What do you think?
Rate this book
اميد
Le livre de Malraux reflète fidèlement le désarroi, les promiscuités et les atrocités d'une révolution; mais il en exprime aussi la conscience, le sens, le mouvement souterrain. Et c'est parce qu'il ne cache rien des horreurs et des niaiseries de la guerre civile, qu'il charge son titre d'une valeur singulière. Voici les fautes, voici les sots, les mercenaires, les guerriers, voici le doute qui prend le plus résolu quand, à l'instant de mourir, il sent que son corps était beau; mais voici cette attente, cet appel, cette recherche, on ne sait au juste de quoi, de quelque chose qui efface le passé, d'une communion plus intime dans le danger, la lutte, la souffrance, d'une patrie, d'une gestation, d'une justification par le sacrifice; - l'espoir.
567 pages, Hardcover
First published November 30, 1937
70 people are currently reading
1881 people want to read
About the author
André Malraux
272 books400 followersMalraux was born in Paris during 1901, the son of Fernand-Georges Malraux and Berthe Lamy (Malraux). His parents separated during 1905 and eventually divorced. He was raised by his mother and maternal grandmother, Berthe and Adrienne Lamy in the small town of Bondy. His father, a stockbroker, committed suicide in 1930. Andre had Tourette's Syndrome during his childhood, resulting in motor and vocal tics.
At the age of 21, Malraux left for Cambodia with his new wife Clara Goldschmidt. In Cambodia, he undertook an exploratory expedition into the Cambodian jungle. On his return he was arrested by French colonial authorities for removing bas-reliefs from one of the temples he discovered. Banteay Srei (The French government itself had removed large numbers of sculptures and artifacts from already discovered sites such as Angkor Wat around this time). Malraux later incorporated the episode into his second novel La Voie Royale.
Malraux became very critical of the French colonial authorities in Indochina, and during 1925 helped to organize the Young Annam League and founded a newspaper Indochina in Chains.
On his return to France, he published The Temptation of the West (1926) which had the format of an exchange of letters between a Westerner and an Asian comparing aspects of the two cultures. This was followed by his first novel The Conquerors (1928), then by The Royal Way (1930) which was influenced by his Cambodian experience, and then by Man's Fate (La Condition Humaine). For La Condition Humaine, a novel about the 1927 failed Communist rebellion in Shanghai, written with obvious sympathy for the Communists, he won the 1933 Prix Goncourt.
During the 1930s, Malraux was active in the anti-Fascist Popular Front in France. At the beginning of the Spanish Civil War he joined the Republican forces in Spain, serving in, and helping to organize, their small air force. His squadron, called "España", became something of a legend after his claims of nearly annihilating part of the Nationalist army at Medellín.
According to Curtis Cate, his biographer, he was slightly wounded twice during efforts to stop the Falangists' takeover of Madrid, but the British historian Hugh Thomas denies this. He also toured the United States to raise funds for the Spanish Republicans. A novel influenced by his Spanish war experiences, Man's Hope, (L'Espoir) was published during 1938.
At the beginning of the Second World War, Malraux joined the French Army. He was captured in 1940 during the Battle of France but escaped and later joined the French Resistance. He was captured by the Gestapo during 1944 and underwent a mock execution. He later commanded the tank unit Brigade Alsace-Lorraine in defence of Strasbourg and in the attack on Stuttgart (Germany). He was awarded the Médaille de la Résistance, the Croix de Guerre. He was also awarded the British Distinguished Service Order for his work with British liaison officers in Corrèze, Dordogne and Lot, and after Dordogne had been liberated, leading a battalion of former resistance fighters to Alsace-Lorraine where they fought alongside the First Army.
During the war he worked on a long novel, The Struggle with the Angel based on the story of the Biblical Jacob. The manuscript was destroyed by the Gestapo after his capture in 1944. A surviving first part titled The Walnut Trees of Altenburg, was published after the war. He would never write another novel.
Malraux and his first wife divorced during the 1940s. His daughter from this marriage, Florence (b.1933), married the filmmaker Alain Resnais.
Malraux had two sons by his second wife Josette Clotis: Pierre-Gauthier (1940-1961) and Vincent (1943-1961). During 1944, while Malraux was fighting in Alsace, Josette died when she slipped while boarding a train. His two sons were killed during 1961 in an automobile accident.
After the war, Malraux served in a variety of government p
At the age of 21, Malraux left for Cambodia with his new wife Clara Goldschmidt. In Cambodia, he undertook an exploratory expedition into the Cambodian jungle. On his return he was arrested by French colonial authorities for removing bas-reliefs from one of the temples he discovered. Banteay Srei (The French government itself had removed large numbers of sculptures and artifacts from already discovered sites such as Angkor Wat around this time). Malraux later incorporated the episode into his second novel La Voie Royale.
Malraux became very critical of the French colonial authorities in Indochina, and during 1925 helped to organize the Young Annam League and founded a newspaper Indochina in Chains.
On his return to France, he published The Temptation of the West (1926) which had the format of an exchange of letters between a Westerner and an Asian comparing aspects of the two cultures. This was followed by his first novel The Conquerors (1928), then by The Royal Way (1930) which was influenced by his Cambodian experience, and then by Man's Fate (La Condition Humaine). For La Condition Humaine, a novel about the 1927 failed Communist rebellion in Shanghai, written with obvious sympathy for the Communists, he won the 1933 Prix Goncourt.
During the 1930s, Malraux was active in the anti-Fascist Popular Front in France. At the beginning of the Spanish Civil War he joined the Republican forces in Spain, serving in, and helping to organize, their small air force. His squadron, called "España", became something of a legend after his claims of nearly annihilating part of the Nationalist army at Medellín.
According to Curtis Cate, his biographer, he was slightly wounded twice during efforts to stop the Falangists' takeover of Madrid, but the British historian Hugh Thomas denies this. He also toured the United States to raise funds for the Spanish Republicans. A novel influenced by his Spanish war experiences, Man's Hope, (L'Espoir) was published during 1938.
At the beginning of the Second World War, Malraux joined the French Army. He was captured in 1940 during the Battle of France but escaped and later joined the French Resistance. He was captured by the Gestapo during 1944 and underwent a mock execution. He later commanded the tank unit Brigade Alsace-Lorraine in defence of Strasbourg and in the attack on Stuttgart (Germany). He was awarded the Médaille de la Résistance, the Croix de Guerre. He was also awarded the British Distinguished Service Order for his work with British liaison officers in Corrèze, Dordogne and Lot, and after Dordogne had been liberated, leading a battalion of former resistance fighters to Alsace-Lorraine where they fought alongside the First Army.
During the war he worked on a long novel, The Struggle with the Angel based on the story of the Biblical Jacob. The manuscript was destroyed by the Gestapo after his capture in 1944. A surviving first part titled The Walnut Trees of Altenburg, was published after the war. He would never write another novel.
Malraux and his first wife divorced during the 1940s. His daughter from this marriage, Florence (b.1933), married the filmmaker Alain Resnais.
Malraux had two sons by his second wife Josette Clotis: Pierre-Gauthier (1940-1961) and Vincent (1943-1961). During 1944, while Malraux was fighting in Alsace, Josette died when she slipped while boarding a train. His two sons were killed during 1961 in an automobile accident.
After the war, Malraux served in a variety of government p
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 76 reviews
February 7, 2017
Begin in medias res exhort those tale-tellers of antiquity, and so doth Malraux hear and obey - enjoining his 500+ page work on the Spanish Civil War, already in progress.
Like the awful war itself this book is a mess, and perhaps it should be, because the reader feels constantly unconnected to the action - so very much in the dark - just as the fascism fighting republicans stay in a constant fog of war. There are a panoply of minor characters that come in and go out (mostly in a bloody way) of the story; they all are in the orbit of the twin protagonists of the book (one a leader of the ground forces, the other a leader of the air corps) - two protagonists whose story lines never meet.
In his afterword to Under the Volcano William T. Vollmann alludes to this book, describing it as a novel that "brings to life with heartbreaking vividness" the horrors of the civil war. And he's spot on, this book delivers the scenes of war horror and the nadir of humanity. It's just a shame that for this reader there wasn't enough cohesion in the narrative to stitch together something in the All Quiet on the Western Front or Matterhorn world of excellent war novels; I can't recommend it, but I can certainly understand why any reader of war fiction would want to give it a go. Perhaps it can find its intended audience with a reader better than me.
Like the awful war itself this book is a mess, and perhaps it should be, because the reader feels constantly unconnected to the action - so very much in the dark - just as the fascism fighting republicans stay in a constant fog of war. There are a panoply of minor characters that come in and go out (mostly in a bloody way) of the story; they all are in the orbit of the twin protagonists of the book (one a leader of the ground forces, the other a leader of the air corps) - two protagonists whose story lines never meet.
In his afterword to Under the Volcano William T. Vollmann alludes to this book, describing it as a novel that "brings to life with heartbreaking vividness" the horrors of the civil war. And he's spot on, this book delivers the scenes of war horror and the nadir of humanity. It's just a shame that for this reader there wasn't enough cohesion in the narrative to stitch together something in the All Quiet on the Western Front or Matterhorn world of excellent war novels; I can't recommend it, but I can certainly understand why any reader of war fiction would want to give it a go. Perhaps it can find its intended audience with a reader better than me.
