| Title | : | In America |
| Author | : | |
| Rating | : | |
| ISBN | : | 0312273207 |
| ISBN-10 | : | 9780312273200 |
| Language | : | English |
| Format Type | : | Paperback |
| Number of Pages | : | 398 |
| Publication | : | First published January 1, 2000 |
| Awards | : | National Book Award Fiction (2000) |
In America is a big, juicy, surprising book-about a woman's search for self-transformation, about the fate of idealism, about the world of the theater-that will captivate its readers from the first page. It is Sontag's most delicious, most brilliant achievement.
In America Reviews
-
In America was an amazing historical fiction novel by Susan Sontag that was so original in its format that it was hard to put down. This book won the National Book Award in 2000. It embraced America in all of its promise and its rawness as it struggled towards modernity in the late nineteenth century in such an engaging way. In 1876 one of Poland's greatest actresses, Maryna Zalezowska led a group of fellow emigres from Poland to the United States bound for California to a vast farmland and vineyard south of Anaheim in a communal form of living. She was accompanied by her young son and husband who was fleeing his aristocratic family in Poland. Among the emigres were an artist and his wife as well as a young writer hopelessly in love with Maryna. In one way or another most of the party embraced the openness and freedom of this new country as they tried to adapt. And no one tried harder than Maryna but after five years she realized that she missed the stage and studied rigorously to learn perfect English and lose her Eastern European accent. Becoming known as Marina Zalenska, she was embraced by America as she played in theaters and opera houses across the country to packed houses.
This was a woman's search for self-transformation with a lot of emphasis on the theater and our great playwrights such as Shakespeare. Also evident in the unfolding pages was the theme of love and the many myriad forms it may take as we all struggle with our various relationships. This was a book that only Susan Sontag could write.
The writing was luscious with some of my favorite quotes:
"You have to float your ideals a little off the ground, to keep them from being profaned. And cut loose the misfortunes and insults, too, lest they take root and strangle your soul."
"In Poland she had represented the aspirations of a nation. Here she could only represent art, or culture, which many feared as something frivolous or snobbish or morally unhinging. Bogdan pointed out with a smile that Americans seemed to need perennial reassurance that art was not just art but served a higher moral or wholesomely civic purpose." -
I had never read Susan Sontag before but ‘In America’ is historical fiction, with the heavy emphasis on fiction, done right.
The drama in this book was underplayed so it’s not an “entertaining” read in the conventional sense. There are probably three unique points that I took from reading this book. First Sontag focuses on a Polish stage princess, Helena Modjeska known as Maryna in the book, who is of serious renown and wealth and who immigrates to California with her gang of industrious Bohemians to start a new life off the land. So she chooses someone to fictionalize who already has a rich story but is unknown to the vast majority of us.
Secondly her writing style is so enlightening. I learned a great deal about living in late 19th century California. It is evident that she did a great deal of local research.
The last point, which is probably obvious to those who have read the author’s other works, is that Sontag’s writing showcases a very strong voice but is not overwrought. The central character, Maryna, exhibits a great deal of strength and influence in an otherwise male dominated 19th century world. The scenes around the romances and affairs are beautifully done.
Five stars. This book is both subtle and muted in its emotional content so it might not be everyone’s cup of tea. It won the National Book Award for Fiction in 2000. -
Let me be perfectly clear——I am a huge fan of Susan Sontag's criticism. "Against Interpretation and Other Essays", "On Photography", and "Regarding the Pain of Others" are books I go back to repeatedly for their ahead-of-their-time provocative points of view. After finishing "In America," I feel it's the critical side of Sontag that makes her fiction suffer. The writing is accomplished and refined, and, formally, the constantly shifting points of view rendered through various writing forms such as correspondence letters and real-time theatrical performance proves to be a clever device to push the story along.
But how has this tireless champion of the avant-garde produced a novel that feels so old and musty, as if it was from the 19th century, but without the strong emotional and moral conflict that informed the best literature of the time by such authors as Tolstoy, Dostoevsky, James, Balzac, etc.? Chapter Zero, with its unnamed mysterious observer/narrator that sneaks into a dinner party, showed promise and piqued my curiosity, but then the novel devolved by having the main characters——who are rather staid, clichéd and uninteresting——take over the storytelling reins. Maybe Sontag intended this to be more of a commentary on the social class issues and bohemian hypocrisies of the time, but I just had no emotional connection to any of these people. The book is well-constructed but has no soul——not surprising, I think, when its written by one of our most celebrated academic thinkers.
