FREE DOWNLOAD õ The Organs of Sense

The Organs of Sense

FREE DOWNLOAD The Organs of Sense

In 1666 an astronomer makes a prediction shared by no one else in the world at the stroke of noon on June 30 of that year a solar eclipse will cast all of Europe into total darkness for four seconds This astronomer is rud to be using the longest telescope ever built but he is also known to be blind and not only blind but incapable of sight both his eyes having been plucked out some time before under mysterious circumstances Is he mad Or d This was of an experimental read or unconventional if you


E haunting and hilarious story behind his strange prediction a tale that ends up encompassing kings and princes family suabbles obsessive pursuits insanity philosophy art loss and the horrors of warWritten with a tip of the hat to the works of Thomas Bernhard and Franz Kafka The Organs of Sense stands as a towering comic fable a story about the nature of perception and the ways the heart of a loved one can prove as unfathomable as the sta I cannot rate this book Of the 275 books that I have read

Adam Ehrlich Sachs Ì 1 FREE DOWNLOAD

Oes he despite this impairment have an insight denied the other scholars of his dayThese uestions intrigue the young Gottfried Leibniz not yet the world renowned polymath who would go on to discover calculus but a nineteen year old whose faith in reason is shaky at best Leibniz sets off to investigate the astronomer’s claim and over the three hours remaining before the eclipse occurs or fails to occur the astronomer tells the scholar th Adam E Sachs' The Organs of Sense is a funny insane ride t

10 thoughts on “The Organs of Sense

  1. says:

    This was of an experimental read or unconventional if you prefer and boy did it not work for me In fact it should have had really added non in its title for a accurate description It was easy enough to get what the author was going foran absurdist historical comedy butbut it was mainly just absurd The plot was like a one punch joke stretched out too long it’s in fact uite difficult to adeuately describe and since the book summary did the work I’ll leave it at that The comedy came from a sort of repetetiveness best demonstrated by the muffin manDo you know the muffin man? The muffin man? The muffin manetc But with a time appropriate vocabulary so words like glockenspiel It goes on and on in seemingly unending serpentine sentences virtually paragraph and dialect free Characters ramble on in meandering monologues The book moves like a drunk and reads like a fugue state I mean objectively it is the sort of thing someone might enjoy but at best it is very very much an acuired taste And otherwise it’s just a complete waste of time An eclectic selection that didn’t pan out really I don’t especially like the saying but this one might have been too clever for its own good Although it seems to have gotten great reviews everywhere Thanks Netgalley

  2. says:

    I won this book in a Goodreads Giveaway The opinion expressed in this review is my ownThis book is completely absurd which is exactly it's purpose If you are expecting something different it's not in there It's how the book was written and how it's supposed to be It's not a book that everyone will fancy but I enjoyed it Have you ever wondered why it's so difficult to understand some people? This book covers the conversation between the blind astronomer and a philosophermathematician There is much at stake regarding this conversation and the events predicted by the astronomer The author does an amazing job of weaving it all together into an absurd story that is uite fantastic and not your average thriller because it is that above and beyond the humor If you are a fan of Philosophy and the absurd you will love this book

  3. says:

    uite popular in contemporary lit is to write in the tradition that goes from Kleist to Walser to Kafka to Bernhard Adam Ehrlich Sachs does this He does it well Despite being a direct descendant of Bernhard and admitting to it he shares very little with WG Sebald and Teju Cole Sachs holds up the tradition by way of absurdity like a young Donald Antrim His sentences are long and paragraphs last for pages but the length is much inline with Kafka than to Bernhard So if you need to pee or grab a coffee or answer a call or file taxes you don't have to worry about losing the cadence of a hundred page paragraph There are breaks On the other hand Sachs prose has the rhythm of Bernhard's The he said she said he said she saids the I feel that you feel that I feel that he feels and of course the refrain that acts as breath at the end of a long sentence With all these similarities you might ask Why not just read Bernhard? Why not just read Kafka? Well for one I think Sachs is funnier Really if you need one reason to read this read it just to see that this style can get even funnier than the works of Kafka and Bernhard but still be literary If you need another reason read it for the fresh perspective Sachs isn't a writer manufactured in a college writing program He comes from the world of science specifically the history of science Plus he wrote for the Harvard Lampoon In the Organs of Sense Sachs blends those two aspects of his life to give us an absurd meditation of solipsism set in the seventeenth century Sorry this is all over the placeHere are some excerptsNeither could've understood how the popping into being of a point of prettily twinkling luminosity overhead could bring to the imperial face such an expression of horrorThat feeling of being in love is the feeling Heinrich realized of ones head being no longer euilibrated with the cosmos but being instead perilously albeit pleasurably out of euilibrium with it overinflated with private associations that must at all costs be discharged or pumped into the head of the loved one Sachs forces his characters to find themselves in the kernels of other characters to see their expressions on the expressions of others resulting in a word entirely in their head in a world that will go with them when they go in a world of solipsism Then when his character's world seems most in them rather than outside of them Sachs defies them not to crack skulls and get a look at the workings Sachs defies his characters to live not knowing

