What do you think?
Rate this book
Under the Net
Jake Donaghue, garrulous artist, meets Hugo Belfounder, silent philosopher.
Jake, hack writer and sponger, now penniless flat-hunter, seeks out an old girlfriend, Anna Quentin, and her glamorous actress sister, Sadie. He resumes acquaintance with formidable Hugo, whose ‘philosophy’ he once presumptuously dared to interpret. These meetings involve Jake and his eccentric servant-companion, Finn, in a series of adventures that include the kidnapping of a film-star dog, and a political riot in a film-set of ancient Rome. Jake, fascinated, longs to learn Hugo’s secret. Perhaps Hugo’s secret is Hugo himself? Admonished, enlightened, Jake hopes at last to become a real writer.
Jake, hack writer and sponger, now penniless flat-hunter, seeks out an old girlfriend, Anna Quentin, and her glamorous actress sister, Sadie. He resumes acquaintance with formidable Hugo, whose ‘philosophy’ he once presumptuously dared to interpret. These meetings involve Jake and his eccentric servant-companion, Finn, in a series of adventures that include the kidnapping of a film-star dog, and a political riot in a film-set of ancient Rome. Jake, fascinated, longs to learn Hugo’s secret. Perhaps Hugo’s secret is Hugo himself? Admonished, enlightened, Jake hopes at last to become a real writer.
252 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1954
About the author
Iris Murdoch
106 books2,281 followersDame Jean Iris Murdoch
Irish-born British writer, university lecturer and prolific and highly professional novelist, Iris Murdoch dealt with everyday ethical or moral issues, sometimes in the light of myths. As a writer, she was a perfectionist who did not allow editors to change her text. Murdoch produced 26 novels in 40 years, the last written while she was suffering from Alzheimer disease.
"She wanted, through her novels, to reach all possible readers, in different ways and by different means: by the excitement of her story, its pace and its comedy, through its ideas and its philosophical implications, through the numinous atmosphere of her own original and created world--the world she must have glimpsed as she considered and planned her first steps in the art of fiction." (John Bayley in Elegy for Iris, 1998)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iris_Mur...
Irish-born British writer, university lecturer and prolific and highly professional novelist, Iris Murdoch dealt with everyday ethical or moral issues, sometimes in the light of myths. As a writer, she was a perfectionist who did not allow editors to change her text. Murdoch produced 26 novels in 40 years, the last written while she was suffering from Alzheimer disease.
"She wanted, through her novels, to reach all possible readers, in different ways and by different means: by the excitement of her story, its pace and its comedy, through its ideas and its philosophical implications, through the numinous atmosphere of her own original and created world--the world she must have glimpsed as she considered and planned her first steps in the art of fiction." (John Bayley in Elegy for Iris, 1998)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iris_Mur...
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 1,048 reviews
November 19, 2020
The cocky narrator of "Under the Net" is precisely what all true antiheroes are (or should be) made out of. Roaming the streets of London like some vagabond (though money frequently touches his hands) & interacting with vile people, THIS is a true perpetual ode to laziness, the exact type of thing to spark my particular interest.
The story is organic, its flow envious. Precious few writers can get away with such subtle themes and sensual undertow. It is eerie, weirdly & mysteriously symbolic. A more faithful rendition of London life had not crossed my eyes ever since Mrs. Dalloway. This novel is a true treasure, it's as delicious as revenge, as emblematic as Big Ben, and as readable & elegant a read as few books ever are.
The story is organic, its flow envious. Precious few writers can get away with such subtle themes and sensual undertow. It is eerie, weirdly & mysteriously symbolic. A more faithful rendition of London life had not crossed my eyes ever since Mrs. Dalloway. This novel is a true treasure, it's as delicious as revenge, as emblematic as Big Ben, and as readable & elegant a read as few books ever are.
August 19, 2024
Under the Net, from 1954, was the first published novel by Iris Murdoch, the distinguished academic, and professor of moral philosophy at Oxford University. As well as books on moral philosophy she wrote twenty-six critically acclaimed novels, one of which won the prestigious Booker prize. Yet Under the Net is sometimes dismissed as a light comic piece, in comparison with her later, lengthier novels. Certainly it can be read that way, as a humorous tale about a Bohemian young Irish man in London, Jake Donoghue, who occasionally earns a crust by translating trashy French novels, but by and large has avoided getting a job, and as the blurb says “sponges off his friends”.
However, appearances can be deceptive, and a closer look reveals that this novel is far more than that. Some critics now view it as her best work, and an excellent introduction to the philosophy of Existentialism.
Our first clue to its depth is the title, Under the Net, which is a metaphor used by the Austrian philosopher Ludwig Wittgenstein, in his famous work, “Tractatus”, of 1921. Wittgenstein believed that the deepest truths can never be fully verbalised. Although people might conceive of them, such truths are diminished by the limitations of language. He stated that any attempt to talk about, explain, or write a truth is similar to placing a net over the truth. Its effect is to blur the image, and make the truth less than perfect. Newtonian mechanics, Wittgenstein said, captures the world through the equivalent of a net, or many nets. The squares of the net determine how things are seen, which is different from that of a net with a triangular, or hexagonal weave:
“To the different networks correspond different systems of describing the world, [and thus] this form is arbitrary.”
This mesh may be fine or coarse, or its holes may be of different shapes, but it will always be regular, and represent an imperfect truth. We may have a unified form to describe the universe, but the selection of the form leads to a built-in inaccuracy.
The novel can be seen as a process of revelation to Jake, that our subjective descriptions are apparent, and unreliable. They conform to our “Net”, and are not the world itself, which may slip away, Under the Net. However, Wittgenstein later referred to this work as meaningless nonsense, and in 1953 he totally rejected the concepts which he had originally published in “Tractatus”.
Interestingly, Under the Net was published just a year later in 1954, and later in her own life Iris Murdoch too, professed to be embarrassed by her novel, saying that the writing was immature and juvenile. Nevertheless Wittgenstein’s influence remained clear in all her novels; she repeatedly demonstrated that life could only be shown, and not explained.
Under the Net represents both the political and philosophical views which Iris Murdoch herself held at the time, but also her self-image. Although we think of her as a self-assured writer with many acclaimed works to her name, this was not always the case. This is not actually Iris Murdoch’s first novel, but merely the first one to be published; she had attempted to write five novels before this one. In 2010, a cache of letters was discovered, which reveal both the writer’s frame of mind at the time, and clarify to some extent its philosophical significance, which derives heavily from both Jean-Paul Sartre and Ludwig Wittgenstein. Her letters also show her insecurity, and how she struggled with her early, unpublished novels. She was finally to destroy a number of these early manuscripts in 1986.
The 160 letters are to the popular French novelist, Raymond Queneau. They span 29 years, but most precede her marriage to the Oxford Professor of English Literature, John Bailey. She admired Raymond Queneau greatly as her mentor, looking to him both for intellectual stimulus and practical help. Queneau was a friend of Sartre: his works are said to have been a link between the Surrealists and the Existentialists. He was very interested in language, and some of his novels were written phonetically, rather than using conventional spelling. In some letters, Iris Murdoch wrote of the characters and plots she was working on. They show her filled with self-doubt, and even “hatred and contempt” for her writing, wondering whether she would “ever write something good”.
One of these early works featured a “bogus scholar” and may have been instigated by Iris Murdoch’s own doubts about her intellectual stature. In 1947, when she took up the offer of a postgraduate scholarship to study Philosophy at Newnham College, Cambridge, she told Raymond Queneau that she had “started writing the novel about the Bogus scholar and the Archaic Goddess which has been in my head so long”. However, she later abandoned the novel, and confided to him her suspicion that what she had produced was “worthless”.
In May 1946 she had told Raymond Queneau that she was inspired by a book by Whately Carington, a British parapsychologist and psychical investigator. A year later, while at Cambridge, she sent him a copy of Carington’s book “Telepathy”, saying that she was again working on a novel based on the idea. She may have returned to some of these ideas in later novels.
Then in 1952, she referred to a work in progress: the story of struggling writer Jake Donoghue:
“For some time now I have been writing a novel, a continuation of one I started two years ago. If it turns out to be any use (about this I still don’t know), I shall dedicate it to you.”
Sure enough, Iris Murdoch’s first novel Under the Net is dedicated to him. Perhaps the extraordinary confidence and success of this first novel, was due in part to her willingness to abandon or destroy her early works.
Under the Net tells the humorous adventures of Jake Donoghue, a picaresque hero, who was - significantly like the author - of Irish descent. Perhaps it is the mixture of the philosophical and the picaresque, which have made it one of Iris Murdoch’s most enduringly popular novels. In 1998, the editors of the American publishers “Modern Library”, named the work as one of the greatest English-language novels of the twentieth century. In 2005 Under the Net was chosen by the American magazine, “Time”, as one of the hundred best 20th century English-language novels from 1923 onwards. Ironically enough, Iris Murdoch herself was refused a visa to visit the United States, despite the fact that she had earned a scholarship from Vassar College in New York, because earlier, she had been a member of the Communist Party.
During the 1930s, Iris Murdoch had read for a first degree in “Greats” (Ancient History, Classics, and Philosophy) at Somerville College, Oxford. After graduating, she worked as a civil servant. (It was during this time that she wrote the unpublished novels.)
During the Second World War, she joined the “United National Relief and Rehabilitation Administration”, working in Belgium. She became fascinated by Existentialism, and especially the work of Jean Paul Sartre, the French philosopher and novelist. She wrote the first monograph about Jean-Paul Sartre to be published in English. Jake, the viewpoint character of Under the Net can be seen as exemplifying Existentialist philosophy, in his search for life’s meaning, and his quest for the truth.
Jake’s quest begins as he walks down the street with his friend Finn, a man who seldom talks. However, Finn tells him that Madge: Magdalen Casement, a typist and Jake’s sometime girlfriend, has kicked them out of her house, where they have been living rent-free for eighteen months. Madge plans to get married to “Sacred Sammy”, (Sammy Starfield, a rich bookmaker).
As Jake packs to leave, two of the books he takes are “Murphy” by Samuel Beckett, and “Pierrot mon ami” by Raymond Queneau. This choice signals the form this story will take; both are heavily referenced. “Murphy” is a story about an alienated young man who cannot hold down a job . Language in Beckett’s work is almost useless, as most of his characters try vainly to express what Wittgenstein concluded is inexpressible. There is also an introductory epigraph, from John Dryden’s “Secular Masque”, which is also a pointer, as it refers to the way in which the main character is driven from place to place by his misunderstandings.
Wittgenstein said that any attempt to verbalise truth only results in lies and half-truths. This first scene gives us a perfect example. Jake had considered marrying Madge, but he could not commit to such a relationship. He does not want to leave Madge, but he does not want to marry her either. Madge does not really want to marry Sammy; she wants to marry Jake. But if Jake does not want to, she will find someone else to marry. Yet none of this is spoken. The character Finn, as he usually will, represents silence. It is only in silence that one remains truthful, according to Wittgenstein. There are to be many allusions to silence in this novel. And each character, as Jake makes contact with them, will reveal an aspect of the book’s philosophy.
First, Jake goes to Mrs. Tinckham’s newspaper shop, to safely deposit some of his manuscripts. People tend to trust Mrs. Tinckham, and to her they will divulge their personal stories, knowing that she will keep them secret. Mrs. Tinckham, like Finn, also represents silence, and truth, and that is why she can be trusted. But is she very intelligent or very naïve? Just as one would have trouble defining truth, Jake has trouble defining Mrs Tinckham. He concludes: “Whatever may be the truth, one thing is certain, that no one will ever know it.” To know truth is to translate it, to put it into words. According to Wittgenstein, truth is beyond knowing.
Jake’s quest next leads him to his friend Dave’s house. Dave Gellman is a philosopher, “a real one,” with whom Jake loves to discuss ideas. Yet no matter how much they talk, he finds that they never get anywhere. Jake tries to discuss various philosophical concepts from Hegel or Spinoza, which he did not fully understand. Dave often tells him that he does not understand Jake. “It took me some time,” Jake said “to realize that when Dave said he didn’t understand, what he meant was that what I said was nonsense.” This reflects Wittgenstein’s belief that all philosophers, including himself, could at best only write nonsense, because of the limitation of language. Jake finally gives up trying to talk philosophy with him, because “Dave could never get past the word.”
When Dave mentions Anna Quentin, Jake suddenly feels he has a strong impulse to see her. She is, to him: “deep … an unfathomable being.” When he finds her (to complete the metaphor), she is the director of a theatre of mime: the “Riverside Miming Theatre”. Anna works with performers who move on the stage in silence, in order to portray the story. The audience is asked not to applaud: to keep the silence. Jake is disturbed by this silence, and finds it hard to face Anna. Significantly, as soon as she speaks, Jake says, “The spell was broken.” She had defined herself when she spoke, and imposed a limitation on the truth.
Anna thus symbolises truth, although she is literally surrounded by fantastic appearances in the theatre. She is also, as truth is, very elusive. Jake is a seeker of truth, but it always frightens him. Although he is always drawn to her, Anna always seems to be slightly out of his reach. Even when he catches her, he is afraid to confront her. In contrast, Anna’s sister Sadie is an actress: flashy and dazzling, but someone who always pretends, and in her personal life is also deceitful.
Jake’s friends seem to present a paradox. Wittgenstein stated that language always imposes limitations on thought. This idea is proposed by one of the main characters, Hugo Belfounder. We hear a lot about Hugo Belfounder before he actually appears in the novel. Jake has looked up to Hugo ever since they met, at a medical research hospital, where the two of them had volunteered to be guinea pigs for a new cold remedy. Significantly, their first few days are silent, at Jake’s request, although they are roommates. It is Jake who breaks the silence, and from then on Jake is fascinated by this mild mannered and softly spoken intelligent man. The two have long philosophical discussions, which both enjoy so much that they enlist for a second medical experiment.
Yet Jake has now lost touch with Hugo, quite deliberately, as Jake feels ashamed of what he has done. He wrote down what he could remember of his conversations with Hugo, editing them, and trying to make some things clearer. Originally this because he missed the discussions, and was attempting to relive them; to somehow capture and make sense of the truth. But he went on to present these discourses between the fictional “Annandine and Tamarus”, and publish them in a book, which he called “The Silencer”. Again this is a supremely ironic title, as the book is a conversation - words - about truth, which Wittgenstein stated could only be known in silence. Iris Murdoch herself stated that with this novel she was attempting to refute Wittgenstein’s contention, which is why the book embarrassed her later in life. Her attempt to explain what Wittgenstein believed could never be made clear, struck her in retrospect as rather foolish.
Iris Murdoch was never a student of Wittgenstein, but she did once meet him, and befriended Wittgenstein’s star pupil, Yorich Smythies. It is likely that she based Hugo’s character on Yorich Smythies.
Jake considered Hugo to be the most objective person he had ever met. Hugo had no general theories, but a separate definition, and theory, about everything. If Jake tried to tie him down to some particular concept, he could not. He was impossible to define.
