663
edits
The Mailer Review/Volume 3, 2009/Washed by the Swells of Time: Reading Mailer, 1998–2008: Difference between revisions
The Mailer Review/Volume 3, 2009/Washed by the Swells of Time: Reading Mailer, 1998–2008 (view source)
Revision as of 10:46, 5 July 2021
, 5 July 2021Added and corrected through §IV.
Jules Carry (talk | contribs) (Corrected through §III.) |
Jules Carry (talk | contribs) m (Added and corrected through §IV.) |
||
| Line 99: | Line 99: | ||
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”{{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. | ||
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 | 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 {{harvtxt|Dickstein|2007}} 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 {{harvtxt|Tanenhaus|2008}} 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 | |||
===IV. Mailer As A Political Symptom: Liberalism And Race=== | |||
One book in particular describes Mailer as having a political role that was at once pivotal and eccentric. George Cotkin’s ''Existential America'' works out the evolution of Mailer’s “giddy existentialism”{{sfn|Cotkin|2003|p=208}} but ambiguously balances between saying that Mailer failed to maintain a position of leadership on the one hand and that he got himself ejected from such a role to maintain his purity: “By the {{date|1960}}s a new generation had arisen to join in his critique of an existentialist perspective, certainly in terms of choice and commitment. But the student radicals would jettison the idiosyncratic theology of Mailer’s hip saints, and would reject much of his macho posturing.”{{sfn|Cotkin|2003|p=207}} Mailer’s errand, Cotkin writes, “required that he speak to the consciousness of an age without being part of it.”{{sfn|Cotkin|2003|p=207}} | |||
The best academic articles have tended to discuss Mailer as a repository of our psycho-social rebellion. Several of these articles have been collected in a clutch of articles on Norman Mailer in the ''Journal of Modern Literature''. James {{harvtxt|Ryan|2006}}, Ashton {{harvtxt|Howley|2006}} and Scott {{harvtxt|Duguid|2006}} each discuss Mailer as a figure of resistance with some ambivalence: Mailer is at once the resister-in-chief who was celebrated as “General Marijuana,” but, increasingly in the last several decades, Mailer has been seen as a symptom of what is wrong with the left rather than medicine for the ailment. In {{" '}}Insatiable as Good Old America’: ''Tough Guys Don’t Dance'' and Popular Criminality,” Ryan argues for the achievement of Mailer’s often disparaged novel ''Tough Guys Don’t Dance'', which Ryan considers neglected by the critics because of its formulaic adhesion to the genre of crime fiction and also because, by Mailer’s own admission, it was written hastily because he needed money. Ryan shows how the populist form of the novel is well suited to its themes and allows Mailer a fresh angle on a favored theme, obscenity. The novel allows for fully fleshed treatment of American self-understanding circa 1980 in which vulgarity and obscenity (especially pornography) had become common cultural currency. Ryan points out that the repetitive structure of this populist form resonates with the structure of pornography, which in turn resonates with the American “diet of reality.”{{sfn|Ryan|2006|p=21}} With the explosion of “reality culture” that has taken over contemporary popular media, Ryan’s analysis shows Mailer’s attention to America’s crude hunger for illusory “realities” to have been quite prescient. | |||
In “The Addiction of Masculinity: Norman Mailer’s ''Tough Guys Don’t Dance'' and the Cultural Politics of Reaganism,” Scott Duguid offers a sympathetic reading of Mailer’s treatment of masculinity in ''Tough Guys Don’t Dance'' with the immediate aim of recovering the novel’s insight and thematic integrity. A larger ambition of this article is to address feminist disapprovals of Mailer’s work. He reads Mailer’s emphases on masculinity as a product of resistance to other ideological systems of power that can potentially compromise an individual’s sense of self. Further, masculinity is portrayed as “high dark comedy” in the novel with “narrative excesses” that point to its own “absurdity” points to Mailer’s awareness of its flaws.{{sfn|Duguid|2006|p=26}} Duguid also takes a socio-historical approach to recognize the novel’s achievement, showing how its emergence coincided with “the cultural materialization of American maleness.”{{sfn|Duguid|2006|p=24}} | |||
