Project Mailer - User contributions [en]

The Mailer Review/Volume 5, 2011/The Conception of Irreversibility: Hannah Arendt and Hemingway’s “Hills Like White Elephants”

2025-04-13T19:50:46Z

JHadaway: Edited citations in notes

{{DISPLAYTITLE:{{BASEPAGENAME}}/{{SUBPAGENAME}}}}
{{MR05}} 
{{Byline|last=Yirinec |first=Jennifer |url=http://prmlr.us/mr05yir |abstract=An analysis of Hannah Arendt's concept of irreversibility in Hemingway’s powerful short story.}}
{{dc|dc=T|here has been a plethora of criticism}} examining one of Ernest Hemingway’s most powerful short stories, “Hills Like White Elephants.” However, one approach that may merit more attention is an exploration of Hemingway’s notions of “action” and of the irreversibility of action within the text. Hannah Arendt, an intellectual whose germinal work has transcended more than one discipline, may be useful in providing some measure of insight into Hemingway’s problematic narrative.{{efn|Hannah {{harvtxt|Arendt |1958 |p=177}}, in ''The Human Condition'', distinguishes action from performative activity based upon the ability of action, in contradistinction to performative activity, “to set something into motion,” to begin something anew. Action, in the Arendtian sense of the word, is intrinsically tied to speech, for it is “[i]n acting and speaking [that] men show who they are, reveal actively their unique personal identities and thus make their appearance in the human world” {{harv|Arendt|1958|p=179}}. As illustrated by the previous quote, action necessitates plurality, for the “revelatory quality of speech and action comes to the fore where people are with others and neither for nor against them—that is, in sheer human togetherness” {{harv|Arendt|1958|p=180}}. According to Arendt, man’s ability to act—to set things into motion—can have severe consequences if actions are left unchecked.}}

I would like to begin by examining certain rhetorical elements of “Hills,” which suggest traces of Arendt’s perspectives on the “nature of action.” More specifically, Arendt’s influential study, ''The Human Condition'', suggests that the dissonance found in the relationship between Jig and the American primarily arises from their differing viewpoints regarding the Arendtian notion of irreversibility.{{efn|In order to combat irreversibility, according to {{harvtxt|Arendt|1958|p=237}}, man must either make promises or bestow forgiveness on others, two actions that, by their nature, also require plurality, “for no one can forgive himself and no one can feel bound by a promise made only to himself.”}} That is to say, the issue is far more important than considerations of the potential abortion, which is the explicit topic of their combative dialogue, as critics have noted.{{sfn|Gillette|2007|pp=50-69}}{{sfn|O’Brien|1992|pp=19-25}}{{sfn|Rankin|2005|p=234}}{{sfn|Urgo|1988|p=35}} We might consider that Jig, in her overtly rhetorical exchanges with the American, illustrates (and promotes) the concept of irreversibility, as she suggests that the conception of life (an action, in essence, as it is a beginning) within her cannot be undone, while the American argues{{pg|407|408}}against irreversibility, as he believes that the conception can be “undone” by the act of abortion. As Stanley Renner proffers in his “Moving to the Girl's Side of ‘Hills Like White Elephants,’” “[I]n choosing whether to abort or to have the child, the couple are [sic] choosing between two ways of life.”{{sfn|Renner|1995|p=28}} This forty-minute exchange determining the end decision—abortion or life—reveals that the couple is also choosing between two ways of ''living''—either living in such a way so that actions can be “undone,” so to say, or living in such a way where actions bring consequences that are absolute.

Throughout the story the American attempts to articulate and advance his belief in reversibility. However, his own actions and statements undermine his attempts to do so. One can first see this situation in the exchange begun by Jig’s comment about the hills in the distance, as this moment initiates the heated philosophical discussion. As David Wyche perceptively states, “This bit of dialogue establishes the characters’ opposing positions in what is, essentially, an emotionally charged negotiation.”{{sfn|Wyche|2002|p=61}} Seated outside the bar, the couple enters into dialogue—the dilemma at hand being whether or not the couple should (or can) have an abortion and thus reverse the conception. While staring off into the distance, Jig remarks that the hills “look like white elephants,” to which the American responds, “I've never seen one.”{{sfn|Hemingway|1987|p=211}} Jig views the hills as white elephants, as entities so large and powerful that they require attention and disallow negotiation, much like the baby within her womb—a connection that Stanley Kozikowski makes: “Hills are like white elephants for Jig because they carry ambivalent evocations of the child within her—like a white elephant, an unwanted gift, a seemingly remote but immense problem.”{{sfn|Kozikowski|1994|p=107}} The American, on the other hand, claims to have never seen a white elephant, a statement that suggests he does not believe in entities or actions that cannot be undone. However, his rhetorical position is weakened by his unwillingness to look up and assess the hills for himself. He responds to his beer,{{efn|Meg Gillette, in her piece “Making Modern Parents in Ernest Hemingway’s ‘Hills Like White Elephants’,” provides a detailed analysis that focuses upon how the characters in the story frequently shift between offering retorts and drinking.}} rather than to Jig, as following his statement, the narrator says, “[T]he man drank his beer,” rather than something like, “The man said,” or, “The man responded.”{{sfn|Hemingway|1987|p=211}}{{sfn|Gillette|2007|pp=55-56}} When Jig snaps back, “You wouldn’t have,” the American replies, “Just because you say I wouldn’t have doesn’t prove anything.”{{sfn|Hemingway|1987|p=211}} In his response, the American, perhaps unwittingly, takes power away from speech, through which the two ways in which actions can be reversed—the making of promises and forgiveness—occur. As such, within this exchange about the hills, Jig constructs the fetus within her womb as irreversible and non-negotiable,{{pg|408|409}}much like a white elephant, while the American attempts to forward his belief in reversibility—in the abortion of actions. Yet the American fails to construct the plurality necessary for such actions to be reversed, as he talks into his beer and limits the power of his own statements.

Another such exchange occurs when Jig and the American try Anis del Toro. Upon imbibing the drink, Jig comments that “[i]t tastes like licorice,” to which the American responds, “That’s the way with everything.”{{sfn|Hemingway|1987|p=212}} The American’s response plays into Jig’s beliefs about irreversibility, for she seizes upon the chance to rephrase the statement and direct it back toward the American: “Yes,” she says. “Everything tastes of licorice. Especially all the things you’ve waited so long for, like absinthe.”{{sfn|Hemingway|1987|p=212}} Perhaps the American only meant to dismiss Jig’s childish statement about licorice; however, in doing so, he opened the door for her to make a philosophical statement about consequence. In saying that everything amounts to one thing—one “taste”—Jig suggests that actions have an absolute consequence, one that leaves a bitter taste that cannot be undone. After a succession of comments about each rhetorician’s motivation, Jig concludes, “That’s all we do, isn’t it—look at things and try new drinks?”{{sfn|Hemingway|1987|p=212}} Jig’s statement indirectly reproves the American for not allowing action within the relationship. The only action she has seen, in her opinion, was the conception, and the American will not even allow that to progress to full term. Detecting Jig’s intimation, David Wyche writes that “[Jig] manages to articulate, again figuratively, what has no doubt been an increasing awareness of the emptiness of the couple’s lifestyle to date.” {{sfn|Wyche|2002|p=62}} Similarly, Paul Rankin surmises that, despite the American’s desire to “act” on the conception, his character is “essentially passive in nature”: “the man has nothing to offer, nothing to contribute to the story, just as he has nothing more to contribute to Jig’s pregnancy.”{{sfn|Rankin|2005|p=235}} As such, despite the American’s desire to reverse the action—the life—he created through the abortion, his passivity inhibits his rhetorical position.

The rhetorical struggle culminates in a battle between the ''cans'' and the ''cannots''—a battle that Jig incites when she looks upon the field and the mountains and says, “And we could have all this....And we could have everything and every day we make it more impossible.”{{sfn|Hemingway|1987|p=213}} She clearly makes this statement to spite her lover, who agrees with her that, once Jig had the abortion, they could do and have anything they wanted. Every time the American suggests something (clearly impossible) they could have or do{{pg|409|410}}post-abortion, Jig responds, “No, we can’t.”{{sfn|Hemingway|1987|p=213}} After the American’s concluding remark (“We can go everywhere”), Jig replies, “No, we can’t. It isn’t ours any more,” and later comments that “once they take it away, you never get it back.”{{sfn|Hemingway|1987|p=213}} At this point Jig cements her belief in irreversibility in the face of the American, who now is at a rhetorical disadvantage and can only make impossible remarks. In these lines, Jig insists that “undoing” something—reversing something—such as the conception of life is an impossibility, for though something can be removed or killed, in the case of the fetus, ''that'' something was once present—was once a reality—and, as such, can never be truly reversed. True reversal would require Jig and the American to “forgive and forget,” so to say—something that Jig, once having had life within her, cannot do. It is clear that if Jig went through with the abortion, she would never be able to view the world in the same way—nothing could ever be hers again, for she would have lost something that was truly important to her. After this exchange during which Jig seemingly wins the rhetorical battle over the potential of irreversibility, she refuses to discuss the matter anymore. Whether or not she has the abortion is open to debate, although the issue of irreversibility, once on the table, has been removed from the discussion.

The story concludes with Jig smiling—yet not because she has discerned the fate of her unborn child, but rather because she has asserted her beliefs regarding the notion of irreversibility and has won the rhetorical battle against her lover, the American. She “feel[s] fine,” perhaps, as a result of this knowledge of rhetorical victory, rather than as a result of her thinking—at least temporarily—she will not go through with the abortion, as Hilary K. Justice and Stanley Renner say, or as a result of her being inebriated, as Phillip Sipiora suggests.{{sfn|Justice|1998|pp=25-26}}{{sfn|Renner|1995|p=40}}{{sfn|Sipiora|1984|p=50}} Without knowing the fate of Jig’s unborn child, the reader can surmise that Jig has successfully promoted her claims of the irreversibility of actions (particularly conceptions), while the American, although attempting to forward the reversibility of actions, has failed in such attempts. By not acting and fostering plurality through his dialogue, he is not able to utilize the two Arendtian modes of reversal that would be open to him—namely, forgiveness and the making of promises. His promises are not grounded in reality, for what he has to offer includes the whole world—a non-reality, which Jig jumps to point out. Moreover, he cannot talk Jig into forgiving him for impregnating her, nor can he “forgive” her for conceiving a child by enabling her to carry it to term. While neither{{pg|410|411}}partner agrees with the other,{{efn|As David {{harvtxt|Wyche|2002|p=61}} points out, “We see that if either or both of the characters experience ‘growth’ throughout the course of the story, neither necessarily moves toward the other’s side.”}} there is a clear rhetorical victor. As no concordance is reached, the reader is merely left with the conclusion that, based upon the rhetorical aspects of the text, Jig has emerged rhetorically victorious, while the American has lost control of the situation and must resort to interacting with others inside the bar and acting as Jig’s porter, moving the luggage to the other side of the tracks.

=== Notes ===
{{notelist}}

===Citations===
{{Reflist|15em}}

===Works Cited===
{{Refbegin|indent=1|20em}}
*{{cite book |last=Arendt |first=Hannah |date=1958 |title=The Human Condition|edition=2nd |location=Chicago |publisher=U of Chicago P |pages= |ref=harv}}
*{{cite journal |last=Elliott |first=Gary |title=Hemingway’s ‘Hills Like White Elephants’ |journal=Explicator |volume=35 |date=1977 |pages=22-23 |ref=harv}}
*{{cite journal |last=Gillette |first=Meg |title=Making Modern Parents in Ernest Hemingway’s ‘Hills Like White Elephants’ And Viña Delmar's ''Bad Girl'' |journal=Modern Fiction Studies |volume=53 |issue=1 |date=Spring 2007 |pages=50-69 |ref=harv}}
*{{cite book |last=Hemingway |first=Ernest |date=1987 |title=The Complete Short Stories of Ernest Hemingway |chapter=Hills Like White Elephants |location= New York |publisher=Scribner |pages=211-214 |ref=harv}}
*{{cite journal |last=Justice |first=Hilary K |title=‘Well, Well, Well’: Cross-Gendered Autobiography and the Manuscript of 'Hills Like White Elephants' |journal=The Hemingway Review |volume=18 |issue=1 |date=Fall 1998 |pages=17-32 |ref=harv}}
*{{cite journal |last=Kozikowski |first=Stanley |title=Hemingway’s ‘Hills Like White Elephants’ |journal=Explicator |volume=52 |date=1994 |pages=107-109 |ref=harv}}
*{{cite journal |last=O’Brien |first=Timothy |title=Allusion, Word-Place, and the Central Conflict in Hemingway’s ‘Hills Like White Elephants’ |journal=The Hemingway Review |volume=12 |issue=1 |date=Fall 1992 |pages=19-25 |ref=harv}}
*{{cite journal |last=Organ |first=Dennis |title=Hemingway’s ‘Hills Like White Elephants’ |journal=Explicator |volume=37 |date=1979 |pages=11 |ref=harv}}
*{{cite journal |last=Rankin |first=Paul |title=Hemingway’s ‘Hills Like White Elephants’ |journal=Explicator |volume=63 |issue=4 |date=Summer 2005 |pages=234-237 |ref=harv}}
*{{cite journal |last=Renner |first=Stanley |title=Moving to the Girl’s Side of ‘Hills Like White Elephants’ |journal=The Hemingway Review |volume=15 |issue=1 |date=Fall 1995 |pages=27-41 |ref=harv}}
*{{cite journal |last=Sipiora |first=Phillip |title=Hemingway’s ‘Hills Like White Elephants’ |journal=Explicator |volume=42 |date=1984 |pages=50 |ref=harv}}
*{{cite journal |last=Urgo |first=Joseph R. |title=Hemingway’s ‘Hills Like White Elephants’ |journal=Explicator |volume=46 |issue=3 |date=1988 |pages=35-37 |ref=harv}}
*{{cite journal |last=Wyche |first=David |title=Letting the Air Into a Relationship: Metaphorical Abortion in ‘Hills Like White Elephants’ |journal=The Hemingway Review |volume=22 |issue=1 |date=2002 |pages=58-73 |ref=harv}}
{{Refend}}

{{Review}}
{{DEFAULTSORT:Conception of Irreversibility: Hannah Arendt and Hemingway’s “Hills Like White Elephants”,The}}
[[Category:Articles (MR)]]

The Mailer Review/Volume 5, 2011/Tributes to Norris Church Mailer/Remembering Norris

2025-04-13T19:39:51Z

JHadaway: Removed spaces before and after the{{pg}}template

{{DISPLAYTITLE:{{BASEPAGENAME}}/{{SUBPAGENAME}}}}
{{MR05}}
{{Byline|last=Howard |first=Margo |url=http://prmlr.us/mr05how }}
{{dc|dc=I|t was love at first sight, and we met cute.}} It was at a 2004 PEN dinner in Boston. My husband and I were seated at the Mailers’ table. A man was seated between Norris and me. After talking to each other for about ten minutes, basically leaning in in front of this man, we told him to move. We continued to talk to each other through the whole dinner; rude, to be sure, but there you are. At the end of the evening we exchanged contacts, and each other’s books, and thus our friendship was born. I had, for whatever reason, always thought middle-aged ladies did not make new friends; they had the old ones. But Norris not only became a cherished friend, she became more. We called each other “the red-headed sister.” I was the big sister, of course, being nine years her senior—and both of us were only children.

The unusual thing about our relationship as girlfriends was that, though we did see each other in Boston, Provincetown, and New York, we did most of our talking in emails. We went through a lot together, in the ether, as it were. For me to even ''meet'' Norris, let alone become close, was amazing to me because I had been aware of her for many years as someone who was covered in the press. The Mrs. Mailer I was used to seeing in photographs was a curvaceous, Rubenesque beauty. The Mrs. Mailer I met was reed thin—and still gorgeous. She told me, soon after we met, that she was duking it out with cancer, and she had been winning for a lot of years. Her approach to her illness was quite matter-of-fact. There was no complaining, no self pity. But I must say there was a good bit of humor. At one particularly rough juncture after Norman’s death, having more to do with anger than grief, she wrote me, “You know, dying wouldn’t be such a bad thing.” If there was a lull in the e-mail conversation and her phone didn’t answer at home, I knew she was back in the hospital. I would then email, saying I had X-ray vision and knew{{pg|50|51}}where she was. She would e-mail back and say, “Oh, sweetie, they have locked me up again.”

Norris had my admiration in so many areas. She was truly multi-talented, level-headed, and so much more than “the great man’s wife.” Whereas I had been a mediocre-to-pretty-terrible stepmother, she had woven together Norman’s children from more different mothers than you can imagine. Along with her own two boys, all the Mailer kids were a family, and that was Norris’s doing. She had wonderful humor and wisdom, and I loved her. She was a gift to my later life that was taken away too soon. Except that she doesn’t seem that far away. When I want to tell her something, I find myself looking heavenward and saying, “Hey, good lookin’, listen to this!” And I have her picture on my desk... along with my mother, my children, and my husband. I mean, where else would you put a sister’s picture?

{{Review}}
{{DEFAULTSORT:Remembering Norris}}
[[Category:Tributes (MR)]]

The Mailer Review/Volume 5, 2011/Tributes to Norris Church Mailer/Norris Mailer

2025-04-13T19:38:56Z

JHadaway: Removed spaces before and after the{{pg}}template

{{DISPLAYTITLE:{{BASEPAGENAME}}/{{SUBPAGENAME}}}}
{{MR05}}
{{Byline|last=Collins |first=Nancy |url=http://prmlr.us/mr05col }}
{{dc|dc=I| called her my southern girl}} . . . since we both were, more or less. Arkansas-born. Norris was landed gentry. I, spawn of a rebellious Alabama Mama who ran off with a brilliant, exciting Yankee—right up Norris’s alley—a Dixie half-breed. Subsequently, our friendship was grounded in our south-of-the Mason-Dixon-Line humor... a shared maverick philosophy where adventure trumped security... heart... logic... passion... common sense. We loved transcendent writing, complicated men, great books, good food, glamorous anything... jewelry, clothes, furniture, trips. “Ordinary,” we agreed, “is our enemy.”

But then Norris Mailer was never, ever... ordinary. Informing that ridiculously gorgeous, movie star persona was a fierce, if soft spoken, intelligence, titanium will, the most tender of hearts, the kind of brutal, unembarrassed candor that rendered her literary ''pièce de résistance'', ''A Ticket to the Circus'', the gold standard for any aspiring memoirist.

Running into each other over the years, Norris and I would, invariably, repair to a corner, engrossed in conversation as the party swirled around us. “You’re the best friend I never see,” she said. I couldn’t have agreed more. That changed during the last couple years of her life when our closeness made up for lost time—alas, not on our side. Wary of making people uncomfortable, Norris resisted talking about her illness, exactly what I, hands-on veteran of my own mother’s pancreatic cancer, wanted to do, providing, I hoped, a discreet, understanding outlet for any unexpressed feelings—or pain—she wished to spare others. Eventually, Norris took me up on it. And though the topic was sometimes hard, it could also become, in our hands, ironically hilarious. Cancer may have been claiming her body, but it never diminished her spirit.

Perhaps the most profound gift that a friend can give is the invitation to{{pg|35|36}}help her gracefully leave the earth. So honored by Norris, the gracious generosity of her extraordinary sons, John and Matt, indeed all the Mailers, made me feel like family as we surrounded her with love. Norris’s last days, far from being sad, were as original, uncomplaining, interesting, courageous, dignified, love-filled—even theatrical—as the rest of her remarkable life. She laughed, ate well, watched videos with her adored grandchildren and put on her makeup—daily. “Southern girls,” she deadpanned, “don’t even die without lipstick.”

She also reminisced about her passionate, high-flying, oft tumultuous but never boring relationship with Norman Mailer, the grand love of her life. She wanted a fascinating man and she got him. “In the end,” she mused, “I had a very good marriage. I ''liked'' it.”

On her last Friday evening, Norris and I were awaiting the imminent arrival of her boys when, suddenly, unexpectedly, she took quite ill. A less gutsy human being no doubt might have called it a day—make that night—and soared off into the celestial. But Norris wasn’t about to leave without kissing her two favorite people on the planet good-bye. And, so, bravely hunkering down, she gave Matt and Johnny almost two more days with their mother, whereupon, I suspect, Norman, by now impatient at being denied his glorious Norris, swooped down and, throwing one of the world’s great dames over his shoulder, absconded to literary parts unknown.

{{Review}}
{{DEFAULTSORT:Norris Mailer}}
[[Category:Tributes (MR)]]

The Mailer Review/Volume 5, 2011/Tributes to Norris Church Mailer/The Norris I Knew

2025-04-13T19:38:23Z

JHadaway: Removed spaces before and after the{{pg}}template

{{DISPLAYTITLE:{{BASEPAGENAME}}/{{SUBPAGENAME}}}}
{{MR05}}
{{Byline|last=Busa |first=Christopher |url=http://prmlr.us/mr05bus }}
{{dc|dc=T|eaching tennis at the Provincetown Tennis Club during the 1970s,}} I gave lessons to members of the Mailer family. I enjoyed playing with Al Wasserman, a television producer for ''60 Minutes'', married to Norman’s sister Barbara, and her son Peter Alson. Michael and Stephen Mailer, the sons of Beverly, had formed childhood roots in Provincetown, as had Danielle, whose mother was Mailer’s second wife Adele.

I met Norris not long after she married Norman in 1980. She only took a few lessons from me, but I still recall the feeling of rallying with her and her nimble adaptation to small movements to keep the ball in play. We shortened the court, using the service line as our baseline, and guided the ball back and forth with the idea of sustaining a rally in the forecourt. We were playing mini-tennis and ball control was our goal, taking small steps and making abbreviated strokes with the racquet. I would take a single ball and attempt to keep it in play for a dozen exchanges, and then we took another ball and kept it going for twice as long. A rally in tennis is like a conversation, a combination of communication and scoring points in a gentle sparing manner.
Norris was a beginner, but she had a sure touch, so my method was not to compete but cooperate by keeping the ball in play.

Much of Norman Mailer’s knowledge of the body came from his interest in sports, especially the principles of dynamic balance of a performing athlete. Like the footwork of a boxer, his characters, both within themselves and with others, are moving through complicated turns from balance point to another balance point, maintaining their center of gravity through evolving alignments. But Norris was a lady. She preferred not to perspire. We bantered a bit in the shade of a courtside beach umbrella, and I said flirtatiously, knowing she would be quizzed by Norman, “Norris, your skin has not been{{pg|30|31}}kissed by the sun, you are so pale.” And she said softly in a voice redolent with the earthiness of her Arkansas upbringing, “I like to be fish-belly white.” Norris had read her husband’s book on Marilyn Monroe and was drawn to his effort to portray something essential about femininity from a male perspective. Mailer believed that what was poignant about Marilyn was her desire to become a lady: “Elegance was elusive and fearful and attractive and as awesome to her in these somewhat sordid early years as the hidden desire to be macho can feel to a young and wimpy intellectual.” Mailer defined wimpy as having muscles like cooked spaghetti that were limp and cold. If elegance was elusive for the young Marilyn, Norris grew up secure in the knowledge of being a natural head-turner; yet she pursued intellectual understandings, teaching art in a high school and subscribing to the ''New Yorker''.

She forgot to return the box she had checked “Don’t Send” on her Book-of-the-Month Club subscription, and a copy of Mailer’s ''Marilyn'' arrived. She was shocked that a book could cost twenty dollars. But she gave deep attention to the photographs. She started reading Mailer’s text and noticed at once that this so-called war novelist had a lot to say about women and a woman’s view of the world. She met Mailer on the famous occasion of Norman’s Arkansas visit to see his old Army buddy, Francis Gwalthney, who had become a writer teaching English at a nearby college. Norris had been a student in Gwalthney’s class.

Norman told me that when he first met Norris that he felt “a great shock of anxiety.” He mocked himself for his fear of tall women. Already statuesque, she was wearing hip hugger jeans and standing in three-inch sandals. Her white blouse was tied in a gypsy knot just above her belly button. Norman would learn that night that she was born January 31, his birthday. They shared a natal bond, despite being born twenty-six years apart. He was twice her age at 52. In an interview published in ''Provincetown Arts'' in 1999, Mailer said, “We looked so unalike and were so different that it was interesting to have something in common. But it wouldn’t have mattered what her birthday was. Over time I’ve learned that we not only have the same virtues, but the same faults.”

Wicked rumors circulated in Provincetown that, after meeting that night, they shacked up in a house trailer and did not emerge for three days. But it is a fact that in less than three months, Norris had quit her job, sold her yellow Volkswagen, and moved to New York to live with Norman. She was a{{pg|31|32}}year older than Norman when he published ''The Naked and the Dead''; just as ''Naked'' altered Norman, transforming him from an aspiring talent to a major author, so did Norman alter Norris, encouraging her surging ambitions to develop her varied talents and find her forms in theater, painting, writing, and mothering. Often, the first task of an artist is to create the persona that will create the work. So Barbara Jean Davis, who married Larry Norris, now became Norris Church Mailer. In an almost perfect understanding of this process of profound change, Coco Chanel said, “Elegance is not just the prerogative of those who have just escaped from adolescence, but of those who have already taken possession of their future.”

Where Norman rushed in, Norris did not fear to follow, but she declined to become a fool, reminding her husband that he was a great American author and not an ill-mannered ruffian. During the New York symposium where several prominent feminists beat up on Norman for saying that women should be kept in cages, he was shocked by their lack of humor. Norris said the she knew that Norman was trying “to be funny,” forgiving him, as usual, for his offish remarks, but not taking him seriously enough to be offended.

In a lengthy interview in ''Provincetown Arts'', I asked Norman, “Do you know a woman named Cinnamon Brown? Rumors say you know of her.”

“Yeah, sure,” Mailer said. “That look of panic you just saw in my eyes was me wondering if I knew two Cinnamon Browns.”

Shortly after Norris moved to New York, Mailer had cast Norris in the role of Cinnamon Brown, his date for a small dinner party in New York. Wearing a blonde wig and brazen makeup, she was introduced as a girl from the South who had moved to New York to enter the adult film industry. “The real art,” Mailer explained, “was that we did it with two extremely sophisticated people, Harold and Mara Conrad. Mara was one of the smartest, hippest women I’ve ever known. The idea was precisely to fool her. As I remember, Harold was in on it, or I don’t think we could have pulled it off.”

If Bea was a college sweetheart, if Adele was a most Spanish passion, if Lady Jean was regal, if Beverly was the consummate actress who could not play the role of wife, if Carol, mother of their lovechild, would become wife for a day, then Norris proved to be the mother who was as powerful as his own. Freud said, “A man who is loved by his mother will always retain the feeling of a conqueror.” In her thirty years of marriage to Norman, Norris integrated the chaotic legacy of five previous marriages and several broods of{{pg|32|33}}children suffering from shell shock of the cultural wars between their sequences of parents. She became friends with former wives, and found a zone of comfort by “avoiding” past mistresses. Family matters were scheduled smoothly. Ironically, Norman wrote the check for Norris’s lessons, which bounced. Norris took over many household matters, including paying bills.

For an exhibition of paintings by Norris Church Mailer, at the Berta Walker Gallery in Provincetown, Norman wrote an appreciation of his wife’s painting, posted on the wall beside ''Leaving California'' (1982), a somewhat surreal celebration of yellow as a hue, depicting an irrepressibly happy tourist heading home, back East, having become deeply tanned from California sunshine:

<blockquote>I admire and am intrigued by the little mysteries that my wife, Norris Church, evokes in her best work. It is genre, and the painter’s tale she tells is usually of middle-aged men and women from middle America, people one would not necessarily sit next to on a train or a plane, tourists, housewives, or peppy grandmothers with a small but crazy light in their eye because they are on vacation. There they are, much like this woman dressed in yellow, optimistic, unafraid, and so innocent that one’s case-hardened heart feels for her. Full of the glow of brilliant sun and big sky, she is nonetheless fixed in all the interred time of a family snapshot. Blissful, she is as American as her pocketbook, which looks very much like a portable radio. From the white plastic frames of her eyeglasses, down to the sturdy set of her legs, she is our perfect and absolute American, sweet, optimistic, a little bewildered—oh, boy!—the vastness of space in which she stands, and wholly unaware of that faint shadow of the sinister that rides along that outgoing American highway down which we travel for the rest of our lives, off on our vacations, full of snapshots for which we posed that never told us who we were, and what the shadows had to say of that other highway that winds beyond our means to the mortal mystery of our ends.</blockquote>

Yellow was Norris’s favorite color, a honey-colored yellow that contained a dose of her husband’s dark syrup. Her elegance was the equal of her husband’s machismo. When I read Norman’s remarks about his wife’s{{pg|33|34}}painting, I began to see why Norris once said, “He had a crazy brain, endlessly fascinating.” In the epilogue to her memoir, ''A Ticket to the Circus'', she confirms her belief in their enduring affection: “I’m anxious to catch up to him.”

{{Review}}
{{DEFAULTSORT:Norris I Knew, The}}
[[Category:Tributes (MR)]]

The Mailer Review/Volume 5, 2011/Tributes to Norris Church Mailer/Remembering Norris Church

2025-04-13T19:36:36Z

JHadaway: Removed spaces before and after the{{pg}}template

{{DISPLAYTITLE:{{BASEPAGENAME}}/{{SUBPAGENAME}}}}
{{MR05}}
{{Byline|last=Bowers |first=John |url=http://prmlr.us/mr05bow }}
{{dc|dc=N|orris came along late in my life,}} but she represented the kind of person I’ve known about for most of my life. She was that tough Southern girl that is often cloaked in the sunshine of beauty and affability. She could change a tire on the highway at three in the morning, I bet, as well as strut down a runway in a beauty parade. She knew how to bat her eyes. What drew my everlasting admiration to her, though, was that she knew where she came from, who she was, and most impressively had an instinctive sympathy for those from a hard scrapple background or from a similar inherited place where one has to fight for every inch of ground to get ahead. In her journey she kept inside her what Hemingway so apply called “a built-in shit detector.” She was nobody’s fool. She’d give until there was no more to give but no one was ever going to walk over her.

I come from the hills of East Tennessee and that fact, and all it means, never leaves me for a second (although I try at times). Norris of course came from the Ozarks. We met at a small get together in an apartment that Mike Lennon and his wife Donna were briefly ensconced in Lower Manhattan. I remember the moment as if it were last night. She was seated on a lounge chair, long legs crossed lady-like, eyes raised shyly, as her husband Norman Mailer sat in great bonhomie and authority a short distance away, showing some stiffness of legs and not able to spring up as of yore. Conversation swirled around gossip, drinks, and possibly politics. Before long, though, Norris and I began the necessary. We had to trade facts to gauge how hillbilly Southern we were, a ritual similar to Armenians far from home who must share their bona fides to set the record straight. We talked about fried chicken, biscuits and gravy, fat back and green beans. We tested each other on Baptist hymns, sang a good one together (very quietly) and shared the info that we both had been submerged in baptism. Not many you meet in a{{pg|28|29}}literary gathering in the Big Apple have “gone under” in such a ritual at puberty. It's not exactly a Bar Mitzvah. We confirmed that we had given up the faith but would never forget the power it had once held over us. Norman was in a good social form that evening, attentive, not a bone to pick with anyone, generous, a little shy himself (if that can be imagined), and I thought, what a pair the two of them make! How do they make it work? I found out when I read ''A Ticket to the Circus''.

Norris and I traded emails after that evening. I began to think of her as “Barbara” as she was before she reinvented herself as “Norris” in New York. We saw each other at Wilkes University where she came to be honored, and we spoke occasionally by phone. When she came down with the brutality of cancer I was aware of how it took away the heretofore soft contours of her body, but a minute later forgot it. Really I did. She remained her radiant self through the greatest of pain, as if, in fact, this disability was either a joke or inconvenience she’d soon get rid of. I held that thought, up until I heard that she’d, as they say, “passed away.” Among the healthy and the lame, she was the most alive person I’d ever met. We emailed each other about work and life a few days before the end. She had a showing of her designed jewelry where my wife was lucky enough to pick up a piece. There was a book party in a palatial Upper East Side apartment that looked out over the lights of Manhattan in which she read from her latest work. She came to a dinner party at our place as if the last thought in her head was that another would not follow. So talented she was, in so many fields—acting, modeling, writing, painting, and on and on. She certainly complemented her multi-talented husband in that regard.

Right now her number is in my address book. I’m not going to take it out. I want to feel I could call her up any time and she would answer.

{{Review}}
{{DEFAULTSORT:Remembering Norris Church}}
[[Category:Tributes (MR)]]

The Mailer Review/Volume 5, 2011/Tributes to Norris Church Mailer/What Would Be the Fun of That?

2025-04-13T19:36:10Z

JHadaway: Removed spaces before and after the{{pg}}template

{{DISPLAYTITLE:{{BASEPAGENAME}}/{{SUBPAGENAME}}}}
{{MR05}}
{{Byline|last=Alson |first=Peter |url=http://prmlr.us/mr05als }}
{{dc|dc=T|he first time I met Norris}} was when she accompanied Norman to Harvard for a lecture that he was giving in the spring of 1976. I was a junior at the time. She was only a few years older than I. But she was tall and beautiful, with cream-white skin and red hair that, as Raymond Chandler might have described it, was “like a fire under control but still dangerous.” In part because she was with my uncle, in part because she was dressed not like my fellow college students, but in a pretty spring dress and heels, she struck me as a full-fledged adult. By contrast, especially in her presence, I felt tongue-tied, nearly protoplasmic. Which didn’t stop me from proudly introducing her and my uncle to my college buddies. I think it safe to say that my connection to her scored me more points with them than my connection to Norman.

Over the years, some of the nervousness and awkwardness I felt around Norris on that first encounter melted away—but not all of it. I was always a little intimidated by her. She was just so damned beautiful and sure of herself and grown up. At the same time she was very much in touch with her inner child. I remember my surprise when I found out that she collected Barbie dolls. I knew there were people who collected them and never even took them out of their boxes so as not to diminish their value. But as Norris pointed out, “What would be the fun of that?”

She loved Christmas with the same kind of kid-like joy. By the time she was finished decorating the tree, I was always surprised that the damn thing was able to stand up under the weight of all the ornaments. Even more impressive was how effortless she made the holiday celebration seem, cooking dinner for the assembled army of kids, nephew, sister, parents. There she’d{{pg|24|25}}be, sitting in her white wicker throne by the picture window of the Provincetown house, flipping through a magazine, not a care in the world, and a while later, dinner would be on the table, a feast of chicken or turkey with all the trimmings. If she felt the slightest bit of stress, it didn’t show. I certainly never saw it.

She had a style and a palette all her own, which wasn’t surprising given her painterly talent, and she took great delight in decorating the house in Provincetown to fit her vision—dark, gothic wallpaper, at one point, lots of eccentric lamps (it would take ten minutes to turn them all on and off). I will be frank and say that it wasn’t my own vision of a beach house, but it was distinct and unapologetic, just like its creator.

If Norman was the king of the Mailer clan, as he surely was, then Norris was the queen without whom his kingdom—namely, us, his children, his sister and I—would have been much the poorer. She was so many things to all of us, and filled so many roles. For me, she was my aunt, my friend, the queen whose approval I would always want, artist, writer, wife of my uncle, the redhead from Arkansas, the giggly funny older sister I never had. She was Barbara. She was Norris. All those things. Now still.

{{Review}}
{{DEFAULTSORT:What Would Be the Fun of That?}}
[[Category:Tributes (MR)]]

The Mailer Review/Volume 5, 2011/Tributes to Norris Church Mailer/Rise Above It

2025-04-13T19:34:00Z

JHadaway: Removed spaces between pg

{{DISPLAYTITLE:{{BASEPAGENAME}}/{{SUBPAGENAME}}}}
{{MR05}}
{{Byline|last=Ebershoff |first=David |url=http://prmlr.us/mr05ebe }}
{{dc|dc=Y|ou’ll never regret taking the high road.}}

The first time I heard Norris say this we were in the living room in Brooklyn Heights a few months after Norman died. She was telling me her early ideas for a memoir. She had all these stories—the story about first meeting Norman in Arkansas, the story about going to a dinner party at Oscar de la Renta’s in a nightgown, the story about dressing up as a stripper named Cinnamon Brown. Then she landed on a story about one of Norman’s “old girl-friends,” as she put it. One evening the woman insulted Norris at a party, looking for a catfight that would land her in the gossip pages. Norris didn’t bite. That’s when she said, “David, you’ll never regret taking the high road.”

If you’re an editor assessing the potential of a memoir, what do you suppose you’re looking for? Of course you want candor, depth, and self-awareness. But you also want a little juice. If a writer says ''You’ll never regret taking the high road''—what is your likely reaction? The high road might be nice for personal relations and family harmony, but will it lead to a fascinating book? Will the high road take a writer to the best stories, like hooking up with Bill Clinton and the painful truths of marital acrimony?

You might have this concern, but not if you’re sitting on Norris Church Mailer’s worn sofa and looking into her worn, wise eyes. There, surrounded by the books and the photos and the memories, you’ll realize the high road will not overlook the hard dirty business of living. The high road will lead a writer like Norris—and all of us—to what’s most important in life: love.

''A Ticket to the Circus'' is about family and fame and books and sex, but above all it’s about love. About loving people when they impress you and when they fail you. About loving friends and not letting foes sap your ability to love. About loving the world you are blessed to live in and the gifts you have been given and loving others whose gifts you sometimes wished you{{pg|43|44}}had. Norris loved life. I don’t mean that in the vague, sentimental sense. No, she loved ''her'' life. She loved her family, her friends, her homes, her talents, her experiences. She loved her ''days''. On that cold afternoon in Brooklyn Heights she understood she wouldn’t have too many more of those days. She wasn’t bitter, she wasn’t regretful and she definitely wasn’t seeking revenge. She was sad of course and perhaps frightened but more than anything she was full of love. They say an artist’s greatness can be measured by her capacity to love. Norris showed me that if you’re an editor looking for a great book, start by assessing the amount of love in a writer’s ink.

{{Review}}
{{DEFAULTSORT:Rise Above It}}
[[Category:Tributes (MR)]]

The Mailer Review/Volume 5, 2011/The Conception of Irreversibility: Hannah Arendt and Hemingway’s “Hills Like White Elephants”

2025-04-13T19:14:41Z

JHadaway: Changed sfn in notes to harvtxt

{{DISPLAYTITLE:{{BASEPAGENAME}}/{{SUBPAGENAME}}}}
{{MR05}} 
{{Byline|last=Yirinec |first=Jennifer |url=http://prmlr.us/mr05yir |abstract=An analysis of Hannah Arendt's concept of irreversibility in Hemingway’s powerful short story.}}
{{dc|dc=T|here has been a plethora of criticism}} examining one of Ernest Hemingway’s most powerful short stories, “Hills Like White Elephants.” However, one approach that may merit more attention is an exploration of Hemingway’s notions of “action” and of the irreversibility of action within the text. Hannah Arendt, an intellectual whose germinal work has transcended more than one discipline, may be useful in providing some measure of insight into Hemingway’s problematic narrative.{{efn|Hannah Arendt, in ''The Human Condition'', distinguishes action from performative activity based upon the ability of action, in contradistinction to performative activity, “to set something into motion,” to begin something anew. {{harvtxt|Arendt |1958 |p=177}} Action, in the Arendtian sense of the word, is intrinsically tied to speech, for it is “[i]n acting and speaking [that] men show who they are, reveal actively their unique personal identities and thus make their appearance in the human world.”{{harvtxt|Arendt|1958|p=179}} As illustrated by the previous quote, action necessitates plurality, for the “revelatory quality of speech and action comes to the fore where people are with others and neither for nor against them—that is, in sheer human togetherness.”{{harvtxt|Arendt|1958|p=180}} According to Arendt, man’s ability to act—to set things into motion—can have severe consequences if actions are left unchecked.}}

I would like to begin by examining certain rhetorical elements of “Hills,” which suggest traces of Arendt’s perspectives on the “nature of action.” More specifically, Arendt’s influential study, ''The Human Condition'', suggests that the dissonance found in the relationship between Jig and the American primarily arises from their differing viewpoints regarding the Arendtian notion of irreversibility.{{efn|In order to combat irreversibility, according to Arendt, man must either make promises or bestow forgiveness on others, two actions that, by their nature, also require plurality, “for no one can forgive himself and no one can feel bound by a promise made only to himself.”{{harvtxt|Arendt|1958|p=237}}}} That is to say, the issue is far more important than considerations of the potential abortion, which is the explicit topic of their combative dialogue, as critics have noted.{{sfn|Gillette|2007|pp=50-69}}{{sfn|O’Brien|1992|pp=19-25}}{{sfn|Rankin|2005|p=234}}{{sfn|Urgo|1988|p=35}} We might consider that Jig, in her overtly rhetorical exchanges with the American, illustrates (and promotes) the concept of irreversibility, as she suggests that the conception of life (an action, in essence, as it is a beginning) within her cannot be undone, while the American argues{{pg|407|408}}against irreversibility, as he believes that the conception can be “undone” by the act of abortion. As Stanley Renner proffers in his “Moving to the Girl's Side of ‘Hills Like White Elephants,’” “[I]n choosing whether to abort or to have the child, the couple are [sic] choosing between two ways of life.”{{sfn|Renner|1995|p=28}} This forty-minute exchange determining the end decision—abortion or life—reveals that the couple is also choosing between two ways of ''living''—either living in such a way so that actions can be “undone,” so to say, or living in such a way where actions bring consequences that are absolute.

Throughout the story the American attempts to articulate and advance his belief in reversibility. However, his own actions and statements undermine his attempts to do so. One can first see this situation in the exchange begun by Jig’s comment about the hills in the distance, as this moment initiates the heated philosophical discussion. As David Wyche perceptively states, “This bit of dialogue establishes the characters’ opposing positions in what is, essentially, an emotionally charged negotiation.”{{sfn|Wyche|2002|p=61}} Seated outside the bar, the couple enters into dialogue—the dilemma at hand being whether or not the couple should (or can) have an abortion and thus reverse the conception. While staring off into the distance, Jig remarks that the hills “look like white elephants,” to which the American responds, “I've never seen one.”{{sfn|Hemingway|1987|p=211}} Jig views the hills as white elephants, as entities so large and powerful that they require attention and disallow negotiation, much like the baby within her womb—a connection that Stanley Kozikowski makes: “Hills are like white elephants for Jig because they carry ambivalent evocations of the child within her—like a white elephant, an unwanted gift, a seemingly remote but immense problem.”{{sfn|Kozikowski|1994|p=107}} The American, on the other hand, claims to have never seen a white elephant, a statement that suggests he does not believe in entities or actions that cannot be undone. However, his rhetorical position is weakened by his unwillingness to look up and assess the hills for himself. He responds to his beer,{{efn|Meg Gillette, in her piece “Making Modern Parents in Ernest Hemingway’s ‘Hills Like White Elephants’,” provides a detailed analysis that focuses upon how the characters in the story frequently shift between offering retorts and drinking.}} rather than to Jig, as following his statement, the narrator says, “[T]he man drank his beer,” rather than something like, “The man said,” or, “The man responded.”{{sfn|Hemingway|1987|p=211}}{{sfn|Gillette|2007|pp=55-56}} When Jig snaps back, “You wouldn’t have,” the American replies, “Just because you say I wouldn’t have doesn’t prove anything.”{{sfn|Hemingway|1987|p=211}} In his response, the American, perhaps unwittingly, takes power away from speech, through which the two ways in which actions can be reversed—the making of promises and forgiveness—occur. As such, within this exchange about the hills, Jig constructs the fetus within her womb as irreversible and non-negotiable,{{pg|408|409}}much like a white elephant, while the American attempts to forward his belief in reversibility—in the abortion of actions. Yet the American fails to construct the plurality necessary for such actions to be reversed, as he talks into his beer and limits the power of his own statements.

Another such exchange occurs when Jig and the American try Anis del Toro. Upon imbibing the drink, Jig comments that “[i]t tastes like licorice,” to which the American responds, “That’s the way with everything.”{{sfn|Hemingway|1987|p=212}} The American’s response plays into Jig’s beliefs about irreversibility, for she seizes upon the chance to rephrase the statement and direct it back toward the American: “Yes,” she says. “Everything tastes of licorice. Especially all the things you’ve waited so long for, like absinthe.”{{sfn|Hemingway|1987|p=212}} Perhaps the American only meant to dismiss Jig’s childish statement about licorice; however, in doing so, he opened the door for her to make a philosophical statement about consequence. In saying that everything amounts to one thing—one “taste”—Jig suggests that actions have an absolute consequence, one that leaves a bitter taste that cannot be undone. After a succession of comments about each rhetorician’s motivation, Jig concludes, “That’s all we do, isn’t it—look at things and try new drinks?”{{sfn|Hemingway|1987|p=212}} Jig’s statement indirectly reproves the American for not allowing action within the relationship. The only action she has seen, in her opinion, was the conception, and the American will not even allow that to progress to full term. Detecting Jig’s intimation, David Wyche writes that “[Jig] manages to articulate, again figuratively, what has no doubt been an increasing awareness of the emptiness of the couple’s lifestyle to date.” {{sfn|Wyche|2002|p=62}} Similarly, Paul Rankin surmises that, despite the American’s desire to “act” on the conception, his character is “essentially passive in nature”: “the man has nothing to offer, nothing to contribute to the story, just as he has nothing more to contribute to Jig’s pregnancy.”{{sfn|Rankin|2005|p=235}} As such, despite the American’s desire to reverse the action—the life—he created through the abortion, his passivity inhibits his rhetorical position.

The rhetorical struggle culminates in a battle between the ''cans'' and the ''cannots''—a battle that Jig incites when she looks upon the field and the mountains and says, “And we could have all this....And we could have everything and every day we make it more impossible.”{{sfn|Hemingway|1987|p=213}} She clearly makes this statement to spite her lover, who agrees with her that, once Jig had the abortion, they could do and have anything they wanted. Every time the American suggests something (clearly impossible) they could have or do{{pg|409|410}}post-abortion, Jig responds, “No, we can’t.”{{sfn|Hemingway|1987|p=213}} After the American’s concluding remark (“We can go everywhere”), Jig replies, “No, we can’t. It isn’t ours any more,” and later comments that “once they take it away, you never get it back.”{{sfn|Hemingway|1987|p=213}} At this point Jig cements her belief in irreversibility in the face of the American, who now is at a rhetorical disadvantage and can only make impossible remarks. In these lines, Jig insists that “undoing” something—reversing something—such as the conception of life is an impossibility, for though something can be removed or killed, in the case of the fetus, ''that'' something was once present—was once a reality—and, as such, can never be truly reversed. True reversal would require Jig and the American to “forgive and forget,” so to say—something that Jig, once having had life within her, cannot do. It is clear that if Jig went through with the abortion, she would never be able to view the world in the same way—nothing could ever be hers again, for she would have lost something that was truly important to her. After this exchange during which Jig seemingly wins the rhetorical battle over the potential of irreversibility, she refuses to discuss the matter anymore. Whether or not she has the abortion is open to debate, although the issue of irreversibility, once on the table, has been removed from the discussion.

The story concludes with Jig smiling—yet not because she has discerned the fate of her unborn child, but rather because she has asserted her beliefs regarding the notion of irreversibility and has won the rhetorical battle against her lover, the American. She “feel[s] fine,” perhaps, as a result of this knowledge of rhetorical victory, rather than as a result of her thinking—at least temporarily—she will not go through with the abortion, as Hilary K. Justice and Stanley Renner say, or as a result of her being inebriated, as Phillip Sipiora suggests.{{sfn|Justice|1998|pp=25-26}}{{sfn|Renner|1995|p=40}}{{sfn|Sipiora|1984|p=50}} Without knowing the fate of Jig’s unborn child, the reader can surmise that Jig has successfully promoted her claims of the irreversibility of actions (particularly conceptions), while the American, although attempting to forward the reversibility of actions, has failed in such attempts. By not acting and fostering plurality through his dialogue, he is not able to utilize the two Arendtian modes of reversal that would be open to him—namely, forgiveness and the making of promises. His promises are not grounded in reality, for what he has to offer includes the whole world—a non-reality, which Jig jumps to point out. Moreover, he cannot talk Jig into forgiving him for impregnating her, nor can he “forgive” her for conceiving a child by enabling her to carry it to term. While neither{{pg|410|411}}partner agrees with the other,{{efn|As David Wyche points out, “We see that if either or both of the characters experience ‘growth’ throughout the course of the story, neither necessarily moves toward the other’s side.”{{harvtxt|Wyche|2002|p=61}}}} there is a clear rhetorical victor. As no concordance is reached, the reader is merely left with the conclusion that, based upon the rhetorical aspects of the text, Jig has emerged rhetorically victorious, while the American has lost control of the situation and must resort to interacting with others inside the bar and acting as Jig’s porter, moving the luggage to the other side of the tracks.

=== Notes ===
{{notelist}}

===Citations===
{{Reflist|15em}}

===Works Cited===
{{Refbegin|indent=1|20em}}
*{{cite book |last=Arendt |first=Hannah |date=1958 |title=The Human Condition|edition=2nd |location=Chicago |publisher=U of Chicago P |pages= |ref=harv}}
*{{cite journal |last=Elliott |first=Gary |title=Hemingway’s ‘Hills Like White Elephants’ |journal=Explicator |volume=35 |date=1977 |pages=22-23 |ref=harv}}
*{{cite journal |last=Gillette |first=Meg |title=Making Modern Parents in Ernest Hemingway’s ‘Hills Like White Elephants’ And Viña Delmar's ''Bad Girl'' |journal=Modern Fiction Studies |volume=53 |issue=1 |date=Spring 2007 |pages=50-69 |ref=harv}}
*{{cite book |last=Hemingway |first=Ernest |date=1987 |title=The Complete Short Stories of Ernest Hemingway |chapter=Hills Like White Elephants |location= New York |publisher=Scribner |pages=211-214 |ref=harv}}
*{{cite journal |last=Justice |first=Hilary K |title=‘Well, Well, Well’: Cross-Gendered Autobiography and the Manuscript of 'Hills Like White Elephants' |journal=The Hemingway Review |volume=18 |issue=1 |date=Fall 1998 |pages=17-32 |ref=harv}}
*{{cite journal |last=Kozikowski |first=Stanley |title=Hemingway’s ‘Hills Like White Elephants’ |journal=Explicator |volume=52 |date=1994 |pages=107-109 |ref=harv}}
*{{cite journal |last=O’Brien |first=Timothy |title=Allusion, Word-Place, and the Central Conflict in Hemingway’s ‘Hills Like White Elephants’ |journal=The Hemingway Review |volume=12 |issue=1 |date=Fall 1992 |pages=19-25 |ref=harv}}
*{{cite journal |last=Organ |first=Dennis |title=Hemingway’s ‘Hills Like White Elephants’ |journal=Explicator |volume=37 |date=1979 |pages=11 |ref=harv}}
*{{cite journal |last=Rankin |first=Paul |title=Hemingway’s ‘Hills Like White Elephants’ |journal=Explicator |volume=63 |issue=4 |date=Summer 2005 |pages=234-237 |ref=harv}}
*{{cite journal |last=Renner |first=Stanley |title=Moving to the Girl’s Side of ‘Hills Like White Elephants’ |journal=The Hemingway Review |volume=15 |issue=1 |date=Fall 1995 |pages=27-41 |ref=harv}}
*{{cite journal |last=Sipiora |first=Phillip |title=Hemingway’s ‘Hills Like White Elephants’ |journal=Explicator |volume=42 |date=1984 |pages=50 |ref=harv}}
*{{cite journal |last=Urgo |first=Joseph R. |title=Hemingway’s ‘Hills Like White Elephants’ |journal=Explicator |volume=46 |issue=3 |date=1988 |pages=35-37 |ref=harv}}
*{{cite journal |last=Wyche |first=David |title=Letting the Air Into a Relationship: Metaphorical Abortion in ‘Hills Like White Elephants’ |journal=The Hemingway Review |volume=22 |issue=1 |date=2002 |pages=58-73 |ref=harv}}
{{Refend}}

{{Review}}
{{DEFAULTSORT:Conception of Irreversibility: Hannah Arendt and Hemingway’s “Hills Like White Elephants”,The}}
[[Category:Articles (MR)]]

The Mailer Review/Volume 4, 2010/Norman Mailer's The Fight: Hemingway, Bullfighting, and the Lovely Metaphysics of Boxing

2025-04-13T18:17:53Z

JHadaway: Changed inverted date and page number for citation 9

{{DISPLAYTITLE:{{BASEPAGENAME}}/{{SUBPAGENAME}}}}
{{Working}}
{{MR04}}
{{byline|last=Cirino|first=Mark|abstract=Although Norman Mailer’s ''[[The Fight]]'' is ostensibly reportage about the Muhammad Ali-George Foreman championship heavyweight boxing match, we learn more about Mailer and his aesthetic and artistic values than we do about either fighter. One of Mailer’s methods for capturing his Zaire experience is to employ Ernest Hemingway as a ghostly father figure, a ''doppelgänger'', both an inspiration and a nagging reminder of his own inadequacies. An intertextual analysis of these two writers demonstrates the way Mailer uses boxing to offer his inflection of Hemingway’s twentieth-century themes. |url=http://prmlr.us/mr04cir }}

{{dc|dc=A|lthough Norman Mailer’s ''The Fight'' is ostensibly reportage}} about the Muhammad Ali-George Foreman championship heavyweight boxing match in Zaire on 30 October 1974, we learn more about Mailer and his aesthetic and artistic values than we do about either fighter. We also learn far more than Mailer’s thoughts on boxing; we glean a broader metaphysical and philosophic notion of action and danger, and the writer’s own role in recording it in prose. One of Mailer’s methods for capturing his Zaire experience is to employ Ernest Hemingway as a ghostly father figure, a ''doppelgänger'', both an inspiration and a nagging reminder of his own inadequacies. Hemingway, whose suicide was thirteen years before the fight, is still active in Mailer’s text, who was enjoying a consciously Hemingwayesque project in Africa.

In Chuck Klosterman’s recent assessment of Norman Mailer as a boxing writer, he writes that “there is nothing metaphysical about getting punched in the face".{{sfn|Klosterman|2008|p=56}}This assertion suggests that Klosterman either has never been punched in the face or was concentrating on the wrong sensation when he was. Mailer and Hemingway represent the boxing ring and the bullfighting arena as possessing such metaphysical possibilities that they invite us to appreciate each of their values in human behavior and the qualities they demand their artists to possess. In ''The Fight'', Mailer’s conspicuous comparisons of boxing to bullfighting, Hemingway, and to art further invite{{pg|123|124}}comparison to Hemingway’s earlier texts. In all instances, we see Mailer and Hemingway with their incisive, intellectual evocations of men of thought (that is, Ali, and any quintessential Hemingway Hero, such as Robert Jordan in ''For Whom the Bell Tolls'' or his short story alter ego Nick Adams) in moments of peak activity. So, if Klosterman limits the transcendence of boxing simply to “primordial reality” and the “base qualities of being alive”,{{sfn|Klosterman|2008|p=56}}he sharply diverges from Mailer and Hemingway, who find in the maelstrom of a boxing match or the murderous possibilities of a bullring, life’s truest, most elevated and aesthetic moments. “Every wound,” Mailer observes in ''The Fight'', “has its own revelation”,{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=214}}both promising the importance of chronicling the defeated and the damaged and signaling his own fascination and debt to the warriors and athletes and even artists of the Hemingway canon. While Mailer may be overly epigrammatic, this aphorism accurately synopsizes the “wound theory” of criticism that defined (and later encumbered) Hemingway Studies for decades.

To Hemingway, boxing might have been important for more complex reasons than many readers ever understood. A celebrated example of this tension offers a useful illustration. The sordid history behind F. Scott Fitzgerald’s revisions to Hemingway’s short story “Fifty Grand” is relevant not as a salacious biographical anecdote or to provide retrospective textual minutiae. Instead, this conflict’s enduring controversy is itself the issue, one that reveals a major facet of Hemingway’s approach to character, and the larger importance of boxing to Hemingway and writers that would follow, primarily Mailer.

“Fifty Grand,” included in Hemingway’s second volume of short stories, ''Men Without Women'' (1927), was inspired by the anecdote with which the typescript draft begins:
{{cquote|Up at the gym over the Garden one time somebody says to Jack, “Say Jack how did you happen to beat Leonard anyway?” And Jack says, “Well, you see Benny’s an awful smart boxer. All the time he’s in there he’s thinking and all the time he’s thinking I was hitting him.”{{sfn|Beegel|1988|p=15}}}}

Lillian Ross reports Hemingway re-telling the story in 1950, about a quarter-century later: “‘One time I asked Jack, speaking of a fight with Benny Leonard,’“How did you handle Benny so easy, Jack?” “Ernie,” he said,“Benny{{pg|124|125}}is an awfully smart boxer. All the time he’s boxing, he’s thinking. All the time he was thinking, I was hitting him.” Hemingway gave a hoarse laugh, as though he had heard the story for the first time...He laughed again. ‘All the time he was thinking, I was hitting him’”.{{sfn|Ross|1961|p=64}}Ross implies surprise that this stale anecdote is so alive for Hemingway, standing in for the readers who may not have appreciated its importance. In his obnoxious essay “The Art of the Short Story,” written in 1959 and unpublished in his lifetime, Hemingway recollects of “Fifty Grand”: “This story originally started like this: “‘How did you handle Benny so easy, Jack?’ Soldier asked him. ‘Benny’s an awful smart boxer,’ Jack said. ‘All the time he’s in there, he’s thinking. All the time he’s thinking, I was hitting him'".{{sfn|Ross|1961|p=88}}These examples demonstrate that his acquiescence to Fitzgerald’s editorial judgment in 1927 haunted him for three-and-a-half decades, literally until his death.{{efn|Elsewhere, Hemingway remarks on the intelligence of fighters just as he evaluates their physical skill: in 1922, Hemingway describes Battling Siki, the challenger to Georges Carpentier, “siki tough slowthinker but mauling style may puzzle carp”.{{sfn|Reynolds|1989|p=73}}In his early journalism, Hemingway reports that, “Jack Dempsey has an imposing list of knockouts over bums and tramps, who were nothing but big slow-moving, slow-thinking set ups for him”.{{sfn|Reynolds|1998|p=192}}Indeed, the payoff of “Fifty Grand”—when Jack Brennan double crosses the double crossers—comes when Jack says, “It’s funny how fast you can think when it means that much money”.{{sfn|Hemingway|2003|p=249}}}}

Fitzgerald’s objection to Hemingway opening the short story with the boxing anecdote was like his misgivings about the original beginning of ''The Sun Also Rises'', what he perceived to be Hemingway’s “tendency to envelope or...to ''embalm'' in mere wordiness an anecdote or joke”.{{sfn|Fitzgerald|1995|p=142}}As Susan Beegel notes in her discussion of Hemingway’s impulse to include the anecdote, “Thinking takes time, and boxing is a sport in which speed is of the essence”.{{sfn|Beegel|1988|p=15}}Beegel’s point must be extended: life, at times, is a sport in which speed is of the essence, particularly if it is to be lived to its fullest. As we see in Mailer—think of ''The Naked and the Dead'' and certainly ''The Fight''—Hemingway placed all his characters in situations in which a quick, strategic, pragmatic response is more appropriate than contemplation and conceptualization, despite the characters’ natural inclinations to indulge their memories, imaginative speculation, and ruminations. Muhammad Ali, after all, is no mindless slugger; he is portrayed as a genius, a scientist, an artist, or a “brain fighter,” in the champ’s own words. More than a boxer, Mailer considers Ali “the first psychologist of the body”,{{sfn|Mailer|1971|p=23}}suggesting that his power is in his mind, as opposed to the brute force, the rage, and the animalistic approach of Foreman and Joe Frazier.

But why did Hemingway’s remorse over deferring to Fitzgerald’s suggestions for “Fifty Grand” fester for the rest of his life? After all, what does one paragraph matter? In “The Art of the Short Story,” Hemingway recounts his version of the circumstances behind the editorial change, and his regret over excising “that lovely revelation of the metaphysics of boxing”.{{sfn|Hemingway|1981a|p=89}}{{pg|125|126}}

Hemingway’s essay taunts Fitzgerald for not appreciating that Hemingway was “trying to explain to him how a truly great boxer like Jack Britton functioned”.{{sfn|Hemingway|1981a|p=89}}The manuscript of “Fifty Grand” betrays Hemingway’s bitterness: on it, he scrawled, “1st 3 pages mutilated by Scott Fitzgerald”.{{sfn|Burwell|1996|p=148}}How can one writer—particularly an established one, which by 1927 Hemingway was—blame a colleague for ruining his own text? This irrational grudge must have endured so persistently because Hemingway disobeyed his instincts as a writer, ironically behaving with the same lack of intuitive trust as the excerpt negatively portrays Benny Leonard. Hemingway obeyed Fitzgerald to great success with ''The Sun Also Rises'', did so again the following year with “Fifty Grand,” and, by 1929, responded to Fitzgerald’s criticisms of A Farewell to Arms with “Kiss my ass”.{{sfn|Reynolds|1976|p=78}}

Fitzgerald and others have misconstrued aspects of Hemingway’s objectives, which Mailer grasped intuitively and intellectually. The central thrust to Hemingway’s literary project was to dramatize the compromised functioning of thought as the modern consciousness is incorporated into the violent activities of the twentieth-century man of action. Hemingway’s portrayal of thinking during war takes this idea to the extreme. In Hemingway’s introduction to ''Men at War'', the anthology of war writing he edited, he writes, “Cowardice, as distinguished from panic, is almost always simply a lack of ability to suspend the functioning of the imagination. Learning to suspend your imagination and live completely in the very second of the present minute with no before and no after is the greatest gift a soldier can acquire. It, naturally, is the opposite of all those gifts a writer should have”.{{sfn|Hemingway|1942|p=xxiv}}Hemingway’s articulation of this conflict is a revelation: he is disclosing the tension that defines his work, the internal struggle between a man of action and a man of thought. Hemingway is distinguishing between the curse of Ishmael and the curse of Stubb in ''Moby-Dick'': Ishmael cannot turn the thinking off; for him, the sea and meditation are inextricable, even when he is on the night watch; Ahab’s eleventh commandment, on the other hand, is: do not think.

This dichotomy is always in play in the Hemingway text, and sometimes baldly explicit. Early in ''For Whom the Bell Tolls'', for example, Robert Jordan coaxes himself, “Turn off the thinking now...You’re a bridge-blower now. Not a thinker”,{{sfn|Hemingway|1940|p=17}}just as he later disingenuously asserts, “My mind is in suspension until we win the war”.{sfn|Hemingway|1940|p=245}}In a 1938 letter to Maxwell Perkins,{{pg|126|127}}Hemingway blames his depressed mood on the rigors of living in a Spanish war zone while simultaneously trying to write his stories of the Spanish Civil War: “If I sound bitter or gloomy throw it out. It’s that it takes one kind of training and frame of mind to do what I’ve been doing and another to write prose”.{{sfn|Bruccoli|1996|p=253}}Ultimately, Hemingway’s contribution to the psychological novel, and to literary Modernism’s conception of mind, is his depiction of how a human being thinks during episodes of great stress, including matadors, boxers, and soldiers, as well as those haunted by their memories of those experiences.

For the purposes of Mailer’s and Hemingway’s intertextuality, boxing and bullfighting are virtually synonymous. Each sport affords the spectator an opportunity to witness violence in a largely—but not completely—sanitized outlet. ''In The Sun Also Rises'', a novel that essentially introduced the bullfight to mainstream American consciousness, boxing and bullfighting are explicitly compared. In addition to the scapegoat Robert Cohn’s dubious (but eventually demonstrable) boxing background, Jake Barnes and his friend Bill Gorton attend the Ledoux-Kid Francis fight in Paris less than a week before their excursion to the Pamplona bullfights. Later, during the ''desencajonada'', or unloading of the bulls, however, Jake constructs the simile of bullfighting to boxing. He tells Brett Ashley, “Look how he knows how to use his horns...He’s got a left and right just like a boxer.” As Brett confirms, “I saw him shift from his left to his right horn”.{{sfn|Hemingway|1926|p=144}}The two activities are clearly appealing to Hemingway: one man, by himself, confronting his own limits as he encounters an attacker with his skill, knowledge, courage, and mind control. Both activities are ritual performances, yet both flirt with the possibility of death, danger, crippling injury, as well as murder.

In Mailer, similarly, the allure of boxing seems to be the formalized structure of a violent situation as an attenuated restatement of war experience. Mailer has suggested as much, saying that boxing presents “a way for a violent man to begin to comprehend that living in a classic situation—in other words, living within certain limitations rather than expressing oneself uncontrollably is a way to live that he didn’t have before”.{{sfn|Mailer|Mailer|2006|p=185}}Mailer’s articulation is anticipated by Jake Barnes himself, who explains the process to Brett so that the bullfight “became more something that was going on with a definite end, and less of a spectacle with unexplained horrors”;{{sfn|Mailer|Mailer|2006|p=171}}in other words, the difference between bullfighting/boxing and war. Just as Mailer differentiates between a championship boxing match between{{pg|127|128}}professionals and a street fight, Hemingway distinguishes between a properly sanctioned bullfight and an amateur bullfight: “The amateur bullfight is as unorganized as a riot and all results are uncertain, bulls or men may be killed; it is all chance and the temper of the populace. The formal bullfight is a commercial spectacle built on the planned and ordered death of the bull and that is its end".{{sfn|Hemingway|1932|p=372}}If the Marquis of Queensbury rules codify violence in boxing and allow it to transcend a back-alley brawl, Hemingway and Mailer are always conscious of this spectrum of violence and its relative level of chaos.

To Mailer and Hemingway, the men who prevail within this organized violence transcend athletic excellence and attain the status of aesthetic and artistic exemplars. Mailer begins ''The Fight'' by describing Ali as “our most beautiful man”,{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=3}}just as Jake says that bullfighting prodigy Pedro Romero is the “best-looking boy I have ever seen”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=167}}{{efn|After Ali’s victory, Mailer suggests that “Maybe he never appeared more handsome”{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=212}}}}Ali was thirty-two when the Rumble in the Jungle took place; Romero is no more than twenty. Mailer was fifty-one in Zaire; Hemingway turned twenty-six in the summer of 1925, when ''The Sun Also Rises'' was composed. If Ali and Romero serve as embodiments of male beauty, Hemingway also uses Romero as a counterbalance to the malaise that had infected the “lost” members of the post-war generation. When Robert Cohn laments, “my life is going so fast and I’m not really living it,” Jake responds, “Nobody ever lives their life all the way up except bull-fighters”.{{sfn|Hemingway|1932|p=18}}Fitzgerald texts like ''The Great Gatsby'' impute an additional intensity of experience to the wealthy; Hemingway ascribes this same quality to the courageous activity of bullfighters. Boxing is precisely the same. In the extended set-piece of the Ledoux-Francis fight that Hemingway sketched in the first draft of SAR, the characters remark on the fight and Ledoux in a way that previews their same awe of bullfighters. Bill Gorton tells Jake, “By God Ledoux is great”{{sfn|Hemingway|1972|p=233}}and asks, “Why don’t they have guys like that in my business (that is, writing)"?{{sfn|Hemingway|1972|p=233}} Bill later deflects a compliment by telling Jake, “I’m not such a good man as Ledoux”.{{sfn|Hemingway|1972|p=234}}In the same way, the bullfighter Maera, whom Hemingway kills off in Chapter XIV of ''In Our Time'', is declared by Nick Adams to be “the greatest man he’d ever known".{{sfn|Hemingway|1972|p=237}}Between Maera and James Joyce, Hemingway wrote Ezra Pound in 1924, there is “absolutely no comparison in art...Maera by a mile”.{{sfn|Hemingway|1981b|p=119}}Boxing and bullfighters emerge in these texts as ideals, both masculine and artistic.

The artistic component of the allure of these sports is Mailer’s explicit{{pg|128|129}}reason for attending the Rumble in the Jungle. When Mailer attributes Foreman’s reference to himself in the third person as equivalent to the “schizophrenia” that “great artists” possess,{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=56}}it echoes Hemingway’s Romero who “talked about his work as something altogether apart from himself”.{{sfn|Hemingway|1926|p=178}}For Mailer, though, the real artist is of course not Foreman, but Ali. “If ever a fighter,” Mailer writes, “had been able to demonstrate that boxing was a twentieth century art, it must be Ali”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=162}}Hemingway writes in ''Death in the Afternoon'' that the only trait separating bull-fighting from its inclusion as one of the major arts is its impermanence. In ''The Dangerous Summer'', Hemingway pointedly compares bullfighting to art: “A bullfighter can never see the work of art that he is making. He has no chance to correct it as a painter or writer has. He cannot hear it as a musician can All the time, he is making his work of art he knows that he must keep within the limits of his skill and the knowledge of the animal”.{{efn|Earlier in The Dangerous Summer, Luis Miguel Dominguín is also compared to an artist: “He had the complete and respectful concentration on his work which marks all great artists”{{sfn|Hemingway|1985|p=106}}}}{{sfn|Hemingway|1985|p=198}}Whether Hemingway is posturing in an intentionally provocative way or not—he surely enjoyed presenting himself as the only novelist who would prefer to be Maera killing a bull than Joyce writing ''Ulysses''—it is sufficient to note that in his career-long characterizations of bullfighters, he saw artistry and exemplary conduct when they excelled during their performances, and displayed high and noble aims in their approaches to their work. The crucial way that bullfighting is instructive to a reading of ''The Fight'' emerges when Mailer captures Ali’s demeanor in the ring and the strategy he uses to dismantle and ultimately defeat Foreman. This exalted strategy is two-fold: in the first round, Ali relies on the enormously dangerous right-hand leads to score against Foreman. The audacity of this means of attack is captured in italicized awe in ''The Fight''. It is not a right, but a ''right''. “Right-hand leads!” Mailer exults, “My God!”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=180}}He explains the technicality that leading with the right “is the most difficult and dangerous punch. Difficult to deliver and dangerous to oneself”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=179}}Hemingway makes the same observation in Romero’s code of performance, which is that he has “the old thing, the holding of his purity of line through the maximum of exposure”.{{sfn|Hemingway|1926|p=172}}Ali might have danced his way to victory against Foreman, but he did not. He deftly took on the punishment of a much stronger man, and attacked in a way that would leave himself vulnerable, all in the hopes of sapping Foreman’s power. These are the qualities which Hemingway and Mailer extol.

In rounds two through five, Ali uses the infamous rope-a-dope, which absorbs punishment as Foreman punches himself out, using the great{{pg|129|130}}champion’s strength against himself. The parallel between Ali’s strategy and the matador’s gambit is evident. Hemingway quotes the bullfighter El Gallo as shunning exercises that would increase his strength: “What do I want with strength, man? The bull weighs half a ton. Should I take exercises for strength to match him? Let the bull have the strength”.{{sfn|Hemingway|1932|p=21}}As this remark suggests, rather than the simple-minded machismo that Hemingway is too frequently reputed to value, the virtue of the effective matador comes in mastering the fear that will inevitably arise when a man encounters a beast that dwarfs him. The successful matador must control his thoughts and emotions and rely on his skill and knowledge to subdue his opponent. Ali faces something precisely equivalent in Zaire. During a training sequence in ''When We Were Kings'', Ali yells out, “He’s the bull. I’m the matador,” clearly deferring to Foreman the trait of power and aggressiveness, and assuming for himself the wit, the knowledge, and the artistry needed to prevail.

Mailer’s hagiography of Ali, then, becomes the more vital when we go beyond his admiration for the fighter to recognize why this admiration was so profound. Ali’s preparation for the Foreman fight (in the 234-page Vintage edition of ''The Fight'', the opening bell to the knockout is confined to pages 177–210; thus, in a book called ''The Fight'', only fourteen percent of the book chronicles the fight{{efn|Mailer’s pacing might have been a model for '' When We Were Kings'', an 89-minute film of which the fight itself spans 7:14, or about 8%.}}follows El Gallo’s logical yet somewhat counter-intuitive training procedure. Mailer reports that Ali confesses, “Foreman can hit harder than me”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=16}}During the uninspired sparring session that opens ''The Fight'', Ali’s strategy is presaged. Since he knows he cannot compete with Foreman’s strength, Ali contrives to use Foreman’s strength against him. Mailer chronicles this strategy meticulously, writing of Ali that “part of his art was to reduce the force of each blow he received to the head and then fraction it further”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=4}}Art? An art to getting hit in the face? If so, it is coupled by fractioning, a melding of the art of war and the sweet science of boxing. Ali consciously courts the same dichotomy that Mailer proposes. Skipping rope in his training quarters, he barks out, “I’m a brain fighter. I’m scientific. I’m artistic” (''When We Were Kings''). The marriage of art and science continues when Mailer describes “the second half of the art of getting hit was to learn the trajectories with which punches glanced off your glove and still hit you”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=5}}If the study of trajectories is associated with physics, Ali the artist is associated with dance and writing and theatre. This almost suicidal strategy—unappreciated, Mailer suggests, by lesser minds like sportswriters and fight critics—recalls the “calculus” with which {{pg|130|131}}Hemingway claimed he wrote ''Across the River and Into the Trees'', destined for dismissal by ignorant critics. Mailer is unapologetic about twinning art and boxing: he references Joyce’s ''A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man'', Rembrandt’s “The Night Watch,” ''Moby-Dick'', and even Hemingway’s ''A Farewell to Arms'', reaching to masterpieces of art and literature to evoke athletic performance.

Mailer extends this articulation to propose that Ali has a physiological understanding of receiving violence that is almost hair-trigger in its fineness. “It was a study,” he writes, “to watch Ali take punches”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=5}}Mailer sees Ali “teaching his nervous system to transmit shock faster than other men could”{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=4}}and possessing the ability to “assimilate punches faster than other fighters,” as Ali “could literally transmit the shock through more parts of his body or direct it to its best path”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=5}}After watching a Foreman training session, Mailer concluded, “it seemed certain that if Ali wished to win, he would have to take more punishment than ever before in his career”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=53}}As Mailer mentions during his commentary in ''When We Were Kings'', “It was as if he wanted to train his body to receive these messages of punishment.”

Just as Ali is positioned as an artist, a craftsman, and a scientist, Mailer describes him in the same way that Hemingway describes matadors. During the first round of the fight, after Ali has tagged Foreman with a scoring punch, Foreman “charged in rage”,{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=178}}a raging bull whose strength must be absorbed, reallocated, frustrated, and then eliminated by the more intelligent foe. After another exchange, in fact, “Foreman responded like a bull. He roared forward. A dangerous bull. His gloves were out like horns”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|pp=178–79}}Even the collection of declarative sentences, uncluttered by punctuation marks, recalls the way Hemingway captures Romero’s style in the ring. After Ali’s strategy of absorbing punches against the ropes emerges, Mailer writes that Foreman “had the pensive expression of a steer being dogged to the ground by a cowboy”,{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=184}}continuing the juxtaposition of Ali’s savvy with Foreman’s depiction as an animal, a beast of the same variety that charges mindlessly and dies inevitably in Pamplona. A brilliant depiction of Ali using his facial expression to deceive Foreman furthers the comparison: Ali, against the ropes, is
{{cquote|now banishing Foreman’s head with the turn of a matador sending away a bull after five fine passes were made, and once when he seemed to hesitate just a little too long, something stirred in{{pg|131|132}}George-like that across-the-arena knowledge of a bull when it is ready at last to gore the matador rather than the cloth, and like a member of a cuadrilla, somebody in Ali’s corner screamed, “Careful! Careful! Careful”!{{sfn|Mailer|1975|pp=196–97}}}}

Is this comparison self-indulgent? How many American readers would find a description of Ali’s defensive strategy in any way clarified by an esoteric gesture towards a bullfight? This link only makes sense in the context of Mailer’s incessant negotiation with the specter of Ernest Hemingway, shadowing him during his journey through Zaire.

