes completely invented, and which 鈥� like a self-fulfilling prophecy 鈥� set in motion a dynamic that effectively led to a Jewish nation, the first example of internal nation-building in history. And the biblical stories bear the traces of that centuries-long process of highly complex redaction history, with different versions and different intentions. I could write much more about this (some more in my review in my History account on 欧宝娱乐: /review/show...), but let me suffice to say that Wright's book made a great impression. His focus may be somewhat narrowly political (nation-building), and he ignores many spiritual aspects of the biblical stories, but this book was the first thoroughly argued synthesis that allowed me to place and interpret the whole, complex process of the emergence of the specific Jewish culture. Of course it's very thorough and edging academic, but it comes highly recommended!...more
Om eerlijk te zijn: het horrorgenre ligt niet echt binnen mijn comfortzone. In dit geval gaat het om een bundel met tien van elkaar losstaande verhaleOm eerlijk te zijn: het horrorgenre ligt niet echt binnen mijn comfortzone. In dit geval gaat het om een bundel met tien van elkaar losstaande verhalen. Ze volgen elkaar op, beginnend bij de Romeinse tijd, en dan telkens vooruitspringend tot wat ik veronderstel 鈥榥u鈥� te zijn. Wat ze gemeen hebben is dat ze zich allemaal afspelen in de Lage Landen, en dat er behoorlijk gruwelijke dingen in gebeuren. De auteur slaagt er zeker in een sfeer van mysterie en dreiging op te roepen, waarna meestal een opeenvolging gebeurt van niet zo鈥檔 fraaie dingen. Het ene verhaal zit al vernuftiger in elkaar dan het andere. Zo vergen vooral het 6de en het 10de verhaal wel wat aandacht van de lezer om in te schatten wat er precies gebeurt (zeker het 10de is mooi gedaan). Een pluspunt is zeker de historische kennis van de auteur: onrechtstreeks schetst hij op adequate wijze de betrokken tijdsperiode; ik kon geen anachronismen of historisch foute beschrijvingen en toestanden ontdekken; en dat is al een prestatie op zich. Maar zoals ik al aangaf: dit is niet mijn 鈥榙ing鈥�, en af en toe werd ik verrast door taalfoutjes, zinsconstructies en metaforen die een beetje rammelden. Maar hier zit zeker potentieel in....more
A few weeks ago I read Understanding Genesis by the Jewish Bible expert Nahum Sarna, a commendable little book, but already 60 years old. And so I optA few weeks ago I read Understanding Genesis by the Jewish Bible expert Nahum Sarna, a commendable little book, but already 60 years old. And so I opted for one of the most recent commentaries on Genesis, by the American writer Marilynne Robinson, whose heavily loaded novels (especially the Gilead series) I read with increasing enthusiasm. Much of what Robinson writes was similar to Sarna, and that is not surprising: I guess there are only a limited amount of views on old texts like this one possible. But Robinson writes in her typical very condensed writing and reasoning style, which automatically makes this a much richer book, with many valuable insights. But a few things bothered me. For instance, that she systematically quotes passages and references from the New Testament to illustrate and explain the texts of the Old Testament; as a historian I have a hard time with that. But also the lack of structure in Robinson鈥檚 argument is disturbing and even discouraging: at times this seems more like a rather loose collection of reflections and explanations, where certain aspects are seriously explored, others not at all. And finally, Robinson completely ignores the discussion about the redaction history of the Bible stories and their historical value. Bothersome, because it is precisely from this redaction history that it can be concluded how constructed and multi-tracked the Bible texts are, including Genesis. In her introduction she refers to this briefly, and then claims that despite this complex redaction history there still is a great deal of coherence and homogeneity in the Old Testament: 鈥淚 take it that in the course of their development the Scriptures were pondered very deeply by those who composed and emended them, and that this created a profound coherency, stabilizing difficult concepts or teachings to the point that earlier and later passages can be seen as elucidating one another鈥�. Now, I don鈥檛 understand that. It is precisely those contributions by so many anonymous writers (scribes), from different times, with different backgrounds, inspirations and intentions, that make the coherence of the Old Testament writings not so great at all. And that鈥檚 no problem: it is precisely that diversity that seems to me to be the richness of those texts. It is a pity that Robinson, like many others, so stubbornly sticks to the one track, and the one truth, narrowing rather than enriching. Too bad....more
Het woord vooraf omschrijft perfect wat je van dit boek mag verwachten: 鈥淒it heeft geen wetenschappelijke pretentie, het houdt de balans tussen badineHet woord vooraf omschrijft perfect wat je van dit boek mag verwachten: 鈥淒it heeft geen wetenschappelijke pretentie, het houdt de balans tussen badinerende anekdotiek en (hopelijk) originele invalshoeken, tussen het vrolijke en het wijze, tussen ernst en goedbedoelde luim.鈥� Het meest interessante deel vond ik de toelichting bij de citaten die aan Caesar worden toegeschreven. Als pleidooi voor sterk geschiedenisonderwijs is dit boek een beetje vreemd, want het lijdt aan alles waar de critici van klassieke kennisoverdracht zich aan ergeren. Maar wie houdt van een opeenstapeling van weetjes, krijgt hier waar voor zijn geld. ...more
Loading...
