What do you think?
Rate this book
Ultima noapte de dragoste, întâia noapte de război #2
Ultima noapte de dragoste, întâia noapte de război
Întâia noapte de război, adică a doua parte a romanului, e un adevărat jurnal de front. Ștefan Gheorghidiu s-a despărțit de Ela, de tot trecutul, cum spune el insuși, și se află pe front, în linia întâi, undeva între Câmpulung-Muscel și Bran, drum de munte, pe care-l străbate de mai multe ori. Camil Petrescu insuși a participat la aceasta fază a războiului dintre 1916 și 1918, pierzându-și, din cauza bubuiturilor artileriei, auzul. [...] Romanul lui Camil Petrescu preferă o perspectivă așa-zicând banală: războiul nu înseamnă nici bătălii sângeroase la baionetă, nici munți de cadavre, ci lucruri mult mai simple și umane din viața de zi cu zi a ofițerilor, care vorbesc vrute și nevrute la popotă, suferă de dureri de stomac sau de frig și uneori, destul de des, mor sfârtecați de un obuz. Asta nu înseamnă că războiul e mai puțin oribil, nici că romancierul ar voi să-i estompeze acest caracter. Înseamnă doar că romancierul e de părere că oribilul nu trebuie căutat în latura excepțională a realității, ci în aceea banală. La noi, nimeni n-a mai privit războiul mondial în această perspectivă...
167 pages, Paperback
First published November 8, 1930
28 people are currently reading
183 people want to read
About the author
Camil Petrescu
54 books197 followersCamil Petrescu was a Romanian playwright, novelist, poet and philosopher. He marked the end of the traditional novel era and laid the foundation of the modern novel era in Romanian literature.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 51 reviews
July 15, 2022
This book had to be written. Big Thank You to its author!
Odd stuff for me to start with the end, meaning volume II, moreover that, as my eyes rested on first page of volume II, I had felt like I wouldn't like what I was to read for the next one hundred and so pages. I could blame this impression on an old prejudice I had against this writer. The Romanian language and literature professor I had in high school stamped on my mind a disturbing memory about him, although now I cannot recall what it was all about. I suspect that he himself did not like him (at all), so in his lectures he used to convey his own, personal reflections, as very solid evidence that the author is not to be liked or pleasant. I wish I hadn’t been so impressionable, yet I had trusted him and so I had lost reading some valuable book(s) once upon a time. Mea culpa!
What a lively paradox between these two books, with a title that indicates clearly that each will talk extensively about a different subject. Volume I ‘The last night of love’ is in fact the end of a passionate and, initially great, love affair, of a marriage (soulfully) and as it’s known (in real life especially) that after love the war starts, surprisingly, the volume II ‘The first night of war’ tells us that it’s not about a ‘classic’ war between ex-lovers, husband and wife, but it’s indeed about a real war, sometime in 1916 when The (old) Kingdom of Romania eventually entered WWI…
Having finished the novel, I had realized at once why I would rate higher volume II, though I was impressed greatly with both. The second part of the novel which begins with the first night of war, is built after the author's WWI own memorial, borrowed in tiny details to his hero Stefan Gheorghidiu, now a second lieutenant, while in his civil life a professor of philosophy. In a note written 25 years later, the author clarified that the first part of the novel is a fictitious tale, an invention of an author who was neither married nor had a family at that time. I didn’t know about it before I read Volume I, therefore I was convinced that things were like that. I was shocked later to learn that the happenings that occurred to his hero Stefan G. (middle-class educated, young handsome man, initially poor but soon to fall under a fortune by getting into an inheritance from his misery uncle) and his wife Ela (which in fact didn’t exist at all) are pure fiction. And the greater news was that the novel should have been continued with volume III, sadly, wasn’t written at all.
