A dumpy, bustling little woman . . . that dumpy little women . . . growing dumpy in middle age . . . dumpy little widow — Coetzee

On the Neglected "Major Work"

The ecumenical inquest as major plot device in Doubt (the play) is no longer vitiated by the notion that the child, a suspected homosexual, may have invited the priest's sexual advance. Perhaps, in the 'Dubya' (Bush) era, we would still be accepting Doubt as an invitation to the heady play of significations of guilt at the expense of the child-character, never depicted, and already spoken for. There's a certain wisdom in the stupidity of simply calling something what it is. One hopes that reading Disgrace twenty-five years later we can appreciate the professor's idiomatic, "How dare they (tell me what to do)!" as the archetypal mental maneuver in Reactionary sediment-formation i.e. something we are already rejecting as a matter of axiomatic disagreement. (A trick for centering: if you find yourself thinking the phrase above, you can reject the whole thought and choose to listen instead.) Most graduate-level literary research is the equivalent of talking-about-the-weather in how it manages to invest the minutia of a text while evading these kind of central concerns. Is a different response possible when confronted with the literary equivalent of the Screaming (Meemies) Uncle.

"On Identity and Difference in the Dog Motif in Coetzee's Disgrace"

For the sake of my thesis, I feel compelled to comment on the use of dogs in the text. In brief: Dogs as protectors of property, leisure animals, lapdogs, purebreds. Entangled as weapon-functionary in history of Apartheid. Our good-humored farm bulldog incidentally having been trained to savage black bodies (memory of this history inscribed incognito in the unspeaking brain of the dog-as-witness), guard dogs also simultaneously pets as recipients of care within one's possession as a kind of sterile child. Overdetermined by their coding as a functional object and therefore also capable of being wanted-by-no-one when not providing a use value. Narratively operating as a Pathos device (for the American reader where dogs now nearly outnumber guns). Bare life, acceptably dispensed with at the discretion of a violent authority (e.g. the robber-gunshot (thisis notably not the disgrace-ful crime referenced in the title of the text; dog-shooting is already re-inscribed as violation of a kind of white-authority) and the veterinary-injection which kills far more). Dog(s) are Black :: Black(s) are Dog :: goD is (s)kcalB (scab / black).
On Disgrace

James Wood's review of Disgrace, notes how the text is placing sexual assault into a relation of exchange, "She does not want to press charges, and refuses to move away from the area, in part because that will seem like a defeat, and in part because she begins to see the rape as the necessary price for her continued occupation of the land. The attack is a kind of historical reparation."(Wood, 219) In addition to some dismissive remarks on Coetzee's prose, Wood, like many reviewers, is occasionally playing with the parallels between the chief characters' responses to sexual assault and disgrace in the context of post-Apartheid struggle. Wood ascertains that both responses to "the attack" (reactionary and "progressive") implicate a "liberal white fatalism" which normalizes rape as the expected outcome of an ongoing historical process. He is unable to get past this problema, which he lets settle as the aporia at the heart of an insoluble conflict.

Wood's inability to get beyond Disgrace in Disgrace closes the analysis at the critical moment, which is the moment of the rejection of the exchange. What he reads as the liberal acquiescence of the daughter, who plans to raise the rapist's child rather than sell her estate, is really an obstinacy that is immovable even past the point of disgrace. This character is invoking a kind of slave-resistance (from master-slave dialectic) which is already dispensing with bodily autonomy and the (non disgraced) status which would expect "equal treatment" within a liberal power structure, all in a Dogged refusal to be moved. This resistance is actually drawing strength from disgrace, which it's putting to use as a kind of nutritional substrate: "That [disgrace] will not pass away, has not passed away, that I can turn back and go behind it, and there I shall find everything as it once was" (Sebald, Austerlitz, quotation modified). For certain, this is a delusional motivation, but it's also the "apocalyptic" perspective from which anything is possible (though this usually just means an infinite number of defeats in succession). (I intend "apocalyptic" in Northrop Frye's sense, i.e. accessing "metaphor as pure and potentially total identification, without regard to plausibility or ordinary experience.")

