What do you think?
Rate this book
Гадкие лебеди
Одна из самых лиричных и одновременно философских повестей Стругацких «Гадкие лебеди» (1966) была написана именно под этим названием, но издательская её судьба оказалась наиболее сложной и несчастливой. Опубликованная почти сразу за рубежом, она лишь в перестройку пришла к нашему читателю, сначала под другим названием, затем в составе двух других повестей. Сегодня особенно интересно познакомиться с первозданным текстом этой вещи.
Провинциальный, богом забытый городок в неназванной стране, где уже который год, не переставая, идёт дождь, а на окраине, в резервации, именуемой лепрозорием, живут странные люди — «мокрецы» или «очкарики». Вот только не понять, кто от кого отгородился. Писатель Виктор Банев попробует разобраться в этомЕ
Провинциальный, богом забытый городок в неназванной стране, где уже который год, не переставая, идёт дождь, а на окраине, в резервации, именуемой лепрозорием, живут странные люди — «мокрецы» или «очкарики». Вот только не понять, кто от кого отгородился. Писатель Виктор Банев попробует разобраться в этомЕ
Audio CD
First published January 1, 1972
25 people are currently reading
1808 people want to read
About the author
Arkady Strugatsky
515 books1,919 followersThe brothers Arkady Strugatsky [Russian: Аркадий Стругацкий] and Boris Strugatsky [Russian: Борис Стругацкий] were Soviet-Russian science fiction authors who collaborated through most of their careers.
Arkady Strugatsky was born 25 August 1925 in Batumi; the family later moved to Leningrad. In January 1942, Arkady and his father were evacuated from the Siege of Leningrad, but Arkady was the only survivor in his train car; his father died upon reaching Vologda. Arkady was drafted into the Soviet army in 1943. He trained first at the artillery school in Aktyubinsk and later at the Military Institute of Foreign Languages in Moscow, from which he graduated in 1949 as an interpreter of English and Japanese. He worked as a teacher and interpreter for the military until 1955. In 1955, he began working as an editor and writer.
In 1958, he began collaborating with his brother Boris, a collaboration that lasted until Arkady's death on 12 October 1991. Arkady Strugatsky became a member of the Union of Soviet Writers in 1964. In addition to his own writing, he translated Japanese language short stories and novels, as well as some English works with his brother.
Source: Wikipedia
Arkady Strugatsky was born 25 August 1925 in Batumi; the family later moved to Leningrad. In January 1942, Arkady and his father were evacuated from the Siege of Leningrad, but Arkady was the only survivor in his train car; his father died upon reaching Vologda. Arkady was drafted into the Soviet army in 1943. He trained first at the artillery school in Aktyubinsk and later at the Military Institute of Foreign Languages in Moscow, from which he graduated in 1949 as an interpreter of English and Japanese. He worked as a teacher and interpreter for the military until 1955. In 1955, he began working as an editor and writer.
In 1958, he began collaborating with his brother Boris, a collaboration that lasted until Arkady's death on 12 October 1991. Arkady Strugatsky became a member of the Union of Soviet Writers in 1964. In addition to his own writing, he translated Japanese language short stories and novels, as well as some English works with his brother.
Source: Wikipedia
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 80 reviews
August 30, 2020
I picked up this novel yesterday and couldn't put it down. I finished this atmospheric literary SF novel in a few hours and while the ending didn't reveal much, I immensely enjoyed reading The Ugly Swans. The Ugly Swans is one of those novels that speaks about the complexity of not only the human soul, but about the way our souls interact. The writing at times feels hallucinatory and it can be hard to follow, but on overall I found the story quite touching and moving. I'm not sure I understood The Ugly Swans, but I loved reading it.
What it is about? About the everlasting conflict between the past, the present and the future, about human society, parenting and revolutions. On the surface it is a story about an alcoholic writer Victor Banev, a citizen from a totalitarian state ruled by the all powerful Mr. President. Victor Banev returns to his hometown (a depressive and claustrophobic place where it has been raining non stop for a couple of years) on a plea of his ex-wife who wants him to help her with their daughter Irma who has become difficult. After a brief conversation with Irma, Victor sees what the problem is. Irma is an intelligent and brilliant teen, but she acts strangely, not appropriate to her years. Irma thinks logically and without emotion. There is something disturbing about Irma's calmness and Victor will soon find out that all teenagers and kids in town are like that- they enjoy reading and are very smart, but they show no emotion towards their parents. Her mother is confused, Victor agrees to help and plans to write letters to get Irma admitted to a boarding school but needs to think first. There is a lot going on in Banev's head, revealed in inner monologues and less often- in dialogues with people he somewhat trusts. When dialogues do happen, they seem to flow naturally.
Victor tries to make sense of things but his thoughts are interrupted by a constant flow of events and mysteries, not to mention his own rather extreme drinking habits. There is a leper colony in the town. Very early in the novel, Banev tries to save one of those leper people from an attack of some sort, but he is knocked unconscious in the process and the leper man is kidnapped. He himself seems to be have contradictory feelings towards the leper people (also known as slimies and four eyes because they have yellow circles around his eyes). After this incident, a young boy helps him get up, he turns out to be a friend of his daughter Irma and is also rather symptomatic towards the lepers. He contradicts Victor when he calls them sick, claiming they are more healthy than them. This young boy named Bol-Kunats, Irma's friend, follows Victor home, argues with the doorman who happens to be his father, uses Victor's telephone and then invites the writer to a meeting with the town school's students. This meeting is the best part of the novel for me, but I won't get into it to avoid spoilers. All I'm going to say is that it really made me think- about education, about youth, revolutions eating their children and so on.
Lot of people advise Banev to leave the town, but something makes him stay. He tries to makes sense of things, as a series of strange events linked to slimies unfold. Banev himself remembers the four-eyes people from his youth and childhood, but senses that things are somehow different now. Back then Banev disliked them like most, but still it is obvious he didn't hate them and he doesn't hate them now, neither he approve of them being mistreated. The slimies live in a former leper colony, nobody is allowed in but slimies can go out. It is clear that something doesn't make sense there. What are slimies up to? What are town people up to?
