[ilds] Kafka and Durrell

Bruce Redwine bredwine1968 at earthlink.net
Mon Jul 23 12:00:50 PDT 2007


Well, then, we must disagree.

Bruce

-----Original Message-----
>From: Richard Pine <richardpin at eircom.net>
>Sent: Jul 23, 2007 11:57 AM
>To: Bruce Redwine <bredwine1968 at earthlink.net>, ilds at lists.uvic.ca
>Subject: Re: [ilds] Kafka and Durrell
>
>Can't agree at all. I read K when very young and it gave me no difficulty 
>whatsoever. (I do think you used 'incomprehensible' and 'baffling' in close 
>proximity, and I thought both words applied to K.) The Castle is crystal 
>clear, as is 'Before the Law', as far as subject matter is concerned and - 
>someone is going to holler at this - he strikes me as a paradigmtaic 
>post(-)colonial writer. Seeing Kafka's Prague, 40 years aftre having read 
>him, was an extra layer of eye-opening.
>RP
>----- Original Message ----- 
>From: "Bruce Redwine" <bredwine1968 at earthlink.net>
>To: "Durrell list" <ilds at lists.uvic.ca>
>Sent: Monday, July 23, 2007 6:04 PM
>Subject: Re: [ilds] Kafka and Durrell
>
>
>> Richard Pine asks why I consider Kafka incomprehensible and baffling.  A 
>> short answer, in a Durrellian context.  Kafka is not incomprehensible (I 
>> didn't say he was); in fact, his Czech German is quite lucid and a delight 
>> to read.  What's baffling is his subject matter, in particular parts of 
>> The Trial (the famous, "Before the Law") and the entirety of The Castle. 
>> He writes in mysterious parables about an incomprehensible social and 
>> cosmic order.  This is not Durrell, whose odd English cannot match the 
>> clarity of Kafka's German.  Durrell seems to be using language as a 
>> smokescreen to hide something.  Kafka sees a smokescreen, which language 
>> cannot penetrate.
>>
>> Bruce
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>>>From: Bruce Redwine <bredwine1968 at earthlink.net>
>>>Sent: Jul 22, 2007 7:49 PM
>>>To: ilds at lists.uvic.ca
>>>Subject: Re: [ilds] John Press and Durrell
>>>
>>>Which poses an interesting problem.  If the poems are intended to be at 
>>>least in part incomprehensible, who will read them?  The poet is 
>>>destroying his own audience.  I'm trying to think of antecedents for this. 
>>>Perhaps Kafka?  Who published almost nothing and wrote mainly for his own 
>>>satisfaction and amusement?  And we all know how baffling Kafka is -- and 
>>>how great.
>>>
>>>Bruce
>>>
>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>>From: Michael Haag <michaelhaag at btinternet.com>
>>>>Sent: Jul 22, 2007 6:25 PM
>>>>To: ilds at lists.uvic.ca
>>>>Subject: Re: [ilds] John Press and Durrell
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Like it or not, Durrell may not want readers seeing too much into his
>>>>poems.
>>>>
>>>>:Michael
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>On Monday, July 23, 2007, at 01:14  am, william godshalk wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>  "At times, his vision is so private that, lacking the key, we find
>>>>> ourselves unable to decipher the vivid cryptograms which lie before
>>>>> us."
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> ILDS mailing list
>> ILDS at lists.uvic.ca
>> https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds
>>
>> 
>



More information about the ILDS mailing list