Kazhes pierakstu burtnīca

Kā var izlasīt šīs grāmatas anotācijā, Jākobs Juliuss Dāvids esot viens no nepelnītāki aizmirstajiem austriešu rakstniekiem. Varbūt tā patiešām ir, bet manis pēc viņš varētu arī joprojām palikt aizmirstībā. Pēdējos 20 gados viņu esot sākuši reanimēt un šis 19.gadsimta austriešu ebrejs tiekot pamazām iznests saulītē. Nez, vai mani uzskatīs par antisemītu, ja teikšu, ka tas ir aplams solis (manās acīs)? Es vienmēr esmu apgalvojis, ka no visām man zināmajām tautām austriešiem ir visaugstākais garlaicīgu un nevajadzīgi pretenciozu rakstnieku procents, bet Jakobs Juliuss Dāvids sit pušu visus iepriekš lasītos. Kaut ko tik garlaicīgu es patiešām nekad, nekad, nekad iepriekš neesmu lasījis. Un nav svarīgi, vai attiecīgajai šī krājuma novelei ir paredzēts kāds sižeta aizmetnis vai nav, viss tiek nogremdēts milzīgā bezjēdzīgā vārdu plūsmā, kas tevi atkal un atkal dauza pa galvu, līdz tu sāc sāpēs kliegt un lūgties, kaut tā beidzot būtu cauri. Es vismaz tā darīju. Un tikai dzelzs griba mani piespieda to vismaz kaut kādā veidā sagremot līdz galam, tiesa, nesaglabājot šīs grāmatas saturu manas galvas cietajā diskā, tikai izpumpējot to cauri RAM un pa taisno atkritumos. Kaut kādus vācu valodas vārdus es varbūt pateicoties šai grāmatai atsvaidzināju, bet kopumā - vienkārši biedējoši bezjēdzīga laika nosišana. Protams, pilnīgi iespējams, ka te ir kaut kāda nopietnā māksla, kas manam trulajam prātam nav saprotama, bet man nav īsti vēlmes mēģināt aizrakties līdz šī autora ģēnija būtībai. Daudz vieglāk ir pateikt: "Afftar wipej jadu!" un nelikties vairs ne zinis.

Protams, ka tikai pārnācis mājās no bibliotēkas, es ievēroju, ka šī grāmata nav nekāda daiļliteratūra, bet Jozefa Rota dienasgrāmatu, vēstuļu un avīžu publikāciju apkopojums. Zināmā mērā to var nosaukt par vilšanos, no otras puses - autora personība un aprakstāmā situācija to padara par pietiekami interesantu lasāmvielu. Proti, te aprakstītas Rota attiecības ar nacistisko Vāciju, no kuras viņš paspēja aiztīties pirms Hitlera nākšanas pie varas, ar Austriju, kuru Hitlers pievienoja Reiham, un no kuras Rots arī paspēja tikt laukā sveiks, kā arī ar Rietumvalstīm, kuras varbūt arī nekļuva nacistiskas, bet patiesībā bija vairāk nekā ignorantas. Ja man būtu jāizloba pamatdomas no Rota darbiem, tās būtu sekojošas: 1) naids pret ebrejiem neradās gluži no tukšas vietas - tam bija ilga vēsture kā no vāciešu, tā no ebreju puses; 2) ne tikai attieksme pret ebrejiem darīja Vāciju par ļaunuma impēriju; 3) vēršoties pret Dāvida zvaigzni Hitlers pastarpināti vērsās pret kristiešu krustu, kas lielā mērā arī bija viņa nopietnākais ienaidnieks; 4) Austrija bija īstā demokrātiskā vācu zeme, kuru Hitlers pakļāva tās līderu vājuma un bezprincipiāluma dēļ; 5) nacisti un komunisti pirmie izgudroja tādu emigrāciju, kuras pārstāvjiem bija liegtas iespējas būt populāriem savā dzimtenē (runa ir par rakstnikiem), līdz ar to nogriežot viņiem iespēju normāli eksistēt un atņemot viņiem lasītājus). Vispār Rots patiešām bija diezgan pravietisks rakstnieks, kas gan kļūdījās, paredzēdams Hitleram ievērojami drīzāku galu, nekā tas bija patiesībā, bet kas ļoti labi izprata Hitlera plānus un ieceres. Simpātisks rakstnieks, ar vienīgo izteikto mīnusu - simpātijas pret monarhiju, konservatīvisms. Bet lasīt interesanti, gandrīz it kā tā būtu "īsta grāmata".