February 20, 2021
A fragmentariedade de boa parte do livro e a multiplicidade de personagens foram forças importantes que implicaram o vencimento do obstáculo «desnorte leitor». Ultrapassada - por pressão de agenda - tal barreira, a leitura ganhou progressivamente, sendo a segunda parte inequivocamente superior à primeira, marcada por grandes momentos que a qualidade da escrita em nada fez perder.
A grandeza do acto de resistir contra uma força maior surge detalhada na multiplicidade de episódios em que os combatentes republicanos e o povo fizeram do pouco-quase-nulo o tudo do seu ímpeto maior de barrar a força fascista, esperando o melhor do futuro.
Amarga e aconchega. O mal que se seguiu (e agora se ergue) sempre teve a opor-se-lhe o melhor de um povo e de um corpo armado. Pleno de ideais, escasso em meios bélicos.
A grandeza do acto de resistir contra uma força maior surge detalhada na multiplicidade de episódios em que os combatentes republicanos e o povo fizeram do pouco-quase-nulo o tudo do seu ímpeto maior de barrar a força fascista, esperando o melhor do futuro.
Amarga e aconchega. O mal que se seguiu (e agora se ergue) sempre teve a opor-se-lhe o melhor de um povo e de um corpo armado. Pleno de ideais, escasso em meios bélicos.
June 10, 2018
1936 Temmuz’unda başlayıp 1937 yılının Şubat’ına kadar devam eden zaman aralığında, bizzat yazarın katıldığı İspanyol İç Savaşı’ndan bir kesitin anlatıldığı romandır Umut. Andre Malraux kitabı 1937’de yazmıştır, yani savaşın sonunu, 1939 Mart’ında Madrid’in düşmesini ve faşistlerin zafer kazanmasını görmeden yazmıştır. Bu nedenle adı Umut’tur.
Toledo’da Alcázar kuşatması, Madrid’in bomdardımanı ve falanjistlerin ilk saldırılarında şehrin savunmasının anlatıldığı kitap onlarca hikayenin roman şeklinde kurgulanmasıyla oluşmuştur.
Şebnem Atakan’ın yazdığı gibi üç ana bölüme ayrılan romanda, Cumhuriyetcilerin zafere ulaşma isteği ve heyecanından bahsedildiği “Gönülden Geçirmek” adlı ilk bölümden sonra “Manzanares” başlıklı ikinci bölümde farklı görüşteki grupların ilk örgütlenme çabaları konu edilir. Son bölüm olan Umut’ta ise birlik sağlanmış bir orduyla zafere ulaşabileceği beklentisi, başka bir deyişle de Cumhuriyetçi birliklerin zafere erişme umudu yansıtılır.*
Tamamiyle gerçekçi bir romandır, hatta yer yer otobiyografik öğeleri barındırır. Politik diyaloglar, savaşanların ruhsal durumları, dini inanç sorgulamaları, köylerin ve köylülerin tanımlanmaları, ölüm korkusu ve ölüyle karşılaşmanın anlatılmadı çok etkileyici bir şekilde kaleme alınmış. Bu arada A. İlhan’ın çevirisi mükemmel.
İç savaşlar arasında tarihte bir benzeri bulunmayan İspanya İç Savaşı’nın bunca inanca, umuda, fedakarlığa, kahramanlığa ve en önemlisi haklılığına rağmen neden kaybedildiğini anlamak için kitabı okumak yeterli. Hitler’in hava kuvvetleri ile, Mussolini’nin tank, zırhlı araç ve piyade desteğini arkasına alan milliyetçilerin, halkın büyük çoğunluğu ve uluslararası insan gücü desteği ile savaşan Cumhuriyetçileri yenilgiye uğratmasının sadece ateş gücü üstünlüğü ile açıklanması ne kadar doğrudur?
Cumhuriyetçilerin kendi aralarındaki anlaşmazlıklar, çatışmalar bazen infaz ve kıyımlar savaşın gidişini kesinlikle etkilemiştir. Kitapta savaşın ilk yıllarında bunun örneklerini okuyorsunuz. Komunistler, sosyalistler, anarşistler arasındaki kayıkçı kavgaları, parti-sendika çekişmesi, C.N.T, F.A.I, U.G.T arasındaki kim daha güçlü kavgaları, parti disiplini adına verilen anlamsız kararlar, idealist Uluslararası Tugay üyelerinin başıbozuklukları, kısaca solun en bikinen hastalığı “ben daha iyi bilirim, ben daha iyi yaparım, ben daha şuyum-buyum hastalığı”.
Kitabı bitirdiğimde ilk sayfasında umutla dolu ve aydınlık olan yüreğimin son 550. sayfasında kararmış ve umudunu tüketmiş olduğunu hissettim. Hüzünlenseniz de okumanızı öneririm, sanırım şimdiye kadar okuduğum en gerçekçi İspanya İç Savaşı kitabıdır Umut.
*ANDRÉ MALRAUX, İSPANYOL İÇ SAVAŞI VE UMUT
http://www.dtcfdergisi.ankara.edu.tr/...
Toledo’da Alcázar kuşatması, Madrid’in bomdardımanı ve falanjistlerin ilk saldırılarında şehrin savunmasının anlatıldığı kitap onlarca hikayenin roman şeklinde kurgulanmasıyla oluşmuştur.
Şebnem Atakan’ın yazdığı gibi üç ana bölüme ayrılan romanda, Cumhuriyetcilerin zafere ulaşma isteği ve heyecanından bahsedildiği “Gönülden Geçirmek” adlı ilk bölümden sonra “Manzanares” başlıklı ikinci bölümde farklı görüşteki grupların ilk örgütlenme çabaları konu edilir. Son bölüm olan Umut’ta ise birlik sağlanmış bir orduyla zafere ulaşabileceği beklentisi, başka bir deyişle de Cumhuriyetçi birliklerin zafere erişme umudu yansıtılır.*
Tamamiyle gerçekçi bir romandır, hatta yer yer otobiyografik öğeleri barındırır. Politik diyaloglar, savaşanların ruhsal durumları, dini inanç sorgulamaları, köylerin ve köylülerin tanımlanmaları, ölüm korkusu ve ölüyle karşılaşmanın anlatılmadı çok etkileyici bir şekilde kaleme alınmış. Bu arada A. İlhan’ın çevirisi mükemmel.
İç savaşlar arasında tarihte bir benzeri bulunmayan İspanya İç Savaşı’nın bunca inanca, umuda, fedakarlığa, kahramanlığa ve en önemlisi haklılığına rağmen neden kaybedildiğini anlamak için kitabı okumak yeterli. Hitler’in hava kuvvetleri ile, Mussolini’nin tank, zırhlı araç ve piyade desteğini arkasına alan milliyetçilerin, halkın büyük çoğunluğu ve uluslararası insan gücü desteği ile savaşan Cumhuriyetçileri yenilgiye uğratmasının sadece ateş gücü üstünlüğü ile açıklanması ne kadar doğrudur?
Cumhuriyetçilerin kendi aralarındaki anlaşmazlıklar, çatışmalar bazen infaz ve kıyımlar savaşın gidişini kesinlikle etkilemiştir. Kitapta savaşın ilk yıllarında bunun örneklerini okuyorsunuz. Komunistler, sosyalistler, anarşistler arasındaki kayıkçı kavgaları, parti-sendika çekişmesi, C.N.T, F.A.I, U.G.T arasındaki kim daha güçlü kavgaları, parti disiplini adına verilen anlamsız kararlar, idealist Uluslararası Tugay üyelerinin başıbozuklukları, kısaca solun en bikinen hastalığı “ben daha iyi bilirim, ben daha iyi yaparım, ben daha şuyum-buyum hastalığı”.
Kitabı bitirdiğimde ilk sayfasında umutla dolu ve aydınlık olan yüreğimin son 550. sayfasında kararmış ve umudunu tüketmiş olduğunu hissettim. Hüzünlenseniz de okumanızı öneririm, sanırım şimdiye kadar okuduğum en gerçekçi İspanya İç Savaşı kitabıdır Umut.
*ANDRÉ MALRAUX, İSPANYOL İÇ SAVAŞI VE UMUT
http://www.dtcfdergisi.ankara.edu.tr/...
January 18, 2015
I almost quit reading this book. It starts out slowly, almost woodenly, and I couldn’t make a connection with the characters. However, because it was mentioned in another book as one of the best books on the Spanish Civil War and because it is by Andre Malraux, I kept reading a little bit more to see if something would finally click. When it did, it came in a rush and I was hardly able to put the book down.
It’s not really a narrative. There is a “plot”: the waging of the Spanish Civil War told from the side of the Republicans. But although characters appear and disappear, converge and go their own ways, have parts in many different sections, the book is almost a series of vignettes. You can almost pick it up anywhere and follow the story. It’s a story about men in war rather than a war story.
I became fascinated by the details Malraux includes, especially the small pieces of nature that make the book more realistic and poignant. One character carries a piece of wheat grass with him while waiting in line to be executed. Another, flat on the ground waiting to throw his bomb at a tank, notices the height of the grass in front of him and the ants crawling around and on it. Pigeons, startled by a close landing shell, rise into the sky in a bunch and then immediately come back to earth and pick up where they left off. A cat watches people hurrying through the streets. A character nearly trips over a purebred dog left loose in the city. Characters carry small branches and sticks with them, just to carry something. Pine cones and needles come raining down on destroyed tanks when they hit the trees. Thousands of sheep patter straight through the city of Madrid. Glasses rattle and lift and fall as shells strike the city, but the men drinking from them seem unmoved. As a line of “rebels” is moved up by threes to be shot, one man seems not able to understand how he needs to stand in relation to his executioners; he turns with his back towards them, when turned around, turns himself sideways. People in the line waiting execution actually step forward to help the fascists line him up correctly.
