What do you think?
Rate this book
Conversation with the Supplicant
8 pages, Unknown Binding
First published January 1, 1917
3 people are currently reading
38 people want to read
About the author
Franz Kafka
3,206 books37.6k followersPrague-born writer Franz Kafka wrote in German, and his stories, such as "
The Metamorphosis
" (1916), and posthumously published novels, including
The Trial
(1925), concern troubled individuals in a nightmarishly impersonal world.
Jewish middle-class family of this major fiction writer of the 20th century spoke German. People consider his unique body of much incomplete writing, mainly published posthumously, among the most influential in European literature.
His stories include "The Metamorphosis" (1912) and " In the Penal Colony " (1914), whereas his posthumous novels include The Trial (1925), The Castle (1926) and Amerika (1927).
Despite first language, Kafka also spoke fluent Czech. Later, Kafka acquired some knowledge of the French language and culture from Flaubert, one of his favorite authors.
Kafka first studied chemistry at the Charles-Ferdinand University of Prague but after two weeks switched to law. This study offered a range of career possibilities, which pleased his father, and required a longer course of study that gave Kafka time to take classes in German studies and art history. At the university, he joined a student club, named Lese- und Redehalle der Deutschen Studenten, which organized literary events, readings, and other activities. In the end of his first year of studies, he met Max Brod, a close friend of his throughout his life, together with the journalist Felix Weltsch, who also studied law. Kafka obtained the degree of doctor of law on 18 June 1906 and performed an obligatory year of unpaid service as law clerk for the civil and criminal courts.
Writing of Kafka attracted little attention before his death. During his lifetime, he published only a few short stories and never finished any of his novels except the very short "The Metamorphosis." Kafka wrote to Max Brod, his friend and literary executor: "Dearest Max, my last request: Everything I leave behind me ... in the way of diaries, manuscripts, letters (my own and others'), sketches, and so on, [is] to be burned unread." Brod told Kafka that he intended not to honor these wishes, but Kafka, so knowing, nevertheless consequently gave these directions specifically to Brod, who, so reasoning, overrode these wishes. Brod in fact oversaw the publication of most of work of Kafka in his possession; these works quickly began to attract attention and high critical regard.
Max Brod encountered significant difficulty in compiling notebooks of Kafka into any chronological order as Kafka started writing in the middle of notebooks, from the last towards the first, et cetera.
Kafka wrote all his published works in German except several letters in Czech to Milena Jesenská.
Jewish middle-class family of this major fiction writer of the 20th century spoke German. People consider his unique body of much incomplete writing, mainly published posthumously, among the most influential in European literature.
His stories include "The Metamorphosis" (1912) and " In the Penal Colony " (1914), whereas his posthumous novels include The Trial (1925), The Castle (1926) and Amerika (1927).
Despite first language, Kafka also spoke fluent Czech. Later, Kafka acquired some knowledge of the French language and culture from Flaubert, one of his favorite authors.
Kafka first studied chemistry at the Charles-Ferdinand University of Prague but after two weeks switched to law. This study offered a range of career possibilities, which pleased his father, and required a longer course of study that gave Kafka time to take classes in German studies and art history. At the university, he joined a student club, named Lese- und Redehalle der Deutschen Studenten, which organized literary events, readings, and other activities. In the end of his first year of studies, he met Max Brod, a close friend of his throughout his life, together with the journalist Felix Weltsch, who also studied law. Kafka obtained the degree of doctor of law on 18 June 1906 and performed an obligatory year of unpaid service as law clerk for the civil and criminal courts.
Writing of Kafka attracted little attention before his death. During his lifetime, he published only a few short stories and never finished any of his novels except the very short "The Metamorphosis." Kafka wrote to Max Brod, his friend and literary executor: "Dearest Max, my last request: Everything I leave behind me ... in the way of diaries, manuscripts, letters (my own and others'), sketches, and so on, [is] to be burned unread." Brod told Kafka that he intended not to honor these wishes, but Kafka, so knowing, nevertheless consequently gave these directions specifically to Brod, who, so reasoning, overrode these wishes. Brod in fact oversaw the publication of most of work of Kafka in his possession; these works quickly began to attract attention and high critical regard.
Max Brod encountered significant difficulty in compiling notebooks of Kafka into any chronological order as Kafka started writing in the middle of notebooks, from the last towards the first, et cetera.