(valoda: krievu) Viljams Tērbers, ja var ticēt aprakstam uz grāmatas aizmugurējā vāka (kam, protams, ticēt nevar, tāpat kā nevar par elektroprecēm spriest pēc to ražotāju atsauksmēm), esot leģendārs amerikāņu satīriķis, karikatūrists un vispār unikāla humora tips. Ja var ticēt manam spriedumam (un tam, protams, ticēt nevar, jo zināms, ka mani ir noalgojuši tumšie spēki, lai es izsmietu jebkuru ASV radītu mākslas darbu, kā jau normālam interneta teroristam klājas), tad Viljama Tērbera humors ir visai otršķirīgs. Šajā grāmatā ir apkopoti viņa labākie darbi (nezinu pēc kādiem kritērijiem) no dažādiem stāstu krājumiem, kas tapuši vairāku gadu desmitu garumā. Pirmais, ko nevarēju neievērot, bija izteiktā līdzība ar Džeroma humoristiskajiem stāstiem - tā pati mazliet ironiskā un mazliet pamācošā noskaņa. Protams, varbūt pie vainas ir krieviskais tulkojums, taču Džeromu esmu krieviski lasījis ļoti antīkā tulkojumā, kamēr Tērbers krieviskots ticis salīdzinoši nesen, līdz ar to diez vai piestrādājis viens un tas pats tulks. Pirmais stāstu kopums nāk no stāstu krājuma "Mana dzīve grūtos laikos" (1933), kurā Tērbers pasniedz it kā smieklīgas epizodes iz savas (iespējams, izdomātas) bērnības. Ko smieklīgu iespējams saskatīt stāstos "Nakts, kad nokrita gulta" vai "Diena, kad pārrāva dambi", es patiešām nezinu, turklāt šie abi stāsti ir principā vienādi. Proti, ir kaut kāds notikums no kura visi baidās, bet kas reāli nenotiek, bet saceļas panika un notiek daudz visādu tizlumu, lai gan centrālais ļaunais notikums nemaz nav iestājies. "Suns, kurš koda" ir izteikti līdzīgs Džeroma stāstam par suni, kas ļoti mīlēja naudu un tiem abiem ir viena kopīga iezīme - tie nav smieklīgi. Nākamais stāstu kopums, kas nākuši no krājuma "Vīrietis vidējos gados uz lidojošas trapeces" (1935), šķiet labāks par pirmo. Stāsts "Misters Prebls atbrīvojas no savas sievas" par vīrieti, kas izlemj nogalināt savu sievu, aizvedot viņu uz pagrabu un klausās sievas lamāšanos par to, cik slikti viņš ir ieplānojis slepkavību, ir patiešām interesants, gandrīz vai Roalda Dāla kvalitātē. Stāsts par "Veiksminieku Džedu Pītersu", kuram allaž paticis stāstīt, kā viņam noveicies neiet bojā dažādās situācijās, bet kurš beigās pavisam stulbi nositās, arī ir ok. Daži stāsti gan atkal ir izteikti bāli, bet tādu vismaz nav vairums. "Mūsu laikmeta fabulas", kā es nojaušu, ir kalpojušas par iedvesmu mūsu pašu tautiešu pasakām par Jamuleju un Tupu, un līdzīgi kā SWH večiem, arī šeit kvalitāte ne vienmēr ir vienāda. "Princese un skārdene" ir klasiska fabula par princesi, kurai jāizvēlas labākais no preciniekiem ar paredzamu, bet perfekti nostrādātu iznākumu. "Vienradzis dārzā" labi izmanto skatu punkta maiņu. "Meitene un vilks" arī ir labs gabals. Tikām "Truši, kuru dēļ bija visas bēdas" ir tik bērnišķīgi realizēta situācija ar nacistiem un ebrejiem, ka pat 10 gadīgs bērns būtu spējīgs tādu uzrakstīt. Arī "Aitas vilku ādā" ir bezjēdzīgs audzinošs stāsts. Neapšaubāmi labākais stāsts atrodams krājumā "Mana pasaule. Laipni lūgti tajā!" un tam par godu nosaukta arī šī izlase. Tajā Šekspīra "Makbets" tiek interpretēts kā detektīvromāns un tajā tiek veiksmīgi (vairāk vai mazāk) atklāts īstais karaļa slepkava (kas, protams, nav Makbets, jo Šekspīrs tak nerakstītu tik stulbu detektīvu, ka slepkava ir acīmredzams). Krājumi "Tērbera valsts" (1953) un "Tērbera karnevāls" (1962) neko īpaši saistošu nesniedz. Papildu visam manā rīcībā nonākušajā krājumā iekļauta viena Tērbera pasaka bērniem "Baltā stirna". Patiesībā, vai tā ir īsti pasaka bērniem vai pieaugušajiem es nezinu. Sižets - mežā atkārtojas laiku pa laikam, ka balta stirna mednieku priekšā pārvēršas par princesi. Tā ir atkārtojošās burvestība, ka princese-stirna var palikt par cilvēku uz mūžu tikai tad, ja viņai nenākas vairāk kā 2 reizes vilties cilvēku mīlestībā. Parasti viņai tā sanāk. Slinkums ieslīgt nopietnākās detaļās. Pasaka patiesībā ir pat diezgan amizanta ar zināmu humoriņu, tomēr novelkot svītru un savelkot visus saskaitāmos rezultāts nav Tērberam labvēlīgs. No aptuveni 40 stāstiem šajā krājumā kādi 10 ir patiešām veiksmīgi, vismaz 10 - katastrofāli bezcerīgi un pārējie - aizmirstībā grimstoši. Secinājums - zināms talants Tērberam, protams, piemita, bet ja jau viņa labāko darbu izlasē dominē neizteiksmīgi darbi, es labprātāk pat neiztēlošos, kādi ir pārējie stāsti viņa krājumos. Bet varbūt tomēr būtu vērts pārbaudīt?

