88
edits
The Mailer Review/Volume 2, 2008/Norman Mailer, Metaphysician at Work: Difference between revisions
The Mailer Review/Volume 2, 2008/Norman Mailer, Metaphysician at Work (view source)
Revision as of 23:53, 29 September 2020
, 29 September 2020corrected typos
m (Removed working banner.) |
Amylhester (talk | contribs) m (corrected typos) |
||
| Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
Mailer has long been known for his search for order,<ref>In 1971, Robert Merrill wrote a dissertation, “A Fondness for Order: The Achievement of Norman Mailer.” (U of Chicago). He later wrote ''Norman Mailer'' (1978) and ''Norman Mailer Revisited'' (1992), both books in Twayne’s United States Authors Series (New York: Twayne Publishers).</ref> for a driving interest in examining explanatory systems that offer glimpses and shreds of insight into human experience, with a continual awareness, at least implicitly and usually explicitly, of their ultimate insufficiencies. In explaining his motivation for this book, Mailer emphasizes the importance of order: “Where does my desire for order come from? Not only do we humans have a fundamental desire for order, we have an obvious tendency as well toward disorder—a true conflict between order and disorder. So I say it may be worth the attempt to search such questions.” A search that, by its very nature, is ultimately futile. | Mailer has long been known for his search for order,<ref>In 1971, Robert Merrill wrote a dissertation, “A Fondness for Order: The Achievement of Norman Mailer.” (U of Chicago). He later wrote ''Norman Mailer'' (1978) and ''Norman Mailer Revisited'' (1992), both books in Twayne’s United States Authors Series (New York: Twayne Publishers).</ref> for a driving interest in examining explanatory systems that offer glimpses and shreds of insight into human experience, with a continual awareness, at least implicitly and usually explicitly, of their ultimate insufficiencies. In explaining his motivation for this book, Mailer emphasizes the importance of order: “Where does my desire for order come from? Not only do we humans have a fundamental desire for order, we have an obvious tendency as well toward disorder—a true conflict between order and disorder. So I say it may be worth the attempt to search such questions.” A search that, by its very nature, is ultimately futile. | ||
It is hardly innovative to point out Mailer’s long-held interest in metaphysics, defined as the domain of ontology (being ''qua'' being). ''[[The Naked and the Dead]]'', for example, is rife with explorations of the strategic importance of human relationships and their role in defining the quality of characters’ characters. Mailer has been regarded for decades as an “existential” writer. Yet his existential vision takes him far beyond human, inter-subjective and intra-subjective issues. Mailer’s metaphysics, well within philosophical tradition, has always reflected a quest into the nature and context of “reality,” particularly non-material entities. It is primarily metaphysical because it pursues an interrogative avenue of analysis, unlike, say, the scientific method. As a metaphysician, Mailer is not concerned with the issue of verification. His investigation is avowedly in the realm of speculation and hypothesis. Through self-reflexive speculation, Mailer attempts not to “capture” revelation, but to explore and articulate subjective theological possibilities: “All I say here may indeed be no more than a projection of my own egotistical preferences.” Most | It is hardly innovative to point out Mailer’s long-held interest in metaphysics, defined as the domain of ontology (being ''qua'' being). ''[[The Naked and the Dead]]'', for example, is rife with explorations of the strategic importance of human relationships and their role in defining the quality of characters’ characters. Mailer has been regarded for decades as an “existential” writer. Yet his existential vision takes him far beyond human, inter-subjective and intra-subjective issues. Mailer’s metaphysics, well within philosophical tradition, has always reflected a quest into the nature and context of “reality,” particularly non-material entities. It is primarily metaphysical because it pursues an interrogative avenue of analysis, unlike, say, the scientific method. As a metaphysician, Mailer is not concerned with the issue of verification. His investigation is avowedly in the realm of speculation and hypothesis. Through self-reflexive speculation, Mailer attempts not to “capture” revelation, but to explore and articulate subjective theological possibilities: “All I say here may indeed be no more than a projection of my own egotistical preferences.” Most readers familiar with Mailer’s ''oeuvre'' would find this statement neither surprising nor irrelevant. | ||
