663
edits
Jules Carry (talk | contribs) (Updated and corrected through §II.) |
Jules Carry (talk | contribs) (Corrected through §III.) |
||
Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
{{Working}} | {{Working}} | ||
{{MR09}} | {{MR09}} | ||
{{Byline|last=Whalen-Bridge |first=John |last1=Oon |first1=Angela |abstract=A survey of the status of Mailer Studies over the past ten years with a detailed analysis of strategic articles, dissertations, and books. |url=https://prmlr.us/mr03wha}} | {{Byline|last=Whalen-Bridge |first=John |last1=Oon |first1=Angela |abstract=A survey of the status of Mailer Studies over the past ten years with a detailed analysis of strategic articles, dissertations, and books. |note=I thank the highly able Edwina Quek, Jane Wong, Low Wai Yee, and Angela Oon for their impressive research skills, nor could I have made my deadline without the much-needed help of Helena Whalen-Bridge. |url=https://prmlr.us/mr03wha}} | ||
{{dc|dc=“T|he final purpose of art is to intensify}}, even, if necessary, to exacerbate, the moral consciousness of people,” Mailer wrote just under half a century ago,{{sfn|Mailer|1959|p=384}} but the majority of serious readers today would not pick up Mailer by that handle. Perhaps it is the business of Mailer scholarship, first and foremost, to ask whether we should. The inquiry would, at its fullest, have implications that extend far beyond Mailer scholarship, which is a way of saying that Mailer is not (or in a just world ''would not be'') merely of interest to specialists. | {{dc|dc=“T|he final purpose of art is to intensify}}, even, if necessary, to exacerbate, the moral consciousness of people,” Mailer wrote just under half a century ago,{{sfn|Mailer|1959|p=384}} but the majority of serious readers today would not pick up Mailer by that handle. Perhaps it is the business of Mailer scholarship, first and foremost, to ask whether we should. The inquiry would, at its fullest, have implications that extend far beyond Mailer scholarship, which is a way of saying that Mailer is not (or in a just world ''would not be'') merely of interest to specialists. | ||
Line 68: | Line 68: | ||
On November 9—11, 2006, the Center hosted its biennale Fleur Cowles Flair Symposium, ''The Sense of Our Time: Norman Mailer and America in Conflict''. The panelists included Norman Mailer himself, J. Michael Lennon, and Pulitzer Prize-winning writer David Oshinsky. There was also an exhibition held in conjunction with the Symposium—“Norman Mailer Takes On America”—which was described by Lennon as “by far the most impressive exhibition of the life and work of Norman Mailer ever mounted.” [https://web.archive.org/web/20080122022501/http://www.hrc.utexas.edu/ransomedition/2006/fall/norman_mailer.html Lennon gave an interview with the Center].{{efn|[As is the case with many URLs in print, the links included by the authors are dead as of the date of remediation, {{date|July 2021}}. Therefore, those that have been archived or just relocated are linked, but dead URLs have been removed. —Ed.]}} Also, an interview with Norman Mailer, his son John Buffalo Mailer and sister Barbara Mailer Wasserman was conducted by Ransom Center’s Curator of Academic Affairs, Robert Fulton, when the family came for the Symposium. The [https://www.hrc.utexas.edu/search/sound/recordings/?collNo=MS-02643 audio clips] from the interview and its transcript can be found at the Center. Among other questions, Fulton asked the following: | On November 9—11, 2006, the Center hosted its biennale Fleur Cowles Flair Symposium, ''The Sense of Our Time: Norman Mailer and America in Conflict''. The panelists included Norman Mailer himself, J. Michael Lennon, and Pulitzer Prize-winning writer David Oshinsky. There was also an exhibition held in conjunction with the Symposium—“Norman Mailer Takes On America”—which was described by Lennon as “by far the most impressive exhibition of the life and work of Norman Mailer ever mounted.” [https://web.archive.org/web/20080122022501/http://www.hrc.utexas.edu/ransomedition/2006/fall/norman_mailer.html Lennon gave an interview with the Center].{{efn|[As is the case with many URLs in print, the links included by the authors are dead as of the date of remediation, {{date|July 2021}}. Therefore, those that have been archived or just relocated are linked, but dead URLs have been removed. —Ed.]}} Also, an interview with Norman Mailer, his son John Buffalo Mailer and sister Barbara Mailer Wasserman was conducted by Ransom Center’s Curator of Academic Affairs, Robert Fulton, when the family came for the Symposium. The [https://www.hrc.utexas.edu/search/sound/recordings/?collNo=MS-02643 audio clips] from the interview and its transcript can be found at the Center. Among other questions, Fulton asked the following: | ||
{{quote|'''Robert Fulton | {{quote|'''Robert Fulton''': You as Norman Mailer have various identities—you are Norman Mailer the writer, then when you speak about yourself as Norman or Mailer in your writings in sort of the third person, and then you’re Norman Mailer the reader. Which one of those is stronger for you? | ||
'''Norman Mailer | '''Norman Mailer''': It almost depends on my mood. If I’m reading aloud, I’ll be the person I’m pretending to be, at that point I’ll be Norman Mailer the reader. I do think we have a certain separation from ourselves. In other words, when I’m talking about myself at the age of 28, and I’m saying “Norman”—he exists in my mind almost like a relative. In other words I don’t feel the individual umbilical cord stretching right out to him so I can yank on him and bring him in. He’s there; he is what he was and so on. And I think that’s true of all of us. We bear an odd relation to our own past that is beyond my powers to explore, but they may get into that sort of thing.}} | ||
The umbilical cord stretching endlessly between imagination and reality—Mailer’s musings, his more polished prose, and the anecdotes we now think of as “his life” flow one into the other, defeating our attempts at anything like narratological precision. | The umbilical cord stretching endlessly between imagination and reality—Mailer’s musings, his more polished prose, and the anecdotes we now think of as “his life” flow one into the other, defeating our attempts at anything like narratological precision. | ||
Line 83: | Line 83: | ||
===III. Mailer And His Others: The Personification Of ''Agon?''=== | ===III. Mailer And His Others: The Personification Of ''Agon?''=== | ||
Taking all the articles written about Mailer in the last ten years in hand, one could select a set of which compare Mailer to another writer, usually in not very surprising ways, but the interesting tendency is for critics to begin to see Mailer less in terms of ''agon'' and more in terms of affiliation. Mailer has been | Taking all the articles written about Mailer in the last ten years in hand, one could select a set of which compare Mailer to another writer, usually in not very surprising ways, but the interesting tendency is for critics to begin to see Mailer less in terms of ''agon'' and more in terms of affiliation. Mailer has been often understood as a rival of other writers, and this perspective is a large aspect of his own self creation. His {{date|1959}} article, “Quick and Expensive Comments on the Talent in the Room,” was perhaps Mailer’s Rubicon: his appraisals of James Jones, William Styron, Truman Capote, Jack Kerouac, Saul Bellow, and so forth made it clear that Mailer was not destined to become a literary politician. Mailer wrote in ''The Armies of the Night'' that he thought of himself as a counter-puncher, and his literary feuds and rivalries, including spats and major feuds with writers such as James Baldwin and Gore Vidal, as well as his battles with larger movements such as his engagement with feminism that led to ''The Prisoner of Sex'', reveal the essential truth of Richard Poirier’s claim that Mailer never stopped being a war novelist. If Mailer has always had reliable Orwellian intuitions about the ways in which American political forces drift toward war to enhance an internal organization rather than ward off external threat, then perhaps it could be said it takes one to know one. Mailer writes on the imagination at war and Mailer readers look for the mythical “good war.” Mailer often was not quite on the right side in the Manichean battle between the Devil and the Lord. | ||