Kafka wrote all his published works in German except several letters in Czech to Milena Jesenská.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 26 of 26 reviews
March 12, 2022
The world is filled with people that live based on their circumstances, thus not truly living. The few and far inbetween that recognize this circumstances that make the world go round are seen through lenses of madness, when they realize how misunderstood they are, they turn back to common world compliments (appearance).
August 31, 2024
May change rating after rereading :
First time you read it, if you aren’t familiar with Kafka, you’re like wtf did I just read. Then you sit and ponder and realize it’s somewhat deeper than you think.
Narrator is curious and somewhat annoyed by the supplicant, he asks the supplicant about his behavior at the church and when the supplicant says he does it for attention, the narrator doesn’t get it. I think supplicant is also frightened yet excited over someone asking him and paying him attention as to why he does this.
The supplicant provides multiple examples and the moment that makes him think the way he does, and my interpretation was that he is living through the lens of others. He’s trying to live through the attention of others and he says he feels like he isn’t alive but he’s aware of everything around him. He talks about the collapsing buildings and the merchants hiding the dead, which could mean trying to hide the truth or society’s way of hiding things or not coming to reality. But the supplicant isn’t living through his own perspective? (Huh?)
In the end, the narrator does not understand the supplicant and I think he (supplicant) realizes that the narrator can’t understand him either so he just compliments him and in the end there’s this line, “And admissions became clear when one withdrew them." Although written in perspective from the narrator I think it’s also for the supplicant and on how he realizes the narrator won’t get it and he steps back from the convo and just compliments him. (It’s 1am what am I even writing). The line means that sometimes you gain clarity and understanding when you let go or step back from things.
First time you read it, if you aren’t familiar with Kafka, you’re like wtf did I just read. Then you sit and ponder and realize it’s somewhat deeper than you think.
Narrator is curious and somewhat annoyed by the supplicant, he asks the supplicant about his behavior at the church and when the supplicant says he does it for attention, the narrator doesn’t get it. I think supplicant is also frightened yet excited over someone asking him and paying him attention as to why he does this.
The supplicant provides multiple examples and the moment that makes him think the way he does, and my interpretation was that he is living through the lens of others. He’s trying to live through the attention of others and he says he feels like he isn’t alive but he’s aware of everything around him. He talks about the collapsing buildings and the merchants hiding the dead, which could mean trying to hide the truth or society’s way of hiding things or not coming to reality. But the supplicant isn’t living through his own perspective? (Huh?)
In the end, the narrator does not understand the supplicant and I think he (supplicant) realizes that the narrator can’t understand him either so he just compliments him and in the end there’s this line, “And admissions became clear when one withdrew them." Although written in perspective from the narrator I think it’s also for the supplicant and on how he realizes the narrator won’t get it and he steps back from the convo and just compliments him. (It’s 1am what am I even writing). The line means that sometimes you gain clarity and understanding when you let go or step back from things.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
October 10, 2023
Interesting absurd story that will stick with you. The ideas could have been conveyed in a more thorough way; perhaps the easiest way would have been over more pages.
August 11, 2024
“There has never been a time in which I have been convinced from within myself that I am alive. You see, I have only such a fugitive awareness of things around me that I always feel they were once real and are now fleeting away. I have a constant longing, my dear sir, to catch a glimpse of things as they may have been before they show themselves to me. I feel that then they were calm and beautiful. It must be so, for I often hear people talking about them as though they were."
August 7, 2022
3.25/5 for what it is it’s good, but it’s hard to provide a deep commentary about madness and perception in 9 pages
Read
October 27, 2025This was my first time reading Kafka since high school, and honestly, his writing is just as confusing now as it was then to me. I find the absurdity and abstractionism in his writing very difficult to process. This could be because I spend so much time reading easy modern day romances for the feels.
I read this story twice over the span of 5 days, not because it's long, but rather I was very confused. During my first read, I was just reacting to the turns of the story and the actions/dialogue from the characters. I didn't really understand what was going on, which I credit to me trying to read this story at 11pm. Poor choice; don't read Kafka if you're not fully present. For my second read, I had to set myself up for success: cup of chai, good lighting, my reading journal, my pen, and a clear mind. I dove into the story once more with the hopes of understanding it better. After my second read, while I do think my understanding is better, I don't think it's complete or without flaw.
The story is about a man, the narrator, who goes to church and runs into a man, the supplicant, who has a very odd form of prayer; he likes to thrash his head around. The narrator is curious about why the supplicant prays in such a disturbing way, that he basically chases him down. The story then transforms into a conversation between the narrator and the supplicant.
