Η τυφλή πιανίστρια

by Brian O'Doherty, Αργυρώ Μαντόγλου (Translator)

Στη Βιέννη του 18ου αιώνα ο αμφιλεγόμενος δρ Φραντς Άντον Μέσμερ αναλαμβάνει τη θεραπεία της δεκαοχτάχρονης Μαρίας Θηρεσίας Παραντίζ, η οποία έχει χάσει την όρασή της από τα τρία της χρόνια χωρίς κανέναν προφανή λόγο. Η κοπέλα, προικισμένη πιανίστρια, τυγχάνει της εύνοιας της Αυτοκράτειρας, κάτι από το οποίο επωφελείται ιδιαίτερα ο ραδιούργος αυλικός πατέρας της. O δρ Μέσμερ, εισηγητής της θεωρίας του ζωικού μαγνητισμού, θα βρεθεί παγιδευμένος στις δολοπλοκίες της αυλής της Μαρίας Θηρεσίας των Αψβούργων, σε μια συγκλονιστική ιστορία για τη μάχη ανάμεσα στο καλό και το κακό, ανάμεσα στο σκοτάδι και το φως.
Σε αυτό το μυστηριώδες μυθιστόρημα ο Μπράιαν O’Ντόχερτι οδηγεί τον αναγνώστη, υπό τους ήχους της μουσικής του νεαρού Μότσαρτ, σε μια καθοριστική εποχή για την Ευρώπη, όταν οι ιδέες του Διαφωτισμού έπαιρναν σάρκα και οστά.

Genres: Fiction, Horror, Irish Literature, Historical Fiction

205 pages, Hardcover

First published January 1, 1992

About the author

Brian O'Doherty is an Irish art critic, writer, artist, and academic. He was born at Ballaghaderreen in County Roscommon in 1928, and grew up in Dublin. He studied medicine at University College Dublin, and did post-graduate work at Cambridge University and at the Harvard School of Public Health. He has lived in New York for more than 50 years.

Reviews

[El Bibliófilo]

My comments in video: https://youtu.be/BaHviCyQ-8A

Chaotic exploration of bias.
The author presents us with a story based on real events, but the identity is not presented to us from the beginning, perhaps trying to generate mystery and expectation, which was not effective but rather confusing, since in addition to hiding the names, he tries to show the perspectives of the different characters, considering hypotheses, exploring motives and psychological problems of each one, even philosophical reflections related to art and music, leaving in the end a great deal of confusion and no answer. From the work I highlight some prejudices or bias that it shows and that I find to be another type of blindness, for example the prejudices that we create with our desires, prejudices of the authorities or of the tribe (what the majority says) according to the approach of Francis Bacon. In general, it is an entertaining work, which invites philosophical reflection because it tells us about the problems of language and the perception that a blind woman from birth would have who recovers her sight. Almost the same thing happens to me as to the author by not mentioning that it is a famous scandal in history, of doctor Franz Mesmer, who had a famous pianist at the Austrian court as a patient, whose treatment was effective at the beginning and then stopped working, which is why he became involved in a web of scientific jealousy, political conspiracies and gossip of all kinds, an interesting subject itself, but I think was not clearly developed. I would like you to share his comments. Greetings

Caótica exploración de prejuicios.
El autor nos presenta una historia basada en hechos reales, pero su identidad no nos la presenta desde el inicio, tal vez tratando de generar misterio y expectación, lo cual no resultó efectivo sino confuso, pues además de velar los nombres, trata de mostrar las perspectivas de los diferentes personajes, barajando hipótesis, explorando motivos y problemas psicológicos de cada uno, incluso hasta reflexiones filosóficas relacionadas con el arte y la música, dejando al final una gran confusión y ninguna respuesta. De la obra logré destacar algunos prejuicios que muestra y que encuentro que son otro tipo de ceguera, por ejemplo los prejuicios que creamos con nuestros deseos, prejuicios de las autoridades o de la tribu (lo que dice la mayoría) de acuerdo con el planteamiento de Francis Bacon. En general es una obra entretenida, que invita a la reflexión filosófica pues nos habla de los problemas del lenguaje y la percepción que tendría un ciego de nacimiento que recobra la vista. Casi me pasa lo mismo que al autor al no mencionar que se trata de un escándalo famoso de la historia, del doctor Franz Mesmer, que tuvo por paciente a una pianista famosa en la corte Austriaca, cuyo tratamiento fue efectivo al inicio y luego dejó de serlo, por lo que se vio envuelto en una trama de celos científicos, conspiraciones políticas y habladurías de todo tipo, lo cual en sí es un tema interesante, pero que pienso, no se desarrolló de manera clara. Me gustaría que compartieran sus comentarios. Saludos

