tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-934096967055481899.post8221718671466529561..comments2024-03-04T11:22:53.502-05:00Comments on Fifty Books Project 2023: The Theory of the Novel by Georg LukacsFifty Books Projecthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08640286429668778869noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-934096967055481899.post-5356220783722118952017-07-19T00:36:03.777-04:002017-07-19T00:36:03.777-04:00Yes, I noticed the same thing while reading it. He...Yes, I noticed the same thing while reading it. He almost never referred to a specific book, only to authors: "Dante", "Homer", "Goethe". He seemed to have read about a dozen books, just enough to refer to their authors by name over and over. The things he claimed about these authors were so vague and incoherent that I couldn't say whether Lukacs was correct even when I could ascribe any meaning to them. He regularly spoke of "Homer" without distinguishing between the Iliad and the Odyssey. The books are so vastly different--an epic work of philosophy versus a boy's adventure tale--that the failure to distinguish between them makes hash of his main thesis.<br /><br />He may have had something worthwhile to say, but the book has all the earmarks of some grand theory merely intuited, not formed from a close and long-term engagement with literature, and not defended by any examples from it.Bad Horsehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10735227563256689679noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-934096967055481899.post-72604545459052260202012-08-10T17:32:58.417-04:002012-08-10T17:32:58.417-04:00This sounds like a very confusing texxt.This sounds like a very confusing texxt.Brent Waggonerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05121696882391723790noreply@blogger.com