Moartea lui Ivan Ilici

Moartea lui Ivan Ilici

“oamenii se tem de moarte”

Se afla in Guardian top 100 books of all time… (from a vote by 100 noted writers from 54 countries as released by the Norwegian Book Clubs.)

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2002/may/08/books.booksnews

Cu un top similar la editura Humanitas vom putea avea o perspectiva romaneasca, tot subiectiva, dar poate mai interesanta. Multi cititori ar dori sa cunoasca top 100 (sau 200, poate top 1,000 carti, pe modelul NYT “The best 1,000 movies ever made”) in viziunea lui Andrei Plesu, Mircea Cartarescu, HR Patapievici, Gabriel Liiceanu, Paul Balogh.

Imi amintesc un interviu in care domnul Gabriel Liiceanu vorbea foarte frumos despre Moartea lui Ivan Ilici. Intr-o lume in care valorile devin confuze, pentru ca se citeste tot mai putin, avem nevoie de repere, recomandari.

Moartea este tema principala a cartii Moartea lui Ivan Ilici…se putea altfel?! Este un leit motiv pentru un best-seller in secolul XXI: “How we die” de exemplu, scrisa de dr Sherwin Nuland, care ne descrie cum moare un pacient: “he cut open his patient’s chest and tried to massage his heart back to life with his bare hands…”

Moartea lui Ivan Ilici este privita dintr-o alta perspectiva, dar nu are mai putin impact asupra noastra. Dimpotriva.

Socrate nu se temea de moarte. In dialogurile lui Platon, Socrate spune ca nu stim ce se afla dincolo de moarte, nu poate sa ne fie frica de ceea ce nu cunoastem. E ca si cum am pretinde ca stim ceea ce nu stim. La Delphi a fost “declarat” cel mai intelept, tocmai pentru ca nu spunea ca stie ceea ce nu stie- cel putin asa a interpretat Socrate rezultatul “alegerilor”.

Pentru oamenii obisnuiti (nu cei din “Ordinary people”, in regia lui Robert Redford) frica de moarte este totusi pe locul doi, in topul angoaselor. Seinfeld are o gluma pe aceasta tema: la o inmormantare, preferam sa fim in cosciug, decat sa citim discursul de despartire (vorbitul in public este spaima numarul unu).

Moartea lui Ivan Ilici mi se pare uimitor de voioasa in multe pasaje. Ne invita la meditatie, tonul este profund, cartea nu este scrisa de Jerome K Jerome, dar detasarea, ironia si umorul contribuie la perfectiunea cartii.

Lord of the flies

Lord of the flies

"....if you don't have rules, if you don't have law, then you're lost, you're finished, you're gone...."

Lord of the flies se afla in topul Modern library 100 best novels si TIME 100 best novels from 1923 to the present. The Guardian nu l-a inclus in al sau “top 100 books of all time”.

Libraria Humanitas ar mari tirajul cartilor si traficul pe site-ul www.libhumanitas.ro daca ar propune un Humanitas top 100 carti, board’s list si reader’s list.

Este fascinanta asemanarea intre insula din Lord of the flies si Romania anului 2009.

”Because we have no rules and we’re lost…”

Am ascultat un pasaj in care Golding, care a “inregistrat” cartea sub forma audio, explica Lord of the flies:

“It was Either 1953 or 1954…one day I was sitting one side of the fireplace and my wife was sitting the other and I suddenly said to her: wouldn’t it be a good idea to write a story about some boys on an island, showing how they would really behave…? And she said that’s a first class idea…”

Baietii de pe insula <>, dupa un atac nuclear? se regasesc in 2009 in jurul nostru, mereu la tribuna si striga:

- “kill the pig, cut his throat..”

Mesajul lui Golding mi se pare demn de un leit motiv, slogan publicitar sau program electoral

In romanul Imparatul Mustelor nu avem niciun personaj feminin!

Raspunsul lui Golding la intrebarea de ce? a fost:

-“a group of boys are more like a scaled down society..”

Autorul continua:

-“this has nothing to do with equality…women are foolish to pretend they are equal to men, they are far superior…”

cu toate ca sunt mult superioare, ele sunt ascunse sub valuri, nu au voie sa conduca o masina in parti ale lumii…

Golding ne mai spune:

“I didn’t want this book to be about sex, sex is too trivial…” dar daca ar citi presa romaneasca, sau the Sun astazi, si-ar schimba opinia?

Lord of the flies are alt subiect: “the book is about the problem of evil and the problem of how people are to live together in society”

Este un cliché: “cartea ar trebui sa fie lectura obligatorie”. Nu va fi! Invatam din ea ce se intampla cand se instaureaza haosul. “Conducatorii” se impun prin violenta. Nu respecta regulile si ataca (asemanarea cu personaje din viata publica este pur intamplatoare, dar exista)

In imparatul mustelor descoperim “ what people were like in society when you don’t have law”.

Golding are o concluzie despre carte:

“the most important thing said in the book is when Jack says:

<<-bollocks to the rules, why should we obey the rules?>> And Ralph says:

<<-because the rules are the only thing we’ve got!>>

That really is… what the book is about!

If you don’t have rules, if you don’t have law, then you’re lost! You’re finished, you’re gone….”

Pe “insula latina” avem reguli? Le respectam? Are we finished?

Cantec despre mine insumi , leaves of grass

Eu sunt multumit-vad, joc, rad, cant…
Un cosmos, bataios, trupes, senzual, mancand, band…
Nici prea modest, nici prea increzut,…
Nu pun degetul la gura, nu ma sfiesc..
Sfintesc orice lucru pe care-l ating sau care ma-atinge..
Eu stiu ca-s mai tare decat timpul si spatiul…
With music strong I come, with my cornets and my drums,
I play not marches for accepted victors only,

The researchers divided 48 inactive Americans, aged 55 to 75, into two groups. Members of one were told to drink half a litre of water (a bit more than an American pint) shortly before each of three daily meals. The others were given no instructions on what to drink. Before the trial, all participants had been consuming between 1,800 and 2,200 calories a day. When it began, the women’s daily rations were slashed to 1,200 calories, while the men were allowed 1,500. After three months the group that drank water before meals had lost about 7kg (15½lb) each, while those in the thirsty group lost only 5kg.

Dr Davy confidently bats away some obvious doubts about the results. There is no selection bias, she observes, since this is a randomised trial. It is possible that the water displaced sugary drinks in the hydrated group, but this does not explain the weight loss because the calories associated with any fizzy drinks consumed by the other group had to fall within the daily limits. Moreover, the effect seems to be long-lasting. In the subsequent 12 months the participants have been allowed to eat and drink what they like. Those told to drink water during the trial have, however, stuck with the habit—apparently they like it. Strikingly, they have continued to lose weight (around 700g over the year), whereas the others have put it back on.

Why this works is obscure. But work it does. It’s cheap. It’s simple. And unlike so much dietary advice, it seems to be enjoyable too.