Coates is a thoughtful and provocative writer, not a scholar. He is presenting his experience of the writing process, which for him helps to engage anCoates is a thoughtful and provocative writer, not a scholar. He is presenting his experience of the writing process, which for him helps to engage and understand his encounters, and show them in ways that open up reflection. I find him to be a humble writer, even though he is not usually ambivalent. I appreciate the perspective he brings, which is different from most that I encounter, and the humanity that he shows. He is not an unbiased observer, but neither does he claim to be. But apparently he provokes some extreme reactions. I'm glad I read this. Having been a school board member for 8 years in which we dealt with some difficult issues, I appreciated his reflections on the handling of his book Between the World and Me. And I was touched by his experiences in Israel and Palestine. The main take-away from that was how little we hear and know about the experience of Palestinians in this mess. The fact that most stuck with me is that of all the stuff written about Israel and Palestine less than 2% is written by Palestinians. He can't fix that or make up for it, but he does draw attention to it. It surprises me that anyone who shows the least sympathy for the Palestinian situation, even while also expressing outrage at the Hamas attacks, is often labelled anti-Semite. I appreciate things that humanize when it is easier and more common to dehumanize. ...more
A pleasure to read. Not exhaustive, but selective--featuring shops that represent various stages and styles in the long story of bookselling. Of coursA pleasure to read. Not exhaustive, but selective--featuring shops that represent various stages and styles in the long story of bookselling. Of course none of "my" favorites were featured, though Politics and Prose was mentioned occasionally. Nevertheless I'll add my 2 cents: Growing up we had no bookstore in town, so the local library was the main source of books. Apart from books I bought for college classes, I really didn't start gathering/collecting books until a retiring professor put a bunch of his books outside his office, and I thought I had found a goldmine. (Though don't think I have any of those books anymore.) In grad school at UCLA I think I mostly relied on the university bookstore, though I bought some books at Westwood Books (I think it was called--no longer around). But I spent some summers in Chicago and I fell in love with my first independent bookstore--Great Expectations, in Evanston https://chicagoreader.com/news-politi... . A marvelous place with an impressive collection of Philosophy books. Allegedly it was once mentioned by Umberto Eco as one of the great bookstores! (It went out of business in 2001.) Moving to Blacksburg, we had Books, Strings & Things--that sold books and records https://that70sblacksburg.blogspot.co... . That was also a wonderful place, and especially as a source of bootleg CD's in the '90's! It went out of business in the late '90's and was bought out by Booksmith, which hung on for a few years before it too went out of business around 2000. In the era before the internet and pre-Amazon I would study the latest Books in Print to find obscure books that interested me. Then I could order them through BS&T. I remember discovering Amazon in 1999. I'm sure I used it, but more for used books than new. I really fell in love with Borders. Especially one near where my parents lived between Akron and Cleveland. They had a whole aisle of Philosophy books, though it gradually shrank over the years! (They went out of business in 2011.) My wife's family lives in Greensboro, so I was delighted when Scuppernong Books opened there around 2014 https://www.scuppernongbooks.com/ . I have enjoyed supporting them, and they have done a lot to become a community site. So it created a real dilemma for me when an independent bookstore finally came back to Blacksburg in the form of Blacksburg Books https://www.blacksburgbooks.com/ . Neither store has a very large inventory, so I mostly support them by special orders, but now I sort of split my orders between them! While I still occasionally order used books through Amazon, I have tried to find them first at Zubal Books, in Cleveland https://www.zubalbooks.com/ . They used to be a great physical used bookstore, but a number of years ago they went totally on-line. Oh well. So that's my story. I'm sure all book lovers have stories about their favorite shops. But this book did a nice job of bringing that all back to mind....more
I enjoyed reading this. But my concerns were in fact flagged by the author himself in his introductory "Note": "I wanted to say some things about editI enjoyed reading this. But my concerns were in fact flagged by the author himself in his introductory "Note": "I wanted to say some things about editing and publishing and even myself--I eventually changed my mind..." Instead: "...it all comes down to 'I did this' and 'I did that'..." So it is a long (and interesting) account of what he did, with much less 'how' and 'why' than I would have liked. It was amazing he recalled so much detail of his personal and professional interactions over at least six decades. It is hard to believe that he had so many intimate friends and colleagues that he loved and spent so much time with--there couldn't have been time and space for them all...but that's how he told it....more
