What do you think?
Rate this book
Innsirkling #1
Обкръжение
Карл Фруде Тилер е историк по образование. Дебютира през 2001 г. с романа "Склонът", за който получава редица награди и който през 2006 г. се нарежда сред най-хубавите произведения на норвежката литература според анкета на вестник "Дагбла". "Обкръжение" е третият роман на Тилер, в който са залегнали важни психологически и социологически въпроси. Както и в предишните си два романа, авторът използва техниката на повторението, връща се на един и същи епизод по няколко пъти и представяйки го от различни гледни точки, всеки път разкрива нови детайли. Всичко това придава на събитията напрежение, а на текста - многослойност. Особената структурна композиция на романа включва три части, съдържащи елементи от различни жанрове - повоествование в сегашно време, писма, спомени от първо лице, единствено число.
Действието се развива в родния град на автора - Намсус. Главният герой, Давид, е изгубил паметта си. Неговият психолог публикува във вестника снимката му с обява, която призовава всички, които го познават, да му помогнат да си спомни кой е. На молбата му се отзовават неговите приятели от младежките години - Юн и Силие - и вторият му баща, Арвид. Всеки от тях по свой начин възстановява идентичността на Давид чрез откъслечните си спомени.
Критиката сравнява романа с най-добрите произведения на Хенрик Ибсен и Ян Херстад.
Действието се развива в родния град на автора - Намсус. Главният герой, Давид, е изгубил паметта си. Неговият психолог публикува във вестника снимката му с обява, която призовава всички, които го познават, да му помогнат да си спомни кой е. На молбата му се отзовават неговите приятели от младежките години - Юн и Силие - и вторият му баща, Арвид. Всеки от тях по свой начин възстановява идентичността на Давид чрез откъслечните си спомени.
Критиката сравнява романа с най-добрите произведения на Хенрик Ибсен и Ян Херстад.
296 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 2007
124 people are currently reading
2853 people want to read
About the author
Carl Frode Tiller
18 books222 followersCarl Frode Tiller is a author, historian and musician. His works are in Nynorsk (lit. "New Norwegian"), one of the two official Norwegian standard languages . Tiller debuted in 2001 with the novel Skråninga (Downward Slope), which was recognized as the best initial work of the year with the Tarjei Vesaas' Debute Prize . Downward Slope was nominated for the Brageprisen (the Brage Prize is a juried award). In November 2007 Tiller was awarded the Brageprisen for his novel Innsirkling (Encirclement). In the fall of 2007 Innsirkling received the Norwegian Critics Prize for Literature and was nominated for the premiere Scandinavian literature prize, the Nordic Council's Literature Prize .
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 212 reviews
June 6, 2017
Fascinating concept for a novel, the first of a trilogy: the lead, David suffers from total amnesia, and his doctors ask various people in his life to write him about their experiences with him. It's wonderful watching David's (strange) character be assembled Rashomon style from the three narrators' letters, since the voices are so different, brilliantly embodied by Tiller's flexible use of first person.
The breakthrough here, I think, is that there are really SIX voices here, three reliable, three un-. We get honestly-told glimpses at each character's life, and see the contrasts between their struggles and the facades they send to David. Each narrator has their own ample motivation to lie to him, and the desire to knock the other two down. The first section, Jon's, is by far the strongest, with twists and turns I wasn't expecting, but the second, Arvid, has its own tragic element that's worth reading.
When this is good, it has the strangely addictive tendency of Knausgaard (the Norwegianness is apparent; lengthy pancake sequences are becoming de rigeur these days), but despite some (late draft, I assume, trying to get ahead of the problem) structural gymnastics, the third voice's dilemma is too similar to the first, and things start to drag as we trod already-told ground. After flying through the first half, I found myself stymied, but the fundamental mystery of David's identity will keep me reading.
That's a bit difficult, though. Unusually, the second volume has been translated by Haveland and is already out in the UK, but isn't due in the U.S. until April of next year. I've ordered it off Abe Books and will certainly keep up with it. It's a masterclass in character, despite its failures of tension.
The breakthrough here, I think, is that there are really SIX voices here, three reliable, three un-. We get honestly-told glimpses at each character's life, and see the contrasts between their struggles and the facades they send to David. Each narrator has their own ample motivation to lie to him, and the desire to knock the other two down. The first section, Jon's, is by far the strongest, with twists and turns I wasn't expecting, but the second, Arvid, has its own tragic element that's worth reading.
When this is good, it has the strangely addictive tendency of Knausgaard (the Norwegianness is apparent; lengthy pancake sequences are becoming de rigeur these days), but despite some (late draft, I assume, trying to get ahead of the problem) structural gymnastics, the third voice's dilemma is too similar to the first, and things start to drag as we trod already-told ground. After flying through the first half, I found myself stymied, but the fundamental mystery of David's identity will keep me reading.
That's a bit difficult, though. Unusually, the second volume has been translated by Haveland and is already out in the UK, but isn't due in the U.S. until April of next year. I've ordered it off Abe Books and will certainly keep up with it. It's a masterclass in character, despite its failures of tension.
May 3, 2020
David elveszítette emlékezetét. Nem tudjuk, miként, de higgyük el, az író ezt mondja. Davidot nem látjuk, ő - feltételezem - valahol a regény terén kívül igyekszik visszaemlékezni, szereti-e a tojásos lecsót, vagy sem. Ami a regény terén belül van, az a három ismerős, Arvid, a mostohaapa, valamint Silje és Jon, a két kamaszkori barát, ők próbálnak segíteni Davidnak, levelet fogalmaznak, hátha így előidézhetik az emlékezet rekonstrukcióját. Az olvasóban* azonban hamar kialakul a meggyőződés, hogy itt bizony nem Davidról tudunk meg sokat, hanem azokról, akik beszélnek. Ez az igazi írói cél, amit alátámasztanak a leveleket kísérő jelenidejű fejezetek is, amelyekben a felek D.u.** életébe nyerünk betekintést. Ezek éles kontrasztot alkotnak azzal az évekkel ezelőtti Arviddal, Siljével és Jonnal, akik a Davidnak írott levelekben szerepelnek. Ahogy éles a kontraszt aközött is, ahogy Arvid vagy Jon látja Siljét, ahogy Silje vagy Arvid látja Jont, ahogy Jon vagy Silje látja Arvidot, és persze ahogy valamennyien látják Davidot (hogy a felsorolásban nem szereplő mellékszereplőkről már ne is beszéljünk). Ettől a megsokszorozott szemszögkavalkádtól lesz olyan a regény, mint egy kaleidoszkóp: az ember forgatja, innen nézi, onnan nézi, aztán próbál valami általánosnak mondható következtetést levonni. De inkább ne vonjon. Mert nincs „igazi” David, akit rekonstruálni lehetne: számos különböző David van, mindenkinek megvan a saját Davidja, aki csak az övé. És a többiek identitása sem feltérképezhető, mindenki csak azt látja a másikból – tükör által homályosan -, amit az látni enged, vagy amit a szemlélő látni akar. Nem vagyunk megismerhetőek, nem vagyunk megfejthetőek. Annyifélék vagyunk, ahányan néznek minket.
