the fisherman of halicarnassus

thomas bernhard's life was marked by relentless misfortunes from the very beginning. born out of wedlock, he carried the stigma of "illegitimacy" in a society that cared deeply about such things. his mother never hid her contempt for him, and his childhood was overshadowed by a sense of rejection. physical illnesses repeatedly brought him to the brink of death, and a misdiagnosis by a doctor cost him his beloved grandfather—one of the few people he truly loved. although bernhard's parents were austrian, his mother, desperate to escape the social pressures of an illegitimate birth in austria, delivered him in a monastery in heerlen, in the netherlands. he was later raised by his grandparents back in austria.

at eleven years old, bernhard was sent to a boarding school in salzburg, where he studied music aesthetics, violin, and voice. by the late 1940s, he developed the severe lung disease that would haunt him for the rest of his life. during a two-year stay at the grafenhof sanatorium, he suffered devastating losses: first his grandfather, the single most important person in his life, and then his mother a year later. by the time he left the sanatorium, he was a budding young journalist, forced early on to grapple with grief and existential questions.

bernhard's first significant published work was a poetry collection, auf der erde und in der hölle (on earth and in hell), released in 1957. however, his true literary breakthrough came in the spring of 1963 with his first novel, frost (freeze), which quickly garnered critical acclaim. at the time, bernhard was living with his aunt in vienna, making ends meet by taking on construction jobs—digging trenches, driving trucks—and steadily forging his unique literary identity. frost earned him the bremen literature prize, which opened new doors.

with the prize money and additional support from his publisher, bernhard bought a farmhouse in upper austria. he spent most of his life there in isolation, venturing abroad frequently but always returning to this rural retreat. yet he never severed his ties to vienna. he regularly traveled back and forth between the countryside and the city, unable to settle comfortably in either place. whenever he grew weary of rural life, he fled to vienna, and as soon as vienna lost its appeal, he hurried back to his farmhouse. when neither option satisfied him—something that happened often—he escaped beyond austria's borders altogether. in fact, he wrote most of his books during these restless journeys.

in an interview, bernhard explained that every one of his books was created in different places—vienna, brussels, somewhere in yugoslavia, poland. he never had a dedicated writing desk and preferred working in noisy environments. construction cranes, bustling crowds, blaring streetcars, even laundries and butcher shops—none of these disturbed him. he found it stimulating to write where he didn't speak the local language, calling it an "encouraging" factor.

bernhard's fame soon spread beyond austria and germany. he was met with great enthusiasm in many parts of continental europe, especially in italy, spain, and france, where his works were quickly translated. his influence was also immense in russia and across the former soviet republics, earning him recognition in slavic literary circles.

over his lifetime, bernhard was astoundingly prolific: nine major novels, five long stories, four volumes of short stories, two volumes of shorter prose pieces, a five-volume autobiography, eighteen plays, several shorter dramas, three volumes of poetry, and countless interviews. he even had many unpublished works that rivaled in quantity those he had already released.

this vast output brought bernhard numerous awards. he received the julius campe prize in 1964, the bremen literature prize in 1965, austria's national prize and the anton wildgans prize in 1968, the georg büchner prize from the german academy for language and literature in 1970, the franz theodor csokor prize and the adolf grimme prize in 1972, and the hanover theater prize and prix seguier in 1974. in 1976, he earned the austrian economists' association literature prize. twice nominated for the nobel prize in literature by the german pen club, he never won, but he famously declared that he would have gladly accepted it—only so he could then turn it down.

bernhard died in 1989 at the age of 57, finally meeting the end he had contemplated so deeply and woven so thoroughly into his books.

the controversy of legacy and identity

two days before he died, bernhard left a will that was as controversial as his life's work. he explicitly banned the performance, publication, or public reading of any work he had published or left behind within austria's recognized borders for as long as his copyrights remained valid. he wanted no involvement with the austrian state, a system whose moral rejection of him began the moment he was born. this ban reflected his lifelong defiance, not only against the austrian government but also against all forms of cultural complacency.

a revolutionary literary style

bernhard's writing stands as a rebellion against the traditional novel in both form and content. readers sense something missing: no conventional story, no grand finale. he dismantles standard narrative structures, refusing to break his work into paragraphs or chapters. everything is presented as one continuous block, resisting logical categorization. his narrative world can begin anywhere and end everywhere, allowing the reader to open the book at any point without losing the thread—because, strictly speaking, there is no linear thread. his works lack the usual "plot" we expect from novels; they exist in a state of suspended action.