often understood as a rival of other writers, and this perspective is a large aspect of his own self creation. His 1959 article, “Quick and Expensive Comments on the Talent in the Room,” was perhaps Mailer’s Rubicon: his appraisals of James Jones, William Styron, Truman Capote, Jack Kerouac, Saul Bellow, and so forth made it clear that Mailer was not destined to become a literary politician. Mailer wrote in ''The Armies of the Night'' that he thought of himself as a counter-puncher, and his literary feuds and rivalries, including spats and major feuds with writers such as James Baldwin and Gore Vidal, as well as his battles with larger movements such as his engagement with feminism that led to ''The Prisoner of Sex'', reveal the essential truth of Richard Poirier’s claim that Mailer never stopped being a war novelist. If Mailer has always had reliable Orwellian intuitions about the ways in which American political forces drift toward war to enhance an internal organization rather than ward off external threat, then perhaps it could be said it | |||
takes one to know one. Mailer writes on the imagination at war and Mailer readers look for the mythical “good war.” Mailer often was not quite on the right side in the Manichean battle between the Devil and the Lord. | |||
Mailer and Coover, for example, help us see homophobia as a function of cold war hegemony in “Crises of Masculinity: Homosexual Desire and Homosexual Panic in the Critical ColdWar Narratives of Mailer and Coover” | Mailer and Coover, for example, help us see homophobia as a function of cold war hegemony in “Crises of Masculinity: Homosexual Desire and Homosexual Panic in the Critical ColdWar Narratives of Mailer and Coover” by Michael Snyder. For Snyder, Mailer’s ''An American Dream'' and ''Why are We in Vietnam?'', like Coover’s ''The Public Burning'', “critique the way homosexuality functions to consolidate patriarchal power,”{{sfn|Snyder|2007|p=250}} but Mailer is a little more of the bad cop to Robert Coover’s good cop, since Mailer’s homophobia is compared to Coover’s “use of subversive Bakhtinian carnival laughter,” which “presents a more devastating, comprehensive critique of cold war rhetoric” than do texts by Mailer.{{sfn|Snyder|2007|p=250}} | ||
by Michael Snyder. For Snyder,Mailer’s ''An American Dream'' and ''Why are We in Vietnam?'', like Coover’s ''The Public Burning'', “critique the way homosexuality functions to consolidate patriarchal | |||
Some of the “Mailer vs. X” merely recycle an idea, using the staged fight to expand naught into naught-much-more. Michael Macilwee’s article “Saul Bellow and Normal Mailer” is somewhat reminiscent of earlier articles we have seen on these two writers. There have been two Vidal vs. Mailer articles during this period, one by Michael Mewshaw, appearing in 2002, “Vidal and Mailer,” and Heather Nelson’s “Jack’s Ghost: Reappearances of John F. Kennedy in the Work of Gore Vidal and Normal Mailer” in ''American Studies International''. Neither one mentions Donald Pease’s Mailer/Vidal comparison from 1992, “Citizen Vidal and Mailer’s America,” for example. | Some of the “Mailer vs. X” merely recycle an idea, using the staged fight to expand naught into naught-much-more. Michael Macilwee’s article “Saul Bellow and Normal Mailer” is somewhat reminiscent of earlier articles we have seen on these two writers. There have been two Vidal vs. Mailer articles during this period, one by Michael Mewshaw, appearing in {{date|2002}}, “Vidal and Mailer,” and Heather Nelson’s “Jack’s Ghost: Reappearances of John F. Kennedy in the Work of Gore Vidal and Normal Mailer” in ''American Studies International''. Neither one mentions Donald Pease’s Mailer/Vidal comparison from {{date|1992}}, “Citizen Vidal and Mailer’s America,” for example. | ||
