Comments on: Unamuno’s Paradox: Jesse Bering on the problem of death. http://www.kathrynkoromilas.com/unamunos-paradox-jesse-bering-on-the-problem-of-death.html A writer neither here nor there Thu, 20 Nov 2008 14:44:19 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.2 by: kathryn http://www.kathrynkoromilas.com/unamunos-paradox-jesse-bering-on-the-problem-of-death.html#comment-152 Tue, 18 Apr 2006 06:15:48 +0000 http://www.kathrynkoromilas.com/unamunos-paradox-jesse-bering-on-the-problem-of-death.html#comment-152 Yes, and I guess that an idea of merit lives or dies depending on the author's execution of it. And yeah, a good yarn...I've just begun reading <u>The Time Traveler's Wife</u> and I expect that will be a good read. Let me know how you go with Kristeva when you get to her. Yes, and I guess that an idea of merit lives or dies depending on the author’s execution of it. And yeah, a good yarn…I’ve just begun reading The Time Traveler’s Wife and I expect that will be a good read. Let me know how you go with Kristeva when you get to her.

]]> by: tom http://www.kathrynkoromilas.com/unamunos-paradox-jesse-bering-on-the-problem-of-death.html#comment-151 Mon, 17 Apr 2006 14:49:42 +0000 http://www.kathrynkoromilas.com/unamunos-paradox-jesse-bering-on-the-problem-of-death.html#comment-151 No, not read any Kristeva. I'll put the name on my list. Always happy to be turned on to something new. I think novels can embody profound philosophical thoughts without necessarily expressing them overtly. Novels of ideas can also be effective and enjoyable if the ideas are of sufficient merit. Kafka, Kundera, Bellow and Vonnegut etc are original and thought-provoking thinkers. But McEwan isn't worthy of inclusion in this list, in my opinion. The more he's encouraged to take himself seriously in this regard the worse his books get for me. He's been ridiculously overpraised for his ideas; ideas aren't his strong point - although the conformity (and banality) of his view of society flatters the middle-brow, middle-class reader. He is a good storyteller, however. Novels don't have to be deep, philosophical texts. Story is a wonderful thing, the flow and engagement of narrative. Empathy through drama, love of character and understanding of others, these aren't qualities to be denigrated or looked down on. No, not read any Kristeva. I’ll put the name on my list. Always happy to be turned on to something new.

I think novels can embody profound philosophical thoughts without necessarily expressing them overtly. Novels of ideas can also be effective and enjoyable if the ideas are of sufficient merit. Kafka, Kundera, Bellow and Vonnegut etc are original and thought-provoking thinkers. But McEwan isn’t worthy of inclusion in this list, in my opinion. The more he’s encouraged to take himself seriously in this regard the worse his books get for me. He’s been ridiculously overpraised for his ideas; ideas aren’t his strong point - although the conformity (and banality) of his view of society flatters the middle-brow, middle-class reader. He is a good storyteller, however. Novels don’t have to be deep, philosophical texts. Story is a wonderful thing, the flow and engagement of narrative. Empathy through drama, love of character and understanding of others, these aren’t qualities to be denigrated or looked down on.

]]> by: kathryn http://www.kathrynkoromilas.com/unamunos-paradox-jesse-bering-on-the-problem-of-death.html#comment-149 Mon, 17 Apr 2006 12:53:48 +0000 http://www.kathrynkoromilas.com/unamunos-paradox-jesse-bering-on-the-problem-of-death.html#comment-149 Tom, do you think that this might be a problem of the medium, of fiction? Is it that narrative cannot, in most cases (?), sustain any "deep" philosophical thinking because, in narratives, things are supposed to "happen" not "be thought about?" Does action, by taking precedence over thought, make intellectual novels only satisfactory in part, and intellectuals when they are novelists appear to address philosophical thoughts only superficially? I know, you've made your statement in response to McEwan as "intellectual" not as "novelist", but I'm just thinking… I don't believe this has to be the case, but maybe it is? An example of novel that I believe was able to be equally intellectually stimulating as much as it was able to appease this reader's need for story is Coetzee's <u>Elizabeth Costello</u>. But even that was controversial and some reviews I'd read concluded that it was not a "novel" but a series of essays, because the protagonist is a writer who is invited to various conferences etc to speak and she does and tackles all sorts of issues, including animal rights. I disagree with those reviews, because I found the story very dramatic and found the characters, narrative, and the ideas, emotionally compelling. But as I write this I can think of other examples of writers who can successfully explore a philosophical premise in fiction - Sartre, Gide, Orwell, Kazantzakis. As for modern writers apart from Coetzee, there is Markson, and Kundera, I think, does it very well. I’m not reading as much as I should be…so, um, who else? Maybe we end up going back to what Bradbury said about novels and novelists having meaning 'back then.' Meanwhile - have you read any Kristeva novels? I'm hoping to start on <u>Murder in Byzantium</u> at some point this year. I'm curious to see how this philosopher does fiction. Tom, do you think that this might be a problem of the medium, of fiction? Is it that narrative cannot, in most cases (?), sustain any “deep” philosophical thinking because, in narratives, things are supposed to “happen” not “be thought about?” Does action, by taking precedence over thought, make intellectual novels only satisfactory in part, and intellectuals when they are novelists appear to address philosophical thoughts only superficially? I know, you’ve made your statement in response to McEwan as “intellectual” not as “novelist”, but I’m just thinking…

I don’t believe this has to be the case, but maybe it is?

An example of novel that I believe was able to be equally intellectually stimulating as much as it was able to appease this reader’s need for story is Coetzee’s Elizabeth Costello. But even that was controversial and some reviews I’d read concluded that it was not a “novel” but a series of essays, because the protagonist is a writer who is invited to various conferences etc to speak and she does and tackles all sorts of issues, including animal rights. I disagree with those reviews, because I found the story very dramatic and found the characters, narrative, and the ideas, emotionally compelling.

But as I write this I can think of other examples of writers who can successfully explore a philosophical premise in fiction - Sartre, Gide, Orwell, Kazantzakis.

As for modern writers apart from Coetzee, there is Markson, and Kundera, I think, does it very well. I’m not reading as much as I should be…so, um, who else? Maybe we end up going back to what Bradbury said about novels and novelists having meaning ‘back then.’

Meanwhile - have you read any Kristeva novels? I’m hoping to start on Murder in Byzantium at some point this year. I’m curious to see how this philosopher does fiction.

]]> by: tom http://www.kathrynkoromilas.com/unamunos-paradox-jesse-bering-on-the-problem-of-death.html#comment-147 Mon, 17 Apr 2006 08:13:54 +0000 http://www.kathrynkoromilas.com/unamunos-paradox-jesse-bering-on-the-problem-of-death.html#comment-147 The McEwan quote seems to me to be a rather clumsy and prolix way of saying: Life is short and therefore to be valued. Which demonstrates my problem with him as an intellectual. He has a great gift for narrative and his books always commence with an interesting premise, but his philosophical thoughts are for the most part commonplace and self-consciously and self-importantly expressed. The McEwan quote seems to me to be a rather clumsy and prolix way of saying: Life is short and therefore to be valued. Which demonstrates my problem with him as an intellectual. He has a great gift for narrative and his books always commence with an interesting premise, but his philosophical thoughts are for the most part commonplace and self-consciously and self-importantly expressed.

]]>