Peter Hoeg (again)
Wm...
First, my apologies for writing in english.
An explanation: in the english speaking world (britain to be particular)
we sometimes find people dislike an author because they are very good.
My first language is english; I am not british but do live in britain.
Does this happen in Denmark too? That a person (say Peter Hoeg) is so
good they get reviled for being good? Is it because they see society
too well? I thought this was a particularly british fault but having
looked at some reviews of Peter Hoeg's writing I think it might be more
general. i.e. some people don't like other people that comment
successfully on the society around them.
--
Wm...
Reply-To: address valid for at least 7 days
Per Vadmand
It sure happens in Denmark too, but I'm not sure if that is the case with
Peter H�eg. Rather it is about his subject matter - many people, especially
critics, have a need to cathegorize, and it a writer transcends cathegories
they have problems with putting the right label on him.
I think that is the case with H�eg - that and a tendency, sometimes, to
write a little sloppily and predictably, especially in "The woman and the
ape" which has all the "politically correct" opinions and very few
surprises - seemingly without the auther being aware of the banalities.
Therefore many critics and readers were disapointed with H�eg, especially
after the brillant "Smilla" and "Borderliners."
I think "The silent girl" tops the curve again, but here I don't agree with
many critics.
Per V
--
Vi vil have "Talking Horns" til Copenhagen Jazz Festival 2010!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ltv155M-8_U
Carsten Agger
First of all, Denmark is the home country of Janteloven, the Jante law
(Aksel Sandemose: En flygtning krydser sit spor), whose first
commandment is: Don't think *you* are special.
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jante_Law)
It is, in other words, a peasant country with a strong
anti-intellectualist touch. This is much worse in Denmark than in the
English-speaking countries, I believe, but of course there'll be an
element of this kind of thing all over the place.
The science fiction writer Erwin Neutzsky-Wulff has been complaining for
years that he gets short thrift from critics because he's too good.
While one should not discount an element of posturing, he has a point:
Many times, critics have slaughtered long and complicated books
apparently without bothering to read them properly. In all fairness,
Neutzsky-Wulff can be wordy and difficult, and irritatingly
self-obsessed to boot.
However as reader I have somehow found it irritating to see a complex
piece of art apparently disparaged because the critic was able to find a
controversial statement on page 237. Maybe they shouldn't let prudes
review books.
Which leads me to conclude that I believe Per is correct: Critics like
predictable writers that are easily categorized. I suspect they want to
be able to hear about an author's new book, and then know the author
well enough to be able to write the review from the back cover blurb alone.
Writers who break that predictability, either by being generally
unpredictable (like H�egh) or by flouting conventions about what does
and what does not belong to which genre (like Neutzsky-Wulff) tend to
get unfairly criticized, not really because they're good, but because
they don't fit in the "comfortable" patterns of contemporary literature.
--
http://www.modspil.dk
- fordi tiden kr�ver et MODSPIL!
Wm...
dk.kultur.litteratur Carsten Agger <ag...@modspilNOSPAM.dk>
>Wm... wrote:
>> First, my apologies for writing in english.
>> An explanation: in the english speaking world (britain to be
>>particular) we sometimes find people dislike an author because they
>>are very good.
>> My first language is english; I am not british but do live in
>>britain.
>> Does this happen in Denmark too? That a person (say Peter Hoeg) is
>>so good they get reviled for being good? Is it because they see
>>society too well? I thought this was a particularly british fault
>>but having looked at some reviews of Peter Hoeg's writing I think it
>>might be more general. i.e. some people don't like other people that
>>comment successfully on the society around them.
>>
>
>
>First of all, Denmark is the home country of Janteloven, the Jante law
>(Aksel Sandemose: En flygtning krydser sit spor), whose first
>commandment is: Don't think *you* are special.
>(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jante_Law)
The dates are interesting, the book was published in 1933 which was a
"busy" year (wiki 1933; Hitler becomes chancellor, etc.)
Is the book currently seen in Denmark as a satire? (you probably don't
need the reference but Orwell's "Animal Farm" is an example) Who is the
"us" the wiki article referring too?
>It is, in other words, a peasant country with a strong
>anti-intellectualist touch. This is much worse in Denmark than in the
>English-speaking countries, I believe, but of course there'll be an
>element of this kind of thing all over the place.
That suggests that Denmark is an *extremely* homogenous society. Or at
least was. Nevertheless it has a monarchy (at least nominally) and
historically they had their friends, etc. Was Aksel Sandemose's "us"
those that were village leaders, local landowners, etc. ?
>The science fiction writer Erwin Neutzsky-Wulff has been complaining
>for years that he gets short thrift from critics because he's too good.
>While one should not discount an element of posturing, he has a point:
>Many times, critics have slaughtered long and complicated books
>apparently without bothering to read them properly. In all fairness,
>Neutzsky-Wulff can be wordy and difficult, and irritatingly
>self-obsessed to boot.
I can't comment on him.
>However as reader I have somehow found it irritating to see a complex
>piece of art apparently disparaged because the critic was able to find
>a controversial statement on page 237. Maybe they shouldn't let prudes
>review books.