One paragraph almost overwhelmed me sensorily; the rain patters down, rifles shoot, a machine gun rattles occasionally, people walk or run through the streets, airplanes drone above, the characters move through it talking. You are almost overwhelmed by the sound so compactly described.
You know what happens. It’s not a case of having to finish 500 pages to know that the government will lose to the fascists, but the journey seems personal, almost as if you were there. Without actually telling, Malraux shows the problems the revolutionaries face through short conversations: lack of coordination, inexperienced soldiers (one, practicing bomb throwing, freezes after his bomb is lit and can’t throw it), anarchists who want their philosophy to be followed, communists who are thoroughly organized and the mainstay of the fighting troops but want another philosophy, socialists who don’t know what they want except to win the war; conflicted Catholics who want the Church but not the current clergy, peasants who just want the land and to be left alone. It’s incredible that this corps of mixed intentions managed to fight as well as it did.
It was almost overwhelming but I couldn’t put it down. Malraux doesn’t so much as espouse a philosophy or a view of the war; he immerses you in it. He shatters you, he astonishes you, he makes you cry with frustration and sigh with resignation. He makes you FEEL.
It’s not really a narrative. There is a “plot”: the waging of the Spanish Civil War told from the side of the Republicans. But although characters appear and disappear, converge and go their own ways, have parts in many different sections, the book is almost a series of vignettes. You can almost pick it up anywhere and follow the story. It’s a story about men in war rather than a war story.
I became fascinated by the details Malraux includes, especially the small pieces of nature that make the book more realistic and poignant. One character carries a piece of wheat grass with him while waiting in line to be executed. Another, flat on the ground waiting to throw his bomb at a tank, notices the height of the grass in front of him and the ants crawling around and on it. Pigeons, startled by a close landing shell, rise into the sky in a bunch and then immediately come back to earth and pick up where they left off. A cat watches people hurrying through the streets. A character nearly trips over a purebred dog left loose in the city. Characters carry small branches and sticks with them, just to carry something. Pine cones and needles come raining down on destroyed tanks when they hit the trees. Thousands of sheep patter straight through the city of Madrid. Glasses rattle and lift and fall as shells strike the city, but the men drinking from them seem unmoved. As a line of “rebels” is moved up by threes to be shot, one man seems not able to understand how he needs to stand in relation to his executioners; he turns with his back towards them, when turned around, turns himself sideways. People in the line waiting execution actually step forward to help the fascists line him up correctly.
One paragraph almost overwhelmed me sensorily; the rain patters down, rifles shoot, a machine gun rattles occasionally, people walk or run through the streets, airplanes drone above, the characters move through it talking. You are almost overwhelmed by the sound so compactly described.
You know what happens. It’s not a case of having to finish 500 pages to know that the government will lose to the fascists, but the journey seems personal, almost as if you were there. Without actually telling, Malraux shows the problems the revolutionaries face through short conversations: lack of coordination, inexperienced soldiers (one, practicing bomb throwing, freezes after his bomb is lit and can’t throw it), anarchists who want their philosophy to be followed, communists who are thoroughly organized and the mainstay of the fighting troops but want another philosophy, socialists who don’t know what they want except to win the war; conflicted Catholics who want the Church but not the current clergy, peasants who just want the land and to be left alone. It’s incredible that this corps of mixed intentions managed to fight as well as it did.
It was almost overwhelming but I couldn’t put it down. Malraux doesn’t so much as espouse a philosophy or a view of the war; he immerses you in it. He shatters you, he astonishes you, he makes you cry with frustration and sigh with resignation. He makes you FEEL.
November 8, 2020
Umut, hazmetmesi de unutması da kolay olmayan ve demir leblebi olarak tanımlayabildiğim kitaplardan... Yazar, savaşı ne bir aşk hikayesi ile yumuşatıyor, ne de okurun kalbini çalacak ucuz hamlelere başvurarak anlatıyor. Sanki elinizden tutup sizi savaşın tam orta yerine bırakıyor ve duygularınıza kapılıp gitmemeniz için elinden geleni ardına koymayıp savaşa anbean tanıklık etmenize sebep oluyor. Açıkçası yaralıların ve ölünün dağdan indirilmesinde nefesim kesildi ama bir yandan da bunun devede kulak olduğundan emin olduğum için kendimi zorlayarak ilerledim. Okunması hiç kolay değil, kaskatı gerçeklerden beslenen bir savaş dokümanı niteliğinde ama bu kitabın da diğer bazı kitaplar gibi onlu yaşlarını süren gençlere tavsiye edilmesini çok isterdim. Okusunlar ki savaş çığırtkanlarının sözlerine kulak asmayıp savaşın gençliklerini elinden alan ne manasız bir şey olduğunu öğrensinler.
December 25, 2021
Read this when I was 17, and I was totally overwhelmed. I reread it when I was 48, but what a disappointment it was! Sure, from a literary point of view "L'espoir" ('The hope') can be situated on a higher level than Malraux's other novels: there's a better balance between action and introspection. And yes, this book is interesting as an historic document about the Spanish Civil War, especially on the great disagreements within the leftist side. But all in all it's too much about the "brotherhood of men in war", focussing on their battle with death, courage, cameraderie and loneliness. And the truth requires adding that Malraux has been very misleading about his own role in the Civil War. If you have to read French war literature with a philosopical slant, I'd rather recommend Flight to Arras by Antoine St-Exupery.
September 29, 2021
Peguei neste livro a pensar que iria ter uma experiência semelhante aquela que tive quando li o Por Quem os Sinos Dobram (de Hemingway), mas trata-se de obras bastante diferentes.
O início foi difícil, por causa das inúmeras referências a figuras históricas, sobretudo militares, incluindo várias que não me são familiares.
A tradução, que me parece ter sido feita a partir do espanhol e não do francês original, também não ajudou, com, entre muitas outras coisas deste género, informes em vez de relatórios, "de passo" em vez de "de passagem" e o uso repetido de palavras que, embora existam em português, praticamente não usamos (ex. pulcro).
Mas não desisti, e ainda bem, porque acabei por gostar bastante, especialmente do último terço do livro, que inclui descrições impressionantes dos bombardeamentos de Madrid e Teruel. Dá arrepios pensar que tudo isto aconteceu aqui ao lado e há assim não tanto tempo, durante a juventude dos meus avós.
O início foi difícil, por causa das inúmeras referências a figuras históricas, sobretudo militares, incluindo várias que não me são familiares.
A tradução, que me parece ter sido feita a partir do espanhol e não do francês original, também não ajudou, com, entre muitas outras coisas deste género, informes em vez de relatórios, "de passo" em vez de "de passagem" e o uso repetido de palavras que, embora existam em português, praticamente não usamos (ex. pulcro).
Mas não desisti, e ainda bem, porque acabei por gostar bastante, especialmente do último terço do livro, que inclui descrições impressionantes dos bombardeamentos de Madrid e Teruel. Dá arrepios pensar que tudo isto aconteceu aqui ao lado e há assim não tanto tempo, durante a juventude dos meus avós.
August 26, 2024
《 - Toute la matinée, j'ai eu l'impression du tremblement de terre, dit Moreno
Il voulait dire que la foule n'était pas prise par la peur des fascistes, mais par l'épouvante d'un cataclysme ; car la question de "se rendre" ne se posait pas plus que celle de se rendre à un tremblements de terre 》
《 Les civières se reprochaient les unes des autres ; le cercueil avait rejoint le brancard de Scali. La mitrailleuse avait été attachée là où sont d'ordinaire les couronnes ; tout le cortege était, à des funérailles, ce qu'étaient à des couronnes cette mitrailleuse 》
Malgré la longueur de ce livre, j'ai rarement lu une œuvre de guerre aussi belle. L'Espagne, son ciel, ses forêts, ses villes et ses campagnes comme terrains de guerre, y est décrite avec une beauté indescriptible et une nostalgie de l'avant guerre magnifique, l'espoir y est présent en filigrane, flouté par les horreurs, mais bien présent, tandis que L'international rythme la prose de Malraux.
Il voulait dire que la foule n'était pas prise par la peur des fascistes, mais par l'épouvante d'un cataclysme ; car la question de "se rendre" ne se posait pas plus que celle de se rendre à un tremblements de terre 》
《 Les civières se reprochaient les unes des autres ; le cercueil avait rejoint le brancard de Scali. La mitrailleuse avait été attachée là où sont d'ordinaire les couronnes ; tout le cortege était, à des funérailles, ce qu'étaient à des couronnes cette mitrailleuse 》
Malgré la longueur de ce livre, j'ai rarement lu une œuvre de guerre aussi belle. L'Espagne, son ciel, ses forêts, ses villes et ses campagnes comme terrains de guerre, y est décrite avec une beauté indescriptible et une nostalgie de l'avant guerre magnifique, l'espoir y est présent en filigrane, flouté par les horreurs, mais bien présent, tandis que L'international rythme la prose de Malraux.