(Kár, hogy Silje fejezete mind a tartalom, mind a szövegforma szintjén lefelé lóg ki a könyvből. Enyhén önismétlő, kissé túlgondolt. Az összkép mindazonáltal több mint érdekes: jó és izgalmas.)
*Most E/3-ban beszélek magamról (olvasó = én), még mielőtt valaki kikérné magának, hogy benne ugyan nem. Csak mondom.
**David utáni.
(Kár, hogy Silje fejezete mind a tartalom, mind a szövegforma szintjén lefelé lóg ki a könyvből. Enyhén önismétlő, kissé túlgondolt. Az összkép mindazonáltal több mint érdekes: jó és izgalmas.)
*Most E/3-ban beszélek magamról (olvasó = én), még mielőtt valaki kikérné magának, hogy benne ugyan nem. Csak mondom.
**David utáni.
February 2, 2022
4.5 stars
Carl Frode Tiller’s Encircling, the first volume of his Encircling Trilogy, is a haunting novel exploring the complexities of human relationships, the constructions and misconstructions of memory, and the self-destructive impulses that often poison one’s decisions and actions. While these themes are certainly not unique to Tiller (they of course circulate through much modern literature), Tiller constructs his novel in such a way as to create a cascading torrent of scenes and situations that leaves the reader mesmerized, if not at times bowled over.
The conceit of the novel establishes its unusual shape: a man named David has apparently suffered severe amnesia and the medical authorities have put out a call to those who knew him to write David letters describing their relationships with him and what they had done together. The novel has three parts, one for each of the characters who writes David; and within these sections, interspersed with the letters, are scenes from the three characters’ lives during the time they are writing. Two of the correspondents, Jon and Silje, are friends (and lovers) from David’s adolescence/young adulthood, and the third is David’s stepfather, Arvid.
As to be expected, conflicting portraits of David emerge, with each correspondent providing a limited view based on memories that may or may not be reliable, given that memories over time (as we all know) are constantly revised by one’s current biases and desires. Adding to the matter of unreliability is what we learn of the three correspondents during the time they are writing their letters: all are navigating through shattering crises which reveal how troubled and unstable their lives are. Writing David provides respite from their crises, but that only leads the reader to question how much their letters are deliberately shaped by their current problems rather than by their desire for fidelity.
If all this sounds complex, it is and it only gets more complex as the novel progresses. Startling revelations abound. Striking observations are everywhere, including one (of many) by Silje. An intense and passionate woman in her younger days but now mired in mid-life despair, Silje observes that a line she had previously written perfectly sums up her current situation: “She is a star, she shines, but her light died years ago.” Or this by Arvid, who in one of his letters to David, writes that “the quietly glowing embers are the warmest, David, not the raging flames, and so it is with happiness, too, it lies in the everyday things.”
Despite Arvid’s observation, there’s not much warmth in this novel, as characters seem constantly at odds with each other, constantly bickering and worse. Everybody seems on edge, everybody seems gritchy. But it’s not emotional warmth that carries the reader along in the novel but rather its stylistic brilliance and psychological suspense. The novel’s head-spinning ending only deepens the mystery and apprehension. Stay tuned for books two and three.
Carl Frode Tiller’s Encircling, the first volume of his Encircling Trilogy, is a haunting novel exploring the complexities of human relationships, the constructions and misconstructions of memory, and the self-destructive impulses that often poison one’s decisions and actions. While these themes are certainly not unique to Tiller (they of course circulate through much modern literature), Tiller constructs his novel in such a way as to create a cascading torrent of scenes and situations that leaves the reader mesmerized, if not at times bowled over.
The conceit of the novel establishes its unusual shape: a man named David has apparently suffered severe amnesia and the medical authorities have put out a call to those who knew him to write David letters describing their relationships with him and what they had done together. The novel has three parts, one for each of the characters who writes David; and within these sections, interspersed with the letters, are scenes from the three characters’ lives during the time they are writing. Two of the correspondents, Jon and Silje, are friends (and lovers) from David’s adolescence/young adulthood, and the third is David’s stepfather, Arvid.
As to be expected, conflicting portraits of David emerge, with each correspondent providing a limited view based on memories that may or may not be reliable, given that memories over time (as we all know) are constantly revised by one’s current biases and desires. Adding to the matter of unreliability is what we learn of the three correspondents during the time they are writing their letters: all are navigating through shattering crises which reveal how troubled and unstable their lives are. Writing David provides respite from their crises, but that only leads the reader to question how much their letters are deliberately shaped by their current problems rather than by their desire for fidelity.
If all this sounds complex, it is and it only gets more complex as the novel progresses. Startling revelations abound. Striking observations are everywhere, including one (of many) by Silje. An intense and passionate woman in her younger days but now mired in mid-life despair, Silje observes that a line she had previously written perfectly sums up her current situation: “She is a star, she shines, but her light died years ago.” Or this by Arvid, who in one of his letters to David, writes that “the quietly glowing embers are the warmest, David, not the raging flames, and so it is with happiness, too, it lies in the everyday things.”
