BRUT:哈罗德-雅夫的《艺术与艺术家文集》(评论)

IF 0.1 4区 文学 0 LITERATURE AMERICAN BOOK REVIEW Pub Date : 2024-03-12 DOI:10.1353/abr.2023.a921802
Eckhard Gerdes
{"title":"BRUT:哈罗德-雅夫的《艺术与艺术家文集》(评论)","authors":"Eckhard Gerdes","doi":"10.1353/abr.2023.a921802","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<span><span>In lieu of</span> an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:</span>\n<p> <span>Reviewed by:</span> <ul> <li><!-- html_title --> <em>BRUT: Writings on Art &amp; Artists</em> by Harold Jaffe <!-- /html_title --></li> <li> Eckhard Gerdes (bio) </li> </ul> <em><small>brut: writings on art &amp; artists</small></em> Harold Jaffe<br/> Anti-Oedipus Press<br/> https://anti-oedipuspress.com/books/brut/<br/> 144 pages; Print, $16.95 <p>Harold Jaffe's transgressive fictions range from the social critique of his novel <em>Mole's Pity</em> (1979), through his fiction treatments of celebrity in <em>Madonna &amp; Other Spectacles</em> (1988), <em>15 Serial Killers</em> (2003), and <em>Brando Bleeds</em> (2022), and carry on throughout his disturbing and astute docufictions such as <em>Porn-Anti-Porn</em> (2019) and <em>False Positive</em> (2002). But in all cases, Jaffe makes one consistent decision as a writer: the dominant methods of employing fiction are not the essential basis of literary art.</p> <p>What makes Jaffe's writing unique is, perhaps, how he creatively and effectively combines the strategies and techniques of fiction with nonfiction. His docufictions blur the distinction between the two. In that sense, Jaffe's work reimagines the first dictum of the English novel: the pretense of being nonfiction. Readers of eighteenth-century novels must have realized that writers such as Defoe and Swift were not actually relating true accounts but were using nonfiction as a conceit upon which to build their novels. This process has been thoroughly discussed in Lennard Davis's <em>Factual Fictions: The Origins of the English Novel</em> (1997), which traces the history of the novel from the printed ballad, which was ostensibly the sharing of the \"news\" (cf. <em>novellus</em> in Latin), to the adoption of the conceit by eighteenth-century novelists. But the factuality of the work was not a real issue. It only had to look like that. <strong>[End Page 158]</strong> Present-day readers can read <em>The Onion</em> or the satire of \"The Borowitz Report\" without believing the stories are true. This synthesis of fact and fiction was foundational in the novel but has been misunderstood and misused by scores of writers who believe that they are so special that all a novel really needs to be is a <em>roman à clef</em>. Indeed, hundreds of these works are of the type that I call \"I hate my parents\" or \"I screwed my grad student\" novels. And though some value can be found in these works, the novel as a form is much larger than that. It can certainly be used for social purposes, but is a work whose goal is to effect social change primarily social commentary or a literary novel? What destination is the author driving toward? Is the goal social commentary or literary excellence? Those are clearly separate and distinct goals. Which of those choices is more important to the author? We should not conflate astute social commentary with literary excellence.</p> <p>Jaffe does not avoid social commentary, but in treating the writing with an enormous set of tools that ultimately obfuscate and complicate our notions of the difference between fact and fiction, he is using the very strategies of the dominant class that are used to keep readers ignorant of the truth. Words such as \"truthiness\" spring to mind as having been weaponized in order to have readers not know what to believe. Jaffe's blurring of this distinction can be seen in his motto that appears on his website, that a writer's task is to \"Find a seam, plant a mine, slip away\" (haroldjaffe.wordpress.com). But in Jaffe's case the social commentary seems to be more in the service of literary expression than vice versa. In this sense, he uses fact as a tool for fiction rather than the other way around.</p> <p>This can be seen, for instance, in the first fiction in <em>BRUT</em>, the first of three pieces called \"Queen of Hearts,\" this one about an indigenous community that is going to be slaughtered by the US cavalry in its racist mission to eradicate the First Nations. The entire community is murdered except for one woman, who, wearing a \"white mask war-painted with mustangs and buffalo,\" begins to \"Ghost Dance\" feverishly to ward off the cavalry. Her dance quite literally kept her alive, and she remained the only one not shot. Her dance was her act of defiance. It was not a precious piece of social commentary meant to seat the cavalry in...</p> </p>","PeriodicalId":41337,"journal":{"name":"AMERICAN BOOK REVIEW","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"BRUT: Writings on Art & Artists by Harold Jaffe (review)\",\"authors\":\"Eckhard Gerdes\",\"doi\":\"10.1353/abr.2023.a921802\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<span><span>In lieu of</span> an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:</span>\\n<p> <span>Reviewed by:</span> <ul> <li><!