“What if I try to be accurate?” Jake asked. Hugo’s response was: “One can’t be … The only hope is to avoid saying it … Language just won’t let you present it as it really is … [it] is a machine for making falsehoods … One must just blunder on. Truth lies in blundering on.”
The role of Hugo is one which recurs in many of Iris Murdoch’s novels. He is a wise figure, a kind of saint, or enchanter, whom others revere. In Under the Net, it is Hugo who best represents truth. He dislikes definitions, and Hugo believed:
“For most of us, for almost all of us, truth can be attained, if at all, only in silence.”
In a way, the relationship between Jake and Hugo is one of artist versus saint. The role of the artist can be seen as to express and communicate ideas, putting them into some kind of form. The saint’s function, however, is contemplative: to be a medium through which ideas are born. Jake and Hugo are closest while they are part of a medical experiment. During this time they are able to spend their time discussing theories and philosophising. Hugo is seen to be the contemplative one, whose concepts are stronger than Jake’s. Hugo even states that some of the thoughts expressed in the book were a bit too deep for him.
When Jake translated Jean-Pierre Breteuil’s work, he said it was clumsy, and claimed to streamline it and improve it. In a similar way, he took Hugo’s thoughts, rearranged them, and made them more accessible. Hugo himself has no impulse to put his thoughts on paper.
Throughout the novel, in various comic situations, we see that when Jake surrounds himself with silence, he is at his most comfortable. His safe place, where he keeps all that is precious, is with the enigmatic Mrs. Tinckham, and her clan of wordless cats. His closest friend Finn, is virtually silent, and Jake is immensely happy when the two of them Other examples are when he is in France, where it is not his language, or when he translates work for Jean-Pierre Breteuil, The ending, turns all Jake’s preconceptions upside down, and shows him a way forward, and a new way of life. No longer will he attempt to decipher and interpret. Jake has always hidden behind others’ words. Now he will find his own voice.
Under the Net is an extraordinary novel which can be read on so many levels. The setting switches between London and Paris on a whim. Most of the characters seem to play at life: to dabble in one thing or another. Time and again we see facades and illusions, such a movie theatre set of an impressive Roman temple, which is shown to be a paper and plaster sham, crumpling to nothing. A simple reflection in a lake dissolves in an instant when it is disturbed. The truth is not how it appears.
Iris Murdoch’s biographer Richard Todd said she was a “powerfully intellectual and original theorist of fiction”. Her characters in Under the Net are almost absurdly implausible, yet all their actions and interactions are believable. They are types, unlike characters in her later novels. We have among others, a bookmaker, a movie mogul, a glamorous actress, a fireworks inventor, a singer and a left-wing activist. We have several episodes of drunken revelry, a tale of kidnap, (where the intended target is most unusual), and another where a character is locked into a penthouse suite. There are instances of gambling on horses, and winning against all the odds, and a theft which proves to be more trouble than it was worth. We have proposed movie deals, and attempts to overthrow society. Many of the situations in the middle are pure farce, and the riot between Socialist agitators and the police had me laughing out loud. My favourite parts of all were the madcap escapades with Jake and his adventurous canine friend.
Iris Murdoch has a wonderful way with words, and can write ridiculously humorous episodes in a most entertaining way. Yet the more I think about his novel, the increasing plethora of cunning allusions I see, and the more brilliant Iris Murdoch’s achievement proves to be.
“All speech lies, and art is only a special form of speech, yet great art can lie its way into the truth.”
“All theorizing is flight. We must be ruled by the situation itself and this is unutterably particular. Indeed it is something to which we can never get close enough, however hard we may try as it were to crawl under the net.”
(From “The Silencer”)
However, appearances can be deceptive, and a closer look reveals that this novel is far more than that. Some critics now view it as her best work, and an excellent introduction to the philosophy of Existentialism.
Our first clue to its depth is the title, Under the Net, which is a metaphor used by the Austrian philosopher Ludwig Wittgenstein, in his famous work, “Tractatus”, of 1921. Wittgenstein believed that the deepest truths can never be fully verbalised. Although people might conceive of them, such truths are diminished by the limitations of language. He stated that any attempt to talk about, explain, or write a truth is similar to placing a net over the truth. Its effect is to blur the image, and make the truth less than perfect. Newtonian mechanics, Wittgenstein said, captures the world through the equivalent of a net, or many nets. The squares of the net determine how things are seen, which is different from that of a net with a triangular, or hexagonal weave:
“To the different networks correspond different systems of describing the world, [and thus] this form is arbitrary.”
This mesh may be fine or coarse, or its holes may be of different shapes, but it will always be regular, and represent an imperfect truth. We may have a unified form to describe the universe, but the selection of the form leads to a built-in inaccuracy.
The novel can be seen as a process of revelation to Jake, that our subjective descriptions are apparent, and unreliable. They conform to our “Net”, and are not the world itself, which may slip away, Under the Net. However, Wittgenstein later referred to this work as meaningless nonsense, and in 1953 he totally rejected the concepts which he had originally published in “Tractatus”.
Interestingly, Under the Net was published just a year later in 1954, and later in her own life Iris Murdoch too, professed to be embarrassed by her novel, saying that the writing was immature and juvenile. Nevertheless Wittgenstein’s influence remained clear in all her novels; she repeatedly demonstrated that life could only be shown, and not explained.
Under the Net represents both the political and philosophical views which Iris Murdoch herself held at the time, but also her self-image. Although we think of her as a self-assured writer with many acclaimed works to her name, this was not always the case. This is not actually Iris Murdoch’s first novel, but merely the first one to be published; she had attempted to write five novels before this one. In 2010, a cache of letters was discovered, which reveal both the writer’s frame of mind at the time, and clarify to some extent its philosophical significance, which derives heavily from both Jean-Paul Sartre and Ludwig Wittgenstein. Her letters also show her insecurity, and how she struggled with her early, unpublished novels. She was finally to destroy a number of these early manuscripts in 1986.
The 160 letters are to the popular French novelist, Raymond Queneau. They span 29 years, but most precede her marriage to the Oxford Professor of English Literature, John Bailey. She admired Raymond Queneau greatly as her mentor, looking to him both for intellectual stimulus and practical help. Queneau was a friend of Sartre: his works are said to have been a link between the Surrealists and the Existentialists. He was very interested in language, and some of his novels were written phonetically, rather than using conventional spelling. In some letters, Iris Murdoch wrote of the characters and plots she was working on. They show her filled with self-doubt, and even “hatred and contempt” for her writing, wondering whether she would “ever write something good”.
One of these early works featured a “bogus scholar” and may have been instigated by Iris Murdoch’s own doubts about her intellectual stature. In 1947, when she took up the offer of a postgraduate scholarship to study Philosophy at Newnham College, Cambridge, she told Raymond Queneau that she had “started writing the novel about the Bogus scholar and the Archaic Goddess which has been in my head so long”. However, she later abandoned the novel, and confided to him her suspicion that what she had produced was “worthless”.
In May 1946 she had told Raymond Queneau that she was inspired by a book by Whately Carington, a British parapsychologist and psychical investigator. A year later, while at Cambridge, she sent him a copy of Carington’s book “Telepathy”, saying that she was again working on a novel based on the idea. She may have returned to some of these ideas in later novels.
Then in 1952, she referred to a work in progress: the story of struggling writer Jake Donoghue:
“For some time now I have been writing a novel, a continuation of one I started two years ago. If it turns out to be any use (about this I still don’t know), I shall dedicate it to you.”
Sure enough, Iris Murdoch’s first novel Under the Net is dedicated to him. Perhaps the extraordinary confidence and success of this first novel, was due in part to her willingness to abandon or destroy her early works.
Under the Net tells the humorous adventures of Jake Donoghue, a picaresque hero, who was - significantly like the author - of Irish descent. Perhaps it is the mixture of the philosophical and the picaresque, which have made it one of Iris Murdoch’s most enduringly popular novels. In 1998, the editors of the American publishers “Modern Library”, named the work as one of the greatest English-language novels of the twentieth century. In 2005 Under the Net was chosen by the American magazine, “Time”, as one of the hundred best 20th century English-language novels from 1923 onwards. Ironically enough, Iris Murdoch herself was refused a visa to visit the United States, despite the fact that she had earned a scholarship from Vassar College in New York, because earlier, she had been a member of the Communist Party.
During the 1930s, Iris Murdoch had read for a first degree in “Greats” (Ancient History, Classics, and Philosophy) at Somerville College, Oxford. After graduating, she worked as a civil servant. (It was during this time that she wrote the unpublished novels.)
During the Second World War, she joined the “United National Relief and Rehabilitation Administration”, working in Belgium. She became fascinated by Existentialism, and especially the work of Jean Paul Sartre, the French philosopher and novelist. She wrote the first monograph about Jean-Paul Sartre to be published in English. Jake, the viewpoint character of Under the Net can be seen as exemplifying Existentialist philosophy, in his search for life’s meaning, and his quest for the truth.
Jake’s quest begins as he walks down the street with his friend Finn, a man who seldom talks. However, Finn tells him that Madge: Magdalen Casement, a typist and Jake’s sometime girlfriend, has kicked them out of her house, where they have been living rent-free for eighteen months. Madge plans to get married to “Sacred Sammy”, (Sammy Starfield, a rich bookmaker).
As Jake packs to leave, two of the books he takes are “Murphy” by Samuel Beckett, and “Pierrot mon ami” by Raymond Queneau. This choice signals the form this story will take; both are heavily referenced. “Murphy” is a story about an alienated young man who cannot hold down a job . Language in Beckett’s work is almost useless, as most of his characters try vainly to express what Wittgenstein concluded is inexpressible. There is also an introductory epigraph, from John Dryden’s “Secular Masque”, which is also a pointer, as it refers to the way in which the main character is driven from place to place by his misunderstandings.
Wittgenstein said that any attempt to verbalise truth only results in lies and half-truths. This first scene gives us a perfect example. Jake had considered marrying Madge, but he could not commit to such a relationship. He does not want to leave Madge, but he does not want to marry her either. Madge does not really want to marry Sammy; she wants to marry Jake. But if Jake does not want to, she will find someone else to marry. Yet none of this is spoken. The character Finn, as he usually will, represents silence. It is only in silence that one remains truthful, according to Wittgenstein. There are to be many allusions to silence in this novel. And each character, as Jake makes contact with them, will reveal an aspect of the book’s philosophy.
First, Jake goes to Mrs. Tinckham’s newspaper shop, to safely deposit some of his manuscripts. People tend to trust Mrs. Tinckham, and to her they will divulge their personal stories, knowing that she will keep them secret. Mrs. Tinckham, like Finn, also represents silence, and truth, and that is why she can be trusted. But is she very intelligent or very naïve? Just as one would have trouble defining truth, Jake has trouble defining Mrs Tinckham. He concludes: “Whatever may be the truth, one thing is certain, that no one will ever know it.” To know truth is to translate it, to put it into words. According to Wittgenstein, truth is beyond knowing.
Jake’s quest next leads him to his friend Dave’s house. Dave Gellman is a philosopher, “a real one,” with whom Jake loves to discuss ideas. Yet no matter how much they talk, he finds that they never get anywhere. Jake tries to discuss various philosophical concepts from Hegel or Spinoza, which he did not fully understand. Dave often tells him that he does not understand Jake. “It took me some time,” Jake said “to realize that when Dave said he didn’t understand, what he meant was that what I said was nonsense.” This reflects Wittgenstein’s belief that all philosophers, including himself, could at best only write nonsense, because of the limitation of language. Jake finally gives up trying to talk philosophy with him, because “Dave could never get past the word.”
When Dave mentions Anna Quentin, Jake suddenly feels he has a strong impulse to see her. She is, to him: “deep … an unfathomable being.” When he finds her (to complete the metaphor), she is the director of a theatre of mime: the “Riverside Miming Theatre”. Anna works with performers who move on the stage in silence, in order to portray the story. The audience is asked not to applaud: to keep the silence. Jake is disturbed by this silence, and finds it hard to face Anna. Significantly, as soon as she speaks, Jake says, “The spell was broken.” She had defined herself when she spoke, and imposed a limitation on the truth.
Anna thus symbolises truth, although she is literally surrounded by fantastic appearances in the theatre. She is also, as truth is, very elusive. Jake is a seeker of truth, but it always frightens him. Although he is always drawn to her, Anna always seems to be slightly out of his reach. Even when he catches her, he is afraid to confront her. In contrast, Anna’s sister Sadie is an actress: flashy and dazzling, but someone who always pretends, and in her personal life is also deceitful.
Jake’s friends seem to present a paradox. Wittgenstein stated that language always imposes limitations on thought. This idea is proposed by one of the main characters, Hugo Belfounder. We hear a lot about Hugo Belfounder before he actually appears in the novel. Jake has looked up to Hugo ever since they met, at a medical research hospital, where the two of them had volunteered to be guinea pigs for a new cold remedy. Significantly, their first few days are silent, at Jake’s request, although they are roommates. It is Jake who breaks the silence, and from then on Jake is fascinated by this mild mannered and softly spoken intelligent man. The two have long philosophical discussions, which both enjoy so much that they enlist for a second medical experiment.
Yet Jake has now lost touch with Hugo, quite deliberately, as Jake feels ashamed of what he has done. He wrote down what he could remember of his conversations with Hugo, editing them, and trying to make some things clearer. Originally this because he missed the discussions, and was attempting to relive them; to somehow capture and make sense of the truth. But he went on to present these discourses between the fictional “Annandine and Tamarus”, and publish them in a book, which he called “The Silencer”. Again this is a supremely ironic title, as the book is a conversation - words - about truth, which Wittgenstein stated could only be known in silence. Iris Murdoch herself stated that with this novel she was attempting to refute Wittgenstein’s contention, which is why the book embarrassed her later in life. Her attempt to explain what Wittgenstein believed could never be made clear, struck her in retrospect as rather foolish.
Iris Murdoch was never a student of Wittgenstein, but she did once meet him, and befriended Wittgenstein’s star pupil, Yorich Smythies. It is likely that she based Hugo’s character on Yorich Smythies.
Jake considered Hugo to be the most objective person he had ever met. Hugo had no general theories, but a separate definition, and theory, about everything. If Jake tried to tie him down to some particular concept, he could not. He was impossible to define.
“What if I try to be accurate?” Jake asked. Hugo’s response was: “One can’t be … The only hope is to avoid saying it … Language just won’t let you present it as it really is … [it] is a machine for making falsehoods … One must just blunder on. Truth lies in blundering on.”
The role of Hugo is one which recurs in many of Iris Murdoch’s novels. He is a wise figure, a kind of saint, or enchanter, whom others revere. In Under the Net, it is Hugo who best represents truth. He dislikes definitions, and Hugo believed:
“For most of us, for almost all of us, truth can be attained, if at all, only in silence.”
In a way, the relationship between Jake and Hugo is one of artist versus saint. The role of the artist can be seen as to express and communicate ideas, putting them into some kind of form. The saint’s function, however, is contemplative: to be a medium through which ideas are born. Jake and Hugo are closest while they are part of a medical experiment. During this time they are able to spend their time discussing theories and philosophising. Hugo is seen to be the contemplative one, whose concepts are stronger than Jake’s. Hugo even states that some of the thoughts expressed in the book were a bit too deep for him.
