Spinoza’s life was the life of an intellect, but it offers one very dramatic moment: At 24, he was permanently expelled from Jewish society for heresy. David Ives has written an engaging play about this theological conflict called “New Jerusalem.” (It returns to Theatre J next week.) But Yalom’s talents in this book do not extend to drama or, frankly, to action of any kind. Instead, he presents Spinoza’s life as a series of carefully organized conversations — something you might hear at the Spinoza ride at Epcot. The artificiality of this presentation is jarring, and it never lessens throughout Yalom’s “teaching novel,” so if you need the verisimilitude of modern literary fiction, drop this class and take another. Exposition marches into these pages in jackboots, and characters speak to one another with a kind of formality that’s just one flat note away from a philosophical proposition: “I find what you say pleasing, even enticing. Let me answer you from both the inside and from the outside. First the inside.”
Indeed, many of these phrases are drawn from Spinoza’s “Theological-Political Treatise,” which accounts for the novel’s stilted tone. I think something more, though, is at play here. Spinoza objected to people’s tendency to anthropomorphize God. He famously joked, “If a triangle could speak, it would say, in like manner, that God is eminently triangular.” In a similar manner, as a psychotherapist, Yalom tends to imagine all encounters as therapeutic dialogues; everyone in this novel is either an analyst or an analysand.
(Basic Books) - ”The Spinoza Problem: A Novel” by Irvin D. Yalom.
But as an accessible introduction to Spinoza’s complex philosophy, Yalom’s method has much to recommend it. Like a good teacher, he presents only a few ideas at a time and moves carefully from one to the next with frequent recapitulation. He demonstrates how Spinoza’s logical examination of his own emotions, anxieties and desires prefigured the development of “talking cures” in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. The conversations he creates give a lovely sense of the philosopher’s character and provide a lucid explanation of the man’s major ideas about nature, free will and reason. It’s enlightening to see the lines of modern secularism and scientific rationalism laid down almost 400 years ago. (Interested readers may want to start here before moving on to Steven M. Nadler’s 1999 biography and Rebecca Goldstein’s “Betraying Spinoza: The Renegade Jew Who Gave Us Modernity.”)
The alternating chapters involving Rosenberg’s rise to power incite a different kind of fascination. With his “gerrymandered sense of self,” he’s an odious man, frightened and needy, so pompous and pseudo-intellectual that even ghouls such as Goebbels make fun of him. But Yalom wants to reach into the man’s mind and see how it works — and, yes, how it might have been healed. The novel imagines that Rosenberg befriends a Freudian psychoanalyst and engages in a series of secret ad hoc sessions with him over the years as he becomes the party’s ideological standard bearer. (His authorized textbook, “The Myth of the Twentieth Century,” sold more than 1 million copies, although Hitler, along with everyone else, found it gibberish.) “We all love to hate the Jews,” this friendly therapist tells him, “but you do it with such . . . such intensity.” The psychological roots of Rosenberg’s “particularly powerful Jew-hatred” become the great mystery of the novel.
As an investigation into what Hannah Arendt called “the banality of evil,” “The Spinoza Problem” offers a strange body of evidence. Yalom suggests that he has projected himself back into history as Rosenberg’s therapist. Given the unfathomable suffering that flowed from Nazism, Yalom’s fantasy of the psychotherapist-savior is at once grandiose and fatalistic. What if someone had managed to help Rosenberg resolve his inferiority complex? For that matter, what if an art teacher had been more encouraging to Hitler?
Yalom isn’t interested in creating an alt-history of the 20th century, but he does want to demonstrate the power of Spinoza’s philosophical insights to unsettle even the mind of a pathetic little monster such as Rosenberg. Fortunately, we’re all descendants of the Jewish philosopher, and nobody studies “The Myth of the Twentieth Century.” The right mind won, but what a bloody path to victory.
Charles is The Post’s fiction editor. You can follow him on Twitter: @RonCharles.
This commenter is a Washington Post contributor. Post contributors aren’t staff, but may write articles or columns. In some cases, contributors are sources or experts quoted in a story.
Comments our editors find particularly useful or relevant are displayed in Top Comments, as are comments by users with these badges: . Replies to those posts appear here, as well as posts by staff writers.
To pause and restart automatic updates, click "Live" or "Paused". If paused, you'll be notified of the number of additional comments that have come in.
Comments our editors find particularly useful or relevant are displayed in Top Comments, as are comments by users with these badges: . Replies to those posts appear here, as well as posts by staff writers.
.JPG)
Loading...
Comments