What do you think?
Rate this book
Zło
Czternastoletni Erik chodzi do szkoły podstawowej w Sztokholmie. Nie jest to jednak beztroskie dzieciństwo. Chłopiec zarówno w domu jak i szkole doświadcza przemocy. Także nowa szkoła z internatem nie spełnia nadziei na lepsze życie, panuje w niej kult siły, donosicielstwa, lizusostwa, według tych zasad Erik nie chce żyć. Dwa lata piekła sprawiają, że chłopak postanawia z całą determinacją przeciwstawiać się okrucieństwu, tym bardziej, że w jednym z kolegów znajduje partnera do rozważań na temat natury zła. Wraca do domu ze świadomością, że teraz już wszystko zależy od niego. Musi jeszcze tylko załatwić sprawę z ojcem.
400 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1981
176 people are currently reading
3461 people want to read
About the author
Jan Guillou
98 books693 followersJan Oscar Sverre Lucien Henri Guillou (born 17 January 1944) is a Swedish author and journalist. Among his books are a series of spy fiction novels about a spy named Carl Hamilton, and a trilogy of historical fiction novels about a Knight Templar, Arn Magnusson. He is the owner of one of the largest publishing companies in Sweden, Piratförlaget, together with Liza Marklund and his common-law wife, publisher Ann-Marie Skarp.
Guillou's fame in Sweden was established during his time as an investigative journalist. In 1973, he and co-reporter Peter Bratt exposed a secret intelligence organization in Sweden, Informationsbyrån (IB). He is still active within journalism as a column writer for the Swedish evening tabloid Aftonbladet.
In October 2009, it was revealed that Guillou had been recruited by the KGB in 1967. The exposure of his activities came after the tabloid Expressen requested the release of documents from the Swedish Security Service (Säpo) and published information from the Säpo files along with information gained through interviews with former KGB Colonel Oleg Gordievsky about Guillou's case. The records showed that Guillou's involvement with the KGB continued for five years, until 1972.
From Wikipedia
Guillou's fame in Sweden was established during his time as an investigative journalist. In 1973, he and co-reporter Peter Bratt exposed a secret intelligence organization in Sweden, Informationsbyrån (IB). He is still active within journalism as a column writer for the Swedish evening tabloid Aftonbladet.
In October 2009, it was revealed that Guillou had been recruited by the KGB in 1967. The exposure of his activities came after the tabloid Expressen requested the release of documents from the Swedish Security Service (Säpo) and published information from the Säpo files along with information gained through interviews with former KGB Colonel Oleg Gordievsky about Guillou's case. The records showed that Guillou's involvement with the KGB continued for five years, until 1972.
From Wikipedia
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 443 reviews
December 31, 2015
I read this as part of a project we're about to write at uni. The project is about evil, so this book is certainly fitting.
When I bought it, the sales person told me "That's a really good book". And he was right. It's brilliant. The danish translation is a bit icky at times, but the story itself is incredible.
And it's a violent book, at the centre of it you find abuse and degradation. But it's also intelligent. Something that comes through in Erik's internal dialogue, and in the conversations between Pierre and Erik. It's a book that explores its own themes, and does it really well.
There's a lot to analyse, in this case I'll go for the title. What does "Evil" refer to? Erik? His dad? His school tormentors? His mother and the teachers who turn a blind eye? I believe it's all of them. This is not a book about The Evil, it's about the many different kinds we encounter every day.
And then it asks the age-old question of whether violence is ever justified as a means of fighting back. This book never really answers that question, all it tells us is that, sometimes, violence works.
It mirrors a lot of my own thoughts and observations too. Most notably how anxiety (angst) and fear work much better as defence or offence tools than any pain you could ever inflict on someone.
Once read, it's not a book or a story that's likely to leave you. It forces you to think, to consider where you stand and to form an opinion of the things that take place. And as a result; to examine yourself. What's the right thing to do? What would YOU have done?
It has much the same effect the movie does, it shocks, it horrifies and it stays with you forever.
When I bought it, the sales person told me "That's a really good book". And he was right. It's brilliant. The danish translation is a bit icky at times, but the story itself is incredible.
And it's a violent book, at the centre of it you find abuse and degradation. But it's also intelligent. Something that comes through in Erik's internal dialogue, and in the conversations between Pierre and Erik. It's a book that explores its own themes, and does it really well.
There's a lot to analyse, in this case I'll go for the title. What does "Evil" refer to? Erik? His dad? His school tormentors? His mother and the teachers who turn a blind eye? I believe it's all of them. This is not a book about The Evil, it's about the many different kinds we encounter every day.
And then it asks the age-old question of whether violence is ever justified as a means of fighting back. This book never really answers that question, all it tells us is that, sometimes, violence works.
It mirrors a lot of my own thoughts and observations too. Most notably how anxiety (angst) and fear work much better as defence or offence tools than any pain you could ever inflict on someone.
Once read, it's not a book or a story that's likely to leave you. It forces you to think, to consider where you stand and to form an opinion of the things that take place. And as a result; to examine yourself. What's the right thing to do? What would YOU have done?
It has much the same effect the movie does, it shocks, it horrifies and it stays with you forever.
March 19, 2021
Шведская подростковая классика, (которую у нас, к слову, перевели и выпустили украдкой), о том, что борьба со злом может быть разве что конкурентной.
October 5, 2018
At least 6 stars.
March 11, 2023
Hur bekämpar man ondskan utan att bli den?
December 25, 2021
Пять звёзд мало.
Когда-то я любила повести Анатолия Алексина за то, что от них невозможно оторваться, за то, что хотелось выть от непрестанного торжества несправедливости и подлости, но потом побеждало добро, которое внутри, не снаружи. И в этой книге всё это есть, но самое главное, что и во мне это всё проснулось, когда я слушала "Зло" (Storytel - воскрешение забытых эмоций, радость моего сегодняшнего Рождества)
Есть ещё "Книга всех вещей" Гюса Кейера, которая сотворила со мной что-то похожее, когда мне уже было много лет.
Когда-то я любила повести Анатолия Алексина за то, что от них невозможно оторваться, за то, что хотелось выть от непрестанного торжества несправедливости и подлости, но потом побеждало добро, которое внутри, не снаружи. И в этой книге всё это есть, но самое главное, что и во мне это всё проснулось, когда я слушала "Зло" (Storytel - воскрешение забытых эмоций, радость моего сегодняшнего Рождества)
Есть ещё "Книга всех вещей" Гюса Кейера, которая сотворила со мной что-то похожее, когда мне уже было много лет.
September 21, 2008
I must admit that I like Guillou in general before I start writing my review.
This book has not changed my mind at all. On the contrary. This was a book that cought me from page one. Not only the story, but also the ease it seems to be written with. The author uses every day language, no decorations, he just tells what he has to tell.
The story of a boy that is severely beaten by his father, and how he survives that. Simultaneously that same boy is part of a group that terrorizes others at school and commits criminal acts.
When all comes out, he is sent to bording school. He looks forward to it, being away from his father and the never stopping beatings. Until he finds, that boarding school is even worse: there's not only one, but there is a whole counsil that tries to break him.
How he fights the system, stands up to it and faces the consequenses, it cought me. Despite what happened in the past and what he is going through now, he finds a friend there. They have long conversations, stand up for each other and almost untill the end of their time at boarding school they are together. He takes revenge for what the board did to his friend, but in a way that noone can pin it down to him. Only on his last day he admits his deeds, just before walking out for good.
But the best scene I found the final confrontation with his father. When coming home, his father thought to go on with him in the old way. He forgot, or didn't want to admit, that his son grew up, got stronger. So, when they stood face to face, Erik only talked. Talked about what he was going to do. And his father already broke, not used to any comment, any reply and out of fear.
Whether the fight really occurred, the book doesn't describe. For me this was a happy ending enough. No need to go on any futher, since the point was made: he won, finally.
