Recently, I got a comment on one of my blog posts that the level of my English is terrible. To be honest, the comment went something like that "Oh, God, this is some bad English." Of course, it is. What do you expect from an Eastern European like me, who has studied only 3 years in the UK (in bad English, OMG!) and who is now studying in France (in the same bad English!). I cannot go on with the difficulties I have with this terrible language, called English. I have to memorize all of my lectures without knowing what they are about. I don't have any friends because they all speak this terrible language (English is it?) and I simply cannot memorize the words needed in social conversations. I don't read in English (ok, I don't understand it) and I write in this blog thanks to the generous help of Google translate (God bless it!)
So now, since I don't know English at all, I am going to post a blog in Bulgarian. I am sorry for all of my English speaking readers (if there are such since obviously I don't speak their language!).
Now to the serious part. The second part of Words of Wisdom (i.e memorable quotes I have written down) comes in Bulgarian because I do mostly read novels in Bulgarian. Hence, most of the quotes I love, are indeed in my mother language. Yes, I know I can go through the fuss of translating them but that ruins the whole point of it. I picked them up exactly because I liked the way they sounded in Bulgarian. So if you are not a Bulgarian, you better close this window now because I promise you, there is no way you can understand what I am talking about (with the slight exception of you being a Russian or a Serbian with an extensive knowledge of the Cyrillic alphabet).
"Това е бедата на хората, които винаги казват истината. Смятат, че и другите са като тях."
"Ловецът на хвърчила" - Халед Хосейни
"Как безупречна изглеждаше любовта, а след туй дойдоха белите."
"Ловецът на хвърчила" - Халед Хосейни
"Тя каза: Толкова се страхувам.
-Защо? - попитах аз, а тя отговори: Защото съм толкова безгранично щастлива, доктор Раоул. Плаши ме това щастие.
Пак я попитах защо и тя рече: Позволяват ти да бъдеш толкова щастлив само ако се канят да ти отнемат нещо."
"Ловецът на хвърчила" - Халед Хосейни
"Вие сте прекалено нещастна, за да бъдете хубава"
"Биография на глада" - Амели Нотомб
"Оставете любовта на мира. Използвате я за оправдание, за защита, за мотивация, за всичко. Любовта това, любовта онова. Поредната масова психоза. Бедно и не на място ми звучи думата "любов" на всяка крачка. Любовни подбуди - чисти и неегоистични? Хайде стига толкова. Любовта не е чаршаф да я постилате всеки ден с повод и без повод. Когато ми кажеш, че го правиш от любов, чувам нищото."
"...тази млада жена, която толкова дълго е страдала мълчаливо, тази добра жена, която отказва да повярва, че е добра, защото само добрите се съмняват в добротата си и това повече от всичко ги прави добри. Защото лошите, те си знаят, че са лоши, докато добрите не знаят нищо подобно. Те цял живот прощават на другите, но не могат да простят на себе си."
"Мъж на тъмно" - Пол Остър
"Но не трябва да обичаме така пестеливо и набързо сякаш от страх, че после можем да обикнем по-силно."
"Доктор Живаго" - Борис Пастернак
"Да се "вселиш" в едо момиче така че изцяло да го завладееш е изкуство, а да се "изселиш" от него - шедьовър. Последното обаче до голяма степен зависи от първото."
"Дневник на прелъстителя" - Сьорен Киркегор
"Мисленете, казва един мой приятел, мисленето е нещо много трудно и не може всеки да дилетанства в него както си иска. Той никога не би седнал да изсвири соната за фортепиано, защото не може. Ала всеки смята, че може да мисли и се хвърля да мисли безспир."
"-Закъсали сте. Мисля, че Ви се е появила душа.
-Това е много опасно.
-Неизлечимо."
"Ние" - Евгени Замятин
"Откакто се помня умирам от глад. Произлизам от заможна среда, вкъщи никога не е липсвало нищо. Това ме навежда на мисълта, че моят глад е специфичен - той е социално необясним. Нека уточня също, че гладът ми трябва да се разбира в широк смисъл - ако беше просто глад за храна, положението нямаше да е толкова сериозно. Впрочем съществува ли само глад за храна? Може ли стомашния глад да не е израз на един общ глад? Под глад разбирам ужасяващата нужда от нещо, изптивана от цялото същество, мъчителното усещане за вакуум, стремежът не толкова към утопичната насита, колкото към простата реалност - там където няма нищо, да се появи нещо.
