Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.69 AVERAGE
3.69 AVERAGE
adventurous
reflective
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
This book is a slow read, but I got inside the head of the oppressed during war, but he did not recognize the oppression. It is a powerful book but not a light read. I guess that's why he won a Nobel.
"A novel inspired by the moral rebellion of a giant panda." (A captured panda who refuses to eat when in captivity.)
Michael K. is 'simple.' Michael K. wants to be simple. Michael K. is harassed. Michael K. is always told what to do. Michael K. eventually figures things out, bringing his self to the brink of destruction, starvation, imprisonment, death, until he gets what he wants... to simply live and live simply.
I felt empathy for Michael, and could see what Coetzee was reflecting on, racism, cultural structures that are ludicrous, etc. but I just didn't really get much from the story that I could relate to.
Michael K. is 'simple.' Michael K. wants to be simple. Michael K. is harassed. Michael K. is always told what to do. Michael K. eventually figures things out, bringing his self to the brink of destruction, starvation, imprisonment, death, until he gets what he wants... to simply live and live simply.
I felt empathy for Michael, and could see what Coetzee was reflecting on, racism, cultural structures that are ludicrous, etc. but I just didn't really get much from the story that I could relate to.
By far one of the most saddest stories I've ever read. The skill of Coetzee I believe is in fact telling a story absolutely dramatic with the coolness of one who does not indulge in false pieties and the veracity of a war reporter: every single detail is shown in all its absolute ferocity. Good book, but I could have lived without it.
In assoluto una delle storie piú tristi che io abbia mai letto. La bravura di Coetzee credo stia nel fatto di raccontare una storia assolutamente drammatica con la freddezza di chi non indulge in falsi pietismi e con la veridicitá di un reporter di guerra: ogni singolo particolare viene riportato in tutta la sua assoluta ferocia. Bel libro, ma avrei potuto farne a meno.
In assoluto una delle storie piú tristi che io abbia mai letto. La bravura di Coetzee credo stia nel fatto di raccontare una storia assolutamente drammatica con la freddezza di chi non indulge in falsi pietismi e con la veridicitá di un reporter di guerra: ogni singolo particolare viene riportato in tutta la sua assoluta ferocia. Bel libro, ma avrei potuto farne a meno.
Set in a vividly imagined South Africa of the 1970s that has descended into civil war. While the setting is important, the novel itself eschews discussions of race or class and concentrates on the journey of the titular character, a simple man whose life has been shaped by institutionalism from a very young age.
In this sense, Coetzee has opted for using an innocent as the central character. It's a tricky ploy, as the simpleton remains simple throughout and - for the reader at least - the state of purity, innocence and grace can be a limiting thing.
The story is told well, with a tale full of ugly and sad scenes, and very few glimmers of hope or beauty. Despite such scenes, it is quite a desolate book. There is only a vague, ominous sense of how bad things really are in the greater society and while Michael K. serves as the vehicle to paint this story of survival and isolation, 'simpleton' is perhaps not the most effective choice to portray the individual struggling against a society gone awry.
The innocent of course must stand above and beyond it all, untouched by the mortal sin. I enjoyed this book, but the underlying messages - ignore the world around you? Don't think? - does trouble me somewhat. B+
In this sense, Coetzee has opted for using an innocent as the central character. It's a tricky ploy, as the simpleton remains simple throughout and - for the reader at least - the state of purity, innocence and grace can be a limiting thing.
The story is told well, with a tale full of ugly and sad scenes, and very few glimmers of hope or beauty. Despite such scenes, it is quite a desolate book. There is only a vague, ominous sense of how bad things really are in the greater society and while Michael K. serves as the vehicle to paint this story of survival and isolation, 'simpleton' is perhaps not the most effective choice to portray the individual struggling against a society gone awry.
The innocent of course must stand above and beyond it all, untouched by the mortal sin. I enjoyed this book, but the underlying messages - ignore the world around you? Don't think? - does trouble me somewhat. B+
What's your story? What is your life? What's the story of your life? Would you call it "The Life and Times of...", or would you leave out the "The", as Coetzee does here? If your life were set in stone, if it were one specific thing, with a beginning and an end, you'd include the "The". But what if it wasn't? What if it was ever-changing, ever-growing, outside of time? What if there was "time enough for everything"?