I also can't help but think that this novel, constructed around supposed historical fact, is some sort of sublimated biographical exploration for Sontag. Every character embodies some facet of her life and personality. Maryna, the star artiste who flees her first marriage for fame and fortune on the stage; Ryzard, the aspiring writer; Bogdan, the dutiful husband wresting with his homosexual tendencies and secret affairs; even the portrait photographer that comes to their Anaheim commune to shoot the group conjures a very Sontag-like discussion of the photographic medium (not to mention could be tagged as Annie Leibovitz-like). But what could have been an interesting exploration of the emotions that drive these characters (and hence Sontag) is too remote, as if the scholar/critic side of Sontag cautioned her fiction writing doppelganger not to reveal too much. So while I appreciate the craft of this novel immensely, I am disappointed that it leaves me so unaffected in the end. -
I want to re-read this novel. It’s gorgeous.
-
Aunque buscaba leer era ensayos de esta autora encontré este libro y debo decir que me termine sorprendiendo para bien.
La utopía de la vida rural, la independencia de una mujer, la mirada de la sociedad.
una historia sobre lucha y aceptación
las mujeres somos lo que somos.
video reseña en:
https://www.instagram.com/p/CLmzhVgAkVi/ -
Forget the old boys club: The most engaging historical fiction is being written by women. What's worse, they have the audacity to make it fun.
In
Ahab's Wife, Sena Jeter Naslund dared to revise Melville's classic "Moby Dick." Anita Shreve re-created a tense custody battle at the turn of the 20th century in
Fortune's Rocks. And
Tracy Chevalier painted a stirring portrait of a maid in Johannes Vermeer's house.
These recent books share the same strengths: All of them are carefully researched, lavishly detailed, and expertly plotted. But they also share the same weakness: Despite their historical accuracy, they can't resist the temptation to project modern sensibilities backward onto their feminist heroines. Ironically, the result is to render 200 years of feminist activism essentially irrelevant. Who needs equal access to education? Chevalier's maid helps Vermeer improve his compositions. Equality before the law? Please. Shreve's young mother gets what's hers despite the legal bias against her. Una, Nasland's pre-Civil War berwoman, could edit Ms. Magazine.
Sontag doesn't make this mistake in her rich new novel, inspired by the life of Polish actress Helena Modrzejewska. When Sontag's Maryna reacts against the constraints of her time, she does so in ways that seem historically accurate. This is no NOW posterwoman; Maryna is a character riddled with contradictions, carving out the kind of power available to her, making the necessary compromises and hating them at the same time.
The novel opens with a daring, almost mystical chapter in which Sontag imagines herself conceiving of her characters at a lavish dinner in Russian-occupied Poland in 1875. It's like watching a projectionist trying to bring the film into focus. This kind of self-referential, post-modern trick could be annoying, but Sontag is a brilliant writer who doesn't gauge her intelligence by how confused she can make her audience.
As the sun of her circle of admirers, Maryna is at the zenith of her power in Polish theater, but she yearns for a kind of simple authenticity. "She had loved being an actress because the theater seemed to her nothing less than the truth," Sontag writes. "Acting in a play, one of the great plays, you became better than you really were."
Perhaps it's not surprising, then, that Maryna is drawn to an even more elaborate stage of self-improvement: She convinces her husband and their friends to take a luxurious trip half- way around the world to begin a utopian community in California.
Of course, Maryna is doomed to discover that simplicity is a complex quality to acquire. Communal living works fine unless people are involved. The faux community they buy in Anaheim promises "the purifying simplicities of rustic life as lived by the privileged," but the laws of economics play havoc with their vineyard's success.
Clinging to the people she pushes away, Maryna and her friends can't escape the multiple ironies of their situation. "A queen who has abdicated will always be a queen to those who knew her on the throne," Sontag notes. Her devoted husband is tormented by his desire for others. Ryszard, a brilliant writer, is so desperately in love with her that he can't compose anything worthwhile. Their friends Julian and Wanda find their marriage growing more hateful in this bucolic paradise. "Doesn't it seem very American," Ryszard sighs, "that America has its America, its better destination where everyone dreams of going?"
When the community falters, as they all suspected it would, Maryna hopes to reincarnate her former theatrical glory. But she discovers painfully that the costs and rewards of being a great European actress are not the same as being an American celebrity. The result is a fascinating exploration of what's real in a culture that preaches authenticity but worships artificiality.
Sontag is so comfortable spinning these big ideas through the details of her novel that they never seem heavy or intrusive. "In America" we discover the country as the curtain rises on the modern age. After so many moving stories from Irish immigrants, the perspective of aristocratic Poles is unusual, but the plot they encounter belongs to us all.
http://www.csmonitor.com/2000/0309/p1... -
A novel about the nineteeth century commune of the great Polish actress Helena Modjeska-- in the era of Bernhardt. It was located near Anaheim California. What an outrageous boatload of bohemians! The commune predated the progressive era's burgeoning of California cults and communes by thirty years. Susan Sontag only wrote two novels, both of them historical, and her sense of character, her ability to bring to life such a wacky crew of intelligentsia utopians, is to be treasured. That Sontag was a Los Angeles native is a fact that often overlooked, but it comes out in her love of this early bohemia. A terrific novel deserving of a new readership.
