What makes it happen that every time my grave opens, now, I rouse a thought there that is strong enough to bring me back to life? The very derisive laughter of my death.
His "living" proof of events will die before he does. Plaster casts of four hand puppets futures in artificial life support. J. first, a dying life and an undying living. She must be closest to death when they feel she is going to live and precipiced to life when it isn't over for the others already. I didn't wonder that after at ...more
Easy to read and very short so I recommend you to try it!
This book begins very intriguing, with the writer saying he is going to tell about events (in 1938) that were such, that he never could write about them earlier on. That everything he has ever written before was an attempt to write about these events, but that words had been cunning and deceiving. And now he wanted to make an end to it and was going to tell you all bluntly, freely and openly. I was captured ri ...more
At least that's what I think is going on. Blanchot releases a torrent of words carry you through a series of events and thoughts and musings and self-reflections and detours and sidebars and words on top of words. In the end, you're where you started, but it's hard to say where you' ...more
I read this once and then once again because I felt lost in Blanchot's thoughts and believed my reaction to the first reading was due to a lapse in con ...more
The original French title of this novel, L'arrêt de mort, can bear two meanings: it is first a "death sentence", but it is also a "stay of execution". This ambiguity is apparently at the heart of this novel, with its two distinct parts and the constant complaints from the narrator about the relative impossibility of finding the words to describe what happens (happened). The first part covers the agony of J., suffering from an incurable disease, experiencing some sort of second wind, only to be...more
It starts out with the narrator basically confessing that he's trying to write about something that he's had bottled up inside of him forever. And, through the whole book, there's an odd, mysterious aspect that makes you THINK he's going to tell you the secret. But, then he just goes off on some other tangent in some other timeline with some other woman...
I felt stiffed. No story? No plot? No ending? WTF???
This book in particular was really fascinating: the narrator is essentially a man who keeps going on and on about his need to explain everything and achieve catharsis by writing out some awful events, but we never really find out exactly what ...more
235) Death Sentence Maurice Blanchot
I would love to say I read and understood this book however that would be a lie, while I most definetely read it most of the content went over my head and I could see no reason for the book being written.
In summary our un-named narrator tells us the "truth" about events in his life. Firstly we have the death of the mysterious J a woman who is terminally ill but seems to live forever and then we have a section about the narrators relationship with different w ...more
نیروی ِهنر است که شب را میگشاید. از آن جا که هنر نیرومند است، شب به تو خوش آمد می گوید؛ خلوتی پذیرا می شود و هنر سرازیر میشود. برای تو هنر می تواند نهایتی پنهان و به شدّت تیره باشد، گویی به سویش کشیده میشوی. لحظهای که گوهرشب به آن شب ِدیگر میرسد
روشنایی باز میگردد ...more
The parts I did understand though, were very perceptive, and on occasion brilliant. I felt the first half did a great job illustrating the mental make up of a person who knows they have limited time to live.
I don't know. I don't have the slightest care for a single thing or word in it. Why should I, the reader, care while the narrator himself tells us that all was just trivial things for him?!