How To Come Alive With Norman Mailer is a good literary documentary, though it has disturbing moments, it’s not easy to watch. Mailer was a wild character — 6 wives, 9 children, ran for mayor of New York, co-founded The Village Voice, stabbed his second wife and almost killed her, appeared on countless talk shows, highly-regarded as a novelist and as a writer of “New Journalism.” His novel about his experiences in World War II (The Naked and the Dead) made him a celebrity at a young age. His best book may be his “non-fiction novel” The Executioner’s Song, which deals with a killer named Gary Gilmore. Mailer also wrote books about Hitler, Jesus, and Lee Harvey Oswald. One might say that Mailer, like other novelists, was an explorer of the human soul.
Louis Menand published an essay on Mailer in New Yorker in 2013. Menand says that Mailer developed a philosophy:
| Mailer spent [the 1950s] putting together a personal theory of the cosmos that he remained committed to for the rest of his life. “Maybe I’m bragging,” he said in an interview in 1980, “but I think I have a coherent philosophy. I believe we could start talking about virtually anything, and before we were done I could connect our subject to almost anything in my universe.”1 |
One element in Mailer’s philosophy was respect for instinct and the unconscious. Mailer believed that the unconscious could guide us, he called it The Navigator. The unconscious had goals, healthy goals; Mailer spoke of the “enormous teleological sense” that the unconscious possessed. For a Jung-admirer like myself, this makes sense. But Mailer’s life and work were so wild that they seem to show the dangers of following the unconscious, not the benefits of following the unconscious.
Mailer expressed his philosophy in a 1957 essay called “The White Negro,” which was later collected in a book called Advertisements for Myself. The phrase “white Negro” refers to the “hipster” who follows his instincts, lives in the present, and is surrounded by danger.
In the 1960s, the term “hipster” evolved into “hippie.” Hippies figured prominently in the anti-war movement of the late-1960s. Mailer was part of the anti-war movement, and wrote about a march on the Pentagon in his 1967 book, The Armies of the Night. It’s difficult to summarize Mailer’s politics; he was a deep thinker, and he could see the drawbacks of both Left and Right. He called himself a “left conservative.”
When Mailer was young, he admired famous writers like Hemingway, Steinbeck, and Dos Passos. He wanted to be one of them, and he thought he could be. In 1940, Great Literature was real and attainable. When it came time to join the Army, he aimed to write about his war experience, and he wondered which theater — the Pacific Theater or the European Theater — would make a better setting for his novel.
Then came the Civil Rights Movement and the Feminist Movement. Was it still possible to speak of Great Literature? If white men were oppressing blacks and women, should we still study the classics written by white men? Was it possible to create a canon of Great Literature without following the principles of affirmative action? Was Great Literature dead? Could people still pursue Beauty and Truth if everyone was talking about Race and Gender?
Mailer had once been close to the New York Intellectuals, but now that group was dividing over political questions. In the 1950s, Mailer castigated the book-publishing industry, but was on friendly terms with literary magazines and literary academics. He was close to Norman Podhoretz, the editor of Commentary; he published in Dissent, edited by Irving Howe; and he was friendly with Lionel Trilling, a Columbia professor, and his wife Diana. Menand says that, by 1970, this world “split apart.” The New York Intellectuals, who had once admired Great Literature and lived for it, were becoming soldiers in the culture wars, were becoming more interested in politics than culture.
Menand says that, around 1970, Mailer found a home with book-publishers, whom he had once castigated. The obscenity laws were changing; a novel that contained explicit sex was no longer banned. Menand writes, “The ideal product for trade publishers was a work by a writer of highbrow reputation that contained plenty of explicit sexual content. By the mid-nineteen-sixties, this had become a best-selling formula.” Mailer had name-recognition, and he was an old hand at erotic description. Publishers began paying him $30,000 a month in advances.
Menand says that publishing was once done by “genteel, privately owned firms,” but by 1970, publishing was in the hands of big, publicly-owned corporations. We find a similar evolution in the financial world: Wall Street firms were once “genteel, privately owned firms,” but then they evolved into public corporations concerned with profits and stock-price. (The evolution of WallStreet firms is discussed in Liar’s Poker, by Michael Lewis.)
