Scan barcode
Reviews
The Good Story: Exchanges on Truth, Fiction and Psychotherapy by Arabella Kurtz, J.M. Coetzee
bettyvd's review against another edition
2.0
Hoewel de vragen die Coetzee opwerpt boeiend zijn, zijn de antwoorden dat minder.Is waarheid (en welke dan?) noodzakelijk? De 'conversatie' tussen de schrijver en de psychoanalyste blijft wat academisch. Ik had er meer (of iets anders) van verwacht.
waltercoleslaw's review against another edition
5.0
A fascinating exchange between a fiction writer and a psychotherapist about the fictions that define our lives and the question of whether the way we perceive ourselves and our lives can be anything but fictional. Kurtz and Coetzee have a lively debate that is enriching at every turn. I read this book slowly and hesitated to finish it because I enjoyed it so much and because it constantly make me critically reflect on my own experience. It’s a book I wish everyone would read.
caractacus's review against another edition
3.0
Surprisingly slight, and Coetzee comes across as weirdly moralistic at times. This is an oddball of a book, but not for the reasons I was expecting - it doesn't go as deep in its discussions of psychotherapy as I was expecting and hoping. In a classroom context, for instance, I would use this as an introductory text rather than a text for intermediate students already familiar with psychotherapy; similarly, readers who are not new to the topic may feel ... not hand-held, exactly, but may feel frustrated by the urge to encourage the authors to go further and deeper in their discussion, only to witness them moving on to the next topic instead.
ybm's review against another edition
2.0
Worth reading only for Kurtz's insights into therapy, which are both illuminating and well written. Coetzee's interjections seem to misunderstand the point of therapy. They come across as unverified, baseless self-aggrandisement couched in grandiose language- the effect is someone showing off his own thoughts without truly engaging with the other speaker (no wonder he believes true conversation is rare). I wish someone would write a psychological analysis of Coetzee's responses in this book. Kurtz has made a valiant attempt at engaging with Coetzee, but the overall effect is of two writers passing each other in the night. A spurious collection of random thoughts, which is a shame because there are hints of true gems of insight that are never fully developed.
noahregained's review against another edition
3.0
My heart goes out to anyone who read this without already being very fond of Coetzee. He's brilliant but(/and) he's so much of himself.
I love Coetzee's 'Elizabeth Costello,' which I think is a very personal writing (Costello is so much of him) and a commanding interpretation of what fiction is. I'm not as fond of 'secondary Coetzee,' person Coetzee, Coetzee out of his fictive shell. But he's about as sage, as analytic, as charming (he's very heavyhanded) as one can expect.
I knew that some ruminations on 'Austerlitz' were the ending of the book. It actually unfolds in a very funny way: Kurtz introducing the book because she sees it relating to narrative in one way; the novelist Coetzee countering this with his [and my] reality that the novel has a complicated, farcical, sinister?, detached, literally foggy relationship with narrative (events unfold in that book through the interpenetration of narrator and protagonist) and the world (it's history, it's people, it's beautiful, and I'm so tired).
I love Coetzee's 'Elizabeth Costello,' which I think is a very personal writing (Costello is so much of him) and a commanding interpretation of what fiction is. I'm not as fond of 'secondary Coetzee,' person Coetzee, Coetzee out of his fictive shell. But he's about as sage, as analytic, as charming (he's very heavyhanded) as one can expect.
I knew that some ruminations on 'Austerlitz' were the ending of the book. It actually unfolds in a very funny way: Kurtz introducing the book because she sees it relating to narrative in one way; the novelist Coetzee countering this with his [and my] reality that the novel has a complicated, farcical, sinister?, detached, literally foggy relationship with narrative (events unfold in that book through the interpenetration of narrator and protagonist) and the world (it's history, it's people, it's beautiful, and I'm so tired).
billyjepma's review
3.0
Reading this felt like reading the transcript for a very long, very intellectual podcast. If that appeals to you, then great! Because there is a lot of interesting ideas discussed here. However, those ideas are not as interconnected as I would have liked - since this entire book really is just one long conversation between two monologuing intellectuals 0 and for a book, I felt like this lacked the cohesive tissue needed to tie Coetzee and Kurtz's (admittedly compelling arguments and rationalizations) together. Instead, it comes across like two deeply intelligent thinkers talking past each other from the perspective of their respective fields. This leads to some fascinating content, to be sure, but there was a distance between the two sides that was never bridged, leaving the book to feel like two separate academic journals conversing with each other at a tangential distance. Again, there's some very good, very worthwhile material here, but the presentation and cohesion of it was lacking for me.
kwilson271's review against another edition
4.0
A Nobel winning novelist and a psychoanalist discuss the formation of stories, both fictional and personal, although there is little difference between the two. This is a book that only a Nobel winning novelist can get away with publishing, but good thing Coetzee has. I was fascinated by so much in this book, but particularly the idea that a person could forget the past, should, and must.
strickvl's review
4.0
More Coetzee! (Good for the soul!)
This book is the written record of a dialogue between Coetzee and a psychotherapist (Arabella Kurtz). The subject matter is interesting if somewhat unfocused. The character and progression of their dialogue, the way they talk to and around each other, was to my mind the real hero of this book. I found their interaction highly stimulating, and it made me wonder why more books like this don't exist. We have the institution of the public discussion, on a stage with an audience, but having the dialogue take place on paper seems to my mind a better way of going about things. You can take time, you can review what was said, you can express yourself in the best way that reflects what you seek to explain, and so on.
Recommended for the above, and for two fascinating discussions of Dostoevsky and Sebald (and what they have to say about the nature of confession, and the extent to which we can know things and/or come to terms with our histor(ies)).
This book is the written record of a dialogue between Coetzee and a psychotherapist (Arabella Kurtz). The subject matter is interesting if somewhat unfocused. The character and progression of their dialogue, the way they talk to and around each other, was to my mind the real hero of this book. I found their interaction highly stimulating, and it made me wonder why more books like this don't exist. We have the institution of the public discussion, on a stage with an audience, but having the dialogue take place on paper seems to my mind a better way of going about things. You can take time, you can review what was said, you can express yourself in the best way that reflects what you seek to explain, and so on.
Recommended for the above, and for two fascinating discussions of Dostoevsky and Sebald (and what they have to say about the nature of confession, and the extent to which we can know things and/or come to terms with our histor(ies)).
More...