Hello Gentle Reader
John Maxwell Coetzee. A native South African writer (who speaks Afrikaans) and now is an Australian citizen. Noted for being reclusive – though others have described him more elusive. Emotionally he is best described as a cold fish. His discipline rivals that of a monk. He does not drink, smoke, or eat meat. He cycles for long distances to keep fit. With his assistance Oak Tree Press, was established to help raise money for the African HIV/AID’s crisis – specifically to assist the children displaced because of the disease. He is not noted for being a public speaker. He is noted as a writer, and academic. He is the first author ever to win the Booker Prize two times – along with Australian novelist Peter Carey. J.M. Coetzee, is the second South African writer to win the Nobel Prize for Literature after Nadine Gordimer. Though as most who win the Nobel Prize for Literature, J.M. Coetzee’s awardance was met with some disdain, and criticism. The most evident was his lack of political activism, or not being political enough as a writer. Others simply stated that he was too much of an easy Nobel win. For one he won the Booker Prize twice, and is internationally renowned author. It was more of a shrug by some, that he had won the Nobel Prize for Literature. In fact the former Permanent Secretary of the Swedish Academy Horace Engdahl had stated that J.M. Coetzee, was an easy choice for Swedish Academy. Recently in two thousand and ten, Martin Amis – the son of Kingsley Amis (another Booker Prize winner) and son of a wealthy mother, whose lineage was in the shoe business. Martin Amis had recently, written a novel titled “The Pregnant Widow,” which spoke of the sexual revolution and the sixties, and discusses his sister, was met with poor reviews from my research. He has yet to win the Booker Prize. The reason why Martin Amis is mentioned is because he had recently attacked J.M. Coetzee the Nobel Laureate in Literature of two thousand and three, as not having any talent – and because of his gloomy writings and lack of pleasure in his books, is somehow seen as seem great writer. The Swedish Academy disagree though. He was awarded because his novels are never the same. They each have their own formula. Each one of them does their own, literary value, and never truly tries to measure up to any previous success. Each one is just on their own and is to be read on its own. None of the novels or any of the works are to be seen as anything more, and certainly each one has its own unique gift and perspective to the world.
Also in recent news, the Nobel Laureate of two-thousand and three, had given away all his records and personal files – business, and correspondence; as well as photo albums, have all been acquired by the Harry Ransom Center, in Austin Texas. Nobel Laureate in Literature, Doris Lessing has also given some of her own archives to the Harry Ransom Center as well.
“Summertime,” by J.M. Coetzee is an interesting novel. I came into knowing about it, back in two thousand and nine, when it was shortlisted for the Booker Prize of that year. Yet it lost out to “Wolf Hall,” by Hilary Mantel. I remember though quite frankly the trailer on youtube, for this novel. That yellowish haze that summer has – even here in Canada; the world teaming with life. Of course I didn’t have the slightest clue what this book was about. Nor did I know that this was in what some consider a trilogy of work, about the Nobel Laureates life, often called a “fictionalised autobiography,” which includes “Boyhood,” and “Youth.”
With this part of his fictionalized autobiography, John Maxwell Coetzee, distances himself from himself even more, then his first two accounts of his life had did. While his first two books of his “fictionalized memoir,” were detached, even though quite frankly about himself, they were written in the third person. Yet now with “Summertime,” Nobel Laureate in Literature has decided to detach himself even further, then before. In this memoir, J.M. Coetzee is dead, and a biographer is conducting various interviews with people close to the deceased fictional puppet, of the author. These people each have different concepts and idea’s of whom the deceased grand author was. Though one calls him a “small man,” in fact, if the portrait (though it is hinted at, as unreliable) is true, J.M. Coetzee is the most (un)human human being there ever could have been. He’s a cold fish, unemotional to the extreme, dethatched, always defensive and cautious of the world. A man always testing the waters before even contemplating sliding in. It is certainly a strange novel, but also very self-mocking and humorous.
In a way, the author himself is mocking himself. Throwing mud on his face, and yet smiling about it. Though the irony or the paradox, of this entire concept is the people interviewed by the biographer Mister Vincent, show a completely different person. He is unable to experience humour; his sexual presence is not even in existent, his social appetite is very small, and his relationship with his father, on the surface looks very strained. Even those that love him don’t quite understand him, those that don’t even like him and claim to have him figured out, as nothing more than a small pathetic man. But as the raw form of these fictional transcripts presents, there is no real understanding between who J.M. Coetzee is and who his fictional puppet counterpart was. He himself is simply a large enigma.