Rushdie wants to be remembered for his novels rather than for his life. Unfortunately his novels have not engaged me, and it is his life that got me tRushdie wants to be remembered for his novels rather than for his life. Unfortunately his novels have not engaged me, and it is his life that got me to read this. In a way this is a self-indulgent book. He said that he had to write it (p. 129), and it felt like it was written more for him than for the reader. It seems to have accomplished its purpose for him--helping to move on from the stabbing. He spends some time near the end writing about his rejection of religions and religion. His attitude to his attacker by the end is one of indifference. I can understand that this worked for him. But it was also notable that there was nothing like forgiveness or redemption or anything that might come from a Christian perspective. Of course his attitude to religion is much influenced by his suffering from radical forms of it. But that leaves out other aspects. To each his own... But it is impressive that he was able to come through this as well as he did. And it was clear that his wife and the prospect of his writing were the most important factors. He talked about whether the fatwa or this attack changed him as a writer, and said that they did not--either in approach or in content. That was interesting to compare with the philosopher Ludwig Wittgenstein, about whom I know more. The content of Wittgenstein's writing was deeply influenced by his experiences in WW1, and the style of his writing was very much influenced by his experience teaching at Cambridge. Of course Rushdie is a novelist rather than a philosopher--but he made it seem like a flaw to be influenced, as though the novels and the series of novels have a life of its own. I suppose different writers experience their writing in different ways. ...more
Not really for the general reader. The literary estates covered are all British or US writers of the last few centuries. The author of this book writeNot really for the general reader. The literary estates covered are all British or US writers of the last few centuries. The author of this book writes in a way that assumes the readers' familiarity with the work and back-stories of these writers. The author writes in an allusive way that seems aimed more at scholars than at a general reader. Still, there was interesting information conveyed, but not much in the way of morals or large conclusions. Here is a shorter and I think more interesting account of the archives of 2 German philosophers: https://aeon.co/essays/how-archives-c......more
I think a better title would have been "The Creative Life" or "The Creative Process", but perhaps the subtitle captures the point. In a way the book iI think a better title would have been "The Creative Life" or "The Creative Process", but perhaps the subtitle captures the point. In a way the book is a lengthy compilation of many truisms, but they are organized and elaborated in helpful ways. And though the author's own field is music, he does a good job of encompassing a wide range of artistic endeavors. Although the book includes some examples to illustrate its points, I could think of lots of other examples, so it was a bit odd when examples were offered and when they weren't. The one example I wish had been deleted was his experience of using randomly discovered advice, such as NOT to have his burst appendix removed (p. 39). The publisher should have nixed that! But for a budding artist, which in many ways is any of us, it is a helpful book to have on hand to read though--straight or occasionally. ...more
A memoir about a bookseller and the store he worked in, the places he went and the people he met--but hardly anything about actual books. There's not A memoir about a bookseller and the store he worked in, the places he went and the people he met--but hardly anything about actual books. There's not a single memorable "tome" in the book. It was written to be humorous, so there were many exaggerations in descriptions and scenes. It was hard to tell what was just made up and what might have actually happened. And for a bookish writer, it was irritating to keep seeing that so-and-so will "try and" do such-and-such. It is "try to"! You can see the book mostly irritated me. If you are interested in stories about hunting for books, try listening to these podcasts for Zubal Books: https://www.zubalbooks.com/book-broth......more
This is an excellent account of the evolution of how Wittgenstein thought about philosophical issues and how he presented those issues--in terms of stThis is an excellent account of the evolution of how Wittgenstein thought about philosophical issues and how he presented those issues--in terms of style and method. The account is carefully grounded in the author's rich and deep familiarity with Wittgenstein's notebooks. But this is not an introductory book or a book for beginners. It really is for experts, and it contributes to our understanding....more