Similar to the work of Ryan and Duguid, Ashton Howley’s “Mailer Again: Heterophobia in ''Tough Guys Don’t Dance''” entreats critics to look beyond the populist form of the critically neglected film in order to give it the hearing it deserves. According to Howley, it deserves critical attention because it shows that Mailer’s debate with his feminist detractors continues long after ''The Prisoner of Sex''. Critics may be interested in further exploring the extensive formal links that Mailer sets up between Reichian psychoanalysis and the crime fiction genre, which differentiates (slightly) the novel from the usual crime story. Howley, Ryan, and Duguid, individually and collectively, make it quite clear that it is a bit of a slander to accuse Mailer of having an “unblinking investment in masculinity” when his books are, in fact, obsessive examinations of the perils of masculine identity. | |||
Three other academic articles take up Mailer’s role as—depending on whether or not you use the “L-word” to describe yourself—either the conscience of American liberalism or as the rightist fox in the leftist henhouse. In “The Imperiled Republic: Norman Mailer and the Poetics of AntiLiberalism” Sean {{harvtxt|McCann|2000}} positions Mailer’s entire novelistic ''oeuvre'' as a reaction against the dangers of a liberal politics. For McCann, Mailer’s literary obsession with a metaphysics of violence and his frequent depictions of sex (namely anal penetration!)point towards a more communitarian-based system of polity where members of a political community can debate and engage with pressing issues as a civic body, as against the individualistic self-assertion that Mailer thinks liberalism entails. McCann thus positions Mailer as a critic against the atomized and anomic individual that he thinks the political culture of liberalism creates, through his upholding of a vision of a community that taps into its collective culture, thereby accessing a more ideal political and social arrangement. McCann’s work is an astonishingly comprehensive effort, one that we would like to see as a fully realized book. However, the author knows too well why it would not be a good career move to do so. He begins by looking at the lavish praise Mikal Gilmore’s rather narrowly focused ''Shot in the Heart'' received: “There may be no better example of the way the world has changed around Norman Mailer than the recent critical esteem showered on Mikal Gilmore’s memoir ''Shot in the Heart''.”{{sfn|McCann|2000|p=293}} “To put it lightly,” McCann admits, “Norman Mailer has gone out of style.” From this sad beginning, though, he tells the story of why Mailer went out of style. Basically, Mailer won the battle against the dragon and so put himself out of business: | |||
{{quote|For more than three decades Mailer wrote as if he were engaged in a life or death struggle with a gargantuan enemy, a many-headed beast whose ability to absorb antagonists, swallow injuries, and engulf opposition, gave it the invulnerability of a mythological creature. It was the hideous immunity of this animal that Mailer always used to justify his literary outrages. . . . The great surprise of Mailer’s career, however, turns out to be that the enemy unexpectedly expired. In a twisted manner, Mailer’s side won.{{sfn|McCann|2000|p=295}} }} | |||
We will not attempt to summarize all the developments of this fascinating article, but will just suggest that McCann’s reading of ''Ancient Evenings'' as a response to America’s turn toward identity politics in the early {{date|1980}}s brings this article to its astonishing close. It is highly recommended. | |||
