Disgrace - JM Coetzee

[Freewheeling Andy]

This brief book is wonderful. It's one of those books that written in a crisp, empty way, where as much as said between the lines as is written in the text itself. A mere 200 pages, of sparse, clear literature.

 

My initial reaction to the premise - a bleak book which won the Booker prize, written about a university professor - was worse than trepidation. These are all kinds of pointers to a book I don't want to read. Yet, on the persuasion of friends with better taste than myself, I read it. And was not disappointed.

 

The story is really quite simple - a rather lecherous old professor, whose powers in his field of work are failing as much as his powers in romance, has a brief fling with one of his students, and rather than admit he was in the wrong, he leaves the university in Cape Town.

 

In disgrace he leaves for the rural setting where his daughter is trying to run a small farm. All his chauvinistic prejudices are then shown to carry through to his views about his daughter and her attitude to life. Then, just as he settles in to his life on the farm, reassessing his own lack of skills, there is a brutal, violent attack. This brings into focus the violence and the racial edge of modern South Africa.

 

The core of this book is about how people with rigid views deal with, or fail to deal with, changed circumstances, both for themselves, and within the new politics of South Africa.

 

It's so enlightening, if not exactly life affirming.

[Kell]

And here's my review too...

 

Title: Disgrace

Author: J. M. Coetzee

ISBN # 0099289520

Publisher: Vintage

First Published: 1999

220 pages

Format: Paperback

Rating: 6/10

 

Synopsis:

A divorced, middle-aged English professor finds himself increasingly unable to resist affairs with his female students. After an impulsive affair with his student sours, and having been discovered by the college authorities, he is expected to apologize to save his job, but instead he refuses and resigns, retiring to live with his daughter on her remote farm. For a time, his daughter's influence and the natural rhythms of the farm promise to harmonise his discordant life. He and Lucy become victims of a disturbing attack which brings into relief all their fault lines.

 

 

Review:

Bit of an odd one this - the story didn't really seem to have a point to it, but it illustrated some of the dangers that people live with every day in countries of conflict while trying to get on with their day to day lives. I did enjoy it, but I can't really put my finger on why.

 

 

There were moments where I rather enjoyed reading it, but those were heavily outweighed by the moments where I felt bored out of my scull. None of the characters seems to have any redeeming features and I couldn

[Guest Sedgewick]

I thought I'd bump this thread since it's 1) on the shortlist for the Best of the Booker; and 2) to respond to some things in Kell's review.

 

 

Bit of an odd one this - the story didn't really seem to have a point to it, but it illustrated some of the dangers that people live with every day in countries of conflict while trying to get on with their day to day lives. I did enjoy it, but I can't really put my finger on why.

 

It's been about six years since I read 'Disgrace' and while there wasn't much to the story - man loses everything, finds redemption - I think it went much deeper than just showing "some of the dangers that people live with every day in countries of conflict". It presents the lives of its people within a microcosm that reflected Coetzee's South Africa after the fall of apartheid. The stubborness of age, that old chestnut, pushes him never to accept anything, notably change, and so losing his job is symbolic of the white man losing his grip on the nation. There's the disgrace of him losing him job for his 'encounter', there's the disgrace of not being able to protect one's kin, and then there's the disgrace of South Africa itself, which can be amplified to a more universal level. But, as I said, it's been a long time since I read it, but it made an impression on me and I should think about revisiting it so as to clear the haze a little.

 

the moments where I felt bored out of my scull.

You have a rowing boat? That must be fun. Canoe see the funny side of that?

 

None of the characters seems to have any redeeming features and I couldn’t bring myself to actually care much about any of them of their situations.

Why is the fact the characters have no redeeming features seen as a bad thing, or indeed the need to care about them? I know that, to me, they are characters, they have their situations, and I accept their misdemeanours and poor traits as what I'm most interested in is how they are going to handle those situations and what it means for those around them, themselves included, and what it means for me, the reader.

 

It all seemed very humdrum and as the winner of the 1999 Booker Prize, I feel it reinforces the idea that prize-winning books are generally dry and a little “worthy”, but not so appealing to readers in general, which is a shame, because then the truly wonderful books that won prizes get tarred with the same brush.

 

I said all I had to say on the notion of prize-winning books - notably the Booker- and it got closed, packed off, and sealed in to some unknown vault, so it's probably best I don't open that whole can of worms again. But 'Disgrace' is one of those books most loved by readers, and is certainly one of the more popular winners of the Booker, along with 'Life Of Pi', 'The Remains Of The Day', and 'Midnight's Children'.

[Freewheeling Andy]

1) on the shortlist for the Best of the Booker;

 

Now, I liked Disgrace, and thought it was a thoroughly worthwhile book. But "Best of the Booker"? It's better than Life of Pi, of course, but it's hardly very ambitious, and I find that lack of ambitious should surely mitigate against it as "best book by a British published author in the last 30 years". (But then, having looked down the list of Booker winners, there's not much that comes close to Midnight's Children in terms of either ambition or achievement).

