3
« dnia: Października 22, 2004, 12:40:02 pm »
So, if you want me to continue, I'll continue, despite of my poor english.
Some additions to the paragraph, which I've defined as
"Personality and autodescription".
Hary's transformation from "nobody", "noone man" into the "complete person" who realize, "autodescript" herself as a person is quite interesting mental and literatural experiment. Noperson converts to person, but when? Where is the point, the "quantum leap" of this transformation? Or is it exists at all, and the process is slooth-continious? And how the person itself sees it? A very interesting psycological aspect. It was tracked in quite close way in one of my favorite american novels -- Daniel Keyes's "Flowers for Algernon". It is interesting, that both of them -- Lem and Keis -- have academical degree in psycology (if to be more exact, Lem has one in psyciatric). The difference between Keyes's and Lem's versions are, that Lem has more kosmopsycolgistic, universalistic view, but Keyes is more psycologistic, as it "sees" a process from inside and also tracks a contaverse process.
Another line in Lem's creativity. A religion. Lem define himself as an atheist. But he returns to the religious and nearly-religious problems so persistently, that you can't doubt, how interesting this theme for Lem is.
His books contain a lot of critics of orthodaxal, official religions, mainly the critics of Catholic concepts. He even presents his own religious (or pseudoreligious) concept, which is scattered in its parts throw many Lem's books from "Cyberiade" and "Star Diaries" to "His Master's Voice" and "Eyewitness Account". His (or his character's) religious conception is closed to european religiosophistic construction known as "Philosopher's God". I will not state or retell Lem's concepts, it will take a lot of space and a lot of difficulties to me, because of my poor english. Everyone who cares can find and analize them himself by reading Lem's books.
I will let myself only a little critic notes, that is very delicate theme, so I beg your pardon from everybody, who can be offended by me.
When Lem mentions critisizes some concepts of orthodoxal religions, he is to concentrated on catholicism and shows an annoying ignorance of jewish religious and philosophical concepts, and this is especially regrettable, because Lem's ancesstors, as he mentioned in one of his books, were jews. Why it is regrettable? Because many contradictions of christian philosophy are sucsessfully solved in jewish classic and kabbalistic philosophy, and almost every lapse in Christian Holy Bible, on which Lem directs his criticism, is based on incorrect translation from hebrew. The great argentinian writer -- Chorche Luis Borches (who is one of the writers, the most respectable by Lem, and one who influents on Lem a lot) is not jewish, but knows a lot about kabbalah and jewish philosophy.
I beg your pardon again.
That's all for today.
Pokaż wiadomości