“My journal is a private affair.” This first clause of the novel presents significant information as to how we should read the book as a whole; what we have is a private journal, and we would ask ourselves why and how we’ve come across this. It was meant to be found, or this portion would not have been included in any private journal entry; this means that the journal is already not private by nature. It, in fact, has entered into the realm of public viewing. It is art, a novel perhaps, but it will at least be chosen according to an audience. We, the readers, then, are now part of the private affair of the journal that is not so private, nor meant to be private. This fact is also indicated by us starting at a certain point in the author’s life. We don’t know the author’s name yet, beyond it being Percival Everett, because the cover is the real beginning of the novel. It is a novel, so it says on the cover, called Erasure, by Percival Everett. Presumably, we already know he’s black, either by reputation, seeing his book in the “African-American Literature” section of Borders, or by his picture on the dust jacket—all of these are used to indicate the “protagonist’s” race within the story.
But when we consider the point further we find that the “novel” began much earlier than even the cover. In our context we chose the novel because the author was black, because we needed equality of representation in our study. It wasn’t even necessary to physically see the book, to hold it in our hands, in order to choose it; these things, after all, are not conditions to prove the reality of the book. We could read a review on Amazon, or look it up on Wikipedia; but these are only ways that we chose our books, in our own context. I don’t mean to suggest that internet or technology causes this kind of representation, and I don’t believe Everett does either; he focuses on other means, like academia, or popular culture in general. In short, the book exists long before the book, through factors such as publicity, reputation, etc.
Returning to the novel, we can now appreciate more fully the irony of its opening words. It is not a private affair because who ever left this “journal” has made a deliberate choice to let it be found; he has created a portion of his own life and chosen a specific starting point—it is his own representation while assuming an audience. In other words, it is not a journal at all, but what we might classify as a novel or a story, which we knew (flipping the pages backward) by the epigraph quoting Twain, the dedication page, the cataloging-in-publication-data (which has five different classifications for it that I suggest you read), the reviews of other authors, the cover, and finally its reputation. And finally, if we buy into the idea that the author of the journal intends its publication, we know it will run the same gamut of publicity, classification, and representation Everett’s novel has gone through.
All these things, I believe, have significant bearing on themes brought up in the novel, but these are by no means the only ones, nor the only themes. However, we should keep things in mind that are outside the novel; and we, in our own context, can especially appreciate its levels of irony when we take a step back and consider our reasons for choosing this book. The irony should not be lost on us, since we, in fact, fell into the way of thinking and classification that is satirized within the novel (I, shamefully, pitched the book because it was a black author).
The rest of the opening paragraph is quite interesting and complex; it brings up many recurring themes, especially as they pertain to identity, that we should keep in mind as we continue to read. I think we should spend a good deal of time discussing this paragraph and linking it to later occurrences at our next meeting. Our reading should be through chapter 6, pg 131 in my addition, which is the end of My Pafology. Hope you guys enjoy it!
-Marcus
- Ulrike -
close reading, page 212: But the irony was beautiful. I was a victim of racism by virtue of my failing to acknowledge racial difference and by failing to have my art be defined as an exercise in racial self-expression. So, I would not be economically oppressed because of writing a book that fell in line with the very books I deemed racist. And I would have to wear the mask of the person I was expected to be.
This passage is very essential to the novel’s theme of racism. Monk is “not black enough” for most publishers; he is a black man and hence the literary world expects him to write about being black. This is the mask Monk is talking about. In Everett’s interview I posted on the Wiki he says “But, here we are again, talking about race. I don't want to talk about race, I just want to make art.” As Marcus already pointed out, it is extremely ironic that we actually added Erasure to our reading list for the exact reason that Everett is an African-American writer, and after thinking about this for a while have come to ask myself why and if his ethnicity is important. Of course it is interesting and important when reading literature to consider aspects such as its historical background and the author’s gender, ethnicity or beliefs. These considerations are often helpful for interpreting a certain piece of art, and sometimes open up whole new contexts for discussion. But I also think that such approaches come with a certain danger, namely by creating certain expectations. Is it possible that we sometimes jump to hasty conclusions by keeping an author’s personal life and history in the back of our mind while reading? Sometimes, I like reading a book without looking at any information on the author or without reading the introduction or criticisms and reviews beforehand. It gives me the opportunity to form my own opinion and enjoy it as a piece of art for art’s sake. Even though this is not an approach that is used in any of my classes, it sometimes is appealing to me to wait before trying to fit a book into a certain genre. I think that is what Everett means, at least partly, when he says that he just wants to make art.
I’m of course open to any criticism or suggestions and different viewpoints :)
Under the Hitler Regime, the Nazis banished the works from many contemporary artists with the gola to prevent the "corruption of art". Everett mentions several German artists in Erasure that experienced this kind of persecution.
What many people do not know is that Hitler himself was an artist, and produced many artworks during his lifetime. Several times he tried to get into an Art School in Vienna (Wiener Kunstakademie).
The link above leads you to a webpage that even features some of Hitler's work.
- Ulrike -
So, I checked up on some people mentioned in the book.
page 37 It’s 1933 and Ernst Barlach is cracking his knuckles while the cup of tea on the table in front of him cools. “My hand hurts so much these days,” he says.
Paul Klee nods, sips his tea. He is saddened himself. He has just been expelled from the Düsseldorf Academy of Art. “They are calling me Siberian Jew.”
“Who is? Das Schwarze Korps?”
“Who else? And they are burning any books which contain pictures of our work. They call me a Slavic
lunatic.”
“They’re correct about both of us."
Ernst laughs.
Well, I know Wikipedia isn't that good aof a scholarly source, BUT I thought the passages beneath are good summaries on both artists during the Nazi Era.
Paul Klee (German pronunciation: [kleː]; 18 December 1879 – 29 June 1940) was born in Münchenbuchsee, Switzerland, and is considered both a Swisspainter and a Germanpainter.[a] His highly individual style was influenced by movements in art that included expressionism, cubism, and surrealism.
...
From nearly the start, the Nazi movement denounced the Bauhaus for its "degenerate art" and in 1933 the Bauhaus was finally shut down. Emigrants did succeed, however, in spreading the concepts of the Bauhaus to other countries, including the “New Bauhaus” of Chicago.[42] Klee also taught at the Düsseldorf Academy from 1931 to 1933, and was singled out by a Nazi newspaper, “Then that great fellow Klee comes onto the scene, already famed as a Bauhaus teacher in Dessau. He tells everyone he’s a thoroughbred Arab, but he’s a typical Galician Jew.”[43] His home was searched by the Gestapo and he was fired from his job.[44][4] His self-portrait Struck from the List (1933) commemorates the sad occasion.[43] In 1933-4, Klee had shows in London and Paris, and finally met Picasso whom he greatly admired.[45] The Klee family emigrated to Switzerland in late 1933.[45]
Ernst Barlach (January 2, 1870 – October 24, 1938) was a Germanexpressionistsculptor, printmaker and writer. Although he was a supporter of the war in the years leading to World War I, his participation in the war made him change his position, and he is mostly known for his sculptures protesting against the war. This created many conflicts during the rise of the Nazi Party, when most of his works were confiscated as degenerate art.
Klee: What are you thinking about?
Kollwitz: Why is it that bloody-minded men are such prudes? Why are they so hostile to sexuality and images of the body?
Klee: You're referring to mustache boy.
Kollwitz: You were lucky to leave when you did. (Klee left with his family in 1933) I couldn't bring myself to abandon my home. But back to the subject. That monster and those like him are as threatened by those silly nymphettes of Muller as they are by Kirchner.
Klee: Ferkel Kunst. (German for "piglet-art") Kollwitz: Pardon?
Klee: That's what he calls what we do.
Kollwitz: I've lost my son in the first war and I fear that I will lose ,y grandson in this one. And all because of a man who is afraid of his pee-pee.
Klee: And other people's pee-pees.
Kollwitz: They've established a new bureau. The Commission on the Value of Confiscated Works of Degenerate Art. They're selling our works to foreigners. They sold them for nothing and burned the rest. I want the ashes of the bonfire to mix with my paints.
Klee: That's a lovely idea.
Kollwitz: Imagine the smell of those ashes.
Klee: Indeed.
Note: On the webpage I linked about Hilter and Art it actually says that Hitler wasn't strictly against nude paintings:
"Contrary to the belief that Hitler was uptight about things such as nudity, he allowed painters and sculptors to produce both male and female nudes. Male nudes were depicted as responsible, heroic and powerful while females were neat, clean, and full breasted while having a flat belly, long-muscled thighs, and slim shanks. They were sometimes depicted as Nordic, perhaps because many people prefer the natural beauty of Nordics, but were sometimes brunette as well. It should be noted that contrary to historical propaganda, Germany is not a Nordic nation but a predominately Alpine one, though it has a small Nordic minority, and this has been the case for several centuries. It is therefore most probable that the artists and people were praising an ideal in the depiction of their minority population rather than positing a notion of national superiority in this image." Link
Käthe Schmidt Kollwitz (July 8, 1867 – April 22, 1945) was a Germanpainter, printmaker, and sculptor whose work offered an eloquent and often searing account of the human condition in the first half of the 20th century. Her empathy for the less fortunate, expressed most famously through the graphic means of drawing, etching, lithography, and woodcut, embraced the victims of poverty, hunger, and war.[1][2] Initially her work was grounded in Naturalism, and later took on Expressionistic qualities.[3]
In 1933, after the establishment of the National-Socialist regime, the Nazi Party authorities forced her to resign her place on the faculty of the Akademie der Künste. Her work was removed from museums.
Ernst Kirchner: I'm glad, no proud that those brown shirts are burning my paintings.
Max Klinger: What do you mean?
Kirchner: Imagine how I would feel if monsters like that tolerated my work.
Ernst Ludwig Kirchner (6 May 1880 – 15 June 1938) was a Germanexpressionistpainter and printmaker and one of the founders of the artists group Die Brücke or "The Bridge", a key group leading to the foundation of Expressionism in 20th century art. He volunteered for army service in the First World War, but soon suffered a breakdown and was discharged. In 1933, his work was branded as "degenerate" by the Nazis and in 1937 over 600 of his works were sold or destroyed. In 1938 he committed suicide.
--> It's interesting that Everett chose Max Klinger, since he died in 1920 and hence didn't even experience the rise of Hitler Max Klinger (February 18, 1857 - July 5, 1920) was a GermanSymbolistpainter, sculptor and printmaker.
“My journal is a private affair.” This first clause of the novel presents significant information as to how we should read the book as a whole; what we have is a private journal, and we would ask ourselves why and how we’ve come across this. It was meant to be found, or this portion would not have been included in any private journal entry; this means that the journal is already not private by nature. It, in fact, has entered into the realm of public viewing. It is art, a novel perhaps, but it will at least be chosen according to an audience. We, the readers, then, are now part of the private affair of the journal that is not so private, nor meant to be private. This fact is also indicated by us starting at a certain point in the author’s life. We don’t know the author’s name yet, beyond it being Percival Everett, because the cover is the real beginning of the novel. It is a novel, so it says on the cover, called Erasure, by Percival Everett. Presumably, we already know he’s black, either by reputation, seeing his book in the “African-American Literature” section of Borders, or by his picture on the dust jacket—all of these are used to indicate the “protagonist’s” race within the story.
But when we consider the point further we find that the “novel” began much earlier than even the cover. In our context we chose the novel because the author was black, because we needed equality of representation in our study. It wasn’t even necessary to physically see the book, to hold it in our hands, in order to choose it; these things, after all, are not conditions to prove the reality of the book. We could read a review on Amazon, or look it up on Wikipedia; but these are only ways that we chose our books, in our own context. I don’t mean to suggest that internet or technology causes this kind of representation, and I don’t believe Everett does either; he focuses on other means, like academia, or popular culture in general. In short, the book exists long before the book, through factors such as publicity, reputation, etc.
Returning to the novel, we can now appreciate more fully the irony of its opening words. It is not a private affair because who ever left this “journal” has made a deliberate choice to let it be found; he has created a portion of his own life and chosen a specific starting point—it is his own representation while assuming an audience. In other words, it is not a journal at all, but what we might classify as a novel or a story, which we knew (flipping the pages backward) by the epigraph quoting Twain, the dedication page, the cataloging-in-publication-data (which has five different classifications for it that I suggest you read), the reviews of other authors, the cover, and finally its reputation. And finally, if we buy into the idea that the author of the journal intends its publication, we know it will run the same gamut of publicity, classification, and representation Everett’s novel has gone through.
All these things, I believe, have significant bearing on themes brought up in the novel, but these are by no means the only ones, nor the only themes. However, we should keep things in mind that are outside the novel; and we, in our own context, can especially appreciate its levels of irony when we take a step back and consider our reasons for choosing this book. The irony should not be lost on us, since we, in fact, fell into the way of thinking and classification that is satirized within the novel (I, shamefully, pitched the book because it was a black author).
The rest of the opening paragraph is quite interesting and complex; it brings up many recurring themes, especially as they pertain to identity, that we should keep in mind as we continue to read. I think we should spend a good deal of time discussing this paragraph and linking it to later occurrences at our next meeting. Our reading should be through chapter 6, pg 131 in my addition, which is the end of My Pafology. Hope you guys enjoy it!
-Marcus
- Ulrike -
close reading, page 212:
But the irony was beautiful. I was a victim of racism by virtue of my failing to acknowledge racial difference and by failing to have my art be defined as an exercise in racial self-expression. So, I would not be economically oppressed because of writing a book that fell in line with the very books I deemed racist. And I would have to wear the mask of the person I was expected to be.
This passage is very essential to the novel’s theme of racism. Monk is “not black enough” for most publishers; he is a black man and hence the literary world expects him to write about being black. This is the mask Monk is talking about. In Everett’s interview I posted on the Wiki he says “But, here we are again, talking about race. I don't want to talk about race, I just want to make art.” As Marcus already pointed out, it is extremely ironic that we actually added Erasure to our reading list for the exact reason that Everett is an African-American writer, and after thinking about this for a while have come to ask myself why and if his ethnicity is important. Of course it is interesting and important when reading literature to consider aspects such as its historical background and the author’s gender, ethnicity or beliefs. These considerations are often helpful for interpreting a certain piece of art, and sometimes open up whole new contexts for discussion. But I also think that such approaches come with a certain danger, namely by creating certain expectations. Is it possible that we sometimes jump to hasty conclusions by keeping an author’s personal life and history in the back of our mind while reading? Sometimes, I like reading a book without looking at any information on the author or without reading the introduction or criticisms and reviews beforehand. It gives me the opportunity to form my own opinion and enjoy it as a piece of art for art’s sake. Even though this is not an approach that is used in any of my classes, it sometimes is appealing to me to wait before trying to fit a book into a certain genre. I think that is what Everett means, at least partly, when he says that he just wants to make art.
I’m of course open to any criticism or suggestions and different viewpoints :)
- Ulrike -
Degenerate Art / Entartete Kunst
Degenerate Art
Under the Hitler Regime, the Nazis banished the works from many contemporary artists with the gola to prevent the "corruption of art". Everett mentions several German artists in Erasure that experienced this kind of persecution.
Hitler and Art
Hitler's Art
What many people do not know is that Hitler himself was an artist, and produced many artworks during his lifetime. Several times he tried to get into an Art School in Vienna (Wiener Kunstakademie).
The link above leads you to a webpage that even features some of Hitler's work.
- Ulrike -
So, I checked up on some people mentioned in the book.
page 37
It’s 1933 and Ernst Barlach is cracking his knuckles while the cup of tea on the table in front of him cools. “My hand hurts so much these days,” he says.
Paul Klee nods, sips his tea. He is saddened himself. He has just been expelled from the Düsseldorf Academy of Art. “They are calling me Siberian Jew.”
“Who is? Das Schwarze Korps?”
“Who else? And they are burning any books which contain pictures of our work. They call me a Slavic
lunatic.”
“They’re correct about both of us."
Ernst laughs.
Well, I know Wikipedia isn't that good aof a scholarly source, BUT I thought the passages beneath are good summaries on both artists during the Nazi Era.
Paul Klee Wikipedia
Paul Klee's Art
I LOVE his paintings by the way!!!
Paul Klee (German pronunciation: [kleː]; 18 December 1879 – 29 June 1940) was born in Münchenbuchsee, Switzerland, and is considered both a Swiss painter and a German painter.[a] His highly individual style was influenced by movements in art that included expressionism, cubism, and surrealism.
...
