I ve recently read 2 of his books,the nightmare(der Alpdrueck) and everyone dies alone(Jeder stirbt fuer sich allein). I would characterize him more of a sociologist rather than psychologist(f.e dostoevsky was a psychologist and cared about the matters of the soul) that depicted with great detail, realism and no literary “jewels”20th century germany, being part of the wave of new objectivity (along with other great writers like stefan zweig,thomas mann etc ).While he was considered a big writer at his time,now i see his name isnt refered when people speak/write about great german authors. is this truth or is it just a false observation? if yes why? could it be that in the end maybe he wasnt such a good writer as the likes of thomas mann f.e, or could it be due to the fact that he didnt leave nazi germany and because he wasnt so vocal against the nazi regime at the time it was still alive??
I believe that some writers are pure geniuses(kafka pessoa,dostoevsky etc) and that is seen in their ideas,the ideological battles of the characters,the same characters and the narration,the organization of the story,the dialogues the perscriptions ,everything. in my opinion,dostoevsky is the best narrator and then there s fallada.i just read everyone dies alone,and while there were so many characters,so many stories going back and forth,the narration was so good that i felt everything was part of a web of a spider,everything connected and everything had its purpose and in the end it made clear sense.i feel that the story is so well imprinted in my mind. also,in one book he manages describes with shame and pride the deutsche society at its whole,the few people that resisted the nazi regime and the many that became part of it.
by Ok_Equivalent2681