The Berlin Zoo is one of the oldest and biggest zoo`s in the world. I had been there some ten years ago, but for my better half it was the first visit. There`s lots of animals in here and they are kept nicely, but who am I to write about animals? In comparison to the Budapest zoo this one is certainly better, so it is better than the zoo in Riga, yet a zoo is still a zoo - a place you visit once you go to a big city - but not a place you think much about afterwards.

We went to this place in order to see the biggest skeleton of a dinosaur that any museum has in its collection. Yet the skeleton wasn`t there for some reason, so we spent some time looking at rocks. I can`t say that I find rocks particulary interesting. There were a few dinosaur bones though but that`s not really the same as a dinousaur itself.

I have a book with some of this writer`s most famous plays (although to be quite honest I haven`t heard anything about this Edlis person), but I found it too troublesome to read all 8 plays included in the book thus I read just the half of it. First, there`s "Where`s your brother, Abel!" - a play for three persons where two of them were in a German concentration camp once, and one of them changed sides while the other one was the only honest person to survive - a typical Soviet piece of propoganda. Numero duo: "Mess for the Virgin" - a strange play where Joan of Arc wasn`t burned by the English but replaced by a different woman and after that got married yet she felt that a part of her was left in the fire and that she wasn`t herself anymore - a very strong play indedd. So is "The game of the shadows" - a dramatic piece about Cleopatra and her lovers. The last play I read was the "Solomennaja storozhka" - a silly Soviet styled comedy which doesn`t get too funny but serves its political goals. Therefore summary there are 2 good plays and 2 bad plays, so as a whole this is pretty average, although I admit that some talent from the author can be clearly felt yet the "obligatory content" doesn`t let him really spread his wings.

Lai būtu skaidrs, par ko ir runa - tā ir otrā daļa Franču animācijas filmu festivālā, kuru ar Lienču apmeklējām iekš K-Suņa un kur tusēja daudz tā saukto šallaiņo.

I don`t know why but I thought myself a fan of European animation. Maybe it had to do with me liking the collection of short European films I watched at the same place something like 9 months ago, maybe I just wanted to prove myself alternative. As for being alternative - the K.Suns cinema in Riga is the perfect place to see "alternative" young people. Most of the spectators at events in there usually look so out of reality that you can`t probably imagine how funny they are. In short - it`s a place where you`d meet a lot of people who look worse than bums and are proud for it. I got tickets for six hours of French animation but neither I nor my girlfriend had enough mental strength to stay until the end of it. Therefore we saw only two out of five programs of animation films.