Hemingway is introduced into the narrative when Mailer arrives in an unappealing Kinshasa with a stomach ailment, and immediately name drops Joseph Conrad and Ernest Hemingway: Conrad for his iconic depiction of the Congo, and Hemingway, about whom Mailer wonders, “Was it part of Hemingway’s genius that he could travel with healthy insides?”,{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=22}}ignoring the overwhelming catalogue of incidents and accidents that Hemingway suffered during his lifetime of travels. When Mailer hears the mighty roar of a lion, he begins a reverie: “To be eaten by a lion on the banks of the Congo— who could fail to notice that it was Hemingway’s own lion waiting down these years for the flesh of Ernest until an appropriate substitute had at last arrived?”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=92}}If the sound of the lion causes Mailer to fancy a lofty reenactment of Francis Macomber’s paranoia, or Mary’s quest for the lion in ''Under Kilimanjaro'', he does well to confess that the joke is on him: Zaire has a zoo. In Mailer’s description of a drunken balancing act on a balcony outside his hotel room, he speculates on the possibility of dying in this way. “What could be worse than accidental suicide?” he asks rhetorically. “A reverberation of Hemingway’s end shivered its echo”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=123}}These three examples indeed position Mailer as an “appropriate substitute” for Hemingway, both in his ambitious writing project in Africa, his encounters with the beasts of the jungle, and the courting of his own death, with Hemingway’s 1961 suicide still hovering over Mailer’s behavior, his thoughts, and his writing.

But Mailer is not through. When he puts forth Ali’s quandary once the fight is under his control, that he must choose between a victory by either a lethargic decision or the flourish of a spectacular knockout, he is compared to “a torero after a great faena who must still face the drear potential of a protracted inept and disappointing kill,” while Foreman remains “a bull”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=200}}In the sixth round, by which time the bout’s fate is foretold, Ali sizes{{pg|132|133}}up Foreman “the way a bullfighter lines up a bull before going in over the horns for the kill...a fair conclusion was that the bull still had an access of strength too great for the kill”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=202}}In a sequence where Mailer would make dozens of comparisons, frantically seeking metaphorical images to convey the magnitude of the scene, his clinging to bullfighting imagery is striking thematically and strategically, even if the image might only resonate with a specialist, with himself, or with a fellow aficionado of ''Death in the Afternoon''.{{efn|Cf. Advertisements For Myself, when Mailer writes, “I used to compare the bed to the bullfight, sometimes seeing myself as the matador and sometimes as the bull”}}{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=495}}When Mailer compares Foreman’s clumsiness to “a street fighter at the end of a long rumble”,{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=204}}the reader does not require any special base of knowledge to access the comparison.

The dynamic set up between Foreman and Ali leads to the rope-a-dope strategy that is ultimately Foreman’s undoing and proof of Ali’s ingenuity. Parodying his own proclivity towards “Germanic formulation,” Mailer teases that he might characterize this approach as “the modal transposition from Active to Passive”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=221}}The serious point about Ali’s strategy, though, is that he did not overpower Foreman (because he could not), and did not even use superior skill. He outsmarted him, outclassed him. Ali kills ''recibiendo''. His technique is the boxing equivalent of the bullfighter’s choice to kill by receiving the bull, to allow the bull’s aggression to work against itself by charging into the sword, rather than attacking the animal. Just as Ali’s technique is legendary, both Mailer and Hemingway have extolled the ''recibiendo'' style as, on several levels, the most sublime way to kill a bull.

Not many Americans understood the importance of ''recibiendo'' before 1926, when Hemingway turned the technique into an objective correlative for courage, the grace-under-pressure ideal that has become threadbare in recent discussions of Hemingway’s texts. In the final bullfight before the end of the festival of San Fermin, Romero’s performance is captured:

{{cquote|The bull watched him. Romero spoke to the bull and tapped one of his feet. The bull charged and Romero waited for the charge, the muleta held low, sighting along the blade, his feet firm. Then without taking a step forward, he became one with the bull...{{sfn|Hemingway|1926|p=224}}}}

In ''Death in the Afternoon'', Hemingway defines ''Recibir'', “to kill the bull from in front awaiting his charge without moving the feet once the charge has started”.{{sfn|Hemingway|1932|p=442}}This definition is nearly a precise restatement of Romero’s{{pg|133|134}}triumph in ''The Sun Also Rises'', his feet firm, waiting for the charge. Hemingway refers to ''recibiendo'' as the most “difficult, dangerous and emotional way to kill bulls”.{{sfn|Hemingway|1985|p=442}}In ''The Dangerous Summer'', Hemingway refers to the technique as “the oldest and the most dangerous and the most beautiful” manner of killing.{{sfn|Hemingway|1985|p=202}}By employing the ''recibiendo'' technique, Antonio Ordóñez in ''The Dangerous Summer'' and Pedro Romero in ''The Sun Also Rises'' impress their observers and impress the writers recording their accomplishments.

Mailer shares Hemingway’s fascination with a matador killing ''recibiendo''. His miniaturized version of ''Death in the Afternoon'', published in 1967, called simply ''The Bullfight'',{{efn|Mailer’s introductory remarks in that text are titled: ''Footnote to Death in the Afternoon.''}} describes this classic style of killing with a sense of awe, and is worth quoting at length:

{{cquote|The bull charged prematurely, and Amado, determined to get the kill, did not skip away but held ground, received the charge, stood there with the sword, turned the bull’s head with the muleta, and the bull impaled himself on the point of the torero’s blade which went right into the proper space between the shoulders, and the bull ran right up on it into his death, took several steps to the side, gave a toss of his head at heaven, and fell. Amado had killed ''recibiendo''. He had killed standing still, receiving the bull while the bull charged. No one had seen that in years.{{sfn|Mailer|1967|p=n.pg}}}}

By leaning back against the ropes and inciting Foreman’s charge, Ali displays the same bravado, courage, and panache in dominating his opponent as these matadors who Mailer and Hemingway laud with such emotion. {{efn|One of the ways Mailer praises Ali in ''When We Were Kings'' is by saying, “What a classic performance,” suggesting the classic style of defeating an opponent that parallels a heroic matador.}}

Mailer and Hemingway mimic the matadors they lionize in two significant ways. For Hemingway, the ''corto y derecho'' style of bullfighting that he describes in “The Undefeated,” another story from ''Men Without Women'', is so closely associated with his own “short and straight” writing style that the reference is almost transparently self-referential and was so already by its publication in 1927. In the same way that Jake’s attention to Romero is revelatory of what he values in a man, Hemingway’s own characterization of Romero is crucial for what Hemingway values in art. When Romero’s performance is summarized as “not brilliant bull-fighting...only perfect bull-fighting”,{{sfn|Hemingway|1926|p=221}}and that Romero’s style contained “no tricks and no{{pg|134|135}}mystifications”,{{sfn|Hemingway|1926|p=223}}Hemingway is separating his own novel from modern masterpieces of the previous few years like ''Ulysses'' or ''The Great Gatsby'' or ''Mrs. Dalloway'' and even anticipating the experimentation of ''The Sound and the Fury'', which would come a few years later.

Just as Hemingway mimics Romero’s clarity, classicism, and linearity in prose,{{efn|The first draft of ''The Sun Also Rises'' originally began in medias res, beginning in Spain, then flashing back to Paris. The change to linearity transcends a narratological decision to achieve thematic importance. For the essential study of ''The Sun Also Rises''’s composition and its implications, see Svoboda.}}Mailer links the passes of his narrative, endeavoring to reach a narrative climax just as the fight reaches its dramatic climax in the eighth round. Unlike Hemingway, who did not cling to figurative language in a conspicuous quest to have the reader understand perfectly a situation which he might not have ever seen before, Mailer’s sequence of comparisons rises to the task as the most memorable writerly performance in his account of the “Rumble in the Jungle.”

A few years earlier, Mailer warned his readers that “Sooner or later, fight metaphors, like fight managers, go sentimental. They go military” (''King of the Hill'').{{sfn|Mailer|1971|p=66}}True to his word, the first similes of the eighth round follow such a trope: Ali chooses his shots “as if he had a reserve of good punches... like a soldier in a siege who counts his bullets”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=206}}Some of the exchanges at the beginning of round eight recall the “great bombardment” of the fifth,{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=207}}which Mailer calls one of the greatest in the history of boxing, with a “shelling reminiscent of artillery battles in World War I”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=195}}While Mailer may caution us of the glibness of comparing boxing to warfare, he gleefully perpetuates the absurdity; he well knows that three minutes of getting punched by a man—even by George Foreman—is nothing like a world war, but he willingly adopts the parlance and conventions of boxing writing.

Towards the end of the seventh round, Mailer uses scenery-chewing similes to control the pace of the narrative, the better to convey Foreman’s mighty fatigue.

{{cquote|Foreman was fighting as slowly as a worn-out fighter in the Golden Gloves, slow as a man walking up a hill of pillows, slow as he would have looked if their first round had been rerun in slow motion, that was no slower than Foreman was fighting now...he was reminiscent...of a linebacker coiling around a runner with his hands and arms in the slow-motion replay...{{sfn|Mailer|1975|pp=204–05}}}}{{pg|135|136}}

And no slower than Mailer is narrating now. In this sequence of three similes, the first and third compare a slow fighter to a slow fighter. To say that Foreman, a tired professional fighter, looks as tired as a tired amateur fighter, is patently ridiculous. Furthermore, to state that he is as slow as a slow-motion version of himself, or a slow-motion version of someone else is not a helpful comparison; it is not vivid and inventive writing. The second simile is brilliant, and would be the only one needed, if the first and third did not aid in establishing the pacing of the moment in the fight.

Directly before the eighth round, Ali’s eyes, by contrast to Foreman’s torpor, are “quick as the eyes, indeed, of a squirrel”,{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=206}}demonstrating the energy, vivacity and speed that has been sapped from Foreman. During the round, Mailer’s similes are telling; they evoke the spectator’s enthusiasm, the witness’s thrill of the final sequence of the fight. Foreman’s legs become “like a horse high-stepping along a road full of rocks”;{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=206}}he bounces off the ropes and pursues Ali “like a man chasing a cat”;{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=206}}he waves his gloves at Ali “like an infant six feet tall waving its uncoordinated battle arm”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=207}}When Ali delivers the ''coup de grâce'', “Foreman’s arms flew out to the side like a man with a parachute jumping out of a plane”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=208}}How does he fall? “He went over like a six-foot, sixty-year-old butler who has just heard tragic news”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=208}}Foreman transforms from a six-foot infant to a six-foot sexagenarian manservant in two minutes. And, finally, Mailer compares a knocked-out fighter to “a drunk hoping to get out of bed to go to work”,{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=208}}an unfortunately predictable association.

All of these similes are Mailer’s own flourishes, the passes that he links together, striving to express his enthusiasm and awe, seeking to get the reader more intimately involved with the experience, culminating with one final comparison, not of Ali or of Foreman, but of his own reaction: our narrator was “like a dim parent who realizes suddenly his child is indeed and indubitably married”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=209}}The figurative rope-a-dope that Mailer employs is unlike Hemingway’s description of the bullfight, but identical in that the scene he is attempting to capture must be described according to the terms of the action being rendered.

Where does ''The Fight'' ultimately belong in Norman Mailer’s life’s work? Is it a self-aggrandizing study of a sport, the nuances of which only a select few appreciate or care about? Is ''The Fight'' Mailer’s ''Death in the Afternoon''— the disquisition on bullfighting Hemingway wrote as a young man—or more precisely his ''The Dangerous Summer'', Hemingway’s revisitation of the{{pg|136|137}}bullfights at the end of his career? Is it Mailer’s ''A Moveable Feast'', a version of his memoirs? Does it equate to the two books Hemingway devoted to African safaris? A combination of all of these? ''The Fight'', ultimately, illuminates the reader of the way Mailer views violence, writing, and Hemingway himself, which positions it as a supplementary text to virtually every other major Mailer effort. With Hemingway and bullfighting as constant presences in ''The Fight'', these intertextual questions yield results that allow Mailer’s project to transcend journalism, or sports writing, to become a key text to determining his restatement of Hemingway’s classic twentieth-century themes.

===Notes===
{{notelist}}

===Citations===
{{Reflist}}

===Works Cited===
{{refbegin|indent=1|20em}}
*{{Cite book| author-last=Beegel | author-first=Susan F. |title=Hemingway’s Craft of Omission: Four Manuscript Examples |location=Ann Arbor, MI |publisher=UMI Research Press |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |date=1988 |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book| author-last= Bruccoli |author-first= Matthew J. |date= 1996 |title=The Only Thing That Counts: Ernest Hemingway-Maxwell Perkins Correspondence |location=New York |publisher=Scribner |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book |author-last=Burwell |author-first=Rose Marie |title=Hemingway: The Postwar Years and the Posthumous Novels |location=Cambridge, UK |publisher=Cambridge UP |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |date=1996 |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book |last=Fitzgerald |first=F. Scott |title=A Life in Letters |editor-first=Matthew J. |editor-last=Bruccoli |location=New York |publisher=Touchstone |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |date=1995 |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite AV media |last=Gast |first=Leon |title=When We Were Kings |date=1996 |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Film |url=https://youtu.be/svhnasgxpqs?si=SF1viC9Lbcs401BG |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite magazine |last=Hemingway |first=Ernest |title=The Art of the Short Story |magazine=Paris Review |date=Spring 1981a|pages=85-102 |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book |last=Hemingway |first=Ernest |authormask=1 |title=The Complete Short Stories of Ernest Hemingway: The Finca Vigía Edition |location=New York |publisher=Scribner’s |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |date=2003 |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book|last=Hemingway |first=Ernest |authormask=1 |title=The Dangerous Summer |date=1985 |location=New York |publisher=Scribner’s |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book|last=Hemingway |first=Ernest |authormask=1 |title=Death in the Afternoon |location=New York |publisher=Scribner’s |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |date=1932 |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book|last=Hemingway |first=Ernest |authormask=1 |title=Ernest Hemingway: Selected Letters, 1917–1961 |location=New York |publisher=Scribner's |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |editor-first=Carlos |editor-last=Baker |date=1981b |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book|last=Hemingway |first=Ernest |authormask=1 |title=For Whom the Bell Tolls |date=1940 |location=New York |publisher=Scribner’s |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book|editor-last=Hemingway |editor-first=Ernest |editormask=1 |title=Men at War: The Best War Stories of All Time |date=1942 |location=New York |publisher=Crown Publishers |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book|last=Hemingway |first=Ernest |authormask=1 |title=The Nick Adams Stories |date=1972 |location=New York |publisher=Scribner's |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book|last=Hemingway |first=Ernest |authormask=1 |title=The Sun Also Rises |date=1926 |location=New York |publisher=Scribner’s |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book|last=Hemingway |first=Ernest |authormask=1 |title=The Sun Also Rises: A Facsimile Edition Volume One |editor-last=Bruccoli |editor-first=Matthew J. |date=1990 |location=Detroit |publisher=Omnigraphics |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite magazine|last=Klosterman |first=Chuck |title=Nothing to Worry About |magazine=Esquire |pages=56-57|isbn= |author-link= |date=Feb 2008 |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book|last=Mailer |first=Norman |title=Advertisements for Myself |location=New York |publisher=Putnam |date=1959 |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book|last=Mailer |first=Norman |authormask=1 |title=The Bullfight: A Photographic Narrative |location=New York |publisher=Mcmillan |date=1967 |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book|last=Mailer |first=Norman |authormask=1 |title=The Fight |location=Boston |publisher=Little, Brown |date=1975 |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book|last=Mailer |first=Norman |authormask=1 |title=King of the Hill: Norman Mailer on the fight of the Century |location=New York |publisher=New American Library |date=1971 |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book|last1=Mailer |first1=Norman |author-mask=1 |first2=John Buffalo |last2=Mailer |title=The Big Empty: Dialogues on Politics, Sex, God, Boxing, Morality, Myth, Poker, and Bad Conscience in America |location=New York |publisher=Nation Books |date=2006 |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book|last=Reynolds |first=Michael S. |title=Hemingway’s First War: The Making of A Farewell to Arms |location=Princeton, NJ |publisher=Princeton UP |date=1976 |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book|last=Reynolds |first=Michael S. |authormask=1 |title=Hemingway: The Paris Years |location=Cambridge, MA |publisher=Basil Blackwell |date=1989 |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book|last=Reynolds |first=Michael S. |authormask=1 |title=The Young Hemingway |location=New York |publisher=Norton |date=1998 |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book|last=Ross |first=Lillian |title=Portrait of Hemingway |location=New York |publisher=Simon & Schuster |date=1961 |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book |last=Svoboda |first=Frederic Joseph |title=Ernest Hemingway & The Sun Also Rises: The crafting of a Style |location=Lawrence, KS |publisher=UP of Kansas |date=1983 |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
{{Refend}}

The Mailer Review/Volume 4, 2010/Norman Mailer's The Fight: Hemingway, Bullfighting, and the Lovely Metaphysics of Boxing

2025-04-13T18:16:06Z

JHadaway: Added missing date to citation 8

{{DISPLAYTITLE:{{BASEPAGENAME}}/{{SUBPAGENAME}}}}
{{Working}}
{{MR04}}
{{byline|last=Cirino|first=Mark|abstract=Although Norman Mailer’s ''[[The Fight]]'' is ostensibly reportage about the Muhammad Ali-George Foreman championship heavyweight boxing match, we learn more about Mailer and his aesthetic and artistic values than we do about either fighter. One of Mailer’s methods for capturing his Zaire experience is to employ Ernest Hemingway as a ghostly father figure, a ''doppelgänger'', both an inspiration and a nagging reminder of his own inadequacies. An intertextual analysis of these two writers demonstrates the way Mailer uses boxing to offer his inflection of Hemingway’s twentieth-century themes. |url=http://prmlr.us/mr04cir }}

{{dc|dc=A|lthough Norman Mailer’s ''The Fight'' is ostensibly reportage}} about the Muhammad Ali-George Foreman championship heavyweight boxing match in Zaire on 30 October 1974, we learn more about Mailer and his aesthetic and artistic values than we do about either fighter. We also learn far more than Mailer’s thoughts on boxing; we glean a broader metaphysical and philosophic notion of action and danger, and the writer’s own role in recording it in prose. One of Mailer’s methods for capturing his Zaire experience is to employ Ernest Hemingway as a ghostly father figure, a ''doppelgänger'', both an inspiration and a nagging reminder of his own inadequacies. Hemingway, whose suicide was thirteen years before the fight, is still active in Mailer’s text, who was enjoying a consciously Hemingwayesque project in Africa.

In Chuck Klosterman’s recent assessment of Norman Mailer as a boxing writer, he writes that “there is nothing metaphysical about getting punched in the face".{{sfn|Klosterman|2008|p=56}}This assertion suggests that Klosterman either has never been punched in the face or was concentrating on the wrong sensation when he was. Mailer and Hemingway represent the boxing ring and the bullfighting arena as possessing such metaphysical possibilities that they invite us to appreciate each of their values in human behavior and the qualities they demand their artists to possess. In ''The Fight'', Mailer’s conspicuous comparisons of boxing to bullfighting, Hemingway, and to art further invite{{pg|123|124}}comparison to Hemingway’s earlier texts. In all instances, we see Mailer and Hemingway with their incisive, intellectual evocations of men of thought (that is, Ali, and any quintessential Hemingway Hero, such as Robert Jordan in ''For Whom the Bell Tolls'' or his short story alter ego Nick Adams) in moments of peak activity. So, if Klosterman limits the transcendence of boxing simply to “primordial reality” and the “base qualities of being alive”,{{sfn|Klosterman|2008|p=56}}he sharply diverges from Mailer and Hemingway, who find in the maelstrom of a boxing match or the murderous possibilities of a bullring, life’s truest, most elevated and aesthetic moments. “Every wound,” Mailer observes in ''The Fight'', “has its own revelation”,{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=214}}both promising the importance of chronicling the defeated and the damaged and signaling his own fascination and debt to the warriors and athletes and even artists of the Hemingway canon. While Mailer may be overly epigrammatic, this aphorism accurately synopsizes the “wound theory” of criticism that defined (and later encumbered) Hemingway Studies for decades.

To Hemingway, boxing might have been important for more complex reasons than many readers ever understood. A celebrated example of this tension offers a useful illustration. The sordid history behind F. Scott Fitzgerald’s revisions to Hemingway’s short story “Fifty Grand” is relevant not as a salacious biographical anecdote or to provide retrospective textual minutiae. Instead, this conflict’s enduring controversy is itself the issue, one that reveals a major facet of Hemingway’s approach to character, and the larger importance of boxing to Hemingway and writers that would follow, primarily Mailer.

“Fifty Grand,” included in Hemingway’s second volume of short stories, ''Men Without Women'' (1927), was inspired by the anecdote with which the typescript draft begins:
{{cquote|Up at the gym over the Garden one time somebody says to Jack, “Say Jack how did you happen to beat Leonard anyway?” And Jack says, “Well, you see Benny’s an awful smart boxer. All the time he’s in there he’s thinking and all the time he’s thinking I was hitting him.”{{sfn|Beegel|1988|p=15}}}}

Lillian Ross reports Hemingway re-telling the story in 1950, about a quarter-century later: “‘One time I asked Jack, speaking of a fight with Benny Leonard,’“How did you handle Benny so easy, Jack?” “Ernie,” he said,“Benny{{pg|124|125}}is an awfully smart boxer. All the time he’s boxing, he’s thinking. All the time he was thinking, I was hitting him.” Hemingway gave a hoarse laugh, as though he had heard the story for the first time...He laughed again. ‘All the time he was thinking, I was hitting him’”.{{sfn|Ross|1961|p=64}}Ross implies surprise that this stale anecdote is so alive for Hemingway, standing in for the readers who may not have appreciated its importance. In his obnoxious essay “The Art of the Short Story,” written in 1959 and unpublished in his lifetime, Hemingway recollects of “Fifty Grand”: “This story originally started like this: “‘How did you handle Benny so easy, Jack?’ Soldier asked him. ‘Benny’s an awful smart boxer,’ Jack said. ‘All the time he’s in there, he’s thinking. All the time he’s thinking, I was hitting him'".{{sfn|Ross|1961|p=88}}These examples demonstrate that his acquiescence to Fitzgerald’s editorial judgment in 1927 haunted him for three-and-a-half decades, literally until his death.{{efn|Elsewhere, Hemingway remarks on the intelligence of fighters just as he evaluates their physical skill: in 1922, Hemingway describes Battling Siki, the challenger to Georges Carpentier, “siki tough slowthinker but mauling style may puzzle carp”.{{sfn|Reynolds|1989|p=73}}In his early journalism, Hemingway reports that, “Jack Dempsey has an imposing list of knockouts over bums and tramps, who were nothing but big slow-moving, slow-thinking set ups for him”.{{sfn|Reynolds|1998|p=192}}Indeed, the payoff of “Fifty Grand”—when Jack Brennan double crosses the double crossers—comes when Jack says, “It’s funny how fast you can think when it means that much money”.{{sfn|Hemingway|2003|p=249}}}}

Fitzgerald’s objection to Hemingway opening the short story with the boxing anecdote was like his misgivings about the original beginning of ''The Sun Also Rises'', what he perceived to be Hemingway’s “tendency to envelope or...to ''embalm'' in mere wordiness an anecdote or joke”.{{sfn|Fitzgerald|p=142|1995}}As Susan Beegel notes in her discussion of Hemingway’s impulse to include the anecdote, “Thinking takes time, and boxing is a sport in which speed is of the essence”.{{sfn|Beegel|1988|p=15}}Beegel’s point must be extended: life, at times, is a sport in which speed is of the essence, particularly if it is to be lived to its fullest. As we see in Mailer—think of ''The Naked and the Dead'' and certainly ''The Fight''—Hemingway placed all his characters in situations in which a quick, strategic, pragmatic response is more appropriate than contemplation and conceptualization, despite the characters’ natural inclinations to indulge their memories, imaginative speculation, and ruminations. Muhammad Ali, after all, is no mindless slugger; he is portrayed as a genius, a scientist, an artist, or a “brain fighter,” in the champ’s own words. More than a boxer, Mailer considers Ali “the first psychologist of the body”,{{sfn|Mailer|1971|p=23}}suggesting that his power is in his mind, as opposed to the brute force, the rage, and the animalistic approach of Foreman and Joe Frazier.

But why did Hemingway’s remorse over deferring to Fitzgerald’s suggestions for “Fifty Grand” fester for the rest of his life? After all, what does one paragraph matter? In “The Art of the Short Story,” Hemingway recounts his version of the circumstances behind the editorial change, and his regret over excising “that lovely revelation of the metaphysics of boxing”.{{sfn|Hemingway|1981a|p=89}}{{pg|125|126}}

Hemingway’s essay taunts Fitzgerald for not appreciating that Hemingway was “trying to explain to him how a truly great boxer like Jack Britton functioned”.{{sfn|Hemingway|1981a|p=89}}The manuscript of “Fifty Grand” betrays Hemingway’s bitterness: on it, he scrawled, “1st 3 pages mutilated by Scott Fitzgerald”.{{sfn|Burwell|1996|p=148}}How can one writer—particularly an established one, which by 1927 Hemingway was—blame a colleague for ruining his own text? This irrational grudge must have endured so persistently because Hemingway disobeyed his instincts as a writer, ironically behaving with the same lack of intuitive trust as the excerpt negatively portrays Benny Leonard. Hemingway obeyed Fitzgerald to great success with ''The Sun Also Rises'', did so again the following year with “Fifty Grand,” and, by 1929, responded to Fitzgerald’s criticisms of A Farewell to Arms with “Kiss my ass”.{{sfn|Reynolds|1976|p=78}}

Fitzgerald and others have misconstrued aspects of Hemingway’s objectives, which Mailer grasped intuitively and intellectually. The central thrust to Hemingway’s literary project was to dramatize the compromised functioning of thought as the modern consciousness is incorporated into the violent activities of the twentieth-century man of action. Hemingway’s portrayal of thinking during war takes this idea to the extreme. In Hemingway’s introduction to ''Men at War'', the anthology of war writing he edited, he writes, “Cowardice, as distinguished from panic, is almost always simply a lack of ability to suspend the functioning of the imagination. Learning to suspend your imagination and live completely in the very second of the present minute with no before and no after is the greatest gift a soldier can acquire. It, naturally, is the opposite of all those gifts a writer should have”.{{sfn|Hemingway|1942|p=xxiv}}Hemingway’s articulation of this conflict is a revelation: he is disclosing the tension that defines his work, the internal struggle between a man of action and a man of thought. Hemingway is distinguishing between the curse of Ishmael and the curse of Stubb in ''Moby-Dick'': Ishmael cannot turn the thinking off; for him, the sea and meditation are inextricable, even when he is on the night watch; Ahab’s eleventh commandment, on the other hand, is: do not think.

This dichotomy is always in play in the Hemingway text, and sometimes baldly explicit. Early in ''For Whom the Bell Tolls'', for example, Robert Jordan coaxes himself, “Turn off the thinking now...You’re a bridge-blower now. Not a thinker”,{{sfn|Hemingway|1940|p=17}}just as he later disingenuously asserts, “My mind is in suspension until we win the war”.{sfn|Hemingway|1940|p=245}}In a 1938 letter to Maxwell Perkins,{{pg|126|127}}Hemingway blames his depressed mood on the rigors of living in a Spanish war zone while simultaneously trying to write his stories of the Spanish Civil War: “If I sound bitter or gloomy throw it out. It’s that it takes one kind of training and frame of mind to do what I’ve been doing and another to write prose”.{{sfn|Bruccoli|1996|p=253}}Ultimately, Hemingway’s contribution to the psychological novel, and to literary Modernism’s conception of mind, is his depiction of how a human being thinks during episodes of great stress, including matadors, boxers, and soldiers, as well as those haunted by their memories of those experiences.

For the purposes of Mailer’s and Hemingway’s intertextuality, boxing and bullfighting are virtually synonymous. Each sport affords the spectator an opportunity to witness violence in a largely—but not completely—sanitized outlet. ''In The Sun Also Rises'', a novel that essentially introduced the bullfight to mainstream American consciousness, boxing and bullfighting are explicitly compared. In addition to the scapegoat Robert Cohn’s dubious (but eventually demonstrable) boxing background, Jake Barnes and his friend Bill Gorton attend the Ledoux-Kid Francis fight in Paris less than a week before their excursion to the Pamplona bullfights. Later, during the ''desencajonada'', or unloading of the bulls, however, Jake constructs the simile of bullfighting to boxing. He tells Brett Ashley, “Look how he knows how to use his horns...He’s got a left and right just like a boxer.” As Brett confirms, “I saw him shift from his left to his right horn”.{{sfn|Hemingway|1926|p=144}}The two activities are clearly appealing to Hemingway: one man, by himself, confronting his own limits as he encounters an attacker with his skill, knowledge, courage, and mind control. Both activities are ritual performances, yet both flirt with the possibility of death, danger, crippling injury, as well as murder.

In Mailer, similarly, the allure of boxing seems to be the formalized structure of a violent situation as an attenuated restatement of war experience. Mailer has suggested as much, saying that boxing presents “a way for a violent man to begin to comprehend that living in a classic situation—in other words, living within certain limitations rather than expressing oneself uncontrollably is a way to live that he didn’t have before”.{{sfn|Mailer|Mailer|2006|p=185}}Mailer’s articulation is anticipated by Jake Barnes himself, who explains the process to Brett so that the bullfight “became more something that was going on with a definite end, and less of a spectacle with unexplained horrors”;{{sfn|Mailer|Mailer|2006|p=171}}in other words, the difference between bullfighting/boxing and war. Just as Mailer differentiates between a championship boxing match between{{pg|127|128}}professionals and a street fight, Hemingway distinguishes between a properly sanctioned bullfight and an amateur bullfight: “The amateur bullfight is as unorganized as a riot and all results are uncertain, bulls or men may be killed; it is all chance and the temper of the populace. The formal bullfight is a commercial spectacle built on the planned and ordered death of the bull and that is its end".{{sfn|Hemingway|1932|p=372}}If the Marquis of Queensbury rules codify violence in boxing and allow it to transcend a back-alley brawl, Hemingway and Mailer are always conscious of this spectrum of violence and its relative level of chaos.

To Mailer and Hemingway, the men who prevail within this organized violence transcend athletic excellence and attain the status of aesthetic and artistic exemplars. Mailer begins ''The Fight'' by describing Ali as “our most beautiful man”,{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=3}}just as Jake says that bullfighting prodigy Pedro Romero is the “best-looking boy I have ever seen”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=167}}{{efn|After Ali’s victory, Mailer suggests that “Maybe he never appeared more handsome”{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=212}}}}Ali was thirty-two when the Rumble in the Jungle took place; Romero is no more than twenty. Mailer was fifty-one in Zaire; Hemingway turned twenty-six in the summer of 1925, when ''The Sun Also Rises'' was composed. If Ali and Romero serve as embodiments of male beauty, Hemingway also uses Romero as a counterbalance to the malaise that had infected the “lost” members of the post-war generation. When Robert Cohn laments, “my life is going so fast and I’m not really living it,” Jake responds, “Nobody ever lives their life all the way up except bull-fighters”.{{sfn|Hemingway|1932|p=18}}Fitzgerald texts like ''The Great Gatsby'' impute an additional intensity of experience to the wealthy; Hemingway ascribes this same quality to the courageous activity of bullfighters. Boxing is precisely the same. In the extended set-piece of the Ledoux-Francis fight that Hemingway sketched in the first draft of SAR, the characters remark on the fight and Ledoux in a way that previews their same awe of bullfighters. Bill Gorton tells Jake, “By God Ledoux is great”{{sfn|Hemingway|1972|p=233}}and asks, “Why don’t they have guys like that in my business (that is, writing)"?{{sfn|Hemingway|1972|p=233}} Bill later deflects a compliment by telling Jake, “I’m not such a good man as Ledoux”.{{sfn|Hemingway|1972|p=234}}In the same way, the bullfighter Maera, whom Hemingway kills off in Chapter XIV of ''In Our Time'', is declared by Nick Adams to be “the greatest man he’d ever known".{{sfn|Hemingway|1972|p=237}}Between Maera and James Joyce, Hemingway wrote Ezra Pound in 1924, there is “absolutely no comparison in art...Maera by a mile”.{{sfn|Hemingway|1981b|p=119}}Boxing and bullfighters emerge in these texts as ideals, both masculine and artistic.

The artistic component of the allure of these sports is Mailer’s explicit{{pg|128|129}}reason for attending the Rumble in the Jungle. When Mailer attributes Foreman’s reference to himself in the third person as equivalent to the “schizophrenia” that “great artists” possess,{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=56}}it echoes Hemingway’s Romero who “talked about his work as something altogether apart from himself”.{{sfn|Hemingway|1926|p=178}}For Mailer, though, the real artist is of course not Foreman, but Ali. “If ever a fighter,” Mailer writes, “had been able to demonstrate that boxing was a twentieth century art, it must be Ali”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=162}}Hemingway writes in ''Death in the Afternoon'' that the only trait separating bull-fighting from its inclusion as one of the major arts is its impermanence. In ''The Dangerous Summer'', Hemingway pointedly compares bullfighting to art: “A bullfighter can never see the work of art that he is making. He has no chance to correct it as a painter or writer has. He cannot hear it as a musician can All the time, he is making his work of art he knows that he must keep within the limits of his skill and the knowledge of the animal”.{{efn|Earlier in The Dangerous Summer, Luis Miguel Dominguín is also compared to an artist: “He had the complete and respectful concentration on his work which marks all great artists”{{sfn|Hemingway|1985|p=106}}}}{{sfn|Hemingway|1985|p=198}}Whether Hemingway is posturing in an intentionally provocative way or not—he surely enjoyed presenting himself as the only novelist who would prefer to be Maera killing a bull than Joyce writing ''Ulysses''—it is sufficient to note that in his career-long characterizations of bullfighters, he saw artistry and exemplary conduct when they excelled during their performances, and displayed high and noble aims in their approaches to their work. The crucial way that bullfighting is instructive to a reading of ''The Fight'' emerges when Mailer captures Ali’s demeanor in the ring and the strategy he uses to dismantle and ultimately defeat Foreman. This exalted strategy is two-fold: in the first round, Ali relies on the enormously dangerous right-hand leads to score against Foreman. The audacity of this means of attack is captured in italicized awe in ''The Fight''. It is not a right, but a ''right''. “Right-hand leads!” Mailer exults, “My God!”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=180}}He explains the technicality that leading with the right “is the most difficult and dangerous punch. Difficult to deliver and dangerous to oneself”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=179}}Hemingway makes the same observation in Romero’s code of performance, which is that he has “the old thing, the holding of his purity of line through the maximum of exposure”.{{sfn|Hemingway|1926|p=172}}Ali might have danced his way to victory against Foreman, but he did not. He deftly took on the punishment of a much stronger man, and attacked in a way that would leave himself vulnerable, all in the hopes of sapping Foreman’s power. These are the qualities which Hemingway and Mailer extol.

In rounds two through five, Ali uses the infamous rope-a-dope, which absorbs punishment as Foreman punches himself out, using the great{{pg|129|130}}champion’s strength against himself. The parallel between Ali’s strategy and the matador’s gambit is evident. Hemingway quotes the bullfighter El Gallo as shunning exercises that would increase his strength: “What do I want with strength, man? The bull weighs half a ton. Should I take exercises for strength to match him? Let the bull have the strength”.{{sfn|Hemingway|1932|p=21}}As this remark suggests, rather than the simple-minded machismo that Hemingway is too frequently reputed to value, the virtue of the effective matador comes in mastering the fear that will inevitably arise when a man encounters a beast that dwarfs him. The successful matador must control his thoughts and emotions and rely on his skill and knowledge to subdue his opponent. Ali faces something precisely equivalent in Zaire. During a training sequence in ''When We Were Kings'', Ali yells out, “He’s the bull. I’m the matador,” clearly deferring to Foreman the trait of power and aggressiveness, and assuming for himself the wit, the knowledge, and the artistry needed to prevail.

Mailer’s hagiography of Ali, then, becomes the more vital when we go beyond his admiration for the fighter to recognize why this admiration was so profound. Ali’s preparation for the Foreman fight (in the 234-page Vintage edition of ''The Fight'', the opening bell to the knockout is confined to pages 177–210; thus, in a book called ''The Fight'', only fourteen percent of the book chronicles the fight{{efn|Mailer’s pacing might have been a model for '' When We Were Kings'', an 89-minute film of which the fight itself spans 7:14, or about 8%.}}follows El Gallo’s logical yet somewhat counter-intuitive training procedure. Mailer reports that Ali confesses, “Foreman can hit harder than me”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=16}}During the uninspired sparring session that opens ''The Fight'', Ali’s strategy is presaged. Since he knows he cannot compete with Foreman’s strength, Ali contrives to use Foreman’s strength against him. Mailer chronicles this strategy meticulously, writing of Ali that “part of his art was to reduce the force of each blow he received to the head and then fraction it further”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=4}}Art? An art to getting hit in the face? If so, it is coupled by fractioning, a melding of the art of war and the sweet science of boxing. Ali consciously courts the same dichotomy that Mailer proposes. Skipping rope in his training quarters, he barks out, “I’m a brain fighter. I’m scientific. I’m artistic” (''When We Were Kings''). The marriage of art and science continues when Mailer describes “the second half of the art of getting hit was to learn the trajectories with which punches glanced off your glove and still hit you”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=5}}If the study of trajectories is associated with physics, Ali the artist is associated with dance and writing and theatre. This almost suicidal strategy—unappreciated, Mailer suggests, by lesser minds like sportswriters and fight critics—recalls the “calculus” with which {{pg|130|131}}Hemingway claimed he wrote ''Across the River and Into the Trees'', destined for dismissal by ignorant critics. Mailer is unapologetic about twinning art and boxing: he references Joyce’s ''A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man'', Rembrandt’s “The Night Watch,” ''Moby-Dick'', and even Hemingway’s ''A Farewell to Arms'', reaching to masterpieces of art and literature to evoke athletic performance.

Mailer extends this articulation to propose that Ali has a physiological understanding of receiving violence that is almost hair-trigger in its fineness. “It was a study,” he writes, “to watch Ali take punches”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=5}}Mailer sees Ali “teaching his nervous system to transmit shock faster than other men could”{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=4}}and possessing the ability to “assimilate punches faster than other fighters,” as Ali “could literally transmit the shock through more parts of his body or direct it to its best path”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=5}}After watching a Foreman training session, Mailer concluded, “it seemed certain that if Ali wished to win, he would have to take more punishment than ever before in his career”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=53}}As Mailer mentions during his commentary in ''When We Were Kings'', “It was as if he wanted to train his body to receive these messages of punishment.”

Just as Ali is positioned as an artist, a craftsman, and a scientist, Mailer describes him in the same way that Hemingway describes matadors. During the first round of the fight, after Ali has tagged Foreman with a scoring punch, Foreman “charged in rage”,{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=178}}a raging bull whose strength must be absorbed, reallocated, frustrated, and then eliminated by the more intelligent foe. After another exchange, in fact, “Foreman responded like a bull. He roared forward. A dangerous bull. His gloves were out like horns”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|pp=178–79}}Even the collection of declarative sentences, uncluttered by punctuation marks, recalls the way Hemingway captures Romero’s style in the ring. After Ali’s strategy of absorbing punches against the ropes emerges, Mailer writes that Foreman “had the pensive expression of a steer being dogged to the ground by a cowboy”,{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=184}}continuing the juxtaposition of Ali’s savvy with Foreman’s depiction as an animal, a beast of the same variety that charges mindlessly and dies inevitably in Pamplona. A brilliant depiction of Ali using his facial expression to deceive Foreman furthers the comparison: Ali, against the ropes, is
{{cquote|now banishing Foreman’s head with the turn of a matador sending away a bull after five fine passes were made, and once when he seemed to hesitate just a little too long, something stirred in{{pg|131|132}}George-like that across-the-arena knowledge of a bull when it is ready at last to gore the matador rather than the cloth, and like a member of a cuadrilla, somebody in Ali’s corner screamed, “Careful! Careful! Careful”!{{sfn|Mailer|1975|pp=196–97}}}}

Is this comparison self-indulgent? How many American readers would find a description of Ali’s defensive strategy in any way clarified by an esoteric gesture towards a bullfight? This link only makes sense in the context of Mailer’s incessant negotiation with the specter of Ernest Hemingway, shadowing him during his journey through Zaire.

Hemingway is introduced into the narrative when Mailer arrives in an unappealing Kinshasa with a stomach ailment, and immediately name drops Joseph Conrad and Ernest Hemingway: Conrad for his iconic depiction of the Congo, and Hemingway, about whom Mailer wonders, “Was it part of Hemingway’s genius that he could travel with healthy insides?”,{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=22}}ignoring the overwhelming catalogue of incidents and accidents that Hemingway suffered during his lifetime of travels. When Mailer hears the mighty roar of a lion, he begins a reverie: “To be eaten by a lion on the banks of the Congo— who could fail to notice that it was Hemingway’s own lion waiting down these years for the flesh of Ernest until an appropriate substitute had at last arrived?”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=92}}If the sound of the lion causes Mailer to fancy a lofty reenactment of Francis Macomber’s paranoia, or Mary’s quest for the lion in ''Under Kilimanjaro'', he does well to confess that the joke is on him: Zaire has a zoo. In Mailer’s description of a drunken balancing act on a balcony outside his hotel room, he speculates on the possibility of dying in this way. “What could be worse than accidental suicide?” he asks rhetorically. “A reverberation of Hemingway’s end shivered its echo”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=123}}These three examples indeed position Mailer as an “appropriate substitute” for Hemingway, both in his ambitious writing project in Africa, his encounters with the beasts of the jungle, and the courting of his own death, with Hemingway’s 1961 suicide still hovering over Mailer’s behavior, his thoughts, and his writing.

But Mailer is not through. When he puts forth Ali’s quandary once the fight is under his control, that he must choose between a victory by either a lethargic decision or the flourish of a spectacular knockout, he is compared to “a torero after a great faena who must still face the drear potential of a protracted inept and disappointing kill,” while Foreman remains “a bull”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=200}}In the sixth round, by which time the bout’s fate is foretold, Ali sizes{{pg|132|133}}up Foreman “the way a bullfighter lines up a bull before going in over the horns for the kill...a fair conclusion was that the bull still had an access of strength too great for the kill”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=202}}In a sequence where Mailer would make dozens of comparisons, frantically seeking metaphorical images to convey the magnitude of the scene, his clinging to bullfighting imagery is striking thematically and strategically, even if the image might only resonate with a specialist, with himself, or with a fellow aficionado of ''Death in the Afternoon''.{{efn|Cf. Advertisements For Myself, when Mailer writes, “I used to compare the bed to the bullfight, sometimes seeing myself as the matador and sometimes as the bull”}}{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=495}}When Mailer compares Foreman’s clumsiness to “a street fighter at the end of a long rumble”,{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=204}}the reader does not require any special base of knowledge to access the comparison.

The dynamic set up between Foreman and Ali leads to the rope-a-dope strategy that is ultimately Foreman’s undoing and proof of Ali’s ingenuity. Parodying his own proclivity towards “Germanic formulation,” Mailer teases that he might characterize this approach as “the modal transposition from Active to Passive”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=221}}The serious point about Ali’s strategy, though, is that he did not overpower Foreman (because he could not), and did not even use superior skill. He outsmarted him, outclassed him. Ali kills ''recibiendo''. His technique is the boxing equivalent of the bullfighter’s choice to kill by receiving the bull, to allow the bull’s aggression to work against itself by charging into the sword, rather than attacking the animal. Just as Ali’s technique is legendary, both Mailer and Hemingway have extolled the ''recibiendo'' style as, on several levels, the most sublime way to kill a bull.

Not many Americans understood the importance of ''recibiendo'' before 1926, when Hemingway turned the technique into an objective correlative for courage, the grace-under-pressure ideal that has become threadbare in recent discussions of Hemingway’s texts. In the final bullfight before the end of the festival of San Fermin, Romero’s performance is captured:

{{cquote|The bull watched him. Romero spoke to the bull and tapped one of his feet. The bull charged and Romero waited for the charge, the muleta held low, sighting along the blade, his feet firm. Then without taking a step forward, he became one with the bull...{{sfn|Hemingway|1926|p=224}}}}

In ''Death in the Afternoon'', Hemingway defines ''Recibir'', “to kill the bull from in front awaiting his charge without moving the feet once the charge has started”.{{sfn|Hemingway|1932|p=442}}This definition is nearly a precise restatement of Romero’s{{pg|133|134}}triumph in ''The Sun Also Rises'', his feet firm, waiting for the charge. Hemingway refers to ''recibiendo'' as the most “difficult, dangerous and emotional way to kill bulls”.{{sfn|Hemingway|1985|p=442}}In ''The Dangerous Summer'', Hemingway refers to the technique as “the oldest and the most dangerous and the most beautiful” manner of killing.{{sfn|Hemingway|1985|p=202}}By employing the ''recibiendo'' technique, Antonio Ordóñez in ''The Dangerous Summer'' and Pedro Romero in ''The Sun Also Rises'' impress their observers and impress the writers recording their accomplishments.

Mailer shares Hemingway’s fascination with a matador killing ''recibiendo''. His miniaturized version of ''Death in the Afternoon'', published in 1967, called simply ''The Bullfight'',{{efn|Mailer’s introductory remarks in that text are titled: ''Footnote to Death in the Afternoon.''}} describes this classic style of killing with a sense of awe, and is worth quoting at length:

{{cquote|The bull charged prematurely, and Amado, determined to get the kill, did not skip away but held ground, received the charge, stood there with the sword, turned the bull’s head with the muleta, and the bull impaled himself on the point of the torero’s blade which went right into the proper space between the shoulders, and the bull ran right up on it into his death, took several steps to the side, gave a toss of his head at heaven, and fell. Amado had killed ''recibiendo''. He had killed standing still, receiving the bull while the bull charged. No one had seen that in years.{{sfn|Mailer|1967|p=n.pg}}}}

By leaning back against the ropes and inciting Foreman’s charge, Ali displays the same bravado, courage, and panache in dominating his opponent as these matadors who Mailer and Hemingway laud with such emotion. {{efn|One of the ways Mailer praises Ali in ''When We Were Kings'' is by saying, “What a classic performance,” suggesting the classic style of defeating an opponent that parallels a heroic matador.}}

Mailer and Hemingway mimic the matadors they lionize in two significant ways. For Hemingway, the ''corto y derecho'' style of bullfighting that he describes in “The Undefeated,” another story from ''Men Without Women'', is so closely associated with his own “short and straight” writing style that the reference is almost transparently self-referential and was so already by its publication in 1927. In the same way that Jake’s attention to Romero is revelatory of what he values in a man, Hemingway’s own characterization of Romero is crucial for what Hemingway values in art. When Romero’s performance is summarized as “not brilliant bull-fighting...only perfect bull-fighting”,{{sfn|Hemingway|1926|p=221}}and that Romero’s style contained “no tricks and no{{pg|134|135}}mystifications”,{{sfn|Hemingway|1926|p=223}}Hemingway is separating his own novel from modern masterpieces of the previous few years like ''Ulysses'' or ''The Great Gatsby'' or ''Mrs. Dalloway'' and even anticipating the experimentation of ''The Sound and the Fury'', which would come a few years later.

Just as Hemingway mimics Romero’s clarity, classicism, and linearity in prose,{{efn|The first draft of ''The Sun Also Rises'' originally began in medias res, beginning in Spain, then flashing back to Paris. The change to linearity transcends a narratological decision to achieve thematic importance. For the essential study of ''The Sun Also Rises''’s composition and its implications, see Svoboda.}}Mailer links the passes of his narrative, endeavoring to reach a narrative climax just as the fight reaches its dramatic climax in the eighth round. Unlike Hemingway, who did not cling to figurative language in a conspicuous quest to have the reader understand perfectly a situation which he might not have ever seen before, Mailer’s sequence of comparisons rises to the task as the most memorable writerly performance in his account of the “Rumble in the Jungle.”

A few years earlier, Mailer warned his readers that “Sooner or later, fight metaphors, like fight managers, go sentimental. They go military” (''King of the Hill'').{{sfn|Mailer|1971|p=66}}True to his word, the first similes of the eighth round follow such a trope: Ali chooses his shots “as if he had a reserve of good punches... like a soldier in a siege who counts his bullets”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=206}}Some of the exchanges at the beginning of round eight recall the “great bombardment” of the fifth,{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=207}}which Mailer calls one of the greatest in the history of boxing, with a “shelling reminiscent of artillery battles in World War I”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=195}}While Mailer may caution us of the glibness of comparing boxing to warfare, he gleefully perpetuates the absurdity; he well knows that three minutes of getting punched by a man—even by George Foreman—is nothing like a world war, but he willingly adopts the parlance and conventions of boxing writing.

Towards the end of the seventh round, Mailer uses scenery-chewing similes to control the pace of the narrative, the better to convey Foreman’s mighty fatigue.

{{cquote|Foreman was fighting as slowly as a worn-out fighter in the Golden Gloves, slow as a man walking up a hill of pillows, slow as he would have looked if their first round had been rerun in slow motion, that was no slower than Foreman was fighting now...he was reminiscent...of a linebacker coiling around a runner with his hands and arms in the slow-motion replay...{{sfn|Mailer|1975|pp=204–05}}}}{{pg|135|136}}

And no slower than Mailer is narrating now. In this sequence of three similes, the first and third compare a slow fighter to a slow fighter. To say that Foreman, a tired professional fighter, looks as tired as a tired amateur fighter, is patently ridiculous. Furthermore, to state that he is as slow as a slow-motion version of himself, or a slow-motion version of someone else is not a helpful comparison; it is not vivid and inventive writing. The second simile is brilliant, and would be the only one needed, if the first and third did not aid in establishing the pacing of the moment in the fight.

Directly before the eighth round, Ali’s eyes, by contrast to Foreman’s torpor, are “quick as the eyes, indeed, of a squirrel”,{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=206}}demonstrating the energy, vivacity and speed that has been sapped from Foreman. During the round, Mailer’s similes are telling; they evoke the spectator’s enthusiasm, the witness’s thrill of the final sequence of the fight. Foreman’s legs become “like a horse high-stepping along a road full of rocks”;{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=206}}he bounces off the ropes and pursues Ali “like a man chasing a cat”;{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=206}}he waves his gloves at Ali “like an infant six feet tall waving its uncoordinated battle arm”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=207}}When Ali delivers the ''coup de grâce'', “Foreman’s arms flew out to the side like a man with a parachute jumping out of a plane”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=208}}How does he fall? “He went over like a six-foot, sixty-year-old butler who has just heard tragic news”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=208}}Foreman transforms from a six-foot infant to a six-foot sexagenarian manservant in two minutes. And, finally, Mailer compares a knocked-out fighter to “a drunk hoping to get out of bed to go to work”,{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=208}}an unfortunately predictable association.

All of these similes are Mailer’s own flourishes, the passes that he links together, striving to express his enthusiasm and awe, seeking to get the reader more intimately involved with the experience, culminating with one final comparison, not of Ali or of Foreman, but of his own reaction: our narrator was “like a dim parent who realizes suddenly his child is indeed and indubitably married”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=209}}The figurative rope-a-dope that Mailer employs is unlike Hemingway’s description of the bullfight, but identical in that the scene he is attempting to capture must be described according to the terms of the action being rendered.

Where does ''The Fight'' ultimately belong in Norman Mailer’s life’s work? Is it a self-aggrandizing study of a sport, the nuances of which only a select few appreciate or care about? Is ''The Fight'' Mailer’s ''Death in the Afternoon''— the disquisition on bullfighting Hemingway wrote as a young man—or more precisely his ''The Dangerous Summer'', Hemingway’s revisitation of the{{pg|136|137}}bullfights at the end of his career? Is it Mailer’s ''A Moveable Feast'', a version of his memoirs? Does it equate to the two books Hemingway devoted to African safaris? A combination of all of these? ''The Fight'', ultimately, illuminates the reader of the way Mailer views violence, writing, and Hemingway himself, which positions it as a supplementary text to virtually every other major Mailer effort. With Hemingway and bullfighting as constant presences in ''The Fight'', these intertextual questions yield results that allow Mailer’s project to transcend journalism, or sports writing, to become a key text to determining his restatement of Hemingway’s classic twentieth-century themes.

===Notes===
{{notelist}}

===Citations===
{{Reflist}}

===Works Cited===
{{refbegin|indent=1|20em}}
*{{Cite book| author-last=Beegel | author-first=Susan F. |title=Hemingway’s Craft of Omission: Four Manuscript Examples |location=Ann Arbor, MI |publisher=UMI Research Press |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |date=1988 |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book| author-last= Bruccoli |author-first= Matthew J. |date= 1996 |title=The Only Thing That Counts: Ernest Hemingway-Maxwell Perkins Correspondence |location=New York |publisher=Scribner |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book |author-last=Burwell |author-first=Rose Marie |title=Hemingway: The Postwar Years and the Posthumous Novels |location=Cambridge, UK |publisher=Cambridge UP |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |date=1996 |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book |last=Fitzgerald |first=F. Scott |title=A Life in Letters |editor-first=Matthew J. |editor-last=Bruccoli |location=New York |publisher=Touchstone |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |date=1995 |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite AV media |last=Gast |first=Leon |title=When We Were Kings |date=1996 |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Film |url=https://youtu.be/svhnasgxpqs?si=SF1viC9Lbcs401BG |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite magazine |last=Hemingway |first=Ernest |title=The Art of the Short Story |magazine=Paris Review |date=Spring 1981a|pages=85-102 |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book |last=Hemingway |first=Ernest |authormask=1 |title=The Complete Short Stories of Ernest Hemingway: The Finca Vigía Edition |location=New York |publisher=Scribner’s |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |date=2003 |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book|last=Hemingway |first=Ernest |authormask=1 |title=The Dangerous Summer |date=1985 |location=New York |publisher=Scribner’s |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book|last=Hemingway |first=Ernest |authormask=1 |title=Death in the Afternoon |location=New York |publisher=Scribner’s |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |date=1932 |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book|last=Hemingway |first=Ernest |authormask=1 |title=Ernest Hemingway: Selected Letters, 1917–1961 |location=New York |publisher=Scribner's |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |editor-first=Carlos |editor-last=Baker |date=1981b |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book|last=Hemingway |first=Ernest |authormask=1 |title=For Whom the Bell Tolls |date=1940 |location=New York |publisher=Scribner’s |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book|editor-last=Hemingway |editor-first=Ernest |editormask=1 |title=Men at War: The Best War Stories of All Time |date=1942 |location=New York |publisher=Crown Publishers |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book|last=Hemingway |first=Ernest |authormask=1 |title=The Nick Adams Stories |date=1972 |location=New York |publisher=Scribner's |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book|last=Hemingway |first=Ernest |authormask=1 |title=The Sun Also Rises |date=1926 |location=New York |publisher=Scribner’s |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book|last=Hemingway |first=Ernest |authormask=1 |title=The Sun Also Rises: A Facsimile Edition Volume One |editor-last=Bruccoli |editor-first=Matthew J. |date=1990 |location=Detroit |publisher=Omnigraphics |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite magazine|last=Klosterman |first=Chuck |title=Nothing to Worry About |magazine=Esquire |pages=56-57|isbn= |author-link= |date=Feb 2008 |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book|last=Mailer |first=Norman |title=Advertisements for Myself |location=New York |publisher=Putnam |date=1959 |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book|last=Mailer |first=Norman |authormask=1 |title=The Bullfight: A Photographic Narrative |location=New York |publisher=Mcmillan |date=1967 |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book|last=Mailer |first=Norman |authormask=1 |title=The Fight |location=Boston |publisher=Little, Brown |date=1975 |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book|last=Mailer |first=Norman |authormask=1 |title=King of the Hill: Norman Mailer on the fight of the Century |location=New York |publisher=New American Library |date=1971 |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book|last1=Mailer |first1=Norman |author-mask=1 |first2=John Buffalo |last2=Mailer |title=The Big Empty: Dialogues on Politics, Sex, God, Boxing, Morality, Myth, Poker, and Bad Conscience in America |location=New York |publisher=Nation Books |date=2006 |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book|last=Reynolds |first=Michael S. |title=Hemingway’s First War: The Making of A Farewell to Arms |location=Princeton, NJ |publisher=Princeton UP |date=1976 |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book|last=Reynolds |first=Michael S. |authormask=1 |title=Hemingway: The Paris Years |location=Cambridge, MA |publisher=Basil Blackwell |date=1989 |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book|last=Reynolds |first=Michael S. |authormask=1 |title=The Young Hemingway |location=New York |publisher=Norton |date=1998 |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book|last=Ross |first=Lillian |title=Portrait of Hemingway |location=New York |publisher=Simon & Schuster |date=1961 |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book |last=Svoboda |first=Frederic Joseph |title=Ernest Hemingway & The Sun Also Rises: The crafting of a Style |location=Lawrence, KS |publisher=UP of Kansas |date=1983 |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
{{Refend}}

The Mailer Review/Volume 4, 2010/Norman Mailer's The Fight: Hemingway, Bullfighting, and the Lovely Metaphysics of Boxing

2025-04-13T18:10:17Z

JHadaway: Added pp for multiple page citations

{{DISPLAYTITLE:{{BASEPAGENAME}}/{{SUBPAGENAME}}}}
{{Working}}
{{MR04}}
{{byline|last=Cirino|first=Mark|abstract=Although Norman Mailer’s ''[[The Fight]]'' is ostensibly reportage about the Muhammad Ali-George Foreman championship heavyweight boxing match, we learn more about Mailer and his aesthetic and artistic values than we do about either fighter. One of Mailer’s methods for capturing his Zaire experience is to employ Ernest Hemingway as a ghostly father figure, a ''doppelgänger'', both an inspiration and a nagging reminder of his own inadequacies. An intertextual analysis of these two writers demonstrates the way Mailer uses boxing to offer his inflection of Hemingway’s twentieth-century themes. |url=http://prmlr.us/mr04cir }}

{{dc|dc=A|lthough Norman Mailer’s ''The Fight'' is ostensibly reportage}} about the Muhammad Ali-George Foreman championship heavyweight boxing match in Zaire on 30 October 1974, we learn more about Mailer and his aesthetic and artistic values than we do about either fighter. We also learn far more than Mailer’s thoughts on boxing; we glean a broader metaphysical and philosophic notion of action and danger, and the writer’s own role in recording it in prose. One of Mailer’s methods for capturing his Zaire experience is to employ Ernest Hemingway as a ghostly father figure, a ''doppelgänger'', both an inspiration and a nagging reminder of his own inadequacies. Hemingway, whose suicide was thirteen years before the fight, is still active in Mailer’s text, who was enjoying a consciously Hemingwayesque project in Africa.

In Chuck Klosterman’s recent assessment of Norman Mailer as a boxing writer, he writes that “there is nothing metaphysical about getting punched in the face".{{sfn|Klosterman|2008|p=56}}This assertion suggests that Klosterman either has never been punched in the face or was concentrating on the wrong sensation when he was. Mailer and Hemingway represent the boxing ring and the bullfighting arena as possessing such metaphysical possibilities that they invite us to appreciate each of their values in human behavior and the qualities they demand their artists to possess. In ''The Fight'', Mailer’s conspicuous comparisons of boxing to bullfighting, Hemingway, and to art further invite{{pg|123|124}}comparison to Hemingway’s earlier texts. In all instances, we see Mailer and Hemingway with their incisive, intellectual evocations of men of thought (that is, Ali, and any quintessential Hemingway Hero, such as Robert Jordan in ''For Whom the Bell Tolls'' or his short story alter ego Nick Adams) in moments of peak activity. So, if Klosterman limits the transcendence of boxing simply to “primordial reality” and the “base qualities of being alive”,{{sfn|Klosterman|2008|p=56}}he sharply diverges from Mailer and Hemingway, who find in the maelstrom of a boxing match or the murderous possibilities of a bullring, life’s truest, most elevated and aesthetic moments. “Every wound,” Mailer observes in ''The Fight'', “has its own revelation”,{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=214}}both promising the importance of chronicling the defeated and the damaged and signaling his own fascination and debt to the warriors and athletes and even artists of the Hemingway canon. While Mailer may be overly epigrammatic, this aphorism accurately synopsizes the “wound theory” of criticism that defined (and later encumbered) Hemingway Studies for decades.

To Hemingway, boxing might have been important for more complex reasons than many readers ever understood. A celebrated example of this tension offers a useful illustration. The sordid history behind F. Scott Fitzgerald’s revisions to Hemingway’s short story “Fifty Grand” is relevant not as a salacious biographical anecdote or to provide retrospective textual minutiae. Instead, this conflict’s enduring controversy is itself the issue, one that reveals a major facet of Hemingway’s approach to character, and the larger importance of boxing to Hemingway and writers that would follow, primarily Mailer.

“Fifty Grand,” included in Hemingway’s second volume of short stories, ''Men Without Women'' (1927), was inspired by the anecdote with which the typescript draft begins:
{{cquote|Up at the gym over the Garden one time somebody says to Jack, “Say Jack how did you happen to beat Leonard anyway?” And Jack says, “Well, you see Benny’s an awful smart boxer. All the time he’s in there he’s thinking and all the time he’s thinking I was hitting him.”{{sfn|Beegel|1988|p=15}}}}

Lillian Ross reports Hemingway re-telling the story in 1950, about a quarter-century later: “‘One time I asked Jack, speaking of a fight with Benny Leonard,’“How did you handle Benny so easy, Jack?” “Ernie,” he said,“Benny{{pg|124|125}}is an awfully smart boxer. All the time he’s boxing, he’s thinking. All the time he was thinking, I was hitting him.” Hemingway gave a hoarse laugh, as though he had heard the story for the first time...He laughed again. ‘All the time he was thinking, I was hitting him’”.{{sfn|Ross|1961|p=64}}Ross implies surprise that this stale anecdote is so alive for Hemingway, standing in for the readers who may not have appreciated its importance. In his obnoxious essay “The Art of the Short Story,” written in 1959 and unpublished in his lifetime, Hemingway recollects of “Fifty Grand”: “This story originally started like this: “‘How did you handle Benny so easy, Jack?’ Soldier asked him. ‘Benny’s an awful smart boxer,’ Jack said. ‘All the time he’s in there, he’s thinking. All the time he’s thinking, I was hitting him'".{{sfn|Ross|1961|p=88}}These examples demonstrate that his acquiescence to Fitzgerald’s editorial judgment in 1927 haunted him for three-and-a-half decades, literally until his death.{{efn|Elsewhere, Hemingway remarks on the intelligence of fighters just as he evaluates their physical skill: in 1922, Hemingway describes Battling Siki, the challenger to Georges Carpentier, “siki tough slowthinker but mauling style may puzzle carp”.{{sfn|Reynolds|1989|p=73}}In his early journalism, Hemingway reports that, “Jack Dempsey has an imposing list of knockouts over bums and tramps, who were nothing but big slow-moving, slow-thinking set ups for him”.{{sfn|Reynolds|1998|p=192}}Indeed, the payoff of “Fifty Grand”—when Jack Brennan double crosses the double crossers—comes when Jack says, “It’s funny how fast you can think when it means that much money”.{{sfn|Hemingway|p=249}}}}

Fitzgerald’s objection to Hemingway opening the short story with the boxing anecdote was like his misgivings about the original beginning of ''The Sun Also Rises'', what he perceived to be Hemingway’s “tendency to envelope or...to ''embalm'' in mere wordiness an anecdote or joke”.{{sfn|Fitzgerald|p=142|1995}}As Susan Beegel notes in her discussion of Hemingway’s impulse to include the anecdote, “Thinking takes time, and boxing is a sport in which speed is of the essence”.{{sfn|Beegel|1988|p=15}}Beegel’s point must be extended: life, at times, is a sport in which speed is of the essence, particularly if it is to be lived to its fullest. As we see in Mailer—think of ''The Naked and the Dead'' and certainly ''The Fight''—Hemingway placed all his characters in situations in which a quick, strategic, pragmatic response is more appropriate than contemplation and conceptualization, despite the characters’ natural inclinations to indulge their memories, imaginative speculation, and ruminations. Muhammad Ali, after all, is no mindless slugger; he is portrayed as a genius, a scientist, an artist, or a “brain fighter,” in the champ’s own words. More than a boxer, Mailer considers Ali “the first psychologist of the body”,{{sfn|Mailer|1971|p=23}}suggesting that his power is in his mind, as opposed to the brute force, the rage, and the animalistic approach of Foreman and Joe Frazier.

But why did Hemingway’s remorse over deferring to Fitzgerald’s suggestions for “Fifty Grand” fester for the rest of his life? After all, what does one paragraph matter? In “The Art of the Short Story,” Hemingway recounts his version of the circumstances behind the editorial change, and his regret over excising “that lovely revelation of the metaphysics of boxing”.{{sfn|Hemingway|1981a|p=89}}{{pg|125|126}}

Hemingway’s essay taunts Fitzgerald for not appreciating that Hemingway was “trying to explain to him how a truly great boxer like Jack Britton functioned”.{{sfn|Hemingway|1981a|p=89}}The manuscript of “Fifty Grand” betrays Hemingway’s bitterness: on it, he scrawled, “1st 3 pages mutilated by Scott Fitzgerald”.{{sfn|Burwell|1996|p=148}}How can one writer—particularly an established one, which by 1927 Hemingway was—blame a colleague for ruining his own text? This irrational grudge must have endured so persistently because Hemingway disobeyed his instincts as a writer, ironically behaving with the same lack of intuitive trust as the excerpt negatively portrays Benny Leonard. Hemingway obeyed Fitzgerald to great success with ''The Sun Also Rises'', did so again the following year with “Fifty Grand,” and, by 1929, responded to Fitzgerald’s criticisms of A Farewell to Arms with “Kiss my ass”.{{sfn|Reynolds|1976|p=78}}

Fitzgerald and others have misconstrued aspects of Hemingway’s objectives, which Mailer grasped intuitively and intellectually. The central thrust to Hemingway’s literary project was to dramatize the compromised functioning of thought as the modern consciousness is incorporated into the violent activities of the twentieth-century man of action. Hemingway’s portrayal of thinking during war takes this idea to the extreme. In Hemingway’s introduction to ''Men at War'', the anthology of war writing he edited, he writes, “Cowardice, as distinguished from panic, is almost always simply a lack of ability to suspend the functioning of the imagination. Learning to suspend your imagination and live completely in the very second of the present minute with no before and no after is the greatest gift a soldier can acquire. It, naturally, is the opposite of all those gifts a writer should have”.{{sfn|Hemingway|1942|p=xxiv}}Hemingway’s articulation of this conflict is a revelation: he is disclosing the tension that defines his work, the internal struggle between a man of action and a man of thought. Hemingway is distinguishing between the curse of Ishmael and the curse of Stubb in ''Moby-Dick'': Ishmael cannot turn the thinking off; for him, the sea and meditation are inextricable, even when he is on the night watch; Ahab’s eleventh commandment, on the other hand, is: do not think.

This dichotomy is always in play in the Hemingway text, and sometimes baldly explicit. Early in ''For Whom the Bell Tolls'', for example, Robert Jordan coaxes himself, “Turn off the thinking now...You’re a bridge-blower now. Not a thinker”,{{sfn|Hemingway|1940|p=17}}just as he later disingenuously asserts, “My mind is in suspension until we win the war”.{sfn|Hemingway|1940|p=245}}In a 1938 letter to Maxwell Perkins,{{pg|126|127}}Hemingway blames his depressed mood on the rigors of living in a Spanish war zone while simultaneously trying to write his stories of the Spanish Civil War: “If I sound bitter or gloomy throw it out. It’s that it takes one kind of training and frame of mind to do what I’ve been doing and another to write prose”.{{sfn|Bruccoli|1996|p=253}}Ultimately, Hemingway’s contribution to the psychological novel, and to literary Modernism’s conception of mind, is his depiction of how a human being thinks during episodes of great stress, including matadors, boxers, and soldiers, as well as those haunted by their memories of those experiences.

For the purposes of Mailer’s and Hemingway’s intertextuality, boxing and bullfighting are virtually synonymous. Each sport affords the spectator an opportunity to witness violence in a largely—but not completely—sanitized outlet. ''In The Sun Also Rises'', a novel that essentially introduced the bullfight to mainstream American consciousness, boxing and bullfighting are explicitly compared. In addition to the scapegoat Robert Cohn’s dubious (but eventually demonstrable) boxing background, Jake Barnes and his friend Bill Gorton attend the Ledoux-Kid Francis fight in Paris less than a week before their excursion to the Pamplona bullfights. Later, during the ''desencajonada'', or unloading of the bulls, however, Jake constructs the simile of bullfighting to boxing. He tells Brett Ashley, “Look how he knows how to use his horns...He’s got a left and right just like a boxer.” As Brett confirms, “I saw him shift from his left to his right horn”.{{sfn|Hemingway|1926|p=144}}The two activities are clearly appealing to Hemingway: one man, by himself, confronting his own limits as he encounters an attacker with his skill, knowledge, courage, and mind control. Both activities are ritual performances, yet both flirt with the possibility of death, danger, crippling injury, as well as murder.

In Mailer, similarly, the allure of boxing seems to be the formalized structure of a violent situation as an attenuated restatement of war experience. Mailer has suggested as much, saying that boxing presents “a way for a violent man to begin to comprehend that living in a classic situation—in other words, living within certain limitations rather than expressing oneself uncontrollably is a way to live that he didn’t have before”.{{sfn|Mailer|Mailer|2006|p=185}}Mailer’s articulation is anticipated by Jake Barnes himself, who explains the process to Brett so that the bullfight “became more something that was going on with a definite end, and less of a spectacle with unexplained horrors”;{{sfn|Mailer|Mailer|2006|p=171}}in other words, the difference between bullfighting/boxing and war. Just as Mailer differentiates between a championship boxing match between{{pg|127|128}}professionals and a street fight, Hemingway distinguishes between a properly sanctioned bullfight and an amateur bullfight: “The amateur bullfight is as unorganized as a riot and all results are uncertain, bulls or men may be killed; it is all chance and the temper of the populace. The formal bullfight is a commercial spectacle built on the planned and ordered death of the bull and that is its end".{{sfn|Hemingway|1932|p=372}}If the Marquis of Queensbury rules codify violence in boxing and allow it to transcend a back-alley brawl, Hemingway and Mailer are always conscious of this spectrum of violence and its relative level of chaos.

To Mailer and Hemingway, the men who prevail within this organized violence transcend athletic excellence and attain the status of aesthetic and artistic exemplars. Mailer begins ''The Fight'' by describing Ali as “our most beautiful man”,{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=3}}just as Jake says that bullfighting prodigy Pedro Romero is the “best-looking boy I have ever seen”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=167}}{{efn|After Ali’s victory, Mailer suggests that “Maybe he never appeared more handsome”{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=212}}}}Ali was thirty-two when the Rumble in the Jungle took place; Romero is no more than twenty. Mailer was fifty-one in Zaire; Hemingway turned twenty-six in the summer of 1925, when ''The Sun Also Rises'' was composed. If Ali and Romero serve as embodiments of male beauty, Hemingway also uses Romero as a counterbalance to the malaise that had infected the “lost” members of the post-war generation. When Robert Cohn laments, “my life is going so fast and I’m not really living it,” Jake responds, “Nobody ever lives their life all the way up except bull-fighters”.{{sfn|Hemingway|1932|p=18}}Fitzgerald texts like ''The Great Gatsby'' impute an additional intensity of experience to the wealthy; Hemingway ascribes this same quality to the courageous activity of bullfighters. Boxing is precisely the same. In the extended set-piece of the Ledoux-Francis fight that Hemingway sketched in the first draft of SAR, the characters remark on the fight and Ledoux in a way that previews their same awe of bullfighters. Bill Gorton tells Jake, “By God Ledoux is great”{{sfn|Hemingway|1972|p=233}}and asks, “Why don’t they have guys like that in my business (that is, writing)"?{{sfn|Hemingway|1972|p=233}} Bill later deflects a compliment by telling Jake, “I’m not such a good man as Ledoux”.{{sfn|Hemingway|1972|p=234}}In the same way, the bullfighter Maera, whom Hemingway kills off in Chapter XIV of ''In Our Time'', is declared by Nick Adams to be “the greatest man he’d ever known".{{sfn|Hemingway|1972|p=237}}Between Maera and James Joyce, Hemingway wrote Ezra Pound in 1924, there is “absolutely no comparison in art...Maera by a mile”.{{sfn|Hemingway|1981b|p=119}}Boxing and bullfighters emerge in these texts as ideals, both masculine and artistic.

The artistic component of the allure of these sports is Mailer’s explicit{{pg|128|129}}reason for attending the Rumble in the Jungle. When Mailer attributes Foreman’s reference to himself in the third person as equivalent to the “schizophrenia” that “great artists” possess,{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=56}}it echoes Hemingway’s Romero who “talked about his work as something altogether apart from himself”.{{sfn|Hemingway|1926|p=178}}For Mailer, though, the real artist is of course not Foreman, but Ali. “If ever a fighter,” Mailer writes, “had been able to demonstrate that boxing was a twentieth century art, it must be Ali”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=162}}Hemingway writes in ''Death in the Afternoon'' that the only trait separating bull-fighting from its inclusion as one of the major arts is its impermanence. In ''The Dangerous Summer'', Hemingway pointedly compares bullfighting to art: “A bullfighter can never see the work of art that he is making. He has no chance to correct it as a painter or writer has. He cannot hear it as a musician can All the time, he is making his work of art he knows that he must keep within the limits of his skill and the knowledge of the animal”.{{efn|Earlier in The Dangerous Summer, Luis Miguel Dominguín is also compared to an artist: “He had the complete and respectful concentration on his work which marks all great artists”{{sfn|Hemingway|1985|p=106}}}}{{sfn|Hemingway|1985|p=198}}Whether Hemingway is posturing in an intentionally provocative way or not—he surely enjoyed presenting himself as the only novelist who would prefer to be Maera killing a bull than Joyce writing ''Ulysses''—it is sufficient to note that in his career-long characterizations of bullfighters, he saw artistry and exemplary conduct when they excelled during their performances, and displayed high and noble aims in their approaches to their work. The crucial way that bullfighting is instructive to a reading of ''The Fight'' emerges when Mailer captures Ali’s demeanor in the ring and the strategy he uses to dismantle and ultimately defeat Foreman. This exalted strategy is two-fold: in the first round, Ali relies on the enormously dangerous right-hand leads to score against Foreman. The audacity of this means of attack is captured in italicized awe in ''The Fight''. It is not a right, but a ''right''. “Right-hand leads!” Mailer exults, “My God!”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=180}}He explains the technicality that leading with the right “is the most difficult and dangerous punch. Difficult to deliver and dangerous to oneself”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=179}}Hemingway makes the same observation in Romero’s code of performance, which is that he has “the old thing, the holding of his purity of line through the maximum of exposure”.{{sfn|Hemingway|1926|p=172}}Ali might have danced his way to victory against Foreman, but he did not. He deftly took on the punishment of a much stronger man, and attacked in a way that would leave himself vulnerable, all in the hopes of sapping Foreman’s power. These are the qualities which Hemingway and Mailer extol.

