“Solo i forti possono mantenere la rotta nelle paludi della Storia.”


Il pensiero che faccio da subito –ancor prima di aver aperto questo libro- riguarda la singolarità di esordire nel mondo della letteratura con un titolo che mette a fuoco il momento del declino.

[ Crepuscolo – la luce del sole si affievolisce, le ombre cominciano a stiracchiarsi allungando i propri contorni, l’occhio guarda ma fa fatica a definire le figure, c’è la sensazione di essersi lasciati alla spalle ogni cosa (“quel che è fatto è fatto”). ]

Dunque qui s’incontra l’inizio con la fine.
E’ il 1974 quando questo libro viene pubblicato (in Italia arriverà dopo 29 anni: nel 2003!) e John Maxwell Coetzee è rientrato in Sud Africa.
Gli Stati Uniti, infatti, hanno respinto la sua richiesta di residenza dopo la sua partecipazione alle proteste contro la guerra in Vietnam e al conseguente arresto.

Le Terre al Crepuscolo si riferiscono al graduale ed inesorabile scivolare del genere umano in una spietata lotta bestiale.
Mentre gli animali, però, lottano per la sopravvivenza l’uomo lotta per avere una supremazia di diritto esistenziale.
Ogni conquista – dai tempi remoti agli attuali, da lande selvagge a nazioni industriali, sempre e dovunque- ci parla del bisogno dell’Uomo di dichiarare l’Altro come essere talmente inferiore da non essere considerato degno di appartenere alla razza umana.

Questo esordio di Coetzee è ben lontano dall’essere una timida e sommessa entrata nel mondo della Letteratura.
E’ un vero pugno allo stomaco, anzi due, dato che si tratta di due racconti.

Entrambi ci parlano in prima persona nella forma del mémoir.
Entrambi chiamano in causa l’autore-

Il primo racconto s’intitola n   ”Progetto Vietnam”n .

Eugene Dawn è uno specialista di mitografia e il suo dipartimento -presieduto dal Prof Coetzee (!!!)- ha avuto l’incarico di condurre studi sul condizionamento psicologico nella guerra in Vietnam.
Attraverso l’analisi dei miti, Dawn deve redigere un rapporto che valuti i risultati della guerra psicologica condotta attraverso i programmi radiofonici.

” Scopo della guerra psicologica è distruggere il morale del nemico. La guerra psicologica è la funzione negativa della propaganda: la sua funzione positiva è diffondere la convinzione che la nostra autorità politica è forte e durevole. Se lanciata in modo efficace, la guerra di propaganda indebolisce il nemico riducendone la base civile e il bacino di reclutamento e rendendo i suoi soldati, in battaglia e dopo, piú inclini alla defezione, rafforzando al tempo stesso la lealtà della popolazione. L’importanza del suo potenziale politico-militare non può dunque essere mai sottolineata abbastanza.”

Un compito che per Dawn risulterà fatale.
L’analisi dei fatti e soprattutto la visione delle fotografie scattate dai soldati americani sgretolerà la psiche di questo uomo.
E allora di declino di un uomo sarà speculare di quella cinica società che agisce nascondendosi dietro le bandiere.

” Purtroppo non riesco a fare un lavoro creativo in biblioteca. Il fervore creativo mi prende solo nelle prime ore del mattino, quando il nemico che ho in corpo è troppo addormentato per erigere mura difensive contro le incursioni del cervello. Il rapporto sul Vietnam è stato composto guardando a est, verso il sole che sorge, e con addosso il rimpianto pungente (poindre, pungere) di trovarmi inchiodato qui, nelle terre del crepuscolo. Niente di tutto questo si riflette nel rapporto. Quando ho un compito da eseguire, lo eseguo.”

Il secondo è n   ” Il racconto di Jacobus Coetzee”n .