In another excellent article, T. H. {{harvtxt|Adamowski|2006}} works similar ground when he hypothesizes in “Demoralizing Liberalism: Lionel Trilling, Leslie Fiedler, and Norman Mailer” that Norman Mailer (alongside Lionel Trilling and Leslie Fiedler) contributed to the demoralization of liberalism just before and after WWII through inadvertent critiques of liberalism from ''within'' its confines. Mailer began to portray ''forms of totalitarianism'' within liberalism itself after ''The Naked and the Dead'', effectively attacking liberalism from both the Left (in his paranoiac mode) and the rightist legacy of the counter Enlightenment tradition (that includes de Maistre, Lawrence, and Heidegger). By going beyond Trilling and Fiedler’s portrayals of liberals as political dupes, Mailer was ultimately prescient in his portrayal of liberals as weak and compromising, since he anticipated the 1960s adoption of this same notion. “Never let the troops become demoralized.” Adamowski writes near the conclusion of his article: “They might desert to the other side.”{{sfn|Adamowski|2006|p=891}} Closing with the triumph of Neo-Conservativism, the suggestion is, somewhat, that Mailer is to blame. Alan Petigny’s counterstatement “Norman Mailer, ‘The White Negro,’ and New Conceptions of the Self in Postwar America” from the inaugural issue of ''The Mailer Review'' in an interesting rejoinder to the idea that Mailer ''et alia'' brought down the house of liberalism, as Petigny argues that Mailer and Company misconstrued the Eisenhower decade: “In ‘The White Negro,’ Mailer seemed to regard white middle-class America as uptight and sexually repressed. While partially correct, Mailer failed to see what the majority of Americans at the time, and till this day, fail to see: a great and broad liberalization that was unfolding almost unnoticed during the fifties.”{{sfn|Petigny|2007|p=186}} Petigny closes with an interesting paradox: “Norman Mailer’s hand-wringing about the lack of individuality in American Society was not a substantiation of his claims but of the reverse,” since the resonance of “The White Negro” was in fact “Evidence of an ascendant spirit during the postwar era—one which was more secular, more expressive, and—in the aggregate—less conformist than anything that had come before.”{{sfn|Petigny|2007|p=192}} So three full cheers for literary liberalism. | |||
Three essays return us to “The White Negro” in relation to racial anxiety. Andrea {{harvtxt|Levine|2003}}, unlike many critics who have focused on the dialectic between white and black masculinity in “The White Negro,” claims that an anxiety concerning the vulnerable, white, ''Jewish'' body becomes central to the text. Mailer’s fetishization of the aggressive African American male actually serves to “obscure the image of the cowed, impotent Jew going meekly to the gas chamber.”{{sfn|Levine|2003|p=61}} Mailer’s (re)construction of Jewish male identity operates first by eradicating Jewish biological and cultural history, after which it deprecates femininity in order to recapture certain notions of white, Jewish masculine difference. | |||
Drawing on the historical example of Muhammad Ali’s verbal challenges to Terrell and the general dynamics at work in the boxing ring, Christopher Brookeman’s “Float Like a Butterfly, Sting Like a Bee: Mythologies of Representation in Selected Writings on Boxing by Norman Mailer” shows how Mailer reconstructs society as existential and oral—as opposed to conceptual and literary—by rewriting it in the key of black boxing culture. He argues that Mailer’s model of African American culture did not depend on a sole fixation on blackness alone but, rather, arose from a complex interplay between African American cultural creativity and a dominant white culture. Muhammad Ali, Brookeman helps us see, was both an aesthetic and political guru of sorts, a source of “mythic defiance and confidence” which essentially became the foundation for the renewal of Mailer’s career. Ali and African American artists like him “challenged the gradualist liberalism of civil rights leaders and their supporters in the Democratic Party.”{{sfn|Brookeman|2005|p=50}} | |||
Finally, Shelly Eversley’s “The Source of Hip” compares Mailer and Kerouac’s treatments of interracial sex: “Hip happens as whiteness processes into blackness, at the moment when a cross-racial union of bodies suggests movement beyond rigid categories of identity, and ideally, toward the revelatory potential of integration.”{{sfn|Eversley|2002|p=261}} Eversley finds that both Mailer and Kerouac “get fabulously close to the edge of integration’s potential”{{sfn|Eversley|2002|p=266}} but ultimately “participate consciously in a cultural economy that marginalizes individuals” that results in ultimate failure: “By fixing the line that separates ‘the Negro’ and ‘the white,’ they insure that there is no communion. They exemplify their own critique, a ‘failure of nerve’ and relinquish the opportunity to come, finally, to cross the most sacrosanct boundaries of postwar U.S. culture.”