Scan barcode
epictetsocrate's review
3.0
S-ar putea ca mulţi să nu ştie că numele oraşului Chicago nu este un cuvânt englezesc, ci provine din limba Algonqui – unul din numeroasele idiomuri vorbite de amerindieni, locuitorii indigeni ai Americii cunoscuţi şi sub numele de „pieile roşii”. În această limbă, chicago înseamnă „miros puternic”, iar motivul alegerii acestui nume se datorează faptului că spaţiul pe care se întinde oraşul în momentul de faţă a fost iniţial ocupat de ogoare întinse cultivate de băştinaşi cu ceapă, care degaja un miros puternic, pătrunzător.
Indienii au locuit zeci de ani în zona Chicago, pe malurile lacului Michigan, ocupându-se cu creşterea vitelor şi cultivarea cepei. Ei au trăit în pace până în anul 1673, când au sosit în această regiune un călător şi cartograf cu numele de Louis Joliet şi un călugăr francez iezuit cu numele de Jacques Marquette care „au descoperit” zona căreia astăzi i se spune Chicago. În urma lor s-au ivit numaidecât mii de colonişti, îngrămădindu-se asemenea furnicilor în jurul ulcelei cu miere, în veacul care a urmat, coloniştii albi au purtat războaie de exterminare îngrozitoare, în timpul cărora au ucis între cinci şi douăsprezece milioane de indieni pe teritoriul întregii Americi de Nord. Cine citeşte despre istoria Americii este uluit de o situaţie paradoxală: coloniştii albi care au ucis milioane de indieni, alungându-i de pe pământurile lor şi jefuindu-i de aur şi celelalte bogăţii, erau în acelaşi timp creştini extrem de credincioşi… Dar acest paradox va fi lesne de înţeles dacă vom cunoaşte opiniile răspândite în vremea aceea. Astfel, numeroşi colonişti albi credeau că „indienii americani, în pofida faptului că sunt în felul lor făpturi ale lui Dumnezeu, nu au fost creaţi în duhul lui Cristos, ci într-un altul, imperfect şi rău”. Alţii afirmau cu deplină convingere că „pieile-roşii sunt asemenea animalelor, făpturi fără suflet şi fără conştiinţă şi, prin urmare, ele sunt lipsite de calităţile omului alb”. În virtutea acestor teorii înţelepte, coloniştii puteau să ucidă oricâţi indieni voiau fără cea mai mică umbră de regret sau sentiment de vinovăţie. Şi oricât de cumplite erau masacrele pe care le săvârşeau în timpul zilei, acestea nu izbuteau să le tulbure puritatea rugăciunilor pe care le rosteau în fiecare noapte înainte de culcare!
Indienii au locuit zeci de ani în zona Chicago, pe malurile lacului Michigan, ocupându-se cu creşterea vitelor şi cultivarea cepei. Ei au trăit în pace până în anul 1673, când au sosit în această regiune un călător şi cartograf cu numele de Louis Joliet şi un călugăr francez iezuit cu numele de Jacques Marquette care „au descoperit” zona căreia astăzi i se spune Chicago. În urma lor s-au ivit numaidecât mii de colonişti, îngrămădindu-se asemenea furnicilor în jurul ulcelei cu miere, în veacul care a urmat, coloniştii albi au purtat războaie de exterminare îngrozitoare, în timpul cărora au ucis între cinci şi douăsprezece milioane de indieni pe teritoriul întregii Americi de Nord. Cine citeşte despre istoria Americii este uluit de o situaţie paradoxală: coloniştii albi care au ucis milioane de indieni, alungându-i de pe pământurile lor şi jefuindu-i de aur şi celelalte bogăţii, erau în acelaşi timp creştini extrem de credincioşi… Dar acest paradox va fi lesne de înţeles dacă vom cunoaşte opiniile răspândite în vremea aceea. Astfel, numeroşi colonişti albi credeau că „indienii americani, în pofida faptului că sunt în felul lor făpturi ale lui Dumnezeu, nu au fost creaţi în duhul lui Cristos, ci într-un altul, imperfect şi rău”. Alţii afirmau cu deplină convingere că „pieile-roşii sunt asemenea animalelor, făpturi fără suflet şi fără conştiinţă şi, prin urmare, ele sunt lipsite de calităţile omului alb”. În virtutea acestor teorii înţelepte, coloniştii puteau să ucidă oricâţi indieni voiau fără cea mai mică umbră de regret sau sentiment de vinovăţie. Şi oricât de cumplite erau masacrele pe care le săvârşeau în timpul zilei, acestea nu izbuteau să le tulbure puritatea rugăciunilor pe care le rosteau în fiecare noapte înainte de culcare!
