Atrapa la vida

by Nadine Gordimer

Paul Bannerman, an ecologist in South Africa, believes he understands the trajectory of his life, with the usual markers of vocation and marriage. But when he's diagnosed with thyroid cancer and, after surgery, prescribed treatment that will leave him radioactive, he is isolated from other people and he begins to question his work and the politics of South Africa.

Genres: Fiction, Africa, Nobel Prize, South Africa, Literary Fiction, Book Club, Literature

256 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 2005

About the author

Nadine Gordimer was a South African writer, political activist, and recipient of the 1991 Nobel Prize in Literature. She was recognized as a woman "who through her magnificent epic writing has – in the words of Alfred Nobel – been of very great benefit to humanity".

Gordimer's writing dealt with moral and racial issues, particularly apartheid in South Africa. Under that regime, works such as Burger's Daughter and July's People were banned. She was active in the anti-apartheid movement, joining the African National Congress during the days when the organization was banned. She was also active in HIV/AIDS causes.

Reviews

[Hugh · Rating 3 out of 5]

I finished this book a few days ago, and have been reluctant to review it. This is partly because I have a lot of respect for Gordimer, but I find her books rather difficult to enjoy, and this is a matter of style and personal taste. This book was shortlisted for the Booker Prize in 2006.

It does have some interesting components, and some of the human stories are quite moving, but for me it was trying to do too many things, especially for a short novel. It starts with Paul Bannerman, an ecologist in his mid-thirties who is recovering from cancer and has just had radiation therapy. Because he is still radioactive, he moves in to his parents house (at their request) to protect his wife and young son. The wife works in advertising, which creates a degree of tension with his idealism. Other storylines focus on the cracks in the parents' superficially perfect marriage, the ecological issues Paul faces through his work and his mother's decision to adopt an orphaned child with AIDS.

[Emma · Rating 2 out of 5]

I had to read this for class and I must say I expected something quite different. The story shifted focus too many times for my taste and so I wasn't really interested in anything really. Also, I think some parts were quite boring. In the end to me it felt like some parts were inconsequential and did not contribute to the story in any way. This book just wasn't for me.

[Pedro · Rating 3 out of 5]

Lost in translation

Paul, un investigador de campo y ambientalista, sufre cáncer de tiroides; luego de una cirugía de extirpación, es sometido a tratamiento radioactivo. Y para no poner en riesgo a su joven esposa, Berenice-Benni, y a su pequeño hijo, Adrian y Lyndsey, sus padres, le proponen alojarse en su casa hasta que pase el peligro. Esta experiencia de volver a la casa de su niñez, modificará el vínculo en el triángulo madre-padre-hijo. En medio de su aislamiento le sorprende que tanto su colega como la doméstica, ambos negros, se rien de las precauciones.

"Él (Paul) conoce lo que no puede verse y emana de alguien que es su propio Chernobil.
¿Cómo era posible que esos dos no tuviesen miedo? Lo más probable es que tanto para este compañero en la investigación, como para la mujer ignorante, todo se deba a que han estado expuestos a las amenazas de la cuarentena de la segregación en la infancia, anterior a las de la guerra, y se han acostumbrado a ellas."

El vínculo de Paul con su madre se fortalece, favoreciendo diálogos que no habían llegado a tener.

“No todo el mundo quiere de forma tan tenaz y absoluta como tú, no todo el mundo tiene, ¿como lo diría?, una vocación tan significativa... Casi nadie es tan afortunado. - Lyndsey apartó la mirada un instante, como si hubiera olvidado algo. Sonrió y añadió- : O desgraciado. Lo que en realidad quería decirle es que sería un mal padre.”

Una novela interesante en cada uno de los múltiples temas, políticos o humanos, que aborda. Pero hay algo que no cierra. Ocurren muchas acciones que parecen denotar intenciones o significados especiales, y que no he sido capaz de reconocer. Como un escolar que es capaz de reconocer cada palabra, aunque no el sentido de la oración.

Es posible que no haya logrado sintonizar plenamente con la novela, aunque también tengo la sospecha de que la traducción ha sido casi literal, perdiéndose en el camino parte del sentido. Como ejemplo, hay un párrafo en que Lyndsey reflexiona sobre las amistades:

“Aparte del círculo de amigos comunes, los de ella solían pertenecer a la fraternidad jurídica - la fraternidad, sí- pues casi todos los jueces y los más ilustres abogados eran varones.”
La palabra fraternidad debe ser una traducción de brotherhood. La palabra en inglés denota género, por lo cual es pertinente la explicación del predominio de varones; en cambio fraternidad, no, por lo cual la explicación parece sobrar. Pero, para eso están las notas al pie.
También lo noté en el título; es cierto que la frase Get a life, es difícil de traducir; es utilizada para reprochar a quien se pierde en meandros de preocupaciones, y sería algo como deja de dar vueltas inútiles y dedicate/atrevete a vivir de verdad. La frase elegida, Atrapa la vida, que además se repite en muchas ocasiones a lo largo de la novela, no parece adecuada.

Ya sea por mi desatención, por deficiencias de traducción o una mala performance de Gordimer, una novela con información y reflexiones muy interesantes, que me costó seguir y encontrar el sentido, como le pasaba al escolar; la encontré muy por debajo de El conservador. Pero, bueno, hay cosas peores. Que no me vengan a decir Get a life!

Nadine Gordimer (1923-2014) nació y vivió en Sudáfrica, donde además de una escritora consagrada fue una activa luchadora contra el Apartheid y las desigualdades. Fue honrada con el Premio Nobel 1991.

[Chinook · Rating 2 out of 5]

This is the second Nadine Gordimer I've read, the first being The House Gun. With both, my early impression was that I hated her writing style. The House Gun eventually drew me into the story far enough that I didn't care that I found the style a bit off. Unfortunately with Get A LIfe that never did happen. There were the odd moments that I got into it, but they were not consistent enough.

[Gisela Hafezparast · Rating 3 out of 5]

Whenever I see a Nadine Gordimer book in the library I take it home as I am a great fan of hers. When I looked at past reviews I was very surprised that this one had 3 stars. It is only a very small book, more like a novella, but from the first chapter I realised why it had the rating it had and I could understand the reviews. Gordimer's writing is often not necessarily an easy read, but this one although it uses beautiful language and often breath-taking sentences is most definitely a difficult read.

For me it was a book of two halves. Whilst the main story is of somebody undergoing a difficult period in his life through a serious illness and dangerous radioactive medication, the main story for me was all about relationships. And this is very it get's difficult. I was not too convinced about the background story as this book was written in 2005. The treatment seemed to say the least unusual and more like a writing device than anything which would really happen in a 21st century (and whilst the story as always is set is Africa, it is upper middle class South Africa). Moreover, the way back into "normal life" from such an illness and treatment could have been better told.

The beauty about the book is definitely the description of the experiences and thoughts people had about their relationships, i.e. the mother with her son and to some extent her daughters, beautifully and heart-wrenching, but unsentimentally described (for me that is Gordimer's strength in most of her books), the son's love for his wife and son, the father for his wife even after she had put him through a lot of heartache (a truly great description of a truly kind and loving father and husband) and the love which is so strong between the father and mother and the mothers guilt over her lengthy adultery. Adultery and its consequences are another one of the themes in this small book. The relationship between two friends and work colleagues. The relationship of a black servant to her white employers.

So it is probably more a 3.5 and the book is worth reading. But be aware, despite it's size this is not a quick read. I could never really read more than a chapter as it can be hard-going at times.

[Ana · Rating 4 out of 5]

Li pela primeira vez, a escritora sul-africana, Nadine Gordimer pro projeto #NobelWomen. Ela foi laureada com Nobel de Literatura, em 1991.
As pessoas dos comentarios do Goodreads estao reclamando de seu estilo de escrita muito excêntrico, rebuscado, ignora as regras de pontuaçao tradicional e da gramatica. Eu passei a vida lendo Saramago, falta de pontuaçao nao é problema para mim. Também li a traduçao e nao no orginal, talvez o tradutor/traidor para o português-BR facilitou a compreensao, porque nao tive dificuldade nenhuma em lê-lo e achei otimo. Conselho: Foca na trama e reflita sobre os problemas discutidos em vez de ficar corrigindo gramatica.

Paul Bannerman é um ecologista qualificado academicamente por universidades e instituições dos Estados Unidos, Inglaterra, e pela experiência em florestas, desertos e savanas da África Ocidental e América do Sul. Ocupa um cargo numa fundação para conservação e controle ambiental. Teve um câncer da glândula tireóide, fez uma tireoidectomia e como estava radioativo, ficou de quarentena na casa dos pais.

"Qual a sua profissão, responda, O que eu sou, sou um conservacionista, sou um dos novos missionários que estão aqui não para salvar almas, mas para salvar a Terra."