"Биография на глада" - Амели Нотомб
"Проблемът на света е, че глупавите са самоуверени, а умните винаги се колебаят."
"Имах чувството, че хората идват и си отиват, раждат се и умират, но книгите са вечни. И като малък мечтаех да стана книга. Не писател - хората мряха като мухи и писателите не правеха изключение. Но не и книгите. Колкото и систематично да ги изтребваш, винаги има вероятност някой екземпляр да оцелее и да продължи да се наслаждава на живота от някоя лавица в ъгъла на забравена от Бога библиотека."
"История за любов и мрак" - Амос Оз
"Ние сме построили тази клетка наречена цивилизация, понеже имаме способността да мислим, а сега трябва да мислим понеже сме хванати в собствената си клетка."
"Пилето" - Уилям Уортън
"-Никога не съм се влюбвал. В това е моето нещастие."
-Аз пък никога не мога да остана влюбен, а това е по-страшно."
Фредерик Бегбеде
Thats all for now. I have many more, most of which are Erich Maria Remarque's. I feel, however, he deserves a separate post, simply because he is great.
Showing posts with label Yevgeny Zamyatin. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Yevgeny Zamyatin. Show all posts
Tuesday, 7 February 2012
Sunday, 3 July 2011
Matched - Condie's Dystopia Where the Society Decides How You Live, What You Work, Whom You Marry, and When You Die
I finished another dystopia in the style of the famous Zamyatin, Huxley, Orwell, Bradbury, and Burgess. Matched by the still young and inexperienced author Ally Condie learns from the best; yet the novel lacks the power, strength, gloominess, and total desperation of the famous predecessors. Still, a rather good read proving that dystopia is not dead and even more important now in the light of our technology-dominated world.
In Condie's world society controls everything - the way you live, whom you marry, what you eat, where you work, and even how you die. People live a life pre-determined by the Officials. Freedom seems a small price to pay in exchange for a well-regulated, healthy, and successful life. Cassia is a girl, who strongly believes in the Society and its means of guiding life. At the age of 17th she is to be assigned a life-partner based on thorough investigations about her character. She is to be "matched". In her lucky case, to her best friend Xander. His friendly face appears on the screen as the best match for a husband, securing a long happy life and healthy offspring. For a moment, though, another face flashes, the fase of the strange Ky. This sets Cassia to doubt the matching, to mistrust the society, and the oppose the choice that has been forced upon her.
Matched is a novel mostly about freedom of choice. Are we ready to abandon this luxury for a comfortable life? Indeed, through technological investigations society has established a perfect world. People are assigned jobs that match their character. All of them are specialists in their field knowing nothing about other fields though. They follow a carefully prepared personal diet that provides the exact amount of calories needed. They are matched to the most suitable member of the opposite sex and their children have the perfect genes. And exactly at the age of 80 people have to die. Society has decided that this is the perfect age to live the world and in a sort of way help people do so. In this obvious perfection, Cassia falls in love with Ky, who is a deviation. He is not "right" and "perfect" according to the norms of society. He is different. And the different are not to be tolerated or let to live according to their rules. In Matched, we see the imperfections of a perfect world, who limits the individuals. The only thing that sets them free is love.
The previous examples of dystopian novels also used love as a trigger for change. The characters in 1984, Brave New World, and We started doubting the status quo the moment they fell in love with the wrong person. In Matched, love is the central theme. The lack of freedom in love suffocates Cassia and prompts her to fight the Officials, to abandon the security, and to isolate from society in order to find Ky. This is a really wonderful love story in the light of dystopia. Although it doesn't have the literary qualities of the other dystopian novels and in times it is largely predictable, Matched should be read. At least, it leaves you with a good taste in your mouth and with a hope that may be totalitarian regimes could be overcome with the power of love. Something that Orwell, Huxley, and Zamyatin certainly don't believe.