-
I came for the reputation, stayed for the form and history, stayed til the end for the attention to detail and plot & character development, and was glad to leave when the experiment had run its course.
I am charmed by the peculiar metafiction in this book, but I think it works against itself. Chapter Zero conjures a fictional dinner party that the invisible narrator haunts, observing Polish intellectuals who are based on real historical figures. The titular character, Maryna Zalezowska, derives from the 19th century Shakespearean diva Helena Modrzejewska. The narrator sets out to learn whether "theirs would be a story that would speak to me," and thus to the reader. Fine: I love fiction about a historical problem. However, I made the mistake of reading Sontag's thoughts on the book beforehand. "I made her into a marvelous person. The real Modjeska [Modrzejewska's stage name] was a horrible racist" (found
here). I couldn't escape that contradiction: if you're scrubbing these characters of their flaws, how can you expect their story to speak to you?
Also, her approach to citing sources is lacking. The foreword pays homage to a few works, but she does not mention her practice of lifting phrases, descriptions, and a couple whole passages from other works and articles. Sontag described this act as scholarly in-joking, and she distinguished between writers and sources (bullshit). Regardless of her reasons, if she benefited from others' works, why not include a bibliography so others can, too? -
Well, that was a whole lot of words. About 400 pages where pretty much nothing of interest happened, internally or externally to any of the characters. Was this a story about a marriage? Not really. Story about an immigrant family? No, not quite. Story about America in 1876? No, not exactly. It just seemed like a ramble. The first chapter is Sontag imagining herself being a fly on the wall at a party given by this family/friend group. They are based on real people, though she changes their names, presumably creates most of their actions. But I can't figure out why she bothered. Lots of words about the differences in theatre in Poland/Europe (its ART!) and America (its celebrity and $$). But we sure didn't need 400 pages to make that point. Marena, the actress and main character is likable enough, but exceedingly dull. Perhaps it would have been more interesting if her transfer to the US stage was not so successful and quick. Sontag is usually making some sort of political point, and she starts down a whole lot of paths, but I could see no conclusion to any of them.
-
از خواهر سانتاگ تا حالا ناداستان خونده بودم فقط.
این اولین کتاب داستانی بود که به قلمش میخوندم و حقیقتا باید بگم انتظار نداشتم خوب باشه ولی خب خوب بود واقعا.
سانتاگ به واسطهی دید عکاسانهای که داره، تونسته بود اکثر صحنهها، مکانها و وقایع رو زنده دربیاره. کاملا این حس رو داشتم که مشغول تماشای یه فیلمم.
شخصیت اصلی یک بازیگر تئاتره و داستان حول مهاجرت این خانم بازیگر از لهستان به امریکا میگذره. اونم کی؟ قرن ۱۹ !! بهترین زمانی که میشده مهاجرت کرد.
سانتاگ هم چیزی رو از قلم ننداخته و ماجرا رو حسابی با جزئیات روایت کرده. اما یکسوم پایانی کتاب خیلی الکی کش داده شده و میشد خیلی تمیزتر جمعش کنه.
درکل من از خوندنش لذت بردم. تکنیکهای روایت رو پسندیدم. خط داستانی و توصیفها رو هم دوست داشتم.
ولی برای خوندنش باید حوصله داشته باشین و عضلات قوی ادبی (با شکسپیر و شخصیتهاش آشناش باشید). -
In English -
http://bombitaluivladmusatescuenglish...
În limba română -
http://bombitaluivladmusatescu.blogsp... -
If you're Susan Sontag, this probably counts as an adventure novel. We follow famous Polish actress Maryna Zalenska through the 1870s in America.
Omniscient point of view is all over the place. Maryna, her husband, son, inept maid, and a group of close friends buy a farm in Annaheim California and try to live well and simply there. No one finds happiness and the work is too hard, so she tries out for a part in a local theater and becomes famous all over again, here in America.
She tours constantly and her fame grows. Eventually she and her supporting players and assistants are given their own train car to live and sleep in as they go between cities and venues.
The story could be simple and dull. But it is given lots of texture as the author brings us readers to crash a party at the beginning, and then she borrows some private journals of some of the characters, and at the end we see a drunken soliloquy delivered by none other than Edwin Booth, yes, the surviving actor brother of the notorious Booth who killed Lincoln.
The events are fictionalized. History doesn't support any of the happenings and the central actress doesn't really exist. But she does seem believable.
However, the most prominent character is the author, herself, Susan Sontag. She was a famous essayist in the 1960s. She wrote the article
Notes on Camp, which defined a cultural entertainment phenomenon. She took a "you'll-know-it-when-you-see-it" concept and made it so complicated in theory and definition, that to this day I still have no idea what to say about "Camp."