-- html_title --> <em>BRUT: Writings on Art &amp; Artists</em> by Harold Jaffe <!-- /html_title --></li> <li> Eckhard Gerdes (bio) </li> </ul> <em><small>brut: writings on art &amp; artists</small></em> Harold Jaffe<br/> Anti-Oedipus Press<br/> https://anti-oedipuspress.com/books/brut/<br/> 144 pages; Print, $16.95 <p>Harold Jaffe's transgressive fictions range from the social critique of his novel <em>Mole's Pity</em> (1979), through his fiction treatments of celebrity in <em>Madonna &amp; Other Spectacles</em> (1988), <em>15 Serial Killers</em> (2003), and <em>Brando Bleeds</em> (2022), and carry on throughout his disturbing and astute docufictions such as <em>Porn-Anti-Porn</em> (2019) and <em>False Positive</em> (2002). But in all cases, Jaffe makes one consistent decision as a writer: the dominant methods of employing fiction are not the essential basis of literary art.</p> <p>What makes Jaffe's writing unique is, perhaps, how he creatively and effectively combines the strategies and techniques of fiction with nonfiction. His docufictions blur the distinction between the two. In that sense, Jaffe's work reimagines the first dictum of the English novel: the pretense of being nonfiction. Readers of eighteenth-century novels must have realized that writers such as Defoe and Swift were not actually relating true accounts but were using nonfiction as a conceit upon which to build their novels. This process has been thoroughly discussed in Lennard Davis's <em>Factual Fictions: The Origins of the English Novel</em> (1997), which traces the history of the novel from the printed ballad, which was ostensibly the sharing of the \\\"news\\\" (cf. <em>novellus</em> in Latin), to the adoption of the conceit by eighteenth-century novelists. But the factuality of the work was not a real issue. It only had to look like that. <strong>[End Page 158]</strong> Present-day readers can read <em>The Onion</em> or the satire of \\\"The Borowitz Report\\\" without believing the stories are true. This synthesis of fact and fiction was foundational in the novel but has been misunderstood and misused by scores of writers who believe that they are so special that all a novel really needs to be is a <em>roman à clef</em>. Indeed, hundreds of these works are of the type that I call \\\"I hate my parents\\\" or \\\"I screwed my grad student\\\" novels. And though some value can be found in these works, the novel as a form is much larger than that. It can certainly be used for social purposes, but is a work whose goal is to effect social change primarily social commentary or a literary novel? What destination is the author driving toward? Is the goal social commentary or literary excellence? Those are clearly separate and distinct goals. Which of those choices is more important to the author? We should not conflate astute social commentary with literary excellence.</p> <p>Jaffe does not avoid social commentary, but in treating the writing with an enormous set of tools that ultimately obfuscate and complicate our notions of the difference between fact and fiction, he is using the very strategies of the dominant class that are used to keep readers ignorant of the truth. Words such as \\\"truthiness\\\" spring to mind as having been weaponized in order to have readers not know what to believe. Jaffe's blurring of this distinction can be seen in his motto that appears on his website, that a writer's task is to \\\"Find a seam, plant a mine, slip away\\\" (haroldjaffe.wordpress.com). But in Jaffe's case the social commentary seems to be more in the service of literary expression than vice versa. In this sense, he uses fact as a tool for fiction rather than the other way around.</p> <p>This can be seen, for instance, in the first fiction in <em>BRUT</em>, the first of three pieces called \\\"Queen of Hearts,\\\" this one about an indigenous community that is going to be slaughtered by the US cavalry in its racist mission to eradicate the First Nations. The entire community is murdered except for one woman, who, wearing a \\\"white mask war-painted with mustangs and buffalo,\\\" begins to \\\"Ghost Dance\\\" feverishly to ward off the cavalry. Her dance quite literally kept her alive, and she remained the only one not shot. Her dance was her act of defiance. It was not a precious piece of social commentary meant to seat the cavalry in...</p> </p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":41337,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"AMERICAN BOOK REVIEW\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"AMERICAN BOOK REVIEW\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1353/abr.2023.a921802\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"文学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"LITERATURE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"AMERICAN BOOK REVIEW","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1353/abr.2023.a921802","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LITERATURE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

