Death by Gassing...

...seems to be a theme. In the flashbacks to Nazi concentration camps there are deaths by gassing, the double homicide crime is a gassing, and then Honza turns on the gas from the heater to commit suicide.

Do the double homicide gassing and the suicidal gassing both stem from the gassing at concentration camps? Are they trying to mimic that kind of death? Or is it something else? Just a convenient way to kill/die without pain?

A Conversation with Ivan Klima

While looking on JSTOR for some information on Klima, I came upon an interview published in The New England Review. Below I have selected a few points that interested me the most, and the link to the full interview is at the end of the post.

The interviewer, Rob Trucks, talked to Klima in the Spring of 1999.

Trucks asked Klima what he thought the "Great Czech Novel" would be (as many say Huckleberry Finn is the "Great American Novel"). Klima said The Grandmother by Bozena Nemcova was the first novel in Czech literature as well as a "Bible of Czech literature." It is a collection of stories. He also says K. H. Macha is the greatest poet, with his greatest poem being "May," an epic poem (found here: http://www.lupomesky.cz/maj/may.html). But more interestingly, for later work, Klima says Kundera's The Joke and Svorkecky's The Cowards are great novels.

When speaking about Judge on Trial, Klima admitted that he hates it only because he rewrote it so many time. He said that the experiences in the novel are very autobiographical, but Adam doesn't equal Ivan.

Two quotes that stood out to me from the interview are:
- "Censorship may add to a book's appeal but it can add nothing to its wisdom." (excerpted from a fiction work of Klima's: My Golden Trades, "The Smuggler's Story")
We talked about censorship in class a couple of weeks ago and how that adds/detracts from a book's reading. It is very insightful that while more people want to read it because it is censored, it doesn't make the book any better. This relates to the government giving meaning to works of art just because they censor them, whether or not the author or artist intended for that meaning. The artist's work is what it is - other people cannot add to it by banning it. They just make the acquisition of it harder, and the whole experience more exciting for the reader.
- "...but people need literature. They need something in common that they can discuss, that will unite them."
This is something that transcends the situation of Communist Czechoslovakia. We can appreciate this idea today. It is obvious from the enormous fanbases of books, mostly young adult literature (Harry Potter, The Hunger Games, Twilight, etc.), that people will come together through their reading. However the experience is different for readers today and readers of literature in Czechoslovakia during the regime. While we read as a leisurely activity and have fun joining groups or writing fan fictions, as well finding a support system, Czech's used literature to give them hope and share the common experience when it felt like they were alone.

link to the full interview: http://www.jstor.org/stable/40244462

Two Quotes from Judge on Trial

These are two quotes I picked up on from the early parts of Judge on Trial. Although they are from the first section of reading, I feel that they directly correspond to the main topic of the class.

“People are incapable of telling the truth about themselves.” (page 24)

“…he explained to me that real strength is doing good against hatred and misunderstanding.” (page 14)

Both of these quotes really have to do with Havel’s Power of the Powerless. The first quote really has to do with living in the lie. It is very easy for people to delude themselves into believing their own lies or to be unaware that they aren’t being true to themselves. While Adam is specifically talking about Honza being humiliated by his father, this statement is true no matter what the situation. It is a statement that transcends the situation of the characters in the book and even the book itself. It is just true, and realizing this is a first step to living in the truth. The second quote is what living in the truth is. It is the foundation of the dissident movement. They tried to do good to help themselves and their people in the face of hatred and misunderstanding. Real strength is not to fight violence with violence, but to set the example of goodness in the face of violence, to hopefully inspire others to do the same.

Interview: Ivan Klima

The following is a link to an interview of Ivan Klima on The Guardian website. He talks about his life in Czechoslovakia.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2009/aug/02/ivan-klima-interview

Finishing up The Joke

Much like in class on Thursday, I collected some of (what I thought) were meaningful quotes in the last part of our reading. I have written out the quotes and my reactions to them...