Golum, the head of hospital for slimies,says their disease is genetic and not contagious. Golum clearly likes Victor, but he doesn't tell him much, not at the beginning of the novel at least. The town's adult population is terrified by slimies, considering them to be the cause of all the bad but the kids and teenagers seem to like them. Why? Nevertheless, the town's teenagers simply adore slimies, that including Banev's daughter Irma.
Nothing is black and white in this one. A man can be a drunkard but still be a good person. Children may be cruel but still lead us into a better world. Or can they? I feel like this novel raises more answers than it answers, but I loved it. What did I just read about? What did it all mean? Is it a dystopian novel as such or is a metaphor? What did the authors want to say with this one? Was it a social commentary? Was it a philosophical novel? Was it about something more specific? Was it about life in the Soviet times or was it a warning for future time?
Personally, I would have preferred the novel to end where it was originally supposed to end, with the beautiful duckling line but I suppose that the changed ending also makes some kind of sense. I'm not sure how I feel about the ending, but I do know that the novel was a terrific read.
What it is about? About the everlasting conflict between the past, the present and the future, about human society, parenting and revolutions. On the surface it is a story about an alcoholic writer Victor Banev, a citizen from a totalitarian state ruled by the all powerful Mr. President. Victor Banev returns to his hometown (a depressive and claustrophobic place where it has been raining non stop for a couple of years) on a plea of his ex-wife who wants him to help her with their daughter Irma who has become difficult. After a brief conversation with Irma, Victor sees what the problem is. Irma is an intelligent and brilliant teen, but she acts strangely, not appropriate to her years. Irma thinks logically and without emotion. There is something disturbing about Irma's calmness and Victor will soon find out that all teenagers and kids in town are like that- they enjoy reading and are very smart, but they show no emotion towards their parents. Her mother is confused, Victor agrees to help and plans to write letters to get Irma admitted to a boarding school but needs to think first. There is a lot going on in Banev's head, revealed in inner monologues and less often- in dialogues with people he somewhat trusts. When dialogues do happen, they seem to flow naturally.
Victor tries to make sense of things but his thoughts are interrupted by a constant flow of events and mysteries, not to mention his own rather extreme drinking habits. There is a leper colony in the town. Very early in the novel, Banev tries to save one of those leper people from an attack of some sort, but he is knocked unconscious in the process and the leper man is kidnapped. He himself seems to be have contradictory feelings towards the leper people (also known as slimies and four eyes because they have yellow circles around his eyes). After this incident, a young boy helps him get up, he turns out to be a friend of his daughter Irma and is also rather symptomatic towards the lepers. He contradicts Victor when he calls them sick, claiming they are more healthy than them. This young boy named Bol-Kunats, Irma's friend, follows Victor home, argues with the doorman who happens to be his father, uses Victor's telephone and then invites the writer to a meeting with the town school's students. This meeting is the best part of the novel for me, but I won't get into it to avoid spoilers. All I'm going to say is that it really made me think- about education, about youth, revolutions eating their children and so on.
Lot of people advise Banev to leave the town, but something makes him stay. He tries to makes sense of things, as a series of strange events linked to slimies unfold. Banev himself remembers the four-eyes people from his youth and childhood, but senses that things are somehow different now. Back then Banev disliked them like most, but still it is obvious he didn't hate them and he doesn't hate them now, neither he approve of them being mistreated. The slimies live in a former leper colony, nobody is allowed in but slimies can go out. It is clear that something doesn't make sense there. What are slimies up to? What are town people up to?
Golum, the head of hospital for slimies,says their disease is genetic and not contagious. Golum clearly likes Victor, but he doesn't tell him much, not at the beginning of the novel at least. The town's adult population is terrified by slimies, considering them to be the cause of all the bad but the kids and teenagers seem to like them. Why? Nevertheless, the town's teenagers simply adore slimies, that including Banev's daughter Irma.
Nothing is black and white in this one. A man can be a drunkard but still be a good person. Children may be cruel but still lead us into a better world. Or can they? I feel like this novel raises more answers than it answers, but I loved it. What did I just read about? What did it all mean? Is it a dystopian novel as such or is a metaphor? What did the authors want to say with this one? Was it a social commentary? Was it a philosophical novel? Was it about something more specific? Was it about life in the Soviet times or was it a warning for future time?
Personally, I would have preferred the novel to end where it was originally supposed to end, with the beautiful duckling line but I suppose that the changed ending also makes some kind of sense. I'm not sure how I feel about the ending, but I do know that the novel was a terrific read.
January 11, 2017
The copy I'm reading is the only one that the Los Angeles Public Library has and they gave me special permission to check it out so I can read it.
August 13, 2020
Років десять тому я вперше читав Стругацьких. Тоді це були "Понеділок починається в суботу" та "Важко бути богом". Перше видалося гарною кумедною науковою фантастикою (хоча й не такою, якої очікуєш від першоджерела "Чародіїв"), друге - теж передусім науковою фанастикою, хоча й повчальною.
А оце зараз, прочитавши за пару тижнів меланхолійних і антиутопічних "Равлика на схилі" та "Гидких лебедів", я почав сумніватися у тих своїх висновках. Може, в тих книгах теж було так само сумно, безнадійно і незрозуміло, як і в цих? Може, те, що тоді мені здавалося ясним, здавалося ясним тільки тому, що ще не здатен був зазирнути трошки вглиб?
Хтозна. І Понеділок, і Богів я колись перечитаю, бо ж вони і тоді мені сподобались. Може, вони й справді виявляться складнішими і похмурішими, ніж я їх пам'ятаю. Та все ж навряд вони такі само темні, як Лебеді. Часові розриви між розділами пригнічують сильніше, ніж тоталітарний лад описаного світу. Історія наганяє мару рівною мірою на читача, як і на головного героя.
