Coetzee said in interview that, [I do not know whether human being forms prideworthy status, when people look how hubris of us to treat livings which share earth with us. Hot Sales in the Fall: pandora jewellery and Accessories" So, I do not try to support or spread my human. The Most Brilliant at Hot Price, Find the One for You! [When Coetzee said this, he seems like the distant relatives of human, calm and indifferent. In today's era which literatures can even noisy show, he might be one of the most incompatible writers, since he continued to avoid the media, the crowd and refused to reputation. This awareness which is distant with the world and prejudice is also reflected in his literary commentary. [Strangers in the Country" is a collection of Coetzee`s 26 literary criticisms in [New York Book Review" from 1986 to 1999. The topics cover literature, society, history, politics, culture, and the personal growth of writer, and the objects discussed have 26 six people such as Defoe, Rilke, Eliot, Kafka, Musil, Brodsky, etc. This book clearly presents Coetzee`s own views of literature and value.
Generally, literary criticisms of writers are all very re-readable, or extremely forceful as Kundera, or wisdom and flexible as Calvino, or sharply penetrating as Nabokov, but most of them emphasis on emotion and experience. With rigorous academic training and the background of social ideas history research, Coetzee on the one hand is good at putting his perceptual experience into the narrative, on the other hand with a sharp point straightforward manner, without taking moderation. In the article of "What is the classic, his capacity for critical thought is the most visible. Eliot made a presentation entitled "What is the classic" during World War II in 1944. Coetzee questioned his lecture why "made no mention of his American identity, even didn't mention his own American origin, but just with a lot of strange perspective praised a European poet to a bunch of European audience", after then used social and cultural analysis.
combined with Eliot`s literary history to sharply criticized him about [By defining the so-called ethnic or national character and using his own cultural power accumulated to impose his definition of nation to the intelligentsia to interfere the public opinion" to achieve Eliot`s personal dedication and initiative. Then, taking Bach`s down and unknown life but high reputation after death as an example, Coetzee had a detailed analysis of the evolution process of "classic" and its relationship with the criticism. He used Polish poet Herbert's view that the so-called classic was that was still retained after going through catastrophe and savage, that's so because generations of people really loved it and made all effort to protect it. And any critic to the classic will not only be not able to destroy it, but on the contrary, it is also they who name the real classic through continuous rigorous challenges and wash out those secondary ones.
In other words, criticism is an indispensable fellow to any work which wish to become classic. Coetzee's comments give up the "sympathetic understanding" in order to determine the complex precipitation disputes between literature and the reality in the method of sociology. The greatest challenge for literature is not to point out the quality of the works, but how to say out your words calmly facing multi-layers of narration of literary history. Do you dare to be the [stranger"in the literary history? This does not only need knowledge, but also need courage. A deep understanding of writers` living history is another major superiority of Coetzee`s words. As we often say, to criticize the world after you totally understand the man. It means that only fully understand the life experiences and value of the writers can we truly have an insight into the unique value of the works. All precise and appropriate literary criticisms are all built on this. In Coetzee`s book, one passage talking about his beloved Dostoevsky is an absolutely exquisite interpretation considered. He told us that Dostoyevsky was very xenophobic, having a "boundless hatred" of Germans, blaming the old Florence man of singing in the streets when he was sleeping and offensive Swiss` not having double glazing, so Dostoyevsky always held a grudge against g Turgenev who was getting along with people in foreign countries.
Yet even though the "Crime and Punishment" received great acclaim and "idiot" was successful published, Dostoyevsky was still depressed about his lower reputation than Turgenev and Tolstoy and hated their property and leisure, which is also an important psychological motivation that stimulated Dostoyevsky to write a masterpiece. Coetzee`s works always adhere to the identity of"stranger", alert to any prejudice and restriction of ideology. Just like his personality, He is keep a distance with outside consciously. This attitude intentionally or unintentionally returns to one basic meaning of literature. The real literature firstly tells people to keep some distance against the world and it does not want to be too close to the world because any work and practice attempt to embrace the world is a gradual loss course of the [I" from the nature it will finally become a [social animals" as Brodsky stressed.