1.Vlasta rebukes me for being a dreamer. She says I don't see things as they are. I do see things as they are, but in addition to these visible things I see the invisible. It's not for nothing that fantasy exists. It's what makes home of our houses. -p.144

- I just personally like this quote. It's hopeful to believe in things that are more than material. I especially like the last sentence. Houses are physical places filled with material things but homes have love and companionship, the invisible.

2. Because being brave in solitude, without witnesses, without the reward of others' approbation, face to face with himself, that took great pride and strength. -p.156

- This sort of relates to Havel. In a way Ludvik argues that no matter what, even if it is not popular, you should be brave and live in the truth. But he also says that it's only true if you keep it to yourself - and Havel argues that when you live in the truth you want to inspire others to live that way.

3. Because it's not your enemies who condemn you to solitude, it's your friends. -p.159

- I also just liked this quote. I think essentially it means that your friends are the ones you rely on for company, not enemies. So when your friends desert you, you are left in solitude. If your enemies desert you, you are better off.

4. Once more I was amazed by the incredible human capacity for transforming reality into a likeness of desires or ideals. -p.181

-  True, humans see and hear what they want to see and hear. But it's interesting that Ludvik says this so scathingly about Helena because he does it himself. Particularly when he was younger, with Lucie. He sees thier relationship as loving and he thinks he loves her. I think their relationship is a tie to real life for him, life outside the camp, nothing more. He doesn't love her, he loves the idea of her. But he wants to be in love so he believes he is.

5. "When I first met you, I know right away that you were the one I'd been waiting for all these years."
"You're not a phrase-monger. You wouldn't talk like that if you didn't mean it."
"...the first time I met you, I realized I had been waiting for you for years. That I was waiting for you without knowing you. And I knew that now I must have you. That it was inevitable as fate."

- What Ludvik is saying is true, just not in the way Helena thinks. He's sneaky with his words - a phrase-monger even... He really does want her - but only to get revenge on her husband, not for love. He has been waiting for her, even before he knew her, because he has constantly been searching for a mean of revenge.

6. "Get undressed, Helena," I repeated for the last time. ... She was naked. -p.194

- This reminds me of earlier in the book when Ludvik wanted Lucie to be naked while he was dressed - which ended up turning out oppositely. Now he has his wish and he likes it because Helena is completely vulnerable and he feels as though he possesses her. Ludvik has a mean streak in him and it comes out now because he's reveling in his "revenge" and it is even sweeter if Helena is embarrassed in the process because he loathes her as well as her husband.

7. True religion does not need the favor of secular power. Secular disfavor only strengthens faith. -p.209

- Sometimes making something unpopular makes it popular. Faith is tested in the face of adversity, which strengthens it.

8. Was I thrown out? Driven out? I can't quite say. All I can say for certain is that doubts about me and my convictions started up again. It is true some of my colleagues hinted I could do well to make a public statement along the Atheist lines. ... It would probably have taken very little: a move to defend myself. They certainly would have stood up for me. But I did nothing. -p.234

- This is what Havel is saying about living in the truth. Stick to your convictions even when you face adversity. It is interesting that in this case Kostka does nothing to continue living in the truth - proof that inaction is sometimes as effective as action - just like the greengrocer doesn't put up the signs in his shop.

Class Discussion for 3.13

In class today we focused on the question “What makes art political?” In books and films, often how the characters are portrayed (their beliefs and ideas and also the settings and situations the characters are put in and how they react and deal to them) are what makes the work political. Arts have the opportunity to make their political statements very subtle ways or in outright ways, though subtlety is much less likely to be censored.

Censorship in itself is interesting because it often does the opposite of what it’s supposed to. When something is censored, it is even more popular. Czechoslovakia was very pro-censorship. This gave some art a political meaning, even when the artist did not intend it to be political or the viewers do not see it as political. This makes Communist Czechoslovakia (the censor-ers) their own worst enemy.

I think The Joke is both art with political content and art given a political meaning because of its content. Kundera is interested in humanity and relationships and moral development and his characters just happen to be in political situations, which would suggest that it is given a political meaning after the fact. But The Joke also has political content, as seen through Ludvik leading a bourgeois lifestyle even under Communism and poking fun at the “Baptism” and therefore mocking the regime. It’s political because it’s critical of the current political situation.

