User:Sherrilledwards/sandbox: Difference between revisions
1st full para p342 - hey look no citations! |
2nd para p342 |
||
| Line 98: | Line 98: | ||
Mailer presents an astonishing degree of humor, irony, and ambiguity, worthy of Nabokov. Can we take Harlot’s speculation seriously? Mailer provides a complex play of ''metaphor, metonymy,'' and ''metaphysics'' in three arenas—character and plot in the modern novel; theology and cosmology in the universe; and the quest for meaning among the contingencies of life. | Mailer presents an astonishing degree of humor, irony, and ambiguity, worthy of Nabokov. Can we take Harlot’s speculation seriously? Mailer provides a complex play of ''metaphor, metonymy,'' and ''metaphysics'' in three arenas—character and plot in the modern novel; theology and cosmology in the universe; and the quest for meaning among the contingencies of life. | ||
Sixteen years later, Mailer returns to these themes in his final book, ''On God.''{{sfn|Mailer|2007}} There, among other topics, he discusses modern science, fundamentalism, and intelligent design, bringing insight into the nature of plot in the novels of Henry James, Hemingway, James Joyce, and others.{{sfn|Mailer|2007|p=143-161}} He suggests, for example, that James and Hemingway were “avatars of Intelligent Design”{{sfn|Mailer|2007|p=150}} whereas Joyce “plays at the very edge of chaos."{{sfn|Mailer|2007|p=151}} It is no coincidence that Mailer moves smoothly between God-language and an analysis of plot in the modern novel—for two reasons. | |||
=== Notes === | === Notes === | ||