April 7, 2023
"L'espoir" d'André Malraux est plate à mort ce qui est malheureux car sa thématique complète bien celle de "La condition humaine." "La condition humaine" a pour sujet la suppression des communistes de Shanghai en 1927 par le Kuomintang sous le commandement de Tchang Kaï-Chek. "L'espoir" raconte l'histoire de la victoire en 1938 des républicaines dans la bataille de Teruel contre les forces Nationalistes de Franco. Les personnages des deux romans sont surtout des intellectuels. Les paysans et les ouvriers sont largement absents des deux œuvres.
André Malraux n'avait pas visité Shanghai au moment ou il a écrit "La condition humaine". Ses descriptions de Shanghai ont pour base son séjour de deux ans en Indochine. Par contre Malraux a été un combattant dans la guerre espagnole en 1936 et 1937. Malheureusement sa participation aux événements semble avoir nui à son roman sur la guerre contre Franco. Je suis d'accord avec Olivier Todd, le biographe de Malraux, qui croit que le grand problème est la manque de femmes parmi les personnages principaux. Les personnages féminins es histories d'amour donne un piquant à "La condition humaine" un piquant qui manque drôlement à "L'espoir."
"La condition humaine" s'adresse surtout à la question de l'engagement tandis que "L'espoir" décrit l'apprentissage difficile dans l'art de la guerre des dirigeants des forces Républicaines (c'est à a dire les antifascistes qui s'opposaient aux Nationalistes de Franco).
D'abord Républicaine étaient trop naïfs. Ils misaient trop sur l'élan et sous-estimaient l'importance de la technologie moderne. Ils croyaient que les révolutions se faisaient toujours aux barricades et ne se rendaient compte de l'importance ni des avions ni des tanks:
"Cette guerre va être une guerre technique, et nous la conduisons en ne parlant que de sentiments." (p. 135)
"La révolution russe a été la première révolution du XXe siècle ; mais notez que militairement elle est la dernière du XIXe siècle. Ni aviation ni tanks chez les tsaristes. Des barricades chez les révolutionnaires. Comment sont nés les barricades? Pour lutter contre les cavaleries royales le peuple n'ayant jamais de cavalerie. L'Espagne est actuellement couvert de barricades - contre l'aviation de Franco." (p. 136)
Pour finir sur une note d'espoir, Malraux raconte à la fin du roman la bataille de Teruel où les Républicaines qui se servent brillamment des blindés et des avions pour emporter la victoire. Comme Malraux savait fort bien c'était trop peu trop tard.
"L'espoir" n'est plus depuis bien des années actuelles et ses qualités littéraires sont nulles. Je lui donne deux étoiles comme un témoignage pertinent de la guerre d'Espagne.
André Malraux n'avait pas visité Shanghai au moment ou il a écrit "La condition humaine". Ses descriptions de Shanghai ont pour base son séjour de deux ans en Indochine. Par contre Malraux a été un combattant dans la guerre espagnole en 1936 et 1937. Malheureusement sa participation aux événements semble avoir nui à son roman sur la guerre contre Franco. Je suis d'accord avec Olivier Todd, le biographe de Malraux, qui croit que le grand problème est la manque de femmes parmi les personnages principaux. Les personnages féminins es histories d'amour donne un piquant à "La condition humaine" un piquant qui manque drôlement à "L'espoir."
"La condition humaine" s'adresse surtout à la question de l'engagement tandis que "L'espoir" décrit l'apprentissage difficile dans l'art de la guerre des dirigeants des forces Républicaines (c'est à a dire les antifascistes qui s'opposaient aux Nationalistes de Franco).
D'abord Républicaine étaient trop naïfs. Ils misaient trop sur l'élan et sous-estimaient l'importance de la technologie moderne. Ils croyaient que les révolutions se faisaient toujours aux barricades et ne se rendaient compte de l'importance ni des avions ni des tanks:
"Cette guerre va être une guerre technique, et nous la conduisons en ne parlant que de sentiments." (p. 135)
"La révolution russe a été la première révolution du XXe siècle ; mais notez que militairement elle est la dernière du XIXe siècle. Ni aviation ni tanks chez les tsaristes. Des barricades chez les révolutionnaires. Comment sont nés les barricades? Pour lutter contre les cavaleries royales le peuple n'ayant jamais de cavalerie. L'Espagne est actuellement couvert de barricades - contre l'aviation de Franco." (p. 136)
Pour finir sur une note d'espoir, Malraux raconte à la fin du roman la bataille de Teruel où les Républicaines qui se servent brillamment des blindés et des avions pour emporter la victoire. Comme Malraux savait fort bien c'était trop peu trop tard.
"L'espoir" n'est plus depuis bien des années actuelles et ses qualités littéraires sont nulles. Je lui donne deux étoiles comme un témoignage pertinent de la guerre d'Espagne.
March 1, 2014
Malraux the hero, the liar, the robber (he plundered Angkor), the coward (his attitude with Clara) and yet we cannot to prevent to like him. He is endangered physically for his ideas. Then the war Spain, this trauma, this preparation of the 2° war. They all are there, Malraux, Orwell, Kessel, Hemmingway. And the Communists who eliminate the trotskystes. Remain books of which that one. But there is also a film. The productions is awkward, the hieratic characters, but it is a good reflection of the book.
Courage was needed because the war was pitiless. We live since 1945 an absence of major conflict. I ask me the question on the choices that would I have made for this period.
At the end of its life, Malraux was devoted to the beauty. He was the Prime Minister for the culture. His collection at Gallimard "Universe of the forms" gathers most beautiful works of the ages of the world. I have some volumesof them, they aged very well.
Courage was needed because the war was pitiless. We live since 1945 an absence of major conflict. I ask me the question on the choices that would I have made for this period.
At the end of its life, Malraux was devoted to the beauty. He was the Prime Minister for the culture. His collection at Gallimard "Universe of the forms" gathers most beautiful works of the ages of the world. I have some volumesof them, they aged very well.
August 25, 2016
While Malraux was writing l'Espoir, he was still a communist and he, like the other Europeans believed that the conflicting forces in the Spanish civil war were fascism and the people. However, nowadays, I believe historians agree that it was in fact an entirely particular problem in a country that hadn't gone through an industrial revolution, in which partisans of "law and order" and the remnants of a colonial army (with so many officers that it could only collapse) fought for control, but without a truly fascist ideology.
Publicity said otherwise.
Now, this book is very close to publicity. Malraux finished it in 1937. The war was not yet lost but things were turning ugly for the republicans. He wanted more support from France and Britain. It focuses on the clash of ideologies much more than on the atrocities of a civil war. His characters are foreigners of the " brigadas internacionales" like Magnin, or don't have a real family, like Manuel. My grandfather was a republican. His own brother fought with the nacionales. Not many really chose their side; it was mostly a matter of were you lived. Travelling to the other side, abandoning friends and family was not easy. The tragedy of a civil war is that it's literally brother fighting brother, without a shadow of meaning or choice.
You can't really see that in Malraux. Although violence is not disguised and there are some gruesome scences, man and sometimes war are glorified.
Ximenès boitant toujours [...] marchait de nouveau vers l'hôtel, seul parmi les balles au milieu du square immense.
Ximenès limped still towards the hotel, alone amongst the bullets in the middle of the huge square"
Ximenes' courage is said to be his homeland.
The war, for Malraux, is justified. There can be no doubt for the reader of who is the good guy. The nationalist side is barely represented in the novel. The enemy is the only thing that unifies anarchists, communists, republicans. In L'espoir, it is seen as from above, like Malraux himself would do from one of his planes: armed masses.
He writes: In every village Franco has taken, everything becomes a little less free
Which was very probably true.
However, it's definetely fiction. Another frenchman, Simon, who was in and wrote about the civil war, said:
L’Espoir ? Pour moi c’est un peu Tintin faisant la révolution. C’est une sorte de roman-feuilleton, de roman d’aventures, écrit par quelqu’un qui est lui-même un aventurier, dans le cadre de la révolution. En plus, il raconte des choses qu’il n’a pas perçues lui-même, c’est le romancier- Dieu, il est partout : au sol, dans les avions, chez les uns, chez les autres...
L'Espoir? I think it's a bit like Tintin playing revolution. A kind of novel-feuilleton, an adventure novel, written by a man who was an adventurer, in a revolutionary context. Moreover, he tells things he hasn't seen, it's the God-narrator, he's everywhere: on the ground, on the planes, following someone or the other...
Why, then, do I love the book?
The characters:
There are enough characters (Manuel, Magnin, le Négus, Garcia, Scali, Ximenès, Ramos, Heinrich, Leclerc, Polski...) to rival a novel by Tolkien, so many it's sometimes difficult for the reader to keep up. But they're usually very well portrayed, with only a few words, a nationality, ideology, a bit of background... but develop into fully fledged people.
For example, Magnin's introduction:
Dès que Darras fut dégagé, Magnin sauta à terre. Il était en combinaison de vol; ses moustaches tombantes, d'un blond gris, lui donnaient sous le serré-tête un aspect de Viking étonné, à cause de ses lunettes décaille
One of the pilots has just crashed the plane they were both in and Magnin, "le patron" is not all that impressed. He's got that distracted-competent air about him.
They have mannerisms. Manuel likes to fidget and often has something in his hands, usually a branch or a pen. I do that too.
The art:
Malraux and his characters talk about art; religious art, street art, anything. Artists and intellectuals were of course mostly in the republican side and Scali was, I think, an art teacher in Italy. It's in fact surprisingly present in the novel. There are constant visual symbols. Two cadillacs in the streets of Madrid are likened to a scene in a gangster movie. Ximenes holds a "bâton de chef" of the guardia civil while walking into the deserted square.