From nearly the start, the Nazi movement denounced the Bauhaus for its "degenerate art" and in 1933 the Bauhaus was finally shut down. Emigrants did succeed, however, in spreading the concepts of the Bauhaus to other countries, including the “New Bauhaus” of Chicago.[42] Klee also taught at the Düsseldorf Academy from 1931 to 1933, and was singled out by a Nazi newspaper, “Then that great fellow Klee comes onto the scene, already famed as a Bauhaus teacher in Dessau. He tells everyone he’s a thoroughbred Arab, but he’s a typical Galician Jew.”[43] His home was searched by the Gestapo and he was fired from his job.[44][4] His self-portrait Struck from the List (1933) commemorates the sad occasion.[43] In 1933-4, Klee had shows in London and Paris, and finally met Picasso whom he greatly admired.[45] The Klee family emigrated to Switzerland in late 1933.[45]
Ernst Barlach Wikipedia
Ernst Barlach's Art
Ernst Barlach (January 2, 1870 – October 24, 1938) was a German expressionist sculptor, printmaker and writer. Although he was a supporter of the war in the years leading to World War I, his participation in the war made him change his position, and he is mostly known for his sculptures protesting against the war. This created many conflicts during the rise of the Nazi Party, when most of his works were confiscated as degenerate art.
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
page 49
Klee: What are you thinking about?
Kollwitz: Why is it that bloody-minded men are such prudes? Why are they so hostile to sexuality and images of the body?
Klee: You're referring to mustache boy.
Kollwitz: You were lucky to leave when you did. (Klee left with his family in 1933) I couldn't bring myself to abandon my home. But back to the subject. That monster and those like him are as threatened by those silly nymphettes of Muller as they are by Kirchner.
Klee: Ferkel Kunst. (German for "piglet-art")
Kollwitz: Pardon?
Klee: That's what he calls what we do.
Kollwitz: I've lost my son in the first war and I fear that I will lose ,y grandson in this one. And all because of a man who is afraid of his pee-pee.
Klee: And other people's pee-pees.
Kollwitz: They've established a new bureau. The Commission on the Value of Confiscated Works of Degenerate Art. They're selling our works to foreigners. They sold them for nothing and burned the rest. I want the ashes of the bonfire to mix with my paints.
Klee: That's a lovely idea.
Kollwitz: Imagine the smell of those ashes.
Klee: Indeed.
Note: On the webpage I linked about Hilter and Art it actually says that Hitler wasn't strictly against nude paintings:
"Contrary to the belief that Hitler was uptight about things such as nudity, he allowed painters and sculptors to produce both male and female nudes. Male nudes were depicted as responsible, heroic and powerful while females were neat, clean, and full breasted while having a flat belly, long-muscled thighs, and slim shanks. They were sometimes depicted as Nordic, perhaps because many people prefer the natural beauty of Nordics, but were sometimes brunette as well. It should be noted that contrary to historical propaganda, Germany is not a Nordic nation but a predominately Alpine one, though it has a small Nordic minority, and this has been the case for several centuries. It is therefore most probable that the artists and people were praising an ideal in the depiction of their minority population rather than positing a notion of national superiority in this image." Link
Käthe Kollwitz's Wikipedia
Käthe Kollwitz's Art
Käthe Schmidt Kollwitz (July 8, 1867 – April 22, 1945) was a German painter, printmaker, and sculptor whose work offered an eloquent and often searing account of the human condition in the first half of the 20th century. Her empathy for the less fortunate, expressed most famously through the graphic means of drawing, etching, lithography, and woodcut, embraced the victims of poverty, hunger, and war.[1][2] Initially her work was grounded in Naturalism, and later took on Expressionistic qualities.[3]
In 1933, after the establishment of the National-Socialist regime, the Nazi Party authorities forced her to resign her place on the faculty of the Akademie der Künste. Her work was removed from museums.
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
page 60
Ernst Kirchner: I'm glad, no proud that those brown shirts are burning my paintings.
Max Klinger: What do you mean?
Kirchner: Imagine how I would feel if monsters like that tolerated my work.
Ernst Kirchner Wikipedia
Ernst Kirchner's Art
Ernst Ludwig Kirchner (6 May 1880 – 15 June 1938) was a German expressionist painter and printmaker and one of the founders of the artists group Die Brücke or "The Bridge", a key group leading to the foundation of Expressionism in 20th century art. He volunteered for army service in the First World War, but soon suffered a breakdown and was discharged. In 1933, his work was branded as "degenerate" by the Nazis and in 1937 over 600 of his works were sold or destroyed. In 1938 he committed suicide.
--> It's interesting that Everett chose Max Klinger, since he died in 1920 and hence didn't even experience the rise of Hitler
Max Klinger (February 18, 1857 - July 5, 1920) was a German Symbolist painter, sculptor and printmaker.
Ernst Klinger Wikipedia
Ernst Klinger's Art