Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.48 AVERAGE
3.48 AVERAGE
Stand-up comedy is an immersive experience. This book captured that feeling incredibly well. I felt myself both in the audience and on the stage with Dovaleh. The crucial question is captured by the retired judge's task of observing and reporting what he sees as Dove performs - namely, what is it that makes us who we are at our essence? Grossman depicts our childhood self as our unadulterated soul. I mostly agree with this supposition. He asks, what is left from the the 'pure loves of our childhood'? Does it leave a mark?
This book is so awarded and highly rated that I was really looking forward to it, I absolutely love Grossman. I found it too harsh though, the redemptive humanity of people that Grossman manages to weave into other books that have challenging or tragic plots I felt was lacking in this one. What drove the book forward I felt was a great deal of schadenfreude of the audience as they watched the book's protagonist perform. Still good, but definitely not one of my Grossman favorites, in comparison with To the End of the Land, Someone to Run With, or even The Zigzag Kid.
challenging
dark
emotional
sad
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
Complicated
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
I spent a lot of time researching this author before agreeing to read the book, but I did expect it to be more critical of the state of Israel.
I initially gave this a 3, but after discussing it at book club I have increased it to 3.5 .
The book was incredibly uncomfortable to read, but that is exactly the point - the author has us feeling the second hand embarrassment of watching a man fall apart. And soon I was so hooked into the mystery owho was dead that I couldn't have put it down. So whilst I didn't 'enjoy' reading it, it is a great book.
For me this book is about the guilt of loosing a parent
I initially gave this a 3, but after discussing it at book club I have increased it to 3.5 .
The book was incredibly uncomfortable to read, but that is exactly the point - the author has us feeling the second hand embarrassment of watching a man fall apart. And soon I was so hooked into the mystery owho was dead that I couldn't have put it down. So whilst I didn't 'enjoy' reading it, it is a great book.
For me this book is about the guilt of loosing a parent
By any measure, this is the single most excruciating book I have read in my entire lifetime. An Israeli comedian self-immolates in front of an incredulous audience, which dwindles to the semi-informed bystander, the childhood neighbor, the woman with the silver hair, the dishwasher, and you. Waiting for the punchline, or, in this case, the punch in the gut, made me want to tear my hair out and put a hot poker in my eye. How, I thought, could this mess of self-abnegation come from the same David Grossman who wrote such a plangent, poetic book as To the End of the Land? Did I have him mixed up with another author? Had he suffered a psychotic breakdown? Had I? Then came the dawn. Both books are about waiting—waiting for the worst possible news in the world. A world turned upside down. Mother and child; child and mother. Book the second is a mirror image of book the first. I could hardly bear the wait—neither of them could bear the weight. Oh, my God. I’ll admit that this is a tour de force, and I will admit to hating every single second of it. But it wasn’t about me.
A public self-chastisement
Reading this book was very uncomfortable and distressing, and that was clearly the intention of Grossman. The 57-year-old stand-up comedian Dovaleh Gerstein performs in a room in Netanja and regularly tells a joke that really needs to be laughed at, but his performance is mainly characterized by corrosive sarcasm about the world, Israelian society , the holocaust (of course), and especially about himself. Gradually he becomes more personal, dives into the depths of his soul, exposes his most severe traumas and pounds on the most serious injuries he has suffered as a person. Gerstein also consciously seeks the confrontation with the audience, that gradually – in disappointment - leaves the room. The reader soon suspects that this is a kind of final act of the comedian before he disappears from the scene of life.
The storytelling point of view is also important: it is a spectator who sits in the room, a retired judge, who was been explicitly invited by Gerstein and apparently was a childhood friend of his 40 years ago. Gradually it becomes clear that that spectator is also wearing a very heavy "backpack", full of unprocessed feelings. Through this narrator the intense interaction between Gerstein and the public is shown, mixed with personal emotions of the judge.
So, this is not a light book at all, and although occasionally it is peppered with a discharging (usually politically incorrect) joke, throughout the book the drama and fierceness become even stronger, certainly when Gerstein begins a very drawn-out story about how he as a 14-year-old was suddenly called away from a youth camp in the desert, for a death in his family. He describes in detail the long journey to the funeral, all the while ignorant of who precisely is dead, and constantly in his mind pass images of his father and mother that both endear and repel, and he has the impression that he will determine who has just died. Grossman clearly builds up here to a climax, in which the feeling of guilt of Gerstein about the death of one of his parents is central.
In the end the anti-climax follows, when everyone is gone and only the spectator-judge and Gerstein themselves remain and talk to each other softly on stage. Gerstein is a wreck, literally and figuratively, but still says goodbye to the (absent) audience in style. At that point you are also exhausted as a reader after the roller coaster on which Grossman has taken you.