Mewshaw informs us, after recycling the Mailer/Vidal feud one more time, that “Vidal gave no sign of being bothered by the noise and the pollution,” that a “servant, Indian or Sri Lankan, brought our | Mewshaw informs us, after recycling the Mailer/Vidal feud one more time, that “Vidal gave no sign of being bothered by the noise and the pollution,” that a “servant, Indian or Sri Lankan, brought our drinks,”{{sfn|Mewshaw|2002|p=6}} and that “as I would often hear Vidal repeat with glee, no number of dinner parties could possibly dry up a writer’s creative juices as quickly as a steady diet of teaching freshman composition.”{{sfn|Mewshaw|2002|p=8}} Heather {{harvtxt|Neilson|1997}} alternatively not only recovers but extends more significant literary memory. She reminds us that this comparison has a history, quoting Bernard F. Dick from {{date|1974}}, who had astutely suggested that “the fact that ''Why Are We in Vietnam?'' ({{date|1967}}) appeared in the same year as ''Washington D.C.'' not only crystallizes the difference between these two literary rivals but also explains why Mailer has become the voice of his generation while Vidal has become its mocking persona.”{{sfn|Dick|1974|p=27}} In more recent years, Neilson notes the pattern has not held: The almost simultaneous appearance of ''Palimpsest'' and ''Oswald’s Tale'' can be seen as a piquant reversal of the expected projectories of their authors’ careers—Vidal at last writing openly about his private life, and Mailer confirming his growing interest in history and historiography. We would like to see Neilson develop these points more fully. | ||
as a piquant reversal of the expected projectories of their authors’ | |||
Whether or not “Vidal vs. Mailer” was in any sense the fight of the century, a good literary feud can have a salutary effect on literary history. The Maxine Hong Kingston vs. Frank Chin fight, for example, has helped Asian-American writers and scholars make communally recognized literary constellations out of what would otherwise be random points of light, and we may ask, along these lines: What has the Gore/Norman fight produced? Reviewing the matter from various angles, including for example Fred | Whether or not “Vidal vs. Mailer” was in any sense the fight of the century, a good literary feud can have a salutary effect on literary history. The Maxine Hong Kingston vs. Frank Chin fight, for example, has helped Asian-American writers and scholars make communally recognized literary constellations out of what would otherwise be random points of light, and we may ask, along these lines: What has the Gore/Norman fight ''produced''? Reviewing the matter from various angles, including for example Fred Kaplan’s ''Gore Vidal: a Biography'' and Dick Cavett’s recollections of the televised parts of the feud just after Mailer’s death, one does not come away thinking that great battles have been won either by the Devil or the Lord.{{efn|Dick Cavett’s recollections are a great pleasure to read, as dozens of readers noted on his ''New York Times'' blog page. Miraculously, he frames the matter in such a way as to indicate how the weirdness of a given time touches the participants in estranging ways that are funny, awful, and invigorating: “It was at a vividly bad time in Norman Mailer’s life that I met him, and a sort of water-treading time in mine. He had stabbed his wife, and I was a copy boy at ''Time'' magazine.”}} Fred Kaplan’s ''Gore Vidal: a Biography'' gives the chemical formulas for the various high-intensity exchanges between the two; Kaplan’s account gives much more than recycled spleen. There are also detailed portraits of intermediaries such as the influential editor Jason Epstein, contrasting responses to various phases of the relationship between Mailer and Vidal, and a tactful rendition of the highly cautious manner in which the two aging writers sidled up to one another in order to end the feud.{{efn|Published in the same year as Gore Vidal, Norman Podhoretz’ ''Ex-Friends: Falling Out with Allen Ginsberg, Lionel and Diana Trilling, Lillian Hellman, Hannah Arendt, and Norman Mailer'' is a picture of rancor for its own sake.