The poetry:
Malraux's language is lyrical . For example, like Flaubert before him, he compares an attack to a wave:
La vague d'assaut, balayée par les trois nids de mitrailleuses, laissa son festo de tués et reflua
Troughout the novel, he mentions colours, smells, striking sceneries that build the epic to an almost operistic level.
Ideology:
Although I have criticized that before, the discussions about ideology are numerous and I find them extremely interesting. Anarchists and communists had a leading role in the civil war, as they had in the resistances across Europe during WWII. It's not that they were many, it's that they were organized and believed in what they were doing. Malraux writes that communists were the better soldiers, because they had the discipline of the Party. These conflicting people were forced to collaborate, and Malraux has them talking at a time when communism had not yet failed. Not only them; there is also Ximenès, the deeply religious colonel discussing God with a member of the anarchist militia. The psychological novel is woven together with the adventure novel.
War:
I dislike war movies, but love war books. The strategy, the technology, the fight with overwhelmingly bad equipment are described in L'espoir and are really shoking. I mean, they fight tanks with grenades and throw bombs from " le trou des chiottes" , the hole for the toilet in the planes, because that's all they've got.
I stress, this book is not boring. Most of the times. I think it's sometimes read in high school, which is almost never good for a book. I agree it's easy to get lost with so many things happening and so many characters. But I would re read it anytime. Well, re re re re read it.
Malraux manages to write a book which is not a reportage, roman a thèse, nor pure publicity. There's adventure and art and poetry. It's great.
Publicity said otherwise.
Now, this book is very close to publicity. Malraux finished it in 1937. The war was not yet lost but things were turning ugly for the republicans. He wanted more support from France and Britain. It focuses on the clash of ideologies much more than on the atrocities of a civil war. His characters are foreigners of the " brigadas internacionales" like Magnin, or don't have a real family, like Manuel. My grandfather was a republican. His own brother fought with the nacionales. Not many really chose their side; it was mostly a matter of were you lived. Travelling to the other side, abandoning friends and family was not easy. The tragedy of a civil war is that it's literally brother fighting brother, without a shadow of meaning or choice.
You can't really see that in Malraux. Although violence is not disguised and there are some gruesome scences, man and sometimes war are glorified.
Ximenès boitant toujours [...] marchait de nouveau vers l'hôtel, seul parmi les balles au milieu du square immense.
Ximenès limped still towards the hotel, alone amongst the bullets in the middle of the huge square"
Ximenes' courage is said to be his homeland.
The war, for Malraux, is justified. There can be no doubt for the reader of who is the good guy. The nationalist side is barely represented in the novel. The enemy is the only thing that unifies anarchists, communists, republicans. In L'espoir, it is seen as from above, like Malraux himself would do from one of his planes: armed masses.
He writes: In every village Franco has taken, everything becomes a little less free
Which was very probably true.
However, it's definetely fiction. Another frenchman, Simon, who was in and wrote about the civil war, said:
L’Espoir ? Pour moi c’est un peu Tintin faisant la révolution. C’est une sorte de roman-feuilleton, de roman d’aventures, écrit par quelqu’un qui est lui-même un aventurier, dans le cadre de la révolution. En plus, il raconte des choses qu’il n’a pas perçues lui-même, c’est le romancier- Dieu, il est partout : au sol, dans les avions, chez les uns, chez les autres...
L'Espoir? I think it's a bit like Tintin playing revolution. A kind of novel-feuilleton, an adventure novel, written by a man who was an adventurer, in a revolutionary context. Moreover, he tells things he hasn't seen, it's the God-narrator, he's everywhere: on the ground, on the planes, following someone or the other...
Why, then, do I love the book?
The characters:
There are enough characters (Manuel, Magnin, le Négus, Garcia, Scali, Ximenès, Ramos, Heinrich, Leclerc, Polski...) to rival a novel by Tolkien, so many it's sometimes difficult for the reader to keep up. But they're usually very well portrayed, with only a few words, a nationality, ideology, a bit of background... but develop into fully fledged people.
For example, Magnin's introduction:
Dès que Darras fut dégagé, Magnin sauta à terre. Il était en combinaison de vol; ses moustaches tombantes, d'un blond gris, lui donnaient sous le serré-tête un aspect de Viking étonné, à cause de ses lunettes décaille
One of the pilots has just crashed the plane they were both in and Magnin, "le patron" is not all that impressed. He's got that distracted-competent air about him.
They have mannerisms. Manuel likes to fidget and often has something in his hands, usually a branch or a pen. I do that too.
The art:
Malraux and his characters talk about art; religious art, street art, anything. Artists and intellectuals were of course mostly in the republican side and Scali was, I think, an art teacher in Italy. It's in fact surprisingly present in the novel. There are constant visual symbols. Two cadillacs in the streets of Madrid are likened to a scene in a gangster movie. Ximenes holds a "bâton de chef" of the guardia civil while walking into the deserted square.
The poetry:
Malraux's language is lyrical . For example, like Flaubert before him, he compares an attack to a wave:
La vague d'assaut, balayée par les trois nids de mitrailleuses, laissa son festo de tués et reflua
Troughout the novel, he mentions colours, smells, striking sceneries that build the epic to an almost operistic level.
Ideology:
Although I have criticized that before, the discussions about ideology are numerous and I find them extremely interesting. Anarchists and communists had a leading role in the civil war, as they had in the resistances across Europe during WWII. It's not that they were many, it's that they were organized and believed in what they were doing. Malraux writes that communists were the better soldiers, because they had the discipline of the Party. These conflicting people were forced to collaborate, and Malraux has them talking at a time when communism had not yet failed. Not only them; there is also Ximenès, the deeply religious colonel discussing God with a member of the anarchist militia. The psychological novel is woven together with the adventure novel.
War:
I dislike war movies, but love war books. The strategy, the technology, the fight with overwhelmingly bad equipment are described in L'espoir and are really shoking. I mean, they fight tanks with grenades and throw bombs from " le trou des chiottes" , the hole for the toilet in the planes, because that's all they've got.
I stress, this book is not boring. Most of the times. I think it's sometimes read in high school, which is almost never good for a book. I agree it's easy to get lost with so many things happening and so many characters. But I would re read it anytime. Well, re re re re read it.
Malraux manages to write a book which is not a reportage, roman a thèse, nor pure publicity. There's adventure and art and poetry. It's great.
June 22, 2020
Luin Toivoa kuukauden. Tiedän, että kirja on maailmansodan alkusoittoa käsittelevän sotakirjallisuuden, tai ehkä peräti maailmankirjallisuuden, klassikko, mutta kylläpä oli tahmeasti etenevä ja melkein masentava lukukokemus. Tavallaan tunnelma sopi aiheeseen.
Malrauxin alter ego on lentäjänä Espanjan sisällissodassa tasavaltalaisten joukossa. Vihollisia tulee oikealta ja vasemmalta, kun vasemmistolaiset taistelevat fasisteja ja saksalaisia vastaan heikommalla kalustolla.
Sota etenee monessa pisteessä ja kirja episodeissa. Ideana on yksinkertaisesti se, että yksi lyhyt episodi kuvaa yhtä taistelujaksoa tai muuta kohtausta. Sen lopuksi yleensä joku kymmenistä taistelijoista menettää henkensä, raajansa, aistinsa tai joukkonsa. Tai raportoidaan osumista, miestuhoista tai palavista kaupungeista.
Koska tasavaltalaisten diktatuurin vastaiset aatteet houkuttelivat yli rajojen, kuuluivat monet kirjan taistelijoista kansainvälisiin joukkoihin. Miehiä menee ja miehiä tulee - vain Magninin (se Malraux itse) ja Manuelin lukija kohtaa useammin.
Sodassa ovat miehillä mielessä sotataktiikka, asemalinjat ja seuraavan päivän operaatiot. Malraux kirjoittaa lakonisesti ja dokumentoiden. Vasta viimeisessä luvussa nimeltä Toivo päästiin pikkaisen kurkistamaan Espanjan kansan puolelle ja taistelijoiden ajatukset tekivät pikakäväisyjä siviilimaailmaan.
Huh, sainpas luettua. En suosittele kirjaa varsinkaan kaveriksi kesähelteille.
Malrauxin alter ego on lentäjänä Espanjan sisällissodassa tasavaltalaisten joukossa. Vihollisia tulee oikealta ja vasemmalta, kun vasemmistolaiset taistelevat fasisteja ja saksalaisia vastaan heikommalla kalustolla.
Sota etenee monessa pisteessä ja kirja episodeissa. Ideana on yksinkertaisesti se, että yksi lyhyt episodi kuvaa yhtä taistelujaksoa tai muuta kohtausta. Sen lopuksi yleensä joku kymmenistä taistelijoista menettää henkensä, raajansa, aistinsa tai joukkonsa. Tai raportoidaan osumista, miestuhoista tai palavista kaupungeista.
Koska tasavaltalaisten diktatuurin vastaiset aatteet houkuttelivat yli rajojen, kuuluivat monet kirjan taistelijoista kansainvälisiin joukkoihin. Miehiä menee ja miehiä tulee - vain Magninin (se Malraux itse) ja Manuelin lukija kohtaa useammin.
Sodassa ovat miehillä mielessä sotataktiikka, asemalinjat ja seuraavan päivän operaatiot. Malraux kirjoittaa lakonisesti ja dokumentoiden. Vasta viimeisessä luvussa nimeltä Toivo päästiin pikkaisen kurkistamaan Espanjan kansan puolelle ja taistelijoiden ajatukset tekivät pikakäväisyjä siviilimaailmaan.
