|
| |||||||||||
What are readers saying about unbearable lightness of being, the (Perennial Classics)?
|
A Reader posted a review at 2007-07-17 09:10:18.
(Language: English)
  
More than a review, Miri's thoughts:I read three Kundera's books over ten years ago (and I remember feeling high levels of admiration. admiration? no, envy). Then, just lately I saw the movie ("the unbearable lightness of being" the title in English) and the movie did not move my envy engines at all... why? I had to open the cover I closed in 1993 and start reading again. Yes, "big discovery", the movie is not much more than just the characters' story that was simply Milan's pretext to write about his issues he had around the concept of "transcendence". I love how he introduces and give closure to each character in the novel. And how he connects "trivial" objects, scenes, moments, with the life of a person, a country, a continent, a planet... A couple of learnings, about myself (what else do we learn about) came from my second reading of this book. To start with, that people can be categorized in four: The first who are used to live under the eyes of the unknown public (actors, politics). The second under the eyes of a known public ("social butterflies"). The third under the eyes of a loved one (and no-ne else). And the four, under the invisible eyes. These last ones are the dreamers. And I found myself in this terrain. Why else was I thinking about writing this, for- whom-book-review when I finished my reading?*... If I wanted to "liberate" myself of these invisible eyes, then I might feel the weight of the known public, or unknown public or the anguish of the fool-in-love. So, rather than seeing this as a "course" I am taking it as a license by which I can share an odd coincidence: Inside my book (in this I can say "my" as I am referring to it as an object, who has been packed and unpacked a dozen of times). I had a dry flower who I have no idea which garden came from (did someone gave it to me? did I cut it myself? did it have any specific relevance?) nothing of that really matters now since its origins are forgotten, only what it's "fragile" (a dry flower) remains. That is my "lightness" .... And as a "book mark" I found I also had a ticked printed in 1995 which has my height and my weight (from a weight balance at a mall with a laser light over my head). Ten years later I weight and measure ex-ac-tly the same! Many, many diets have come and gone, many holyday-eating, "fasting" and "feastings", and yet what stays here is my "weight", my "being", and my light obsession with this issue (I weighted myself and kept that ticket as a bookmark ten years ago, I was not feeling like eating much again... )... the ticket with my weight, altogether with the dry flower, are still among Kundera's pages as my own involuntary assimilation to his philosophical discourse. será? * (I am posting this in July, I wrote it a couple of months ago and just saved it as a draft I never sent, and still not sure who will read, but at least I am not overflowing my friends inboxes with another of my kilometric emails, I guess that is why I am liking this facebook deal) 
|
Yes (2) 
No (0) |
|
A Reader posted a review at 2009-12-06 11:54:29.
(Language: English)
You can call this the novel of ideas. It is one of the highly perceptible novels that i have ever read. Kundera didn't stick to one situation as an end in itself unlike other novels but he explored different occurrences and recurrences in a single situation. If you don't like anything philosophical this isn't the book for you. What i loved about this book is the balance between fiction and the author's philosophical ideas. He discussed Parminedes, Nietzsche, Descartes, Marx and even Beethoven to intertwine it with the story. He even formed an imagery of Czechoslovakia during the Russian invasion and the Communist environment it created while creatively creating a world of two couples in love, passion, and how they dealt with the government and their social status. It is broad when it comes to scope and substance. The Unbearable Lightness of being is not just a literary novel but a philosophy in itself.
|
|
|
A Reader posted a review at 2008-03-02 03:39:20.
(Language: English)
Overall, I liked it. It presented a lot of interesting images and thoughts, but was a bit ponerous and pretentious. Although sections of this book were quite good but nothing really grabbed me. Kundera is a brilliant writer, but the mix of philosophical musings and novel didn't always work for me. They were overly blatent and slowed the book down so that the actual plot went very slowly. It was as if he had constructed to plot only to display the ideas and not on it's own merits. Although the characters were interesting I still couldn't help feeling that they were slightly one-dimensional; they stood for something rather then standing on their own. I hate to say it was too much metaphor, and although Kundera kept making it sound like he was presenting really meaningful stuff, there wasn't a lot of it that I thought would stick with me. However, I loved certain sections, particularly the section about Kitch. Worth the read, but don't expect it to grab you the way a good novel does.
|
|
|
A Reader posted a review at 2008-09-07 09:09:35.
(Language: English)
This is a spectacular work of literature. I would go so far as to say it blows Love in the time of Cholera out of the water (I compare the two since my last read was Cholera). The structure serves the story extremely well. One gradually gets to know each character better and better until one is comfortable having their narratives combined and intermingled. The narrator’s voice is usually less than dominant, but it returns to the story here and there to great effect. The characters are well drawn and fascinating, as are the events that surround them. The prose is superb, it bears a remarkable resemblance to poetry at times. The title and the themes are inspired and awe-inspiring. This is the kind of book that can give one goose bumps simply with ideas. I really can’t think of anything bad to say about the novel. Kundera knocked it out of the park.
|
|
|
A Reader posted a review at 2007-06-15 09:28:03.