{{sfn|Eversley|2002|p=267}} This is a detailed and perspicacious essay, but I wish the author would give us the measure of who succeeded. White authors, for a variety of reasons and toward a number of aesthetic and political ends, challenged soft and hard taboos and put blacks and whites in bed together. The suggestion is made early in the essay that Mailer and Kerouac moved toward interracial sex to revivify their declining careers, but Mailer’s character Wilson, the gut-soldier in The ''Naked and the Dead'', is proof that Mailer was interested in just this sort of transgression before he ever gained fame. It would be nice if a progressive political development came all at once, as complete as Athena when she burst out of her father’s skull, but some things take more time. | |||
Even the most formalistic approaches to Mailer’s work are connected to political perception. Very little has been written about Mailer’s achievement as an artist first and foremost. Mailer’s work would seem to sustain moral commentary much more readily than it does purely formalist appreciation, and critics such as Robert Merrill have complained that writing about Mailer’s ''life'' cannot sufficiently bolster claims that he is a first-rate American writer. According to {{harvtxt|Merrill|1992}}, first-rate criticism of first-rate writing is needful, and in his 1992 revised Twayne study of Mailer, Merrill claims this burden has not been met. There have been a few attempts that warrant attention, however. In “Plexed Artistry: The Formal Case for Mailer’s ''Harlot’s Ghost''” David {{harvtxt|Rampton|2006}} begins by squaring off against Richard Rorty, who in ''Achieving Our Country'' attacked Pynchon, Mailer, and several other writers in for being writers too ready to portray America with “mockery” or “disgust.” Rampton challenges Rorty on ideological grounds but then defends Mailer as an artist. Unlike the reviewers and critics who complain about the formlessness of ''Harlot’s Ghost'', Rampton demonstrates that Mailer’s work is patterned carefully and balanced almost obsessively. Rampton also draws attention to acts of reading in ''Harlot’s Ghost'' with a view to defending it on artistic rather than political grounds. | |||
Lennon’s “Norman Mailer: Novelist, Journalist, or Historian” locates Mailer’s key claims to our attention in the region between clearly fictional and clearly non-fictional writing. {{sfn|Lennon|2006}} carefully approaches what he describes as a “reversible dualism” between fiction and non-fiction, carefully avoiding prescriptive definitions of narrative forms. He concludes that Mailer’s primary purpose is not to blur genre so much as to engulf and ingest whatever form, stance or rhetoric he needs to carry his tales forward. Mailer succeeds in reminding us that there is no real difference between fact and fiction. Mailer was completely dedicated to the novel and to his role as a novelist, although the writer’s intentions and the reader’s own requirements may not coincide exactly | |||
Louis {{harvtxt|Menand|2007}}, in the ''New Yorker'', located Mailer’s greatest achievements in the interplay between fictional and non-fictional selves, a proliferation of protean selves that some readers did not like very much at all. The sense we get from Menand is that Mailer did a great deal to humanize writing and to make it more honest: | |||
{{quote|Some readers found all these Normans obnoxious, a display of egotism. But Mailer was simply making apparent something that modern literature and, in particular, modern journalism preferred to disguise, which is that a book is written by a human being, someone with professional ambitions, financial needs, tastes and distastes, and this human being is part of the story whether he or she appears in the story or not. It was not important for readers to like this person; it was important to know him. Mailer did not put the first person into journalism; he took it out of the closet.}} | |||
. . . | . . . | ||
| Line 112: | Line 139: | ||
===Works Cited=== | ===Works Cited=== | ||