It looks that the author himself had very strong, deeply felt convictions, publicly too (by writing articles in newspapers and gazettes), about how things (politics, authorities, society, economy, etc) should be handled in a state that should look after all its citizens, and not just a part of them, and especially he had a long lasting ‘battle’ with bourgeoisie, overall…
It is an awfully 'nouveau riche' settled bourgeoisie, in which the aristocratic lusts are still boiling. Her lack of scruples is frightening. The hatred it provokes in intellectuals is terrible. See Eminescu's satires and Caragiale's plays. […] It is no wonder, then, that the Romanian army was sacrificed to class interests and taken un-commanded and unequipped to one of the most categorical national catastrophes (* the novel was written in 1930). Bourgeois nationalism reveals itself inferior to the class spirit and we can say that none of the classes of the Romanian people has so little sense of true patriotism as this bourgeoisie that fights nationally with fists in its chest and operates in the name of holy principles...
Together with the pulsations of life and love, the author reveals in this novel the 'law suit' aimed at the lifestyle of the bourgeoisie, it dissects its mentality, its fierce spirit of the class violently in solidarity when it comes to material interests, its parasitism that consumed the substance of the state…
In just two words, The last night of love , is the passionate confession of a jealous man, though he was right eventually... Apparently, a very ordinary middle-class history, and yet it is not trivial at all. There is a very high degree of uncertainty about the events and the psychology of the characters... (I should write more on Volume I..).
The first night of war , is a real front diary. Stefan G. parted with his wife Ela, with his whole past as he himself said, and was on the front, in the first line, somewhere between Campulung-Muscel and Bran, a mountain road, which he crosses several times. (Camil Petrescu himself participated in this phase of the war between 1916 and 1918, losing his hearing due to blasts of artillery ...)
The idea that resonates out of these pages is that war means neither bloody bayonet battles nor mountains of corpses, but much simpler and more human things in the daily life of military officers and soldiers, who speak all sorts of trivial stuff when together at meals, suffer from awful stomach aches or extreme cold and, quite often, they die shattered by bombshells. Nonetheless, the war is no less dreadful and the novelist considers that the horrible should not be sought in the exceptional side of reality, but in the ordinary side too.
Romanian bayonets are a match for any cannon...
What was horror to read in this second book was to clearly understand how unprepared the Romanian army was. Everything looks like a really ‘bad joke’. There was not enough weaponry, and they were still using bayonet, that was used during 1888! During their earlier talks it looks they had no idea how to fight a war, and on later stages of war development, it shows that the officers had no idea about strategy or tactics. It is no wonder that when they met in battle the Germans, who had the heavy equipment and knew how to fight, they had to retreat and in a logical way, it could end only one way, as history tells us that an armistice was signed by end of 1917...
Odd stuff for me to start with the end, meaning volume II, moreover that, as my eyes rested on first page of volume II, I had felt like I wouldn't like what I was to read for the next one hundred and so pages. I could blame this impression on an old prejudice I had against this writer. The Romanian language and literature professor I had in high school stamped on my mind a disturbing memory about him, although now I cannot recall what it was all about. I suspect that he himself did not like him (at all), so in his lectures he used to convey his own, personal reflections, as very solid evidence that the author is not to be liked or pleasant. I wish I hadn’t been so impressionable, yet I had trusted him and so I had lost reading some valuable book(s) once upon a time. Mea culpa!
What a lively paradox between these two books, with a title that indicates clearly that each will talk extensively about a different subject. Volume I ‘The last night of love’ is in fact the end of a passionate and, initially great, love affair, of a marriage (soulfully) and as it’s known (in real life especially) that after love the war starts, surprisingly, the volume II ‘The first night of war’ tells us that it’s not about a ‘classic’ war between ex-lovers, husband and wife, but it’s indeed about a real war, sometime in 1916 when The (old) Kingdom of Romania eventually entered WWI…
Having finished the novel, I had realized at once why I would rate higher volume II, though I was impressed greatly with both. The second part of the novel which begins with the first night of war, is built after the author's WWI own memorial, borrowed in tiny details to his hero Stefan Gheorghidiu, now a second lieutenant, while in his civil life a professor of philosophy. In a note written 25 years later, the author clarified that the first part of the novel is a fictitious tale, an invention of an author who was neither married nor had a family at that time. I didn’t know about it before I read Volume I, therefore I was convinced that things were like that. I was shocked later to learn that the happenings that occurred to his hero Stefan G. (middle-class educated, young handsome man, initially poor but soon to fall under a fortune by getting into an inheritance from his misery uncle) and his wife Ela (which in fact didn’t exist at all) are pure fiction. And the greater news was that the novel should have been continued with volume III, sadly, wasn’t written at all.