Despite Arvid’s observation, there’s not much warmth in this novel, as characters seem constantly at odds with each other, constantly bickering and worse. Everybody seems on edge, everybody seems gritchy. But it’s not emotional warmth that carries the reader along in the novel but rather its stylistic brilliance and psychological suspense. The novel’s head-spinning ending only deepens the mystery and apprehension. Stay tuned for books two and three.
July 3, 2017
You know what it's like to be in the room when a married couple -- most likely your parents -- argues on and on and on about the most inane minutiae? There's a bit of that in play in this book and boy, howdy, does it take its toll as the book drags on.
The concept is promising, anyway. Guy loses his memory. Three different people answer the call to write letters with common memories in hopes that these will provide the "nudge" needed to bring it all back. Amnesia is such a mysterious thing, after all.
This book, impossibly the first of a trilogy (OK, not impossibly--scarily), gives us three different narrators, the amnesiac David's good friend and possible lover (who's the unreliable narrator, after all?), Jon, followed by amnesiac David's stepfather Arvid, followed by amnesiac David and buddy Jon's common friend, Silje. She's also David's girlfriend for a while (or possible girlfriend, if she's to be believed).
These three sections are further bifurcated by parts that serve as the letter to David and parts that are just snapshots from the narrator-of-the-moment's present life (the two in different fonts). In all three cases, nothing big happens. Like I said, all day-in-the-life stuff, much of it filled with bickering and endless talking and self-identified armchair psychological diagnosing as everyone tells everyone else exactly what's wrong with them.
In the final section (toughest of all, maybe), there's actually a 4-page argument between Silje and her husband over what's for dinner. She's serving waffles, damn it, and he finds that beneath him. Strangely, though, he's had PANCAKES for dinner before, he just won't put up with waffles, even if they have the same ingredients as pancakes, and what time is it again?
So, yeah, if you've ever listened to long-married couples make mountains out of molehills, then you might prepare for over 300 pages of molehill expansion in this book. Or not.
The concept is promising, anyway. Guy loses his memory. Three different people answer the call to write letters with common memories in hopes that these will provide the "nudge" needed to bring it all back. Amnesia is such a mysterious thing, after all.
This book, impossibly the first of a trilogy (OK, not impossibly--scarily), gives us three different narrators, the amnesiac David's good friend and possible lover (who's the unreliable narrator, after all?), Jon, followed by amnesiac David's stepfather Arvid, followed by amnesiac David and buddy Jon's common friend, Silje. She's also David's girlfriend for a while (or possible girlfriend, if she's to be believed).
These three sections are further bifurcated by parts that serve as the letter to David and parts that are just snapshots from the narrator-of-the-moment's present life (the two in different fonts). In all three cases, nothing big happens. Like I said, all day-in-the-life stuff, much of it filled with bickering and endless talking and self-identified armchair psychological diagnosing as everyone tells everyone else exactly what's wrong with them.
In the final section (toughest of all, maybe), there's actually a 4-page argument between Silje and her husband over what's for dinner. She's serving waffles, damn it, and he finds that beneath him. Strangely, though, he's had PANCAKES for dinner before, he just won't put up with waffles, even if they have the same ingredients as pancakes, and what time is it again?
So, yeah, if you've ever listened to long-married couples make mountains out of molehills, then you might prepare for over 300 pages of molehill expansion in this book. Or not.
February 5, 2018
I find myself completely conflicted regarding how I feel about this first instalment of the Encircling trilogy. It’s a fantastic premise for a story. David is a man apparently suffering from amnesia. His doctor's ask that people who know him write down their memories of him with the idea that these will help him regain his memory. What we then get is three people recording their memories of David, one at at time, with the letters they write mixed together with their own personal life. It rapidly becomes clear that all may not be quite a simple as it appears at first. Cracks appear as one narrator's story contradicts or questions another’s. Nothing is resolved in this first instalment, but the scene is set. Alongside letters to David, the personal lives of these people reveal the realities of family life. It has to be said the focus is almost entirely on the way family life goes wrong. Marital difficulties, kids struggling to come to terms with their sexuality, terminal illnesses - all these play a part.
But there is a lot of interesting things happening. Jon's story asks us how we can believe a view of David when people are so continually adjusting their behaviour according to how they think others will interpret their actions. Arvid's story asks us how real the picture we have of a person is when so much of what that person is is shaped by the actions of others not just themselves. Silje's story asks us how we can believe a story about a person when it is so simple to build an alternative story that fits the facts but is completely wrong.
This all sounds fascinating. And as an idea, it is. I felt hugely let down by the execution. Firstly, all the people in this story are incredibly unpleasant. That’s not a reason for necessarily disliking a book, because unpleasant people can be the most interesting ones. But I could not engage with any of the protagonists here. Secondly, and more fundamentally, I found the writing style very aggravating. I don’t want to give details of why because there are things that annoyed me that others may not be bothered by unless I draw attention to them and that could spoil the book for them. But there are writing tics here that had the same effect on me as the multiple, multiple repetition of "says he, Simon” (or similar) in Coetzee’s Childhood/Schooldays of Jesus which I really could not cope with. My wife kept asking me why I was groaning so much as I read the book and I found myself scanning down pages to see if it was all going to happen again (which it almost invariably did).
So, lots of stars for idea and subject matter. But lots of negative stars for style. I’m the first to acknowledge that the style thing is personal so it may well just be me that is annoyed by it.
The ideas presented mean that the second and third volumes have an appeal, but I genuinely don't think I can bring myself to go through another two books like that so I’ll have to look for plot summaries on the Internet or something like that.
But there is a lot of interesting things happening. Jon's story asks us how we can believe a view of David when people are so continually adjusting their behaviour according to how they think others will interpret their actions. Arvid's story asks us how real the picture we have of a person is when so much of what that person is is shaped by the actions of others not just themselves. Silje's story asks us how we can believe a story about a person when it is so simple to build an alternative story that fits the facts but is completely wrong.