We then moved on the truth in art. In this case The Joke, a fictional novel, can still have truth. While characters and situations can be fictional, made-up, the characters’ feelings and reactions can be true in the sense that people Trudy do react and feel that way and can relate. Simply, it represents life the way it is.

Finally we talked about the truth in music. This left me with a question:

If a musical piece has no lyrics, can it still inspire the truth?

A reflection of my blog so far...

For this half of the semester I have been keeping a handwritten journal that includes details from the readings and my thoughts on them. I have tried to find connections between the novels and Havel, focusing on characters in the novel who were either living in the lie or living the truth. There have been many instances where I have been able to make these connections.

As I have gotten the hang of the blog, my posts have been more articulate. I’ve gotten better at editing my personal journal entries to make them more coherent to the readers.  The comments Bill left on my first few posts made me realize that I needed to explain my thoughts because on the blog I am “talking” to someone else, who doesn’t know exactly what is going on in my mind. Hopefully the posts keep getting better: more thought out, articulated clearly, and interesting connections and conclusions from the readings.

Terminal Paradox

I checked out a book from the library entitled Terminal Paradox: The Novels of Milan Kundera. I haven't read much of the text, and only part of it is focused on The Joke, but there were two quotes that jumped out at me. They are as follows:

"Critics have called it a realistic novel because of the way it exemplifies the conditions of Czechoslovak society is the first two decades of the Communist regime." - p 11

This is just like The Miracle Game - both are very realistic and seem like the author is telling a non-fiction story in which he is the main character (less so in The Joke than in The Miracle Game).

"One of the paradoxes of this period was that the victims of Communism were often the very devotees who had helped usher it in." - p 12

Which exactly describes Ludvik, which just adds to the realistic nature of the novel.

An Interview with Milan Kundera

Following is a link to a website that has long interview of Milan Kundera by Olga Carlisle in 1985, if you're interested in learning more about the author.

http://www.kundera.de/english/Info-Point/Interview_Carlisle/interview_carlisle.html

Some Passages from The Joke

"Sometimes (more in sport than from real concern) I defended myself against the charge of individualism..." -spoken by Ludvik on page 33
"...I actually came to believe them because I couldn't imagine (I wasn't bold enough to imagine) that everyone else might be wrong, that the Revolution itself, the spirit of the times, might be wrong and I, an individual might be right." - spoken by Ludvik on page 33

Both of these passages relate directly to some of the sections we've read of Havel. The first passage is interesting because what it states is completely contradictory from what Havel is suggesting people do. Ludvik tries to fight the judgment that he is an individual while Havel strives to convince everyone to embrace their individuality. But Ludvik also strengthens Havel's argument: Ludvik is a member of the Party who hates the thought of individualism. Thus he shows that Havel is speaking the truth - being an individual is a way to rebel against the Party.

The second quotation shoes Ludvik's disbelief that he may be able, as Havel would say, to "live in the truth." He cannot (or is too scared to) believe that he is able to live in the truth because that would mean that all that he currently believes (the Party) is false, and is therefore the lie. I think this mindset probably plagued many Party members at one time or another. It is human nature to experience doubt in things that you have previously taken for granted as being true, in this case the Party. But many choose to not act on the doubt, or choose to believe (in the Party) rather than believe in themselves. People are very receptive to the group mentality especially in circumstances where standing alone can come with bad consequences. We naturally want to fit into the majority rather than stand out as the individual, like Ludvik, because it is safer and more certain. Perhaps it is also significant that Ludvik is a young man. Though he is marked as an individual, he is probably more likely to be swayed by his peers and the authority to be shaped by what he has grown up believing - the Party rule.

Reaction to Cultures of Resistance

I think the movie was extremely relevant to our class. it depicted both groups of people living in the lie and groups living in the truth. i think the movie focused most on those people living in the truth and actively resisting whatever was oppressing them, but it also did depict people who were just trying to stay alive and get by however they could.