Through the conversation, I think Kafka is primarily discussing the awareness of our realities and how those realities differ among individuals based on our lived experiences. The key dialogue that contributes to this interpretation is when the supplicant tells the narrator "'There has never been a time in which I have been convinced from within myself that I am alive. You see, I have only such a fugitive awareness of things around me that I always feel they were once real and are now fleeting away. I have a constant longing, my dear sir, to catch a glimpse of things as they may have been before they show themselves to me. I feel that then they were calm and beautiful. I must be so, for I often hear people talking about them as though they were.'" The supplicant seems to want to see the reality of something when he cannot see it himself -- from the perspective of others around him, as he feels it may be more beautiful (or simply different) from his own perspective of it. Later on the supplicant says "'No , I don't [project my own state of mind like that on other people], not even with you for instance, because I can't. But I should be glad if I could, for then I wouldn't need to make people look at me in church. Do you know why I need to?'" My understanding of this quote is that if the supplicant could project his state of mind (or reality) upon others, he wouldn't need them to stare at him, likely for them to understand his reality. There would be no need for them to observe him since they would likely already understand what he is experiencing, feeling, etc. However, because he cannot project his state of mind, he yearns for them to observe him and connect.
The narrator certainly seems to relate to the supplicant. Throughout the story he seems to want to disagree with the supplicant but then finds that he is unable to react. Furthermore, in the middle of the dialogue, the narrator actually says "'... I've had some experience, and I don't mean it as a joke when I tell you it's like being seasick on dry land. It's a condition in which you can't remember the real names of things and so in a great hurry you fling temporary names at them. You do it as a fast as you can. But you've hardly turned your back on them before you've forgotten what you called them. A poplar in the fields which you called 'the tower of Babel,' since you either didn't or wouldn't know that it was a poplar, stands unwavering anonymously again, and so you have to call it 'Noah in his cups.''" To me, it seems the narrator is describing a reality where what one doesn't know has a different name and existence in their mind compared to what perhaps others do know. The narrator seems to acknowledge/understand the supplicant, but feels a need to disagree. However, by the end of the story, I think the supplicant knows that the narrator agrees with him even if he has vehemently voiced a disagreement, which is why he's "very delighted" at the end and complimented him. The final sentence "And admissions became most clear and unequivocal when one withdrew them" seems to say that the narrator's true feelings were evident even when he voiced the opposite.
I could be entirely wrong in my interpretation of this story, but I'm okay with that. The point of reading Kafka is to feel challenged and more curious about philosophies of life. A challenging by curious read.
I read this story twice over the span of 5 days, not because it's long, but rather I was very confused. During my first read, I was just reacting to the turns of the story and the actions/dialogue from the characters. I didn't really understand what was going on, which I credit to me trying to read this story at 11pm. Poor choice; don't read Kafka if you're not fully present. For my second read, I had to set myself up for success: cup of chai, good lighting, my reading journal, my pen, and a clear mind. I dove into the story once more with the hopes of understanding it better. After my second read, while I do think my understanding is better, I don't think it's complete or without flaw.
The story is about a man, the narrator, who goes to church and runs into a man, the supplicant, who has a very odd form of prayer; he likes to thrash his head around. The narrator is curious about why the supplicant prays in such a disturbing way, that he basically chases him down. The story then transforms into a conversation between the narrator and the supplicant.
Through the conversation, I think Kafka is primarily discussing the awareness of our realities and how those realities differ among individuals based on our lived experiences. The key dialogue that contributes to this interpretation is when the supplicant tells the narrator "'There has never been a time in which I have been convinced from within myself that I am alive. You see, I have only such a fugitive awareness of things around me that I always feel they were once real and are now fleeting away. I have a constant longing, my dear sir, to catch a glimpse of things as they may have been before they show themselves to me. I feel that then they were calm and beautiful. I must be so, for I often hear people talking about them as though they were.'" The supplicant seems to want to see the reality of something when he cannot see it himself -- from the perspective of others around him, as he feels it may be more beautiful (or simply different) from his own perspective of it. Later on the supplicant says "'No , I don't [project my own state of mind like that on other people], not even with you for instance, because I can't. But I should be glad if I could, for then I wouldn't need to make people look at me in church. Do you know why I need to?'" My understanding of this quote is that if the supplicant could project his state of mind (or reality) upon others, he wouldn't need them to stare at him, likely for them to understand his reality. There would be no need for them to observe him since they would likely already understand what he is experiencing, feeling, etc. However, because he cannot project his state of mind, he yearns for them to observe him and connect.