In 1979, William F. Buckley interviewed Mailer about The Executioner’s Song. Mailer is engrossed by his subject, and he speaks in a lively way; he makes one want to read the book. Buckley’s language is somewhat obscure, he’s not good at interviewing.
In 1995, Mailer was interviewed by Brian Lamb about his latest book, Oswald’s Tale. Lamb is good at interviewing, and Mailer is good at being interviewed.
In his later years, Mailer was concerned about polarization in the country. He felt that “polarization was the first step on the high road to Fascism.”2 Mailer said, “What you’ve got is a war of extremes between Left and Right in America right now, and they’re both right. Each of them has nothing to say on their own, but they’re each right in their criticism of the other.”3 The problem of polarization is far worse now than when Mailer was discussing it. Only in recent years has polarization reached the wild extreme of bringing 10 million foreigners into the country in order to change the electorate, change demography.
Perhaps one reason for polarization is that the federal government has acquired more and more power, so control of the federal government is hotly-contested. If we could devolve some power to states and cities, perhaps national elections wouldn’t be a life-and-death struggle. Could American democracy be re-invigorated and rejuvenated by a reduction of federal power?
The illegals who are pouring across Biden’s open border have no respect for democratic traditions.
Pack the Supreme Court?
Sure, why not?
Eliminate the filibuster?
What’s a filibuster?
Do away with the secret ballot?
Fine with me, I don’t care.
Biden’s illegals should be deported, or at least prevented from becoming citizens/voters. And they shouldn’t figure in the census, and in the apportionment of congressional seats and electoral votes. If they become voters, democratic norms will decline more rapidly (since they don’t understand or respect those norms). If they become voters, the Democratic Party will be rewarded for its nefarious scheme, i.e., rewarded for opening the border, hence Democrats might open the border again.
When Democrats argue with Republicans, Democrats often say that we need immigrants, “One of the founders of Google is an immigrant, one of the founders of Yahoo is an immigrant,” etc. Democrats seem to think that Republicans are against immigration. In fact, Republicans aren’t against immigration, they’re against un-filtered immigration, un-vetted immigration; they’re against an open border, they’re against letting murderers and spies enter the country at will.
Immigration should be orderly and controlled; it should express the will of the American people, as reflected in their elected officials, it shouldn’t express the will of anyone who wants to enter the country. If anyone in the world can enter the U.S. tomorrow, and get on a path to citizenship, is there any honor in being an American citizen? Can anyone be proud of being an American? Can anyone respect a nation that can’t enforce its laws, and control its border?
There’s a big discrepancy between the polls and the prediction markets. The polls show a very tight race, the prediction markets say that Trump has a clear lead. Unless the prediction markets are way off, Trump is going to win. And Republicans still have a 50% chance of keeping the House, and at least an 80% chance of controlling the Senate. For Democrats, there’s a bright spot: Harris has momentum.
Cecil Roth says that, before 1500, Jews in Germany and Italy were persecuted and confined to ghettos. In Poland and Turkey, Jews lived more freely, but they were segregated from the general population, speaking a different language, leading separate lives. In Spain and Portugal, Jews mingled freely with the general population, and often became eminent, but they were “crypto-Jews,” Marranos, not open Jews.
Many crypto-Jews wanted to leave Spain/Portugal, so they could practice their religion openly, and live without fear of the Inquisition. They were prohibited from emigrating, but many managed to flee, or pretended to be traveling on business or making a pilgrimage to Rome. Starting around 1500, many Marranos went to the Belgian city of Antwerp, then under Spanish control; Antwerp was “the most important seaport in the north of Europe.”
In 1568, the Netherlands revolted against Spain, and Amsterdam eclipsed Antwerp as the chief port, and the chief destination of Marranos. “The colony grew with astonishing rapidity, throwing out offshoots to The Hague, Rotterdam, and elsewhere.” The philosopher Spinoza was born in Amsterdam in 1632; his family was Portuguese-Jewish.