(Language: English)
In this book, Kundera's gift for tragedy and his excruciating sense of humor combine to explore what he calls a "terminal paradox," a prismatic view from all sides of the implications of existence in a world unfettered (destabilized) by the old societal anchors of marriage, work, and religion. Taking as his starting point Nietzsche's doctrine of "eternal recurrence," and working from the phrase einmal ist keinmal, he probes the lives of four characters: Tomas, Teresa, Franz, and Sabina, as they move through Europe and through history, in an attempt to discover the possibilities of existence in a world bereft of boundaries. To do this, he brings immense learning to bear, bringing forth a novel that, despite its erudition, is uniquely accessible to people with little or no background knowledge. Approaching his story through the lenses of photography, philosophy, musicology, and philology, he nevertheless avoids trampling us under the weight of his knowledge by a deft use of irony and a riotous sense of humor. Mr. Kundera's constant experimentation with form will delight his readers in this book; he sets up a section entitled "Words Misunderstood" as a dictionary of words used by his two lovers, each taking the other to mean something entirely different. This is not only a fantastic investigation the problem of language in human sexuality, but it is a riotously funny critique of dictionaries in general, of how they ossify language, as if it could be codified. The romance of Franz and Sabina clearly shows that it cannot. His master touch is just this way that he uses a massive store of knowledge, a unique perspicuity to human behavior, and a poet's sense of formal experiment to tell us what in the end is a joke with no punchline. That is the paradox of his un-nerving sense of humor: if no device serves to wrap the story up, if the story just happens quietly and is gone, what are we to make of its importance? Kundera provides no answer, and, as a voice of instruction to readers, I advise that those who would use this book as a means to cheap moralizing or obnoxious carpe diem-isme should just pass by. On the other hand, if you will read this book with an eye to reflection, you may be surprised at just how much you can learn. On a lighter note, the section entitled "Karenin's smile" is one of my favorite performances in all literature. If Tomas and Teresa's dog doesn't make you laugh, I question whether you have a pulse. I end with his epitaph, which puts this whole novel into its proper light: "Here lies Karenin: he gave birth to two rolls and a bee."
|
|
|
A Reader posted a review at 2008-03-06 12:48:37.
(Language: English)
This book was difficult for me to red not because of the his use of language or the intricicies but because I felt it was so anticlimactic. He presents two ways of viewing the world, one with heavy significance and one with out any so that one can soar( the unbearable lightness of being), yet he presents his case of these worlds through what appears to be people who are immature and can't deal with their problems correctly so they don't ever communicate with each other. Yes, we have the very in your face theme of loss of existence and many existential questions but Woolf did it better and she wasn't an existentialist. I thought the way he desribed everything, was not well elaborated, I was always left wanting more. The themes presented are valid and important themes to dwell upon: recurrence, civil and personal consequence, etc. but I've seen these themes highlighted in other books and Kundera doesn't do it as well.
|
|
|
A Reader posted a review at 2008-11-12 06:43:58.
(Language: English)
"Making love with a woman and sleeping with a woman are two separate passions, not merely different but opposite. Love does not make itself felt in the desire for copulation (a desire that extends to an infinite number of women) but in the desire for shared sleep (a desire limited to one woman)." A philosophical window into love, passion, jealousy, and duty--set during the Russian invasion of the Czechoslovakia. When you read this, you will re-evaluate your relationships--past and present--and wonder if the person was by chance sent to you "in a bulrush basket" or your other half according to Plato's "Symposium". In either case, would you be willing to alter your life and your future for this person? Strangely enough, I wondered why an ex-boyfriend suddenly decided he would like to see me a couple of months after we broke up. I remember he was reading this book at the time. And after having read this book, I wonder whether he had been sent to me by chance--in a foreign city--like Tereza was sent to Tomas through six alterable choices he had made...Or was he the person in "my" dream--my ideal that suddenly showed up in person, thus inspiring one of the weirdest relationships I've ever had (and was he thinking the same thing when he saw me for the first time...and then again months later)?
|
|
|
A Reader posted a review at 2009-03-05 12:14:58.
(Language: English)
Don't see what the big deal is. Some of the philosophy is interesting. Much of it isn't. There is something of a tendency towards what I would normally associate with stoned philosophizing - hanging massively convoluted arguments on seemingly minor details of the narrative. The main character knowingly keeps the woman he loves permanently on the brink of a nervous breakdown through his epic philandering, which comes across as more of a hobby than an addiction. And this guy is supposed to be basically decent and intelligent. Eh? A couple of the side characters are quite cool. There is a very convincing romance based on total mutual misunderstanding. In short: some of the characterizations are iffy, the plot is pretty lose, and the language is a bit bland (but this could be the translators fault). On the upside: a few interesting thoughts, a couple of laughs here and there.
|
|
|
A Reader posted a review at 2008-05-30 07:53:33.