I loved the topic of this book. The writing didn't impress quite as much, but still well worth reading! It evokes so many thoughts I'm not sure how toI loved the topic of this book. The writing didn't impress quite as much, but still well worth reading! It evokes so many thoughts I'm not sure how to organize this review. I'll start with my experience with libraries. My first memory of library books was going on vacation to Cape Hatteras in 1961 when I was 6. I remember that I checked out a few biographies of baseball players to bring along and read on the trip. I think one was of Ty Cobb. My first real responsibility, not quite a job, since I was a volunteer, was working at the medical library of the nearby VA hospital the summer after my senior year of HS in 1972. I reorganized their card catalogue system--by hand. My first actual paying job was working at the College of William and Mary library the next summer, checking books in and out, and re-shelving. My first academic position was at UC San Diego. I loved the architecture of their library, now named after Theodor Geisel (Dr. Seuss) and his wife. (Check it out--it's easy to find an image online.) In 1999 I spent two days in the Wren Library of Trinity College, Cambridge, studying material in their Ludwig Wittgenstein archive. I have continued to make use of my discoveries there ever since in my publications. While we associate libraries with acquiring and borrowing books, the authors remind us that part of a librarian's job is to get rid of books (unless you work at the Library of Congress, I guess). When I was in grad school at UCLA the Philosophy Department had its own library. A rather famous logician, Richard Montague, had been murdered in 1971, and his "papers" from his office were stored in a closet across the hall from the library. I took the opportunity to look through them one day, but they were in complete disarray, and I was not a logician. A few years ago I noticed that a linguist at UCSD was working on a biography of Montague, so I contacted him to see how it was going. We corresponded some, but I didn't have anything to offer. Apparently in the intervening years the papers from the department as well as personal papers from his home had been all deposited at the university library. Montague was a gay man apparently murdered by a casual lover, but the case was never solved. So a biography promised to be a fascinating combination of life and work. When the author started to research the Montague material at the library he noticed there was a distinct lack of personal material. Upon inquiring with the manuscript librarian he was told that the personal material has been disposed of, since this was an academic library. He couldn't believe it. But material is also sometimes lost involuntarily. In the 1930's an academic in Germany decided to collect all the papers and the letters to and from the logician Gottlob Frege. He amassed a good deal of material and deposited it at the library at the University of Muenster. Allied bombing during 1944-1945 destroyed the library, and all of that collection was lost. An ironic footnote to this story is that Frege had corresponded with Ludwig Wittgenstein during and after the First World War. The academic asked Wittgenstein, in 1936, if he would share the letters he received from Frege, and he declined to do so. In retrospect it is lucky that he declined, since they too would have been destroyed, as Wittgenstein's own letters to Frege were destroyed by the bombing. Frege's letters to Wittgenstein were discovered many years after his death. Of course Germany contributed its share of destruction of books during WWII as well. Holland House in London was destroyed during the blitz of 1940, though a famous photo (easily found online) shows browsers examining the remains of the library in the rubble. A framed copy of that photo hangs in my office. But of course, in addition to public libraries, there are also private ones, such as ones own. I have two--one in my office comprising my philosophical books, and the one at home comprising all the rest. Books are just one focus of my collecting instinct, which includes music, stamps and baseball cards. I wrote about why I collect books and music in an op-ed several years ago: https://roanoke.com/opinion/klagge-me... . There I noted that while I had once hoped that my children would be interested in all these books and music, it has become clear that they are not. And the authors note that this is the fate of many libraries--the values that drive the collector are rarely shared by others of the next generation. Indeed, much of what our parents and grandparents owned and valued simply doesn't matter to us--and why should it? We have to get used to the idea that it is enough that something matters to me, and not expect or insist that it should matter to others. Since I'm nearing retirement, I have tried to acknowledge this dynamic by offering my colleagues the chance to look through my books at work and take what they would like (with some exceptions). They leave with between one and a dozen books. That way I feel like I've found a good home for some of them. But