Huh, sainpas luettua. En suosittele kirjaa varsinkaan kaveriksi kesähelteille.
October 23, 2019
Okunması çok zor bir kitap insan sürekli konudan kopuyor. Sürekli acı sürekli ölüm ve kitabın isminin aksine umutsuzluk. Ama bu kitabı çekici kılıp bana okutan nedenler bu olumsuzlukları geride bıraktı. Yazarın birebir olayları yaşamış olması bu kitabı bir nevi otobiyografi yapıyor, kitabın çıktığı senelerde dilimize çevrildikten sonra yasaklanmış olması iyice ilginçleştirmiş. Bir devletin halkına yaptığı bu kadar eziyetin gerçek olması inanılmaz bir olay ve halkın son derece haklı mücadelesine karşı Nazilerden yardım alan devlet.. kitabın sonuna yetişmemiş olsa da sonuçta da halk kaybetmiş... ve en son ama çok önemli konu ise kitabın çevirisini Atilla İlhan’ın yapması. Kitap hiç çeviri gibi gelmiyor sanki direkt Türkçe yazılmış hissini veriyor.
November 1, 2025
Beaucoup de très belles phrases (un peu moralisatrices sur les bords mais soit) diluées au milieu de beaucoup trop de pages. Trop de personnages, trop d’événements flous, trop de paragraphes consacrés à l’escadrille… je pense que j’étais pas le public visé. Si j’avais voulu passer ma semaine à comprendre le fonctionnement d’un avion (hautement improbable par ailleurs), j’aurais regardé C’est pas sorcier.
August 25, 2018
I tried...
But I cannot take 589 pages of Spanish
Civil war in French.
“…passez mon chemin” ( moving on...)
#DNF
But I cannot take 589 pages of Spanish
Civil war in French.
“…passez mon chemin” ( moving on...)
#DNF
July 9, 2018
La narración es pulida y muy bien hecha. Es quizás una de las mejores crónicas de la Guerra Civil Española. Sin embargo, no le doy una alta calificación, porque adolece de 2 cosas: En cualquier guerra, se debe narrar lo que ocurre en ambos bandos. Aquí, no es así. El 99% de la novela narra exclusivamente lo que ocurre en el ejército republicano. Por otra parte, el autor se explaya, mucho, en describir toda la ideología socialista-comunista que, teóricamente, los republicanos defendían en la Guerra. Y claro, si el lector retira todos los párrafos propagandísticos del comunismo, te quedas con 3/4 del libro. Cuando se revisa la biografía del autor, entiendes el por qué la novela tiene estas características. Sin embargo, es meritorio que haya sido redactada y publicada, porque daba un testimonio del bando perdedor de la Guerra. Un aspecto que no es común después de la victoria.
October 13, 2018
L'Espoir est un roman écrit par André Malraux qui a paru en décembre 1937 aux éditions Gallimard ; il relate les évènements importants du début de la Guerre d'Espagne, du putsch militaire franquiste du 18 juillet 1936 à la bataille de Guadalajara en mars 1937, où les républicains furent victorieux.
August 2, 2012
Un des rares livres que j'ai abandonné en cours de lecture, après quand même 250 pages
La narration, le style, les personnages rien ne m'a vraiment plu.
J'en garde un souvenir très pesant, ennuyeux et un peu donneur de leçons.
La narration, le style, les personnages rien ne m'a vraiment plu.
J'en garde un souvenir très pesant, ennuyeux et un peu donneur de leçons.
September 29, 2019
Man’s Hope is an epic novel about the Spanish Civil War of 1936-1939. During this bloody conflict, the Fascist elements of the Spanish military and the Catholic church, under the leadership of the Falangist dictator Francisco Franco, were supported vigorously by Benito Mussolini’s Italy and Adolf Hitler’s Germany and overthrew the leftist Republican government of Spain which was supported by the Soviet Union and by individual citizens of the Western European nations.
André Malraux was among many anti-Fascist Europeans who volunteered to fight for the Republicans, and he played a significant role as an organizer of the International Squadron of aircraft for the Republic. Man’s Hope is based on Malraux's experiences which he chronicled during the battles on the Republican side and and published while the war was still raging; it depicts the events of 1936-1937 as an adventure of the human spirit within a framework of historical, political, and philosophical ideas.
The novel is divided into three parts of which the first, “Careless Rapture”, begins with the optimistic and carefree mood of the Republican militia and their international volunteer comrades during the first summer of the Civil War. The second section of part 1, entitled “Prelude to Apocalypse,” concerns the mismanagement of the emotions of the Republican movement. This is followed by “The Manzanares” (the second part), with sections entitled “Action and Reaction” and “Comrades’ Blood.” “The Manzanares” begins with the rout of the Republicans from Toledo in September, continues with the siege and bombing of the Republicans in Madrid (now a city in flames), and ends in December with the Republican counterattack. The final part of the novel was originally entitled “The Peasants,” but Malraux changed the title to “Hope” in his definitive 1947 revision—probably to underscore its importance for the work as a whole.
A significant theme of the novel concerns the nature of a revolution or popular uprising. From Malraux's perspective, a revolution comes into being under the impetus of a lyric burst of feeling, the best of which is found in freedom and fraternity. At this stage, Anarchism seems to fit well with the revolution. For a revolution to be sustained, however, these feelings have to be disciplined and organized; hence the need for a political machinery such as that of the Communist Party (which will, ironically, destroy the lyric impulses of revolution).
On a political level, then, Man’s Hope dramatizes the self-defining process of a revolution. As it does so, Malraux also explores the meaning of being human. When humanist intellectuals such as Scali are confronted with the brutalities of war and carefree individuals such as Manuel evolve into effective military leaders, they have to come to terms with the meaning of humanity—their own as well as others’. By means of symbolic epiphanies Malraux provides an assurance of hope in the endurance of fundamental humanity. Overall this book is a great sort of mess mirroring the morass of war.
André Malraux was among many anti-Fascist Europeans who volunteered to fight for the Republicans, and he played a significant role as an organizer of the International Squadron of aircraft for the Republic. Man’s Hope is based on Malraux's experiences which he chronicled during the battles on the Republican side and and published while the war was still raging; it depicts the events of 1936-1937 as an adventure of the human spirit within a framework of historical, political, and philosophical ideas.
The novel is divided into three parts of which the first, “Careless Rapture”, begins with the optimistic and carefree mood of the Republican militia and their international volunteer comrades during the first summer of the Civil War. The second section of part 1, entitled “Prelude to Apocalypse,” concerns the mismanagement of the emotions of the Republican movement. This is followed by “The Manzanares” (the second part), with sections entitled “Action and Reaction” and “Comrades’ Blood.” “The Manzanares” begins with the rout of the Republicans from Toledo in September, continues with the siege and bombing of the Republicans in Madrid (now a city in flames), and ends in December with the Republican counterattack. The final part of the novel was originally entitled “The Peasants,” but Malraux changed the title to “Hope” in his definitive 1947 revision—probably to underscore its importance for the work as a whole.
A significant theme of the novel concerns the nature of a revolution or popular uprising. From Malraux's perspective, a revolution comes into being under the impetus of a lyric burst of feeling, the best of which is found in freedom and fraternity. At this stage, Anarchism seems to fit well with the revolution. For a revolution to be sustained, however, these feelings have to be disciplined and organized; hence the need for a political machinery such as that of the Communist Party (which will, ironically, destroy the lyric impulses of revolution).
On a political level, then, Man’s Hope dramatizes the self-defining process of a revolution. As it does so, Malraux also explores the meaning of being human. When humanist intellectuals such as Scali are confronted with the brutalities of war and carefree individuals such as Manuel evolve into effective military leaders, they have to come to terms with the meaning of humanity—their own as well as others’. By means of symbolic epiphanies Malraux provides an assurance of hope in the endurance of fundamental humanity. Overall this book is a great sort of mess mirroring the morass of war.
May 30, 2021
فوق العاده بود. همینگوی و مالرو هر دو یک جنگ را توصیف کرده اند اما هر چقدر تصویر همینگوی غیر مشخص و بی زمان بود کتاب مالرو خواننده را میبرد به قلب جنگ داخلی اسپآنیا باهمه بیم و امید هایش .مالرو یک لانگ شات ازاین جنگ گرفته و همینگوی یک کلوز آپ از گوشه ی از این صحنه . .تفاوت دیگر این دو کتاب درسطح مفهوم و معنای این جنگ است. کتاب مالرو پر است از اشاره به انگیزه های جنگ, به معنای جنگ برای آدم ها و گروه های درگیر آن , نام کتاب هم "امید " است , کتاب روایتگرو ستایشگر آرزوها و امید های آدم هایی است که برای رسیدن به آنچه درست میدانند , جان میبازند . نام کتاب هم در تضاد با "امید "مالرو به تلخی جنگ اشاره میکند "این ناقوس مرگ کیست ؟". همینگوی نگاه آرمانگرایانه ای به این جنگ ندارد.بیشتر در آن مرگ و نیستی میبیند. جاهایی به آرمان های این جنگ اشاره دارد اما انقدر کمرنگ است که بیشتر رنگ مخالفت کلی با جنگ در ذهن میماند.بعنوان "رمان جنگ " من "امید "مالرو را که که نابرابری دو سوی این جنگ را پر رنگ نشان داده است, بیشتر دوست دارم.