When Jake translated Jean-Pierre Breteuil’s work, he said it was clumsy, and claimed to streamline it and improve it. In a similar way, he took Hugo’s thoughts, rearranged them, and made them more accessible. Hugo himself has no impulse to put his thoughts on paper.
Throughout the novel, in various comic situations, we see that when Jake surrounds himself with silence, he is at his most comfortable. His safe place, where he keeps all that is precious, is with the enigmatic Mrs. Tinckham, and her clan of wordless cats. His closest friend Finn, is virtually silent, and Jake is immensely happy when the two of them Other examples are when he is in France, where it is not his language, or when he translates work for Jean-Pierre Breteuil, The ending, turns all Jake’s preconceptions upside down, and shows him a way forward, and a new way of life. No longer will he attempt to decipher and interpret. Jake has always hidden behind others’ words. Now he will find his own voice.
Under the Net is an extraordinary novel which can be read on so many levels. The setting switches between London and Paris on a whim. Most of the characters seem to play at life: to dabble in one thing or another. Time and again we see facades and illusions, such a movie theatre set of an impressive Roman temple, which is shown to be a paper and plaster sham, crumpling to nothing. A simple reflection in a lake dissolves in an instant when it is disturbed. The truth is not how it appears.
Iris Murdoch’s biographer Richard Todd said she was a “powerfully intellectual and original theorist of fiction”. Her characters in Under the Net are almost absurdly implausible, yet all their actions and interactions are believable. They are types, unlike characters in her later novels. We have among others, a bookmaker, a movie mogul, a glamorous actress, a fireworks inventor, a singer and a left-wing activist. We have several episodes of drunken revelry, a tale of kidnap, (where the intended target is most unusual), and another where a character is locked into a penthouse suite. There are instances of gambling on horses, and winning against all the odds, and a theft which proves to be more trouble than it was worth. We have proposed movie deals, and attempts to overthrow society. Many of the situations in the middle are pure farce, and the riot between Socialist agitators and the police had me laughing out loud. My favourite parts of all were the madcap escapades with Jake and his adventurous canine friend.
Iris Murdoch has a wonderful way with words, and can write ridiculously humorous episodes in a most entertaining way. Yet the more I think about his novel, the increasing plethora of cunning allusions I see, and the more brilliant Iris Murdoch’s achievement proves to be.
“All speech lies, and art is only a special form of speech, yet great art can lie its way into the truth.”
“All theorizing is flight. We must be ruled by the situation itself and this is unutterably particular. Indeed it is something to which we can never get close enough, however hard we may try as it were to crawl under the net.”
(From “The Silencer”)
September 19, 2023
Iris Murdoch is one of my favorite authors. This is the 6th book of hers that I have read and I never thought I would rate one of them a ‘3’ but here it is. I'll explain below. It's still a good story.
We have a hapless antihero, Jake, probably 30ish, bumming around London. He considers himself an intellectual but also recognizes that he’s basically a ‘literary hack.’ He gets some money by translating crappy books from French. But Jake is a guy who has never held down a full-time job.
Jake survives by house-sitting and crashing in friends’ houses and attics of old girlfriends. He's a good guy and women generally like him. He has a sidekick named Finn, a Sancho Panza who is the stereotypical hard-drinking Irishman. Finn provides the muscle and gopher work for Jake’s various adventures.
Jake always makes the wrong decision. It must be a genetic thing with him. Even when he works through all the pros and cons in his mind, and the cons vastly outweigh the pros, he ends up talking himself into doing the wrong thing. “If one has good reasons for an action one should not be deterred from doing it because one may also have bad reasons.” That's a good part his escapades that make up most of the story -- that and a complicated love triangle – a love rectangle actually. I will make up names so I don't give anything away. Bob loves Lois who loves Tony who loves Diane who loves Bob. So the plot thickens.
Jake interacts with some wealthy people. There are two sisters, one a famous actress, and three wealthy men who are entrepreneurs.
Jake thinks a valuable manuscript he wrote has been stolen from him and he gets Finn to help him kidnap a valuable show dog as ransom to get the manuscript back.
The author’s day job was as a professor at Oxford so all her novels have concepts from philosophy or philosophy of life themes worked into them. Two are evident in this story. One is political, based around a socialist political activist appropriately named ‘Lefty.’ He corners Jake in a bar. They are both socialists but Jake doesn’t give a rap about politics, so Lefty engages him in a Socratic dialog to run him through the paces: Is it that you don’t care or is it that you feel it’s hopeless to try to do anything? Well, Jake tells him, it’s a bit of both and they’re interconnected aren’t they?
A second, bigger theme, developed in several discussions with another character, is ‘do you need a general theory or philosophy of life to get by?’ Or can you be a pragmatist and make your decisions by the seat of your pants. Obviously Jake has opted for the latter, and we even get to read excerpts from a book Jake is writing about all this.
And one more bit of heavy-duty philosophy. Remember the love rectangle? “Some situations can’t be unraveled.” lol
Some examples of the humor that I liked:
“I have often asked Finn why he shakes his head when he has a hangover, and he tells me that it's to make the spots move away from in front of his eyes.”
“He [Finn] loves trouble, his own or other people’s without discrimination…”
“After all, she had no father, and I felt in loco parentis. It was about the only locus I had left.”
“I needed to think, and I can never think in a taxi for looking at the cash meter.”
“He was dressed in tweeds and had the look of an outdoor man who had lived too much by electric light.”
“By now I had enough alcohol inside me to feel despair at the prospect of having to stop drinking.”
Are there is other good writing:
“Arriving in Paris always causes me pain, even when I have been away for only a short while. It is a city which I never fail to approach with expectation and leave with disappointment. There is a question which only I can ask and which only Paris can answer; but this question is something which I have never yet been able to formulate. Certain things indeed I have learnt here: for instance, that my happiness has a sad face, so sad that for years I took it for my unhappiness and drove it away.”
“What is more tormenting than a meeting after a long time, when all of the words fall to the ground like dead things, and the spirit that should animate them floats disembodied in the air? We both felt its presence.”
Still it's a good story and I enjoyed the humor in the writing. So why rate it a ‘3’? It turns out, and I did not know this while I was reading the book, that this was the first novel that Murdoch published, 1954. Obviously her skills improved over time.
I didn't enjoy the slapstick Three Stooges, overly-long escapade about kidnapping the dog and escaping with it through London. I also thought there were several other overly-long passages of 5 or more pages that didn't go anywhere. For example, Jake wandering through Paris in pursuit of a woman through streets and parks, or another slapstick episode where a movie stage set of Rome collapses, and a breaking and entering scene to get to see someone in a hospital.
But I’ll back-pedal a bit more. I note that Under the Net has a similar overall ranking on GR as her other novels. Of all her novels, Under the Net was selected in 1998 as one of Modern Library's 100 best English-language novels of the 20th century. (I think it should have been her Booker prize winner, The Sea, the Sea.)
Top photo, London in the 1950s from alamy.com
London from gettyimages.com
The author from irismurdochsociety.org.uk
[Edited for typos, pictures added 1/26/22, edited for spoilers 9/19/23/]
We have a hapless antihero, Jake, probably 30ish, bumming around London. He considers himself an intellectual but also recognizes that he’s basically a ‘literary hack.’ He gets some money by translating crappy books from French. But Jake is a guy who has never held down a full-time job.
Jake survives by house-sitting and crashing in friends’ houses and attics of old girlfriends. He's a good guy and women generally like him. He has a sidekick named Finn, a Sancho Panza who is the stereotypical hard-drinking Irishman. Finn provides the muscle and gopher work for Jake’s various adventures.
Jake always makes the wrong decision. It must be a genetic thing with him. Even when he works through all the pros and cons in his mind, and the cons vastly outweigh the pros, he ends up talking himself into doing the wrong thing. “If one has good reasons for an action one should not be deterred from doing it because one may also have bad reasons.” That's a good part his escapades that make up most of the story -- that and a complicated love triangle – a love rectangle actually. I will make up names so I don't give anything away. Bob loves Lois who loves Tony who loves Diane who loves Bob. So the plot thickens.
Jake interacts with some wealthy people. There are two sisters, one a famous actress, and three wealthy men who are entrepreneurs.
Jake thinks a valuable manuscript he wrote has been stolen from him and he gets Finn to help him kidnap a valuable show dog as ransom to get the manuscript back.
The author’s day job was as a professor at Oxford so all her novels have concepts from philosophy or philosophy of life themes worked into them. Two are evident in this story. One is political, based around a socialist political activist appropriately named ‘Lefty.’ He corners Jake in a bar. They are both socialists but Jake doesn’t give a rap about politics, so Lefty engages him in a Socratic dialog to run him through the paces: Is it that you don’t care or is it that you feel it’s hopeless to try to do anything? Well, Jake tells him, it’s a bit of both and they’re interconnected aren’t they?
A second, bigger theme, developed in several discussions with another character, is ‘do you need a general theory or philosophy of life to get by?’ Or can you be a pragmatist and make your decisions by the seat of your pants. Obviously Jake has opted for the latter, and we even get to read excerpts from a book Jake is writing about all this.
And one more bit of heavy-duty philosophy. Remember the love rectangle? “Some situations can’t be unraveled.” lol
Some examples of the humor that I liked:
“I have often asked Finn why he shakes his head when he has a hangover, and he tells me that it's to make the spots move away from in front of his eyes.”
“He [Finn] loves trouble, his own or other people’s without discrimination…”
“After all, she had no father, and I felt in loco parentis. It was about the only locus I had left.”
“I needed to think, and I can never think in a taxi for looking at the cash meter.”
“He was dressed in tweeds and had the look of an outdoor man who had lived too much by electric light.”
“By now I had enough alcohol inside me to feel despair at the prospect of having to stop drinking.”
Are there is other good writing:
“Arriving in Paris always causes me pain, even when I have been away for only a short while. It is a city which I never fail to approach with expectation and leave with disappointment. There is a question which only I can ask and which only Paris can answer; but this question is something which I have never yet been able to formulate. Certain things indeed I have learnt here: for instance, that my happiness has a sad face, so sad that for years I took it for my unhappiness and drove it away.”
“What is more tormenting than a meeting after a long time, when all of the words fall to the ground like dead things, and the spirit that should animate them floats disembodied in the air? We both felt its presence.”
Still it's a good story and I enjoyed the humor in the writing. So why rate it a ‘3’? It turns out, and I did not know this while I was reading the book, that this was the first novel that Murdoch published, 1954. Obviously her skills improved over time.
I didn't enjoy the slapstick Three Stooges, overly-long escapade about kidnapping the dog and escaping with it through London. I also thought there were several other overly-long passages of 5 or more pages that didn't go anywhere. For example, Jake wandering through Paris in pursuit of a woman through streets and parks, or another slapstick episode where a movie stage set of Rome collapses, and a breaking and entering scene to get to see someone in a hospital.
But I’ll back-pedal a bit more. I note that Under the Net has a similar overall ranking on GR as her other novels. Of all her novels, Under the Net was selected in 1998 as one of Modern Library's 100 best English-language novels of the 20th century. (I think it should have been her Booker prize winner, The Sea, the Sea.)
Top photo, London in the 1950s from alamy.com
London from gettyimages.com
The author from irismurdochsociety.org.uk
[Edited for typos, pictures added 1/26/22, edited for spoilers 9/19/23/]
September 10, 2023
"Toda teorización es una huida. Debe dirigirnos la situación en sí, y eso es inexpresablemente concreto. Desde luego, es algo a lo que nunca podemos acercarnos lo bastante, por mucho que intentemos, por así decirlo, meternos bajo la red".La más humorística de las obras que hasta ahora he leído de la autora, alguien a quien admiro profundamente y a la que saboreo me hable de lo que me hable. Y aquí, en su primera novela, me ha hablado de algunas de las cosas que le importan y de las que ya me ha hablado en sus obras posteriores.
Entre estas páginas nuevamente he disfrutado de su inteligencia y de su arte, de la aparente ligereza con la que nos habla de esta nadería entre dos vacíos que en el fondo es nuestra vida, o de la incompetencia del lenguaje para expresarnos y que como una red nos envuelve y nos conforma, o de la inutilidad de las teorías que inevitablemente configuramos sobre todo, incluidas las personas con las que nos relacionamos, incluidos nosotros mismos aunque en realidad “nunca sabes que querrás hacer cuando llegue el momento”. Y ello aunque la historia que envuelve todo me ha interesado bastante menos que en otras ocasiones. No pasa nada, en Murdoch siempre vamos a encontrar perlitas maravillosas como esta que aquí traigo:
“Los acontecimientos se suceden ante nosotros como estas multitudes, y el rostro de cada uno de ellos se ve únicamente un instante. Lo que es urgente no lo es para siempre, sino efímeramente. Todo el trabajo y todo el amor, la búsqueda de la riqueza y la fama, la búsqueda de la verdad, la vida misma están formadas por momentos que se convierten en nada. Sin embargo, el impulso de esas nadas nos lleva hacia adelante con esa milagrosa vitalidad que crea nuestros precarios habitáculos en el pasado y en el futuro. Así vivimos; un espíritu que cavila y vacila por encima de la muerte continua en el tiempo, el sentido perdido, el momento no recuperado, el rostro no recordado, hasta el golpe final que termina con todos nuestros momentos y zambulle ese espíritu en el vacío del que procede.”Sin premeditación alguna, encadené su lectura con la del Murphy de Beckett, un libro que no por casualidad se cita en la novela de Murdoch. En aquel se dice:
"Así era el amor de Neary por Miss Dwyer, la cual amaba a un cierto teniente Elliman de la aviación, que amaba a una cierta Miss Farren de Ringsakiddy, que amaba al Padre Fitt de Ballinclashet, quien con todas sinceridad se veía forzado a admitir una cierta inclinación por una tal Mrs. West de Passage, que amaba a Neary. El amor correspondido –dijo Neary- es un conrtocircuito.”Un enredo sentimental de este tipo es el que se produce en la novela de Murdoch, y no es la única coincidencia con el libro de Beckett. Aparte del humor y de la importancia que un hospital tiene en ambas tramas, su personaje principal, Jake Donaghue es un individuo alérgico al trabajo que consigue vivir a costa de sus amantes y conocidos.
La red que Jack proyectaba sobre sí mismo le devolvía la imagen de un ser volátil desplazándose al azar de un punto a otro y precisando únicamente la compañía que se puede encontrar en cualquier pub. La falta de fe en su propio trabajo como escritor le empujaba a una serie infinita de reflexiones ensoñadoramente estériles en las que él era el centro del universo y a despilfarrar su talento en traducciones irrelevantes de novelas francesas de las que en realidad se burlaba.
Con estos antecedentes, la novela discurrirá en una especie de comedia disparatada de formación y crecimiento en la que Jake se ve envuelto en un sinfín de aventuras grotescas repletas de casualidades imposibles, de planes absurdos y siempre fracasados, de comportamientos fuera de toda lógica, de toda teoría, que le irán provocando un cambio de perspectiva, de red, que provocará un giro copernicano en sus creencia sobre su entorno, sobre sí mismo y sobre sus supuestos grandes naufragios vitales, como el haber dejado escapar al que pensaba habría sido su gran amor, Anna Quentin, y el haber traicionado y abandonado a su amigo Hugo Belfounder, al que conoció en un experimento médico en el que ambos servían como cobayas, tras escribir un libro de título tan revelador como The Silencer basado en las ideas filosóficas que Hugo le transmitió y que tanta impresión le causaron.
Como toda comedia que se precie, la novela de Murdoch tiene un final esperanzador para Jake. El cambio en la red con la que se explicaba el mundo ha conseguido despertar en él esa alegría propia de “la mañana del primer día”, una nueva existencia que aborda con una fuerza que es aun mejor que la felicidad. Buen viaje, Jake Donaghue.
"¿Cuándo conocemos a un ser humano? Tal vez sólo cuando uno ha comprobado la imposibilidad de conocerlo y ha renunciado al deseo de ello y al final ni siquiera siente su necesidad. Pero lo que uno consigue ya no es conocimiento, es simplemente una especie de coexistencia; y esa es también una de las máscaras del amor".
August 23, 2021
UN AMORE VERO
Iris Murdoch negli anni ’50. Oops, questa è Kate Winslet che la interpreta da giovane nel film “Iris” diretto da Richard Eyre tratto dal libro di John Bayley, marito della Murdoch.
Il primo romanzo di Iris Murdoch, il suo esordio letterario a metà degli anni Cinquanta.
Inglese irlandese, nel senso che nata a Dublino, dopo dodici mesi era già a Londra.
Ho iniziato a leggerla sicuramente perché la trovavo nominata spesso leggendo Arbasino. E ho cominciato proprio da qui e non da un altro dei suoi venticinque romanzi immagino per via della dedica: “a Raymond Queneau”.
Murdoch fu amica di Queneau per decenni, probabilmente innamorata (almeno a giudicare dalla fitta corrispondenza) ma non ricambiata. Passione platonica, si dice. In ogni caso, grande sentimento, grande storia, grande ammirazione per lo scrittore francese.
E quindi, benvenuta nella mia libreria.
Judy Dench è Iris Murdoch più agée.
Londra anni ’50.
Il protagonista è un traduttore che vorrebbe essere scrittore, picaro e bohémien, eccentrico e stravagante: poco impiego, molto ozio, niente negozio. È indolente, pigro, sempre pronto ad abbandonarsi alle avventure, che siano amorose o della conoscenza.
Un po’ caotica, un po’ a zig zag, e strampalata, oltre che la sua vita, è la sua cerchia d’amici, a cominciare dalla grassa giornalaia che è piena di gatti (la prima edizione italiana fu intitolata I gatti ci guardano, sigh).
Si va al pub, si beve, si parla (lui, Jake, l’io narrante protagonista), l’amico del cuore Finn ascolta senza aprire bocca, e così sembra molto intelligente. Chiacchiere, pensieri, filosofeggiare, letteratura.
Probabilmente quello che era la vita della Murdoch all’epoca, insegnante di filosofia a Oxford.
Jim Broadbent interpreta il marito John Bayley, sul cui memoir il film è basato.
Volendo, un romanzo di formazione (di cui io vado ghiotto).
Le meditazioni ad alta voce, i dialoghi, gli sproloqui sono arguti, divertenti, profondi. Quel tanto che m’ha fatto proseguire la conoscenza leggendo qualche altro romanzo della Murdoch (che ne pubblicò ventisei).
PS
Il titolo dovrebbe essere una qualche forma di citazione di Wittgenstein, che fu docente di Iris all’università. Non so se fu lui a instradarla verso la filosofia alla quale rimase sempre legata, scrivendone e insegnandola.
Iris Murdoch negli anni ’50. Oops, questa è Kate Winslet che la interpreta da giovane nel film “Iris” diretto da Richard Eyre tratto dal libro di John Bayley, marito della Murdoch.
Il primo romanzo di Iris Murdoch, il suo esordio letterario a metà degli anni Cinquanta.
Inglese irlandese, nel senso che nata a Dublino, dopo dodici mesi era già a Londra.
Ho iniziato a leggerla sicuramente perché la trovavo nominata spesso leggendo Arbasino. E ho cominciato proprio da qui e non da un altro dei suoi venticinque romanzi immagino per via della dedica: “a Raymond Queneau”.
Murdoch fu amica di Queneau per decenni, probabilmente innamorata (almeno a giudicare dalla fitta corrispondenza) ma non ricambiata. Passione platonica, si dice. In ogni caso, grande sentimento, grande storia, grande ammirazione per lo scrittore francese.
E quindi, benvenuta nella mia libreria.
Judy Dench è Iris Murdoch più agée.
Londra anni ’50.
Il protagonista è un traduttore che vorrebbe essere scrittore, picaro e bohémien, eccentrico e stravagante: poco impiego, molto ozio, niente negozio. È indolente, pigro, sempre pronto ad abbandonarsi alle avventure, che siano amorose o della conoscenza.
Un po’ caotica, un po’ a zig zag, e strampalata, oltre che la sua vita, è la sua cerchia d’amici, a cominciare dalla grassa giornalaia che è piena di gatti (la prima edizione italiana fu intitolata I gatti ci guardano, sigh).
Si va al pub, si beve, si parla (lui, Jake, l’io narrante protagonista), l’amico del cuore Finn ascolta senza aprire bocca, e così sembra molto intelligente. Chiacchiere, pensieri, filosofeggiare, letteratura.
Probabilmente quello che era la vita della Murdoch all’epoca, insegnante di filosofia a Oxford.
Jim Broadbent interpreta il marito John Bayley, sul cui memoir il film è basato.
Volendo, un romanzo di formazione (di cui io vado ghiotto).
Le meditazioni ad alta voce, i dialoghi, gli sproloqui sono arguti, divertenti, profondi. Quel tanto che m’ha fatto proseguire la conoscenza leggendo qualche altro romanzo della Murdoch (che ne pubblicò ventisei).
PS
Il titolo dovrebbe essere una qualche forma di citazione di Wittgenstein, che fu docente di Iris all’università. Non so se fu lui a instradarla verso la filosofia alla quale rimase sempre legata, scrivendone e insegnandola.
July 11, 2017
I may be alone in thinking this, but Iris Murdoch's main character here, Jake Donaghue, reminds me of Holden Caulfield of The Catcher in the Rye fame. Both are seriously separated from normality, and both take us on their disjointed, almost chaotic, trips around their respective cities; Jake in London and Holden in New York. Salinger's novel was published in 1951, Murdoch's in 1954, but I don't think there was any influence there, at least consciously, but their similarities struck me. But now over 60 years later, Holden Caulfield is certainly more famous than Jake Donaghue. Nevertheless, both novels are well entrenched in 20th century literary history, both appearing in Time Magazine's and Modern Library's best 100 novels list.
July 21, 2020
I put aside the book I was reading and rang for Jeeves. As he shimmied into existence beside me, I gave him a scathing look: I wanted him to know I was miffed.
"Jeeves!" I said. "You remember you recommended this tome to me?" I showed it to him.
"Ah, yes, sir." He said. "You said you wanted to read serious literature, and I thought you would find this one enjoyable. Miss Murdoch is thought of very highly in literary circles, sir."
"I don't care what they think of her!" I bellowed. "If you ask me, the woman is batty. I have never read such utter bilge in my life!"
Jeeves was quiet. I glanced up at him, and found the corner of his mouth turned down one-sixteenth of an inch. Blast the chap, he was sneering at me!
"Jeeves," I said, steel in my voice, "I'll thank you not to laugh at me."
"Oh, no, sir," the man was all apologies immediately. "Such behaviour is furthest from my mind, I assure you."
"Then why were you sneering? Don't deny it!" I cut off his objections before he could mouth them. "You were smiling. I saw it."
"Well, sir, I must confess that I was a trifle amused by your forthright opinion of Miss Murdoch's work and her person. I was just trying to imagine what kind of impression it would create on Goodreads if you expressed it there. I am sorry if I caused anguish, sir." Jeeves said.
Now, those of you who have been religiously following these chronicles of mine know that Jeeves has been infesting that blasted book reviewing site, Goodreads, for quite some time. I had a brief stint there and found that it was not suited to chappies like me who read books only for enjoyment.
"Never mind those blighters at Goodreads! What do you feel, Jeeves? Did you like it?" I asked.
"Actually, sir, my taste runs more towards philosophical works by the great masters such as Spinoza. I read fiction very sparingly, so my opinion is necessarily limited by my lack of experience. But from my imperfect viewpoint, I would count this novel as an accomplished work, sir." He said.
"Accomplished work my foot!" I exploded. "This tale of a dotty bounder who wanders around London, going on one continuous toot - I mean, there is hardly a scene where he is not having a drink - and getting the raspberry from one popsy after the other, until he winds up on the road with an aged Alsatian dog is considered an 'accomplished' work?"
Jeeves's tone was reproachful. "Reduced to the bare essentials, sir, any work of art will look puerile. It is not what is written, but how it is written that matters in all forms of high literature. Interpolating a philosophical argument into a picaresque novel, and carrying it off without the pace flagging or the thread being lost, requires quite a deft hand. Miss Murdoch has accomplished it seamlessly, sir."
"Jeeves," I said reproachfully. "This is pure apple sauce. Philosophy? What philosophy is there in this load of tripe other than the nonsense the hero - what is his name? Yes, Jake Donaghue - and his friend Hugo Belfounder keeps on jabbering about, and which he had the crust to publish as a book? I thought the whole thing was a joke. No wonder, in the novel itself, that the book didn't sell. And what did you mean by that word - pic-something?"
Jeeves was quiet, and when I looked up, I found that he was smirking again. Seeing me watching, he immediately went back to his usual impassive self. "Picaresque means episodic, sir," he explained. "A type of narrative in which the protagonist moves from happening to happening. In this novel, the author has created the incidents in such a way as to make them traverse the whole range from the humdrum to the fantastic without straining the reader's credibility, and without losing sight of the underlying philosophy. A creditable achievement, sir."
"Jeeves," I said in a strained tone of voice. "Can you tell me what is this philosophy that you are going on about?"
"Logical atomism, sir." Jeeves was ready with his answer. "As explained in the great philosopher Ludwig Wittgenstein's Tractus Logico-Philosophicus. Newtonian mechanics, the philosopher says, capture the world through the equivalent of a net, or many nets. The mesh may be fine or coarse, and its holes of different shapes, but it will always be regular, will always bring description ‘to a unified form’. But the world will always defy our descriptions and slip 'under the net' - that is where the novel's title comes from, sir."
I was by this time gasping like a landed fish, but he went on.
"Mr. Donaghue is the one who is constantly in search for form, sir. If you recall, he says many a time he hates contigency. He is contrasted with Mr. Belfounder, who is not interested in any grand theory, but sees only the details. You must also have observed, sir, that Mr. Belfounder is a success at whatever he does without trying while Mr. Donaghue struggles till the very end, when he learns to let go of his net. Mrs. Tinckham's cat who manages finally to mate with the Siamese is a fine touch, sir."
I raised my hand. "Jeeves!" I croaked. "Enough! You are telling me that the story of this bozo doing daft things like skinny-dipping at two o'clock in the morning in the Thames and his pal blowing up studio sets is somehow connected to some deep philosophy?"
"Undoubtedly, sir."
"Then that's it! I am done with serious literature for the nonce. Soon you will be telling me that me and Pongo Twisteton and Freddie Widgeon and the rest of the chaps stealing policemen's helmets during Boat Race Night is also somehow connected to Spinoza." I leaned back in my chair. "Gosh, I wish I had Rex West's latest whodunit. From all reports, it's a humdinger."
Jeeves gave a deferential cough. "Will this be the volume that you are enquiring about, sir?" He extended a book to me. The Secret of the Bloodless Corpse by Rex West!
"Jeeves! Where did you get it?" I asked.
"The bookseller just delivered it, sir. I heard you discussing this book with the other gentlemen from the Drones, and took the liberty of ordering a copy. I anticipated that you would be in need of some light reading after finishing Miss Murdoch's book. I hope it was not too much of a liberty, sir."
"Jeeves! Liberty? You did exactly right!" I cooed. "You are a life-saver! One in a million!"
"I endeavour to give satisfaction, sir," said Jeeves.
"Jeeves!" I said. "You remember you recommended this tome to me?" I showed it to him.
"Ah, yes, sir." He said. "You said you wanted to read serious literature, and I thought you would find this one enjoyable. Miss Murdoch is thought of very highly in literary circles, sir."
"I don't care what they think of her!" I bellowed. "If you ask me, the woman is batty. I have never read such utter bilge in my life!"
Jeeves was quiet. I glanced up at him, and found the corner of his mouth turned down one-sixteenth of an inch. Blast the chap, he was sneering at me!
"Jeeves," I said, steel in my voice, "I'll thank you not to laugh at me."
"Oh, no, sir," the man was all apologies immediately. "Such behaviour is furthest from my mind, I assure you."
"Then why were you sneering? Don't deny it!" I cut off his objections before he could mouth them. "You were smiling. I saw it."
"Well, sir, I must confess that I was a trifle amused by your forthright opinion of Miss Murdoch's work and her person. I was just trying to imagine what kind of impression it would create on Goodreads if you expressed it there. I am sorry if I caused anguish, sir." Jeeves said.
Now, those of you who have been religiously following these chronicles of mine know that Jeeves has been infesting that blasted book reviewing site, Goodreads, for quite some time. I had a brief stint there and found that it was not suited to chappies like me who read books only for enjoyment.
"Never mind those blighters at Goodreads! What do you feel, Jeeves? Did you like it?" I asked.
"Actually, sir, my taste runs more towards philosophical works by the great masters such as Spinoza. I read fiction very sparingly, so my opinion is necessarily limited by my lack of experience. But from my imperfect viewpoint, I would count this novel as an accomplished work, sir." He said.
"Accomplished work my foot!" I exploded. "This tale of a dotty bounder who wanders around London, going on one continuous toot - I mean, there is hardly a scene where he is not having a drink - and getting the raspberry from one popsy after the other, until he winds up on the road with an aged Alsatian dog is considered an 'accomplished' work?"
Jeeves's tone was reproachful. "Reduced to the bare essentials, sir, any work of art will look puerile. It is not what is written, but how it is written that matters in all forms of high literature. Interpolating a philosophical argument into a picaresque novel, and carrying it off without the pace flagging or the thread being lost, requires quite a deft hand. Miss Murdoch has accomplished it seamlessly, sir."
"Jeeves," I said reproachfully. "This is pure apple sauce. Philosophy? What philosophy is there in this load of tripe other than the nonsense the hero - what is his name? Yes, Jake Donaghue - and his friend Hugo Belfounder keeps on jabbering about, and which he had the crust to publish as a book? I thought the whole thing was a joke. No wonder, in the novel itself, that the book didn't sell. And what did you mean by that word - pic-something?"