(Language: English)
i read many sparkling reviews citing this book as life-changing, the best book ever, and so on. i guess i've learned that when someone says, "this book changed my life," i should be more cynical.kundera's ideas are interesting, but not life-changing or revolutionary. i came into the book completely disagreeing with the premise of the lightness of living with no eternal return. it seemed to me he came to this idea, along with many others, in ways that were jumpy and illogical, with loose evidence that he tried to string together although they didn't always follow. also, choppy, disconnected narrative usually intrigues me, but this window into four characters' life events in no sort of chronological order was unnecessarily confusing. overall, his writing was straightforward and almost sassy at times (hopefully the translation reflected the original), but i almost had to force myself through this book in hopes the ideas would come to breath-taking conclusion...which they didn't.
|
|
Mónica posted a review at 2008-07-21 06:56:04.
(Language: English)
Depressing and utterly pretentious. Completely disappointing, the author's unnecessary and overly-present omniscient voice often looks down on the reader as somebody unable to think by himself. Demagogic. It reads more as a failed attempt to sound "genial", "complicated", "postmodern" and "deep", ignoring that real geniuses do not have to try, nor need to directly explain themselves or their characters, and often rely on simplicity. I had heard of Kundera and was curious, looking forward to reading him. Never again, it sounds more like a marketing trap than anything else. Thank God there are also bad/horrible reviews apart from the 5-star ones, it is maybe one of the most overrated books ever. I would save a couple of "kind of" interesting existential philosophic tries, and a sometimes somewhat effective (others just clumsy and failed) originality in the broken time-line of plot development, that is all, but they are not actually much worthy of attention, compared to genuine high-quality existential and postmodern authors out there. Some bits may be of interest for somebody interested in Czech, Russian or Cold War history as well.
|
|
|
A Reader posted a review at 2009-02-25 10:49:40.
(Language: English)
(Possible Spoilers) I almost don't want to bother writing because I know I am in the minority opinion. BUT I'm sorry to say, I really did NOT like this book! I read some reviews, and I understand his ideas and points as many others have praised him for, and those I did enjoy. But it seems to be lessons with a loose, scattered storyline based around it. Is the only way for him to show his lessons, even if it involves pain, to be surrounded by seemingly meaningless cheating? It seems to be the stories main activity, and that bothers me greatly. I tried to see it as realistic, that life is not always perfect and sometimes it is still possible to love someone who can hurt you so much. But is it not romanticized that the characters' pain was taken so silently? (Like Tereza's) Some of the characters connections seemed to be more intense, as Thomas and Sabina's, or at least made sense in a bizarre way, as Franz and Sabina's. But piled together with other relationships it seems out of place. (I can't see Thomas as actually loving Tereza, or if so, he must have loved Sabina as well, and then, why would all the others be needed!??? Etc. Etc.) There were also many details that I also felt were unnecessary. I fail to see the lesson in Thomas' ego, and I tried to see my hatred of his character as a sign of good writing; at least he evoked emotion in me. I tried to identify with both Sabina and Tereza, and possibly Franz, but felt like the relationships weren't as real as the persons were. Maybe that is all a part of the unbearable lightness. Those emotions I can understand, but life is not a constant negativity. Many of his trains of thought to connect ideas seem like he is logically getting to the next step, but to me those steps do not necessarily follow each other. I am all for bizarre, but I could not reconcile myself with the vague yet detailed, watery and loosely connected ties that the story tried to make. Overall I just couldn't wait to get it over with. Maybe the lessons are deep, or maybe like many other important ones, they are just simple yet need to be explained. I'm not trying to criticize only for the sake of casting his work aside, I just truly did not find it as compelling as it is supposed to be. I can't recommend this book but I'm glad others can enjoy it.
|
|
|
A Reader posted a review at 2007-10-15 05:08:15.