I have to admit that there are still very many that have not yet found a good home. Oh well. One of my professors in grad school, Rogers Albritton, always rented and never bought a house in LA. I don't know if this was because of the expense or the responsibility, but he told me once that he thought his equity was in his books. Several years after he passed away I wrote to a friend in the department to ask what had happened to Rogers' books, and he said they had somehow just scattered and disappeared. Presumably the department had simply piled them up in the hall outside his office, free for the taking. The authors begin by talking about the famous ancient library at Alexandria which was a repository for much of the literature of the ancient world and which burned down, thereby losing some/much(?) of that literature--including Aristotle's legendary dialogues. The authors wonder if that story is apocryphal and suggest that the loss might have simply been due to later generations not caring about what was collected and the library drifting into ruin, as many libraries have over the centuries. But there is a bit of interesting evidence against that hypothesis. Euripides was a famous tragedian of Ancient Athens. He is thought to have written over 90 plays, of which less than 20 have survived. Interestingly about half of the surviving plays have titles beginning with H or I, which are almost adjacent in the Greek alphabet. If the manuscripts were stored in shelves alphabetically, as the authors suggest, then it seems likely that the shelf that those plays were stored in happened to fare better in the fire than some of the other shelves. While the focus of this book was on the content of libraries--books--there was also some discussion of the architecture and organization of libraries, and the role of librarians. But I was surprised that there was no mention of the best known thing about librarians: "Shush!"...more
A dialogical meditation and exploration of metaphor in ways inspired by Wittgenstein. Left-hand pages have rather brief reflections by the author, andA dialogical meditation and exploration of metaphor in ways inspired by Wittgenstein. Left-hand pages have rather brief reflections by the author, and right-hand pages have quotations from a vast variety of authors that illustrate or in some ways respond to the author's reflections. I appreciated the stylistic experiment. And I especially liked that the author used math and science examples to illustrate or reflect on the role of metaphor, since it is often thought only to be a literary phenomenon. ...more
I've thought more about this than any other novel I've read in years. It is about the friendship of two couples over 40 years. It is about academia anI've thought more about this than any other novel I've read in years. It is about the friendship of two couples over 40 years. It is about academia and publishing. It is about a controlling benevolent despot of a spouse and friend. It is about co-dependence. While the characters are (a bit) exaggerated, they represent interesting types. While the novel takes place from the early 1930s to the early 1970s it does not feel dated. It got me thinking about couple-friendships and their presence/absence in my life and my parents' life. A deep and engaging book....more
While I consider myself well-read in theology, I had never read anything by the author. I had heard of him, but not read anything. I was attracted by While I consider myself well-read in theology, I had never read anything by the author. I had heard of him, but not read anything. I was attracted by the subtitle--since I consider myself a scholar as well. The first thing to say is that I am not as much of a scholar as the author--maybe 10% as much! He offers a litany of his publications (p. 5)--35 books, 75+ articles, 100+ popular articles, 200+ book reviews... I'm a far cry from that...and I consider myself fairly productive--4 books, 4 edited books, 27 articles... I'm not sure how you do that much! But we are on the same path anyway. The second thing to say is that the author's personal life remained something of a mystery. It is true that he did not propose to write a spiritual memoir. But his spiritual life--he began as a monk and then soon accepted excommunication to marry, a woman 9 years older than him with 6 children and significant health challenges--had a great impact on his scholarly life, yet we never learn much about that (pp. 82-5). There was a slight parallel between our paths early on. Once while I was working on my PhD I considered focussing on doing community development work in a Christian community before going into academia. But the advice of a professor and a budding romance turned me away from that route. Perhaps it remained a mystery to him as well. But he is so articulate about so many things that it is hard to imagine he couldn't have articulated more about this. Anyway... I thought the author did a good job of characterizing the life of a scholar--not only the process of research, but the other activities such as teaching, administration, public service, family...that make such a life a challenge. What he did not do as well, at least through most of the book, was