'The Old Man and the Wolves' was so-and-so, the beginning and the end more worthwhile than the middle. Unfortunately, the fact that it was written by 'The Old Man and the Wolves' was so-and-so, the beginning and the end more worthwhile than the middle. Unfortunately, the fact that it was written by a theoretician / postmodernism adept / structuralism circle member can be felt too much. Thus, the read sadly becomes a demonstration of various points the author wants to make about narratives, meaning and so on.
After the first 50 pages, I resigned myself to disliking it, but continuing to read for the sheer value of adding another landmark to my personal reading map. It did manage to turn my perception enough afterwards somewhat, through the less predictable meanings assigned, and it was a pleasant surprise. The last part, about the dead father and the complexities of a loving daughter's relationship with him really touched me and sort of revived the read, also.
So, overall it was borderline enjoyable and interesting, after all, but not impressively so. I don't regret reading it, and some of its sentences-conclusions regarding family psychology made for interesting nuggets of 'quotable' would-be philosophy (even though they're more than a little misogynistic - not a surprise, coming from the intellectual circles Kristeva was part of). ...more
Loading...
