Kazhes pierakstu burtnīca

It was several weeks ago when I went to a book shop in order to buy a book in English. I spent at least quarter an hour choosing, what book it would be - nothing apalled to me enough. I had nearly already bought one of Haruki Murakami`s novels when I decided in favour of Iris Murdoch, and now, after having read the book I can clap on my own shoulder upon a wise choice. "A fairly honorable defeat" portrays the lives of several members of London`s middlehigh society as they are put through a test by an unconventionally minded biologist named Julius King. Like it`s mentioned on the back cover of the book - people are just puppets in Julius` hands who punishes people for them being too vain. Rupert and Hilda are a happy married couple with quite successful lives and a black sheep for a son - Peter wants to quit Oxford and live in a different way than his parents had lived. Rupert`s brother Simon is gay and has been living with Rupert`s colleague Axel in a steady relation for three years now. Morgan, Hilda`s sister has just returned from the States where she had an affair with Julius King and by whom she was essentially forced to break up with him. Morgan still hasn`t gone over her husband Tallis, whom she left two years ago for Julius. Tallis now lives together with his father, who just happens to be quite a pesky person but who Tallis truly loves. Then there`s the problem that Peter who now lives at Tallis`s place is secretly in love with Morgan, who isn`t quite cold about her nephew either. But it would all be good for the lot of them, had Julius not decided to teach Rupert a lesson. You see, Rupert claimed himself to be a man of goodness and a man of good knowledge about what`s black and what`s white and he had even written some sort of a philosophy book. And when Julius started a sly game to make Morgan and Rupert believe that the other one of them is secretly in love with the other, all the good relationships between the heroes started to collapse about as beautifully as the twin towers. As for what I think about all this stuff - the book is mostly about one of the most important problems of the modern age - people don`t talk to each other, and a little white lie can turn into a heavy stone around your neck because of that. The ending isn`t as dark as it could probably be for Julius isn`t an evil mastermind, he just wants to prove his point, which he does perfectly. Although he puts the cards on the table a bit too late, so Rupert has enough time to drown himself. I can`t really say that everything in the book is particulary realistic, considering that Julius was sending Rupert letters that Morgan wrote to himself during their relationship while Morgan was receiving letters that Rupert wrote to her sister some twenty years ago - I seriously doubt that people usually write love letters in such a manner that they never mention any people`s names or events so there`s no way to tell that a letter isn`t exactly new. Still it is quite an amazing book with bright characters and witty dialogue.

A young woman returns from a lengthy abscence to her lover just to dissapear again. In the process of searching for her her lover and best friend fall in love. Once again a Michelangelo Antonioni film doesn`t feature a lot of action. On the contrary - pretty much nothing is happening on screen for about 95% of the film. It is not a mystery about the lost woman but a drama or even a melodrama about the remaining people. Though it doesn`t mean that the characters on screen are more active than the ones that are invisible - most of the things they do (Claudia and Sandro are the names of the new-lovers, Anna is the lost one) don`t make very much sense to me. I know that it`s the way it`s supposed to be - real people don`t behave like machines and are confused quite often, but I still wouldn`t say that the film was a terrific experience, especially remembering how boring it was.

Isn`t it an oxymoron - Adam Sandler in a serious movie? Not, it isn`t. And it`s strange. What`s the piano all about? And those coloured bars that sometimes appear? Nethertheless the film is good. And it`s positive (although Adam does smash some things during the process). I also liked the music.

Let`s face it - I have almost entirely forgotten what this book was all about. I can remember that it was a village close to the Polish border of Germany, where everyone tried to persuade everybody else of their Polish origins. As far as I can remember a long period of time was described. There was this one guy who was among the first to join the NSDAP hoping that his low party number will bring him great benefits but he was kicked out because he was Polish. There was a woman who had an affair with a musician but she kicked him out because while having sex he set up a metronome in order to control the speed and occasionally got off from her to switch it. It all started with a wedding - the grooms parents weren`t rich and they weren`t even invited to sit at the table. Cholonek was born only some time after the wedding. What else do I remember? It wasn`t particulary interesting, that`s for sure. Otherwise there would be more to tell. Don`t bother looking for it unless you`re a Janosch completist (and I doubt that there is a single Janosch completist around).

This book was a sensation way back in Germany when it first came out. Why is that? For the obvious reason, of course. And what is the obvious reason - a guy of 15 having affair with a 36 year old former guard at a Nazi concentration camp. Actually I`ve had enough of those books about nazism - damn, there`s not much that hasn`t been already said and most of this stuff is just a repetition. What`s special about this teenie`s woman is that she likes people to read loudly for her - she did it with her prisoners near Auschwitz and she did it with this boy. And why did she like that? Because she couldn`t read and was ashamed of herself. Anyhow, I don`t care for non-reading war criminals, nor do I care for young boys with sexual problems. And I don`t care about this book either.