(Language: English)
Kundera’s most famous novel is a complex book. Set against the Russian invasion of Czechoslovakia, the story evolves around different fictional topics but could just as well be the story of real people. A man torn between thought and emotion, between love and lust. A woman who lives for rebellion. Another whose body is simply an amplifier for her emotions. Tomas, the male protagonist, falls in love with Teresa and marries her, while still having many one-night stands in an attempt to give weight (meaning) to his life. Moreover, he maintains a love-affair with Sabina. Teresa is aware of Tomas' adulteries and cannot bear the situation, which manifests itself in numerous detailed nightmares illustrating the realities of life. For Teresa, love and sex go together, whereas Tomas believes that having sex without love is possible. The female protagonist therefore suffers from the heaviness of life, while her male counterpart feels the unbearable lightness of being. Teresa later tries to gain this lightness for herself. Most of us carry the heavy and the light, the expression of either part depending on our character and circumstances. For that reason, one can identify with Teresa as well as Tomas and Sabina too. Kundera led me to understand that the "specialness" of relationships is not really held in the place that we tend to think it is nor manifests itself in the way that we wish. That love is not what we think it is and unfortunately can sometimes only be gained through situations that we would otherwise find abhorrent if not consumed with these feelings. Sex and love are so intimately joined that it is very difficult to distinguish between the two. Tereza stayed with Tomas knowing he spent most days and nights in another woman’s arms because she loved him, and therefore would suffer anything for him. For her, sex and love were the same thing and that is what tormented her but at the same time made her stay. Is Tereza’s acceptance weakness or a pessimistically hopeful attempt to gain love through persistence and loyalty? The very fact that they stay together and seem to find some degree of happiness illustrates that an acceptance of a relationship that falls well short of satisfying and fulfilling hopes, is possible. Is Tomas and Tereza's tolerance of their imperfect love, their acceptance of where they have arrived at simply a reflection of the fact that you can't change the strong’s oppression of the weak? You may hate it, as Tereza hates Thomas' infidelity, but you have to accept it and move on. However, this suggestion that change can only be incremental (at best) and that basically everyone must cope with life, however awful, must be rejected. Life without dreams is no life at all, but perhaps this is the very point that Kundera was trying to portray. Kundera plays with opposites: life and death, heaviness and lightness throughout his story. The reader can try to decide which life is happier: the light or the dark? What is "The Unbearable Lightness of Being?" It is the realization that, with no hope of knowing the right path from the wrong, there can be no wrong path. One is necessarily absolved of mistakes. The search for meaning in life leans towards the necessity of significance, which comes from a sense of weight. Are events forgiven in advance because they happen only once? But, is it also not unbearable that events only occur once as we can never go back and rectify our mistakes? Everyone wishes they could replay a past error; a lost opportunity, a lost love, a relationship that should not be. Is this not unbearable?! Is this not a weight we feel pressing down on us every day? The novel is an attempt to identify what makes us need companionship in life so badly, trying to understand the relationships between the conflicting desires that humans possess and act upon. What makes a man leave the woman that he loves and is perfectly happy with and seek something intangible in the arms of a mistress? Why does the same man sacrifice everything he has - freedom, social status, and his life's work - only to go back to the same woman he absolutely had to leave before? Is the absence of any responsibilities and ties in life really a "lightness"? Could this absolute lightness turn into absolute emptiness and thus become unbearable at some point - a burden pulling us to the ground? It shows how vulnerable we are, and how miserable we can be made by our contradictory desires, aspirations and impulses. If you read deep enough into this novel you’ll repeatedly think, ‘he’s talking about me’. "How can life ever be a good teacher if there is only one of them to be lived? How can one perform life when the dress rehearsal for life is life?" Kundera's Unbearable Lightness is a real tour de force – sensitively exploring loves and lives, evoking deep philosophical questions about the human condition…what it is to Be. My only regret is… why did it take me so long to get to it and yet on reflection it requires an experienced adult mind (and experiences) to fully appreciate what is being contemplated. Enjoy A
|
|
|
A Reader posted a review at 2007-09-30 05:02:50.
(Language: English)
Milan Kundera is a stone cold genius. I'm telling you. Why? Well anyone who can write a book about adultery, bowler hats and existentialism in sixties Czechoslovakia, and yet still make it dull as ditchwater, has got to have some serious pen-skills. I can't tell you how much I was looking forward to reading this book when I got my hands on it a few years ago. I was rollicking through my third year at university and was fully ready to get pretentious and quote The Unbearable Lightness of Being as my favourite book, with a stroke of the chin, to all who asked. It was with aching dismay that I waded through the first few words, then pages, then chapters (not real ones, mind you: tiny, numbered ones, like proper philosophers insist upon using) stuffed with bland, tedious and cloyingly introspective characters. Perhaps ditchwater was an unfair simile. Treacle is more apt. Smug, knowing treacle, that ambles around your mouth doing nothing in particular whilst everyone else in the treacle shop raves about how good it is. Kundrera's stilted writing style is similar to Camus', but Camus gets away with it because The Outsider was 118 pages long. The Unbearable&(what a pleasing abbreviation) is three times that. Now, the only function that my copy serves is to be held at arms length and regarded with an expression of equal parts disdain and disgust. Im doing it now. On the back cover, someone from Cosmopolitan has blurted a brilliant novel from someone who, amongst Rushdie and Márquez, is one of our masters of magic realism. Have they ever read a book by either of those authors? If so, did they notice that little stylistic tick that they both have whereby they fill them with rich, engaging prose and fascinating characters? I've also just noticed the names of Kundera's other books. This must be some kind of wry, postmodern literary humour to which I'm not party: Laughable Loves (plenty of that), Life is elsewhere (it certainly is), The Book of Laughter and Forgetting (yes please, that would be lovely) and, lastly: The Joke. Don't mock your reader, Milan. I have to admit, I stopped reading about one third of the way through. Yes, I committed that most heinous of critical crimes. I was suffocating in the yeast of boredom. But if Kundera can't be bothered to start writing properly until page 112, then why should I waste my time waiting for him? The book was acclaimed as a classic almost as soon as it was published, which suggests that no-one else bothered to finish it either. If it looks profound, and it sounds profound, and you can't understand it, then it must be profound. Oh. Wait there. I've just read page 262. They're in Cambodia, and there are oinking pigs and the French are arguing with the Americans. This is quite good! Damn.