this approach leaves the story perpetually "open." you cannot easily summarize a bernhard narrative to someone else because it resists any neat reconstruction. his works might feel repetitive or monotonous at first glance, but this "monotony" actually reveals an intricate landscape of subtle differences for those patient enough to look closely. in describing this effect, bernhard himself used a brilliant metaphor: staring at a white wall long enough reveals that it's neither blank nor uniform. with time—and a certain loneliness as your companion—you begin to notice cracks, indentations, tiny movements, and insects. the wall, like his texts, becomes alive with detail.

everything in bernhard's writing is intentionally crafted and exaggerated. he believed that only through exaggeration could we truly understand how bad reality can be. this overemphasis serves as a form of aesthetic stance: to make something understandable, he insisted, you must present it in an extreme form.

repetition is a core technique in bernhard's work. he tells essentially the same story in every novel—though always in new ways—and then repeatedly revisits phrases, sentences, and descriptions. he frequently employs narrators who restate what the main character has told them. the narrator's voice often risks losing its own identity in the overwhelming presence of the protagonist's worldview. each bernhard novel reads like a monologue, delivered through a proxy, anchored in the same philosophical undercurrent: the inescapable tension between individual existence and a world that feels impossibly hostile.

bernhard's protagonists live secluded, often in remote rural places that serve as both prison and refuge. they flee the city's horrors only to discover that the countryside offers no relief. he despised the notion that pastoral settings or small towns were inherently wholesome or redemptive. for bernhard, nature was "rotten," rural life even more corrupt and depressing than the city. there is no safe haven—no place is free of human folly and decay.

this relentless negativity might seem bleak, but it's central to his vision. for bernhard, the only true escape from the world's misery is death. to live means to suffer, to endure crushing loneliness, and to fail to communicate one's inner torment. it's no surprise that one of his most famous public statements—delivered when he received a national literary prize in austria—was simply that when you consider death, everything else becomes absurd.

in the 18th century, under the personal initiatives of peter the great, a significant wave of westernization swept through russia. the country began adapting western ideas in philosophy, art, and science. russia pursued urbanization and industrialization through a top-down, state-led approach, and these changes significantly influenced art and literature, offering these fields new opportunities.

the unique conditions of russia blended with western thought to create a distinctive synthesis, carrying both material and spiritual elements. the most striking urban symbol of this synthesis is st. petersburg. it is no coincidence that many of russia's most iconic works of art and literature were created by artists and novelists living in this city, built entirely on a swamp with distinctly western architecture. writers like pushkin, gogol, and dostoevsky produced their extraordinary works in st. petersburg, not only because it was a center of the russian empire but because it represented the intersection of local russian culture and western influence. for the same reason, st. petersburg played a pivotal role in the literary careers of turgenev and tolstoy.

the "virtuous yet free" 19th century

in short, russian literature, which produced some of the world's greatest novelists and classics, achieved these feats in just one century and within almost a single city: 19th-century st. petersburg. the 20th-century russian novelist vladimir nabokov, himself born in st. petersburg, attributed another reason to this concentration of literary brilliance: the "incompetence" of 19th-century russian censors.

according to nabokov, the state censors of 19th-century russia were quick to ban obscene works but often failed to understand subtle political allusions, leaving such writings untouched. while this forced russian authors to write their novels in a "chaste" manner, it also granted them considerable freedom to explore political and social ideas.

the decline in the 20th century

the inability of this great literary tradition to sustain itself in the 20th century was largely due to the changing political system. the new soviet regime adopted a highly intrusive and pragmatic approach, controlling nearly every aspect of society.

following the 1917 revolution, the censorship mechanisms of the ussr became far more sophisticated, complex, and educated compared to those of the russian empire. literature was now subordinated to the needs of the system, and the idea of "art for art's sake" was wholly replaced by the motto "art for the people." any attempt to challenge this new motto was harshly banned or exiled.

in such a stifling environment, the only widely recognized 20th-century russian authors were system opponents like boris pasternak and vladimir nabokov, who wrote their works abroad. as a result, when most readers think of russian literature today, they typically refer to its 19th-century achievements.

