Exotic birds and unity of action
Like birds, the characters of Edzard Meek’s new novel, why birdsThey hardly catch themselves. The various characters are animated and at times elusive, as also mentioned in Kafka’s motto about Odradec. Dodgy characters usually leave room for the imagination, but inside why birds Unfortunately, this space is limited.
The perspective lies with opera singer Katya, with whom her friend Amy has a complicated relationship. This relationship is described as a friendly one, but every now and then you feel like there is more to it than just friendship. Amy appears to be a somewhat naive activist compared to the sober Katya, who fights with the Bird Gang to keep Plas van Wely. She is fascinated by the wondrous personality of Tido, the son of a well-known writer, but lives somewhat secluded by the lake, in a house with a wild garden, where he talks to the birds and, according to Amy, even dead birds.. brings life back. In turn, Tidu openly talks about his sexual adventures with young student Sophie.
People of flesh and blood are often inconsistent and too complex to pick up with just a few personality traits. In this sense, it is not surprising that sometimes Katya is cold and distant and at other times full of passion and passion. As a result, the character may appear more realistic. However, throughout the book, I was distracted by my own thoughts about Willem Frederick Hermanns’ essays on the experimental novel and about the novel’s sympathetic and anti-pathetic characters from the “sadistic universe”. In this he defends the unity of the work and the characters belonging to that unit in the novel. The novel distinguishes itself in this from the journalistic work that tries to do justice to reality. After all, in reality there is no unit to work. Thomas Rosenbaum also argues this attack gameIt shows how you should write a good novel.
However, Mick’s novel contains nothing but unity of action. Several storylines are drawn, which are not necessarily related to each other, such as the Battle of the Pond, the love triangle between Tido, Emmy and Katja, crossed by Sophie again, Emmy’s disappearance, the excited Spaniards, and much more. Hermans might say: This mixture is great if you want to write a novel about reality that jumps in all directions that have no purpose or unity. Such ingenious stories exist in reality, where you as a reader feel in the dark, and the characters in their world remain out of reach. Take, for example, the work of Kafka, which quotes the author in one of the slogans. However, Mik fills in his characters and actions a lot for that. Even in the case of “elusive” friendship, it hardly leaves anything to the reader’s imagination:
My friends didn’t understand anything about our friendship, I was partying and scratching, smoking weed and drinking, what was I supposed to do with this bostrol? I didn’t understand it myself either, but I was looking forward to the lessons we took together, I was hoping to get into school at the same time in the morning with her and be able to talk to her as she put her tattered bag between I ran her legs and hands through her hair, always my eyes darting around The hall during breaks to have a look at it, making sure that it did not leave the school or dissolve into thin air.
The dialogues are filled with endless descriptions of facial expressions and feelings, so that everything is filled with.
As for the subject matter, you stay in the dark, because what is all this book about? For friendship, for the preservation of nature and birds, or for the complexity of human relations, or for jealousy and passion, or for the mystery of birds and their interweaving with human nature, or for everything together? The art of writing is often the art of omission, so that the essence appears naturally. As far as I’m concerned, the author has omitted a lot, so this guy, just like myrrh among the reeds, has remained elusive indeed.
Edzard Mike – why birds† Queredo, Amsterdam. 304 pages.22.99€.