Bialik & co
So much for Moby Dick. the class messes up my schedule, so i've dropped it. No American novel 1850-1950. Oh well. But i'm taking a cool class instead--Zionism: a cultural perspective. The professor is one Dan Miron--he's really top notch, superintelligent, a storehouse of information and insight. the course explores zionism--from its inception in the latter half of the 19th century onwards, through the lens of Hebrew literature, poetry, etc. That means Bialik, Agnon, Pinsker, Achad Ha'am, etc. Pretty cool stuff.
In other exciting news: Tolstoy's Sebastopol Sketches makes for a compelling read, though I'm really looking forward to the next assignment--Dostoevsky's Notes from the Underground.
My literary nonfiction class is cool. The instructor writes for NPR and is publishing a book on gangs in L.A. My fiction class is less cool because the instructor likes to talk a lot about nothing and that puts me to sleep.
Check out the new links to the right--I've posted links to some really cool blogs.
In other exciting news: Tolstoy's Sebastopol Sketches makes for a compelling read, though I'm really looking forward to the next assignment--Dostoevsky's Notes from the Underground.
My literary nonfiction class is cool. The instructor writes for NPR and is publishing a book on gangs in L.A. My fiction class is less cool because the instructor likes to talk a lot about nothing and that puts me to sleep.
Check out the new links to the right--I've posted links to some really cool blogs.
posted by shoshana at 9:54 AM
14 Comments:
A Princeton professor by the name of joseph frank wrote two lengthy books on Dostoevsky and in the second writes of a ex-chassidic young man (possibly a ex-lubab) who from jail writes Dostoevsky a letter in which he takes him to task for the hypocrisy and inconsistency of the social politics he espouses in his writing and his venomous anti-semitism. Dostoevsky struggled to reconcile and make sense of this issue all his life but never came to terms with the nonuniformity of his views and writings (he was responsible for a notoriously anti-semitic periodical). In response to this young mans letter, if I recall correctly, D begins by saying that this letter is from the most intelligent letters he has received and then goes on to ek and bek a response to the accusations.
Recently there has been debate as to the value of fiction writing being used as a ‘moral compass’, after all it being fiction, and in her essay “Moral Fiction”, printed in the Atlantic Monthly, Mary Gordon, ‘argues that we should look to serious fiction for moral complexity, not moral certainty’. As a side note the Atlantic has since ceased to publish fiction with the exception of a special fiction issue. Chaim Walder wrote a few books called Kid’s Speak which I find to be absolute cheesy rubbish- kind of like chicken soup for the soul- and being that most of it if not all is a work of fiction loosely based on fact (there once was a boy.... and now the fiction begins:)) I find it hard to believe that any thinking person can find inspiration in events conceived by the fancy of some guy’s imagination. No more time to kill- but the point is- unless we look to actual events namely human beings who overcame struggle or whatever it may have been, we are left looking to empty ideals which do not take into account human nature etc. (e.g. dostoevsky) thus making there implementation uncertain at best. The best we can hope for is (the way I see it) the ability to identify and understand the complexities of one another thus making us more aware and sensitive blah blah (uncle tom’s cabin put a face and name on the slaves- Lincoln is believed to have said to stowe ‘you’re the woman who started the war’ something like that).
oh yeah cheers on your fiction defection and affection (?:) to nonfiction-poet know it ya know
Thanks for linking me and commenting on my blog! I can't find any contact info for you, but I would love to hear about your Forward writing if you want to email me. My address is on my blog.
http://www.nytimes.com/2002/06/30/books/review/30SCAMMET.html?ex=1138424400&en=362229151af09610&ei=5070
Chatul, this reviewer touches on a few of you’re points.
Nine Lives-wow you're beter with ref. links than i am. i guess it's a simple point really- with out being 'boduk uminoosa', 'tried and true', practical application is questionable. like reading superman and deciding you want to fly. history, non fiction and any other factual, actual (that rhymes) events provide the necessary test- can the human condition transcend its natural predisposition? (sounds a little to heady/poetic for me) thanks for the link-
btw Nine Lives did you recall that article from 2002??? wowee
Chatul, the internet is a very powerful tool.