The narrator certainly seems to relate to the supplicant. Throughout the story he seems to want to disagree with the supplicant but then finds that he is unable to react. Furthermore, in the middle of the dialogue, the narrator actually says "'... I've had some experience, and I don't mean it as a joke when I tell you it's like being seasick on dry land. It's a condition in which you can't remember the real names of things and so in a great hurry you fling temporary names at them. You do it as a fast as you can. But you've hardly turned your back on them before you've forgotten what you called them. A poplar in the fields which you called 'the tower of Babel,' since you either didn't or wouldn't know that it was a poplar, stands unwavering anonymously again, and so you have to call it 'Noah in his cups.''" To me, it seems the narrator is describing a reality where what one doesn't know has a different name and existence in their mind compared to what perhaps others do know. The narrator seems to acknowledge/understand the supplicant, but feels a need to disagree. However, by the end of the story, I think the supplicant knows that the narrator agrees with him even if he has vehemently voiced a disagreement, which is why he's "very delighted" at the end and complimented him. The final sentence "And admissions became most clear and unequivocal when one withdrew them" seems to say that the narrator's true feelings were evident even when he voiced the opposite.
I could be entirely wrong in my interpretation of this story, but I'm okay with that. The point of reading Kafka is to feel challenged and more curious about philosophies of life. A challenging by curious read.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
November 24, 2023
This is my second time reading the story. At first, I wanted to read it in German, as for a language practise (I'm somewhat b2). It was a tough job, yet I always strive to read books in their original language, for only then I feel like I understand what the writer truly meant.
Reading it for the first time, I had no context of Kafka's style, biography, philosophical influences in his works... and to be honest, I saw no depth in the story, only an extent of absurdity.
Now though, after re-reading the text, after being somewhat more acquainted with the author, I can actually appreciate this hidden gem. This is not the kind of the story, like Metamorphosis, that throughout the years have developed a fixed interpretation route. Here, Kafka explores the theme of madness, perception, absurdity and frailness of character in his characteristic, ambiguous way. It's great to have the story left for yourself and your interpretation. Although, I have to say, it requires careful reading. You have to be ready to receive it, too.
Reading it for the first time, I had no context of Kafka's style, biography, philosophical influences in his works... and to be honest, I saw no depth in the story, only an extent of absurdity.
Now though, after re-reading the text, after being somewhat more acquainted with the author, I can actually appreciate this hidden gem. This is not the kind of the story, like Metamorphosis, that throughout the years have developed a fixed interpretation route. Here, Kafka explores the theme of madness, perception, absurdity and frailness of character in his characteristic, ambiguous way. It's great to have the story left for yourself and your interpretation. Although, I have to say, it requires careful reading. You have to be ready to receive it, too.
May 22, 2024
This was the first Kafka piece I have ever read and it was easier to read than the metamorphosis. The metamorphosis had too much imagery and I'm not the greatest bug fan. This book was about a man who had seen someone praying for attention and when he had constantly asked him why and conflict occurred he had gotten arrested. Although it was short, it carried the message about how he felt like he was able to see the perspectives no one else was able to see. It also shows that he had trying to use his voice he was instantly oppressed and arrested. This was an interesting book to read, and I would rate it better than the metamorphosis but I don't think it was 5 star worthy.
January 14, 2025
very short story. details the yearning to be alive and using your experiences to prove that you are. the supplicant discusses his reasons for this and also mentions how fleeting life can be, supplicating at the altar to prolong his existence. i believe kafka is confused; why would a man use the eyes of others to prove that he is experiencing life? only giving this two stars because it wasn’t particularly interesting, but it’s not bad so i can’t give it one
November 22, 2024
The supplicant feels like a character that is slightly out of touch with reality, only feeling alive through others perceiving his existence. He momentarily seems to connect with the narrator and feels he sees his perspective but soon pulls back and leaves complimenting his tie as soon as he sees the disconnect.
But yep, need to reread as I don't think I got it.
But yep, need to reread as I don't think I got it.
April 9, 2025
There is no meaning, no development, no story, just a conversation. Such a short story, no more than 20 pages aa well. We were given nothing as readers, nothing. This nothingness is the beauty, the lack of meaning is beautiful. We create the story through our perspective and what every aspect means to us as individuals. Amazing.
Read
May 4, 2025I really enjoy Kafka’s prose and the off-kilter way his characters talk. That being said, I definitely did not fully understand this. It felt like two crazy people talking to eachother and I can’t tell if I’m supposed to agree or understand either of them lol. Will be re-reading at some point for sure.