In rounds two through five, Ali uses the infamous rope-a-dope, which absorbs punishment as Foreman punches himself out, using the great{{pg|129|130}}champion’s strength against himself. The parallel between Ali’s strategy and the matador’s gambit is evident. Hemingway quotes the bullfighter El Gallo as shunning exercises that would increase his strength: “What do I want with strength, man? The bull weighs half a ton. Should I take exercises for strength to match him? Let the bull have the strength”.{{sfn|Hemingway|1932|p=21}}As this remark suggests, rather than the simple-minded machismo that Hemingway is too frequently reputed to value, the virtue of the effective matador comes in mastering the fear that will inevitably arise when a man encounters a beast that dwarfs him. The successful matador must control his thoughts and emotions and rely on his skill and knowledge to subdue his opponent. Ali faces something precisely equivalent in Zaire. During a training sequence in ''When We Were Kings'', Ali yells out, “He’s the bull. I’m the matador,” clearly deferring to Foreman the trait of power and aggressiveness, and assuming for himself the wit, the knowledge, and the artistry needed to prevail.

Mailer’s hagiography of Ali, then, becomes the more vital when we go beyond his admiration for the fighter to recognize why this admiration was so profound. Ali’s preparation for the Foreman fight (in the 234-page Vintage edition of ''The Fight'', the opening bell to the knockout is confined to pages 177–210; thus, in a book called ''The Fight'', only fourteen percent of the book chronicles the fight{{efn|Mailer’s pacing might have been a model for '' When We Were Kings'', an 89-minute film of which the fight itself spans 7:14, or about 8%.}}follows El Gallo’s logical yet somewhat counter-intuitive training procedure. Mailer reports that Ali confesses, “Foreman can hit harder than me”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=16}}During the uninspired sparring session that opens ''The Fight'', Ali’s strategy is presaged. Since he knows he cannot compete with Foreman’s strength, Ali contrives to use Foreman’s strength against him. Mailer chronicles this strategy meticulously, writing of Ali that “part of his art was to reduce the force of each blow he received to the head and then fraction it further”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=4}}Art? An art to getting hit in the face? If so, it is coupled by fractioning, a melding of the art of war and the sweet science of boxing. Ali consciously courts the same dichotomy that Mailer proposes. Skipping rope in his training quarters, he barks out, “I’m a brain fighter. I’m scientific. I’m artistic” (''When We Were Kings''). The marriage of art and science continues when Mailer describes “the second half of the art of getting hit was to learn the trajectories with which punches glanced off your glove and still hit you”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=5}}If the study of trajectories is associated with physics, Ali the artist is associated with dance and writing and theatre. This almost suicidal strategy—unappreciated, Mailer suggests, by lesser minds like sportswriters and fight critics—recalls the “calculus” with which {{pg|130|131}}Hemingway claimed he wrote ''Across the River and Into the Trees'', destined for dismissal by ignorant critics. Mailer is unapologetic about twinning art and boxing: he references Joyce’s ''A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man'', Rembrandt’s “The Night Watch,” ''Moby-Dick'', and even Hemingway’s ''A Farewell to Arms'', reaching to masterpieces of art and literature to evoke athletic performance.

Mailer extends this articulation to propose that Ali has a physiological understanding of receiving violence that is almost hair-trigger in its fineness. “It was a study,” he writes, “to watch Ali take punches”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=5}}Mailer sees Ali “teaching his nervous system to transmit shock faster than other men could”{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=4}}and possessing the ability to “assimilate punches faster than other fighters,” as Ali “could literally transmit the shock through more parts of his body or direct it to its best path”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=5}}After watching a Foreman training session, Mailer concluded, “it seemed certain that if Ali wished to win, he would have to take more punishment than ever before in his career”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=53}}As Mailer mentions during his commentary in ''When We Were Kings'', “It was as if he wanted to train his body to receive these messages of punishment.”

Just as Ali is positioned as an artist, a craftsman, and a scientist, Mailer describes him in the same way that Hemingway describes matadors. During the first round of the fight, after Ali has tagged Foreman with a scoring punch, Foreman “charged in rage”,{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=178}}a raging bull whose strength must be absorbed, reallocated, frustrated, and then eliminated by the more intelligent foe. After another exchange, in fact, “Foreman responded like a bull. He roared forward. A dangerous bull. His gloves were out like horns”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|pp=178–79}}Even the collection of declarative sentences, uncluttered by punctuation marks, recalls the way Hemingway captures Romero’s style in the ring. After Ali’s strategy of absorbing punches against the ropes emerges, Mailer writes that Foreman “had the pensive expression of a steer being dogged to the ground by a cowboy”,{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=184}}continuing the juxtaposition of Ali’s savvy with Foreman’s depiction as an animal, a beast of the same variety that charges mindlessly and dies inevitably in Pamplona. A brilliant depiction of Ali using his facial expression to deceive Foreman furthers the comparison: Ali, against the ropes, is
{{cquote|now banishing Foreman’s head with the turn of a matador sending away a bull after five fine passes were made, and once when he seemed to hesitate just a little too long, something stirred in{{pg|131|132}}George-like that across-the-arena knowledge of a bull when it is ready at last to gore the matador rather than the cloth, and like a member of a cuadrilla, somebody in Ali’s corner screamed, “Careful! Careful! Careful”!{{sfn|Mailer|1975|pp=196–97}}}}

Is this comparison self-indulgent? How many American readers would find a description of Ali’s defensive strategy in any way clarified by an esoteric gesture towards a bullfight? This link only makes sense in the context of Mailer’s incessant negotiation with the specter of Ernest Hemingway, shadowing him during his journey through Zaire.

Hemingway is introduced into the narrative when Mailer arrives in an unappealing Kinshasa with a stomach ailment, and immediately name drops Joseph Conrad and Ernest Hemingway: Conrad for his iconic depiction of the Congo, and Hemingway, about whom Mailer wonders, “Was it part of Hemingway’s genius that he could travel with healthy insides?”,{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=22}}ignoring the overwhelming catalogue of incidents and accidents that Hemingway suffered during his lifetime of travels. When Mailer hears the mighty roar of a lion, he begins a reverie: “To be eaten by a lion on the banks of the Congo— who could fail to notice that it was Hemingway’s own lion waiting down these years for the flesh of Ernest until an appropriate substitute had at last arrived?”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=92}}If the sound of the lion causes Mailer to fancy a lofty reenactment of Francis Macomber’s paranoia, or Mary’s quest for the lion in ''Under Kilimanjaro'', he does well to confess that the joke is on him: Zaire has a zoo. In Mailer’s description of a drunken balancing act on a balcony outside his hotel room, he speculates on the possibility of dying in this way. “What could be worse than accidental suicide?” he asks rhetorically. “A reverberation of Hemingway’s end shivered its echo”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=123}}These three examples indeed position Mailer as an “appropriate substitute” for Hemingway, both in his ambitious writing project in Africa, his encounters with the beasts of the jungle, and the courting of his own death, with Hemingway’s 1961 suicide still hovering over Mailer’s behavior, his thoughts, and his writing.

But Mailer is not through. When he puts forth Ali’s quandary once the fight is under his control, that he must choose between a victory by either a lethargic decision or the flourish of a spectacular knockout, he is compared to “a torero after a great faena who must still face the drear potential of a protracted inept and disappointing kill,” while Foreman remains “a bull”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=200}}In the sixth round, by which time the bout’s fate is foretold, Ali sizes{{pg|132|133}}up Foreman “the way a bullfighter lines up a bull before going in over the horns for the kill...a fair conclusion was that the bull still had an access of strength too great for the kill”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=202}}In a sequence where Mailer would make dozens of comparisons, frantically seeking metaphorical images to convey the magnitude of the scene, his clinging to bullfighting imagery is striking thematically and strategically, even if the image might only resonate with a specialist, with himself, or with a fellow aficionado of ''Death in the Afternoon''.{{efn|Cf. Advertisements For Myself, when Mailer writes, “I used to compare the bed to the bullfight, sometimes seeing myself as the matador and sometimes as the bull”}}{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=495}}When Mailer compares Foreman’s clumsiness to “a street fighter at the end of a long rumble”,{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=204}}the reader does not require any special base of knowledge to access the comparison.

The dynamic set up between Foreman and Ali leads to the rope-a-dope strategy that is ultimately Foreman’s undoing and proof of Ali’s ingenuity. Parodying his own proclivity towards “Germanic formulation,” Mailer teases that he might characterize this approach as “the modal transposition from Active to Passive”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=221}}The serious point about Ali’s strategy, though, is that he did not overpower Foreman (because he could not), and did not even use superior skill. He outsmarted him, outclassed him. Ali kills ''recibiendo''. His technique is the boxing equivalent of the bullfighter’s choice to kill by receiving the bull, to allow the bull’s aggression to work against itself by charging into the sword, rather than attacking the animal. Just as Ali’s technique is legendary, both Mailer and Hemingway have extolled the ''recibiendo'' style as, on several levels, the most sublime way to kill a bull.

Not many Americans understood the importance of ''recibiendo'' before 1926, when Hemingway turned the technique into an objective correlative for courage, the grace-under-pressure ideal that has become threadbare in recent discussions of Hemingway’s texts. In the final bullfight before the end of the festival of San Fermin, Romero’s performance is captured:

{{cquote|The bull watched him. Romero spoke to the bull and tapped one of his feet. The bull charged and Romero waited for the charge, the muleta held low, sighting along the blade, his feet firm. Then without taking a step forward, he became one with the bull...{{sfn|Hemingway|1926|p=224}}}}

In ''Death in the Afternoon'', Hemingway defines ''Recibir'', “to kill the bull from in front awaiting his charge without moving the feet once the charge has started”.{{sfn|Hemingway|1932|p=442}}This definition is nearly a precise restatement of Romero’s{{pg|133|134}}triumph in ''The Sun Also Rises'', his feet firm, waiting for the charge. Hemingway refers to ''recibiendo'' as the most “difficult, dangerous and emotional way to kill bulls”.{{sfn|Hemingway|1985|p=442}}In ''The Dangerous Summer'', Hemingway refers to the technique as “the oldest and the most dangerous and the most beautiful” manner of killing.{{sfn|Hemingway|1985|p=202}}By employing the ''recibiendo'' technique, Antonio Ordóñez in ''The Dangerous Summer'' and Pedro Romero in ''The Sun Also Rises'' impress their observers and impress the writers recording their accomplishments.

Mailer shares Hemingway’s fascination with a matador killing ''recibiendo''. His miniaturized version of ''Death in the Afternoon'', published in 1967, called simply ''The Bullfight'',{{efn|Mailer’s introductory remarks in that text are titled: ''Footnote to Death in the Afternoon.''}} describes this classic style of killing with a sense of awe, and is worth quoting at length:

{{cquote|The bull charged prematurely, and Amado, determined to get the kill, did not skip away but held ground, received the charge, stood there with the sword, turned the bull’s head with the muleta, and the bull impaled himself on the point of the torero’s blade which went right into the proper space between the shoulders, and the bull ran right up on it into his death, took several steps to the side, gave a toss of his head at heaven, and fell. Amado had killed ''recibiendo''. He had killed standing still, receiving the bull while the bull charged. No one had seen that in years.{{sfn|Mailer|1967|p=n.pg}}}}

By leaning back against the ropes and inciting Foreman’s charge, Ali displays the same bravado, courage, and panache in dominating his opponent as these matadors who Mailer and Hemingway laud with such emotion. {{efn|One of the ways Mailer praises Ali in ''When We Were Kings'' is by saying, “What a classic performance,” suggesting the classic style of defeating an opponent that parallels a heroic matador.}}

Mailer and Hemingway mimic the matadors they lionize in two significant ways. For Hemingway, the ''corto y derecho'' style of bullfighting that he describes in “The Undefeated,” another story from ''Men Without Women'', is so closely associated with his own “short and straight” writing style that the reference is almost transparently self-referential and was so already by its publication in 1927. In the same way that Jake’s attention to Romero is revelatory of what he values in a man, Hemingway’s own characterization of Romero is crucial for what Hemingway values in art. When Romero’s performance is summarized as “not brilliant bull-fighting...only perfect bull-fighting”,{{sfn|Hemingway|1926|p=221}}and that Romero’s style contained “no tricks and no{{pg|134|135}}mystifications”,{{sfn|Hemingway|1926|p=223}}Hemingway is separating his own novel from modern masterpieces of the previous few years like ''Ulysses'' or ''The Great Gatsby'' or ''Mrs. Dalloway'' and even anticipating the experimentation of ''The Sound and the Fury'', which would come a few years later.

Just as Hemingway mimics Romero’s clarity, classicism, and linearity in prose,{{efn|The first draft of ''The Sun Also Rises'' originally began in medias res, beginning in Spain, then flashing back to Paris. The change to linearity transcends a narratological decision to achieve thematic importance. For the essential study of ''The Sun Also Rises''’s composition and its implications, see Svoboda.}}Mailer links the passes of his narrative, endeavoring to reach a narrative climax just as the fight reaches its dramatic climax in the eighth round. Unlike Hemingway, who did not cling to figurative language in a conspicuous quest to have the reader understand perfectly a situation which he might not have ever seen before, Mailer’s sequence of comparisons rises to the task as the most memorable writerly performance in his account of the “Rumble in the Jungle.”

A few years earlier, Mailer warned his readers that “Sooner or later, fight metaphors, like fight managers, go sentimental. They go military” (''King of the Hill'').{{sfn|Mailer|1971|p=66}}True to his word, the first similes of the eighth round follow such a trope: Ali chooses his shots “as if he had a reserve of good punches... like a soldier in a siege who counts his bullets”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=206}}Some of the exchanges at the beginning of round eight recall the “great bombardment” of the fifth,{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=207}}which Mailer calls one of the greatest in the history of boxing, with a “shelling reminiscent of artillery battles in World War I”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=195}}While Mailer may caution us of the glibness of comparing boxing to warfare, he gleefully perpetuates the absurdity; he well knows that three minutes of getting punched by a man—even by George Foreman—is nothing like a world war, but he willingly adopts the parlance and conventions of boxing writing.

Towards the end of the seventh round, Mailer uses scenery-chewing similes to control the pace of the narrative, the better to convey Foreman’s mighty fatigue.

{{cquote|Foreman was fighting as slowly as a worn-out fighter in the Golden Gloves, slow as a man walking up a hill of pillows, slow as he would have looked if their first round had been rerun in slow motion, that was no slower than Foreman was fighting now...he was reminiscent...of a linebacker coiling around a runner with his hands and arms in the slow-motion replay...{{sfn|Mailer|1975|pp=204–05}}}}{{pg|135|136}}

And no slower than Mailer is narrating now. In this sequence of three similes, the first and third compare a slow fighter to a slow fighter. To say that Foreman, a tired professional fighter, looks as tired as a tired amateur fighter, is patently ridiculous. Furthermore, to state that he is as slow as a slow-motion version of himself, or a slow-motion version of someone else is not a helpful comparison; it is not vivid and inventive writing. The second simile is brilliant, and would be the only one needed, if the first and third did not aid in establishing the pacing of the moment in the fight.

Directly before the eighth round, Ali’s eyes, by contrast to Foreman’s torpor, are “quick as the eyes, indeed, of a squirrel”,{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=206}}demonstrating the energy, vivacity and speed that has been sapped from Foreman. During the round, Mailer’s similes are telling; they evoke the spectator’s enthusiasm, the witness’s thrill of the final sequence of the fight. Foreman’s legs become “like a horse high-stepping along a road full of rocks”;{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=206}}he bounces off the ropes and pursues Ali “like a man chasing a cat”;{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=206}}he waves his gloves at Ali “like an infant six feet tall waving its uncoordinated battle arm”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=207}}When Ali delivers the ''coup de grâce'', “Foreman’s arms flew out to the side like a man with a parachute jumping out of a plane”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=208}}How does he fall? “He went over like a six-foot, sixty-year-old butler who has just heard tragic news”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=208}}Foreman transforms from a six-foot infant to a six-foot sexagenarian manservant in two minutes. And, finally, Mailer compares a knocked-out fighter to “a drunk hoping to get out of bed to go to work”,{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=208}}an unfortunately predictable association.

All of these similes are Mailer’s own flourishes, the passes that he links together, striving to express his enthusiasm and awe, seeking to get the reader more intimately involved with the experience, culminating with one final comparison, not of Ali or of Foreman, but of his own reaction: our narrator was “like a dim parent who realizes suddenly his child is indeed and indubitably married”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=209}}The figurative rope-a-dope that Mailer employs is unlike Hemingway’s description of the bullfight, but identical in that the scene he is attempting to capture must be described according to the terms of the action being rendered.

Where does ''The Fight'' ultimately belong in Norman Mailer’s life’s work? Is it a self-aggrandizing study of a sport, the nuances of which only a select few appreciate or care about? Is ''The Fight'' Mailer’s ''Death in the Afternoon''— the disquisition on bullfighting Hemingway wrote as a young man—or more precisely his ''The Dangerous Summer'', Hemingway’s revisitation of the{{pg|136|137}}bullfights at the end of his career? Is it Mailer’s ''A Moveable Feast'', a version of his memoirs? Does it equate to the two books Hemingway devoted to African safaris? A combination of all of these? ''The Fight'', ultimately, illuminates the reader of the way Mailer views violence, writing, and Hemingway himself, which positions it as a supplementary text to virtually every other major Mailer effort. With Hemingway and bullfighting as constant presences in ''The Fight'', these intertextual questions yield results that allow Mailer’s project to transcend journalism, or sports writing, to become a key text to determining his restatement of Hemingway’s classic twentieth-century themes.

===Notes===
{{notelist}}

===Citations===
{{Reflist}}

===Works Cited===
{{refbegin|indent=1|20em}}
*{{Cite book| author-last=Beegel | author-first=Susan F. |title=Hemingway’s Craft of Omission: Four Manuscript Examples |location=Ann Arbor, MI |publisher=UMI Research Press |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |date=1988 |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book| author-last= Bruccoli |author-first= Matthew J. |date= 1996 |title=The Only Thing That Counts: Ernest Hemingway-Maxwell Perkins Correspondence |location=New York |publisher=Scribner |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book |author-last=Burwell |author-first=Rose Marie |title=Hemingway: The Postwar Years and the Posthumous Novels |location=Cambridge, UK |publisher=Cambridge UP |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |date=1996 |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book |last=Fitzgerald |first=F. Scott |title=A Life in Letters |editor-first=Matthew J. |editor-last=Bruccoli |location=New York |publisher=Touchstone |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |date=1995 |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite AV media |last=Gast |first=Leon |title=When We Were Kings |date=1996 |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Film |url=https://youtu.be/svhnasgxpqs?si=SF1viC9Lbcs401BG |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite magazine |last=Hemingway |first=Ernest |title=The Art of the Short Story |magazine=Paris Review |date=Spring 1981a|pages=85-102 |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book |last=Hemingway |first=Ernest |authormask=1 |title=The Complete Short Stories of Ernest Hemingway: The Finca Vigía Edition |location=New York |publisher=Scribner’s |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |date=2003 |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book|last=Hemingway |first=Ernest |authormask=1 |title=The Dangerous Summer |date=1985 |location=New York |publisher=Scribner’s |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book|last=Hemingway |first=Ernest |authormask=1 |title=Death in the Afternoon |location=New York |publisher=Scribner’s |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |date=1932 |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book|last=Hemingway |first=Ernest |authormask=1 |title=Ernest Hemingway: Selected Letters, 1917–1961 |location=New York |publisher=Scribner's |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |editor-first=Carlos |editor-last=Baker |date=1981b |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book|last=Hemingway |first=Ernest |authormask=1 |title=For Whom the Bell Tolls |date=1940 |location=New York |publisher=Scribner’s |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book|editor-last=Hemingway |editor-first=Ernest |editormask=1 |title=Men at War: The Best War Stories of All Time |date=1942 |location=New York |publisher=Crown Publishers |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book|last=Hemingway |first=Ernest |authormask=1 |title=The Nick Adams Stories |date=1972 |location=New York |publisher=Scribner's |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book|last=Hemingway |first=Ernest |authormask=1 |title=The Sun Also Rises |date=1926 |location=New York |publisher=Scribner’s |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book|last=Hemingway |first=Ernest |authormask=1 |title=The Sun Also Rises: A Facsimile Edition Volume One |editor-last=Bruccoli |editor-first=Matthew J. |date=1990 |location=Detroit |publisher=Omnigraphics |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite magazine|last=Klosterman |first=Chuck |title=Nothing to Worry About |magazine=Esquire |pages=56-57|isbn= |author-link= |date=Feb 2008 |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book|last=Mailer |first=Norman |title=Advertisements for Myself |location=New York |publisher=Putnam |date=1959 |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book|last=Mailer |first=Norman |authormask=1 |title=The Bullfight: A Photographic Narrative |location=New York |publisher=Mcmillan |date=1967 |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book|last=Mailer |first=Norman |authormask=1 |title=The Fight |location=Boston |publisher=Little, Brown |date=1975 |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book|last=Mailer |first=Norman |authormask=1 |title=King of the Hill: Norman Mailer on the fight of the Century |location=New York |publisher=New American Library |date=1971 |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book|last1=Mailer |first1=Norman |author-mask=1 |first2=John Buffalo |last2=Mailer |title=The Big Empty: Dialogues on Politics, Sex, God, Boxing, Morality, Myth, Poker, and Bad Conscience in America |location=New York |publisher=Nation Books |date=2006 |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book|last=Reynolds |first=Michael S. |title=Hemingway’s First War: The Making of A Farewell to Arms |location=Princeton, NJ |publisher=Princeton UP |date=1976 |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book|last=Reynolds |first=Michael S. |authormask=1 |title=Hemingway: The Paris Years |location=Cambridge, MA |publisher=Basil Blackwell |date=1989 |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book|last=Reynolds |first=Michael S. |authormask=1 |title=The Young Hemingway |location=New York |publisher=Norton |date=1998 |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book|last=Ross |first=Lillian |title=Portrait of Hemingway |location=New York |publisher=Simon & Schuster |date=1961 |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book |last=Svoboda |first=Frederic Joseph |title=Ernest Hemingway & The Sun Also Rises: The crafting of a Style |location=Lawrence, KS |publisher=UP of Kansas |date=1983 |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
{{Refend}}

The Mailer Review/Volume 4, 2010/Norman Mailer's The Fight: Hemingway, Bullfighting, and the Lovely Metaphysics of Boxing

2025-04-13T18:03:06Z

JHadaway: Added a space between Men Without Women and (1927)

{{DISPLAYTITLE:{{BASEPAGENAME}}/{{SUBPAGENAME}}}}
{{Working}}
{{MR04}}
{{byline|last=Cirino|first=Mark|abstract=Although Norman Mailer’s ''[[The Fight]]'' is ostensibly reportage about the Muhammad Ali-George Foreman championship heavyweight boxing match, we learn more about Mailer and his aesthetic and artistic values than we do about either fighter. One of Mailer’s methods for capturing his Zaire experience is to employ Ernest Hemingway as a ghostly father figure, a ''doppelgänger'', both an inspiration and a nagging reminder of his own inadequacies. An intertextual analysis of these two writers demonstrates the way Mailer uses boxing to offer his inflection of Hemingway’s twentieth-century themes. |url=http://prmlr.us/mr04cir }}

{{dc|dc=A|lthough Norman Mailer’s ''The Fight'' is ostensibly reportage}} about the Muhammad Ali-George Foreman championship heavyweight boxing match in Zaire on 30 October 1974, we learn more about Mailer and his aesthetic and artistic values than we do about either fighter. We also learn far more than Mailer’s thoughts on boxing; we glean a broader metaphysical and philosophic notion of action and danger, and the writer’s own role in recording it in prose. One of Mailer’s methods for capturing his Zaire experience is to employ Ernest Hemingway as a ghostly father figure, a ''doppelgänger'', both an inspiration and a nagging reminder of his own inadequacies. Hemingway, whose suicide was thirteen years before the fight, is still active in Mailer’s text, who was enjoying a consciously Hemingwayesque project in Africa.

In Chuck Klosterman’s recent assessment of Norman Mailer as a boxing writer, he writes that “there is nothing metaphysical about getting punched in the face".{{sfn|Klosterman|2008|p=56}}This assertion suggests that Klosterman either has never been punched in the face or was concentrating on the wrong sensation when he was. Mailer and Hemingway represent the boxing ring and the bullfighting arena as possessing such metaphysical possibilities that they invite us to appreciate each of their values in human behavior and the qualities they demand their artists to possess. In ''The Fight'', Mailer’s conspicuous comparisons of boxing to bullfighting, Hemingway, and to art further invite{{pg|123|124}}comparison to Hemingway’s earlier texts. In all instances, we see Mailer and Hemingway with their incisive, intellectual evocations of men of thought (that is, Ali, and any quintessential Hemingway Hero, such as Robert Jordan in ''For Whom the Bell Tolls'' or his short story alter ego Nick Adams) in moments of peak activity. So, if Klosterman limits the transcendence of boxing simply to “primordial reality” and the “base qualities of being alive”,{{sfn|Klosterman|2008|p=56}}he sharply diverges from Mailer and Hemingway, who find in the maelstrom of a boxing match or the murderous possibilities of a bullring, life’s truest, most elevated and aesthetic moments. “Every wound,” Mailer observes in ''The Fight'', “has its own revelation”,{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=214}}both promising the importance of chronicling the defeated and the damaged and signaling his own fascination and debt to the warriors and athletes and even artists of the Hemingway canon. While Mailer may be overly epigrammatic, this aphorism accurately synopsizes the “wound theory” of criticism that defined (and later encumbered) Hemingway Studies for decades.

To Hemingway, boxing might have been important for more complex reasons than many readers ever understood. A celebrated example of this tension offers a useful illustration. The sordid history behind F. Scott Fitzgerald’s revisions to Hemingway’s short story “Fifty Grand” is relevant not as a salacious biographical anecdote or to provide retrospective textual minutiae. Instead, this conflict’s enduring controversy is itself the issue, one that reveals a major facet of Hemingway’s approach to character, and the larger importance of boxing to Hemingway and writers that would follow, primarily Mailer.

“Fifty Grand,” included in Hemingway’s second volume of short stories, ''Men Without Women'' (1927), was inspired by the anecdote with which the typescript draft begins:
{{cquote|Up at the gym over the Garden one time somebody says to Jack, “Say Jack how did you happen to beat Leonard anyway?” And Jack says, “Well, you see Benny’s an awful smart boxer. All the time he’s in there he’s thinking and all the time he’s thinking I was hitting him.”{{sfn|Beegel|1988|p=15}}}}

Lillian Ross reports Hemingway re-telling the story in 1950, about a quarter-century later: “‘One time I asked Jack, speaking of a fight with Benny Leonard,’“How did you handle Benny so easy, Jack?” “Ernie,” he said,“Benny{{pg|124|125}}is an awfully smart boxer. All the time he’s boxing, he’s thinking. All the time he was thinking, I was hitting him.” Hemingway gave a hoarse laugh, as though he had heard the story for the first time...He laughed again. ‘All the time he was thinking, I was hitting him’”.{{sfn|Ross|1961|p=64}}Ross implies surprise that this stale anecdote is so alive for Hemingway, standing in for the readers who may not have appreciated its importance. In his obnoxious essay “The Art of the Short Story,” written in 1959 and unpublished in his lifetime, Hemingway recollects of “Fifty Grand”: “This story originally started like this: “‘How did you handle Benny so easy, Jack?’ Soldier asked him. ‘Benny’s an awful smart boxer,’ Jack said. ‘All the time he’s in there, he’s thinking. All the time he’s thinking, I was hitting him'".{{sfn|Ross|1961|p=88}}These examples demonstrate that his acquiescence to Fitzgerald’s editorial judgment in 1927 haunted him for three-and-a-half decades, literally until his death.{{efn|Elsewhere, Hemingway remarks on the intelligence of fighters just as he evaluates their physical skill: in 1922, Hemingway describes Battling Siki, the challenger to Georges Carpentier, “siki tough slowthinker but mauling style may puzzle carp”.{{sfn|Reynolds|1989|p=73}}In his early journalism, Hemingway reports that, “Jack Dempsey has an imposing list of knockouts over bums and tramps, who were nothing but big slow-moving, slow-thinking set ups for him”.{{sfn|Reynolds|1998|p=192}}Indeed, the payoff of “Fifty Grand”—when Jack Brennan double crosses the double crossers—comes when Jack says, “It’s funny how fast you can think when it means that much money”.{{sfn|Hemingway|p=249}}}}

Fitzgerald’s objection to Hemingway opening the short story with the boxing anecdote was like his misgivings about the original beginning of ''The Sun Also Rises'', what he perceived to be Hemingway’s “tendency to envelope or...to ''embalm'' in mere wordiness an anecdote or joke”.{{sfn|Fitzgerald|p=142|1995}}As Susan Beegel notes in her discussion of Hemingway’s impulse to include the anecdote, “Thinking takes time, and boxing is a sport in which speed is of the essence”.{{sfn|Beegel|1988|p=15}}Beegel’s point must be extended: life, at times, is a sport in which speed is of the essence, particularly if it is to be lived to its fullest. As we see in Mailer—think of ''The Naked and the Dead'' and certainly ''The Fight''—Hemingway placed all his characters in situations in which a quick, strategic, pragmatic response is more appropriate than contemplation and conceptualization, despite the characters’ natural inclinations to indulge their memories, imaginative speculation, and ruminations. Muhammad Ali, after all, is no mindless slugger; he is portrayed as a genius, a scientist, an artist, or a “brain fighter,” in the champ’s own words. More than a boxer, Mailer considers Ali “the first psychologist of the body”,{{sfn|Mailer|1971|p=23}}suggesting that his power is in his mind, as opposed to the brute force, the rage, and the animalistic approach of Foreman and Joe Frazier.

But why did Hemingway’s remorse over deferring to Fitzgerald’s suggestions for “Fifty Grand” fester for the rest of his life? After all, what does one paragraph matter? In “The Art of the Short Story,” Hemingway recounts his version of the circumstances behind the editorial change, and his regret over excising “that lovely revelation of the metaphysics of boxing”.{{sfn|Hemingway|1981a|p=89}}{{pg|125|126}}

Hemingway’s essay taunts Fitzgerald for not appreciating that Hemingway was “trying to explain to him how a truly great boxer like Jack Britton functioned”.{{sfn|Hemingway|1981a|p=89}}The manuscript of “Fifty Grand” betrays Hemingway’s bitterness: on it, he scrawled, “1st 3 pages mutilated by Scott Fitzgerald”.{{sfn|Burwell|1996|p=148}}How can one writer—particularly an established one, which by 1927 Hemingway was—blame a colleague for ruining his own text? This irrational grudge must have endured so persistently because Hemingway disobeyed his instincts as a writer, ironically behaving with the same lack of intuitive trust as the excerpt negatively portrays Benny Leonard. Hemingway obeyed Fitzgerald to great success with ''The Sun Also Rises'', did so again the following year with “Fifty Grand,” and, by 1929, responded to Fitzgerald’s criticisms of A Farewell to Arms with “Kiss my ass”.{{sfn|Reynolds|1976|p=78}}

Fitzgerald and others have misconstrued aspects of Hemingway’s objectives, which Mailer grasped intuitively and intellectually. The central thrust to Hemingway’s literary project was to dramatize the compromised functioning of thought as the modern consciousness is incorporated into the violent activities of the twentieth-century man of action. Hemingway’s portrayal of thinking during war takes this idea to the extreme. In Hemingway’s introduction to ''Men at War'', the anthology of war writing he edited, he writes, “Cowardice, as distinguished from panic, is almost always simply a lack of ability to suspend the functioning of the imagination. Learning to suspend your imagination and live completely in the very second of the present minute with no before and no after is the greatest gift a soldier can acquire. It, naturally, is the opposite of all those gifts a writer should have”.{{sfn|Hemingway|1942|p=xxiv}}Hemingway’s articulation of this conflict is a revelation: he is disclosing the tension that defines his work, the internal struggle between a man of action and a man of thought. Hemingway is distinguishing between the curse of Ishmael and the curse of Stubb in ''Moby-Dick'': Ishmael cannot turn the thinking off; for him, the sea and meditation are inextricable, even when he is on the night watch; Ahab’s eleventh commandment, on the other hand, is: do not think.

This dichotomy is always in play in the Hemingway text, and sometimes baldly explicit. Early in ''For Whom the Bell Tolls'', for example, Robert Jordan coaxes himself, “Turn off the thinking now...You’re a bridge-blower now. Not a thinker”,{{sfn|Hemingway|1940|p=17}}just as he later disingenuously asserts, “My mind is in suspension until we win the war”.{sfn|Hemingway|1940|p=245}}In a 1938 letter to Maxwell Perkins,{{pg|126|127}}Hemingway blames his depressed mood on the rigors of living in a Spanish war zone while simultaneously trying to write his stories of the Spanish Civil War: “If I sound bitter or gloomy throw it out. It’s that it takes one kind of training and frame of mind to do what I’ve been doing and another to write prose”.{{sfn|Bruccoli|1996|p=253}}Ultimately, Hemingway’s contribution to the psychological novel, and to literary Modernism’s conception of mind, is his depiction of how a human being thinks during episodes of great stress, including matadors, boxers, and soldiers, as well as those haunted by their memories of those experiences.

For the purposes of Mailer’s and Hemingway’s intertextuality, boxing and bullfighting are virtually synonymous. Each sport affords the spectator an opportunity to witness violence in a largely—but not completely—sanitized outlet. ''In The Sun Also Rises'', a novel that essentially introduced the bullfight to mainstream American consciousness, boxing and bullfighting are explicitly compared. In addition to the scapegoat Robert Cohn’s dubious (but eventually demonstrable) boxing background, Jake Barnes and his friend Bill Gorton attend the Ledoux-Kid Francis fight in Paris less than a week before their excursion to the Pamplona bullfights. Later, during the ''desencajonada'', or unloading of the bulls, however, Jake constructs the simile of bullfighting to boxing. He tells Brett Ashley, “Look how he knows how to use his horns...He’s got a left and right just like a boxer.” As Brett confirms, “I saw him shift from his left to his right horn”.{{sfn|Hemingway|1926|p=144}}The two activities are clearly appealing to Hemingway: one man, by himself, confronting his own limits as he encounters an attacker with his skill, knowledge, courage, and mind control. Both activities are ritual performances, yet both flirt with the possibility of death, danger, crippling injury, as well as murder.

In Mailer, similarly, the allure of boxing seems to be the formalized structure of a violent situation as an attenuated restatement of war experience. Mailer has suggested as much, saying that boxing presents “a way for a violent man to begin to comprehend that living in a classic situation—in other words, living within certain limitations rather than expressing oneself uncontrollably is a way to live that he didn’t have before”.{{sfn|Mailer|Mailer|2006|p=185}}Mailer’s articulation is anticipated by Jake Barnes himself, who explains the process to Brett so that the bullfight “became more something that was going on with a definite end, and less of a spectacle with unexplained horrors”;{{sfn|Mailer|Mailer|2006|p=171}}in other words, the difference between bullfighting/boxing and war. Just as Mailer differentiates between a championship boxing match between{{pg|127|128}}professionals and a street fight, Hemingway distinguishes between a properly sanctioned bullfight and an amateur bullfight: “The amateur bullfight is as unorganized as a riot and all results are uncertain, bulls or men may be killed; it is all chance and the temper of the populace. The formal bullfight is a commercial spectacle built on the planned and ordered death of the bull and that is its end".{{sfn|Hemingway|1932|p=372}}If the Marquis of Queensbury rules codify violence in boxing and allow it to transcend a back-alley brawl, Hemingway and Mailer are always conscious of this spectrum of violence and its relative level of chaos.

To Mailer and Hemingway, the men who prevail within this organized violence transcend athletic excellence and attain the status of aesthetic and artistic exemplars. Mailer begins ''The Fight'' by describing Ali as “our most beautiful man”,{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=3}}just as Jake says that bullfighting prodigy Pedro Romero is the “best-looking boy I have ever seen”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=167}}{{efn|After Ali’s victory, Mailer suggests that “Maybe he never appeared more handsome”{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=212}}}}Ali was thirty-two when the Rumble in the Jungle took place; Romero is no more than twenty. Mailer was fifty-one in Zaire; Hemingway turned twenty-six in the summer of 1925, when ''The Sun Also Rises'' was composed. If Ali and Romero serve as embodiments of male beauty, Hemingway also uses Romero as a counterbalance to the malaise that had infected the “lost” members of the post-war generation. When Robert Cohn laments, “my life is going so fast and I’m not really living it,” Jake responds, “Nobody ever lives their life all the way up except bull-fighters”.{{sfn|Hemingway|1932|p=18}}Fitzgerald texts like ''The Great Gatsby'' impute an additional intensity of experience to the wealthy; Hemingway ascribes this same quality to the courageous activity of bullfighters. Boxing is precisely the same. In the extended set-piece of the Ledoux-Francis fight that Hemingway sketched in the first draft of SAR, the characters remark on the fight and Ledoux in a way that previews their same awe of bullfighters. Bill Gorton tells Jake, “By God Ledoux is great”{{sfn|Hemingway|1972|p=233}}and asks, “Why don’t they have guys like that in my business (that is, writing)"?{{sfn|Hemingway|1972|p=233}} Bill later deflects a compliment by telling Jake, “I’m not such a good man as Ledoux”.{{sfn|Hemingway|1972|p=234}}In the same way, the bullfighter Maera, whom Hemingway kills off in Chapter XIV of ''In Our Time'', is declared by Nick Adams to be “the greatest man he’d ever known".{{sfn|Hemingway|1972|p=237}}Between Maera and James Joyce, Hemingway wrote Ezra Pound in 1924, there is “absolutely no comparison in art...Maera by a mile”.{{sfn|Hemingway|1981b|p=119}}Boxing and bullfighters emerge in these texts as ideals, both masculine and artistic.

The artistic component of the allure of these sports is Mailer’s explicit{{pg|128|129}}reason for attending the Rumble in the Jungle. When Mailer attributes Foreman’s reference to himself in the third person as equivalent to the “schizophrenia” that “great artists” possess,{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=56}}it echoes Hemingway’s Romero who “talked about his work as something altogether apart from himself”.{{sfn|Hemingway|1926|p=178}}For Mailer, though, the real artist is of course not Foreman, but Ali. “If ever a fighter,” Mailer writes, “had been able to demonstrate that boxing was a twentieth century art, it must be Ali”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=162}}Hemingway writes in ''Death in the Afternoon'' that the only trait separating bull-fighting from its inclusion as one of the major arts is its impermanence. In ''The Dangerous Summer'', Hemingway pointedly compares bullfighting to art: “A bullfighter can never see the work of art that he is making. He has no chance to correct it as a painter or writer has. He cannot hear it as a musician can All the time, he is making his work of art he knows that he must keep within the limits of his skill and the knowledge of the animal”.{{efn|Earlier in The Dangerous Summer, Luis Miguel Dominguín is also compared to an artist: “He had the complete and respectful concentration on his work which marks all great artists”{{sfn|Hemingway|1985|p=106}}}}{{sfn|Hemingway|1985|p=198}}Whether Hemingway is posturing in an intentionally provocative way or not—he surely enjoyed presenting himself as the only novelist who would prefer to be Maera killing a bull than Joyce writing ''Ulysses''—it is sufficient to note that in his career-long characterizations of bullfighters, he saw artistry and exemplary conduct when they excelled during their performances, and displayed high and noble aims in their approaches to their work. The crucial way that bullfighting is instructive to a reading of ''The Fight'' emerges when Mailer captures Ali’s demeanor in the ring and the strategy he uses to dismantle and ultimately defeat Foreman. This exalted strategy is two-fold: in the first round, Ali relies on the enormously dangerous right-hand leads to score against Foreman. The audacity of this means of attack is captured in italicized awe in ''The Fight''. It is not a right, but a ''right''. “Right-hand leads!” Mailer exults, “My God!”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=180}}He explains the technicality that leading with the right “is the most difficult and dangerous punch. Difficult to deliver and dangerous to oneself”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=179}}Hemingway makes the same observation in Romero’s code of performance, which is that he has “the old thing, the holding of his purity of line through the maximum of exposure”.{{sfn|Hemingway|1926|p=172}}Ali might have danced his way to victory against Foreman, but he did not. He deftly took on the punishment of a much stronger man, and attacked in a way that would leave himself vulnerable, all in the hopes of sapping Foreman’s power. These are the qualities which Hemingway and Mailer extol.

In rounds two through five, Ali uses the infamous rope-a-dope, which absorbs punishment as Foreman punches himself out, using the great{{pg|129|130}}champion’s strength against himself. The parallel between Ali’s strategy and the matador’s gambit is evident. Hemingway quotes the bullfighter El Gallo as shunning exercises that would increase his strength: “What do I want with strength, man? The bull weighs half a ton. Should I take exercises for strength to match him? Let the bull have the strength”.{{sfn|Hemingway|1932|p=21}}As this remark suggests, rather than the simple-minded machismo that Hemingway is too frequently reputed to value, the virtue of the effective matador comes in mastering the fear that will inevitably arise when a man encounters a beast that dwarfs him. The successful matador must control his thoughts and emotions and rely on his skill and knowledge to subdue his opponent. Ali faces something precisely equivalent in Zaire. During a training sequence in ''When We Were Kings'', Ali yells out, “He’s the bull. I’m the matador,” clearly deferring to Foreman the trait of power and aggressiveness, and assuming for himself the wit, the knowledge, and the artistry needed to prevail.

Mailer’s hagiography of Ali, then, becomes the more vital when we go beyond his admiration for the fighter to recognize why this admiration was so profound. Ali’s preparation for the Foreman fight (in the 234-page Vintage edition of ''The Fight'', the opening bell to the knockout is confined to pages 177–210; thus, in a book called ''The Fight'', only fourteen percent of the book chronicles the fight{{efn|Mailer’s pacing might have been a model for '' When We Were Kings'', an 89-minute film of which the fight itself spans 7:14, or about 8%.}}follows El Gallo’s logical yet somewhat counter-intuitive training procedure. Mailer reports that Ali confesses, “Foreman can hit harder than me”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=16}}During the uninspired sparring session that opens ''The Fight'', Ali’s strategy is presaged. Since he knows he cannot compete with Foreman’s strength, Ali contrives to use Foreman’s strength against him. Mailer chronicles this strategy meticulously, writing of Ali that “part of his art was to reduce the force of each blow he received to the head and then fraction it further”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=4}}Art? An art to getting hit in the face? If so, it is coupled by fractioning, a melding of the art of war and the sweet science of boxing. Ali consciously courts the same dichotomy that Mailer proposes. Skipping rope in his training quarters, he barks out, “I’m a brain fighter. I’m scientific. I’m artistic” (''When We Were Kings''). The marriage of art and science continues when Mailer describes “the second half of the art of getting hit was to learn the trajectories with which punches glanced off your glove and still hit you”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=5}}If the study of trajectories is associated with physics, Ali the artist is associated with dance and writing and theatre. This almost suicidal strategy—unappreciated, Mailer suggests, by lesser minds like sportswriters and fight critics—recalls the “calculus” with which {{pg|130|131}}Hemingway claimed he wrote ''Across the River and Into the Trees'', destined for dismissal by ignorant critics. Mailer is unapologetic about twinning art and boxing: he references Joyce’s ''A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man'', Rembrandt’s “The Night Watch,” ''Moby-Dick'', and even Hemingway’s ''A Farewell to Arms'', reaching to masterpieces of art and literature to evoke athletic performance.

Mailer extends this articulation to propose that Ali has a physiological understanding of receiving violence that is almost hair-trigger in its fineness. “It was a study,” he writes, “to watch Ali take punches”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=5}}Mailer sees Ali “teaching his nervous system to transmit shock faster than other men could”{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=4}}and possessing the ability to “assimilate punches faster than other fighters,” as Ali “could literally transmit the shock through more parts of his body or direct it to its best path”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=5}}After watching a Foreman training session, Mailer concluded, “it seemed certain that if Ali wished to win, he would have to take more punishment than ever before in his career”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=53}}As Mailer mentions during his commentary in ''When We Were Kings'', “It was as if he wanted to train his body to receive these messages of punishment.”

Just as Ali is positioned as an artist, a craftsman, and a scientist, Mailer describes him in the same way that Hemingway describes matadors. During the first round of the fight, after Ali has tagged Foreman with a scoring punch, Foreman “charged in rage”,{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=178}}a raging bull whose strength must be absorbed, reallocated, frustrated, and then eliminated by the more intelligent foe. After another exchange, in fact, “Foreman responded like a bull. He roared forward. A dangerous bull. His gloves were out like horns”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=178–79}}Even the collection of declarative sentences, uncluttered by punctuation marks, recalls the way Hemingway captures Romero’s style in the ring. After Ali’s strategy of absorbing punches against the ropes emerges, Mailer writes that Foreman “had the pensive expression of a steer being dogged to the ground by a cowboy”,{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=184}}continuing the juxtaposition of Ali’s savvy with Foreman’s depiction as an animal, a beast of the same variety that charges mindlessly and dies inevitably in Pamplona. A brilliant depiction of Ali using his facial expression to deceive Foreman furthers the comparison: Ali, against the ropes, is
{{cquote|now banishing Foreman’s head with the turn of a matador sending away a bull after five fine passes were made, and once when he seemed to hesitate just a little too long, something stirred in{{pg|131|132}}George-like that across-the-arena knowledge of a bull when it is ready at last to gore the matador rather than the cloth, and like a member of a cuadrilla, somebody in Ali’s corner screamed, “Careful! Careful! Careful”!{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=196–97}}}}

Is this comparison self-indulgent? How many American readers would find a description of Ali’s defensive strategy in any way clarified by an esoteric gesture towards a bullfight? This link only makes sense in the context of Mailer’s incessant negotiation with the specter of Ernest Hemingway, shadowing him during his journey through Zaire.

Hemingway is introduced into the narrative when Mailer arrives in an unappealing Kinshasa with a stomach ailment, and immediately name drops Joseph Conrad and Ernest Hemingway: Conrad for his iconic depiction of the Congo, and Hemingway, about whom Mailer wonders, “Was it part of Hemingway’s genius that he could travel with healthy insides?”,{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=22}}ignoring the overwhelming catalogue of incidents and accidents that Hemingway suffered during his lifetime of travels. When Mailer hears the mighty roar of a lion, he begins a reverie: “To be eaten by a lion on the banks of the Congo— who could fail to notice that it was Hemingway’s own lion waiting down these years for the flesh of Ernest until an appropriate substitute had at last arrived?”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=92}}If the sound of the lion causes Mailer to fancy a lofty reenactment of Francis Macomber’s paranoia, or Mary’s quest for the lion in ''Under Kilimanjaro'', he does well to confess that the joke is on him: Zaire has a zoo. In Mailer’s description of a drunken balancing act on a balcony outside his hotel room, he speculates on the possibility of dying in this way. “What could be worse than accidental suicide?” he asks rhetorically. “A reverberation of Hemingway’s end shivered its echo”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=123}}These three examples indeed position Mailer as an “appropriate substitute” for Hemingway, both in his ambitious writing project in Africa, his encounters with the beasts of the jungle, and the courting of his own death, with Hemingway’s 1961 suicide still hovering over Mailer’s behavior, his thoughts, and his writing.

But Mailer is not through. When he puts forth Ali’s quandary once the fight is under his control, that he must choose between a victory by either a lethargic decision or the flourish of a spectacular knockout, he is compared to “a torero after a great faena who must still face the drear potential of a protracted inept and disappointing kill,” while Foreman remains “a bull”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=200}}In the sixth round, by which time the bout’s fate is foretold, Ali sizes{{pg|132|133}}up Foreman “the way a bullfighter lines up a bull before going in over the horns for the kill...a fair conclusion was that the bull still had an access of strength too great for the kill”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=202}}In a sequence where Mailer would make dozens of comparisons, frantically seeking metaphorical images to convey the magnitude of the scene, his clinging to bullfighting imagery is striking thematically and strategically, even if the image might only resonate with a specialist, with himself, or with a fellow aficionado of ''Death in the Afternoon''.{{efn|Cf. Advertisements For Myself, when Mailer writes, “I used to compare the bed to the bullfight, sometimes seeing myself as the matador and sometimes as the bull”}}{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=495}}When Mailer compares Foreman’s clumsiness to “a street fighter at the end of a long rumble”,{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=204}}the reader does not require any special base of knowledge to access the comparison.

The dynamic set up between Foreman and Ali leads to the rope-a-dope strategy that is ultimately Foreman’s undoing and proof of Ali’s ingenuity. Parodying his own proclivity towards “Germanic formulation,” Mailer teases that he might characterize this approach as “the modal transposition from Active to Passive”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=221}}The serious point about Ali’s strategy, though, is that he did not overpower Foreman (because he could not), and did not even use superior skill. He outsmarted him, outclassed him. Ali kills ''recibiendo''. His technique is the boxing equivalent of the bullfighter’s choice to kill by receiving the bull, to allow the bull’s aggression to work against itself by charging into the sword, rather than attacking the animal. Just as Ali’s technique is legendary, both Mailer and Hemingway have extolled the ''recibiendo'' style as, on several levels, the most sublime way to kill a bull.

Not many Americans understood the importance of ''recibiendo'' before 1926, when Hemingway turned the technique into an objective correlative for courage, the grace-under-pressure ideal that has become threadbare in recent discussions of Hemingway’s texts. In the final bullfight before the end of the festival of San Fermin, Romero’s performance is captured:

{{cquote|The bull watched him. Romero spoke to the bull and tapped one of his feet. The bull charged and Romero waited for the charge, the muleta held low, sighting along the blade, his feet firm. Then without taking a step forward, he became one with the bull...{{sfn|Hemingway|1926|p=224}}}}

In ''Death in the Afternoon'', Hemingway defines ''Recibir'', “to kill the bull from in front awaiting his charge without moving the feet once the charge has started”.{{sfn|Hemingway|1932|p=442}}This definition is nearly a precise restatement of Romero’s{{pg|133|134}}triumph in ''The Sun Also Rises'', his feet firm, waiting for the charge. Hemingway refers to ''recibiendo'' as the most “difficult, dangerous and emotional way to kill bulls”.{{sfn|Hemingway|1985|p=442}}In ''The Dangerous Summer'', Hemingway refers to the technique as “the oldest and the most dangerous and the most beautiful” manner of killing.{{sfn|Hemingway|1985|p=202}}By employing the ''recibiendo'' technique, Antonio Ordóñez in ''The Dangerous Summer'' and Pedro Romero in ''The Sun Also Rises'' impress their observers and impress the writers recording their accomplishments.

Mailer shares Hemingway’s fascination with a matador killing ''recibiendo''. His miniaturized version of ''Death in the Afternoon'', published in 1967, called simply ''The Bullfight'',{{efn|Mailer’s introductory remarks in that text are titled: ''Footnote to Death in the Afternoon.''}} describes this classic style of killing with a sense of awe, and is worth quoting at length:

{{cquote|The bull charged prematurely, and Amado, determined to get the kill, did not skip away but held ground, received the charge, stood there with the sword, turned the bull’s head with the muleta, and the bull impaled himself on the point of the torero’s blade which went right into the proper space between the shoulders, and the bull ran right up on it into his death, took several steps to the side, gave a toss of his head at heaven, and fell. Amado had killed ''recibiendo''. He had killed standing still, receiving the bull while the bull charged. No one had seen that in years.{{sfn|Mailer|1967|p=n.pg}}}}

By leaning back against the ropes and inciting Foreman’s charge, Ali displays the same bravado, courage, and panache in dominating his opponent as these matadors who Mailer and Hemingway laud with such emotion. {{efn|One of the ways Mailer praises Ali in ''When We Were Kings'' is by saying, “What a classic performance,” suggesting the classic style of defeating an opponent that parallels a heroic matador.}}

Mailer and Hemingway mimic the matadors they lionize in two significant ways. For Hemingway, the ''corto y derecho'' style of bullfighting that he describes in “The Undefeated,” another story from ''Men Without Women'', is so closely associated with his own “short and straight” writing style that the reference is almost transparently self-referential and was so already by its publication in 1927. In the same way that Jake’s attention to Romero is revelatory of what he values in a man, Hemingway’s own characterization of Romero is crucial for what Hemingway values in art. When Romero’s performance is summarized as “not brilliant bull-fighting...only perfect bull-fighting”,{{sfn|Hemingway|1926|p=221}}and that Romero’s style contained “no tricks and no{{pg|134|135}}mystifications”,{{sfn|Hemingway|1926|p=223}}Hemingway is separating his own novel from modern masterpieces of the previous few years like ''Ulysses'' or ''The Great Gatsby'' or ''Mrs. Dalloway'' and even anticipating the experimentation of ''The Sound and the Fury'', which would come a few years later.

Just as Hemingway mimics Romero’s clarity, classicism, and linearity in prose,{{efn|The first draft of ''The Sun Also Rises'' originally began in medias res, beginning in Spain, then flashing back to Paris. The change to linearity transcends a narratological decision to achieve thematic importance. For the essential study of ''The Sun Also Rises''’s composition and its implications, see Svoboda.}}Mailer links the passes of his narrative, endeavoring to reach a narrative climax just as the fight reaches its dramatic climax in the eighth round. Unlike Hemingway, who did not cling to figurative language in a conspicuous quest to have the reader understand perfectly a situation which he might not have ever seen before, Mailer’s sequence of comparisons rises to the task as the most memorable writerly performance in his account of the “Rumble in the Jungle.”

A few years earlier, Mailer warned his readers that “Sooner or later, fight metaphors, like fight managers, go sentimental. They go military” (''King of the Hill'').{{sfn|Mailer|1971|p=66}}True to his word, the first similes of the eighth round follow such a trope: Ali chooses his shots “as if he had a reserve of good punches... like a soldier in a siege who counts his bullets”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=206}}Some of the exchanges at the beginning of round eight recall the “great bombardment” of the fifth,{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=207}}which Mailer calls one of the greatest in the history of boxing, with a “shelling reminiscent of artillery battles in World War I”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=195}}While Mailer may caution us of the glibness of comparing boxing to warfare, he gleefully perpetuates the absurdity; he well knows that three minutes of getting punched by a man—even by George Foreman—is nothing like a world war, but he willingly adopts the parlance and conventions of boxing writing.

Towards the end of the seventh round, Mailer uses scenery-chewing similes to control the pace of the narrative, the better to convey Foreman’s mighty fatigue.

{{cquote|Foreman was fighting as slowly as a worn-out fighter in the Golden Gloves, slow as a man walking up a hill of pillows, slow as he would have looked if their first round had been rerun in slow motion, that was no slower than Foreman was fighting now...he was reminiscent...of a linebacker coiling around a runner with his hands and arms in the slow-motion replay...{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=204–05}}}}{{pg|135|136}}

And no slower than Mailer is narrating now. In this sequence of three similes, the first and third compare a slow fighter to a slow fighter. To say that Foreman, a tired professional fighter, looks as tired as a tired amateur fighter, is patently ridiculous. Furthermore, to state that he is as slow as a slow-motion version of himself, or a slow-motion version of someone else is not a helpful comparison; it is not vivid and inventive writing. The second simile is brilliant, and would be the only one needed, if the first and third did not aid in establishing the pacing of the moment in the fight.

Directly before the eighth round, Ali’s eyes, by contrast to Foreman’s torpor, are “quick as the eyes, indeed, of a squirrel”,{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=206}}demonstrating the energy, vivacity and speed that has been sapped from Foreman. During the round, Mailer’s similes are telling; they evoke the spectator’s enthusiasm, the witness’s thrill of the final sequence of the fight. Foreman’s legs become “like a horse high-stepping along a road full of rocks”;{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=206}}he bounces off the ropes and pursues Ali “like a man chasing a cat”;{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=206}}he waves his gloves at Ali “like an infant six feet tall waving its uncoordinated battle arm”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=207}}When Ali delivers the ''coup de grâce'', “Foreman’s arms flew out to the side like a man with a parachute jumping out of a plane”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=208}}How does he fall? “He went over like a six-foot, sixty-year-old butler who has just heard tragic news”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=208}}Foreman transforms from a six-foot infant to a six-foot sexagenarian manservant in two minutes. And, finally, Mailer compares a knocked-out fighter to “a drunk hoping to get out of bed to go to work”,{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=208}}an unfortunately predictable association.

All of these similes are Mailer’s own flourishes, the passes that he links together, striving to express his enthusiasm and awe, seeking to get the reader more intimately involved with the experience, culminating with one final comparison, not of Ali or of Foreman, but of his own reaction: our narrator was “like a dim parent who realizes suddenly his child is indeed and indubitably married”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=209}}The figurative rope-a-dope that Mailer employs is unlike Hemingway’s description of the bullfight, but identical in that the scene he is attempting to capture must be described according to the terms of the action being rendered.

Where does ''The Fight'' ultimately belong in Norman Mailer’s life’s work? Is it a self-aggrandizing study of a sport, the nuances of which only a select few appreciate or care about? Is ''The Fight'' Mailer’s ''Death in the Afternoon''— the disquisition on bullfighting Hemingway wrote as a young man—or more precisely his ''The Dangerous Summer'', Hemingway’s revisitation of the{{pg|136|137}}bullfights at the end of his career? Is it Mailer’s ''A Moveable Feast'', a version of his memoirs? Does it equate to the two books Hemingway devoted to African safaris? A combination of all of these? ''The Fight'', ultimately, illuminates the reader of the way Mailer views violence, writing, and Hemingway himself, which positions it as a supplementary text to virtually every other major Mailer effort. With Hemingway and bullfighting as constant presences in ''The Fight'', these intertextual questions yield results that allow Mailer’s project to transcend journalism, or sports writing, to become a key text to determining his restatement of Hemingway’s classic twentieth-century themes.

===Notes===
{{notelist}}

===Citations===
{{Reflist}}

===Works Cited===
{{refbegin|indent=1|20em}}
*{{Cite book| author-last=Beegel | author-first=Susan F. |title=Hemingway’s Craft of Omission: Four Manuscript Examples |location=Ann Arbor, MI |publisher=UMI Research Press |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |date=1988 |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book| author-last= Bruccoli |author-first= Matthew J. |date= 1996 |title=The Only Thing That Counts: Ernest Hemingway-Maxwell Perkins Correspondence |location=New York |publisher=Scribner |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book |author-last=Burwell |author-first=Rose Marie |title=Hemingway: The Postwar Years and the Posthumous Novels |location=Cambridge, UK |publisher=Cambridge UP |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |date=1996 |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book |last=Fitzgerald |first=F. Scott |title=A Life in Letters |editor-first=Matthew J. |editor-last=Bruccoli |location=New York |publisher=Touchstone |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |date=1995 |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite AV media |last=Gast |first=Leon |title=When We Were Kings |date=1996 |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Film |url=https://youtu.be/svhnasgxpqs?si=SF1viC9Lbcs401BG |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite magazine |last=Hemingway |first=Ernest |title=The Art of the Short Story |magazine=Paris Review |date=Spring 1981a|pages=85-102 |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book |last=Hemingway |first=Ernest |authormask=1 |title=The Complete Short Stories of Ernest Hemingway: The Finca Vigía Edition |location=New York |publisher=Scribner’s |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |date=2003 |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book|last=Hemingway |first=Ernest |authormask=1 |title=The Dangerous Summer |date=1985 |location=New York |publisher=Scribner’s |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book|last=Hemingway |first=Ernest |authormask=1 |title=Death in the Afternoon |location=New York |publisher=Scribner’s |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |date=1932 |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book|last=Hemingway |first=Ernest |authormask=1 |title=Ernest Hemingway: Selected Letters, 1917–1961 |location=New York |publisher=Scribner's |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |editor-first=Carlos |editor-last=Baker |date=1981b |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book|last=Hemingway |first=Ernest |authormask=1 |title=For Whom the Bell Tolls |date=1940 |location=New York |publisher=Scribner’s |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book|editor-last=Hemingway |editor-first=Ernest |editormask=1 |title=Men at War: The Best War Stories of All Time |date=1942 |location=New York |publisher=Crown Publishers |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book|last=Hemingway |first=Ernest |authormask=1 |title=The Nick Adams Stories |date=1972 |location=New York |publisher=Scribner's |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book|last=Hemingway |first=Ernest |authormask=1 |title=The Sun Also Rises |date=1926 |location=New York |publisher=Scribner’s |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book|last=Hemingway |first=Ernest |authormask=1 |title=The Sun Also Rises: A Facsimile Edition Volume One |editor-last=Bruccoli |editor-first=Matthew J. |date=1990 |location=Detroit |publisher=Omnigraphics |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite magazine|last=Klosterman |first=Chuck |title=Nothing to Worry About |magazine=Esquire |pages=56-57|isbn= |author-link= |date=Feb 2008 |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book|last=Mailer |first=Norman |title=Advertisements for Myself |location=New York |publisher=Putnam |date=1959 |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book|last=Mailer |first=Norman |authormask=1 |title=The Bullfight: A Photographic Narrative |location=New York |publisher=Mcmillan |date=1967 |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book|last=Mailer |first=Norman |authormask=1 |title=The Fight |location=Boston |publisher=Little, Brown |date=1975 |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book|last=Mailer |first=Norman |authormask=1 |title=King of the Hill: Norman Mailer on the fight of the Century |location=New York |publisher=New American Library |date=1971 |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book|last1=Mailer |first1=Norman |author-mask=1 |first2=John Buffalo |last2=Mailer |title=The Big Empty: Dialogues on Politics, Sex, God, Boxing, Morality, Myth, Poker, and Bad Conscience in America |location=New York |publisher=Nation Books |date=2006 |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book|last=Reynolds |first=Michael S. |title=Hemingway’s First War: The Making of A Farewell to Arms |location=Princeton, NJ |publisher=Princeton UP |date=1976 |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book|last=Reynolds |first=Michael S. |authormask=1 |title=Hemingway: The Paris Years |location=Cambridge, MA |publisher=Basil Blackwell |date=1989 |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book|last=Reynolds |first=Michael S. |authormask=1 |title=The Young Hemingway |location=New York |publisher=Norton |date=1998 |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book|last=Ross |first=Lillian |title=Portrait of Hemingway |location=New York |publisher=Simon & Schuster |date=1961 |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book |last=Svoboda |first=Frederic Joseph |title=Ernest Hemingway & The Sun Also Rises: The crafting of a Style |location=Lawrence, KS |publisher=UP of Kansas |date=1983 |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
{{Refend}}

The Mailer Review/Volume 4, 2010/Norman Mailer's The Fight: Hemingway, Bullfighting, and the Lovely Metaphysics of Boxing

2025-04-13T18:01:35Z

JHadaway: Removed citation 3. 1927 is the publication year for Men Without Women, which is not in the works cited

{{DISPLAYTITLE:{{BASEPAGENAME}}/{{SUBPAGENAME}}}}
{{Working}}
{{MR04}}
{{byline|last=Cirino|first=Mark|abstract=Although Norman Mailer’s ''[[The Fight]]'' is ostensibly reportage about the Muhammad Ali-George Foreman championship heavyweight boxing match, we learn more about Mailer and his aesthetic and artistic values than we do about either fighter. One of Mailer’s methods for capturing his Zaire experience is to employ Ernest Hemingway as a ghostly father figure, a ''doppelgänger'', both an inspiration and a nagging reminder of his own inadequacies. An intertextual analysis of these two writers demonstrates the way Mailer uses boxing to offer his inflection of Hemingway’s twentieth-century themes. |url=http://prmlr.us/mr04cir }}

{{dc|dc=A|lthough Norman Mailer’s ''The Fight'' is ostensibly reportage}} about the Muhammad Ali-George Foreman championship heavyweight boxing match in Zaire on 30 October 1974, we learn more about Mailer and his aesthetic and artistic values than we do about either fighter. We also learn far more than Mailer’s thoughts on boxing; we glean a broader metaphysical and philosophic notion of action and danger, and the writer’s own role in recording it in prose. One of Mailer’s methods for capturing his Zaire experience is to employ Ernest Hemingway as a ghostly father figure, a ''doppelgänger'', both an inspiration and a nagging reminder of his own inadequacies. Hemingway, whose suicide was thirteen years before the fight, is still active in Mailer’s text, who was enjoying a consciously Hemingwayesque project in Africa.

In Chuck Klosterman’s recent assessment of Norman Mailer as a boxing writer, he writes that “there is nothing metaphysical about getting punched in the face".{{sfn|Klosterman|2008|p=56}}This assertion suggests that Klosterman either has never been punched in the face or was concentrating on the wrong sensation when he was. Mailer and Hemingway represent the boxing ring and the bullfighting arena as possessing such metaphysical possibilities that they invite us to appreciate each of their values in human behavior and the qualities they demand their artists to possess. In ''The Fight'', Mailer’s conspicuous comparisons of boxing to bullfighting, Hemingway, and to art further invite{{pg|123|124}}comparison to Hemingway’s earlier texts. In all instances, we see Mailer and Hemingway with their incisive, intellectual evocations of men of thought (that is, Ali, and any quintessential Hemingway Hero, such as Robert Jordan in ''For Whom the Bell Tolls'' or his short story alter ego Nick Adams) in moments of peak activity. So, if Klosterman limits the transcendence of boxing simply to “primordial reality” and the “base qualities of being alive”,{{sfn|Klosterman|2008|p=56}}he sharply diverges from Mailer and Hemingway, who find in the maelstrom of a boxing match or the murderous possibilities of a bullring, life’s truest, most elevated and aesthetic moments. “Every wound,” Mailer observes in ''The Fight'', “has its own revelation”,{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=214}}both promising the importance of chronicling the defeated and the damaged and signaling his own fascination and debt to the warriors and athletes and even artists of the Hemingway canon. While Mailer may be overly epigrammatic, this aphorism accurately synopsizes the “wound theory” of criticism that defined (and later encumbered) Hemingway Studies for decades.

To Hemingway, boxing might have been important for more complex reasons than many readers ever understood. A celebrated example of this tension offers a useful illustration. The sordid history behind F. Scott Fitzgerald’s revisions to Hemingway’s short story “Fifty Grand” is relevant not as a salacious biographical anecdote or to provide retrospective textual minutiae. Instead, this conflict’s enduring controversy is itself the issue, one that reveals a major facet of Hemingway’s approach to character, and the larger importance of boxing to Hemingway and writers that would follow, primarily Mailer.

“Fifty Grand,” included in Hemingway’s second volume of short stories, ''Men Without Women''(1927), was inspired by the anecdote with which the typescript draft begins:
{{cquote|Up at the gym over the Garden one time somebody says to Jack, “Say Jack how did you happen to beat Leonard anyway?” And Jack says, “Well, you see Benny’s an awful smart boxer. All the time he’s in there he’s thinking and all the time he’s thinking I was hitting him.”{{sfn|Beegel|1988|p=15}}}}

Lillian Ross reports Hemingway re-telling the story in 1950, about a quarter-century later: “‘One time I asked Jack, speaking of a fight with Benny Leonard,’“How did you handle Benny so easy, Jack?” “Ernie,” he said,“Benny{{pg|124|125}}is an awfully smart boxer. All the time he’s boxing, he’s thinking. All the time he was thinking, I was hitting him.” Hemingway gave a hoarse laugh, as though he had heard the story for the first time...He laughed again. ‘All the time he was thinking, I was hitting him’”.{{sfn|Ross|1961|p=64}}Ross implies surprise that this stale anecdote is so alive for Hemingway, standing in for the readers who may not have appreciated its importance. In his obnoxious essay “The Art of the Short Story,” written in 1959 and unpublished in his lifetime, Hemingway recollects of “Fifty Grand”: “This story originally started like this: “‘How did you handle Benny so easy, Jack?’ Soldier asked him. ‘Benny’s an awful smart boxer,’ Jack said. ‘All the time he’s in there, he’s thinking. All the time he’s thinking, I was hitting him'".{{sfn|Ross|1961|p=88}}These examples demonstrate that his acquiescence to Fitzgerald’s editorial judgment in 1927 haunted him for three-and-a-half decades, literally until his death.{{efn|Elsewhere, Hemingway remarks on the intelligence of fighters just as he evaluates their physical skill: in 1922, Hemingway describes Battling Siki, the challenger to Georges Carpentier, “siki tough slowthinker but mauling style may puzzle carp”.{{sfn|Reynolds|1989|p=73}}In his early journalism, Hemingway reports that, “Jack Dempsey has an imposing list of knockouts over bums and tramps, who were nothing but big slow-moving, slow-thinking set ups for him”.{{sfn|Reynolds|1998|p=192}}Indeed, the payoff of “Fifty Grand”—when Jack Brennan double crosses the double crossers—comes when Jack says, “It’s funny how fast you can think when it means that much money”.{{sfn|Hemingway|p=249}}}}

Fitzgerald’s objection to Hemingway opening the short story with the boxing anecdote was like his misgivings about the original beginning of ''The Sun Also Rises'', what he perceived to be Hemingway’s “tendency to envelope or...to ''embalm'' in mere wordiness an anecdote or joke”.{{sfn|Fitzgerald|p=142|1995}}As Susan Beegel notes in her discussion of Hemingway’s impulse to include the anecdote, “Thinking takes time, and boxing is a sport in which speed is of the essence”.{{sfn|Beegel|1988|p=15}}Beegel’s point must be extended: life, at times, is a sport in which speed is of the essence, particularly if it is to be lived to its fullest. As we see in Mailer—think of ''The Naked and the Dead'' and certainly ''The Fight''—Hemingway placed all his characters in situations in which a quick, strategic, pragmatic response is more appropriate than contemplation and conceptualization, despite the characters’ natural inclinations to indulge their memories, imaginative speculation, and ruminations. Muhammad Ali, after all, is no mindless slugger; he is portrayed as a genius, a scientist, an artist, or a “brain fighter,” in the champ’s own words. More than a boxer, Mailer considers Ali “the first psychologist of the body”,{{sfn|Mailer|1971|p=23}}suggesting that his power is in his mind, as opposed to the brute force, the rage, and the animalistic approach of Foreman and Joe Frazier.

But why did Hemingway’s remorse over deferring to Fitzgerald’s suggestions for “Fifty Grand” fester for the rest of his life? After all, what does one paragraph matter? In “The Art of the Short Story,” Hemingway recounts his version of the circumstances behind the editorial change, and his regret over excising “that lovely revelation of the metaphysics of boxing”.{{sfn|Hemingway|1981a|p=89}}{{pg|125|126}}

Hemingway’s essay taunts Fitzgerald for not appreciating that Hemingway was “trying to explain to him how a truly great boxer like Jack Britton functioned”.{{sfn|Hemingway|1981a|p=89}}The manuscript of “Fifty Grand” betrays Hemingway’s bitterness: on it, he scrawled, “1st 3 pages mutilated by Scott Fitzgerald”.{{sfn|Burwell|1996|p=148}}How can one writer—particularly an established one, which by 1927 Hemingway was—blame a colleague for ruining his own text? This irrational grudge must have endured so persistently because Hemingway disobeyed his instincts as a writer, ironically behaving with the same lack of intuitive trust as the excerpt negatively portrays Benny Leonard. Hemingway obeyed Fitzgerald to great success with ''The Sun Also Rises'', did so again the following year with “Fifty Grand,” and, by 1929, responded to Fitzgerald’s criticisms of A Farewell to Arms with “Kiss my ass”.{{sfn|Reynolds|1976|p=78}}

Fitzgerald and others have misconstrued aspects of Hemingway’s objectives, which Mailer grasped intuitively and intellectually. The central thrust to Hemingway’s literary project was to dramatize the compromised functioning of thought as the modern consciousness is incorporated into the violent activities of the twentieth-century man of action. Hemingway’s portrayal of thinking during war takes this idea to the extreme. In Hemingway’s introduction to ''Men at War'', the anthology of war writing he edited, he writes, “Cowardice, as distinguished from panic, is almost always simply a lack of ability to suspend the functioning of the imagination. Learning to suspend your imagination and live completely in the very second of the present minute with no before and no after is the greatest gift a soldier can acquire. It, naturally, is the opposite of all those gifts a writer should have”.{{sfn|Hemingway|1942|p=xxiv}}Hemingway’s articulation of this conflict is a revelation: he is disclosing the tension that defines his work, the internal struggle between a man of action and a man of thought. Hemingway is distinguishing between the curse of Ishmael and the curse of Stubb in ''Moby-Dick'': Ishmael cannot turn the thinking off; for him, the sea and meditation are inextricable, even when he is on the night watch; Ahab’s eleventh commandment, on the other hand, is: do not think.

This dichotomy is always in play in the Hemingway text, and sometimes baldly explicit. Early in ''For Whom the Bell Tolls'', for example, Robert Jordan coaxes himself, “Turn off the thinking now...You’re a bridge-blower now. Not a thinker”,{{sfn|Hemingway|1940|p=17}}just as he later disingenuously asserts, “My mind is in suspension until we win the war”.{sfn|Hemingway|1940|p=245}}In a 1938 letter to Maxwell Perkins,{{pg|126|127}}Hemingway blames his depressed mood on the rigors of living in a Spanish war zone while simultaneously trying to write his stories of the Spanish Civil War: “If I sound bitter or gloomy throw it out. It’s that it takes one kind of training and frame of mind to do what I’ve been doing and another to write prose”.{{sfn|Bruccoli|1996|p=253}}Ultimately, Hemingway’s contribution to the psychological novel, and to literary Modernism’s conception of mind, is his depiction of how a human being thinks during episodes of great stress, including matadors, boxers, and soldiers, as well as those haunted by their memories of those experiences.

For the purposes of Mailer’s and Hemingway’s intertextuality, boxing and bullfighting are virtually synonymous. Each sport affords the spectator an opportunity to witness violence in a largely—but not completely—sanitized outlet. ''In The Sun Also Rises'', a novel that essentially introduced the bullfight to mainstream American consciousness, boxing and bullfighting are explicitly compared. In addition to the scapegoat Robert Cohn’s dubious (but eventually demonstrable) boxing background, Jake Barnes and his friend Bill Gorton attend the Ledoux-Kid Francis fight in Paris less than a week before their excursion to the Pamplona bullfights. Later, during the ''desencajonada'', or unloading of the bulls, however, Jake constructs the simile of bullfighting to boxing. He tells Brett Ashley, “Look how he knows how to use his horns...He’s got a left and right just like a boxer.” As Brett confirms, “I saw him shift from his left to his right horn”.{{sfn|Hemingway|1926|p=144}}The two activities are clearly appealing to Hemingway: one man, by himself, confronting his own limits as he encounters an attacker with his skill, knowledge, courage, and mind control. Both activities are ritual performances, yet both flirt with the possibility of death, danger, crippling injury, as well as murder.

In Mailer, similarly, the allure of boxing seems to be the formalized structure of a violent situation as an attenuated restatement of war experience. Mailer has suggested as much, saying that boxing presents “a way for a violent man to begin to comprehend that living in a classic situation—in other words, living within certain limitations rather than expressing oneself uncontrollably is a way to live that he didn’t have before”.{{sfn|Mailer|Mailer|2006|p=185}}Mailer’s articulation is anticipated by Jake Barnes himself, who explains the process to Brett so that the bullfight “became more something that was going on with a definite end, and less of a spectacle with unexplained horrors”;{{sfn|Mailer|Mailer|2006|p=171}}in other words, the difference between bullfighting/boxing and war. Just as Mailer differentiates between a championship boxing match between{{pg|127|128}}professionals and a street fight, Hemingway distinguishes between a properly sanctioned bullfight and an amateur bullfight: “The amateur bullfight is as unorganized as a riot and all results are uncertain, bulls or men may be killed; it is all chance and the temper of the populace. The formal bullfight is a commercial spectacle built on the planned and ordered death of the bull and that is its end".{{sfn|Hemingway|1932|p=372}}If the Marquis of Queensbury rules codify violence in boxing and allow it to transcend a back-alley brawl, Hemingway and Mailer are always conscious of this spectrum of violence and its relative level of chaos.

To Mailer and Hemingway, the men who prevail within this organized violence transcend athletic excellence and attain the status of aesthetic and artistic exemplars. Mailer begins ''The Fight'' by describing Ali as “our most beautiful man”,{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=3}}just as Jake says that bullfighting prodigy Pedro Romero is the “best-looking boy I have ever seen”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=167}}{{efn|After Ali’s victory, Mailer suggests that “Maybe he never appeared more handsome”{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=212}}}}Ali was thirty-two when the Rumble in the Jungle took place; Romero is no more than twenty. Mailer was fifty-one in Zaire; Hemingway turned twenty-six in the summer of 1925, when ''The Sun Also Rises'' was composed. If Ali and Romero serve as embodiments of male beauty, Hemingway also uses Romero as a counterbalance to the malaise that had infected the “lost” members of the post-war generation. When Robert Cohn laments, “my life is going so fast and I’m not really living it,” Jake responds, “Nobody ever lives their life all the way up except bull-fighters”.{{sfn|Hemingway|1932|p=18}}Fitzgerald texts like ''The Great Gatsby'' impute an additional intensity of experience to the wealthy; Hemingway ascribes this same quality to the courageous activity of bullfighters. Boxing is precisely the same. In the extended set-piece of the Ledoux-Francis fight that Hemingway sketched in the first draft of SAR, the characters remark on the fight and Ledoux in a way that previews their same awe of bullfighters. Bill Gorton tells Jake, “By God Ledoux is great”{{sfn|Hemingway|1972|p=233}}and asks, “Why don’t they have guys like that in my business (that is, writing)"?{{sfn|Hemingway|1972|p=233}} Bill later deflects a compliment by telling Jake, “I’m not such a good man as Ledoux”.{{sfn|Hemingway|1972|p=234}}In the same way, the bullfighter Maera, whom Hemingway kills off in Chapter XIV of ''In Our Time'', is declared by Nick Adams to be “the greatest man he’d ever known".{{sfn|Hemingway|1972|p=237}}Between Maera and James Joyce, Hemingway wrote Ezra Pound in 1924, there is “absolutely no comparison in art...Maera by a mile”.{{sfn|Hemingway|1981b|p=119}}Boxing and bullfighters emerge in these texts as ideals, both masculine and artistic.

The artistic component of the allure of these sports is Mailer’s explicit{{pg|128|129}}reason for attending the Rumble in the Jungle. When Mailer attributes Foreman’s reference to himself in the third person as equivalent to the “schizophrenia” that “great artists” possess,{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=56}}it echoes Hemingway’s Romero who “talked about his work as something altogether apart from himself”.{{sfn|Hemingway|1926|p=178}}For Mailer, though, the real artist is of course not Foreman, but Ali. “If ever a fighter,” Mailer writes, “had been able to demonstrate that boxing was a twentieth century art, it must be Ali”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=162}}Hemingway writes in ''Death in the Afternoon'' that the only trait separating bull-fighting from its inclusion as one of the major arts is its impermanence. In ''The Dangerous Summer'', Hemingway pointedly compares bullfighting to art: “A bullfighter can never see the work of art that he is making. He has no chance to correct it as a painter or writer has. He cannot hear it as a musician can All the time, he is making his work of art he knows that he must keep within the limits of his skill and the knowledge of the animal”.{{efn|Earlier in The Dangerous Summer, Luis Miguel Dominguín is also compared to an artist: “He had the complete and respectful concentration on his work which marks all great artists”{{sfn|Hemingway|1985|p=106}}}}{{sfn|Hemingway|1985|p=198}}Whether Hemingway is posturing in an intentionally provocative way or not—he surely enjoyed presenting himself as the only novelist who would prefer to be Maera killing a bull than Joyce writing ''Ulysses''—it is sufficient to note that in his career-long characterizations of bullfighters, he saw artistry and exemplary conduct when they excelled during their performances, and displayed high and noble aims in their approaches to their work. The crucial way that bullfighting is instructive to a reading of ''The Fight'' emerges when Mailer captures Ali’s demeanor in the ring and the strategy he uses to dismantle and ultimately defeat Foreman. This exalted strategy is two-fold: in the first round, Ali relies on the enormously dangerous right-hand leads to score against Foreman. The audacity of this means of attack is captured in italicized awe in ''The Fight''. It is not a right, but a ''right''. “Right-hand leads!” Mailer exults, “My God!”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=180}}He explains the technicality that leading with the right “is the most difficult and dangerous punch. Difficult to deliver and dangerous to oneself”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=179}}Hemingway makes the same observation in Romero’s code of performance, which is that he has “the old thing, the holding of his purity of line through the maximum of exposure”.{{sfn|Hemingway|1926|p=172}}Ali might have danced his way to victory against Foreman, but he did not. He deftly took on the punishment of a much stronger man, and attacked in a way that would leave himself vulnerable, all in the hopes of sapping Foreman’s power. These are the qualities which Hemingway and Mailer extol.

In rounds two through five, Ali uses the infamous rope-a-dope, which absorbs punishment as Foreman punches himself out, using the great{{pg|129|130}}champion’s strength against himself. The parallel between Ali’s strategy and the matador’s gambit is evident. Hemingway quotes the bullfighter El Gallo as shunning exercises that would increase his strength: “What do I want with strength, man? The bull weighs half a ton. Should I take exercises for strength to match him? Let the bull have the strength”.{{sfn|Hemingway|1932|p=21}}As this remark suggests, rather than the simple-minded machismo that Hemingway is too frequently reputed to value, the virtue of the effective matador comes in mastering the fear that will inevitably arise when a man encounters a beast that dwarfs him. The successful matador must control his thoughts and emotions and rely on his skill and knowledge to subdue his opponent. Ali faces something precisely equivalent in Zaire. During a training sequence in ''When We Were Kings'', Ali yells out, “He’s the bull. I’m the matador,” clearly deferring to Foreman the trait of power and aggressiveness, and assuming for himself the wit, the knowledge, and the artistry needed to prevail.

Mailer’s hagiography of Ali, then, becomes the more vital when we go beyond his admiration for the fighter to recognize why this admiration was so profound. Ali’s preparation for the Foreman fight (in the 234-page Vintage edition of ''The Fight'', the opening bell to the knockout is confined to pages 177–210; thus, in a book called ''The Fight'', only fourteen percent of the book chronicles the fight{{efn|Mailer’s pacing might have been a model for '' When We Were Kings'', an 89-minute film of which the fight itself spans 7:14, or about 8%.}}follows El Gallo’s logical yet somewhat counter-intuitive training procedure. Mailer reports that Ali confesses, “Foreman can hit harder than me”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=16}}During the uninspired sparring session that opens ''The Fight'', Ali’s strategy is presaged. Since he knows he cannot compete with Foreman’s strength, Ali contrives to use Foreman’s strength against him. Mailer chronicles this strategy meticulously, writing of Ali that “part of his art was to reduce the force of each blow he received to the head and then fraction it further”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=4}}Art? An art to getting hit in the face? If so, it is coupled by fractioning, a melding of the art of war and the sweet science of boxing. Ali consciously courts the same dichotomy that Mailer proposes. Skipping rope in his training quarters, he barks out, “I’m a brain fighter. I’m scientific. I’m artistic” (''When We Were Kings''). The marriage of art and science continues when Mailer describes “the second half of the art of getting hit was to learn the trajectories with which punches glanced off your glove and still hit you”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=5}}If the study of trajectories is associated with physics, Ali the artist is associated with dance and writing and theatre. This almost suicidal strategy—unappreciated, Mailer suggests, by lesser minds like sportswriters and fight critics—recalls the “calculus” with which {{pg|130|131}}Hemingway claimed he wrote ''Across the River and Into the Trees'', destined for dismissal by ignorant critics. Mailer is unapologetic about twinning art and boxing: he references Joyce’s ''A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man'', Rembrandt’s “The Night Watch,” ''Moby-Dick'', and even Hemingway’s ''A Farewell to Arms'', reaching to masterpieces of art and literature to evoke athletic performance.

Mailer extends this articulation to propose that Ali has a physiological understanding of receiving violence that is almost hair-trigger in its fineness. “It was a study,” he writes, “to watch Ali take punches”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=5}}Mailer sees Ali “teaching his nervous system to transmit shock faster than other men could”{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=4}}and possessing the ability to “assimilate punches faster than other fighters,” as Ali “could literally transmit the shock through more parts of his body or direct it to its best path”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=5}}After watching a Foreman training session, Mailer concluded, “it seemed certain that if Ali wished to win, he would have to take more punishment than ever before in his career”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=53}}As Mailer mentions during his commentary in ''When We Were Kings'', “It was as if he wanted to train his body to receive these messages of punishment.”

Just as Ali is positioned as an artist, a craftsman, and a scientist, Mailer describes him in the same way that Hemingway describes matadors. During the first round of the fight, after Ali has tagged Foreman with a scoring punch, Foreman “charged in rage”,{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=178}}a raging bull whose strength must be absorbed, reallocated, frustrated, and then eliminated by the more intelligent foe. After another exchange, in fact, “Foreman responded like a bull. He roared forward. A dangerous bull. His gloves were out like horns”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=178–79}}Even the collection of declarative sentences, uncluttered by punctuation marks, recalls the way Hemingway captures Romero’s style in the ring. After Ali’s strategy of absorbing punches against the ropes emerges, Mailer writes that Foreman “had the pensive expression of a steer being dogged to the ground by a cowboy”,{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=184}}continuing the juxtaposition of Ali’s savvy with Foreman’s depiction as an animal, a beast of the same variety that charges mindlessly and dies inevitably in Pamplona. A brilliant depiction of Ali using his facial expression to deceive Foreman furthers the comparison: Ali, against the ropes, is
{{cquote|now banishing Foreman’s head with the turn of a matador sending away a bull after five fine passes were made, and once when he seemed to hesitate just a little too long, something stirred in{{pg|131|132}}George-like that across-the-arena knowledge of a bull when it is ready at last to gore the matador rather than the cloth, and like a member of a cuadrilla, somebody in Ali’s corner screamed, “Careful! Careful! Careful”!{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=196–97}}}}

Is this comparison self-indulgent? How many American readers would find a description of Ali’s defensive strategy in any way clarified by an esoteric gesture towards a bullfight? This link only makes sense in the context of Mailer’s incessant negotiation with the specter of Ernest Hemingway, shadowing him during his journey through Zaire.

Hemingway is introduced into the narrative when Mailer arrives in an unappealing Kinshasa with a stomach ailment, and immediately name drops Joseph Conrad and Ernest Hemingway: Conrad for his iconic depiction of the Congo, and Hemingway, about whom Mailer wonders, “Was it part of Hemingway’s genius that he could travel with healthy insides?”,{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=22}}ignoring the overwhelming catalogue of incidents and accidents that Hemingway suffered during his lifetime of travels. When Mailer hears the mighty roar of a lion, he begins a reverie: “To be eaten by a lion on the banks of the Congo— who could fail to notice that it was Hemingway’s own lion waiting down these years for the flesh of Ernest until an appropriate substitute had at last arrived?”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=92}}If the sound of the lion causes Mailer to fancy a lofty reenactment of Francis Macomber’s paranoia, or Mary’s quest for the lion in ''Under Kilimanjaro'', he does well to confess that the joke is on him: Zaire has a zoo. In Mailer’s description of a drunken balancing act on a balcony outside his hotel room, he speculates on the possibility of dying in this way. “What could be worse than accidental suicide?” he asks rhetorically. “A reverberation of Hemingway’s end shivered its echo”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=123}}These three examples indeed position Mailer as an “appropriate substitute” for Hemingway, both in his ambitious writing project in Africa, his encounters with the beasts of the jungle, and the courting of his own death, with Hemingway’s 1961 suicide still hovering over Mailer’s behavior, his thoughts, and his writing.

But Mailer is not through. When he puts forth Ali’s quandary once the fight is under his control, that he must choose between a victory by either a lethargic decision or the flourish of a spectacular knockout, he is compared to “a torero after a great faena who must still face the drear potential of a protracted inept and disappointing kill,” while Foreman remains “a bull”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=200}}In the sixth round, by which time the bout’s fate is foretold, Ali sizes{{pg|132|133}}up Foreman “the way a bullfighter lines up a bull before going in over the horns for the kill...a fair conclusion was that the bull still had an access of strength too great for the kill”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=202}}In a sequence where Mailer would make dozens of comparisons, frantically seeking metaphorical images to convey the magnitude of the scene, his clinging to bullfighting imagery is striking thematically and strategically, even if the image might only resonate with a specialist, with himself, or with a fellow aficionado of ''Death in the Afternoon''.{{efn|Cf. Advertisements For Myself, when Mailer writes, “I used to compare the bed to the bullfight, sometimes seeing myself as the matador and sometimes as the bull”}}{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=495}}When Mailer compares Foreman’s clumsiness to “a street fighter at the end of a long rumble”,{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=204}}the reader does not require any special base of knowledge to access the comparison.

The dynamic set up between Foreman and Ali leads to the rope-a-dope strategy that is ultimately Foreman’s undoing and proof of Ali’s ingenuity. Parodying his own proclivity towards “Germanic formulation,” Mailer teases that he might characterize this approach as “the modal transposition from Active to Passive”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=221}}The serious point about Ali’s strategy, though, is that he did not overpower Foreman (because he could not), and did not even use superior skill. He outsmarted him, outclassed him. Ali kills ''recibiendo''. His technique is the boxing equivalent of the bullfighter’s choice to kill by receiving the bull, to allow the bull’s aggression to work against itself by charging into the sword, rather than attacking the animal. Just as Ali’s technique is legendary, both Mailer and Hemingway have extolled the ''recibiendo'' style as, on several levels, the most sublime way to kill a bull.

Not many Americans understood the importance of ''recibiendo'' before 1926, when Hemingway turned the technique into an objective correlative for courage, the grace-under-pressure ideal that has become threadbare in recent discussions of Hemingway’s texts. In the final bullfight before the end of the festival of San Fermin, Romero’s performance is captured:

{{cquote|The bull watched him. Romero spoke to the bull and tapped one of his feet. The bull charged and Romero waited for the charge, the muleta held low, sighting along the blade, his feet firm. Then without taking a step forward, he became one with the bull...{{sfn|Hemingway|1926|p=224}}}}

In ''Death in the Afternoon'', Hemingway defines ''Recibir'', “to kill the bull from in front awaiting his charge without moving the feet once the charge has started”.{{sfn|Hemingway|1932|p=442}}This definition is nearly a precise restatement of Romero’s{{pg|133|134}}triumph in ''The Sun Also Rises'', his feet firm, waiting for the charge. Hemingway refers to ''recibiendo'' as the most “difficult, dangerous and emotional way to kill bulls”.{{sfn|Hemingway|1985|p=442}}In ''The Dangerous Summer'', Hemingway refers to the technique as “the oldest and the most dangerous and the most beautiful” manner of killing.{{sfn|Hemingway|1985|p=202}}By employing the ''recibiendo'' technique, Antonio Ordóñez in ''The Dangerous Summer'' and Pedro Romero in ''The Sun Also Rises'' impress their observers and impress the writers recording their accomplishments.

Mailer shares Hemingway’s fascination with a matador killing ''recibiendo''. His miniaturized version of ''Death in the Afternoon'', published in 1967, called simply ''The Bullfight'',{{efn|Mailer’s introductory remarks in that text are titled: ''Footnote to Death in the Afternoon.''}} describes this classic style of killing with a sense of awe, and is worth quoting at length:

{{cquote|The bull charged prematurely, and Amado, determined to get the kill, did not skip away but held ground, received the charge, stood there with the sword, turned the bull’s head with the muleta, and the bull impaled himself on the point of the torero’s blade which went right into the proper space between the shoulders, and the bull ran right up on it into his death, took several steps to the side, gave a toss of his head at heaven, and fell. Amado had killed ''recibiendo''. He had killed standing still, receiving the bull while the bull charged. No one had seen that in years.{{sfn|Mailer|1967|p=n.pg}}}}

By leaning back against the ropes and inciting Foreman’s charge, Ali displays the same bravado, courage, and panache in dominating his opponent as these matadors who Mailer and Hemingway laud with such emotion. {{efn|One of the ways Mailer praises Ali in ''When We Were Kings'' is by saying, “What a classic performance,” suggesting the classic style of defeating an opponent that parallels a heroic matador.}}

Mailer and Hemingway mimic the matadors they lionize in two significant ways. For Hemingway, the ''corto y derecho'' style of bullfighting that he describes in “The Undefeated,” another story from ''Men Without Women'', is so closely associated with his own “short and straight” writing style that the reference is almost transparently self-referential and was so already by its publication in 1927. In the same way that Jake’s attention to Romero is revelatory of what he values in a man, Hemingway’s own characterization of Romero is crucial for what Hemingway values in art. When Romero’s performance is summarized as “not brilliant bull-fighting...only perfect bull-fighting”,{{sfn|Hemingway|1926|p=221}}and that Romero’s style contained “no tricks and no{{pg|134|135}}mystifications”,{{sfn|Hemingway|1926|p=223}}Hemingway is separating his own novel from modern masterpieces of the previous few years like ''Ulysses'' or ''The Great Gatsby'' or ''Mrs. Dalloway'' and even anticipating the experimentation of ''The Sound and the Fury'', which would come a few years later.

Just as Hemingway mimics Romero’s clarity, classicism, and linearity in prose,{{efn|The first draft of ''The Sun Also Rises'' originally began in medias res, beginning in Spain, then flashing back to Paris. The change to linearity transcends a narratological decision to achieve thematic importance. For the essential study of ''The Sun Also Rises''’s composition and its implications, see Svoboda.}}Mailer links the passes of his narrative, endeavoring to reach a narrative climax just as the fight reaches its dramatic climax in the eighth round. Unlike Hemingway, who did not cling to figurative language in a conspicuous quest to have the reader understand perfectly a situation which he might not have ever seen before, Mailer’s sequence of comparisons rises to the task as the most memorable writerly performance in his account of the “Rumble in the Jungle.”

A few years earlier, Mailer warned his readers that “Sooner or later, fight metaphors, like fight managers, go sentimental. They go military” (''King of the Hill'').{{sfn|Mailer|1971|p=66}}True to his word, the first similes of the eighth round follow such a trope: Ali chooses his shots “as if he had a reserve of good punches... like a soldier in a siege who counts his bullets”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=206}}Some of the exchanges at the beginning of round eight recall the “great bombardment” of the fifth,{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=207}}which Mailer calls one of the greatest in the history of boxing, with a “shelling reminiscent of artillery battles in World War I”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=195}}While Mailer may caution us of the glibness of comparing boxing to warfare, he gleefully perpetuates the absurdity; he well knows that three minutes of getting punched by a man—even by George Foreman—is nothing like a world war, but he willingly adopts the parlance and conventions of boxing writing.

Towards the end of the seventh round, Mailer uses scenery-chewing similes to control the pace of the narrative, the better to convey Foreman’s mighty fatigue.

{{cquote|Foreman was fighting as slowly as a worn-out fighter in the Golden Gloves, slow as a man walking up a hill of pillows, slow as he would have looked if their first round had been rerun in slow motion, that was no slower than Foreman was fighting now...he was reminiscent...of a linebacker coiling around a runner with his hands and arms in the slow-motion replay...{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=204–05}}}}{{pg|135|136}}

And no slower than Mailer is narrating now. In this sequence of three similes, the first and third compare a slow fighter to a slow fighter. To say that Foreman, a tired professional fighter, looks as tired as a tired amateur fighter, is patently ridiculous. Furthermore, to state that he is as slow as a slow-motion version of himself, or a slow-motion version of someone else is not a helpful comparison; it is not vivid and inventive writing. The second simile is brilliant, and would be the only one needed, if the first and third did not aid in establishing the pacing of the moment in the fight.

Directly before the eighth round, Ali’s eyes, by contrast to Foreman’s torpor, are “quick as the eyes, indeed, of a squirrel”,{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=206}}demonstrating the energy, vivacity and speed that has been sapped from Foreman. During the round, Mailer’s similes are telling; they evoke the spectator’s enthusiasm, the witness’s thrill of the final sequence of the fight. Foreman’s legs become “like a horse high-stepping along a road full of rocks”;{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=206}}he bounces off the ropes and pursues Ali “like a man chasing a cat”;{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=206}}he waves his gloves at Ali “like an infant six feet tall waving its uncoordinated battle arm”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=207}}When Ali delivers the ''coup de grâce'', “Foreman’s arms flew out to the side like a man with a parachute jumping out of a plane”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=208}}How does he fall? “He went over like a six-foot, sixty-year-old butler who has just heard tragic news”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=208}}Foreman transforms from a six-foot infant to a six-foot sexagenarian manservant in two minutes. And, finally, Mailer compares a knocked-out fighter to “a drunk hoping to get out of bed to go to work”,{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=208}}an unfortunately predictable association.

All of these similes are Mailer’s own flourishes, the passes that he links together, striving to express his enthusiasm and awe, seeking to get the reader more intimately involved with the experience, culminating with one final comparison, not of Ali or of Foreman, but of his own reaction: our narrator was “like a dim parent who realizes suddenly his child is indeed and indubitably married”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=209}}The figurative rope-a-dope that Mailer employs is unlike Hemingway’s description of the bullfight, but identical in that the scene he is attempting to capture must be described according to the terms of the action being rendered.

Where does ''The Fight'' ultimately belong in Norman Mailer’s life’s work? Is it a self-aggrandizing study of a sport, the nuances of which only a select few appreciate or care about? Is ''The Fight'' Mailer’s ''Death in the Afternoon''— the disquisition on bullfighting Hemingway wrote as a young man—or more precisely his ''The Dangerous Summer'', Hemingway’s revisitation of the{{pg|136|137}}bullfights at the end of his career? Is it Mailer’s ''A Moveable Feast'', a version of his memoirs? Does it equate to the two books Hemingway devoted to African safaris? A combination of all of these? ''The Fight'', ultimately, illuminates the reader of the way Mailer views violence, writing, and Hemingway himself, which positions it as a supplementary text to virtually every other major Mailer effort. With Hemingway and bullfighting as constant presences in ''The Fight'', these intertextual questions yield results that allow Mailer’s project to transcend journalism, or sports writing, to become a key text to determining his restatement of Hemingway’s classic twentieth-century themes.

===Notes===
{{notelist}}

===Citations===
{{Reflist}}

===Works Cited===
{{refbegin|indent=1|20em}}
*{{Cite book| author-last=Beegel | author-first=Susan F. |title=Hemingway’s Craft of Omission: Four Manuscript Examples |location=Ann Arbor, MI |publisher=UMI Research Press |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |date=1988 |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book| author-last= Bruccoli |author-first= Matthew J. |date= 1996 |title=The Only Thing That Counts: Ernest Hemingway-Maxwell Perkins Correspondence |location=New York |publisher=Scribner |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book |author-last=Burwell |author-first=Rose Marie |title=Hemingway: The Postwar Years and the Posthumous Novels |location=Cambridge, UK |publisher=Cambridge UP |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |date=1996 |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book |last=Fitzgerald |first=F. Scott |title=A Life in Letters |editor-first=Matthew J. |editor-last=Bruccoli |location=New York |publisher=Touchstone |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |date=1995 |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite AV media |last=Gast |first=Leon |title=When We Were Kings |date=1996 |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Film |url=https://youtu.be/svhnasgxpqs?si=SF1viC9Lbcs401BG |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite magazine |last=Hemingway |first=Ernest |title=The Art of the Short Story |magazine=Paris Review |date=Spring 1981a|pages=85-102 |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book |last=Hemingway |first=Ernest |authormask=1 |title=The Complete Short Stories of Ernest Hemingway: The Finca Vigía Edition |location=New York |publisher=Scribner’s |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |date=2003 |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book|last=Hemingway |first=Ernest |authormask=1 |title=The Dangerous Summer |date=1985 |location=New York |publisher=Scribner’s |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book|last=Hemingway |first=Ernest |authormask=1 |title=Death in the Afternoon |location=New York |publisher=Scribner’s |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |date=1932 |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book|last=Hemingway |first=Ernest |authormask=1 |title=Ernest Hemingway: Selected Letters, 1917–1961 |location=New York |publisher=Scribner's |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |editor-first=Carlos |editor-last=Baker |date=1981b |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book|last=Hemingway |first=Ernest |authormask=1 |title=For Whom the Bell Tolls |date=1940 |location=New York |publisher=Scribner’s |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book|editor-last=Hemingway |editor-first=Ernest |editormask=1 |title=Men at War: The Best War Stories of All Time |date=1942 |location=New York |publisher=Crown Publishers |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book|last=Hemingway |first=Ernest |authormask=1 |title=The Nick Adams Stories |date=1972 |location=New York |publisher=Scribner's |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book|last=Hemingway |first=Ernest |authormask=1 |title=The Sun Also Rises |date=1926 |location=New York |publisher=Scribner’s |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book|last=Hemingway |first=Ernest |authormask=1 |title=The Sun Also Rises: A Facsimile Edition Volume One |editor-last=Bruccoli |editor-first=Matthew J. |date=1990 |location=Detroit |publisher=Omnigraphics |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite magazine|last=Klosterman |first=Chuck |title=Nothing to Worry About |magazine=Esquire |pages=56-57|isbn= |author-link= |date=Feb 2008 |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book|last=Mailer |first=Norman |title=Advertisements for Myself |location=New York |publisher=Putnam |date=1959 |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book|last=Mailer |first=Norman |authormask=1 |title=The Bullfight: A Photographic Narrative |location=New York |publisher=Mcmillan |date=1967 |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book|last=Mailer |first=Norman |authormask=1 |title=The Fight |location=Boston |publisher=Little, Brown |date=1975 |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book|last=Mailer |first=Norman |authormask=1 |title=King of the Hill: Norman Mailer on the fight of the Century |location=New York |publisher=New American Library |date=1971 |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book|last1=Mailer |first1=Norman |author-mask=1 |first2=John Buffalo |last2=Mailer |title=The Big Empty: Dialogues on Politics, Sex, God, Boxing, Morality, Myth, Poker, and Bad Conscience in America |location=New York |publisher=Nation Books |date=2006 |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book|last=Reynolds |first=Michael S. |title=Hemingway’s First War: The Making of A Farewell to Arms |location=Princeton, NJ |publisher=Princeton UP |date=1976 |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book|last=Reynolds |first=Michael S. |authormask=1 |title=Hemingway: The Paris Years |location=Cambridge, MA |publisher=Basil Blackwell |date=1989 |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book|last=Reynolds |first=Michael S. |authormask=1 |title=The Young Hemingway |location=New York |publisher=Norton |date=1998 |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book|last=Ross |first=Lillian |title=Portrait of Hemingway |location=New York |publisher=Simon & Schuster |date=1961 |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book |last=Svoboda |first=Frederic Joseph |title=Ernest Hemingway & The Sun Also Rises: The crafting of a Style |location=Lawrence, KS |publisher=UP of Kansas |date=1983 |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
{{Refend}}

The Mailer Review/Volume 4, 2010/Norman Mailer's The Fight: Hemingway, Bullfighting, and the Lovely Metaphysics of Boxing

2025-04-13T17:52:37Z

JHadaway: Removed ) from citation 9

{{DISPLAYTITLE:{{BASEPAGENAME}}/{{SUBPAGENAME}}}}
{{Working}}
{{MR04}}
{{byline|last=Cirino|first=Mark|abstract=Although Norman Mailer’s ''[[The Fight]]'' is ostensibly reportage about the Muhammad Ali-George Foreman championship heavyweight boxing match, we learn more about Mailer and his aesthetic and artistic values than we do about either fighter. One of Mailer’s methods for capturing his Zaire experience is to employ Ernest Hemingway as a ghostly father figure, a ''doppelgänger'', both an inspiration and a nagging reminder of his own inadequacies. An intertextual analysis of these two writers demonstrates the way Mailer uses boxing to offer his inflection of Hemingway’s twentieth-century themes. |url=http://prmlr.us/mr04cir }}

{{dc|dc=A|lthough Norman Mailer’s ''The Fight'' is ostensibly reportage}} about the Muhammad Ali-George Foreman championship heavyweight boxing match in Zaire on 30 October 1974, we learn more about Mailer and his aesthetic and artistic values than we do about either fighter. We also learn far more than Mailer’s thoughts on boxing; we glean a broader metaphysical and philosophic notion of action and danger, and the writer’s own role in recording it in prose. One of Mailer’s methods for capturing his Zaire experience is to employ Ernest Hemingway as a ghostly father figure, a ''doppelgänger'', both an inspiration and a nagging reminder of his own inadequacies. Hemingway, whose suicide was thirteen years before the fight, is still active in Mailer’s text, who was enjoying a consciously Hemingwayesque project in Africa.

In Chuck Klosterman’s recent assessment of Norman Mailer as a boxing writer, he writes that “there is nothing metaphysical about getting punched in the face".{{sfn|Klosterman|2008|p=56}}This assertion suggests that Klosterman either has never been punched in the face or was concentrating on the wrong sensation when he was. Mailer and Hemingway represent the boxing ring and the bullfighting arena as possessing such metaphysical possibilities that they invite us to appreciate each of their values in human behavior and the qualities they demand their artists to possess. In ''The Fight'', Mailer’s conspicuous comparisons of boxing to bullfighting, Hemingway, and to art further invite{{pg|123|124}}comparison to Hemingway’s earlier texts. In all instances, we see Mailer and Hemingway with their incisive, intellectual evocations of men of thought (that is, Ali, and any quintessential Hemingway Hero, such as Robert Jordan in ''For Whom the Bell Tolls'' or his short story alter ego Nick Adams) in moments of peak activity. So, if Klosterman limits the transcendence of boxing simply to “primordial reality” and the “base qualities of being alive”,{{sfn|Klosterman|2008|p=56}}he sharply diverges from Mailer and Hemingway, who find in the maelstrom of a boxing match or the murderous possibilities of a bullring, life’s truest, most elevated and aesthetic moments. “Every wound,” Mailer observes in ''The Fight'', “has its own revelation”,{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=214}}both promising the importance of chronicling the defeated and the damaged and signaling his own fascination and debt to the warriors and athletes and even artists of the Hemingway canon. While Mailer may be overly epigrammatic, this aphorism accurately synopsizes the “wound theory” of criticism that defined (and later encumbered) Hemingway Studies for decades.

To Hemingway, boxing might have been important for more complex reasons than many readers ever understood. A celebrated example of this tension offers a useful illustration. The sordid history behind F. Scott Fitzgerald’s revisions to Hemingway’s short story “Fifty Grand” is relevant not as a salacious biographical anecdote or to provide retrospective textual minutiae. Instead, this conflict’s enduring controversy is itself the issue, one that reveals a major facet of Hemingway’s approach to character, and the larger importance of boxing to Hemingway and writers that would follow, primarily Mailer.

“Fifty Grand,” included in Hemingway’s second volume of short stories, ''Men Without Women'',{{sfn|Hemingway|2003|p=1927}}was inspired by the anecdote with which the typescript draft begins:
{{cquote|Up at the gym over the Garden one time somebody says to Jack, “Say Jack how did you happen to beat Leonard anyway?” And Jack says, “Well, you see Benny’s an awful smart boxer. All the time he’s in there he’s thinking and all the time he’s thinking I was hitting him.”{{sfn|Beegel|1988|p=15}}}}

Lillian Ross reports Hemingway re-telling the story in 1950, about a quarter-century later: “‘One time I asked Jack, speaking of a fight with Benny Leonard,’“How did you handle Benny so easy, Jack?” “Ernie,” he said,“Benny{{pg|124|125}}is an awfully smart boxer. All the time he’s boxing, he’s thinking. All the time he was thinking, I was hitting him.” Hemingway gave a hoarse laugh, as though he had heard the story for the first time...He laughed again. ‘All the time he was thinking, I was hitting him’”.{{sfn|Ross|1961|p=64}}Ross implies surprise that this stale anecdote is so alive for Hemingway, standing in for the readers who may not have appreciated its importance. In his obnoxious essay “The Art of the Short Story,” written in 1959 and unpublished in his lifetime, Hemingway recollects of “Fifty Grand”: “This story originally started like this: “‘How did you handle Benny so easy, Jack?’ Soldier asked him. ‘Benny’s an awful smart boxer,’ Jack said. ‘All the time he’s in there, he’s thinking. All the time he’s thinking, I was hitting him'".{{sfn|Ross|1961|p=88}}These examples demonstrate that his acquiescence to Fitzgerald’s editorial judgment in 1927 haunted him for three-and-a-half decades, literally until his death.{{efn|Elsewhere, Hemingway remarks on the intelligence of fighters just as he evaluates their physical skill: in 1922, Hemingway describes Battling Siki, the challenger to Georges Carpentier, “siki tough slowthinker but mauling style may puzzle carp”.{{sfn|Reynolds|1989|p=73}}In his early journalism, Hemingway reports that, “Jack Dempsey has an imposing list of knockouts over bums and tramps, who were nothing but big slow-moving, slow-thinking set ups for him”.{{sfn|Reynolds|1998|p=192}}Indeed, the payoff of “Fifty Grand”—when Jack Brennan double crosses the double crossers—comes when Jack says, “It’s funny how fast you can think when it means that much money”.{{sfn|Hemingway|p=249}}}}

Fitzgerald’s objection to Hemingway opening the short story with the boxing anecdote was like his misgivings about the original beginning of ''The Sun Also Rises'', what he perceived to be Hemingway’s “tendency to envelope or...to ''embalm'' in mere wordiness an anecdote or joke”.{{sfn|Fitzgerald|p=142|1995}}As Susan Beegel notes in her discussion of Hemingway’s impulse to include the anecdote, “Thinking takes time, and boxing is a sport in which speed is of the essence”.{{sfn|Beegel|1988|p=15}}Beegel’s point must be extended: life, at times, is a sport in which speed is of the essence, particularly if it is to be lived to its fullest. As we see in Mailer—think of ''The Naked and the Dead'' and certainly ''The Fight''—Hemingway placed all his characters in situations in which a quick, strategic, pragmatic response is more appropriate than contemplation and conceptualization, despite the characters’ natural inclinations to indulge their memories, imaginative speculation, and ruminations. Muhammad Ali, after all, is no mindless slugger; he is portrayed as a genius, a scientist, an artist, or a “brain fighter,” in the champ’s own words. More than a boxer, Mailer considers Ali “the first psychologist of the body”,{{sfn|Mailer|1971|p=23}}suggesting that his power is in his mind, as opposed to the brute force, the rage, and the animalistic approach of Foreman and Joe Frazier.

But why did Hemingway’s remorse over deferring to Fitzgerald’s suggestions for “Fifty Grand” fester for the rest of his life? After all, what does one paragraph matter? In “The Art of the Short Story,” Hemingway recounts his version of the circumstances behind the editorial change, and his regret over excising “that lovely revelation of the metaphysics of boxing”.{{sfn|Hemingway|1981a|p=89}}{{pg|125|126}}

Hemingway’s essay taunts Fitzgerald for not appreciating that Hemingway was “trying to explain to him how a truly great boxer like Jack Britton functioned”.{{sfn|Hemingway|1981a|p=89}}The manuscript of “Fifty Grand” betrays Hemingway’s bitterness: on it, he scrawled, “1st 3 pages mutilated by Scott Fitzgerald”.{{sfn|Burwell|1996|p=148}}How can one writer—particularly an established one, which by 1927 Hemingway was—blame a colleague for ruining his own text? This irrational grudge must have endured so persistently because Hemingway disobeyed his instincts as a writer, ironically behaving with the same lack of intuitive trust as the excerpt negatively portrays Benny Leonard. Hemingway obeyed Fitzgerald to great success with ''The Sun Also Rises'', did so again the following year with “Fifty Grand,” and, by 1929, responded to Fitzgerald’s criticisms of A Farewell to Arms with “Kiss my ass”.{{sfn|Reynolds|1976|p=78}}

Fitzgerald and others have misconstrued aspects of Hemingway’s objectives, which Mailer grasped intuitively and intellectually. The central thrust to Hemingway’s literary project was to dramatize the compromised functioning of thought as the modern consciousness is incorporated into the violent activities of the twentieth-century man of action. Hemingway’s portrayal of thinking during war takes this idea to the extreme. In Hemingway’s introduction to ''Men at War'', the anthology of war writing he edited, he writes, “Cowardice, as distinguished from panic, is almost always simply a lack of ability to suspend the functioning of the imagination. Learning to suspend your imagination and live completely in the very second of the present minute with no before and no after is the greatest gift a soldier can acquire. It, naturally, is the opposite of all those gifts a writer should have”.{{sfn|Hemingway|1942|p=xxiv}}Hemingway’s articulation of this conflict is a revelation: he is disclosing the tension that defines his work, the internal struggle between a man of action and a man of thought. Hemingway is distinguishing between the curse of Ishmael and the curse of Stubb in ''Moby-Dick'': Ishmael cannot turn the thinking off; for him, the sea and meditation are inextricable, even when he is on the night watch; Ahab’s eleventh commandment, on the other hand, is: do not think.

This dichotomy is always in play in the Hemingway text, and sometimes baldly explicit. Early in ''For Whom the Bell Tolls'', for example, Robert Jordan coaxes himself, “Turn off the thinking now...You’re a bridge-blower now. Not a thinker”,{{sfn|Hemingway|1940|p=17}}just as he later disingenuously asserts, “My mind is in suspension until we win the war”.{sfn|Hemingway|1940|p=245}}In a 1938 letter to Maxwell Perkins,{{pg|126|127}}Hemingway blames his depressed mood on the rigors of living in a Spanish war zone while simultaneously trying to write his stories of the Spanish Civil War: “If I sound bitter or gloomy throw it out. It’s that it takes one kind of training and frame of mind to do what I’ve been doing and another to write prose”.{{sfn|Bruccoli|1996|p=253}}Ultimately, Hemingway’s contribution to the psychological novel, and to literary Modernism’s conception of mind, is his depiction of how a human being thinks during episodes of great stress, including matadors, boxers, and soldiers, as well as those haunted by their memories of those experiences.

For the purposes of Mailer’s and Hemingway’s intertextuality, boxing and bullfighting are virtually synonymous. Each sport affords the spectator an opportunity to witness violence in a largely—but not completely—sanitized outlet. ''In The Sun Also Rises'', a novel that essentially introduced the bullfight to mainstream American consciousness, boxing and bullfighting are explicitly compared. In addition to the scapegoat Robert Cohn’s dubious (but eventually demonstrable) boxing background, Jake Barnes and his friend Bill Gorton attend the Ledoux-Kid Francis fight in Paris less than a week before their excursion to the Pamplona bullfights. Later, during the ''desencajonada'', or unloading of the bulls, however, Jake constructs the simile of bullfighting to boxing. He tells Brett Ashley, “Look how he knows how to use his horns...He’s got a left and right just like a boxer.” As Brett confirms, “I saw him shift from his left to his right horn”.{{sfn|Hemingway|1926|p=144}}The two activities are clearly appealing to Hemingway: one man, by himself, confronting his own limits as he encounters an attacker with his skill, knowledge, courage, and mind control. Both activities are ritual performances, yet both flirt with the possibility of death, danger, crippling injury, as well as murder.

In Mailer, similarly, the allure of boxing seems to be the formalized structure of a violent situation as an attenuated restatement of war experience. Mailer has suggested as much, saying that boxing presents “a way for a violent man to begin to comprehend that living in a classic situation—in other words, living within certain limitations rather than expressing oneself uncontrollably is a way to live that he didn’t have before”.{{sfn|Mailer|Mailer|2006|p=185}}Mailer’s articulation is anticipated by Jake Barnes himself, who explains the process to Brett so that the bullfight “became more something that was going on with a definite end, and less of a spectacle with unexplained horrors”;{{sfn|Mailer|Mailer|2006|p=171}}in other words, the difference between bullfighting/boxing and war. Just as Mailer differentiates between a championship boxing match between{{pg|127|128}}professionals and a street fight, Hemingway distinguishes between a properly sanctioned bullfight and an amateur bullfight: “The amateur bullfight is as unorganized as a riot and all results are uncertain, bulls or men may be killed; it is all chance and the temper of the populace. The formal bullfight is a commercial spectacle built on the planned and ordered death of the bull and that is its end".{{sfn|Hemingway|1932|p=372}}If the Marquis of Queensbury rules codify violence in boxing and allow it to transcend a back-alley brawl, Hemingway and Mailer are always conscious of this spectrum of violence and its relative level of chaos.

To Mailer and Hemingway, the men who prevail within this organized violence transcend athletic excellence and attain the status of aesthetic and artistic exemplars. Mailer begins ''The Fight'' by describing Ali as “our most beautiful man”,{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=3}}just as Jake says that bullfighting prodigy Pedro Romero is the “best-looking boy I have ever seen”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=167}}{{efn|After Ali’s victory, Mailer suggests that “Maybe he never appeared more handsome”{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=212}}}}Ali was thirty-two when the Rumble in the Jungle took place; Romero is no more than twenty. Mailer was fifty-one in Zaire; Hemingway turned twenty-six in the summer of 1925, when ''The Sun Also Rises'' was composed. If Ali and Romero serve as embodiments of male beauty, Hemingway also uses Romero as a counterbalance to the malaise that had infected the “lost” members of the post-war generation. When Robert Cohn laments, “my life is going so fast and I’m not really living it,” Jake responds, “Nobody ever lives their life all the way up except bull-fighters”.{{sfn|Hemingway|1932|p=18}}Fitzgerald texts like ''The Great Gatsby'' impute an additional intensity of experience to the wealthy; Hemingway ascribes this same quality to the courageous activity of bullfighters. Boxing is precisely the same. In the extended set-piece of the Ledoux-Francis fight that Hemingway sketched in the first draft of SAR, the characters remark on the fight and Ledoux in a way that previews their same awe of bullfighters. Bill Gorton tells Jake, “By God Ledoux is great”{{sfn|Hemingway|1972|p=233}}and asks, “Why don’t they have guys like that in my business (that is, writing)"?{{sfn|Hemingway|1972|p=233}} Bill later deflects a compliment by telling Jake, “I’m not such a good man as Ledoux”.{{sfn|Hemingway|1972|p=234}}In the same way, the bullfighter Maera, whom Hemingway kills off in Chapter XIV of ''In Our Time'', is declared by Nick Adams to be “the greatest man he’d ever known".{{sfn|Hemingway|1972|p=237}}Between Maera and James Joyce, Hemingway wrote Ezra Pound in 1924, there is “absolutely no comparison in art...Maera by a mile”.{{sfn|Hemingway|1981b|p=119}}Boxing and bullfighters emerge in these texts as ideals, both masculine and artistic.

The artistic component of the allure of these sports is Mailer’s explicit{{pg|128|129}}reason for attending the Rumble in the Jungle. When Mailer attributes Foreman’s reference to himself in the third person as equivalent to the “schizophrenia” that “great artists” possess,{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=56}}it echoes Hemingway’s Romero who “talked about his work as something altogether apart from himself”.{{sfn|Hemingway|1926|p=178}}For Mailer, though, the real artist is of course not Foreman, but Ali. “If ever a fighter,” Mailer writes, “had been able to demonstrate that boxing was a twentieth century art, it must be Ali”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=162}}Hemingway writes in ''Death in the Afternoon'' that the only trait separating bull-fighting from its inclusion as one of the major arts is its impermanence. In ''The Dangerous Summer'', Hemingway pointedly compares bullfighting to art: “A bullfighter can never see the work of art that he is making. He has no chance to correct it as a painter or writer has. He cannot hear it as a musician can All the time, he is making his work of art he knows that he must keep within the limits of his skill and the knowledge of the animal”.{{efn|Earlier in The Dangerous Summer, Luis Miguel Dominguín is also compared to an artist: “He had the complete and respectful concentration on his work which marks all great artists”{{sfn|Hemingway|1985|p=106}}}}{{sfn|Hemingway|1985|p=198}}Whether Hemingway is posturing in an intentionally provocative way or not—he surely enjoyed presenting himself as the only novelist who would prefer to be Maera killing a bull than Joyce writing ''Ulysses''—it is sufficient to note that in his career-long characterizations of bullfighters, he saw artistry and exemplary conduct when they excelled during their performances, and displayed high and noble aims in their approaches to their work. The crucial way that bullfighting is instructive to a reading of ''The Fight'' emerges when Mailer captures Ali’s demeanor in the ring and the strategy he uses to dismantle and ultimately defeat Foreman. This exalted strategy is two-fold: in the first round, Ali relies on the enormously dangerous right-hand leads to score against Foreman. The audacity of this means of attack is captured in italicized awe in ''The Fight''. It is not a right, but a ''right''. “Right-hand leads!” Mailer exults, “My God!”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=180}}He explains the technicality that leading with the right “is the most difficult and dangerous punch. Difficult to deliver and dangerous to oneself”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=179}}Hemingway makes the same observation in Romero’s code of performance, which is that he has “the old thing, the holding of his purity of line through the maximum of exposure”.{{sfn|Hemingway|1926|p=172}}Ali might have danced his way to victory against Foreman, but he did not. He deftly took on the punishment of a much stronger man, and attacked in a way that would leave himself vulnerable, all in the hopes of sapping Foreman’s power. These are the qualities which Hemingway and Mailer extol.

In rounds two through five, Ali uses the infamous rope-a-dope, which absorbs punishment as Foreman punches himself out, using the great{{pg|129|130}}champion’s strength against himself. The parallel between Ali’s strategy and the matador’s gambit is evident. Hemingway quotes the bullfighter El Gallo as shunning exercises that would increase his strength: “What do I want with strength, man? The bull weighs half a ton. Should I take exercises for strength to match him? Let the bull have the strength”.{{sfn|Hemingway|1932|p=21}}As this remark suggests, rather than the simple-minded machismo that Hemingway is too frequently reputed to value, the virtue of the effective matador comes in mastering the fear that will inevitably arise when a man encounters a beast that dwarfs him. The successful matador must control his thoughts and emotions and rely on his skill and knowledge to subdue his opponent. Ali faces something precisely equivalent in Zaire. During a training sequence in ''When We Were Kings'', Ali yells out, “He’s the bull. I’m the matador,” clearly deferring to Foreman the trait of power and aggressiveness, and assuming for himself the wit, the knowledge, and the artistry needed to prevail.

Mailer’s hagiography of Ali, then, becomes the more vital when we go beyond his admiration for the fighter to recognize why this admiration was so profound. Ali’s preparation for the Foreman fight (in the 234-page Vintage edition of ''The Fight'', the opening bell to the knockout is confined to pages 177–210; thus, in a book called ''The Fight'', only fourteen percent of the book chronicles the fight{{efn|Mailer’s pacing might have been a model for '' When We Were Kings'', an 89-minute film of which the fight itself spans 7:14, or about 8%.}}follows El Gallo’s logical yet somewhat counter-intuitive training procedure. Mailer reports that Ali confesses, “Foreman can hit harder than me”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=16}}During the uninspired sparring session that opens ''The Fight'', Ali’s strategy is presaged. Since he knows he cannot compete with Foreman’s strength, Ali contrives to use Foreman’s strength against him. Mailer chronicles this strategy meticulously, writing of Ali that “part of his art was to reduce the force of each blow he received to the head and then fraction it further”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=4}}Art? An art to getting hit in the face? If so, it is coupled by fractioning, a melding of the art of war and the sweet science of boxing. Ali consciously courts the same dichotomy that Mailer proposes. Skipping rope in his training quarters, he barks out, “I’m a brain fighter. I’m scientific. I’m artistic” (''When We Were Kings''). The marriage of art and science continues when Mailer describes “the second half of the art of getting hit was to learn the trajectories with which punches glanced off your glove and still hit you”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=5}}If the study of trajectories is associated with physics, Ali the artist is associated with dance and writing and theatre. This almost suicidal strategy—unappreciated, Mailer suggests, by lesser minds like sportswriters and fight critics—recalls the “calculus” with which {{pg|130|131}}Hemingway claimed he wrote ''Across the River and Into the Trees'', destined for dismissal by ignorant critics. Mailer is unapologetic about twinning art and boxing: he references Joyce’s ''A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man'', Rembrandt’s “The Night Watch,” ''Moby-Dick'', and even Hemingway’s ''A Farewell to Arms'', reaching to masterpieces of art and literature to evoke athletic performance.

Mailer extends this articulation to propose that Ali has a physiological understanding of receiving violence that is almost hair-trigger in its fineness. “It was a study,” he writes, “to watch Ali take punches”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=5}}Mailer sees Ali “teaching his nervous system to transmit shock faster than other men could”{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=4}}and possessing the ability to “assimilate punches faster than other fighters,” as Ali “could literally transmit the shock through more parts of his body or direct it to its best path”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=5}}After watching a Foreman training session, Mailer concluded, “it seemed certain that if Ali wished to win, he would have to take more punishment than ever before in his career”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=53}}As Mailer mentions during his commentary in ''When We Were Kings'', “It was as if he wanted to train his body to receive these messages of punishment.”

Just as Ali is positioned as an artist, a craftsman, and a scientist, Mailer describes him in the same way that Hemingway describes matadors. During the first round of the fight, after Ali has tagged Foreman with a scoring punch, Foreman “charged in rage”,{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=178}}a raging bull whose strength must be absorbed, reallocated, frustrated, and then eliminated by the more intelligent foe. After another exchange, in fact, “Foreman responded like a bull. He roared forward. A dangerous bull. His gloves were out like horns”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=178–79}}Even the collection of declarative sentences, uncluttered by punctuation marks, recalls the way Hemingway captures Romero’s style in the ring. After Ali’s strategy of absorbing punches against the ropes emerges, Mailer writes that Foreman “had the pensive expression of a steer being dogged to the ground by a cowboy”,{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=184}}continuing the juxtaposition of Ali’s savvy with Foreman’s depiction as an animal, a beast of the same variety that charges mindlessly and dies inevitably in Pamplona. A brilliant depiction of Ali using his facial expression to deceive Foreman furthers the comparison: Ali, against the ropes, is
{{cquote|now banishing Foreman’s head with the turn of a matador sending away a bull after five fine passes were made, and once when he seemed to hesitate just a little too long, something stirred in{{pg|131|132}}George-like that across-the-arena knowledge of a bull when it is ready at last to gore the matador rather than the cloth, and like a member of a cuadrilla, somebody in Ali’s corner screamed, “Careful! Careful! Careful”!{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=196–97}}}}

Is this comparison self-indulgent? How many American readers would find a description of Ali’s defensive strategy in any way clarified by an esoteric gesture towards a bullfight? This link only makes sense in the context of Mailer’s incessant negotiation with the specter of Ernest Hemingway, shadowing him during his journey through Zaire.

Hemingway is introduced into the narrative when Mailer arrives in an unappealing Kinshasa with a stomach ailment, and immediately name drops Joseph Conrad and Ernest Hemingway: Conrad for his iconic depiction of the Congo, and Hemingway, about whom Mailer wonders, “Was it part of Hemingway’s genius that he could travel with healthy insides?”,{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=22}}ignoring the overwhelming catalogue of incidents and accidents that Hemingway suffered during his lifetime of travels. When Mailer hears the mighty roar of a lion, he begins a reverie: “To be eaten by a lion on the banks of the Congo— who could fail to notice that it was Hemingway’s own lion waiting down these years for the flesh of Ernest until an appropriate substitute had at last arrived?”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=92}}If the sound of the lion causes Mailer to fancy a lofty reenactment of Francis Macomber’s paranoia, or Mary’s quest for the lion in ''Under Kilimanjaro'', he does well to confess that the joke is on him: Zaire has a zoo. In Mailer’s description of a drunken balancing act on a balcony outside his hotel room, he speculates on the possibility of dying in this way. “What could be worse than accidental suicide?” he asks rhetorically. “A reverberation of Hemingway’s end shivered its echo”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=123}}These three examples indeed position Mailer as an “appropriate substitute” for Hemingway, both in his ambitious writing project in Africa, his encounters with the beasts of the jungle, and the courting of his own death, with Hemingway’s 1961 suicide still hovering over Mailer’s behavior, his thoughts, and his writing.

But Mailer is not through. When he puts forth Ali’s quandary once the fight is under his control, that he must choose between a victory by either a lethargic decision or the flourish of a spectacular knockout, he is compared to “a torero after a great faena who must still face the drear potential of a protracted inept and disappointing kill,” while Foreman remains “a bull”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=200}}In the sixth round, by which time the bout’s fate is foretold, Ali sizes{{pg|132|133}}up Foreman “the way a bullfighter lines up a bull before going in over the horns for the kill...a fair conclusion was that the bull still had an access of strength too great for the kill”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=202}}In a sequence where Mailer would make dozens of comparisons, frantically seeking metaphorical images to convey the magnitude of the scene, his clinging to bullfighting imagery is striking thematically and strategically, even if the image might only resonate with a specialist, with himself, or with a fellow aficionado of ''Death in the Afternoon''.{{efn|Cf. Advertisements For Myself, when Mailer writes, “I used to compare the bed to the bullfight, sometimes seeing myself as the matador and sometimes as the bull”}}{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=495}}When Mailer compares Foreman’s clumsiness to “a street fighter at the end of a long rumble”,{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=204}}the reader does not require any special base of knowledge to access the comparison.

The dynamic set up between Foreman and Ali leads to the rope-a-dope strategy that is ultimately Foreman’s undoing and proof of Ali’s ingenuity. Parodying his own proclivity towards “Germanic formulation,” Mailer teases that he might characterize this approach as “the modal transposition from Active to Passive”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=221}}The serious point about Ali’s strategy, though, is that he did not overpower Foreman (because he could not), and did not even use superior skill. He outsmarted him, outclassed him. Ali kills ''recibiendo''. His technique is the boxing equivalent of the bullfighter’s choice to kill by receiving the bull, to allow the bull’s aggression to work against itself by charging into the sword, rather than attacking the animal. Just as Ali’s technique is legendary, both Mailer and Hemingway have extolled the ''recibiendo'' style as, on several levels, the most sublime way to kill a bull.

Not many Americans understood the importance of ''recibiendo'' before 1926, when Hemingway turned the technique into an objective correlative for courage, the grace-under-pressure ideal that has become threadbare in recent discussions of Hemingway’s texts. In the final bullfight before the end of the festival of San Fermin, Romero’s performance is captured:

{{cquote|The bull watched him. Romero spoke to the bull and tapped one of his feet. The bull charged and Romero waited for the charge, the muleta held low, sighting along the blade, his feet firm. Then without taking a step forward, he became one with the bull...{{sfn|Hemingway|1926|p=224}}}}

In ''Death in the Afternoon'', Hemingway defines ''Recibir'', “to kill the bull from in front awaiting his charge without moving the feet once the charge has started”.{{sfn|Hemingway|1932|p=442}}This definition is nearly a precise restatement of Romero’s{{pg|133|134}}triumph in ''The Sun Also Rises'', his feet firm, waiting for the charge. Hemingway refers to ''recibiendo'' as the most “difficult, dangerous and emotional way to kill bulls”.{{sfn|Hemingway|1985|p=442}}In ''The Dangerous Summer'', Hemingway refers to the technique as “the oldest and the most dangerous and the most beautiful” manner of killing.{{sfn|Hemingway|1985|p=202}}By employing the ''recibiendo'' technique, Antonio Ordóñez in ''The Dangerous Summer'' and Pedro Romero in ''The Sun Also Rises'' impress their observers and impress the writers recording their accomplishments.

Mailer shares Hemingway’s fascination with a matador killing ''recibiendo''. His miniaturized version of ''Death in the Afternoon'', published in 1967, called simply ''The Bullfight'',{{efn|Mailer’s introductory remarks in that text are titled: ''Footnote to Death in the Afternoon.''}} describes this classic style of killing with a sense of awe, and is worth quoting at length:

{{cquote|The bull charged prematurely, and Amado, determined to get the kill, did not skip away but held ground, received the charge, stood there with the sword, turned the bull’s head with the muleta, and the bull impaled himself on the point of the torero’s blade which went right into the proper space between the shoulders, and the bull ran right up on it into his death, took several steps to the side, gave a toss of his head at heaven, and fell. Amado had killed ''recibiendo''. He had killed standing still, receiving the bull while the bull charged. No one had seen that in years.{{sfn|Mailer|1967|p=n.pg}}}}

By leaning back against the ropes and inciting Foreman’s charge, Ali displays the same bravado, courage, and panache in dominating his opponent as these matadors who Mailer and Hemingway laud with such emotion. {{efn|One of the ways Mailer praises Ali in ''When We Were Kings'' is by saying, “What a classic performance,” suggesting the classic style of defeating an opponent that parallels a heroic matador.}}

Mailer and Hemingway mimic the matadors they lionize in two significant ways. For Hemingway, the ''corto y derecho'' style of bullfighting that he describes in “The Undefeated,” another story from ''Men Without Women'', is so closely associated with his own “short and straight” writing style that the reference is almost transparently self-referential and was so already by its publication in 1927. In the same way that Jake’s attention to Romero is revelatory of what he values in a man, Hemingway’s own characterization of Romero is crucial for what Hemingway values in art. When Romero’s performance is summarized as “not brilliant bull-fighting...only perfect bull-fighting”,{{sfn|Hemingway|1926|p=221}}and that Romero’s style contained “no tricks and no{{pg|134|135}}mystifications”,{{sfn|Hemingway|1926|p=223}}Hemingway is separating his own novel from modern masterpieces of the previous few years like ''Ulysses'' or ''The Great Gatsby'' or ''Mrs. Dalloway'' and even anticipating the experimentation of ''The Sound and the Fury'', which would come a few years later.

Just as Hemingway mimics Romero’s clarity, classicism, and linearity in prose,{{efn|The first draft of ''The Sun Also Rises'' originally began in medias res, beginning in Spain, then flashing back to Paris. The change to linearity transcends a narratological decision to achieve thematic importance. For the essential study of ''The Sun Also Rises''’s composition and its implications, see Svoboda.}}Mailer links the passes of his narrative, endeavoring to reach a narrative climax just as the fight reaches its dramatic climax in the eighth round. Unlike Hemingway, who did not cling to figurative language in a conspicuous quest to have the reader understand perfectly a situation which he might not have ever seen before, Mailer’s sequence of comparisons rises to the task as the most memorable writerly performance in his account of the “Rumble in the Jungle.”

A few years earlier, Mailer warned his readers that “Sooner or later, fight metaphors, like fight managers, go sentimental. They go military” (''King of the Hill'').{{sfn|Mailer|1971|p=66}}True to his word, the first similes of the eighth round follow such a trope: Ali chooses his shots “as if he had a reserve of good punches... like a soldier in a siege who counts his bullets”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=206}}Some of the exchanges at the beginning of round eight recall the “great bombardment” of the fifth,{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=207}}which Mailer calls one of the greatest in the history of boxing, with a “shelling reminiscent of artillery battles in World War I”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=195}}While Mailer may caution us of the glibness of comparing boxing to warfare, he gleefully perpetuates the absurdity; he well knows that three minutes of getting punched by a man—even by George Foreman—is nothing like a world war, but he willingly adopts the parlance and conventions of boxing writing.

Towards the end of the seventh round, Mailer uses scenery-chewing similes to control the pace of the narrative, the better to convey Foreman’s mighty fatigue.

{{cquote|Foreman was fighting as slowly as a worn-out fighter in the Golden Gloves, slow as a man walking up a hill of pillows, slow as he would have looked if their first round had been rerun in slow motion, that was no slower than Foreman was fighting now...he was reminiscent...of a linebacker coiling around a runner with his hands and arms in the slow-motion replay...{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=204–05}}}}{{pg|135|136}}

And no slower than Mailer is narrating now. In this sequence of three similes, the first and third compare a slow fighter to a slow fighter. To say that Foreman, a tired professional fighter, looks as tired as a tired amateur fighter, is patently ridiculous. Furthermore, to state that he is as slow as a slow-motion version of himself, or a slow-motion version of someone else is not a helpful comparison; it is not vivid and inventive writing. The second simile is brilliant, and would be the only one needed, if the first and third did not aid in establishing the pacing of the moment in the fight.

Directly before the eighth round, Ali’s eyes, by contrast to Foreman’s torpor, are “quick as the eyes, indeed, of a squirrel”,{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=206}}demonstrating the energy, vivacity and speed that has been sapped from Foreman. During the round, Mailer’s similes are telling; they evoke the spectator’s enthusiasm, the witness’s thrill of the final sequence of the fight. Foreman’s legs become “like a horse high-stepping along a road full of rocks”;{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=206}}he bounces off the ropes and pursues Ali “like a man chasing a cat”;{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=206}}he waves his gloves at Ali “like an infant six feet tall waving its uncoordinated battle arm”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=207}}When Ali delivers the ''coup de grâce'', “Foreman’s arms flew out to the side like a man with a parachute jumping out of a plane”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=208}}How does he fall? “He went over like a six-foot, sixty-year-old butler who has just heard tragic news”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=208}}Foreman transforms from a six-foot infant to a six-foot sexagenarian manservant in two minutes. And, finally, Mailer compares a knocked-out fighter to “a drunk hoping to get out of bed to go to work”,{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=208}}an unfortunately predictable association.

All of these similes are Mailer’s own flourishes, the passes that he links together, striving to express his enthusiasm and awe, seeking to get the reader more intimately involved with the experience, culminating with one final comparison, not of Ali or of Foreman, but of his own reaction: our narrator was “like a dim parent who realizes suddenly his child is indeed and indubitably married”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=209}}The figurative rope-a-dope that Mailer employs is unlike Hemingway’s description of the bullfight, but identical in that the scene he is attempting to capture must be described according to the terms of the action being rendered.

Where does ''The Fight'' ultimately belong in Norman Mailer’s life’s work? Is it a self-aggrandizing study of a sport, the nuances of which only a select few appreciate or care about? Is ''The Fight'' Mailer’s ''Death in the Afternoon''— the disquisition on bullfighting Hemingway wrote as a young man—or more precisely his ''The Dangerous Summer'', Hemingway’s revisitation of the{{pg|136|137}}bullfights at the end of his career? Is it Mailer’s ''A Moveable Feast'', a version of his memoirs? Does it equate to the two books Hemingway devoted to African safaris? A combination of all of these? ''The Fight'', ultimately, illuminates the reader of the way Mailer views violence, writing, and Hemingway himself, which positions it as a supplementary text to virtually every other major Mailer effort. With Hemingway and bullfighting as constant presences in ''The Fight'', these intertextual questions yield results that allow Mailer’s project to transcend journalism, or sports writing, to become a key text to determining his restatement of Hemingway’s classic twentieth-century themes.

===Notes===
{{notelist}}

===Citations===
{{Reflist}}

===Works Cited===
{{refbegin|indent=1|20em}}
*{{Cite book| author-last=Beegel | author-first=Susan F. |title=Hemingway’s Craft of Omission: Four Manuscript Examples |location=Ann Arbor, MI |publisher=UMI Research Press |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |date=1988 |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book| author-last= Bruccoli |author-first= Matthew J. |date= 1996 |title=The Only Thing That Counts: Ernest Hemingway-Maxwell Perkins Correspondence |location=New York |publisher=Scribner |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book |author-last=Burwell |author-first=Rose Marie |title=Hemingway: The Postwar Years and the Posthumous Novels |location=Cambridge, UK |publisher=Cambridge UP |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |date=1996 |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book |last=Fitzgerald |first=F. Scott |title=A Life in Letters |editor-first=Matthew J. |editor-last=Bruccoli |location=New York |publisher=Touchstone |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |date=1995 |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite AV media |last=Gast |first=Leon |title=When We Were Kings |date=1996 |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Film |url=https://youtu.be/svhnasgxpqs?si=SF1viC9Lbcs401BG |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite magazine |last=Hemingway |first=Ernest |title=The Art of the Short Story |magazine=Paris Review |date=Spring 1981a|pages=85-102 |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book |last=Hemingway |first=Ernest |authormask=1 |title=The Complete Short Stories of Ernest Hemingway: The Finca Vigía Edition |location=New York |publisher=Scribner’s |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |date=2003 |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book|last=Hemingway |first=Ernest |authormask=1 |title=The Dangerous Summer |date=1985 |location=New York |publisher=Scribner’s |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book|last=Hemingway |first=Ernest |authormask=1 |title=Death in the Afternoon |location=New York |publisher=Scribner’s |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |date=1932 |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book|last=Hemingway |first=Ernest |authormask=1 |title=Ernest Hemingway: Selected Letters, 1917–1961 |location=New York |publisher=Scribner's |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |editor-first=Carlos |editor-last=Baker |date=1981b |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book|last=Hemingway |first=Ernest |authormask=1 |title=For Whom the Bell Tolls |date=1940 |location=New York |publisher=Scribner’s |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book|editor-last=Hemingway |editor-first=Ernest |editormask=1 |title=Men at War: The Best War Stories of All Time |date=1942 |location=New York |publisher=Crown Publishers |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book|last=Hemingway |first=Ernest |authormask=1 |title=The Nick Adams Stories |date=1972 |location=New York |publisher=Scribner's |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book|last=Hemingway |first=Ernest |authormask=1 |title=The Sun Also Rises |date=1926 |location=New York |publisher=Scribner’s |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book|last=Hemingway |first=Ernest |authormask=1 |title=The Sun Also Rises: A Facsimile Edition Volume One |editor-last=Bruccoli |editor-first=Matthew J. |date=1990 |location=Detroit |publisher=Omnigraphics |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite magazine|last=Klosterman |first=Chuck |title=Nothing to Worry About |magazine=Esquire |pages=56-57|isbn= |author-link= |date=Feb 2008 |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book|last=Mailer |first=Norman |title=Advertisements for Myself |location=New York |publisher=Putnam |date=1959 |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book|last=Mailer |first=Norman |authormask=1 |title=The Bullfight: A Photographic Narrative |location=New York |publisher=Mcmillan |date=1967 |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book|last=Mailer |first=Norman |authormask=1 |title=The Fight |location=Boston |publisher=Little, Brown |date=1975 |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book|last=Mailer |first=Norman |authormask=1 |title=King of the Hill: Norman Mailer on the fight of the Century |location=New York |publisher=New American Library |date=1971 |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book|last1=Mailer |first1=Norman |author-mask=1 |first2=John Buffalo |last2=Mailer |title=The Big Empty: Dialogues on Politics, Sex, God, Boxing, Morality, Myth, Poker, and Bad Conscience in America |location=New York |publisher=Nation Books |date=2006 |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book|last=Reynolds |first=Michael S. |title=Hemingway’s First War: The Making of A Farewell to Arms |location=Princeton, NJ |publisher=Princeton UP |date=1976 |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book|last=Reynolds |first=Michael S. |authormask=1 |title=Hemingway: The Paris Years |location=Cambridge, MA |publisher=Basil Blackwell |date=1989 |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book|last=Reynolds |first=Michael S. |authormask=1 |title=The Young Hemingway |location=New York |publisher=Norton |date=1998 |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book|last=Ross |first=Lillian |title=Portrait of Hemingway |location=New York |publisher=Simon & Schuster |date=1961 |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book |last=Svoboda |first=Frederic Joseph |title=Ernest Hemingway & The Sun Also Rises: The crafting of a Style |location=Lawrence, KS |publisher=UP of Kansas |date=1983 |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
{{Refend}}

The Mailer Review/Volume 4, 2010/Norman Mailer's The Fight: Hemingway, Bullfighting, and the Lovely Metaphysics of Boxing

2025-04-13T17:47:54Z

JHadaway: Removed extra {{ on page 128

{{DISPLAYTITLE:{{BASEPAGENAME}}/{{SUBPAGENAME}}}}
{{Working}}
{{MR04}}
{{byline|last=Cirino|first=Mark|abstract=Although Norman Mailer’s ''[[The Fight]]'' is ostensibly reportage about the Muhammad Ali-George Foreman championship heavyweight boxing match, we learn more about Mailer and his aesthetic and artistic values than we do about either fighter. One of Mailer’s methods for capturing his Zaire experience is to employ Ernest Hemingway as a ghostly father figure, a ''doppelgänger'', both an inspiration and a nagging reminder of his own inadequacies. An intertextual analysis of these two writers demonstrates the way Mailer uses boxing to offer his inflection of Hemingway’s twentieth-century themes. |url=http://prmlr.us/mr04cir }}

{{dc|dc=A|lthough Norman Mailer’s ''The Fight'' is ostensibly reportage}} about the Muhammad Ali-George Foreman championship heavyweight boxing match in Zaire on 30 October 1974, we learn more about Mailer and his aesthetic and artistic values than we do about either fighter. We also learn far more than Mailer’s thoughts on boxing; we glean a broader metaphysical and philosophic notion of action and danger, and the writer’s own role in recording it in prose. One of Mailer’s methods for capturing his Zaire experience is to employ Ernest Hemingway as a ghostly father figure, a ''doppelgänger'', both an inspiration and a nagging reminder of his own inadequacies. Hemingway, whose suicide was thirteen years before the fight, is still active in Mailer’s text, who was enjoying a consciously Hemingwayesque project in Africa.

In Chuck Klosterman’s recent assessment of Norman Mailer as a boxing writer, he writes that “there is nothing metaphysical about getting punched in the face".{{sfn|Klosterman|2008|p=56}}This assertion suggests that Klosterman either has never been punched in the face or was concentrating on the wrong sensation when he was. Mailer and Hemingway represent the boxing ring and the bullfighting arena as possessing such metaphysical possibilities that they invite us to appreciate each of their values in human behavior and the qualities they demand their artists to possess. In ''The Fight'', Mailer’s conspicuous comparisons of boxing to bullfighting, Hemingway, and to art further invite{{pg|123|124}}comparison to Hemingway’s earlier texts. In all instances, we see Mailer and Hemingway with their incisive, intellectual evocations of men of thought (that is, Ali, and any quintessential Hemingway Hero, such as Robert Jordan in ''For Whom the Bell Tolls'' or his short story alter ego Nick Adams) in moments of peak activity. So, if Klosterman limits the transcendence of boxing simply to “primordial reality” and the “base qualities of being alive”,{{sfn|Klosterman|2008|p=56}}he sharply diverges from Mailer and Hemingway, who find in the maelstrom of a boxing match or the murderous possibilities of a bullring, life’s truest, most elevated and aesthetic moments. “Every wound,” Mailer observes in ''The Fight'', “has its own revelation”,{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=214}}both promising the importance of chronicling the defeated and the damaged and signaling his own fascination and debt to the warriors and athletes and even artists of the Hemingway canon. While Mailer may be overly epigrammatic, this aphorism accurately synopsizes the “wound theory” of criticism that defined (and later encumbered) Hemingway Studies for decades.

To Hemingway, boxing might have been important for more complex reasons than many readers ever understood. A celebrated example of this tension offers a useful illustration. The sordid history behind F. Scott Fitzgerald’s revisions to Hemingway’s short story “Fifty Grand” is relevant not as a salacious biographical anecdote or to provide retrospective textual minutiae. Instead, this conflict’s enduring controversy is itself the issue, one that reveals a major facet of Hemingway’s approach to character, and the larger importance of boxing to Hemingway and writers that would follow, primarily Mailer.

“Fifty Grand,” included in Hemingway’s second volume of short stories, ''Men Without Women'',{{sfn|Hemingway|2003|p=1927}}was inspired by the anecdote with which the typescript draft begins:
{{cquote|Up at the gym over the Garden one time somebody says to Jack, “Say Jack how did you happen to beat Leonard anyway?” And Jack says, “Well, you see Benny’s an awful smart boxer. All the time he’s in there he’s thinking and all the time he’s thinking I was hitting him.”{{sfn|Beegel|1988|p=15}}}}

Lillian Ross reports Hemingway re-telling the story in 1950, about a quarter-century later: “‘One time I asked Jack, speaking of a fight with Benny Leonard,’“How did you handle Benny so easy, Jack?” “Ernie,” he said,“Benny{{pg|124|125}}is an awfully smart boxer. All the time he’s boxing, he’s thinking. All the time he was thinking, I was hitting him.” Hemingway gave a hoarse laugh, as though he had heard the story for the first time...He laughed again. ‘All the time he was thinking, I was hitting him’”.{{sfn|Ross|1961|p=64}}Ross implies surprise that this stale anecdote is so alive for Hemingway, standing in for the readers who may not have appreciated its importance. In his obnoxious essay “The Art of the Short Story,” written in 1959 and unpublished in his lifetime, Hemingway recollects of “Fifty Grand”: “This story originally started like this: “‘How did you handle Benny so easy, Jack?’ Soldier asked him. ‘Benny’s an awful smart boxer,’ Jack said. ‘All the time he’s in there, he’s thinking. All the time he’s thinking, I was hitting him'".{{sfn|Ross|1961|p=88}}These examples demonstrate that his acquiescence to Fitzgerald’s editorial judgment in 1927 haunted him for three-and-a-half decades, literally until his death.{{efn|Elsewhere, Hemingway remarks on the intelligence of fighters just as he evaluates their physical skill: in 1922, Hemingway describes Battling Siki, the challenger to Georges Carpentier, “siki tough slowthinker but mauling style may puzzle carp”.{{sfn|Reynolds|1989|p=73}}In his early journalism, Hemingway reports that, “Jack Dempsey has an imposing list of knockouts over bums and tramps, who were nothing but big slow-moving, slow-thinking set ups for him”.{{sfn|Reynolds|1998|p=192}}Indeed, the payoff of “Fifty Grand”—when Jack Brennan double crosses the double crossers—comes when Jack says, “It’s funny how fast you can think when it means that much money”.{{sfn|Hemingway|p=249)}}}}

Fitzgerald’s objection to Hemingway opening the short story with the boxing anecdote was like his misgivings about the original beginning of ''The Sun Also Rises'', what he perceived to be Hemingway’s “tendency to envelope or...to ''embalm'' in mere wordiness an anecdote or joke”.{{sfn|Fitzgerald|p=142|1995}}As Susan Beegel notes in her discussion of Hemingway’s impulse to include the anecdote, “Thinking takes time, and boxing is a sport in which speed is of the essence”.{{sfn|Beegel|1988|p=15}}Beegel’s point must be extended: life, at times, is a sport in which speed is of the essence, particularly if it is to be lived to its fullest. As we see in Mailer—think of ''The Naked and the Dead'' and certainly ''The Fight''—Hemingway placed all his characters in situations in which a quick, strategic, pragmatic response is more appropriate than contemplation and conceptualization, despite the characters’ natural inclinations to indulge their memories, imaginative speculation, and ruminations. Muhammad Ali, after all, is no mindless slugger; he is portrayed as a genius, a scientist, an artist, or a “brain fighter,” in the champ’s own words. More than a boxer, Mailer considers Ali “the first psychologist of the body”,{{sfn|Mailer|1971|p=23}}suggesting that his power is in his mind, as opposed to the brute force, the rage, and the animalistic approach of Foreman and Joe Frazier.

But why did Hemingway’s remorse over deferring to Fitzgerald’s suggestions for “Fifty Grand” fester for the rest of his life? After all, what does one paragraph matter? In “The Art of the Short Story,” Hemingway recounts his version of the circumstances behind the editorial change, and his regret over excising “that lovely revelation of the metaphysics of boxing”.{{sfn|Hemingway|1981a|p=89}}{{pg|125|126}}

Hemingway’s essay taunts Fitzgerald for not appreciating that Hemingway was “trying to explain to him how a truly great boxer like Jack Britton functioned”.{{sfn|Hemingway|1981a|p=89}}The manuscript of “Fifty Grand” betrays Hemingway’s bitterness: on it, he scrawled, “1st 3 pages mutilated by Scott Fitzgerald”.{{sfn|Burwell|1996|p=148}}How can one writer—particularly an established one, which by 1927 Hemingway was—blame a colleague for ruining his own text? This irrational grudge must have endured so persistently because Hemingway disobeyed his instincts as a writer, ironically behaving with the same lack of intuitive trust as the excerpt negatively portrays Benny Leonard. Hemingway obeyed Fitzgerald to great success with ''The Sun Also Rises'', did so again the following year with “Fifty Grand,” and, by 1929, responded to Fitzgerald’s criticisms of A Farewell to Arms with “Kiss my ass”.{{sfn|Reynolds|1976|p=78}}

Fitzgerald and others have misconstrued aspects of Hemingway’s objectives, which Mailer grasped intuitively and intellectually. The central thrust to Hemingway’s literary project was to dramatize the compromised functioning of thought as the modern consciousness is incorporated into the violent activities of the twentieth-century man of action. Hemingway’s portrayal of thinking during war takes this idea to the extreme. In Hemingway’s introduction to ''Men at War'', the anthology of war writing he edited, he writes, “Cowardice, as distinguished from panic, is almost always simply a lack of ability to suspend the functioning of the imagination. Learning to suspend your imagination and live completely in the very second of the present minute with no before and no after is the greatest gift a soldier can acquire. It, naturally, is the opposite of all those gifts a writer should have”.{{sfn|Hemingway|1942|p=xxiv}}Hemingway’s articulation of this conflict is a revelation: he is disclosing the tension that defines his work, the internal struggle between a man of action and a man of thought. Hemingway is distinguishing between the curse of Ishmael and the curse of Stubb in ''Moby-Dick'': Ishmael cannot turn the thinking off; for him, the sea and meditation are inextricable, even when he is on the night watch; Ahab’s eleventh commandment, on the other hand, is: do not think.

