The Dwarfs
by Harold Pinter | Literature & Fiction | This book has not been rated.
ISBN: 0802132669 Global Overview for this book
ISBN: 0802132669 Global Overview for this book
4 journalers for this copy...
AMAZON:
From Publishers Weekly
British playwright Pinter's semi-absurdist novel of stunted lives in 1950s London is a story of friendship, love and betrayal. As in his plays, the characters often talk past one another into an existential void. The precarious equilibrium of a trio of male friends is disrupted when one of them, Pete, falls in love with Virginia. He puts her on a pedestal or, alternately, treats her as a slut or boyish pal. Advising him are Mark, a frustrated actor who blithely accepts that "everything's a calamity," and Len, who escapes his dull job in a train station through abstract mathematics and playing violin to his cat. Written in the early 1950s, Pinter's only novel was the genesis for his play of the same title; revised in 1989, the work is being published for the first time (had it been issued earlier, it would not have made his reputation). As the foursome oscillates between mistrust and communion, the dialogue veers from minimalist chatter to booming Shakespearean eloquence, with an occasional glowing line and lambent lyricism relieving long stretches of soul-searching angst.
From Library Journal
This is a novel clearly poised on the edge of drama. It is Pinter's only novel, written in the early Fifties just before he began writing the plays for which he is so well known. (This novel was, in fact, turned into a play that was first produced in 1960.) It is a fascinating text, revolving around the lives and worries of its three main characters, and operates as a kind of study of Pinter from his own hand, as true and accurate a chronicle of his development and method as any biography could be. It is sometimes difficult to follow because it is so very "play-like," not always cluing the reader in to who's talking to whom, who's responding, etc. Yet the dialog is brilliant, cranky, and eccentric, and the narrative passages are some of the most thrillingly imaginative ever written.
From Publishers Weekly
British playwright Pinter's semi-absurdist novel of stunted lives in 1950s London is a story of friendship, love and betrayal. As in his plays, the characters often talk past one another into an existential void. The precarious equilibrium of a trio of male friends is disrupted when one of them, Pete, falls in love with Virginia. He puts her on a pedestal or, alternately, treats her as a slut or boyish pal. Advising him are Mark, a frustrated actor who blithely accepts that "everything's a calamity," and Len, who escapes his dull job in a train station through abstract mathematics and playing violin to his cat. Written in the early 1950s, Pinter's only novel was the genesis for his play of the same title; revised in 1989, the work is being published for the first time (had it been issued earlier, it would not have made his reputation). As the foursome oscillates between mistrust and communion, the dialogue veers from minimalist chatter to booming Shakespearean eloquence, with an occasional glowing line and lambent lyricism relieving long stretches of soul-searching angst.
From Library Journal
This is a novel clearly poised on the edge of drama. It is Pinter's only novel, written in the early Fifties just before he began writing the plays for which he is so well known. (This novel was, in fact, turned into a play that was first produced in 1960.) It is a fascinating text, revolving around the lives and worries of its three main characters, and operates as a kind of study of Pinter from his own hand, as true and accurate a chronicle of his development and method as any biography could be. It is sometimes difficult to follow because it is so very "play-like," not always cluing the reader in to who's talking to whom, who's responding, etc. Yet the dialog is brilliant, cranky, and eccentric, and the narrative passages are some of the most thrillingly imaginative ever written.
This book will be part of my Nobel Prize Winners -Challenge.
Panin tämän Sikasäkki 1:n jatkokierrokselle possukseni # 4 ja Aspen72 valitsi sen.
Edit 17.12.2007
I don't know why it was such a hard work to read this book. I don't really see the geniality of this book. I found it rather boring. As I want to read a book by each Nobel Prize winner I fought my way through the book.
My Nobel-Challenge
Edit 17.12.2007
I don't know why it was such a hard work to read this book. I don't really see the geniality of this book. I found it rather boring. As I want to read a book by each Nobel Prize winner I fought my way through the book.