Mailer’s philosophical, speculative impulses come into play precisely because the inherited theological legacy has been too rigid in its adherence to a doctrine of the Deity as omnipotent and omniscient: “I think that’s where the philosophical trouble begins: the idea that God is All-Good and All-Powerful.” Mailer considers God an Artist, an anthropomorphic entity, who is part of a tripartite structure of forces in play: God, the Devil, and humans. God has some power, of course, but is not omnipotent. He knows much but not everything. Mailer’s metaphysical reasoning concludes that these | Mailer’s philosophical, speculative impulses come into play precisely because the inherited theological legacy has been too rigid in its adherence to a doctrine of the Deity as omnipotent and omniscient: “I think that’s where the philosophical trouble begins: the idea that God is All-Good and All-Powerful.” Mailer considers God an Artist, an anthropomorphic entity, who is part of a tripartite structure of forces in play: God, the Devil, and humans. God has some power, of course, but is not omnipotent. He knows much but not everything. Mailer’s metaphysical reasoning concludes that these forces are in perpetual conflict. Mailer sums up these forces as always and already in conflict, as if they were characters in a novel: “But my argument is that it has become a contest among three protagonists.” Humans vacillate between God and the devil, choosing sides at various moments and remaining independent at other times. | ||
One of the more interesting dimensions of Mailer’s speculations is his rejection of the common belief that individuals are judged and given infinite punishment (or reward) for finite behavior: “I’m not interested in absolute moral judgments, eternal Heaven, eternal Hell—to the contrary. Just think of what it means to be a good man or a bad one. What, after all, is the measure of the difference?” Mailer is nothing if not firmly rooted in the critical importance of reason, and it is through his powers of intense intellection that he approaches cosmology. Mailer understands faith and its universal stature, but it is not a major force in his metaphysics. Interestingly, Mailer believes in reincarnation, although he has always spoken of it in an ironic manner, perhaps as if treating something ironically protects against the drawing of fallacious inferences. In Mailer’s projections, there is always an element of doubt, skepticism, even cynicism. Mailer’s tonal reservations, however, do not diminish the fervor of his intuitions. Life is a continual state of metamorphosis. In this context, Mailer is reminiscent of Aristotle, who in his ''[[w:Rhetoric (Aristotle)|Art of Rhetoric]]'' defines rhetoric as an “ability,” “capacity,” or “potential.” Mailer’s metaphysical exploration of cosmology deals with the art and act of what “might be,” in sharp contrast to revelatory theological doctrine—rejected by Mailer—that is fundamentally assertive rather than speculative. | One of the more interesting dimensions of Mailer’s speculations is his rejection of the common belief that individuals are judged and given infinite punishment (or reward) for finite behavior: “I’m not interested in absolute moral judgments, eternal Heaven, eternal Hell—to the contrary. Just think of what it means to be a good man or a bad one. What, after all, is the measure of the difference?” Mailer is nothing if not firmly rooted in the critical importance of reason, and it is through his powers of intense intellection that he approaches cosmology. Mailer understands faith and its universal stature, but it is not a major force in his metaphysics. Interestingly, Mailer believes in reincarnation, although he has always spoken of it in an ironic manner, perhaps as if treating something ironically protects against the drawing of fallacious inferences. In Mailer’s projections, there is always an element of doubt, skepticism, even cynicism. Mailer’s tonal reservations, however, do not diminish the fervor of his intuitions. Life is a continual state of metamorphosis. In this context, Mailer is reminiscent of Aristotle, who in his ''[[w:Rhetoric (Aristotle)|Art of Rhetoric]]'' defines rhetoric as an “ability,” “capacity,” or “potential.” Mailer’s metaphysical exploration of cosmology deals with the art and act of what “might be,” in sharp contrast to revelatory theological doctrine—rejected by Mailer—that is fundamentally assertive rather than speculative. | ||