Subject
Fw: Fw: Martin Amis on Bellow , VN, et al
From
Date
Body
lines) ------------------
For myself, and I presume to speak for no one else on this issue, the
aversion isn't so much to Bellow, as to Martin Amis, and other members of
his bad boy set (Christopher Hitchens comes immediately to mind), trumpeting
Bellow as some kind of "American Tolstoy." This is pure rubbish, and Amis
knows it. As far as I know, Bellow has made no similar exaggerated claims on
his own behalf - although, now that I think about it, didn't Bellow ruffle
some feathers a few years back by proclaiming that there were no "African
Tolstoys," or something to that effect? Perhaps this was an oblique
reference to his own standing in world of letters? Or not. In either event,
the problem isn't with Saul Bellow, who has no doubt done his best, and has
the Nobel to show for it, but with the absurd claims that Amis, et al, are
making on his behalf. As Rodney Welch noted, these claims are just flat
bizarre. Imagine the reaction among British readers if, say, Michael Chabon
took every opportunity to publish essays claiming that, say, John Fowles was
the Greatest British Novelist, a veritable "British Tolstoy." Amis the
Younger would grind his expensive dentures together and dash off a vicious
riposte that would eventually find its way into "Against Cliche, The
Sequel." And he would be right to do so. Well, to my mind, Saul Bellow
couldn't carry John Fowles' inkpot, so where does Amis get off making these
endless, wildly extravagant claims for Bellow? It's just ridiculous.
________________________________
From: Vladimir Nabokov Forum on behalf of D. Barton Johnson
Sent: Tue 3/9/2004 2:57 PM
To: NABOKV-L@LISTSERV.UCSB.EDU
Subject: Fw: Martin Amis on Bellow , VN, et al
From: "Michael Donohue" <michaeldonohue@hotmail.com>
> ---------------- Message requiring your approval (265
lines) ------------------
> There's something interesting about the seemingly uniform reaction of list
> people to the Bellow post. It would appear that many Nabokovians have an
> aversion for the Bellovian. (Of course, this could be a complete
illusion;
> perhaps the Bellow people are just quiet.) I wonder if, Amis
> notwithstanding, there's something inherently different about VN and SB
that
> makes so many of us VN types react to SB with such puzzlement and
> indifference. Something along the lines of the old "Tolstoy vs.
Dostoevsky"
> debate.
----------------------------------------
EDNOTE. I suspect you are right, although Ellen Pifer has done admiring
books on both writers--so there are exceptions to the dichotomy. As for
myself---- I remember reading Augie in the late 50s. I am a compulsive
reader who can't bear not to finish a book I start. However I found the book
so annoying that I started tearing out and throwing away each page as I
finished it. The only Bellow book I look back at with any affection is
Humbolt's Gift. which I vaguely recall is based on Delmore Schwartz whom VN
did admire. VN expressed his opinion of Bellow in ADA.
Letters from Terra, by Voltemand, came out in 1891 on Van's twenty-first
birthday, under the imprint of two bogus houses, 'Abencerage' in Manhattan,
and 'Zegris' in London........ [Van] had little experience in the
intricacies of book-publishing matters, and ... was an absolute ignoramus
there, not knowing, for example, that 'review copies' were supposed to go to
the editors of various periodicals or that advertisements should be
purchased and not be expected to appear by spontaneous generation in
full-page adulthood between similar blurbs boosting The Possessed by Miss
Love and The Puffer by Mr Dukes.
-----------------------------------------
>
For myself, and I presume to speak for no one else on this issue, the
aversion isn't so much to Bellow, as to Martin Amis, and other members of
his bad boy set (Christopher Hitchens comes immediately to mind), trumpeting
Bellow as some kind of "American Tolstoy." This is pure rubbish, and Amis
knows it. As far as I know, Bellow has made no similar exaggerated claims on
his own behalf - although, now that I think about it, didn't Bellow ruffle
some feathers a few years back by proclaiming that there were no "African
Tolstoys," or something to that effect? Perhaps this was an oblique
reference to his own standing in world of letters? Or not. In either event,
the problem isn't with Saul Bellow, who has no doubt done his best, and has
the Nobel to show for it, but with the absurd claims that Amis, et al, are
making on his behalf. As Rodney Welch noted, these claims are just flat
bizarre. Imagine the reaction among British readers if, say, Michael Chabon
took every opportunity to publish essays claiming that, say, John Fowles was
the Greatest British Novelist, a veritable "British Tolstoy." Amis the
Younger would grind his expensive dentures together and dash off a vicious
riposte that would eventually find its way into "Against Cliche, The
Sequel." And he would be right to do so. Well, to my mind, Saul Bellow
couldn't carry John Fowles' inkpot, so where does Amis get off making these
endless, wildly extravagant claims for Bellow? It's just ridiculous.
________________________________
From: Vladimir Nabokov Forum on behalf of D. Barton Johnson
Sent: Tue 3/9/2004 2:57 PM
To: NABOKV-L@LISTSERV.UCSB.EDU
Subject: Fw: Martin Amis on Bellow , VN, et al
From: "Michael Donohue" <michaeldonohue@hotmail.com>
> ---------------- Message requiring your approval (265
lines) ------------------
> There's something interesting about the seemingly uniform reaction of list
> people to the Bellow post. It would appear that many Nabokovians have an
> aversion for the Bellovian. (Of course, this could be a complete
illusion;
> perhaps the Bellow people are just quiet.) I wonder if, Amis
> notwithstanding, there's something inherently different about VN and SB
that
> makes so many of us VN types react to SB with such puzzlement and
> indifference. Something along the lines of the old "Tolstoy vs.
Dostoevsky"
> debate.
----------------------------------------
EDNOTE. I suspect you are right, although Ellen Pifer has done admiring
books on both writers--so there are exceptions to the dichotomy. As for
myself---- I remember reading Augie in the late 50s. I am a compulsive
reader who can't bear not to finish a book I start. However I found the book
so annoying that I started tearing out and throwing away each page as I
finished it. The only Bellow book I look back at with any affection is
Humbolt's Gift. which I vaguely recall is based on Delmore Schwartz whom VN
did admire. VN expressed his opinion of Bellow in ADA.
Letters from Terra, by Voltemand, came out in 1891 on Van's twenty-first
birthday, under the imprint of two bogus houses, 'Abencerage' in Manhattan,
and 'Zegris' in London........ [Van] had little experience in the
intricacies of book-publishing matters, and ... was an absolute ignoramus
there, not knowing, for example, that 'review copies' were supposed to go to
the editors of various periodicals or that advertisements should be
purchased and not be expected to appear by spontaneous generation in
full-page adulthood between similar blurbs boosting The Possessed by Miss
Love and The Puffer by Mr Dukes.
-----------------------------------------
>