Я навіть не готовий сказати, чим усе закінчилось. Це щасливий кінець? Чи просто робочий? Чи й взагалі не кінець? А біс його зна. Головне, що подорож була цікава. Хоч і вогка.
А оце зараз, прочитавши за пару тижнів меланхолійних і антиутопічних "Равлика на схилі" та "Гидких лебедів", я почав сумніватися у тих своїх висновках. Може, в тих книгах теж було так само сумно, безнадійно і незрозуміло, як і в цих? Може, те, що тоді мені здавалося ясним, здавалося ясним тільки тому, що ще не здатен був зазирнути трошки вглиб?
Хтозна. І Понеділок, і Богів я колись перечитаю, бо ж вони і тоді мені сподобались. Може, вони й справді виявляться складнішими і похмурішими, ніж я їх пам'ятаю. Та все ж навряд вони такі само темні, як Лебеді. Часові розриви між розділами пригнічують сильніше, ніж тоталітарний лад описаного світу. Історія наганяє мару рівною мірою на читача, як і на головного героя.
Я навіть не готовий сказати, чим усе закінчилось. Це щасливий кінець? Чи просто робочий? Чи й взагалі не кінець? А біс його зна. Головне, що подорож була цікава. Хоч і вогка.
November 10, 2018
I really enjoyed the book. It is science fiction but for the most part it is social commentary written using elements of science fiction. The atmosphere of the book is pretty dark and one can feel it due to vivid descriptions. It uses some cynical humor that adds to it. Great dialogues that made one think. And I am not even sure I got exactly what the authors wanted out of it. While written in USSR and banned from being published for 20 years it seems to be relevant today and will be in years to come, at least in the way I interpreted it. This is something that also makes a book great.
The book seems to be about future. Can one build a better future without destroying the present? (Which is probably why it was banned in USSR. Why would one want to destroy present and build a different future). As they say Children are our future, but is it really our future? It is about resistance of adult people to change. To loosely quote the book: "It was good in the old times. One could spend the life fighting for a new world and die in the old one. Really liked this sentence, it says a lot. Like many others in the book.
Maybe this is not hat was was intended at all. Maybe (most likely) there is more in it. This seems to be one of those books which you get more and more out when you reread it.
The book seems to be about future. Can one build a better future without destroying the present? (Which is probably why it was banned in USSR. Why would one want to destroy present and build a different future). As they say Children are our future, but is it really our future? It is about resistance of adult people to change. To loosely quote the book: "It was good in the old times. One could spend the life fighting for a new world and die in the old one. Really liked this sentence, it says a lot. Like many others in the book.
Maybe this is not hat was was intended at all. Maybe (most likely) there is more in it. This seems to be one of those books which you get more and more out when you reread it.
August 27, 2015
It starts off as confusing, and gives off glimmers of a hallucination. But it all starts making sense after a while. Somewhere around page 70 you realize that this is a book about thinking, and the human psyche. True to their nature as the writers of Roadside Picnic, the same recurring theme is human transcendence, aliens, evolution and hints to homo superior - what can be considered the next step in human evolution.
The absurdity of daily life under the dictatorship of Mr. President, who at the same time has relationships with all of the characters in the book, but is present as an overtly ominous mention and not a real character, takes its toll upon the characters through whose eyes we are supposed to view the world.
Mr. Banev, a writer, is the protagonist, he loves himself some marinated eel, vodka, gin, and well any sort of liquor or alcoholic beverage. He lives in a hotel, and there he keeps drinking himself into a stupor with a doctor, a health inspector and a painter. But not everything is as it seems. He has a 12 year old daughter, Irma, who is acquainted with the slimies, a sort of genetically mutated humans that cause heightened intelligence in children, but whom the townsfolk hate.
The absurdity of daily life under the dictatorship of Mr. President, who at the same time has relationships with all of the characters in the book, but is present as an overtly ominous mention and not a real character, takes its toll upon the characters through whose eyes we are supposed to view the world.
Mr. Banev, a writer, is the protagonist, he loves himself some marinated eel, vodka, gin, and well any sort of liquor or alcoholic beverage. He lives in a hotel, and there he keeps drinking himself into a stupor with a doctor, a health inspector and a painter. But not everything is as it seems. He has a 12 year old daughter, Irma, who is acquainted with the slimies, a sort of genetically mutated humans that cause heightened intelligence in children, but whom the townsfolk hate.
April 24, 2008
The most literary science fiction I've ever read.
August 4, 2024
"Гидкі лебеді" - досить мудра та майже філософська повість братів Стругацьких, але на жаль, в мій топ творів цих авторів вона не входить. Напевно, через те, що вона в деякій мірі депресивна, хоча наприкінці все закінчується більш позитивним, хоч і відкритим, фіналом. Повість було написано у 1968 році, але її вперше надрукували лише за часів перебудови, у 1987 - бо тоді аж занадто яскраві були аналогії із похмурою та безнадійною реальністю радянського суспільства, хоч автори і намагалися винести місце подій в якусь іншу державу. Але все одно - натяків було предостатньо, щоби уважний читач розумів, про саме про яку країну йде мова.
Гидкі лебеді - це дорослі цього похмурого світу, яким, на відміну від дітей (гидких каченят, що потім мають вирости в гарних лебедів, але насправді виростають в таких самих гидких), перетворюватись вже нема куди. Звичайні дорослі пиячать, еліта міста займається оргіями, за вікном тоталітаризм, і ні у кого нема майбутнього - ні у дорослих, ні у дітей. Ситуацію підкреслює постійний дощ, який ніколи в місті не припиняється. Це і є гіпертрофоване відображення радянського суспільства, за що цензура і відклала цю повість в стіл аж на 19 років.