It looks that the author himself had very strong, deeply felt convictions, publicly too (by writing articles in newspapers and gazettes), about how things (politics, authorities, society, economy, etc) should be handled in a state that should look after all its citizens, and not just a part of them, and especially he had a long lasting ‘battle’ with bourgeoisie, overall…
It is an awfully 'nouveau riche' settled bourgeoisie, in which the aristocratic lusts are still boiling. Her lack of scruples is frightening. The hatred it provokes in intellectuals is terrible. See Eminescu's satires and Caragiale's plays. […] It is no wonder, then, that the Romanian army was sacrificed to class interests and taken un-commanded and unequipped to one of the most categorical national catastrophes (* the novel was written in 1930). Bourgeois nationalism reveals itself inferior to the class spirit and we can say that none of the classes of the Romanian people has so little sense of true patriotism as this bourgeoisie that fights nationally with fists in its chest and operates in the name of holy principles...
Together with the pulsations of life and love, the author reveals in this novel the 'law suit' aimed at the lifestyle of the bourgeoisie, it dissects its mentality, its fierce spirit of the class violently in solidarity when it comes to material interests, its parasitism that consumed the substance of the state…
In just two words, The last night of love , is the passionate confession of a jealous man, though he was right eventually... Apparently, a very ordinary middle-class history, and yet it is not trivial at all. There is a very high degree of uncertainty about the events and the psychology of the characters... (I should write more on Volume I..).
The first night of war , is a real front diary. Stefan G. parted with his wife Ela, with his whole past as he himself said, and was on the front, in the first line, somewhere between Campulung-Muscel and Bran, a mountain road, which he crosses several times. (Camil Petrescu himself participated in this phase of the war between 1916 and 1918, losing his hearing due to blasts of artillery ...)
The idea that resonates out of these pages is that war means neither bloody bayonet battles nor mountains of corpses, but much simpler and more human things in the daily life of military officers and soldiers, who speak all sorts of trivial stuff when together at meals, suffer from awful stomach aches or extreme cold and, quite often, they die shattered by bombshells. Nonetheless, the war is no less dreadful and the novelist considers that the horrible should not be sought in the exceptional side of reality, but in the ordinary side too.
Romanian bayonets are a match for any cannon...
What was horror to read in this second book was to clearly understand how unprepared the Romanian army was. Everything looks like a really ‘bad joke’. There was not enough weaponry, and they were still using bayonet, that was used during 1888! During their earlier talks it looks they had no idea how to fight a war, and on later stages of war development, it shows that the officers had no idea about strategy or tactics. It is no wonder that when they met in battle the Germans, who had the heavy equipment and knew how to fight, they had to retreat and in a logical way, it could end only one way, as history tells us that an armistice was signed by end of 1917...
March 2, 2024
"Ei se iubeau sus in camera mea
Pe patul meu si pe muzica mea."
Pe patul meu si pe muzica mea."
August 13, 2023
actually loved this part
ma plictisisem pe la început dar dupa a devenit mai interesanta
"ma gândesc halucinat ca as fi putut ucide pentru femeia asta... ca as fi fost inchis din cauza ei, pentru crima."
ma plictisisem pe la început dar dupa a devenit mai interesanta
"ma gândesc halucinat ca as fi putut ucide pentru femeia asta... ca as fi fost inchis din cauza ei, pentru crima."
March 20, 2023
Când credeam ca povestea nu mai poate deveni mai rea
Apare partea a doua
Apare partea a doua
April 3, 2022
Recunosc că am citit aproape în zigzag pasajele despre război, încurcam până și numele personajelor de la atâta confuzie. Oh well, at least it's over.