{{refbegin|30em|indent=yes}} | {{refbegin|30em|indent=yes}} | ||
* {{cite book |last=Adamowski |first=T.H. |date=Summer 2006 |title=Demoralizing Liberalism: Lionel Trilling, Leslie Fiedler, and Norman Mailer. |location=Toronto |publisher=University of Toronto Quarterly |ref= | * {{cite book |last=Adamowski |first=T.H. |date=Summer 2006 |title=Demoralizing Liberalism: Lionel Trilling, Leslie Fiedler, and Norman Mailer. |location=Toronto |publisher=University of Toronto Quarterly |ref={{SfnRef|Adamowski|2006}} }} | ||
* {{cite book |last=Allen-Mills |first=Tony |date=2009 |title=Exclusive View of Archive Reveals Norma Mailer's gay sexual fantasy |location=UK |publisher=Times Online UK |ref=harv }} | * {{cite book |last=Allen-Mills |first=Tony |date=2009 |title=Exclusive View of Archive Reveals Norma Mailer's gay sexual fantasy |location=UK |publisher=Times Online UK |ref=harv }} | ||
* {{cite book |last=Bloom |first=Harold |date=2003 |title=Norman Mailer |location=Broomall, PA |publisher=Chelsea House |ref=harv }} | * {{cite book |last=Bloom |first=Harold |date=2003 |title=Norman Mailer |location=Broomall, PA |publisher=Chelsea House |ref=harv }} | ||
* {{cite book |last=Bosman |first=Julie |date=2006 |title=Loved His New Novel, And What A Bibliography |location=New York |publisher=New York Times |ref=harv }} | * {{cite book |last=Bosman |first=Julie |date=2006 |title=Loved His New Novel, And What A Bibliography |location=New York |publisher=New York Times |ref=harv }} | ||
* {{cite book |last=Brookeman |first= | * {{cite book |last=Brookeman |first=Christopher |date=2005 |chapter=Float Like A Butterfly, Sting Like A Bee: Mythologies of Representation in Selected Writings on Boxing by Norman Mailer |location=Liverpool |publisher=Liverpool UP |title=American Mythologies: Essays on Contemporary Literature |editor1-last=Glenday |editor1-first=Michael K. |editor2-last=Blazek |editor2-first=William |pages=47–62 |ref=harv }} | ||
* {{cite book |last=Caserio |first=Robert |date=2006 |title=Editor's Introduction |location= |publisher=Journal of Modern Literature |ref=harv }} | * {{cite book |last=Caserio |first=Robert |date=2006 |title=Editor's Introduction |location= |publisher=Journal of Modern Literature |ref=harv }} | ||
* {{cite book |last=Cavett |first=Dick |date=2007 |title=In This Corner, Norman Mailer |location=New York |publisher= New York Times|ref=harv }} | * {{cite book |last=Cavett |first=Dick |date=2007 |title=In This Corner, Norman Mailer |location=New York |publisher= New York Times|ref=harv }} | ||
| Line 123: | Line 150: | ||
* {{cite book |last=Dick |first=Bernard F. |date=1974 |title=The Apostate Angel: A Critical Study of Gore Vidal |location=New York |publisher=Random House |ref=harv }} | * {{cite book |last=Dick |first=Bernard F. |date=1974 |title=The Apostate Angel: A Critical Study of Gore Vidal |location=New York |publisher=Random House |ref=harv }} | ||
* {{cite book |last=Dickstein |first=Morris |date=2002 |title=Leopards in the Temple: The Transformation of American Fiction, 1945-1970 |location=Cambridge |publisher=Harvard UP |ref=harv }} | * {{cite book |last=Dickstein |first=Morris |date=2002 |title=Leopards in the Temple: The Transformation of American Fiction, 1945-1970 |location=Cambridge |publisher=Harvard UP |ref=harv }} | ||
* {{cite book |last=Dickstein |first=Morris |author-mask=1 |date=2007 |title=The Un-Generation |location=Los Angeles |publisher=Los Angeles Times |ref=harv }} | * {{cite book |last=Dickstein |first=Morris |author-mask=1 |date=2007 |title=The Un-Generation |location=Los Angeles |publisher=Los Angeles Times |url=https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2007-dec-30-bk-dickstein30-story.html |access-date={{date|2021-07-05|ISO}} |ref=harv }} | ||
* {{cite book |last=Droit |first=Roger-Pol |date={{date|2003}} |title=The Cult of Nothingness: The Philosophers and the Buddha |translator1-last=Streight |translator1-first=David |translator2-last=Vohnson |translator2-first=Pamela |url= |location=Chapel Hill |publisher=University of North Carolina Press |ref=harv }} | * {{cite book |last=Droit |first=Roger-Pol |date={{date|2003}} |title=The Cult of Nothingness: The Philosophers and the Buddha |translator1-last=Streight |translator1-first=David |translator2-last=Vohnson |translator2-first=Pamela |url= |location=Chapel Hill |publisher=University of North Carolina Press |ref=harv }} | ||
