Authenticity, Complaint, and the Russianness of American Jewish Literature

IF 0.2 3区 文学 N/A LITERATURE
Gabriella Safran
{"title":"Authenticity, Complaint, and the Russianness of American Jewish Literature","authors":"Gabriella Safran","doi":"10.2979/PROOFTEXTS.36.3.02","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract:Bernard Malamud, Saul Bellow, Philip Roth, and their critics embraced the notion that their work displayed an affinity to Russian and Yiddish literature, especially to the work of Fyodor Dostoevsky, Nikolai Gogol, and Sholem Aleichem. Like these writers, the prominent American Jewish writers of the 1960s were understood as producing writing that emerged from their authentic, often negative emotions, work that voiced complaints. I first describe this generation's playful claiming of a Russian and Jewish genealogy, their definition of the Russian and Yiddish writers as a collective worthy of copying. I then use close readings of six passages to evaluate the American writers' assertions about their influence by the Russian and Yiddish ones. I compare the inset oral and written complaints in Roth and Bellow with those in Gogol, Dostoevsky, and Sholem Aleichem, both acknowledging their striking formal similarities and distinguishing the comic, satirically presented literary complaints of prerevolutionary Russia from the potentially more therapeutically oriented—albeit still satirical—literary complaints of postwar America. Finally, I look outside the literary texts to understand why it was appealing to 1960s American writers to think of themselves as influenced by prerevolutionary Russian and Yiddish verbal art. This article situates the American Jewish writers and their critics in an aural environment where Russian and Yiddish sounds were increasingly available in entertainment and where they were associated with authenticity and political opposition. In spite of the formal parallels among the American Jewish, Russian, and Yiddish literary complaints, and in spite of Roth and Bellow representing themselves compellingly as imitators, I argue that they need to be understood instead in their own national and temporal communicative context.","PeriodicalId":43444,"journal":{"name":"PROOFTEXTS-A JOURNAL OF JEWISH LITERARY HISTORY","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2018-06-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"PROOFTEXTS-A JOURNAL OF JEWISH LITERARY HISTORY","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2979/PROOFTEXTS.36.3.02","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"N/A","JCRName":"LITERATURE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Abstract:Bernard Malamud, Saul Bellow, Philip Roth, and their critics embraced the notion that their work displayed an affinity to Russian and Yiddish literature, especially to the work of Fyodor Dostoevsky, Nikolai Gogol, and Sholem Aleichem. Like these writers, the prominent American Jewish writers of the 1960s were understood as producing writing that emerged from their authentic, often negative emotions, work that voiced complaints. I first describe this generation's playful claiming of a Russian and Jewish genealogy, their definition of the Russian and Yiddish writers as a collective worthy of copying. I then use close readings of six passages to evaluate the American writers' assertions about their influence by the Russian and Yiddish ones. I compare the inset oral and written complaints in Roth and Bellow with those in Gogol, Dostoevsky, and Sholem Aleichem, both acknowledging their striking formal similarities and distinguishing the comic, satirically presented literary complaints of prerevolutionary Russia from the potentially more therapeutically oriented—albeit still satirical—literary complaints of postwar America. Finally, I look outside the literary texts to understand why it was appealing to 1960s American writers to think of themselves as influenced by prerevolutionary Russian and Yiddish verbal art. This article situates the American Jewish writers and their critics in an aural environment where Russian and Yiddish sounds were increasingly available in entertainment and where they were associated with authenticity and political opposition. In spite of the formal parallels among the American Jewish, Russian, and Yiddish literary complaints, and in spite of Roth and Bellow representing themselves compellingly as imitators, I argue that they need to be understood instead in their own national and temporal communicative context.
美国犹太文学的真实性、抱怨性与俄罗斯性
摘要:伯纳德·马拉默德、索尔·贝娄、菲利普·罗斯和他们的批评家们都认为,他们的作品与俄罗斯和意第绪语文学,尤其是陀思妥耶夫斯基、果戈理和阿莱奇姆的作品有着密切的联系。和这些作家一样,20世纪60年代杰出的美国犹太作家被认为创作出了真实的、通常是负面情绪的作品,这些作品表达了抱怨。我首先描述了这一代人对俄罗斯和犹太谱系的戏谑主张,他们将俄罗斯和意第绪语作家定义为值得复制的集体。然后,我仔细阅读了六篇文章,评估了美国作家关于他们受到俄罗斯和意第绪语影响的说法。我将罗斯和贝娄的口头和书面抱怨与果戈理、陀思妥耶夫斯基和肖勒姆·阿莱奇姆的口头和书面抱怨进行了比较,两者都承认他们在形式上的惊人相似性,并将革命前俄罗斯的喜剧性、讽刺性的文学抱怨与战后美国的潜在的更倾向于治疗性的文学抱怨区分开来。最后,我将目光投向文学文本之外,以理解为什么20世纪60年代的美国作家认为自己受到前革命时期的俄罗斯和意第绪语语言艺术的影响。这篇文章将美国犹太作家和他们的评论家置于一个听觉环境中,在这个环境中,俄语和意第绪语的声音越来越多地出现在娱乐中,它们与真实性和政治反对派联系在一起。尽管美国犹太人、俄罗斯人和意第绪人的文学抱怨在形式上有相似之处,尽管罗斯和贝娄令人信服地以模仿者自居,但我认为,人们需要在他们自己的国家和时代的交际语境中理解他们。
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
CiteScore
0.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: For sixteen years, Prooftexts: A Journal of Jewish Literary History has brought to the study of Jewish literature, in its many guises and periods, new methods of study and a new wholeness of approach. A unique exchange has taken place between Israeli and American scholars, as more work from Israelis has appeared in the journal. Prooftexts" thematic issues have made important contributions to the field.
文献相关原料
公司名称 产品信息 采购帮参考价格
×
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