This is where I got it from, enjoy.
http://www.nytimes.com/ref/books/literary-biographies.html
i love this--providing a forum for cat eyes to discuss literature and its value (or lack thereof).
i did read the review ninelives linked to which chatul referred to in post# 1--and am really looking forward to reading brothers karmazov and notes from the underground.
chatul: i don't know who chaim walder is. i was aware that the altantic stopped publishing fiction--although i'd hardly call that grounds for dismissing fiction. i'm still not quite sure what you're getting at with dostoevsky. it seems to me he was a man who struggled, and i think it's fair to assume that the "moral complexity" his novels explore reflect the ambiguities and uncertainties he faced as a human being. i don't think that's much of a stretch. of course some people do this better than othres--which is why not all novelists are good novelists. not to disappoint, but i'm still very much a fan of fiction. though id say most of my favorite fiction is at least loosely based on fact (ernest hemingway, i.b. singer, marguerite duras)
well keep at it, cat eyes.
Bitsnpieces, is that a compliment or a hint of sarcasm or both?
Chatul first things first. Regarding your post on the Lolita turning 50, Humbert to me still seems pretty sinful. the whole idea seems repulsive to me. I think it’s got more to do - as our gracious host has pointed out - with Lolita turning 50 people are becoming more aware of his artistic genius. Almost like the revival of Yiddish literature with the centennial of IBS, etc….get where IM going??
It’s interesting to note how the word has evolved over the past half century and how we look and appreciate the arts in general. I don’t know if you’re aware of this or not, but when Lolita was first published in Paris in 1958 (I think) it was banned, Chazer Treif!! Another good example would be when the Italian Jewish artist Modigliani held his first public exhibit in Paris the police came and shut it down due to what they deemed the art to raunchy, so much for the French and their open mindedness (this is going back 75 years ago when Hemmingway and Joyce where hanging out in the city of lights). And today what courses a stir is how some fellow wrote a book and it seems not all the details of his life were true or accurate etc…. so I think if a work such as Nabakov’s would be published today it would not cause a stir at all and if you read the news you’ll hear about people spending millions of dollars on some nude painting by Picasso. So in short the character to me at least still seems sinful but we’ve become more tolerant. Just a though what do you think?
As to your question if humans can transcend their natural predispositions, well I think literature is all about transcending not natural, but moral, ethical or mental predispositions. A good example would be Robert Jordan in Hemingway’s for whom the bell tolls. Or the protagonist in crime and punishment or Stephen Dudalus in Joyce’s a portrait of the artist as a young man. All just a though.
hey Nine Lives- the lolita turning 50 and humbert seeming less sinful was a joke-and now i know not a very good one. delete,recycle bin. i believe nabakov's original choice of a publisher probably did not help much to quell the uproar.
Bit's- chaim walder is a charedi childrens author, and i decided to throw in his name when i felt i was getting ahead of myself (mendel the mouse was a close second choice). as to the point of my original post- boring lunchbreak and not to many buddies who share an interest -ill keep at it though-
hmm a blog where lolita is a main topic of convs is a tough place to say something provocative
ninelives: merely a statement of fact:)
ninelives & chatul:
just crs how we got onto this whole lolita bit to begin with?
because of the provocative nature of the novel lolita was really what made nabokov famous--but i don't think it's his best novel.
Bitsnpeices, I don’t know myself, but I think the trilingual puns had something to do with it. If Lolita is not his best work then what is? Nabakov himself said “Lolita is famous, not I”
Here’s a very not such a positive review on his book pale fire. Enjoy.
http://www.nytimes.com/books/97/03/02/lifetimes/nab-r-palefire.html
Kahtur, I don’t mean to get in you’re way here, but you mentioned Philip Roth, I got here his book Zuckerman Bound. Care to shed some light on it? Good read etc?
egozimcoco: whatever it takes, as long as you find yourself, eventually. along the way perhaps you'll enlighten us too, as to who you are.
kahtur: i dont know if i'm really a fan of american jewish lit. i kind of buy into it because im jewish american and want to be literary. . .i enjoyed bellow's herzog and ravelstein but his writing hasn't really 'moved' me the way singer--as a jew-- and hemingway --as an american--. . .
re phillip roth i know this is weird but i haven't read a single one of his books. i'm sort of resistant to it. . . kind of like not wanting to read what everyone's reading. . so really i can't say anything on the subject since my opinions are utterly baseless.
btw, i'd add bernard malamud and henry roth as other favorites in the jewish-american category. we should start a book club.
Post a Comment
<< Home