A Land Apart is an excellent collection of short stories and poetry by different South African writers. It is divided into three different sections each devoted to the main groups of South Africa. This book gives a clear glimpse of life in South Africa during apartheid through the eyes of three different groups. It is a clear depiction of the times and struggles of all South Africans during their struggle. This book is excellent for anyone wanting an inside view of South Africa during apartheid.

The novel imagines Dostoevsky's life between the the publication of Crime and Punishment and before he began writing The Brothers Karamazov. It is a meditation on pain, loss, and love, as Dostoevsky's stepson, Pavel, has died. He tries obsessively to reclaim some of this boy's past by renting the room he once lived in and conversing with the people who knew Pavel to ascertain whether he committed suicide or was a victim of murder. Coetzee's style in this novel is much like Dostoevsky's. There is a lot of inner monologue and the thoughts and anguish of the characters are always known. It makes you think about the similarities and differences between the characters an author writes about and the life of the author himself. Coetzee seems to say that they are almost impossible to distinguish from each other and I will agree to some extent, although I was distracted somewhat by this extreme portrayal. Overall, a nice glimpse into the life of Dostoevsky (though I found it akward that Coetzee changed the year of Pavel's death) and the atmosphere of pre-revolutionary Russia.

I must say that the present tense of the book was shocking for me. It seemed to drive me relentlessly onto the next page and then the next....
While certainly, some of the facts aren't truly historical or necessarily accurate, that doesn't really affect the nature of the story. This book isn't concerned with being totally accurate in the details. It is the voyage that Dostoevsky makes internally from his initial knowledge of his step-sons death to his ability to release all the emotions, pain, fears etc associated with it.
This is about Dostoevsky (and maybe authors in general). It isnt about "the facts."
Anyway, I thought it was great. I look forward to reading more...

A father travels to Petersburg upon learning of the death of his beloved stepson, Pavel. There he resides in his son's apartment for what he intends to be a time of remembrance and vigilance. Yet, before he can even begin this time of healing, he is spun into a web of unknowns and deception. The police, who are keeping some of Pavel's personal papers, say that he killed himself while the social group to which he belonged believe he was murdered. Add to all this confusion a landlady whom the father finds himself totally taken by and you have The Master of Petersburg. Coetzee's writing is, as usual, superior. He has the ability to draw in the reader and then keep him there wanting to better understand the feelings of the protagonist and the forces that surround him. I think Coetzee is one of the best-kept secrets in the entire literary world. Although he may have won many a prize, the typical reader is not familiar with his name or his works.

In the Heart of the Country tells the story of Magda, an old spinster who lives à huis clos with her father, her step-mother and the servants Henrik and Klein Anna, on a far-flung farm in the middle of the veld. The novel is set at an unspecified time, the present tense heightens this sense of timelessness. Madga's dis-aster starts at her birth since she is not the male heir that the baas has long wished for and who will keep the lineage alive. Therefore, Magda's only way of making a show of resistance to this despotic patriarch is to write her story and make her voice heard so as not to be "one of the forgotten ones of history" (3).
The novel is structured in fragments numbered from 1 to 266 to convey a seeming sense of linearity and thus give the reader a precarious fil conducteur to hold on to. But, by and by, the reading becomes somewhat disorienting and dis-astrous. Indeed, the boundary between reality and imagination is often blurred to our detriment since we vacillate endlessly between the two. Magda's narrative is riddled with adverbs of uncertainty, repetitions and at times contradictions. Yet, she has managed to accomplish an ingenious feat : captivate the reader's attention until the last page of the novel only to realize that s/he comes out of it none the wiser because all the contradictions that permeate the novel remain baffling.
Coetzee's novel achieves a double goal. First, to give voice to the voiceless Other, Magda, allowing her to dissolve the totalising linearity of the patriarchal discourse. Second, to condemn Apartheid as an authoritarian regime and portend its demise, and in both endeavours Coetzee's In the Heart of the Country has succeeded masterfully.

This novel is Coetzee's descent into madness essay, but it is more of a plane crach into madness. His most openly philosophical work except perhaps Master of Petersburg.

It is ruthless, graphic, horrific, magnificent, brilliant and unfathomably profound.

It is not a question of loving Coetzee, but of loving great literature. This is great literature. Disregard poor reviews. This work is so well written, so moving and finely wrought. It stands beside not only the best of Coetzee's work, but also the best work of the 20th Century. It is fiction and meta-fiction. A pastoral novel and a novel about the pastoral novel. An acheivement of the hightest order!