“I really was the main character. John really was a minor character.”
One character states quite firmly. It speaks loud and clear as well. The fictional puppet John really is only a minor character throughout this novel, even though this novel surely does focus upon him. Each character however, reveals their own fictional memoir, which just happens to deal with John. Julia discusses her love affair with John, and her own cheating husband’s love affair with another woman. Throughout it all, Julia explains the complicated relationship between herself and John, how they too could never really love each other, and the subsequent break down of her marriage. She offers insight into the complicated relationship and distant relationship between father and son. The horrible state of the house, somewhat of a filthy place to be honest. The fictional puppets, father is a cold and distant man – much like his son. In fact because of this as his nature, he is given no real meaning or deep characterization, based upon the fact that the entire novel is based on the interviews of five different people. In fact even John the factious counterpart, is more of a shape shifter if anything. A fish out of water, to say the least when it comes to sexual relationships – relationships at all for that matter; and can clearly be seen in many aspects. It’s hard to see John as anything more than just what is depicted by the less than rose coloured lens of the characters that have surrounded his life. In fact, if anything at all, it’s hard to see John as a child – though he and his cousin Margot often spoke of how they would marry, it would have been difficult to see it happen – not because they were cousins, but because of Johns nature, resembling that more of a hermetic celibate monk then that of anything else. It is hard to see, him as a child at all. But Julia’s depiction of John show nothing more than just a weird reclusive and eccentric man. A man who wouldn’t be able to have a relationship with a woman, if he tried – for that matter a man unable to have any real decent human relationship at all. For the most part Julia herself only recounts the parts of that part of her life, which John was merely a shadow in. She is far more interested in stating the fact that because of their “relationship,” her marriage failed – but then again one can perhaps even see that it was doomed to failure from the beginning.
Next for the interviewing is cousin Margot. She is not so detached from John, as Julia was. In fact she has more pity for him. Defending him against her sister, who often speaks low of him. How she suspects he is homosexual, and writes poetry. Perhaps Margot see’s a rather pathetic man. A man bashful and shy to the point of reclusiveness, and a man whose enjoyment of manual labour – something that the family believes is native work – or black work. In fact if anything, Margot has the best understanding of the outsider of John, an outsider to his family, an outcast in his home country, and an outcast in relationships and society at large. For whatever reason. She discusses their drive in the Karoo, and how the truck breaks down. They spend the night in the truck, at this point Margot shows her frustration with John, but his anger is more of a cold retreat, then that of a typical person. In the end however, she shows more pity and the kindness that comes from that pity, for her cousin, and does not really understand him, but understands him far more than the rest of the family does. Though she does take quite the concern, when John expresses interest in buying a cottage, and having his father shake up there. Even John realizes it is not all that much of a grand idea. Though perhaps they both have different reasons why the luxury of the thought is less the luxurious. Rather than that cold detached tone Julia had, who looks at John more as a patient in one of her therapy sessions, Margot looks at him in a much more intimate and loving way. She sees him as still that little boy that she had said she was going to marry.
Adriana the immigrant or refugee, dancer, is less then kind in her depiction of John. She seems as a nuisance, as a fly. A disgusting fly in certain need of being swatted down. She has a grand hatred for John. In fact she states, that he cannot be a great writer, because he is not a great man. In fact Adriana’s entire depiction of John is harsh, cruel, and full of a salsa like arrogance, which the author himself (J.M. Coetzee) grasps right away. Though the fictional John was in love with her, she herself saw him as nothing more than a pest. A stalker. A man unqualified to teach her daughter. It is hard to find any pity for the experiences that Adriana herself had experienced, because of her own ability to see anything other than her own view.
There are others as well, but the main three – Julia, Margot, and Adriana provide the most captivating accounts of the fictional John, and how the perception of one differs from the opinions of others.
J.M. Coetzee the outsider and Nobel Laureate in Literature of two-thousand and three, still remains an enigma, and a shifting shadow. His autobiography leaves on with an uneasy feeling of what the lines the two dance, between being a documentary and being a fictional account of a real man.
Thank-you For Reading Gentle Reader
Take Care
And As Always
Stay Well Read
*And Remember: Downloading Books Illegally is Thievery and Wrong.*
M. Mary
