Blogs > Cliopatria > Noted Here and There ...

Dec 27, 2004

Noted Here and There ...




Congratulations to Nathanael Robinson, whose Rhine River won a place on Nuno of Rua da Judiaria's list of the Golden Stars of David in 2004.

In the Guardian, Sir Martin Gilbert, historian of Israel and biographer of Winston Churchill, is comparing and contrasting George Bush and Tony Blair with Franklin Roosevelt and Winston Churchill. Thanks to Stephen Tootle at Big Tent for the tip.

Ed Cohn at Gnostical Turpitude recommends two thoughtful essays at The American Prospect.
Michael Lind, author of Made in Texas: George W. Bush and the Southern Takeover of American Politics, argues that the history of American party systems is the record of one party adopting an anti-war, reformist stance and finding its base narrowed to New England. Federalists, National Republicans, and Whigs followed that trail, says Lind, who asks"Are the Democrats next?"
David Greenberg of Rutgers reviews several books on mid-twentieth century American liberalism from the New Deal to Kingman Brewster and Eugene McCarthy.

Kevin Holtsbury at Collected Miscellany recommends Randy Boyagoda's review of Philip Roth's The Plot Against America for The New Pantagruel. I hardly know where to begin with the commendations here: to The New Pantagruel, that bills itself as"hymns in a whorehouse," or with Boyagoda, who spots the"two-page single paragraph meditation on the double meaning of Americans ‘being Jews.' Through punishing prose," says Boyagoda,

Roth rejects God, rejects synagogue, rejects race, rejects ancient language, rejects schmaltzy ethnic pride — rejects most every imaginable source and standard for a people's self-definition, save one. At the end of this streaking comet of a passage, this is where we land:"Their being Jews issued from their being themselves, as did their being American."
"Is this Philip Roth, or Dr. Phil?" Boyagoda asks. Is this Roth, the great American novelist; or Dr. Phil, memorably tagged the" corpulent gasbag" by Derek Catsam at Rebunk?
To be Jewish is to be yourself? To be American is to be yourself? No further commitments, obligations, virtues, histories, traditions needed? Just be yourself? At the core of this moving, horrifying book, the intellectual formulation of Jewish and American identity proves to be a puddle of drippy, 21st century identity-speak. In vain does one search this late fiction from a great American writer, from perhaps the great Jewish American writer, for finer knowledge of what American Jews drew on when they were expelled from their innocent Garden State, into a stars-and-stripes-and-swastikas desert.
Argue with Boyagoda, if you will. His literary criticism won't let us off the hook with sappy answers to difficult issues.

Finally, in"Eggheads Naughty Word Games," John Strausbaugh reports on the usual MLA silliness for the New York Times.



comments powered by Disqus

More Comments:


Jonathan Dresner - 12/27/2004

Sure, but I've looked through the AHA program, and though I admit that I was looking for Asia panels, there weren't a lot of titles that jumped out at me, either.


Ralph E. Luker - 12/27/2004

Of course the AHA is held later than the MLA, so we don't know what coverage the AHA will get; but it would probably get more coverage than it otherwise will if it were held in some place more central than in Seattle.
Miriam's point is well taken, but even the author of the NYT's article acknowledged that the MLA program committee and authors of approved papers were probably just feeding NYT's trolls by submitting and approving panel and paper titles that are so ridiculously provocative.


Miriam Elizabeth Burstein - 12/27/2004

And, as per the usual, we've got the cherry-picked run of silly titles, from a convention of thousands of papers. No mention, I see, of "Victorian Women Writers and the Cult of John de Wycliffe." Must have sounded too dull. Or conservative. Or something. In any event, see this list of papers at Thanks for Not Being a Zombie.


Jonathan Dresner - 12/27/2004

Say what you like about the "eggheads" and "provokies", they've got national attention. People read their convention program.

How do we get the NY Times to cover the Seattle conclave?