Jeeves was quiet, and when I looked up, I found that he was smirking again. Seeing me watching, he immediately went back to his usual impassive self. "Picaresque means episodic, sir," he explained. "A type of narrative in which the protagonist moves from happening to happening. In this novel, the author has created the incidents in such a way as to make them traverse the whole range from the humdrum to the fantastic without straining the reader's credibility, and without losing sight of the underlying philosophy. A creditable achievement, sir."
"Jeeves," I said in a strained tone of voice. "Can you tell me what is this philosophy that you are going on about?"
"Logical atomism, sir." Jeeves was ready with his answer. "As explained in the great philosopher Ludwig Wittgenstein's Tractus Logico-Philosophicus. Newtonian mechanics, the philosopher says, capture the world through the equivalent of a net, or many nets. The mesh may be fine or coarse, and its holes of different shapes, but it will always be regular, will always bring description ‘to a unified form’. But the world will always defy our descriptions and slip 'under the net' - that is where the novel's title comes from, sir."
I was by this time gasping like a landed fish, but he went on.
"Mr. Donaghue is the one who is constantly in search for form, sir. If you recall, he says many a time he hates contigency. He is contrasted with Mr. Belfounder, who is not interested in any grand theory, but sees only the details. You must also have observed, sir, that Mr. Belfounder is a success at whatever he does without trying while Mr. Donaghue struggles till the very end, when he learns to let go of his net. Mrs. Tinckham's cat who manages finally to mate with the Siamese is a fine touch, sir."
I raised my hand. "Jeeves!" I croaked. "Enough! You are telling me that the story of this bozo doing daft things like skinny-dipping at two o'clock in the morning in the Thames and his pal blowing up studio sets is somehow connected to some deep philosophy?"
"Undoubtedly, sir."
"Then that's it! I am done with serious literature for the nonce. Soon you will be telling me that me and Pongo Twisteton and Freddie Widgeon and the rest of the chaps stealing policemen's helmets during Boat Race Night is also somehow connected to Spinoza." I leaned back in my chair. "Gosh, I wish I had Rex West's latest whodunit. From all reports, it's a humdinger."
Jeeves gave a deferential cough. "Will this be the volume that you are enquiring about, sir?" He extended a book to me. The Secret of the Bloodless Corpse by Rex West!
"Jeeves! Where did you get it?" I asked.
"The bookseller just delivered it, sir. I heard you discussing this book with the other gentlemen from the Drones, and took the liberty of ordering a copy. I anticipated that you would be in need of some light reading after finishing Miss Murdoch's book. I hope it was not too much of a liberty, sir."
"Jeeves! Liberty? You did exactly right!" I cooed. "You are a life-saver! One in a million!"
"I endeavour to give satisfaction, sir," said Jeeves.
December 9, 2007
I loved this book. A first person narrative about a young man on a picaresque quest for love and friendship, with a good healthy dose of philosophy added in for good measure.
The part of the story that stays with me is the story around Hugo. I think I liked most the idea that a friendship might end on the basis of an assumed betrayal and that the betrayal is one of the spirit and not one that occurred at all. Although, that is an interesting question in itself - does the person we feel we have betrayed have to feel betrayed to have been betrayed?
This is the only of Murdoch's books I've ever read, but will read more now after this.
The part of the story that stays with me is the story around Hugo. I think I liked most the idea that a friendship might end on the basis of an assumed betrayal and that the betrayal is one of the spirit and not one that occurred at all. Although, that is an interesting question in itself - does the person we feel we have betrayed have to feel betrayed to have been betrayed?
This is the only of Murdoch's books I've ever read, but will read more now after this.
May 18, 2017
You can't spend too much time figuring Iris Murdoch out. It's better to just buckle in with her. Her characters are basically insane, and so are her plots, and so are her sentences. They have a tidal effect; they pull you under.
Under the Net reminds me of Martin Amis's Money, or more accurately Money reminds me of it. They feature amoral protagonists in the entertainment industry, and they're both nuts. I actually think Money is a little better. It's certainly amped up, which is startling considering how far Murdoch is already amped past mostly everyone else.
She published this, her first novel, in 1954, so just before the similarly unhinged On the Road blew up the Beats. She was Irish, and you know how Irish novelists are. (Recent discussion: "Has there ever been a sane Irish author?")
So far as the plot matters, it follows Jake Donaghue through a series of misadventures. He kidnaps a dog. He schemes to get money, while steadfastly turning down every opportunity to have it. He gets drunk. He discusses philosophy and socialism. The most memorable character is the dog.
Murdoch is not my favorite author. I like her but I'm not burning to read every one of her books. I'm going to read some of them, though! They strain at the seams. She's thoroughly off on her own trip and you're not invited to participate; you may watch. She's distinct, thus the like. Some books are like marathons and some like sprints, and hers are like meandering chases through side streets, after which you are out of breath and sweaty and you've pulled a hamstring and you're not sure if you lost the guy chasing you or not.
Under the Net reminds me of Martin Amis's Money, or more accurately Money reminds me of it. They feature amoral protagonists in the entertainment industry, and they're both nuts. I actually think Money is a little better. It's certainly amped up, which is startling considering how far Murdoch is already amped past mostly everyone else.
She published this, her first novel, in 1954, so just before the similarly unhinged On the Road blew up the Beats. She was Irish, and you know how Irish novelists are. (Recent discussion: "Has there ever been a sane Irish author?")
So far as the plot matters, it follows Jake Donaghue through a series of misadventures. He kidnaps a dog. He schemes to get money, while steadfastly turning down every opportunity to have it. He gets drunk. He discusses philosophy and socialism. The most memorable character is the dog.
Murdoch is not my favorite author. I like her but I'm not burning to read every one of her books. I'm going to read some of them, though! They strain at the seams. She's thoroughly off on her own trip and you're not invited to participate; you may watch. She's distinct, thus the like. Some books are like marathons and some like sprints, and hers are like meandering chases through side streets, after which you are out of breath and sweaty and you've pulled a hamstring and you're not sure if you lost the guy chasing you or not.
January 24, 2019
Murdoch hep isteyip bitürlü kavuşamadığım yazarlardandı. Nihayet tanıştım. Ve görür görmez hayran kaldım kendisine. Tarzına ama özellikle zekasına.
Tanımlar tespitlerin de altını çokça çizdirdiği kitapta asıl zevkli kısım tam bir ingiliz komedisi tadını duymaktı. Zira çok sevdiğim bir lezzettir.
Kitapsa kendi kendine ördüğü hayata sıkışıp kalmış yazar olmayı istediğini kendine bile söyleyemeyen bir çevirmenin maceralarını anlatıyor ama ne anlatım... Filmi olsa aynı keyifle izlerdim.
İnce espri seven kendini ciddiye almamayı başarabilenlere tavsiye ederim.
Tanımlar tespitlerin de altını çokça çizdirdiği kitapta asıl zevkli kısım tam bir ingiliz komedisi tadını duymaktı. Zira çok sevdiğim bir lezzettir.
Kitapsa kendi kendine ördüğü hayata sıkışıp kalmış yazar olmayı istediğini kendine bile söyleyemeyen bir çevirmenin maceralarını anlatıyor ama ne anlatım... Filmi olsa aynı keyifle izlerdim.
İnce espri seven kendini ciddiye almamayı başarabilenlere tavsiye ederim.
July 24, 2022
2.75 stars
My first Murdoch in some years and it probably wasn’t a good idea to go for her first novel! It’s from 1954 and is set in 1950s London with an eclectic bunch of Bohemian characters. The narrator is Jake, a hack writer, who has a set of fairly picaresque adventures. This being Murdoch, there is a fair amount of philosophy flung about the place (one of the characters is a philosopher) with Beckett and Queneau both being referenced. The net referenced in the title is a net of abstraction, generalisation and theory. Indeed the title is explained by a quote from the title character’s own book!
"All theorizing is flight. We must be ruled by the situation itself and this is unutterably particular here. Indeed it is something to which we can never get close enough, however hard we may try as it were to crawl under the net.”
Well that’s obviously clear then.
The plot is best not described in detail: Jake is always looking for someone and rarely finding them, He has a fairly tangential relationship to the law and as this is Murdoch contingency raises its head:
“There are some parts in London which are necessary and others which are contingent. Everywhere west of Earls Court is contingent, except for a few places along the river. I hate contingency. I want everything in my life to have a sufficient reason.”
Murdoch, throughout her writing stresses the importance of the accidental, unpredictable and life’s messiness. That is also contingent and Jake experiences all this by the bucketload.
There are some good minor characters. For example, the chain-smoking cat lover Mrs Tinckham, who owns a newsagents shop:
“In the midst sits Mrs Tinckham herself, smoking a cigarette. She is the only person I know who is literally a chain-smoker. She lights each one from the butt of the last; how she lights the first one of the day remains to me a mystery, for she never seems to have any matches in the house when I ask her for one. I once arrived to find her in great distress because her current cigarette had fallen into a cup of coffee and she had no fire to light another. Perhaps she smokes all night, or perhaps there is an undying cigarette which burns eternally in her bedroom. An enamel basin at her feet is filled, usually to overflowing, with cigarette ends; and beside her on the counter is a little wireless which is always on, very softly and inaudibly, so that a sort of murmurous music accompanies Mrs Tinckham as she sits, wreathed in cigarette smoke, among the cats.”
Mars, the aged Alsatian is also a star turn. Jake however is pretty self-centred and unlikeable (like a number of Murdoch’s leading men) and spending most of the book in his company is a bit wearing:
‘I am myself a sort of professional Unauthorized Person; I am sure I have been turned out of more places than any other member of the English intelligentsia.’
In a sort of way Jake is trying to find himself and although the novel is only about 250 pages, he seems to take a long time to do so!
It isn’t all bad, there are some well-drawn minor characters and the picaresque areas are entertaining (and probably contingent).
My first Murdoch in some years and it probably wasn’t a good idea to go for her first novel! It’s from 1954 and is set in 1950s London with an eclectic bunch of Bohemian characters. The narrator is Jake, a hack writer, who has a set of fairly picaresque adventures. This being Murdoch, there is a fair amount of philosophy flung about the place (one of the characters is a philosopher) with Beckett and Queneau both being referenced. The net referenced in the title is a net of abstraction, generalisation and theory. Indeed the title is explained by a quote from the title character’s own book!
"All theorizing is flight. We must be ruled by the situation itself and this is unutterably particular here. Indeed it is something to which we can never get close enough, however hard we may try as it were to crawl under the net.”
Well that’s obviously clear then.
The plot is best not described in detail: Jake is always looking for someone and rarely finding them, He has a fairly tangential relationship to the law and as this is Murdoch contingency raises its head:
“There are some parts in London which are necessary and others which are contingent. Everywhere west of Earls Court is contingent, except for a few places along the river. I hate contingency. I want everything in my life to have a sufficient reason.”
Murdoch, throughout her writing stresses the importance of the accidental, unpredictable and life’s messiness. That is also contingent and Jake experiences all this by the bucketload.
There are some good minor characters. For example, the chain-smoking cat lover Mrs Tinckham, who owns a newsagents shop:
“In the midst sits Mrs Tinckham herself, smoking a cigarette. She is the only person I know who is literally a chain-smoker. She lights each one from the butt of the last; how she lights the first one of the day remains to me a mystery, for she never seems to have any matches in the house when I ask her for one. I once arrived to find her in great distress because her current cigarette had fallen into a cup of coffee and she had no fire to light another. Perhaps she smokes all night, or perhaps there is an undying cigarette which burns eternally in her bedroom. An enamel basin at her feet is filled, usually to overflowing, with cigarette ends; and beside her on the counter is a little wireless which is always on, very softly and inaudibly, so that a sort of murmurous music accompanies Mrs Tinckham as she sits, wreathed in cigarette smoke, among the cats.”
Mars, the aged Alsatian is also a star turn. Jake however is pretty self-centred and unlikeable (like a number of Murdoch’s leading men) and spending most of the book in his company is a bit wearing:
‘I am myself a sort of professional Unauthorized Person; I am sure I have been turned out of more places than any other member of the English intelligentsia.’
In a sort of way Jake is trying to find himself and although the novel is only about 250 pages, he seems to take a long time to do so!
It isn’t all bad, there are some well-drawn minor characters and the picaresque areas are entertaining (and probably contingent).
May 25, 2024
أول عمل أدبي للكاتبة الفيلسوفة آيريس مردوك ومن ضمن أفضل روايات القرن العشرين 1954. رواية فلسفية وفكرية وأخلاقية، تحتاج تروي أثناء القراءة لهضم الآراء الفلسفية.
حكاية مروية على لسان كاتب ومترجم شاب موهوب يدعى "چيك Jake" ولكن كسول ورافض لكل أشكال العمل النظامي. يعتنق آراء الجناح اليساري ولكن لا يشارك ولا يشتغل في السياسة بشكل إيجابي. مع تجاوبه وتعامله مع المحيطين به، نرى كيف تنشأ النزاعات والقرارات بشكل غير متوقع في الحياة الإبداعية، وشق طريقه في عالم الأدب والفلسفة. وحواراته الفلسفية مع صديقه "هوجو Hugo" الشخصية الغير مفهومة والغامضة، وقد رأيت أن شخصية هوجو هي حياتنا الغامضة وما يحيط بنا من عالم غير مفهوم بالكامل. يصارع بطلنا في عالمه وفي نهاية المطاف يحاول كتابة روايته الأصيلة عوضًا عن الترجمة وحياته المهلهلة الفوضوية.
يتميز سرد مردوك بالبذخ، من حيث الوصف التفصيلي للأماكن وسلوك الشخصيات وما يعتمل في صدورهم، كما أن الحبكة الروائية دقيقة كالبنيان المرصوص، شخصيات عديدة تتطور فيما بينها الأحداث بسلاسة رائعة بدون الإخلال بالسرد العام. تتحكم بخيوط هذا كله مردوك البارعة، بمساعدة فهمها للنفس البشرية، وعلمها الفلسفي العميق، كما لاحظت أنها مولعة بالأساطير وخاصة الميثولوجيا اليونانية القديمة، ويظهر أيضًا ولعها العظيم بمدينة لندن العريقة ومعالمها الثرية وبعض من معالم باريس أيضًا، مع مسحة فكاهية خفيفة لتخفيف الوقع الفلسفي الفكري المسرود، لا تشعرك مردوك بالملل أبدًا.
لا أدري سبب عزوف القراء العرب لقراءة أعمالها القيمة، وللعلم لها 27 رواية ترجم منها القليل. أيضًا عدم وجود أفلام لأعمالها وقد تخيلت Jude Law في مكان بطلنا هنا وهو بالمناسبة من عشاق أدب مردوك.
ترجمة فؤاد كامل رائعة؛ كانت رائعة أيضًا مع روايتها البوكرية البحر، البحر 1978.
"كل أنواع التنظير هروب. إذ ينبغي أن يتحكم فينا الموقف نفسه، وهذا شئ جزئي، لا جدال في ذلك. كما أنه شئ لا نستطيع بكل تأكيد أن نقترب منه أبدًا اقترابًا كافيًا، مهما اجتهدنا في المحاولة، وكأننا نزحف تحت الشبكة".
