I can see why this novel got such an outstanding reception. It broached the important issue of racial discrimination at a time long before it got common sense that Blacks are equals. It treated outsiders in an empathic manner. Be it the deaf main character, his mentally handicapped best buddy, a drunkard or a removed bar owner. It also provides a great depiction of the poor deep South of the US.

Nonetheless, I don’t think it’s a necessary read today. Especially not outside of the US when the historical or political relation is lacking. Times have changed so much that racial issues are still prevalent but are very different from the situation depicted here. Also, the social milieu has changed dramatically. In these concerns, the novel is dated nowadays. That leaves the characters and their interaction. Here, the young age of the author becomes obvious. They aren’t anywhere close to real people. McCullers created idealized silhouettes. The main protagonist John Singer is unanimously loved as a projection screen with others seeing in him what they want him to be. But it never becomes clear or believable why that is. The relations between the characters serve a purpose to progress the plot but they don’t feel very plausible. The development of the characters is limited and only present through Singer as a catalyst.

Don’t get me wrong. I still like this book. It’s heartwarming. But at the same time, it feels naive and has lost the important message that it carried at the time of its creation.

One of the few books that I chose to read a second time. And I don’t regret it. If at all, it’s gotten better with reading it again. Mostly because I’m now able to fully appreciate the quality and style of Kundera in addition to the topic of love and coincidence he’s writing about.

You know from almost the start that the ending will be tragic. The plot skips forth and back freely, providing depth and later on explaining how thing happened that you knew will happen. The structure of the book is excellent and worth any analysis that thousands of readers have done much more competently and thoroughly than I care to do.

What I love about this book the most is already contained in the title. You could also call it butterfly effect. Minor ripples in time, a coincidence here, a different choice there and life would be totally different. At the same time, a character remains what it is and will develop the way he does, notwithstanding what coincidences he will face. The disposition underneath is set even if the circumstances change.

There’s more to this book. It’s a political book with Kundera looking back at his Czech homeland from a distance of time and place. It’s a philosophical book about what drives us humans as individuals. And above all, it’s a great love story.

I wasn’t really prepared for Coup de Grâce. At its surface, it’s a long monologue of Erick de Lhomond, looking back at an obscure place and time in history, the Baltique provinces in the aftermath of World War I with German corps fighting against communist Russian troops. He’s leading a squad of these corps and takes a base in the castle of his childhood friend Konrad and his sister Sophie. Against this backdrop, a fatal love triangle and psychological intimate theatre evolves.

What surprised me is the homo-erotic nature of this love triangle. While it never is mentioned explicitly due to the time this novella was written, it’s obvious that Sophie’s love for Erick never has a chance because Erick is attracted to men and specifically to Konrad. The way this plays out, ultimately leads to an extraordinary resolution. [As Sophie joins the communist troops she gets caught by Eric’s squad. Her comrades get executed and the one thing she asks of Erick is to be executed by him personally which he does. (hide spoiler)]

An intense and brief character study providing a glimpse into an extraordinary and forgotten setting. It hasn’t aged particularly well due to its specific content but it’s written well enough and the resolution makes it a worthy read that I don’t regret reading it given how short it is.

The Pursuer is a short sketch about a musician on the verge between genius and insanity. It’s only thinly disguised that it’s about Charlie Parker and his drug-fueled decline and death. In Germany, it was published as a stand-alone book while the novella is usually part of the collection Blow-Up and Other stories.

It’s a well-written character study of the madness that results from heroin abuse. It’s trying to give us insights into the mind of a genius that fails to cope with reality. Johnny Carter, the alter ego of Charlie Parker, is on a constant search to express what moves him. Coincidentally, works of genius result which nonetheless don’t satisfy him as they fail short from what he’s trying to achieve. He uses and abuses substances as well as the people around him. Being around him is like walking on a thin rope without a happy end.

I liked this novella but ultimately it’s a literary improvisation about jazz which itself is an improvisation and nothing I have any special bond to. Nice enough but nothing I could relate to personally.