This dichotomy is always in play in the Hemingway text, and sometimes baldly explicit. Early in ''For Whom the Bell Tolls'', for example, Robert Jordan coaxes himself, “Turn off the thinking now...You’re a bridge-blower now. Not a thinker”,{{sfn|Hemingway|1940|p=17}}just as he later disingenuously asserts, “My mind is in suspension until we win the war”.{sfn|Hemingway|1940|p=245}}In a 1938 letter to Maxwell Perkins,{{pg|126|127}}Hemingway blames his depressed mood on the rigors of living in a Spanish war zone while simultaneously trying to write his stories of the Spanish Civil War: “If I sound bitter or gloomy throw it out. It’s that it takes one kind of training and frame of mind to do what I’ve been doing and another to write prose”.{{sfn|Bruccoli|1996|p=253}}Ultimately, Hemingway’s contribution to the psychological novel, and to literary Modernism’s conception of mind, is his depiction of how a human being thinks during episodes of great stress, including matadors, boxers, and soldiers, as well as those haunted by their memories of those experiences.

For the purposes of Mailer’s and Hemingway’s intertextuality, boxing and bullfighting are virtually synonymous. Each sport affords the spectator an opportunity to witness violence in a largely—but not completely—sanitized outlet. ''In The Sun Also Rises'', a novel that essentially introduced the bullfight to mainstream American consciousness, boxing and bullfighting are explicitly compared. In addition to the scapegoat Robert Cohn’s dubious (but eventually demonstrable) boxing background, Jake Barnes and his friend Bill Gorton attend the Ledoux-Kid Francis fight in Paris less than a week before their excursion to the Pamplona bullfights. Later, during the ''desencajonada'', or unloading of the bulls, however, Jake constructs the simile of bullfighting to boxing. He tells Brett Ashley, “Look how he knows how to use his horns...He’s got a left and right just like a boxer.” As Brett confirms, “I saw him shift from his left to his right horn”.{{sfn|Hemingway|1926|p=144}}The two activities are clearly appealing to Hemingway: one man, by himself, confronting his own limits as he encounters an attacker with his skill, knowledge, courage, and mind control. Both activities are ritual performances, yet both flirt with the possibility of death, danger, crippling injury, as well as murder.

In Mailer, similarly, the allure of boxing seems to be the formalized structure of a violent situation as an attenuated restatement of war experience. Mailer has suggested as much, saying that boxing presents “a way for a violent man to begin to comprehend that living in a classic situation—in other words, living within certain limitations rather than expressing oneself uncontrollably is a way to live that he didn’t have before”.{{sfn|Mailer|Mailer|2006|p=185}}Mailer’s articulation is anticipated by Jake Barnes himself, who explains the process to Brett so that the bullfight “became more something that was going on with a definite end, and less of a spectacle with unexplained horrors”;{{sfn|Mailer|Mailer|2006|p=171}}in other words, the difference between bullfighting/boxing and war. Just as Mailer differentiates between a championship boxing match between{{pg|127|128}}professionals and a street fight, Hemingway distinguishes between a properly sanctioned bullfight and an amateur bullfight: “The amateur bullfight is as unorganized as a riot and all results are uncertain, bulls or men may be killed; it is all chance and the temper of the populace. The formal bullfight is a commercial spectacle built on the planned and ordered death of the bull and that is its end".{{sfn|Hemingway|1932|p=372}}If the Marquis of Queensbury rules codify violence in boxing and allow it to transcend a back-alley brawl, Hemingway and Mailer are always conscious of this spectrum of violence and its relative level of chaos.

To Mailer and Hemingway, the men who prevail within this organized violence transcend athletic excellence and attain the status of aesthetic and artistic exemplars. Mailer begins ''The Fight'' by describing Ali as “our most beautiful man”,{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=3}}just as Jake says that bullfighting prodigy Pedro Romero is the “best-looking boy I have ever seen”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=167}}{{efn|After Ali’s victory, Mailer suggests that “Maybe he never appeared more handsome”{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=212}}}}Ali was thirty-two when the Rumble in the Jungle took place; Romero is no more than twenty. Mailer was fifty-one in Zaire; Hemingway turned twenty-six in the summer of 1925, when ''The Sun Also Rises'' was composed. If Ali and Romero serve as embodiments of male beauty, Hemingway also uses Romero as a counterbalance to the malaise that had infected the “lost” members of the post-war generation. When Robert Cohn laments, “my life is going so fast and I’m not really living it,” Jake responds, “Nobody ever lives their life all the way up except bull-fighters”.{{sfn|Hemingway|1932|p=18}}Fitzgerald texts like ''The Great Gatsby'' impute an additional intensity of experience to the wealthy; Hemingway ascribes this same quality to the courageous activity of bullfighters. Boxing is precisely the same. In the extended set-piece of the Ledoux-Francis fight that Hemingway sketched in the first draft of SAR, the characters remark on the fight and Ledoux in a way that previews their same awe of bullfighters. Bill Gorton tells Jake, “By God Ledoux is great”{{sfn|Hemingway|1972|p=233}}and asks, “Why don’t they have guys like that in my business (that is, writing)"?{{sfn|Hemingway|1972|p=233}} Bill later deflects a compliment by telling Jake, “I’m not such a good man as Ledoux”.{{sfn|Hemingway|1972|p=234}}In the same way, the bullfighter Maera, whom Hemingway kills off in Chapter XIV of ''In Our Time'', is declared by Nick Adams to be “the greatest man he’d ever known".{{sfn|Hemingway|1972|p=237}}Between Maera and James Joyce, Hemingway wrote Ezra Pound in 1924, there is “absolutely no comparison in art...Maera by a mile”.{{sfn|Hemingway|1981b|p=119}}Boxing and bullfighters emerge in these texts as ideals, both masculine and artistic.

The artistic component of the allure of these sports is Mailer’s explicit{{pg|128|129}}reason for attending the Rumble in the Jungle. When Mailer attributes Foreman’s reference to himself in the third person as equivalent to the “schizophrenia” that “great artists” possess,{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=56}}it echoes Hemingway’s Romero who “talked about his work as something altogether apart from himself”.{{sfn|Hemingway|1926|p=178}}For Mailer, though, the real artist is of course not Foreman, but Ali. “If ever a fighter,” Mailer writes, “had been able to demonstrate that boxing was a twentieth century art, it must be Ali”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=162}}Hemingway writes in ''Death in the Afternoon'' that the only trait separating bull-fighting from its inclusion as one of the major arts is its impermanence. In ''The Dangerous Summer'', Hemingway pointedly compares bullfighting to art: “A bullfighter can never see the work of art that he is making. He has no chance to correct it as a painter or writer has. He cannot hear it as a musician can All the time, he is making his work of art he knows that he must keep within the limits of his skill and the knowledge of the animal”.{{efn|Earlier in The Dangerous Summer, Luis Miguel Dominguín is also compared to an artist: “He had the complete and respectful concentration on his work which marks all great artists”{{sfn|Hemingway|1985|p=106}}}}{{sfn|Hemingway|1985|p=198}}Whether Hemingway is posturing in an intentionally provocative way or not—he surely enjoyed presenting himself as the only novelist who would prefer to be Maera killing a bull than Joyce writing ''Ulysses''—it is sufficient to note that in his career-long characterizations of bullfighters, he saw artistry and exemplary conduct when they excelled during their performances, and displayed high and noble aims in their approaches to their work. The crucial way that bullfighting is instructive to a reading of ''The Fight'' emerges when Mailer captures Ali’s demeanor in the ring and the strategy he uses to dismantle and ultimately defeat Foreman. This exalted strategy is two-fold: in the first round, Ali relies on the enormously dangerous right-hand leads to score against Foreman. The audacity of this means of attack is captured in italicized awe in ''The Fight''. It is not a right, but a ''right''. “Right-hand leads!” Mailer exults, “My God!”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=180}}He explains the technicality that leading with the right “is the most difficult and dangerous punch. Difficult to deliver and dangerous to oneself”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=179}}Hemingway makes the same observation in Romero’s code of performance, which is that he has “the old thing, the holding of his purity of line through the maximum of exposure”.{{sfn|Hemingway|1926|p=172}}Ali might have danced his way to victory against Foreman, but he did not. He deftly took on the punishment of a much stronger man, and attacked in a way that would leave himself vulnerable, all in the hopes of sapping Foreman’s power. These are the qualities which Hemingway and Mailer extol.

In rounds two through five, Ali uses the infamous rope-a-dope, which absorbs punishment as Foreman punches himself out, using the great{{pg|129|130}}champion’s strength against himself. The parallel between Ali’s strategy and the matador’s gambit is evident. Hemingway quotes the bullfighter El Gallo as shunning exercises that would increase his strength: “What do I want with strength, man? The bull weighs half a ton. Should I take exercises for strength to match him? Let the bull have the strength”.{{sfn|Hemingway|1932|p=21}}As this remark suggests, rather than the simple-minded machismo that Hemingway is too frequently reputed to value, the virtue of the effective matador comes in mastering the fear that will inevitably arise when a man encounters a beast that dwarfs him. The successful matador must control his thoughts and emotions and rely on his skill and knowledge to subdue his opponent. Ali faces something precisely equivalent in Zaire. During a training sequence in ''When We Were Kings'', Ali yells out, “He’s the bull. I’m the matador,” clearly deferring to Foreman the trait of power and aggressiveness, and assuming for himself the wit, the knowledge, and the artistry needed to prevail.

Mailer’s hagiography of Ali, then, becomes the more vital when we go beyond his admiration for the fighter to recognize why this admiration was so profound. Ali’s preparation for the Foreman fight (in the 234-page Vintage edition of ''The Fight'', the opening bell to the knockout is confined to pages 177–210; thus, in a book called ''The Fight'', only fourteen percent of the book chronicles the fight{{efn|Mailer’s pacing might have been a model for '' When We Were Kings'', an 89-minute film of which the fight itself spans 7:14, or about 8%.}}follows El Gallo’s logical yet somewhat counter-intuitive training procedure. Mailer reports that Ali confesses, “Foreman can hit harder than me”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=16}}During the uninspired sparring session that opens ''The Fight'', Ali’s strategy is presaged. Since he knows he cannot compete with Foreman’s strength, Ali contrives to use Foreman’s strength against him. Mailer chronicles this strategy meticulously, writing of Ali that “part of his art was to reduce the force of each blow he received to the head and then fraction it further”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=4}}Art? An art to getting hit in the face? If so, it is coupled by fractioning, a melding of the art of war and the sweet science of boxing. Ali consciously courts the same dichotomy that Mailer proposes. Skipping rope in his training quarters, he barks out, “I’m a brain fighter. I’m scientific. I’m artistic” (''When We Were Kings''). The marriage of art and science continues when Mailer describes “the second half of the art of getting hit was to learn the trajectories with which punches glanced off your glove and still hit you”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=5}}If the study of trajectories is associated with physics, Ali the artist is associated with dance and writing and theatre. This almost suicidal strategy—unappreciated, Mailer suggests, by lesser minds like sportswriters and fight critics—recalls the “calculus” with which {{pg|130|131}}Hemingway claimed he wrote ''Across the River and Into the Trees'', destined for dismissal by ignorant critics. Mailer is unapologetic about twinning art and boxing: he references Joyce’s ''A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man'', Rembrandt’s “The Night Watch,” ''Moby-Dick'', and even Hemingway’s ''A Farewell to Arms'', reaching to masterpieces of art and literature to evoke athletic performance.

Mailer extends this articulation to propose that Ali has a physiological understanding of receiving violence that is almost hair-trigger in its fineness. “It was a study,” he writes, “to watch Ali take punches”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=5}}Mailer sees Ali “teaching his nervous system to transmit shock faster than other men could”{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=4}}and possessing the ability to “assimilate punches faster than other fighters,” as Ali “could literally transmit the shock through more parts of his body or direct it to its best path”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=5}}After watching a Foreman training session, Mailer concluded, “it seemed certain that if Ali wished to win, he would have to take more punishment than ever before in his career”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=53}}As Mailer mentions during his commentary in ''When We Were Kings'', “It was as if he wanted to train his body to receive these messages of punishment.”

Just as Ali is positioned as an artist, a craftsman, and a scientist, Mailer describes him in the same way that Hemingway describes matadors. During the first round of the fight, after Ali has tagged Foreman with a scoring punch, Foreman “charged in rage”,{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=178}}a raging bull whose strength must be absorbed, reallocated, frustrated, and then eliminated by the more intelligent foe. After another exchange, in fact, “Foreman responded like a bull. He roared forward. A dangerous bull. His gloves were out like horns”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=178–79}}Even the collection of declarative sentences, uncluttered by punctuation marks, recalls the way Hemingway captures Romero’s style in the ring. After Ali’s strategy of absorbing punches against the ropes emerges, Mailer writes that Foreman “had the pensive expression of a steer being dogged to the ground by a cowboy”,{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=184}}continuing the juxtaposition of Ali’s savvy with Foreman’s depiction as an animal, a beast of the same variety that charges mindlessly and dies inevitably in Pamplona. A brilliant depiction of Ali using his facial expression to deceive Foreman furthers the comparison: Ali, against the ropes, is
{{cquote|now banishing Foreman’s head with the turn of a matador sending away a bull after five fine passes were made, and once when he seemed to hesitate just a little too long, something stirred in{{pg|131|132}}George-like that across-the-arena knowledge of a bull when it is ready at last to gore the matador rather than the cloth, and like a member of a cuadrilla, somebody in Ali’s corner screamed, “Careful! Careful! Careful”!{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=196–97}}}}

Is this comparison self-indulgent? How many American readers would find a description of Ali’s defensive strategy in any way clarified by an esoteric gesture towards a bullfight? This link only makes sense in the context of Mailer’s incessant negotiation with the specter of Ernest Hemingway, shadowing him during his journey through Zaire.

Hemingway is introduced into the narrative when Mailer arrives in an unappealing Kinshasa with a stomach ailment, and immediately name drops Joseph Conrad and Ernest Hemingway: Conrad for his iconic depiction of the Congo, and Hemingway, about whom Mailer wonders, “Was it part of Hemingway’s genius that he could travel with healthy insides?”,{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=22}}ignoring the overwhelming catalogue of incidents and accidents that Hemingway suffered during his lifetime of travels. When Mailer hears the mighty roar of a lion, he begins a reverie: “To be eaten by a lion on the banks of the Congo— who could fail to notice that it was Hemingway’s own lion waiting down these years for the flesh of Ernest until an appropriate substitute had at last arrived?”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=92}}If the sound of the lion causes Mailer to fancy a lofty reenactment of Francis Macomber’s paranoia, or Mary’s quest for the lion in ''Under Kilimanjaro'', he does well to confess that the joke is on him: Zaire has a zoo. In Mailer’s description of a drunken balancing act on a balcony outside his hotel room, he speculates on the possibility of dying in this way. “What could be worse than accidental suicide?” he asks rhetorically. “A reverberation of Hemingway’s end shivered its echo”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=123}}These three examples indeed position Mailer as an “appropriate substitute” for Hemingway, both in his ambitious writing project in Africa, his encounters with the beasts of the jungle, and the courting of his own death, with Hemingway’s 1961 suicide still hovering over Mailer’s behavior, his thoughts, and his writing.

But Mailer is not through. When he puts forth Ali’s quandary once the fight is under his control, that he must choose between a victory by either a lethargic decision or the flourish of a spectacular knockout, he is compared to “a torero after a great faena who must still face the drear potential of a protracted inept and disappointing kill,” while Foreman remains “a bull”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=200}}In the sixth round, by which time the bout’s fate is foretold, Ali sizes{{pg|132|133}}up Foreman “the way a bullfighter lines up a bull before going in over the horns for the kill...a fair conclusion was that the bull still had an access of strength too great for the kill”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=202}}In a sequence where Mailer would make dozens of comparisons, frantically seeking metaphorical images to convey the magnitude of the scene, his clinging to bullfighting imagery is striking thematically and strategically, even if the image might only resonate with a specialist, with himself, or with a fellow aficionado of ''Death in the Afternoon''.{{efn|Cf. Advertisements For Myself, when Mailer writes, “I used to compare the bed to the bullfight, sometimes seeing myself as the matador and sometimes as the bull”}}{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=495}}When Mailer compares Foreman’s clumsiness to “a street fighter at the end of a long rumble”,{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=204}}the reader does not require any special base of knowledge to access the comparison.

The dynamic set up between Foreman and Ali leads to the rope-a-dope strategy that is ultimately Foreman’s undoing and proof of Ali’s ingenuity. Parodying his own proclivity towards “Germanic formulation,” Mailer teases that he might characterize this approach as “the modal transposition from Active to Passive”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=221}}The serious point about Ali’s strategy, though, is that he did not overpower Foreman (because he could not), and did not even use superior skill. He outsmarted him, outclassed him. Ali kills ''recibiendo''. His technique is the boxing equivalent of the bullfighter’s choice to kill by receiving the bull, to allow the bull’s aggression to work against itself by charging into the sword, rather than attacking the animal. Just as Ali’s technique is legendary, both Mailer and Hemingway have extolled the ''recibiendo'' style as, on several levels, the most sublime way to kill a bull.

Not many Americans understood the importance of ''recibiendo'' before 1926, when Hemingway turned the technique into an objective correlative for courage, the grace-under-pressure ideal that has become threadbare in recent discussions of Hemingway’s texts. In the final bullfight before the end of the festival of San Fermin, Romero’s performance is captured:

{{cquote|The bull watched him. Romero spoke to the bull and tapped one of his feet. The bull charged and Romero waited for the charge, the muleta held low, sighting along the blade, his feet firm. Then without taking a step forward, he became one with the bull...{{sfn|Hemingway|1926|p=224}}}}

In ''Death in the Afternoon'', Hemingway defines ''Recibir'', “to kill the bull from in front awaiting his charge without moving the feet once the charge has started”.{{sfn|Hemingway|1932|p=442}}This definition is nearly a precise restatement of Romero’s{{pg|133|134}}triumph in ''The Sun Also Rises'', his feet firm, waiting for the charge. Hemingway refers to ''recibiendo'' as the most “difficult, dangerous and emotional way to kill bulls”.{{sfn|Hemingway|1985|p=442}}In ''The Dangerous Summer'', Hemingway refers to the technique as “the oldest and the most dangerous and the most beautiful” manner of killing.{{sfn|Hemingway|1985|p=202}}By employing the ''recibiendo'' technique, Antonio Ordóñez in ''The Dangerous Summer'' and Pedro Romero in ''The Sun Also Rises'' impress their observers and impress the writers recording their accomplishments.

Mailer shares Hemingway’s fascination with a matador killing ''recibiendo''. His miniaturized version of ''Death in the Afternoon'', published in 1967, called simply ''The Bullfight'',{{efn|Mailer’s introductory remarks in that text are titled: ''Footnote to Death in the Afternoon.''}} describes this classic style of killing with a sense of awe, and is worth quoting at length:

{{cquote|The bull charged prematurely, and Amado, determined to get the kill, did not skip away but held ground, received the charge, stood there with the sword, turned the bull’s head with the muleta, and the bull impaled himself on the point of the torero’s blade which went right into the proper space between the shoulders, and the bull ran right up on it into his death, took several steps to the side, gave a toss of his head at heaven, and fell. Amado had killed ''recibiendo''. He had killed standing still, receiving the bull while the bull charged. No one had seen that in years.{{sfn|Mailer|1967|p=n.pg}}}}

By leaning back against the ropes and inciting Foreman’s charge, Ali displays the same bravado, courage, and panache in dominating his opponent as these matadors who Mailer and Hemingway laud with such emotion. {{efn|One of the ways Mailer praises Ali in ''When We Were Kings'' is by saying, “What a classic performance,” suggesting the classic style of defeating an opponent that parallels a heroic matador.}}

Mailer and Hemingway mimic the matadors they lionize in two significant ways. For Hemingway, the ''corto y derecho'' style of bullfighting that he describes in “The Undefeated,” another story from ''Men Without Women'', is so closely associated with his own “short and straight” writing style that the reference is almost transparently self-referential and was so already by its publication in 1927. In the same way that Jake’s attention to Romero is revelatory of what he values in a man, Hemingway’s own characterization of Romero is crucial for what Hemingway values in art. When Romero’s performance is summarized as “not brilliant bull-fighting...only perfect bull-fighting”,{{sfn|Hemingway|1926|p=221}}and that Romero’s style contained “no tricks and no{{pg|134|135}}mystifications”,{{sfn|Hemingway|1926|p=223}}Hemingway is separating his own novel from modern masterpieces of the previous few years like ''Ulysses'' or ''The Great Gatsby'' or ''Mrs. Dalloway'' and even anticipating the experimentation of ''The Sound and the Fury'', which would come a few years later.

Just as Hemingway mimics Romero’s clarity, classicism, and linearity in prose,{{efn|The first draft of ''The Sun Also Rises'' originally began in medias res, beginning in Spain, then flashing back to Paris. The change to linearity transcends a narratological decision to achieve thematic importance. For the essential study of ''The Sun Also Rises''’s composition and its implications, see Svoboda.}}Mailer links the passes of his narrative, endeavoring to reach a narrative climax just as the fight reaches its dramatic climax in the eighth round. Unlike Hemingway, who did not cling to figurative language in a conspicuous quest to have the reader understand perfectly a situation which he might not have ever seen before, Mailer’s sequence of comparisons rises to the task as the most memorable writerly performance in his account of the “Rumble in the Jungle.”

A few years earlier, Mailer warned his readers that “Sooner or later, fight metaphors, like fight managers, go sentimental. They go military” (''King of the Hill'').{{sfn|Mailer|1971|p=66}}True to his word, the first similes of the eighth round follow such a trope: Ali chooses his shots “as if he had a reserve of good punches... like a soldier in a siege who counts his bullets”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=206}}Some of the exchanges at the beginning of round eight recall the “great bombardment” of the fifth,{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=207}}which Mailer calls one of the greatest in the history of boxing, with a “shelling reminiscent of artillery battles in World War I”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=195}}While Mailer may caution us of the glibness of comparing boxing to warfare, he gleefully perpetuates the absurdity; he well knows that three minutes of getting punched by a man—even by George Foreman—is nothing like a world war, but he willingly adopts the parlance and conventions of boxing writing.

Towards the end of the seventh round, Mailer uses scenery-chewing similes to control the pace of the narrative, the better to convey Foreman’s mighty fatigue.

{{cquote|Foreman was fighting as slowly as a worn-out fighter in the Golden Gloves, slow as a man walking up a hill of pillows, slow as he would have looked if their first round had been rerun in slow motion, that was no slower than Foreman was fighting now...he was reminiscent...of a linebacker coiling around a runner with his hands and arms in the slow-motion replay...{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=204–05}}}}{{pg|135|136}}

And no slower than Mailer is narrating now. In this sequence of three similes, the first and third compare a slow fighter to a slow fighter. To say that Foreman, a tired professional fighter, looks as tired as a tired amateur fighter, is patently ridiculous. Furthermore, to state that he is as slow as a slow-motion version of himself, or a slow-motion version of someone else is not a helpful comparison; it is not vivid and inventive writing. The second simile is brilliant, and would be the only one needed, if the first and third did not aid in establishing the pacing of the moment in the fight.

Directly before the eighth round, Ali’s eyes, by contrast to Foreman’s torpor, are “quick as the eyes, indeed, of a squirrel”,{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=206}}demonstrating the energy, vivacity and speed that has been sapped from Foreman. During the round, Mailer’s similes are telling; they evoke the spectator’s enthusiasm, the witness’s thrill of the final sequence of the fight. Foreman’s legs become “like a horse high-stepping along a road full of rocks”;{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=206}}he bounces off the ropes and pursues Ali “like a man chasing a cat”;{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=206}}he waves his gloves at Ali “like an infant six feet tall waving its uncoordinated battle arm”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=207}}When Ali delivers the ''coup de grâce'', “Foreman’s arms flew out to the side like a man with a parachute jumping out of a plane”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=208}}How does he fall? “He went over like a six-foot, sixty-year-old butler who has just heard tragic news”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=208}}Foreman transforms from a six-foot infant to a six-foot sexagenarian manservant in two minutes. And, finally, Mailer compares a knocked-out fighter to “a drunk hoping to get out of bed to go to work”,{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=208}}an unfortunately predictable association.

All of these similes are Mailer’s own flourishes, the passes that he links together, striving to express his enthusiasm and awe, seeking to get the reader more intimately involved with the experience, culminating with one final comparison, not of Ali or of Foreman, but of his own reaction: our narrator was “like a dim parent who realizes suddenly his child is indeed and indubitably married”.{{sfn|Mailer|1975|p=209}}The figurative rope-a-dope that Mailer employs is unlike Hemingway’s description of the bullfight, but identical in that the scene he is attempting to capture must be described according to the terms of the action being rendered.

Where does ''The Fight'' ultimately belong in Norman Mailer’s life’s work? Is it a self-aggrandizing study of a sport, the nuances of which only a select few appreciate or care about? Is ''The Fight'' Mailer’s ''Death in the Afternoon''— the disquisition on bullfighting Hemingway wrote as a young man—or more precisely his ''The Dangerous Summer'', Hemingway’s revisitation of the{{pg|136|137}}bullfights at the end of his career? Is it Mailer’s ''A Moveable Feast'', a version of his memoirs? Does it equate to the two books Hemingway devoted to African safaris? A combination of all of these? ''The Fight'', ultimately, illuminates the reader of the way Mailer views violence, writing, and Hemingway himself, which positions it as a supplementary text to virtually every other major Mailer effort. With Hemingway and bullfighting as constant presences in ''The Fight'', these intertextual questions yield results that allow Mailer’s project to transcend journalism, or sports writing, to become a key text to determining his restatement of Hemingway’s classic twentieth-century themes.

===Notes===
{{notelist}}

===Citations===
{{Reflist}}

===Works Cited===
{{refbegin|indent=1|20em}}
*{{Cite book| author-last=Beegel | author-first=Susan F. |title=Hemingway’s Craft of Omission: Four Manuscript Examples |location=Ann Arbor, MI |publisher=UMI Research Press |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |date=1988 |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book| author-last= Bruccoli |author-first= Matthew J. |date= 1996 |title=The Only Thing That Counts: Ernest Hemingway-Maxwell Perkins Correspondence |location=New York |publisher=Scribner |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book |author-last=Burwell |author-first=Rose Marie |title=Hemingway: The Postwar Years and the Posthumous Novels |location=Cambridge, UK |publisher=Cambridge UP |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |date=1996 |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book |last=Fitzgerald |first=F. Scott |title=A Life in Letters |editor-first=Matthew J. |editor-last=Bruccoli |location=New York |publisher=Touchstone |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |date=1995 |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite AV media |last=Gast |first=Leon |title=When We Were Kings |date=1996 |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Film |url=https://youtu.be/svhnasgxpqs?si=SF1viC9Lbcs401BG |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite magazine |last=Hemingway |first=Ernest |title=The Art of the Short Story |magazine=Paris Review |date=Spring 1981a|pages=85-102 |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book |last=Hemingway |first=Ernest |authormask=1 |title=The Complete Short Stories of Ernest Hemingway: The Finca Vigía Edition |location=New York |publisher=Scribner’s |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |date=2003 |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book|last=Hemingway |first=Ernest |authormask=1 |title=The Dangerous Summer |date=1985 |location=New York |publisher=Scribner’s |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book|last=Hemingway |first=Ernest |authormask=1 |title=Death in the Afternoon |location=New York |publisher=Scribner’s |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |date=1932 |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book|last=Hemingway |first=Ernest |authormask=1 |title=Ernest Hemingway: Selected Letters, 1917–1961 |location=New York |publisher=Scribner's |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |editor-first=Carlos |editor-last=Baker |date=1981b |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book|last=Hemingway |first=Ernest |authormask=1 |title=For Whom the Bell Tolls |date=1940 |location=New York |publisher=Scribner’s |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book|editor-last=Hemingway |editor-first=Ernest |editormask=1 |title=Men at War: The Best War Stories of All Time |date=1942 |location=New York |publisher=Crown Publishers |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book|last=Hemingway |first=Ernest |authormask=1 |title=The Nick Adams Stories |date=1972 |location=New York |publisher=Scribner's |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book|last=Hemingway |first=Ernest |authormask=1 |title=The Sun Also Rises |date=1926 |location=New York |publisher=Scribner’s |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book|last=Hemingway |first=Ernest |authormask=1 |title=The Sun Also Rises: A Facsimile Edition Volume One |editor-last=Bruccoli |editor-first=Matthew J. |date=1990 |location=Detroit |publisher=Omnigraphics |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite magazine|last=Klosterman |first=Chuck |title=Nothing to Worry About |magazine=Esquire |pages=56-57|isbn= |author-link= |date=Feb 2008 |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book|last=Mailer |first=Norman |title=Advertisements for Myself |location=New York |publisher=Putnam |date=1959 |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book|last=Mailer |first=Norman |authormask=1 |title=The Bullfight: A Photographic Narrative |location=New York |publisher=Mcmillan |date=1967 |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book|last=Mailer |first=Norman |authormask=1 |title=The Fight |location=Boston |publisher=Little, Brown |date=1975 |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book|last=Mailer |first=Norman |authormask=1 |title=King of the Hill: Norman Mailer on the fight of the Century |location=New York |publisher=New American Library |date=1971 |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book|last1=Mailer |first1=Norman |author-mask=1 |first2=John Buffalo |last2=Mailer |title=The Big Empty: Dialogues on Politics, Sex, God, Boxing, Morality, Myth, Poker, and Bad Conscience in America |location=New York |publisher=Nation Books |date=2006 |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book|last=Reynolds |first=Michael S. |title=Hemingway’s First War: The Making of A Farewell to Arms |location=Princeton, NJ |publisher=Princeton UP |date=1976 |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book|last=Reynolds |first=Michael S. |authormask=1 |title=Hemingway: The Paris Years |location=Cambridge, MA |publisher=Basil Blackwell |date=1989 |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book|last=Reynolds |first=Michael S. |authormask=1 |title=The Young Hemingway |location=New York |publisher=Norton |date=1998 |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book|last=Ross |first=Lillian |title=Portrait of Hemingway |location=New York |publisher=Simon & Schuster |date=1961 |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
*{{Cite book |last=Svoboda |first=Frederic Joseph |title=Ernest Hemingway & The Sun Also Rises: The crafting of a Style |location=Lawrence, KS |publisher=UP of Kansas |date=1983 |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |medium=Print |ref=harv }}
{{Refend}}

User talk:Grlucas

2025-04-12T13:20:32Z

JHadaway: /* "Remembering Norris" Tribute Remediation */ new section

{{Talk header}}
[[/Archive 202504/]]

== Final edits ==
Hello, my article is complete: [[The_Mailer_Review/Volume_4,_2010/Ernest_and_Norman_(Exit_Music)|Ernest and Norman (Exit Music)]]
:{{Reply to|Flowersbloom}} great, thank you. I made some corrections. Please be sure to sign your talk page posts. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 09:59, 10 April 2025 (EDT)

Good evening, Dr. Lucas. Below is the link to my edited article:
https://projectmailer.net/pm/User:ASpeed/sandbox
:{{Reply to|ASpeed}} great. Let me know when it’s finished and posted, and I’l have a look. It appears as if you still have a bit of work to do. Please be sure to sign your talk page posts. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 09:59, 10 April 2025 (EDT)

Good evening, @[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]]. I have completed most of my Remediation Articles, but I still show issues for the one named, "[[The_Mailer_Review/Volume_4,_2010/Norman,_Papa,_and_the_Autoerotic_Construction_of_Woman|Norman, Papa, and the Autoerotic Construction of Woman]].

Based on the latest updates, [[The_Mailer_Review/Volume_4,_2010/Battles_for_Regard,_Writerly_and_Otherwise|Battles for Regard, Writerly and Otherwise]] looks good with exception of including a '''category'''.
:{{Reply to|ALedezma}} this one is good. I made some corrections before removing the banner, mostly in your sources. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 09:59, 10 April 2025 (EDT)

May you let me know if there is anything I can do on my end to resolve the issues with the first [[The_Mailer_Review/Volume_4,_2010/Norman,_Papa,_and_the_Autoerotic_Construction_of_Woman|article]]?

[[User:ALedezma|ALedezma]] ([[User talk:ALedezma|talk]]) 21:47, 8 April 2025 (EDT)
:{{Reply to|ALedezma}} looking very good, but some sources missing page numbers. Please see to those. Thanks. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 09:59, 10 April 2025 (EDT)

:::Thank you @[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] . I will review those and respond when complete. [[User:ALedezma|ALedezma]] ([[User talk:ALedezma|talk]]) 22:47, 10 April 2025 (EDT)
::::@[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]]. Thank you for your feedback. A review of article additions was made for source pages. [[User:ALedezma|ALedezma]] ([[User talk:ALedezma|talk]]) 20:22, 11 April 2025 (EDT)

Dr. Lucas I finished my remediation article https://projectmailer.net/index.php?title=The_Mailer_Review/Volume_4,_2010/Norman_Mailer%27s_The_Fight:_Hemingway,_Bullfighting,_and_the_Lovely_Metaphysics_of_Boxing&action=edit [[User:TWietstruk|TWietstruk]] ([[User talk:TWietstruk|talk]]) 19:44, 8 April 2025 (EDT)
:{{Reply to| TWietstruk}} good work so far, but there is more to do: placement of footnotes (eliminate spaces around them and punctuation always goes ''before'' the footnote.); proofread for typos; fix all red errors at the bottom (most of these are from errors in sourcing); works cited entries should be bulleted list and eliminate space between entries. Thanks. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 10:05, 10 April 2025 (EDT)

Dr. Lucas I have finished my assigned remediation article: https://projectmailer.net/pm/The_Mailer_Review/Volume_4,_2010/Jive-Ass_Aficionado:_Why_Are_We_in_Vietnam%3F_and_Hemingway%27s_Moral_Code#cite_note-FOOTNOTEHemingway2003-24
Username ADear.
:{{Reply to|ADear}} thank you. I have marked this as complete. Please be sure you sign your talk page posts correctly. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 10:05, 10 April 2025 (EDT)

Dr. Lucas, I have finished remediating my assigned article. Please review it at your earliest convenience. The link is here: [[The_Mailer_Review/Volume_5,_2011/Norman_Mailer's_Mythmaking_in_An_American_Dream_and_“The_White_Negro”|Norman Mailer's Mythmaking in An American Dream and “The White Negro”]]—[[User:Erhernandez|Erhernandez]] ([[User talk:Erhernandez|talk]]) 08:52, 4 April 2025 (EDT)
:{{Reply to|Erhernandez}} well done! A couple of things: never bury your talk page post. Put it at the bottom, preferably in its own section by clicking "Add topic" on the top-right. I removed your banner after making a few corrections. Please have a look over it and move on to the next thing. Thanks. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 09:06, 5 April 2025 (EDT)

Dr. Lucas, I transferred and edited my article. Can you look at it and remove the banner? Here's the link: [[The_Mailer_Review/Volume_4,_2010/Authorship_and_Alienation_in_Death_in_the_Afternoon_and_Advertisements_for_Myself|Authorship and Alienation in Death in the Afternoon and Advertisements for Myself]] ( [[User:APKnight25|APKnight25]] ([[User talk:APKnight25|talk]]) 13:02, 28 March 2025 (EDT) )
:{{Reply to| APKnight25}} looking good! A couple of things: never bury your talk page post. Put it at the bottom, preferably in its own section by clicking "Add topic" on the top-right. Next, eliminate all "fang" quotes in the article and add “real quotation marks.” Your sources should be a bulleted list. And there should be no space before a citation. You’re almost finished! —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 11:21, 30 March 2025 (EDT)

== Remediation of "Reinventing the Wheel" Mailer Article for Review ==

Dr. Lucas,

My [[The_Mailer_Review/Volume_5,_2011/Reinventing_a_New_Wheel:_The_Films_of_Norman_Mailer|article]] is ready for review.

Thank you!
[[User:TPoole|TPoole]] ([[User talk:TPoole|talk]]) 15:29, 29 March 2025 (EDT)
:{{Reply to|TPoole}} great! Could you include a link to it? Thanks. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 11:07, 30 March 2025 (EDT)
::OK, I [[The Mailer Review/Volume 5, 2011/Reinventing a New Wheel: The Films of Norman Mailer|found it]]. Looking really good. Great work. There are some citation issues that need to be seen to. The two red categories at the bottom should not be there; they will go away when the citations errors are corrected. Eliminate any quotation mark "fangs" in the text and replace them with “real quotation marks.” Let me know if you need help. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 11:14, 30 March 2025 (EDT)
:::@Grlucas, what are the citation issues? Which ones need correcting? [[User:TPoole|TPoole]] ([[User talk:TPoole|talk]]) 17:31, 31 March 2025 (EDT)
::::{{Reply to| TPoole}} When you click your citations, they should jump to the works cited entry they correspond to. Several of yours do not, indicated by the red “Harv and Sfn no-target errors” at the bottom. You also have a "CS1 maint: Unrecognized language" error that will likely be cleared up when you fix the citation issues. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 08:55, 1 April 2025 (EDT)
:::::@Grlucas, I have tried correcting the sfn codes in my citations. I was able to get the 2 web citations to link correctly. But for some reason, I cannot get the Mailer 1967 film Wild 90 citation to link to the reference list. Please advise. [[User:TPoole|TPoole]] ([[User talk:TPoole|talk]]) 20:24, 4 April 2025 (EDT)
::::::{{Reply to| TPoole}} OK, all fixed and published. Thanks. Please move on to another remediation. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 08:46, 5 April 2025 (EDT)

== Remediation of: "Contradictory Syntheses: Norman Mailer’s Left Conservatism and the Problematic of 'Totalitarianism'" ==

Dr. Lucas

I finished the remediation of the following article:

https://projectmailer.net/pm/The_Mailer_Review/Volume_5,_2011/Contradictory_Syntheses:_Norman_Mailer%E2%80%99s_Left_Conservatism_and_the_Problematic_of_%E2%80%9CTotalitarianism%E2%80%9D

It is ready for your review. Thank you.
[[User:JKilchenmann|JKilchenmann]] ([[User talk:JKilchenmann|talk]]) 19:04, 30 March 2025 (EDT)
:{{Reply to| JKilchenmann}} looks great. I made some tweaks to the references and some throughout, like changing ' and " to real apostrophes and quotation marks. A bit more clean-up, but you might want to check over it again. I removed the under-construction banner. Well one. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 21:32, 30 March 2025 (EDT)

== Final Edit ==

Thank you for your comments on my remediation of
"[[The Mailer Review/Volume 4, 2010/Authorship and Alienation in Death in the Afternoon and Advertisements for Myself|Authorship and Alienation in Death in the Afternoon and Advertisements for Myself.]]"

I've eliminated the "fang quotes" and changed them to “real quotation marks.” This was a very fascinating tip that taught me something new. It's something I've never noticed before but now always will.

I also put my sources in a bulleted list and removed the space before the citations. I think I'm all set now.
:{{Reply to|APKnight25}} great work! Please help other editors to complete the volume. Thanks! —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 08:34, 3 April 2025 (EDT)

== Remediation for ''Firearms in the Works of Hemingway and Mailer'' ==

[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]]

Hi Dr. Lucas,

I believe I have done everything for the Remediation of my article. Please let me know if there is anything else I need to do.

I will also link the article below:

https://projectmailer.net/pm/The_Mailer_Review/Volume_4,_2010/Firearms_in_the_Works_of_Hemingway_and_Mailer

Thank you,
Caitlin Vinson
:{{Reply to|CVinson}} great work so far. Your references must use templates, please. Blockquotes must also be done correctly. No spaces or line breaks before or after the {{tl|pg}} template. Footnote placement is also off (punctuation goes before the footnote; no spaces before or after the footnote). I will add the abstract and url. Thanks. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 08:30, 3 April 2025 (EDT)

:{{Reply to|Grlucas}} Hi Dr. Lucas, I believe there have been some updates made to the project. I believe I have also updated the works cited section to show correct templates. Please let me know if there is anything further that I need to do. Thank you, Caitlin.
::{{reply to| CVinson}} please sign your talk page posts correctly. Thanks. You still need to do some work on the sources. Use the <code>|author-mask=1</code> in your template for repeated author names. Also, you must eliminate the red “Harv and Sfn no-target errors” message at the bottom. No spaces or returns before or after the {{tl|pg}} call, as I already mentioned above. No parenthetical citations should be left, either; those should all be remediated to footnotes. Thanks. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 10:50, 8 April 2025 (EDT)

:{{Reply to|Grlucas}} I have updated the sources and updated the in-text citations. I am still having trouble with the "Harv and Sfn no-target errors." I have not been successful in fixing this error and have tried multiple ways to fix it. —[[User:CVinson|CVinson]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 8:18, 8 April 2025 (EDT)

:{{Reply to|Grlucas}} Hi Dr. Lucas, I see that I still have a red X for my remediation assignment. Is there something else I am still missing? —[[User:CVinson|CVinson]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 11:35, 10 April 2025 (EDT)

== Remediation for ''Norman Mailer Today'' ==
Dr. Lucas, I have finished up my remediation article [[The Mailer Review/Volume 5, 2011/Norman Mailer Today|Norman Mailer Today]], and it is ready for review. Please let me know if I missed something. Thank you! —[[User:Kamyers|Kamyers]] ([[User talk:Kamyers|talk]]) 18:20, 3 April 2025 (EDT)
:{{Reply to|Kamyers}} Great work! Please help your fellow editors finish the volume, or pick something to work on in [[The Mailer Review/Volume 4, 2010|Volume 4]]. Thanks, and well done. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 07:00, 4 April 2025 (EDT)

== Remediation of “The Conception of Irreversibility: Hannah Arendt and Hemingway’s ‘Hills Like White Elephants’” ==
Dr. Lucas, I have finished my remediation of Jennifer Yirinec's article: [[The Mailer Review/Volume 5, 2011/The Conception of Irreversibility: Hannah Arendt and Hemingway’s “Hills Like White Elephants”|The Conception of Irreversibility: Hannah Arendt and Hemingway’s “Hills Like White Elephants.”]] Thank you for your assistance with the article. It is ready for its final review! [[User:JHadaway|JHadaway]] ([[User talk:JHadaway|talk]]) 10:24, 4 April 2025 (EDT)
:{{Reply to|JHadaway}} a stellar job. Well done. I removed the banner, so you can move on to another article. Thanks. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 08:12, 5 April 2025 (EDT)

== Tribute Remediations ==
Dr. Lucas, I have begun work on the tributes for volume 5. [[The Mailer Review/Volume 5, 2011/Tributes to Norris Church Mailer/Grace Notes|Grace Notes]] by Stephen Borkowski is ready for its final review.—[[User:JHadaway|JHadaway]] ([[User talk:JHadaway|talk]]) 12:58, 4 April 2025 (EDT)
:{{Reply to|JHadaway}} Well done! Banner removed, url added. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 08:18, 5 April 2025 (EDT)

==Oohh Normie Final Edits==
Hi Dr. Lucas, I have finished my article: [[The_Mailer_Review/Volume_4,_2010/"Oohh_Normie_—_You're_Sooo_Hemingway":_Mailer_Memories_and_Encounters|Oohh Normie, You're Sooo Hemingway]]. Please let me know if there is anything I need to fix. [[User:Tbara4554|Tbara4554]] ([[User talk:Tbara4554|talk]]) 20:01, 5 April 2025 (EDT)
:{{reply to|Tbara4554}} thank you. I made some corrections and removed the banner. You might want to have another look over it. Please move on to something else. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 09:53, 6 April 2025 (EDT)

== Harlot's Ghost, Bildungsroman, Masculinity and Hemingway ==

Dr. Lucas,

The following article is ready for your review. Thanks.

https://projectmailer.net/pm/The_Mailer_Review/Volume_4,_2010/Harlot%27s_Ghost,_Bildungsroman,_Masculinity_and_Hemingway

[[User:JKilchenmann|JKilchenmann]] ([[User talk:JKilchenmann|talk]]) 21:22, 5 April 2025 (EDT)
:{{Reply to| JKilchenmann}} excellent. Thank you. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 09:39, 6 April 2025 (EDT)

== I am done with this ==

https://projectmailer.net/pm/The_Mailer_Review/Volume_5,_2011/Situating_Hemingway:_Mailer,_Style,_Ethics
:Received. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 10:29, 6 April 2025 (EDT)

== Final Review PM Article ==

Hi Dr. Lucas, [[The_Mailer_Review/Volume_4,_2010/Hemingway_to_Mailer_—_A_Delayed_Response_to_The_Deer_Park|here]] is my remediated article, ready for review![[User:Hobbitonya|Hobbitonya]] ([[User talk:Hobbitonya|talk]]) 12:21, 6 April 2025 (EDT)
:{{Reply to| Hobbitonya}} great work. I have removed the banner, so you are good to move on to something else. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 07:20, 7 April 2025 (EDT)

== Remediation Project ==

{{reply to|Grlucas}}
I have finished my remedidation project and I am ready for it to be reviewed. '''Article link''': [https://projectmailer.net/pm/The_Mailer_Review/Volume_5,_2011/Piling_On:_Norman_Mailer’s_Utilization_of_Marilyn_Monroe#Works_Cited|Piling On: Norman Mailer's Utilization of Marilyn Monroe]

Thanks,

[[User:MerAtticus|MerAtticus]] ([[User talk:MerAtticus|talk]]) 13:04, 6 April 2025 (EDT)
:{{Reply to| MerAtticus}} good work so far. Please remove wikilinks. Change ' and " to typographical apostrophes and quotation marks. And all red errors at the bottom of the page need to be taken care of. These are likely all from coding errors in your sources. Thanks! —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 07:24, 7 April 2025 (EDT)

{{reply to|Grlucas}}
I have removed the wikilinks, changed to the correct typographic style and updated my sources.
'''Article link''': [https://projectmailer.net/pm/The_Mailer_Review/Volume_5,_2011/Piling_On:_Norman_Mailer’s_Utilization_of_Marilyn_Monroe#Works_Cited|Piling On: Norman Mailer's Utilization of Marilyn Monroe] Thanks, [[User:MerAtticus|MerAtticus]] ([[User talk:MerAtticus|talk]]) 21:55, 7 April 2025 (EDT)

[I forgot to fill out the summary box. I am adding my summary]
:{{Reply to| MerAtticus}} you're getting there! It looks great. You must eliminate all the red errors at the bottom. These appear when there are errors in your citations. Let me know if you need help. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 09:15, 8 April 2025 (EDT)

@{{reply to|Grlucas}} I have tried everything I can think of and I still have harv and sfn no-target errors and harv and sfn multiple-target errors and cs1 uses editors parameter. Do I not include the editor? [[User:MerAtticus|MerAtticus]] ([[User talk:MerAtticus|talk]]) 16:03, 8 April 2025 (EDT)

{{reply to|Grlucas}} I have managed to get rid of two of the red target errors. I am still working on finding the harv sfn multiple target error. Thanks, [[User:MerAtticus|MerAtticus]] ([[User talk:MerAtticus|talk]]) 20:37, 8 April 2025 (EDT)

{{reply to|Grlucas}} I have tried everything i can think of to remove the last red error flag. I had to turn it in. I don't know that else I can do in this situation. I was given citation that did not follow any of the given formats. [[User:MerAtticus|MerAtticus]] ([[User talk:MerAtticus|talk]]) 21:45, 8 April 2025 (EDT)

== Remediation Submission ==

Hello!
Here's my remediated article; [[The_Mailer_Review/Volume_5,_2011/The_Devil's_Party:_Reading_and_Wreaking_Vengeance_in_The_Castle_in_the_Forest|The Devil's Party: Reading and Wreaking Vengeance in ''The Castle in the Forest'']].
Thanks! Please let me know if there's anything I can review or correct.
[[User:Maggiemrogers|Maggiemrogers]] ([[User talk:Maggiemrogers|talk]]) 13:23, 6 April 2025 (EDT)
:{{Reply to| Maggiemrogers}} nice work! Banner removed, so please move on to something else in the volume. Thanks. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 07:39, 7 April 2025 (EDT)

== Vol. 4: Rumors of Grace article remediated ==

I believe I have completed remediation of ''[[The_Mailer_Review/Volume_4,_2010/Rumors_of_Grace:_God-Language_in_Hemingway_and_Mailer|Rumors of Grace: God-Language in Hemingway and Mailer]]'', vol. 4. I was having last-minute trouble with sfn errors for sources without authors, but Justin Kilchenmann helped me out, so I think they are fixed.
:{{Reply to|Sherrilledwards}} You have done a remarkable job—a real Herculean effort! Footnotes should not go in any notes. See those I changed; the others should be changed in the same way. I have done some, but the others have to be fixed, I'm afraid. Thanks! —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 09:20, 8 April 2025 (EDT)

== Remediation of "Inside Norman Mailer ==

Hi Dr. Lucas - I have finished remediating the article, [[The Mailer Review/Volume 4, 2010/Inside Norman Mailer|Inside Norman Mailer]]. Please let me know if I need to make any adjustments. Thank you! [[User:Chelsey.brantley|Chelsey.brantley]] ([[User talk:Chelsey.brantley|talk]]) 18:09, 7 April 2025 (EDT)
:{{Reply to|Chelsey.brantley}} good work! Please help with another article from volume 4. Thanks! —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 09:36, 8 April 2025 (EDT)

== Completed: Norman Mailer: Playboy Magazine ==

I hope I am doing this is right. I have finished remediating my article about Norman Mailer and its in my designated sandbox [https://projectmailer.net/pm/The_Mailer_Review/Volume_5,_2011/Norman_Mailer:_Playboy_Magazine_Heavyweight here.]
If there are any last minute edits, let me know. I got the last of the errors removed yesterday. And I believe we are on the same page with leaving the in-line citations for ''Playboy'' to be as is, since the author didn't put them down in the works cited. [[User:NrmMGA5108|NrmMGA5108]] ([[User talk:NrmMGA5108|talk]]) 20:14, 7 April 2025 (EDT)Nina Mizner
:{{Reply to|NrmMGA5108}} looking good! So, the parenthetical citations still in the article, I'm assuming, are there because of those missing sources? Please check your page numbers; some seem to be off. Thanks. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 10:04, 8 April 2025 (EDT)

:{{Reply to|Grlucas}} I found the page number error and its corrected, and yes all the parenthetical citations should be referencing issues of the ''playboy'' magazine, which were not listed in the works cited. --[[User:NrmMGA5108|NrmMGA5108]] ([[User talk:NrmMGA5108|talk]]) 20:54, 10 April 2025 (EDT)

== Completed Remediation From Here to Eternity and The Naked and The Dead: Premier to Eternity? ==

Greeting Dr. Lucas,

I have made the adjustment that you mentioned.

I also made additional edits to my short footnotes and noticed that my citations did not link to my references - which has been fixed.

I have tested all of my citations, and they all work.

Here is my article by Alexander Hicks, ''From Here to Eternity and The Naked and The Dead: Premier to Eternity?''

https://projectmailer.net/pm/The_Mailer_Review/Volume_5,_2011/From_Here_to_Eternity_and_The_Naked_and_the_Dead:_Premiere_to_Eternity%3F

Have a great day.
:{{Reply to| THarrell}} Please always sign your talk page posts. Several “quoted items” in the article appear as ‘quoted items’; these must be corrected, please. No spaces or returns should surround {{tl|pg}} calls. Multiple page numbers should look like this <code><nowiki>{{sfn|Moretti|1996|pp=11-14}}</nowiki></code>; note the double <code>pp</code>. There seem to be many typos. I corrected some for you, but you must see to the rest. Thanks. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 10:16, 8 April 2025 (EDT)

:{{Reply to| Grlucas}} Greetings,

Are these the only additional corrections that need to be made? This is different from what you mentioned before.

I just want to be sure that I have hit everything.

Also can you verify what other typos you are seeing, I have ran through this twice.

If something is spelt a certain way, for example "Soljer", I have left it that way. Since it is mentioned like that in the article.
—[[User:THarrell|THarrell]] ([[User talk:THarrell|talk]]) 06:49, 8 April 2025 (EDT)

:{{Reply to| Grlucas}} Greetings,

I have gone through and fixed all of the short footnotes.

I have gone line by line with a ruler to look at any typos, and fixed the words that I found that had a dash in them/needed to be lowercased.

I have also fixed the quotations.

—[[User:THarrell|THarrell]] ([[User talk:THarrell|talk]]) 12:31, 9 April 2025 (EDT)

== Remediation for “Footnote to Death in the Afternoon” ==

Greetings Dr. Lucus,

My article is ready for your review. Thank you.

https://projectmailer.net/pm/The_Mailer_Review/Volume_4,_2010/Mailer%E2%80%99s_%E2%80%9CFootnote_to_Death_in_the_Afternoon%E2%80%9D)
:{{Reply to| KForeman}} it's coming along. Please ''always'' sign your talk page posts. Right up top, there are errors. Please use the real {{tl|pg}}, like all the other articles. Citations need to be fixed. All parenthetical citations must be converted. You still have quite a bit of work to do. All red sections need to be seen to and corrected. Thanks. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 10:20, 8 April 2025 (EDT)

=Remediation of "Cluster Seeds and the Mailer Legacy"=
Hello, Dr. Lucas. I have completed the remediation of [https://projectmailer.net/index.php?title=The_Mailer_Review/Volume_5,_2011/Cluster_Seeds_and_the_Mailer_Legacy&oldid=18200| my article], and it is ready for your review. Thank you!—[[User:ADavis|ADavis]] ([[User talk:ADavis|talk]]) 11:32, 8 April 2025 (EDT)@ADavis
:{{Reply to| ADavis}} got it. I think I check it yesterday and removed the banner then. Please move on to another piece. Thanks. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 17:29, 8 April 2025 (EDT)

== Remediating Article: Mailer, Hemingway, and Boxing Volume 4. ==

Hello Dr. Lucas,

I have completed remediating my article. Here is the link [[The Mailer Review/Volume 4, 2010/Mailer, Hemingway, and Boxing|The Mailer Review: Volume 4: Mailer, Hemingway, Boxing (2010)]] [[User:JBrown|JBrown]] ([[User talk:JBrown|talk]]) 13:01, 8 April 2025 (EDT)JBrown
:{{Reply to|JBrown}} a good start, but all parenthetical citations need to be footnotes. Also, check your headers. Thanks. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 17:29, 8 April 2025 (EDT)

== Remediation for ''Norris Church Mailer'' ==
Dr. Lucas, I have finished up remediating the article [[The Mailer Review/Volume 4, 2010/Norris Church Mailer|Norris Church Mailer]], and it is ready for review. Please let me know if I missed something. Thank you! —[[User:Kamyers|Kamyers]] ([[User talk:Kamyers|talk]]) 13:42, 8 April 2025 (EDT)
:{{reply to|Kamyers}} awesome work! Thank you! —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 17:29, 8 April 2025 (EDT)

== Final Edits Completed and Ready for Review ==

Dr. Lucas, I have completed my assigned remediation article: [[The_Mailer_Review/Volume_4,_2010/Looking_at_the_Past:_Nostalgia_as_Technique_in_The_Naked_and_the_Dead_and_For_Whom_the_Bell_Tolls|Looking at the Past: Nostalgia as Technique in The Naked and the Dead and For Whom the Bell Tolls]]. Please review at your convenience. I enjoyed working on this assignment. I look forward to your suggestions and feedback. All the best, Danielle (DBond007)
:{{Reply to| DBond007}} ok, good work. Please remove all the external links. Links to Wikipedia are not necessary, but if used, they need to be done correctly. There should be no spaces before {{tl|sfn}}. May sure all your ' and " are actually typographical apostrophes and quotation marks. Remove any superfluous spaces and line breaks; these mess up the formatting. Thanks! —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 17:29, 8 April 2025 (EDT)
::{{Reply to| Grlucas}} Thank you. I will get started on these revisions immediately. Thanks for the feedback and your time. :)[[User:DBond007|DBond007]] ([[User talk:DBond007|talk]]) 11:30, 10 April 2025 (EDT)
::{{Reply to| Grlucas}} I have completed all the requested revisions and ready for review round 2. Thank you again![[User:DBond007|DBond007]] ([[User talk:DBond007|talk]]) 12:10, 10 April 2025 (EDT)
:::{{Reply to|DBond007}} looking better! There are still items to be seen to, like titles on novels and magazines need to appear like they do in the original: if it's italicized in the PDF, it must be italicized on the web. I added the epigram for you and corrected that pesky citation. Thanks. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 08:41, 12 April 2025 (EDT)

== Completed the remediation assignment ==

Good evening Dr. Lucas,

I hope I am doing this right. Here is the link for my completed Remediation article: [http://The_Mailer_Review/Volume_4,_2010/Encounters_with_Mailer Encounters with Mailer].

I look forward to reading your feedback.

All the best,

Patrick Riley
:{{Reply to|Priley1984}} thank you! —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 07:40, 10 April 2025 (EDT)

== Remediation Project Submission: An Expected Encounter in an Unexpected Place ==

Link:

https://projectmailer.net/pm/The_Mailer_Review/Volume_4,_2010/Norman_Mailer:_An_Expected_Encounter_in_an_Unexpected_Place

Winnie Verna
:{{Reply to|Wverna}} received, thanks! —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 07:51, 10 April 2025 (EDT)

== E.Mosley ==

Good evening, @Grlucas. I have completed my Remediation Articles[[https://projectmailer.net/pm/The_Mailer_Review/Volume_4,_2010/On_Reading_Mailer_Too_Young]]. The article I had was " On Reading Mailer Too Young Volume 4, 2010
:{{Reply to| Essence903m}} thank you. I had to fix and clean-up quite a bit. Your saves also do not include summaries. When you move on to your next article, please be more careful and follow the instructions. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 09:12, 10 April 2025 (EDT)

== Kynndra Watson ==

Good Evening, @grlucas. i have completed my Remediation articles: Volume 5: https://projectmailer.net/pm/The_Mailer_Review/Volume_5,_2011/Making_Masculinity_and_Unmaking_Jewishness:_Norman_Mailer%E2%80%99s_Voice_in_Wild_90_and_Beyond_the_Law and Volume 4: https://projectmailer.net/pm/The_Mailer_Review/Volume_4,_2010/Mailer,_Hemingway,_and_the_%E2%80%9CReds%E2%80%9D.

Thank you.
:{{Reply to| KWatson}} thank you, and this is a good start, but there are still many items that need to be cleaned up, like footnote indications (They go after punctuation), citation errors (all the red errors at the bottom need to be seen to), extra spaces and ALL CAPS need to be removed. Please see other completed articles for models. Thanks. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 09:18, 10 April 2025 (EDT)

== Tribute Remediation ==
Dr. Lucas, I have finished [[The Mailer Review/Volume 5, 2011/Tributes to Norris Church Mailer/What Would Be the Fun of That?|"What Would Be the Fun of That?"]] by Peter Alson.—[[User:JHadaway|JHadaway]] ([[User talk:JHadaway|talk]]) 09:33, 9 April 2025 (EDT)
:{{Reply to| JHadaway}} awesome! Thank you! —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 09:21, 10 April 2025 (EDT)

== “Remembering Norris Church” Tribute Remediation ==
Dr. Lucas, I have finished [[The Mailer Review/Volume 5, 2011/Tributes to Norris Church Mailer/Remembering Norris Church|“Remembering Norris Church”]] by John Bowers.—[[User:JHadaway|JHadaway]] ([[User talk:JHadaway|talk]]) 16:17, 9 April 2025 (EDT)
:{{Reply to| JHadaway}} and again, excellent! Thank you! —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 09:22, 10 April 2025 (EDT)

== “The Norris I Knew” Tribute Remediation ==
Dr. Lucas, I have finished [[The Mailer Review/Volume 5, 2011/Tributes to Norris Church Mailer/The Norris I Knew|“The Norris I Knew”]] by Christopher Busa.—[[User:JHadaway|JHadaway]] ([[User talk:JHadaway|talk]]) 09:04, 10 April 2025 (EDT)
:{{Reply to| JHadaway}} rockin’! 👍🏼 —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 09:24, 10 April 2025 (EDT)

== "Norris Mailer" Tribute Remediation ==
Dr. Lucas, I have finished [[The Mailer Review/Volume 5, 2011/Tributes to Norris Church Mailer/Norris Mailer|"Norris Mailer"]] by Nancy Collins.—[[User:JHadaway|JHadaway]] ([[User talk:JHadaway|talk]]) 09:35, 10 April 2025 (EDT)
:{{Reply to| JHadaway}} thanks again. You’re tearing it up. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 10:32, 10 April 2025 (EDT)

== "Rise Above It" Tribute Remediation ==

Dr. Lucas, I have finished [[The Mailer Review/Volume 5, 2011/Tributes to Norris Church Mailer/Rise Above It|"Rise Above It"]] by David Ebershoff—[[User:JHadaway|JHadaway]] ([[User talk:JHadaway|talk]]) 11:12, 10 April 2025 (EDT)
:{{Reply to|JHadaway}} excellent. Many thanks! —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 07:15, 12 April 2025 (EDT)

== Completed Additional Articles ==

Hello, Dr. Lucas. I have remediated [https://projectmailer.net/index.php?title=The_Mailer_Review/Volume_5,_2011/Tributes_to_Norris_Church_Mailer/A_View_Through_the_Prism&oldid=18744|"A View Through the Prism"], [https://projectmailer.net/pm/The_Mailer_Review/Volume_5,_2011/Tributes_to_Norris_Church_Mailer/Lip_Liner|"Lip Liner"], and [https://projectmailer.net/pm/The_Mailer_Review/Volume_5,_2011/The_Living_Room_Show#|"The Living Room Show"] in Volume 5. They are ready for your review. Thank you!—[[User:ADavis|ADavis]] ([[User talk:ADavis|talk]]) 12:31, 10 April 2025 (EDT)
:{{Reply to|ADavis}} great work. Thank you! —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 07:26, 12 April 2025 (EDT)

== Submission notification sent 29 March ==

@grlucas

Dr. Lucas - I sent a Talk Page notification that I had completed the page I remediated on 29 March. The table indicates I haven't done anything yet. I sent it from the Talk Page from the article site. I don't see a response from that notification, but I had received one from you earlier in the process.
I don't understand what happened.

[[User:LogansPop22|LogansPop22]] ([[User talk:LogansPop22|talk]]) 14:54, 10 April 2025 (EDT)
:{{reply to|LogansPop22}} sorry if I missed that. [[The Mailer Review/Volume 5, 2011/Hemingway and Women at the Front: Blowing Bridges in The Fifth Column, For Whom the Bell Tolls, and Other Works|this article]], right? It's looking great, though all the parenthetical citations must be converted to footnotes using {{tl|sfn}} and some of the author names in your notes should use {{tl|harvtxt}}. I added the "citations" section for you. Thanks. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 07:39, 12 April 2025 (EDT)

== Making Masculinity and Unmaking Jewishness: Norman Mailer’s Voice in Wild 90 and Beyond the Law ==

@Grlucas, I have made some additional edits to this [https://projectmailer.net/pm/The_Mailer_Review/Volume_5,_2011/Making_Masculinity_and_Unmaking_Jewishness:_Norman_Mailer%E2%80%99s_Voice_in_Wild_90_and_Beyond_the_Law article] in Volume 5 by correcting most of the citations. There are 2 that still do not work, but I think that is because the sources are incomplete.

[[User:TPoole|TPoole]] ([[User talk:TPoole|talk]]) 21:16, 10 April 2025 (EDT)
:{{Reply to| TPoole}} Looking really good, and this is a complicated one. A couple of things: no spaces or line breaks before or after {{tl|pg}}; I removed the spaces before {{tl|sfn}}, but you might want to check them; there are some typos, like missing spaces before some parentheses; no footnotes should appear in the notes section: use {{tl|harvtxt}} instead. And all the red errors at the bottom need to be cleared up. Great work so far! —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 08:00, 12 April 2025 (EDT)

== Red Error-Gone ==

{{reply to|Grlucas}}I have deleted all the sfn's and the red error is gone. I don't know why I didn't think about this days ago.

[[The_Mailer_Review/Volume_5,_2011/Piling_On:_Norman_Mailer’s_Utilization_of_Marilyn_Monroe|Gladstein-Monroe]]

[[User:MerAtticus|MerAtticus]] ([[User talk:MerAtticus|talk]]) 23:07, 10 April 2025 (EDT)
:{{Reply to|MerAtticus}} getting closer. A few things: you should use <code>|author-mask=1</code> for repeated author names in your works cited; all parenthetical citations need to be replaced with footnotes using {{tl|sfn}}; must punctuation in your sources need to be removed as the templates do that for you; and you need to use {{tl|harvtxt}} for citations in your endnotes. Also, letters and films have their own templates. I did a couple of these for you as examples. Thanks! —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 08:14, 12 April 2025 (EDT)

== "Remembering Norris" Tribute Remediation ==

Dr. Lucas, I have finished [[The Mailer Review/Volume 5, 2011/Tributes to Norris Church Mailer/Remembering Norris|"Remembering Norris"]] by Margo Howard.—[[User:JHadaway|JHadaway]] ([[User talk:JHadaway|talk]]) 09:20, 12 April 2025 (EDT)

The Mailer Review/Volume 5, 2011/Tributes to Norris Church Mailer/Remembering Norris

2025-04-12T13:16:39Z

JHadaway: Added category, sorting

{{DISPLAYTITLE:{{BASEPAGENAME}}/{{SUBPAGENAME}}}}
{{MR05}}
{{Working}}
{{Byline|last=Howard |first=Margo |url= }}
{{dc|dc=I|t was love at first sight, and we met cute.}} It was at a 2004 PEN dinner in Boston. My husband and I were seated at the Mailers’ table. A man was seated between Norris and me. After talking to each other for about ten minutes, basically leaning in in front of this man, we told him to move. We continued to talk to each other through the whole dinner; rude, to be sure, but there you are. At the end of the evening we exchanged contacts, and each other’s books, and thus our friendship was born. I had, for whatever reason, always thought middle-aged ladies did not make new friends; they had the old ones. But Norris not only became a cherished friend, she became more. We called each other “the red-headed sister.” I was the big sister, of course, being nine years her senior—and both of us were only children.

The unusual thing about our relationship as girlfriends was that, though we did see each other in Boston, Provincetown, and New York, we did most of our talking in emails. We went through a lot together, in the ether, as it were. For me to even ''meet'' Norris, let alone become close, was amazing to me because I had been aware of her for many years as someone who was covered in the press. The Mrs. Mailer I was used to seeing in photographs was a curvaceous, Rubenesque beauty. The Mrs. Mailer I met was reed thin—and still gorgeous. She told me, soon after we met, that she was duking it out with cancer, and she had been winning for a lot of years. Her approach to her illness was quite matter-of-fact. There was no complaining, no self pity. But I must say there was a good bit of humor. At one particularly rough juncture after Norman’s death, having more to do with anger than grief, she wrote me, “You know, dying wouldn’t be such a bad thing.” If there was a lull in the e-mail conversation and her phone didn’t answer at home, I knew she was back in the hospital. I would then email, saying I had X-ray vision and knew {{pg|50|51}} where she was. She would e-mail back and say, “Oh, sweetie, they have locked me up again.”

Norris had my admiration in so many areas. She was truly multi-talented, level-headed, and so much more than “the great man’s wife.” Whereas I had been a mediocre-to-pretty-terrible stepmother, she had woven together Norman’s children from more different mothers than you can imagine. Along with her own two boys, all the Mailer kids were a family, and that was Norris’s doing. She had wonderful humor and wisdom, and I loved her. She was a gift to my later life that was taken away too soon. Except that she doesn’t seem that far away. When I want to tell her something, I find myself looking heavenward and saying, “Hey, good lookin’, listen to this!” And I have her picture on my desk... along with my mother, my children, and my husband. I mean, where else would you put a sister’s picture?

{{Review}}
{{DEFAULTSORT:Remembering Norris}}
[[Category:Tributes (MR)]]

The Mailer Review/Volume 5, 2011/Tributes to Norris Church Mailer/Remembering Norris

2025-04-12T13:15:51Z

JHadaway: Added second page

The Mailer Review/Volume 5, 2011/Tributes to Norris Church Mailer/Remembering Norris

2025-04-12T13:12:26Z

JHadaway: Added first page

The Mailer Review/Volume 5, 2011/Tributes to Norris Church Mailer/Remembering Norris

2025-04-12T13:05:45Z

JHadaway: Started working

User talk:Grlucas

2025-04-10T15:12:56Z

JHadaway: /* "Rise Above It" Tribute Remediation */ new section

{{Talk header}}
[[/Archive 202504/]]

== Final edits ==
Hello, my article is complete: [[The_Mailer_Review/Volume_4,_2010/Ernest_and_Norman_(Exit_Music)|Ernest and Norman (Exit Music)]]
:{{Reply to|Flowersbloom}} great, thank you. I made some corrections. Please be sure to sign your talk page posts. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 09:59, 10 April 2025 (EDT)

Good evening, Dr. Lucas. Below is the link to my edited article:
https://projectmailer.net/pm/User:ASpeed/sandbox
:{{Reply to|ASpeed}} great. Let me know when it’s finished and posted, and I’l have a look. It appears as if you still have a bit of work to do. Please be sure to sign your talk page posts. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 09:59, 10 April 2025 (EDT)

Good evening, @[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]]. I have completed most of my Remediation Articles, but I still show issues for the one named, "[[The_Mailer_Review/Volume_4,_2010/Norman,_Papa,_and_the_Autoerotic_Construction_of_Woman|Norman, Papa, and the Autoerotic Construction of Woman]].

Based on the latest updates, [[The_Mailer_Review/Volume_4,_2010/Battles_for_Regard,_Writerly_and_Otherwise|Battles for Regard, Writerly and Otherwise]] looks good with exception of including a '''category'''.
:{{Reply to|ALedezma}} this one is good. I made some corrections before removing the banner, mostly in your sources. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 09:59, 10 April 2025 (EDT)

May you let me know if there is anything I can do on my end to resolve the issues with the first [[The_Mailer_Review/Volume_4,_2010/Norman,_Papa,_and_the_Autoerotic_Construction_of_Woman|article]]?

[[User:ALedezma|ALedezma]] ([[User talk:ALedezma|talk]]) 21:47, 8 April 2025 (EDT)
:{{Reply to|ALedezma}} looking very good, but some sources missing page numbers. Please see to those. Thanks. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 09:59, 10 April 2025 (EDT)

Dr. Lucas I finished my remediation article https://projectmailer.net/index.php?title=The_Mailer_Review/Volume_4,_2010/Norman_Mailer%27s_The_Fight:_Hemingway,_Bullfighting,_and_the_Lovely_Metaphysics_of_Boxing&action=edit [[User:TWietstruk|TWietstruk]] ([[User talk:TWietstruk|talk]]) 19:44, 8 April 2025 (EDT)
:{{Reply to| TWietstruk}} good work so far, but there is more to do: placement of footnotes (eliminate spaces around them and punctuation always goes ''before'' the footnote.); proofread for typos; fix all red errors at the bottom (most of these are from errors in sourcing); works cited entries should be bulleted list and eliminate space between entries. Thanks. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 10:05, 10 April 2025 (EDT)

Dr. Lucas I have finished my assigned remediation article: https://projectmailer.net/pm/The_Mailer_Review/Volume_4,_2010/Jive-Ass_Aficionado:_Why_Are_We_in_Vietnam%3F_and_Hemingway%27s_Moral_Code#cite_note-FOOTNOTEHemingway2003-24
Username ADear.
:{{Reply to|ADear}} thank you. I have marked this as complete. Please be sure you sign your talk page posts correctly. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 10:05, 10 April 2025 (EDT)

Dr. Lucas, I have finished remediating my assigned article. Please review it at your earliest convenience. The link is here: [[The_Mailer_Review/Volume_5,_2011/Norman_Mailer's_Mythmaking_in_An_American_Dream_and_“The_White_Negro”|Norman Mailer's Mythmaking in An American Dream and “The White Negro”]]—[[User:Erhernandez|Erhernandez]] ([[User talk:Erhernandez|talk]]) 08:52, 4 April 2025 (EDT)
:{{Reply to|Erhernandez}} well done! A couple of things: never bury your talk page post. Put it at the bottom, preferably in its own section by clicking "Add topic" on the top-right. I removed your banner after making a few corrections. Please have a look over it and move on to the next thing. Thanks. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 09:06, 5 April 2025 (EDT)

Dr. Lucas, I transferred and edited my article. Can you look at it and remove the banner? Here's the link: [[The_Mailer_Review/Volume_4,_2010/Authorship_and_Alienation_in_Death_in_the_Afternoon_and_Advertisements_for_Myself|Authorship and Alienation in Death in the Afternoon and Advertisements for Myself]] ( [[User:APKnight25|APKnight25]] ([[User talk:APKnight25|talk]]) 13:02, 28 March 2025 (EDT) )
:{{Reply to| APKnight25}} looking good! A couple of things: never bury your talk page post. Put it at the bottom, preferably in its own section by clicking "Add topic" on the top-right. Next, eliminate all "fang" quotes in the article and add “real quotation marks.” Your sources should be a bulleted list. And there should be no space before a citation. You’re almost finished! —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 11:21, 30 March 2025 (EDT)

== Remediation of "Reinventing the Wheel" Mailer Article for Review ==

Dr. Lucas,

My [[The_Mailer_Review/Volume_5,_2011/Reinventing_a_New_Wheel:_The_Films_of_Norman_Mailer|article]] is ready for review.

