Bücher

Scientists claim that if you physically punish or otherwise abuse your child, that child will have a higher probability of becoming physically aggressive, cruel, or even criminial as a grown up. But other people contest that it is the inherently bad child that, on the one hand, is more likely to become (or rather: stay) miscreant as grown up and, on the other hand, more likely to be physically punished by its desparate parents.

The question if parental conduct influences a child's character or if it is the other way round lies at the heart of Shrivers novel about Kevin who grows up to kill 11 people in a highschool-shooting. The relation to his mother Eva is rocky right from the beginning and only gets worse. Kevin does not drink his mother's milk, he will not be pacified by her and certainly does not play with her. He ruins everything she holds dear while showing no attachment either to persons or objects. In the course of his childhood and youth there are multiple incidents in which Kevin hurts other children, which culminate in his killing eight co-students, one teacher, his father and his little sister.

Is all this the mother's fault? That is what Shriver’s novel-mother Eva asks herself and which the ending may imply. But although in her afterword the author claims otherwise, I have the impression that from the beginning almost to the end of the novel Kevin is described in a way that puts all the blame on him. He is presented as such an evil child that it is easy to understand how Eva denies him any love at all. The relationship to his father Franklin seems better, but only on first sight: Eva is rightly convinced that Kevin only plays happy family with him and indeed, towards the end of the novel, Kevin himself describes his father as a dupe.

So, according to the novel, the responsibilty clearly lies with Kevin who simply is an evil character.

But: this is a novel, it is fiction. The author herself does not have children because she does not want to. Of course she, too, has every right to write about what forms children’s characters - but how should she know? The Kevin in the novel is definitely a flat character and not really convincing. He is not modelled along the lines of real persons, he is not modelled according to scientific findings. What the novel really tells us is how the relation between children's characters and parental ways are in Shrivener's  mind. Therefore, the novel will not give us any relevant insights. It might, however, raise relevant questions or just be entertaining. But beware: reading about Kevin really hurts.

This is a strange mix between a dictionary, an encyclopedia, and a linguistic history book. Taggart gives explanations on the origins of modern English words. The book is organised by topics, e.g. Fun and Games, Sex 'n' Drugs 'n' Rock 'n' Roll or Hi- and Lo-Tech.

Paul Auster writes what at first sight seem to be classic detective novels set in the 1940s. All the usual clichees are there - the lone wolf detective, the shabby suroundings, the myterious clients and their enigmatic communications. Still, all the cases develop in an unexpected way: They drag on and on, peetering out and dissolving into nothing. But not before they absorb the detective's life completely, raising questions about identity, truth, and meaning, which are generally left open and unresolved.

There's a lot of responsibility coming with parenthood. Different people have different concepts of how exactly to cope with this responsibility, but about everyone would agree that Guy Delisle's approach is the bsolute worst. Therefore, the title »Guide to Terrible Parenting« is more than appropriate.

Delisle's has a minimalastic style in drawing but a vivid and rich imagination in texting. The father he depicts in this collection of cartoons is absolutely inept but immensely recognisable and sympethetic.

Apart from telling us how not to be parent, he also has tips on how to teach:

Wer Deutschland lieb haben möchte, kann im Flüchtlingssommer von 2015 das wahre deutsche Sommermärchen sehen. Einmal hat die Kanzlerin das gemacht, was möglicherweise eine pragmatische Notwendigkeit, aber eben auch das moralisch Richtige war: Flüchtende Menschen in Not einfach ins Land gelassen, vielleicht sogar ohne rechtliche Verpflichtung dazu. Und das erstaunlichste: Öffentlichkeit und öffentliche Meinung bis hin zur Bildzeitung folgten ihr auf diesem Kurs. Einen Sommer lang konnte man sich an einem Deutschland mit menschlichem Antlitz ergötzen.

Diese Zeiten sind längst vorbei, und es ist nicht nur die erstarkte afd, die gegen Flüchtlinge und Merkel hetzt, sondern auch Öffentlichkeit, Bildzeitung und selbst ihre eigene CDU finden schon lange nicht mehr gut, was damals Gutes geschehen ist.

Streeck ist Soziologe mit offenkundigem Interesse an Wirtschaftsthemen. Als guter Marxist hat er die These von der Krisenhaftigkeit des Kapitalismus verinnerlicht, ist aber mit der Tatsache konfrontiert, dass der Kapitalismus bislang alle Krisen irgendwie meistern konnte.