}} The story of Mailer as a ''friend'' rather than as an ineluctable adversary emerges in Rachel Cohen’s ''A Chance Meeting: Intertwined Lives of American Writers and Artists, 1854—1967''. This book is in some ways quite Mailerian, folding in the radical intuitionism of Mailer’s speculative biography ''Marilyn'' into the subjective force of ''The Armies of the Night'', in which the centering self stands up to history. The book braids together the pacts and patterns of hundreds of biographical books and articles, and if it is a little too general at times, it always proceeds form a genuine appreciation of the affiliations that explain the intensity of all literary quests. Mailer figures quite strongly in the last third of the book, with chapters on Mailer with Baldwin, with Marianne Moore, and with Robert Lowell. | ||
Kaplan’s ''Gore Vidal: a Biography'' and Dick Cavett’s recollections of the televised parts of the feud just after Mailer’s death, one does not come away | |||
thinking that great battles have been won either by the Devil or the Lord. | |||
Fred Kaplan’s ''Gore Vidal: a Biography'' gives the chemical formulas for the various high-intensity exchanges between the two; Kaplan’s account gives much more than recycled spleen. There are also detailed portraits of intermediaries such as the influential editor Jason Epstein, contrasting responses to various phases of the relationship between Mailer and Vidal, and a tactful rendition of the highly cautious manner in which the two aging writers sidled up to one another in order to end the feud. | |||
friend rather than as an ineluctable adversary emerges in Rachel Cohen’s ''A Chance Meeting: Intertwined Lives of American Writers and Artists, 1854—1967''. This book is in some ways quite Mailerian, folding in the radical intuitionism of Mailer’s speculative biography Marilyn into the subjective force of ''The Armies of the Night'', in which the centering self stands up to history. The book braids together the pacts and patterns of hundreds of biographical books and articles, and if it is a little too general at times, it always proceeds form a genuine appreciation of the affiliations that explain the intensity of all literary quests. Mailer figures quite strongly in the last third of the book, with chapters on Mailer with Baldwin, with Marianne Moore, and with Robert Lowell. | |||
There have been a few articles in which Mailer is not the Satanic adversary. John M. Kinder’s “The Good War’s “Raw Chunks”: Norman Mailer’s ''The Naked and the Dead'' and James Gould Cozzens’s ''Guard of Honor''” | There have been a few articles in which Mailer is not the Satanic adversary. John M. Kinder’s “The Good War’s “Raw Chunks”: Norman Mailer’s ''The Naked and the Dead'' and James Gould Cozzens’s ''Guard of Honor''” | ||
returns to WWII via two 1948 novels to correct our misimpression that the “good war” was always good: “At best, what we now call the ‘Good War’ is a well-maintained fiction, a constellation of images, narratives, memories, and sound bites invoked to lend authority to everything from the War on Drugs to the current American-lead occupation of | returns to WWII via two 1948 novels to correct our misimpression that the “good war” was always good: “At best, what we now call the ‘Good War’ is a well-maintained fiction, a constellation of images, narratives, memories, and sound bites invoked to lend authority to everything from the War on Drugs to the current American-lead occupation of Iraq.”{{sfn|Kinder|2005|p=187}} In this article, not only does Mailer become friends with another writer, he also gets to be the political good guy. Gary Rosenshield aligns Mailer with three other writers in his article “Crime and Redemption, Russian and American style: Dostoevsky, Buckley, Mailer, Styron and Their Wards.” Many people have commented critically on Mailer’s involvement in the Abbot case, noting his valorization in contemporary American society, “his romanticization of the criminal, and his faith in the redemptive power of literary talent.”{{sfn|Rosenshield|1998|p=684}} The main virtue of Rosenshield’s essay is that he does not look at the activity of a single writer in isolation, instead choosing to compare Mailer, Styron and Dostoevsky to show the complex interrelations between judgment, risk and seduction in all of these cases. Rosenshield does what a scholar should do—he connects the impulsive judgments that energize daily journalism to the deeper responsibilities of historical memory. How does Mailer come off | ||