E quando você pensa que o câncer estava so em Paul, você vai percebendo o câncer no seio familiar, porque começa a aparecer os podres. O câncer também esta na sociedade: brancos, negros, apartheid, desigualdades, a Aids e os problemas ambientais.

Eu aqui imaginando a vida da empregada dos pais de Paul, a Primrose, negra e mae solteira, responsavel por dar comida e limpar o lugar em que ele estava, sem saber do perigo da radiaçao.

Adrian e Lyndsay tiveram que decidir o que fazer, se aquela mulher, sem conhecimento do perigo, sem conhecimento de qualquer responsabilidade familiar para com o filho, deveria ser exposta.

A mae de Paul adota uma menina negra, soropositiva que passa o dia na creche e à tarde sob os cuidados de Primrose. Mulheres que dedicam suas vidas aos filhos que nao sao seus para que as maes burguesas destes possam ser bem-sucedidas.

Alguém pode me dizer por quê em pleno sec XXI ainda existe zoologico?

A águia engaiolada tornada uma metáfora para todas as formas de isolamento, o supremo aprisionamento. Um zoológico é uma prisão.

Em época de Amazonia em chamas, é sempre bom lembrar:

"poderiam provar que essa forma de exploração em determinado meio ambiente pode beneficiar o crescimento humano, animal e orgânico e a atmosfera; aquela forma, em outro meio ambiente, adoecerá a população humana com efluentes, privará espécies animais de seu habitat alimentar, fazendo-as morrer de fome, extrairá do mar mais do que consegue repor. Mas as “descobertas” das pesquisas ecológicas feitas por empresários com projetos aprovados pelo governo são forjadas como uma espécie de justificativa para prosseguir com seus projetos.
Que importam os pesquisadores independentes que provam o contrário? As suas descobertas podem receber uma atenção insignificante, ah, sim, os projetos empresariais são levemente adaptados como uma concessão — e os produtos desastrosos. Por isso os ambientalistas precisam consultar advogados que saibam quais brechas da lei, usadas pelos empresários dos projetos, precisam ser previstas e denunciadas enquanto a investigação independente está em andamento".

Qual a sua convicção quando ele chega da natureza selvagem e fala da floresta insubstituível
sendo derrubada para dar lugar a um cassino, os peixes flutuando de barriga para cima no que restou de um curso d’água desviado para alimentar uma piscina olímpica e a réplica de uma das fontes de Roma?

[Michele · Rating 1 out of 5]

So this is what a Nobel prize winner produces.
Pretentious , leaden prose.
Quite frankly I almost lost the will to live while reading this.
Am I supposed to be impressed by the writing style?Or in awe of a far superior intelligence?
I am neither.
May give Ms Gordimer another chance but it will be a while.

[sdw · Rating 3 out of 5]

This is a book about an environmentalist fighting nuclear expansion diagnosed with thyroid cancer. The treatment for thyroid cancer includes ingesting radioactive iodine making one (briefly) a radioactive threat to others. As an environmentalist with thyroid cancer, this aspect of the novel intrigued me the most.

I found the book's depiction of thyroid cancer over-dramatic. The main character is in his thirties and has papillary thyroid cancer. His chances of dying are slim - yet the book repeatedly claims him to be on the brink of death (until the first treatment miraculously cures him). It even explains that papillary thyroid cancer is the most serious type of thyroid cancer. Papillary thyroid cancer is actually the least serious type. From the types of treatments he had (significantly less than mine) he was never at any real risk, just inconvenience. Secondly, after ingesting the large dose of radiation, Paul is quarenteened for 16 days. This is not inaccurate but the book describes it as if months passed by. The book depicts the weeks and weekends that pass. Months seem to happen in those 16 days --a length of tortuous separation that traumatizes everyone.

The book ultimately however was not about the cancer or about the environmentalist protagonist's quest to save an environmental eden. They are just wrinkles of complexity and symbolism in the background of a book about human romantic relationships. A large focus is on the protagonist and his wife (a relationship I did not find to be mature or believable) while the other key relationship is between his mother and her husband (more true to life, more engaging, a romance you want to believe in - I won't say more as to not ruin the plot).

The language of the book was disappointing. The sentence structure was as overdramatic as the plot itself, and the language was obtuse rather than poetic. I read the book in a few hours. I found it intriguing and thought provoking. It was worth reading, but it was not a very accurate picture of thyroid cancer.