to characterize his own scholarly contributions. He certainly listed them. But not as much of what they amounted to in general terms accessible to most readers, such as myself. (He did this more near the end.) The one area that I had some familiarity with was the work of the Jesus Seminar--assessing the historicity of Jesus (e.g., The Five Gospels: What Did Jesus Really Say? The Search for the Authentic Words of Jesus). I have long been a fan of this work, and it was frustrating to hear that he roundly criticized it, without him offering a clear account of why (pp. 146-49). He questioned their method, but I was unclear how he disagreed with their conclusions--especially since he distances himself from fundamentalists. I gather that he thinks historicity is the wrong lens to bring to the issue, but I wish he had done more to explain his preferred lens. In general, when it came to his research contributions, he never presented them in a way that made me think I would read this or that by him. In the end I felt sympathetic to the views and approaches he set out, but I was never pulled in. And so that was a little disappointing. The author's scholarly career spanned about 1970 to the present (mine about 1975 to the present), so it was interesting to recall the evolution of scholarship in those decades. E.g., the advent of personal computers for faculty in the late 1980's, the move from letters to faxes to e-mail, by the mid-1990's, the development of digital resources beginning around 2000, etc. When I was corresponding with G.H. von Wright about Wittgenstein stuff for our book Philosophical Occasions: 1912-1951 we used faxes, which were faster than letters! When I published a survey of Wittgenstein's use of the concept "besteht darin [consisting in]" in 1995, it was completely based on my actual reading of all the sources. There was no digital search I could do. (And I don't think I missed any!) When the author recounts his childhood and the relevant influences, he recounts an intellectual family life. In my case it was not until I was in high school that I found the debate team and friends who valued intellectual activities--not that my family discouraged that, but never modeled it. One interesting topic the author considered was productivity and perfectionism (pp. 130, 221). On the one hand he talks about the odd valuing on non-productivity in elite departments--as though there is something beneath dignity to actually publish things. I have heard about this but not experienced it. And then he also discusses perfectionism, where a scholar can't let go of a piece. This was how Wittgenstein behaved, and to a lesser extent was present at UCLA when I was a grad student there (1976-1983). Maybe Rogers Albritton is the best example of that, but also exhibited by David Kaplan to a lesser extent. Kaplan never published his monograph on Demonstratives (on which he gave courses in the late 1970s) and only allowed it to be published in a collection about his work Themes from Kaplan published in 1989. The ethos at UCLA was certainly to publish only very carefully. The author had an incredible commitment to teaching. This is all to the good, and something that I share in my own work. But he took it far beyond anything I would expect. When he has TAs--in his case for courses around 100 students--he not only oversees their work, but he himself does all the actual grading. This would be completely unworkable in my case, with courses numbering 150+ students. But it seems to me that TAs should be trusted to do their grading, with proper oversight. I'm not sure why he went that far. I most enjoyed the book's chapters near the end on the intellectual and moral virtues of a scholar. These were interesting and to me insightful and plausible. He discusses the importance of not allowing ideological perspectives to overwhelm the issues under discussion. It is clear that this has had greater impact on New Testament studies than it has on Wittgenstein studies. I hope that remains true. He also discusses the long time it sometimes takes to research, process and write up scholarly results. This was true of a number of the author's projects. This was another respect in which my own work can be compared to the author's. My longest-term project Tractatus in Context: The Essential Background for Appreciating Wittgenstein's Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus took 45 years. Another Wittgenstein's Artillery: Philosophy as Poetry took 10 years. And my views about Wittgenstein's views on the relation of mind and brain have evolved over 30 years, starting with a paper in 1989, another in 1996, this book Wittgenstein in Exile in 2011, and a book review in 2018. Another virtue the author promotes is Imagination. I especially appreciate this one. Ray Monk's famous biography of Wittgenstein Ludwig Wittgenstein: The Duty of Genius is subtitled "The Duty of Genius." Monk uses "genius" as a perspective to view Wittgenstein's life. In one of my books I use "exile" as a perspective to view his life. This is not a fact that one discovers or proves, but an imaginative way of thinking about Wittgenstein. The "proof" is only in how much illumination it brings. Perhaps this seems