ellauri052.html on line 948: Only his last wife, Janis Freedman, who was 43 years younger, redeemed his marital failures and fulfilled his expectations. Plain and pliant, Canadian, Jewish and well-educated, she devoted her life to Bellow. She became his amanuensis, household major domo, surrogate parent, guardian of the flame and mother of his child when the biblical patriarch was 84. Hiljaiset ja halukkaat, ketterät ja kurvikkaat, sellaiset me haluaisimme. Jasu ja Jörkka yxissä kansissa.
ellauri052.html on line 964: Bellow's wives were Anita Goshkin, Alexandra (Sondra) Tsachacbasov, Susan Glassman, Alexandra Ionescu Tulcea, and Janis Freedman. In 2000, when he was 84, Bellow had his fourth child and first daughter, with Freedman. Goshkin elätti sitä tunarointivuosina. Sen se dumppas kun alko tulla rahaa. Se oli kuin se Jasun ykkönen.
ellauri061.html on line 213: 1900-luvun alussa näytelmä kuvasi alitajuntaa, 60-luvulla vapaata rakkautta, 70-luvulla sadomasokismia (ja Oberon oli bi). Eka naiskriitikko Marjorie Garber 1974 sanoi et se oli ihan ihqua. Toka naiskriitikko Anne Paolucci laski 1977 et näytelmä kestikin 5 päivää (eikä 4). 1980 Florence Falk näki siinä kulttuuriantropologiaa. Cheis Hassell kristillisen sanoman. Se on nostanut tanaan kokonaisen nipun tsygologeja. Heput on hulluja kunnes löytää autenttisen sexuaalisen izensä. Jonkun Mordechain mielestä siinä on vastakkain Eros ja Thanatos. Eros taitaa päästä joholle. Joka tapauxessa näytelmä on terapeuttinen. 1991-luvulla vasta Barbara Freedman huohmaa että siinä on aika paljon patriarkaalisia viboja.
ellauri222.html on line 197:

Jänis Freedman
ellauri351.html on line 301: Westfall ja Hilbe vuonna 2007 valittivat, että Talebin kritiikki on "usein perusteetonta ja joskus törkeää". Taleb, kirjoittaa John Kay, "kuvailee kirjailijoita ja ammattilaisia ​​sekopäixi tai tyhmiksi, enimmäkseen tyhmiksi. Hänen kirjoituksensa on täynnä epäolennaisuutta, sivukieltä ja puhekieltä, lukeminen kuin kirjailijan keskustelua eikä tiukasti argumentoitua teesiä. Mutta se on äärimmäisen nautinnollinen – houkutteleva, mutta helppo sukeltaa. Silti hänen raivonsa ja pilkkansa alla piilee vakavia asioita. Nykyään käytössä olevat riskinhallintamallit sulkevat pois juuri ne tapahtumat, joilta ne väittävät suojelevan niitä työllistäviä yrityksiä. Nämä mallit tuovat sisäänsä vi-...-lun teknisen hienostuneisuuden... Kvantitatiiviset psykoanalyytikot ovat tuudittaneet yritysten johtajat ja sääntelyviranomaiset illusoriseen turvallisuuden tunteeseen." Berkeleyn tilastotieteilijä David Freedman sanoi, että tilastotieteilijöiden yritykset kumota Talebin kanta eivät ole olleet vakuuttavia. Kuha vekuttavat housut nilkoissa, mulkut heilahdellen tuulessa.
ellauri353.html on line 281: Mrs. FRIEDMAN attended Reed College and studied economics at the University of Chicago. She was on the staff of the National Research and the bureau. A few. Home Economics. She next joined the staff of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation where she worked until she married Milton and moved to New York. Since then she has continued home economic research on her own publishing. Individually and coauthoring the three works referred to a few moments ago. She was mostly a producer of the P.B.S. T.V. series free to choose. And in one thousand nine hundred six she received an honorary doctorate from Pepperdine University. The Milton. And Rose de Friedman Foundation which the Freedman's us. Promotes parental choice. Of the schools. Attend. As I mentioned the title of their most recent book is Two lucky people. I'm being told by my parents. That the harder you work the luckier you get. It is no wonder the Friedan consider themselves lucky. They have worked long hard to make the contributions they have made to each other and to our society. We the members and listen. Well are the lucky ones today. To have them share themselves and their insights with us once again. We welcome. (Milton claps his hands to them.)
xxx/ellauri087.html on line 342: Friedman was an idiosyncratic figure who would be hard to pigeonhole in the current political spectrum, he kinda drops off on the ultraviolet side. He inspired the conservative movement, but was against any discrimination against gay people, in addition to being an agnostic. He was a libertarian who advocated for a progressive income tax system that even went into the negative to ensure that everyone could, at the very least, meet their basic needs. Elon Musk is all for basic income too. But he also wants to send a Tesla to deep space as a token of esteem to alien intelligence. With a piece of cardboard inside the windshield spelling HUMAN. To sum up, Freedman and Musk are both East European emigrants, Elon is not a jew, and Milton was not gay, although a funny guy.
xxx/ellauri187.html on line 93: Rilke died 1926 from leukemia in Switzerland. Mutta oliko ne homoja, ja homosteliko ne? Ralph Freedman veikkaa että kyllä. Muut pahentuivat.
xxx/ellauri187.html on line 95: We can't really blame Ralph Freedman, Rilke's latest biographer, for writing about his subject as if Rilke were just another infuriating narcissist who kept turning up at parties.
xxx/ellauri187.html on line 119: Ralph Freedman gives a remarkably purposeful account of Rilke's deprivation. But he describes none of Rilke's ardor--or his honest avowals, or all the discipline and strength and health he needed to draw his life's work out of depressions, blocks, and fears, out of his contemporary-sounding struggle between a Faustian ego and an endangered self. In this biography we don't get Rilke's poetic transformations. We get only the modern condition--his and his society's--that he poetically transformed and that we've inherited.
xxx/ellauri187.html on line 121: Freedman's Rilke, oddly enough, dwells on the dark underside of contemporary American life. Behind the mingled, multicolored yarn of his passions, obsessions, powerful yearnings, and self-interest--all wisely balanced in Donald Prater's majestic and definitive 1986 biography--Freedman sees only self-interest. Rilke is "hucksterish." His carefully cultivated literary success Freedman characterizes as a "relentless career." He refers to Rilke's "careerist standards." The places Rilke settles in for a time are not homes but Rilke's "bases."
xxx/ellauri187.html on line 123: At moments Rilke's awareness of his self-interest amid modern anxieties appears uncannily precocious: "The pressures even in the preschooler's life were often suffocating. He longed for change." How does Freedman know that? I presume he got it from one of the mature Rilke's self-dramatizing letters, letters that Freedman paraphrases tendentiously throughout the book. That approach has the effect of turning Rilke's harsh and vain self-explorations into evidence of the "traumas" that Rilke spent a life riddled with "failure" denying. Indeed, Freedman writes enigmatically about "Rilke's pattern of living through failure as part of a process that turns denial into poetic art." I'm not sure what that means, but it sounds like success to me.
xxx/ellauri187.html on line 125: But no--if, for Freedman, Rilke is a slick little engine of self-advancement, he is also "thin-skinned," "fragile," "depressed," "thwarted," "troubled," "distraught," "schizophrenic," and "almost suicidal," and he suffered from "hysteria," "anxiety," and "insecurity." This poet seems so tightly shackled to his inner condition that we wonder how he found the freedom to make his art. Freedman himself only occasionally glances at Rilke's art, and then with considerable lack of charm, not to say comprehension ("Still addressing the woman's genitals in confrontation with the man's, Rilke weighed in with his most devastating critique of death's dialectic").
xxx/ellauri187.html on line 127: Freedman's Rilke is an almost wholly psychologized being. He has little existence outside his leaden states of mind. We rarely hear about the rich medley of artistic and intellectual influences on him--amazingly, Simmel's "The Adventurer" never comes up. This is an extreme approach to the telling of a poet's life, but Freedman has a method to his extremism. As in a rash of recent despoiling biographies--John Fuegi's life of Brecht, Michael Shelden's of Graham Greene, Ronald Hayman's of Thomas Mann, to name just three--the author shortly puts his cards on the table: in this case we are going to meet Rilke the anti-Semite, Rilke the secret homosexual, Rilke the sexist.
xxx/ellauri187.html on line 129: The first strut of biographical art to buckle under such an avenging mission is language. "Death emasculates," Freedman reports dishearteningly. He describes one doubly unlucky fellow as being "fatally electrocuted." We find Rilke seeking the "panacea of a cure." Women almost never give birth--they just "birth." Clara, Rilke's wife, "was the messenger but also the transparent glass and reflecting mirror of Rilke's depression." And what a shame that a sentence like this should appear in a book about a poet's life: "Like garden flowers opening their petals early only to wither quickly, Italy's current art avoided the hard surface required for effective poetry." It's as if, somewhere in the deeper regions of his writing self, Freedman knows that Rilke wasn't any of the bad things his biographer says he was.
xxx/ellauri187.html on line 131: One ugly phrase in a personal letter, for instance (out of a vast personal correspondence), referring to Franz Werfel as a "Jew-boy," and some murky generalities about Werfel's "Jewish attitude toward his work," do not an anti-Semite make. Rilke cherished the many Jews he knew, including Simmel; he enjoyed reading the Hasidic philosopher Martin Buber and steeped himself in Jewish Scripture, claiming that Judaism was closer than Christianity to God. He also remained a lifelong champion of Werfel's work. And a reader discovers buried deep in Freedman's footnotes that Rilke wrote the offending letter to the poet Hugo von Hoffmannsthal, a good friend and an important patron. Hoffmannsthal was also Jewish, and he shared Rilke's negative views on the superambitious Werfel, who emigrated to America and, in 1941, published The Song of Bernadette, a novel about a miracle at Lourdes. Freedman doesn't mention that about five months after Rilke wrote the letter to Hoffmannsthal, along with a nearly identical letter to his patron Princess Marie von Thurn und Taxis, Rilke again wrote similar letters to the two of them praising Werfel's poetry so exuberantly that they almost sound like retractions of his first letters.
xxx/ellauri187.html on line 133: Why would an anti-Semite extol a Jewish poet to two of the most powerful and influential figures in Central European literary culture--to his own patrons? To paraphrase that great Jewish philosopher Thomas Aquinas, When you meet a contradiction, make a distinction. But Freedman builds from the surface contradiction. For Rilke, he writes, "a cultural and sometimes even a social anti-Semitism was part of daily existence." Yet aside from the letter to Hoffmannsthal, he offers no evidence for that litigable assumption, though he does inform us, with a smug and bizarre knowingness, that one of Rilke's Jewish lovers later died at Auschwitz.
xxx/ellauri187.html on line 135: With similarly blind zeal Freedman bases his insinuation that Rilke was secretly gay on two pieces of evidence: the poet's idealistic adolescent pact with another boy at military school, "sealed by a handshake and a kiss," as Rilke put it in a letter; and a fictional letter meant for publication, which brought Rilke, in Freedman's weasel words, "close to a disguised rendering of homosexuality with personal overtones." That's all the proof Freedman has.
xxx/ellauri187.html on line 137: Well, so what if Rilke happened to be homosexual? I don't see what Freedman thinks he is gaining by making a near-assertion and then failing to prove it. If there are readers who might be obscurely benefited by the revelation of Rilke's homosexuality, they'll be disappointed. If there are readers whose identity rests on the affirmation of Rilke's heterosexuality, they will be shaken and then cheered. If there are readers who couldn't care less about the whole matter, they'll be bored. Meanwhile, Rilke's ghost drums its fingers on some eternal windowsill, waiting patiently to be evoked.
xxx/ellauri187.html on line 139: This is formidable revisionism. The cumulative effect of such a distortion of truth to an admirable, if sadly misplaced, idea of redemption and redress is to make Freedman's biography read like a forced confession. But the beating heart of Freedman's interminable deconstruction is Rilke the sexist. Rilke's extraordinary sensitivity to women, his admiration and need for strong and intelligent women, women's love for Rilke--these facts Freedman brusquely mentions only to knock down. What he wants is to prove that Rilke was a spirited accomplice in European society's subjugation of women. He writes,
xxx/ellauri187.html on line 143: Throughout 600 pages Freedman gives us encounter after encounter between Rilke and the women in his life, in which the women are flawless angels and Rilke a consummate villain. If Rilke's dear friend the great German painter Paula Modersohn-Becker found herself trapped in a stifling marriage, Rilke was a traitor for not extricating her. If Lou Andreas-Salomé told the young Rilke to go off somewhere because one of her other lovers was coming to visit, Rilke's anger was the symptom of an unbalanced psyche.
xxx/ellauri187.html on line 145: If the adolescent Rilke broke up with his adolescent girlfriend, Valerie von David-Rhônfeld, he was a treacherous seducer. Freedman quotes copiously from David-Rhônfeld's embittered memoirs--published shortly after Rilke's death--to posit a pattern in Rilke's personality. "I came to love that poor unfortunate creature," David-Rhônfeld recalls about her teenage sweetheart, "whom everyone avoided like a mangy dog." For Freedman, this vindictive picture of Rilke provides the "clue" to Rilke's "isolation."
xxx/ellauri187.html on line 149: Rilke's most benevolent patron, Princess Marie von Thurn und Taxis, was wise enough both to nurture Rilke's gift and to keep her distance from her complicated protégé. An unblinking observer of Rilke's life, she was able to see his liaisons for what they were. And she knew how Rilke's acute sensitivity to his own condition, combined with his talent for self-pity, often landed him in the arms of the wrong people: "You must always be seeking out such weeping willows, who are by no means so weepy in reality, believe me--you find your own reflection in those eyes." But Freedman, doggedly indifferent to the available evidence, makes Rilke's lovers and women friends out to be helpless victims of a smooth seduction machine.
xxx/ellauri187.html on line 151: As for the centerpiece of Freedman's argument for Rilke's sexism--he "abandoned" Clara and their daughter, Ruth--here he portrays Clara, too, as if she were Tess of the D'Urbervilles. On the contrary. Clara enthusiastically seconded Rilke's definition of two artists wedded as each, in Rilke's cautiously ambiguous phrase, "the guardian of the other's solitude." After Rilke left for Paris, she placed Ruth with her wealthy and supportive parents and went on a pilgrimage to Egypt, among other places. Like Rilke, the adventurous Clara had a fascinating life--I don't know why Freedman didn't write her biography. Women artists suffered in Rilke's society, but not because of Rilke.
24