امید روایت "محشر برادری" است. ۴۲۰نوعی برادری هست که فقط ماورای مرگ وجود دارد
همه دانه ها اول میپوسند ,اما میان آنها دانه هایی است که جوانه میزنند ..دنیای بی امید خفه کننده است .
۳۷۳ انسان هایی که بر اثر امید و عمل با هم متحد شده باشند ,مانند کسانی که به سبب عشق یگانه شوند ,به قلمروهایی دست می یابند که تک تک شان به تنهایی نمیتوانستند به آن دست یابند .
آدم به کنه جنگ فقط یکبار میتواند پی ببرد اما به ژرفای زندگی بارها وبارها
مثل این است که جنگ , برای شکار انسانها , ... امید را به عنوان طعمه بکار می برد. بالاخره سفلیس هم با عشق شروع می شود.
امید روایت "محشر برادری" است. ۴۲۰نوعی برادری هست که فقط ماورای مرگ وجود دارد
همه دانه ها اول میپوسند ,اما میان آنها دانه هایی است که جوانه میزنند ..دنیای بی امید خفه کننده است .
۳۷۳ انسان هایی که بر اثر امید و عمل با هم متحد شده باشند ,مانند کسانی که به سبب عشق یگانه شوند ,به قلمروهایی دست می یابند که تک تک شان به تنهایی نمیتوانستند به آن دست یابند .
آدم به کنه جنگ فقط یکبار میتواند پی ببرد اما به ژرفای زندگی بارها وبارها
مثل این است که جنگ , برای شکار انسانها , ... امید را به عنوان طعمه بکار می برد. بالاخره سفلیس هم با عشق شروع می شود.
November 17, 2025
Alors comment dire ... si j'avais pu DNF, je ne me serais pas gênée. Malheureusement, livre de cours oblige.
Ce livre porte vraiment mal son nom je trouve - L'Espoir - franchement qui a eu cette idée, ce sont 600 pages de désespoir du lecteur qui se perd parmi les (TROP) nombreux personnages et les descriptions interminables de la violence de la guerre !
La deuxième étoile est uniquement présente pour célébrer la fin de ce livre !!
Ce livre porte vraiment mal son nom je trouve - L'Espoir - franchement qui a eu cette idée, ce sont 600 pages de désespoir du lecteur qui se perd parmi les (TROP) nombreux personnages et les descriptions interminables de la violence de la guerre !
La deuxième étoile est uniquement présente pour célébrer la fin de ce livre !!
July 3, 2022
Roman kaléidoscopique...une foule de personnages apparaissent les uns après les autres, sans introduction, leur psychologie se détachant dans l'action et dans quelques rares discussions abstraites
Il y a des fulgurences mais aussi des incohérences fâcheuses...tel personnage à pied se retrouve dans la même phrase sur un mulet ...
Un sujet magnifique, un style très, très particulier...ça peut plaire, cela n'a pas été mon cas...
Il y a des fulgurences mais aussi des incohérences fâcheuses...tel personnage à pied se retrouve dans la même phrase sur un mulet ...
Un sujet magnifique, un style très, très particulier...ça peut plaire, cela n'a pas été mon cas...
November 23, 2025
G abandonné au bout de 500 pages, plus jamais je lis une merde pareille. Les gens qui disent avoir bien aimé : sur une échelle de 1 à 10, à quel point vous vous écoutez parler quand vous louez ce bousin ?
March 30, 2022
Très beau et intéressant
Un peu longuet sur la fin
Un peu longuet sur la fin
December 12, 2024
Ouais nan plus jamais
August 8, 2017
L'éspoir est le sentiment avec lequel on commence ce livre, l'éspoir de mieux comprendre l'époque et les personnes qui y ont vécu. Malheuresement, il n'y répond que très partiellement, car la part du lion du récit est concentrée sur les discussions idéologiques dont le contexte a été pérdu avec le temps. Le vécu cependant montre qu'il y a eu bien des causes justes dans le camp républicain, et que la guerre de l'Éspagne a été conduite dans l'absurdité d'une guerre honorable ornée des attaques a corps lévée et des grandes déclaration mais véritablement sans honneur usant des bombardement indiscriminés, prises d'otages civils de deux cotés, destruction et pillage opportuniste de la propriété de l'église, usage des lance-flammes et autres petites et grandes vilainies. Tout au plus on peut citer Malraux même - "Ici nous fabriquons l'Apocalypse, lequel par définition n'a pas d'avenir" . La République a pérdu justement parce que son mouvement était trop apocalyptique - composé des groupes très diverses venus du monde entier, pour préparer l'apocalypse du statut quo, sans même refléchir quoi ils allaient proposer à tous ces réscapés et "réscusités" par la suite. Géopolitiquement et historiquement, c'était une conséquence de l'éclatement de l'Empire Habsbourgeois et la montée du néocolonialisme américain qui a évincé le paléocolonialitsme éspagnol tout en provoquant un malaise majeur dans la société et une rupture entre l'armée et les civils en Espagne.
September 19, 2023
J’avais acheté ce roman pour un séminaire de Master auquel je n’ai pas pu assister. La première fois que j’avais entendu parler de ce roman j’étais en cours d’histoire en classe préparatoire et nous étudions (ou plutôt on nous racontait) la guerre d’Espagne. Bien loin de la curiosité que j’ai pu avoir ensuite pour l’histoire quand j’ai compris que cela me permettait de comprendre le contexte de production des oeuvres et leur environnement culturel et donc d’entrer plus profondément à l’intérieur d’elles, de m’imprégner réellement de toutes leurs richesses, je n’écoutais qu’à moitié le cours, le prenant machinalement en notes (parfois je ne faisais même pas semblant, ce cours est l’un des seuls où je me suis permise de dormir). Les événements s’accumulaient sur la page, une longue liste de dates accompagnée d’une aussi longue liste de partis politiques que les acronymes rendent anonymes et mystérieux. Le tout a dû faire l’objet d’une évaluation, une colle ou un devoir sur table, mais je ne me rappelle même plus si j’ai fait l’effort d’apprendre le contenu du cours. Cependant, je connais les dates essentielles, le pourquoi du comment dans les grandes lignes, les forces majeures qui s’opposèrent et les conséquences pour l’Europe. Cela n’était apparemment pas suffisant pour lire l’Espoir.
André Malraux ne nous prend pas par la main pour nous guider à travers les événements. Il y a rarement des dates tout au long du récit, si bien que pour les ignorants comme moi, la chronologie devient très vite floue. Le temps n’est défini que par les victoires et les défaites qui ont presque l’air anecdotiques dans l’aveuglement que l’auteur nous impose : il nous fait porter des sortes d’oeillères en nous donnant presque jamais l’accès à une vue d’ensemble qui nous permettraient d’organiser, de trier et de hiérarchiser les événements. A cela s’ajoute que les indices d’une avancée dans l’Histoire sont cachés dans des discours toujours tronqués, soit parce que nous n’avons pas tout le dialogue des personnages, soit parce qu’ils parlent entre eux par allusions comme le feraient des personnes vivant la même expérience. On peut louer ce réalisme des dialogues mais cela n’avance pas plus le lecteur qui n’aurait pas la même expérience. Cette manière de mimer l’intimité des soldats, de faire communauté à travers un dialogue d’initiés, est à l’origine des chefs d’oeuvre d’Apollinaire — entre autres — mais c’est de la poésie, on peut tout de même apprécier l’ouvrage car sa puissance évocatrice n’en est pas ruinée pour autant. Dans un roman, il s’avère que c’est un peu moins supportable.
Comme bien souvent Malraux privilégie pour conter les faits l’échelle de l’individu. Les faits sont alors fragmentés comme l’existence des personnages. A cause de la grande confusion de cette fragmentation et parce que Malraux multiplie les points de vue en inventant des personnages correspondant à toutes les positions politiques et hiérarchiques, il est difficile de garder en mémoire les informations essentielles sur les personnages. Cela gêne en grande partie l’identification et l’empathie. Il y a bien un ou deux personnages qui sortent du lot, mais cet afflux de personnages est difficile à suivre parce qu’on les perd un moment pour les retrouver ensuite, demandant donc à la mémoire de reprendre les éléments du passé alors que cette dernière est déjà en panique car elle n’a pas beaucoup de branches bien solides auxquelles se raccrocher, comme elle ne comprend pas grand chose dans la confusion des moments saccadés. Je finissais par confondre les personnages entre eux, surtout quand leur évolution dans les hiérarchies implicites était au coeur de leurs actions et de leurs relations.
A cela s’ajoute ma méconnaissance des titres dans l’armée, des figures historiques que l’auteur cite comme des personnalités connues de tous, qui se passent de présentation, et surtout des différents mouvements politiques fortement liés à une origine sociale qui semblent pour l’auteur suffire à définir certains traits des personnages, à expliquer leurs comportements et leur implication dans le conflit. Alors bien sûr, il y a les prénoms, deux trois caractéristiques physiques et psychologiques, mais j’étais tout de même perdue et bien souvent mon cerveau se contentait de se souvenir vaguement de tel personnage, au lieu de chercher dans les pages précédentes d’un roman dont j’avais bien du mal à suivre la chronologie (et sans chronologie établie, comment retrouver efficacement une information ?).