Coetzee himself, as author, is eliding this potentiality, which would have let him do something more interesting with the novel. The concluding scene in Disgrace involves the euthanization of a beloved, useless dog. Our chief character could save it, along with the implication that reconciliation is possible (but not for you), however we understand this plot is Blocked because we are reading "a novel of literary merit," which, most of all, is afraid of becoming a Happy Dog Story. That Coetzee doesn't have the courage to disgrace himself by writing something unexpected in this way is somehow reassuring. (Thank goodness these awful chauvinist professors remain vulnerable (because they still fear Disgrace).) Though what we're left with, despite adherence to literary convention, is something kind of Dumpy. ( )

Top-notch writing from JMC. This man can fit in so many layers of emotional complexity and nuances beautifully and smoothly in a book which isn't voluminous at all, is bizarre. The lust, guilt, redemption, despair, forgiveness and acceptance, this dude has (in my humble opinion) nailed it. ( )

"A los cincuenta y dos años, David Lurie tiene poco de lo que enorgullecerse. Con dos divorcios a sus espaldas, apaciguar el deseo es su única aspiración; sus clases en la universidad son un mero trámite para él y para los estudiantes. Cuando se descubre su relación con una alumna, David, en un acto de soberbia, preferirá renunciar a su puesto antes que disculparse en público. Rechazado por todos, abandona Ciudad del Cabo y va a visitar la granja de su hija Lucy. Allí, David, verá hacerse añicos todas sus creencias en una tarde de violencia implacable. Desgracia, que obtuvo el prestigioso premio Booker, no dejará indiferente al lector". (Descripción editorial).

He just doesn't get it!

The He in question is David Lurie a college lecturer in the university of Cape Town in South Africa. A white male of 52 years old who sees himself as a sort of Byronic figure. He readily uses his power and position to satisfy his sexual needs; only now as he gets older his main concern is that he may be losing his appeal. He has always been disgraceful, but when he seduces a 20 year old female student of his, he faces the wrath of an investigating committee, after her family make a formal complaint. He readily admits his guilt, agrees that he has done wrong, but sees no reason why he should apologise or seek help. He will lose his job and his reputation, but sees no reason to change his behaviour. When faced with a more difficult position when his daughter is raped and he is beaten up, he still demonstrates that he has a total inability to see another persons point of view or 'walk in their shoes'. He is selfish, egotistical and remains so until the end of the novel. He just doesn't get it. This is not a bildungsroman.

This novel published in 1999 won Coetzee his second Booker prize and in my opinion it was a very worthy winner, because not only is it a good extremely well written story, it throws up so many themes and issues around post colonial Africa, women's equality and even animal rights in just over 200 pages, that it could keep college lecturers in employment until the end of this century (assuming they could keep their sex in their pants or their knickers, while at work). There have been many fine reviews, analysis and expositions of the story line and so I don't want to add another one to the list, but there have also been many thoughts expressed that I think are wrong headed. In my opinion this is not a book that shows, or even hints at, some sort of redemption for David Lurie. He is clearly a man out of his time. This is important because as a reader we see almost everything through David Luries' eyes, although it is written in the third person. Lucy his daughter cannot explain to him, her fears and concerns after the attack, because she knows he will not be able to grasp the reasons that she behaves the way she does. He will only make it worse. He will not understand. He will not get it. It is best that he keeps himself occupied with his pointless attempts to write an opera on Byron's final years. Just because he shows empathy towards an injured dog in the final paragraph of the book doesn't mean he is on the path towards redemption.

A brilliant novel 5 stars. ( )

A stunning, disturbing novel of a father and daughter and their changing lives in the South Africa of today. ( )

found it super hard to read due to it being severely uninteresting, very boring, good riddance ! misogynistic ( )

The story of a disgraced university professor in Cape Town South Africa. He takes advantage of a female student and is asked to apologise publicly but refuses because he believes it is his right not to. He leaves the uni in disgrace and goes to live in the country where his daughter runs a very small land holding growing flowers and vegetables for sale at the local market. The era is not spelt out specifically but seems to reflect the unrest during the period of apartheid. they are attacked by 2 men and a youth who rape his daughter and set him alight with methylated spirits. the relationship between father and daughter ends up fractured due to their differing views on how the incident should be dealt with. I found the focus he gave to his attempt to write an opera on Byron's life an unnecessary distraction from the relationship issues explored through the interactions he had with various people. ( )

I found this well written but extremely dark and depressing. ( )

This is an absolutely wonderful book, one I thoroughly enjoyed. The narrative voice is excellent, the story flows well, and a book that reads quickly. The chapters are relatively short and I was anxious at the end of one chapter to get to the next. It is a relatively short book, just over 200 pages, but an absolute delight to read.

The story is set in South Africa following apartheid, and follows 52 year old Professor David Lurie. Some might say he has a sexual addiction. He visits a prostitute on a weekly basis to satisfy his needs, but when she leaves the business, he turns to one of his students for an affair. This dalliance sets off a chain of events that ultimately lead to his dismissal at the university.