Around 1600, a Jewish community was established at Hamburg, with the approval of the Lutheran authorities. Protestants in England were also somewhat tolerant toward the Jews; around 1655, Cromwell adopted a tolerant attitude toward English Jews, though he didn’t formally authorize their community.
In the early 1500s, Jewish communities developed in southwest France, especially in the ports of Bayonne and Bordeaux (the philosopher Montaigne came from these Jewish communities, as I mentioned in an earlier issue). They were officially Christian, but made little effort to conceal their Jewish faith. It wasn’t until 1730 that they threw off all disguise, and declared their Judaism openly.
There were also Jewish communities in northwest Italy, at the seaports of Pisa and Leghorn (also known as Livorno). Pisa and Leghorn were “virtually the only places in Italy where the Ghetto system was never introduced.” And finally, there were small Jewish communities in the overseas colonies of England and Holland, especially in the West Indies. Roth sums up by saying, “The members of the Marrano Diaspora [were] the first modern Jews.”
This Marrano Diaspora was accompanied by a decrease of persecution and segregation, and an increase of freedom. Roth writes,
| For the first time since the age of Imperial Rome a healthy individualism was possible in Jewish life. The circumstance of the Marrano settlement thus provides the key to the remarkable paradox that those European lands, such as England and Holland, where conditions had hitherto been most adverse, and where exclusion was rigid, were now the first to treat the Jew with real tolerance. |
Compared to other Jewish communities, the Iberian community had a high degree of “outward graces and general culture.” Perhaps Spinoza and Montaigne exemplify this.
On the heels of the Marranos, German Jews (Ashkenazi Jews) began moving into Amsterdam, into Holland generally, into Hamburg, and into London. Thus, the Iberian Jews opened doors through which other Jews came.
Hamburg’s Jewish community was the largest in Germany from about 1700 to 1850. Roth says that we have a literary record of Hamburg life:
| The garrulous Memoirs of Glückel von Hameln (1645-1724), the Pepys of German Jewry, have preserved for future generations a delightfully minute picture of the life of the local community, with its scholars and its rascals and its diamond-brokers and its hucksters, and its triumphs and its vicissitudes, when it was at the height of its importance. |
A rudimentary Stock Exchange began in Antwerp in 1531. A more modern kind of Stock Exchange began in Amsterdam in 1602, with the establishment of the Dutch East India Company. Roth writes,
| From the middle of the seventeenth century, Jews of Spanish and Portuguese origin were prominent figures in every important [Stock] Exchange. They were partly instrumental in the establishment of the great national banks. The transference of the center of the world’s commerce during the course of the seventeenth century from southern to northern Europe is not the least important of the achievements which the Inquisition helped to bring about. |
While Jews were enjoying more prosperity and freedom in Northern Europe, Jews in Poland were undergoing a severe trial. In 1648, Cossacks in Ukraine rose up against their Polish masters; the leader of the Cossack revolt was Bohdan Khmelnytsky. (These Cossacks are sometimes called “Zaporozhian Cossacks,” their leader is sometimes called a “Hetman,” and their realm is sometimes called a “Hetmanate.”) Jews often worked as estate-managers for the Polish nobility, so Ukrainians regarded Jews as their chief oppressors. Roth writes,
| Throughout the country massacres took place on a scale and of a ferocity which beggared anything which had been known in Europe since the time of the Black Death; and the horrors were accentuated by the refinement of ingenuity shewn in the tortures by which they were accompanied. In every captured city or township a wholesale extermination took place; the Poles betraying their Jewish neighbors in many instances in the mistaken hope of saving their own lives. |
In 1654, the Cossacks signed a treaty with the Russian Czar, who became the guarantor of the Hetmanate’s independence. Also in 1654, the Czar invaded Poland, probably with Cossack help. “As the cities of White Russia [i.e., Belarus] and Lithuania fell before [the Czar’s forces], the Jewish residents were either exterminated or expelled. Simultaneously, Charles X of Sweden stormed into the country from the west, bringing fire and sword in his wake. The total toll of Jewish lives between 1648 and 1658 is estimated at no less than one hundred thousand.”