[rep]

A disgusting book that says nothing is empty and only praises himself and describes his perverse tendencies. Art shouldn't be like this. These kinds of artists are the reason why I'm prejudiced against artists.

[Julianna]

Only the fact that it bothers me to stop reading a book once I've started it made me finish this book.

[Anya]

This is quite a weird kind of book, set in the 18th century and about a doctor treating a girl who is blind but whose eyes are theoretically still able to see. The book examines the treatment and in particular how that has been affected by various opinions and mistrust of the doctor. Each chapter presents an opinion from another characters point of view. The whole idea is interesting and a bit intriguing, but ultimately it’s not particularly enjoyable to read, and the last part of the book ends with a disappointing aging doctor.

[Vichy]

Ο Φραντς Άντον Μέσμερ (1734 – 1815) ήταν Γερμανός γιατρός, ο οποίος σπούδασε φιλοσοφία και ιατρική στο πανεπιστήμιο της Βιέννης. Έγινε γνωστός από τις μελέτες που διεξήγαγε σχετικά με τις θεραπευτικές ιδιότητες του ζωικού μαγνητισμού (που από αυτόν ονομάστηκε μεσμερισμός). Με το «ζωικό μαγνητισμό» περιγράφεται το συμπαντικό ρευστό, μαγνητικής φύσης, που διαπερνά όλα τα δημιουργήματα (άψυχα και έμψυχα) μέσα στο σύμπαν, ένα ρευστό που αποκαλείται και «παγκόσμια δύναμη της ζωής». Υποστήριζε ότι οι πλανήτες επηρεάζουν τη λειτουργία των μαγνητικών ρευστών του ανθρώπου και καθορίζουν την υγεία του. Στους υγιείς οργανισμούς η κυκλοφορία των μαγνητικών ρευστών είναι ισορροπημένη και ομαλή, ενώ στους ασθενείς διαταράσσεται.

Με αυτόν τον τρόπο ο Μέσμερ προσπάθησε να θεραπεύσει την 18χρονη Μαρία- Θηρεσία Παραντίζ. Η κοπέλα ήταν 3 χρονών όταν βυθίστηκε στο σκοτάδι αλλά εμφάνισε μέγιστη μουσική ικανότητα. Η αυτοκράτειρα Μαρία Θηρεσία της Αγίας Ρωμαϊκής Αυτοκρατορίας και τελευταίος ηγεμόνας του Οίκου των Αψβούργων, από της οποίας πήρε το όνομα, απολάβανε τις μουσικές της εκτελέσεις και η ίδια είχε την εύνοιά της καθώς και ο πατέρας της που ήταν γραμματέας και άριστος χειριστής της επιβίωσης μέσα στην Αυλή.

Οι γονείς έχοντας δοκιμάσει όλες τις σύγχρονες μεθόδους της ιατρικής που άγγιζαν τα βασανιστήρια, απευθύνθηκαν στο Μέσμερ, ο οποίος έκανε τα θαύματά του ομολογουμένως. Όταν, όμως, η κοπέλα με την ανάκτηση της όρασης έχανε τη μουσική της επιδεξιότητα, ο πατέρας εκμεταλλευόμενος τα γρανάζια της αυλής, ματαίωσε τη θεραπεία, με αποτέλεσμα η μικρή να βυθιστεί ξανά αιωνίως στο σκοτάδι και ο Μέσμερ να κατατροπωθεί από τους αντιπάλους του.