This book has not changed my mind at all. On the contrary. This was a book that cought me from page one. Not only the story, but also the ease it seems to be written with. The author uses every day language, no decorations, he just tells what he has to tell.
The story of a boy that is severely beaten by his father, and how he survives that. Simultaneously that same boy is part of a group that terrorizes others at school and commits criminal acts.
When all comes out, he is sent to bording school. He looks forward to it, being away from his father and the never stopping beatings. Until he finds, that boarding school is even worse: there's not only one, but there is a whole counsil that tries to break him.
How he fights the system, stands up to it and faces the consequenses, it cought me. Despite what happened in the past and what he is going through now, he finds a friend there. They have long conversations, stand up for each other and almost untill the end of their time at boarding school they are together. He takes revenge for what the board did to his friend, but in a way that noone can pin it down to him. Only on his last day he admits his deeds, just before walking out for good.
But the best scene I found the final confrontation with his father. When coming home, his father thought to go on with him in the old way. He forgot, or didn't want to admit, that his son grew up, got stronger. So, when they stood face to face, Erik only talked. Talked about what he was going to do. And his father already broke, not used to any comment, any reply and out of fear.
Whether the fight really occurred, the book doesn't describe. For me this was a happy ending enough. No need to go on any futher, since the point was made: he won, finally.
November 12, 2010
My mothertongue being Swedish I've heard a lot of hype about this book over the years. And by the creed 'no one is a prophet in his own hometown' I never took it seriously, despite not even being of the same nationality as the author. But I've now read it for school and it far exceeded my expectations. It's a bit teenage-angsty but if you, like me, delight in reading about suffering and those who power through it you will love this book. The main character is portrayed in a way that I at times was taken aback by. The way he knew himself to be steered by his emotions and knew he couldn't avoid it. That acceptance he had of his own emotional self. It felt refreshing. I don't think a woman could have written a book like this. Or, rather, I don't think a woman would have written this book like this. And well, truth is, no one could have written this book but Guillou. He doesn't advertise it anywhere on, or in, the book but it is a autobiografi, which is both horrifying and amazing. And it makes me wonder how much of it is true. Even as fiction it is gruesome and it makes me ache to think that Guillou has lived through this. Perhaps there is a reason for the macho, 'you can't do shit to me' way he carries himself (that same confidence that has made me sort of take a dislike to him whenever I see him on the telly...). Definitely a book worth reading.
October 2, 2019
Nincs nekem mostanság szerencsém ezekkel az „agyonhype”-olt, magyarországi megjelenésükre hazájukban már klasszikussá vált bestsellerekkel. Pedig a regény által boncolgatott témakörök miatt a Könyörtelenekbe is nagy várakozással vágtam bele. Gyermekbántalmazás, családon belüli erőszak – örök témája az irodalomnak és más művészeti ágaknak. Pennalizmus, vagy egyszerűen csak a büntetés-alapú engedelmességi rendszer, a csicskáztatás bármely férfiak, vagy fiatal fiúk által megtöltött zárt közösségben (legyen az kollégium, internátus, katonaság, vagy akár börtön) – ugyancsak nagyon izgalmas téma. Számos – a könyv fülszövegében is megemlített – valódi klasszikus, méltán halhatatlan irodalmi mű alaptétele. Ráadásul mindez a 2. világháborút követő újjáépítés évtizedeiben, az újra lélegzethez jutó skandináv demokráciákban (jelen esetben Svédországban), megspékelve azzal, hogy a regény tulajdonképpen önéletrajzi ihletésű, a szerző ifjúkori emlékeiből táplálkozik – hát ennyi minden csak valami fantasztikus nagy durranást eredményezhet. De sajnos nem nekem.
Érdekes elképzelnem a francia-norvég szülőpáros svéd gyermekeként felcseperedő Jan Guillout, amint a regényében színesen ábrázolt brutális erőszakot, kegyetlen szadizmust John J. Rambo-t és John McClane-t egyaránt megszégyenítő profizmussal és mindvégig a gáncstalan igazságosztó köntösében tetszelegve – mindkét oldaláról – megéli és mindeközben még besepri a jól megérdemelt erkölcsi győzelmet is. Még ha a történeti gyökerek valósak is, a regényt olvasva számomra mindez visszatetsző.
Pedig a regény kifejezetten nekem tetsző módon indult. A szerző – talán a hosszú évek újságírói tapasztalatából merítve – tárgyszerűen, tudósítás jelleggel ismerteti meg az olvasóval Eriket és világát. Jól esik, hogy a visszafogott írásmód segít valamelyest távol tartanom magamat a főhőstől – akinek érzelmi intellektusáról ekkor még semmit nem tudok, valamint aberrált családi és iskolai környezetétől egyaránt.
Miután azonban Erik „bevackol” Stjärnsberg internátusának „idilli” környezetébe, a fiúiskola ódon falai közé, egyre jobban elszabadul a pokol szerzőnk képzeletében és az engem érdeklő erkölcsi-társadalmi vonatkozásokat olyannyira személyes és ízléstelenül plasztikusan ábrázolt túlélő akció-sztorivá alacsonyítja, amely engem egyre inkább taszított, s ez az érzés kitartott egészen a történet végéig.
Pedig az Erik és Pierre között folyó morális eszmecserék rendkívül érdekesek voltak, igazán izgalmas kérdéseket feszegettek. Félelem és fájdalom kontextusa. Félelem a fájdalomtól, vagy rettegés a megaláztatástól?
A rend és a szabad akarat összefüggései. A gondolat, a józan gondolkodás erejének helye és szerepe egy olyan közösségben, amely a külvilág demokratikus keretei között, látszólag a többség és a tradíciók által szentesített rendszer igazgat, de valójában náci eszközökkel, egy szűk, kiváltságos kisebbség tart rendet, álszent törvénykezéssel, saját kicsinyes, undorító érdekeiket kiszolgálandó (mennyi hasonló rendszer működik a demokrácia köntösében még manapság is – állami szintre emelve…)?
Meddig tűröd „balsorsod minden nyűgét, s nyilait” egy jövőbeni magasztos cél érdekében? Lehet-e erkölcsi tartással, erőszakmentességgel, passzív rezisztenciával, Gandhi és MLK példájával válaszolni az értelmetlen erőszakra?
…és így tovább, rengeteg roppant izgalmas kérdés, amelyről nagyon szívesen olvastam volna, a mérhetetlen erőszak tobzódása helyett. Félreértések elkerülése végett: szeretem én az izgalmas, véres akciókat, nem riadok vissza a kiomló belekben tobzódó berserker főhősöktől. De ne keverjük mindezt a mélyen szántó erkölcsi tanulságokkal.
Tetszett azonban, ahogyan Guillou apró bepillantást enged a korabeli finn kisebbség helyzetébe a felsőbbrendű, germán eredetmítoszra építő svéd társadalom szerkezetében. Ez mindenképpen jó pont.
Összességében azonban az a véleményem, hogy az író prózája nem túl kifinomult, jellemábrázolása már-már karikatúra-szerűen sarkított, stílusáról, vonalvezetésének következetességéről pedig csak annyit, hogy a zárójelenet kb. annyira ízlésesen illeszkedett a cselekmény ívébe, mint Magdi anyus otthonkája a Rózsa presszó illusztris törzsvendégeinek könnyű, kis nyári belépőjéhez. Nem az én könyvem.
(Molyon még árnyaltam, egészen 3 és fél csillagig magasztalva eme csodát.)
Érdekes elképzelnem a francia-norvég szülőpáros svéd gyermekeként felcseperedő Jan Guillout, amint a regényében színesen ábrázolt brutális erőszakot, kegyetlen szadizmust John J. Rambo-t és John McClane-t egyaránt megszégyenítő profizmussal és mindvégig a gáncstalan igazságosztó köntösében tetszelegve – mindkét oldaláról – megéli és mindeközben még besepri a jól megérdemelt erkölcsi győzelmet is. Még ha a történeti gyökerek valósak is, a regényt olvasva számomra mindez visszatetsző.