nferre's review
2.0
This book started out with a bang. I told my husband I thought he would like it, I thought maybe I'd lend it to my son it was that good. I thought maybe it was my scatterbrain's fault that I didn't know who all the characters were from chapter to chapter. Maybe I should have started an index card cheat sheet to keep them all in order.I thought some of the characterizations were spot on, some of the observations of the Egyptians coming to the States were insightful. But by page 100, the book started falling apart with one cliched character after another. Blacks can't find work - ever, so they resort to work that contradicts their morals; health insurance (for a professor in a university) is so expensive it leaves no additional money for extras; couples of mixed race can't walk down a Chicago street without observing hateful looks, blatant racism against Egyptians in a post-doctoral or PhD setting in Chicago? In Aswayn's world women are weak in matters of the heart no matter how strong and intelligent they are in other areas.
By page 250 I was barely into the book. It seemed more like short stories very loosely tied together by a thread of Egypt, Chicago and histology - but never really meeting in a central place.
In the end, just unsatisfying. I really enjoyed The Yacubian Building a few years ago - but maybe this book just lacked sufficient insight into the topics the author dealt with that they fell flat, or perhaps it was stunted in the translation as the language came across as to make it anywhere past 2 stars for me.
By page 250 I was barely into the book. It seemed more like short stories very loosely tied together by a thread of Egypt, Chicago and histology - but never really meeting in a central place.
In the end, just unsatisfying. I really enjoyed The Yacubian Building a few years ago - but maybe this book just lacked sufficient insight into the topics the author dealt with that they fell flat, or perhaps it was stunted in the translation as the language came across as to make it anywhere past 2 stars for me.
merthelibrarian's review
3.0
I thought the perspective of this book was interesting and I definitely was eagerly to keep reading, but I found the characters to be a bit lacking in dimension and the transitions between their stories to be a bit forced. Don't know if this is due to the author or the translator. Liked it, though. Worth reading.
drsarahgrace's review against another edition
4.0
I really enjoyed Alaa Al Aswany's first novel, The Yacoubian Building, which I read while I was living in Egypt. The setup of Chicago is similar in that the cast of characters revolves around one site - in this case, it's an academic department. The storylines were compelling, and not just because the setting was a university and one of the characters hailed from the city where I first lived in Egypt in 1996. I am amazed at how quickly I read this book, given everything else going on in my life these days!
williamc's review
3.0
Alaa Al Aswany’s novel Chicago suffers from a translation that never succeeds in allowing the dialogue to sound anything but that: translated. Speech from the novel’s Egyptian immigrant scholars might be passable if readers expect stiff and awkward phrasing, but the Chicago natives here sound equally stilted. The result isn’t completely unattractive: the overly formal speech allows Al Aswany’s many messages – of American racism toward Arabs and African-Americans, of the conflicts felt by devout Muslims practicing in a primarily Christian nation, of drug addiction, of infidelity, of the competing passions of morality and sensuality – to be approached with a tone of naivety that can, in places, allow these issues to be freshly viewed. The larger problem is that Chicago’s many stories, centered primarily on Egyptian Arabs studying histology at the University of Illinois Medical School, never cohere. The novel is still an enjoyable read, however. In particular, the ending hints at an emotional depth that, while not quite realized in the rest of the novel, feels satisfying nonetheless.
larabobara's review
4.0
It’s a bit appalling that I haven’t written about Chicago by now, because I actually finished it a while ago. My reluctance to write has nothing to do with my impression of the book, because I must say, I really liked it - more than I expected to. Not in a “I can’t part with this book” sort of way, but I really did enjoy it. I read some reviews of the book after finishing it and was disappointed to see that it averaged about 3 stars. I realize that I have a tendency to looooove most books - to give out five star ratings and announce that a book was the best one I’ve read in a particular year - but 3? Come on, people. This one’s a 4-star-er. Easily.
