Posts mit dem Label NYT werden angezeigt. Alle Posts anzeigen
Posts mit dem Label NYT werden angezeigt. Alle Posts anzeigen

Montag, 22. Oktober 2018

The Library

Nonfiction

The Library Fire That Ignited an Author’s Imagination

The New York Times, Oct. 15, 2018

Review By Michael Lewis


THE LIBRARY BOOK
By Susan Orlean
Illustrated. 317 pp. Simon & Schuster. $28
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Reading Room

12 Authors Write About the Libraries They Love

The New York Times, Oct. 15, 2018


Dienstag, 2. Oktober 2018

The NYRB and the troubles of political correctness

Accused Sexual Assaulter’s Tale of Ostracism

Should The New York Review of Books have published the essay by a Canadian broadcaster that led to the departure of the publication’s editor?


New York Review of Books Acknowledges ‘Failures’ in a #MeToo Essay


  • This article has been updated to include information about a letter sent to the New York Review of Books on Tuesday by contributors to the magazine saying they found Ian Buruma’s departure as editor “very troubling.” 

    THE NATION did apologize, now the NYRB. Who will be next? The rule of the mob reigns. Even if a court accquits a case, the pure mass of accusers keep it hot and demand obedience - and business follows cowardly.
    As one female wrote in a letter, quoted by by the NYT:
    Sexual harassment and assault are evils, but so is firing an editor for refusing to pass judgment on allegations rejected by a court, or choosing to publish an author who writes not to excuse bad behavior, but rather to describe the effects of a contemporary phenomenon — justice by internet — that is rampant and dangerous.
    Fascism takes many forms, and rough justice by self-selected vigilantes is one of them. I won’t cancel my subscription to The Review, but I am appalled.
    Rita C. Tobin

    Freitag, 21. September 2018

    The cleansing of the American mind

    The cleansing of the American mind

    Haimo L. Handl

    Ian Buruma on a New Era at The New York Review of Books
    John Williams, NYT, Sept. 9, 2017

    When Ian Buruma became editor of the famous NEW YORK REVIEW OF BOOKS, John Williams portraied him in his article. One could read:
    One can understand why Ian Buruma, when he was announced as The Review’s new editor in May, thought: “What the hell have I taken on?” But that only came after a happier intitial reaction. “I thought it was a challenge I would regret not accepting,” Buruma said. “The first feeling was a sense of euphoria, of a changed life.”

    A reviewer once called Buruma’s writing “disarmingly reasonable and calm,” and this is precisely how he comes across in person.

    Buruma intends to feature a more unpredictable ideological roster, given the unprecedented nature of the country’s political climate.

    “We’re not living in the same time as Nixon or Clinton or Bush,” he said. “Under Trump, the distinctions that used to exist, roughly speaking, between left and right, have become much more fluid. People who may never have come within a mile of the pages of The Review 20 years ago might have a place in it now. Everything will be looked at with fresh eyes.”
    Now it's a fact that he has gone too far. He didn't forsee with fresh eyes the changed climate, the the changed mental sets, the changed powers.

    An article which led to uproars exploded like a bomb and led to his ouster.

    What has happened?

    Buruma had published a very controversial peace of a Canadian writer who has been accused of sexual harassment but finally got acquitted. It wasn't just the plain article but Burumas defense and helpless explanations why he did publish that peace. Buruma had to go. One reads of the reactions:

    New York Review of Books Editor Is Out Amid Uproar Over #MeToo Essay
    Cara Buckley, NYT, Sept. 19, 2018
    Ian Buruma, the editor of The New York Review of Books, left his position on Wednesday amid an uproar over the magazine’s publication of an essay by a disgraced Canadian radio broadcaster who had been accused of sexually assaulting women.

    The upheaval at the publication shows the raw emotion still surrounding nearly every #MeToo accusation and response, less than a year after the first reports about Harvey Weinstein’s behavior unleashed a tide of allegations against other famous men.

