What do you think?
Rate this book
Picture This
"Mr. Heller treats the whole panorama of history past and present with the bravado of Mark Twain in one of his sassier moods."--The New York Times Book Review
A keenly satirical look at the world of art and museums by the author of the modern classic, Catch-22.
A keenly satirical look at the world of art and museums by the author of the modern classic, Catch-22.
352 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1988
About the author
Joseph Heller
59 books2,829 followersLibrarian Note: There is more than one author in the GoodReads database with this name.
Joseph Heller was the son of poor Jewish parents from Russia. Even as a child, he loved to write; at the age of eleven, he wrote a story about the Russian invasion of Finland. He sent it to New York Daily News, which rejected it. After graduating from Abraham Lincoln High School in 1941, Heller spent the next year working as a blacksmith's apprentice, a messenger boy, and a filing clerk. In 1942, at age 19, he joined the U.S. Army Air Corps. Two years later he was sent to Italy, where he flew 60 combat missions as a B-25 bombardier. Heller later remembered the war as "fun in the beginning... You got the feeling that there was something glorious about it." On his return home he "felt like a hero... People think it quite remarkable that I was in combat in an airplane and I flew sixty missions even though I tell them that the missions were largely milk runs."
See also http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_H...
Joseph Heller was the son of poor Jewish parents from Russia. Even as a child, he loved to write; at the age of eleven, he wrote a story about the Russian invasion of Finland. He sent it to New York Daily News, which rejected it. After graduating from Abraham Lincoln High School in 1941, Heller spent the next year working as a blacksmith's apprentice, a messenger boy, and a filing clerk. In 1942, at age 19, he joined the U.S. Army Air Corps. Two years later he was sent to Italy, where he flew 60 combat missions as a B-25 bombardier. Heller later remembered the war as "fun in the beginning... You got the feeling that there was something glorious about it." On his return home he "felt like a hero... People think it quite remarkable that I was in combat in an airplane and I flew sixty missions even though I tell them that the missions were largely milk runs."
See also http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_H...
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 124 reviews
Read
October 31, 2023Aristóteles, em quem a propensão para observar, classificar, correlacionar e inferir tinha permanecido inalterada via o paralelismo entre Sócrates a aproximar-se da execução e Rembrandt a aproximar-se da bancarrota.
Imaginem Que é um livro brilhante no qual se traçam não só os primórdios da civilização ocidental enraizados na Grécia antiga, como as ligações entre essa civilização e a o mundo moderno. Mas Heller vai mais longe e propõe que a primeira república moderna europeia nasce na Holanda de século XVII, filha das repúblicas utópicas clássicas, e assim se transfere para o continente americano - o que não é, de todo, descabido - e é essa primeira proposta que alimenta todo o livro.
Mas, se fosse só isto (e já não era pouco) eu não teria saído deslumbrada desta leitura que é uma extraordinária collage cujo objetivo (a sua segunda proposta) é o de provar que toda a História é pura falácia.
E, para isso, o narrador salta constantemente entre épocas e acontecimentos análogos:
Tinha Sócrates sessenta e cinco e Platão vinte e quatro quando Atenas foi submetida a um bloqueio por barcos financiados pela Pérsia e comandados por Espartanos, que, pelas amargas experiências anteriores contra os Atenienses, já tinham então aprendido a fazer a guerra no mar. Em terra, a cidade voltava a estar sitiada. A população amontoava-se de novo no interior das muralhas no fim de uma guerra iniciada vinte e sete anos antes.(...)Tinha Rembrandt quarenta e sete anos e pintava o seu Aristóteles, as costas da Holanda foram bloqueadas pelos Ingleses que, com a experiência das lutas contra os Holandeses, haviam aprendido a construir barcos de guerra maiores, capazes de transportar armamento mais pesado. Perceberam, também, que havia mais dinheiro no comércio do que na agricultura e na criação de gado, tal como os Holandeses haviam por sua vez aprendido com os Portugueses.
E, usando como gérmen para essa reflexão, o quadro Aristóteles Contemplando o Busto de Homero, de Rembrandt, alimenta poderosas correlações em que se entremeia a biografia do pintor e as vidas dos retratados numa mescla de arte, filosofia, política e cultura:
Quando os Holandeses desalojaram os Portugueses das Molucas, no oceano Índico, e estabeleceram o seu monopólio mundial de cravinho e noz-moscada, Rembrandt, que tinha nove anos, matriculou-se na escola de Latim.
Shakespeare morreu. (...)
Em 1617, Rembrandt celebrou o seu décimo primeiro aniversário e Snellius desenvolveu a técnica da triangulação trigonométrica para a cartografia, utilizando a Estrela Polar para medir as latitudes das cidades holandesas de Alkmaar e Bergen-op-Zoom.
No oitavo ano da Paz dos Doze Anos, os Holandeses juntaram-se aos Ingleses para enviarem barcos de guerra para Veneza, para a ajudarem a lutar contra os Habsburgo da Áustria.
Rembrandt acabou o curso na escola de latim dois anos antes de ser reatada a guerra com a Espanha, dois anos depois de William Harvey, do Hospital de São Bartolomeu, em Londres, ter anunciado pela primeira vez a sua descoberta da circulação do sangue enquanto os primeiros escravos negros chegavam à colónia inglesa da Virgínia, precisamente doze anos depois de ter sido fundada a cidade de Jamestown.
O poder de Imaginem Que reside assim numa força narrativa muito próxima da fabulação em que as histórias, ao jeito de matrioscas, se encaixam umas nas outras sendo o fio condutor da narrativa desenrolado pelo narrador ao estilo de As Mil e Uma Noites, com uma mestria sem igual, capaz de deixar o leitor (que sabe sempre o desfecho da história a menos que não saiba nada de História) em suspenso e, sobretudo, em check pois é constantemente lembrado de que a sua realidade é uma longa sequência de acasos que, qual teoria do caos, nos trazem até ao momento presente:
Em 432 a. C., Péricles decretou uma lei que proibia os barcos de Mégara de entrarem nos portos do império ateniense. Isso ajudou a levar à guerra.
E também levou àquela prolongada série de acontecimentos em que Atenas saiu derrotada; o império foi destruído; a democracia foi proibida e depois restaurada; Sócrates e Asclépio foram julgados, considerados culpados e executados; Platão escreveu as suas filosofias e inaugurou a sua escola; Aristóteles chegou a Atenas como estudante e partiu como fugitivo e, mais tarde, durante uma guerra diferente, Rembrandt pintou-o em Amesterdão a contemplar um busto de Homero que era apenas um exemplar, e, em resultado disso, como conclusão de vários séculos de viagens arriscadas, efectuou em 1961, facto efectivo e verificável, a triunfal passagem das Parke-Bernet Galleries, no cruzamento da Avenida Madison com a Rua 77, na cidade hoje chamada Nova Iorque, para o Metropolitan Museum of Art na esquina da Quinta Avenida com a Rua 82, antes de John F. Kennedy ter sido assassinado entre a guerra da Coreia e a guerra do Vietname.
É muito claro para Heller que a história se repete, que nada é independente na linha histórica, que não há acidentes e raros são os desvios de percurso pois os condutores do destino são sempre os mesmos, ontem como hoje, movidos pelos mesmos interesses e paixões:
Na segunda metade do século xx, as antagónicas super-potências do capitalismo e do comunismo coexistiam num equilibrio simbiótico de males necessários e entendiam-se muito melhor do que qualquer das duas queria admitir. A União Soviética e os Estados Unidos foram inimigos durante setenta anos e as duas únicas alturas em que ambos entraram em guerra neste século foi como aliados contra a Alemanha.
Nos dois países, como em qualquer lado, a qualidade do governo era, em geral, muito baixa.
Os dirigentes dos dois lados nunca pareceram odiar-se tanto como odiavam os membros das suas próprias populações que discordavam deles e, tal como na antiga Atenas, as nações mais pequenas que tentavam escapar ao se domínio. Cada um dos dois governos ficaria indefeso sem a ameaça do outro. É impossível imaginar qualquer uma das nações a funcionar com tanta fluidez sem o terrível perigo de aniquilação pela outra.
No entanto, é fácil imaginar o caos que surgiria em ambas com uma súbita eclosão de paz.
A paz na Terra significaria o fim da civilização tal como hoje a conhecemos.
De Homero, Sócrates, Platão, Aristóteles, Rembrandt, Filipe II (o nosso "I"), até Kennedy e Hitler, passando pela filosofia, a tragédia, a Guerra dos Trinta Anos, o colonialismo, Wall Street, ou o Metropolitan, Imaginem Que é uma obra deliciosa cheia de referências e cruzamentos eruditos, na qual as personalidades mais relevantes da história ocidental têm espaço para respirar, falar e meditar sobre os seus tempos e os nossos:
Tu não és real, meu jovem e orgulhoso Aristóteles. Eu não sou real. O próprio Sócrates era uma imitação de si mesmo. Todos nós somos apenas cópias inferiores da forma que somos nós. Sei que me entendes.
Heller desmistifica a aura de heroísmo que rodeia a história ocidental, mostrando-a bélica, misógina e cruel como realmente é, mas com momentos de verdadeira inspiração e génio de onde nascem obras imortais:
Aristóteles [de Rembrandt] foi exibido [em 1815] em Londres, tendo sobrevivido milagrosamente à primeira guerra do Norte, à segunda guerra do Norte, à guerra da Devolução, à guerra da Grande Aliança, à guerra da Sucessão espanhola, à guerra da Sucessão polaca, à guerra da Sucessão austríaca, à guerra dos Sete Anos, à primeira guerra da Silésia, à segunda guerra da Silésia, à guerra da Sucessão bávara, à guerra russo-turca, à Revolução Francesa, à guerra turco-polaca, à guerra sueco-dinamarquesa, à guerra sueco-russa, à guerra franco-austro-prussiana, à guerra da Pri- meira Coligação contra a França, à guerra franco-holandesa, à campanha de Itália de Napoleão, à guerra anglo-espanhola, à campanha do Egipto de Napoleão, à guerra da Segunda Coligação contra a França, à rebelião dos Irlandeses Unidos contra a Inglaterra, a outra guerra anglo-espanhola, à guerra russo-persa, à guerra da Terceira Coligação contra a França, à guerra franco-prussiana, à guerra franco-portuguesa, à triunfal invasão da Rússia por Napoleão e à desastrosa retirada deste, ao Congresso de Viena e à batalha de Waterloo, saindo-se bem destes e de outros perigosos acontecimentos e chegando são e salvo, por caminhos e de maneiras que não conhecemos, a Londres.
