I just finished Flesh. It's gotten a lot of criticism and a lot of praise. It's hard to describe how I feel about this book...kinda transfixed...like not being able to look away from a train wreck. Deeply fascinated by Istvan whom I believe sadly embodies the personality and characteristics of many young men. It is a window into the soul of a seemingly souless character. Actually I thought all of the characters were amoral and soulless except Thomas. And it is he whom Istvan ends up saving. This is a book that will end up staying with me for a long time.
Yes! Related to this. But if it’s a picture then you are not looking to fill a checklist of morality. There’s no morality on a picture. And even if you don’t understand the reason why you liked the book, if you’re thinking about it days after finishing it, it is because it has power.
I haven’t read the other shortlisted entries yet and so can’t speak to the question of who should have won, but I can say that I devoured Flesh in a few days. Bravo
Don't you hate when you're reading your way through the short list and you get the winning title as the subject line the minute the prize is final? Ugh.
Feel like Szalay didn’t really need this win, he’d already been shortlisted previously as well. The prize can help give a new writer a career. David already had one. Ah well
Very tedious opening chapters, and not particularly original. I think it's hard to write well about sex even if you want to talk about alienation. MIndless sex is too cliched -- a staple out of modernists like Albert Camus and Andre Gide. Even D.H. Lawrence is preferable. Sorry, but the Booker judges needs to be better acquainted with what's been done before with the novel.
What stands out here is the emphasis on form as much as subject. The description of how silence and white space shape István’s character makes this feel like a win for precision, not just scale or topical weight. I also find the Hungarian to English arc especially interesting because it suggests a novel that tracks both one life and a larger European shift. Definitely moved this higher on my reading list.
Didn't like it at first, but curiosity kept me returning. At book's end, the feeling of a life lived with all the air sucked out of it, without success/failure markers, with basic instincts"I will" or "I won't" inactivated.
Congratulations to the author. I read "Flesh" recently, and I agree with the judges. The extremely simple syntax makes every word and detail matter. It seems to me like Itsvan was a follower of life, letting life happen to him rather than being the result of his own choices (of which the book shows very few).
I just finished Flesh. It's gotten a lot of criticism and a lot of praise. It's hard to describe how I feel about this book...kinda transfixed...like not being able to look away from a train wreck. Deeply fascinated by Istvan whom I believe sadly embodies the personality and characteristics of many young men. It is a window into the soul of a seemingly souless character. Actually I thought all of the characters were amoral and soulless except Thomas. And it is he whom Istvan ends up saving. This is a book that will end up staying with me for a long time.
Yes! Related to this. But if it’s a picture then you are not looking to fill a checklist of morality. There’s no morality on a picture. And even if you don’t understand the reason why you liked the book, if you’re thinking about it days after finishing it, it is because it has power.
I haven’t read the other shortlisted entries yet and so can’t speak to the question of who should have won, but I can say that I devoured Flesh in a few days. Bravo
Well done
Don't you hate when you're reading your way through the short list and you get the winning title as the subject line the minute the prize is final? Ugh.
Feel like Szalay didn’t really need this win, he’d already been shortlisted previously as well. The prize can help give a new writer a career. David already had one. Ah well
Very tedious opening chapters, and not particularly original. I think it's hard to write well about sex even if you want to talk about alienation. MIndless sex is too cliched -- a staple out of modernists like Albert Camus and Andre Gide. Even D.H. Lawrence is preferable. Sorry, but the Booker judges needs to be better acquainted with what's been done before with the novel.
What stands out here is the emphasis on form as much as subject. The description of how silence and white space shape István’s character makes this feel like a win for precision, not just scale or topical weight. I also find the Hungarian to English arc especially interesting because it suggests a novel that tracks both one life and a larger European shift. Definitely moved this higher on my reading list.
Loved it.
Me too can’t wait to read it. This book will be part of my shopping cart list.
Me too can’t wait to read it. This book will be part of my shopping cart list.
The simple syntax makes Flesh perfect for listening to as an audiobook while cooking or driving. Highly recommend.
Very much looking forward to revisiting this as part of our inaugural book club read!
Didn't like it at first, but curiosity kept me returning. At book's end, the feeling of a life lived with all the air sucked out of it, without success/failure markers, with basic instincts"I will" or "I won't" inactivated.
I wrote about it (your taste is fine)
Can’t wait to read it!
Congratulations to the author. I read "Flesh" recently, and I agree with the judges. The extremely simple syntax makes every word and detail matter. It seems to me like Itsvan was a follower of life, letting life happen to him rather than being the result of his own choices (of which the book shows very few).