قصدت بالشبكة هنا الفكر التجريدي والنظريات الفلسفية.
حكاية مروية على لسان كاتب ومترجم شاب موهوب يدعى "چيك Jake" ولكن كسول ورافض لكل أشكال العمل النظامي. يعتنق آراء الجناح اليساري ولكن لا يشارك ولا يشتغل في السياسة بشكل إيجابي. مع تجاوبه وتعامله مع المحيطين به، نرى كيف تنشأ النزاعات والقرارات بشكل غير متوقع في الحياة الإبداعية، وشق طريقه في عالم الأدب والفلسفة. وحواراته الفلسفية مع صديقه "هوجو Hugo" الشخصية الغير مفهومة والغامضة، وقد رأيت أن شخصية هوجو هي حياتنا الغامضة وما يحيط بنا من عالم غير مفهوم بالكامل. يصارع بطلنا في عالمه وفي نهاية المطاف يحاول كتابة روايته الأصيلة عوضًا عن الترجمة وحياته المهلهلة الفوضوية.
يتميز سرد مردوك بالبذخ، من حيث الوصف التفصيلي للأماكن وسلوك الشخصيات وما يعتمل في صدورهم، كما أن الحبكة الروائية دقيقة كالبنيان المرصوص، شخصيات عديدة تتطور فيما بينها الأحداث بسلاسة رائعة بدون الإخلال بالسرد العام. تتحكم بخيوط هذا كله مردوك البارعة، بمساعدة فهمها للنفس البشرية، وعلمها الفلسفي العميق، كما لاحظت أنها مولعة بالأساطير وخاصة الميثولوجيا اليونانية القديمة، ويظهر أيضًا ولعها العظيم بمدينة لندن العريقة ومعالمها الثرية وبعض من معالم باريس أيضًا، مع مسحة فكاهية خفيفة لتخفيف الوقع الفلسفي الفكري المسرود، لا تشعرك مردوك بالملل أبدًا.
لا أدري سبب عزوف القراء العرب لقراءة أعمالها القيمة، وللعلم لها 27 رواية ترجم منها القليل. أيضًا عدم وجود أفلام لأعمالها وقد تخيلت Jude Law في مكان بطلنا هنا وهو بالمناسبة من عشاق أدب مردوك.
ترجمة فؤاد كامل رائعة؛ كانت رائعة أيضًا مع روايتها البوكرية البحر، البحر 1978.
"كل أنواع التنظير هروب. إذ ينبغي أن يتحكم فينا الموقف نفسه، وهذا شئ جزئي، لا جدال في ذلك. كما أنه شئ لا نستطيع بكل تأكيد أن نقترب منه أبدًا اقترابًا كافيًا، مهما اجتهدنا في المحاولة، وكأننا نزحف تحت الشبكة".
قصدت بالشبكة هنا الفكر التجريدي والنظريات الفلسفية.
January 13, 2022
The first thing is that Nandakishore Mridula has already written the perfect review of Under the Net.
https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...
We both had the same reaction to this thing about PHILOSOPHY which everybody and his kidnapped dog goes on about in all other reviews. (There is a kidnapped dog in this book.) And our reaction was
APPLESAUCE
Ok, two things. First thing, Iris Murdoch was a 24 carat solid gold actual real world philosopher. At age 28 she was lecturing in philosophy at Oxford University, and she wrote the first book on Sartre in English. She was the hot potato of thinking real hard. But second thing is that I dragged my sorry ass over to the London Review of Books where I read my LAST FREE ARTICLE on Under the Net by Michael Wood (“Don’t Worry about the Pronouns”). He is a guy who thinks philosophy is oozing out of every pore of Under the Net, and this is because he thinks parts of this novel are an early parody of structuralist thought and that characters like Finn the silent moocher or Hugo the rich firework manufacturer represent particular Wittgensteinian arguments.
I will take a wild guess and say that this will not appeal to the general reader much.
Instead most readers will find Under the Net is a fairly comical farce involving a penniless translator who ricochets around London and Paris like someone in the throes of the manic phase of a bipolar disorder. He is constantly deciding after not seeing an old girlfriend for years he is suddenly IN LOVE with her, or out of the blue decides that this woman will definitely be IN PARIS RIGHT NOW and of course he will be able to find her because Paris is so small; and he realises that the very thing to resolve his current complicated problems is to KIDNAP A DOG. And he makes gigantic assumptions about everyone, which (no spoiler) are discovered to be quite inaccurate.
This whole cockamamie tale is one giant shaggy dog story which wiki expertly defines as
an extremely long-winded anecdote characterized by extensive narration of typically irrelevant incidents and terminated by an anticlimax.
Unreal characters have very unlikely things happen to them like the ex-gf’s sister is now a big movie star who is now being stalked by his old friend the fireworks manufacturer. Who is now a movie producer. And the dog is a famous movie star too. And Jake our hapless writer will break into your house if he feels like it because he can pick locks.
I think the dog is logical positivism (note that it was in a cage but was freed by Jake) and the lock picking tools must be Tractatus Logico-philosophicus, the masterwork by Wittgenstein.
JOKING ASIDE
This all sounds like I did not have much time for IM’s first novel but I was quite charmed while I was reading it, she drags us along in double quick time and all is fun and fireworks. She has a spiffy style. There are a couple of moments of drunken despondency and moaning about futility but you have to take the rough with the smooth. So I kind of enjoyed it, whilst not understanding what the heck was really going on, just like Jake.
https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...
We both had the same reaction to this thing about PHILOSOPHY which everybody and his kidnapped dog goes on about in all other reviews. (There is a kidnapped dog in this book.) And our reaction was
APPLESAUCE
Ok, two things. First thing, Iris Murdoch was a 24 carat solid gold actual real world philosopher. At age 28 she was lecturing in philosophy at Oxford University, and she wrote the first book on Sartre in English. She was the hot potato of thinking real hard. But second thing is that I dragged my sorry ass over to the London Review of Books where I read my LAST FREE ARTICLE on Under the Net by Michael Wood (“Don’t Worry about the Pronouns”). He is a guy who thinks philosophy is oozing out of every pore of Under the Net, and this is because he thinks parts of this novel are an early parody of structuralist thought and that characters like Finn the silent moocher or Hugo the rich firework manufacturer represent particular Wittgensteinian arguments.
I will take a wild guess and say that this will not appeal to the general reader much.
Instead most readers will find Under the Net is a fairly comical farce involving a penniless translator who ricochets around London and Paris like someone in the throes of the manic phase of a bipolar disorder. He is constantly deciding after not seeing an old girlfriend for years he is suddenly IN LOVE with her, or out of the blue decides that this woman will definitely be IN PARIS RIGHT NOW and of course he will be able to find her because Paris is so small; and he realises that the very thing to resolve his current complicated problems is to KIDNAP A DOG. And he makes gigantic assumptions about everyone, which (no spoiler) are discovered to be quite inaccurate.
This whole cockamamie tale is one giant shaggy dog story which wiki expertly defines as
an extremely long-winded anecdote characterized by extensive narration of typically irrelevant incidents and terminated by an anticlimax.
Unreal characters have very unlikely things happen to them like the ex-gf’s sister is now a big movie star who is now being stalked by his old friend the fireworks manufacturer. Who is now a movie producer. And the dog is a famous movie star too. And Jake our hapless writer will break into your house if he feels like it because he can pick locks.
I think the dog is logical positivism (note that it was in a cage but was freed by Jake) and the lock picking tools must be Tractatus Logico-philosophicus, the masterwork by Wittgenstein.
JOKING ASIDE
This all sounds like I did not have much time for IM’s first novel but I was quite charmed while I was reading it, she drags us along in double quick time and all is fun and fireworks. She has a spiffy style. There are a couple of moments of drunken despondency and moaning about futility but you have to take the rough with the smooth. So I kind of enjoyed it, whilst not understanding what the heck was really going on, just like Jake.
November 26, 2017
(3.5) I plan to dip in and out of Liz Dexter’s two-year Iris Murdoch readalong project to increase my familiarity with Murdoch and get through some of the paperbacks I happen to own. Even though I don’t own it, I decided to join in with Under the Net (1954) to see how her fiction career began.
Under the Net is narrated by Jake Donoghue, a translator who arrives back in London after a trip to France to find that he’s being kicked out of the flat where he’s been living for free with his friend Finn. In his desultory search for where to go next he takes readers along to Mrs Tinckham’s cat-filled shop, his Jewish philosopher friend Dave’s place, and the theatre where a former girlfriend, Anna Quentin, is in charge of props. (One of my favorite scenes has him accidentally locked into the theatre overnight; he has to sleep among the costumes.)
Anna’s sister Sadie, an actress, offers Jake a role as her bodyguard; she has a stalker of sorts, fireworks manufacturer and film studio owner Hugo Belfounder – whom, it turns out, Jake already knows. Together they were guinea pigs for an experiment on the common cold, and Jake secretly worked up Hugo’s conversations into a poorly received book called The Silencer. “Hugo was my destiny,” Jake muses; even though he’s embarrassed to see Hugo again, he gets drawn back into a connection with him.
One of the central themes of the novel, playing out with various characters, is the difficulty of seeing people clearly rather than resting with the image of them you’ve built up in your mind. I enjoyed Jake’s contrasting of physical and intellectual work, and his (sometimes contradictory) reflections on solitude and introversion:
Many readers probably expect Murdoch’s books to be dense and difficult, bogged down with philosophical ideas. But what I most noticed about this first novel is how humorous it is: it’s even madcap in places, with some coming and going via windows and Mister Mars, the film star dog, playing dead to get Jake out of a sticky situation. Over at Liz’s blog we’ve been discussing whether Murdoch is a typical ‘woman writer’; if her books had been published anonymously or under her initials, would it have been assumed that she was a man? I think so, given her success in creating a male narrator and her focus on the world of work and less traditional domestic arrangements.
This is my sixth Murdoch book. I didn’t enjoy Under the Net as much as the Booker Prize-winning The Sea, The Sea or The Bell, but liked it more than The Black Prince and An Unofficial Rose (I’ve also read one of her philosophy books, The Fire and the Sun; I could make neither head nor tail of it), so it falls right in the middle for me so far. I’m looking forward to participating with several more of the readalong books next year, starting with A Severed Head in March.
Another favorite line, spoken by Hugo: “One must just blunder on. Truth lies in blundering on.”
Originally published, with images, on my blog, Bookish Beck.
Under the Net is narrated by Jake Donoghue, a translator who arrives back in London after a trip to France to find that he’s being kicked out of the flat where he’s been living for free with his friend Finn. In his desultory search for where to go next he takes readers along to Mrs Tinckham’s cat-filled shop, his Jewish philosopher friend Dave’s place, and the theatre where a former girlfriend, Anna Quentin, is in charge of props. (One of my favorite scenes has him accidentally locked into the theatre overnight; he has to sleep among the costumes.)
Anna’s sister Sadie, an actress, offers Jake a role as her bodyguard; she has a stalker of sorts, fireworks manufacturer and film studio owner Hugo Belfounder – whom, it turns out, Jake already knows. Together they were guinea pigs for an experiment on the common cold, and Jake secretly worked up Hugo’s conversations into a poorly received book called The Silencer. “Hugo was my destiny,” Jake muses; even though he’s embarrassed to see Hugo again, he gets drawn back into a connection with him.
One of the central themes of the novel, playing out with various characters, is the difficulty of seeing people clearly rather than resting with the image of them you’ve built up in your mind. I enjoyed Jake’s contrasting of physical and intellectual work, and his (sometimes contradictory) reflections on solitude and introversion:
I sometimes feel that Finn has very little inner life. I mean no disrespect to him in saying this; some have and some haven’t. I connect this too with his truthfulness. Subtle people, like myself, can see too much ever to give a straight answer.
I hate solitude, but I am afraid of intimacy. The substance of my life is a private conversation with myself which to turn into a dialogue would be equivalent to self-destruction. The company which I need is the company which a pub or a café will provide.
If like myself you are a connoisseur of solitude, I recommend to you the experience of being alone in Paris on the fourteenth of July.
Many readers probably expect Murdoch’s books to be dense and difficult, bogged down with philosophical ideas. But what I most noticed about this first novel is how humorous it is: it’s even madcap in places, with some coming and going via windows and Mister Mars, the film star dog, playing dead to get Jake out of a sticky situation. Over at Liz’s blog we’ve been discussing whether Murdoch is a typical ‘woman writer’; if her books had been published anonymously or under her initials, would it have been assumed that she was a man? I think so, given her success in creating a male narrator and her focus on the world of work and less traditional domestic arrangements.
This is my sixth Murdoch book. I didn’t enjoy Under the Net as much as the Booker Prize-winning The Sea, The Sea or The Bell, but liked it more than The Black Prince and An Unofficial Rose (I’ve also read one of her philosophy books, The Fire and the Sun; I could make neither head nor tail of it), so it falls right in the middle for me so far. I’m looking forward to participating with several more of the readalong books next year, starting with A Severed Head in March.
Another favorite line, spoken by Hugo: “One must just blunder on. Truth lies in blundering on.”
Originally published, with images, on my blog, Bookish Beck.
February 3, 2021
“Yalnızlıktan nefret etmekle birlikte yakınlıktan da korkarım ben. Hayatımın özü, kendi kendimle yürüttüğüm özel bir konuşmadır ki bunu bir diyaloğa çevirmek kendi kendimi mahvetmekle eş anlamlı olur. Benim gereksindiğim can yoldaşlığı, pub ve kahvelerin sağlayabileceği bir can yoldaşlığıdır. Ruhsal beraberlik denen şeyi asla istememişimdir. İnsanın kendisine bile doğruyu söylemesi yeterince zordur zaten.”
Iris Murdoch ile tanışmak için en ideal kitaplarından birisi.
Iris Murdoch ile tanışmak için en ideal kitaplarından birisi.
April 17, 2020
"Review" in 2008 from reading in 2001: Her first published novel, set in "contemporary" 50s London. Aimless youth gets philosophical. He oughtn't to be a sympathetic character and nothing much happens, but it's strangely compelling.
Comment in 2020: It was my first Murdoch, picked at random in a second-hand bookshop, because I wanted to have read one of hers before going with a friend to see the biopic, Iris, starring Judi Dench, Jim Broadbent, Kate Winslet (see imdb).
I didn't really appreciate it back in 2001, but since then, I've read and reviewed a dozen other Murdochs, and I now count myself a fan. Some of the other reviews are more substantial than this. They're all on GoodReads, HERE.
Comment in 2020: It was my first Murdoch, picked at random in a second-hand bookshop, because I wanted to have read one of hers before going with a friend to see the biopic, Iris, starring Judi Dench, Jim Broadbent, Kate Winslet (see imdb).
I didn't really appreciate it back in 2001, but since then, I've read and reviewed a dozen other Murdochs, and I now count myself a fan. Some of the other reviews are more substantial than this. They're all on GoodReads, HERE.