Pelo caminho, Heller imprime doses de ironia e sarcasmo mordazes aplicadas a acontecimentos históricos mais ou menos inauditos:
Nova Amesterdão entregou-se, no principio da segunda guerra anglo-holandesa, a um corpo de menos de 200 ingleses, e foi re-baptizada com o nome de Nova Iorque.
Foi entregue sem luta pelo director-geral da Nova Holanda, Peter Stuyvesant, que(...)[e]ntregou Wall Street.
Que alguém tente agora recuperá-la sem luta.
Nos países totalitários, como a China e a União Soviética, o público é lixado com decretos, estritas regulamentações, polícia e terror. Nas democracias industriais é lixado com desprezo.
E favoritismo.
E, no fim, a sua premissa de que a História é falaciosa não pode deixar de se comprovar e, a ser assim, não admira que a tomemos por inócua:
A morte de uma pessoa não é tão importante para o futuro como a literatura sobre essa mesma morte.
Da História nada se aprende que possa ser aplicado, por isso não se enganem pensando o contrário.
- A História são tretas. - disse Henry Ford. Mas Sócrates morreu. Platão não conta que tenha chorado nesse dia.
Ele teria apenas doze anos na altura do seu O Banquete e por isso não estava presente para ouvir os elogios afectuosos de Alcibiades a Sócrates, que tão eloquentemente descreve.
O quadro de Rembrandt de Aristóteles Contemplando o Busto de Homero talvez não seja de Rembrandt, mas de um discípulo tão divinamente dotado na aprendizagem das lições do seu mestre que nunca mais tivesse sido capaz de fazer mais coisa alguma e cujo nome, por conseguinte, se perdeu na obscuridade. O busto de Homero que Aristóteles é mostrado a contemplar não é de Homero. O homem não é Aristóteles.
Imaginem Que é um livro brilhante no qual se traçam não só os primórdios da civilização ocidental enraizados na Grécia antiga, como as ligações entre essa civilização e a o mundo moderno. Mas Heller vai mais longe e propõe que a primeira república moderna europeia nasce na Holanda de século XVII, filha das repúblicas utópicas clássicas, e assim se transfere para o continente americano - o que não é, de todo, descabido - e é essa primeira proposta que alimenta todo o livro.
Mas, se fosse só isto (e já não era pouco) eu não teria saído deslumbrada desta leitura que é uma extraordinária collage cujo objetivo (a sua segunda proposta) é o de provar que toda a História é pura falácia.
E, para isso, o narrador salta constantemente entre épocas e acontecimentos análogos:
Tinha Sócrates sessenta e cinco e Platão vinte e quatro quando Atenas foi submetida a um bloqueio por barcos financiados pela Pérsia e comandados por Espartanos, que, pelas amargas experiências anteriores contra os Atenienses, já tinham então aprendido a fazer a guerra no mar. Em terra, a cidade voltava a estar sitiada. A população amontoava-se de novo no interior das muralhas no fim de uma guerra iniciada vinte e sete anos antes.(...)Tinha Rembrandt quarenta e sete anos e pintava o seu Aristóteles, as costas da Holanda foram bloqueadas pelos Ingleses que, com a experiência das lutas contra os Holandeses, haviam aprendido a construir barcos de guerra maiores, capazes de transportar armamento mais pesado. Perceberam, também, que havia mais dinheiro no comércio do que na agricultura e na criação de gado, tal como os Holandeses haviam por sua vez aprendido com os Portugueses.
E, usando como gérmen para essa reflexão, o quadro Aristóteles Contemplando o Busto de Homero, de Rembrandt, alimenta poderosas correlações em que se entremeia a biografia do pintor e as vidas dos retratados numa mescla de arte, filosofia, política e cultura:
Quando os Holandeses desalojaram os Portugueses das Molucas, no oceano Índico, e estabeleceram o seu monopólio mundial de cravinho e noz-moscada, Rembrandt, que tinha nove anos, matriculou-se na escola de Latim.
Shakespeare morreu. (...)
Em 1617, Rembrandt celebrou o seu décimo primeiro aniversário e Snellius desenvolveu a técnica da triangulação trigonométrica para a cartografia, utilizando a Estrela Polar para medir as latitudes das cidades holandesas de Alkmaar e Bergen-op-Zoom.
No oitavo ano da Paz dos Doze Anos, os Holandeses juntaram-se aos Ingleses para enviarem barcos de guerra para Veneza, para a ajudarem a lutar contra os Habsburgo da Áustria.
Rembrandt acabou o curso na escola de latim dois anos antes de ser reatada a guerra com a Espanha, dois anos depois de William Harvey, do Hospital de São Bartolomeu, em Londres, ter anunciado pela primeira vez a sua descoberta da circulação do sangue enquanto os primeiros escravos negros chegavam à colónia inglesa da Virgínia, precisamente doze anos depois de ter sido fundada a cidade de Jamestown.
O poder de Imaginem Que reside assim numa força narrativa muito próxima da fabulação em que as histórias, ao jeito de matrioscas, se encaixam umas nas outras sendo o fio condutor da narrativa desenrolado pelo narrador ao estilo de As Mil e Uma Noites, com uma mestria sem igual, capaz de deixar o leitor (que sabe sempre o desfecho da história a menos que não saiba nada de História) em suspenso e, sobretudo, em check pois é constantemente lembrado de que a sua realidade é uma longa sequência de acasos que, qual teoria do caos, nos trazem até ao momento presente:
Em 432 a. C., Péricles decretou uma lei que proibia os barcos de Mégara de entrarem nos portos do império ateniense. Isso ajudou a levar à guerra.
E também levou àquela prolongada série de acontecimentos em que Atenas saiu derrotada; o império foi destruído; a democracia foi proibida e depois restaurada; Sócrates e Asclépio foram julgados, considerados culpados e executados; Platão escreveu as suas filosofias e inaugurou a sua escola; Aristóteles chegou a Atenas como estudante e partiu como fugitivo e, mais tarde, durante uma guerra diferente, Rembrandt pintou-o em Amesterdão a contemplar um busto de Homero que era apenas um exemplar, e, em resultado disso, como conclusão de vários séculos de viagens arriscadas, efectuou em 1961, facto efectivo e verificável, a triunfal passagem das Parke-Bernet Galleries, no cruzamento da Avenida Madison com a Rua 77, na cidade hoje chamada Nova Iorque, para o Metropolitan Museum of Art na esquina da Quinta Avenida com a Rua 82, antes de John F. Kennedy ter sido assassinado entre a guerra da Coreia e a guerra do Vietname.
É muito claro para Heller que a história se repete, que nada é independente na linha histórica, que não há acidentes e raros são os desvios de percurso pois os condutores do destino são sempre os mesmos, ontem como hoje, movidos pelos mesmos interesses e paixões:
Na segunda metade do século xx, as antagónicas super-potências do capitalismo e do comunismo coexistiam num equilibrio simbiótico de males necessários e entendiam-se muito melhor do que qualquer das duas queria admitir. A União Soviética e os Estados Unidos foram inimigos durante setenta anos e as duas únicas alturas em que ambos entraram em guerra neste século foi como aliados contra a Alemanha.
Nos dois países, como em qualquer lado, a qualidade do governo era, em geral, muito baixa.
Os dirigentes dos dois lados nunca pareceram odiar-se tanto como odiavam os membros das suas próprias populações que discordavam deles e, tal como na antiga Atenas, as nações mais pequenas que tentavam escapar ao se domínio. Cada um dos dois governos ficaria indefeso sem a ameaça do outro. É impossível imaginar qualquer uma das nações a funcionar com tanta fluidez sem o terrível perigo de aniquilação pela outra.
No entanto, é fácil imaginar o caos que surgiria em ambas com uma súbita eclosão de paz.
A paz na Terra significaria o fim da civilização tal como hoje a conhecemos.
De Homero, Sócrates, Platão, Aristóteles, Rembrandt, Filipe II (o nosso "I"), até Kennedy e Hitler, passando pela filosofia, a tragédia, a Guerra dos Trinta Anos, o colonialismo, Wall Street, ou o Metropolitan, Imaginem Que é uma obra deliciosa cheia de referências e cruzamentos eruditos, na qual as personalidades mais relevantes da história ocidental têm espaço para respirar, falar e meditar sobre os seus tempos e os nossos:
Tu não és real, meu jovem e orgulhoso Aristóteles. Eu não sou real. O próprio Sócrates era uma imitação de si mesmo. Todos nós somos apenas cópias inferiores da forma que somos nós. Sei que me entendes.
Heller desmistifica a aura de heroísmo que rodeia a história ocidental, mostrando-a bélica, misógina e cruel como realmente é, mas com momentos de verdadeira inspiração e génio de onde nascem obras imortais:
Aristóteles [de Rembrandt] foi exibido [em 1815] em Londres, tendo sobrevivido milagrosamente à primeira guerra do Norte, à segunda guerra do Norte, à guerra da Devolução, à guerra da Grande Aliança, à guerra da Sucessão espanhola, à guerra da Sucessão polaca, à guerra da Sucessão austríaca, à guerra dos Sete Anos, à primeira guerra da Silésia, à segunda guerra da Silésia, à guerra da Sucessão bávara, à guerra russo-turca, à Revolução Francesa, à guerra turco-polaca, à guerra sueco-dinamarquesa, à guerra sueco-russa, à guerra franco-austro-prussiana, à guerra da Pri- meira Coligação contra a França, à guerra franco-holandesa, à campanha de Itália de Napoleão, à guerra anglo-espanhola, à campanha do Egipto de Napoleão, à guerra da Segunda Coligação contra a França, à rebelião dos Irlandeses Unidos contra a Inglaterra, a outra guerra anglo-espanhola, à guerra russo-persa, à guerra da Terceira Coligação contra a França, à guerra franco-prussiana, à guerra franco-portuguesa, à triunfal invasão da Rússia por Napoleão e à desastrosa retirada deste, ao Congresso de Viena e à batalha de Waterloo, saindo-se bem destes e de outros perigosos acontecimentos e chegando são e salvo, por caminhos e de maneiras que não conhecemos, a Londres.
