When I ventured into the American Book Centre in The Hague, I felt like an idiot. I was about to go and order a book called ‘War with the Newts‘. Despite the somewhat corny title; some people on amazon.com rate this book as a satirical dystopia which belongs up there with Orwell’s ‘1984′ and Huxley’s ‘Brave New World”. To be perfectly honest, the author mentions Huxley, but apart from that, it really does not feel like either of the books ( Although I’ve never read BNW, I read all the spoilers on the internet).
But first things first. The book was written in 1936 by the Czech author Karel Capek. Its original title (Valka s mloky) to me sounds a million times less silly than its aforementioned English translation. Capek was one of the most celebrated Czech authors of his time (20’s and 30’s) and is also known for introducing the word robot. Without him, we’d all be using the word ‘android’ or something similar.
As you should know ‘1984′ opens up with the world (or at least England) in a sorry state, ‘The Handmaid’s Tale’, another book in the genre also presents the world (in this case, the USA) in a grip of a totalitarian regime. The War with the Newts, however, begins in the Dutch East Indies, on the boat of captain Van Toch (later to be revealed Vantoch from Jevicko, Czechoslovakia), who is neither a pirate, nor a resistance fighter to any opressive world state. Simply, the book begins with a world where the author lived, a world, which still in many respects resembles ours.
To be blunt, the novel does not once present a well rounded main character (a character which undergoes some development is Mr Povondra, but the author does not give him enough space). That is not however, the point of the novel. The novel does not need to make us feel sorry for a person, and not even for humanity. We finally see ourselves as greedy, enslaving, cheating, perpetually unhappy and so sure of our own intelligence and superiority that we don’t even consider the implications of our deeds, and after the truth finally arrives on us, we sink into a state of denial.
While this all sound rather bleak, the author puts this across in a humorous, witty way and in a sense it seems like this cannot have been otherwise. While other respected authors tend treat their end-of-the-world-as-we-know-it scenario with seriousness, Capek makes it all rather funny, only at the end does one realise the tragedy of mankind.
I cannot compare this novel with 1984, both are too different to be compared, but the War with the News, for me is more light-hearted and the constantly shifting storyline, in which the author proves to be an accomplished storyteller in many different ‘genres’, and in the end, mankind gets a second chance, unlike 1984, which is a masterpiece, although a rather depressing one.
Some of my favourite chapters in the book are chapters 6 and 7 (The Yacht in the Lagoon and the Yacht in the Lagoon (continued)). It really shows the silliness of Hollywood (read it and you’ll see). I also liked one part in the book when various contemporary celebrities are ‘interviewed’ about whether Newts have souls; the funniest answer (which again, mocks showbizz) is that of ‘Mae West’: “They have no sex appeal. So they can’t have a soul.” (page 142) or another witty remark by ‘G. B. Shaw’: “The certainly have no soul. In this they resemble man.”(page 141).
If you’re looking for a likeable character in this book, someone you can identify with, don’t read it, you’ll be disappointed. If you are looking for a clever satire and an accurate commentary on the state of the world (not only in the 30’s), then this is something you might want to read and enjoy.
Note: never having read the original version, I cannot be sure how accurate the translation was, although it seemed to flow nicely, I found one mistake of the translator. At the end of the book, things are reffered to as ‘dear’ due to the war with the Newts. This should really be ‘expensive’, but I’ll forgive this one mistake, since is Czech (and also Slovak) the meaning of the word ‘drahy’ (dear, expensive) depends on the context in which it is used.
Posted by petersmisek 