William James Durant was a prolific American writer, historian, and philosopher. He is best known for the 11-volume The Story of Civilization, written in collaboration with his wife Ariel and published between 1935 and 1975. He was earlier noted for his book, The Story of Philosophy, written in 1926, which was considered "a groundbreaking work that helped to popularize philosophy."
They were awarded the Pulitzer Prize for literature in 1967 and the Presidential Medal of Freedom in 1977.
بهترین مزیت این کتاب اینه که میتونیم باهاش به یه مرور کلی از آثار نویسنده هایی که در موردش بحث شده دست پیدا کنیم و احیانا وسوسه بشیم تا یکی از اون کتابارو بخونیم .
هترین مزیت این کتاب اینه که میتونیم باهاش به یه مرور کلی از آثار نویسنده هایی که در موردش بحث شده دست پیدا کنیم و احیانا وسوسه بشیم تا یکی از اون کتابارو بخونیم .
کلی کتاب به لیستم اضافه کرد برای خوندن. یه چیزی که شاید برای بعضیها اذیتکننده باشه اینکه که سرتاسر اسپویلر ئه. بهترین کتابها از بهترین نویسندهها رو از اول تا آخر توضیح میده و تفسیر میکنه و ربطش میده به زندگی شخصی نویسنده. این که زندگی بعضی از نویسندهها جالبتر از کتابهاشون بود و چیزهایی بود که نمیدونستم دربارهشون به نظرم این کتاب رو خاص میکرد. در کل به نظرم انتخاب خوبیه برای کسایی که یه آشنایی قبلی با این بزرگان دارن.
هیچ دلیلی وجود ندارد که چرا چیزی یا کسی باید وجود داشته باشد. به راستی چرا به جای نیستی بی ضرر، جهان وجود دارد؟ قبلا به این پرسش چنین پاسخ داده می شد که خدا همه چیز را خلق کرده است و او دلیل و معنای این ها را می داند، اما اکنون که خدا دیگر وجود ندارد، چه ضرورتی برای وجود این همه سوسک، ماهی، شیر و انسان هست؟اینها با این آشفتگی و شتاب به کجا می روند؟فقط به سوی مرگ. همه چیز می میرد: هر موجود زنده ای، هر شهری و هر تمدنی و هیچ کس زمان فرارسیدن مرگ را نمی داند. این "یقین متزلزل" به مثابه سرانجام خفت بار صدها هزار مبارزه، بیماری، اضطراب و شکست، بر فراز هر پدیده ای آویخته است. چه پوچی حیرت آوری! "ژان پل سارتر"
in-depth analysis maybe a bit lacking here, but cut the guy some slack--he'd already written the "Story of Philosophy" (which, incidentally, helped me pass my written exams back in college) and then embarked on his 11 volume set of History, so here he's just sort of clearing the air, finishing off those loose ends, and telling you what he thinks of all these folks. He's no literary scholar, but he is wonderful mind in his own right, and writes some colorful biographic sections. I read through it back in college and still keep it around for easy reference. Very easy to read and informative for anyone looking to get into some of the recent canon of world lit.
There was a time when there were few specialists. People had what I call a synthesis of learning. There was a time when you could say the phrase 'of cabbages and kings' and EVERYONE from doctors to scientists to postman to farmers knew what that meant, and where it came from. Sadly, we do not live in such a world today. Will Durant is the herald of that last age. A man who happily gave he life to the study of western civilization. A mere historian he was not - historians are shadows to his bright light. He lived and breathed all western thought. Its art, writing, drama, morality, religion, and even the wars that were fought have given shape to our collective heritage. I could say more, but it all boils down to this: read Will Durant's books. All of them.
ویل دورانت قلم روانی دارد، نوع نوشتار و شکل نوشتارش را دوست دارم. این کتاب هم استثنایی بر این عقیده نیست، همچنان روان و زیبا نوشته است. ترجمه کتاب هم دوست داشتنی است . در کل کتاب مفیدیست و خوانش داستان زندگی این ادیبان نه تنها نگرشی از آنها بلکه نگرشی از ویل دورانت هم به شما هدیه میکند. تنها موردی که برای من اندکی آزار دهنده بود؛ که البته امکان دارد که اشتباه کنم، توجه بیش از حد دورانت به زندگی شخصی و موتیف های جنسی در آثار بود. در بعضی از موارد بسیار جایز است اما در بعضی کمی آزار دهنده بود. به هر حال سلیقهایست و ارزشی ازین کتاب کم نمی کند.
این کتاب شامل معرفی نویسندگان مهم اروپا و آمریکا در یک صد سال اخیر است و میتوان گفت مرجع کتاب شناسی خوبی است تا با طرز فکر نویسندگان و آثارشون آشنا بشیم از میان همه ی شرح حالها قسمت معرفی کافکا و کامو را بیشتر دوست داشتم کتاب زیاده گویی های زیادی داشت و به همین خاطر بهش 4 ستاره ندادم
Well, this was very amazing; In fact 3 times I've passionately read it so far! Not for being too complicated but for I've been interested to find more. Late Will Durant never claimed to be a sociologist*, nor, as far as I know, any other person has claimed yet this book as a sociological approach to understanding literature, but I may find this book as a very good source both as an icon in sociological -also psychological- attempts to re-understanding modern literature, and to understand some in-depth interpretations of modernity as it's mirrored in literature. I may recommend it to everyone who is interested in classic novels, also to sociologists of literature as well as everyone who likes to know something about historical context of literature, of course as well as Literary Criticism. * In the Introduction Will says: Literature has been his and Ariel's real interest, despite of spending their life in researches on philosophy and history.
کتاب تفسیرهای زندگی از ویل دورانت که به نوشتن تاریخ تمدن شناخته شده است. تلاشی است برای پرداختن به برخی از نویسندگان معاصر و بررسی آثار و درک آنها از زندگی. ویل دورانت به گفته خود دید این نویسندگان را از لحاظ واکنش آنها به مردن خدا مورد واکاوی قرار میدهد. چند نکته درباره این کتاب از نظر خودم: ۱. کتاب در ابتدا یادآور ویکیپدیا بود ولی کم کم جالب تر شد و اواسط کتاب برای من لذت بخش ترین بخش بود و در انتها باز هم کسل کننده میشود. ۲. کتاب در کل میتواند کسل کننده باشد چرا که عدم آشنایی با برخی نویسندگان هیچ کنجکاوی ای درباره زندگی آنها برنمی انگیزاند (برای من این طور بود). ۳. خواندن کتاب برای من مفید بود چون تا حدودی یاد گرفتم چطور بهتر کتاب بخوانم. ۴. نکته دیگر این که ویل دورانت برخی کتاب های نویسندگان را لو میدهد که بهتر است این بخش رو اسکیپ کنین تا بیشتر لذت ببرین (هرچند من این کارو نکردم و البته داستان کتاب ها هم یادم نموند:)) نمره ۳ و نیم رو برای این کتاب ترجیح میدم.
I had a naive assumption that Durant is not concerned with Existentialists, but this book proved me wrong. Will Durant's writing style is bewitching, I read it passionately from 1st to last chapter. The enchanting aspect of this book is that it pursues a literature student and layman in same manner to study outstanding writers of our history... I would recommend it lover of literature.
یکی از مواردی که باید در مورد این کتاب بهش توجه بشه اینه که ویل دورانت با بررسی زندگی شخصی نویسندگان و تاثیری که محیط دز آثار هر یک از نویسندگان ایفا کرده ما رو در درک بهترآثار این بزرگان کمک می کنه...
“I need another indulgence. In almost all these studies I have found the author himself more interesting than any character in his books, and his career more instructive than the imaginary world by which he revealed or cloaked himself. I varied an old motto, and told myself, Cherchez l’homme – search for the man.” – Will Durant, Interpretations of Life
In 1967, Will Durant published Rousseau and Revolution, his tenth and – so he thought at the time – final entry to his monumental Story of Civilization, a series of books published over nearly four decades, each aiming to capture and convey the essence of a significant era in human history. Eight years later he would give the world his eleventh and truly final volume, The Age of Napoleon. Between these books and before this realization that he had another Story to tell, Durant pivoted to biographize, analyze and reflect on twentieth century literature and its authors; the result is Interpretations of Life.
First published in 1970, the book is titled in appreciation of the widely varied works these authors produced while reckoning the nature of existence. It features seventeen chapters and a several authors more than that. Most authors are given their own chapters. Some are grouped together, such as Wittgenstein, Kierkegaard, Heidegger and others in ‘The Philosophers’, and Sholokhov, Pasternak, Solzhenitsyn and Yevtushenko in ‘Literature Under the Soviets.’ There are three pairings of writers. John Steinbeck with Upton Sinclair had both passed in 1968 while Durant was writing Interpretations, and so the chapter is framed as a dual obituary: “Each of them fought throughout life against the cruelty of man to man or beast; each struck a lusty blow for justice by writing a book that stirred the nation…” Robinson Jeffers and Ezra Pound are two of the 20th century’s most controversial poets and so are matched here. Sartre is paired de Beauvoir, being the most necessary dual-biography, as Durant argues that to “divorce” their lives and works is to not fully understand them.
Durant, formerly writing mostly on centuries past, here focuses on the era in which he was living. Several authors selected were still alive at the time of publication. Sartre would live one decade more, and he notes that Solzhenitsyn was working on, but had not finished The Gulag Archipelago. This shift proved to be a non-issue; from his lengthy historical works Durant had developed perspective enough to, as he would put it, “see the part in the whole” even as history was unfolding. The selections are, however, colored by an admission Durant emphasizes in the conclusion, wherein he acknowledges the nature of writing about his own era and the inherent, inescapable bias this comes with. These writers lived and breathed alongside him, and the great and terrible moments of the twentieth century that formed the perspectives of these authors formed Durant as well. It is this sentiment of a shared era that he emphasizes in his final, reflective chapter, and he goes on to thus conclude the book: “The twentieth century is the age of Nietzsche, as he predicted it would be: the age of dictators unmoved by any moral tradition, of wars made more deadly and devastating by the progress of science; the age of the “death of God” for those who lead the parade in thought and power...”
The book excels because it does not confine these great and influential minds to vacuums. Their lives, words and deeds are contextualized and their appearance in the world is framed as the events that they were. Here he repeats the style and format he used in his previous The Story of Philosophy (1926). The writers are provided historical background with thorough commentary on the time and place they inhabited. The major events of their lives are chronicled. Similar space is given to their significant works, wherein the nature of the work itself is discussed, significant themes and purposes are identified, and often retrospectives on the influence they later would enjoy. From The Story of Philosophy he also developed the skill of communicating philosophical ideas, works and arguments with clarity, and this quality is reflected throughout Interpretations.
Durant is a fair critic. He does not fawn too deeply or dismiss too harshly, seeing both the parts and the wholes of a man’s life and career. The chapter on Hemingway provides an excellent example of this. When focusing on biography, he describes the man himself as “totally alive, and had vitality enough for a dozen matadors. His courage was all the deeper for having to fight fear…” He chronicles Hemingway's remarkable life, experience and heroisms with such appreciation that the pivot to his writing is almost surprising, wherein he asks if any of Hemingway’s books were “…as rich in incident and character as his life? Excepting The Old Man and the Sea his novels were too timely to be timeless…” And yet, in the chapter’s conclusion, Durant provides the perfect synthesis of these themes and observations: “He left behind him a frothy wake of imitators who used his tricks of tough talk and staccato dialogue, of flashbacks and symbolism and stream of consciousness, but who never rivaled the simplicity, clarity, and verve of his style, or the stimulating challenges of his thought. The imitators fade away, but the figure of Ernest Hemingway remains… Voila un homme!”
He is harshest on Ezra Pound, the target most deserving of criticism out of the authors featured, both for his compensated contributions to Mussolini's propaganda machines and undisciplined literary style – the former clearly the more grievous sin than the latter. Preparing to outline Cantos, Pound’s most controversial poem that was published gradually throughout his life, Durant produces one of the sharpest criticisms to be made on some schools of 20th century literature: “Art ceases to be a communication in significant form, and becomes a crossword puzzle for the leisure class.” He characterizes the lengthy poem as reading “like Socialist pamphlets, and become poetry only through typography.” Nevertheless, Durant still sees Pound as a complicated man, and despite his transgressions in life and literature, he is granted a dignified sendoff: “He was often absurd, even as you and I; but we forget our blunders and hide our sins, while Pound spread his follies over the mercuries of the air…”
He handles a century of diverse literature well. There are many genres, ideas, themes, styles and schools of writing discussed and, while he treats them with fairness, it is impossible to read the many works these wildly differing authors produced without adopting clear preferences. Durant is open about his prejudices and how his responses were formed. He occasionally adopts a confessional style – he wants his biases known and understood. He opens the chapter on Jeffers and Pound: “I have given up the attempt to understand contemporary poetry. I am too old, too bound to prose, to puzzle over the built-in obscurity of twentieth-century verse.” Yet in other chapters he does display a great appreciation for recent poetry, and such statements largely seem intended to not wholly cut down the literary contributions of a man like Pound. He makes a similar admission when he praises Camus in the beginning of his respective chapter: “I confess to a personal prejudice in preferring, for these studies, those authors who have dressed in fiction, drama, or poetry the problems of philosophy, rather than those who sought, by sensitivity, imagination, and artistry, to give some passing beauty a form that could be caressed by generations yet unborn.” These statements do not read like deflections from criticism, seeking to turn ignorance or humility into an advantage; rather, Durant is inescapably authentic. He is open about his literary inclinations and how these may have formed his estimations. His honesty is refreshing.