[Calypso · Rating 1 out of 5]

It seems rather harsh, a one-star review for a Nobel prize winner, but instead of trying to gauge its merits, I opted for providing just my personal opinion: I didn't like it.

The first 60+ pages I found extremely difficult to read and I entertained the thought of abandoning the book. However, other reviewers said it gets easier after that section and it does. Still, I continued for the sake of finishing the book, out of a sense of 'obligation' so to speak, not because I enjoyed it.

The story opens with one main character, diagnosed with cancer and exposed to a radiation treatment that makes him dangerous for human contact for a few days. He spends that time in his parents' house. This is the hardest part of the book to read,possibly written in a long-winded, disjointed, almost incoherent way to mirror his introspection. The few days he stayed at his family home feel to the reader like months. The rest of the book follows the story of the family (his family as well as his parents) after he returns home. It is mainly exposition, no 'showing' but 'telling', which I'm not very keen on.

It's a shame that the first book I read of hers had to be this one.Nonetheless, I am looking forward to reading more of Gordimer's work.

[-Neslihan K · Rating 3 out of 5]

Kolay bir okuma değil. Dil ve anlatım tarzındaki kopukluk, mesafelilik bir dakika şimdi kim konuşuyor sorgulamalarına sebep oluyor. Lakin yarısından sonra hikayeleşiyor, daha akıcı hale geliyor. Bu yüzden verdiğim 3 yıldızı, 3,5 diye yükseltiyorum. Bitirdiğime ve okuduğuma memnunum.
Kitap üstüne blog yazım..
https://mindmills.wordpress.com/2015/...

[Anne · Rating 1 out of 5]

Gordimer's sentences are the equivalent of stuffing so many crackers in your mouth you become incoherent. This was painful to read; I didn't care about anything or anyone and I hated her writing style. Although only a novella, I quit half way through. And I rarely give up on a book, even ones I don't enjoy.

[Amanda Patterson · Rating 1 out of 5]

I wish she would get one and stop writing like this. Nadine Gordimer is way past her sell by date. She is read by the 2000 people who still sit in Ivory Towers. Unfortunately some of those people force feed her awful books to our children as set works. Shame on all of you.

[Jim · Rating 3 out of 5]

Success sometimes may be defined as a disaster put on hold – Nadine Gorminder, Get a Life

I thought the idea behind this novel was an intriguing one: after undergoing treatment for thyroid cancer a man—Paul Bannerman—needs to be quarantined from his family for sixteen days because he’s literally radioactive. His parents agree to care for him, not that they’re immune but they’re not young and that’s what parents do; both are in their mid-sixties. So, at the age of thirty-five Paul’s reduced to being a child once again. The only contact he has with his wife is by phone or sitting across the garden from her—his mini-Eden—when she comes to visit. I imagined this was going to be a South African Dangling Man which is a book I’ve failed to finish twice but I still like the conceit.

I stumbled on the very first sentence:

Only the street-sweeper swishing his broom to collect fallen leaves from the gutter.

Not quite right, is it? I mean I got the idea but it’s an odd almost-sentence to open with. It only gets worse and I found myself having to slow down my reading to take account of her unusual narrative techniques. Take this short paragraph:

A state of existence. Unimaginable. Because her son, belonging to the historical continuity, brings a state of existence, his, before her days and nights, there returns a chapter not written, included, that surely cannot be believed was possible; could never happen to her as the son could not be thought ever to emanate danger out of the dark of his body.

In her review for The Observer Jane Stevenson says quite bluntly: “One of the most bizarre aspects of the book is that it seems not to have been edited or proofread.” And Sophie Harrison in The New York Times adds: “Paul communes with himself in paragraphs that would fatigue Heidegger.” I fully expected to get through this book in a couple of days but it proved a hard and not especially satisfying slog.

Paul’s quarantine takes up the first half of the book and yet I felt we were kept at a distance from the man. His suffering was all intellectual. He gets time to take stock of his life but then drifts into the background for the rest of the novel which focuses mostly on his parents whose marriage undergoes an unexpected shakeup. And then there’s Paul’s wife, Bernice or Benni; Gordimer uses both and frequently even calls her Bernice/Benni so these are clearly titles and not merely formal and pet names: Bernice is the successful career woman whereas Benni is the loving wife. We get Bernice’s story too. They’re an odd couple: Paul is an ecologist; his wife is an advertising executive. In many ways their professions are at odd with each other and yet this doesn’t seem to interfere with their marriage.

