Take a photo of a barcode or cover
A review by anicolett
The Childhood of Jesus by J.M. Coetzee
4.0
A novel of ideas, but more so, one of complexity.
The Childhood of Jesus, since its release, has gotten many mixed reviews, partly because no one knows what to think of it. Even when I finished, I had to digest what I'd just finished reading.
On the back of my ARC copy, Coetzee's story is called a modern day fable. Perhaps that is the most fitting, albeit simplified description. For me, though, this novel transcends labels, any and all sorts of identifying markers.
Modern readers ask and expect a lot from a novel. They sift through the text, hoping to come across something familiar, something concrete that they understand. Immediately, here we have the allusion to Christ in the title. In many ways, the title is the first bit of information we have when we encounter a book. Before a blurb, a description, there is only the title. I'd like to think it is a clue, a sort of direction on how to correctly handle this novel - read it as you'd read the bible. Don't ask anything of the text, let it simply be. I first learned this, when I enrolled in a course at University called the Bible as literature. What I learned was that people search the books in the Bible for something, demand something from it. All expectations needs to be let go of. I'd say the same thing has to be done with The Childhood of Jesus.
That said, I enjoyed this story, immensely. Is it unbelievable in parts? Of course. But, isn't the bible, also, quite unbelievable in parts?
Out of all of the novels, especially recent releases, Coetzee seems to challenge the idea we have for what a modern novel is. If you were to ask someone: What is a novel? I am sure you they could give you multiple responses. But, what about: What is the modern novel?
I can list a bunch of novels that are the result of countless MFA programs that are identical not just in subject matter, but style and structure. For the most part, they don't leave me with anything to consider or think about.
Again, I'm convinced that the differing reviews (and even negative ones) stem from a discomfort and confusion. We are all met with discomfort and confusion in the face of something that is difficult.
There are no answers here. Coetzee allows the reader that freedom, which is severely lacking in modern literature. Ambiguity as a freedom. He isn't writing to the reader, laying out every single detail, but treats the audience as if they are intelligent, free thinking people, ones who can make what they will of the book, in the same way people make what they will of the bible.
The Childhood of Jesus, since its release, has gotten many mixed reviews, partly because no one knows what to think of it. Even when I finished, I had to digest what I'd just finished reading.
On the back of my ARC copy, Coetzee's story is called a modern day fable. Perhaps that is the most fitting, albeit simplified description. For me, though, this novel transcends labels, any and all sorts of identifying markers.
Modern readers ask and expect a lot from a novel. They sift through the text, hoping to come across something familiar, something concrete that they understand. Immediately, here we have the allusion to Christ in the title. In many ways, the title is the first bit of information we have when we encounter a book. Before a blurb, a description, there is only the title. I'd like to think it is a clue, a sort of direction on how to correctly handle this novel - read it as you'd read the bible. Don't ask anything of the text, let it simply be. I first learned this, when I enrolled in a course at University called the Bible as literature. What I learned was that people search the books in the Bible for something, demand something from it. All expectations needs to be let go of. I'd say the same thing has to be done with The Childhood of Jesus.
That said, I enjoyed this story, immensely. Is it unbelievable in parts? Of course. But, isn't the bible, also, quite unbelievable in parts?
Out of all of the novels, especially recent releases, Coetzee seems to challenge the idea we have for what a modern novel is. If you were to ask someone: What is a novel? I am sure you they could give you multiple responses. But, what about: What is the modern novel?
I can list a bunch of novels that are the result of countless MFA programs that are identical not just in subject matter, but style and structure. For the most part, they don't leave me with anything to consider or think about.
Again, I'm convinced that the differing reviews (and even negative ones) stem from a discomfort and confusion. We are all met with discomfort and confusion in the face of something that is difficult.
There are no answers here. Coetzee allows the reader that freedom, which is severely lacking in modern literature. Ambiguity as a freedom. He isn't writing to the reader, laying out every single detail, but treats the audience as if they are intelligent, free thinking people, ones who can make what they will of the book, in the same way people make what they will of the bible.