Peter's Reviews > The Bridge on the Drina
The Bridge on the Drina (Bosnian Trilogy, #1)
by
by

I was really looking forward to reading this book but upon actually reading it I was disappointed and -I have to admit- started to skip whole paragraphs towards the end. From the reviews I had read I expected a sweeping epic of Bosnia and the Balkans, but that’s not really what the book is.
The beginning, when the construction of the Mehmed Paša Sokolović bridge in Višegrad is narrated, is very interesting and vivid, not to say lurid in places. Mehmed Paša was actually a Serbian (Christian) Bosniak, who was abducted as a young boy by the Turks under their notorious blood tax system (‘designed� to minimise internecine disloyalty by competing Muslim groups and families in the military and public service of the Ottoman Empire), renamed, forcibly converted to Islam, and then rose through the ranks to become Grand Vizier to the Sultan. He commissioned the building of the (now) eponymous bridge over the Drina, which in the book symbolises the only firm and solid structure against a background of constant and often violent change typical of the Balkans.
Although the book spans a long period from the 16th century, when the bridge was built, to the beginning of the Great War at the beginning of the 20th century, the story is not so much an epic as a (temporally and topically) inconsistent series of portraits of Višegrad townsfolk: Turks (Muslims), Serbs (Orthodox Christians), Jews (Sephardic and later Ashkenazi), and more recently Austrians and Hungarians. I found that the narrative is strong when telling stories of actual (or fictional) occurrences, but weak(er) when talking about abstract concepts (e.g. politics), especially towards the end.
Also I feel there are issues with the translation into English. Edwards makes a brave effort but the language now seems oddly stilted and dated, at least to me. Even I know that in the Balkans they drink slivovitz, not ‘plum brandy�, and the Sephardic Jews of Višegrad probably speak Ladino rather than ‘Spanish�. Anyway, I bet the book is much better in the original but I have no way of finding out, as I don’t understand any Serbo-Croatian.
So in conclusion: either I had unrealistic expectations of what the scope and range of this book were, or I was influenced by the fact that it won the author a Literature Nobel Prize. Maybe both; anyway I’m more than a bit disappointed.
The beginning, when the construction of the Mehmed Paša Sokolović bridge in Višegrad is narrated, is very interesting and vivid, not to say lurid in places. Mehmed Paša was actually a Serbian (Christian) Bosniak, who was abducted as a young boy by the Turks under their notorious blood tax system (‘designed� to minimise internecine disloyalty by competing Muslim groups and families in the military and public service of the Ottoman Empire), renamed, forcibly converted to Islam, and then rose through the ranks to become Grand Vizier to the Sultan. He commissioned the building of the (now) eponymous bridge over the Drina, which in the book symbolises the only firm and solid structure against a background of constant and often violent change typical of the Balkans.
Although the book spans a long period from the 16th century, when the bridge was built, to the beginning of the Great War at the beginning of the 20th century, the story is not so much an epic as a (temporally and topically) inconsistent series of portraits of Višegrad townsfolk: Turks (Muslims), Serbs (Orthodox Christians), Jews (Sephardic and later Ashkenazi), and more recently Austrians and Hungarians. I found that the narrative is strong when telling stories of actual (or fictional) occurrences, but weak(er) when talking about abstract concepts (e.g. politics), especially towards the end.
Also I feel there are issues with the translation into English. Edwards makes a brave effort but the language now seems oddly stilted and dated, at least to me. Even I know that in the Balkans they drink slivovitz, not ‘plum brandy�, and the Sephardic Jews of Višegrad probably speak Ladino rather than ‘Spanish�. Anyway, I bet the book is much better in the original but I have no way of finding out, as I don’t understand any Serbo-Croatian.
So in conclusion: either I had unrealistic expectations of what the scope and range of this book were, or I was influenced by the fact that it won the author a Literature Nobel Prize. Maybe both; anyway I’m more than a bit disappointed.
Sign into ŷ to see if any of your friends have read
The Bridge on the Drina.
Sign In »
Reading Progress
Comments Showing 1-16 of 16 (16 new)
date
newest »

message 1:
by
Iluvatar
(new)
-
rated it 3 stars
Nov 11, 2023 05:38AM

reply
|
flag






Maybe the reason it isn’t the sweeping epic you anticipated is because the only consistent point of narrative reference isn’t a dynasty or even a people but an inanimate object.
Even though I’m English, for me plum brandy is pàlinka and even the Spanish (Ladino) only encouraged me to go to a concert of Ladino music in the Dohàny St. synagogue in Budapest.
If we all shared the same opinions the world we be a very tedious place.

Peter wrote: "By the way, Iluvatar, did you read the book in its original Serbo-Croatian? If do what do you think of the translation into English (see my review)?"
Thanks for the clarification and the tip, Iluvatar.


Obviously, The Bridge on the Drina might seem differently shaded in Arabic, Turkish or Serbo-Croatian but I sensed no limitations while reading an English translation. A friend from Bosnia suggested that the novel by Ivo Andric is often assigned by schools in Sarajevo & elsewhere within his native country but also in Croatia, Montenegro, etc. Bill