In Condie's world society controls everything - the way you live, whom you marry, what you eat, where you work, and even how you die. People live a life pre-determined by the Officials. Freedom seems a small price to pay in exchange for a well-regulated, healthy, and successful life. Cassia is a girl, who strongly believes in the Society and its means of guiding life. At the age of 17th she is to be assigned a life-partner based on thorough investigations about her character. She is to be "matched". In her lucky case, to her best friend Xander. His friendly face appears on the screen as the best match for a husband, securing a long happy life and healthy offspring. For a moment, though, another face flashes, the fase of the strange Ky. This sets Cassia to doubt the matching, to mistrust the society, and the oppose the choice that has been forced upon her.
Matched is a novel mostly about freedom of choice. Are we ready to abandon this luxury for a comfortable life? Indeed, through technological investigations society has established a perfect world. People are assigned jobs that match their character. All of them are specialists in their field knowing nothing about other fields though. They follow a carefully prepared personal diet that provides the exact amount of calories needed. They are matched to the most suitable member of the opposite sex and their children have the perfect genes. And exactly at the age of 80 people have to die. Society has decided that this is the perfect age to live the world and in a sort of way help people do so. In this obvious perfection, Cassia falls in love with Ky, who is a deviation. He is not "right" and "perfect" according to the norms of society. He is different. And the different are not to be tolerated or let to live according to their rules. In Matched, we see the imperfections of a perfect world, who limits the individuals. The only thing that sets them free is love.
The previous examples of dystopian novels also used love as a trigger for change. The characters in 1984, Brave New World, and We started doubting the status quo the moment they fell in love with the wrong person. In Matched, love is the central theme. The lack of freedom in love suffocates Cassia and prompts her to fight the Officials, to abandon the security, and to isolate from society in order to find Ky. This is a really wonderful love story in the light of dystopia. Although it doesn't have the literary qualities of the other dystopian novels and in times it is largely predictable, Matched should be read. At least, it leaves you with a good taste in your mouth and with a hope that may be totalitarian regimes could be overcome with the power of love. Something that Orwell, Huxley, and Zamyatin certainly don't believe.
Thursday, 23 June 2011
"We" is Bigger Than "I" in Zamyatin's Dystopian World
Before George Orwell, Anthony Burgess
Ray Bradbury, and Aldus Huxley, there was the pioneer of the dystopian novel. The first man who wrote a shocking novel about the extremities of totalitarianism and control was actually Russian. Yes, Orwell, Bradbury, and Huxley were taught about socialist dictatorship by no other but Yevgeny Zamyatin.
We was published in 1926 as a response of the author's personal experiences during the Russian revolutions in 1906 and in 1917. The dystopian world of We is set in the future, where people do not have names but numbers. Males have odd numbers prefixed by consonants while women - even number prefixed by vowels. All of these "numbers" wear identical clothes, sleep in identical places, and are subject to the ideal of industrial efficiency. Human beings are screws in a machine - the "I" is not important; the "We" creates the state. The whole country is made up of glass as to facilitate control by the secret police and the spies. The ruler is (and has been for quite some time) the same one, the Benefactor, always chosen non-anonymously, as there is no other candidate. The control over society is secured by the successful victory over the two things that drive it - hunger and sex. People eat only mechanically prepared food (the ancient, or future equivalent of GMO) and have sex with whomever they want but only in the pre-determined hours.
In the light of this totalitarian regime, the main character is D-503. He is the builder of the Integral, a space ship supposed to take the logic of the One State to the rest of the universe. However, love and affection mess up the mechanically functioning mind of D-503. He begins doubting the regime and its sustainability and he visits a doctor, fearing he might be having a soul. The reason for his rebellion is a woman, an idea followed by Orwell and Huxley as well. I-330 is magnetic, sensual, and sexual. She dreams of life outside of the wall that surounds the state from the wild nature. She smokes, drinks, and experience the pure pleasure of sexual affairs. Her character and passion attempt to shaken the carefully mechanized world in which D-503 lives.