Confesso di non aver capito se Jacobus Coetzee sia personaggio immaginario o un reale avo dello scrittore.
In ogni caso, anche qui abbiamo un memoriale ma siamo catapultati in un’altra epoca e in un altro continente.
Siamo nella seconda nel 1760 nei territori sudafricani.
Jacobus Coetzee è un allevatore ma anche cacciatore: una vita di frontiera divisa tra le richieste dell’olandese Compagnia delle Indie e la necessità di sopravvivere in un ambiente ostile.
Il racconto parla di un viaggio verso sud con lo scopo di cacciare elefanti.
Si tratta di un resoconto di un esploratore e del primo contatto con un mondo sconosciuto: flora, fauna e popolazioni che fino a quel momento non si erano mai incontrate (si parla ad esempio della giraffa come animale mia visto prima).
Gli indigeni già conosciuti sono classificati tra ottentotti (già assoggettati) e boscimani (selvaggi e indomiti).
Il viaggio, però, condurrà all’incontro con un popolo dei Namaqua -che non aveva mai visto l’uomo bianco- e si trasforma ben presto in uno scontro…

”L’avanzata dell’uomo verso il futuro è storia; tutto il resto – il suo gingillarsi lungo il cammino, il suo ripercorrere la stessa strada – appartiene all’aneddotica, alle serate intorno al fuoco.”

Due racconti che parlano la lingua del colonizzatore e con forza denunciano i soprusi del potere al di là di ogni confine di tempo e luogo.

L’umanità del disumano

Il libro raccoglie primi due racconti di Coetzee (del 1974, pubblicati in Italia nel 2003), che si presentano, già dall’esordio, caratterizzati da una scrittura potente, intensa, e da un contenuto terribile. Ambientati in epoche diverse e a latitudini differenti, i due racconti sono accomunati dal tema: il rapporto inestricabile tra bene e male, bianchi e neri, colonialismo e civiltà. Lungi dall’imboccare la rassicurante e scontata via del politically correct, lo scrittore sudafricano affronta con spietata lucidità il non riconciliabile, l'umanità del disumano.

Il protagonista del primo racconto, ambientato negli Stati Uniti della guerra in Vietnam, è Eugene Dawn, psicologo, chiamato dall'esercito americano a elaborare proposte in grado di porre un qualche rimedio agli effetti nefasti della guerra sull'immagine del Paese. Eugene è determinato a raggiungere l'obiettivo e ha molti strumenti a disposizione, ma la materia che tratta è scottante: di ogni dato o fotografia che guarda, memorizza, analizza, con angoscia crescente vede la brutalità inammissibile e l'altrettanto inammissibile "necessità"; la strada per uscirne, l'unica ad apparirgli via via sempre più limpida ed evidente, lo porterà alla pazzia.

Il secondo racconto è ambientato nel XVIII secolo e ripercorre il viaggio di caccia di un lontano avo boero dell’autore – Jacobus Coetzee – nell’entroterra del Sudafrica, fino ad allora inesplorato, tra i nativi Namaqua, una tribù Ottentotta: esseri primitivi, senza alcun principio etico, dagli “occhi pieni di una desolata stupidità”, sporchi, puzzolenti, indolenti… uomini e donne che non riconoscono la superiorità di Jacobus, non lo rispettano, anzi, quando lui si ammala lo abbandonano, lo umiliano. Una volta guarito, Jacobus si riapproprierà della sua identità di “domatore della natura selvaggia” e tra mille peripezie ritroverà la via di casa. Tornerà in seguito al villaggio Namaqua, ci tornerà e si vendicherà. Ah, se si vendicherà!

Due racconti duri, spietati, terribili. Il secondo meglio del primo.

La menos llamativa de las obras de Coetzee que he leído. No es un mal experimento, simplemente palidece frente a sus otras novelas.

Jeg er så forvirret

Coetzee retreads similar material in his work through what I see as near-perfect novels - even a debut, every sentence and paragraph as tight as a short story or poem (Morrison is similar to me in this way). His depth of insight and experimental nature keep the experience of reading his whole oeuvre interesting. This book also made me think of the concept of public guilt, expiation (in this culture we live in) and how Coetzee's own guilt (if it can be called this) seems a genuine form of that. How much more difficult self flagellation is than it seems. Which for us is often a defense, diversionary or escape mechanism.

The first novella funnily reminds me of Modiano's Occupation Trilogy and the second reminds me of Murnane - the metafictional self-referential aspect, the talk of the White man and his view of and movement towards the interior, escape from the coast. I do think that there is something to be said about the greater clarity and straightforwardness of his presentation in latter works - ex. Michael K, but there is also something to be gained in the construction of this one. Especially when possibly the main question is what do we lose to 'time,' 'history,' its curators? In the quietest way? The way the loudest of actions or events become silent by the subtlest means.

Astonishing in every way. The slow build of The Vietnam Project dropping little hints of the madness that is to come and the unnerving colonialism of The Narrative of Jacobus Coatzee filled with violent detail and imagery that is part of the landscape and everyday for r characters.

Dusklands is Coetzee's first book, two stories that combine to be about 120 pages. Watching Coetzee's early musings puts familiar themes on display: racism, colonialism, the writing of history, strained relationships, etc. I enjoyed the work as an artifact of Coetzee's development as an artist and award-winning author.

The writing, itself, is clunkier than what one encounters in Coetzee's later novels (not unexpected). Because the novella is greatly centered around faux historical accounts, the clunky writing combines with a dry academic style to form a less-than-ideal read. Conflict is also discussed more straightforwardly. In my mind, the finest moments of Coetzee's career arise from the calculated subtlety with which he portrays tragedy. I did not find Dusklands to be as delicately rendered.

While I am happy to have finally read Dusklands, I recommend it only for those who want to read Coetzee's entire body of work.

Lacks a sufficient amount of cohesiveness--although we do unearth the strong rebellious nature of the revered South African master that later became his staple. His avantgardism* has been made clear to us since this here, his first novel (An IMPORTANT, historical must read, considering the writer and his envious prominence). It is a clearheaded (not in the editing, mind you) multi message work... that actually fails to build up to a monolithic whole.

"Dusklands" allows for tons of discussion about... political stuff. More impressed with ideas here than with a clear or classic plot.

*here Coetzee writes as a student of Coetzee, as a version of his grandfather, etc. He is original in his interpersonal doppelganger show, as well as the crisscross, mishmash, hoopla of breeding true fiction with fakish true life histories.

Passages in the opening pages and during the horrific final massacre speak to Coetzee's august, direct and deeply moral sensibility.

The first novella is overwritten in places. The prose is often beautiful but it lacks the softly humming intensity of his later writing. It gestures towards a Coetzee who remained a poet, as he thought of himself during his twenties.

Most notable is that Coetzee's literary intentions evidently arrived fully formed: reflexive partial identification with characters; writing about the work of writing text. Coetzee always had an mature creativity, never seriously playful, always playfully serious. He was 34 when this debut was published. The product of a precisely intellectual mind, his writing was always already mature. Even in this earliest novel, to read Coetzee is to commune with someone who's gift is not only in the stature but in the structure of their intelligence.

4,5 stars. My video review: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_hllK...

First ever published Coeztee novel from 1974 is made of two parts, two novellas actually. Although they might seem as two separate stories both are deeply connected.

The first one "The Vietnam Project," is narration of Eugene Dawn, a scientist writing a report for Department of Defense, on propaganda methods to be used in Vietnam War.

Second part "The Narrative of Jacob Coetzee," is the story XVIII century Dutch farmer, an elephant hunter in conflict with the indigenous people of South Africa. Just a short sidetrack in my ramble, as you noticed Coetzee gave his name to the character in his second novella, as admitting he is also a part of colonial forces.

Coming back on track.
The novel juxtaposes twentieth-century American imperialism with eighteenth-century Dutch colonialism, and it shows the as being comparable in their quest for self-realization through the dominance over colonialized “less civilized nations”.
There is a deep analogy between Eugene Down and Jacob Coetzee. Down, the employer of American imperialism is nothing more than later more abstract version of Dutch colonist Jacob Coetzee.