Disgraced, Lurie retreats to his daughter’s home in the country, and moves in with her. Unfortunately, he fares no better there. He is attached and his daughter is raped by two black men and a young black boy. Lurie tries to make sense of the events that have occurred, but things become more complicated. His daughter becomes pregnant and the young boy turns out to be the brother of a neighbor’s wife. The neighbor, Petrus, assists Lurie’s daughter on the farm, but has his eyes on taking over her property. It appears the attack was an attempt to scare Lurie’s daughter away from the farm and surrender it to Petrus. The relationship between Lurie and his daughter become estranged and he leaves for a while. Lurie returns later, but no longer lives with his daughter.

Lurie has his misfortunes, most are of his own causing. He is his own worst enemy. The story is full of symbolism, especially surrounding death. It is a touching story, one that will remain with you for a long time. J. M. Coetzee has written a masterpiece. ( )

Although this book was well written, the central character’s lack of morality repulsed me. I also found the aspect of animal euthanasia extremely depressing. Glad it was only a short book. ( )

I suppose my review probably has something to do with the fact that my male Human Rights class professor has assigned nothing but books with violent rape for the last four months. Needless to say - I'm a little over it. And since I've read so many - this one was just meh. Well written, but nothing new or insightful or even shocking.

Not impressed. ( )

Brutal. The hubris of the protagonist is depicted with no mercy, and the changes (or lack thereof) launched by his fall from grace are complex and fascinating. ( )

A work that transcends time and place, and yet it also helps the outsider understand South Africa at that moment. A haunting and terrifying study that begs to be read as national allegory; however, it also stands alone as a character study. A novel that is well worthy of all of the praise it has received. ( )

This beautifully written novel treads on the edge of despair, but ends with love -- and death. The novel is set in South Africa after the end of apartheid, and the tensions of the situation permeate the novel. The protagonist, a 50-ish professor who is dismissed and disgraced because of his affair with a student, is not likable, which can make the novel tough. He does learn, however, from his relationships with various people, including his daughter. At times the novel is painful to read, but I am very glad that I did. ( )

A los cincuenta y dos años, David Lurie tiene poco de lo que enorgullecerse. Con dos divorcios a sus espaldas, apaciguar el deseo es su única aspiración; sus clases en la universidad son un mero trámite para él y para los estudiantes. Cuando se destapa su relación con una alumna, David, en un acto de soberbia, preferirá renunciar a su puesto antes que disculparse en público. Rechazado por todos, abandona Ciudad del Cabo y va a visitar la granja de su hija Lucy. Allí, David verá hacerse añicos todas sus creencias en una tarde de violencia implacable... ( )

2.4

South Africa, Booker winner 1993, ( )

Read! Read this novel if you have any love for words and great literature. I won't do any disservice to this book by elaborating; it needs no preface. ( )

Well-written literary fiction about substantial, and potentially disturbing, topics – power dynamics, sexual harassment, rape, reputation, guilt, shame, animal euthanasia, and the aftermath of Apartheid in South Africa.

In 1997, protagonist David Lurie is a professor at Cape Technical University and a scholar of Romantic poets. He admires Lord Byron and wants to write an operetta about him and one of his mistresses. He is 52 and feeling ambivalent about his life. He pursues a sexual relationship with one of his students. He travels from Cape Town to his daughter’s house in the countryside in the Eastern Cape to get away from the scandal. While there, he and his daughter are violently attacked but his daughter does not want to report anything more than a robbery.

It is narrated in third party limited, and we are privy to David’s thoughts, but only actions of the other characters. For an erudite man, David is surprisingly clueless about his own actions. He is horrified by what happens to his daughter but does not see (or is in denial) that he has committed a similar act against his student. It is a stark story with a number of complex undercurrents, including racial issues related to the legacy of Apartheid. Much of the racial storyline lies between the lines.

There is a lot of suffering and sadness in this book. I cannot say I “enjoyed” it, but I appreciated the writing, the depth of themes, and the literary references. This book contains plenty of room for meaningful contemplation. It won the Booker Prize in 1999.
( )

When I closed on the last page of this book, I just sat in stunned silence and stared into space. I felt a little sick and lost, over affected by the sad truths it disclosed. I did not cry, but there were tears behind my eyes pricking through much of this read, and they were not tears for these characters as much as for humanity at large.

David Lurie is not a likeable person. He is short-sighted and self-centered and amazingly insensitive. So, how is it that I ended this book wishing him well? Wishing he would find the future better than the present? That Bev Shaw’s assertion that “One gets used to things getting harder; one ceases to be surprised that what used to be as hard as hard can be grows harder yet.” will not be the truth for him always? There is a glimmer of hope growing at the end of this story that flickers like a candle flame. It might easily be blown out, but perhaps it will find a way to burn on into the future; perhaps it will save Lucy and David alike.