Pedig a regény kifejezetten nekem tetsző módon indult. A szerző – talán a hosszú évek újságírói tapasztalatából merítve – tárgyszerűen, tudósítás jelleggel ismerteti meg az olvasóval Eriket és világát. Jól esik, hogy a visszafogott írásmód segít valamelyest távol tartanom magamat a főhőstől – akinek érzelmi intellektusáról ekkor még semmit nem tudok, valamint aberrált családi és iskolai környezetétől egyaránt.
Miután azonban Erik „bevackol” Stjärnsberg internátusának „idilli” környezetébe, a fiúiskola ódon falai közé, egyre jobban elszabadul a pokol szerzőnk képzeletében és az engem érdeklő erkölcsi-társadalmi vonatkozásokat olyannyira személyes és ízléstelenül plasztikusan ábrázolt túlélő akció-sztorivá alacsonyítja, amely engem egyre inkább taszított, s ez az érzés kitartott egészen a történet végéig.
Pedig az Erik és Pierre között folyó morális eszmecserék rendkívül érdekesek voltak, igazán izgalmas kérdéseket feszegettek. Félelem és fájdalom kontextusa. Félelem a fájdalomtól, vagy rettegés a megaláztatástól?
A rend és a szabad akarat összefüggései. A gondolat, a józan gondolkodás erejének helye és szerepe egy olyan közösségben, amely a külvilág demokratikus keretei között, látszólag a többség és a tradíciók által szentesített rendszer igazgat, de valójában náci eszközökkel, egy szűk, kiváltságos kisebbség tart rendet, álszent törvénykezéssel, saját kicsinyes, undorító érdekeiket kiszolgálandó (mennyi hasonló rendszer működik a demokrácia köntösében még manapság is – állami szintre emelve…)?
Meddig tűröd „balsorsod minden nyűgét, s nyilait” egy jövőbeni magasztos cél érdekében? Lehet-e erkölcsi tartással, erőszakmentességgel, passzív rezisztenciával, Gandhi és MLK példájával válaszolni az értelmetlen erőszakra?
…és így tovább, rengeteg roppant izgalmas kérdés, amelyről nagyon szívesen olvastam volna, a mérhetetlen erőszak tobzódása helyett. Félreértések elkerülése végett: szeretem én az izgalmas, véres akciókat, nem riadok vissza a kiomló belekben tobzódó berserker főhősöktől. De ne keverjük mindezt a mélyen szántó erkölcsi tanulságokkal.
Tetszett azonban, ahogyan Guillou apró bepillantást enged a korabeli finn kisebbség helyzetébe a felsőbbrendű, germán eredetmítoszra építő svéd társadalom szerkezetében. Ez mindenképpen jó pont.
Összességében azonban az a véleményem, hogy az író prózája nem túl kifinomult, jellemábrázolása már-már karikatúra-szerűen sarkított, stílusáról, vonalvezetésének következetességéről pedig csak annyit, hogy a zárójelenet kb. annyira ízlésesen illeszkedett a cselekmény ívébe, mint Magdi anyus otthonkája a Rózsa presszó illusztris törzsvendégeinek könnyű, kis nyári belépőjéhez. Nem az én könyvem.
October 2, 2019
Ez a könyv számomra egyértelműen a fehéren izzó düh felélesztéséről szól a földi igazságtalanságokkal szemben. Amikor a főszereplővel, Erikkel találkozunk, egyben megismerjük szadista apját is, aki zsigeri élvezettel és nagy szakértelemmel kínozza őt – itt már felhorgad az emberben a bosszúszomj. Aztán Erik látszólag kiszabadul a szörny karmai közül, amikor egy távoli internátusba kerül, de valójában csöbörből vödörbe pottyan: az elitgimnáziumban ugyanis egy diáktanács uralkodik, akik a „bajtársi nevelés” szellemében a testi és lelki bántalmazások legocsmányabb variációiban részesítik az alsóbb éveseket. És itt az ember már tajtékzik.
Két dolog az értékelés nehézségeiről: 1.) Guillou annyira tisztán, annyira egyértelműen a fenn említett „fehéren izzó düh” felébresztésére törekszik polarizált jellemrajzaival és a kegyetlenkedések helyenként naturális ábrázolásával, hogy az nagyon megnehezíti a hideg értelmezést*. Az világos, hogy Guillou nem különösebben technikás – a szöveg szintjeit tekintve a Könyörtelenek Ottlik és Golding „testvérregényeihez” képest a kanyarba' sincs –, viszont szemmel láthatóan tudatos író, aki tisztában van vele, milyen hatást akar elérni. 2.) Nagyon nem tetszik a regénynek az az opcionális olvasata, miszerint a családon belüli erőszak végső soron nem is rossz eszköz arra, hogy egy alapvetően jó szándékú embert felkészítsen a küzdelemre az élet igazságtalanságai ellen. Erik ugyanis az apa kezétől elszenvedett szörnyűségeknek köszönheti, hogy természetellenes (és amorális) higgadtsággal képes felkészülni az őrá leselkedő veszélyekre – hát… biztos akad ilyen is, de összességében ez nekem elég félrevezetőnek (és veszélyesnek) tűnik.
Nagy ingerem van lepontozni, mert bizonyos szempontból a hátam borsódzik ettől a regénytől. Ugyanakkor ha azt nézem, hogy hatását tekintve megfelel-e a vélt írói szándéknak – nos, az hétszentség. Bennem például úgy ágasodott tegnap az igazságosztás** vágya, hogy azt el se tudom mondani. Ha csak azt nézem, mennyire nem tudom magam kivonni a hatása alól, ez egy jó könyv. De (update 2019-ben) még így három év után is érzem, mennyire dühítő Guillou inkorrekt eljárása, az erőszak, a jogosnak beállított agresszió ilyetén fetisizálása - és ezért erőt véve magamon nem adok neki 3 csillagnál többet.
* Külön kiemelném, Guillou milyen gátlástalanul használja ki az olvasó azon vágyát, hogy a végén a „rosszakat” brutálisan megbüntetve lássa. Komolyan mondom, ilyen téren csak a pőre ’90-es évek bosszúakciófilmjei vehetik fel vele a versenyt. Meg a Machete.
** Tegyük hozzá, itt az „igazságosztás” szó azt jelenti, hogy „verjünk ripityomra minden szadista náci rohadékot”. Ami higgadt fejjel végiggondolva maga sem több, mint szimpla szadizmus, csak éppen erkölcsi értelemben ünneplőbe van öltöztetve.
Két dolog az értékelés nehézségeiről: 1.) Guillou annyira tisztán, annyira egyértelműen a fenn említett „fehéren izzó düh” felébresztésére törekszik polarizált jellemrajzaival és a kegyetlenkedések helyenként naturális ábrázolásával, hogy az nagyon megnehezíti a hideg értelmezést*. Az világos, hogy Guillou nem különösebben technikás – a szöveg szintjeit tekintve a Könyörtelenek Ottlik és Golding „testvérregényeihez” képest a kanyarba' sincs –, viszont szemmel láthatóan tudatos író, aki tisztában van vele, milyen hatást akar elérni. 2.) Nagyon nem tetszik a regénynek az az opcionális olvasata, miszerint a családon belüli erőszak végső soron nem is rossz eszköz arra, hogy egy alapvetően jó szándékú embert felkészítsen a küzdelemre az élet igazságtalanságai ellen. Erik ugyanis az apa kezétől elszenvedett szörnyűségeknek köszönheti, hogy természetellenes (és amorális) higgadtsággal képes felkészülni az őrá leselkedő veszélyekre – hát… biztos akad ilyen is, de összességében ez nekem elég félrevezetőnek (és veszélyesnek) tűnik.
