![]() ![]() You are not going to get a conventional linear narrative. Metafiction itself is not always an easy genre by dismissing conventional form, it requires the reader to be attentive, to be aware that the form is self-consciously playing with you. ![]() The difficulty comes from this: Pavic’ attempts to do too much and tries to be too clever, making it an inaccessible book, a book that asks too much of the reader. Sadly, I have found this book to be a disappointment and quite a trial to read. It is from this point of view that I have read Milorad Pavic’’s Dictionary of the Khazars, his acclaimed work from the late 1980s, translated by Christina Pribic’evic’-Zoric’. I have also complained in earlier posts about the need for writers who understand their own cultures, politics, and histories, especially here in the United States. Garcia Marquez, Calvino, Rushdie, and others create worlds full of fantasy that intersect with our own, leaving us to wonder what is real and what is not. A vivid imagination is also something that is a joy to read, given the very often-pragmatic nature of American short stories and novels that deal with family dynamics, relationship woes, etc. I also have an interest in metafiction-Margaret Atwood’s “Happy Endings” is one of the most brilliant little stories I have read, not to mention one of the funniest ones. (Due to formatting issues, the accent on the c does not appear properly)Īs a reader of novels by world authors as well as a writer, I appreciate books that offer a different sensibility than our very pragmatic, often spare American one. Dictionary of the Khazars: Milorad Pavic’’s Brilliant Balkan Babbling ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |