Mordecai Richler’s Imperfect Search for Moral Values by Shana Rosenblatt Mauer (review)
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Reviewed by: Mordecai Richler's Imperfect Search for Moral Values by Shana Rosenblatt Mauer Ira Robinson Shana Rosenblatt Mauer, Mordecai Richler's Imperfect Search for Moral Values. Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press, 2022. 232 pp. The celebrated Jewish Canadian writer Mordecai Richler (1931–2001), whose novels have led both readers and critics on a merry chase during his lifetime and in the more than two decades since his death as well, remains very much an enigma. In particular, Richler's writing has spurred many scholars in multiple books and articles to attempt to unravel the puzzles and contradictions that abound in his life story as well as in his oeuvre. The many enigmatic elements of Richler's creativity have deeply engaged many of his readers — both positively and negatively — and have without doubt affected the multiple ways in which his work has been received by critics and by the public at large. Shana Rosenblatt Mauer, a scholar of modern Jewish literature and a faculty member at Herzog College in Israel, is the latest academic critic to take on the Richler challenge. She has written an illuminating scholarly work that attempts to probe and evaluate Mordecai Richler's broad and biting satire that often infuriates its readers — prominent among them Montreal Jews, French Canadians, and the politically correct in all their guises. Mauer's book attempts to present its reader with what she calls a "holistic reading" of Richler and his career. This "holistic" strategy, she argues, has not been completely achieved in the work of her predecessors. Her holistic approach spurred Mauer to try to make her base of evidence as complete as possible. Beyond including Richler's standard works of fiction and nonfiction within her purview, she incorporates the script adaptations he wrote for television programs (52). Among the major goals of her book is an effort to refute widespread charges by both critics and the public at large, particularly members of Montreal's Jewish community, that "Richler's fiction suffers from anti-Semitic, or even self-hating overtones and makes a mockery of most Jewish concerns," and that, therefore, Richler is a prime example of a "self-hating" Jew (184). In dealing with this sensitive issue, it is quite evident to Mauer that the primary key to a full, contextual understanding of Richler is through his biography, which strongly influences his fictional work. Understanding where Richler came from, in terms both of his family background and his multiple Montreal Jewish community connections, helps her in her task of elucidating his reactions to a multiplicity of people, institutions, and situations. [End Page 203] Equally key to Mauer's attempt to understand Richler is what she refers to as the sustained search for an adequate moral standard to live by that is to be found in his writing. This element in understanding Richler's work is much more subtle than the more overt details of Richler's biography because, as Mauer points out, Richler, unlike "classic" satirists, has structured his novels in such a way as to veil his underlying search for moral purpose (9). Rising to this challenge, Mauer cites a Richler interview in which he stated that he is "groping for . . . a code of honour . . . as a way to live" (9). She thus detects in Richler's work a "value system . . . grounded in the limitations of reality." In this particular value system, Richler's novelistic heroes "figure as the embodiment of moral imperatives . . . [espousing] a distinct moral vision that is, in many ways, a counterbalance to much of modern life's moral relativism" (24). For Mauer, this discovery is of great significance. It means that Richler had been attempting to convey in his fiction a value system she characterizes as "a just and plausible Jewish outlook for the twentieth century . . . alternative to the complacent . . . and often hypocritical Jewish code of living" often espoused by Richlerian characters who are members of the Montreal Jewish "establishment" (25). Mauer's problem, however, is that Richler's "ordinary Jewish values" are not easy to discern clearly because they are "seldom articulated directly" (25, 75). What does this unwritten code of "ordinary" Jewish values in Richler's work include? It certainly includes...
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,010 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,003 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Communication savante | 0,004 | 0,004 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,002 | 0,005 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,009 | 0,005 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».