April 29, 2024
Dave once said to me that to find a person inexhaustible is simply the definition of love, so perhaps I loved Anna.
…
We all live in the interstices of each other’s lives, and we would all get a surprise if we could see everything.
Jack Donaghue holds himself out as a writer, though his only book The Silencer had no discernible success. He makes his way through life largely by mooching off his friends and occasionally providing translations of others’ novels. As the novel opens, Jack and his cousin Finn have been asked to leave the apartment where they’ve been crashing. Looking for a new place to stay, Jake reaches out to Anna, the woman he once loved, which leads him to her sister Sadie, and ultimately to the larger-than life man who inspired his one book, Hugo Belfounder.
Under the Net regularly appears on lists of the 100 greatest novels. I must confess the reasons for such high regard escaped me. Perhaps it’s because the novel is a classic example of the picaresque. Jack rarely holds a job and gets by on his wits but his ne’er-do-well tendencies are more rascal than criminal. Told by Jack in the first-person, the plot is really more of a series of connected vignettes, as Jack bounces from getting locked in a house, to skinny dipping in the Thames, kidnapping a movie star dog, and so on and so on. I found the relationships between Jack, Hugo, Anna, and Sadie interesting, and I liked the writing, but I just couldn’t get into the story. 2.5 stars rounded up to 3.
May 31, 2019
Description: Iris Murdoch's first novel is set in a part of London where struggling writers rub shoulders with successful bookies, and film starlets with frantic philosophers. Its hero, Jake Donaghue, is a drifting, clever, likeable young man who makes a living out of translation work and sponging on his friends. A meeting with Anna, an old flame, leads him into a series of fantastic adventures. Jake is captivated by a majestic philosopher, Hugo Belfounder, whose profound and inconclusive reflections give the book its title - under the net of language.
Opening: When I saw Finn waiting for me at the corner of the street I knew at once that something had gone wrong.
This is me trying to read all of Murdoch's oeuvre and will admit to being grateful that didn't have the bad luck to have encountered this one first. My mid-teen initiation to Murdoch in the newly sprung 70s was 'The Severed Head.'
'Under the Net' does have some adorable moments to treasure, not least with Mister Mars, but the philosophical aspects were very heavy-handed, and dare I use the word pompous. The title could just have easily been 'Between the Lines' or 'Behind the Mask', nothing very deep after all. But the language use is there, such a repertoire of delicious combinations, and my 2016 quest of reading chronologically, will see IM develop .
3* Under the Net (1954)
TR The Flight from the Enchanter (1956)
5* The Bell (1958)
WL The Unicorn(1963)
TR The Nice and the Good (1968)
5* A Severed Head(1971)
5* The Black Prince(1973)
5* The Sacred and Profane Love Machine(1974)
5* A Word Child(1978)
5* The Sea, the Sea (1978)
4* Existentialists and Mystics Writings on Philosophy and Literature
4* Living on Paper: Letters from Iris Murdoch, 1934-1995
Opening: When I saw Finn waiting for me at the corner of the street I knew at once that something had gone wrong.
This is me trying to read all of Murdoch's oeuvre and will admit to being grateful that didn't have the bad luck to have encountered this one first. My mid-teen initiation to Murdoch in the newly sprung 70s was 'The Severed Head.''Under the Net' does have some adorable moments to treasure, not least with Mister Mars, but the philosophical aspects were very heavy-handed, and dare I use the word pompous. The title could just have easily been 'Between the Lines' or 'Behind the Mask', nothing very deep after all. But the language use is there, such a repertoire of delicious combinations, and my 2016 quest of reading chronologically, will see IM develop .
3* Under the Net (1954)
TR The Flight from the Enchanter (1956)
5* The Bell (1958)
WL The Unicorn(1963)
TR The Nice and the Good (1968)
5* A Severed Head(1971)
5* The Black Prince(1973)
5* The Sacred and Profane Love Machine(1974)
5* A Word Child(1978)
5* The Sea, the Sea (1978)
4* Existentialists and Mystics Writings on Philosophy and Literature
4* Living on Paper: Letters from Iris Murdoch, 1934-1995
April 12, 2018
When I read this in college our modern literature professor warned us against being hayseed critics. We need to have a basis for our criticism, a chunk of spoken reason, or thought, behind our critiques and accolades of each book we read. Otherwise we’ll end up looking like the foolish critic in Norman Rockwell’s painting, sucking on a strand of hay while we squint and furrow at a work of art still in progress.
By the time Murdoch’s book was assigned that quarter, I was trying hard not be caught with straw between my teeth as I read about a struggling writer. Iris was female. (She passed away only a few years before I read this first published novel of hers.) Her gender didn’t keep her from writing from a man’s perspective.
The author created a sparkling account of Jake Donaghue, the penniless artist who networks with an array of magnetic characters throughout London and Paris. Drifting through these quintessential corners of the world, Jake flirts with starlets, crosses bookies and brainstorms about life with the eccentric. Rekindled love and episodes of the absurd burn and douse the pages; smoldering gems of satire and panache (too much?) reveal themselves en route to Jake's final philosophy on life. From page one, witty phrases made me smile--and this marvelous little world that was constructed never ebbs far from the insightful.
Virginia Woolf called novels “life escapes.” She continued, “and perhaps without life nothing else is worth while.” If we didn’t have existence in all its zaniness--all its pitch changes and scars—where would books take us? There would be nothing left to write about and no reason to read. Many people question writers, wondering how someone can have so much to say when most are running on fumes by the end of page one. But there’s no EMPTY line for the imagination coupled with experience. Ms. Murdoch proves there’s always something worth writing about. And always something worth experiencing, read or lived.
By the time Murdoch’s book was assigned that quarter, I was trying hard not be caught with straw between my teeth as I read about a struggling writer. Iris was female. (She passed away only a few years before I read this first published novel of hers.) Her gender didn’t keep her from writing from a man’s perspective.
The author created a sparkling account of Jake Donaghue, the penniless artist who networks with an array of magnetic characters throughout London and Paris. Drifting through these quintessential corners of the world, Jake flirts with starlets, crosses bookies and brainstorms about life with the eccentric. Rekindled love and episodes of the absurd burn and douse the pages; smoldering gems of satire and panache (too much?) reveal themselves en route to Jake's final philosophy on life. From page one, witty phrases made me smile--and this marvelous little world that was constructed never ebbs far from the insightful.
Virginia Woolf called novels “life escapes.” She continued, “and perhaps without life nothing else is worth while.” If we didn’t have existence in all its zaniness--all its pitch changes and scars—where would books take us? There would be nothing left to write about and no reason to read. Many people question writers, wondering how someone can have so much to say when most are running on fumes by the end of page one. But there’s no EMPTY line for the imagination coupled with experience. Ms. Murdoch proves there’s always something worth writing about. And always something worth experiencing, read or lived.
Read
December 18, 2020من الجميل التعرف على عالم " أيريس مردوخ"...عالم فريد..فاتن...وقد تظن للوهلة الأولى بأنه يفتح لك الأبواب الموصدة مُستقبلاً إياك بحفاوة بالغة...لكن في الحقيقة أنت تنزلق لتسقط في ذاك العالم بلحظة لن يكن بمقدورك تعيينها أبداً...
السرد..رشيق وسلس ، يتلاعب بحس فكاهي ناعم ، بإيقاع متمهل طويل نوعاً ما ، يزخم بالتفاصيل الصغيرة وتلك التي قد تبدو لك تافهة تضفي الكاتبة عليها ثراء ، عالم يخفق بالألوان..الأحاسيس الدفينة...الأفكار الفلسفية المُربكة...
تلتقي هنا بكاتب ومترجم يعيش حياة عبثية مبعثرة ، يتورط بشبكة من الأحداث المتداخلة والمُتشابكة إلى حد بعيد....، تنسج مُخيلته مواقف عن الآخرين وفقاً لتصوراته وحدها التي شُكلت عميقاً بداخله...، فإذ به لا يحل الخيوط بل يزيد من تعقيدها ويتعثر بخطى غير محسوبة في عالم شاسع لاحدود له.....
يدور حول ذاته في دائرة مفرغة...يحاول ملئها بالمعنى...فإذ يصلك خفوت الصمت وضجيج الفوضى في مزيج غريب لن يمكنك إلا التسليم له....
ترى هل الشبكة هى الزمن الذي يقوضنا ؟
يمر عابراً من فوقنا ونحن نرزح تحت انقضاء اللحظات وزوال الأشياء ؟
تحت الشبكة نحن ..تكافح أرواحنا من أجل القبض على الزمن الذي يطوي كل شيء وفي محاولة منا للتشبث به نطلق عليها ماضٍ...؟
نترقب مستقبل مجهول غامض.. وما أن يأتي حاضراً حتى يغدو ماضياً...
أجل كل ذلك يمضي تحت شبكة الزمن لننتظر النهاية....
ومتى يعرف المرء كائناً بشرياً على الإطلاق ؟
ربما لا يكون ذلك إلا حين يدرك استحالة تلك المعرفة ، وحين يتخلى عن الرغبة فيها وأن يكف ��ن الشعور بحاجته اليها وحين يكون ما يحققه المرء شيئاً بعيداً عن المعرفة ، نوع من التعايش وهذا أيضاً قناع آخر من أقنعة الحب......
السرد..رشيق وسلس ، يتلاعب بحس فكاهي ناعم ، بإيقاع متمهل طويل نوعاً ما ، يزخم بالتفاصيل الصغيرة وتلك التي قد تبدو لك تافهة تضفي الكاتبة عليها ثراء ، عالم يخفق بالألوان..الأحاسيس الدفينة...الأفكار الفلسفية المُربكة...
تلتقي هنا بكاتب ومترجم يعيش حياة عبثية مبعثرة ، يتورط بشبكة من الأحداث المتداخلة والمُتشابكة إلى حد بعيد....، تنسج مُخيلته مواقف عن الآخرين وفقاً لتصوراته وحدها التي شُكلت عميقاً بداخله...، فإذ به لا يحل الخيوط بل يزيد من تعقيدها ويتعثر بخطى غير محسوبة في عالم شاسع لاحدود له.....
يدور حول ذاته في دائرة مفرغة...يحاول ملئها بالمعنى...فإذ يصلك خفوت الصمت وضجيج الفوضى في مزيج غريب لن يمكنك إلا التسليم له....
ترى هل الشبكة هى الزمن الذي يقوضنا ؟
يمر عابراً من فوقنا ونحن نرزح تحت انقضاء اللحظات وزوال الأشياء ؟
تحت الشبكة نحن ..تكافح أرواحنا من أجل القبض على الزمن الذي يطوي كل شيء وفي محاولة منا للتشبث به نطلق عليها ماضٍ...؟
نترقب مستقبل مجهول غامض.. وما أن يأتي حاضراً حتى يغدو ماضياً...
أجل كل ذلك يمضي تحت شبكة الزمن لننتظر النهاية....
ومتى يعرف المرء كائناً بشرياً على الإطلاق ؟
ربما لا يكون ذلك إلا حين يدرك استحالة تلك المعرفة ، وحين يتخلى عن الرغبة فيها وأن يكف ��ن الشعور بحاجته اليها وحين يكون ما يحققه المرء شيئاً بعيداً عن المعرفة ، نوع من التعايش وهذا أيضاً قناع آخر من أقنعة الحب......
August 28, 2007
It seems to me that most male authors have male central characters, and female authors female central characters, especially when the novel is in the first person. It also seems to me that female authors (in general) create more believable female central characters, and male authors (in general) more believable male characters, especially concerning central characters and particularly when in the first person narrative. This shouldn't be surprising. That said, this novel, for me, is the best exception to this putative rule. There are acute problems that I had with the ideas/motivations of the central male character, but aside from them Murdoch does a *wonderful* job of crafting a believable, fascinating male central character. Oh, and the novel is very good, too.
October 31, 2020
“O que é necessário não o é para sempre, mas apenas efémero. Todo o trabalho e todo o amor, a busca de riqueza e fama, a procura da verdade são feitos de instantes que passam e se transformam em nada. Todavia, através deste feixe de nadas, avançamos com aquela miraculosa vitalidade que cria os sítios que precariamente habitamos no passado e no futuro. Assim vivemos: um espírito que cisma e paira sobre a contínua morte do tempo, o sentido perdido, o momento irrecuperável, o rosto esquecido, até ao golpe final que termina todos os nossos momentos e de novo mergulha esse espírito no vazio de onde ele veio.”
October 11, 2021
Çok zamandır bu kadar eğlenerek bir şeyler okuduğumu hatırlamıyorum!
Iris Murdoch külliyatını okumak istediğim yazarlardan biriydi hep. Talihsiz bir başlangıçla İtalyan Kızı'nı okuyup ara vermiştim. Sonra evdeki hacimli Kara Prens ya da Deniz Deniz'e elim gitmeyince basitçe ince gördüğüm için bunu aldım. Elime aldığım akşam kaç kez kahkaha attım hatırlamıyorum bile :)
İlk romanı olmasına rağmen en başarılılarından olduğu söyleniyor. Kişisel bir hesaplaşma hikayesi. Hem arkadaşlarıyla, hem kendiyle, yaptığı işlerle, para kazanma ve günü bitirme şekliyle. Dildeki mizah olay örgüsüne de yansımış ve gerçekten Jake'i anladım ben okurken :) Olay akışları o kadar doğal ki hiçbir şey sırıtmıyor. Antikahraman diye tanımlanabilir belki ama bence gerek yok.
Aynı zamanda köpek Mister Mars ve kedi Maggie'nin kitaptaki insan karakterler kadar yer kaplaması, hikayelerinin olması çokça hoşuma gitti.
Belki edebi değer olarak 5 puan etmez ama beni bu kadar güldürmesi ve karakterleriyle yakınlık kurdurması açısından ben puan kırmıyorum hiç!
Iris Murdoch külliyatını okumak istediğim yazarlardan biriydi hep. Talihsiz bir başlangıçla İtalyan Kızı'nı okuyup ara vermiştim. Sonra evdeki hacimli Kara Prens ya da Deniz Deniz'e elim gitmeyince basitçe ince gördüğüm için bunu aldım. Elime aldığım akşam kaç kez kahkaha attım hatırlamıyorum bile :)
İlk romanı olmasına rağmen en başarılılarından olduğu söyleniyor. Kişisel bir hesaplaşma hikayesi. Hem arkadaşlarıyla, hem kendiyle, yaptığı işlerle, para kazanma ve günü bitirme şekliyle. Dildeki mizah olay örgüsüne de yansımış ve gerçekten Jake'i anladım ben okurken :) Olay akışları o kadar doğal ki hiçbir şey sırıtmıyor. Antikahraman diye tanımlanabilir belki ama bence gerek yok.
Aynı zamanda köpek Mister Mars ve kedi Maggie'nin kitaptaki insan karakterler kadar yer kaplaması, hikayelerinin olması çokça hoşuma gitti.
Belki edebi değer olarak 5 puan etmez ama beni bu kadar güldürmesi ve karakterleriyle yakınlık kurdurması açısından ben puan kırmıyorum hiç!
