I certainly have never read a book (not even 30 pages) after having consumed so much criticism on that. Even in the German newspapers were already talking about the book is not even available in German. Somehow such a success (nearly a million copies sold in France), such an advance would lead to a disappointment. And that's what happened.
But it again. Who is Stéphane Hessel, for those of you who live on the moon or who never touch a newspaper? Born in Berlin in 1917, he moved to Paris in 1924, it will become tough and French diplomat, he played an important role during the drafting of the Declaration of Human Rights in 1948. He continues to fight for the poor and oppressed over the years, supports the same (it is after all a French diplomat!) Algerian independence. Mitterrand appointed him ambassador to France in 1981. An impressive character with a life almost unbelievable obviously. Still, personally I find it almost more interesting his parents (Franz Hessel and Helen Grund) who served as a model for the film Jules and Jim and lived life post-national at a time when it seemed just possible. Especially literary works of Franz Hessel on Berlin and Paris interest me much and I'm going to start when I can. Hessel's son seems a little too perfect, perhaps, it lacks the tragic failure or maybe it's just the fact it is so popular everywhere that makes me a little away from him.
Anyway, I finally managed to buy his very first little book and read it now. I was not very impressed. First, as some critics have said, it remains unclear on what he wants us to do. Indignant is, certainly, and there are plenty of reasons to be, but what about after that? Hessel ask questions or even, as it offers a sense of political expression without specifying anything about the path to take or how to express themselves. I find it a little too easy.
Furthermore, also disappoints his little speech on the pitch plane. It is inconsistent, and his allusions or comparisons are not convincing. It completely ignores that the resistance has not won the war and drove the Germans. It gave them life difficult without doubt, without allies, D Day and especially the front to the east, the resistance could ever claim the winner. From this point of view, I can not see why it is supposed to be a model for action today.
What else? Obviously his criticism of Israel falling into xenophobia. His proclamation: " Be a terrorist Israeli nonviolence. " is nothing but an attempt to limit a corporation, a people to acts of his government. I am convinced that Hessel defend himself (rightly) a trial so flat and generally on another nation.
To continue in this vein, I'll never understand why the situation of Palestinians is the main outrage world today. I disagree with the policy of the government of Israel, obviously, and I pity the suffering of the Palestinian people, but there are islands in the world will disappear if the West can not restrict his lifestyle. ago an ongoing war in Congo, where millions of people have died in recent years. Palestine is suffering, but it is far from being the main source of indignation today, Claiming it is nothing intellectually dishonest to me.
So what to make of this tract that makes as much about him? I think that Hessel is primarily a feeling that people want to feel. They want indignation against the loss of the ideals of the resistance against the power of money, against national and international inequalities in him they find a voice. I agree with this outrage, moreover, with this criticism of the system today, it's just intellectually Hessel is not very convincing nor innovative. It speaks to the hearts, not brains.
But it again. Who is Stéphane Hessel, for those of you who live on the moon or who never touch a newspaper? Born in Berlin in 1917, he moved to Paris in 1924, it will become tough and French diplomat, he played an important role during the drafting of the Declaration of Human Rights in 1948. He continues to fight for the poor and oppressed over the years, supports the same (it is after all a French diplomat!) Algerian independence. Mitterrand appointed him ambassador to France in 1981. An impressive character with a life almost unbelievable obviously. Still, personally I find it almost more interesting his parents (Franz Hessel and Helen Grund) who served as a model for the film Jules and Jim and lived life post-national at a time when it seemed just possible. Especially literary works of Franz Hessel on Berlin and Paris interest me much and I'm going to start when I can. Hessel's son seems a little too perfect, perhaps, it lacks the tragic failure or maybe it's just the fact it is so popular everywhere that makes me a little away from him.
Anyway, I finally managed to buy his very first little book and read it now. I was not very impressed. First, as some critics have said, it remains unclear on what he wants us to do. Indignant is, certainly, and there are plenty of reasons to be, but what about after that? Hessel ask questions or even, as it offers a sense of political expression without specifying anything about the path to take or how to express themselves. I find it a little too easy.
Furthermore, also disappoints his little speech on the pitch plane. It is inconsistent, and his allusions or comparisons are not convincing. It completely ignores that the resistance has not won the war and drove the Germans. It gave them life difficult without doubt, without allies, D Day and especially the front to the east, the resistance could ever claim the winner. From this point of view, I can not see why it is supposed to be a model for action today.
What else? Obviously his criticism of Israel falling into xenophobia. His proclamation: " Be a terrorist Israeli nonviolence. " is nothing but an attempt to limit a corporation, a people to acts of his government. I am convinced that Hessel defend himself (rightly) a trial so flat and generally on another nation.
To continue in this vein, I'll never understand why the situation of Palestinians is the main outrage world today. I disagree with the policy of the government of Israel, obviously, and I pity the suffering of the Palestinian people, but there are islands in the world will disappear if the West can not restrict his lifestyle. ago an ongoing war in Congo, where millions of people have died in recent years. Palestine is suffering, but it is far from being the main source of indignation today, Claiming it is nothing intellectually dishonest to me.
So what to make of this tract that makes as much about him? I think that Hessel is primarily a feeling that people want to feel. They want indignation against the loss of the ideals of the resistance against the power of money, against national and international inequalities in him they find a voice. I agree with this outrage, moreover, with this criticism of the system today, it's just intellectually Hessel is not very convincing nor innovative. It speaks to the hearts, not brains.
0 comments:
Post a Comment