Ok, so I read The Futurological Congress by Lem on /lit/'s recommendation. I was searching for sci-fi with beautiful prose and the book came up. Being a fan of Tarkovsky's Solaris, I thought Lem's books would be equally intense and beautiful.
What I got, however, seemed like third rate Vonnegut (and Vonnegut's already third rate). Don't get me wrong. It was a decent and amusing read, which is what I needed at the time. My question is just, should I try any other Lem books? I want to read Solaris. But I'm afraid it'll be just like FC; an interesting idea wrapped up in mediocre postmodernist prose. Thoughts?
>>7998178
You know Polish?
>postmodernist prose
>The Futurological Congress
wat
>>7998198
to expand on that:
Lem's translated prose (neither in German nor in English translation, don't speak Polish) is never spectacular, the prose is a vehicle of the story with him, very typical of SF.
However, the concepts he presents are very unique - he has one fun/quixotic side where The Futurological Congress or the robot fables or all the Pirx the Pilot stories reside, and he has a mindbending side where Solaris, The Invincible, Fiasco, Eden reside. Sometimes they overlap, most notably in that wonderful scene in The Futurological Congress where the different layers of reality-altering drugs fight.
If you don't like reading for story alone then don't read Lem (but his essays are great too!)
>>7998178
fuck
time to fap again
>>7998233
>and he has a mindbending side where Solaris, The Invincible, Fiasco, Eden reside.
Ok so just to clarify, you're saying that Solaris IS intense or beautiful? What I mean is, does he ever write beautiful, breathtaking sentences?
>>7998289
Mindbending in terms of story and concepts, not mindbending in terms of prose
Look at the quotes on Goodreads for Solaris:
https://www.goodreads.com/work/quotes/3333881-solaris
>On the surface, I was calm: in secret, without really admitting it, I was waiting for something. Her return? How could I have been waiting for that? We all know that we are material creatures, subject to the laws of physiology and physics, and not even the power of all our feelings combined can defeat those laws. All we can do is detest them. The age-old faith of lovers and poets in the power of love, stronger than death, that finis vitae sed non amoris, is a lie, useless and not even funny. So must one be resigned to being a clock that measures the passage of time, now out of order, now repaired, and whose mechanism generates despair and love as soon as its maker sets it going? Are we to grow used to the idea that every man relives ancient torments, which are all the more profound because they grow comic with repetition? That human existence should repeat itself, well and good, but that it should repeat itself like a hackneyed tune, or a record a drunkard keeps playing as he feeds coins into the jukebox...
This has the most "likes", it's not particularly mind-blowing or amazing
>>7998299
I have to wonder if the whole book is like that though. That's the problem I'm starting to see with goodreads. There were some decent quotes for FC, but they all turned out to be from the one or two "philosophical" chapters. They really didn't reflect the rest of the book. Meh.
>>7998178
would third rate third rate be (x^3)^3 or (x^3)(x^3)?
>>7998840
Ok, that settles it. I'll try Solaris. Have you read any of Lem's other stuff that made you feel that way?
>>7998998
I've also read The Futurological Congress and Mortal Engines, neither of which I enjoyed.
>>7998217
You can't rate the quality of an author's prose unless you've read it in the original language. Otherwise, you are just rating the quality of a translator's prose. And Lem's work, in particular, has a poor track record in terms of translation to English.
>>7999666
Satanic trips
>>7999666
That's goddamn retarded bro. Reading in a different language just means you're one more level removed from the original work. It doesn't mean you're completely removed. Makes about as much sense as saying you can't judge a movie unless you see it on the big screen, or you can't judge baroque music unless it's played on period instruments.
If you think someone can't tell the difference between Bret Easton Ellis translated into Spanish and Shakespeare translated into Spanish, then I don't know what to tell you.
>>8000074
It depends entirely on the translator.
>>7998840
>I have no idea how you got that from the post.
From the OP
>I'm afraid it'll be just like FC; an interesting idea wrapped up in mediocre postmodernist prose.
He is clearly saying that FC uses postmodernist prose.
>>8000091
Congratulations, you've now achieved full retard. If it depends ENTIRELY on the translator, then that means it's a total coincidence when two translations of the same work match up.
>>8000074
Can you read? He said "the quality of the author's prose". If you're reading a translation done by somebody other than the author, then you aren't reading the author's prose.
>>8000202
And where in fuck's name do you think the "quality of the prose" come from? Is it just a mystical I-know-not-what that cannot be transferred, to varying degrees of faithfulness?
No, the quality of the prose come from technical elements of the prose, and these technical elements can be transferred to other formats (i.e. translated to other languages).
Again, are you saying that a Spanish speaker can't objectively say that Shakespeare is better than Ellis, even though they've never read them in English?
>>8000168
By definition, they don't match up.
>>8000240
>are you saying that a Spanish speaker can't objectively say that Shakespeare is better than Ellis, even though they've never read them in English
If the speaker only knows Spanish, then no: he cannot evaluate the quality of Shakespeare's verse. He can of course evaluate the quality of Shakespeare's ideas, themes, characterizations, pacing, etc. And he can evaluate the quality of the translator's verse.
So what's a goodtranslationof Solyaris or does it not matter?
>>8000285
Bill Johnston.
>>8000240
By the way, you're responding to at least two different people
>>7998178
>My question is just, should I try any other Lem books?
Style of his writing varies from book to book. There are grotesque(like Congress or The Cyberiad), there are essay-like(His Master's Voice or Perfect Vacuum) and more realistic(Solaris or Invincible). Even if you don't like one of his styles, you can still like other. So I recommend you to try something else.
>I was searching for sci-fi with beautiful prose
I don't know how it looks like in english(or if it's even transleted) but imo his most beautiful prose is in short Mask.
>>7998178
Futurological Congress is one of Lem's most "non-serious" books, along with other stories about Iion Tichy. You better read "Master's voice", "Solaris", as mentioned above, and maybe a series about Pilot Pirx, with "Fiasco". The prose is indeed beautiful, but that's probably because I read russian translation, and russian is close to polish.
