Subject
Re: Cruelty
From
Date
Body
Matt Roth [to JM] You said, affirming Gavriel Shapiro's point, that genuine art doesn't resort to cruelty. I have to admit that I'm not sure what this means in practical terms. Your statement seems to imply that genuine art could resort to cruelty, but doesn't. But what is cruelty in art? Cruelty at what level? Certainly all satire has an element of cruelty in it, insomuch as corrective laughter, even when well-placed, corrects by shaming and/or embarrassing the butt of the joke. So the point may be both true and cruel. If, on the other hand, we're talking about an author's relationship to his characters, I don't see how an author can be either cruel or kind. Was it cruel to give Humbert Humbert that nasty habit? Was it kind of VN to show us Pnin's tender side? Perhaps I'm missing something. Can you give an example of another author you would consider cruel?
JM: A pertinent point, thanks for raising it, Matt.
I've been finding it especially difficult to fully express my thoughts, perhaps in English it's becoming even more complicated. In the present case you mention, my intention had been to indicate a cartoonist's "cruelty" and offer a contrasting view (Shapiro's), but not to endorse either one or the other (because this would entail my entering into the slippery ground of subjectivie appraisals*).
I agree with you that "art", like "truth", in themselves are neither cruel nor kind. But an author my be cruel or a reader my feel cruelly treated by an author. Truth often hurts while it "heals" and art, perhaps, may engender a similar effect. Nabokov describes himself as taking pity on Krug and thereby rendering him insane; he also takes pity on Cincinnatus, even on Shade and Kinbote. But, before coming to this, he makes them (and the reader) suffer a lot (he treats them cruelly ...by his adherence to truth, by his observation of the "real world", by a putative sadistic pleasure? Who's to know?).
Personally, I consider Nabokov a cruel author and a cruel critic. Are Jonathan Swift, Joris-Karl Huysmans, Machado de Assis, Lautrèamont cruel, are they truthful artists? ( I'm not referring to sadistic authors, such as...Sade). As a reader, am I a masochist or a sadist instead of being a lover of "great art"? Why is Nabokov my favourite writer?
............................................................................................
* - Today someone said to me "gosto não se discute, só se lamenta" and the additional commentary to "de gustibus non est disputandum" was new to me ( ie: one cannot discuss a matter of taste, but one can lament a person's taste..."
Search archive with Google:
http://www.google.com/advanced_search?q=site:listserv.ucsb.edu&HL=en
Contact the Editors: mailto:nabokv-l@utk.edu,nabokv-l@holycross.edu
Visit Zembla: http://www.libraries.psu.edu/nabokov/zembla.htm
View Nabokv-L policies: http://web.utk.edu/~sblackwe/EDNote.htm
Visit "Nabokov Online Journal:" http://www.nabokovonline.com
Manage subscription options: http://listserv.ucsb.edu/
JM: A pertinent point, thanks for raising it, Matt.
I've been finding it especially difficult to fully express my thoughts, perhaps in English it's becoming even more complicated. In the present case you mention, my intention had been to indicate a cartoonist's "cruelty" and offer a contrasting view (Shapiro's), but not to endorse either one or the other (because this would entail my entering into the slippery ground of subjectivie appraisals*).
I agree with you that "art", like "truth", in themselves are neither cruel nor kind. But an author my be cruel or a reader my feel cruelly treated by an author. Truth often hurts while it "heals" and art, perhaps, may engender a similar effect. Nabokov describes himself as taking pity on Krug and thereby rendering him insane; he also takes pity on Cincinnatus, even on Shade and Kinbote. But, before coming to this, he makes them (and the reader) suffer a lot (he treats them cruelly ...by his adherence to truth, by his observation of the "real world", by a putative sadistic pleasure? Who's to know?).
Personally, I consider Nabokov a cruel author and a cruel critic. Are Jonathan Swift, Joris-Karl Huysmans, Machado de Assis, Lautrèamont cruel, are they truthful artists? ( I'm not referring to sadistic authors, such as...Sade). As a reader, am I a masochist or a sadist instead of being a lover of "great art"? Why is Nabokov my favourite writer?
............................................................................................
* - Today someone said to me "gosto não se discute, só se lamenta" and the additional commentary to "de gustibus non est disputandum" was new to me ( ie: one cannot discuss a matter of taste, but one can lament a person's taste..."
Search archive with Google:
http://www.google.com/advanced_search?q=site:listserv.ucsb.edu&HL=en
Contact the Editors: mailto:nabokv-l@utk.edu,nabokv-l@holycross.edu
Visit Zembla: http://www.libraries.psu.edu/nabokov/zembla.htm
View Nabokv-L policies: http://web.utk.edu/~sblackwe/EDNote.htm
Visit "Nabokov Online Journal:" http://www.nabokovonline.com
Manage subscription options: http://listserv.ucsb.edu/