September 3, 2023
Nu-mi dau seama dacă mi-a plăcut mai mult decât ultima sau nu, dar foarte interesant descris războiul și felul în care i-a luat pe nepregătite.
Român+ baionetă= love
Român+ baionetă= love
September 25, 2022
3,5⭐️
"I-am scris că-i las absolut tot ce e în casă, de la obiecte de preț la cărţi... de la lucruri personale, la amintiri. *Adică tot trecutul*."
"I-am scris că-i las absolut tot ce e în casă, de la obiecte de preț la cărţi... de la lucruri personale, la amintiri. *Adică tot trecutul*."
January 15, 2023
huh...însfârșit am terminat-o.
„Drama războiului nu e numai amenințarea continuă a morții, măcelul și foamea, cât această permanentă verificare sufletească, acest continuu conflict al eului tău, care cunoaște altfel ceea ce cunoștea într-un anumit fel.” -p.104
„Între noi e o prietenie definitivă ca viața și ca moartea. Și totuși încerc un sentiment ciudat. Mi-e imposibil să îi pun vreo întrebare despre viața lui de familie. Îl cunosc cum nu l-a cunoscut nici mama lui - căci numai acolo, în fața morții și a cerului înalt, poți cunoaște oamenii - dar nu știu absolut nimic despre el. Și nici despre vreun alt camarad al meu.” (Gheorghidiu despre Orișan) -p.122
„Drama războiului nu e numai amenințarea continuă a morții, măcelul și foamea, cât această permanentă verificare sufletească, acest continuu conflict al eului tău, care cunoaște altfel ceea ce cunoștea într-un anumit fel.” -p.104
„Între noi e o prietenie definitivă ca viața și ca moartea. Și totuși încerc un sentiment ciudat. Mi-e imposibil să îi pun vreo întrebare despre viața lui de familie. Îl cunosc cum nu l-a cunoscut nici mama lui - căci numai acolo, în fața morții și a cerului înalt, poți cunoaște oamenii - dar nu știu absolut nimic despre el. Și nici despre vreun alt camarad al meu.” (Gheorghidiu despre Orișan) -p.122
February 26, 2022
1🌟
AMIN AM TERMINAT-O.
NU MAI VREAU SĂ AM DE-A FACE CU EA IN VIATA MEA!!!!!!
AMIN AM TERMINAT-O.
NU MAI VREAU SĂ AM DE-A FACE CU EA IN VIATA MEA!!!!!!
April 23, 2023
tarfa dracului
December 10, 2024
daca vi se pare relatable stefan gheorghediu spuneti mi ca sa va fac ordin de restrictie
August 26, 2025
1/5 pt că nu a murit Ștefan
March 30, 2022
“Drama războiului nu e numai ameninţarea continuă a morţii, măcelul şi foamea, cât această permanentă verificare sufletească, acest continuu conflict al eului tău, care cunoaşte altfel ceea ce cunoştea într-un anumit fel.”
m-am cam plictisit
m-am cam plictisit
January 5, 2023
E gata.. nu știu cum mă simt.
Mi a plăcut, dar nu la fel de mult ca primul.
Mi a plăcut, dar nu la fel de mult ca primul.
October 23, 2023
oribil.
nu merita bos
nu merita bos
September 6, 2024
I-as fi dat doua stele daca murea Stefan la final
September 23, 2025
Mie personal mi-a placut mult mai mult a 2-a carte, fata de prima. Cine-ar fi crezut ca daca subiectul principal nu este inselatul, si Gheorghidiu este departe de nevasta lui, ar fi o lectura suportabila sau poate chiar captivanta?
Dpmdv emotiile de pe front sunt foarte bine capturate, incepand cu momentul cand a fost dat ordinul sa plece la razboi si confuzia si haosul care au urmat. Modul cum descrie autorul intamplarile te face sa realizezi, cu fiecare pagina, cat de nepregatita era armata romana si faptul ca they were doomed from the beginning (more or less), punctul culminant pt mine fiind discutia lui Gheorghidiu cu neamtul ranit, care pune in perspectiva ideile gresite pe care le avea marea majoritate a soldatilor romani in relatie cu ceea ce urma in realitate sa se intample.
