Jump to content

The Mailer Review/Volume 4, 2010/A Visionary Hermeneutic Appropriation: Meditations on Hemingway’s Influence on Mailer: Difference between revisions

← Older editNewer edit →
APKnight25 (talk | contribs)
175 edits
Removal test.
APKnight25 (talk | contribs)
175 edits
Undo revision 20274 by APKnight25 (talk)
Tag: Undo
Line 4: Line 4:
{{Byline |last=Nakjavani |first=Erik |url=TBD |abstract=TBD}}
{{Byline |last=Nakjavani |first=Erik |url=TBD |abstract=TBD}}


 
<blockquote>
[T]here is nothing in the critical field that should be of greater
philosophical interest or prove more rewarding to analysis than
the progressive modification of one mind by the work of
another.{{sfn|Valéry|1972|p=241}}
</blockquote>


'''I. Prologue'''
'''I. Prologue'''
Line 55: Line 60:
<blockquote>
<blockquote>
Hemingway’s style had an ability to hit the young writers in the
Hemingway’s style had an ability to hit the young writers in the
gut, and they weren’t the same after that.
gut, and they weren’t the same after that.{{sfn|Mailer|198|p=298}}
</blockquote>
</blockquote>


Retrieved from "https://projectmailer.net/pm/The_Mailer_Review/Volume_4,_2010/A_Visionary_Hermeneutic_Appropriation:_Meditations_on_Hemingway’s_Influence_on_Mailer"