My Philip Roth

Q2 Arts and Humanities
D. Shostak
{"title":"My Philip Roth","authors":"D. Shostak","doi":"10.5703/PHILROTHSTUD.15.1.0135","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Halfway through a year I was devoting to writing a book about his work, Philip Roth appeared to me for the first time in a dream. He said little; in fact, he seemed interested only in talking to my husband rather than to me. He stayed on the fringes of the dream, looking sternly over at me once or twice, until the dream shifted away, as dreams do, and I was startled awake by the disappearance of my quarry. I was lying at my in-laws’ house on a sofa bed, a rather inadequate contraption that slopes lumpily upward from your feet to your head, so you feel as though you should be rising rather than sleeping, restless, and guilty for your sloth. It was a Christmas in Wisconsin without snow, so desperately wished for by my children, like the outline of a story where the plot hasn’t been filled in. That’s how my dream felt, too. Of course, I knew that it wasn’t Philip Roth in the dream, it was me, or so psychoanalytic wisdom tells me, since it was my dream and not the real world in which I very nearly met the man I was spending all my days thinking about. But if Philip Roth was me, then my husband must have been me, too, which confusingly means that I did get to speak to Roth, though really I was talking inaudibly to myself and never heard his side of the conversation. I didn’t meet Philip Roth in the dream, couldn’t fill in the outlines that my waking imagination could color in just so far. Had I done so, I would have betrayed the fraught work of imagining subjectivities that Roth spent a career exploring, perhaps best captured in that riveting paragraph in American Pastoral in which Zuckerman confesses that “The fact remains that getting people right is not what living is all about anyway. It’s getting them wrong that is living, getting them wrong and wrong and wrong and then, on careful reconsideration, getting them wrong again” (Pastoral 35). That, the writer admits, is the work of imaginative writing. It’s getting people wrong that is living. It’s also the work of imaginative reading. That’s what’s so vital about reading, getting people wrong in all those ways that are right for us, at the moment and from wherever we are sitting. The experience of a dream is like the experience of reading a book, where","PeriodicalId":37093,"journal":{"name":"Philip Roth Studies","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-05-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Philip Roth Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5703/PHILROTHSTUD.15.1.0135","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Halfway through a year I was devoting to writing a book about his work, Philip Roth appeared to me for the first time in a dream. He said little; in fact, he seemed interested only in talking to my husband rather than to me. He stayed on the fringes of the dream, looking sternly over at me once or twice, until the dream shifted away, as dreams do, and I was startled awake by the disappearance of my quarry. I was lying at my in-laws’ house on a sofa bed, a rather inadequate contraption that slopes lumpily upward from your feet to your head, so you feel as though you should be rising rather than sleeping, restless, and guilty for your sloth. It was a Christmas in Wisconsin without snow, so desperately wished for by my children, like the outline of a story where the plot hasn’t been filled in. That’s how my dream felt, too. Of course, I knew that it wasn’t Philip Roth in the dream, it was me, or so psychoanalytic wisdom tells me, since it was my dream and not the real world in which I very nearly met the man I was spending all my days thinking about. But if Philip Roth was me, then my husband must have been me, too, which confusingly means that I did get to speak to Roth, though really I was talking inaudibly to myself and never heard his side of the conversation. I didn’t meet Philip Roth in the dream, couldn’t fill in the outlines that my waking imagination could color in just so far. Had I done so, I would have betrayed the fraught work of imagining subjectivities that Roth spent a career exploring, perhaps best captured in that riveting paragraph in American Pastoral in which Zuckerman confesses that “The fact remains that getting people right is not what living is all about anyway. It’s getting them wrong that is living, getting them wrong and wrong and wrong and then, on careful reconsideration, getting them wrong again” (Pastoral 35). That, the writer admits, is the work of imaginative writing. It’s getting people wrong that is living. It’s also the work of imaginative reading. That’s what’s so vital about reading, getting people wrong in all those ways that are right for us, at the moment and from wherever we are sitting. The experience of a dream is like the experience of reading a book, where
我的Philip Roth
我花了一年的时间写一本关于菲利普·罗斯作品的书,在半途中,他第一次在梦中出现在我面前。他很少说话;事实上,他似乎只对和我丈夫说话感兴趣,而不是和我说话。他停留在梦的边缘,严厉地看了我一两次,直到梦像梦一样移开,我被我的猎物的消失吓醒了。我躺在公婆家的沙发床上,这是一个不太合适的装置,从你的脚到你的头凹凸不平地向上倾斜,所以你觉得你应该起床而不是睡觉,不安,为自己的懒惰感到内疚。那是威斯康辛州一个没有下雪的圣诞节,我的孩子们急切地盼望着,就像一个情节还没有完成的故事大纲。这也是我在梦里的感受。当然,我知道梦里的人不是菲利普·罗斯(Philip Roth),而是我自己,至少精神分析学的智慧是这么告诉我的,因为那是我的梦,而不是在现实世界里,我差点遇到了那个我整天都在想的人。但如果菲利普·罗斯是我,那么我的丈夫也一定是我,这令人困惑地意味着我确实和罗斯说话了,尽管实际上我是在无声地自言自语,从未听到他的谈话。我没有在梦里见到菲利普·罗斯,也无法勾勒出我清醒时的想象所能勾勒出的轮廓。如果我这样做了,我就会背叛罗斯花了整个职业生涯探索的想象主体性的令人担忧的工作,也许在《美国田园牧歌》中那段引人入胜的段落中得到了最好的描述,朱克曼在其中承认“事实仍然是,无论如何,让人们正确并不是生活的全部。”生活就是把他们弄错,把他们弄错,弄错,再弄错,然后,仔细地重新考虑,再把他们弄错”(田园牧歌35)。作者承认,这是想象力写作的成果。生活就是让别人犯错。这也是想象力阅读的成果。这就是阅读的重要之处,让人们在所有适合我们的方面出错,在当下,无论我们坐在哪里。做梦的经历就像读书的经历,在那里
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Philip Roth Studies
Philip Roth Studies Arts and Humanities-Literature and Literary Theory
CiteScore
0.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信