Thank you!
[[User:TPoole|TPoole]] ([[User talk:TPoole|talk]]) 15:29, 29 March 2025 (EDT)
:{{Reply to|TPoole}} great! Could you include a link to it? Thanks. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 11:07, 30 March 2025 (EDT)
::OK, I [[The Mailer Review/Volume 5, 2011/Reinventing a New Wheel: The Films of Norman Mailer|found it]]. Looking really good. Great work. There are some citation issues that need to be seen to. The two red categories at the bottom should not be there; they will go away when the citations errors are corrected. Eliminate any quotation mark "fangs" in the text and replace them with “real quotation marks.” Let me know if you need help. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 11:14, 30 March 2025 (EDT)
:::@Grlucas, what are the citation issues? Which ones need correcting? [[User:TPoole|TPoole]] ([[User talk:TPoole|talk]]) 17:31, 31 March 2025 (EDT)
::::{{Reply to| TPoole}} When you click your citations, they should jump to the works cited entry they correspond to. Several of yours do not, indicated by the red “Harv and Sfn no-target errors” at the bottom. You also have a "CS1 maint: Unrecognized language" error that will likely be cleared up when you fix the citation issues. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 08:55, 1 April 2025 (EDT)
:::::@Grlucas, I have tried correcting the sfn codes in my citations. I was able to get the 2 web citations to link correctly. But for some reason, I cannot get the Mailer 1967 film Wild 90 citation to link to the reference list. Please advise. [[User:TPoole|TPoole]] ([[User talk:TPoole|talk]]) 20:24, 4 April 2025 (EDT)
::::::{{Reply to| TPoole}} OK, all fixed and published. Thanks. Please move on to another remediation. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 08:46, 5 April 2025 (EDT)

== Remediation of: "Contradictory Syntheses: Norman Mailer’s Left Conservatism and the Problematic of 'Totalitarianism'" ==

Dr. Lucas

I finished the remediation of the following article:

https://projectmailer.net/pm/The_Mailer_Review/Volume_5,_2011/Contradictory_Syntheses:_Norman_Mailer%E2%80%99s_Left_Conservatism_and_the_Problematic_of_%E2%80%9CTotalitarianism%E2%80%9D

It is ready for your review. Thank you.
[[User:JKilchenmann|JKilchenmann]] ([[User talk:JKilchenmann|talk]]) 19:04, 30 March 2025 (EDT)
:{{Reply to| JKilchenmann}} looks great. I made some tweaks to the references and some throughout, like changing ' and " to real apostrophes and quotation marks. A bit more clean-up, but you might want to check over it again. I removed the under-construction banner. Well one. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 21:32, 30 March 2025 (EDT)

== Final Edit ==

Thank you for your comments on my remediation of
"[[The Mailer Review/Volume 4, 2010/Authorship and Alienation in Death in the Afternoon and Advertisements for Myself|Authorship and Alienation in Death in the Afternoon and Advertisements for Myself.]]"

I've eliminated the "fang quotes" and changed them to “real quotation marks.” This was a very fascinating tip that taught me something new. It's something I've never noticed before but now always will.

I also put my sources in a bulleted list and removed the space before the citations. I think I'm all set now.
:{{Reply to|APKnight25}} great work! Please help other editors to complete the volume. Thanks! —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 08:34, 3 April 2025 (EDT)

== Remediation for ''Firearms in the Works of Hemingway and Mailer'' ==

[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]]

Hi Dr. Lucas,

I believe I have done everything for the Remediation of my article. Please let me know if there is anything else I need to do.

I will also link the article below:

https://projectmailer.net/pm/The_Mailer_Review/Volume_4,_2010/Firearms_in_the_Works_of_Hemingway_and_Mailer

Thank you,
Caitlin Vinson
:{{Reply to|CVinson}} great work so far. Your references must use templates, please. Blockquotes must also be done correctly. No spaces or line breaks before or after the {{tl|pg}} template. Footnote placement is also off (punctuation goes before the footnote; no spaces before or after the footnote). I will add the abstract and url. Thanks. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 08:30, 3 April 2025 (EDT)

:{{Reply to|Grlucas}} Hi Dr. Lucas, I believe there have been some updates made to the project. I believe I have also updated the works cited section to show correct templates. Please let me know if there is anything further that I need to do. Thank you, Caitlin.
::{{reply to| CVinson}} please sign your talk page posts correctly. Thanks. You still need to do some work on the sources. Use the <code>|author-mask=1</code> in your template for repeated author names. Also, you must eliminate the red “Harv and Sfn no-target errors” message at the bottom. No spaces or returns before or after the {{tl|pg}} call, as I already mentioned above. No parenthetical citations should be left, either; those should all be remediated to footnotes. Thanks. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 10:50, 8 April 2025 (EDT)

:{{Reply to|Grlucas}} I have updated the sources and updated the in-text citations. I am still having trouble with the "Harv and Sfn no-target errors." I have not been successful in fixing this error and have tried multiple ways to fix it. —[[User:CVinson|CVinson]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 8:18, 8 April 2025 (EDT)

== Remediation for ''Norman Mailer Today'' ==
Dr. Lucas, I have finished up my remediation article [[The Mailer Review/Volume 5, 2011/Norman Mailer Today|Norman Mailer Today]], and it is ready for review. Please let me know if I missed something. Thank you! —[[User:Kamyers|Kamyers]] ([[User talk:Kamyers|talk]]) 18:20, 3 April 2025 (EDT)
:{{Reply to|Kamyers}} Great work! Please help your fellow editors finish the volume, or pick something to work on in [[The Mailer Review/Volume 4, 2010|Volume 4]]. Thanks, and well done. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 07:00, 4 April 2025 (EDT)

== Remediation of “The Conception of Irreversibility: Hannah Arendt and Hemingway’s ‘Hills Like White Elephants’” ==
Dr. Lucas, I have finished my remediation of Jennifer Yirinec's article: [[The Mailer Review/Volume 5, 2011/The Conception of Irreversibility: Hannah Arendt and Hemingway’s “Hills Like White Elephants”|The Conception of Irreversibility: Hannah Arendt and Hemingway’s “Hills Like White Elephants.”]] Thank you for your assistance with the article. It is ready for its final review! [[User:JHadaway|JHadaway]] ([[User talk:JHadaway|talk]]) 10:24, 4 April 2025 (EDT)
:{{Reply to|JHadaway}} a stellar job. Well done. I removed the banner, so you can move on to another article. Thanks. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 08:12, 5 April 2025 (EDT)

== Tribute Remediations ==
Dr. Lucas, I have begun work on the tributes for volume 5. [[The Mailer Review/Volume 5, 2011/Tributes to Norris Church Mailer/Grace Notes|Grace Notes]] by Stephen Borkowski is ready for its final review.—[[User:JHadaway|JHadaway]] ([[User talk:JHadaway|talk]]) 12:58, 4 April 2025 (EDT)
:{{Reply to|JHadaway}} Well done! Banner removed, url added. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 08:18, 5 April 2025 (EDT)

==Oohh Normie Final Edits==
Hi Dr. Lucas, I have finished my article: [[The_Mailer_Review/Volume_4,_2010/"Oohh_Normie_—_You're_Sooo_Hemingway":_Mailer_Memories_and_Encounters|Oohh Normie, You're Sooo Hemingway]]. Please let me know if there is anything I need to fix. [[User:Tbara4554|Tbara4554]] ([[User talk:Tbara4554|talk]]) 20:01, 5 April 2025 (EDT)
:{{reply to|Tbara4554}} thank you. I made some corrections and removed the banner. You might want to have another look over it. Please move on to something else. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 09:53, 6 April 2025 (EDT)

== Harlot's Ghost, Bildungsroman, Masculinity and Hemingway ==

Dr. Lucas,

The following article is ready for your review. Thanks.

https://projectmailer.net/pm/The_Mailer_Review/Volume_4,_2010/Harlot%27s_Ghost,_Bildungsroman,_Masculinity_and_Hemingway

[[User:JKilchenmann|JKilchenmann]] ([[User talk:JKilchenmann|talk]]) 21:22, 5 April 2025 (EDT)
:{{Reply to| JKilchenmann}} excellent. Thank you. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 09:39, 6 April 2025 (EDT)

== I am done with this ==

https://projectmailer.net/pm/The_Mailer_Review/Volume_5,_2011/Situating_Hemingway:_Mailer,_Style,_Ethics
:Received. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 10:29, 6 April 2025 (EDT)

== Final Review PM Article ==

Hi Dr. Lucas, [[The_Mailer_Review/Volume_4,_2010/Hemingway_to_Mailer_—_A_Delayed_Response_to_The_Deer_Park|here]] is my remediated article, ready for review![[User:Hobbitonya|Hobbitonya]] ([[User talk:Hobbitonya|talk]]) 12:21, 6 April 2025 (EDT)
:{{Reply to| Hobbitonya}} great work. I have removed the banner, so you are good to move on to something else. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 07:20, 7 April 2025 (EDT)

== Remediation Project ==

{{reply to|Grlucas}}
I have finished my remedidation project and I am ready for it to be reviewed. '''Article link''': [https://projectmailer.net/pm/The_Mailer_Review/Volume_5,_2011/Piling_On:_Norman_Mailer’s_Utilization_of_Marilyn_Monroe#Works_Cited|Piling On: Norman Mailer's Utilization of Marilyn Monroe]

Thanks,

[[User:MerAtticus|MerAtticus]] ([[User talk:MerAtticus|talk]]) 13:04, 6 April 2025 (EDT)
:{{Reply to| MerAtticus}} good work so far. Please remove wikilinks. Change ' and " to typographical apostrophes and quotation marks. And all red errors at the bottom of the page need to be taken care of. These are likely all from coding errors in your sources. Thanks! —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 07:24, 7 April 2025 (EDT)

{{reply to|Grlucas}}
I have removed the wikilinks, changed to the correct typographic style and updated my sources.
'''Article link''': [https://projectmailer.net/pm/The_Mailer_Review/Volume_5,_2011/Piling_On:_Norman_Mailer’s_Utilization_of_Marilyn_Monroe#Works_Cited|Piling On: Norman Mailer's Utilization of Marilyn Monroe] Thanks, [[User:MerAtticus|MerAtticus]] ([[User talk:MerAtticus|talk]]) 21:55, 7 April 2025 (EDT)

[I forgot to fill out the summary box. I am adding my summary]
:{{Reply to| MerAtticus}} you're getting there! It looks great. You must eliminate all the red errors at the bottom. These appear when there are errors in your citations. Let me know if you need help. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 09:15, 8 April 2025 (EDT)

@{{reply to|Grlucas}} I have tried everything I can think of and I still have harv and sfn no-target errors and harv and sfn multiple-target errors and cs1 uses editors parameter. Do I not include the editor? [[User:MerAtticus|MerAtticus]] ([[User talk:MerAtticus|talk]]) 16:03, 8 April 2025 (EDT)

{{reply to|Grlucas}} I have managed to get rid of two of the red target errors. I am still working on finding the harv sfn multiple target error. Thanks, [[User:MerAtticus|MerAtticus]] ([[User talk:MerAtticus|talk]]) 20:37, 8 April 2025 (EDT)

{{reply to|Grlucas}} I have tried everything i can think of to remove the last red error flag. I had to turn it in. I don't know that else I can do in this situation. I was given citation that did not follow any of the given formats. [[User:MerAtticus|MerAtticus]] ([[User talk:MerAtticus|talk]]) 21:45, 8 April 2025 (EDT)

== Remediation Submission ==

Hello!
Here's my remediated article; [[The_Mailer_Review/Volume_5,_2011/The_Devil's_Party:_Reading_and_Wreaking_Vengeance_in_The_Castle_in_the_Forest|The Devil's Party: Reading and Wreaking Vengeance in ''The Castle in the Forest'']].
Thanks! Please let me know if there's anything I can review or correct.
[[User:Maggiemrogers|Maggiemrogers]] ([[User talk:Maggiemrogers|talk]]) 13:23, 6 April 2025 (EDT)
:{{Reply to| Maggiemrogers}} nice work! Banner removed, so please move on to something else in the volume. Thanks. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 07:39, 7 April 2025 (EDT)

== Vol. 4: Rumors of Grace article remediated ==

I believe I have completed remediation of ''[[The_Mailer_Review/Volume_4,_2010/Rumors_of_Grace:_God-Language_in_Hemingway_and_Mailer|Rumors of Grace: God-Language in Hemingway and Mailer]]'', vol. 4. I was having last-minute trouble with sfn errors for sources without authors, but Justin Kilchenmann helped me out, so I think they are fixed.
:{{Reply to|Sherrilledwards}} You have done a remarkable job—a real Herculean effort! Footnotes should not go in any notes. See those I changed; the others should be changed in the same way. I have done some, but the others have to be fixed, I'm afraid. Thanks! —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 09:20, 8 April 2025 (EDT)

== Remediation of "Inside Norman Mailer ==

Hi Dr. Lucas - I have finished remediating the article, [[The Mailer Review/Volume 4, 2010/Inside Norman Mailer|Inside Norman Mailer]]. Please let me know if I need to make any adjustments. Thank you! [[User:Chelsey.brantley|Chelsey.brantley]] ([[User talk:Chelsey.brantley|talk]]) 18:09, 7 April 2025 (EDT)
:{{Reply to|Chelsey.brantley}} good work! Please help with another article from volume 4. Thanks! —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 09:36, 8 April 2025 (EDT)

== Completed: Norman Mailer: Playboy Magazine ==

I hope I am doing this is right. I have finished remediating my article about Norman Mailer and its in my designated sandbox [https://projectmailer.net/pm/The_Mailer_Review/Volume_5,_2011/Norman_Mailer:_Playboy_Magazine_Heavyweight here.]
If there are any last minute edits, let me know. I got the last of the errors removed yesterday. And I believe we are on the same page with leaving the in-line citations for ''Playboy'' to be as is, since the author didn't put them down in the works cited. [[User:NrmMGA5108|NrmMGA5108]] ([[User talk:NrmMGA5108|talk]]) 20:14, 7 April 2025 (EDT)Nina Mizner
:{{Reply to|NrmMGA5108}} looking good! So, the parenthetical citations still in the article, I'm assuming, are there because of those missing sources? Please check your page numbers; some seem to be off. Thanks. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 10:04, 8 April 2025 (EDT)

== Completed Remediation From Here to Eternity and The Naked and The Dead: Premier to Eternity? ==

Greeting Dr. Lucas,

I have made the adjustment that you mentioned.

I also made additional edits to my short footnotes and noticed that my citations did not link to my references - which has been fixed.

I have tested all of my citations, and they all work.

Here is my article by Alexander Hicks, ''From Here to Eternity and The Naked and The Dead: Premier to Eternity?''

https://projectmailer.net/pm/The_Mailer_Review/Volume_5,_2011/From_Here_to_Eternity_and_The_Naked_and_the_Dead:_Premiere_to_Eternity%3F

Have a great day.
:{{Reply to| THarrell}} Please always sign your talk page posts. Several “quoted items” in the article appear as ‘quoted items’; these must be corrected, please. No spaces or returns should surround {{tl|pg}} calls. Multiple page numbers should look like this <code><nowiki>{{sfn|Moretti|1996|pp=11-14}}</nowiki></code>; note the double <code>pp</code>. There seem to be many typos. I corrected some for you, but you must see to the rest. Thanks. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 10:16, 8 April 2025 (EDT)

:{{Reply to| Grlucas}} Greetings,

Are these the only additional corrections that need to be made? This is different from what you mentioned before.

I just want to be sure that I have hit everything.

Also can you verify what other typos you are seeing, I have ran through this twice.

If something is spelt a certain way, for example "Soljer", I have left it that way. Since it is mentioned like that in the article.
—[[User:THarrell|THarrell]] ([[User talk:THarrell|talk]]) 06:49, 8 April 2025 (EDT)

:{{Reply to| Grlucas}} Greetings,

I have gone through and fixed all of the short footnotes.

I have gone line by line with a ruler to look at any typos, and fixed the words that I found that had a dash in them/needed to be lowercased.

I have also fixed the quotations.

—[[User:THarrell|THarrell]] ([[User talk:THarrell|talk]]) 12:31, 9 April 2025 (EDT)

== Remediation for “Footnote to Death in the Afternoon” ==

Greetings Dr. Lucus,

My article is ready for your review. Thank you.

https://projectmailer.net/pm/The_Mailer_Review/Volume_4,_2010/Mailer%E2%80%99s_%E2%80%9CFootnote_to_Death_in_the_Afternoon%E2%80%9D)
:{{Reply to| KForeman}} it's coming along. Please ''always'' sign your talk page posts. Right up top, there are errors. Please use the real {{tl|pg}}, like all the other articles. Citations need to be fixed. All parenthetical citations must be converted. You still have quite a bit of work to do. All red sections need to be seen to and corrected. Thanks. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 10:20, 8 April 2025 (EDT)

=Remediation of "Cluster Seeds and the Mailer Legacy"=
Hello, Dr. Lucas. I have completed the remediation of [https://projectmailer.net/index.php?title=The_Mailer_Review/Volume_5,_2011/Cluster_Seeds_and_the_Mailer_Legacy&oldid=18200| my article], and it is ready for your review. Thank you!—[[User:ADavis|ADavis]] ([[User talk:ADavis|talk]]) 11:32, 8 April 2025 (EDT)@ADavis
:{{Reply to| ADavis}} got it. I think I check it yesterday and removed the banner then. Please move on to another piece. Thanks. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 17:29, 8 April 2025 (EDT)

== Remediating Article: Mailer, Hemingway, and Boxing Volume 4. ==

Hello Dr. Lucas,

I have completed remediating my article. Here is the link [[The Mailer Review/Volume 4, 2010/Mailer, Hemingway, and Boxing|The Mailer Review: Volume 4: Mailer, Hemingway, Boxing (2010)]] [[User:JBrown|JBrown]] ([[User talk:JBrown|talk]]) 13:01, 8 April 2025 (EDT)JBrown
:{{Reply to|JBrown}} a good start, but all parenthetical citations need to be footnotes. Also, check your headers. Thanks. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 17:29, 8 April 2025 (EDT)

== Remediation for ''Norris Church Mailer'' ==
Dr. Lucas, I have finished up remediating the article [[The Mailer Review/Volume 4, 2010/Norris Church Mailer|Norris Church Mailer]], and it is ready for review. Please let me know if I missed something. Thank you! —[[User:Kamyers|Kamyers]] ([[User talk:Kamyers|talk]]) 13:42, 8 April 2025 (EDT)
:{{reply to|Kamyers}} awesome work! Thank you! —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 17:29, 8 April 2025 (EDT)

== Final Edits Completed and Ready for Review ==

Dr. Lucas, I have completed my assigned remediation article: [[The_Mailer_Review/Volume_4,_2010/Looking_at_the_Past:_Nostalgia_as_Technique_in_The_Naked_and_the_Dead_and_For_Whom_the_Bell_Tolls|Looking at the Past: Nostalgia as Technique in The Naked and the Dead and For Whom the Bell Tolls]]. Please review at your convenience. I enjoyed working on this assignment. I look forward to your suggestions and feedback. All the best, Danielle (DBond007)
:{{Reply to| DBond007}} ok, good work. Please remove all the external links. Links to Wikipedia are not necessary, but if used, they need to be done correctly. There should be no spaces before {{tl|sfn}}. May sure all your ' and " are actually typographical apostrophes and quotation marks. Remove any superfluous spaces and line breaks; these mess up the formatting. Thanks! —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 17:29, 8 April 2025 (EDT)

== Completed the remediation assignment ==

Good evening Dr. Lucas,

I hope I am doing this right. Here is the link for my completed Remediation article: [http://The_Mailer_Review/Volume_4,_2010/Encounters_with_Mailer Encounters with Mailer].

I look forward to reading your feedback.

All the best,

Patrick Riley
:{{Reply to|Priley1984}} thank you! —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 07:40, 10 April 2025 (EDT)

== Remediation Project Submission: An Expected Encounter in an Unexpected Place ==

Link:

https://projectmailer.net/pm/The_Mailer_Review/Volume_4,_2010/Norman_Mailer:_An_Expected_Encounter_in_an_Unexpected_Place

Winnie Verna
:{{Reply to|Wverna}} received, thanks! —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 07:51, 10 April 2025 (EDT)

== E.Mosley ==

Good evening, @Grlucas. I have completed my Remediation Articles[[https://projectmailer.net/pm/The_Mailer_Review/Volume_4,_2010/On_Reading_Mailer_Too_Young]]. The article I had was " On Reading Mailer Too Young Volume 4, 2010
:{{Reply to| Essence903m}} thank you. I had to fix and clean-up quite a bit. Your saves also do not include summaries. When you move on to your next article, please be more careful and follow the instructions. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 09:12, 10 April 2025 (EDT)

== Kynndra Watson ==

Good Evening, @grlucas. i have completed my Remediation articles: Volume 5: https://projectmailer.net/pm/The_Mailer_Review/Volume_5,_2011/Making_Masculinity_and_Unmaking_Jewishness:_Norman_Mailer%E2%80%99s_Voice_in_Wild_90_and_Beyond_the_Law and Volume 4: https://projectmailer.net/pm/The_Mailer_Review/Volume_4,_2010/Mailer,_Hemingway,_and_the_%E2%80%9CReds%E2%80%9D.

Thank you.
:{{Reply to| KWatson}} thank you, and this is a good start, but there are still many items that need to be cleaned up, like footnote indications (They go after punctuation), citation errors (all the red errors at the bottom need to be seen to), extra spaces and ALL CAPS need to be removed. Please see other completed articles for models. Thanks. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 09:18, 10 April 2025 (EDT)

== Tribute Remediation ==
Dr. Lucas, I have finished [[The Mailer Review/Volume 5, 2011/Tributes to Norris Church Mailer/What Would Be the Fun of That?|"What Would Be the Fun of That?"]] by Peter Alson.—[[User:JHadaway|JHadaway]] ([[User talk:JHadaway|talk]]) 09:33, 9 April 2025 (EDT)
:{{Reply to| JHadaway}} awesome! Thank you! —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 09:21, 10 April 2025 (EDT)

== “Remembering Norris Church” Tribute Remediation ==
Dr. Lucas, I have finished [[The Mailer Review/Volume 5, 2011/Tributes to Norris Church Mailer/Remembering Norris Church|“Remembering Norris Church”]] by John Bowers.—[[User:JHadaway|JHadaway]] ([[User talk:JHadaway|talk]]) 16:17, 9 April 2025 (EDT)
:{{Reply to| JHadaway}} and again, excellent! Thank you! —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 09:22, 10 April 2025 (EDT)

== “The Norris I Knew” Tribute Remediation ==
Dr. Lucas, I have finished [[The Mailer Review/Volume 5, 2011/Tributes to Norris Church Mailer/The Norris I Knew|“The Norris I Knew”]] by Christopher Busa.—[[User:JHadaway|JHadaway]] ([[User talk:JHadaway|talk]]) 09:04, 10 April 2025 (EDT)
:{{Reply to| JHadaway}} rockin’! 👍🏼 —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 09:24, 10 April 2025 (EDT)

== "Norris Mailer" Tribute Remediation ==
Dr. Lucas, I have finished [[The Mailer Review/Volume 5, 2011/Tributes to Norris Church Mailer/Norris Mailer|"Norris Mailer"]] by Nancy Collins.—[[User:JHadaway|JHadaway]] ([[User talk:JHadaway|talk]]) 09:35, 10 April 2025 (EDT)
:{{Reply to| JHadaway}} thanks again. You’re tearing it up. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 10:32, 10 April 2025 (EDT)

== "Rise Above It" Tribute Remediation ==

Dr. Lucas, I have finished [[The Mailer Review/Volume 5, 2011/Tributes to Norris Church Mailer/Rise Above It|"Rise Above It"]] by David Ebershoff—[[User:JHadaway|JHadaway]] ([[User talk:JHadaway|talk]]) 11:12, 10 April 2025 (EDT)

The Mailer Review/Volume 5, 2011/Tributes to Norris Church Mailer/Rise Above It

2025-04-10T15:11:01Z

JHadaway: Added category, sorting

’{{DISPLAYTITLE:{{BASEPAGENAME}}/{{SUBPAGENAME}}}}
{{MR05}}
{{Working}}
{{Byline|last=Ebershoff |first=David |url= }}
{{dc|dc=Y|ou’ll never regret taking the high road.}}

The first time I heard Norris say this we were in the living room in Brooklyn Heights a few months after Norman died. She was telling me her early ideas for a memoir. She had all these stories—the story about first meeting Norman in Arkansas, the story about going to a dinner party at Oscar de la Renta’s in a nightgown, the story about dressing up as a stripper named Cinnamon Brown. Then she landed on a story about one of Norman’s “old girl-friends,” as she put it. One evening the woman insulted Norris at a party, looking for a catfight that would land her in the gossip pages. Norris didn’t bite. That’s when she said, “David, you’ll never regret taking the high road.”

If you’re an editor assessing the potential of a memoir, what do you suppose you’re looking for? Of course you want candor, depth, and self-awareness. But you also want a little juice. If a writer says ''You’ll never regret taking the high road''—what is your likely reaction? The high road might be nice for personal relations and family harmony, but will it lead to a fascinating book? Will the high road take a writer to the best stories, like hooking up with Bill Clinton and the painful truths of marital acrimony?

You might have this concern, but not if you’re sitting on Norris Church Mailer’s worn sofa and looking into her worn, wise eyes. There, surrounded by the books and the photos and the memories, you’ll realize the high road will not overlook the hard dirty business of living. The high road will lead a writer like Norris—and all of us—to what’s most important in life: love.

''A Ticket to the Circus'' is about family and fame and books and sex, but above all it’s about love. About loving people when they impress you and when they fail you. About loving friends and not letting foes sap your ability to love. About loving the world you are blessed to live in and the gifts you have been given and loving others whose gifts you sometimes wished you {{pg|43|44}} had. Norris loved life. I don’t mean that in the vague, sentimental sense. No, she loved ''her'' life. She loved her family, her friends, her homes, her talents, her experiences. She loved her ''days''. On that cold afternoon in Brooklyn Heights she understood she wouldn’t have too many more of those days. She wasn’t bitter, she wasn’t regretful and she definitely wasn’t seeking revenge. She was sad of course and perhaps frightened but more than anything she was full of love. They say an artist’s greatness can be measured by her capacity to love. Norris showed me that if you’re an editor looking for a great book, start by assessing the amount of love in a writer’s ink.

{{Review}}
{{DEFAULTSORT:Rise Above It}}
[[Category:Tributes (MR)]]

The Mailer Review/Volume 5, 2011/Tributes to Norris Church Mailer/Rise Above It

2025-04-10T15:10:14Z

JHadaway: Added last page

The Mailer Review/Volume 5, 2011/Tributes to Norris Church Mailer/Rise Above It

2025-04-10T14:59:17Z

JHadaway: Added working banner

{{DISPLAYTITLE:{{BASEPAGENAME}}/{{SUBPAGENAME}}}}
{{MR05}}
{{Working}}
{{Byline|last=Ebershoff |first=David |url= }}
{{dc|dc=Y|ou’ll never regret taking the high road.}}

The Mailer Review/Volume 5, 2011/Tributes to Norris Church Mailer/Rise Above It

2025-04-10T14:58:58Z

JHadaway: Started working

{{DISPLAYTITLE:{{BASEPAGENAME}}/{{SUBPAGENAME}}}}
{{MR05}}
{{Byline|last=Ebershoff |first=David |url= }}
{{dc|dc=Y|ou’ll never regret taking the high road.}}

The Mailer Review/Volume 5, 2011/Tributes to Norris Church Mailer/Norris Mailer

2025-04-10T14:43:03Z

JHadaway: edited en dashes

{{DISPLAYTITLE:{{BASEPAGENAME}}/{{SUBPAGENAME}}}}
{{MR05}}
{{Byline|last=Collins |first=Nancy |url=http://prmlr.us/mr05col }}
{{dc|dc=I| called her my southern girl}} . . . since we both were, more or less. Arkansas-born. Norris was landed gentry. I, spawn of a rebellious Alabama Mama who ran off with a brilliant, exciting Yankee—right up Norris’s alley—a Dixie half-breed. Subsequently, our friendship was grounded in our south-of-the Mason-Dixon-Line humor... a shared maverick philosophy where adventure trumped security... heart... logic... passion... common sense. We loved transcendent writing, complicated men, great books, good food, glamorous anything... jewelry, clothes, furniture, trips. “Ordinary,” we agreed, “is our enemy.”

But then Norris Mailer was never, ever... ordinary. Informing that ridiculously gorgeous, movie star persona was a fierce, if soft spoken, intelligence, titanium will, the most tender of hearts, the kind of brutal, unembarrassed candor that rendered her literary ''pièce de résistance'', ''A Ticket to the Circus'', the gold standard for any aspiring memoirist.

Running into each other over the years, Norris and I would, invariably, repair to a corner, engrossed in conversation as the party swirled around us. “You’re the best friend I never see,” she said. I couldn’t have agreed more. That changed during the last couple years of her life when our closeness made up for lost time—alas, not on our side. Wary of making people uncomfortable, Norris resisted talking about her illness, exactly what I, hands-on veteran of my own mother’s pancreatic cancer, wanted to do, providing, I hoped, a discreet, understanding outlet for any unexpressed feelings—or pain—she wished to spare others. Eventually, Norris took me up on it. And though the topic was sometimes hard, it could also become, in our hands, ironically hilarious. Cancer may have been claiming her body, but it never diminished her spirit.

Perhaps the most profound gift that a friend can give is the invitation to {{pg|35|36}} help her gracefully leave the earth. So honored by Norris, the gracious generosity of her extraordinary sons, John and Matt, indeed all the Mailers, made me feel like family as we surrounded her with love. Norris’s last days, far from being sad, were as original, uncomplaining, interesting, courageous, dignified, love-filled—even theatrical—as the rest of her remarkable life. She laughed, ate well, watched videos with her adored grandchildren and put on her makeup—daily. “Southern girls,” she deadpanned, “don’t even die without lipstick.”

She also reminisced about her passionate, high-flying, oft tumultuous but never boring relationship with Norman Mailer, the grand love of her life. She wanted a fascinating man and she got him. “In the end,” she mused, “I had a very good marriage. I ''liked'' it.”

On her last Friday evening, Norris and I were awaiting the imminent arrival of her boys when, suddenly, unexpectedly, she took quite ill. A less gutsy human being no doubt might have called it a day—make that night—and soared off into the celestial. But Norris wasn’t about to leave without kissing her two favorite people on the planet good-bye. And, so, bravely hunkering down, she gave Matt and Johnny almost two more days with their mother, whereupon, I suspect, Norman, by now impatient at being denied his glorious Norris, swooped down and, throwing one of the world’s great dames over his shoulder, absconded to literary parts unknown.

{{Review}}
{{DEFAULTSORT:Norris Mailer}}
[[Category:Tributes (MR)]]

User talk:Grlucas

2025-04-10T13:35:17Z

JHadaway: Added tribute remediation

{{Talk header}}
[[/Archive 202504/]]

== Final edits ==
Hello, my article is complete: [[The_Mailer_Review/Volume_4,_2010/Ernest_and_Norman_(Exit_Music)|Ernest and Norman (Exit Music)]]

Good evening, Dr. Lucas. Below is the link to my edited article:
https://projectmailer.net/pm/User:ASpeed/sandbox

Good evening, @[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]]. I have completed most of my Remediation Articles, but I still show issues for the one named, "[[The_Mailer_Review/Volume_4,_2010/Norman,_Papa,_and_the_Autoerotic_Construction_of_Woman|Norman, Papa, and the Autoerotic Construction of Woman]].

Based on the latest updates, [[The_Mailer_Review/Volume_4,_2010/Battles_for_Regard,_Writerly_and_Otherwise|Battles for Regard, Writerly and Otherwise]] looks good with exception of including a '''category'''.

May you let me know if there is anything I can do on my end to resolve the issues with the first [[The_Mailer_Review/Volume_4,_2010/Norman,_Papa,_and_the_Autoerotic_Construction_of_Woman|article]]?

[[User:ALedezma|ALedezma]] ([[User talk:ALedezma|talk]]) 21:47, 8 April 2025 (EDT)

Dr. Lucas I finished my remediation article https://projectmailer.net/index.php?title=The_Mailer_Review/Volume_4,_2010/Norman_Mailer%27s_The_Fight:_Hemingway,_Bullfighting,_and_the_Lovely_Metaphysics_of_Boxing&action=edit [[User:TWietstruk|TWietstruk]] ([[User talk:TWietstruk|talk]]) 19:44, 8 April 2025 (EDT)

Dr. Lucas I have finished my assigned remediation article: https://projectmailer.net/pm/The_Mailer_Review/Volume_4,_2010/Jive-Ass_Aficionado:_Why_Are_We_in_Vietnam%3F_and_Hemingway%27s_Moral_Code#cite_note-FOOTNOTEHemingway2003-24
Username ADear.

Dr. Lucas, I have finished remediating my assigned article. Please review it at your earliest convenience. The link is here: [[The_Mailer_Review/Volume_5,_2011/Norman_Mailer's_Mythmaking_in_An_American_Dream_and_“The_White_Negro”|Norman Mailer's Mythmaking in An American Dream and “The White Negro”]]—[[User:Erhernandez|Erhernandez]] ([[User talk:Erhernandez|talk]]) 08:52, 4 April 2025 (EDT)
:{{Reply to|Erhernandez}} well done! A couple of things: never bury your talk page post. Put it at the bottom, preferably in its own section by clicking "Add topic" on the top-right. I removed your banner after making a few corrections. Please have a look over it and move on to the next thing. Thanks. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 09:06, 5 April 2025 (EDT)

Dr. Lucas, I transferred and edited my article. Can you look at it and remove the banner? Here's the link: [[The_Mailer_Review/Volume_4,_2010/Authorship_and_Alienation_in_Death_in_the_Afternoon_and_Advertisements_for_Myself|Authorship and Alienation in Death in the Afternoon and Advertisements for Myself]] ( [[User:APKnight25|APKnight25]] ([[User talk:APKnight25|talk]]) 13:02, 28 March 2025 (EDT) )
:{{Reply to| APKnight25}} looking good! A couple of things: never bury your talk page post. Put it at the bottom, preferably in its own section by clicking "Add topic" on the top-right. Next, eliminate all "fang" quotes in the article and add “real quotation marks.” Your sources should be a bulleted list. And there should be no space before a citation. You’re almost finished! —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 11:21, 30 March 2025 (EDT)

== Remediation of "Reinventing the Wheel" Mailer Article for Review ==

Dr. Lucas,

My [[The_Mailer_Review/Volume_5,_2011/Reinventing_a_New_Wheel:_The_Films_of_Norman_Mailer|article]] is ready for review.

Thank you!
[[User:TPoole|TPoole]] ([[User talk:TPoole|talk]]) 15:29, 29 March 2025 (EDT)
:{{Reply to|TPoole}} great! Could you include a link to it? Thanks. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 11:07, 30 March 2025 (EDT)
::OK, I [[The Mailer Review/Volume 5, 2011/Reinventing a New Wheel: The Films of Norman Mailer|found it]]. Looking really good. Great work. There are some citation issues that need to be seen to. The two red categories at the bottom should not be there; they will go away when the citations errors are corrected. Eliminate any quotation mark "fangs" in the text and replace them with “real quotation marks.” Let me know if you need help. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 11:14, 30 March 2025 (EDT)
:::@Grlucas, what are the citation issues? Which ones need correcting? [[User:TPoole|TPoole]] ([[User talk:TPoole|talk]]) 17:31, 31 March 2025 (EDT)
::::{{Reply to| TPoole}} When you click your citations, they should jump to the works cited entry they correspond to. Several of yours do not, indicated by the red “Harv and Sfn no-target errors” at the bottom. You also have a "CS1 maint: Unrecognized language" error that will likely be cleared up when you fix the citation issues. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 08:55, 1 April 2025 (EDT)
:::::@Grlucas, I have tried correcting the sfn codes in my citations. I was able to get the 2 web citations to link correctly. But for some reason, I cannot get the Mailer 1967 film Wild 90 citation to link to the reference list. Please advise. [[User:TPoole|TPoole]] ([[User talk:TPoole|talk]]) 20:24, 4 April 2025 (EDT)
::::::{{Reply to| TPoole}} OK, all fixed and published. Thanks. Please move on to another remediation. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 08:46, 5 April 2025 (EDT)

== Remediation of: "Contradictory Syntheses: Norman Mailer’s Left Conservatism and the Problematic of 'Totalitarianism'" ==

Dr. Lucas

I finished the remediation of the following article:

https://projectmailer.net/pm/The_Mailer_Review/Volume_5,_2011/Contradictory_Syntheses:_Norman_Mailer%E2%80%99s_Left_Conservatism_and_the_Problematic_of_%E2%80%9CTotalitarianism%E2%80%9D

It is ready for your review. Thank you.
[[User:JKilchenmann|JKilchenmann]] ([[User talk:JKilchenmann|talk]]) 19:04, 30 March 2025 (EDT)
:{{Reply to| JKilchenmann}} looks great. I made some tweaks to the references and some throughout, like changing ' and " to real apostrophes and quotation marks. A bit more clean-up, but you might want to check over it again. I removed the under-construction banner. Well one. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 21:32, 30 March 2025 (EDT)

== Final Edit ==

Thank you for your comments on my remediation of
"[[The Mailer Review/Volume 4, 2010/Authorship and Alienation in Death in the Afternoon and Advertisements for Myself|Authorship and Alienation in Death in the Afternoon and Advertisements for Myself.]]"

I've eliminated the "fang quotes" and changed them to “real quotation marks.” This was a very fascinating tip that taught me something new. It's something I've never noticed before but now always will.

I also put my sources in a bulleted list and removed the space before the citations. I think I'm all set now.
:{{Reply to|APKnight25}} great work! Please help other editors to complete the volume. Thanks! —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 08:34, 3 April 2025 (EDT)

== Remediation for ''Firearms in the Works of Hemingway and Mailer'' ==

[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]]

Hi Dr. Lucas,

I believe I have done everything for the Remediation of my article. Please let me know if there is anything else I need to do.

I will also link the article below:

https://projectmailer.net/pm/The_Mailer_Review/Volume_4,_2010/Firearms_in_the_Works_of_Hemingway_and_Mailer

Thank you,
Caitlin Vinson
:{{Reply to|CVinson}} great work so far. Your references must use templates, please. Blockquotes must also be done correctly. No spaces or line breaks before or after the {{tl|pg}} template. Footnote placement is also off (punctuation goes before the footnote; no spaces before or after the footnote). I will add the abstract and url. Thanks. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 08:30, 3 April 2025 (EDT)

:{{Reply to|Grlucas}} Hi Dr. Lucas, I believe there have been some updates made to the project. I believe I have also updated the works cited section to show correct templates. Please let me know if there is anything further that I need to do. Thank you, Caitlin.
::{{reply to| CVinson}} please sign your talk page posts correctly. Thanks. You still need to do some work on the sources. Use the <code>|author-mask=1</code> in your template for repeated author names. Also, you must eliminate the red “Harv and Sfn no-target errors” message at the bottom. No spaces or returns before or after the {{tl|pg}} call, as I already mentioned above. No parenthetical citations should be left, either; those should all be remediated to footnotes. Thanks. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 10:50, 8 April 2025 (EDT)

:{{Reply to|Grlucas}} I have updated the sources and updated the in-text citations. I am still having trouble with the "Harv and Sfn no-target errors." I have not been successful in fixing this error and have tried multiple ways to fix it. —[[User:CVinson|CVinson]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 8:18, 8 April 2025 (EDT)

== Remediation for ''Norman Mailer Today'' ==
Dr. Lucas, I have finished up my remediation article [[The Mailer Review/Volume 5, 2011/Norman Mailer Today|Norman Mailer Today]], and it is ready for review. Please let me know if I missed something. Thank you! —[[User:Kamyers|Kamyers]] ([[User talk:Kamyers|talk]]) 18:20, 3 April 2025 (EDT)
:{{Reply to|Kamyers}} Great work! Please help your fellow editors finish the volume, or pick something to work on in [[The Mailer Review/Volume 4, 2010|Volume 4]]. Thanks, and well done. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 07:00, 4 April 2025 (EDT)

== Remediation of “The Conception of Irreversibility: Hannah Arendt and Hemingway’s ‘Hills Like White Elephants’” ==
Dr. Lucas, I have finished my remediation of Jennifer Yirinec's article: [[The Mailer Review/Volume 5, 2011/The Conception of Irreversibility: Hannah Arendt and Hemingway’s “Hills Like White Elephants”|The Conception of Irreversibility: Hannah Arendt and Hemingway’s “Hills Like White Elephants.”]] Thank you for your assistance with the article. It is ready for its final review! [[User:JHadaway|JHadaway]] ([[User talk:JHadaway|talk]]) 10:24, 4 April 2025 (EDT)
:{{Reply to|JHadaway}} a stellar job. Well done. I removed the banner, so you can move on to another article. Thanks. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 08:12, 5 April 2025 (EDT)

== Tribute Remediations ==
Dr. Lucas, I have begun work on the tributes for volume 5. [[The Mailer Review/Volume 5, 2011/Tributes to Norris Church Mailer/Grace Notes|Grace Notes]] by Stephen Borkowski is ready for its final review.—[[User:JHadaway|JHadaway]] ([[User talk:JHadaway|talk]]) 12:58, 4 April 2025 (EDT)
:{{Reply to|JHadaway}} Well done! Banner removed, url added. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 08:18, 5 April 2025 (EDT)

==Oohh Normie Final Edits==
Hi Dr. Lucas, I have finished my article: [[The_Mailer_Review/Volume_4,_2010/"Oohh_Normie_—_You're_Sooo_Hemingway":_Mailer_Memories_and_Encounters|Oohh Normie, You're Sooo Hemingway]]. Please let me know if there is anything I need to fix. [[User:Tbara4554|Tbara4554]] ([[User talk:Tbara4554|talk]]) 20:01, 5 April 2025 (EDT)
:{{reply to|Tbara4554}} thank you. I made some corrections and removed the banner. You might want to have another look over it. Please move on to something else. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 09:53, 6 April 2025 (EDT)

== Harlot's Ghost, Bildungsroman, Masculinity and Hemingway ==

Dr. Lucas,

The following article is ready for your review. Thanks.

https://projectmailer.net/pm/The_Mailer_Review/Volume_4,_2010/Harlot%27s_Ghost,_Bildungsroman,_Masculinity_and_Hemingway

[[User:JKilchenmann|JKilchenmann]] ([[User talk:JKilchenmann|talk]]) 21:22, 5 April 2025 (EDT)
:{{Reply to| JKilchenmann}} excellent. Thank you. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 09:39, 6 April 2025 (EDT)

== I am done with this ==

https://projectmailer.net/pm/The_Mailer_Review/Volume_5,_2011/Situating_Hemingway:_Mailer,_Style,_Ethics
:Received. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 10:29, 6 April 2025 (EDT)

== Final Review PM Article ==

Hi Dr. Lucas, [[The_Mailer_Review/Volume_4,_2010/Hemingway_to_Mailer_—_A_Delayed_Response_to_The_Deer_Park|here]] is my remediated article, ready for review![[User:Hobbitonya|Hobbitonya]] ([[User talk:Hobbitonya|talk]]) 12:21, 6 April 2025 (EDT)
:{{Reply to| Hobbitonya}} great work. I have removed the banner, so you are good to move on to something else. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 07:20, 7 April 2025 (EDT)

== Remediation Project ==

{{reply to|Grlucas}}
I have finished my remedidation project and I am ready for it to be reviewed. '''Article link''': [https://projectmailer.net/pm/The_Mailer_Review/Volume_5,_2011/Piling_On:_Norman_Mailer’s_Utilization_of_Marilyn_Monroe#Works_Cited|Piling On: Norman Mailer's Utilization of Marilyn Monroe]

Thanks,

[[User:MerAtticus|MerAtticus]] ([[User talk:MerAtticus|talk]]) 13:04, 6 April 2025 (EDT)
:{{Reply to| MerAtticus}} good work so far. Please remove wikilinks. Change ' and " to typographical apostrophes and quotation marks. And all red errors at the bottom of the page need to be taken care of. These are likely all from coding errors in your sources. Thanks! —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 07:24, 7 April 2025 (EDT)

{{reply to|Grlucas}}
I have removed the wikilinks, changed to the correct typographic style and updated my sources.
'''Article link''': [https://projectmailer.net/pm/The_Mailer_Review/Volume_5,_2011/Piling_On:_Norman_Mailer’s_Utilization_of_Marilyn_Monroe#Works_Cited|Piling On: Norman Mailer's Utilization of Marilyn Monroe] Thanks, [[User:MerAtticus|MerAtticus]] ([[User talk:MerAtticus|talk]]) 21:55, 7 April 2025 (EDT)

[I forgot to fill out the summary box. I am adding my summary]
:{{Reply to| MerAtticus}} you're getting there! It looks great. You must eliminate all the red errors at the bottom. These appear when there are errors in your citations. Let me know if you need help. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 09:15, 8 April 2025 (EDT)

@{{reply to|Grlucas}} I have tried everything I can think of and I still have harv and sfn no-target errors and harv and sfn multiple-target errors and cs1 uses editors parameter. Do I not include the editor? [[User:MerAtticus|MerAtticus]] ([[User talk:MerAtticus|talk]]) 16:03, 8 April 2025 (EDT)

{{reply to|Grlucas}} I have managed to get rid of two of the red target errors. I am still working on finding the harv sfn multiple target error. Thanks, [[User:MerAtticus|MerAtticus]] ([[User talk:MerAtticus|talk]]) 20:37, 8 April 2025 (EDT)

{{reply to|Grlucas}} I have tried everything i can think of to remove the last red error flag. I had to turn it in. I don't know that else I can do in this situation. I was given citation that did not follow any of the given formats. [[User:MerAtticus|MerAtticus]] ([[User talk:MerAtticus|talk]]) 21:45, 8 April 2025 (EDT)

== Remediation Submission ==

Hello!
Here's my remediated article; [[The_Mailer_Review/Volume_5,_2011/The_Devil's_Party:_Reading_and_Wreaking_Vengeance_in_The_Castle_in_the_Forest|The Devil's Party: Reading and Wreaking Vengeance in ''The Castle in the Forest'']].
Thanks! Please let me know if there's anything I can review or correct.
[[User:Maggiemrogers|Maggiemrogers]] ([[User talk:Maggiemrogers|talk]]) 13:23, 6 April 2025 (EDT)
:{{Reply to| Maggiemrogers}} nice work! Banner removed, so please move on to something else in the volume. Thanks. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 07:39, 7 April 2025 (EDT)

== Vol. 4: Rumors of Grace article remediated ==

I believe I have completed remediation of ''[[The_Mailer_Review/Volume_4,_2010/Rumors_of_Grace:_God-Language_in_Hemingway_and_Mailer|Rumors of Grace: God-Language in Hemingway and Mailer]]'', vol. 4. I was having last-minute trouble with sfn errors for sources without authors, but Justin Kilchenmann helped me out, so I think they are fixed.
:{{Reply to|Sherrilledwards}} You have done a remarkable job—a real Herculean effort! Footnotes should not go in any notes. See those I changed; the others should be changed in the same way. I have done some, but the others have to be fixed, I'm afraid. Thanks! —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 09:20, 8 April 2025 (EDT)

== Remediation of "Inside Norman Mailer ==

Hi Dr. Lucas - I have finished remediating the article, [[The Mailer Review/Volume 4, 2010/Inside Norman Mailer|Inside Norman Mailer]]. Please let me know if I need to make any adjustments. Thank you! [[User:Chelsey.brantley|Chelsey.brantley]] ([[User talk:Chelsey.brantley|talk]]) 18:09, 7 April 2025 (EDT)
:{{Reply to|Chelsey.brantley}} good work! Please help with another article from volume 4. Thanks! —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 09:36, 8 April 2025 (EDT)

== Completed: Norman Mailer: Playboy Magazine ==

I hope I am doing this is right. I have finished remediating my article about Norman Mailer and its in my designated sandbox [https://projectmailer.net/pm/The_Mailer_Review/Volume_5,_2011/Norman_Mailer:_Playboy_Magazine_Heavyweight here.]
If there are any last minute edits, let me know. I got the last of the errors removed yesterday. And I believe we are on the same page with leaving the in-line citations for ''Playboy'' to be as is, since the author didn't put them down in the works cited. [[User:NrmMGA5108|NrmMGA5108]] ([[User talk:NrmMGA5108|talk]]) 20:14, 7 April 2025 (EDT)Nina Mizner
:{{Reply to|NrmMGA5108}} looking good! So, the parenthetical citations still in the article, I'm assuming, are there because of those missing sources? Please check your page numbers; some seem to be off. Thanks. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 10:04, 8 April 2025 (EDT)

== Completed Remediation From Here to Eternity and The Naked and The Dead: Premier to Eternity? ==

Greeting Dr. Lucas,

I have made the adjustment that you mentioned.

I also made additional edits to my short footnotes and noticed that my citations did not link to my references - which has been fixed.

I have tested all of my citations, and they all work.

Here is my article by Alexander Hicks, ''From Here to Eternity and The Naked and The Dead: Premier to Eternity?''

https://projectmailer.net/pm/The_Mailer_Review/Volume_5,_2011/From_Here_to_Eternity_and_The_Naked_and_the_Dead:_Premiere_to_Eternity%3F

Have a great day.
:{{Reply to| THarrell}} Please always sign your talk page posts. Several “quoted items” in the article appear as ‘quoted items’; these must be corrected, please. No spaces or returns should surround {{tl|pg}} calls. Multiple page numbers should look like this <code><nowiki>{{sfn|Moretti|1996|pp=11-14}}</nowiki></code>; note the double <code>pp</code>. There seem to be many typos. I corrected some for you, but you must see to the rest. Thanks. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 10:16, 8 April 2025 (EDT)

:{{Reply to| Grlucas}} Greetings,

Are these the only additional corrections that need to be made? This is different from what you mentioned before.

I just want to be sure that I have hit everything.

Also can you verify what other typos you are seeing, I have ran through this twice.

If something is spelt a certain way, for example "Soljer", I have left it that way. Since it is mentioned like that in the article.
—[[User:THarrell|THarrell]] ([[User talk:THarrell|talk]]) 06:49, 8 April 2025 (EDT)

:{{Reply to| Grlucas}} Greetings,

I have gone through and fixed all of the short footnotes.

I have gone line by line with a ruler to look at any typos, and fixed the words that I found that had a dash in them/needed to be lowercased.

I have also fixed the quotations.

—[[User:THarrell|THarrell]] ([[User talk:THarrell|talk]]) 12:31, 9 April 2025 (EDT)

== Remediation for “Footnote to Death in the Afternoon” ==

Greetings Dr. Lucus,

My article is ready for your review. Thank you.

https://projectmailer.net/pm/The_Mailer_Review/Volume_4,_2010/Mailer%E2%80%99s_%E2%80%9CFootnote_to_Death_in_the_Afternoon%E2%80%9D)
:{{Reply to| KForeman}} it's coming along. Please ''always'' sign your talk page posts. Right up top, there are errors. Please use the real {{tl|pg}}, like all the other articles. Citations need to be fixed. All parenthetical citations must be converted. You still have quite a bit of work to do. All red sections need to be seen to and corrected. Thanks. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 10:20, 8 April 2025 (EDT)

=Remediation of "Cluster Seeds and the Mailer Legacy"=
Hello, Dr. Lucas. I have completed the remediation of [https://projectmailer.net/index.php?title=The_Mailer_Review/Volume_5,_2011/Cluster_Seeds_and_the_Mailer_Legacy&oldid=18200| my article], and it is ready for your review. Thank you!—[[User:ADavis|ADavis]] ([[User talk:ADavis|talk]]) 11:32, 8 April 2025 (EDT)@ADavis
:{{Reply to| ADavis}} got it. I think I check it yesterday and removed the banner then. Please move on to another piece. Thanks. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 17:29, 8 April 2025 (EDT)

== Remediating Article: Mailer, Hemingway, and Boxing Volume 4. ==

Hello Dr. Lucas,

I have completed remediating my article. Here is the link [[The Mailer Review/Volume 4, 2010/Mailer, Hemingway, and Boxing|The Mailer Review: Volume 4: Mailer, Hemingway, Boxing (2010)]] [[User:JBrown|JBrown]] ([[User talk:JBrown|talk]]) 13:01, 8 April 2025 (EDT)JBrown
:{{Reply to|JBrown}} a good start, but all parenthetical citations need to be footnotes. Also, check your headers. Thanks. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 17:29, 8 April 2025 (EDT)

== Remediation for ''Norris Church Mailer'' ==
Dr. Lucas, I have finished up remediating the article [[The Mailer Review/Volume 4, 2010/Norris Church Mailer|Norris Church Mailer]], and it is ready for review. Please let me know if I missed something. Thank you! —[[User:Kamyers|Kamyers]] ([[User talk:Kamyers|talk]]) 13:42, 8 April 2025 (EDT)
:{{reply to|Kamyers}} awesome work! Thank you! —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 17:29, 8 April 2025 (EDT)

== Final Edits Completed and Ready for Review ==

Dr. Lucas, I have completed my assigned remediation article: [[The_Mailer_Review/Volume_4,_2010/Looking_at_the_Past:_Nostalgia_as_Technique_in_The_Naked_and_the_Dead_and_For_Whom_the_Bell_Tolls|Looking at the Past: Nostalgia as Technique in The Naked and the Dead and For Whom the Bell Tolls]]. Please review at your convenience. I enjoyed working on this assignment. I look forward to your suggestions and feedback. All the best, Danielle (DBond007)
:{{Reply to| DBond007}} ok, good work. Please remove all the external links. Links to Wikipedia are not necessary, but if used, they need to be done correctly. There should be no spaces before {{tl|sfn}}. May sure all your ' and " are actually typographical apostrophes and quotation marks. Remove any superfluous spaces and line breaks; these mess up the formatting. Thanks! —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 17:29, 8 April 2025 (EDT)

== Completed the remediation assignment ==

Good evening Dr. Lucas,

I hope I am doing this right. Here is the link for my completed Remediation article: [http://The_Mailer_Review/Volume_4,_2010/Encounters_with_Mailer Encounters with Mailer].

I look forward to reading your feedback.

All the best,

Patrick Riley
:{{Reply to|Priley1984}} thank you! —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 07:40, 10 April 2025 (EDT)

== Remediation Project Submission: An Expected Encounter in an Unexpected Place ==

Link:

https://projectmailer.net/pm/The_Mailer_Review/Volume_4,_2010/Norman_Mailer:_An_Expected_Encounter_in_an_Unexpected_Place

Winnie Verna
:{{Reply to|Wverna}} received, thanks! —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 07:51, 10 April 2025 (EDT)

== E.Mosley ==

Good evening, @Grlucas. I have completed my Remediation Articles[[https://projectmailer.net/pm/The_Mailer_Review/Volume_4,_2010/On_Reading_Mailer_Too_Young]]. The article I had was " On Reading Mailer Too Young Volume 4, 2010
:{{Reply to| Essence903m}} thank you. I had to fix and clean-up quite a bit. Your saves also do not include summaries. When you move on to your next article, please be more careful and follow the instructions. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 09:12, 10 April 2025 (EDT)

== Kynndra Watson ==

Good Evening, @grlucas. i have completed my Remediation articles: Volume 5: https://projectmailer.net/pm/The_Mailer_Review/Volume_5,_2011/Making_Masculinity_and_Unmaking_Jewishness:_Norman_Mailer%E2%80%99s_Voice_in_Wild_90_and_Beyond_the_Law and Volume 4: https://projectmailer.net/pm/The_Mailer_Review/Volume_4,_2010/Mailer,_Hemingway,_and_the_%E2%80%9CReds%E2%80%9D.

Thank you.
:{{Reply to| KWatson}} thank you, and this is a good start, but there are still many items that need to be cleaned up, like footnote indications (They go after punctuation), citation errors (all the red errors at the bottom need to be seen to), extra spaces and ALL CAPS need to be removed. Please see other completed articles for models. Thanks. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 09:18, 10 April 2025 (EDT)

== Tribute Remediation ==
Dr. Lucas, I have finished [[The Mailer Review/Volume 5, 2011/Tributes to Norris Church Mailer/What Would Be the Fun of That?|"What Would Be the Fun of That?"]] by Peter Alson.—[[User:JHadaway|JHadaway]] ([[User talk:JHadaway|talk]]) 09:33, 9 April 2025 (EDT)
:{{Reply to| JHadaway}} awesome! Thank you! —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 09:21, 10 April 2025 (EDT)

== “Remembering Norris Church” Tribute Remediation ==
Dr. Lucas, I have finished [[The Mailer Review/Volume 5, 2011/Tributes to Norris Church Mailer/Remembering Norris Church|“Remembering Norris Church”]] by John Bowers.—[[User:JHadaway|JHadaway]] ([[User talk:JHadaway|talk]]) 16:17, 9 April 2025 (EDT)
:{{Reply to| JHadaway}} and again, excellent! Thank you! —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 09:22, 10 April 2025 (EDT)

== “The Norris I Knew” Tribute Remediation ==
Dr. Lucas, I have finished [[The Mailer Review/Volume 5, 2011/Tributes to Norris Church Mailer/The Norris I Knew|“The Norris I Knew”]] by Christopher Busa.—[[User:JHadaway|JHadaway]] ([[User talk:JHadaway|talk]]) 09:04, 10 April 2025 (EDT)
:{{Reply to| JHadaway}} rockin’! 👍🏼 —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 09:24, 10 April 2025 (EDT)

== "Norris Mailer" Tribute Remediation ==
Dr. Lucas, I have finished [[The Mailer Review/Volume 5, 2011/Tributes to Norris Church Mailer/Norris Mailer|"Norris Mailer"]] by Nancy Collins.—[[User:JHadaway|JHadaway]] ([[User talk:JHadaway|talk]]) 09:35, 10 April 2025 (EDT)

The Mailer Review/Volume 5, 2011/Tributes to Norris Church Mailer/Norris Mailer

2025-04-10T13:31:26Z

JHadaway: Added category, sorting

{{DISPLAYTITLE:{{BASEPAGENAME}}/{{SUBPAGENAME}}}}
{{MR05}}
{{Working}}

{{Byline|last=Collins |first=Nancy |url= }}
{{dc|dc=I| called her my southern girl}} . . . since we both were, more or less. Arkansas–born. Norris was landed gentry. I, spawn of a rebellious Alabama Mama who ran off with a brilliant, exciting Yankee—right up Norris’s alley—a Dixie half-breed. Subsequently, our friendship was grounded in our south–of–the Mason–Dixon–Line humor... a shared maverick philosophy where adventure trumped security... heart... logic... passion... common sense. We loved transcendent writing, complicated men, great books, good food, glamorous anything... jewelry, clothes, furniture, trips. “Ordinary,” we agreed, “is our enemy.”

But then Norris Mailer was never, ever... ordinary. Informing that ridiculously gorgeous, movie star persona was a fierce, if soft spoken, intelligence, titanium will, the most tender of hearts, the kind of brutal, unembarrassed candor that rendered her literary ''pièce de résistance'', ''A Ticket to the Circus'', the gold standard for any aspiring memoirist.

Running into each other over the years, Norris and I would, invariably, repair to a corner, engrossed in conversation as the party swirled around us. “You’re the best friend I never see,” she said. I couldn’t have agreed more. That changed during the last couple years of her life when our closeness made up for lost time—alas, not on our side. Wary of making people uncomfortable, Norris resisted talking about her illness, exactly what I, hands-on veteran of my own mother’s pancreatic cancer, wanted to do, providing, I hoped, a discreet, understanding outlet for any unexpressed feelings—or pain—she wished to spare others. Eventually, Norris took me up on it. And though the topic was sometimes hard, it could also become, in our hands, ironically hilarious. Cancer may have been claiming her body, but it never diminished her spirit.

Perhaps the most profound gift that a friend can give is the invitation to {{pg|35|36}} help her gracefully leave the earth. So honored by Norris, the gracious generosity of her extraordinary sons, John and Matt, indeed all the Mailers, made me feel like family as we surrounded her with love. Norris’s last days, far from being sad, were as original, uncomplaining, interesting, courageous, dignified, love–filled—even theatrical—as the rest of her remarkable life. She laughed, ate well, watched videos with her adored grandchildren and put on her makeup—daily. “Southern girls,” she deadpanned, “don’t even die without lipstick.”

She also reminisced about her passionate, high–flying, oft tumultuous but never boring relationship with Norman Mailer, the grand love of her life. She wanted a fascinating man and she got him. “In the end,” she mused, “I had a very good marriage. I ''liked'' it.”

On her last Friday evening, Norris and I were awaiting the imminent arrival of her boys when, suddenly, unexpectedly, she took quite ill. A less gutsy human being no doubt might have called it a day—make that night—and soared off into the celestial. But Norris wasn’t about to leave without kissing her two favorite people on the planet good–bye. And, so, bravely hunkering down, she gave Matt and Johnny almost two more days with their mother, whereupon, I suspect, Norman, by now impatient at being denied his glorious Norris, swooped down and, throwing one of the world’s great dames over his shoulder, absconded to literary parts unknown.

{{Review}}
{{DEFAULTSORT:Norris Mailer}}
[[Category:Tributes (MR)]]

The Mailer Review/Volume 5, 2011/Tributes to Norris Church Mailer/Norris Mailer

2025-04-10T13:30:32Z

JHadaway: Added last page

The Mailer Review/Volume 5, 2011/Tributes to Norris Church Mailer/Norris Mailer

2025-04-10T13:25:23Z

JHadaway: Added first page

The Mailer Review/Volume 5, 2011/Tributes to Norris Church Mailer/Norris Mailer

2025-04-10T13:13:38Z

JHadaway: Started working

User talk:Grlucas

2025-04-10T13:04:33Z

JHadaway: Added tribute remediation

{{Talk header}}
[[/Archive 202504/]]

== Final edits ==
Hello, my article is complete: [[The_Mailer_Review/Volume_4,_2010/Ernest_and_Norman_(Exit_Music)|Ernest and Norman (Exit Music)]]

Good evening, Dr. Lucas. Below is the link to my edited article:
https://projectmailer.net/pm/User:ASpeed/sandbox

Good evening, @[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]]. I have completed most of my Remediation Articles, but I still show issues for the one named, "[[The_Mailer_Review/Volume_4,_2010/Norman,_Papa,_and_the_Autoerotic_Construction_of_Woman|Norman, Papa, and the Autoerotic Construction of Woman]].

Based on the latest updates, [[The_Mailer_Review/Volume_4,_2010/Battles_for_Regard,_Writerly_and_Otherwise|Battles for Regard, Writerly and Otherwise]] looks good with exception of including a '''category'''.

May you let me know if there is anything I can do on my end to resolve the issues with the first [[The_Mailer_Review/Volume_4,_2010/Norman,_Papa,_and_the_Autoerotic_Construction_of_Woman|article]]?

[[User:ALedezma|ALedezma]] ([[User talk:ALedezma|talk]]) 21:47, 8 April 2025 (EDT)

Dr. Lucas I finished my remediation article https://projectmailer.net/index.php?title=The_Mailer_Review/Volume_4,_2010/Norman_Mailer%27s_The_Fight:_Hemingway,_Bullfighting,_and_the_Lovely_Metaphysics_of_Boxing&action=edit [[User:TWietstruk|TWietstruk]] ([[User talk:TWietstruk|talk]]) 19:44, 8 April 2025 (EDT)

Dr. Lucas I have finished my assigned remediation article: https://projectmailer.net/pm/The_Mailer_Review/Volume_4,_2010/Jive-Ass_Aficionado:_Why_Are_We_in_Vietnam%3F_and_Hemingway%27s_Moral_Code#cite_note-FOOTNOTEHemingway2003-24
Username ADear.

Dr. Lucas, I have finished remediating my assigned article. Please review it at your earliest convenience. The link is here: [[The_Mailer_Review/Volume_5,_2011/Norman_Mailer's_Mythmaking_in_An_American_Dream_and_“The_White_Negro”|Norman Mailer's Mythmaking in An American Dream and “The White Negro”]]—[[User:Erhernandez|Erhernandez]] ([[User talk:Erhernandez|talk]]) 08:52, 4 April 2025 (EDT)
:{{Reply to|Erhernandez}} well done! A couple of things: never bury your talk page post. Put it at the bottom, preferably in its own section by clicking "Add topic" on the top-right. I removed your banner after making a few corrections. Please have a look over it and move on to the next thing. Thanks. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 09:06, 5 April 2025 (EDT)

Dr. Lucas, I transferred and edited my article. Can you look at it and remove the banner? Here's the link: [[The_Mailer_Review/Volume_4,_2010/Authorship_and_Alienation_in_Death_in_the_Afternoon_and_Advertisements_for_Myself|Authorship and Alienation in Death in the Afternoon and Advertisements for Myself]] ( [[User:APKnight25|APKnight25]] ([[User talk:APKnight25|talk]]) 13:02, 28 March 2025 (EDT) )
:{{Reply to| APKnight25}} looking good! A couple of things: never bury your talk page post. Put it at the bottom, preferably in its own section by clicking "Add topic" on the top-right. Next, eliminate all "fang" quotes in the article and add “real quotation marks.” Your sources should be a bulleted list. And there should be no space before a citation. You’re almost finished! —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 11:21, 30 March 2025 (EDT)

== Remediation of "Reinventing the Wheel" Mailer Article for Review ==

Dr. Lucas,

My [[The_Mailer_Review/Volume_5,_2011/Reinventing_a_New_Wheel:_The_Films_of_Norman_Mailer|article]] is ready for review.

Thank you!
[[User:TPoole|TPoole]] ([[User talk:TPoole|talk]]) 15:29, 29 March 2025 (EDT)
:{{Reply to|TPoole}} great! Could you include a link to it? Thanks. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 11:07, 30 March 2025 (EDT)
::OK, I [[The Mailer Review/Volume 5, 2011/Reinventing a New Wheel: The Films of Norman Mailer|found it]]. Looking really good. Great work. There are some citation issues that need to be seen to. The two red categories at the bottom should not be there; they will go away when the citations errors are corrected. Eliminate any quotation mark "fangs" in the text and replace them with “real quotation marks.” Let me know if you need help. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 11:14, 30 March 2025 (EDT)
:::@Grlucas, what are the citation issues? Which ones need correcting? [[User:TPoole|TPoole]] ([[User talk:TPoole|talk]]) 17:31, 31 March 2025 (EDT)
::::{{Reply to| TPoole}} When you click your citations, they should jump to the works cited entry they correspond to. Several of yours do not, indicated by the red “Harv and Sfn no-target errors” at the bottom. You also have a "CS1 maint: Unrecognized language" error that will likely be cleared up when you fix the citation issues. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 08:55, 1 April 2025 (EDT)
:::::@Grlucas, I have tried correcting the sfn codes in my citations. I was able to get the 2 web citations to link correctly. But for some reason, I cannot get the Mailer 1967 film Wild 90 citation to link to the reference list. Please advise. [[User:TPoole|TPoole]] ([[User talk:TPoole|talk]]) 20:24, 4 April 2025 (EDT)
::::::{{Reply to| TPoole}} OK, all fixed and published. Thanks. Please move on to another remediation. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 08:46, 5 April 2025 (EDT)

== Remediation of: "Contradictory Syntheses: Norman Mailer’s Left Conservatism and the Problematic of 'Totalitarianism'" ==

Dr. Lucas

I finished the remediation of the following article:

https://projectmailer.net/pm/The_Mailer_Review/Volume_5,_2011/Contradictory_Syntheses:_Norman_Mailer%E2%80%99s_Left_Conservatism_and_the_Problematic_of_%E2%80%9CTotalitarianism%E2%80%9D

It is ready for your review. Thank you.
[[User:JKilchenmann|JKilchenmann]] ([[User talk:JKilchenmann|talk]]) 19:04, 30 March 2025 (EDT)
:{{Reply to| JKilchenmann}} looks great. I made some tweaks to the references and some throughout, like changing ' and " to real apostrophes and quotation marks. A bit more clean-up, but you might want to check over it again. I removed the under-construction banner. Well one. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 21:32, 30 March 2025 (EDT)

== Final Edit ==

Thank you for your comments on my remediation of
"[[The Mailer Review/Volume 4, 2010/Authorship and Alienation in Death in the Afternoon and Advertisements for Myself|Authorship and Alienation in Death in the Afternoon and Advertisements for Myself.]]"

I've eliminated the "fang quotes" and changed them to “real quotation marks.” This was a very fascinating tip that taught me something new. It's something I've never noticed before but now always will.

I also put my sources in a bulleted list and removed the space before the citations. I think I'm all set now.
:{{Reply to|APKnight25}} great work! Please help other editors to complete the volume. Thanks! —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 08:34, 3 April 2025 (EDT)

== Remediation for ''Firearms in the Works of Hemingway and Mailer'' ==

[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]]

Hi Dr. Lucas,

I believe I have done everything for the Remediation of my article. Please let me know if there is anything else I need to do.

I will also link the article below:

https://projectmailer.net/pm/The_Mailer_Review/Volume_4,_2010/Firearms_in_the_Works_of_Hemingway_and_Mailer

Thank you,
Caitlin Vinson
:{{Reply to|CVinson}} great work so far. Your references must use templates, please. Blockquotes must also be done correctly. No spaces or line breaks before or after the {{tl|pg}} template. Footnote placement is also off (punctuation goes before the footnote; no spaces before or after the footnote). I will add the abstract and url. Thanks. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 08:30, 3 April 2025 (EDT)

:{{Reply to|Grlucas}} Hi Dr. Lucas, I believe there have been some updates made to the project. I believe I have also updated the works cited section to show correct templates. Please let me know if there is anything further that I need to do. Thank you, Caitlin.
::{{reply to| CVinson}} please sign your talk page posts correctly. Thanks. You still need to do some work on the sources. Use the <code>|author-mask=1</code> in your template for repeated author names. Also, you must eliminate the red “Harv and Sfn no-target errors” message at the bottom. No spaces or returns before or after the {{tl|pg}} call, as I already mentioned above. No parenthetical citations should be left, either; those should all be remediated to footnotes. Thanks. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 10:50, 8 April 2025 (EDT)

:{{Reply to|Grlucas}} I have updated the sources and updated the in-text citations. I am still having trouble with the "Harv and Sfn no-target errors." I have not been successful in fixing this error and have tried multiple ways to fix it. —[[User:CVinson|CVinson]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 8:18, 8 April 2025 (EDT)

== Remediation for ''Norman Mailer Today'' ==
Dr. Lucas, I have finished up my remediation article [[The Mailer Review/Volume 5, 2011/Norman Mailer Today|Norman Mailer Today]], and it is ready for review. Please let me know if I missed something. Thank you! —[[User:Kamyers|Kamyers]] ([[User talk:Kamyers|talk]]) 18:20, 3 April 2025 (EDT)
:{{Reply to|Kamyers}} Great work! Please help your fellow editors finish the volume, or pick something to work on in [[The Mailer Review/Volume 4, 2010|Volume 4]]. Thanks, and well done. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 07:00, 4 April 2025 (EDT)

== Remediation of “The Conception of Irreversibility: Hannah Arendt and Hemingway’s ‘Hills Like White Elephants’” ==
Dr. Lucas, I have finished my remediation of Jennifer Yirinec's article: [[The Mailer Review/Volume 5, 2011/The Conception of Irreversibility: Hannah Arendt and Hemingway’s “Hills Like White Elephants”|The Conception of Irreversibility: Hannah Arendt and Hemingway’s “Hills Like White Elephants.”]] Thank you for your assistance with the article. It is ready for its final review! [[User:JHadaway|JHadaway]] ([[User talk:JHadaway|talk]]) 10:24, 4 April 2025 (EDT)
:{{Reply to|JHadaway}} a stellar job. Well done. I removed the banner, so you can move on to another article. Thanks. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 08:12, 5 April 2025 (EDT)

== Tribute Remediations ==
Dr. Lucas, I have begun work on the tributes for volume 5. [[The Mailer Review/Volume 5, 2011/Tributes to Norris Church Mailer/Grace Notes|Grace Notes]] by Stephen Borkowski is ready for its final review.—[[User:JHadaway|JHadaway]] ([[User talk:JHadaway|talk]]) 12:58, 4 April 2025 (EDT)
:{{Reply to|JHadaway}} Well done! Banner removed, url added. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 08:18, 5 April 2025 (EDT)

==Oohh Normie Final Edits==
Hi Dr. Lucas, I have finished my article: [[The_Mailer_Review/Volume_4,_2010/"Oohh_Normie_—_You're_Sooo_Hemingway":_Mailer_Memories_and_Encounters|Oohh Normie, You're Sooo Hemingway]]. Please let me know if there is anything I need to fix. [[User:Tbara4554|Tbara4554]] ([[User talk:Tbara4554|talk]]) 20:01, 5 April 2025 (EDT)
:{{reply to|Tbara4554}} thank you. I made some corrections and removed the banner. You might want to have another look over it. Please move on to something else. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 09:53, 6 April 2025 (EDT)

== Harlot's Ghost, Bildungsroman, Masculinity and Hemingway ==

Dr. Lucas,

The following article is ready for your review. Thanks.

https://projectmailer.net/pm/The_Mailer_Review/Volume_4,_2010/Harlot%27s_Ghost,_Bildungsroman,_Masculinity_and_Hemingway

[[User:JKilchenmann|JKilchenmann]] ([[User talk:JKilchenmann|talk]]) 21:22, 5 April 2025 (EDT)
:{{Reply to| JKilchenmann}} excellent. Thank you. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 09:39, 6 April 2025 (EDT)

== I am done with this ==

https://projectmailer.net/pm/The_Mailer_Review/Volume_5,_2011/Situating_Hemingway:_Mailer,_Style,_Ethics
:Received. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 10:29, 6 April 2025 (EDT)

== Final Review PM Article ==

Hi Dr. Lucas, [[The_Mailer_Review/Volume_4,_2010/Hemingway_to_Mailer_—_A_Delayed_Response_to_The_Deer_Park|here]] is my remediated article, ready for review![[User:Hobbitonya|Hobbitonya]] ([[User talk:Hobbitonya|talk]]) 12:21, 6 April 2025 (EDT)
:{{Reply to| Hobbitonya}} great work. I have removed the banner, so you are good to move on to something else. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 07:20, 7 April 2025 (EDT)

== Remediation Project ==

{{reply to|Grlucas}}
I have finished my remedidation project and I am ready for it to be reviewed. '''Article link''': [https://projectmailer.net/pm/The_Mailer_Review/Volume_5,_2011/Piling_On:_Norman_Mailer’s_Utilization_of_Marilyn_Monroe#Works_Cited|Piling On: Norman Mailer's Utilization of Marilyn Monroe]

Thanks,

[[User:MerAtticus|MerAtticus]] ([[User talk:MerAtticus|talk]]) 13:04, 6 April 2025 (EDT)
:{{Reply to| MerAtticus}} good work so far. Please remove wikilinks. Change ' and " to typographical apostrophes and quotation marks. And all red errors at the bottom of the page need to be taken care of. These are likely all from coding errors in your sources. Thanks! —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 07:24, 7 April 2025 (EDT)

{{reply to|Grlucas}}
I have removed the wikilinks, changed to the correct typographic style and updated my sources.
'''Article link''': [https://projectmailer.net/pm/The_Mailer_Review/Volume_5,_2011/Piling_On:_Norman_Mailer’s_Utilization_of_Marilyn_Monroe#Works_Cited|Piling On: Norman Mailer's Utilization of Marilyn Monroe] Thanks, [[User:MerAtticus|MerAtticus]] ([[User talk:MerAtticus|talk]]) 21:55, 7 April 2025 (EDT)

[I forgot to fill out the summary box. I am adding my summary]
:{{Reply to| MerAtticus}} you're getting there! It looks great. You must eliminate all the red errors at the bottom. These appear when there are errors in your citations. Let me know if you need help. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 09:15, 8 April 2025 (EDT)

@{{reply to|Grlucas}} I have tried everything I can think of and I still have harv and sfn no-target errors and harv and sfn multiple-target errors and cs1 uses editors parameter. Do I not include the editor? [[User:MerAtticus|MerAtticus]] ([[User talk:MerAtticus|talk]]) 16:03, 8 April 2025 (EDT)

{{reply to|Grlucas}} I have managed to get rid of two of the red target errors. I am still working on finding the harv sfn multiple target error. Thanks, [[User:MerAtticus|MerAtticus]] ([[User talk:MerAtticus|talk]]) 20:37, 8 April 2025 (EDT)

{{reply to|Grlucas}} I have tried everything i can think of to remove the last red error flag. I had to turn it in. I don't know that else I can do in this situation. I was given citation that did not follow any of the given formats. [[User:MerAtticus|MerAtticus]] ([[User talk:MerAtticus|talk]]) 21:45, 8 April 2025 (EDT)

== Remediation Submission ==

Hello!
Here's my remediated article; [[The_Mailer_Review/Volume_5,_2011/The_Devil's_Party:_Reading_and_Wreaking_Vengeance_in_The_Castle_in_the_Forest|The Devil's Party: Reading and Wreaking Vengeance in ''The Castle in the Forest'']].
Thanks! Please let me know if there's anything I can review or correct.
[[User:Maggiemrogers|Maggiemrogers]] ([[User talk:Maggiemrogers|talk]]) 13:23, 6 April 2025 (EDT)
:{{Reply to| Maggiemrogers}} nice work! Banner removed, so please move on to something else in the volume. Thanks. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 07:39, 7 April 2025 (EDT)

== Vol. 4: Rumors of Grace article remediated ==

I believe I have completed remediation of ''[[The_Mailer_Review/Volume_4,_2010/Rumors_of_Grace:_God-Language_in_Hemingway_and_Mailer|Rumors of Grace: God-Language in Hemingway and Mailer]]'', vol. 4. I was having last-minute trouble with sfn errors for sources without authors, but Justin Kilchenmann helped me out, so I think they are fixed.
:{{Reply to|Sherrilledwards}} You have done a remarkable job—a real Herculean effort! Footnotes should not go in any notes. See those I changed; the others should be changed in the same way. I have done some, but the others have to be fixed, I'm afraid. Thanks! —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 09:20, 8 April 2025 (EDT)

== Remediation of "Inside Norman Mailer ==

Hi Dr. Lucas - I have finished remediating the article, [[The Mailer Review/Volume 4, 2010/Inside Norman Mailer|Inside Norman Mailer]]. Please let me know if I need to make any adjustments. Thank you! [[User:Chelsey.brantley|Chelsey.brantley]] ([[User talk:Chelsey.brantley|talk]]) 18:09, 7 April 2025 (EDT)
:{{Reply to|Chelsey.brantley}} good work! Please help with another article from volume 4. Thanks! —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 09:36, 8 April 2025 (EDT)

== Completed: Norman Mailer: Playboy Magazine ==

I hope I am doing this is right. I have finished remediating my article about Norman Mailer and its in my designated sandbox [https://projectmailer.net/pm/The_Mailer_Review/Volume_5,_2011/Norman_Mailer:_Playboy_Magazine_Heavyweight here.]
If there are any last minute edits, let me know. I got the last of the errors removed yesterday. And I believe we are on the same page with leaving the in-line citations for ''Playboy'' to be as is, since the author didn't put them down in the works cited. [[User:NrmMGA5108|NrmMGA5108]] ([[User talk:NrmMGA5108|talk]]) 20:14, 7 April 2025 (EDT)Nina Mizner
:{{Reply to|NrmMGA5108}} looking good! So, the parenthetical citations still in the article, I'm assuming, are there because of those missing sources? Please check your page numbers; some seem to be off. Thanks. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 10:04, 8 April 2025 (EDT)

== Completed Remediation From Here to Eternity and The Naked and The Dead: Premier to Eternity? ==

Greeting Dr. Lucas,

I have made the adjustment that you mentioned.