* {{cite journal |last=Duguid |first=Scott |title=The Addiction of Masculinity: Norman Mailer’s ''Tough Guys Don’t Dance'' and the Cultural Politics of Reaganism |url= |journal=Journal of Modern Literature |volume=30 |issue=1 |date=Fall {{date|2006}} |pages=23–30 |access-date= |ref= | * {{cite journal |last=Duguid |first=Scott |title=The Addiction of Masculinity: Norman Mailer’s ''Tough Guys Don’t Dance'' and the Cultural Politics of Reaganism |url= |journal=Journal of Modern Literature |volume=30 |issue=1 |date=Fall {{date|2006}} |pages=23–30 |access-date= |ref={{SfnRef|Duguid|2006}} }} | ||
* {{cite journal |last=Eversley |first=Shelly |title=The Source of Hip |url= |journal=Minnesota Review: A Journal of Committed Writing |volume=55–57 |issue= |date={{Date|2002}} |pages=257–270 |access-date= |ref=harv }} | * {{cite journal |last=Eversley |first=Shelly |title=The Source of Hip |url= |journal=Minnesota Review: A Journal of Committed Writing |volume=55–57 |issue= |date={{Date|2002}} |pages=257–270 |access-date= |ref=harv }} | ||
* {{cite web |url=https://artsbeat.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/10/18/the-mailer-review/ |title=The Mailer Review |last=Garner |first=Dwight |date={{date|2007-10-18|MDY}} |website=ArtsBeat |publisher=The New York Times |access-date={{date|2009-04-16|ISO}} |quote= |ref=harv }} | * {{cite web |url=https://artsbeat.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/10/18/the-mailer-review/ |title=The Mailer Review |last=Garner |first=Dwight |date={{date|2007-10-18|MDY}} |website=ArtsBeat |publisher=The New York Times |access-date={{date|2009-04-16|ISO}} |quote= |ref=harv }} | ||
| Line 131: | Line 158: | ||
* {{cite web |url=https://www.hrc.utexas.edu |title=The Harry Ransom Canter |author=<!--HRC Staff--> |date={{date|2007}} |website=The Harry Ransom Humanities Research Center |publisher=University of Texas Austin |access-date={{date|2009-03-31|ISO}} |quote= |ref={{SfnRef|HRC|2007}} }} | * {{cite web |url=https://www.hrc.utexas.edu |title=The Harry Ransom Canter |author=<!--HRC Staff--> |date={{date|2007}} |website=The Harry Ransom Humanities Research Center |publisher=University of Texas Austin |access-date={{date|2009-03-31|ISO}} |quote= |ref={{SfnRef|HRC|2007}} }} | ||
* {{cite journal |last1=Holmes |first1=Constance E. |last2=Lennon |first2=J. Michael |title=Norman Mailer: Supplemental Bibliography Through 2006 |url=https://prmlr.us/mr06bib |journal=The Mailer Review |volume=1 |issue=1 |date={{date|2006}} |pages=234–260 |access-date={{date|2021-07-05|ISO}} |author-link=Constance E. Holmes |ref=harv }} | * {{cite journal |last1=Holmes |first1=Constance E. |last2=Lennon |first2=J. Michael |title=Norman Mailer: Supplemental Bibliography Through 2006 |url=https://prmlr.us/mr06bib |journal=The Mailer Review |volume=1 |issue=1 |date={{date|2006}} |pages=234–260 |access-date={{date|2021-07-05|ISO}} |author-link=Constance E. Holmes |ref=harv }} | ||
* {{cite journal |last=Howley |first=Ashton |title=Mailer Again: Heterophobia in ''Tough Guys Don’t Dance'' |url= |journal=Journal of Modern Literature |volume=30 |issue=1 |date=Fall {{date|2006}} |pages=31–46 |access-date= |ref= | * {{cite journal |last=Howley |first=Ashton |title=Mailer Again: Heterophobia in ''Tough Guys Don’t Dance'' |url= |journal=Journal of Modern Literature |volume=30 |issue=1 |date=Fall {{date|2006}} |pages=31–46 |access-date= |ref={{SfnRef|Howley|2006}} }} | ||
* {{cite book |last=Hume |first=Kathryn |date={{date|2000}} |title=American Dream, American Nightmare: Fiction since 1960 |url= |location=Urbana |publisher=University of Illnois Press |ref=harv }} | * {{cite book |last=Hume |first=Kathryn |date={{date|2000}} |title=American Dream, American Nightmare: Fiction since 1960 |url= |location=Urbana |publisher=University of Illnois Press |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 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 }} | ||
| Line 139: | Line 166: | ||
* {{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 }} | ||
* {{cite book |editor-last=Lennon |editor-first=J. Michael |date={{date|1988}} |title=Conversations with Norman Mailer |url= |location=Jackson |publisher=University Press of Mississippi |editor-link=J. Michael Lennon |ref=harv }} | * {{cite book |editor-last=Lennon |editor-first=J. Michael |date={{date|1988}} |title=Conversations with Norman Mailer |url= |location=Jackson |publisher=University Press of Mississippi |editor-link=J. Michael Lennon |ref=harv }} | ||