This particular story is told in three parts. In the first, our "hero" Michael K -- in the middle of a vague war which seems to be simply an excuse for the State to make and enforce stupid rules -- sets off on a journey he didn't intend to set off on: taking his sick mother from the city (Cape Town) to the country farm where she grew up. On the way he encounters "careless violence" and bureaucratic stupidity (among other things), and then his mother dies before reaching their destination. He continues on to the farm without really knowing where it is, and when he thinks he's found it, he "plants" his mother's ashes, thus beginning his transformation into a "gardener".
In the second part, we switch to the perspective of a medical officer in a "rehabilitation" camp. The first part was in the third person, but from K's perspective. This section is in the first person and is diary-like. Here, our medical officer is trying to make sense of K (as perhaps we might be). In a way, it's Coetzee stepping back and offering his take on what we've just been through.
In the 3rd and final part, we return to K in the third person, his transformation nearly complete.
Transformation is a good word I think, because K is constantly compared to various animals: dogs, cats, ants, moles, monkeys, budgies, "like a beast", "like an animal", "timorous as a mouse", "cockroach pilgrimages", "like a worm", "like a snail", "like a parasite", "like a lizard", "a stick insect", etc etc. Animals are closer to Nature, closer to the ground, closer to the earth.
Is it a coincidence that I read this immediately after Pavese's La luna è i falò? (My choice was "random" anyway.) The styles are wildly different, but the earth, and our necessary connection to it, is everywhere in both. Not to mention a hunger to be free, which, put another way, is really the hunger for openness.
I could go on because, as always, Coetzee manages to pack a lot into a small package (I tried to sneak in some of the ideas into my review anyway). So I'll end with a cinematic reference [1]:
I was almost going to give this only 4 stars, but then I changed my mind because of the ending. As in the films of the Dardenne brothers, you're taken through a bleak landscape, you're subjected to hardship and violence, and then at the end -- prepared for the worst, expecting the worst -- you emerge into a new world. Not a better one, just one with hope.
[1] While I hate literature that pretends to be cinematic, I don't mind using the cinema in literature reviews. It can help with trying to describe a feeling. For example, one director that came to mind was Haneke. The "purity" in the style, the violence, the "I have no idea what's going to happen next" feeling because "anything could happen next".
This particular story is told in three parts. In the first, our "hero" Michael K -- in the middle of a vague war which seems to be simply an excuse for the State to make and enforce stupid rules -- sets off on a journey he didn't intend to set off on: taking his sick mother from the city (Cape Town) to the country farm where she grew up. On the way he encounters "careless violence" and bureaucratic stupidity (among other things), and then his mother dies before reaching their destination. He continues on to the farm without really knowing where it is, and when he thinks he's found it, he "plants" his mother's ashes, thus beginning his transformation into a "gardener".
In the second part, we switch to the perspective of a medical officer in a "rehabilitation" camp. The first part was in the third person, but from K's perspective. This section is in the first person and is diary-like. Here, our medical officer is trying to make sense of K (as perhaps we might be). In a way, it's Coetzee stepping back and offering his take on what we've just been through.
In the 3rd and final part, we return to K in the third person, his transformation nearly complete.
Transformation is a good word I think, because K is constantly compared to various animals: dogs, cats, ants, moles, monkeys, budgies, "like a beast", "like an animal", "timorous as a mouse", "cockroach pilgrimages", "like a worm", "like a snail", "like a parasite", "like a lizard", "a stick insect", etc etc. Animals are closer to Nature, closer to the ground, closer to the earth.
Is it a coincidence that I read this immediately after Pavese's La luna è i falò? (My choice was "random" anyway.) The styles are wildly different, but the earth, and our necessary connection to it, is everywhere in both. Not to mention a hunger to be free, which, put another way, is really the hunger for openness.
I could go on because, as always, Coetzee manages to pack a lot into a small package (I tried to sneak in some of the ideas into my review anyway). So I'll end with a cinematic reference [1]:
I was almost going to give this only 4 stars, but then I changed my mind because of the ending. As in the films of the Dardenne brothers, you're taken through a bleak landscape, you're subjected to hardship and violence, and then at the end -- prepared for the worst, expecting the worst -- you emerge into a new world. Not a better one, just one with hope.
[1] While I hate literature that pretends to be cinematic, I don't mind using the cinema in literature reviews. It can help with trying to describe a feeling. For example, one director that came to mind was Haneke. The "purity" in the style, the violence, the "I have no idea what's going to happen next" feeling because "anything could happen next".
An interesting mix of Siddhartha and Watt, set in a fictionalized civil-war-torn South Africa. Certainly interesting, but not my favourite Coetzee novel.