My Nobel-Challenge
Journal Entry 4 by AspenYard from Turku, Varsinais-Suomi / Egentliga Finland Finland on Thursday, December 20, 2007
Kiitos!!!!! Possu pääsee "vuoren rinteille" odottelemaan.
I found the first page of the book quite interesting, but I'm actually happier because of getting in touch with a Nobel-writer :)
I have started with Nobel-challenge, and at the same time I have noticed how few Nobel-authors are familiar... well, again another Nobel-writer I haven't heard of earlier...
My Nobel-books
I found the first page of the book quite interesting, but I'm actually happier because of getting in touch with a Nobel-writer :)
I have started with Nobel-challenge, and at the same time I have noticed how few Nobel-authors are familiar... well, again another Nobel-writer I haven't heard of earlier...
My Nobel-books
Journal Entry 5 by AspenYard from Turku, Varsinais-Suomi / Egentliga Finland Finland on Friday, February 19, 2010
With this essay I participate to such challenge in Finnish Forum, where you should write a journal of at least 3500 characters of the book you've read.
I suppose I first thought this book was a detective story, when I had read the first page of it, because it starts with the sentence: “Just before midnight they went to the flat.” Maybe that was the reason for selecting it from bookXerpt in the first place. But getting further, revealed the truth which was quite far from detective story, however, not disappointing issue at all. The story was in a way mysterious, and the curiosity kept me reading it towards the end.
The introduction says that the author is playwright. The book contained lots of dialogues which were quite hilarious and funny at times, and reminded me of English pub atmosphere and British TV series like Emmerdale and Lovejoy and Hyacint. I needed to check his work, and actually he has written screenplays and film scripts for both cinema and television.
The characters were just like from those series, ordinary British people. Those dialogues needed to be read pretty fast in order to gain some kind of rhythm. It felt really funny after reading such dialogues with short lines, having not much sense and content, even though having playful flow of words. Example, one of the characters was called Mark, to whom Len says “You're a marked man.”
It was easy to visualise all the characters and their voices and faces and how they talked. This book is in a way a play, too, or could be easily adapted to a play – and part of it actually has been, it's mentioned in author's notes in the beginning of the book.
For some reason of all the characters I started to dislike Pete. I found him in a way quite dominating, having strong opinions on things, having lots of long monologues in between the dialogues and kind of superior attitude towards others. When he talked to someone, the other person didn't say much, just listened – this gave the feeling of authority. I didn't realize it in the beginning but maybe the culmination point was, when he gave the preach to Victoria. He had old-fashioned attitudes towards the women (the little feminist inside me woke up), kind of reflecting the atmosphere of 50's, when the book is mainly written. This attitude is something similar to how one sketch shows it: there were two couples sitting and having dinner. Men were discussing on serious subjects, and women were quiet, only listening. Then there was another version of this, where women told their opinions and showed how much they knew of the subject – the reaction of men was shocked and in a way embarrassed, how that woman dared to open her mouth.
In one pub discussion the men talked of Shakespeare and his plays. Those comments were quite analytical and really interesting, but unrealistic for the characters in the book. No one had been like literature professional before that pub discussion and I started to feel that the author had just obsessively wanted to add those comments into the book. Or maybe I have missed something of British pub culture, maybe they have very deep literature discussions there once and a while.
In the end, I must say that I missed in a way the point of the dwarfs. Those short paragraphs of dwarfs made me wait something dramatical and gave the thoughts that some of the characters was really depressed. After one of those chapters I thought that something bad had already happened. Nevertheless, the next chapter showed the opposite, and I felt relieved. The story was about quite undramatic daily life in Britain; meeting friends, small talking, going to pubs, kind of boring in times, and the dwarfs felt in a way strange and seemed not to belong to the story. Now that I think of it, maybe I got the point, because two of the characters in a way achieved kind of independence in the end of the book. Maybe the role of the dwarfs was meant to be in a way metaphorical and mythical.