Pelo caminho, Heller imprime doses de ironia e sarcasmo mordazes aplicadas a acontecimentos históricos mais ou menos inauditos:
Nova Amesterdão entregou-se, no principio da segunda guerra anglo-holandesa, a um corpo de menos de 200 ingleses, e foi re-baptizada com o nome de Nova Iorque.
Foi entregue sem luta pelo director-geral da Nova Holanda, Peter Stuyvesant, que(...)[e]ntregou Wall Street.
Que alguém tente agora recuperá-la sem luta.
Nos países totalitários, como a China e a União Soviética, o público é lixado com decretos, estritas regulamentações, polícia e terror. Nas democracias industriais é lixado com desprezo.
E favoritismo.
E, no fim, a sua premissa de que a História é falaciosa não pode deixar de se comprovar e, a ser assim, não admira que a tomemos por inócua:
A morte de uma pessoa não é tão importante para o futuro como a literatura sobre essa mesma morte.
Da História nada se aprende que possa ser aplicado, por isso não se enganem pensando o contrário.
- A História são tretas. - disse Henry Ford. Mas Sócrates morreu. Platão não conta que tenha chorado nesse dia.
Ele teria apenas doze anos na altura do seu O Banquete e por isso não estava presente para ouvir os elogios afectuosos de Alcibiades a Sócrates, que tão eloquentemente descreve.
O quadro de Rembrandt de Aristóteles Contemplando o Busto de Homero talvez não seja de Rembrandt, mas de um discípulo tão divinamente dotado na aprendizagem das lições do seu mestre que nunca mais tivesse sido capaz de fazer mais coisa alguma e cujo nome, por conseguinte, se perdeu na obscuridade. O busto de Homero que Aristóteles é mostrado a contemplar não é de Homero. O homem não é Aristóteles.
January 9, 2017
“Picture This” is a book that is remarkable on many levels. The concept for the novel itself is almost genius, and the execution of that concept is no mean feat, and Mr. Heller pulls it off nicely.
It is amazing how this novel, published in 1988, feels like it was written yesterday about very current events. It just goes to show you how much history is a cycle of events and how much Western Civilization (and all civilization) just rotate through the same stories again and again. Page 101 of this text is literally a description of the current political leadership in the western world. Eerily prescient.
One of the greatest joys of this novel is its style. The book contains some irony, and then more irony and more irony mixed in with sarcasm and dry dark humor, and even more irony. It abounds, and is delivered in such a manner that it does not seem to be overkill. There were more than a few times while reading this text that I was reminded of reading Kurt Vonnegut.
Some highlights of the book included “Section VII: Biography” which is brilliant. It is a history lesson, satire of modern life and good reading and writing all in one. A real joy. “Section XV: The Last Laugh” is a clever overview of Western Civilization told while explaining the journey that Rembrandt’s painting “Aristotle Contemplating a Bust of Homer” took from its original owner in the mid-1600s to its current home at the Metropolitan Museum of Art in NYC.
A couple of examples of some of the wit in this text include one of the truest things I’ve ever read in a novel; “A middle aged man with a theory to which he has long been attached grows less interested in whether it is true and more obsessed that it be accepted as true…” and the biting and also very accurate “That property owned in common by all of the people is owned by none of the people but belongs to the government.” I mean seriously folks, that is some major truth right there!
I first read “Picture This” 16 years ago, and remember liking it. Although the last couple of chapters drag a little in comparison to those that precede them, the novel is exceptional. I was worried that my opinion of the text would change and not for the better. I needn’t have fretted; this book holds up and is well worth your time.
It is amazing how this novel, published in 1988, feels like it was written yesterday about very current events. It just goes to show you how much history is a cycle of events and how much Western Civilization (and all civilization) just rotate through the same stories again and again. Page 101 of this text is literally a description of the current political leadership in the western world. Eerily prescient.
One of the greatest joys of this novel is its style. The book contains some irony, and then more irony and more irony mixed in with sarcasm and dry dark humor, and even more irony. It abounds, and is delivered in such a manner that it does not seem to be overkill. There were more than a few times while reading this text that I was reminded of reading Kurt Vonnegut.
Some highlights of the book included “Section VII: Biography” which is brilliant. It is a history lesson, satire of modern life and good reading and writing all in one. A real joy. “Section XV: The Last Laugh” is a clever overview of Western Civilization told while explaining the journey that Rembrandt’s painting “Aristotle Contemplating a Bust of Homer” took from its original owner in the mid-1600s to its current home at the Metropolitan Museum of Art in NYC.
A couple of examples of some of the wit in this text include one of the truest things I’ve ever read in a novel; “A middle aged man with a theory to which he has long been attached grows less interested in whether it is true and more obsessed that it be accepted as true…” and the biting and also very accurate “That property owned in common by all of the people is owned by none of the people but belongs to the government.” I mean seriously folks, that is some major truth right there!
I first read “Picture This” 16 years ago, and remember liking it. Although the last couple of chapters drag a little in comparison to those that precede them, the novel is exceptional. I was worried that my opinion of the text would change and not for the better. I needn’t have fretted; this book holds up and is well worth your time.
June 3, 2017
I came to Joseph Heller's Picture this, for a second time. My warning should have been that I remembered nothing from my first read. I am a J Heller fan. I can quote much of Catch 22 by heart. I still bristle at those who call him a One hit Wonder. I took the extra try to get through Something Happened and am glad that I did. Picture This, in this, my second read through was aggravating.
Picture This is something of an experimental novel. There is not a plot so much as a central story line. The picture in question is Rembrandt's Aristotle Contemplating a Bust of Homer. Through the eyes of the painted Aristotle figure the reader experiences a deliberately disjointed history of classical Greece, the philosophies attributed to Socrates, Plato and Aristotle, parts of the Peloponnesian War, the rise of European Mercantilism and some of what may be dozens of historic events, people , artists and a fairly complete bio of Rembrandt and the history of this particular painting. This much is ambitious.
All of the included people, philosophies and politics are from ancient history. All of Heller's conclusions and satirical insight on long gone people and events apply to the modern word and continue to apply to this day. This is evidence of the author's skills.
Part of the creativity of this irregular narrative is that the history is quite accurate. Indeed, there may be living historians who might who would class this as history. Another part of the creativity is the perfectly maintained level cynical insight. All events and players are given the same chance to be fake, faked, hypocritical, dishonest or deadly. This inflexibility in in handing down judgments against all named people, philosophies and politics is the cause of my frustration.
Heller places himself in a position where everyone has to disappoint. All actors and all events point to the failure of institutions to perform or to be able to perform. This may be a legitimate position for a writer to base a book, but it is hardly reason for a reader to finish the book. We get it: The world of Picture This is a failure and by extension we are living in a continuation of this failure. Then again Heller has no solutions or alternatives.
I admire the depths of Joseph Heller's scholarship. He forces his reader to think of much that has been taught as only a convenient short version and neither complete nor correctly summarized. For me the reading experience became unrelenting, depressing and draining. Page after page of bitter humor and sarcastic denunciation required too much of this reader. Picture this is an easier book to admire, after you read it, than a book you can enjoy as you read it.
Picture This is something of an experimental novel. There is not a plot so much as a central story line. The picture in question is Rembrandt's Aristotle Contemplating a Bust of Homer. Through the eyes of the painted Aristotle figure the reader experiences a deliberately disjointed history of classical Greece, the philosophies attributed to Socrates, Plato and Aristotle, parts of the Peloponnesian War, the rise of European Mercantilism and some of what may be dozens of historic events, people , artists and a fairly complete bio of Rembrandt and the history of this particular painting. This much is ambitious.
All of the included people, philosophies and politics are from ancient history. All of Heller's conclusions and satirical insight on long gone people and events apply to the modern word and continue to apply to this day. This is evidence of the author's skills.
Part of the creativity of this irregular narrative is that the history is quite accurate. Indeed, there may be living historians who might who would class this as history. Another part of the creativity is the perfectly maintained level cynical insight. All events and players are given the same chance to be fake, faked, hypocritical, dishonest or deadly. This inflexibility in in handing down judgments against all named people, philosophies and politics is the cause of my frustration.
Heller places himself in a position where everyone has to disappoint. All actors and all events point to the failure of institutions to perform or to be able to perform. This may be a legitimate position for a writer to base a book, but it is hardly reason for a reader to finish the book. We get it: The world of Picture This is a failure and by extension we are living in a continuation of this failure. Then again Heller has no solutions or alternatives.
I admire the depths of Joseph Heller's scholarship. He forces his reader to think of much that has been taught as only a convenient short version and neither complete nor correctly summarized. For me the reading experience became unrelenting, depressing and draining. Page after page of bitter humor and sarcastic denunciation required too much of this reader. Picture this is an easier book to admire, after you read it, than a book you can enjoy as you read it.