    On Wednesday, the magazine posted a note atop the essay that began, “The following article, which has provoked much criticism, should have included acknowledgment of the serious nature and number of allegations that had been made against the writer, Jian Ghomeshi.” It then listed some of the allegations. *)

    Ms. Kipnis also said as news of Mr. Buruma’s departure spread, fellow writers shared alarm. “People are terrified to get caught in a Twitter storm,” she said. “And if they say they support Ian, it’s easy for someone to say, ‘There’s someone who doesn’t care about sexual assault.’”
    Buruma had given an interview to a Dutch paper as well as with  Isaac Chotiner from SLATE.

    Interrogation
    Why Did the New York Review of Books Publish That Jian Ghomeshi Essay?
    We asked the editor.
    By Isaac Chotiner, SLATE, Sept. 14, 2018

    *) The core of the affair:

    Reflections from a Hashtag
    Jian Ghomeshi   
    October 11, 2018 Issue, THE NEW YORK REVIEW OF BOOKS
    The following article, which has provoked much criticism, should have included acknowledgment of the serious nature and number of allegations that had been made against the writer, Jian Ghomeshi. In October 2014, Ghomeshi—about whom multiple women had filed harassment complaints—was fired from the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation after executives saw evidence that he had caused physical harm to a woman. Shortly after, more than twenty women accused him of sexual abuse and harassment, which included hitting, biting, choking, and verbal abuse during sex. Many of these allegations were made in respected publications, including The Toronto Star. That November, Ghomeshi was charged with the sexual assault of three women. (Sexual assault, under Canada’s Criminal Code, can include threats and nonconsensual physical contact. There is no specific legal provision for rape as it is defined in US law.) In January 2015, additional counts of sexual assault were brought against him by three more women. He was acquitted of all charges, and settled a further charge of sexual assault, of a coworker at the CBC, out of court with a peace bond and public apology. Substantial space will be devoted to letters responding to this article in the next issue of The New York Review, dated October 25, 2018.
    [This note which has been put in front of the article, evokes a kind of déjà-vu. THE NATION felt it necessary to put their craven apology in front of a poem which has insulted thousands of readers.]

    America, it seems, is getting clean. The cleansers are working hard.


    Freitag, 31. August 2018

    Safety versus Freedom

    Does Our Cultural Obsession With Safety Spell the Downfall of Democracy?

    By Thomas Chatterton Williams, NYT


    THE SPLINTERING OF THE AMERICAN MIND
    Identity Politics, Inequality, and Community on Today’s College Campuses
    By William Egginton
    263 pp. Bloomsbury. $28.

    THE CODDLING OF THE AMERICAN MIND
    How Good Intentions and Bad Ideas Are Setting Up a Generation for Failure
    By Greg Lukianoff and Jonathan Haidt
    338 pp. Penguin Press. $28.

    In this review Thomas Chatterton Willliams frist refers to the so called "How-To"-affair of THE NATION and goes on to remark:

    If it feels as though we no longer know how to speak or listen in good faith to one another, it’s because we don’t. This is the kind of controversy that might have seemed overblown as recently as the start of the Obama administration. Today it arrives with frequency and fervor — a marker of the country’s rapidly shifting mores, which are the product of new generations increasingly fluent in, in thrall to and in fear of the hyperspecialized language and norms of academia. Whether you even find the above exchange intelligible reveals a great deal more than merely your political bent, touching on aspects of age, education and geography — not to mention distinctions of race and class.

    Read more in the NYT 
    Auf deutsch siehe Artikel von Haimo L. Handl: Sprachpolizei
     

    Freitag, 17. August 2018

    William Giraldi's defense of Literature

    A Critic Who Worships Literature, and Defends His Faith Accordingly

    By Nathaniel Rich, NYT,

    Review of:
    AMERICAN AUDACITY
    In Defense of Literary Daring
    By William Giraldi
    462 pp. Liveright. $30.