Nagy ingerem van lepontozni, mert bizonyos szempontból a hátam borsódzik ettől a regénytől. Ugyanakkor ha azt nézem, hogy hatását tekintve megfelel-e a vélt írói szándéknak – nos, az hétszentség. Bennem például úgy ágasodott tegnap az igazságosztás** vágya, hogy azt el se tudom mondani. Ha csak azt nézem, mennyire nem tudom magam kivonni a hatása alól, ez egy jó könyv. De (update 2019-ben) még így három év után is érzem, mennyire dühítő Guillou inkorrekt eljárása, az erőszak, a jogosnak beállított agresszió ilyetén fetisizálása - és ezért erőt véve magamon nem adok neki 3 csillagnál többet.
* Külön kiemelném, Guillou milyen gátlástalanul használja ki az olvasó azon vágyát, hogy a végén a „rosszakat” brutálisan megbüntetve lássa. Komolyan mondom, ilyen téren csak a pőre ’90-es évek bosszúakciófilmjei vehetik fel vele a versenyt. Meg a Machete.
** Tegyük hozzá, itt az „igazságosztás” szó azt jelenti, hogy „verjünk ripityomra minden szadista náci rohadékot”. Ami higgadt fejjel végiggondolva maga sem több, mint szimpla szadizmus, csak éppen erkölcsi értelemben ünneplőbe van öltöztetve.
July 12, 2019
Upea kirja! Hienosti avattu motiiveja ja mekanismeja rakenteellisen vallan väärinkäytön ja väkivallan taustalla, ja myös henkilökohtaisella tasolla samaistuttavasti ja koskettavasti.
July 31, 2018
დაახლოებით ორი წლის წინ ვიყიდე ეს წიგნი და რამდენჯერ ვიფიქრებამ წიგნის წაკითხვა იმდენჯერ რაღაც მაბრკოლებდა, თურმე რა საოცრებასთან მქონია საქმე...
ეს აღმოჩნდა წიგნი, რომელმაც მთლიანად შემიპყრო, რამდენიმე წუთია რაც დავასრულე და ჯერ კიდევ შოკში ვარ, ნორმალურად ვერც ვაანალიზებ რას ვწერ.
ეს არ არის წიგნი მხოლოდ ბულინგზე და სუსტის ჩაგვრაზე და არც ძალადობაზე, ეს წიგნი ბევრას მეტ თემას ეხება და საერთოდ, ვფიქრობ, რომ იან გიუს ეს საოცრება ყველამ უნდა წაიკითხოს!!
ჩემი საყვარელი წიგნია, მეტი რაღა ვთქვა
P.S მინდოდა რივიუში რამდენიმე ციტატა ჩამეწერა, მაგრამ მთლიან წიგნს ვერ დავტევდი.
ეს აღმოჩნდა წიგნი, რომელმაც მთლიანად შემიპყრო, რამდენიმე წუთია რაც დავასრულე და ჯერ კიდევ შოკში ვარ, ნორმალურად ვერც ვაანალიზებ რას ვწერ.
ეს არ არის წიგნი მხოლოდ ბულინგზე და სუსტის ჩაგვრაზე და არც ძალადობაზე, ეს წიგნი ბევრას მეტ თემას ეხება და საერთოდ, ვფიქრობ, რომ იან გიუს ეს საოცრება ყველამ უნდა წაიკითხოს!!
ჩემი საყვარელი წიგნია, მეტი რაღა ვთქვა
P.S მინდოდა რივიუში რამდენიმე ციტატა ჩამეწერა, მაგრამ მთლიან წიგნს ვერ დავტევდი.
December 17, 2023
I’m finally done!
I think that u would have liked it more if it weren’t a school book. Cause when you have a school book you can’t just read in your own speed and I think that that’s what threw me off.
Also the writing was also kinda weird sometimes, and the worst part of the book is that it has NO CHAPTERS.
But at the same time it kinda shocked me, and sometimes it was pretty exciting to read tho.
But overall a okay book 📖
I think that u would have liked it more if it weren’t a school book. Cause when you have a school book you can’t just read in your own speed and I think that that’s what threw me off.
Also the writing was also kinda weird sometimes, and the worst part of the book is that it has NO CHAPTERS.
But at the same time it kinda shocked me, and sometimes it was pretty exciting to read tho.
But overall a okay book 📖
October 26, 2021
It was halfway through this book that I realized that Eric seemed like a very untrustworthy narrator. This book and it’s events were said to be true and yet everything was in very black and white.
(Edit: This comes off as if I don’t like untrustworthy narrators, this is not, and was not the case when I read it. But I was researching the book while I read it. It was a school project after all. What I found when I was researching it was that this book is essentially a autobiography and Eric, the main character is Jan Guillou. And because of this fact, the untrustworthiness and overblown perfection of Eric comes off as extra unlikable.)
Eric, and everybody who supported him was good and anybody who opposed him was bad.
I’m not saying that the people in the book who opposed him were good, they did incredibly gruesome things. Some of the things that Eric have to go through in this book are just downright torture, this isn’t your typical schoolyard bully stuff. But of course, Eric could do some truly gruesome stuff too, perhaps not downright torture but nothing I would consider moral from my own standpoint, perhaps justified but not moral
But somehow I find myself feeling skeptical about the events in this book, could I really trust a narrator who describes everybody in his surroundings as slow and stupid while he himself was absolutely flawless.
Here are some instances in which Eric is just undeniably and unrealistically perfect. Or just a horrible human being.
• When he was the leader in his class, could turn the whole class against any teacher he wanted if he wanted.
• When he was a mobster leader at his school when he was thirteen.
• When he got to remain as the mobster leader at his school by beating up his taller, stronger and bigger dicked friend, with absolutely no trouble whatsoever
• When he successfully intimidated and singlehandedly beat up a boxer who was said to have gone to the country’s junior championship in boxing.
• The several times he informs us how desensitized to pain he his and how he barely reacts to a blow dealt at full strength by an adult twice his size
• When he threatened and beat his little brother (Who was being a huge dick, but still!)
• When he informed the reader how dumb every adult he knew was and how easily he could fool them into thinking he was a ‘good boy’ just by changing the way he dressed and his vocabulary a little.
• When he got to his new school and immediately beat the school’s record of swimming with hardly any warmup.
• When he won several athletic competitions in several areas against many other athletic students, many of which were several years older than himself.
• When after he stands up to the school’s screwed up system decides to overthrow the entire damn system and becomes Katniss Everdeen and less impressive and more pretentious
• When he goes into a whole spiel about how good he is at fighting but hates violence
• Every damn time he threatens to take out someone’s tooth or break their nose or bones and still has the fucking nerve to claim he’s against violence
• When he beats up two guys BAD
• When he starts a rebellion in the school that more and more people start joining and the school starts to see him as a major threat to the system and take any opportunity they can to get him expelled (which he never does)
• When he does a lot of things that should get him expelled but doesn’t because he’s so “Sneaky” that they can’t prove anything and he’s so smug about it. “You can’t expel me, there’s no evidence to prove I did it ;)”
• Every death threat.
• When he convinces his friend to refuse orders from the corrupt students in power, get beat up by several guys because of that and keep taunting them until they beat him to a pulp, then do the same thing all over again, for the greater good, and because getting beat up really isn’t “that bad” completely ignoring the fact that this friend is afraid and PTSD is something that can actually happen as a result of physical abuse, and he’s taking advantage of this friend that trusts and admires him.
• When he wins three competition in a huge athletic competition against the most athletic students in other schools, the entire school wins thanks to him, and he gets a prize for the best contribution to the team.
• When his friend leaves the school due to severe bullying he decides to dress up in an unrecognizable costume and beat up the people he deems responsible, using the getup as a way not the get expelled because nobody can prove that he was the one doing these violent acts and sending people to the hospital one after one with missing teeth and broken bones.