This all sounds fascinating. And as an idea, it is. I felt hugely let down by the execution. Firstly, all the people in this story are incredibly unpleasant. That’s not a reason for necessarily disliking a book, because unpleasant people can be the most interesting ones. But I could not engage with any of the protagonists here. Secondly, and more fundamentally, I found the writing style very aggravating. I don’t want to give details of why because there are things that annoyed me that others may not be bothered by unless I draw attention to them and that could spoil the book for them. But there are writing tics here that had the same effect on me as the multiple, multiple repetition of "says he, Simon” (or similar) in Coetzee’s Childhood/Schooldays of Jesus which I really could not cope with. My wife kept asking me why I was groaning so much as I read the book and I found myself scanning down pages to see if it was all going to happen again (which it almost invariably did).
So, lots of stars for idea and subject matter. But lots of negative stars for style. I’m the first to acknowledge that the style thing is personal so it may well just be me that is annoyed by it.
The ideas presented mean that the second and third volumes have an appeal, but I genuinely don't think I can bring myself to go through another two books like that so I’ll have to look for plot summaries on the Internet or something like that.
February 9, 2022
It's hard to review a book that you really enjoy, and this is no exception. I honestly think it's best to know little about Encircling before you start it, because this book surprised me, charmed me, impressed me, and then threw me for a loop at the end. If you like literary fiction, novels in translation, and/or great character studies, this novel is for you. If you don't like any of those things (why?) and you just want a great story with several unreliable narrators, this novel is for you.
If you aren't convinced by this, the New Yorker agrees with me - there was review of the series published in early January 2022. (My very hip husband would probably like me to note that he bought the first book in Norway in 2018. He has been waiting impatiently for the sequels to be translated, and for me to finally read the trilogy. You're welcome!)
STOP READING THIS REVIEW AND READ THE BOOK!
This centers on David, who has lost his memory in middle age. To recover his personality and past, his psychologist puts out a news story asking for friends to write to him. Three people who were previously close to him answer, with each of them taking a section of the book. The writing is excellent, and we move through three distinct characters with their own styles. In each section, the character writes first-person letters to David, and then we as the readers see the character's life at the time in third person. This structure is really successful: it becomes clear who's interpreting events differently, and who might be only partially remembering (or maybe embellishing the truth).
Despite how much I enjoyed the book, I think this was probably four stars until I got to the ending, which absolutely walloped me. It made me want to start over from the beginning again. Tiller is a truly gifted writer and the translation is excellent.
Other short, but spoilery, thoughts:
Final note: According to his author bio, Carl Frode Tiller was in a band called Kong Ler. I found them on Spotify. All of it is in Norwegian and it rocks. I listen to it on loop while I am doing work because I can't understand any of the lyrics. They only have 7 monthly listeners ... which means that I am a Kong Ler superfan!!!
If you aren't convinced by this, the New Yorker agrees with me - there was review of the series published in early January 2022. (My very hip husband would probably like me to note that he bought the first book in Norway in 2018. He has been waiting impatiently for the sequels to be translated, and for me to finally read the trilogy. You're welcome!)
STOP READING THIS REVIEW AND READ THE BOOK!
This centers on David, who has lost his memory in middle age. To recover his personality and past, his psychologist puts out a news story asking for friends to write to him. Three people who were previously close to him answer, with each of them taking a section of the book. The writing is excellent, and we move through three distinct characters with their own styles. In each section, the character writes first-person letters to David, and then we as the readers see the character's life at the time in third person. This structure is really successful: it becomes clear who's interpreting events differently, and who might be only partially remembering (or maybe embellishing the truth).
Despite how much I enjoyed the book, I think this was probably four stars until I got to the ending, which absolutely walloped me. It made me want to start over from the beginning again. Tiller is a truly gifted writer and the translation is excellent.
Other short, but spoilery, thoughts:
Final note: According to his author bio, Carl Frode Tiller was in a band called Kong Ler. I found them on Spotify. All of it is in Norwegian and it rocks. I listen to it on loop while I am doing work because I can't understand any of the lyrics. They only have 7 monthly listeners ... which means that I am a Kong Ler superfan!!!
September 15, 2025
Wat een meesterlijke ontleding van gevoelens en situaties! Het verhaal zit ook goed ineen. Soms leek het mij of er wat inconsistenties waren in het verhaal zoals bijvoorbeeld een ongeloofwaardige karakterevolutie gedurende het verloop van de jaren. Desondanks toch een zeer goed boek dat ik graag gelezen heb.
August 15, 2025
Jeg har aldrig læst så gode skænderier før. Aldrig. Der er en enorm psykologisk dybde og tyngde bag hvert eneste giftige ord i denne hadske perle.
David har mistet sin hukommelse, så hans venner og familie skriver breve til ham, hvor de forsøger at fortælle ham, hvem han var (og hvem de selv var). Samtidig får vi også indblik i brevskrivernes liv som det er nu. Råt og upoleret – fyldt med kontroverser.
Det resulterer i en fuldstændig magisk eksplosiv roman, der er spækket med utroværdige fortællere, der pynter på dem selv, deres relationer og deres liv i brevene, men bliver afsløret i hverdagen.
Samtidig får vi indkredset (wow, det er jo titlen!?) David og finder ud af, at han absolut ikke er nogen helgenkarakter. Det hele er modbydeligt komplekst, menneskeligt mismodigt og helt afsindigt godt!
David har mistet sin hukommelse, så hans venner og familie skriver breve til ham, hvor de forsøger at fortælle ham, hvem han var (og hvem de selv var). Samtidig får vi også indblik i brevskrivernes liv som det er nu. Råt og upoleret – fyldt med kontroverser.
Det resulterer i en fuldstændig magisk eksplosiv roman, der er spækket med utroværdige fortællere, der pynter på dem selv, deres relationer og deres liv i brevene, men bliver afsløret i hverdagen.
Samtidig får vi indkredset (wow, det er jo titlen!?) David og finder ud af, at han absolut ikke er nogen helgenkarakter. Det hele er modbydeligt komplekst, menneskeligt mismodigt og helt afsindigt godt!
November 18, 2017
The underlying premise of this first book, in the trilogy, is excellent. Ostensibly amnesia leads to various 'witnesses' to give their personal account of David's life as a young man.
What is factual and what is embellished does not get revealed by the end of this book one.
Jon, Arvid and Silje are the primary narrators, each given a turn to recall families and events from a particular time.