to go beyond the work of the scholar, narrowly construed. But it is a contribution to our appreciation. That is what I have aimed for. Another virtue the author promotes is breadth, which I also second. He mentions the value of reading literature broadly--not (just) for its content, but for its vision. I have especially brought this to bear in my recent book Wittgenstein's Artillery: Philosophy as Poetry. In one chapter I draw on a wide range of examples from literature to illustrate other ways of doing some of the kinds of things Wittgenstein tries to do in his vignettes and aphorisms. To appreciate Wittgenstein we have to try to bring as broad a perspective as he himself brought to his own work. All in all, this book gave me a lot to think about, and I appreciated the author's candor. I guess I wished for even more--but that may be too much to ask....more
A book right up my alley! I really enjoyed the empirical perspective on writing and writers. It reminded me of my own empirical investigation of a phiA book right up my alley! I really enjoyed the empirical perspective on writing and writers. It reminded me of my own empirical investigation of a philosophy paper in a review of Virtues and Reasons: Philippa Foot and Moral Theory: Essays in Honour of Philippa Foot that I published 25 years ago. I examined the 34-page contribution by Wiggins and found that it had an average sentence length of 30 words, had three dozen sentences over 60 words long, and the longest sentences were 120 and 121 words long! My review earned informal recognition as the "funniest mean philosophical book review." So I was pleased to discover that this book offered an actual tool for assessing the reading level of a book (p. 107), known as the Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level test: Grade level = 0.39 x (total words/total sentences) + 11.8 x (total syllables/total words) - 15.59 It was used to show the way in which books, especially best-sellers, have declined in sophistication over the years. So I decided to use that test on the paper by Wiggins. (I didn't actually count total syllables, but I sampled a few paragraphs.) That paper was a grade-level of 16.6, which I guess would be the first year of graduate school. I suppose that's not too inaccurate, though I think it underestimates the sheer density of that paper. Still it was in the ballpark even at that extreme. (The other extreme would be Dr. Seuss books.) A statistical approach to a literary issue that first interested me was the study of the relationship between Aristotle's two treatises on Ethics--Nicomachean and Eudemian--in The Aristotelian Ethics: A Study of the Relationship Between the Eudemian and Nicomachean Ethics of Aristotle. There are portions of these works that overlap, and that book uses statistical means (in the mid-1970s) to figure out what's what. The results were not terribly convincing, but it was a pioneering use of the method. I wished it had been mentioned in this book. I think this book could be useful for writers, as well as being fun for readers, by reminding them of things they may not ordinarily think about....more
A very readable book, but not a how-to...despite the title! For each topic the author provides numerous quotes and anecdotes from published and often fA very readable book, but not a how-to...despite the title! For each topic the author provides numerous quotes and anecdotes from published and often famous authors to illustrate points, and as an editor himself, the author draws on a lot of his own experience. Inevitably the illustrations present a variety of divergent views on the topic. The author only occasionally adds his own opinions, on such topics as Beginnings, Character development, Plagiarism, Point of view, Irony, Rhythm, Sex, Revisions, and Ending. I am not a fiction writer, but I did find some things that might be helpful to writers of non-fiction....more
An interesting oddity. Interesting mainly to Wittgenstein fans as a little-known book he published in 1926 for elementary school students. It is, as tAn interesting oddity. Interesting mainly to Wittgenstein fans as a little-known book he published in 1926 for elementary school students. It is, as the title says, a "Wörterbuch"--a Word Book. While this German word can also be translated as "dictionary," this is not a dictionary. It is unfortunate that the editors slip into calling it a dictionary some dozen times. In English a "dictionary" offers the meanings of words. This book does not offer meanings. Its purpose is to help students learn to spell words. To the causal reader it might appear to be giving definitions, but that is only because it gives the translation of the German words that Wittgenstein lists for the students, and the translation looks like the meaning. But that was not part of the original. What makes the book interesting is what words Wittgenstein included in his list of some 6000 words. While Wittgenstein aimed to list all and only words that would be needed by rural elementary school children, there are a number of words that figured in his earlier book, Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus: Aberglaube, Bedeutung, Begriff, Bild, Gedanke, Gegenstand, Gerüst, Grenze, Leiter, Merkmal, Sache, Satz, schweigen, sinnlos, Tatsache, überwinden, unsinnig, Wahrheit, and zeigen. And some words that would figure in his posthumously published book, Philosophical Investigations: Erlösung, Gleichnis, and übersichtlich. Somehow he left out Logik and Philosophie. But I was personally glad to see he included Klage....more