Seine Antwort auf diese scheinbare Widerlegung Marxens ist das titelgebende Konzept der »Gekauften Zeit«: Während in der unmittelbaren Nachkriegszeit der (anfangs sehr kleine) ökonomische Kuchen so schnell wuchs, dass Wachstum und Wohlstandszuwachs die Interessen sowohl der Lohn- als auch der Renditeabhängigen befriedigen konnten, war dies spätestens in den 70erjahren nicht mehr der Fall. Da ein Profitverzicht des Kapitals nicht vorstellbar war, mussten der Arbeitnehmer*innen-Anteil am Profitkuchen, wenigstens an dessen Wachstum, geschmälert werden. Dies hätte allerdings deren Zufriedenheit und damit langfristig die Stabilität des System gefährdet. Zwar stand nicht der Kapitalismus selber zur Disposition, aber über kurz oder lang wären Kapitalismus und Demokratie nicht mehr miteinander vereinbar gewesen. Die Industriestaaten griffen daher nacheinander zu einer Reihe von Tricks, um den ökonomischen Abstieg der Lohnabhängigen zu verzögern oder wenigstens zu verschleiern, um sich also Zeit zu kaufen.

A Tokoloshe seems to be the (South) African version of what we in the north would call a troll. Not the internet troll of the 21st century, but the original troublemaker from legends and fairy tales. In Salomon's novel »Tokoloshe Song«, tokoloshe’s do really exist, but of course all the legends lead to prejudice and fear which in their turn lead to public discrimination and even violence against the really quite loveable little creatures.

Fortunateley there are heroes like Richard or Phakama who do volunteerwork protecting and caring for tokoloshes. However, there are also villains like Mamron or Kras who abuse tokoloshes and any number of innocent people in pursuit of their dark and fiendish goals. And then there is the strange order of midwives sidelining in protecting peace and justice and order with the help of martial arts; guess whose side they are on in the conflict of criminal interest against protection of cuddly little troll-babies.

After the death of his wife from cancer, Max goes on holiday in a village at the sea where he used to spent his holidays as a child. After some time his daughter takes him back home.

This is about the plot of The Sea. Not much action there, one could say, although, to be fair, I must add that a lot of the novel is written as flashbacks – to Max’s final year with his wife and, more prominently, to one particular childhood holiday on the sea. Especially the latter storyline has at least some action and tension, it also lays the foundations for an unexpected ending.

Still: The main value lies not in what happens or what Max remembers but in Banville’s detailed and empathic descriptions of how the protagonist feels, how the scenery feels, how feelings and ideas are tested and changed. This is prose that is a pleasure to read and pulls you inside – not the action, because there is none – but inside a slow-moving world in a different life and time. Max remembers and considers, he compares and tries to rediscover places and persons from childhood memories. There are implicit comparisons between different phases of his life and a whole lot of stabs at life’s general futility. You do not learn anything from this book, but it may offer some interesting food for thought.

Contemplative.

Margo, nach Israel ausgewandertes Kind der südafrikanischen Provinz, kehrt nach Winburg im Freistaat zurück, um ihrer schwer erkrankten Mutter beizustehen. Sie erlebt dort das neue Südafrika aus der Sicht weißer Farmer*innen, das bedeutet vor allem: plaasmoorde, also mörderische Angriffe auf die häufig sehr abgelegenen Farmen weißer Familien.

Der demokratische Rechtsstaat ermöglicht allen Bürger*innen Partizipation und damit Mit-Gestaltung ihres Gemeinwesens. Konflikte zwischen verschiedenen Bevölkerungsgruppen werden so gewaltlos und produktiv gelöst.

Falsch!, sagt Agnoli. Das sei vielleicht der ursprüngliche Anspruch der Demokratie, der aber schon lange nicht mehr erfüllt werde. Er beschreibt die Entwicklung bzw. Transformation der Demokratie als »Involution« und meint damit das Gegenteil von »Evolution«. Will sagen: Die Demokratie entwickele sich nicht vorwärts, entfalte nicht immer mehr ihr inhärentes Potenzial, sondern sie schrumpfe in sich zusammen und werde immer schwächer. Dies geschehe im Wesentlichen nicht durch Verfassungsänderungen (obwohl auch die eine Rolle spielen können), sonder vor allem durch ein Kapern demokratischer Institutionen durch Interessengruppen, die qua materialer Macht immer schon die Geschicke des Staatswesens beeinflusst haben. Es etabliert sich in den Institutionen ein Konsens dessen, was gesagt und was nicht gesagt werden darf, und die Spielräume demokratischer Gestaltung reduzieren sich auf die Ausfüllung dieses Konsens.