Jon is particularly well drawn, with numerous phobias, secrets, anxieties. Silje's perplexing dialogue with her husband, Egil, is just that: perplexing.
The realities of family life are explored by Tiller. Marital strife, sexuality and uncertainty, sibling rivalry, old age and illness. It all adds up to a rather stark appraisal of small town life.
Encircling keeps the readers interest largely as a consequence of what is yet to be revealed.
I certainly expect to read part two in the near future.
What is factual and what is embellished does not get revealed by the end of this book one.
Jon, Arvid and Silje are the primary narrators, each given a turn to recall families and events from a particular time.
Jon is particularly well drawn, with numerous phobias, secrets, anxieties. Silje's perplexing dialogue with her husband, Egil, is just that: perplexing.
The realities of family life are explored by Tiller. Marital strife, sexuality and uncertainty, sibling rivalry, old age and illness. It all adds up to a rather stark appraisal of small town life.
Encircling keeps the readers interest largely as a consequence of what is yet to be revealed.
I certainly expect to read part two in the near future.
May 13, 2025
grāmata, kas pilna sāpīgu dusmu un postoša niknuma. katra tuvošanās kā mēģinājums pārraut membrānu, kas cilvēkus attur vienu no otra, lai gan patiesā barjera, kas mums katram ir pārvarama, esam mēs paši. un otru zināt līdz galam - tā paliek neiespējamā misija. par sapratni nemaz nerunājot.
July 8, 2017
From my USA Today review
*
Traditional genre novels are so often about the moments when love, no matter how profound, isn’t enough to keep us safe. This Norwegian novel, the first in a trilogy that has drawn wide acclaim in Europe, is a beautiful meditation on the subtler ways we fail each other, our quieter forms of grief. It begins with a failing rocker, Jon, bolting from the band that looks like his last chance, and then composing a letter to the companion of his adolescent years, David. Why is he narrating their history? It turns out David cannot remember his life – in the book’s next two sections, his stepfather and a second friend, Silje, write similar accounts. Characters appear in radically different light in each, anecdotes taking on new meaning through new tellings. And the mystery of David’s own path lingers. It’s thrilling to know two more books will arrive to tell its story.
*
Traditional genre novels are so often about the moments when love, no matter how profound, isn’t enough to keep us safe. This Norwegian novel, the first in a trilogy that has drawn wide acclaim in Europe, is a beautiful meditation on the subtler ways we fail each other, our quieter forms of grief. It begins with a failing rocker, Jon, bolting from the band that looks like his last chance, and then composing a letter to the companion of his adolescent years, David. Why is he narrating their history? It turns out David cannot remember his life – in the book’s next two sections, his stepfather and a second friend, Silje, write similar accounts. Characters appear in radically different light in each, anecdotes taking on new meaning through new tellings. And the mystery of David’s own path lingers. It’s thrilling to know two more books will arrive to tell its story.
June 13, 2025
Es laikam saprotu kāpēc Harijs Hols (tas, no Jū Nesbē) dzer.
Kādu laiku negribēšu lasīt norvēģus.
Nospiedoši smagi.
Kādu laiku negribēšu lasīt norvēģus.
Nospiedoši smagi.
May 12, 2019
Umiddelbare tankar om den første boka i trilogien: ”Innsirkling” – av Carl Frode Tiller
Litt om ”konseptet” og plottet:
- David har mista hukommelsen etter ei ulykke, og i den forbindelse blir folka rundt han oppmuntra til å skrive brev til han, for å stimulere minnene, for å gje han eit bilete av kven han er. I boka følger vi tre menneske som har kjent David – ungdomsvenene Jon og Silje, og stefaren Arvid.
- Boka er delt i tre – og vil følgjer desse tre bekjente i kvar sin del av boka. Vi følger dei her og no (juni/juli 2006) - og får dermed sjå korleis dei har det, kva dei driv med, kva liva deirar handlar om osv… og denne ”no-tida” blir broten av med jamne mellomrom av utdrag av brevet dei har skrive til David – brev med tankar og minne om David.
DET EG LIKTE GODT:
- originalt og ”nytt” konsept for ei bok; noko eg ikkje har lese liknanande av før
- ein enorm menneskeleg g psykologisk forståelse og innsikt frå forfattaraen si side; ein kjenner igjen dei menneskelege karakteristikka; dei gode, dei vonde, dei flaue, tabu-tankane, ”galne” tankar.
- Spennande og tankevekkande
- interessant å sjå korleis David blir måla fram av dei andre sine tankar og minne. Og dette får ein til å sjølv reflektere litt på kven en er – korleis andre ser ein vs korleis ein ser på seg sjølv.
- det er ikkje noko fasit eller svar her på kven David er. Lesaren får sjølv danne seg eit bilete og eg ser føre meg at ingen sit igjen med heilt det same inntrykket av mannen David.
- Nettopp dette (punktet over) gjer også at dette er ei bok eg kan få lyst til å lese igjen seinare; for eg tipper at eg ved ein ny gjennomlesing vil tillegge karakteren David endå nokre nye karaktertrekk.
-
DET EG LIKTE LITT MINDRE:
- boka tek føre seg tre svært ulike karakterar, og alle desse tre skal skrive brev; då sakna eg ein tydelegare skillnad mellom karakterane. Skrivestilen er svært lik, språket og ordvalet er også veldig likt. For meg blei det tydeleg at det var ein forfattar som har skrive breva og ikkje karakterene i boka – for, treffer ein verkeleg på tre ”tilfeldige” menneske i den store verda som skriver så bra og som formulerer seg så likt?
- Dette samme poenget– språkvalet og formuleringar – er også noko eg syntes ødela litt når det gjaldt å følgje karakterane i no-tid; også her er skrivestilen veldig lik for kvar karakter. Måten tankane deirar blir skildra på, måten kjenseler kjem fram på .. det er så likt hos alle dei tre. Det blir nok ekstra synleg fordi det er skrive i første person. Alle tre karakterane fortel frå ”eg”-perspektivet, og hos alle tre er det tatt i bruk same slags verkemiddel – mellom anna gjentakningar og repetisjon.