December 8, 2022
Imaginem que um autor fabuloso quase só é conhecido por um dos livros que escreveu. Imaginem que, além desse livro, em si um grande romance, este autor escreveu vários outros romances fantásticos. Imaginem que dois dos melhores livros que li este ano são desse autor, que tinha um talento inato para utilizar acontecimentos históricos e mitológicos como base para os seus romances. Imaginem que um desses dois livros é este «Imaginem que» [Picture This, tradução de Cristina Rodriguez, edição portuguesa de 1991]. Imaginem que, neste livro, Joseph Heller estabelece associações geniais entre a época áurea da antiga Atenas, o século de ouro dos holandeses, e a ascensão do império americano. Imaginem que o que está por trás de todos os regimes não é o bem-estar do povo, mas a obtenção de propriedade e poder. Imaginem que Heller parte do quadro «Aristóteles contemplando o busto de Homero» para nos dar a conhecer Rembrandt, Aristóteles, Platão e Sócrates. Imaginem que a História é feita de pulhices e ultrajes, e que Henry Ford, esse grande nazi, disse que a História são tretas. Imaginem que todos os regimes políticos são uma farsa, que o cidadão comum não tem poder nenhum, e que ninguém aprende nada com a História. Imaginem que, apesar disso, Heller nos conta tudo isto com sarcasmo e humor. Imaginem que podiam ler este livro, e que provavelmente nunca o fizeram.
January 29, 2014
Я не люблю науку историю. Потому как это и не наука вовсе...
В самом скучном виде - это бесконечный список событий с датами.
В самом вздорном виде - это попытки историков (каждого на свой лад) установить (измыслить? реконструировать? вообразить?) с��язи между этими событиями из списка.
Но самое главное (как сказал кто-то из великих): история нас учит тому, что она нас ничему не учит.
Хотя... Почти каждый великий (известный, популярный) историк - обязательно литератор. Берёшь какие-нибудь лекции Грановского по истории европейского средневековья, и наслаждаешься))) Но потом про даты, и уж тем более про умные взаимосвязи между ними лучше не спрашивайте! Дух эпохи был вкушён, эмоции и впечатления получены с избытком, но не более...
История обретает красоту и смыслы лишь в подаче талантливых литераторов. Книга Джозефа Хеллера несомненно глубока и прекрасна.
Формально - это некий сюрреализм)) Фабула проста: Рембрандт (да-да, тот самый) рисует Аристотеля, который... как бы пребывает в двух мирах - и на портрете (живо размышляя о Рембрандте))) и в своей древнегреческой эпохе.
Но за этой простой фабулой скрывается гигантская эрудиция автора, который охватывает в своём романе фактически всю историю западной цивилизации, начиная со времён расцвета древнегреческих полисов и заканчивая серединой 20 века.
В книге огромное количество исторических личностей: Аристотель, Сократ, Платон, Рембрандт, Декарт и т.д. Их судьбы и идеи самым причудливым образом переплетены - они постоянно вступают в реально-виртуальные диалоги друг с другом :)
И это очень любопытно! Это своего рода мысленный эксперимент: действительно, о чём бы стал беседовать Аристотель с Декартом, если бы смог встретиться с ним? У автора этот эксперимент получился, на мой взгляд, отлично - тонко, умно, с юмором...
В книге много явных (и не очень) контрапунктов. Например, крайне неприглядный делец, аморальщик и сутяга Рембрандт явно противопоставляется добропорядочному и нищему Сократу.
Книгу также смело можно отнести к разряду антиутопии. Я бы вообще рекомендовал её читать в обязательном порядке всем любителям демократии. Ибо ничто не ново под луной :( И демократия в её древнегреческом варианте нааамного честнее нынешних рассадников демократии.
Но все узнаваемые "инструменты демократизации" были уже тогда. И "власть закона" (хотя именно демократический суд с помощью закона и угробил Сократа фактически ни за что); и "всенародное голосование" (которое с легкостью принимает решения о разорении соседних полисов, лишь бы нам было хорошо); и "переговорный процесс" (когда у ваших стен стоит эскадра боевых кораблей, и независимо от исхода переговоров все взрослые боеспособные мужчины уничтожаются); и "свобода слова", когда внутренние противники войны с нашим полисом объявляются "борцами за свободу", а сторонники независимости называются "кровавыми тиранами", ну и т.д.
В плане таких вот "политических технологий" - очень сильная и очень современная книга.
Читается довольно легко и увлекательно. Рекомендую.
В самом скучном виде - это бесконечный список событий с датами.
В самом вздорном виде - это попытки историков (каждого на свой лад) установить (измыслить? реконструировать? вообразить?) с��язи между этими событиями из списка.
Но самое главное (как сказал кто-то из великих): история нас учит тому, что она нас ничему не учит.
Хотя... Почти каждый великий (известный, популярный) историк - обязательно литератор. Берёшь какие-нибудь лекции Грановского по истории европейского средневековья, и наслаждаешься))) Но потом про даты, и уж тем более про умные взаимосвязи между ними лучше не спрашивайте! Дух эпохи был вкушён, эмоции и впечатления получены с избытком, но не более...
История обретает красоту и смыслы лишь в подаче талантливых литераторов. Книга Джозефа Хеллера несомненно глубока и прекрасна.
Формально - это некий сюрреализм)) Фабула проста: Рембрандт (да-да, тот самый) рисует Аристотеля, который... как бы пребывает в двух мирах - и на портрете (живо размышляя о Рембрандте))) и в своей древнегреческой эпохе.
Но за этой простой фабулой скрывается гигантская эрудиция автора, который охватывает в своём романе фактически всю историю западной цивилизации, начиная со времён расцвета древнегреческих полисов и заканчивая серединой 20 века.
В книге огромное количество исторических личностей: Аристотель, Сократ, Платон, Рембрандт, Декарт и т.д. Их судьбы и идеи самым причудливым образом переплетены - они постоянно вступают в реально-виртуальные диалоги друг с другом :)
И это очень любопытно! Это своего рода мысленный эксперимент: действительно, о чём бы стал беседовать Аристотель с Декартом, если бы смог встретиться с ним? У автора этот эксперимент получился, на мой взгляд, отлично - тонко, умно, с юмором...
В книге много явных (и не очень) контрапунктов. Например, крайне неприглядный делец, аморальщик и сутяга Рембрандт явно противопоставляется добропорядочному и нищему Сократу.
Книгу также смело можно отнести к разряду антиутопии. Я бы вообще рекомендовал её читать в обязательном порядке всем любителям демократии. Ибо ничто не ново под луной :( И демократия в её древнегреческом варианте нааамного честнее нынешних рассадников демократии.
Но все узнаваемые "инструменты демократизации" были уже тогда. И "власть закона" (хотя именно демократический суд с помощью закона и угробил Сократа фактически ни за что); и "всенародное голосование" (которое с легкостью принимает решения о разорении соседних полисов, лишь бы нам было хорошо); и "переговорный процесс" (когда у ваших стен стоит эскадра боевых кораблей, и независимо от исхода переговоров все взрослые боеспособные мужчины уничтожаются); и "свобода слова", когда внутренние противники войны с нашим полисом объявляются "борцами за свободу", а сторонники независимости называются "кровавыми тиранами", ну и т.д.
В плане таких вот "политических технологий" - очень сильная и очень современная книга.
Читается довольно легко и увлекательно. Рекомендую.
October 2, 2010
Heller's Catch-22 was probably the most popular novel at Maine Township South High School. My one attempt at reading it while on study break in the libary one Friday afternoon was circumvented by a brush up the nape of my neck. Dean Elbert Smith, objecting to the feel of it, a tapered bristle being required, told me then and there that I was suspended until the hair was cut to regulation. I returned the copy of Heller to my friend Richard who was sitting in front of me, marvelled with him about what an asshole the Dean of Boys was and went home at the end of period to tell Dad what had happened.
Dad's response was "No one tells you when to get your hair cut but me."--and indeed I was scheduled for a cut over at the Polish barbershop in Edison Park. Now, however, it was an issue of authority. No trimming would occur.
During this period towards the end of secondary school I had been doing occasional weekend volunteer work downtown for the ACLU. Dad was a member and student rights were an issue which came up repeatedly in their magazine. Over the course of time I'd met a number of young attorneys so, that weekend, when I went to the office and told the story, everyone offered to help should it come to legal action.
This was enough for Dad. I was expected to come into school with a parent on Monday, hair trimmed and shame-faced, for a meeting with the authorities. Dad, who usually didn't even bother to look at my report cards or show any interest whatsoever in my schooling, volunteered to be the parent.
The meeting was attended by the Dean, Principal Clyde Watson and, briefly, by Assistant Dean Barker in the Principal's office. It began civilly enough with Dad asking about the dress code policies. It ended as an argument between him and the Dean and Principal about the war in Vietnam. The decisive factor, however, was Dad's threat of legal action. The school didn't want bad publicity and in loco parentis obviously wasn't a principle which would hold in my case. I was readmitted and didn't cut my hair again for nine years.
I went on to see the filmed version of Catch-22 but never got around to the book again. It was perhaps too real, too much like the petty authoritarianism of high school. It also wasn't a very good film--at least I didn't think it funny, just depressing.
The fact that I hadn't finished Heller nagged. I almost always finish what I begin. Consequently, when I found this other novel by him, a novel which promised to be about, among other things, classical Athens, my reluctance was overcome. This might work. I bought the thing and finished it. Unfortunately, as with my sampling of Catch-22 back in high school, I wasn't much impressed despite a general sympathy for Heller's critique of the United States.
Dad's response was "No one tells you when to get your hair cut but me."--and indeed I was scheduled for a cut over at the Polish barbershop in Edison Park. Now, however, it was an issue of authority. No trimming would occur.
During this period towards the end of secondary school I had been doing occasional weekend volunteer work downtown for the ACLU. Dad was a member and student rights were an issue which came up repeatedly in their magazine. Over the course of time I'd met a number of young attorneys so, that weekend, when I went to the office and told the story, everyone offered to help should it come to legal action.
This was enough for Dad. I was expected to come into school with a parent on Monday, hair trimmed and shame-faced, for a meeting with the authorities. Dad, who usually didn't even bother to look at my report cards or show any interest whatsoever in my schooling, volunteered to be the parent.
