صبوات أو سكسوس هي أول الكتب في "ثلاثية الصلب الوردي " والتي تصنف كونها سيرة ذاتية لهنري ميلر

ميلر من الرواة القلّه الذين يمتلكون دقة الوصف وقوة التعبير حتى لكأن المشاهد تصوّر أمامك في فيلم طويل .. وطويل جداً .. وهذا ما قد يعيبه .. إذ أن إيقاع الملل يستبد بك حين وتتمكن أنت منه حيناً آخر

يحكي الجزء الأول معاناة فشل زواجه وطريقه في الوقوع بحب امرأة أحلامه التي كانت "عاهره" .. وصراع الكبار في وظيفته الصغيره

هي بالتأكيد كحياة أي كاتب آخر .. ولكنك ستعشق الكثير من الاقتباسات التي لن تراها إلا تجسّد حالتك بالأمس .. او الآن أو ربما غداً

الجدير بالذكر أن روايات هنري كلها +21

Henry Miller reminds me of Norman Mailer in some ways. You have to accept the good comes with the bad for both these guys. Sexus is probably the best representation of that maxim as you're bludgeoned over the head for five hundred pages with some of Miller's sleaziest and smartest prose. You will either love or viscerally hate what he has to offer. No doubt about it though, this guy could write.

هنري يظهر للناس نفسه .. بكل سفاله و طيبه، بكل بساطه وعفويه. تحدث ميلر في هذا العمل باجزائة عن نفسه وعن مجتمعه في اهم حقبه من حقب المجتمع الامريكي

How interesting that many readers respond to Anais Nin's sexuality so positively and then react to Henry Miller with such repulsion. I think it's important to note that Nin is the true pornographer (she writes unusually sensitive and socially and psychologically complex pornography, but it would be difficult to claim that the object of her work is not erotic arousal, while Miller's primary interest throughout the novel is his character's progress as an artist). Miller's explicit scenes have various functions in the work and, honestly, when so much of Henry's energy is devoted to his relationships with women and his envy of female bodies, I submit that the omission of the sexual aspect of these concerns would be not only prudish but cowardly. But I also think there is more at work here, in terms of Miller's motives, than a simple commitment to honest writing (why, for instance, don't we hear more about Henry's bowels).

I was never bored while reading this book. Miller’s attitude toward life is so exhilarating that he makes it quite easy for you to hop on for one of his little unhinged joyrides. I half expected the same disjointed erotica from Tropic of Cancer, which all in all struck me as repetitive and dull, but here Miller appears to have matured as a writer (both thematically and stylistically). The erotica is surely present and I ain’t complaining, but what makes the book is that it manages to go much beyond that, and he does so while maintaining the same uncontrived live-or-let-die approach.

I really liked this book. The same way I liked "The dice man", "Zen and the art of motorcycle maintanance" or "A moveable feast".

The sex descriptions are awesome. The lust for life that Miller has is so contagious.

An eye opener.

حسنا هنرى اخبرنى كيف أقيم هذا الكتاب ؟؟
من المفترض انها الجزء الاول من ثلاثية الصلب الوردى التى اساسها حياته الخاصة .
وما تم كتابته عن العمل
ان مافعله هنرى انه تناول السنوات الجوهرية للحياة فى أمريكا حين كان يتعلم فى البداية كيف يكتب وعلاقة الحب الجوهرية فى حياته وفحصهما بدقة ولكن من وجهة نظر لاحقة اكثر نضجا بكثير فكانت النتيجة سردا ساحرا بصورة لاتصدق عملا ملحميا بالمعنى الشخصى والاجتماعى والاجمالى

حقيقة لااستطيع تصنيف هذا العمل لكنه مزيج غريب وجذاب احداث حياتيه يومية ، وفلسفة ، واراء اجتماعية وسياسية ، وأفكار، وجنس .