For min del gjorde dette at det blei vanskelegare å sjå skilandene mellom dei tre karakterane; dei framstår (for meg) som likare enn dei er. Språket gjer at dei framstår ganske like, medan innhaldet og det som kjem fram gjer at ein veit at dei overhodet ikkje er like i det heile tatt.
- over tid; nesten tre hundre sider – blei det litt slitsamt å lese dette. Lange setningar, utallige komma. Skjønner jo at dette er virkemiddel og det fungerer (for det meste) veldig fint for å visekorleis dei ulike tankane utspelar seg, korleis assossiasjonar dukkar opp osv. Men når det heile vegen er skrive slik, som eit oppgulp av tankar og kjensler, blir det rett og slett litt for mykje av det gode. I mi audmjuke meining ville det gjort seg godt om det innimellom blei brote litt opp, at vi som lesarar i blant kunne få servert nokre kortare setningar, noko litt meir presist enn ”berre” lange tankebanar.
Litt om ”konseptet” og plottet:
- David har mista hukommelsen etter ei ulykke, og i den forbindelse blir folka rundt han oppmuntra til å skrive brev til han, for å stimulere minnene, for å gje han eit bilete av kven han er. I boka følger vi tre menneske som har kjent David – ungdomsvenene Jon og Silje, og stefaren Arvid.
- Boka er delt i tre – og vil følgjer desse tre bekjente i kvar sin del av boka. Vi følger dei her og no (juni/juli 2006) - og får dermed sjå korleis dei har det, kva dei driv med, kva liva deirar handlar om osv… og denne ”no-tida” blir broten av med jamne mellomrom av utdrag av brevet dei har skrive til David – brev med tankar og minne om David.
DET EG LIKTE GODT:
- originalt og ”nytt” konsept for ei bok; noko eg ikkje har lese liknanande av før
- ein enorm menneskeleg g psykologisk forståelse og innsikt frå forfattaraen si side; ein kjenner igjen dei menneskelege karakteristikka; dei gode, dei vonde, dei flaue, tabu-tankane, ”galne” tankar.
- Spennande og tankevekkande
- interessant å sjå korleis David blir måla fram av dei andre sine tankar og minne. Og dette får ein til å sjølv reflektere litt på kven en er – korleis andre ser ein vs korleis ein ser på seg sjølv.
- det er ikkje noko fasit eller svar her på kven David er. Lesaren får sjølv danne seg eit bilete og eg ser føre meg at ingen sit igjen med heilt det same inntrykket av mannen David.
- Nettopp dette (punktet over) gjer også at dette er ei bok eg kan få lyst til å lese igjen seinare; for eg tipper at eg ved ein ny gjennomlesing vil tillegge karakteren David endå nokre nye karaktertrekk.
-
DET EG LIKTE LITT MINDRE:
- boka tek føre seg tre svært ulike karakterar, og alle desse tre skal skrive brev; då sakna eg ein tydelegare skillnad mellom karakterane. Skrivestilen er svært lik, språket og ordvalet er også veldig likt. For meg blei det tydeleg at det var ein forfattar som har skrive breva og ikkje karakterene i boka – for, treffer ein verkeleg på tre ”tilfeldige” menneske i den store verda som skriver så bra og som formulerer seg så likt?
- Dette samme poenget– språkvalet og formuleringar – er også noko eg syntes ødela litt når det gjaldt å følgje karakterane i no-tid; også her er skrivestilen veldig lik for kvar karakter. Måten tankane deirar blir skildra på, måten kjenseler kjem fram på .. det er så likt hos alle dei tre. Det blir nok ekstra synleg fordi det er skrive i første person. Alle tre karakterane fortel frå ”eg”-perspektivet, og hos alle tre er det tatt i bruk same slags verkemiddel – mellom anna gjentakningar og repetisjon.
For min del gjorde dette at det blei vanskelegare å sjå skilandene mellom dei tre karakterane; dei framstår (for meg) som likare enn dei er. Språket gjer at dei framstår ganske like, medan innhaldet og det som kjem fram gjer at ein veit at dei overhodet ikkje er like i det heile tatt.
- over tid; nesten tre hundre sider – blei det litt slitsamt å lese dette. Lange setningar, utallige komma. Skjønner jo at dette er virkemiddel og det fungerer (for det meste) veldig fint for å visekorleis dei ulike tankane utspelar seg, korleis assossiasjonar dukkar opp osv. Men når det heile vegen er skrive slik, som eit oppgulp av tankar og kjensler, blir det rett og slett litt for mykje av det gode. I mi audmjuke meining ville det gjort seg godt om det innimellom blei brote litt opp, at vi som lesarar i blant kunne få servert nokre kortare setningar, noko litt meir presist enn ”berre” lange tankebanar.
November 15, 2023
La historia comienza con Jon en una gira de su grupo de rock, sus sarcasmos hacia los lugares donde van, y una crisis inesperada.
Con esta apertura, comienza a armarse la estructura de la novela; una historia que gira en parte en torno al ausente David, rodeándolo de memoria, un cerco que pretende rellenar el cerco de su olvido.
Cada uno de los tres narradores contará, como a un diario personal, su día a día, su presente, que será presentado en forma alternada con las cartas que le escriben a David: Jon, su amigo de la adolescencia; Arvid, su padrastro, pastor religioso; y Silje, su primera novia.
De esta forma irán alternando las situaciones de su vida actual, con un período del pasado en relación con David, con las perspectivas y contradicciones de cada uno de ellos.
Los diálogos que se cuentan sobre la vida cotidiana, a través de un discurso indirecto (reported speech) presenta una excelente recreación de la vida cotidiana y sus conflictos familiares e interpersonales, y constituye uno de los puntos fuertes de la novela.
“Estoy empezando a darme cuenta de algo, dice Egil. Ya iba siendo hora, coño, le digo y oigo lo triunfante que suena mi voz, el final de mi frase casi me sale en falsete y miro a los ojos, furiosa, y Egil me mira de frente”.
Una novela muy bien elaborada, en la que el contenido es más relevante que el final, abierto a la interpretación (o a una segunda parte).
Con esta apertura, comienza a armarse la estructura de la novela; una historia que gira en parte en torno al ausente David, rodeándolo de memoria, un cerco que pretende rellenar el cerco de su olvido.
