From the Bookshelf of Lietuva / Lithuania…

Vilniaus pokeris

Ričardas Gavelis

Discussion: Lietuvių literatūra

Find A Copy At

Libraries

Group Discussions About This Book

Showing 2 of 11 topics — 128 comments total

Lietuvių literatūra

Prašymas pridėti knygą
By Justina · 2 posts · 17 views

last updated Aug 23, 2025 12:38AM

Lietuvių fantasy/fantastika
By Laurynas · 14 posts · 449 views

last updated May 02, 2025 11:03AM

showing 2 of 2 topics view all »

What Members Thought

Dec 26, 2019 Andrius rated it it was ok · review of another edition

Shelves: lithuanian-literature, novels, contemporary, literary-fiction, uni

I did not enjoy this book by any stretch of the word, but I do think there's something important and meaningful in it. Vilnius Poker is a surrealist postmodern novel about a dehumanised kind of life in Soviet Lithuania that, I am told, manages to capture the absurd and senseless aspects of life in Vilnius at the time quite well. The primary concern of the book, I think, is the decay of meaning and soul in Lithuania under the Soviet system, and Gavelis endeavours (successfully) to evoke similar u I did not enjoy this book by any stretch of the word, but I do think there's something important and meaningful in it. Vilnius Poker is a surrealist postmodern novel about a dehumanised kind of life in Soviet Lithuania that, I am told, manages to capture the absurd and senseless aspects of life in Vilnius at the time quite well. The primary concern of the book, I think, is the decay of meaning and soul in Lithuania under the Soviet system, and Gavelis endeavours (successfully) to evoke similar ugly, disgusting feelings via his writing as well.

First off, this means Vilnius Poker is a difficult book, in several different senses. It is difficult to read because of the chaotic nature of the writing for at least two thirds of the novel; it is difficult to get through because of its utterly bleak and frustrated (or even raging) outlook and its depressing subject matter; it is difficult to stomach because of the abundance of some of the grossest sexual and violent imagery (and a mix of the two) that I've ever seen in a book. The latter especially I can see why someone might find gratuitous, and on some level I did as well, although I do think Gavelis for the most part uses this imagery meaningfully to produce an effect of ugliness and desperation that is appropriate for the novel. Either way, this is something that you read as a difficult and challenging classic (if it is one), not for entertainment.

Also, I already mentioned that the writing is chaotic, but it really, really is a slog for most of the book. That's not the translator's fault; the translation is mostly okay, aside from a few odd word choices bordering on mistranslations. It really is just a rambling, circular mess for a good 300 out of its 500-ish pages, and while that also fits thematically, that doesn't make it any easier to read. For a good while I was wondering if it was an actual problem with Gavelis' writing, but fortunately he cleans it up somewhat (though not entirely) in the final three sections of the book, so the messiness does seem to be deliberate at least to some degree.

Speaking of the final sections, and without going too far into big spoilers, I need to note that the book has a multiple unreliable narrators and conflicting perspectives thing going on, which was both one of my favourite things about the book and also kind of a wasted opportunity. These other narrators brought in new perspectives that were far more interesting than that of the ostensible main character, who takes up the largest part of the book, so it's kind of a shame that they were only used to punctuate or question the preceding narrative rather than as a genuinely symmetrical or equal alternative view. However, one of the biggest issues with this unreliability, and the reason why I call it a waste of potential, is the fact that most of the points of divergence, aside from the main biggest one, between the different narrators were of almost no consequence. To me that seems like a misuse of the technique. And maybe that also fits the theme that Gavelis is going for, but just having a consistent idea does not necessarily make for a good book.

And honestly, I think that's my main gripe with Vilnius Poker. I accept that it is an important book for its concepts and ideas and authentic glimpses into the period, but I can't call it a a good one. It's too rough around the edges, and I find its fundamental idea flawed anyway. Its depressiveness and rage are single-minded almost to the point of blindness; it captures absurdity and senselessness perfectly but it seems to me that the author almost willfully closes his eyes to anything positive.

As a final note, I would be very curious to see how Vilnius Poker might read for someone with no existing knowledge of the historical and cultural context. It feels to me that the book makes quite a few assumptions about the reader's foreknowledge, and the translator makes no attempt to alleviate this. ...more

6 likes · Like · see review