Element Yayınları 3. Sınıf Tüm Dersler Soru Bankası-Kolektif EPub e-kitap Bir kitabı indir

Ahmed Garhy ahmedgarhy — I ended up giving up on this one... I read about half of it. It basically is a collection of various characters whose lives are drastically changed by the war. Depressing with a side of depression, and not alll that much. It was readable, it just got old and depressing, harder to want to pick it up.

Sarah Ferraro sarahferraro — The decent, standard treatment of the "Crime of the Century," since supercede by Fisher's even more extensive book.

Hirzi Aulia hirziazaky — -Luke Harding is a 16 yr. Old forensic investigator (in the future sometime) in England. He is investigating 3 separate murders that are somehow connected. Luke analyzes the crime scenes with his robot partner Malc, trying to figure out who the murderer is. -This book was ok, but I thought is was boring, not a lot of action.

Giovanna Mello annavoigmello — Hmm, Satan as agent of salvation in a corrupt state? That seems to be one question B. addresses in this novel. The salvation in this case, though, is more aesthetic and political than theological -- I think. The grand theme is one of faith and belief in various forms: the Master has lost faith in his novel about Pontius Pilate; Russian citizens don't believe in Satan or black magic, and Woland punishes them for their insistence on empirical truth. Not having read my Milton (oh, the shame!), I can't say how or if B. is working with or against literary tradition of Satan. For all his nonchalant violence and chaos, Wolands seem easily swayed by Margarita's pleas on behalf of a man writing a novel about the ultimate corruption of faith. Are we to believe that Margarita has sold her soul by agreeing to be queen of Satan's Ball? The novel raises all sorts of interesting questions re faith, but if it offers a coherent vision of faith, I haven't worked it out yet. (any thoughts out there?) On to more practical matters: this was my 2nd reading, 10 years after the first, and the virtues and flaws were more pronounced this time. Though still highly entertaining, this time I found the political and literary satire of scenes set in Moscow a wee bit tiresome, or overly long, anyway. Part of the problem is that they are mostly written as straight descpritive action, never or rarely entering minds of charcters in any way that makes them fully 3-dimensional characters. So for larger chunck, the novel skates along the surface, granted with lots of fancy and hilarious moves, but some scenes tend to run on like extended clown skits at the circus, and since these scenes, all set in the present Moscow of novel, make up the bulk of novel, it can get rather wearisome. Oddly, this was the suff I loved the most my first reading. This time around, it was the chapters on Pilate that I found most riveting and moving, and that's because B. develops PP as a 3-dimensional charcter, part arrogant, political bureaucrat concerned only with preserving his own powers and part insecure victim plagued by demands of political machinations of expediencies and by his own doubts about his cowardice in the face of public opinion and his desire to do the fair and just thing. B's language and tone change markedly here, demonstrating his impressive range. These sections, only 3 chapters unfortunately, make this one of the great political novels of all time, but as for the rest, I got tired of wading through it to get back to PP. Overall, is this a great novel? Does Bulgakov belong in the ranks of Dostoevsky, Tolstoy, Chekhov? Not in my opinion. He occupies a slot beneath those folks. Mind you, that's still plenty impressive, and I don't mean to disparage the novel. Anyone reading it for first time, I think would find the satire greatly entertaining, and some scenes still made me hoot aloud. My reactions this time around just confirm my growing belief that it's not the writing that changes but one's evolving taste as a reader. With a third reading in another 10 years, I'm sure I'll have yet another reaction. But that's part of the fun of returning to favorite books over time. A note re translations: I read Mirra Ginsburg edition first time, the P/V edition this time, and I think I preferred Ginsburg. P/V often use wordy prepositional noun phrases where G. uses a more direct, streamlined wording: For example, P/V open the novel with "At the hour of the hot, spring sunset ... " whereas G. and others write "On a warm spring evening ... " or something along those lines, don't have text in front of me. A minor annoyance, but done repeatedly over the course of a long novel, such stylistic speed bumps can make for a bumpy ride. Having taught freshmen comp for 20 years, I'm probably too sensitive to such distractions. Whether this style more faithfully captures B's Russian, I can't say. Just something that jumped out at me.