Ne me restait alors plus que l’expression pure des sentiments, d’apprécier l’exploration par l’auteur de l’horreur, de la détermination, de la camaraderie. Ou bien les dialogues sur la condition humaine et sur sa nature (mais l’auteur alors emploie le ton mystérieux des philosophes qui ne veulent pas révéler les conclusions de leur sagesse mais seulement suggérer des éléments d’une réflexion au lecteur – fausse profondeur ?). Me restait aussi le destin d’un personnage qui par la force des choses prend le rôle de leader et de tout ce que cela signifie pour un individu en terme de responsabilité mais aussi d’isolement. De remarquables scènes de combats aériens qui même dans la confusion des enjeux m’ont fait ressentir une certaine trépidation et de l’inquiétude. J’ai de vagues souvenirs d’une scène de siège ou d’un combat de tanks, des moments forts qui me sont restés car la narration s’était alors suffisamment ralentie pour que je puisse me plonger dans le contexte de l’instant décrit en faisant fi de certaines données contextuelles plus larges.
A force d’en parler, je me demande même maintenant si la confusion n’est pas un des objets de la narration où les détails peuvent prendre plus d’ampleur que dans l’organisation bien structurée et claire du récit de l’Histoire qui pour cela est bien obligée d’élaguer, d’aplanir les aspérités du terrain et du vécu pour ne garder que les grands mouvements au mépris souvent de la réalité. Cela n’empêche pas que L’Espoir n’est pas un roman à lire si on n’y connait rien et que je suis bien triste de ne pas avoir pu assister au séminaire qui m’aurait peut-être permis de mieux l’apprécier.
André Malraux ne nous prend pas par la main pour nous guider à travers les événements. Il y a rarement des dates tout au long du récit, si bien que pour les ignorants comme moi, la chronologie devient très vite floue. Le temps n’est défini que par les victoires et les défaites qui ont presque l’air anecdotiques dans l’aveuglement que l’auteur nous impose : il nous fait porter des sortes d’oeillères en nous donnant presque jamais l’accès à une vue d’ensemble qui nous permettraient d’organiser, de trier et de hiérarchiser les événements. A cela s’ajoute que les indices d’une avancée dans l’Histoire sont cachés dans des discours toujours tronqués, soit parce que nous n’avons pas tout le dialogue des personnages, soit parce qu’ils parlent entre eux par allusions comme le feraient des personnes vivant la même expérience. On peut louer ce réalisme des dialogues mais cela n’avance pas plus le lecteur qui n’aurait pas la même expérience. Cette manière de mimer l’intimité des soldats, de faire communauté à travers un dialogue d’initiés, est à l’origine des chefs d’oeuvre d’Apollinaire — entre autres — mais c’est de la poésie, on peut tout de même apprécier l’ouvrage car sa puissance évocatrice n’en est pas ruinée pour autant. Dans un roman, il s’avère que c’est un peu moins supportable.
Comme bien souvent Malraux privilégie pour conter les faits l’échelle de l’individu. Les faits sont alors fragmentés comme l’existence des personnages. A cause de la grande confusion de cette fragmentation et parce que Malraux multiplie les points de vue en inventant des personnages correspondant à toutes les positions politiques et hiérarchiques, il est difficile de garder en mémoire les informations essentielles sur les personnages. Cela gêne en grande partie l’identification et l’empathie. Il y a bien un ou deux personnages qui sortent du lot, mais cet afflux de personnages est difficile à suivre parce qu’on les perd un moment pour les retrouver ensuite, demandant donc à la mémoire de reprendre les éléments du passé alors que cette dernière est déjà en panique car elle n’a pas beaucoup de branches bien solides auxquelles se raccrocher, comme elle ne comprend pas grand chose dans la confusion des moments saccadés. Je finissais par confondre les personnages entre eux, surtout quand leur évolution dans les hiérarchies implicites était au coeur de leurs actions et de leurs relations.
A cela s’ajoute ma méconnaissance des titres dans l’armée, des figures historiques que l’auteur cite comme des personnalités connues de tous, qui se passent de présentation, et surtout des différents mouvements politiques fortement liés à une origine sociale qui semblent pour l’auteur suffire à définir certains traits des personnages, à expliquer leurs comportements et leur implication dans le conflit. Alors bien sûr, il y a les prénoms, deux trois caractéristiques physiques et psychologiques, mais j’étais tout de même perdue et bien souvent mon cerveau se contentait de se souvenir vaguement de tel personnage, au lieu de chercher dans les pages précédentes d’un roman dont j’avais bien du mal à suivre la chronologie (et sans chronologie établie, comment retrouver efficacement une information ?).
Ne me restait alors plus que l’expression pure des sentiments, d’apprécier l’exploration par l’auteur de l’horreur, de la détermination, de la camaraderie. Ou bien les dialogues sur la condition humaine et sur sa nature (mais l’auteur alors emploie le ton mystérieux des philosophes qui ne veulent pas révéler les conclusions de leur sagesse mais seulement suggérer des éléments d’une réflexion au lecteur – fausse profondeur ?). Me restait aussi le destin d’un personnage qui par la force des choses prend le rôle de leader et de tout ce que cela signifie pour un individu en terme de responsabilité mais aussi d’isolement. De remarquables scènes de combats aériens qui même dans la confusion des enjeux m’ont fait ressentir une certaine trépidation et de l’inquiétude. J’ai de vagues souvenirs d’une scène de siège ou d’un combat de tanks, des moments forts qui me sont restés car la narration s’était alors suffisamment ralentie pour que je puisse me plonger dans le contexte de l’instant décrit en faisant fi de certaines données contextuelles plus larges.
A force d’en parler, je me demande même maintenant si la confusion n’est pas un des objets de la narration où les détails peuvent prendre plus d’ampleur que dans l’organisation bien structurée et claire du récit de l’Histoire qui pour cela est bien obligée d’élaguer, d’aplanir les aspérités du terrain et du vécu pour ne garder que les grands mouvements au mépris souvent de la réalité. Cela n’empêche pas que L’Espoir n’est pas un roman à lire si on n’y connait rien et que je suis bien triste de ne pas avoir pu assister au séminaire qui m’aurait peut-être permis de mieux l’apprécier.
May 9, 2013
Avanzar en la lectura de L'Espoir es avanzar en la misma guerra civil española. André Malraux recrea magistralmente las distintas fases de dicha contienda bélica, tanto en escenarios geográficos como psicológicos.
Las primeras páginas son desoladoras, no por lo que se describe sino por el verismo con el que Malraux describe la ingenuidad del entusiasmo de los milicianos y de las fuerzas leales a la República. El lector sabe que la lucha y la muerte de muchos de ellos será en vano. Pero ellos todavía no. Por ello, su lectura es triste porque el lector es sabedor del triste final.
Después, algunas victorias del lado republicano nos traen algunas páginas de optimismo. Pero ya hacia el final, la maestría en la narración de Malraux, cuando describen las batallas finales que inclinarán la balanza de la victoria hacia el lado de los sublevados, convierte esta lectura en farragosa. Incluso cuesta avanzar. La sensación es la de encontrarse en el campo de batalla y la de tener que conquistar el final metro a metro, línea a línea.
Un magnífico ejemplo de veracidad narrativa.
Las primeras páginas son desoladoras, no por lo que se describe sino por el verismo con el que Malraux describe la ingenuidad del entusiasmo de los milicianos y de las fuerzas leales a la República. El lector sabe que la lucha y la muerte de muchos de ellos será en vano. Pero ellos todavía no. Por ello, su lectura es triste porque el lector es sabedor del triste final.
Después, algunas victorias del lado republicano nos traen algunas páginas de optimismo. Pero ya hacia el final, la maestría en la narración de Malraux, cuando describen las batallas finales que inclinarán la balanza de la victoria hacia el lado de los sublevados, convierte esta lectura en farragosa. Incluso cuesta avanzar. La sensación es la de encontrarse en el campo de batalla y la de tener que conquistar el final metro a metro, línea a línea.
Un magnífico ejemplo de veracidad narrativa.
August 30, 2012
This book and me didn't get along, at all! First of all, I can blame it on a deceptive description at the back of the book that gave me some unrealistic expectations. It's a novel, not his witness of the times he spent in the Spanish Civil War.
But never mind that. I just couldn't get into the book, into the story or the characters. There were some dramatic events but... nothing touched me, it wasn't remotely close to Orwell's Homage to Catalonia. Don't mind the mark, it's not a bad novel. Actually I enjoyed some of the conversations between the characters about what is a revolution, and the differences between socialists, communists and anarchists. And it's very well-written, very poetic, but it didn't get me.
But never mind that. I just couldn't get into the book, into the story or the characters. There were some dramatic events but... nothing touched me, it wasn't remotely close to Orwell's Homage to Catalonia. Don't mind the mark, it's not a bad novel. Actually I enjoyed some of the conversations between the characters about what is a revolution, and the differences between socialists, communists and anarchists. And it's very well-written, very poetic, but it didn't get me.
June 30, 2014
This book talks about the Spanish civil war that eventually ended with Franco's victory. This subject is often overseen by the beginning of WWII, so I hoped to get a good insight from a historical perspective. However, the view is obscured by the author sympathy for the communists, who, at that times opposed the fascists in Spain. The narration is somehow confuse and it took me some time to get myself familiar with the main characters. The pace is growing slow and steady as well as my reading speed. I have written down some quotes but moderately appreciate the socio-philosophical ideas exposed through the characters. Overall there were things I liked and thinks I didn't.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 76 reviews