The meeting was attended by the Dean, Principal Clyde Watson and, briefly, by Assistant Dean Barker in the Principal's office. It began civilly enough with Dad asking about the dress code policies. It ended as an argument between him and the Dean and Principal about the war in Vietnam. The decisive factor, however, was Dad's threat of legal action. The school didn't want bad publicity and in loco parentis obviously wasn't a principle which would hold in my case. I was readmitted and didn't cut my hair again for nine years.
I went on to see the filmed version of Catch-22 but never got around to the book again. It was perhaps too real, too much like the petty authoritarianism of high school. It also wasn't a very good film--at least I didn't think it funny, just depressing.
The fact that I hadn't finished Heller nagged. I almost always finish what I begin. Consequently, when I found this other novel by him, a novel which promised to be about, among other things, classical Athens, my reluctance was overcome. This might work. I bought the thing and finished it. Unfortunately, as with my sampling of Catch-22 back in high school, I wasn't much impressed despite a general sympathy for Heller's critique of the United States.
April 25, 2019
Vintage Heller. Devastatingly prescient. Hilariously scathing. Too many passages could be written in 2019. Not really because Heller is prescient, either, but because past is prologue, and history repeats, and several hundred centuries hasn’t changed humanity all that much.
Peace on earth would mean the end of civilization as we know it.
Wisdom consists in knowing there is no such thing.
From men motivated by moral certitude, history teaches, no lasting good ever comes.
I’m going to give it high marks, but still rank it slightly below Catch-22 and God Knows, just because… Catch-22 and God Knows.
April 11, 2008
i've fancied myself a kind of minor champion of this book for a long while. Catch-22 was one of my first real "favorite" books, and Joseph Heller was one of the first authors I really recognized as having this authorial voice that I could learn from & follow. And Catch-22 is great, terrific, wonderful, everyone knows that . . . but when I read Picture This it appealed to me in this strange dark way which is also wickedly smart, and has always had a unique place in my book-loving heart.
it's a different kind of writing. It is a "novel" but it is also a kind of weird historiography; it spans ancient Greek and Renaissance Europe, with Aristotle and Rembrandt and Socrates as its characters, and with Heller's wry pitch-dark sense of humor as the overarching narrative force. Without ever explicitly saying so, it turns ancient Athens & Sparta into a perfect analogy of Cold War-era USA & USSR; it is, beyond that, a fairly ingenious discussion of state politics, art, philosophy, and capitalism. Rembrandt in this book is a wonderfully done character; depressed and brooding, and the book hinges on a metaphysical connection between what Rembrandt paints and how art & philosophy were being conducted in the "ancient" Greek world: painting a painting of Aristotle, as he paints each part of Aristotle, that part "comes to life" and we are treated to a kind of comic extrapolation of ancient Greek City-State politics, before sinking back through History and into Rembrandt's time again, where he is dreadfully poor and suffering for his art. All of this reflects quite expertly, if never explicitly, on the modern nation-state-political-art world.
That's why I love this book so much; it is very much a book about artists, and what Heller learned from himself as an artist who has already written his magnum opus. It should also be noted: this book has probably my favorite ending to a novel (the last paragraph) ever. Ever !!
it's a different kind of writing. It is a "novel" but it is also a kind of weird historiography; it spans ancient Greek and Renaissance Europe, with Aristotle and Rembrandt and Socrates as its characters, and with Heller's wry pitch-dark sense of humor as the overarching narrative force. Without ever explicitly saying so, it turns ancient Athens & Sparta into a perfect analogy of Cold War-era USA & USSR; it is, beyond that, a fairly ingenious discussion of state politics, art, philosophy, and capitalism. Rembrandt in this book is a wonderfully done character; depressed and brooding, and the book hinges on a metaphysical connection between what Rembrandt paints and how art & philosophy were being conducted in the "ancient" Greek world: painting a painting of Aristotle, as he paints each part of Aristotle, that part "comes to life" and we are treated to a kind of comic extrapolation of ancient Greek City-State politics, before sinking back through History and into Rembrandt's time again, where he is dreadfully poor and suffering for his art. All of this reflects quite expertly, if never explicitly, on the modern nation-state-political-art world.
That's why I love this book so much; it is very much a book about artists, and what Heller learned from himself as an artist who has already written his magnum opus. It should also be noted: this book has probably my favorite ending to a novel (the last paragraph) ever. Ever !!
June 22, 2020
"There comes a time in the lifecycle of a nation when no decision that can be made is the right one and no action that can be taken is intelligent"
"There are outrages and there are outrages, and some are more outrageous than others.
Mankind is resilient: the atrocities that horrified us a week ago become acceptable tomorrow."
When Joseph Heller wants to examine the space of art and philosophy, you are not really sure what he is going to come up with. Bad news is neither did he.
The book starts in 1653 as Rembrandt is painting his work "Aristotle Contemplating the Bust of Homer". The frame of reference keeps shifting from the painter to the painting to the painted. So Aristotle - whose philosophy is against monetary gains - gets sold/smuggled/ auctioned/peddled till he takes pride on being paid $250,000 to be hung at MET. Rembrandt,whose works raked in millions, is a spendthrift who ends up bankrupt and is almost begging patrons to be paid while working on his masterpieces.
Since we are talking Aristotle we go back to ancient Greece and talk out of frame a lot of Socrates, Plato and the war between Athens and Sparta. The dialogues are faithful take on the written history and the works of these philosophers with Heller's own asides and comments. It does not make it seem like a parody.
What Heller is going for - and I may be wrong - is to say over generations and ages nothing much changes. Things keep evolving, come a full circle and this he explains as he draws parallel with 1988 USA (which holds good now). He critiques Plato's republic as something he himself would not have opted, but then quickly moves away from committing himself. Socrates - we get to know his questioning technique through the various dialogues and probably spins his own interpretation of this (Note: I have had a chance to study these dialogues as part of a course).
The major problem with the book is the structure. It meanders a lot across ages/times and lacks those recurring motifs which connect the story lines. Having said that, the disjoint pieces in themselves have some takeaway - be it Greek history, Socrates trial, Plato's republic or Rembrandt's penury.
Not the best - but still a book to reckon!
"There are outrages and there are outrages, and some are more outrageous than others.
Mankind is resilient: the atrocities that horrified us a week ago become acceptable tomorrow."
When Joseph Heller wants to examine the space of art and philosophy, you are not really sure what he is going to come up with. Bad news is neither did he.
The book starts in 1653 as Rembrandt is painting his work "Aristotle Contemplating the Bust of Homer". The frame of reference keeps shifting from the painter to the painting to the painted. So Aristotle - whose philosophy is against monetary gains - gets sold/smuggled/ auctioned/peddled till he takes pride on being paid $250,000 to be hung at MET. Rembrandt,whose works raked in millions, is a spendthrift who ends up bankrupt and is almost begging patrons to be paid while working on his masterpieces.
Since we are talking Aristotle we go back to ancient Greece and talk out of frame a lot of Socrates, Plato and the war between Athens and Sparta. The dialogues are faithful take on the written history and the works of these philosophers with Heller's own asides and comments. It does not make it seem like a parody.
What Heller is going for - and I may be wrong - is to say over generations and ages nothing much changes. Things keep evolving, come a full circle and this he explains as he draws parallel with 1988 USA (which holds good now). He critiques Plato's republic as something he himself would not have opted, but then quickly moves away from committing himself. Socrates - we get to know his questioning technique through the various dialogues and probably spins his own interpretation of this (Note: I have had a chance to study these dialogues as part of a course).
The major problem with the book is the structure. It meanders a lot across ages/times and lacks those recurring motifs which connect the story lines. Having said that, the disjoint pieces in themselves have some takeaway - be it Greek history, Socrates trial, Plato's republic or Rembrandt's penury.
Not the best - but still a book to reckon!
March 14, 2021
Picture this! You are in your class room and your history's teacher is the funniest guy in the world!
Score: 10/10
It was a love at the first sight! I was something like 16 when I read “It was a love at the first sight” sentence for the first time and although I was able to get surprising lot of an action (wink wink) for that shy of a guy, I still consider Heller’s Catch 22 to be the best thing I was able to get hold of at that age.
Summary: “Picture This” is a shallow beating of Rembrandt and a deep deep dive into the minds of a person/group of people/society.
Some more(e):
I was always torn between liking and disliking my history classes as they featured some of the most amazing stories, yet many of them were missing the essential piece – the right narrator.
“Picture This” are the best history classes you will ever get, because good old Joey is the funniest person who ever lived on this good planet and you betcha he won’t let you down on the narration! He will stop you, make you read him twice, trice and then he will award your patience with some beautifully-flowing nonsensical conversation. And even if this book’s plot would be a pure fiction, it would be an impressive one (‘course I borrowed this one from the book). So much better that it’s not…
It’s as real as Rembrandt’s paintings, Socrates’s teachings, Plato’s intellect and people’s interest in art. You can hardly ask for more…
Well, you can and you’ll get that too.
And you get to fall in love in here twice! (Heller is an obvious one, but…) If you have been as much of an ignorant as I was and didn’t know what Socrates was all about, you will end up reshuffling your all times Top 3 people list. I promise!
Just do yourself a favor and read it! Seriously!
#whatwouldSocratesdoitsarealtthing #heneverwroteaword#neverlearnedhowtousethese
Favourite quote:
On Rembrandt:
“Rembrandt could not afford a Rembrandt.”
On books:
“He said that readers of books read much and learned nothing, that they appeared full of knowledge, but for the most part were without it, and had the show of wisdom without its reality.
He said this in a book.
The book, though, is by Plato…”
On the Economy:
“Rich is the country that has plenty of poor.
In periods when prosperity is general, the value of the impoverished to that country increases, and nations not rich in poor must import indigents from inferior countries for the labor now considered degrading for citizens of repute to perform.
The bidding sometimes goes high.
It is fortunate for the progress of civilization that there are always plenty of poor.”
On power:
“Considerations of right and wrong have never yet turned people aside from the opportunities to take what they could get by superior strength.”
On Plato’s suggestions for a functional state:
““It is the incurable wickedness of man that makes the work of the legislator a sad necessity,” declared Plato.