August 25, 2018
Containing all the requisite hilarity and pathos of a first novel, Murdoch succeeds where others fail, by aiming at one person and finding half-measures which translates into a fleeting philosophy but little transformation. This will likely spur me to read more of Murdoch’s books over the summer.
October 1, 2019
I wasn't expecting to love this so much. It's the best feeling when a book unexpectedly impresses you. I bought this in London with a friend, who I lived with at university, so reading it then about these young men drinking together and talking politics, it was very relatable to my time at University, which is sadly now over. Of course, the plot then takes wind and some semi-mad, but wholly serious, events happen. I've never been more in love with a dog in any film or book before than I am with Mister Mars. What a hero. I wish I could take him too, though he belongs quite rightly with Jake. Surprisingly entertaining, funny and heartfelt. I wasn't expecting this from Murdoch at all so I look forward to reading some of her other novels and seeing what they're like.
April 21, 2015
At the beginning I was enjoying this semi-farcical/semi-philosophical novel. I love the ridiculousness of the entire plot and the characters but after a while it just became a bore. Once I hit the last hundred page stretch I found myself picking it up, reading ten pages, and putting it down again ad nauseum. It was a bit of a struggle to finish. However this book has not put me off Murdoch's work thankfully so I will be revisiting her again sometime in the future.
March 19, 2015
Iris Murdoch is among my favorite writers. I’ve read 4 books by her so far (this is the 4th) and I was amazed with her capacity to touch psychology and philosophy at the same time, while focusing on crucial moments from the lives of her characters. I read “The Sea, The Sea” (her Man Booker Prize work) and I considered it stunning, but the other books I read by her were even more powerful than her award-winning novel.
“Starting a novel is opening a door on a misty landscape; you can still see very little but you can smell the earth and feel the wind blowing.”, says Murdoch. This is how this novel started: promising at the beginning, it seemed to raise a lot of psychological questions. Its intricate plot seemed promising at the beginning as well. Through the book, I felt the author was rather drifting than continuing with the problems introduced upon the reader at first. This might have been only a strategy and having read Murdoch before, I was actually expecting this, but in the end, the problems were still there, alive and untouched. Maybe this was the whole idea: just to put some philosophical ideas out in the open and not really debate on them, but rather to stir the mind of the reader and determine him to ponder upon them. Although I like subtlety, whatever the intention of the writer in this book, the approach was a bit too subtle for me to appreciate it at its fullest.
Jake Donaghue, a rather bohemian writer who once wrote a book, but is now only doing translation work is kicked out of his accommodation and has to look for a solution. He contacts a friend (Dave) for help and he suggests Jake should contact Anna, a woman he had loved years ago. He meets her and a chain of events is determined. Jake gets to find out that everything around him is somehow connected: Anna is in love with a person whom he had considered his best friend, while this friend is in love with Anna’s sister. He had stopped talking to this friend long ago because the only book he published was a modified version of their discussions and he thought his friend (Hugo) would be offended.
As Murdoch says so poetically, “we all live in the interstices of each other’s lives, and we could all get a surprise if we could see everything”. Jake Donaghue gets to know a bit of this "everything" and he realizes that all his perceptions had been totally wrong. As I have read in one of the reviews from Goodreads, I do think too that “Under the Net” is a book about language and its inability to express certain things and it stresses on the fact that life itself is an amalgamation of meaningless events to which the individual gives meaning. Jack’s life goes through a series of misunderstandings and all this mixture of chance and chaos conspires to transform his perception of life: his past, present and future rewrite themselves and renegotiate his true feelings towards Anna, Hugo and his writing career. His revelations through the book are described very poetically by Murdoch in the next fragments:
“What then took place within my mind was much the same as happens in a huge theater if the lights suddenly go out, and someone shrilly screams in the swift-winged darkness, and other voices join in, resulting in a blind tempest, with the black thunder of panic growing-until suddenly the lights come on again, and the performance of the play is blandly resumed.”
and
“Events stream past us like these crowds and the face of each is seen only for a minute. What is urgent is not urgent for ever but only ephemerally. All work and all love, the search for wealth and fame, the search for truth, like itself, are made up of moments which pass and become nothing. Yet through this shaft of nothings we drive onward with that miraculous vitality that creates our precarious habitations in the past and the future. So we live: a spirit that broods and hovers over the continual death of time, the lost meaning, the unrecaptured moment, the unremembered face, until the final chop that ends all our moments and plunges that spirit back into the void from which it came.”
Now that I come to think of it while writing this review, Murdoch’s book is not bad at all: it’s actually really good, but it just needs a lot more pondering than the others maybe in order to decipher its meanings. She highlights with subtlety that language is a barrier and we are trapped under the net of language: it can create emotional prisons and our feelings become sometimes impossible to express because the power of words is limited. My first reaction was to declare myself disappointed. After reanalyzing my thoughts about this book, I can say that Murdoch has managed to impress me once again with her ability of putting out there very deep psychological problems. I somehow feel like her character Jake Donaghue: I feel that I had a misperception when I finished the book and after a time of pondering, I come to realize through analysis the depth of what I read.
Way to go Murdoch. You’re still among my favorite authors! I knew it that you could not disappoint me!
“Starting a novel is opening a door on a misty landscape; you can still see very little but you can smell the earth and feel the wind blowing.”, says Murdoch. This is how this novel started: promising at the beginning, it seemed to raise a lot of psychological questions. Its intricate plot seemed promising at the beginning as well. Through the book, I felt the author was rather drifting than continuing with the problems introduced upon the reader at first. This might have been only a strategy and having read Murdoch before, I was actually expecting this, but in the end, the problems were still there, alive and untouched. Maybe this was the whole idea: just to put some philosophical ideas out in the open and not really debate on them, but rather to stir the mind of the reader and determine him to ponder upon them. Although I like subtlety, whatever the intention of the writer in this book, the approach was a bit too subtle for me to appreciate it at its fullest.
Jake Donaghue, a rather bohemian writer who once wrote a book, but is now only doing translation work is kicked out of his accommodation and has to look for a solution. He contacts a friend (Dave) for help and he suggests Jake should contact Anna, a woman he had loved years ago. He meets her and a chain of events is determined. Jake gets to find out that everything around him is somehow connected: Anna is in love with a person whom he had considered his best friend, while this friend is in love with Anna’s sister. He had stopped talking to this friend long ago because the only book he published was a modified version of their discussions and he thought his friend (Hugo) would be offended.
As Murdoch says so poetically, “we all live in the interstices of each other’s lives, and we could all get a surprise if we could see everything”. Jake Donaghue gets to know a bit of this "everything" and he realizes that all his perceptions had been totally wrong. As I have read in one of the reviews from Goodreads, I do think too that “Under the Net” is a book about language and its inability to express certain things and it stresses on the fact that life itself is an amalgamation of meaningless events to which the individual gives meaning. Jack’s life goes through a series of misunderstandings and all this mixture of chance and chaos conspires to transform his perception of life: his past, present and future rewrite themselves and renegotiate his true feelings towards Anna, Hugo and his writing career. His revelations through the book are described very poetically by Murdoch in the next fragments:
“What then took place within my mind was much the same as happens in a huge theater if the lights suddenly go out, and someone shrilly screams in the swift-winged darkness, and other voices join in, resulting in a blind tempest, with the black thunder of panic growing-until suddenly the lights come on again, and the performance of the play is blandly resumed.”
and
“Events stream past us like these crowds and the face of each is seen only for a minute. What is urgent is not urgent for ever but only ephemerally. All work and all love, the search for wealth and fame, the search for truth, like itself, are made up of moments which pass and become nothing. Yet through this shaft of nothings we drive onward with that miraculous vitality that creates our precarious habitations in the past and the future. So we live: a spirit that broods and hovers over the continual death of time, the lost meaning, the unrecaptured moment, the unremembered face, until the final chop that ends all our moments and plunges that spirit back into the void from which it came.”
Now that I come to think of it while writing this review, Murdoch’s book is not bad at all: it’s actually really good, but it just needs a lot more pondering than the others maybe in order to decipher its meanings. She highlights with subtlety that language is a barrier and we are trapped under the net of language: it can create emotional prisons and our feelings become sometimes impossible to express because the power of words is limited. My first reaction was to declare myself disappointed. After reanalyzing my thoughts about this book, I can say that Murdoch has managed to impress me once again with her ability of putting out there very deep psychological problems. I somehow feel like her character Jake Donaghue: I feel that I had a misperception when I finished the book and after a time of pondering, I come to realize through analysis the depth of what I read.
Way to go Murdoch. You’re still among my favorite authors! I knew it that you could not disappoint me!
May 1, 2020
I must admit that I find this novel difficult to rate. It was quite a fast read for me and every time I picked it up I did enjoy it, but the writing skill and the plot progress varied. It is my first Iris Murdoch novel and I think I need to read more.
January 5, 2012
تدور الرواية حول جيك و هو مؤلف و صحفي يعيش حياة فوضوية متبطلة، لا تلوي على شيء و لا حتى للشهرة و المال، أشبه بالريشة التي تستسلم للريح و لتأخذها حيثما شاءت، و حول بعض الأحداث التي حصلت له في فترة من فترات حياته مع أصدقائه، و خاصة هوجو، الرجل غريب الأطوار الذي يعيش فلسفته الخاصة، لدرجة التخلي عن ثروته أكثر من مرة لأجل فكرة... و الكثير من النقاش و الحوار حول عدد من القضايا... و الكثير من ضمير الأنا للراوي جيك و عالمه الداخلي و تبصر في تحليل نفسه و مشاعره و تناقضاته...0
ليس هناك من أحداث لا مألوفة، فالرواية هذه ليست قائمة على الحدث الغريب بالشكل الأساسي، و لا حتى على اللغة الشاعرية، و لكنها أقرب لتكون رحلة نفسية للبطل، و رؤية هذا النوع من الشخصية البوهيمية التي تميل للتنظير و الانفصال عن الواقع و كيف تتعامل مع الحياة الواقعية... و من خلالها تقرأ الكثير من الحوارات الذكية و النظرة المتعمقة للكون و لكثير من أمور الحياة، بحيث تشعر أن كل شيء ممكن فلسفته حتى الألعاب النارية... و في النهاية قامت المؤلفة بتمرير الحل، الحل الذي يساعد هذه الشخصية على أن تضبط نفسها فلا تجنح للعدمية المطبقة، من خلال اكتشافه أن العمل اليدوي و رؤية انجازه رأي العين، يفيد في توازنه، لأن العمل الذهني المحض يترك في المرء احساسا بأنه لم ينجز شيئا... نهاية جعلتني أبتسم و أتذكر الأستاذ الذي ذكر لي هذه الفكرة ذات مرة على سبيل النصيحة...0
لن أدعي أن الرواية تحفة أدبية، أو ربما تكون، لست متأكدة تماما لأني قرأتها في ��زاج سيء جدا، و لكنها مع ذلك أمتعتني بجملها الحاذقة و المتبصرة، و بأسلوب معالجة كل هذه الأفكار الذهنية بطريقة مسلية لم يتسرب الملل خلالها إلي أبدا، و بأسلوب لا يخلو من ظرف بحيث لم أشعر بالانقباض... و حقيقة من أكثر ما لفت نظري و أعجبني أنه من النادر لي أن أقرأ لامرأة تفكر أو تكتب هكذا...0
و في النهاية، الشكر طبعا للزميل الذي نصحني بالرواية و قال أنها ستعجبني، فما كنت لأقدم من نفسي على شرائها، إذ أن دار الآداب لا تتخلى عن عادتها من إخراج كتبها بهيئة تعسة بحيث أنك لا تصدق أن غلافا غبيا كهذا الغلاف يحوي كل هذا العمق و الذكاء خلفه... 0
ليس هناك من أحداث لا مألوفة، فالرواية هذه ليست قائمة على الحدث الغريب بالشكل الأساسي، و لا حتى على اللغة الشاعرية، و لكنها أقرب لتكون رحلة نفسية للبطل، و رؤية هذا النوع من الشخصية البوهيمية التي تميل للتنظير و الانفصال عن الواقع و كيف تتعامل مع الحياة الواقعية... و من خلالها تقرأ الكثير من الحوارات الذكية و النظرة المتعمقة للكون و لكثير من أمور الحياة، بحيث تشعر أن كل شيء ممكن فلسفته حتى الألعاب النارية... و في النهاية قامت المؤلفة بتمرير الحل، الحل الذي يساعد هذه الشخصية على أن تضبط نفسها فلا تجنح للعدمية المطبقة، من خلال اكتشافه أن العمل اليدوي و رؤية انجازه رأي العين، يفيد في توازنه، لأن العمل الذهني المحض يترك في المرء احساسا بأنه لم ينجز شيئا... نهاية جعلتني أبتسم و أتذكر الأستاذ الذي ذكر لي هذه الفكرة ذات مرة على سبيل النصيحة...0
لن أدعي أن الرواية تحفة أدبية، أو ربما تكون، لست متأكدة تماما لأني قرأتها في ��زاج سيء جدا، و لكنها مع ذلك أمتعتني بجملها الحاذقة و المتبصرة، و بأسلوب معالجة كل هذه الأفكار الذهنية بطريقة مسلية لم يتسرب الملل خلالها إلي أبدا، و بأسلوب لا يخلو من ظرف بحيث لم أشعر بالانقباض... و حقيقة من أكثر ما لفت نظري و أعجبني أنه من النادر لي أن أقرأ لامرأة تفكر أو تكتب هكذا...0
و في النهاية، الشكر طبعا للزميل الذي نصحني بالرواية و قال أنها ستعجبني، فما كنت لأقدم من نفسي على شرائها، إذ أن دار الآداب لا تتخلى عن عادتها من إخراج كتبها بهيئة تعسة بحيث أنك لا تصدق أن غلافا غبيا كهذا الغلاف يحوي كل هذا العمق و الذكاء خلفه... 0
November 28, 2016
This is my first Iris Murdoch novel (although I've been meaning to read something of hers for years) and I was half expecting it to be dense and somewhat stuffy (literary award winning author and all that jazz). Much to my great delight, it was no such thing.
This book has a likeable, somewhat puckish, picaresque protagonist who leads you through a few days of his life in a conversational, easy-to-read style. We see the carousel of his relationships as the people in his life dance around him, we witness his philosophy of life as it evolves and grows and we share in some rather amusing hi-jinx involving a canine movie star.
While it didn't exactly blow me away or move me deeply I can honestly say Under The Net was a joy to read. This audiobook version was read by Samuel West and his narration was superb. So much so that I'm tempted to check out other audiobooks he's read, regardless of author.
This book has a likeable, somewhat puckish, picaresque protagonist who leads you through a few days of his life in a conversational, easy-to-read style. We see the carousel of his relationships as the people in his life dance around him, we witness his philosophy of life as it evolves and grows and we share in some rather amusing hi-jinx involving a canine movie star.
While it didn't exactly blow me away or move me deeply I can honestly say Under The Net was a joy to read. This audiobook version was read by Samuel West and his narration was superb. So much so that I'm tempted to check out other audiobooks he's read, regardless of author.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 1,048 reviews