Але діти знаходять вихід - вони кидають батьків і йдуть за тими, хто дасть їм це майбутнє, а саме - за мешканцями лепрозорію, які мають генетичну хворобу, і яких всі бояться і уникають. Хто вони насправді - невідомо, і ким стануть нові діти - теж питання відкриті, але стара система таки ламається, що насправді й сталося за часів перебудови, у тому ж 1987 році, тоді ж із книги і зняли заборону.
Це мій далеко не перший твір Стругацьких, але перший українською, за що лайк-підписка-шер видавництву Комубук. Стругацьких треба видавати, вони завжди актуальні і не несуть московистьку ідеологію, жодних натяків на імперство в їх творах нема, це мудрі філософи-космополіти, у яких не нудна мора��ь, але вона таки є, і думати таки є про що, на відміну від багатьох сучасних книжок-одноденок.
Гидкі лебеді - це дорослі цього похмурого світу, яким, на відміну від дітей (гидких каченят, що потім мають вирости в гарних лебедів, але насправді виростають в таких самих гидких), перетворюватись вже нема куди. Звичайні дорослі пиячать, еліта міста займається оргіями, за вікном тоталітаризм, і ні у кого нема майбутнього - ні у дорослих, ні у дітей. Ситуацію підкреслює постійний дощ, який ніколи в місті не припиняється. Це і є гіпертрофоване відображення радянського суспільства, за що цензура і відклала цю повість в стіл аж на 19 років.
Але діти знаходять вихід - вони кидають батьків і йдуть за тими, хто дасть їм це майбутнє, а саме - за мешканцями лепрозорію, які мають генетичну хворобу, і яких всі бояться і уникають. Хто вони насправді - невідомо, і ким стануть нові діти - теж питання відкриті, але стара система таки ламається, що насправді й сталося за часів перебудови, у тому ж 1987 році, тоді ж із книги і зняли заборону.
Це мій далеко не перший твір Стругацьких, але перший українською, за що лайк-підписка-шер видавництву Комубук. Стругацьких треба видавати, вони завжди актуальні і не несуть московистьку ідеологію, жодних натяків на імперство в їх творах нема, це мудрі філософи-космополіти, у яких не нудна мора��ь, але вона таки є, і думати таки є про що, на відміну від багатьох сучасних книжок-одноденок.
December 8, 2016
Well, this is the second Russian novel with a writer as the POV character I've read in the last week, the other being Bulgakov's Memoir of a Dead Man. This is also my first exposure to a Strugatsky Brothers' novel, and while it didn't knock my socks off, I did order two more of them before sitting down to write this brief comment.
I'd call the book more surreal than science fictional, despite the normal categorization of the Sturgatskys as SF writers. It takes place in that generic European surreal territory that Saramago novels, and some Stanislaw Lems take place in. Indeed, The Ugly Swans seemed to be a Saramago, or a lesser Lem, as I was reading it.
The story involves an apparent leap for mankind, the leap that society is always hoping for, but never expects to see. The future really is going to be different, and the folks who are embracing it seem to be more powerful, more intelligent, and more self-controlled than the rest of us. It's a novel about the old being cast off, and left behind. Maybe. And it consciously embraces the Pied Piper story as the basis of its allegory.
We're not being told this big-picture story directly, though. We're being told the story of a drunken, disgraced writer living in internal exile, having displeased the President. He's back in his home city, and there are some strange things going on up at the leprosy sanatorium; and it's been raining for two years; and the kids seem to be reading more books than seems quite right.
My problem with books like this is that I'm easily bored by lots of details that aren't relevant, while also not becoming coherent. The idea, I assume, is to show that even in the face of major events small, even petty, details still take place. Yeah, right, but the repetitious listing of them kills the narrative after a time. Too many things that we don't understand push past the narrative purpose (letting the reader know that the POV can't figure the events out) to become just clutter.
Books of this sort often stumble at the end, with the inference of something BIG having happened, but really just collapsing into fragments of incoherent events. Yep, that's what happens here. We get several contradictory suggestions of what has happened, several more contradictory indications of what will happen after this point in time, and then some unexplained and tenuously motivated choices and acts by the characters, and we're done. Oh, and some considerable part of the town disappears.
So basically you can come to any conclusion you'd care to about what the book means.
Which can make the whole thing seem like a complete waste of time. In this case, however, we have been invited to think about what would happen if our dream of a better, more effective society; with a better, more effective species living in it; actually came to pass. How would we feel?? Is it really what we ought to be hoping for?? That thought experiment is worth the experience, for this reader.
I'd call the book more surreal than science fictional, despite the normal categorization of the Sturgatskys as SF writers. It takes place in that generic European surreal territory that Saramago novels, and some Stanislaw Lems take place in. Indeed, The Ugly Swans seemed to be a Saramago, or a lesser Lem, as I was reading it.
The story involves an apparent leap for mankind, the leap that society is always hoping for, but never expects to see. The future really is going to be different, and the folks who are embracing it seem to be more powerful, more intelligent, and more self-controlled than the rest of us. It's a novel about the old being cast off, and left behind. Maybe. And it consciously embraces the Pied Piper story as the basis of its allegory.
We're not being told this big-picture story directly, though. We're being told the story of a drunken, disgraced writer living in internal exile, having displeased the President. He's back in his home city, and there are some strange things going on up at the leprosy sanatorium; and it's been raining for two years; and the kids seem to be reading more books than seems quite right.
My problem with books like this is that I'm easily bored by lots of details that aren't relevant, while also not becoming coherent. The idea, I assume, is to show that even in the face of major events small, even petty, details still take place. Yeah, right, but the repetitious listing of them kills the narrative after a time. Too many things that we don't understand push past the narrative purpose (letting the reader know that the POV can't figure the events out) to become just clutter.
Books of this sort often stumble at the end, with the inference of something BIG having happened, but really just collapsing into fragments of incoherent events. Yep, that's what happens here. We get several contradictory suggestions of what has happened, several more contradictory indications of what will happen after this point in time, and then some unexplained and tenuously motivated choices and acts by the characters, and we're done. Oh, and some considerable part of the town disappears.