For the incurable wickedness of the legislator he gave no efficacious remedy. “
On Jesus (sorta):
“There will be no happy ending.
All good tragedies have happy endings.
What would happen had Jesus not been crucified?
The trial of Socrates was a fair one. There was no manufactured evidence, no lying witnesses. There was no evidence, no witnesses. All in the jury knew that. A lucky thing about the rule of law in the democratic society Anythus had helped restore was that charges against a person no longer had to be proved. They only had to be convincing. Due process was observed. Justice was done.
Even Socrates did not complain.”
But should I pick just one, it would be this one:
“The desire of some men for peace is a frequent cause of war”
Bonus: http://billmoyers.com/content/joseph-...
You have more?
Score: 10/10
It was a love at the first sight! I was something like 16 when I read “It was a love at the first sight” sentence for the first time and although I was able to get surprising lot of an action (wink wink) for that shy of a guy, I still consider Heller’s Catch 22 to be the best thing I was able to get hold of at that age.
Summary: “Picture This” is a shallow beating of Rembrandt and a deep deep dive into the minds of a person/group of people/society.
Some more(e):
I was always torn between liking and disliking my history classes as they featured some of the most amazing stories, yet many of them were missing the essential piece – the right narrator.
“Picture This” are the best history classes you will ever get, because good old Joey is the funniest person who ever lived on this good planet and you betcha he won’t let you down on the narration! He will stop you, make you read him twice, trice and then he will award your patience with some beautifully-flowing nonsensical conversation. And even if this book’s plot would be a pure fiction, it would be an impressive one (‘course I borrowed this one from the book). So much better that it’s not…
It’s as real as Rembrandt’s paintings, Socrates’s teachings, Plato’s intellect and people’s interest in art. You can hardly ask for more…
Well, you can and you’ll get that too.
And you get to fall in love in here twice! (Heller is an obvious one, but…) If you have been as much of an ignorant as I was and didn’t know what Socrates was all about, you will end up reshuffling your all times Top 3 people list. I promise!
Just do yourself a favor and read it! Seriously!
#whatwouldSocratesdoitsarealtthing #heneverwroteaword#neverlearnedhowtousethese
Favourite quote:
On Rembrandt:
“Rembrandt could not afford a Rembrandt.”
On books:
“He said that readers of books read much and learned nothing, that they appeared full of knowledge, but for the most part were without it, and had the show of wisdom without its reality.
He said this in a book.
The book, though, is by Plato…”
On the Economy:
“Rich is the country that has plenty of poor.
In periods when prosperity is general, the value of the impoverished to that country increases, and nations not rich in poor must import indigents from inferior countries for the labor now considered degrading for citizens of repute to perform.
The bidding sometimes goes high.
It is fortunate for the progress of civilization that there are always plenty of poor.”
On power:
“Considerations of right and wrong have never yet turned people aside from the opportunities to take what they could get by superior strength.”
On Plato’s suggestions for a functional state:
““It is the incurable wickedness of man that makes the work of the legislator a sad necessity,” declared Plato.
For the incurable wickedness of the legislator he gave no efficacious remedy. “
On Jesus (sorta):
“There will be no happy ending.
All good tragedies have happy endings.
What would happen had Jesus not been crucified?
The trial of Socrates was a fair one. There was no manufactured evidence, no lying witnesses. There was no evidence, no witnesses. All in the jury knew that. A lucky thing about the rule of law in the democratic society Anythus had helped restore was that charges against a person no longer had to be proved. They only had to be convincing. Due process was observed. Justice was done.
Even Socrates did not complain.”
But should I pick just one, it would be this one:
“The desire of some men for peace is a frequent cause of war”
Bonus: http://billmoyers.com/content/joseph-...
You have more?
August 9, 2020
i would confidently place this book among the fuckiest books i’ve read. the best way i could describe is 300-odd pages of heller bitching about how we can’t trust anything in history because we don’t know whether or not it really happened. it’s a ride start to finish, heller providing us with his sarcastic and often comical commentary.
he gives us a recounting of history from the greeks to the great depression using only one painting to do so. confused as to how that’s possible? yeah, so am i. but it’s brilliant so i’m not really complaining. it’s a story he tells with such heart and satire, te historical aspect of it isn’t even that jarring; you don’t realize it’s a commentary on history. and coming from someone who doesn’t know as much history as they probably should, it’s an easy read. and you learn a bunch from it as well. it doesn’t feel like a history book.
i didn’t get the point of the book until the last page and let me tell you it threw me for a fucking loop. it’s awing how me manages to fluently end the book just as it’s beginning while at the same time explaining his point without actually addressing it. nothing i can say will ever really do it justice, you really gotta read the book and experience it yourself. the best way to go about that is going in blind not really knowing anything.
this is the first heller book i’ve ever read and suffice it to say i adored it. it’s a recounting of history through someone else’s eyes and it’s just exactly what a story should be. i wish i could formulate all of this so much better but in conclusion, heller wrote a story. and it’s a damn good one.
he gives us a recounting of history from the greeks to the great depression using only one painting to do so. confused as to how that’s possible? yeah, so am i. but it’s brilliant so i’m not really complaining. it’s a story he tells with such heart and satire, te historical aspect of it isn’t even that jarring; you don’t realize it’s a commentary on history. and coming from someone who doesn’t know as much history as they probably should, it’s an easy read. and you learn a bunch from it as well. it doesn’t feel like a history book.
i didn’t get the point of the book until the last page and let me tell you it threw me for a fucking loop. it’s awing how me manages to fluently end the book just as it’s beginning while at the same time explaining his point without actually addressing it. nothing i can say will ever really do it justice, you really gotta read the book and experience it yourself. the best way to go about that is going in blind not really knowing anything.
this is the first heller book i’ve ever read and suffice it to say i adored it. it’s a recounting of history through someone else’s eyes and it’s just exactly what a story should be. i wish i could formulate all of this so much better but in conclusion, heller wrote a story. and it’s a damn good one.
September 21, 2015
An absolute gem of a brilliant little book that is nothing like anything you've read before. Not a quick read, you rather have to go slow and contemplate, but incredibly rewarding.
December 16, 2017
This is a book which is quite different from Catch-22 and attempts to compare the two wouldn't be doing it justice. Still, I am going to do it. Compared to Catch-22, this is a much more sophisticated book, it deals predominantly with art and intellectuals, and their lives. The centre piece of this book is a painting by Rembrandt which has "Aristotle" with his hand on a bust of "Homer" as he ponders vacantly. I use the quotes because the book tells us: nothing is what it seems. It's a painting which might not be by Rembrandt, of a guy who posed as Aristotle whom the painter thinks better suits the name, and a bust of a person who may or may not have existed or may not be a single entity but a collection of people, and hence is a random bust. And it may not be the best work of the painter, and yet it was the most expensive painting at one point in history. Speaking of history, the book follows a few characters from it: Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, and Rembrandt with their compatriots as the author narrates and correlates their stories. In doing so we are taken through a crash course in Greek history, through the principle philosophies governing it, the nature of democracy and politics, the machinations of war, the need for conflicts and its aftermath and so on. In doing so, the author makes us reflect and make up our mind about how much things have changed and yet remain the same; we see the same interplay of emotions, rhetoric and reasoning in the modern world as the modern day equivalents of the characters make the same mistakes as the historical ones. On cross examination of history, we gain clarity about the nature of capitalism and communism, the estoric emphasis on ethics, the way civilisations have been built and destroyed and the part that people play in them. One of the recurring theme in the book is the part played by the bourgeoisie and the wealthy elite in running what is essentially a kleptocracy and an oligarchy. It speaks of the profit motif and the way it drives people to do what they want in the pursuit of wealth and power: appeal to emotion and rhetoric, wage wars, put innocent lives on the line and make good money. It's a tour de force which relentlessly breaks down the nature of socio-political history to its base elements and uses the monologues of the thinkers of the time to shine a light on them. It's does an incredible job at making the reader relate to the current by taking a look at the past as we see how much of it still holds true. The characters change but history repeats itself.
The books isn't funny like catch-22, it's more witty, which won't make you laugh-out-loud but would make you smile and nod in recognition of the wit which the author intends. He relies on ironies and subtle nods to the circumstantial humour in history to keep the reader engaged. A cursory reading of the background and lives of Greek philosophers would work really well for the reader to help get into the book, along with some resources to see the paintings referenced in the book. It sets the stage to really delve into the world that the author has described where we jump between characters and time frames and find a common thread running through history which binds them together.
The books isn't funny like catch-22, it's more witty, which won't make you laugh-out-loud but would make you smile and nod in recognition of the wit which the author intends. He relies on ironies and subtle nods to the circumstantial humour in history to keep the reader engaged. A cursory reading of the background and lives of Greek philosophers would work really well for the reader to help get into the book, along with some resources to see the paintings referenced in the book. It sets the stage to really delve into the world that the author has described where we jump between characters and time frames and find a common thread running through history which binds them together.
March 14, 2018
Изключителна книга, много добър превод; ужасна корица.
"Съществува насилие и насилие. Едно е по-смазващо от друго.
Човечеството лесно забравя: зверствата, потресли ни преди седмица, утре ни се струват нещо нормално.
Смъртта на Сократ не повлия по никакъв начин на атинската история. Само може би благоприятства за подобряването на репутацията на града.
Няма човешка смърт, която да е толкова важна за бъдещето, колкото литературата, изписана за нея."
"Съществува насилие и насилие. Едно е по-смазващо от друго.
Човечеството лесно забравя: зверствата, потресли ни преди седмица, утре ни се струват нещо нормално.
Смъртта на Сократ не повлия по никакъв начин на атинската история. Само може би благоприятства за подобряването на репутацията на града.
Няма човешка смърт, която да е толкова важна за бъдещето, колкото литературата, изписана за нея."
