88
edits
Amylhester (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Amylhester (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
Line 29: | Line 29: | ||
starkly posed, has not received an answer in the sequel promised at the end of the novel. | starkly posed, has not received an answer in the sequel promised at the end of the novel. | ||
Mailer sets up grandiose expectations for the sequel by the incomplete | Mailer sets up grandiose expectations for the sequel by the incomplete ending and the final questions of the novel. The information left open concerns the fictional life of Harry Hubbard but also implies a verdict on the politics of America in the Cold War. To explain the events of ''Harlot’s Ghost'' means to reveal history since Hubbard is conveniently placed in the midst of | ||
ending and the final questions of the novel. The information left open concerns the fictional life of Harry Hubbard but also implies a verdict on the | major episodes in the Cold War due to his role in the CIA as an “agent” trying to influence developments. It is only at the end that Hubbard and readers realize the degree to which there is uncertainty as to what exactly has happened and why. In effect, the novel has set up a mystery without providing answers. However, to provide the meaning of the political events so starkly, in the form of answers to a question (“Whom does all this benefit?”), | ||
politics of America in the Cold War. To explain the events of Harlot’s Ghost | which will supposedly be answered when Harlot is located, is difficult to imagine given the deep level of political truths involved. Can any person, no matter how well placed, really be imagined who can answer ultimate truths about the meaning of the Cold War? In my view, it is to Mailer’s credit that he challenges himself to find a way to imaginatively create persuasive | ||
means to reveal history since Hubbard is conveniently placed in the midst of | answers and meaning to the most important political issues of our times. Yet, it is further to his credit that, whether consciously or not, he has shown the honesty to abandon a simple approach to a career long objective which could only be achieved, I will argue, at the cost of intellectual, political, and literary triviality. In effect, Mailer turns away from a dream that, if achieved, | ||
major episodes in the Cold War due to his role in the CIA as an “agent” trying to influence developments. It is only at the end that Hubbard and readers realize the degree to which there is uncertainty as to what exactly has | would situate him as part of a literary tradition that includes authors he admires most: Balzac, Tolstoy, and Zola, who also strove to tell the truth of their times. However, to invent a character revealing the meaning behind historical events brings to mind the superficiality of conspiracy theories, one form of historical fiction that seems to be growing in popularity (sometimes | ||
happened and why. In effect, the novel has set up a mystery without providing answers. However, to provide the meaning of the political events so | interestingly in literature but tragically in public discourse). | ||
starkly, in the form of answers to a question | {{efn|6. Conspiracy theories have been taken by several critics as the hallmark of postmodern historical representation. See Jameson, and McHale, among others.}} | ||
which will supposedly be answered when Harlot is located, is difficult to | |||
imagine given the deep level of political truths involved. Can any person, no | |||
matter how well placed, really be imagined who can answer ultimate truths | |||
about the meaning of the Cold War? In my view, it is to Mailer’s credit that | |||
he challenges himself to find a way to imaginatively create persuasive | On the other | ||
answers and meaning to the most important political issues of our times. Yet, | |||
it is further to his credit that, whether consciously or not, he has shown the | |||
honesty to abandon a simple approach to a career long objective which | |||
could only be achieved, I will argue, at the cost of intellectual, political, and | |||
literary triviality. In effect, Mailer turns away from a dream that, if achieved, | |||
would situate him as part of a literary tradition that includes authors he | |||
admires most: Balzac, Tolstoy, and Zola, who also strove to tell the truth of their times. However, to invent a character revealing the meaning behind historical events brings to mind the superficiality of conspiracy theories, one | |||
form of historical fiction that seems to be growing in popularity | |||
interestingly in literature but tragically in public discourse | |||
6 On the other | |||
hand, Bertolt Brecht’s goal for writers that they should “render reality to men | hand, Bertolt Brecht’s goal for writers that they should “render reality to men | ||
in a form they can master” ~Aesthetics and Politics 81! 7 seems the prerequisite for any politically useful fiction and sets up relevant criteria for evaluating Harlot’s Ghost. Therefore, Mailer’s unwillingness or inability to write an | in a form they can master” ~Aesthetics and Politics 81! 7 seems the prerequisite for any politically useful fiction and sets up relevant criteria for evaluating Harlot’s Ghost. Therefore, Mailer’s unwillingness or inability to write an | ||
Line 520: | Line 510: | ||
7. This phrase comes from Brecht’s polemic around the nature of realism with Georg Lukács | 7. This phrase comes from Brecht’s polemic around the nature of realism with Georg Lukács | ||
“Against Lukács” in Aesthetics and Politics ~NY: Verso, 1978 p. 81!. | “Against Lukács” in Aesthetics and Politics ~NY: Verso, 1978 p. 81!. |
edits