Though I'm happy to say that I've read this book as a member of the English-literature canon, it has been a dry read. Inspired to approach it by the movie Castaway (Note however that the film is not based on the novel), I'm confronted by a overwhelming need for a modern interpretation of the stranded-isle genre.

Slow in action; ponderous with 18th century circuitious, flowery and repetitive prose; haphazardly concerned with supportive plot details -- it wasn't a long read, but about as enjoyable and juicy as a Mexican pastry.

I'd be surprised if this is still on school reading lists today considering it reflects an appauling stance on slavery and white supremacy (though true to the era). Furthermore, it openly espouses a fundamental, Calvinist theology that most school districts would altogether avoid.

Crusoe's spiritual journey is the sole theme of the book that addresses any sort of intellectual character development. Even though it grows distastful in some respects, expunge this topic from the novel and your left with a comic book. And if reduced to a characture, why wouldn't you opt for something like Stevenson's child-friendly Swiss Family Robinson? Something filled with adventure, intrigue, humor and drama?

To make this novel more enduring it would certainly have benefitted to analyze Crusoe's enduring lonliness and its effects on his psyche. Until the character Friday appears, Defoe barely mentions solitude even being an issue for Crusoe. Is not man a fundamentally social creature? Would there not be painful, enduring mental extirpations to work through?

Sigh...what else is there to say but it's a book to check off the list and move on.

Robinson Crusoe is one of the first English novels. Written by Daniel DeFoe in the early 18th century during the rise of economic theory, this book chronicles the struggle of an economic hero shipwrecked on an island. He takes advantage of people, always looking to make money or increase economic value. Although Crusoe has religious experiences and gets preachy at times (DeFoe was of Puritan stock at a time when Puritanism was a significant force), Crusoe is a practical man. He does not let morals get in the way of carving out a prosperous life -- there are scenes where the main character is no role model. The novel is episodic, with Crusoe hopping from one scene to another. The narration isn't smooth. However, the "flaws" when compared to later writings may be forgiven because Robinson Crusoe is an early novel. Writers had not worked out the fine points of the genre. DeFoe is an important early English novelist who cobbled together economic theory, religious opinion, travel writing, and borrowed material from a contemporary shipwreck victim to create a work of fiction. Robinson Crusoe is often mislabelled as a childrens book. Perhaps in a watered down abridgement, it is a good children's book. The original, complete, unabridged work is a literary classic that should be read by any student of English literature.

Robinson Crusoe is best taken at two levels, the literal adventure story of survival on an isolated island and as a metaphor for finding one's way through life. I recommend that everyone read the book who is willing to look at both of those levels. If you only want the adventure story, you may not be totally satisfied. The language, circumstances, and attitudes may put you off so that you would prefer to be reading a Western or Space-based adventure story with a more modern perspective.

Few books require anyone to rethink the availability and nature of the fundamentals of life: Water, food, shelter, clothing, and entertainment. Then having become solitary in our own minds as a reader, Defoe adds the extraordinary complication of providing a companion who is totally different from Crusoe. This provides the important opportunity to see Crusoe's civilized limitations compared to Friday's more natural ones. The comparisons will make for thought-provoking reading for those who are able to overcome the stalled thinking that the educated, civilized route is always the best.

One of the things that I specially liked about the book is the Crusoe is an ordinary person in many ways, making lots of mistakes, and having lots of setbacks. Put a modern Superhero (from either the comic books, adventure or spy novels, or the movies) into this situation, and it would all be solved in a few minutes with devices from the heel of one's shoe. Maybe I'm old fashioned, but I liked the trial-and-error explorations. They seemed just like everyday life, and made the book's many lessons come home to me in a more fundamental way.

Have a good solitary trip through this book!

A book plenty of sophisms, and a bad argumentation on philosophical and onthological topics. That's the synthesis of this book written by the south african writer J. M Coetzee. In this writing the author tries to identify himself as a professor linked to movement Vegana (an strict and extremist branch of vegetarianism that consists not only on stop eating meat but also not to use any kind of animal product -which is very very difficult, and almost imposible, since many things are made from animal; from gelatin, brushes, clothes, shoes, most of the aliments, etc-) who gives speeches about the rights of the animals, falling into many errors about the soul and the consciusness of the animals (for those who have studied philosophy it is clear that only we -the homo sapiens sapiens- have a rational soul, in order to understand the world, and that the animals doesn't matter whether we care of them or not)Along with this arguments, Coetzee seems he does not know the ontological and metaphisical diferences of the soul (what I would prefer to call life principle) on the animals and on the human beings. Coetzee claims to stop the 'butchering' (maybe he doesn't know that almost neither of the "big religions" ban animal products consumption -obviosuly, and as well as the other natural resources, animals can be used to human consumption MODERATELY)Coetzee has wrong ideas about the topic, this makes "The lives of animals" a bad book based on its argumentations. It's sad that authors cannot have clearful bases for what they say. Coetzee, you are wrong.