May 13, 2019
I was telling someone about The Anatomy Lesson which is a fictional account of the famous Rembrandt painting, and they recommended Picture This which is ostensibly about Rembrandt’s Aristotle Contemplating the Bust of Homer, but really is the opportunity for Heller to tackle our human history of war, chaos, capitalism, democracy, art, power. Heller really knows his Greeks. It’s hard to believe it was written in 1988. It could have been written yesterday. It is a brilliant novel.
May 31, 2023
This was so close for me, it just didn't fully deliver on the premise. This is a journey across time, and the globe, all connected by a single painting. Heller goes from Aristotle to Jimmy Carter, from Athens to America. Heller's conclusion is that so much of our history is based on myth, and not fact, that there is no real possible way we can learn from our past.
June 2, 2020
Rather than “novel”, I would label Heller’s Picture This an “imaginative rumination”. Heller spins out a good-sized book whose seminal moment is Rembrandt’s final days completing his painting, Aristotle Contemplating the Bust of Homer. This enables Heller to bring in meditative accounts of the lives/works of Aristotle, Socrates, and Plato, which in turn leads to discussions of the varieties of politics in Athens during these philosophers’ lives, with especial reference to one of Socrates’ pupils, Alcibiades.
Further ramifications are shorter takes on Alexander the Great (Aristotle’s pupil), Plato’s badly conceived perfect societies (proposed in The Republic and revamped in The Laws), and Aristotle’s last days as an exile from Athens. Heller gives Rembrandt's anachronistic image of Aristotle a consciousness, but it is Socrates to whom he returns most often and with whom he concludes this long rumination on art, politics, war, and wisdom. The trial and death of Socrates are recounted by Plato, but Heller reworks the stories and particularly points up the absurdities of the trial, which bring to mind both Kafka and Koestler. The repose and calm with which Socrates suffers his death suggest it is the abiding spirit a reader must assume in taking in all of the peculiar and contrary human impulses Heller illumines in this discursive and digressive meditation.
Rembrandt himself is given some attention, and it allows Heller to look at the emergence of the 17th century’s greatest mercantile economy and its commercial and political empire-building. Even in the midst of this profitable enterprise, the Dutch were still contending in an 80-year war with Spain, with Amsterdam (and Rembrandt) simply going about their business. Rembrandt does not emerge an exemplary man, and the Aristotle on his canvas notes how much finer a painter he is than a man. Heller relates how Rembrandt’s extant literary output is a collection of seven terse letters concerning remuneration for his paintings; additionally, Rembrandt spent most of his life in debt, fending off creditors whilst stealing from his son’s and mistress’ inheritances.
The many digressions lead to a tangle of connections and comparisons that inevitably lead to mention of warmongering in the United States (a la Vietnam). Heller is ironic and satiric in positioning images of hawkish democrats in Athens with neo-conservative war hawks in the United States, but there is no condemnation, and it’s more a quick aside. In such juxtapositions and comparisons, Heller is vividly making the point that our contemporary issues are not unique (even today, 35 years after this book’s publication), and that, in fact, there is nothing new under the sun.
Heller is witty, informative, and breezy enough to maintain this peculiar meditation for several hundred pages, and I found myself continually delighted with this intermingling of fact, fiction, and rumination.
Further ramifications are shorter takes on Alexander the Great (Aristotle’s pupil), Plato’s badly conceived perfect societies (proposed in The Republic and revamped in The Laws), and Aristotle’s last days as an exile from Athens. Heller gives Rembrandt's anachronistic image of Aristotle a consciousness, but it is Socrates to whom he returns most often and with whom he concludes this long rumination on art, politics, war, and wisdom. The trial and death of Socrates are recounted by Plato, but Heller reworks the stories and particularly points up the absurdities of the trial, which bring to mind both Kafka and Koestler. The repose and calm with which Socrates suffers his death suggest it is the abiding spirit a reader must assume in taking in all of the peculiar and contrary human impulses Heller illumines in this discursive and digressive meditation.
Rembrandt himself is given some attention, and it allows Heller to look at the emergence of the 17th century’s greatest mercantile economy and its commercial and political empire-building. Even in the midst of this profitable enterprise, the Dutch were still contending in an 80-year war with Spain, with Amsterdam (and Rembrandt) simply going about their business. Rembrandt does not emerge an exemplary man, and the Aristotle on his canvas notes how much finer a painter he is than a man. Heller relates how Rembrandt’s extant literary output is a collection of seven terse letters concerning remuneration for his paintings; additionally, Rembrandt spent most of his life in debt, fending off creditors whilst stealing from his son’s and mistress’ inheritances.
The many digressions lead to a tangle of connections and comparisons that inevitably lead to mention of warmongering in the United States (a la Vietnam). Heller is ironic and satiric in positioning images of hawkish democrats in Athens with neo-conservative war hawks in the United States, but there is no condemnation, and it’s more a quick aside. In such juxtapositions and comparisons, Heller is vividly making the point that our contemporary issues are not unique (even today, 35 years after this book’s publication), and that, in fact, there is nothing new under the sun.
Heller is witty, informative, and breezy enough to maintain this peculiar meditation for several hundred pages, and I found myself continually delighted with this intermingling of fact, fiction, and rumination.
May 12, 2015
Imaginem que iniciam a leitura de uma obra de um autor cujos romances anteriores haviam considerado excelentes.
Imaginem que o autor em questão tem uma voz extremamente única - deliciosamente satírica, irónica e espirituosa - na qual anseiam por voltar a mergulhar.
Imaginem ainda que a sinopse do volume da obra que se propõem a ler descreve-a como sendo constituída pelos pensamentos e considerações do quadro "Aristótles contemplando o busto de Homero" de Rembrandt van Rijn que, de algum modo, ganha vida e tece comentários sobre os acontecimentos que testemunha.
Agora imaginem que pouco ou nenhuma da "verve" e acutilante humor do autor está presente nas páginas da dita obra e que esta parece ser apenas uma compilação mais ou menos aleatória de acontecimentos históricos entre os quais o autor insiste em estabelecer ligações algo forçadas com o único intuito de sugerir que as motivações e avanço (ou retrocesso) do ser humano e das várias nações do mundo permanecem a mesma independentemente do século a que nos referimos.
Imaginem ainda que, contrariamente ao prometido pela sinopse do livro que têm nas vossas mãos, as considerações do quadro em questão praticamente não figuram nas páginas do livro e que esta obra, tanto em linguagem como estrutura, assemelha-se a uma espécie de ensaio histórico mal planeado e organizado, escrito por um aspirante a autor de ficção.
Imaginem o meu desapontamento ao ler este romance, ensaio histórico amador ou seja lá o que for que esta obra é suposto ser.
Imaginem que nem o consegui ler até ao fim...
Imaginem que o autor em questão tem uma voz extremamente única - deliciosamente satírica, irónica e espirituosa - na qual anseiam por voltar a mergulhar.
Imaginem ainda que a sinopse do volume da obra que se propõem a ler descreve-a como sendo constituída pelos pensamentos e considerações do quadro "Aristótles contemplando o busto de Homero" de Rembrandt van Rijn que, de algum modo, ganha vida e tece comentários sobre os acontecimentos que testemunha.
Agora imaginem que pouco ou nenhuma da "verve" e acutilante humor do autor está presente nas páginas da dita obra e que esta parece ser apenas uma compilação mais ou menos aleatória de acontecimentos históricos entre os quais o autor insiste em estabelecer ligações algo forçadas com o único intuito de sugerir que as motivações e avanço (ou retrocesso) do ser humano e das várias nações do mundo permanecem a mesma independentemente do século a que nos referimos.
Imaginem ainda que, contrariamente ao prometido pela sinopse do livro que têm nas vossas mãos, as considerações do quadro em questão praticamente não figuram nas páginas do livro e que esta obra, tanto em linguagem como estrutura, assemelha-se a uma espécie de ensaio histórico mal planeado e organizado, escrito por um aspirante a autor de ficção.
Imaginem o meu desapontamento ao ler este romance, ensaio histórico amador ou seja lá o que for que esta obra é suposto ser.
Imaginem que nem o consegui ler até ao fim...
December 24, 2010
I'm a little embarrassed, but it took me a few years to finish this book ... I had tons of other books to read for school and work, but this novel is a bit demanding, as well. Heller does something original, as far as I know, in the history of literature. He tells the story of Rembrandt painting Aristotle contemplating a bust of Homer. One the very first page, we find out that the painting of Aristotle can observe the world, think, and feel, but cannot move. (I know, it's impossible, just like Toy Story, but once you accept the premise of the book, the rest is lots of fun). This juxtaposition of historical figures gives Heller the chance to range over the histories and philosophies of Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, jumping back and forth between ancient Greece and Holland during the time of Rebrandt. Since Rembrandt's painting has a life of its own, Heller gets to outline the histories of Rembrandt's paintings: who bought them, for how much, the change of opinion among audiences and art critics towards Rembrandt. All of this is combined with a not-very-subtle commentary on modern America, with lots of pointed jabs at Cold War politics and American imperialism.
Philosophical and historical fiction, lots of wry humor, demanding on the reader, but well worth the effort!
Philosophical and historical fiction, lots of wry humor, demanding on the reader, but well worth the effort!
January 18, 2020
4.8 stars!
2nd favorite Heller novel. Read it several times. Gifted it to my philosophy professor.
“There are outrages and there are outrages, and some are more outrageous than others.
Mankind is resilient: the atrocities that horrified us a week ago become acceptable tomorrow.
The Death of Socrates had no effect upon the history of Athens. If anything, the reputation of the city has been improved by it.
The death of no person is as important to the future as the literature about it.
You will learn nothing from history that can be applied, so don't kid yourself into thinking you can.
'History is bunk', said Henry Ford.”
Heller weaves a rich tapestry of art, philosophy, economics, history, and humor. Only Kurt Vonnegut compares.
“As soon as there was profit, there were people who wanted to make it, more than they wanted to make anything else.”
Welcome addition to any literature collection.
2nd favorite Heller novel. Read it several times. Gifted it to my philosophy professor.
