sirinrob

Yes that's in Part1 Chapter 9 - its the start of the philosophy. Which brings me neatly to my view on the style. The first few chapters are informal - the informal form of address (du) being used in the main, with a fair sprinkling of colloquial language. From chapter 9 onwards the philosophy starts taking over, and the style becoming more formal. By the time we get to the trial the formal dominates ( I have seen this referred to hardboiled writing ) . The third part brings back the more informal style. Picking up on the philosophy, its stongly based on Kant - Micheal's father's set piece is a summary of Kant's view on morality. Micheal continues with that to the end of the book. As a sidenote that is Schlinks stance as well, his own philosopy being very much in the Kantian style. As a lawyer Schlink has to adhere to certain style rules - simple sentences and no superflous words. He does here, but has an annoying habit of putting in some obtuse sentences, which to the translator's credit have been well translated. Whilst I found Micheal's questions interesting and thought provoking - Schlink has an annoying habit of prodding his readership towards certain answers, which I found myself disagreeing with. Did anyone else notice that- or is just me?

Look likes I'll be jumping between 'Bleak House' Charles Dickens and 'Rumo' Walter Moers - talk about a contrast - and spouting on a about the 'The Reader' Schlink

Just finished 'TheThird Policeman' review here

This was the second novel that Brian O'Nolan (under the pseudonym Flann O'Brien. This novel had a checkered history, being rejected 'as too fantastic' by his exisiting publisher and rejected by other publishers. Having been rejected, O'Brien put around stories that the manuscripit had been lost, but in reality he had kept hold of it. It was eventually published a year after his death. Its suppression does give rise to speculation - I think he did so to avoid the censure of the Irish establishment, given he was a civil servant a favourable post at the time. In comparison to 'At-Two -Birds -Swim', this novel at the start does not appear to be so radical. However it that impression is swiftly dispelled. The protagnist has a unusual relationship with John Divinity, which culminates with him being accessory to a murder for the contents of a mysterious black box. Three years after the murder, The protagnist goes to retrieve the box, only yo be catapulted into a parallel universe, in which the physical laws seem to be distorted. Added to this is a rural policeforce that seem obsessed with bycycles, to the extent they fabricate thefts of bycycles. also they indulge in strange activities which take physical concepts to extreme lengths , for example inmfinitely nested boxes. The protagonist gets caught up in the general mayhem ., even to being condemend to being hung. The language is playful and well crafted. There are several memorable lines , for example 'Thats an insoluble pancake'. The situations that arise are wryly amusing and itellectually challenging. There is a minor amount of violence , but no sex. If I have one criticisment, it is regarding the literay joke regarding footnotes. There is a wry comment early in the novel viz: 'footnotes are like books on the lower shelf people dont read them as they have to bend down'. Now O'Brien takes that by the scruff of the neck and in the second half he creates footnotes that effectively take up most of a page. First time its amusing - but scond time round i found it irksome. Notwithstanding a minor criticism , I enjoyed the novel and intend rereading. If you approach the novel with an open mind and willigness to suspend disbelief then I believe you will find it rewarding.

I'm finishing off 'The Third Policeman' by Flann O'Brien. Interesting read - review to follow

Living in Neath im forced to go to either Swansea or Cardiff, as we only have a small, poorly stocked W H Smiths. Waterstones in Swansea is pleasant, but I find their habit of 'pushing' books irksome. I tend to use Borders and Watersons in Cardiff mostly as they are near each other so if I cant find what I want in one I can try the other. Whilst I prefer going to a bookshop, I'm increasingly finding that I have to buy online as bookstores tend to carry what is popular as oppossed to the type of books I'm after (books on philosophy, literary criticism, novels in German)

I know one of the questions that is coming up is to do with the style in part one and how it relates to the rest of the novel. I thought it would be interesting to examine the structure of the novel, before considering the style question. Looking at the overall structure, it struck me that there is a degree of symmetry. The first 3 chapters and the last 2 chapters, in my view, serve as bookends. Considering the first 3 chapters we have 'Meeting Hannah', followed by a description of her old building and comparison with the replacement followed by a dream and finally a formal visit. Looking at the last 2 chapters a similar structure can be detected: firstly a dream, followed by a description of the daughter's building, then the formal visit and finally 'Farewell Hannah'. It is instructive to compare these two segments, something I'll return to () Between these 2 segments we have the affair, the trial and the aftermath of the trial/affair. In my view the style and and tone are shaped by this structure, but will wait till the question is posed before posting further.