The book contains three dramatic works by the famous German writer Herman Broch (ok, I`m not so sure that he was that famous indeed but his name seems familiar to me - and that`s something). Note: after consulting Wikipedia (I`ve been mentioning this source of information quite often lately but only because it`s very informative and not because They would pay me for it, although I`d feel happy if they would) I know that Broch comes from a Jewish family and that he`s considered an Austrian writer. He`s mostly known for his novel "The Death of Virgil" which I`ll probably read later to be more educated than I am now. Yet I can`t say that after reading some of his plays I`ve become particulary interested in Broch`s writing. Out of the three plays published in the book I got from my library - "Die Entsuehnung", "Aus der Luft gegriffen oder Die Geschaefte des Baron Laborde" and "Es bleibt alles by Alten" I found only one that really worked for me. The first play - a tragical piece about a factory is - is too sad, boring and has too many characters for me to really get it on paper (rating 4.0). The second is a comedy and it`s fine - I always like to read something about con-artists and villains (8.0). The last play is also a comedy and it`s nothing really - nor good, nor bad, passable and not more (5.5). Maybe it wasn`t the best start of learning to know Hermann Broch.

It probably can`t be classified as a single record but should instead be separated into different elements that don`t have too much in common. On the other hand, discussing bonus material as such seems to be a silly thing. Yet for a whole disc of previously unseen (at least by me) material I can make an exception. First, this disc features a documentary about Terry Jones and Michael Palin revisiting most of the locations where "The Holy Grail" was shot. I never thought that those guys worked under such money saving circumstances that they shot almost all scenes in a single castle which has only about 3 different rooms but in the film it appeared to be a lot of castles and dozens of rooms. The things they talk about on those locations they go are worth to be heard as well. This documentary also proves how extremely significant to Britain this legendary film has become - you can nowadays buy coconuts at the castle where king Arthur was harrased about European and African swallows. But enough about the documentary already. Let`s talk about another documentary. It was done by BBC in 1974 on the shooting locations. Despite having got all 6 pythons on screen it ain`t too useful, for it`s mainly goofing around with very little substance. Both Terries shine on this documentary more than the rest of the sixpack, mainly due to the fact that it was them directing the film and therefore receiving more attention from the BsBC. Other materials aren`t that extensive - there`s a short new film about splitting coconuts featuring Michael Palin and some unknown fellow, there`s a bit of old posters and bashing reviews (one of those states that "Holy Grail" makes "Ben Hur" look like an epic. To me it was "Life of Brian" that really made "Ben Hur" look like an epic). Oh, I almost forgot - there`s a short part of the film done in "LEGO". It`s goofy, of course, but not particulary interesting. As for the final judgement - only a Python fanatic would care about those things. But on the other hand - I am a Python fanatic!

By reading this I continued my acquaintance with the genre of memoirs. I gotta admit that reading diaries and letters of a person that you don`t already know by its work seems a bit weird. I haven`t read a single poem by Byron, that`s for sure. On the other hand I`ve read a few books about people interested in Byron ("Arcadia" by Stoppard and "The luxury of exile" by L.Bass are the first two works to come to my mind). As for this book it can probably by described as a novel in letters although it surely ain`t no fiction. Lord Byron himself can be seen this way without all those exterragations historians have put upon him. Basically he was a fine young upper class fellow without much money and with his mind set on women and adventures. In his letters to his friends he`s quite honest and sarcastic, his letters to his lovers don`t come off as particulary honest but probably he meant what he wrote (at least during the writing and probably some ten minutes afterwards). Byron`s travels and the self-chosen exile for the most of his adult life can be understood pretty well. Without a doubt I don`t claim that this book is particulary interesting to read - the witty passages where Byron pokes fun at some of his contemporaries or the times when he tells funny stories in his diaries are a treat but some of the stuff only for biographers isn`t particulary what I want from a book.

Now there`s one thing I can`t deny even if I want to - it`s that Duerrenmatt is one of my favourite writers of all times. He`s funny and he`s smart, he`s witty and his joke is never a fart. "Der Meteor" is an absurd story about a nobel prize winning writer who rises from the dead. The only problem for him is that he doesn`t believe in that. He only thinks that he`s gonna die very soon and comes back to the place where he once lived when he was young, thinking that it would make a good place to die. Yet he not only doesn`t die but drives many other people into graves - by scaring them for him being alive, by doing what they don`t want him to. He`s a real asshole so to say. "Dichterdammerung" is a really twisted play - it`s basically a play where we see a play being played on a stage in some low quality theatre. It`s a play about a nobel prize winning writer who is visited by a great admirer of his who has found out that in all the authors book he writes about killings he performs himself. This admirer of his doesn`t want no money he just wants to be able to follow the master and look at his work. Yet since the writer is famous only because everyone knows that he does murder people the admirer can`t succeed at his wish. I don`t even want to comment the high rating, for Duerrenmatt it usually goes without saying.