The Integral that is supposed to send the message of power and control to other nations is analogous to the Marxist's view of a Global Communist state. The focus is on industry and mechanization, which break down actions to easily understood and performed tasks, which require no imagination or creativity. D-503 writes a poem, the initial purpose of which is to share with the others the happiness and wisdom of the One State. Zamyatin here is disgusted with the use of literature by the communists to manipulate and shape public opinion. D-503's poem is a manifesto of conformity and equality but as the protagonist begins to experience his "soul", his attitude towards the regime understandably changes.
We certainly set the beginning of the dystopian novels that widely spread in the second half of the 20th century. Authors were fascinated with the topic of totalitarianism gone mad, especially in the light of the USSR and its rise to power. In We every hour of life is determined by The Table, a precursor of 1984's telescreen. The benefactor is the equivalent of Orwell's Big Brother. The similarities with Brave New World are even more obvious - the control of sex, the focus on industrialization and mechanization, the lack of the family, and the programming of people to love the regime that deprives them. Huxley indeed goes a bit further with his society of promiscuous conformists, pleasure seekers, and happy consumers.
To be honest Zamyatin is not as good as the other authors that followed him. His novel is still a child in its ideas about the endless possibilities of control mechanisms over the society. yet, the Russian is the first one to see through the idea of social equality and to the devastating effects its extreme form might lead in a futuristic world. In that sense, his contribution to the future development of the dystopian literature is incomparable.
We was published in 1926 as a response of the author's personal experiences during the Russian revolutions in 1906 and in 1917. The dystopian world of We is set in the future, where people do not have names but numbers. Males have odd numbers prefixed by consonants while women - even number prefixed by vowels. All of these "numbers" wear identical clothes, sleep in identical places, and are subject to the ideal of industrial efficiency. Human beings are screws in a machine - the "I" is not important; the "We" creates the state. The whole country is made up of glass as to facilitate control by the secret police and the spies. The ruler is (and has been for quite some time) the same one, the Benefactor, always chosen non-anonymously, as there is no other candidate. The control over society is secured by the successful victory over the two things that drive it - hunger and sex. People eat only mechanically prepared food (the ancient, or future equivalent of GMO) and have sex with whomever they want but only in the pre-determined hours.
In the light of this totalitarian regime, the main character is D-503. He is the builder of the Integral, a space ship supposed to take the logic of the One State to the rest of the universe. However, love and affection mess up the mechanically functioning mind of D-503. He begins doubting the regime and its sustainability and he visits a doctor, fearing he might be having a soul. The reason for his rebellion is a woman, an idea followed by Orwell and Huxley as well. I-330 is magnetic, sensual, and sexual. She dreams of life outside of the wall that surounds the state from the wild nature. She smokes, drinks, and experience the pure pleasure of sexual affairs. Her character and passion attempt to shaken the carefully mechanized world in which D-503 lives.
The Integral that is supposed to send the message of power and control to other nations is analogous to the Marxist's view of a Global Communist state. The focus is on industry and mechanization, which break down actions to easily understood and performed tasks, which require no imagination or creativity. D-503 writes a poem, the initial purpose of which is to share with the others the happiness and wisdom of the One State. Zamyatin here is disgusted with the use of literature by the communists to manipulate and shape public opinion. D-503's poem is a manifesto of conformity and equality but as the protagonist begins to experience his "soul", his attitude towards the regime understandably changes.
We certainly set the beginning of the dystopian novels that widely spread in the second half of the 20th century. Authors were fascinated with the topic of totalitarianism gone mad, especially in the light of the USSR and its rise to power. In We every hour of life is determined by The Table, a precursor of 1984's telescreen. The benefactor is the equivalent of Orwell's Big Brother. The similarities with Brave New World are even more obvious - the control of sex, the focus on industrialization and mechanization, the lack of the family, and the programming of people to love the regime that deprives them. Huxley indeed goes a bit further with his society of promiscuous conformists, pleasure seekers, and happy consumers.
To be honest Zamyatin is not as good as the other authors that followed him. His novel is still a child in its ideas about the endless possibilities of control mechanisms over the society. yet, the Russian is the first one to see through the idea of social equality and to the devastating effects its extreme form might lead in a futuristic world. In that sense, his contribution to the future development of the dystopian literature is incomparable.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)