I gather that a lot of people didn’t like it because they expected a lot more from it - that they expected it to be weightier. One reader suggested he or she expected it to be similar to an Orhan Pahmuk novel in some way. To that reader and to the others, I say POO. (Dudes, I tried reading one of Pahmuk’s…I think it was Istanbul…and damn if I didn’t have to add it to the very short list of books I eventually abandoned before finishing.)
Alaa Al Aswany’s Chicago was both fun and significant. In a weird way, it resonated with me in a similar manner as my beloved Tales of the City books. I say “in a weird way” because Chicago has nothing to do with homosexuality - but there are similarities there nonetheless.
Chicago is the story of several Egyptian students and faculty members (as well as a couple Americans) at the University of Illinois in Chicago hematology program. You’d think that I would be able to tell you by now what hematology is, but no. I am too lazy to look it up. But it involves cells and science and, um, stuff.
Hi! I’m a genius!
Anyway, the book follows the lives of these students and faculty members, alternating story lines in a way that sounds confusing but really isn’t. It had that same sort of cliffhanger aspect that Tales of the City has…just with different unknowns hanging in the balance. Will the conservative, veiled Muslim Egyptian woman ditch her society’s customs and make out with the nerd-ish guy who, until he met her, spent every evening home alone with no social life? Will the militant dude who is the head of the Egyptian Student Union (or whatever it’s called) flunk out of school? Will the professor who had previously completely renounced his Egyptian heritage (or, at least, its customs) continue to act like a bonehead about his daughter moving in with her boyfriend? What will happen next??
This is all my way of saying that this was a fun, interesting read. And it’s not a total soap opera, either - it provides a fascinating glimpse into a culture to which I’ve otherwise not been exposed.
I gather that a lot of people didn’t like it because they expected a lot more from it - that they expected it to be weightier. One reader suggested he or she expected it to be similar to an Orhan Pahmuk novel in some way. To that reader and to the others, I say POO. (Dudes, I tried reading one of Pahmuk’s…I think it was Istanbul…and damn if I didn’t have to add it to the very short list of books I eventually abandoned before finishing.)
Alaa Al Aswany’s Chicago was both fun and significant. In a weird way, it resonated with me in a similar manner as my beloved Tales of the City books. I say “in a weird way” because Chicago has nothing to do with homosexuality - but there are similarities there nonetheless.
Chicago is the story of several Egyptian students and faculty members (as well as a couple Americans) at the University of Illinois in Chicago hematology program. You’d think that I would be able to tell you by now what hematology is, but no. I am too lazy to look it up. But it involves cells and science and, um, stuff.
Hi! I’m a genius!
Anyway, the book follows the lives of these students and faculty members, alternating story lines in a way that sounds confusing but really isn’t. It had that same sort of cliffhanger aspect that Tales of the City has…just with different unknowns hanging in the balance. Will the conservative, veiled Muslim Egyptian woman ditch her society’s customs and make out with the nerd-ish guy who, until he met her, spent every evening home alone with no social life? Will the militant dude who is the head of the Egyptian Student Union (or whatever it’s called) flunk out of school? Will the professor who had previously completely renounced his Egyptian heritage (or, at least, its customs) continue to act like a bonehead about his daughter moving in with her boyfriend? What will happen next??
This is all my way of saying that this was a fun, interesting read. And it’s not a total soap opera, either - it provides a fascinating glimpse into a culture to which I’ve otherwise not been exposed.
ninachachu's review against another edition
3.0
A series of interconnected vignettes of Egyptians living in Chicago in the mid 2000s. Thus this novel examines some of the issues facing members of the Egyptian diaspora - whether recently arrived, or long term emigrants who have become American citizens.
michaelnlibrarian's review against another edition
2.0
I am probably breaking some GoodReads protocol by starting my reviews on books when I'm only partway through ...
