סקוט

מתוך scholionjnc

גרסה מתאריך 11:54, 15 באפריל 2010 מאת Scott (שיחה | תרומות)
(הבדל) → הגרסה הקודמת | הגרסה הנוכחית (הבדל) | הגרסה הבאה ← (הבדל)
קפיצה אל: ניווט, חיפוש

Boker tov!



כותרת

Response to Meir Appelfeld- At Home in the City?

I enjoyed the visual perspective very much and feel that it is both fascinating and necessary to explore other means of experiencing and representing that which is urban and its connection to that which is Jewish.

That said, I believe that Dvir and Yakir were onto something when they pointed to the intimate aspects of Meir's Jerusalem. In many senses, I felt that he was using art to domesticate the city and, thereby, rendering it more familiar, less hostile and, ultimately, subject to his own act of artistic (re)definition and control. I felt that the Jerusalem that we saw yesterday was not a city, but, as Dvir said, an extension of the home.

Of course, he is not alone in this and we are all, perhaps, guilty of the sin of narrative and the very act of reducing and domesticating the worlds we write about. So, my question is: can write (or paint) the city without domesticating that which makes it a city: its mulitplicities, its energy, its inherent danger.?

Or does the very act of writing about the city inherently render it readable, digestible, known and safe and, therefore, no longer a city?

כלים אישיים