|
|
|
A Reader posted a review at 2008-02-10 06:45:27.
(Language: English)
Truly great books jolt you out of your sense of complacency – a been there, read that kind of attitude. Lightness was electrifying – every page reminding me of the need to read. Despite the lack of utilitarian value, literature opens up worlds we engage with and debate with and by so doing opens up our minds and liberates us from the narrowness of ourselves. The tension between weight and lightness shows up how the individual seems to be torn between the need for solitude and, at the same time, the need to associate with the Other. And it is in part this restlessness that gives rise to works of creative endeavour.There is also that recognition that no single person has a monopoly over meaning; that all these evolve and change as a result of one’s interaction with the world beyond ourselves, thus giving rise to an infinitude of possibilities. The invocation, so subtle, to rethink boundaries, so reminiscent of the Surrealists (think defamiliarisation, art that provokes people to think about things out of their original context) gently leads one to sidestep the dangers of totalitarianism, which is at least partially born out of a mechanisation of the spirit (doing something just because everyone else is doing it and not pausing to think about the ethical consequences involved) or an unwillingness to accept that someone else other than the self may be right. And I think it is precisely this interactive engagement or challenge that is constitutive of the book’s ethical stance, given the backdrop of the reign of Communism and repressive government.
|
|
|
A Reader posted a review at 2008-01-27 05:30:58.
(Language: English)
Ο ΦÏάντς είχε ξαφνικά την εντÏπωση οτι η Μεγάλη ΠοÏεία εφθανε στο Ï„ÎÏμα της.ΓÏÏω απ'την ΕυÏώπη οÏθώνονται τα τείχη της σιωπής και ο χώÏος όπου ξετυλίγονταν η ΜεγάληΠοÏÎιαδεν ήταν παÏά μια μικÏή εξÎδÏα στο κÎντÏο του πλανήτη.Τα πλήθη που άλλοτε συνωθοÏνταν κάτω απ'την εξÎδÏα,είχαν φÏγει απο Ï€Î¿Î»Ï ÎºÎ±Î¹ÏÏŒ και η Μεγάλη ΠοÏεία συνεχίζονταν μÎσα στην μοναξιά και χωÏίς θεατÎÏ‚.Îαι,η Μεγάλη ΠοÏεία συνεχίζεται,σκÎφτονταν ο ΦÏάντσ,παÏά την αδιαφοÏία του κόσμου,αλλά αποπνÎει ωευÏικότητα,είναι πυÏετική,χθÎÏ‚ ήταν εναντίον της αμεÏικάνικης κατοχής στο Βιετνάμ,σήμεÏα εναντίον της Βιετναμικής κατοχής στην Καμπότζη,χθÎÏ‚ για το ΙσÏαήλ,σήμεÏα για τους Παλαιστίνιους,χθÎÏ‚ για την ΚοÏβα,αÏÏιο εναντίον της ΚοÏβας και πάντοτε εναντίον της ΑμεÏικής,κάθε φοÏά εναντίον των σφαγών και κάθε φοÏά για ναυποστηÏιχθοÏν άλλες σφαγÎÏ‚,η ΕυÏώπη παÏελαÏνει,και για να μποÏÎσει να ακολουθήσει το Ïυθμό των γεγονότων χωÏίς να της ξεφÏγει κανÎνα,επιταχÏνει όλο και πεÏισσότεÏο το βήμα της...
|
|
|
A Reader posted a review at 2007-07-14 09:14:24.
(Language: English)
I was so surprised to discover that there are people in this world who actually don't appreciate this book. This book is the most brilliant novel I have ever read. It redefined my life. I literally think in terms of kitsch, of Tereza in a bulrush basket, of the human sensation of vertigo - I don't live a day without relating to this book. Kundera is brilliant in his unique perspective on life and he has amazing philosophies of human tendencies, history, music, and love. But more than that, he is able to capture what I would call a "slice of life." This is a feat that so few books in literature have been able to do, to be able to wrap an aspect of life between two paperback covers, and capture the core of what makes us human. He is one of the most intelligent authors alive, nothing short of brilliant. There is no book like this one; it is philosophical and deep but never ceases to be human. The characters in this novel are all so beautiful because they live out his musings, and they are not characters at all but symbols of philosophies. This book touched me on the deepest level possible. To read it once is to not read it at all - you should read it at least four or five times to come to a full understanding of it. And it is so deep and beautiful that it is one of the only books I would not mind rereading multiple times. This novel gave me such an appreciation of how Kundera looks at life; at times the words seem almost holy, larger than life themselves. This is a book that should touch your mind, your thoughts, your life, your entire soul, and nothing less. It has the power to be religious.
|
|
|
A Reader posted a review at 2007-12-31 07:33:16.