• When he gets a romance with a cute Finnish girl at the last probably fifteen minutes of the book, who straight-up worships him and thinks he’s doing the right thing in every way by beating up these guys
• When he beats up a guy who’s sniveling and begging for forgiveness, threatens to kill him and bury him somewhere where no one will find him for several years and then makes him throw up from a memory of when he poured shit and piss into this guys mouth.
• When he got valedictorian
Yeah. To me, the characters are what make or break the story. I can enjoy or even love characters that are bad people if they’re written well, if they’re written to be bad. But Eric was written to be the hero. This doesn’t surprise me because this is said to be an autobiography, but most of this book I’m dismissing as a blatant lie or at least as an exaggeration because that’s how if comes off.
I think the best part (maybe only good part) of this book was Eric’s beat friend Pierre. I LOVED Pierre. A chubby bookworm with glasses who has long discussions with our mythic main character and shares a lot of the same ideas and philosophies without being a complete sociopath and understanding that fear is a natural part of the human psyche and not always something you can overcome. Even if I didn’t like Eric, I loved Pierre and I also loved the wonderful connection these two share. How much they trust each other and are willing to do anything for each other. I also think Pierre genuinely helped Eric grow as a person and somewhat overcome his violent tendencies or at least avoid them mostly until he leaves, at which point Eric goes ballistic and starts beating the shit out of everybody he meets.
(Edit: This comes off as if I don’t like untrustworthy narrators, this is not, and was not the case when I read it. But I was researching the book while I read it. It was a school project after all. What I found when I was researching it was that this book is essentially a autobiography and Eric, the main character is Jan Guillou. And because of this fact, the untrustworthiness and overblown perfection of Eric comes off as extra unlikable.)
Eric, and everybody who supported him was good and anybody who opposed him was bad.
I’m not saying that the people in the book who opposed him were good, they did incredibly gruesome things. Some of the things that Eric have to go through in this book are just downright torture, this isn’t your typical schoolyard bully stuff. But of course, Eric could do some truly gruesome stuff too, perhaps not downright torture but nothing I would consider moral from my own standpoint, perhaps justified but not moral
But somehow I find myself feeling skeptical about the events in this book, could I really trust a narrator who describes everybody in his surroundings as slow and stupid while he himself was absolutely flawless.
Here are some instances in which Eric is just undeniably and unrealistically perfect. Or just a horrible human being.
• When he was the leader in his class, could turn the whole class against any teacher he wanted if he wanted.
• When he was a mobster leader at his school when he was thirteen.
• When he got to remain as the mobster leader at his school by beating up his taller, stronger and bigger dicked friend, with absolutely no trouble whatsoever
• When he successfully intimidated and singlehandedly beat up a boxer who was said to have gone to the country’s junior championship in boxing.
• The several times he informs us how desensitized to pain he his and how he barely reacts to a blow dealt at full strength by an adult twice his size
• When he threatened and beat his little brother (Who was being a huge dick, but still!)
• When he informed the reader how dumb every adult he knew was and how easily he could fool them into thinking he was a ‘good boy’ just by changing the way he dressed and his vocabulary a little.
• When he got to his new school and immediately beat the school’s record of swimming with hardly any warmup.
• When he won several athletic competitions in several areas against many other athletic students, many of which were several years older than himself.
• When after he stands up to the school’s screwed up system decides to overthrow the entire damn system and becomes Katniss Everdeen and less impressive and more pretentious
• When he goes into a whole spiel about how good he is at fighting but hates violence
• Every damn time he threatens to take out someone’s tooth or break their nose or bones and still has the fucking nerve to claim he’s against violence
• When he beats up two guys BAD
• When he starts a rebellion in the school that more and more people start joining and the school starts to see him as a major threat to the system and take any opportunity they can to get him expelled (which he never does)
• When he does a lot of things that should get him expelled but doesn’t because he’s so “Sneaky” that they can’t prove anything and he’s so smug about it. “You can’t expel me, there’s no evidence to prove I did it ;)”
• Every death threat.
• When he convinces his friend to refuse orders from the corrupt students in power, get beat up by several guys because of that and keep taunting them until they beat him to a pulp, then do the same thing all over again, for the greater good, and because getting beat up really isn’t “that bad” completely ignoring the fact that this friend is afraid and PTSD is something that can actually happen as a result of physical abuse, and he’s taking advantage of this friend that trusts and admires him.
• When he wins three competition in a huge athletic competition against the most athletic students in other schools, the entire school wins thanks to him, and he gets a prize for the best contribution to the team.
• When his friend leaves the school due to severe bullying he decides to dress up in an unrecognizable costume and beat up the people he deems responsible, using the getup as a way not the get expelled because nobody can prove that he was the one doing these violent acts and sending people to the hospital one after one with missing teeth and broken bones.
• When he gets a romance with a cute Finnish girl at the last probably fifteen minutes of the book, who straight-up worships him and thinks he’s doing the right thing in every way by beating up these guys
• When he beats up a guy who’s sniveling and begging for forgiveness, threatens to kill him and bury him somewhere where no one will find him for several years and then makes him throw up from a memory of when he poured shit and piss into this guys mouth.
• When he got valedictorian
Yeah. To me, the characters are what make or break the story. I can enjoy or even love characters that are bad people if they’re written well, if they’re written to be bad. But Eric was written to be the hero. This doesn’t surprise me because this is said to be an autobiography, but most of this book I’m dismissing as a blatant lie or at least as an exaggeration because that’s how if comes off.
I think the best part (maybe only good part) of this book was Eric’s beat friend Pierre. I LOVED Pierre. A chubby bookworm with glasses who has long discussions with our mythic main character and shares a lot of the same ideas and philosophies without being a complete sociopath and understanding that fear is a natural part of the human psyche and not always something you can overcome. Even if I didn’t like Eric, I loved Pierre and I also loved the wonderful connection these two share. How much they trust each other and are willing to do anything for each other. I also think Pierre genuinely helped Eric grow as a person and somewhat overcome his violent tendencies or at least avoid them mostly until he leaves, at which point Eric goes ballistic and starts beating the shit out of everybody he meets.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
August 9, 2025
" Tėvas žiūrėjo į jį kaip į šunį, kuris negali, tiesiog negali jam įkasti. Ir ne taip lengva buvo žinoti, kaip tėvas reaguotų pirmą kartą įkastas. Pirmą ir paskutinį kartą, kad nereikėtų daugiau, nė karto daugiau.
Nuolatinis vakarinis mušimas po valgio, nuolatinis plakimas, nuolatinės muštynės, nuolatinė išdavystė draugų, kurie visai nebuvo draugai; nuolatinė baimė, kad kas nors pribėgs ir iš visų jėgų trenks..."
Dar viena knyga,kur blogio ir fizinio smurto labai daug,kai daugelis iš suaugusių užmerktomis akimis nemato to,kas vyksta; kai viduje turi būti labai stiprus,kad viską atlaikytum,kovotum dėl savęs ir vieną dieną taptum stipriausiais iš visų.
Nuolatinis vakarinis mušimas po valgio, nuolatinis plakimas, nuolatinės muštynės, nuolatinė išdavystė draugų, kurie visai nebuvo draugai; nuolatinė baimė, kad kas nors pribėgs ir iš visų jėgų trenks..."
Dar viena knyga,kur blogio ir fizinio smurto labai daug,kai daugelis iš suaugusių užmerktomis akimis nemato to,kas vyksta; kai viduje turi būti labai stiprus,kad viską atlaikytum,kovotum dėl savęs ir vieną dieną taptum stipriausiais iš visų.
October 24, 2020
Ma olen päris kindel, et mu esimese raamatu "Medaljon" peategelane Tanel sai inspiratsiooni Erikust ehk järelikult pidin raamatut esimest korda lugema 7. klassis või isegi enne ehk siis nii 15 aastat tagasi! Palju ma seda kokku olen lugenud, ei teagi. Mäletan et algul jätsin Pierre ja Eriku kaldkirjas vahendatud dialoogi vahele aga edaspidi olen ka selle läbi lugenud.