After 140 or so pages, my main impression is that this is a good novel, but it could have been a better one for English-speakers with relatively little effort, so it's disappointing that it isn't.
Translation: the story pulled me in so it took 30-40 pages before I noticed just how poor it is - after that, it became almost hard to ignore. There are no howlers (so far) but it is clear that the translator is not a native speaker of English. The stilted way that some of the Egyptian characters address one another is OK because I think that it reflects the stilted nature of their relationships but the narrative would flow better if it was done by a literary translator with better skills. I don't remember this problem with The Yacoubian Building but I think this problem is more noticeable when the setting is Chicago and not Cairo.
American characters: Around page 135, one of the American characters is moved to the rank of "main characters" (of which I think there are too many) and unfortunately this character is completely improbable and his interactions with other Americans seem very poorly drawn. Or rather, it's presumably a reasonable portrayal of an American archetype that an Egyptian thinks exists but for an American this character and his interactions seem weird.
Font changes: Each chapter starts with one character at center stage in Times Roman, then when there is switch to a different character, there is a switch to Helvetica. You need this cue because Al Aswany starts a new section involving different characters with personal pronouns and you have to figure out who the characters are based on your understanding of the various plot lines. To me it feels like a series of quizzes to make sure you are paying attention. Perhaps I'm just old, but this doesn't add anything substantive to my reading experience.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
OK, now I have finished reading Chicago. And I'm glad to be done with it because I would guess I will never again read the phrase "pant (or panting) with lust" that came up several dozen times in this novel. Ugh.
The problems I noted, above, in the first 145 pages of the novel just get worse in my opinion. (The books is 335 pages long.) The various American subplots seem increasingly and in some cases annoyingly improbable. The setting is in modern day Chicago but the description of racism that the one African American character encounters, perhaps to make it easy for an Egyptian to relate to, is hugely exaggerated. I'm sure there are people who still act in the way Al Aswany describes, but his novel has dozens of people, one after another, mistreating the character in an extreme way that might have been pervasive in this way fifty years ago but I do not believe is now. (If the novel is going to criticize the United States for still having racist elements, it would be better if it was vaguely plausible.) And the solution he describes to her unemployment situation is not just improbable but impossible.
It also becomes irritating that the American characters have their dialog presented by a translator who doesn't grasp colloquial American English. Since the story is set in Chicago, the American characters should sound like Americans, but, uhm, boy do they sound like Egyptians (speaking English).
Perhaps the terrible English is OK. Al Aswany doesn't understand Americans nearly so well as he (I hope) understands Egyptians, so what you have in this novel is not a description of the relationship of Egyptians living in the U.S. of various backgrounds to Americans but rather a description of what Al Aswany thinks Americans are like to ex-pat Egyptians. Having the phony Americans speak phony American English certainly draws attention to the phoniness of it all.
This may qualify as a spoiler, but I was not terribly pleased with the ending. Years ago, Michael O'Donohue wrote a satire for the National Lampoon about how to write novels that suggested that if you, as author, couldn't figure out how to end the thing, just have the main character run over by a truck. The end of this novel isn't quite MacBeth but there certainly end up being dead bodies that I wasn't expecting and don't see as contributing to a plausible ending for the book. On the other hand, it enabled him to write, "the end" and be done with the thing.
Despite all this complaining, it is a good book for someone interested in the relationship of Egyptians abroad to their home country. Each of the Egyptian characters demonstrates different facets of that kind of relationship and the many ambiguities that can exist for ex-pats, particularly long-term ex-pats and immigrants from a country with a repressive government. Talking about Egyptians' feelings about Egypt and for other Egyptians who have different views is the point of the novel (not the Americans) and it provides some useful insights on that subject.
After 140 or so pages, my main impression is that this is a good novel, but it could have been a better one for English-speakers with relatively little effort, so it's disappointing that it isn't.