With this novel, Grossman gives a new face to the concept of "tragicomic". Dovaleh Gerstein is a very fragile person, and what he does is very much in line with the self-chastisement that is said to be so typical of Jewish humour, maybe he stands for Israel itself (at least that is suggested in various reviews). From a technical and stylistic point of view, this novel is simply stunning and due to the personal drama and uncomfortable intensity it certainly makes a great impression. For me, it may not be Grossman's best (I was a bit disappointed by the proposed climax), but the author shows an impressive example of his abilities. (2.5 stars)
Reading this book was very uncomfortable and distressing, and that was clearly the intention of Grossman. The 57-year-old stand-up comedian Dovaleh Gerstein performs in a room in Netanja and regularly tells a joke that really needs to be laughed at, but his performance is mainly characterized by corrosive sarcasm about the world, Israelian society , the holocaust (of course), and especially about himself. Gradually he becomes more personal, dives into the depths of his soul, exposes his most severe traumas and pounds on the most serious injuries he has suffered as a person. Gerstein also consciously seeks the confrontation with the audience, that gradually – in disappointment - leaves the room. The reader soon suspects that this is a kind of final act of the comedian before he disappears from the scene of life.
The storytelling point of view is also important: it is a spectator who sits in the room, a retired judge, who was been explicitly invited by Gerstein and apparently was a childhood friend of his 40 years ago. Gradually it becomes clear that that spectator is also wearing a very heavy "backpack", full of unprocessed feelings. Through this narrator the intense interaction between Gerstein and the public is shown, mixed with personal emotions of the judge.
So, this is not a light book at all, and although occasionally it is peppered with a discharging (usually politically incorrect) joke, throughout the book the drama and fierceness become even stronger, certainly when Gerstein begins a very drawn-out story about how he as a 14-year-old was suddenly called away from a youth camp in the desert, for a death in his family. He describes in detail the long journey to the funeral, all the while ignorant of who precisely is dead, and constantly in his mind pass images of his father and mother that both endear and repel, and he has the impression that he will determine who has just died. Grossman clearly builds up here to a climax, in which the feeling of guilt of Gerstein about the death of one of his parents is central.
In the end the anti-climax follows, when everyone is gone and only the spectator-judge and Gerstein themselves remain and talk to each other softly on stage. Gerstein is a wreck, literally and figuratively, but still says goodbye to the (absent) audience in style. At that point you are also exhausted as a reader after the roller coaster on which Grossman has taken you.
With this novel, Grossman gives a new face to the concept of "tragicomic". Dovaleh Gerstein is a very fragile person, and what he does is very much in line with the self-chastisement that is said to be so typical of Jewish humour, maybe he stands for Israel itself (at least that is suggested in various reviews). From a technical and stylistic point of view, this novel is simply stunning and due to the personal drama and uncomfortable intensity it certainly makes a great impression. For me, it may not be Grossman's best (I was a bit disappointed by the proposed climax), but the author shows an impressive example of his abilities. (2.5 stars)
סוס אחד נכנס לבר, יותר מכל דבר אחר, מרגיש כמו ספר מפוספס. הוא מתחיל מרעיון מעניין: הופעת סטנדאפ שקורסת תחת משקל חייו של הסטנדאפיסט. מדי פעם מבליחה נובלה שעושה שימוש בפורמט חדש, מייבאת סוג מסויים של טקסט לתוך המבנה של ספר ועושה בו שימוש מתוחכם כדי לספר סיפור. אבל במקרה הזה, לא נראה כאילו גרוסמן מחוייב במיוחד לפורמט שהוא בחר בו: לגרוסמן יש עמדה מאוד שלילית לגבי סטנדאפ, ולא מרגיש כאילו הוא עשה שום מאמץ כדי להבין אותו או למה הוא עובד. הדבר ניכר בדמותו של המספר, צופה במופע שהדבר נכפה עליו בניגוד לרצונו, שמביע את הבוז שלו לפורמט כבר בתחילת הספר, ולכל אורכו מביע פליאה על תגובות הקהל. גרוסמן הופך את האינטראקציה בין הסטנדאפיסט לקהל למשהו חייתי, שבטי, כי הוא פשוט לא מצליח להבין למה שמישהו יהנה ממופע סטנדאפ.
כתוצאה מכך, ה"מופע" הוא לא באמת סטנדאפ. לא נראה כאילו לסטנדאפיסט הייתה תוכנית כלשהי כשהוא עלה על הבמה (למרות שהוא מזכיר מדי פעם דברים כמו "חומר חדש", ומציין שהוא מופיע כבר עשרות שנים). חמור מכל: מספר שמתיימר לעשות שימוש בפורמט של סטנדאפ אני מצפה להיות *מצחיק*. לפחות בתחילתו, לפני שמתחילה ההדרדרות המובטחת. מצחיק עצוב, אולי, אבל מצחיק. אבל גרוסמן לא יצר פה דמות מצחיקה. הוא יצר דמות גסת רוח ואינטלקטואלית לסירוגין, אבל לא דמות מצחיקה. אין לו אבחנות משעשעות על החיים. לכל היותר יש לו עלבונות קלושים לקהל שלו -- זה, ככל הנראה, מה שגרוסמן חושב עליו כמהות הפורמט של סטנדאפ. אבל זו קלישאה. לא ככה עובד מופע כזה.