Gordimer is known as a political writer and politics does form the backdrop for this novel or at least geopolitics and ecopolitics do. Metaphors and symbols abound but I’m not sure Gordimer is saying anything especially new in between the lines here. I’ve not read any of her other books but from what I have read about her it does seem that she’s had her say and there’s nothing more to say. A bit like Solzhenitsyn who said it all in his early novels but kept on writing to the bitter end. Maybe I’m judging her unfairly. I just didn’t feel that the personal received the attention it deserved here but then neither did the political. Certainly as far as Paul goes who, for me, promised to be the most engaging character but then really wasn’t. The relationship between his parents takes centre stage as the book progresses and is more interesting that Paul and Bernice’s since in their old age they’re the two who do end up getting new lives.

The book felt poorly researched—a number of reviewers have criticised her treatment of this particular type of cancer—unfocused and badly edited (if at all). Because a Nobel Prize winner wrote it doesn’t mean she can get away with what anyone else would be pulled up for. One reviewer was kind calling her style “grammatically eccentric” but I kept asking myself: What’s she gaining here? I feel the same when it comes to Beckett’s late prose but, again, he’s a Nobel Prize winner and so you persist and assume they’re writing at a level just beyond your reach and you have to step up. Or then it could just be experiments that don’t quite succeed. Not every work by a genius is a work of genius.

[Darc Long · Rating 1 out of 5]

i’d rather get a lobotomy than think about this stupid book again, it’s like she used a thesaurus for every word to make it sound smart, but it was just incoherent.

[Gail · Rating 4 out of 5]

I hadn't read any Nadine Gordimer since I was 15, when I had to read a book of her short stories for GCSE English, and I hadn't enjoyed them much - I remember vaguely recognising they were good, but not really interesting to me at that age. But I was curious to read more, and this seemed quite interesting - the story of an environmentalist who is given radioactive treatment which means he has to avoid everyone for a couple of week, being radioactive.

I found the writing style a little like wading through mud - it seemed purposely obscure in order to somehow represent the unfamiliarity of the situation to the main character and his family. It is something to which they have no frame of reference - other than thinking of lepers! He has to live away from his wife and child - his parents take him in, because they are his parents, and they consider the dangers to themselves a natural sacrifice to make for their son. Part of me was thinking it was a bit melodramatic - my next-door neighbour had this treatment too, and although it weirded me out when I first heard about it, I soon discovered it's quite common, and not something to panic about at all.

But then actually, as I read further on in the book, I realised this was also what the book was about - the characters are weirded out, and then it becomes less weird to them - they get used to it. And then this helps them overcome other mental barriers - I can't say much more without venturing into spoiler territory, but the whole radioactive treatment is used to explore wider issues, and help the characters develop, and the novel as a whole was very interesting and complex.

[Stephen Hayes · Rating 4 out of 5]

A book about a white middle-class family living in Johannesburg in the early 21st century. Paul Bannerman is an ecologist, an environmentalist, with a wife, Berenice, who works in an advertising agency, and a small pre-school son.

Paul has cancer, and has to have radiation treatment that makes him temporarily radioactive and a danger to other with whom he comes into contact, s he has to live in quarantine, and does so in the house of his parents, Adrian, a businessman, and Lyndsey, a lawyer.

The family responds to various internal and external crises, the first of which is Paul's cancer and enforced isolation. Berenice has two personas. At work she is Berenice, at home she is Benni, and there are hints of a conflict between the interests of the clients of her agency whose business can be a threat to the environment that Paul is trying to protect.

When Paul recovers, he returns to work, and his parents go on an extended holiday to Mexico, where his father, beginning retirement, can indulge in his interest in archaeology. The family relations change in various unexpected ways as a result of subsequent changes.

I found it a difficult book to read. Nadine Gordimer's prose, which was lucid and flowing in her essays, letters and speeches, which I had also read recently, was awkward and jerky. I had to go back and re-read passages because I either couldn't understand them, or because they seemed to change their meaning halfway through a sentence. Eventually I attributed this to bad punctuation. Commas were missing, or in the wrong places. Perhaps Gordimer's writing had slipped badly in the 20 years since the book of essays I had just read, or else she had been very badly served by an editor who had decided to mangle her sentences and had no feeling for language.

Another problem was that it was too expository. It feels strange for me to say that, because someone quite recently criticised my own writing on that ground, using that very word. By that they meant (I think) that there was too much detail extraneous to the story, and in the one example given I agreed with them. I probably tend to err in giving too much detail, partly because I am concerned that readers not familiar with the setting or social and political background might not follow the story because of that, and that forms part of the story.