I also made additional edits to my short footnotes and noticed that my citations did not link to my references - which has been fixed.

I have tested all of my citations, and they all work.

Here is my article by Alexander Hicks, ''From Here to Eternity and The Naked and The Dead: Premier to Eternity?''

https://projectmailer.net/pm/The_Mailer_Review/Volume_5,_2011/From_Here_to_Eternity_and_The_Naked_and_the_Dead:_Premiere_to_Eternity%3F

Have a great day.
:{{Reply to| THarrell}} Please always sign your talk page posts. Several “quoted items” in the article appear as ‘quoted items’; these must be corrected, please. No spaces or returns should surround {{tl|pg}} calls. Multiple page numbers should look like this <code><nowiki>{{sfn|Moretti|1996|pp=11-14}}</nowiki></code>; note the double <code>pp</code>. There seem to be many typos. I corrected some for you, but you must see to the rest. Thanks. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 10:16, 8 April 2025 (EDT)

:{{Reply to| Grlucas}} Greetings,

Are these the only additional corrections that need to be made? This is different from what you mentioned before.

I just want to be sure that I have hit everything.

Also can you verify what other typos you are seeing, I have ran through this twice.

If something is spelt a certain way, for example "Soljer", I have left it that way. Since it is mentioned like that in the article.
—[[User:THarrell|THarrell]] ([[User talk:THarrell|talk]]) 06:49, 8 April 2025 (EDT)

:{{Reply to| Grlucas}} Greetings,

I have gone through and fixed all of the short footnotes.

I have gone line by line with a ruler to look at any typos, and fixed the words that I found that had a dash in them/needed to be lowercased.

I have also fixed the quotations.

—[[User:THarrell|THarrell]] ([[User talk:THarrell|talk]]) 12:31, 9 April 2025 (EDT)

== Remediation for “Footnote to Death in the Afternoon” ==

Greetings Dr. Lucus,

My article is ready for your review. Thank you.

https://projectmailer.net/pm/The_Mailer_Review/Volume_4,_2010/Mailer%E2%80%99s_%E2%80%9CFootnote_to_Death_in_the_Afternoon%E2%80%9D)
:{{Reply to| KForeman}} it's coming along. Please ''always'' sign your talk page posts. Right up top, there are errors. Please use the real {{tl|pg}}, like all the other articles. Citations need to be fixed. All parenthetical citations must be converted. You still have quite a bit of work to do. All red sections need to be seen to and corrected. Thanks. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 10:20, 8 April 2025 (EDT)

=Remediation of "Cluster Seeds and the Mailer Legacy"=
Hello, Dr. Lucas. I have completed the remediation of [https://projectmailer.net/index.php?title=The_Mailer_Review/Volume_5,_2011/Cluster_Seeds_and_the_Mailer_Legacy&oldid=18200| my article], and it is ready for your review. Thank you!—[[User:ADavis|ADavis]] ([[User talk:ADavis|talk]]) 11:32, 8 April 2025 (EDT)@ADavis
:{{Reply to| ADavis}} got it. I think I check it yesterday and removed the banner then. Please move on to another piece. Thanks. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 17:29, 8 April 2025 (EDT)

== Remediating Article: Mailer, Hemingway, and Boxing Volume 4. ==

Hello Dr. Lucas,

I have completed remediating my article. Here is the link [[The Mailer Review/Volume 4, 2010/Mailer, Hemingway, and Boxing|The Mailer Review: Volume 4: Mailer, Hemingway, Boxing (2010)]] [[User:JBrown|JBrown]] ([[User talk:JBrown|talk]]) 13:01, 8 April 2025 (EDT)JBrown
:{{Reply to|JBrown}} a good start, but all parenthetical citations need to be footnotes. Also, check your headers. Thanks. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 17:29, 8 April 2025 (EDT)

== Remediation for ''Norris Church Mailer'' ==
Dr. Lucas, I have finished up remediating the article [[The Mailer Review/Volume 4, 2010/Norris Church Mailer|Norris Church Mailer]], and it is ready for review. Please let me know if I missed something. Thank you! —[[User:Kamyers|Kamyers]] ([[User talk:Kamyers|talk]]) 13:42, 8 April 2025 (EDT)
:{{reply to|Kamyers}} awesome work! Thank you! —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 17:29, 8 April 2025 (EDT)

== Final Edits Completed and Ready for Review ==

Dr. Lucas, I have completed my assigned remediation article: [[The_Mailer_Review/Volume_4,_2010/Looking_at_the_Past:_Nostalgia_as_Technique_in_The_Naked_and_the_Dead_and_For_Whom_the_Bell_Tolls|Looking at the Past: Nostalgia as Technique in The Naked and the Dead and For Whom the Bell Tolls]]. Please review at your convenience. I enjoyed working on this assignment. I look forward to your suggestions and feedback. All the best, Danielle (DBond007)
:{{Reply to| DBond007}} ok, good work. Please remove all the external links. Links to Wikipedia are not necessary, but if used, they need to be done correctly. There should be no spaces before {{tl|sfn}}. May sure all your ' and " are actually typographical apostrophes and quotation marks. Remove any superfluous spaces and line breaks; these mess up the formatting. Thanks! —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 17:29, 8 April 2025 (EDT)

== Completed the remediation assignment ==

Good evening Dr. Lucas,

I hope I am doing this right. Here is the link for my completed Remediation article: [http://The_Mailer_Review/Volume_4,_2010/Encounters_with_Mailer Encounters with Mailer].

I look forward to reading your feedback.

All the best,

Patrick Riley
:{{Reply to|Priley1984}} thank you! —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 07:40, 10 April 2025 (EDT)

== Remediation Project Submission: An Expected Encounter in an Unexpected Place ==

Link:

https://projectmailer.net/pm/The_Mailer_Review/Volume_4,_2010/Norman_Mailer:_An_Expected_Encounter_in_an_Unexpected_Place

Winnie Verna
:{{Reply to|Wverna}} received, thanks! —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 07:51, 10 April 2025 (EDT)

== E.Mosley ==

Good evening, @Grlucas. I have completed my Remediation Articles[[https://projectmailer.net/pm/The_Mailer_Review/Volume_4,_2010/On_Reading_Mailer_Too_Young]]. The article I had was " On Reading Mailer Too Young Volume 4, 2010

== Kynndra Watson ==

Good Evening, @grlucas. i have completed my Remediation articles: Volume 5: https://projectmailer.net/pm/The_Mailer_Review/Volume_5,_2011/Making_Masculinity_and_Unmaking_Jewishness:_Norman_Mailer%E2%80%99s_Voice_in_Wild_90_and_Beyond_the_Law and Volume 4: https://projectmailer.net/pm/The_Mailer_Review/Volume_4,_2010/Mailer,_Hemingway,_and_the_%E2%80%9CReds%E2%80%9D.

Thank you.

== Tribute Remediation ==
Dr. Lucas, I have finished [[The Mailer Review/Volume 5, 2011/Tributes to Norris Church Mailer/What Would Be the Fun of That?|"What Would Be the Fun of That?"]] by Peter Alson.—[[User:JHadaway|JHadaway]] ([[User talk:JHadaway|talk]]) 09:33, 9 April 2025 (EDT)

== “Remembering Norris Church” Tribute Remediation ==
Dr. Lucas, I have finished [[The Mailer Review/Volume 5, 2011/Tributes to Norris Church Mailer/Remembering Norris Church|“Remembering Norris Church”]] by John Bowers.—[[User:JHadaway|JHadaway]] ([[User talk:JHadaway|talk]]) 16:17, 9 April 2025 (EDT)

== “The Norris I Knew” Tribute Remediation ==
Dr. Lucas, I have finished [[The Mailer Review/Volume 5, 2011/Tributes to Norris Church Mailer/The Norris I Knew|“The Norris I Knew”]] by Christopher Busa.—[[User:JHadaway|JHadaway]] ([[User talk:JHadaway|talk]]) 09:04, 10 April 2025 (EDT)

The Mailer Review/Volume 5, 2011/Tributes to Norris Church Mailer/The Norris I Knew

2025-04-10T13:01:13Z

JHadaway: Added category, sorting

{{DISPLAYTITLE:{{BASEPAGENAME}}/{{SUBPAGENAME}}}}
{{MR05}}
{{Working}}

{{Byline|last=Busa |first=Christopher |url= }}
{{dc|dc=T|eaching tennis at the Provincetown Tennis Club during the 1970s,}} I gave lessons to members of the Mailer family. I enjoyed playing with Al Wasserman, a television producer for ''60 Minutes'', married to Norman’s sister Barbara, and her son Peter Alson. Michael and Stephen Mailer, the sons of Beverly, had formed childhood roots in Provincetown, as had Danielle, whose mother was Mailer’s second wife Adele.

I met Norris not long after she married Norman in 1980. She only took a few lessons from me, but I still recall the feeling of rallying with her and her nimble adaptation to small movements to keep the ball in play. We shortened the court, using the service line as our baseline, and guided the ball back and forth with the idea of sustaining a rally in the forecourt. We were playing mini-tennis and ball control was our goal, taking small steps and making abbreviated strokes with the racquet. I would take a single ball and attempt to keep it in play for a dozen exchanges, and then we took another ball and kept it going for twice as long. A rally in tennis is like a conversation, a combination of communication and scoring points in a gentle sparing manner.
Norris was a beginner, but she had a sure touch, so my method was not to compete but cooperate by keeping the ball in play.

Much of Norman Mailer’s knowledge of the body came from his interest in sports, especially the principles of dynamic balance of a performing athlete. Like the footwork of a boxer, his characters, both within themselves and with others, are moving through complicated turns from balance point to another balance point, maintaining their center of gravity through evolving alignments. But Norris was a lady. She preferred not to perspire. We bantered a bit in the shade of a courtside beach umbrella, and I said flirtatiously, knowing she would be quizzed by Norman, “Norris, your skin has not been {{pg|30|31}} kissed by the sun, you are so pale.” And she said softly in a voice redolent with the earthiness of her Arkansas upbringing, “I like to be fish-belly white.” Norris had read her husband’s book on Marilyn Monroe and was drawn to his effort to portray something essential about femininity from a male perspective. Mailer believed that what was poignant about Marilyn was her desire to become a lady: “Elegance was elusive and fearful and attractive and as awesome to her in these somewhat sordid early years as the hidden desire to be macho can feel to a young and wimpy intellectual.” Mailer defined wimpy as having muscles like cooked spaghetti that were limp and cold. If elegance was elusive for the young Marilyn, Norris grew up secure in the knowledge of being a natural head-turner; yet she pursued intellectual understandings, teaching art in a high school and subscribing to the ''New Yorker''.

She forgot to return the box she had checked “Don’t Send” on her Book-of-the-Month Club subscription, and a copy of Mailer’s ''Marilyn'' arrived. She was shocked that a book could cost twenty dollars. But she gave deep attention to the photographs. She started reading Mailer’s text and noticed at once that this so-called war novelist had a lot to say about women and a woman’s view of the world. She met Mailer on the famous occasion of Norman’s Arkansas visit to see his old Army buddy, Francis Gwalthney, who had become a writer teaching English at a nearby college. Norris had been a student in Gwalthney’s class.

Norman told me that when he first met Norris that he felt “a great shock of anxiety.” He mocked himself for his fear of tall women. Already statuesque, she was wearing hip hugger jeans and standing in three-inch sandals. Her white blouse was tied in a gypsy knot just above her belly button. Norman would learn that night that she was born January 31, his birthday. They shared a natal bond, despite being born twenty-six years apart. He was twice her age at 52. In an interview published in ''Provincetown Arts'' in 1999, Mailer said, “We looked so unalike and were so different that it was interesting to have something in common. But it wouldn’t have mattered what her birthday was. Over time I’ve learned that we not only have the same virtues, but the same faults.”

Wicked rumors circulated in Provincetown that, after meeting that night, they shacked up in a house trailer and did not emerge for three days. But it is a fact that in less than three months, Norris had quit her job, sold her yellow Volkswagen, and moved to New York to live with Norman. She was a {{pg|31|32}} year older than Norman when he published ''The Naked and the Dead''; just as ''Naked'' altered Norman, transforming him from an aspiring talent to a major author, so did Norman alter Norris, encouraging her surging ambitions to develop her varied talents and find her forms in theater, painting, writing, and mothering. Often, the first task of an artist is to create the persona that will create the work. So Barbara Jean Davis, who married Larry Norris, now became Norris Church Mailer. In an almost perfect understanding of this process of profound change, Coco Chanel said, “Elegance is not just the prerogative of those who have just escaped from adolescence, but of those who have already taken possession of their future.”

Where Norman rushed in, Norris did not fear to follow, but she declined to become a fool, reminding her husband that he was a great American author and not an ill-mannered ruffian. During the New York symposium where several prominent feminists beat up on Norman for saying that women should be kept in cages, he was shocked by their lack of humor. Norris said the she knew that Norman was trying “to be funny,” forgiving him, as usual, for his offish remarks, but not taking him seriously enough to be offended.

In a lengthy interview in ''Provincetown Arts'', I asked Norman, “Do you know a woman named Cinnamon Brown? Rumors say you know of her.”

“Yeah, sure,” Mailer said. “That look of panic you just saw in my eyes was me wondering if I knew two Cinnamon Browns.”

Shortly after Norris moved to New York, Mailer had cast Norris in the role of Cinnamon Brown, his date for a small dinner party in New York. Wearing a blonde wig and brazen makeup, she was introduced as a girl from the South who had moved to New York to enter the adult film industry. “The real art,” Mailer explained, “was that we did it with two extremely sophisticated people, Harold and Mara Conrad. Mara was one of the smartest, hippest women I’ve ever known. The idea was precisely to fool her. As I remember, Harold was in on it, or I don’t think we could have pulled it off.”

If Bea was a college sweetheart, if Adele was a most Spanish passion, if Lady Jean was regal, if Beverly was the consummate actress who could not play the role of wife, if Carol, mother of their lovechild, would become wife for a day, then Norris proved to be the mother who was as powerful as his own. Freud said, “A man who is loved by his mother will always retain the feeling of a conqueror.” In her thirty years of marriage to Norman, Norris integrated the chaotic legacy of five previous marriages and several broods of {{pg|32|33}} children suffering from shell shock of the cultural wars between their sequences of parents. She became friends with former wives, and found a zone of comfort by “avoiding” past mistresses. Family matters were scheduled smoothly. Ironically, Norman wrote the check for Norris’s lessons, which bounced. Norris took over many household matters, including paying bills.

For an exhibition of paintings by Norris Church Mailer, at the Berta Walker Gallery in Provincetown, Norman wrote an appreciation of his wife’s painting, posted on the wall beside ''Leaving California'' (1982), a somewhat surreal celebration of yellow as a hue, depicting an irrepressibly happy tourist heading home, back East, having become deeply tanned from California sunshine:

<blockquote>I admire and am intrigued by the little mysteries that my wife, Norris Church, evokes in her best work. It is genre, and the painter’s tale she tells is usually of middle-aged men and women from middle America, people one would not necessarily sit next to on a train or a plane, tourists, housewives, or peppy grandmothers with a small but crazy light in their eye because they are on vacation. There they are, much like this woman dressed in yellow, optimistic, unafraid, and so innocent that one’s case-hardened heart feels for her. Full of the glow of brilliant sun and big sky, she is nonetheless fixed in all the interred time of a family snapshot. Blissful, she is as American as her pocketbook, which looks very much like a portable radio. From the white plastic frames of her eyeglasses, down to the sturdy set of her legs, she is our perfect and absolute American, sweet, optimistic, a little bewildered—oh, boy!—the vastness of space in which she stands, and wholly unaware of that faint shadow of the sinister that rides along that outgoing American highway down which we travel for the rest of our lives, off on our vacations, full of snapshots for which we posed that never told us who we were, and what the shadows had to say of that other highway that winds beyond our means to the mortal mystery of our ends.</blockquote>

Yellow was Norris’s favorite color, a honey-colored yellow that contained a dose of her husband’s dark syrup. Her elegance was the equal of her husband’s machismo. When I read Norman’s remarks about his wife’s {{pg|33|34}} painting, I began to see why Norris once said, “He had a crazy brain, endlessly fascinating.” In the epilogue to her memoir, ''A Ticket to the Circus'', she confirms her belief in their enduring affection: “I’m anxious to catch up to him.”

{{Review}}
{{DEFAULTSORT:Norris I Knew, The}}
[[Category:Tributes (MR)]]

The Mailer Review/Volume 5, 2011/Tributes to Norris Church Mailer/The Norris I Knew

2025-04-10T12:59:16Z

JHadaway: Added fourth and fifth pages

The Mailer Review/Volume 5, 2011/Tributes to Norris Church Mailer/The Norris I Knew

2025-04-10T12:42:35Z

JHadaway: Added third page

The Mailer Review/Volume 5, 2011/Tributes to Norris Church Mailer/The Norris I Knew

2025-04-10T12:33:24Z

JHadaway: Added second page

The Mailer Review/Volume 5, 2011/Tributes to Norris Church Mailer/The Norris I Knew

2025-04-10T12:24:58Z

JHadaway: Added first page

The Mailer Review/Volume 5, 2011/Tributes to Norris Church Mailer/The Norris I Knew

2025-04-10T12:19:21Z

JHadaway: Started working

User talk:Grlucas

2025-04-09T20:17:16Z

JHadaway: Added tribute remediation

{{Talk header}}
[[/Archive 202504/]]

== Final edits ==
Hello, my article is complete: [[The_Mailer_Review/Volume_4,_2010/Ernest_and_Norman_(Exit_Music)|Ernest and Norman (Exit Music)]]

Good evening, Dr. Lucas. Below is the link to my edited article:
https://projectmailer.net/pm/User:ASpeed/sandbox

Good evening, @[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]]. I have completed most of my Remediation Articles, but I still show issues for the one named, "[[The_Mailer_Review/Volume_4,_2010/Norman,_Papa,_and_the_Autoerotic_Construction_of_Woman|Norman, Papa, and the Autoerotic Construction of Woman]].

Based on the latest updates, [[The_Mailer_Review/Volume_4,_2010/Battles_for_Regard,_Writerly_and_Otherwise|Battles for Regard, Writerly and Otherwise]] looks good with exception of including a '''category'''.

May you let me know if there is anything I can do on my end to resolve the issues with the first [[The_Mailer_Review/Volume_4,_2010/Norman,_Papa,_and_the_Autoerotic_Construction_of_Woman|article]]?

[[User:ALedezma|ALedezma]] ([[User talk:ALedezma|talk]]) 21:47, 8 April 2025 (EDT)

Dr. Lucas I finished my remediation article https://projectmailer.net/index.php?title=The_Mailer_Review/Volume_4,_2010/Norman_Mailer%27s_The_Fight:_Hemingway,_Bullfighting,_and_the_Lovely_Metaphysics_of_Boxing&action=edit [[User:TWietstruk|TWietstruk]] ([[User talk:TWietstruk|talk]]) 19:44, 8 April 2025 (EDT)

Dr. Lucas I have finished my assigned remediation article: https://projectmailer.net/pm/The_Mailer_Review/Volume_4,_2010/Jive-Ass_Aficionado:_Why_Are_We_in_Vietnam%3F_and_Hemingway%27s_Moral_Code#cite_note-FOOTNOTEHemingway2003-24
Username ADear.

Dr. Lucas, I have finished remediating my assigned article. Please review it at your earliest convenience. The link is here: [[The_Mailer_Review/Volume_5,_2011/Norman_Mailer's_Mythmaking_in_An_American_Dream_and_“The_White_Negro”|Norman Mailer's Mythmaking in An American Dream and “The White Negro”]]—[[User:Erhernandez|Erhernandez]] ([[User talk:Erhernandez|talk]]) 08:52, 4 April 2025 (EDT)
:{{Reply to|Erhernandez}} well done! A couple of things: never bury your talk page post. Put it at the bottom, preferably in its own section by clicking "Add topic" on the top-right. I removed your banner after making a few corrections. Please have a look over it and move on to the next thing. Thanks. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 09:06, 5 April 2025 (EDT)

Dr. Lucas, I transferred and edited my article. Can you look at it and remove the banner? Here's the link: [[The_Mailer_Review/Volume_4,_2010/Authorship_and_Alienation_in_Death_in_the_Afternoon_and_Advertisements_for_Myself|Authorship and Alienation in Death in the Afternoon and Advertisements for Myself]] ( [[User:APKnight25|APKnight25]] ([[User talk:APKnight25|talk]]) 13:02, 28 March 2025 (EDT) )
:{{Reply to| APKnight25}} looking good! A couple of things: never bury your talk page post. Put it at the bottom, preferably in its own section by clicking "Add topic" on the top-right. Next, eliminate all "fang" quotes in the article and add “real quotation marks.” Your sources should be a bulleted list. And there should be no space before a citation. You’re almost finished! —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 11:21, 30 March 2025 (EDT)

== Remediation of "Reinventing the Wheel" Mailer Article for Review ==

Dr. Lucas,

My [[The_Mailer_Review/Volume_5,_2011/Reinventing_a_New_Wheel:_The_Films_of_Norman_Mailer|article]] is ready for review.

Thank you!
[[User:TPoole|TPoole]] ([[User talk:TPoole|talk]]) 15:29, 29 March 2025 (EDT)
:{{Reply to|TPoole}} great! Could you include a link to it? Thanks. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 11:07, 30 March 2025 (EDT)
::OK, I [[The Mailer Review/Volume 5, 2011/Reinventing a New Wheel: The Films of Norman Mailer|found it]]. Looking really good. Great work. There are some citation issues that need to be seen to. The two red categories at the bottom should not be there; they will go away when the citations errors are corrected. Eliminate any quotation mark "fangs" in the text and replace them with “real quotation marks.” Let me know if you need help. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 11:14, 30 March 2025 (EDT)
:::@Grlucas, what are the citation issues? Which ones need correcting? [[User:TPoole|TPoole]] ([[User talk:TPoole|talk]]) 17:31, 31 March 2025 (EDT)
::::{{Reply to| TPoole}} When you click your citations, they should jump to the works cited entry they correspond to. Several of yours do not, indicated by the red “Harv and Sfn no-target errors” at the bottom. You also have a "CS1 maint: Unrecognized language" error that will likely be cleared up when you fix the citation issues. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 08:55, 1 April 2025 (EDT)
:::::@Grlucas, I have tried correcting the sfn codes in my citations. I was able to get the 2 web citations to link correctly. But for some reason, I cannot get the Mailer 1967 film Wild 90 citation to link to the reference list. Please advise. [[User:TPoole|TPoole]] ([[User talk:TPoole|talk]]) 20:24, 4 April 2025 (EDT)
::::::{{Reply to| TPoole}} OK, all fixed and published. Thanks. Please move on to another remediation. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 08:46, 5 April 2025 (EDT)

== Remediation of: "Contradictory Syntheses: Norman Mailer’s Left Conservatism and the Problematic of 'Totalitarianism'" ==

Dr. Lucas

I finished the remediation of the following article:

https://projectmailer.net/pm/The_Mailer_Review/Volume_5,_2011/Contradictory_Syntheses:_Norman_Mailer%E2%80%99s_Left_Conservatism_and_the_Problematic_of_%E2%80%9CTotalitarianism%E2%80%9D

It is ready for your review. Thank you.
[[User:JKilchenmann|JKilchenmann]] ([[User talk:JKilchenmann|talk]]) 19:04, 30 March 2025 (EDT)
:{{Reply to| JKilchenmann}} looks great. I made some tweaks to the references and some throughout, like changing ' and " to real apostrophes and quotation marks. A bit more clean-up, but you might want to check over it again. I removed the under-construction banner. Well one. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 21:32, 30 March 2025 (EDT)

== Final Edit ==

Thank you for your comments on my remediation of
"[[The Mailer Review/Volume 4, 2010/Authorship and Alienation in Death in the Afternoon and Advertisements for Myself|Authorship and Alienation in Death in the Afternoon and Advertisements for Myself.]]"

I've eliminated the "fang quotes" and changed them to “real quotation marks.” This was a very fascinating tip that taught me something new. It's something I've never noticed before but now always will.

I also put my sources in a bulleted list and removed the space before the citations. I think I'm all set now.
:{{Reply to|APKnight25}} great work! Please help other editors to complete the volume. Thanks! —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 08:34, 3 April 2025 (EDT)

== Remediation for ''Firearms in the Works of Hemingway and Mailer'' ==

[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]]

Hi Dr. Lucas,

I believe I have done everything for the Remediation of my article. Please let me know if there is anything else I need to do.

I will also link the article below:

https://projectmailer.net/pm/The_Mailer_Review/Volume_4,_2010/Firearms_in_the_Works_of_Hemingway_and_Mailer

Thank you,
Caitlin Vinson
:{{Reply to|CVinson}} great work so far. Your references must use templates, please. Blockquotes must also be done correctly. No spaces or line breaks before or after the {{tl|pg}} template. Footnote placement is also off (punctuation goes before the footnote; no spaces before or after the footnote). I will add the abstract and url. Thanks. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 08:30, 3 April 2025 (EDT)

:{{Reply to|Grlucas}} Hi Dr. Lucas, I believe there have been some updates made to the project. I believe I have also updated the works cited section to show correct templates. Please let me know if there is anything further that I need to do. Thank you, Caitlin.
::{{reply to| CVinson}} please sign your talk page posts correctly. Thanks. You still need to do some work on the sources. Use the <code>|author-mask=1</code> in your template for repeated author names. Also, you must eliminate the red “Harv and Sfn no-target errors” message at the bottom. No spaces or returns before or after the {{tl|pg}} call, as I already mentioned above. No parenthetical citations should be left, either; those should all be remediated to footnotes. Thanks. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 10:50, 8 April 2025 (EDT)

:{{Reply to|Grlucas}} I have updated the sources and updated the in-text citations. I am still having trouble with the "Harv and Sfn no-target errors." I have not been successful in fixing this error and have tried multiple ways to fix it. —[[User:CVinson|CVinson]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 8:18, 8 April 2025 (EDT)

== Remediation for ''Norman Mailer Today'' ==
Dr. Lucas, I have finished up my remediation article [[The Mailer Review/Volume 5, 2011/Norman Mailer Today|Norman Mailer Today]], and it is ready for review. Please let me know if I missed something. Thank you! —[[User:Kamyers|Kamyers]] ([[User talk:Kamyers|talk]]) 18:20, 3 April 2025 (EDT)
:{{Reply to|Kamyers}} Great work! Please help your fellow editors finish the volume, or pick something to work on in [[The Mailer Review/Volume 4, 2010|Volume 4]]. Thanks, and well done. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 07:00, 4 April 2025 (EDT)

== Remediation of “The Conception of Irreversibility: Hannah Arendt and Hemingway’s ‘Hills Like White Elephants’” ==
Dr. Lucas, I have finished my remediation of Jennifer Yirinec's article: [[The Mailer Review/Volume 5, 2011/The Conception of Irreversibility: Hannah Arendt and Hemingway’s “Hills Like White Elephants”|The Conception of Irreversibility: Hannah Arendt and Hemingway’s “Hills Like White Elephants.”]] Thank you for your assistance with the article. It is ready for its final review! [[User:JHadaway|JHadaway]] ([[User talk:JHadaway|talk]]) 10:24, 4 April 2025 (EDT)
:{{Reply to|JHadaway}} a stellar job. Well done. I removed the banner, so you can move on to another article. Thanks. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 08:12, 5 April 2025 (EDT)

== Tribute Remediations ==
Dr. Lucas, I have begun work on the tributes for volume 5. [[The Mailer Review/Volume 5, 2011/Tributes to Norris Church Mailer/Grace Notes|Grace Notes]] by Stephen Borkowski is ready for its final review.—[[User:JHadaway|JHadaway]] ([[User talk:JHadaway|talk]]) 12:58, 4 April 2025 (EDT)
:{{Reply to|JHadaway}} Well done! Banner removed, url added. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 08:18, 5 April 2025 (EDT)

==Oohh Normie Final Edits==
Hi Dr. Lucas, I have finished my article: [[The_Mailer_Review/Volume_4,_2010/"Oohh_Normie_—_You're_Sooo_Hemingway":_Mailer_Memories_and_Encounters|Oohh Normie, You're Sooo Hemingway]]. Please let me know if there is anything I need to fix. [[User:Tbara4554|Tbara4554]] ([[User talk:Tbara4554|talk]]) 20:01, 5 April 2025 (EDT)
:{{reply to|Tbara4554}} thank you. I made some corrections and removed the banner. You might want to have another look over it. Please move on to something else. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 09:53, 6 April 2025 (EDT)

== Harlot's Ghost, Bildungsroman, Masculinity and Hemingway ==

Dr. Lucas,

The following article is ready for your review. Thanks.

https://projectmailer.net/pm/The_Mailer_Review/Volume_4,_2010/Harlot%27s_Ghost,_Bildungsroman,_Masculinity_and_Hemingway

[[User:JKilchenmann|JKilchenmann]] ([[User talk:JKilchenmann|talk]]) 21:22, 5 April 2025 (EDT)
:{{Reply to| JKilchenmann}} excellent. Thank you. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 09:39, 6 April 2025 (EDT)

== I am done with this ==

https://projectmailer.net/pm/The_Mailer_Review/Volume_5,_2011/Situating_Hemingway:_Mailer,_Style,_Ethics
:Received. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 10:29, 6 April 2025 (EDT)

== Final Review PM Article ==

Hi Dr. Lucas, [[The_Mailer_Review/Volume_4,_2010/Hemingway_to_Mailer_—_A_Delayed_Response_to_The_Deer_Park|here]] is my remediated article, ready for review![[User:Hobbitonya|Hobbitonya]] ([[User talk:Hobbitonya|talk]]) 12:21, 6 April 2025 (EDT)
:{{Reply to| Hobbitonya}} great work. I have removed the banner, so you are good to move on to something else. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 07:20, 7 April 2025 (EDT)

== Remediation Project ==

{{reply to|Grlucas}}
I have finished my remedidation project and I am ready for it to be reviewed. '''Article link''': [https://projectmailer.net/pm/The_Mailer_Review/Volume_5,_2011/Piling_On:_Norman_Mailer’s_Utilization_of_Marilyn_Monroe#Works_Cited|Piling On: Norman Mailer's Utilization of Marilyn Monroe]

Thanks,

[[User:MerAtticus|MerAtticus]] ([[User talk:MerAtticus|talk]]) 13:04, 6 April 2025 (EDT)
:{{Reply to| MerAtticus}} good work so far. Please remove wikilinks. Change ' and " to typographical apostrophes and quotation marks. And all red errors at the bottom of the page need to be taken care of. These are likely all from coding errors in your sources. Thanks! —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 07:24, 7 April 2025 (EDT)

{{reply to|Grlucas}}
I have removed the wikilinks, changed to the correct typographic style and updated my sources.
'''Article link''': [https://projectmailer.net/pm/The_Mailer_Review/Volume_5,_2011/Piling_On:_Norman_Mailer’s_Utilization_of_Marilyn_Monroe#Works_Cited|Piling On: Norman Mailer's Utilization of Marilyn Monroe] Thanks, [[User:MerAtticus|MerAtticus]] ([[User talk:MerAtticus|talk]]) 21:55, 7 April 2025 (EDT)

[I forgot to fill out the summary box. I am adding my summary]
:{{Reply to| MerAtticus}} you're getting there! It looks great. You must eliminate all the red errors at the bottom. These appear when there are errors in your citations. Let me know if you need help. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 09:15, 8 April 2025 (EDT)

@{{reply to|Grlucas}} I have tried everything I can think of and I still have harv and sfn no-target errors and harv and sfn multiple-target errors and cs1 uses editors parameter. Do I not include the editor? [[User:MerAtticus|MerAtticus]] ([[User talk:MerAtticus|talk]]) 16:03, 8 April 2025 (EDT)

{{reply to|Grlucas}} I have managed to get rid of two of the red target errors. I am still working on finding the harv sfn multiple target error. Thanks, [[User:MerAtticus|MerAtticus]] ([[User talk:MerAtticus|talk]]) 20:37, 8 April 2025 (EDT)

{{reply to|Grlucas}} I have tried everything i can think of to remove the last red error flag. I had to turn it in. I don't know that else I can do in this situation. I was given citation that did not follow any of the given formats. [[User:MerAtticus|MerAtticus]] ([[User talk:MerAtticus|talk]]) 21:45, 8 April 2025 (EDT)

== Remediation Submission ==

Hello!
Here's my remediated article; [[The_Mailer_Review/Volume_5,_2011/The_Devil's_Party:_Reading_and_Wreaking_Vengeance_in_The_Castle_in_the_Forest|The Devil's Party: Reading and Wreaking Vengeance in ''The Castle in the Forest'']].
Thanks! Please let me know if there's anything I can review or correct.
[[User:Maggiemrogers|Maggiemrogers]] ([[User talk:Maggiemrogers|talk]]) 13:23, 6 April 2025 (EDT)
:{{Reply to| Maggiemrogers}} nice work! Banner removed, so please move on to something else in the volume. Thanks. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 07:39, 7 April 2025 (EDT)

== Vol. 4: Rumors of Grace article remediated ==

I believe I have completed remediation of ''[[The_Mailer_Review/Volume_4,_2010/Rumors_of_Grace:_God-Language_in_Hemingway_and_Mailer|Rumors of Grace: God-Language in Hemingway and Mailer]]'', vol. 4. I was having last-minute trouble with sfn errors for sources without authors, but Justin Kilchenmann helped me out, so I think they are fixed.
:{{Reply to|Sherrilledwards}} You have done a remarkable job—a real Herculean effort! Footnotes should not go in any notes. See those I changed; the others should be changed in the same way. I have done some, but the others have to be fixed, I'm afraid. Thanks! —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 09:20, 8 April 2025 (EDT)

== Remediation of "Inside Norman Mailer ==

Hi Dr. Lucas - I have finished remediating the article, [[The Mailer Review/Volume 4, 2010/Inside Norman Mailer|Inside Norman Mailer]]. Please let me know if I need to make any adjustments. Thank you! [[User:Chelsey.brantley|Chelsey.brantley]] ([[User talk:Chelsey.brantley|talk]]) 18:09, 7 April 2025 (EDT)
:{{Reply to|Chelsey.brantley}} good work! Please help with another article from volume 4. Thanks! —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 09:36, 8 April 2025 (EDT)

== Completed: Norman Mailer: Playboy Magazine ==

I hope I am doing this is right. I have finished remediating my article about Norman Mailer and its in my designated sandbox [https://projectmailer.net/pm/The_Mailer_Review/Volume_5,_2011/Norman_Mailer:_Playboy_Magazine_Heavyweight here.]
If there are any last minute edits, let me know. I got the last of the errors removed yesterday. And I believe we are on the same page with leaving the in-line citations for ''Playboy'' to be as is, since the author didn't put them down in the works cited. [[User:NrmMGA5108|NrmMGA5108]] ([[User talk:NrmMGA5108|talk]]) 20:14, 7 April 2025 (EDT)Nina Mizner
:{{Reply to|NrmMGA5108}} looking good! So, the parenthetical citations still in the article, I'm assuming, are there because of those missing sources? Please check your page numbers; some seem to be off. Thanks. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 10:04, 8 April 2025 (EDT)

== Completed Remediation From Here to Eternity and The Naked and The Dead: Premier to Eternity? ==

Greeting Dr. Lucas,

I have made the adjustment that you mentioned.

I also made additional edits to my short footnotes and noticed that my citations did not link to my references - which has been fixed.

I have tested all of my citations, and they all work.

Here is my article by Alexander Hicks, ''From Here to Eternity and The Naked and The Dead: Premier to Eternity?''

https://projectmailer.net/pm/The_Mailer_Review/Volume_5,_2011/From_Here_to_Eternity_and_The_Naked_and_the_Dead:_Premiere_to_Eternity%3F

Have a great day.
:{{Reply to| THarrell}} Please always sign your talk page posts. Several “quoted items” in the article appear as ‘quoted items’; these must be corrected, please. No spaces or returns should surround {{tl|pg}} calls. Multiple page numbers should look like this <code><nowiki>{{sfn|Moretti|1996|pp=11-14}}</nowiki></code>; note the double <code>pp</code>. There seem to be many typos. I corrected some for you, but you must see to the rest. Thanks. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 10:16, 8 April 2025 (EDT)

:{{Reply to| Grlucas}} Greetings,

Are these the only additional corrections that need to be made? This is different from what you mentioned before.

I just want to be sure that I have hit everything.

Also can you verify what other typos you are seeing, I have ran through this twice.

If something is spelt a certain way, for example "Soljer", I have left it that way. Since it is mentioned like that in the article.
—[[User:THarrell|THarrell]] ([[User talk:THarrell|talk]]) 06:49, 8 April 2025 (EDT)

:{{Reply to| Grlucas}} Greetings,

I have gone through and fixed all of the short footnotes.

I have gone line by line with a ruler to look at any typos, and fixed the words that I found that had a dash in them/needed to be lowercased.

I have also fixed the quotations.

—[[User:THarrell|THarrell]] ([[User talk:THarrell|talk]]) 12:31, 9 April 2025 (EDT)

== Remediation for “Footnote to Death in the Afternoon” ==

Greetings Dr. Lucus,

My article is ready for your review. Thank you.

https://projectmailer.net/pm/The_Mailer_Review/Volume_4,_2010/Mailer%E2%80%99s_%E2%80%9CFootnote_to_Death_in_the_Afternoon%E2%80%9D)
:{{Reply to| KForeman}} it's coming along. Please ''always'' sign your talk page posts. Right up top, there are errors. Please use the real {{tl|pg}}, like all the other articles. Citations need to be fixed. All parenthetical citations must be converted. You still have quite a bit of work to do. All red sections need to be seen to and corrected. Thanks. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 10:20, 8 April 2025 (EDT)

=Remediation of "Cluster Seeds and the Mailer Legacy"=
Hello, Dr. Lucas. I have completed the remediation of [https://projectmailer.net/index.php?title=The_Mailer_Review/Volume_5,_2011/Cluster_Seeds_and_the_Mailer_Legacy&oldid=18200| my article], and it is ready for your review. Thank you!—[[User:ADavis|ADavis]] ([[User talk:ADavis|talk]]) 11:32, 8 April 2025 (EDT)@ADavis
:{{Reply to| ADavis}} got it. I think I check it yesterday and removed the banner then. Please move on to another piece. Thanks. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 17:29, 8 April 2025 (EDT)

== Remediating Article: Mailer, Hemingway, and Boxing Volume 4. ==

Hello Dr. Lucas,

I have completed remediating my article. Here is the link [[The Mailer Review/Volume 4, 2010/Mailer, Hemingway, and Boxing|The Mailer Review: Volume 4: Mailer, Hemingway, Boxing (2010)]] [[User:JBrown|JBrown]] ([[User talk:JBrown|talk]]) 13:01, 8 April 2025 (EDT)JBrown
:{{Reply to|JBrown}} a good start, but all parenthetical citations need to be footnotes. Also, check your headers. Thanks. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 17:29, 8 April 2025 (EDT)

== Remediation for ''Norris Church Mailer'' ==
Dr. Lucas, I have finished up remediating the article [[The Mailer Review/Volume 4, 2010/Norris Church Mailer|Norris Church Mailer]], and it is ready for review. Please let me know if I missed something. Thank you! —[[User:Kamyers|Kamyers]] ([[User talk:Kamyers|talk]]) 13:42, 8 April 2025 (EDT)
:{{reply to|Kamyers}} awesome work! Thank you! —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 17:29, 8 April 2025 (EDT)

== Final Edits Completed and Ready for Review ==

Dr. Lucas, I have completed my assigned remediation article: [[The_Mailer_Review/Volume_4,_2010/Looking_at_the_Past:_Nostalgia_as_Technique_in_The_Naked_and_the_Dead_and_For_Whom_the_Bell_Tolls|Looking at the Past: Nostalgia as Technique in The Naked and the Dead and For Whom the Bell Tolls]]. Please review at your convenience. I enjoyed working on this assignment. I look forward to your suggestions and feedback. All the best, Danielle (DBond007)
:{{Reply to| DBond007}} ok, good work. Please remove all the external links. Links to Wikipedia are not necessary, but if used, they need to be done correctly. There should be no spaces before {{tl|sfn}}. May sure all your ' and " are actually typographical apostrophes and quotation marks. Remove any superfluous spaces and line breaks; these mess up the formatting. Thanks! —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 17:29, 8 April 2025 (EDT)

== Completed the remediation assignment ==

Good evening Dr. Lucas,

I hope I am doing this right. Here is the link for my completed Remediation article: [http://The_Mailer_Review/Volume_4,_2010/Encounters_with_Mailer Encounters with Mailer].

I look forward to reading your feedback.

All the best,

Patrick Riley

== Remediation Project Submission: An Expected Encounter in an Unexpected Place ==

Link:

https://projectmailer.net/pm/The_Mailer_Review/Volume_4,_2010/Norman_Mailer:_An_Expected_Encounter_in_an_Unexpected_Place

Winnie Verna

== E.Mosley ==

Good evening, @Grlucas. I have completed my Remediation Articles[[https://projectmailer.net/pm/The_Mailer_Review/Volume_4,_2010/On_Reading_Mailer_Too_Young]]. The article I had was " On Reading Mailer Too Young Volume 4, 2010

== Kynndra Watson ==

Good Evening, @grlucas. i have completed my Remediation articles: Volume 5: https://projectmailer.net/pm/The_Mailer_Review/Volume_5,_2011/Making_Masculinity_and_Unmaking_Jewishness:_Norman_Mailer%E2%80%99s_Voice_in_Wild_90_and_Beyond_the_Law and Volume 4: https://projectmailer.net/pm/The_Mailer_Review/Volume_4,_2010/Mailer,_Hemingway,_and_the_%E2%80%9CReds%E2%80%9D.

Thank you.

== Tribute Remediation ==
Dr. Lucas, I have finished [[The Mailer Review/Volume 5, 2011/Tributes to Norris Church Mailer/What Would Be the Fun of That?|"What Would Be the Fun of That?"]] by Peter Alson.—[[User:JHadaway|JHadaway]] ([[User talk:JHadaway|talk]]) 09:33, 9 April 2025 (EDT)

== “Remembering Norris Church” Tribute Remediation ==
Dr. Lucas, I have finished [[The Mailer Review/Volume 5, 2011/Tributes to Norris Church Mailer/Remembering Norris Church|“Remembering Norris Church”]] by John Bowers.—[[User:JHadaway|JHadaway]] ([[User talk:JHadaway|talk]]) 16:17, 9 April 2025 (EDT)

The Mailer Review/Volume 5, 2011/Tributes to Norris Church Mailer/Remembering Norris Church

2025-04-09T20:13:13Z

JHadaway: Corrected punctuation in parentheses

{{DISPLAYTITLE:{{BASEPAGENAME}}/{{SUBPAGENAME}}}}
{{MR05}}
{{Working}}

{{Byline|last=Bowers |first=John |url= }}
{{dc|dc=N|orris came along late in my life,}} but she represented the kind of person I’ve known about for most of my life. She was that tough Southern girl that is often cloaked in the sunshine of beauty and affability. She could change a tire on the highway at three in the morning, I bet, as well as strut down a runway in a beauty parade. She knew how to bat her eyes. What drew my everlasting admiration to her, though, was that she knew where she came from, who she was, and most impressively had an instinctive sympathy for those from a hard scrapple background or from a similar inherited place where one has to fight for every inch of ground to get ahead. In her journey she kept inside her what Hemingway so apply called “a built-in shit detector.” She was nobody’s fool. She’d give until there was no more to give but no one was ever going to walk over her.

I come from the hills of East Tennessee and that fact, and all it means, never leaves me for a second (although I try at times). Norris of course came from the Ozarks. We met at a small get together in an apartment that Mike Lennon and his wife Donna were briefly ensconced in Lower Manhattan. I remember the moment as if it were last night. She was seated on a lounge chair, long legs crossed lady-like, eyes raised shyly, as her husband Norman Mailer sat in great bonhomie and authority a short distance away, showing some stiffness of legs and not able to spring up as of yore. Conversation swirled around gossip, drinks, and possibly politics. Before long, though, Norris and I began the necessary. We had to trade facts to gauge how hillbilly Southern we were, a ritual similar to Armenians far from home who must share their bona fides to set the record straight. We talked about fried chicken, biscuits and gravy, fat back and green beans. We tested each other on Baptist hymns, sang a good one together (very quietly) and shared the info that we both had been submerged in baptism. Not many you meet in a {{pg|28|29}} literary gathering in the Big Apple have “gone under” in such a ritual at puberty. It's not exactly a Bar Mitzvah. We confirmed that we had given up the faith but would never forget the power it had once held over us. Norman was in a good social form that evening, attentive, not a bone to pick with anyone, generous, a little shy himself (if that can be imagined), and I thought, what a pair the two of them make! How do they make it work? I found out when I read ''A Ticket to the Circus''.

Norris and I traded emails after that evening. I began to think of her as “Barbara” as she was before she reinvented herself as “Norris” in New York. We saw each other at Wilkes University where she came to be honored, and we spoke occasionally by phone. When she came down with the brutality of cancer I was aware of how it took away the heretofore soft contours of her body, but a minute later forgot it. Really I did. She remained her radiant self through the greatest of pain, as if, in fact, this disability was either a joke or inconvenience she’d soon get rid of. I held that thought, up until I heard that she’d, as they say, “passed away.” Among the healthy and the lame, she was the most alive person I’d ever met. We emailed each other about work and life a few days before the end. She had a showing of her designed jewelry where my wife was lucky enough to pick up a piece. There was a book party in a palatial Upper East Side apartment that looked out over the lights of Manhattan in which she read from her latest work. She came to a dinner party at our place as if the last thought in her head was that another would not follow. So talented she was, in so many fields—acting, modeling, writing, painting, and on and on. She certainly complemented her multi-talented husband in that regard.

Right now her number is in my address book. I’m not going to take it out. I want to feel I could call her up any time and she would answer.

{{Review}}
{{DEFAULTSORT:Remembering Norris Church}}
[[Category:Tributes (MR)]]

The Mailer Review/Volume 5, 2011/Tributes to Norris Church Mailer/Remembering Norris Church

2025-04-09T20:11:04Z

JHadaway:

{{DISPLAYTITLE:{{BASEPAGENAME}}/{{SUBPAGENAME}}}}
{{MR05}}
{{Working}}

{{Byline|last=Bowers |first=John |url= }}
{{dc|dc=N|orris came along late in my life,}} but she represented the kind of person I’ve known about for most of my life. She was that tough Southern girl that is often cloaked in the sunshine of beauty and affability. She could change a tire on the highway at three in the morning, I bet, as well as strut down a runway in a beauty parade. She knew how to bat her eyes. What drew my everlasting admiration to her, though, was that she knew where she came from, who she was, and most impressively had an instinctive sympathy for those from a hard scrapple background or from a similar inherited place where one has to fight for every inch of ground to get ahead. In her journey she kept inside her what Hemingway so apply called “a built-in shit detector.” She was nobody’s fool. She’d give until there was no more to give but no one was ever going to walk over her.

I come from the hills of East Tennessee and that fact, and all it means, never leaves me for a second (although I try at times.) Norris of course came from the Ozarks. We met at a small get together in an apartment that Mike Lennon and his wife Donna were briefly ensconced in Lower Manhattan. I remember the moment as if it were last night. She was seated on a lounge chair, long legs crossed lady-like, eyes raised shyly, as her husband Norman Mailer sat in great bonhomie and authority a short distance away, showing some stiffness of legs and not able to spring up as of yore. Conversation swirled around gossip, drinks, and possibly politics. Before long, though, Norris and I began the necessary. We had to trade facts to gauge how hillbilly Southern we were, a ritual similar to Armenians far from home who must share their bona fides to set the record straight. We talked about fried chicken, biscuits and gravy, fat back and green beans. We tested each other on Baptist hymns, sang a good one together (very quietly) and shared the info that we both had been submerged in baptism. Not many you meet in a {{pg|28|29}} literary gathering in the Big Apple have “gone under” in such a ritual at puberty. It's not exactly a Bar Mitzvah. We confirmed that we had given up the faith but would never forget the power it had once held over us. Norman was in a good social form that evening, attentive, not a bone to pick with anyone, generous, a little shy himself (if that can be imagined), and I thought, what a pair the two of them make! How do they make it work? I found out when I read ''A Ticket to the Circus''.

Norris and I traded emails after that evening. I began to think of her as “Barbara” as she was before she reinvented herself as “Norris” in New York. We saw each other at Wilkes University where she came to be honored, and we spoke occasionally by phone. When she came down with the brutality of cancer I was aware of how it took away the heretofore soft contours of her body, but a minute later forgot it. Really I did. She remained her radiant self through the greatest of pain, as if, in fact, this disability was either a joke or inconvenience she’d soon get rid of. I held that thought, up until I heard that she’d, as they say, “passed away.” Among the healthy and the lame, she was the most alive person I’d ever met. We emailed each other about work and life a few days before the end. She had a showing of her designed jewelry where my wife was lucky enough to pick up a piece. There was a book party in a palatial Upper East Side apartment that looked out over the lights of Manhattan in which she read from her latest work. She came to a dinner party at our place as if the last thought in her head was that another would not follow. So talented she was, in so many fields—acting, modeling, writing, painting, and on and on. She certainly complemented her multi-talented husband in that regard.

Right now her number is in my address book. I’m not going to take it out. I want to feel I could call her up any time and she would answer.

{{Review}}
{{DEFAULTSORT:Remembering Norris Church}}
[[Category:Tributes (MR)]]

The Mailer Review/Volume 5, 2011/Tributes to Norris Church Mailer/Remembering Norris Church

2025-04-09T20:10:19Z

JHadaway: Added category

{{DISPLAYTITLE:{{BASEPAGENAME}}/{{SUBPAGENAME}}}}
{{MR05}}
{{Working}}

{{Byline|last=Bowers |first=John |url= }}
{{dc|dc=N|orris came along late in my life,}}but she represented the kind of person I’ve known about for most of my life. She was that tough Southern girl that is often cloaked in the sunshine of beauty and affability. She could change a tire on the highway at three in the morning, I bet, as well as strut down a runway in a beauty parade. She knew how to bat her eyes. What drew my everlasting admiration to her, though, was that she knew where she came from, who she was, and most impressively had an instinctive sympathy for those from a hard scrapple background or from a similar inherited place where one has to fight for every inch of ground to get ahead. In her journey she kept inside her what Hemingway so apply called “a built-in shit detector.” She was nobody’s fool. She’d give until there was no more to give but no one was ever going to walk over her.

I come from the hills of East Tennessee and that fact, and all it means, never leaves me for a second (although I try at times.) Norris of course came from the Ozarks. We met at a small get together in an apartment that Mike Lennon and his wife Donna were briefly ensconced in Lower Manhattan. I remember the moment as if it were last night. She was seated on a lounge chair, long legs crossed lady-like, eyes raised shyly, as her husband Norman Mailer sat in great bonhomie and authority a short distance away, showing some stiffness of legs and not able to spring up as of yore. Conversation swirled around gossip, drinks, and possibly politics. Before long, though, Norris and I began the necessary. We had to trade facts to gauge how hillbilly Southern we were, a ritual similar to Armenians far from home who must share their bona fides to set the record straight. We talked about fried chicken, biscuits and gravy, fat back and green beans. We tested each other on Baptist hymns, sang a good one together (very quietly) and shared the info that we both had been submerged in baptism. Not many you meet in a {{pg|28|29}} literary gathering in the Big Apple have “gone under” in such a ritual at puberty. It's not exactly a Bar Mitzvah. We confirmed that we had given up the faith but would never forget the power it had once held over us. Norman was in a good social form that evening, attentive, not a bone to pick with anyone, generous, a little shy himself (if that can be imagined), and I thought, what a pair the two of them make! How do they make it work? I found out when I read ''A Ticket to the Circus''.

Norris and I traded emails after that evening. I began to think of her as “Barbara” as she was before she reinvented herself as “Norris” in New York. We saw each other at Wilkes University where she came to be honored, and we spoke occasionally by phone. When she came down with the brutality of cancer I was aware of how it took away the heretofore soft contours of her body, but a minute later forgot it. Really I did. She remained her radiant self through the greatest of pain, as if, in fact, this disability was either a joke or inconvenience she’d soon get rid of. I held that thought, up until I heard that she’d, as they say, “passed away.” Among the healthy and the lame, she was the most alive person I’d ever met. We emailed each other about work and life a few days before the end. She had a showing of her designed jewelry where my wife was lucky enough to pick up a piece. There was a book party in a palatial Upper East Side apartment that looked out over the lights of Manhattan in which she read from her latest work. She came to a dinner party at our place as if the last thought in her head was that another would not follow. So talented she was, in so many fields—acting, modeling, writing, painting, and on and on. She certainly complemented her multi-talented husband in that regard.

Right now her number is in my address book. I’m not going to take it out. I want to feel I could call her up any time and she would answer.

{{Review}}
{{DEFAULTSORT:Remembering Norris Church}}
[[Category:Tributes (MR)]]

The Mailer Review/Volume 5, 2011/Tributes to Norris Church Mailer/Remembering Norris Church

2025-04-09T20:08:47Z

JHadaway: Added body

{{DISPLAYTITLE:{{BASEPAGENAME}}/{{SUBPAGENAME}}}}
{{MR05}}
{{Working}}

{{Byline|last=Bowers |first=John |url= }}
{{dc|dc=N|orris came along late in my life,}}but she represented the kind of person I’ve known about for most of my life. She was that tough Southern girl that is often cloaked in the sunshine of beauty and affability. She could change a tire on the highway at three in the morning, I bet, as well as strut down a runway in a beauty parade. She knew how to bat her eyes. What drew my everlasting admiration to her, though, was that she knew where she came from, who she was, and most impressively had an instinctive sympathy for those from a hard scrapple background or from a similar inherited place where one has to fight for every inch of ground to get ahead. In her journey she kept inside her what Hemingway so apply called “a built-in shit detector.” She was nobody’s fool. She’d give until there was no more to give but no one was ever going to walk over her.

I come from the hills of East Tennessee and that fact, and all it means, never leaves me for a second (although I try at times.) Norris of course came from the Ozarks. We met at a small get together in an apartment that Mike Lennon and his wife Donna were briefly ensconced in Lower Manhattan. I remember the moment as if it were last night. She was seated on a lounge chair, long legs crossed lady-like, eyes raised shyly, as her husband Norman Mailer sat in great bonhomie and authority a short distance away, showing some stiffness of legs and not able to spring up as of yore. Conversation swirled around gossip, drinks, and possibly politics. Before long, though, Norris and I began the necessary. We had to trade facts to gauge how hillbilly Southern we were, a ritual similar to Armenians far from home who must share their bona fides to set the record straight. We talked about fried chicken, biscuits and gravy, fat back and green beans. We tested each other on Baptist hymns, sang a good one together (very quietly) and shared the info that we both had been submerged in baptism. Not many you meet in a {{pg|28|29}} literary gathering in the Big Apple have “gone under” in such a ritual at puberty. It's not exactly a Bar Mitzvah. We confirmed that we had given up the faith but would never forget the power it had once held over us. Norman was in a good social form that evening, attentive, not a bone to pick with anyone, generous, a little shy himself (if that can be imagined), and I thought, what a pair the two of them make! How do they make it work? I found out when I read ''A Ticket to the Circus''.

Norris and I traded emails after that evening. I began to think of her as “Barbara” as she was before she reinvented herself as “Norris” in New York. We saw each other at Wilkes University where she came to be honored, and we spoke occasionally by phone. When she came down with the brutality of cancer I was aware of how it took away the heretofore soft contours of her body, but a minute later forgot it. Really I did. She remained her radiant self through the greatest of pain, as if, in fact, this disability was either a joke or inconvenience she’d soon get rid of. I held that thought, up until I heard that she’d, as they say, “passed away.” Among the healthy and the lame, she was the most alive person I’d ever met. We emailed each other about work and life a few days before the end. She had a showing of her designed jewelry where my wife was lucky enough to pick up a piece. There was a book party in a palatial Upper East Side apartment that looked out over the lights of Manhattan in which she read from her latest work. She came to a dinner party at our place as if the last thought in her head was that another would not follow. So talented she was, in so many fields—acting, modeling, writing, painting, and on and on. She certainly complemented her multi-talented husband in that regard.

Right now her number is in my address book. I’m not going to take it out. I want to feel I could call her up any time and she would answer.

The Mailer Review/Volume 5, 2011/Tributes to Norris Church Mailer/Remembering Norris Church

2025-04-09T19:54:14Z

JHadaway: Started working

{{DISPLAYTITLE:{{BASEPAGENAME}}/{{SUBPAGENAME}}}}
{{MR05}}
{{Working}}

{{Byline|last=Bowers |first=John |url= }}
{{dc|dc=N|orris came along late in my life,}}

The Mailer Review/Volume 4, 2010/Mailer, Hemingway, and the “Reds”

2025-04-09T17:39:33Z

JHadaway: Changed two citations from "Hemigway" to "Hemingway" to get rid of errors

{{DISPLAYTITLE:{{BASEPAGENAME}}/{{SUBPAGENAME}}}}
{{Working}}
{{MR04}}
{{Byline|last=Peppard|first=Victor|abstract=Ernest Hemingway and Norman Mailer both wrote fiction and journalism that deal with Russians (“Reds”). In Ernest Hemingway’s ''For Whom the Bell Tolls'' and Norman Mailer’s Harlot’s Ghost and Oswald’s Tale, Reds or communists of different types, stripes, and nationalities appear in various significant roles and guises.|url=https://projectmailer.net/pm/Victor_Peppard}}|
{{dc|dc=E|rnest Hemingway and Norman Mailer}} both wrote fiction and journalisms that deal with what I am calling here the “Reds.” In Hemingway’s ''For Whom the Bell Tolls'' and in Mailer’s ''Harlot’s Ghost'' and ''Oswald’s Tale'' Reds or communists of different types, stripes, and nationalities appear in various significant roles and guises. There are several questions I would like to address, especially the following: What is it that attracted Hemingway and Mailer to write about the Reds? Even if they depict very different historical periods, can we still discern certain commonalities in their approaches to and treatment of the Reds? Further, what is the dominant image of them in the works of Hemingway and Mailer?

The fact that Hemingway and Mailer share a number of common interests and traits is no secret. Both artists dealt extensively and importantly with the horrors of war and with the ways in which people cope with war and conduct themselves in it. Both writers were preoccupied (some might even say obsessed with) macho tests of manhood that in the case of Hemingway involved balls, battles, boxing, bulls, and hunting and fishing. For Mailer balls were also always in play, but he was more of a boxer than a bullfighter, and he was always a battler whatever the arena. A corollary to this is their fascination with the stars and celebrities of American pop culture and with their own stardom and celebrity as well.

Hemingway and Mailer were deeply in love with language, and not just English, as we see in the former’s ''For Whom the Bell Tolls'', which exudes his fondness for Spanish. Mailer studied German assiduously as preparation for writing ''The Castle in the Forest'', and he also worked with Russian in connection with his trips to the Soviet Union, as is evident in ''Harlot’s Ghost'',

{{pg|229|230}}

''Oswald’s Tale'', and ''Castle in the Forest''. Their stylistic innovations, well celebrated in Hemingway but not yet fully recognized in Mailer, are no doubt related to this love of language that they shared. Further, neither writer hesitated to tackle the burning issues of the day, in and out of their fiction.
Thus, it is no wonder they both engaged with the two most controversial and problematic “isms” of their century, Communism and Fascism.

Before examining ''For Whom the Bell Tolls'' it is instructive briefly to consider Hemingway’s relationship to the Spanish Civil War, which he witnessed primarily as a journalist who wrote about the conflict. William Braasch Watson has shown how, in his attitude toward this war, Hemingway moved from a position of complete abhorrence of all war to an ardent supporter of the Republican / Loyalist / Red or Communist cause against the Fascists /Falangists / Francoists, largely under the influence of Jorvis Ivens, an avid Communist and member of the Comintern.{{sfn|Watson|1992|p=37-57}} Watson comes to the conclusion that in his enthusiasm for the Comintern / Communist cause
Hemingway distorted the truth:

<blockquote>He suppressed certain realities he knew to be true, and he promoted as realities things he must have known to be false, all in the name of winning a war whose character the Communists had largely defined. In this respect Hemingway had become an effective propagandist . . . . He genuinely admired the Communists for their commitment and for their proven ability to organize and fight the war. But partly too his transformation was the product of a conscious effort on the part of the Communists to gain his confidence and to enlist his support. {{sfn|Watson|1992|p=53}}</blockquote>

It should be stressed that Watson is writing about Hemingway’s journalism and not his fiction. Naturally, one has to ask whether in ''For Whom the Bell Tolls'' Hemingway continues to portray the Spanish Civil War in the same fashion as Watson describes. I believe that in the novel Hemingway’s treatment of the Reds does indeed include a measure of admiration, but it also contains a much fuller depiction of them and their conduct of the war that includes both direct and indirect condemnation of certain communist actors and their acts. Let me quickly say that in ''For Whom the Bell Tolls,'' despite an open sympathy for the Loyalist-Red cause, Hemingway complicates the actual conduct of the war by both sides, as well as the associated moral

{{pg|230|231}}

questions, to a degree that renders any pat conclusions about these matters more than problematic.

What Hemingway describes in ''For Whom the Bell Tolls'' has some interesting correspondences with the depiction of the Russian civil war by Russian writers such as Isaac Babel, Vasily Grossman, Vsevolod Ivanov, Nikolai Nikitin, Boris Pil’niak, and Andrei Platonov in their works of the early and mid 1920s and, in the case of Grossman, the early 1930s. These Russian authors portray the atrocities of the Reds, Whites, Greens, anarchists such as Makhno, and assorted marauding bands in graphic scenes of brutality, cruelty, and above all violence. Frequently, the various principals of the war mostly, but not just the Reds and Whites—alternate in taking over towns and villages, and it is usually impossible to distinguish their violent methods from one another. Furthermore, the local villagers and townsfolk are invariably clueless about the great issues of ideology and policy history has associated with the Russian Civil War, and they struggle to understand what is happening to and around them in terms of the cultural practices the past has given them. At the same time, the Russian fiction of this period, such as Babel’s stories in ''Red Cavalry'' (''Konarmiia''), 1926, often exhibit a certain “revolutionary romanticism” that treats the Civil War not so much as a struggle rooted in politics or ideology but as a great force of nature sweeping across the land.

I mention this because Hemingway read some of these Russian authors, including Platonov, and because his treatment of the Spanish Civil War has, as I am claiming, significant points of contact with their work. For example, in ''For Whom the Bell Tolls'' the Reds’ takeover of a town, so brutally led by Pablo and so eloquently described by Pilar, is followed three days later by a fascist takeover that was even worse{{sfn|Hemingway|1940|p=129}}. Judging by both Hemingway and the Russian authors mentioned here, these horrific cyclical reigns the combatants inflict on towns, villages, and cities appear to be an inevitable phenomenon of any civil war.

The tendency throughout ''For Whom the Bell Tolls'', as we see in the case of the town just mentioned, that Robert A. Martin has identified as Ronda in Malaga Province {{sfn|Martin|1992|p=63}} is for each of the sides to match or exceed each other in the commission of atrocities. For instance, the beheading of Sordo and his men that the fascist Lt. Burrendo orders is followed shortly by Pablo’s execution of several men he has recruited to help with the blowing up of the bridge. When reflecting on Pilar’s story, Robert Jordan admits to himself

{{pg|231|232}}

that he always knew that the side he was fighting for behaved as she described and that however much he hates this “that damned woman made me see it
as though I had been there”{{sfn|Martin|1992|p=135}}.

In a number of places in ''For Whom the Bell Tolls'' it is clear that the loyalists are executing non-fascists, perhaps most dramatically in the case of Don Guillermo, who is killed, as H. R. Stoneback points out, because of his loyalty to his wife whose religiosity was taken as proof she is a fascist{{sfn|Stoneback|1992|p=106}}. Robert Jordan wonders at times about the real commitment of his erstwhile enemies to the fascist cause, in particular that of a boy he has killed in battle{{sfn|Hemingway|1940|p=304}}. Here Jordan concludes that he simply has to kill whether it is wrong or not.

Robert Jordan’s band of battlers for the Republic, not unlike many of the characters in Russian fiction of the 1920s, are shown at various levels of commitment to and belief in the cause. Pilar is no doubt the most avid devotee
of the new red atheism, as we see when she declares that “before we had religion and other nonsense. Now for everyone there should be someone to whom one can speak frankly” {{sfn|Hemingway|1940|p=89}}. Yet even Pilar can waver in her faith in atheism as when she says, “There probably still is God after all, although we have abolished him” {{sfn|Hemingway|1940|p=88}}. For all of its many ironies, I do not see a great deal of humor in ''For Whom the Bell Tolls'', but this example is surely an exception. It is also a most effective way to capture the ambivalence the Spanish Reds experience as they try out their newfound atheism.

Pablo is someone whose beliefs, if any, are most mercurial and murky, but at one point he invokes God and the Virgen(sic). This prompts Pilar, acting in her role as law giver, to rebuke him for talking that way {{sfn|Hemingway|1940|p=90}}. In moments of crisis, as when Joaquín prays to the Virgin Mary at death, and when Maria prays for Robert Jordan’s safety, Republicans of various degrees of redness tend to revert back to their traditional cultural practices.

The case of Robert Jordan is special for a number of reasons, primarily of course because he is an American who is taking orders from a Soviet general, but also because he is a fascinating combination of stubborn commitment to what he sees as his duty and his far ranging and sensitive introspection and contemplation. In the early passages of the novel Jordan might be easily mistaken for a hero straight out of Soviet Socialist Realism—not just because he agrees to the highly questionable orders of Soviet General Golz, but because his virtues are so strong, and his motives are so pure. Over the course of the novel, however, Robert Jordan grows ever richer, more complex and

{{pg|232|233}}

elusive as a character. In this sense, ''For Whom the Bell Tolls'' is a concentrated case of a ''Bildungsroman'' that covers not an extended period of maturation but only about seventy hours, the last hours of Jordan’s life. In the end, Jordan, for all of his attachment to the Republican cause, tells himself that he is “not a red Marxist” and not to “kid yourself with too many dialectics"{{sfn|Hemingway|1940|p=305}}. It is here that he undergoes the revelation that his love for Maria is the most important thing in his life and that such love is indeed the most important part of life. I would claim also (allowing for the fact that there were indeed genuine American communists such as Jorvis Ivens) that Jordan’s “non-party” commitment to the Red/Republican cause is characteristically American in his lack of interest in the specifics of its ideology.

Hemingway’s Soviet Russian characters play important parts in ''For Whom the Bell Tolls'' and they are problematic in a number of ways and on a number of levels. First, the names of General Golz and the journalist Karkov look as though they are real Russian names, but they are not. This is my own (virtual native speaker’s) reaction to these surnames that I have confirmed with actual native speakers of Russian. Kashkin, however, could be a genuine Russian family name. He is a double to Jordan, as they are both explosives experts. Kashkin’s lack of resolve reflects the side of Robert Jordan that is sometimes subject to indecisiveness. The link between the fates of these two is made explicit when we learn that Robert Jordan killed the wounded Kashkin in an act of mercy so that Kashkin would not be tortured by the fascists. Kashkin’s demise is also a foreshadowing of Jordan’s who, as he lies with a broken left thigh, fights off the temptation to take his own life in order to avoid the sort of torture by the fascists he has spared Kashkin.

General Golz has formulated a strategy for winning a battle with the fascists that includes the plan to blow up the bridge, the central, culminating act toward which the plot of ''For Whom the Bell Tolls'' inexorably moves. This plan, however, is fraught with danger for Robert Jordan and the others who are supposed to carry it out. If Golz’s indifference to the likely loss of life on the part of those carrying out his orders is on a certain level contemptible, it is more than convincing as a motivation for a general bent on victory at all costs. In one of the many passages of the novel that are so psychologically persuasive, Golz watches the Republican planes take off for battle. Golz, has learned from Robert Jordan via Andrés that the surprise attack he had conceived is no longer a surprise and that “it would be one famous balls up

{{pg|233|234}}

more” {{sfn|Hemingway|1940|p=429}} and allows himself to bask in the false glow of what might have been.

<blockquote>All he heard was the roar of the planes and he thought, now, maybe this time, listen to them come, maybe the bombers will blow them all off, maybe we will get a break-though, maybe he will get the reserves he asked for, maybe this is it, maybe this is the time.{{sfn|Hemingway|1940|p=430}}</blockquote>

Although this passage openly broaches the fact that the Loyalist side made strategic mistakes, it is nothing like an overall critique of its conduct of the
war. A far more damning instance that lays bare the cynical, opportunistic
side of the International / Red / Republican project in the Spanish Civil War
is found in the confrontation between the Soviet journalist Karkov and
André Marty, the Frenchman who is a member of the Comintern. As Robert A. Martin shows, Karkov is drawn on the model of Stalin’s personal journalist Koltsov, whereas Marty, also an actual historical figure, retains his own name in the novel{{sfn|Martin|1992|p=62}}. Marty, for whom, as Martin writes, Hemingway had “an intense personal animosity” {{sfn|Martin|1992|p=61}} appears in ''For Whom the Bell Tolls'' as a paranoid, deranged careerist who is eager and willing to have executed anyone on his own side about whom he has the least suspicion. He is the embodiment of the worst side of the Comintern’s involvement in the Spanish Civil War. He is also a prescient if unintentional portrait of many of Stalin’s salient character traits, especially in his obsession with rooting out imaginary enemies.

Karkov-Koltsov, like Hemingway, detests Marty, who for all of his misdeeds has somehow remained untouchable, and he is determined to find Marty’s “weakness” and expose it{{sfn|Hemingway|1940|p=418}}. When Karkov-Kolstsov forces Marty to release unharmed Gomez and Andrés, who have brought the news from Robert Jordan that the fascists can no longer be subject to a surprise attack, he is asserting his role as the chief do-gooder of the Soviet contingent. Hemingway draws him as the righteous one who uses his privileged status as journalist and Stalin’s right-hand man to make things right in both Spain and the Soviet Union. I have to say that I find this portrait of Karkov-Koltsov to be naïve at best. It is the one place in the novel where Hemingway comes closest to the realm of Socialist Realism, where the heroes
are all too good and too true to the cause to be true.

{{pg|234|235}}

Lest anyone think I am about to attempt a deconstruction of ''For Whom the Bell Tolls'', let me say that whatever its minor faults may be I find the novel to be a work of real genius. (I will let specialists in American literature continue their battle over its rank among Hemingway’s and America’s great novels.) In addition to this multi-leveled novel’s masterfully constructed plot and its superb development of a whole range of disparate characters, several of whom are imbued with the kinds of mythic qualities Robert E. Gajdusek attributes to them{{sfn|Gajdusek|1992|p=133-30}}, I find that Hemingway’s use of Spanish is both innovative and effective. Although he translates many of the Spanish passages, he lets others stand in the original, trusting the reader who does not know the language to deduce the meaning from the context. Furthermore, Hemingway’s use of Spanish phraseology in English, as in “the woman of Pablo,” and “What passes with thee?” and “thou askest” creates a kind of linguistic estrangement, a kind of “Inglespañol” that effectively conveys the Spanish speaking milieu of the novel as well as the point of view of the Spanish speaking hero Robert Jordan, who is a Spanish instructor at the University Montana in Missoula.

Much more could be said about language and style here, but I will add only one more comment. As Thomas E. Gould demonstrates, the American linguistic Puritanism of the
1930s would not permit Hemingway to use the obscenities his characters spoke in, nor would it permit explicit description of sexual acts{{sfn|Gould|1992|p=67-81}}. This last prohibition might be construed to have had one positive outcome with respect to Hemingway’s description of the love making of Robert Jordan and Maria, because rather than describing their actions directly Hemingway uses a rich repertoire of metaphors. Hemingway’s depiction of the third and final time Jordan and Maria make love, when together they reach “la gloria,” is highly original and moving.

<blockquote>There is no other one but one now, one, going now, rising now, sailing now, leaving now, wheeling now, soaring now, away now, all the way now, all of all the way now, one and one is one, is one, is one, is one ...is one in goodness, is one to cherish, is one now on earth with elbows against the cut and slept-on branches of the pine tree with the smell of the pine boughs and the night; to earth conclusively now, and with the morning of the day to come.{{sfn|Hemingway|1940|p=379}}</blockquote>

{{pg|235|236}}

I find this passage doubly noteworthy because its rhythmic, flowing, repetitive intonations are so unlike the straight-forward, gruff and blunt style Hemingway often employs. Here Hemingway also evokes the bond between nature and the characters, especially Robert Jordan, that he develops throughout the novel.