* {{cite journal |last=Lennon |first=J. Michael |author-mask=1 |title=Norman Mailer: Novelist, Journalist, or Historian? |url= |journal=JML |volume=30 |issue=1 |date=Fall {{date|2006}} |pages=91–103 |access-date= |ref= | * {{cite journal |last=Lennon |first=J. Michael |author-mask=1 |title=Norman Mailer: Novelist, Journalist, or Historian? |url= |journal=JML |volume=30 |issue=1 |date=Fall {{date|2006}} |pages=91–103 |access-date= |ref={{SfnRef|Lennon|2006}} }} | ||
* {{cite book |last1=Lennon |first1=J. Michael |author-mask=1 |last2=Lennon |first2=Donna Pedro |date=2000 |title=Norman Mailer: Works and Days |url= |location=Shavertown, PA |publisher=Sligo Press |ref=harv }} | * {{cite book |last1=Lennon |first1=J. Michael |author-mask=1 |last2=Lennon |first2=Donna Pedro |date=2000 |title=Norman Mailer: Works and Days |url= |location=Shavertown, PA |publisher=Sligo Press |ref=harv }} | ||
* {{cite journal |last=Levine |first=Andrea |title=The (Jewish) White Negro: Norman Mailer’s Racial Bodies |url= |journal=MELUS |volume=28 |issue=2 |date=Summer {{date|2003}} |pages=59–81 |access-date= |ref= | * {{cite journal |last=Levine |first=Andrea |title=The (Jewish) White Negro: Norman Mailer’s Racial Bodies |url= |journal=MELUS |volume=28 |issue=2 |date=Summer {{date|2003}} |pages=59–81 |access-date= |ref={{SfnRef|Levine|2003}} }} | ||
* {{cite journal |last=Macilwee |first=Michael |title=Saul Bellow and Norman Mailer |url= |journal=Saul Bellow Journal |volume=19 |issue=1 |date={{date|2003}} |pages=3–22 |access-date= |ref=harv }} | * {{cite journal |last=Macilwee |first=Michael |title=Saul Bellow and Norman Mailer |url= |journal=Saul Bellow Journal |volume=19 |issue=1 |date={{date|2003}} |pages=3–22 |access-date= |ref=harv }} | ||
* {{cite book |last=Mailer |first=Norman |date=1959 |title=Advertisements for Myself |location=New York |publisher=Putnam |author-link=Norman Mailer |ref=harv }} | * {{cite book |last=Mailer |first=Norman |date=1959 |title=Advertisements for Myself |location=New York |publisher=Putnam |author-link=Norman Mailer |ref=harv }} | ||
| Line 153: | Line 180: | ||
* {{cite book |last=Mailer |first=Norman |author-mask=1 |date=1998 |title=The Time of Our Time |url= |location=New York |publisher=Random House |ref=harv }} | * {{cite book |last=Mailer |first=Norman |author-mask=1 |date=1998 |title=The Time of Our Time |url= |location=New York |publisher=Random House |ref=harv }} | ||
* {{cite book |last=Mailer |first=Norman |author-mask=1 |date=2003 |title=Why Are We at War? |url= |location=New York |publisher=Random House |ref=harv }} | * {{cite book |last=Mailer |first=Norman |author-mask=1 |date=2003 |title=Why Are We at War? |url= |location=New York |publisher=Random House |ref=harv }} | ||
* {{cite journal |last=McCann |first=Sean |title=The Imperiled Republic: Norman Mailer and the Poetics of Anti-Liberalism |url= |journal=English Literary History |volume=67 |issue=1 |date=Spring {{date|2000}} |pages=293–336 |access-date= |ref= | * {{cite journal |last=McCann |first=Sean |title=The Imperiled Republic: Norman Mailer and the Poetics of Anti-Liberalism |url= |journal=English Literary History |volume=67 |issue=1 |date=Spring {{date|2000}} |pages=293–336 |access-date= |ref={{SfnRef|McCann|2000}} }} | ||
* {{cite journal |last=McDonald |first=Brian |title=Post-Holocaust Theodicy, American Imperialism, and the ‘Very Jewish Jesus’ of Norman Mailer’s ''The Gospel According to the Son'' |url= |journal=Journal of Modern Literature |volume=30 |issue=1 |date=Fall {{date|2006}} |pages=78–90 |access-date= |ref=harv }} | * {{cite journal |last=McDonald |first=Brian |title=Post-Holocaust Theodicy, American Imperialism, and the ‘Very Jewish Jesus’ of Norman Mailer’s ''The Gospel According to the Son'' |url= |journal=Journal of Modern Literature |volume=30 |issue=1 |date=Fall {{date|2006}} |pages=78–90 |access-date= |ref=harv }} | ||
* {{cite magazine |last= | * {{cite magazine |last=Menand |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={{date|2002}} |pages=4–14 |access-date= |ref=harv }} | * {{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 }} | ||