Because elastic geographies respond to a multiple and diffused rather than a single source of power,” Weizman writes, “their architecture cannot be understood as the material embodiment of a unified political will or as the product of a single ideology. Rather, the organization of the occupied territories should be seen as a kind of ‘political plastic’, or as a map of the relation between all the forces that shaped it.”



In his first book “Tolstoy or Dostoevsky” George Steiner argued the two great Russian novelists represent two opposed schools of prose and philosophy. Tolstoy was the heir to Homer, the writer of the epic, cool and dispassionate and Olympian. Dostoevsky was the successor to Shakespeare; earthy and popular, human. The one is cool and distant, vast and mostly unsympathetic, objective and analytical. The other is intensely subjective, personal, intense, much too close.

James Woods remarks somewhere that all of Dostoevsky works might ultimately be grouped under the title “Crime and Punishment.” Dostoevsky was the novelist of the moral law. Tolstoy, according to Lenin the author of the “mirror of the Russian revolution” explored dimensions beyond the law; dimensions like war, and concepts like force.



There are no comments on this post.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: