The Mailer Review/Volume 4, 2010/A Visionary Hermeneutic Appropriation: Meditations on Hemingway’s Influence on Mailer: Difference between revisions
APKnight25 (talk | contribs) Added page 172. |
APKnight25 (talk | contribs) Added page 173. |
||
| Line 117: | Line 117: | ||
If we integrate visionary hermeneutic appropriation within its twin phenomenological appearance in our consciousness and its existential implications in our experience, the term would then impart a sense of imaginative apprehension and alignment. This is so because one may perceive it as a type of conversion that would be justifiable. As conversion, it carries in it a{{pg|172|173}} | If we integrate visionary hermeneutic appropriation within its twin phenomenological appearance in our consciousness and its existential implications in our experience, the term would then impart a sense of imaginative apprehension and alignment. This is so because one may perceive it as a type of conversion that would be justifiable. As conversion, it carries in it a{{pg|172|173}} | ||
combined sense of artistic and spiritual adhesion and adherence.As such, it would differentiate itself from the passivity and inertia that usually characterize imitation and influence. Applied to Mailer’s attitude toward Hemingway, the whole process characterizes itself as a freely chosen mode of dynamic commitment and fidelity to an imaginatively energizing ideal. What it categorically refuses is a type of willy-nilly literary seduction. The entire enterprise demands an authentic self-transformation and renewal of identity from within. Therefore, certain perceived affinities and empathies between Mailer and Hemingway are more or less analogous to spiritual and religious longings as influence. | |||
I would like to convey a recollection that may put the concept of Mailer’s visionary hermeneutic appropriation of Hemingway in a clearer proper perspective. I remember reading French philosopher Gabriel Marcel’s effort to tell his readers that although he had read German philosopher Karl Jaspers’ essay ''“Système de philosophie”'' (Philosophical System), his own essay ''“On the Ontological Mystery,”'' had not been ''directly'' influenced by it. Marcel explained that Jaspers’ “terminology” and his “spiritual and religious orientations” were quite different from his own.{{sfn|Marcel|1973|p=6}} Marcel then added, “Nevertheless, I feel obscurely that I owe a real debt to this noble and profound thinker [Jaspers], and I am anxious to acknowledge the ''inward'' and almost ''indefinable'' influence which he has exercised on our own mind.”{{sfn|Marcel|1973|p=6}} I consider this statement to be an elegant, touching acknowledgement. This “inward” and “indefinable” and perhaps ultimately ineffable influence, with all that it implies, is precisely what I mean by visionary hermeneutic appropriation as influence. I detect it in Mailer’s inward and often ineffable responses to Hemingway. This is precisely my reason for differentiating among literary imitation, influence, and visionary hermeneutic appropriation. | |||
'''VI. SEARCH FOR ELEMENTS OF MAILER’S VISIONARY HERMENEUTIC | |||
APPROPRIATION OF HEMINGWAY''' | |||
<blockquote> | |||
Literary influence remains endlessly curious.{{sfn|Mailer|2003|p=99}} | |||
</blockquote> | |||
I would say that searching for the components of Hemingway’s nontransparent but nonetheless true influence on a writer such as Mailer could resemble the psychological mechanisms of paranoia. Or at least it may appear{{pg|173|174}} | |||
=== Notes === | === Notes === | ||