More on Richler
- Mehdy writes:
> Although I have no expertise in either Mordecai Richler orKabbalah, but your topic seems to be interesting even for
non-religious person like me.
Let me clarify here: Kabbalah-related symbolism or allusions would
have been useful with the Lowry/Pynchon thesis, but would not really
do for analyzing Richler. I'm using the Messiah 'archetype', if you
will, as shaping the sort of hero that Richler repeatedly brings into
his narrative (in his later novels); in other words, my thesis will
not deal with the Kabbalah at all.
The analysis of Richler's work so far has mostly been done from a
firm, secular standpoint, and has focused on social issues, so I hope
what I want to demonstrate with a more 'mythographic' approach is at
least refreshing (if not misguided; hopefully not). Even though I keep
hearing that Harold Bloom and Leslie Fiedler are hopelessly outdated
as beacons of lit crit, I just can't help but find the myth-oriented
reading of literature the most stimulating... Of course, the work must
lend itself to such a reading, and this is what I see as overlooked in
the criticism of Richler.
> The first time I came upon this Mordecai Richler was when I was >browsing Encartar for Canadian Literature. There was his photo >
sitting on a bench with a grim face.
He does look grim, and rather shabby on most of the photos, usually
with a dangling cigarette, probably to keep up the 'humble beginnings'
look. But his writing is wildly funny, even if at times the humor is a
bit puerile and/or somewhat disgusting. I'd recommend "Solomon Gursky
Was Here", one of his last novels (he died in 2001), as his best
(that's the one I'm writing about, together with "St. Urbain's
Horseman" and perhaps portions of "Joshua Now and Then"). If you have
a feeling that all Canadian Literature lacks the necessary punch, that
it's bland and colorless, well, let Richler prove you entirely wrong. :)
> Thanks for the Information and Good Luck With Your Thesis.Thanks a lot!