Around 1700, the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth made peace with Russia, perhaps because the Ottoman Turks were making inroads in Ukraine, forcing the Poles and Russians to bury their differences. As part of this peace treaty, certain Ukrainian territories were again placed under Polish control, leading to further Ukrainian uprisings against the Poles, which in turn led to further massacres of Jews. Ukrainian rebels known as Haydamaks “perpetrated atrocities rivalling those of one hundred and twenty years earlier, culminating in a shocking massacre at Uman in 1768.”4
The tribulations of Polish Jews prompted some to emigrate to Western Europe; penniless Polish refugees appeared in many European cities. Roth writes,
| From the period of the First Crusade down to that of the Renaissance — from the close of the eleventh to the close of the fifteenth century — the tide of Jewish migration had been directed eastwards, from France and the Rhineland and Spain towards Turkey and Poland.... With the Khmelnytsky massacres the backward swing of the pendulum commenced; and a second wave, in a westerly direction, set in. |
So NorthernEuropean cities like London experienced a wave of Marrano immigration, then a wave of German-Jewish immigration, then a wave of Polish-Jewish immigration.
In 1648, the Peace of Westphalia ended the Thirty Years War. In Germany, a new type of state arose, modelled on France’s absolute monarchy. The new state was “strongly centralized, maintaining an elaborate organization, and looking to France as its model.” The central government was becoming stronger, the church and nobility weaker. The period from about 1650 to 1800 is sometimes called The Age of Absolutism.
During this period, some states in Germany and Austria had a “court Jew” (Hofjude), who managed purchasing for the army, loans for the government, financial administration, etc. Court Jews were sometimes raised to the nobility. Court Jews generally blended in with high society. Some court Jews had little interest in Jewish customs and beliefs. They could, however, intervene to help Jews who were endangered.
The “protected Jew” was below the “court Jew,” but above the “ghetto Jew.” The “protected Jew” might be an engraver or jeweller. A German state would grant certain privileges to the protected Jew — such as the privilege of living outside the ghetto — lest he emigrate.
In 1670, Jews were expelled from Austria, as a result of “the influence of an Empress of Spanish birth and Jesuit upbringing” (in Spain, the Inquisition was powerful, and Jews were persecuted). Such expulsions often didn’t last; by 1675, Jews were returning to Austria.
In 1745, Jews were expelled from Bohemia (which included Prague). English and Dutch Jews were able to persuade their governments to intercede on behalf of the Bohemian Jews; the decree was changed to partial expulsion.
It was believed that the Messiah would appear when things were at their worst, and in the mid-1600s, it seemed that things were at their worst. Polish Jews were suffering from the Cossack/Ukrainian massacres. Germany hadn’t yet recovered from the ravages of the Thirty Years War, which had claimed around 6 million lives, and reduced the population of some German territories by 50%. England was in the throes of civil war; the King of England (Charles I) was executed in 1649.
Furthermore, Jewish scholars in Safed were focusing on Kabbalah, and on obscure clues about when the Messiah would appear. The influence of The Safed School prompted Jews everywhere to think about the coming of the Messiah.
Around 1650, a Messiah, or pseudo-Messiah, appeared in Asia Minor, one Sabbatai Zevi. His followers became known as Sabbateans. As a young man, Sabbatai Zevi had immersed himself in the Kabbalah, “mortified his body with repeated flagellations, and bathed constantly in the sea, both in summer and winter.”
On a visit to Jerusalem, Sabbatai persuaded a Jewish scholar, Nathan of Gaza, that he was the Messiah, and Nathan began proclaiming the glad tidings. The news spread like wildfire throughout the Near East. As Sabbatai made his way back to Asia Minor, he was met by jubilant crowds, and few doubted his claim. “The frenzy of the masses knew no bounds.”
When he was about 40, Sabbatai publicly proclaimed himself Messiah, and began granting territories to his leading disciples. Even the philosopher Spinoza (1632-1677), seemed disinclined to doubt Sabbatai’s claim; Spinoza said that he “saw no rational reason for doubting the possibility of a restoration of temporal rule by the Jews.”5
Roth says that Sabbatai’s father had business connections in England, and through those connections, Sabbatai may have heard of the millenarian ideas being discussed in England. Some Englishmen were talking of a Fifth Monarchy, a monarchy of the Messiah, which would follow the four monarchies mentioned in the Book of Daniel (the four monarchies are sometimes identified as two Babylonian monarchies, the Macedonian Empire, and the Roman Empire). Some people believed that the Messiah would appear in 1666; 666 has a mystical significance; the number of the beast in Revelation is 666.