Knowing me as a sicko who`s just crazy for anything done by any member of the Monty Python flying circus, you can guess that I watched those 3 episodes of the Muppet Show only because of John Cleese`s performance. It turned out that he indeed was the only worthy thing about those episodes. Peter Sellers was a great actor for sure, his performance in "Dr Strangelove" playing multiple characters of that film was just excellent. But he doesn`t have a very funny part in the Muppet Show. Probably the only good thing about his performance was when Kermit introduces him as the epitome of Britishness and then says: "So we naturally employed him as a gypsie violin player." The rest is crap. John Cleese has two good sketches - one where he complains that he never works with pigs, and then another when he works with Pigs in space as a pirate with a stupid talking parrot. Dudley Moore? Who`s that fellow? I don`t know, and after watching the show I`m not so sure that I want to know who he was.

Damn, does ones attitude change with time. When I was a kid I though Pink Panther to be the coolest cartoon character ever. Now in this series of 51 minutes of Pink Panther I found only one cartoon I could fully enjoy - and it was the one I had already seen back then when I was a kid. All the rest? Uninteresting, quite similar to Tom and Jerry (which I never liked). So what was the difference between those two cartoons? I don`t remember.

The first dissapointment of the year. For the last few months I have been a fan of Duerenmatt`s work - both his short stories and plays have impressed me quite significantly. But now I found out that he was also capable of rewriting classical stuff (although I have no idea whatsoever what the original Wojcziek was about) and make it sound boring. Not that I said that I find "Faust" by Goethe particulary interesting in its original form for the modern audience. But still I expected this to be more fun. Probably my lack of interest has something to do with the fact that I`m not a great expert of "Faust" and that I`m not an expert at all in everything else classical German literature could offer. I`m pretty sure that in "Urfaust" there are some elements from poems not by Goethe, just as there is something from the older version of the same book. But it`s dull (at least my taste found it to be that way). Wojcziek? I never even got what was the plot here. The lead character seems to be some stupid fool, who has some problems with his wife. And he does a job that doesn`t get paid too well. That`s probably all I can tell. Apart from the fact that from now on I won`t believe that Duerenmatt=very good quality brandname.

You gotta be crazy even calling this thing to be short stories. These aren`t even stories - simply some works that Kafka had started to write but never managed to complete. Some of them are but a few sentences long, and don`t show no sign of Kafkas genius, just like you could expect such stories to be. One of the longest stories which seems to be at least something has even a fragment that says "a few pages missing" and that isn`t a joke from Kafka, simply the texts are missing. Great! Then why don`t I rate these stories lower than Britney Spears rates Michael Boltons imaginary stepbrother Ricky? Because there`s one story that lives up to Kafkas fame and is interesting to read, partly even hilarious and absolutely unconventional. It`s about some school teacher who claims to have discovered a gigantic mole, and about another guy trying to drag the worlds attention towards the discoverer of this phenomena. Of course, nobody ever cares about this mole thing, but at least those two guys start a conflict because they have different opinions towards the mole that even they themselves don`t try to catch or to prove seriously its existence. You can read this one story but the rest isn`t worth even looking at it. That guy whom Kafka asked to burn his works would have done a good job if he had burned those stupid unfinished stories.

Not so bad, actually. I wouldn`t say that I feel completely changed or anything like that, but nevertheless at some moments the impression of the read was quite strong.

First there`s the world famous "The Inspector General" (aka `The Revizor`). If you don`t know about, shame on you, I don`t even want to tell you about it. Next comes a somewhat obscure short play with a long title. Then there`s "The Marriage" - another good comedy. And last but not least - "The Gamblers" - which actually deal with a subject common to "The Inspector General". To be honest most of the text is pure enjoyment which makes one wonder about the power of language Gogol had.

The first few stories had a really good impression on me - a fresh language and quite interesting characters can be a sign of interesting things to come. However every next story tends to repeat the previous ones and pretty soon the book gets overwhelmingly boring. As a mater of fact, I didn`t make it past one third of the book. It seems that Mr. Maurois was an author for wide masses that wrote about the dull and boring problems in the love life of the bourgeoisie. I admit that having not read the complete book I am not able to judge it in an adequate way but I don`t care about that because more of the same bore cannot change the impression in the positive direction. It`s just no good literature by any means.

In here you can find all the novels about the worlds greatest detective. Three of them I had already read or seen on TV (but never in English), while the fourth one wasn`t that good. "The Valley of Fear", "The Sign of the Four", "A Study in Scarlet" and "The Hound of the Baskervilles".