I think these cultures were so much more openly resisting because the government oppression was much more severe, violent, and out in the open. these cultures also have enough people, groups of people, that their dissent and resistance is supported and also made aware to other parts of the world.

With Communism, it was hard for the people to prove that the government was committing crimes. In the cultures in the movie to crimes are outright and outrageous, spurring groups around the world to support the local cultures.

It all goes back to Havel - it only takes one person to dissent to show that it is just "a game" and others will follow.

Reading for 2.14 The Miracle Game

"Laura, do you think ideology is stronger than the police?" -Danny
"Man is inclined to evil, right? Well, we're convinced it's the other way around. in primitive societies, man had a powerful sense of the collective, of mutual help. in that way he was good. it was class society that turned him into an evil animal. communism will eventually replicate the relationships in those original societies. it will awaken all those old, original virtues in man." - Laura
page 386

I found this passage very interesting because it gives us insight to what Party members truly believe, if we take Laura to be the face of every Party member. It is interesting to me that the people who have the most "power", the Party members/officials, are the ones who are the most brainwashed, which really makes them powerless. They are powerless because all of their power comes from an outside source, it is not their own individual self-pride that gives them power. This also makes me wonder if they are living in the lie, because they truly believe in what they're supporting. this brings us back to the questions of "what is the truth?" If we take it as fact that the truth can vary from individual to individual, then I would argue that Laura, and Party members that truly support the Party, are living in the truth, their truth.

It is also ironic that Laura and Havel essentially want the same thing - human collective. However, Laura is willing to get that through oppression, forcing people to be a collective, while Havel imagines a human collective of individuals living in the truth but supporting one another's self-respect and individuality.

Lies vs. Truths

In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act. --George Orwell

Living in the Lie

Ideology was originally a critique of capitalism. Is capitalism just as bad as socialism?

If the Czech people were living under the Communist regime and that was "living in the lie" then now they have changed to capitalism and are "living in the truth." But, if they are now unhappy with the current system, capitalism, are they again "living in the lie"?

The Truth

What is the truth? What is living in the truth?

These are broad questions, not easily answered.

I don’t think it’s possible to ever fully live in the truth and live in society. To fully function in society, there will always be some things that you don’t agree with but must go along with. In our society, we are free but only to an extent. While we can have our own ideas, and usually express them without repression from the government, there are laws that prevent us from doing whatever we want, and also pressures from society itself that prevent us from always voicing our opinion. If you do voice your opinion, there will always be dissenters, which is a hindrance to some people. No one likes to be criticized for their ideas, even if they know they are unpopular.

Maybe you can only have true freedom if you disengage from society altogether.  

Class Discussion 2.9

In class on Thursday (2.9) we talked about how people that live in the lie come to realize that they have human dignity, that they have self-respect, are proud of their individuality, and then come to live in the truth. I think there is also another way to look at it. It seems probable to me that many people that are living the lie feel that self-respect is keeping yourself alive. So even though they know they are living in the lie, they continue to live in it to stay alive and have a decent life, and also protect their family from being mistreated by the government.

What I wrote in class about IDEOLOGY--> LIVING IN THE LIE--> LIVING IN THE TRUTH….

     Ideology is the first step to living in a lie. These two steps are so closely related that I think it is impossible to leave living within the lie out of the equation. Ideology supplies the lie within which the people live. It is the façade – the bridge to the regime – that allows people to live the lie. Ideology provides the blanket opinions, tells the citizens the way they should act and think, and allows them to hide behind it so as to not get caught living in the truth – thus it is living in the lie.

     One can realize he/she is living in a lie and feel helpless and do nothing to remove themselves from the lie which just fuels the ideology and the lie. Only once one realizes he/she is living a lie and does something to change it is he/she living in the truth. And when one starts to live in the truth, he/she illuminates the cracks in the façade, they show that it is just “a game” which allows everyone else to see that it is just a game and spurs them to step out of the lie as well.

     When one person starts to live the truth it shows that ideology is a lie, threatening ideology itself. Thus it comes full circle – living in the truth will promote living in the truth and extinguish the lie of ideology.