  4. says:

    Adam Ehrlich Sachs has some skills and for me the fun of this book was seeing how long he could sustain what he started In answer he took it uite a distance and although the ending may leave some unfulfilled it was a pleasure to watch Sachs get as far as he did He starts off with the philosopher Leibniz seeking to investigate in 1666 the prediction of an eclipse by a blind astronomer who is not merely completely blind but in fact entirely without eyes From this hook Sachs has Leibniz tell the rest of the story as related to him by the astronomer who was employed by Rudolf II Holy Roman Emperor who had an interest in science and mysticism and so on Sachs brings in facts and fiction and thus develops a a fairly complex fractured fairy tale with the fun being in seeing how he can keep it all together as things get and preposterous I enjoyed this and will look for by the author but remind others once again that this novel is written in fun and the readers must be able to accept themselves as part of the joke

  5. says:

    This is from the beginning a delightful frolic through absurd philosophically circular syllogisms Some readers will have little patience for the simple repetitious style of silly humor but I loved it In fact if I were bedridden and dependent on others to read to me I would relish having someone read this very book to me If they would dress in period costume and use ridiculous voices all the better Julia Child Monty Python Miss Piggy whatever surprise me It's that preposterous at first and well for most of the book There's not a lot of cohesion to the narrative until the very very end The plot if you can call it as such must first increase to a laughable crescendo This joyful ride picks up characters as it goes along each acting as a perpetual non seuitor machine everyone bouncing along batting comparatives and superlatives back and forth like speech beach balls Effectively there are stories nesting within stories and multiple interrupting oblivious solilouiesUnless I'm reading too much into it I swear there are several swipes at the Age of Reason and at some or all of the great logicians scientists and thinkers all of the astronomers Descartes and even a veiled swipe at Schrödinger's cat Eventually there is a big payoff I was glad that I read 'til the end though I still closed the book and asked myself WTF did I just read??

  6. says:

    Adam E Sachs' The Organs of Sense is a funny insane ride through what appears to be in the story the perfectly normal While the story revolves around Gottfried seeking a blind astrologer who has predicted a solar eclipse for me the story takes on a bigger picture For me Adam has crafted a make believe past that revolves around all the things that we spend entirely to much time think aboutworrying about or put entirely way too much faith inThe story while well paced and fast reading has a great cast of characters from the sublime to the insane or at the very least faking both sublime and insanityThe Organs of Sense has a very real surreal feel to it like looking at a Dali you know it can't be realtrue but you have this feeling that if it isn't it could beThe story not only had me laughing out loud but it is thought provoking as well I would laugh out loud reading Assimov laughter the only comparison intended for his knack of turning science present past or future upside down and reminding me not to take it too seriouslyOnce again this is entirely from my point of view The Organs of Sense is a sharp absurd look at the world we take way too seriously and a reminder that we should ease offThank you Adam and Goodreads for hosting the contest that won me this copy that being said my review is an honest and unsolicited one

  7. says:

    I cannot rate this book Of the 275 books that I have read since I joined Goodreads in 2013 this is the first book that I didn't finish Actually it's only the second book that I ever didn't finish as an adult There was one in high school but that was over 40 years ago It may sound strange to some people but I feel that if an author takes the time to find the right words for hisher book I as a reader have the responsibility to read every one of those words So there are books that I trudged slogged and forced myself to finish I could not do that with The Organ of Sense I should have realized something was wrong when I had to read the first page three times before I was able to get to the next one Maybe I was tired because my mind kept wandering The next day fresh and wide awake I started reading and made it to the end of chapter one but I could go no further On the third day while reading or rather trying to read I again could not focus on what I was reading Then it hit me There was nothing wrong with me It was the book Why was I reading this when I couldn't stay focused and when I didn't enjoy what I was reading I did not think it was funny I didn't get the satire Judging by the other reviews some people loved it Not me Can I give Mr Sachs' book a negative rating if I didn't finish it? The run on sentences segues and detours were begging for a GPS A map A navigator Pebbles leading away from the mess and keeping me on the right path I could not be bothered This book was not that important I owed this author nothing I was wasting my time There are so many other books to read and enjoy So I just stopped reading this one

  8. says:

    I understand a blind old guy living by himself in the woods with nothing but a telescope for company might be longwinded when he had a visitor But do I need to sit there for the entire time?