    If literature, as William Giraldi writes in “American Audacity,” is “the one religion worth having,” then Giraldi is our most tenacious revivalist preacher, his sermons galvanized by a righteous exhortative energy, a mastery of the sacred texts and — unique in contemporary literary criticism — an enthusiasm for moralizing in defense of high standards. “Do I really expect Americans to sit down with ‘Adam Bede’ or ‘Clarissa’ after all the professional and domestic hurly-burly of their day?” he asks in an essay bemoaning “Fifty Shades of Grey.” “Pardon me, but yes, I do.” The only insincerity there is the request for pardon: Giraldi is defiantly, lavishly unforgiving.

    Read more in the NYT

    Montag, 18. Juni 2018

    Kinder in der Bibliothek

    Sketchbook

    Left to Their Own (Literary) Devices

    An illustrated reminder of what happens when kids are left to roam the stacks of a library.

    Samstag, 14. April 2018

    Those dark times arn't gone

    The Philosopher in Dark Times

    THINKING WITHOUT A BANISTER
    Essays in Understanding, 1953-1975
    By Hannah Arendt
    Edited by Jerome Kohn
    569 pp. Schocken Books. $40.

    What is the relationship between thinking, acting and historical consciousness? How do we preserve a spirited intellectual autonomy that yet includes enough sense of the past to contextualize and resist those power-grabbers who would bamboozle the public with their own fun house versions of truth?

    -----------------------------

    Bei einem philosophisch-politischen Gespräch erwähnte ich kürzlich Hannah Arendt, worauf ein aufrechter, progressiver, linker Autor mich vehement anfuhr und wünschte, von dieser Person nichts zu hören, weil sie mit ihrem Konzept der Banalität des Bösen Hitler und die Nazis bagatellisiert habe, weil sie politisch dem Feind geholfen habe etc.

    Ich sah ihn erstaunt an, wie man einen Typen beschaut, der eine seltsame Krankheit zeigt, und es stieg weniger Ärger in mir hoch, ob der blöden falschen Aussage und seiner bornierten Haltung eines typischen Linken, der nichts, jedenfalls zu wenig, gerlenrt hatte, als Bedauern über seine geringe Denkfähigkeit, seine brüchige Weltbildfragilität. Er war ein Moralist mit Ideologie, war, wie er meinte, zukunftsorientiert und führte das Versagen der Sozialdemokratie bzw. der Kommunisten auf die Gegner zurück: damals wie heute. Seine Zukunft war aber eigentlich schon dunkel, lag im Gestern, war eine verzerrte Erinnerung geworden. Auch die letzten Reste von Mao konnten das alte Regime mit SEINER Wahrheit nicht mehr herstellen, auch dieses verblasste und dunkelte.

    Kein Wort über totalitäre Seiten und Menschenverachtung bei den Kommis, kein Wort über den linken Faschismus (das Konzept sei bürgerliche Propaganda, basta!), In seinem Gartenlaubenkosmos war alles klar geordnet: oben und unten, links und rechts. Die Hannah lag falsch, basta. (Er versuchte sich zu beherrschen in seinen folgenen Invektiven, weil die Arendt ja eine Jüdin war und man - er - deshalb etwas gewählter, sorgsamer vorgehen musste, um nicht in den falschen Winkel gestellt zu werden, der aber, wenn man seine Position näher beleuchtete, durchaus der passende für ihn gewesen wäre.)

    Sein Kollege, ein älterer, frustrierter Sozialdemoklrat, hielt sich klug aus der Debatte, wiegte bedeutungsschwanger sein Haupt, hüstelte, und versuchte eine neutrale Verbindungsbemerkung zu äußern, die aber unterging.

    Es existiert nicht nur eine Kritik an Arendt, sondern eine abwertende Gehässigkeit, wenn nicht blanker Hass. Für mich und andere bleibt Hannah Arendt, bei aller Kritik, die sie ja durchaus aushält, eine beeindruckende, tapfere Denkerin, die Spuren hinterließ.
    HLH


    Nachtrag:

    Fifty Years Later, Why Does ‘Eichmann in Jerusalem’ Remain Contentious?