Kate Christensen – The Great Man
Well, I know I have said it again and again while discussing the book…but it really bothered me how unrealistic it is that people in their eighties behave the way Kate Christensen portrays them. Perhaps, if they were 10 years younger I would have found the whole plot more believable.
My guess is that the author was trying to make a statement that just because you are old, it doesn’t necessarily mean that you don’t “have a life” anymore. And I definitely agree that there are still things to look forward to even in the end of your life. But the fact that Christensen’s characters are so old just makes me think that she completely failed because it to me it makes the whole story just seem so very unrealistic.
On the first page of my edition of the book, a part of Philip Larkin’s poem “The Old Fools” is printed:
Perhaps being old is having lighted rooms
Inside you head, and people in them, acting
People you know, yet can't quite name; each looms
Like a deep loss restored, from known doors turning,
Setting down a lamp, smiling from a stair, extracting
A known book from the shelves; or sometimes only
The rooms themselves, chairs and a fire burning,
The blown bush at the window, or the sun's
Faint friendliness on the wall some lonely
Rain-ceased midsummer evening. That is where they live:
How I understood the poem is that Philip Larkin addresses the fears and stereotypes that are accompanied by old age. While reading some reviews of the poem, I found an interesting comment by someone:
“What will I do with myself with limited mobility and how will I live my life? The things that I'm interested in now such as, shopping, dressing up to look my best, fitting in with certain social settings, and being active with my children, husband and friends. That will all change when my body no longer allows it. What will be left of my life when all that is familiar to me and activities that I enjoy doing, is no longer an option in my older age?”
I felt that with her portrayal of the main characters in the novel, Kate Christensen is trying to state the exact contrary, but in my eyes she definitely fails. Some of the things Lila and Teddy were concerned about, for instance hiding the copy of Active Senior (p. 41) so that Lila’s lover won’t find it. I somehow just think that after having lived such a long life and after having been through so much, something insignificant like that doesn’t really matter to you and that there are more important things to worry or think about.
Art in The Great Man “…Lucien Freud, John Currin . . . they’re his artistic offspring, wouldn’t you say?” (Ralph on p. 52/53)
Lucien Freud, Lady Vampiresang (not sure if it's the right title...)
Naked Girl Asleep II
John Currin, The Danes
2/18/10
Here is the link to a reading guide for The Great Man. Perhaps we can work through these questions in our discussion.... Reading Guide
Nietzsche considered the ultimate goal of society to be the creation of great artists. The reasons for this are that he believed that art was the greatest embodiment of humanity's ability to transcend the things that link us to the rest of the physical world. Indeed, he thought that art, truly creative art was the only real salvation of humanity. He saw art as being what separated humans from animals. However, he realized that not all humans were capable of rising above animalistic tendencies. So, he came up with a system by which great men ("Ubermenschen") could be cultivated. This meant that all of society had to be sacrificed in order to make it possible for great artists to appear. More specifically, society had to be extremely oppressive and unforgiving because the core of the artistic transcendance that Nietzsche so admired, was suffereing. The artist had to be persecuted his (and yes, for Nietzsche it was almost certainly a 'he.') entire life. Only in this way could it be ensured that the artist would posses an incredible will and aleviate his own suffering by bringing on the profound passion of pure artistic creation. He had to be isolated from the rest of society in order to transcend it and he pretty much had to die a pauper. An artist could only be appreciated after his death, because to do so during his life would be to remove the essential conditions for his creativity.
At least, this is what I seem to remember from Existentialism. Hope it helps, and feel free to fact check me.
Kate Christensen – The Great Man
Well, I know I have said it again and again while discussing the book…but it really bothered me how unrealistic it is that people in their eighties behave the way Kate Christensen portrays them. Perhaps, if they were 10 years younger I would have found the whole plot more believable.
My guess is that the author was trying to make a statement that just because you are old, it doesn’t necessarily mean that you don’t “have a life” anymore. And I definitely agree that there are still things to look forward to even in the end of your life. But the fact that Christensen’s characters are so old just makes me think that she completely failed because it to me it makes the whole story just seem so very unrealistic.
On the first page of my edition of the book, a part of Philip Larkin’s poem “The Old Fools” is printed:
If you’re interested, this link leads you to the whole poem:
http://www.poetryconnection.net/poets/Philip_Larkin/4813
And the following link leads you to a reading of the poem with music and very moving pictures I think, I loved listening/watching it:
http://vimeo.com/7812171
How I understood the poem is that Philip Larkin addresses the fears and stereotypes that are accompanied by old age. While reading some reviews of the poem, I found an interesting comment by someone:
“What will I do with myself with limited mobility and how will I live my life? The things that I'm interested in now such as, shopping, dressing up to look my best, fitting in with certain social settings, and being active with my children, husband and friends. That will all change when my body no longer allows it. What will be left of my life when all that is familiar to me and activities that I enjoy doing, is no longer an option in my older age?”
I felt that with her portrayal of the main characters in the novel, Kate Christensen is trying to state the exact contrary, but in my eyes she definitely fails. Some of the things Lila and Teddy were concerned about, for instance hiding the copy of Active Senior (p. 41) so that Lila’s lover won’t find it. I somehow just think that after having lived such a long life and after having been through so much, something insignificant like that doesn’t really matter to you and that there are more important things to worry or think about.
Art in The Great Man
“…Lucien Freud, John Currin . . . they’re his artistic offspring, wouldn’t you say?” (Ralph on p. 52/53)
Lucien Freud, Lady Vampiresang (not sure if it's the right title...)
Naked Girl Asleep II
John Currin, The Danes
2/18/10
Here is the link to a reading guide for The Great Man. Perhaps we can work through these questions in our discussion....
Reading Guide
2/16/2010 Nietzsche and the artist
Wiki article on the Ubermensch
Nietzsche considered the ultimate goal of society to be the creation of great artists. The reasons for this are that he believed that art was the greatest embodiment of humanity's ability to transcend the things that link us to the rest of the physical world. Indeed, he thought that art, truly creative art was the only real salvation of humanity. He saw art as being what separated humans from animals. However, he realized that not all humans were capable of rising above animalistic tendencies. So, he came up with a system by which great men ("Ubermenschen") could be cultivated. This meant that all of society had to be sacrificed in order to make it possible for great artists to appear. More specifically, society had to be extremely oppressive and unforgiving because the core of the artistic transcendance that Nietzsche so admired, was suffereing. The artist had to be persecuted his (and yes, for Nietzsche it was almost certainly a 'he.') entire life. Only in this way could it be ensured that the artist would posses an incredible will and aleviate his own suffering by bringing on the profound passion of pure artistic creation. He had to be isolated from the rest of society in order to transcend it and he pretty much had to die a pauper. An artist could only be appreciated after his death, because to do so during his life would be to remove the essential conditions for his creativity.
At least, this is what I seem to remember from Existentialism. Hope it helps, and feel free to fact check me.