More of the author from wikipedia
I suppose I first thought this book was a detective story, when I had read the first page of it, because it starts with the sentence: “Just before midnight they went to the flat.” Maybe that was the reason for selecting it from bookXerpt in the first place. But getting further, revealed the truth which was quite far from detective story, however, not disappointing issue at all. The story was in a way mysterious, and the curiosity kept me reading it towards the end.
The introduction says that the author is playwright. The book contained lots of dialogues which were quite hilarious and funny at times, and reminded me of English pub atmosphere and British TV series like Emmerdale and Lovejoy and Hyacint. I needed to check his work, and actually he has written screenplays and film scripts for both cinema and television.
The characters were just like from those series, ordinary British people. Those dialogues needed to be read pretty fast in order to gain some kind of rhythm. It felt really funny after reading such dialogues with short lines, having not much sense and content, even though having playful flow of words. Example, one of the characters was called Mark, to whom Len says “You're a marked man.”
It was easy to visualise all the characters and their voices and faces and how they talked. This book is in a way a play, too, or could be easily adapted to a play – and part of it actually has been, it's mentioned in author's notes in the beginning of the book.
For some reason of all the characters I started to dislike Pete. I found him in a way quite dominating, having strong opinions on things, having lots of long monologues in between the dialogues and kind of superior attitude towards others. When he talked to someone, the other person didn't say much, just listened – this gave the feeling of authority. I didn't realize it in the beginning but maybe the culmination point was, when he gave the preach to Victoria. He had old-fashioned attitudes towards the women (the little feminist inside me woke up), kind of reflecting the atmosphere of 50's, when the book is mainly written. This attitude is something similar to how one sketch shows it: there were two couples sitting and having dinner. Men were discussing on serious subjects, and women were quiet, only listening. Then there was another version of this, where women told their opinions and showed how much they knew of the subject – the reaction of men was shocked and in a way embarrassed, how that woman dared to open her mouth.
In one pub discussion the men talked of Shakespeare and his plays. Those comments were quite analytical and really interesting, but unrealistic for the characters in the book. No one had been like literature professional before that pub discussion and I started to feel that the author had just obsessively wanted to add those comments into the book. Or maybe I have missed something of British pub culture, maybe they have very deep literature discussions there once and a while.
In the end, I must say that I missed in a way the point of the dwarfs. Those short paragraphs of dwarfs made me wait something dramatical and gave the thoughts that some of the characters was really depressed. After one of those chapters I thought that something bad had already happened. Nevertheless, the next chapter showed the opposite, and I felt relieved. The story was about quite undramatic daily life in Britain; meeting friends, small talking, going to pubs, kind of boring in times, and the dwarfs felt in a way strange and seemed not to belong to the story. Now that I think of it, maybe I got the point, because two of the characters in a way achieved kind of independence in the end of the book. Maybe the role of the dwarfs was meant to be in a way metaphorical and mythical.
More of the author from wikipedia
Journal Entry 6 by Piiku from Turku, Varsinais-Suomi / Egentliga Finland Finland on Saturday, March 27, 2010
Well, I also have a Nobel project. Thank you AspenYard for helping me with it :)
Journal Entry 7 by Piiku at Parainen, Varsinais-Suomi / Egentliga Finland Finland on Thursday, March 17, 2011
I started reading this, but no, I just can't. It seems weird... and to be honest, a bit boring. And yes, I'm probably wrong.
I've promised to myself that I will not keep a book registered by someone else in my TBR pile for more than a year. That is why this book does not get a second chance from me, it is now free to go.
*** Edit 8/2011: reserved for ruzena.
I've promised to myself that I will not keep a book registered by someone else in my TBR pile for more than a year. That is why this book does not get a second chance from me, it is now free to go.
*** Edit 8/2011: reserved for ruzena.
Journal Entry 8 by ruzena at Hämeenlinna, Kanta-Häme / Egentliga Tavastland Finland on Tuesday, August 16, 2011
I don't promise anything :D