Cada uno de los tres narradores contará, como a un diario personal, su día a día, su presente, que será presentado en forma alternada con las cartas que le escriben a David: Jon, su amigo de la adolescencia; Arvid, su padrastro, pastor religioso; y Silje, su primera novia.
De esta forma irán alternando las situaciones de su vida actual, con un período del pasado en relación con David, con las perspectivas y contradicciones de cada uno de ellos.
Los diálogos que se cuentan sobre la vida cotidiana, a través de un discurso indirecto (reported speech) presenta una excelente recreación de la vida cotidiana y sus conflictos familiares e interpersonales, y constituye uno de los puntos fuertes de la novela.
“Estoy empezando a darme cuenta de algo, dice Egil. Ya iba siendo hora, coño, le digo y oigo lo triunfante que suena mi voz, el final de mi frase casi me sale en falsete y miro a los ojos, furiosa, y Egil me mira de frente”.
Una novela muy bien elaborada, en la que el contenido es más relevante que el final, abierto a la interpretación (o a una segunda parte).
tasted
March 19, 2018This was simply too Norwegian for me, that is, too naturalistic, too, for example, wedded to making dialogue just as boring as it is in real life.
May 16, 2025
Varbūt starp dusmām un naidu tomēr ir robeža – tā ir apzinātība. Dusmas nāk kā vilnis, bet tikai tad, kad ļaujam tām palikt un indēt domas, tās kļūst par naidu.
February 22, 2021
Februar: Bok 2, anbefalt av Katarina.
David mister hukommelsen. Historien hans sirkles inn ved flere brev fra venner og bekjente. Alle med sin versjon om hvem David var. En spennende bok om hva som utgjør en person, og om hvilke detaljer som definerer deg. Boken startet veldig tregt og først halvveis inn begynte den å ta seg opp. Noen personer er så irriterende og kjedelig å lese om at de trekker boken noe ned.
I mangel av stjerner med desimaltall får den hele 4 stjerner.
David mister hukommelsen. Historien hans sirkles inn ved flere brev fra venner og bekjente. Alle med sin versjon om hvem David var. En spennende bok om hva som utgjør en person, og om hvilke detaljer som definerer deg. Boken startet veldig tregt og først halvveis inn begynte den å ta seg opp. Noen personer er så irriterende og kjedelig å lese om at de trekker boken noe ned.
I mangel av stjerner med desimaltall får den hele 4 stjerner.
March 29, 2017
An incredibly well written novel that made me question everything-identity, memory, truth. It sounds heavy, but it is so well written I didn't get bogged down. Great discussion in my book club about this one. We can't wait for the second book to be published in English!
January 6, 2025
(4:an kan mycket väl komma att höjas, men med tanke på att det kommer fler delar är det svårt att se detta som ett färdigt verk och jag börjar därför med ett lite konservativt betyg även om det kliar i fingrarna att sätta en 5:a.)
Flo förlag har varit sällsynt enhetliga i sin utgivning, dels i val av titlar och författare men kanske ännu mer i den fysiska formen. Med "Inringning" gör man för första gången avsteg från den och låter boken vara några centimeter större vilket på sätt och vis är passande för innehållet här är också stort.
Premissen är att en man, David, har förlorat minnet och att bekanta via en tidningsannons uppmuntras att skriva brev till honom för att hjälpa hans minne på traven. I den här boken, som är den första av tre, är det tre personer som antar uppmaningen: barndomsvännen Jon, styvpappan Arvid och ungdomsflickvännen Silje.
Eftersom jag själv också heter David är jag väl medveten om att namnet betyder "den älskade", och det är knappast valt av en slump. De tre brevskrivarna har alla haft nära och kärleksfulla relationer till David, men den ligger i alla tre fall många år tillbaka i tiden.
Parallellt med breven får vi följa de tre personerna dagarna innan de sätter sig ner för att skriva, och de är för samtliga färgade av dramatik. Den situation de befinner sig i färgar såklart vad och hur de skriver, och det är tre motstridiga bilder av såväl David som av sig själva och varandra som framträder. Det är såklart en av poängerna här: hur ringer man in en person och vems sanning litar man på?
Skildringarna av alla tre är oerhört välskrivna och engagerande, varje person hade i princip kunnat bli sin egna roman. Breven blir av nödvändighet ganska självcentrerade och som läsare är David även vid romanens slut en person man fortfarande har en mycket vag bild av.
Även om det är tre väldigt olika röster som kommer till tals händer det några gånger att de lånar varandras uttryck. Det kan såklart vara författaren som lyser igenom men jag är böjd att tro att det snarare är en ledtråd till vad som komma skall.
Det är helt enkelt en otroligt bra roman. Att den kommer från Norge är bara logiskt för visst kan man lätt se hur detta verk kommer ur samma mylla som t.ex. Knausgård och Fosse.
Hur man ska kunna vänta till slutet av sommaren med att läsa nästa del är annars den största frågan. Helst skulle jag ge mig i kast med den direkt.
Flo förlag har varit sällsynt enhetliga i sin utgivning, dels i val av titlar och författare men kanske ännu mer i den fysiska formen. Med "Inringning" gör man för första gången avsteg från den och låter boken vara några centimeter större vilket på sätt och vis är passande för innehållet här är också stort.
Premissen är att en man, David, har förlorat minnet och att bekanta via en tidningsannons uppmuntras att skriva brev till honom för att hjälpa hans minne på traven. I den här boken, som är den första av tre, är det tre personer som antar uppmaningen: barndomsvännen Jon, styvpappan Arvid och ungdomsflickvännen Silje.
Eftersom jag själv också heter David är jag väl medveten om att namnet betyder "den älskade", och det är knappast valt av en slump. De tre brevskrivarna har alla haft nära och kärleksfulla relationer till David, men den ligger i alla tre fall många år tillbaka i tiden.
Parallellt med breven får vi följa de tre personerna dagarna innan de sätter sig ner för att skriva, och de är för samtliga färgade av dramatik. Den situation de befinner sig i färgar såklart vad och hur de skriver, och det är tre motstridiga bilder av såväl David som av sig själva och varandra som framträder. Det är såklart en av poängerna här: hur ringer man in en person och vems sanning litar man på?