فى العادة عندما اكتب مراجعة تتدفق الافكار او احساسى تجاه ��لعمل لكن هنا اجد صعوبة ، بداية اجد تسميتها رواية ليست صحيحة فلن تجد حبكة وقصة متكاملة ويمكن تلخيصها فى جملتين السيد ميلر وزوجته وحبيبته واصدقاءه ومعارفة .
اما الجزء الاخير فحقيقة لم افهم ماذا يريد هنرى لم افهمه جيدا ..

لكن ذلك لم يمنع ان هناك شئ يجذبنى للقراءة بشدة هناك افكار داخلية ومناقشات خارجية واحاسيس واراء جذبتنى . تشعر انه يتحدث عن كل شئ ف الحياة والمجتمع ليس عن شى محدد ، تجده يأخذك فى جميع الاتجاهات .
《مع هنرى ميلر مش هتقدر تغمض عنيك 》

Henry miller at his best. Even when the prose is tedious and long-winded, his humor shines through. Mara (later Mona) is a complicated figure. Even racially, she is ambiguous. All one learns is that she has no real history or personality. She is custom made for Miller and you feel that she fits like a mold for any man or woman she desires. I'm struggling to write a review because the contents of the book are all over the place. Yes, this is roughly about Henry Miller's third wife and their romance, but you get a huge perspective on life in 1920s New York. You get vulgarity, the vulnerability of young people who move there, the cynics that Miller befriends, and the general grime. Miller never romanticizes a person or local but experience itself. He states that the phantasmagoria is the past shackled to man; he references Nietzsche by calling man a rope between animal and God. He wants to live. He is ravenous and full of love (he states he loves everything but gravy the most of all). He hopes to collect moments and mull them over piece by piece. He is Whitman's successor.

I intended to give it 3 stars but because of the last 2 chapters - almost 50 pages - i decided that it deserve the 4 stars.

The big difference between "Sexus" and his first two gems "Tropic of Cancer" and "Tropic of Capricorn" is that here there's a lot of sex without any aesthetic or artistic purposes. Also many times i feel he constrained the events and encounters with other characters. his ordinary nonsense about life and women reach another high limit.

He still got the great talent of a bohemian artist, still use the most remarkable language among American novelists. You can keep reading for many successive hours without felling boring except for the unnecessary porn scenes.

The most remarkable parts in Sexus are :
- When he tried to get rid of Maude by convincing her ex-lover to save her from him.
- The party he arranged for his friends when he got the bonus.
- His definition of creation and creativity.
- How Melanie got into the book.
- His dream of Una.
- Kent Hamson's letter.
- Finally the most beautiful parts i've ever read by Miller until now is the last 50 pages which starts with Cleo at Minsky brothers then the two deaths of Osmanli the Turk, and the end with Miller the dog and his woof! woof!.

Some of Miller's most inspiring writing, I think. This is the kind of book you want to come with a highlighter so you can remember where those amazing passages are to quote again and again. That said, it's not for everybody, especially prudes. The gratuitious sex scenes almost turned me off from this book only for their sheer unbelievability and ridiculous frequency... but it all made sense in the end... or rather once I started reading Plexus, which contains absolutely NO sex scenes at all. Sexus covers the period of Miller's life when he was trying very hard to BECOME a writer, that is, work up the nerve to actually write something. Plexus covers the period when he actually does and becomes an artist. So the shift from Sexus to Plexus can be seen as the shift from the carnal to the intellectual life. Of course, it's much more fun to figure it out by reading it. Sorry for the spoiler.

A piece of transgressive fiction that draws upon Céline's 'Voyage au bout de la Nuit' to affirm a lust for life and love for sex like no other. While at first glance it may seem superficial or frivolous, drowning in its own sea of lustful scenes, there is depth to be discovered with each new reading. The trilogy constitutes a paradigmatic self-inquiry into the depth of the soul of a man forever in between being in love with everything and loving nothing at all.

Much to say about nothing