Αν και στο βιβλίο συχνά η Μαρία Θηρεσία παίζει συχνά με το Μότσαρτ, πράγμα απίθανο, ο ίδιος ο Μότσαρτ έγραψε το ακόλουθο κομμάτι για τη Mademoiselle P.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0KhGS...

[Sofiya]

I picked it up because I hoped for a fictive version of Freud's case studies which I had read previously. I was mostly satisfied; yet as a novel I found it failed to satisfy my curiosity; how much this had to do with the reality of events that the author felt compelled to follow, I don't know.

My personal dislikes: the going-ons of Dr M about his fluids and celestial arrangements in the cure of a patient (which far exceeded the allowable number of 2 pages); his failure to discern what exactly happened to Marie Therese in her childhood (though we were subsequently told by the father's voice) and incorporating this into his cure; the lack of explanation from Dr M about Josef's claims of his orgy-like cure for young members of society.

It sounded more like the author was a giant fan of Dr M but this failed to translate well into novel form, although I loved to follow Marie T's cure and slow approach to the light. To entrance me further it would have had to take a more medicinal approach and ennumerate exactly how the doctor would have cured her given time (which I was sure he could do given his current success), and a more detailed version of events once she was retaken by her family.

[TaxusNocturnus]

The book started great. Lured me in, I got interested, but somewhere in the last third of the book it turned from interesting to boring and tedious and philosophical.. Although I do not mind retrospection in general, it just didn't fit for me. In my opinion it would be better if, along with doctors, childs and fathers point of view the author included mothers point of view. Or something like that... Anyways, started out great, that's why I give three stars.

[Mary]

Out of the ordinary idea for a book. Really enjoyed it.

[Rachel Hutton macdonald]

I found this rather hard going. Interesting subject material, but not my cup of tea at all.

[Lynette Lark]

For me, this book was annoying and boring. Written in 1992 by an author (NOT BORN IN 1928) who wrote the book for himself and not for his readers! It's egotistical and I wouldn't recommend this to my mother who reads anything! The subject matter could have been made into a great historical novel if another author had written it. Instead, we're subjected to an author who is too lazy to turn it into a great novel. Good grief! And what is happening to Goodreads? They get so much wrong.

[Jill]

Very slow read. Get drawn in a little and then collapse to too much introspection by the narrator(s). The woman at the heart of the story is a pawn. The people around her all self-absorbed and using her for their own gain. I think there was a lot to be said about this historical story but the actual book was too flat.

[Simo Brando]

The story itself was interesting and makes you realize how reality can be manipulated by those who have the power. The style however was cataleptic and a real struggle not to fall asleep to. It's only 120 pages long but 90 of those are mere thoughts and reflections of the characters.

[Florence Wheeler]

I thought this book was a bore, but as a student of science there was this fascinating theme of evidence being real/unreal that was the only thing that kept me going. The metaphysical and pseudoscience kind of ruined it though.

[Maja Lange]

Built expectations for drama that never really came. I basically see the first half of the book as false advertising for the second half.

[Kristin Ward]

glad that's over

[Juliet]

Super compelling and an easy read! Love the style of the prose. I would have given this four stars, but I wasn’t a massive fan of how the book tied itself up at the end. Great momentum to start with, but dried up a bit at the end. Still! A wonderful and glittery read.

[Amy Caroline]

Did not really understand the point in this story. It started abruptly which was a little jarring but I enjoyed the tension between the doctor trying to help his patient and the skeptical society in which he lived. The politics and influence of those higher in socirty shows what a fragile time the characters lived in. The switch in narrator was confusing. No clear explanation is given as to what really happened and huge chunks of time are missing. Felt unfinished or like I'd missed sections

[Stefanie Jones]

""

[Emily]

Excellent use of language, abundant adjectives, philosophical examinations--but no plot.

[Sasha Strader]

Everything started out very slow with this book, then picked up in such a way that I started to have hope...only to slam back to a screeching halt again. Good imagery, very little plotline.

[Hilda Reilly]

The author knows how to turn out an elegant sentence but the characterization and the overall narrative were curiously lifeless.