Translation: the story pulled me in so it took 30-40 pages before I noticed just how poor it is - after that, it became almost hard to ignore. There are no howlers (so far) but it is clear that the translator is not a native speaker of English. The stilted way that some of the Egyptian characters address one another is OK because I think that it reflects the stilted nature of their relationships but the narrative would flow better if it was done by a literary translator with better skills. I don't remember this problem with The Yacoubian Building but I think this problem is more noticeable when the setting is Chicago and not Cairo.
American characters: Around page 135, one of the American characters is moved to the rank of "main characters" (of which I think there are too many) and unfortunately this character is completely improbable and his interactions with other Americans seem very poorly drawn. Or rather, it's presumably a reasonable portrayal of an American archetype that an Egyptian thinks exists but for an American this character and his interactions seem weird.
Font changes: Each chapter starts with one character at center stage in Times Roman, then when there is switch to a different character, there is a switch to Helvetica. You need this cue because Al Aswany starts a new section involving different characters with personal pronouns and you have to figure out who the characters are based on your understanding of the various plot lines. To me it feels like a series of quizzes to make sure you are paying attention. Perhaps I'm just old, but this doesn't add anything substantive to my reading experience.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
OK, now I have finished reading Chicago. And I'm glad to be done with it because I would guess I will never again read the phrase "pant (or panting) with lust" that came up several dozen times in this novel. Ugh.
The problems I noted, above, in the first 145 pages of the novel just get worse in my opinion. (The books is 335 pages long.) The various American subplots seem increasingly and in some cases annoyingly improbable. The setting is in modern day Chicago but the description of racism that the one African American character encounters, perhaps to make it easy for an Egyptian to relate to, is hugely exaggerated. I'm sure there are
It also becomes irritating that the American characters have their dialog presented by a translator who doesn't grasp colloquial American English. Since the story is set in Chicago, the American characters should sound like Americans, but, uhm, boy do they sound like Egyptians (speaking English).
Perhaps the terrible English is OK. Al Aswany doesn't understand Americans nearly so well as he (I hope) understands Egyptians, so what you have in this novel is not a description of the relationship of Egyptians living in the U.S. of various backgrounds to Americans but rather a description of what Al Aswany thinks Americans are like to ex-pat Egyptians. Having the phony Americans speak phony American English certainly draws attention to the phoniness of it all.
This may qualify as a spoiler, but I was not terribly pleased with the ending. Years ago, Michael O'Donohue wrote a satire for the National Lampoon about how to write novels that suggested that if you, as author, couldn't figure out how to end the thing, just have the main character run over by a truck. The end of this novel isn't quite MacBeth but there certainly end up being dead bodies that I wasn't expecting and don't see as contributing to a plausible ending for the book. On the other hand, it enabled him to write, "the end" and be done with the thing.
Despite all this complaining, it is a good book for someone interested in the relationship of Egyptians abroad to their home country. Each of the Egyptian characters demonstrates different facets of that kind of relationship and the many ambiguities that can exist for ex-pats, particularly long-term ex-pats and immigrants from a country with a repressive government. Talking about Egyptians' feelings about Egypt and for other Egyptians who have different views is the point of the novel (not the Americans) and it provides some useful insights on that subject.
creativeinminds's review against another edition
3.0
3,5 /5
Oerhört rörande och verklighetsförankrat men samtidigt väldigt fint.
Oerhört rörande och verklighetsförankrat men samtidigt väldigt fint.
sarainbookland's review against another edition
5.0
هي مالها قلبت على فيلم عربي في الآخر كدا ؟!
ما علينا :D المهم
الرواية جميلة وجذّابة،جذبتني منذ السطر الأول وشعرت بشخوصها تتحرك أمامي،صادمة في بعضها وصاخبة في آرائها،متحركة وسريعة الأحداث ومتنوعة الشخوص.
إنها تجربني الأولى مع علاء الأسواني كروائي،فبعد متابعتي لعدة أعوام له في مقالات الصحف وكتب المقالات مثل "لماذا لا يثور المصريون؟" أقرأ له شيكاجو وأتمنى ألا تكون تجربني الأخيرة معه كروائي لأنني أحببت أسلوبه السلس السريع الممتع في السرد وتنوع شخصياته.
