Matthew Biberman writer of nonfiction (memoir), fiction and literary theory

Bellow/Roth vs. Bloom/Fish: The Jew as Metaphor

September 3, 2008, 2:11 pm

A response to Vivian Gornick

(See her essay in the September Harper’s Magazine)

In the September Harper’s Vivian Gornick adds her voice to the choir that has pronounced the death of “Jewish-American writing.”  Her diagnosis centers on the waning of Roth and Bellow as literary stars of the first rank and it is worth quoting at some length:

“As the social reality of Jewish otherness waned, the rage at the heart of Jewish American fiction writing began to lose its natural source of energy. . . . The work was intrinsically bound up not so much with being kept out as with the sickness of feeling kept out.  Woman-hating had been the synthetic fuel needed to keep the sense of illness alive.  Without that, the work had nowhere to go and nothing much to say.”

So I ask RRers—Is this a just accounting?

*

My take on the death of Jewish American writing—

First, Gornick’s declaration, is, as I suggested, nothing new.  I remember attending a session at the MLA annual convention around 1999 in order to hear the great American Jewish intellectual Leslie Fiedler speak.  In his essay collection, Fiedler on the Roof (1991) Fiedler had announced the end of the era of the Jew as the anointed conduit through which America wanted to understand itself.  I had sat in the audience largely to confront him about that claim. 

But first a reporter from the now defunct (but legendary) mag Lingua Franca asked Fieldler, “As the man who coined the term postmodern, how do you feel about how it is being used today?”  “None of them get it,” Fieldler said.

Then I said to him, I understand your point about the moment of the Jewish writer having passed—“
    “Yes, it’s the black woman now.” Fiedler interrupted.
    “Right, and then my bet is it will shift to the queer Latino,” I said.  Fiedler smiled to see I understood the kind of game he wanted to play.  Then I pressed on, “All the same, don’t you feel remorse about not being supportive of a new generation of Jewish writers coming up who want to find an audience?”

“Hey,” he said to me, “What are you—one of those new Jewish turks?”  I nodded my head.  “Novelist?”  I shrugged.  “I write novels too.  And I’m not dead yet either.  I want to be read.  But you got to know what the score is.”

Then he fielded another question.

*

A second take:

If Gornick is right, and Bellow and Roth mark the apex of Jewish American Writing, it is still only half the story.  Absent entirely is the recognition that at some point, Bellow and Roth became Harold Bloom and Stanley Fish.

Perhaps the best way for me to chart the transformation is autobiographically.

When I was a ten or so, my older brother came home from college with two books: Gravity’s Rainbow (by Thomas Pynchon) and Humboldt’s Gift (by Bellow).  He gave them to my father as a present.  Even now I can see their covers, simple cheap paper backs, but they came from a different world.

There were books in my house, but they didn’t possess that kind of aura--not to me.  Books were just the crap that accumulates in a working class home where neither parent had went to college: my father read motorcycle magazines and my mother sat with self-help books and read compulsively in the hopes that it would help her come to accept her miserable existence.

Soon the Bellow and Pynchon were lying around unread and so I scooped them up and carried them into my room where I kept them on display.  Every so often I would try to read them and skim a bit and put them down.  One day, I told myself,  I would be ready.  One of them had been written by a Jew—about Jews, even.  (The other, might be the iconic goyish novel—all conceptual games.)

Those days finally came when I went away to college.  I read Bellow and even today I can’t imagine how any ambitious writer in a workshop could not suck down Humboldt’s Gift in an orgy of reading.  It remains the greatest novel ever written about what it means to be a poet in America.  I can close my eyes and I am back sitting in that hall at Dartmouth in a sea of people and there up front is Bellow reading and when he says, Humboldt was proud to be the first American poet to be driving around in a car with power steering, a wave of laughter erupts.

And then a few years later, I am sitting in a hall just off Washington Square Park, and its jam packed with people.  There are 30 people registered for the class-American Poetry with Harold Bloom and there are 200 people in the hall.  My friend tugs my sleeve—there is Ashbery.  And at the front, bedraggled and looking for all the world like the Jewish Falstaff he so rightly said he was—Bloom mumbled away, periodically twisting his body into odd contortions, his arm hung behind his head as if there was an itch just above his belt he could almost reach.  Bloom:  I am less surprised by Sin then I am surprised by Satan—he is Milton’s conduit to the Sublime.

And there it is: in the 20th Century the final debate on the worth of Milton, before he too, this most Christian of poets, sinks into oblivion.  On one side there was Bloom (talking about the Sublime) and on the other Stanley Fish who rose to fame on the strength of his argument about Milton, a book he titled Surprised by Sin.  How odd and fitting that Milton and the Jews go down together.

When Fish first walked into the classroom and began to talk, I was convinced he was a character out of a Bellow novel.  Herzog to be specific.  He even reminded me of Bellow.  Both live in my mind as wiry and active elder Jews, country club Jews.  With tans and gold watches.  The kind of guy you sat with in the back of the Temple and traded stock tips with while the Cantor sang on and on.