About 15 years ago I read Disgrace by the same author and thought it was spectacular, so imagine my joy at getting to read another one of Coetzee's Man Booker Prize winners for book club. A first edition of this book has graced my bookshelves since the last century, but being a bit of a simpleton I had always assumed that it was the memoirs of John Michael Coetzee.
Well, within a few pages it was obvious that not only was this a novel, but it was even set against the backdrop of a fictitious civil war in South Africa, possibly during the 1960s or 70s, but no specific time references are given. That is not the only thing to keep the reader guessing - given that the story is set in South Africa during the Apartheid, I wondered from the beginning whether or not the protagonist is white or black / coloured, something that would strongly affect his social status and safety. I came to the conclusion that he was black based on the way that other people treated him (badly), and the way he behaved.
Frankly the guesswork (about Michael K himself, the relationship with his mother, his whereabouts, his passive aggressive ways, etc. etc.) didn't make this a fun experience in terms of reading but it felt really quite tedious. Never before has it taken me six weeks to read a 190 page novel. It simply did not engage me, and I did not appreciate how it made me feel, or rather what it failed to make me feel: empathy for a poor, hard done by protagonist. I felt like a bad person when I had to admit to myself that I actually stopped caring about what happened to Michael K as he travelled around war-stricken South Africa, hiding on farmland without any sense of purpose.
In our book club discussion we all agreed that there was some beautiful Coetzee writing to be found, albeit even more sparse than in Disgrace but the slightly gratuitous and very incongruous sex scene at the very end of the book sullied The Life and Times of Michael K for a lot of us.
For a Coetzee fan and Man Booker Prize follower, this was a very disappointing read.
Well, within a few pages it was obvious that not only was this a novel, but it was even set against the backdrop of a fictitious civil war in South Africa, possibly during the 1960s or 70s, but no specific time references are given. That is not the only thing to keep the reader guessing - given that the story is set in South Africa during the Apartheid, I wondered from the beginning whether or not the protagonist is white or black / coloured, something that would strongly affect his social status and safety. I came to the conclusion that he was black based on the way that other people treated him (badly), and the way he behaved.
Frankly the guesswork (about Michael K himself, the relationship with his mother, his whereabouts, his passive aggressive ways, etc. etc.) didn't make this a fun experience in terms of reading but it felt really quite tedious. Never before has it taken me six weeks to read a 190 page novel. It simply did not engage me, and I did not appreciate how it made me feel, or rather what it failed to make me feel: empathy for a poor, hard done by protagonist. I felt like a bad person when I had to admit to myself that I actually stopped caring about what happened to Michael K as he travelled around war-stricken South Africa, hiding on farmland without any sense of purpose.
In our book club discussion we all agreed that there was some beautiful Coetzee writing to be found, albeit even more sparse than in Disgrace but the slightly gratuitous and very incongruous sex scene at the very end of the book sullied The Life and Times of Michael K for a lot of us.
For a Coetzee fan and Man Booker Prize follower, this was a very disappointing read.
Life & Times of Michael K by J.M. Coetzee
2.5, rounded to 3
Setting: Cape Town South Africa
Published: 1983
Michael is a gardener. This is all he knows, other than the relationship with his mother. The pair live in Cape Town South Africa and when the war breaks out they decide to leave the city for the place of her birth. However, they are stopped many times and made to turn back before Michael takes the trip into his own hands.
This book is once again a 1001 lister. I'm not sure how I feel about it, I didn't hate it but didn't love it either. I'm on the fence about this one. I liked the persistence and determination that Michael demonstrated however, there weren't a lot of action senses to really keep you engaged. This is a book that I'm unsure of if I would recommend it or if I would say read at your own discretion, however, a fast read none the less.
2.5, rounded to 3
Setting: Cape Town South Africa
Published: 1983
Michael is a gardener. This is all he knows, other than the relationship with his mother. The pair live in Cape Town South Africa and when the war breaks out they decide to leave the city for the place of her birth. However, they are stopped many times and made to turn back before Michael takes the trip into his own hands.
This book is once again a 1001 lister. I'm not sure how I feel about it, I didn't hate it but didn't love it either. I'm on the fence about this one. I liked the persistence and determination that Michael demonstrated however, there weren't a lot of action senses to really keep you engaged. This is a book that I'm unsure of if I would recommend it or if I would say read at your own discretion, however, a fast read none the less.