Heh! I don't for a moment take all of what I am reading in "The Quiet
Girl" as fact. It seems to me (as a reader) that Kasper, although the
interlocutor with the reader, is *not* intended as a reliable reporter.
>Which leads me to conclude that I believe Per is correct: Critics like
>predictable writers that are easily categorized. I suspect they want to
>be able to hear about an author's new book, and then know the author
>well enough to be able to write the review from the back cover blurb
>alone.
Hmmmn. Do you think "difficult" or "uneasily categorized" Danish
authors are reviewed better in translation than in their first language?
I could say something here about english being spoken so widely that a
novel written in or translated into english gets read so much more and
reviewed by a much broader public and so on but that is not my main
interest in this conversation except that I was introduced to Orhan
Pamuk and predicted (correctly) that he'd get a Nobel many years before
he got one, even when his books were still being translated badly.
Enough about me :)
>Writers who break that predictability, either by being generally
>unpredictable (like H�egh) or by flouting conventions about what does
>and what does not belong to which genre (like Neutzsky-Wulff) tend to
>get unfairly criticized, not really because they're good, but because
>they don't fit in the "comfortable" patterns of contemporary literature.
I am enjoying talking to you folks.
Thanks to you and Per for your replies.
Wm...
<4a599b66$0$15891$edfa...@dtext01.news.tele.dk> dk.kultur.litteratur
Per Vadmand <pe...@post.tele.dk>
>I think "The silent girl" tops the curve again, but here I don't agree with
>many critics.
Per, I hope I have covered what you said in my reply to Carsten.
Carsten Agger
> Mon, 13 Jul 2009 21:47:55 <4a5b8f6c$0$48242$1472...@news.sunsite.dk>
>> First of all, Denmark is the home country of Janteloven, the Jante law
>> (Aksel Sandemose: En flygtning krydser sit spor), whose first
>> commandment is: Don't think *you* are special.
>> (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jante_Law)
>
> The dates are interesting, the book was published in 1933 which was a
> "busy" year (wiki 1933; Hitler becomes chancellor, etc.)
>
> Is the book currently seen in Denmark as a satire? (you probably don't
> need the reference but Orwell's "Animal Farm" is an example) Who is the
> "us" the wiki article referring too?
>
The good people of Jante, the fictitious town in which the novel is set.
As the novel is autobiographical, this means that it's the people of
Nyk�bing Mors, a small town (today abt. 9,000 inhabitants) on the island
of Mors in northern Jutland.
Figuratively and in the sense that "Janteloven" has become a general
concept in Denmark, it's the consensual "norm" of intolerant mediocrity,
the novel and the law attack.
"En flygtning krydser sit spor" is not really satire as much as it is
social realism and autobiography. It's about being young and clueless in
the provincial, homogenous (yes) and materially dirt poor setting of
a small rural/provincial Danish town in the early 20th century.
>> It is, in other words, a peasant country with a strong
>> anti-intellectualist touch. This is much worse in Denmark than in the
>> English-speaking countries, I believe, but of course there'll be an
>> element of this kind of thing all over the place.
>
> That suggests that Denmark is an *extremely* homogenous society. Or at
> least was. Nevertheless it has a monarchy (at least nominally) and
> historically they had their friends, etc. Was Aksel Sandemose's "us"
> those that were village leaders, local landowners, etc. ?
See above :-)
>
>
> Hmmmn. Do you think "difficult" or "uneasily categorized" Danish
> authors are reviewed better in translation than in their first language?
>
Generally speaking, yes. There's too much "I've never heard about that
so it can't be done" and "don't think *you're* special" in Denmark. Add
to that some petty jealousy, so for some the way to go would be
published -> axed in reviews -> translated -> hailed as original in
foreign reviews -> republished in Denmark -> hailed as a popular, and
all the reviewers knew it all along
Just my opinion, of course. But this is the country which neglected
S�ren Kierkegaard and nearly denied tenure to Niels Bohr. So there's
some truth to it at least ;-)
> I am enjoying talking to you folks.
>
> Thanks to you and Per for your replies.
>
Likewise.
Wm...
dk.kultur.litteratur Carsten Agger <ag...@modspilNOSPAM.dk>
Wm:
>> Hmmmn. Do you think "difficult" or "uneasily categorized" Danish
>>authors are reviewed better in translation than in their first language?
>>
>
>Generally speaking, yes. There's too much "I've never heard about that
>so it can't be done" and "don't think *you're* special" in Denmark. Add
>to that some petty jealousy, so for some the way to go would be
>
>published -> axed in reviews -> translated -> hailed as original in
>foreign reviews -> republished in Denmark -> hailed as a popular, and
>all the reviewers knew it all along
I find that amusing. Sad in a way too.
>Just my opinion, of course. But this is the country which neglected
>S�ren Kierkegaard and nearly denied tenure to Niels Bohr. So there's
>some truth to it at least ;-)
are there other modern danish authors I should read? please bear in
mind my first language is english but good translations should be
available to me.
Other people can answer this too. I appreciate the people that talk to
me but I wonder ... is Carsten one of the clever ones :)
P.S. inverted intellectualism can get confusing for some people when you
do it twice :)