SEVEN CIRCUMSTANCES

Original Book Reviews, Recommendations and Discussions


The trolls Ūgh and Bõögâr are getting their own perfume

In the previous post I discussed Ūgh and Bõögâr, the creations of Berlin-based Icelandic artist Egill Sæbjörnsson. The two trolls are huge, ugly, temperamental, artistic, and very fond of Egill, coffee, and eating tourists. They are also smelly. At 36 metres tall, they need a lot of deodorant and perfume. In the interests of cleaning up the trolls before they stink out all the tourists whom they haven’t eaten at the Venice Biennale 2017, the trolls are getting their own perfume called Noise. Continue reading


Mythology Meets Art in Venice – Trolls and Gods

Sometimes artists use themes or characters from Mythology, and currently, two artists have done this in Venice, Italy, in exhibitions running concurrently. In one case, Iceland-born artist Egill Sæbjörnsson has created two enormous and ugly trolls, which are a staple of Nordic Mythology, and in another, British artist Damien Hirst has created sculptures that depict many well-known Ancient Greek, Roman, Egyptian and Nautical myths. In this post I take a look at the references in the exhibitions of both artists and hazard a guess at what they may be trying to say. Opposing arguments are to be expected at important art exhibitions but these two have caused a particularly high level of puzzlement and publicity. In the case of the trolls – the hullabaloo is, well…because they are trolls. And in the case of the classical myths, it is because it is a huge exhibition by a very famous artist. Continue reading


Flummoxed by a “J” – J – A Novel, by Howard Jacobson

J by Howard Jacobson (Originally published: August 14, 2014, 326 pp., publisher: Jonathan Cape)

Sometimes a novel just flummoxes me. I have tried my best to get to grips with “J” by Howard Jacobson, which was shortlisted for the 2014 Man Booker Prize, but the novel made me feel vaguely worried and confused while I was reading it. That was probably the author’s intention, since those sort of feelings drove him to write it. It is set in a Britain of the near future, at a time after a calamitous global event. This event is called “WHAT HAPPENED, IF IT HAPPENED” or “Twitternacht” (with reference to “Kristallnacht” and Twitter.) As a result of this event, many people got killed, or were forced to move to other countries or back where they came from; everybody got given random, different names (oddly spelled), social media was banned and art was reduced to inoffensive, pleasing aesthetics so as not to arouse any extreme emotions ever again. The protagonists are “Kevern”, a carver of  Welsh love spoons, and his lover, “Ailinn”.  Continue reading

The header for this and other posts contain images from both original and fan fiction/sequels by other authors. In this case, Tintin and Snowy (left) come from Rodier’s version, the Little Prince (adapted, centre) comes from the original by De Saint-Exupéry, and the Young Prince (right) comes from A.G. Roemmers’ version. All three images have been used under the terms of “fair use”: “In its most general sense, a fair use is any copying of copyrighted material done for a limited and ‘transformative’ purpose, such as to comment upon, criticize, or parody a copyrighted work.” (Rich Stim, Stanford University Libraries). The main image, of Paris, France, is by M.F. O’Brien, used with permission.


The Unfinished “Tintin” – The tricky business of fan fiction versus copyright, Part 3 of 4

Tintin and the Alph-Art, by Hergé (Georges Remi)

Tintin and Alph-Art, by Hergé (real name: Georges Prosper Remi)

On the subject of fan fiction versus copyright rules, I am discussing examples of three cases of what seems to be copyright infringement of famous books, starting with the case of the two “Alephs” – Jorge Luis Borges vs. Pablo Katchadjian. Now it is the turn of Tintin and Alph-Art, a Tintin comic book which was incomplete at the time of author and artist Hergé’s death, and which was completed and recreated by Canadian Yves Rodier in an impressive feat of fan fiction.  Continue reading

The header for this and other posts contain images from both original and fan fiction/sequels by other authors. In this case, Tintin and Snowy (left) come from Rodier’s version, the Little Prince (adapted, centre) comes from the original by De Saint-Exupéry, and the Young Prince (right) comes from A.G. Roemmers’ version. All three images have been used under the terms of “fair use”: “In its most general sense, a fair use is any copying of copyrighted material done for a limited and ‘transformative’ purpose, such as to comment upon, criticize, or parody a copyrighted work.” (Rich Stim, Stanford University Libraries). The main image, of Paris, France, is by M.F. O’Brien, used with permission.


