Tuesday, March 3, 2009

fairness differs from mercy

Having condemned Toni Morrison's new novel, her views of language-as-oppression, and the critics' sycophancy, I want to add a qualification in the interest of full disclosure and of fairness:

I have not read the book, but only a review of it, along with lots of "critical" puffery. I have also watched an interview with TM on the book and on assorted other topics, such as the election of Barack Obama.

Why have I not read it? Because the "critics" who praise it praise it in ways that are either patently untrue, or that reflect values that I do not share, and at least one critic who has panned it has done so in a fair, balanced, and well-argued manner that presupposes literary values similar to my own. I am too busy to read books of such a character. Also, I have read enough of Ms. Morrison's other productions to know that she is fond of some very muddled ideas, is overrated as a stylist, and has a severely misguided agenda.

But I do not doubt that the book has some good passages and some good aspects. Toni Morrison is a human being who is capable of sympathetic and beautiful writing (though not in a style that particularly appeals to me). Some of her purposes in writing as she does are noble. I do not mean in any way to question her intentions. She is right to concern herself with racism, and with the plight of those who are helpless, and with the injustices (I would call them sins) that we inflict on each other daily, especially in our most closely knit circles. Our differences are mostly on the question of how to make the world better, not whether it needs to be made better, or even what about it needs to be fixed.


No comments:

Post a Comment