以下是内容的简要摘录,以代替摘要:评论者: BRUT:作者:哈罗德-雅菲 Eckhard Gerdes (简历) 《BRUT: Writings on Art & Artists》(《艺术与艺术家》) 哈罗德-雅菲 Anti-Oedipus Press https://anti-oedipuspress.com/books/brut/ 144 页;印刷版,16 美元。95 哈罗德-谢斐的越轨小说从他的小说《鼹鼠的怜悯》(1979 年)中的社会批判,到他在《麦当娜与其他眼镜》(1988 年)、《15 名连环杀手》(2003 年)和《白兰度流血》(2022 年)中对名人的小说处理,再到他令人不安而又敏锐的纪录片,如《色情-反色情》(2019 年)和《假阳性》(2002 年)。但无论如何,作为作家,谢斐都做出了一个一致的决定:使用小说的主流方法并非文学艺术的根本基础。贾菲写作的独特之处或许在于他如何创造性地将虚构与非虚构的策略和技巧有效地结合起来。他的纪录片模糊了两者之间的区别。从这个意义上说,谢斐的作品重新诠释了英国小说的第一要义:伪装成非虚构。十八世纪小说的读者一定意识到,笛福和斯威夫特等作家实际上并不是在讲述真实的故事,而是在利用非虚构作为小说的自负。伦纳德-戴维斯(Lennard Davis)的《事实小说》(Factual Fictions)对这一过程进行了深入探讨:戴维斯的《事实小说:英国小说的起源》(The Origins of the English Novel,1997 年)对这一过程进行了详尽的论述,该书追溯了小说的历史,从表面上是分享 "新闻"(参见拉丁语中的 novellus)的印刷民谣,到 18 世纪小说家对这一隐喻的采用。但作品的真实性并不是一个真正的问题。它只需要看起来像那么回事。[现在的读者可以阅读《洋葱头》或《博罗威茨报告》的讽刺作品,而不会相信这些故事是真实的。这种事实与虚构的结合是小说的基础,但却被数十位作家误解和滥用,他们认为自己是如此特别,以至于一部小说只需要是一部 "罗马小说"。事实上,数以百计的这类作品被我称为 "我恨我的父母 "或 "我坑了我的研究生 "的小说。虽然在这些作品中可以发现一些价值,但小说作为一种形式远不止于此。它当然可以用于社会目的,但一部以实现社会变革为目标的作品主要是社会评论还是文学小说?作者的目标是什么?目标是社会评论还是文学精品?这些显然是不同的、截然不同的目标。哪一个选择对作者更重要?我们不应将敏锐的社会评论与卓越的文学作品混为一谈。谢斐并没有回避社会评论,但他在处理写作时使用了大量的工具,这些工具最终混淆了我们对事实与虚构之间区别的概念并使之复杂化,他使用的正是统治阶级用来让读者对真相一无所知的策略。我想到了 "真实性 "等词,这些词已经被武器化,目的是让读者不知道该相信什么。贾菲模糊了这一区别,他在自己网站上的座右铭是:作家的任务是 "找到地缝,埋下地雷,溜之大吉"(haroldjaffe.wordpress.com)。但在贾菲的作品中,社会评论似乎更多是为文学表达服务,而不是相反。在这个意义上,他将事实作为小说的工具,而不是相反。例如,在《BRUT》中的第一篇小说,即三部作品中的第一部《Queen of Hearts》中,就可以看到这一点,这部作品讲述的是一个土著社区将被美国骑兵屠杀的故事。整个社区的人都被杀了,只有一个女人例外,她戴着 "画着野马和水牛的白色面具",开始疯狂地跳起 "鬼舞",以抵挡骑兵。她的舞蹈确实让她活了下来,她也是唯一一个没有中弹的人。她的舞蹈是她的反抗行为。这并不是为了让骑兵们坐下来而进行的珍贵的社会评论。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
BRUT: Writings on Art & Artists by Harold Jaffe (review)
In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

Reviewed by:

  • BRUT: Writings on Art & Artists by Harold Jaffe
  • Eckhard Gerdes (bio)
brut: writings on art & artists Harold Jaffe
Anti-Oedipus Press
https://anti-oedipuspress.com/books/brut/
144 pages; Print, $16.95

Harold Jaffe's transgressive fictions range from the social critique of his novel Mole's Pity (1979), through his fiction treatments of celebrity in Madonna & Other Spectacles (1988), 15 Serial Killers (2003), and Brando Bleeds (2022), and carry on throughout his disturbing and astute docufictions such as Porn-Anti-Porn (2019) and False Positive (2002). But in all cases, Jaffe makes one consistent decision as a writer: the dominant methods of employing fiction are not the essential basis of literary art.

What makes Jaffe's writing unique is, perhaps, how he creatively and effectively combines the strategies and techniques of fiction with nonfiction. His docufictions blur the distinction between the two. In that sense, Jaffe's work reimagines the first dictum of the English novel: the pretense of being nonfiction. Readers of eighteenth-century novels must have realized that writers such as Defoe and Swift were not actually relating true accounts but were using nonfiction as a conceit upon which to build their novels. This process has been thoroughly discussed in Lennard Davis's Factual Fictions: The Origins of the English Novel (1997), which traces the history of the novel from the printed ballad, which was ostensibly the sharing of the "news" (cf. novellus in Latin), to the adoption of the conceit by eighteenth-century novelists. But the factuality of the work was not a real issue. It only had to look like that. [End Page 158] Present-day readers can read The Onion or the satire of "The Borowitz Report" without believing the stories are true. This synthesis of fact and fiction was foundational in the novel but has been misunderstood and misused by scores of writers who believe that they are so special that all a novel really needs to be is a roman à clef. Indeed, hundreds of these works are of the type that I call "I hate my parents" or "I screwed my grad student" novels. And though some value can be found in these works, the novel as a form is much larger than that. It can certainly be used for social purposes, but is a work whose goal is to effect social change primarily social commentary or a literary novel? What destination is the author driving toward? Is the goal social commentary or literary excellence? Those are clearly separate and distinct goals. Which of those choices is more important to the author? We should not conflate astute social commentary with literary excellence.

Jaffe does not avoid social commentary, but in treating the writing with an enormous set of tools that ultimately obfuscate and complicate our notions of the difference between fact and fiction, he is using the very strategies of the dominant class that are used to keep readers ignorant of the truth. Words such as "truthiness" spring to mind as having been weaponized in order to have readers not know what to believe. Jaffe's blurring of this distinction can be seen in his motto that appears on his website, that a writer's task is to "Find a seam, plant a mine, slip away" (haroldjaffe.wordpress.com). But in Jaffe's case the social commentary seems to be more in the service of literary expression than vice versa. In this sense, he uses fact as a tool for fiction rather than the other way around.

This can be seen, for instance, in the first fiction in BRUT, the first of three pieces called "Queen of Hearts," this one about an indigenous community that is going to be slaughtered by the US cavalry in its racist mission to eradicate the First Nations. The entire community is murdered except for one woman, who, wearing a "white mask war-painted with mustangs and buffalo," begins to "Ghost Dance" feverishly to ward off the cavalry. Her dance quite literally kept her alive, and she remained the only one not shot. Her dance was her act of defiance. It was not a precious piece of social commentary meant to seat the cavalry in...

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
AMERICAN BOOK REVIEW
AMERICAN BOOK REVIEW LITERATURE-
自引率
0.00%
发文量
35
期刊最新文献
It's the Algorithm, Stupid! Conspiracy Theories in the Time of Covid-19 by Clare Birchall and Peter Knight (review) A Lot of People Are Saying: The New Conspiracism and the Assault on Democracy by Russell Muirhead and Nancy L. Rosenblum (review) Conspiracy Theories and Latin American History: Lurking in the Shadows by Luis Roniger and Leonardo Senkman (review) Perennial Conspiracy Theory: Reflections on the History of "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion" by Michael Hagemeister (review)
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1