This book was dull and lifeless. I found the story to be just plain irritating and could not wait to reach the end. The only part of the book where I felt that there was at least something to grasp onto was the section written by Peter Singer. Other than that small snippet, I found nothing else of interest. It was like eagerly anticipating a lecture only to have it be really, really, really boring and nothing like you expected. Only the book is worse than that because you have to read it, so you can't let your mind wander or do other things while the speaker is speaking. I know I didn't have to finish it, but I always try to finish books in hopes that they get better. This one didn't. Perhaps it was because I was hoping to learn something new about animal rights and where it is heading, or at least to solidify the knowledge that I have, but instead it did nothing but waste my time. I highly suggest getting a different book.

Literature in many respects is very similar to music. In order to catch the subtle nuances, the beauty or message of the piece, requires more than one sitting. A single piece can appear deceptively simple on the first hearing or reading. But on closer examination, the book, poem or song takes on a more complex significance; you find yourself pouring over the work time and time again, digging deeper into its potential meaning. J.M. Coetzee's ~The Lives of Animals` is one such example.

This book is short, simple but elegantly written; containing ideas and arguments that could well take weeks to adequately unpack to reach a semblance of understanding of the many issues it proposes we ponder. In short, the novel concerns itself with the contentious issue of animal rights. More specifically, animal cruelty, in regards to our treatment of the edible, warm blooded variety: cattle, poultry et al. Reaching for a hard hitting comparison to make his point, Coetzee uses the Nazi concentrations camps and the genocide of the Jews as an example of how we currently treat and prepare the animals for slaughter in the henhouses and abattoirs around the planet. This comparison is flawed to some extent, (which a character in the novel points out) but Coetzee manages to make the similarities work as the novel progresses and the arguments are fleshed-out. However this is not the main thesis of the book.

The central question the book proposes we consider is whether animals have consciousness. And if they do have 'reasoning' consciousness, how can we justify their slaughter for our own gain? Our current Darwinian view of the world, that is, human beings hovering at the top of some evolutionary hierarchy, and all other living things falling in neat categories below, at the end of the 19th century, paved the way for some pretty horrific wars and some juicy justifications for the crimes committed in the 20th century. The Nazis used Darwin and his theories to justify their massive slaughter of Jews, gypsies, homosexuals and avant-garde artists, particularly the German Expressionists, calling it 'degenerative art'. Are animal's mere biological automatons? Are they 'degenerate', and therefore an easy target for exploitation? And if animals do have consciousness, what rights do they have?

This is not the place to launch into the arguments of animal rights or human rights for that matter. But what Coetzee has done with this exceptional book, is to present these important issues and complex philosophical arguments in a fictional format, enabling the subject to be more accessible to anyone interested in the way we treat our fellow creatures.

Spend an hour reading this book; then read it again - you will not be disappointed.

Some of the absolute worst, most pretentious, emptiest, and most ultimately worthless drivel I have ever read. Jorge Luis Borges, regardless of all the idolatry that's been heaped upon him, had a surprising number of misses, and maybe nothing much to say. But I'll grant that he had a few high spots. Not this guy. Very derivative and disappointing stuff...I'll go elsewhere for literary thrills.

This slim volume contains two superficially discreet narratives. Coetzee is once again brilliant. His form here is slightly experimental, and the prose does not display quite the crystalline exactitude found in "Disgrace", "Waiting for the Barbarians", "Age of Iron", or "The Life and Times of Michael K". Here he works in a softer vein, more like "Foe" or "In the Heart of the Country".

The content is classic Coetzee. Unflinching. Sometimes his clarity and realism lead me towards existential despair. But to emerge from any of his works is to emerge stronger, emboldened by the power of the brutally honest and righteous.

This book might be about passion and compassion. It is definitely an examination of human psychology, specifically how it is formed, informed, reformed, and deformed by fascistic social/political structures.

"Dusklands" is a fascinating read. It illuminates another facet (or two) of the human condition. It is deceptively quick light reading. Subtly profound while intellectually massive, it is a delicate jackhammer. It is so good, and so right, that it is out of print. Do what it takes to find a copy.