So basically you can come to any conclusion you'd care to about what the book means.
Which can make the whole thing seem like a complete waste of time. In this case, however, we have been invited to think about what would happen if our dream of a better, more effective society; with a better, more effective species living in it; actually came to pass. How would we feel?? Is it really what we ought to be hoping for?? That thought experiment is worth the experience, for this reader.
June 2, 2023
"Because a mother wolf can say to her cubs, 'Bite the way I do,' and that's enough, and the mother rabbit teaches her bunnies, 'Run for your lives the way I do,' and that's also enough, but if a man teaches children, 'Think as I do,' it's criminal."
The books by the Strugatsky brothers pose way more questions than they can answer. Always mysterious until the end, always leaving things open to interpretation, always provoking but somehow always letting the reader dream and hope. Though I was confused throughout most of the narrative, the book proved a stimulating read for me, not only as a lover of Sci-Fi but also as a mother. Besides the central conflict between the old and new, I found many other interesting themes, such as progress, communication between generations, freedom of speech, the importance of literature. I will definitely continue to explore more books by these profound and inspiring authors.
The books by the Strugatsky brothers pose way more questions than they can answer. Always mysterious until the end, always leaving things open to interpretation, always provoking but somehow always letting the reader dream and hope. Though I was confused throughout most of the narrative, the book proved a stimulating read for me, not only as a lover of Sci-Fi but also as a mother. Besides the central conflict between the old and new, I found many other interesting themes, such as progress, communication between generations, freedom of speech, the importance of literature. I will definitely continue to explore more books by these profound and inspiring authors.
August 7, 2016
Mida teha ühiskonnas, kui alati on vihm ja enesesse sulgunud, aina sopastuv vaimueliit pendeldab enda mahamüümise ja veel rohkem sopastumise vahepeal. Vehelda otsustes ja katsetes meenutada, mis oli see kaotatud läige ja sära. Selle leidmiseks veelgi klaase tõsta.
Ja loota, et sünnib ime?
Aga, imesid ju ei sünni.
Võib-olla hoopis loota, et järgnev põlvkond tuleb parem: On ju targad, on ju virgad, aga näe - käituvad kuidagi imelikult. Isegi valesti.
Teha neist paremad - kuidas? - kui isegi ei mäleta. Ei vist, seega.
Ikkagi ime?
Karm ja võimalik-et igivärske teos...
Ja loota, et sünnib ime?
Aga, imesid ju ei sünni.
Võib-olla hoopis loota, et järgnev põlvkond tuleb parem: On ju targad, on ju virgad, aga näe - käituvad kuidagi imelikult. Isegi valesti.
Teha neist paremad - kuidas? - kui isegi ei mäleta. Ei vist, seega.
Ikkagi ime?
Karm ja võimalik-et igivärske teos...
January 26, 2025
Շատ հզոր գործ էր, բայց մի քիչ թերություններով
Ես արդեն վաղուց դադարել եմ Ստրուգացկիներին ընկալել որպես գիտաֆանտաստներ: Իրենք ինձ համար դարձել են պարզապես փիլիսոփաներ, ովքեր, խոշոր հաշվով, գեղարվեստական գրականությունից շատ գլուխ չեն հանում: Բայց որ հզոր գործեր են ստեղծում (ոչ գեղարվեստական տեսանկյունից) դա հաստատ:
Շատ լավ օրինակ է այս գիրքը: Դժվար է ընկալել սա որպես գեղարվեստական գրականություն: Թույլ նկարագրություններ, որոնց պատճառով շատ դժվար ես պատկերացնում աշխարհը, ստվարաթղթե հերոսներ, որոնք բացի իրենց անուններից ուրիշ ոչինչ չունեն, չմշակված ու չզարգացող սյուժե...
Բայց... Սա հիասքանչ փիլիսոփայական աշխատանք է, որը հարկավոր է կարդալ դանդաղ, անընդհատ մտածելով ու վերջում, երբ արդեն ավարտել ես գիրքը, փորձել վերլուծել այն: Ըստ էության գիրքը անսպառ փիլիսոփայական խնդիրների մասին՝ սերունդների փոփոխություն, նոր աշխարհի ստեղծում, հնի և նորի պայքար: Կան բազմաթիվ տեսակետներ, որոնց հետ կարող ես համաձայնվել կամ ուղարկել գրողի ծոցը: Այս դեպքում գրողների ծոցը:
Դատավճիռ... Եթե կարդում ես որպես գեղարվեստական գրականություն, ապա բանի պետք չէ: Եթե կարդում ես որպես էսսե կամ փիլիսոփայական աշխատք, հիասքանչ է:
Ես արդեն վաղուց դադարել եմ Ստրուգացկիներին ընկալել որպես գիտաֆանտաստներ: Իրենք ինձ համար դարձել են պարզապես փիլիսոփաներ, ովքեր, խոշոր հաշվով, գեղարվեստական գրականությունից շատ գլուխ չեն հանում: Բայց որ հզոր գործեր են ստեղծում (ոչ գեղարվեստական տեսանկյունից) դա հաստատ:
Շատ լավ օրինակ է այս գիրքը: Դժվար է ընկալել սա որպես գեղարվեստական գրականություն: Թույլ նկարագրություններ, որոնց պատճառով շատ դժվար ես պատկերացնում աշխարհը, ստվարաթղթե հերոսներ, որոնք բացի իրենց անուններից ուրիշ ոչինչ չունեն, չմշակված ու չզարգացող սյուժե...