"the best" in 23,000 pages

nabokov, who taught literature for many years at cornell university in the u.s. and achieved fame with his novel lolita, focused exclusively on the 19th century in his lectures on russian literature. he claimed that the finest examples of russian prose and poetry collectively amounted to only 23,000 pages—a relatively small volume compared to european and american literature, yet substantial enough to stand alongside them. in his book lectures on russian literature, nabokov's canon includes pushkin, gogol, turgenev, dostoevsky, tolstoy, chekhov, and gorky, suggesting that russian literature is essentially defined by these figures.

admiration and resentment

nabokov ranked these authors in order of greatness: tolstoy as the greatest, followed by gogol, chekhov, and turgenev. dostoevsky, conspicuously absent from this list, was the subject of nabokov's peculiar disdain. throughout his lectures, nabokov referred to dostoevsky as a mediocre writer whose works, in his view, lacked artistic value. he famously wrote, "i can't wait to debunk dostoevsky," and described crime and punishment as a "cheap literary trick," notes from underground as "100% banal," the idiot as a "series of clumsy blows rather than an artist's touch," demons as a "play disguised as a novel," and the brothers karamazov as a "detective story in the guise of a novel" or a "peculiar vaudeville script."

dostoevsky's "best" work is his "worst"

ironically, nabokov considered dostoevsky's the double—widely regarded as one of his weakest works—to be his best, though he dismissed it as a mere imitation of gogol. nonetheless, many literary critics have argued that nabokov's lolita owes much to dostoevsky's a gentle creature, and that characters like humbert humbert in lolita were inspired by stavrogin in demons and svidrigailov in crime and punishment. this dynamic suggests that nabokov's complex relationship with dostoevsky, marked by both admiration and resentment, may have shaped his personal bias against him.

nabokov's genius

despite nabokov's overt hostility toward dostoevsky, the other sections of his lectures on russian literature, recently published in english, offer valuable insights and commentary. his brilliance permeates much of the book, captivating readers and igniting their curiosity. for seasoned readers of russian literature, the book provides a compelling perspective on the trajectory of 19th-century russian authors within the interplay of state, critics, and audiences. however, beginners may find its depth more challenging to navigate.

many of dostoevsky's early narratives center on characters burdened with a unique combination of personal traits—a mix of destructive and self-destructive tendencies—that seem destined to lead to failure.

in his early works, dostoevsky presents a gallery of dreamers, cowards, clowns, masochists, loners, and those born to lose. these characters are at odds with themselves, succumbing to internal contradictions and weaknesses. they fail to adapt to the demands of their social environment and are ultimately undone by their inability to reconcile their inner lives with external realities.

dostoevsky's dreamer is doomed to disappointment, striving for goals they can never hope to achieve. this isolated recluse severs ties with the outside world and attempts to construct a personal reality grounded in illusion. yet, as soon as this dream encounters the tangible world, it crumbles. the protagonist, overwhelmed by guilt, punishes themselves for the dissonance between their actions and their moral values. these individuals, often consumed by delusions of grandeur, are destroyed by their unrealistic perceptions of their own potential. all of them are victims of irrational, self-destructive instincts they neither control nor fully comprehend.

the question of whether it takes strength or weakness for a person to take their own life does not have a definitive answer. a man of weak will often struggles to cope with his existence, unable to adapt to life's external demands. for such a person, suicide may seem like an escape from a reality that has become unbearable and impossible to manage.

however, a weak individual is often indecisive, lacking the inner strength and resolve required to end their own life. conversely, a person with a strong character may possess the willpower to destroy themselves, yet that same strength can also drive them to fight for a better life, to combat the very causes of their despair. this paradox highlights that those who take their own lives can be either strong or weak. no two suicides happen for the exact same reason.

founder of chatgpt.

his sister (see: annie altman) claimed in a tweet that despite her brother being a billionaire, she is homeless and broke, resorting to prostitution to survive. she also accused him of sexually abusing her when they were children.

he is vegan and gay but also described as someone who schemes behind others' backs. because of this, elon musk allegedly kicked him out and severed ties.

now, he says he wants to advance artificial intelligence, but the western world lacks the financial resources to build the computers powerful enough to manage this ai. who does have that power? china.

apple is moving away from its traditional annual product release cycle, with plans to adopt a more flexible approach.

men fall in love with what they see, and women fall in love with what they hear. that's why men lie and women wear makeup.