  9. says:

    via my blog he could not stop He felt he had a “compulsion to look” to look closer and closer “a looking closer and closer compulsion” What he wondered would it take to stop looking “to look this closely and no closer? Through such and such a magnification and no higher?”Certainly the strangest book I’ve read this year and in fact last year We are told that G W Leibniz who was throughout his life “an assiduous inuirer into miracles and other aberrations of nature” is on a mission It seems fitting he would want to uncover the truth behind an astronomer’s peculiar prediction The German philosopher mathematician and logician is on a uest to reveal whether or not a blind astronomer could possibly be able to study the stars so accurately as to have predicted an eclipse at noon and on the last day of 1666 that will leave all of Europe in complete and total darkness This man’s prediction is made shocking by the fact that he has empty sockets where his eyes should be can you get any blinder? Sure he has been ‘rud’ to have built the most power telescope of the times but powerful or not one still needs eyes to peer into telescopes no?Leibniz intends to remain at the observatory long enough to test the man’s reason sanity and if the eclipse happens he is certainly an astronomer if it doesn’t it means nothing because astronomers can be wrong So begins the stories the old shriveled man tells Leibniz and he discusses how one must “truly see” what could a man with empty eye sockets know about seeing? Well with his trusty instrument the telescope he has seen a lot A lot I tell you And he demands of Leibniz that he “prove that I cannot see what I claim to see” we have a conundrum tangled in philosophy and history How did the old man lose his eyes anyway? What is truth? How do you get into someone’s head to determine what they are experiencing what their truth is? Words can words reveal what is in another’s head? Mere words?Can one go through life without the ‘belief in other people?’ The astronomer tells Leibniz that what he means will become clear I think most readers will try to grasp at the silliness and science but clarity may not be easy Maybe a lot of readers are like the astronomer’s father who wasn’t interested in the sky and cannot be tangled in knots because they just don’t care to ponder The play on faith as what we devote our existence to is evident in the astronomer’s father’s inventionsa box is just a box is a box no matter how we decorate it it will not open the cosmos to us Be you a surface dweller or a plunger of depths does it matter where we put our faith? Does madness await us all either way what is sanitized madness? How does an Emperor art or an automaton head lead to the astronomer losing his eyes so that he can truly see?This was a dizzying book It takes a ‘discerning mind’ if you’re going to be a thinker and one must lose the eyes that deceive us even if that’s a straight plunge into ‘philosophical torment’ This is meant to be amusing I think it’s scientificphilosopher’s humor and it is easy to get lost What do we really understand about our the world or each other whether we’re filled with genius or disinterested in anything beyond the surface? It’s okay if you can’t engage with the witty humor and philosophy within you can always gaze at the cool book cover with your actual eyesPublication Date May 21 2019Farrar Straus and Giroux

  10. says:

    The Organs of Sense from Adam Ehrlich Sachs surprised me a bit by just how much it actually made me think beyond the humor and the sometimes misappropriated philosophy And it did this without being a difficult or convoluted readThis novel is definitely one of those that will turn some people off Just ignore the ones who make it sound like the book is flawed that just means they didn't get it The ones who point out why they didn't like it as compared to making it sound like it was all about the book itself and not the dynamic of reader and book are the ones you might want to pay attention to Yes there is repetition but not a lot and not beyond what is needed to make a point Maybe repeating a form of said so and so to so and so as reported by so and so Some concepts are repeated as well but usually to illustrate that they can be understood differently depending on context andor desired outcome If someone just saw repetition as repetition they simply didn't follow the story or the thinking very wellIf you like to read a bit of an absurdist take on philosophical thought taken to some unusual extremes this will appeal to you Thinking or over thinking in the abstract about very real phenomena such as family relationships sanityinsanity sensitiveinsensitive and so many other things If you pause and think about why a section made you chuckle you'll likely hopefully? find yourself thinking about what might be a realistic explanation for whatever the situation or idea was This is actually a sneaky way to generate some philosophical thinkingI highly recommend this but at the same time I don't know how to categorize who might or might not enjoy it I read the description and was immediately interested in reading it I'm not sure what it appealed to in my case so I can't say very well what it might appeal to in yours Reviewed from a copy made available through Goodreads First Reads

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *