Eva Hoffman's 'Lost in Translation'
Nov. 16th, 2010 09:45 amMan, it's been so long since I had to read a depressing Holocaust novel! What is it now, a whole week? Jeepers, time to bring it back! It's the motherfucking leitmotif, y'all.
Okay, so Lost in Translation is about a girl whose /parents/ survived the aforementioned, and thus the book's not as blargh as If This Is A Man, which I had severe teaching-issues with.*
Eva Hoffman is a Polish-born immigrant writing a memoir about her coming of age in America, and it's a testament to her skill as a writer that the book's not Immigrant Suffer Porn. If you went through a writing program/have seen the American bestseller list, you know what I mean. It's Frank McCourt's sixth Poor-and-Irish, Amy Tan's endless renditions of My Mother is Asian, and the 57th short story you've read this semester which seeks to debunk an overly-sanguine, old-fashioned narrative of immigration which has by now been so thoroughly unseated that the process of debunking it has itself become predictable, comfortable and smug. 'It's harsh to be an immigrant--OR DID I JUST BLOW YOUR MIND?!?!'
It trades a bit in that market, but it's classier about it. The prose is uniformly /very/ good.
My issue with it is the structure. Hoffman opts for disjointed fragments, presumably out of discomfort with the too-neat archetypal immigrant narrative, with its smooth formula of struggle-and-success. This, however, keeps me from feeling as connected as I should to her as a narrator. I cannot tell whether the boy she's going out with in this section is the boy she was considering marrying a paragraph ago--these little vignettes provide color without continuity of feeling.
And that's a fine gesture of po-mo distrust in The Narrative--and this /is/, after all, nonfiction rather than a novel, which is an important gradient my class often fails to comment on--but it does keep me from investing in the story/narrator. The conceptual/emotional matter, while intriguing, gets a bit derailed at times by this. The vague chronology of periods of her life gives some form of scaffolding, but in lieu of a time-frame I feel we should have some thematic organizing transitions, or that she should think harder about what she gains vs. loses out of this more atypical structure. Do anything you want to, structurally, experimentally, but have some good reasons.
The ending, because it's a chunky grouping of revelations, feels a bit too faux-profound? Too 'my story ends here, complications wrapped up, in its way/to the extent they can be' for a novel about the impossibility of wrapping up/the on-going project of the immigrant self, the eternal internal revolution. And it seems, structurally, as though her complications are resolved rather conveniently near the time she's writing--not because of the writing, or any obvious provocation, just gradually, coalescing at the life-stage that an American-born writer might feel a settling into comfortable middle-age (and I wonder if that's not unconnected to her sense of having arrived).
Some interesting ideas I'll carry along, despite some twitchy craft issues that kept it from flowering into a truly astounding book.
* In class we approached it as a novel rather than as non-fiction, and furthermore as a Descent Into Hell closely modeled on Dante. We'd spent some time on Dante as a Christian writer (vs. Virgil and Homer), and the fact that Levi would have a fundamentally different relationship to Hell, as someone raised in a Jewish theological tradition, was not touched on. Idk, I felt the entire thing was about as poorly handled as I'd thought it was going to be. Legit teaching issues with the reduction of the Holocaust to the safe, teachable, conveniently-packaged and safely-in-the-past Disney Genocide that happened to innocent white people, which we use to demonstrate the unembodied Evil of Man, which whitewashes the of subjectivity of the victims and functions as a means of not becoming involved/morally implicated in modern, potentially-ongoing genocidal action ('never again' vs. What Rwanda/Killing Fields/Armenians/never-taught-tragedies?): I haz them.
Okay, so Lost in Translation is about a girl whose /parents/ survived the aforementioned, and thus the book's not as blargh as If This Is A Man, which I had severe teaching-issues with.*
Eva Hoffman is a Polish-born immigrant writing a memoir about her coming of age in America, and it's a testament to her skill as a writer that the book's not Immigrant Suffer Porn. If you went through a writing program/have seen the American bestseller list, you know what I mean. It's Frank McCourt's sixth Poor-and-Irish, Amy Tan's endless renditions of My Mother is Asian, and the 57th short story you've read this semester which seeks to debunk an overly-sanguine, old-fashioned narrative of immigration which has by now been so thoroughly unseated that the process of debunking it has itself become predictable, comfortable and smug. 'It's harsh to be an immigrant--OR DID I JUST BLOW YOUR MIND?!?!'
It trades a bit in that market, but it's classier about it. The prose is uniformly /very/ good.
My issue with it is the structure. Hoffman opts for disjointed fragments, presumably out of discomfort with the too-neat archetypal immigrant narrative, with its smooth formula of struggle-and-success. This, however, keeps me from feeling as connected as I should to her as a narrator. I cannot tell whether the boy she's going out with in this section is the boy she was considering marrying a paragraph ago--these little vignettes provide color without continuity of feeling.
And that's a fine gesture of po-mo distrust in The Narrative--and this /is/, after all, nonfiction rather than a novel, which is an important gradient my class often fails to comment on--but it does keep me from investing in the story/narrator. The conceptual/emotional matter, while intriguing, gets a bit derailed at times by this. The vague chronology of periods of her life gives some form of scaffolding, but in lieu of a time-frame I feel we should have some thematic organizing transitions, or that she should think harder about what she gains vs. loses out of this more atypical structure. Do anything you want to, structurally, experimentally, but have some good reasons.
The ending, because it's a chunky grouping of revelations, feels a bit too faux-profound? Too 'my story ends here, complications wrapped up, in its way/to the extent they can be' for a novel about the impossibility of wrapping up/the on-going project of the immigrant self, the eternal internal revolution. And it seems, structurally, as though her complications are resolved rather conveniently near the time she's writing--not because of the writing, or any obvious provocation, just gradually, coalescing at the life-stage that an American-born writer might feel a settling into comfortable middle-age (and I wonder if that's not unconnected to her sense of having arrived).
Some interesting ideas I'll carry along, despite some twitchy craft issues that kept it from flowering into a truly astounding book.
* In class we approached it as a novel rather than as non-fiction, and furthermore as a Descent Into Hell closely modeled on Dante. We'd spent some time on Dante as a Christian writer (vs. Virgil and Homer), and the fact that Levi would have a fundamentally different relationship to Hell, as someone raised in a Jewish theological tradition, was not touched on. Idk, I felt the entire thing was about as poorly handled as I'd thought it was going to be. Legit teaching issues with the reduction of the Holocaust to the safe, teachable, conveniently-packaged and safely-in-the-past Disney Genocide that happened to innocent white people, which we use to demonstrate the unembodied Evil of Man, which whitewashes the of subjectivity of the victims and functions as a means of not becoming involved/morally implicated in modern, potentially-ongoing genocidal action ('never again' vs. What Rwanda/Killing Fields/Armenians/never-taught-tragedies?): I haz them.