Բայց... Սա հիասքանչ փիլիսոփայական աշխատանք է, որը հարկավոր է կարդալ դանդաղ, անընդհատ մտածելով ու վերջում, երբ արդեն ավարտել ես գիրքը, փորձել վերլուծել այն: Ըստ էության գիրքը անսպառ փիլիսոփայական խնդիրների մասին՝ սերունդների փոփոխություն, նոր աշխարհի ստեղծում, հնի և նորի պայքար: Կան բազմաթիվ տեսակետներ, որոնց հետ կարող ես համաձայնվել կամ ուղարկել գրողի ծոցը: Այս դեպքում գրողների ծոցը:
Դատավճիռ... Եթե կարդում ես որպես գեղարվեստական գրականություն, ապա բանի պետք չէ: Եթե կարդում ես որպես էսսե կամ փիլիսոփայական աշխատք, հիասքանչ է:
July 19, 2020
Що тут скажеш - чудова повість, класні діалоги, один з улюблених протагоністів евер. Похмура, але в той же час дуже дотепна і іронічна.
Це певно вже втретє перечитував, чи вчетверте (?) і цього разу предметно звертав увагу на ідеологічні моменти, з яких переважно було декілька згадувань комуністів, але так до кінця і не ясно чи вбачали Стругацькі цей новий устрій саме комуністичним, чи це була лише стілістична згадка в контексті їхньої дійсності. В будь якому разі якогось ідеологічного спрямування за повістю не відчувається, а відчувається трохи суму, багато сатири на корумповану владу (за що, очікувано, книжка і була заборонена), гуманізму та чорного гумору.
Банєв, звісно, прекрасний в своїй щирості, відучтно нетиповий протагоніст як на радянську фантастику. Власне, фантастики тут не так і багато, радше натяки на неї, а суть нмд все ж більше про прогнившу владу, варіанти побудови кращого суспільства, конфлікт поколінь та можливі виходи з цього порочного кола. Сама повість відчувається радше психологічним трилером і драмою, ніж sci-fi. Також, звично для АБС, кінцівка в значній мірі лишається відкритою.
Стосовно самого видання - переклад Комубук цілком ок, очі не муляв.
Це певно вже втретє перечитував, чи вчетверте (?) і цього разу предметно звертав увагу на ідеологічні моменти, з яких переважно було декілька згадувань комуністів, але так до кінця і не ясно чи вбачали Стругацькі цей новий устрій саме комуністичним, чи це була лише стілістична згадка в контексті їхньої дійсності. В будь якому разі якогось ідеологічного спрямування за повістю не відчувається, а відчувається трохи суму, багато сатири на корумповану владу (за що, очікувано, книжка і була заборонена), гуманізму та чорного гумору.
Банєв, звісно, прекрасний в своїй щирості, відучтно нетиповий протагоніст як на радянську фантастику. Власне, фантастики тут не так і багато, радше натяки на неї, а суть нмд все ж більше про прогнившу владу, варіанти побудови кращого суспільства, конфлікт поколінь та можливі виходи з цього порочного кола. Сама повість відчувається радше психологічним трилером і драмою, ніж sci-fi. Також, звично для АБС, кінцівка в значній мірі лишається відкритою.
Стосовно самого видання - переклад Комубук цілком ок, очі не муляв.
January 16, 2016
I first read this book in a college, having general dislike of science fiction as such, thinking that it is rather pointless to follow elaborate fantasies of some other people. This book was the first one that completely overturned my bias against since fiction as a genre.
I came across a smuggled edition (published in West Germany) and was amazed, astonished - the book was brilliant, and it was nothing like any other "science fiction" books I had ever read or attempted to read.
I still not very much like mainstream fantasies, but this book is anything but mainstream, it stands incomparably higher, it is rather classics than fugacious sparks of pop-culture.
I came across a smuggled edition (published in West Germany) and was amazed, astonished - the book was brilliant, and it was nothing like any other "science fiction" books I had ever read or attempted to read.
I still not very much like mainstream fantasies, but this book is anything but mainstream, it stands incomparably higher, it is rather classics than fugacious sparks of pop-culture.
December 19, 2017
If I could, I would give this book more than five start in the rating. The book produces the effect of a contrast shower: it burns you with the coldness of human hearts and it makes you freeze in astonishment when you see people's real, hidden intentions. The book is dark, but in the end of it there is shining of wisdom. Try it.
May 3, 2015
I picked the book up this evening and couldn't put it down until the next page. Mesmerizing, dark, poetic, hopeless. Strugatskys at their best. No wonder they themselves thought this is one of their best works.
October 19, 2021
И не скажешь, что 1967 год..
December 29, 2020
Чудовий переклад на українську. Сконструйований світ цілком в стилі Стругацьких - химерний і незрозумілий, з присмаком тоталітаризму і відчаю (що смішно переслідують в книжці комуністів).
Цікавий головний герой і цікава ідея співіснування різних поколінь. Як прогресувати далі і що таке прогрес.
От тільки здалась мені ця повість недописаною чи то дещо сумбурною, особливо під кінець.
Цікавий головний герой і цікава ідея співіснування різних поколінь. Як прогресувати далі і що таке прогрес.
От тільки здалась мені ця повість недописаною чи то дещо сумбурною, особливо під кінець.
June 5, 2020
I was up until 5 in the morning since last night so I'd finish this book, which I knew I had to read immediately after seeing the movie "The Ugly Swans" by Konstantin Lopushanskiy.
So many things left unsaid and unexplained, so many things not dished out for you to consume and get exactly what's going on and what it all actually means - from time to time you're not even sure if something was real or not! - and yet, upon reading the finale over the several last pages, I felt purified, calm (after an extremely long anxiety-filled period), as if I was bathed in God's own light (I don't even believe in God). I felt transformed, almost tangibly.
There was almost no page which failed to move me and make me sympathize with all the characters, their "incurable" flaws, the way they clung to their own, "old" world whose time is running out. I recognized myself in all of them and in everything they were going through mentally and philosophically.
Given what's happening in the world at the moment, i.e. the transformations we're all going through, individually and collectively, "The Ugly Swans" is more relevant than ever.
The conversations and inner monologues are, in my opinion, authentic and naturally-flowing, and they really support the whole book through and through, and paint it with the full range of colors we're supposed to see and experience.
