From: Arnon Grunberg To: Adam Mansbach Re: Grotesqueries
Adam,
Let me reassure you: I can be approached without heavy drinking. Actually I can be approached without drinking at all.
The nice thing about the text on a jacket-flap is that the text wasn't written by the author of the book. At least in most cases. In the Netherlands I have written the text on the jacket-flap a few times myself, mostly to avoid misunderstandings about my own novel. So I don't think The Jewish Messiah is a grotesque farce. But had my novel been called a highly realistic drama I would have had problems subscribing to that theory as well. In general I would say it's hard and probably unpleasant for a writer to categorize his own work or to agree with other people's categorizations.
The word 'grotesque' implies that part of reality has been distorted. In the context of a novel, or, to be more precise, in the context of the jacket, or a review, it's probably meant to comfort the reader, to reassure him that it might look grim in the novel but don't worry, it's a distortion. I would say that most of reality is worse than any novel, when it comes to degradations of the flesh for example, but probably for pragmatic reasons I didn't have many problems with reassuring the reader on the jacket. After having read your email I realized that I should have been more careful.
The thin line between ecstasy and suffering is widespread, at least since Christianity. But I guess this does exist in other cultures as well. And even in Judai
sm you can find a tendency to blur this line. It's telling that in the context of a novel blurring this line leads to the descriptions "grotesque" and "farce" whereas the same thing in a religious context might lead to a thing called epiphany.
I wonder why you prefer satire to farce. A satire seems to me heavily dependent on an audience that is very much aware of specific reality, and laugh about your attempts to poke fun at certain people or institutions.
A novelist strives to reveal certain truths with all means possible. In an attempt to disguise the unpleasant truth he or she is revealing, society might react by calling it a farce, a satire, slapstick (nothing wrong with good slapstick by the way), or a grotesque farce.
Or do you think this is too much honor for the novelist? Or is it little bit heavy-handed? That's the risk you face while speaking about farces and satire.
I haven't read any of your books yet, but why do you insist in calling your last novel a satire?
Throwing a drink in my face might be a good idea, but we can continue without. What do you prefer?
Best, Arnon