I have enjoyed reading some of Pamuk's novels, so I looked forward to reading this. But I would say he is better at writing novels than reflecting on I have enjoyed reading some of Pamuk's novels, so I looked forward to reading this. But I would say he is better at writing novels than reflecting on them. He talks a lot about the "center" of the novel. This is not something that I had heard of or that clicked with me. It grows out of his experience of reading and writing novels. I am fine with him describing his own such experiences. But he seemed to want to make a theory out of it. So when he makes a questionable generalization, he backs it up with (p. 77): "This is how I have always done it. And I feel that all writers, knowingly or unknowingly, do the same." And his (p. 187): "belief that if I frankly discuss my own experience of writing novels, and what I do when I write or read novels, then I will be discussing all novelists and the art of the novel generally." Why would he assume that? When it comes to clarifying the "center" it seems that novels do or should have one, or maybe have more than one, or at least we assume they do and look for one, or for more than one.... Maybe the book could be presented as Pamuk's search for the center of the novels he's read and written....more
Despite a few drawbacks, I enjoyed the book--it's right up my alley. The title is a bit misleading, since Alter is only concerned with the Hebrew BibleDespite a few drawbacks, I enjoyed the book--it's right up my alley. The title is a bit misleading, since Alter is only concerned with the Hebrew Bible--that is, the so-called "Old" Testament. He has just recently published his own complete translation with commentary: The Hebrew Bible: A Translation with Commentary. This book under review feels like his attempt to promote his translation in comparison with several others. It is pretty didactic. He seems to most appreciate the King James translation--because it sticks most closely and literally to the original, which is his own approach. He emphasizes the literary style, without caring much about the theological message. Yet he does emphasize the challenges translators face. It is a balancing act that cannot accommodate all perspectives. Alter's claim to fame is that he is the first to really attend to literary style. The oddity of this is that the Hebrew Bible (as well as Greek testament) is really a collection of very diverse material, and it seems implausible to attribute any kind of uniform style to this material. Yet he rarely addresses any stylistic differences between the various authors--e.g., the 4 sources of the Torah--the Elohist, Jahwist, Deuteronomist, and Priestly sources. Not to mention the various prophets, historians, etc. Since these sources also span several centuries, it is hard to imagine there are significant uniformities...unless one imagines that this is all the word of (one) God, which Alter never even contemplates. ...more
P. 2: "The theory this book advances is that aphorisms are before, against, and after philosophy....The philosopher creates and critiques continuous lP. 2: "The theory this book advances is that aphorisms are before, against, and after philosophy....The philosopher creates and critiques continuous lines of argument. The aphorist, on the other hand, composes scattered lines of intuition." The aphorists Hui focuses on are: Confucius, Heraclitus, Jesus (via Thomas), Erasmus, Bacon, Pascal and Nietzsche. (Twitter is given rather short shrift.) Hui by-passes: Goethe, Lichtenberg, Schopenhauer, Kafka and Wittgenstein. Of course you can't cover everything, but the ones he by-passed were the ones I'd have been most interested in. Since I was not too familiar with Confucius, Erasmus or Bacon, I did learn some things from the book. But I didn't feel like I came away with a deeper appreciation of the aphoristic form. He repeatedly emphasizes that aphorisms are short in length but long in interpretation. But that wasn't news. At least the book was short....more
While I have not read Caro's bio-historical tomes, I loved this auto-bio-memoir about his work. It is a quick read, and interesting to me b/c I also tWhile I have not read Caro's bio-historical tomes, I loved this auto-bio-memoir about his work. It is a quick read, and interesting to me b/c I also take a bio-historical approach to Wittgenstein. I don't work the way he works, but I liked hearing how he worked, and want to try some of his ideas....more
Some interesting background to her novels and her writing. But a lot of repetition. The story about the serpentine rock in the Appalachian chain of moSome interesting background to her novels and her writing. But a lot of repetition. The story about the serpentine rock in the Appalachian chain of mountains extending into Ireland and Scotland was told at least 3 times. ...more
Loading...
