Printable View
I also, am about 200 pages into the book. I find Grass' vocabulary, similies, and metaphor's an abundant feast for the mind. The only problem I have... where to begin for a focus of discussion. Perhaps I will need to read on before I can find a starting point.
I'm on page 95, the too-detailed descriptions tend to slow me down. But I'm enjoying the story all in all. I love the irony and the scathing humor.
How about kicking off the discussion with Anna Bronski's wide skirt (Book 1, Chapter 1)? Was/Is the wearing of 4 layers a traditional thing in those parts?
hehe i've been having the same problem..and hoping someone else might bring up a topic :DQuote:
Originally Posted by mickitaz
I don't think it's a traditional thing but part of the satire ;) it makes the funny incident of the encounter between Anna and her future husband even funnier and absurd..this part made me laugh out loud.Quote:
Originally Posted by bouquin
Perhaps Grass also wants to comment on Anna's practical nature and also give us a picture of how poor people were at those parts (?)
What kind of principle would be then if you brake it whenever it suits you?Quote:
Originally Posted by Etienne
But there are good principles and there are (with no insult meant) dumb ones. The dumb ones should be broken whenever one likes it.
Actually my point is that you should simply scratch this "principle"... just a friend's suggestion.
As a Johnny-come-lately to reading, my first fabulous feast involved the novels of Patrick White, a dead Australian author. His first nomination for the Nobel Prize for Literature (finally awarded in 1973) followed his 1961 novel, 'Riders in the Chariot', which deals, in part, with a German Jew. Mordecai Himmelfarb, a professor of English, flees Nazi Germany after Kristallnacht, only to suffer crucifixion in Australia while working on the assembly line at an outer-suburban, bicycle factory.
At page 95 of 'The Tin Drum', published in 1959, I am beginning to see pleasant similarities in style and approach between the two writers. Irony flows steadily.
Ok so what do you guys think about the two incidents that take place inside the church? (the first involves Oskar and little jesus and the second Oskar's "gang" and the fake ceremony)
Got my book today!
Read quickly, Scheherazade.
I'm at p.260, and adored the reference to Jan Bronski:
It was a skat card - the seven of spades.Many allusions in few words!
Quote:
Originally Posted by manolia
What does the skirt symbolize, if it does at all? And why 4 layers? The narrator avers that "skirts are masculine by nature." What is the basis for this reasoning and would you agree with it?
Anna's skirt protects Koljaiczek, and later Oskar, from a threatening world. The four layers act like the multi-layered armour-plating of an army tank - very masculine.Quote:
Originally Posted by bouquin
Security is important for pygmy Oskar, whose immediate family is ambiguous. Even his paternity problematic. So he hides his ability to speak and, later, to read. As a teenager, he fancies being considered a 3-year-old. Drumming, he finds, helps too.
Having read 2/3 of the book by now i think that indeed the skirt symbolizes something. Oskar in more than one instances wants to hide under his grandma's skirts. Her skirts are quite appealing to him. He even cherishes their buttery smell. I don't know how far you are in your reading, but there is a scene (possible spoiler) where Oskar pictures a family reunion inside his grandma. So grandma-skirts and all- is quite an important person for Oskar..her four skirts kind of reminds me a warm and protective womb (well, not a masculine figure)..i don't know what do you think?Quote:
Originally Posted by bouquin
I agree with what you say, but like i said above i am not sure about the masculine part.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gladys
The German language has three articles: der (masculine), die (feminine), das (neuter). Just like in French or Latin, gender is arbitrary with things. So it's 'der Rock' - the skirt.Quote:
Originally Posted by bouquin
But of course, that's only the language side. Associations here are the tanks as mentioned above, ancient Greeks wearing togas, Roman soldiers, Scottish men etc. Certainly they stand for protection, but there may be something else. If you hide under these skirts, you don't have to see what is going on outside.
What a breath-taking start! Finding it hard to put it down (*shakes her fist at her RL obligations*)
Couple of questions...
Why does Oskar refers himself as "Oskar" every now and then?
He made himself stop growing up? :-/ Sounds like a desperate attempt to rationalise/explain an undesirable condition ("It did not happen to me... I made it happen")
We can talk about the drum forever and ever, I guess.
Has anyone read Owen Meany? The size and the voice reminded me of Owen... (not one of my favorite characters... nor books).
My take, Sche, on Oskar objectifying himself, is that it is meant to jar the reader as to Oskar's reliability, in terms of telling his own story. I accept that the first person narration may be held suspect, but Oskar is not a *classical* unreliable narrator, not in the Jamesian sense of psychological instability, at least to me.Quote:
Originally Posted by Scheherazade
When it is safe, I'd like to look at Oskar's mother and the eels; I will try to read the winds on when I can jump in here.:p Perhaps barbara can help me interpret certain episodes which simply elude me as an American reader. The take on the skirts is interesting!