[Guest Sedgewick]

But then, having looked down the list of Booker winners, there's not much that comes close to Midnight's Children in terms of either ambition or achievement).

 

I've personally not read 'Midnight's Children' although it's been taking up shelf space for ages now. It's a pick up and put down title at the mo'.

 

Well, the judges picked 'Disgrace' as being one of the six best, leaving the final decision to the public vote. Perhaps they don't trust the public not to pick 'Life Of Pi', given how many its sold and therefore how popular it is, but I know that I would swap 'The Remains of The Day' for a couple of the titles on that shortlist.

[Kell]

Sedgewick - You had me in fits over the "scull" spelling mistake!

 

On the point about me not feeling any of the characters having redeeming features and not caring about any of them - it's not essential for all characters to have something redeeming about them, but to me it makes a characters ore believable if there is good and bad both evident about them - and if I don't care at least a little bit about at least one of the characters, it makes it difficult for me to make any kind of connection with them, which does make things slightly less enjoyable for me. I know that's probably purely personal, but it's just true for me. Conversely, it's often the "baddies" I feel the better connection too - I like a good, flawed character, and I love for a "bad guy" to get away with stuff, but someone, somewhere has to have something positive about them to give a bit of balance.

 

The "prize-winners are dry" comment is a generalisation, I know, and personally I've enjoyed some of the prize-winners I've read, but it is a commonly-felt thing that prize-winners tend to be seen as "high brow" and, on occasion, more than a little "worthy", and tend to appeal to a certain type of reader. There's nothing wrong with that, but many readers (maybe not most, I can't speak for everyone and I wouldn't want to really) read purely for enjoyment and sometimes with the heavier tomes (not necessarily in physical weight, but perhaps in mental or emotional weight) don’t' appeal on that kind of level - not always, but I'd probably go with 50/50 on that call.

 

I don't pretend to be a high-brow reader, but I will try most things and I think that in general I have a pretty good level of understanding. However, when it comes to writing reviews, I go on my personal experience of the book in question and this one just held very little appeal for me. That said, I haven't completely ruled out trying something else by Coetzee, despite not thinking much of this particular novel...

Edited June 9, 2008 by Kell
Dealing with some of the more glaring typos before Sedgewick picks up on them - LOL!

[Guest Sedgewick]

On the point about me not feeling any of the characters having redeeming features and not caring about any of them - it's not essential for all characters to have something redeeming about them, but to me it makes a characters ore believable if there is good and bad both evident about them - and if I don't care at least a little bit about at least one of the characters, it makes it difficult for me to make any kind of connection with them, which does make things slightly less enjoyable for me.

Conversely, it's often the "baddies" I feel the better connection too - I like a good, flawed character, and I love for a "bad guy" to get away with stuff, but someone, somewhere has to have something positive about them to give a bit of balance.

 

Since the main character was the prof - Lurie, I think - are you saying that he wasn't good and bad in equal measure. Of course there was the stuff about his sex offences - I can't remember the severity of them, perhaps just an affair with a student, or something - and his stubborn character, but at the same time he was a man lost in a changing world, a man who wanted to protect his daughter and ultimately couldn't. Heartbreaking.

 

I think this is important, for Coetzee himself is an aging man who has lived a certain comfort for years and then his nation has given way to a massive change that he perhaps can't reconcile in his mind. Maybe that's why he lives in Australia now.

 

The "prize-winners are dry" comment is a generalisation, I know, and personally I've enjoyed some of the prize-winners I've read, but it is a commonly-felt thing that prize-winners tend to be seen as "high brow" and, on occasion, more than a little "worthy", and tend to appeal to a certain type of reader.

It's a misconception as there are prizes for pretty much everything nowadays. If Katie Price can be up for an award (ie. the Galaxy Awards) then I'd be wary of throwing around the highbrow tag. But I think you are referring to literary prizes rather than your Golden Daggers, Galaxies, and the now defunct Smarties. Saying the winners are highbrow does the runners up a disservice as they must surely be highbrow, too.

 

Personally, I don't like the highbrow tag because everything is just books, and as Oscar Wilde once said, and to paraphrase, there are only good books and bad books and that is all. Highbrow, like pretentious, seems to be one of those tags thrown upwards because it doesn't fit a person's particular tastes - it gives us a small window to look into the nature of the person using it.

 

I don't quite know what the certain type of reader you refer to is, as reading really is an all walks of life thing, and I'm sure sixteen year olds can enjoy a John Banville as much as a sixty year old. Age, in reading, doesn't define much, so that can't be it.

 

many readers read purely for enjoyment and sometimes with the heavier tomes (not necessarily in physical weight, but perhaps in mental or emotional weight) don’t' appeal on that kind of level - not always, but I'd probably go with 50/50 on that call.

I hardly think people using their spare time to read "heavier tomes" are doing it out of some obligation. No, I'd say it's also "purely for enjoyment". Anyone not reading purely for enjoyment is someone studying, be it for exams or business.

 

I haven't completely ruled out trying something else by Coetzee, despite not thinking much of this particular novel...

I wish I could recommend something else by him, but sadly 'Disgrace' is all I've read.