As is his wit. The book could not be called “dry” by any means. Durant’s style is consistently charming and often funny. When writing about William Faulkner’s Sanctuary (1931) being adapted into the Hollywood Film The Story of Temple Drake (1933), Durant states: “The film makers responded, the picture prospered, and a critic called the book ‘one of the finest novels in modern literature.’ It is terrible.” And, concerning Joyce: “In July, 1920, Joyce and his family went to Paris for a week’s stay; they remained there twenty years.” So too is he gifted at finding wit in others, again concerning Joyce, specifically the United States censorship boards deliberation of Ulysses - “The ban against it in America was removed by U.S. District Court Judge John Munro Woolsey on December 6, 1933, on the ground that “whilst in many places the effect of ‘Ulysses’ on the reader undoubtedly is somewhat emetic, nowhere does it tend to be an aphrodisiac.”’
Interpretations of Life is, perhaps, not as interesting or memorable as his other works - but that is through no inherent mistake; titans of literature though they are, the subjects here largely cannot match the depth or importance of those captured in his various Stories. It is easier to reflect on a few leaders, minds or events that time has concluded held the most influence on an era, and move on, than it is to focus on one type of thinker in an era that time is still deliberating. But the book’s theme was chosen, treated with intelligence and care, and succeeded exceptionally well in fulfilling its purpose. There is some lapse of consistency of form and length, and some may find an injustice here, finding that their preferred authors were allotted a few brief pages where others were given nearly fifty; but this quality too makes the work more honest. There are far more books from interesting people than there is time to read them, and even one as well-read as Durant is no exception.
There is now some distance between us and the twentieth century. Looking back, it is easy to agree with Durant’s conviction, quoted earlier from the final paragraph of Interpretations, that it was “the age of the “death of God” for those who lead the parade in thought and power…” Yet Durant was not a pessimist, for the quote continues, and the book ultimately concludes: “…But the poets and artists and dreamers are not dead; they will tell new stories, paint new pictures, of our heroes, our achievements, and our possibilities; we shall be inspired and strengthened again; and we shall go on to add to our heritage.”
کتاب «تفسیرهای زندگی»، اثری است که به معرّفی برخی از مشهورترین نویسندگان جهان پرداخته و زندگی و آثار آنان را مورد بررسی قرار داده است. ویل دورانت بهسبب عشقی که به ادبیات داشته است این کتاب را با مشارکت همسر خود در هشتادوچهار سالگی و پس از نیم قرن فعالیّت در فلسفه و تاریخ نوشته است (دورانت، ۱۳۶۹: ۹).
سامرست موام بااینکه ازدواج کرده بود و تا پایان عمر کوشید تا رجحانی را که برای مردهای جوان نسبت به زنها قائل بود پنهان کند، ولی همجنسگرایی او برای نزدیکانش آشکار بود. موآم به برادرزادهاش گفته بود: مردم تایلند بسیار معقول هستند. آنها همجنسگرایی را کاملاً عادی میدانند و آن را پذیرفتهاند. من اعتقاد دارم که مردم سرانجام روزی خواهند فهمید کسانی هم وجود دارند که همجنسگرا به دنیا میآیند (همان: ۱۸۳).
مارسل پروست هم پسرانی جوان از طبقات پایین اجتماع را به اتاق خود میبُرد و نیاز جنسیش را برآورده میکرد. چنانکه یادداشتها و شاهکار او نیز به رنج و وحشت جوانی همجنسگرا دلالت دارد که تلاش میکند وضع خود و ماجراهایی را که از سر میگذراند بر پدر و مادر و دوستان معمولیاش پنهان سازد (همان: ۱۹۷-۱۹۹).