April 25, 2025
"I heard my mother calling down from the balcony in the most natural voice: 'What are you doing, my dear? It's so hot.' And a woman answered from the garden: 'I'm reveling in the grass.' She said it quite simply and without insistence, as if it were to be taken for granted."
I love this.
I love this.
June 23, 2025
pretty fun, i love the premise “i get angry when i behave badly; but if someone else does the wrong thing I am delighted,” the poplar, “i’m reveling in the grass,” and the ending. it’s about performance? relationship with society? i wanna read about it.
November 10, 2022
Good early work by Kafka.
March 25, 2023
Nice one Kafka
Read
July 17, 2023Read in 2023.
December 16, 2024
One of Kafka's shorter works. It'll break your brain in just 15 or so pages, and leave you to clean up the pieces.
February 28, 2025
I understand what it's saying, and yeah it's a very interesting concept. I can relate to the supplicant a whole lot. But it doesn't really go deep enough into it's own themes in my opinion idk
September 24, 2025
interesting and confusing, but i enjoyed it nonetheless. the feeling of seeing the world around you in a different light from everyone else, and how isolating that is shines through.
September 2, 2024
Une remise en question de la notion de réalité, des banalités relevant des apparences et des évidences qui nous y maintiennent. Les autres s'établissent en son sein sans même s'en rendre compte ou en avoir conscience. L'homme en prière cherche à attirer l'attention de cette réalité, il est conscient de sa condition et des circonstances qui la régissent, il symbolise une folie consciente qui cherche à être vu et compris, lorsqu'il constate que la compréhension ne lui est pas permise, il en revient aux automatismes qui gouvernent ce monde, les apparences au travers de compliments aveuglants.
July 19, 2025
Now this feels like cheating it’s so short. But anyways. Going to need some time to think on this one but my initial review is that the desire for attention starves one of knowing themself truly. I could’ve gotten the memo totally wrong. Idk. I literally JUST read it.
August 11, 2024
Note to self: Please re-read!
"I think there are several ideas Kafka is exploring at once but mostly the story is about the nature of reality. The supplicant is like a fish that is aware of the water he lives in, where others are not. He sees forces acting upon people, bringing them through their day. And because the Supplicant's experiences are so disparate from what he believes everyone else experiences, he isn't sure he is alive in the same sense everyone else is, so getting the attention of others (by flopping around on the floor) is really his only direct interaction with the reality of everyone else.
He enjoys his conversation with the man who pulls him aside but by the end of it, realizes he takes everything for granted too and leaves him by casually complementing him on his clothes and appearance, knowing that he doesn't understand the nature of reality."
(Copied from a reddit post but want to save it for myself)
5/5
"I think there are several ideas Kafka is exploring at once but mostly the story is about the nature of reality. The supplicant is like a fish that is aware of the water he lives in, where others are not. He sees forces acting upon people, bringing them through their day. And because the Supplicant's experiences are so disparate from what he believes everyone else experiences, he isn't sure he is alive in the same sense everyone else is, so getting the attention of others (by flopping around on the floor) is really his only direct interaction with the reality of everyone else.
He enjoys his conversation with the man who pulls him aside but by the end of it, realizes he takes everything for granted too and leaves him by casually complementing him on his clothes and appearance, knowing that he doesn't understand the nature of reality."
(Copied from a reddit post but want to save it for myself)
5/5
March 15, 2025
“Don’t be angry - why should you be angry about things that don’t concern you. I get angry when I behave badly; but if someone else does the wrong thing I am delighted.”
This was my first impression ever of Kafka, so this rating might change as I reread and think more about this story and others.
Although being very short its touches on a lot of different questions that we all find asking ourselves at some point in our lives. Am I really alive? Is there a point of living? Do other people really live like me? Do other people really think like me? These are all questions that Kafka seems to asking. The supplicant seems like someone confused but also maybe curious how and why people act in general society, and why people might shun others for not following the considered ‘norms’.
“Why indeed should I feel ashamed - or why should we feel ashamed - because I don’t walk upright and ponderously, striking my walking stick on the pavement and brushing the clothes of the people who pass by so loudly.”
The supplicant seems so honed in on all the little nuances in life that he actually forgets you’re supposed to enjoy it; he seems so concerned and questions why the general population is not afraid, or at least seemingly unaware, of all the constant uncertainties and changes occurring all around them. I don’t think that it’s that these people are unaware of these things, but they simply accept it because it’s normal, which reminds me of the above question of what is ‘normal’.
