User:Sherrilledwards/sandbox: Difference between revisions

These vignettes, a quarter century apart, illustrate the Modernist rhetoric of Hemingway and Mailer. For both authors, they mark a beginning, a revelation, a new Genesis. One thing is clear: unlike the biblical Genesis, there is an absence of traditional concepts of God, a sense of Providence, a rational universe. We have ''left'' the Garden. Many have written on religious themes in Hemingway and in Mailer: certainly, the themes exist and can be discussed.{{efn|Recent articles include Buske,{{sfn|Buske|2002}} Stoneback,{{sfn|Stoneback|2003}} Lewis,{{sfn|Lewis|2004}} Stolzfus,{{sfn|Stolzfus|2005}} Adamowski,{{sfn|Adamowski|2005}} Kroupi,{{sfn|Kroupi|2008}} Bernstein,{{sfn|Bernstein|2008}} Cappell,{{sfn|Cappell|2008}}, Sipioria,{{sfn|Sipiora|2008}} and Whalen-Bridge and Oon.{{sfn|Whalen-Bridge and Oon|2009}}}} But I would like to examine the overall ''matrix'' of Modernity in which those themes are embedded, focusing on the ''disenchantment'' of the world.

=== Modernity and Disenchantment ===

Today, the relationship between religion and modernity is more nuanced than in the naturalistic Nineteenth Century. We recognize a wide spectrum from faith through doubt to atheism. But at the risk of simplification, there seem to be two main approaches. For conservative Christianity and Judaism, religious commitment may be expressed as a ''rejection'' of modernity, using an either/or approach to truth. For those with liberal perspectives on Christianity and Judaism, religious commitment may be regarded as ''complementary'' to modernity, utilizing a both/and approach to truth. That complementary perspective may remind us of wave-particle duality in quantum mechanics. This is not simply a literary trope.{{efn| Planck, Einstein, and Heisenberg revealed the inescapable reality of indeterminacy in our world.}} In both humanities and physical sciences, there will be no return to rigid determinism.

=== God-Language in Hemingway: "Scared Stiff Looking at It" ===