Both novellas are written from the imperial, colonialist perspective and Coeztee is very subtle in getting his critic of colonialism across.
His main tool in his critic is parody, first part he parodies the documents of military bureaucrats and planner that worked during the Vietnam war for Department of Defense. In the second part he parodies the documents of Dutch colonialist societies in South Africa.

Two parts of Dusklands are critic of, first American self-idea of being the global policemen of democracy, second, the only slightly more fantastical white South African presumption about representing a historical link with Western, civilized values on a barbaric continent, the idea being fed by the mythology of the frontier.

As I said Coetzee is very subtle, is not one of this authors that would give you his program on hand, that will explain everything to you as on the lecture.
In Duskland it’s especially tricky, he sets his protagonists and their narration in history. Both stories are settled deeply in their times and written from the imperial perspective, but don’t be fooled by that.

Coetzee show shortfalls of philosophies of his protagonists, shows their narcissism selfishness and unwillingness to see and understand the other, representing different culture.

We have two white dudes, Eugen Down, the Vietnam project guy writing about the culture he didn’t even found worth visiting when as a employer working on Vietnam had a chance to do that, and racist Duch farmer, Jacob Coetzee unable to see human being in natives and unable to engage in human relation of any kind, even when welcomed with kindness.

But the harshest critic is present in the last moments of each story, when those 2 white dudes are transformed into forces bringing extreme violence against the innocent.

What Eugene and Jacob do after their crimes? They address history or science, as the ultimate forces that shall have the judgments over their deeds. # MrCoetzeeCriticOfRationalism.

“Dusklands” is not an easy read, and I’m not talking about writing style because his writing is smooth, untouchable. By saying it’s not an easy read I mean mostly the fact the structure is not reader friendly, two separate novellas, first ending shortly after you put an effort to go through the fragments of Eugene’s Vietnam report, second is twisting your guts with racist reasoning of XVIII white colonialist. It’s not action packed either, what’s important is rather under the surface and because of that it demands quite a bit of an effort.

That’s why if you are not interested in the aspects I’ve addressed in this video and you are still before reading your first Coetzee novel, it might be better to start your Coetzee experience somewhere else, because this one would be probably much more appreciated by your when you are after one or two other of his books.

I understood so little that it would be pointless to give it a rating... I'm not sure where I should seek meaning, especially in the second story. Both tell the tale from the agressor's point of view, in a convincing 'true story' tone. If it's a critique of the hunter/colonialist mind, it's one that comes from the reader's disapproval of the text, or even of human nature. The writing style is unique, but dense and confusing (+I'm dumb probably?) I'll tag it as to-be-reread, because there's definitely something there and the first one got me thinking for a long time, and researching about the Vietnam War and mythography. Heavy stuff for sure, both in subject matter and in complexity.

While Coetzee is firmly associated with his native South Africa, he has lived almost a quarter of his life in Australia and a key decade (the 60s!) in England and the U.S.

As such, I feel I should temper my (obviously belated) surprise that his first novel is about an American government employee who goes mad while attempting to document the Vietnam war. As with my prior review of Henry Green, it is tempting to play "spot the influences" with someone's first novel - it seems like there is a touch of "Pale Fire" here where the narrator's dissociation gradually emerges in a (not literally) footnoted way relative to the official story.

But the fact that this single publication comprises two seemingly unrelated novellas that were published as a singular opening artistic statement (if you will) seems the thing one clearly needs to consider. The second half, a story of South African 18th century colonialism, fits into a different place in the modernist framework. The same story is retold three times, once a purely stream of consciousness narrative from a character who could not possibly have kept or later recorded such a minute by minute memoir (an almost Ryder Haggard tale), one in a drier pseudo-historical tone that references lots of real 19th century historical work, and finally in a sort of clipped courtroom narrative. The connection to the first half as simply another report on the horrors of colonialism may be all you need to know but some ambitious dissertation thesis on Coetzee has, or will, include a chapter with a better analysis!