And for some reason when I checked out this book, I had the misconception that she did some time as a humor writer, but most likely I was misinformed. I THINK I remember reading a very funny essay by a woman who spent a day with her friend and her friend's children. But maybe the author was Susan Orlean? Erica Jong? Dorothy Parker? I just don't know!
The author who was probably not Susan Sontag made a note to her readers something in the mood of: "I have no idea why children's hands are ALWAYS sticky! I assume it's because they don't smoke enough."
Does anyone know who DID write that? -
H Susan Sontag λοιπόν... Μεγάλη μορφή της αμερικάνικης διανόησης, γαλοθρεμμένη όμως και πολύ πιο κοντά στην ευρωπαϊκή κουλτούρα απ' όσο σε αυτή της πατρίδας της, είναι κυρίως γνωστή για το δοκιμιακό της έργο (Περί φωτογραφίας, Η γοητεία τους Φασισμού, Η νόσος ως μεταφορά κ. α.). Τέσσερα όλα κι όλα τα μυθιστορήματά της, εκ των οποίων τα δύο τελευταία - και τα δύο ιστορικά - μεταφράστηκαν και εκδόθηκαν για το ελληνικό αναγνωστικό κοινό από τις εκδόσεις Οδυσσέας, αλλά δυστυχώς γνώρισαν ελάχιστη ανταπόκριση: "Ο Εραστής του Ηφαιστείου (1992), ένα αντισυμβατικό ρομάντζο του ναυάρχου Νέλσον και της Λαίδης Χάμιλτον που εκτυλίσσεται στη Νάπολη του 18ου αιώνα, και το περι ου ο λόγος ¨"Αμέρικα" (1999), βραβευμένο με το Εθνικό βραβείο των ΗΠΑ.
Εν ολίγοις: βρισκόμαστε στα 1876 όταν μια ντίβα του Εθνικού Θεάτρου της Πολωνίας και εθνικό σύμβολο της πατρίδας της, η Μαριάννα Ζαλένσκα, αποφασίζει, λίγο για να ξεφύγει από το βάρος του διάσημου εαυτού της και λίγο για να ανακουφίστεί από την πληγή της τριχοτομημένης της παρίδας και των αποτυχημένων εθνικών επαναστάσεων, να ακολουθήσει το Αμερικάνικο Όνειρο στην Καλιφόρνια, όπου αγοράζει ένα ράντσο ονειρευόμενη να ιδρύσει μια ουτοπική κοινότητα μαζί με τον αριστοκράτη σύζυγό της και μια ομάδα στενών φίλων που την ακολουθούν. Σε ένα χρόνο το όνειρο τελειώνει άδοξα και αναγκάζεται να επιστρέψει στο σανίδι, κατ' αρχάς για βιοπορισμό, αρχής γενομένης από το Σαν Φρανσίσκο, ερμηνεύοντας όλες τις αγαπημένες της ηρωίδες (Ανδριανή Λεκουβρέρ, Μαργαρίτα Γκωτιέ, Οφηλία και Ιουλιέττα) ενώ μόνιμα παλεύει να αρθρώσει σωστά τα αγγλικά και να καταπνίξει τη βαριά σλάβικη προφορά της. Ο Θρίαμβος δεν αργεί: μια μεγάλη αμερικανίδα Σταρ γεννιέται...
Ο αναγνώστης δεν θα το βρει πουθενά γραμμένο μέσα στο βιβλίο, αλλά επί της ουσίας η Πολωνικής - λόγω των γονέων της - καταγωγής συγγραφέας, παρακολουθεί στενά το βίο της διάσημης Πολωνέζας σαιξπηρικής ηθοποιού Helena Modjeska, από τη στιγμή που αποφασίζει να εγκαταλείψει την καριέρα και την πατρίδα της για να ακολουθήσει το αμερικάνικο όνειρο μια ανάσα από τα μεξικάνικα σύνορα της Καλιφορνέζικης χερσονήσο��, μέχρι την ανάδυσή της ως μεγάλη STAR των αμερικάνικων θεατρικών σκηνών, στηριγμένη κυρίως στα απομνημονεύματα της ηθοποιού αλλά και σε πλήθος άλλων κειμένων (που επίσης δεν αναφέρονται). Στην πορεία αυτή, ακούμε υπόκωφα αλλά σταθερά τη φωνή της δοκιμιογράφου Sontag να σχολιάζει εύστοχα τη σχέση αμερικάνικης και ευρωπαϊκής κουλτούρας, τη θέση του χρήματος και της δόξας στην νεότευκτη αμερικάνικη κοινωνία, την απουσία παρελθόντος και την πίστη στο μελλον που καθιστά προκλητικό το αμερικάνικο όνειρο, την υποκριτική ως στάση ζωής και ως πολλαπλό προσωπείο, το δίλημμα καριέρα ή ιδιωτικός βίος, και πλήθος άλλα. Επιπλέον η ηρωίδα συναντάται με ενδιαφέρουσες ιστορικές προσωπικότητες σε καμέο εμφανίσεις, όπως ο ποιητής Paul Whitman και ο Henry James, αλλά και Η Κόρη της Δύσης (ηρωίδα ενός παλιού αμερικάνικου μυθιστορήματος στο οποίο βασίστηκε η ομώνυμη όπερα του Puccini), ενώ καταλήγει να συμπρωταγωνιστεί στο σανίδι με τον θρυλι��ό αμερκανό σιαξπηρικό ηθοποιό Edwin Booth, αδελφό του επίσης ηθοποιού John Wilkes Booth, που έμεινε στην ιστορία ως ο δολοφόνος του Abraham Lincoln. Ας αναφέρω εδώ και την πληθώρα σαιξπηρικών αποσπασμάτων με τα οποία διανθίζεται η αφήγηση...