I can understand that. Having read the German original, the involved web of ideas is easier to see. The translation smoothes out many of the ideas, into snappy colloquillisnms that are easily forgotten.

Good point - and she seems to be asking for his help at this stage but he doesn't realise it. That said , im looking at the history of her birth place and ther e is the possibility that her mother tongue is Hungarian as Hermannstadt was not part of Roumania till 1918. Before that it was part of Hungary - Transylvannia no less. Also bear in mind her spoken German is restricted to the informal register. She struggles in the trial to make her self understood in formal German. Also Schlink has indicated we should critque Micheal, but Schlink makes this difficult. I could well be clutching at straws with this instance, but still get the feeling Micheal is unreliable - recall how he cant recall Hannah's face , but has to reconstruct it , a bit like an Identikit? The implication of your point - she doenst feel ownership of the language might be related to her withdrawal from the everyday world. This is shown in her apparant withdrawal into herself when dressing. I'll return to that later (yep im a blue meanie )

I have a rule - i do not lend books - either they do not get returned - or returned in a bad state. Mind you most people would not as k for most of my books they are a bit obscure.

As this would seem to be his first attempt at an original novel, then it could signal an attempt to break away from his Warhammer background. I'd give him the benefit of the doubt and see where it leads. From what I've been able to glean you dont need any knowledge of his back catalogue. This is light in touch and comic, in contrast to his dark grim style in connection with Warhammer ( something I detest by the way). Found an excerpt here. Reading that reminds of the 'Sot-Weed Factor' by Johanathan Barth which is in itself extremely funny.

try Primo Levi 'The Drownded and the Saved' for a very poignant account. Be interested in your response.

i'm aware of the various issues posed, and I'm glad that I'm assisting in a meaningful discussion. Lets hope others join in.... Further to the literacy issue, there is acurious exchange between Micheal and Hanna (page 40) 'Are you also learning German?' 'How do you mean?' 'Do you only learn foreign languages, or is there still stuff you have to learn in your own?' (emphasis mine) This is a direct translation of the German, so its not an artifact of translation. The unpsoken implication is that German is not Hannah's mother tongue, even though we are told she came from a ethnic German community in Roumania. This might be an indicator pointing to Micheal's unreliability as a narrator. Thoughts? At the risk of getting my wrist slapped ( spiky limp lettuce leaves preferred) I'll pose a question - what is your estimation of Hannah's and Micheals emotional literacy?

i've just acquired Primo Levi's autobiography 'The Drownded and the Saved'. I have started reading this and it is very poignant. Once I've finished it ill post a review as I feel its important do so.

Yay giulia thats sounds a blast!!! As always your writeups are intersesting and cover the subject Glad you enjoyed the experience - now all we need is to entice that nice Mr Moers to the UK so we can grill him lol. I bet it would be really fun.

I have read both and there are differences. Most are cosmetic, but I have found an instance on page 18 where the authorial intention has impaired by omission. On that page in the english version there is the sentence 'Often in my life I have done things that I had decided not to do.' In the German version the sentence starts with that but then continues with 'and not done things I had decided to do'. So in this instance it looks like the translator has edited the text during translation.