Skildringarna av alla tre är oerhört välskrivna och engagerande, varje person hade i princip kunnat bli sin egna roman. Breven blir av nödvändighet ganska självcentrerade och som läsare är David även vid romanens slut en person man fortfarande har en mycket vag bild av.
Även om det är tre väldigt olika röster som kommer till tals händer det några gånger att de lånar varandras uttryck. Det kan såklart vara författaren som lyser igenom men jag är böjd att tro att det snarare är en ledtråd till vad som komma skall.
Det är helt enkelt en otroligt bra roman. Att den kommer från Norge är bara logiskt för visst kan man lätt se hur detta verk kommer ur samma mylla som t.ex. Knausgård och Fosse.
Hur man ska kunna vänta till slutet av sommaren med att läsa nästa del är annars den största frågan. Helst skulle jag ge mig i kast med den direkt.
December 29, 2021
Den er så fantastisk👏🏼
May 21, 2025
Trīs stāsti un, iespējams, trīs patiesības. Iemesls, kādēļ mēs vienu cilvēku pieredzam un piedzīvojam tik dažādi, ir mūsos, mūsu pieredzē un varbūt arī tajā, kā viņš pieredz un piedzīvo katru no mums.
July 12, 2017
One of the most astonishing novels I've read in a while. The conceit alone is brilliant (a guy loses all memory of who he is, so those who have known him write letters to him to tell him who he is), but the execution was breathtaking. And up unto the penultimate paragraph, I had no idea how he was going to pull it all together. But like Alice Munro in her best stories, he pulled it together in that last paragraph in a way that was surprising yet inevitable.
March 16, 2018
Tja, skjønner jo hypen. God, men vond, med en herlig slutt
July 16, 2025
Carl Frode Tillers gengivelse af personernes indre monologer og deres refleksive selvbevidsthed er så vanvittigt raffineret.
Indkredsning burde simpelthen være pligtlægsning på Nordisk/Dansk-studiet. Det er upålidelighed, du-fortælling og pårørende-fortælling til perfektion.
Hver gang man tror man har regnet fortællerens upålidelighed ud, bekender de den selv i selvransagelse. Tiller skaber et psykologisk toplans-drama, hvor hver eftertanke er mindst ligeså interessant som hver replik der leveres.
Peak Sommerferie-læsning!
Indkredsning burde simpelthen være pligtlægsning på Nordisk/Dansk-studiet. Det er upålidelighed, du-fortælling og pårørende-fortælling til perfektion.
Hver gang man tror man har regnet fortællerens upålidelighed ud, bekender de den selv i selvransagelse. Tiller skaber et psykologisk toplans-drama, hvor hver eftertanke er mindst ligeså interessant som hver replik der leveres.
Peak Sommerferie-læsning!
January 13, 2025
Inringningen är ett personporträtt om David som tappat minnet. De som ska fylla i hans minne är de som tidigare stått honom nära: en gammal vän, en styvfar, en gammal flickvän. Alla med olika perspektiv på huvudpersonen. Det är ett originellt grepp som skapar spänning i det skav som uppstår mellan de olika personernas bild av David. Relationerna ser olika ut från olika håll. Var styvfadern kall och hård, eller vänskaplig och förlåtande, som han själv vill få det till. Vem älskade egentligen vem?
Boken tar också frågan om hur mycket vi påverkas av andras syn på oss till sin spets. Hur blir en person vars minne bara fylls av andras bilder och känslor över livets skeenden? Det kanske man får svaret på i del två.
Boken tar också frågan om hur mycket vi påverkas av andras syn på oss till sin spets. Hur blir en person vars minne bara fylls av andras bilder och känslor över livets skeenden? Det kanske man får svaret på i del två.
August 6, 2025
En bok som jag initialt blev mycket intresserad av för dess tematik, men lite besviken på då jag insåg formen, även om jag alltid uppskattar en uttänkt form. Stilen i första perspektivet påminner lite om Knausgård, den misslyckade musikern, flanören, som det inte blir något vettigt av. För varje perspektivbyte växer bilden av den de skriver till, mannen som ska ha tappat sitt minne, och även bilden av de andra inblandade i berättelsen växer. Det är ett bra grepp. Kan se att det nog kan bli långdraget, och därför (samt min besvikelse över tonen i texten) håller mig lite avvaktande på kommande delar innan jag kan ge något verkligt omdöme.
Ogillar kursiveringen av "breven", det är fan a och o att inte använda det i längre sjok av respekt för läsaren. Det finns andra sätt att markera skillnad i text.
Det finns flera diskrepanser i bilden av honom, liksom av de andra karaktärerna, som växer med perspektiven, och jag anade relativt tidigt det Silje också säger i slutet att hon misstänker. Jag hoppas att bilderna fortsätter att växa och bli mer intrikata, annars tappar jag nog intresset. Ett intressant sätt att visa både ett "estranged" nu och en dåtid.
Ogillar kursiveringen av "breven", det är fan a och o att inte använda det i längre sjok av respekt för läsaren. Det finns andra sätt att markera skillnad i text.
Det finns flera diskrepanser i bilden av honom, liksom av de andra karaktärerna, som växer med perspektiven, och jag anade relativt tidigt det Silje också säger i slutet att hon misstänker. Jag hoppas att bilderna fortsätter att växa och bli mer intrikata, annars tappar jag nog intresset. Ett intressant sätt att visa både ett "estranged" nu och en dåtid.
March 21, 2025
Otrolig läsning! En sådan (ganska sällsynt) bok, som ger en nya sätt att se på livet och beskriva karaktärer. Kändes högtidligt att läsa.
November 26, 2025
Veldig god og fascinerende, men intensiteten og mørket gjør den litt vanskelig å lese (for meg).
March 6, 2025
Kunde nästan fått en femma om den haft ett snyggare omslag.
January 29, 2022
Va litt usikker på om den va 4 eller 5 stjerner, men jøyemeg det må bli 5 itte de to siste sidene 😶
Displaying 1 - 30 of 212 reviews