hardcover, 304 pages
Published Sept. 21, 2019 by Rebis.
Tekst wyróżniono najważniejszymi nagrodami w świecie science fiction: Hugo (opowiadanie) i Nebula (powieść). Ta ponadczasowa opowieść doczekała się kilkunastu adaptacji filmowych i teatralnych na całym świecie. Trzydziestodwuletni Charlie Gordon jest upośledzony umysłowo, ma iloraz inteligencji na poziomie 68 punktów. Uczy się czytać i pisać na zajęciach w Beekman College. Dwaj naukowcy z tej uczelni, doktor Nemur i doktor Strauss, prowadzą badania nad wzrostem inteligencji. Udało im się już za pomocą zabiegu chirurgicznego zwiększyć zdolności umysłowe myszy o imieniu Algernon i teraz chcą przeprowadzić taki sam eksperyment z człowiekiem.
Wielka literatura. Historia i główny bohater pozostają ze mną od kilkudziesięciu lat, od chwili, gdy przeczytałem książkę. - Conn Iggulden Arcydzieło poruszającej błyskotliwości (…) chwytające za serce i całkowicie, bezdyskusyjnie znakomite. - „The Guardian” Przejmująco szczera. Skłoni cię do refleksji nad twoim życiem i złamie ci serce. - „The Guardian Online” Uderzająco oryginalna. - „Publishers Weekly” Przekonująca i poruszająca opowieść. - „New …
Tekst wyróżniono najważniejszymi nagrodami w świecie science fiction: Hugo (opowiadanie) i Nebula (powieść). Ta ponadczasowa opowieść doczekała się kilkunastu adaptacji filmowych i teatralnych na całym świecie. Trzydziestodwuletni Charlie Gordon jest upośledzony umysłowo, ma iloraz inteligencji na poziomie 68 punktów. Uczy się czytać i pisać na zajęciach w Beekman College. Dwaj naukowcy z tej uczelni, doktor Nemur i doktor Strauss, prowadzą badania nad wzrostem inteligencji. Udało im się już za pomocą zabiegu chirurgicznego zwiększyć zdolności umysłowe myszy o imieniu Algernon i teraz chcą przeprowadzić taki sam eksperyment z człowiekiem.
Wielka literatura. Historia i główny bohater pozostają ze mną od kilkudziesięciu lat, od chwili, gdy przeczytałem książkę. - Conn Iggulden Arcydzieło poruszającej błyskotliwości (…) chwytające za serce i całkowicie, bezdyskusyjnie znakomite. - „The Guardian” Przejmująco szczera. Skłoni cię do refleksji nad twoim życiem i złamie ci serce. - „The Guardian Online” Uderzająco oryginalna. - „Publishers Weekly” Przekonująca i poruszająca opowieść. - „New York Times” Daniel Keyes (1927-2014) – amerykański pisarz. Jego opowiadanie Kwiaty dla Algernona otrzymało nagrodę Hugo w 1960 roku. Rozwinięte do formy powieści pod tym samym tytułem doczekało się z kolei nagrody Nebula w roku 1966, a dwa lata później zostało zekranizowane jako Charly. Keyes opublikował także m.in. obsypaną nagrodami książkę non-fiction Człowiek o 24 twarzach.
This was part of my middle school curriculum. I initially read it in seventh grade and a few times later in my early teens. This is one of the few books that I have a full memory of. It haunted me. It still does. Is it better to have something and lose it or never have it at all?
Poignant, sad, and deeply insightful
I had been assigned a watered-down adaptation of this in Junior High, so I went into this with some knowledge of what the general arc would be. What I didn't expect is that I would be reading until the sun came up, bawling my eyes out, absolutely shaken.
From the very first page, I liked Charlie Gordon. He comes across as innocent and sweet, with good intentions and a very one-dimensional frame of reference to the world. There's a few moments where people ask Charlie things that made me chuckle, like his initial confusion at the Rorschach test, but his attitude is strangely endearing.
The prose in this book is phenomenal. The gradual narrative shift from crude writing to eloquent philosophical insight is kind of an amazing writing trick, and the development of Charlie's awareness is hypnotic to watch.
In a way, I was kind …
Poignant, sad, and deeply insightful
I had been assigned a watered-down adaptation of this in Junior High, so I went into this with some knowledge of what the general arc would be. What I didn't expect is that I would be reading until the sun came up, bawling my eyes out, absolutely shaken.
From the very first page, I liked Charlie Gordon. He comes across as innocent and sweet, with good intentions and a very one-dimensional frame of reference to the world. There's a few moments where people ask Charlie things that made me chuckle, like his initial confusion at the Rorschach test, but his attitude is strangely endearing.
The prose in this book is phenomenal. The gradual narrative shift from crude writing to eloquent philosophical insight is kind of an amazing writing trick, and the development of Charlie's awareness is hypnotic to watch.
In a way, I was kind of reminded of the story of Faust, where a man tries to use his seemingly unlimited knowledge to get out of an inevitable outcome. I'd argue that Charlie is a far more sympathetic character, but watching his mind develop and deteriorate, along with his strained efforts to work against time, made for one hell of a roller coaster.
Beautiful, beautiful story. I haven't cried like that in a while.
Having read the synopsis, I knew this book could potentially be quite sad. I don't do sad. Not in books, not in movies, not in any medium. However, the premise was so intriguing I had to give it a chance anyway. (I've somehow avoided seeing any of the cinematic versions.) I'm really glad I did. It did turn out to be sad, but totally worth it. Something I especially enjoyed was the accuracy with which the psychology was presented. Since this book came out in the 60s, I had guessed that it might espouse full on behaviorism, or worse, psychoanalysis. After all, I still see Freudian terminology bandied about today, as if the approach wasn't decrepit and discredited. It's not an uncommon theme in fiction, either. Fortunately, it turns out Daniel Keyes is a psychologist himself.
For my obligatory nitpick, I'll choose to point out that a few techniques in …
Having read the synopsis, I knew this book could potentially be quite sad. I don't do sad. Not in books, not in movies, not in any medium. However, the premise was so intriguing I had to give it a chance anyway. (I've somehow avoided seeing any of the cinematic versions.) I'm really glad I did. It did turn out to be sad, but totally worth it. Something I especially enjoyed was the accuracy with which the psychology was presented. Since this book came out in the 60s, I had guessed that it might espouse full on behaviorism, or worse, psychoanalysis. After all, I still see Freudian terminology bandied about today, as if the approach wasn't decrepit and discredited. It's not an uncommon theme in fiction, either. Fortunately, it turns out Daniel Keyes is a psychologist himself.
For my obligatory nitpick, I'll choose to point out that a few techniques in the book actually have been scrapped today. The author's masterful approach here leaves me nothing but these technicalities to criticize. Everything is spot on for it's time, of course, but a few things haven't aged well (IE the Rorschach test).