آندره ژید هم بااینکه با دخترعموی خود ازدواج کرد، با او همبستر نشد و به همجنسگرایی تن داد. او در سال ۱۹۲۴ درحالیکه تقریباً پنجاهوپنج ساله بود با انتشار کتاب «کوریدون» صراحتاً و به شکلی عریان به دفاع از همجنسگرایی پرداخت و کوریدون را برجستهترین کتاب خود انگاشت (همان: ۲۳۸). ژید در دفتر خاطرات محرمانۀ خود مینویسد:
من به کسی میگویم بچهباز که عاشق پسرهای جوان باشد و به کسی میگویم همجنسگرا که به مردان بالغ گرایـش دارد. بچهبازها که مـن هم یکی از آنان هستم، بسیار نادرند، ولی همجنسگراها بسیار بیشتر از آنند که من در ابتدا فکر میکردم (همان: ۲۳۳).
در این اثر به زندگی و آثار ویلیام فاکنر، ارنست همینگوی، جان استین بک، آپتون سینکلر، یوجین اونیل، رابینسون جفرز، ازرا پاوند، جیمز جویس، تی. اس. الیوت، سامرست موام، مارسل پروست، آندره ژید، ل. و. وینگنشتاین، کیر کگارد، هو سرل، هایدگر ژان پل سارتر، سیمون دوبوار، آلبرکامو، توماس مان، آلکساندر سولژنیتسین، نیکوس کازانتزاکیس، میخائیل شولوخوف، بوریس پاسترناک، فرانتس کافکا، یوگنی یفتوشنکو پرداخته شده است. تفسیرهای زندگی جلوهی دیگری از تاریخ تمدن نویسندگان یا اگر بتوان گفت تمدن ادبیات معاصر محسوب میشود.
نویسنده اطلاعاتی از زندگی خصوصی و یا هنری و کاری و اجتماعی تعداد از نویسندگان معروف ارائه میدهد... مانند ویلیام فاکنر، ارنست همینگوی، جان استین بک، آپتون سینکلر، یوجین اونیل، رابینسون جفرز، ازرا پاوند، جیمز جویس، تی. اس. الیوت، سامرست موام، مارسل پروست، آندره ژید، وینگنشتاین، کیر کگارد، هو سرل، هایدگر ژان پل سارتر و سیمون دوبوار، آلبرکامو، توماس مان و ... با اینکه حس کردم خیلی نظراتش شخصی هست... کتاب چندان دارا تحلیلات عمیق نیست و خوندنش راحت و روان هست...
نوع نوشتار کتاب جالب نیست و خواندن آن به این دلیل سخت می شود .کتاب اطلاعات جالبی از زندگی بعضی نویسندگان معروف به خواننده ارائه می دهد در عین حال خیلی کتاب پراکنده و بی نظمی بود و طبیعتا به کسی پیشنهاد خواندنش را نمی دهم
سیمون ( دوبوار) و (ژان پل ) سارتر عشق خود به آزادی را تا به آن حد گستردند که به یکدیگر اجازه دادند تا برای تنوع گهگاه به " عشقهای موقتی " نیز بپردازند. سارتر طبیعتا به یک زن راضی نبود و از همنشینی با زنان لذت می برد و آنها را کمتر از مردان مضحک می یافت. در بیست وسه سالگی قصد نداشت که از گوناگونی و تنوع آنها چشم بپوشد . به فاصله کمی پس از آنکه پیمان زندگی مشترک بستند ، سارتر به مدت دو سال گهگاه با زن هنرپیشه و خواننده ای روابط نزدیکی داشت. سیمون از حسادت رنج می برد گرچه بعدها روابط عاشقانه اش با دیگران بیشتر از روابطش با سارتر بود . آنها خانه مشخصی برای خود فراهم نکردند بلکه تقریبا جدا از هم زندگی می کردند..... شخصیت سیمون با شخصیت سارتر کاملا فرق داشت. سارتر در بند تفکر بود و عشق برای او نوعی گریز به حساب می آمد. اما سیمون موجود بی پروایی بود که بیشتر شور عشق داشت تا باریک بینی....هر دو جوان . نیرومند بودند و احساس می کردند که دنیا برای مطالعه و لذت بردن و تسلط بر آن ، روبرویشان است . در آن روزهای آرام ، آنارشیسم را بر سوسیالیسم ترجیح می دادند و از هر مانعی بر سر" فرد گرای " ( و لذت های فردی ) نفرت داشتند. " عشق ما به آزادی ومخالفت ما با نظم مستقر در اشیا ، ما را به موضعی آنارشیستی نزدیک کرد...ضد سرمایه داری بودیم گرچه مارکسیست هم نبودیم . شیفته هر نوع افراطی بودیم ... هرنوع خیزش و جنبشی غرایز آنارشیستی ما را ارضاء می کرد "