Something else I thought of, maybe he does the things he does in the church as a sort of ‘test’ to see if people are really aware of the things around them, hence his constant looking around to see if anybody is watching him.
One of the things I like about this short story is that it’s left up to the reader to deduce what he has just read, and come up with his own conclusions/theories based on his own unique way of thinking and interpretation.
This was my first impression ever of Kafka, so this rating might change as I reread and think more about this story and others.
Although being very short its touches on a lot of different questions that we all find asking ourselves at some point in our lives. Am I really alive? Is there a point of living? Do other people really live like me? Do other people really think like me? These are all questions that Kafka seems to asking. The supplicant seems like someone confused but also maybe curious how and why people act in general society, and why people might shun others for not following the considered ‘norms’.
“Why indeed should I feel ashamed - or why should we feel ashamed - because I don’t walk upright and ponderously, striking my walking stick on the pavement and brushing the clothes of the people who pass by so loudly.”
The supplicant seems so honed in on all the little nuances in life that he actually forgets you’re supposed to enjoy it; he seems so concerned and questions why the general population is not afraid, or at least seemingly unaware, of all the constant uncertainties and changes occurring all around them. I don’t think that it’s that these people are unaware of these things, but they simply accept it because it’s normal, which reminds me of the above question of what is ‘normal’.
Something else I thought of, maybe he does the things he does in the church as a sort of ‘test’ to see if people are really aware of the things around them, hence his constant looking around to see if anybody is watching him.
One of the things I like about this short story is that it’s left up to the reader to deduce what he has just read, and come up with his own conclusions/theories based on his own unique way of thinking and interpretation.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
June 7, 2022
হে আমার চমৎকার ভদ্রলোক, কাফকা পাঠের আনন্দ এখানেই যে আমি যেভাবে দেখলাম, আপনি সেভাবে নাও দেখতে পারেন। খুঁজে পেতে পারেন নতুন কিছু।
এই লেখাটি কাফকার ২১-২৪ বছর বয়সে লেখা অসমাপ্ত নভেলা Description of a Struggle এর একটি অংশ। যেখানে একজন 'মোটা লোক' কথা বলছেন একজন প্রার্থনাকারীর সঙ্গে।
সবকিছু পরিষ্কার করে জানার ব্যাপারটা যার কাছে আর সব কিছুর থেকে অধিক গুরুত্বের। সে ভাবছে, এ জগতের সমস্ত কিছুর নাম নিয়ে। একটা দেবদারু গাছকে যদি ডাকা হয় পাথুরে পাহাড়, তবে কেমন হয়? ভাবছে, জগতের সবকিছু শুরুতে কেমন ছিল? তা যদি একপলক দেখা যেত! বেঁচে থাকার বোধটা কতো তীব্র!
মাথার ভেতরে তার দুনিয়াটা অন্যরকম..এক্কেবারে অন্যরকম..
এই লেখাটি কাফকার ২১-২৪ বছর বয়সে লেখা অসমাপ্ত নভেলা Description of a Struggle এর একটি অংশ। যেখানে একজন 'মোটা লোক' কথা বলছেন একজন প্রার্থনাকারীর সঙ্গে।
সবকিছু পরিষ্কার করে জানার ব্যাপারটা যার কাছে আর সব কিছুর থেকে অধিক গুরুত্বের। সে ভাবছে, এ জগতের সমস্ত কিছুর নাম নিয়ে। একটা দেবদারু গাছকে যদি ডাকা হয় পাথুরে পাহাড়, তবে কেমন হয়? ভাবছে, জগতের সবকিছু শুরুতে কেমন ছিল? তা যদি একপলক দেখা যেত! বেঁচে থাকার বোধটা কতো তীব্র!
মাথার ভেতরে তার দুনিয়াটা অন্যরকম..এক্কেবারে অন্যরকম..
January 16, 2025
this review is written months (many months) after i originally read this but i just remembered this existed
i liked this a lot, it resonated with me and i feel like if i re-read it i might like it more than last time
i still remember the quote "nobody is scared but me" (or something along the lines of that)
its only 8 pages sooo i recommend
i liked this a lot, it resonated with me and i feel like if i re-read it i might like it more than last time
i still remember the quote "nobody is scared but me" (or something along the lines of that)
its only 8 pages sooo i recommend
Displaying 1 - 26 of 26 reviews