21st Century Literature discussion

This is the thread for discussion of the book. Setting up a couple days early as will be tied up with packing and other details for travel on the next couple of days and then on the road for a couple of weeks. My responses will likely not be particularly timely while I'm traveling.

I saved a review for the to put here, as it notes something that I did not notice because I have not read the classic the reviewer compares this book with the Inferno from Dante's The Divine Comedy: The Inferno, the Purgatorio and the Paradiso. https://www.petoskeynews.com/story/ne...

The news outlet this article is in limits the number of articles one can read in a period of time, so I printed it - it's short, 2 pages, as the ads disappear when printing. Do any of you see the comparison? And even if, like me, do you agree that a central focus is "the question of allegiance?" Do you think that Pasha opts for a side by the end of the book? Did you have any difficulty knowing what forces were in charge when?

Feel free to ignore my questions and raise different ones.

Thank you for posting the review, Linda! Very interesting. I think a comparison to Dante is a stretch, other than the concept that there is no real option to not pick a side when evil is being waged, that remaining neutral is tantamount to endorsing evil. I rated this book four stars, but more because I thought the very real story and surrounding despair are important for people to be ware of and should be told. I didn't particularly like Pasha, he seemed devoid of passion or strength of character. He didn't even seem particularly invested in his nephew. He seemed like a regular guy who didn't want to change his day to day routine and was forced into a series of situations that he had to navigate in order to survive. The actual 'orphanage' was not reached until the 1/3 mark in the book. I did think the detailed and visceral images of suffering and squalid conditions were probably accurate depictions of the prior attacks.

Interesting description of Pasha Dianne. I thought he grew in character over the 3 days. I agree that he was a quite passive in the beginning but foe me, he seemed to gain self-confidence as time passes, with some backsliding from time to time. How did Pasha strike others on this journey with us?

I thought the descriptions of checkpoints changing hands and the random bombing, including the orphanage, were quite powerful. I was never really sure which side was in control at any given time.

I was struck by the language issue and how Russian was as common as Ukrainian. I was reminded of that today when our guide in Madrid was telling us that his son, who is 6, speaks Russian (it is Ukrainian mother’s language) and he is helping at his school which just welcomed a couple of young Ukrainian refugees.

While I downloaded a copy of the Inferno, I have not had a chance to delve into it. Thanks for providing your thoughts on its applicability. I find the concept of having to pick a side because remaining neutral supports evil sobering and in need of further consideration.

Looking forward to hearing from others on the points that Dianne has raised.

My daughter studies Russian and one of the cultural things she has told me about it how much less of a sense of personal political power there is which flows from the very language - "law givers" in Russian and "law makers" in English. She notes that everything gets accomplished by knowing and paying people, that laws are arcane and designed to trip you up. I read a NYT piece said something similar about the oligarchs - that there is no law protecting personal property so Putin can imprison and strip assets as he wishes, so no way to "stand up".

I found this all very helpful in thinking about Pasha. He is weak and afraid, but actually heart in the right place - motivated by love for his nephew, and his dad. He knows right from wrong and feels shame when he fails to face it - like in the school yard memory. And maybe some of the avoidance is shame that he isnt healthy. I thought he grew so much over the 3 days. He learns that there is more than one way to take a stand and do the right thing. Being proud of Ukrainian, teaching it, isnt nothing. Rescuing a kid, demanding food, helping with the wounded. He does what a civilian can do.

Other things I was struck by - orphanage as a metaphor for the situation when he is sitting in the blown up house on the way out and thinking about the lack of privacy, the poverty and shabbiness. Because a feeling of rejection, of being abandoned changes how you act in the world. When they get back to the Ukrainian lines and are back inside their "family" Pasha finally turns and faces down the dogs of fear chasing him (as he sits by the wounded soldier). This is such a moment of catharsis and transformation that the narrative voice switches to Sasha, giving us a more holistic view of Pasha. This fear and cowardice is what the hell of war has finally burned away, leaving perhaps a functional adult who tells Peter "we all speak latin here." He has rescued himself from the sense of abandonment and embraced his identity.

Brilliant points Linda and Jenna. Love Jenna's point about his fear and cowardice being burned away. Perhaps the atrocities forced his evolution from ordinary or extraordinary after all.

Thanks Jenna for you thoughts. As Dianne says your description of his fear being “burned away” is a great descriptor. And thanks for reminding me of the POV we get from Sasha at the end. It helped me to appreciate that Pasha appeared much stronger to those observing him than he felt about himself.

I often wonder how I would react in such a situation as Pasha found himself. The thought first occurred to me when visiting Auschwitz and wondering how German civilians felt about the concentration camps and what was happening at them.

A final thought this morning-the author is a poet as well as a novelist. Do you think that shows through in this book’s prose?