So many things left unsaid and unexplained, so many things not dished out for you to consume and get exactly what's going on and what it all actually means - from time to time you're not even sure if something was real or not! - and yet, upon reading the finale over the several last pages, I felt purified, calm (after an extremely long anxiety-filled period), as if I was bathed in God's own light (I don't even believe in God). I felt transformed, almost tangibly.
There was almost no page which failed to move me and make me sympathize with all the characters, their "incurable" flaws, the way they clung to their own, "old" world whose time is running out. I recognized myself in all of them and in everything they were going through mentally and philosophically.
Given what's happening in the world at the moment, i.e. the transformations we're all going through, individually and collectively, "The Ugly Swans" is more relevant than ever.
The conversations and inner monologues are, in my opinion, authentic and naturally-flowing, and they really support the whole book through and through, and paint it with the full range of colors we're supposed to see and experience.
September 11, 2020
This is the third book that I’ve read by the Strugatsky Brothers and after finishing the last page it feels like I’m coming out of a dream. The whole story and atmosphere are very dream like or at least dream influenced. I love that the Goodreads description is “Soviet science fiction novel by the Strugatsky brothers”. Is that all anyone could come up with as a description or was one just never made. Either way I get it.
It’s a strange novel more similar to their Roadside Picnic than Hard to Be a God. The main protagonist is an Ernest Hemingway like writer who is back in his hometown which rains all day and night every day and night. All the adults are hedonist alcoholics that live in a health centre/hotel of some kind near a leprosy like colony of mysterious “slimies” who wear bandages and have yellow rings around their eyes.
The book was denied release in the USSR by the censor board due to the anti-government and pro thinker ideas held in it which doesn’t come as a shock at all while reading it. The whole feel and tone are nightmarish and odd. I had to use the Google machine to understand what the ending meant as I didn’t understand if it was allegorical for something or if there was some kind of hidden symbolism to it. Great read. I love the Strugatsky Brothers may they rest in peace.
It’s a strange novel more similar to their Roadside Picnic than Hard to Be a God. The main protagonist is an Ernest Hemingway like writer who is back in his hometown which rains all day and night every day and night. All the adults are hedonist alcoholics that live in a health centre/hotel of some kind near a leprosy like colony of mysterious “slimies” who wear bandages and have yellow rings around their eyes.
The book was denied release in the USSR by the censor board due to the anti-government and pro thinker ideas held in it which doesn’t come as a shock at all while reading it. The whole feel and tone are nightmarish and odd. I had to use the Google machine to understand what the ending meant as I didn’t understand if it was allegorical for something or if there was some kind of hidden symbolism to it. Great read. I love the Strugatsky Brothers may they rest in peace.
March 2, 2020
This is a tough one to rate. As unrelentingly grey, washed-out, and chill as much of this book is, it maintains a spark of human warmth through the main character, Victor Banev, and his doubts, ridiculous behavior, and simple affection for the "kids.". Where it is going and what is happening along the way is confusing, much like in a good Philip Dick novel (there's more than a little similarity throughout), but Banev is feeling his way along through it with you, so the reader doesn't just get lost in the words. Crucial to the overall take is the Russian nature of the writing: even dystopic quagmires get presented with a rueful humor (Zamyatin, anyone?).
I could oversimplify and describe this book as a dark, political take on the nitty-gritty internal doings of a Childhood's End-like metamorphosis, but that would be a disservice both to CE and TUS. It seems more like the Strugatskis were taking on all the inertia a modern nation-state (read that: "military-industrial complex") brings to bear on any serious forces of change, whether it be inciting racism/bigotry, spies and counter-spies, internment camps (!), or just floods of disinformation. Were the authors expressing hope that change will occur nonetheless? Could be. I'll go with that.
I could oversimplify and describe this book as a dark, political take on the nitty-gritty internal doings of a Childhood's End-like metamorphosis, but that would be a disservice both to CE and TUS. It seems more like the Strugatskis were taking on all the inertia a modern nation-state (read that: "military-industrial complex") brings to bear on any serious forces of change, whether it be inciting racism/bigotry, spies and counter-spies, internment camps (!), or just floods of disinformation. Were the authors expressing hope that change will occur nonetheless? Could be. I'll go with that.
June 10, 2022
Der zweite Roman, den ich von den Strugatzkys gelesen habe. Lektüre liegt schon lange zurück. Damals bin ich enttäuscht gewesen, denn ich habe mehr Science Fiction erwartet, als der Roman geboten hatte. Der hintergründige Erzählweise mit den Verweisen auf die Lebenswirklichkeit des russischen Publikums hat mir wohl auch Probleme bereitet. Bei der SF erwarte ich das einfach nicht. Heute würde ich ihn vermutlich ganz anders lesen.
July 17, 2014
By today's standards, very little happens. This would usually be an issue for me as I've been spoiled by Joe Abercrombie and Pat Rothfuss and Tom Cruise, but it wasn't at all. The language is vivid and evocative, and full of so much more flavor than most things I read and consider to be masterfully written. And humor is pervasive, as in most of their works.
June 17, 2017
-------
Волчица говорит своим волчатами: "Кусайте, как я", и этого достаточно, и зайчиха учит зайчат: "Удирайте, как я", и этого тоже достаточно, но человек-то учит детёныша: "Думай, как я", а это уже - преступление...
Волчица говорит своим волчатами: "Кусайте, как я", и этого достаточно, и зайчиха учит зайчат: "Удирайте, как я", и этого тоже достаточно, но человек-то учит детёныша: "Думай, как я", а это уже - преступление...
October 31, 2017
The Strugatsky brothers (Boris and Arkady) published several dozen novels, novellas, and short stories between 1958 and 1988. Their short novel The Ugly Swans, written in the 1960s and published in 1972, is categorized as science fiction, due mostly to the genre which includes the authors' other works. However, there are few elements in this work that warrant this categorization outside of that context. I suppose I'm used to reading harder (American) science fiction novels that include discussions of physics, space travel, aliens, et cetera. This book had none of those plot devices. My book club in St. Petersburg, Russia read this work as our November 2017 selection, even though it was a bit outside of our standard fare (recently, we've focused on literature of the Russian Revolution).