Antiteza dintre Gheorghidiu care isi repeta foarte des ca desi avea arma la el, n-ar fi putut niciodata sa traga in cineva (si chiar n-a facut asta) si descrierile mitralierelor si obuzelor nemtesti cateva pagini mai tarziu mi s-a parut geniala.
Diferenta dintre cele 2 carti este una majora, dat fiind faptul ca prima carte este 80% monolog interior, personajele sunt 90% din timp insuportabile si subiectul principal al cartii este 100% penibil, pe cand a 2-a carte se distinge prin emotiile puternice evocate si repeziciunea intamplarilor din prim plan care nu lasa timp pentru monologuri interioare sau caracterizari de personaje (good riddance tbh)
De asemenea, e de mentionat si finalul cartii in care aflam o dovada relativ mai clara in legatura cu ce s-a intamplat intre Ela si Grigoriade si il vedem pe Gheorghidiu renuntand de-adevaratelea la casnicia lui si la ce credea ca e iubirea vietii si femeia pentru care "ar fi ucis" (ce gluma buna, cand el nici ca sa se apere pe front nu ar fi apasat tragiul armei. Dar poate din iubire chiar faci lucruri de care in general te feresti, mai stii?). Dpmdv a fost oricum vorba doar despre orgoliul lui Gheorghidiu, care nu era indragostit pe bune de Ela, ci iubea ideea iubirii ei fata de el si ca toti ii priveau cu invidie.
Dpmdv emotiile de pe front sunt foarte bine capturate, incepand cu momentul cand a fost dat ordinul sa plece la razboi si confuzia si haosul care au urmat. Modul cum descrie autorul intamplarile te face sa realizezi, cu fiecare pagina, cat de nepregatita era armata romana si faptul ca they were doomed from the beginning (more or less), punctul culminant pt mine fiind discutia lui Gheorghidiu cu neamtul ranit, care pune in perspectiva ideile gresite pe care le avea marea majoritate a soldatilor romani in relatie cu ceea ce urma in realitate sa se intample.
Antiteza dintre Gheorghidiu care isi repeta foarte des ca desi avea arma la el, n-ar fi putut niciodata sa traga in cineva (si chiar n-a facut asta) si descrierile mitralierelor si obuzelor nemtesti cateva pagini mai tarziu mi s-a parut geniala.
Diferenta dintre cele 2 carti este una majora, dat fiind faptul ca prima carte este 80% monolog interior, personajele sunt 90% din timp insuportabile si subiectul principal al cartii este 100% penibil, pe cand a 2-a carte se distinge prin emotiile puternice evocate si repeziciunea intamplarilor din prim plan care nu lasa timp pentru monologuri interioare sau caracterizari de personaje (good riddance tbh)
De asemenea, e de mentionat si finalul cartii in care aflam o dovada relativ mai clara in legatura cu ce s-a intamplat intre Ela si Grigoriade si il vedem pe Gheorghidiu renuntand de-adevaratelea la casnicia lui si la ce credea ca e iubirea vietii si femeia pentru care "ar fi ucis" (ce gluma buna, cand el nici ca sa se apere pe front nu ar fi apasat tragiul armei. Dar poate din iubire chiar faci lucruri de care in general te feresti, mai stii?). Dpmdv a fost oricum vorba doar despre orgoliul lui Gheorghidiu, care nu era indragostit pe bune de Ela, ci iubea ideea iubirii ei fata de el si ca toti ii priveau cu invidie.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
August 19, 2024
în mod extrem de surprinzător, cartea aceasta mi-a plăcut chiar foarte mult. eram sigură ca nu va fi cazul având în vedere faptul că toată acțiunea se învârte în jurul războiului, subiect care nu credeam că m-ar atrage în literatură. totuși, cred ăa ce m-a făcut să îmi placă a fost stilul autorului de a scrie și faptul că devenisem intrigată de ce urma să se întâmple după fiecare pagină. aș putea spune că ultima noapte a detronat enigma otiliei și e probabil opera mea preferată de bac.