Theoretically I should have disliked this film from the very first moments of it - you see, I`m not exactly fond of the Japanese culture and neither am I a huge fan of Hollywood takes on different cultures. But surprising it proved to be a very worthy film. I still can`t say that I can identify myself with geishas perfectly - I`m not 100% sure that I understand what`s so cool about them. And - why do Japanese make those cardboard houses that I could accidentally destroy after having slipped on a wet floor and crashed through the wall? Neiter do I get what`s so cool about wearing dressing gowns (I don`t care that they call it kimono - it`s still a gown to me), putting on lots and lots of makeup and - the part that bugs me the most - what`s about those shoes? I suppose Japanese people think that wearing ugly sandals with the sole a whole foot thick as the greatest idea ever, but I`ll quote Edmund Blackadder here: "It`s the worst idea since Abraham Lincoln thought to himself - I`m bored from sitting at home, I think I shall go to see a show tonight." The film itself though is good, a bit depressive of course, for there`s not much funny in being sold by your father to be a geisha (although geisha is not a prostitute and it`s very cool to be a geisha and everyone envies you if you become one) and your virginity is put on an auction after you`ve given rice puddings to the contestants, and you end up with your first sexual experience being offered by a fifty year old doctor called Dr. Crab. But that`s life I suppose. The dreary content doesn`t change the fact that the film is astonishingly beautifully directed and that there`s lots and lots of breath taking scenes in it (yeah, and there are no silly folks with blades in sight, just a couple of funny sumo warriors).

Since I had already seen all the contestants in the semi finals (or nearly all), they could offer little surprises. Maybe I was a litle surprised how Mr. Kivics changed his brilliant line "every mother, every children" to "every mother, all the children" but that was all. The winners - the boy band/a capella band Cosmos - could be predicted before the show, of course, so was the case with the second placed "Melo M", but Jenny May that got into the third with the catchy "I`m alone" was quite a surprise. I was kinda dissapointed though for the hostess didn`t shake her breasts quite as much as in the semis (and her dress was far from good as well).

These stories are supposed to be funny. Maybe I`m a twisted weirdo but I didn`t find them to be like that. Some of them are some mock-biographies of people that never existed. Only one of them still comes to my mind - about a guy who was a great artist in the form of art where nothing remains after the man`s death - he persuaded different artists not to do something - for example, he told Brahms to stop writing music, he insisted that Chopin wouldn`t wear woman`s clothing just like George Sand wore man`s clothes. And he also wrote some letters, most of which are analysed and quoted until today (most of those letters are about as brilliant as "Hello. I`m fine. How are you?") That`s all I can tell about this book.

"Did you know that the memory of a goldfish is only three seconds long? Every time they turn away and see each other it`s like the first meeting. Aren`t humans when they fall in love the same?" That`s a very imprecise quote from the film, that stills gives the main message of the film. What is this film all about? It`s about how fragile relationships are and how stupid people are that just fall out from one relationship to be dragged into another? There`s quite a lot of heroes in this film, so it was a bit hard to keep every one of them in memory even during the film and it`s even more complicated now. Tom has a relationship with Clara, but starts cheating on her with Isolde. Rosie is David`s girlfriend but he doesn`t seem to care for her much. Instead he turns out to be gay and falls in love with a man named Red. Red is Angie`s best friend and a gay, Angie is lesbian and she has a crush for Clara so she turns Clara into a lesbian (oh, and that doesn`t stop Angie from making love to Red once - who cares that she`s lesbian and he`s gay). After Isolde has had an affair with Tom (and Clara has dumped him therefore) she has sex with Tom`s colleague Larry. When Tom finds out he`s a bit angry. Meanwhile Angie and Clara split up for Clara isn`t ready for a monogamous relationship. So she teaches Isolde the pleasure of womanly love. But Isolde isn`t ready for a monogamous relationship and has some sex with some one named Shane, and that lead to the collapse of this lesbian relationship (although Clara has something with her friend Conzo as well). Tom meets a college teacher named Renee that tries to change him. Tom learns to know Rosie and they nearly got married, but on the night before wedding Rosie has sex with another man and decides that she may not be quite ready for that. Angie has found a new girlfriend - a certain Kate and they decide to have a child but their plans go wrong when Angie founds out that she`s pregnant from Red. Nevertheless they decide to stay together and keep the child. And as a bonus they have two fatherly figures - Red and David who have formed quite a strong relationship. Oh, and Clara starts a relationship with Isolde from the beginning, whilst Tom has given up his dirty activities - he doesn`t tell anyone about goldfish anymore and he doesn`t offer women to read Rilke out loud for him, he marries Renee instead. And the film ends with Clara and Tom getting together and Clara giving him the goldfish speech.

It`s a wonder that I hadn`t seen this film before. You wouldn`t guess - but this film is about sex, and it`s about Sharon Stone having sex with Michael Douglas, and that`s a thing they do quite enough. And, since Stone`s character is a bisexual murder she also has sex with some other people of both sexes and kills some people as well. Douglas` character is a cop who has some drinkning problems but his psychiatrist is helping him out - both mentally and physically, still she gets murdered, but that doesn`t mean that Douglas and Stone can`t be together anymore. Quite a nasty film I dare saying with enough erotics, but otherwise a bit too much of the crime/thriller shtick for me.