Customer Rating:  
Summary: I could not finish the book
Comment: I guess I was looking for a sequel to Blindness and this book is defintely not a sequel to Blindness. Book could have been good, but after reading first 40 - 50 pages, I could not bring myself to devoting more time to finish this book.
Customer Rating:
Summary: More About Blindness
Comment: For those who have read Blindness, this book is less a sequel than a haunting extension of the concept of human blindness, all the more provocative since the literal blindness is over. This time, it is not the populace, but the government which tries to keep its citizens blind, but the government itself is blind.
The first half of this novel is grueling, nerve-wracking as it focuses on machiavellian politics, the second half more personal and fluid as we follow one police superintendent who encounters some characters who should be quite familiar to those who have read Blindness, which I would suggest doing before reading this book.
Discomforting, maddening, and tragic, this book may ramble at times, but it begins to become strangely coherent and thoughtful in its latter half.
Customer Rating:
Summary: First - Open Your Eyes and Your Mind
Comment: In Saramago's normal humorous manner, he again takes on the political structure of Portugal. His style cuts with the ease of a razor blade, while easing the pain with his wit. The characters are stereotypes that bring to mind people you have met (think Dilbert). You are only given enough about the characters for you to mentally "slot" them. The meat of the book is the underlying attitudes of the "government" vs. the "people".
With Saramago as with all politics the "story" is never resolved. He always leaves you wanting more. Your imagination will be in overdrive as you consider the implications of the opening chapters.
Though this books stands very well on its own, you should read "Blindness" first (I didn't).
If you have never read Saramago, start with "Baltasar & Blimunda". It will ease you into his style of writing which can be difficult - identifying the speaker; run-on (and on and on) sentences; unusual punctuation.
Customer Rating:
Summary: interesting but i question the style
Comment: The premise is interesting and there is meat to the story: the voters in the capital city decide to cast blank ballots and the democratic government panics. I won't divulge any more because it builds up fairly logically from there but I have an important quibble about the style: the absence of dialogue breaks and proper sentences (everything is a long paragraph, comma after comma, dialogue mixed with description, he said, she said, yes that's true - that kind of stuff) really bothers me. I couldn't see a point to it other than a sort of teenage 'showing-off' of the post-modern type.
Ask yourself, what if the book had proper sentences? It would, of course be easier on the eye (God forbid the author should try being readable). Would it detract from the story? I don't think so. It might, if anything, force the author to be more economical, and leave out some of the mundane descriptions he throws in - I imagine that's a sort of affectation. But hey, he won the Nobel Prize, so I guess he doesn't feel he needs to take advice from anonymous reviewers :)
Customer Rating:
Summary: Another Interesting Allegory From Saramago
Comment: It's amazing to me that Jose Saramago is producing incredibly thought provoking literature at an age when most writers have long since written their best works. Seeing is another example of Saramago's penchant for creating such literature. Among the themes that he explores in Seeing are:
- If democracy is a form of government that truly represents "the will of the people", what happens when "none of the above" gets the most votes?
- Does a government need to create a plausible enemy in order to be effective?
- Just how far will a government go to stay in power?
These are very powerful questions (particularly in this day and age), and Saramago doesn't disappoint in providing his answers. However, wrapping those answers within a farce seems a little odd when considering the seriousness of the issues being presented. While I'm sure Saramago was trying to express his overall opinion of government, he undercuts his message by making the government officials seem comical and more than a little inept. The frequent asides and imaginary conversations also do little to advance the themes.
Still, a slightly below average effort from Saramago is better than 98% of the books in the market today. With its complex themes and thought provoking answers, Seeing deserves to be purchased by anyone who enjoys true literature.
|