The story of The Ugly Swans largely centers on a famous writer in an unnamed town, who is stuck between literature-obsessed and child-corrupting "slimies" (people with a non-communicable disease characterized by yellow circles around their eyes) and the repressive anti-slimie political establishment. The slimies are housed in a former leprosy hospital, and are generally hated and feared by the other residents of the area. They have drawn all the children to them, and created a precociously intelligent, independent, and cynical orientation in them. Eventually, the conflict reaches a boiling point and each of the groups leaves the city, one way or another (no spoilers here), making way for a new order to the community.
Most of the story takes place in a bar, hotel rooms, school lecture hall, or outside the guarded fences of the secure leper colony. In general, I felt that too much detail was left out of the text; there is a lot of talking and not a ton of action or detailed explanation of the events taking place or the different characters' motivations. The novel leaves more questions than it answers. In an interview, Boris Strugatsky apparently stated that "Slimies came from the future. But this future is a terrible thing and they returned to the past, trying to change it. The success of the operation changed the future and destroyed the slimies." There is nothing in the text itself that explicitly suggests time travel or changing the past.
The story seems characteristically Russian to me, and I noticed stylistic and thematic similarities with other Soviet literature. The novel's major theme relates to the importance of independent thought. My favorite passage, which more or less sums up the entire book, is the following: "Because a mother wolf can say to her cubs, 'Bite the way I do,' and that's enough, and the mother rabbit teaches her bunnies, 'Run for your lives the way I do,' and that's also enough, but if a man teaches children, 'Think as I do,' it's criminal."
The story of The Ugly Swans largely centers on a famous writer in an unnamed town, who is stuck between literature-obsessed and child-corrupting "slimies" (people with a non-communicable disease characterized by yellow circles around their eyes) and the repressive anti-slimie political establishment. The slimies are housed in a former leprosy hospital, and are generally hated and feared by the other residents of the area. They have drawn all the children to them, and created a precociously intelligent, independent, and cynical orientation in them. Eventually, the conflict reaches a boiling point and each of the groups leaves the city, one way or another (no spoilers here), making way for a new order to the community.
Most of the story takes place in a bar, hotel rooms, school lecture hall, or outside the guarded fences of the secure leper colony. In general, I felt that too much detail was left out of the text; there is a lot of talking and not a ton of action or detailed explanation of the events taking place or the different characters' motivations. The novel leaves more questions than it answers. In an interview, Boris Strugatsky apparently stated that "Slimies came from the future. But this future is a terrible thing and they returned to the past, trying to change it. The success of the operation changed the future and destroyed the slimies." There is nothing in the text itself that explicitly suggests time travel or changing the past.
The story seems characteristically Russian to me, and I noticed stylistic and thematic similarities with other Soviet literature. The novel's major theme relates to the importance of independent thought. My favorite passage, which more or less sums up the entire book, is the following: "Because a mother wolf can say to her cubs, 'Bite the way I do,' and that's enough, and the mother rabbit teaches her bunnies, 'Run for your lives the way I do,' and that's also enough, but if a man teaches children, 'Think as I do,' it's criminal."
July 23, 2020
Друге прочитання з інтервалом у 7-8 років. Що тут сказати? Реально золотий фонд фантастики! І в принципі, не лише фантастики. Це те, що називається справжньою літературою. Особливо вражає, як швидкий темп оповіді поєднується з глибиною розкриття тем. Діалоги і навіть внутрішні монологи Банєва дуже емоційні, експресивні, живі! Ну, і філософська дилема в основі історії, звичайно, не втратила актуальності.
January 29, 2015
Започвам да свиквам с всекидневността на научната фантастика на Стругацки. Например, ето какво си припява главният персонаж Виктор Банев по едно време:
Втръсна ми вече, дойде ми до гуша,
взех и от песните да се моря.
Като подводница дъното търся -
и с пеленгатор да не ме ловят.
Те не лекуват, даже ме втриса -
сит съм, преситен от водка, жени.
Като подводница дъното търся, без да предавам дори позивни...
Втръсна ми всичко, дойде ми до гуша, даже да свиря и пея не ща!
Като подводница дъното търся -
и с пеленгатор да не ме ловят...
(по Вл. Висоцки)
Българското заглавие е "Времето на дъжда".
Втръсна ми вече, дойде ми до гуша,
взех и от песните да се моря.
Като подводница дъното търся -
и с пеленгатор да не ме ловят.
Те не лекуват, даже ме втриса -
сит съм, преситен от водка, жени.
Като подводница дъното търся, без да предавам дори позивни...
Втръсна ми всичко, дойде ми до гуша, даже да свиря и пея не ща!
Като подводница дъното търся -
и с пеленгатор да не ме ловят...
(по Вл. Висоцки)
Българското заглавие е "Времето на дъжда".
July 13, 2013
I read it when I was 14 or 15, sinse then I've reread many times. one of the best Strugatskys' novel, the best stuff I had read... A paraphrase of The Ungly Ducking is still an example of non-conformism, unremitted quest for perfection and fine humour...
December 4, 2017
Неполный список "аллюзий" и просто упоминаний писателей из "Гадких лебедей": Всемирный потоп, "Дикие лебеди" Андерсена, Толстой, Достоевский, Фолкнер, Перри Мейсон, Иисус, Гегель, Шпенглер, Высоцкий, Бодлер, Оруэлл, Воннегут(?), зомби-апокалипсис.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
April 2, 2020
Стругацкие закладывают новый майндсет людям, в данной книге в отношении воспитания детей например. Что дети - это взрослые, просто другого размера. Дети - футурологи.
А вот финал я так и не понял. Почему все бежали из города?
А вот финал я так и не понял. Почему все бежали из города?
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
August 12, 2013
безнадійна, незважаючи на фінал, і чудова книжка.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 80 reviews