But Nadine Gordimer, I think does this to excess, giving excessively repeated details of plans to build a toll road or mine the dunes of the Wild Coast, and build dams in the Okavango Delta, in ways that goes way beyond the needs of the story, even if one of the aims of the story is to raise awareness of these things among readers. And this is not an early work by a novice writer, it is a late work in a much-respected writer with a long career. Were it not for these faults, I might have given it 5 stars, and there was a time, in the early chapters when I was thinking of giving it 3.

[Desnudando Libros · Rating 2 out of 5]

Esta novela invita al lector a reflexionar sobre la fragilidad del ser humano, la naturaleza imperecedera y el deseo de sentirnos vivos.

Paul, el protagonista, es un abogado de mediana edad que es diagnosticado con cáncer y debe someterse a un tratamiento con radiación. Debido al peligro de la exposición, sus padres deciden acogerlo en su casa, realizando un sacrificio sentimental incuestionable.

Durante las cuatro partes que componen la novela, Paul se recupera en esta lucha por la supervivencia, y su visita da paso a la cotidianeidad de los padres, Adian y Lynsday, así como de su hermana, Benni. El lector es introducido en el clima de político de Sudáfrica que reclama su identidad para establecer un paralelismo con el hombre y su búsqueda de sentido de la vida.

Los títulos de las partes, 𝐽𝑢𝑒𝑔𝑜 𝑑𝑒 𝑛𝑖𝑛̃𝑜𝑠, 𝐸𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑑𝑜𝑠 𝑒𝑥𝑖𝑠𝑡𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑖𝑎𝑙𝑒𝑠, 𝐶𝑜𝑠𝑎𝑠 𝑞𝑢𝑒 𝑜𝑐𝑢𝑟𝑟𝑒𝑛 𝑦 𝐴𝑡𝑟𝑎𝑝𝑎 𝑙𝑎 𝑣𝑖𝑑𝑎 establecen una cronología de los acontecimientos vitales y su repercusión. Lynsday acepta el hecho de que su marido Adrian decida viajar a Sudamérica para realizar unas investigaciones persiguiendo el sueño de la infancia, donde conoce a una joven guía de la que se enamora; por lo que acaba por abandonar a su mujer y decide guiarse por lo que realmente quiere antes de que sea demasiado tarde.

Gordimer reclama, con esta narrativa emotiva y evocadora, el poder de atrapar aquellos instantes que con frecuencia dejamos pasar ante nosotros sin ser conscientes. En mi caso, el mensaje de la obra ha trascendido a la escritura y los personajes. ¿Qué haríais vosotros para atrapar la vida?

[Siobhan Markwell · Rating 3 out of 5]

Nadine Gordimer is notorious as a fiercely intellectual writer and there were times while reading Get a Life that I felt I was out of my depth in pulling together the various strands of this family tale in it's post-apartheid, globalizing context. Life is explored on lots of levels from the very poetic and metaphorical treatment (literally) of a family member with cancer to reminiscences of how relationships and families are influenced by both loyalty and infidelity.

Alongside all this, there are wry comments on relationships between people of different racial backgrounds in the new South Africa and a sub-plot about the conservation of some important beach and marshlands stretching from the coast inland to Botswana. While struggling with treatment that may save his own life, while ironically making his radioactive body dangerous to others, a lawyer must fight to defend a larger piece of the natural life that forms our planet from the cynical ravages of global multinationals intent on prioritising profit over ecosystems.

I think this would benefit from a very leisurely read with breaks for reflection because the images and observations are so tightly crammed with meaning it's hard to feel you're doing the book justice when approaching it as a bedtime read, which was my allotted time with this book from the local library!

[Del Trigo · Rating 3 out of 5]

Una muestra de la profunda evolución cultural sucedida en los últimos años es el hecho de que hasta 1990, tan solo seis mujeres habían obtenido el premio Nobel de literatura y desde entonces, en treinta años lo han conseguido otras nueve. Por otra parte fue la tercera escritura africana en cinco años (1986 Soyinka, 1988 Mahfuz; 1990 Gordimer).

Nacida en 1923 en el seno de una familia blanca en Springs, cerca de Johannesburgo (Sudáfrica) ,además de gran escritora fue activista por los derechos humanos en su país, siendo de las primeras blancas en militar en el Congreso Nacional Africano, formación política de Nelson Mandela.