(Language: English)
Favorite quotes: For Franz music was the art that comes closest to Dionysian beauty in the sense of intoxication. No one can get really drunk on a novel or painting, but who can help getting drunk on Beethoven's Ninth, Bartok's Sonata for Two Pianos and Percussion, or the Beatles' White Album? Franz made no distinction between "classical" music and "pop." He found the distinction old-fashioned and hypocritical. He loved rock as much as Mozart. He considered music a liberating force: it liberated him from loneliness, introversion, the dust of the library; it opened the door of his body and allowed his soul to step out into the world to make friends. He loved to dance and regretted that Sabina did not share his passion. Franz felt his book life to be unreal. He yearned for real life, for the touch of people walking side by side with him, for their shouts. It never occurred to him that what he considered unreal (the work he did in the solitude of the office or library) was in fact his real life, whereas the parades he imagined to be reality were nothing but theater, dance, carnival - in other words, a dream. It was drizzling. As people rushed along, they began opening umbrellas over their heads, and all at once the streets were crowded, too. Arched umbrella roofs collided with one another. The men were courteous, and when passing Tereza they held their umbrellas high over their heads and gave her room to go by. But the women would not yield; each looked straight ahead, waiting for the other woman to acknowledge their inferiority and step aside. The meeting of the umbrellas was a test of strength. At first Tereza gave way, but when she realized her courtesy was not being reciprocated, she started clutching her umbrellas like the other women and ramming it forcefully against the oncoming umbrellas. No one ever said "Sorry." For the most part no one said anything, though once or twice she did hear a "Fat cow!" or "Fuck you!" Shit is a more onerous theological problem than is evil. Since God gave man freedom, we can, if need be, accept the idea that He is not responsible for man's crimes. The responsibility for shit, however, rests entirely with Him, the Creator of man. The fact that until recently the word "shit" appeared in print as s--- has nothing to do with moral considerations. You can't claim that shit is immoral, after all! The objection is daily proof of the unacceptability of Creation. Either/or: either shit is acceptable (in which case don't lock yourself in the bathroom!) or we are created in an unacceptable manner. A question is like a knife that slices through the stage backdrop and gives us a look at what lies hidden behind it.
|
|
|
A Reader posted a review at 2008-04-27 09:30:35.
(Language: English)
Milan Kundera's spectacular book takes us through the lives of a small number of Czech, Swiss and French characters that are roughly sketched out, and pushed through barely a skeleton of a plot that allows his ideas to come to the fore. It is a dense novel that at its heart explores the distinction of lightness and weight. Drawing on Nietzsche he suggests that our lives would be heavy if we were stuck in a kind of groundhog day, month, year or life - where what we did would repeat itself over-and-over and we would need to think seriously of the consequences of all our actions. Noting this does not characterise out existence, he conjectures that our lives are light; what happens, happens once and is, therefore, of little consequence. But the importance and seriousness to which his characters go about their lives, their supposedly light lives, hint at the key work in the title, unbearable. His characters are subjected to love, infidelity, Soviet oppression, exile, political protesting on events in Indochina and through these myriad of 'adventures' an encyclopaedia of ideas about modern living and modern lives emerge - extraordinarily relevant to the contemporary man and fantastically innovative at every turn.
|
|
|
A Reader posted a review at 2009-05-21 10:09:47.
(Language: English)
Set in Prague in 1968 just as the USSR is absorbing Czechoslovakia into the Soviet empire against its will, THE UNBEARABLE LIGHTNESS OF BEING features a love triangle of Tomas, a young, womanizing surgeon, Tereza, a young, beautiful and former innocent who marries Tomas, and Sabina, Tomas' favorite ex-lover and now constant companion. Author Milan Kundera rejects the literary concept of "eternal return," that certain places invite people to continually reenact certain archetypal dramas, and embraces the idea of "lightness of being," where each person has but one life to live and leaves a unique footprint on it based on whatever decisions the person makes. The book alternates between the erotic dealings of the three main characters and a serious discussion of the purpose of life, while all around them Soviet tanks are threatening not only the stability of their love triangle but their very existence. The book was complex, disturbing, tragic and ultimately unfulfilling, but still accurately describes young, ambitious and intellectually gifted people living during times of great upheaval. Made into a powerful movie starring Daniel Day-Lewis, Juliet Binoche and Lena Olin.
|
|
|
A Reader posted a review at 2007-10-04 06:42:47.