Nagu saab pealkirjast järeldada, on raamat täis vägivalda, õhkõrna lootust ning kurba pettumust. Tõenäoliselt on see üks vägivaldsemaid noorteraamatuid, mida ma olen lugenud. Just kirjelduste osas ning selles osas, kui palju seda pidevat peksu on. Huvitav on see, et kuigi raamatu tegevustik toimub 1950. aastate teises pooles, on see mõneti ülekantav ka tänapäeva... Ma tahaks loota, et koolides päris sellist vägivaldset hierarhiat ei ole (vähemalt Eestis), aga pere osas ma kardan, et sellise dünaamikaga peresid on ka praegu. Ka Eestis. Tahaks loota, et ei ole, aga realistlikult mõeldes...
Samas pole tegu üksnes mõttetu peksu kirjeldamisega. Väga palju on mõtisklust ja vestlusi (Pierre ja Eriku vahel) üldiselt vägivalla teemal. Kas vägivald on mingis olukorras õigustatud? Kas õigem oleks hambad ristis vastu pidada ja pikad traditsioonid üle elada või ebaõiglaste traditsioonide vastu üles tõusta? Mida teha, kui täiskasvanud pigistavad silma kinni, ei näe, ei kuule?
Ma arvan, et see ei olnud mul ka viimane kord toda raamatut lugeda.
Nagu saab pealkirjast järeldada, on raamat täis vägivalda, õhkõrna lootust ning kurba pettumust. Tõenäoliselt on see üks vägivaldsemaid noorteraamatuid, mida ma olen lugenud. Just kirjelduste osas ning selles osas, kui palju seda pidevat peksu on. Huvitav on see, et kuigi raamatu tegevustik toimub 1950. aastate teises pooles, on see mõneti ülekantav ka tänapäeva... Ma tahaks loota, et koolides päris sellist vägivaldset hierarhiat ei ole (vähemalt Eestis), aga pere osas ma kardan, et sellise dünaamikaga peresid on ka praegu. Ka Eestis. Tahaks loota, et ei ole, aga realistlikult mõeldes...
Samas pole tegu üksnes mõttetu peksu kirjeldamisega. Väga palju on mõtisklust ja vestlusi (Pierre ja Eriku vahel) üldiselt vägivalla teemal. Kas vägivald on mingis olukorras õigustatud? Kas õigem oleks hambad ristis vastu pidada ja pikad traditsioonid üle elada või ebaõiglaste traditsioonide vastu üles tõusta? Mida teha, kui täiskasvanud pigistavad silma kinni, ei näe, ei kuule?
Ma arvan, et see ei olnud mul ka viimane kord toda raamatut lugeda.
April 20, 2025
I’m giving three stars because I feel puzzled by the ambiguity of the moral educational message of the book. I also read it in Swedish as a lättläst so I might have missed some narrative layers to fully decode Erik’s behaviors.
Normally I would find a book that doesn’t follow the imparting of traditional moral values compelling. However, this book is supposed to be a young-adult educational novel directed to Swedish teens (Swedes can correct me if I’m wrong). So I find it puzzling that the book seems to not only glorify dysfunctional violent behaviors as the right answer to bullying. I would understand a portrayal of an “eye for an eye” ethics as a more straightforward coping and defensive mechanism to survive certain hostile conditions, however the book does not simply portray violence as a defensive mean, but as a solution. This is made even more clear in the end when the maturation progress undergone by Erik at the boarding school blooms into a fully-formed conscience of acting in revenge. And although we all sympathize with this final act of self-assertion, we are also left to deal with an aftertaste of sour defeat.
Normally I would find a book that doesn’t follow the imparting of traditional moral values compelling. However, this book is supposed to be a young-adult educational novel directed to Swedish teens (Swedes can correct me if I’m wrong). So I find it puzzling that the book seems to not only glorify dysfunctional violent behaviors as the right answer to bullying. I would understand a portrayal of an “eye for an eye” ethics as a more straightforward coping and defensive mechanism to survive certain hostile conditions, however the book does not simply portray violence as a defensive mean, but as a solution. This is made even more clear in the end when the maturation progress undergone by Erik at the boarding school blooms into a fully-formed conscience of acting in revenge. And although we all sympathize with this final act of self-assertion, we are also left to deal with an aftertaste of sour defeat.
October 16, 2016
Ondskan. En bok som vi läste i helklass i skolan. När jag fick den i min hand och slog upp första sidan ansåg jag att den inte var särskilt speciell. Det var inte mycket som lockade och skapade läsarlust. Men ju mer jag läste desto bättre blev den. Slutet har fått mest krut och det är där tyngd ligger. Det är kraftiga och stora ord som avslutar boken på ett värdigt sätt. Annars öppnar verket vyerna och man får lite andra tankebanor och perspektiv. Slutligen skulle jag inte tipsa någon om Ondskan. Det är dels den mest antifeministiska bok jag läst men förutom det var det inte riktigt min typ av bok, med andra ord för lite kärlek och ett trist språk.
July 26, 2017
Jag är lite för trött för att för tillfället orka skriva en ordentlig recension, men jag kan i varje fall utan tvekan säga att Ondskan är en av de mest gripande böcker jag läst. Kanske den bästa bok jag läst (vilket tyvärr inte säger mycket med tanke på mitt bibliotek). I Ondskan får jag fördjupa mig i filosofiska frågor och frågor om människans moral och analyser om det sociala samspelet i olika sammanhang, allt med ett stadigt flöde av adrenalin i blodet. Verket är dessutom stundom väldigt vackert förmulerat samtidigt som språket oftast är högst vardagligt och förmodligen i utvalda stycken och till viss del avspeglar det som användes på 50-talet. Rekommenderas för alla.
September 23, 2022
Основные правила от главного героя книги:
Чтобы иметь преимущество в драке (конфликте) - нужно сперва напугать соперника.
Чтобы не чувствовать боль - нужно сильно ненавидеть (если не соперника, то воображаемого врага).
И да, со злом не получается бороться добром, только одно зло над другим может победить.
Чтобы иметь преимущество в драке (конфликте) - нужно сперва напугать соперника.
Чтобы не чувствовать боль - нужно сильно ненавидеть (если не соперника, то воображаемого врага).
И да, со злом не получается бороться добром, только одно зло над другим может победить.
October 25, 2019
Not entirely sure about the rating. Should probably have read it rather than listened to it. Jan Guillou's reading didn't bring much to the experience.
I'm a big fan of the movie adaption, and having read the book now, I'd say I prefer the movie over the book.
I'm a big fan of the movie adaption, and having read the book now, I'd say I prefer the movie over the book.
November 7, 2024
Jeg var lidt i tvivl, om bogen skulle have så høj rating, alene af den grund, at jeg var i tvivl om den vil blive siddende. Men filmen er blevet siddende i 10+ år, og det samme vil bogen.
Jeg synes, det er så skræmmende, at det er en autobiografi. Det er jo fuldstændig forfærdeligt at tænke på. Stakkels Erik/Jan.
Jeg synes virkelig, at bogen og historien er tidsløs. De her ting finder faktisk stadig sted, omend det måske ikke alle steder er i så voldsom grad.
Sproget er virkelig godt. Meget minimalistisk, og det er svært hele tiden at blive klog på, hvordan Erik altid har det. Men jeg tror, det stemmer godt overens med hans indre. For ud over når folk bliver taget fra ham, så lader han til at gøre alt for ikke at føle noget. Og lige præcis derfor betyder de følelsesmæssige scener ekstremt meget i den her.
Jeg var vild med venskabet med Pierre og deres dialoger (selvom de blev ret lange og ensformige til tider), det var et lidt dødt stykke på et tidspunkt i bogen, men hold op så skete den ene mere forfærdelige ting efter den anden.
SPOILER
*
*
Flere peger på afførings-scenen som den, de reagerede mest på. Personligt reagerede jeg mest på skoldningen. Den scene knuste mit hjerte.
Og hvis jeg nogensinde hører om brækkede næseben igen, så tror jeg, at jeg brækker mig 😂
*
*
SPOILER slut
Alt den vold var lige ved at blive for meget for mig til sidst, og hvordan Erik har kunnet undgå at knække er mig en kæmpe gåde.
Noget andet fedt ved bogen er, at flere ting kan fortolkes på mange måder. Fx bare begrebet ondskab som jeg på en måde synes får ny betydning i slutningen, for kan han nogensinde slippe ud af det igen?
En meget skræmmende, tidsløs, vigtig, rå, god, alt muligt bog. Læs den, se den.
Jeg synes, det er så skræmmende, at det er en autobiografi. Det er jo fuldstændig forfærdeligt at tænke på. Stakkels Erik/Jan.
Jeg synes virkelig, at bogen og historien er tidsløs. De her ting finder faktisk stadig sted, omend det måske ikke alle steder er i så voldsom grad.
Sproget er virkelig godt. Meget minimalistisk, og det er svært hele tiden at blive klog på, hvordan Erik altid har det. Men jeg tror, det stemmer godt overens med hans indre. For ud over når folk bliver taget fra ham, så lader han til at gøre alt for ikke at føle noget. Og lige præcis derfor betyder de følelsesmæssige scener ekstremt meget i den her.
Jeg var vild med venskabet med Pierre og deres dialoger (selvom de blev ret lange og ensformige til tider), det var et lidt dødt stykke på et tidspunkt i bogen, men hold op så skete den ene mere forfærdelige ting efter den anden.
SPOILER
*
*
Flere peger på afførings-scenen som den, de reagerede mest på. Personligt reagerede jeg mest på skoldningen. Den scene knuste mit hjerte.
Og hvis jeg nogensinde hører om brækkede næseben igen, så tror jeg, at jeg brækker mig 😂
*
*
SPOILER slut
Alt den vold var lige ved at blive for meget for mig til sidst, og hvordan Erik har kunnet undgå at knække er mig en kæmpe gåde.
Noget andet fedt ved bogen er, at flere ting kan fortolkes på mange måder. Fx bare begrebet ondskab som jeg på en måde synes får ny betydning i slutningen, for kan han nogensinde slippe ud af det igen?
En meget skræmmende, tidsløs, vigtig, rå, god, alt muligt bog. Læs den, se den.
June 6, 2022
3,5
Blev lite uppehåll med läsningen pga plugg, men nu har man äntligen läst klart :)
Gillade boken och tycker att beskrivningar av olika slagsmål var väldigt bra. Intressant slut dessutom!
Tror jag ger den en 3,5 bara för att det kändes som om hela boken bara var slagsmål, men det är kanske poängen. Så det kanske bara handlar om vad jag personligen gillar och inte gillar. Men annars bra bok.
Blev lite uppehåll med läsningen pga plugg, men nu har man äntligen läst klart :)
Gillade boken och tycker att beskrivningar av olika slagsmål var väldigt bra. Intressant slut dessutom!
Tror jag ger den en 3,5 bara för att det kändes som om hela boken bara var slagsmål, men det är kanske poängen. Så det kanske bara handlar om vad jag personligen gillar och inte gillar. Men annars bra bok.
August 10, 2024
Jag tyckte verkligen om den här boken men herregud Erik är för cool, han är som någon slags superhjälte. Han simmar som en fisk, slåss som en brottare, klår alla de äldre i löpning, gör alltid mål i fotbollsmatcherna och är en av de bästa i klassen o.s.v. Just det blev lite för mycket för mig bara.
May 4, 2025
4.9 stars
November 3, 2025
bardzo mi sie podobało. momentami a w sumie nawet przez znaczną większość przeraża. ciężko wyobrazić sobie ból, który przeżywają bohaterowie, ale wydaje mi sie ze warto uświadomić sobie jak tragicznie moze byc.
zdecydowanie lepsza niz "zło" lagerkvista!!
zdecydowanie lepsza niz "zło" lagerkvista!!
November 28, 2023
Ojämn, Stundtals 5+ men väldigt svag i slutet. Relationen med finska tjejen varade i 10 sidor och baserades bara på att hon var imponerad över att han ”slog tjiten ur dem”. Fin filosofisk reflektion om varför män använder våld. mkt referenser till nazityskland, lite otippat.
June 8, 2024
Bra bok, men ibland tycker jag det känns som att huvudpersonen är lite överlägsen? Som att det aldrig finns några tvivel eller tveksamheter? Känns inte helt realistiskt även om det gör en bra hjälte. Förutom det bara bra!
June 6, 2012
You're evil incarnate, and you need to be destroyed.
Erik Ponti just wants to leave all the violence and criminality behind. He wants to get away from his sadistic devil of a father, his dreary school, and the so-called friends who let him down. When he is transferred to a new boarding school, Stjärnberg, he thinks it might just be the saving grace he has been waiting for. He can finally start over: nobody knows him on Stjärnberg. Instead of Erik the violent gang leader, he can be Erik, the quiet boy with the goofy haircut.
Unfortunately, that's not what happens.
Stjärnberg turns out to be a melting pot of violence and insanity. In Stjärnberg, it's up to the older students to educate their younger peers in proper behaviour, and the teachers are not allowed to interfere. They call it "comrade rearing". In actuality, the last year-students dominate the younger ones through methodical harassments and beatings. In Stjärnberg, the rules of the real world don’t apply.
Erik doesn't fit into this world. At all. But, thanks to his indomitable personality and skills as a fighter, he is most certainly not helpless.
What worked? So much!
First of all: the prose. Jan Guillou doesn't care about proper grammar or pretentious formulations or shit like that. He writes honestly and fluently, sets the mood of every scene perfectly by choosing his words carefully and slowing down or speeding up the rhythm when it's needed. He is no doubt up there with Stephen King when it comes to good prose. I read this book in Swedish, the original language, but I'm aware that many of the readers on this site might have to read a copy in another language. All I can hope is that the translation holds up to the original. It's a shame to miss it.
Second, the characters. There are some characters in this book that aren't nearly well-developed enough (which is mostly why I did not give it five stars), but those that are developed are wonderful. Erik is a manipulative, violent young man with issues as large as Australia. But he is also incredibly intelligent, vulnerable, and painfully sympathetic. He's the best fighter you will ever see, not because he's the biggest or strongest or fastest, but because he knows how to play his opponent. He knows how people work. He knows how to make them scared. And, as Erik himself states, fear is really much worse than pain. Over and over again, we see him use his amazing intellect to manipulate people into giving up before they ever realize it. It's often-times satisfying, sometimes frightening, but rarely unenjoyable.
Pierre Tanguy, Erik's best friend, is another wonderful character. They're as different as night and day, but balance each other perfectly. I deeply enjoyed their friendship; the scenes where they interacted casually or worked together were some of my favourites, and without giving away too many spoilers, .
As far as the rest of the cast, including Erik's family, the students and teachers at Stjärnberg, and Marja, I will just say that some were terrible but at the same time immensely enoyable while others were unbearable to read about and some really should have been given more screen-time. No spoilers here!
Additionally, this book has some of the best fight-scenes I've ever read. Yeah, Hunger Games and the rest of YA can suck it, because they've got nothing on Erik's formidable displays of violence. Jan Guillou does a fantastic job raising the tension before a fight, and you're never quite sure who or what is going to snap, or when.
On the other side of the coin, the humor is spot on! Watching Erik "stick it to the man" is just as satisfying as his fights, especially considering his wit is as sharp as his knuckles. But that's not all; here's another area where Guillou's descriptions and word-choices really shine. He's got a very dry sense of humor which I loved!
But what really makes this book one of the best is that it matters. For better or worse, we've all witnessed violence. Heck, this book is even based on Jan Guillou's own life! (By the way, that boy on the cover? A young Guillou!) Whether we love it or hate it, believe it needs to stop or think it's a means to an end, violence is a prominent part of our world. Ondskan doesn't try to sell us on one point of view or the other. Not really. It just tells it like it is, and lets you make your own decision. And that, to me, is what makes a great book.
I really hope you will read this. I think everyone should. It's just one of those books, you know?
Erik Ponti just wants to leave all the violence and criminality behind. He wants to get away from his sadistic devil of a father, his dreary school, and the so-called friends who let him down. When he is transferred to a new boarding school, Stjärnberg, he thinks it might just be the saving grace he has been waiting for. He can finally start over: nobody knows him on Stjärnberg. Instead of Erik the violent gang leader, he can be Erik, the quiet boy with the goofy haircut.
Unfortunately, that's not what happens.
Stjärnberg turns out to be a melting pot of violence and insanity. In Stjärnberg, it's up to the older students to educate their younger peers in proper behaviour, and the teachers are not allowed to interfere. They call it "comrade rearing". In actuality, the last year-students dominate the younger ones through methodical harassments and beatings. In Stjärnberg, the rules of the real world don’t apply.
Erik doesn't fit into this world. At all. But, thanks to his indomitable personality and skills as a fighter, he is most certainly not helpless.
What worked? So much!
First of all: the prose. Jan Guillou doesn't care about proper grammar or pretentious formulations or shit like that. He writes honestly and fluently, sets the mood of every scene perfectly by choosing his words carefully and slowing down or speeding up the rhythm when it's needed. He is no doubt up there with Stephen King when it comes to good prose. I read this book in Swedish, the original language, but I'm aware that many of the readers on this site might have to read a copy in another language. All I can hope is that the translation holds up to the original. It's a shame to miss it.
Second, the characters. There are some characters in this book that aren't nearly well-developed enough (which is mostly why I did not give it five stars), but those that are developed are wonderful. Erik is a manipulative, violent young man with issues as large as Australia. But he is also incredibly intelligent, vulnerable, and painfully sympathetic. He's the best fighter you will ever see, not because he's the biggest or strongest or fastest, but because he knows how to play his opponent. He knows how people work. He knows how to make them scared. And, as Erik himself states, fear is really much worse than pain. Over and over again, we see him use his amazing intellect to manipulate people into giving up before they ever realize it. It's often-times satisfying, sometimes frightening, but rarely unenjoyable.
Pierre Tanguy, Erik's best friend, is another wonderful character. They're as different as night and day, but balance each other perfectly. I deeply enjoyed their friendship; the scenes where they interacted casually or worked together were some of my favourites, and without giving away too many spoilers, .
As far as the rest of the cast, including Erik's family, the students and teachers at Stjärnberg, and Marja, I will just say that some were terrible but at the same time immensely enoyable while others were unbearable to read about and some really should have been given more screen-time. No spoilers here!
Additionally, this book has some of the best fight-scenes I've ever read. Yeah, Hunger Games and the rest of YA can suck it, because they've got nothing on Erik's formidable displays of violence. Jan Guillou does a fantastic job raising the tension before a fight, and you're never quite sure who or what is going to snap, or when.
On the other side of the coin, the humor is spot on! Watching Erik "stick it to the man" is just as satisfying as his fights, especially considering his wit is as sharp as his knuckles. But that's not all; here's another area where Guillou's descriptions and word-choices really shine. He's got a very dry sense of humor which I loved!
But what really makes this book one of the best is that it matters. For better or worse, we've all witnessed violence. Heck, this book is even based on Jan Guillou's own life! (By the way, that boy on the cover? A young Guillou!) Whether we love it or hate it, believe it needs to stop or think it's a means to an end, violence is a prominent part of our world. Ondskan doesn't try to sell us on one point of view or the other. Not really. It just tells it like it is, and lets you make your own decision. And that, to me, is what makes a great book.
I really hope you will read this. I think everyone should. It's just one of those books, you know?
November 21, 2020
"Slaget träffade högt upp på höger kindben" - en öppningsmening som kastar läsaren direkt in i en spiral av hat, våld och hämnd. Jag läste den här boken nån gång på 90-talet, under de åren då jag knappt läste romaner alls. En tacksam bok att sätta i handen på ovana läsare (inte minst unga killar, som generellt läser för lite), för det är spännande och engagerande från start till mål. Guillou har själv sagt att boken är delvis självbiografisk, men visst finns redan här orealistiskt rosaskimrande drag av superhjälte hos huvudpersonen Erik Ponti, precis som i böckerna om Carl Hamilton.
Erik blir grovt misshandlad dagligen av sin sadistiske far. Samtidigt är han med i ett våldsamt gäng i skolan och blir så småningom relegerad. Han börjar på internatskolan Stjärnsberg (Solbacka), där eleverna lämnas vind för våg med sin "kamratuppfostran". Erik väljer direkt den stöddiga vägen att försöka stå upp mot de äldre eleverna och blir samtidigt vän med plugghästen Pierre med författardrömmar. Eriks okuvliga kampmoral gör att överklasspojkarna inser att enda sättet att knäcka Erik är att ge sig på de människor han bryr sig om.
Alla bör kunna känna igen mobbningen, hierarkierna och den blinda vuxenvärlden i skolmiljön. Storyn är enkel och lätt att ta till sig. Vem gillar inte en berättelse om en underdog med en inre och yttre urkraft, som står upp mot förtryck och visar var skåpet ska stå. Våldet skildras utan varken skyggande eufemismer eller sado-poetiska inzoomningar av typen man senare hittar hos Lars Kepler. Guillou har utvecklat sitt författarskap de senaste 40 åren, men den här stannar kvar hos alla som läst den. Våld föder våld, absolut. Men det här är också en berättelse om att ta sig ur våldets grepp.
Erik blir grovt misshandlad dagligen av sin sadistiske far. Samtidigt är han med i ett våldsamt gäng i skolan och blir så småningom relegerad. Han börjar på internatskolan Stjärnsberg (Solbacka), där eleverna lämnas vind för våg med sin "kamratuppfostran". Erik väljer direkt den stöddiga vägen att försöka stå upp mot de äldre eleverna och blir samtidigt vän med plugghästen Pierre med författardrömmar. Eriks okuvliga kampmoral gör att överklasspojkarna inser att enda sättet att knäcka Erik är att ge sig på de människor han bryr sig om.
Alla bör kunna känna igen mobbningen, hierarkierna och den blinda vuxenvärlden i skolmiljön. Storyn är enkel och lätt att ta till sig. Vem gillar inte en berättelse om en underdog med en inre och yttre urkraft, som står upp mot förtryck och visar var skåpet ska stå. Våldet skildras utan varken skyggande eufemismer eller sado-poetiska inzoomningar av typen man senare hittar hos Lars Kepler. Guillou har utvecklat sitt författarskap de senaste 40 åren, men den här stannar kvar hos alla som läst den. Våld föder våld, absolut. Men det här är också en berättelse om att ta sig ur våldets grepp.
July 19, 2020
Great book. This is not the first book of Guillou that I have read, but it was by far the best. While I (as well as about everyone in Sweden) already was familiar to Ondskan and its plot through seeing the movie, I had never read the book before. The book was better, although I think the movie holds up well.
Ondskan is a very strong depiction of violence (in many different forms), oppression and wickedness. Once I started reading it, I did not want to stop. Usually I am not a fan of too much realistic violence (and Ondskan is riddled with that), I could not help but enjoying the way in which violence was used by the main character, Erik Ponti, in Ondskan. It was raw, gritty and dark.
Overall a superb book.
Ondskan is a very strong depiction of violence (in many different forms), oppression and wickedness. Once I started reading it, I did not want to stop. Usually I am not a fan of too much realistic violence (and Ondskan is riddled with that), I could not help but enjoying the way in which violence was used by the main character, Erik Ponti, in Ondskan. It was raw, gritty and dark.
Overall a superb book.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 443 reviews