This topic needs more comments. In answer to the comparison between the novel and Dante, I see the angle of the article author, but see Zhadan's hell to be far more existential and absurd. While a Christian hell is of choice and can be defined, rationalized, and avoided, Pasha's journey, despite his choosing to go to the orphanage, seems far less a situation he could avoid, much less understand and define. Zhadan also is careful to avoid instituting blame, even defining sides as "your guys and our guys," without distinguishing much difference except language which I interpret is Zhadan's way of minimalizing differences. The character of Pasha seems an everyman whose likeness to proscribed masculinity during his journey seems more a demonstation of the artifice of this aspect, with growth coming from a heightened awareness toward the end of generalities like compassion, awareness, meaning, and life itself. The work stands well in comparison to Death Is Hard Work, Khaled Khalifa with similar themes though a different war. More commentary from the readers please.

Thanks Sam. Having returned yesterday from my travels, I can now focus on this discussion.

Sam, you said that Pasha “seems an Everyman whose likeness to proscribed masculinity during his journey seems more a demonstration of the artifact of this aspect”. Could you explain a bit what you mean by “proscribed masculinity?”

I think your description of Pasha as an “Everyman” makes sense, if you mean that Pasha is like the vast majority of people in similar situations in that they are not instigators but victims of the conflict but perhaps I am misinterpreting your meaning.

LindaJ^ wrote: "Thanks Sam. Having returned yesterday from my travels, I can now focus on this discussion.

Sam, you said that Pasha “seems an Everyman whose likeness to proscribed masculinity during his journey ..."

LindaJ^ wrote: "Thanks Sam. Having returned yesterday from my travels, I can now focus on this discussion.

Sam, you said that Pasha “seems an Everyman whose likeness to proscribed masculinity during his journey ..."
Well it might help if I used the right verb. I meant prescribed
I think most of us grow with defined ideas of masculine behavior (many behaviors actually- male/female, child/adult, responsible/irresponsible, etc.) and the behaviors are defined by time and culture. Growing up in the U.S. in the 1950's I would learn "boys don't cry," "men take out the garbage," men display calm and courage in crisis," etc. People growing up in different times and cultures would be subject to different prescribed examples. But IMO, all are artificially imposed expectations coming from cultural influences on the individual and differ from what actual behavior an invidual would exhibit which varies from individual to individual based on a host of genetic and envirionmental influences that change over iindividual's life. I think Zhadan is showing us Pasha's behavior as compared to our presupposed expectations of the male hero, on which Pasha's own thoughts are centered and his growth occurs when his awareness extends beyond the limitations of his ( and our) expectations. So it seems to me Pasha grows when his awareness exceeds these cultural artifices. (For example Pasha a eems to experience compassion and understanding when he gives the person he bullied the canned food after the ride)

I agree with Sam that Pasha could be seen as "everyman" in the sense that he is unwilling to take action, until the conflict touches him directly via his family and he can no longer avoid it. However, once he is on the road so to speak, he responds with kindness and tries to help others where he can. I thought it was interesting that he takes on a leadership role as self appointed group representative when he is the only adult male among a group of women and children.

Linda and Sam -- I'm wondering if Pasha's action in taking on that leadership role in respect to the group of women and kids (I forget if he was given the role or if he chose it) is one of those "presupposed expectations of the male hero" that Pasha himself doesn't think he is up to but which he surprises himself by taking?

At the end of the book, the POV becomes the nephew's. He presents Pasha differently than Pasha presents himself when we hear about the journey from Pasha's POV. Does anyone have thoughts on why the author gave us the nephew's POV at the end?

LindaJ^ wrote: "Linda and Sam -- I'm wondering if Pasha's action in taking on that leadership role in respect to the group of women and kids (I forget if he was given the role or if he chose it) is one of those "p..."
For me the nephew's POV signifies hope for the future, at least for the future of their relationship. It seems like the journey was transformative for them both and what Sam calls prescribed masculinity is irrelevant for Sasha in terms of his feeling for his uncle.

In a way by switching POV, zhadan let's Pasha die during that final nightmare being chased in the snow, the old pasha of avoidance and fear is gone, replaced by someone who can talk back to peter and be an inspiration for his nephew.

Thanks Linda and Jenna. Interesting perspectives. Others?

Has just won the 2022 EBRD Literature Prize

https://www.ebrd.com/news/2022/the-or...

Toby Lichtig, Chair of the independent judging panel, said: “ A schoolteacher travels across the war-torn Donbas in Ukraine to pick up his nephew from a residential school. The pair then travel back home together. Belying the simplicity of this storyline is Serhiy Zhadan’s extraordinary, explosive, tender, angry and poetic novel of a country riven by conflict, and the absurdities, banalities, horrors and moments of human connection that war occasions. The Orphanage was timely when it first appeared in Ukrainian in 2017, it was timely when it first appeared in Reilly Costigan-Humes and Isaac Stackhouse Wheeler’s excellent translation last year, and it is even more grimly timely now.”

Announcing the winner of this year’s Literature Prize at a virtual Award Ceremony today, Odile Renaud-Basso, EBRD President, said: “With all of the world’s attention on many of our EBRD’s countries of operations, for devastating reasons, the EBRD Literature Prize reminds us of the power of literature to convey urgent experiences, bridge cultural divides and unite us in our shared humanity.”

Thanks Paul for sharing the news. A worthy winner I think and the words of the Chair are so true.