Ένα βιβλίο που απόλαυσα πραγματικά, και θα ευχόμουν να έχει καλύτερη τύχη στην Ελλάδα.
4,5 🌟 -
Ugh, one of the most dismally boring books I have ever read! Why can I not just discard it? Somehow I always think it will get better and I drag myself through to the bitter end.
What is up with Susan Sontag here? This must be some secret passion she always had...telling the story of a Polish "theataaah" actress.
It's like Gus Van Sant's remake of Psycho...huh? What was he thinking!
Unless you are truly into "Theataaaah" and I mean in the WORST way, then this book is for you!
The main character is a spoiled, unfeeling actress who Susan Sontag apparently loves but gives us NO sympathy for.
The other characters all cater to her and talk incessantly about the Theatahhhh and reference plays and quote plays. Apparently they only knew a few plays in ol' Poland so they talk about all three plays throughout the entire book.
The main character is a heartless, famous, rich actress slut who stays with her husband because he dotes on her prima donna ass while spending all her free time shamelessly leading on their best family friend until she finally has an affair with him. Then she dumps him and goes back to her husband. Nothing really happens after that. Oh yeah, and she has a son. We never hear much about the poor kid. Susan seems to forget that he is there....so she finally ships him off to boarding school. Hmmmm, they go on holiday a lot. One time they tried to leave the Theatre behind and moved to California to be farmers. They have so much money that even though they could not grow a single thing they could just buy it at the store or from their neighbors! How nice.
Do not read this book. If you must get your fill of Theataaaah B.S. try 42nd street. It is much more entertaining. -
O melhor romance desta grande escritora, que conseguiu captar excelentemente o que significa a América como terra de sonhos, de recomeços, de oportunidades, onde começar de novo tem muitos mais níveis e camadas do que pode parecer. Recomendo.
-
"Niezdecydowana, nie, zziębnięta, wkroczyłam bez zaproszenia na przyjęcie w zamkniętej sali jadalnej hotelu".
Podobał mi się ten zabieg na początku: jako człowiek nam współczesny wkroczyć w kostiumie dziewiętnastowiecznego przechodnia w miejsce akcji własnej powieści i...podsłuchiwać, jak bohaterowie (w tym "Helena albo Maryna") mówią w niezrozumiałym dla autorki języku polskim. Prawie niezrozumiałym, bo - jak uzasadnia to w tekście - choć osłuchała się tylko z językiem bośniackim (3 lata w Sarajewie) w cudowny sposób rozumie mówiących. Być może słyszała ten język w domu? Dziadkowie wychowujący Susan Sontag przybyli do Ameryki właśnie z terenów Polski i Litwy. W powieści, dość wiernie opartej na życiu Heleny Modrzejewskiej (mimo zmiany wszystkich nazwisk polskich bohaterów), Sontag wykorzystuje i dalsze środki stylistyczne: dziennik męża, Bogdana Dembowskiego (Karola Chłapowskiego), niewyróżnione w tekście i przemieszane ze sobą myśli Maryny Załężowskiej/Mariny Zalenskiej (Heleny Modrzejewskiej/Modjeskiej), kierowane to jako listy do Henryka (dr Chramiec?) - przyjaciela i lekarza w Zakopanem, to jako pozostawiane bez odpowiedzi elementy rozmowy z rodziną i znajomymi, zaś w innym miejscu w dialog aktorów - Mariny i Edwina Bootha, największego amerykańskiego aktora szekspirowskiego - wstawia didaskalia. To dość oryginalne rozwiązania narracyjne.
Książka zostaje w pamięci i po latach wydaje się dużo lepsza, niż natychmiast po przeczytaniu.
Całość recenzji na stronie:
https://nakanapie.pl/ksiazka/w-ameryc... -
*******************************
*
Sontag: Her Life and Work by
Benjamin Moser
*
The Volcano Lover: A Romance DNF
*
In America -
I'm waiting for the Literature Police to knock down my door for 3-starring a National Book Award winner. I was sure I would love this book, but not so much. The paragraphs sometimes last for pages at a time, and this is dense, tiny print that takes up the whole page with very small margins, too. The protagonist feels dull to me, and the narrative wakes up in places, but mostly it drones. I soldiered through it to page 80, and then I just.