כשגרוסמן מנסה להזכיר לנו שזה אמור להיות מופע בידור, שהוא אמור להיות מצחיק, הסטנדאפיסט דובל'ה *מספר בדיחות*. בדיחות ממש, כאלה של "איש אחד נכנס לבר". זה הדבר היחיד שדומה להומור בספר הזה, וזה מגוחך: סטנדאפיסטים לא מספרים בדיחות. בטח לא כאלו שנמצאים בעסק כבר 15 שנה.
לא הצלחתי להמנע, בעת קריאת הספר, מלדמיין את עבודת התחקיר שערך גרוסמן - הנה בדיחה שהוא מצא על ידי גיגול "בדיחה מוות", והנה אחת שהוא מצא על ידי גיגול "בדיחה לוויה", והנה אחת על בלונדיניות. אולי גרוסמן הוא פשוט לא אדם של כתיבה הומוריסטית, שזה בסדר גמור ולגטימי, אבל אז לא ברור למה הוא בחר דווקא בפורמט הזה.
העובדה שהסטנדאפיסט של גרוסמן לגמרי לא מרגיש כמו סטנדאפיסט הורסת את הבניה של הסיפור, ועד שמגיעים לחלק המרכזי, הדמות שלו לא אמינה בגרוש, האינטראקציה עם הקהל לא מרגישה אמיתית, והסיפור מאבד את רוב העוגן שלו. וחבל, כי יש שם סיפור לספר, והפורמט מתאים לו, אבל הביצוע מרגיש עצלני.
במילים אחרות: אכזבה.
כתוצאה מכך, ה"מופע" הוא לא באמת סטנדאפ. לא נראה כאילו לסטנדאפיסט הייתה תוכנית כלשהי כשהוא עלה על הבמה (למרות שהוא מזכיר מדי פעם דברים כמו "חומר חדש", ומציין שהוא מופיע כבר עשרות שנים). חמור מכל: מספר שמתיימר לעשות שימוש בפורמט של סטנדאפ אני מצפה להיות *מצחיק*. לפחות בתחילתו, לפני שמתחילה ההדרדרות המובטחת. מצחיק עצוב, אולי, אבל מצחיק. אבל גרוסמן לא יצר פה דמות מצחיקה. הוא יצר דמות גסת רוח ואינטלקטואלית לסירוגין, אבל לא דמות מצחיקה. אין לו אבחנות משעשעות על החיים. לכל היותר יש לו עלבונות קלושים לקהל שלו -- זה, ככל הנראה, מה שגרוסמן חושב עליו כמהות הפורמט של סטנדאפ. אבל זו קלישאה. לא ככה עובד מופע כזה.
כשגרוסמן מנסה להזכיר לנו שזה אמור להיות מופע בידור, שהוא אמור להיות מצחיק, הסטנדאפיסט דובל'ה *מספר בדיחות*. בדיחות ממש, כאלה של "איש אחד נכנס לבר". זה הדבר היחיד שדומה להומור בספר הזה, וזה מגוחך: סטנדאפיסטים לא מספרים בדיחות. בטח לא כאלו שנמצאים בעסק כבר 15 שנה.
לא הצלחתי להמנע, בעת קריאת הספר, מלדמיין את עבודת התחקיר שערך גרוסמן - הנה בדיחה שהוא מצא על ידי גיגול "בדיחה מוות", והנה אחת שהוא מצא על ידי גיגול "בדיחה לוויה", והנה אחת על בלונדיניות. אולי גרוסמן הוא פשוט לא אדם של כתיבה הומוריסטית, שזה בסדר גמור ולגטימי, אבל אז לא ברור למה הוא בחר דווקא בפורמט הזה.
העובדה שהסטנדאפיסט של גרוסמן לגמרי לא מרגיש כמו סטנדאפיסט הורסת את הבניה של הסיפור, ועד שמגיעים לחלק המרכזי, הדמות שלו לא אמינה בגרוש, האינטראקציה עם הקהל לא מרגישה אמיתית, והסיפור מאבד את רוב העוגן שלו. וחבל, כי יש שם סיפור לספר, והפורמט מתאים לו, אבל הביצוע מרגיש עצלני.
במילים אחרות: אכזבה.
challenging
dark
emotional
reflective
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Complicated
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
I honestly don't know what to say about this one. It's fascinating, maddening, uncomfortable, and doesn't lend itself to easy reviews or conclusions. I don't even really know whether I'm glad I read it or not.
dark
emotional
sad
slow-paced