"the truman show," directed by peter weir and released in 1998, stars jim carrey as truman burbank. the story revolves around truman, an ordinary man living in the seemingly perfect town of seahaven. his life appears normal, but unbeknownst to him, his entire existence is actually a meticulously crafted reality tv show, broadcast live 24/7 to the entire world. everyone in his life, including his friends, family, and even his wife, are actors. the town itself is a massive set enclosed in a dome, with thousands of hidden cameras capturing truman's every move.

as truman goes about his daily life, he begins to notice odd occurrences that make him question his reality. lights fall from the sky, his radio picks up the production crew's communications, and he starts to recognize patterns and inconsistencies in his world. the turning point comes when he meets sylvia, an extra who tries to reveal the truth to him before being whisked away by the show's producers.

truman's curiosity and determination grow, leading him on a journey to discover the truth about his life. the climax sees truman sailing to the edge of the dome, confronting his fears, and ultimately finding an exit door labeled "exit," leading him to the real world. his final moment on the set is poignant, as he delivers his iconic line, "in case i don't see you… good afternoon, good evening, and good night," before stepping out into freedom.

what makes "the truman show" such a compelling movie is its innovative concept. the film presents a thought-provoking premise about reality, media manipulation, and personal freedom. remarkably, it predates the explosion of reality tv and social media, making it eerily prescient about society's voyeuristic tendencies.

jim carrey's performance is another standout aspect of the film. known primarily for his comedic roles, carrey delivers a nuanced and heartfelt portrayal of truman. he balances humor and drama beautifully, making truman's gradual awakening and search for truth both compelling and relatable.

the film also offers sharp social commentary, critiquing media ethics and the intrusion of privacy. it explores themes of authenticity, control, and the human desire for genuine connection in a world dominated by artificial experiences. this satirical edge adds depth to the narrative, making it more than just an entertaining story.

visually, the movie excels thanks to peter weir's direction and the meticulous set design. the use of hidden cameras and unique angles enhances the feeling of surveillance and confinement, drawing viewers into truman's world. the emotional core of the film lies in truman's journey of self-discovery and liberation. as viewers, we root for him to challenge the boundaries of his manufactured reality, making his eventual triumph deeply satisfying.

on a philosophical level, "the truman show" raises profound questions about reality and free will. it echoes plato's allegory of the cave, where truman, like the prisoners in the cave, must break free from his illusory world to see the truth. this philosophical depth invites viewers to reflect on their own lives and the nature of the world around them.

the world's biggest forum.
top 3 communities*:
1- r/funny 62m
2- r/askreddit 47m
3- r/gaming 42m

imagine if the cold war and a dark comedy had a baby, and that baby was directed by the legendary stanley kubrick. that's "dr. strangelove or: how i learned to stop worrying and love the bomb."

here's the lowdown:

1. plot in a nutshell: the movie is about the absolute madness and absurdity of nuclear warfare. picture a bunch of military and political leaders trying to stop a doomsday scenario they accidentally set in motion.
--spoiler--
they fail spectacularly.
--spoiler--

2. key characters:
• dr. strangelove: he's this eccentric, wheelchair-bound ex-nazi scientist who can't control his own hand, which keeps trying to give the nazi salute. yeah, it's as wild as it sounds.
• president merkin muffley: the u.s. president, who's trying to keep things under control but is hilariously out of his depth.
• general buck turgidson: a gung-ho, slightly unhinged military man who thinks the solution to everything is more bombs.
• major kong: the cowboy pilot who rides a nuclear bomb like a rodeo bull, waving his hat and hollering "yeehaw!" on the way down. iconic.

3. hilarious scenes:
• war room antics: imagine a bunch of world leaders in a high-stakes meeting, but they're acting like kids in a playground fight. "gentlemen, you can't fight in here! this is the war room!"
• phone call with the soviet premier: the president has to call the soviet leader to explain they accidentally sent a nuke their way. it's like the world's worst customer service call.

4. themes: the film is a satire, so it's poking fun at the absurdity of war, the ridiculousness of human error, and the terrifying power of nuclear weapons. it's a laugh-so-you-don't-cry kind of deal.

let's dive into muphry's law (yes, that's spelled right). imagine murphy's law (anything that can go wrong, will go wrong) had a nerdy cousin who loved grammar and spelling. muphry's law states that whenever you criticize someone else's writing, you're almost guaranteed to make a mistake yourself. it's like the universe's way of keeping us humble.

here are some funny examples to illustrate:

1. social media fail: you comment on someone's post, "your such a idiot for not knowing the difference between 'your' and 'you're'." congrats, you just became the idiot.
2. email embarrassment: you send an email to your coworker, "please proofread this report. it's full of errors, and we can't have any misstakes." your coworker replies, "sure thing! by the way, you spelled 'mistakes' wrong."
3. editing nightmare: you're editing a friend's blog post and write in the margin, "this sentence is awkwardly phrased. rewright it." oops, guess who needs to rewrite their comment?