May 4, 2024
acuma sincer eu n am inteles nici jumatate din plot
it did not serve😾
primu volum a fost 🤌🤌🤌
asta e 🗑️ (gunoi)
am inteles partea de final. atat. cand divorteaza aia.
ii las ceva
ii las si asta
ii las tot🤭
it did not serve😾
primu volum a fost 🤌🤌🤌
asta e 🗑️ (gunoi)
am inteles partea de final. atat. cand divorteaza aia.
ii las ceva
ii las si asta
ii las tot🤭
January 14, 2024
M a facut sa imi dau seama ca nu sunt cea mai stralucita persoana si ca nu am inteles mai nimic. Cineva sa imi explice ultimul capitol va rog
March 6, 2025
Mi-a plăcut mai mult ca prima parte. A fost ok. N-am crezut ca pana la urma ea chiar l-a înșelat
February 6, 2023
la inceput nu prea m a dat pe spate, nu ma asteptam sa mi placa dar pana la urma a fost super ok, fain plotul si personajele 🫶🫶🫶
August 19, 2023
plictisitor
December 22, 2022
Mi-a plăcut cum e scrisă cartea , descrierile , chiar si pasaje … , dar nu îl pot înțelege in totalitate pe protagonist , Ștefan Ghiorghidiu … îi înțelegeam sentimentele din preajma războiului , dar nu am putut sa înțeleg toate acțiunile lui față de Ela , care el ca om superior , ce studia filosofia și făcea față războiului a morții a pericolului , nu știa să treacă peste ceva banal , sau poate ceea ce ar fi numit chiar el o etapă . Mai bine ar fi donat toată aceea avere sau chiar nu știu , o păstra pentru însuși dacă ar fi supraviețuit in continuare … dar ultima lui fapta nu mi-a sa părut una eroica , sau dulce , sau a omului superior ci a celui ce sa lasă tocmai de aceea onoare neexistentă păcălit . El care știa ca trăiește intr-o lume a împrejurărilor , una rece .
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
April 14, 2023
A fost un chin să trec prin acest volum al romanului. Dacă nu aveam nevoie de el pentru școală chiar nu m-aș mai fi chinuit.
Povestea este, într-adevăr, interesantă, pentru cine citește romanul de plăcere, dar nu a fost și cazul meu. Am trecut prin pagini întregi și m-am uitat ca pisica-n calendar, pentru că nu am înțeles mai nimic. Pagini întregi despre politică și grade militare cu care nu sunt familiară, deci nu am înțeles mare lucru. Au fost și câteva pagini despre povestea de dragoste care au fost mai interesantă, dar gândirea lui Ștefan a stricat toată plăcerea acelor fraze.
Am iubit sfârșitul, mai ales ultimele propoziții, căci, în sfârșit, după două volume întregi despre cât de distrusă e relație dintre cei doi, chiar s-a făcut ceva pentru a rezolva problema.
Din nou, pentru cine e interesant cu adevărat de poveste, chiar recomand să o citiți, pentru că fiecare carte e o experiență.
Povestea este, într-adevăr, interesantă, pentru cine citește romanul de plăcere, dar nu a fost și cazul meu. Am trecut prin pagini întregi și m-am uitat ca pisica-n calendar, pentru că nu am înțeles mai nimic. Pagini întregi despre politică și grade militare cu care nu sunt familiară, deci nu am înțeles mare lucru. Au fost și câteva pagini despre povestea de dragoste care au fost mai interesantă, dar gândirea lui Ștefan a stricat toată plăcerea acelor fraze.
Am iubit sfârșitul, mai ales ultimele propoziții, căci, în sfârșit, după două volume întregi despre cât de distrusă e relație dintre cei doi, chiar s-a făcut ceva pentru a rezolva problema.
Din nou, pentru cine e interesant cu adevărat de poveste, chiar recomand să o citiți, pentru că fiecare carte e o experiență.