-
Wow, this was a really cool novel, fun to read (except the first chapter which was tough to get into). Sontag takes you to Poland, California, New York, and all across America in the 1860s and 1870s, as a Polish actress takes the nation by storm, more or less, after a few months trying to live in a rural "utopia" effort.
It's very post modern--multiple narrators and styles, some stream of consciousness stuff, a chapter where three conversations are going on at the same time (maybe more, hard to say), a couple of chapters that are diary entries, etc., so if that throws you for a loop, look out.
I loved it though, and didn't expect to. I'm not a big theater person (though I do like and appreciate it, just not a huge fan or anything) but it really pulls you into that world, (I do like reading about people who take art and the arts very seriously) and the utopia attempt is fascinating (I do like reading about utopian societies), if only for descriptions of people and places in 1860s Anaheim and Los Angeles (wow) that sure seems meticulously researched. (All of it does.)
I don't think I've read any Sontag other than "Notes on Camp" in college, which I hated at the time and have never tried again (nothing like taking camp super-duper seriously to bore a young reader). Anyway, this is an excellent book, enough to make me look into more Sontag. -
In America is an historical novel, yet it is more. It is a novel about identity, about names and words and people who leave their homeland for a new unknown and undiscovered land called America. The novel is one where the stage and all that it represents mirrors life -- a story set near the end of the nineteenth century.
On the first page of the novel the motif of the stage is hinted at by how snow flakes seen through a window are described as a "scrim" for the moonlight in the background. The unnamed narrator looks out on the wintry landscape from her vantage point in a warm corner of a large room filled with people. Slowly the narrator, who is Sontag herself embedded in this prelude to the novel, gradually introduces the main characters who are gathered at a private party. These characters include an actress, Maryna the greatest leading lady in Poland; her husband, Bogdan; and a budding writer, Ryszard, who will eventually become her lover.
Language is an important aspect of the novel as the narrator meditates on all the words in the air swirling around her at this party. Her meditation leads he to comment that "I mean here only to give these words their proper, poignant emphasis. And it occurred to me that this might explain, partly, my presence in this room. For I was moved by the way they possessed these words and regarded themselves bound by them to actions. . . . I was enjoying the repetition. Dare I say I felt at one with them? Almost. Those dreaded words, dreaded by others (not by me), seemed like caresses. Pleasantly numbed, I felt myself borne along by their music . . ." (p 8) While musing on the Polish diva who holds the company spellbound, Sontag notes: "I remember when I first read Middlemarch: I had just turned 18, and a third of the way through the book burst into tears because I realised not only that I was Dorothea but that a few months earlier, I had married Mr Casaubon... It took me nine years to decide that I had the right, the moral right, to divorce Mr Casaubon." (p 24) She indulges herself and suggests that this will be the story of a Dorothea who does not, like George Eliot's heroine, bury herself in the obscurity of "private" good works. She will shine in the public blaze of celebrity.
The party is in Poland, but some converse in French as well. This is their home where they are known and comfortable--yet there is more--ideas are in the air. The narrator hears bits of conversation that hint at plans Maryna has to leave Poland. These words suggest the possibility of a project to create a "perfect" society, one influenced by both Voltaire and Rousseau. After further ruminations on these people surrounding her at the party the narrator decides to write their story: "I decided to follow them out into the world." (p 27)
After this unusual introduction the actual story, an historical one, continues for nine more chapters chronicling the journey of Maryna, her close friends, family, and entourage, to America. They fairly quickly settle in a dusty southern California village established originally by Germans, namely Anaheim. Just as earlier communities like Brook Farm in New England and others have failed theirs does as well. The experiment is unsuccessful due to unexpected difficulties as they find the empty and dry expanse of California is not conducive to their plans. While many of them return to Poland it is at this moment that Maryna, longing for a return to the stage, decides to move to San Francisco and mount an American career where she can once again become a leading lady, perhaps a legend. This is, after all, an historical novel and the main characters are based on real people. Maryna is based on Helena Modrzejewska, who at 35 years old was Poland's greatest actress and who emigrated to America. The story abounds with moments when Maryna is in the theater playing Camille or Juliet for adoring audiences. Gradually her stage character takes hold of the reader much as it must have for those audiences. Following her came her husband and her lover, based on the writer Henryk Sinkiewicz (later famous as the author of Quo Vadis, winner of the Nobel Prize for Literature). However, not all the real names are changed and , not unlike some other historical novels, famous names drop in from time to time including Edwin Booth and Henry James (later in the story as Maryna has moved on to conquer the London stage; her success there was limited but better by far than that of James whose plays bombed).