everyone's all focused on the hawk tuah thing, but the real bomb she dropped was when she said, "the only way to get over one is to get under another."

southwest airlines, renowned for its low-cost fares and customer-friendly service, is an iconic american airline that revolutionized air travel with its no-frills approach and point-to-point flight model. known for its humorous flight attendants and unique boarding process, southwest has consistently ranked high in customer satisfaction. in a recent move to enhance accessibility and convenience, southwest airlines has begun displaying its flight schedules and fares on google flights, allowing travelers to easily compare and book southwest flights alongside other airlines, ensuring an even smoother journey from planning to takeoff.

the battle of gettysburg, fought from july 1 to july 3, 1863, is often depicted as the turning point of the american civil war, a colossal clash that was essentially an epic drama played out in the fields and hills of pennsylvania. it was a conflict where the very fate of a nation hung in the balance, a narrative filled with strategy, valor, and tragedy.

here's a perspective on this monumental battle:

the setup: imagine the united states as a fractured chessboard, with the union and confederate armies maneuvering their pieces across the board. gettysburg became the unexpected stage where these forces collided. general robert e. lee, hoping to invade the north and force a quick end to the war, led his confederate army into pennsylvania.

the clash: over three days, the battle unfolded like a three-act play. the first day saw the confederates pushing back union forces through the town, gaining confidence. the second day expanded the fight to the left and right flanks, with fierce fighting at places like little round top and the wheatfield. the climax came on the third day with pickett's charge, a bold but doomed assault on the union center.

the denouement: the union's victory at gettysburg, coupled with the fall of vicksburg in the west on july 4, marked a pivotal shift in the war's momentum towards the north. the battle's aftermath left over 50,000 soldiers dead, wounded, or missing, making it the bloodiest battle of the civil war.

the battle of gettysburg was more than just a military engagement; it was a moment when the collective aspirations and fears of a divided nation were crystallized in the fires of combat. it remains a poignant symbol of sacrifice and the complex quest for unity and freedom.

the core-periphery model is a tale of two cities—well, more accurately, a tale of countless cities and regions, split into the haves and the have-nots of the economic world. it's like looking at a map where some areas glitter with wealth, innovation, and power (the core), while others (the periphery) are like the less-visited backdrops, struggling and often exploited.

imagine this model as a solar system:

the core: these are the suns of our economic universe—the new yorks, londons, and tokyos. they beam brightly with high technology, strong governments, and concentrated wealth. here, decisions are made, cultures are set, and innovations thrive.

the periphery: orbiting the bright suns, these are the distant planets like rural areas in africa, asia, or south america, often rich in resources yet lacking in technology, infrastructure, and capital. they provide the raw materials and labor to the core but see less of the economic pie in return.

the semi-periphery: these are akin to planets within a habitable zone, like brazil, india, and china. not as dominant as the core, but more developed than the periphery, they exploit the periphery while being exploited by the core, serving as a buffer or a stepping stone between the two extremes.

this model helps explain why some areas of the world advance rapidly, accumulating wealth and influence, while others lag behind, trapped in a cycle of dependency. it's a powerful lens through which to view global inequalities and dynamics, illustrating how economic gravity pulls resources and power toward the core, leaving the periphery in its shadow.

pickett's charge was the civil war's equivalent of a dramatic, high-stakes gamble, a bold throw of the dice in the smoky haze of battle. it was the centerpiece of the battle of gettysburg, taking place on july 3, 1863, and remains one of the most infamous military maneuvers in american history.

imagine it as a grand yet tragic theatrical act in three parts:

the buildup: confederate general robert e. lee decided to stake everything on breaking the union lines after two days of inconclusive fighting. he ordered nearly 12,500 men to march across open fields towards a well-fortified enemy.

the assault: led by major general george pickett and other division commanders, this massive infantry advance stretched over a mile wide. as they moved, the union artillery and rifle fire tore into them, creating a storm of lead and iron.

the aftermath: the charge reached the union lines but faltered under overwhelming defensive fire. it ended in devastating losses for the confederates, marking a turning point in the war and symbolizing the high cost of lee's gamble.

pickett's charge was a poignant example of courage and catastrophe intertwined, a bold stride that ended in retreat, influencing the fate of the nation. it's a historical moment that encapsulates the desperation and the decisive nature of battle choices in the crucible of war.

(see: battle of gettysburg)