“There are outrages and there are outrages, and some are more outrageous than others.
Mankind is resilient: the atrocities that horrified us a week ago become acceptable tomorrow.
The Death of Socrates had no effect upon the history of Athens. If anything, the reputation of the city has been improved by it.
The death of no person is as important to the future as the literature about it.
You will learn nothing from history that can be applied, so don't kid yourself into thinking you can.
'History is bunk', said Henry Ford.”
Heller weaves a rich tapestry of art, philosophy, economics, history, and humor. Only Kurt Vonnegut compares.
“As soon as there was profit, there were people who wanted to make it, more than they wanted to make anything else.”
Welcome addition to any literature collection.
September 4, 2020
"You will Learn nothing from History that can be applied, so don't kid yourself into thinking you can"
Joseph Heller brings such tremendous humor and erudition at once in his works that, barring Eco, I seldom witnessed in any other writer. Most of his works are satires on history, or, to put it properly satires on the glorification of History. Picture This is no different. It is an in depth rendering of probably factual, sometimes farcical and often humorous lives and surroundings of the people involved in one of the famous Rembrandt painting" Contemplation of Bust of Homer By Aristotle".
It is a joyous read. I would say no more.
Joseph Heller brings such tremendous humor and erudition at once in his works that, barring Eco, I seldom witnessed in any other writer. Most of his works are satires on history, or, to put it properly satires on the glorification of History. Picture This is no different. It is an in depth rendering of probably factual, sometimes farcical and often humorous lives and surroundings of the people involved in one of the famous Rembrandt painting" Contemplation of Bust of Homer By Aristotle".
It is a joyous read. I would say no more.
October 12, 2020
I’m not generally a fan of non-linear stories, but this was compelling and sometimes fun. It was a romp through 1600s Amsterdam and ancient Greece exploring the idea of what is real and fake, and resonated with today’s cries of “fake news.” The brief overview of Thucydides through the lens of Vietnam was interesting (I originally read it through the lens of Iraq). It was hard not to see vicious Twitter spats playing out in the corrupt Athenian justice system.
Written in the 1980s, this story uses history, humor and magical realism in a way that never felt dated but comments on much of the political turmoil of the last 20 years.
Written in the 1980s, this story uses history, humor and magical realism in a way that never felt dated but comments on much of the political turmoil of the last 20 years.
June 30, 2007
A glorious coming of age story about a young English boy who attends wizard school and discovers his treasure trove of hidden magical ability whilst cavorting with hirsuite giants and majestic Owls. Wait, I was reading it upside down. Actually, Its a novel about a real painting written from the point of view of the painting itself. Uhmm, yeah.
August 19, 2020
An excellent typical Heller read. Extremely funny and witty with life’s serious philosophical contemplations mixed in. Always thought provoking and historically informative. A very fine book and just a damn good read
July 19, 2022
An excellent read - thanks to Heller's signature pithy sense of humor, sweeping historical parallels, and a sharp dialogue. As always, Heller does not disappoint. Particularly enjoyed the social / political critique of militarism and dictatorship.
December 11, 2007
This book whetted my youthful appetite for art and history and philosophy all together.
May 5, 2020
I love the concept of the point of view and the development of the levels of sophistication and perception as the portrait takes shape.
August 19, 2020
Most astonishing book. Bravo!
September 14, 2022
Una trama brillante. Gran ejercicio literario, muy bien ejecutado.
March 13, 2022
In "Picture This," Joseph Heller uses Rembrandt's portrait of Aristotle with a bust of Homer as a device to analyze avarice and empire, traveling from ancient Athens to mercantile Amsterdam all the way into the present day. In his trademark style, Heller uses repetitive, layered storytelling--much as a painter uses brushstrokes--to illustrate his central theme: that power is derived from cruelty.
There isn't much of a narrative to advance this thesis. We do get scenes of Rembrandt in his workshop, applying and removing paint as he ponders how to dodge his creditors. But much of what Heller offers is synopsis, selections from the Greek classics: the trial of Socrates, the plague of Athens, the siege of Melos. He uses these pieces of history, like a lawyer building a case, to argue for the essential futility of the human condition. Warmongers profit, Heller tells us. Innocent people are massacred, enslaved, exploitatively forced to toil. Thus it ever was, and thus it ever will be.
In sketching this pattern, though, Heller finds himself drawn to the outliers. Take Rembrandt, for instance. The painter is a crude man. He squanders his childrens' inheritances, impregnates his housemaids, takes on debts he'll never repay. He stitches old canvases together to try to make a buck from frustrated patrons. And yet he is exquisite in conjuring the gilt of gold or using a few brushstrokes to evoke the contours of lace.
There is something inexplicable about Rembrandt, a bit of the divine, even if he never benefits from it. Instead, he dies bankrupt while his paintings appreciate in the hands of counts and wealthy widows.
Socrates too is unique. The philosopher opts out of the striving and cruelty of his ancient home; he walks away from a dictator's orders, accumulates nothing, has his wife dump a chamber pot on his head. Put on trial for blasphemy and corrupting the youth, he defends himself, arguing that he deserves a pension from the state for his work. He refuses compromise, contrition, escape and exile, sticking to his principles...that and a large glass of hemlock.
It's worth noting, as Heller does, that Socrates risked his life for Athens, taking up arms multiple times as a common soldier on the city's behalf. These actions were pointless--everything seems pointless to Socrates, at least in Heller's telling--but he did it anyway. One has to serve the empire one is born into, Socrates suggests. In this service, it's easy to see a parallel to John Yossarian in "Catch 22" and Heller's own combat experience in World War II.
Like most of Heller's books, "Picture This" argues that the world is senseless and arbitrary and often cruel. In transmuting history into fiction, it also argues that history isn't really knowable. Many of the paintings credited to Rembrandt are forgeries. Socrates' words are passed down to us through Plato, who was only a child when many of them were uttered.
And so like Socrates, Heller makes a show of flaunting his ignorance, highlighting what he doesn't know--what can't be known. We never learn anything from history it seems. Only that the same dark patterns keep recurring.
Quotes
"Nowhere in history is this assumption that human life has a value borne out by human events.
All our religions but the Judaic and the Greek think more of us dead than alive."
***
"Rich is the country that has plenty of poor. In periods when prosperity is general, the value of the impoverished to that country increases, and nations not rich in poor must import indigents from inferior countries for the labor now considered degrading for citizens of repute to perform.
The bidding sometimes goes high.
It is fortunate for the progress of civilization that there are always plenty of poor."
***
"War is always in fashion, my dear old friend. Look at our history. In our golden age of Athens there is scarcely a period as long as five years in which we have not been at war. We lost most of the big battles and can't hold on to what we win. Yet the city prospers, the economy booms. And now see how unconvincing and feeble poor Nicias appears each time he comes into public to argue for threadbare, ragged, tedious peace. A politician can roar for war. For peace he can only plead."
There isn't much of a narrative to advance this thesis. We do get scenes of Rembrandt in his workshop, applying and removing paint as he ponders how to dodge his creditors. But much of what Heller offers is synopsis, selections from the Greek classics: the trial of Socrates, the plague of Athens, the siege of Melos. He uses these pieces of history, like a lawyer building a case, to argue for the essential futility of the human condition. Warmongers profit, Heller tells us. Innocent people are massacred, enslaved, exploitatively forced to toil. Thus it ever was, and thus it ever will be.
In sketching this pattern, though, Heller finds himself drawn to the outliers. Take Rembrandt, for instance. The painter is a crude man. He squanders his childrens' inheritances, impregnates his housemaids, takes on debts he'll never repay. He stitches old canvases together to try to make a buck from frustrated patrons. And yet he is exquisite in conjuring the gilt of gold or using a few brushstrokes to evoke the contours of lace.
There is something inexplicable about Rembrandt, a bit of the divine, even if he never benefits from it. Instead, he dies bankrupt while his paintings appreciate in the hands of counts and wealthy widows.
Socrates too is unique. The philosopher opts out of the striving and cruelty of his ancient home; he walks away from a dictator's orders, accumulates nothing, has his wife dump a chamber pot on his head. Put on trial for blasphemy and corrupting the youth, he defends himself, arguing that he deserves a pension from the state for his work. He refuses compromise, contrition, escape and exile, sticking to his principles...that and a large glass of hemlock.
It's worth noting, as Heller does, that Socrates risked his life for Athens, taking up arms multiple times as a common soldier on the city's behalf. These actions were pointless--everything seems pointless to Socrates, at least in Heller's telling--but he did it anyway. One has to serve the empire one is born into, Socrates suggests. In this service, it's easy to see a parallel to John Yossarian in "Catch 22" and Heller's own combat experience in World War II.
Like most of Heller's books, "Picture This" argues that the world is senseless and arbitrary and often cruel. In transmuting history into fiction, it also argues that history isn't really knowable. Many of the paintings credited to Rembrandt are forgeries. Socrates' words are passed down to us through Plato, who was only a child when many of them were uttered.
And so like Socrates, Heller makes a show of flaunting his ignorance, highlighting what he doesn't know--what can't be known. We never learn anything from history it seems. Only that the same dark patterns keep recurring.
Quotes
"Nowhere in history is this assumption that human life has a value borne out by human events.
All our religions but the Judaic and the Greek think more of us dead than alive."
***
"Rich is the country that has plenty of poor. In periods when prosperity is general, the value of the impoverished to that country increases, and nations not rich in poor must import indigents from inferior countries for the labor now considered degrading for citizens of repute to perform.
The bidding sometimes goes high.
It is fortunate for the progress of civilization that there are always plenty of poor."
***
"War is always in fashion, my dear old friend. Look at our history. In our golden age of Athens there is scarcely a period as long as five years in which we have not been at war. We lost most of the big battles and can't hold on to what we win. Yet the city prospers, the economy booms. And now see how unconvincing and feeble poor Nicias appears each time he comes into public to argue for threadbare, ragged, tedious peace. A politician can roar for war. For peace he can only plead."
Displaying 1 - 30 of 124 reviews