This is a novel that, according to the author, was inspired by her own family background as all four of her grandparents came from Poland. She herself, in the three years of the novel's conception, frequently visited "besieged Sarajevo" (the novel is dedicated to her friends in that unhappy city). The main character has luminescent moments, but I found the story as a whole uneven. Ryszard and Bogdan both have moments "on stage" but the rest of the characters fade into the background. They all were on stage as followers of Maryna to America and it is a book worth reading to share the experiences of her dramatic and eventful life. -
The relentless success of these Californians gets on my nerves. I am bred to a distinctively Polish appreciation of the nobility of failure. (It seems vulgar to succeed, and so forth.)
A plague of grasshoppers has descended on our fields. -
Susan sontag is one of the most influential critics of the 20th century, she did quite A lot in her career~ filmmaker, teacher, and political activist she even wrote her own fiction. Unfortunately this book is pretty bad. It suffers from two main issues, it doesn't have it's own identity and it's also incredibly boring.
-
http://delsharm.blog.ir/1396/12/29/in...
این رمان برای چندمین بار دو چیز را به من ثابت کرد. اول آن که هر کتابی که جایزهٔ معتبری میبرد لزوماً کتاب خوبی نیست، خاصه آنکه بسیاری از داوران علایق سیاسی و ایدئولوژیکی دارند و این علایق، حتی اگر ناخودآگاه، در تصمیمسازیشان تأثیر میگذارد. دوم آن که هر منتقد خوبی لزوماً نویسندهٔ خوبی نیست. سوزان سونتاگ، منتقد معروف آمریکایی، در سال ۲۰۰۴ از دنیا رفت و این رمان، ظاهراً جزء آخرین کارهای اوست. او اصالتاً لهستانی یهودیتبار بوده است و احتمالاً انتخاب چنین سوژهای برای کارش بیدلیل نبوده. کتاب «در امریکا» که جایزهٔ بخش رمان جایزهٔ ملی کتاب آمریکا را از آن خود کرده است، با اقتباس از زندگی یک بازیگر تئاتر لهستانی در نیمهٔ دوم قرن نوزدهم است که به دلایلی مانند وجود سانسور در لهستان به امریکا مهاجرت میکند. البته سونتاگ نام شخصیتهای داستان را کلاً عوض کرده است و فقط استخوانبندی اصلی داستان مشابهت با شخصیت آن بازیگر دارد. رمان نُه به علاوهٔ یک فصل دارد. فصل صفرم تخیل نویسنده است وقتی که در جمع گروهی از هنرمندان لهستانی است ولی زبانشان را نمیفهمد. او در تخیلش به شخصیتها اسم میدهد و نسبتهایشان را با هم تعیین میکند. به زبان بیزبانی سونتاگ تأکید میکند که این داستان خیالی است. از فصل یکم یا نهم با پرشهای زاویهٔ دید و شخصیتی زیادی مواجه هستیم: گاهی از زبان مارینا بازیگر تئاتر و شخصیت اصلی داستان است، گاهی نامههای مارینا به هنریک که ظاهراً در لهستان است، گاهی خاطرات روزانهٔ بوگدان همسر مارینا، گاهی روایت سوم شخص در مورد ریشارد دوست مارینا و گاهی روایت سوم شخص نزدیک به دانای کل از سفرهای مارینا. متأسفانه در این داستان وجههٔ منتقدی نویسنده بر وجههٔ نویسندگیاش چربیده است. داستان پر از ظرافتهای تکنیکی مکانیکی است ولی خبری از روح زیبایی در داستان نیست. حتی قاعدهٔ گذاشتن فکر و مضمون در بستر داستان آن طور که باید و شاید رعایت نشده است. در این داستان همهاش از امریکا به نیکی یاد میشود؛ کشوری که سرزمین فرصتهاست، آزاد است و حتی وقتی مارینا انگلیس را امتحان میکند طرفی نمیبندد. این کتاب پر است از ملیگرایی کاملاً قشری، فمینیسم و اباهیگری ناشی از همان فمینیسم. باید تأکید کنم که بحث بر سر این که کسی آمریکا را دوست دارد یا ندارد نیست، بحث بر سر آن است که هر مضمونی باید در دل داستان جا خشک کند نه آن که مدام از دهان شخصیتها به صورت هویجوری! دربیاید. متأسفانه این کتاب ارزش خواندن ندارد. به قول جان سوثرلند، استاد دانشگاه یونیورسیتی کالج لندن، در مقالهای در گاردین، اگر این کتاب نویسندهای معروف نداشت حتی شاید شانسی برای انتشار پیدا نمیکرد. -
Being a reader of Sontag’s literary criticism and theory, I thought this would fit in a kind of formal writing exercise in the field of fiction or perhaps towards a view on the feminine emancipation and the XIX century. The novel is an historical romance and belongs to a more traditional side of Sontag’s work. Although the author did a good job reading about life after the American Civil War the novel is far from engaging. This book is mostly – and unfortunately only – a fictionalized biography of the polish actress Helena Modjeska (who appears in the character of Maryna Zalezowska).
