muhammedmahfouz

I found it to be highly overrated. The constant quest for food (that never-ending character nemesis), and the fact that I couldn't stop thinking, "why doesn't he just do the right thing and kill his son?!" made it impossible for me to recognize its alleged "brilliance". Does the fact that he doesn't kill his son make it brilliant? Is it because the novel concerns itself with this bizarre westernized valuation of life, and the preservation of life, despite the most abysmal circumstances, that made people rave? I'm not one to argue based off of what's "logical" from a reasoning standpoint, but nothing made sense to me: I wasn't able to unveil the art behind the piece. Its saving grace is that it was entertaining and it certainly induced visceral responses; that alone made it worth reading. Success of a novel doesn't always follow even if the author entertains the thought of humanity turning on itself in a cannibalistic way. Ultimately, I couldn't grasp at what to take away. I loved the mother character - sanity in a female character (who has little presence physically in the novel, but has an almost constant presence throughout our antagonist's thought-process) is refreshing.

2023-07-08 07:04