Hará dos o tres meses que cayó en mis manos "Atrapa la vida" que siendo de corta duración no tardé más de dos o tres días en devorar. El protagonista es un blanco sudafricano de clase media -como la propia Gordimer- que a los 35 años y estando recientemente casado y con una hija sufre un peligroso cáncer de tiroides del que solo saldrá a través de un tratamiento con yodo reactivo que su familia interpreta -seguramente de manera equivocada- que les puede contagiar, así que debe ir varias semanas a casa de sus padres a rehabilitarse, lo cual alterará irremediablemente el devenir de las complicadas relaciones afectivas entre su familia originaria y posteriormente creada. Muy recomendable.

[Home Faber]

* Nadine Gordimer ırk ayrımının en sert muhaliflerinden ve kitaplarında bütün içtenliğiyle işleyen bir yazardır.

** Paul Bannerman, tiroit kanserine yakalanmış beyaz, orta sınıftan gelme bir çevrebilimci ve aktivisttir.

*** Paul aldığı tedavi sonrası yaydığı radyoaktivite ailesi ve çevresi büyük tehlike oluşturmaya başlar.

**** Paul aile üyelerini ve çevresini bu radyoaktivitelerinden korumak adına anne, babasının evine taşınır ve durum ironik bir hal alır. Çünkü Paul nükleer enerji santrallerine karşı biriyken bu hastalıktan muzdarip olur.

***** Paul'un politik duruşundan kaynaklı nükleer enerji kaynaklarına olan karşı çıkışı ve bu hastalığa yakalanması diğer aile üyelerinin politik duruşlarında bir iç hesaplaşma ve sorgulamalaya gitmelerine sebebiyet verir.

****** Anne ve babasının yanına taşınması sonrası evde hizmetçi olan siyah kadın okuma yazma bilmeyen biridir. Anne ve baba her ne kadar Paul'u eve almışlar isede hâlâ bir ikilem içindeyken, hizmetçileri için herhangi bir önlem almamaktadırlar. Buda ırk ayrımını en sert biçimde ortaya koyan ve aile üyelerinin ikiyüzlülüğünü ortaya koyan noktalardandır.

******* Toplumsal ve bireysel ikiyüzlülükle örülü, ırk ayrımını görebeleceğiniz, hatta hissedebileceğiniz müthiş bir roman okuyun...

[Anita · Rating 1 out of 5]

This is the first book I have read, or barely read as is the case here, by this celebrated author. I was expecting gorgeous writing given her reputation as a writer. I was not impressed by her writing style which had the effect of slowing my reading now to very slow, and wondering if it had been poorly translated from Africaans. Michele, another reviewer who gave a 1 rating, nailed my sense of the writing in her review, "Am I supposed to be impressed by the writing style? Or in awe of a far superior intelligence?" That is what came across to me on every page, nearly with every sentence.

The main reason I did not continue reading this book, stopping at page 40, is that it read to me like a thinly disguised manifesto on all things political and societal in the author's native land, with a few characters sprinkled in who represent these issues, albeit very important issues. I thought I was going to read a novel about a family, but the issues presented, even early on, were so pointedly explicit and detailed that I did not feel remotely interested in following the shreds of the family story draped over these issues.

[Mihai · Rating 3 out of 5]

You can start reading it, thinking that the world has changed now, and that the eternal struggle, half of it against death and the other half against everybody's brother - Cain or Abel -has not stopped, has not had a definitive conclusion. So is this book, a meditation more than a story about what being human means over and over again: disease, isolation, divorce, family, friendship, fight, equality, all of them actual parts of what makes us us. If one follows only this, the continuously self aware characters who can see the world beyond the social curtain become snippets of the reader's mind. Unfortunately the ideal stops here as, and this the secret unsaid by the writer, the actors penned there are living a life in which money exist and are not a problem. Everybody there is either rich/middle class or well to do and also, as expected, everybody has issues. And this book is mostly about them.

Would I recommend it? Only as an example of how even if rich, you struggle too.

[Isabel · Rating 4 out of 5]

Nadine Gordimer tem um estilo de escrita simples, conciso e direto, mas ao mesmo tempo de uma grande intensidade.

São várias as questões abordadas como sociais, políticas, nucleares, ecológicas. E, apesar de ser um livro com apenas 157 páginas, a minha leitura não foi linear, ou seja, umas vezes tive que parar para refletir e outras tive que voltar a ler certos parágrafos.