(Language: English)
If your looking for something that won't make you want to committ suicide halfway through reading it don't read it. If you don't like knowing the end before the final page, don't read it. If you think because of the first page its not going to do your head in at some point, don't read it. I read it. Huwzore gives it to me and he's like 'read this one'. Now Huw and i are a bit different. He likes deep, intelligent things. And i like Elmo. But we both like exchanging ideas on how the world works, how human nature works and how life operates as a whole. And this book creates a conversation point. The unbearable lightness of being is about love of somebody, how you measure yourself and your weight of importance on how others receive it, and how to not feel as though you belong can cease reason to live. Our very being is unimportant unless somebody beholds it as significant. Its not a novel, its a philosophy. the characters are pawns in a conversational experiment, the plot jumps and flits back and forth because really it isn't the story thats imperative here but the idea behind it. It's one rare occasion i'll say that in lacking plot and great characters, it still had worth at the end of it. And if anything else had been more substantial, it wouldn't have made nearly as powerful a point. Books are in being because they're important to people after all
|
|
|
A Reader posted a review at 2008-05-27 11:33:20.
(Language: English)
When I read the first twenty pages of this book, I just kept having to lay it down to say, "Yes! Yes!" This was mainly because Kundera found a very eloquent way to make womanizing and shallowness in relationships sound deep. Naturally, this was pleasing.The novel explores events in a semi-linear fashion, in that it will go in a straight line, than take a few steps back to look at the events from a different perspective. I thought it got a little slow to the end, but overall, a very enjoyable read. He's great when he's writing as Tomas, not so great when he's writing as Tereza, good when he's in Franz''s head, not particularly good in Sabina's head. See a pattern? In any case, I think whether or not this book is enjoyable will depend mainly on how the reader deals with the philosophical elements. If they're taken seriously, Kundera will get old really quick. But if the reader looks at them with the kind of playfulness and lightness that they suggest, I think it will be a very good 1
|
|
|
A Reader posted a review at 2008-03-25 12:39:45.
(Language: English)
This book, short on plot, is nevertheless worth reading if only because sprinkled throughout the text, are revelations and ruminations on life which stick with you beyond the time spent reading the book. If it were longer or more complicated, I would say it isn't worth the effort of reading, but being what it is, the few nuggets are entertaining and easy to find. Eimal ist Keinmal is an idea that Kundera expands on to explain that anything done only once may as well not have been done at all, the greatest example being life. When faced with a choice between two courses of action, we are unable to choose wisely because we have never had that choice before and never will have it again. Even if the outcome of our decision is positive, we will never be able to try the other option in order to be able to compare the two and see which one is best. For me this is a reminder not to take myself too seriously - I can only do my best, and even though uninformed, cannot be faulted for the outcome.
|
|
|
A Reader posted a review at 2007-09-30 08:14:44.
(Language: English)
About time i read this book again - it's been a couple of decades since the first time! My perspective on his stance has modified since moving to the Czech Republic, and especially since going out with a Moravian (Though much of the novel is set in Prague, Kundera hails from Brno). He states as a narrator that the characters are ideas not people, in order to consider certain ideas, such as lightness and weight. I actually feel the book was the best exploration of the concepts of 'masculine' and 'feminine' of it's time. And although his later books start sounding irritatingly didactic (especially after he started lecturing at the Sorbonne) the style in this book gets the balance almost perfect (and a site better than Calvino does with 'If on a winters night' around the same time). I thought at the time this was one of the great books (novels?) of the 20th Century. Then began to wonder; was it mysogynist claptrap after all? Now, after gaining a little cultural context I'm inclined even more to it's greatness. Right up there with 100 years and Midnight's Children. And topped only, perhaps, by The Book of Laughter and Forgetting...
|
|
|
A Reader posted a review at 2007-10-14 04:02:19.