These ideas were circulating among English Protestants. The diarist Samuel Pepys mentions, in early 1666, a London Jew who was placing bets that the Messiah would soon appear, and would be accepted by “the Princes of the East” as “the King of the world.” Pepys mentions the link between 1666 and “the mark of the beast.”
Sabbatai was finally arrested by the Turks, and given the choice of conversion to Islam or death. He chose conversion; Roth speaks of his “pusillanimity.” Some of his followers continued to view him as the Messiah, and even after his death, a sect called the Donmeh worshipped him.
The Donmeh were Jews who, like Sabbatai, pretended to convert to Islam. Roth says that the Donmeh sect survived for centuries, and some Donmeh were in the YoungTurk movement in the early 1900s. One might compare Donmeh to Marranos — Jews who pretended to be Christians. Roth compares Donmeh to Christians, since both worshipped a Messiah-figure; Roth says that the Donmeh Messiah chose apostasy, while the Christian Messiah chose death.
After Sabbatai’s death, other Messiahs emerged in the Jewish community, especially in Eastern Europe. Perhaps the most prominent of these Messiahs was Jacob Frank, who was born Jacob Leibovicz; Frank’s followers were called Frankists. The Frankists clashed with Jewish authorities; they rejected the Talmud, and studied the Zohar. When the Rabbis excommunicated the Frankists, many went over to Christianity. Roth says there were Frankists “well into the nineteenth century.”
Frank taught his followers that “they were obligated to transgress moral boundaries.... Father-daughter incest was commonly practiced by his followers, and orgies featured prominently in ritual.” Anti-Semites sometimes accuse Jews of being Frankists.
For Jews, Poland was a place of spiritual ferment in the early 1700s, with new sects and Messiahs appearing; one might compare it to western New York in the early 1800s. One of the sects that arose in Poland was Hasidism. Hasidism began with Israel ben Eliezer, a humble laborer, a digger of clay and lime. Hasidism might be called a corrective, it corrects the excessive bookishness of mainstream Judaism. Roth says that Israel ben Eliezer
| revolted against the hegemony of intellect which had hitherto prevailed undisputed amongst the Polish Jewries, where learning had been considered fundamental to Judaism, and consideration was withheld from any person who was not a profound Talmudist. The new leader, a tender-hearted mystic of rare personal magnetism, taught that piety was superior to scholarship, and that it was the prerogative of any man, however ignorant and however poor, to attain communion with his God. The Deity, according to him, infused all creation, could be served in many manners and with every bodily function, so long as His worship was carried on with joy and gladness. Man could derive no advantage from the mortification of the flesh. |
The new sect held meetings that featured “feasting and ecstasy and song.” The new sect had a mystical tendency and respected Kabbalah; they believed that God was in all things. Hasidic Jews are divided into separate “dynasties,” each of which worships a certain leader or Rebbe. One of the most prominent Hasidic dynasties is Chabad, also known as Chabad-Lubavitch.
The office of Rebbe is hereditary. Spiritual leaders are also referred to as Zadikim, Righteous Ones (the singular of Zadikim is Zadik or Tzadik). The position of Zadik, like the position of Rebbe, is hereditary, it’s passed down in “a few chosen families of special merit.”
According to Wikipedia, Hasidim make up about 5% of the Jewish population worldwide (there are about 15 million Jews worldwide, so 5% would be about 3 million). Hasidism was effective as a corrective, effective at strengthening the “poetical element” in Judaism, effective at introducing a “mystical constituent in daily life.”
Hasidism should not be confused with Orthodox Judaism. Hasidism is a new approach to Judaism — less bookish, more emotional. Orthodoxy is about maintaining the old approach — following ancient Jewish law, eating kosher, wearing traditional clothes, studying Hebrew, speaking Yiddish, etc. Orthodox Judaism is the opposite of Reform Judaism. The Hasidim and the Orthodox may be lumped together because of a resemblance in dress/appearance, and because both groups separate themselves from society.