Personally, the most interesting fact resides in its formal aspect – though scarcely explored – focused on the description of the perspective of each character. The novel begins with the encounter of a group of Polish friends and the author who hears excerpts of their conversations about their departure to America. She admits to take these characters from this event to write the novel (introducing the idea that these characters are strictly fictitious within the fiction in itself). Other voices are Bogdan’s diary, Maryna’s letters to his admirer and physician Henry, and Booth’s drunken monologue – being his introduction in the novel just at the end of the story – who is also in love with Maryna (in fact she is such a diva that all the people are in love with her). Far from one of the greatest of Sontag’s works, this was almost like a sketch for a dramatic text or cinematic piece with several voices or a set of monologues – the novel encounters its depth on the density of the characters, on the historical and spatial description – as opposed to its sluggish development and lack of thoroughness.
For a more detailed review please visit:
https://vivichambel.wordpress.com/201... -
تصور می کنم سوزان سونتاگ تحت تاثیر عنوانی که به او دادند، رابط میان فرهنگ اروپایی و فرهنگ آمریکایی، این رمان را نوشته باشد. شخصیت زن لهستانی رمان دوست داشتنی ست اما برخی از عکس العمل ها و رفتارهایش فرمایشی بنظر می رسند. حس می کنی نویسنده خواسته این زن چنین رفتار یا عملی داشته باشد،...
اگرچه سوزان سونتاگ در ایران بیشتر به یک منتقد ادبی و اجتماعی نویس معروف است، و در این زمینه ها کارهای بزرگی تالیف کرده، اما رمان های سونتاگ کارهای زیبایی ست که ندیده یا نشنیده ام به فارسی ترجمه شده باشد. روشن نیست چرا بجز چند مقاله، آثار او به فارسی برگردانده نشده. سوزان سونتاگ از روشنفکران آمریکایی دهه ی 1960 است، با همان دید رادیکال نسبت به جوامع غربی. بعدها به شکلی از آمریکا زده شد و به تبعیدی خودخواسته به اروپا، سوئد و بعدن فرانسه رفت. سال های اقامت سونتاگ در اروپا یادآور زندگی بسیاری از نویسندگان نسل پیش از او هم چون همینگوی است که بخشی از دوران جوانی و میانسالی شان را در اروپا و عمدتن فرانسه گذراندند. اگرچه سونتاگ در میان دانشگاهیان و در رسانه ها بیشتر به یک روشنفکر نق نقو و ایرادگیر معروف است، با این همه نمی توان از نقش او به عنوان یک زن نویسنده در روند تفکر دایره ی روشنفکری آمریکایی ها چشم پوشید.
در مورد رمان های سونتاگ، و بسیاری از رمان های مدرن، به سختی می شود چیزی نوشت، نه داستانی دارد چنان که در رمان های کلاسیک، و نه روندی سنتی، وقایعی پی در پی، کنش ها و واکانش هایی چنان که ذهن ما به آن عادت دارد. در رمان نو بسیاری از خانه ها خالی ست، و پر کردن این خانه های خالی به عهده ی خواننده است. خواندن هم مثل زندگی کردن در دنیای جدید، کار طاقت فرسایی ست. -
I don't think this book would be everyone's cup of tea; it's long, dense and difficult to read in that Sontag's language is intricate and intellectually sophisticated, at least by my standards. I am very proud of myself for getting through it, and yes, I liked it! Part of the draw is that it is a very interesting story about a real and fascinating woman character in history; I love that sort of stuff! Also, I wanted SO badly to be able to say I had read a Susan Sontag, whose prose is not for the lily-livered and requires full attention at all times. I had to reread whole passages sometimes but was always glad I had and that I persevered through this story of epic proportions which takes its reader through such worlds as old, pre-war Europe's intellectual art and theatre culture; immigration to America for more of the glamourous theatrical scene of large cities; and ultimately into pioneering experiences in lesser cultivated areas of the early American west.
I highly recommend this book to anyone enjoying historical narrative, especially if interested in the world of the theatre, and IF that someone is ready and able to apply extra time and mental efforts to the read. -
This might have been a worthwhile read if the book was primarily concerned with actual storytelling than an exploration of themes and ideas. Much was discussed (and none of it particularly insightfully) by the narrator, and what served as artificial dialogue between characters, on acting, writing, the arts, immigration/migration, Polishness, Americaness, and Jewishness. What then is lacking is a story where character and plot are central, and the themes are background and implicit. The story glides over long passages of time without stopping to sink into crucial moments to reveal character and dramatize the action. There were a few moments where the historical research was well rendered and woven into vivid scenes, and here I was compelled to read closely. These moments though were few and far between the long passages where nothing much is happening in building plot or character, and so my reading was more a superficial skim, rather like the writing itself.