But here is the thing: Bloom and Fish in their own way are just as on board with the death of the Jew thesis as Gornick.  And I am too, I guess.  And perhaps it’s time.  But what to do now?  And what is to come next?

Notes

1)John Berryman on Scwartz (from Dreamsong 147)

Henry’s mind grew blacker the more he thought.
He looked onto the world like the act of an aged whore.
Delmore, Delmore.
He flung to pieces and they hit the floor.

2) Berryman’s great short story “the Imaginary Jew” is fascinating in how clearly he anticipates the Gornick thesis fifty years in advance of her.

3) See Douglas Brooks’ recent essay collection Milton and the Jews (Cambridge, 2008) which has an essay on mine that delves into these issues in a more peer review manner.

 4) What of all the hype and ink spilt on the new Jewish immigrant writing?

Evie Shockley

Evie Shockley says:

totally interesting

Matthew,

Very thought-provoking.  I'm short on time, so I'll just say that I think the question sits at the intersection of what's-going-on-with-the-writers and what's-going-on-with-the-readers.  If Jewish-American writing is "dead" because it no longer does what interests the bulk of the book-buying public (i.e., provide a window into a specific kind of otherness that reflects back, among other things, what is "normal" about the majority) -- because that public is now interested in a different kind of otherness -- that says something about the readers, but it doesn't necessarily answer the question about the writers.  There "you" are (Matthew or whomever), Jewish-American and writing: what's going on in the work?  What does its saleability have to do with its quality?  What does it become if it sells?  ("Unhyphenated-American" writing??)  Thanks for posting.

jinclan10.jpg

Jessica Barksdale Inclan says:

I read this article, too,

I read this article, too, and thought that the points were pretty well stated, and to answer your ending question--I don't know what is next.  I wondered briefly how to put side-by-side the Jewish-American writers and the Israeli writers, but that's apples and oranges. 

Then considering her point that the "new" Jewish writers were trying to break from their immigrant pasts right around the time of the Holocaust shows yet another "thing" to write around and through.  Another "thing" to process and ingest and are we done?  I don't know if that can be done in terms of art, but is the reading population done?

So, I have no answer.  I think we have to wait to read it.

J

Jessica Barksdale Inclan www.jessicabarksdaleinclan.com

Belle Yang and Maggie Mae Photoshop.jpg

Belle Yang says:

When My Harcourt Brace Editor,

a Jewish-American from New York City, came to visit me, my first adult book had just been sold.  We went for a walk by the water and said to me, "Now it's your turn.  It was the African-Americans, now it's the Chinese-Americans." 

I think Chinese-America's time has passed, too ;)  Blink, and I would have missedmy turn.

GREAT piece, Matthew.  At this moment, I am drawing a motorcyclist in my graphic novel and cheating with doing only the helmet and the handlebars.

Curious:  your bio says "Currently proffessor of English. . ."  I've always wondered if you were planning to morph into something else and that "currently" means temporary?  I am looking forward to reading 'Big Sid's Vicanti."

M.Biberman-047(2).jpg

Matthew Biberman says:

Thanks guys for the comments.

I'm glad you found it an interesting issue to mull over.

 And Belle--regarding "currently" . . . I can dream, can't I?!

 And I can't wait to see this panel with the motorcyclist in it!!

Belle Yang and Maggie Mae Photoshop.jpg

Belle Yang says:

Not a very good motorcycle

but it will do as a guest appearance.

Thinking some more about the categorization of literature by race/culture . . . this has always disturbed me.  I would just like to called a writer, not a Chinese-American writer.

Farzana Versey says to be categorized is near-death.

In America, one thinks one is at liberty to be who one wants to be, but it's not true.  The market dictates, just like a character actor (like Peter Lorre) who is made to play certain roles throughout his career.  I think I've done a good job of circumventing the market--or more likely current interest just happen to mesh with the market--but there have been many fights along the way.

 

FVRR22.jpg

Farzana Versey says:

How real are metaphors?

Hi Matthew, this was enlightening.

I am wondering, though, about the sagacity of using race as metaphor. For example, in Eng Lit class in India we had a paper on American literature. Saul Bellow was read as just that. Did I miss out on the nuances that his history might have imbued him with? Where do you place Arthur Miller? Or, to extend the parameters, Woody Allen or Spielberg?

At different times, some groups of writers will be considered the best in their genre. The invention of a new idiom seems to be anathema. My knowledge of what may be called contemporary Jewish writing is rather flimsy for me to comment, but is there still a pre-ponderence with the Holocaust, that afflicts cinema?

Too many questions...

 

B.Webster

Brenda Webster says:

Vivian Gornick

Matthew, hi

I have to interview Vivian on Sunday at the SFJCC 5:15. Any suggestions for things I might ask her? I am supposed to be asking about her collection of essays. The Men in my Life where she re-prints the Bellow/roth piece. Reading your essay I thought you were going to make a case for the continuation of Jewish writing. There are after all Englander and Chabon and Froer and Lethem. But I would have to agree that they are not fueled anymore by the rage of outsiders.