As for the various Messiahs that emerged in the 1600s, Roth says that they turned out to be false Messiahs, and left Jews disillusioned. Never again did Jews hearken to a self-proclaimed Messiah. Instead, Jews thought about national redemption in a more rational, more practical way.
Roth is concerned about American Jews, concerned that they’re ceasing to be Jews:
| Jewish education was at a lamentably low level. It was estimated that no less than 60 per cent of the Jewish youth of the country received no grounding whatsoever in their own hereditary culture.... Indications seemed almost to point to the evolution of a de-nationalized, de-culturalized, and de-religionized type of Jew, who would lose all touch with his past. |
This situation has probably changed little in the 75 years since Roth wrote; indeed, the trends he lamented have probably gained momentum. A recent article by Elliott Abrams notes similar trends:
| As the new year begins, the state of the American Jewish community is daunting. While American Jews are proud of their achievements, they are mostly secular in nature: high levels of assimilation, education and income. The record of distinctly Jewish achievements is mediocre at best: less Jewish education and knowledge of Hebrew and fewer visits to Israel than any other major diaspora community. If these trends continue there will be fewer Jews who strongly support Israel, are involved in Jewish life, and are interested in passing their identity to their children and grandchildren. |
In the U.S., Orthodox Jews make up 10% of the Jewish community, and this figure seems bound to rise, just as the number of Orthodox Jews is rising in Israel. Will non-Orthodox Jews gradually blend into the general population, leaving Orthodox Jews as the only Jews?
With America declining rapidly, American Jews may begin to regard Israel as an important refuge, and Israeli Jews may begin to feel fortunate that they’re in Israel, instead of trying to emigrate to the U.S.
My view is that the best course for American Jews is whatever conduces to their personal growth, their inner life, their wholeness. In the long run, the good life must be based on truth, must be consistent with modern science/philosophy. Clinging to the past, and trying to preserve Jewish identity, is probably not the best path to personal growth and the good life.
© L. James Hammond 2024
feedback
visit Phlit home page
become a patron via Patreon
make a donation via PayPal
| Footnotes | |
| 1. | Menand writes, “[Mailer] published dyspeptic criticism of his contemporaries, and feuded publicly with several of them, including William Styron and Gore Vidal, and privately with a long list of colleagues and collaborators. He told (bad) dirty jokes on the wrong occasions, drank to excess, picked fights at parties, was unfaithful to all of his wives, and habitually spent more than he took in. To raise money, he once charged admission to his own birthday party.”
Menand says that Mailer wanted to be an engaged intellectual; Mailer admired André Malraux, who was both a famous novelist and a Cabinet minister. Malraux, for his part, admired T. E. Lawrence, who was an eminent writer and also a leader of Arab revolts against the Ottoman Turks. Menand writes frequently for New Yorker. A member of Harvard’s English Department, Menand often writes intellectual history; he “straddles the fence” between English and History. One might say that his real subject is the humanities in general; in 2015, Menand received the National Humanities Medal from President Obama. back |
| 2. | How to Come Alive with Norman Mailer, documentary, 1:31:02. These aren’t Mailer’s words, they’re the words of his biographer, J. Michael Lennon.
David Thorburn recommends a story by Mailer called “The Man Who Studied Yoga,” which is in the volume Advertisements For Myself. back |
| 3. | How to Come Alive with Norman Mailer, documentary, 1:31:30. These are Mailer’s own words, spoken by himself in the film. back |
| 4. | Roth (1948), Ch. 26, #4, p. 325. Timothy Snyder paints a rosier picture of Polish Jewry. He says that Jewish communities bounced back from the 1648 massacres; Jewish communities in Poland were “relatively secure and prosperous” until the late 1800s. On the other hand, Roth speaks of, “a protracted series of local disturbances, of petty persecutions, of ritual murder libels.” back |
| 5. | These are Roth’s words, not Spinoza’s. Was Spinoza anticipating the establishment of Israel? Or did he really think that Sabbatai might be the Messiah? back |