Over the course of ''For Whom the Bell Tolls'' we learn that not only do both sides commit the same atrocities on each other, but that they both pray to the same Virgin Mary. We further see that participants on both sides are appalled by the war itself. Agustin, who is one of the several mouthpieces in the novel for the senselessness of war says, “In this war there is an idiocy without bounds” {{sfn|Hemingway|1940|p=94}}.The fascist Lt. Burrendo comes to a similar conclusion, but his statement is redolent of unconscious irony and hypocrisy when he says, “what a bad thing war is” just after ordering the beheading of Sordo’s men{{sfn|Hemingway|1940|p=322}}. At the very end of the novel, Robert Jordan has Burrendo in his sights at twenty yards away, a range at which he can hardly miss his target. Jordan does not know of Burrendo’s previous perfidy; he only knows that he is the leader of the detachment of fascists who are hot on his trail and that of his companions—I should say comrades—after the bridge has been blown up. But we see that the author has a plan in mind for the fascist lieutenant to receive a poetically appropriate payback for his deeds. The novel ends before Robert Jordan shoots Burrendo, but Hemingway leaves no doubt that this will happen.

With all of the balancing and matching Hemingway does between the Republican and Fascist sides, we may conclude that with respect to the conduct of the war itself the warring parties are virtually equal in their employment of brutality and violence—including the execution of members of their own side who for whatever reason happened to displease someone such as Marty or Pablo. If there is any “romance” left over in Hemingway’s description of the Spanish Civil War, it has more to do with Spain than with the war. Even given the cynicism, corruption, and brutality of the Reds and Republicans that Hemingway exposes with much(o) gusto,
he is still fundamentally in sympathy with their cause, the preservation of the
Republic, for whatever else they are, they are not fascists.

Here, then, is my segue to Norman Mailer, who also uses Communism and Fascism as measures of each other. In 1984 Mailer made his first trip to Russia and the Soviet Union. This brief visit helped lay the groundwork for a much longer one in which he researched material and interviewed many

{{pg|236|237}}

Soviet citizens in pursuit of material for Oswald’s Tale. I should add here that Mailer had a built in, so to speak, predisposition to visit Russia, since as J.
Michael Lennon, Mailer’s authorized biographer, has pointed out to me, all
four of his grandparents were from there. Mailer wrote an interesting article for the Times of London about the first trip in which he questions Ronald Reagan’s famous declaration that the Soviet Union was “an evil empire” and also makes a plea for a more nuanced and mature relationship on the part of the US with the USSR. In addition to some perceptive observations on the life of the USSR at that time and comparisons with the US, Mailer writes,

<blockquote>American leaders are invariably ready to accept fascism in other
countries and do business with it. Since fascism is the foul disease of the rich when capitalism breaks down, so our leaders can understand it. Communism, however, terrifies the American rich. After all, it is the tyranny of the poor when society breaks up altogether ...It is significant that we have forgiven Nazi Germany for its concentration camps and the million people the Nazis exterminated. We do great business with Germany, but we still do not exculpate the Russians for their gulags.{{sfn|Mailer|1984|p=38}}</blockquote>

One could certainly debate Mailer’s conclusions, the sort of sweeping, summative analysis he was fond of making on the large questions of politics and life, but that is not the object here. My point is that forty-four years after the publication of ''For Whom the Bell Tolls'', for all of the differences in the
contexts and the details, Mailer is using the F-ism to test and partially justify the C-ism in a way that is not unlike Hemingway’s approach to the same question. And like Hemingway, Mailer comes down on the side of the now former Reds partly because they are not fascists.

We can say former Reds now not just because there is no longer a Soviet Union, but also because in Russia the word itself has long since lost the edge it possessed in the early years of the establishment of the Soviet state. Of course, the word remains in such terms as the Red Army, but there it is in a vestigial role, not the provocative one it once had. Similarly, by the time Mailer began visiting the Soviet Union the energy of the 1930s, its frenzied “socialist building" had flowed over the dams of all those hydroelectric plants, flown up through the stacks of all the steel mills, and become frozen in the gray cement of the resulting Soviet concrete colossus. During Harry

{{pg|237|238}}

Hubbard’s visits to Moscow in Harlot’s Ghost, Oswald’s strange stay in the USSR chronicled in Oswald’s Tale, and Mailer’s own visit just mentioned, the overall impression one gets is that of hum-drum routine. The human energy that was voluntarily and forcibly put into the building of the new state’s infrastructure was long since spent. I say forcibly because prisoners of the Gulag were used as laborers on many major and minor projects, including the building of the Moscow Metro, the extensive system of waterways linking Moscow with Leningrad-Petersburg, and the Belomor (White Sea) Canal. The romance associated with the Soviet intervention in Spain, amplified by cultural visits such as the one made by a Basque soccer team in 1937, was also long gone. Even if in the mid 1980s the Soviet Union was still a police state, Stalin’s terror of the 1930s was over as well, and dissidents were, as Mailer wrote in 1984 “ostracized . . . but no longer pulled out of their beds at three in the morning” {{sfn|Mailer|1984|p=36}}.By the mid 1980s, a Soviet version of the middle class had long since formed (at least in the cities) that provided its citizens a stable and predictable way of life. When Hubbard visits the Metropol Hotel in Moscow with “aged parquet that buckled like cheap linoleum when you stepped on it” (Harlot’s, 99), he cannot believe that this is the place where the Bolsheviks gathered before and after the Revolution. “I was furious suddenly at I knew not what. How did these people presume to be our greatest enemy on earth? They did not even have the wherewithal to be evil” {{sfn|Mailer|1991|p=107}}.

Hubbard shortly backs away from this apparently definitive repost to the Reagan doctrine when he reflects that “Communism might well be evil. That is an awesome and terrible thesis, but then the simple can reign over the complex” {{sfn|Mailer|1991|p=103}}. Even the statue of fearsome Felix Dzerzhinsky in Lyubanka Square and the Lyubanka prison itself fail to “stir adrenaline” in Hubbard, who knows he might wind up there{{sfn|Mailer|1991|p=104}}. When he walks out onto Red Square, whose ancient name means Beautiful Square in Russian, Hubbard is struck by his impression that “[e]ven the young had an air of relinquishment that speaks of middle age” {{sfn|Mailer|1991|p=105}}.

Throughout Harlot’s Ghost Mailer describes how the CIA and the KGB engaged in competition with each other in both Latin America, especially Uruguay, and in Berlin. (Mailer also describes the CIA’s and Hubbard’s activities in “Red” Cuba that led to the Bay of Pigs fiasco.) Even with the understanding that over all of this hung the possibility of some overzealous fool on either side making a fatal blunder that could have led to a nuclear exchange, I hope that we have now reached a time when we can look

{{pg|238|239}}

back and say, as I believe Mailer shows us, that all of the hugger-mugger, derring-do, tunnel digging, and various forms of cat and mouse the CIA and KGB engaged in were just so much silliness. We do so of course in the full recognition that much of this nonsense still goes on in the post-Soviet present.

At the end of ''Harlot’s Ghost'', Hubbard, using a fake passport, makes a second visit to Moscow to see whether Harlot has defected from the CIA to the KGB and there by become an American version of the British spy Kim Philby. If this were found to be the case, it would of course be an enormous defeat and embarrassment for the CIA and a personal trauma for Hubbard as well, since Harlot was variously his surrogate father, mentor, and rival in romance. Here Hubbard’s rage at the Soviet Union is in full cry when in contemplation of the bad coffee he will drink in the Metropol, he exclaims that it is an “[a]ccursed country of whole incapacities!”{{sfn|Mailer|1991|p=982}} What I take from ''Harlot’s Ghost'' is that on one hand the US-USSR rivalry is still a good platform for the sort of mystery Mailer is creating in the novel, especially with regard to the fate of Harlot himself that is left unresolved. On the other hand, the middle-aged, middle-class Soviets are no longer really Red anymore, and the system they have created, however formidable militarily, is rent with glaring faults and failures, many of which are in plain sight for all to see.

In Mailer’s description of the pre-revolutionary period in Russia in The Castle in the Forest there is virtually no mention of the Bolsheviks and other revolutionaries, for his interest is all in Nicholas, Alexandra, Rasputin, and
his narrator Dieter’s professed manipulations of events. Had Mailer finished the future Russian project he forecasts in Castle; he would certainly have dealt with the Reds. My own hunch is that he could not have resisted the temptation to give his own characterization of Lenin. Leaving aside such moot points, I find that Mailer, for all of his attention to politics on a national level, is greatly more interested in the inner workings of the personalities of his characters than in their politics.

And the same may be said of Hemingway, who largely on account of his time at the Hotel Gaylord in Madrid, where he met with a number of Soviet participants in the Spanish Civil War on the Republican side, was exceptionally well informed about what was going on in the Soviet Union of the late 1930s. He knew about the purges, especially of the Red Army’s officer corps, including that of Tukachevsky. He also knew buzz words and phrases, such as “liquidated” and “enemy of the people,” and he knew about political

{{pg|239|240}}

commissars. I am not claiming that his Soviet sources revealed to Hemingway everything they knew about the darker sides of Soviet life, particularly Stalin’s terror, for they would have been unlikely to risk being found out as Hemingway’s source of such information since he was known to them as a famous writer and journalist. However, Hemingway, one way or another did crack some of the Soviets’ seamier secrets, as we see in Robert Jordan’s ruminations on the fate of the Russian poet Mayakovsky who, according to Jordan, was guilty of the sin of Bohemianism, but now that he is dead, he is a “saint” {{sfn|Hemingway|1940|p=164}}. I understand this to mean that Hemingway was concerned about the fates of Soviet Russian writers and that Jordan’s irony shows that he understood they were subject to the vagaries of the state’s ever shifting attitudes toward them. I have to say here parenthetically that among the writers of his time Mayakovsky was certainly the reddest of them all, and his leftist proclivities outlasted even those of the regime itself. For all of Robert Jordan’s political awareness and involvement, he is no party’s man, and ultimately, we judge him not on his politics but on his character. Likewise, I believe that we should judge Hemingway by the character of his prose and not his politics.

It seems clear that the red connections of Hemingway and Mailer are sometimes linked with their interest in things Russian and sometimes not.
Moreover, both writers are bound up with Russian literature in a number of substantial, one might even say formative ways. To put it briefly, Hemingway
was clearly well read in Chekhov and he also read authors of the Soviet period. As Clarence Brown points out, Hemingway’s praise of Andrei Platonov to Soviet journalists helped spur the Soviets to resume publication of this writer of exceptional and original talent{{sfn|Brown|1993|p=116}}. It was during the 1960s that Hemingway experienced a surge of popularity among Russian readers. Indeed, I remember vividly a young man I met in Kiev in 1969 who had literally read all of Hemingway that was available in Russian translation at that time and who knew by heart the plots of many of his stories and novels. There is not space here adequately to describe what voracious readers of fiction Russians are except to say that they—from professional intellectuals to professional bus drivers—often know well not just the “classics” of their own literature but those of world literature, including of course Hemingway. Furthermore, some of the Russian writers who are often associated with a loose grouping from the 1960s called “Young Prose,” for example Yury Kazakov, show the unmistakable hand of Hemingway in their manner of writing. So

{{pg|240|241}}

we see that the relations between Hemingway and Russian writers form a two-way street.

I have made a case for what I consider to be Norman Mailer’s seminal relationship with Russian literature in the 2009 edition of ''The Mailer Review'' {{sfn|Peppard|2009|p=173-211}}, and some of his best-known works, such as ''An American Dream'', have been translated into Russian. A more thorough investigation of his reception in Russia, however, remains to be done.

==Citations==
{{Reflist}}

===Works Cited===

{{Refbegin}}

* {{cite book |last=Babel |first=Isaac |date=2002 |title=The Complete Works of Isaac Babel. |url= |location=New York, NY |publisher=Norton |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |ref=harv }}
* {{cite book |last=Brown |first=Clarence |date=1993 |title=The Viking Portable Twentieth-Century Russian Reader |url= |location=New York, NY |publisher=Penguin Books |pages=116 |isbn= |author-link= |ref=harv }}
* {{cite journal |last=Gajdusek |first=Robert E. |title=Pilar’s Tale: The Myth and the Message |url= |journal=Blowing the Bridge: Essays on Hemingway and For Whom the Bell Tolls. |volume= |issue= |date=1992 |pages=113-30 |access-date= |ref=harv }}
* {{cite book |last=Gould |first=Thomas E. |date=1992 |title=.“A Tiny Operation with Great Effect: Authorial Revision and Editorial Emasculation in the Manuscript of Hemingway’s For Whom the Bell Tolls.” |url= |location=New York |publisher= Greenwood Press |pages=67-81 |isbn= |author-link= |ref=harv }}
* {{cite book |last=Hemingway |first=Ernest |date=1940 |title=For Whom the Bell Tolls |url= |location=New York |publisher=Charles Scribner’s Sons |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |ref=harv }}
* {{cite book |last=Mailer |first=Norman |date=2007 |title=The Castle in the Forest |url= |location=New York |publisher=Random House |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |ref=harv }}
* {{cite book |last=Mailer |first=Norman |date=1991 |title=Harlot’s Ghost |url= |location=New York |publisher=Random House |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |ref=harv }}
* {{cite magazine |last=Mailer |first=Norman |date= 4 Nov 1984 |title=Mailer in Moscow. |url= |magazine=The Sunday Times Magazine |location= |publisher= |access-date=}}
* {{cite book |last=Mailer |first=Norman |date=1995 |title=Oswald’s Tale: An American Mystery |url= |location=New York |publisher=Random House |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |ref=harv }}
* {{cite journal |last=Martin |first=Robert A. |title=. “Hemingway’s For Whom the Bell Tolls: Fact into Fiction.” |url= |journal=Blowing the Bridge:Essays on Hemingway and For Whom the Bell Tolls. |volume= |issue= |date=1992 |pages=59-66 |access-date= |ref=harv }}
* {{cite journal |last=Peppard |first=Victor |title=.“Norman Mailer in the Light of Russian Literature.” |url= |journal=The Mailer Review |volume=3.1 |issue= |date=2009 |pages=173-211 |access-date= |ref=harv }}
* {{cite journal |last=Stoneback |first=H.R. |title=.“The Priest Did Not Answer: Hemingway, the Church, the Party, and For Whom the Bell Tolls.” |url= |journal=Blowing the Bridge: Essays on Hemingway and For Whom the Bell Tolls. |volume= |issue= |date=1992 |pages=99-112 |access-date= |ref=harv }}
* {{cite journal |last=Watson |first=William Braasch |title=.“Joris Ivens and the Communists: Bringing Hemingway into the Spanish Civil War.” |url= |journal= Blowing the Bridge: Essays on Hemingway and For Whom the Bell Tolls |volume= |issue= |date=1992 |pages=37-57 |access-date= |ref=harv }}
{{refend}}

{{Review}}

{{DEFAULTSORT:Hemingway, Mailer, and The "Reds"}}
[[Category:Book Reviews (MR)]]

User talk:Grlucas

2025-04-09T13:34:01Z

JHadaway: Added finished tribute

{{Talk header}}
[[/Archive 202504/]]

== Final edits ==
Hello, my article is complete: [[The_Mailer_Review/Volume_4,_2010/Ernest_and_Norman_(Exit_Music)|Ernest and Norman (Exit Music)]]

Good evening, Dr. Lucas. Below is the link to my edited article:
https://projectmailer.net/pm/User:ASpeed/sandbox

Good evening, @[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]]. I have completed most of my Remediation Articles, but I still show issues for the one named, "[[The_Mailer_Review/Volume_4,_2010/Norman,_Papa,_and_the_Autoerotic_Construction_of_Woman|Norman, Papa, and the Autoerotic Construction of Woman]].

Based on the latest updates, [[The_Mailer_Review/Volume_4,_2010/Battles_for_Regard,_Writerly_and_Otherwise|Battles for Regard, Writerly and Otherwise]] looks good with exception of including a '''category'''.

May you let me know if there is anything I can do on my end to resolve the issues with the first [[The_Mailer_Review/Volume_4,_2010/Norman,_Papa,_and_the_Autoerotic_Construction_of_Woman|article]]?

[[User:ALedezma|ALedezma]] ([[User talk:ALedezma|talk]]) 21:47, 8 April 2025 (EDT)

Dr. Lucas I finished my remediation article https://projectmailer.net/index.php?title=The_Mailer_Review/Volume_4,_2010/Norman_Mailer%27s_The_Fight:_Hemingway,_Bullfighting,_and_the_Lovely_Metaphysics_of_Boxing&action=edit [[User:TWietstruk|TWietstruk]] ([[User talk:TWietstruk|talk]]) 19:44, 8 April 2025 (EDT)

Dr. Lucas I have finished my assigned remediation article: https://projectmailer.net/pm/The_Mailer_Review/Volume_4,_2010/Jive-Ass_Aficionado:_Why_Are_We_in_Vietnam%3F_and_Hemingway%27s_Moral_Code#cite_note-FOOTNOTEHemingway2003-24
Username ADear.

Dr. Lucas, I have finished remediating my assigned article. Please review it at your earliest convenience. The link is here: [[The_Mailer_Review/Volume_5,_2011/Norman_Mailer's_Mythmaking_in_An_American_Dream_and_“The_White_Negro”|Norman Mailer's Mythmaking in An American Dream and “The White Negro”]]—[[User:Erhernandez|Erhernandez]] ([[User talk:Erhernandez|talk]]) 08:52, 4 April 2025 (EDT)
:{{Reply to|Erhernandez}} well done! A couple of things: never bury your talk page post. Put it at the bottom, preferably in its own section by clicking "Add topic" on the top-right. I removed your banner after making a few corrections. Please have a look over it and move on to the next thing. Thanks. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 09:06, 5 April 2025 (EDT)

Dr. Lucas, I transferred and edited my article. Can you look at it and remove the banner? Here's the link: [[The_Mailer_Review/Volume_4,_2010/Authorship_and_Alienation_in_Death_in_the_Afternoon_and_Advertisements_for_Myself|Authorship and Alienation in Death in the Afternoon and Advertisements for Myself]] ( [[User:APKnight25|APKnight25]] ([[User talk:APKnight25|talk]]) 13:02, 28 March 2025 (EDT) )
:{{Reply to| APKnight25}} looking good! A couple of things: never bury your talk page post. Put it at the bottom, preferably in its own section by clicking "Add topic" on the top-right. Next, eliminate all "fang" quotes in the article and add “real quotation marks.” Your sources should be a bulleted list. And there should be no space before a citation. You’re almost finished! —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 11:21, 30 March 2025 (EDT)

== Remediation of "Reinventing the Wheel" Mailer Article for Review ==

Dr. Lucas,

My [[The_Mailer_Review/Volume_5,_2011/Reinventing_a_New_Wheel:_The_Films_of_Norman_Mailer|article]] is ready for review.

Thank you!
[[User:TPoole|TPoole]] ([[User talk:TPoole|talk]]) 15:29, 29 March 2025 (EDT)
:{{Reply to|TPoole}} great! Could you include a link to it? Thanks. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 11:07, 30 March 2025 (EDT)
::OK, I [[The Mailer Review/Volume 5, 2011/Reinventing a New Wheel: The Films of Norman Mailer|found it]]. Looking really good. Great work. There are some citation issues that need to be seen to. The two red categories at the bottom should not be there; they will go away when the citations errors are corrected. Eliminate any quotation mark "fangs" in the text and replace them with “real quotation marks.” Let me know if you need help. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 11:14, 30 March 2025 (EDT)
:::@Grlucas, what are the citation issues? Which ones need correcting? [[User:TPoole|TPoole]] ([[User talk:TPoole|talk]]) 17:31, 31 March 2025 (EDT)
::::{{Reply to| TPoole}} When you click your citations, they should jump to the works cited entry they correspond to. Several of yours do not, indicated by the red “Harv and Sfn no-target errors” at the bottom. You also have a "CS1 maint: Unrecognized language" error that will likely be cleared up when you fix the citation issues. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 08:55, 1 April 2025 (EDT)
:::::@Grlucas, I have tried correcting the sfn codes in my citations. I was able to get the 2 web citations to link correctly. But for some reason, I cannot get the Mailer 1967 film Wild 90 citation to link to the reference list. Please advise. [[User:TPoole|TPoole]] ([[User talk:TPoole|talk]]) 20:24, 4 April 2025 (EDT)
::::::{{Reply to| TPoole}} OK, all fixed and published. Thanks. Please move on to another remediation. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 08:46, 5 April 2025 (EDT)

== Remediation of: "Contradictory Syntheses: Norman Mailer’s Left Conservatism and the Problematic of 'Totalitarianism'" ==

Dr. Lucas

I finished the remediation of the following article:

https://projectmailer.net/pm/The_Mailer_Review/Volume_5,_2011/Contradictory_Syntheses:_Norman_Mailer%E2%80%99s_Left_Conservatism_and_the_Problematic_of_%E2%80%9CTotalitarianism%E2%80%9D

It is ready for your review. Thank you.
[[User:JKilchenmann|JKilchenmann]] ([[User talk:JKilchenmann|talk]]) 19:04, 30 March 2025 (EDT)
:{{Reply to| JKilchenmann}} looks great. I made some tweaks to the references and some throughout, like changing ' and " to real apostrophes and quotation marks. A bit more clean-up, but you might want to check over it again. I removed the under-construction banner. Well one. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 21:32, 30 March 2025 (EDT)

== Final Edit ==

Thank you for your comments on my remediation of
"[[The Mailer Review/Volume 4, 2010/Authorship and Alienation in Death in the Afternoon and Advertisements for Myself|Authorship and Alienation in Death in the Afternoon and Advertisements for Myself.]]"

I've eliminated the "fang quotes" and changed them to “real quotation marks.” This was a very fascinating tip that taught me something new. It's something I've never noticed before but now always will.

I also put my sources in a bulleted list and removed the space before the citations. I think I'm all set now.
:{{Reply to|APKnight25}} great work! Please help other editors to complete the volume. Thanks! —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 08:34, 3 April 2025 (EDT)

== Remediation for ''Firearms in the Works of Hemingway and Mailer'' ==

[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]]

Hi Dr. Lucas,

I believe I have done everything for the Remediation of my article. Please let me know if there is anything else I need to do.

I will also link the article below:

https://projectmailer.net/pm/The_Mailer_Review/Volume_4,_2010/Firearms_in_the_Works_of_Hemingway_and_Mailer

Thank you,
Caitlin Vinson
:{{Reply to|CVinson}} great work so far. Your references must use templates, please. Blockquotes must also be done correctly. No spaces or line breaks before or after the {{tl|pg}} template. Footnote placement is also off (punctuation goes before the footnote; no spaces before or after the footnote). I will add the abstract and url. Thanks. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 08:30, 3 April 2025 (EDT)

:{{Reply to|Grlucas}} Hi Dr. Lucas, I believe there have been some updates made to the project. I believe I have also updated the works cited section to show correct templates. Please let me know if there is anything further that I need to do. Thank you, Caitlin.
::{{reply to| CVinson}} please sign your talk page posts correctly. Thanks. You still need to do some work on the sources. Use the <code>|author-mask=1</code> in your template for repeated author names. Also, you must eliminate the red “Harv and Sfn no-target errors” message at the bottom. No spaces or returns before or after the {{tl|pg}} call, as I already mentioned above. No parenthetical citations should be left, either; those should all be remediated to footnotes. Thanks. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 10:50, 8 April 2025 (EDT)

:{{Reply to|Grlucas}} I have updated the sources and updated the in-text citations. I am still having trouble with the "Harv and Sfn no-target errors." I have not been successful in fixing this error and have tried multiple ways to fix it. —[[User:CVinson|CVinson]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 8:18, 8 April 2025 (EDT)

== Remediation for ''Norman Mailer Today'' ==
Dr. Lucas, I have finished up my remediation article [[The Mailer Review/Volume 5, 2011/Norman Mailer Today|Norman Mailer Today]], and it is ready for review. Please let me know if I missed something. Thank you! —[[User:Kamyers|Kamyers]] ([[User talk:Kamyers|talk]]) 18:20, 3 April 2025 (EDT)
:{{Reply to|Kamyers}} Great work! Please help your fellow editors finish the volume, or pick something to work on in [[The Mailer Review/Volume 4, 2010|Volume 4]]. Thanks, and well done. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 07:00, 4 April 2025 (EDT)

== Remediation of “The Conception of Irreversibility: Hannah Arendt and Hemingway’s ‘Hills Like White Elephants’” ==
Dr. Lucas, I have finished my remediation of Jennifer Yirinec's article: [[The Mailer Review/Volume 5, 2011/The Conception of Irreversibility: Hannah Arendt and Hemingway’s “Hills Like White Elephants”|The Conception of Irreversibility: Hannah Arendt and Hemingway’s “Hills Like White Elephants.”]] Thank you for your assistance with the article. It is ready for its final review! [[User:JHadaway|JHadaway]] ([[User talk:JHadaway|talk]]) 10:24, 4 April 2025 (EDT)
:{{Reply to|JHadaway}} a stellar job. Well done. I removed the banner, so you can move on to another article. Thanks. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 08:12, 5 April 2025 (EDT)

== Tribute Remediations ==
Dr. Lucas, I have begun work on the tributes for volume 5. [[The Mailer Review/Volume 5, 2011/Tributes to Norris Church Mailer/Grace Notes|Grace Notes]] by Stephen Borkowski is ready for its final review.—[[User:JHadaway|JHadaway]] ([[User talk:JHadaway|talk]]) 12:58, 4 April 2025 (EDT)
:{{Reply to|JHadaway}} Well done! Banner removed, url added. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 08:18, 5 April 2025 (EDT)

==Oohh Normie Final Edits==
Hi Dr. Lucas, I have finished my article: [[The_Mailer_Review/Volume_4,_2010/"Oohh_Normie_—_You're_Sooo_Hemingway":_Mailer_Memories_and_Encounters|Oohh Normie, You're Sooo Hemingway]]. Please let me know if there is anything I need to fix. [[User:Tbara4554|Tbara4554]] ([[User talk:Tbara4554|talk]]) 20:01, 5 April 2025 (EDT)
:{{reply to|Tbara4554}} thank you. I made some corrections and removed the banner. You might want to have another look over it. Please move on to something else. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 09:53, 6 April 2025 (EDT)

== Harlot's Ghost, Bildungsroman, Masculinity and Hemingway ==

Dr. Lucas,

The following article is ready for your review. Thanks.

https://projectmailer.net/pm/The_Mailer_Review/Volume_4,_2010/Harlot%27s_Ghost,_Bildungsroman,_Masculinity_and_Hemingway

[[User:JKilchenmann|JKilchenmann]] ([[User talk:JKilchenmann|talk]]) 21:22, 5 April 2025 (EDT)
:{{Reply to| JKilchenmann}} excellent. Thank you. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 09:39, 6 April 2025 (EDT)

== I am done with this ==

https://projectmailer.net/pm/The_Mailer_Review/Volume_5,_2011/Situating_Hemingway:_Mailer,_Style,_Ethics
:Received. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 10:29, 6 April 2025 (EDT)

== Final Review PM Article ==

Hi Dr. Lucas, [[The_Mailer_Review/Volume_4,_2010/Hemingway_to_Mailer_—_A_Delayed_Response_to_The_Deer_Park|here]] is my remediated article, ready for review![[User:Hobbitonya|Hobbitonya]] ([[User talk:Hobbitonya|talk]]) 12:21, 6 April 2025 (EDT)
:{{Reply to| Hobbitonya}} great work. I have removed the banner, so you are good to move on to something else. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 07:20, 7 April 2025 (EDT)

== Remediation Project ==

{{reply to|Grlucas}}
I have finished my remedidation project and I am ready for it to be reviewed. '''Article link''': [https://projectmailer.net/pm/The_Mailer_Review/Volume_5,_2011/Piling_On:_Norman_Mailer’s_Utilization_of_Marilyn_Monroe#Works_Cited|Piling On: Norman Mailer's Utilization of Marilyn Monroe]

Thanks,

[[User:MerAtticus|MerAtticus]] ([[User talk:MerAtticus|talk]]) 13:04, 6 April 2025 (EDT)
:{{Reply to| MerAtticus}} good work so far. Please remove wikilinks. Change ' and " to typographical apostrophes and quotation marks. And all red errors at the bottom of the page need to be taken care of. These are likely all from coding errors in your sources. Thanks! —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 07:24, 7 April 2025 (EDT)

{{reply to|Grlucas}}
I have removed the wikilinks, changed to the correct typographic style and updated my sources.
'''Article link''': [https://projectmailer.net/pm/The_Mailer_Review/Volume_5,_2011/Piling_On:_Norman_Mailer’s_Utilization_of_Marilyn_Monroe#Works_Cited|Piling On: Norman Mailer's Utilization of Marilyn Monroe] Thanks, [[User:MerAtticus|MerAtticus]] ([[User talk:MerAtticus|talk]]) 21:55, 7 April 2025 (EDT)

[I forgot to fill out the summary box. I am adding my summary]
:{{Reply to| MerAtticus}} you're getting there! It looks great. You must eliminate all the red errors at the bottom. These appear when there are errors in your citations. Let me know if you need help. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 09:15, 8 April 2025 (EDT)

@{{reply to|Grlucas}} I have tried everything I can think of and I still have harv and sfn no-target errors and harv and sfn multiple-target errors and cs1 uses editors parameter. Do I not include the editor? [[User:MerAtticus|MerAtticus]] ([[User talk:MerAtticus|talk]]) 16:03, 8 April 2025 (EDT)

{{reply to|Grlucas}} I have managed to get rid of two of the red target errors. I am still working on finding the harv sfn multiple target error. Thanks, [[User:MerAtticus|MerAtticus]] ([[User talk:MerAtticus|talk]]) 20:37, 8 April 2025 (EDT)

{{reply to|Grlucas}} I have tried everything i can think of to remove the last red error flag. I had to turn it in. I don't know that else I can do in this situation. I was given citation that did not follow any of the given formats. [[User:MerAtticus|MerAtticus]] ([[User talk:MerAtticus|talk]]) 21:45, 8 April 2025 (EDT)

== Remediation Submission ==

Hello!
Here's my remediated article; [[The_Mailer_Review/Volume_5,_2011/The_Devil's_Party:_Reading_and_Wreaking_Vengeance_in_The_Castle_in_the_Forest|The Devil's Party: Reading and Wreaking Vengeance in ''The Castle in the Forest'']].
Thanks! Please let me know if there's anything I can review or correct.
[[User:Maggiemrogers|Maggiemrogers]] ([[User talk:Maggiemrogers|talk]]) 13:23, 6 April 2025 (EDT)
:{{Reply to| Maggiemrogers}} nice work! Banner removed, so please move on to something else in the volume. Thanks. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 07:39, 7 April 2025 (EDT)

== Vol. 4: Rumors of Grace article remediated ==

I believe I have completed remediation of ''[[The_Mailer_Review/Volume_4,_2010/Rumors_of_Grace:_God-Language_in_Hemingway_and_Mailer|Rumors of Grace: God-Language in Hemingway and Mailer]]'', vol. 4. I was having last-minute trouble with sfn errors for sources without authors, but Justin Kilchenmann helped me out, so I think they are fixed.
:{{Reply to|Sherrilledwards}} You have done a remarkable job—a real Herculean effort! Footnotes should not go in any notes. See those I changed; the others should be changed in the same way. I have done some, but the others have to be fixed, I'm afraid. Thanks! —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 09:20, 8 April 2025 (EDT)

== Remediation of "Inside Norman Mailer ==

Hi Dr. Lucas - I have finished remediating the article, [[The Mailer Review/Volume 4, 2010/Inside Norman Mailer|Inside Norman Mailer]]. Please let me know if I need to make any adjustments. Thank you! [[User:Chelsey.brantley|Chelsey.brantley]] ([[User talk:Chelsey.brantley|talk]]) 18:09, 7 April 2025 (EDT)
:{{Reply to|Chelsey.brantley}} good work! Please help with another article from volume 4. Thanks! —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 09:36, 8 April 2025 (EDT)

== Completed: Norman Mailer: Playboy Magazine ==

I hope I am doing this is right. I have finished remediating my article about Norman Mailer and its in my designated sandbox [https://projectmailer.net/pm/The_Mailer_Review/Volume_5,_2011/Norman_Mailer:_Playboy_Magazine_Heavyweight here.]
If there are any last minute edits, let me know. I got the last of the errors removed yesterday. And I believe we are on the same page with leaving the in-line citations for ''Playboy'' to be as is, since the author didn't put them down in the works cited. [[User:NrmMGA5108|NrmMGA5108]] ([[User talk:NrmMGA5108|talk]]) 20:14, 7 April 2025 (EDT)Nina Mizner
:{{Reply to|NrmMGA5108}} looking good! So, the parenthetical citations still in the article, I'm assuming, are there because of those missing sources? Please check your page numbers; some seem to be off. Thanks. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 10:04, 8 April 2025 (EDT)

== Completed Remediation From Here to Eternity and The Naked and The Dead: Premier to Eternity? ==

Greeting Dr. Lucas,

I have made the adjustment that you mentioned.

I also made additional edits to my short footnotes and noticed that my citations did not link to my references - which has been fixed.

I have tested all of my citations, and they all work.

Here is my article by Alexander Hicks, ''From Here to Eternity and The Naked and The Dead: Premier to Eternity?''

https://projectmailer.net/pm/The_Mailer_Review/Volume_5,_2011/From_Here_to_Eternity_and_The_Naked_and_the_Dead:_Premiere_to_Eternity%3F

Have a great day.
:{{Reply to| THarrell}} Please always sign your talk page posts. Several “quoted items” in the article appear as ‘quoted items’; these must be corrected, please. No spaces or returns should surround {{tl|pg}} calls. Multiple page numbers should look like this <code><nowiki>{{sfn|Moretti|1996|pp=11-14}}</nowiki></code>; note the double <code>pp</code>. There seem to be many typos. I corrected some for you, but you must see to the rest. Thanks. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 10:16, 8 April 2025 (EDT)

:{{Reply to| Grlucas}} Greetings,

Are these the only additional corrections that need to be made? This is different from what you mentioned before.

I just want to be sure that I have hit everything.

Also can you verify what other typos you are seeing, I have ran through this twice.

If something is spelt a certain way, for example "Soljer", I have left it that way. Since it is mentioned like that in the article.
—[[User:THarrell|THarrell]] ([[User talk:THarrell|talk]]) 06:49, 8 April 2025 (EDT)

:{{Reply to| Grlucas}} Greetings,

I have gone through and fixed all of the short footnotes.

I have gone line by line with a ruler to look at any typos, and fixed the words that I found that had a dash in them/needed to be lowercased.

I have also fixed the quotations.

—[[User:THarrell|THarrell]] ([[User talk:THarrell|talk]]) 12:31, 9 April 2025 (EDT)

== Remediation for “Footnote to Death in the Afternoon” ==

Greetings Dr. Lucus,

My article is ready for your review. Thank you.

https://projectmailer.net/pm/The_Mailer_Review/Volume_4,_2010/Mailer%E2%80%99s_%E2%80%9CFootnote_to_Death_in_the_Afternoon%E2%80%9D)
:{{Reply to| KForeman}} it's coming along. Please ''always'' sign your talk page posts. Right up top, there are errors. Please use the real {{tl|pg}}, like all the other articles. Citations need to be fixed. All parenthetical citations must be converted. You still have quite a bit of work to do. All red sections need to be seen to and corrected. Thanks. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 10:20, 8 April 2025 (EDT)

=Remediation of "Cluster Seeds and the Mailer Legacy"=
Hello, Dr. Lucas. I have completed the remediation of [https://projectmailer.net/index.php?title=The_Mailer_Review/Volume_5,_2011/Cluster_Seeds_and_the_Mailer_Legacy&oldid=18200| my article], and it is ready for your review. Thank you!—[[User:ADavis|ADavis]] ([[User talk:ADavis|talk]]) 11:32, 8 April 2025 (EDT)@ADavis
:{{Reply to| ADavis}} got it. I think I check it yesterday and removed the banner then. Please move on to another piece. Thanks. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 17:29, 8 April 2025 (EDT)

== Remediating Article: Mailer, Hemingway, and Boxing Volume 4. ==

Hello Dr. Lucas,

I have completed remediating my article. Here is the link [[The Mailer Review/Volume 4, 2010/Mailer, Hemingway, and Boxing|The Mailer Review: Volume 4: Mailer, Hemingway, Boxing (2010)]] [[User:JBrown|JBrown]] ([[User talk:JBrown|talk]]) 13:01, 8 April 2025 (EDT)JBrown
:{{Reply to|JBrown}} a good start, but all parenthetical citations need to be footnotes. Also, check your headers. Thanks. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 17:29, 8 April 2025 (EDT)

== Remediation for ''Norris Church Mailer'' ==
Dr. Lucas, I have finished up remediating the article [[The Mailer Review/Volume 4, 2010/Norris Church Mailer|Norris Church Mailer]], and it is ready for review. Please let me know if I missed something. Thank you! —[[User:Kamyers|Kamyers]] ([[User talk:Kamyers|talk]]) 13:42, 8 April 2025 (EDT)
:{{reply to|Kamyers}} awesome work! Thank you! —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 17:29, 8 April 2025 (EDT)

== Final Edits Completed and Ready for Review ==

Dr. Lucas, I have completed my assigned remediation article: [[The_Mailer_Review/Volume_4,_2010/Looking_at_the_Past:_Nostalgia_as_Technique_in_The_Naked_and_the_Dead_and_For_Whom_the_Bell_Tolls|Looking at the Past: Nostalgia as Technique in The Naked and the Dead and For Whom the Bell Tolls]]. Please review at your convenience. I enjoyed working on this assignment. I look forward to your suggestions and feedback. All the best, Danielle (DBond007)
:{{Reply to| DBond007}} ok, good work. Please remove all the external links. Links to Wikipedia are not necessary, but if used, they need to be done correctly. There should be no spaces before {{tl|sfn}}. May sure all your ' and " are actually typographical apostrophes and quotation marks. Remove any superfluous spaces and line breaks; these mess up the formatting. Thanks! —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 17:29, 8 April 2025 (EDT)

== Completed the remediation assignment ==

Good evening Dr. Lucas,

I hope I am doing this right. Here is the link for my completed Remediation article: [http://The_Mailer_Review/Volume_4,_2010/Encounters_with_Mailer Encounters with Mailer].

I look forward to reading your feedback.

All the best,

Patrick Riley

== Remediation Project Submission: An Expected Encounter in an Unexpected Place ==

Link:

https://projectmailer.net/pm/The_Mailer_Review/Volume_4,_2010/Norman_Mailer:_An_Expected_Encounter_in_an_Unexpected_Place

Winnie Verna

== E.Mosley ==

Good evening, @Grlucas. I have completed my Remediation Articles[[https://projectmailer.net/pm/The_Mailer_Review/Volume_4,_2010/On_Reading_Mailer_Too_Young]]. The article I had was " On Reading Mailer Too Young Volume 4, 2010

== Kynndra Watson ==

Good Evening, @grlucas. i have completed my Remediation articles: Volume 5: https://projectmailer.net/pm/The_Mailer_Review/Volume_5,_2011/Making_Masculinity_and_Unmaking_Jewishness:_Norman_Mailer%E2%80%99s_Voice_in_Wild_90_and_Beyond_the_Law and Volume 4: https://projectmailer.net/pm/The_Mailer_Review/Volume_4,_2010/Mailer,_Hemingway,_and_the_%E2%80%9CReds%E2%80%9D.

Thank you.

== Tribute Remediation ==
Dr. Lucas, I have finished [[The Mailer Review/Volume 5, 2011/Tributes to Norris Church Mailer/What Would Be the Fun of That?|"What Would Be the Fun of That?"]] by Peter Alson.—[[User:JHadaway|JHadaway]] ([[User talk:JHadaway|talk]]) 09:33, 9 April 2025 (EDT)

The Mailer Review/Volume 5, 2011/Tributes to Norris Church Mailer/What Would Be the Fun of That?

2025-04-09T13:19:23Z

JHadaway: Added body

{{DISPLAYTITLE:{{BASEPAGENAME}}/{{SUBPAGENAME}}}}
{{MR05}}
{{Working}}

{{Byline|last=Alson |first=Peter |url= }}
{{dc|dc=T|he first time I met Norris}} was when she accompanied Norman to Harvard for a lecture that he was giving in the spring of 1976. I was a junior at the time. She was only a few years older than I. But she was tall and beautiful, with cream-white skin and red hair that, as Raymond Chandler might have described it, was “like a fire under control but still dangerous.” In part because she was with my uncle, in part because she was dressed not like my fellow college students, but in a pretty spring dress and heels, she struck me as a full-fledged adult. By contrast, especially in her presence, I felt tongue-tied, nearly protoplasmic. Which didn’t stop me from proudly introducing her and my uncle to my college buddies. I think it safe to say that my connection to her scored me more points with them than my connection to Norman.

Over the years, some of the nervousness and awkwardness I felt around Norris on that first encounter melted away—but not all of it. I was always a little intimidated by her. She was just so damned beautiful and sure of herself and grown up. At the same time she was very much in touch with her inner child. I remember my surprise when I found out that she collected Barbie dolls. I knew there were people who collected them and never even took them out of their boxes so as not to diminish their value. But as Norris pointed out, “What would be the fun of that?”

She loved Christmas with the same kind of kid-like joy. By the time she was finished decorating the tree, I was always surprised that the damn thing was able to stand up under the weight of all the ornaments. Even more impressive was how effortless she made the holiday celebration seem, cooking dinner for the assembled army of kids, nephew, sister, parents. There she’d {{pg|24|25}} be, sitting in her white wicker throne by the picture window of the Provincetown house, flipping through a magazine, not a care in the world, and a while later, dinner would be on the table, a feast of chicken or turkey with all the trimmings. If she felt the slightest bit of stress, it didn’t show. I certainly never saw it.

She had a style and a palette all her own, which wasn’t surprising given her painterly talent, and she took great delight in decorating the house in Provincetown to fit her vision—dark, gothic wallpaper, at one point, lots of eccentric lamps (it would take ten minutes to turn them all on and off). I will be frank and say that it wasn’t my own vision of a beach house, but it was distinct and unapologetic, just like its creator.

If Norman was the king of the Mailer clan, as he surely was, then Norris was the queen without whom his kingdom—namely, us, his children, his sister and I—would have been much the poorer. She was so many things to all of us, and filled so many roles. For me, she was my aunt, my friend, the queen whose approval I would always want, artist, writer, wife of my uncle, the redhead from Arkansas, the giggly funny older sister I never had. She was Barbara. She was Norris. All those things. Now still.

{{Review}}
{{DEFAULTSORT:What Would Be the Fun of That?}}
[[Category:Tributes (MR)]]

User:JHadaway/sandbox

2025-04-09T13:18:19Z

JHadaway: Added tribute to sandbox

{{user sandbox|plain=yes}}
THERE HAS BEEN A PLETHORA OF CRITICISM examining one of Ernest Hemingway’s most powerful short stories, “Hills Like White Elephants.” However, one approach that may merit more attention is an exploration of Hemingway’s notions of “action” and of the irreversibility of action within the text. Hannah Arendt, an intellectual whose germinal work has transcended more than one discipline, may be useful in providing some measure of insight into Hemingway’s problematic narrative.

I would like to begin by examining certain rhetorical elements of “Hills,” which suggest traces of Arendt’s perspectives on the “nature of action.” More specifically, Arendt’s influential study, ''The Human Condition'', suggests that the dissonance found in the relationship between Jig and the American primarily arises from their differing viewpoints regarding the Arendtian notion of irreversibility.{{efn|In order to combat irreversibility, according to Arendt, man must either make promises or bestow forgiveness on others, two actions that, by their nature, also require plurality, “for no one can forgive himself and no one can feel bound by a promise made only to himself.”{{sfn|Arendt|1958|p=237}}}} That is to say, the issue is far more important than considerations of the potential abortion, which is the explicit topic of their combative dialogue, as critics have noted.{{sfn|Gillette|2007|pp=50-69}}{{sfn|O’Brien|1992|pp=19-25}}{{sfn|Rankin|2005|p=234}}{{sfn|Urgo|1988|p=35}} We might consider that Jig, in her overtly rhetorical exchanges with the American, illustrates (and promotes) the concept of irreversibility, as she suggests that the conception of life (an action, in essence, as it is a beginning) within her cannot be undone, while the American argues {{pg|407|408}} against irreversibility, as he believes that the conception can be “undone” by the act of abortion. As Stanley Renner proffers in his “Moving to the Girl's Side of ‘Hills Like White Elephants,’” “[I]n choosing whether to abort or to have the child, the couple are [sic] choosing between two ways of life.”{{sfn|Renner|1995|p=28}} This forty-minute exchange determining the end decision—abortion or life—reveals that the couple is also choosing between two ways of ''living''—either living in such a way so that actions can be “undone,” so to say, or living in such a way where actions bring consequences that are absolute.

Throughout the story the American attempts to articulate and advance his belief in reversibility. However, his own actions and statements undermine his attempts to do so. One can first see this situation in the exchange begun by Jig’s comment about the hills in the distance, as this moment initiates the heated philosophical discussion. As David Wyche perceptively states, “This bit of dialogue establishes the characters’ opposing positions in what is, essentially, an emotionally charged negotiation.”{{sfn|Wyche|2002|p=61}} Seated outside the bar, the couple enters into dialogue—the dilemma at hand being whether or not the couple should (or can) have an abortion and thus reverse the conception. While staring off into the distance, Jig remarks that the hills “look like white elephants,” to which the American responds, “I've never seen one.”{{sfn|Hemingway|1987|p=211}} Jig views the hills as white elephants, as entities so large and powerful that they require attention and disallow negotiation, much like the baby within her womb—a connection that Stanley Kozikowski makes: “Hills are like white elephants for Jig because they carry ambivalent evocations of the child within her—like a white elephant, an unwanted gift, a seemingly remote but immense problem.”{{sfn|Kozikowski|1994|p=107}} The American, on the other hand, claims to have never seen a white elephant, a statement that suggests he does not believe in entities or actions that cannot be undone. However, his rhetorical position is weakened by his unwillingness to look up and assess the hills for himself. He responds to his beer,{{efn|Meg Gillette, in her piece “Making Modern Parents in Ernest Hemingway’s ‘Hills Like White Elephants’,” provides a detailed analysis that focuses upon how the characters in the story frequently shift between offering retorts and drinking.}} rather than to Jig, as following his statement, the narrator says, “[T]he man drank his beer,” rather than something like, “The man said,” or, “The man responded.”{{sfn|Hemingway|1987|p=211}}{{sfn|Gillette|2007|pp=55-56}} When Jig snaps back, “You wouldn’t have,” the American replies, “Just because you say I wouldn’t have doesn't prove anything.”{{sfn|Hemingway|1987|p=211}} In his response, the American, perhaps unwittingly, takes power away from speech, through which the two ways in which actions can be reversed—the making of promises and forgiveness—occur. As such, within this exchange about the hills, Jig constructs the fetus within her womb as irreversible and non-negotiable, {{pg|408|409}} much like a white elephant, while the American attempts to forward his belief in reversibility—in the abortion of actions. Yet the American fails to construct the plurality necessary for such actions to be reversed, as he talks into his beer and limits the power of his own statements.

Another such exchange occurs when Jig and the American try Anis del Toro. Upon imbibing the drink, Jig comments that “[i]t tastes like licorice,” to which the American responds, “That's the way with everything.”{{sfn|Hemingway|1987|p=212}} The American's response plays into Jig’s beliefs about irreversibility, for she seizes upon the chance to rephrase the statement and direct it back toward the American: “Yes,” she says. “Everything tastes of licorice. Especially all the things you've waited so long for, like absinthe.”{{sfn|Hemingway|1987|p=21}} Perhaps the American only meant to dismiss Jig’s childish statement about licorice; however, in doing so, he opened the door for her to make a philosophical statement about consequence. In saying that everything amounts to one thing—one “taste”—Jig suggests that actions have an absolute consequence, one that leaves a bitter taste that cannot be undone. After a succession of comments about each rhetorician’s motivation, Jig concludes, “That’s all we do, isn’t it—look at things and try new drinks?”{{sfn|Hemingway|1987|p=212}} Jig’s statement indirectly reproves the American for not allowing action within the relationship. The only action she has seen, in her opinion, was the conception, and the American will not even allow that to progress to full term. Detecting Jig’s intimation, David Wyche writes that “[Jig] manages to articulate, again figuratively, what has no doubt been an increasing awareness of the emptiness of the couple’s lifestyle to date.” {{sfn|Wyche|2002|p=62}} Similarly, Paul Rankin surmises that, despite the American’s desire to “act” on the conception, his character is “essentially passive in nature”: “the man has nothing to offer, nothing to contribute to the story, just as he has nothing more to contribute to Jig’s pregnancy.”{{sfn|Rankin|2005|p=235}} As such, despite the American’s desire to reverse the action—the life—he created through the abortion, his passivity inhibits his rhetorical position.

The rhetorical struggle culminates in a battle between the ''cans'' and the ''cannots''—a battle that Jig incites when she looks upon the field and the mountains and says, “And we could have all this....And we could have everything and every day we make it more impossible.”{{sfn|Hemingway|1987|p=213}} She clearly makes this statement to spite her lover, who agrees with her that, once Jig had the abortion, they could do and have anything they wanted. Every time the American suggests something (clearly impossible) they could have or do {{pg|409|410}} post-abortion, Jig responds, “No, we can't.”{{sfn|Hemingway|1987|p=213}} After the American’s concluding remark (“We can go everywhere”), Jig replies, “No, we can’t. It isn’t ours any more,” and later comments that “once they take it away, you never get it back.”{{sfn|Hemingway|1987|p=213}} At this point Jig cements her belief in irreversibility in the face of the American, who now is at a rhetorical disadvantage and can only make impossible remarks. In these lines, Jig insists that “undoing” something—reversing something—such as the conception of life is an impossibility, for though something can be removed or killed, in the case of the fetus, ''that'' something was once present—was once a reality—and, as such, can never be truly reversed. True reversal would require Jig and the American to “forgive and forget,” so to say—something that Jig, once having had life within her, cannot do. It is clear that if Jig went through with the abortion, she would never be able to view the world in the same way—nothing could ever be hers again, for she would have lost something that was truly important to her. After this exchange during which Jig seemingly wins the rhetorical battle over the potential of irreversibility, she refuses to discuss the matter anymore. Whether or not she has the abortion is open to debate, although the issue of irreversibility, once on the table, has been removed from the discussion.

The story concludes with Jig smiling—yet not because she has discerned the fate of her unborn child, but rather because she has asserted her beliefs regarding the notion of irreversibility and has won the rhetorical battle against her lover, the American. She “feel[s] fine,” perhaps, as a result of this knowledge of rhetorical victory, rather than as a result of her thinking—at least temporarily—she will not go through with the abortion, as Hilary K. Justice and Stanley Renner say, or as a result of her being inebriated, as Phillip Sipiora suggests.{{sfn|Justice|1998|pp=25-26}}{{sfn|Renner|1995|p=40}}{{sfn|Sipiora|1984|p=50}} Without knowing the fate of Jig's unborn child, the reader can surmise that Jig has successfully promoted her claims of the irreversibility of actions (particularly conceptions), while the American, although attempting to forward the reversibility of actions, has failed in such attempts. By not acting and fostering plurality through his dialogue, he is not able to utilize the two Arendtian modes of reversal that would be open to him—namely, forgiveness and the making of promises. His promises are not grounded in reality, for what he has to offer includes the whole world—a non-reality, which Jig jumps to point out. Moreover, he cannot talk Jig into forgiving him for impregnating her, nor can he “forgive” her for conceiving a child by enabling her to carry it to term. While neither {{pg|410|411}} partner agrees with the other,{{efn|As David Wyche points out, “We see that if either or both of the characters experience ‘growth’ throughout the course of the story, neither necessarily moves toward the other's side.”{{sfn|Wyche|2002|p=61}}}} there is a clear rhetorical victor. As no concordance is reached, the reader is merely left with the conclusion that, based upon the rhetorical aspects of the text, Jig has emerged rhetorically victorious, while the American has lost control of the situation and must resort to interacting with others inside the bar and acting as Jig’s porter, moving the luggage to the other side of the tracks.

=== Notes ===
{{notelist}}

===Citations===
{{Reflist}}

===Works Cited===
{{Refbegin}}
* {{cite book |last=Arendt |first=Hannah |date=1958 |title=The Human Condition|edition=2nd |location=Chicago |publisher=U of Chicago P |pages= |ref=harv }}
* {{cite journal |last=Elliott |first=Gary |title=Hemingway’s ‘Hills Like White Elephants’ |journal=Explicator |volume=35 |date=1977 |pages=22-23 |ref=harv }}
* {{cite journal |last=Gillette |first=Meg |title=Making Modern Parents in Ernest Hemingway’s ‘Hills Like White Elephants’ And Vina Delmar's Bad Girl |journal=Modern Fiction Studies |volume=53 |issue=1 |date=Spring 2007 |pages=50-69 |ref=harv }}
* {{cite book |last=Hemingway |first=Ernest |date=1987 |title=The Complete Short Stories of Ernest Hemingway |chapter=Hills Like White Elephants |location= New York |publisher=Scribner |pages=211-214 |ref=harv }}
* {{cite journal |last=Justice |first=Hilary K |title=‘Well, Well, Well’: Cross-Gendered Autobiography and the Manuscript of 'Hills Like White Elephants |journal=The Hemingway Review |volume=18 |issue=1 |date=Fall 1998 |pages=17-32 |ref=harv }}
* {{cite journal |last=Kozikowski |first=Stanley |title=Hemingway’s ‘Hills Like White Elephants’ |journal=Explicator |volume=52 |date=1994 |pages=107-109 |ref=harv }}
* {{cite journal |last=O’Brien |first=Timothy |title=Allusion, Word-Place, and the Central Conflict in Hemingway’s ‘Hills Like White Elephants’ |journal=The Hemingway Review |volume=12 |issue=1 |date=Fall 1992 |pages=19-25 |ref=harv }}
* {{cite journal |last=Organ |first=Dennis |title=Hemingway’s ‘Hills Like White Elephants’ |journal=Explicator |volume=37 |date=1979 |pages=11 |ref=harv }}
* {{cite journal |last=Rankin |first=Paul |title=Hemingway’s ‘Hills Like White Elephants’ |journal=Explicator |volume=63 |issue=4 |date=Summer 2005 |pages=234-237 |ref=harv }}
* {{cite journal |last=Renner |first=Stanley |title=Moving to the Girl’s Side of ‘Hills Like White Elephants’ |journal=The Hemingway Review |volume=15 |issue=1 |date=Fall 1995 |pages=27-41 |ref=harv }}
* {{cite journal |last=Sipiora |first=Phillip |title=Hemingway’s ‘Hills Like White Elephants’ |journal=Explicator |volume=42 |date=1984 |pages=50 |ref=harv }}
* {{cite journal |last=Urgo |first=Joseph R. |title=Hemingway’s ‘Hills Like White Elephants’ |journal=Explicator |volume=46 |issue=3 |date=1988 |pages=35-37 |ref=harv }}
* {{cite journal |last=Wyche |first=David |title=Letting the Air Into a Relationship: Metaphorical Abortion in ‘Hills Like White Elephants’ |journal=The Hemingway Review |volume=22 |issue=1 |date=2002 |pages=58-73 |ref=harv }}
{{Refend}}

{{DISPLAYTITLE:{{BASEPAGENAME}}/{{SUBPAGENAME}}}}
{{MR05}}
{{Working}}
{{Byline|last=Alson |first=Peter |url= }}
{{dc|dc=T|he first time I met Norris}} was when she accompanied Norman to Harvard for a lecture that he was giving in the spring of 1976. I was a junior at the time. She was only a few years older than I. But she was tall and beautiful, with cream-white skin and red hair that, as Raymond Chandler might have described it, was “like a fire under control but still dangerous.” In part because she was with my uncle, in part because she was dressed not like my fellow college students, but in a pretty spring dress and heels, she struck me as a full-fledged adult. By contrast, especially in her presence, I felt tongue-tied, nearly protoplasmic. Which didn’t stop me from proudly introducing her and my uncle to my college buddies. I think it safe to say that my connection to her scored me more points with them than my connection to Norman.

Over the years, some of the nervousness and awkwardness I felt around Norris on that first encounter melted away—but not all of it. I was always a little intimidated by her. She was just so damned beautiful and sure of herself and grown up. At the same time she was very much in touch with her inner child. I remember my surprise when I found out that she collected Barbie dolls. I knew there were people who collected them and never even took them out of their boxes so as not to diminish their value. But as Norris pointed out, “What would be the fun of that?”

She loved Christmas with the same kind of kid-like joy. By the time she was finished decorating the tree, I was always surprised that the damn thing was able to stand up under the weight of all the ornaments. Even more impressive was how effortless she made the holiday celebration seem, cooking dinner for the assembled army of kids, nephew, sister, parents. There she’d {{pg|24|25}} be, sitting in her white wicker throne by the picture window of the Provincetown house, flipping through a magazine, not a care in the world, and a while later, dinner would be on the table, a feast of chicken or turkey with all the trimmings. If she felt the slightest bit of stress, it didn’t show. I certainly never saw it.

She had a style and a palette all her own, which wasn’t surprising given her painterly talent, and she took great delight in decorating the house in Provincetown to fit her vision—dark, gothic wallpaper, at one point, lots of eccentric lamps (it would take ten minutes to turn them all on and off). I will be frank and say that it wasn’t my own vision of a beach house, but it was distinct and unapologetic, just like its creator.

If Norman was the king of the Mailer clan, as he surely was, then Norris was the queen without whom his kingdom—namely, us, his children, his sister and I—would have been much the poorer. She was so many things to all of us, and filled so many roles. For me, she was my aunt, my friend, the queen whose approval I would always want, artist, writer, wife of my uncle, the redhead from Arkansas, the giggly funny older sister I never had. She was Barbara. She was Norris. All those things. Now still.

{{Review}}
{{DEFAULTSORT:What Would Be the Fun of That?}}
[[Category:Tributes (MR)]]

The Mailer Review/Volume 5, 2011/Tributes to Norris Church Mailer/What Would Be the Fun of That?

2025-04-09T13:08:51Z

JHadaway: Started working

{{DISPLAYTITLE:{{BASEPAGENAME}}/{{SUBPAGENAME}}}}
{{MR05}}
{{Working}}

{{Byline|last=Alson |first=Peter |url= }}
{{dc|dc=T|he first time I met Norris}}

User talk:Grlucas

2025-04-04T16:58:39Z

JHadaway: Added Tribute Remediations section and Grace Notes for final review

{{Talk header}}

== Article Errors ==

I've added the body of the article to my sandbox page. What errors do I need to specifically change in order to make it correct?[[User:CDucharme|CDucharme]] ([[User talk:CDucharme|talk]]) 17:04, 14 September 2020 (EDT)
:{{Reply to|CDucharme}} Mostly you need to add the notes, citation, and read for typos. It’s meticulous, but that’s the job. (Thanks for signing.) —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 17:08, 14 September 2020 (EDT)

Hey, I need help with instructions for the Norman Mailer Bibliography for the remediation project. I am not sure what I am supposed to do.[[User:AJohnson|AJohnson]] ([[User talk:AJohnson|talk]]) 29 March 2021 (EDT)
:{{Reply to|AJohnson}} You need to remediate the bibliography by adding missing entries from the PDF to the article on this site using the correct templates. As the note on the bibliography says, you may use [[The Mailer Review/Volume 2, 2008/Norman Mailer Bibliography: 2007|Norman Mailer Bibliography: 2007]] as a model. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 14:48, 29 March 2021 (EDT)

== Final edits ==
Dr. Lucas, I have finished remediating my assigned article. Please review it at your earliest convenience. The link is here: [[The_Mailer_Review/Volume_5,_2011/Norman_Mailer's_Mythmaking_in_An_American_Dream_and_“The_White_Negro”|Norman Mailer's Mythmaking in An American Dream and “The White Negro”]]—[[User:Erhernandez|Erhernandez]] ([[User talk:Erhernandez|talk]]) 08:52, 4 April 2025 (EDT)

Dr. Lucas, I transferred and edited my article. Can you look at it and remove the banner? Here's the link: [[The_Mailer_Review/Volume_4,_2010/Authorship_and_Alienation_in_Death_in_the_Afternoon_and_Advertisements_for_Myself|Authorship and Alienation in Death in the Afternoon and Advertisements for Myself]] ( [[User:APKnight25|APKnight25]] ([[User talk:APKnight25|talk]]) 13:02, 28 March 2025 (EDT) )
:{{Reply to| APKnight25}} looking good! A couple of things: never bury your talk page post. Put it at the bottom, preferably in its own section by clicking "Add topic" on the top-right. Next, eliminate all "fang" quotes in the article and add “real quotation marks.” Your sources should be a bulleted list. And there should be no space before a citation. You’re almost finished! —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 11:21, 30 March 2025 (EDT)

Hello, Dr. Lucas, I finished editing my article. May I have the banner removed?[[User:KJordan|KJordan]] ([[User talk:KJordan|talk]]) 20:13, 22 September 2020 (EDT)KJordan
:{{Reply to|KJordan}} Maybe. You should always link to something you want me to have a look at, please. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 20:14, 22 September 2020 (EDT)

Dr. Lucas, I have finished editing my article. Can you please review it? Thank You. Here is a link to it: https://projectmailer.net/pm/The_Mailer_Review/Volume_2,_2008/The_Heart_of_the_Nation:_Jewish_Values_in_the_Fiction_of_Norman_Mailer --[[User:AMurray|AMurray]] ([[User talk:AMurray|talk]]) 21:56, 23 September 2020 (EDT)

:{{Reply to|AMurray}} Looking good! However, I still see quote a few typos. There should be no space before a footnote or citation.<ref>Like this.</ref> And all parenthetical citations need to be converted. I also see a lot of missing punctuation, especially around citations. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 07:24, 24 September 2020 (EDT)

{{Reflist}}

Dr. Lucas, I finished editing my article. Will you please review?
https://projectmailer.net/pm/The_Mailer_Review/Volume_2,_2008/The_Unknown_and_the_General --[[User:Jrdavisjr|Jrdavisjr]] ([[User talk:Jrdavisjr|talk]]) 09:00, 25 September 2020 (EDT)
:{{Reply to| Jrdavisjr}} It looks good. Let's go through editing week and see if anything else comes up. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 10:15, 25 September 2020 (EDT)

Dr. Lucas, I have finished editing my article. Can you please review it? Thank You
https://projectmailer.net/pm/User:JSheppard/sandbox [[User:JSheppard|JSheppard]] ([[User talk:JSheppard|talk]])
:{{Reply to| JSheppard}} You have a '''lot''' of work left to do. I see [[User:Jules Carry]] is helping, but you’re missing references and there are typos throughout. Keep working. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 17:19, 25 September 2020 (EDT)

Dr. Lucas, I finished my article.
https://projectmailer.net/pm/The_Mailer_Review/Volume_13,_2019/More_Than_The_Dead_Know
[[User:RWalsh|RWalsh]] ([[User talk:RWalsh|talk]]) 15:15, 8 February 2021 (EST)
:{{reply to|RWalsh}} Not quite, but it's looking good. Clean it up and begin helping others. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 07:11, 9 February 2021 (EST)

Dr. Lucas, I believe I have finished editing my article. Will you please review?
https://projectmailer.net/pm/The_Mailer_Review/Volume_13,_2019/%E2%80%9CHer_Problems_Were_Everyone%E2%80%99s_Problems%E2%80%9D:_Self_and_Gender_in_The_Deer_Park [[User:Klcrawford|Klcrawford]] ([[User talk:Klcrawford|talk]]) 09:06, 15 February 2021 (EST)
:{{Reply to|Klcrawford}} Great work. I have removed the working banner. I would appreciate it if you began to assist some of the other editors. Thanks. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 13:04, 15 February 2021 (EST)

Hello Dr. Lucas, I have been making some edits, I am still looking to see if there is more, can you look through and give any feedback?https://projectmailer.net/pm/The_Mailer_Review/Volume_13,_2019/Angst,_Authorship,_Critics:_“The_Snows_of_Kilimanjaro,”_“The_Crack-Up,”_Advertisements_for_Myself [[User:JFordyce|JFordyce]] ([[User talk:JFordyce|talk]]) 18:27, 20 February 2021 (EST)JFordyce

Hello Dr. Lucas, I believe I have finished my article. Can you please review it? https://projectmailer.net/pm/The_Mailer_Review/Volume_13,_2019/Request [[User:EKrauskopf|EKrauskopf]] ([[User talk:EKrauskopf|talk]]) 13:06, 22 Februrary 2021 (EST)
:{{Reply to|EKrauskopf}} OK, looks good. Well done. Now please begin assisting others on getting volume 9 finished. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 06:41, 23 February 2021 (EST)

Dr. Lucas, I have finished and cleaned up my article. Could you please review it?
https://projectmailer.net/pm/The_Mailer_Review/Volume_13,_2019/More_Than_The_Dead_Know [[User:RWalsh|RWalsh]] ([[User talk:RWalsh|talk]]) 12:35, 23 February 2021 (EST)
:{{Reply to|RWalsh}} OK, nice job. Now please begin assisting others on getting volume 9 finished. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 13:47, 23 February 2021 (EST)

Hello Dr.Lucas final edits have been made and the article is finished.https://projectmailer.net/pm/The_Mailer_Review/Volume_13,_2019/Angst,_Authorship,_Critics:_“The_Snows_of_Kilimanjaro,”_“The_Crack-Up,”_Advertisements_for_Myself[[User:JFordyce|JFordyce]] ([[User talk:JFordyce|talk]]) 22:27, 2 March 2021 (EST) JFordyce

Hello, Dr. Lucas! I have completed remediation on [[The Mailer Review/Volume 4, 2010/The American Civil War in The Naked and the Dead and Across the River and Into the Trees]]. Can you please let me know if there's anything I need to correct? Thanks so much! [[User:KaraCroissant|KaraCroissant]] ([[User talk:KaraCroissant|talk]]) 17:11, 1 April 2025 (EDT)
:{{Reply to|KaraCroissant}} great work! A couple of things: never bury your talk page post. Put it at the bottom, preferably in its own section by clicking "Add topic" on the top-right. Other than that—great job! I have removed the banner, so you are free to help with the rest of the volume. Thanks! —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 08:58, 3 April 2025 (EDT)

Hi, Dr. Lucas. I think I have finished my PM article:[[The_Mailer_Review/Volume_4,_2010/Hemingway_to_Mailer_—_A_Delayed_Response_to_The_Deer_Park|Hemingway to Mailer-A Delayed Response to The Deer Park]]. Please let me know if there is anything else needed from me. [[User:Hobbitonya|Hobbitonya]] ([[User talk:Hobbitonya|talk]]) 17:54, 2 April 2025 (EDT)
:{{Reply to|Hobbitonya}} nice work. A couple of things: never bury your talk page post. Put it at the bottom, preferably in its own section by clicking "Add topic" on the top-right. Look at punctuation placement and footnotes; commas go inside quotation marks; punctuation goes before footnotes. You still have some citation issues. Note the read errors at the bottom of the page. These need to be gone. (Check the Mailer 1963 short footnote; there is no corresponding citation for 1963.) Thanks! —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 08:58, 3 April 2025 (EDT)

Hi Dr. Lucas. I think I have finished my article: https://projectmailer.net/index.php?title=The_Mailer_Review/Volume_4,_2010/Ernest_and_Norman:_A_Dialogue_in_Two_Acts&oldid=17870
Please let me know if there is anything I need to fix. Also, let me know if the link is working. [[User:DSánchez|DSánchez]] ([[User talk:DSánchez|talk]]) 17:13, 3 April 2025 (EDT)
:{{Reply to| DSánchez}} looks good. I removed the banner, but please remove all the links. I understand what you were trying to do, but it's unnecessary. Thanks. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 07:13, 4 April 2025 (EDT)

==Article Request==
Dr. Lucas. I have started working on another article. Would you be able to send me the PDF of "The Savage Poet-- Unlocking the Universe With Metaphor" so that I can help add to the article? [[User:Klcrawford|Klcrawford]] ([[User talk:Klcrawford|talk]]) 18:24, 23 February 2021 (EST)
:{{Reply to|Klcrawford}} Done. Thank you. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 07:46, 24 February 2021 (EST)

== When we Were Kings 1st remediation ==

[[The_Mailer_Review/Volume_13,_2019/When_We_Were_Kings:_Review_and_Commentary|https://projectmailer.net/pm/The_Mailer_Review/Volume_13,_2019/When_We_Were_Kings:_Review_and_Commentary]]

Here is the link for the remediation I did for this weeks assignment. I did not now where to place the link.

Thank you,
Trevor Ryals
:{{Reply to|TRyals}} Thank you, but this is unnecessary. Just do the work; I promise I will see it. (And be sure to sign your talk page posts.) —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 18:16, 2 February 2021 (EST)

==Summer 2021==
Can you please review my article? I have a couple errors that I do not understand how to fix. Other than that, I am finished. https://projectmailer.net/pm/User:PLowery/sandbox

Can you review my article again please? I think I might be done. [[User:PLowery|PLowery]] ([[User talk:PLowery|talk]])
:{{Reply to|PLowery}} In order for you to be finished, your entire article must be posted [[The Mailer Review/Volume 3, 2009/A Favor for the Ages|in the mainspace]]. Thanks. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 07:29, 21 June 2021 (EDT)
::Done
:::I believe I have it done correctly now.

My topic person is Marion Stegeman Hodgson,however she was not my first choice. There are four others who initially chose Hodgson, Tyler McMillan, Elizabeth Webb, Caleb Andrews, and Marguerite Walker. I haven't gotten in touch with either classmate as of this date however.[[User:KWilcox|KWilcox]] ([[User talk:KWilcox|talk]])Kenneth Wilcox(KWilcox)July 7, 2021[[User:KWilcox|KWilcox]] ([[User talk:KWilcox|talk]])
:{{Reply to|KWilcox}} This work should be done on Wikipedia. Please post all questions and work about project 2 on Wikipedia. Thanks. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 09:12, 8 July 2021 (EDT)

My attempt at creating a draft article failed by creating a new page. My next attempt will be using the user page to create the draft article, is this correct?[[User:KWilcox|KWilcox]] ([[User talk:KWilcox|talk]]) 10:22, 8 July 2021 (EDT)Kenneth Wilcox, July 8, 2021, 10:21am[[User:KWilcox|KWilcox]] ([[User talk:KWilcox|talk]]) 10:22, 8 July 2021 (EDT)
:{{Reply to|KWilcox}} As I said: please post all questions for project 2 on Wikipedia. This is an inappropriate forum for them. Thank you. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 10:27, 8 July 2021 (EDT)

== Remediation of "Reinventing the Wheel" Mailer Article for Review ==

Dr. Lucas,

My [[The_Mailer_Review/Volume_5,_2011/Reinventing_a_New_Wheel:_The_Films_of_Norman_Mailer|article]] is ready for review.

Thank you!
[[User:TPoole|TPoole]] ([[User talk:TPoole|talk]]) 15:29, 29 March 2025 (EDT)
:{{Reply to|TPoole}} great! Could you include a link to it? Thanks. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 11:07, 30 March 2025 (EDT)
::OK, I [[The Mailer Review/Volume 5, 2011/Reinventing a New Wheel: The Films of Norman Mailer|found it]]. Looking really good. Great work. There are some citation issues that need to be seen to. The two red categories at the bottom should not be there; they will go away when the citations errors are corrected. Eliminate any quotation mark "fangs" in the text and replace them with “real quotation marks.” Let me know if you need help. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 11:14, 30 March 2025 (EDT)
:::@Grlucas, what are the citation issues? Which ones need correcting? [[User:TPoole|TPoole]] ([[User talk:TPoole|talk]]) 17:31, 31 March 2025 (EDT)
::::{{Reply to| TPoole}} When you click your citations, they should jump to the works cited entry they correspond to. Several of yours do not, indicated by the red “Harv and Sfn no-target errors” at the bottom. You also have a "CS1 maint: Unrecognized language" error that will likely be cleared up when you fix the citation issues. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 08:55, 1 April 2025 (EDT)

== Remediation of: "Contradictory Syntheses: Norman Mailer’s Left Conservatism and the Problematic of 'Totalitarianism'" ==

Dr. Lucas

I finished the remediation of the following article:

https://projectmailer.net/pm/The_Mailer_Review/Volume_5,_2011/Contradictory_Syntheses:_Norman_Mailer%E2%80%99s_Left_Conservatism_and_the_Problematic_of_%E2%80%9CTotalitarianism%E2%80%9D

It is ready for your review. Thank you.
[[User:JKilchenmann|JKilchenmann]] ([[User talk:JKilchenmann|talk]]) 19:04, 30 March 2025 (EDT)
:{{Reply to| JKilchenmann}} looks great. I made some tweaks to the references and some throughout, like changing ' and " to real apostrophes and quotation marks. A bit more clean-up, but you might want to check over it again. I removed the under-construction banner. Well one. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 21:32, 30 March 2025 (EDT)

== Final Edit ==

Thank you for your comments on my remediation of
"[[The Mailer Review/Volume 4, 2010/Authorship and Alienation in Death in the Afternoon and Advertisements for Myself|Authorship and Alienation in Death in the Afternoon and Advertisements for Myself.]]"

I've eliminated the "fang quotes" and changed them to “real quotation marks.” This was a very fascinating tip that taught me something new. It's something I've never noticed before but now always will.

I also put my sources in a bulleted list and removed the space before the citations. I think I'm all set now.
:{{Reply to|APKnight25}} great work! Please help other editors to complete the volume. Thanks! —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 08:34, 3 April 2025 (EDT)

== Remediation for ''Firearms in the Works of Hemingway and Mailer'' ==

[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]]

Hi Dr. Lucas,

I believe I have done everything for the Remediation of my article. Please let me know if there is anything else I need to do.

I will also link the article below:

https://projectmailer.net/pm/The_Mailer_Review/Volume_4,_2010/Firearms_in_the_Works_of_Hemingway_and_Mailer

Thank you,
Caitlin Vinson
:{{Reply to|CVinson}} great work so far. Your references must use templates, please. Blockquotes must also be done correctly. No spaces or line breaks before or after the {{tl|pg}} template. Footnote placement is also off (punctuation goes before the footnote; no spaces before or after the footnote). I will add the abstract and url. Thanks. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 08:30, 3 April 2025 (EDT)

== Remediation for ''Norman Mailer Today'' ==
Dr. Lucas, I have finished up my remediation article [[The Mailer Review/Volume 5, 2011/Norman Mailer Today|Norman Mailer Today]], and it is ready for review. Please let me know if I missed something. Thank you! —[[User:Kamyers|Kamyers]] ([[User talk:Kamyers|talk]]) 18:20, 3 April 2025 (EDT)
:{{Reply to|Kamyers}} Great work! Please help your fellow editors finish the volume, or pick something to work on in [[The Mailer Review/Volume 4, 2010|Volume 4]]. Thanks, and well done. —[[User:Grlucas|Grlucas]] ([[User talk:Grlucas|talk]]) 07:00, 4 April 2025 (EDT)

== Remediation of “The Conception of Irreversibility: Hannah Arendt and Hemingway’s ‘Hills Like White Elephants’” ==
Dr. Lucas, I have finished my remediation of Jennifer Yirinec's article: [[The Mailer Review/Volume 5, 2011/The Conception of Irreversibility: Hannah Arendt and Hemingway’s “Hills Like White Elephants”|The Conception of Irreversibility: Hannah Arendt and Hemingway’s “Hills Like White Elephants.”]] Thank you for your assistance with the article. It is ready for its final review! [[User:JHadaway|JHadaway]] ([[User talk:JHadaway|talk]]) 10:24, 4 April 2025 (EDT)

== Tribute Remediations ==
Dr. Lucas, I have begun work on the tributes for volume 5. [[The Mailer Review/Volume 5, 2011/Tributes to Norris Church Mailer/Grace Notes|Grace Notes]] by Stephen Borkowski is ready for its final review.—[[User:JHadaway|JHadaway]] ([[User talk:JHadaway|talk]]) 12:58, 4 April 2025 (EDT)