Reading 1001 discussion

Death Sentence is a narrative about a man's thoughts and feelings about his relationships with 2 particular women and with death as it occurs or nearly occurs to him and those women. Originally published in 1948, this book certainly has the bleak, angsty feel of WW2 shell-shocked literature, and does include one bomb incident from the war, though it is still about the man's thoughts and feelings, not the war, the women, or any other outside events or things.
This book barely made sense. I think that was intentional, actually, and it certainly came across as a very artsy novella, with lots of 'deep' introspection, and occasionally an idea that was pretty good. Most of this novella though is so vague that it drags like a dead weight. Considering the death theme in this story, that may be appropriate too, but it doesn't make for a very enjoyable read. I rated it 2 stars, though my sister said she would probably enjoy this one, when I was telling her about it, so I am sure some people will love this novella. And, it is at least short, even if it is not a favorite.

I haven't heard too much about this one. Your review intrigues me although I'm not sure I'll rush out to read it.

Also, I just realized that Lydia Davis translated this book. 1001 book crossover :)

Rating: 2.5 stars

A strange little book, but a quick read. It is a philosophical fictionalized memoir about a man and his relationships with two women. It had a promising start but failed to really go anywhere. The author initially made it sound like these were important stories he had to get off his chest, but I really had trouble seeing the whole point. Overall, good prose with too many tangents, making the story seem rather disjointed and pointless. Too experimental for my tastes.

Pre-2016 review:

**

The original French title of this novel, L'arrêt de mort, can bear two meanings: it is first a "death sentence", but it is also a "stay of execution". This ambiguity is apparently at the heart of this novel, with its two distinct parts and the constant complaints from the narrator about the relative impossibility of finding the words to describe what happens (happened). The first part covers the agony of J., suffering from an incurable disease, experiencing some sort of second wind, only to be killed by the narrator via drug overdose. The second part explores the narrator's relationships with three different women in Paris at the beginning of WWII. To be completely honest, I had to read the book's description in the 1001 List book in order to get a better understanding of what I had just read, because it felt like I had just read another book from Handke. After reading the first part, I thought the second would provide me some enlightenment. I was sorely bored and disappointed.

Although his book is quite short and rather a quick read, I suspect one would have to read it repeatedly in order to glean Blanchot's literary philosophy from his fictionalized writings. The narrator we are introduced to in the novel is not the author and the narrator's relationships with women are not meant to be about anything that could be called a "realistic" relationship. The book is not even really about death but rather that very ambiguous line between living and death, between the words we use to represent those (and other) states of being which fail utterly to tell us anything about that line which in fact isn't even a line. The unnamed area between the sand and the water on a stormy day....that is where Blanchot finds his language. He plays with repetition, contradiction and ambiguity and builds some small tension with our (the readers) having to suffer through parsing those layers. I found this quote in the New York Times about Blanchot's use of language: "the power language has to destroy these elements of reality it ostensibly labors to reveal". Okay then.