تعجبت جدًا من تصرف محمد صلاح في نهاية الرواية وأتمنى لو ترك لي تفسيرًا لما جرى أمام الرئيس قبل نهايته المأساوية تلك.
كما وددت لوأعرف كيف ماتت سارة والسيارة التي ألقتها أمام المستشفى تتبع مـَن؟!
أشفق كثيرًا على دكتور رأفت رغم نفوري منه في بداية الرواية..هذه الرواية مليئة فعلاً وأود لو أعرف المزيد عن تصرف أشخاصها بعد كل تلك المصائب.
أحببت شخصية دكتور جون جراهام وكرم دوس وناجي وزينب رضوان (ذكرتني بنفسي أيام 25 يناير والحماس الثوري)
شيماء بلهاء وطارق أحمق مستغل ومتذبذب.
أشفقت على ويندي ومروة..وكرهت أحمد دنانة للغاية هو وصفوت..سحقـًا لكما وما تتبعونه!
سارة غبية أيضـًا..(معرفش غاويين يشوهوا صورة السارات في الروايات ليه) :D :D
كما كرهت جيف كثيرًا..شخصية شابة أميريكية عابثة فعلاً
مأساة كارول توضح أن العنصرية مازالت قوية في أمريكا...تعاطفت معها جدًا
رواية جميلة،لم أندم على قراءتها
ملحوظة مهمة : الرواية صادمة في بعض الأجزاء لذا أنصح بقراءتها لما هم فوق سن الـ18 ويكونوا عاقلين وبيفهموا عشان ما يفضحوناش وسط الأمم :D
اللهم بلغت .
قراءة ممتعة :)
ما علينا :D المهم
الرواية جميلة وجذّابة،جذبتني منذ السطر الأول وشعرت بشخوصها تتحرك أمامي،صادمة في بعضها وصاخبة في آرائها،متحركة وسريعة الأحداث ومتنوعة الشخوص.
إنها تجربني الأولى مع علاء الأسواني كروائي،فبعد متابعتي لعدة أعوام له في مقالات الصحف وكتب المقالات مثل "لماذا لا يثور المصريون؟" أقرأ له شيكاجو وأتمنى ألا تكون تجربني الأخيرة معه كروائي لأنني أحببت أسلوبه السلس السريع الممتع في السرد وتنوع شخصياته.
تعجبت جدًا من تصرف محمد صلاح في نهاية الرواية وأتمنى لو ترك لي تفسيرًا لما جرى أمام الرئيس قبل نهايته المأساوية تلك.
كما وددت لوأعرف كيف ماتت سارة والسيارة التي ألقتها أمام المستشفى تتبع مـَن؟!
أشفق كثيرًا على دكتور رأفت رغم نفوري منه في بداية الرواية..هذه الرواية مليئة فعلاً وأود لو أعرف المزيد عن تصرف أشخاصها بعد كل تلك المصائب.
أحببت شخصية دكتور جون جراهام وكرم دوس وناجي وزينب رضوان (ذكرتني بنفسي أيام 25 يناير والحماس الثوري)
شيماء بلهاء وطارق أحمق مستغل ومتذبذب.
أشفقت على ويندي ومروة..وكرهت أحمد دنانة للغاية هو وصفوت..سحقـًا لكما وما تتبعونه!
سارة غبية أيضـًا..(معرفش غاويين يشوهوا صورة السارات في الروايات ليه) :D :D
كما كرهت جيف كثيرًا..شخصية شابة أميريكية عابثة فعلاً
مأساة كارول توضح أن العنصرية مازالت قوية في أمريكا...تعاطفت معها جدًا
رواية جميلة،لم أندم على قراءتها
ملحوظة مهمة : الرواية صادمة في بعض الأجزاء لذا أنصح بقراءتها لما هم فوق سن الـ18 ويكونوا عاقلين وبيفهموا عشان ما يفضحوناش وسط الأمم :D
اللهم بلغت .
قراءة ممتعة :)
More...