November 3, 2022
A fost bine scrisa si indetaliata dar nu pot relata cu o poveste de razboi fiindca nu am luat parte la nici un razboi lol
December 26, 2024
N-am terminat-o:)
January 22, 2025
Acum înțeleg la ce se refereau criticii literari când au spus ca cele două părți par romane diferite.
November 30, 2023
I have to admit that I liked this book more than the first volume. Here the action already takes place, through the war in which the character participates. I really liked how the first world war is presented through Romania's involvement. It can be seen that it is presented both through the battles that are given, and through the dynamics of the characters, the author representing both the dark side of the war, but what I noticed much better is that he slowly brings to light the positive side and maybe I can say the fun of it .
The philosophical lines also impressed me in this volume, but what I always appreciate about a book is when I learn something new from it, and this book really did that. I really learned aspects of which I can say that I am very glad that I know them now. There were moments when I couldn't take my eyes off the book, the action becoming too interesting. I have to admit that there were some plot twists that made me enjoy the reading even more. And what I liked again, was how well the war and the hardships faced by the soldiers were portrayed. And of course the author did a wonderful job with this, writing from his own experience because yes, he participated in the first world war and yes, i’ll say it again: he did a wonderful job with this book. It is the very first book I read about the first world war, I read more about the second, but this is the first one in which the first world war takes place and especially the first of its kind from the perspective of the Romanians. And I am so happy that it did not disappoint me.
But sometimes I felt that I was struggling to understand certain names, being a bunch of strings of names of the participants in the action.
The ending is an open one, but I think the volume ends exactly as it should, connecting the two plans and themes of the book: love and war.
The philosophical lines also impressed me in this volume, but what I always appreciate about a book is when I learn something new from it, and this book really did that. I really learned aspects of which I can say that I am very glad that I know them now. There were moments when I couldn't take my eyes off the book, the action becoming too interesting. I have to admit that there were some plot twists that made me enjoy the reading even more. And what I liked again, was how well the war and the hardships faced by the soldiers were portrayed. And of course the author did a wonderful job with this, writing from his own experience because yes, he participated in the first world war and yes, i’ll say it again: he did a wonderful job with this book. It is the very first book I read about the first world war, I read more about the second, but this is the first one in which the first world war takes place and especially the first of its kind from the perspective of the Romanians. And I am so happy that it did not disappoint me.
But sometimes I felt that I was struggling to understand certain names, being a bunch of strings of names of the participants in the action.
The ending is an open one, but I think the volume ends exactly as it should, connecting the two plans and themes of the book: love and war.
October 1, 2024
Camil Petrescu reușește să ilustreze procesul de maturizare al lui Gheorghidiu pe parcursul războiului, evidențiind transformările sale interioare profunde. La începutul romanului, Gheorghidiu este un tânăr idealist, plin de aspirații romantice și visuri legate de dragoste și viață. Cu toate acestea, pe măsură ce conflictul devine tot mai intens, el este confruntat cu realitățile brutale ale războiului, care îi pun la încercare nu doar curajul fizic, ci și valorile morale și psihologia.
Experiențele traumatizante, confruntările cu moartea și suferința celorlalți îl obligă să își reevalueze concepțiile despre lume și despre sine. Gheorghidiu evoluează de la o viziune idealizată asupra vieții către o înțelegere mai profundă a complexității și fragilității existenței umane. Această maturizare este marcată de o pierdere a inocenței și de o acceptare a realităților dure, în care idealurile romantice sunt adesea copleșite de anxietatea și teroarea războiului.
Astfel, Petrescu reușește să contureze un personaj care, prin intermediul suferinței și al experiențelor extrem de dificile, ajunge să își găsească un nou sens în viață, învățând lecții valoroase despre responsabilitate, sacrificiu și umanitate. Maturizarea lui Gheorghidiu în contextul războiului reflectă nu doar evoluția individuală, ci și un comentariu asupra condiției umane în fața adversităților. (supararea lui Camil Petrescu ca nu i s-a permis sa participe la razboi si totodata imparacarea cu acest fapt)
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 51 reviews