I became aware of Hannah's 'impaired literacy' when she first got Micheal to read to her - it is rather obvious, especially in the German text. Something that never seems to get commented on is Micheal's 'impaired literacy'. There are three instances I've noted. The first one is when he reads from his father's book on Kant and doesn't understand it all, secondly at the trial he struggles to read the english version of the daughter's book and thirdly when he visits the daughter they quickly switch from English to German. In my view the whole issue of Literacy in the novel is confused. The likelihood of Hannah of having impaired literacy is high as she was brought up in Roumania which during her formative years had a policy of educating Roumanians at the expense of ethnic Germans ( which she is). In addition boys got a better education than girls. There is enough evidence that she has a very basic grasp of German, but I concede she cant write and has very limited reading ability. Schlink appears to have chosen impaired literacy as a convenient handle for a metaphor for the lack of understanding of the post war generations with regard to the Nazi past. Something Schlink seems to play on as well is the perceived notion that litearcy is black and white concept. This is a notion I disagree with. Literacy is a spectrum, some people can read and write at a basic level others have a much higher level of ability. It ties in with comprehension. A personal example - 2 years ago I didnt have a clue about surveying houses and all the associated knowledge. Now i do have a good basic understanding of the subject. So in my case I had an impaired literacy in house surveying which after traing has become more literate.

Yes thats on my wishlist too hehe guess I like Moers books.

Yes, but then Schlink would have had to be more specific and that goes against his style. One thing that would have made the whole novel more complete would have been to address directly the question 'What did you do?' in addition to 'What would would you have done?' The latter question is directly asked, the former glossed over as its painful and would have required more exposure to what actually happened in the past, something that Schlink is at great pains to avoid.

Yes, there are plenty of pointers towards classical underpinnings to the novel and the Oedippus story isnt far away. From the various clues dotted around like Hannah being old enough to be his mother but that not bothering him, his reading to her, like a parent to a child, going away together and pretending to be mother and son; all point to the Oeddippus story. The dream about the building is interesting too - it eventually looks blind - I believe thats a metaphor for amongst other things Micheal's blind love of Hannah and Oeddippus's blindess. The entire Oedippus story pervades the novel - to the extent that Hannah represents Jocasta, and like Jocasta hangs herself offstage.

Yes and No. Both Hannah and Micheal sek escapism from life. However as I have pointed out the German title refers to someone who reads something to someone else so in that regard I disagree. Taking up your point re Micheal's confinement due to illness, I believe that extends to his relationship with his family - Father is distant, the rest lecture him in how to think and behave. He is a victim BEFORE he meets Hannah

I'm not surprised you had overlayed your image of the holocaust on the daughter. The structure of the novel is elastic enough for that to happen. What I find troublesome about how Schlink deals with the daughter is how he uses her to validate Hannah's brutatilty towards Micheal, as opossed to the events of the Holocaust. In my view this is symptomatic of Schlink's determination to obfuscate the events of the Holocaust.

Having read 'The City of Dreaming Books' I've now acquired 'Rumo' and from what I've read so far its just as fun and inventive as the other books.

The point you make about sympathy for the daughter is interesting. If you examine how Schlink treats her overall ther is feeling that the author is attempting the opposite. This is particularly noticeable in the scene when Micheal visits her. Schlink's intention is more to invoke sympathy for Hannah as a victim of circumstances beyond her control. The implications of that are troublesome in my view.

The title 'The Reader' is an unfortunate title as it has several meanings in English. The original German title is far less amibigous, meaning someone who reads something out to someone else. Bearing that in mind and intially restricting ourselves to the German meaning , then Micheal, the Judge, the prison governess and possibly the seminar professor are readers. Opening the meaning out draws in more - Hannah in the sense reading other people and eventually being able to read and the daughter in her reading of Micheal. Turning to the more generic questions: i didnt have a favourite character, many were 'cardboard cutouts'. Only Micheal and Hannah received a modicum of development which was still fuzzy, especially in the case of Hannah. The early chapter where Micheal fantasises aabout the building in which Hannah lived is good. I also found the conversation with his father interesting, as it highlights the philosophical underpinning of the novel. This was the first work by Schlink I have read. I have tried reading some his other works and I've come to conclusion that I'm unlikely to read anything else by him as I find his style evasive and approach deliberately vague. I didnt struggle with any of the concepts. My main complaint is the amount of contradiction unspoken implications and evasivness present in the novel. As to whether I found it enjoyable is difficult to answer. It is interesting, but at the same disconcerting in my view.