No entanto, foi gratificante a reflexão de temas tão atuais, como se o livro tivesse sido escrito ontem.

Em nome do progresso e do bem estar da humanidade, os projetos e interesses políticos e economicos sobrepõem se aos da preservação da natureza. Projetos de construção de barragens no delta do Okavango.

Questões raciais pós- apartheid, adultério no feminino, trabalho sem vocação, profissionais que trabalham por vocação, adoção na velhice, cancro em idade jovem, quarentena, relações amorosas, Sida, violência na infância e lares de acolhimento.

Foi activista em causas como luta contra o anti-apartheid e Sida.

[Carlos Ghiraldelli · Rating 3 out of 5]

Momentos muito bons, com passagens longas/líricas/poéticas/filosóficas demais, que acabam por perder a dinâmica do livro. Minha vontade em ler um livro de cada país do mundo é conhecer um pouco de como é a vida nesses países (já que vai ser muito difícil conhecer todos eles pessoalmente) e isso eu consegui de uma certa forma com esse livro.

Contando a história da volta à vida "normal" de Paul depois de uma doença (que parece ser o personagem principal) a uma família de classe média alta na África do Sul, a autora traz diversas nuances do apartheid e de como o relacionamento entre negros e brancos ainda é delicado em diversas partes no país. No fim, a história é sensível, delicada e a gente se afeiçoa aos personagens, especialmente à esposa, à mãe e aos amigos de Paul.

[Poornima Vijayan · Rating 4 out of 5]

My first Gordimer book. And I loved it. Her writing style is amazing. Crisp sentences, even half constructed with more meaning than elaborately formed ones. The characters in this book, Father, Mother, Son, Wife- each with a little bit of their story, their independence and dependence. Paul who has cancer and has a cure that makes him radioactive. Lyn, the mother who plays the role of the mother suddenly to perfection, more now than all the years lived. Adrian, the father who has been playing father so long that he takes a break now. Benni, the wife with conflicting career goals to Paul. And they all live on. Do read.

[Shane · Rating 4 out of 5]

Yona ke yona, Nadine Gordimer excels in this often detatched narrative that is a culmination of a lot of her writing on South Africa. Moving from a local to a global context, the book uses a family's crises (a serious illness of the son, affairs of the loves) to weave a story that seems more relevant now than it would have when published in 2005, highlighting the environmental crisis while keeping strong the undercurrent of recent apartheid politics. The writing flows like flooded valleys, and slows to stark, karst passages, usually distant when it seems it should be most intense. A beautifully constructed novel about modern times.

[Natalie · Rating 4 out of 5]

I blame the misleading title and official synopsis for the poor ratings but the book deserves a lot more love. Gordimer has an interesting way with words, and she is a demanding writer with the many unexpected turns and large themes so please fight the urge to skim through or you’ll miss all its nuances. What this book is not: A story of one man with cancer. It’s a much more ambitious story about four people, two marriages, and their personal struggles within the context of much wider themes. And Gordimer tells it without being too preachy. Yes, it’s not perfect - the writing style can come off as experimental bordering on journal jots at times - but I appreciate the effort.

[Hedwig · Rating 2 out of 5]

Het was niet gemakkelijk om uit te lezen. We begonnen dit boek al voorlezend aan elkaar maar we zijn halverwege gestrand. Zoveel verschillende lijnen om te volgen en moeilijk om de hoofdpersonen in te voelen. Het verhaal blijft heel lang hangen bij Paul die een radioactieve therapie ondergaat en in de tussentijd bij zijn ouders verblijft. We krijgen het huwelijk van zijn ouders te zien, zijn huwelijk… wat beklijft? Uiteindelijk blijft er een treurig gevoel hangen; de mens is alleen. Is dit wat de schrijfster wil zeggen? Ik weet het echt niet.

[Lydia Ruth · Rating 4 out of 5]

An interesting and compact exploration of post-colonial environmentalism placed within a domestic context. I would suggest reading this in conjunction with Rob Nixon's 'Slow Violence and the Environmentalism of the Poor' as the main theme of interactions between capitalism and ecology - for me at least - was really highlighted by this study. If reading purely for pleasure then it's a good and though provoking read.

[Nadima El-khalafawi · Rating 2 out of 5]

I would rate this more like a 2.5. I enjoyed the actual story but I just couldn't get into her style of writing. I found my mind wandering and I would have to re-read a page several times because I was getting really bored at times. It was almost as if she was trying too hard to be artsy in the way that she wrote.