“The Aleph” – The tricky business of fan fiction versus copyright, Part 2 of 4

To continue the discussion on fan fiction versus copyright, here follows the case of the two “Alephs”, one by Jorge Luis Borges and the other by Pablo Katchadjian. In Buenos Aires, Argentina, writer Pablo Katchadjian is currently being sued for plagiarism, or the re-use without permission of copyrighted work, because he “fattened”, padded, added to or otherwise re-used the novel The Aleph, written in 1945, by the famous Argentine writer Jorge Luis Borges. Katchadjian says, in his defence, that his version of the novel, called The Fattened Aleph, is a “lengthened” version of Borges’s short story and is not plagiarism because it is “an experiment” and “open about its source”. An open-and-shut case this is not. Continue reading

The header for this and other posts contain images from both original and fan fiction/sequels by other authors. In this case, Tintin and Snowy (left) come from Rodier’s version, the Little Prince (adapted, centre) comes from the original by De Saint-Exupéry, and the Young Prince (right) comes from A.G. Roemmers’ version. All three images have been used under the terms of “fair use”: “In its most general sense, a fair use is any copying of copyrighted material done for a limited and ‘transformative’ purpose, such as to comment upon, criticize, or parody a copyrighted work.” (Rich Stim, Stanford University Libraries). The main image, of Paris, France, is by M.F. O’Brien, used with permission.


The tricky business of fan fiction versus copyright, Part 1 of 4

2-fan-fiction2

The header for this and other posts contain images from both original and fan fiction/sequels by other authors. In this case, Tintin and Snowy (left) come from Rodier’s version, the Little Prince (adapted, centre) comes from the original by De Saint-Exupéry, and the Young Prince (right) comes from A.G. Roemmers’ version. All three images have been used under the terms of “fair use”: “In its most general sense, a fair use is any copying of copyrighted material done for a limited and ‘transformative’ purpose, such as to comment upon, criticize, or parody a copyrighted work.” (Rich Stim, Stanford University Libraries). The main photo, of Paris, France, is by M.F. O’Brien, used with permission.

The Era of the Reboot and Sequel

Whenever an author adds a new book on to a successful novel or series of novels, comparisons are inevitable and fans are not always kind – like with To Set a Watchman, Harper Lee’s final and second only novel after To Kill a Mockingbird. Comparisons can get particularly odious when another author takes over a book “franchise” or a particular novel’s subjects, characters or writing style. It takes enormous skill to write a follow-up or sequel to a successful novel or film, especially if you are not the original author. There is a very thin line between copying the original writer’s style and writing it in your own style while maintaining the “magic” or success factor of the original work.  Apart from skill, it is also about copyright. And copyright is complicated.  Continue reading


GoodReads 2016 – A Year in Books

Your Year in Books Report from GoodReads, 2016

Your Year in Books Report from GoodReads, 2016

This is the report of my year on GoodReads.com, where I repost short versions of my reviews. Goodreads still has the “star” system of ratings which I’m not crazy about, simply because it lacks subtlety. You can “not like” a book while having found it excellent. It might have been masterfully written but left a bad aftertaste – or recurring nightmares. Or you can say you “really liked it” but have to confess that you don’t know why, or that you didn’t understand it, or that it is forgettable. It’s a flawed system, but nou ja, as we say with a shrug in Afrikaans, it is what it is. I note with interest that Science Fiction, as a genre, is simply not as popular as any other, and that Paul Auster, though brilliant, is still an acquired taste, especially his latest novel. It reminds me that I gave Sjón a rare five-star-rating – Icelandic authors was a delightful discovery in 2016. Unsurprisingly, the very-hot-right-now Do Not Say We Have Nothing by Madeleine Thien has been highly rated on GoodReads. Most people I’ve spoken to say it was hard to read, and even harder to make sense of, but they nevertheless were moved and thought it was worthwhile. Funny that – it’s almost on the edge of  being unreadable. But there is a thin line between genius and madness, and a thin line between daringly brilliant and plain old confused, isn’t there. And this one teeters on the tightrope. Continue reading