(Language: English)
Kundera is not the easiest writer to read cause he does not give answers but questions. However I loved this book (even if it gave out the ending of another book I was reading, Tolstoy: Anna Karenina :) ). I was touched by the last pages where Karenini dies and Kundera ponders about the love between people and between a human and an animal. A couple of these quotes below in Finnish. Have to read again to get more out of it. 'Rakkaus koiraan on epäitsekästä: Terezza ei halua Kareninilta mitään, hän ei vaadi siltä edes rakkautta. Hän ei ole koskaan kysellyt ihmispareja kiduttavia kysymyksiä: rakastaako rakastettuni minua? Onko hän rakastanut jotakuta enemmän kuin minua? Rakastaanko hän minua enemmän kuin minä häntä? Kenties tuollaiset rakkautta mittaavat, tutkivat, kuulustelevat ja peräävät kysymykset myös tuhoavat sen alkiona. Kenties emme kykene rakastamaan siksi että haluamme olla rakastettuja, toisin sanoen siksi että haluamme toiselta jotakin sen sijaan että lähestyisimme häntä vaatimatta mitään, tyytyisimme vain hänen läsnäoloonsa.' Ja kertomus Nietzschestä: 'Näen Nietzshen poistuvan torinolaishotellista. Nähdessään ajurin suomivan piiskalla hevostaan Nietzsche menee hevosen luo, ottaa sitä ajurin nähden kaulasta ja itkee. Tämä tapahtui vuonna 1889 jolloin Nietzsche oli jo loitonnut ihmiskunnasta. Toisin sanoen hänen sielullinen sairautensa puhkesi juuri. Mutta nimenomaan siksi hänen eleellään on mielestäni kauaskantoinen merkitys. Nietzsche pyysi hevoselta anteeksi Descartesin puolesta. Hänen hulluutensa (eli hänen eronsa ihmiskunnasta) alkaa sillä hetkellä jona hän itkee hevosen vuoksi. Juuri tuota Nietzscheä rakastan, samoin rakastan Terezaa, joka hyväilee polvillaan lepäävää kuolemansairaan koiran päätä. Näen heidän kulkevan rinnakkain: molemmat astuvat syrjään tieltä jolla ihmiskunta, "luonnon herra ja omistaja", marssii eteenpäin.'
|
|
|
A Reader posted a review at 2007-12-18 03:45:47.
(Language: English)
Eternal return (also known as "eternal recurrence") is a concept which posits that the universe has been recurring, and will continue to recur in the exact same self-similar form an incomprehensible and unfathomable number of times. The concept has roots in ancient Egypt, and was subsequently taken up by the Pythagoreans and Stoics. With the decline of antiquity and the spread of Christianity, the concept fell into disuse, though Friedrich Nietzsche briefly resurrected it. In addition, the philosophical concept of eternal recurrence was addressed by Arthur Schopenhauer. It is a purely physical concept, involving no "reincarnation," but the return of beings in the same bodies. Time is viewed as being not linear but cyclical. The basic premise is that the universe is limited in extent and contains a finite amount of matter, while time is viewed as being infinite. The universe has no starting or ending state, while the matter comprising it is constantly changing its state. The number of possible changes is finite, and so sooner or later the same state will recur. Physicists such as Stephen Hawking and J. Richard Gott have proposed models by which the (or a) universe could undergo time travel, provided the balance between mass and energy created the appropriate cosmological geometry. More philosophical concepts from physics, such as Hawking's "arrow of time," for example, discuss cosmology as proceeding up to a certain point, whereafter it undergoes a time reversal (which, as a consequence of T-symmetry, is thought to bring about a chaotic state due to thermodynamic entropy). from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eternal_return --- Eternal recurrence is such a crucial part of Nietzsche. In the beginning of the book The Unbearable Lightness of Being, Kundera had already mentioned the basic concept of eternal recurrence as a prologue of story. It implies that the idea denied a fact - life fade away and never return, just like weightless shadow. Everything recurs again and again and destroys the beauty of the universe. Why do I say this? Jesus had been nailed down on the cross numerously if eternal recurrence actually existed. The Christian meaning of Jesus’ sacrifice, and the Resurrection would be meaningless. Then I can say that God is acting like a fool for sending his only son to us, and make him died on the cross innocently. And what Bible said became fake, the meaning of "save the universe" and "bearing the sin for us" are really stupid. The death of Christ is like a world drama tours that starring on the stage every minute. Kundera also distinguished the ideas of "light and weight" root of Nietzscheism. If life recurs forever, the deepest concept of eternal recurrence would be the heaviest weight (das schwerste Gewicht). We all would be nailed on the cross of eternity, suffering permanently. Even though the heaviest weight suffocates us, but life with heft could be colourful. If we bear the heaviest weight and it makes us stick onto the ground. It deduces life become more realistic and we can actually proof and feel our existence. Suffering make us more actual, relatively, if time passes and affairs never come back, will we become blameless and weightless? Is this what we want? Everyone tried to pursuit immortality, but the truth is, when immortality approach to us, life is painful and meaningless. Contrarily, if life is just a glance and started ferment into reminiscing, life is just a glimpse and we are able to catch their beauty. Facing the dilemma of Light and weight, what could we choose? Sabina or Tereza? Life is just like a karma and looping, the crucial difference is the occasion, timing and role. I don't believe in destiny, because what the god of destiny said is always cruel. But since you choose not to believe him, he will send disasters upon you and tame you. I am allowed to choose Sabina between Tereza again, what shall I choose? I never wanna be a fatalist again, however, I really wanna caress you, and sleep with you upon the tiny tiny bunk bed. Under the lovely blue sky and sunshine, I feel dizzy and really confused rite now.
|
Share your views!
Similar books