in his article “Crime and Redemption, Russian and American style: Dostoevsky, Buckley, Mailer, Styron and Their Wards.” Many people have commented critically on Mailer’s involvement in the Abbot case, noting his | |||
valorization in contemporary American society, “his romanticization of the criminal, and his faith in the redemptive power of literary | |||
deeper responsibilities of historical memory. How does Mailer come off | |||
compared to others?: | compared to others?: | ||
{{quote|By comparison to both Buckley and Dostoevsky, Mailer indeed seems reckless. What makes Mailer’s intercession so interesting in relationship to Dostoevsky’s is that like Dostoevsky he conceives his redemptive project in the broadest social and ideological terms. He even seems to have borrowed some of the rhetoric relating to the redemption of criminals directly from Dostoevsky, buttressing his sponsorship of [Jack Henry] Abbot—and the downtrodden in general—by framing it in a Dostoevskean progression from crime, imprisonment, and punishment to redemption.{{sfn|Rosenshield|1998|p=696}} }} | |||
{{quote|By comparison to both Buckley and Dostoevsky, Mailer indeed seems reckless. What makes Mailer’s intercession so interesting in relationship to Dostoevsky’s is that like Dostoevsky he conceives his redemptive project in the broadest social and ideological terms. He even seems to have borrowed some of the rhetoric relating to the redemption of criminals directly from Dostoevsky, buttressing his sponsorship of [Jack Henry] Abbot—and the downtrodden in general—by framing it in a Dostoevskean progression from crime, imprisonment, and punishment to redemption. | Rosenshield attempts to understand the phenomena but not just to play “gotcha.” He knows that several of these famous writer-criminal relationships have had “unfortunate outcomes”{{sfn|Rosenshield|1998|p=678}} and that the writers are aware of the risks, but that the American hunger for redemption makes those risks seem worthwhile to American writers. | ||
Rosenshield attempts to understand the phenomena but not just to play “gotcha.” He knows that several of these famous writer-criminal relationships have had “unfortunate outcomes” | |||
Mailer never tried to be average, to tack toward the center, and so the idea that we can better understand the range of possibilities by comparing something, a name, with Norman Mailer and it will often yield good results. We see this in two elegiac pieces, one from the ''Los Angeles Times'' and one from the ''New York Times'' after Mailer’s death. Morris Dickstein’s triptych “Mailer, Paley, Vonnegut: Same Era, Different Voices” pays homage to three distinctly different talents but puts them together not just because they all | Mailer never tried to be average, to tack toward the center, and so the idea that we can better understand the range of possibilities by comparing something, a name, with Norman Mailer and it will often yield good results. We see this in two elegiac pieces, one from the ''Los Angeles Times'' and one from the ''New York Times'' after Mailer’s death. Morris Dickstein’s triptych “Mailer, Paley, Vonnegut: Same Era, Different Voices” pays homage to three distinctly different talents but puts them together not just because they all | ||
died around the same time but rather to make a claim about scale. Sam Tanenhaus’ “Requiem for Two Heavyweights” makes a comparison between Mailer and William F. Buckley, one that seems both more apt (because of the way these two men related to the mass media) and more surprising, considering that they often debated the issues from opposite ends of the spectrum. For Tanenhaus, these two were “more than public intellectuals they were citizen intellectuals, active participants in the great dramas of their time, and eager at times to pursue their ideas in democracy’s more bruising arenas.” | died around the same time but rather to make a claim about scale. Sam Tanenhaus’ “Requiem for Two Heavyweights” makes a comparison between Mailer and William F. Buckley, one that seems both more apt (because of the way these two men related to the mass media) and more surprising, considering that they often debated the issues from opposite ends of the spectrum. For Tanenhaus, these two were “more than public intellectuals they were citizen intellectuals, active participants in the great dramas of their time, and eager at times to pursue their ideas in democracy’s more bruising arenas.” | ||
. . . | |||
===Notes=== | ===Notes=== | ||
Line 209: | Line 135: | ||
* {{cite journal |last=Hume |first=Kathryn |author-mask=1 |title=Books of the Dead: Postmortem Politics in Novels by Mailer, Burroughs, Acker, and Pynchon |url= |journal=Modern Philology |volume=97 |issue=3 |date={{date|February 2000}} |pages=417–444 |access-date= |ref=harv }} | * {{cite journal |last=Hume |first=Kathryn |author-mask=1 |title=Books of the Dead: Postmortem Politics in Novels by Mailer, Burroughs, Acker, and Pynchon |url= |journal=Modern Philology |volume=97 |issue=3 |date={{date|February 2000}} |pages=417–444 |access-date= |ref=harv }} | ||
* {{cite news |last=Kakutani |first=Michiko |date={{date|2003-01-22|MDY}} |title=Quoting Himself on His Lofty Dream |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2003/01/22/books/books-of-the-times-quoting-himself-on-his-lofty-dream.html |work=New York Times |location= |page= |access-date={{Date|2021-07-05|ISO}} |ref=harv }} | * {{cite news |last=Kakutani |first=Michiko |date={{date|2003-01-22|MDY}} |title=Quoting Himself on His Lofty Dream |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2003/01/22/books/books-of-the-times-quoting-himself-on-his-lofty-dream.html |work=New York Times |location= |page= |access-date={{Date|2021-07-05|ISO}} |ref=harv }} | ||
* {{cite journal |last=Kinder |first=John M. |title=The Good War’s ‘Raw Chunks’: Norman Mailer’s ''The Naked and the Dead'' and James Gould Cozzens’s ''Guard of Honor'' |url= |journal=The Midwest Quarterly |volume=46 |issue=2 |date={{date|2005}} |pages=187–202 |access-date= |ref=harv }} | |||
* {{cite book |last=Leeds |first=Barry |date={{date|2002}} |title=The Enduring Vision of Norman Mailer |url= |location=New York |publisher=Pleasure Boat Studio Press |author-link=Barry H. Leeds |ref=harv }} | * {{cite book |last=Leeds |first=Barry |date={{date|2002}} |title=The Enduring Vision of Norman Mailer |url= |location=New York |publisher=Pleasure Boat Studio Press |author-link=Barry H. Leeds |ref=harv }} | ||
* {{cite book |last=Lehtimäki |first=Markku |date={{date|2005}} |title=The Poetics of Norman Mailer’s Nonfiction: Self-Reflexivity, Literary Form, and the Rhetoric of Narrative |url= |location=Tampere |publisher=Tampere UP |ref=harv }} | * {{cite book |last=Lehtimäki |first=Markku |date={{date|2005}} |title=The Poetics of Norman Mailer’s Nonfiction: Self-Reflexivity, Literary Form, and the Rhetoric of Narrative |url= |location=Tampere |publisher=Tampere UP |ref=harv }} | ||
Line 230: | Line 157: | ||
* {{cite magazine |last=Manand |first=Louis |date={{date|2007-11-11|MDY}} |title=Norman Mailer |url=https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2007/11/19/norman-mailer |magazine=The New Yorker |pages= |access-date={{date|2008-07-21|ISO}} |url-access=subscription |ref=harv }} | * {{cite magazine |last=Manand |first=Louis |date={{date|2007-11-11|MDY}} |title=Norman Mailer |url=https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2007/11/19/norman-mailer |magazine=The New Yorker |pages= |access-date={{date|2008-07-21|ISO}} |url-access=subscription |ref=harv }} | ||
* {{cite book |last=Merrill |first=Robert |date={{date|1992}} |title=Norman Mailer Revisited |url= |location=New York |publisher=Twayne |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |ref=harv }} | * {{cite book |last=Merrill |first=Robert |date={{date|1992}} |title=Norman Mailer Revisited |url= |location=New York |publisher=Twayne |pages= |isbn= |author-link= |ref=harv }} | ||
* {{cite journal |last=Mewshaw |first=Michael |title=Vidal and Mailer |url= |journal=South Central Review |volume=19 |issue=1 |date= | * {{cite journal |last=Mewshaw |first=Michael |title=Vidal and Mailer |url= |journal=South Central Review |volume=19 |issue=1 |date={{date|2002}} |pages=4–14 |access-date= |ref=harv }} | ||
* {{cite web |url=https://www.nationalbook.org/norman-mailer-accepts-the-2005-medal-for-distinguished-contribution-in-american-letters/ |title=Toni Morrison Presents Norman Mailer with the 2005 National Book Foundation Medal for Distinguished Contribution to American Letters |last=Morrison |first=Toni |date={{date|2005-11-16|MDY}} |website=National Book Foundation |publisher= |access-date={{date|2021-07-04|ISO}} |quote= |ref=harv }} | * {{cite web |url=https://www.nationalbook.org/norman-mailer-accepts-the-2005-medal-for-distinguished-contribution-in-american-letters/ |title=Toni Morrison Presents Norman Mailer with the 2005 National Book Foundation Medal for Distinguished Contribution to American Letters |last=Morrison |first=Toni |date={{date|2005-11-16|MDY}} |website=National Book Foundation |publisher= |access-date={{date|2021-07-04|ISO}} |quote= |ref=harv }} | ||
* {{cite journal |last=Neilson |first=Heather |title=Jack’s Ghost: Reappearances of John F. Kennedy in the Work of Gore Vidal and Norman Mailer |url= |journal=American Studies International |volume=35 |issue=3 |date={{date|October 1997}} |pages=23–41 |access-date= |ref=harv }} | * {{cite journal |last=Neilson |first=Heather |title=Jack’s Ghost: Reappearances of John F. Kennedy in the Work of Gore Vidal and Norman Mailer |url= |journal=American Studies International |volume=35 |issue=3 |date={{date|October 1997}} |pages=23–41 |access-date= |ref=harv }} | ||
Line 242: | Line 169: | ||
* {{cite book |last=Robbins |first=Bruce |date=1999 |title=Feeling Global: Internationalism in Distress |url= |location=New York |publisher=NYU Press |ref=harv }} | * {{cite book |last=Robbins |first=Bruce |date=1999 |title=Feeling Global: Internationalism in Distress |url= |location=New York |publisher=NYU Press |ref=harv }} | ||
* {{cite book |last=Rosenbaum |first=Ron |date={{date|1998}} |title=Explaining Hitler: The Search for the Origins of His Evil |url= |location=New York |publisher=Random House |ref=harv }} | * {{cite book |last=Rosenbaum |first=Ron |date={{date|1998}} |title=Explaining Hitler: The Search for the Origins of His Evil |url= |location=New York |publisher=Random House |ref=harv }} | ||
* {{cite journal |last=Rosenshield |first=Gary |title=Crime and Redemption, Russian and American Style: Dostoevsky, Buckley, Mailer, Styron and Their Wards |url= |journal=The Slavic and East European Journal |volume=42 |issue=4 |date=Winter {{date|1998}} |pages=677–709 |access-date= |ref= | * {{cite journal |last=Rosenshield |first=Gary |title=Crime and Redemption, Russian and American Style: Dostoevsky, Buckley, Mailer, Styron and Their Wards |url= |journal=The Slavic and East European Journal |volume=42 |issue=4 |date=Winter {{date|1998}} |pages=677–709 |access-date= |ref={{SfnRef|Rosenshield|1998}} }} | ||
* {{cite journal |last=Ryan |first=James Emmett |title=‘Insatiable as Good Old America’: ''Tough Guys Don’t Dance'' and Popular Criminality |url= |journal=Journal of Modern Literature |volume=30 |issue=1 |date=Fall 2006 |ref=harv }} | * {{cite journal |last=Ryan |first=James Emmett |title=‘Insatiable as Good Old America’: ''Tough Guys Don’t Dance'' and Popular Criminality |url= |journal=Journal of Modern Literature |volume=30 |issue=1 |date=Fall 2006 |ref=harv }} | ||
* {{cite book |editor-last=Sipiora |editor-first=Phillip |date=2007 |title=The Mailer Review |url= |location=Tampa, FL |publisher=U of South Florida |editor-link=Phillip Sipiora |ref=harv }} | * {{cite book |editor-last=Sipiora |editor-first=Phillip |date=2007 |title=The Mailer Review |url= |location=Tampa, FL |publisher=U of South Florida |editor-link=Phillip Sipiora |ref=harv }} |