I have been being surprised a lot by the books I have been reading lately. I seem to have some preconceived idea about what they will entail and then find they are not that at all. This definitely falls into that category for me. I thought this was going to be about race relations in South Africa, and it is, but it is about so much more than that. It is about humanity and what unavoidable ugly choices we make, that we are not always forced into, and how we relate to others and their choices which we find completely impossible to understand. Lucy tells David that he sees her as a minor play in the story of his life, but that she believes she is at the center of her own story. And that might be the most true statement Coetzee makes. We are all the center of our own stories and everyone else is a minor player. We cannot help that. Can anyone really imagine life goes on without them? Can you think about the day after you are dead and all the people you know still getting up for breakfast and going to work...but you are not there, you do not exist? It is the hardest thing to imagine in all the world.

Huge kudos to J. M. Coetzee for tackling the big questions and weaving them into a marvelous story that grips you from beginning to end. I heartily recommend this book. I have no doubt I will be thinking about it for a long, long time. ( )

Booker and Nobel Prizes are indeed something...!... still, I liked the book best at its beginning with the focus on university life; the professor's sudden desire in an otherwise button-down scholarly life. I can't appreciate some of the politics of his daughter's life "on the farm" and their interactions with the locals. Beautifully written of course. Ironically, I feel I need a college English class to understand Coetzee's many devices and themes. ( )

This is a small novel about big things. Primarily, in my reading, it is about how men treat women, and how women feel about it. David is 52 and in a late-arriving mid-life crisis, unable to relinquish acting on his attraction to women half his age - including one of his students. Refusing to prostrate himself before society's judgement, he withdraws from his former life by visiting his daughter at her country farm. Here he witnesses and experiences more ways in which men treat women, which slowly begins to influence his perspective. Perhaps he can become a better man, perhaps not. He does not allow that he has much capacity for change. But he does learn - from his own experience, and from his daughter - how to let things go.

Coetzee did a lot of things here in a very tight space. There's also political undercurrents about the after-effects of South Africa's apartheid, thoughts about justice, commentary on humanity's duty to animals, etc. None of it becomes didactic or overbearing, though it can be violent and even disturbing; there are shades of Flannery O'Connor here. You can pick and choose what you get out of it from the buffet on offer. ( )

Took me 4 years to read this a second time. Just as good as the first. ( )

I don't think I ever saw such a mixed range of stars but where the majority had such deep emotions about a book. It makes me want to read it. But ... the subject.. is a major trigger to me. So for now it goes on my maybe list and maybe in the future I can handle a story that seems to evoke such intens emotions.

I've rarely come across a book this evocatively written, with such well-developed characters, set in such a distinctive setting, and probing such (arguably) fundamental questions, that I felt so tepidly about.

Perhaps it was the protagonist -- an objectionable guy, a literature professor who practices his hedonism with total disregard for his effect on others. But despite the way he exploits and "Cat Person"s his student, and despite his neglect of his daughter, blindness to her needs, and denial of her autonomy, the professor is someone I identified with. He is in a constant state of thought, always trying to balance his desires and actions with the way they fit into his framework of the world.

But perhaps this was the problem -- this "framework", the character's constant and seemingly offhand attempts to observe and understand the society around him. E.g., a foreshadowing:

A risk to own anything: a car, a pair of shoes, a packet of cigarettes. Not enough to go around, not enough cars, shoes, cigarettes. Too many people, too few things. What there is must go into circulation, so that everyone can have a chance to be happy for a day. That is the theory; hold to the theory and to the comforts of theory. Not human evil, just a vast circulatory system, to whose workings pity and terror are irrelevant. That is how one must see life in this country: in its schematic aspect. Otherwise one could go mad. Cars, shoes; women too. There must be some niche in the system for women and what happens to them.

Yes, his thinking is often dirtied by puerile and even despicable ideas, as demonstrated here. That's not the part that bothered me. I think what bothered me is how the character eventually became so useless, so isolated, so nearly irredeemably disgraced so as to render all of his ideas -- not just the barefaced despicable ones -- as silly and trivial. His redemption (is there a redemption? This seems like a question ripe for book club consensuses) is unbelievable; his trials and tribulations feel "sloppily" plotted -- maybe in the way that life can resemble a rambling course, but more in the way that symbols and motifs and moments of buried character insights flow out casually.

Anyway. 3.5 stars for a book I can acknowledge as great. ( )